View Full Version : When Your Right Tackle Gets Exposed.....Along With Your Safety
WARHORSE
11-02-2014, 08:06 PM
One weak link in the line, and the rest of the team has to compensate. Cornick couldnt block an ant in molasses.
Broncos refused to address it before the trade deadline, and as I said before in an earlier thread, this will get exposed later in the season, ie the playoffs.
Cornick is HORRIBLE. Put Ryan back in there and hope for the best.
When one man is that bad, the man playing next to him is always playing on eggshells trying to protect their gap alone.
The interior of the line is a mess when they pressure Vazquez and Cornick and it aint because of Vasquez.
Peyton making him look good by getting rid of the ball makes you feel safe.........but you aint. At least not once youre going against playoff teams or opposing coaches who understand your weaknesses.
Belichick smoked two weaknesses: Cornick and Ward in coverage.
Almost every significant pass completed against us over the past number of games has come at number 43s expense. The man cant cover.
Also, they stoned our pass rush.
ALL IM SAYING IS.........FIX IT......OR GET SENT HOME IN JANUARY.
Ryan? As you say, it's past the trade deadline, so we can't get the 'Skins FS to come play RT for us, and anyway, he can't play in Denver because it would kill him.
CHRIS Clark, however, was as bad as or worse than Cornick, so there's not much to be done at this point; it's not like some stiff signed off the waiver wire would be any better.
Ward's a good SS, but that means a better blitzer and run stuffer than centerfielder: That's Rahim the Nightmare's job, and the coaches are evidently convinced he's up to it whether or not they're correct.
Miller had better than usual luck going at Brady off the edge, but neither he nor Ware had MUCH, because Vollmer and Solder are both excellent OTs; I have no idea why we didn't send our roving Sam and SS through their rookie center for more inside pressure: It worked well enough for NE that a BACKUP LB blew by Franklin to sack Manning on 4th and 6 at the end of the first half.
Northman
11-02-2014, 08:17 PM
Its just one game.
tripp
11-02-2014, 08:23 PM
We're onto Oakland.
Timmy!
11-02-2014, 08:26 PM
Meh, a loss in Foxboro is nothing new. 34 straight in the regular season at home is no joke. More concerned about Irving than anything. NE will finish no better than 12-4, and have to come to Denver in January. I had Denver at 6-2 at this point when I saw the schedule. All good.
Simple Jaded
11-02-2014, 08:28 PM
Meh, a loss in Foxboro is nothing new. 34 straight in the regular season at home is no joke. More concerned about Irving than anything. NE will finish no better than 12-4, and have to come to Denver in January. I had Denver at 6-2 at this point when I saw the schedule. All good.
Must be comforting to know that you'll get your biggest threat in your home-ref advantage year after year.
tripp
11-02-2014, 08:29 PM
Meh, a loss in Foxboro is nothing new. 34 straight in the regular season at home is no joke. More concerned about Irving than anything. NE will finish no better than 12-4, and have to come to Denver in January. I had Denver at 6-2 at this point when I saw the schedule. All good.
Absolutely. They needed that win more than we did. We'll be fine, 6-2 isn't bad, nor is our schedule.
Timmy!
11-02-2014, 08:31 PM
Pretty much, but Broncos didn't play well...as usual in Foxboro. Losses suck, but by the end of November Denver will be back in control of the AFC.
Timmy!
11-02-2014, 08:32 PM
Absolutely. They needed that win more than we did. We'll be fine, 6-2 isn't bad, nor is our schedule.
That's pretty much it. We have already gone through our murders row....NE is just starting thiers. I hate playing damage control but this game really shouldn't shock anybody.
tripp
11-02-2014, 08:41 PM
That's pretty much it. We have already gone through our murders row....NE is just starting thiers. I hate playing damage control but this game really shouldn't shock anybody.
A loss is a loss. Some reason people would be "ok" if we lost in a nail biter. The only thing I hate is relying on other teams.
Timmy!
11-02-2014, 08:49 PM
A loss is a loss. Some reason people would be "ok" if we lost in a nail biter. The only thing I hate is relying on other teams.
