PDA

View Full Version : Broncos WRs make NFL history


HEAV
09-29-2010, 12:51 AM
Go ahead, list all the reasons why the Broncos can’t run the ball. Inexpereince on the offensive line. Injuries to running back.

Here might be the primary reason: The Broncos are a PASSING team. A passing team of historical proportions.

The stats and record have just been confirmed: The Broncos are the first team in NFL history to have four receivers with at least 10 catches, 140 receiving yards and one touchdown through the first three games.

Here’s a breakdown of the Broncos Big 4:
Brandon Lloyd: 14 catches, 339 yards (24.2 yards per catch), 1 TD.
Jabar Gaffney: 17 catches, 189 yards, 1 TD.
Eddie Royal: 17 catches, 186 yards, 1 TD.
Demaryius Thomas: 10 catches, 140 yards, 1 TD.

OK, as records go, this is on the esoteric side. But it still speaks of the Broncos’ passing-game transformation from QB Kyle Orton primarily only having eyes for Brandon Marshall to getting everyone involved.




http://blogs.denverpost.com/broncos/2010/09/28/broncos-wrs-make-nfl-history/5387/

footstepsfrom#27
09-29-2010, 12:58 AM
Still gotta be able to run it.

TheReverend
09-29-2010, 01:01 AM
OK, as records go, this is on the esoteric side. But it still speaks of the Broncosí passing-game transformation from QB Kyle Orton primarily only having eyes for Brandon Marshall to getting everyone involved.




http://blogs.denverpost.com/broncos/2010/09/28/broncos-wrs-make-nfl-history/5387/

Fully agree. It's been a very encouraging past two games.

broncocalijohn
09-29-2010, 01:08 AM
We need to run the ball. Reason why we are passing is because we cant run. Simple as that. Luckily, they are producing but that should be half or 60% of the offense.

The Joker
09-29-2010, 01:31 AM
Still gotta be able to run it.

Agreed.

Until we can run the ball at least competently, we're going to see a lot of games like the one against Indy. Lots of yards, but trouble in the redzone. It's simply too hard to just pass it in a short field, you have to be able to make teams respect your running game and convert in short yardage a respectable percentage of the time.

TDmvp
09-29-2010, 01:32 AM
http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/crank_yankers_yay-737929.jpg

ColoradoDarin
09-29-2010, 04:40 AM
Congrats to Orton, the OL and our receivers!


Boo to all the people who had to use this thread to dump on our team!

Man-Goblin
09-29-2010, 04:57 AM
I hereby declare those four receivers: The Four Horsemen.

KevinJames
09-29-2010, 05:08 AM
I hereby declare those four receivers: The Four Horsemen.

:militia:

Lolad
09-29-2010, 05:45 AM
Go ahead, list all the reasons why the Broncos canít run the ball. Inexpereince on the offensive line. Injuries to running back.

Here might be the primary reason: The Broncos are a PASSING team. A passing team of historical proportions.

The stats and record have just been confirmed: The Broncos are the first team in NFL history to have four receivers with at least 10 catches, 140 receiving yards and one touchdown through the first three games.

Hereís a breakdown of the Broncos Big 4:
Brandon Lloyd: 14 catches, 339 yards (24.2 yards per catch), 1 TD.
Jabar Gaffney: 17 catches, 189 yards, 1 TD.
Eddie Royal: 17 catches, 186 yards, 1 TD.
Demaryius Thomas: 10 catches, 140 yards, 1 TD.

OK, as records go, this is on the esoteric side. But it still speaks of the Broncosí passing-game transformation from QB Kyle Orton primarily only having eyes for Brandon Marshall to getting everyone involved.




http://blogs.denverpost.com/broncos/2010/09/28/broncos-wrs-make-nfl-history/5387/

I'm glad we are setting records in the history books. But I don't want to be the 1st team to be #1 in passing and still not make the playoffs. So yes we need a running game

v2micca
09-29-2010, 05:52 AM
Eh, would much rather be 3-0 with a decent running game. But, we are still a young team at the O-line. So, there is cause for hope. But for now, we are just a 20 to 20 Offense.

55CrushEm
09-29-2010, 05:54 AM
Reason why we are passing is because we cant run. Simple as that.

Ummm.....partly. We also pass because that is Josh's expertise.....he knows how to coach QB's and develop great passing schemes.

2KBack
09-29-2010, 05:59 AM
Eh, would much rather be 3-0 with a decent running game. But, we are still a young team at the O-line. So, there is cause for hope. But for now, we are just a 20 to 20 Offense.

I'm pretty sure we'd all rather be 3-0, but I would also much rather struggle a bit early in the season then finish strong, as opposed to the last few seasons.

Rabb
09-29-2010, 06:11 AM
Ummm.....partly. We also pass because that is Josh's expertise.....he knows how to coach QB's and develop great passing schemes.

was about to say this as well, our offense is very specifically built to treat a short 3-5 yard pass the exact same as a 3-5 yard run

the reason we aren't running isn't because we are passing too much, we aren't running because at the moment it's not productive and you don't run just to run

tsiguy96
09-29-2010, 06:19 AM
I'm glad we are setting records in the history books. But I don't want to be the 1st team to be #1 in passing and still not make the playoffs. So yes we need a running game

best rushing teams in NFL last few years dont exactly have a hot playoff record. this is a pass first league now.

Lolad
09-29-2010, 06:21 AM
was about to say this as well, our offense is very specifically built to treat a short 3-5 yard pass the exact same as a 3-5 yard run

the reason we aren't running isn't because we are passing too much, we aren't running because at the moment it's not productive and you don't run just to run

Josh was too busy trying to win games in the preseason when he should have been running the ball to get our lineman ready

Mogulseeker
09-29-2010, 06:23 AM
Nice use of the word esoteric, haha.

