PDA

View Full Version : Game thoughts.....Falcons



Superchop 7
09-17-2012, 11:20 PM
Starting off Peyton looked like a rookie.....if you look at his mechanics.....first half horrible....second half much better....started stepping into his throws.

D-line.....we all know our DT is weak, needed an INTERIOR rush.....they could simply focus on the ends.....next time line up ultra wide 9 to counter.

Secondary....ours was poor.....theirs was superb.

Game ball Broncos.....Stokley....kept the drive alive on 3rd down several times.

Game ball #2.....McGahee....even better than last year....

The game was weird, Im putting it behind me....no way Manning will ever play that bad again.

CrazyHorse
09-17-2012, 11:24 PM
Manning is 3 TD's 3 Ints so far this season. We still can't cover a tight end. Our run defense is solid though. If it weren't for the turnovers we win this game.

cmc0605
09-17-2012, 11:25 PM
I agree with you. It sucks to lose, but I'm not incredibly worried after this game. Take away that very odd first quarter, and the score might be reversed. It may take this offense a few weeks to click, but really I see no reason why this isn't a top 10 unit between Manning, McGahee, Decker, Thomas, and the TEs. Stokley is clutch, and is going to play a Rod Smith role this year. This o-line is not super elite but better than average I think. Manning seems to control his protection and has made some mistakes in that regard.

I'm extremely happy with our defenses performance against the run in these first two weeks. Last year, teams ran up the middle on us with holes the size of an interstate thruway. I'm actually a little concerned with our pass rush, despite the elite pass rushers we have. We're not getting a lot of 4-man pressure, and Elvis Dumervil has not come around yet this season. Miller is a beast, but someone else needs to step up.

chazoe60
09-17-2012, 11:35 PM
Replacement refs are terrible and so is Rahim "the nightmare" Moore.

silkamilkamonico
09-17-2012, 11:39 PM
My 2 cents.

Denver needs some receivers. Bad. Watching julio and roddy is envious. I know its a bad comparison becuase they are elite bit good god. Get Manning sone targets for crying out loud. That should be denvers #1 priority.

DThomas - hes our only legitimate receiver.
Stokley - still solid in the slot but cmon, he shouod not be a showcase in the offense.
Decker - who? Dude should have his picture on a crunch time milk carton.
Tamme/Dreeskn - these are really our te's? They so bad peyton manning makes them looks average.
McGahee is good but old and breaking down.
Moreno - sucks.
Ball - sucks

Get some targets already. With tbe exception of thomas, i cringe at the sight of them getting blasted every time they catch the ball.

Jim Leonard is really our returner? Are you kidding me? Let decker return, he fan be effective there.

cmc0605
09-17-2012, 11:53 PM
My 2 cents.

Denver needs some receivers. Bad. Watching julio and roddy is envious. I know its a bad comparison becuase they are elite bit good god. Get Manning sone targets for crying out loud. That should be denvers #1 priority.

DThomas - hes our only legitimate receiver.
Stokley - still solid in the slot but cmon, he shouod not be a showcase in the offense.
Decker - who? Dude should have his picture on a crunch time milk carton.
Tamme/Dreeskn - these are really our te's? They so bad peyton manning makes them looks average.
McGahee is good but old and breaking down.
Moreno - sucks.
Ball - sucks

Get some targets already. With tbe exception of thomas, i cringe at the sight of them getting blasted every time they catch the ball.

Jim Leonard is really our returner? Are you kidding me? Let decker return, he fan be effective there.

I don't agree with this, except perhaps for my support in not having a slow white guy returning punts.

Decker is a very good receiver, in fact, and I thought it was pretty well acknowledged that our WR tandem is a good (and young) group. The TEs may not be elite, but they are quality targets, and only a few TEs in the league anyway can be considered "elite." Atlanta has two #1 quality corners, so keep that in mind tonight, but Manning has plenty of targets.

Tonight, all three interceptions were on Manning not reading the DBs that dropped back onto that seam route. Credit Atlanta's defensive game plan, but I doubt we see the same quarter 1 performance out of Manning for the rest of the year. None of the offense mishaps had to do with poor WR performance, and I've not seen that our WRs are unreliable after the catch.

wayninja
09-17-2012, 11:55 PM
Von Miller continues to show the workhorse spirit he came into the league with. Only 1 sack tonight, but remains tied with a few for the top spot in that department. He is truly our number 1 pass rush threat now. Not sure where the other guys went.

Manning looked shaky at best. He forced too many throws, and some of his throws looked downright terrible. He can definitely still throw as he did make some nice throws, I'm not sure if it's a phyiscal or mental thing at this point, but hopefully the consistency will return. I'm getting a bit concerned that his accuracy on passes over 20 yards just isn't there.

Too many freaking penalties. I know the refs sucked ass an all, but man we really killed ourselves here.

jhildebrand
09-18-2012, 12:01 AM
The bad and ugly:
Joe Mays-SUCKS.
Brooking is too old even in the few plays he is out there.
Decker has no excuses but still tons of drops.
Moreno is so dense he can't learn simple things like keeping the ball tight.
No real threat on Punt Returns. Put Bolden there too!

The Good
Run D
DT is proving to be an all out threat on all 3 downs

Needed:
Hillman in Moreno out and use the roster spot on DL or LB

Fullback32
09-18-2012, 12:01 AM
Best quote of the night: "Does Jim Leonard have a piano tied to his ass?" Credit: Buff

Manning: I wish to forget the first quarter. Rest of game: more like it.
O-line run blocking: good.
O-line pass blocking: bad. Will improve with the return of Kuper and installation of Koppen.
McGahee: running tough. I liked it.
Knowshon: Knowshon
Decker: stone hands
Thomas: still the best receiver on the team
TEs: Average play
D-Line interior: Good on run defense, non-existant on pass defense.
D-Line outside: Von Miller played well as usual - double-teamed all night though. Elvis better step up and start giving Von some help. So far he has been invisible.
Linebackers: OMG
Secondary: Champ played well. Porter: just okay, but out of position too many times. Safeties: Moore is less. Adams: I don't recall screaming his name, whatever that means.

Superchop 7
09-18-2012, 12:11 AM
What is most worrisome is that the LB's had to help out in the A gap. DT is scaring the hell out of me.

jhildebrand
09-18-2012, 12:13 AM
Rahim moore was in position to stop Jones on that 3rd down. He just wasn't strong enough. Jones took him 3 yards.

Superchop 7
09-18-2012, 12:15 AM
They picked on Moore and Carter all night.....IMO Carter has the makings of a very good safety, CB....not so much. (but he does give great effort)

You all know my thoughts on Rahim.......

tomjonesrocks
09-18-2012, 12:20 AM
Agree with a couple comments here.

First, Hillman has to spell Moreno. Moreno can't break tackles and his fumble tonight was the nail in the coffin. He was drafted early. Use him.

When does Kuper come back?

I am anxious to see if getting DJ back helps the linebacker play. Have never been a huge DJ fan, but it seems like he is sorely needed.

Doom should be embarrassed.

CrazyHorse
09-18-2012, 01:07 AM
I think we should stick DJ back in the Middle, at least on obvious passing downs. He should be better in coverage than what we have now. Safety should be one of our top priorities this offseason. The loss of Dawkins really hurt.

Simple Jaded
09-18-2012, 02:13 AM
Beadles and Walton provide solid depth from the starters position.......

Northman
09-18-2012, 04:41 AM
.no way Manning will ever play that bad again.

Well, dont say that. Just two years ago he went in a 3 game stretch throwing 11 INT's. I dont hope thats the case here but he has to play better, much much better. He's the guy everyone is looking up too for leadership and quality play.

TXBRONC
09-18-2012, 06:50 AM
Mannings mechanics were fine, it was just bad reads by him. It happens even to veteran quarterbacks. Even with as poorly has he played we still had chance to win the game at the end had defense been able to get a stop the last time the Falcons had the ball.

Considering how badly the defense was compromised by turnovers by the offense they played very well. They kept Turner in check for most of the night unfortunately the one run where Turner made a difference was the last play of game that sealed the win for the Falcons.

I have disagree that our receivers are that horrible. They will get the job done.

I hate losing with a passion and it leaves a very bitter taste in my mouth when we turn the ball over four times.

Northman
09-18-2012, 06:53 AM
Yea, just cant turn it over. It happens but its also a massive pet peeve of mine. On another note but not surprising,

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8393575/replacement-officials-poor-performance-steals-show-denver-broncos-atlanta-falcons


ATLANTA -- Champ Bailey (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/1758/champ-bailey) turned his back and said something about not trying to be rude, but he wouldn't talk about the debacle that was the officiating in the Falcons' 27-21 win over the Broncos on Monday night.
Radio silence for a reason. "You'll get fined," Broncos safety Mike Adams (http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/_/id/5893/mike-adams) said to Bailey with a laugh.
And that would be a shame. No one should have to pay money for speaking out about the train wreck that the performance of replacement officials has become. Week 1 was one thing. But now in Week 2, we've seen just how incompetent these officials are. Players know. Coaches know. Everyone is pushing. And intimidating. And trying to get an edge any way they can.

http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2012/0917/nfl_g_refs01jr_300.jpg (http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2012/0917/nfl_g_refs01jr_600.jpg) The specter of replacement officials is beginning to obscure the NFL's product.




It is what men in the National Football League do. They look for an edge. And gaining an edge over the underqualified and overmatched officials has led to problems on the field. Some games are longer. The first quarter Monday night lasted an hour. Players are griping on the field. Coaches are getting frustrated. The overall product is taking a hit.

Dzone
09-18-2012, 06:57 AM
Knowshon Moreno is NOT an NFL caliber running back. He is a liability on this team.

TXBRONC
09-18-2012, 06:59 AM
Yea, just cant turn it over. It happens but its also a massive pet peeve of mine. On another note but not surprising,

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8393575/replacement-officials-poor-performance-steals-show-denver-broncos-atlanta-falcons

Agreed the officating was terrible. They are way to inconsistent in how they call a game.

chazoe60
09-18-2012, 07:01 AM
Agreed the officating was terrible. They are way to inconsistent in how they call a game.

Consistently shitty is still consistent.

Northman
09-18-2012, 07:04 AM
Knowshon Moreno is NOT an NFL caliber running back. He is a liability on this team.

I know for myself im not going to rehash the argument about Moreno and whether he is NFL calibur or not. What i will say is with his opportunities he does NOT make the most of it. And more times than not as you say he becomes more of a liability than a hero. My opinion on him will not change until i actually see this fool do something "special" or at the very least a "positive" for this team. And i dont care, people can throw out his stats the last couple of years all they want. I judge by what i see going on in the game and on the field and this dude is NOT good. We definitely need to rethink our position as a team by keeping this guy.

BroncoNut
09-18-2012, 07:12 AM
I only watched til early in the 3rd then drifted off. my thoughts? Secondary was weak, run D pretty good, no pass rush. Falcons D, pretty much the opposite, put pressure on manning and their secondary simply shut us down from what I see, disregarding the interceptions even. dont even know at this point what the final score was, but man that was an exhausting game to watch. Objectively, gotta give credit to the Falcons and matt Ryan. We were bad, but damn they looked good. Got into Peyton's head early

Mike
09-18-2012, 07:54 AM
Stupid, stupid offensive gameplan killed us. The frantic pace of the offense and Manning's dumb decisions were as bad as I've seen. Good job on Nolan for confusing Manning...but the coaches have to step in and slow things down. It just looked like everything was coming way too fast for our guys to process. That defense was aggressive and swarming. We didn't capitilize on it and use it against them. Simply outcoached on the offense IMO.

Refs have got to go. Simply unacceptable officiating for the NFL. Possibly the most agonizing half of football I have ever watched and it wasn't cause the Broncos were playing bad. Goodell has to give in to the demands of the real refs. This is going to cost teams a chance at the playoffs.

Superchop 7
09-18-2012, 08:06 AM
I liked what Nick Ferguson had to say.

1) We were not winning the 1 on 1 battles.

2) Move Von Miller around like Dom Capers uses Clay Mathews.....do not let the o-line know where he is coming from.

Superchop 7
09-18-2012, 08:10 AM
I fell out of my chair laughing when Gruden was praising Walton and Beadles.

Thnikkaman
09-18-2012, 08:23 AM
Really disappointed that we didn't try an onside kick before Atlanta's last possession. And Fox needs to trust Manning a little more when he wants to go for it on 4th.

No guts, no glory.

vandammage13
09-18-2012, 08:28 AM
Look on the bright side guys...Manning had a very good completion %...which we all know has a direct correlation with winning.

Mike
09-18-2012, 08:33 AM
Let it go, dude.

vandammage13
09-18-2012, 08:40 AM
Let it go, dude.

Never...

jhns
09-18-2012, 08:47 AM
The defense looks good. Moreno looks like crap. McGahee is still playing well. The team needs much better receivers. Manning had a bad game.

This was the worst officiating I have ever seen. They had to overturn three calls that were originally called in Atlantas favor. They gave away a fumble after this team clearly recovered it. The game took forever and was just sad to watch. People need to start protesting this garbage.

I do pike what I am seeing from the team. Obviously the turnovers were terrible. Hopefully those are rare though. The defense and run game look good. Manning should only get better as the year goes on.

vandammage13
09-18-2012, 09:09 AM
The defense looks good. Moreno looks like crap. McGahee is still playing well. The team needs much better receivers. Manning had a bad game.

This was the worst officiating I have ever seen. They had to overturn three calls that were originally called in Atlantas favor. They gave away a fumble after this team clearly recovered it. The game took forever and was just sad to watch. People need to start protesting this garbage.

I do pike what I am seeing from the team. Obviously the turnovers were terrible. Hopefully those are rare though. The defense and run game look good. Manning should only get better as the year goes on.


Refs were bad, but they did not cost us this game.

4 turnovers did.

Mike
09-18-2012, 09:11 AM
Refs were bad, but they did not cost us this game.

4 turnovers did.

Doesn't mean it shouldn't be dealt with or talked about. While I agree that you can't say they costed Denver the game, they did have an impact on the game.

