Broncos Gameday Thead: Broncos vs Chiefs 11/27/16

[dogfish]

**** that game. I guess as many as we have pulled out of our ass the last few years we had that kind of loss coming.

sometimes you eat the ba'ar, and sometimes the ba'ar eats you. . .

[wayninja]

Siemian threw for like 360 yards and 3 tds. what the hell do you want him to do?

If he would just have not taken a safety.

I'm not sure i totally blame him, but that would have been the game winner.

You did ask.

[Hawgdriver]

Oh, and the FG try decision, if the tie proves necessary for a postseason invite.

[Tned]

If you would of told me after winning the SB that we would be 7-4 at this point i would of said you were high. We may or may not make the postseason but at last we arent the Cleveland Browns.

Most of the people posting in this thread figured we would start 1-3 or so and then start Lynch in a bit of a rebuild year.

[dogfish]

You owe me an apology and you know what thread to deliver it in.

for what? i may have to plead drunken insanity. . .

[Tned]

If he would just have not taken a safety.

I'm not sure i totally blame him, but that would have been the game winner.

You did ask.

Go back and look at the replay. That safety wasn't on him.

[ShaneFalco]

If he would just have not taken a safety.

I'm not sure i totally blame him, but that would have been the game winner.

You did ask.

who set up the safety?


Norwood and our shitty ass special teams. The same issue we have had since day ******* one of the season.

[Nomad]

ST did allow a TD...:ohwell:

[wayninja]

who set up the safety?


Norwood and our shitty ass special teams. The same issue we have had since day ******* one of the season.

Well, yeah, i did say that I don't totally blame him. The offense did go backward on 3 straight plays I think, so there's SOME on him.

Again, you did ask what else he could have done. That was it.

[Hawgdriver]

Tie or loss and you are likely playing for second or third place in the West and a wild card. It makes the path to the playoffs a little harder, of course, but the division would have been hard to win with the tie unless the Raiders really stumbled.

That's the point...give up the AFCW, but have a better shot of locking up WC.

[MOtorboat]

Siemian threw for like 360 yards and 3 tds. what the hell do you want him to do?

The offense had 3 points at halftime. 3. He was awful in the first half. I'm sorry people are so damn sensitive about this, but they have to play a complete game and cannot just play one half. That starts with Siemian. The defense isn't going to score two touchdowns every game.

[Joel]

At Baltimore, at NYJets and at Buffalo who are division rivals, New England and Arizona who can win any week with their defense. Yea I'll take our schedule every day of the week and twice on Sunday.
You'd rather play KC and Oakland again, Tennessee and Jax than Buffalo, Baltimore, the Jets, and Arizona? I wouldn't.

[ShaneFalco]

Well, yeah, i did say that I don't totally blame him. The offense did go backward on 3 straight plays I think, so there's SOME on him.

Again, you did ask what else he could have done. That was it.
maybe if he was peyton manning. Not some 7th rounder playing in his first season ever.

Guy had a huge game. Would have been even bigger if Fowler caught that 3rd down play in OT. I dont blame bennie thou, they dont even use him until the 4th quarter and expect him to get into sync.

[I Eat Staples]

I said going into this season, that I wouldn't get too worked up over losses because after winning the Superbowl, because anything we do this year would just be a bonus. But this is the worst I've felt after a loss in a long time.

Special teams blunders were the only thing that kept KC in the game. We were clearly the far superior team for 58 minutes. Then, our defense, which was dominant all game, allowed Alex Smith to completely carve them up in the last 2 minutes and OT. Just awful. And then to lose on a terrible coaching decision when we should have at least gotten a tie...all of those things just make this loss harder to swallow than most.

[Poet]

Go back and look at the replay. That safety wasn't on him.

He didn't feel the pressure. He didn't identify it pre-snap either.

[Joel]

The offense had 3 points at halftime. 3. He was awful in the first half. I'm sorry people are so damn sensitive about this, but they have to play a complete game and cannot just play one half. That starts with Siemian. The defense isn't going to score two touchdowns every game.
Seems more like it started with benching Sambrailo for Stephenson. Not that Stephenson was great, but "bad" is a big step up from "inexcusable."

[MOtorboat]

He didn't feel the pressure. He didn't identify it pre-snap either.

He's young.

[dogfish]

FWIW, i was totally unboard with the field goal try. . . play with some balls, especially at home-- we have a mandate from the top guy in the organization. . . you go down kicking and screaming-- play to win, and don't apologise. . . i was sitting in front of my TV urging him to try it, so no second guessing here. . . oakland still has hard road games ahead of them, so i personally won't concede anything. . .

[MOtorboat]

Seems more like it started with benching Sambrailo for Stephenson. Not that Stephenson was great, but "bad" is a big step up from "inexcusable."

No. Stephenson was getting owned too.

[dogfish]

He didn't feel the pressure. He didn't identify it pre-snap either.

the safety doesn't matter that much. . . giving up the ass on the return is the issue here, Dude. . .

[wayninja]

maybe if he was peyton manning. Not some 7th rounder playing in his first season ever.

Guy had a huge game. Would have been even bigger if Fowler caught that 3rd down play in OT. I dont blame bennie thou, they dont even use him until the 4th quarter and expect him to get into sync.

The guy had a huge half. I reject the idea that he had a huge game. He shit the bed in the first half and almost redeemed in the second. That's what happened. Regardless of draft order or number of years played.

