The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community

The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/index.php)
-   Orange Mane Central Discussion (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   Use of nickel against KC (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=109064)

TonyR 11-27-2012 10:52 AM

Use of nickel against KC
 
Interesting post over at IAOFM about how the Broncos used a lot of nickel against the Cheifs despite the fact that they're a running team that can't pass for sh*t. So they used their preferred personnel groupings rather than matching up with what the offense was doing quite often.

Give it a read here: http://www.itsalloverfatman.com/bron...throw-the-ball

yakyakyuk 11-27-2012 10:58 AM

This is simply not true - if you look at the comments replied to the blog/post, you can see the corrected response.

The broncos played their base defense more than usual - and were not in a nickel the majority times the chiefs ran the ball.

The Denver Post estimated that 133 of the Chiefs using yards came against the base defense.

TonyR 11-27-2012 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yakyakyuk (Post 3738643)
This is simply not true - if you look at the comments replied to the blog/post, you can see the corrected response.

You mean the update that confirms the point of the post?

Quote:

...the Broncos averaged 3.6 defensive linemen, 2.7 LBs, and 4.7 DBs in Sunday's game. The Chiefs averaged 1.9 WRs, 1.6 TEs, 1.3 RBs, and 0.3 of whatever Dexter McCluster is. That confirms that the Broncos were not at all concerned with matching the offensive personnel groupings of the Chiefs.

Crushaholic 11-27-2012 11:26 AM

Using their base defense explains a LOT, about this game. They kept the action in front of them, and expected the Chiefs to choose the wrong times to implode. That's exactly what happened. The Chiefs couldn't get it in the end zone, primarily because of crucial playcalling mistakes and penalties. Therefore, we traded touchdowns for their field goals...

MagicHef 11-27-2012 11:38 AM

Breaking it down between Chiefs running plays and passing plays:

Run:
3.9 DL
2.8 LB
4.3 DB

Pass:
3.3 DL
2.6 LB
5.1 DB

What does it mean? I don't know.

SonOfLe-loLang 11-27-2012 11:43 AM

People are getting awfully huffy about a defensive performance that yielded a whole 9 pts

enjolras 11-27-2012 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SonOfLe-loLang (Post 3738680)
People are getting awfully huffy about a defensive performance that yielded a whole 9 pts

I think everyone is judging every performance against one metric: "Can this team stay in a game with New England".

Watching them struggle with the stretch play and elusive backs like Charles sure brings to mind images of Woodhead dancing through the defense more or less unmolested.

KC can't score against anybody. However, if you're judging things against the New England metric than it was a really concerning performance IMHO.

Crushaholic 11-27-2012 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SonOfLe-loLang (Post 3738680)
People are getting awfully huffy about a defensive performance that yielded a whole 9 pts

It's more about disrespecting the Chiefs. We can't have a performance like that, against a good team...

Or, just ignore my comment and go with what enjolras said...:thumbsup:

SonOfLe-loLang 11-27-2012 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by enjolras (Post 3738727)
I think everyone is judging every performance against one metric: "Can this team stay in a game with New England".

Watching them struggle with the stretch play and elusive backs like Charles sure brings to mind images of Woodhead dancing through the defense more or less unmolested.

KC can't score against anybody. However, if you're judging things against the New England metric than it was a really concerning performance IMHO.

I guess. But they are still two vastly different teams. I dont think that much can be gleaned from it

SonOfLe-loLang 11-27-2012 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crushaholic (Post 3738740)
It's more about disrespecting the Chiefs. We can't have a performance like that, against a good team...

It's never going to be an apples to apples comparison. Do you understand how many variables go into a football game?>

Crushaholic 11-27-2012 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SonOfLe-loLang (Post 3738743)
It's never going to be an apples to apples comparison. Do you understand how many variables go into a football game?>

I know. It's always a new game, with new factors. With Prater missing 2 field goals, we're lucky to get out of there with a W. The good teams find a way to win.

See? I'm SLOWLY coming down, from the ledge...:rofl:

baja 11-27-2012 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SonOfLe-loLang (Post 3738680)
People are getting awfully huffy about a defensive performance that yielded a whole 9 pts

It exposed Denver's weakness to defend the run to the outside.

Other teams will see that. Doom really struggles when you run at him.

Inkana7 11-27-2012 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crushaholic (Post 3738740)
It's more about disrespecting the Chiefs. We can't have a performance like that, against a good team...

