PDA

View Full Version : A little motivation for the Broncos



Mr D
08-06-2010, 08:53 AM
http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/7820/screenshot20100805at144.png

Even in the colorado, the percentage was still about 20/80.
:tsk:

Dirk
08-06-2010, 08:55 AM
That doesn't surprise me at all.

I think that we will make it to the playoffs this year. With or without Doom.

BroncoNut
08-06-2010, 08:58 AM
Mr. D. Pm me some boob shots

Northman
08-06-2010, 09:02 AM
We would of had trouble making the playoffs with Doom.

Dirk
08-06-2010, 09:03 AM
We would of had trouble making the playoffs with Doom.

C'mon Bro...think POSITIVE!!! :beer:

BroncoJoe
08-06-2010, 09:04 AM
Sorry, but I just don't think losing Doom equates to Doomsday for the Broncos. We'll miss his sacks, but he was fairly one dimentional anyway.

Mr D
08-06-2010, 09:06 AM
Mr. D. Pm me some boob shots

:lol: Sorry man, I can't risk that your daughter is on your lap while reading Broncos forums.

Northman
08-06-2010, 09:06 AM
C'mon Bro...think POSITIVE!!! :beer:
I like to think realistically mate. Im not one to blow smoke up people's asses. :D

Nomad
08-06-2010, 09:08 AM
Sorry, but I just don't think losing Doom equates to Doomsday for the Broncos. We'll miss his sacks, but he was fairly one dimentional anyway.

Pretty much this! I believe if Clady isn't in the game will make more of a difference than Dumervil not being in the game, though like you said he'll be missed!!

Northman
08-06-2010, 09:10 AM
Pretty much this! I believe if Clady isn't in the game will make more of a difference than Dumervil not being in the game, though like you said he'll be missed!!

Your nuts. There is NO ONE who can replace Doom right now on our squad in terms of pressuring the QB. Like i said, even with Doom it was a stretch for us to make the playoffs but without him the odds are even worse.

Nomad
08-06-2010, 09:11 AM
Your nuts. There is NO ONE who can replace Doom right now on our squad in terms of pressuring the QB. Like i said, even with Doom it was a stretch for us to make the playoffs but without him the odds are even worse.

We'll find out!:whoknows:

Mr D
08-06-2010, 09:12 AM
I like to think realistically mate. Im not one to blow smoke up people's asses. :D

How realistic was that we started off 6-0? how realistic is it that we ended up with Tim Tebow? How realistic is it that we could beat the Patriots, Chargers, Bengals, Cowboys, yet we lose to the Raiders and Chiefs? If I told you all this in hind sight would you have believed me?

If I threw these two stat lines at you

3802 passing yards 21 tds 12 ints 62.1% 86.8 qb rating 15 games

3666 passing yards 27 tds 26 ints 60.1% 76.8 qb rating 16 games

What if I told you one was Jay Cutler and the other was Kyle Orton BEFORE last season started, but AFTER the trade? What if I told you Orton threw for more yardage than Jay Cutler in less games?

Sorry man, but being realistic in your reality isn't exactly... well reality.

BroncoNut
08-06-2010, 09:12 AM
:whoknows:

Nomad
08-06-2010, 09:15 AM
:whoknows:

It's anybody's guess, but I will flop my ass on the couch watching every Sunday to find out having a few of these:beer: of course!:D

Mr D
08-06-2010, 09:16 AM
Your nuts. There is NO ONE who can replace Doom right now on our squad in terms of pressuring the QB. Like i said, even with Doom it was a stretch for us to make the playoffs but without him the odds are even worse.

Not sure how it was a stretch for us to make the playoffs. Our schedule is easier than last years, Chargers are bleeding, and we've upgraded at some key positions + this will be the first time in a long time we go into year 2 keeping all 3 systems in tact.

Doom being out does make the odds worse... no denying that.

Northman
08-06-2010, 09:16 AM
How realistic was that we started off 6-0? how realistic is it that we ended up with Tim Tebow? How realistic is it that we could beat the Patriots, Chargers, Bengals, Cowboys, yet we lose to the Raiders and Chiefs? If I told you all this in hind sight would you have believed me?

Yes, because it happened the year before.


If I threw these two stat lines at you

3802 passing yards 21 tds 12 ints 62.1% 86.8 qb rating 15 games

3666 passing yards 27 tds 26 ints 60.1% 76.8 qb rating 16 games

What if I told you one was Jay Cutler and the other was Kyle Orton BEFORE last season started, but AFTER the trade? What if I told you Orton threw for more yardage than Jay Cutler in less games?

Sorry man, but being realistic in your reality isn't exactly... well reality.

And neither team made the playoffs. But hey, go ahead and celebrate Kyle's personal stats if it makes you feel better. I want to win games and get back to the Super Bowl.

Northman
08-06-2010, 09:19 AM
Not sure how it was a stretch for us to make the playoffs. Our schedule is easier than last years, Chargers are bleeding, and we've upgraded at some key positions + this will be the first time in a long time we go into year 2 keeping all 3 systems in tact.

Doom being out does make the odds worse... no denying that.

Chargers are bleeding indeed. But since we find ways to lose to bottom dwelling teams (at home no less) like Oakland and KC it means very little in the NFL world. As for the 3 systems intact? I wouldnt really call them intact. We have yet again changed over players and coaches which messes with chemistry. Its not so cut and dry as you might think.