[ShaneFalco]

If shitting the bed is getting hit within 2 seconds, then by all means "he shit the bed"

[weazel]

Oh well, Im going to order a superbowl 50 patch for my jersey

[Tned]

The offense had 3 points at halftime. 3. He was awful in the first half. I'm sorry people are so damn sensitive about this, but they have to play a complete game and cannot just play one half. That starts with Siemian. The defense isn't going to score two touchdowns every game.

Not sure why you are so defensive and lashing out at people.

Everyone agrees the offense needed to do more, but the problem in the first half until Houston went out with the injury was that the Broncos had zero answer for their pass rush. The switch to Stephenson and probably some second half adjustments and the QB got a few tenths of a second more of pass protection, which in the NFL is a huge. There is a huge difference between having to get the ball out in 2.2 seconds vs. 2.5 seconds.

[wayninja]

If shitting the bed is getting hit within 2 seconds, then by all means "he shit the bed"

I'm glad we are agreed.

[weazel]

If shitting the bed is getting hit within 2 seconds, then by all means "he shit the bed"

Will you admit he stunk in the first half if others admit he played well in the second?

Youre getting mad because they arent agreeing with you about his great game but they are agreeing he played well for a half. This is on you, not rhem

[I Eat Staples]

Siemian played a great 2nd half. He did more than enough to win the game. Two TD passes in the 4th quarter in big moments. Our defense choked away the lead and our special teams killed us all game.

[ShaneFalco]

I'm glad we are agreed.
oh yea he is supposed to slow down time and get to his 3rd read.

Like Neo.

[Poet]

The excuse cannot be 'the line broke down' all the time. As far as Mo lashing out, well a moderator attacked him. That's pretty good for a starting point.

[NightTerror218]

No. Stephenson was getting owned too.

But Houston slowed down aftwr that. He was tearing shut up with Sambrailo on field.

[dogfish]

No. Stephenson was getting owned too.

i thought he at least offered some resistance. . .


sombrero bears an uncanny resemblance to freaking T-rex. . . or the gator from the geico commercial-- he's really trying, he just can't quite reach those stumpy little arms to the check! or the pass rusher, in this case. . .


more importantly, my diminutive friend, i'd like to re-visit my assertion from early in the gameday thread. . . would you know agree or disagree that our current right tackle options are even worse than george foster?

[ShaneFalco]

Will you admit he stunk in the first half if others admit he played well in the second?

nope. Because if Lynch was playing and was getting teed off on like that, i wouldnt call it "stinking" either.

Those problems do not extend from the Quarterback play.

They come from long developing routes with a bad o line facing a superior pass rush.

[Tned]

He didn't feel the pressure. He didn't identify it pre-snap either.

Well, there was no time to "feel" the pressure, whether or not he should or could have made some adjustment to Houston coming to the right side of the line, I don't know. Again, go look at the replay and take a stop watch to it. Other than a presnap adjustment, there was nothing he could do on that play. Period.

[weazel]

oh yea he is supposed to slow down time and get to his 3rd read.

Like Neo.

To be fair, siemian doesnt go down his reads. Its first, then checkdown

[wayninja]

oh yea he is supposed to slow down time and get to his 3rd read.

Like Neo.

I'd just settle for throwing the ball more accurately and/or not directly into linemen and not taking bad sacks.

[GEM]

Whatever qb you put back there is going to look the same. This oline couldn't protect Joe friggen Montana or John freaking Elway. If you watch this and think a rookie qb is going to come in and light a fire, you're either lying to yourself or you are blind to just how bad this oline's deficiencies really are.

[weazel]

nope. Because if Lynch was playing and was getting teed off on like that, i wouldnt call it "stinking" either.

Those problems do not extend from the Quarterback play.

Then as I said, this is on you. You refuse to look at reality and are focusing on your delusions

[Hawgdriver]

Broncos line up 4 offensive linemen, fans blame Siemian. Makes sense lol.

[Tned]

i thought he at least offered some resistance. . .


sombrero bears an uncanny resemblance to freaking T-rex. . . or the gator from the geico commercial-- he's really trying, he just can't quite reach those stumpy little arms to the check! or the pass rusher, in this case. . .


more importantly, my diminutive friend, i'd like to re-visit my assertion from early in the gameday thread. . . would you know agree or disagree that our current right tackle options are even worse than george foster?

Exactly, Stephenson at least got his hands on him and even held him a bit. Just slowed him down a tad, enough for routes to develop and Siemian a chance to make a play, whether throwing or scrambling.

You are right on Sambrailo. I can't believe how many of those rushes he had his elbows in at his side and didn't even extend and try and get a hand on Houston until he was past him.

[ShaneFalco]

I'd just settle for throwing the ball more accurately and/or not directly into linemen and not taking bad sacks.
he had 2 bad plays.

One where he hit the linemen, the other when he threw a ball high to sanders.

two bad plays in the entire game. You guys crack me up. Treating this guy like Tom Brady or something.

[Nomad]

Hoping it snows (it's been a miserable no the last few years here in Alaska with no snow) a ton. I'm usually looking forward to a BRONCO game , but they're pretty much screwed with Kubiak as the HC. By Christmas, the BRONCOS will be looking forward to vacation.

[MOtorboat]

Not sure why you are so defensive and lashing out at people.

Everyone agrees the offense needed to do more, but the problem in the first half until Houston went out with the injury was that the Broncos had zero answer for their pass rush. The switch to Stephenson and probably some second half adjustments and the QB got a few tenths of a second more of pass protection, which in the NFL is a huge. There is a huge difference between having to get the ball out in 2.2 seconds vs. 2.5 seconds.

I haven't lashed out at anyone. Siemian didn't play a good first half, the offensive line didn't play a good first half, the special teams wasn't good in the first half. They have to play a complete game. That starts with Siemian. They cannot rely on the defense playing lights out for 60 minutes and getting defensive scores. The offense has to play better.

