PDA

View Full Version : Adams, Harris, Ihenacho play every snap against Chiefs



Denver Native (Carol)
12-04-2013, 04:57 PM
The Broncos have released the play-time numbers for their game last Sunday against the Kansas City Chiefs.

Three defensive backs — safeties Mike Adams and Duke Ihenacho and cornerback Chris Harris — never came off the field. They played in all 72 defensive snaps. Next among defensive backs were Kayvon Webster (50), Quentin Jammer (32), Champ Bailey (30) and David Bruton (19).

Next most were linebackers Danny Trevathan (70) and Von Miller (68). Middle linebacker Wesley Woodyard had the big end zone interception on the first drive but didn’t play much in the fourth quarter and was out there for 49 snaps.

rest - stats on others defensive players
http://blogs.denverpost.com/broncos/2013/12/03/adams-harris-ihenacho-play-every-snap-against-chiefs/23750/

UnderArmour
12-04-2013, 05:27 PM
Ihenacho had a terrible game against the Chiefs. I hope Huff gets up to speed soon because we desperately need a rotation going again at safety. When the likes of Earnest Hemmingway and AJ Jenkins are getting open on your secondary, it's clear that Rahim Moore is sorely missed. Had Alex Smith not had his receivers drop everything deep on him, the Chiefs almost certainly would have won that game. The loss of DRC is in part to credit for this, but we were getting burned by #2, #3, #4 receivers and TEs all day against the Chiefs. The loss of Rahim Moore showed on Sunday and if Huff is up to speed, we need him out there if only to give Adams and Ihenacho a breather.

Joel
12-04-2013, 05:46 PM
The Chiefs had ONE good drive at the start before the D settled in (we could call the first one good, except it ended with an interception, which isn't good.) Their only other scores were on a drive that started at our 20, a kick return after WE scored, and a 7:44 CLASSIC Prevent drive when we led by 2 TDs in the fourth. With Smith swinging for the fences all day that's pretty good, and I loved how it ended: Mike Adams knocking down a tying TD pass on 4th down instead of flailing for a pick 5 yds in front of the receiver and letting a beaten opponent force OT.

I like that group, a lot; hopefully DRC is 100% next week and we've got him and Champ on the edges with Harris in the slot, Webster playing dime, Adams deep and Ihenacho playing enforcer.

Ziggy
12-04-2013, 06:02 PM
Ihenacho had a terrible game against the Chiefs. I hope Huff gets up to speed soon because we desperately need a rotation going again at safety. When the likes of Earnest Hemmingway and AJ Jenkins are getting open on your secondary, it's clear that Rahim Moore is sorely missed. Had Alex Smith not had his receivers drop everything deep on him, the Chiefs almost certainly would have won that game. The loss of DRC is in part to credit for this, but we were getting burned by #2, #3, #4 receivers and TEs all day against the Chiefs. The loss of Rahim Moore showed on Sunday and if Huff is up to speed, we need him out there if only to give Adams and Ihenacho a breather.

If we need Huff to save the day, we're screwed. I'll look for Bruton to make an impact first.

tomjonesrocks
12-04-2013, 06:14 PM
Do not follow the logic that Ihenacho's poor performance meant Denver missed Moore.

Moore was replaced adequately by Adams.

VonDoom
12-04-2013, 07:32 PM
Do not follow the logic that Ihenacho's poor performance meant Denver missed Moore.

Moore was replaced adequately by Adams.

True, but Duke hasn't been good, and if Moore were healthy, I suspect we'd get a large helping of Moore and Adams at the same time

TXBRONC
12-04-2013, 07:33 PM
Ihenacho had a terrible game against the Chiefs. I hope Huff gets up to speed soon because we desperately need a rotation going again at safety. When the likes of Earnest Hemmingway and AJ Jenkins are getting open on your secondary, it's clear that Rahim Moore is sorely missed. Had Alex Smith not had his receivers drop everything deep on him, the Chiefs almost certainly would have won that game. The loss of DRC is in part to credit for this, but we were getting burned by #2, #3, #4 receivers and TEs all day against the Chiefs. The loss of Rahim Moore showed on Sunday and if Huff is up to speed, we need him out there if only to give Adams and Ihenacho a breather.

