PDA

View Full Version : A thought on the playcalling today...?


crush17
11-13-2011, 06:00 PM
So, I get this funny feeling that the Broncos staff pushed this run, run, run approach because A) It was working so well, B) why stop when you have a good thing and C) Could they be hiding some of the playbook in hopes that they catch NY off guard? We know the coaches have already begun game planning for Thursday... Maybe they are planning to unleash a more even offensive attack then?

barryr
11-13-2011, 06:04 PM
Right. If the running game wasn't working so well, then quite possible they would have thrown more. But some seem upset that they didn't go away from what was working and try something else. Or have this really great insight that the Broncos can not only throw 8 passes in games where the running game isn't working so well. Wow, never thought of that. The ones that want Tebow to fail are sure coming with such stupid crap week to week.

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 06:13 PM
Right. If the running game wasn't working so well, then quite possible they would have thrown more. But some seem upset that they didn't go away from what was working and try something else. Or have this really great insight that the Broncos can not only throw 8 passes in games where the running game isn't working so well. Wow, never thought of that. The ones that want Tebow to fail are sure coming with such stupid crap week to week.

LOL

2nd half drives:

1. 13 yds gained
2. 6 yds gained
3. 33 yds gained
4. 29 yds gained then long TD
5. 3 yds gained
6. -5 yds gained

Yeah, it was working well. They stuck to it just because they were up a whole, single score and didn't want to mess with success.

MagicHef
11-13-2011, 06:20 PM
Let's see. We:

Shortened the game
Kept our defense off the field
Kept Tebow from taking hits

That couldn't have been because we have a short week coming up.

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 06:23 PM
Let's see. We:

Shortened the game
Kept our defense off the field
Kept Tebow from taking hits

That couldn't have been because we have a short week coming up.

Considering we were up by a single score most of the game, I'd kinda wish they worry more about getting this division game in the bag before they worry about winning on Thursday against one of the better teams in the NFL.

But that's just me...

El Jué
11-13-2011, 06:23 PM
I doubt that the Broncos would have a plan to appear be one dimensional against a division rival just so they might catch an AFC East opponent off guard. I think it's much more likely that Tebow still hasn't convinced anyone that matters that he can run a traditional NFL offense.

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 06:26 PM
I don't get it. Last year against the Chiefs we were in the same position, pounding the ball with great success on the ground, and in the 2nd half decided to abandon the run and try to throw the ball. We lost and people cried a river.

Now we don't abandon the run, we win, and people are crying a river?

Play2win
11-13-2011, 06:27 PM
If you believe you can win, maybe do the littlest amount that you know you can still get a win (when playing a team like the chiefs and a QB like Cassel)?

barryr
11-13-2011, 06:30 PM
LOL

2nd half drives:

1. 13 yds gained
2. 6 yds gained
3. 33 yds gained
4. 29 yds gained then long TD
5. 3 yds gained
6. -5 yds gained

Yeah, it was working well. They stuck to it just because they were up a whole, single score and didn't want to mess with success.

They had the lead on the road, at a place that Elway rarely won as well and the defense was playing great, so why start throwing the ball all around and risk a turnover when they didn't have to?

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 06:30 PM
I don't get it. Last year against the Chiefs we were in the same position, pounding the ball with great success on the ground, and in the 2nd half decided to abandon the run and try to throw the ball. We lost and people cried a river.

Now we don't abandon the run, we win, and people are crying a river?

Nobody is complaining about a win that I see. They won today and it sounds like it was a fun game to watch but it wasn't just a twist in the playbook they threw out there. I'm almost as disappointed that our best QB is incapable of passing competently as I am entertained by the fact that a team with 2 completions won in Kansas City. I'd rather a team that can play a balanced game and have a legitimate shot against any team in the NFL than a team that can beat KFC with such quirkiness.

Hopefully they have a wrinkle to add that'll beat the Jets on Thursday but I expect more Detroit Lions game than Kansas City game.

barryr
11-13-2011, 06:32 PM
Nobody is complaining about a win that I see. They won today and it sounds like it was a fun game to watch but it wasn't just a twist in the playbook they threw out there. I'm almost as disappointed that our best QB is incapable of passing competently as I am entertained by the fact that a team with 2 completions won in Kansas City. I'd rather a team that can play a balanced game and have a legitimate shot against any team in the NFL than a team that can beat KFC with such quirkiness.

Hopefully they have a wrinkle to add that'll beat the Jets on Thursday but I expect more Detroit Lions game than Kansas City game.

Are you new? This team has not played great for a number of years and you bitch when they win because they don't win games prettier? I think all of us know to be a true contender they will need Tebow or whomever to be better passing the ball, but you thought this team was headed for greatness to start the season with Orton at QB?

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 06:33 PM
They had the lead on the road, at a place that Elway rarely won as well and the defense was playing great, so why start throwing the ball all around and risk a turnover when they didn't have to?

I agree. That just highlights what I'm saying. They ran because the other options were overly risky - not because running was necessarily working so well.

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 06:35 PM
Are you new? This team has not played great for a number of years and you b**** when they win because they don't win games prettier? I think all of us know to be a true contender they will need Tebow or whomever to be better passing the ball, but you thought this team was headed for greatness to start the season with Orton at QB?

Look at those join dates and figure out who is newer.

Beyond that, do you expect us to compete against the Jets on Thursday or are we just conceding that today was our SB?

barryr
11-13-2011, 06:38 PM
I agree. That just highlights what I'm saying. They ran because the other options were overly risky - not because running was necessarily working so well.

