PDA

View Full Version : I actually think we're starting to look good.


Kaylore
08-15-2009, 07:17 AM
I expected the Mane to crash and knew that in one preseason game our fickle fan base would jump off a cliff. Orton had a very bad day, probably worse than anything I've seen. As expected, I knew the mane would throw out how the rest of the team looked because of one player. If you decided to watch the rest of the team you saw a lot of good things.

San Fran is a very physical team. It was our first preseason game and on the road. I thought we held our own from a pure physicality stand point.

Offense: Let's be honest, Orton choked and in the worst places to do so (red zone, backed up in your own end zone). I also am growing concerned if when the pressure is on he's going to keep imploding like he has. However he was moving the ball effectively and our first team offense looked pretty good. Our backs were making good runs and our receivers were getting open. Our QB's were protected. This unit looked good sans Orton, and that's something to build on.

Defense: Again, we did pretty good. When they weren't screwed with bad field position they held their own. Champ was robbed of an int because Alex Smith made a bad pass, and we missed the forced fumble. Still no turnovers I'd like to see but we got four sacks and two were on legit pressure and not coverage. We played physical, too. In situations where we had to stop them (like in their own endzone at the end of the game) we came through. We tackled well and were bringing the heat. In sum: Already the effects of Slowick are being removed and this looks like a respectable defense, granted the niners offense isn't great, and there are a lot things we need to clean up, but it's a decent start.

Special Teams: I was amazed to see us field a good special teams unit! We had then pinned deep on a couple punts and we had three returns past the thirty. Prater only had one kick but overall did well. I was really impressed with how good the ST unit looked.

Rookies: Baker had a sack, McKinley had his moments (good and bad), Knowshon looked great until he left the game with a knee issue, Alphonso showed his ball skills, Quinn had a nice block, and both Smith and McKinley had good returns.

So for all the whining, some of you can't see the forest for the trees. Had our unit from last year been playing, the score would have been 30-0 with three ints in the first half, not 16-17. This group looks closer than I expected for new systems across the board. I still think we'll need one more offseason of turnover to get really competitive, but if we're playing to a tie on the road then I'll be satisfied. Bottom line: We ARE getting better.

And give Orton more than one preseason game to throw him under the bus.

lex
08-15-2009, 07:21 AM
I think the tone might be different if Moreno didnt play after getting hurt. The anxiety has been doubled because of that. The prospect of losing the #12 pick has everyone steeped in negativity.

Rohirrim
08-15-2009, 07:23 AM
I don't think anybody choked. It's a brand new team. Everybody is trying to figure everybody else out. There's very little timing. Orton didn't have much of an idea where people were going and his receivers aren't very familiar with him. I don't know what people expected, Broncos '98? They looked like exactly what they are, a bunch of guys thrown together who don't quite know each other yet.

broncogary
08-15-2009, 07:26 AM
I thought the offensive system was very creative and it should score a lot of points. The defense was improved, but we still got no turnovers.

When we gave up that 15 yard run on 2nd and 18, I was thinking, "Here we go again." But after that we got pretty solid on the run.

Basically, we dominated the game against a weak team, but lost on the scoreboard.

Chris
08-15-2009, 07:26 AM
People are behaving like eagles fans. I saw a lot of things I liked particularly with tackling and our OL.

Kaylore
08-15-2009, 07:29 AM
I don't think anybody choked. It's a brand new team. Everybody is trying to figure everybody else out. There's very little timing. Orton didn't have much of an idea where people were going and his receivers aren't very familiar with him. I don't know what people expected, Broncos '98? They looked like exactly what they are, a bunch of guys thrown together who don't quite know each other yet.

I agree, but three turnovers in one half, especially those situations is unacceptable. Two in scoring position and one in your own endzone. The last needed a bit more air under it, the first was him mis-reading Graham (and really it shouldn't have been thrown to him anyway) and the second was just Bly making a play on a ball. I agree he'll need time, and it's way too early to declare him a failure, but he's beginning to run out of time. I would feel better if instead of reading "Orton responds with best practice ever" we read "Orton responds with best game ever." We shall see.

The point of this thread was to show that the rest of the team is better than last year.

NYBronco
08-15-2009, 07:30 AM
I expected the Mane to crash and knew that in one preseason game our fickle fan base would jump off a cliff. Orton had a very bad day, probably worse than anything I've seen. As expected, I knew the mane would throw out how the rest of the team looked because of one player. If you decided to watch the rest of the team you saw a lot of good things.

San Fran is a very physical team. It was our first preseason game and on the road. I thought we held our own from a pure physicality stand point.

Offense: Let's be honest, Orton choked and in the worst places to do so (red zone, backed up in your own end zone). I also am growing concerned if when the pressure is on he's going to keep imploding like he has. However he was moving the ball effectively and our first team offense looked pretty good. Our backs were making good runs and our receivers were getting open. Our QB's were protected. This unit looked good sans Orton, and that's something to build on.

Defense: Again, we did pretty good. When they weren't screwed with bad field position they held their own. Champ was robbed of an int because Alex Smith made a bad pass, and we missed the forced fumble. Still no turnovers I'd like to see but we got four sacks and two were on legit pressure and not coverage. We played physical, too. In situations where we had to stop them (like in their own endzone at the end of the game) we came through. We tackled well and were bringing the heat. In sum: Already the effects of Slowick are being removed and this looks like a respectable defense, granted the niners offense isn't great, and there are a lot things we need to clean up, but it's a decent start.

Special Teams: I was amazed to see us field a good special teams unit! We had then pinned deep on a couple punts and we had three returns past the thirty. Prater only had one kick but overall did well. I was really impressed with how good the ST unit looked.

Rookies: Baker had a sack, McKinley had his moments (good and bad), Knowshon looked great until he left the game with a knee issue, Alphonso showed his ball skills, Quinn had a nice block, and both Smith and McKinley had good returns.

So for all the whining, some of you can't see the forest for the trees. Had our unit from last year been playing, the score would have been 30-0 with three ints in the first half, not 16-17. This group looks closer than I expected for new systems across the board. I still think we'll need one more offseason of turnover to get really competitive, but if we're playing to a tie on the road then I'll be satisfied. Bottom line: We ARE getting better.

And give Orton more than one preseason game to throw him under the bus.


This is an area where the Broncos remain to have room for improvement and the last year is an extermely good example. Well, other than this is the first preseason game and last year was predominantly in regualr season games.

SonOfLe-loLang
08-15-2009, 07:30 AM
I don't think anybody choked. It's a brand new team. Everybody is trying to figure everybody else out. There's very little timing. Orton didn't have much of an idea where people were going and his receivers aren't very familiar with him. I don't know what people expected, Broncos '98? They looked like exactly what they are, a bunch of guys thrown together who don't quite know each other yet.

I agree with most everything Khan said. I also agree Orton did choke and looked tentative. His picks were NOT on misreads. He missed an open receiver on the first TD (in his line of sight), he threw the next pass RIGHT to Dre Bly...it wasnt like disguised coverage or a receiver running a bad route...then he severely underthrew another receiver for the third.

Obviously, its one game and he's proven in his career that he can take care of the ball...but it would be nice to see:)

Kaylore
08-15-2009, 07:31 AM
I thought the offensive system was very creative and it should score a lot of points. The defense was improved, but we still got no turnovers.

When we gave up that 15 yard run on 2nd and 18, I was thinking, "Here we go again." But after that we got pretty solid on the run.

Basically, we dominated the game against a weak team, but lost on the scoreboard.
Reggie Rivers said it best. The Broncos outplayed the Niners and the turnovers did us in. I didn't expect us to be that much improved after one preseason game in all three phases.

Rohirrim
08-15-2009, 07:44 AM
I agree with most everything Khan said. I also agree Orton did choke and looked tentative. His picks were NOT on misreads. He missed an open receiver on the first TD (in his line of sight), he threw the next pass RIGHT to Dre Bly...it wasnt like disguised coverage or a receiver running a bad route...then he severely underthrew another receiver for the third.