[Poet]

Wait what? A guy still posting with 71,000+ posts from his mothers basement obviously only OWNs a Motorboat and has yet to perform one. Still stirring the drunk basement point of view.

What?

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

We can't rely on the defense scoring every game.

No, but getting a stop at the end of the game would have been nice instead of giving up 3 consecutive scoring drives. KC could have scored another TD on that last drive if they wanted to.

[wayninja]

I don't see a lot of folks just outright blaming siemian. I see a lot of people saying he played much better in the second half than the first.

Not sure why that idea is so radical.

[weazel]

Whatever qb you put back there is going to look the same. This oline couldn't protect Joe friggen Montana or John freaking Elway. If you watch this and think a rookie qb is going to come in and light a fire, you're either lying to yourself or you are blind to just how bad this oline's deficiencies really are.

I agree, but he seemed to have enough time in the 2nd half. Thats all people are saying

[Watchthemiddle]

To be fair, siemian doesnt go down his reads. Its first, then checkdown

Stop listening to Cecil...come up with your own scouting observations

[ShaneFalco]

Whatever qb you put back there is going to look the same. This oline couldn't protect Joe friggen Montana or John freaking Elway. If you watch this and think a rookie qb is going to come in and light a fire, you're either lying to yourself or you are blind to just how bad this oline's deficiencies really are.

pretty much how i feel. I like both QBs.

[wayninja]

he had 2 bad plays.

One where he hit the linemen, the other when he threw a ball high to sanders.

two bad plays in the entire game. You guys crack me up. Treating this guy like Tom Brady or something.

Lol, yep.

He only had 2 bad plays the entire game.

You got me.

[Tned]

To be fair, siemian doesnt go down his reads. Its first, then checkdown

To be fair, it's rarely clear on TV whether or not that's really happening. I'm sure it does happen, since as MO pointed out, he's young, and he has very little time in the pocket, but again not knowing the play calls and the limited views from TV, it's really hard to know this for sure.

[weazel]

Stop listening to Cecil...come up with your own scouting observations

Who the **** is cecil, actually, who the **** are you?

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

The offense had 3 points at halftime. 3. He was awful in the first half. I'm sorry people are so damn sensitive about this, but they have to play a complete game and cannot just play one half. That starts with Siemian. The defense isn't going to score two touchdowns every game.
We scored enough points to win this game. The defense and especially ST's let us down.

[GEM]

I agree, but he seemed to have enough time in the 2nd half. Thats all people are saying

And how funny, we actually scored in the second half. The play calling aunt doing him any favors either. Kubiak is calling like a ******* virgin protecting her hymen. Max protect! To the point it's absolutely detrimental to the team.

[weazel]

I don't see a lot of folks just outright blaming siemian. I see a lot of people saying he played much better in the second half than the first.

Not sure why that idea is so radical.

Exactly.

[Tned]

What?

I think he's referring to MO's posting style.

[chazoe60]

To be clear, I don't think they should have gone for the 4th and 10. We should have taken the tie. That half game is going to hurt us.

The statistics comment was in response to a stupid poster making everything about me, personally. I have no idea what the stats say about that scenario, other than that trying a 62 yarder is almost a sure loss.

Post reported.

[wayninja]

Yep, the line sucks and when it does, so does siemian. He's rarely able to overcome that.

For some reason this statement REALLY bothers some folks.

[MOtorboat]

I don't see a lot of folks just outright blaming siemian. I see a lot of people saying he played much better in the second half than the first.

Not sure why that idea is so radical.

It's not. It's what happened. And he, and the offense, have to play a complete game. It starts with the quarterback. That's reality.

[Poet]

I think he's referring to MO's posting style.

So we have a moderator attack Mo (and Mo can back up his arguments) and this random dude attacking Mo. Random dude then refers to people whom he disagrees with as being someone who listens to a radio personality while being a condescending jerk about it.

Mo's the man. The moderator is a joke and this WTM guy is a random fly in jerk.

[Tned]

I'd just settle for throwing the ball more accurately and/or not directly into linemen and not taking bad sacks.

Which sacks were bad?

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Yep, the line sucks and when it does, so does siemian. He's rarely able to overcome that.

For some reason this statement REALLY bothers some folks.

It makes sense to me. It's just ignorant for some to infer he should be able to play well when this line couldn't stop a runny nose.

[dogfish]

Whatever qb you put back there is going to look the same. This oline couldn't protect Joe friggen Montana or John freaking Elway. If you watch this and think a rookie qb is going to come in and light a fire, you're either lying to yourself or you are blind to just how bad this oline's deficiencies really are.

you all should just listen to this woman. . . who hopefully has no voice left. . .

and now i'm thinking about a cold breeze in the stands, and nips. . .




:drinking:

[Chidoze]

You gotta give KC credit though. Their defense played great tonight and Alex Smith was clutch in the 4th quarter and overtime. Im really glad it wasn't an ass whooping like the oakland game. Proud of the Broncos. They are gritty and can fight, they proved that to me tonight. With that being said, I still hate KC and Oakland. Hope they burn in hell. :coffee:

[Freyaka]

Will you admit he stunk in the first half if others admit he played well in the second?

Youre getting mad because they arent agreeing with you about his great game but they are agreeing he played well for a half. This is on you, not rhem

The pass protection was terrible in the first half... Could he have played better? Possibly, but there isn't a lot any QB can do when shortly after you get the ball in your hands Justin Houston is in your grill...

