PDA

View Full Version : Massive Offensive Decline


Pages : 1 [2]

TonyR
12-31-2009, 12:58 PM
Do you have a link to this strength of schedule you keep talking about?

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/nfl09.htm?loc=interstitialskip

This link is for this season. See the column labeled SCHEDL(RANK). You'll see the number 7.


http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/nfl08.htm

This link is for last season. You'll see the number 30.

jhns
12-31-2009, 01:05 PM
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/nfl09.htm?loc=interstitialskip

This link is for this season. See the column labeled SCHEDL(RANK). You'll see the number 7.


http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/nfl08.htm

This link is for last season. You'll see the number 30.

Thanks for the links. I haven't seen those. The page is hard for me to view right now so I will get back to you with my comments when I get to my computer.

strafen
12-31-2009, 02:12 PM
Wow, that's really interesting. It really is.

However, it's not the question at hand.

Thanks for playing, and please feel free to jump in when you've got real data to add to the conversation, not fantasy-football dreamland stuff where we combine last year's offense with this year's special teams and John Elway comes out of retirement.


3 ppg. (maybe less by Sunday)

Considerably less turnovers this year.


The two most important things for an offense?

-points

-taking care of the ball


Result: No "massive decline."


Thanks for playing, kid. Now run along.Fine. Here you go, slick...
Those 3 points that you keep downplaying as not being relevant, is what have us at 8 and 7 instead of 10-5 right now.
Last year we scored 13 more touchdowns combined than we have this year.
(2008: 40 TD's. 2009: 27 TD's) You can't ignore that huge fact and trying trumping it with your silly 3 points laughable contention, as being just that, an insignificant data according to you.

So, from 40 TD's to 27 TD's this season, that's 13 touchdowns less than last year, that equates to 78 less points -not taking the PAT into the mix- that we've left on the field. We've only scored 302 points so far. Last year we've score 370. 370-302= 68 points, divided by 15 games= 4.53 points a game

Furthermore, last year we had 8 games where we had 400 yards or better in total offense, and two of those were 500 yards total offense or better.

Want to know how many total yards over 400 we've had this year?
Two. That's 2 games when we've had 400 yards or better in total offense

popps, don't let those facts stop you from making an ass out of yourself

That's the solid proof you've been asking for all along.
Yup, I'm sure that's not the answer you're looking for. It's got to be some obscured data you want to send people out to try to find or prove to you, since you're not about to man up and admit you didn't have a leg to stand on this argument.

521 1N5
12-31-2009, 02:17 PM
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/CdcFYNe9U7A&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/CdcFYNe9U7A&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Beantown Bronco
12-31-2009, 02:21 PM
What exactly was your "here we go again, I did this a week ago for jhns" post about?

It was in relation to this:

I hope you realize that this also becomes a giant circle. If it uses records, what was the strength of schedule for the teams we played? Could it be that they had it easier and that is why they have better records?

When, a few weeks ago, you asked me about the rankings of the team defenses we faced this year vs last year, I provided you with the hard numbers to show the difference.

Your response?

Well, show me the rankings of each of the offenses THOSE defenses faced and prove that they are for real and not just padding stats against scrubs.

So I did it. I went through the pains of looking at all of our opponents and then their opponents and showed that the strong defenses this year faced strong offenses this year, so by definition they were not padding their stats.

Your response? Nothing.

That's your MO. You make people jump through hoops to prove every single thing they post, even if it's obviously true. Then they do it and you either go away for awhile, pretend you didn't see it, or you try to come up with some other thing to make us hunt down.

Meanwhile, you never back up your generalizations with anything remotely approaching "on point" supporting evidence.

MplsBronco
12-31-2009, 02:22 PM
Fine. Here you go, slick...
Those 3 points that you keep downplaying as not being relevant, is what have us at 8 and 7 instead of 10-5 right now.
Last year we scored 13 more touchdowns combined than we have this year.
(2008: 40 TD's. 2009: 27 TD's) You can't ignore that huge fact and trying trumping it with your silly 3 points laughable contention, as being just that, an insignificant data according to you.

So, from 40 TD's to 27 TD's this season, that's 13 touchdowns less than last year, that equates to 78 less points -not taking the PAT into the mix- that we've left on the field. We've only scored 302 points so far. Last year we've score 370. 370-302= 68 points, divided by 15 games= 4.53 points a game

Furthermore, last year we had 8 games where we had 400 yards or better in total offense, and two of those were 500 yards total offense or better.

