A Nice Top 11 List List from our friends at FO

[Lidderer]

1) You run when you win, not win when you run.
2) A great rushing defense is nothing without a great passing defense. In fact, in general, teams win or lose with the passing game more than the running game.
3) You will score more when playing a bad defense, and you will give up more points when playing a good offense. This sounds stupid, but when people consider stats without looking at strength of schedule, they are ignoring this.
4) Rushing is more dependent on the offensive line than people realize, but pass protection is more dependent on the QB himself than people realize.
5) Recovery of a fumble, despite being the product of hard work, is a completely random event that has no predictive qualities.
6) Running on third and short is more likely to convert than passing on third and short. One of the reasons that, despite #2 above, teams need balance.
7) The most underrated aspect of an NFL team's performance is the field position gained or lost on kickoffs and punts.
8) Teams which are strong on first and second down, but weak on third down, will tend to improve the following year. Teams which are weak on first and second down, but strong on third down, will tend to decline the following year.
9) RB generally decline after age 28, TE after age 29, WR after age 30, and QB after age 32, although in the last couple years a few players have had huge years after these general age guidelines (Martin, Dillon, Barber, Dunn, and lots and lots of WR in 2004 like Horn and Muhammad).
10) A team built on depth (Patriots, Steelers) is generally better than a team built on stars and scrubs (Redskins, Chiefs). The main reason is that there is no such thing as avoiding injuries in the NFL. Every team will suffer injuries, the only question is how many. The game is too fast and the players too strong to build a team where you say "if we can avoid all injuries this year, we'll win."
11) Actually this should have been on top: ranking pass defenses based on total yardage allowed is phenomenally stupid.

wonderful folks at Baseball prospectus provided us with this handy list.

[Clockwork Orange]

7) The most underrated aspect of an NFL team's performance is the field position gained or lost on kickoffs and punts.

I agree wholeheartedly with this and I was thrilled when the Broncos took steps to improve in this area a year ago. They traded for Sauerbrun, brought Keith Burns back and drafted Darrent Williams (who was originally supposed to make his biggest contribution to the team as a punt/kickoff returner until he surprised everyone with his play and put Lenny Walls out of a job).

[Borks147]

number eleven is totally true about the broncos. everyone in the media says "they were number 2 against the run but need work on the pass defense"...wwhhaaa?? sure we gave up alot of yards, but that's because we burried teams early and they had to resort to passing pretty quickly, thus we yielded alot of passing yards (most of which was futile in any case)....

[Ballhawk]

The only numbers I care about:

1) Points scored
2) Points allowed

Last year we ranked #7 on O and #3 on D!

[Northman]

Originally Posted by Ballhawk

The only numbers I care about:

1) Points scored
2) Points allowed

Last year we ranked #7 on O and #3 on D!

Interesting we ranked 3rd on Defense yet people complain that was our weakest point and was the sole reason we lost to Pitt.

[Rock Chalk]

Originally Posted by Anubis

Interesting we ranked 3rd on Defense yet people complain that was our weakest point and was the sole reason we lost to Pitt.

How many points did we give up against Pitt again? Twice what we averaged.

[Fan In Exile]

I liked number 8 because we were weak on third down last year and that means we will tend to improve this year. Up from the AFC championship game means Superbowl.

[Steve Sewell]

"10) A team built on depth (Patriots, Steelers) is generally better than a team built on stars and scrubs (Redskins, Chiefs)"

Nice.

[defenseman]

Originally Posted by Ballhawk

The only numbers I care about:

1) Points scored
2) Points allowed

Last year we ranked #7 on O and #3 on D!

the above, and W's and L's, are all that counts. The rest is fodder for the bookies..dman

[PatsWin2002]

10) A team built on depth (Patriots, Steelers) is generally better than a team built on stars and scrubs (Redskins, Chiefs). The main reason is that there is no such thing as avoiding injuries in the NFL. Every team will suffer injuries, the only question is how many. The game is too fast and the players too strong to build a team where you say "if we can avoid all injuries this year, we'll win."

I love this one.

The truth is that a guy like Troy Brown playing CB can help you immensely when even the most highly paid star is in rehab.

[Lidderer]

Originally Posted by Ballhawk

The only numbers I care about:

1) Points scored
2) Points allowed

Last year we ranked #7 on O and #3 on D!

That's sorta silly though, since those 2 things are heavily dependent on how one fares in other areas. It's like enjoying fatherhood but skipping over the dating, the wedding, the conception.

[DeuceOfClub]

1) You run when you win, not win when you run.
You run when you win, you will win if you can run.


3) (A)You will score more when playing a bad defense, and you will give up more points when playing a good offense. This sounds stupid, (B) but when people consider stats without looking at strength of schedule, they are ignoring this.
What does (A) have to do with (B)? (even though I agree with both statements)


4) Rushing is more dependent on the offensive line than people realize, but pass protection is more dependent on the QB himself than people realize.



