CHFF's Take Merged

[Thnikkaman]

A team in need of a statistical stimulus plan
Cold, Hard Football Facts for April 3, 2009

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/11_2708_A_team_in_need_of_a_statistical_stimulus_p lan.html

Denver has been one of the league’s marquee franchises since the arrival of John Elway more than quarter century ago.

But the Broncos sit here in the 2009 off-season surrounded by so much chaos that we swear we saw their fans smashing windows yesterday outside the G-20 summit in London.

Mike Shanahan was dumped as head coach at the end of last year’s disappointing 8-8 campaign, following 14 successful seasons during which he guided the organization to its only two Super Bowl titles.

Quarterback Jay Cutler, meanwhile, the face of the franchise and the team’s No. 1 pick in the 2006 draft, was shipped to Chicago yesterday after a highly publicized pissing match with Shanahan’s replacement, former Patriots offensive coordinator Josh McDaniels – the baby-faced 32-year-old head coach (33 on April 22) charged with rebuilding the Broncos brand. Denver landed Bears signal-caller Kyle Orton and a stunning two first-round draft picks.

The Broncos who run onto the field in September will look and feel a whole lot different than the Broncos who sheepishly walked off the field back in December.

And that’s a very good thing for the Denver faithful as they look toward their own New World Order.

In fact, the 2008 Broncos were in desperate need of an auto-industry-style makeover and were an organization scarred by acts of statistical dysfunction so profound that only the Cold, Hard Football Facts have the insight you need to put it all into perspective.

Denver’s Shocking Statistical Soulmate
To comprehend the chaos in Denver here in the 2009 off-season, you need to wrap your fragile little mind around two sets of data about two very different teams.

Don’t worry, this will be fun … and incredibly enlightening.

Consider Team A. It averaged:

* 411.2 yards per game
* 295.7 passing yards per game
* 115.6 rushing yards per game
* An inspiring 6.22 yards per offensive play over the course of an entire season.

Now Consider Team B. It averaged:

* 395.8 yards per game
* 279.4 passing yards per game
* 116.4 rushing yards per game
* An inspiring 6.21 yards per offensive play over the course of an entire season.

Given the highly comparable offensive numbers – a slight but hardly significant edge to Team A in most categories – you’d assume that Team A was slightly more productive on offense than Team B, but not by much. After all, each snap by each team yielded nearly the same exact gain of 6.2 yards.

We’d make that same assumption, too.

But both of us would be wrong.

Team A is the 16-0 Patriots of 2007 – who scored an NFL-record 589 points (36.8 PPG), the second-highest per-game average in the entire history of the league (1950 Rams, 38.8 PPG).

Team B is the 8-8 Broncos of 2008 – who scored a paltry 370 points (23.1), barely ranking in the top half of the league last year (16th).

That’s right: the 2008 Broncos moved the ball up and down the field nearly as well as the offense many consider the greatest in the history of the game. On a per-play basis, the 2007 Patriots and 2008 Broncos were statistical equals.

But when it came to the two results that actually mattered – turning those yards into points and victories – the two teams could not have been more different. The 2007 Patriots boasted twice as many victories and outscored the 2008 Broncos by better than two touchdowns per game.

The 2008 Broncos, in other words, were an extraordinarily inefficient offense.

Right or wrong, quarterbacks always shoulder an undue amount of praise and blame for their team’s fortunes. So, naturally, the blame for Denver’s dysfunction fell on the shoulders of the quarterback – or at least it did in the eyes of the only person that matters: new head coach Josh McDaniels, a guy who had a front-row seat to New England's version of 6.2 yards per play as the team’s offensive coordinator.

A Very Bad Trend
Cutler was seen by most pigskin “pundits” as one of the bright young stars of the NFL – a player who seemed to prove his place in the NFL when he passed for a tremendous 4,526 yards last year.

It was easily the most prolific passing season in franchise history. Consider that John Elway himself surpassed the 4,000-yard mark just once – and just barely – with 4,030 yards in 1993.

So many observers were confused when McDaniels walked in and immediately made noise about acquiring another quarterback, touching off the flame war that ended in Cutler’s trade to Chicago on Thursday.