Mr D
08-06-2010, 09:20 AM
Yes, because it happened the year before.

What happend the year before? :lol: Horrible.




And neither team made the playoffs. But hey, go ahead and celebrate Kyle's personal stats if it makes you feel better. I want to win games and get back to the Super Bowl.

My post wasn't about making playoffs and getting back to the super bowl, it was about you claiming to be realistic and not blowing smoke, yet the NFL is the most unexpected/unpredictable sport in which what teams do well every year.

Northman
08-06-2010, 09:20 AM
It's anybody's guess, but I will flop my ass on the couch watching every Sunday to find out having a few of these:beer: of course!:D

No one has said i wont be watching the games. :confused:

BroncoNut
08-06-2010, 09:21 AM
I think I am probably most in agreement with Northman on this. After last season's last 8 game debacle, I would not describe the team as intact

BroncoNut
08-06-2010, 09:23 AM
Yeah, Northman is just projecting. No need to be attacknig him Nomad

Nomad
08-06-2010, 09:24 AM
No one has said i wont be watching the games. :confused:

You know I don't go that route North! I was speaking on my behalf and answering Nut's because I really don't know how this season will go but I'm anxious to find out and Aug can't end soon enough! And you know if I underestimate Dumervil's importance to this team, then I will be the first to admit I was wrong.

:beer:

Nomad
08-06-2010, 09:26 AM
I think I am probably most in agreement with Northman on this. After last season's last 8 game debacle, I would not describe the team as intact

I agree with North too as this team's chemistry seems to be going down the tubes!

Northman
08-06-2010, 09:26 AM
Yeah, Northman is just projecting. No need to be attacknig him Mr. D.

Yep. I have my doubts about this season but im all for McD proving me wrong. If he makes the playoffs and we have a good year than im a happy Bronco fan. But, seeing is believing and until that happens i will just be skeptical about how we are going to do. Never the less, ill be watching the game every week regardless of record.

BroncoJoe
08-06-2010, 09:27 AM
Personally, I don't get the "doom-sayers". How many plays was the defense involved with last year? Doom got 17 sacks. Impressive, yes. The reason we won or lost 8 games? Doubtful.

Mr D
08-06-2010, 09:27 AM
Chargers are bleeding indeed. But since we find ways to lose to bottom dwelling teams (at home no less) like Oakland and KC it means very little in the NFL world. As for the 3 systems intact? I wouldnt really call them intact. We have yet again changed over players and coaches which messes with chemistry. Its not so cut and dry as you might think.

It's as intact as any other good team... any other elite team too. There really isn't a team that goes into the next year with some changes, so I'm not sure what you're trying to prove.

I mean, you do realize last year was Gregg Williams 1st year on the Saints?

Our systems are more intact than the "average" team.

We got Nunnley coaching back at his natural spot, we have a RB coach that actually suits our running style... the only real argument you can bring up is Nolan, but there is obvious pit falls to that.

Players change every year, and we've upgraded on the players that DID change at every position, other than Brandon Marshall... so I'm not sure what your point here is either about "players changing."

I like that you emphasize losing to KC and Oakland,... it's pretty obvious you're a half empty glass type of guy. You don't want to emphasize beating the teams I mentioned in the previous post, and being one score away from beating the Colts and Eagles... we kept up with both teams (even though they required some comebacks <<--- which great teams do).

It's the 2nd year for our HC... the list goes on.

EDIT
Colts wasn't one score away - the point I was trying to make was that we were one stop away from putting us in a position to take the lead or win the game.

BroncoNut
08-06-2010, 09:27 AM
that's why the games are played. So you know who is the best team. That's the way I see it anyway.

Northman
08-06-2010, 09:30 AM
Personally, I don't get the "doom-sayers". How many plays was the defense involved with last year? Doom got 17 sacks. Impressive, yes. The reason we won or lost 8 games? Doubtful.

But its not really just about the 17 sacks. Its about the actual pressure on the opposing QB. I never really got why people short change Doom's ability based off the lack of talent around him. But to each his own.

BroncoJoe
08-06-2010, 09:31 AM
Not short changing Doom at all. Love the guy. Just don't believe that with or without him changes the outcome substantially.

BroncoNut
08-06-2010, 09:34 AM
It's as intact as any other good team... any other elite team too. There really isn't a team that goes into the next year with some changes, so I'm not sure what you're trying to prove.

I mean, you do realize last year was Gregg Williams 1st year on the Saints?

Our systems are more intact than the "average" team.

We got Nunnley coaching back at his natural spot, we have a RB coach that actually suits our running style... the only real argument you can bring up is Nolan, but there is obvious pit falls to that.

Players change every year, and we've upgraded on the players that DID change at every position, other than Brandon Marshall... so I'm not sure what your point here is either about "players changing."

I like that you emphasize losing to KC and Oakland,... it's pretty obvious you're a half empty glass type of guy. You don't want to emphasize beating the teams I mentioned in the previous post, and being one score away from beating the Colts and Eagles... we kept up with both teams (even though they required some comebacks <<--- which great teams do).

It's the 2nd year for our HC... the list goes on.

EDIT
Colts wasn't one score away - the point I was trying to make was that we were one stop away from putting us in a position to take the lead or win the game.

