PDA

View Full Version : Kiszla: Broncos might have to change offensive blueprint


Bronco Rob
11-02-2009, 01:47 AM
Kiszla: Broncos might have to change offensive blueprint


By Mark Kiszla
The Denver Post
Posted: 11/02/2009 01:00:00 AM MST



BALTIMORE It took the Broncos six games to earn the NFL's respect and one snap to be exposed.

From the first snap of this lopsided 30-7 loss to Baltimore, quarterback Kyle Orton ate turf, while the conservative game plan of coach Josh McDan- iels got fed to the shredder.

Perfection was gone in less than 60 seconds.

"Who said we'd go 16-0?" linebacker Andra Davis asked after the Broncos came undone Sunday.

Answer: nobody.

The league has been handed a formula to beat Denver, which had won six straight times with sound fundamentals unencumbered by anything resembling pizazz.

The big question now: Are the Broncos and McDaniels bold enough to do anything about it?

"It would be naive to think, 'Hey, we'll be all right.' We need a sense of urgency right now," said Broncos safety Renaldo Hill, fully aware the next team on the schedule is the defending world champion Steelers.

"Who's to say Pittsburgh won't take the same formula to try to beat us?"

If we have learned anything about the Broncos, we know they are well- coached, physical and disciplined.

It's all good . . . to a point.

We also have seen enough to realize if the playbook of McDaniels were any more conservative, it would read like a best seller from Glenn Beck.

The Broncos have made too much noise in the standings to continue to win by boring foes to death.

For the sixth time in seven games, Orton did not throw an interception. But, against the Ravens, he averaged 3.4 yards per pass attempt.

The Denver offense was dink, dunk and a cloud of dust.

"We put ourselves in some bad situations, long-yardage situations. That's not the way to beat this team. You can't get behind in down and distance," Broncos receiver Jabar Gaffney said.

On the road or against a stout defense, it is too difficult to make 10-play, 86-yard drives like the one that resulted in Denver's lone touchdown against Baltimore anything more than an aberration.

Although Orton stood in front of his locker and forthrightly said, "When it doesn't go right, it's on me," it would be far too easy to point a finger at the quarterback.

Blame McDaniels. It's the coach who needs to let his team evolve beyond old-fashioned, block-and-tackle philosophies that pay homage to all the classic football masters from George Halas to Vince Lombardi but don't always play smoothly at the high baud rates of 2009.

The Broncos have the basics down pat. But throw them off their game and make them play outside of their comfort zone, and they can look as frustrated as kids with plain vanilla ice cream melting at their feet.

The small charms of a brutally long 16-game NFL season can be found in how patterns emerge and even the most brilliant schemes are forced to adjust. There's now a book on the Broncos. They don't defeat themselves. But if they can't establish physical dominance, this is a team that can be revealed to be painfully short on imagination.

Against Baltimore, Knowshon Moreno rushed 10 times for 39 yards, and Brandon Marshall caught four passes for 24 yards. Those are not the stats of playmakers. It was as if Denver was more interested in trying to hypnotize linebacker Ray Lewis and the Ravens than attack the Baltimore defense. Who knew a 33-year-old coach would be so risk-averse?

Throw the Broncos for a loss, knock them off their down-and-distance rhythm, and they quickly get stuck in the same mire that eventually led to extinction of the power- sweep offenses roaming the the NFL during the 1960s. Maybe the lone fatal flaw in the way McDaniels likes to play is not the lack of a strong- armed quarterback who throws deep, but a relentless demand for fine motor-skill precision that is tough to replicate all season long unless your name is Tom Brady.

"I think anytime you have a game like this, it forces you to look in the mirror and really tell yourself where you're at individually and as a football team," McDaniels said.

A single loss does not doom Denver. Far from it. It's hard to envision a future without this team in the playoffs.

But the road to the Super Bowl never is a straight line, and right now the Broncos have mastered only one path to victory.

Is a Denver locker room full of football overachievers capable of learning more?


http://www.denverpost.com/premium/broncos/ci_13691543

The Joker
11-02-2009, 05:08 AM
We'll open the playbook up more as the season goes on and it becomes more apparent what the players can and can't do, I'm sure.

Didn't like the offensive gameplan much yesterday though, we should have taken more shots deep once it became obvious the Ravens were gonna be so aggressive in taking away the short stuff.

The premise of the article is pretty gammy though. "Boring" football, as it is described here, wins more championships than "pizazz". Always been the case and still is, even in today's pass happy NFL.

Colts are the only high powered, flashy offense to win a Superbowl since the turn of the century.

peacepipe
11-02-2009, 05:36 AM
We'll open the playbook up more as the season goes on and it becomes more apparent what the players can and can't do, I'm sure.

Didn't like the offensive gameplan much yesterday though, we should have taken more shots deep once it became obvious the Ravens were gonna be so aggressive in taking away the short stuff.

The premise of the article is pretty gammy though. "Boring" football, as it is described here, wins more championships than "pizazz". Always been the case and still is, even in today's pass happy NFL.

Colts are the only high powered, flashy offense to win a Superbowl since the turn of the century.

Didn't like our gameplan yesterday? It's been the same gameplan all season so far. Throw a short pass & hope marshall & co. can break it for a long run.

Colts
Steelers 2x
patriots. 3x

6 of the last 9 Superbowl winners had high-powered offenses.
Not including 2 more on the losing ends seattle & the rams.

baja
11-02-2009, 06:01 AM
Yesterday was the first game this season that I thought Cutler (Still don't want him here but I'd take Flacco in a NY minute) would have made a difference. Orton is going to have to find a way to beat the pressure with his arm or our winning ways are over.

Florida_Bronco
11-02-2009, 06:03 AM
Who the hell let this guy become a sportswriter?

mwill07
11-02-2009, 06:23 AM
Didn't like our gameplan yesterday? It's been the same gameplan all season so far. Throw a short pass & hope marshall & co. can break it for a long run.

Colts
Steelers 2x
patriots. 3x

6 of the last 9 Superbowl winners had high-powered offenses.
Not including 2 more on the losing ends seattle & the rams.

not true. Steelers and 2 out of three pats teams could hardly be considered "high powered".

2000 Ravens: O was ranked 14th in points, 16th in yards.
2001 Patriots: O was ranked 6th in scoring, 19th in yards.
2002 Buccs: O was ranked 18th in scoring, 24th in yards.
2003 Patriots: O was ranked 12th in scoring, 17th in yards.
2004 Patriots: O was ranked 4th in scoring, 7th in yards.
2005 Steelers:O was ranked 9th in scoring, 15th in yards.
2006 Colts: O was ranked 2nd in scoring, 3rd in yards.
2007 Giants: O wa ranked 14th in scoring, 16th in points
2008 Steelers:O was ranked 20th in scoring, 22nd in yards.

Of the past 9 SB champs, only the 2006 Colts and 2004 Patriots had offenses that could be considered top 5, no matter how you cut it.

Gort
11-02-2009, 06:23 AM
the sports department at the Denver Post is downright giddy this morning. probably high-fiving each other over the Broncos loss. now they get to write the kind of articles they haven't been able to write all year. what a bunch of dinks.

i said yesterday that the loss was 99% on the coaching staff. give them a week to respond and see if they make the changes needed to beat Pittsburgh. then, if they don't, the Denver Post writers can have a field day. but it's a bit premature to start jumping off the bandwagon.

gtown
11-02-2009, 06:26 AM
The Broncos were exposed? The book on beating the Broncos is getting up for a big game and winning the physical battles?

Seems to be the formula for beating any team.

barryr
11-02-2009, 06:31 AM
Seems the Broncos never play the Ravens well, so losing wasn't that big a surprise to me. Especially on the road and the Ravens playing to catch Cincy.

Oh, and I find this yards per pass attempt one of the more useless stats in football. if a guy throws two 50 yard passes and they are both incomplete, then throws a pass complete for 10 yards, it's considered he is basically throwing 3 yards per pass attempt. I worrry more about the yards per pass completion more important, if even that is important, for pass atttempts since it doesn't indicate truly the passes that were really thrown and attempted. A complete, bogus stat.

ant1999e
11-02-2009, 06:33 AM
Yesterday was the first game this season that I thought Cutler (Still don't want him here but I'd take Flacco in a NY minute) would have made a difference. Orton is going to have to find a way to beat the pressure with his arm or our winning ways are over.

