So what is the problem...

[The Glue Factory]

with the first 3.5 quarters of the game?

I get it that we're crafting a new offensive scheme that requires in game tweaking. That should account for the first quarter, leaving the next two and a half quarters to do more than trusting the defense to stop the opponents offense. That is not likely to continue especially with the higher powered offenses out there (Green Bay, Giants, Cowboys, etc.)

I'm not sold on the whole magic / divine intervention thing. Tebow and co. are definitely taking advantage of the breaks that come their way. Sometimes you make your own luck, sometimes the ball just bounces the right way. Either way the Broncos are taking advantage of those breaks, but why is our best football in the last half of the 4th quarter?

Is it Tebow turning on the magic when things look impossible? Is it McCoy pulling a Reeves and forcing Tebow into a more conventional QB role and then taking the handcuffs off when things look impossible? Is it something in between?

[CoachChaz]

When you find an explanation for it...let me know. Personally, I think it's a lot of luck and it will eventually run out

[slim]

Play calling is part of it, IMO (both ours and that of the D cordinators we are facing)....we tend to open it up late and the defenses start playing softer.

[HammeredOut]

Tebow doesn't follow the script, and he won't take chances in a lot of open windows. Tebow needs to start to believe in himself when dealing with type new change in looks, in the NFL game. Tebow might have the ability of Mike Alstott when it comes to making contact when he runs the ball, but he needs to start doing what all great QBs do and that is "Anticipation".

A : a prior action that takes into account or forestalls a later action
B : the act of looking forward; especially : pleasurable expectation
C : visualization of a future event or state
D : an object or form that anticipates a later type

If we get a QB who starts to take a few chances with "Anticipation", and believing in himself, and his teammates truly on a another level, Tim Tebow would have a vanilla offense that could be compared to a Randell Cunningham.

[wayninja]

I agree with Slim, it's mostly playcalling. McCoy and crew keep it very conservative unless they have to open it up. Usually late in games they have to take the reigns off. Couple that with Defenses starting to play softer because of the lead and you have the formula for why we look so bad initially and so good late.

[rcsodak]

When you find an explanation for it...let me know. Personally, I think it's a lot of luck and it will eventually run out
Just look at the teams theyve beat, and their starting qb's, rb's, S's, OL's, wr's, HC's, etc.

Granted, ALL teams have injuries, but it seems the cards are falling in denver's favor of late.

Now comes a team with a top notch HC/QB/TE's/Welker, with decent rb's and DLinemen, but sketchy secondary.

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[G_Money]

We suck for the first 3 quarters anyway - let Tebow start off THROWING. The opposing defenses stack like 23 guys in the box to start the game. He CAN throw, we've seen it now, and he's getting comfortable doing it - so let him. It'll help McGahee out too. It's okay to call pass plays on first and 10 or 2nd and 8, I promise.

We grind teams down with the running game (which is another reason we do better in the fourth - we've been beating teams up all game on the ground)...but we can't keep making our defense play this way. We got into a shootout in Minny, and it was good to see we were capable of it. The Bears have a very good defense, so scoring 13 points on them is not shameful.

But I'm with Chaz on the idea that luck WILL run out. It's nice to have it, and I like that our team fights HARD for the whole game, but we can definitely make it easier on ourselves.

It'd be nice to start doing that sometime before the playoffs, I think.

~G

[TT15Superman]

What's wrong with the first 3.5 quarters?

Nothing. Tim has said that he is a "people pleaser". He just wants to give the other team (and their fans) a little happiness before he and his soldiers rip their hearts out.

[Nomad]

Play calling is part of it, IMO (both ours and that of the D cordinators we are facing)....we tend to open it up late and the defenses start playing softer.

I don't think playing a team like the Steelers or Ravens would be pretty for the BRONCOS.

[wayninja]

I don't think playing a team like the Steelers or Ravens would be pretty for the BRONCOS.

No, but we'll take another ugly win.

[Nomad]

No, but we'll take another ugly win.

