PDA

View Full Version : Can Denver's defense take next step?


Bronco Rob
03-26-2012, 09:44 AM
Can Denver's defense take next step?


Mar 26 11:00 AM ET By Bill Williamson




Barring a setback from the neck injury that cost him the entire 2011 season, Peyton Manning has the Denver Broncos’ offense covered. That side of the ball will be fine and will be in playoff form.

But what about the defense?

That side of the ball will be a key to Denver's season. If the 2012 Denver defense can make the strides it did in 2011, the Broncos have a chance to be a serious contender.

Bill Polian, who knows Manning well, has said he thinks the potential of the Broncos' defense is one of the reasons Manning chose to play in Denver. Polian, the Colts’ former general manager who brought Manning to Indianapolis and who is now an ESPN analyst, said last week he thinks the Denver defense could be a spark for the Manning-led offense.

“John Fox is going to coach up that defense and it has a chance to play great defense,” Polian said. “That will only help Peyton.”

However, I believe the Broncos have work to do before they can start playing great defense.

This unit is a work in progress. It went from No. 32 in 2010 prior to Fox’s arrival to No. 20 in 2011 under the guidance of Fox and coordinator Dennis Allen, who is now the head coach in Oakland. The 2011 Denver Broncos will be remembered for the wild days of Tim Tebow, but it was the defense that rose up and solidified the team. With Manning running the offense and former Jacksonville head coach Jack Del Rio running the defense, the team has a chance to go to the next level.

The defense in Denver starts with pass-rushers Elvis Dumervil and Von Miller. The pair combined for 21 sacks last season and they should be one of the most dynamic pass-rush duos in the NFL for years to come. Polian called the pair special and an anchor for the defense.

Denver upgraded at cornerback by signing Tracy Porter of New Orleans. He is a solid No. 2 cornerback and will make a strong pairing with the aging, but still dominant Champ Bailey. Porter, who has had challenges staying healthy, is an upgrade from Andre Goodman. Underrated safety Mike Adams was signed from Cleveland. He will pair with second-year player Quinton Carter, who made strides as the season went on. The team will give 2011 No. 2 pick Rahim Moore a chance to rebound from a rookie season in which he regressed. But Adams and Carter should be a serviceable pairing.

There are some problems, though. Outside linebacker D.J. Williams, one of the better defenders on the team, is facing a six-game NFL suspension for using a banned substance. He is fighting it in the form of a lawsuit. Defensive tackle Brodrick Bunkley signed with New Orleans. Bunkley was a tone-setter, and even though he played only 43 percent of the snaps, he will be missed.

Denver has a major void at defensive tackle and it probably will take advantage of a strong draft class at the position and use the No. 25 pick on a player such as Mississippi State’s Fletcher Cox, Penn State’s Devon Still or LSU’s Michael Brockers. They also want to re-sign Marcus Thomas and hope 2011 free-agent signee Ty Warren is healthy after missing the past two seasons.

There is no doubt this is still a building project and that concerns Matt Williamson of Scouts Inc.

“I was very worried about this defense, but now I feel a little better about it after it signed Porter, who is a very solid No. 2 behind Bailey,” Williamson said. “But I still have my worries about the defense up the middle. Losing Bunkley hurts quite a bit, but maybe Ty Warren can help out this year. The safety position worries me. But they can sure rush the passer. The question is will be they be able to handle a physical offense.”

After being the bright spot of a surprise team in 2011, the Denver defense must take the next step in a year when, suddenly, much is expected from this team.




http://espn.go.com/blog/afcwest/post/_/id/42101/can-denvers-defense-take-next-step

Chris
03-26-2012, 10:09 AM
surprisingly good write up

gyldenlove
03-26-2012, 10:20 AM
Amazing, this may be the best piece of Burger Bill writing I have ever seen.

Improvements over last year:

Healthy Doom - there is no way to overstate this, he is one of the most dominant pass rushers in the game and having him healthy the whole season is a huge upgrade.
Von Miller with a years experience - he was a stud as a rookie playing a new position, now that he has a year in the scheme he will be even better - with Dumervil he combines to give us the pass rush that Mathis and Freeney gave Indy for so many years.
Tracey Porter - Goodman got picked on badly by good QBs, with Porter we get a much better matchup on that side of the field.
1 more year - Ayers got better as the season progressed, that should continue, Quinton Carter got better, Harris got better, Thomas got better, I am looking for several players to get more comfortable in the system, for the first time we have the same defense two years in a row.

Regression:

DT - Bunkley was a loss, and he hasn't been replaced, even if we get a DT in the 1st round, they typically take a number of years to reach peak performance.
Dawkins gone - I am not sure he will come back, his presence helped a ton.
DJ suspended - I love Woodyard and I am happy he is back, but he is smallish and not as strong in coverage.

razorwire77
03-26-2012, 10:24 AM
I don't think we can underestimate how badly Miller's injury hurt his pass-rushing ability. In the beginning of the year, he was the best instinctive pass-rusher I've seen since Derrick Thomas. Miller could swim with either hand, bull-rush and rip, or even spin right off of an engaged lineman. Sometimes he would simply catch an angle and blow by a slow footed tackle. After the injury, he was limited to becoming an obvious speed rusher. A big part of pass rushing is being able to jam the tackle with your hands before he can envelop you. Von couldn't do that effectively after the injury.

This year, a health Miller will be a nightmare for quarterbacks. Especially, if the team is playing with leads.

Gort
03-26-2012, 10:32 AM
i completely missed the Porter signing. was something else in the news overshadowing it?

;)

Lestat
03-26-2012, 10:53 AM
oh God how i wish Brockers would fall to #25. that would be epic and help the defense so much it would be damn near illegal.

Chris
03-26-2012, 10:54 AM
oh God how i wish Brockers would fall to #25. that would be epic and help the defense so much it would be damn near illegal.

Given his combine, there's a chance.

Lestat
03-26-2012, 10:55 AM
given his pro day, that chance melted like a snow ball in hell.
Given his combine, there's a chance.

Gcver2ver3
03-26-2012, 11:07 AM
that may be the 1st burger bill write up i agreed with 100%...

DBroncos4life
03-26-2012, 11:10 AM
I still feel like we need another pass rusher. Freeney or someone from the draft I don't care. Hell try and trade DJ for Osi. We need to bring the heat from the front four.

BroncoBen
03-26-2012, 11:35 AM
The other thing to think about.. Whats it going to be like with the Defense playing with a lead on the scoreboard? That more than anything may be the one thing that puts the defense in the top 10 of the league.

BroncoMan4ever
03-26-2012, 11:53 AM
i am not worried. With Fox and Del Rio on board i have no doubts this defense will be improved over last season.

DBroncos4life
03-26-2012, 11:56 AM
The other thing to think about.. Whats it going to be like with the Defense playing with a lead on the scoreboard? That more than anything may be the one thing that puts the defense in the top 10 of the league.

That's why I want another pass rusher.

BroncoMan4ever
03-26-2012, 11:59 AM
That's why I want another pass rusher.

i'd love a guy who can get pressure up the middle. it's why i really want Fletcher Cox or Devon Still in the 1st round this year.

DBroncos4life
03-26-2012, 12:18 PM
i'd love a guy who can get pressure up the middle. it's why i really want Fletcher Cox or Devon Still in the 1st round this year.

I agree 100%. I do think Ayers is going to be better this year up the middle. A nickel edge rusher soul be sweet too.

Lestat
03-26-2012, 12:35 PM
definitely want another pass rusher on the team. i think there will be some tweeners and underrated guys that fall to the 2nd and 3rd rounds who will blossom into big time DE's.

BroncoMan4ever
03-26-2012, 01:48 PM
I agree 100%. I do think Ayers is going to be better this year up the middle. A nickel edge rusher soul be sweet too.

if Ayers finally makes the next step in his progression and we get a good up the middle DT rusher this can be an extremely potent pass rushing defense.

DBroncos4life
03-26-2012, 02:09 PM
if Ayers finally makes the next step in his progression and we get a good up the middle DT rusher this can be an extremely potent pass rushing defense.

I thought he played his best football at the end of last season and in the playoffs. Part of me thinks that's why the coaching staff isn't all that worried about a DT yet.

Punisher
03-26-2012, 02:15 PM
Manning will give the defense less time and positions to actually D up so i say yea they'll take the next step

razorwire77
03-26-2012, 02:18 PM
I thought he played his best football at the end of last season and in the playoffs. Part of me thinks that's why the coaching staff isn't all that worried about a DT yet.

I agree. I always got the sense that he had a lot of ability, but struggled with leverage and the cerebral parts of the game. In the playoffs, he seemed to really shed blockers a lot more effectively. I think the light bulb has gone off. It would be really exciting if that's the case.

Agamemnon
03-26-2012, 02:37 PM
What's the "next step"? If it amounts to going from bad to mediocre, maybe, but they have to get better at DT for that to happen. Right now the DT position all but assures us a bottom five defense, especially against the run.

vancejohnson82
03-26-2012, 02:48 PM
losing Dennis Allen is going to affect us as well

love the Del Rio hire, but the swinging gate at DC needs to end at some point

OBF1
03-26-2012, 02:52 PM
What's the "next step"? If it amounts to going from bad to mediocre, maybe, but they have to get better at DT for that to happen. Right now the DT position all but assures us a bottom five defense, especially against the run.

You are talking out your ass, No way this team drops from 20 to 27...as you claim.

DENVERDUI55
03-26-2012, 02:52 PM
losing Dennis Allen is going to affect us as well

love the Del Rio hire, but the swinging gate at DC needs to end at some point

Fox had plenty of imput. I'm sure replacing a 30 some DC won't be a problem. In fact Denver will take the next step because I doubt we lead the league in 3 and outs this next year.

Kaylore
03-26-2012, 02:53 PM
We need to draft a defensive tackle. He won't be that good, may even bust since they have a pretty good bust rate - but you need to make a statement and invest in the position to show you are actually trying.

GreatBronco16
03-26-2012, 02:55 PM
The other thing to think about.. Whats it going to be like with the Defense playing with a lead on the scoreboard? That more than anything may be the one thing that puts the defense in the top 10 of the league.

So Denver is going to receive the ball first to start every game? Denver will put up 7, just to have the defense give 7 right back. So how is this playing with a lead that will turn the pass rush loose? Or do you think that Manning by himself is good to put up 21 before the defense(as it is right now) gives up a score?

vancejohnson82
03-26-2012, 03:00 PM
So Denver is going to receive the ball first to start every game? Denver will put up 7, just to have the defense give 7 right back. So how is this playing with a lead that will turn the pass rush loose? Or do you think that Manning by himself is good to put up 21 before the defense(as it is right now) gives up a score?

I think we are going see our defense force a lot more turnovers this year....

since I'm assuming we are going to put up more scores its going to force the opposing teams to take more shots against us....riskier playcalling = better opportunity to create those turnovers this team has struggled to create in the past

DENVERDUI55
03-26-2012, 03:05 PM
The Defense stepped up last year with playoffs on the line and held the opponent to 7 pts. I guarantee a Manning led team would of won that game 100 out of a 100 times.

chickennob2
03-26-2012, 03:42 PM
What's the "next step"? If it amounts to going from bad to mediocre, maybe, but they have to get better at DT for that to happen. Right now the DT position all but assures us a bottom five defense, especially against the run.

Why are you still here?

Broncos4tw
03-26-2012, 03:47 PM
What's the "next step"? If it amounts to going from bad to mediocre, maybe, but they have to get better at DT for that to happen. Right now the DT position all but assures us a bottom five defense, especially against the run.

You are still bitter about Tebow, aren't you. :wiggle:

Sorry.. I don't think our defense will regress. Our offense will force our opponents to toss the ball more. Our pass rush will be a much more dominant feature this year. If we can get a solid rusher in the middle, we will be doing very well.

To think our defense will regress to almost the worst in the league makes no sense whatsoever. Like I said.. you sound bitter and negative.

Bmore Manning
03-26-2012, 03:49 PM
There are players in the first Four rounds who could make a difference on D.
I would do 1 of 2 scenarios.

Still 1 DT, Thompson 2 DT, Cam Johnson 3 DE, Nigel Bradham 4 WLB
Or
Mercilus/Curry 1 DE, Thompson 2 DT, Chapman 3 DT, Bradham 4 WLB

lonestar
03-26-2012, 03:50 PM
surprisingly good write up

from bill burger?.. Obviously someone else wrote it..

Jetmeck
03-26-2012, 03:54 PM
Duh, we might take another step if we sign some decent free agents....DUH

Agamemnon
03-26-2012, 07:13 PM
You are still bitter about Tebow, aren't you. :wiggle:

Sorry.. I don't think our defense will regress. Our offense will force our opponents to toss the ball more. Our pass rush will be a much more dominant feature this year. If we can get a solid rusher in the middle, we will be doing very well.

To think our defense will regress to almost the worst in the league makes no sense whatsoever. Like I said.. you sound bitter and negative.

We have the worst DT's in the game right now, and the book on beating Manning has always been to keep him off the field. Even a mental midget like yourself should be able to do that math.

Agamemnon
03-26-2012, 07:16 PM
You are talking out your ass, No way this team drops from 20 to 27...as you claim.

Why? We have gotten worse in the middle, and the foundation of a defense is in the middle. If the middle of your defense is soft then everything around it crumbles. People are being willfully delusional about this topic.

campocorto
03-26-2012, 07:17 PM
This year, I want to see Miller/Dumervil/Ayers, one of them, hit Cassel in the leg and snap it in half. I want to see blood gushing out of his thigh.

Agamemnon
03-26-2012, 07:20 PM
I think we are going see our defense force a lot more turnovers this year....

since I'm assuming we are going to put up more scores its going to force the opposing teams to take more shots against us....riskier playcalling = better opportunity to create those turnovers this team has struggled to create in the past

Why? Because we signed Manning? He's going to magically make us a turnover producing machine as well? Wow, the guy just cures all ails doesn't he? ::)

Dutch
03-26-2012, 09:11 PM
Fox had plenty of imput. I'm sure replacing a 30 some DC won't be a problem. In fact Denver will take the next step because I doubt we lead the league in 3 and outs this next year.

This. Instead of asking our "D" to keep it close all game long, we will actually be giving them a chance to rest and adjust during our offensive drives. This, in addition to scoring more points will force opposing offenses to throw more- playing into our pass rush.

Punisher
03-26-2012, 09:14 PM
This year, I want to see Miller/Dumervil/Ayers, one of them, hit Cassel in the leg and snap it in half. I want to see blood gushing out of his thigh.

Will that get you horny?

Vegas_Bronco
03-26-2012, 09:50 PM
We need a solid secondary...but moreso a strong middle so teams can't just run on the Broncos and keep Peyton off the field. I like what we are doing going secondary first, but at some point we need a Dline that has some experience. I think we will sign 2 more before the FA period is over.

KevinJames
03-27-2012, 05:12 AM
Having Manning will help the defense soooooo much its not even funny.

Why? Because we signed Manning? He's going to magically make us a turnover producing machine as well? Wow, the guy just cures all ails doesn't he? ::)

Tebow's gone get over it.....Manning is 100x better than Tebow at throwing the football.....

Yes this defense will force more turnovers just because we signed Peyton.

Think about it, if you really know football you will realize Manning = more turnovers from our defense

Agamemnon
03-27-2012, 05:23 AM
We need a solid secondary...but moreso a strong middle so teams can't just run on the Broncos and keep Peyton off the field. I like what we are doing going secondary first, but at some point we need a Dline that has some experience. I think we will sign 2 more before the FA period is over.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the bolded section is exactly how we lose the games we lose next season. Looking at the middle of our defense, how could any coach not think "hey, let's pound it and keep Manning off the field"? And who really thinks we will be able to stop it while looking at the nobodies we have at DT and Joe ****ing Mays at Mike?

Spider
03-27-2012, 05:26 AM
Duh, we might take another step if we sign some decent free agents....DUH

your talking bout your new team the JETS right ?

Spider
03-27-2012, 05:27 AM
Having Manning will help the defense soooooo much its not even funny.



Tebow's gone get over it.....Manning is 100x better than Tebow at throwing the football.....

Yes this defense will force more turnovers just because we signed Peyton.

Think about it, if you really know football you will realize Manning = more turnovers from our defense

This ..... +1

Agamemnon
03-27-2012, 05:30 AM
Think about it, if you really know football you will realize Manning = more turnovers from our defense

No he doesn't. God you people are ****ing nuts with this ****. Our pass defense forced so few turnovers last season it's not even funny, so a few more pass attempts isn't going to make that much difference. And with the looks of our run defense, I really don't get why people think teams will pass more on us anyway. Yes Manning will score more points. But he isn't going to be blowing people away 45-0 at halftime. And again, running is the best way for teams to slow him down as long as the game is relatively close (which it probably will be more often than not), especially seeing as our run defense won't be able to stop anyone.

Spider
03-27-2012, 05:30 AM
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the bolded section is exactly how we lose the games we lose next season. Looking at the middle of our defense, how could any coach not think "hey, let's pound it and keep Manning off the field"? And who really thinks we will be able to stop it while looking at the nobodies we have at DT and Joe ****ing Mays at Mike?

everyone tries that against manning , Problem is not to many offense's in the NFL can work the field like that .... then lets say you have a 7 point lead in the 4th as a coach are you going to feel good sitting on that lead with time on the clock ? very few teams can pound the rock for 4 quarters

Spider
03-27-2012, 05:31 AM
No he doesn't. God you people are ****ing nuts with this ****. Our pass defense forced so few turnovers last season it's not even funny, so a few more pass attempts isn't going to make that much difference. And with the looks of our run defense, I really don't get why people think teams will pass more on us anyway. Yes Manning will score more points. But he isn't going to be blowing people away 45-0 at halftime. And again, running is the best way for teams to slow him down as long as the game is relatively close (which it probably will be more often than not), especially seeing as our run defense won't be able to stop anyone.

Now your just being stupid for the sake of being stupid

Spider
03-27-2012, 05:37 AM
So Denver is going to receive the ball first to start every game? Denver will put up 7, just to have the defense give 7 right back. So how is this playing with a lead that will turn the pass rush loose? Or do you think that Manning by himself is good to put up 21 before the defense(as it is right now) gives up a score?
really ? Defensing Manning and Brady is alot different ten defensing Big Ben and Eli , Manning and Brady bring so much Pressure to a defense that the other teams offense is in a catch up mode by Half time .... Ben and Eli you got to shut down during Crunch time , Manning and Brady you got to start at Kick off and never let up ...... recipe for **** ups

Drek
03-27-2012, 05:41 AM
Having Manning will help the defense soooooo much its not even funny.



Tebow's gone get over it.....Manning is 100x better than Tebow at throwing the football.....

Yes this defense will force more turnovers just because we signed Peyton.