I don't know. Orton was pressured all day. Cutler is known to throw a few int's when under pressure. I do agree we may have thrown a few more deep balls thus relieving some pressure.

baja
11-02-2009, 06:37 AM
Seems the Broncos never play the Ravens well, so losing wasn't that big a surprise to me. Especially on the road and the Ravens playing to catch Cincy.

Oh, and I find this yards per pass attempt one of the more useless stats in football. if a guy throws two 50 yard passes and they are both incomplete, then throws a pass complete for 10 yards, it's considered he is basically throwing 3 yards per pass attempt. I worrry more about the yards per pass completion more important, if even that is important, for pass atttempts since it doesn't indicate truly the passes that were really thrown and attempted. A complete, bogus stat.

LOL So true about that stat, would be the same if at the end of the season add up every teams total points scored and say the team with the most points is the best team.

go_broncos
11-02-2009, 07:11 AM
Yesterday was the first game this season that I thought Cutler (Still don't want him here but I'd take Flacco in a NY minute) would have made a difference. Orton is going to have to find a way to beat the pressure with his arm or our winning ways are over.

Baja..don't think about Cutler..

I believe it is the best thing to happen for our team.

We never know if we get Good or Bad Jay on Sunday's.

Though we might have won yesterday against BAL, we might have lost other games.

My only problem with our team is about offensive playcalling and punter.

Rohirrim
11-02-2009, 07:14 AM
I'm sure when Josh needs advise about football, he'll turn to Kizla.

baja
11-02-2009, 07:27 AM
Baja..don't think about Cutler..

I believe it is the best thing to happen for our team.

We never know if we get Good or Bad Jay on Sunday's.

Though we might have won yesterday against BAL, we might have lost other games.

My only problem with our team is about offensive playcalling and punter.

I see you joined in 06, do you read the Mane often?

go_broncos
11-02-2009, 07:39 AM
I see you joined in 06, do you read the Mane often?

Yes..I came to know about this site in 06.

I read most of the time and don't post often.

rastaman
11-02-2009, 07:48 AM
Well when you "Dink" and Dung on offense during practise....you will dink and dung offensively in the games. Question is, how much has McD worked on the deep ball during practice to where Orton and the WR's feel comfortable enough to make it a success on Sunday. The deep ball must be drilled and practised as a major part of the offensive game plan every Sunday.

loborugger
11-02-2009, 07:52 AM
I'm sure when Josh needs advise about football, he'll turn to Kizla.

LOL

Someone else already said it, but its worth repeating. Out physicaling a team is always a path to success.

BroncoInferno
11-02-2009, 07:54 AM
Well when you "Dink" and Dung on offense during practise....you will dink and dung offensively in the games. Question is, how much has McD worked on the deep ball during practice to where Orton and the WR's feel comfortable enough to make it a success on Sunday. The deep ball must be drilled and practised as a major part of the offensive game plan every Sunday.

The lack of the deep ball wasn't the problem yesteray. Orton barely had any time in the pocket. The run game sets up the deep passing, and we did not do that well enough or block the blitz well enough to give Orton even a chance with the deep ball.

mwill07
11-02-2009, 07:59 AM
I would have liked to see Broncos go max protect, keeping RB's and TE's in blocking to counter the blitz, and let Royal/Marshall get deep. Take a couple of shots like that, then start sneaking Scheffler/Graham out into the middle of the field.

Make this work, and the safeties will be out of the box. Once that happens, you can go to the screen game, and then the whole O works.

Without the deep threat, Reed/Polomau will be able to blow up any screen they see developing and this O will be stuck in the mud.

Rohirrim
11-02-2009, 08:00 AM
Well when you "Dink" and Dung on offense during practise....you will dink and dung offensively in the games. Question is, how much has McD worked on the deep ball during practice to where Orton and the WR's feel comfortable enough to make it a success on Sunday. The deep ball must be drilled and practised as a major part of the offensive game plan every Sunday.

Thank you, Sid Gillman.

OABB
11-02-2009, 08:08 AM
I don't understand how throwing deep is the answer to porous line play. Hell, EVen that Lispy Dbag dierdorf said coming out of the half" The broncos are going to have to go to quick passes".

It seems that alot of people that understand football agree with this assessment.

Or, I guess we could just hold on to the ball longer and than throw it really far.

Ambiguous
11-02-2009, 08:09 AM
I think he was somewhat right about the conservative play calling, but the biggest and most glaring problem was the offensive line. They looked totally out matched yesterday.

EDIT: Treed by orangeandblue

BlaK-Argentina
11-02-2009, 08:19 AM
The lack of the deep ball wasn't the problem yesteray. Orton barely had any time in the pocket. The run game sets up the deep passing, and we did not do that well enough or block the blitz well enough to give Orton even a chance with the deep ball.

Exactly. The only time we were able to pass deep was on the fake reverse. And that play resulted in a PI and probably a catch if Foxworth doesn't pull on Marshall's arm. They didn't give Orton time to throw and the WRs can't get open in a second. It's as simple as that. We were outplayed but this talk about the Broncos being "exposed" is really dumb. I expected it though.

We have problems, everyone does, I'm confident McD will work on them and we'll be an improved team come monday.

peacepipe
11-02-2009, 08:20 AM
I don't understand how throwing deep is the answer to porous line play. Hell, EVen that Lispy Dbag dierdorf said coming out of the half" The broncos are going to have to go to quick passes".

It seems that alot of people that understand football agree with this assessment.

Or, I guess we could just hold on to the ball longer and than throw it really far.How often were we going deep prior to this game,when were giving good protection to Orton? If defenses don't believe/respect that we can go deep,they'll just crowd everything in close & sit on routes. If you can stretch a defense it'll open up receivers in the for short throws.

Smiling Assassin27
11-02-2009, 08:23 AM
So let me get this straight. Fundamental football wasn't good enough to beat a team that beat us playing solid fundamental football? The Ravens just blocked, tackled, ran and passed better--no tricks, just simple downhill running, superior qb play, and defensive execution. Imagination doesn't win games--implementation of imagination can, however, which goes back to yes, fundamentals. Imaginative play calls require MORE fundamentals than normal--things like holding blocks longer, being more sure on tackles, and covering wr's for even longer. If you are getting beat soundly at these things already, 'imagination' only puts your team in more jeopardy, IMO.

Granted, there are some plays that could add a creative wrinke, like a halfback toss with an option to throw it, a no huddle, or even the wild horse look, but overall, this team just got beat by a better version of themselves, IMO.

baja
11-02-2009, 08:24 AM
How often were we going deep prior to this game,when were giving good protection to Orton? If defenses don't believe/respect that we can go deep,they'll just crowd everything in close & sit on routes. If you can stretch a defense it'll open up receivers in the for short throws.

This!

Congrats on a thousand posts peacepipe

Kaylore
11-02-2009, 08:26 AM
I'm sure when Josh needs advise about football, he'll turn to Kizla.

:thanku:

BossChief
11-02-2009, 08:27 AM
Yes..I came to know about this site in 06.

I read most of the time and don't post often.

whew!

BroncoInferno
11-02-2009, 08:28 AM
How often were we going deep prior to this game,when were giving good protection to Orton? If defenses don't believe/respect that we can go deep,they'll just crowd everything in close & sit on routes. If you can stretch a defense it'll open up receivers in the for short throws.

We didn't really need the deep passing game the first six games. When we did, it came through for us (versus Dallas). One reason we don't through deep much is because those are low percentage plays, no matter who is the QB. Most QBs are going to complete less than 50% of their passes when they throw it 25+ yards downfield. That said, we do need bigger plays from our offense in generally...noth passing and running.

SonOfLe-loLang
11-02-2009, 08:28 AM
HAHA THIS is the official meltdown thread. My god

orangeatheist
11-02-2009, 08:34 AM
Yesterday was the first game this season that I thought Cutler (Still don't want him here but I'd take Flacco in a NY minute) would have made a difference. Orton is going to have to find a way to beat the pressure with his arm or our winning ways are over.

If the Broncos still had Cutler, they wouldn't have been going into that game 6-0 and there would have been significantly more INTs as he tried to press the balls to his recievers as the game wore on.