Obviously, its one game and he's proven in his career that he can take care of the ball...but it would be nice to see:)

It's the first preseason game. I guess I don't care much.

SonOfLe-loLang
08-15-2009, 08:01 AM
It's the first preseason game. I guess I don't care much.

Fair enough, i cant really argue against that

TheReverend
08-15-2009, 08:01 AM
This is a sweet rationalization but we also blitzed the **** out of their vanilla "First Team" O that they were using to get an evaluation on Alex Smith after a series with Hill.

They didn't play Frank Gore, either. Yet, they still rushed for 136 with over 5 ypc.

DarkHorse
08-15-2009, 08:01 AM
I agree with Kaylore 100%


Orton looked great on that first drive, I thought the play by Clements was better versus the pass being bad.

Ayers looked pretty good getting pressure from the outside, he nearly got a sack. Dumervil looks like he'll be fine as a pass rushing OLB, hell I thought our defense looked pretty damn good but it's only preseason.

Simms has a lot more zip on his ball than Orton.

Kaylore
08-15-2009, 08:02 AM
This is a sweet rationalization but we also blitzed the **** out of their vanilla "First Team" O that they were using to get an evaluation on Alex Smith after a series with Hill.

They didn't play Frank Gore, either. Yet, they still rushed for 136 with over 5 ypc.

Most of those runs were garbage draw plays as time expired.

backup qb
08-15-2009, 08:08 AM
I saw Quinn miss several blocks inluding one that led to a near sack with about 5 min to play. I was disappointed in what I saw of him, although only one game.

Lolad
08-15-2009, 08:09 AM
This is a sweet rationalization but we also blitzed the **** out of their vanilla "First Team" O that they were using to get an evaluation on Alex Smith after a series with Hill.

They didn't play Frank Gore, either. Yet, they still rushed for 136 with over 5 ypc.

I'm glad we are blitzing. I think teams will start to figure us out soon though. It seems like we are running a 5-2 defense. And they didn't change up which LB was going to rush the passer. It was always the OLB's

Chris Baker should be starting by mid season I really liked what I saw in him. A. Smith made a great play in pass coverage. Ayers seems like he needs another move, all I saw was bull rushing passed the QB when he was in the game.

Special teams coverage units played well

Lolad
08-15-2009, 08:10 AM
I saw Quinn miss several blocks inluding one that led to a near sack with about 5 min to play. I was disappointed in what I saw of him, although only one game.

Quinn still needs time, he got pushed in the backfield that resulted in a 5 yard loss on a run play. I've been hearing the same thing in the practice write ups about hows he's getting dominated at the LOS.

baja
08-15-2009, 08:12 AM
I expected the Mane to crash and knew that in one preseason game our fickle fan base would jump off a cliff. Orton had a very bad day, probably worse than anything I've seen. As expected, I knew the mane would throw out how the rest of the team looked because of one player. If you decided to watch the rest of the team you saw a lot of good things.

San Fran is a very physical team. It was our first preseason game and on the road. I thought we held our own from a pure physicality stand point.

Offense: Let's be honest, Orton choked and in the worst places to do so (red zone, backed up in your own end zone). I also am growing concerned if when the pressure is on he's going to keep imploding like he has. However he was moving the ball effectively and our first team offense looked pretty good. Our backs were making good runs and our receivers were getting open. Our QB's were protected. This unit looked good sans Orton, and that's something to build on.

Defense: Again, we did pretty good. When they weren't screwed with bad field position they held their own. Champ was robbed of an int because Alex Smith made a bad pass, and we missed the forced fumble. Still no turnovers I'd like to see but we got four sacks and two were on legit pressure and not coverage. We played physical, too. In situations where we had to stop them (like in their own endzone at the end of the game) we came through. We tackled well and were bringing the heat. In sum: Already the effects of Slowick are being removed and this looks like a respectable defense, granted the niners offense isn't great, and there are a lot things we need to clean up, but it's a decent start.

Special Teams: I was amazed to see us field a good special teams unit! We had then pinned deep on a couple punts and we had three returns past the thirty. Prater only had one kick but overall did well. I was really impressed with how good the ST unit looked.

Rookies: Baker had a sack, McKinley had his moments (good and bad), Knowshon looked great until he left the game with a knee issue, Alphonso showed his ball skills, Quinn had a nice block, and both Smith and McKinley had good returns.

So for all the whining, some of you can't see the forest for the trees. Had our unit from last year been playing, the score would have been 30-0 with three ints in the first half, not 16-17. This group looks closer than I expected for new systems across the board. I still think we'll need one more offseason of turnover to get really competitive, but if we're playing to a tie on the road then I'll be satisfied. Bottom line: We ARE getting better.

And give Orton more than one preseason game to throw him under the bus.

Another voice of reason in the insane asylum.

ghwk
08-15-2009, 08:12 AM
Here's my positive takeaways from the game:






Thank you and good night.

cutthemdown
08-15-2009, 08:13 AM
People who want to be right will always find a way to support the positions they have put forth. Orton haters will point to the picks, supporters will say well he moved ball well and will get better.

Defense looks more physical, wasn't getting pushed around much, so I am pleased.

Let's see how team looks going through preseason before we panic.

At least the played hard and weren't being pansies on defense like last 3 yrs.

Rock Chalk
08-15-2009, 08:16 AM
This is a sweet rationalization but we also blitzed the **** out of their vanilla "First Team" O that they were using to get an evaluation on Alex Smith after a series with Hill.

They didn't play Frank Gore, either. Yet, they still rushed for 136 with over 5 ypc.

Most of that came against 2nd stringers Rev.

There were still a few concerns about the run defense having lapses but for the most part they stuffed the run. There are things as Kahn noted, that they need to clean up but the team is most definitely getting better.

Is it too much to ask to give the guys some time to gel together? Really, new scheme, new coaches and 7 of 11 new starters on defense.

I guess I just had different expectations of what to look for in the game than you guys did. I was looking for how the players played both individually and as a team. With 3 picks in the first half last year, we are getting blown out. This year, we were down by 9 points. Thats somethign positive to take away even if it was a vanillla offense we were playing.

ANd 3 of the 4 sacks did not come on blitzes. Dumervile just speed rushed his guy, the second sack was a coverage sack and Baker's sack was a bullrush straight up the middle.

oubronco
08-15-2009, 08:21 AM
they looked good other than getting the ball ran down there throats and Orton throwing 3 int's with his weakass arm and bad decisions but what do we know there is a reason the Bears coaches didn't want him

s0phr0syne
08-15-2009, 08:23 AM
Nothing's really changed from when we originally got Orton. When he was acquired and announced starter, we knew that his success would be incumbent on the success of our ground attack. Orton was getting us down the field without the benefit of a good rushing attack. Don't know what was up, but it didn't seem like the first team OL and RBs were getting us much on the ground.

Simms and 2nd team OL/RBs did a great job keeping the offense balanced.

Agree that Lamont looked horridly slow. I'm already a little bit worried about our RB situation. Would be cool if they bring Torain back midseason after his knee is healed (if he's still available). Darius looked good...enjoyed that play he just put his head down and ran straight in the middle for 7 or 8.

Loved seeing the Larsen/Hillis combo backfield for the 3rd and 1 in the 1st half (i think). Larsen got more reps at FB than I thought he would.

Orton will be fine...but those picks were horrible.

I said it in another post, I'll say it again: He's only had <6 months in the offense. To expect Brady/Cassel-like performance was unreasonable (Cassel had 5 or 6 offseasons to learn it and was still less than spectacular last year in the preseason).