But McDaniels apparently knew what the Cold, Hard Football Facts have long told you: yards, and passing yards in particular, have virtually no correlation to success in the NFL.

Let us say that again to be very clear: Yards, and passing yards in particular, have virtually no correlation to success in the NFL.

And few teams in history epitomized the vast emptiness of yards as an indicator of success better than the Broncos under Cutler.

In fact, his ascent to the role of starting QB was marked by rapid descent in Denver’s offensive efficiency and, therefore, in Denver’s success as a team.

* The 2008 Broncos needed to produce a daunting 17.12 yards of offense for every point it scored in 2008 – 28th in the NFL as measured by the Cold, Hard Football Facts Scoreability Index, our measure of offensive efficiency. They went 8-8.
* The 2007 Broncos were even worse: they needed to produce 17.32 yards of offense for every point it scored – 25th in the NFL as measured by our Scoreability Index. They went 7-9.

To find the last time that Broncos boasted an efficient offense – an offense that effectively squeezed points out of its yards – you have to go back to the 2005 Broncos under Jake Plummer.

The 2005 Broncos ranked 9th on our Scoreability Index, scoring a point for every 14.6 yards of offense. Not so coincidentally, the 2005 Broncos went 13-3 and were one game away from reaching the Super Bowl.

But for some reason that seems inexplicable in retrospect, the offensive efficiency and the 13-3 season weren't good enough for Denver fans or for the organization. In fact, Plummer, the quarterback behind that fairly efficient 2005 Broncos offense, was pigskin persona-non-grata in Denver. From fans to management, it seems nobody liked Plummer.

So, in the wake of their 13-3 season, the Broncos devoted their top pick in the 2006 draft to Jay Cutler, the proverbial quarterback of the future.

He threw pretty passes and put up big individual numbers. His 87.1 career passer rating, for example, easily exceed's Elway's 79.9 career passer rating.

But the Broncos under Cutler could not put the ball in the end zone. Denver clearly had serious defensive issues that made it harder for the offense to score points (last year's Broncos ranked 30th, surrendering 28.0 PPG). But it doesn't change the fact that, in two seasons with Cutler the clear-cut No. 1 quarterback, Denver's offensive efficiency crashed faster and more sharply than the Icelandic stock market.

The Cold, Hard Football Facts saw the problems with Denver through our Scoreability Index, even as most of the pigskin “pundits” gawked at Cutler's gaudy yardage total.

McDaniels apparently saw the same problems we did, too. After all, he learned what 6.2 yards per play looked like when he guided the Patriots to a record 589 points in 2007. And he must have been shocked when we watched film of Cutler and the Denver offense and its version of 6.2 yards per play last season.

He apparently knew big changes were in order. Cutler took the bait, making it clear he was not happy in Denver.

So McDaniels and the Broncos flipped an pouting, inefficient quarterback for Kyle Orton, who’s won 21 of his 32 NFL starts with the Bears, and a stunning two first-round draft picks.

It's a great deal for a team that desperately needed a statistical stimulus plan.

[roomemp]

This is a very positive way to look at this offseason, ESPECIALLY the whole Cutler Fiasco.

[gregbroncs]

I liked that article. Good find, very interesting.

[Superchop 7]

This is a smart move ?

Must be out of your mind.

This was about a young coach with a huge ego and a severe lack of maturity.

[Thnikkaman]

This is a smart move ?

Must be out of your mind.

This was about a young coach with a huge ego and a severe lack of maturity.

No. The characters in this play were:

A coach who had is naivete taken advantage of that didn't handle his shit in time.
A agent who saw an opportunity to cash a big check with a young QB coming of a statistically great season.
A young QB who felt like he deserved top 10 draft pick money and was going to get it no matter the means.
A football team who had trust in a QB that just screwed them.
An Owner who just got sick and tired of the drama and ended it.

Sure I'm going to miss the athleticism of Cutler, and I would be smoking crack if I said he wasn't a great QB. But he is a head case with a stack of victim cards in his back pocket.

Orton did nothing but win football games and toss a few back in Chicago. I'm willing to give him a chance here. Lets stock up our D in the draft, and move forward.

