PDA

View Full Version : Once upon a time we had an Offense...


Bronco Yoda
12-22-2009, 09:45 PM
Or did we? Opinions will differ greatly on this one...

But then it happened...

...McD had a beautiful dream. Pink hearts, blue diamands, red hearts kind of stuff here.

A solution to fix all problems concerning the Offense. The plan could not fail. It was so simple yet pure genius.

It was almost like a movie .... yet real somehow.

Almost manafest destiny-like in it's breadth and scope. This would be our plan. THE PLAN!

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Z3csfLkMJT4&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Z3csfLkMJT4&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

Inkana7
12-22-2009, 11:40 PM
http://images.starcraftmazter.net/4chan/for_forums/cool_story_bro.jpg

watermock
12-23-2009, 12:00 AM
Sgt. McBeavis sets Pvt. Hillis straight:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/gQVmfYBzlgk&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/gQVmfYBzlgk&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

ZONA
12-23-2009, 12:02 AM
okay, I read your post and I still don't know what point you are trying to make. That we all might have a different opinion on if we had a good offense last year? And so the point would be...........????

Archer81
12-23-2009, 12:12 AM
Last time we had an offense that put up over 400 points in a season Brian Griese was our QB. Since 2006 we've been beyond average. Odd trend.


:Broncos:

watermock
12-23-2009, 12:47 AM
Actually we were 2nd in yards.

Our lack of anything resembling a running back made us ask Cutler to force plays.

We havent had a good OL since 2000 before last year.

GTFO. Our line isn't as bad as our playcalling, it's obvious.

tsiguy96
12-23-2009, 01:31 AM
Actually we were 2nd in yards.

Our lack of anything resembling a running back made us ask Cutler to force plays.

We havent had a good OL since 2000 before last year.

GTFO. Our line isn't as bad as our playcalling, it's obvious.

we averaged 4.5ypc on the ground, that was like 2nd in the NFL. and dont tell me it was because cutler stretched the field, if taht was true chicago would have SOMETHING that resembles a running game this year. they dont. we were a dominant rushing team that stopped running the damn ball for no reason other than to let cutler air it out.

watermock
12-23-2009, 01:45 AM
Sorry,you make no sense.

You want to kow the truth?

The NFL has been a pussy league since 2000.

It sucks even in HDTV, in fact, worse.

BTW, moron, we ran becaus it's called football.

Don't bring up Chicago, there are teams that will dominate in the playoffs, id the refs will let them.

The NFL is almost becoming lame.

tsiguy96
12-23-2009, 01:56 AM
Sorry,you make no sense.

You want to kow the truth?

The NFL has been a p***Y league since 2000.

It sucks even in HDTV, in fact, worse.

BTW, moron, we ran becaus it's called football.

Don't bring up Chicago, there are teams that will dominate in the playoffs, id the refs will let them.

The NFL is almost becoming lame.

not gonna lie mock, i dont know what the hell you are talking about.

watermock
12-23-2009, 02:02 AM
The NF has been neutered,

HDTV makes the game better at home.

The passing game is dominant now because it's more exciting for the ignorant.

I'm sorry.

Bronco Yoda
12-23-2009, 06:02 AM
Last time we had an offense that put up over 400 points in a season Brian Griese was our QB. Since 2006 we've been beyond average. Odd trend.


:Broncos:

We had an Offense last year. We just didn't have a good redzone.

We could insert just about anyone to gain yards on the ground when needed... until the body count on RB's went past the point of absurd.

Gort
12-23-2009, 06:06 AM
okay, I read your post and I still don't know what point you are trying to make. That we all might have a different opinion on if we had a good offense last year? And so the point would be...........????

maybe his point is that we all have a different opinion about what his point may be?

Crushaholic
12-23-2009, 09:22 AM
During the first half of the season (when we were winning), Orton was able to spread the ball out to several different receivers. Now, for whatever reason, we're trying to force the ball to Marshall, Marshall, and...oh, yeah, Marshall. A team can't win if only one person is making plays on offense...

DrFate
12-23-2009, 09:47 AM
Although I fully expect the 'fan police' to descend on this thread like a swarm of locusts... I'll proceed anyway.

This team has taken a big step back this year on the offensive side of the ball. You add a top 15 pick (Moreno), you add a vet (Buckhalter), you trade a bunch of picks for Quinn (still scratching my head on that one). You trade the 'team cancer' for a 'winner' under center.

And now - less than we had before. Look at poor Eddie Royal - he's looking at less than half his rookie season production. You can't screen pass your way up and down the field in this league. The red zone issues continue. The short yardage issues continue. The 'only real stat' (aka - wins) is going to look a LOT like 2008. The result (aka - playoffs) is going to look a lot like 2008. The real difference is that rather than looking at what looks like an offense on the rise (young skill players, getting better), you feel like you are a looking at an offense on the decline.

Blame Orton. Blame the play calling. Blame whomever you want. In the end - the guy in the hoodie gets the love/hate for the outcome.

tsiguy96
12-23-2009, 09:51 AM
Although I fully expect the 'fan police' to descend on this thread like a swarm of locusts... I'll proceed anyway.

This team has taken a big step back this year on the offensive side of the ball. You add a top 15 pick (Moreno), you add a vet (Buckhalter), you trade a bunch of picks for Quinn (still scratching my head on that one). You trade the 'team cancer' for a 'winner' under center.

And now - less than we had before. Look at poor Eddie Royal - he's looking at less than half his rookie season production. You can't screen pass your way up and down the field in this league. The red zone issues continue. The short yardage issues continue. The 'only real stat' (aka - wins) is going to look a LOT like 2008. The result (aka - playoffs) is going to look a lot like 2008. The real difference is that rather than looking at what looks like an offense on the rise (young skill players, getting better), you feel like you are a looking at an offense on the decline.

Blame Orton. Blame the play calling. Blame whomever you want. In the end - the guy in the hoodie gets the love/hate for the outcome.

we didnt trade a bunch of picks for quinn, we basically broke even. we traded 2 3's for a 4 and 2.

jsco70
12-23-2009, 09:56 AM
Instead of looking at an offense on the decline, I believe it is an offense in transition. I suggest everyone enjoy the fact the team is probably going to make the playoffs during this transition, which is something hardly anyone in TC believed possible.

Furthermore, I suggest we judge the offense next year, or even the year after, once McD has a chance to bring in the players to match his system. He'll also have a year under his belt in regard to play calling, clock mgmt, etc.

watermock
12-23-2009, 09:58 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vD1_GikiTMU.

Archer81
12-23-2009, 09:59 AM
We had an Offense last year. We just didn't have a good redzone.