Northman
09-18-2012, 09:12 AM
The turnovers were the brunt of our woes. But, the phantom PI call on Carter and the recovery on the Morono fumble were huge considering we really needed those plays.

vandammage13
09-18-2012, 09:18 AM
The turnovers were the brunt of our woes. But, the phantom PI call on Carter and the recovery on the Morono fumble were huge considering we really needed those plays.

I don't think you can unequivically say that we recovered the fumble.

You couldn't see very clearly on camera what was going on in that pile. Once the refs determined ATL recovered, he might have let go of the ball since the ruling had been made and then the Broncos came out of the pile with it.

PI call was BS though.

jhns
09-18-2012, 09:22 AM
Refs were bad, but they did not cost us this game.

4 turnovers did.

For one, nothing in that quote says anything about the refs costing the Broncos the game. Then there is the fact that there were only three turnovers if not for one of the worst calls I have ever seen, which kind of makes your post a joke...

They caught the one ref in time before the Saints game. I think they missed checking these refs pasts...

jhns
09-18-2012, 09:25 AM
I don't think you can unequivically say that we recovered the fumble.

You couldn't see very clearly on camera what was going on in that pile. Once the refs determined ATL recovered, he might have let go of the ball since the ruling had been made and then the Broncos came out of the pile with it.

PI call was BS though.

That is such garbage. The only defender near the ball, had his back to it on the ground. It was clear as day. The refs called the recovery before they even got to the pile. You need to watch the game before commenting. They showed clear angles. The defender who fell on it, never had control of it.

Mike
09-18-2012, 09:26 AM
That is such garbage. The only defender near the ball, had his back to it on the ground. It was clear as day. The refs called the recovery before they even got to the pile. You need to watch the game before commenting.

That was what bothered me. How the hell do you determine who has the ball before you pull everyone out of the pile?

Northman
09-18-2012, 09:28 AM
That was what bothered me. How the hell do you determine who has the ball before you pull everyone out of the pile?

Rock, Paper, Scissors apparently.

vandammage13
09-18-2012, 09:48 AM
That is such garbage. The only defender near the ball, had his back to it on the ground. It was clear as day. The refs called the recovery before they even got to the pile. You need to watch the game before commenting. They showed clear angles. The defender who fell on it, never had control of it.


That was what bothered me. How the hell do you determine who has the ball before you pull everyone out of the pile?

The refs are closer to the pile than the cameras were.

You might not be able to see what is inside a house from far away, but if I am right up there looking through a window I'll probably be able to make that determination.

The refs were bad, but anyone can peek into a pile and see who has the football...It doesn't take a trained eye to make that determination if you are close enough.

Dzone
09-18-2012, 09:59 AM
Seems like Brandon Stokely was Mannings primary on far too many plays. Gotta love Stokes but when he becomes our main receiver,not good

G_Money
09-18-2012, 10:09 AM
Game thoughts:

- Peyton was airmailing throws all over the place in the first half. He doesn't seem to understand yet that he never had the strongest arm but right now it's one of the weaker in the league, and he cannot be throwing into tight windows or hurling deep balls into double coverage. The ball isn't gonna get there. If his feet are set, he can get a ball there. If they aren't, he won't. It doesn't mean he can't win - Brian Griese's arm with Peyton's head attached will still do very good things for us, but there's no way he can do what he did in the first half of the game and succeed at it. Unless interceptions are the road to success.

- McGahee is 7,432 times better than Moreno. Moreno needs to never get the ball. He can't run inside, he didn't hold on to the ball, Lance Ball is at least as good a receiver and better at blitz pick-up... I don't get why Knowshon is out there. Get JJ back off the practice squad. Our running game with McGahee is power nasty. When he goes out of the game it's nothing. Watching the muscle hamster in Tampa I can see this is gonna be a frustration all season, especially if the old man gets nicked up and has to miss a game or two.

- Our defense cannot afford injuries. Warren going down hurts. Harris being unavailable hurts bad. If something happens to a dude whose name rhymes with "biller" then we're in it deep, since right now he is our consistent pass rush. Also, our LBs are not pass-covering gurus against the multiple TE / big receiver fronts, and we need our safeties to pick up the slack. Moore is just made of slack. Carter and Harris need to get on the field again ASAP.

- Stokley is our best receiver. That's an issue. Decker still has his hands-problem, as does DT (who also has trouble coloring between the lines when he's running routes - they're sorta impressions of routes instead of actual ones). We're leaning heaving on Thomas right now since he's our only real mismatch. Our TEs are pass-catchers but nothing special at doing so, and the holding flags hurt us in this game (so I have concerns about leaning on them when we're running the ball). The pass-catchers need to step it up. Hillman is supposed to be some sort of weapon, which is why we traded up for him in the draft, so I'd like to see him. Or JJ, as stated before. Somebody with a motor once they get the ball.

- For all the mistakes we made, we were about two plays from winning this game. The defensive scheme is solid, but we need to be able to get off the field. The offense is either quick-strike (last week) or a grinding slog (this week) so it feels like somebody learning to drive stick and shredding my clutch in the process right now. Makes me wince a bit to see it, but it'll get better. For a team with its third offense in the last 18 weeks and its 7th DC in 7 years, we're doin' all right. But we can't afford the slack kind of mistakes we made. Peyton can't throw picks. Back's can't fumble. The defense can't fail to get teams off the field on third down, or continue to botch its own turnover opportunities.

As Peyton knocks the rust off, we'll get better - but with our tough schedule, he can't take too long in doing it. We are better than the Raiders or the Chiefs by what should be significant margins, but compounded errors could cost us important divisional games and we can't have that. We need to clean up our execution for sure, and find other playmakers. DT's athleticism and Miller's all around badassery can only take us so far.

~G

Ravage!!!
09-18-2012, 10:10 AM
For one, the refs were terrible. If you have to go to the sidelines and talk with someone every other minute to find out whats going on, its awful. 2, any time you hit a referee.. intentional or not...its an automatic ejection. Period. Three, how many times does a team have to throw the red flag and challenge before you realize that the refs aren't making the right calls?

The refs did not cost us the game.. the turnovers did. But they were horrible.


Now, about the game. I hate that we lost, BUT... our defense played AWESOME. Where are the "we can't stop the run" worry-warts??? Where are those that want to hate and hate on the OL, telling us just how HORRIBLE they are because they couldn't protect Tebow?? Can we PLEASE stop saying this crap "when Manning gets sacked, I think the season is over?" He is NO MORE LIKELY to be injured than ANY OTHER QB. Get your head out, and read the facts. Jeez.

This game, considering we had FOUR turnovers, gave up few points....took them 3 tries to run the ball in from the 1, and we had some MAJOR stops on defense.... was HUGELY encouraging for me!! I'm super excited about how our defense kept us in that game (just as they did with Tebow)..our DL isn't "horrible" like so many scouts around here will tell you. Our OL is NOT bad, like so many experts around here want to say, and our offense can actually score points!! HATED the turnovers...hated them. But in the end, this game showed heart. It showed a team that can keep a STUD offense in check, and that even with tough pass rushing team, this OL not only protected, but created some great holes.

MOtorboat
09-18-2012, 10:12 AM
Seems like Brandon Stokely was Mannings primary on far too many plays. Gotta love Stokes but when he becomes our main receiver,not good

It looked, to me, that Thomas and Decker weren't ready for the no huddle and the adjustments that are needed in a hostile (read: loud) environment.

BroncoNut
09-18-2012, 10:13 AM
The turnovers were the brunt of our woes. But, the phantom PI call on Carter and the recovery on the Morono fumble were huge considering we really needed those plays.

I agree. just heard the loss was by 1 score. so I missed some type of rally. guessing the D made some adjustments/plays. It was something like 27-6 when I dozed off. Anyway, I feel that barring anymore turnovers we could have scratched our way back into the game. I was thinking that before Moreno coughed it up, but in all honesty, I was kinda expecting it. Him in rotation does make me a little nervous now. Willis McGahee had a good game.

Ravage!!!
09-18-2012, 10:15 AM
It looked, to me, that Thomas and Decker weren't ready for the no huddle and the adjustments that are needed in a hostile (read: loud) environment.

Agreed. I think its purely because Manning has such a chemistry with Stokely. Its not the receivers that are "bad".. its just that Manning KNOWS that Stokely and he are on the same page. Thats a comfort that has developed over time. Decker had great catches, down low, on important downs. DT is, by far, a STUD on the field and is Manning's favorite target. He looks to get the ball to DT for scores, for big plays, for the break.... thats easy to see.

Our receivers are fine. I think its just a matter of time for Manning to learn them, and for them to learn Manning. Only 2 games into the first season.

jhns
09-18-2012, 10:18 AM
The refs are closer to the pile than the cameras were.

You might not be able to see what is inside a house from far away, but if I am right up there looking through a window I'll probably be able to make that determination.

The refs were bad, but anyone can peek into a pile and see who has the football...It doesn't take a trained eye to make that determination if you are close enough.

And the cameras have better angles. What does this have to do with anything though? Everyone could clearly see that Franklin recovered that fumble. The ball went under his fat ass and there was no way anyone else could have had it. The original defender to fall on it, lost it as he was falling on it. The recs called that this defender recovered it before making it to the pile, which is not how real refs do it.

You need to watch the game before commenting...

weazel
09-18-2012, 10:23 AM
its a work in progress... we're going to see things like the 1st quarter every once in a while. Anyone who thinks this team is winning the superbowl this season is just fooling themselves, we are building for a championship team, but not there yet. I wouldn't get too crazy over last nights game, even with the turnovers we still came close to evening the game up

weazel
09-18-2012, 10:26 AM
The refs are closer to the pile than the cameras were.

You might not be able to see what is inside a house from far away, but if I am right up there looking through a window I'll probably be able to make that determination.

The refs were bad, but anyone can peek into a pile and see who has the football...It doesn't take a trained eye to make that determination if you are close enough.

You would think... but then again, we had to wait for a challenge to get DT's touchdown. They guy was right beside the play and was staring right at the line and foot and still called it wrong. We seen it on tv from farther away at real speed, how did the ref miss it? sorry, they are terrible.

pnbronco
09-18-2012, 11:31 AM
Nolan really did his research and came up with a D that rattled Peyton. I have watched 3 games that started the same way, San Diego, Raiders and now Atlanta. The first 2 the other team scored 40 + points and that was because they backed off because there was no hope that Denver had any type of chance. This team fought back and never turned on each other as they were fighting. The fact they came within 6 points and just ran out of time was a positive in my mind.

Peyton being Peyton will study the heck out of what happened and figure out a way to not go there again. I hope DT, Decker and the 2 TE's did not have anything planned this week because I have a feeling there will be extra study time on how to get on the same page in the hurry up, can't hear schemes.

pnbronco
09-18-2012, 11:32 AM
Oh and please get the real Ref's back on the field. It was distracting and just not good.

slim
09-18-2012, 11:37 AM
Nolan really did his research and came up with a D that rattled Peyton. I have watched 3 games that started the same way, San Diego, Raiders and now Atlanta. The first 2 the other team scored 40 + points and that was because they backed off because there was no hope that Denver had any type of chance. This team fought back and never turned on each other as they were fighting. The fact they came within 6 points and just ran out of time was a positive in my mind.

Peyton being Peyton will study the heck out of what happened and figure out a way to not go there again. I hope DT, Decker and the 2 TE's did not have anything planned this week because I have a feeling there will be extra study time on how to get on the same page in the hurry up, can't hear schemes.

I agree, PN. I like how they fought their way back into the game.

BroncoNut
09-18-2012, 11:51 AM
I agree, PN. I like how they fought their way back into the game.

it demonstrates character and professionalism.

slim
09-18-2012, 11:54 AM
it demonstrates character and professionalism.

It would have been easy for them to quit, but they didn't. Willis ran hard, the defense bowed it's back and Peyton stopped crapping down his leg.

BroncoNut
09-18-2012, 12:07 PM
For one, the refs were terrible. If you have to go to the sidelines and talk with someone every other minute to find out whats going on, its awful. 2, any time you hit a referee.. intentional or not...its an automatic ejection. Period. Three, how many times does a team have to throw the red flag and challenge before you realize that the refs aren't making the right calls?

The refs did not cost us the game.. the turnovers did. But they were horrible.


Now, about the game. I hate that we lost, BUT... our defense played AWESOME. Where are the "we can't stop the run" worry-warts??? Where are those that want to hate and hate on the OL, telling us just how HORRIBLE they are because they couldn't protect Tebow?? Can we PLEASE stop saying this crap "when Manning gets sacked, I think the season is over?" He is NO MORE LIKELY to be injured than ANY OTHER QB. Get your head out, and read the facts. Jeez.

This game, considering we had FOUR turnovers, gave up few points....took them 3 tries to run the ball in from the 1, and we had some MAJOR stops on defense.... was HUGELY encouraging for me!! I'm super excited about how our defense kept us in that game (just as they did with Tebow)..our DL isn't "horrible" like so many scouts around here will tell you. Our OL is NOT bad, like so many experts around here want to say, and our offense can actually score points!! HATED the turnovers...hated them. But in the end, this game showed heart. It showed a team that can keep a STUD offense in check, and that even with tough pass rushing team, this OL not only protected, but created some great holes.

I saluted this post, but I really had to stretch it. I thought pass protection was a bit weak. I like the red zone defense last night, but lets get more aggressive in the secondary and get the defense off the field. Someone had to make a play there for this turnaround. when I checked out they were passing at will on us. other than that, I think you are on the right track Ravage. Keep it up

BroncoNut
09-18-2012, 12:08 PM
It would have been easy for them to quit, but they didn't. Willis ran hard, the defense bowed it's back and Peyton stopped crapping down his leg.

it would have been REAL easy. they hung in there though

BroncoNut
09-18-2012, 12:14 PM
If we still had Tebow, we'd be talking about what a great win it was for us last night

slim
09-18-2012, 12:16 PM
If we still had Tebow, we'd be talking about what a great win it was for us last night

I know, right?

I think it's pretty clear we would have won.

BroncoNut
09-18-2012, 12:18 PM
I know, right?

I think it's pretty clear we would have won.

We needed that Georgia dome magic

slim
09-18-2012, 12:20 PM
We needed that Georgia dome magic

Some of the smaller people here can't see it. But it is better to have magic than to be good.