As a fan, you have 3 choices, bitch and moan about something you chant change, get over it and look forward, or go find another team to follow.

[CoachChaz]

This is a smart move ?

Must be out of your mind.

This was about a young coach with a huge ego and a severe lack of maturity.

That is a completely ridiculous statement that could only come from someone with a complete man crush on Cutler and the incapacity to see anything beyond that.

[Den21vsBal19]

This is a smart move ?

Must be out of your mind.

This was about a young coach with a huge ego and a severe lack of maturity.

This was about a young QB with a huge ego and a severe lack of maturity.

[LRtagger]

That is a completely ridiculous statement that could only come from someone with a complete man crush on Cutler and the incapacity to see anything beyond that.

Also remember this was the guy that was hoping we would lose to end the season last year so we could draft Curry.

The irony is that we didn't have a shot at Curry anyways, and if we had won to end the season last year Jay would still be a Bronco.

[EastCoastBronco]

The boys at "Cold Hard Football Facts: The Truth Hurts" always seem to get it right. Enjoy...or not.. depending on what side of this fence you are on...;-)

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/11_2708_A_team_in_need_of_a_statistical_stimulus_p lan.html

A team in need of a statistical stimulus plan
Cold, Hard Football Facts for April 3, 2009


Denver has been one of the league’s marquee franchises since the arrival of John Elway more than quarter century ago.

But the Broncos sit here in the 2009 off-season surrounded by so much chaos that we swear we saw their fans smashing windows yesterday outside the G-20 summit in London.

Mike Shanahan was dumped as head coach at the end of last year’s disappointing 8-8 campaign, following 14 successful seasons during which he guided the organization to its only two Super Bowl titles.

Quarterback Jay Cutler, meanwhile, the face of the franchise and the team’s No. 1 pick in the 2006 draft, was shipped to Chicago yesterday after a highly publicized pissing match with Shanahan’s replacement, former Patriots offensive coordinator Josh McDaniels – the baby-faced 32-year-old head coach (33 on April 22) charged with rebuilding the Broncos brand. Denver landed Bears signal-caller Kyle Orton and a stunning two first-round draft picks.

The Broncos who run onto the field in September will look and feel a whole lot different than the Broncos who sheepishly walked off the field back in December.

And that’s a very good thing for the Denver faithful as they look toward their own New World Order.

In fact, the 2008 Broncos were in desperate need of an auto-industry-style makeover and were an organization scarred by acts of statistical dysfunction so profound that only the Cold, Hard Football Facts have the insight you need to put it all into perspective.

Denver’s Shocking Statistical Soulmate
To comprehend the chaos in Denver here in the 2009 off-season, you need to wrap your fragile little mind around two sets of data about two very different teams.

Don’t worry, this will be fun … and incredibly enlightening.

Consider Team A. It averaged:
411.2 yards per game
295.7 passing yards per game
115.6 rushing yards per game
An inspiring 6.22 yards per offensive play over the course of an entire season.
Now Consider Team B. It averaged:
395.8 yards per game
279.4 passing yards per game
116.4 rushing yards per game
An inspiring 6.21 yards per offensive play over the course of an entire season.
Given the highly comparable offensive numbers – a slight but hardly significant edge to Team A in most categories – you’d assume that Team A was slightly more productive on offense than Team B, but not by much. After all, each snap by each team yielded nearly the same exact gain of 6.2 yards.

We’d make that same assumption, too.

But both of us would be wrong.

Team A is the 16-0 Patriots of 2007 – who scored an NFL-record 589 points (36.8 PPG), the second-highest per-game average in the entire history of the league (1950 Rams, 38.8 PPG).

Team B is the 8-8 Broncos of 2008 – who scored a paltry 370 points (23.1), barely ranking in the top half of the league last year (16th).

That’s right: the 2008 Broncos moved the ball up and down the field nearly as well as the offense many consider the greatest in the history of the game. On a per-play basis, the 2007 Patriots and 2008 Broncos were statistical equals.

But when it came to the two results that actually mattered – turning those yards into points and victories – the two teams could not have been more different. The 2007 Patriots boasted twice as many victories and outscored the 2008 Broncos by better than two touchdowns per game.