[wayninja]

Mo's the man. The moderator is a joke and this WTM guy is a random fly in jerk.

We should be a thread about fly jerk about.

[Tned]

So we have a moderator attack Mo (and Mo can back up his arguments) and this random dude attacking Mo. Random dude then refers to people whom he disagrees with as being someone who listens to a radio personality while being a condescending jerk about it.

Mo's the man. The moderator is a joke and this WTM guy is a random fly in jerk.

Considering you have me on ignore, you are responding to me quite a bit. If you think something was done wrong, report it. I'm not a moderator, my posting account doesn't have mod or admin privileges, so report it if you think someone is treating your "man" wrong.

[wayninja]

Which sacks were bad?

All sacks are bad. I'll need to go back to watch, but there was one where he gave himself up fairly early and at least one more where he held on for too long (more than 2.06 seconds).

Taking a sack in the end zone is typically frowned upon as well.

[weazel]

So we have a moderator attack Mo (and Mo can back up his arguments) and this random dude attacking Mo. Random dude then refers to people whom he disagrees with as being someone who listens to a radio personality while being a condescending jerk about it.

Mo's the man. The moderator is a joke and this WTM guy is a random fly in jerk.

Is cecil a radio personality? I guess this ****tard doesnt know Im from Canada and dont listen to american radio

[Freyaka]

Then as I said, this is on you. You refuse to look at reality and are focusing on your delusions

If it's a delusion to recognize that our o-line is PATHETIC and until we fix it, it doesn't matter who the hell we have back there. I guess I'm "delusional too"

It's not a QB issue, it's a pass protection issue and has been dating clear back to last season.

[wayninja]

Is cecil a radio personality? I guess this ****tard doesnt know Im from Canada and dont listen to american radio

How could one just know that? We aren't all ******* mind readers. Or post header readers.

[Tned]

Yep, the line sucks and when it does, so does siemian. He's rarely able to overcome that.

For some reason this statement REALLY bothers some folks.

The statement doesn't, it's the fact that some posters think any QB can play well when he's getting hit in under 2.3 seconds on a regular basis.

The statements that get reactions are things like "he held the ball too long" when he was hit in just over two seconds. I'm sorry, it's just not reality to think a QB can get a ball out in that amount of time unless the play that's called is a bubble screen or the like.

[weazel]

The pass protection was terrible in the first half... Could he have played better? Possibly, but there isn't a lot any QB can do when shortly after you get the ball in your hands Justin Houston is in your grill...

I agree that it was bad, there were times he had time though. Once was when he flung the ball into his linemans mind and that is the only time I faulted him in this entire thread. You can look back if you like

[wayninja]

You gotta give KC credit though. Their defense played great tonight and Alex Smith was clutch in the 4th quarter and overtime. Im really glad it wasn't an ass whooping like the oakland game. Proud of the Broncos. They are gritty and can fight, they proved that to me tonight. With that being said, I still hate KC and Oakland. Hope they burn in hell. :coffee:

KC gutted it out for sure. They did what they had to do, and had just enough luck to pull it off.

[sneakers]

if you are going to try a 62 yard field goal to win, I think it would be a higher % to try to win it by going for it on 4th and 10.

[GEM]

The first attack was ip'd and deleted. Enough with the personal attacks. This game has me pissed off enough to pull some Rambo shit on some of you! ;)

[dogfish]

back off, mfers!

WTM is my man-- if ya don't know, now ya know. . . that guy pre-dates ALL y'all, and it's good to have him back. . .

even if he is a pain in the ass, which he probably will be. . . :D

[Freyaka]

I agree that it was bad, there were times he had time though. Once was when he flung the ball into his linemans mind

He's having to rush to get the ball out as quickly as possible...One time he throws it into a lineman and that's all you are going to cling to. The guy did more than enough to win (300+ yards and 3 TD's with 0 INT's is going to win you a game in most situations) but you want to cling to one ball in the helmet....

[I Eat Staples]

If it's a delusion to recognize that our o-line is PATHETIC and until we fix it, it doesn't matter who the hell we have back there. I guess I'm "delusional too"

It's not a QB issue, it's a pass protection issue and has been dating clear back to last season.

You're not going to find anyone on here pretending that our line isn't shit. That doesn't mean we can't point out when Siemian is playing badly.

[Tned]

All sacks are bad. I'll need to go back to watch, but there was one where he gave himself up fairly early and at least one more where he held on for too long (more than 2.06 seconds).

Taking a sack in the end zone is typically frowned upon as well.

Well, the endzone was 2.06 seconds.

Go back and look. I think it would be a good discussion to have to move us all towards neutrality, to be able to talk through those sacks and which ones you think were on Siemian and he could have avoided and how. No doubt there might have been one or two of those sacks that he could have avoided somehow. I know several of the ones where people said he held it too long, I went back and put a stop watch on it, and it simply wasn't accurate, but I'm also curious to see the sacks on the coaches film to see if there was even anyone open.

On the safety, he couldn't have even thrown it away in that time. The only thing that maybe you can blame on him is what King said, which is that maybe he should have recognized it pre snap and done something.

[Joel]

"Developing" QBs who "feel the pressure" in LESS THAN TWO SECONDS is a big reason I don't want Lynch out there "learning the offense" right now. Siemian needing cortisone shots to get his shoulder working again is another. And no, King, our running wasn't "solid" with CJ: He has 4.0/att, less than the NFL average. That means lots of 3rd and longs, so the QB must throw deep to WRs who must get way downfield and open in <2 seconds. Not gonna happen.

It fails for the same reason you can't PA on a D that HOPES you run because it knows you CAN'T. No QB on Earth can fix that.