BRONCOS would not match up well against those teams and would get beat badly.

[SM19]

When you find an explanation for it...let me know. Personally, I think it's a lot of luck and it will eventually run out

We don't win some of these games without a hefty helping of luck, that's certain. But I've had to conclude, watching the Broncos offense the last few weeks, that it really is better late (though enough better to win these games if we aren't lucky). I said in another thread that the most likely explanations are that teams are defending the Denver offense differently late in games (the "prevent defense" theory), or that the Denver offense is catching teams off guard by changing the playcalling late (the "super-secret emergency plays" theory). In all likelihood it's some of each; I'm not sure yet how much, though.

[wayninja]

BRONCOS would not match up well against those teams and would get beat badly.

Yeah, I know, but I've stopped caring/listening about what's supposed to happen because the probability engine of the universe is on vacation or something.

I'll believe we will lose after we've actually lost. Not before then. I'm sure that makes no sense, but none of this does.

[G_Money]

I don't think playing a team like the Steelers or Ravens would be pretty for the BRONCOS.

Sure, but I dunno that Ben would survive playing our D either.

It would be low-scoring and close, most likely, with either team.

Which means there's an opportunity for Tebow-time, which is how we keep winning all these games in the first place.

I think we're masking our deficiencies as a run defense decently well, but the Ravens aren't gonna throw it all over the field on us. They'll try to run it on us, we'll try to run it on them.

*shrugs* Those are not the teams that I'd be afraid of in the playoffs. The NFC has most of the scary teams, since Houston has a 3rd string QB right now. We've fought the Jets to a standstill, and their offense is not terrifying. We'll probably get another chance, just as they'll get another chance to talk crap about Tebow and then fail to back it up for 60 minutes.

NE could crush us with their offense...but their D isn't good by any means. Can we win a shootout with them? Probably not. But we could and should score on em, because everybody scores on em. That's what's gonna be interesting to watch this week.

GB and the Saints would be teams that should demolish us, but we wouldn't play them til the SB.

And that statement right there makes me laugh, because this team is thin as a sheet of paper with a bunch of guys who should be either too old or too young to continue to do this.

We'll see. Defense is shouldering the heavy burden at this point, with the offense doing just enough to scrape by.

If the D falters, we're probably toast. If the O would pick it up in the first 3 quarters by call more than dive plays for 45 minutes, maybe that wouldn't be the case and teams like Baltimore and Pitt would be VERY concerned about playing us.

We've got 3 weeks to fix that first 45, especially since we're not playing an option heavy offense at this point. That excuse of "we dunno how they're gonna play us so we have to wait and see what they do and make halftime adjustments" doesn't fly if you're running a mostly conventional offense, which we are (despite the run emphasis).

Better offensive gameplans are required to START the game, McCoy - starting now.

~G

[Nomad]

Most of what you say is true but Denver doesn't fair well against the more physical teams and BRONCOS will have to get by those mentioned teams to meet up with any NFC teams you're afraid of from this point on.

[lgenf]

It's not the only thing, but one BIG reason is the spread formation

We didn't go into a true spread formation until 8 mins or something like that on the drive when Tebow fumbled the ball

That was the first time we got into the spread formation all game

Now spread helps our QB, the defense has to play against 4 WRs and a back out of the backfield if there is no blitzer to pick up, AND they have to account for Tebow running

The Jets handled us most of the game, then we went spread set, they had to go nickel coverage just to cover our WRs which left then rushing 4 and against our 5 OL they got no pressure and as the pocket shifted/collapsed/got up field towards Tebow then he has the ability to take off nd get 8-15 yds running with relative ease as the defense is dropping into coverage.

When we go into the spread WE have the advantage.

Now since the defense has to respect the running ability, as Tebow leaves the pocket (rolling left or right, not taking off up field) once he starts to roll out, the defense secondary and LBs start to push up towar him because they don't want him rushing all over them, that then opens up the downfield receivers because they can find the open areas as the defense collapses on Tebow.

