PDA

View Full Version : Three sacks from three different guys...a credit to Nolan?...a reason for optimism?


lex
09-14-2009, 11:33 AM
Is anyone else guardedly optimistic about the fact that we had 3 sacks coming from 3 different players, with none of them being Doom?

One of my gripes about Slowik is that I dont think he was very good at scheming pressure. I dont know why. Maybe it was not knowing his players or maybe it was not understanding the interplay in blocking and what one does on defense. Either way, it seems like Nolan is far more capable at scheming pressure. Time will tell though.

Broncoman13
09-14-2009, 11:33 AM
I wish one of those would have come on that last drive!!! But yes, reason for optimisim.

McDman
09-14-2009, 11:35 AM
I'm definitely more optimistic than last year, but it's still early. I really wish Doom had stepped it up and gotten some pressure.

lex
09-14-2009, 11:36 AM
I wish one of those would have come on that last drive!!! But yes, reason for optimisim.

Lets not focus on the fact that he didnt get a sack on the last drive but rather the fact that he can scheme pressure. Being too passive by choice is a better problem than being passive because of incompetence.

BTW, even when Palmer did get some passes off, he had guys around him. When Nolan decided to bring heat (around the 2nd qtr I think), Palmer started looking A LOT less comfortable.

PRBronco
09-14-2009, 11:36 AM
I wish one of those would have come on that last drive!!! But yes, reason for optimisim.

Yeah I'm not sure if Killericon apologized for our co-Adopt a bronco for that one, but that was our bad, he stopped blitzing for some reason.

Also I'm going to eat a private plate of crow for Darrell Reid already contributing more than I thought he would.

But I'm going to enjoy a plate of the opposite of crow (pheasant?) for Andra Davis being a hero! :strong:

Garcia Bronco
09-14-2009, 11:37 AM
Doom got pressure several times forcing bad throws. Solwik couldn't scheme pressure, secondary, or LB play.

PRBronco
09-14-2009, 11:38 AM
I'm definitely more optimistic than last year, but it's still early. I really wish Doom had stepped it up and gotten some pressure.

Did anyone notice they hardly ever rushed him from Palmer's blindside? Seemed like after the first few downs he was always coming from the other side. Maybe Whitworth was better than i expected.

gtown
09-14-2009, 11:39 AM
I am glad that we didnt just sit there like last year only rushing four guys in vain. We are not one of those lucky teams that can pressure with just the down lineman, we gotta bring pressure using creative blitzes from the linebackers. For the life of me I just don't get why Slowick couldn't understand this.

WolfpackGuy
09-14-2009, 11:40 AM
The defense played beyond my expectations.
I noticed more gaming between the DL and LB's than I've seen in a long time.
It looks like extra rushers could come from anywhere, and they can actually make a tackle.
Now if the offense can do its part and not leave the D on the field for so long next time.

lex
09-14-2009, 11:40 AM
Did anyone notice they hardly ever rushed him from Palmer's blindside? Seemed like after the first few downs he was always coming from the other side. Maybe Whitworth was better than i expected.

Cincinnatis OLine isnt exactly on par with Denvers. Maybe they thought other parts of their line were more suspect and so they targeted those guys. It could be more about other guys beinga weak link more than its abouth Whitworth, although it would seem like he is their best OLineman.

Broncos4tw
09-14-2009, 11:42 AM
We did repeatedly what Slowik would only do once or twice a game - actually blitz the QB. We had more in one quarter than Slowik would do for an entire game. Bliztes are great things: they stop drives, and kill runs, too. You can get burned with them, but you know, it's worth it, imo. It was all the difference in the world today.

I can't remember the last time we stopped that many runners for a loss, and even a few passes. It was great to watch.

TheDave
09-14-2009, 11:42 AM
Nolan did a fantastic job of mixing things up and bringing pressure from all different angles. Lets see what happens when teams get a couple games worth of tape on us.


But, so far so good.

McDman
09-14-2009, 11:43 AM
Did anyone notice they hardly ever rushed him from Palmer's blindside? Seemed like after the first few downs he was always coming from the other side. Maybe Whitworth was better than i expected.