Want to know how many total yards over 400 we've had this year?
Two. That's 2 games when we've had 400 yards or better in total offense

popps, don't let those facts stop you from making an ass out of yourself

That's the solid proof you've been asking for all along.
Yup, I'm sure that's not the answer you're looking for. It's got to be some obscured data you want to send people out to try to find or prove to you, since you're not about to man up and admit you didn't have a leg to stand on this argument.

Genius, the 370 points last year were in 16 games. The 302 point this year were in 15 games. The fact you can't grasp this simple mathematics is telling.

strafen
12-31-2009, 02:29 PM
Genius, the 370 points last year were in 16 games. The 302 point this year were in 15 games. The fact you can't grasp this simple mathematics is telling.The fact that you can't read well to understand what you're reading is numbing.
Please go back to what you've just read. Pull your head out of popps nuts sack so you can see and read where I've said 302 poinst SO FAR, and that I actually divided those numbers by 15, which is actually the games we've played so far.
15-16 games, at this point is still not going to make much of a difference, is it?

If you want to make a case for computing numbers before the season is actually over, then your popps should've waited before he opened his mouth, don't you think?
I mean you have to go with what you have on hand in front of you, and that is 15 games so far played this season against a full season last year.
Perhaps your popps should've waited one more week, right?
Or am I wrong again? :wiggle:

jhns
12-31-2009, 02:31 PM
It was in relation to this:



When, a few weeks ago, you asked me about the rankings of the team defenses we faced this year vs last year, I provided you with the hard numbers to show the difference.

Your response?

Well, show me the rankings of each of the offenses THOSE defenses faced and prove that they are for real and not just padding stats against scrubs.

So I did it. I went through the pains of looking at all of our opponents and then their opponents and showed that the strong defenses this year faced strong offenses this year, so by definition they were not padding their stats.

Your response? Nothing.

That's your MO. You make people jump through hoops to prove every single thing they post, even if it's obviously true. Then they do it and you either go away for awhile, pretend you didn't see it, or you try to come up with some other thing to make us hunt down.

Meanwhile, you never back up your generalizations with anything remotely approaching "on point" supporting evidence.

I didn't make you do anything... I never saw that post that broke down who they all played. I would be very interested to see that. I asked you to link me and you didn't. I'm not sure what you expect from me. I miss some posts and am not always on here.

Other than that, I only ever ask for people to back up their claims. I give numbers all the time and I have links to back them up if they are requested. I wouldn't really expect someone to look through all of everyones schedule to get a real strength of schedule. The whole point of that was that if you are going to use something as proof, it won't be excepted by many with that many holes in it. You also should have the proof. I don't care if you do the work or you have a link to someone elses work. If you think you can claim any random thing without it being questioned, I would have to ask what kind of dumb pussies do you hang out with?

Beantown Bronco
12-31-2009, 02:31 PM
Or am I wrong again? :wiggle:

This is usually a safe assumption....

strafen
12-31-2009, 02:32 PM
This is usually a safe assumption....

Again, elaborate. Tell me why I'm wrong?
I'm not asking you for too much, am I? :thumbsup:

MplsBronco
12-31-2009, 02:34 PM
The fact that you can't read well to understand what you're reading is numbing.
Please go back to what you've just read. Pull your head out of popps nuts sack so you can see and read where I've said 302 poinst SO FAR, and that I actually divided those numbers by 15, which is actually the games we've played so far.
15-16 games, at this point is still not going to make much of a difference, is it?

If you want to make a case for computing numbers before the season is actually over, then your popps should've waited before he opened his mouth, don't you think?
I mean you have to go with what you have on hand in front of you, and that is 15 games so far played this season against a full season last year.
Perhaps your popps should've waited one more week, right?
Or am I wrong again? :wiggle:

Wow you aint too bright is you, boy?

You are the one presenting a calculation to show that we are actually 4. whatever points worse. I was just pointing out that you were using some flawed mathematics.

strafen
12-31-2009, 02:37 PM
Genius, the 370 points last year were in 16 games. The 302 point this year were in 15 games. The fact you can't grasp this simple mathematics is telling.Oh, one more thing. I just want to make sure you didn't skip over this important piece of telling data, which is what you need to be focusing on. I understand why you didn't want to dispute it though :thumbs:



Furthermore, last year we had 8 games where we had 400 yards or better in total offense, and two of those were 500 yards total offense or better.

