Eric Decker embraces role as Broncos' punt returner during playoffs

[Denver Native (Carol)]

A 47-yard punt return should produce more "oohs" than "aahs" from the partisan crowd. The yardage gained is more important than the yardage left on the field.

But that's not how the Broncos and their delirious crowd viewed Eric Decker's dramatic punt return Sunday. It was dramatic because Decker split San Diego's two speedy gunners, made several outstanding moves, slipped through three tackles and ... inadvertently tripped with nothing ahead of him but the end zone.

rest - http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_24910472/eric-decker-embraces-role-broncos-punt-returner-during

[Denver Native (Carol)]

from same article:


Nevertheless, Decker is Denver's new No. 1 punt returner. He returned only one punt during the regular season (plus two fair catches), but he made three returns Sunday.

"If I had stayed up and not tripped myself, maybe I would feel better about myself. But I thought overall, with the winds and conditions, I was happy with my performance as far as catching the ball and advancing it," Decker said Monday.

AND


"That was an outstanding return," Fox said of Decker's 47-yarder. "He made a lot of good cuts and movement to get into that position. After that, maybe not so much (laughing). It was still a huge play and a big change of field position that did help our team."

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_24910472/eric-decker-embraces-role-broncos-punt-returner-during

[Ziggy]

All we need him to do is to hang on to the ball. Any yardage on top of it is icing on the cake. He did an outstanding job Sunday.

[dogfish]

Eric Decker embraces role as Broncos' punt returner during playoffs

despite a marked lack of support from a certain uppity short fellow around here. . . :coffee:

[DenBronx]

He has done tremendous all season long.



Franchise tag will be coming for Decker if Manning plays next year.

[MOtorboat]

despite a marked lack of support from a certain uppity short fellow around here. . . :coffee:

At least Decker knows what happened on that play.

[dogfish]

At least Decker knows what happened on that play.

yea, no shit. . . he tripped!

:laugh:

he's still the right option back there, just admit it. . .

[Ziggy]

He has done tremendous all season long.



Franchise tag will be coming for Decker if Manning plays next year.

Wouldn't care to make a bet on that, would ya?

[MOtorboat]

yea, no shit. . . he tripped!

:laugh:

he's still the right option back there, just admit it. . .

Why would I admit something I don't believe?

[Joel]

How did the punt return "help our team"? It gave us good field position, true, but Decker let the 3rd and G pass bounce off his chest into the hands of a Charger who showed him how to make a catch and get both feet down inside the end line—then it was halftime. We got NOTHING out of that return; unless he flat out DROPPED it a fair catch would've been exactly the same.

Understand, if he's more reliable than Holliday (or lights a fire under him, as it seemed like he might have Sunday) great, and he's not been horrible, but that one return? Irrelevant.

[Dreadnought]

despite a marked lack of support from a certain uppity short fellow around here. . . :coffee:

MO is a great guy, one of my personal faves, but whatever football opinion he takes you can be sure it is either entirely wrong or wildly overstated

[slim]

Decker was the right choice to return punts. I just wish he wasn't such a spaz.

[Dreadnought]

Decker was the right choice to return punts. I just wish he wasn't such a spaz.

He looked like one of Jerry's Kids in that moment - but a 47 yard punt return is just damned fine. If he could arrange to run a Pats punt back 47 yards and then trip over his own feet I will be ecstatic

[slim]

He looked like one of Jerry's Kids in that moment - but a 47 yard punt return is just damned fine. If he could arrange to run a Pats punt back 47 yards and then trip over his own feet I will be ecstatic

That was the last drive before half IIRC...the one that ended with an Int. It sure would have been nice if he had scored there. But not the end of the world.

You have to give him credit for breaking the tackles to be in that position in the first place. I certainly would rather see him returning punts against NE than Holiday.

[Joel]

That was the last drive before half IIRC...the one that ended with an Int. It sure would have been nice if he had scored there. But not the end of the world.

You have to give him credit for breaking the tackles to be in that position in the first place. I certainly would rather see him returning punts against NE than Holiday.
Yes, it was, and ended in an Int because Decker popped up a ball that hit him squarely in the chest, then a Bolts DB showed him how to catch a ball on the end line and tap both feet in bounds.

Like I say, that return didn't "help our team" even marginally; a fair catch would've done as much. I really like Decker, but can't remember anyone so consistently inconsistent to such extremes. He's like a slugger with a .200 average and 40 HRs; one can never be sure if he'll be awesome or awful, only that he'll definitely be one or the other—sometimes BOTH on the SAME PLAY. Demaryius was the same way as recently as midseason last year, but finally matured into a playmaker who beats guys deep and DOESN'T fumble off his own knee on the way to the end zone.

If Decker ever makes that same transition... look out NFL.... :shocked:

[Northman]

How did the punt return "help our team"? It gave us good field position, true, but Decker let the 3rd and G pass bounce off his chest into the hands of a Charger who showed him how to make a catch and get both feet down inside the end line—then it was halftime.

Oh please. Yes, he could of caught that pass but the ******* defender had his arm up in his chest area as well. It wasnt like he was wide open like say Wes Welker.......

[dogfish]

That was the last drive before half IIRC...the one that ended with an Int. It sure would have been nice if he had scored there. But not the end of the world.

You have to give him credit for breaking the tackles to be in that position in the first place. I certainly would rather see him returning punts against NE than Holiday.

pretty sure you will. . . fox is playing FTW this year. . .

[Ziggy]

The pass in the end zone wasn't on Decker. It was two great plays by defenders.

[TXBRONC]

despite a marked lack of support from a certain uppity short fellow around here. . . :coffee:

I was perfectly fine with Decker returning the punts. He's not as explosive as Holiday but still very good and he sure handed. Fumblig five isn't good even though he recovered three of them.

[Joel]

Oh please. Yes, he could of caught that pass but the ******* defender had his arm up in his chest area as well. It wasnt like he was wide open like say Wes Welker.......
Actually, yeah, you're right; I forgot the guy in coverage got his hand between the ball and Deckers chest. Again the old maxim is proven: You catch with your hands, not with your body.

[Tned]

Actually, yeah, you're right; I forgot the guy in coverage got his hand between the ball and Deckers chest. Again the old maxim is proven: You catch with your hands, not with your body.

Do you even watch any of the Broncos games? Or do you just make up the stuff you spew based on articles and guesses and shit?

