PDA

View Full Version : Jackie Battle likely out Sunday


LetsGoBroncos
12-29-2011, 10:00 AM
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/rapid-reports/post/16628595

Good news for us

Ambiguous
12-29-2011, 10:06 AM
Who will be getting most of the carries?

Smiling Assassin27
12-29-2011, 10:07 AM
Isn't it THomas Jones? Still a tough runner.

Shotgun Willie
12-29-2011, 10:12 AM
Bears were missing Cutler and Forte and our defense still looked like crap. Minny didn't have AP and our defense still looked like crap.

BroncoBeavis
12-29-2011, 10:14 AM
Bears were missing Cutler and Forte and our defense still looked like crap. Minny didn't have AP and our defense still looked like crap.

The Bears put up 10 points. I've seen worse.

Jetmeck
12-29-2011, 10:15 AM
Who will be getting most of the carries?

Mc Cluster ****....the little scat back......................

peacepipe
12-29-2011, 10:20 AM
Bears were missing Cutler and Forte and our defense still looked like crap. Minny didn't have AP and our defense still looked like crap.only allowed 86 yds passing & only 10 points,yet you think our D looked like crap.

Rabb
12-29-2011, 10:21 AM
only allowed 86 yds passing & only 10 points,yet you think our D looked like crap.

it could be argued that our D is all that kept us in that game

Shotgun Willie
12-29-2011, 10:22 AM
The Bears put up 10 points. I've seen worse.

No doubt. We can thank Hanie (and Barber's two brain farts) for that. The guy is awful.

We gave up 160 yds and a TD on the ground to a team missing its #1 running back. I'm not going to spin that into some great performance.

Rabb
12-29-2011, 10:24 AM
No doubt. We can thank Hanie (and Barber's two brain farts) for that. The guy is awful.

We gave up 160 yds and a TD on the ground to a team missing its #1 running back. I'm not going to spin that into some great performance.

We won, you know that right?

And it's ok to be happy about winning, stop being a douche.

Shotgun Willie
12-29-2011, 10:26 AM
We won, you know that right?

And it's ok to be happy about winning, stop being a douche.

And the name calling starts.

I KNOW WE WON. I'm solely focusing on the thread topic though. The one where people are pointing to a starter going out with injury and how it might affect our chances. I'm pointing out two recent instances of this happening and how I felt it helped (or didn't) our defense.

Rabb
12-29-2011, 10:30 AM
But who cares is my point. You play who you play, week in and week out. Every team deals with injuries, and every team benefits from another team's injuries so why discount that?

Jesus, you can point to name calling all you want but just be happy with a freaking win. We beat a team we should have, can you say that about a lot of other years?

Ambiguous
12-29-2011, 10:32 AM
And the name calling starts.

I KNOW WE WON. I'm solely focusing on the thread topic though. The one where people are pointing to a starter going out with injury and how it might affect our chances. I'm pointing out two recent instances of this happening and how I felt it helped (or didn't) our defense.

If our defense sucks, how is one more guy injured not good news?

Rabb
12-29-2011, 10:34 AM
If our defense sucks, how is one more guy injured not good news?

no you have it all wrong, even if we win our D still sucks...we just cannot prove it

:wiggle:

BroncoBeavis
12-29-2011, 10:42 AM
No doubt. We can thank Hanie (and Barber's two brain farts) for that. The guy is awful.

The fumble may have ended up costing his team 3. The running out of bounds mistake wouldn't have led to more Bears points.

Any way you look at it, hard to fault the D much in the Bears game.

The more years I watch the NFL, the more I believe in the any given Sunday thing.

This week we have a KC team who got pwned by the Jets, then offed the undefeated World Champs... who crushed the Raiders the week before... only to come home and get beaten by those same Raiders.

The only thing that matters is what you bring on that one Sunday.

Shotgun Willie
12-29-2011, 10:43 AM
But who cares is my point. You play who you play, week in and week out. Every team deals with injuries, and every team benefits from another team's injuries so why discount that?



I'm not discounting it. I'm just providing "comps".

Jesus, you can point to name calling all you want but just be happy with a freaking win. We beat a team we should have, can you say that about a lot of other years?

Honest question: in your world, can one not be happy with a win, yet critique the game and find things to improve on after said win?

Shotgun Willie
12-29-2011, 10:46 AM
Any way you look at it, hard to fault the D much in the Bears game.

Again, I'm not "faulting" them for anything. I'm just saying that giving up 160+ on the ground to a team missing it's #1 rb is not something to hang your hat on. That's all.