I don't want Huff anywhere near the field unless there is no other choice. He's a terrible safety.

You acting like they Jenkins and Hemmingway torched our secondary if that's what you think then we didn't watch same game. Combined they had 6 catches for 77 yards and a touchdown. Big deal.

Joel
12-04-2013, 08:27 PM
True, but Duke hasn't been good, and if Moore were healthy, I suspect we'd get a large helping of Moore and Adams at the same time
Duke's playing like a SS, which is what he is, on the depth chart and in skillset. That's fine as long as Adams does a good job playing centerfield at FS and the rest of our DBs cover their men. There've been more than a few times I was glad Ihenacho was there to prevent a feature back turning a minimal gain into a 20+ yd play, and he's jarred loose a few catches, too.

BroncoWave
12-04-2013, 08:40 PM
I don't want Huff anywhere near the field unless there is no other choice. He's terrible safety.

You acting like they Jenkins and Hemmingway torched our secondary if that's what you think then we didn't watch same game. Combined they had 6 catches for 77 yards and a touchdown. Big deal.

Anyone who watched the game knows those stats don't tell the whole story. They were getting open all day. They were beating themselves with drops more than our secondary was stopping them.

tomjonesrocks
12-05-2013, 12:04 AM
True, but Duke hasn't been good, and if Moore were healthy, I suspect we'd get a large helping of Moore and Adams at the same time

"A large helping" of either Moore or Adams means one or the other is on the bench. So am confused.

I am surprised Ihenacho is stinking it up though. He could still be hurt, hit the rookie wall, or both. It sucks though as he was tearing it up earlier in the season.

Joel
12-05-2013, 12:19 AM
"A large helping" of either Moore or Adams means one or the other is on the bench. So am confused.

I am surprised Ihenacho is stinking it up though. He could still be hurt, hit the rookie wall, or both. It sucks though as he was tearing it up earlier in the season.
Not necessarily; Moore and Adams were the starters last year: Adams just started at SS. I thought then he's better at FS since he's statistically better in coverage (as on the 4th down end zone pass he knocked down Sunday, or, to take a counterexample, the most infamous play of Moores career to date) and Moore's a statistically better tackler, but Adams was the one Ihenacho bumped to get the starting SS job. We could go Moore/Adams again as easily as we did last year, but I personally prefer Adams/Ihenacho because the latter's well suited to SS.

Hawgdriver
12-05-2013, 12:20 AM
Anyone who watched the game knows those stats don't tell the whole story. They were getting open all day. They were beating themselves with drops more than our secondary was stopping them.

That might be true, but results are definitely true.

BroncoWave
12-05-2013, 08:42 AM
That might be true, but results are definitely true.

A WR dropping a pass doesn't absolve the secondary for poor coverage though. It's still a mistake we have to correct, because the next team might not drop that many passes.

VonDoom
12-05-2013, 09:18 AM
"A large helping" of either Moore or Adams means one or the other is on the bench. So am confused.

I am surprised Ihenacho is stinking it up though. He could still be hurt, hit the rookie wall, or both. It sucks though as he was tearing it up earlier in the season.


Not necessarily; Moore and Adams were the starters last year: Adams just started at SS. I thought then he's better at FS since he's statistically better in coverage (as on the 4th down end zone pass he knocked down Sunday, or, to take a counterexample, the most infamous play of Moores career to date) and Moore's a statistically better tackler, but Adams was the one Ihenacho bumped to get the starting SS job. We could go Moore/Adams again as easily as we did last year, but I personally prefer Adams/Ihenacho because the latter's well suited to SS.

