![]() |
|
|
#1 | |
|
Ring of Famer
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,589
Adopt-a-Bronco: Bill Vinovich |
Quote:
http://www.denverpost.com/premium/broncos/ci_13691543 |
|
|
|
|
| Sponsored Links |
|
|
#2 |
|
Ring of Famer
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,930
Adopt-a-Bronco: None |
We'll open the playbook up more as the season goes on and it becomes more apparent what the players can and can't do, I'm sure.
Didn't like the offensive gameplan much yesterday though, we should have taken more shots deep once it became obvious the Ravens were gonna be so aggressive in taking away the short stuff. The premise of the article is pretty gammy though. "Boring" football, as it is described here, wins more championships than "pizazz". Always been the case and still is, even in today's pass happy NFL. Colts are the only high powered, flashy offense to win a Superbowl since the turn of the century. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 | |
|
Ring of Famer
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,846
Adopt-a-Bronco: None |
Quote:
Colts Steelers 2x patriots. 3x 6 of the last 9 Superbowl winners had high-powered offenses. Not including 2 more on the losing ends seattle & the rams. Last edited by peacepipe; 11-02-2009 at 05:41 AM.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
It is what it Is.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in a bunker
Posts: 54,394
Adopt-a-Bronco: Julius Thomas |
Yesterday was the first game this season that I thought Cutler (Still don't want him here but I'd take Flacco in a NY minute) would have made a difference. Orton is going to have to find a way to beat the pressure with his arm or our winning ways are over.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Got trolls?
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Tampa Bay
Posts: 13,810
Adopt-a-Bronco: Brady Quinn |
Who the hell let this guy become a sportswriter?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
Ring of Famer
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 1,213
Adopt-a-Bronco: VMFM |
Quote:
2000 Ravens: O was ranked 14th in points, 16th in yards. 2001 Patriots: O was ranked 6th in scoring, 19th in yards. 2002 Buccs: O was ranked 18th in scoring, 24th in yards. 2003 Patriots: O was ranked 12th in scoring, 17th in yards. 2004 Patriots: O was ranked 4th in scoring, 7th in yards. 2005 Steelers:O was ranked 9th in scoring, 15th in yards. 2006 Colts: O was ranked 2nd in scoring, 3rd in yards. 2007 Giants: O wa ranked 14th in scoring, 16th in points 2008 Steelers:O was ranked 20th in scoring, 22nd in yards. Of the past 9 SB champs, only the 2006 Colts and 2004 Patriots had offenses that could be considered top 5, no matter how you cut it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 6,648
|
the sports department at the Denver Post is downright giddy this morning. probably high-fiving each other over the Broncos loss. now they get to write the kind of articles they haven't been able to write all year. what a bunch of dinks.
i said yesterday that the loss was 99% on the coaching staff. give them a week to respond and see if they make the changes needed to beat Pittsburgh. then, if they don't, the Denver Post writers can have a field day. but it's a bit premature to start jumping off the bandwagon. |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Perennial Pro-bowler
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: DC
Posts: 925
Adopt-a-Bronco: Juggernaut #46 |
The Broncos were exposed? The book on beating the Broncos is getting up for a big game and winning the physical battles?
Seems to be the formula for beating any team. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Ring of Famer
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 8,278
Adopt-a-Bronco: None |
Seems the Broncos never play the Ravens well, so losing wasn't that big a surprise to me. Especially on the road and the Ravens playing to catch Cincy.