Lolad
09-29-2010, 06:29 AM
best rushing teams in NFL last few years dont exactly have a hot playoff record. this is a pass first league now.

I'm not asking for us to be the best rushing team. If it's a pass 1st team we should be going to the playoffs shouldn't we? We need a running game, it's evident, I'll take middle of the pack.

Garcia Bronco
09-29-2010, 06:35 AM
We need to run the ball. Reason why we are passing is because we cant run. Simple as that. Luckily, they are producing but that should be half or 60% of the offense.

No. Passing is what McDaniels offense all about.

Bahshay
09-29-2010, 06:44 AM
No. Passing is what McDaniels offense all about.

Absolutely agree. And while I am very much a supporter of McD, this fact made the 3 runs at the goal line more confusing to me. I really thought he'd have a clever pass play ready for those situations. Instead, we ran 3 times and tried a fade.

Rabb
09-29-2010, 07:02 AM
Josh was too busy trying to win games in the preseason when he should have been running the ball to get our lineman ready

yeah you are right, I bet the subject of a running game never came up until about kickoff in week 1

"Crap guys, running! I KNEW I was forgetting something!!!!"

Lolad
09-29-2010, 07:30 AM
yeah you are right, I bet the subject of a running game never came up until about kickoff in week 1

"Crap guys, running! I KNEW I was forgetting something!!!!"

Did we run the ball a lot in the 1st 2 preseason games? If I'm lying let me know, I feel the only way to get better at something is to keep working at it. He gave up on it, probably to evaluate other plays/players but it looks like that wasn't a good decision

2KBack
09-29-2010, 07:35 AM
best rushing teams in NFL last few years dont exactly have a hot playoff record. this is a pass first league now.

Unless if you consider that 3 out of the 4 teams in the conference championship games were top ten rushing teams.

Beantown Bronco
09-29-2010, 07:36 AM
Did we run the ball a lot in the 1st 2 preseason games? If I'm lying let me know, I feel the only way to get better at something is to keep working at it. He gave up on it, probably to evaluate other plays/players but it looks like that wasn't a good decision

Well, when your three starting running backs are hurt in the preseason and the only guys left are guys you know you're gonna cut, that tends to favor passing the ball....even in the preseason.

Old Dude
09-29-2010, 07:38 AM
If we only had some red zone punch ...

Beantown Bronco
09-29-2010, 07:39 AM
Unless if you consider that 3 out of the 4 teams in the conference championship games were top ten rushing teams.

This is false.

Indy was ranked 32nd
Vikings - 13th

misturanderson
09-29-2010, 07:40 AM
Did we run the ball a lot in the 1st 2 preseason games? If I'm lying let me know, I feel the only way to get better at something is to keep working at it. He gave up on it, probably to evaluate other plays/players but it looks like that wasn't a good decision

They also had their 1st 2 backs out and multiple linemen out. It's not like those games would have helped most of the players that are playing right now anyway.

2KBack
09-29-2010, 07:42 AM
This is false.

Indy was ranked 32nd
Vikings - 13th

Whoops, you're right, I was looking at rushing attempts for the Vikes on accident.

Cito Pelon
09-29-2010, 07:47 AM
The passing game can produce, no doubt. Nice receiver corps, decent NFL starter with Orton, well-coached. But I'm pretty sure McD would like to develop a better running game.

Beantown Bronco
09-29-2010, 07:48 AM
Whoops, you're right, I was looking at rushing attempts for the Vikes on accident.

Kind of surprised me that that weren't and New Orleans was to be honest.

Tombstone RJ
09-29-2010, 07:50 AM
Unless you have RoboQB, passing the ball all the time is a double edged sword. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

2KBack
09-29-2010, 07:59 AM
Kind of surprised me that that weren't and New Orleans was to be honest.

Me too, I remember a lot of press about the NO new focus on running, and fully expected minny to be there too.

Personally I think a team should go with their strength. That said, I don't think there is sufficient evidence to say that being a great rushing team or passing team is more preferable for success.

lostknight
09-29-2010, 08:20 AM
Here might be the primary reason: The Broncos are a PASSING team. A passing team of historical proportions.

this.

The problem is, the evidence so far is that even when you pass the ball this much, you won't win games, because you can't control the clock, and push it in no matter which coverages are down field.

lostknight
09-29-2010, 08:27 AM
was about to say this as well, our offense is very specifically built to treat a short 3-5 yard pass the exact same as a 3-5 yard run

the reason we aren't running isn't because we are passing too much, we aren't running because at the moment it's not productive and you don't run just to run

The problem is there are not:
1) They don't take the same amount of time off the clock.
2) They don't exhaust the opponent's D-line, or wear them down.
3) Turnover ratios are different.
4) The force different coverages and just passing turns your team into a one dimensional threat.

Yes, you do have to run, even when it's not working. You need to force the D coordinators to gamble occasionally (and loose), and you need, no matter what to be able to pick up one yard on demand.

BroncosSR
09-29-2010, 08:30 AM
Stats don't get you into the playoffs...

Beantown Bronco
09-29-2010, 08:48 AM
The problem is, the evidence so far is that even when you pass the ball this much, you won't win games, because you can't control the clock

The problem is there are not:
1) They don't take the same amount of time off the clock.


This is simply wrong.

We have won the time of possession battles 2 out of 3 games so far this year, and the one game we didn't (against Indy) we only lost the TOP battle by 16 seconds. Big deal.