BroncoNut
09-18-2012, 12:23 PM
Some of the smaller people here can't see it. But it is better to have magic than to be good.
i'll have to read those posts. apparently Mo is all up in arms about something huh?

Superchop 7
09-18-2012, 12:24 PM
Ravage,

Your kidding me with the line talk......

How many sacks did the D-line produce ? Hurries ?

Who led the league last year in qb hurries last year ? Beadles. He can pull and trap but can't pass protect.....and you sure as hell can't run behind him.

Our DTs could not hold the A gap and had to get help from the LB's, without an inside presence, the Falcons could focus on our DE's.

27 points is not good for any defense to give up.

slim
09-18-2012, 12:27 PM
Ravage,

Your kidding me with the line talk......

How many sacks did the D-line produce ? Hurries ?

Who led the league last year in qb hurries last year ? Beadles. He can pull and trap but can't pass protect.....and you sure as hell can't run behind him.

Our DTs could not hold the A gap and had to get help from the LB's, without an inside presence, the Falcons could focus on our DE's.

27 points is not good for any defense to give up.

We turned the ball over 4 times on the road against a very good offense....27 points was just fine.

MOtorboat
09-18-2012, 12:31 PM
Ravage,

Your kidding me with the line talk......

How many sacks did the D-line produce ? Hurries ?

Who led the league last year in qb hurries last year ? Beadles. He can pull and trap but can't pass protect.....and you sure as hell can't run behind him.

Our DTs could not hold the A gap and had to get help from the LB's, without an inside presence, the Falcons could focus on our DE's.

27 points is not good for any defense to give up.

Beadles' block was the reason McGahee scored on fourth down to pull within six.

And give credit where credit is due, Atlanta, defensively had a great game, especially in the secondary.

BroncoNut
09-18-2012, 12:52 PM
Beadles' block was the reason McGahee scored on fourth down to pull within six.

And give credit where credit is due, Atlanta, defensively had a great game, especially in the secondary.

I alredy posted something very much along that line earlier. I believe it was in this thread, but if not, some other thread. their 2ary was really good that one corner that had to go out for a little while then came back had some very good plays probably one of the ints. forget his name, but I think he wasan African American

ChairmanBron
09-18-2012, 12:58 PM
Nolan really did his research and came up with a D that rattled Peyton. I have watched 3 games that started the same way, San Diego, Raiders and now Atlanta. The first 2 the other team scored 40 + points and that was because they backed off because there was no hope that Denver had any type of chance. This team fought back and never turned on each other as they were fighting. The fact they came within 6 points and just ran out of time was a positive in my mind.

Peyton being Peyton will study the heck out of what happened and figure out a way to not go there again. I hope DT, Decker and the 2 TE's did not have anything planned this week because I have a feeling there will be extra study time on how to get on the same page in the hurry up, can't hear schemes.

I totally agree... I also think the offense needed to slow down to regroup. Then once in rhythm, laydown the fast no-huddle.

Peyton's 3 picks...

First Pick:

http://cdn3.sbnation.com/imported_assets/1195525/jgo4E_medium.gif

Second Pick:

http://cdn2.sbnation.com/imported_assets/1195533/Jr3Pg_medium.gif

Third Pick:

http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1388211/peypick3_medium.gif



.

Ravage!!!
09-18-2012, 12:59 PM
Ravage,

Your kidding me with the line talk......

How many sacks did the D-line produce ? Hurries ?

Who led the league last year in qb hurries last year ? Beadles. He can pull and trap but can't pass protect.....and you sure as hell can't run behind him.

Our DTs could not hold the A gap and had to get help from the LB's, without an inside presence, the Falcons could focus on our DE's.

27 points is not good for any defense to give up.


Wait... 27 points after giving up 4 tunovers in the 1st quarter is NOT good for any defense to give up???? Seriously??? they took 3 attempts to put the ball in from the one after the first INT, and after that they scored 13 more points on 3 more turnovers. They couldn't run the ball on us worth a CRAP and have a potent passing attack with Jones, WHite, and Gonzo. They 7 points on the board in the 2nd half, with that one drive being the ONLY real scoring drive they had alllll game long. I VERY MUCH disagree with your assessment.

catfish
09-18-2012, 01:03 PM
Wait... 27 points after giving up 4 tunovers in the 1st quarter is NOT good for any defense to give up???? Seriously??? they took 3 attempts to put the ball in from the one after the first INT, and after that they scored 13 more points on 3 more turnovers. I VERY MUCH disagree with your assessment.

For once I agree with you, the D gave up nothing after the turnovers happened, this game could have been 35-0 at the half if the D wasn't playing lights out.

CoachChaz
09-18-2012, 01:03 PM
Wait... 27 points after giving up 4 tunovers in the 1st quarter is NOT good for any defense to give up???? Seriously??? they took 3 attempts to put the ball in from the one after the first INT, and after that they scored 13 more points on 3 more turnovers. They couldn't run the ball on us worth a CRAP and have a potent passing attack with Jones, WHite, and Gonzo. They 7 points on the board in the 2nd half, with that one drive being the ONLY real scoring drive they had alllll game long. I VERY MUCH disagree with your assessment.

And we only allowed 275 yards of offense

DenBronx
09-18-2012, 01:07 PM
Starting off Peyton looked like a rookie.....if you look at his mechanics.....first half horrible....second half much better....started stepping into his throws.

D-line.....we all know our DT is weak, needed an INTERIOR rush.....they could simply focus on the ends.....next time line up ultra wide 9 to counter.

Secondary....ours was poor.....theirs was superb.

Game ball Broncos.....Stokley....kept the drive alive on 3rd down several times.

Game ball #2.....McGahee....even better than last year....

The game was weird, Im putting it behind me....no way Manning will ever play that bad again.

Chop, the only reason their DBs looked superb is because Manning threw 3 very terrible passes. Otherwise our DBs would of had a field day not being down 20 points. I think the game looks very differant if Manning wouldnt have been so bad as he was in the first quarter.

But he pulled it together and I think if he would have got the ball back in the end he could of pulled off a miracle comeback win.

Unfortunately, we also were playing against the refs too.

Ravage!!!
09-18-2012, 01:10 PM
And we only allowed 275 yards of offense

Considering the circumstances, with the turnovers, I'm MUCH more impressed with this game than I am with the Pitt game. Our offensive line didn't allow sacks despite them coming after Manning hard, and we created holes for McGahee to rush for over 100. Without giving them 4 of our offensive drives, and putting them in scoring position in the first quarter, what did they do against us that hurt us? Get some first downs? I was very impressed with how our defense played. Where was Julio Jones?

DenBronx
09-18-2012, 01:14 PM
I totally agree... I also think the offense needed to slow down to regroup. Then once in rhythm, laydown the fast no-huddle.

Peyton's 3 picks...

First Pick:

http://cdn3.sbnation.com/imported_assets/1195525/jgo4E_medium.gif

Second Pick:

http://cdn2.sbnation.com/imported_assets/1195533/Jr3Pg_medium.gif

Third Pick:

http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1388211/peypick3_medium.gif



.

3 very very bad throws. I think that shows signs of rust and Manning will regroup next week.


But the problem is I think 2 of those put Atl in the redzone right away. Those 3 plays are why we lost the ballgame and so was the Moreno fumble. You can't give a high powered offense like Atl gifts like that.

I highly doubt we will see this poor of play from Manning again this year.

catfish
09-18-2012, 01:17 PM
3 very very bad throws. I think that shows signs of rust and Manning will regroup next week.


But the problem is I think 2 of those put Atl in the redzone right away. Those 3 plays are why we lost the ballgame and so was the Moreno fumble. You can't give a high powered offense like Atl gifts like that.

I highly doubt we will see this poor of play from Manning again this year.

Historically he doesn't play as well as he did the first game or as bad as he did the 2nd. He will be fine, and will fall towards the upper middle of between those 2 performances IMO

BroncoNut
09-18-2012, 01:21 PM
plus, I think it's important to consider that it wasn't a home game

weazel
09-18-2012, 01:29 PM
plus, I think it's important to consider that it wasn't a home game

shutup bronconut

broncobryce
09-18-2012, 01:41 PM
Peyton better pull his head out of his ass, Houston is up next. And they are no joke.

Superchop 7
09-18-2012, 01:50 PM
sO.....to recap.

1) It was a GREAT loss. (and better than a Pittsburgh win)

2) Offensive line play had nothing to do with 3 INT's or Manning crapping his pants.

3) The D-line was great even though Ryan had all day to throw and the A gap needed help via LB's.

OK.....so be it.....we agree to disagree.

BroncoNut
09-18-2012, 01:54 PM
shutup bronconut

well, it can be a factor. more fans of the opposing team are ussually there and I can guarantee you that they are not afraid to make noise to confuse our players

BroncoNut
09-18-2012, 01:55 PM
sO.....to recap.

1) It was a GREAT loss. (and better than a Pittsburgh win)

2) Offensive line play had nothing to do with 3 INT's or Manning crapping his pants.

3) The D-line was great even though Ryan had all day to throw and the A gap needed help via LB's.

OK.....so be it.....we agree to disagree.

I guess the only thing I would disagree with you on is that the defense sucked overall.

DenBronx
09-18-2012, 01:56 PM
Peyton better pull his head out of his ass, Houston is up next. And they are no joke.

Yeah, just as tough as Atl. But without mistakes last night then we beat Houston.

Fox needs to really depend on the running game more early and allow the field to open up for Manning.

HORSEPOWER 56
09-18-2012, 03:16 PM
Here's my assessment:

Offense:

The three interceptions hurt. It was very un-Manning-like to go to the same well not twice, but three times. Exact same route, exact same throw, all three times the same result. None of those times was he really pressured. 2 of those times he had guys wide open underneath. He turned it around at the end of the first half and didn't look back, but those three turnovers were a killer early on. It made the Atlanta crowd ravenous and they stayed fired up for a long time. McGahee had a good night, but there's something missing from him. He, for some reason, refuses to lower his shoulder and drive would-be tacklers backward. At first contact, he turns his back to the defense and tries to "back-in" or spin out for yards which makes him a big target for being gang tackled. Like I said, he had a good night, but it is usually easier to run the ball when you're playing from behind.

Moreno and Ball were pretty much non-factors. Everyone is shitting on Moreno for his fumble, but McGahee fumbled last week and also ran the wrong play resulting in a sack for Manning just like Moreno did last week. There's no way that Atlanta recovered that fumble... no way. The refs gave it to them and started signaling before anyone had possession. It was preordained. If Hillman could beat out Moreno or Ball, and was healthy, he'd be playing. He's neither so he continues to be inactive. The WRs and TEs did okay, but lest we not forget that Mike Nolan is a frickin' defensive genius. Props to Nolan for having his guys prepared. That mush-rush defense where it was almost impossible to know who is rushing and who is dropping is extremely difficult to read and plan against. Our offense will improve, I'm really not too worried about it. Except for the disaster in the first quarter and a few questionable play calls, they were solid. Had we not gotten down 20-0 (due to the turnovers), vs a good defense, at their house, with some referee sponsored "home-cookin'" mixed in, the offense played well enough to win the game.

Defense:

Props to them for playing tough against a very tough offense. We handed them 13 points (which could've easily been 21-0 before the end of the 1st quarter) and the refs handed them the opportunity to get 7 more with their terrible PI call. The only real problems I saw were again, our Safeties and LBs in coverage. Often it really wasn't their fault because they were playing a lot of zone coverage. A good QB like Ryan who is in sync with his receivers can pick apart zone coverage like that. The pass rush wasn't getting home because they were dinking and dunking. Quick slants, quick outs to Gonzales, and timely dump offs. They were chipping and doubling Dumervil and Miller all night. Our interior DL, outside of Wolfe isn't built to rush the passer and so they were stymied one-on-one often. Atlanta also has a veteran group of O-linemen that have been playing together since Ryan was drafted. They work well together now, even if the individual talent isn't there. The problem I had with the DL is that I NEVER ONCE saw those guys put their hands up. Isn't that the golden rule? If you can't get to the QB, put your hands up into the passing lanes and try to tip balls? Nobody did that, nobody even attempted it.

Rahim Moore has failed to impress me thus far. Not a very good tackler, not a guy who can stand up a WR or RB, and not a ball-hawk playmaker. He's just kind of "there" and if someone runs right at him or catches the ball right in front of him, he'll try to make the tackle. He's often late on getting over if he has over the top responsibility on a route which allows for easier catches for the WRs if the CB is in the trail position. I'd much rather see Leonhard or Carter in there playing in the box and move Adams back out to FS. Mike Adams is a solid tackler, but he's not much of a physical presence out there either - our Safeties are kinda "soft". Our LBs suck pretty bad in coverage, but like I said, they play a lot of zone which normally means they pass the TE off to the Safety if he gets more than 5 yards from the LOS. They are also out of position a lot and all those quick slants that Ryan hit would never happen if the LB was standing in the right spot in that hook zone (they would hit him in the chest).

Overall though, the defense played a good game. In the position they were put in early, they could've folded like a house of cards but they didn't. They contained the run and pretty much stopped Julio Jones - of course that allowed White and Gonzales to have big games, but pick your poison. At least the Falcons had to earn (with some help of the refs) their scores with hard fought yards - we didn't let Jones beat us with big plays and deep balls. They even played tough in the RZ.

2 FGs. After all that, which will be our worst offensive showing in the first half all year, we lost by 2 FGs. Nothing is over, it's a looooooooong season.

weazel
09-18-2012, 03:23 PM
well, it can be a factor. more fans of the opposing team are ussually there and I can guarantee you that they are not afraid to make noise to confuse our players

hearsay and conjecture

BroncoNut
09-18-2012, 03:28 PM
hearsay and conjecture

something worth considering. if you don't want to I can't make you.

Simple Jaded
09-18-2012, 09:47 PM
Look on the bright side guys...Manning had a very good completion %...which we all know has a direct correlation with winning.

Um? It does have a direct correlation with winning.......

Simple Jaded
09-18-2012, 10:04 PM
Peyton better pull his head out of his ass, Houston is up next. And they are no joke.

Enough of what we think of last nights game, the real question is what does Lady Gaga think of last nights game?.......

Hawgdriver
09-18-2012, 10:36 PM
Secondary....ours was poor.....theirs was superb.