Other than Decker, who gets open?

gyldenlove
11-13-2011, 06:41 PM
The defense was dominating, just keep the clock rolling, keep your defense fresh and minimize the risk of mistakes that is exactly what we were doing in a game we had a good lead in all the way, this is how you win football games.

barryr
11-13-2011, 06:41 PM
Look at those join dates and figure out who is newer.

Beyond that, do you expect us to compete against the Jets on Thursday or are we just conceding that today was our SB?

You really thought the new comment was really a question? Sigh. Anyway, not having their top RB's will hurt, so the defense will have to step up and play well again. They will need to pass the ball more to win against the Jets, but the same would be true if Orton was playing. And unlike Orton, Tebow has not spent much time turning the ball over, which seems to not get much attention for some reason.

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 06:45 PM
Other than Decker, who gets open?

Are you arguing with me or alongside me?

For me, this gameplan is akin to that game against the Colts where we brought out 4 DEs and no DTs in an attempt to pressure Manning and maybe find a way to win. We knew we'd get our asses kicked if we lined up and went head to head with them. We tried something crazy to cover up our weaknesses. That time it didn't work, this time it did. That's awesome.

I just don't understand the folks thinking we struck gold with this run-only gameplan and that it'll revolutionize the NFL or something. This team has a lot of flaws and is running like they are because they have to. Bragging about this would be as bad as bragging about how our DTs were so bad we had to try the 4 DEs back then. If we just had good players, we wouldn't have to do it.

barryr
11-13-2011, 06:50 PM
Are you arguing with me or alongside me?

For me, this gameplan is akin to that game against the Colts where we brought out 4 DEs and no DTs in an attempt to pressure Manning and maybe find a way to win. We knew we'd get our asses kicked if we lined up and went head to head with them. We tried something crazy to cover up our weaknesses. That time it didn't work, this time it did. That's awesome.

I just don't understand the folks thinking we struck gold with this run-only gameplan and that it'll revolutionize the NFL or something. This team has a lot of flaws and is running like they are because they have to. Bragging about this would be as bad as bragging about how our DTs were so bad we had to try the 4 DEs back then. If we just had good players, we wouldn't have to do it.

Nobody is even saying that. I don't understand someone bitching the Broncos won a game but didn't do it better or to your liking. That is why I asked about being new, you are aware this team has not been doing much winning lately? But now you want pretty wins or they don't count in your book I guess.

I also do not see anybody saying the Broncos can be successful throwing 8 passes a game every game, so stop it already.

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 06:54 PM
Nobody is complaining about a win that I see. They won today and it sounds like it was a fun game to watch but it wasn't just a twist in the playbook they threw out there. I'm almost as disappointed that our best QB is incapable of passing competently as I am entertained by the fact that a team with 2 completions won in Kansas City. I'd rather a team that can play a balanced game and have a legitimate shot against any team in the NFL than a team that can beat KFC with such quirkiness.

Hopefully they have a wrinkle to add that'll beat the Jets on Thursday but I expect more Detroit Lions game than Kansas City game.I love that you equate staying with the ground game on the road with a lead to Tebow being incapable of passing. Good take.

That's the exact whining I'm talking about, BTW. And please explain what, exactly is quirky about running the ball down a team's throat when you have a lead.

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 06:56 PM
Are you arguing with me or alongside me?

For me, this gameplan is akin to that game against the Colts where we brought out 4 DEs and no DTs in an attempt to pressure Manning and maybe find a way to win. We knew we'd get our asses kicked if we lined up and went head to head with them. We tried something crazy to cover up our weaknesses. That time it didn't work, this time it did. That's awesome.

I just don't understand the folks thinking we struck gold with this run-only gameplan and that it'll revolutionize the NFL or something. This team has a lot of flaws and is running like they are because they have to. Bragging about this would be as bad as bragging about how our DTs were so bad we had to try the 4 DEs back then. If we just had good players, we wouldn't have to do it.
It was stated during the game that the game plan was for a 30/20 run/pass ratio. We got the lead early and the Chiefs couldn't stop the run. What exactly don't you understand. There's nothing gimicky about it.

Popps
11-13-2011, 06:57 PM
LOL

2nd half drives:

1. 13 yds gained
2. 6 yds gained
3. 33 yds gained
4. 29 yds gained then long TD

Yeah, it was working well. They stuck to it just because they were up a whole, single score and didn't want to mess with success.

Take away the last two drives, those were clock killers. So, you have this...

1. 13 yds gained
2. 6 yds gained
3. 33 yds gained
4. 29 yds gained then long TD

So, two stalled drives... one long one that killed some clock and one that resulted in a TD.

Besides that, you're not factoring in any game factors. (Score, defensive looks, clock, personnel, etc.)

You don't have to like the game-plan... but we were never down in the game and it was only a 1-score game for a quarter or so. To say it didn't work isn't really accurate.

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 07:00 PM
I love that you equate staying with the ground game on the road with a lead to Tebow being incapable of passing. Good take.

That's the exact whining I'm talking about, BTW. And please explain what, exactly is quirky about running the ball down a team's throat when you have a lead.

Staying with the run to hold a lead? That's a good thing.

Being forced to stick with the run because your QB isn't making any passes? Even when you're in 3rd and long or other obvious passing situations? Not a good thing.

TDmvp
11-13-2011, 07:03 PM
I also agree that a little of the play calling may have been geared to try to shorten the game considering we play again in like 80 hours...

enjolras
11-13-2011, 07:03 PM
At the end of the day they ran the ball so much because the defense was doing well. You go conservative on 3rd down because you think your defense is going to stop them when they get the ball.