I thought Doom was going to eat up Whit, but he played very well for a RT converted into a LT.

Broncoman13
09-14-2009, 11:44 AM
The beauty of the 3-4... 4th rusher can come from anywhere and you still have coverage options!

The run D did outstanding as well, especially when you consider we did it with 7 and didn't have to put an extra guy in the box. Benson and the Bengals running game is probably near the top 10-12 in the league... good test for our run D.

The Bengals offense is potent, a lot of reason for optimism after that effort. We were helped greatly by dropped passes, but there is a lot of reason to be happy too.

Beantown Bronco
09-14-2009, 11:45 AM
I am glad that we didnt just sit there like last year only rushing four guys in vain. We are not one of those lucky teams that can pressure with just the down lineman, we gotta bring pressure using creative blitzes from the linebackers. For the life of me I just don't get why Slowick couldn't understand this.

It had A LOT more to do with him not wanting to leave his backup quality safeties and CBs (after Champ went down) exposed in coverage last year than him not understanding it. He didn't have the talent on that side of the ball to play that way.

lex
09-14-2009, 11:45 AM
I am glad that we didnt just sit there like last year only rushing four guys in vain. We are not one of those lucky teams that can pressure with just the down lineman, we gotta bring pressure using creative blitzes from the linebackers. For the life of me I just don't get why Slowick couldn't understand this.


Well, last year it came out that the lack of pressure was a result of having bad safeties. There was a thread about how the 10 yard cushions were compensating for bad safety play. The result of the 10 yard cushions was that they undermined a pass rush. So the safety play had a downstream effect that resulted in less of a pass rush...according to this theory that was discussed. I dont agree with this ( I always refer to the Capt. Lindermann quote) but addressing the safety position this past offseason might be what has allowed Nolan to attack more.

WolfpackGuy
09-14-2009, 11:47 AM
The run D did outstanding as well, especially when you consider we did it with 7 and didn't have to put an extra guy in the box. Benson and the Bengals running game is probably near the top 10-12 in the league... good test for our run D.

Good call.
Outside of that one run by Benson, the Bengals did little on the ground.
DJ should've blown that play up after 3 yards though.

lex
09-14-2009, 11:47 AM
It had A LOT more to do with him not wanting to leave his backup quality safeties and CBs (after Champ went down) exposed in coverage last year than him not understanding it. He didn't have the talent on that side of the ball to play that way.

Yeah, but his approach to hide his safeties perpetuated the problem because it undermined his pass rush.

Beantown Bronco
09-14-2009, 11:50 AM
Yeah, but his approach to hide his safeties perpetuated the problem because it undermined his pass rush.

Agreed. But what can't be stressed enough IMO is that the defense of the 1st half last season, before Champ went down, was MILES better than the 2nd half of the year defense when he wasn't out there (or when he was, wasn't anywhere near 100%). Let's not be so quick to forget.....the defense in the first Oakland game and the Tampa Bay game last year was every bit as good as the defense we saw yesterday. And Slowik was the DC for those games the last time I checked.

The Champ injury REALLY hurt any chance they had at being average IMO.

gtown
09-14-2009, 11:52 AM
We did repeatedly what Slowik would only do once or twice a game - actually blitz the QB. We had more in one quarter than Slowik would do for an entire game. Bliztes are great things: they stop drives, and kill runs, too. You can get burned with them, but you know, it's worth it, imo. It was all the difference in the world today.

I can't remember the last time we stopped that many runners for a loss, and even a few passes. It was great to watch.

That's the rub right there. Slowik was playing not to lose, while Nolan knows that creative blitzing is an educated gamble that usually pays off.

The only thing we gotta shore up is more press coverage. I think once we establish that we can consistently get to the quarterback this year, I think Nolan will move away from the zone they are currently employing into more bump and run, which will create more turnovers.

lex
09-14-2009, 11:55 AM
Agreed. But what can't be stressed enough IMO is that the defense of the 1st half last season, before Champ went down, was MILES better than the 2nd half of the year defense when he wasn't out there (or when he was, wasn't anywhere near 100%). Let's not be so quick to forget.....the defense in the first Oakland game and the Tampa Bay game last year was every bit as good as the defense we saw yesterday. And Slowik was the DC for those games the last time I checked.