BossChief
11-02-2009, 08:34 AM
How often were we going deep prior to this game,when were giving good protection to Orton? If defenses don't believe/respect that we can go deep,they'll just crowd everything in close & sit on routes. If you can stretch a defense it'll open up receivers in the for short throws.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/splits?playerId=8520

that will tell you everything you need to know about abour Orton

SonOfLe-loLang
11-02-2009, 08:39 AM
If the Broncos still had Cutler, they wouldn't have been going into that game 6-0 and there would have been significantly more INTs as he tried to press the balls to his recievers as the game wore on.

Seriously, sometimes you just get beat. The Ravens were ultra aggressive and got consistent pressure on Orton all day. Even look at the first play of the game which I believe was a 5 step drop where Orton scanned down the field only to have an unblocked blitzer clock him in the back.

As we all know, a good way to offset the aggressiveness is by using playaction and the screen game. Cept the Ravens were up to task on both of those. On top of that, they left us with a long field for the entire game, were very efficient on offense (zero mistakes) and ran the ball well in the 4th when the D was gassed.

I'm surprised that people like Kiszla (well maybe i shouldnt) are discussing blueprints on how to beat us. Its simple, we got beat on the offensive line and the Ravens played textbook D. Thats it. No secrets here. This will not happen every week. Calm the **** down.

BroncoInferno
11-02-2009, 08:40 AM
If the Broncos still had Cutler, they wouldn't have been going into that game 6-0 and there would have been significantly more INTs as he tried to press the balls to his recievers as the game wore on.

This is the sort of game where Cutler typically would toss up 2 or 3 picks. This notion that some people are trying to sell that Cutler was a guy who could bring you from multiple scores back is a joke. Most of the time, it was like what Chicago experienced versus Cincy. Cutler makes an already miserable day worse by turning it over multiple times. If Jay is QBing yesterday, we probably have a demoralizing 44-7 loss on our hands.

Bronco Warrior
11-02-2009, 08:40 AM
We got wooped in every phaze of the game.I understand the offense's ass whipping, but Nolan getting outschemed is shocking! We have very little in the way of D weakness but they seemed to find them every time it happened. We couldn't take advantage of any D shortcomings they had at all. Funny thing, same plan only Flacco had the arm to make us pay, Orton does not!

BroncoInferno
11-02-2009, 08:43 AM
We got wooped in every phaze of the game.I understand the offense's ass whipping, but Nolan getting outschemed is shocking! We have very little in the way of D weakness but they seemed to find them every time it happened. We couldn't take advantage of any D shortcomings they had at all. Funny thing, same plan only Flacco had the arm to make us pay, Orton does not!

No, dummy; Flacco's OL gave him time to throw, Orton's did not.

Bronco Warrior
11-02-2009, 08:45 AM
Cutler can roll out or run a bootleg, can throw a pass longer than 15 yards on the run, can run a QB sneak or run for a 12 yard first down. He has a downside but has 50 times the upside. Cutler is gone but we need a guy that can throw more than 20 yards and doesn't run like a schoolgirl in lead pumps. McD needs to see what he can get out of Orton or see what he can get out of Simms (Stronger arm, more mobile) or Brandstater who had all the tools in College including a cannon arm!

SonOfLe-loLang
11-02-2009, 08:46 AM
We got wooped in every phaze of the game.I understand the offense's ass whipping, but Nolan getting outschemed is shocking! We have very little in the way of D weakness but they seemed to find them every time it happened. We couldn't take advantage of any D shortcomings they had at all. Funny thing, same plan only Flacco had the arm to make us pay, Orton does not!

When giving up less than 300 yards and essentially 20 (and 7 of those late in the 4th whent he game was out of reach and the D gassed) pts by an offense thats playing really well is getting WOOPED, then I guess our D is pretty damn good. Not to mention, their average starting field position had to be in the high 30's. All in all, the D really wasn't bad at all. Flacco threw some accurate nice balls and evaded defenders in the pocket to buy time very well.

Relax and listen to Judas Priest or something

SonOfLe-loLang
11-02-2009, 08:48 AM
Cutler can roll out or run a bootleg, can throw a pass longer than 15 yards on the run, can run a QB sneak or run for a 12 yard first down. He has a downside but has 50 times the upside. Cutler is gone but we need a guy that can throw more than 20 yards and doesn't run like a schoolgirl in lead pumps. McD needs to see what he can get out of Orton or see what he can get out of Simms (Stronger arm, more mobile) or Brandstater who had all the tools in College including a cannon arm!

Your posts are becoming microcosms of why I think humans will destroy the planet.

fontaine
11-02-2009, 08:52 AM
What a crappy, poorly thought, and short sighted article. Up until the Ravens game the offense was making intermediate passes all the time.

The article would have made a point IF it said that McD operated a conservative game plan just for the Ravens game.

Wasn't it only two games ago when the Broncos shocked the Pats by running the wild horses offense? How conservative is that?

Every team has ups and downs in the passing game and Denver is no different. The key is going to be getting back to the passing game against New England/Dallas where they thrived not changing the offense.

Bronco Warrior
11-02-2009, 08:52 AM
No, dummy; Flacco's OL gave him time to throw, Orton's did not.

Rewatch the game, Orton had more time than you think, it just seemed like it because he is a statue and paniced alot and threw it away. We got more pressure on Flacco than you seem to remember too, it just seems longer because he is 6'6 and has a rocket arm and moves well when the pocket is going to hell. We missed several sacks by a knat's ass, nd Flacco made us pay! Definate sack only to get away and get it to Rice for a big gain prime example.

If Orton could run a boot or a roll out anything to change the launch point, it would have slowed that rush down and made the LBs and Safties play honest.

baja
11-02-2009, 08:55 AM
If the Broncos still had Cutler, they wouldn't have been going into that game 6-0 and there would have been significantly more INTs as he tried to press the balls to his recievers as the game wore on.

And if you believed in a power greater than yourself you would know more peace. ;D

Bronco Warrior
11-02-2009, 08:59 AM
The D did play great but you have to pick your Poison, cheat the safties up to stop Rice and you leave Goodman alone with no help and he gets burned for a TD that normall Dawkins is there, and was earlier, to break up. We had the same thing against Them but they knew that Orton couldn't beat them with it, and were willing to risk it till Orton game them a reason to change.

I love how many on this board resort to ridicule and name calling when they have no point actually about football.

Bronco Warrior
11-02-2009, 09:01 AM
Your posts are becoming microcosms of why I think humans will destroy the planet.

Nice attempt at pseudo intelligence, too bad it had nothing to do with the thread or anything at all for that matter! Bonus point for trying to sound cool though!

HEAV
11-02-2009, 09:09 AM
Kiz-la returns to hack-form...

HEAV
11-02-2009, 09:12 AM
The D did play great but you have to pick your Poison, cheat the safties up to stop Rice and you leave Goodman alone with no help and he gets burned for a TD that normall Dawkins is there, and was earlier, to break up. We had the same thing against Them but they knew that Orton couldn't beat them with it, and were willing to risk it till Orton game them a reason to change.

I love how many on this board resort to ridicule and name calling when they have no point actually about football.

On the touchdown to Mason both Hill and Dawkins were late or missed rolling over to help. They both where back ther in coverage, hill too k the under and Dawkins drifted more towards the left side and left Goodman out to dry.

SonOfLe-loLang
11-02-2009, 09:20 AM
Nice attempt at pseudo intelligence, too bad it had nothing to do with the thread or anything at all for that matter! Bonus point for trying to sound cool though!

First of all, never presume to know my intelligence level. Secondly, my point was that your posts have been classic cases of over-reaction and surface level thought. You took one tiny sample size and created some sort of abstract truth about Orton's abilities without taking account of ALL OF THE VARIABLES that go along with a football loss. Your assumptions are asinine and are akin to digging your own grave with stupid thought.

SonOfLe-loLang
11-02-2009, 09:21 AM
On the touchdown to Mason both Hill and Dawkins were late or missed rolling over to help. They both where back ther in coverage, hill too k the under and Dawkins drifted more towards the left side and left Goodman out to dry.

not to mention Goodman had good coverage and it was a great throw by Flacco. Bronco Warrior is just creating a mountain out of a mole hill. He needs drama in his life.