Want to know how many total yards over 400 we've had this year?
Two. That's 2 games when we've had 400 yards or better in total offense

strafen
12-31-2009, 02:43 PM
Wow you aint too bright is you, boy?

You are the one presenting a calculation to show that we are actually 4. whatever points worse. I was just pointing out that you were using some flawed mathematics.Again, you need to realize that your popps brought this argument one game shy of the season being over, and by doing so, you have to present the argument with what you have in front of you.
The season is 16-game long. popps is trying to make a dumb argument comparing our last years' offense to this years' offense when the final offensive numbers and stats won't be available until the end of the Chiefs game.
What part of that are you having trouble understanding?

You want to make a case with real actual data? then you wait until next week.
Pretty simple, really... :thumbsup:

MplsBronco
12-31-2009, 02:45 PM
Oh, one more thing. I just want to make sure you didn't skip over this important piece of telling data, which is what you need to be focusing on. I understand why you didn't want to dispute it though :thumbs:





I get it, your one of the guys on here claiming we had the 2nd best offense in the league last year. You're a yards guy, a between the 20's guy, that's what gets you off at night. No one is saying we have a great offense this year. What were saying is were not that worse than last year because we weren't that great then either.

MplsBronco
12-31-2009, 02:46 PM
Again, you need to realize that your popps brought this argument one game shy of the season being over, and by doing so, you have to present the argument with what you have in front of you.
The season is 16-game long. popps is trying to mae a dumb argument comparing our last years' offense to this years' offense when the final offensive numbers and stats won't be available until the end of the Chiefs games.
What part of that are you having trouble understanding?

You want to make a case with real actual data? then you wait until next week.
Pretty simple, really... :thumbsup:

Through 15 games we have a pretty good sampling to make a comparison. With any luck, this weeks game against the Chiefs should bolster Popps argument, especially if we can put up 40+ points again.

Rabb
12-31-2009, 02:50 PM
I get it, your one of the guys on here claiming we had the 2nd best offense in the league last year. You're a yards guy, a between the 20's guy, that's what gets you off at night. No one is saying we have a great offense this year. What were saying is were not that worse than last year because we weren't that great then either.

but but but, it's better to go for a lot of yards with a cannon arm in a loss!!!

strafen
12-31-2009, 02:50 PM
I get it, your one of the guys on here claiming we had the 2nd best offense in the league last year. You're a yards guy, a between the 20's guy, that's what gets you off at night. No one is saying we have a great offense this year. What were saying is were not that worse than last year because we weren't that great then either.How can we not be that great last year?
The numbers don't lie.
You have an offense with 8 games of 400 yards or better total offense, 370 points, and you're downplaying that as nothing?
And this year we have 2 games in which we went over 400 yards total offense and you can't come to grips with the huge discrepancy those numbers are telling you?
:welcome:

strafen
12-31-2009, 02:54 PM
but but but, it's better to go for a lot of yards with a cannon arm in a loss!!!The losses were both Cutler's mistakes and our poorly defense.
Still, the offense moved the ball, we scored 370 points, and again, had it not been for Cutler's bonehead mistakes in the RZ those numbers would be greater.
For the sake of staying within the thread, the offense showed to be superior by far in any statistic category you care to compare in relation to this years'

Inkana7
12-31-2009, 02:55 PM
I think we're all forgetting the most important thing here.

Jay Cutler sucks.

MplsBronco
12-31-2009, 02:58 PM
How can we not be that great last year?
The numbers don't lie.
You have an offense with 8 games of 400 yards or better total offense, 370 points, and you're downplaying that as nothing?
And this year we have 2 games in which we went over 400 yards total offense and you can't come to grips with the huge discrepancy those numbers are telling you?
:welcome:

Because is doesn't mean jack shiat unless you score points! Is it or is it not the point of the game to score more points than your opponents? With those kind of yardage stats you would expect the team to score 500+ points. But we didn't. Man, why am I engaged in a convo with this guy???

Rabb
12-31-2009, 03:01 PM
How can we not be that great last year?
The numbers don't lie.
You have an offense with 8 games of 400 yards or better total offense, 370 points, and you're downplaying that as nothing?
And this year we have 2 games in which we went over 400 yards total offense and you can't come to grips with the huge discrepancy those numbers are telling you?
:welcome:

San Diego, KC were over 400 yards, Buffalo over 500 last season...guess who won?

San Diego and Buffalo (say that with me, BUFFA-****ING-LO) were crucial games we had to win to get into the playoffs.