Tom A Hawk
09-29-2010, 08:49 AM
I think Broncos are close to great as a passing team......but what has that got you?

You have to be able to run the ball.....you got to be able to stop the opponent. But, I will admit; stopping Indy is pretty tough.

lostknight
09-29-2010, 08:50 AM
This is simply wrong.

We have won the time of possession battles 2 out of 3 games so far this year, and the one game we didn't (against Indy) we only lost the TOP battle by 16 seconds. Big deal.

Umm, that's not my point. A three and out with rushing takes about a minute and a half longer then a 3 and out by missed passes.

Mediator12
09-29-2010, 08:54 AM
The old maxim you have to run the ball and you have to stop the run is not a true as it was in the 80's. The game has evolved and running the ball is a change-up while passing is much more prevalent.

broncofan2438
09-29-2010, 09:03 AM
Any chance Moreno/Maroney get it going this Sunday?

broncosteven
09-29-2010, 09:14 AM
Orton is on pace to throw for 5,749 yards.

Beantown Bronco
09-29-2010, 09:15 AM
Umm, that's not my point. A three and out with rushing takes about a minute and a half longer then a 3 and out by missed passes.

Ummm, this is precisely the point. The Broncos style of passing is chewing up the clock just as much as if they were running the ball. They're winning the TOP battle as-is.

Your example above, while potentially true, leaves out a TON of variables and assumes others. Sure, three runs up the middle will chew up more time than 3 incomplete passes....but how often is that happening anywhere? In reality, we're talking about a difference of maybe 10 passes on average throughout a game and we're completing about 7 of them.

Kaylore
09-29-2010, 09:38 AM
This is one of those frustrating threads to read on the mane because of the flagrant lying everyone does.

Our run to pass ratio is still 1:1 and has been all year. McDaniels likes it that way so defenders don't start guessing. Our biggest pass plays have been on play action. Orton is the highest rated PA passer in the league right now. If we weren't at least trying half the time, they would not be nearly as effective.

This isn't about philosophy, or not running enough, or the load of crap Loload said where we were trying too hard to win games in the preseason and the run suffered (seriously, WTF is that supposed to mean?). This is about the team no executing in the run game. There is little to no chemistry or rhythm between the linemen as they have been shuffled like a deck of cards game to game and our running backs have been hurt.

That's all it is.

We run half the time. We just don't break many and they are there. Moreno is going to explode once the line settles in.

Beantown Bronco
09-29-2010, 09:46 AM
This is one of those frustrating threads to read on the mane because of the flagrant lying everyone does.

Our run to pass ratio is still 1:1 and has been all year.

Huh?

125 passes to 81 runs so far this year (and that's if you count Orton's sacks and forced rushes as running plays)

Cito Pelon
09-29-2010, 09:47 AM
Absolutely agree. And while I am very much a supporter of McD, this fact made the 3 runs at the goal line more confusing to me. I really thought he'd have a clever pass play ready for those situations. Instead, we ran 3 times and tried a fade.

Josh seems to have a penchant for stubbornly running the same ineffective short-yardage running plays over, and over, and over.

I can see the reasoning behind it, showing confidence in your guys to get it done, giving them the chance to make a statement, etc, but he still has to keep one primary goal in mind - score TD's and win.

Cito Pelon
09-29-2010, 09:53 AM
This is false.

Indy was ranked 32nd
Vikings - 13th

What? The great AP only had Minny at 13th? /sarcasm

I mentioned quite a few times last year AP was getting stuffed with regularity when he didn't have a hole to run through at the LOS. Same as any RB in NFL history, Moreno included of course.

Popps
09-29-2010, 09:58 AM
Good thread...

This basically means that McD's offense is taking shape. Targeting multiple receivers instead of just one is something we should grow to expect. (And appreciate, really.)

Now, let's get the run-blocking up to par, and this offense is going to be unstoppable.

Cito Pelon
09-29-2010, 10:00 AM
This is simply wrong.

We have won the time of possession battles 2 out of 3 games so far this year, and the one game we didn't (against Indy) we only lost the TOP battle by 16 seconds. Big deal.

Big plays can turn the TOP on it's head. Against JAX, they got the big plays on ST's to get a short field so TOP going against them didn't hurt.

I'm looking forward to when Denver can put together a good three-phase game. ST's hurt Denver again Sunday with a muffed punt at the 10 when momentum was starting to swing our way.

orinjkrush
09-29-2010, 10:07 AM
i guess that means we better pass more in the red zone to score TDs

That One Guy
09-29-2010, 10:11 AM
Huh?

125 passes to 81 runs so far this year (and that's if you count Orton's sacks and forced rushes as running plays)

LOL! if true. I love when callout moments like this happen

The Joker
09-29-2010, 10:11 AM
We'll know a lot more about this passing offense after the next three games. These are some good defenses we're going up against, if Orton can move the ball well against them then I'll truly believe that the passing game is "for real", so to speak.

And if it is, then there's real cause to be excited IMO. Assuming we don't have any more bad injuries along the O-Line, I'm confident the running game will improve steadily as the year goes on. We don't have to be a great or even good rushing team, just a respectable one. We are a passing team, that's where we'll do most of our damage. At the moment though our running game is a disgrace, and you simply can't afford to be quite THAT one dimensional.

I do fear things are going to get worse before they get better though regarding our running game, that Jets game in particular could be brutal.

Cito Pelon
09-29-2010, 10:13 AM
The old maxim you have to run the ball and you have to stop the run is not a true as it was in the 80's. The game has evolved and running the ball is a change-up while passing is much more prevalent.

Well, I'd still like to see a more balanced O attack. It would be nice to have a more effective running O. Oh yeah, and better ST's, although the ST's seemed to improve some against Indy.