Agreed. Hopefully the news on Irving isn't season ending (but sure looks like it is). Some people will panic, but I don't think the Broncos lose again till next September. :D
VonDoom
11-02-2014, 08:49 PM
A loss is a loss. Some reason people would be "ok" if we lost in a nail biter. The only thing I hate is relying on other teams.
Right, and that's the problem here. I know NE's schedule is rough in the next four weeks (after their bye). But can we really count on them losing a couple of games, the way they've been playing? People keep saying they'll be 12-4; maybe they will, maybe they won't. But if we're assuming that, it means we need to go 7-1 to get home field away from them. Right now, we haven't proven we can beat anyone on the road. Let's say we beat up on the teams we're supposed to - both Oakland games (the team that lost by 7 at NE and 6 at SEA, by the way), at St Louis (the team that beat SEA and SF, by the way), Miami at home, Buffalo at home. That's a lot of assumptions, but it would give us 11. That means we need to win two out of three at KC, at SD, at CIN. We may yet do it, but this game did us no favors for the rest of the year.
Like I said earlier, let's worry about closing out our division before we worry about potentially playing another game in that house of horrors in NE.
7DnBrnc53
11-02-2014, 09:14 PM
Absolutely. They needed that win more than we did. We'll be fine, 6-2 isn't bad, nor is our schedule.
No, we needed it just as much. It should be our time. NE should be a non-issue anymore, and Peyton still loses at Foxboro. If we are so great, we need to win against anyone, anywhere. Tonight was inexcusable.
Dzone
11-02-2014, 09:22 PM
TJ Ward-good tackler who cant cover
tripp
11-02-2014, 09:25 PM
Right, and that's the problem here. I know NE's schedule is rough in the next four weeks (after their bye). But can we really count on them losing a couple of games, the way they've been playing? People keep saying they'll be 12-4; maybe they will, maybe they won't. But if we're assuming that, it means we need to go 7-1 to get home field away from them. Right now, we haven't proven we can beat anyone on the road. Let's say we beat up on the teams we're supposed to - both Oakland games (the team that lost by 7 at NE and 6 at SEA, by the way), at St Louis (the team that beat SEA and SF, by the way), Miami at home, Buffalo at home. That's a lot of assumptions, but it would give us 11. That means we need to win two out of three at KC, at SD, at CIN. We may yet do it, but this game did us no favors for the rest of the year.
Like I said earlier, let's worry about closing out our division before we worry about potentially playing another game in that house of horrors in NE.
Agreed. There's a lot of assumptions, including me, that we'll even play New England in the playoffs. There's no guarantee of that. Nothing saying we'll even get to the AFCCG, or the Patriots. One week at a time.
tripp
11-02-2014, 09:28 PM
No, we needed it just as much. It should be our time. NE should be a non-issue anymore, and Peyton still loses at Foxboro. If we are so great, we need to win against anyone, anywhere. Tonight was inexcusable.
Unfortunately that's not the case. We're not invincible, and there are chinks in our armor, we just have to hope the coaching staff IDENTIFIES those issues and corrects them, and not just say that during press conferences. There's still a whole lot of football left and it won't take long for us to start feeling good about our team again.
TJ Ward-good tackler who cant cover
Sounds like some of you need to learn FS vs SS roles and responsibilities.
WARHORSE
11-02-2014, 10:10 PM
Its one game and we have enough talent to overcome alot.
Doesnt change one fact: Cornick is horrible.
This will raise its ugly head again.
I hope it doesnt......but it is what it is...........
People are killing Ward. Covering is not simply running close to somebody.
tripp
11-02-2014, 10:14 PM
Its one game and we have enough talent to overcome alot.
Doesnt change one fact: Cornick is horrible.
This will raise its ugly head again.
I hope it doesnt......but it is what it is...........
People are killing Ward. Covering is not simply running close to somebody.
Ward is what he is. Hard hitter that clogs up the gap. I don't hate on his game. I didn't even know who Cornick was until we started him against SF.
Ward is what he is. Hard hitter that clogs up the gap.
In other words, a SS, and a darned good one.
I don't hate on his game. I didn't even know who Cornick was until we started him against SF.