Loved the win. Loved it. I'm just pointing out what no doubt the coaches pointed out in film study the next week.

Rabb
12-29-2011, 10:50 AM
Of course it is ok to win OR lose and critique or find good and bad. It's a complete catch 22...if we beat a team without their starting RB, it's because we should have. If we lose to the same team, it's because our D wasn't good enough for a backup RB.

My take on the whole thing is, you play who you play and it doesn't really make a difference with very few glaring exceptions (I am looking at you Indy). It could be that the Bears have nice run blocking and poor pass blocking.

DBroncos4life
12-29-2011, 10:50 AM
Barber didn't just fumble the ball our ****ing D caused it. I'm about ready just to put every poster from 2011 on ignore.

BroncoBeavis
12-29-2011, 10:58 AM
Again, I'm not "faulting" them for anything. I'm just saying that giving up 160+ on the ground to a team missing it's #1 rb is not something to hang your hat on. That's all.

Loved the win. Loved it. I'm just pointing out what no doubt the coaches pointed out in film study the next week.

Usually a team that can run the ball isn't just about the RB. We saw this for many years in Denver. A good rushing attack will work with any competent runner. But having a team put up decent rushing yardage when that was their sole focus is no surprise.

At the end of the day, they lacked balance and because of that points. Hopefully McCoy learns something here. :)

Kaylore
12-29-2011, 11:01 AM
only allowed 86 yds passing & only 10 points,yet you think our D looked like crap.

Ha!

Rabb
12-29-2011, 11:04 AM
Barber didn't just fumble the ball our ****ing D caused it. I'm about ready just to put every poster from 2011 on ignore.

me too

Shotgun Willie
12-29-2011, 11:08 AM
Of course it is ok to win OR lose and critique or find good and bad. It's a complete catch 22...if we beat a team without their starting RB, it's because we should have. If we lose to the same team, it's because our D wasn't good enough for a backup RB.......It could be that the Bears have nice run blocking and poor pass blocking.

Usually a team that can run the ball isn't just about the RB. We saw this for many years in Denver. A good rushing attack will work with any competent runner. But having a team put up decent rushing yardage when that was their sole focus is no surprise.


Just to put the performance in context: the Bears average 128 rushing yds/game this year. We allowed them to rush for 160 without their #1 running back.....who, this year in particular, has been responsible for almost all of their offense.

That's not good.

I really don't want to beat that horse any more so I'll move along now.

DBroncos4life
12-29-2011, 11:13 AM
The Packers just allowed 199 yards to that same Bears team. The only this time the Bears used the THIRD string RB. Those silly Packers, no soup for them.

KCStud
12-29-2011, 11:13 AM
This is what you guys will be going up against, so I wouldn't be very worried if I were you.

http://uranus.ckt.net/%7Egochiefs/jones%201.jpg

SpringStein
12-29-2011, 11:13 AM
Not so good news for us:

"San Diego Chargers head coach Norv Turner didn't sound too optimistic about the statuses of RBs Ryan Mathews (calf) and Mike Tolbert (hamstring) for the team's regular-season finale against the Oakland Raiders."

(From KFFL Hot Off the Wire)

Shotgun Willie
12-29-2011, 11:17 AM
The Packers just allowed 199 yards to that same Bears team. The only this time the Bears used the THIRD string RB. Those silly Packers, no soup for them.

And nobody is saying the Packers have a good defense this year. Thanks for helping me make my point.

Peoples Champ
12-29-2011, 11:22 AM
Bears were missing Cutler and Forte and our defense still looked like crap. Minny didn't have AP and our defense still looked like crap.


Also, Bills didnt have Fred Jackson their starter and we made CJ spiller look like a hall of famer the way he broke tackles.

TonyR
12-29-2011, 12:10 PM
Not so good news for us:

"San Diego Chargers head coach Norv Turner didn't sound too optimistic about the statuses of RBs Ryan Mathews (calf) and Mike Tolbert (hamstring) for the team's regular-season finale against the Oakland Raiders."

(From KFFL Hot Off the Wire)

Agree, but if we can't beat the Cheifs at home we don't belong anywhere near the playoffs anyway.

Shotgun Willie
12-29-2011, 12:16 PM
Agree, but if we can't beat the Cheifs at home we don't belong anywhere near the playoffs anyway.

I wonder if last year's Saints were saying that after they got bounced by the 7-9 Seahawks.

Smilin Assassin
12-29-2011, 12:24 PM
Playoffs start this week.

HAS to be the team's mindset going in.