IHaveALight
08-15-2009, 08:25 AM
I was very impressed with the front 7 for being the first preseason game.
They looked completely different then what we're used to. You can tell that the mind set is to attack not the old read and react that gave QB's all day back there. Besides 1 or 2 runs the run D looked great, Larsen made a huge play against the run on 3rd and short! And the pass rush looked great to me. Baker, Doom, Haggan and McBean all came through with sacks. It was especially encouraging to see that from Baker and McBean (when was the last time we had 4 sacks in a game?). I think I remember Ayers getting some good pressure out of the nickel on one play too. This defense is going to be good! And just think, B-Dawk is going to add to the defense when he comes back too. Plus I must say, that play that Alphonso made when he was beaten and stumbling was amazing, if he didn't lose his footing he would have had a pick on that.

Eliminate the turnovers and we've got a good squad. :thumbsup:

cousinal11
08-15-2009, 08:25 AM
Positives

-Playcalling. I thought the playcalling had gotten stale last year.

-Special teams looked better.

-We tackled better.

-Knowshon showed explosion we haven't seen in a while (fingers crossed).

-Royal is awesome.

-Simms. He's better than Ramsey.


Negatives

-Linebackers looked slow - Maybe they are still thinking and not reacting?

-Orton -The 3 picks really didn't bother me. It's preseason, he's still learning the system, and until he's comfortable making his reads, I won't judge his ability to manage the offense. However, I know you don't have to throw it through a wall to be a good QB, but he obviously can't make all the throws and I fear this will result in teams stacking the box against us. We'll see.

-Lamont Jordan.

broncogary
08-15-2009, 08:31 AM
Positives

-Simms. He's better than Ramsey.


That's encouraging! Ha!

Dr. Broncenstein
08-15-2009, 08:33 AM
Take away the stats, and just look at the way Simms plays in comparison to Orton. Simms has markedly better physical tools and was able to improvise when plays broke down. Orton looked efficient on the first drive, but was shell shocked after the fist INT. Seems to me like this would be a simple fix.. but McD is married to Orton.

cousinal11
08-15-2009, 08:34 AM
That's encouraging! Ha!

Hey, I'm trying really ****ing hard to be optimistic!

TheReverend
08-15-2009, 08:37 AM
Most of that came against 2nd stringers Rev.

Actually no.

That was THEIR 2nd stringer (Gore didn't play) versus our first team complete with game planned defense

Coffee only played the first half netting 14 attempts for 67 yards.

#2 in the pre-season so far.

Pony Boy
08-15-2009, 08:38 AM
they looked good other than getting the ball ran down there throats and Orton throwing 3 int's with his weakass arm and bad decisions but what do we know there is a reason the Bears coaches didn't want him

Good points !! Orton has no zip on the ball and the bad passes become picks. I miss Cutlers fastball !!!

Hercules Rockefeller
08-15-2009, 08:39 AM
Simms has markedly better physical tools and was able to improvise when plays broke down.

I don't think anyone has ever questioned Simms' physical skills, that shouldn't have been a surprise to anyone.

broncogary
08-15-2009, 08:41 AM
I don't think anyone has ever questioned Simms' physical skills, that shouldn't have been a surprise to anyone.

The funny thing is he's BFF with Kyle Shanahan, so you would think he'd be big on the mental side of the game.

TheReverend
08-15-2009, 08:42 AM
Good points !! Orton has no zip on the ball and the bad passes become picks. I miss Cutlers fastball !!!

Where are the people that tried calling me an idiot when I first said Orton had a noodle-arm? :rofl:

Hercules Rockefeller
08-15-2009, 08:53 AM
What I took from it:

Orton completely and utterly **** the bed after that first pick. It's only preseason, but it goes without saying there needs to be some improvement. He was absolutely ****ing terrible after that first drive.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=230907004

That's the line from Jake's 1st regular season game in '03, people flipped out over that and he settled down and became a pretty good game manager. Can Orton overcome this, or is last night what we should expect to some degree? It was obvious the guy was pressing. He's not stupid. He knows he was the QB the HC wanted in a trade that included a Pro Bowl QB and he knew all of Denver would be watching. But ****, that was terrible.

Once Marshall gets back, the other starting 10 on offense can match up and hold its own with every other team in the league. The massive problem with that, is that 1 position we're leaving out, is the most important position on offense. Maybe that 1 will be Orton, or Simms, or Brand-whatever the hell it is, or maybe that guy isn't on the roster yet. The OL and skill position foundation is definitely there though.

I can't believe there was a coverage sack, I don't think that phrase has been used with the Broncos defense in years. Yes it's only preseason and SF will never be compared to an offensive juggernaut, but they only really moved the ball twice all night.

I realize it was his "look" at RB, didn't like to see Hillis in the game in the 4th quarter. He needs his hands on the ball much more, which everyone already knew.

God I hope Moreno is ok, probably ranked 3rd (behind Clady and Royal) on my list of guys that they could not afford to see go down tonight.

Royal and Marshall are going to be catching a lot of balls this year. They're both YAC guys, they'll get a ton of chances to make a play after they get the ball in their hands.

Bob's your Information Minister
08-15-2009, 09:02 AM
Of course you do you fricking homer.

Rohirrim
08-15-2009, 09:06 AM
Did you see the Mighty McChesney hold up two guys on that running play in the fourth quarter? !Booya!

Hercules Rockefeller
08-15-2009, 09:23 AM
Of course you do you fricking homer.

And the really sad part is that there is still more talent in Denver than there is in KC.

Lolad
08-15-2009, 09:24 AM
another positive is the backup OL played well in pass protection and run blocking

prunch
08-15-2009, 09:27 AM
Well setting aside the awful, unforgivable Orton issue - which is a huge issue ... huge, huge issue.

I liked most else of what I saw.

1. Our D collapsed the pocket on almost every passing play at a decent pace. I don't recall seeing that last year at all.
2. Knowshon looks like the real deal. To anyone complaining he was out there, I think its the nfl, you gotta play em'.
3. McKinley and Llyod look good.
4. Baker looks like he'll be good.
5. Hillis remains awesome and I wonder will there be 2 back sets with him and knowshon.

If you take away the poor qb play - and that is something that is a HUGE big deal .... I think we have a team that is improving in all areas. but yes, the qb play is huge, huge, huge.

I'm not sure why everyone is down on McD over babygate .... Cutler wanted out before he got there ... I thought that was well established. McD is playing the hand he is dealt.

I think we have another good draft class by the way.

JCMElway
08-15-2009, 09:31 AM
And give Orton more than one preseason game to throw him under the bus.

Hell, I'll even give him two more preseason games. And I'll throw in a regular season game as well!

Willynowei
08-15-2009, 09:36 AM
Its funny how people have successfully gotten themselves to believe that somehow, any level of run defense is better than what we had last year. Because, we had two games with a healthy Larsen starting over the terrible Webster, and woodyard on the field, never mind the fact that a healthy DJ never played with that group. And in those games, we all but shut down the run games of Atlanta (leagues #1 running game) and New York, both hot teams rolling towards the playoffs.

Did our defense perform poorly last year? Yes, For how many games did we have all our starters PLAYING? 1.

Not to mention by the end of last season, several stand out players would've replaced overated veterans at key positions: Larsen over Webster, Woodyard/Winborn over Bailey. Our safeties were the result of odd decisions to get rid of Lynch and Hamza, and for that, Slowick would've been fired, to think that the forever politically correct Shanahan wouldn't have fired Slowick simply because he "said so" is ignorant of what his past actions clearly indicate.

So for our defense to be "definitely" or "clearly" better, they'd have to do a lot more than hold on from being rolled over by a Sanfransisco offense that doesn't have Frank Gore.

DenverBrit
08-15-2009, 09:36 AM
Hell, I'll even give him two more preseason games. And I'll throw in a regular season game as well!

That's the spirit!! Ha!

HEAV
08-15-2009, 09:43 AM
What I saw last night was Orton and the first team move the ball on the 4ers starting defense.

The first pick was a nice play by Nate Clements, he played off (baited) just enough to let Orton think he could throw it. Didn't help that Lamont Jordan whiff on a block that let a rusher free.