We scored 21 against San Diego, 23 against Buffalo and 19 against KC. But yeah let's focus on yards, that clearly wins games.

strafen
12-31-2009, 03:11 PM
We're not arguing win and losses.
We're arguing the decline on offense from last year, are we not?
That doesn't change the fact that our offense was that much better.

I've already acknowledged the Cutler's mistakes in the RZ costs us points and games.
That's not what this argument is about. Nor is our terrible defense that contributed to our 8-8 record, but if you want to add w/l into the mix, then you would have to agree that had it not been for our powerful offense, our record would have been much worse, don't you think?
Oh no, no, no, dragster is wrong again. He can't win ROFL!

Think about it, bad defense, bad special teams, injured running backs, a QB that turned the ball over like it was going out of style, and you're all telling me that there was a divine intervention we finished 8-8 other than our offense?
Get real!
Our best defense last year was to outscore the opponents.

azbroncfan
12-31-2009, 05:22 PM
Our best defense last year was to outscore the opponents.

With an offense that averaged 19 ppg after the first three games once other DC had game film to plan against.

Popps
12-31-2009, 06:15 PM
With an offense that averaged 19 ppg after the first three games once other DC had game film to plan against.

So, after the first 3 games... the 08 team averaged less than the 09 team.

We already knew the 09 team has scored more points in the 2nd half, but it's interesting how quickly last year's "great" offense was exposed.

Not only was there no "massive decline," but again... there's probably more evidence to support an improving offense, than anything.

We couldn't score 20 against Buffalo last year at this time, but put up 27 on one of the top teams in the NFC.


Massive decline? Pfffffft.

Broncomutt
12-31-2009, 07:11 PM
Should the offense get credit for a kick return, pick-six, fumble return for TD or a safety?

We had 2 of those last year and 4 so far this year. That's 14 points.

2008: 22.3
2009: 18.3

Just sayin'...:stirstir:

Dean
12-31-2009, 07:12 PM
We averaged less over that same span last season.


So, we clearly need to work on the offense.



Just like last season. No massive decline, just a unit that still needs attention.

Last year for games 5-15 (the last ten games we scored 17, 7, 17, 34, 24, 10, 34, 24, 10, and 23. In my math that average to 20 points per game and that is not less than the per game points we are averaging these ten games.tsk tsk

Popps
12-31-2009, 07:33 PM
Last year for games 5-15 (the last ten games we scored 17, 7, 17, 34, 24, 10, 34, 24, 10, and 23. In my math that average to 20 points per game and that is not less than 10 points per game we are averaging these ten games.tsk tsk

If it was 20, then that's still .01 less than what we've done for the season. (Someone had said we averaged 19 points after game 3, which would have been 1 pt less than this season.)

In the past 7 games, we've outscored the last 7 from last season, and stand to improve on that Sunday.

But, the bottom line remains... when we're dicking around with decimal points, you can remove the word "massive" from the conversation.

Florida_Bronco
12-31-2009, 08:01 PM
From what I can tell, we've effectively rearranged deck chairs on a ship that is taking on water. We've improved the defense, and downgraded the offense, and the end result is a team very similar to last year's team - the one that lost 8 runningbacks to injury and was forced into a one-dimensional pass happy mode.

So we've effectively made a lateral move from last year to this. We've made MASSIVE improvements to the defense at the expense of a very small drop in offensive production, which is more the result of a complete change in offensive scheme rather than a personnel issue.

The wildcard in this debate is the complete culture change in Denver. Shanahan's culture of losing and nepotism has been replaced by a culture that demands maximum effort and accountability. That tips the scales overwhelmingly in favor of McDaniels and the 2009 team.

Which is fine. I mean, I'm not completely cool with it. I still think that it was a mistake not to give Shanahan one more year to work out the kinks as he groomed his new quarterback and brought his new DC online - but whatever. The reset button has been hit, and we are where we are. At the end of the day, I understand that we've got a new coach, and expecting him to take a team from mediocre to above average or better is a big job that might take more than one season. (I can't help it, even when I try to be sincere, my natural cynicism kicks in). I'm glad you were willing to stick with a defensive coordinator who had a year and a half to prove how bad he sucked on top of his three previous failures.

Thankfully, Bowlen wasn't willing to allow that.

My concern is that in McDaniels inexperience, he's biting off more than he can chew and changing too much too fast. How? Specific examples please.

