PDA

View Full Version : Fact: Denver has scored 97 more points than Dallas



MOtorboat
11-11-2013, 12:39 AM
And Dallas is No. 2 in scoring.

Davii
11-11-2013, 01:10 AM
That's a ridiculous stat. Let's hope this high scoring machine keeps rolling along.

Joel
11-11-2013, 02:47 AM
That's a ridiculous stat. Let's hope this high scoring machine keeps rolling along.
Doubtful; our running game is strictly average (that might even be a bit generous) and KC's only allowed 111 pts in 9 games. For those scoring at home, that's 12.33... per week.

Ravage!!!
11-11-2013, 02:53 AM
Doubtful; our running game is strictly average (that might even be a bit generous) and KC's only allowed 111 pts in 9 games. For those scoring at home, that's 12.33... per week.

They have also faced the 3rd string QB for 4 weeks in a row.

CrazyHorse
11-11-2013, 02:58 AM
What do we have to average the rest of the season to usurp the title of highest scoring offense of all time?

Ravage!!!
11-11-2013, 03:06 AM
I don't know, but I think we have looked like shit for 3 weeks in a row now.

atwater27
11-11-2013, 08:26 AM
They have also faced the 3rd string QB for 4 weeks in a row.

The MRI hasn't come back yet. If Peyton doesn't get protection next week, they could get yet another 2nd stringer.

Northman
11-11-2013, 10:10 AM
The MRI hasn't come back yet. If Peyton doesn't get protection next week, they could get yet another 2nd stringer.

They might bite off more than can chew if that happens. Oz just might surprise some people.

CoachChaz
11-11-2013, 11:28 AM
I think we can score 20 and still beat them.

NightTrainLayne
11-11-2013, 01:54 PM
I think we can score 20 and still beat them.

That would be too close for comfort for me.

I see KC scoring in the range of 20 on us.

But I think 24-25 is their absolute ceiling. We'll get plenty of possessions, and assuming Manning is "okay" we should be able to score more than that.

underrated29
11-11-2013, 03:22 PM
If doesn't score more than 13. Their fg kicker is going to be fantasy gold this week.

ForgettingBrandonMarshall
11-11-2013, 04:54 PM
We held the Chargers to 20 last week, which included 7 points off a turnover in the red zone. I'm more worried about the Chiefs defense scoring on a strip-sack, then I am about the Chiefs offense scoring a TD.

Bowe doesn't look the same this year. A lot of their offense is running the ball and checking it down to Charles/McCluster and whoever their FB is. If we limit the penalties and turnovers, then we've got this game. I just hope the Oline can keep Peyton upright.

NightTrainLayne
11-11-2013, 05:21 PM
I keep seeing the, "well if it weren't for these turnovers, team x wouldn't have scored so many points."

Well. . .every week we have "these turnovers". Maybe you can't blame the defense, but I think at this point through the season it's fair to factor in that our opponent will get some of these. Especially, a great defense like the Chiefs. Maybe their offense won't score 20, but I won't be surprised at all to see 20 points next to their name next Sunday.

slim
11-11-2013, 05:23 PM
The only way KC stays in the game is if we turn it over. Unfortunately we turn it over a lot and they take it away a lot, so that worries me a little.

Edit: NTL beat me too it.

Joel
11-11-2013, 08:37 PM
They have also faced the 3rd string QB for 4 weeks in a row.
And we've faced garbage defenses three weeks in a row. In fact, the best scoring D we've faced all years is the 9th ranked Ravens. But okay, fine, if we're gonna cherry-pick, let's go all the way: How come Romo, Peytons kid brother and Vick couldn't manage >16 pts against them? They haven't given up >17 to ANYONE (and only TWICE allowed that much.) A pattern can only continue unbroken so long before we luck ceases to be a plausible explanation; we passed that point when we passed the seasons halfway mark. Number one September rankings mean little; number one November rankings mean much.

It genuinely amuses me how people can simultaneously insist the Chiefs 9-0 record and #1 D is meaningless because "they haven't played anyone," yet our 8-1 record and #1 offense is for real despite mostly playing THE SAME TEAMS. They're as real as we; we're as overrated as they. If anything, they're more credible after shutting down the #2 and #6 ranked offenses than we are after lighting up the #9 D.


I keep seeing the, "well if it weren't for these turnovers, team x wouldn't have scored so many points."

Well. . .every week we have "these turnovers". Maybe you can't blame the defense, but I think at this point through the season it's fair to factor in that our opponent will get some of these. Especially, a great defense like the Chiefs. Maybe their offense won't score 20, but I won't be surprised at all to see 20 points next to their name next Sunday.
It really is the perfect storm: Their D is soft against the run but has a brutal pass rush and scores points of opposing offenses; our Swiss cheese line has made our running game anemic and forced lots of turnovers that kept teams in games (and, against Indys awful D, LOST the game.) People expecting us to "expose" the Chiefs may be in for a rude awakening as the wrong pretender gets exposed. :(

FACT: Dallas has scored more than anyone but us (hanging 48 on us and staging a 20 pt second half comeback against SD) yet only managed 16 against KC, worst of Dallas' season. Facts are stubborn things.