[sneakers]

Do you think after the Patriots game they will start Lynch for the rest of the year?

[wayninja]

The statement doesn't, it's the fact that some posters think any QB can play well when he's getting hit in under 2.3 seconds on a regular basis.

The statements that get reactions are things like "he held the ball too long" when he was hit in just over two seconds. I'm sorry, it's just not reality to think a QB can get a ball out in that amount of time unless the play that's called is a bubble screen or the like.

I'm not comparing him to anyone else in that exact situation, because that is literally impossible to do.

Between 2 and 3 seconds is likely all any quarterback reasonably gets. More often than not, he didn't do well when it was closer to 2 than 3. And while that makes sense, there are QB's out there that are better under pressure than Siemian is. In fact, I would go so far as to say he's generally not good at all under pressure. And he gets a lot of pressure.

That's really as far as the analysis goes. It's fair to say that it would be difficult for anyone. It's also fair to say that some are better at it than others.

[Freyaka]

You're not going to find anyone on here pretending that our line isn't shit. That doesn't mean we can't point out when Siemian is playing badly.

The point is QB's rarely play well when they have split seconds to make decisions or be sacked... You can't really say a QB is "playing badly" when he doesn't have enough time to even make a good decision before he's being ran over.

[Nomad]

back off, mfers!

WTM is my man-- if ya don't know, now ya know. . . that guy pre-dates ALL y'all, and it's good to have him back. . .

even if he is a pain in the ass, which he probably will be. . . :D

Do you remember ...BigBadJohn!? :lol: the cop from wherever.

[weazel]

He's having to rush to get the ball out as quickly as possible...One time he throws it into a lineman and that's all you are going to cling to. The guy did more than enough to win (300+ yards and 3 TD's with 0 INT's is going to win you a game in most situations) but you want to cling to one ball in the helmet....

Dudu im not arguing that he didnt have a great game. Im not a siemian hater, I was trying to chill out shanes love in

[chazoe60]

I think Gem said shut the **** up, so shut the **** up. :D

[GEM]

The topic is the Broncos and a ******* loss to kc...get on topic or sign off for the night. ..or I'll sign you off for you.

[weazel]

My ipad is almost dead, Im out

[Watchthemiddle]

Do you think after the Patriots game they will start Lynch for the rest of the year?

Yup!! And he has less experience so he will play much better. See the ATL game and circa Cutler v Plummer. 7-4 to not making the playoffs

[weazel]

The topic is the Broncos and a ******* loss to kc...get on topic or sign off for the night. ..or I'll sign you off for you.

Were talking about the game, wtf

[Freyaka]

Dudu im not arguing that he didnt have a great game. Im not a siemian hater, I was trying to chill out shanes love in

I'm not even so much trying to get you to praise TS...Just simply trying to get people in this thread to rationally recognize that our o-line is so freaking bad not even Joe Montana could be successful behind this craptastic o-line...

When you've got a turnstile for a RT (two of them to be precise) you are going to struggle on offense.

[Nomad]

I think Gem said shut the **** up, so shut the **** up. :D

Yeah, I noticed you high fived dog, then backed out :eviltongue:

[sneakers]

Just eyeballing the averages here, but it looks like the average NFL quarterback has 3 1/2 seconds to throw the ball before he is sacked on an average dropback

https://www.profootballfocus.com/signature-stat-snapshot-time-to-throw/

[weazel]

I'm not even so much trying to get you to praise TS...Just simply trying to get people in this thread to rationally recognize that our o-line is so freaking bad not even Joe Montana could be successful behind this craptastic o-line...

When you've got a turnstile for a RT (two of them to be precise) you are going to struggle on offense.

Quit talking shit about turnstyles. Oh, and you let me call you dudu

[Tned]

I'm not comparing him to anyone else in that exact situation, because that is literally impossible to do.

Between 2 and 3 seconds is likely all any quarterback reasonably gets. More often than not, he didn't do well when it was closer to 2 than 3. And while that makes sense, there are QB's out there that are better under pressure than Siemian is. In fact, I would go so far as to say he's generally not good at all under pressure. And he gets a lot of pressure.

That's really as far as the analysis goes. It's fair to say that it would be difficult for anyone. It's also fair to say that some are better at it than others.

In the NFL, the difference between 2 and 3 seconds is HUGE. I fully agree, he's not good when he had 2 to 2.3 seconds, and also agree he's in that territory a lot. The question is whether any first year starter is good when they regularly have less than 2.3 seconds to get the ball out, and often are doing so with 3rd and long because there isn't a good running game?

I have never said that TS doesn't make mistakes or is inconsistent, I've posted for weeks about his regression and how it reminded me of Brock last year, and hoped it was the shoulder rather than pure regression. My only argument is that posters like yourself aren't being realistic in your expectations of a first year starter behind one of the worst offensive lines in football. Actually, not being realistic about what a first year starter can be expected to do period.

[wayninja]

Just eyeballing the averages here, but it looks like the average NFL quarterback has 3 1/2 seconds to throw the ball before he is sacked on an average dropback

https://www.profootballfocus.com/signature-stat-snapshot-time-to-throw/

Time to throw looks closer to about 2.7 to me.

[dogfish]

Post reported.

NTL can't save you now, chazzy. . . :coffee:



Do you remember ...BigBadJohn!? :lol: the cop from wherever.

for sure i remember BBJ-- the poet-laureate of the broncomania smack forum!

:laugh:

BBJ was a good dude-- just like san luis, fins, silver_black, whodey and others. . .