We could insert just about anyone to gain yards on the ground when needed... until the body count on RB's went past the point of absurd.


We also had issues on 3rd and short and turned the ball over 30 times. What difference does it make if you move the ball fine between the 20s but dont score any points?


:Broncos:

DrFate
12-23-2009, 10:05 AM
Instead of looking at an offense on the decline, I believe it is an offense in transition.

Isn't transition merely a euphemism for decline?

DrFate
12-23-2009, 10:13 AM
I mean seriously - 2008 ended. Another late season collapse, another off season of questions - but I felt the offense was IMPROVING. (the defense was awful)

2009 is ending - another late season collapse, another off season of questions. Do you really feel the offense is on the up-swing? (I think the D is better)

(and yes the season isn't over, but I can't see us beating Philly)

This team isn't really all that different from last season. When it NEEDS to win - it doesn't. Oakland 09 isn't that different from the Buffalo game of 08.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/teams/schedule?team=den

http://espn.go.com/nfl/teams/schedule?team=den&year=2008

lex
12-23-2009, 10:20 AM
Instead of looking at an offense on the decline, I believe it is an offense in transition. I suggest everyone enjoy the fact the team is probably going to make the playoffs during this transition, which is something hardly anyone in TC believed possible.

Furthermore, I suggest we judge the offense next year, or even the year after, once McD has a chance to bring in the players to match his system. He'll also have a year under his belt in regard to play calling, clock mgmt, etc.

No. Theyre accountable this year, especially if they dont make the playoffs because of the transition.

lex
12-23-2009, 10:21 AM
We also had issues on 3rd and short and turned the ball over 30 times. What difference does it make if you move the ball fine between the 20s but dont score any points?


:Broncos:

The more you move the ball, the more opportunities you have to score. Duh.

Archer81
12-23-2009, 10:23 AM
The more you move the ball, the more opportunities you have to score. Duh.


Yet we didnt score. Odd.


:Broncos:

tsiguy96
12-23-2009, 10:32 AM
(and yes the season isn't over, but I can't see us beating Philly)


im sure you saw 4-12 as the magic number for this year too. are you forgetting this team has beat some great teams, and held it tight with the BEST team in the NFL?

and how you linked the words transition and decline is beynod me, the offense isnt producing obviously but they are in the first year of a complex system, so calling it a failure and giving up is clearly pretty dumb.

this doom and gloom **** is getting old, again.

lex
12-23-2009, 10:39 AM
Yet we didnt score. Odd.


:Broncos:

You asked about the value in moving the ball. Duh.

Relative to what we're doing now? At least last year you can tangibly point to injuries to RBs. There are no excuses this year.

jhns
12-23-2009, 10:45 AM
Yet we didnt score. Odd.


:Broncos:

I don't get people trying to discredit last years offense. It shows you don't have much of a point when everyone falls back on a team stat and acts like it is an offensive thing.
This team had its worst ever defense last year. This team had a crap special teams unit last year. The offense of rookie-third year players carried the franchises worst ever defense to 8 wins. Just taking out defensive and special teams TDs, this team was 11th in scoring. Add 2 more FGs(our kicker missed a lot, I know that is the offenses fault) and we were 9th. That was with the 32nd ranked starting field position. I could go on all day with stats that say you guys have no clue what you are talking about.


Anyways, all stats aside, can anyone try explaining how our offense was anything other than great when we won 8 games with our worst ever defense and tons of injuries? I don't understand the logic being used.

2KBack
12-23-2009, 10:45 AM
I mean seriously - 2008 ended. Another late season collapse, another off season of questions - but I felt the offense was IMPROVING. (the defense was awful)

2009 is ending - another late season collapse, another off season of questions. Do you really feel the offense is on the up-swing? (I think the D is better)

(and yes the season isn't over, but I can't see us beating Philly)

This team isn't really all that different from last season. When it NEEDS to win - it doesn't. Oakland 09 isn't that different from the Buffalo game of 08.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/teams/schedule?team=den

http://espn.go.com/nfl/teams/schedule?team=den&year=2008

Odd that you felt that the offense was on the upswing last season, when it was far worse in the second half than the first.

I suppose the Oak game is similar to the Buffalo game. Except that it is the freakin Raiders, and no matter how bad they are, they have an annoying tendency to play spoiler to Denver A LOT. The Raiders are scrappy this year, they have beaten the Bengals, The Steelers, The Eagles, and Denver.

Tombstone RJ
12-23-2009, 10:52 AM
The NF has been neutered,

HDTV makes the game better at home.

The passing game is dominant now because it's more exciting for the ignorant.

I'm sorry.

I'm well versed in gibberish. Let me translate this post for others who can't understand Mock:

I'm completely off topic,

I watch games on HDTV.

The NFL is castrating the running game because it's been pussified.

I'm Mock, and I'm looney, sorry if you don't understand me.

Archer81
12-23-2009, 10:58 AM
I don't get people trying to discredit last years offense. It shows you don't have much of a point when everyone falls back on a team stat and acts like it is an offensive thing.
This team had its worst ever defense last year. This team had a crap special teams unit last year. The offense of rookie-third year players carried the franchises worst ever defense to 8 wins. Just taking out defensive and special teams TDs, this team was 11th in scoring. Add 2 more FGs(our kicker missed a lot, I know that is the offenses fault) and we were 9th. That was with the 32nd ranked starting field position. I could go on all day with stats that say you guys have no clue what you are talking about.


Anyways, all stats aside, can anyone try explaining how our offense was anything other than great when we won 8 games with our worst ever defense and tons of injuries? I don't understand the logic being used.


We were 16th in scoring, not 11th. Our offense turned the ball over too often, especially in the redzone. A third of the 370 points we scored last year came in the first 3 weeks of the season. Painting last year's offense as anything other than average is being purposely blinded.

:Broncos:

HEAV
12-23-2009, 11:02 AM
Once upon a time we had an Offense... and a defense that gave up just as many points...

Not to mention a spoiled brat at QB that now leads the NFL in interceptions throwns.

It's about the overall TEAM. Not just a great O or dominating D or even a great SP. It's about balance and you need solid play at all three to be a contending team.

jhns
12-23-2009, 11:02 AM
We were 16th in scoring, not 11th. Our offense turned the ball over too often, especially in the redzone. A third of the 370 points we scored last year came in the first 3 weeks of the season. Painting last year's offense as anything other than average is being purposely blinded.

:Broncos:

16th is a team stat. That includes defensive and special teams scores. That is not what the offense did.

So again. How did this team win half its games with its worst ever defense, bad special teams, and an "average" offense? I am not understanding how this works.