The Champ injury REALLY hurt any chance they had at being average IMO.

I dont know about that. We jumped out to 21-0 leads against both San Diego and New Orleans only to barely hang on.

Also, during the time that Hillis played significant minutes, I think the defense was better. I think they gave up 23 pts a game vs. 28, which was their season average I think. Im not saying the defense was better without Champ as much as Im saying it was better with a running game and with Larsen and not Webster.

lex
09-14-2009, 11:57 AM
I actually feel better about drafting defense now since I feel its less likely to be wasted. I still think trading the 1st next year for Smith was a bad move but is off to a good start. I think Smith is another guy who was more utilized by Nolan when it was live bullets. He seemed to be more active and involved whether as a result of scheme. I think Nolan speeding up Palmers clock helped Smith make plays as it accelerated Palmers checkdown faster. I think this is something that wasnt seen in the preseason.

Beantown Bronco
09-14-2009, 11:59 AM
I dont know about that. We jumped out to 21-0 leads against both San Diego and New Orleans only to barely hang on.

Those were also two HISTORICALLY good offenses.

Im not saying the defense was better without Champ as much as Im saying it was better with a running game and with Larsen and not Webster.

Can't argue with that.

lazarus4444
09-14-2009, 12:00 PM
Agreed. But what can't be stressed enough IMO is that the defense of the 1st half last season, before Champ went down, was MILES better than the 2nd half of the year defense when he wasn't out there (or when he was, wasn't anywhere near 100%). Let's not be so quick to forget.....the defense in the first Oakland game and the Tampa Bay game last year was every bit as good as the defense we saw yesterday. And Slowik was the DC for those games the last time I checked.

The Champ injury REALLY hurt any chance they had at being average IMO.

Not true. Last years defense was epically bad all yar and no game from last year will compare to Sunday Sep 13, 2009. Are you a slovik fan or something?

Dr. Broncenstein
09-14-2009, 12:02 PM
Zero points allowed over 58 minutes on the road. There isn't a team in any league that wins less than 95% of the time with that kind of performance. It was a spectacular performance... especially given the fact that it is the first game with a new regime and a roster in transition.

SonOfLe-loLang
09-14-2009, 12:02 PM
The entire preseason was reason for optimism. I expected a good defensive performance and we got one

Garcia Bronco
09-14-2009, 12:02 PM
Not true. Last years defense was epically bad all yar and no game from last year will compare to Sunday Sep 13, 2009. Are you a slovik fan or something?

I am going to have to agree. Even though we won last year our defense got lit up in those games.

lex
09-14-2009, 12:04 PM
Those were also two HISTORICALLY good offenses.



Can't argue with that.


Noted. Its not like our offense was garbage and I still think that giving up those leads is a black eye on the defense but also, I think it just goes to show how being pass happy as we were really exposes you to this kind of stuff. Passing teams often have lulls during the course of the game that allow this.

lex
09-14-2009, 12:06 PM
Not true. Last years defense was epically bad all yar and no game from last year will compare to Sunday Sep 13, 2009. Are you a slovik fan or something?


He makes a fair point. You could also go back to 2006 when Plummers struggles kept putting the D in bad positions. They came through a lot early but wore down.

We really need to get the offense going. Id hate to repeat 2006.

mr007
09-14-2009, 12:13 PM
I would say yes, based on our first game, our D looks a lot better than it did last year and the credit should be pointed towards Nolan.

Beantown Bronco
09-14-2009, 12:34 PM
Not true. Last years defense was epically bad all yar and no game from last year will compare to Sunday Sep 13, 2009. Are you a slovik fan or something?

I am going to have to agree. Even though we won last year our defense got lit up in those games.

What!?!

Yesterday: the Broncos gave up 307 net yards of offense.
Last year vs Oakland: 307 net yards of offense.
Last year vs TB: 307 net yards of offense.

It's uncanny, but true.