The second pick (Bly) was a bad decision. Orton must have thought that the 49ers were still playing of and assumed he could get the ball in the spot. Bad choice on his part.

The third pick was a under throw on his part. He may have tried loft'n the ball in between the coverage and got burnt. If you look at the video of the play the wideout was open and Orton just missed the pass.

But all three picks can and most likely will be corrected by McDaniels.

As far as Simms goes. He move the ball on the second/third team and even he threw a force interception (which you could say lost the game).

People (on here) wanted everything to go perfect last night. Sorry folks... It's a new system with new players and missing one of it's playmakers (sitting in a Atlanta court room).

The reason we have pre-season games is to work on this stuff and get ready for the season.

But I guess I'm forgeting that the winner of the preseason wins the Super bowl every year.:welcome:

Mat'hir Uth Gan
08-15-2009, 09:48 AM
I expected the Mane to crash and knew that in one preseason game our fickle fan base would jump off a cliff. Orton had a very bad day, probably worse than anything I've seen. As expected, I knew the mane would throw out how the rest of the team looked because of one player. If you decided to watch the rest of the team you saw a lot of good things.

San Fran is a very physical team. It was our first preseason game and on the road. I thought we held our own from a pure physicality stand point.

Offense: Let's be honest, Orton choked and in the worst places to do so (red zone, backed up in your own end zone). I also am growing concerned if when the pressure is on he's going to keep imploding like he has. However he was moving the ball effectively and our first team offense looked pretty good. Our backs were making good runs and our receivers were getting open. Our QB's were protected. This unit looked good sans Orton, and that's something to build on.

Defense: Again, we did pretty good. When they weren't screwed with bad field position they held their own. Champ was robbed of an int because Alex Smith made a bad pass, and we missed the forced fumble. Still no turnovers I'd like to see but we got four sacks and two were on legit pressure and not coverage. We played physical, too. In situations where we had to stop them (like in their own endzone at the end of the game) we came through. We tackled well and were bringing the heat. In sum: Already the effects of Slowick are being removed and this looks like a respectable defense, granted the niners offense isn't great, and there are a lot things we need to clean up, but it's a decent start.

Special Teams: I was amazed to see us field a good special teams unit! We had then pinned deep on a couple punts and we had three returns past the thirty. Prater only had one kick but overall did well. I was really impressed with how good the ST unit looked.

Rookies: Baker had a sack, McKinley had his moments (good and bad), Knowshon looked great until he left the game with a knee issue, Alphonso showed his ball skills, Quinn had a nice block, and both Smith and McKinley had good returns.

So for all the whining, some of you can't see the forest for the trees. Had our unit from last year been playing, the score would have been 30-0 with three ints in the first half, not 16-17. This group looks closer than I expected for new systems across the board. I still think we'll need one more offseason of turnover to get really competitive, but if we're playing to a tie on the road then I'll be satisfied. Bottom line: We ARE getting better.

And give Orton more than one preseason game to throw him under the bus.


Fully Agreed! Excellent Post.

JCMElway
08-15-2009, 09:50 AM
As far as Orton goes, I think everyone knows he's not the answer at QB long term, and we're in a 2-3 year rebuilding mode while still staying competitive. He is a stop gap answer to be sure. I think Denver will be able to snag Snead, Teabow, or McCoy in the first. Or, if McD likes them, we may take Devlin or Hiller a bit lower.

So, I've never been too worried about the whole Orton thing. We got him for a fifth round pick, and his eventual successor will, more than likely, be here next year.

JCMElway
08-15-2009, 09:52 AM
And remember everyone, the Lions were 4-0 in the preseason last year.

Bob's your Information Minister
08-15-2009, 09:54 AM
I heard Bly had a pick, though. So you guys are OK at corner.

Right?

Bob's your Information Minister
08-15-2009, 09:55 AM
And the really sad part is that there is still more talent in Denver than there is in KC.

And yet Orton will **** it all up...the great equalizer...

Chiefs are getting out the brooms this year...maybe...just maybe...

TheReverend
08-15-2009, 09:57 AM
I heard Bly had a pick, though. So you guys are OK at corner.

Right?

It cost us money to get rid of him... and a 2010 first to replace him...

Bob's your Information Minister
08-15-2009, 09:58 AM
It cost us money to get rid of him... and a 2010 first to replace him...

OH...you mean Bly don't play for Denver no mo?

OH!!!

ROFL!

DenverBrit
08-15-2009, 10:00 AM
I heard Bly had a pick, though. So you guys are OK at corner.

I know, I know, you don't get the connection.

Me neither, but I'm an a$$hat of epic proportions and wanted to be sure you didn't forget.


Do you use your head for anything other than a suppository??

tnedator
08-15-2009, 10:05 AM
Except for the three INTs (and that is a big 'except'), the Broncos offense moved the ball with ease, moved into scoring position several times and SF was not able to stop them. What was it something like four possessions, with three INTs and a punt?

The defense while not a juggernaut, got pressure on the QB, something we haven't seen in a while, and was mostly good against the run, but did break down at times.

If (yes, again it's a big 'if') we didn't have those three INTs, I think most people would be very encouraged about the performance today.

So, we will have to see if those INTs were an aberration or what we have to look forward to all season.

telluride
08-15-2009, 10:10 AM
I'm always amazed at this place. It often approaches Denver Post forum-levels of insanity.

It's simple. New coach, new complex system, new QB, first game of the preseason. Some perspective, please.

montrose
08-15-2009, 10:11 AM
Good points Kahn. I was pretty happy with the D and ST overall, still work to do but light years ahead of last year. The offense was looking good until Orton missed Hillis in the flats and threw that pick. I almost got the feeling he was trying to overcompensate at that point. Had Orton not sucked last night, and everything else been the way it was, I'd be really excited.

And oh yeah, I'm still biting my nails over Knowshon's knee.

TheReverend
08-15-2009, 10:14 AM
Good points Kahn. I was pretty happy with the D and ST overall, still work to do but light years ahead of last year. The offense was looking good until Orton missed Hillis in the flats and threw that pick. I almost got the feeling he was trying to overcompensate at that point. Had Orton not sucked last night, and everything else been the way it was, I'd be really excited.

And oh yeah, I'm still biting my nails over Knowshon's knee.

Then address:

Also, here's the opposing QBs stat line:

D. Huard 7/9 98 1 0
S. Hill 2/2 41 0 0
A. Smith 5/7 33 1 0

No turnovers and only 4 incomplete passes from the likes of Shaun Hill, Alex Smith and Damon Huard.

A composite QB rating of 143.519

They also rushed for over 130 and 5 ypc (NO Frank Gore)

This was vs a game-planned D

Rohirrim
08-15-2009, 10:15 AM
McChesney has some cool tats. ;D

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/04S49Q051P3l8/610x.jpg

montrose
08-15-2009, 10:19 AM
Then address:

Because I realize that rebuilding a god awful team like last year's Broncos takes time and I saw some encouraging signs. If Slowik's unit from last year was on the field we would've been down 24-0 by halftime.

wandlc
08-15-2009, 10:20 AM
Do you people also realize that P Willis didn't play? The Niners didn't play their best Offensive or defensive players. I would have liked to see the first team run the ball with P Willis in the game, it would have given a better indication of how well our run game is and conversely I would have liked to see F Gore run the ball. I am a Giants fan so I also here the camp reports for the Niners and all I have heard is that F Gore plays the game about twice as fast as Coffee does right now. I want to see the run D against a good RB and run blocking team.

Popps
08-15-2009, 10:20 AM
I don't think anybody choked. It's a brand new team. Everybody is trying to figure everybody else out. There's very little timing. Orton didn't have much of an idea where people were going and his receivers aren't very familiar with him. I don't know what people expected, Broncos '98? They looked like exactly what they are, a bunch of guys thrown together who don't quite know each other yet.

Agree.

I also thought it looked like Orton was running a full version of the offense, whereas Simms was running something more controlled. I have a feeling McDaniels just opened up the whole book and threw Orton to the wolves, which is fine.

