Breaking Down The Chiefs [Archive]

BSN Denver

11-15-2013, 08:23 PM

The Denver Broncos face the toughest opponent they’ve faced all season in the Kansas City Chiefs. It’s also the team’s third divisional game of the season.

The last time the Chiefs were in town it was week 17 of the 2012 season and the Broncos demolished the Chiefs 38-3.

Last year, Kansas City was the worst team in football at 2-14; they are a much better football team this year. A key reason for that is Andy Reid. The veteran coach seems to have gotten his groove back in new surroundings after leaving the Philadelphia Eagles. Reid, whose teams haven’t won more than eight games since the 2010 season, already has nine this year. He has the Chiefs poised for a playoff spot which hasn’t happened in that city since 2010 when the team lost to Baltimore 30-7.

Two big factors that have aided the improvement of the offense would be the addition of....CONTINUE READING (http://www.brandonspano.com/headlines.html?entry=breaking-down-the-chiefs)

Joel

11-15-2013, 08:43 PM

Run the ball
The Chiefs aren’t good against the run, giving up an average of 118.6 yards per game on the ground. Knowshon Moreno is the veteran in the backfield. Run it down their throats.
Unfortunately, we haven't run well the past month; Knowshon Morenos 65 yards last week was the only one of our last our games that he had >50. We need better blocking to get him the kind of production he had in our first five games, when he averaged 5.1 per carry; since Orlando Franklins injury against Jax put him on the bench next to Ryan Clady, Moreno's average is down to 3.3.

Use the run to sell the pass
Quite the opposite of what the Broncos have done this season but play-action is the Broncos friend in this matchup. If the Broncos can establish the run game and make the Chiefs honor it. Manning can do the rest.
Run to establish the pass is as old as the hills; it's far easier to pass with a safety in the box—IF teams not only run, but so successfully it demands safety help; if the defense can ignore the possibility of a run because the offense never gains much doing it, they can and will sell out on the pass as their only threat. It's not enough just to handoff a lot, then punt; runs must produce.

Protect Manning
This goes without saying, fans were on edge last week when Manning went down against the Chargers due to a hit to Manning’s ankle by Corey Liuget. Alex Gibbs and the Broncos offensive line has to figure something out to keep that ankle safe. The Broncos have allowed the least amount of pressures this season with 62, but 31 of those have come in the last three weeks. The Chiefs lead the league in sacks with 36 and Tamba Hali and Justin Houston will have their ears pinned back all game.
The Chiefs pass rush is a big reason they lead the NFL in takeaways; strip-sacks+pressured throws=lots of turnovers. No one needs to tell Peyton Manning that; he's been blindside strip-sacked in each of his last three games, and the only time it didn't result in a short TD drive was when it resulted in a safety FOLLOWED by a TD drive. That safety and TD, combined with an interception when Indy shoved Julius Thomas into Manning and grabbed his arm, produced 12 Indy points, twice their victory margin.

So we end where we began: Denver must block well to win, but IF we do KC is sunk. They have two Pro Bowl LBs lined up on the left, and backup LT Chris Clark can't handle both of them, especially if LG Zane Beadles must help C Manny Ramirez against 3-4 NT Dontari Poe. Beadles, though a good downfield blocker against smaller safeties and LBs, also has a bad habit of letting defenders into the backfield to take down backs early in the run game. Tight ends on the left could be key, REAL tight ends who catch AND block (e.g. Dreesen, Tamme) rather than big receivers and fast tackles impersonating TEs.

Bronco4ever

11-16-2013, 05:23 PM

Tight ends on the left could be key, REAL tight ends who catch AND block (e.g. Dreesen, Tamme) rather than big receivers and fast tackles impersonating TEs.

Joel, you are becoming a broken record with your obsession over OJ's blocking. Yes, he's not our best blocking TE but he's by far our best receiving threat from the position. None of your complaining is going to change that he's going to start and get the majority of the snaps. I get your concern but please, we don't need to hear about it in every single thread.

Joel

11-16-2013, 06:41 PM

Joel, you are becoming a broken record with your obsession over OJ's blocking. Yes, he's not our best blocking TE but he's by far our best receiving threat from the position. None of your complaining is going to change that he's going to start and get the majority of the snaps. I get your concern but please, we don't need to hear about it in every single thread.
He's our WORST blocking TE, and the ONLY indisputably better receiver than Dreesen. Tight end receptions won't beat KC tomorrow; we have too many other receiving threats, and too few other blockers. I wouldn't be surprised if JT DOESN'T start tomorrow, because he brings nothing indispensable to the table, which is not true for ANY other Denver TE.

Whether he starts or doesn't though, blocking's the key to winning tomorrow. That's how we run on a bad run D, that's how we protect our limping 37 year old QB, that's how we avoid turnovers against a team forcing more than ANYONE. They can't beat us without turnovers, and know as well as anyone that's what's won pretty much every game of their so-far-unbeaten season. If Orange Julius suddenly—somehow—becomes a good (even passable) pass blocker, great; if not, we should put in someone who is. But I really don't care WHO keeps Manning off the turf and Moreno running free as long as SOMEONE does.

Slick

11-16-2013, 06:59 PM

Julius Thomas' pass catching abilities could very well keep their LBs and safeties honest, Joel. Who's going to guard him?

MOtorboat

11-16-2013, 07:01 PM

Julius Thomas' pass catching abilities could very well keep their LBs and safeties honest, Joel. Who's going to guard him?

Not Akeem Jordan. And certainly not Hali and Houston. Berry and Johnson are the only two who have a chance on that entire vaunted defense.

But by all means, let's just take that out of the equation and play Dreesen.

Slick

11-16-2013, 07:03 PM

Did I do that right, Mo? The apostrophe after the s in Thomas?

Joel

11-16-2013, 08:09 PM

If their LBs beat teams with coverage that would reassure me far more. The author of the ESPN article Carol just linked seems to strongly feel Berry will cover JT like he did Witten and every other good receiving TE they've faced, which is fine with me because leaving two Pro Bowl WRs plus Decker one-on-one DOES create opportunities.

Of course, that's what we've been hearing all along but it hasn't been as completely overwhelming the past month as DBs copied Indys press coverage and refs let everyone play "bump and bump" 15 yds downfield. Whenever that happens PFM needs just a bit longer to throw (apparently PI and Defensive Holding can't be called within 10 yds of the LoS either.) If that leads to strip-sacks prompting fans to angrily demand Manning throw it away after 2-3 seconds, it could be a long day.

The point is we have plenty of other receiving big receiving threats without JT; I can think of four, plus legit additional receivers in Dreesen and Tamme. What we DON'T have is any more blockers apart from them and Moreno. I mean, really, if all we need to win is as many receivers as possible, let's bench Moreno, too and go five-wide with Caldwell or Holliday; anyone see any potential problems there...?

If JT has 5 TDs, KC loses by 30 and we lose PFM for the season, even a win is worse than three losses, because our season's in the tank, and Manning might retire rather than come back for more of the same.