I think you are just really naiive an live in a fantasy world.

Northman
08-06-2010, 09:37 AM
It's as intact as any other good team... any other elite team too. There really isn't a team that goes into the next year with some changes, so I'm not sure what you're trying to prove.

But the problem is the other teams have been together longer and the chemistry is much better than ours.


I mean, you do realize last year was Gregg Williams 1st year on the Saints?

But he's also an experience DC and has been for years. Martindale is in his first year as DC and just like HC McD it is different than his previous position.


Our systems are more intact than the "average" team.

Im not sure how you can come to that conclusion. This will be the first year that the Oline will actually be playing the system it was designed for.


Players change every year, and we've upgraded on the players that DID change at every position, other than Brandon Marshall... so I'm not sure what your point here is either about "players changing."

The only real upgrade was Williams on the Dline. The rest are just rookies who have not proven anything on the pro level yet. And even with Williams now we lose Doom which even at worse is a wash so we are pretty much back to square one. People keep saying someone has got to step up but we've been asking that question for the last 4 years no?


I like that you emphasize losing to KC and Oakland,... it's pretty obvious you're a half empty glass type of guy. You don't want to emphasize beating the teams I mentioned in the previous post, and being one score away from beating the Colts and Eagles... we kept up with both teams (even though they required some comebacks <<--- which great teams do).

It's the 2nd year for our HC... the list goes on.

EDIT
Colts wasn't one score away - the point I was trying to make was that we were one stop away from putting us in a position to take the lead or win the game.

I put emphasis on Oak and KC mate because if we win those games last year we make the playoffs. I can handle losing to good teams as i know that those teams are good for reasons. And its nice to beat teams like the Pats (whom we generally beat anyway) and the Cowboys. But that is what makes it disappointing that we would then go and lose to teams that we should beat. You said it yourself, the NFL is unpredictable but for "elite" teams they beat the teams they should. Denver is nowhere near that level yet and im not sure why people believe that we are.

Mr D
08-06-2010, 09:38 AM
But its not really just about the 17 sacks. Its about the actual pressure on the opposing QB. I never really got why people short change Doom's ability based off the lack of talent around him. But to each his own.

Dumervil was also a liability in coverage... we tried to mask it by not putting him out there as much. He hurt us on rush defense...

Actual pressure on the QB? He had the lowest total of QB pressures out of all the top sack leaders in the league last year. He's also the only player that went 3 games 0 QB pressures.

We make it work as WHOLE defense last year, with creative blitzes (that were soon deciphered). We played great team ball.

I'm not trying to make it seem as if he's not worth much, that's far from the truth. I was convinced he was coming into this season BETTER, and he'd be better in the run game.

But if you want to be "realistic," just take a look at the stats above.

Northman
08-06-2010, 09:42 AM
Dumervil was also a liability in coverage... we tried to mask it by not putting him out there as much. He hurt us on rush defense...

But then your basically asking one man to carry the team. Doom plays on a defense with (or previously had) no support on the Dline. If you look at teams like Bmore and Indy they have multiple guys on the Dline who can help their LB core. Unfortuantely, we wont get a chance to see how Doom would of played with Williams on the line.


But if you want to be "realistic," just take a look at the stats above.

Again, compared to the other guys your measuring him by how many have to do it on their own?

Mr D
08-06-2010, 09:52 AM
But the problem is the other teams have been together longer and the chemistry is much better than ours.


This is just an excuse to be pessimistic. "The chemistry is much better than ours." I mean really? So you'll only be satisfied once we get a team that has played together for 4-5 seasons, then you'll believe we'll finally have a shot at the PLAYOFFS?

Going into year 2 will be an improvement, because it is ANOTHER year that this team will have been together. You're statement would be stronger last year, and it's much weaker this year.



But he's also an experience DC and has been for years. Martindale is in his first year as DC and just like HC McD it is different than his previous position.


True. He hasn't had any play calling experience (at least from what we know). So he's a ?, and if you'd like to be pessimistic, fine... there's nothing than can really be proven or said with this until games are played.[/quote]



Im not sure how you can come to that conclusion. This will be the first year that the Oline will actually be playing the system it was designed for.


When I talk about system, I'm actually referring to the SYSTEM, not the players. The oline has 3/5 players that will have been together for a while... and yes 2/5 new players, especially possible rookies, is not good... however it can work at the interior positions... take a look at the Jets. Saints LT last year was horrible btw... he single handedly almost lost them some games.




The only real upgrade was Williams on the Dline. The rest are just rookies who have not proven anything on the pro level yet. And even with Williams now we lose Doom which even at worse is a wash so we are pretty much back to square one. People keep saying someone has got to step up but we've been asking that question for the last 4 years no?

No, the only real upgrade was not just Williams. All the players there are either coming from a 3-4, or going into another year in the same system.




I put emphasis on Oak and KC mate because if we win those games last year we make the playoffs. I can handle losing to good teams as i know that those teams are good for reasons. And its nice to beat teams like the Pats (whom we generally beat anyway) and the Cowboys. But that is what makes it disappointing that we would then go and lose to teams that we should beat. You said it yourself, the NFL is unpredictable but for "elite" teams they beat the teams they should. Denver is nowhere near that level yet and im not sure why people believe that we are.