Think about it, if you really know football you will realize Manning = more turnovers from our defense

Having Manning means the defense is going to spend a lot of time on the field. That has not been a strength for the past decade. We give up too much yardage on first downs and give up too many 3rd down conversions. A lot of this is symptomatic of a weak interior DL and poor cover LBs. I see nothing to suggest that has changed.

Manning will put pressure on opposing teams for the second half of games once he can build a lead. Prior to that though the opposition can put pressure on Manning by not letting our defense off the field. It is the same problem the Colts struggled with for years with Manning. Just having Manning didn't suddenly make the Colts D great or make them a juggernaut. The Colts had plenty of bad games, bad stretches of games, and were almost always a bottom tier defense.

Manning isn't going to change that one bit. He'll turn close wins into blow outs when he's hot early and spots our D a double digit lead, letting them unleash the pass rush. But early in games and in any game that stays close our D will have to play honest and as a result is likely to get exploited.

Joe Mays could show some disciplinary growth in year 2 as a 4-3 MLB starter or Nate Irving could make a run to take the job from him. Miller will almost definitely take a step forward as an all around LB. That gives us some in-house hope for better short to intermediate coverage by our LBs. DJ also isn't likely to actually miss time and he's our best cover LB, so we're ok there.

DT is the real concern though. Warren is rarely ever healthy. We've never seen a <320 pound Vickerson on the football field and his two previous stops in 4-3 fronts he couldn't make the 53 man roster. McBean likely avoids the suspension along with DJ but he's a bit player on even an average DT rotation, not a significant downs guy. Unrein shouldn't even make the roster but right now he's #4 assuming a healthy Warren.

This is where Del Rio and Fox need to step it up. Fox had a history in Carolina of pulling together passable DT play year after year even without committing real value. He did the same for us last year. Nothing great at DT, but passable. That has resulted in Bunkley getting grossly overpaid for contract year performance though, so now its time to start the hunt anew. Del Rio has a track record of actually finding good DT play from all tiers of player acquisition, so his ability to do that is the real X factor in our off-season. Everyone laughed when they grabbed Alualu at #11 a few years back, but from day one Alualu was a solid starter for them. He pulled Knighton out of the 4th round if I recall, who has been another productive starter from day one. We need Del Rio to take this deep DT class and do the same thing for us.

At #25 I expect Del Rio and Fox to successfully identify a high value day one starter much like Alualu. This is the year to find one as they'll probably have their pick of at least two or three from Brockers, Poe, Cox, Worthy, and Still. In round three we'll likely have at least a couple of Champman, Martin, Ta'amu, and Randall to pick from. The depth of the draft pairs well with our pick locations. We should have good value available without having to jockey for position.

My personal ideal world would see us sign Sammie Lee Hill at the cost of his RFA tender (4th round). Since we have the 2nd pick in the 5th already just 7 picks away from our own 4th we wouldn't suddenly have a prolonged wait between picks and Hill could potentially be the every down NT type we have struggled all these years to find. I had previously been interested in Okoye as a pass rush UT but I think the FO views Ayers as the guy they want in that role, with McBean taking some of that work as well. Therefore I'd like to see them shoot for an every down UT talent at #25 and if the draft plays out right grab another in the late 3rd. Hill directly replaces Bunkley, the 1st rounder directly replaces Thomas, and the 3rd rounder replaces Unrein.

Spider
03-27-2012, 05:51 AM
Having Manning means the defense is going to spend a lot of time on the field. That has not been a strength for the past decade. We give up too much yardage on first downs and give up too many 3rd down conversions. A lot of this is symptomatic of a weak interior DL and poor cover LBs. I see nothing to suggest that has changed.

Manning will put pressure on opposing teams for the second half of games once he can build a lead. Prior to that though the opposition can put pressure on Manning by not letting our defense off the field. It is the same problem the Colts struggled with for years with Manning. Just having Manning didn't suddenly make the Colts D great or make them a juggernaut. The Colts had plenty of bad games, bad stretches of games, and were almost always a bottom tier defense.


Last years Colts team proves you wrong .....

Spider
03-27-2012, 05:55 AM
Look Denver as a better core team then the Colts , Manning kept the Colts competitive week in week out year after year , Wen Manning Crashed, the entire team did , We went to the playoffs with a QB that cant throw , Yea we gave up yards , But giving up yards means nothing wen you got a QB that can play Teams have to score against Manning , I like our chances

Drek
03-27-2012, 06:25 AM
Last years Colts team proves you wrong .....

How so?

They were 28th in points, 25th in yards last year. In 2010 they were 23rd in points, 20th in yards. Bottom tier with and without Manning, same split in their points v. yards too.

In 2009 they went to the Super Bowl and were 8th in points, but only 18th in yards. This trend of being ranked better in points than yards is par for the course in the Colts' few "good" years with Manning at QB, which makes sense as Manning does help turn other teams into one dimensional/higher risk offenses once behind. But as you can see from the trends (only 5 at best of his 13 years in Indy were their defenses even top half of the league level) this isn't a strong predictor of future success. Twice they were a top team in points allowed ('05 and '07) only to fall apart in the playoffs and then have a significant drop the next year in overall defensive success.

In short, Manning is good for a few less points on the board v. your total yardage given up, but he doesn't suddenly make teams less likely to throw up 400 yards of offense on you. Just instead of scoring 35 points they score 32.

If you want a strong defense that Manning can truly compliment you need to shore up DT so that our interior isn't a sieve in the running game. Do that and this D has real elite potential.

Also, to be fair to the Manning era Colts, in only 3 of Manning's 13 years there was their offense anything less than a top 5 team in both points and yardage, so Manning doesn't exactly need an all world D to make great things happen. The chances we don't put up a LOT of points is pretty damn slim.

KevinJames
03-27-2012, 06:31 AM
No he doesn't. God you people are ****ing nuts with this ****. Our pass defense forced so few turnovers last season it's not even funny, so a few more pass attempts isn't going to make that much difference. And with the looks of our run defense, I really don't get why people think teams will pass more on us anyway. Yes Manning will score more points. But he isn't going to be blowing people away 45-0 at halftime. And again, running is the best way for teams to slow him down as long as the game is relatively close (which it probably will be more often than not), especially seeing as our run defense won't be able to stop anyone.

You are probably the most retarded individual I have seen post on this site, outside of maybe AlphaSierra and MacGruder.....so let me break it down for the slow people.

Peyton Manning is a master of the forward pass. Tebow was more so a master of the option.

Forward pass leads to quick points. Option leads to slow grind it out football games with very few points.

Points create momentum for us. Creates pressure for them to score. Pressure to score leads to QBs getting hit. QBs getting hit leads to getting turnovers. It can create either a forced fumble or it forces the QB to get rid of the ball quicker for an interception.

We have the best edge rushing combo in the NFL. 2 Pro Bowl Pass Rushers. Your telling me they won't be better with Peyton Manning? ROFL!

Soooo clearly Peyton Manning will help our defense and they will force more turnovers.

Having Manning means the defense is going to spend a lot of time on the field. That has not been a strength for the past decade. We give up too much yardage on first downs and give up too many 3rd down conversions. A lot of this is symptomatic of a weak interior DL and poor cover LBs. I see nothing to suggest that has changed.

Manning will put pressure on opposing teams for the second half of games once he can build a lead. Prior to that though the opposition can put pressure on Manning by not letting our defense off the field. It is the same problem the Colts struggled with for years with Manning. Just having Manning didn't suddenly make the Colts D great or make them a juggernaut. The Colts had plenty of bad games, bad stretches of games, and were almost always a bottom tier defense.

Manning isn't going to change that one bit. He'll turn close wins into blow outs when he's hot early and spots our D a double digit lead, letting them unleash the pass rush. But early in games and in any game that stays close our D will have to play honest and as a result is likely to get exploited.

Joe Mays could show some disciplinary growth in year 2 as a 4-3 MLB starter or Nate Irving could make a run to take the job from him. Miller will almost definitely take a step forward as an all around LB. That gives us some in-house hope for better short to intermediate coverage by our LBs. DJ also isn't likely to actually miss time and he's our best cover LB, so we're ok there.

DT is the real concern though. Warren is rarely ever healthy. We've never seen a <320 pound Vickerson on the football field and his two previous stops in 4-3 fronts he couldn't make the 53 man roster. McBean likely avoids the suspension along with DJ but he's a bit player on even an average DT rotation, not a significant downs guy. Unrein shouldn't even make the roster but right now he's #4 assuming a healthy Warren.

This is where Del Rio and Fox need to step it up. Fox had a history in Carolina of pulling together passable DT play year after year even without committing real value. He did the same for us last year. Nothing great at DT, but passable. That has resulted in Bunkley getting grossly overpaid for contract year performance though, so now its time to start the hunt anew. Del Rio has a track record of actually finding good DT play from all tiers of player acquisition, so his ability to do that is the real X factor in our off-season. Everyone laughed when they grabbed Alualu at #11 a few years back, but from day one Alualu was a solid starter for them. He pulled Knighton out of the 4th round if I recall, who has been another productive starter from day one. We need Del Rio to take this deep DT class and do the same thing for us.

At #25 I expect Del Rio and Fox to successfully identify a high value day one starter much like Alualu. This is the year to find one as they'll probably have their pick of at least two or three from Brockers, Poe, Cox, Worthy, and Still. In round three we'll likely have at least a couple of Champman, Martin, Ta'amu, and Randall to pick from. The depth of the draft pairs well with our pick locations. We should have good value available without having to jockey for position.

My personal ideal world would see us sign Sammie Lee Hill at the cost of his RFA tender (4th round). Since we have the 2nd pick in the 5th already just 7 picks away from our own 4th we wouldn't suddenly have a prolonged wait between picks and Hill could potentially be the every down NT type we have struggled all these years to find. I had previously been interested in Okoye as a pass rush UT but I think the FO views Ayers as the guy they want in that role, with McBean taking some of that work as well. Therefore I'd like to see them shoot for an every down UT talent at #25 and if the draft plays out right grab another in the late 3rd. Hill directly replaces Bunkley, the 1st rounder directly replaces Thomas, and the 3rd rounder replaces Unrein.

Nice story you wrote.Ha!

Yeah we still need some more players before we can become a top 5 defense but the foundation is definitely in place. Its a passing league, we got a great passer and great pass rushers. Pretty good starting corners a well.

You do know that this is the same defense (well it will be better this year) that held opponents to under 16 points in 5 of our 8 wins right?

Also the same defense that was ranked 6th in 3rd down conversion pct. yeah that's right 34% (the best was 31% the worst was 49%)

We didn't really ever get off to fast starts and huge leads with Tim Tebow quarterbacking the team, must I remind you we have Peyton Manning. Can you imagine the kind of pass rush we are going to have with him as our QB? How many times did our defense have a two possession lead and get to pin their ears back and get after the QB?

We were 20th in the league last year with an offense that barely passed the ball. We will be in the top 15 for sure this lock it up, it wouldn't shock me if we were top 10.

Drek
03-27-2012, 06:49 AM
Yeah we still need some more players before we can become a top 5 defense but the foundation is definitely in place. Its a passing league, we got a great passer and great pass rushers. Pretty good starting corners a well.

You do know that this is the same defense (well it will be better this year) that held opponents to under 16 points in 5 of our 8 wins right?
We also gave up 40 or more points in 4 of our 8 losses and in our second round playoff loss. We knew what was coming against those teams and still got torched.

Also the same defense that was ranked 6th in 3rd down conversion pct. yeah that's right 34% (the best was 31% the worst was 49%)
And? They get bad teams off the field well. They fail to do this with good offenses. This is symptomatic of poor run defense and short to intermediate coverage by our LBs and safeties.

We didn't really ever get off to fast starts and huge leads with Tim Tebow quarterbacking the team, must I remind you we have Peyton Manning. Can you imagine the kind of pass rush we are going to have with him as our QB? How many times did our defense have a two possession lead and get to pin their ears back and get after the QB?
How many games did we play against teams that were DEFINITELY going to be passing the ball heavily on us and still fail to generate said pressure? We knew Green Bay would pass on us. They did uncontested. We knew Detroit would want to pass on us. Again, uncontested. New England did it to us twice one month apart and we gave zero resistance either time. Knowing the opposition is going to throw the ball has only benefited us against weak passing offenses. Our defense still lacks the ability to shut down the elite passing offenses in the league.

We were 20th in the league last year with an offense that barely passed the ball. We will be in the top 15 for sure this lock it up, it wouldn't shock me if we were top 10.
I would expect us to step into the top 15 even if we still had Tebow at QB. That is tied to the maturation of our young defensive players, not QB play.

Tebow helped the D by having longer, clock bleeding drives. That shortened the game overall. Manning will not do that. He'll assure them of point support but it's on the D to spend 30+ minutes of game clock on the field stopping the opposition. With how easily we got chewed up by pass oriented offenses I wouldn't view that as an asset. with how easily we got chewed up by strong interior running teams I wouldn't view that as an asset. You strengthen DT and you make both into an asset by stuffing the inside run and generating inside pressure. If you fail to fix DT our D is not going to be anything special and Manning will have to outscore the elite teams in the league if we're going to win a title.

BroncoBeavis
03-27-2012, 07:03 AM
Look Denver as a better core team then the Colts , Manning kept the Colts competitive week in week out year after year , Wen Manning Crashed, the entire team did , We went to the playoffs with a QB that cant throw , Yea we gave up yards , But giving up yards means nothing wen you got a QB that can play Teams have to score against Manning , I like our chances

Colts sucked without Manning, therefore Manning rulez!
Broncos sucked without Timmy, therefore Timmy sucked!

Epic sense.

Bmore Manning
03-27-2012, 07:12 AM
Having Manning means the defense is going to spend a lot of time on the field. That has not been a strength for the past decade. We give up too much yardage on first downs and give up too many 3rd down conversions. A lot of this is symptomatic of a weak interior DL and poor cover LBs. I see nothing to suggest that has changed.

Manning will put pressure on opposing teams for the second half of games once he can build a lead. Prior to that though the opposition can put pressure on Manning by not letting our defense off the field. It is the same problem the Colts struggled with for years with Manning. Just having Manning didn't suddenly make the Colts D great or make them a juggernaut. The Colts had plenty of bad games, bad stretches of games, and were almost always a bottom tier defense.

Manning isn't going to change that one bit. He'll turn close wins into blow outs when he's hot early and spots our D a double digit lead, letting them unleash the pass rush. But early in games and in any game that stays close our D will have to play honest and as a result is likely to get exploited.

Joe Mays could show some disciplinary growth in year 2 as a 4-3 MLB starter or Nate Irving could make a run to take the job from him. Miller will almost definitely take a step forward as an all around LB. That gives us some in-house hope for better short to intermediate coverage by our LBs. DJ also isn't likely to actually miss time and he's our best cover LB, so we're ok there.

DT is the real concern though. Warren is rarely ever healthy. We've never seen a <320 pound Vickerson on the football field and his two previous stops in 4-3 fronts he couldn't make the 53 man roster. McBean likely avoids the suspension along with DJ but he's a bit player on even an average DT rotation, not a significant downs guy. Unrein shouldn't even make the roster but right now he's #4 assuming a healthy Warren.

This is where Del Rio and Fox need to step it up. Fox had a history in Carolina of pulling together passable DT play year after year even without committing real value. He did the same for us last year. Nothing great at DT, but passable. That has resulted in Bunkley getting grossly overpaid for contract year performance though, so now its time to start the hunt anew. Del Rio has a track record of actually finding good DT play from all tiers of player acquisition, so his ability to do that is the real X factor in our off-season. Everyone laughed when they grabbed Alualu at #11 a few years back, but from day one Alualu was a solid starter for them. He pulled Knighton out of the 4th round if I recall, who has been another productive starter from day one. We need Del Rio to take this deep DT class and do the same thing for us.

At #25 I expect Del Rio and Fox to successfully identify a high value day one starter much like Alualu. This is the year to find one as they'll probably have their pick of at least two or three from Brockers, Poe, Cox, Worthy, and Still. In round three we'll likely have at least a couple of Champman, Martin, Ta'amu, and Randall to pick from. The depth of the draft pairs well with our pick locations. We should have good value available without having to jockey for position.

My personal ideal world would see us sign Sammie Lee Hill at the cost of his RFA tender (4th round). Since we have the 2nd pick in the 5th already just 7 picks away from our own 4th we wouldn't suddenly have a prolonged wait between picks and Hill could potentially be the every down NT type we have struggled all these years to find. I had previously been interested in Okoye as a pass rush UT but I think the FO views Ayers as the guy they want in that role, with McBean taking some of that work as well. Therefore I'd like to see them shoot for an every down UT talent at #25 and if the draft plays out right grab another in the late 3rd. Hill directly replaces Bunkley, the 1st rounder directly replaces Thomas, and the 3rd rounder replaces Unrein.

If Ayers will be the run down DE and pass down DT, which I like by the way.. Would you not recommend drafting a DE, and if they get Hill, would you @25 take a DE like Mercilus or Curry? Grab Reyes or Thompson in the second and Chapman, Martin, Randal in the third.. Bradham hopefully at the top of 5.. Thoughts?

55CrushEm
03-27-2012, 07:14 AM
You do know that this is the same defense (well it will be better this year) that held opponents to under 16 points in 5 of our 8 wins right?


And if you look at who those teams we beat were.....they all had average to poor offenses.

As soon as we faced an elite offense (the Pats).....we got absolutely obliterated.

Our defense was never as good as advertised during that win streak.

Spider
03-27-2012, 07:46 AM
How so?

They were 28th in points, 25th in yards last year. In 2010 they were 23rd in points, 20th in yards. Bottom tier with and without Manning, same split in their points v. yards too.

In 2009 they went to the Super Bowl and were 8th in points, but only 18th in yards. This trend of being ranked better in points than yards is par for the course in the Colts' few "good" years with Manning at QB, which makes sense as Manning does help turn other teams into one dimensional/higher risk offenses once behind. But as you can see from the trends (only 5 at best of his 13 years in Indy were their defenses even top half of the league level) this isn't a strong predictor of future success. Twice they were a top team in points allowed ('05 and '07) only to fall apart in the playoffs and then have a significant drop the next year in overall defensive success.

In short, Manning is good for a few less points on the board v. your total yardage given up, but he doesn't suddenly make teams less likely to throw up 400 yards of offense on you. Just instead of scoring 35 points they score 32.

If you want a strong defense that Manning can truly compliment you need to shore up DT so that our interior isn't a sieve in the running game. Do that and this D has real elite potential.

Also, to be fair to the Manning era Colts, in only 3 of Manning's 13 years there was their offense anything less than a top 5 team in both points and yardage, so Manning doesn't exactly need an all world D to make great things happen. The chances we don't put up a LOT of points is pretty damn slim.
ROFL! what was the colts record with manning and without ? you can dress up stats to make them fit your argument , bottom lime is win vs loss , to many variables in the NFL for it to work like baseball , Garbage time comes to mind ..........