MOtorboat
11-11-2013, 11:34 PM
I can't wait for this game.

Destruction. Exposure. Sadness. Oh, bring KC on.

Joel
11-11-2013, 11:40 PM
I can't wait for this game.

Destruction. Exposure. Sadness. Oh, bring KC on.
Still sounds like Croesus going to the Oracle, but we'll know one way or the other in about six days. I hope you're right, but hope even more for a close game, because that should mean KC doesn't get 24 pts off half a dozen turnovers.

MOtorboat
11-11-2013, 11:43 PM
Still sounds like Croesus going to the Oracle

Not any more or less than your dire ramblings that make it sound like this team hasn't won a game yet.

Joel
11-12-2013, 12:02 AM
Not any more or less than your dire ramblings that make it sound like this team hasn't won a game yet.
Never said that; we dominate scrub teams. The problem is we're 2-5 against WINNING teams, and there are no scrubs in the playoffs (yet; Goodell's trying to "fix" that....)

It's back to the same old thing: KC's 9-0 record's overinflated because "they haven't played anyone," yet beating mostly the same teams proves we're the real deal. Even though most of those teams are much better offensively than defensively, which tends to give the edge to the team that shut down their offenses rather than the one who blew up defenses that were already smoking rubble. So we beat Dallas and have outscored them by a wide margin this season; who cares? I'm reliably informed "Dallas sucks." ;)

MOtorboat
11-12-2013, 12:12 AM
Never said that; we dominate scrub teams. The problem is we're 2-5 against WINNING teams, and there are no scrubs in the playoffs (yet; Goodell's trying to "fix" that....)

It's back to the same old thing: KC's 9-0 record's overinflated because "they haven't played anyone," yet beating mostly the same teams proves we're the real deal. Even though most of those teams are much better offensively than defensively, which tends to give the edge to the team that shut down their offenses rather than the one who blew up defenses that were already smoking rubble. So we beat Dallas and have outscored them by a wide margin this season; who cares? I'm reliably informed "Dallas sucks." ;)

Why does Denver's last two seasons count, and only Kansas City's last nine games, where they are 0-0 against winning teams?

Joel
11-12-2013, 01:25 AM
Why does Denver's last two seasons count, and only Kansas City's last nine games, where they are 0-0 against winning teams?
They count the same, all I've said from the start: Based on their record, KC's as much/little contender/pretender as we are, since we've both racked many wins, but none against winning teams.

It's certainly worth noting they barely beat ANYONE last year (they needed OT against a Saints team utterly lost without Sean Payton.) I don't think Alex Smith and Andy Reid made them 5X better in just six months, no. This year and last they were probably a lot closer to their 7-9 2011 finish than either 2-14 or 9-0. Whether they're better than we remains to be seen; all we can with certainty is that after next weeks 8-1 vs. 9-0 meeting ONE of us will have beaten a winning team in 2013 (now watch us play to a tie. :tongue:)

Ziggy
11-12-2013, 02:01 AM
I don't know, but I think we have looked like shit for 3 weeks in a row now.

.....and scored 28, 45, and 33 points in those 3 games. That's an average of over 35 points/game. That may not be up to the 2013 Broncos standards, but it would still lead the NFL in scoring by almost 10 points per game. Talk about looking for that dark cloud in a silver lining. It's amazing how spoiled we've become this season with this record setting offense. Denver is winning by an average of over 2 TD's/game. Also best in the NFL.

Joel
11-12-2013, 03:02 AM
.....and scored 28, 45, and 33 points in those 3 games. That's an average of over 35 points/game. That may not be up to the 2013 Broncos standards, but it would still lead the NFL in scoring by almost 10 points per game. Talk about looking for that dark cloud in a silver lining. It's amazing how spoiled we've become this season with this record setting offense. Denver is winning by an average of over 2 TD's/game. Also best in the NFL.
Against the 14th, 31st and 10th best scoring defenses, and that 45 point game was mostly from OUR D. Their 5 turnovers made up for our 4, and, combined with a three-and-out before the shanked punt, set us up in great field position multiple times (plus DRCs pick-six gave us 7 pts outright.) The offense had three good drives on their own to get us 21 pts, but that was marred by two turnovers giving Washington 14 more.

Our offense tends to be a feast-or-famine, high risk/reward, system. We don't so much sustain drives as make plays that either score TDs themselves or put us in position to do so, but we also have a lot of short drives that abruptly end in punts (especially when we lost Clady, then Franklin, and our running game disappeared.) We can shred weak defenses doing that, but it's unclear it'll work as well against GOOD defenses, especially if they have the rush to exploit our weak protection, and force turnovers as often as we commit them. We all know the situation though; we'll just have to see what happens.

Our gameplan's pretty simple: Shut down Charles and keep Smith in the pocket, then run the ball, protect Manning and don't commit turnovers. The first part shouldn't be hard, but shutting down KCs offense is ALWAYS the easy part since it does half the job before kickoff. It's that ball hawking QB crunching D that's the problem, and our current line is a problem all its own.