Which we wouldn't have if Clark had been doing a starting-quality job; Elway can say Cornick earned the starting role and it wasn't a comment on Clark, but he didn't bench Clark just to give Cornick a gold star.
Simple Jaded
11-02-2014, 10:48 PM
That holding call on Cornick looked like bullshit to me, I was at a bar but it sure didn't look legit.
NightTrainLayne
11-02-2014, 10:58 PM
Yeah. I think Cornick's performance tonight is the least of our worries.
Hawgdriver
11-03-2014, 12:53 AM
Meh, a loss in Foxboro is nothing new. 34 straight in the regular season at home is no joke. More concerned about Irving than anything. NE will finish no better than 12-4, and have to come to Denver in January. I had Denver at 6-2 at this point when I saw the schedule. All good.
Same here. I was more worried about the injuries. It's a grind. Just need to win when you need to win.
CoachChaz
11-03-2014, 09:29 AM
Sounds like some of you need to learn FS vs SS roles and responsibilities.
Despite his talents in the run game...pass coverage is still a required skill for a strong safety. Just saying
Despite his talents in the run game...pass coverage is still a required skill for a strong safety. Just saying
It is and he's adequate enough but he made his money stuffing the run and making big hits.
Dzone
11-03-2014, 09:51 AM
TJ Ward got beat for 2 touchdowns , he sure as hell is supposed to be able to pass defend. Its a major part of his job.
ForgettingBrandonMarshall
11-03-2014, 09:57 AM
I personally thought our other safety played worse than Ward, but maybe I wasn't paying enough attention.
CoachChaz
11-03-2014, 10:00 AM
It is and he's adequate enough but he made his money stuffing the run and making big hits.
We dont need a run stuffer...we need help on the back end and against TE's. Still do. I'd have to argue the notion that Ward is "adequate" in coverage
tomjonesrocks
11-03-2014, 10:09 AM
No, we needed it just as much. It should be our time. NE should be a non-issue anymore, and Peyton still loses at Foxboro. If we are so great, we need to win against anyone, anywhere. Tonight was inexcusable.
Denver has better personnel on both sides of the ball. Yet the Pats dominate. I don't see it as "it's all good" at all.
Shows inferior coaching and an inability to show up in big games top to bottom. The team went from SB favorites to pretenders overnight.
weazel
11-03-2014, 11:22 AM
Its just one game.
no, this happened last game as well... and warhorse said the same thing.
Krugan
11-03-2014, 11:57 AM
My problem, 10 days off and we just didnt look ready.
That being said we are 6-2, leading the afc west again.
Its 1 game, and beating them at home is tough no matter what they field.
Simple Jaded
11-03-2014, 02:27 PM
Denver has better personnel on both sides of the ball. Yet the Pats dominate. I don't see it as "it's all good" at all.
Shows inferior coaching and an inability to show up in big games top to bottom. The team went from SB favorites to pretenders overnight.
There's always next year.
There's always next year.
Not when you're 38 and it's been "inferior coaching and an inability to show up in big games top to bottom. The team went from SB favorites to pretenders overnight" 3 years running. What changes in 2015?
Manning turns 39, our cap gets tighter and Welker leaves or retires. Sooner or later, second chances end: This is our THIRD....
tripp
11-03-2014, 02:50 PM
There's always next year.
Next year as in... when we play the Patriots in the Playoffs in January? :lol:
Simple Jaded
11-03-2014, 03:04 PM
Next year as in... when we play the Patriots in the Playoffs in January? :lol:
No this season is lost, the Broncos are pretenders, time to start looking forward to next year.
tripp
11-03-2014, 03:05 PM
No this season is lost, the Broncos are pretenders, time to start looking forward to next year.
Ya but PFM is the greatest regular season QB of all time
Dzone
11-03-2014, 03:18 PM
Manning is not a big game QB. We can enjoy the star wars numbers during the season though!
underrated29
11-03-2014, 03:23 PM
Its just one game.
agreed, but the line has been an issue all season imo
Simple Jaded
11-03-2014, 03:35 PM
They could start Manning during the regular season and then go to the big game QB outlet store and see what's on clearance, no sense in actually playing the playoff games til they get a better big game QB.