Just because you hate Cutler doesn't mean you have to hate on what this offense did last year. It was a lot more than Cutler doing work out there. if it makes you feel better, just tell yourself Shanny can make bad players look good.

Tombstone RJ
12-23-2009, 11:04 AM
Sorry,you make no sense.

You want to kow the truth?

The NFL has been a p***Y league since 2000.

It sucks even in HDTV, in fact, worse.

BTW, moron, we ran becaus it's called football.

Don't bring up Chicago, there are teams that will dominate in the playoffs, id the refs will let them.

The NFL is almost becoming lame.

More gibberish translation:

Sorry, I don't understand you.

I will now go completely looney, wanna keep reading?

The NFL changed in the year 2000 because it was the year 2000.

I watch the NFL on HDTV, but I do not like the NFL.

I will now insult you and pretend to know football.

I will now string together two completely unrelated things: Chicago and teams that will make the playoffs, oh, and refs.

I do not like the NFL.

Taco John
12-23-2009, 11:06 AM
I can't lie. I share the concern about the offense. We've taken monumental strides backwards here. Our offenseive line has gone from "Joe Blow could break 2k yards in that system" to "how can anyone expect one of the highest drafted runningbacks in Broncos last 20 years to break off even 1k in this system?"

Scheffler has gone from looking like a top 5 TE prospect, to being invisible. Eddie Royal has gone from looking like the poor man's Reggie Wayne to looking like Wayne's World. Stokely might as well be Casper the invisible receiver. We seem to have regressed at just about every position on offense.

People seemed to be confused about what we were doing the first six weeks of the season, and this team took advantage of that with some nice wins. But the league seems to have caught on.

With that said, at the very least it doesn't seem like the defense has given up. They have struggled, but they always seem to pull it together enough to give the offense a chance back into games. That's promising.

Archer81
12-23-2009, 11:16 AM
16th is a team stat. That includes defensive and special teams scores. That is not what the offense did.

So again. How did this team win half its games with its worst ever defense, bad special teams, and an "average" offense? I am not understanding how this works.


Last year we did not have a kickoff or punt return for a TD, and only had 2 defensive scores all season. So 23.1-.875 (14 points divided by 16 games from the defensive scores) You end up with an average of 22.2 pts a game, which would rank Denver 20th in ppg scored. Yup. That screams awesome offense, doesnt it.

:Broncos:

jhns
12-23-2009, 11:19 AM
Last year we did not have a kickoff or punt return for a TD, and only had 2 defensive scores all season. So 23.1-.875 (14 points divided by 16 games from the defensive scores) You end up with an average of 22.2 pts a game, which would rank Denver 20th in ppg scored. Yup. That screams awesome offense, doesnt it.

:Broncos:

Is this post serious?

Archer81
12-23-2009, 11:23 AM
Is this post serious?


You stated the premise, I proved you wrong. Sorry about it.


:Broncos:

jhns
12-23-2009, 11:27 AM
You stated the premise, I proved you wrong. Sorry about it.


:Broncos:

Well, I don't claim to have a good sarcasm meter when reading stuff online, so I will just go with it.

If you take out our defensive and special teams scores, like you should, you then also have to take them out for other teams.

2KBack
12-23-2009, 11:31 AM
I can't lie. I share the concern about the offense. We've taken monumental strides backwards here. Our offenseive line has gone from "Joe Blow could break 2k yards in that system" to "how can anyone expect one of the highest drafted runningbacks in Broncos last 20 years to break off even 1k in this system?"

Scheffler has gone from looking like a top 5 TE prospect, to being invisible. Eddie Royal has gone from looking like the poor man's Reggie Wayne to looking like Wayne's World. Stokely might as well be Casper the invisible receiver. We seem to have regressed at just about every position on offense.

Do you honestly think that the insane number of passes thrown last year has nothing to do with the difference in production? Although the production isn't as regressed as you make it sound really. The TE's this year are about 20 catches behind with 2 games to go, the RB's will probably have more yards on the ground and through the air than last year at this pace. Scheffler only has 10 fewer catches this season than last and still has two more games to play, invisible my ass. Marshall will likely match or surpass most of his numbers. The big difference is that Denver will have passed the ball more than 100 times less this season, in an effort to become more balanced. Royal has regressed in his new role, and Stokely has been too much of an afterthought, but overall the regression is nowhere near as bad as you make it sound. It's actually about what you would expect given the transition.

Archer81
12-23-2009, 11:33 AM
Well, I don't claim to have a good sarcasm meter when reading stuff online, so I will just go with it.

If you take out our defensive and special teams scores, like you should, you then also have to take them out for other teams.


You are saying our offense was great because it had to overcome a horrible defense and special teams. Clearly you believe having a 2nd ranked offense in yards a game = great. I agree it is if the ppg average is in the top 5 as well. Denver was 16th. That is right in the middle. Average.


:Broncos:

Beantown Bronco
12-23-2009, 11:37 AM
So again. How did this team win half its games with its worst ever defense, bad special teams, and an "average" offense? I am not understanding how this works.

Creampuff schedule for one.

jhns
12-23-2009, 11:37 AM
You are saying our offense was great because it had to overcome a horrible defense and special teams. Clearly you believe having a 2nd ranked offense in yards a game = great. I agree it is if the ppg average is in the top 5 as well. Denver was 16th. That is right in the middle. Average.


:Broncos:

Your only defense is that the offense was average due to a team stat. Way to come with no argument at all. I get it, you guys have no ability to be rationale.

WolfpackGuy
12-23-2009, 12:18 PM
<a href="http://tinyurl.com/y8dqxqx" target="_blank">
<img src="http://tinyurl.com/y8dqxqx" width=450></a>

Raw scoring data from 2008.

Highlighted teams are the playoff teams.

The bold line represents above or below league average.

Hopefully, this doesn't blow the wigs off the "16th ranked offense" crowd.

Archer81
12-23-2009, 12:26 PM
Your only defense is that the offense was average due to a team stat. Way to come with no argument at all. I get it, you guys have no ability to be rationale.

The defense and special teams had nearly nothing to do with how many points the Broncos scored last season. The offense moved the ball and didnt score alot of points. Thats an average offense. Spin it any way you like but thats a fact.


:Broncos:

jhns
12-23-2009, 12:38 PM
The defense and special teams had nearly nothing to do with how many points the Broncos scored last season.

Exactly my point.