Or, just ignore my comment and go with what enjolras said...:thumbsup:

They Chiefs are awful, but they are the #1 rushing team in the NFL.

maher_tyler 11-27-2012 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baja (Post 3738756)
It exposed Denver's weakness to defend the run to the outside.

Other teams will see that. Doom really struggles when you run at him.

They were picking up chunks of yards over the left tackle over and over. Against a good running team I wouldn't be totally against putting Ayers in at Dooms spot on first down.

pricejj 11-27-2012 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baja (Post 3738756)
It exposed Denver's weakness to defend the run to the outside.

Other teams will see that. Doom really struggles when you run at him.

...which is exactly how the Patriots were killing us. Brooking was getting blocked/washed out of running plays all day. DJ wasn't much better in limited snaps. Woodyard will make a great run stop sporadically, but is done when engaged by a blocker.

baja 11-27-2012 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maher_tyler (Post 3738783)
They were picking up chunks of yards over the left tackle over and over. Against a good running team I wouldn't be totally against putting Ayers in at Dooms spot on first down.

I was telling my TV that on Sunday but my message didn't get through.

SonOfLe-loLang 11-27-2012 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baja (Post 3738756)
It exposed Denver's weakness to defend the run to the outside.

Other teams will see that. Doom really struggles when you run at him.

You really think this is some amazing second SUDDENLY EXPOSED? Or that Denver just had an off game

11-27-2012 02:29 PM

They had the perfect personnel in to defend a Hillis throw to Quinn.

yakyakyuk 11-27-2012 03:05 PM

There is a reply to the original IAOFM post in he comments section (see below) - the analysis is incorrect. When the Chiefs range ball, the majority of the time the Broncos were in base D - not a nickel.

Quote:

I stand by my earlier comment that the Broncos were not in a nickel package with disregard to the KC running game - they were definitely playing the run.

If I use your same analysis, but on actual KC running plays (per PFF), you see a 3.9 average Bronco defensive lineman in the game (and higher LB, lower DB averages).

Tony Carter played the least % of total defensive snaps since he established himself in the SD game (46%). Plus he was only on the field 10 times when the Chiefs actually ran the ball (only 1/3 of his total time). This is not a coincidence, the Broncos played for the run.

Not trying to be a jerk, as I really like your site - and am a long time Bronco fan. If you watch the game, you will see the base defense on the key drives the chiefs ran the ball.

Not saying it is panic time, but we will need better run d performance in the playoffs.

baja 11-27-2012 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SonOfLe-loLang (Post 3738835)
You really think this is some amazing second SUDDENLY EXPOSED? Or that Denver just had an off game

I think Doom sucks against the run and Ayers is much better so the solution is play Ayers on obvious running downs.

11-28-2012 08:17 AM

Just rewatched game and as others said this article is untrue. I think they heard deirdorf say on one first down when Denver played nickle and got pooped pushed in question why they ran nickle. Denver played base on almost all first downs and if it was 6 yds or less for 1 st they were in base.

pricejj 11-28-2012 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baja (Post 3738881)
I think Doom sucks against the run and Ayers is much better so the solution is play Ayers on obvious running downs.

Against New England's no-huddle, Dumervil would never play, which isn't smart...

When you play your SLB on the line everytime, like the Broncos do with Von, you only leave yourself 2 LB's. The Broncos have tried to offset this imbalance, by shifting both of their LB's to the right side of the Defense. The Chiefs were able to effectively block both Woodyard and Brooking.

You also have to remember that Jamal Charles runs a 4.38.

Stevan Ridley (Patriots) runs 4.65, so won't be able to get to the outside nearly as fast as Charles did. Remember, Woodhead (who also runs a 4.38) is the RB who kept picking up long 3rd down conversions against the Broncos.

Giving up 7 yards a pop to Charles shows improvement to giving up 19 yards a pop against Woodhead.

ZONA 11-28-2012 09:28 AM

I'm not worried about NE. We had them figured out in the 2nd half and got things going pretty good. They're whomping on bad teams right now. Their division is just as weak as ours. We'll find out what NE is made of in 2 weeks when the play Houston. Good news is that one of those teams must drop a game to us. I hope it's N.E. and then when we beat the Ravens in 3 weeks, we'll get that other 1st round bye. That's the game plan folks.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:04 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.