MOtorboat

11-16-2013, 08:22 PM

Joel

11-16-2013, 10:17 PM

This notion that a potential Manning injury is strictly based on whether Dreesen plays or Thomas plays is asinine.
There's a large and real difference between one of the teams, if not leagues, best blocking TEs and one who's blocking is pitiful. If our QB weren't limping, we hadn't given up a strip-sack for points in our last three games and the Chiefs didn't lead the NFL in forcing turnovers it might not be a big deal, but since all those things are documented indisputable facts, it is. Julius Thomas is not our offenses indispensable piece, PFM is.

Even if it DID happen, to pin it on playing one tight end over another is asinine. And the spam is getting old.
I mentioned him in all of ONE sentence in a four paragraph post about blocking being the key to winning tomorrow, and the alternatives to him in all of ONE other. Not sure how that's spam.

We hear it from every team every week, sometimes as false bravado and sometimes sincerely: We'll win if we avoid turnovers. This is the first time I can recall when I both firmly believed that yet seriously worried we wouldn't be ABLE to avoid those turnovers. Or run on a bad run D. Or keep our QB healthy. There's more to football than just getting as many deep receiving threats as possible, then blitzing on D.

MOtorboat

11-16-2013, 10:43 PM

There's a large and real difference between one of the teams, if not leagues, best blocking TEs and one who's blocking is pitiful. If our QB weren't limping, we hadn't given up a strip-sack for points in our last three games and the Chiefs didn't lead the NFL in forcing turnovers it might not be a big deal, but since all those things are documented indisputable facts, it is. Julius Thomas is not our offenses indispensable piece, PFM is.

We hear it from every team every week, sometimes as false bravado and sometimes sincerely: We'll win if we avoid turnovers. This is the first time I can recall when I both firmly believed that yet seriously worried we wouldn't be ABLE to avoid those turnovers. Or run on a bad run D. Or keep our QB healthy. There's more to football than just getting as many deep receiving threats as possible, then blitzing on D.

And removing one of our weapons from the field doesn't guarantee Manning doesn't get hit. Keeping him out there doesn't guarantee that he does get injured.

You've used causation the entire week and causation isn't there. In fact, it's not even logical. And you've spammed the board.

Joel

11-16-2013, 11:07 PM

And removing one of our weapons from the field doesn't guarantee Manning doesn't get hit. Keeping him out there doesn't guarantee that he does get injured.

You've used causation the entire week and causation isn't there. In fact, it's not even logical. And you've spammed the board.
It's more probability and quantity than strict causality, but works causally, too: Against 3 Pro Bowl pass rushers it's practically guaranteed he'll get hit SOME, but LESS if our blocking greatly improves. Otherwise, once again, why have any TEs; why not just go 5-wide every down? Why not start the best running and receiving RB we've got (or none) whether he can pick up blitzes or not?

Clark's given up a blindside strip-sack in our last three games, costing us points each time; with two Pro Bowlers coming straight at him on a team with the most takeaways, I won't say it's CERTAIN he'll have (at least) one more unless he gets help, but it's pretty freakin' likely, yes? And every time Manning's hit there's a chance he's injured (or rather, further injured; it's already happened more than once,) so reducing the total number of hits he takes from a team that's marched to 9-0 hitting QBs and forcing turnovers is a very desirable thing. I'd rather run it down their throat and avoid the whole issue, but that takes blocking, too.

I could (sort of) understand arguing JT will step it up this week; there's not much supporting evidence, but it would at least acknowledge the need. Implying it doesn't matter either way is harder to comprehend.

Now, if ya'll want to talk about something else in a thread on breaking down the Chiefs, fine; again, I only mentioned TEs twice (and JT only once) in a four paragraph response, and only because blocking is how I think we break down the Chiefs. If the point is this isn't an Orange Julius thread and shouldn't be made one, I wholeheartedly agree and will be more than happy to not mention him again in the thread.

MOtorboat

11-16-2013, 11:08 PM

It's more probability and quantity than strict causality, but works causally, too: Against 3 Pro Bowl pass rushers it's practically guaranteed he'll get hit SOME, but LESS if our blocking greatly improves. Otherwise, once again, why have any TEs; why not just go 5-wide every down? Why not start the best running and receiving RB we've got (or none) whether he can pick up blitzes or not?

Clark's given up a blindside strip-sack in our last three games, costing us points each time; with two Pro Bowlers coming straight at him on a team with the most takeaways, I won't say it's CERTAIN he'll have (at least) one more unless he gets help, but it's pretty freakin' likely, yes? And every time Manning's hit there's a chance he's injured (or rather, further injured; it's already happened more than once,) so reducing the total number of hits he takes from a team that's marched to 9-0 hitting QBs and forcing turnovers is a very desirable thing.

I could (sort of) understand arguing JT will step it up this week; there's not much supporting evidence, but it would at least acknowledge the need. Implying it doesn't matter either way is harder to comprehend.

No. Clark gave up ONE strip-sack. He gave up ONE. Yes, there were three, but not all were given up by the same guy.

Watch the damn games.

Poet

11-16-2013, 11:25 PM

I just want you guys to destroy the Chiefs.

Joel

11-16-2013, 11:42 PM

No. Clark gave up ONE strip-sack. He gave up ONE. Yes, there were three, but not all were given up by the same guy.

Watch the damn games.
Um... WHAT?! Clark's still 75, right? So which two of the following three sacks 75 gave up do you contend Clark DIDN'T allow?

1) Mathis' http://www.colts.com/news/article-1/Robert-Mathis%E2%80%99-safety-changes-momentum-and-produces-a-lead-the-Colts-would-not-lose-in-39-33-win/9f0ed0d6-8202-4aa0-a9a9-68ab6206ed4b
2) Orakpos http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap2000000270565/Manning-fumble-recovered-by-Orakpo or
3) Williams' http://www.chargers.com/multimedia/videos/Williams-Strip-Sacks-Manning/61b848de-de61-4b25-b38d-dce882417991

I see 75s man beat him, hit PFM from behind and force a fumble THREE TIMES in as many games; same thing I saw "watch[ing] the games." A safety+2 short TD drives. Who did YOU see give up the strip-sacks...?

Now, after Orakpos strip-sack I didn't see anyone—including Clark—allow another in that game, but watching it revealed why: http://www.gettyimages.no/detail/news-photo/joel-dreessen-of-the-denver-broncos-blocks-against-brian-news-photo/187127755

Simple Jaded

11-19-2013, 05:19 PM

Ravage!!!

11-19-2013, 06:32 PM

Al Wilson 4 Mayor

11-19-2013, 06:41 PM

Dreesen just showed that he's not anywhere in the same UNIVERSE as far as being a passing threat.

FACT: Dreesen doesn't beat Berry for that TD.

The Commentators quoted Manning saying that he just can't justify keeping Thomas off the field with his ability to make plays. Maybe Joel needs to talk with Peyton so that Joel can give Manning a good education on what's best for this offense.