Taco John
12-23-2009, 01:06 PM
Do you honestly think that the insane number of passes thrown last year has nothing to do with the difference in production? Although the production isn't as regressed as you make it sound really. The TE's this year are about 20 catches behind with 2 games to go, the RB's will probably have more yards on the ground and through the air than last year at this pace. Scheffler only has 10 fewer catches this season than last and still has two more games to play, invisible my ass. Marshall will likely match or surpass most of his numbers. The big difference is that Denver will have passed the ball more than 100 times less this season, in an effort to become more balanced. Royal has regressed in his new role, and Stokely has been too much of an afterthought, but overall the regression is nowhere near as bad as you make it sound. It's actually about what you would expect given the transition.


We've gotten 7 rushing touchdowns all year. We had 15 last year. Even if you want to pro-rate the numbers to match, you're looking at close to a 50% drop in scoring production.

In the passing game, Eddie Royal went from 5 TDs, to none (a 500% drop off). His 91 grabs for 980 yards passing has dropped to a mere 345 on 37 receptions. That's a shocking drop off! Stokely had a similar drop off, going from 49 catches to 14 catches!

You're right though, Scheffler does look to be on the same pace as he was last year. His yards per reception has dropped though so it doesn't seem like it because he's not making as many big plays.

I don't think these figures point to there being a discrepancy in the amount of times that we passed the ball. Both rushing production and passing production are way down.

Beantown Bronco
12-23-2009, 01:22 PM
In the passing game, Eddie Royal went from 5 TDs, to none (a 500% drop off). His 91 grabs for 980 yards passing has dropped to a mere 345 on 37 receptions. That's a shocking drop off! Stokely had a similar drop off, going from 49 catches to 14 catches!


Gaffney's 35 or so catches for 450 yds had to come from somewhere. Seems pretty clear to me.

Taco John
12-23-2009, 01:30 PM
Gaffney's 35 or so catches for 450 yds had to come from somewhere. Seems pretty clear to me.

...and zero touchdowns...

Beantown Bronco
12-23-2009, 01:35 PM
...and zero touchdowns...

Yup. I think it's pretty clear, especially lately, that Orton has pretty much locked in on Marshall in the EZ. Good for Marshall and his agent. Bad for the other WRs/TEs.

2KBack
12-23-2009, 01:39 PM
We've gotten 7 rushing touchdowns all year. We had 15 last year. Even if you want to pro-rate the numbers to match, you're looking at close to a 50% drop in scoring production.

In the passing game, Eddie Royal went from 5 TDs, to none (a 500% drop off). His 91 grabs for 980 yards passing has dropped to a mere 345 on 37 receptions. That's a shocking drop off! Stokely had a similar drop off, going from 49 catches to 14 catches!

You're right though, Scheffler does look to be on the same pace as he was last year. His yards per reception has dropped though so it doesn't seem like it because he's not making as many big plays.

I don't think these figures point to there being a discrepancy in the amount of times that we passed the ball. Both rushing production and passing production are way down.

I know removing a players stats is frowned upon, but if you take Jay Cutler's rushing stats out, Denver has already matched their rushing yards from last year.

Of course passing the ball over a hundred more times will cause a discrepancy. Rushing more will effect passing stats, there is no argument there, it is simply a fact. It is also a fact that Denver averages about a yard less per play this season, which is some regression, but easily explained by other variables. I posted this in another thread:

The average Defense that Denver faced ranked 16th (points), this season they average 14th. Could account for 3 points per game easy.

A really interesting stat though is how often does Denver's offense actually match or surpass the average points given up by the opposition. Last year Denver matched or exceeded the average points allowed by the opposing team 7 total times. So far this season, against better defenses, Denver has matched or surpassed those averages 5 times. Seems to me the offense last year got pretty fat on a couple really bad defenses, and then underperformed in 9 other games. This season Denver may match that, showing that there wasn't any real regression in the onfield production when considering all the variables.

tsiguy96
12-23-2009, 01:40 PM
Yup. I think it's pretty clear, especially lately, that Orton has pretty much locked in on Marshall in the EZ. Good for Marshall and his agent. Bad for the other WRs/TEs.

if you had one of the most physical WR in the NFL who just happens to be about 6'4 you would throw it to him a LOT when its most important.

jsco70
12-23-2009, 03:15 PM
Isn't transition merely a euphemism for decline?

One can certainly argue that point which, unlike most, I won't bother doing. From my perspective, it's pointless to compare the offense production between this season and last. There's a new coach with only 14 games under his belt, new QB, new system moving away from the zone blocking scheme of years gone by. There are undoubtedly going to be growing pains when all of the above is considered or, in other words, a transition.

What matters to me is wins and losses. Shockingly, whether there was a gunslinger QB putting up Madden 2010 numbers, or a "game manager" under center, the results are pretty much the same. Denver is once again on the verge of missing out on the playoffs when it seemed a certainty a few weeks ago.

The biggest difference, at least from my perspective, is the fact McD is a rookie coach. Yes, he's made mistakes, called some questionable plays, and come off as arrogant. Alternatively, I've seen a lot of positives from him as well - his enthusiasm, some unique play designs, improving the defense and winning the respect of his players. The bottom line is I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for at least two or three years. Let him get his players, install his offense and see what happens. I find it far more interesting than watching Shanahan continue with his same tired formula for the past 8 years and fail.

Oh, and before I get hammered for my comment on Shanahan, I respect the hell out of him. He's a great coach whose time in Denver simply came to an end. It was time to move on for both sides and I wish him the best. I think it would be fascinating if he ended up in Chicago with Cutler again. It would really put the "Mastermind" moniker to the test.

lex
12-23-2009, 03:35 PM
One can certainly argue that point which, unlike most, I won't bother doing. From my perspective, it's pointless to compare the offense production between this season and last. There's a new coach with only 14 games under his belt, new QB, new system moving away from the zone blocking scheme of years gone by. There are undoubtedly going to be growing pains when all of the above is considered or, in other words, a transition.



Clady, Harris, Hillis, Royal, Pittman and Wiegmann were either rookies or first year starters in Denver last year. Kuper, Cutler, and Marshall were all in their second year as starters. Also, last year was Hamiltons first year back from missing the prior season due to injury. There was more turnover in 2008 than there has been this year.

Also, I love all the people trashing Shanahan.

oubronco
12-23-2009, 04:34 PM
Orton's numbers so far vs Rivers not alot of difference other than td's

Orton's 277 - 444 3182 17 td's 8 int's

River's 287 - 444 3891 25 td's 9 int's

HEAV
12-23-2009, 06:19 PM
Gaffney's 35 or so catches for 450 yds had to come from somewhere. Seems pretty clear to me.