The 2008 Broncos, in other words, were an extraordinarily inefficient offense.

Right or wrong, quarterbacks always shoulder an undue amount of praise and blame for their team’s fortunes. So, naturally, the blame for Denver’s dysfunction fell on the shoulders of the quarterback – or at least it did in the eyes of the only person that matters: new head coach Josh McDaniels, a guy who had a front-row seat to New England's version of 6.2 yards per play as the team’s offensive coordinator.

A Very Bad Trend
Cutler was seen by most pigskin “pundits” as one of the bright young stars of the NFL – a player who seemed to prove his place in the NFL when he passed for a tremendous 4,526 yards last year.

It was easily the most prolific passing season in franchise history. Consider that John Elway himself surpassed the 4,000-yard mark just once – and just barely – with 4,030 yards in 1993.

So many observers were confused when McDaniels walked in and immediately made noise about acquiring another quarterback, touching off the flame war that ended in Cutler’s trade to Chicago on Thursday.

But McDaniels apparently knew what the Cold, Hard Football Facts have long told you: yards, and passing yards in particular, have virtually no correlation to success in the NFL.

Let us say that again to be very clear: Yards, and passing yards in particular, have virtually no correlation to success in the NFL.

And few teams in history epitomized the vast emptiness of yards as an indicator of success better than the Broncos under Cutler.

In fact, his ascent to the role of starting QB was marked by rapid descent in Denver’s offensive efficiency and, therefore, in Denver’s success as a team.
The 2008 Broncos needed to produce a daunting 17.12 yards of offense for every point it scored in 2008 – 28th in the NFL as measured by the Cold, Hard Football Facts Scoreability Index, our measure of offensive efficiency. They went 8-8.
The 2007 Broncos were even worse: they needed to produce 17.32 yards of offense for every point it scored – 25th in the NFL as measured by our Scoreability Index. They went 7-9.
To find the last time that Broncos boasted an efficient offense – an offense that effectively squeezed points out of its yards – you have to go back to the 2005 Broncos under Jake Plummer.

The 2005 Broncos ranked 9th on our Scoreability Index, scoring a point for every 14.6 yards of offense. Not so coincidentally, the 2005 Broncos went 13-3 and were one game away from reaching the Super Bowl.

But for some reason that seems inexplicable in retrospect, the offensive efficiency and the 13-3 season weren't good enough for Denver fans or for the organization. In fact, Plummer, the quarterback behind that fairly efficient 2005 Broncos offense, was pigskin persona-non-grata in Denver. From fans to management, it seems nobody liked Plummer.

So, in the wake of their 13-3 season, the Broncos devoted their top pick in the 2006 draft to Jay Cutler, the proverbial quarterback of the future.

He threw pretty passes and put up big individual numbers. His 87.1 career passer rating, for example, easily exceed's Elway's 79.9 career passer rating.

But the Broncos under Cutler could not put the ball in the end zone. Denver clearly had serious defensive issues that made it harder for the offense to score points (last year's Broncos ranked 30th, surrendering 28.0 PPG). But it doesn't change the fact that, in two seasons with Cutler the clear-cut No. 1 quarterback, Denver's offensive efficiency crashed faster and more sharply than the Icelandic stock market.

The Cold, Hard Football Facts saw the problems with Denver through our Scoreability Index, even as most of the pigskin “pundits” gawked at Cutler's gaudy yardage total.

McDaniels apparently saw the same problems we did, too. After all, he learned what 6.2 yards per play looked like when he guided the Patriots to a record 589 points in 2007. And he must have been shocked when he watched film of Cutler and the Denver offense and its version of 6.2 yards per play last season.

He apparently knew big changes were in order. Cutler took the bait, making it clear he was not happy in Denver.

So McDaniels and the Broncos flipped an pouting, inefficient quarterback for Kyle Orton, who’s won 21 of his 32 NFL starts with the Bears, and a stunning two first-round draft picks.

It's a great deal for a team that desperately needed a statistical stimulus plan.

[Thnikkaman]

http://www.broncosforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36657

[EastCoastBronco]

Didn't even see it brother...
Mods, feel free to kill it...