Davii
11-13-2013, 04:04 PM
So, now we're reduced to complaining that we have a pretty complete team? Wow.

powderaddict
11-13-2013, 04:32 PM
The defense scored 7 of the points against Washington, how is that "mostly from our D"? We had quite a few nice scoring drives in that game.

Joel
11-13-2013, 06:37 PM
The defense scored 7 of the points against Washington, how is that "mostly from our D"? We had quite a few nice scoring drives in that game.
So we're just ignoring the fact HALF our scoring "drives" started with TURNOVERS deep in Washington territory? My personal favorite was the one that didn't even NEED a turnover: The three-and-out followed by a shanked punt that gave us the ball at the WSH 35. Yes, the ensuing one play TD "drive" was well executed, and might have scored from much farther out (though it's unclear how long Knowshon can outrun a safety,) but our D set it up, as was typical of our scoring in that game.

Our offense had three solid DRIVES: The opening TD, and the two after they handed Washington two TDs and a 21-7 lead. One of THOSE drives required TWO fourth down conversions; it ends in a FG attempt if we aren't down 14 in the second half. ALL the rest were thanks to our D giving us good field position with a turnover or punt. Check the drive chart: http://espn.go.com/nfl/drivechart?gameId=331027007

HALF our 6 scoring drives started on the WSH 35, WSH 24 or WSH 25 (one somehow managed to reach the goal line without a TD; we settled for a FG and a two score lead.) Two other times our D forced a turnover (at the DEN 43 and 39) only for our great offense to hand the ball BACK a few plays later, but at least the D prevented 60 and 56 yd FG tries. Don't just look at the big score and assume the offense had a big day, because they didn't: The defense did. That's also the problem with saying, "KCs offense can't score." That's been irrelevant for 9 games (so far....)

MOtorboat
11-13-2013, 06:38 PM
So we're just ignoring the fact HALF our scoring "drives" started with TURNOVERS deep in Washington territory? My personal favorite was the one that didn't even NEED a turnover: The three-and-out followed by a shanked punt that gave us the ball at the WSH 35. Yes, the ensuing one play TD "drive" was well executed, and might have scored from much farther out (though it's unclear how long Knowshon can outrun a safety,) but our D set it up, as was typical of our scoring in that game.

Our offense had three solid DRIVES: The opening TD, and the two after they handed Washington two TDs and a 21-7 lead. One of THOSE drives required TWO fourth down conversions; it ends in a FG attempt if we aren't down 14 in the second half. ALL the rest were thanks to our D giving us good field position with a turnover or punt. Check the drive chart: http://espn.go.com/nfl/drivechart?gameId=331027007

HALF our 6 scoring drives started on the WSH 35, WSH 24 or WSH 25 (one somehow managed to reach the goal line without a TD; we settled for a FG and a two score lead.) Two other times our D forced a turnover (at the DEN 43 and 39) only for our great offense to hand the ball BACK a few plays later, but at least the D prevented 60 and 56 yd FG tries. Don't just look at the big score and assume the offense had a big day, because they didn't: The defense did. That's also the problem with saying, "KCs offense can't score." That's been irrelevant for 9 games (so far....)

Oh.

The Horror.

Dreadnought
11-13-2013, 06:46 PM
They have also faced the 3rd string QB for 4 weeks in a row.

The Chiefs also have trouble stopping the run. they are giving up 5.0 YPC, which suggests a heavier dose of KM et al. than usual.

Joel, I think you are wildly off base - our running game is quite good, we just don't run as much as we could. Plus our team YPC gets tanked by almost 3 Victory Formation kneel downs per game. PFM has accounted for -27 yards so far, and I'd like to see him over -50 by the time we're done

Nomad
11-13-2013, 08:07 PM
So, now we're reduced to complaining that we have a pretty complete team? Wow.

Scoring all these points seems very addictive to fans. I sure hope the fans don't boo, if the BRONCOS don't score more than 30 points:lol:

Joel
11-13-2013, 09:12 PM
The Chiefs also have trouble stopping the run. they are giving up 5.0 YPC, which suggests a heavier dose of KM et al. than usual.
No argument there; I'm hoping our blocking is good enough we run them into the ground and Manning never has to do anything more dangerous than handoff; it's not like their offense can sideline our run game.


Joel, I think you are wildly off base - our running game is quite good, we just don't run as much as we could. Plus our team YPC gets tanked by almost 3 Victory Formation kneel downs per game. PFM has accounted for -27 yards so far, and I'd like to see him over -50 by the time we're done
Our 20th ranked rushing TOTAL is actually better than our 26th ranked rushing AVERAGE. In other words, only Cleveland, Pitt, Atlanta, the Giants, Jax and Baltimore get less per run. 3.7 YPA=/=quite good.

I do think it's stupid kneel downs count as rushing stats though, have ever since THGoF pointed it out and noted the USFL much more intelligently separated them from rushing stats.