Eddie Royal = Devin Hester just not as fast

jsco70
12-23-2009, 07:10 PM
Clady, Harris, Hillis, Royal, Pittman and Wiegmann were either rookies or first year starters in Denver last year. Kuper, Cutler, and Marshall were all in their second year as starters. Also, last year was Hamiltons first year back from missing the prior season due to injury. There was more turnover in 2008 than there has been this year.

Also, I love all the people trashing Shanahan.

Yes, but the system itself was in place. Therefore, Kuper, Harris, Culter, and Marshall had spent time in multiple TCs, mini-camps, OTA, gameplanning sessions so they knew their roles. Meanwhile, Wiegmann and Pittman were experienced professionals who easily adapted. Finally, the coaching staff had been in place for a number of years which accounts for continuity.

Fast forward to 2009 and it's a completely new regime and system. Everything the holdover players had learned in the past has been either completely revamped or altered. Not to mention the extreme growing pains McD is experiencing as a rookie head coach. It's simply going to take some time and, apparently, a large number of Bronco fans can't accept it...or don't want to. Therefore, these individuals spend their time pining for the past while creating a toxic atmosphere here on the Mane. Everything from bitching about the hoodie, the new long snapper, the Patriot way, last year's offense, Shanahan and Cutler, etc, etc.

Anyway, this is my perspective. I'll continue to support the team and enjoy watching them push for a playoff spot.

As for "trashing Shanahan" you must have missed my last paragraph, or chose to ignore it. Besides, it isn't anywhere near as bad as what most of the McD bashers have written about him.

lex
12-23-2009, 07:30 PM
Yes, but the system itself was in place. Therefore, Kuper, Harris, Culter, and Marshall had spent time in multiple TCs, mini-camps, OTA, gameplanning sessions so they knew their roles. Meanwhile, Wiegmann and Pittman were experienced professionals who easily adapted. Finally, the coaching staff had been in place for a number of years which accounts for continuity.



Kuper played as LG in his first year as a starter, then was slotted as the RT until training camp when an injury and Holland required him to move. So, last year was Kupers first year at his position and its not like he was RG before that. He was first string RT up until he was switched.

Harris was in the system a year previously but its not just about learning a new system. Its also about learning the speed of the game. In that regard, last year was Harris' rookie season as it was other guys I mentioned.

Regarding experienced vets learning new systems, youre the one who mentioned learning a new system as an excuse this year. It wasnt as much of a problem last year. Wiegmann and Hamilton are still experienced professionals, no?... or were they just experienced professionals last year?

colonelbeef
12-23-2009, 08:04 PM
Last year we did not have a kickoff or punt return for a TD, and only had 2 defensive scores all season. So 23.1-.875 (14 points divided by 16 games from the defensive scores) You end up with an average of 22.2 pts a game, which would rank Denver 20th in ppg scored. Yup. That screams awesome offense, doesnt it.

:Broncos:

It's amusing to watch you completely miss the point, post after post.

It's clear that you don't understand what jhns is actually saying to you, I'm just having a hard time fathoming why

Archer81
12-23-2009, 11:36 PM
It's amusing to watch you completely miss the point, post after post.

It's clear that you don't understand what jhns is actually saying to you, I'm just having a hard time fathoming why


Then explain it.


:Broncos:

lex
12-23-2009, 11:42 PM
Then explain it.


:Broncos:

If youre going to make an apples to apples comparison, the 16th ranked scoring offense stat that you referred to becomes irrelevant.

Archer81
12-23-2009, 11:46 PM
If youre going to make an apples to apples comparison, the 16th ranked scoring offense stat that you referred to becomes irrelevant.


This doesnt help explain it.


:Broncos:

lex
12-23-2009, 11:47 PM
This doesnt help explain it.


:Broncos:

Sorry. I tried.

Archer81
12-23-2009, 11:54 PM
Sorry. I tried.


Not really. What was the point he was originally trying to make?


:Broncos:

snowspot66
12-24-2009, 12:32 AM
Orton's numbers so far vs Rivers not alot of difference other than td's

Orton's 277 - 444 3182 17 td's 8 int's

River's 287 - 444 3891 25 td's 9 int's

Huh. Wouldn't have thought it was that close. Especially with Orton having a dinged up hand and akle. Well, that's having multiple 6'5 receivers and one of the best TE's to ever play the game for you.

broncolife
12-24-2009, 12:55 AM
Denver Offensive Drives in 2008

DEN 41 Oak 14
TD
D forces a fumble at Den 17. Denver punts
Field Goal
TD
Punt
TD
Field Goal
TD
TD
Knee

41-0=41

Den 39 SD 38
Punt
TD
TD
TD great field position at the 48
Field goal
TD
Punt
Punt
Jay picked off at SDs 3. SD scores with a 66 yard td
TD and 2 point conversion to win game

39-0=39

Den 34 NO 32

TD
TD
Denver forces fumbler and returns it for a TD
Cutler picked at the 50 returned to the 36. TD NO
Field Goal
Saftey-D made a goaline stand at 1 and Hall got tackled in endzone with 27 seconds left in the half.
Punt
TD
Field Goal
Fumble Scheffler at the NO 8
Punt

34-9=25

Den 19 KC 33

Fumble! Royal at Den 26.Kc gets field goal
Punt
TD
Fumble! Marshall at Den 39 then returned to the 2. TD KC
Missed 28 yard field goal
Field Goal
Field Goal
Cutler picked at 50 than ran back to the 43.Kc fumbles at Den 45.
Cutler picked at kc 21 then returned to Den 47, Kc punts
Punt
Field Goal
Field Goal
Out of time

19-0=19

Den 16 TB 13

Punt
Punt
Field Goal
Punt
Field Goal
Punt
TD
Field Goal
D intercepts ball then fumbles it back
Punt
Runs out Clock

16-0=16

DEN 17 JAC 24

TD
D forces a fumble at Den 42. Cutler scrambles for 2 yards and fumbles it back.field goal jags
Cutlers long pass to Marshall picked off at Jags 6. Jags punt
Fumble! Marshall at the 6 then returned to jags 25.TD jags
Stopped on 4th and 1 on Jags 30.Pittman up the middle
D forces a fumble at Den 27. We punt
Field Goal
Punt
Punt
TD great return by shoebomber set us up at Jac 37
Punt

17-0=17

Den 7 Ne 41

Fumble! Andre Hall fumbles ball at NE 32.NE gets field goal
Fumble! Andre Hall fumbles ball at NE 38 they end up with at our 22 after return and penalties.NE gets field goal
Punt
Punt
Cutler picked off on a long pass intended for D. Jackson at Ne 16.TD for NE
Ramsey in
Fumble! Ramsey sacked at NE 44.Ball at 50. halftime
Cutler in
Punt
Cutler picked at NE 26.NE end up getting it at the 20 after penalites.TD NE
TD
Punt
Punt