The bottom line is it's been a long time since Denver had a good three-phase team. It's hard to put it together, but that's what is required to win titles.

bronco militia
09-29-2010, 10:14 AM
http://www.drewlitton.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/24b.gif

Beantown Bronco
09-29-2010, 10:16 AM
LOL! if true. I love when callout moments like this happen

It's true. Here's the breakdown from nfl.com game logs:

week one = 33 passes to 25 runs (and 2 of those runs were technically pass plays that resulted in Orton scrambling)
week two = 35 passes to 38 runs (and 3 of those runs were technically pass plays that resulted in Orton scrambling)
week three = 57 passes to 18 runs (and 2 of those runs were technically pass plays that resulted in Orton scrambling)

That One Guy
09-29-2010, 10:17 AM
In my own opinion, TOP is the most useless stat out there. I'd rather a quick TD than an 80 yard drive that stalls on the one.

All we've seen so far is the same things we saw in the shanny years - movement between the 20s and scoring problems. It was frustrating before and still is.

TheProfessor
09-29-2010, 10:20 AM
Since we seem determined to move to a complete spread offense, maybe we need to configure our Oline like Texas Tech does... ;)

Actually, I'm intreagued to see what this kid coach of ours can do with a wide open air attack. Our Oline can definately pass block, and we have amazing depth at the wr position. Add to that, KO has moments where he looks like the prototypical QB for this type of offense. Who knows, in time, this offense could be incredible.

Or we could go 4-12 and be coach hunting next year.

Gues were going to find out.

ColoradoDarin
09-29-2010, 10:24 AM
It's true. Here's the breakdown from nfl.com game logs:

week one = 33 passes to 25 runs (and 2 of those runs were technically pass plays that resulted in Orton scrambling)
week two = 35 passes to 38 runs (and 3 of those runs were technically pass plays that resulted in Orton scrambling)
week three = 57 passes to 18 runs (and 2 of those runs were technically pass plays that resulted in Orton scrambling)

I am going to say that when Kaylore looked it up it only had the first 2 games. Even so, his point holds that 2 out of the 3 games we've been pretty even on run/pass, I think we can safely call the Colts gameplan an aberration.

Man-Goblin
09-29-2010, 10:25 AM
Huh?

125 passes to 81 runs so far this year (and that's if you count Orton's sacks and forced rushes as running plays)

The play selection was very even before the Colts game; 68 pass, 63 rush. Of course, the Colts game skews that balance quite a bit.

The fact is, the entire league throws more than they pass. In fact, I think the Jets are the only team with more rushing attempts than passes last year.

broncosteven
09-29-2010, 10:25 AM
In my own opinion, TOP is the most useless stat out there. I'd rather a quick TD than an 80 yard drive that stalls on the one.

All we've seen so far is the same things we saw in the shanny years - movement between the 20s and scoring problems. It was frustrating before and still is.

I would rather dominate week in and out rather than pray for 80 yard TD's.

I hate cheap scores on INT's or ST's returns control the game and get points.

It is bad enough to turn the ball over via INT or Fumble but turning the ball over on downs 3 times is inexcuseable.

Don't panic, get points or play FP but don't give the ball away on downs.

broncosteven
09-29-2010, 10:26 AM
I am going to say that when Kaylore looked it up it only had the first 2 games. Even so, his point holds that 2 out of the 3 games we've been pretty even on run/pass, I think we can safely call the Colts gameplan an aberration.

Anytime your down 13-0 before your 2nd 1st down your going to be pass heavy that day.

Cito Pelon
09-29-2010, 10:29 AM
Huh?

125 passes to 81 runs so far this year (and that's if you count Orton's sacks and forced rushes as running plays)

Well, take out 27 pass plays from the Indy game and that would even it up some, yeah? We were playing from behind the whole game, so that game skewed the stats some.

I can see Kaylore's point.

lostknight
09-29-2010, 10:30 AM
Our run to pass ratio is still 1:1 and has been all year.

After the first series red zone series, we ran the ball in the red zone exactly once.

That's not balanced, and a perfect example of why the unbalanced approach sucks. In addition, the Broncos ran the ball as a percentage less last year then any year under shanny.

TheProfessor
09-29-2010, 10:30 AM
I am going to say that when Kaylore looked it up it only had the first 2 games. Even so, his point holds that 2 out of the 3 games we've been pretty even on run/pass, I think we can safely call the Colts gameplan an aberration.

We chose not to run on the worst rushing defense in the NFL. That's not an aberration, this is bar none the worst running team I have seen in the last 10 years... and before people grab's some obscure stat that shows someone else sucked more for 3 games rewatch that 1st and goal series again. God that was hard to watch.


Maybe if we air it out enough teams will stick to a dime package and then maybe we will have a chance.

HEAV
09-29-2010, 10:31 AM
After 3 weeks the run/pass ratio is 40/60. Again the Broncos use the short pass as a running play. The short pass is one reason why the Broncos have 67 first downs via the pass and 13 first downs with the run.

Beantown Bronco
09-29-2010, 10:36 AM
Well, take out 27 pass plays from the Indy game and that would even it up some, yeah?

Huh? How about I then take out 27 run plays from the Seattle game once we got up on them big? Same principle.

Man-Goblin
09-29-2010, 10:36 AM
Check this out. I remember reading this article last December. It really details how, at least last year, passing ruled the league.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d814a895c/article/ground-game-defense-no-longer-keys-to-championship-run
Passing wins championships?

