Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Broncos Offense has actually gotten better since StL game.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by fontaine View Post
    What's so frightening about running the football more effectively, expecting the defense to play well and Manning being effective when he throws the ball less than 30 times a game?

    Generally speaking, if your QB has to throw the ball 40+ times in a playoff game, then it's not really a good sign.
    Not only that, striving to be a complete football team and not a one man show will benefit the team in the post Manning era.

    Comment


    • #77
      Everyone is just used to Manning throwing 50 times a game to bail out the team like he used to in Indy. Now that he can't, it scares everyone.

      Its about time the rest of the team is held accountable, namely defense, special teams, offensive line, etc.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by 2KBack View Post
        Not only that, striving to be a complete football team and not a one man show will benefit the team in the post Manning era.
        Exactly. Even with a 100% healthy Manning throwing the ball all over the place, it still wouldn't have given us a better chance to win in New England and/or against a top notch defense like Seattle.

        Hell those two teams want Denver to throw the ball 40+ times a game right into the strengths of their defense.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by fontaine View Post
          What's so frightening about running the football more effectively, expecting the defense to play well and Manning being effective when he throws the ball less than 30 times a game?

          Generally speaking, if your QB has to throw the ball 40+ times in a playoff game, then it's not really a good sign.
          Go back and read Med's post again, particularly the part about the Cincinnati game. Broncos fell behind, had to pass to get back in the game. More passes means more problems for Manning. Sometimes this is going to happen, particularly against good teams. And hey, guess what?!? You play good teams in the playoffs. Manning is this team's bread and butter, and if he can't be relied upon I think the implications are pretty clear. Of course, perhaps not for you since you're one of those denial people I mentioned. If nothing else, I like your optimism!

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by oubronco View Post
            All they need is a whole lot of this

            This ALWAYS a makes my day!

            Rep just cuz...

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by 2KBack View Post
              Not only that, striving to be a complete football team and not a one man show will benefit the team in the post Manning era.
              I don't disagree. The problem is that Peyton Manning is part of that "complete football team" equation. Sometimes a complete football team needs to throw the ball to win. If Med's point about his arm is correct, it's possible that we can't rely on that.

              Comment


              • #82
                They will worry about next season when this one is over.

                Regardless of what ails Mr. Manning, the team is still moving and scoring as efficiently as they were before St. Louis. Regardless of what we see (or think we see, and then use only circumstantial evidence which only supports our predetermined opinions), Denver is scoring as efficiently, while also shortening the game and playing better defense.

                That is better for playoff football. Manning, if truly suffering inner thigh damage (lol), won't suddenly be so bad that Denver stops doing what they've done as effectively as before - win.

                And again, they are now playing a brand of football more conducive to successful playoff runs. How it looked while working on the kinks in the regular season doesn't matter. I repeat: IT DOESN'T MATTER. Ravens and Panthers were ugly in the regular season as well, and both nearly missed the playoffs. Denver went 12-4 with an absurdly difficult schedule and a week 4 bye.

                What we've seen is irrelevant. What we think is happening is laughably full of ignorance; and again, irrelevant. It has nothing to do with denial or contrasting colored glasses. Denver changed up everything on offense, and still went 6-1 during that stretch against a bunch of teams desperately fighting for playoff spots.

                Think big picture: Denver is playing the right kind of football for the playoffs (3 times to drive home this fact).

                Unjustified nervousness over a stupid football game is creating this conversation.

                @TonyR: Until Vinovich took over, and the Broncos line bailed, Manning was doing just fine tossing all over the Bengals. The 3rd quarter comes to mind. It isn't denial just because people in the right (correctly) disagree with you.

                Seattle and New England are HOPING Manning has to throw 45+ times. That's the strength of their defense(s). The Cincinnati game was a complete outlier, and yet folks thinking doomsday and panic (like you) are assuming that's how it's always going to go. Evidence, the Broncos record, and now a week of rest contradict everything you're saying.
                Last edited by Doogansquest; 01-07-2015, 08:48 AM.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by TonyR View Post
                  Go back and read Med's post again, particularly the part about the Cincinnati game. Broncos fell behind, had to pass to get back in the game. More passes means more problems for Manning. Sometimes this is going to happen, particularly against good teams.
                  This is why you're black and white logic is silly. Manning and team did pass to come back into the game in the 3rd quarter where we scored 21 points and were leading the game and then start shooting ourselves in the foot with interceptions, penalties and poor OL play. You just choose to focus on one position. That's on you, not me.

                  Manning is this team's bread and butter, and if he can't be relied upon I think the implications are pretty clear. Of course, perhaps not for you since you're one of those denial people I mentioned.
                  According to who? You?



                  You can keep spouting this but I've said going back to last month that Manning's having problems when he can't step into his throws.

                  http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthr...highlight=step

                  The difference is I don't go from what I can see on the field to getting hyper sensitive and speculating that "it's frightening" and "he can't be relied upon" to oh sh*t he must have worn out his inner thigh.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    I dont think Denver will overlook Indy based on 2012 and ppl complain about Manning having to throw 40 times but this is exactly what Luck will end up doing which should give Denver opportunies for INTs.

                    Indy is maybe a 4 win team without Luck (based on talent) . Baring flukes , I don't think Denver will lay an egg and will take care of business in a workman like fashion

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by TonyR View Post
                      Go back and read Med's post again, particularly the part about the Cincinnati game. Broncos fell behind, had to pass to get back in the game. More passes means more problems for Manning. Sometimes this is going to happen, particularly against good teams. And hey, guess what?!? You play good teams in the playoffs. Manning is this team's bread and butter, and if he can't be relied upon I think the implications are pretty clear. Of course, perhaps not for you since you're one of those denial people I mentioned. If nothing else, I like your optimism!
                      This might be true, but problems also started when the rain came. Also, one of his picks was due to him jumping back, not setting his feet. His passes have floated in these cases since the day he arrived here. Also, he was clearly feeling footsteps in that game (a mental problem)

                      So, Med might be right, there does seem to be something amiss. I just wouldn't use the Cinn 4th quarter as an example.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by Doogansquest View Post
                        @TonyR: Until Vinovich took over, and the Broncos line bailed, Manning was doing just fine tossing all over the Bengals. The 3rd quarter comes to mind. It isn't denial just because people in the right (correctly) disagree with you.
                        So, then, Manning's 3 intereceptions in the 4th quarter are irrelevant to the discussion? And you're the one "in the right"? Lol.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by fontaine View Post
                          This is why you're black and white logic is silly. Manning and team did pass to come back into the game in the 3rd quarter where we scored 21 points and were leading the game and then start shooting ourselves in the foot with interceptions, penalties and poor OL play. You just choose to focus on one position. That's on you, not me.
                          My logic? I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with. Manning played great in the 3rd quarter and then fell apart. Which was pretty much what Med posted. And you mention those interceptions........ who threw them?

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            My advice; Enjoy Peyton Manning while you can.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by SonOfLe-loLang View Post
                              So, Med might be right, there does seem to be something amiss. I just wouldn't use the Cinn 4th quarter as an example.
                              Right. I'm saying it's frightening if Med is right. And for some reason this is hard for some people to understand and/or agree with. If Med is right, how can a Broncos fan not be concerned? What is there to argue with here?

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by TonyR View Post
                                Right. I'm saying it's frightening if Med is right. And for some reason this is hard for some people to understand and/or agree with. If Med is right, how can a Broncos fan not be concerned? What is there to argue with here?
                                No real argument from me, though i'm not sure I agree with Med's logic. Something is obviously amiss, but I'm not sure if its mental or physical (maybe a mixture of both).

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X