And the Broncos literally had 3 sacks in all 3 games.
One turnover in each of the two last year as well.
All 14 pts given up vs. Oakland last year were in the 4th quarter after we were up 35 or so to nothing. Garbage prevent defense time.
Only 13 pts given up against TB.

You can't get any more comparable than that.

KevinJames
09-14-2009, 12:37 PM
I like that we blitzed Champ once or twice too, I think he is such a underrated blitzer simply for the fact that a lot of QBs won't even look in his direction.

Orange_Beard
09-14-2009, 12:50 PM
Bring it for 4 quarters. For the first time in 3 years, I think the D is on the right track.

SonOfLe-loLang
09-14-2009, 01:02 PM
What!?!

Yesterday: the Broncos gave up 307 net yards of offense.
Last year vs Oakland: 307 net yards of offense.
Last year vs TB: 307 net yards of offense.

It's uncanny, but true.

And the Broncos literally had 3 sacks in all 3 games.
One turnover in each of the two last year as well.
All 14 pts given up vs. Oakland last year were in the 4th quarter after we were up 35 or so to nothing. Garbage prevent defense time.
Only 13 pts given up against TB.

You can't get any more comparable than that.


Cept for the fact that the defense successfully protected a 6 point lead (till the last minute) and wasnt playing against a team getting blown out (that clearly packed it in) and instead was playing against an above average QB with above average receivers?

gtown
09-14-2009, 01:06 PM
Well, last year it came out that the lack of pressure was a result of having bad safeties. There was a thread about how the 10 yard cushions were compensating for bad safety play. The result of the 10 yard cushions was that they undermined a pass rush. So the safety play had a downstream effect that resulted in less of a pass rush...according to this theory that was discussed. I dont agree with this ( I always refer to the Capt. Lindermann quote) but addressing the safety position this past offseason might be what has allowed Nolan to attack more.

I think that's a bit chicken and egg. We definitely had talent issues, but the longer we let a play develop by rushing only four, the more those talent issues came into focus in the secondary. Just my two cents on that. The players and the scheme BOTH sucked, evidenced by several of them still on the streets and Slodick on a love tour with Shanny.

lex
09-14-2009, 01:08 PM
I think that's a bit chicken and egg. We definitely had talent issues, but the longer we let a play develop by rushing only four, the more those talent issues came into focus in the secondary. Just my two cents on that. The players and the scheme sucked, evidenced by several them still be on the streets and Slodick on a love tour with Shanny.

Its not even worth that. More good things come from pressuring the passer. You may get gashed but its not like the passive approach stopped anyone anyway. At least with pressure, you have a better chance at forcing the other team into mistakes.

Beantown Bronco
09-14-2009, 01:16 PM
Cept for the fact that the defense successfully protected a 6 point lead (till the last minute) and wasnt playing against a team getting blown out (that clearly packed it in) and instead was playing against an above average QB with above average receivers?

Cept for the fact that neither team they faced last year had 246 dropped passes.

See, I can play that game too.

Obviously there were different circumstances involved in each game, but c'mon, to say that they're not comparable is insane. They literally, to the yard, gave up the same production in all three games, got the same exact number of sacks in each game, and looked superb in all but 2 drives in each game.

Oh, and BTW, Tampa Bay was ranked 14th in offense last year. Do you really think this Cincy offense is going to be ranked significantly higher than that? They certainly didn't look that way yesterday, and much of it was largely due to unforced errors. We didn't exactly shut down New Orleans.

Did they look great? Yes. Did I enjoy it? Yes. Was it something I didn't see out of them on at least two occasions last year? Not exactly.

Bronco Yoda
09-14-2009, 01:20 PM
What!?!

Yesterday: the Broncos gave up 307 net yards of offense.
Last year vs Oakland: 307 net yards of offense.
Last year vs TB: 307 net yards of offense.

It's uncanny, but true.

And the Broncos literally had 3 sacks in all 3 games.
One turnover in each of the two last year as well.
All 14 pts given up vs. Oakland last year were in the 4th quarter after we were up 35 or so to nothing. Garbage prevent defense time.
Only 13 pts given up against TB.

You can't get any more comparable than that.