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 07:05 PM
Nobody is even saying that. I don't understand someone b****ing the Broncos won a game but didn't do it better or to your liking. That is why I asked about being new, you are aware this team has not been doing much winning lately? But now you want pretty wins or they don't count in your book I guess.

I also do not see anybody saying the Broncos can be successful throwing 8 passes a game every game, so stop it already.

http://orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=101227

That makes us the most unique team in the league...the team that chose strength and toughness over finesse.

That's exactly what people are saying.

I won't even get into the MacGruder comments.

barryr
11-13-2011, 07:05 PM
Staying with the run to hold a lead? That's a good thing.

Being forced to stick with the run because your QB isn't making any passes? Even when you're in 3rd and long or other obvious passing situations? Not a good thing.

Well, you can choose to believe they didn't pass because they do not think Tebow can throw the ball, but again, if have the lead and a defense playing so well on the road, and only one WR who shows he can get open, why start throwing the ball all over the field? Fox is a conservative coach and this game was exactly fitting to that mentality.

Popps
11-13-2011, 07:07 PM
Staying with the run to hold a lead? That's a good thing.

Being forced to stick with the run because your QB isn't making any passes? Even when you're in 3rd and long or other obvious passing situations? Not a good thing.

I'd agree with this statement to an extent. There were a few times today I think throwing would have been wiser on 3rd down. We converted 5 out of 14 today. (Really 5 out of 12 if you consider the lay-downs on the last two drives.) That's the stat that worries me the most. That's the stat that will indeed improve with better passing.

Still, I don't think the results always justify the game-plan... but I understand why they did what they did today.

HAT
11-13-2011, 07:08 PM
Nobody is even saying that.

You haven't been on the OM this week?

There is a very large contingent stating exactly that. They're wrong of course but they are still stating it.

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 07:09 PM
Take away the last two drives, those were clock killers. So, you have this...

1. 13 yds gained
2. 6 yds gained
3. 33 yds gained
4. 29 yds gained then long TD

So, two stalled drives... one long one that killed some clock and one that resulted in a TD.

Besides that, you're not factoring in any game factors. (Score, defensive looks, clock, personnel, etc.)

You don't have to like the game-plan... but we were never down in the game and it was only a 1-score game for a quarter or so. To say it didn't work isn't really accurate.

Of course it worked - they won. The team surely would've liked a security score though. That gameplan wasn't getting it and the deep strike to Decker ended up being the difference in the game.

It worked and the fact that I have bragging rights over my KC fan relatives is good in my book. The fact that it happened because our QB can't throw is disconcerting still. Why I'm concerning myself with other people's logic? No idea. The late game sucks so it's either this or go to bed, I guess.

ColoradoDarin
11-13-2011, 07:14 PM
Of course it worked - they won. The team surely would've liked a security score though. That gameplan wasn't getting it and the deep strike to Decker ended up being the difference in the game.

It worked and the fact that I have bragging rights over my KC fan relatives is good in my book. The fact that it happened because our QB can't throw is disconcerting still. Why I'm concerning myself with other people's logic? No idea. The late game sucks so it's either this or go to bed, I guess.

Yes, but Prater missed.

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 07:14 PM
Staying with the run to hold a lead? That's a good thing.

Being forced to stick with the run because your QB isn't making any passes? Even when you're in 3rd and long or other obvious passing situations? Not a good thing.

They faced 2 third downs over 9 yards all day. One on the TD pass to Decker and one with a 2 score lead with under 4 minutes to play.

They hardly had a 3rd and long all day.

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 07:17 PM
Of course it worked - they won. The team surely would've liked a security score though. That gameplan wasn't getting it and the deep strike to Decker ended up being the difference in the game.

It worked and the fact that I have bragging rights over my KC fan relatives is good in my book. The fact that it happened because our QB can't throw is disconcerting still. Why I'm concerning myself with other people's logic? No idea. The late game sucks so it's either this or go to bed, I guess.

You should go to bed. Your logic is absurd.

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 07:23 PM
They faced 2 third downs over 9 yards all day. One on the TD pass to Decker and one with a 2 score lead with under 4 minutes to play.

They hardly had a 3rd and long all day.

3rd and 9 or more is the definition of 3rd and long?

Maybe you'd prefer I redefine my message as '3rd and long enough that Tebow and company probably weren't picking it up'?

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 07:23 PM
Yes, but Prater missed.

If we're relying on other teams to give us the ball in FG range to get our points, we're in even worse shape than I'm claiming.

ColoradoDarin
11-13-2011, 07:24 PM
If we're relying on other teams to give us the ball in FG range to get our points, we're in even worse shape than I'm claiming.

Moving goalposts.

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 07:27 PM
Moving goalposts.

Yes you are.

My point was that the team was incapable of getting a security score. A team with a solid offense does not sit on their heels with a one score lead. We were forced to rely on our D. The fact that KC tried to gift us points is immaterial to that.

ColoradoDarin
11-13-2011, 07:30 PM
Yes you are.

My point was that the team was incapable of getting a security score. A team with a solid offense does not sit on their heels with a one score lead. We were forced to rely on our D. The fact that KC tried to gift us points is immaterial to that.

If Prater makes that kick, is it not a security score, yes or no?

broncofan2438
11-13-2011, 07:33 PM
I would agree that some could get annoyed with the conservative play calling. Fine, if running the ball works then do it. But having tebow throw nothing but deep balls doesn't really give anyone an idea of him as a passer. He had some good deep ball throws I feel. Some that should have been caught. It would just be nice to see some short routes every now and then, some screens maybe?

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 07:35 PM
If Prater makes that kick, is it not a security score, yes or no?

If Tebow hits more deep balls, the Broncos score 50.

If I win the lottery, I never log back into the Mane and don't care.