"Run the ball and play defense if you want to win a championship." It's an old coaching expression ... perhaps the emphasis should be on "old."
The NFL has turned into a passing league, and anyone who doubts it should check out the facts. Currently, the top five defenses in the NFL are a combined 31-24; the top five offenses are 47-8. As for running the ball, the top five rushing teams are 30-25; the top five passing teams are 41-14. The message, this season at least, is build up your offense and throw the ball.

I discussed these findings with one former NFL head coach who has a Super Bowl ring. He said the numbers will be more meaningful if they hold up at season's end, but right now, he added, it looks like teams can still make the playoffs with a strong defense and a run game but they will not win a championship.

If you're still not sure you buy into the modern game, check this out: Teams with at least 20 touchdown passes this season have a combined record of 58-19; teams averaging at least 150 rushing yards a game are 25-30.

Mediator12
09-29-2010, 10:41 AM
After 3 weeks the run/pass ratio is 40/60. Again the Broncos use the short pass as a running play. The short pass is one reason why the Broncos have 67 first downs via the pass and 13 first downs with the run.

True. Very true. The SF teams under Bill walsh did very ok with using the WEST coast offense short passes as their runs. The new use of the spread offense is really a schematically different extension of the same philosophy.

The spread also thins the defense out enough to deter disguising coverages as the players are dramatically out of position at the snap. It can also create the numbers advantage in the box if teams play the pass.

I really like the Broncos new offense, because it is cutting edge of the new NFL. I realize people like the Shanahan offense because it is so familiar. However, it is not as effective as it once was with superior personnel. And, it has not been in some time.

I also like the direction of the new Defense. Finally, they have a scheme that is the same from year to year for the first time since 2004. I really like the tough, physical, in your face style more than the finesse Cover 2 they played for years.

I understand peopel want to debate this whole running game thing, but really WHY? The teams that won the SB in the 2000's were pass heavy offenses, outside of BAL who was so good defensively it did not matter they had an offense ;D

broncosteven
09-29-2010, 10:42 AM
Huh? How about I then take out 27 run plays from the Seattle game once we got up on them big? Same principle.

We had to start an RB who had been with the team for 2 weeks, the pass game was working, we were behind and when they did run they were lucky to pick up 2YPC so I have no problem throwing more than running.

Beantown Bronco
09-29-2010, 10:43 AM
We had to start an RB who had been with the team for 2 weeks, the pass game was working, we were behind and when they did run they were lucky to pick up 2YPC so I have no problem throwing more than running.

Me neither.

Cito Pelon
09-29-2010, 10:48 AM
Huh? How about I then take out 27 run plays from the Seattle game once we got up on them big? Same principle.

I'm saying Josh wants to have a balanced attack, and will do so when it is feasible.

I keep hearing this mantra, "complimentary football", and I think that is what the Broncs are striving for.

Edit: Actually, it would be "complementary", not "complimentary".

TheProfessor
09-29-2010, 10:51 AM
I'm saying Josh wants to have a balanced attack

I sure hope that is not true. If McD really wants a balanced attack then he has failed miserably.

JMO, but I really do think this kid has his eyes set on a full blown spread offense (one more reason why tebow was picked)

gtown
09-29-2010, 10:52 AM
I hereby declare those four receivers: The Four Horsemen.

Ed McDecker might have something to say about that.

Tombstone RJ
09-29-2010, 10:52 AM
Passing is all fine and dandy when between the 20s. But when you get into the redzone, you better damn well BE ABLE to run the ball. Goal line especially. You gotta make the opposing LBers at least THINK there is a possibility of a run play. Otherwise the opposing defense just plays zone coverage and sooner or later a guy like Orton is gonna make a bone head stupid throw (I like Orton, but he whiffs on some easy passes).

ColoradoDarin
09-29-2010, 10:53 AM
We chose not to run on the worst rushing defense in the NFL. That's not an aberration, this is bar none the worst running team I have seen in the last 10 years... and before people grab's some obscure stat that shows someone else sucked more for 3 games rewatch that 1st and goal series again. God that was hard to watch.


Maybe if we air it out enough teams will stick to a dime package and then maybe we will have a chance.

No, he said that we had to score to keep up with the Colts offense going into the game.

Kaylore
09-29-2010, 10:55 AM
After the first series red zone series, we ran the ball in the red zone exactly once.

That's not balanced, and a perfect example of why the unbalanced approach sucks. In addition, the Broncos ran the ball as a percentage less last year then any year under shanny.

Against Indy we did pass more. Prior to this game we have been fairly even. I think people are once again blowing the Indy game out of proportion.

ColoradoDarin
09-29-2010, 10:56 AM
Congrats to Orton, the OL and our receivers!


Boo to all the people who had to use this thread to dump on our team!

Again....

Rock Chalk
09-29-2010, 10:57 AM
Passing is all fine and dandy when between the 20s. But when you get into the redzone, you better damn well BE ABLE to run the ball. Goal line especially. You gotta make the opposing LBers at least THINK there is a possibility of a run play. Otherwise the opposing defense just plays zone coverage and sooner or later a guy like Orton is gonna make a bone head stupid throw (I like Orton, but he whiffs on some easy passes).

Not in the red zone he doesnt. Dude has fewer red zone turnovers than I think every other startign QB in the league. That doesnt mean he will complete the pass but you can almost be assured that we wont turn it over due to him.

TheProfessor
09-29-2010, 10:57 AM
No, he said that we had to score to keep up with the Colts offense going into the game.

then he must not have watched the texans game, 'cause running the ball is what houston used to "keep up with the colts offense"

Like I said, it JMO, but I absolutely believe this kid has his sights set on spreading other teams out with his passing game.