Spider
03-27-2012, 07:49 AM
LOL so our offense with manning is going to be like our Offense with Tebow , multiple 3 and outs , defenses wont have to defend much against the pass ....

BroncoBeavis
03-27-2012, 07:50 AM
ROFL! what was the colts record with manning and without ? you can dress up stats to make them fit your argument , bottom lime is win vs loss , to many variables in the NFL for it to work like baseball , Garbage time comes to mind ..........

What was the Broncos record with Tebow and without? You can dress up stats to make them fit your argument, bottom lime? is win vs loss.

Spider
03-27-2012, 07:51 AM
What was the Broncos record with Tebow and without? You can dress up stats to make them fit your argument, bottom lime? is win vs loss.

I already said , we went to the playoffs with a QB that coudnt throw ...... thus making our core team better then the Colts ..... keep up or get the **** out

BroncoBeavis
03-27-2012, 07:56 AM
I already said , we went to the playoffs with a QB that coudnt throw ...... thus making our core team better then the Colts ..... keep up or get the **** out

Wow, you must think Kyle Orton REALLY sucks then compared to the Painter.

Spider
03-27-2012, 08:00 AM
Wow, you must think Kyle Orton REALLY sucks then compared to the Painter.

so you see you ****ed up , so now Bring up Kyle Orton , Bottom line is doesnt matter what I think of Kyle orton now does it ? Manning is our QB now , and next to Manning alot of QB's suck , a few can think of off hand that compare to Manning , Brees , brady , Eli ....

BroncoBeavis
03-27-2012, 08:12 AM
so you see you ****ed up , so now Bring up Kyle Orton , Bottom line is doesnt matter what I think of Kyle orton now does it ? Manning is our QB now , and next to Manning alot of QB's suck , a few can think of off hand that compare to Manning , Brees , brady , Eli ....

Missing the point again...

You're saying the Broncos are far better than the Colts (outside of the QB position)

Yet Kyle Orton posted similar Wins and Losses to Curtis Painter, with a far 'better' team.

The truth is this team has gaping holes. Tebow patched some of them over with a running game. Manning will patch some different holes, no doubt, but not the ones Timmy patched. Those will be reopened.

Our passing game will open up. Our running game will shut down, and we'll get to see how our defense holds up in 60+ point shootouts, or against teams that can play keepaway with the run.

There are more questions than answers going into next season.

BroncoBen
03-27-2012, 08:16 AM
How many games did we play against teams that were DEFINITELY going to be passing the ball heavily on us and still fail to generate said pressure? We knew Green Bay would pass on us. They did uncontested. We knew Detroit would want to pass on us. Again, uncontested. New England did it to us twice one month apart and we gave zero resistance either time. Knowing the opposition is going to throw the ball has only benefited us against weak passing offenses. Our defense still lacks the ability to shut down the elite passing offenses in the league.




You are right about those teams coming out and passing and Denver not stopping them. But the Broncos offense didn't do anything to help out either, too many 3 and outs or turnovers..

In these type of games it would be nice to be able to score thru the air and go mano-a-mano on the scoreboard.

DENVERDUI55
03-27-2012, 08:16 AM
Having Manning means the defense is going to spend a lot of time on the field. .

Well with Tebow in there team averaged 8 punts a game and led league in 3 and outs. With Orton averaged 4 punts a game.

BroncoBeavis
03-27-2012, 08:20 AM
You are right about those teams coming out and passing and Denver not stopping them. But the Broncos offense didn't do anything to help out either, too many 3 and outs or turnovers..

In these type of games it would be nice to be able to score thru the air and go mano-a-mano on the scoreboard.

There were times when turnovers were bad (ie the first Pats game), but on average we did pretty well on turnovers.

Tebow threw quite a few fewer INTs per attempt than Manning averages. There's no reason to believe the turnover situation will improve.

Spider
03-27-2012, 08:20 AM
Missing the point again...

You're saying the Broncos are far better than the Colts (outside of the QB position)

Yet Kyle Orton posted similar Wins and Losses to Curtis Painter, with a far 'better' team.

The truth is this team has gaping holes. Tebow patched some of them over with a running game. Manning will patch some different holes, no doubt, but not the ones Timmy patched. Those will be reopened.

Our passing game will open up. Our running game will shut down, and we'll get to see how our defense holds up in 60+ point shootouts, or against teams that can play keepaway with the run.

There are more questions than answers going into next season.
our running game will not shut down , dont know where in the **** you get that from , Our defense matured alot after the Detroit game , carried Tebow to an 8-8 record , 60 point shootouts huh ? care to point to some games like that ? 60 points is alot ......

Spider
03-27-2012, 08:22 AM
only a ****ing Teboner will see a QB like Manning coming in , then look at someone with a strait face and say we got more questions this year then last year with Tebow a QB that cant run an NFL offense .........

CEH
03-27-2012, 08:25 AM
The defense will be on the field the same amount this year only Manning will score TDs while Tebow generated 3 and outs

I'll take that any day and not worry about how long the defense is on the field

Give me CHamp, Von and Doom and a lead and I'll take my chances with against any team in the league

BroncoBeavis
03-27-2012, 08:28 AM
our running game will not shut down , dont know where in the **** you get that from , Our defense matured alot after the Detroit game , carried Tebow to an 8-8 record , 60 point shootouts huh ? care to point to some games like that ? 60 points is alot ......

2010 Colts and 2011 Broncos gave up more than 24 per game. 2010 Broncos gave up more than 29 (worst in the league)

For reference, the Steelers and 9ers allowed just over 14.

If you want to win some games, especially against teams that can score, 60 point games will be commonplace.

CEH
03-27-2012, 08:36 AM
2010 Colts and 2011 Broncos gave up more than 24 per game. 2010 Broncos gave up more than 29 (worst in the league)

For reference, the Steelers and 9ers allowed just over 14.

If you want to win some games, especially against teams that can score, 60 point games will be commonplace.

One team is ascending on defense and one is regressing. Guess which on has the better defensive coaches

Spider
03-27-2012, 08:39 AM
2010 Colts and 2011 Broncos gave up more than 24 per game. 2010 Broncos gave up more than 29 (worst in the league)

For reference, the Steelers and 9ers allowed just over 14.

If you want to win some games, especially against teams that can score, 60 point games will be commonplace.
I know with you being a teboner you dont see much need for a throwing qb , or a QB to show up before 5 minutes left in the 4 th quarter , so naturally
you dont think much of manning , but you are talking out of your ass cause your mouth should know better

DENVERDUI55
03-27-2012, 08:41 AM
The defense will be on the field the same amount this year only Manning will score TDs while Tebow generated 3 and outs

I'll take that any day and not worry about how long the defense is on the field

Give me CHamp, Von and Doom and a lead and I'll take my chances with against any team in the league

Exactly. Tebow's led Bronco's had 40 plus hung on them 4 times and over 30 another. 3 of those happened in the last 5 games.

BroncoBeavis
03-27-2012, 08:45 AM
One team is ascending on defense and one is regressing. Guess which on has the better defensive coaches

And which one's blowing it's wad on offense and ignoring clear needs on defense. This is Colts West, through and through.

Spider
03-27-2012, 08:46 AM
And which one's blowing it's wad on offense and ignoring clear needs on defense. This is Colts West, through and through.

LOL desperation post here .......

BroncoBeavis
03-27-2012, 08:49 AM
LOL desperation post here .......

Nothing's so desperate as making a 36 year old the highest paid QB in the league on a rebuilding team.

2KBack
03-27-2012, 08:54 AM
Nothing's so desperate as making a 36 year old the highest paid QB in the league on a rebuilding team.

meh...Sam Bradford is #2 I believe. Which one actually earns that money?

CEH
03-27-2012, 08:54 AM
And which one's blowing it's wad on offense and ignoring clear needs on defense. This is Colts West, through and through.

Which needs would that be. They went into FA wanting a DT, CB , LBer and S. So far they have failed to get the DT yet we have 7+ picks in the draft plus any cuts made by teams. Sure Solari or Bunkley would have been nice but overpaying for journeyman FAs is not the way I would approach building a team and it's not the way EFX is going about it.


Plus we won a playoff game with the Florida offense and now we just signed the biggest FA out there. I'm pretty confident Manning at 36 will run a better more productive offense than the Florida offense we ran last year

BroncoBeavis
03-27-2012, 09:03 AM
Which needs would that be. They went into FA wanting a DT, CB , LBer and S. So far they have failed to get the DT yet we have 7+ picks in the draft plus any cuts made by teams. Sure Solari or Bunkley would have been nice but overpaying for journeyman FAs is not the way I would approach building a team and it's not the way EFX is going about it.

I'm less meh about losing the only serviceable DT we had. And if you read Bunk's contract terms down in NO, there's no evidence we would've had to overpay to keep him around for another year or two.

Counting on the draft isn't planning when you have 0 depth. It's rolling the dice.


Plus we won a playoff game with the Florida offense and now we just signed the biggest FA out there. I'm pretty confident Manning at 36 will run a better more productive offense than the Florida offense we ran last year

As soon as someone can show me Urban running 2 WR gameplans in Florida, you'll be allowed to call what McCoy did a 'Florida offense'. In reality, there's no resemblance. At all.

Rohirrim
03-27-2012, 09:07 AM
I'm less meh about losing the only serviceable DT we had. And if you read Bunk's contract terms down in NO, there's no evidence we would've had to overpay to keep him around for another year or two.



You're just assuming that Bunkley made the decision based on money. What if he decided based on food? Denver vs New Orleans? I'm going with N'awlins every time. ;D

CEH
03-27-2012, 09:10 AM
I'm less meh about losing the only serviceable DT we had. And if you read Bunk's contract terms down in NO, there's no evidence we would've had to overpay to keep him around for another year or two.

Counting on the draft isn't planning when you have 0 depth. It's rolling the dice.




As soon as someone can show me Urban running 2 WR gameplans in Florida, you'll be allowed to call what McCoy did a 'Florida offense'. In reality, there's no resemblance. At all.

I'm sorry "college" offense. Is that better.

BroncoBeavis
03-27-2012, 09:16 AM
I'm sorry "college" offense. Is that better.

More like high school. :)

Broncolt
03-27-2012, 09:32 AM
manning will make the defense better. throw all the garbage colts stats out the window. ive been watching them for over a decade. when manning does his job and puts points up drive after drive the defense plays wit more momentum, with a lead, and the passrushers become 10 times better. look at freeney/mathis stats for the past 10 years compared to last year. the enhanced pass rush alone in denver will make the secondary "look" better, as the passrushers get to the QB faster, the secondary has less field to cover...etc etc. its all cause and effect

Bronco Rob
03-27-2012, 10:14 AM
Nothing's so desperate as making a 36 year old the highest paid QB in the league on a rebuilding team.




???

Drek
03-27-2012, 10:29 AM
If Ayers will be the run down DE and pass down DT, which I like by the way.. Would you not recommend drafting a DE, and if they get Hill, would you @25 take a DE like Mercilus or Curry? Grab Reyes or Thompson in the second and Chapman, Martin, Randal in the third.. Bradham hopefully at the top of 5.. Thoughts?

No. If you bump Ayers inside to give you an interior pass rush its because you want to move Miller in at DE. That is your pass rush specialist to replaces Ayers. We do not need another one.

Otherwise you go with a 4-2 front in nickel packages and are taking Miller out of the pass rush unless you blitz him. We shouldn't rely on a 5 man rush to get pressure, good QBs feed on those kinds of defenses.

If a good pass rusher falls into our laps in the later rounds it would be great to add that pass rush weapon we can roll out when up by two scores and can gamble on a five man rush repeatedly to ice a game. But another end rusher isn't a first round priority. Getting someone who can actually shore up the porous run defense and generate even a little push up the middle is. That and additional OL depth are my two biggest concerns that might keep us from a dominant season in 2012.

ROFL! what was the colts record with manning and without ? you can dress up stats to make them fit your argument , bottom lime is win vs loss , to many variables in the NFL for it to work like baseball , Garbage time comes to mind ..........
This isn't even a good attempt at moving goal posts. You didn't say anything about wins. This topic doesn't have anything to do with wins. Its about the defense taking the next step towards being an elite unit. Manning isn't suddenly going to make that happen. He didn't in Indy and he won't here. He'll make your team elite by throwing for 400 yards and 4 TDs with regularity. Then you can win a lot of 35-28 games. But the value his prolific offense can add to the defense isn't going to be realized if we can't generate any push up the middle or stop the run.

You are right about those teams coming out and passing and Denver not stopping them. But the Broncos offense didn't do anything to help out either, too many 3 and outs or turnovers..

In these type of games it would be nice to be able to score thru the air and go mano-a-mano on the scoreboard.
Again, when did this become a thread about "how good will the Broncos as a whole be in 2012?" This is about the defense, what our defense needs to take the next step forward, and dispelling the myth that this team was great at getting to the passer week in and week out, meaning that we'll be a great pass D next year. Our offense didn't help the D in many of the blow out losses, sure. But then the D sure didn't help the O in those games either. Cuts both ways, and building your team under the assumption that one side of the ball will somehow make the other side better is just a wrong headed mindset. One side can carry the other's water, but don't expect a good offense to suddenly make your defense better over the long haul. The defense needs to improve itself, not hope for an offensive game changer to make their lives easier.

Well with Tebow in there team averaged 8 punts a game and led league in 3 and outs. With Orton averaged 4 punts a game.
What's your point? That you can go to NFL.com and look up ancillary stats? Or you can remember the stat line every broadcaster quoted during Tebow's last few starts here?

Manning has literally won games with a TOP of less than a single quarter. He's lost games in nearly that same fashion too. It is the SOP on how to beat a Manning team. Keep him off the field as much as possible, grind out enough scoring drives to where he needs to throw when he gets the ball, and unleash everything you've got to hit him every time he steps back to pass.

Step number one to keep that from happening? Don't let teams run for 5 yards per carry on us anymore. Instead of saying "how much better does Manning make our defense?" we should be asking "how can some key defensive improvements make Manning's life easier?" because that is an easy question to answer. Let him play with the first good run defense of his career.

DENVERDUI55
03-27-2012, 10:50 AM
What's your point? That you can go to NFL.com and look up ancillary stats? Or you can remember the stat line every broadcaster quoted during Tebow's last few starts here?

Manning has literally won games with a TOP of less than a single quarter. He's lost games in nearly that same fashion too. It is the SOP on how to beat a Manning team. Keep him off the field as much as possible, grind out enough scoring drives to where he needs to throw when he gets the ball, and unleash everything you've got to hit him every time he steps back to pass.



My point is we will have similar TOP with more plays ran and pts scored. We were in bottom of TOP last year. I'll take 26 ppg than the 15 or whatever TT averaged. I agree with you that we need to shore up run D but Manning will help put the other team in predictable plays if he is running up the score.

Drek
03-27-2012, 02:18 PM
My point is we will have similar TOP with more plays ran and pts scored. We were in bottom of TOP last year. I'll take 26 ppg than the 15 or whatever TT averaged. I agree with you that we need to shore up run D but Manning will help put the other team in predictable plays if he is running up the score.

Of course we're all willing to take Manning's offensive production. You made a comparison between Tebow and Orton on punts per game. How is that anything but trivia when the Broncos won TOP with Tebow and lost it with Orton? Our TOP wasn't costant throughout the year. It did a completely 180 when Orton was replaced.

In Orton's four full games this year we lost time of possession in all but one (Cincy). In Tebow's 11 full starts the team won time of possession in 5 of them. Two others were less than one minute splits. None of Orton's losses were that close, and his one TOP win was less a split of less than a minute.

When we changed to Tebow our TOP went up significantly. We had a few games where our offense was turnover prone (New England) or where we won on a handful of Tebow's passes (Minnesota and Pittsburgh). But other than that the general theme of the game was grinding on the other team, winning or drawing on TOP in regulation, and then finding a way to win late in regulation or in overtime.

All of this ignores the fact that the slow, sustained drives approach also leads to longer real world time, not just longer clock time. This extension of real world time lets the defense get real rest on the sidelines, another big help.

The change from Orton to Tebow did a lot to pick up the defense. We are now undoing those benefits with Manning. He offers his own set of benefits, but people act like our defense just suddenly flipped the switch week 7 of last year and ignore how directly that correlates with the change at starting QB, the change in rushing yardage per game, and the change in TOP. The defense will receive help from Manning's prolific passing game, but at the expense of the help Tebow already gave them. In the end our defense's improvement will hinge on the player personnel moves of the FO and the players themselves making the next step forward, as the assistance given to the defense by our QB is the equivalent of one step forward, one step back.

Bronco Rob
03-27-2012, 03:10 PM
Of course we're all willing to take Manning's offensive production. You made a comparison between Tebow and Orton on punts per game. How is that anything but trivia when the Broncos won TOP with Tebow and lost it with Orton? Our TOP wasn't costant throughout the year. It did a completely 180 when Orton was replaced.

In Orton's four full games this year we lost time of possession in all but one (Cincy). In Tebow's 11 full starts the team won time of possession in 5 of them. Two others were less than one minute splits. None of Orton's losses were that close, and his one TOP win was less a split of less than a minute.

When we changed to Tebow our TOP went up significantly. We had a few games where our offense was turnover prone (New England) or where we won on a handful of Tebow's passes (Minnesota and Pittsburgh). But other than that the general theme of the game was grinding on the other team, winning or drawing on TOP in regulation, and then finding a way to win late in regulation or in overtime.

All of this ignores the fact that the slow, sustained drives approach also leads to longer real world time, not just longer clock time. This extension of real world time lets the defense get real rest on the sidelines, another big help.

The change from Orton to Tebow did a lot to pick up the defense. We are now undoing those benefits with Manning. He offers his own set of benefits, but people act like our defense just suddenly flipped the switch week 7 of last year and ignore how directly that correlates with the change at starting QB, the change in rushing yardage per game, and the change in TOP. The defense will receive help from Manning's prolific passing game, but at the expense of the help Tebow already gave them. In the end our defense's improvement will hinge on the player personnel moves of the FO and the players themselves making the next step forward, as the assistance given to the defense by our QB is the equivalent of one step forward, one step back.




:strong:

DENVERDUI55
03-27-2012, 05:55 PM
Of course we're all willing to take Manning's offensive production. You made a comparison between Tebow and Orton on punts per game. How is that anything but trivia when the Broncos won TOP with Tebow and lost it with Orton? Our TOP wasn't costant throughout the year. It did a completely 180 when Orton was replaced.

In Orton's four full games this year we lost time of possession in all but one (Cincy). In Tebow's 11 full starts the team won time of possession in 5 of them. Two others were less than one minute splits. None of Orton's losses were that close, and uhis one TOP win was less a split of less than a minute.