7-0=7

Mia 26 Den 17

Cutler picked at Den 34. Miami Field goal
Punt
Cutler throws a pick 6 32 yards.
TD Royal with a great return to the 5
Punt
Punt
Punt
Field Goal
Missed 49 yard field goal
D intercepts ball at Den 29
77 yard td pass to Marshall nullified. offense pi
Cutler picked a few plays later at Den 44. Miami gets field goal
TD

17-7=10

Den 34 Cle 30

Missed 38 yard field goal
TD
Punt
Cutler picked off trying to pass to Marshall at the Den 33. TD Browns
Field Goal
halftime O was at Cle 45
Field Goal
TD 93 yards to Royal
D forces a fumble at Den 38. 28 yard td pass to Graham
TD

34-7=27

Den 24 Atl 20

TD
Punt
Missed 49 yard field goal
Punt
Punt
TD
D intercepts ball at Den 38. Den get Field goal
TD
Ran clock out

24-3=21

Oak 31 Den 10

Fumble! Bad handoff at Oak 7. Oak punts
Missed 47 yard field goal
Field goal.
Punt 89 yard td return by oak
Missed 43 yard field goal
TD
Punt
Cutler picked at Den 40. TD Oak
Stopped at Oak 38

10-0=10

Den 34 Nyj 17

Punt at the Nyj 39
D Forces a fumble and its returned 29 yards for a td by V.Fox. but of course next play Nyj get a 59 td.
TD Royal with a 59 yard td reception
Field goal
Punt
D Intercepts ball at Den 32. TD broncos
Field Goal
Punt
Hillis 14 yard Td nullified by holding.
Cutler picked in the endzone a few plays later.
Punt
TD pass to Stokley for 36 yards
Punt
Clock ran out

34-14=20

Den 24 KC 17

Punt
Cutler throws a 27 yard pick 6
TD Hillis with a 18 yard td
TD pass to Marshall
Field Goal
Missed 48 yard field goal
TD pass to Marshall
ran clock out

24-7=17

Den 10 vs Car 30

TD
Field Goal
Int
Punt
Punt
Young fumbles
Punt
Punt
Missed Field Goal
Punt
Out of time drove 80 yards though

10-0=10

So our 2008 O averages about 20 points a game without the help of the D.
Total points without help from the D =279


Denvers 2009 Offensive Drives

Denver vs Cin

Punt
Punt
D forces fumble and give the O the ball at Den 44
Punt
Punt
D intercepts ball and gives the ball to the O at the 20
Punt
Field Goal
Punt
Punt
Field Goal
Punt
87 yard miracle tipped pass play failed 2pt conversion

Den 12 Cin 7 12-0=12


Denver vs Cle

Punt
D forces a fumble and give the O the ball at the 9 for an easy 7.
Field goal
Punt
Missed Field goal
D forces a fumble and O gets it at the 38. O does crap and gets a field goal.
Missed Field goal
4thQ first real td drive
Td
trying to run clock and stoped on 4th
D intercepts, Orton takes a Knee

Cle 6 Den 27
Basically give 10 points to the D. 27-10=17

Den vs Oak

Stopped on 4th and goal.
D intercepts ball and O gets it at the 23. TD
D intercepts ball and O gets it at the 34. O does crap and gets a field goal.
Field goal
Td
Fumble Oak gets ball at our 16
D forces Oak to fumble the ball back at the 6 which leads to a field goal.
O starts at 49 and ends up punting
O starts at 44 and ends up punting
O starts at 44 and runs clock out

Den 23 Oak 13
Basically give 13 points to the D. 23-13=10

Den vs Dal

punt
punt
punt
D forces fumble and gives the O the ball at the 9. Easy Td
punt
Fumbles ball away at own 27
D gets ball back at 6 with a int end up Punting
O stuffed on 4th and 1 on Dallas 30
punt
field goal
Td

Dal 10 Den 17
Basically give 7 points to the D 17-7=10

Den vs Ne

field goal
Fumble, Ne gets 3 points
punt
punt
90 yard Td drive
Halftime Hail mary int
field goal
punt
98 yard Td drive
punt
punt
OT field goal

Ne 17 Den 20
O gave Ne 3 points, but D had no turnovers = 20

Den vs SD

punt
Eddie Royal td return
field goal
Eddie Royal td return
Punt Sproles return
missed field goal
punt
TD
D Forces a fumble and O gets the ball at SD 47 field goal
punt
TD
Den 34 SD 23
Special team and D gave 17 points. 34-17=17

Den vs Balt

Punt
Punt
Moreno Fumble ball at Den 23. D holds Balt to field goal
Punt
Punt
Punt
TD 3 Balt penalties helped especially the 39 yarder
Punt
Punt
ran out of time

Balt 30 Den 7 7-0= 7


Pitts vs Den

Field goal
Punt
Orton with a pick 6
Punt
Punt
D forces a fumble and gets a 54 yard td return by Ayers
Punt
D intercept ball at 10 (Goodman)
Punt
Punt
Orton picked at Denvers 25 and Pitts scores a TD
Punt
Orton picked at Denvers 45

Pitt 28 Den 10 10-14= -4 for the O. pick 6 included and the Ds td.

Den vs Wash

TD wooohoooo
Buck Fumbles Wash punts
TD
Punt
Punt
Field goal
Simms in Punt
Punt
Simms picked at Wash 40. Wash gets TD
Stopped

Den 17 Wash 27 17-0=17

SD vs Den *Simms Starting

Simms fumbles at SD28. SD gets a TD on drive
Punt
Punt
Orton in and Moreno fumbles at 1.BULLS... They Punt
Orton picked at the SD 41. not enough time on the clock for SD
Field goal
Stopped
Punt
Stopped
Stopped

SD 32 Den 3 3-0=3

NYG vs Den

Punt
Field goal
Field goal
D forces fumble at Nyg 38. O scores a TD
Field goal. started at midfield
Ran the clock out with 1:41 remaning in the half
Orton pick at Nyg 16 returned to the 40.Giant get Field goal
Punt
TD
D forces fumble at NYG 31. O scores field goal
D intercept ball at Den 46 returned to NYG 48. O punts

Den 26 NYG 6 26-10=16

Den vs KC

Orton Picked in the endzone. Kc punts
TD
Punt
TD
Punt
Orton fumbles at Denver 50. Kc gets a field goal
Field goal. Get ball at KCs 27 because of failed fake punt
D intercepts ball at 29 returned to Kc 21. O scores TD
D intercepts ball at Kc 42. O gets field goal
Punt

Orton fumbles at Denver 3. Kc gets an easy TD
TD
Eddie Royal Big return to KC 41. Field goal
Hillis runs out the clock
D forces fumble and returns it for a Td

Den 44 KC 13 44-17= 27 not giving points for the fake field goal eventhough it set up our O with awesome field position.