[Thnikkaman]

Didn't even see it brother...
Mods, feel free to kill it...

Not a problem. I felt silly posting the reply since my thread was 4 pages into the history of this forum. I think I posted that last Friday.

[AlWilsonizKING]

"you need to wrap your fragile little mind"


How dare they....


lol



PEACE!!!

[EastCoastBronco]

I always read their stuff because their statistics driven style makes the "pundits" look like fools...;-) I always come away with that "back to reality" feeling.

[Medford Bronco]

This is what stood out to me

Stats lie to back up your argument. I think this is a well written and truthful artcle. Great job CHHF:salute:


The 2008 Broncos, in other words, were an extraordinarily inefficient offense.

Yeah but we were the 2nd ranked one :lol: :rolleyes:




But McDaniels apparently knew what the Cold, Hard Football Facts have long told you: yards, and passing yards in particular, have virtually no correlation to success in the NFL.

Agreed, points are more important than yards, didnt Denver lose a game with 500 yards of offense last year (yes to Buffalo:mad: and with 446 yards at KC)

Let us say that again to be very clear: Yards, and passing yards in particular, have virtually no correlation to success in the NFL.

Stop making sense CHFF it is very clear to me


And few teams in history epitomized the vast emptiness of yards as an indicator of success better than the Broncos under Cutler.



He threw pretty passes and put up big individual numbers. His 87.1 career passer rating, for example, easily exceed's Elway's 79.9 career passer rating.

Pretty passes are overrated, just ask Jeff George Also
QB rating is a farce, intangilbes are so important, Elway would make a play more ofen then not, especially early in his career when he had such "great" wrs as the 3 amigos or Steve Watson (whom I love but was not as talented as Royal or Marshall)


But the Broncos under Cutler could not put the ball in the end zone. Denver clearly had serious defensive issues that made it harder for the offense to score points (last year's Broncos ranked 30th, surrendering 28.0 PPG). But it doesn't change the fact that, in two seasons with Cutler the clear-cut No. 1 quarterback, Denver's offensive efficiency crashed faster and more sharply than the Icelandic stock market.

This also is true but dont bring up the statistical factual analysis. :lol:

The Cold, Hard Football Facts saw the problems with Denver through our Scoreability Index, even as most of the pigskin “pundits” gawked at Cutler's gaudy yardage total.

Agreed the most important thing is points scored not yardage, You dont win games with the most yards, most points does. Football 101:lol:

[Medford Bronco]

I always read their stuff because their statistics driven style makes the "pundits" look like fools...;-) I always come away with that "back to reality" feeling.

Thanks for posting this ECB. It might be an eye opener for some or some might rail against it I am sure

[CoachChaz]

Thanks for posting this ECB. It might be an eye opener for some or some might rail against it I am sure

Now why would anyone want any facts or proof before they make a decision?

[Broncolingus]

Thx to both of you...

I have no problem with the article...

[Medford Bronco]

mods please merge, I actually spend time on my post and would love to see some opinions on that.

[Shazam!]

Too many people throw out 2nd ranked offense, but that's only in yards, they were 16th in scoring.

Also, if the patriots were he best offense of all time they would've won a Championship. You can't be the best in the NFL without the metal to back it up. Prolific, yes. Best ever? No.

[NightTrainLayne]

Threads merged.

[G_Money]

Agreed the most important thing is points scored not yardage, You dont win games with the most yards, most points does. Football 101:lol:

I agree 100% with the article that passing yards are not indicative of success. How many yards was Kitna throwing for in Detroit? How many yards were some of those old Run n Shoot offenses putting up?

But they don't explain what IS indicative of success in their view.

Stating, "Well, lots of passing yards doesn't mean wins, and the Broncos won less, and they moved the ball but didn't score a lot, so Cutler had to go" is inaccurate. Correlation is not causation.

Having a rocket arm and the ability to throw for 4000 yards doesn't automatically net you lots of wins, but it's sure a nice ability to have. It doesn't HURT your winning chances. Strong-armed QBs don't lose more games than noodle-armed ones by default or something.