TonyR
12-29-2011, 12:30 PM
I wonder if last year's Saints were saying that after they got bounced by the 7-9 Seahawks.

Come talk to me if/when we back into the playoffs and win our first playoff game. Until then backing into the playoffs on a three game losing streak, including getting blown out at least twice and losing at home to a weak division rival, would be lame. Simpler translation: I want the Broncos to beat the Chiefs on Sunday.

Rabb
12-29-2011, 12:31 PM
Come talk to me if/when we back into the playoffs and win our first playoff game. Until then backing into the playoffs on a three game losing streak, including getting blown out at least twice and losing at home to a weak division rival, would be lame. Simpler translation: I want the Broncos to beat the Chiefs on Sunday.

:thanku:

LetsGoBroncos
12-29-2011, 01:32 PM
Come talk to me if/when we back into the playoffs and win our first playoff game. Until then backing into the playoffs on a three game losing streak, including getting blown out at least twice and losing at home to a weak division rival, would be lame. Simpler translation: I want the Broncos to beat the Chiefs on Sunday.

Agree. If we can win Sunday I think we have a legit shot to beat Pittsburgh or Baltimore. We can hang in any game until the fourth quarter if we don't turn the ball over

55CrushEm
12-29-2011, 01:40 PM
Agree. If we can win Sunday I think we have a legit shot to beat Pittsburgh or Baltimore. We can hang in any game until the fourth quarter if we don't turn the ball over

Exactly, when we were 7-1 under Tebow.....we had minimal turnovers.

Now, in the last 2 games......SEVEN. That will lose you games every ****ing time.

If we don't turn ball over.....considering our #1 rushing offense and mobile/impovisational QB.....I agree....I think we can hang with anyone. Hell, we were up 9 on New England....until the wheels fell off with 3 turnovers in roughly FIVE minutes......

Must play mistake free football. Obviously.

UberBroncoMan
12-29-2011, 02:52 PM
Mc Cluster ****....the little scat back......................

I remember when we lost to the Chiefs to end our season not too long ago. They had a fast **** breakout against us for over 200 yards.

BroncoBeavis
12-29-2011, 02:57 PM
Now, in the last 2 games......SEVEN. That will lose you games every ****ing time.

Eh. In the Pats game turnovers were a primary cause. In the Bills game it was more of a symptom. We didn't have any turnovers until late in the 3rd but were already down multiple scores with the D struggling to hold it together.

Those turnovers were more a symptom of the panic brought on by the failure of one of the worst NFL gameplans ever devised.

BroncoBeavis
12-29-2011, 03:01 PM
Come talk to me if/when we back into the playoffs and win our first playoff game. Until then backing into the playoffs on a three game losing streak, including getting blown out at least twice and losing at home to a weak division rival, would be lame. Simpler translation: I want the Broncos to beat the Chiefs on Sunday.

You must've already forgotten what 3-13 felt like. Every game mattered this season. That's a huge step up from where we were.

Requiem
12-29-2011, 07:07 PM
Jackie who? Irrelevant.

oubronco
12-29-2011, 08:11 PM
No doubt. We can thank Hanie (and Barber's two brain farts) for that. The guy is awful.

We gave up 160 yds and a TD on the ground to a team missing its #1 running back. I'm not going to spin that into some great performance.

And who caused Barber to fumble the ball? He didn't just drop it you know

And we gave up 160 yds to a very good running team their running game consists of more than Forte

oubronco
12-29-2011, 08:15 PM
Agree. If we can win Sunday I think we have a legit shot to beat Pittsburgh or Baltimore. We can hang in any game until the fourth quarter if we don't turn the ball over

You do know their defenses are ranked 1st and 3rd right

eddie mac
12-29-2011, 09:33 PM
I'd rather McCluster was out. We struggle against speed backs/WR. Look what Harvin and Spiller did to our D.

55CrushEm
12-30-2011, 07:31 AM
Eh. In the Pats game turnovers were a primary cause. In the Bills game it was more of a symptom. We didn't have any turnovers until late in the 3rd but were already down multiple scores with the D struggling to hold it together.

Those turnovers were more a symptom of the panic brought on by the failure of one of the worst NFL gameplans ever devised.

Eh.....our defense only gave up 19 vs. the Bills. 21 points came from their defense and special teams. And if by being down "multiple" scores, you mean TWO (26-14).....well, we've been in that situation pretty much every game.

19 points is hardly a horrible performance by our D. Our D was holding Buffalo to FG after FG to start the second half.