Ok? And if we didn't win the Cowboys, Pats, etc we wouldn't have had a shot. You can spin it either way.

I'm not saying we are an elite team... it doesn't take an elite team to make the playoffs, make it to the SB, or win it.

Saints lost to the Bucs last season...?

Vikings lost to the Panthers and Bears.

The games we lost were division games - and those are arguable the toughest games of the season - especially the 2nd time around (which they were).

Beating a team twice in a season is much easier said than done... no matter how horrible they are.

Mr D
08-06-2010, 09:56 AM
But then your basically asking one man to carry the team. Doom plays on a defense with (or previously had) no support on the Dline. If you look at teams like Bmore and Indy they have multiple guys on the Dline who can help their LB core. Unfortuantely, we wont get a chance to see how Doom would of played with Williams on the line.



Again, compared to the other guys your measuring him by how many have to do it on their own?

What are you talking about? Dumervil "doing it on his own"? So now, the other 10 guys are like ponds compared to Dumervil? I mean, REALLY? :lol:

Northman
08-06-2010, 09:57 AM
Beating a team twice in a season is much easier said than done... no matter how horrible they are.

But, good teams (playoff calibur) teams get it done. Sure, you will find a very good team who will have a letdown game. But not a continued history of starting strong and blowing the second half of the season. Even in Denver's glory days we werent splitting the division series often. Right now there is just nothing to suggest that we are a better team than last year. But again, McD is free to prove me wrong but until it happens im just going to wait and see. But it wont change my perception that we arent very good right now.

Northman
08-06-2010, 09:58 AM
What are you talking about? Dumervil "doing it on his own"? So now, the other 10 guys are like ponds compared to Dumervil? I mean, REALLY? :lol:

When it comes to rushing the passer? Absolutely.

Mr D
08-06-2010, 10:01 AM
When it comes to rushing the passer? Absolutely.

:lol: What the hell are you talking about?

First you said, Dumervil didn't have any help, and now you say he does with Williams (whom is NOT a pass rusher, just someone who takes up a lot of space).

Now you're talking about "rushing the passer"?

It doesn't matter, the fact is those stats account for what Dumervil did, and he was horrible against the run and his QB pressures were not as serious as you made it sound.

Ravage!!!
08-06-2010, 10:05 AM
Sorry, but I just don't think losing Doom equates to Doomsday for the Broncos. We'll miss his sacks, but he was fairly one dimentional anyway.

But that ONE dimension is so vital in today's passing league. It's why teams pay top dollar to pass rushers, and why defenses that pressure the QB are considered tops in the NFL. We didn't have a pass rush, outside of Doom. You take that one aspect out, and we are again a 2008 defensive team. Group that with our poor offense of 2009.....

Northman
08-06-2010, 10:05 AM
:lol: What the hell are you talking about?

First you said, Dumervil didn't have any help, and now you say he does with Williams (whom is NOT a pass rusher, just someone who takes up a lot of space).

Now you're talking about "rushing the passer"?

It doesn't matter, the fact is those stats account for what Dumervil did, and he was horrible against the run and his QB pressures were not as serious as you made it sound.

Umm okay. Whatever you say.

Mr D
08-06-2010, 10:07 AM
But that ONE dimension is so vital in today's passing league. It's why teams pay top dollar to pass rushers, and why defenses that pressure the QB are considered tops in the NFL. We didn't have a pass rush, out side of Doom. You take that one aspect out, and we are again a 2008 defensive team.

2008 defensive team had Dumervil.

Try again.

Northman
08-06-2010, 10:07 AM
2008 defensive team had Dumervil.

Try again.

Not at the same position. Try harder.

Mr D
08-06-2010, 10:08 AM
Not at the same position. Try harder.

Dumervil recorded 16/17 sacks with 4 DL, with his hands on the ground.

:lol:

Ravage!!!
08-06-2010, 10:09 AM
2008 defensive team had Dumervil.

Try again.

:lol: Whats that got to do with it? Doom had his most success last season in a 34. In 2008, we couldn't get to the passer, and the defense was HORRENDOUS. You think Doom being OUT of the game is going to be better than Doom IN the game in 2008? You just made another point for my case. Its even WORSE than 2008, thank you.

LordTrychon
08-06-2010, 10:12 AM
The 2008 defense had Champ Bailey on it.

Unfortunately... he's still on the team, so we're likely to be at least that bad this year.

:sigh:

Northman
08-06-2010, 10:14 AM
:lol: Whats that got to do with it? Doom had his most success last season in a 34. In 2008, we couldn't get to the passer, and the defense was HORRENDOUS. You think Doom being OUT of the game is going to be better than Doom IN the game in 2008? You just made another point for my case. Its even WORSE than 2008, thank you.

Clearly, we are dealing with a Doom hater. I get so sick of these ********.

BroncoJoe
08-06-2010, 10:16 AM
:lol: Whats that got to do with it? Doom had his most success last season in a 34. In 2008, we couldn't get to the passer, and the defense was HORRENDOUS. You think Doom being OUT of the game is going to be better than Doom IN the game in 2008? You just made another point for my case. Its even WORSE than 2008, thank you.

I don't think anyone is saying the D is going to be better without him. It's debatable if the D is going to be worse.