I wouldn't call 208 net passing yards against Matt Ryan, Julio Jones, Roddy White, and Tony Gonzalez poor. When Ryan threw 36 times. At 67% pct.

He took all that we gave him, but it wasn't that much. I think the secondary should get more credit. I even think the young safety is coming along, showing improvement.

But that's me.

catfish
09-19-2012, 07:05 AM
Um? It does have a direct correlation with winning.......

Historically it has a lower correlation to winning than other relevant statistics of the QB position, hence the sarcasm

http://www.footballperspective.com/correlating-passing-stats-with-wins/

TXBRONC
09-19-2012, 08:53 AM
Consistently shitty is still consistent.

Yes but it's the wrong kind of consistency.

Jsteve01
09-19-2012, 08:56 AM
wait are we talking about the consistency of shit?

Ravage!!!
09-19-2012, 09:05 AM
Historically it has a lower correlation to winning than other relevant statistics of the QB position, hence the sarcasm

http://www.footballperspective.com/correlating-passing-stats-with-wins/

Thats a pretty lame statistic. Its like looking for the mathmatical proof that a daisy can keep you from falling off a cliff. I'll take the GOOD passer against the inaccurate passer EVERY TIME in choosing a QB to lead to victory over one that isn't. EVERY time. The NFL is NOW a game about passing more than EVER before.

It amazes me how often people look to "Math and tables" to prove football. Numbers DO lie, especially if you are looking for them to.

TXBRONC
09-19-2012, 09:08 AM
It looked, to me, that Thomas and Decker weren't ready for the no huddle and the adjustments that are needed in a hostile (read: loud) environment.

I don't think they were unprepared, it's that offense is still a work in progress. Couple that with a hostile environment and it's a recipe for mistakes.

TXBRONC
09-19-2012, 09:13 AM
Historically it has a lower correlation to winning than other relevant statistics of the QB position, hence the sarcasm

http://www.footballperspective.com/correlating-passing-stats-with-wins/

Uh maybe 30 or 40 years ago but not today. You can get numbers to say whatever you want them say to validate a pov.

catfish
09-19-2012, 09:20 AM
Thats a pretty lame statistic. Its like looking for the mathmatical proof that a daisy can keep you from falling off a cliff. I'll take the GOOD passer against the inaccurate passer EVERY TIME in choosing a QB to lead to victory over one that isn't. EVERY time. The NFL is NOW a game about passing more than EVER before.

It amazes me how often people look to "Math and tables" to prove football. Numbers DO lie, especially if you are looking for them to.

all other number being equal you take the higher comletion%, but for instance if you have 2 qbs and 1 throws 70% at 5YPA and 1 throws 60% for 9ypa who is better. Not saying that completion% is useless, but it is way down the list of important statistics

Chef Zambini
09-19-2012, 09:34 AM
winning is a result, it is not a stat. winners count WINS losers find solace in stats.
stats are for losers, winners look at the win loss column for the only stat that really matters.

vick, 9 turnovers 2 victories, stats schmatz!
passing yards one of my favorites too!
most QBs who throw for over 300 yards are LOSERS !
and the 100 yaRD RUSHER IS USUALLY ON THE WINNING TEAM.

vandammage13
09-19-2012, 09:42 AM
You would think... but then again, we had to wait for a challenge to get DT's touchdown. They guy was right beside the play and was staring right at the line and foot and still called it wrong. We seen it on tv from farther away at real speed, how did the ref miss it? sorry, they are terrible.

This sort of thing happened with the regular refs too...that's why replay had to be introduced in the first place.

I'm with you that the refs are very sub-par, but I think that people (especially those on the losing end) are putting a little too much onus on the refs than the team's performance.

TXBRONC
09-19-2012, 09:45 AM
all other number being equal you take the higher comletion%, but for instance if you have 2 qbs and 1 throws 70% at 5YPA and 1 throws 60% for 9ypa who is better. Not saying that completion% is useless, but it is way down the list of important statistics

No it's not that far down the list and it is very important. It's not the most important but it's still very important. There was only one guarterback that made the playoffs with a completion percentage below 55% and his team backed into the playoffs with a .500 record. All the other quarterbacks were well above 55% and their teams had winning records.

MOtorboat
09-19-2012, 09:48 AM
winning is a result, it is not a stat. winners count WINS losers find solace in stats.
stats are for losers, winners look at the win loss column for the only stat that really matters.

vick, 9 turnovers 2 victories, stats schmatz!
passing yards one of my favorites too!
most QBs who throw for over 300 yards are LOSERS !
and the 100 yaRD RUSHER IS USUALLY ON THE WINNING TEAM.

You do realize these statements are the complete opposite of what happened Monday night, right?

Thnikkaman
09-19-2012, 09:49 AM
You do realize these statements are the complete opposite of what happened Monday night, right?

I found a picture of Zam on the internet:

http://homevideos.com/freezeframes6/animalhouse347.jpeg

vandammage13
09-19-2012, 09:55 AM
No it's not that far down the list and it is very important. It's not the most important but it's still very important. There was only one guarterback that made the playoffs with a completion percentage below 55% and his team backed into the playoffs with a .500 record. All the other quarterbacks were well above 55% and their teams had winning records.

90% of teams with losing records also had QB's over 55% completion as well...

TXBRONC
09-19-2012, 09:59 AM
90% of teams with losing records also had QB's over 55% completion as well...

So what.

MOtorboat
09-19-2012, 09:59 AM
90% of teams with losing records also had QB's over 55% completion as well...

Right. So the 3 percent of teams that didn't have a starting quarterback over that percentage should probably look for a new quarterback.

Glad Elway is smart like that.

catfish
09-19-2012, 10:13 AM
No it's not that far down the list and it is very important. It's not the most important but it's still very important. There was only one guarterback that made the playoffs with a completion percentage below 55% and his team backed into the playoffs with a .500 record. All the other quarterbacks were well above 55% and their teams had winning records.

5 of the top 10 teams with highest completion% did not make the playoffs, 55% is a bar with no real context. I could just as easily say only 1 team with a TD/ ATT ratio of less than 3.6% made it to the playoffs unless there is context for the number it is meaningless. All I was saying is if you have to chse a stat for a qb to struggle in completion% is not a bad one. Given the choice you are better of with a qb throwing 60% for 9 YPA than you are with a qb throwing 70% for 5ypa is all I am saying. Of course you would prefer 70% for 9 YPA, but it is an either or situation

catfish
09-19-2012, 10:16 AM
those correlations are from 1990 on up, they only show on a per game basis what the correlation of certain stats and winning was. It does not imply causation, only correlation.

MOtorboat
09-19-2012, 10:19 AM
I don't think they were unprepared, it's that offense is still a work in progress. Couple that with a hostile environment and it's a recipe for mistakes.

I didn't say they were unprepared. I said they weren't ready to run the no huddle and all of its intricacies with Manning on the road yet. And I think it was a bit of a mistake for Manning, McCoy and Gase to push the no huddle the entire game.

MOtorboat
09-19-2012, 10:20 AM
I just checked, and yup, Tebow's 2011 performance as a quarterback is still one of the worst on record...

Now back to the Falcons game...

catfish
09-19-2012, 10:21 AM
I didn't say they were unprepared. I said they weren't ready to run the no huddle and all of its intricacies with Manning on the road yet. And I think it was a bit of a mistake for Manning, McCoy and Gase to push the no huddle the entire game.

to some extent it was probably difficult adjusting to trying to hear certain audibles in away game noise as well. I wouldn't be worried about them yet, it is only 2 games

vandammage13
09-19-2012, 10:21 AM
winning is a result, it is not a stat. winners count WINS losers find solace in stats.
stats are for losers, winners look at the win loss column for the only stat that really matters.

vick, 9 turnovers 2 victories, stats schmatz!
passing yards one of my favorites too!
most QBs who throw for over 300 yards are LOSERS !
and the 100 yaRD RUSHER IS USUALLY ON THE WINNING TEAM.

You must be a Teblower :laugh:

MOtorboat
09-19-2012, 10:25 AM
to some extent it was probably difficult adjusting to trying to hear certain audibles in away game noise as well. I wouldn't be worried about them yet, it is only 2 games

I don't think they quite have all the hand signals down, and I think that's why he was looking for Stokley. They will by mid-season.

Another reason he was looking for Stokley was because Atlanta was taking away the deep ball well. It took Manning three drives to figure that out, which is a bit perplexing, but they did an excellent job of covering deep, and working the Broncos forward. Also did an excellent of job of disguising and mixing up coverage schemes. I believe all three interceptions were into three different coverage schemes and three different pre-snap looks.

vandammage13
09-19-2012, 10:27 AM
I just checked, and yup, Tebow's 2011 performance as a quarterback is still one of the worst on record...

Now back to the Falcons game...

If completion % is your barometer, then yes...

Outside of that, there was nothing abysmal about it.

Simple Jaded
09-19-2012, 10:27 AM
Historically it has a lower correlation to winning than other relevant statistics of the QB position, hence the sarcasm

http://www.footballperspective.com/correlating-passing-stats-with-wins/Bullshit.......hence the condescension.......

MOtorboat
09-19-2012, 10:33 AM
If completion % is your barometer, then yes...

Outside of that, there was nothing abysmal about it.

You must have been a big Akili Smith and Ryan Leaf fan...

catfish
09-19-2012, 10:33 AM
I don't think they quite have all the hand signals down, and I think that's why he was looking for Stokley. They will by mid-season.

Another reason he was looking for Stokley was because Atlanta was taking away the deep ball well. It took Manning three drives to figure that out, which is a bit perplexing, but they did an excellent job of covering deep, and working the Broncos forward. Also did an excellent of job of disguising and mixing up coverage schemes. I believe all three interceptions were into three different coverage schemes and three different pre-snap looks.

The D they were running was tough for sure, he will knock the rust off. I doubt you see too many games like the first week and doubt you see any more like the second week. It will probably fall right in the middle somewhere more towards teh first week than the second IMO.

I saw your Tebow comment, and won't respond because you are right it sidetracked the converstaion, I wasn't trying to get into that discussion, just provide some insight to correlations between some statistics that I thought were interesting

Simple Jaded
09-19-2012, 10:37 AM
If completion % is your barometer, then yes...

Outside of that, there was nothing abysmal about it.
Yep, he sucks at QB but other than that he's a natural.......

Ravage!!!
09-19-2012, 11:24 AM
sO.....to recap.

1) It was a GREAT loss. (and better than a Pittsburgh win) ..Never said it was a great loss. After watching Pitt this weekend, its obvious they aren't an overly good team. Atlanta is much better. The fact that we gave up only 20 points on 4 turnovers in the first quarter of play, and still only gave up 27 for the entire game... WHILE having a chance to win it at the end... wasn't a disappointment to me. We didn't get blown out, and the fact that we were able to keep the Atlanta's offense to soooooo little despite handing them the ball over and over again....is MORE encouraging to me than simply looking at the loss as you are.

2) Offensive line play had nothing to do with 3 INT's or Manning crapping his pants... NO, it didn't :lol: What game were you watching??? Manning making reads against defenses that did a GREAT job of disquising, is what caused the turnovers. Manning wasn't taking hit after hit. Did you not watch the replays? Were you just moping around after the INTs and just guessing on what happened? Chop, the INTs were not because Manning was rushing for his life and just tossing it up. They were just bad reads and trying to put the ball into windows that weren't there. (also...the INTs were not because of lack of arm strength like some others have tried to cry about).

3) The D-line was great even though Ryan had all day to throw and the A gap needed help via LB's. Great. Again with your exaggerations. The Falcons couldn't run on us at all. They have the best WR duo in the NFL, with a TE that...although long in tooth...is still a passing compliment. They have a runner that was one of the tops in the NFL, and a QB that is very accurate. Yet their offense put together ONE scoring drive after the 1st quarter of the game. ONE. The "A Gap" of which you are bitching about, was not a concern.... in the least.

OK.....so be it.....we agree to disagree.

Wow.. talk about taking EVERYTHING out of context and exaggerating every point. Unbelievable.

Hawgdriver
09-19-2012, 11:27 AM
Sarcasm and Statistics. A novelette from Hawgdriver.

I thought Von Miller's dance per game statistic (D/G) was pretty terrible last season (15%), but he's really brought it in line with what's expected of an elite pass rusher so far this season (100%).

Just like my use of e's per letter per post in this post (EPP%). It's up to about 12%, well beyond the normal parameter for such a variable. Usually, when you see such a high EPP%, it means you are reading a winning post. And this is a winning post.

Next year, we are going to a new, two-tier NFL: 1) "Believe! NFL", and 2) "Simulate! NFL". Legacy NFL will be tabled as the owners stage a surprise holdout against the monetary authority, demanding more money from every dollar.

"Believe! NFL" allows viewers to follow their team through a virtual 3D season with lifelike graphics and real human press conferences after each game. Every Believe! NFL contest is determined solely by each viewer's belief of what should happen, and that outcome is unique to that viewer. The beauty of it is that the viewer's team or their favorite player will always prevail, because that's viewer's belief is the right one--and our viewers are always right.

"Simulate! NFL" is the second new NFL offering. It will allow viewers to actually participate in the NFL season by designing teams with certain statistical parameters--within the hallowed constraints of simulated league parity. Then, that viewer's statistically favorite team (e.g., if they are a huge fan of the statistic of winning percentage or passing completion rate, they can root for a team with those statistics) will compete with the other simulated teams using NFL's new MegaSim Contest Simulation Engine. While the circuit boards sizzle and wail for relief, the viewer watches the probability distributions coalesce into simulated reality. As a bonus, each viewer's team always wins (this is kept secret), because our viewers are always right.

Ravage!!!
09-19-2012, 11:28 AM
all other number being equal you take the higher comletion%, but for instance if you have 2 qbs and 1 throws 70% at 5YPA and 1 throws 60% for 9ypa who is better. Not saying that completion% is useless, but it is way down the list of important statistics

Wait... I thought you said all numbers being equal? You just gave two, unequal, numbers for ypc...why? Also, your LOW completion guy is still completing 60% as opposed to below 50. Rarely does a QB throw for 70%, and certainly extremely rare for the season and playoffs. So having a 60+ completion % isn't exactly counting a QB that can't pass. Not to mention, 5 yrds per completion is pretty low as well. So you have one QB completigin below the NFL average in ypc and comparing to a guy well over the average ypc to make your point. Thats a very poor example, imo.

catfish
09-19-2012, 11:41 AM
Wait... I thought you said all numbers being equal? You just gave two, unequal, numbers for ypc...why? Also, your LOW completion guy is still completing 60% as opposed to below 50. Rarely does a QB throw for 70%, and certainly extremely rare for the season and playoffs. So having a 60+ completion % isn't exactly counting a QB that can't pass. Thats a very poor example.