The defender had an arm across Deckers arm. It might not have reached the level of PI, but there was no way to get his hands up to catch the ball.

So the old adage that really applies is watch the film before spewing shit.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Forum Runner

[BroncoJoe]

Do you even watch any of the Broncos games? Or do you just make up the stuff you spew based on articles and guesses and shit?

The defender had an arm across Deckers arm. It might not have reached the level of PI, but there was no way to get his hands up to catch the ball.

So the old adage that really applies is watch the film before spewing shit.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Forum Runner

As painful as it is to admit, I actually agree with Joel. That was a catchable ball. Decker should have had his hands up before the defender had his arm tangled up. It hit him in the chest, for chrissake. It's highly debatable though and no one is going to be "right" regardless of which side they take.

http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2014-01-12/nfl-divisional-playoffs-chargers-broncos-score-result-highlights-analysis-peyton-manning-rivers-welker-allen

[Ravage!!!]

Decker wasn't open. Easy to say this "he should ahve had his hands up." Receivers don't run with their hands up around their head, and it was the process of gettiing his hands up where he was fighting through the tight coverage. Before we get the couch coaches say "he should have brough his hands up"... I'm PRETTY DAMNED sure that Decker knows how to catch a football considering he's been the most consistant on the team all season long.

It was a decision by Manning that we don't see very often. THe ball nicks the defender that is already ALL OVER him, not to mention gripping his arm. It was a bad decision by Manning that even the comentators of the game commented on.

[Dreadnought]

Decker wasn't open. Easy to say this "he should ahve had his hands up." Receivers don't run with their hands up around their head, and it was the process of gettiing his hands up where he was fighting through the tight coverage. Before we get the couch coaches say "he should have brough his hands up"... I'm PRETTY DAMNED sure that Decker knows how to catch a football considering he's been the most consistant on the team all season long.

It was a decision by Manning that we don't see very often. THe ball nicks the defender that is already ALL OVER him, not to mention gripping his arm. It was a bad decision by Manning that even the comentators of the game commented on.

Its the one downside of a Superhuman QB. He gets used to being able to do superhuman stuff and will sometimes make a throw he perhaps should not have. This was one of them. That throw should have been @ 18 feet over everyone's head and take the 3 points for a 3 score lead

[Northman]

Decker wasn't open. Easy to say this "he should ahve had his hands up." Receivers don't run with their hands up around their head, and it was the process of gettiing his hands up where he was fighting through the tight coverage. Before we get the couch coaches say "he should have brough his hands up"... I'm PRETTY DAMNED sure that Decker knows how to catch a football considering he's been the most consistant on the team all season long.

It was a decision by Manning that we don't see very often. THe ball nicks the defender that is already ALL OVER him, not to mention gripping his arm. It was a bad decision by Manning that even the comentators of the game commented on.

Agreed.

Deck is in the air when trying to bring that pass and even if he manages to keep it too his chest the defender has a VERY good chance of ripping it out on his way down. It was a great pass by Manning and on target but Decker was blanketed very well with what Tned said is very close to PI. The defender was all over him so it would of been very difficult to complete that as it was.

[CoachChaz]

I may be crazy, but if a ball hits you square in the chest...and you dont get either of your arms up to catch it...and there is no PI...the receiver has at least partial fault in the play.

[Northman]

Oh shit, here we go.

[CoachChaz]

I'm not saying it should have been caught. It was a tight window with good coverage. I'm just saying that I dont think Decker was expecting it and didnt react in time to make an effort to catch it.

[Hawgdriver]

Yes, it was, and ended in an Int because Decker popped up a ball that hit him squarely in the chest,

Define, "hit squarely." Does it include balls that ricochet off defender helmets milliseconds before contact?

[Hawgdriver]

The pass in the end zone wasn't on Decker. It was two great plays by defenders.

I'm putting it on Manning trying to squeeze it into a too small window. Was it the wind?

[Joel]

Do you even watch any of the Broncos games? Or do you just make up the stuff you spew based on articles and guesses and shit?

The defender had an arm across Deckers arm. It might not have reached the level of PI, but there was no way to get his hands up to catch the ball.

So the old adage that really applies is watch the film before spewing shit.
There's a slo-mo closeup at 2:55 here: http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap2000000312637/GameDay-Chargers-vs-Broncos-highlights

Which of Deckers arms did the defender have his arm across? Looks to me like both Deckers arms are clear but the defender has a hand between the ball and Deckers chest. He MAY have SLIGHTLY blocked Deckers right hand, but not because he was holding or grabbing it: The defender simply had his hand higher IN THE AIR than Deckers, so Deckers hand would've had to go through it to reach the ball. It MIGHT not have reached the level of PI? Any ref who calls PI on that is wearing a shirt with orange stripes, not black.

I admitted forgetting the defender just made a great play—that Decker did NOT let it bounce. Why pile on, let alone by claiming other things that ALSO never happened? It's like that old George Carlin bit: "Have you noticed that their stuff is shit and your shit is stuff?"

[Tned]

Not to belabor the point. Hell, who am I trying to kid, of course i'm going to belabor the point and prove I'm right.

The video clearly shows the defender made contact with Decker before the ball arrived. I said close to PI, because arm checking and arm bars are not consistently called in the NFL.

Decker's right arm was blocked from coming up by the defenders arm, who was making contact with Decker's check during the route. In addition, because of the arm bar had his arm in Decker's chest, it meant that when Decker attempted to catch the ball with his only free hand/arm (left hand), Stucky then slid his hand/arm up slightly over the left arm and then ripped down on it, breaking Decker's one handed grip on the ball.

PI or great defensive play, either way, Decker had close to zero chance to catch that ball.

http://www.broncosforums.com/downloads/decker-int-div-playoff-1.jpg

http://www.broncosforums.com/downloads/decker-int-div-playoff-2.jpg

[Ravage!!!]

Those two pictures alone show that Deck was looking for the ball, how close the coverage was, and how little change he had of catching that ball... and despite people thinking it... the ball is bouncing off the defender's arm and not deckers chest.