If the world explodes tomorrow, none of it matters.

What was your point again?

ColoradoDarin
11-13-2011, 07:41 PM
If Tebow hits more deep balls, the Broncos score 50.

If I win the lottery, I never log back into the Mane and don't care.

If the world explodes tomorrow, none of it matters.

What was your point again?

You didn't say that Tebow needed a security score, or the offense needed it. You said the TEAM needed a security score. Our defense put us into a position to do so.

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 07:45 PM
If we're relying on other teams to give us the ball in FG range to get our points, we're in even worse shape than I'm claiming.

The security score you're talking about happened with 6:44 to go in the 4th on the TD pass to Decker.

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 07:51 PM
You didn't say that Tebow needed a security score, or the offense needed it. You said the TEAM needed a security score. Our defense put us into a position to do so.

But they went a long time before even that opportunity presented itself. It's hardly a defense of the gameplan which is what this is all about.

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 07:52 PM
The security score you're talking about happened with 6:44 to go in the 4th on the TD pass to Decker.

Sweet. We can win with deep bombs. This'll be a fun team to watch.

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 07:55 PM
Sweet. We can win with deep bombs. This'll be a fun team to watch.

I know that you're trying to be sarcastic here, however, we just won exactly that way. What don't you get?

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 07:59 PM
But they went a long time before even that opportunity presented itself. It's hardly a defense of the gameplan which is what this is all about.

This is just a lie. The Chiefs were within 2 scores for exactly 2 Broncos' possessions.

TonyR
11-13-2011, 08:01 PM
I just don't understand the folks thinking we struck gold with this run-only gameplan and that it'll revolutionize the NFL or something.

LOL I'm with you on this. You're about the only one in this thread making any sense. I don't understand what game people watched today. People are delusional. It was a nice win but let's not get too carried away. How quickly everyone forgets what happened against Detroit a couple of weeks ago...

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 08:06 PM
LOL I'm with you on this. You're about the only one in this thread making any sense. I don't understand what game people watched today. People are delusional. It was a nice win but let's not get too carried away. How quickly everyone forgets what happened against Detroit a couple of weeks ago...

I watched the game where we had the lead for the ENTIRE GAME, and our defense was dominant. Which one did you watch?

errand
11-13-2011, 08:07 PM
Right. If the running game wasn't working so well, then quite possible they would have thrown more. But some seem upset that they didn't go away from what was working and try something else. Or have this really great insight that the Broncos can not only throw 8 passes in games where the running game isn't working so well. Wow, never thought of that. The ones that want Tebow to fail are sure coming with such stupid crap week to week.

No, his detractors have bitched about his accuracy....his supporters are the ones bitching about the playcalling, and the number of attempts he's had to throw the ball.

HAT
11-13-2011, 08:10 PM
I watched the game where we had the lead for the ENTIRE GAME, and our defense was dominant. Which one did you watch?

Holy crap....FMT have revolutionized the game! Who knew that all you had to do is have a lead for an ENTIRE GAME to win. ???

3 Cheers for FMT!

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 08:11 PM
No, his detractors have b****ed about his accuracy....his supporters are the ones b****ing about the playcalling, and the number of attempts he's had to throw the ball.

No. This week the detractors are saying that because the Broncos didn't abandon a dominant ground game with the lead, the Broncos won't be able to beat real teams with Tebow.

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 08:13 PM
Holy crap....FMT have revolutionized the game! Who knew that all you had to do is have a lead for an ENTIRE GAME to win. ???

3 Cheers for FMT!

Are the Tebow haters really this daft? In every win their claims as to why Tebow won't work have changed.

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 08:13 PM
I know that you're trying to be sarcastic here, however, we just won exactly that way. What don't you get?

It was over KC. What is there to get?

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 08:15 PM
It was over KC. What is there to get?

3-1

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 08:16 PM
No. This week the detractors are saying that because the Broncos didn't abandon a dominant ground game with the lead, the Broncos won't be able to beat real teams with Tebow.

LOL

We rushed for 4.4 YPC. We were dominant.

KC rushed for 5.6. What does that make them?

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 08:16 PM
3-1

45-10

TonyR
11-13-2011, 08:17 PM
...the Tebow haters really...

Why are you so sensitive and dramatic? Some of us have some concerns. Doesn't mean we didn't enjoy the win. Doesn't mean we dislike Tebow. What it does mean is that we want to see more before we get too excited. You need to stop labeling people who have a different opinion than you do.

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 08:18 PM
45-10

What was your excuse last week when we beat the division leading Raiders on the road?

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 08:19 PM
Are the Tebow haters really this daft? In every win their claims as to why Tebow won't work have changed.

What is the standard to which Tebow will be judged? I think "Can this guy win us a SB?". When it was clear Plummer couldn't, I rooted for Cutler to start. As it was clear Orton wouldn't, I became content with Tebow starting. He may be the best option we currently have so I'm far from crying for a QB change but I wouldn't mind if he'd learn to throw the ball because, right now, my answer to the above question is that Tebow can't win us a SB unless he significantly improves. VERY significantly... like... revolutionizing his entire skill set significantly...

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 08:20 PM
Why are you so sensitive and dramatic? Some of us have some concerns. Doesn't mean we didn't enjoy the win. Doesn't mean we dislike Tebow. What it does mean is that we want to see more before we get too excited. You need to stop labeling people who have a different opinion than you do.

I think claiming that using the play calling today to say that Tebow can't win games against good teams is where the drama lies.