I said all numbers being equal you take the higher comp % so if you have a 70% for 6YPA and a 60% for 6YPA of course you go with the 70% completion % isn't completely negligible. However given the choice of 10 completion% points and 3-4 YPA points I would take the YPA.

say you are arguing Grossman Vs Hasselbeck last year(looking at just comp% and YPA). Both have 6.88 YPA, hasselbeck is 5% higher comp % take hasselbeck as he completes more and gets the same results

but if you are choosing between Josh Freeman and Jay Cutler

Freeman has 62% completion rate for 6.52 YPA,

Cutler has 58% completion rate for 7.39 YPA

I think you go with Cutler, again not looking at TDs or INT which could change the analysis.

If both YPA and comp% are higher you go with the higher guy, that is just common sense


Taking this to it logical conclusion.Who wouldnt pick manning over Tebow, both Mannings completion% and YPA blow Tebow out of the water. My only pooint was that there are far more usefull tools to measure qb success than comp% alone, that doesnt mean it isnt one of the tools, or is completely unimportant, just less important than some others.

vandammage13
09-19-2012, 11:45 AM
You must have been a big Akili Smith and Ryan Leaf fan...

Nah...they always threw more INT's than TD's...and they rarely won.

Simple Jaded
09-19-2012, 11:47 AM
I go with the better QB regardless of stats, stats are useless without context. If the QB's were put to the test with the exact same conditions you might have an argument, but suggesting that completion percentage has no direct correlation with winning is just plain F'n stupid.

You rank the importance of stats all you want, but if Tebow throws 47% against prevent defenses with 2:00 to go his so-called magic never amounts to shit.......

catfish
09-19-2012, 11:51 AM
I go with the better QB regardless of stats, stats are useless without context. If the QB's were put to the test with the exact same conditions you might have an argument, but suggesting that completion percentage has no direct correlation with winning is just plain F'n stupid.

You rank the importance of stats all you want, but if Tebow throws 47% against prevent defenses with 2:00 to go his so-called magic never amounts to shit.......

I said it has a lower % correlation than other QB stats as evidenced by 20 years of statistcal history not that it had 0 correlation. I also said it is not predictave. You can't guess what YPA or comp% a QB will have going in to a game, so it is just pointing out the historical correlation not who is likely to win in week 6. I also stated that it shows correlation, not causation. For example a team may not win becasue they run the bal, they may run the ball because they are winning. Likewise you may not have lost a game because you threw 3 picks, but threw 3 picks becasue you were losing, hence making it harder to throw.

edit: if we want to talk about it more lets start a different thread, MO is right we are ******* up the Falcons thread and that was not my intent

TXBRONC
09-19-2012, 11:54 AM
I don't think they quite have all the hand signals down, and I think that's why he was looking for Stokley. They will by mid-season.

Another reason he was looking for Stokley was because Atlanta was taking away the deep ball well. It took Manning three drives to figure that out, which is a bit perplexing, but they did an excellent job of covering deep, and working the Broncos forward. Also did an excellent of job of disguising and mixing up coverage schemes. I believe all three interceptions were into three different coverage schemes and three different pre-snap looks.

Stokely caught three passes so Manning didn't really look for him that often. Thomas had eight catches and Decker had five.

It shouldn't be preplexing that Manning struggled. Nolan had his defense standing around until very last possible second. It was effective until they set the no huddle aside. On one of those interceptions Manning saw a safety on the opposite side of where he wanted to go with ball so he probably figured that there was little chance that the safety could get back to where the pick was made.

Ravage!!!
09-19-2012, 12:00 PM
Stokely caught three passes so Manning didn't really look for him that often. Thomas had eight catches and Decker had five.



Yeah.. I think its been way overblown as to how STokely is Manning's "main" receiver. It probably is true that Manning feels comfortable knowing that Stokely and he are on the same page in tight moments. He knows that Stokes is making the same read as he is, and knows exactly where Stokely is going to go, where he's breaking, and when. But its also very obvious that DT is his main guy.

MOtorboat
09-19-2012, 12:05 PM
I could be wrong, but wasn't the intended target on all three INTs, Stokley.

catfish
09-19-2012, 12:10 PM
I could be wrong, but wasn't the intended target on all three INTs, Stokley.

2 to stokely 1 to Tamme

MOtorboat
09-19-2012, 12:18 PM
I think Denver's problem is that they have too many white receivers.

chazoe60
09-19-2012, 12:19 PM
I think Denver's problem is that they have too many white receivers.

That's racist.

BroncoNut
09-19-2012, 12:35 PM
I think Denver's problem is that they have too many white receivers.

dt? Willis? Stokely? yeah, pretty white

Simple Jaded
09-19-2012, 12:37 PM
I said it has a lower % correlation than other QB stats as evidenced by 20 years of statistcal history not that it had 0 correlation. I also said it is not predictave. You can't guess what YPA or comp% a QB will have going in to a game, so it is just pointing out the historical correlation not who is likely to win in week 6. I also stated that it shows correlation, not causation. For example a team may not win becasue they run the bal, they may run the ball because they are winning. Likewise you may not have lost a game because you threw 3 picks, but threw 3 picks becasue you were losing, hence making it harder to throw.

edit: if we want to talk about it more lets start a different thread, MO is right we are ******* up the Falcons thread and that was not my intent
No need for a different thread, what Tebowfan was saying is not what you're saying. He said percentage had no correlation with winning, you're making a case for ranking importance of certain stats. One would actually take time and another thread, the other is just obscenely stupid.......

catfish
09-19-2012, 12:39 PM
No need for a different thread, what Tebowfan was saying is not what you're saying. He said percentage had no correlation with winning, you're making a case for ranking importance of certain stats. One would actually take time and another thread, the other is just obscenely stupid.......

fair enough, and agreed. I think the conversation has run its course :)

slim
09-19-2012, 12:51 PM
dt? Willis? Stokely? yeah, pretty white

Is Stokely white?

He looks like he has a little color in his family tree.

HORSEPOWER 56
09-19-2012, 01:57 PM
I think Denver's problem is that they have too many white receivers.

I thought the problem was too many white guys on defense... At times we could have Wolfe, Unrein, Bannan, Brooking, and Leonhard out there at the same time... scary.

Then I remembered that the Texans have lots of white guys on their defense, too: JJ Watt, Brooks Reed, Brian Cushing, Connor Barwin, and Shaun Cody looks kinda white.

I think between the two teams, we make up 90% of the white defensive players in the league.

slim
09-19-2012, 02:00 PM
I wonder if Al Sharpton will protest the game?

vandammage13
09-19-2012, 02:06 PM
No need for a different thread, what Tebowfan was saying is not what you're saying. He said percentage had no correlation with winning, you're making a case for ranking importance of certain stats. One would actually take time and another thread, the other is just obscenely stupid.......

Wrong..

I never said it had "NO" correlation with winning...rather, I said it doesn't have a "DIRECT" correlation with winning.

For instance, if a QB goes 7/10 (that's 70%)...looks awesome!!! The problem is that in today's NFL, more of these passes are short high percentage plays, but often don't amount to much. (Hence why we see guys like Tavaris Jackson completing well over 60% last year.)

QB A goes 7/10, but 4 of those passes go for 3 yards, not amounting to much.

QB B goes 5/10 but 3 of them are 15-20 yards down the field.

On paper, QB A looks great because of the completion %, but the reality is that QB B was far more effective.

So, I see QB's constantly checking down in today's NFL, throwing short of the sticks on 3rd down, and I'm supposed think that's effective QB'ing?...I think not.

Obviously, I want to see my QB completing at a high rate...But I'm not impressed if they are dinking and dunking all over the field..it means nothing.

slim
09-19-2012, 02:08 PM
Math can be a cruel mistress to those that don't understand it (no offense, Buff).

MOtorboat
09-19-2012, 02:09 PM
The White Defense Bowl.

MOtorboat
09-19-2012, 02:13 PM
Wrong..

I never said it had "NO" correlation with winning...rather, I said it doesn't have a "DIRECT" correlation with winning.

For instance, if a QB goes 7/10 (that's 70%)...looks awesome!!! The problem is that in today's NFL, more of these passes are short high percentage plays, but often don't amount to much. (Hence why we see guys like Tavaris Jackson completing well over 60% last year.)

QB A goes 7/10, but 4 of those passes go for 3 yards, not amounting to much.

QB B goes 5/10 but 3 of them are 15-20 yards down the field.

On paper, QB A looks great because of the completion %, but the reality is that QB B was far more effective.

So, I see QB's constantly checking down in today's NFL, throwing short of the sticks on 3rd down, and I'm supposed think that's effective QB'ing?...I think not.

OH FFS!

Everyone else agreed to move on...

I told a Chiefs fan that there were Broncos fans still upset that the Broncos traded Tebow and signed Manning.

He laughed for 20 minutes, because it's so stupid.

vandammage13
09-19-2012, 02:20 PM
OH FFS!

Everyone else agreed to move on...

I told a Chiefs fan that there were Broncos fans still upset that the Broncos traded Tebow and signed Manning.

He laughed for 20 minutes, because it's so stupid.

It might not have been completely dumb to have jettisoned Tebow if Oz pans out...

But I do question the Manning signing...at least for the amount we are paying him anyway...

I think the Oz man has the potential to be a good one, so that might be the saving grace for Elway the VP, IMO...

BroncoNut
09-19-2012, 02:23 PM
Is Stokely white?

He looks like he has a little color in his family tree.

look at him real close up and tell me he's a whitey

BroncoNut
09-19-2012, 02:24 PM
It might not have been completely dumb to have jettisoned Tebow if Oz pans out...

But I do question the Manning signing...at least for the amount we are paying him anyway...

as you've made us aware of so many times.

slim
09-19-2012, 02:24 PM
look at him real close up and tell me he's a whitey

Yeah, there is no way he is. I mean, he doesn't really look white, plus he plays WR in the NFL. Is any other proof really needed?

BroncoNut
09-19-2012, 02:29 PM
Yeah, there is no way he is. I mean, he doesn't really look white, plus he plays WR in the NFL. Is any other proof really needed?

actually haven't seen a pic of him recently. i think there is an avy of him though. Now Wes Welker is white.

slim
09-19-2012, 02:32 PM
actually haven't seen a pic of him recently. i think there is an avy of him though. Now Wes Welker is white.

I think so (at least mostly).

I think Lance Alworth was at least half white.

vandammage13
09-19-2012, 02:39 PM
as you've made us aware of so many times.

And I'll continue to beat that drum :hi:

Simple Jaded
09-19-2012, 02:57 PM
It might not have been completely dumb to have jettisoned Tebow if Oz pans out...

But I do question the Manning signing...at least for the amount we are paying him anyway...

I think the Oz man has the potential to be a good one, so that might be the saving grace for Elway the VP, IMO...
What the **** do you care how much Manning makes?

I question anybody who questions the signing of Manning or questions the jettisoning of Tim Tebow.......

BroncoNut
09-19-2012, 02:59 PM
And I'll continue to beat that drum :hi:
why?

MOtorboat
09-19-2012, 03:00 PM
Manning makes the going rate for good quarterbacks.

No skin off my hide.

slim
09-19-2012, 03:01 PM
What the **** do you care how much Manning makes?

I question anybody who questions the signing of Manning or questions the jettisoning of Tim Tebow.......

You are going to be asking a lot of questions :listen:

slim
09-19-2012, 03:01 PM
Manning makes the going rate for good quarterbacks.

No skin off my hide.

Yeah and it's really just a one year contract. BFD...

Simple Jaded
09-19-2012, 03:01 PM
Wrong..

I never said it had "NO" correlation with winning...rather, I said it doesn't have a "DIRECT" correlation with winning.

For instance, if a QB goes 7/10 (that's 70%)...looks awesome!!! The problem is that in today's NFL, more of these passes are short high percentage plays, but often don't amount to much. (Hence why we see guys like Tavaris Jackson completing well over 60% last year.)

QB A goes 7/10, but 4 of those passes go for 3 yards, not amounting to much.

QB B goes 5/10 but 3 of them are 15-20 yards down the field.

On paper, QB A looks great because of the completion %, but the reality is that QB B was far more effective.

So, I see QB's constantly checking down in today's NFL, throwing short of the sticks on 3rd down, and I'm supposed think that's effective QB'ing?...I think not.

Obviously, I want to see my QB completing at a high rate...But I'm not impressed if they are dinking and dunking all over the field..it means nothing.
There is a direct correlation to winning.......

MOtorboat
09-19-2012, 03:02 PM
why?

Because his boi toi got traded.

Simple Jaded
09-19-2012, 03:03 PM
You are going to be asking a lot of questions :listen:

Questions like "are you high?" and "have you actually seen Tebow play QB?".......

slim
09-19-2012, 03:04 PM
There is a direct correlation to winning.......

Not really.

Simple Jaded
09-19-2012, 03:12 PM
Not really.

For a RB, not really, but for an NFL QB, yes really.

Like I said, if Teebs is completing 47% against those prevent defense in the last 2:00 his so-called magic amounts to a pile of shit. Just think where his percentage would be without prevent defenses.......

vandammage13
09-19-2012, 03:12 PM
What the **** do you care how much Manning makes?

I question anybody who questions the signing of Manning or questions the jettisoning of Tim Tebow.......

Uhhh...because this isn't baseball and there is a salary cap.

I would actually like to have the cap space to re-sign some of our key players and not have to let them go because someone is vastly overpaid...I would also like to be able to compete for a top free agent or two during the offseason as well...

2008 Peyton Manning- Worth every penny of $20 million

2012 Peyton Manning- Not so much...

slim
09-19-2012, 03:17 PM
For a RB, not really, but for an NFL QB, yes really.