[Tned]

There's a slo-mo closeup at 2:55 here: http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap2000000312637/GameDay-Chargers-vs-Broncos-highlights

Which of Deckers arms did the defender have his arm across? Looks to me like both Deckers arms are clear but the defender has a hand between the ball and Deckers chest. He MAY have SLIGHTLY blocked Deckers right hand, but not because he was holding or grabbing it: The defender simply had his hand higher IN THE AIR than Deckers, so Deckers hand would've had to go through it to reach the ball. It MIGHT not have reached the level of PI? Any ref who calls PI on that is wearing a shirt with orange stripes, not black.

I admitted forgetting the defender just made a great play—that Decker did NOT let it bounce. Why pile on, let alone by claiming other things that ALSO never happened? It's like that old George Carlin bit: "Have you noticed that their stuff is shit and your shit is stuff?"

Nice spewage -- almost as impressive as a West Virginia chemical plant.

Please explain how Decker could have followed the old adage about catching the ball with his the hands not the body?

[topscribe]

Decker was the right choice to return punts. I just wish he wasn't such a spaz.
It was pretty much a deja vu moment, wasn't it? :laugh:
.

[dogfish]

and in any case, more to the point, it doesn't effing matter what happened on that interception. . . it really doesn't have a damn thing to do with whether or not he should be the punt returner. . .

[Tned]

Those two pictures alone show that Deck was looking for the ball, how close the coverage was, and how little change he had of catching that ball... and despite people thinking it... the ball is bouncing off the defender's arm and not deckers chest.

And they show, that despite the defender making early contact (albeit fairly minor early contact), and blocking his right arm from coming up for the ball, Decker still almost made a one handed catch and probably would have pulled it off if not for the defender's arm being between Decker's hand and chest.

[topscribe]

Not to belabor the point. Hell, who am I trying to kid, of course i'm going to belabor the point and prove I'm right.

The video clearly shows the defender made contact with Decker before the ball arrived. I said close to PI, because arm checking and arm bars are not consistently called in the NFL.

Decker's right arm was blocked from coming up by the defenders arm, who was making contact with Decker's check during the route. In addition, because of the arm bar had his arm in Decker's chest, it meant that when Decker attempted to catch the ball with his only free hand/arm (left hand), Stucky then slid his hand/arm up slightly over the left arm and then ripped down on it, breaking Decker's one handed grip on the ball.

PI or great defensive play, either way, Decker had close to zero chance to catch that ball.

Thanks. Nice analysis. I was leaning toward blaming Decker for this until you
cleared it up here. One thing I don't agree with -- not what you said, but
what certain others have mentioned -- it was NOT a bad pass by Manning.
This kind of pass is what makes him Peyton Manning. He has been completing
these his whole career, and this one was pinpoint.

It reminds me of an interception year ago where another defender was
holding down Decker's arm. That one clearly should have been PI. But both
are pretty much the same: PIs that went unflagged . . .
.

[Tned]

While Dog is 100% right that we shouldn't have let Joel turn this punt return thread into a debate about how horrible his analysis of the 2nd quarter INT was, I think I have to save this quote and picture for prosperity.


Yes, it was, and ended in an Int because Decker popped up a ball that hit him squarely in the chest, then a Bolts DB showed him how to catch a ball on the end line and tap both feet in bounds.



http://www.broncosforums.com/downloads/decker-int-div-playoff-2.jpg

[Ravage!!!]

Not a bad Pass, but a bad decision.

I think Mannng figured that since it was the back of the endzone that if it worked, great, if not it would fly out of bounds. Throwing INTO coverage like that is not a Manning type of decision, especially down in the endzone. But considering the way it was intercepted it was just a "fluke" of a play. His first INT inside the redzone this season (the stat just HAD to flash up on the screen before the play).

[topscribe]

Not a bad Pass, but a bad decision.

I think Mannng figured that since it was the back of the endzone that if it worked, great, if not it would fly out of bounds. Throwing INTO coverage like that is not a Manning type of decision, especially down in the endzone. But considering the way it was intercepted it was just a "fluke" of a play. His first INT inside the redzone this season (the stat just HAD to flash up on the screen before the play).
I don't think it was even a bad decision. He figured he could get it in there, and he did.
.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

I never faulted Decker for that. It was obvious on the replays during the broadcast he couldn't get his arms up to make the catch because he was locked up with the DB. It was actually a pretty risky throw by Manning. I was a little irritated we were throwing. It was only 2nd and goal from the three and there was a minute and half left. We should have tried to run it in at least once.

[TXBRONC]

I may be crazy, but if a ball hits you square in the chest...and you dont get either of your arms up to catch it...and there is no PI...the receiver has at least partial fault in the play.

He could his hands up because the had them pinned.

[Ravage!!!]

I don't think it was even a bad decision. He figured he could get it in there, and he did.
.

Well, actually, he didn't. He threw it into coverage and it was deflected into the air by hitting the defender's arm. That's not getting it in there.

[Tned]

Thanks. Nice analysis. I was leaning toward blaming Decker for this until you
cleared it up here. One thing I don't agree with -- not what you said, but
what certain others have mentioned -- it was NOT a bad pass by Manning.
This kind of pass is what makes him Peyton Manning. He has been completing
these his whole career, and this one was pinpoint.

It reminds me of an interception year ago where another defender was
holding down Decker's arm. That one clearly should have been PI. But both
are pretty much the same: PIs that went unflagged . . .
.

Agreed. It was NOT a bad pass by Manning. When he let the ball go, he was throwing to an open spot in the endzone. Decker had just started to make his break. This was a clear timing route, where Manning was throwing to where Decker was GOING to be, not where he was when he made the decision to throw.

When Manning released the ball, the receivers on the right were covered. Welker was bracketed by two defenders and if he had squeezed it in, which he probably could have, there was a pretty good chance the catch would be outside the endzone and Welker may or may not have been able to fall back in for the score.

With Decker, he was throwing to a wide open area of the endzone that he knew Decker was heading for, and the defender appeared to be flat footed and it looked like Decker would likely blow right past him. The defender made a great move, and then used his body/arm to make it impossible for Decker to catch the ball.

http://www.broncosforums.com/downloads/decker-int-div-playoff-3.jpg

[TXBRONC]

While Dog is 100% right that we shouldn't have let Joel turn this punt return thread into a debate about how horrible his analysis of the 2nd quarter INT was, I think I have to save this quote and picture for prosperity.

This started because a comment that had Decker not gone to the ground on the punt Manning would not have throw that interception.