BroncoMan4ever
11-02-2009, 09:21 AM
Yesterday was the first game this season that I thought Cutler (Still don't want him here but I'd take Flacco in a NY minute) would have made a difference. Orton is going to have to find a way to beat the pressure with his arm or our winning ways are over.

i disagree. Orton did not have a good game, the entire team had a ****ty game, but i can just envision Cutler if he were still here, tossing 4 INTs and giving Baltimore even shorter fields and make the 30-7 loss look good in comparison to the loss we would have suffered with him under Center.

there DL just flat out beat up our OL, especially the interior. That is the weakness of this offense, LG and C, neither are big or strong enough to hold up in a power blocking scheme. I can't blame Orton for the loss or how inept the offense looked, early in the game McDaniels was calling for short underneath passes and those weren't working, in the 2nd half he started trying to get us to go downfield more with the ball, but Orton did not have enough time to allow those routes to materialize and was forced into dump off passes, throwing it away or taking a sack.

Also, we did not run enough early in the game, we did not establish the running game, even though it was working decently. this was just a poorly game planned game, which was not helped by the OL not being able to hold up against a much bigger defense.

too much is being made of Orton not being able to throw a ball through a brick wall, and that the offensive scheme needs to be changed. none of that is the problem, Denver just got outplayed by a team that came out with the mindset that the playoffs have begun for them and they showed it and punched Denver in the mouth from the 1st snap.

Bronco Warrior
11-02-2009, 09:22 AM
On the touchdown to Mason both Hill and Dawkins were late or missed rolling over to help. They both where back ther in coverage, hill too k the under and Dawkins drifted more towards the left side and left Goodman out to dry.

Exactly, They were both looking in the backfield and short and but the time they realized it was too late. That is not like our Safties, and I think it was because they were trying to help with the short and run stuff IMO.

BroncoMan4ever
11-02-2009, 09:27 AM
The D did play great but you have to pick your Poison, cheat the safties up to stop Rice and you leave Goodman alone with no help and he gets burned for a TD that normall Dawkins is there, and was earlier, to break up. We had the same thing against Them but they knew that Orton couldn't beat them with it, and were willing to risk it till Orton game them a reason to change.

I love how many on this board resort to ridicule and name calling when they have no point actually about football.

that is such bull****. the only reason Orton could not exploit those matchups is that he didn't have time to let those routes by the receivers come together. for the majority of the day, he had maybe 3 seconds to receive the snap, drop back find his receiver and get rid of the ball. there is no chance that a deeper route can materialize that quickly when Orton is being harrased by Baltimore's DL. that is why there were so many dump off passes and passes just thrown away. he took what was available when he had the time to make a positive play, or he threw the ball away when he had enough time and space from the DL to get rid of the ball or he took the sack.

baja
11-02-2009, 09:29 AM
The D did play great but you have to pick your Poison, cheat the safties up to stop Rice and you leave Goodman alone with no help and he gets burned for a TD that normall Dawkins is there, and was earlier, to break up. We had the same thing against Them but they knew that Orton couldn't beat them with it, and were willing to risk it till Orton game them a reason to change.

I love how many on this board resort to ridicule and name calling when they have no point actually about football.

I guess we could make up grandiose stories about ourselves instead.

baja
11-02-2009, 09:32 AM
Bronco Warrior - I love how many on this board resort to ridicule and name calling when they have no point actually about football.


Nice attempt at pseudo intelligence, too bad it had nothing to do with the thread or anything at all for that matter! Bonus point for trying to sound cool though!

Like this you mean?

Popps
11-02-2009, 09:34 AM
not true. Steelers and 2 out of three pats teams could hardly be considered "high powered".

2000 Ravens: O was ranked 14th in points, 16th in yards.
2001 Patriots: O was ranked 6th in scoring, 19th in yards.
2002 Buccs: O was ranked 18th in scoring, 24th in yards.
2003 Patriots: O was ranked 12th in scoring, 17th in yards.
2004 Patriots: O was ranked 4th in scoring, 7th in yards.
2005 Steelers:O was ranked 9th in scoring, 15th in yards.
2006 Colts: O was ranked 2nd in scoring, 3rd in yards.
2007 Giants: O wa ranked 14th in scoring, 16th in points
2008 Steelers:O was ranked 20th in scoring, 22nd in yards.

Of the past 9 SB champs, only the 2006 Colts and 2004 Patriots had offenses that could be considered top 5, no matter how you cut it.


A few of us have been trying to educate people to that fact around here for years.

People simply don't understand anything but offensive yardage numbers. Anything else is just too abstract for them to get their heads around.

****ing Baltimore came out and played lights-out defense all day. That's how you win games. That's how games are won in Dec/Jan.

We played good defense, they played great defense. We made a big mistake on special teams... they made none. They ran the ball fairly well, we did not.

This isn't rocket science.

When Kyle Orton hands the ball to a running back and there are 4 Ravens meeting him in the backfield, things aren't going to go well from there. 2nd and long, 3rd and long... against a great defense, and you're ****ed.

This isn't a "game plan" thing, it's an execution thing.

As I said yesterday, Baltimore executed the game-plan that we are attempting to employ. Hopefully we'll learn from it and continue to improve our team. But, this isn't "exposure" and isn't cause for a philosophy shift. Quite the opposite. We just saw a prime example of how our style of football dominates games when executed properly.

Rigs11
11-02-2009, 09:34 AM
Yesterday was the first game this season that I thought Cutler (Still don't want him here but I'd take Flacco in a NY minute) would have made a difference. Orton is going to have to find a way to beat the pressure with his arm or our winning ways are over.
Orton didn't even have time to plant his feet.Even Manning would have lost with that kind of shoddy protection.

Bronco Warrior
11-02-2009, 09:36 AM
First of all, never presume to know my intelligence level. Secondly, my point was that your posts have been classic cases of over-reaction and surface level thought. You took one tiny sample size and created some sort of abstract truth about Orton's abilities without taking account of ALL OF THE VARIABLES that go along with a football loss. Your assumptions are asinine and are akin to digging your own grave with stupid thought.

LMAO!!!! Atleast this post you backed up you inability to assess the written word or my approach to the game, with comprehensive and dedicated dribble!
Orton has always been Orton, slow footed and weak armed. McD's coaching had helped hide that for much of the year, but it was always the finger, or the glove or some excuse people made for it. He was the same in Chicago and Purdue, and just because we won games inspite of him, not because of him, people though that all just magically went away. To his credit he has been an efficient Game manager, not much upside but no big mistakes, but not a game WINNER. That doesn't work when a guy like Orton gets knocked around and the rest of the team isn't plauying well enough to pick up the slack. Orton's Wins have been more a product of great D, Luck and others who have made monster plays.

I'm not claiming we really suck all of a sudden or that the shy is falling, but we did get beat, and good. Orton needs stop be able to learn a bootleg and magically learn to throw a ball more than 20 yards without all day in the pocket to do it and then hit more than 1 in a season. Without YAC, Orton has completed 1 pass from his hand to a receiver more than 25 yards down feild! Baltimore was the first eam t be able to make us pay for that.

HEAV
11-02-2009, 09:36 AM
Exactly, They were both looking in the backfield and short and but the time they realized it was too late. That is not like our Safties, and I think it was because they were trying to help with the short and run stuff IMO.

Watch the play again ass-hat.

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/XzT0NLUKOV4&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/XzT0NLUKOV4&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>


The Ravens where in shot gun, no playaction and the RB dropped into the flat. Hill had under/middle while Dawkins hung on the leftside far too long. Flacco made a great throw.

But continue with you ass-hat-ness.

baja
11-02-2009, 09:38 AM
i disagree. Orton did not have a good game, the entire team had a ****ty game, but i can just envision Cutler if he were still here, tossing 4 INTs and giving Baltimore even shorter fields and make the 30-7 loss look good in comparison to the loss we would have suffered with him under Center.

there DL just flat out beat up our OL, especially the interior. That is the weakness of this offense, LG and C, neither are big or strong enough to hold up in a power blocking scheme. I can't blame Orton for the loss or how inept the offense looked, early in the game McDaniels was calling for short underneath passes and those weren't working, in the 2nd half he started trying to get us to go downfield more with the ball, but Orton did not have enough time to allow those routes to materialize and was forced into dump off passes, throwing it away or taking a sack.

