Broncos must start to finish

[Taco John]

Broncos must start to finish
Last-quarter slumps have become too commonplace for AFC West leaders in recent weeks
By Mike Klis
Denver Post Staff Writer


To begin a new week, the Broncos concentrated on the finish.

They gathered Monday at their Dove Valley headquarters for a film session on their most recent game against the New York Giants.

Unlike the movies at the theatres, half the flicks shown in NFL film rooms have unhappy endings.

"It was rough," Broncos fullback Kyle Johnson said.

The Broncos could not have played much better for 2 1/2 quarters, maybe even three quarters and change, against the Giants at the Meadowlands, building a 23-10 lead early in the fourth quarter. Yet a poor finish cost them. It was the Giants who won, 24-23.

Instead of bringing a 6-1 record into their game before the bye week Sunday against the stout Philadelphia Eagles at Invesco Field at Mile High, the Broncos must confront their disturbing habits.

There's their three-year pattern of turning a 5-1 record into 5-2. No sense dwelling on that anymore. But if they are to get everybody off their case by not dropping to 5-3 for the third time in three years, the Broncos must address their tendency to get a big lead, only to transform their fans into basket cases.

Yes, there was in-house discussion Monday about the team's late-game breakdowns.

Blame went around the room. After going up 20-10 before the second half was two minutes old against the Giants, the Broncos' offense added only three more points. Not exactly what they mean by piling on.

They also led Washington 21-10 midway through the third quarter and never scored again. They were defeating New England 28-3 early in the third quarter, but again, the Broncos stopped scoring.

Yes, the Broncos won those two



games, but the Giants became strike three.

Here's a scary statistic: From the moment the Broncos stopped scoring in their past three games, they were outscored to the finish by a combined 40-0.



Blame the offense for the 0.

"My college coach (Paul Pasqualoni) used to say it's the idea about having a sense of urgency," Johnson said. "If you were down by seven, you'd play in a way where you have to get points now. I think sometimes we have lost that sense of urgency in the second half."

Put the 40 on the defense's shoulders.

With rookies running around in the secondary, the Broncos could use more help up front. There were a few times Sunday when it appeared defensive end Trevor Pryce and tackle Gerard Warren were mugged in their futile attempts to reach Giants quarterback Eli Manning. But don't all defensive linemen endure some form of holding?
Besides a turnover, nothing kills a potential comeback drive like a sack, and no team has fewer sacks than the Broncos' eight. The Browns have eight, but they've played one fewer game.

"We're winning," Warren said. "That (sack) stat is not showing up, but we're getting penetration, we're getting pressures."

In his Monday news conference, Broncos coach Mike Shanahan gave as much credit to the Giants for their late-game comeback as he blamed his own team for failing to finish. But when a team is gasping at the finish three consecutive weeks, an opponent deserves only so much credit.



"Sometimes it's human nature to relax a little bit," Shanahan said. "And if you do relax, you don't make plays."

The Broncos' latest major issue isn't all bad. Step one to blowing



a big lead is building a big lead. That is a problem the Broncos don't want to solve. Reprogramming human nature against taking a deep breath? That's where Shanahan comes in.

"That's what you try to work on in practice," he said. "You try to emphasize it. Hopefully, we've got the same opportunity next week. I'm hoping that we're up 14, 21 points so I can find out if my words of wisdom have sunk in or not."

Seizing the moment
Five teams made comebacks in the final minutes of play to win Sunday:

Team Score || Big play || Time left

Arizona beat Tennessee 20-10 34-yard pass to Larry Fitzgerald 5:20

Minnesota beat Green Bay 23-20 56-yard FG by Paul Edinger :00

New York beat Denver 24-23 2-yard pass to Amani Toomer :05

Philadelphia beat San Diego 20-17 65-yard return of blocked FG 2:25

Seattle beat Dallas 13-10 50-yard FG by Josh Brown :00

Staff writer Mike Klis can be reached at 303-820-5440 or mklis@denverpost.com.