[MOtorboat]

This started because a comment that had Decker not gone to the ground on the punt Manning would not have throw that interception.

Exactly. ;)

[Northman]

I never faulted Decker for that. It was obvious on the replays during the broadcast he couldn't get his arms up to make the catch because he was locked up with the DB. It was actually a pretty risky throw by Manning. I was a little irritated we were throwing. It was only 2nd and goal from the three and there was a minute and half left. We should have tried to run it in at least once.

Same here, we were having a lot of success running the ball.

[Hawgdriver]

Not Manning's best decision, but I'm all for pushing the envelope.

[Joel]

Not to belabor the point. Hell, who am I trying to kid, of course i'm going to belabor the point and prove I'm right.

The video clearly shows the defender made contact with Decker before the ball arrived. I said close to PI, because arm checking and arm bars are not consistently called in the NFL.

Decker's right arm was blocked from coming up by the defenders arm, who was making contact with Decker's check during the route. In addition, because of the arm bar had his arm in Decker's chest, it meant that when Decker attempted to catch the ball with his only free hand/arm (left hand), Stucky then slid his hand/arm up slightly over the left arm and then ripped down on it, breaking Decker's one handed grip on the ball.

PI or great defensive play, either way, Decker had close to zero chance to catch that ball.

http://www.broncosforums.com/downloads/decker-int-div-playoff-1.jpg

http://www.broncosforums.com/downloads/decker-int-div-playoff-2.jpg
The first pic doesn't show any defender contact on Decker, and the second shows the ball hitting the defenders arm. He played the ball the whole way, so I don't see how PI nor any other defensive penalty could be called. If we're bringing in the personal side, that's from a wannabe possession receiver who gives the offense ALL close calls: In this case there's nothing TO call.

It was a good, very precise throw (had to be vs. coverage that good) but an even better deflection by the defender, and a great toe-tapping endline catch by the other defender.


Nice spewage -- almost as impressive as a West Virginia chemical plant.

Please explain how Decker could have followed the old adage about catching the ball with his the hands not the body?
He has to get his hands up before the DB does (just as BroncoJoe and CoachChaz said,) because afterward he can't. I'm not slamming Decker for that; it was a tough split-second catch to make. Once the DB gets his hand in front of the ball though it's pretty much hopeless, because that was a textbook example of how to break up a pass by playing the ball rather than the man. The only way Decker can catch that ball is to ALSO "catch" and HOLD ONTO the DBs hand: No chance.


While Dog is 100% right that we shouldn't have let Joel turn this punt return thread into a debate about how horrible his analysis of the 2nd quarter INT was, I think I have to save this quote and picture for prosperity.
Knock your lights out; it's your site. I made TWO posts on the topic, then Hawdriver and Northman pointed out the ball bounced off Stuckeys hand, not Deckers chest, and fifteen minutes later I admitted I was wrong. Ten minutes AFTER that you "called me out" by referencing armbars and possible PIs, even though there's no evidence of either even in the pics YOU posted. If the ensuing TWO PAGES are a problem, it began there, and I've only made ONE post since (till now:) Physician, heal thyself. And if that merits a petty gilded frame, again, no one's stopping you.

Discretion's the better part of valor though, and it IS your site, so I know better than to argue with a site owner who was pissed at me from the start. Especially when I long ago admitted I was wrong on my initial point; I'm as baffled as anyone folks chose to spend another two pages reproving my error (literally) just for the Hell of it.

[BroncoJoe]

DT would have caught it.

[Tned]

DT would have caught it.

Joel would have not only caught it, but also would have direct snapped it to himself and scored a two point conversion on the ensuing snap...

.

[Tned]

Discretion's the better part of valor though, and it IS your site, so I know better than to argue with a site owner who was pissed at me from the start. Especially when I long ago admitted I was wrong on my initial point; I'm as baffled as anyone folks chose to spend another two pages reproving my error (literally) just for the Hell of it.

Yea, because anyone that argues with me gets banned, right. What a dick move to go there with your comments, Joel.

[Northman]

Yea, because anyone that argues with me gets banned, right. What a dick move to go there with your comments, Joel.

Your such a dicktator Tned.

(You're) for MO

[MOtorboat]

Your such a dicktator Tned.

(You're) for MO

Yeah. T has the correct version of "your" in his post.

:wave:

[Joel]

Yea, because anyone that argues with me gets banned, right. What a dick move to go there with your comments, Joel.
Not saying that, but my rule of thumb for all sites is "fights with Admins are unwinnable." Double that for site owners, especially when they make it clear they're pissed at me from the start. As far as dick moves, you came into the thread comparing me to a sewage spout. Then suggested framing additional proof of error I'd already admitted before you said a word. Taking the high road?

While I'm here though, I'm glad I can finally reference Eric Dickerson without the language filter getting mad at me. :tongue:

[dogfish]

DT would have caught it.

maybe they should put him on punt returns. . .


:coffee: :coffee:

[MOtorboat]

maybe they should put him on punt returns. . .


:coffee: :coffee:

If they insist on not putting Holliday back there I'd like to see them try it.

:coffee:

[Tned]

Not saying that, but my rule of thumb for all sites is "fights with Admins are unwinnable." Double that for site owners, especially when they make it clear they're pissed at me from the start. As far as dick moves, you came into the thread comparing me to a sewage spout. Then suggested framing additional proof of error I'd already admitted before you said a word. Taking the high road?

While I'm here though, I'm glad I can finally reference Eric Dickerson without the language filter getting mad at me. :tongue:

Maybe that's a reflection on you and not site admins/owners.

Anyway, speaking of punt returns. How much do we have to pay the Buffalo Wild Wings guy to get him to stop popping up the sprinklers and tripping Decker?

[Tned]

maybe they should put him on punt returns. . .


:coffee: :coffee:

Even though him and Decker are more or less the same time, when they put DT back there he just looked like a huge, lumbering target waiting to have his head taken off. Can't remember if it was punts or just kick returns, but I don't want to ever see him back there again.

[tomjonesrocks]

pretty sure you will. . . fox is playing FTW this year. . .

Except for kicking that long (missed) FG into wind last week on 3rd and short when the added 3 points wouldn't have even required an additional Chargers possession to surpass the score...

[Hawgdriver]

Since we are on the topic of Buffalo Wild Wings, I'm going there tonight. I'll have a chat with the guy, he's actually pretty cool.