Let's give the Bills defense some credit, too.....this is the same defense that picked off Tom Brady 4 times earlier in the season.

Bob's your Information Minister
12-30-2011, 08:01 AM
You guys need to worry about our passing game.

MagicHef
12-30-2011, 08:13 AM
You guys need to worry about our passing game.

Nah, Goodman and Moore got this.

BroncoBeavis
12-30-2011, 08:14 AM
Eh.....our defense only gave up 19 vs. the Bills. 21 points came from their defense and special teams. And if by being down "multiple" scores, you mean TWO (26-14).....well, we've been in that situation pretty much every game.

19 points is hardly a horrible performance by our D. Our D was holding Buffalo to FG after FG to start the second half.

Let's give the Bills defense some credit, too.....this is the same defense that picked off Tom Brady 4 times earlier in the season.

I didn't say anything about the Defense losing the game. I'm saying having a gameplan that gets you down two scores while largely keeping your QB out of the game you can't expect him to flip a switch against a defense that knows exactly what you're going to do.

When any QB walks into that kind of situation, they're going to take chances as they feel the game slipping away. Especially when they see their own defense struggling. When that same QB's only been given a few attempts to even observe the defense up until that point, you're just begging him to take chances and make mistakes.

The fact that they've gotten away with it before doesn't make it better.

Bob's your Information Minister
12-30-2011, 08:16 AM
Nah, Goodman and Moore got this.

Your defense has been a sieve 3 of the last 4 weeks.

Prepare to get Orton'd.

MagicHef
12-30-2011, 08:51 AM
Your defense has been a sieve 3 of the last 4 weeks.

Prepare to get Orton'd.

Yes, please!

Shotgun Willie
12-30-2011, 10:21 AM
And who caused Barber to fumble the ball? He didn't just drop it you know

Yup, I know. What about the other unforced error? What about Hanie's complete incompetence? Please don't cherry pick. Respond to my whole post.

And we gave up 160 yds to a very good running team their running game consists of more than Forte

Ummm, ok. With their #1 weapon, they were averaging about 125 yds on the ground per game. Without him, they rang up 160 on us. That sucks. I can't believe it's even a debate.

Inkana7
12-30-2011, 10:51 AM
Yup, I know. What about the other unforced error? What about Hanie's complete incompetence? Please don't cherry pick. Respond to my whole post.



Ummm, ok. With their #1 weapon, they were averaging about 125 yds on the ground per game. Without him, they rang up 160 on us. That sucks. I can't believe it's even a debate.

Also with their #1 weapon, they had Cutler, and as you pointed out, Hanks is incompetent, thus more of a reliance on the running game. There are lots of games you could have pointed to to make your point, but you chose one of the worst examples. Well done.

Shotgun Willie
12-30-2011, 10:59 AM
Also with their #1 weapon, they had Cutler, and as you pointed out, Hanks is incompetent, thus more of a reliance on the running game. There are lots of games you could have pointed to to make your point, but you chose one of the worst examples. Well done.

Ummm, the week before our game, they rushed for 93 yds.
The week after, 132 yds.
Neither performance topped what they did against us.
And both were without Cutler.

You were saying?

BroncoBeavis
12-30-2011, 11:11 AM
Ummm, the week before our game, they rushed for 93 yds.
The week after, 132 yds.
Neither performance topped what they did against us.
And both were without Cutler.

You were saying?

Are you really bitching over 28 extra rushing yards over 4 quarters and an overtime? The bears also had about 25% more rushing attempts against us than the Seahawks.

Was the D supposed to hold the Bears to less yards on more carries?

Inkana7
12-30-2011, 11:18 AM
Are you really b****ing over 28 extra rushing yards over 4 quarters and an overtime? The bears also had about 25% more rushing attempts against us than the Seahawks.

Was the D supposed to hold the Bears to less yards on more carries?

What this guy said.

Shotgun Willie
12-30-2011, 11:36 AM
Are you really b****ing over 28 extra rushing yards over 4 quarters and an overtime? The bears also had about 25% more rushing attempts against us than the Seahawks.

Was the D supposed to hold the Bears to less yards on more carries?

You two are right. What was I thinking? Giving up more yards than a team averages all season long, when they were missing their best runner, is a GOOD thing. Our rush D clearly earned an A for that effort.

Inkana7
12-30-2011, 11:49 AM
You two are right. What was I thinking? Giving up more yards than a team averages all season long, when they were missing their best runner, is a GOOD thing. Our rush D clearly earned an A for that effort.

If giving up 10 points is bad I don't want to be good.