Mr D
08-06-2010, 10:16 AM
We couldn't get to the passer for many reasons, not just Dumervil. (2008)

Ravage!!!
08-06-2010, 10:18 AM
Clearly, we are dealing with a Doom hater. I get so sick of these ********.

I've had my doubts about Doom... and I know that every team, every year, has to deal with injuries.

I don't think that the year is over, by any means, but to deny the fact that this defense absolutely RELIED on Doom's pressure last season, is being blind.

Look at how quickly the Chiefs defense fell on its face after they traded away Allen. HUGE difference on that team, and they've been drafting TOP Defensive prospects ever since.

As of right now, this team just doesn't have the depth to lose that kind of talent and not take a significant drop.

Mr D
08-06-2010, 10:18 AM
Clearly, we are dealing with a Doom hater. I get so sick of these ********.

Nope. I love Dumervil.

I'm just uhh... as you would say, being "realistic."

Northman
08-06-2010, 10:19 AM
I've had my doubts about Doom... and I know that every team, every year, has to deal with injuries.

I don't think that the year is over, by any means, but to deny the fact that this defense absolutely RELIED on Doom's pressure last season, is being blind.

Look at how quickly the Chiefs defense fell on its face after they traded away Allen. HUGE difference on that team, and they've been drafting TOP Defensive prospects ever since.

As of right now, this team just doesn't have the depth to lose that kind of talent, and not take a significant drop.

Exactly.

Ravage!!!
08-06-2010, 10:20 AM
I don't think anyone is saying the D is going to be better without him. It's debatable if the D is going to be worse.

It already is. When you take your TOP player, and remove them from the equation, its already worse. Doom was THE most dominant and productive player/playmaker on our defense last season.

I do not believe that a team gets better by means of subtraction. That goes for offense and defense.

Northman
08-06-2010, 10:21 AM
It already is. When you take your TOP player, and remove them from the equation, its already worse. Doom was THE most dominant and productive player/playmaker on our defense last season.

I do not believe that a team gets better by means of subtraction. That goes for offense and defense.

You would think that would be common sense at this point.

Ravage!!!
08-06-2010, 10:24 AM
We couldn't get to the passer for many reasons, not just Dumervil. (2008)

Exactly. We couldn't get to the pass rusher EVEN when having a talent that can/did lead the league in sacks. Doom was KNOWN to be a GOOD pass rusher in 2008. He already proved it, and couldn't get to the passer, and our defense was miserable. Any team that can't get to the passer, is miserable on defense.

Now whom, on our team, is good enough to get to the passer when they don't have a Doom on the other side to take away the protection? Anyone at all?

BroncoJoe
08-06-2010, 10:24 AM
It already is. When you take your TOP player, and remove them from the equation, its already worse. Doom was THE most dominant and productive player/playmaker on our defense last season.

I do not believe that a team gets better by means of subtraction. That goes for offense and defense.

If you're talking about sacks alone, I'd agree. The rest is debatable.

Northman
08-06-2010, 10:26 AM
If you're talking about sacks alone, I'd agree. The rest is debatable.

Who is going to replace his production?

Mr D
08-06-2010, 10:27 AM
I've had my doubts about Doom... and I know that every team, every year, has to deal with injuries.

I don't think that the year is over, by any means, but to deny the fact that this defense absolutely RELIED on Doom's pressure last season, is being blind.

Look at how quickly the Chiefs defense fell on its face after they traded away Allen. HUGE difference on that team, and they've been drafting TOP Defensive prospects ever since.

As of right now, this team just doesn't have the depth to lose that kind of talent and not take a significant drop.

There is no team that has enough depth to lose an elite pass rusher.

Contrary to your belief, we did not RELY on Doom's pressure. I just told you he had the least amount of QB pressures out of all the top sack leaders. He's a great player, and the whole TEAM defense gave him an opportunity to shine along with some coaches who actually know how to coach defense.

We ran a defense that would highlight some players and let them do their work, saying that we relied on Doom is like saying carbs are bad for you.

Dumervil is a GREAT player with distinct, special abilities. We were obviously counting on him to play a big role this season too, NOBODY is denying that. But talking as if, he's the motor of our defense is ridiculous.

Being someone that watched all 16 games, sober, it's much easier to see things in a "realistic" light.

Take a look at the Jets... they didn't have anyone with double digit sacks, yet they're the best defense...

Please man... the sky is not falling. We have to find other ways to create pressure.

Northman
08-06-2010, 10:28 AM
We have to find other ways to create pressure.

Which outside of Doom we have not been able to do in 4 years.

Ravage!!!
08-06-2010, 10:29 AM
The 2008 defense had Champ Bailey on it.

Unfortunately... he's still on the team, so we're likely to be at least that bad this year.

:sigh:

Hah... I just want you to know that I saw this :beer:

Mr D
08-06-2010, 10:32 AM
Who is going to replace his production?

Not 1 person CAN, and not 1 person will.

The whole defense, staff, team has to step up their play. It's not all about "production" and getting those 17 sacks... pressuring the QB, stopping the run...

Again - it's a dramatic loss... but it's one teams face every year.

Who thought the Colts could be on a top half of the league in pass defense, and have a better pass defense than run defense with Bob Sanders out?

Mr D
08-06-2010, 10:34 AM
Which outside of Doom we have not been able to do in 4 years.

Yeah - 3/4 of those 4 years have been with another staff...