When we changed to Tebow our TOP went up significantly. We had a few games where our offense was turnover prone (New England) or where we won on a handful of Tebow's passes (Minnesota and Pittsburgh). But other than that the general theme of the game was grinding on the other team, winning or drawing on TOP in regulation, and then finding a way to win late in regulation or in overtime.

All of this ignores the fact that the slow, sus drives approach also leads to longer real world time, not just longer clock time. This extension of real world time lets the defense get real rest on the sidelines, another big help.

The change from Orton to Tebow did a lot to pick up the defense. We are now undoing those benefits with Manning. He offers his own set of benefits, but people act like our defense just suddenly flipped the switch week 7 of last year and ignore how directly that correlates with the change at starting QB, the change in rushing yardage per game, and the change in TOP. The defense will receive help from Manning's prolific passing game, but at the expense of the help Tebow already gave them. In the end our defense's improvement will hinge on the player personnel moves of the FO and the players themselves making the next step forward, as the assistance given to the defense by our QB is the equivalent of one step forward, one step back.
The defense started to gel to about the time qb change occured. They got hot for a couple weeks til teams adjusted and the 3 and out machine took over. Manning will fix that part. The D gave up 40 pts in 3 of last 5 games and the bad offense had a lot to do with that too.

Agamemnon
03-27-2012, 05:58 PM
I'm sorry "college" offense. Is that better.

That wasn't a college offense. Keep trying.

Agamemnon
03-27-2012, 06:04 PM
Step number one to keep that from happening? Don't let teams run for 5 yards per carry on us anymore. Instead of saying "how much better does Manning make our defense?" we should be asking "how can some key defensive improvements make Manning's life easier?" because that is an easy question to answer. Let him play with the first good run defense of his career.

The writing is already on the wall as far as that is concerned. There's almost no chance we even have a mediocre run defense, much less an actual good one. At least this upcoming season that is. Maybe they'll fix it the year after. I'm not going to hold my breath though.

errand
03-27-2012, 06:10 PM
So Denver is going to receive the ball first to start every game? Denver will put up 7, just to have the defense give 7 right back. So how is this playing with a lead that will turn the pass rush loose? Or do you think that Manning by himself is good to put up 21 before the defense(as it is right now) gives up a score?

****ing hero worshipers...please go root for the jets dude.

Manning will help this team score points, alot more than the Jet's new back-up could ever dream of...you clowns keep forgetting that alot of those great come back wins were possible because this defense was able to keep opposing teams out of the end zone more times than not in several of them. the Vikings game was the lone win where they didn't give up 15 or less...but they helped us win that by getting a timely INT.

Regardless of who gets the ball first...point being is i feel alot more comfortable in Manning being able to win a shootout than that other guy we had.

cutthemdown
03-27-2012, 06:14 PM
Of course we're all willing to take Manning's offensive production. You made a comparison between Tebow and Orton on punts per game. How is that anything but trivia when the Broncos won TOP with Tebow and lost it with Orton? Our TOP wasn't costant throughout the year. It did a completely 180 when Orton was replaced.

In Orton's four full games this year we lost time of possession in all but one (Cincy). In Tebow's 11 full starts the team won time of possession in 5 of them. Two others were less than one minute splits. None of Orton's losses were that close, and his one TOP win was less a split of less than a minute.

When we changed to Tebow our TOP went up significantly. We had a few games where our offense was turnover prone (New England) or where we won on a handful of Tebow's passes (Minnesota and Pittsburgh). But other than that the general theme of the game was grinding on the other team, winning or drawing on TOP in regulation, and then finding a way to win late in regulation or in overtime.

All of this ignores the fact that the slow, sustained drives approach also leads to longer real world time, not just longer clock time. This extension of real world time lets the defense get real rest on the sidelines, another big help.

The change from Orton to Tebow did a lot to pick up the defense. We are now undoing those benefits with Manning. He offers his own set of benefits, but people act like our defense just suddenly flipped the switch week 7 of last year and ignore how directly that correlates with the change at starting QB, the change in rushing yardage per game, and the change in TOP. The defense will receive help from Manning's prolific passing game, but at the expense of the help Tebow already gave them. In the end our defense's improvement will hinge on the player personnel moves of the FO and the players themselves making the next step forward, as the assistance given to the defense by our QB is the equivalent of one step forward, one step back.

Good post. I would add though that our TOP got better under Tebow because they ran even if it meant 3 and out. TOP is great but we want it by getting first downs and scoring points. Broncos TOP under Tebow really skewed because we didn't do well on 3rd downs. Usually you have to do really good on 3rd downs for a good TOP.

DAN_BRONCO_FAN
03-27-2012, 06:16 PM
your talking bout your new team the JETS right ?

HATERRRRRRRRRRRRRR LOL still a tebow fan but im not crazy but have my doubts on manning but still U R A HATEERRRRRRRRRRRRRRR THEREFORE I HATE YOU FOR HATING HATER LOL

Chris
03-27-2012, 06:18 PM
Of course we're all willing to take Manning's offensive production. You made a comparison between Tebow and Orton on punts per game. How is that anything but trivia when the Broncos won TOP with Tebow and lost it with Orton? Our TOP wasn't costant throughout the year. It did a completely 180 when Orton was replaced.

In Orton's four full games this year we lost time of possession in all but one (Cincy). In Tebow's 11 full starts the team won time of possession in 5 of them. Two others were less than one minute splits. None of Orton's losses were that close, and his one TOP win was less a split of less than a minute.

When we changed to Tebow our TOP went up significantly. We had a few games where our offense was turnover prone (New England) or where we won on a handful of Tebow's passes (Minnesota and Pittsburgh). But other than that the general theme of the game was grinding on the other team, winning or drawing on TOP in regulation, and then finding a way to win late in regulation or in overtime.

All of this ignores the fact that the slow, sustained drives approach also leads to longer real world time, not just longer clock time. This extension of real world time lets the defense get real rest on the sidelines, another big help.

The change from Orton to Tebow did a lot to pick up the defense. We are now undoing those benefits with Manning. He offers his own set of benefits, but people act like our defense just suddenly flipped the switch week 7 of last year and ignore how directly that correlates with the change at starting QB, the change in rushing yardage per game, and the change in TOP. The defense will receive help from Manning's prolific passing game, but at the expense of the help Tebow already gave them. In the end our defense's improvement will hinge on the player personnel moves of the FO and the players themselves making the next step forward, as the assistance given to the defense by our QB is the equivalent of one step forward, one step back.

You're assuming our O will be as pass happy as the Colts. I don't think it will be. I do think it will lead to more converted third downs than last year. When I compare the added TOP last year under Tebow with all the rushing vs the TOP we could have under an offense that converts third downs more often (particularly if Manning's arm strength is weaker and it looks less downfield / more west coast than in the past) and is more balanced, then it seems we aren't in for much of a TOP drop off.

DAN_BRONCO_FAN
03-27-2012, 06:19 PM
with or with out manning we need a front four who can rush the qb like brady and keep him from finding people to throw to . with out a good front four we wont get to a superbowl

errand
03-27-2012, 06:21 PM
Why? Because we signed Manning? He's going to magically make us a turnover producing machine as well? Wow, the guy just cures all ails doesn't he? ::)

The best defense sometimes is a good offense....

Look at the '97-'98 Broncos....

Our offense would score a TD on their initial drive many times, which caused opposing teams to play catch up. And on those occasions where our defense allowed a score, our offense was able to come back and answer it with one of their own.....once our offense took the lead, our defense got more aggressive and that created more sacks and more turnovers.

Nobody is gonna score on EVERY possession, but the colts with Manning at the helm were one of the few teams capable of doing so on a very good day......

Drek
03-27-2012, 06:24 PM
The defense started to gel to about the time qb change occured. They got hot for a couple weeks til teams adjusted and the 3 and out machine took over. Manning will fix that part. The D gave up 40 pts in 3 of last 5 games and the bad offense had a lot to do with that too.

Sure. But you're acting like the defense starting to gel had nothing to do with the change at QB, despite all evidence to the contrary. That evidence:

1. Denver started winning TOP at twice the rate it previously had.

2. Denver offense didn't just win TOP, it also spent more "real world" time on the field.

3. Denver offense was generally less turnover prone.

4. Denver offense even on non-scoring drives helped win the field position battle by making the punter's job easier (very few 3rd and >10 punts).

All of these made the defense's life much easier. Those will not be characteristics of the new offense (well, maybe 3 and 4, just by the merits of being a better offense). We will not chew up clock and let the D catch it's breath. The D better be ready for a lot of times when they spend three minutes on the field stopping a drive, get to the sideline, watch Manning score on three plays in about 50 seconds, then get back out there and do another 3+ minute grind 'em out drive that they need to shut down. The single biggest solution to this is taking away the free pass on running between the tackles we've given teams for several years now. Otherwise 3rd and 3 or less is a freebie and a new set of downs our defense needs to sustain.

The writing is already on the wall as far as that is concerned. There's almost no chance we even have a mediocre run defense, much less an actual good one. At least this upcoming season that is. Maybe they'll fix it the year after. I'm not going to hold my breath though.
Del Rio is a damn good front seven guy. He's gotten good football out of less talented LBs than DJ, Miller, and even Mays. He's put together DLs that didn't benefit from bookends like Doom and Ayers. Finding young DTs who could contribute out of the gate is the single best thing he did in Jacksonville over the last four years.

If he picks the right DTs in the draft and we have a healthy, productive Ty Warren this defense could be passable up the middle. If we spend one of our 4ths on a guy like Sammie Lee Hill, or sign someone like Okoye who takes the next big step forward thanks to Del Rio, and we could actually start looking pretty good.

errand
03-27-2012, 06:26 PM
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the bolded section is exactly how we lose the games we lose next season. Looking at the middle of our defense, how could any coach not think "hey, let's pound it and keep Manning off the field"?


Well, that's gonna be better than them saying, " let's make the Broncos throw the ball to beat us"

Manning will score more points....more points means opposing teams will need to take more chances which means our defense playing with a lead will generate more sacks and more turnovers......

Drek
03-27-2012, 06:27 PM
You're assuming our O will be as pass happy as the Colts. I don't think it will be. I do think it will lead to more converted third downs than last year. When I compare the added TOP last year under Tebow with all the rushing vs the TOP we could have under an offense that converts third downs more often (particularly if Manning's arm strength is weaker and it looks less downfield / more west coast than in the past) and is more balanced, then it seems we aren't in for much of a TOP drop off.

We might not, but that is dealing entirely in the "maybes" of what this offense will look like.

No one was talking about how great our running game was pre-Tebow. Instead the OL looked mediocre at best and McGahee needed nearly 30 carries a game to break 100 yards. Tebow was a game changer for our running attack. I'd like to see McGahee and co. prove they're the horses we need to have a top tier running game when they get less than 50 carries a game.

errand
03-27-2012, 06:34 PM
No he doesn't. God you people are ****ing nuts with this ****.

Time will abide....soon your butt hurt over Tebow being dumped will subside


Our pass defense forced so few turnovers last season it's not even funny,

Exactly, because we rarely led in any of our games, save for the final few seconds when a miracle happened....




so a few more pass attempts isn't going to make that much difference.

A "few more" trust me...Manning will get 8 attempts on our first drive, un like your hero who wasn't trusted to throw more than 20 passes a game unless we were usually behind.

And with the looks of our run defense, I really don't get why people think teams will pass more on us anyway.

the final roster hasn't been announced clown....and you won't know how well anyone will do until the games begin.....but keep spouting your doom and gloom. Hey the Jets got a new back-up...go discuss his ability to run the option at ganggreen.com


Yes Manning will score more points. But he isn't going to be blowing people away 45-0 at halftime.

Well he's not gonna be getting his ass kicked 45-10 that often either



And again, running is the best way for teams to slow him down as long as the game is relatively close (which it probably will be more often than not), especially seeing as our run defense won't be able to stop anyone.

I doubt we have alot of 13-10 games this coming season....



in bold

errand
03-27-2012, 06:39 PM
Just having Manning didn't suddenly make the Colts D great or make them a juggernaut. The Colts had plenty of bad games, bad stretches of games, and were almost always a bottom tier defense.


.

and yet for some reason they only won fewer than ten games twice in his tenure as their starter.....

errand
03-27-2012, 06:46 PM
And which one's blowing it's wad on offense and ignoring clear needs on defense. This is Colts West, through and through.

so you're saying that if the next decade sees us averaging 10+ wins per season, 8-9 consecutive playoff appearances and a SB win you're not gonna be pleased?

errand
03-27-2012, 06:47 PM
Nothing's so desperate as making a 36 year old the highest paid QB in the league on a rebuilding team.

i hear that the Jets have a solid team and they just acquired a young QB....and they have plenty of room on their bandwagon

CEH
03-27-2012, 06:48 PM
That wasn't a college offense. Keep trying.

Keep trying what knowing more about the team I follow then you
Might want to watch the 1/2 hour John Fox interview then get back to me on what he called last years offense

errand
03-27-2012, 06:49 PM
I've noticed a lot of nuthuggers still butt hurt....i thought those clowns went to ganggreen site?

I told you guys this would happen.....

errand
03-27-2012, 06:52 PM
More like high school. :)

Well, if you want McCoy to run a pro offense, then perhaps EFX should've given him a pro QB....oh wait, they just did

errand
03-27-2012, 06:56 PM
manning will make the defense better. throw all the garbage colts stats out the window. ive been watching them for over a decade. when manning does his job and puts points up drive after drive the defense plays wit more momentum, with a lead, and the passrushers become 10 times better. look at freeney/mathis stats for the past 10 years compared to last year. the enhanced pass rush alone in denver will make the secondary "look" better, as the passrushers get to the QB faster, the secondary has less field to cover...etc etc. its all cause and effect

Hey, Teboners....

Please take note when you go to Jets boards. this is how you state your case for your favorite player....

He didn't diss the team, or those that put team above any one player...he didn't make any wild bizzaro claims of how unique Manning is, how nobody has ever seen a QB like him, he just gave a lucid, logical argument for Manning being able to help our defense improve....

Drek
03-27-2012, 07:02 PM
and yet for some reason they only won fewer than ten games twice in his tenure as their starter.....

Are you an idiot?

I ask because you clearly can't glean meaning from "reading" (if one wants to call it that) the written word in what I'm assuming is your primary language.

When did this thread become a discussion on how many games we win with Manning? As you could see in that very post you quoted, I pointed out how Manning did win a lot of games, had a wildly successful offense, and generally carried his weak defenses to success.

But this thread is about how the Denver Broncos defense can take the next step forward. The common argument posed was that having Manning = better defense. That is a straw man with no supporting evidence. The Colts D was rarely dominant with all the benefits that Manning supposedly grants a defense and the drop from 2010 to 2011 was marginal.

You like to paint others as blinded fanboys but yet everything to you is a matter of "pro-Tebow = dumb. Anti-Tebow = Awesome" while at the same time letting illogical statements about Manning's positives be viewed as incontrovertible fact.

If you're going to spam an ongoing conversation with multiple repeat posts at least have the wherewithal to post on topic for a few of them.

BroncoBuff
03-27-2012, 08:06 PM
Can Denver's defense take next step?


ADD: Tracy Porter, Mike Adams
LOSE: Brodrick Bunkley, Brian Dawkins
ABOUT TO OVERPAY FOR: Marcus Thomas


Yes, they can take the next step.


http://www.220-electronics.com/Transformers/trans/stepdown-voltageconverter-down-arrow-image.jpg

Agamemnon
03-27-2012, 08:14 PM
in bold

You are one of the stupidest posters on this board. I make that statement without any hesitation. Your "bold" responses are so monumentally idiotic in terms of actual football knowledge, or the lack thereof, that words fail me (I wasn't talking about our offensive passing attempts by the way, but you clearly only have rudimentary reading ability, so don't sweat it). Honestly, I think your posts may actually kill brain cells in anyone who reads them. Thanks for that.

Agamemnon
03-27-2012, 08:15 PM
Keep trying what knowing more about the team I follow then you
Might want to watch the 1/2 hour John Fox interview then get back to me on what he called last years offense

Running some option plays does not equate to running a college offense. Don't be a dip****.

barryr
03-27-2012, 08:18 PM
So people assume Manning can carry an average defense at the age of 36 and multiple neck surgeries? Whatever. The Colts made it to 2 Super Bowls, winning one in Manning's 14 years in the NFL. As Elway can attest to, when older at QB, you need more weapons since the QB can not do as much as before. If Manning had more help, maybe the Colts would have been to more Super Bowls.

People are fooling themselves if they think this defense is fine as is. The heck it is. The Bronco offense can not score many points if they are standing on the sidelines watching the other team run the ball at will.

This defense needs serious DT help and Marcus Thomas is probably a nice guy and all, but come on, he worries anybody on the opposition? The LB spot does not look so great either. There is more work to be done before this defense is to be really considered a strength and losing your best DT is not a great way to improve from 20th in the NFL. But they have time to get more talent, but let's not pretend this defense was fantastic to start with.

Agamemnon
03-27-2012, 08:22 PM
Can Denver's defense take next step?


ADD: Tracy Porter, Mike Adams
LOSE: Brodrick Bunkley, Brian Dawkins
ABOUT TO OVERPAY FOR: Marcus Thomas


Yes, they can take the next step.


http://www.220-electronics.com/Transformers/trans/stepdown-voltageconverter-down-arrow-image.jpg

But we have Manning. So we'll be up 20 points at half time every game, forcing teams to pass a ton, which will result in tons of sacks and turnovers and very few points because our pass rush is so awesome! Don't be such a Tebowner. Our defense has the most awesome QB ever, and that automatically makes our DT's and Joe Mays huge playmakers! If you were a real Bronco fan you would get it. ;)

Agamemnon
03-27-2012, 08:23 PM
So people assume Manning can carry an average defense at the age of 36 and multiple neck surgeries? Whatever. The Colts made it to 2 Super Bowls, winning one in Manning's 14 years in the NFL. As Elway can attest to, when older at QB, you need more weapons since the QB can not do as much as before. If Manning had more help, maybe the Colts would have been to more Super Bowls.

People are fooling themselves if they think this defense is fine as is. The heck it is. The Bronco offense can not score many points if they are standing on the sidelines watching the other team run the ball at will.

This defense needs serious DT help and Marcus Thomas is probably a nice guy and all, but come on, he worries anybody on the opposition? The LB spot does not look so great either. There is more work to be done before this defense is to be really considered a strength and losing your best DT is not a great way to improve from 20th in the NFL. But they have time to get more talent, but let's not pretend this defense was fantastic to start with.

This defense is not average. Just saying.

Dedhed
03-27-2012, 08:30 PM
oh God how i wish Brockers would fall to #25. that would be epic and help the defense so much it would be damn near illegal.
Brockers may be the most overrated player in the draft. Watch film, he's stonewalled all the time, and gets tossed around way too often.

barryr
03-27-2012, 08:34 PM
Brockers may be the most overrated player in the draft. Watch film, he's stonewalled all the time, and gets tossed around way too often.