Again, if Kyle just connects on that first TD pass, I have a feeling the other two INTs never come. He just looked like he was jittery. I can let that go, given the circumstances.

But now, he's got a game under his belt and it's time to move on. Everyone expects him to fail, so he can only go up from here.

Overall, I saw some encouraging things... and some sloppy things last night.
This team has a lot of talent, but Ro is right... it's just a mish-mosh of players, at this point.

This is going to take time. If people want to jump ship because of one pre-season game, that's fine. But, I remain optimistic.

zdoor
08-15-2009, 10:20 AM
Liked Alphonso. Thought we actually got some decent pressure. Liked the way Moreno looked on the 2 runs he had. Hillis is healthy and is the shiznit. Royal looked great and faster than last year. The pass blocking looked great (of course SF has no pass rush but still...). Ayers was dissappointing but looked lost so on the bright side, maybe there's hope.

But, that may have been one of the ugliest QB performances I've seen... I'm a positive kinda guy but man, it's impossible to find a bright side in that crap....

Popps
08-15-2009, 10:22 AM
Do you people also realize that P Willis didn't play? The Niners didn't play their best Offensive or defensive players. I would have liked to see the first team run the ball with P Willis in the game, it would have given a better indication of how well our run game is and conversely I would have liked to see F Gore run the ball. I am a Giants fan so I also here the camp reports for the Niners and all I have heard is that F Gore plays the game about twice as fast as Coffee does right now. I want to see the run D against a good RB and run blocking team.

We were missing Dawkins, Moreno hasn't practiced much and we are installing an entirely new offensive and defensive system.

So, both teams had some factors working against them.

TheReverend
08-15-2009, 10:24 AM
Because I realize that rebuilding a god awful team like last year's Broncos takes time and I saw some encouraging signs. If Slowik's unit from last year was on the field we would've been down 24-0 by halftime.

What encouraging signs? We gave up over a 140 QB rating and 5 ypc? Where are these phantom signs of improvement? Please tell.

TheReverend
08-15-2009, 10:27 AM
We were missing Dawkins, Moreno hasn't practiced much and we are installing an entirely new offensive and defensive system.

So, both teams had some factors working against them.

So are they, fyi

wandlc
08-15-2009, 10:28 AM
I don't think Dawkins is our best D player and right now I don't think Moreno is our best O player and in when in his 3rd season hopefully Moreno will be competing at the level of F Gore.

broncosteven
08-15-2009, 10:39 AM
I expected the Mane to crash and knew that in one preseason game our fickle fan base would jump off a cliff. Orton had a very bad day, probably worse than anything I've seen. As expected, I knew the mane would throw out how the rest of the team looked because of one player. If you decided to watch the rest of the team you saw a lot of good things.

San Fran is a very physical team. It was our first preseason game and on the road. I thought we held our own from a pure physicality stand point.

Offense: Let's be honest, Orton choked and in the worst places to do so (red zone, backed up in your own end zone). I also am growing concerned if when the pressure is on he's going to keep imploding like he has. However he was moving the ball effectively and our first team offense looked pretty good. Our backs were making good runs and our receivers were getting open. Our QB's were protected. This unit looked good sans Orton, and that's something to build on.

Defense: Again, we did pretty good. When they weren't screwed with bad field position they held their own. Champ was robbed of an int because Alex Smith made a bad pass, and we missed the forced fumble. Still no turnovers I'd like to see but we got four sacks and two were on legit pressure and not coverage. We played physical, too. In situations where we had to stop them (like in their own endzone at the end of the game) we came through. We tackled well and were bringing the heat. In sum: Already the effects of Slowick are being removed and this looks like a respectable defense, granted the niners offense isn't great, and there are a lot things we need to clean up, but it's a decent start.

Special Teams: I was amazed to see us field a good special teams unit! We had then pinned deep on a couple punts and we had three returns past the thirty. Prater only had one kick but overall did well. I was really impressed with how good the ST unit looked.

Rookies: Baker had a sack, McKinley had his moments (good and bad), Knowshon looked great until he left the game with a knee issue, Alphonso showed his ball skills, Quinn had a nice block, and both Smith and McKinley had good returns.

So for all the whining, some of you can't see the forest for the trees. Had our unit from last year been playing, the score would have been 30-0 with three ints in the first half, not 16-17. This group looks closer than I expected for new systems across the board. I still think we'll need one more offseason of turnover to get really competitive, but if we're playing to a tie on the road then I'll be satisfied. Bottom line: We ARE getting better.

And give Orton more than one preseason game to throw him under the bus.

After watching Orton in Chicago for his career I expected better from him. After the 1st INT he looked lost out there to me.

The 1st drive it was nice to see him find the open guy but after he threw the 1st INT he looked like he started losing track of the defenders and had a couple plays where he either misread the reads or thew to wrong spot on the field.

Can he get better, yep, is he going to perform at a high level? Still a long, long, long, long...longity, long, longish, lllllllllllooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooonnnn nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnngg ggggggggggggggggggggggggggg, lllllllllllllllllllllllloooooooooooooooooooooooonn nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnniiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii ggggggggggggggggggggggggtttttttttttttttttttttttttt ttttttyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy, long way to go.

I really liked Knowshon and Montrose was right about Smith. Not only does Smith provide some skills on D he looked explosive on ST's.

I thought Ayers got pushed around.

The D did look better vs run, I think the 3-4 helped, talent has a lot of room to improve. I didn't notice any plays out of the Safety position, I hope Dawkins return can push the D over the edge on way to respectablity.

I liked Hill making tackles from CB, It is nice to see someone other than Champ lay the wood back there.

I thought Hill hung on to the ball too long but it was nice to see the D get to him for the sacks.

I liked the 3-4 zone blitz Nolan ran with the DL, if he runs that alot they will need to find a source of pressure from LB or SS up the middle to prevent QB draws.

Oh and that last INT by Orton was pathetic, his lack of arm strength was exposed. I saw Flacco throw the same type of pass vs Skins, he laid it over an underneath guy downfield. Still hoping that a healthy Marshall can help Orton get better but he has a long way to go.

TheChamp24
08-15-2009, 10:39 AM
Then address:

Also, here's the opposing QBs stat line:

D. Huard 7/9 98 1 0
S. Hill 2/2 41 0 0
A. Smith 5/7 33 1 0

No turnovers and only 4 incomplete passes from the likes of Shaun Hill, Alex Smith and Damon Huard.

A composite QB rating of 143.519

They also rushed for over 130 and 5 ypc (NO Frank Gore)

This was vs a game-planned D

17 points is all that was given up, and 6 of that was when the 49ers started on the 3 yard line. Plus, it was a new scheme the players are adjusting to, and the players are more agressive. Did you watch the game at all? Because if you only look at the stats, then you don't get the whole picture. More physical/agressive in nature. The D did alright to me in its 1st real action. Do they need to get better? Yes. Coverage wasn't spectacular.

Also, Lamont Jordan should be cut, he is awful.

TheReverend
08-15-2009, 10:42 AM
17 points is all that was given up, and 6 of that was when the 49ers started on the 3 yard line. Plus, it was a new scheme the players are adjusting to, and the players are more agressive. Did you watch the game at all? Because if you only look at the stats, then you don't get the whole picture. More physical/agressive in nature. The D did alright to me in its 1st real action. Do they need to get better? Yes. Coverage wasn't spectacular.

Also, Lamont Jordan should be cut, he is awful.

Yeah, I did. And SF was also adjusting to a new system (Jets OC fresh into town). And SF played a vanilla game vs a game planned D. And SF had their best O players out. And SF pulled Hill and let Alex Smith take the reps after the first drive.

And this was STILL the stat line.

Did you watch the game at all?

montrose
08-15-2009, 10:43 AM
What encouraging signs? We gave up over a 140 QB rating and 5 ypc? Where are these phantom signs of improvement? Please tell.

First and foremost, only 17 points allowed, six of which came after the deep offensive turnover. From watching our own team over the past few seasons we've learned that yards, 3rd down conversions, ypc, QB ratings and everything else means jack - it's about points scored and points allowed. I know we gameplanned they probably didn't. I know they didn't have all of their players in and even when they do they're not very good. Despite all that, to see the first digit on the other team's scoreboard not begin with a 2, 3, 4 or 5 (as was the case recently) - I'm encouraged. That's how low my standards have been set by this decade of Broncos football.

It was also nice to see us rush the passer a bit with those sacks and I don't even recall too many plays of watching Hill or Smith sit back without being at least pressured.

TheReverend
08-15-2009, 10:46 AM
First and foremost, only 17 points allowed, six of which came after the deep offensive turnover. From watching our own team over the past few seasons we've learned that yards, 3rd down conversions, ypc, QB ratings and everything else means jack - it's about points scored and points allowed. I know we gameplanned they probably didn't. I know they didn't have all of their players in and even when they do they're not very good. Despite all that, to see the first digit on the other team's scoreboard not begin with a 2, 3, 4 or 5 (as was the case recently) - I'm encouraged. That's how low my standards have been set by this decade of Broncos football.

It was also nice to see us rush the passer a bit with those sacks and I don't even recall too many plays of watching Hill or Smith sit back without being at least pressured.

We were blitzing up to 7 guys versus base protection... what do you think will happen...?

DenverBrit
08-15-2009, 10:48 AM
Had Orton thrown 3 tds instead of 3 Ints, hands up those who would have been quick to say:

"But it's only a pre-season game, it's meaningless."

C'mon, you know who you are. ;D

TheReverend
08-15-2009, 10:49 AM
Let me make sure this clear:

The ONLY alarming part about the end result of all of this is that we DID in fact take this game seriously and approached it like a regular season game... and failed miserably in every aspect against a team that wasn't approaching it that way whatsoever.

montrose
08-15-2009, 10:54 AM
We were blitzing up to 7 guys versus base protection... what do you think will happen...?

I expected worse. Far worse. What we have here is a difference in standards. My standards of football have been dropped so much by Shanny that if we blitz 11 men against 5 and only give up 4 ypc - I'm happy.

TheReverend
08-15-2009, 10:57 AM
i expected worse. Far worse. What we have here is a difference in standards. my standards of football have been dropped so much by shanny that if we blitz 11 men against 5 and only give up 4 ypc - i'm happy.

rofl!rofl!rofl!rofl!rofl!rofl!rofl!rofl!rofl!rofl! rofl!

DenverBrit
08-15-2009, 11:00 AM
Let me make sure this clear:

The ONLY alarming part about the end result of all of this is that we DID in fact take this game seriously and approached it like a regular season game... and failed miserably in every aspect against a team that wasn't approaching it that way whatsoever.

Singletary ran a very intensive TC by all accounts, his expectations were probably similar to McD's.

Yes, Orton failed in his first outing, but not everyone is ready or quick to give up on him or McPoopyPants.

We'll see what decisions McD makes to correct the problems during the next few games.

Buckle up!!

TheReverend
08-15-2009, 11:02 AM
Singletary ran a very intensive TC by all accounts, his expectations were probably similar to McD's.

Yes, Orton failed in his first outing, but not everyone is ready or quick to give up on him or McPoopyPants.

We'll see what decisions McD makes to correct the problems during the next few games.

Buckle up!!

Rested his best players. Pulled QB after one drive. Never blitzed... even remaining classy in that regard after we sent 7 to put his QB on his ass MULTIPLE times.

So, no. His expectations may have been similar, but he certainly wasn't out to treat it like a regular season game in any regard.

Northman
08-15-2009, 11:04 AM
Then address:

Also, here's the opposing QBs stat line:

D. Huard 7/9 98 1 0
S. Hill 2/2 41 0 0
A. Smith 5/7 33 1 0

No turnovers and only 4 incomplete passes from the likes of Shaun Hill, Alex Smith and Damon Huard.

A composite QB rating of 143.519

They also rushed for over 130 and 5 ypc (NO Frank Gore)

This was vs a game-planned D


They didnt give up 30 points so you got to start somewhere. ;D

baja
08-15-2009, 11:20 AM
Where are the people that tried calling me an idiot when I first said Orton had a noodle-arm? :rofl:

I don't think I have ever run across anyone who's need to be right is greater than yours.

TheReverend
08-15-2009, 11:23 AM
I don't think I have ever run across anyone who's need to be right is greater than yours.

I don't need to be. I just am.

baja
08-15-2009, 11:34 AM
My observations on the game.

I didn't get to see Hillis play last year as I was traveling but after watching him I'm wondering why we drafted a RB with our #12 pick but we will see.

I had to check to make sure they were really Bronco uniforms when I watch special teams play, they are light years better than the Broncos of the last several seasons and that is one good reason why Shanny is fishing in Mexico.

Baker might be the steal of the year for us.

I miss Jay's big arm but not the rest of him.

baja
08-15-2009, 11:36 AM
I don't need to be. I just am.

Than let that speak for it self..

HEAV
08-15-2009, 11:42 AM
I don't think I have ever run across anyone who's need to be right is greater than yours.


It's due to the empty hole in his life from the lack of daddy's love.

baja
08-15-2009, 11:43 AM
Then address:

Also, here's the opposing QBs stat line:

D. Huard 7/9 98 1 0
S. Hill 2/2 41 0 0
A. Smith 5/7 33 1 0

No turnovers and only 4 incomplete passes from the likes of Shaun Hill, Alex Smith and Damon Huard.

A composite QB rating of 143.519

They also rushed for over 130 and 5 ypc (NO Frank Gore)

This was vs a game-planned D

I really think you would be happier following another team

Rock Chalk
08-15-2009, 11:43 AM
What encouraging signs? We gave up over a 140 QB rating and 5 ypc? Where are these phantom signs of improvement? Please tell.

OK Rev, we are going to suck. Everything is doomed this year, we shouldnt watch.

Happy now?

DenverBrit
08-15-2009, 11:45 AM
I don't need to be. I just am.

Great news!!! Your disorder is treatable. ;D


http://blogs.pitch.com/plog/narcissistic%20personality%20disorder.JPG

BroncoMan4ever
08-15-2009, 11:50 AM
i agree, as a unit we looked better than last season, and by the regular season Orton will look just fine.

we still have a little trouble stopping teams on 3rd down which is annoying, but it is better than last season when we knew a team was going to take it down the field for 6 every time they hit the field.

Rohirrim
08-15-2009, 11:50 AM
Great news!!! Your disorder is treatable. ;D


http://blogs.pitch.com/plog/narcissistic%20personality%20disorder.JPG

Perhaps that explains his simpatico with Cutler? ;D

baja
08-15-2009, 11:54 AM
Perhaps that explains his simpatico with Cutler? ;D

And Shanny ;D

bronco militia
08-15-2009, 11:56 AM
minus the qb, this team didn't look any better or worse than the 2006-2008 broncos.

fdf
08-15-2009, 11:58 AM
I expected the Mane to crash and knew that in one preseason game our fickle fan base would jump off a cliff. Orton had a very bad day, probably worse than anything I've seen. As expected, I knew the mane would throw out how the rest of the team looked because of one player. If you decided to watch the rest of the team you saw a lot of good things.

San Fran is a very physical team. It was our first preseason game and on the road. I thought we held our own from a pure physicality stand point.

Offense: Let's be honest, Orton choked and in the worst places to do so (red zone, backed up in your own end zone). I also am growing concerned if when the pressure is on he's going to keep imploding like he has. However he was moving the ball effectively and our first team offense looked pretty good. Our backs were making good runs and our receivers were getting open. Our QB's were protected. This unit looked good sans Orton, and that's something to build on.

Defense: Again, we did pretty good. When they weren't screwed with bad field position they held their own. Champ was robbed of an int because Alex Smith made a bad pass, and we missed the forced fumble. Still no turnovers I'd like to see but we got four sacks and two were on legit pressure and not coverage. We played physical, too. In situations where we had to stop them (like in their own endzone at the end of the game) we came through. We tackled well and were bringing the heat. In sum: Already the effects of Slowick are being removed and this looks like a respectable defense, granted the niners offense isn't great, and there are a lot things we need to clean up, but it's a decent start.

Special Teams: I was amazed to see us field a good special teams unit! We had then pinned deep on a couple punts and we had three returns past the thirty. Prater only had one kick but overall did well. I was really impressed with how good the ST unit looked.

Rookies: Baker had a sack, McKinley had his moments (good and bad), Knowshon looked great until he left the game with a knee issue, Alphonso showed his ball skills, Quinn had a nice block, and both Smith and McKinley had good returns.

So for all the whining, some of you can't see the forest for the trees. Had our unit from last year been playing, the score would have been 30-0 with three ints in the first half, not 16-17. This group looks closer than I expected for new systems across the board. I still think we'll need one more offseason of turnover to get really competitive, but if we're playing to a tie on the road then I'll be satisfied. Bottom line: We ARE getting better.

And give Orton more than one preseason game to throw him under the bus.

I pretty much thought the same thing. First team DL actually controlled the line of scrimmage and got good push. Several sacks.

On O, OL looked good. RB's: Hillis was a man among boys when he was playing in the second half. Moreno looked really good on three carries. But anything other than a trivial injury is a huge setback for him, given the time he has misseed already. Hillis is far and away the best of our uninjured RB's. I wasn't that impressed with Buckhalter or Jordan. But they would be serviceable backups for Hillis or Moreno.

First string passing offense is the same old Broncos bugaboo for the last several years. Good movement until it matters and then our QB does something stupid. I hope this is just a "learning the offense and syncing with receivers" problem.

Simms played very well against the scrubs.

Baker and Larsen stood out against the scrubs. Other than the two of them, our front 7 drops off dramatically in quality after the first string (either that or SF's second string OL is a lot better than it's first string OL).

But all in all, they are playing better than I expected with all the new stuff, except for stupid interceptions.

missingnumber7
08-15-2009, 12:20 PM
Royal looked as good as expected...I think he's ready, not missing Marhsall to much right now. I actually think we are going to have a decent WR crew to run the spread. Was interesting to see Jordan out in the spread as a WR. I liked seeing Moreno run hard, he could be a stud, but it also helps having 3 RBs to lean on, Jordan and Buckhalter did well too, I think it could be a good rotation type situation where they could give Moreno his touches but also keep him healthy for the end of the season. Also Hillis impressed, works as FB, HB, in that H-back/slot type, can catch, run, pass block, and even opened a hole or two run blocking.

D was well it was serviceable. They looked confused in how they were lined up and were running around to get into position a couple times, but all in all for switching from 4/3 to 3/4 was a different look, we got some different style blitzes in there and it has potential.

uplink
08-15-2009, 12:30 PM
Take away a few bad throws by Orton and the team look great. McD is doing a good job. The more i see the more i agree with the offseason moves, Shanny was getting stale in the job even though he is a great great coach.
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

SouthStndJunkie
08-15-2009, 12:38 PM
I will say that I thought Denver played a relatively disciplined game in terms of penalties and stupid mistakes (outside of Orton's blunders).

Bronco Yoda
08-15-2009, 12:42 PM
I agree. We even won the battle of field position. No breakdowns in special teams coverage.

It's a solid start besides those INT's.

bayarealightning
08-15-2009, 12:42 PM
I cannot remember the last time the '9ers were in the playoffs! It's not like you were playing a powerhouse of a team. They have issues at QB; Gore did not play; they are remaking their OL; they do not have any WRs; they run a 3-4 without a dominant NT; they do not have any OLBs (Manny Lawson has been hurt in his time with the '9ers); outside of Willis (who didn't play), can anyone name a LB?; they have new safeties; and Bly is their CB.

Outside of that, it was an o.k. game.

baja
08-15-2009, 12:43 PM
I was thrilled with the special teams play.

TheReverend
08-15-2009, 12:47 PM
Great news!!! Your disorder is treatable. ;D


http://blogs.pitch.com/plog/narcissistic%20personality%20disorder.JPG

Perhaps that explains his simpatico with Cutler? ;D

And Shanny ;D

All repped.

You simple peasants were able to amuse me.

TheReverend
08-15-2009, 12:50 PM
OK Rev, we are going to suck. Everything is doomed this year, we shouldnt watch.

Happy now?

No, no, no. This season is going to be immensely entertaining.

On one hand, we don't need to fail. There are always adjustments, but it does look pretty f'ing grim.

On the other hand, this is definitely the yang to our yin of winning seasons and playoff berths. We probably deserve the cellar for a bit.

DenverBrit
08-15-2009, 01:06 PM
All repped.

You simple peasants were able to amuse me.

T'is good to be King!!. :notworthy

Rock Chalk
08-15-2009, 01:11 PM
No, no, no. This season is going to be immensely entertaining.

On one hand, we don't need to fail. There are always adjustments, but it does look pretty f'ing grim.

On the other hand, this is definitely the yang to our yin of winning seasons and playoff berths. We probably deserve the cellar for a bit.

What playoff berths? We havent been to the playoffs in 3 years, the longest stretch since before Elway. 1 Winning season (barely) in 3 years.

Maybe I dont understand what you expected to see in the first pre-season game with basically a completely rebuilt team.

You don't apparently seem to think any thing at all from last night was encouraging - either that's because you don't want to or are too focused on the negatives - and think the team won't get any better?

Will we make the playoffs or even have a winning season? Don't know (then again, neither do you), but is it likely, even probable that we will improve over the course of the season? I think so.

Hulamau
08-15-2009, 02:05 PM
I expected the Mane to crash and knew that in one preseason game our fickle fan base would jump off a cliff. Orton had a very bad day, probably worse than anything I've seen. As expected, I knew the mane would throw out how the rest of the team looked because of one player. If you decided to watch the rest of the team you saw a lot of good things.

San Fran is a very physical team. It was our first preseason game and on the road. I thought we held our own from a pure physicality stand point.

Offense: Let's be honest, Orton choked and in the worst places to do so (red zone, backed up in your own end zone). I also am growing concerned if when the pressure is on he's going to keep imploding like he has. However he was moving the ball effectively and our first team offense looked pretty good. Our backs were making good runs and our receivers were getting open. Our QB's were protected. This unit looked good sans Orton, and that's something to build on.

Defense: Again, we did pretty good. When they weren't screwed with bad field position they held their own. Champ was robbed of an int because Alex Smith made a bad pass, and we missed the forced fumble. Still no turnovers I'd like to see but we got four sacks and two were on legit pressure and not coverage. We played physical, too. In situations where we had to stop them (like in their own endzone at the end of the game) we came through. We tackled well and were bringing the heat. In sum: Already the effects of Slowick are being removed and this looks like a respectable defense, granted the niners offense isn't great, and there are a lot things we need to clean up, but it's a decent start.

Special Teams: I was amazed to see us field a good special teams unit! We had then pinned deep on a couple punts and we had three returns past the thirty. Prater only had one kick but overall did well. I was really impressed with how good the ST unit looked.

Rookies: Baker had a sack, McKinley had his moments (good and bad), Knowshon looked great until he left the game with a knee issue, Alphonso showed his ball skills, Quinn had a nice block, and both Smith and McKinley had good returns.

So for all the whining, some of you can't see the forest for the trees. Had our unit from last year been playing, the score would have been 30-0 with three ints in the first half, not 16-17. This group looks closer than I expected for new systems across the board. I still think we'll need one more offseason of turnover to get really competitive, but if we're playing to a tie on the road then I'll be satisfied. Bottom line: We ARE getting better.

And give Orton more than one preseason game to throw him under the bus.

Amen Kaylore, my sentiments across the board. The angst ridden pansy brigade here notwithstanding.

montrose
08-15-2009, 02:15 PM
rofl!rofl!rofl!rofl!rofl!rofl!rofl!rofl!rofl!rofl! rofl!

The last decade of Broncos football hasn't exactly been funny, depressing is more accurate. I miss 1990's Mike Shanahan.

missingnumber7
08-15-2009, 02:40 PM
The last decade of Broncos football hasn't exactly been funny, depressing is more accurate. I miss John Elway.

Fixed it for you

Taco John
08-15-2009, 04:03 PM
I think that it's difficult to put any stock either way in this game. McDaniels surely isn't happy with it, which is good for us. I think if people want to get worked up over a preaseason game - game three is the one to get worked up about.

But the, I wouldn't get worked up about this team until at least mid-to-late October. And even then a 9-7 team could end up in the playoffs - and that's all I personally care about. Just make it to the playoffs.

tnedator
08-15-2009, 04:05 PM
I think that it's difficult to put any stock either way in this game. McDaniels surely isn't happy with it, which is good for us. I think if people want to get worked up over a preaseason game - game three is the one to get worked up about.

But the, I wouldn't get worked up about this team until at least mid-to-late October. And even then a 9-7 team could end up in the playoffs - and that's all I personally care about. Just make it to the playoffs.

With the schedule the AFC West has, I think it is very possible that 8-8, and very likely, 9-7 wins the division.

Taco John
08-15-2009, 04:08 PM
With the schedule the AFC West has, I think it is very possible that 8-8, and very likely, 9-7 wins the division.

I think we've got a shot at it (Division title or WC playoff birth). I don't buy the "cupboard was left bare" mentality and that we should all accept a 6 win season so long as those six wins are at the end of the season and we're showing improvement. I think that this team can compete now. I don't think that we're going to dominate anybody. But I don't know if Atlanta or Miami thought they were going to have the seasons that they had last year at this point in the game.

tnedator
08-15-2009, 04:21 PM
I think we've got a shot at it (Division title or WC playoff birth). I don't buy the "cupboard was left bare" mentality and that we should all accept a 6 win season so long as those six wins are at the end of the season and we're showing improvement. I think that this team can compete now. I don't think that we're going to dominate anybody. But I don't know if Atlanta or Miami thought they were going to have the seasons that they had last year at this point in the game.

Agreed. Also, I have seen nothing from McDaniels that indicates he doesn't expect to win right away.

Rock Chalk
08-15-2009, 05:12 PM
Winning the division will be tough. It will almost certainly rely on SD having a slow Norvesque start again.

_Oro_
08-15-2009, 05:26 PM
One thing I like about our new defense is Doom matched up on Fullbacks.

Tombstone RJ
08-15-2009, 05:27 PM
The AFCW is weak division, if the bolts stumble and the Broncos win 50% of their first 10 games the Broncos can finish strong and still make the playoffs.

Los Broncos
08-15-2009, 05:38 PM
Good game over all, I think our defense played well.

I was actually surprised how physical we did play.

Sacks were nice to see finally.

Orton made some bad throws for sure, but we knew that coming in so I wasn't that surprised.

I think Simms has a chance at the starting job depending on what happens in the next couple of games.

fdf
08-15-2009, 06:04 PM
No, no, no. This season is going to be immensely entertaining.

On one hand, we don't need to fail. There are always adjustments, but it does look pretty f'ing grim.

On the other hand, this is definitely the yang to our yin of winning seasons and playoff berths. We probably deserve the cellar for a bit.

We've had 10 years of yang since the last superbowl. Not one team we produced was ever a serious contender to go deep in the playoffs. The only "sorta" exception to that: had Griese stayed healthy, we would have contended that year. So that year, but for a QB, I think we would have been a serious contender. Other than that were have been mired somewhere between bad and mediocre.

Inkana7
08-16-2009, 04:31 PM
Actually no.

That was THEIR 2nd stringer (Gore didn't play) versus our first team complete with game planned defense

Coffee only played the first half netting 14 attempts for 67 yards.

#2 in the pre-season so far.

I watched the game. A very high percentage of those yards came right before the half on draws. Besides one run where Fields missed a tackle, their first string offense couldn't run against us.

broncosteven
08-18-2009, 01:49 PM
Bumping Cutler threads off the main page

Cito Pelon
08-18-2009, 02:24 PM
It was just an evaluation game. The staff put more packages in on O and D then you typically see in the first preseason game, but that's not a great big deal. The staff sure knows more about the state of the team than if they went vanilla. Besides, Nolan got fired from SF last year, maybe he was looking to get just a little bit of revenge.

Taco John
08-18-2009, 02:28 PM
All things considered - that single preseason game didn't give us that much worth talking about. It's just way too early to have a strong opinion on anything at this point (with regards to the team on the field).

Atwater His Ass
08-18-2009, 02:30 PM
All repped.

You simple peasants were able to amuse me.

I like to use plebs over peasants myself. Has a better ring to it.

I'll let you borrow it.

Atwater His Ass
08-18-2009, 02:34 PM
All things considered - that single preseason game didn't give us that much worth talking about. It's just way too early to have a strong opinion on anything at this point (with regards to the team on the field).

I also agree with that overall sentiment.

But I also don't think you can just igonre Orton's performance. It is what it is and currently, it's an aspect of the team to be concerned about.

Denver is already a bad place for a new QB to come to. Let alone surrounded by the circumstances that ushered in Orton. He's going to be criticized all season, sometimes fairly and sometimes not.

Right now, I think the criticism is fair, considering the way McD approached the game and the performance Orton had.

BroncoInferno
08-18-2009, 02:59 PM
We've had 10 years of yang since the last superbowl. Not one team we produced was ever a serious contender to go deep in the playoffs. The only "sorta" exception to that: had Griese stayed healthy, we would have contended that year. So that year, but for a QB, I think we would have been a serious contender. Other than that were have been mired somewhere between bad and mediocre.

did you sleep through 2005? i think hosting the afc championship game qualifies as a deep playoff run. that said, other than that year we never better than above average. even the 2000 season you refer to the defense was too awful to be a serious contender. and we actually had a better record with gus that year than with griese.

Cito Pelon
08-18-2009, 03:45 PM
All things considered - that single preseason game didn't give us that much worth talking about. It's just way too early to have a strong opinion on anything at this point (with regards to the team on the field).

That was a good parenthetical shot, TJ. And it's true that it's too early to say how the team will look come opening day. The team is getting into crunch time fast. The pressure is certainly on.

They've been boo'd mightily every year at home since 2003, so we'll see how this edition deals with it.

Bronx33
08-18-2009, 04:01 PM
I thought we moved the ball damn good and D was decent just a few boneheaded passes stopped a blowout from happening just get horton and simms a color chart and we should be ok.

wolf754life
08-18-2009, 05:08 PM
the sky is falling! the sky is falling! this team will compete hard... harder than any team since 2005.

that much we do know.

sisterhellfyre
08-18-2009, 11:19 PM
Good points Kahn. I was pretty happy with the D and ST overall, still work to do but light years ahead of last year. The offense was looking good until Orton missed Hillis in the flats and threw that pick. I almost got the feeling he was trying to overcompensate at that point.

Ditto, Montrose (wherever you are now). The first pick was not Orton's fault; it was a great play on the ball by a really good cornerback. The worst effect of that first pick was that Orton started second-guessing himself. The second pick was just a bad pass, and by the third, he was clearly tentative, over-thinking, and trying way too hard to aim and guide the ball instead of just throwing the darn thing.

I hope Orton's confidence level will rise over the next three weeks. If he gets off to a rough start against Cincy on opening day like he did against San Francrisco, it's going to make for a rough opening month (maybe more) while he tries to rebuild his zen at game speed.

Let's hope McDaniels really is the QB coach he's cracked up to be, eh?