Just like your whole "we always beat the Pats" statement... all that type of ordeal is gone when new order comes in.

Northman
08-06-2010, 10:36 AM
Not 1 person CAN, and not 1 person will.

The whole defense, staff, team has to step up their play. It's not all about "production" and getting those 17 sacks... pressuring the QB, stopping the run...

Again - it's a dramatic loss... but it's one teams face every year.

Who thought the Colts could be on a top half of the league in pass defense, and have a better pass defense than run defense with Bob Sanders out?

Sanders has a couple of guys on the Dline that helps tremendously even when he's out. You should know by now considering our problems that without Dline help the secondary can get killed no matter how good your DB's are. The major problem with you arguement is that thus far Denver has not shown it can replace that production when Doom isnt there whether you think he is all that great or not. Even taking Doom out of the equation alltogether we still do not have a team capable of creating pressure. Thats why i find it odd that one would look at this year and believe that we are going to be better simply by going off hopeful faith. There is no indication that we will be better in that area with Doom going down. Its just not logical in any way.

Northman
08-06-2010, 10:38 AM
Yeah - 3/4 of those 4 years have been with another staff...

Just like your whole "we always beat the Pats" statement... all that type of ordeal is gone when new order comes in.

True, but the results from last year were the exact same from the previous one so again history supports my arguement at this point while you go on blind faith. I dont condemn you for being positive about the season but there is no real indication that we will be better than the year before. Nothing.

Ravage!!!
08-06-2010, 10:43 AM
There is no team that has enough depth to lose an elite pass rusher.
Who's more likely to have someone step it up, a team like teh Ravens that surrounding talent, or a team like the Broncos that not only don't have surrounding talent on defense, but no depth?


Contrary to your belief, we did not RELY on Doom's pressure. I just told you he had the least amount of QB pressures out of all the top sack leaders. He's a great player, and the whole TEAM defense gave him an opportunity to shine along with some coaches who actually know how to coach defense.

We ran a defense that would highlight some players and let them do their work, saying that we relied on Doom is like saying carbs are bad for you.
You say we had coaches that knew how to give him an opportunity to shine? You mean by letting him rush the passer??? :confused: Thats real tough decision, letting the league sack leader rush the passer.

We DID rely on Doom's pass rushing in critical moments. When we needed a pass rush, the other team was absolutely aware of Doom, and that cause THEIR protections schemes to be determined as well as possibly freeing up somone else. When you have passing situations, you RELY on the pass rush to get it done and DOom is an ELITE pass rusher (as you just said). How is that NOT relying on him?

Not to mention, the coaches that knew how to get it done, are gone.


Dumervil is a GREAT player with distinct, special abilities. We were obviously counting on him to play a big role this season too, NOBODY is denying that. But talking as if, he's the motor of our defense is ridiculous.

Being someone that watched all 16 games, sober, it's much easier to see things in a "realistic" light.

Take a look at the Jets... they didn't have anyone with double digit sacks, yet they're the best defense...

Please man... the sky is not falling. We have to find other ways to create pressure.

Doom was absolutely the motor of our pass rush. Without hesitation and without doubt. When you are in a passing league like the NFL, you NEED to pressure the QB.

Don't compare our defense to the Jets. Its a ridiculous comparison. That defense has had a top defense for years, and the surrounding talent is SIGNIFICANTLY better than ours. This statement just shows that maybe you need to start watching the games Drunk. Perhaps you would get a more realistic perspective instead of the Orange Colored GLasses you are wearing right now. Because you are being blatantly blind.

Of COURSE we have to find other ways to create pressure... duh. No kidding? But taking the league leader in sacks isn't going to make that easy, especially when we don't have a SINGLE guy on the team that has proved he can do it. Now that we don't have Doom to take pressure off the protection of those other players, and Doom isn't around for defenses to be aware of and keep an eye on, making that kind of pressure without talent is going to be tough...especially for a new DC (although I think the HC will want to now take over the DC's job as well).

We are going to have to do it with blitzing, and this is exactly what got us in trouble in years past, because we didn't have the guys to rush the passer so we tried to create ways of getting to the QB by using TONS of blitzes. We've seen it before. We know the results. This is what we are saying.

Mr D
08-06-2010, 10:51 AM
Sanders has a couple of guys on the Dline that helps tremendously even when he's out. You should know by now considering our problems that without Dline help the secondary can get killed no matter how good your DB's are. The major problem with you arguement is that thus far Denver has not shown it can replace that production when Doom isnt there whether you think he is all that great or not. Even taking Doom out of the equation alltogether we still do not have a team capable of creating pressure. Thats why i find it odd that one would look at this year and believe that we are going to be better simply by going off hopeful faith. There is no indication that we will be better in that area with Doom going down. Its just not logical in any way.

So now you're saying that secondary injuries don't mean as much... ok.

Who said we were gonna be better "in that area"?

You can keep avoiding all the stats and examples I've given.

Of course Denver hasn't shown it an replace that "production" because DOOM played every game. I told you the defense we played highlighted specific players at times to let them do what they do.

It's really not a leap of faith... I mean we upgraded, we didn't get worse, and we were 1-2 games out of the play offs last year, and we're heading into year 2 with an INTACT core.

anyways - I find it that most people who watch all 16 games are usually more knowledgeable.

Football isn't played on a spreadsheet.