[turftoad]

Hey, our o line is shit but if you think Semien is answer you are wrong.
Yeah he's the Broncos starting QB but he is NOT the answer. Make as many excuses as you need. He is not the guy.

[dogfish]

Yeah, I noticed you high fived dog, then backed out :eviltongue:

don't hate the player, nomad. . . hate the game!


:cool::laugh:

[wayninja]

In the NFL, the difference between 2 and 3 seconds is HUGE. I fully agree, he's not good when he had 2 to 2.3 seconds, and also agree he's in that territory a lot. The question is whether any first year starter is good when they regularly have less than 2.3 seconds to get the ball out, and often are doing so with 3rd and long because there isn't a good running game?

Well, I don't know. I'm betting some first year starters are better than others. Unless the argument is that all players are the same. I'm not really buying that one.

Would Lynch be better at it? Not sure. I haven't seen him enough.


I have never said that TS doesn't make mistakes or is inconsistent, I've posted for weeks about his regression and how it reminded me of Brock last year, and hoped it was the shoulder rather than pure regression. My only argument is that posters like yourself aren't being realistic in your expectations of a first year starter behind one of the worst offensive lines in football. Actually, not being realistic about what a first year starter can be expected to do period.

How am I not being realistic? I never said I expected him to be X or Y, just that bad plays are bad plays. I've also called out really good plays. And sometimes the reason is shitty line, and sometimes the reason is TS. It's not all on him. But "expectation" isn't sufficient excuse.

If that's not reasonable, I'd be happy to tweak it such that it improves your sensitivity on the subject.

[Tned]

Hey, our o line is shit but if you think Semien is answer you are wrong.
Yeah he's the Broncos starting QB but he is NOT the answer. Make as many excuses as you need. He is not the guy.

Who said he's the guy. What he is is the Broncos starting QB this year.

[Tned]

Well, I don't know. I'm betting some first year starters are better than others. Unless the argument is that all players are the same. I'm not really buying that one.

Would Lynch be better at it? Not sure. I haven't seen him enough.



How am I not being realistic? I never said I expected him to be X or Y, just that bad plays are bad plays. I've also called out really good plays. And sometimes the reason is shitty line, and sometimes the reason is TS. It's not all on him. But "expectation" isn't sufficient excuse.

If that's not reasonable, I'd be happy to tweak it such that it improves your sensitivity on the subject.

Ok, I've been trying to have a reasoned discussion, but as you are now getting snide, I'll give it a break with you tonight.

I hope you actually do go back and look at the sacks and tell me the ones that you think were bad in terms of Siemian holding the ball too long or the like, and that we can do it by simply discussing it and not making cracks about sensitivity and the like.

[dogfish]

Hey, our o line is shit but if you think Semien is answer you are wrong.
Yeah he's the Broncos starting QB but he is NOT the answer. Make as many excuses as you need. He is not the guy.

toad, i don't necessarily disagree with you. . . as of right now, i expect lynch to be the starter next year unless trevor miraculously kills it from here. . .

but he's going to need significantly better blocking, or he's going to eat shit and die also. . . QBs who are vastly better than siemian would have given up the ass tonight in the first half. . . you can't name five QBs in today's game that could do anything with justin houston in their lap by three steps. . .

i do think lynch's mobility could help some, but it's not like he's mike vick or a rus wilson. . . we're gonna need to upgrade the OL in a big way, regardless of who we put behind them. . .

[Nomad]

NTL can't save you now, chazzy. . . :coffee:




for sure i remember BBJ-- the poet-laureate of the broncomania smack forum!

:laugh:

BBJ was a good dude-- just like san luis, fins, silver_black, whodey and others. . .

chazoe is one of my favorites , same as you, dog.! Never liked BBJ, but that's just me. :)

[wayninja]

Ok, I've been trying to have a reasoned discussion, but as you are now getting snide, I'll give it a break with you tonight.

I hope you actually do go back and look at the sacks and tell me the ones that you think were bad in terms of Siemian holding the ball too long or the like, and that we can do it by simply discussing it and not making cracks about sensitivity and the like.

You seem sensitive about Siemian. I'm not sure how else to say it. It's not snide and it's not a crack, it's just an observation.

[Watchthemiddle]

Well, I don't know. I'm betting some first year starters are better than others. Unless the argument is that all players are the same. I'm not really buying that one.

Would Lynch be better at it? Not sure. I haven't seen him enough.



How am I not being realistic? I never said I expected him to be X or Y, just that bad plays are bad plays. I've also called out really good plays. And sometimes the reason is shitty line, and sometimes the reason is TS. It's not all on him. But "expectation" isn't sufficient excuse.

If that's not reasonable, I'd be happy to tweak it such that it improves your sensitivity on the subject.

See ATL.....here at home......try not to be blinded by the lights that Paxton was. He was clearly not ready. When you have 3 rings, and the most current as a HQ, then stay on a forum and do your thig

[Joel]

For what it's worth, I still think we're a 10-win playoff team. But there's NO margin of error now, and this was easily our best chance to beat KC: At home, fresh off our bye, with several of their key players hurt.

[Tned]

You seem sensitive about Siemian. I'm not sure how else to say it. It's not snide and it's not a crack, it's just an observation.

Nope, not at all. I'm like a Mr. Spock of posting. I don't like illogical, or emotional positions. They happen more times than not in regards to our QBs, so that's where I'm mostly going to post counter positions or stats where I think people are being emotional or have unreasonable expectations or viewpoints. Such as the expectations for a first year starter, or stating that he's holding the ball too long when he's getting hit in under 2.3 seconds.