I like the Desert Heat dry wings. And Mango Hab. Thai Curry are pretty boss. And, can't forget, Parm Garlic.

[Northman]

Old Bay wings FTW.

[Hawgdriver]

That sounds good. I made some Old Bay chili queso a few weeks ago, so good.

[dogfish]

Even though him and Decker are more or less the same time, when they put DT back there he just looked like a huge, lumbering target waiting to have his head taken off. Can't remember if it was punts or just kick returns, but I don't want to ever see him back there again.

that was kick-offs. . . and yes, terrifying. . . :lol:

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

I thought Decker looked great on punt returns. He's not going down with an arm tackle, he's got good agility and burst.

[Tned]

I thought Decker looked great on punt returns. He's not going down with an arm tackle, he's got good agility and burst.

Probably not going to get worse than it was last Sunday with those swirling winds.

[Joel]

Maybe that's a reflection on you and not site admins/owners.
Doubtful; it's based on a lot of observation, not personal experience; not everything's about me. ;) I'm not a fan of confrontations in general, but tend to avoid them online with admins for the stated reason: I've been in few but WITNESSED many, and recall NONE ending pleasantly for the non-admin. Eventually, the non-admin always stops talking—one way or another....

I wasn't accusing you of any abuse of power, though it does remind me of one of those situations, played out over years. THAT moral is that when it gets personal one can't simultaneously be a neutral referee AND participant; neutrality kind of goes out the window when one not only has a dog in the fight, but also named it. Ending where we began, it ultimately doesn't MATTER whether an admin abuses their power in a personal online conflict; the mere fact they CAN makes it unwinnable for others. That's not an accusation of any fault; just how it is.

[EastCoastBronco]

As long as he's getting lots of practice doing it through the week, I'm cool with it.
I'd still rather see a more consistent Holiday back there though. He can really fly.

[Joel]

As long as he's getting lots of practice doing it through the week, I'm cool with it.
I'd still rather see a more consistent Holiday back there though. He can really fly.
Agreed. I prefer a dedicated returner anyway just because those guys routinely get LEVELED, and I don't want to lose one of our top two WRs (well, I don't WANT to lose anyone, but if there IS an injury I'd rather it NOT jeopardize the season.) It's just, Holliday's such a boom/bust, beyond any of the "Can you believe he DID that?! :D/I can't believe he did THAT! :tsk:" stuff Decker and (until the middle of last season) DT have done. What I'd REALLY like is for him to run good enough routes and have good enough hands to use his speed as a WR; not holding my breath though.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

As long as he's getting lots of practice doing it through the week, I'm cool with it.
I'd still rather see a more consistent Holiday back there though. He can really fly.

Sometimes without the ball - lol

[dogfish]

I'd still rather see a more consistent Holiday back there though. He can really fly.

i'm sure everyone can agree on this. . .

it's on him to make it happen, though. . . he has some trust to regain-- personally, i'd rather see him get the opportunity next season. . . we got two more games to take care of business, first. . . :D

[Tned]

Doubtful; it's based on a lot of observation, not personal experience; not everything's about me. ;) I'm not a fan of confrontations in general, but tend to avoid them online with admins for the stated reason: I've been in few but WITNESSED many, and recall NONE ending pleasantly for the non-admin. Eventually, the non-admin always stops talking—one way or another....

I wasn't accusing you of any abuse of power, though it does remind me of one of those situations, played out over years. THAT moral is that when it gets personal one can't simultaneously be a neutral referee AND participant; neutrality kind of goes out the window when one not only has a dog in the fight, but also named it. Ending where we began, it ultimately doesn't MATTER whether an admin abuses their power in a personal online conflict; the mere fact they CAN makes it unwinnable for others. That's not an accusation of any fault; just how it is.

I guess you're (correct usage MO?) new around here and are therefore clueless to the fact that I not only don't stop people from posting, but don't even participate in ban votes.

Stop with the martyr act already, it's ridiculous. Man up and discuss/debate if you want, don't if you don't want, but don't hide behind the owner/admin crap.

[TXBRONC]

Exactly. ;)

It's dead wrong. :2thumbs:

[MOtorboat]

It's dead wrong. :2thumbs:

If Decker scores, as he should have, how does Manning throw the interception?

For people who are saying the two have no correlation, I think that would be an easy question to answer.

[TXBRONC]

If Decker scores, as he should have, how does Manning throw the interception?

For people who are saying the two have no correlation, I think that would be an easy question to answer.

I don't think so. If Decker had to fair catch the ball and Denver still and Manning still gets picked in the end zone it still wouldn't be his. One does not have anything to do with other.

[MOtorboat]

I don't think so. If Decker had to fair catch the ball and Denver still and Manning still gets picked in the end zone it still wouldn't be his. One does not have anything to do with other.

What? He didn't fair catch it. He ran it 39 yards and tripped on the 35 yard line with a clear path to the end zone.

I'm not even sure what you're talking about, honestly.

[dogfish]

so, back to the whole punt thing. . .

might be worth noting that new england's punter got dinged last week, and had to leave the game. . . their kicker, gostkowski, did the punting in the second half-- seemed to do a creditable job. . . the regular dude was back to practice today-- sounds like he's probably okay to play. . . still, if he's not 100%, the odds of him shanking one could go up. . . they also had a snap sail over the punter's head last week, resulting in a safety. . .

special teams could be a factor this weekend. . .

and it should be an emphasis in the off-season, as it's been something of a weakness, other than prater and colquitt. . . i'm mostly concerned about the coverage units, but we probably will need to at least find or develop some depth behind holliday, if not an alternate to compete with him for punt return duties. . . we'll probably be looking at DBs and WRs in the draft-- finding one who could contribute right away on teams would be a bonus. . . and frankly, i kinda wish we'd hire bobby april away from the faders-- that guy was money when he had some talent to work with. . .

[Joel]

I guess you're (correct usage MO?) new around here and are therefore clueless to the fact that I not only don't stop people from posting, but don't even participate in ban votes.