Now you combine all that with the fact that our WRs had 6 drops, I mean full on drops where balls hit them in the hands, shit the throw beginning of 3Q to DT was a fng TD, you take those drops for first downs get us in FG range, we get a FG blocked for 29 yds that will usually be automatic, the throw to DT is another 7, so by all accounts IF we executed all game we would be up in the game, and have at least 13 or 16 pts going INTO the 4th Q

[The Glue Factory]

Tebow doesn't follow the script, and he won't take chances in a lot of open windows. Tebow needs to start to believe in himself when dealing with type new change in looks, in the NFL game. Tebow might have the ability of Mike Alstott when it comes to making contact when he runs the ball, but he needs to start doing what all great QBs do and that is "Anticipation".

But what is it about that final 7 minutes of the game? Tebow looks like HOF material after being horrible for the previous 53 minutes. Or what is it about the first 53 minutes that makes him so bad?

[lgenf]

But what is it about that final 7 minutes of the game? Tebow looks like HOF material after being horrible for the previous 53 minutes. Or what is it about the first 53 minutes that makes him so bad?

Glue read my post above you

It's the formation

[TimHippo]

I don't think all the dropped passes helped during the first 3 quarters.

The WR corp is depleted thanks to Josh McDaniels. Even having Hillis as an extra outlet WRs would have helped.

[TimHippo]

Now you combine all that with the fact that our WRs had 6 drops, I mean full on drops where balls hit them in the hands, shit the throw beginning of 3Q to DT was a fng TD, you take those drops for first downs get us in FG range, we get a FG blocked for 29 yds that will usually be automatic, the throw to DT is another 7, so by all accounts IF we executed all game we would be up in the game, and have at least 13 or 16 pts going INTO the 4th Q

Yup this is basically what happened.

It should have been 17-3 or something but all those drops hurt considering the Chicago D was shutting down the run.

Also, Marion Barber had a really good game rushing (minus his late game errors). That allowed Hanie to at least appear serviceable. Barber played well above expectation as a replacement for Forte, and that allowed the Bears to run the ball and eat up the clock (which gave the Broncos less opportunities on offense)

[jlarsiii]

Just watched Mangini break down the game film on ESPN, and he showed that in the final 4 minutes the Chicago D went from an aggressive man coverage by the DBs to a 2 deep zone to prevent the deep pass.

He stated that for the first 55 minutes Chicago played their gaps and were playing aggressive bump coverage on the WRs that completely limited our offense. Once the switch was made Tebow was able to find underneath WRs that got into the openings in the zone coverage which enabled him to make throws and get good yardage.

It has nothing to do with the offensive play-calling by our coaches. Tebow simply took advantage of the zone coverage that Chicago switched to.

[lgenf]

Just watched Mangini break down the game film on ESPN, and he showed that in the final 4 minutes the Chicago D went from an aggressive man coverage by the DBs to a 2 deep zone to prevent the deep pass.

He stated that for the first 55 minutes Chicago played their gaps and were playing aggressive bump coverage on the WRs that completely limited our offense. Once the switch was made Tebow was able to find underneath WRs that got into the openings in the zone coverage which enabled him to make throws and get good yardage.

It has nothing to do with the offensive play-calling by our coaches. Tebow simply took advantage of the zone coverage that Chicago switched to.


Your right it's not the play calling, but they didn't just switch to cover 3, our switch to the spread formation forces teams to go into that defense


That is why some of us beg for that offensive set to come out in the beginning of the game

[rcsodak]

But what is it about that final 7 minutes of the game? Tebow looks like HOF material after being horrible for the previous 53 minutes. Or what is it about the first 53 minutes that makes him so bad?
It almost looks like he's aiming the ball, early on. Almost tentative, afraid to make a mistake that might put the team in a bad position. Whereas later, when its do-or-die, he just lets it fly and doesnt overthink each play.