Den vs Ind

Punt
Stopped
Punt
TD
Stopped.crap punt gave us great field position too.Den 46
D intercepts ball at IND 48. O gets nothing out of it.
Punt
Punt
D intercepts ball at IND 37. Orton Picked off at Ind 14. Indy punts
Missed field goal. Started with great field position at Den 43
D intercepts ball at IND 49 returned to the 24. O gets Field goal
TD

Den 16 Ind 28 16-3=13 sad with 3 turnover in Indy territory.

Den 19 vs Oak 20

Field Goal
D intercepts ball. We get a field goal off of it
7 yard punt
punt
punt
punt
Field Goal
D forces a fumble. We get a td off of it.
punt
Field Goal
punt
stopped

19-10=9


So our O averages about 12.5 points a game without the Defenses help.
Total points without help from the D =175

The big difference in the Offenses is one had a D and the other didnt. One O had to rely on getting Points by driving the field why the other would get field position handed to them by thier defense. Im pretty sure we would have won more games last season if we had this year D and Sp teams playing with them. Im pretty sure we would have lost more games this season if we had last years D and sp teams playing this year.

snowspot66
12-24-2009, 01:16 AM
Except for the fact that you are punishing this years team for taking advantage of opportunities presented by the defense. Who's to say they wouldn't have taken care of business even if they had to drive an extra 30 or 40 yards? When the D or special teams scores the offense doesn't even get a chance to touch the ball.

How do you account for the yardage and points put up by last years team playing against prevent defenses when the defense was getting blown out week in and week out?

How do you account for the fact that this years team is playing significantly stronger competition across the board?

Durango
12-24-2009, 01:36 AM
McDaniels needs to admit he needs a heavy hitter offensive coordinator and stop trying to manage the play-calling all by himself moment by moment. Yeah, I know he has help, but even he admits the buck stops with him with the play calls, and I would bet he changes a lot of plays called from the booth. I don't know that for a fact, but the results would suggest something, or somebody isn't planning ahead with the play calling, rather, impulsively calling in stuff as the down presents itself.

broncolife
12-24-2009, 02:57 AM
Except for the fact that you are punishing this years team for taking advantage of opportunities presented by the defense. Who's to say they wouldn't have taken care of business even if they had to drive an extra 30 or 40 yards? When the D or special teams scores the offense doesn't even get a chance to touch the ball.

How do you account for the yardage and points put up by last years team playing against prevent defenses when the defense was getting blown out week in and week out?

How do you account for the fact that this years team is playing significantly stronger competition across the board?

Because they havent proven they can take care of business the whole year except maybe 2 games. The fact is this years O was put in positions to succeed way more times then last years O. Heres a chilling fact for you. At this point in the season last year we lost 5 games by double digits. This year we have lost 5 games by double digits. So I dont buy the prevent defense theory. Competition means crap to me. Any given sunday.

rastaman
12-24-2009, 07:59 AM
One can certainly argue that point which, unlike most, I won't bother doing. From my perspective, it's pointless to compare the offense production between this season and last. There's a new coach with only 14 games under his belt, new QB, new system moving away from the zone blocking scheme of years gone by. There are undoubtedly going to be growing pains when all of the above is considered or, in other words, a transition.

What matters to me is wins and losses. Shockingly, whether there was a gunslinger QB putting up Madden 2010 numbers, or a "game manager" under center, the results are pretty much the same. Denver is once again on the verge of missing out on the playoffs when it seemed a certainty a few weeks ago.

The biggest difference, at least from my perspective, is the fact McD is a rookie coach. Yes, he's made mistakes, called some questionable plays, and come off as arrogant. Alternatively, I've seen a lot of positives from him as well - his enthusiasm, some unique play designs, improving the defense and winning the respect of his players. The bottom line is I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for at least two or three years. Let him get his players, install his offense and see what happens. I find it far more interesting than watching Shanahan continue with his same tired formula for the past 8 years and fail.

Oh, and before I get hammered for my comment on Shanahan, I respect the hell out of him. He's a great coach whose time in Denver simply came to an end. It was time to move on for both sides and I wish him the best. I think it would be fascinating if he ended up in Chicago with Cutler again. It would really put the "Mastermind" moniker to the test.

Great insight. I'll be the first to admit that I rag on McD and he has way off pissing me off. But the being said, I have McD on a 6 year schedule of returing the Broncos back to the SB. I believe McD has at least 3 years of growing pains yet to go thru as an NFL HC. Although I believe there's something sinister, shady and calculating about McD, I'll let his results and actions speak for him. We as fans have no other choice but to grow with him, but this is not to say we must hold our tongue when it comes to addressing when McD screws up.

As for Shanahan I personaly believe Bowlen fired him one year too early but thats just me. Once you fire a HC of Shanny's magnitude thats a major shake up in itself and all bets are off. We all saw the departure of Cutler, and now must wait and see how Marshall's financial future works out as well.

So yes this team is in a state of flux and is rebuilding and we are talking the 2009, 2010, and 2011 seasons to remove this Franchise from the 8-8 or 9-7 middle of the road team. By then, McD should well be on his way over the last 3 years to avg 12-14 wins per year with possible SB(s) appearances. If not then the McD experiment has failed. And it will be time for Bowlen to find another HC!

Who knows seven years from now the fans could wake up one morning to find that Shanny and Cutler are returning to Denver to give Bowlen a few more SB's.:~ohyah!:

Tombstone RJ
12-24-2009, 08:57 AM
I can't believe you think so highly of yourself rasta, that you re-post your own stuff and don't simple just give a link. Here, I'll do it for your:

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=87885

TheDave
12-24-2009, 09:48 AM
I said from day 1 that an 8 win season would be a masterful job of coaching with this schedule. As much as I don't like the typical late season collapse, McKidd deserves a lot of credit for remaking this team on the fly and still being in the playoff hunt.

Has the offense taken a step back... absolutely.

I'm willing to wait and see what he does this offseason to fix the problems.

jsco70
12-24-2009, 10:27 AM
Regarding experienced vets learning new systems, youre the one who mentioned learning a new system as an excuse this year. It wasnt as much of a problem last year. Wiegmann and Hamilton are still experienced professionals, no?... or were they just experienced professionals last year?

I don't think the struggles of learning McD's system is an "excuse", it's more like the reality of the situation.