Like I said, if Teebs is completing 47% against those prevent defense in the last 2:00 his so-called magic amounts to a pile of shit. Just think where his percentage would be without prevent defenses.......

Completion % has no direct correlation to winning.

Quick, tell me which QB has the best completion % so far this year.

Then tell me which of the following QBs finished in the top ten in completion % last year:
1. Eli Manning
2. Josh Freeman
3. Andy Dalton

Tim Tebow had the worst % ever, yet we won the division and a playoff game.

No correlation at all. Sorry, but there isn't.

Simple Jaded
09-19-2012, 03:31 PM
Completion % has no direct correlation to winning.

Quick, tell me which QB has the best completion % so far this year.

Then tell me which of the following QBs finished in the top ten in completion % last year:
1. Eli Manning
2. Josh Freeman
3. Andy Dalton

Tim Tebow had the worst % ever, yet we won the division and a playoff game.

No correlation at all. Sorry, but there isn't.

Please, nobody said anything about the highest percentage or top10. Tebowfan didn't say that, he made a sarcastic blanket statement that percentage doesn't directly correlate with wins. It does. This bullshit argument goes right up there with Joel's passer rating thread.......

slim
09-19-2012, 03:34 PM
Please, nobody said anything about the highest percentage or top10. Tebowfan didn't say that, he made a sarcastic blanket statement that percentage doesn't directly correlate with wins. It does. This bullshit argument goes right up there with Joel's passer rating thread.......

LOL.

Josh Freeman had a higher completion % than Eli or Andy Dalton last year. Which of those teams actually won games last year?

Ponder leads the league in completion % this year (on a team that is lucky to be 1-1), yet Kevin Kolb is in the bottom third of the league with his % and the Cards are 2-0.

You are wrong. There is no correlation.

Simple Jaded
09-19-2012, 03:37 PM
Uhhh...because this isn't baseball and there is a salary cap.

I would actually like to have the cap space to re-sign some of our key players and not have to let them go because someone is vastly overpaid...I would also like to be able to compete for a top free agent or two during the offseason as well...

2008 Peyton Manning- Worth every penny of $20 million

2012 Peyton Manning- Not so much...
The top QB's make top money, it's a bullshit argument. People keep talking about spending that money elsewhere, you talk about vastly overpaying in the next sentence. But if Denver was to sign legitimate free agents they were gonna have to vastly overpay to get them to ignore the garbage high school offense the Broncos were running.

So, in short, you're fine with overpaying just as long as Tim Tebow is your QB.......

slim
09-19-2012, 03:38 PM
Tomo Romo was in the top 3 in completion % last year and the Cowboys went 6-10.

vandammage13
09-19-2012, 03:39 PM
Please, nobody said anything about the highest percentage or top10. Tebowfan didn't say that, he made a sarcastic blanket statement that percentage doesn't directly correlate with wins. It does. This bullshit argument goes right up there with Joel's passer rating thread.......

On it's own it does not...

Combined with low INT's or high TD's it can be an indication of something separating you from the average...But if it had a direct correlation with winning on its own then the Panthers would have went 10-6 as opposed to 6-10 last year since Newton was in the heralded 60% club...

Thnikkaman
09-19-2012, 03:42 PM
And I'll continue to beat that drum :hi:

But the skins of the drum have gaping holes in it, and you've broken the drumsticks. I see you've resorted to using your hands, but your fingers are all broken and I see you've lost a couple of them.

Nobody's marching to that beat anymore anyway.

vandammage13
09-19-2012, 03:46 PM
The top QB's make top money, it's a bullshit argument. People keep talking about spending that money elsewhere, you talk about vastly overpaying in the next sentence. But if Denver was to sign legitimate free agents they were gonna have to vastly overpay to get them to ignore the garbage high school offense the Broncos were running.

So, in short, you're fine with overpaying just as long as Tim Tebow is your QB.......

Manning is no longer a top QB...I know you want to believe that, but he just isn't anymore (I still think he's pretty good, just not on that elite level)...We made him the HIGHEST paid QB in the NFL (although I think Brees' new contract may have since eclipsed that).

As far as Tebow, he was actually pretty cheap, but I am not for overpaying any player (even Tebow).

vandammage13
09-19-2012, 03:50 PM
But the skins of the drum have gaping holes in it, and you've broken the drumsticks. I see you've resorted to using your hands, but your fingers are all broken and I see you've lost a couple of them.

Nobody's marching to that beat anymore anyway.

We will see when the average performances keep piling up...People might just change their minds and see it my way...

I keep a seat open on the bandwagon for you when you decide to come on over, Thnik.

I acknowledge I could be wrong about Manning...It's just my opinion that he won't ever get back to being the QB we want him to be.

Simple Jaded
09-19-2012, 03:57 PM
Manning is no longer a top QB...I know you want to believe that, but he just isn't anymore (I still think he's pretty good, just not on that elite level)...We made him the HIGHEST paid QB in the NFL (although I think Brees' new contract may have since eclipsed that).

As far as Tebow, he was actually pretty cheap, but I am not for overpaying any player (even Tebow).

He never had elite skills but you know damn well that he's an elite QB. This pretentious bullshit about how they're paid is a you problem, just pretend that Denver paid $15 mil for a Top 10 QB and another $4 mil to get the **** away from Tebowmania. Hope that helps.......

Thnikkaman
09-19-2012, 04:00 PM
We will see when the average performances keep piling up...People might just change their minds and see it my way...

I keep a seat open on the bandwagon for you when you decide to come on over, Thnik.

I acknowledge I could be wrong about Manning...It's just my opinion that he won't ever get back to being the QB we want him to be.

I'm not saying that we got the Manning that won the Superbowl a few years ago, but I'm also not saying that Tebow is going to do anything on the NFL level. He's going to make his money, and when he can no longer play professional football, he will go and spread the word of God. That is what's important to him.

If he can get past his deficiencies as a quarterback and become a great QB, that's good on him. He's no longer a bronco, and I can't dwell on that. I spilled milk this morning, I'm not crying about that either.

slim
09-19-2012, 04:01 PM
I'm not saying that we got the Manning that won the Superbowl a few years ago, but I'm also not saying that Tebow is going to do anything on the NFL level. He's going to make his money, and when he can no longer play professional football, he will go and spread the word of God. That is what's important to him.

If he can get past his deficiencies as a quarterback and become a great QB, that's good on him. He's no longer a bronco, and I can't dwell on that. I spilled milk this morning, I'm not crying about that either.

Did you spill it on your shirt?

Simple Jaded
09-19-2012, 04:02 PM
Tomo Romo was in the top 3 in completion % last year and the Cowboys went 6-10.

And what's their record with Tebow's 47%? Again, if all conditions were the same you might have a point. But put Romo's top 3 performance in Denver's '11 situation and you are not talking about replacing him with Peyton Manning in '12.......

vandammage13
09-19-2012, 04:04 PM
He never had elite skills but you know damn well that he's an elite QB. This pretentious bullshit about how they're paid is a you problem, just pretend that Denver paid $15 mil for a Top 10 QB and another $4 mil to get the **** away from Tebowmania. Hope that helps.......

I don't have a personal problem with how much he's making...If someone is willing to pay him $20 million then more power to him.

I just don't like my Broncos taking up a huge piece of the cap on a has been...nothing personal, just don't like the business aspect of it. Not sure why you can't separate the two....

Simple Jaded
09-19-2012, 04:05 PM
I acknowledge I could be wrong about Manning...It's just my opinion that he won't ever get back to being the QB we want him to be.

That's because you want him to be Tim Tebow.......

vandammage13
09-19-2012, 04:07 PM
I'm not saying that we got the Manning that won the Superbowl a few years ago, but I'm also not saying that Tebow is going to do anything on the NFL level. He's going to make his money, and when he can no longer play professional football, he will go and spread the word of God. That is what's important to him.

If he can get past his deficiencies as a quarterback and become a great QB, that's good on him. He's no longer a bronco, and I can't dwell on that. I spilled milk this morning, I'm not crying about that either.

So because I liked Tebow as our QB, I'm not allowed to criticize our current one? :confused:

Tebow aside (he's gone), I don't think getting Manning was the right move...he's washed up IMO, that's all...

slim
09-19-2012, 04:08 PM
And what's their record with Tebow's 47%? Again, if all conditions were the same you might have a point. But put Romo's top 3 performance in Denver's '11 situation and you are not talking about replacing him with Peyton Manning in '12.......

I'm not sure what your point is (except trying to change the subject, I guess). Tebow won with a 47% completion. Romo couldn't win with + 60%.

You complain about his "blanket statement" (which had a fair amount of truth to it) and then try to counter it with your own overgeneralization (which had significantly less truth to it).

Bottom line: no direct correlation.

Simple Jaded
09-19-2012, 04:12 PM
Look on the bright side guys...Manning had a very good completion %...which we all know has a direct correlation with winning.

Slim, where does he say anything about needing the highest, or even top10, percentage to win? He trying to say that Manning's accuracy doesn't directly correlate with his ability to win a game. It does.

When you throw 7 times it may not matter (to that players fans anyway) but when you're an actual NFL QB it directly correlates with winning.......

slim
09-19-2012, 04:19 PM
Slim, where does he say anything about needing the highest, or even top10, percentage to win? He trying to say that Manning's accuracy doesn't directly correlate with his ability to win a game. It does.

When you throw 7 times it may not matter but when you're an actual NFL QB it directly correlates with winning.......

Well, I didn't see that post, but there were many I did see related to this discussion.

I was really just responding to your claim that there is somehow a direct correlation between completion % and winning. Maybe I missed the point here, but it seems he is claiming there is none and you are claiming there is.

If you feel there is, I would think it would be pretty easy to dig up some statitics to back up that claim.

Simple Jaded
09-19-2012, 04:22 PM
I'm not sure what your point is (except trying to change the subject, I guess). Tebow won with a 47% completion. Romo couldn't win with + 60%.

You complain about his "blanket statement" (which had a fair amount of truth to it) and then try to counter it with your own overgeneralization (which had significantly less truth to it).

Bottom line: no direct correlation.Like I told catfish, if you wanna delve deeper into ranking the importance of particular stats, have at it, otherwise an overgeneralization is a perfectly reasonable response to a blanket statement when tht blanket statement is so incredibly stupid.

Completion percentage is a measure of accuracy, accuracy has a direct correlation with a QB's ability to win games. Why bother improving Tebow's throwing motion and footwork if it has no correlation with his long term success? It does.......

Simple Jaded
09-19-2012, 04:24 PM
Well, I didn't see that post, but there were many I did see related to this discuss.

I was really just responding to your claim that there is somehow a direct correlation between completion % and winning. Maybe I missed the point here, but it seems he is claiming there is none and you are claiming there is.

If you feel there is, I would think it would be pretty easy to dig up some statitics to back up that claim.And that would be perfectly fine, tho maybe in another thread, like Catfish suggested.......

vandammage13
09-19-2012, 04:25 PM
That's because you want him to be Tim Tebow.......

Nope...My problem is not necessarily that Tebow is gone (although i liked what he brought to the team), but rather, his replacement.

Manning is not the answer IMO...I look at it like the Jets picking up Favre or even when Minny got him...temporary, overpaid bandaid that missed the playoffs for one team and left the other team in shambles.

Now, if things would have went according to Elway's plan when they inserted Tebow into the lineup and we tanked and got Andrew Luck or even RGIII, then bye bye Tebow...Thank you for your contribution to the team, but we've got a better long-term answer. See ya later...You'd have no qualms about it from me.

Unfortunately that's not how things played out and I don't believe that we upgraded in the long run.

vandammage13
09-19-2012, 04:28 PM
And that would be perfectly fine, tho maybe in another thread, like Catfish suggested.......

With the amount of posts you've made regarding the topic, you would have had ample time to post those stats/facts/opinions, but instead you chose to make multiple posts talking about it while somehow saying nothing.

Thnikkaman
09-19-2012, 04:31 PM
Did you spill it on your shirt?

I wasn't wearing a shirt.

slim
09-19-2012, 04:49 PM
I wasn't wearing a shirt.

:semi:

Ravage!!!
09-19-2012, 04:58 PM
Now, if things would have went according to Elway's plan when they inserted Tebow into the lineup and we tanked and got Andrew Luck or even RGIII, then bye bye Tebow...Thank you for your contribution to the team, but we've got a better long-term answer. See ya later...You'd have no qualms about it from me.
Yeah, right.


Unfortunately that's not how things played out and I don't believe that we upgraded in the long run.

Uhmm... long term? :lol: Where did you get the impression, from ANYONE, anywhere, at ANY time, that Manning was looked upon as a "long term" solution?

Simple Jaded
09-19-2012, 04:59 PM
With the amount of posts you've made regarding the topic, you would have had ample time to post those stats/facts/opinions, but instead you chose to make multiple posts talking about it while somehow saying nothing.
I need to provide proof that accuracy has a direct correlation to winning? That's like asking for proof that air helps us breath. I have no intention of providing stats/facts/opinions in this or any other thread, I thought Slim was suggesting that he might. I should pay closer attention.......

vandammage13
09-19-2012, 05:01 PM
I need to provide proof that accuracy has a direct correlation to winning?.......

You don't need to do anything...but it is usually SOP to present some sort of evidence to back up an opinion during a debate.

Ravage!!!
09-19-2012, 05:04 PM
With the amount of posts you've made regarding the topic, you would have had ample time to post those stats/facts/opinions, but instead you chose to make multiple posts talking about it while somehow saying nothing.

He has stated his opinion... of which you keep telling him he needs to post facts. Which really is silly considering his last post. If the QBs accuracy is not important to a QBs wins, why do QBs work on it? Why work on the timing of passes with WRs? Why try to improve throwing motion and feet work if it doesn't matter? He's made it pretty clear, and I think its pretty obvious, that passing accuracy is ABSOLUTELY a contributing factor to a QBs success...thus... contributing factor to a QBs wins. From what I can tell, the ONLY people that are trying to say "accuracy is not important"... are those that are missing a QB that can't throw accurately.

MOtorboat
09-19-2012, 05:11 PM
Uhhh...because this isn't baseball and there is a salary cap.

I would actually like to have the cap space to re-sign some of our key players and not have to let them go because someone is vastly overpaid...I would also like to be able to compete for a top free agent or two during the offseason as well...