:shrugs:

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[rcsodak]

I don't think all the dropped passes helped during the first 3 quarters.

The WR corp is depleted thanks to Josh McDaniels. Even having Hillis as an extra outlet WRs would have helped.
Disagree. Gaffney/Lloyd were both sent packing by EFX.....both contributing.
EFX decided to go young, and added vets to 2 rook TE's with upside.

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[Joel]

Is it McCoy pulling a Reeves and forcing Tebow into a more conventional QB role and then taking the handcuffs off when things look impossible?
I think it's mostly that, with a little bit of new coach/player relationship thrown in and McCoys growing confidence in Tebows passing being undermined by his waning confidence in our WRs.

[Dreadnought]

Disagree. Gaffney/Lloyd were both sent packing by EFX.....both contributing.
EFX decided to go young, and added vets to 2 rook TE's with upside.

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

I'll agree here. Gaffney/Lloyd were also both useless for run blocking, which both DT and Decker are not. DT and Decker need to step it up as pure receivers, but they have the potential to be more complete football players

[vandammage13]

BRONCOS would not match up well against those teams and would get beat badly.

How do we not match up well?

All 3 teams are successful by playing sound D, running the ball, and making the occasional big play in the passing game....

I actually think its a fairly even matchup.

[Joel]

Yup this is basically what happened.

It should have been 17-3 or something but all those drops hurt considering the Chicago D was shutting down the run.

Also, Marion Barber had a really good game rushing (minus his late game errors). That allowed Hanie to at least appear serviceable. Barber played well above expectation as a replacement for Forte, and that allowed the Bears to run the ball and eat up the clock (which gave the Broncos less opportunities on offense)
Barber didn't play above MY expectations, if anything, our D did a better job stopping him than I expected. He's a fast and powerful runner who can outrun/bowl over many tacklers but rarely makes them miss, the kind of guy you can shut down IF you contain him. We actually did a pretty good job of that except for a handful of plays, which is why we stayed in the game long enough to force OT and win it, despite all the drops. Barber did help immensely by doing the "won't go down" thing OUT OF BOUNDS then fumbling when Chicago should've had the game wrapped up with a FG, but for the most part our D did exactly what I hoped but didn't expect against him, so kudoes to them. :salute:

[TimHippo]

Barber didn't play above MY expectations, if anything, our D did a better job stopping him than I expected. He's a fast and powerful runner who can outrun/bowl over many tacklers but rarely makes them miss, the kind of guy you can shut down IF you contain him. We actually did a pretty good job of that except for a handful of plays, which is why we stayed in the game long enough to force OT and win it, despite all the drops. Barber did help immensely by doing the "won't go down" thing OUT OF BOUNDS then fumbling when Chicago should've had the game wrapped up with a FG, but for the most part our D did exactly what I hoped but didn't expect against him, so kudoes to them. :salute:

I disagree. With Hanie starting, you should've been able to stack the box and prevent any running game with Forte out. I really didn't think that there was much of a drop off between Forte and Barber and normally there should be. (minus the whole going out of bounds think and the fumble).

[weazel]

I don't think playing a team like the Steelers or Ravens would be pretty for the BRONCOS.

we never beat Baltimore and I dont see Tebow changing that for now

[Cugel]

I'm not sure why this is such a mystery to people. The Broncos suck for 3 quarters because the offense is almost totally lacking in serious playmakers, especially at WR and TE, and because Tebow has not been a particularly accurate thrower.

I the last game he wasn't helped by 4 WRs dropping the ball during the first 3 quarters. How can you score when your QB hits the idiot right on the hands, and he drops the ball! Thomas and Decker did that repeatedly. Their catches in the last 2 minutes do not make up for their FUMBLING the first 3 quarters. The failures this game were mostly not the fault of Tebow. It was his WRs.

They do well in the last 10 minutes because the other teams have been self-destructing in almost unprecedented fashion giving Tebow a chance to come back.