The difference between this year and last year is that EVERYONE has to learn the new system, not just players here and there. As for for your quote above, Hamilton's play has been declining for years due to the fact he's undersized and numerous injuries. Moving away from the zone blocking system that helped him be successful was the final straw. Wiegmann is also more of a tactician so he's also struggling.

To be clear, I'm not arguing the offense isn't as dynamic as last year. I'm simply saying that, in my opinion, it doesn't do any good to lament the differences. The offense is new, different and obviously a work in progress. I just think it will come around in the next year or so provided McD and Co can draft the type of offensive lineman required, and that they don't let Marshall walk.

snowspot66
12-24-2009, 10:32 PM
Because they havent proven they can take care of business the whole year except maybe 2 games. The fact is this years O was put in positions to succeed way more times then last years O. Heres a chilling fact for you. At this point in the season last year we lost 5 games by double digits. This year we have lost 5 games by double digits. So I dont buy the prevent defense theory. Competition means crap to me. Any given sunday.

This years losses the team has been in every game well into the third quarter.

Last years were pretty much over before the half.

Competition means crap? So playing half the games against opponents with top 10 defenses (some in the top 5) this year isn't somehow affecting this teams offensive output? Last years offense played only a handful of teams even in the top 15.

When all is said and done this team will likely only put up around 50 to 60 points fewer this year than last year despite throwing the ball a conservative estimate of 120 times less for and against stronger competition. All while having a new QB, new coaches, and a left side of the interior offensive line showing it's age and significant disparity in size.

And don't kid yourself. Last years offense made plenty of opportunities for itself. And then it would promptly turn the ball over in red zone (or fumble it mid field). The only thing they did last year was rack up stats between the 20's. This years offense at least gets the field goal.

If we fix the offensive line and get the guys more experience in the system I'm confident we'll put out a top 10 offense next year. Orton has shown improvement statistically every year he's played and he played a quarter of this season injured (his % are almost identical to Cutlers from last year). Cutler has not. In fact the drop or stagnation in almost every stat begins between 07 and 08 (with the same ****ty defense but massive upgrade on the offensive line and receivers with Clady and Royal). It's not just because he plays on a sh*tty Bears team.

Orton didn't down grade this offense at all. Offensively we've done nothing but tread water all year. Considering all of the changes and stronger competition I'm not sure we really could have expected more.

broncolife
12-25-2009, 01:46 AM
This years losses the team has been in every game well into the third quarter.

Last years were pretty much over before the half.
Actually I made a mistake the 2008 team actually only lost 4 games by double digits at this point in the season.

KC 16-13 going into the 4th
NE blown out. we scored a late td. (only game I see out of the 14 games that makes your point)
Oak 17-10 going into the 4th
Car 20-10 until late in the 3rd. game was still in reach


Competition means crap? So playing half the games against opponents with top 10 defenses (some in the top 5) this year isn't somehow affecting this teams offensive output? Last years offense played only a handful of teams even in the top 15.

Yes it means crap. Tell me whos competition those top 10 defenses played that made them a top 10 D. Then tell me who there oppenents played and so on. Then tell me the rank of last years defenses the O played. Then tell me who those defenses play so on and so on.

When all is said and done this team will likely only put up around 50 to 60 points fewer this year than last year despite throwing the ball a conservative estimate of 120 times less for and against stronger competition. All while having a new QB, new coaches, and a left side of the interior offensive line showing it's age and significant disparity in size.

Yes they did alright playing p**** Offense. I just dont think it right to say they are as good as last years O. Especially when the 2008 O was relied upon to win games, just like the 2009 D is relied upon to win games now.

And don't kid yourself. Last years offense made plenty of opportunities for itself. And then it would promptly turn the ball over in red zone (or fumble it mid field). The only thing they did last year was rack up stats between the 20's. This years offense at least gets the field goal.

For a team that racked only stats between the 20s they sure score way more than this years O without the help of the D.So last years O had to make their own opportunities since the D sucked.This years O doesnt seem to be able to that. But at least this years O can get field goals off of great field positon set up by our D.

If we fix the offensive line and get the guys more experience in the system I'm confident we'll put out a top 10 offense next year. Orton has shown improvement statistically every year he's played and he played a quarter of this season injured (his % are almost identical to Cutlers from last year). Cutler has not. In fact the drop or stagnation in almost every stat begins between 07 and 08 (with the same ****ty defense but massive upgrade on the offensive line and receivers with Clady and Royal). It's not just because he plays on a sh*tty Bears team.

Orton didn't down grade this offense at all. Offensively we've done nothing but tread water all year. Considering all of the changes and stronger competition I'm not sure we really could have expected more.

Not even going to get into the Jay thing. All I have to say is I hated Brian Griese and when I heard he was Ortons mentor I hated that we picked him up. I also remember in the draft Shanny was thinking about getting Simms and I was praying we wouldnt get him because he also reminded me of Griese. Orton just reminds me too much of the Greaseball. I just hope we dont do a Griese and resign Orton to a big contract. I dont mind giving him another year in the O as long as its not at a heavy price and we have someone waiting in the wings just in case he fails. I just dont want to see another year of a O that looks to scared to take a chance. ooh, it Christmas. MERRY CHRISTMAS!!!!!

Bronco Yoda
12-25-2009, 03:32 AM
So...Is McD holding back Orton or is Orton holding back McD?

lex
12-25-2009, 09:43 AM
I don't think the struggles of learning McD's system is an "excuse", it's more like the reality of the situation.

The difference between this year and last year is that EVERYONE has to learn the new system, not just players here and there. As for for your quote above, Hamilton's play has been declining for years due to the fact he's undersized and numerous injuries. Moving away from the zone blocking system that helped him be successful was the final straw. Wiegmann is also more of a tactician so he's also struggling.

To be clear, I'm not arguing the offense isn't as dynamic as last year. I'm simply saying that, in my opinion, it doesn't do any good to lament the differences. The offense is new, different and obviously a work in progress. I just think it will come around in the next year or so provided McD and Co can draft the type of offensive lineman required, and that they don't let Marshall walk.

Again, previously more people were learning the speed of the game in addition to learning their positions and/or a new system. You contradict yourself when you say its not a problem for Wiegmann to learn a new system over one offseason because he's an veteran but when it comes to this year, you claim the same thing is no longer in play. There is more experience on this team this year than there was last year since a lot of rookies and young players are a year older...a lot of rookies and young players who performed last year.

What youre saying is very much excuse making.

Northman
12-25-2009, 03:40 PM
Hmmm, 8 Ints vs 25? Ill take the 8.