PDA

View Full Version : Broncos' Mistakes Adding Up On Offense



Denver Native (Carol)
10-15-2008, 10:48 PM
http://cbs4denver.com/broncos/Broncos.offence.mistakes.2.841567.html

Broncos' Mistakes Adding Up On Offense

DENVER (AP) ― Broncos quarterback Jay Cutler's unflinching confidence in his cannon of an arm has at times gotten him into trouble, forcing ill-advised passes into tight spots.

Boasting about it has also landed him in hot water.

Cutler claimed in a recent edition of The Sporting News that he has a stronger arm than Hall of Famer John Elway, "hands down."

"Some people agreed, some people didn't agree and some people were upset with it," Cutler said. "It caused a little stir."

Care to take the comment back?

"No," he said.

Cutler didn't back up his boast in a 24-17 loss to Jacksonville on Sunday, completing just 21 of 37 passes for a season-low 192 yards. He also fumbled once and threw an interception.

"What's done is done, what's said is said," Cutler said of his comments concerning Elway. "I'm not worried about it."

What Cutler is concerned with is fixing the Broncos' high-scoring offense, which has fallen into a funk. He became rather gruff Wednesday when explaining their woes.

"Turnovers," he muttered, his Broncos cap pulled low.

That's it?

"Yep," he bluntly said.

Turnovers have indeed troubled the Broncos, partially explaining why a team averaging 38 points a game through the first three weeks has now struggled to score. Denver's offense has turned the ball over seven times in losing two of its last three contests.

The high-powered offense has suddenly gone from vaunted to vexed, failing to score more than 19 points in their last three games.

"We expect to put up 30, 40 points every game," Cutler said. "If we don't achieve that, we're obviously disappointed."

The Broncos have also been besieged by injuries, losing playmakers like Tony Scheffler (groin), Selvin Young (groin) and Eddie Royal (ankle).

Denver then lost slot receiver extraordinaire Brandon Stokley to a concussion midway through the Jacksonville game, thinning the receiving corps even more.

"Yeah, it hurts," Cutler said of the recent spate of injuries. "But we can win without those guys. We've just got to limit our turnovers and take care of the ball."

Brandon Marshall has vowed to do a better job securing the football -- even if it means curtailing his explosive moves. Marshall surrendered the football for a second time this season, trying to gain extra yardage deep in Jacksonville territory. He also fumbled the ball against Kansas City when he tried to make something happen from a play bound for nowhere.

"You've got to do what's best for the team," Marshall recently said when asked if he'd play it safer.

Cutler doesn't want to see a more conservative Marshall.

"He brings that aggressiveness to our offense, he's always attacking," Cutler said. "You can't change that."

Cutler is the same way, willing to put his powerful right arm to the test. He'll try to squeeze in a pass to a covered receiver now and then and take shots down the field even if Marshall has drawn a crowd.

"We want to get the ball to Brandon as much as possible," said Cutler, who's thrown 12 touchdown passes and five interceptions this season. "We've got to expect the same thing this week -- for them to try to take him out of the ball game."

That may be harder to do if Royal returns for Monday night's game at New England. Royal and Marshall have a combined 73 catches this season, the most productive pass catching tandem in the league. Royal said he expects to be back this week after sitting out a game with an ankle injury.

"It's definitely a lot better than a week ago," the rookie receiver said. "Right now, I feel good."

The groin injuries of Scheffler and Young are mending as well, both practicing Wednesday on a limited basis.

What's more, rookie tailback Ryan Torain was back at practice after missing the first six games with an elbow injury.

"I can't wait to get back out there," Torain said.

As for Stokley, he's not sure if he'll be ready by Monday night, not with his head still feeling fuzzy.

"Once I start to feel better, we'll just go from there," Stokley said.

Cutler is concerned with getting the offense better -- fast.

That starts with eliminating mistakes.

"We've got to secure the ball and be smart with it," he said.

broncophan
10-15-2008, 11:26 PM
Imo....I don't think their should be any complaints on the way Cutler has played......he has been very good thus far this season.....I just hope he continues to improve ........as he learns.......hard to argue with his numbers so far...