The year we went to the AFCC game with Plummer in 05, how many rushing TDs did we have? What's that, 25? We were 3rd in the league in rushing TDs? 2nd in attempts, 2nd in yards? Plummer just had to middle-of-the-pack it? Interesting. Does that mean you only WANT a quarterback with limited skills?

I wouldn't think so. When we won it all we had a QB who could throw it all over the field and a running game that turned opposing defenses into mulch, as well as an OL that knocked em dead in both aspects.

Jay threw for 25 TDs in 2007 and 25 this past year as well.

Jake Plummer threw 18 in 2005. "Well yeah, but Jay had way more attempts!" you say? Not in 2007 he didn't.

Jake Plummer: 456 attempts in 2005
Jay Cutler: 467 attempts in 2006, 616 attempts in 2007. So then you'd like to know, "WHY did Cutler's TD% decline between 2006 and 2007?" Simple chance? Playcalling? Lessened ability to find the endzone? More stupid mistakes?

How were we 7th in the league in points in 2005, and fell to 17th, 21st and 16th in succeeding years?

The line died after 2005. Our running game inside the 20 suffered.

Our sacks went from 23 to 31 to 33...to 12. Wow. Looks like we might have finally rebuilt our line somewhat, certainly for the passing game. But our zone scheme always takes a bit to pick up, and we weren't running anywhere near our normal level of effectiveness. Or were we?

Rushing:

2005: 25 rushing TDs on 542 attempts = 1 TD every 21.7 rushes
2006: 12 rushing TDs on 488 attempts = 1 TD every 40.7 rushes
2007: 10 rushing TDs on 429 attempts = 1 TD every 42.9 rushes
2008: 15 rushing TDs on 387 attempts = 1 TD every 25.8 rushes

In terms of Runs per TD, it looks like we're rebuilding the effectiveness of our running game as well, even WITH a litany of scrubs toting the rock.

Our running-game scoring was better this year, our sacks were better this year...looks like the line might be nearly back.

So why couldn't Cutler and Co put it in the end zone? Again, was it play-calling? Was it red-zone turnovers, both from Cutler and some fumbles? If the line's back, and Cutler can do everything BUT put it in the end zone, and we were figuring out our running attack again...things were looking up. We just needed Cutler to take that next step of taking care of the football better. Not a TON better - he threw 600+ passes with 18 picks. His INT-per-pass numbers weren't atrocious. It looked like tweaks.

Maybe it wasn't. Maybe that was as good as it was ever going to get, as it was with Griese, and with Plummer.

But as the article states, passing yards mean very little in scoring and winning ballgames. So what DOES mean something? And how close or far away were we to GETTING those somethings with Cutler here?

*shrugs* The points are all moot now.

Now it's up to the Bears to figure out what to do with a guy who can throw for a lot of yards but not punch it in the end zone, and it up to us to figure out how to score more with a QB who has fewer obvious gifts.

I really hope we figure it out before they do, or we're gonna look like a buncha maroons.

~G

[Lonestar]

seemed obvious to Josh that something was wrong and either trying to get the QB to change or change the QB was the way to go..

since the QB seemed unwilling to play here or change if he did, decisions had to be made..

I will not fault Josh for doing what had to be done..

BTW great article..

[Cugel]

G-Money basically hit it on the head. I'll simplify.

That was one of the most idiotic articles I've ever read!

Here's why.

WHY did the Broncos fail to score a lot of TDs? Because they had 8 RBs on IR. Why is that difficult to grasp?

It's hard to score in the red-zone by passing. You can move up and down the field but if everybody in the stadium knows you can't punch it in on first and goal from the 5 yard line, they just stand there and commit to cover all the receivers and rush the passer.

I was actually surprised when teams would go for the run fake, when I KNEW it was going to be a pass. Their ingrained reactions led them to commit before their brain could reason it out "Denver can't pound the ball, so the play-action hand off is bound to be a fake. Cutler will probably roll out and I'll be waiting." :coffee:

When teams did that, Denver didn't score much. Lots of FGs.

So, was that Cutler's fault? Would a noodle-armed QB like say Brian Griese or Kyle Orton be better?