Also, we did not run enough early in the game, we did not establish the running game, even though it was working decently. this was just a poorly game planned game, which was not helped by the OL not being able to hold up against a much bigger defense.

too much is being made of Orton not being able to throw a ball through a brick wall, and that the offensive scheme needs to be changed. none of that is the problem, Denver just got outplayed by a team that came out with the mindset that the playoffs have begun for them and they showed it and punched Denver in the mouth from the 1st snap.

We are not talking about arm strength here but mobility. A more mobile QB like Cutler (So very glad he is gone) would have been an asset yesterday. Like I said yesterday was the first game that I thought Cutler would have been an improvement over Orton. This is basically a complement for Orton.

HEAV
11-02-2009, 09:39 AM
If there is any cornerback you really want to bitch about it's Jack Williams.

baja
11-02-2009, 09:40 AM
Orton didn't even have time to plant his feet.Even Manning would have lost with that kind of shoddy protection.

Manning no but jake plummer would have.

What I'm saying is Bmore game planned for the lack of mobility of Orton

SonOfLe-loLang
11-02-2009, 09:41 AM
LMAO!!!! Atleast this post you backed up you inability to assess the written word or my approach to the game, with comprehensive and dedicated dribble!
Orton has always been Orton, slow footed and weak armed. McD's coaching had helped hide that for much of the year, but it was always the finger, or the glove or some excuse people made for it. He was the same in Chicago and Purdue, and just because we won games inspite of him, not because of him, people though that all just magically went away. To his credit he has been an efficient Game manager, not much upside but no big mistakes, but not a game WINNER. That doesn't work when a guy like Orton gets knocked around and the rest of the team isn't plauying well enough to pick up the slack. Orton's Wins have been more a product of great D, Luck and others who have made monster plays.

I'm not claiming we really suck all of a sudden or that the shy is falling, but we did get beat, and good. Orton needs stop be able to learn a bootleg and magically learn to throw a ball more than 20 yards without all day in the pocket to do it and then hit more than 1 in a season. Without YAC, Orton has completed 1 pass from his hand to a receiver more than 25 yards down feild! Baltimore was the first eam t be able to make us pay for that.

Seriously, nothing raises my blood pressure like idiots like yourself questioning my intelligence while blatantly ignoring your own earlier posts. HE'S 27-13 OVER HIS ****ING CAREER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Seriously, youre not even worth my time. And I know you'll sit here and laugh, thinking you are right, completely ignoring the irony of the situation. You're a ****ing moron and too stupid to even realize it.

Bronco Warrior
11-02-2009, 09:41 AM
Like this you mean?

What name did I call him? Is pointing out his attacks and the fact that it had nothing to do with the thread ridicule? Funny you buddies can attack guys like e and that's fine but if someone calls them on it or fire back then you jump in and talk shick. Find a post where I said "Boy you are a moron and your posts are the reason the earth will be destroyed" or anything like it in response to a football opinion and you will have a point. Good luck!
what you will find is a direct counter point opinion or a different take that isn't disrespectful or attacking...unless it hurts your feelbads to be disagreed with.

Bronco Warrior
11-02-2009, 09:45 AM
Seriously, nothing raises my blood pressure like idiots like yourself questioning my intelligence while blatantly ignoring your own earlier posts. HE'S 27-13 OVER HIS ****ING CAREER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Seriously, youre not even worth my time. And I know you'll sit here and laugh, thinking you are right, completely ignoring the irony of the situation. You're a ****ing moron and too stupid to even realize it.

What in my football posts question you intelligence? Or was it the response to your mindless attacks that so enraged you? Tell me where I attacked you intelligence before you called me an idiot and told me my posts are proof that man will destroy the planet? Do you feel so insecure that an opinion about football and the Broncos, that you don't agree with threatens your status among the great minds of the world?

baja
11-02-2009, 09:48 AM
What name did I call him? Is pointing out his attacks and the fact that it had nothing to do with the thread ridicule? Funny you buddies can attack guys like e and that's fine but if someone calls them on it or fire back then you jump in and talk shick. Find a post where I said "Boy you are a moron and your posts are the reason the earth will be destroyed" or anything like it in response to a football opinion and you will have a point. Good luck!
what you will find is a direct counter point opinion or a different take that isn't disrespectful or attacking...unless it hurts your feelbads to be disagreed with.

We get new posters here all the time but few have gotten the board wide reception that you have managed. Do you wonder why?

From what I read you have been run off at least two other boards are you going for the trifecta?

Bronco Warrior
11-02-2009, 09:52 AM
Because I don't drink the board koolaid? Because I don't just sit back and say whatever? Because I don't get my football knowledge from espn and Madden games? Pick onE My personal favorite is because I don't feel the need to jump on stupid things like typos and make fun of people for things that have nothing to do with the Broncos and the game of football or namecall when I have nothing better to say!

SonOfLe-loLang
11-02-2009, 10:00 AM
What in my football posts question you intelligence? Or was it the response to your mindless attacks that so enraged you? Tell me where I attacked you intelligence before you called me an idiot and told me my posts are proof that man will destroy the planet? Do you feel so insecure that an opinion about football and the Broncos, that you don't agree with threatens your status among the great minds of the world?

You called my quote psuedo intelligent. Did you forget that? Who cares, it doesn't matter. I'm just in a poor mood

Bronco Warrior
11-02-2009, 10:05 AM
You called my quote psuedo intelligent. Did you forget that? Who cares, it doesn't matter. I'm just in a poor mood

You attacked me first, but that isn't an excuse for antagonizing the situation. It just gets old being ttacked for things that have nothing to do with football. For the Pseudo intelligence thing I apologize. Have a better day!:sunshine:

baja
11-02-2009, 10:09 AM
Because I don't drink the board koolaid? Because I don't just sit back and say whatever? Because I don't get my football knowledge from espn and Madden games? Pick onE My personal favorite is because I don't feel the need to jump on stupid things like typos and make fun of people for things that have nothing to do with the Broncos and the game of football or namecall when I have nothing better to say!

Well you are learning I see you have come to understand what a typo is as vs a "type 0 ".

I'm A+ BTW.

Eldorado
11-02-2009, 10:13 AM
Is this the fat girlfriend guy, or the mormon rocker who was mentored by metallica?

I forgot.

baja
11-02-2009, 10:14 AM
No this is the guy that showed Bill Walsh the West Coast offense.

underrated29
11-02-2009, 10:16 AM
You guys all need to go the last page of the man, the myth the bronco warrior page right now.

EPIC!

trust me.

underrated29
11-02-2009, 10:17 AM
In BW defense though, Kyle is not doing anything to help keep the safties from stacking the box. Although, playcalling and protection also factor in to that.

Eldorado
11-02-2009, 10:17 AM
No this is the guy that showed Bill Walsh the West Coast offense.

Goodness. Must be a formidable intellect. You guys better be careful.

HEAV
11-02-2009, 10:20 AM
You guys all need to go the last page of the man, the myth the bronco warrior page right now.

EPIC!

trust me.

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=86087&page=11

Bronco Warrior
11-02-2009, 10:27 AM
No this is the guy that showed Bill Walsh the West Coast offense.

No but played for and grew up watching the guy who did ;)

Never let the facts stand in any of you haters way!

EDIT: Wait practicing as a red shirt transfer doesn't actually count as playing for right? My Bad!

Eldorado
11-02-2009, 10:29 AM
No but played for and grew up watching the guy who did ;)

Never let the facts stand in any othe r you haters way!

I think this guy is actually a troll from the Indian subcontinent.

HEAV
11-02-2009, 10:37 AM
Watch the play again ass-hat.

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/XzT0NLUKOV4&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/XzT0NLUKOV4&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>


The Ravens where in shot gun, no playaction and the RB dropped into the flat. Hill had under/middle while Dawkins hung on the leftside far too long. Flacco made a great throw.

But continue with you ass-hat-ness.


Still waiting for a response BW...:welcome:

baja
11-02-2009, 10:50 AM
I think this guy is actually a troll from the Indian subcontinent.

Now that you mention it he does have that "help desk" accent doesn't he.

Eldorado
11-02-2009, 10:52 AM
Now that you mention it he does have that "help desk" accent doesn't he.