Beantown Bronco
09-29-2010, 10:57 AM
People keep mentioning that the Indy game was an aberration because they were getting blown out, etc.....last time I checked, it was a one score game for most of the first half and most of the second half.....it wasn't until halfway through the 4th quarter that they were forced to throw the ball, so the gameplan going in was obviously going to be pass-heavy regardless of the score IMO. Before anyone reads this wrong, I'm not saying this is a bad thing.

Tombstone RJ
09-29-2010, 10:59 AM
Not in the red zone he doesnt. Dude has fewer red zone turnovers than I think every other startign QB in the league. That doesnt mean he will complete the pass but you can almost be assured that we wont turn it over due to him.

You wanna gamble like that? I don't. Run the fuggen ball.

Rock Chalk
09-29-2010, 11:00 AM
You wanna gamble like that? I don't. Run the fuggen ball.

I wasnt disputing your argument. Just pointing out that Orton "will make a bone headed" decision in the red zone is a fallacy. He just doesnt do it.

ColoradoDarin
09-29-2010, 11:01 AM
then he must not have watched the texans game, 'cause running the ball is what houston used to "keep up with the colts offense"

Like I said, it JMO, but I absolutely believe this kid has his sights set on spreading other teams out with his passing game.

Oh I didn't know that we were the Texans? With the exact same strengths and weaknesses!

Cito Pelon
09-29-2010, 11:01 AM
I sure hope that is not true. If McD really wants a balanced attack then he has failed miserably.

JMO, but I really do think this kid has his eyes set on a full blown spread offense (one more reason why tebow was picked)

I'm saying that's what he's striving for, and I think it's a good team strategy. It's dang hard to pull off, though.

TheProfessor
09-29-2010, 11:06 AM
Oh I didn't know that we were the Texans? With the exact same strengths and weaknesses!

Really?

You think we need to be the texans to run on the worst rushing defense in the league?

Look, we just proved we can not run the ball, now either that is the fault of the coaches for not acquiring the players necessary to accomplish that, or it is the coaches fault because he has other plans.

The fact is he went into the season with only one healthy back, tells me that either he is crazy or he doesn't see the running game as a priority.

I'm choosing the latter.

Cito Pelon
09-29-2010, 11:10 AM
People keep mentioning that the Indy game was an aberration because they were getting blown out, etc.....last time I checked, it was a one score game for most of the first half and most of the second half.....it wasn't until halfway through the 4th quarter that they were forced to throw the ball, so the gameplan going in was obviously going to be pass-heavy regardless of the score IMO. Before anyone reads this wrong, I'm not saying this is a bad thing.

And Denver's last drive was like 9 passes in a row, no runs, right? The last two drives something like 20 passes, 8 runs, right?

ColoradoDarin
09-29-2010, 11:10 AM
Really?

You think we need to be the texans to run on the worst rushing defense in the league?

Look, we just proved we can not run the ball, now either that is the fault of the coaches for not acquiring the players necessary to accomplish that, or it is the coaches fault because he has other plans.

The fact is he went into the season with only one healthy back, tells me that either he is crazy or he doesn't see the running game as a priority.

I'm choosing the latter.

Can you please show what other RBs are available? It's not like we didn't try others, like Lendale White and Justin Fargas during preseason after our top 2 RBs got injured. At that point it was a little late to acquire anyone of value. We did go get the (sadly) best option open to us in Maroney.

Your hindsight is pitiful.

Tombstone RJ
09-29-2010, 11:11 AM
I wasnt disputing your argument. Just pointing out that Orton "will make a bone headed" decision in the red zone is a fallacy. He just doesnt do it.

If last Sunday Orton managed to throw one or two TD passes in the redzone, then I'd be willing agree a little more with you. Fact is, when the defense has to protect a confined space into which the opposing offense must throw the ball, the percentage for a turnover goes way up, and Orton IMHO is just not accurate enough to CONSISTENTLY make those throws.

I understand that Orton doesn't turn the ball over, but if the offense doesn't put 6 points on the board either, then it's a victory for the defense.

TheProfessor
09-29-2010, 11:18 AM
Can you please show what other RBs are available? It's not like we didn't try others, like Lendale White and Justin Fargas during preseason after our top 2 RBs got injured. At that point it was a little late to acquire anyone of value. We did go get the (sadly) best option open to us in Maroney.

Your hindsight is pitiful.

Don't get your panties in a bunch, people are just giving opinions on the subject.

But to answer your question, the list was available all off season, it's called the draft and FA.

Knowshon was injured of and on all of last year and Buckhalter has always been injurred.

If I planned on producing half of my points by running the ball this year, then I would have looked for quality depth at the position. Sorry but I do not consider an out of work Lendale white and a should be retired fargas as "quality depth"

The fact is we are running a spread offense more times than not this year. You may consider that an abaration, but IMO the evidence says this is a trend.

ColoradoDarin
09-29-2010, 11:22 AM
Don't gert your panties in a bunch, were just giving our opinion.

But to answer your question the list was available all off season, it's called the draft and FA.

Knowshon was injured of and on all of last year and Buckhalter has always been injurred.

If I planned on producing half of my points by running the ball this year, then I would have looked for quality depth at the position. Sorry but I do not consider an out of work Lendale white and a should be retired fargas as "quality depth"

The fact is we are running a spread offense more times than not this year. You may consider that an abaration, but IMO the evidence says this is a trend.

1. I don't see any names there?
2. Buck and Knowshon weren't injured until preseason, that's why I called your hindsight pitiful.
3. That's my point, we're bringing in Lendale and Fargas (and Brown and Maroney) precisely because quality RBs are not available during the season.