Yeah, Brockers could be another Trevor Pryce or a guy who looks the part and never does anything. In any case, it would be hard to see him ready to play in the NFL next year. If the Broncos could trade down and come up with say a Reyes and another DT later, I would take that.

Agamemnon
03-27-2012, 08:35 PM
Brockers may be the most overrated player in the draft. Watch film, he's stonewalled all the time, and gets tossed around way too often.

I feel this way about most of the DT's in this draft. Not that I think we will actually draft a DT mind you, but if we do I have very little hope of the guy becoming anything special. This is a bad draft class for the position. Period.

BroncoBuff
03-27-2012, 08:41 PM
Dontari Poe ... that'd be the next step.

Dedhed
03-27-2012, 08:47 PM
I feel this way about most of the DT's in this draft. Not that I think we will actually draft a DT mind you, but if we do I have very little hope of the guy becoming anything special. This is a bad draft class for the position. Period.

I like Still and Worthy. Very different, but I think both will be very good. Brockers and Poe are busts waiting to happen.

DBroncos4life
03-27-2012, 08:53 PM
Can Denver's defense take next step?


ADD: Tracy Porter, Mike Adams
LOSE: Brodrick Bunkley, Brian Dawkins
ABOUT TO OVERPAY FOR: Marcus Thomas


Yes, they can take the next step.


http://www.220-electronics.com/Transformers/trans/stepdown-voltageconverter-down-arrow-image.jpg

Yeah our D took a huge hit when we lost Tebow. I hope the only 4 time MVP in NFL history can pick up some of the slack.

We lost ONE dude from our D that played 43% of the snaps and everyone is freaking out.

strafen
03-27-2012, 09:40 PM
losing Dennis Allen is going to affect us as well

love the Del Rio hire, but the swinging gate at DC needs to end at some pointDel Rio is an upgrade over Dennis Allen, all day long...

strafen
03-27-2012, 09:41 PM
Devon Still from Penn State, nuff said! :strong:

Drek
03-28-2012, 03:24 AM
Yeah our D took a huge hit when we lost Tebow. I hope the only 4 time MVP in NFL history can pick up some of the slack.

We lost ONE dude from our D that played 43% of the snaps and everyone is freaking out.

1. I don't see where Buff mentioned anything about Tebow.

2. That one dude who played 43% of the snaps happened to be the only worthwhile DT we put on the field all last season. When he wasn't in we were a joke at stopping the run. When he was in we were only mildly pathetic. People have good cause for concern.

A chain is only as strong as it's weakest link.

cutthemdown
03-28-2012, 03:35 AM
Saints will regret that signing, but still a huge loss for us. Sometimes FA moves turn out bad for both teams. Bunkley getting deal, going to a team in turmoil, head coach not around, QB pissed and not signed, I could see him not working super hard this offseason.

Drek
03-28-2012, 03:58 AM
Saints will regret that signing, but still a huge loss for us. Sometimes FA moves turn out bad for both teams. Bunkley getting deal, going to a team in turmoil, head coach not around, QB pissed and not signed, I could see him not working super hard this offseason.

He would have been a bad signing for us at that price, I firmly believe he was a contract year wonder who will regress hard now. Doesn't change what we got out of him in 2011 and the gap not having that kind of player (not him in particular) creates in our defense.

fontaine
03-28-2012, 04:28 AM
1. I don't see where Buff mentioned anything about Tebow.

2. That one dude who played 43% of the snaps happened to be the only worthwhile DT we put on the field all last season. When he wasn't in we were a joke at stopping the run. When he was in we were only mildly pathetic. People have good cause for concern.

A chain is only as strong as it's weakest link.

I know you don't think Warren can hold up but he's a better run stopper than Bunkley when healthy.

Yes it's a big if but so was Bunkley last year.

And it's not just Denver, the entire league is going pass defense and with Champ/Porter/Harris plus Von and Doom our defense will have the teeth to get it done.

Yes DT/Safety is a concern but we have the draft for that.

Drek
03-28-2012, 05:45 AM
I know you don't think Warren can hold up but he's a better run stopper than Bunkley when healthy.

Yes it's a big if but so was Bunkley last year.

And it's not just Denver, the entire league is going pass defense and with Champ/Porter/Harris plus Von and Doom our defense will have the teeth to get it done.

Yes DT/Safety is a concern but we have the draft for that.

The 2011 Denver Broncos could try a few coin tosses at DT. They weren't expected to do ****.

The 2012 Denver Broncos are expected to be in serious Super Bowl contention. They can not just go with coin tosses at DT and hope for the best.

Elway and Fox moved the goal posts when they signed Manning. Now they need to live up to those new standards. To do that they need to find real answers at DT. A 31 year old DT who hasn't been healthy in two full seasons and hasn't been elite in the two he did play before that is not a real answer.

I'm ok with what we have at safety. Adams isn't amazing but he's a solid cover guy, which we sorely lack, but isn't so highly paid as to close the door on Rahim Moore. Carter will be an every down starter and is poised to take the next step forward. Bruton started to show flashes late last year of being something more than a special teamer. If Dawkins can come back I'd be quite happy with our safeties, rotating Adams/Moore and Dawkins based on down and distance, with Carter as the ever down guy and Adams/Moore and Bruton for depth.

BroncoBeavis
03-28-2012, 06:02 AM
He would have been a bad signing for us at that price, I firmly believe he was a contract year wonder who will regress hard now. Doesn't change what we got out of him in 2011 and the gap not having that kind of player (not him in particular) creates in our defense.

Bunk's contract is seriously backloaded. Majority of the money comes in years 3 and 4,but I think only up to year 2 is guaranteed. Saints are pretty well protected from bust potential. Far more protected than we are from any Manning injury.

If it was a money thing we should've made it work. But maybe there was more to it.

DBroncos4life
03-28-2012, 06:35 AM
1. I don't see where Buff mentioned anything about Tebow.

2. That one dude who played 43% of the snaps happened to be the only worthwhile DT we put on the field all last season. When he wasn't in we were a joke at stopping the run. When he was in we were only mildly pathetic. People have good cause for concern.

A chain is only as strong as it's weakest link.

Bunkley was a scrub last year we got in a broken trade. He played above his NFL norm and cashed in on a big payday.

There are FA's out there just as good if not better then Bunkley.

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=99157&highlight=Bunkley

This was a fun thread.

DBroncos4life
03-28-2012, 06:37 AM
I'll tell you who is good at getting the most out of nobody DT's. It's John Fox. We should look at bringing him in and see if he can figure something out for us.

fontaine
03-28-2012, 07:55 AM
The 2011 Denver Broncos could try a few coin tosses at DT. They weren't expected to do ****.

The 2012 Denver Broncos are expected to be in serious Super Bowl contention. They can not just go with coin tosses at DT and hope for the best.

Elway and Fox moved the goal posts when they signed Manning. Now they need to live up to those new standards. To do that they need to find real answers at DT. A 31 year old DT who hasn't been healthy in two full seasons and hasn't been elite in the two he did play before that is not a real answer.

I'm not sure what you're point is. Yes the DT position isn't great but obviously they're going to address it at some point since they wanted Bunkley back and still want Thomas. So that's two roster spots at DT they still want to address.

Why not wait till they do something about it instead of whining now?

Broncolt
03-28-2012, 07:55 AM
Hey, Teboners....

Please take note when you go to Jets boards. this is how you state your case for your favorite player....

He didn't diss the team, or those that put team above any one player...he didn't make any wild bizzaro claims of how unique Manning is, how nobody has ever seen a QB like him, he just gave a lucid, logical argument for Manning being able to help our defense improve....

Thank you sir :yayaya:

I really think that even if the defense wont necessarily BE BETTER, they sure will PLAY better and be more successful. theres less weight on the defense' shoulders to keep the team in games when the offense is doing their job and lighting it up.

Spider
03-28-2012, 08:39 AM
That is a straw man with no supporting evidence. The Colts D was rarely dominant with all the benefits that Manning supposedly grants a defense and the drop from 2010 to 2011 was marginal.



there is a difference in playing defense with a lead and from behind , with a QB like manning , you can dial up more blitz packages , take more chances on D , lets throw out stats and x and o's for a second , Football is a mental game , stats , rankings etc dont mean shiat in this game , for example , your team has a 17 point lead late in the 4 th , your defense will trade points and yards for time off the clock , and some games your defense is just going to be flat it happens ....... If the NFL followed your line of thinking , The Pats would be champions ..........

Chris
03-28-2012, 08:47 AM
there is a difference in playing defense with a lead and from behind , with a QB like manning , you can dial up more blitz packages , take more chances on D , lets throw out stats and x and o's for a second , Football is a mental game , stats , rankings etc dont mean shiat in this game , for example , your team has a 17 point lead late in the 4 th , your defense will trade points and yards for time off the clock , and some games your defense is just going to be flat it happens ....... If the NFL followed your line of thinking , The Pats would be champions ..........

To play the Drek side... you're less likely to get a lead if you never get the ball because they're running it down your throats.

Spider
03-28-2012, 09:14 AM
To play the Drek side... you're less likely to get a lead if you never get the ball because they're running it down your throats.

how many teams can put together back to back scoring drives , by running the rock ?

BroncoBeavis
03-28-2012, 09:23 AM
Thank you sir :yayaya:

I really think that even if the defense wont necessarily BE BETTER, they sure will PLAY better and be more successful. theres less weight on the defense' shoulders to keep the team in games when the offense is doing their job and lighting it up.

We just got done witnessing twice at the end of last season how Tom Brady laughs off a d-line who can pressure from the edge but stays soft in the middle.

This team won't beat Tom Brady giving up the middle of the field with the animal TE's he's got to throw to. He stepped up into the pocket at will and killed us. So far the solution has been to get worse at DT. Something has to change, if we're seriously talking championships. I'd would've rather kept Goodman then sacrifice at DT. Good push in the middle can make the secondary look a lot better.

55CrushEm
03-28-2012, 09:32 AM
I'm not sure what you're point is. Yes the DT position isn't great but obviously they're going to address it at some point since they wanted Bunkley back and still want Thomas. So that's two roster spots at DT they still want to address.

Why not wait till they do something about it instead of whining now?

Probably because we've been waiting for over a decade for this organization to seriously address the DT position.

Broncolt
03-28-2012, 10:01 AM
We just got done witnessing twice at the end of last season how Tom Brady laughs off a d-line who can pressure from the edge but stays soft in the middle.

This team won't beat Tom Brady giving up the middle of the field with the animal TE's he's got to throw to. He stepped up into the pocket at will and killed us. So far the solution has been to get worse at DT. Something has to change, if we're seriously talking championships. I'd would've rather kept Goodman then sacrifice at DT. Good push in the middle can make the secondary look a lot better.

Very true. the DT position cannot be overlooked, and it literally can take just 1 great DT to make the entire defense look different. DT has been one of the colts haunting issues for years too...so im familiar with the many,many,many,many cons of having ****ty personnel at DT.

BroncoBuff
03-28-2012, 10:41 AM
defense wont necessarily BE BETTER, they sure will PLAY better ... less weight on the defense' shoulders when the offense is lighting it up.

Well said. Peyton won't take them to the next step, but he'll make things more comfortable where they're standing now. Which should be at or beneath their 2011 version.

I like Mike Adams, and Porter is okay. Problem is these two guys can't make up for what's lost, no way. If the defense wants to take a step, then trade up for an impact guy like Poe or Keochly.

BroncoBuff
03-28-2012, 10:50 AM
I think we should've signed somebody like Stanford Routt instead of Porter. Porter seems like bad mojo to me. You don't see the Patriots signing David Tyree, do you?

Bronco Rob
03-29-2012, 03:48 AM
I think we should've signed somebody like Stanford Routt instead of Porter. Porter seems like bad mojo to me. You don't see the Patriots signing David Tyree, do you?



???

fontaine
03-29-2012, 04:01 AM
Probably because we've been waiting for over a decade for this organization to seriously address the DT position.

Meh, this FO has shown it's willing to do whatever it takes to win.

If we go into week 1 with Mitch Unrein, Vickerson, and Warren as the only DTs then you've got a right to complain.

My guess is they'll go with a one year hire of Amobi Okoye or Franklin and double up in the draft at DT for the long term future.

BroncoBuff
03-29-2012, 06:51 AM
???

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/DBlvjtfpPAg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

SUPER BOWL ... Saints lead by 7 with 3:20 to play ...

Manning drives to their 25, is ready to tie it up, when .....

BroncoBuff
03-29-2012, 06:52 AM
Patriots wouldn't sign David Tyree, would they?

TonyR
03-29-2012, 07:01 AM
Patriots wouldn't sign David Tyree, would they?

If Tyree was available, WR was a need, he'd be an upgrade for them at the position, and was the right price, yes.

Drek
03-29-2012, 04:43 PM
Bunk's contract is seriously backloaded. Majority of the money comes in years 3 and 4,but I think only up to year 2 is guaranteed. Saints are pretty well protected from bust potential. Far more protected than we are from any Manning injury.

If it was a money thing we should've made it work. But maybe there was more to it.

Still about $9M guaranteed for a guy who isn't worth it. If they were going to commit that kind of money to a DT then it should have gone to splashing the pot on Paul Soliai and making sure he leaves Miami.

I'm not sure what you're point is. Yes the DT position isn't great but obviously they're going to address it at some point since they wanted Bunkley back and still want Thomas. So that's two roster spots at DT they still want to address.

Why not wait till they do something about it instead of whining now?
No point discussing anything Broncos related until it happens? So I guess Taco should just pull the plug on this site between news stories then if we can't discuss the actual future of the Denver Broncos on a discussion group that centers entirely on the Denver Broncos.

The FO claimed they'd address DT last year. In the end we got Ty Warren who did nothing, and Bunkley who was only mildly less ****ty than what we've played there the last several years. He still wasn't a complete player, let alone a real impact DT.

What you view as "whining" I view as legitimate critique of an organization that repeatedly tells its fanbase (read: customers) that they'll address DT and then never actually follow through.

there is a difference in playing defense with a lead and from behind , with a QB like manning , you can dial up more blitz packages , take more chances on D , lets throw out stats and x and o's for a second , Football is a mental game , stats , rankings etc dont mean shiat in this game , for example , your team has a 17 point lead late in the 4 th , your defense will trade points and yards for time off the clock , and some games your defense is just going to be flat it happens ....... If the NFL followed your line of thinking , The Pats would be champions ..........
This response fails to address my post in any meaningful way. I pointed out to you with clear, concise facts how Manning did not dramatically improve the Colts' defense and how the Colts' defense was inconsistent year to year, often on the bad end of the league's defenses as a whole.

Obviously within a game there is a wide variety of strategy employed, but it is quite clear that the strategic advantages Manning gives by being able to score so many points are off-set with regards to defensive success by some extraneous factors, hence why the Colts failed year after year to muster a good defense.

Those factors I also referenced, most notably the weakening of TOP control, rest for the defense, and a built in strategy by all opponents to want to establish a ground game and control the clock early and often against Manning.

Manning is a significant addition in the end goal of winning football games. The net benefit he gives a defense are not something you can sufficiently prove at this point. It is clear he offers some significant theoretical advantages but those come at the expense of some equal theoretical disadvantages.

how many teams can put together back to back scoring drives , by running the rock ?
Against the Denver Broncos? Most teams in the league. I thought we'd seen enough of teams running roughshod over us to establish that fact. Or do you need a repeat of all our Raiders losses, Chiefs losses, etc. over the last four years or so?

You can make a VERY strong argument that the Denver Broncos have been the worst run defense team in the league from 2007 to current. 2011 was the first season since then that this organization didn't finish in the bottom handful of spots in rushing yards given up. It was still middle of the road, lost it's best run defending DT, and has yet to resign their other starting DT while no one else has been brought in to fill those voids.

Without some kind of worthwhile addition it's entirely possible that teams CAN run on us for consecutive scoring drives.

Spider
03-29-2012, 07:36 PM
This response fails to address my post in any meaningful way. I pointed out to you with clear, concise facts how Manning did not dramatically improve the Colts' defense and how the Colts' defense was inconsistent year to year, often on the bad end of the league's defenses as a whole.

Obviously within a game there is a wide variety of strategy employed, but it is quite clear that the strategic advantages Manning gives by being able to score so many points are off-set with regards to defensive success by some extraneous factors, hence why the Colts failed year after year to muster a good defense.

Those factors I also referenced, most notably the weakening of TOP control, rest for the defense, and a built in strategy by all opponents to want to establish a ground game and control the clock early and often against Manning.

Manning is a significant addition in the end goal of winning football games. The net benefit he gives a defense are not something you can sufficiently prove at this point. It is clear he offers some significant theoretical advantages but those come at the expense of some equal theoretical disadvantages.


Against the Denver Broncos? Most teams in the league. I thought we'd seen enough of teams running roughshod over us to establish that fact. Or do you need a repeat of all our Raiders losses, Chiefs losses, etc. over the last four years or so?

You can make a VERY strong argument that the Denver Broncos have been the worst run defense team in the league from 2007 to current. 2011 was the first season since then that this organization didn't finish in the bottom handful of spots in rushing yards given up. It was still middle of the road, lost it's best run defending DT, and has yet to resign their other starting DT while no one else has been brought in to fill those voids.

Without some kind of worthwhile addition it's entirely possible that teams CAN run on us for consecutive scoring drives.
sure it did , you are just trying to muddy up the water with a bunch of useless stats , you need to make a mountain out of a mole hill , this defense will be fine , not great , but fine , now for the statement you made about teams scoring back to back on drives toting the rock , well I think most see how silly that is , so really dont need to say anything , just like saying that Tebow going 3 and out almost every drive except late in the 4 th some how kept the other team from scoring on every drive

barryr
03-29-2012, 07:40 PM
The Broncos will not go, much less win, a Super Bowl with just an ok defense.

Agamemnon
03-29-2012, 08:15 PM
Still about $9M guaranteed for a guy who isn't worth it. If they were going to commit that kind of money to a DT then it should have gone to splashing the pot on Paul Soliai and making sure he leaves Miami.

Bunkley is totally worth the contract he was given. Are you kidding?

Spider
03-29-2012, 08:16 PM
The Broncos will not go, much less win, a Super Bowl with just an ok defense.

Did in 97 and 98 , granted it was ball control , But Elway built up such a lead early , it didnt matter

BroncoBuff
03-29-2012, 10:08 PM
The Broncos will not go, much less win, a Super Bowl with just an ok defense.

I was about to disagree with you, I thought TRULY great offenses could win Lombardis even with average defenses. But I did some research first, and I'm glad I did, because you were right.

Looked at the NFL's 3 best offenses over last twenty years: '99 Rams, '97 Broncos and '94 49ers. All three led the league in yardage gained and points scored, all three won the Super Bowl. However . . .