Bears Game: Bears throw away game and manage to turn certain victory into defeat.

a. Their defense holds Tebow in check entire game, they get a 10 point lead, then with less than 3 minutes to go, go into prevent mode and allow him to throw all down the field putting ZERO pressure on him. Broncos score quickly.

b. Game is over. Broncos can't stop the clock. Barber goes out of bounds. Clock stops. Broncos get the ball back. More awesome prevent defense that prevents them from winning.

c. Barber gets the ball in overtime. Bears are in obvious FG range. He fails to put 2 hands on the ball. He fumbles.

This stuff happened in 2009 too, remember? The "Immaculate Deflection?"

This season it all began with the on-side kick recovery that never should have been recovered. Remember that one? An idiot rookie doesn't let the ball travel 10 yards. He tries to go up and grab it -- while surrounded by 4 Broncos. Once he touches the ball, it's live and they wrestle it away from him.

Every game has been like that, from amazing fumbles to an insane coaches' decision to go for 2 in the middle of the 3rd quarter and they end up losing by 1 point. Some years you just get lucky. Teams have been self-destructing right and left when they play the Broncos.

It's not as if the Broncos have been beating up on these teams. They've been totally OUT of games, but the other team makes fundamental stupid mistakes that allows them the chance to come back.

Next season we will know more since the Broncos will be playing a 1st place, and not a last place schedule. I think that's good. If you're not good enough to beat the elite teams in the league, why wait until the playoffs to find that out? Why not lose a bunch of games to teams like the Ravens and Saints, stockpile draft picks and improve your team until you are?

[NightTerror218]

Fox mentioned they are not sure how teams will defend them yet with this new offense, so they tweek game plan at half time. I do not have link to this, it was couple weeks back.

[Cugel]

Fox mentioned they are not sure how teams will defend them yet with this new offense, so they tweek game plan at half time. I do not have link to this, it was couple weeks back.

But the "tweak" at half-time accomplished nothing in the 3rd quarter did it? They were down by 10 with less than 3 minutes to go when the Bears self-destructed and threw away the game.

I think eventually teams will realize NOT to go into "prevent mode" against Tebow. If they've been containing him the entire game, why change in the last 3 minutes and give him a chance to come back with ZERO pressure? Just stand off 20 yards and let him make a bunch of easy throws?

IDIOTS! They'll eventually learn from watching the game film of teams that did that to the Broncos and lost. :coffee:

[bcbronc]

How do we not match up well?

All 3 teams are successful by playing sound D, running the ball, and making the occasional big play in the passing game....

I actually think its a fairly even matchup.

you haven't watched the Steelers play for a couple of seasons I take it?

As for the thread, combination of conservative coaches not wanting to take their D out of the game early, a power running game that wears down the opponent and luck.

[Joel]

We've got 3 weeks to fix that first 45, especially since we're not playing an option heavy offense at this point. That excuse of "we dunno how they're gonna play us so we have to wait and see what they do and make halftime adjustments" doesn't fly if you're running a mostly conventional offense, which we are (despite the run emphasis).

Better offensive gameplans are required to START the game, McCoy - starting now.

~G
Yeah, that's pretty much crap; I'd expect to hear it from Fox because he's a defensive coach, but an OC shouldn't be talking that way. Offenses take the initiative, or rather, they seize the initiative footballs rules already inherently gave them by letting them put the ball in play and forbidding periods to end on defensive penalties. All the other recent offense friendly rules only reinforce that (though they certainly do that, one more reason offenses should come out firing.)

DEFENCES react, because they must; they don't know what the offense will try to do (or at least not how) until they do it. Probably the greatest reason big heavy defenders tire more and faster than equally big and heavy offenses is constantly hustling to keep up with them, especially when they guess wrong or bite on a fake and have to get back into the play. Ever seen a "Hurry Up defence"? Doesn't work, 'cos however fast you get back to the line and get set the offense will snap the ball when it pleases, and try to get a cheap five yards or a free play with the hard count in the mean time.