Stop with the martyr act already, it's ridiculous. Man up and discuss/debate if you want, don't if you don't want, but don't hide behind the owner/admin crap.
I already discussed and debated: I said the Int hit Decker squarely in the chest, then two people pointed out it actually hit Stuckeys hand, so I conceded they were right and I wrong.
THEN someone came along to ask if I only read about but don't watch games, compare me to a sewer (twice) and demand I stop playing martyr and man up—and I made the "dick move"? :confused:

It's not a dick move to note the guy trying hard to pick an online fight out of the blue has the ultimate closer in his pocket the whole time: It's stating undeniable fact. He never even considers using it; great—he can still reconsider that choice anytime, which will always loom over any conflict with any admin on any site. Again, not—repeat NOT—an accusation: That's just the way it is.

Especially when he shows up just to tear someone a new one AFTER they concede error and defeat in a debate. It's impossible to start a fight AND impartially referee it. Seriously, what are we discussing and debating now? It sure as Hell ain't football. Were I prone to dick moves I'd report FAR more personal attacks (I've been here how many years and reported how many personal attacks?) Gee, a poster just joined a thread to compare me to a sewer; to whom should I report that, and what response should I expect? ;)

It's a no win game, and I agree it's getting in the way of a thread actually ABOUT football, on which I've already said my piece, so I'll only end up regretting any further comment.

[BroncoJoe]

Joel, just shut up.

Tia

[Dapper Dan]

One thing I dislike about arguments on the forum is we talk very negatively about a lot of players. The longer the argument goes, the further from the center each side gets. Everything needs to be sometimes fault for some reason.

[NightTerror218]

so, back to the whole punt thing. . .

might be worth noting that new england's punter got dinged last week, and had to leave the game. . . their kicker, gostkowski, did the punting in the second half-- seemed to do a creditable job. . . the regular dude was back to practice today-- sounds like he's probably okay to play. . . still, if he's not 100%, the odds of him shanking one could go up. . . they also had a snap sail over the punter's head last week, resulting in a safety. . .

special teams could be a factor this weekend. . .

and it should be an emphasis in the off-season, as it's been something of a weakness, other than prater and colquitt. . . i'm mostly concerned about the coverage units, but we probably will need to at least find or develop some depth behind holliday, if not an alternate to compete with him for punt return duties. . . we'll probably be looking at DBs and WRs in the draft-- finding one who could contribute right away on teams would be a bonus. . . and frankly, i kinda wish we'd hire bobby april away from the faders-- that guy was money when he had some talent to work with. . .

Brandon cooks WR oregon state can return

[Tned]

I already discussed and debated: I said the Int hit Decker squarely in the chest, then two people pointed out it actually hit Stuckeys hand, so I conceded they were right and I wrong.
THEN someone came along to ask if I only read about but don't watch games, compare me to a sewer (twice) and demand I stop playing martyr and man up—and I made the "dick move"? :confused:

It's not a dick move to note the guy trying hard to pick an online fight out of the blue has the ultimate closer in his pocket the whole time: It's stating undeniable fact. He never even considers using it; great—he can still reconsider that choice anytime, which will always loom over any conflict with any admin on any site. Again, not—repeat NOT—an accusation: That's just the way it is.

Especially when he shows up just to tear someone a new one AFTER they concede error and defeat in a debate. It's impossible to start a fight AND impartially referee it. Seriously, what are we discussing and debating now? It sure as Hell ain't football. Were I prone to dick moves I'd report FAR more personal attacks (I've been here how many years and reported how many personal attacks?) Gee, a poster just joined a thread to compare me to a sewer; to whom should I report that, and what response should I expect? ;)

It's a no win game, and I agree it's getting in the way of a thread actually ABOUT football, on which I've already said my piece, so I'll only end up regretting any further comment.

I don't referee anything, so don't get your pretty little panties in a wad or worry about getting your skirt wrinkled.

So, now that you repeated four times that I have zero integrity and will abuse my power if you disagree with me, but apparently not if you imply i don't have the integrity to not abuse my power :confused: why don't we both stipulate to the fact that you have thoroughly made the point of what you're afraid of and get back to the topic. K?

[Tned]

One thing I dislike about arguments on the forum is we talk very negatively about a lot of players. The longer the argument goes, the further from the center each side gets. Everything needs to be sometimes fault for some reason.

Not always. Sometimes we get very negative about coaches.

Joking aside, you are right.

[Dapper Dan]

so, back to the whole punt thing. . .

might be worth noting that new england's punter got dinged last week, and had to leave the game. . . their kicker, gostkowski, did the punting in the second half-- seemed to do a creditable job. . . the regular dude was back to practice today-- sounds like he's probably okay to play. . . still, if he's not 100%, the odds of him shanking one could go up. . . they also had a snap sail over the punter's head last week, resulting in a safety. . .

special teams could be a factor this weekend. . .

and it should be an emphasis in the off-season, as it's been something of a weakness, other than prater and colquitt. . . i'm mostly concerned about the coverage units, but we probably will need to at least find or develop some depth behind holliday, if not an alternate to compete with him for punt return duties. . . we'll probably be looking at DBs and WRs in the draft-- finding one who could contribute right away on teams would be a bonus. . . and frankly, i kinda wish we'd hire bobby april away from the faders-- that guy was money when he had some talent to work with. . .

Many good points here.

[Tned]

Seems like we have more than our share of returns called back for holding or blocks in back and Holliday is as likely to muff it as return it to the house.

I would have to see the stats, but my feel is that our coverage teams are better than recent years.

[Dapper Dan]

Seems like we have more than our share of returns called back for holding or blocks in back and Holliday is as likely to muff it as return it to the house.

I would have to see the stats, but my feel is that our coverage teams are better than recent years.

Idk. How many TDs have we given up?

[Tned]

Idk. How many TDs have we given up?

One kickoff return and no punt returns. I guess looking at the stats, we have been pretty bad. We are bottom third in net punting average, and while Broncos have FAR more touchbacks than anyone else (and far more kickoffs due to the record breaking scoring), the Broncos are worst in the league averaging nearly 30 return yards on kickoffs.

[dogfish]

Seems like we have more than our share of returns called back for holding or blocks in back and Holliday is as likely to muff it as return it to the house.

I would have to see the stats, but my feel is that our coverage teams are better than recent years.

i thought our coverage units were significantly improved last season, but they've regressed down the stretch this year-- we've gotten back into the habit of giving up big returns at inopportune moments. . . i think part of it can probably be chalked up to all the injuries pulling players off teams duty, and having other guys out there who haven't practiced it as much, but either way it doesn't help the cause any. . .