I was talking to my son on Sunday, and there was only one TE we could think of that can run like Julius does. There are not many TE's that would have scored on that 79 yard TD against the Chargers. He's every bit as athletic as Shannon was.

Ravage!!!

11-19-2013, 06:46 PM

I was talking to my son on Sunday, and there was only one TE we could think of that can run like Julius does. There are not many TE's that would have scored on that 79 yard TD against the Chargers. He's every bit as athletic as Shannon was.

That catch, spin, and run up the sidelines reminded me of Sharpes catch and run for the long TD in 2000 when he played for the Ravens.

Joel

11-20-2013, 10:56 AM

I think Thomas has earned the starting job, he's more than just a little better than Dreessen as a receiver and as long as he's healthy he is just gonna have to learn to block better while putting up 80-yard catch-and-run TD's.

The only real question is whether or not Slick used the apostrophe correctly.
The apostrophe was fine; the question is whether Clark can consistently block well enough to justify starting a TE who blocks very poorly. Let's be reasonable here: After a guy said two of those three strip-sacks weren't on Clark and (again) told me to "watch the games," then I posted video of Clark giving up ALL THREE strip-sacks, why are ya'll busting MY chops? Clark had a good game Sunday, and I commend him for that, but it was just one game against costly blunders in THREE others. It doesn't matter how good JT catches and runs if Osweiler's our QB; there's more to football than catching passes.

Dreesen just showed that he's not anywhere in the same UNIVERSE as far as being a passing threat.

FACT: Dreesen doesn't beat Berry for that TD.

The Commentators quoted Manning saying that he just can't justify keeping Thomas off the field with his ability to make plays. Maybe Joel needs to talk with Peyton so that Joel can give Manning a good education on what's best for this offense.
How's that a "fact?"? It's opinion about a hypothetical match up that never occurred; speculation about what might've been is many things, but not fact. Could JT make the block Ball spun inside off of for his first TD?

Ravage!!!

11-20-2013, 11:22 AM

Yes Joel, I understand the difference between a fact and hypothetical. I do forget that you take everything SOOOOO very literally. Do you seem to understand that it is not necessary to respond to EVERY comment in a thread individually?

Let me clarify for you. Given EVERYTHING we know about the players, their skillsets, and the FACT that Kansas City has not allowed a touchdown to a TE all season long, I find it to be HIGHLY unlikely that Dreesen would not have been able to beat Berry for the TD. I know its a FACT that the Broncos lined up in that formation to give Thomas a 1-n-1 match-up against Berry based on the defenses that KC had been showing, and feel very comfortable in saying that the Broncos would NOT have lined up for the same match-up had Dreesen been on the field in place of Thomas.

I know its a FACT that Manning has stated that he can't justify sitting Thomas because of his skillset and playmaking ability. Considering we have seen QBs throughout the NFL survive with weaker OLs, and the fact that Manning is a bit more knowledgeable in these matters than you (you lost a LOT of credibility in assessing the NFL when stating that Marino couldn't survive in today's NFL), he'll be fine. Peyton has a better handle on the strengths and weaknesses of his offensive teammates than you or I do, that he is well informed as to how to handle those strengths as well as weaknesses.

NO ONE is saying that Thomas is a good blocker. However, your constant riding this "Dreesen must start to watch our glass QB" horse is not only inaccurate, but complete exaggeration. Now I'm sure you'll keep whipping the hindquarters until there is another sack, then you will raise your arms up in triumph as if you had somehow been vilified. But I'm very confident that Manning and Co. can evaluate the situation at a much higher knowledge base than what you possess.

MOtorboat

11-20-2013, 12:00 PM

claymore

11-20-2013, 12:07 PM

Morambar_in_Tx is beatin Mo like Mo beats his ding dong. :scared:

Ravage!!!

11-20-2013, 12:08 PM

Joel

11-20-2013, 12:35 PM

Hey Joel, did you see Dreesen get blown up every time he tried to block Sunday, or are you conveniently ignoring that?

If it wasn't for a nifty spin move, Montee Ball would have been tackled on the 5 and not had a touchdown thanks to Dreesen who put an Ole block on.
I already posted the video of Dreesen locking up Hali on that play, but here it is again: http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap2000000283606/Ball-1-yard-TD

Did you see the videos of Clarks THREE strip-sacks posted after you insisted he only had one? This thread stopped dead for, like, two days after that, and you've yet to comment on it. Busy not-watching games?

wait, he was giving credit for Dreesen on that play.
Because I "watched" it. Despite Collinsworths insistence Dreesen blew the play because Tamba Hali pushed him back, the FACT is Ball went right by Hali, who didn't make the tackle because he was engaged with Dreesen. And, yeah, call something an all caps "FACT" and that's how I'll take it. Ya'll keep denying what happened, or talking about what might've happened; I'll keep talking about what actually DID happen.

Ravage!!!

11-20-2013, 12:44 PM

Because I "watched" it; maybe we should see it again: http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap2000000283606/Ball-1-yard-TD Despite Collinsworths insistence Dreesen blew the play because Tamba Hali pushed him back, the FACT is Ball went right by Hali, who didn't make the tackle because he was engaged with Dreesen. And, yeah, call something an all caps "FACT" and that's how I'll take it.

Ya'll keep saying things that happened didn't happen, or talking about what might've happened, and I'll keep talking about things that actually DID happen.

Yes, I believe it to be a FACT that Dreesen doesn't beat Berry on that slant route based on the FACT that he doesnt' have the skillset Thomas does to get it done.

As far as the rest, HORSE SHIT. ALL you do is give hypotheticals on how the OL can't handle this and can't handle that. How Dreesen is the best option because Thomas can't block. ALLLL you do is speculate for the worst, and now you are trying to tell us that all you talk about are things that DID happen????? Your ENTIRE posting career is based on negative hypotheticals and guesses.

I would guess that they are more hopes and wants considering how much you dislike Manning.

MOtorboat

11-20-2013, 12:58 PM

I already posted the video of Dreesen locking up Hali on that play, but here it is again: http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap2000000283606/Ball-1-yard-TD

Did you see the videos of Clarks THREE strip-sacks posted after you insisted he only had one? This thread stopped dead for, like, two days after that, and you've yet to comment on it. Busy not-watching games?

Because I "watched" it. Despite Collinsworths insistence Dreesen blew the play because Tamba Hali pushed him back, the FACT is Ball went right by Hali, who didn't make the tackle because he was engaged with Dreesen. And, yeah, call something an all caps "FACT" and that's how I'll take it. Ya'll keep denying what happened, or talking about what might've happened; I'll keep talking about what actually DID happen.

So, Dreesen getting knocked three yards into the offensive backfield was designed? Is that what you're trying to claim? Ball was supposed to go off tackle. Dreesen gets manhandled because he's the best tight end blocker Denver has, and Ball has to cut it inside with a spin move, and you're claiming that's designed?

Whatever.