If Lynch was the starter and people were having the emotional melt downs in threads, I would be doing the same thing in "defense" of him. I'm not a player fan, I'm a Broncos fan and have been for over 30 years. Odds are Siemian is not our starter next year, unless Lynch is the 2-3 year project that most draft experts expected him to be, and then it's possible Siemian or a vet could be the starter next year. If Lynch takes over next year, I'm not going to shed any tears or whine about how Siemian was treated or follow him to another team if he was traded (I don't see, much more likely he's the backup).

It's a discussion board, and I am of the opinion that people come here to discuss their opinions.

[wayninja]

See ATL.....here at home......try not to be blinded by the lights that Paxton was. He was clearly not ready. When you have 3 rings, and the most current as a HQ, then stay on a forum and do your thig

So, we can't judge Siemian after 10 games, but we can judge Lynch after 1?

I don't plan on ever being a HeadQuarters.

[BroncoWave]

See ATL.....here at home......try not to be blinded by the lights that Paxton was. He was clearly not ready. When you have 3 rings, and the most current as a HQ, then stay on a forum and do your thig

Dude, shut the **** up with that last sentence. None of us have a ring. Using that logic, we should just shut this board down since none of us are qualified to discuss football.

[Poet]

Considering you have me on ignore, you are responding to me quite a bit. If you think something was done wrong, report it. I'm not a moderator, my posting account doesn't have mod or admin privileges, so report it if you think someone is treating your "man" wrong.

I took you off ignore because while your P and R posts are awful, and while you are not exactly my favorite person in the world, we're not going anywhere. I'm not telling you that you should do anything via being a mod because I know you're not one. I was responding to your response of the style.

[Tned]

So, we can't judge Siemian after 10 games, but we can judge Lynch after 1?

I don't plan on ever being a HeadQuarters.

I think WTM's point was that in that game and a half (and obviously in practice the coaches watch as well), it was clear that Lynch was not more NFL ready than Siemian. In both his half of relief and his start, Lynch was the sixth most inaccurate passer in the NFL those two weeks. He wasn't using his mobility to avoid the rush, but instead just looked lost.

Through his ups and downs, Siemian has stood tall in the pocket and rarely gotten happy feet or just started running around in circles, which Lynch literally did a few times when under pressure. He has not been a fainting goat as some have claimed. Quite the opposite, he's routinely hung in their an gotten tagged hard. He's also made some first year starter mistakes, like getting too deep at times and not helping out his tackles, or failing to step up or move to avoid pressure.

[Freyaka]

In the NFL, the difference between 2 and 3 seconds is HUGE. I fully agree, he's not good when he had 2 to 2.3 seconds, and also agree he's in that territory a lot. The question is whether any first year starter is good when they regularly have less than 2.3 seconds to get the ball out, and often are doing so with 3rd and long because there isn't a good running game?

I have never said that TS doesn't make mistakes or is inconsistent, I've posted for weeks about his regression and how it reminded me of Brock last year, and hoped it was the shoulder rather than pure regression. My only argument is that posters like yourself aren't being realistic in your expectations of a first year starter behind one of the worst offensive lines in football. Actually, not being realistic about what a first year starter can be expected to do period.

I've brought it up before, I feel like it should be brought up again.

I've seen so many just act like what we have is what we get with Trevor and to be clear ahead of time, I'm not comparing him to these players, I'm not saying he can or will be as good as them, I'm just trying to set a benchmark in your minds for first year starters.

Through 10 games TS has 2,396 yards, 15 TD 7 INT's and roughly a 60 percent completion percentage.
Other notable QB's through 10 games

Brees 1,999 yards 12 TD 11 INT's and 61.8 comp %
Carr 2,075 yards 13 TD 9 INT's and 59.5%
Big Ben 1,719 yards 12 TD 6 INt's and 65.7%
Brady 2,644 yards 21 TD's 10 INT's and 65%
Manning 2,289 yards 15 TD's 30 INT's and 55.55%
Rivers 2,307 yards 15 TD 5 INT's and 67.3%
Elway 1,518 yards 9 TD 8 INT's and 58.2%
Rogers 2,351 yards 15 TD's 6 INT's and 65.4%

Outside of Brady, none of the QB's listed did were far better better than TS in their first 10 games as the full time starter (my stats did not include games where they came in as relief. This is first 10 games starting as the QB for the team.)

Again, this isn't to say that TS is going to be as good as any of the aforementioned players, it is to point out that you guys have unreasonably high expectations of TS as a first year starter. Historically first year starters aren't going to play any better than the level Trevor is at now.

Most on that list played like they did without having a line that was complete and utter garbage and a lot of them had a solid run game to keep drives going.

[Tned]

I took you off ignore because while your P and R posts are awful, and while you are not exactly my favorite person in the world, we're not going anywhere. I'm not telling you that you should do anything via being a mod because I know you're not one. I was responding to your response of the style.

My bad, it was just three days ago you took a dig at me by claiming you had me on ignore. Anyway, we are supposed to be talking football, not about each other. Gem is trying to keep it on track. So, let's stick to football.

[wayninja]

I think WTM's point was that in that game and a half (and obviously in practice the coaches watch as well), it was clear that Lynch was not more NFL ready than Siemian. In both his half of relief and his start, Lynch was the sixth most inaccurate passer in the NFL those two weeks. He wasn't using his mobility to avoid the rush, but instead just looked lost.

Through his ups and downs, Siemian has stood tall in the pocket and rarely gotten happy feet or just started running around in circles, which Lynch literally did a few times when under pressure. He has not been a fainting goat as some have claimed. Quite the opposite, he's routinely hung in their an gotten tagged hard. He's also made some first year starter mistakes, like getting too deep at times and not helping out his tackles, or failing to step up or move to avoid pressure.