I don't understand the point of keeping Dennison around if we're not going to use him. Dennison is probably a top 5 ZBS coaches in the league - if not two. Who says we aren't using him? McDaniels kept him on staff so he obviously thinks that Dennison brings something to the table, and it's not like the ZBS is so specialized that Dennison couldn't learn anything besides that.

How many games did the O-line switch cost us? Even one is one too many right now. None.

Hillis for that matter too. What's the point of keeping him around if you're not going to find a way to get creative with him? You keep him around because he's a decent backup who could evolve into a legit talent if he gets his head in order. Really TJ, you shouldn't even need to ask that question.

He's a five tool talent on a runningback squad that hasn't been a model of consistency. Pairing Hillis up with Larsen in a power set could have been a great change of pace during the season. We probably would have seen that had Hillis not dropped the ball (literally and figuratively speaking) this year.

we saw more and more tired unimaginative screen passes. One thing this season did for me was confirm an understanding for me of why Shanahan shunned the screen pass in his offense. McD ran the screen pass with great success in New England. What Shanny did is irrelevant as his offense is on the scrap heap now.

I personally felt that this season, we'd have been moving under year 3 of a 5 year arc towards the Superbowl under the previous regime. Right now, I feel like we're at year 1 at best. That's frustrating. I like some of the things that I see, but I'm very skeptical of some of the others. We were never going back to the Super Bowl under Shanny. He had simply lost his touch and the checks and balances that should exist were removed many years ago. Also he had bred a team that crumbled under adversity and quit on the field multiple times over the last 2-3 years.

Maybe getting canned was the wake up call he needed, but he just wasn't going to get the same wakeup call here in Denver.

I hope that he's right that abandoning an offensive line system that has produced so much for this franchise is the smart/right thing to do. He's unquestionably right, if only because his record setting offense (which far surpassed anything Shanny had done for years) does not use the same system.

This is Josh's team now, not Shanahan's.

strafen
12-31-2009, 08:36 PM
We've made MASSIVE improvements to the defense at the expense of a very small drop in offensive production, which is more the result of a complete change in offensive scheme rather than a personnel issue.

The wildcard in this debate is the complete culture change in Denver. Shanahan's culture of losing and nepotism has been replaced by a culture that demands maximum effort and accountability. That tips the scales overwhelmingly in favor of McDaniels and the 2009 team.

I'm glad you were willing to stick with a defensive coordinator who had a year and a half to prove how bad he sucked on top of his three previous failures.

Thankfully, Bowlen wasn't willing to allow that.

How? Specific examples please.

Who says we aren't using him? McDaniels kept him on staff so he obviously thinks that Dennison brings something to the table, and it's not like the ZBS is so specialized that Dennison couldn't learn anything besides that.

None.

You keep him around because he's a decent backup who could evolve into a legit talent if he gets his head in order. Really TJ, you shouldn't even need to ask that question.

We probably would have seen that had Hillis not dropped the ball (literally and figuratively speaking) this year.

McD ran the screen pass with great success in New England. What Shanny did is irrelevant as his offense is on the scrap heap now.

We were never going back to the Super Bowl under Shanny. He had simply lost his touch and the checks and balances that should exist were removed many years ago. Also he had bred a team that crumbled under adversity and quit on the field multiple times over the last 2-3 years.

Maybe getting canned was the wake up call he needed, but he just wasn't going to get the same wakeup call here in Denver.

He's unquestionably right, if only because his record setting offense (which far surpassed anything Shanny had done for years) does not use the same system.

This is Josh's team now, not Shanahan's.Wow, in your opinion there's no ****ing way Mcdaniels can do any wrong, huh?

Popps
12-31-2009, 09:07 PM
This is Josh's team now, not Shanahan's.

Let's just hope we can win more than one playoff game in the next decade.

Florida_Bronco
12-31-2009, 09:08 PM
Wow, in your opinion there's no ****ing way Mcdaniels can do any wrong, huh?

How the hell did you come to that conclusion?

Florida_Bronco
12-31-2009, 09:10 PM
Let's just hope we can win more than one playoff game in the next decade.

Amen brother.

TomServo
01-01-2010, 12:55 AM
Let's just hope we can win more than one playoff game in the next decade.

and lil napoleon Josh is the one to take us there?

TomServo
01-01-2010, 01:03 AM
lil Josh rode Nolans D for a 6-0 start and still F-d it up.
just like Plummer ruining a D for the ages. (No TD's for the first six games was it?)
lil josh and his crappy #1 pic wore out a good D.

watermock
01-01-2010, 01:26 AM
Should the offense get credit for a kick return, pick-six, fumble return for TD or a safety?