Good digging BB...odd but interesting...

fdf
09-14-2009, 01:20 PM
I would say yes, based on our first game, our D looks a lot better than it did last year and the credit should be pointed towards Nolan.

Dare I say that the guy who hired Nolan and then let him do his job deserves some of the credit also? Or will I get in trouble.

lex
09-14-2009, 01:23 PM
Dare I say that the guy who hired Nolan and then let him do his job deserves some of the credit also? Or will I get in trouble.

Im not so sure Bowlen wasnt behing bringing Nolan in. And besides that, according to everyone, Nolan inherited less to work with and has dont more with it so far. The guy youre referring to really needs to step up on his side of the ball before people get carried away.

gyldenlove
09-14-2009, 01:45 PM
Doom got pressure several times forcing bad throws. Solwik couldn't scheme pressure, secondary, or LB play.

Absertively.

Slowicks biggest problem was his very vanilla approach to defense, it probably works if you player for player have more talent than the opposition, but it exposes every weakness and flaw you have since it relies heavily on people winning 1 on 1 battles and often 1 on 2 battles since the offense gets to dictate which matchups it likes.

Dumervil looked good yesterday, he was aggressive at the line and on the Haggan sack he was a splitsecond after Haggan making sure that Palmer couldn't step up in the pocket to avoid the sack. I really like how he looks right now, he might just have found a home.

gyldenlove
09-14-2009, 01:49 PM
What!?!

Yesterday: the Broncos gave up 307 net yards of offense.
Last year vs Oakland: 307 net yards of offense.
Last year vs TB: 307 net yards of offense.

It's uncanny, but true.

And the Broncos literally had 3 sacks in all 3 games.
One turnover in each of the two last year as well.
All 14 pts given up vs. Oakland last year were in the 4th quarter after we were up 35 or so to nothing. Garbage prevent defense time.
Only 13 pts given up against TB.

You can't get any more comparable than that.

The only difference there is that Oakland had one of the worst offensive lines, an overweight and undertalented QB and their top WR had just gotten back from getting mugged in Vegas. Tampa Bay were without their top RBs (yup, more than one) and had Brian Griese at QB.

On the other hand Cincy had Palmer, Ochocinco and Laveranus Coles.

I think it is quite a bit more impressive to hold Cincinnati without significant injuries than it is to hold a frankly awful Oakland team or a Brian Griese led Tampa Bay offense without their best runningbacks.

lex
09-14-2009, 01:51 PM
The only difference there is that Oakland had one of the worst offensive lines, an overweight and undertalented QB and their top WR had just gotten back from getting mugged in Vegas. Tampa Bay were without their top RBs (yup, more than one) and had Brian Griese at QB.

On the other hand Cincy had Palmer, Ochocinco and Laveranus Coles.

I think it is quite a bit more impressive to hold Cincinnati without significant injuries than it is to hold a frankly awful Oakland team or a Brian Griese led Tampa Bay offense without their best runningbacks.

It doesnt really matter. Youre missing the larger point which was that its still early so guarded uptimism is in order. Thats more than fair. Theres a lot of season left.

rbackfactory80
09-14-2009, 02:00 PM
What!?!

Yesterday: the Broncos gave up 307 net yards of offense.
Last year vs Oakland: 307 net yards of offense.
Last year vs TB: 307 net yards of offense.

It's uncanny, but true.

And the Broncos literally had 3 sacks in all 3 games.
One turnover in each of the two last year as well.
All 14 pts given up vs. Oakland last year were in the 4th quarter after we were up 35 or so to nothing. Garbage prevent defense time.
Only 13 pts given up against TB.

You can't get any more comparable than that.

Sure you can, try comparing it to a team who has an offense.

Beantown Bronco
09-14-2009, 02:10 PM
I think it is quite a bit more impressive to hold Cincinnati without significant injuries than it is to hold a frankly awful Oakland team or a Brian Griese led Tampa Bay offense without their best runningbacks.

Sure you can, try comparing it to a team who has an offense.

Carson Palmer was not 100% yesterday and he hasn't had any real time with the #1 unit this preseason. It showed.