HORSEPOWER 56
11-04-2014, 01:22 PM
I'm guessing Schofield must really stink. If he can't beat out Clark and Cornick and their below average play, perhaps he wasn't worth the draft pick.
jhildebrand
11-04-2014, 01:32 PM
Why the Broncos haven't found a solution at C is beyond me. The bulk of the line's problems are with Manny. On the 4th and 6 where they went for it, IIRC, Manning was sacked by a 4 man rush. Manny was lost next to Vasquez.
Ravage!!!
11-04-2014, 01:47 PM
Yeah.. its hard to see how a team can't miss in the draft of FAs. I mean, EVERYONE has a stud C and RT. Its BEYOND me how they can't possibly have every position filled with beasts. How can they not just "get a stud" for that position? Its simple. Just fix it. Thats all it takes.. just fix it.
Don't worry guys. We'll be able to feel better about the Broncos again on Sunday. All will be well....until the next time and probably late Jan.
underrated29
11-04-2014, 02:24 PM
I'm guessing Schofield must really stink. If he can't beat out Clark and Cornick and their below average play, perhaps he wasn't worth the draft pick.
I did a big write up on him before the season started. Might have been before preseason and TC....Im sure it was. What I saw from schofield made me think he needed AT Least 1 year. Maybe more. He tips off what the play is going to be.
Simple Jaded
11-05-2014, 12:10 AM
http://www.ourlads.com/nfldepthcharts/depthchart/DEN
DEPTH CHART FEATURE - What Ourlads NFL Scouting Services said before MICHAEL SCHOFIELD made the Denver Broncos' depth chart: Michigan, 6064 301 5.02. Three-year starter. Has steadily made his move up draft boards with his consistent play. Plays with good bend, base, and arm extension in pass protection. Patient letting the defender come to him. Mirrors and walls off upfield rusher with foot quickness and power. Consistent on his inside hand placement. Can anchor and turn a power player or bull rush. Technically sound. Steers the defender and drives him where he wants to go. Good agility to seal the second level. Works to finish his blocks. Did not lift at Combine due to a hand bruise. At Michigan pro day he had a 9 foot broad jump which was 15 inches more than his Combine jump. Senior Bowl notes: started at right tackle for Michigan but worked at right guard during the Senior Bowl week. Possesses good height with ample room to add additional muscle weight. Can get to inline block targets with explosive power. Can bend but took bend out of knees on both run and pass opportunities at times. Good agility to slide feet and mirror straight on pass rushers. May have a dual role on the next level as a tackle and a guard. OSR:10/ 40. Third/fourth round. (A-34, H-9 5/8, BP-DNP, 10-1.73).
Here what Ourlads thinks of Schofield, I don't think he's the stiff people insist he is.
MOtorboat
11-05-2014, 03:54 AM
Not when you're 38 and it's been "inferior coaching and an inability to show up in big games top to bottom. The team went from SB favorites to pretenders overnight" 3 years running. What changes in 2015?
Manning turns 39, our cap gets tighter and Welker leaves or retires. Sooner or later, second chances end: This is our THIRD....
I mean, right? Why can't this team be like Jacksonville?
tripp
11-05-2014, 01:28 PM
Not when you're 38 and it's been "inferior coaching and an inability to show up in big games top to bottom. The team went from SB favorites to pretenders overnight" 3 years running. What changes in 2015?
Manning turns 39, our cap gets tighter and Welker leaves or retires. Sooner or later, second chances end: This is our THIRD....
I think we tend to forget about the wins we have picked up over the course of the season. I will admit Sunday night and even Monday I was down on our team, and I wish I wouldn't comment on anything until you get over the initial shock of defeat.
We have beat Chiefs, Chargers, San Fran, Colts, and Cardinals. All good teams that are above .500, and all of them made the playoffs last year (with the exception of the Card, but in any other division they would've made it with their record). San Fran has gone to the NFC Championship 3 times in a row. We dismantled them in prime time. We beat the Colts with a brand new defence who half the players have never played with each other. We were shakey, but we held on for a good win. Same with the game against the Chiefs. Same Chiefs team that ruined the Patriots in prime time.