We had 2 of those last year and 4 so far this year. That's 14 points.

2008: 22.3
2009: 18.3

Just sayin'...:stirstir:


I thought Royal had 2 returns.

Of course we had McKinley back there whho went on IR.

BTW, Hillis returned kickoffs for arkansas.

We also got DOUBLE the turnovers from last year.

TomServo
01-01-2010, 01:38 AM
lesse, first game fluke, royals crazy return games against the chargers. O and marshalls one man TD, Tom Bradys Worst game in years.
i wore my bronco jersey all year but i wasnt stupid enough to drink the McD Koolaid. anyone thinks sundays game will be a walk remember the raider game.

Broncomutt
01-01-2010, 04:53 AM
Of course we had McKinley back there whho went on IR.


Seriously? She hurt herself that bad? It was a self inflicted injury. I'm actually watching the DVR replay right now.

She makes a clean catch. Starts strong.....picks up speed across the ten. She suddenly sees something at the 18 :holyguac! and comes to a screeching halt at the 20. It's #52 and he looks angry. McKinley cowers, awaiting the inevitable. Tracy, the name of the guy tackling her, wraps her up and realizes she isn't going to struggle. He flings her back, her lifeless body skidding roughly across the turf and coming to a stop at the 17 yard line. The angry man named Tracy has thrown her body 9 feet. :punched:

She isn't moving as a crowd begins to gather around the victim.

The color analyst, Phil Simms, who ironically has a daughter who's also on the team :slapsilly, doesn't know quite what to say. He's not used to commenting on such hostile displays towards women.

"Well Jim, let's go back to the touchdown by the Philadelphia Eagles......"

GeniusatWork
01-01-2010, 06:59 AM
So last year I did radar chart analysis to compare relative effectiveness of the offenses that a lot of you liked. I redid it today (adding Strength of Schedule (SOS), and 3rd down %). All the data is from ESPN or NFL site. The less area covered means the better the offense. Teams done - Denver 09, Denver 08, New Orleans and KC. In general the 08 offense is better, because of the yards per carry (OL driven) and 3rd down conversion percentage (QB driven).

That was a good way to show the differnces. Good representation!

Beantown Bronco
01-01-2010, 07:51 AM
For the sake of staying within the thread, the offense showed to be superior by far in any statistic category you care to compare in relation to this years'

Fail.

See: Offensive turnovers.

azbroncfan
01-01-2010, 10:46 AM
lil Josh rode Nolans D for a 6-0 start and still F-d it up.
just like Plummer ruining a D for the ages. (No TD's for the first six games was it?)
lil josh and his crappy #1 pic wore out a good D.

You don't think Josh had any imput on the D or personel?

Atwater His Ass
01-01-2010, 01:06 PM
Shanahan's culture of losing and nepotism has been replaced by a culture that demands maximum effort and accountability. That tips the scales overwhelmingly in favor of McDaniels and the 2009 team.



Maximum effort and accountability = 2-7 over the last 9 games.

That's so much different than last year's team....oh wait.

This offense has regressed about as much as the defense has improved. Almost every game we won this year was due to superior defensive effort and/or luck and had nothing to due with the offense.

The biggest question mark this off-season is how does Denver upgrade the weakest position on this roster, QB?

azbroncfan
01-01-2010, 02:18 PM
The biggest question mark this off-season is how does Denver upgrade the weakest position on this roster?

Offensive Line can be improved in Draft and FA. The T position is set just need the interior size, talent and strength improved.

go_broncos
01-01-2010, 02:21 PM
Let's blame everyone except the QB..

GreatBronco16
01-01-2010, 03:09 PM
Let's blame everyone except the QB..

Or we can be like the closed minded haters still swinging from Shannys and Cutlers nut hairs and blame just the QB, all the while just hating a coach.

DBroncos4life
01-01-2010, 05:10 PM
I think we will see first hand what our team would like without Marshall. I have faith that we can win this game but if we don't then it's going to be REAL bad around here. I just don't think Gaffney is going to replace Marshall in this O.

skpac1001
01-01-2010, 05:13 PM
Fail.

See: Offensive turnovers.

Or scoring against top 10 defenses (defenses measured by either yardage or scoring).

This years O scores better against top 10 defenses then last years. Not by much, but still.

TomServo
01-02-2010, 12:21 AM
You don't think Josh had any imput on the D or personel?

yes he suckered b dawk into this debacle.