When an offense cedes their nearly overwhelming initiative by letting defences know what they'll do, they make the defences life easier and their own much harder. Running is great; I love it 'cos it's safe and averages a little over 4 yds/play, which spits out a first down on every series. However, you run to establish the pass at least as much as to matriculate the ball down the field. When a professional D doesn't have to guess what offenses will do, they'll stuff 'em most of the time, because they can bring all their force to bear at the same point the offense does. Offenses want to bring that force to bear at a weak point in a defence forced to cover the whole field (hence teams that can't run have trouble on the red zones short field.)

Every time our coaches say they won't know what offense to run until they see the D, I cringe and our opponents smile.

Fox mentioned they are not sure how teams will defend them yet with this new offense, so they tweek game plan at half time. I do not have link to this, it was couple weeks back.
As I say, that's a defensive coach talking. That's fine, but he should find an OC who knows how to say, "this is what we're going to try, because it's what we do best; they have to try to stop us, and if they succeed will do these other things instead."

I disagree. With Hanie starting, you should've been able to stack the box and prevent any running game with Forte out. I really didn't think that there was much of a drop off between Forte and Barber and normally there should be. (minus the whole going out of bounds think and the fumble).
We'll have to agree to disagree on that, I guess; I don't think there's that big a drop between Barber and Forte normally (for one thing, Forte's not THAT great, just very good, and for another, Barber's pretty good, too, which is why he made the Pro Bowl a few years ago.) All I can say is that Barber performed about the way I remember from watching him in all those Dallas games, right down to the fumble.

[tomjonesrocks]

There has GOT to be a way to reduce the 3-and-outs.

The receivers really let the offense down last week. And it seemed like a lot of times in the first 3 quarters receivers just aren't open.

[wayninja]

There has GOT to be a way to reduce the 3-and-outs.

The receivers really let the offense down last week. And it seemed like a lot of times in the first 3 quarters receivers just aren't open.

I have the answer. Maybe call something different than;

1st down; McGahee up the the gut for 1-2 yards
2nd down; Option Mcgahee/Tebow for 1-3 yards
3rd down; Draw for no gain or inaccurate throw or dopped pass
punt

[Dreadnought]

Ted from IAOFM has some interesting thoughts on this


...For today, I’m going short blog-post style, on a topic that seems to be flummoxing the whole football watching world. Why is Tim Tebow so much better in the 4th quarter of games? I know the answer to this question, and I’m going to share it with you today. It’s a matter of seeing the forest through the trees, and looking back to Tebow’s time at Florida to understand the phenomenon.

First, let’s start with a thought exercise. Based on Tebow’s skill set, what’s the best approach that the Broncos can take to being successful on offense? Consider personnel groupings, play-calling, and overall philosophy. Really consider this, and get the answer in your head.

Okay, everything you’ve been told about Tebow is that he’s not that good a thrower of the football, right? That’s sort of fair – he throws some real headscratchers sometimes. After the Detroit game, the Broncos staff decided that the thing to do was to pound teams with the running game. It worked really well against Oakland (299 yards) and Kansas City (244), then quite a bit less well against a Jets team (125) that played big and sold out to stuff it. The effectiveness came back against San Diego (208 yards), before falling off against Minnesota (150), and especially Chicago (124). What we’ve learned, and what the Broncos have learned, is that teams are going to make it their mission to stack the box and stop the running game...

http://www.itsalloverfatman.com/broncos/entry/why-tim-tebow-is-better-in-the-4th-quarter

[catfish]

we aren't the only ones asking this

http://www.nfl.com/videos/denver-broncos/09000d5d824feedb/Coaches-Show-Play-calling-in-Denver

[The Glue Factory]

Ted from IAOFM has some interesting thoughts on this

I like that piece. I think it's the best explanation so far, which is basically; playcalling is most of the fault of the first 3 quarters. I will add that a wrinkle might be that we drastically change gears when the game gets into do or die. I'd like to see what happens if McCoy and Fox put together a game plan to do what is done in the last 5 minutes of the game from the opening drive.