[Taco John]

http://www.denverpost.com/sports/ci_3148454

[Popps]

We've given up more points in the last two minutes than any team in the league? Good god, it's worse than I thought.

Oh well, maybe we can make some adjustments. Coyer did it after the Miami game. He'd better dig deep and figure out a way to quit letting teams back into games when we have a late-game lead.

[Kaylore]

For the O its just playing with urgency knowing that the D has not been able to stop a team from rolling 20+ points on us in the fourth no matter how many long scoring drives we've had in the game.

On D I would start with the premise that they're probably going to score on us in the fourth since those stats show that. With that in mind I think what you have to do is sell out and blitz every single down like we did against San Diego. Did Brees get some big plays on us? Yes. Did we pretty much shut him down anyway? Yes. If they're going to score we might as well blitz two extra guys every play the second half. Eventually you'll get a turnover that you need.

[OrangeShadow]

well we know what we have to fix now we just have to fix it

[baja]

Originally Posted by Popps

We've given up more points in the last two minutes than any team in the league? Good god, it's worse than I thought.

Oh well, maybe we can make some adjustments. Coyer did it after the Miami game. He'd better dig deep and figure out a way to quit letting teams back into games when we have a late-game lead.

It seems to me this problem is a team problem not just the D as you say nor is it just the O as TJ says. The whole team plays not to lose when they get a lead. They are like a different team out there. It's my guess that will be addressed this week with the heart breaking loss to the giants. This is a game we had won, I just hope the loss did not knock us out of a bye week during playoffs.

[Rascal]

40-0....wow. That's just ugly.

[Popps]

Originally Posted by baja fan

It seems to me this problem is a team problem not just the D as you say nor is it just the O as TJ says. The whole team plays not to lose when they get a lead. They are like a different team out there. It's my guess that will be addressed this week with the heart breaking loss to the giants. This is a game we had won, I just hope the loss did not knock us out of a bye week during playoffs.

Well, it's fair enough to say that neither unit does its best work late in a game. But a lead is a lead, especially when we're talking about late game, double-digit leads. A real defense has to step up and protect that lead.

One thing I notice is that when the other team just starts airing it out, our defense looks totally befuddled. i.e... we can't stop the 2 minute drill. The last three games saw teams get behind and in situations where they had to just let it rip. When they did, we were totally lost. The dump pass kills us. We don't get to the QB and our famous "almost sacks" aren't getting it done late in the game.

How's this, even if people want to blame the offense... it's still obvious that we've got big problems stopping people when it counts, no matter WHAT our O is doing.

[rbackfactory80]

Originally Posted by Popps

Well, it's fair enough to say that neither unit does its best work late in a game. But a lead is a lead, especially when we're talking about late game, double-digit leads. A real defense has to step up and protect that lead.

One thing I notice is that when the other team just starts airing it out, our defense looks totally befuddled. i.e... we can't stop the 2 minute drill. The last three games saw teams get behind and in situations where they had to just let it rip. When they did, we were totally lost. The dump pass kills us. We don't get to the QB and our famous "almost sacks" aren't getting it done late in the game.

How's this, even if people want to blame the offense... it's still obvious that we've got big problems stopping people when it counts, no matter WHAT our O is doing.

I agree. A real Defense would have died for that chance to shut them down, and to me that was not how it looked. They looked like they were still counting on the offense on that last drive. In my opinion once they got the ball on the second drive to win the game, the game was already over. The only chance this defense had was stopping them on the first of the two touchdown scoring drives. They should have kept it real at that point.

[ludo21]

Originally Posted by Kaylore

For the O its just playing with urgency knowing that the D has not been able to stop a team from rolling 20+ points on us in the fourth no matter how many long scoring drives we've had in the game.

On D I would start with the premise that they're probably going to score on us in the fourth since those stats show that. With that in mind I think what you have to do is sell out and blitz every single down like we did against San Diego. Did Brees get some big plays on us? Yes. Did we pretty much shut him down anyway? Yes. If they're going to score we might as well blitz two extra guys every play the second half. Eventually you'll get a turnover that you need.