Br0nc0Buster
11-13-2011, 08:20 PM
there is a difference between running the ball effectively, and running it just to run it

the 1st half was the former, the 2nd was more the latter

we need to open the offense up a bit more if we want a chance to beat the Jets

I would rather us not run the ball over and over again only to get down multiple scores and have to scramble at the end to make it a game

TonyR
11-13-2011, 08:21 PM
We rushed for 4.4 YPC. We were dominant.

KC rushed for 5.6. What does that make them?

Yup. Losing McGahee and Moreno didn't help this, of course, but our running game really wasn't "dominant" in the 2nd half. Again, I'm floored by how delusional people are after these last two games.

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 08:22 PM
What was your excuse last week when we beat the division leading Raiders on the road?

McGahee : 160+ yds rushing
Royal: Punt return TD
Palmer: 3 INTs

People complain because Tebow didn't have an offseason. Palmer had a week and 3 days under contract. Is THAT the standard of success?

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 08:22 PM
What is the standard to which Tebow will be judged? I think "Can this guy win us a SB?". When it was clear Plummer couldn't, I rooted for Cutler to start. As it was clear Orton wouldn't, I became content with Tebow starting. He may be the best option we currently have so I'm far from crying for a QB change but I wouldn't mind if he'd learn to throw the ball because, right now, my answer to the above question is that Tebow can't win us a SB unless he significantly improves. VERY significantly... like... revolutionizing his entire skill set significantly...

He just stared his 7th game. Of course he needs to improve. Relax.

Bronx33
11-13-2011, 08:22 PM
Question is can McCOY call plays to move this team to the next level?

TonyR
11-13-2011, 08:22 PM
there is a difference between running the ball effectively, and running it just to run it

the 1st half was the former, the 2nd was more the latter

we need to open the offense up a bit more if we want a chance to beat the Jets

Exactly. Another sane Broncos fan.

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 08:23 PM
McGahee : 160+ yds rushing
Royal: Punt return TD
Palmer: 3 INTs

People complain because Tebow didn't have an offseason. Palmer had a week and 3 days under contract. Is THAT the standard of success?

I get it. Give Credit to anyone but Tebow.

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 08:23 PM
there is a difference between running the ball effectively, and running it just to run it

the 1st half was the former, the 2nd was more the latter

we need to open the offense up a bit more if we want a chance to beat the Jets

I would rather us not run the ball over and over again only to get down multiple scores and have to scramble at the end to make it a game

If running non-stop works, I'm all for it. I just wish we had an ace in the hole incase we do fall behind. I'm afraid we'll have no fallback in that scenario.

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 08:25 PM
I get it. Give Credit to anyone but Tebow.

I give Tebow credit. The Miami game is all him - both the good and the bad.

He gets a lot of credit from Detroit but it's shared many ways.

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 08:26 PM
If running non-stop works, I'm all for it. Clearly you're not. Because it just worked, and you're whining about it.

I just wish we had an ace in the hole incase we do fall behind. I'm afraid we'll have no fallback in that scenario.Like the biggest comeback since the merger or something?

Oh, right, that was against the Dolphins which of course doesn't count.

Or like against the Raiders? Oh, right, that doesn't count either because....

eh, I can't remember any more why Tebow leading this team to wins doesn't count.

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 08:28 PM
I give Tebow credit.

And yet I noticed you left his 117 yards rushing and two TD passes out of your reasons why we were able to beat the Raiders.

hmmm...

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 08:29 PM
Clearly you're not. Because it just worked, and you're whining about it.

Like the biggest comeback since the merger or something?

Oh, right, that was against the Dolphins which of course doesn't count.

Or like against the Raiders? Oh, right, that doesn't count either because....

eh, I can't remember any more why Tebow leading this team to wins doesn't count.

We've shifted this from "You guys are really excited for the future because of THAT game?!" to an "I hate Tebow" thread. That wasn't where this was ever intended to go and not my opinion.

Kaylore
11-13-2011, 08:31 PM
I think they pushed the running thing because the only times the Chiefs have been competitive has been when their opponents turned the ball over. I think the staff was going to take a few shots, but for the most part to play conservative, smash mouth football and out tough the Chiefs. It worked.

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 08:32 PM
We've shifted this from "You guys are really excited for the future because of THAT game?!" to an "I hate Tebow" thread. That wasn't where this was ever intended to go and not my opinion.

Where has anyone said anything about being excited about the future because of this game?

I'm merely debunking your take that the play calling speaks volumes about Tebow as a passer.

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 08:35 PM
I think they pushed the running thing because the only times the Chiefs have been competitive has been when their opponents turned the ball over. I think the staff was going to take a few shots, but for the most part to play conservative, smash mouth football and out tough the Chiefs. It worked.

I think they pushed the running game because they had a 2 possession lead for the vast majority of the game, and they were moving the ball. It's that simple for me.

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 08:36 PM
And yet I noticed you left his 117 yards rushing and two TD passes out of your reasons why we were able to beat the Raiders.

hmmm...

You take away any of those 3 I mentioned and Denver doesn't win.

You take away those stats and that's not necessarily the case.

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 08:38 PM
Where has anyone said anything about being excited about the future because of this game?

I'm merely debunking your take that the play calling speaks volumes about Tebow as a passer.

We're back to page 1 of this very thread...

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 08:43 PM
I think they pushed the running game because they had a 2 possession lead for the vast majority of the game, and they were moving the ball. It's that simple for me.

They led by 2 scores from 7:51 in the 2nd until 8:15 in the 3rd then again from 6:52 in the 4th until 11 seconds.

Yeah, vast majority of the time... looks like about 21-22 mins to me. If that made them content to just run out the clock, they're fools.

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 08:44 PM
We're back to page 1 of this very thread...