Oh, and I find this yards per pass attempt one of the more useless stats in football. if a guy throws two 50 yard passes and they are both incomplete, then throws a pass complete for 10 yards, it's considered he is basically throwing 3 yards per pass attempt. I worrry more about the yards per pass completion more important, if even that is important, for pass atttempts since it doesn't indicate truly the passes that were really thrown and attempted. A complete, bogus stat. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Ring of Famer
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: BFE
Posts: 5,994
Adopt-a-Bronco: Money Ball |
I don't know. Orton was pressured all day. Cutler is known to throw a few int's when under pressure. I do agree we may have thrown a few more deep balls thus relieving some pressure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 | |
|
It is what it Is.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in a bunker
Posts: 54,394
Adopt-a-Bronco: Julius Thomas |
Quote:
So true about that stat, would be the same if at the end of the season add up every teams total points scored and say the team with the most points is the best team. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
Ring of Famer
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 5,221
Adopt-a-Bronco: Rod Smith |
Quote:
I believe it is the best thing to happen for our team. We never know if we get Good or Bad Jay on Sunday's. Though we might have won yesterday against BAL, we might have lost other games. My only problem with our team is about offensive playcalling and punter. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Partisan
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 49,113
|
I'm sure when Josh needs advise about football, he'll turn to Kizla.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 | |
|
It is what it Is.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in a bunker
Posts: 54,394
Adopt-a-Bronco: Julius Thomas |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Ring of Famer
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 5,221
Adopt-a-Bronco: Rod Smith |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Ring of Famer
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 7,180
Adopt-a-Bronco: None |
Well when you "Dink" and Dung on offense during practise....you will dink and dung offensively in the games. Question is, how much has McD worked on the deep ball during practice to where Orton and the WR's feel comfortable enough to make it a success on Sunday. The deep ball must be drilled and practised as a major part of the offensive game plan every Sunday.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
lost in the ether
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The 'cuse
Posts: 5,793
Adopt-a-Bronco: Peyton Hillis |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 | |
|
Ring of Famer
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 13,033
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Ring of Famer
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 1,213
Adopt-a-Bronco: VMFM |
I would have liked to see Broncos go max protect, keeping RB's and TE's in blocking to counter the blitz, and let Royal/Marshall get deep. Take a couple of shots like that, then start sneaking Scheffler/Graham out into the middle of the field.
Make this work, and the safeties will be out of the box. Once that happens, you can go to the screen game, and then the whole O works. Without the deep threat, Reed/Polomau will be able to blow up any screen they see developing and this O will be stuck in the mud. |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 | |
|
Partisan
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater
Posts: 49,113
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Master of Karate
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Los angeles
Posts: 7,141
Adopt-a-Bronco: tgnsmyb**** |
I don't understand how throwing deep is the answer to porous line play. Hell, EVen that Lispy Dbag dierdorf said coming out of the half" The broncos are going to have to go to quick passes".
It seems that alot of people that understand football agree with this assessment. Or, I guess we could just hold on to the ball longer and than throw it really far. |
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Ask me about my title
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,849
Adopt-a-Bronco: Von Miller |
I think he was somewhat right about the conservative play calling, but the biggest and most glaring problem was the offensive line. They looked totally out matched yesterday.
EDIT: Treed by orangeandblue |
|
|
|
|
|
#23 | |
|
Pampita says...
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Mar del Plata, Argentina.
Posts: 5,175
Adopt-a-Bronco: Eddie Royal |
Quote:
We have problems, everyone does, I'm confident McD will work on them and we'll be an improved team come monday. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#24 | |
|
Ring of Famer
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,846
Adopt-a-Bronco: None |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
STOP!
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: In a van down by the river
Posts: 11,104
Adopt-a-Bronco: Von Miller |
So let me get this straight. Fundamental football wasn't good enough to beat a team that beat us playing solid fundamental football? The Ravens just blocked, tackled, ran and passed better--no tricks, just simple downhill running, superior qb play, and defensive execution. Imagination doesn't win games--implementation of imagination can, however, which goes back to yes, fundamentals. Imaginative play calls require MORE fundamentals than normal--things like holding blocks longer, being more sure on tackles, and covering wr's for even longer. If you are getting beat soundly at these things already, 'imagination' only puts your team in more jeopardy, IMO.
Granted, there are some plays that could add a creative wrinke, like a halfback toss with an option to throw it, a no huddle, or even the wild horse look, but overall, this team just got beat by a better version of themselves, IMO. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|