Lonestar
08-06-2010, 10:58 AM
There were several games I saw ayers closing in on the QB only to have doom beat him by a step.

I suspect that if the QB can't step up into the pocket like they could last year with willams and company putting pressure up the middle that we just maybe really surprised at our sacl levels this year if noy sacks then picks may go up.

Just do not see all the doom and gloom that Y'all do.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Mr D
08-06-2010, 10:58 AM
Who's more likely to have someone step it up, a team like teh Ravens that surrounding talent, or a team like the Broncos that not only don't have surrounding talent on defense, but no depth?

No surrounding talent? WTF? :confused:



You say we had coaches that knew how to give him an opportunity to shine? You mean by letting him rush the passer??? :confused: Thats real tough decision, letting the league sack leader rush the passer.

lol if it was this easy, I'm not sure why he had only 5 sacks in 2008. I mean, THAT'S REAL TOUGH to let an elite pass rusher only get 5 sacks... I mean come on all you gotta do is stick him in there and everything will work! :lol:



Don't compare our defense to the Jets. Its a ridiculous comparison. That defense has had a top defense for years, and the surrounding talent is SIGNIFICANTLY better than ours. This statement just shows that maybe you need to start watching the games Drunk. Perhaps you would get a more realistic perspective instead of the Orange Colored GLasses you are wearing right now. Because you are being blatantly blind.

Did I "compare" our defense to the Jets?

The Jets had a top defense for years?

2008 16th in the league
2007 18th in the league
2006 20th in the league

:lol:

Ravage!!!
08-06-2010, 11:01 AM
So now you're saying that secondary injuries don't mean as much... ok.

Who said we were gonna be better "in that area"?

You can keep avoiding all the stats and examples I've given.

Of course Denver hasn't shown it an replace that "production" because DOOM played every game. I told you the defense we played highlighted specific players at times to let them do what they do.

It's really not a leap of faith... I mean we upgraded, we didn't get worse, and we were 1-2 games out of the play offs last year, and we're heading into year 2 with an INTACT core.

anyways - I find it that most people who watch all 16 games are usually more knowledgeable.

Football isn't played on a spreadsheet.

Dude, you REALLY need to stop thinking you are the only one to watch 16 games, and really need to stop thinking you are more knowledgeable, because you are proving otherwise. Your opinion with orange colored glasses on, doesn't make you more knowledgeable, it just makes you more hopeful.

You also need to realize that we DID see our team lose 8 out of the last TEN (or maybe you weren't watching all 16 games), so the chances of us having that lucky 6-0 start this year, is pretty DAMNED unlikely. So we won't have a 6 game head-start on the back-end of the season, and we certainly will NOT shut teams out in the second half in 5 of the first 6 games, as we did last year.

You don't know that we upgraded, and we DID get worse with injuries.

Also, since you are being so condescending, you comment to North that he's You can keep "...avoiding all the stats and examples I've given."

Then turn around and suggest that you know more because, as you stated, "Football isn't played on a spreadsheet." Make up your mind. Seems you want to use stats when you want, then turn around and suggest someone isn't WATCHING the game and only using spreadsheets.:rolleyes:

Mr D
08-06-2010, 11:07 AM
Dude, you REALLY need to stop thinking you are the only one to watch 16 games, and really need to stop thinking you are more knowledgeable, because you are proving otherwise. Your opinion with orange colored glasses on, doesn't make you more knowledgeable, it just makes you more hopeful.

You also need to realize that we DID see our team lose 8 out of the last TEN (or maybe you weren't watching all 16 games), so the chances of us having that lucky 6-0 start this year, is pretty DAMNED unlikely. So we won't have a 6 game head-start on the back-end of the season, and we certainly will NOT shut teams out in the second half in 5 of the first 6 games, as we did last year.

You don't know that we upgraded, and we DID get worse with injuries.

Also, since you are being so condescending, you comment to North that he's You can keep "...avoiding all the stats and examples I've given."

Then turn around and suggest that you know more because, as you stated, "Football isn't played on a spreadsheet." Make up your mind. Seems you want to use stats when you want, then turn around and suggest someone isn't WATCHING the game and only using spreadsheets.:rolleyes:

well, I try to match up to what you guys are saying by using stats... I mean logically that's what I would do, because, you guys are so obsessed with this "production" thing here. So I pull out some examples where I can easily talk to your in your "language."

I mean if you really want to talk about things outside of stats, you'd realize comparing the 2008 defense to anything after doesn't really make any sense.

Football isn't played on a spreadsheet...

Mr D
08-06-2010, 11:14 AM
Well, technically it is played on a spreadsheet - but you guys get the point :lol:

Ravage!!!
08-06-2010, 11:19 AM
well, I try to match up to what you guys are saying by using stats... I mean logically that's what I would do, because, you guys are so obsessed with this "production" thing here. So I pull out some examples where I can easily talk to your in your "language."

I mean if you really want to talk about things outside of stats, you'd realize comparing the 2008 defense to anything after doesn't really make any sense.

Football isn't played on a spreadsheet...

Exactly why your stats on how he doesn't pressure the QB doesn't really hold much water.

We've seen the games, and WATCHED all 16 games... sober.... and have just as much perspective and knowledge of the team as you do.... just to speak your language.