I only see you proposing that despite 244 yards rushing, "It wasn't working very well".

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 08:46 PM
I only see you proposing that despite 244 yards rushing, "It wasn't working very well".

I posted a link to Epic's thread where he's ready to jerk it to the potential of this offense. Other people have been making even more absurd comments. Look around the Mane and you'll see lots of people that think this 55 run, 8 pass, 2 completion recipe is the recipe for future NFL domination.

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 08:50 PM
They led by 2 scores from 7:51 in the 2nd until 8:15 in the 3rd then again from 6:52 in the 4th until 11 seconds.

Yeah, vast majority of the time... looks like about 21-22 mins to me. If that made them content to just run out the clock, they're fools.

That's brutally disingenuous to the argument. They scored on two of the first 3 possessions, so clearly the running game was producing. So why change. After that they stuck with it because the Chiefs never put any pressure on the offense to score more points.

It's simple unless you want to turn it into a conspiracy to indict Tebow.

HAT
11-13-2011, 08:51 PM
Are the Tebow haters really this daft? In every win their claims as to why Tebow won't work have changed.

Dunno...Go ask TGN or Alec. I love Tebow.

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 08:52 PM
I posted a link to Epic's thread where he's ready to jerk it to the potential of this offense. Other people have been making even more absurd comments. Look around the Mane and you'll see lots of people that think this 55 run, 8 pass, 2 completion recipe is the recipe for future NFL dominationwhat does that have to do with this thread?

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 08:53 PM
Dunno...Go ask TGN or Alec. I love Tebow.

They won't come around until the Broncos lose.

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 08:54 PM
what does that have to do with this thread?

You're hurting my head...

You posted:

Where has anyone said anything about being excited about the future because of this game?

I'm merely debunking your take that the play calling speaks volumes about Tebow as a passer.

I referenced Epic's thread where he's doing exactly that. Which I had posted in this very thread.

You then didn't get how that related.

errand
11-13-2011, 08:55 PM
Staying with the run to hold a lead? That's a good thing.

Being forced to stick with the run because your QB isn't making any passes? Even when you're in 3rd and long or other obvious passing situations? Not a good thing.

Well maybe Fox looked at the bench and saw Orton and quinn there and said.."Naw...we're good"

razorwire77
11-13-2011, 08:56 PM
That's brutally disingenuous to the argument. They scored on two of the first 3 possessions, so clearly the running game was producing. So why change. After that they stuck with it because the Chiefs never put any pressure on the offense to score more points.

It's simple unless you want to turn it into a conspiracy to indict Tebow.

What seems to be getting lost too is that they did it with Lance ****ing Ball and only Spencer ****ing Larsen to spell him. With the way Willis and Moreno were gashing the Chefs early, and Romeo's stubborn refusal to bring the safety up into the box, I really think this is a 3 + score win and 350 yards rushing if those guys don't get hurt.

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 08:58 PM
Well maybe Fox looked at the bench and saw Orton and quinn there and said.."Naw...we're good"

I don't know what we do or don't have in Quinn.

We have to see what Tebow is. If the option is for Tebow to throw 10 times a game and we just try to run or switch to one of them... I'd take the running.

Again, I'm not opposed to Tebow at all. I just think folks should reign in their excitement for the next few games.

That One Guy
11-13-2011, 08:59 PM
That's brutally disingenuous to the argument. They scored on two of the first 3 possessions, so clearly the running game was producing. So why change. After that they stuck with it because the Chiefs never put any pressure on the offense to score more points.

It's simple unless you want to turn it into a conspiracy to indict Tebow.

From mid 3rd quarter to mid 4th quarter, it was a one possession game and the offense couldn't move the ball. It is what it is.

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 09:00 PM
What seems to be getting lost too is that they did it with Lance ****ing Ball and only Spencer ****ing Larsen to spell him. With the way Willis and Moreno were gashing the Chefs early, and Romeo's stubborn refusal to bring the safety up into the box, I really think this is a 3 + score win and 350 yards rushing if those guys don't get hurt.

Everything has been lost in this thread. We're 3-1 with raw, young quarterback, but people want to make the way we won into a conspiracy.

Good Night folks.

Dedhed
11-13-2011, 09:03 PM
From mid 3rd quarter to mid 4th quarter, it was a one possession game and the offense couldn't move the ball. It was a one score game for 2 Broncos possessions before Tebow iced it with the pass to Decker.

It is what it is.
Exactly. It is the first winning streak in more than 2 years.

strafen
11-13-2011, 09:08 PM
So, I get this funny feeling that the Broncos staff pushed this run, run, run approach because A) It was working so well, B) why stop when you have a good thing and C) Could they be hiding some of the playbook in hopes that they catch NY off guard? We know the coaches have already begun game planning for Thursday... Maybe they are planning to unleash a more even offensive attack then?

They won't have much of our passing game to look at, that's for sure LOL

errand
11-13-2011, 09:08 PM
Sweet. We can win with deep bombs. This'll be a fun team to watch.

most bombs are set up by the opposing team crowding the line in order to stop the running game....just saying

errand
11-13-2011, 09:16 PM
No. This week the detractors are saying that because the Broncos didn't abandon a dominant ground game with the lead, the Broncos won't be able to beat real teams with Tebow.

I agree you go with what's working, and if you can win this way..fine...but thinking you're gonna run as well vs the Jets..especially after Ryan rips them a new one for getting raped by Pats, well you might be certifiable.

I'm glad we won...and don't care how we did it...but I understand others saying that sooner or later our QB is gonna have to make plays with his arm more consistently, and gasp! from the pocket as well....