I was thinking about Manning getting older and if he'll come back next year. My question is this, why would D-Ware (who is getting up there in age), TJ Ward, and Aqib Talib come to Denver to have 1 shot of making it to the SB. I personally think Manning said to Elway, short of breaking a bone in his body, he will be back next year and perhaps for the following year. I don't see how the FO invests in veteran players if the mindset is, this year or bust. I find it hard that Elway and company doesn't have some kind of indication/estimate when Peyton will really retire. I don't think they're going by year to year. I just don't.
I've forgotten neither the many wins against many good teams NOR the context: ALL were missing key starters—even Indy in the OPENER (Mathis' suspension)—and 5 of our first 7 games were at home: On the road, we beat the awful Jets and to the imploding Seahawks in OT. Those were our 6-1 starts qualifiers as we headed into the lesser quality half of the season but with 6 of our last 9 on the road and with SD and KC expecting most starters back before each hosts us again. It was another big reason to show up big to start that road stretch against a much lesser also missing far more starters.
Well. That beat up lesser team beat up OURS, blowing us out of the stadium, taking Welker out of the game and sidelining Irving until his sprained ligament heals. We'll see what we've got left and how we bounce back from that over the rest of our games (most of which are on the road,) but Seattle and NO aren't the only teams far more beatable on the road: Thin air's good for us and bad for opponents, while the Pats have been virtually unbeatable at NE since Brady got there (IIRC he's lost all of 3 career games at home.) Yet getting the rematch in our house instead of theirs just got harder....
As to the rest, I don't think Elway would've told top FAs Manning's retiring next year even—ESPECIALLY—if he knew it was true. I'm sure we'll keep Clady and hope we'll keep the Thomases, but, IMHO, it's increasingly clear the post-Manning Broncos will be a DEFENSIVE team, so guys like Ware, Ward and Talib will be more valuable then than now. If anything, that would help explain why Elway focussed more on beefing up a D that played a fine SB than on shoring up an offensive line that LOST one almost singlehandedly.
I personally think Manning will play until he 1) wins another SB or 2) realizes he NEVER will. At 38-year-old, he's not far from EITHER now.
MOtorboat
11-08-2014, 06:41 PM
I've forgotten neither the many wins against many good teams NOR the context: ALL were missing key starters—even Indy in the OPENER (Mathis' suspension)—and 5 of our first 7 games were at home: On the road, we beat the awful Jets and to the imploding Seahawks in OT. Those were our 6-1 starts qualifiers as we headed into the lesser quality half of the season but with 6 of our last 9 on the road and with SD and KC expecting most starters back before each hosts us again. It was another big reason to show up big to start that road stretch against a much lesser also missing far more starters.
Well. That beat up lesser team beat up OURS, blowing us out of the stadium, taking Welker out of the game and sidelining Irving until his sprained ligament heals. We'll see what we've got left and how we bounce back from that over the rest of our games (most of which are on the road,) but Seattle and NO aren't the only teams far more beatable on the road: Thin air's good for us and bad for opponents, while the Pats have been virtually unbeatable at NE since Brady got there (IIRC he's lost all of 3 career games at home.) Yet getting the rematch in our house instead of theirs just Ogot harder....
:laugh:
MOtorboat
11-08-2014, 06:43 PM
The Sagarin ratings disagree strongly.
http://sagarin.com/sports/nflsend.htm
VonDoom
11-08-2014, 08:11 PM
The Sagarin ratings disagree strongly.
http://sagarin.com/sports/nflsend.htm
Every advanced metric I've seen still has us as the best team in football. Football Outsiders, I believe, has us down for the hardest first half schedule of any team all year. And we're 6-2. The sky isn't falling.
I agree that we need to prove something on the road; we look like a different team in those games so far, and we're going to have to figure that out with this stretch run.
The Sagarin ratings disagree strongly.
http://sagarin.com/sports/nflsend.htm
So... you LIKE Sagarin ratings but HATE power ratings? :confused: Do you also like Coke but hate cola? :tongue: Disagree with WHAT, exactly? I see NOTHING there that disputes ANYTHING I said. Obvious troll iz obvious.