Despite six Hall-of-Fame caliber starters, the vaunted Broncos offense clearly needed every bit of the league's #5/#6 ranked pts/yds allowed defense to slog through a tight Wild Card seed and win a very close Super Bowl.
Despite the giddy dramatics of its Greatest Show on Turf, Rams won their two playoff games by just 16 combined points, and the Super Bowl by just two feet. So they too obviously needed their #4/#6 ranked pts/yds allowed defense to eke out their Lombardi.
The 49ers steam-rolled through the post-season, but nonetheless did have the NFL's #6/#8 ranked pts/yds allowed defense.


If this sample is representative, it looks like even the greatest offenses need very good defenses to Lombardi.

bowtown
03-29-2012, 10:12 PM
I was about to disagree with you, I thought TRULY great offenses could win Lombardis even with average defenses. But I did some research first, and I'm glad I did, because you were right.

Looked at the NFL's 3 best offenses over last twenty years: '99 Rams, '97 Broncos and '94 49ers. All three led the league in yardage gained and points scored, all three won the Super Bowl. However . . .


Despite six Hall-of-Fame caliber starters, the vaunted Broncos offense clearly needed every bit of the league's #5/#6 ranked pts/yds allowed defense to slog through a tight Wild Card seed and win a very close Super Bowl.
Despite the giddy dramatics of its Greatest Show on Turf, Rams won their two playoff games by just 16 combined points, and the Super Bowl by just two feet. So they too obviously needed their #4/#6 ranked pts/yds allowed defense to eke out their Lombardi.
The 49ers steam-rolled through the post-season, but nonetheless did have the NFL's #6/#8 ranked pts/yds allowed defense.


If this sample is representative, it looks like even the greatest offenses need very good defenses to Lombardi.

The Bronco's and Ram's defenses owed a lot of their success to their respective offenses.

BroncoBuff
03-29-2012, 10:21 PM
The Bronco's and Ram's defenses owed a lot of their success to their respective offenses.

Seemed like the Rams offense scored too quickly to help.

Besides, those are very highly ranked defenses. No offense can boost their defense into borderline elite status. Dunno about you, but I was quite surprised how highly these defenses were ranked.

bowtown
03-29-2012, 10:24 PM
Seemed like the Rams offense scored too quickly to help.

Besides, those are very highly ranked defenses. No offense can boost their defense into top 5/6 numbers. Dunno about you, but I was quite surprised how highly these defenses were ranked.

It's not just about scoring quickly, it's about playing in the lead and not being afraid of shoot outs.

At the end of the day though, I'd still always rather have a nasty defense as the heart of my team than a flashy offense.

BroncoBuff
03-29-2012, 10:50 PM
I'd still always rather have a nasty defense as the heart of my team than a flashy offense.

Exactly where I was headed, definitely.

Tampa Bay's top-ranked 2002 defense dragged it's #19/#24 offense across the finish line pretty easily. 2000 Ravens did the same with their #16/#18 offense.

Despite the Ravens' wildly successful year, the cerebral genius Brian Billick set out to fine tune his roster by waiving the starting QB outright and signing a free agent to replace him.

"HOW DO YOU LIKE MY QUARTERBACK NOW?" What a dumass :oyvey:

cutthemdown
03-29-2012, 11:06 PM
Broncos need for Carter and Moore to play better. They should finally getting an off season. Looks like Carter the better of the two so far. I think the secondary has gotten better. Adams playing 16 games better then Dawkins injured. Tracy Porter not a huge upgrade at corner, but an upgrade just the same. With that, maybe Carter and Harris get better also the secondary might be pretty good. It does have Champ Bailey on one side who seems to be really good still.

At linebacker we haven't gotten better.

On the Dline we have gotten worst. You have to believe they plan on drafting at least 2 DT. I think they look for ones that can also play dend. Guys like 300 pounds not 330 etc.

Spider
03-30-2012, 02:30 AM
Seemed like the Rams offense scored too quickly to help.

Besides, those are very highly ranked defenses. No offense can boost their defense into borderline elite status. Dunno about you, but I was quite surprised how highly these defenses were ranked.

rankings are misleading .......Defense wins championships , but you need a t.o.p .controlling offense . only a fool would believe we had a better Defense then the Packers or the Chiefs that year .....

fontaine
03-30-2012, 04:25 AM
No point discussing anything Broncos related until it happens? So I guess Taco should just pull the plug on this site between news stories then if we can't discuss the actual future of the Denver Broncos on a discussion group that centers entirely on the Denver Broncos.



That actually would be a good idea. It would certainly put an end to the constant drama, speculation and hyper exagerration that goes on here routinely. Stuff like calling out the FO constantly, speculating they're cheap, short sighted and incompetent just because they were patient and didn't sign every other FA in the first few hours of free agency.


The FO claimed they'd address DT last year. In the end we got Ty Warren who did nothing, and Bunkley who was only mildly less ****ty than what we've played there the last several years. He still wasn't a complete player, let alone a real impact DT.

What you view as "whining" I view as legitimate critique of an organization that repeatedly tells its fanbase (read: customers) that they'll address DT and then never actually follow through.

This current FO is just a year old so I don't see where the "then never actually follow through" part comes in.

They've signed two of the best TEs available, the best QB to ever hit FA, upgraded the secondary at two positions, resigned a couple of LBers and have a loaded draft stockpile, not to mention they mentioned they are still looking to upgrade the DT positiono AND signed one of the best DC out there.

FA and the draft isn't over, yet the FO has catapulted this team from mediocrity to genuine SuperBowl contenders with a franchise QB in just a few weeks of FA.

And still the whining doesn't stop.

Play2win
03-30-2012, 06:00 AM
That actually would be a good idea. It would certainly put an end to the constant drama, speculation and hyper exagerration that goes on here routinely. Stuff like calling out the FO constantly, speculating they're cheap, short sighted and incompetent just because they were patient and didn't sign every other FA in the first few hours of free agency.




This current FO is just a year old so I don't see where the "then never actually follow through" part comes in.

They've signed two of the best TEs available, the best QB to ever hit FA, upgraded the secondary at two positions, resigned a couple of LBers and have a loaded draft stockpile, not to mention they mentioned they are still looking to upgrade the DT positiono AND signed one of the best DC out there.

FA and the draft isn't over, yet the FO has catapulted this team from mediocrity to genuine SuperBowl contenders with a franchise QB in just a few weeks of FA.

And still the whining doesn't stop.

I can't imagine having a beter offseason, ever. It could turnout to be the best offseason any team has ever had.

We went from having our biggest weakness (Tebow) to having our biggest strength (Manning) at the most important position in one off-season. It could be legendary.

TonyR
03-30-2012, 06:04 AM
...they mentioned they are still looking to upgrade the DT...

Yup, John Fox's recent comments (below) suggest they know they need a body or two at the position and hopefully further suggests they'll act on it soon. See the second link below for how it could play out.

"We've got some holes, in particular at defensive tackle," Broncos coach John
Fox said Tuesday at the AFC coaches breakfast with the media.

http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_20270470/denver-broncos-still-have-holes-fill-at-defensive&sa=U&ei=hq51T5uTN4KKiAKupbSnDg&ved=0CBEQFjAA&usg=AFQjCNHyJgzuMk1EnWzKKptxxL-mpWyW9A


http://www.itsalloverfatman.com/broncos/entry/some-speculation-on-how-defensive-tackle-could-play-itself-out

Play2win
03-30-2012, 06:10 AM
Yup, John Fox's recent comments (below) suggest they know they need a body or two at the position and hopefully further suggests they'll act on it soon. See the second link below for how it could play out.

"We've got some holes, in particular at defensive tackle," Broncos coach John
Fox said Tuesday at the AFC coaches breakfast with the media.

http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_20270470/denver-broncos-still-have-holes-fill-at-defensive&sa=U&ei=hq51T5uTN4KKiAKupbSnDg&ved=0CBEQFjAA&usg=AFQjCNHyJgzuMk1EnWzKKptxxL-mpWyW9A


http://www.itsalloverfatman.com/broncos/entry/some-speculation-on-how-defensive-tackle-could-play-itself-out

I think bringing in Jack Del Rio speaks volumes to that fact that the position is going to addressed and made a priority. It is one of my top reasons why I love the JDR signing so much.

Drek
03-30-2012, 06:17 AM
sure it did , you are just trying to muddy up the water with a bunch of useless stats , you need to make a mountain out of a mole hill , this defense will be fine , not great , but fine , now for the statement you made about teams scoring back to back on drives toting the rock , well I think most see how silly that is , so really dont need to say anything , just like saying that Tebow going 3 and out almost every drive except late in the 4 th some how kept the other team from scoring on every drive

1. The entire point of this thread is to discuss if the Broncos D can take the next step up to great. Hence the thread title "Can Denver's defense take the next step?"

2. I'm sorry that simple stats like year to year team rankings muddy the water for you.

3. Tebow going 3 and out almost every drive also corresponded directly with the team winning time of possession at a league average clip. With the previous starter the team almost never won TOP. Do you think TOP is a silly stat? It has a pretty strong correlation to wins, right along side turnover ratio which also improved with Tebow at QB. Orton consistently shot our defense in the foot by having no ability to control the clock and a proclivity for turnovers. Tebow picked our D up by controlling the clock even in failure and protecting the ball. Manning does the later, he does not do the former. Our defense will spend a LOT of time on the field in 2012.

Bunkley is totally worth the contract he was given. Are you kidding?
I have zero faith in Bunkley repeating his 2012 season. It screams "contract year wonder" from a guy who did the exact same thing his last year of college.

rankings are misleading .......Defense wins championships , but you need a t.o.p .controlling offense . only a fool would believe we had a better Defense then the Packers or the Chiefs that year .....
You do know that this is my point and you've spent several pages of this thread arguing against it right? TOP is huge and Manning's offense does not control TOP. So how do the Broncos win TOP with a fast scoring Manning offense? By stopping the run early and consistently.

That actually would be a good idea. It would certainly put an end to the constant drama, speculation and hyper exagerration that goes on here routinely. Stuff like calling out the FO constantly, speculating they're cheap, short sighted and incompetent just because they were patient and didn't sign every other FA in the first few hours of free agency.
If you don't like to discuss the Broncos outside the context of already happened events then why did you enter a thread that centers entirely around speculation on the 2012 season? No one gives a **** about you personally not enjoying the speculative nature of pulling for a sports club.

This current FO is just a year old so I don't see where the "then never actually follow through" part comes in.
1. This is year two for Elway and Fox. Xanders is the GM and he's been here since Shanahan, with the GM title since early 2009. Many people involved in talent evaluation have been here since the Shanahan days as well. At some point when an organization consistently fails to address an issue you need to start asking what is wrong with how they evaluate potential solutions to that issue.

They've signed two of the best TEs available, the best QB to ever hit FA, upgraded the secondary at two positions, resigned a couple of LBers and have a loaded draft stockpile, not to mention they mentioned they are still looking to upgrade the DT positiono AND signed one of the best DC out there.
2. They have fewer draft picks than last year in lower positions. I wouldn't call it "loaded".

3. The offensive improvements are nice, but that isn't what we are talking about here. We're talking about the defense. Which has regressed from a player personnel standpoint so far in free agency.

FA and the draft isn't over, yet the FO has catapulted this team from mediocrity to genuine SuperBowl contenders with a franchise QB in just a few weeks of FA.

And still the whining doesn't stop.
4. Again, not whining. Objective critiques. Ask the Patriots how well that high flying unstoppable offense worked for them in winning the Super Bowl last year. Oh wait, they didn't win and got their asses shut down by a well rounded defense with some exceptional pass rush talent. Right now we aren't a well rounded defense. Even league average starters at DT and this team has a real shot at greatness. Right now we have Ty Warren (hasn't played in two years), Kevin Vickerson (never been a 4-3 DT starter in the league despite being almost 30, missed all last season with an injury) and Mitch Unrein (definition of the term "scrub"). I'm sure the FO will attempt a solution and I firmly believe Del Rio will be a big help there. But it doesn't change the fact that we've once again put DT at the bottom end of our priorities list.

Drek
03-30-2012, 06:19 AM
Yup, John Fox's recent comments (below) suggest they know they need a body or two at the position and hopefully further suggests they'll act on it soon. See the second link below for how it could play out.


They don't need a body or two, they need a starter or two. This is also the same song and dance Fox and Elway played last year. Then we got nothing in the draft while they said "wait until FA". Come FA we again did nothing of note. Now we're hearing the same talk but not a whole lot of action to back it up.

BroncoBeavis
03-30-2012, 06:27 AM
1. The entire point of this thread is to discuss if the Broncos D can take the next step up to great. Hence the thread title "Can Denver's defense take the next step?"

2. I'm sorry that simple stats like year to year team rankings muddy the water for you.

3. Tebow going 3 and out almost every drive also corresponded directly with the team winning time of possession at a league average clip. With the previous starter the team almost never won TOP. Do you think TOP is a silly stat? It has a pretty strong correlation to wins, right along side turnover ratio which also improved with Tebow at QB. Orton consistently shot our defense in the foot by having no ability to control the clock and a proclivity for turnovers. Tebow picked our D up by controlling the clock even in failure and protecting the ball. Manning does the later, he does not do the former. Our defense will spend a LOT of time on the field in 2012.


I have zero faith in Bunkley repeating his 2012 season. It screams "contract year wonder" from a guy who did the exact same thing his last year of college.


You do know that this is my point and you've spent several pages of this thread arguing against it right? TOP is huge and Manning's offense does not control TOP. So how do the Broncos win TOP with a fast scoring Manning offense? By stopping the run early and consistently.


If you don't like to discuss the Broncos outside the context of already happened events then why did you enter a thread that centers entirely around speculation on the 2012 season? No one gives a **** about you personally not enjoying the speculative nature of pulling for a sports club.


1. This is year two for Elway and Fox. Xanders is the GM and he's been here since Shanahan, with the GM title since early 2009. Many people involved in talent evaluation have been here since the Shanahan days as well. At some point when an organization consistently fails to address an issue you need to start asking what is wrong with how they evaluate potential solutions to that issue.


2. They have fewer draft picks than last year in lower positions. I wouldn't call it "loaded".

3. The offensive improvements are nice, but that isn't what we are talking about here. We're talking about the defense. Which has regressed from a player personnel standpoint so far in free agency.


4. Again, not whining. Objective critiques. Ask the Patriots how well that high flying unstoppable offense worked for them in winning the Super Bowl last year. Oh wait, they didn't win and got their asses shut down by a well rounded defense with some exceptional pass rush talent. Right now we aren't a well rounded defense. Even league average starters at DT and this team has a real shot at greatness. Right now we have Ty Warren (hasn't played in two years), Kevin Vickerson (never been a 4-3 DT starter in the league despite being almost 30, missed all last season with an injury) and Mitch Unrein (definition of the term "scrub"). I'm sure the FO will attempt a solution and I firmly believe Del Rio will be a big help there. But it doesn't change the fact that we've once again put DT at the bottom end of our priorities list.

I'm really enjoying how they keep talking about Manning running no huddle @ Mile High without thinking through what that does to our defense. Teams who have running games will formulate entire gameplans around keeping our D on the field as long as possible.

TonyR
03-30-2012, 06:47 AM
They don't need a body or two, they need a starter or two.

I hear what you're saying, but you're not going to find a top end starter in FA. The Eagles didn't consider Bunkley a starter last year and they gave him away and became a "starter" for the Broncos. If we sign Okoye, for example, he'll compete for minutes and push the starters and will possibly be one. We need to hope for a guy or two to add to the rotation along with hopefully a guy or two in the draft.

Drek
03-30-2012, 07:14 AM
I hear what you're saying, but you're not going to find a top end starter in FA. The Eagles didn't consider Bunkley a starter last year and they gave him away and became a "starter" for the Broncos. If we sign Okoye, for example, he'll compete for minutes and push the starters and will possibly be one. We need to hope for a guy or two to add to the rotation along with hopefully a guy or two in the draft.

Did I say "top end starter"? I said "starter" as in anyone who is league average at DT or better.

We've brought two in the past two off-seasons, signed neither (Mebane and Soliai).

Now we need to go patchwork again, so we might as well aim for guys with starter potential. Okoye has potential. Sammie Lee Hill has potential (but he costs a 4th rounder). Those guys would be nice moves to shore up a weak DT unit with young guys who might just be ready to break out.

fontaine
03-30-2012, 07:15 AM
If you don't like to discuss the Broncos outside the context of already happened events then why did you enter a thread that centers entirely around speculation on the 2012 season? No one gives a **** about you personally not enjoying the speculative nature of pulling for a sports club.


Nothing wrong with discussing football. What I see on this thread from you though is the same boring, and jaded old nonsense about the FO not doing anything about the DT position, again, and again, and again and trying to blame the current new staff/FO for previous problems at DT they had nothing to do with even though the offseason isn't finished yet and we've still to go through the draft.

That's not discussing football and speculating about the 2012 season, it's just stupid whining.

1. This is year two for Elway and Fox. Xanders is the GM and he's been here since Shanahan, with the GM title since early 2009. Many people involved in talent evaluation have been here since the Shanahan days as well. At some point when an organization consistently fails to address an issue you need to start asking what is wrong with how they evaluate potential solutions to that issue.

So Xanders and a few scouts that don't make personnel decisions constitute "an organisation."

ROFL!

The offensive improvements are nice, but that isn't what we are talking about here. We're talking about the defense. Which has regressed from a player personnel standpoint so far in free agency.

Meh, too early to say for the entire defense.

4. Again, not whining. Objective critiques. Ask the Patriots how well that high flying unstoppable offense worked for them in winning the Super Bowl last year. Oh wait, they didn't win and got their asses shut down by a well rounded defense with some exceptional pass rush talent. Right now we aren't a well rounded defense. Even league average starters at DT and this team has a real shot at greatness. Right now we have Ty Warren (hasn't played in two years), Kevin Vickerson (never been a 4-3 DT starter in the league despite being almost 30, missed all last season with an injury) and Mitch Unrein (definition of the term "scrub"). I'm sure the FO will attempt a solution and I firmly believe Del Rio will be a big help there.

You keep on repeating the same thing but what else was the FO supposed to do in the first two weeks of free agency? Forget Manning and putting an offense around him, let's drop that and start chasing Bunkley and other mostly average DTs.

Elway/Fox didn't create the current problems at DT. We have McDumbass and Shanahan to thank for that. They're trying to address it but higher priorities got in the way like Manning and giving him the offense he needs.


We still have options like the draft, or bringing in a one year hire like Franklin, or trading for a DT like Hill. Is it going to give us long term solutions at DT? No probably not, but it's the best for the moment and sometimes that's all you can do. The rest is up to the coaches and players.

BroncoBeavis
03-30-2012, 07:21 AM
Nothing wrong with discussing football. What I see on this thread from you though is the same boring, and jaded old nonsense about the FO not doing anything about the DT position, again, and again, and again and trying to blame the current new staff/FO for previous problems at DT they had nothing to do with even though the offseason isn't finished yet and we've still to go through the draft.