And, again for those in the cheap seats, that TB offense still ranked 14th in the entire league in offense that season despite all those injuries. This year's Cincy squad will NOT be any better than 14th or so in the league. Of this I am very confident.

It doesnt really matter. Youre missing the larger point which was that its still early so guarded uptimism is in order. Thats more than fair. Theres a lot of season left.

This.

gyldenlove
09-14-2009, 02:32 PM
Carson Palmer was not 100% yesterday and he hasn't had any real time with the #1 unit this preseason. It showed.

And, again for those in the cheap seats, that TB offense still ranked 14th in the entire league in offense that season despite all those injuries. This year's Cincy squad will NOT be any better than 14th or so in the league. Of this I am very confident.



This.

Tampa ranked 19 in points scored last year and their offense was so good that they fired BOTH QBs and the top RB who played in that game and drafted a new QB. Let us not pretend it was a powerhouse offense we played against in that game.

This years cincy offense will be better than 19th in points as long as Palmer, Chad Johnson, Coles and Benson remain healthy, that I am sure about.

BroncoMan4ever
09-14-2009, 02:33 PM
Is anyone else guardedly optimistic about the fact that we had 3 sacks coming from 3 different players, with none of them being Doom?

One of my gripes about Slowik is that I dont think he was very good at scheming pressure. I dont know why. Maybe it was not knowing his players or maybe it was not understanding the interplay in blocking and what one does on defense. Either way, it seems like Nolan is far more capable at scheming pressure. Time will tell though.

Nolan deserves a raise after the defensive performance yesterday. it hase been almost 3 years since our defense allowed 7 points in the 1st half of a game let alone the whole game. pressure was there and it was a damn good day for the defense. if our defense can keep up like this all year and when we get the offense firing we might be a scary team to play

listopencil
09-14-2009, 02:33 PM
It doesnt really matter. Youre missing the larger point which was that its still early so guarded uptimism is in order. Thats more than fair. Theres a lot of season left.

Sums it up nicely.

SonOfLe-loLang
09-14-2009, 02:35 PM
Carson Palmer was not 100% yesterday and he hasn't had any real time with the #1 unit this preseason. It showed.

And, again for those in the cheap seats, that TB offense still ranked 14th in the entire league in offense that season despite all those injuries. This year's Cincy squad will NOT be any better than 14th or so in the league. Of this I am very confident.



This.

Actually i thought Carson looked pretty sharp. They dropped some balls, but i thought he looked pretty good

Beantown Bronco
09-14-2009, 02:47 PM
Tampa ranked 19 in points scored last year and their offense was so good that they fired BOTH QBs and the top RB who played in that game and drafted a new QB. Let us not pretend it was a powerhouse offense we played against in that game.

Garcia specified "up and down the field" not scoring defense, which is why I went with the 14 in yardage statistic in my response.

This years cincy offense will be better than 19th in points as long as Palmer, Chad Johnson, Coles and Benson remain healthy, that I am sure about.

We'll see. 4 games against Pitt and Baltimore won't help them any.

Beantown Bronco
09-14-2009, 02:49 PM
it hase been almost 3 years since our defense allowed 7 points in the 1st half of a game let alone the whole game.

Looks like someone else missed week one (shutout into the 4th quarter) and week five (6 pts given up in the first 3.5 quarters of play) last year.

Rock Chalk
09-14-2009, 03:46 PM
What!?!

Yesterday: the Broncos gave up 307 net yards of offense.
Last year vs Oakland: 307 net yards of offense.
Last year vs TB: 307 net yards of offense.

It's uncanny, but true.

And the Broncos literally had 3 sacks in all 3 games.
One turnover in each of the two last year as well.
All 14 pts given up vs. Oakland last year were in the 4th quarter after we were up 35 or so to nothing. Garbage prevent defense time.
Only 13 pts given up against TB.

You can't get any more comparable than that.
Except we had 3 turnovers against Cincy :)

Sure, one came on the last play of the game but everyone discounts turnover's on downs. THAT IS STILL A TURNOVER.

ScottXray
09-14-2009, 03:52 PM
The sacks were encouraging, and the overall pressure was too.