Right? Next he'll be soliciting TJ for his 'start-up' IT company. Hell, it might have already happened.

Cito Pelon
11-02-2009, 11:13 AM
Orton really does have to complete more long passes. Downfield strikes have to be part of the repertoire.

Bronco Warrior
11-02-2009, 11:18 AM
Still waiting for a response BW...:welcome:

What do you want me to say? That since it was shotgun they couldn't run out of it? That there is no way that the safties froze and didn't get back to help? If it makes you feel better tell yourself that all day but having played DB I know it for what it was. They made a choice to hesitate and react first to short and underneath and that hesitation left Goodman alone without the help he needed and had gotten earlier in the game. Also it was a great throw by Flacco. My original point was that Flacco made us pay for not giving over the top help, and Orton couldn't, and gameplanning didn't even ask him to try more than the one time, and that once was a weak pass to Marshall that they had all day to get to and break up!

Bronco Warrior
11-02-2009, 11:21 AM
Orton really does have to complete more long passes. Downfield strikes have to be part of the repertoire.

Amen! But outside of cloning him a stronger arm and some footspeed what are the chances of that happening? That's the only real problem, oh and Berger sucking ass and light interior linemen that could be fixed if we went back to more Zone blocking.

BroncoMan4ever
11-02-2009, 11:22 AM
We are not talking about arm strength here but mobility. A more mobile QB like Cutler (So very glad he is gone) would have been an asset yesterday. Like I said yesterday was the first game that I thought Cutler would have been an improvement over Orton. This is basically a complement for Orton.

i agree that the mobility is a real asset, but the way Baltimore was coming at Orton from all sides, i don't think even if he had Plummer type mobility that he does any better. Baltimore had defenders coming from everywhere on just about every pass play. it was just coming up the middle that if we had a mobile QB he could just side step and get away to buy more time. It seemed no matter where Orton would slide in the pocket there was another DL right in his face.

i agree, and know well that you are not a Cutler nut swinger, i just don't think any QB looks good in Orton's place yesterday, that defense performed incredibly, and just owned our offense all game long.

Bronco Warrior
11-02-2009, 11:28 AM
i agree that the mobility is a real asset, but the way Baltimore was coming at Orton from all sides, i don't think even if he had Plummer type mobility that he does any better. Baltimore had defenders coming from everywhere on just about every pass play. it was just coming up the middle that if we had a mobile QB he could just side step and get away to buy more time. It seemed no matter where Orton would slide in the pocket there was another DL right in his face.

i agree, and know well that you are not a Cutler nut swinger, i just don't think any QB looks good in Orton's place yesterday, that defense performed incredibly, and just owned our offense all game long.

A good defense sold out to exploit Orton's weaknesses, and we did nothing to make them play honest, no misdirection no play action, no bootlegs, no nothing. A Cutler or Plummer makes them pay with mobility and the ability to get the ball downfield against single coverage and can get it there before the D closes.

BroncoMan4ever
11-02-2009, 11:32 AM
Orton really does have to complete more long passes. Downfield strikes have to be part of the repertoire.

the downfield strikes aren't there because that isn't McDaniels scheme. it has nothing to do with arm strength, because Orton's arm strength is comparable to guys like Brady, Rivers, and Warner all of whom can throw a good deep ball. McDaniels scheme just doesn't have a lot of deep passes, his scheme is predicated on hitting receivers in open spaces and getting YAC, not loading up and launching a ball 50+ yards down the field.

and with NE where he coached the offense, the deep ball was put in because that is Moss' biggest strength, and he isn't strong at going across the middle of the field and turning short passes into big gains. and we don't have a Randy Moss on the roster, so those deep passes aren't there because we don't have the type of receiver necessary to do those types of deep pass plays.

BroncoMan4ever
11-02-2009, 11:37 AM
A good defense sold out to exploit Orton's weaknesses, and we did nothing to make them play honest, no misdirection no play action, no bootlegs, no nothing. A Cutler or Plummer makes them pay with mobility and the ability to get the ball downfield against single coverage and can get it there before the D closes.

QB play wasn't the negating factor in the loss. we didn't establish the run, so even if we had a mobile QB in the Cutler or Plummer mold, play action and misdirection don't work if the defense won't bite on the run.

too much blame is being tossed at the feet of Orton, when the play calling that did nothing to get the running game going had Baltimore cheating up and blitzing the hell out of Orton all day deserves mention as reason for the loss, the fact that the interior of our OL was a swinging gate for the Ravens D is a big reason we lost, because without enough protection to get a pass off, it doesn't matter who is being snapped the ball, also the RBs being very ****ty at pass protection was a problem.

i'm not saying Orton had a good game or that it isn't his fault, because he like the rest of the team played like ****, and blame is on his shoulders as well as everyone else, i am just saying all the blame can't be placed at the feet of Orton, simply because he doesn't have Cutler's arm and legs.

anon
11-02-2009, 11:51 AM
Is it me or do any of you guys feel that our run game was more effective when we were a straight ZBS team? Hopefully it is just a personnel/learning issue.

Soul-Bronco
11-02-2009, 12:03 PM
Amen! But outside of cloning him a stronger arm and some footspeed what are the chances of that happening? That's the only real problem, oh and Berger sucking ass and light interior linemen that could be fixed if we went back to more Zone blocking.

you really are dense. check the highlights of orton in chicago. HE CAN THROW DEEP. if you took the time to listen to post game interviews instead of loving to hear yourself talk, you would know that they were dropping safeties deep all game long. orton is not jay baby cutler who would of thrown at least a pick vs Bmore. If its not open its not open

Bronco Warrior
11-02-2009, 03:53 PM
Sheffler was open alot deep and no attempts, and Marshall was single covered half the game and some times not at all once he got 20 yrds deep. Safties were making hits on the run and screens all game, proves we weren't fooling anybody, and that suggests that except on 3rd and forever (Which we had alot) they weren't deep, unless Reed can teleport himself from a deep half to the Line of Scrimmage and light up Moreno before he had time to gather the ball and turn to brace for the hit, or he might be the fastest man alive who knows!

It falls on the coaches either way! They know what they have in Orton and you can watch film all the way back to first year at Puirdue and not see Orton throw a strike over 30 yards.... let alone a 60 yarder off his back foot on the run across the feild like a Cutler Farve or Elway did routinely.
The coaches aren't under the delusion that Orton has a strong arm so it is ultimately up to McD and McCoy to gameplan and call a game so that doesn't hurt us!

We have won a few games despite Orton's Weaknesses (And watch any game but the Dallas and NE and you will see it) why is everybody an ass if they would like a guy that can win one even if the team isn't carrying him? Ask Royal when the last time he had a catch of a ball that he didn't have to come back a mile and dive for to get!

rastaman
11-02-2009, 04:52 PM
Is it me or do any of you guys feel that our run game was more effective when we were a straight ZBS team? Hopefully it is just a personnel/learning issue.

Don't doubt yourself. Go with your hunch. Not only is the zone blocking schemes missing from last year, but not utilizing a JUMBO-POWER package consisting of Lamont Jordon and Peyton Hillis is also a major reason why the offense has problems converting third and short to sustain drives and give the Defense a rest. Our lack of running game finally got up with us against the Ravens. Our non ability to sustain drives by converting 3rd downs resulted in way too many 3 downs and punt. Thus putting the defense back on the field. By the middle of 3rd QTR and all the 4th qtr....the Bronco defense was worn down.

Bronco Warrior
11-02-2009, 05:01 PM
Ddid anybody else see Hillis get blown up on an attempted fB kick out block? It made me cry! Something is wrong in Hillisville!

elsid13
11-02-2009, 05:03 PM
the downfield strikes aren't there because that isn't McDaniels scheme. it has nothing to do with arm strength, because Orton's arm strength is comparable to guys like Brady, Rivers, and Warner all of whom can throw a good deep ball. McDaniels scheme just doesn't have a lot of deep passes, his scheme is predicated on hitting receivers in open spaces and getting YAC, not loading up and launching a ball 50+ yards down the field.

and with NE where he coached the offense, the deep ball was put in because that is Moss' biggest strength, and he isn't strong at going across the middle of the field and turning short passes into big gains. and we don't have a Randy Moss on the roster, so those deep passes aren't there because we don't have the type of receiver necessary to do those types of deep pass plays.