I'm just waiting for him to "go off" on the media.....in the few press conferences/interviews that I have seen with him......he doesn't seem to comfortable talking with reporters...

omac
10-15-2008, 11:48 PM
Nice article, Carol. :salute:

In the previous game, though, turnovers weren't as much of a key as it should've been. The strip on Cutler just gave Jacksonville the ball back at around where they lost it; I'm not sure if that was the drive Jacksonville scored a FG or not. The INT on Cutler was on 3rd (and long?), so even if he just threw that away, they'd still punt the ball and hopefully get it at the 10 yard line; the way it worked out, the INT was better than a punt. The only really key turnover was the Marshall strip because we were in scoring position and with a pretty good rythm going; we lost 3 to 7 points there and they scored 7 on that drive, so that's potentially a 14 point swing.

What I haven't liked much this season, including this game, is that on 3rd and 1, Bates gets too cute with the playcalling and goes with a pass instead of higher percentage run play. That effort and the ensuing gamble cost us 3 to 7 points, and that was huge. I'm pretty sure by now, every DC knows that Bates likes to go with a "surprise" pass on 3rd and 2 or 1. On 3rd and 2, I'd like to see much more running to keep the play alive and get 4 more downs. The pass is too low of a percentage play on 3rd and 1 to be used as frequently as it seems to have been used this season.

We need to get less "cute" on 3rd and 1, and even on 2nd and 1, sometimes. :coffee:

hamrob
10-16-2008, 12:02 AM
Nice article, Carol. :salute:

In the previous game, though, turnovers weren't as much of a key as it should've been. The strip on Cutler just gave Jacksonville the ball back at around where they lost it; I'm not sure if that was the drive Jacksonville scored a FG or not. The INT on Cutler was on 3rd (and long?), so even if he just threw that away, they'd still punt the ball and hopefully get it at the 10 yard line; the way it worked out, the INT was better than a punt. The only really key turnover was the Marshall strip because we were in scoring position and with a pretty good rythm going; we lost 3 to 7 points there and they scored 7 on that drive, so that's potentially a 14 point swing.

What I haven't liked much this season, including this game, is that on 3rd and 1, Bates gets too cute with the playcalling and goes with a pass instead of higher percentage run play. That effort and the ensuing gamble cost us 3 to 7 points, and that was huge. I'm pretty sure by now, every DC knows that Bates likes to go with a "surprise" pass on 3rd and 2 or 1. On 3rd and 2, I'd like to see much more running to keep the play alive and get 4 more downs. The pass is too low of a percentage play on 3rd and 1 to be used as frequently as it seems to have been used this season.

We need to get less "cute" on 3rd and 1, and even on 2nd and 1, sometimes. :coffee:Wasn't it Jay's fumble that the Jags ended up scoring a TD off of. When you look at that...we were driving at the time...so you have to take 3 to 7 points away from us and give them 7...that's huge. Then again with Marshall...if he doesn't fumble at the 7...he probably scores on that play (watch the replay...it was set up for him to cut inside and score from the 7)....I believe the Jags turned that into a FG. So again, you take 7 points away from us and give them 3. So, now...let's do the math.

We'll say....perhaps we have to settle for a FG on the drive which Jay fumbled...that would have been 3 more points for us where they ended up with 7. Then they got 3 on Marshall's where we would have had 7.

So

24-17 Jags coud have been:

27-14 Broncos

Those two fumbles were absolutely HUGE. Jay's got it right. What's changed? The turnovers. Stop them...and we're clicking again!

omac
10-16-2008, 12:15 AM
Wasn't it Jay's fumble that the Jags ended up scoring a TD off of. When you look at that...we were driving at the time...so you have to take 3 to 7 points away from us and give them 7...that's huge. Then again with Marshall...if he doesn't fumble at the 7...he probably scores on that play (watch the replay...it was set up for him to cut inside and score from the 7)....I believe the Jags turned that into a FG. So again, you take 7 points away from us and give them 3. So, now...let's do the math.