Even when we didn't get too close to Plamer I noticed that the
rushers kept trying to. They never gave up, and that is totally different than
what would happen last year. Last year it was try for 3-4 seconds then fall down and stay there. This year they get back up if they fell and try to get to the QB again.

There is much more disciplined play out there now, both in the rush and at the point of attack.

PRBronco
09-14-2009, 03:55 PM
The sacks were encouraging, and the overall pressure was too.

Even when we didn't get too close to Plamer I noticed that the
rushers kept trying to. They never gave up, and that is totally different than
what would happen last year. Last year it was try for 3-4 seconds then fall down and stay there. This year they get back up if they fell and try to get to the QB again.

There is much more disciplined play out there now, both in the rush and at the point of attack.

Man, reading this post, and remembering last season caused this image to pop up in my head:

http://www.newmediaist.com/files/FarSide.jpg

The sign should say: "Slowick's School for Pass Rushers"

BroncoBuff
09-14-2009, 04:33 PM
I'll wait a couple weeks before I give out too much credit ... we should be able to go 3-0 with this momentum.

Popps
09-14-2009, 04:45 PM
Is anyone else guardedly optimistic about the fact that we had 3 sacks coming from 3 different players, with none of them being Doom?

.

Noticed that, too. Doom actually had a decent day. Nice plays against the run... but he's going to sometimes have trouble with mauler-type OL. I expect us to continue to work to get him an extra step. Maybe we line him up wider, etc.

This defense is going to feature guys coming from all directions. I love it.

I think Doom will get on track, though. I need to watch again, but I imagine he saw double-teams from time to time yesterday.

missingnumber7
09-14-2009, 05:15 PM
One stat missing that I heard earlier was that in the second half before the last drive we had held them to 1 First down.

I think Nolan did a great job of adjusting in the second half and identifying issues from the first half and fixing problems. One key one that they fixed from half to half was the OLB's stepping up in the hole. Force/Fill sucked in the first half second half alot more plays stretched out.

Gcver2ver3
09-14-2009, 05:22 PM
i enjoyed the 3 and outs...

it was a refreshing sight...i had forgotten what it looked like...

listopencil
09-14-2009, 06:55 PM
What gets me optimistic is that D and Special Teams looked good and our HC is young Offensive minded coach. The biggest weakness on our team is his strength. Fix it McD, and we are on an upswing.

Garcia Bronco
09-14-2009, 07:05 PM
What!?!

Yesterday: the Broncos gave up 307 net yards of offense.
Last year vs Oakland: 307 net yards of offense.
Last year vs TB: 307 net yards of offense.

It's uncanny, but true.

And the Broncos literally had 3 sacks in all 3 games.
One turnover in each of the two last year as well.
All 14 pts given up vs. Oakland last year were in the 4th quarter after we were up 35 or so to nothing. Garbage prevent defense time.
Only 13 pts given up against TB.

You can't get any more comparable than that.

What about the San Diego game? And special teams? What about New England? The Saints?

Beantown Bronco
09-14-2009, 07:14 PM
What about the San Diego game? And special teams? What about New England? The Saints?

Changing the entire argument now?

Not true. Last years defense was epically bad all yar and no game from last year will compare to Sunday Sep 13, 2009. Are you a slovik fan or something?

I am going to have to agree. Even though we won last year our defense got lit up in those games.

Popcorn Sutton
09-14-2009, 07:23 PM
I'll wait a couple weeks before I give out too much credit ... we should be able to go 3-0 with this momentum.

The preseason wasn't enough?

Careful, it's a trap. ROFL!

Popps
09-14-2009, 08:06 PM
Looks like someone else missed week one (shutout into the 4th quarter) and week five (6 pts given up in the first 3.5 quarters of play) last year.

Up for a wager, Beantown?

You think this year's defense won't be improved after what you saw yesterday?


Let's talk wager.

Haven't found a single taker yet. Lots of yapping, but no takers.

Interested?

Beantown Bronco
09-14-2009, 08:15 PM
You think this year's defense won't be improved after what you saw yesterday?