Even before Moss showed up NE would take shots down the field. This system like every other ball control offense needs take two to three attempt down the field to keep the safeties honest and back in cover 2 look. Right now Orton is more likely to take the underneath pass then attempt the long incomplete, even when that incomplete might be better for the offense in the long run.

With the 3 WR looks that McDaniels is running he has options in all the zones for Orton go to dependent on what the defense does.

Bronco Warrior
11-02-2009, 05:11 PM
Even before Moss showed up NE would take shots down the field. This system like every other ball control offense needs take two to three attempt down the field to keep the safeties honest back into cover 2 look. Right now Orton is more likely to take the underneath pass then attempt the long incomplete, even when that incomplete might be better for the offense in the long run.

With the 3 WR looks that McDaniels is running he has options in all the zones for Orton go to dependent on what the defense does.

Yeah what you said! So there! :P

Circle Orange
11-02-2009, 10:01 PM
Who the hell let this guy become a sportswriter?

He's quite talented. He reads other people's opinions and then copies them in his articles. :clown:

Popps
11-02-2009, 10:22 PM
Again, how is Orton supposed to "take shots" downfield when he's getting body-slammed to the turf.

How many "open shots" do you think he had? Better yet, just watch the game again.. then report back and tell me how many times he had a man open or in single coverage.

Beyond that, we've taken our shots down the field the past couple of games. We could hardly get a snap into his hands before he was mauled, yesterday.

Do you guys think McDaniels just looked at what was going on and thought, "you know... there are guys wide open down field but I'm not going to call plays to get them the ball?"

We weren't chucking it downfield because **** wasn't there. Beyond that, you don't go flipping the ball up into traffic just to make a point when playing a team like the Ravens. As you saw, give them a 7 point lead and it's like giving most teams a 21 point lead. Points aren't easy to come by when they're playing like that.

We could have "aired it out" 10 times yesterday, and the likely result would have been more turnovers and more 3 and outs. Wouldn't have meant jack ****.

You know what would have fixed yesterday? 4 yards rushing on first down. That's all we needed. No Madden, fantasy football ****. Just 4 yards a carry on first down. Instead, our RBs were getting the ****ing Milachi Crunch 2 yards behind the line of scrimmage.

NFLBRONCO
11-02-2009, 10:53 PM
We need BM Royal and Stokes to play big as well. They all played scared. I'm no Orton fan either but, he needs guys to help.

HEAV
11-02-2009, 10:55 PM
We need BM Royal and Stokes to play big as well. They all played scared. I'm no Orton fan either but, he needs guys to help.

Royal has been on a milk carton most of the season so far. "Have you seen this Bronco WR?"

ZONA
11-02-2009, 11:15 PM
The Broncos were exposed? The book on beating the Broncos is getting up for a big game and winning the physical battles?

Seems to be the formula for beating any team.

I always laugh when I hear that crap about the blueprints on how to beat a team just because they lost a game. Teams have different coaching styles and different players who no doubt have different strengths and weaknesses. As if most teams that get a loss don't get a win sometime down the road after that. Well hey, how the hell did they win, there was a blueprint out there on how to beat them............lol. That kind of statement says MORON like no other.

BroncoMan4ever
11-02-2009, 11:27 PM
Even before Moss showed up NE would take shots down the field. This system like every other ball control offense needs take two to three attempt down the field to keep the safeties honest and back in cover 2 look. Right now Orton is more likely to take the underneath pass then attempt the long incomplete, even when that incomplete might be better for the offense in the long run.

With the 3 WR looks that McDaniels is running he has options in all the zones for Orton go to dependent on what the defense does.

prior to Moss arrival in NE, McDaniels had not yet taken over as OC, it wasn't his scheme that was taking shots down the field.

also, too many are saying we didn't go deep on sunday because orton can't make the throws, which is crap, he can make the throws if he has the time to allow routes to develop, and get rid of the ball, which he didn't have in Baltimore

BroncoMan4ever
11-02-2009, 11:31 PM
Again, how is Orton supposed to "take shots" downfield when he's getting body-slammed to the turf.

How many "open shots" do you think he had? Better yet, just watch the game again.. then report back and tell me how many times he had a man open or in single coverage.

Beyond that, we've taken our shots down the field the past couple of games. We could hardly get a snap into his hands before he was mauled, yesterday.

Do you guys think McDaniels just looked at what was going on and thought, "you know... there are guys wide open down field but I'm not going to call plays to get them the ball?"

We weren't chucking it downfield because **** wasn't there. Beyond that, you don't go flipping the ball up into traffic just to make a point when playing a team like the Ravens. As you saw, give them a 7 point lead and it's like giving most teams a 21 point lead. Points aren't easy to come by when they're playing like that.

We could have "aired it out" 10 times yesterday, and the likely result would have been more turnovers and more 3 and outs. Wouldn't have meant jack ****.

You know what would have fixed yesterday? 4 yards rushing on first down. That's all we needed. No Madden, fantasy football ****. Just 4 yards a carry on first down. Instead, our RBs were getting the ****ing Milachi Crunch 2 yards behind the line of scrimmage.

thank god, another person who sees that Orton didn't have the necessary time or protection to get a downfield pass off. it had nothing to do with arm strength or ****ty play calling, it was Baltimore's defense raping our OL and pounding Orton through the turf all day long. he can't be expected to air it out if almost as soon as he takes the snap, there were defenders in his grill.

Taco John
11-02-2009, 11:42 PM
Again, how is Orton supposed to "take shots" downfield when he's getting body-slammed to the turf.


Direct quote from Taco John in 2001-2002. Just replace Orton with Griese.

But I agree with Popps.

Orton doesn't make mistakes. He's probably the most efficient quarterback in the league when he's getting protection and his teammates are playing team football.

BUT - and this is a big one - hit him early and often and the guy doesn't make the confident throws that we all know that he's capable of.

The good news for us is that not everyone has a defensive line like Baltimore has. The bad news is the playoffs is where you're likely to find teams like that.

We got beat by a playoff team last weekend. It looked bad. We're going to face another one this weekend. This next Monday Night under the hot lights, we'll get to see how our team responds. I think they're going to respond with a chip on their shoulder.

Popps
11-03-2009, 01:39 AM
Taco,

Griese would have lofted 3 balls into coverage for INTs, and been sacked 5 times and fumbled at least twice on Sunday. I'm not sure why you're reviving your losing Griese argument these days, but Griese is no Orton. Not on his best day.

Orton does the little things, Griese couldn't get out of his own way.

As I've said before, you're the same guy who told us Griese was the same guy as Tom Brady.

It's more than arm strength, Taco. Griese had horrible intangibles, bad leadership skills and routinely made terrible plays at crucial times.

You didn't see Orton make a single mistake yesterday, despite being pummeled all day long.


The two are nothing alike, outside of neither having "rocket arms." The comparison ends after that.

Orton=Winner.

Griese=Loser.

UberBroncoMan
11-03-2009, 01:47 AM
We'll open the playbook up more as the season goes on and it becomes more apparent what the players can and can't do, I'm sure.

Didn't like the offensive gameplan much yesterday though, we should have taken more shots deep once it became obvious the Ravens were gonna be so aggressive in taking away the short stuff.

The premise of the article is pretty gammy though. "Boring" football, as it is described here, wins more championships than "pizazz". Always been the case and still is, even in today's pass happy NFL.

Colts are the only high powered, flashy offense to win a Superbowl since the turn of the century.

Rams on January 30th 2000... MUAHAHA!!!

UberBroncoMan
11-03-2009, 01:52 AM
Taco,

Griese would have lofted 3 balls into coverage for INTs, and been sacked 5 times and fumbled at least twice on Sunday. I'm not sure why you're reviving your losing Griese argument these days, but Griese is no Orton. Not on his best day.

Orton does the little things, Griese couldn't get out of his own way.

As I've said before, you're the same guy who told us Griese was the same guy as Tom Brady.

It's more than arm strength, Taco. Griese had horrible intangibles, bad leadership skills and routinely made terrible plays at crucial times.

You didn't see Orton make a single mistake yesterday, despite being pummeled all day long.


The two are nothing alike, outside of neither having "rocket arms." The comparison ends after that.

Orton=Winner.