That's not discussing football and speculating about the 2012 season, it's just stupid whining.



So Xanders and a few scouts that don't make personnel decisions constitute "an organisation."

ROFL!



Meh, too early to say for the entire defense.



You keep on repeating the same thing but what else was the FO supposed to do in the first two weeks of free agency? Forget Manning and putting an offense around him, let's drop that and start chasing Bunkley and other mostly average DTs.

Sorry, but they should have been able to manage both. SF and TEN weren't icing every free agent waiting for Manning. Manning or no Manning didn't change this team's need for a proven DT, especially after Bunkley walked.

fontaine
03-30-2012, 07:26 AM
Sorry, but they should have been able to manage both. SF and TEN weren't icing every free agent waiting for Manning. Manning or no Manning didn't change this team's need for a proven DT, especially after Bunkley walked.

Yes, Manning didn't change that need. But signing Manning and the skill players he needs on offense in Tamme/Dreessen, Caldwell etc meant that they had to be realistic in cap dollars in chasing someone like Solai.

It's not the ideal solution but given that choice I'm glad they went down the route of the offense/secondary as it gives us a better chance of getting in the playoffs and staying there.

BroncoBeavis
03-30-2012, 07:32 AM
Yes, Manning didn't change that need. But signing Manning and the skill players he needs on offense in Tamme/Dreessen, Caldwell etc meant that they had to be realistic in cap dollars in chasing someone like Solai.

It's not the ideal solution but given that choice I'm glad they went down the route of the offense/secondary as it gives us a better chance of getting in the playoffs and staying there.

Well, if we end FA season with significant cap space, I'm not sure that argument can be maintained. We'll see.

Drek
03-30-2012, 07:40 AM
Nothing wrong with discussing football. What I see on this thread from you though is the same boring, and jaded old nonsense about the FO not doing anything about the DT position, again, and again, and again and trying to blame the current new staff/FO for previous problems at DT they had nothing to do with even though the offseason isn't finished yet and we've still to go through the draft.
It might be boring and old but its boring and old because the team consistently fails to address the position.

So Xanders and a few scouts that don't make personnel decisions constitute "an organisation."
Try the majority of the scouting staff along with Xanders, and half of the positional coaches. Do you think Elway and Fox scout all of the players every draft? There is a reason why the Broncos organization is consistently unhappy with the "value" at DT in draft after draft, but other teams take guys throughout the draft who wind up starting for them. The Broncos as an organization have a blind spot when it comes to assessing DT talent and has for years.

Meh, too early to say for the entire defense.
How? At this point the defense has definitely regressed. Porter is a nice get, big pick up from Goodman (who is still on the roster for god knows what reason) but Adams is a downgrade from Dawkins and no one has been added to replace the one passable DT we had last year.

I'm not saying the defense can't be better by adding the right people. But to this point they haven't. They need to. Until they do it will be the single biggest problem with this team, just like it has been for about a decade now.

You keep on repeating the same thing but what else was the FO supposed to do in the first two weeks of free agency? Forget Manning and putting an offense around him, let's drop that and start chasing Bunkley and other mostly average DTs.
So the FO can't walk and chew gum at the same time apparently? After all the praise heaped on Elway for landing Manning and after the fact that Manning didn't talk dollars with anyone until after he made his decision I'm left wondering why Xanders was spending his every waking moment involved in the Manning pursuit instead of helping to fix the defense. They brought Soliai in and then failed to trump the Dolphins offer despite having more than enough cap room to make a signature defensive addition along with paying Manning whatever he might want.

Elway/Fox didn't create the current problems at DT. We have McDumbass and Shanahan to thank for that. They're trying to address it but higher priorities got in the way like Manning and giving him the offense he needs.
There is no higher priority for this organization than DT. They had a QB who won a playoff game for them and had spent the first year talking about a slow rebuild through the draft. Choosing to sacrifice that for the instant gratification of Manning is not an excuse for failing to deliver the kind of defensive help this team needs in order to live up to these new expectations.

And the "they didn't create this mess" line only works in year one. They have now had just as many opportunities to add DT help as McDaniels with better FA classes to work with and yet you blame him for our DT issues but not the current FO? That is fan worship controlling your perspective, plain and simple.

We still have options like the draft, or bringing in a one year hire like Franklin, or trading for a DT like Hill. Is it going to give us long term solutions at DT? No probably not, but it's the best for the moment and sometimes that's all you can do. The rest is up to the coaches and players.
Hill is in his mid-20's. He'd be a long term addition. Those kinds of moves are exactly what I'm talking about. Why haven't we made a strong push for Hill or Okoye? We have the cap room. We have the incentive of being able to win. We guarantee significant playing time. How hard is it to seal a deal if you really want someone on your club? This FO has only gotten aggressive once, and that was to pursue Manning. They need to have that same kind of attitude for addressing DT, otherwise we're going to be a high scoring offense playing opposite a defense that gives up a ton of yardage on the ground and fails to consistently get after QBs.

Drek
03-30-2012, 07:42 AM
Yes, Manning didn't change that need. But signing Manning and the skill players he needs on offense in Tamme/Dreessen, Caldwell etc meant that they had to be realistic in cap dollars in chasing someone like Solai.

It's not the ideal solution but given that choice I'm glad they went down the route of the offense/secondary as it gives us a better chance of getting in the playoffs and staying there.

Still have $15M in cap room according to Schefter.

fontaine
03-30-2012, 07:49 AM
Still have $15M in cap room according to Schefter.

A lot of that is tied to the Draft, a reserve every team keeps for injuries etc.

I think they have a lot less a few million for another FA or two.

I don't disagree that DT isn't a real need but I'm not prepared to label the FO as failing at that position until I see the same final roster set as we see now like Vickerson/Unrein/Warren.

Bmore Manning
03-30-2012, 07:57 AM
Still have $15M in cap room according to Schefter.

I thought about something, as much as Hill sounds inticing, being a NT that can rush the passer and only surrendering a 4th which Denver has two of. Detroit was terrible against the RUN, and they have one of the better MLBs in football. That means Hill and Suh didn't get it done.

Mediator12
03-30-2012, 09:17 AM
I'm really enjoying how they keep talking about Manning running no huddle @ Mile High without thinking through what that does to our defense. Teams who have running games will formulate entire gameplans around keeping our D on the field as long as possible.

TOP is being discussed very poorly in this thread right now. TOP has many factors, but the reason INDY's TOP was so poor was directly related to INDY's defense being 30th in third down conversions for a decade or so, versus the fact that the NO Huddle offense was being used. Combine that with very few TO's giving the ball back to the offense and even though INDY has been a top 3 team in average offensive yards per drive and scored top 3 in points per drive that's what you get.

Add in the fact, they played a Cover 2 scheme that not only allowed more rushing YPA and allowed a higher completion rate by keeping teams from making Big plays on offense and therefore more complete in bounds passes that kept the clock running on their defense.

DEN's defense does not play that way. DEN's defense will helped Tebow's offense with TOP and should give Manning more drives per game than the Colts defense ever did by having respectable third down % plus TO's.

Sure, the Indy No Huddle was a potential quick strike score, but they always changed Field position and got in scoring position more often than not.

Mediator12
03-30-2012, 09:23 AM
I thought about something, as much as Hill sounds inticing, being a NT that can rush the passer and only surrendering a 4th which Denver has two of. Detroit was terrible against the RUN, and they have one of the better MLBs in football. That means Hill and Suh didn't get it done.

Not really. Their defense was very good up the middle in adjusted Line Yards ranking 7th in the league and 15th overall. They were actually porous as a unit in the C and D gaps. Most of the inside rushing yardage was also against nickel personnel and Hill was not a part of that.

So, really, The DT duo more than did their jobs in run situations.

Bmore Manning
03-30-2012, 09:30 AM
Not really. Their defense was very good up the middle in adjusted Line Yards ranking 7th in the league and 15th overall. They were actually porous as a unit in the C and D gaps. Most of the inside rushing yardage was also against nickel personnel and Hill was not a part of that.

So, really, The DT duo more than did their jobs in run situations.

So then you advocate Hill coming on board? I am going to have to do more research but I remember them being weak against the run from the games I watched...

BroncoBeavis
03-30-2012, 09:35 AM
TOP is being discussed very poorly in this thread right now. TOP has many factors, but the reason INDY's TOP was so poor was directly related to INDY's defense being 30th in third down conversions for a decade or so, versus the fact that the NO Huddle offense was being used. Combine that with very few TO's giving the ball back to the offense and even though INDY has been a top 3 team in average offensive yards per drive and scored top 3 in points per drive that's what you get.

That's classic chicken vs egg argument. High 3rd down completion percentage would be a tell-tale sign of a defense in a lot of 3rd and short situations.

A grind-them-down gameplan would result in exactly that kind of scenario. Use every down to get your 10... eat clock, don't reach for the big play unless you have to... take what the Defense gives.

This is exactly how the Jets beat Manning in the 2011 Wild Card game. They won TOP, and Manning only had 9 possessions and was held to 16 points.

Drek
03-30-2012, 09:50 AM
A lot of that is tied to the Draft, a reserve every team keeps for injuries etc.

I think they have a lot less a few million for another FA or two.

I don't disagree that DT isn't a real need but I'm not prepared to label the FO as failing at that position until I see the same final roster set as we see now like Vickerson/Unrein/Warren.
The draft is maybe $5M or so. A reserve for injuries doesn't need to be more than a few million. This team still has a good sized chunk of money they could make some moves with.

And this is my point by the way. I'm not saying the FO is an utter failure. Instead I'd say they have done a pretty solid job this off-season. Getting Manning is huge. I'm a big fan of the Porter signing. Dreessen and Tamme are solid additions. But DT is still a big issue. You say you'll hold off labeling the FO's attempts a failure until the roster is set in stone and I'd agree, but the entire point of this forum is to discuss the day to day operations and if you had to grade them today their work at DT would clearly be an F-.

Which leads directly into the point of this thread. Can the defense take the next step? Sure, if the FO finds some answers at DT. Everything else is pretty solid with some good camp competition in the weaker spots. A lot to be optimistic about. But they need to fix DT or the run D will be an sieve just like he's been for years now.

TOP is being discussed very poorly in this thread right now. TOP has many factors, but the reason INDY's TOP was so poor was directly related to INDY's defense being 30th in third down conversions for a decade or so, versus the fact that the NO Huddle offense was being used. Combine that with very few TO's giving the ball back to the offense and even though INDY has been a top 3 team in average offensive yards per drive and scored top 3 in points per drive that's what you get.

Add in the fact, they played a Cover 2 scheme that not only allowed more rushing YPA and allowed a higher completion rate by keeping teams from making Big plays on offense and therefore more complete in bounds passes that kept the clock running on their defense.

DEN's defense does not play that way. DEN's defense will helped Tebow's offense with TOP and should give Manning more drives per game than the Colts defense ever did by having respectable third down % plus TO's.

Sure, the Indy No Huddle was a potential quick strike score, but they always changed Field position and got in scoring position more often than not.
So you're saying that if Indy ran the ball more often and better when they had Manning their TOP wouldn't have been better?

TOP is a combination of both offense and defense. I'm sure Indy's defense couldn't get themselves off the field while Manning was there but a pass-centric offense with no ability to establish a ground game sure didn't help. Blaming it on the no huddle is worthless, but the overall style of offense does reduce the amount of time the offense will have the ball compared to a more balanced, equally capable offense. The payoff for it is well worth it, but it doesn't make life easier on the defense.

To that end, I question just how well this current Broncos D will play without having a powerful, high carries per game rushing offense to help them win TOP. Rushing YPA has been a weakness for quite a while, and it was a weakness at various points last year. Getting 3rd down stops was far less a problem last year than any time before but again, in key match ups the defense suddenly lost the ability to get those stops. Turnovers were still boom/bust from game to game. All of these issues seemed to come together every time we played a top tier offense. Those are scary signs.

I think there is a lot of cause for optimism. I think Del Rio is a huge get. Porter is a big upgrade on Goodman. Adams should at least have a stabilizing presence in the secondary. A lot of young talent are getting another year of quality coaching. All the issues of inconsistency could be just growing pains the team is ready to shake off. But the lack of even one DT worth a damn is an issue you can't just overlook. If there was any good reason to believe this team could legitimately stop the run then I'd agree completely that we've got an offense and defense poised to feed off one another to achieve great things. But as long as 3rd and 5 is a potential rushing down against our defense we've got problems.

Mediator12
03-30-2012, 11:05 AM
That's classic chicken vs egg argument. High 3rd down completion percentage would be a tell-tale sign of a defense in a lot of 3rd and short situations.

A grind-them-down gameplan would result in exactly that kind of scenario. Use every down to get your 10... eat clock, don't reach for the big play unless you have to... take what the Defense gives.

This is exactly how the Jets beat Manning in the 2011 Wild Card game. They won TOP, and Manning only had 9 possessions and was held to 16 points.

How is it Chicken verus Egg? You were saying that the No Huddle was the reason for the TOP disparity while I explained it had more to do with the Defense NOT getting off the field than the No huddle. If the offense had not been so prolific, the Defense would have given up 10 more points a game and had an even worse TOP with more and longer possesions for the other team.

Also, many teams tried to run the ball against INDY, but you forgot that the Cover 2 keeps a safety out of the box and makes you play the run with 7. Without Sanders to blow up running plays, the cover 2 was horrible schematically versus the run. The worst down for Indy was actually second down too. They gave up more first downs on second down than any team in the NFL for the last 5 years. That gets you a new set of downs, before you get to the horrendous third down %. And while you deduced it would result in a lot of third and short plays, it also gave up a lot of third and medium that they failed to convert on defense.

To put this in context, DEN led the league with 199 offensive drives for the season and the DEF had 198 drives for 4th place. That was a factor of so many 3 and outs for the offense and the defense getting off the field quickly to give the ball back. TOP was so good for DEN not because of the 26th yards per drive or 26th ranked Drive success rate, but because the defense held the other team to 14th in yards per drive and 12th in success rate. That allowed Den to continue running the ball not being down 2+ scores and not be forced in to less than 50% throwing completion drives.

That DEN was successful running the ball was not the issue, it was still having the ability to run the ball and gain TOP advantage. They gave other teams in the NFL more opportunities to score than all but 3 offenses, all who missed the playoffs BTW. DEN really should have, but the AFCW helped out a bit there too.

TOP is a function of both sides of the ball. In INDY's case, the defense had a lot more to do with the negative TOP than the offense contributed to it. The reverse was true with DEN last year. Despite the Offense giving ample opportunites for teams to take advantage of so many offensive possessions, the defense was well above average in giving the ball back to the offense and keeping the score close enough to continue running the ball and sticking to the game plan.

BroncoBuff
03-30-2012, 12:11 PM
I agree Drek is repetitive on this, over and over he says the same thing. Maybe that's because this problem is repetitive, over and over the same glaring weakness. DT was already a perennial Broncos failure three years ago when to our horror Mike Nolan decided to "build back to front." That approach failed again of course, but still we didn't learn a damn thing. We just this month pulled another "Nolan," signing two free agent DBs to start for us, while ignoring DT.

We've become way too comfortable with the timid approach, fretting over the health of retreads like Warren and Vickerson ... plucking petals off daisies, hoping a one-year contract-year rental like Bunkley loves us. Are we not men? Let's act like men and fix the problem. Is there a player in this draft we're confident can come in, can start soon, make a difference? Is Poe a guy who can do that, is Brookers? Then go tf out and get him. Make a bold move, pay the price to plug the biggest hole on the roster while Manning still has a couple-three seasons left.

No BroncoBuff, no! We can't give up first-round picks to move up like that!

Yeah, you're right ... god forbid we miss out on the next Knowshon Moreno or Tim Tebow or Alphonso Smith. Besides, teams will always gash our run defense, that's who we are now. We're the denver Broncos.

BroncoBeavis
03-30-2012, 12:29 PM
How is it Chicken verus Egg? You were saying that the No Huddle was the reason for the TOP disparity while I explained it had more to do with the Defense NOT getting off the field than the No huddle. If the offense had not been so prolific, the Defense would have given up 10 more points a game and had an even worse TOP with more and longer possesions for the other team.

Also, many teams tried to run the ball against INDY, but you forgot that the Cover 2 keeps a safety out of the box and makes you play the run with 7. Without Sanders to blow up running plays, the cover 2 was horrible schematically versus the run. The worst down for Indy was actually second down too. They gave up more first downs on second down than any team in the NFL for the last 5 years. That gets you a new set of downs, before you get to the horrendous third down %. And while you deduced it would result in a lot of third and short plays, it also gave up a lot of third and medium that they failed to convert on defense.

To put this in context, DEN led the league with 199 offensive drives for the season and the DEF had 198 drives for 4th place. That was a factor of so many 3 and outs for the offense and the defense getting off the field quickly to give the ball back. TOP was so good for DEN not because of the 26th yards per drive or 26th ranked Drive success rate, but because the defense held the other team to 14th in yards per drive and 12th in success rate. That allowed Den to continue running the ball not being down 2+ scores and not be forced in to less than 50% throwing completion drives.

That DEN was successful running the ball was not the issue, it was still having the ability to run the ball and gain TOP advantage. They gave other teams in the NFL more opportunities to score than all but 3 offenses, all who missed the playoffs BTW. DEN really should have, but the AFCW helped out a bit there too.

TOP is a function of both sides of the ball. In INDY's case, the defense had a lot more to do with the negative TOP than the offense contributed to it. The reverse was true with DEN last year. Despite the Offense giving ample opportunites for teams to take advantage of so many offensive possessions, the defense was well above average in giving the ball back to the offense and keeping the score close enough to continue running the ball and sticking to the game plan.

I didn't say the no-huddle was THE reason for TOP disparity. I said that people who are happy-clapping about Peyton's No-Huddle only think about it's effect on the other team's defense and not ours.

And the chicken and egg argument is about 3rd down conversion percentage. You said it was an indicator of a defense that couldn't get off the field. I said it's just as much an indicator of offenses who do everything they can to stay on the field (to keep Manning iced on the sideline)

It's no mystery. It's the widely understood method to beat Manning. It's why the Jets ran and chewed clock on him in Peyton's last game. He ended with only 9 possessions (and 16 points) all game.

Mediator12
03-30-2012, 01:20 PM
I didn't say the no-huddle was THE reason for TOP disparity. I said that people who are happy-clapping about Peyton's No-Huddle only think about it's effect on the other team's defense and not ours.

And the chicken and egg argument is about 3rd down conversion percentage. You said it was an indicator of a defense that couldn't get off the field. I said it's just as much an indicator of offenses who do everything they can to stay on the field (to keep Manning iced on the sideline)

It's no mystery. It's the widely understood method to beat Manning. It's why the Jets ran and chewed clock on him in Peyton's last game. He ended with only 9 possessions (and 16 points) all game.