My apologies. You were right about Clark on those three plays.

slim

11-20-2013, 01:03 PM

Morambar_in_Tx is beatin Mo like Mo beats his ding dong. :scared:

It's embarrassing.

Joel

11-20-2013, 01:22 PM

Yes, I believe it to be a FACT that Dreesen doesn't beat Berry on that slant route based on the FACT that he doesnt' have the skillset Thomas does to get it done.
You can pretty much stop after "I believe," because from then on we're talking about opinion, not fact. If it didn't happen it's not a fact.

As far as the rest, HORSE SHIT. ALL you do is give hypotheticals on how the OL can't handle this and can't handle that. How Dreesen is the best option because Thomas can't block. ALLLL you do is speculate for the worst, and now you are trying to tell us that all you talk about are things that DID happen????? Your ENTIRE posting career is based on negative hypotheticals and guesses.
It's documented fact (with video) JT's a poor blocker, hence Mannings pick against Indy: Thomas was pushed back FAR more than Hali pushed back Dreesen, right into Manning, in FACT, whose arm the defender grabbed during the throw to force a champagne cork Indy easily ran under for the pick.

It's documented fact (with video) Clark gave up strip-sacks in three consecutive games (starting with the one cited above.)

Here's the thing though: There's nothing wrong with speculation in itself; the problem is saying, "FACT: [Lots of speculation]" Sure, I speculate a lot; we all do, but I carefully avoid using "fact" rhetorically, for a very good reason: Because fact is fact and opinion opinion, and never the twain shall meet.

I would guess that they are more hopes and wants considering how much you dislike Manning.
My only problem with Manning is his losing playoff record, but there's a purportedly an easy way for him to both satisfy and silence me.

So, Dreesen getting knocked three yards into the offensive backfield was designed? Is that what you're trying to claim? Ball was supposed to go off tackle. Dreesen gets manhandled because he's the best tight end blocker Denver has, and Ball has to cut it inside with a spin move, and you're claiming that's designed?
Whatever.
I'm claiming Ball went right by Hali and Hali couldn't make the tackle, because Dreesen locked him up: That's what HAPPENED. Whether the play was designed to go off tackle or one of those cutbacks we popularized with Terrell Davis and still use as much as anyone is something only our coaches can say with certainty.

My apologies. You were right about Clark on those three plays.
Fair enough then. Hopefully his last game and the one against Dallas is more representative of what he'll produce going forward, but, especially once the playoffs start, we can't afford even ONE bad game from him.

Ravage!!!

11-20-2013, 01:24 PM

I already posted the video of Dreesen locking up Hali on that play, but here it is again: http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap2000000283606/Ball-1-yard-TD

Joel, I honestly don't know WHAT play you are seeing when you see this goal line play, but if you are TRYING to give Dreesen CREDIT , then you are watching it with blinders on. Dreesen is COMPLETELY dominated and pushed 3 yards into the backfield. Thomas could have EASILY done as Dreesen did on this play and you are reaching WAY into your ass to defend Dreesen for your own purposes. Are you SERIOUSLY trying to tell us that you don't think Thomas could have done as well as Dreesen on this, seriously? You are trying to tell the "commentator" (and ex football player) that he was WRONG by pointing out the Hali won that battle? Dreesen did NOT win tht match. He did NOT make the block, and he did NOT keep Hali from making the play. Hali didn't make the play because Hali simply didn't see the play. Ball made a VERY Good spin, a NEEDED spin, because Dreesen was BLOWN UP and destroyed.

If you want to use GOOD examples on how Dreesen is "needed" to block, I would suggest you put this one away under lock and key and NEVER bring it out again....because it RUINS your case.

Because I "watched" it. Despite Collinsworths insistence Dreesen blew the play because Tamba Hali pushed him back, the FACT is Ball went right by Hali, who didn't make the tackle because he was engaged with Dreesen. And, yeah, call something an all caps "FACT" and that's how I'll take it. Ya'll keep denying what happened, or talking about what might've happened; I'll keep talking about what actually DID happen.

yeah, I've seen you try to use FACT in this sentence and you've proved that what you consider to be "fact" is in FACT.. wrong. I know you are VERY VERY literal.

But let me just say, its a FACT that Dreesen didn't make a good block on Hali, or even a mediocre block on that goal line, and its a FACT that Dreesen would not have beat Berry on the slant.

Joel

11-20-2013, 01:44 PM

Joel, I honestly don't know WHAT play you are seeing when you see this goal line play, but if you are TRYING to give Dreesen CREDIT , then you are watching it with blinders on. Dreesen is COMPLETELY dominated and pushed 3 yards into the backfield. Thomas could have EASILY done as Dreesen did on this play and you are reaching WAY into your ass to defend Dreesen for your own purposes. Are you SERIOUSLY trying to tell us that you don't think Thomas could have done as well as Dreesen on this, seriously? You are trying to tell the "commentator" (and ex football player) that he was WRONG by pointing out the Hali won that battle? Dreesen did NOT win tht match. He did NOT make the block, and he did NOT keep Hali from making the play. Hali didn't make the play because Hali simply didn't see the play. Ball made a VERY Good spin, a NEEDED spin, because Dreesen was BLOWN UP and destroyed.

If you want to use GOOD examples on how Dreesen is "needed" to block, I would suggest you put this one away under lock and key and NEVER bring it out again....because it RUINS your case.

yeah, I've seen you try to use FACT in this sentence and you've proved that what you consider to be "fact" is in FACT.. wrong. I know you are VERY VERY literal.

But let me just say, its a FACT that Dreesen didn't make a good block on Hali, or even a mediocre block on that goal line, and its a FACT that Dreesen would not have beat Berry on the slant.
It is a FACT Ball went right by Hali, yes? Hali saw Ball spin off of Dreesen; he tried to lunge as Ball went by him for the TD: He just COULDN'T. Because he was locked up with Dreesen. Yes, Hali pushed him back a fair amount, which I never disputed, but "dominated"? If he'd dominated Dreesen he'd have made the tackle, probably would've taken Ball down with the guy supposedly failing to block him at all.

Here's how that would've looked: http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap2000000266910/Manning-intecepted-by-Angerer THAT'S a defensive lineman dominating a TE blocker, but it's not Joel Dreesen: It's Julius Thomas. So, no, I don't think Thomas would've done as well as Dreesen; Erik Walden's nowhere as good as Tamba Hali, yet Dreesen still blocked better than Thomas.

Ravage!!!

11-20-2013, 04:33 PM

It is a FACT Ball went right by Hali, yes? Hali saw Ball spin off of Dreesen; he tried to lunge as Ball went by him for the TD: He just COULDN'T. Because he was locked up with Dreesen. Yes, Hali pushed him back a fair amount, which I never disputed, but "dominated"? If he'd dominated Dreesen he'd have made the tackle, probably would've taken Ball down with the guy supposedly failing to block him at all.