[Joel]

Ted from IAOFM has some interesting thoughts on this
Several good points in there, but the biggest is that Gator fans are right for the wrong reasons about why we should stay in a shotgun spread all game. I don't think many teams will play much dime against us even if Tebow turns into a great passer, simply because, for reasons known but to them and God, most DCs prefer heavy blitzes to heavy coverage (no matter how much they get eaten up by quick outs, screens and delay draws.) Current NFL rules on defensive backs only encourage that prevalent pre-existing tendency. However, the basic point remains valid: Whether they go to a dime or not, spread shotgun has real strength with a good versatile QB who can run on the dime or pass on a stacked box. If they're so frightened of the run they stack the box with a dime, so much the better, because almost any playcall will work.

It still say it's a bit late for Tebow and Newton to "revolutionize" the position with running, since the recent NFL has a legacy of successful running QBs (at least) as far back as Steve Young and Randall Cunningham, and it was the norm in the early days of the T Renaissance with guys like Sid Luckman. However, if Newton, Tebow and possibly Joe Webb (not to mention Vick and Young) succeed I could see a revival of the '40s and '50s offenses where teams ran a feature back/committee a third of the time, the QB a third of the time and threw TD strikes a third of the time. Guys like Rodgers and Roethlisberger (the SB XLV starters) represent a balance the other way, but still don't JUST pass any more than they JUST run.

Spread offenses in general revived the 3-4, which incidentally made the pure pocket passer the exception rather than the rule, even with all the rules added to protect them. There's not much difference between Bob Griese and Brian Griese, but a pocket passing game manager could win 2 Super Bowls in the '70s. Now he's luck to stay on the field without Peyton Mannings vision and accuracy (not to mention pass protection.)

As an aside, I share the bloggers amusement that we've gone from "Tebow can't hit the open man!" to "all he did was hit the open man!" Even were that analysis complete, it would still mean Tebow's obviously improved: He's doing the very things he was criticized for NOT doing just a month ago.

[vandammage13]

But the "tweak" at half-time accomplished nothing in the 3rd quarter did it? They were down by 10 with less than 3 minutes to go when the Bears self-destructed and threw away the game.

I think eventually teams will realize NOT to go into "prevent mode" against Tebow. If they've been containing him the entire game, why change in the last 3 minutes and give him a chance to come back with ZERO pressure? Just stand off 20 yards and let him make a bunch of easy throws?

IDIOTS! They'll eventually learn from watching the game film of teams that did that to the Broncos and lost. :coffee:

The public narrative out there questioning why teams are going into "prevent" mode is missing a major point in why.

It is the Broncos that are dictating the defensive change. Throughout the first 3 quarters, the Broncos are mostly playing with heavy packages geared toward running the ball. The Broncos are keeping the game close enough until the end playing this way. This philosophy worked throughout the game against KC and OAK.

When it comes to the end of the game, and the Broncos find themselves having no choice but to throw, it is the BRONCOS who are dictating the defensive change. The Broncos abandon their heavy package for a 4-5 WR set. Defenses cannot continue to run their 4-3 base that had worked so well for 3 quarters against this package.

It is not that defenses are abandoning what had been working for them earlier in the game, but that the Broncos are forcing a switch by changing what they are doing. The defenses have to match the personnel that the Broncos put on the field. It's not as if Lance Briggs can be expected to cover Matt Willis or Eddie Royal (Especially with Tebow's ability to buy time).

I wish they would run the 4-5 WR set more earlier, but they are winning, so I won't pretend to know more than the coaches do.

[catfish]

The public narrative out there questioning why teams are going into "prevent" mode is missing a major point in why.

It is the Broncos that are dictating the defensive change. Throughout the first 3 quarters, the Broncos are mostly playing with heavy packages geared toward running the ball. The Broncos are keeping the game close enough until the end playing this way. This philosophy worked throughout the game against KC and OAK.