IMO, this off-season is the perfect time to start really focusing on it. . . would really be nice to build an impact special teams unit like the bears have had in recent years to help ease us into the post-peyton era. . . it takes time to establish that type of culture. . . we have a jump-start with nice players at kicker, punter and return specialist, but it still needs a lot of work. . .

as for the rest of this year, i'll be happy if they can just stay even or better-- don't give up any big plays. . .

[Dapper Dan]

I really thought we gave up at least 2. We only gave up the 1 @ KC?

[Hawgdriver]

i'm sure everyone can agree on this. . .

it's on him to make it happen, though. . . he has some trust to regain-- personally, i'd rather see him get the opportunity next season. . . we got two more games to take care of business, first. . . :D

I don't want to play scared. Balls out.

[Hawgdriver]

Many good points here.

I counted 2.

[Dapper Dan]

I counted 2.

I counted 4.

[Hawgdriver]

I counted 4.

Math majors. :smh:

[Joel]

I really thought we gave up at least 2. We only gave up the 1 @ KC?
We ended several with shoe string tackles inside our 10, so maybe that's it. Returns like that don't show up as TDs on our stats, but it's easy to remember them as TDs because that's the usual result. It's totally understandable that we're dead last in kickoff return yards allowed, and totally unacceptable. Our D's not good enough to give teams the ball outside their 30 everytime we score, and our punt return unit clearly isn't either. Does Beadles play on returns? He's good at running downfield and blocking much smaller guys. :tongue:

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Agreed. It was NOT a bad pass by Manning. When he let the ball go, he was throwing to an open spot in the endzone. Decker had just started to make his break. This was a clear timing route, where Manning was throwing to where Decker was GOING to be, not where he was when he made the decision to throw.

When Manning released the ball, the receivers on the right were covered. Welker was bracketed by two defenders and if he had squeezed it in, which he probably could have, there was a pretty good chance the catch would be outside the endzone and Welker may or may not have been able to fall back in for the score.

With Decker, he was throwing to a wide open area of the endzone that he knew Decker was heading for, and the defender appeared to be flat footed and it looked like Decker would likely blow right past him. The defender made a great move, and then used his body/arm to make it impossible for Decker to catch the ball.

http://www.broncosforums.com/downloads/decker-int-div-playoff-3.jpg

Man, look at that shot. They dropped 8 into coverage...definitely should have audibled to a running play. They might have disguised it pre-snap, but still, it was 2nd and goal from the 3.

[PatriotsGuy]

Has anyone mentioned that if Decker hadn't tackled himself, Manning wouldn't have thrown that interception? Just wondering.

[Ravage!!!]

Man, look at that shot. They dropped 8 into coverage...definitely should have audibled to a running play. They might have disguised it pre-snap, but still, it was 2nd and goal from the 3.

The Patriots will put a weak 6 defense up front and force Manning to audible to run plays all night long.

[Ravage!!!]

Has anyone mentioned that if Decker hadn't tackled himself, Manning wouldn't have thrown that interception? Just wondering.

Pfffft... who would mention that? That woud just be stupid.

[Ravage!!!]

Agreed. It was NOT a bad pass by Manning. When he let the ball go, he was throwing to an open spot in the endzone. Decker had just started to make his break. This was a clear timing route, where Manning was throwing to where Decker was GOING to be, not where he was when he made the decision to throw.
That's what you do when you lead EVERY WR on any route. You don't throw the ball where they are when you decide to throw, but where they WILL be when the ball gets there. That's leading the receiver, and not a timing route.


With Decker, he was throwing to a wide open area of the endzone that he knew Decker was heading for, and the defender appeared to be flat footed and it looked like Decker would likely blow right past him. The defender made a great move, and then used his body/arm to make it impossible for Decker to catch the ball.

Wait. I love Manning, but this is silly. So yo uare saying that because he threw the ball to where he THOUGHT Decker was going to be open, it's not a bad decision? That is the DEFINITION of bad decision in throwing the ball in the NFL. QBs don't TRY to throw balls when they KNOW the coverage is going to be in the way. They make a mis-read and throw INTO coverage because they didn't know it was going to be there. That is what a "bad decision" is when it comes to QB'ing. Decker was MORE than covered.

I don't think anyone is trying to hang Manning for making a bad decision, especially when it has to be considered he was throwing to the back of the endzone where NORMALLY its a "my guy or no guy" type of throw. But saying the "he thought he would be open" is the same excuse every QB can say for EVERY INT. "He thought he would have been open enough to catch it." I guess there just aren't bad decisions when it comes to INTs, then.

[Tned]

That's what you do when you lead EVERY WR on any route. You don't throw the ball where they are when you decide to throw, but where they WILL be when the ball gets there. That's leading the receiver, and not a timing route.

Yes and no. Very often, when you throw to a receiver, there is a defender in stride or covering the receiver, and the QB leads him (obviously, except maybe on a short comeback or WR screen) and then either counts on the WR winning the one on one battle OR he throws it to a spot where he believes only the WR can get to the ball, such as outside shoulder, back shoulder, etc.

In this case, he was starting his windup as Decker was just making his break and Manning was throwing to a spot on the field.


Wait. I love Manning, but this is silly. So yo uare saying that because he threw the ball to where he THOUGHT Decker was going to be open, it's not a bad decision? That is the DEFINITION of bad decision in throwing the ball in the NFL. QBs don't TRY to throw balls when they KNOW the coverage is going to be in the way. They make a mis-read and throw INTO coverage because they didn't know it was going to be there. That is what a "bad decision" is when it comes to QB'ing. Decker was MORE than covered.

I don't think anyone is trying to hang Manning for making a bad decision, especially when it has to be considered he was throwing to the back of the endzone where NORMALLY its a "my guy or no guy" type of throw. But saying the "he thought he would be open" is the same excuse every QB can say for EVERY INT. "He thought he would have been open enough to catch it." I guess there just aren't bad decisions when it comes to INTs, then.

Manning throughout his career has done this with regularity. If you think back to the pick six Manning threw last year down in/near the redzone, it was because he was throwing to a spot, counting on Matt Willis to read the coverage and be on the same page, but Willis failed to read the coverage the same as Manning and break to the spot where Manning expected him.

Granted, a QB like Tebow would not do this, but instead waited for a receiver to make his break or even be open before throwing, but what makes great QB's like Manning great is that they throw to where the receiver will be, quite often long before they actually make their break.