MOtorboat
11-08-2014, 08:16 PM
So... you LIKE Sagarin ratings but HATE power ratings? :confused: Do you also like Coke but hate cola? :tongue: Disagree with WHAT, exactly? I see NOTHING there that disputes ANYTHING I said. Obvious troll iz obvious.
The No. 1 hardest schedule in the NFL completely disputes your original post where you are disparaging the Broncos repeatedly for the ******* schedule.
The No. 1 hardest schedule in the NFL completely disputes your original post where you are disparaging the Broncos repeatedly for the ******* schedule.
It's not the schedule, it's the LOCATION: We've played 5 home and 3 road games so far (and before last week it was just 2 on the road.) Now we play 3 home and 5 road games; the competition's not as ferocious as the first half (it scarcely could be,) but we've come out VERY flat on the road so far, not putting away the awful Jets till the final period, not SHOWING UP till the final period in Seattle and gettting utterly destroyed by a lesser team @NE. I did note NE's practically unbeatable by ANYONE at home in the Brady Era, but that's just one more reason I don't want to go there in January.
MOtorboat
11-08-2014, 08:29 PM
Interesting, the schedule has nothing to do with where the game is played.
Learn something new every day.
Interesting, the schedule has nothing to do with where the game is played.
Learn something new every day.
In terms of difficulty, it's worth ~3 pts, on average, give or take whatever house rules the handicapper applies. A little extra math can make it more precise for particular teams against other particular teams (say, if a team hosts NO, or travels to KC) but it's unclear that extra precision adds any accuracy.
Seriously, Sagarin's just using a proprietary homebrew of the same old power ratings. The big difference is power ratings just iterate raw victory margins against opponent victory margins, so can be independently checked, whereas Sagarin doesn't disclose his specifics, so no verification's possible. Regardless, dismissing them as irrelevant only to do a 180° and treat them as some infallible oracle when convenient's just transparently hypocritical. They either have value or not (and one big shortcoming is they can't factor in injuries,) but can't go back and forth from invaluable to valueless as it suits us.
MOtorboat
11-08-2014, 08:53 PM
In terms of difficulty, it's worth ~3 pts, on average, give or take whatever house rules the handicapper applies. A little extra math can make it more precise for particular teams against other particular teams (say, if a team hosts NO, or travels to KC) but it's unclear that extra precision adds any accuracy.
Seriously, Sagarin's just using a proprietary homebrew of the same old power ratings. The big difference is power ratings just iterate raw victory margins against opponent victory margins, so can be independently checked, whereas Sagarin doesn't disclose his specifics, so no verification's possible. Regardless, dismissing them as irrelevant only to do a 180° and treat them as some infallible oracle when convenient's just transparently hypocritical. They either have value or not (and one big shortcoming is they can't factor in injuries,) but can't go back and forth from invaluable to valueless as it suits us.
I don't remember ever dismissing Sagarin.
Runamok
11-08-2014, 09:21 PM
Right, and that's the problem here. I know NE's schedule is rough in the next four weeks (after their bye). But can we really count on them losing a couple of games, the way they've been playing? People keep saying they'll be 12-4; maybe they will, maybe they won't. But if we're assuming that, it means we need to go 7-1 to get home field away from them. Right now, we haven't proven we can beat anyone on the road. Let's say we beat up on the teams we're supposed to - both Oakland games (the team that lost by 7 at NE and 6 at SEA, by the way), at St Louis (the team that beat SEA and SF, by the way), Miami at home, Buffalo at home. That's a lot of assumptions, but it would give us 11. That means we need to win two out of three at KC, at SD, at CIN. We may yet do it, but this game did us no favors for the rest of the year.
Like I said earlier, let's worry about closing out our division before we worry about potentially playing another game in that house of horrors in NE.
People better hope NE goes 12-4 because the pressure is totally on Denver. Another loss, and NE can then afford a third loss, thanks to the tie-breaker.
Slick
11-08-2014, 09:25 PM
People better hope NE goes 12-4 because the pressure is totally on Denver. Another loss, and NE can then afford a third loss, thanks to the tie-breaker.
Why stop there? I'm hoping New England goes 9-7.