I agree. It was said all last week that putting a team away was important, but they still managed to win every game. i think the loss here was an important wake up call for this team.

maybe Coyer should break down again

[ZachKC]

Originally Posted by ludo21

i think the loss here was an important wake up call for this team.

I thought that was Miami. I don't know if I believe in "wake up calls" at this point in the season. I believe it about as much as the idea that because a team lost the week before they are "angry" and are more dangerous to the next team they play.

[ludo21]

Originally Posted by ZachKC

I thought that was Miami. I don't know if I believe in "wake up calls" at this point in the season. I believe it about as much as the idea that because a team lost the week before they are "angry" and are more dangerous to the next team they play.

dont ruin it for me, it was a wake up call!!!!!!!!!!

[ZachKC]

Originally Posted by ludo21

dont ruin it for me, it was a wake up call!!!!!!!!!!

Ha, I am not saying this team can't get better...but the idea of there being a "wake up call" just seems over simplistic when you look at what these players and coaches do week in and week out.

[ludo21]

Originally Posted by ZachKC

Ha, I am not saying this team can't get better...but the idea of there being a "wake up call" just seems over simplistic when you look at what these players and coaches do week in and week out.

I guess, but a gut wrenching loss to a team you know their better then would sure wake me up.

[2KBack]

Originally Posted by ludo21

dont ruin it for me, it was a wake up call!!!!!!!!!!

While the term "wake up call" is a little cliche', I'd say it's pretty accurate here. This was a case where there was a possibility on the horizon of having a let down in the 4th cause a loss. I doubt it was considered a priority in the weeks where we still had a victory. Now that the lapses have actually cost them a game I think they will pay better attention.

[Dagmar]

I maintain getting a hypnosis expert in at half time and convince the players the game is just starting and we'll be fine.

[ZachKC]

Originally Posted by ludo21

I guess, but a gut wrenching loss to a team you know their better then would sure wake me up.

Again, I have to point you to week 1.

[Taco John]

Originally Posted by Kaylore

If they're going to score we might as well blitz two extra guys every play the second half. Eventually you'll get a turnover that you need.

We got the turnover we needed in the Giants game... How'd that work out for us?

[ZachKC]

Originally Posted by Taco John

We got the turnover we needed in the Giants game... How'd that work out for us?

It didn't.

Wait was I not supposed to answer that? Was it one of those questions?

Sorry.

[Taco John]

Originally Posted by ZachKC

I thought that was Miami. I don't know if I believe in "wake up calls" at this point in the season. I believe it about as much as the idea that because a team lost the week before they are "angry" and are more dangerous to the next team they play.

Well you should study some NFL history then. Teams get wake-up calls well into December.

[ZachKC]

Originally Posted by Taco John

Well you should study some NFL history then. Teams get wake-up calls well into December.

I believe teams can get better in the month of December but we will just disagree on the the fact that it was a "wakeup call."

[Taco John]

Originally Posted by ZachKC

I believe teams can get better in the month of December but we will just disagree on the the fact that it was a "wakeup call."

Well we'll just have to agree to disagree. I think wake-up calls happen whenever a team loses focus. Whether they use the game as a wake up call, or whether they roll over and hit snooze, that's another matter entirely.

[Kaylore]

Originally Posted by Taco John

We got the turnover we needed in the Giants game... How'd that work out for us?

Not good when Eli made first down after first down in a row from his own 90 yard line did it? They need to play 60 minutes.

[BigRedChief]

It's not just you guys. We had 17 points on Philly. Look at the 3 games that got away from the teams that should have won.
Shannon Sharpe has an interesting article on nfl.com about going for the kill.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/8999282

[Kaylore]

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

It's not just you guys. We had 17 points on Philly. Look at the 3 games that got away from the teams that should have won.
Shannon Sharpe has an interesting article on nfl.com about going for the kill.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/8999282

Thanks. That's a good article and I agree with most of it.