We'll say....perhaps we have to settle for a FG on the drive which Jay fumbled...that would have been 3 more points for us where they ended up with 7. Then they got 3 on Marshall's where we would have had 7.

So

24-17 Jags coud have been:

27-14 Broncos

Those two fumbles were absolutely HUGE. Jay's got it right. What's changed? The turnovers. Stop them...and we're clicking again!

Nah, the TD score was from the drive that started with the Marshall fumble, so that was the potential 14 point swing.

Also, at the point of Jay's fumble, which happened exactly after Webster made Taylor fumble, we were still out of FG range. We didn't yet get the drive going, so there was no offensive rythm yet. The Broncos could've easily gone 3 and out, or score a TD or FG. And originally, it was Jacksonville who had the ball, so this was almost like a temporary break from their drive. There was no point swing here.

With the one of Marshall, we were moving the chains with a good offensive rythm, and were easily within FG range at the time it happened. Had Marshall held on, we might've been able to continue with the offensive rythm that got us there. So at this point, we had a "sure" 3 points, and a very "probable" 7 points based on how the offense was playing. We got 0 instead of a potential 7 (so, -7), and Jacksonville got 7 from that same drive (+7), so that was the 14 point swing.

I don't blame Marshall for that one, though. It was a tackle that he broke that caused that one, and those same kinds of plays Marshall makes also wins us games.

omac
10-16-2008, 12:16 AM
(double post)

hamrob
10-16-2008, 12:27 AM
Nah, the TD score was from the drive that started with the Marshall fumble, so that was the potential 14 point swing.

Also, at the point of Jay's fumble, which happened exactly after Webster made Taylor fumble, we were still out of FG range. We didn't yet get the drive going, so there was no offensive rythm yet. The Broncos could've easily gone 3 and out, or score a TD or FG. And originally, it was Jacksonville who had the ball, so this was almost like a temporary break from their drive. There was no point swing here.

With the one of Marshall, we were moving the chains with a good offensive rythm, and were easily within FG range at the time it happened. Had Marshall held on, we might've been able to continue with the offensive rythm that got us there. So at this point, we had a "sure" 3 points, and a very "probable" 7 points based on how the offense was playing. We got 0 instead of a potential 7 (so, -7), and Jacksonville got 7 from that same drive (+7), so that was the 14 point swing.

I don't blame Marshall for that one, though. It was a tackle that he broke that caused that one, and those same kinds of plays Marshall makes also wins us games.It all depends on how you look at it. If Jay doesn't fumble...and we pick up a 1st down or two...we're in FG range. I'd like to think that would have happened. The momentum was surely on our side and Jay lost it...by trying to do too much and not protecting the football. We definitely should have had points off of that TO. Marshall's fumble was because he carries the ball away from his chest too often. If he held it to his chest...he would have been o.k. That drive we would have had 7 easy.

Regardless...I don't think any of us want to see Jay or Bradon dialing it down. They're playmakers and that's what we need. They just need to do a little bit more of the "little things" and we'll get it turned around.

I bet if either of those guys were asked....If those two fumbles hadn't of happened...do you think you would have won the game...both would say...absolutely!

Lonestar
10-16-2008, 12:41 AM
Yet it can be said with 416 yards of Offense perhaps had we scored they might have also..

that is why they play on sindays..

Fat Joe
10-16-2008, 01:32 AM
Wasn't it Jay's fumble that the Jags ended up scoring a TD off of. When you look at that...we were driving at the time...so you have to take 3 to 7 points away from us and give them 7...that's huge. Then again with Marshall...if he doesn't fumble at the 7...he probably scores on that play (watch the replay...it was set up for him to cut inside and score from the 7)....I believe the Jags turned that into a FG. So again, you take 7 points away from us and give them 3. So, now...let's do the math.