Runamok
11-08-2014, 09:26 PM
Sounds like some of you need to learn FS vs SS roles and responsibilities.
I agree with you, for the most part. Strong safeties get paid, primarily, for their run-stuffing and blitzing abilities......but they do have to be able to cover the tight end position.
Those complaining about Ward this week don't seem to understand that NOBODY can cover Gronkowski.
Cugel
11-08-2014, 09:28 PM
That's pretty much it. We have already gone through our murders row....NE is just starting thiers. I hate playing damage control but this game really shouldn't shock anybody.
Alright. Playing @Indy, then home against the 6-2 Lions, then @Green Bay won't be easy. Then they have Miami at home and go to San Diego before finishing up with the Jets & Buffalo. Even Buffalo has a winning record right now. So, yes, they have a tougher schedule than the Broncos.
But, they could win all those games, and if they play like they did Sunday, they will.
The Broncos have an easier schedule, @Raiders, @Rams, Dolphins at home, etc. Even the @Cincy that looked like a tough game at the beginning of the season looks like it might be a walk-over as the Bengals are collapsing. There's no game the Broncos shouldn't be favored to win.
But, that does NOT mean they won't be upset by someone. And if they lose even 1 more game they could lose home-field advantage. And if they go back to Gillette Stadium they're going to be overwhelming underdogs.
I agree with you, for the most part. Strong safeties get paid, primarily, for their run-stuffing and blitzing abilities......but they do have to be able to cover the tight end position. Those complaining about Ward this week don't seem to understand that NOBODY can cover Gronkowski.
Ward can cover when needed, but not the best TE around. He made his money stuffing the run and making big hits in the box. Anyone who is bitching about "Ward can't cover" needs to have a talking to.
Simple Jaded
11-09-2014, 01:34 AM
At least 2 of the TD's Wards given up has been well-played, contested passes, the one to Edelman was a tight window and there was one vs Gates where Gates pushed off big time on what Shoulda been a goaline stand if it wasn't for a shit PI call on 4th down the play before.
WARHORSE
11-11-2014, 02:05 PM
The line sure played better but I still think ManRam should be second string. If Cognito can play better than him, then bring the man in.
The line sure played better but I still think ManRam should be second string. If Cognito can play better than him, then bring the man in.
Richie, at his best. Is better than anyone on our line not named Clady or Vasquez.
WARHORSE
11-11-2014, 02:32 PM
Richie, at his best. Is better than anyone on our line not named Clady or Vasquez.
Perhaps. The man hasnt been playing.
I liked what I saw from Schoefield especially considering it was his first game.
Im just relieved Cornick isnt in there anymore. The man cant play tackle.
Perhaps. The man hasnt been playing. I liked what I saw from Schoefield especially considering it was his first game. Im just relieved Cornick isnt in there anymore. The man cant play tackle.
Peyton took a year off...
Ravage!!!
11-11-2014, 03:59 PM
Peyton took a year off...
True, but it took him quite a few games to start looking like himself. However, I don't think Incognito has been away long enough that conditioning won't help.
7DnBrnc53
11-12-2014, 10:14 AM
Perhaps. The man hasnt been playing.
I liked what I saw from Schoefield especially considering it was his first game.
Im just relieved Cornick isnt in there anymore. The man cant play tackle.
Did Scholfield see action at the end of the game on Sunday? I didn't see because I turned it off early in the fourth quarter when it was way out of hand.
Did Scholfield see action at the end of the game on Sunday? I didn't see because I turned it off early in the fourth quarter when it was way out of hand.
:laugh: When it's out of the hand in our favor, I savor every minute up until the clock hits 0. If it's not in our favor, I turn it off.
HORSEPOWER 56
11-12-2014, 11:46 AM
Perhaps. The man hasnt been playing.
I liked what I saw from Schoefield especially considering it was his first game.
Im just relieved Cornick isnt in there anymore. The man cant play tackle.
Did Scholfield see action at the end of the game on Sunday? I didn't see because I turned it off early in the fourth quarter when it was way out of hand.
No, Scofield didn't dress he was on the inactive list.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4 Release Candidate 2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.