Read this closely. There's a key difference here.

Do I think they'll be improved? Yes.

But do I think they'll be improved based solely off what I saw yesterday, as you specify above? No. Not necessarily. It would take an idiot to make a conclusion about an entire season based off of week one. ESPECIALLY when, as I showed, their defense looked equally as dominant in week one last year.

orinjkrush
09-14-2009, 09:05 PM
Nolan did a fantastic job of mixing things up and bringing pressure from all different angles. Lets see what happens when teams get a couple games worth of tape on us.


But, so far so good.

agree. the proof will be if they can continue. but it was nice to see some real live kick-ass pressure.

Popps
09-14-2009, 11:33 PM
Read this closely. There's a key difference here.

Do I think they'll be improved? Yes.

But do I think they'll be improved based solely off what I saw yesterday, as you specify above? No. Not necessarily. It would take an idiot to make a conclusion about an entire season based off of week one. ESPECIALLY when, as I showed, their defense looked equally as dominant in week one last year.

My prediction of an improved defense came during the pre-season. Actually, before the pre-season.

You spent a lot of time attempting to make this defense appear to be the same as last year's. Now, you're saying you don't feel that way.

I'm not making judgments based on one game. I simply think we have better personnel/staff than last season.

Beantown Bronco
09-14-2009, 11:51 PM
My prediction of an improved defense came during the pre-season. Actually, before the pre-season. .

I know. Not like it's really going out on a limb. They'd have to be the worst defense in history to be worse.

You spent a lot of time attempting to make this defense appear to be the same as last year's. Now, you're saying you don't feel that way.

Simply correcting those who are stating that they haven't seen a defensive performance like yesterday in years. We saw similar performances twice last year.

Popps
09-15-2009, 12:02 AM
Simply correcting those who are stating that they haven't seen a defensive performance like yesterday in years. We saw similar performances twice last year.

No we didn't.



Week one, the Raiders scored more points on our D, despite a massive offensive output.

We went on from there to give up the most points in the league, if I recall.

Archer81
09-15-2009, 12:25 AM
2008 Broncos Yardage/Score by game

Wk 1 at Oak:
41-14 Den Win
Oak off: 330
Den off: 441

Wk 2 vs SD
39-38 Den win
SD off: 457
Den: 495

Wk 3 vs NO
34-32 Den Win
No off: 509
Den off: 369

Wk 4 at KC
33-19 KC Win
KC Off: 373
Den Off: 455

Wk 5 vs TB
16-13 Den win
TB off: 320
Den off: 333

Wk 6 vs Jax
24-17 Jax Win
Jax off: 431
Den off: 323

Wk 7 at NE
41-7 NE win
NE off: 442
Den off: 293

Wk 8: bye

wk 9 vs Mia
26-17 Mia win
Mia off: 356
Den off: 321

Wk 10 at Cle
34-30 Den win
Cleve off: 399
Den off: 570

Wk 11 at Atlanta
24-20 Den win
Atl off: 364
Den off: 340

Wk 12 vs Oak
31-10 Oak Win
Oak off: 318
Den off: 319

Wk 13 at NYJ
34-17 Den win
NYJ off: 389
Den off: 484

Wk 14 vs KC
24-17 Den win
KC off: 270
Den off: 425

Wk 15 at Car
30-10 Car win
Car off: 400
Den off: 293

Wk 16 vs Buf
30-23 Buf win
Buf off: 280
Den off: 540

Wk 17 at SD
52-21 SD Win
SD off: 496
Den off: 406

:Broncos:

Beantown Bronco
09-15-2009, 05:07 AM
No we didn't.



Week one, the Raiders scored more points on our D, despite a massive offensive output.

We went on from there to give up the most points in the league, if I recall.

Yes, we did. Read my analysis earlier in this thread.

Broncos_OTM
09-15-2009, 06:10 AM
I like that we blitzed Champ once or twice too, I think he is such a underrated blitzer simply for the fact that a lot of QBs won't even look in his direction.

i love champ but i just dont think thats true no more he is still great, but i dont think he is feared like he was.

lex do you know how many passes he faced. i think it was four or five.