When it comes to the end of the game, and the Broncos find themselves having no choice but to throw, it is the BRONCOS who are dictating the defensive change. The Broncos abandon their heavy package for a 4-5 WR set. Defenses cannot continue to run their 4-3 base that had worked so well for 3 quarters against this package.

It is not that defenses are abandoning what had been working for them earlier in the game, but that the Broncos are forcing a switch by changing what they are doing. The defenses have to match the personnel that the Broncos put on the field. It's not as if Lance Briggs can be expected to cover Matt Willis or Eddie Royal.

I wish they would run the 4-5 WR set more earlier, but they are winning, so I won't pretend to know more than the coaches do.

it is your job as a fan/forums poster to claim to know more than the coaches...do your damn job ;)

[vandammage13]

you haven't watched the Steelers play for a couple of seasons I take it?

As for the thread, combination of conservative coaches not wanting to take their D out of the game early, a power running game that wears down the opponent and luck.

------------------------------
Big Ben's last few games:

Week 14: B. Roethlisberger 16/21 280 yds

Week 13: B. Roethlisberger 15/23 176 yds

Week 12: B. Roethlisberger 21/31 193 yds

Week 11: BYE

Week 10: B. Roethlisberger 21-33, 245 yds
-----------------------------------------

I'm not sure what you're getting at, but the Steelers aren't throwing the ball all over the field. The amount of completions the Steelers have each game is pretty similar to what the Broncos have.

In fact, since Week 10, Roethlisberger hasn't had any more completions in a game than what Tim had last week. They are just making the most of their limited attempts like the Broncos are.

So, yeah.....They are pretty similar. Steelers may have better personnel top to bottom, but the philosophies of the teams are pretty much the same formula. Pretty even matchup IMO.

A matchup against the Steelers or Ravens would just come down to 1 or 2 big plays IMO, because our defense and clock-eating running game isn't going to allow either of those teams to build a big lead against us.

[Joel]

The public narrative out there questioning why teams are going into "prevent" mode is missing a major point in why.

It is the Broncos that are dictating the defensive change. Throughout the first 3 quarters, the Broncos are mostly playing with heavy packages geared toward running the ball. The Broncos are keeping the game close enough until the end playing this way. This philosophy worked throughout the game against KC and OAK.

When it comes to the end of the game, and the Broncos find themselves having no choice but to throw, it is the BRONCOS who are dictating the defensive change. The Broncos abandon their heavy package for a 4-5 WR set. Defenses cannot continue to run their 4-3 base that had worked so well for 3 quarters against this package.

It is not that defenses are abandoning what had been working for them earlier in the game, but that the Broncos are forcing a switch by changing what they are doing. The defenses have to match the personnel that the Broncos put on the field. It's not as if Lance Briggs can be expected to cover Matt Willis or Eddie Royal (Especially with Tebow's ability to buy time).

I wish they would run the 4-5 WR set more earlier, but they are winning, so I won't pretend to know more than the coaches do.
So, in a sense, our offense is taking the initiative by forcing them into the only defence that can succeed against our heavy running. I could buy into that if it didn't so consistently leave us behind in the fourth quarter.

The bottom line is we're winning games when we go to the multi-WR spreads that dictate their defences just as assuredly as our running game does. Given that's the case, why not run it all game and score 20 point blow outs instead of eking out come from behind victories (with a lot of luck)? We can wear them down and tire them out just as effectively doing that as running.

As of Sunday it's a moot point; our secondary is beat up and green, the Pats line can stop any blitz that doesn't bring the house and even when we do Brady can make quick throws to a wealth of good receivers. They can and likely will take out our running game early, and on the flip side, NE has one of the few secondaries in the League more beat up and green than ours, so depleted they're starting backup WRs as CBs.

All that adds up to Denver throwing early and often; it's not only strategically sound, but will likely prove necessary. Tebow will have to be on target, our line will have to protect him and our receivers will have to catch balls placed in both hands.