Sorry for getting your panties in a bunch, prof - the numerous typos and spelling errors are just sad for the Tenured Professor :)

TheProfessor
09-29-2010, 11:25 AM
1. I don't see any names there?
2. Buck and Knowshon weren't injured until preseason, that's why I called your hindsight pitiful.
3. That's my point, we're bringing in Lendale and Fargas (and Brown and Maroney) precisely because quality RBs are not available during the season.

Sorry for getting your panties in a bunch, prof - the numerous typos and spelling errors are just sad for the Tenured Professor :)

Buck wasn't injured until preseason Hilarious!

Come on, Buck has been injured his entire career. But hey at least you got in a spelling crack.

Obviously this topic is real sensative for you. sorry to have offended.

Mediator12
09-29-2010, 11:27 AM
Don't gert your panties in a bunch, were just giving our opinion.

But to answer your question the list was available all off season, it's called the draft and FA.

Knowshon was injured of and on all of last year and Buckhalter has always been injurred.

If I planned on producing half of my points by running the ball this year, then I would have looked for quality depth at the position. Sorry but I do not consider an out of work Lendale white and a should be retired fargas as "quality depth"

The fact is we are running a spread offense more times than not this year. You may consider that an abaration, but IMO the evidence says this is a trend.

I do not understand the use of the spread as a reason to not run the ball. NE did just fine being balanced on the way to the SB in this spread look. They were so good a throwing the ball they finally opened running lanes for their Average RB's. I mean Brady threw for 50 TD passes because he had a freak in Moss, and stud Slot in Welker, and some complimentary WR's including Gaffney. Plus, they ran the ball clsoer to 50% of the time than people think, but they were exceptional at passing the ball.

Why not use the whole purpose of the spread (to create mismatches, to eliminate poor presnap reads, and spread out the Defense to get the ball to playmakers in space) as a compliment to running the ball? Utilizing the spread does not = a poor running game. What does = a poor running game is lack of chemistry along the OL and RB depth. Something that DEN has had to accept the first three weeks of the season.

However, the first four weeks of the season is highly un-correlated to the last 12 weeks as far as establishing trends in the NFL. Right now, teams are still feeling out tendencies and searching for matchups to exploit. Once they have four weeks of film, gameplans will drastically change. Let's see how unbalanced they are in like week 8 or so. Right now, matchups dictate tendencies more than philosophy.

Beantown Bronco
09-29-2010, 11:29 AM
The last two drives something like 20 passes, 8 runs, right?

Which would've made it far more balanced than the game as a whole.

[Edit below]

Just looked it up: prior to going down by two scores halfway through the 4th quarter which forced them into "pass only" mode, 16 run plays were called to 44 pass plays.

TheProfessor
09-29-2010, 11:40 AM
I do not understand the use of the spread as a reason to not run the ball.

By no means am I saying that they are failing to run on purpose. I think resorces (both time and personell) have been put into the passing game, and because of that it is now our strength.

Will we have to run some to keep defenses honest...absolutely.

But I bet we will see this 60/40 split continue well past this week.

Just as a side note, everything I have read about McD tells me that this kid is infatuated with, and has studied the hell out of Urban Meyers system. I think we are watching the NFL version being implimented.

ColoradoDarin
09-29-2010, 11:43 AM
Buck wasn't injured until preseason Hilarious!

Come on, Buck has been injured his entire career. But hey at least you got in a spelling crack.

Obviously this topic is real sensative for you. sorry to have offended.

Offense? Who is offended? I'm laughing at you. You claimed there are a ton of RBs available, when I asked for a name you can't provide even a scrubs name for me to make fun of. I mean, what's Selvin Young up to, is he on a roster at all?

Please, name a few available RBs for us to pick up that would be better than what we have.

Rock Chalk
09-29-2010, 11:47 AM
We could have drafted one obviously but then that would have ruined what was an otherwise outstanding looking draft for Denver (with the exception of moving up to get Teblow).

Professor is forgetting that there ARE 3 rookie offensive linemen that the bulk of our REAL starters are not playing on the line, that our RBs did take unfortunate injuries and missed most of pre-season but even if they hadn't, the blocking STILL wouldn't be tthere and I dont care if we had a re-incarnated Earl Campbell, there is no where to run on 90% of the run plays called.

TheProfessor
09-29-2010, 11:55 AM
Offense? Who is offended? I'm laughing at you. You claimed there are a ton of RBs available, when I asked for a name you can't provide even a scrubs name for me to make fun of. I mean, what's Slevin Young up to, is he on a roster at all?

Please, name a few available RBs for us to pick up that would be better than what we have.

Lets try this,

If I was planning on a ballanced attack I would have wanted better depth than Just knowshon (injured in his only season in the pros) and always injured Buckhalter. Well that and I would not have traded that RB we got last year from AZ. I would have bolstered our RB's in the offseason (draft & FA) and not waited until game 3 of preseason.

But, as I said several times I think the running game has taken a back seat to the passing game by design.

What I do not get is, why you think this is such an outlandish opinion.

Actually, never mind, I'll jump out of this conversation and we can take a look at how this plays out at the end of the year.

ColoradoDarin
09-29-2010, 11:58 AM
Lets try this,

If I was planning on a ballanced attack I would have wanted better depth than Just knowshon (injured in his only season in the pros) and always injured Buckhalter. Well that and I would not have traded that RB we got last year from AZ. I would have bolstered our RB's in the offseason (draft & FA) and not waited until game 3 of preseason.

But, as I said several times I think the running game has taken a back seat to the passing game by design.

What I do not get is, why you think this is such an outlandish opinion.

Because your timeline is off.