2008 Peyton Manning- Worth every penny of $20 million

2012 Peyton Manning- Not so much...

Denver has the second most amount of cap space in the entire league as of opening day.

If you care so much about the financials, you should know them.

slim
09-19-2012, 05:12 PM
Yeah, the money thing is kind of silly.

Simple Jaded
09-19-2012, 05:15 PM
You don't need to do anything...but it is usually SOP to present some sort of evidence to back up an opinion during a debate.
When I need someone/something to back my opinion I'll consider it but I am not the one who claims that a QB's accuracy has no direct correlation with winning. It is not a matter of opinion, a blanket statement saying completion percentage has no bearing on winning is patently stupid.......

slim
09-19-2012, 05:19 PM
There is a direct correlation to winning.......


When I need someone/something to back my opinion I'll consider it but I am not the one who claims that a QB's accuracy has no direct correlation with winning. It is not a matter of opinion, a blanket statement saying completion percentage has no bearing on winning is patently stupid.......

Do you understand what the phrase "direct correlation" means?

Ravage!!!
09-19-2012, 05:27 PM
I think someone wrote some article that catfish posted that tried to explain...using mathmatical formulas...that accuracy was not important and didn't correlate to wins. Thats the ONLY thing this discussion is based on. There is probably only ONE person that would write soemthing like this, and there is only one group of people that would actually believe it.

Conversely, I'm sure there might be an article for the other side, but who would write an article saying "Accuracy is important for a QB?" The reason no one would write such a ridiculous paper, is the response would be a resounding... "No Shit."

vandammage13
09-19-2012, 05:30 PM
When I need someone/something to back my opinion I'll consider it but I am not the one who claims that a QB's accuracy has no direct correlation with winning. It is not a matter of opinion, a blanket statement saying completion percentage has no bearing on winning is patently stupid.......

Again...I never said it has NO bearing...just not a direct correlation.

You can not attempt to point at completion % for a reason for success...There are plenty of QB's who have had good completion % but have not won.

However, things like INTs you can point to on their own...a team who tends to protect the football has a much higher chance of winning than one who does not.

So, a QB that limits turnovers is more likely to beat the opposing QB even if he has a better completion %...that is a fact (the supporting evidence was previously posted).

slim
09-19-2012, 05:30 PM
I think someone wrote some article that catfish posted that tried to explain...using mathmatical formulas...that accuracy was not important and didn't correlate to wins. Thats the ONLY thing this discussion is based on. There is probably only ONE person that would write soemthing like this, and there is only one group of people that would actually believe it.

Conversely, I'm sure there might be an article for the other side, but who would write an article saying "Accuracy is important for a QB?" The reason no one would write such a ridiculous paper, is the response would be a resounding... "No Shit."

I don't think this is a discussion of whether or not accuracy is important. Someone said there is a direct correlation between completion % and winning. That is not true. If it were true, then the QBs with the highest completion rates would have the most wins (on a consistent basis), which is clearly not the case.

Simple Jaded
09-19-2012, 05:32 PM
Do you understand what the phrase "direct correlation" means?

Educate me.......

Ravage!!!
09-19-2012, 05:33 PM
Again...I never said it has NO bearing...just not a direct correlation.

You can not attempt to point at completion % for a reason for success...There are plenty of QB's who have had good completion % but have not won.

However, things like INTs you can point to on their own...a team who tends to protect the football has a much higher chance of winning than one who does not.

So, a QB that limits turnovers is more likely to beat the opposing QB even if he has a better completion %...that is a fact.

So I can't point to a QB that has had 20 INTs that has won? Or are we only using the abnormal on one side of the argument. You just said "has a much HIGHER % to win"..so you can't give a direct correlation. QBs that are more accurate, have a MUCH HIGHER chance of winning than those that aren't.

Your example isn't a fact. Its cherry picking stats and combining the info to spit out what you WANT to see.

slim
09-19-2012, 05:36 PM
Educate me.......

Check out the last few pages of this thread. It is very educational.

Ravage!!!
09-19-2012, 05:39 PM
I don't think this is a discussion of whether or not accuracy is important. Someone said there is a direct correlation between completion % and winning. That is not true. If it were true, then the QBs with the highest completion rates would have the most wins (on a consistent basis), which is clearly not the case.

Fair enough on that. But I think the "direct correlation" is being used liberally on both sides. I don't think either side of the argument is using the "definition" of the term. Vandy just tried to use generalities on one side, while being specific on the other, trying to make a point for his case.

I think we all know that Jaded is trying to say that QB that are accurate, and have a higher % of completions, have a better chance of winning than those that don't. If you find that to be an inaccurate statement, then I would think you need to change how every QB is drafted in the NFL. Teach them, to stop teaching mechanics, feet, and not to worry about hitting a WR in stride. We can get very specific into semantics...but I think its pretty obvious that the better QBs in the NFL are better because they are NOT bad passers. Bad passers...meaning inaccurate passers. Brees, Brady, Manning, and Rodgers aren't considered the best in teh NFL because they are completing 49% of their passes.

Vandy wanted to take a snide stab at those that criticize Tebow by sarcastically complimenting the "passing %" of Manning. Its a stupid argument.

MOtorboat
09-19-2012, 05:39 PM
This reminds me, I do want to look up the record of 100-yard rushers and 300-yard passers in the last five years to see if Zam was onto something or if, as usual, he was talking out his bunghole again...

slim
09-19-2012, 05:43 PM
Fair enough on that. But I think the "direct correlation" is being used liberally on both sides. I don't think either side of the argument is using the "definition" of the term. Vandy just tried to use generalities on one side, while being specific on the other, trying to make a point for his case.

I think we all know that Jaded is trying to say that QB that are accurate, and have a higher % of completions, have a better chance of winning than those that don't. If you find that to be an inaccurate statement, then I would think you need to change how every QB is drafted in the NFL. Teach them, to stop teaching mechanics, feet, and not to worry about hitting a WR in stride. We can get very specific into semantics...but I think its pretty obvious that the better QBs in the NFL are better because they are NOT bad passers. Bad passers...meaning inaccurate passers. Brees, Brady, Manning, and Rodgers aren't considered the best in teh NFL because they are completing 49% of their passes.

Vandy wanted to take a snide stab at those that criticize Tebow by sarcastically complimenting the "passing %" of Manning. Its a stupid argument.

Yeah, you are probably right. I just wanted to point out that there is no direct correlation. Not that I really care all that much about this argument, it's just that I found it kind of interesting that there isn't (I was kind of surprised by it). Dread made a similar statement some time ago and I hadn't really thought about it much since then. Just found it interesting, that's all.

slim
09-19-2012, 05:47 PM
This reminds me, I do want to look up the record of 100-yard rushers and 300-yard passers in the last five years to see if Zam was onto something or if, as usual, he was talking out his bunghole again...

Do you really need research to answer this?

Simple Jaded
09-19-2012, 05:49 PM
Check out the last few pages of this thread. It is very educational.

Yeah I googled it, I read things like "interpretation of quantitative data" and "large values of one variable are associated with large values of the other", of which this thread is lacking. Your idea of proof is the win/loss record of Romo, Freeman and Dalton, you don't even bother looking at the completion percentage of the QB they lost to, much less provide a significant amount of data or large values.

If you interested in doing an in-depth study, have at it, but for the purposes of this particular discussion I'll stick with my over generalization of commonly held perception that accuracy directly influences the outcome of an NFL game.......

I Eat Staples
09-19-2012, 05:50 PM
Look on the bright side guys...Manning had a very good completion %...which we all know has a direct correlation with winning.

We're a much better team than last year, you really don't have to be so bitter.

slim
09-19-2012, 05:55 PM
Yeah I googled it, I read things like "interpretation of quantitative data" and "large values of one variable are associated with large values of the other", of which this thread is lacking. Your idea of proof is the win/loss record of Romo, Freeman and Dalton, you don't even bother looking at the completion percentage of the QB they lost to, much less provide a significant amount of data or large values.

If you interested in doing an in-depth study, have at it, but for the purposes of this particular discussion I'll stick with my over generalization of commonly held perception that accuracy directly influences the outcome of an NFL game.......

One number increases in relation to the other. For this discussion, as completion % goes up, so does number of wins. Opposing QBs are irrelevant. Sounds good in theory, doesn't work with actual NFL results.

But stick to painting with the broad brush of overgeneralization...that is almost never the wrong way to approach things.

broncobryce
09-19-2012, 05:56 PM
There's an exception to everything.

vandammage13
09-19-2012, 05:58 PM
So I can't point to a QB that has had 20 INTs that has won? Or are we only using the abnormal on one side of the argument. You just said "has a much HIGHER % to win"..so you can't give a direct correlation. QBs that are more accurate, have a MUCH HIGHER chance of winning than those that aren't.

Your example isn't a fact. Its cherry picking stats and combining the info to spit out what you WANT to see.

Yeah...a higher %...there will sometimes be exceptions to the rule, but the % are overwhelmingly in favor of the QB who turns it over at a lower rate.

In fact, you might be surprised to find that last year there were absolutely no exceptions to this rule...

For example:

Out of the 15 QB's who had the worst INT%...0 of these QB's made the playoffs.

Conversely, out of the 15 QB's wo had the best INT%...ALL 15 made the playoffs.

While you are chewing on those FACTS, consider that out of the 15 QB's who had the top completion %, 6 of those QB's did not make the playoffs (nearly half).

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2011/passing.htm <<<just sort by INT%

Simple Jaded
09-19-2012, 06:02 PM
One number increases in relation to the other. For this discussion, as completion % goes up, so does number of wins. Opposing QBs are irrelevant. Sounds good in theory, doesn't work with actual NFL results.

But stick to painting with the broad brush of overgeneralization...that is almost never the wrong way to approach things.
The burden of proof is yours, Romo's '11 win/loss record is hardly proof of his completion percentage in relation to anything, it's textbook "painting with the broad brush of overgeneralization". At least look into the completion percentage of the QB he lost to, that would be providing the sample comparison "in relation to" your argument.......

Ravage!!!
09-19-2012, 06:12 PM
Yeah...a higher %...there will sometimes be exceptions to the rule, but the % are overwhelmingly in favor of the QB who turns it over at a lower rate.

In fact, you might be surprised to find that last year there were absolutely no exceptions to this rule...

For example:

Out of the 15 QB's who had the worst INT%...0 of these QB's made the playoffs.

Conversely, out of the 15 QB's wo had the best INT%...ALL 15 made the playoffs.

While you are chewing on those FACTS, consider that out of the 15 QB's who had the top completion %, 6 of those QB's did not make the playoffs (nearly half).

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2011/passing.htm <<<just sort by INT%

Either way, you are picking which facts to use, and then proclaiming them as FACT compared to another, when you are cherry picking when to use exceptions and when not to. You are SOOOO trying to prove that having a QB like Manning is not better than having a QB like Tebow, that you want people to believe in the theory that QBs aren't better if they are more accurate.

To be honest, this is exactly why I think using math to prove football is absolutely absurd. Baseball is based on math, football is not. Give me the QB that can actually pass the ball well, and I'll bet that he beats the inaccurate QB 90% of the time, and THAT is really all I need to know. I'm betting that every coach in the NFL would take the accurate passer to lead their team over the inaccurate passer...... oh wait.... we've seen that already when NO ONE in the NFL wanted Tebow to be their starting QB.

slim
09-19-2012, 06:14 PM
The burden of proof is yours, Romo's '11 win/loss record is hardly proof of his completion percentage in relation to anything, it's textbook "painting with the broad brush of overgeneralization".......

No, the burden of proof is yours. You are the one that said there is a direct correlation.

The examples (plural, not just Romo) that I gave you show there is no direct correlation. If there was, then Josh Freeman would not have had such a high completion % last year and Tebow would not have such a low one. There are many examples of this, not just a few.

I will let you in on a secret. You cannot win this argument (at least not using statistics). It would be impossible to prove ANY direct correlation (use any metric you want) when something has so many variables as this. I suspect you already know this, which is why you scoff at the notion.

MOtorboat
09-19-2012, 06:19 PM
While you are chewing on those FACTS, consider that out of the 15 QB's who had the top completion %, 6 of those QB's did not make the playoffs (nearly half).

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2011/passing.htm <<<just sort by INT%

This is hilarious.

Only 12 quarterbacks make the playoffs each year, but you're taking the Top 15, so inherently, three aren't making it no matter how you roll, which is very convenient to the argument.

On top of that, we're talking about winning, not making the playoffs. There is, under current rules, a difference.

The Top 12 quarterbacks in completion percentage, for quarterbacks who qualified, was 118-68 last year.

Top 5? 58-21.

How about the bottom 12? 58-79.

catfish
09-19-2012, 06:39 PM
since the thread is completely hijacked now

http://www.twominutewarning.com/correlations.htm

and here is a 4 part article on win correlations

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2007/07/what-makes-teams-win-part-1.html

I am done with the conversation and posting this only becasue I think it is interesting. I have nothing further to add

Simple Jaded
09-19-2012, 06:51 PM
No, the burden of proof is yours. You are the one that said there is a direct correlation.

The examples (plural, not just Romo) that I gave you show there is no direct correlation. If there was, then Josh Freeman would not have had such a high completion % last year and Tebow would not have such a low one. There are many examples of this, not just a few.

I will let you in on a secret. You cannot win this argument (at least not using statistics). It would be impossible to prove ANY direct correlation (use any metric you want) when something has so many variables as this. I suspect you already know this, which is why you scoff at the notion.
I'm not the trying to prove something, "no direct correlation", your words not mine. You provided season stats, win/loss records and Top10 rankings, which is almost vague enough to pass for a direct correlation between the jobless rate and the price of tea in China.......

slim
09-19-2012, 06:56 PM
I'm not the trying to prove something, "no direct correlation", your words not mine. You provided season stats, win/loss records and Top10 rankings, which is almost vague enough to pass for a direct correlation between the jobless rate and the price of tea in China.......

IDK, Jaded. I am getting a headache.

Let's just put all of this ugliness behind us.

slim
09-19-2012, 07:01 PM
since the thread is completely hijacked now

http://www.twominutewarning.com/correlations.htm

and here is a 4 part article on win correlations

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2007/07/what-makes-teams-win-part-1.html

I am done with the conversation and posting this only becasue I think it is interesting. I have nothing further to add

That is pretty interesting....a lot to digest.