Its pretty obvious statement that the team will have to create pressure from other areas. We don't have a choice, and thats not the point. Its whether or not we have the personnel to do it, and the coaching staff to do it. We haven't seen ANYTHING from any of the players we currently have on the roster, that would suggest for a moment that we ahve anyone that could come close to Dooms pressure and/or sack production. That mean someone is going to have to come out of the blue, and doing that USUALLY happens when there is already a good player on the other side of the line taking the double teams away. Doom was that guy. So even is Ayers would normally start stepping up and being able to contribute more to the pressure when Doom was gathering most of the attention, that is now taken away.

I get that you have your bright orange jersey on, and your brand new denver hat, and are looking forward to the season with high-hopes and grand expectations. Everything to you is fabulous, fine, wonderful and good. The season is new, you are excited about football... and cheering for the season to start. But don't think that you are "more realistic" with your "everything will be fine" attitude and your insults of "we that watch all 16 games are more knowledgeable" proclamations. It just shows that you want to look away from the realism while HOPING for something else. Which is fine, but do us all a favor and don't declare yourself smarter than everyone simply because your bifocals have a warm hue.

Mr D
08-06-2010, 11:27 AM
Exactly why your stats on how he doesn't pressure the QB doesn't really hold much water.

We've seen the games, and WATCHED all 16 games... sober.... and have just as much perspective and knowledge of the team as you do.... just to speak your language.

Its pretty obvious statement that the team will have to create pressure from other areas. We don't have a choice, and thats not the point. Its whether or not we have the personnel to do it, and the coaching staff to do it. We haven't seen ANYTHING from any of the players we currently have on the roster, that would suggest for a moment that we ahve anyone that could come close to Dooms pressure and/or sack production. That mean someone is going to have to come out of the blue, and doing that USUALLY happens when there is already a good player on the other side of the line taking the double teams away. Doom was that guy. So even is Ayers would normally start stepping up and being able to contribute more to the pressure when Doom was gathering most of the attention, that is now taken away.

I get that you have your bright orange jersey on, and your brand new denver hat, and are looking forward to the season with high-hopes and grand expectations. Everything to you is fabulous, fine, wonderful and good. The season is new, you are excited about football... and cheering for the season to start. But don't think that you are "more realistic" with your "everything will be fine" attitude and your insults of "we that watch all 16 games are more knowledgeable" proclamations. It just shows that you want to look away from the realism while HOPING for something else. Which is fine, but don't declare yourself smarter because your bi-focals have a warm hue.

This comes from the guy who said the Jets have had a top defense for years.
:lol:

The realistic thing is that, we have 11 players that play on defense every down, and we lost 1.

Yeah, that's a very realistic outlook to say, now the season is tarnished. :lol:

Wait, how does the Dumervil pressure stat not hold much water? That IS the basis of your argument. :rolleyes:

BroncoWave
08-06-2010, 11:29 AM
:lol: Whats that got to do with it? Doom had his most success last season in a 34. In 2008, we couldn't get to the passer, and the defense was HORRENDOUS. You think Doom being OUT of the game is going to be better than Doom IN the game in 2008? You just made another point for my case. Its even WORSE than 2008, thank you.

Come on, you don't really believe that.

First of all, our secondary is EONS better than in 08. Remember Calvin Lowry, Marquad Manuel, and Dre Bly? I would say Dawkins, Goodman, and Hill are substantial upgrades.

Also, remember Nate Webster who started every game? We've upgraded over him as well.

And I cant even remember who was on our d-line it was so bad. Definitely an upgrade now over then.

Mr D
08-06-2010, 11:30 AM
Come on, you don't really believe that.

First of all, our secondary is EONS better than in 08. Remember Calvin Lowry, Marquad Manuel, and Dre Bly? I would say Dawkins, Goodman, and Hill are substantial upgrades.

Also, remember Nate Webster who started every game? We've upgraded over him as well.

And I cant even remember who was on our d-line it was so bad. Definitely an upgrade now over then.

Sorry but if you are really trying to say this defense will be worse then 08 you are either trolling or an unbelievable moron.

As to the last line, I'll take the latter. :lol:

frenchfan
08-07-2010, 04:05 PM
http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/7820/screenshot20100805at144.png

Even in the colorado, the percentage was still about 20/80.
:tsk:HUmmm.... question...

Do you believe the Pats could have been 11-5 without Tom Brady and playing a QB nammed... hummm... Cassel???? :shocked:

I don't wear orange coloured glasses... I know we have issues like many teams (if not every teams)...
But I also know that anything can happen... The odds are not for us, but who knows?
May be it will be some other players' day...
And we need a team, not just a player (even though I admit it's a big loss of course).

Damn... this offseason is really too long :laugh:

Davii
08-07-2010, 04:52 PM
Football isn't played on a spreadsheet.

/THREAD

There has been a "OMG so and so is out" every season somewhere in the league, normally on every team. Still, every year there's a team in the playoffs that should've been done because of that "OMG so and so is out". We have a very upgraded D line, there is no telling whether that will lead to more sacks, more pressure, or even help against the run.

Should it? Yes.

Will it? We'll find out.

With our upgraded D line there could be more sacks (albeit spread around) than we had last year. Maybe we can force some turnovers, maybe Jarvis Moss leads the NFL in sacks this year.

We don't know, but I can't wait to find out.