And exactly why would that be? :coffee:

There's simply no logic here. Cutler sucks because the Broncos were inefficient? So a guy with a weaker arm would be better?

These idiots seem to think that Cutler CAN'T be more conservative with the football. Well, he certainly could if that's what Shanahan wanted done.

You didn't see Shanahan get in Cutler's face or do anything to change the way he played last season. (Remember the criticism of Plummer Shanahan gave out? He's not shy about getting on players who don't do exactly what he wants them to do).

Well then why do all those NFL GMs want Cutler? Why were multiple teams willing to give up 2 or more top draft picks for him, plus a veteran QB?

Is it some special magic that only CHHF knows? They're the only ones who have the secret mystical formula?

Stats geeks think they've got some special corner on wisdom that nobody else sees a lot. Mostly, though it's B.S. You can create statistics about almost anything.

Denver was "inefficient." Big surprise. Now tell me how "efficient" they were expected to be with 8 RBs on IR and how that's Cutler's fault? :coffee:

[LawDog]

Seems to me that if we put up a whole bunch of yards and still were mediocre in points scored that all those yards came in the middle of the field. Don't have time to look at the moment, but if someone has the time it would be interesting to see what our average start of drive yardline was for each of the four years. We've been screaming "it's the defense stupid" for so long, I would expect that we were starting way backed up on our own side of the field by a strong margin. Especially considering G's analysis of how our offense was improving or at least headed in the right direction.

[Cugel]

Seems to me that if we put up a whole bunch of yards and still were mediocre in points scored that all those yards came in the middle of the field. Don't have time to look at the moment, but if someone has the time it would be interesting to see what our average start of drive yardline was for each of the four years. We've been screaming "it's the defense stupid" for so long, I would expect that we were starting way backed up on our own side of the field by a strong margin. Especially considering G's analysis of how our offense was improving or at least headed in the right direction.

Denver's average starting possession was something like the 2nd worst in football last I looked.

Certainly the defense was the worst in the NFL. Football Outsiders considered them to be one of the worst defenses of the last 15 years statistically, for whatever that is worth. The NFL ranked them 29th but the offense kept them off the field a lot, which should have helped them out but didn't. :coffee:

The un-special teams contributed a lot to this, if you remember the Chiefs game they started virtually every drive near the 50 yard line.

Lots of yards but mediocre in points = lousy running game. That's what did it. RBs all on IR makes it hard to score TDs in the red-zone. :coffee:

You can move the ball passing up and down the field, but to score from the 10 yard line in you need a running game. Denver mostly didn't have one except for a few games before Peyton Hillis got hurt.

[Medford Bronco]

.

Lots of yards but mediocre in points = lousy running game. That's what did it. RBs all on IR makes it hard to score TDs in the red-zone. :coffee:

You can move the ball passing up and down the field, but to score from the 10 yard line in you need a running game. Denver mostly didn't have one except for a few games before Peyton Hillis got hurt.

Arizona had a shitty running game and scored over 400 pts with a horrid defense to boot until the playoffs.

I think that kinds pokes a hole in that argument.

I dont know why people cant accept that Cutler made a lot of bad decisions. He certainly was not sacked a lot. Yes the defense did suck I agree but when Denver had chances to score there were lots of FGs and sometimes turnvoers, espcially at the wrong time of the game. Buffalo game (the SD game twice if not for the fluke inadvertent blown call as well)


Right now is far from a finished product. He might be great someday but right now he is a decent NFL QB with prone to turning it over and is very immature off the field as well.

[Foochacho]

Can't wait till Orton shows this team how to score. The bears scored more points than us last year even though they had a weak offense. The running game rushed for 200 yds less than us even though they had 47 more attempts. If they had such a powerful running game, than with 47 more attempts they should of blown our running game out of the water instead of it being the other way around.

I think it all boils down to Kyle Orton making smarter decisions than Jay going for the safe pass instead of bombing down the field to a double covered receiver. With a stronger O-line, better receivers, and a stronger running game he should have no problem scoring easier than what he did with the Bears.

Screw Jay Cutler he is gone. It is time for Neck Beard to show him how to use a powerful offense.