Griese=Loser.

You need to be fair here. Orton had 3 picks DROPPED by the Ravens in the game. 2 of which were a guaranteed 6 points. We're lucky we only gave up 30 points. Yeah he's better than Griese because of the leadership etc, but Orton had a horrid game to go with our bland and predictable play calling.

elsid13
11-03-2009, 01:57 AM
prior to Moss arrival in NE, McDaniels had not yet taken over as OC, it wasn't his scheme that was taking shots down the field.

also, too many are saying we didn't go deep on sunday because orton can't make the throws, which is crap, he can make the throws if he has the time to allow routes to develop, and get rid of the ball, which he didn't have in Baltimore

McDaniels has added his wrinkles to the scheme but at it heart it similar to what Charlie Weis ran during to his years at OC. The goals of the system remain intact - possession football by either running the ball or short passing game. But even ball control offense, you need to throw the ball deep once and awhile to keep the defense honest.

Taco John
11-03-2009, 02:18 AM
Taco,

Griese would have lofted 3 balls into coverage for INTs, and been sacked 5 times and fumbled at least twice on Sunday. I'm not sure why you're reviving your losing Griese argument these days, but Griese is no Orton. Not on his best day.

The reason I'm reviving the "losing" Griese arguments is because you're making the same ones for Orton - and I happen to agree with them. I understand that everybody forgot about how excited the fanbase was for the Griese that went to the pro bowl. I certainly know you have. But there was a reason that even you were on the Griese bandwagon at one time.

I think Orton is a more natural leader than Griese (I think the death of Griese's mother affected him socially to some degree). But as far as physicality goes, they're practically clones. If Orton takes the same pounding that Griese took week after week, he'll end up where Griese is: hated by the fans and the media and on the sideline.

I don't think that's going to be the case though. We're not going to face the Ravens every week. I think we'll continue to see an efficient Kyle Orton who makes few mistakes, but who will have a tendancy to be pedestrian. He's not our home run hitter. The guys around him are supposed to be the home run hitters. Kyle is just supposed to get the ball in their hands.

rastaman
11-03-2009, 04:04 AM
thank god, another person who sees that Orton didn't have the necessary time or protection to get a downfield pass off. it had nothing to do with arm strength or ****ty play calling, it was Baltimore's defense raping our OL and pounding Orton through the turf all day long. he can't be expected to air it out if almost as soon as he takes the snap, there were defenders in his grill.

Orton didn't have time to pass b/c the offensive game plan last Sunday had no max protection sets with leaving both HB & FB in to give Orton extra protection! This would have given Orton more time in the Pocket.

Another thought, to improve Denver's running consistency McD needs to add more lead full back blocking schemes for Moreno or Buckhalter. Both Moreno and Buckhalter are running from a single RB set.

Mediator12
11-03-2009, 06:13 AM
Kiszla is a smart Writer, he knows how to stir up controversy. After that though, he has about zero football knowledge ;D

The truth is, BAL simply outplayed DEN by executing much better than DEN did in almost every phase of the game. Playcalling is completely dependent on the execution of your players. No scheme can cover up poor execution. So, Calling out the gameplanning means very little if your players can not execute it in the first place.

It happens, to every team in the NFL. The difference is can you win a close game without your A game, can you play better the next week against another top team, and can you come back better after the loss.

I find this article very funny because this team changes the blueprint every week anyway! The people who are still arguing what is real or what is your perception crack me up and just prove you watch the game with emotional biased eyes looking for what you want to see and then cherry pick examples to prove it. Get over it! Watch the football and stop letting your emotions dictate your analysis. We will all feel better after you do it!

snowspot66
11-03-2009, 08:02 AM
You need to be fair here. Orton had 3 picks DROPPED by the Ravens in the game. 2 of which were a guaranteed 6 points. We're lucky we only gave up 30 points. Yeah he's better than Griese because of the leadership etc, but Orton had a horrid game to go with our bland and predictable play calling.

Picks were dropped. But you have to also realize none of those dropped picks were horrible double or triple coverage picks. There was one defender for each and they all missed. That's how you get lucky. They just played better than us that day. As long as Orton continues to throw where at most only one defender would even have a chance we'll see very good things from him.

BroncoInferno
11-03-2009, 08:13 AM
You need to be fair here. Orton had 3 picks DROPPED by the Ravens in the game. 2 of which were a guaranteed 6 points. We're lucky we only gave up 30 points. Yeah he's better than Griese because of the leadership etc, but Orton had a horrid game to go with our bland and predictable play calling.

Dropped picks don't count, bud. There are one or two passes per game from any QB that theoretically "should" have been a pick. But they aren't. They don't count. You'd have to add about 10 picks to every QBs season total if they did. Cutler's INT numbers would be astronomical. DBs and LBs play on defense and not at WR or TE for good reason...bad hands.

Bronco Warrior
11-03-2009, 08:54 AM
Dropped picks don't count, bud. There are one or two passes per game from any QB that theoretically "should" have been a pick. But they aren't. They don't count. You'd have to add about 10 picks to every QBs season total if they did. Cutler's INT numbers would be astronomical. DBs and LBs play on defense and not at WR or TE for good reason...bad hands.

I think they are just saying just because other teams haven't made us pay more for bad passes doesn't mean they are being made by the QB. As a former DB that could and did play Wide out, Orton's passes are kinda like trying to hit a knuckle bal or a breaking ball. It throws your timing off when that ball doesn't zip in there like you are used too. Part of the reason guys like Marshall took a while to get used to Orton's ball.

Popps
11-03-2009, 09:19 AM
I understand that everybody forgot about how excited the fanbase was for the Griese that went to the pro bowl.

Dude, Travis Henry had some nice games as a Bronco, too. We were all excited about him early-on. Then, reality set in.

The majority of Griese's tenure as a Bronco was unproductive due to his lack of instincts, leadership and intangibles.

The guys around him are supposed to be the home run hitters. Kyle is just supposed to get the ball in their hands.

Wrong.

Again, watch the 3rd down conversion throw by Orton to Royal against New England with 8:00 left to go in the game. You'll see the very distinct difference between Orton and Griese.

QBs need to get the ball in play-makers' hands... but sometimes that takes some work, instincts and football intelligence. (Ability to know what you're seeing, elude a rush, etc.)

I'm not even saying Orton is the guy, but to compare Griese to Orton is just silly.

Yes, Elway needed guys around him. Doesn't mean Cutler is as good as Elway because he also needs guys around him. Cutler sucks, Elway was a legend.

Orton seems to have winning intangibles and Griese did not, regardless of who is around them.

jhns
11-03-2009, 09:27 AM
, regardless of who is around them.

Yes, the old argument of a single player winning a team sport. Are you guys serious with this stuff? Just wondering.

Popps
11-03-2009, 09:31 AM
Yes, the old argument of a single player winning a team sport. Are you guys serious with this stuff? Just wondering.

If you believe that's what I'm saying, you're either not reading properly or very ignorant.

I'm the biggest proponent of a complete team concept you'll find around here.

However, if we start Pee Wee Herman at QB, we're going to have different results than if we start Drew Brees.

Get it?

Orton is better than Griese. Drew Brees is better than Orton. Pee Wee Herman isn't as good as any of them... REGARDLESS of who is around him.

Understand?

YES, we absolutely need a complete team. NO, Brian Griese wouldn't have been as good as Orton at handling that offense, nor would Pee Wee Herman.




I hope that makes it all easier for you to understand. It really shouldn't be that hard.

jhns
11-03-2009, 09:36 AM
If you believe that's what I'm saying, you're either not reading properly or very ignorant.

I'm the biggest proponent of a complete team concept you'll find around here.

However, if we start Pee Wee Herman at QB, we're going to have different results than if we start Drew Brees.

Get it?

Orton is better than Griese. Drew Brees is better than Orton. Pee Wee Herman isn't as good as any of them... REGARDLESS of who is around him.

Understand?

YES, we absolutely need a complete team. NO, Brian Griese wouldn't have been as good as Orton at handling that offense, nor would Pee Wee Herman.




I hope that makes it all easier for you to understand. It really shouldn't be that hard.

That is obviously what you just said in my quote....

Anyways, A very large percentage of QBs in this league would have a winning record on this team. I'm not sure what you are trying to say about Orton.