Dude, everyone tried to do that to Indy. It's the common myth that it could be done. It's been debunked for years that it's all you have to do. It's a little bit harder than that ;D It helps it was the Jets defense and the offense did not execute very well at all that day. It happens in the NFL.

However, you forgot the MIA game in that same year. INDY had the ball for 15 minutes and MIA for 45 in that game. The defense gave up over 230 yards on the ground. MIA won in rout remember? Oh, wait they lost because even though the defense was epically poor, INDY still scored 27 points!

TOP basically reflects what happened, not how it happened.

As for the 3rd down % being an indicator of a team doing everything they can to stay on the field, that is what EVERY offense does. No one tries to get off the field. That is NOT a gameplan. It's a media stereotype, but its Not NFL football. It's what hacks say to the masses when asked the ridiculous question "so, how do you beat the Colts today?"

Not being able to get off the field because you are playing cover 2 and the team dinks and dunks its way down the field is a gameplan. And one very rarely used to beat INDY all these years. It has worked in the playoffs against Manning, just not a lot. Mostly, because they play real defenses who are disciplined enough to keep doing it all game. However, it's also because the other offense puts up points while doing it too.

Mediator12
03-30-2012, 01:30 PM
Also, DEN was 21st in the NFL in TOP with 29:43 last year. Losing to INDY from 2010 by minus 12 seconds a game ;D Indy was 29:55 in 2010.

This is a little strange. I thought the Offense was good at TOP!

oubronco
03-30-2012, 01:32 PM
All those 3and outs were killers

BroncoBeavis
03-30-2012, 01:32 PM
Dude, everyone tried to do that to Indy. It's the common myth that it could be done. It's been debunked for years that it's all you have to do. It's a little bit harder than that ;D It helps it was the Jets defense and the offense did not execute very well at all that day. It happens in the NFL.

However, you forgot the MIA game in that same year. INDY had the ball for 15 minutes and MIA for 45 in that game. The defense gave up over 230 yards on the ground. MIA won in rout remember? Oh, wait they lost because even though the defense was epically poor, INDY still scored 27 points!

TOP basically reflects what happened, not how it happened.

As for the 3rd down % being an indicator of a team doing everything they can to stay on the field, that is what EVERY offense does. No one tries to get off the field. That is NOT a gameplan. It's a media stereotype, but its Not NFL football. It's what hacks say to the masses when asked the ridiculous question "so, how do you beat the Colts today?"

Not being able to get off the field because you are playing cover 2 and the team dinks and dunks its way down the field is a gameplan. And one very rarely used to beat INDY all these years. It has worked in the playoffs against Manning, just not a lot. Mostly, because they play real defenses who are disciplined enough to keep doing it all game. However, it's also because the other offense puts up points while doing it too.

Indy didn't play Miami in 2010. Guessing you're talking about 2009. But so what.

The Colts beat a mediocre team early in the season with big plays against a bottom-10 defense. I don't care about beating mediocre teams. I care about what teams like Pittsburgh, Pats, Ravens and Jets can do to us when all the chips are down. Goes back to whether the goal here is championships or just making the playoffs.

BroncoBeavis
03-30-2012, 01:34 PM
Also, DEN was 21st in the NFL in TOP with 29:43 last year. Losing to INDY from 2010 by minus 12 seconds a game ;D Indy was 29:55 in 2010.

This is a little strange. I thought the Offense was good at TOP!

Yeah, and they were 30th before Tebow started.

Contrary to popular belief, QB's can't make bad teams good all by themselves.

oubronco
03-30-2012, 01:36 PM
Well isn't that what you were saying about Tebow?

BroncoBeavis
03-30-2012, 01:38 PM
Well isn't that what you were saying about Tebow?

Tebow was an improvement, like Manning will be.

But he didn't make the team's weaknesses disappear. And neither will Manning. We won't win championships with the mindset that he will.

oubronco
03-30-2012, 01:39 PM
Tebow was an improvement, like Manning will be.

But he didn't make the team's weaknesses disappear. And neither will Manning. We won't win championships with the mindset that he will.

I agree with that

CEH
03-31-2012, 06:41 AM
In today's NFL, you can't have two sides of the ball defined as "great". It is just unrealistic and I'm not sure there has been a powerhouse like that since the '90's cowboys. To even strive to build a team like that should not be the goal of the FO.To suggest the defense has to be "great" or what it will take to be "great " is the fallacy. The truth is the offense is being looked at as being the "great" side of the ball due to Mannng presense.

The defense just needs to improve and under two defenisve minded coaches I am sure we will improve our PPG from 24 down to near 20 PPG. This will be enough to complete for the Super Bowl if the offense does it's great job averages a Manning-like 26 ppg

Drek
03-31-2012, 07:17 AM
In today's NFL, you can't have two sides of the ball defined as "great". It is just unrealistic and I'm not sure there has been a powerhouse like that since the '90's cowboys. To even strive to build a team like that should not be the goal of the FO.To suggest the defense has to be "great" or what it will take to be "great " is the fallacy. The truth is the offense is being looked at as being the "great" side of the ball due to Mannng presense.

The defense just needs to improve and under two defenisve minded coaches I am sure we will improve our PPG from 24 down to near 20 PPG. This will be enough to complete for the Super Bowl if the offense does it's great job averages a Manning-like 26 ppg

I'd disagree quite strongly with this.

We've effectively lucked into a great offense for the next two or three years assuming Manning is even 90% of what he was pre-surgery when we got him for "free" (only for money, guys like him should never be available for simply money). Seeings how he apparently played much of 2010 with diminishing arm strength I'd say its pretty likely that worst case scenario we have something very close to 2010 Manning.

We were already heading down the path towards building a great D. That was clearly the front office's focus pre-Manning. Getting Manning for "free" shouldn't change that. Instead we should continue building that great D the FO had in mind. In part to potentially be the first club post-salary cap to be great on both sides of the ball. In at least equal part to have a highly competitive team post-Manning however.

We've got quite a few pieces for Manning to work with. Add another solid back and some OL depth and he's probably got all the toys he needs (assuming DT stays healthy) to have an elite offense. All those pieces are young guys locked up long term except RB. This is a perfect scenario for the Broncos to be highly competitive over the next few years while building the foundation of a decade long defensive power house.

All it will take is a couple key additions, most notably at DT. You address DT in anything resembling a reasonable fashion and this club is potentially an elite D next year. If you show a real commitment to building the defense back to front by investing heavily in DT the next several years you could build a defensive powerhouse that makes Fox's Carolina teams look like the '07 to '10 Denver Broncos.

Hulamau
03-31-2012, 07:18 AM
The other thing to think about.. Whats it going to be like with the Defense playing with a lead on the scoreboard? That more than anything may be the one thing that puts the defense in the top 10 of the league.

Amen to that!!

TonyR
03-31-2012, 07:43 AM
Tebow was an improvement, like Manning will be.

But he didn't make the team's weaknesses disappear. And neither will Manning.

True. But it's a pretty good bet that Manning's offense will get more 1st downs and, even more importantly, score more points.

CEH
03-31-2012, 07:58 AM
All it will take is a couple key additions, most notably at DT. You address DT in anything resembling a reasonable fashion and this club is potentially an elite D next year. .



They were thinking of trading up for Fairley last year if he got past DET. I think if they really like a specific DT they may do it again.


How about

So we resign Marcus THomas, we trade up (3rd and 5th or whatever) in the draft for our top rated DT (the guy EFX has at #1 or #2), still get a RB in round two and draft another DT in round 4 ala a Paul Soliai type DT. Anything out of Warren would be gravy

Not a bad draft haul if you ask me.

How much closer to an elite D would we been then?

Okoye would be off the market right now if he were viewed around the league as a journeyman rotational DT. He's a 5 year pro looking for his 3rd team. Something is not right here.

I'd say step back and see what materializes. It could brighten your day

Drek
03-31-2012, 09:12 AM
They were thinking of trading up for Fairley last year if he got past DET. I think if they really like a specific DT they may do it again.


How about

So we resign Marcus THomas, we trade up (3rd and 5th or whatever) in the draft for our top rated DT (the guy EFX has at #1 or #2), still get a RB in round two and draft another DT in round 4 ala a Paul Soliai type DT. Anything out of Warren would be gravy

Not a bad draft haul if you ask me.

How much closer to an elite D would we been then?

Okoye would be off the market right now if he were viewed around the league as a journeyman rotational DT. He's a 5 year pro looking for his 3rd team. Something is not right here.

I'd say step back and see what materializes. It could brighten your day

1. Okoye - He left Houston when they changed to a 3-4 and his rookie contract was escalating. Chicago actually would like him back. He's also still only 24 years old. He a rotational guy with potential to be more.

2. The FO doesn't seem to be real interested in bringing Thomas back. At this point I'd be fine with it as he's better than Mitch Unrein actually playing in games.

3. Ideally we should be drafting AND signing DTs to add some stop gaps while we develop our own impact guys at the position.

4. Instead of drafting a project in the 4th why not send our 4th to Detroit and steal Sammie Lee Hill to be our NT? He's young and already a solid player in the league. Just saying, there are a lot of ways this team could improve at DT if they would just commit to doing so.

Bmore Manning
03-31-2012, 09:22 AM
Hill and Draft Thompson! That's a deadly 1 2 punch!

baja
03-31-2012, 10:11 AM
1. Okoye - He left Houston when they changed to a 3-4 and his rookie contract was escalating. Chicago actually would like him back. He's also still only 24 years old. He a rotational guy with potential to be more.

2. The FO doesn't seem to be real interested in bringing Thomas back. At this point I'd be fine with it as he's better than Mitch Unrein actually playing in games.

3. Ideally we should be drafting AND signing DTs to add some stop gaps while we develop our own impact guys at the position.

4. Instead of drafting a project in the 4th why not send our 4th to Detroit and steal Sammie Lee Hill to be our NT? He's young and already a solid player in the league. Just saying, there are a lot of ways this team could improve at DT if they would just commit to doing so.

Id like to see him brought in. Wonder why there isn't more interest in him around the league?

Rohirrim
03-31-2012, 10:24 AM
What is starting to bother me is that the Broncos didn't like any of the options available to them at DT in FA and by the time the draft rolls around, they'll panic and go into full McDaniels mode chasing DTs and hemorrhaging draft picks.

DAN_BRONCO_FAN
03-31-2012, 12:24 PM
i still say we need a front four to get to QBs like Brady other wise he will kill you time and time again

lonestar
03-31-2012, 12:37 PM
i still say we need a front four to get to QBs like Brady other wise he will kill you time and time again

and YOU have been correct for as long as you have been a bronco fan..

as far back as I can remember we have never had more than two guys on the DL at a time that had any skills at getting after the QB.

Most of our pressure came out of mismatches when LBs blitzed..

If you look at the Giants their LBs and DBs are so much better becasue of the relentless pressure the DL creates..

WHen they do send a LB or Safety havoc happens..

The Giants have won two Rings because of that DL, the rest of the players complemented them..

I remember years ago that everyone was crying because Manning kicked our asses in the playoffs so mikey traded for Champ and low and behold the next year he did it again.. BEcause we could not get quick pressure on him with out blitzing him when we did that he hit the open guy..

Just like Brady and all the premier passers do they get mismatches and burn the defense with them..

Until we can do that I fear we will never win anotehr ring regardless of who the QB is..

lonestar
03-31-2012, 12:41 PM
What is starting to bother me is that the Broncos didn't like any of the options available to them at DT in FA and by the time the draft rolls around, they'll panic and go into full McDaniels mode chasing DTs and hemorrhaging draft picks.

WOW I'm guessing your talking Joshes first draft and not his send..

as he was a master at moving around to get the players THEY wanted..

overall this as it stands is one hell of a draft.. consisdering they started out with IIRC 6 picks..

2010 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
1 22 Demaryius Thomas WR Georgia Tech
1 25 Tim Tebow QB Florida
2 45 Zane Beadles G Utah
3 80 J.D. Walton C Baylor
3 87 Eric Decker WR Minnesota
5 137 Perrish Cox CB Oklahoma State
6 183 Eric Olsen G Notre Dame
7 225 Syd'Quan Thompson DB California
7 232 Jammie Kirlew DE Indiana

six starters at one time or the other that year or last year and Cox had he been able to keep his pecker contained would probably be a starting or nickle CB ..

CEH
03-31-2012, 01:29 PM
How many stud DTs does Detroit possess? How did they do in thier playoff game. 460 yards passing and 170 yards rushing. DT unless you can rush the passer is not a high valued position right now.

Who plays DT for San Fran in the next game? Even that game the SF offense had to bail out the great SF defense.

Just saying. These guys everyone wants now will not make that much difference as compared to the DTs they actaully have at the start of training camp

barryr
03-31-2012, 02:28 PM
How many stud DTs does Detroit possess? How did they do in thier playoff game. 460 yards passing and 170 yards rushing. DT unless you can rush the passer is not a high valued position right now.

Who plays DT for San Fran in the next game? Even that game the SF offense had to bail out the great SF defense.

Just saying. These guys everyone wants now will not make that much difference as compared to the DTs they actaully have at the start of training camp

The Giants have invested many high type picks and free agent money on their DL and have won 2 Super Bowls. Bottom line is the Broncos did not get Manning to sneak into the playoffs and with mostly players at DT who don't even belong in the NFL, the Broncos will have a hard time stopping the run without cheating their LB's and safeties all game long.

Agamemnon
03-31-2012, 02:53 PM
How many stud DTs does Detroit possess? How did they do in thier playoff game. 460 yards passing and 170 yards rushing. DT unless you can rush the passer is not a high valued position right now.

Who plays DT for San Fran in the next game? Even that game the SF offense had to bail out the great SF defense.

Just saying. These guys everyone wants now will not make that much difference as compared to the DTs they actaully have at the start of training camp

Oh good lord. They have undisciplined DT's that play the run like ****, and a terrible secondary. Your take on the topic means less than nothing.

Rohirrim
03-31-2012, 03:13 PM
WOW I'm guessing your talking Joshes first draft and not his send..

as he was a master at moving around to get the players THEY wanted..

overall this as it stands is one hell of a draft.. consisdering they started out with IIRC 6 picks..

2010 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
1 22 Demaryius Thomas WR Georgia Tech
1 25 Tim Tebow QB Florida
2 45 Zane Beadles G Utah
3 80 J.D. Walton C Baylor
3 87 Eric Decker WR Minnesota
5 137 Perrish Cox CB Oklahoma State
6 183 Eric Olsen G Notre Dame
7 225 Syd'Quan Thompson DB California
7 232 Jammie Kirlew DE Indiana

six starters at one time or the other that year or last year and Cox had he been able to keep his pecker contained would probably be a starting or nickle CB ..

I meant more like trading three picks to go back up into the first and take some player who would have been there in the second.

cutthemdown
03-31-2012, 03:33 PM
Broncos just need a solid rotation inside. They will bring pressure from the edges with doom and miller. They signed Porter, and Adams which will shore up secondary. I think its reasonable to assume Peyton Manning adds 10 points a game. That puts us in the top 10, which will probably give our defense a little more help.

I think Broncos just need some bodies at DT, Vickerson and Warren both healthy would be a lot better then people think. They should draft a couple young ones though i agree. I just think our defense is going to better then Bronco fans think. It's about ready to the corner.

baja
03-31-2012, 03:38 PM
Broncos just need a solid rotation inside. They will bring pressure from the edges with doom and miller. They signed Porter, and Adams which will shore up secondary. I think its reasonable to assume Peyton Manning adds 10 points a game. That puts us in the top 10, which will probably give our defense a little more help.

I think Broncos just need some bodies at DT, Vickerson and Warren both healthy would be a lot better then people think. They should draft a couple young ones though i agree. I just think our defense is going to better then Bronco fans think. It's about ready to the corner.

Not to mention Del Rio has something to prove

Bmore Manning
03-31-2012, 04:20 PM
Del Rio is better suited to be a DC then head coach. And Fox has a solid track record with defenses. What excites me the most, is they can focus on what they specialize in, cause Manning has the offense, BELIEVE THAT!

BroncoBuff
04-01-2012, 08:17 PM
Broncos just need a solid rotation inside ....

I think Broncos just need some bodies at DT ....

This is the same approach every year.

We need a new approach, barryr is right - we spent for Manning, let's make a bold move to plug the DT hole. Trade a #1 plus something to move up for Poe or Brockers if we're confident one can contribute. No more 1 year rentals.

lonestar
04-01-2012, 08:40 PM
I meant more like trading three picks to go back up into the first and take some player who would have been there in the second.

None of knows if the ow would have been there in the second where we would drafted.

And frankly we wound up with one more pick than we started out with.

We did not use but one of our picks IIRC to move but other teams picks we accumulated by moving around in the first.

I think that was genius of Josh. He gets who he wanted they both wind up starters as well as a couple more guys in the same draft.

Now you could argue that those "other two" would have wound up as starters also but considering how young the team was to start with not sure they could have afforded to get even younger than it was.
Someone else would have had to go. Probably someone with experience we could ill afford to lose.

IMO it was the greatest draft day I have ever seen. Had me glued to the seat all day. Just when I thought we were done in the first I tried to go to the bathroom and get snackies. Almost missed Tebow getting drafted.

Just like last year Tebow got everyone renergized. Something we had lost in the last decade.

I did not miss a game last year after he started the network covered them all and they even bumped the Texans "our supposed home team".

CEH
04-03-2012, 10:38 AM
Just some stats from last year

Denver's defense had to play a lot because Denver's offense had trouble sustaining drives. The Broncos ranked only 30th in the league in third-down conversions at 30.8 percent.

Denver's defense was on the field for 1,063 plays. The only defenses with more plays belonged to Arizona (1,095), Tennessee (1,080), the New York Giants (1,072), Oakland (1,070) and New England (1,064).

The second part is OK if the first part is doing it's job. 3rd to last in the league is not doing it's job to stay on the field

Think a Manning lead offense will be 30th in the league, 15th in the league, 5th in the league. I believe EFX is assuming top 5

BroncoBuff
04-03-2012, 12:01 PM
Just some stats from last year

Denver's defense had to play a lot because Denver's offense had trouble sustaining drives. The Broncos ranked only 30th in the league in third-down conversions at 30.8 percent.

Denver's defense was on the field for 1,063 plays. The only defenses with more plays belonged to Arizona (1,095), Tennessee (1,080), the New York Giants (1,072), Oakland (1,070) and New England (1,064).

The second part is OK if the first part is doing it's job. 3rd to last in the league is not doing it's job to stay on the field

Think a Manning lead offense will be 30th in the league, 15th in the league, 5th in the league. I believe EFX is assuming top 5

Nice job, rep. Finally this "Manning will help the D" idea takes some shape. I'm still skeptical, but those stats are persuasive.