Sassy
11-13-2011, 09:35 PM
I agree you go with what's working, and if you can win this way..fine...but thinking you're gonna run as well vs the Jets..especially after Ryan rips them a new one for getting raped by Pats, well you might be certifiable.

I'm glad we won...and don't care how we did it...but I understand others saying that sooner or later our QB is gonna have to make plays with his arm more consistently, and gasp! from the pocket as well....

:strong: Shhh...wait and see. ;D

errand
11-13-2011, 09:40 PM
I don't know what we do or don't have in Quinn.

..and we probably never will know


We have to see what Tebow is. If the option is for Tebow to throw 10 times a game and we just try to run or switch to one of them... I'd take the running.

I think we should stick with the kid for the one stat that matters most 3-1...just win baby


Again, I'm not opposed to Tebow at all. I just think folks should reign in their excitement for the next few games.

I understand his supporters getting a bit excited because they feel vindicated by the Broncos going 3-1 with him at the helm ("told you so syndrome") just as much as I understand people who are saying "it's too soon to cream your jeans over the kid". As long as we win..i don't care if he doesn't put up huge passing numbers....is a prototypical QB...nope...but i'll take winning QB over prototypical



in bold

Bronco Yoda
11-13-2011, 11:01 PM
I just loved winning in mulletville.

We did what we had to do. The run is the Chiefs greatest weakness right now. Tebow is still learning. The WR's look lost out there still and dropping passes. Clady went out and it's easier to run block than pass block. We protected our paper thin D roster. The run just kept working...and working...and working.

So many reasons to keep with the run. Granted they took it to an extreme that most of us would ever had guessed.

WE WON!

woooooooooohooooooooooooooooooo!

BroncoMan4ever
11-13-2011, 11:29 PM
Right. If the running game wasn't working so well, then quite possible they would have thrown more. But some seem upset that they didn't go away from what was working and try something else. Or have this really great insight that the Broncos can not only throw 8 passes in games where the running game isn't working so well. Wow, never thought of that. The ones that want Tebow to fail are sure coming with such stupid crap week to week.

i look at it this way. it is great to win, it is great to see dominant rushing performances again, it is great seeing the D step up. but with a pretty good QB class coming next year, and still many questions regarding Tebow as a passer, these games of severely limited passing are making it harder for him to show he can be a starting QB in this league. if he can't do it or is unable to prove he is improving at it, this team needs to find someone who can.

right now if this keeps up, at the end of the season there will not be much of a sample on his abilities to fairly say good or bad with him. Elway is not sold on him yet, and if there is not enough evidence to show Tebow can be the guy, Elway will draft someone he thinks can be the guy. i worry that at the end of the season Denver pulls off the improbable and rush their way to the division title host a playoff game and do it squarely rushing the ball. because if that were to happen, we have the Tebow supportors pissed off when Elway decides to draft a QBOTF and ship Tebow out of here, and again the debate heats up and Denver is again national news but for all the wrong reasons.

at the end of the season the evidence needs to be clear. either Tebow shows he is improving his game and will earn the support of Elway and staff and become the guy for at least the next couple years or the evidence proves the doubters wrong and Tebow is traded or released and is no longer part of Denver's future plans. and sadly that evidence can't be had with him throwing 8 times a game.

and yes i am serious, if a new QB is drafted, Tebow will not be back next year. no way in hell will the team go through another Tebow debate offseason. they will trade the headache.

Armchair Bronco
11-14-2011, 12:42 AM
Denver's aerial attack actually reminds me of the Raiders back in the 1970's. Maybe a little of San Diego from that same era. Just heave the ball downfield and hope for the best.

Tebow can throw the little dump off, and he's surprisingly accurate with his long bombs. It's the short and medium throws that aren't so great.

We have a college running attack combined with the Al Davis-inspired long bomb. Nuttin' wrong with dat.

ColoradoDarin
11-14-2011, 04:55 AM
If running non-stop works, I'm all for it. I just wish we had an ace in the hole incase we do fall behind. I'm afraid we'll have no fallback in that scenario.

Houston Texans 23 at Denver Broncos 24
Sunday, December 26, 2010


Denver Broncos 18 at Miami Dolphins 15
Sunday, October 23, 2011


Yeah, I mean we've never seen it at all in his 7 starts...

Now I know you're just trolling.

barryr
11-14-2011, 06:09 AM
i look at it this way. it is great to win, it is great to see dominant rushing performances again, it is great seeing the D step up. but with a pretty good QB class coming next year, and still many questions regarding Tebow as a passer, these games of severely limited passing are making it harder for him to show he can be a starting QB in this league. if he can't do it or is unable to prove he is improving at it, this team needs to find someone who can.

right now if this keeps up, at the end of the season there will not be much of a sample on his abilities to fairly say good or bad with him. Elway is not sold on him yet, and if there is not enough evidence to show Tebow can be the guy, Elway will draft someone he thinks can be the guy. i worry that at the end of the season Denver pulls off the improbable and rush their way to the division title host a playoff game and do it squarely rushing the ball. because if that were to happen, we have the Tebow supportors pissed off when Elway decides to draft a QBOTF and ship Tebow out of here, and again the debate heats up and Denver is again national news but for all the wrong reasons.

at the end of the season the evidence needs to be clear. either Tebow shows he is improving his game and will earn the support of Elway and staff and become the guy for at least the next couple years or the evidence proves the doubters wrong and Tebow is traded or released and is no longer part of Denver's future plans. and sadly that evidence can't be had with him throwing 8 times a game.

and yes i am serious, if a new QB is drafted, Tebow will not be back next year. no way in hell will the team go through another Tebow debate offseason. they will trade the headache.