It goes like this:
F/A
draft
camp
injuries
season

but I guess since you only joined in May you missed the first 2

Also noted: No names given (I'll give Arrington is implied though, but he's no improvement)

TheProfessor
09-29-2010, 11:59 AM
We could have drafted one obviously but then that would have ruined what was an otherwise outstanding looking draft for Denver (with the exception of moving up to get Teblow).

Professor is forgetting that there ARE 3 rookie offensive linemen that the bulk of our REAL starters are not playing on the line, that our RBs did take unfortunate injuries and missed most of pre-season but even if they hadn't, the blocking STILL wouldn't be tthere and I dont care if we had a re-incarnated Earl Campbell, there is no where to run on 90% of the run plays called.

The strange thing is to me is that rookies usually run block much better than they pass block. This groups looks like they have been practicing nothing but pass blocking for the last several months.

EDIT: Sorry, had to edit the spelling before Darin tries to get my tenure revocked ;D

ColoradoDarin
09-29-2010, 12:04 PM
The strange thing is to me that rookies usually run block mush better that they pass block. This groups looks like they have been practicing nothing but pass blocking for the last several months.

It was noted around here (I don't feel like looking it up) but our OL came from predominantly passing college programs, or excelled at passpro in college. So in general you are right, but with the 5 we have lined up there is a different story.

TheProfessor
09-29-2010, 12:08 PM
It was noted around here (I don't feel like looking it up) but our OL came from predominantly passing college programs, or excelled at passpro in college. So in general you are right, but with the 5 we have lined up there is a different story.

Thats what I'm trying to say, this seems by design.


Who knows, maybe I'm all screwed up and starting this week we are going to ground and pound every team on the schedule. It just looks to me that we are focused much more on the pass.

ColoradoDarin
09-29-2010, 12:18 PM
Thats what I'm trying to say, this seems by design.


Who knows, maybe I'm all screwed up and starting this week we are going to ground and pound every team on the schedule. It just looks to me that we are focused much more on the pass.

I don't know about by design by McD though. Clady and Kuper were Shanahan picks, Harris is our best run blocker, but he's injury prone. It looks like Daniels is an okay run blocker and he's only in there because Beadles is covering for Harris. Weigmann was awful in both last year, so Walton is an improvement over him in both (I love Walton, but he can use a bit of seasoning).

Greatspirits
09-29-2010, 12:28 PM
Sounds great, but our record is still 1-2

errand
09-29-2010, 04:09 PM
Eh, would much rather be 3-0 with a decent running game. But, we are still a young team at the O-line. So, there is cause for hope. But for now, we are just a 20 to 20 Offense.

..just curious. What were the rankings of the Colts and Saints in rushing last season? And passing?

Cito Pelon
09-29-2010, 09:33 PM
Which would've made it far more balanced than the game as a whole.

[Edit below]

Just looked it up: prior to going down by two scores halfway through the 4th quarter which forced them into "pass only" mode, 16 run plays were called to 44 pass plays.

Oh well, I gave it a good try, but it was ultimately a failure.

The MVPlaya
09-29-2010, 09:45 PM
Sounds great, but our record is still 1-2

Yeah, and we were 8-8 and missed the playoffs in 2008 with Shanahan as head coach. We had the 2nd best offense in the league.

We can slobber all over that tho, can't we?

Bob's your Information Minister
09-29-2010, 10:11 PM
Stats are for losers.

SoCalBronco
09-29-2010, 10:16 PM
Stats are for losers.

Are you feeling ok, Bob? You used to use stats for anything and everything.

baja
09-29-2010, 10:25 PM
Are you feeling ok, Bob? You used to use stats for anything and everything.

Maybe he's just making a confession.

Bob's your Information Minister
09-29-2010, 10:59 PM
Are you feeling ok, Bob? You used to use stats for anything and everything.

That's because my team was a bunch of losers.

Taco John
09-29-2010, 11:05 PM
That's because my team was a bunch of losers.


I can't find the flaw in this argument. What's going on here?

Bob's your Information Minister
09-29-2010, 11:10 PM
I can't find the flaw in this argument. What's going on here?

There is nothing wrong with your NFL. Do not attempt to adjust the division. We are controlling transmission. If we wish to make it louder, we will bring up the volume (at Arrowhead). If we wish to make it softer, we will tune it to a whisper.

We will control the horizontal. We will control the vertical. We can roll the quarterback out, make his passes flutter. We can change the focus to a soft blur or sharpen it to crystal clarity.

For the next 14 weeks, sit quietly and we will control all that you see and hear. We repeat: there is nothing wrong with your NFL. You are about to participate in a great adventure. You are about to experience the awe and mystery which reaches from the inner mind to...The Kansas City Chiefs.

http://i54.tinypic.com/2aimp1c.jpg

mhgaffney
09-29-2010, 11:12 PM
It might mean something if we were 3-0.

Flex Gunmetal
09-29-2010, 11:14 PM
Hey I wonder what the chances of a 6-0 team missing the playoffs are. That could never happen, right?

SoCalBronco
09-29-2010, 11:15 PM
It might mean something if we were 3-0.

He's referring to the Chiefs, Gaff.

Bob's your Information Minister
09-29-2010, 11:15 PM
Hey I wonder what the chances of a 6-0 team missing the playoffs are. That could never happen, right?

Less than the chance of a 1-5 team making the playoffs.

Inkana7
09-30-2010, 07:03 AM
Who's 1-5? I thought only 3 games had been played? Geez, where have I been?

fontaine
09-30-2010, 08:32 AM
When did we become a great passing team?
We've only had 4 passing TDs in three games. Same as KC. Cutler has 6 TDs.