BroncoBeavis
12-30-2011, 12:02 PM
You two are right. What was I thinking? Giving up more yards than a team averages all season long, when they were missing their best runner, is a GOOD thing. Our rush D clearly earned an A for that effort.

Matt Forte this year never once had as many rushing attempts in a game as Marion Barber did against us (27).

I hope and pray we see another 'failure' like this from our defense this week. :)

Shotgun Willie
12-30-2011, 12:21 PM
Matt Forte this year never once had as many rushing attempts in a game as Marion Barber did against us (27).

I hope and pray we see another 'failure' like this from our defense this week. :)

He had either 24 or 25 carries 3 times. Talk about a technicality.

You hope and pray we give up 160 yds on the ground to KC this week?!?

I sure as hell don't.

Say what you will about Orton, but he doesn't lose games with that kind of support from the running game.

Dagmar
12-30-2011, 01:15 PM
Battle is officially out per the Goblin.

BroncoBeavis
12-30-2011, 01:51 PM
He had either 24 or 25 carries 3 times. Talk about a technicality.

You hope and pray we give up 160 yds on the ground to KC this week?!?

I sure as hell don't.

If it comes with their quarterback only getting 19 attempts and netting 115 yards, I'll take that all day, every day. Thanks.

Say what you will about Orton, but he doesn't lose games with that kind of support from the running game.

Last time we lost to the Chiefs (not coincidentally, Kyle's second to last start last year)

Knowshon put up 161 yards rushing by himself. Kyle went 9 for 28 (yeah you read that right) for 113 yards. Broncos lose 10-6.

BroncoBeavis
12-30-2011, 02:04 PM
He had either 24 or 25 carries 3 times. Talk about a technicality..

And he had way more yards than Marion Barber did in every one of those games. Barber had 108. Forte AVG'd 160 by himself during the 3 games you mention.

Broncos D did a pretty decent job considering the Bears focus on running.

Shotgun Willie
12-30-2011, 02:12 PM
Knowshon put up 161 yards rushing by himself. Kyle went 9 for 28 (yeah you read that right) for 113 yards. Broncos lose 10-6.

Ahhh, yes. That one was on McD. 140 or so of those yards through the first three quarters and he shuts it down and goes pass happy. Zero runs after the 10 minute mark to go in the game. Unreal.

Dagmar
12-30-2011, 02:16 PM
From our side, McGahee isn't even on the injur report.

Shotgun Willie
12-30-2011, 02:17 PM
And he had way more yards than Marion Barber did in every one of those games. Barber had 108. Forte AVG'd 160 by himself during the 3 games you mention.

Broncos D did a pretty decent job considering the Bears focus on running.

Fact: we gave up 160 yds on the ground to a backup and a #3. If we averaged that for the year, we'd literally be ranked #32 (last!) in the league.

Whatever, let's just agree to disagree. Neither of us are going to change our minds.

BroncoBeavis
12-30-2011, 02:20 PM
Ahhh, yes. That one was on McD. 140 or so of those yards through the first three quarters and he shuts it down and goes pass happy. Zero runs after the 10 minute mark to go in the game. Unreal.

He probably should've shut it down. They had 3 points until late in the 3rd quarter when they got to 6. Whether the rushing yards looked good on paper or not, they weren't putting points on the board.

BroncoBeavis
12-30-2011, 02:25 PM
Fact: we gave up 160 yds on the ground to a backup and a #3. If we averaged that for the year, we'd literally be ranked #32 (last!) in the league.

Whatever, let's just agree to disagree. Neither of us are going to change our minds.

So let's say the Bears hadn't passed at all, and racked up 250 yards rushing. Would you say that was terrible defense? I wouldn't. That's the best result you could hope for.

If you want to talk yards, it should all be in terms of yards per attempt. Total yardage means nothing if you don't look at it in context. Whether you're talking passing or rushing yards.

Barber had 4.0 yards per carry. That's pretty pedestrian. That average wouldn't put him in the top 30 backs in the league.

Shotgun Willie
12-30-2011, 02:28 PM
Agree..........to............disagree

Rolandftw
12-30-2011, 05:22 PM
I don't see how this could be good news. Before, it was theoretically possible KC would have went to Thomas "I'm so old, that I forgot what a TD was" Jones, and Jackie "Now that Haley is fired, I'm out of the doghouse" Battle.

Instead we will see a healthy dose of McCluster. Hopefully, their OC still doesn't have a brain and will use McCluster between the tackles. He isn't quite up to his fumble quota for the year so he's due for at least two.