5) Recovery of a fumble, despite being the product of hard work, is a completely random event that has no predictive qualities.
This is a repeated mantra at FO. What they are ignoring is that the number of fumble recoveries is a base directly from the numbers of fumble. Once the ball is on the ground the defense will recover a certain percent (anyone have an accurate number? My guess is about 45%). but if you cause more fumble, you will recover more. (duh!)


10) A team built on depth (Patriots, Steelers) is generally better than a team built on stars and scrubs (Redskins, Chiefs). The main reason is that there is no such thing as avoiding injuries in the NFL. Every team will suffer injuries, the only question is how many. The game is too fast and the players too strong to build a team where you say "if we can avoid all injuries this year, we'll win."
This is very true in the salary-cap era.
Calling the Chiefs scrubs made me laugh though.


11) Actually this should have been on top: ranking pass defenses based on total yardage allowed is phenomenally stupid.
OK

[GonzoLays]

Originally Posted by Clockwork Orange

7) The most underrated aspect of an NFL team's performance is the field position gained or lost on kickoffs and punts.

I agree wholeheartedly with this and I was thrilled when the Broncos took steps to improve in this area a year ago. They traded for Sauerbrun, brought Keith Burns back and drafted Darrent Williams (who was originally supposed to make his biggest contribution to the team as a punt/kickoff returner until he surprised everyone with his play and put Lenny Walls out of a job).

SIGN KOREN ROBINSON! Who cares if he has to sit out for a while, he returned 7 kickoffs for more than 40 yards compared to a high of 36 for us last season. KO returns are our weakpoint without a doubt.

[Lidderer]

Originally Posted by DeuceOfClub

1) You run when you win, not win when you run.
You run when you win, you will win if you can run.


3) (A)You will score more when playing a bad defense, and you will give up more points when playing a good offense. This sounds stupid, (B) but when people consider stats without looking at strength of schedule, they are ignoring this.
What does (A) have to do with (B)? (even though I agree with both statements)

1) No, you won't necessarily win if you run well. The majority of rushes come when a team has a lead. I mean, sure, if you can't run at all then you probably won't have many leads, but the same can be said for passing, so there's no need to make a distinction. If you can't do both reasonably well you're not gonna win much. See: Cardinals, Arizona; Falcons, Atlanta.

2)People can look at, say, Seattle and suggest they are a potent offense, which might neglect the fact that they've played 6 games vs ARZ, SF, STL--some truly horrendous Ds.

[watermock]

11) Actually this should have been on top: ranking pass defenses based on total yardage allowed is phenomenally stupid.

This is something I have said at least a dozen times. Yes, Fox got burned at the stake against Pitt, but generally, higher passing yards mean our run D is adequate and your playing with a lead.

[watermock]

Originally Posted by Lidderer

1) No, you won't necessarily win if you run well. The majority of rushes come when a team has a lead. I mean, sure, if you can't run at all then you probably won't have many leads, but the same can be said for passing, so there's no need to make a distinction. If you can't do both reasonably well you're not gonna win much. See: Cardinals, Arizona; Falcons, Atlanta.

2)People can look at, say, Seattle and suggest they are a potent offense, which might neglect the fact that they've played 6 games vs ARZ, SF, STL--some truly horrendous Ds.

Will you ever post something I agree with? Of course your going to win when a team has to put 8 in the box to try to stop the run. It's football 101 that you have to stop the run first. Loading the box up to stop the run means man on man is somewhere. That's why Champ is worth his 63 million dollar contract.

As far as Seattle goes, yes they had an easy division, but they didn't play divisional rivals in the playoffs now did they? They also got Royally Fvucked in the SB by the refs.

[watermock]

Originally Posted by GonzoLays

SIGN KOREN ROBINSON! Who cares if he has to sit out for a while, he returned 7 kickoffs for more than 40 yards compared to a high of 36 for us last season. KO returns are our weakpoint without a doubt.

Koren Robinson is suspended for the whole year moron. You can't even sign him if you wanted to. Even on IR.

He's going to be BANNED from the league for a minimum of one year. Denver couldn't even sniff his jock strap if they wanted to.

[goldengopher1976]

Originally Posted by Fan In Exile

I liked number 8 because we were weak on third down last year and that means we will tend to improve this year. Up from the AFC championship game means Superbowl.

Took the words from my mouth. This bodes well for us.

[watermock]

The major problem is our line is great in space, but can't push at the goal line. They just don't have the size. Add in the fact that teams don't have to defend deep, it makes coverage that much easier because the back line is your two deep safties.

That's why I kept calling for Warren to lead block on the goal line. Our OL has no push...not from lack of effort, from lack of size.

[Jason in LA]

Originally Posted by Clockwork Orange

7) The most underrated aspect of an NFL team's performance is the field position gained or lost on kickoffs and punts.

I agree wholeheartedly with this and I was thrilled when the Broncos took steps to improve in this area a year ago. They traded for Sauerbrun, brought Keith Burns back and drafted Darrent Williams (who was originally supposed to make his biggest contribution to the team as a punt/kickoff returner until he surprised everyone with his play and put Lenny Walls out of a job).