Joel said it better than I could. My contention was that if Moore were healthy, Adams would have gotten his job back from Ihenacho, given the latter's play of late.

TXBRONC
12-05-2013, 10:47 AM
Anyone who watched the game knows those stats don't tell the whole story. They were getting open all day. They were beating themselves with drops more than our secondary was stopping them.

Reality is two people can look at same thing and see it differently seriously. You're full of it I watched the yes they had some drops but so did our recievers anyone who actually watched game would know that.

Ravage!!!
12-05-2013, 10:48 AM
A WR dropping a pass doesn't absolve the secondary for poor coverage though. It's still a mistake we have to correct, because the next team might not drop that many passes.

The time that the QB had to throw the ball vs zone defenses has a LOT to do with the WRs "appearing" to simply be open. You can NOT cover every WR and field alllll the time. You can't play man-up, alll the time.

As far as the Chiefs "beating themselves"..horse shit. No more than we did with INTs and special teams play.

TXBRONC
12-05-2013, 10:54 AM
The time that the QB had to throw the ball vs zone defenses has a LOT to do with the WRs "appearing" to simply be open. You can NOT cover every WR and field alllll the time. You can't play man-up, alll the time.

As far as the Chiefs "beating themselves"..horse shit. No more than we did with INTs and special teams play.

Spot on. Every game there are errors made by both teams. It usually comes who can make either makes the least amount of errors or overcome the ones they make or both.

BroncoWave
12-05-2013, 12:18 PM
I think you guys are misunderstanding. I didn't say we simply won the game because the Chiefs beat themselves. I'm just saying their passing/receiving numbers weren't as good as they could have been because they beat themselves with tons of drops. I don't see how you can deny that. They dropped at least 5 or 6 passes.

TXBRONC
12-05-2013, 12:38 PM
I think you guys are misunderstanding. I didn't say we simply won the game because the Chiefs beat themselves. I'm just saying their passing/receiving numbers weren't as good as they could have been because they beat themselves with tons of drops. I don't see how you can deny that. They dropped at least 5 or 6 passes.

Who the hell has denied that they the Chiefs receivers dropped passes?


Besides that this isn't what you said earlier. You said they beat themselves more so than the defense primarily the secondary.

BroncoWave
12-05-2013, 12:52 PM
Who the hell has denied that they the Chiefs receivers dropped passes?


Besides that this isn't what you said earlier. You said they beat themselves more so than the defense primarily the secondary.

Yes, I said they (the receivers) were beating themselves with drops more than the secondary was covering them well.

Broncolingus
12-05-2013, 12:59 PM
I don't think Duke had a stellar game against the Chefs, but I also don't think he was horrible...

I think it was more that (ahem) Moore was playing really well this year...

...all those young'un's need the next 4 games to get salty for the playoffs.

TXBRONC
12-05-2013, 01:10 PM
I don't think Duke had a stellar game against the Chefs, but I also don't think he was horrible...

I think it was more that (ahem) Moore was playing really well this year...

...all those young'un's need the next 4 games to get salty for the playoffs.

Smith did attempt to push the ball down the field a little more earlier in the season but must still most of his yardage was accumulated working the short and intermediate routs and screen plays.

TXBRONC
12-05-2013, 01:49 PM
Yes, I said they (the receivers) were beating themselves with drops more than the secondary was covering them well.

Yep which the same thing as saying the Chiefs lost the game Denver didn't win it.

BroncoWave
12-05-2013, 02:16 PM
Yep which the same thing as saying the Chiefs lost the game Denver didn't win it.

Wut? That's assuming I think the Chiefs would have won had their WRs not dropped those passes. I still think we would have found a way to win regardless.

TXBRONC
12-05-2013, 02:48 PM
"A large helping" of either Moore or Adams means one or the other is on the bench. So am confused.

I am surprised Ihenacho is stinking it up though. He could still be hurt, hit the rookie wall, or both. It sucks though as he was tearing it up earlier in the season.

I bet Ihenacho still dinged up.