Lynch has better feet than Siemian. I expect them to be happier. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not just yet.

I admire Siemians heart. He's clearly not afraid of taking a shot. I don't think he's "scared" of getting hurt. If anything I think he's just a bit overprotective of the ball (which is not necessarily a bad thing).

But again, if the argument is being made that "what do you expect from someone starting his first year", then surely that same argument extends to someone playing in his first game?

Look, I'm not calling for Lynch anymore. I think Siemian had a great second half and am happy to see him start the Jax game. That feeling will likely last up until his next run of shit.

[Freyaka]

So, we can't judge Siemian after 10 games, but we can judge Lynch after 1?

I don't plan on ever being a HeadQuarters.

See my post above....That should resoundingly answer your question. The answer is yes, we can't judge TS after 10 games....We also can't judge Lynch either. I don't think any of us are saying Lynch will never be starter quality. We're saying he's behind the 8-ball on knowing the offense right now and would be a liability. That's not to say he can't get there long term, just that he isn't there yet.

[Tned]

I've brought it up before, I feel like it should be brought up again.

I've seen so many just act like what we have is what we get with Trevor and to be clear ahead of time, I'm not comparing him to these players, I'm not saying he can or will be as good as them, I'm just trying to set a benchmark in your minds for first year starters.

Through 10 games TS has 2,396 yards, 15 TD 7 INT's and roughly a 60 percent completion percentage.
Other notable QB's through 10 games

Brees 1,999 yards 12 TD 11 INT's and 61.8 comp %
Carr 2,075 yards 13 TD 9 INT's and 59.5%
Big Ben 1,719 yards 12 TD 6 INt's and 65.7%
Brady 2,644 yards 21 TD's 10 INT's and 65%
Manning 2,289 yards 15 TD's 30 INT's and 55.55%
Rivers 2,307 yards 15 TD 5 INT's and 67.3%
Elway 1,518 yards 9 TD 8 INT's and 58.2%
Rogers 2,351 yards 15 TD's 6 INT's and 65.4%

Outside of Brady, none of the QB's listed did were far better better than TS in their first 10 games as the full time starter (my stats did not include games where they came in as relief. This is first 10 games starting as the QB for the team.)

Again, this isn't to say that TS is going to be as good as any of the aforementioned players, it is to point out that you guys have unreasonably high expectations of TS as a first year starter. Historically first year starters aren't going to play any better than the level Trevor is at now.

Most on that list played like they did without having a line that was complete and utter garbage and a lot of them had a solid run game to keep drives going.

And this, in a nutshell, is what some see as my defense of Siemian. It isn't, it's simply pointing out that we have to have reasonable expectation of first year starters. There is a reason that what Dak is doing, and what Wentz is doing (more in the first four or five games) is so spectacular and the talk of the league. It's very rare for first year starters to play great.

[Freyaka]

And this, in a nutshell, is what some see as my defense of Siemian. It isn't, it's simply pointing out that we have to have reasonable expectation of first year starters. There is a reason that what Dak is doing, and what Wentz is doing (more in the first four or five games) is so spectacular and the talk of the league. It's very rare for first year starters to play great.

And what does Dak have that we don't? An o-line that doesn't have a death wish against him and one of the best young RB's in the league.

[wayninja]

It just feels to me like we should just be happy expecting to lose, because, first year.

Yeah, I don't give a shit about the stats on that.

[Tned]

Lynch has better feet than Siemian. I expect them to be happier. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or not just yet.

I admire Siemians heart. He's clearly not afraid of taking a shot. I don't think he's "scared" of getting hurt. If anything I think he's just a bit overprotective of the ball (which is not necessarily a bad thing).

But again, if the argument is being made that "what do you expect from someone starting his first year", then surely that same argument extends to someone playing in his first game?

Look, I'm not calling for Lynch anymore. I think Siemian had a great second half and am happy to see him start the Jax game. That feeling will likely last up until his next run of shit.

Of course it extends to someone playing his first game, especially as a rookie. I even pointed out at the time that I wondered if the week of knowing he was a starter, vs. being thrown in there in relief, put extra pressure on him. While he was equally inaccurate in both games, he looked MUCH worse in his start. He looked totally lost. I'll admit, I was hoping Lynch would light it up and play so great that Kubiak had a tough decision as to whether or not to go back to Siemian.

In Lynch, I see Elway like physical tools, even if he clearly wasn't the same type of QB (NFL ready) coming out of school.

[Freyaka]

It just feels to me like we should just be happy expecting to lose, because, first year.

Yeah, I don't give a shit about the stats on that.

And you act like we're 4-7 not 7-4....Yes we've lost, but honestly, if you'd have told me we would be 7-4 after winning the SB and losing several key players. I'd have been alright with that in the offseason. I'm alright with it now even though i'm really pissed off at this game right now.

[Poet]

Multiple times TS did not make the quick read. Multiple times he did not identify the blitzer. Multiple times he did not feel the pressure. The answer to TS' woes isn't magically 'it's the line' and I'm sorry but the TS defenders pretty much make it all out to be that. It's not a catch all that you can just bring up every time. Just about every week I hear a commentator say that the blitzer down the middle is on the QB to both identify and deal with. Can we not think of a major play in the game were TS failed to do that? Can we not think of a first down throw he horribly botched? Can we not think of a literal entire half that he was wretched in?

In the second half he was a god damned man. But asking him to occasionally be a man isn't anything new. A young Roethlisberger, Flacco, