PDA

View Full Version : For the optomists: A little kool aid from espn radio


prunch
08-27-2009, 04:48 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/stations/player?id=4423924

minute 63

Borks147
08-27-2009, 04:49 PM
summary?

prunch
08-27-2009, 04:50 PM
Summary: Expects Denver to surprise. Thinks Royal in for monster year. Thinks McD has the respect of the team. Like the offensive system and thinks D will improve.

PRBronco
08-27-2009, 04:50 PM
Aw man where's titan when I need him. No one types out an entire radio conversation like him!

*edit* Thanks for summary brah.

Popps
08-27-2009, 04:55 PM
Royal looked great last week. Turned that 3 yard gain into a 12 yard gain with almost no effort. Dude makes it look easy.

I think if Marshall continues his PMSing, we'll need to use our TEs a bit more in the passing game to give Orton bigger targets now and then.

I love how we're getting our backs involved in the passing game. Haven't seen that in a long time. Against SF, Takeo Spikes was trying to cover a RB in pass coverage. You have to love those match-ups. Imagine when it's a guy like Buck or Moreno.

Besides a few bad throws from Orton, I see reason to be excited on both sides of the ball.

Borks147
08-27-2009, 04:55 PM
sweet, thanks prunch

Dukes
08-27-2009, 05:01 PM
Mmmm, that Kool-aid tasted gooooood!

Punisher
08-27-2009, 05:11 PM
Mmmm, that Kool-aid tasted gooooood!

Too Sweet for me......

lex
08-27-2009, 05:12 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/stations/player?id=4423924

minute 63

This is worthless.

Bill Simmons is a ma-hole. WTF! LOL. You might as well go ask Connor Fahey from Natick, if he likes the Patriots. Seriously.

Good grief!

TonyR
08-27-2009, 05:13 PM
Who was the analyst making these comments?

BMarsh615
08-27-2009, 05:16 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/stations/player?id=4423924

minute 63

This is the Orange Mane. **** like this isn't allowed to be posted here.

BMarsh615
08-27-2009, 05:16 PM
Who was the analyst making these comments?

Mike Lombardi.

He was on the Vic Lombardi show saying similar things. Every Thursday he comes on that show and just raves about the Broncos.

TonyR
08-27-2009, 05:18 PM
This morning on Mike & Mike (it was Golic and Kuselias this morning) Matthew Berry (ESPN's fantasy football guy) said stay away from Cutler since Chi will have a more conservative offense than Cutler had in Denver and he doesn't have good WRs. He also said take Orton because Denver will pass a lot and will be in shootouts because of their bad defense.

http://sports.espn.go.com/stations/player?id=4426112

Bronco Boy
08-27-2009, 06:03 PM
How did that relate to ophthalmologists? I don't get it.

Merlin
08-27-2009, 06:03 PM
I love how we're getting our backs involved in the passing game. Haven't seen that in a long time.
I seem to forget, how did Hillis get injured last yr? Nah, we never passed to RBs last yr.

Inkana7
08-27-2009, 06:05 PM
I seem to forget, how did Hillis get injured last yr? Nah, we never passed to RBs last yr.

Just because backs occasionally caught a pass doesn't mean it was a big part of the offense.

elsid13
08-27-2009, 06:12 PM
Just because backs occasionally caught a pass doesn't mean it was a big part of the offense.

All about trade offs, having back out as receiving option, mean Denver has to keep a TE in. Of the two groups we have I would rather have our back pass blocking and letting Scheffer control the center hash zone.

OBF1
08-27-2009, 08:02 PM
Please pass a large glass of the Kool-Aid, I am drinking

broncosteven
08-27-2009, 08:32 PM
All about trade offs, having back out as receiving option, mean Denver has to keep a TE in. Of the two groups we have I would rather have our back pass blocking and letting Scheffer control the center hash zone.

I would like to see more screens to the HB's and less to the TE's.

Let the TE's work the seam or the flat and let a guy with moves catch the screen.

Br0nc0Buster
08-27-2009, 08:46 PM
I would like to see more screens to the HB's and less to the TE's.

Let the TE's work the seam or the flat and let a guy with moves catch the screen.

I thought that but after watching Graham do a couple he could be a weapon on screens

Not the fastest guy, but there arent any corners than want a piece of that

Popps
08-27-2009, 09:31 PM
Just because backs occasionally caught a pass doesn't mean it was a big part of the offense.

You'd think someone wouldn't need that explained to them.

BroncoMan4ever
08-27-2009, 09:45 PM
Royal looked great last week. Turned that 3 yard gain into a 12 yard gain with almost no effort. Dude makes it look easy.

I think if Marshall continues his PMSing, we'll need to use our TEs a bit more in the passing game to give Orton bigger targets now and then.

I love how we're getting our backs involved in the passing game. Haven't seen that in a long time. Against SF, Takeo Spikes was trying to cover a RB in pass coverage. You have to love those match-ups. Imagine when it's a guy like Buck or Moreno.

Besides a few bad throws from Orton, I see reason to be excited on both sides of the ball.

Scheff having a huge year would not surprise me at all. i think a lot of the Marshall patterns of using his size and strength are going to fall to Scheff. as opposed to lining a WR up wide like we would with Marshall, our formations will shift slightly to get the ball to Scheff.

theAPAOps5
08-27-2009, 09:47 PM
Why would you even post this? Don't you know that the Mane knows all and we are DOOMED and McD is just a implant to ruin the organization and Orton sucks. Cutler's tears cured AIDS and he farted excellence.

Why would you post anything even remotely optimistic? Ass clown, BAN HIM

On a side note I talked to Charley Casserly at camp the day we got booted he said the same thing. I just didn't post it here because I would a kool aid drinker.

watermock
08-27-2009, 09:56 PM
On a side note I talked to Charley Casserly at camp the day we got booted

Then it's true?

Cutler's tears cure AIDS and he farts excellence?

theAPAOps5
08-27-2009, 10:00 PM
Then it's true?

Cutler's tears cure AIDS and he farts excellence?

I love you Mock you got me! Yeah he said his laser rocket arm could end the Iraq and Afghanistan war too!

To clarify he said the Broncos may surprise some folks and don't be surprised.

dbfan21
08-28-2009, 07:04 AM
Scheff having a huge year would not surprise me at all. i think a lot of the Marshall patterns of using his size and strength are going to fall to Scheff. as opposed to lining a WR up wide like we would with Marshall, our formations will shift slightly to get the ball to Scheff.

Gosh...it's so funny this came up because as I logged on to the Mane this morning and started reading about all the Marshall drama, I thought, "This could really make Scheffler's life terrific". I mean, Scheff is big, fast, elusive. He's no Marshall clone in terms of size and speed, but he has great hands, can catch the ball in traffic and has the ability to make guys miss.

If we split him out wide in Brandon's spot, I bet he could be successful.

TonyR
08-28-2009, 07:12 AM
Back to the OP, if you listened to the audio, Bill Simmons made a good point. He talked about how he thinks Eddie Royal is going to make a huge leap this year, so if they can get Brandon Marshall on the field (sadly a big if at this point) and get Knowshon Moreno healthy that makes three offensive weapons that opposing defenses have to gameplan for. When's the last time this franchise had three offensive skill position weapons like that? Perhaps never.

The Joker
08-28-2009, 07:15 AM
Back to the OP, if you listened to the audio, Bill Simmons made a good point. He talked about how he thinks Eddie Royal is going to make a huge leap this year, so if they can get Brandon Marshall on the field (sadly a big if at this point) and get Knowshon Moreno healthy that makes three offensive weapons that opposing defenses have to gameplan for. When's the last time this franchise had three offensive skill position weapons like that? Perhaps never.

TD, Sharpe and Smith?

TonyR
08-28-2009, 07:37 AM
TD, Sharpe and Smith?

Maybe, but I think the current trio has more potential. I loved Rod Smith but both Marshall and Royal are more talented than he ever was. They also currently have Scheffler who can do a poor man's approximation of Sharpe when healthy. And although Moreno will never be the dominant pure RB that TD was I think he can actually do more things in this offense. Now granted they don't have John Elway to get them the ball, but I think this group can be really special if BM ever pulls his head out of his backside and gets on the field.

gtown
08-28-2009, 07:45 AM
The key is Moreno and Hillis. I think we will move the ball fine through the air, with or without Brandy. Consistently running the ball well will keep our defense off of the field, and add a great dimension to the offense.

If we can get some continuity on offense, especially in the red zone, Denver will surprise some folks. All of a sudden the acquisitions of Moreno, Quinn, Hochstein, et al make sense.

Cito Pelon
08-28-2009, 07:46 AM
Thanks, I am drinking all the Koolaid I can get.

Beantown Bronco
08-28-2009, 07:50 AM
Summary: Expects Denver to surprise. Thinks Royal in for monster year. Thinks McD has the respect of the team. Like the offensive system and thinks D will improve.

I think it's pretty clear that if Royal goes down with an injury, the Broncos likely don't win a single game without him.

TonyR
08-28-2009, 07:53 AM
The key is Moreno and Hillis.

Yes, I didn't even consider Hillis above. Yet another weapon at McD's disposal.

Eldorado
08-28-2009, 07:57 AM
TD, Sharpe and Smith?

Maybe, but I think the current trio has more potential. I loved Rod Smith but both Marshall and Royal are more talented than he ever was. They also currently have Scheffler who can do a poor man's approximation of Sharpe when healthy. And although Moreno will never be the dominant pure RB that TD was I think he can actually do more things in this offense. Now granted they don't have John Elway to get them the ball, but I think this group can be really special if BM ever pulls his head out of his backside and gets on the field.

Lex? How did you get control of big T's account? I want to know. I think it would be funny to post retarded **** using another users account.

Drek
08-28-2009, 07:59 AM
Maybe, but I think the current trio has more potential. I loved Rod Smith but both Marshall and Royal are more talented than he ever was. They also currently have Scheffler who can do a poor man's approximation of Sharpe when healthy. And although Moreno will never be the dominant pure RB that TD was I think he can actually do more things in this offense. Now granted they don't have John Elway to get them the ball, but I think this group can be really special if BM ever pulls his head out of his backside and gets on the field.

A lot of guys are more talented than Rod Smith. 99.9% of them don't come close to having a tenth of his career.

Royal is very talented and has a great attitude. Scheffler is a stud receiving TE, and Moreno is a very versatile RB with a bright future. To say that they have more potential than three guys who all deserve to be in the Hall of Fame (and one of whom will definitely make it) is the very definition of drinking the kool-aid.

Tony Romo is a solid QB, Marion Barber is a capable back, and Roy Williams has had flashes of greatness in his career. If a Cowboys fan compared them to the Aikman, Smith, and Irvin trio wouldn't you laugh your ass off at them? I know I sure would.

I think it's pretty clear that if Royal goes down with an injury, the Broncos likely don't win a single game without him.

That is grossly underselling what Stokley, Scheffler, Moreno, Hillis, Graham, and Gaffney can provide (ruling out Marshall until he stops being a bitch).

We're spoiled as Bronco fans because last year we got to see two elite WR weapons on the field at the same time. Very few teams have that. We shouldn't look at those two and miss the wider cast of very accomplished secondary targets we're also providing Orton with this year.

The optimism for Royal from the mainstream press comes from the expectation that he takes Welker's role and builds on it. I'm sure he can, but he'll likely play a more diverse role than that, since he's also our best deep threat (what Randy Moss does for NE). Meanwhile that Welker kind of slot WR role is also tailor made for Stokley. He has the same skill set as Welker and has gotten the job done for years in the NFL now.

If we have a zero effort Marshall and an injured Eddie Royal when lined up to face the Patriots or Steelers, yeah, we're probably ****ed. But we go toe to toe with all but the elite teams without them. It obviously isn't ideal and we'll struggle, but not being able to win a game is grossly overstating how badly we need him.

The Joker
08-28-2009, 07:59 AM
A big concern of preseason for me has been that we've been making not much more than a token effort to run the ball.

I'm confident Orton can do a good job at QB for us, but only if we've got a quality running game to take the pressure off him. With Moreno, Hillis and Buckhalter, we should have a decent stable of backs to get that going.

If we ask Orton to carry the team we're ****ed though.

Beantown Bronco
08-28-2009, 08:06 AM
That is grossly underselling what Stokley, Scheffler, Moreno, Hillis, Graham, and Gaffney can provide (ruling out Marshall until he stops being a b****).

Underselling? Not at all. I love the potential of most of those guys above, but in reality, if you remove Marshall and Royal from this offense, who do you have Orton throwing the ball to? Gaffney against a #1 corner. Please. Stokley against a #2 corner and playing every down? Sorry. He wore down VERY quickly doing this in just a few games last year. If he has to do it all the time, one year later and one year older? It's not gonna happen.

Moreno and Hillis are going to find the running VERY difficult unless Orton can show that he can actually complete a pass over 10 yards. 8 in the box? Sorry, but it'll be 9 or 10 in the box until he can prove this. And that's WITH Marshall and Royal. Without them, who's going to be any sort of a consistent deep threat anyway?

They NEED a healthy Royal.

TonyR
08-28-2009, 08:10 AM
To say that they have more potential than three guys who all deserve to be in the Hall of Fame (and one of whom will definitely make it) is the very definition of drinking the kool-aid.


I said they have the potential but did NOT say they'd reach it. And particularly with respect to Marshall and Royal the facts are very clear in support of this. No Kool-Aid needed.

In a 12 year career Rod Smith went over 90 catches twice. In a 3 year career Marshall has already done it twice, and Royal did it his rookie year. To suggest that both of them don't have the potential to easily eclipse what Smith did is a bit myopic. Putting 3 young players like Marshall, Royal and Moreno together, none of whom have begun to reach their potential peak years, and you have a recipe for possible great things. Again, doesn't mean it will happen and I never said it would.

Eldorado
08-28-2009, 08:16 AM
scheffler <<<< sharpe even for potential
moreno <<<< TD even for potential

Chris
08-28-2009, 09:38 PM
I've listened to the whole podcast now and these guys really know what they're talking about (not just because they're high on the broncos). More like the non-BS report. It's refreshing when 99% of media coverage is limited to snap judgments.

lex
08-29-2009, 12:00 AM
Back to the OP, if you listened to the audio, Bill Simmons made a good point. He talked about how he thinks Eddie Royal is going to make a huge leap this year, so if they can get Brandon Marshall on the field (sadly a big if at this point) and get Knowshon Moreno healthy that makes three offensive weapons that opposing defenses have to gameplan for. When's the last time this franchise had three offensive skill position weapons like that? Perhaps never.

You must have started following the team a couple of years ago.

Also, the fact that you listen to that masshole says a lot.

Chris
08-29-2009, 12:04 AM
TD, Sharpe and Smith?

Smith and eddie mac were both good WRs during the SB but Smith didn't really become the go to guy beast we know him as until Sharpe bolted for the Ravens and Eddie retired.

I'm now stuck trying to remember who our 3rd WRs was during the SB years...shame on me...lost in amongst names like Glenn Cadrez and Tyrone Braxton.

lex
08-29-2009, 12:24 AM
Smith and eddie mac were both good WRs during the SB but Smith didn't really become the go to guy beast we know him as until Sharpe bolted for the Ravens and Eddie retired.

I'm now stuck trying to remember who our 3rd WRs was during the SB years...shame on me...lost in amongst names like Glenn Cadrez and Tyrone Braxton.


Actually, Smith was a very dangerous receiver before Sharpe left. He could and often did carve teams up. Off the top of my head I can think of a long catch and run he had against the Rams in 97 and also an amazing catch on a deep pass against Kansas City at Arrowhead in that same year. Smith wasnt the stat horse he would later become but thats not the issue. He was a dangerous weapon that could and often did punish other teams.

But this whole thought also ignores Smiths and McCaffreys blocking. Marshall is a really strong blocker but Royal and Marshall fall well short of Smith/McCaffrey. It matters because a WR that blocks often makes the difference between a 10 yard run and a 60 yard run. So, while the tone of this discussion that is trashing Smith, it should also be pointed out that a big play is a big play, whether its because the WR has the ball in his hands or someone else does.

Chris
08-29-2009, 11:25 AM
Fair points Lex. But if they can make Scheffler improve in blocking as much as everyone's saying he has (I haven't payed attention to it in the games) then there's still hope yet.

How well did Moreno block in college? Maybe he could be the guy that puts in the block for royal's big run off a screen ;)

TonyR
08-29-2009, 11:31 AM
You must have started following the team a couple of years ago.

Also, the fact that you listen to that ma-hole says a lot.

To your first point, I've been following the team since the late 70's. And see post #38.

To your second point, I'm not a fan of Boston teams, in particular the Rex Sox who I despise, but unlike you I'm able to put aside my bias and listen to and appreciate content. Despite his style Simmons is actually very knowledgable and has a lot of interesting things to say. And most of the comments in this podcast are from Mike Lombardi. Do you have a problem with him, too?

lex
08-29-2009, 11:39 AM
To your first point, I've been following the team since the late 70's. And see post #38.

Ive seen your subsequent tripe and as many have pointed out to you, its still wrong, no matter how much tapdancing you want to do. See post 43. Ive seen Gaffney try to block and he sucks. Same with a lot of other guys theyre trotting out there.

Also, you've devoted numerous posts defending Moreno being utilized in a RBBC but now youre doting on him as a weapon...apparently one thats underutilized. Youre kind of speaking out of both sides of your mouth. If he's really the weapon, youre claiming, its hard to justify utilizing him the way RBs were in NE.


To your second point, I'm not a fan of Boston teams, in particular the Rex Sox who I despise, but unlike you I'm able to put aside my bias and listen to and appreciate content. Despite his style Simmons is actually very knowledgable and has a lot of interesting things to say. And most of the comments in this podcast are from Mike Lombardi. Do you have a problem with him, too?

Yeah, whatever, you closet ma-hole. Has it occurred to you that Bill Simmons is another east coast fathead who is only paying attention to Denver now because they have one of his guys coaching them.




responses in bold.

Chris
08-29-2009, 12:02 PM
No need to get personal guys. You just disagree.

listopencil
08-29-2009, 01:04 PM
scheffler <<<< sharpe even for potential
moreno <<<< TD even for potential


Heh, for a second I misread your post and was typing this long winded and very harsh response. So....I'll just say I agree with you completely.

listopencil
08-29-2009, 01:04 PM
responses in bold.


What's a ma-hole?

Inkana7
08-29-2009, 01:20 PM
What's a ma-hole?

Lex's incorrect way of saying mass-hole.

lex
08-29-2009, 03:21 PM
What's a ma-hole?

http://massholeproshop.com/items/more-masshole-stuff/list.htm

TonyR
08-29-2009, 03:38 PM
responses in bold.

You didn't make a single coherent argument against what I said in post #38. Try again.