That's the one that stood out to me the most. Field position is so important. More important that total yards in my opinion. Over the past few years the Broncos always won the game on the stats sheets, but would lose the turnover battle, giving the opposing team the short field too much. I remember one year the Broncos were amoung the league leaders in forced punts, but were still giving up too many punts because the O would turn the ball over too much. Last year they stopped turnover the ball and the team improved by three games. I don't know the stats on field position, but I bet the field position was way better last year than the few years before.

Somebody on the radio a couple years ago was talking about the Bills/Giants Super Bowl. The guy said that Parcells told his punt returner to catch ever single punt so they would save field position. The Bills punt returner let a lot of them go, and they were downed deep by the Giants. The combined yards off of all those punts was like 130 yards in favor of the Giants. 130 yards just by catching the punt?!?!

[Lidderer]

Originally Posted by watermock

Will you ever post something I agree with?

hey I'm batting 1.000%. Jk.

Originally Posted by watermock

Of course your going to win when a team has to put 8 in the box to try to stop the run. It's football 101 that you have to stop the run first. Loading the box up to stop the run means man on man is somewhere. That's why Champ is worth his 63 million dollar contract.

As far as Seattle goes, yes they had an easy division, but they didn't play divisional rivals in the playoffs now did they? They also got Royally Fvucked in the SB by the refs.

You're not really disagreeing with anything I said, as far as I can see. You're just talking different ideas basically.

The Seattle example was just a random example, and if you can't understand the point FO made and that I tried to rephrase, well....see the weird thing is that I think you DO understand it, but you just wanna take jabs instead of accepting that it's correct.

[Jason in LA]

Originally Posted by aborquez147

number eleven is totally true about the broncos. everyone in the media says "they were number 2 against the run but need work on the pass defense"...wwhhaaa?? sure we gave up alot of yards, but that's because we burried teams early and they had to resort to passing pretty quickly, thus we yielded alot of passing yards (most of which was futile in any case)....

This is another one that's true. After crunching the numbers, I'll say that the Broncos had one of the best pass defenses in the league. Check these numbers out.

3rd lowest completion percentage given up.
4th lowest yards per attempt given up.
4th lowest opposing QB rating.

How can anybody look at those numbers and say the Broncos didn't have a good pass defense? People look at the amount of yards given up (29th in the league) and assume that the pass defense sucked. But two stats that are kind of strange explains it all.

The Broncos had the most passes attempted on them in the league, and the fewest rushes attempted against them in the league. Nobody was running on the Broncos, they were all trying to pass, and didn't have much success.

In just about every game the Broncos had the lead, milked the clock, and forced the other team to pass. So they gave up a lot of passing yards while winning the game. That translated into a 13-3 season, which was damn near 15-1. They blew the lead late against the Giants, and they fell short against at KC. The Broncos forced teams to ditch the running game. In most cases that translates into a win.

Last year's team was very good, and their record reflected that.

[Jason in LA]

Originally Posted by DeuceOfClub

4) Rushing is more dependent on the offensive line than people realize, but pass protection is more dependent on the QB himself than people realize.

The Broncos have proven this one true. It doesn't really matter who the RB is, they'll always run the ball well because the O line is so good at run blocking.

The O line sucked at pass blocking with Griese. I think they set a franchise record for most sacks given up. The Broncos get Plummer, who plays behind pretty much the same O line, and the sacks go down by a mile. All of a sudden the O line can pass block? Nope, Plummer avoids the sacks for the most part.

[Lidderer]

Originally Posted by Jason in LA

The O line sucked at pass blocking with Griese. I think they set a franchise record for most sacks given up. The Broncos get Plummer, who plays behind pretty much the same O line, and the sacks go down by a mile. All of a sudden the O line can pass block? Nope, Plummer avoids the sacks for the most part.

So true.

[Phantom]

Originally Posted by Jason in LA

This is another one that's true. After crunching the numbers, I'll say that the Broncos had one of the best pass defenses in the league. Check these numbers out.

3rd lowest completion percentage given up.
4th lowest yards per attempt given up.
4th lowest opposing QB rating.

How can anybody look at those numbers and say the Broncos didn't have a good pass defense? People look at the amount of yards given up (29th in the league) and assume that the pass defense sucked. But two stats that are kind of strange explains it all.

The Broncos had the most passes attempted on them in the league, and the fewest rushes attempted against them in the league. Nobody was running on the Broncos, they were all trying to pass, and didn't have much success.

In just about every game the Broncos had the lead, milked the clock, and forced the other team to pass. So they gave up a lot of passing yards while winning the game. That translated into a 13-3 season, which was damn near 15-1. They blew the lead late against the Giants, and they fell short against at KC. The Broncos forced teams to ditch the running game. In most cases that translates into a win.

Last year's team was very good, and their record reflected that.

More correct, you could not be.

We will see the same stats this year. No complaints here, except listening to Chef fans next offseason about how their D was comparable.

We saw it already in the preseason week 2. The Titans had, what 45 passing yards at half - down 28 to 3. They ended up with 172 to our 196.

It is all the mop up, prevent D, last minute touchdowns, when the game is out of hand. That extra 80 yards skews the stats. Sixty yards passing per game last year separted the number one team and us at 29.