Using your logic, any time a pass is broken up, not to mention intercepted, it was a bad decision, because the receiver wasn't open. That just is an unrealistic view of things.

Let's look realistically about what happened on that play. A VERY good play by the defender, which bordered on PI, because he was making contact and blocking Decker from raising his right arm, resulted in a pass breakup that through a great effort from another defender, wound up in a ball batted up in the air and being intercepted. If Manning makes that throw 20 times, it's probably a TD half of the times or more, and intercepted one out of 20 or one out of 100 times.

I think it's just as crazy to go on about it being a bad decision, as it is to claim (as many did) that it hit Decker in the chest and he screwed the pooch and caused the INT.

[BroncoJoe]

That was about the dumbest two paragraphs I've ever read. Rav, you've out done yourself.

[pipes]

Add Content

[slim]

Has anyone mentioned that if Decker hadn't tackled himself, Manning wouldn't have thrown that interception? Just wondering.

Has anyone mentioned that pags can go **** himself?

[Ravage!!!]

That was about the dumbest two paragraphs I've ever read. Rav, you've out done yourself.

Joe, if I thought you had a SINGLE ounce of football intelligence that I respected, then your comment would bother me. But I have NEVER seen you say much that brings intelligent thought to ANY discussion. Any time.... ANY time... you want to talk football, I would GLADLY sit down and educate you.

[PatriotsGuy]

Has anyone mentioned that pags can go **** himself?

Other than you? Well maybe, I don't read every post here.

[Ravage!!!]

Yes and no. Very often, when you throw to a receiver, there is a defender in stride or covering the receiver, and the QB leads him (obviously, except maybe on a short comeback or WR screen) and then either counts on the WR winning the one on one battle OR he throws it to a spot where he believes only the WR can get to the ball, such as outside shoulder, back shoulder, etc.

In this case, he was starting his windup as Decker was just making his break and Manning was throwing to a spot on the field.
Yes, and we've seen a ton of QB's make good throws on bad decisions. Doesn't make the throw a better decision, despite the outcome. But, that isn't a timing route, and this was NOT a timing route. Leading the WR, is not a timing route. This play was Manning reading the defense, and throwing to the crossing Decker....which is completely different from what you are trying to explain below.



Manning throughout his career has done this with regularity. If you think back to the pick six Manning threw last year down in/near the redzone, it was because he was throwing to a spot, counting on Matt Willis to read the coverage and be on the same page, but Willis failed to read the coverage the same as Manning and break to the spot where Manning expected him.
Maybe, but that is completely different than the decision on this play. That was a pre-snap CALL, a designed play to be thrown, to that spot, before the snap occured. Not the same.


Using your logic, any time a pass is broken up, not to mention intercepted, it was a bad decision, because the receiver wasn't open. That just is an unrealistic view of things.
No. The bad decisions are throwing to WRs that aren't open. This wasn't a back shoulder pass, this wasn't a fade, and this wasn't a deep ball thrown to where only the WR or "no one" could get the ball. This wasn't a pre-snap, going-to-throw-to-this-spot, designed timing route. THis was a read during the play that Manning decided to throw the ball to that receiver based on coverage that he saw DURING the play. The WR wasn't open, and thus why the play was broken up. ANY time a QB throws INTO coverage, it most likely is a bad decision on the QB. That's why we are able to go back and look at game film and see why, based on coverage, the QB made the decision he did. The WR was covered, the ball was thrown INTo coverage, and the ball was deflected BY the defender. That, by definition, is a bad/poor decision made by the QB.


I think it's just as crazy to go on about it being a bad decision, as it is to claim (as many did) that it hit Decker in the chest and he screwed the pooch and caused the INT.

Hey, it happens to the greatest of QBs (as we've just witnessed)...and it will happen again. That's part of football and even the Great Manning makes mistakes...and its ok to accept that without TRYING to make excuses for him. That's really the only point being made. As I said, its not throwing Manning under the bus and/or "blaming" him by admiting he made a mistake in that choice.

[Tned]

Yes, and we've seen a ton of QB's make good throws on bad decisions. Doesn't make the throw a better decision, despite the outcome. But, that isn't a timing route, and this was NOT a timing route. Leading the WR, is not a timing route. This play was Manning reading the defense, and throwing to the crossing Decker....which is completely different from what you are trying to explain below.



Maybe, but that is completely different than the decision on this play. That was a pre-snap CALL, a designed play to be thrown, to that spot, before the snap occured. Not the same.


No. The bad decisions are throwing to WRs that aren't open. This wasn't a back shoulder pass, this wasn't a fade, and this wasn't a deep ball thrown to where only the WR or "no one" could get the ball. This wasn't a pre-snap, going-to-throw-to-this-spot, designed timing route. THis was a read during the play that Manning decided to throw the ball to that receiver based on coverage that he saw DURING the play. The WR wasn't open, and thus why the play was broken up. ANY time a QB throws INTO coverage, it most likely is a bad decision on the QB. That's why we are able to go back and look at game film and see why, based on coverage, the QB made the decision he did. The WR was covered, the ball was thrown INTo coverage, and the ball was deflected BY the defender. That, by definition, is a bad/poor decision made by the QB.



Hey, it happens to the greatest of QBs (as we've just witnessed)...and it will happen again. That's part of football and even the Great Manning makes mistakes...and its ok to accept that without TRYING to make excuses for him. That's really the only point being made. As I said, its not throwing Manning under the bus and/or "blaming" him by admiting he made a mistake in that choice.

You might want to go back to your DVR and rewatch it, and better yet, watch it on NFL rewind with the coaches cam/all 22.

[Ravage!!!]

You might want to go back to your DVR and rewatch it, and better yet, watch it on NFL rewind with the coaches cam/all 22.

Ok. Not going to change anything, though.

[BroncoJoe]

Joe, if I thought you had a SINGLE ounce of football intelligence that I respected, then your comment would bother me. But I have NEVER seen you say much that brings intelligent thought to ANY discussion. Any time.... ANY time... you want to talk football, I would GLADLY sit down and educate you.

I suppose you're an NFL coach of some sort? Please detail for us your extensive knowledge and how you're applying it to everyday life.

I'd guess it's ZERO, but I'm very sure you were a star in High School.