We'll say....perhaps we have to settle for a FG on the drive which Jay fumbled...that would have been 3 more points for us where they ended up with 7. Then they got 3 on Marshall's where we would have had 7.

So

24-17 Jags coud have been:

27-14 Broncos

Those two fumbles were absolutely HUGE. Jay's got it right. What's changed? The turnovers. Stop them...and we're clicking again!



Agreed. The INT was basically a punt that looked lousy on the stat sheet. I mean, you'd love to see them convert that and turn it into points but in the end if we had to punt that would have probably given us better field position then an actual punt itself. Either way,the fumbles were all that really seperated us from a convincing win or a disapointing loss. The offense was struggling after that first drive and when you turn the ball over it kills you. Those two fumbles were essentially 14 point swings.


tl:dr - Dont turn the ball over and we're back at averaging 38 a game.

LRtagger
10-16-2008, 10:09 AM
I hate when people say that INT was as good as a punt.

I believe that INT was on 3rd and 7, when Jay was running outside the pocket he had 5 or 6 open yards to run and probably would have gotten a first down had he made a better decision. He took a risk and it backfired. I don't care what kind of field position Jax had after the INT. Anytime you give the ball to the other team on a play that is not 4th down, it is not a smart play. Besides, how could Jay have known that the DB would have to lay out to catch the ball? He could just as easily have caught the ball in stride and ran it back 30 yards.

Basically when you throw a ball up for grabs like that on 3rd down you are conceding the possession. The chances of him completing that ball to Marshall were slim to none.

We were on our 43 yard line when he threw the pick. If he had even run for 5 yards it would have setup about a 55 yard FG which is very makeable for Prater. It may have created an entirely different scenario for the game (would have been 10-3 if made).


We can speculate what ifs all day, but to say that was a smart throw by Jay is foolish. I know Mike wants to enstill confidence and support Jay in he media, but I hope behind the scenes he is telling Jay to not try to make that throw again. We cant keep leaving points on the field with this defense.

omac
10-16-2008, 11:02 AM
I hate when people say that INT was as good as a punt.

I believe that INT was on 3rd and 7, when Jay was running outside the pocket he had 5 or 6 open yards to run and probably would have gotten a first down had he made a better decision. He took a risk and it backfired. I don't care what kind of field position Jax had after the INT. Anytime you give the ball to the other team on a play that is not 4th down, it is not a smart play. Besides, how could Jay have known that the DB would have to lay out to catch the ball? He could just as easily have caught the ball in stride and ran it back 30 yards.

Basically when you throw a ball up for grabs like that on 3rd down you are conceding the possession. The chances of him completing that ball to Marshall were slim to none.

We were on our 43 yard line when he threw the pick. If he had even run for 5 yards it would have setup about a 55 yard FG which is very makeable for Prater. It may have created an entirely different scenario for the game (would have been 10-3 if made).


We can speculate what ifs all day, but to say that was a smart throw by Jay is foolish. I know Mike wants to enstill confidence and support Jay in he media, but I hope behind the scenes he is telling Jay to not try to make that throw again. We cant keep leaving points on the field with this defense.

First of all, on that play where Jay rolls out on 3rd and 7, he was being scouted by a Jacksonville player 3 yards away from him. Had he tried to run for it, he would've taken a pretty big hit, and most likely not get the 1st down yardage anyway.

There were 2 Broncos within 10 yards for an underneath pass (if they were eligible; didn't bother checking), but they were covered by 2 defenders, making a pass for minimal gain very dangerous.

There was not a lot of running room for Jay. But even if Jay ran for 5 yards from our 43, the new line of scrimmage would be the 48 yard line. The distance from the LOS to where the ball will be for the kicker to kick is 7 yards. Add 10 yards for the distance from the start of the endzone to the fieldgoal post, and that's 17 yards. So, it's actually 52 + 17, which would make it a 69 yard field goal, not something you'd want to attempt during the early part of the game.

No one is saying Jay should throw an INT, but the way it turned out for us, it had better results than a throwaway pass out of bounds and an ensuing punt.