Here's how that would've looked: http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap2000000266910/Manning-intecepted-by-Angerer THAT'S a defensive lineman dominating a TE blocker, but it's not Joel Dreesen: It's Julius Thomas. So, no, I don't think Thomas would've done as well as Dreesen; Erik Walden's nowhere as good as Tamba Hali, yet Dreesen still blocked better than Thomas.

Hali DOMINATED Dreesen on that play, PERIOD. COmpletely and TOTALLY dominated him on that play. He pushed Dreesen STRAIGHT back 3 yrrds off the LoS from the SNAP of the ball on a goal line offense. He didn't swim move, he didn't go around him, he fired of the ball and pushed Dreesen STRAIGHT BACK, in 3 steps....as fast as it took for Manning to get Ball the pigskin, Hali was in the backfield. That is DOMINATED and Dreesen Was NOT the reason he didn't make the play. IF THAT is what you THINK a successful block/execution looks like, then you have absolutely NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO business telling people how the OL should "change" things. You have NOOOOOO business telling us who is a better OL between Pears, Harris, or Clark because you are making it VERY VERY obvious that you don't know what a successful block is or is not. Your ability to analyze blocking has zero, zilch, no credibility whatsoever.

you've pulled a Zam on this, and are now just doing what you can to tread and keep your head above water trying justifying a TERRIBLE case for yourself. Almost, but not quite, as bad as your "marino would fail in today's NFL."

Joel

11-20-2013, 05:36 PM

Ravage!!!

11-20-2013, 05:44 PM

I wouldn't call it a successful block, but not a failure either; again, if you want a FAILED block, check out a MUCH weaker player than Hali shoving back Julius Thomas AND GETTING FREE to force an interception that handed Indy 3 pts. If you want to argue that's worse than getting shoved back a lot BUT holding the block on a play that scored us 7 pts, fine, but my schools math classes taught -3<7.

I DEFINITELY wouldn't say the only reason Hali didn't tackle Ball was because he just didn't see him; that's not just a slam on Dreesen, but on Hali. Hali saw him well enough to reach out a hand as Ball went by, but that's ALL he could do: The other arm was pushing Dreesen, who pushed back enough Hali couldn't just release and slam down Ball. Watch the video again and tell me that's not what happened.

Honestly, the argument's been reduced to "Dreesen only blocked a Pro Bowler slightly better than JT blocked a journeyman, therefore JT is better" and I'M the one rationalizing? I never denied Thomas is a better RECEIVER than Dreesen (though Dreesen IS good, just not at Thomas' level,) but won't sit here debating whether he's a better BLOCKER than Dreesen (or pretty much anyone else.)

No one has debated on whether or not Thomas is as good of a blocker. YOU keep trying to say that the block was successful, and THAT is not just rationalizing, that is BLINDNESS. It's denial. It's absurd. That wasn't a block, it was barely a speedbump. You are using an example of Thomas blocking and having to hold a block longer on a pass play, while Dreesen just had to get in the way for a run (on the 1 yard at that)... and DID NOT DO THAT. Thomas COULD have gotten in the way as much as Dreesen did on that play. Which is the point. ANYONE could have gotten a better block than Dreesen did on that play. Your comparison example is a FAIL, imo.

I get you have to try and hold your position, but you need a better video clip. That was terribl..HORRIBLe...block by Dreesen. Dreadful.

Dreesen is an "ok" receiver. He's not good, and he's not even close. We saw him "attempting" to receive in the Chiefs game.

If your point is the same as it's been for weeks in saying that Dreesen is a "better" blocker....well.. no crap. But he's not such a good blocker that it justifies keeping Dreesen in over Thomas......which is really the point. Even Manning acknowledged that very thing. Sure Thomas has weaknesses, but the weaknesses aren't large compared to the positives that he gives to the scoring potential of our Broncos.

Joel

11-20-2013, 07:08 PM

If Dreesen didn't get in Halis way, why didn't Hali tackle Ball? Because the three-time Pro Bowler didn't see Ball spin off Dreesens block RIGHT IN FRONT OF HIM, then go RIGHT BY HIM for the TD? Even though he reached for him but didn't get there? And why didn't he get to a guy right next to him? I'm not calling it a successful block when Dreesen got pushed back that far, but it wasn't a failure either. He looked pretty good blocking against the 'Skins, good enough that's all they expected him to do when he caught that TD pass on 4th and G.

If you want an example other than KC, try page 1 of the thread: Dreesen blocking a Pro Bowler who'd previously gotten through our LT for a strip-sack: http://www.gettyimages.no/detail/news-photo/joel-dreessen-of-the-denver-broncos-blocks-against-brian-news-photo/187127755

Simple Jaded

11-21-2013, 09:21 AM

Ravage!!!

11-21-2013, 12:17 PM

If Dreesen didn't get in Halis way, why didn't Hali tackle Ball?

I stopped reading after this. Again, what is your point, because I think YOU have lost what you are trying to argue. Are you REALLY .. REALLY..trying to say that was a successful block in ANY sense of the word? Because, trust me on this, in the grading film day....Dreesen got an F on this play. I PROMISE you that.

There is NOTHING... zero...zilch... good about that block. Hali made did HIS assignment, he did HIS job, and that was the blow up the block and Penetrate the back field. That forces RBs to take wider turns to the corner, and or stops the hole, allowing the LBS to make the tackle. WHY Didn't Hali make the tackle? Several reasons. 1 being as simple as he probably didn't expect to be 3 yards ito the backfield and have to reach BACK for the RB. 2, his job is to take UP blockers and the LBs to fill those holes. 3 Reaction time to the RB making a move in a direction that wasn't in the "draw up" of the play. NONE of which has ANYTHING to do with Dreesen and that HORRENDOUS attempt at a block.

If you are trying to argue that Dreesen is a better blocker than Thomas, THAT has already been agreed upon. Stop trying ot make that point because no one is arguing with that. But that isn't what you are trying to argue. You are ACTUALLY, for some VERY odd reason, trying to argue that Dreesen made a successful block on THIS play. It wasn't, but ANY definition of the word. An F.

I'm sure he made other good blocks. Great. Good for him. Cheers. I'm bettting Thomas made other better blocks than the one you keep trying to use as your example against him. I also know that Dreesen isn't near the talent that Thomas is, and despite his "brilliant" blocking abilities, isn't going to keep Thomas off the field.

Joel

11-21-2013, 02:40 PM

If the Broncos insisted on starting a better blocker Shannon Sharpe's HoF career never has a chance to develop into what came to be a very accomplished career.......a career that also included BLOCKING for a 2000-yard rusher.
Blocking for a 2000 yd rusher makes Sharpe a weak blocker? :confused: Our CURRENT backfield's averaging 3.6 yds/carry; are you SURE you want to compare Orange Julius' run blocking to Sharpes for Davis? Sharpe was as phenomenal receiving as one would expect of Sterlings brother, but that didn't make him a useless blocker (useless run blockers don't stick around long on Shannys teams.) I don't think much of the racial polemic at the end, but this guys statistical analysis of Sharpes blocking is pretty good: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/muhammad-ali-hasan/shannon-sharpe-the-best-b_b_754948.html

If JT blocked like Sharpe we wouldn't be having this dicussion (and Denver probably would've beaten Indy.)

I stopped reading after this. Again, what is your point, because I think YOU have lost what you are trying to argue. Are you REALLY .. REALLY..trying to say that was a successful block in ANY sense of the word? Because, trust me on this, in the grading film day....Dreesen got an F on this play. I PROMISE you that.
It was a good enough block because his man couldn't make the play. That doesn't mean it's great to be shoved back, but Hali shoves back lots of guys; taking him out of the play is a win for a TE.

There is NOTHING... zero...zilch... good about that block. Hali made did HIS assignment, he did HIS job, and that was the blow up the block and Penetrate the back field. That forces RBs to take wider turns to the corner, and or stops the hole, allowing the LBS to make the tackle. WHY Didn't Hali make the tackle? Several reasons. 1 being as simple as he probably didn't expect to be 3 yards ito the backfield and have to reach BACK for the RB. 2, his job is to take UP blockers and the LBs to fill those holes. 3 Reaction time to the RB making a move in a direction that wasn't in the "draw up" of the play. NONE of which has ANYTHING to do with Dreesen and that HORRENDOUS attempt at a block.
Did he force Ball to take wider turns to the corner, or stop the hole? The hole Ball ran through for a TD? Allowing the LBs to make the tackle? You know Hali's not a DE, right? Hali WAS one of those "LBs to fill those holes" (are you saying Ball scored because the LB who was supposed to fill the hole just wasn't there?)

Here's the bottom line: The only guys at the point of attack were Ball, Dreesen and Hali; Ball scored a TD because Hali couldn't do anything but make a unsuccessful one-armed lunge. WHY?!

If you are trying to argue that Dreesen is a better blocker than Thomas, THAT has already been agreed upon. Stop trying ot make that point because no one is arguing with that. But that isn't what you are trying to argue. You are ACTUALLY, for some VERY odd reason, trying to argue that Dreesen made a successful block on THIS play. It wasn't, but ANY definition of the word. An F.
Seems like that's EXACTLY what people are trying to argue: They can't build up Thomas' blocking, so they're tearing down Dreesens instead.

I'm sure he made other good blocks. Great. Good for him. Cheers. I'm bettting Thomas made other better blocks than the one you keep trying to use as your example against him. I also know that Dreesen isn't near the talent that Thomas is, and despite his "brilliant" blocking abilities, isn't going to keep Thomas off the field.
I did post a pic of Dreesen making a good block against Washington (maybe you should've kept reading.) Feel free to share any pics or video of a great block from Thomas; there's little I'd like to see more.

11-21-2013, 02:42 PM

Blocking for a 2000 yd rusher makes Sharpe a weak blocker? :confused: Our CURRENT backfield's averaging 3.6 yds/carry; are you SURE you want to compare Orange Julius' run blocking to Sharpes for Davis? Sharpe was as phenomenal receiving as one would expect of Sterlings brother, but that didn't make him a useless blocker (useless run blockers don't stick around long on Shannys teams.) I don't think much of the racial polemic at the end, but this guys statistical analysis of Sharpes blocking is pretty good: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/muhammad-ali-hasan/shannon-sharpe-the-best-b_b_754948.html If JT blocked like Sharpe we wouldn't be having this dicussion (and Denver probably would've beaten Indy.) It was a good enough block because his man couldn't make the play. That doesn't mean it's great to be shoved back, but Hali shoves back lots of guys; taking him out of the play is a win for a TE. Did he force Ball to take wider turns to the corner, or stop the hole? The hole Ball ran through for a TD? Allowing the LBs to make the tackle? You know Hali's not a DE, right? Hali WAS one of those "LBs to fill those holes" (are you saying Ball scored because the LB who was supposed to fill the hole just wasn't there?) Here's the bottom line: The only guys at the point of attack were Ball, Dreesen and Hali; Ball scored a TD because Hali couldn't do anything but make a unsuccessful one-armed lunge. WHY?! Seems like that's EXACTLY what people are trying to argue: They can't build up Thomas' blocking, so they're tearing down Dreesens instead. I did post a pic of Dreesen making a good block against Washington (maybe you should've kept reading.) Feel free to share any pics or video of a great block from Thomas; there's little I'd like to see more. The running back's stats are not the tell all of the blocking ability of a TE. The blocking ability of a TE does not dictate the success of a RB.

Joel

11-21-2013, 03:24 PM

The running back's stats are not the tell all of the blocking ability of a TE. The blocking ability of a TE does not dictate the success of a RB.
True, but there is a correlation, and it's about the only statistical means of evaluating ANY blocking; the most frustrating thing about blocking is that the most crucial part of the game is also hardest to measure, not least because it's the most team-based part: Four linemen and a TE can do their job perfectly and the play STILL gets blown up in the backfield if the other blockers whiffs. The best we can do is compare results, and Jadeds reference to Davis' 2000 yd season is both valid and customary. It's also why comparing THAT result to our current 3.6 yd average makes JT appear a much worse blocker than Sharpe (as he happens to be.)

I didn't bring it up though, so if it's a problem take it up with the person who did (and pretty much everyone who's ever professionally analyzed blocking; maybe start with DVOA over at Football Outsiders.)

Ravage!!!

11-21-2013, 04:06 PM

It was a good enough block because his man couldn't make the play. That doesn't mean it's great to be shoved back, but Hali shoves back lots of guys; taking him out of the play is a win for a TE.
Joel, It was not EVEN a BLOCK! Dreesen did NOT "take" him out of the play. If ANYTHING, Hali took himself out of the play because he pushed Dreesen so far BACK into the backfield.

I don't know if you are INTENTIONALLY being obtuse, or purely blind as to the facts. It's like talkign with Zam on this one.

Did he force Ball to take wider turns to the corner, or stop the hole? The hole Ball ran through for a TD? Allowing the LBs to make the tackle? You know Hali's not a DE, right? Hali WAS one of those "LBs to fill those holes" (are you saying Ball scored because the LB who was supposed to fill the hole just wasn't there?)
ON that play, Hali was hand on the ground, right? The 3-4 OLB on a goal line defense, hand in the dirt, isn't playing LB (yes, the Chiefs play a hybrid 34/43), he's playing DE.

Your question of "did Ball have to swing out wider"... NO!! He pushed Dreesen SOOO far back into the back field, Ball had to SPIN up into the hole that was LEFT because Hali complete DESTROYED Dreesen. Dreesen didn't hold ground at ALL, and that was a FAIL of a block. I'm sorry you don't understand enough to get it, and I'm sorry you only learned football through books and statistical analysis, but you are SOOO wrong on this that it's embarrassing for you.

Here's the bottom line: The only guys at the point of attack were Ball, Dreesen and Hali; Ball scored a TD because Hali couldn't do anything but make a unsuccessful one-armed lunge. WHY?!
Simple... Ball made a play because Dreesen did NOT do his job. SOmetimes, another player makes up for the complete LAPSE of another. Thankfully, Ball did just that.

Seems like that's EXACTLY what people are trying to argue: They can't build up Thomas' blocking, so they're tearing down Dreesens instead.
Nice twist. The ONLY thing people have pointed out to you is the absurdity of you claiming that was a good block. YOU are the one that came to defense of a shit blocking job by sprinkling less stinky shit.

This entire discussion happened because YOU were trying to put down Thomas' blocking sooo much, that you asked the question "Could Thomas have made THAT block on Hali on the goalline"...the answer to that question is YES! On THAT play, ANYONE could have made as good of a block as Dreesen did. Thomas ABSOLUTELY could have made as good of a block since that was NOT EVEN CLOSE to being a block.

Now, if you want to point out that Dreesen made other good blocks on other plays or against other players in other games...fantastic. Whoop-d-do. Great for Dreesen. I can turn around and show a ton of catches and runs that Thomas has made that Dreesen could only dream of making.

I did post a pic of Dreesen making a good block against Washington (maybe you should've kept reading.) Feel free to share any pics or video of a great block from Thomas; there's little I'd like to see more.

Why? You've already pointed out th bad blocks and I pointed out a HORRIBL block by Dreesen that YOU ACTUALLY THINK IS GOOD!! You woudln't know what a good/bad block looks like anyway.

I telll you what, you look at better blocks by Dreesen, and I'll look at the better catchs/runs by Thomas, and we'll both see what the other player does BETTER than the other. I promise I won't do this though. I won't see a crappy catch/run by Thomas, wrap it up in snot, smother it with potpourri, and try to sell it to you as a burrito.

Joel

11-21-2013, 11:00 PM

We can go back and forth all day; the bottom line is Ball went RIGHT BY a multiple-time Pro Bowler because Hali could do no more than try and FAIL to lunge with one arm. Either Tamba Hali took himself out of a play lined up for a goal line stand and let a rookie second stringer blow right through the middle, or the guy locked up on him gave him no choice. It ain't like Dreesen was on his butt or Hali was free to make a play.

Why? You've already pointed out th bad blocks and I pointed out a HORRIBL block by Dreesen that YOU ACTUALLY THINK IS GOOD!! You woudln't know what a good/bad block looks like anyway.
Why did I post the pic of Dreesen making a block after I'd already posted it once? Because you said I'm only looking at ONE Dreesen block, so presumably you didn't see the first post.

I telll you what, you look at better blocks by Dreesen, and I'll look at the better catchs/runs by Thomas, and we'll both see what the other player does BETTER than the other. I promise I won't do this though. I won't see a crappy catch/run by Thomas, wrap it up in snot, smother it with potpourri, and try to sell it to you as a burrito.
Yeah, that's another problem: The pretense Dreesen's some awful receiver with mittens for hands, even though he racked up dozens of catches and multiple TDs every year playing behind a Pro Bowler in Houston. Dreesen can't block, Dreesen can't catch, Shannon Sharpe can't block; it'd be easier to have faith in Orange Julius if his cheering section gave more examples of his excellence and spent less time explaining what's WRONG with EVERYONE ELSE. There's a reason he told his college coach he wanted to be a WR; it remains to be seen if he's actually a TE.

MOtorboat

11-21-2013, 11:04 PM

Dude leads the league in touchdowns and is posting Jimmy Graham/Shannon Sharpe/Tony Gonzalez numbers, and somebody is ACTUALLY BITCHING that he's seeing playing time.

Seriously. Think about that.

Joel

11-21-2013, 11:11 PM

Dude leads the league in touchdowns and is posting Jimmy Graham/Shannon Sharpe/Tony Gonzalez numbers, and somebody is ACTUALLY BITCHING that he's seeing playing time.

Seriously. Think about that.
Not as long as Clark (and the rest of the line) does his job keeping Manning upright (though 2.9 yds/carry against a bottom ten run D is still inexcusable.) If his receiving's all that matters though why not line him up in the slot and compare him to Randy Moss or Jerry Rice? Seriously, why would anyone want a TE who CANNOT BLOCK? Is there some obscure NFL rule that says defenses can't put a safety or dimeback on a big WR if he's lined up at TE? Did anyone tell Eric Berry?

MOtorboat

11-21-2013, 11:17 PM

Not as long as Clark (and the rest of the line) does his job keeping Manning upright (though 2.9 yds/carry against a bottom ten run D is still inexcusable.) If his receiving's all that matters though why not line him up in the slot and compare him to Randy Moss or Jerry Rice? Seriously, why would anyone want a TE who CANNOT BLOCK? Is there some obscure NFL rule that says defenses can't put a safety or dimeback on a big WR if he's lined up at TE? Did anyone tell Eric Berry?

Don't know what to tell you, other than it's just mind-boggling that anyone would complain about what Thomas has done this year.

Of course, we found out he's every bit the blocker any other tight end on this team is, but you don't want to admit that, you just want to bitch about one of the best years for a tight end in team history.

Joel

11-22-2013, 12:13 AM

Don't know what to tell you, other than it's just mind-boggling that anyone would complain about what Thomas has done this year.

Of course, we found out he's every bit the blocker any other tight end on this team is, but you don't want to admit that, you just want to bitch about one of the best years for a tight end in team history.
Julius Thomas is "every bit the blocker any other TE on this team is"?! Contrariness is one thing, but... wow....

Hey, Ravage, remember this:
If you are trying to argue that Dreesen is a better blocker than Thomas, THAT has already been agreed upon. Stop trying ot make that point because no one is arguing with that.

Seems like that's EXACTLY what people are trying to argue: They can't build up Thomas' blocking, so they're tearing down Dreesens instead.
Yeah, don't look now, but someone just said POINT BLANK Julius Thomas is not only as good a blocker as Dreesen, he's as good a blocker as ANY Denver TE. Fine: I showed ya'll mine, now ya'll show me ya'lls.

MOtorboat

11-22-2013, 12:17 AM

Julius Thomas is "every bit the blocker any other TE on this team is"?! Contrariness is one thing, but... wow....

Hey, Ravage, remember this:

Yeah, don't look now, but someone just said POINT BLANK Julius Thomas is not only as good a blocker as Dreesen, he's as good a blocker as ANY Denver TE. Fine: I showed ya'll mine, now ya'll show me ya'lls.

You consider "good blocking" getting blown off the line three yards backwards, so I'm not too worried about your evaluation of the line.

Joel

11-22-2013, 12:32 AM

You consider "good blocking" getting blown off the line three yards backwards, so I'm not too worried about your evaluation of the line.
Never said it was good, I said it wasn't a failure. The BEST I've said of it (once) was it was "good enough." Since the only thing preventing a three time Pro Bowler tackling Ball for a loss was Dreesen, I stand by that. Ball spin move on Dreesen was nice, but didn't break Halis tackle, nor make him miss: A one-handed grab and inability to move and cut Ball off did. Balls spin move certainly didn't stand up Brian Orakpo.

Ravage!!!

11-22-2013, 10:54 AM

Ravage!!!

11-22-2013, 10:56 AM

Dude leads the league in touchdowns and is posting Jimmy Graham/Shannon Sharpe/Tony Gonzalez numbers, and somebody is ACTUALLY BITCHING that he's seeing playing time.

Seriously. Think about that.

It's Joel. There is a reason that those in charge, are playing Thomas. Thomas gives MUCH more to this offense doing what he does in comparison to Dreesen.

Ravage!!!

11-22-2013, 11:05 AM

Yeah, that's another problem: The pretense Dreesen's some awful receiver with mittens for hands, even though he racked up dozens of catches and multiple TDs every year playing behind a Pro Bowler in Houston. Dreesen can't block, Dreesen can't catch, Shannon Sharpe can't block; it'd be easier to have faith in Orange Julius if his cheering section gave more examples of his excellence and spent less time explaining what's WRONG with EVERYONE ELSE. There's a reason he told his college coach he wanted to be a WR; it remains to be seen if he's actually a TE.

Actually.. HERE is the problem. You haven't noticed that he actually IS playing TE, and doing it fantastically!!

The REAL problem is, you have this "image" in yoru head as to what he's supposed to look like and supposed to do. Hell, you ACTUALLY said that Marino couldn't survive in today's NFL because he wasn't mobile. Probably one of the dumbest things posted, but you stick with that thought because you have it in your head that the QB HAS to be able to run at "this" level, and be able to pass at "this" level to succeed. Not only is it wrong, but its just blind.

Thomas is performing his TE duties at a level that no other TE in Denver history has. "Dreesen caught dozens of passes".... WOW.. dozens!! DId you see the TEs for KC? They "can catch" the ball too. How many of them were threatening our defense??? Anthony Fasano is basically the same TE that Dreesen is, how many TDs were you worried about Fasano scoring? DId we have to defensive gameplan to stop Fasano in the middle? Did we have to dedicate our safety to stop him?

you know who is in Julius Thomas' "cheering section?" Peyton ******* Manning.

Joel

11-22-2013, 01:18 PM

You used that block as an EXAMPLE of what Thomas couldn't do. You defended that block, and STLL are trying to your best to make it sound like it actually was even a block at all. That, ALONE, gives everyone MORE than reason enough to see that you don't really know what a bad block looks like.
Yes or no questions: 1) Was Hali engaged with Dreessen when Ball went by him for the TD? 2) Did Halis attempted tackle him? 3) Was there a LB OTHER than Hali filling that goal line hole?

Tight ends aren't tackles any more than they're receivers: They're tight ends. I don't expect Dreessen or any TE to pancake a LB in his prime and probably headed to his fourth straight Pro Bowl. Very few TEs can do any more than just impede a guy like that, get in his way (though Dreessen too often did better against Orakpo than the guy who IS our LT, as noted earlier.) It wasn't a good block, it was a good enough block, because it kept Hali from making a play; if the TE's not there Ball's spinning off Halis chest instead of Dreessen's butt, and I doubt that play ends like the one on Sunday.

Actually.. HERE is the problem. You haven't noticed that he actually IS playing TE, and doing it fantastically!!
He's playing WR spectacularly, but until/unless he can at least briefly slow down the guys charing our QB and RBs he's not a TE, just a big WR lined up inside. A 6" taller 50 lb. heavier Welker; that's not a TE.

The REAL problem is, you have this "image" in yoru head as to what he's supposed to look like and supposed to do. Hell, you ACTUALLY said that Marino couldn't survive in today's NFL because he wasn't mobile. Probably one of the dumbest things posted, but you stick with that thought because you have it in your head that the QB HAS to be able to run at "this" level, and be able to pass at "this" level to succeed. Not only is it wrong, but its just blind.
Well, if we're just speculating about peoples motives, I think the REAL problem is some people have it in their heads that everything >20 years old is hopelessly obsolete because it's a Brave New World BUT everything <10 years old is just a momentary fad that will fade before the enduring consistency of common sense. Blu-Ray and CDs are the state of the art and always will be, just like VHS and 3.5" floppies before them. Actually, I WISH CDs were half as tough as 3.5" disks. Flash drives are more durable than either though, and lots of people stream movies now, but only 'cause kids think that's cool; it'll never last. ;)

The means change, but not the ends; passers had to pass ends had to block in 1913 and they both still do in 2013. They'll keep finding new tricks to do it, because they must, but football's football.

Thomas is performing his TE duties at a level that no other TE in Denver history has. "Dreesen caught dozens of passes".... WOW.. dozens!! DId you see the TEs for KC? They "can catch" the ball too. How many of them were threatening our defense??? Anthony Fasano is basically the same TE that Dreesen is, how many TDs were you worried about Fasano scoring? DId we have to defensive gameplan to stop Fasano in the middle? Did we have to dedicate our safety to stop him?
Dozens of catches every year are an achievement, especially when splitting time with a Pro Bowler like Owen Daniels. After 10 starts Julius Thomas is on pace for about six dozen IF he starts every game (which is somewhere between Questionable and Doubtful at the moment, though that's still better than being Out of the question like his first two seasons.) I'm not worried about TEs scoring on us because we have a very good Will to cover them and an even better one starting at Mike, but yeah, Fasano and Dreesen are fairly comparable; they both get their share of balls and TDs, and they both block well: They're TEs.

you know who is in Julius Thomas' "cheering section?" Peyton ******* Manning.
His ankles aren't, but Erik Walden's there with his forced interception to help cheer on Orange Julius. Seriously, if blocking's IRRELEVANT to TEs, what's the difference between TEs and WRs? Size? The way WRs have been bulking up and playing physical the past decade I'm not even sure THAT difference is too big anymore. Y'know what? Forget I asked, in fact, forget all the questions: You're not my coach (unless you're one of the folks who still remembers where they were 50 years ago you can't even be qualified) and I'm done being talked down to in the name of "teaching."

Poet

11-22-2013, 01:27 PM

This is the worst debate I have ever seen.

powderaddict

11-22-2013, 01:49 PM

Not as long as Clark (and the rest of the line) does his job keeping Manning upright (though 2.9 yds/carry against a bottom ten run D is still inexcusable.) If his receiving's all that matters though why not line him up in the slot and compare him to Randy Moss or Jerry Rice? Seriously, why would anyone want a TE who CANNOT BLOCK? Is there some obscure NFL rule that says defenses can't put a safety or dimeback on a big WR if he's lined up at TE? Did anyone tell Eric Berry?

Because a TE that can quickly get open and catch the ball before the rush gets there helps the QB get rid of the ball quickly, which can be even more effective at slowing a pass rush than actually putting your hands on a defender and moving him. Plus, it helps the offense put points on the board. Which is what the offense is supposed to do.

Jimmy Graham isn't that great of a blocker. Antonio Gates has never been that great of a blocker. They are both very good TE's who pressure a defense much in the same way Julius Thomas does.