No doubt is they are not convinced of Tebow they will look to get another, likely in the draft, but the likelihood of finding one ready to play in the NFL is slim, so another year at least of developing a QB who may not pan out either.

55CrushEm
11-14-2011, 06:24 AM
I get it. Give Credit to anyone but Tebow.

I'm in between here. I agree with Tony in that we want to see a more improvement. I also see them whining about not winning with the pass.

But I also think they need to give Tebow a LOT more credit for the success of our run game....not just because HE himself is mobile....but just simply because of the threat he provides especially out of the zone read option, or whatever the **** it is called.

I already said (as I'm sure other have too).....we've rushed for nearly 550 yards in the last 2 games!! That's a 275yd/game average!! We haven't had this dominant a run game in a LONG LONG time. And this is despite teams KNOWING THAT WE ARE GOING TO RUN.

I've been waiting a long time to have a dominant running game again.....and yet others are still complaining. Again, Tebow is a HUGE part of the success of that running game. His accuracy will get better. And each week you can already see the game slowing down for him. Once it slows down some more, his presnap reads will be better, and his WHOLE game will continue to improve.

Shotgun Willie
11-14-2011, 06:33 AM
Houston Texans 23 at Denver Broncos 24
Sunday, December 26, 2010


Denver Broncos 18 at Miami Dolphins 15
Sunday, October 23, 2011


Yeah, I mean we've never seen it at all in his 7 starts...

Now I know you're just trolling.

Literally one of the worst passing defenses in the history of the NFL and another that currently isn't far behind. And both of whom shut him down for the majority of their games until they went soft late. Coincidence?

jhns
11-14-2011, 06:40 AM
If running non-stop works, I'm all for it. I just wish we had an ace in the hole incase we do fall behind. I'm afraid we'll have no fallback in that scenario.

You do realize that three of Tebows four wins are comebacks, right?

Momentum
11-14-2011, 06:46 AM
The play calling made me so happy, nothing like a team & staff with no QB going into one of the most talented QB drafts in a while :D

Momentum
11-14-2011, 06:47 AM
You do realize that three of Tebows four wins are comebacks, right?

You do realize they are all against crappy teams :D

ColoradoDarin
11-14-2011, 06:47 AM
Literally one of the worst passing defenses in the history of the NFL and another that currently isn't far behind. And both of whom shut him down for the majority of their games until they went soft late. Coincidence?

That wasn't the question posed.

jhns
11-14-2011, 06:48 AM
You do realize they are all against crappy teams :D

Raider fan fail

Peoples Champ
11-14-2011, 06:49 AM
So, I get this funny feeling that the Broncos staff pushed this run, run, run approach because A) It was working so well, B) why stop when you have a good thing and C) Could they be hiding some of the playbook in hopes that they catch NY off guard? We know the coaches have already begun game planning for Thursday... Maybe they are planning to unleash a more even offensive attack then?


I don't think it specifically put in to hide against the jets, but I do think its an overall mentality to establish the run to set up the pass.

Shotgun Willie
11-14-2011, 06:54 AM
That wasn't the question posed.

I realize that. It's called "giving context to the answer."

Requiem
11-14-2011, 06:57 AM
The play calling is going to have to change at some sort of time. If defenses are able to stop us to minimal gains in first down, it is going to have to force us to throw eventually. I expect a lot of hybrid looks from the Jets next week. It might be interesting to see if any 5-2 fronts are involved. The Chiefs didn't game plan well for us, but they did knock out our top two backs. Which is going to happen a lot of we keep running this gravy train.

EmpireOrange
11-14-2011, 06:57 AM
...and C) Could they be hiding some of the playbook in hopes that they catch NY off guard? ...

I love the winning, and will never grow tired of this offense if it keeps winning; however, one has to believe that they are setting the league up for something. Its almost that they are trying to blantantly show everybody that we can't pass the ball and will run, run, run with two to three running backs (one of them being under center). You can almost see everybody on the Broncos side lines laughing. I think either this week or later one they will open up a hybrid offense that takes the sucesses of read option and traditional passing. I would look for screens and maybe even a jump pass or two to start to filter in. One of these weeks the whole world will tune in laughing at our 55 runs/8 passes offense and tebow will hang a 300 yard passing day on someone. I would love that to be the jets under the bright lights. But for now, if it wins who really gives a flying rats effecicle!!?!?

bronco militia
11-14-2011, 06:59 AM
http://www.drewlitton.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/donotpasscolornewest.gif

tsiguy96
11-14-2011, 07:05 AM
as broncos starter this year, rushing totals:

@KC 55 att, 244 yards
@OAK 39 att, 299 yards
DET 28 att, 113 yards
@MIA 40 att, 177 yards

one thing to keep in mind, those first 2 games they basically told tebow to run the system in place instead of making the offense for him. now that they did that, i imagine we wll continue to see 200+ yard rushing games

ColoradoDarin
11-14-2011, 07:33 AM
I realize that. It's called "giving context to the answer."

No, it's not ;D

edog24
11-14-2011, 07:40 AM
The play calling made me so happy, nothing like a team & staff with no QB going into one of the most talented QB drafts in a while :D

You realize at this point we have enough wins that puts into qb "project" territory?

bendog
11-14-2011, 07:46 AM
McCoy's too conservative and doesn't call a game to meet Tebow's unique skill set that will revolutionize the way por football is played. The pos needs to go, and Fox too, and Elway celary has no clues!

chawknz
11-14-2011, 07:51 AM
3rd down and long running plays really made me mental. That's all I can really say. We won after all.

Mogulseeker
11-14-2011, 10:04 AM
If we're getting first downs every 3 plays, than I'm all for it.