Do they give a definition of "passing efficiency"? I didn't see one.

vandammage13
09-19-2012, 08:00 PM
Either way, you are picking which facts to use, and then proclaiming them as FACT compared to another, when you are cherry picking when to use exceptions and when not to. You are SOOOO trying to prove that having a QB like Manning is not better than having a QB like Tebow, that you want people to believe in the theory that QBs aren't better if they are more accurate.

To be honest, this is exactly why I think using math to prove football is absolutely absurd. Baseball is based on math, football is not. Give me the QB that can actually pass the ball well, and I'll bet that he beats the inaccurate QB 90% of the time, and THAT is really all I need to know. I'm betting that every coach in the NFL would take the accurate passer to lead their team over the inaccurate passer...... oh wait.... we've seen that already when NO ONE in the NFL wanted Tebow to be their starting QB.

1. The stats I presented are Facts, whether compared to something else or standing on their own.

2. If you would have bet that way on tebow last year you would be in the red...

MOtorboat
09-19-2012, 08:07 PM
1. The stats I presented are Facts, whether compared to something else or standing on their own.

2. If you would have bet that way on tebow last year you would be in the red...

Dude. Tebow is a terrible quarterback.

I mean all-time worst type quarterbacks. Akili Smith. Ryan Leaf. He's THAT bad.

Get over it. And go root for your punt formation protector in New York. There is a reason that's what he's doing, and it's because he's a shitty quarterback, in every aspect.

MOtorboat
09-19-2012, 09:07 PM
Now.

Back to the game last week, the topic of the thread, not vanddamme's boyfriend....

I've heard a lot of people talking about Atlanta using a "Psycho" formation early, especially on the interceptions, and I don't think they did that at all.

First interception:
Pre-snap - The Atlanta defense didn't look set, but it was basic 4-2-5 nickel.
Post-snap - William Moore was actually lucky that he wasn't on time getting set in the two-deep zone, because he saw Manning throwing the seem and picked it off.

Second interception:
Pre-snap - very basic nickel formation. ROLB hinting at a blitz.
Post-snap - still a very basic look, man coverage by three corners on three wide receivers, two-deep zone. The two linebackers dropping into a mid-zone are what caused the chaos.

Third interception:
Pre-snap - Broncos were in a trips right, and Atlanta was in a 3-3-5, showing zone-blitz
Post-snap - I think Manning thought he had a seem route easy, but Atlanta dropped everyone into a mid zone, and the seem route was cut off by the safety in a three deep, three under zone.

Simple Jaded
09-20-2012, 12:03 AM
Manning had Decker open on all 3 int's, just bad reads.......

catfish
09-20-2012, 06:57 AM
That is pretty interesting....a lot to digest.

Do they give a definition of "passing efficiency"? I didn't see one.

did see on either, most likley a combination of YPA and 1st down% by drive. they have a contact us section if you are interested

Northman
09-20-2012, 07:18 AM
Unfortuantely if Tebow was so great he would be starting and he would of been more sought after if teams truly believed he was a legitimate QB. But, he's playing mainly on special teams and most surprising overall isnt really being used that much in the wildcat package. People can throw stats out all they want regarding Manning vs Tebow, it doesnt matter. The true fact is one guy is automatically given a starting job while the other is playing special teams. Its not rocket science, there's nothing to break down here.

vandammage13
09-20-2012, 08:26 AM
Unfortuantely if Tebow was so great he would be starting and he would of been more sought after if teams truly believed he was a legitimate QB. But, he's playing mainly on special teams and most surprising overall isnt really being used that much in the wildcat package. People can throw stats out all they want regarding Manning vs Tebow, it doesnt matter. The true fact is one guy is automatically given a starting job while the other is playing special teams. Its not rocket science, there's nothing to break down here.

You might be right about that, but that still doesn't make the numbers I posted invalid....

Regardless, I never intended for the remark about competion % earier in the thread to become the topic...It was mainly just a tongue in cheek remark meant for a bit of sarcastic comedy relief...It seems that there is a lot of blowback on these boards for anyone even insinuating that they aren't sold on the Manning acquisition.

So back to the game..

TXBRONC
09-20-2012, 09:09 AM
You might be right about that, but that still doesn't make the numbers I posted invalid....

Regardless, I never intended for the remark about competition % earlier in the thread to become the topic...It was mainly just a tongue in cheek remark meant for a bit of sarcastic comedy relief...It seems that there is a lot of blowback on these boards for anyone even insinuating that they aren't sold on the Manning acquisition.

So back to the game..

There is no he might be right North is right period. If Tebow was any good he would be starting.

I might believe you about your comments being meant as tongue in cheek if it wasn't for the fact you piss and moan about Tebow every time we talk about quarterbacks.

Ravage!!!
09-20-2012, 09:51 AM
There is no he might be right North is right period. If Tebow was any good he would be starting.

I might believe you about your comments being meant as tongue in cheek if it wasn't for the fact you piss and moan about Tebow every time we talk about quarterbacks.

And it was a statement people used against Tebow....regarding his lack of passing abilities.

MO showed that the top 12 passer ratings in the NFL had a MUCH higher win % than the lowest 12 in passing %. Vandy picked his stats and pulled out what he wanted. Thats what we all do with stats, and why mathmatics can be used for both sides of every argument, if you want to manipulate and use only what works for you. Its why a "mathmatical formula" to calculate out a number (quarter back rating) is absolutely retarded. Its why math "indexs" to tell us who is playing well and who isn't, is pretty absurd in general.

But...

Ravage!!!
09-20-2012, 09:53 AM
This is hilarious.

Only 12 quarterbacks make the playoffs each year, but you're taking the Top 15, so inherently, three aren't making it no matter how you roll, which is very convenient to the argument.

On top of that, we're talking about winning, not making the playoffs. There is, under current rules, a difference.

The Top 12 quarterbacks in completion percentage, for quarterbacks who qualified, was 118-68 last year.

Top 5? 58-21.

How about the bottom 12? 58-79.
.....

Ravage!!!
09-20-2012, 09:55 AM
Now.

Back to the game last week, the topic of the thread, not vanddamme's boyfriend....

I've heard a lot of people talking about Atlanta using a "Psycho" formation early, especially on the interceptions, and I don't think they did that at all.

First interception:
Pre-snap - The Atlanta defense didn't look set, but it was basic 4-2-5 nickel.
Post-snap - William Moore was actually lucky that he wasn't on time getting set in the two-deep zone, because he saw Manning throwing the seem and picked it off.

Second interception:
Pre-snap - very basic nickel formation. ROLB hinting at a blitz.
Post-snap - still a very basic look, man coverage by three corners on three wide receivers, two-deep zone. The two linebackers dropping into a mid-zone are what caused the chaos.

Third interception:
Pre-snap - Broncos were in a trips right, and Atlanta was in a 3-3-5, showing zone-blitz
Post-snap - I think Manning thought he had a seem route easy, but Atlanta dropped everyone into a mid zone, and the seem route was cut off by the safety in a three deep, three under zone.

Which one of these is the one that Manning actually over-through the route? The second? I can't remember

MOtorboat
09-20-2012, 10:03 AM
Which one of these is the one that Manning actually over-through the route? The second? I can't remember

Actually, I think it may have been the third one.

I'm not wondering, and I don't know this for a fact at all, if Manning and McCoy watched gamefilm of the Saints-Falcons last year, and saw the Saints working their seem routes, and thought they could take advantage of that too. That's only speculation, but I think its plausible.

BroncoNut
09-20-2012, 10:04 AM
my mind is not right today.

Ravage!!!
09-20-2012, 10:46 AM
Actually, I think it may have been the third one.

I'm not wondering, and I don't know this for a fact at all, if Manning and McCoy watched gamefilm of the Saints-Falcons last year, and saw the Saints working their seem routes, and thought they could take advantage of that too. That's only speculation, but I think its plausible.

Makes sense since they jumped out into no-huddle and were hitting those fast and early. Well, attempting to hit those fast and early.

silkamilkamonico
09-20-2012, 10:59 AM
For the record, I think Tebow is a bad NFL QB. Does Tebow get any credit for being the very good leader and mentally tough that he is? I'm just wondering. If not, than we can put aside any arguments of Cutler being a bad leader and not mentally tough.

As for the game, the Atlanta defense, whatever they did, did enough early in the game to have it playout as the difference. They confused the hell out of Manning, and by the time Manning adjusted, Denver just ran out of time. Will be interesting to see if its some type of trend developing with defenses. Manning said he had a terible time figuring out what they were doing in the early part of the game, but did adjust.

slim
09-20-2012, 11:22 AM
Now.

Back to the game last week, the topic of the thread, not vanddamme's boyfriend....

I've heard a lot of people talking about Atlanta using a "Psycho" formation early, especially on the interceptions, and I don't think they did that at all.

First interception:
Pre-snap - The Atlanta defense didn't look set, but it was basic 4-2-5 nickel.
Post-snap - William Moore was actually lucky that he wasn't on time getting set in the two-deep zone, because he saw Manning throwing the seem and picked it off.

Second interception:
Pre-snap - very basic nickel formation. ROLB hinting at a blitz.
Post-snap - still a very basic look, man coverage by three corners on three wide receivers, two-deep zone. The two linebackers dropping into a mid-zone are what caused the chaos.

Third interception:
Pre-snap - Broncos were in a trips right, and Atlanta was in a 3-3-5, showing zone-blitz
Post-snap - I think Manning thought he had a seem route easy, but Atlanta dropped everyone into a mid zone, and the seem route was cut off by the safety in a three deep, three under zone.

Nice breakdown, MO. Did you sign up for the deal that gives you access to game film?

TXBRONC
09-20-2012, 11:44 AM
For the record, I think Tebow is a bad NFL QB. Does Tebow get any credit for being the very good leader and mentally tough that he is? I'm just wondering. If not, than we can put aside any arguments of Cutler being a bad leader and not mentally tough.

As for the game, the Atlanta defense, whatever they did, did enough early in the game to have it play out as the difference. They confused the hell out of Manning, and by the time Manning adjusted, Denver just ran out of time. Will be interesting to see if its some type of trend developing with defenses. Manning said he had a terible time figuring out what they were doing in the early part of the game, but did adjust.

Excellent Silk! :salute:

In answer to your question. Tebow should get some of credit for the wins. He was apart them that's an established fact. We can still leave Cutler out of the conversation. Cutler is still a better a quarterback and I don't agree mentally weak. He has better stats and he's also has same playoff record as the guy who couldn't throw accurately if his life depended on it.

We don't turn the ball over three maybe the out come is different.

Hawgdriver
09-20-2012, 12:28 PM
Modern era quarterbacks with full careers; best and worst completion percentage; wins. R=0.69. Not that I really care. Whither to Tebow or not to Tebow. I do care about my numbers..

1583

Chef Zambini
09-20-2012, 12:32 PM
cutler is a cry-baby malcontent. teboiw is a fullback who thinks he is a QB.
peyton manning is the smartest QB on the planet with a great skill set, tremendous work ethic and full of desire and motivation! he tried to go deep early to get on top of the falcons, just like all of you predicted for all our games this season ! his desire got in the way if his common sense, he started out too fast, he got burned! NOLAN did to him what he usually does to defenses.
lesson learned?
I feel confident that PM wont need a second lesson.
when i saw our schedule, i predicted 10-6
ATL was one of those six.
hold on to your hat, so was houston !
a healthy houston is a superbowl contender!
lets see how we handle houston and the best offensive mind ever to work for denver, GARY KUBIAK.
and one of the best DCs in the league, BUM PHILLIPS KID.
I would be very impressed if we beat the texans this sunday.
maybe hillman can contribute?
is DOOM still on the team?

Northman
09-20-2012, 01:35 PM
For the record, I think Tebow is a bad NFL QB. Does Tebow get any credit for being the very good leader and mentally tough that he is? I'm just wondering. If not, than we can put aside any arguments of Cutler being a bad leader and not mentally tough.

For me personally, absolutely. Ive always maintained that Tebow is a great athlete and a great leader. Now, if you took all that and put it in Jay's body you would have one hell of a QB.


As for the game, the Atlanta defense, whatever they did, did enough early in the game to have it playout as the difference. They confused the hell out of Manning, and by the time Manning adjusted, Denver just ran out of time. Will be interesting to see if its some type of trend developing with defenses. Manning said he had a terible time figuring out what they were doing in the early part of the game, but did adjust.

Agreed.

chazoe60
09-20-2012, 01:41 PM
I wonder if Al Sharpton will protest the game?

Tink is gonna refuse to listen to it.

Thnikkaman
09-20-2012, 01:49 PM
Tink is gonna refuse to listen to it.

Refuse to listen to the game? No.

Refuse to listen to Al Sharpton? Yes.

Funny fact, my wife's parents live on the street Jessie Jackson's family lives on in South Carolina.

slim
09-20-2012, 01:51 PM
Refuse to listen to the game? No.

Refuse to listen to Al Sharpton? Yes.

Funny fact, my wife's parents live on the street Jessie Jackson's family lives on in South Carolina.

Your inlaws live in the ghetto?

Thnikkaman
09-20-2012, 01:55 PM
Your inlaws live in the ghetto?

When you assume, you make an ass out of you and chazoe.

slim
09-20-2012, 02:06 PM
When you assume, you make an ass out of you and chazoe.

Chaz doesn't need my help.

Your inlaws must be rich and black and maybe Jewish.

Abraham was the father of Issac
Issac was the father Jacob
Jacob had twelve sons, for real
and these were the childern of Isreal

Chef Zambini
09-20-2012, 02:15 PM
rich, black, jewish/
sammy davis jr. ?

slim
09-20-2012, 02:17 PM
rich, black, jewish/
sammy davis jr. ?

Shem was a black man, from Africa.

Thnikkaman
09-20-2012, 02:25 PM
Chaz doesn't need my help.

Your inlaws must be rich and black and maybe Jewish.

Abraham was the father of Issac
Issac was the father Jacob
Jacob had twelve sons, for real
and these were the childern of Isreal


I wish on part 1, they swim so they can't be part 2, and they are part German, so there goes part 3.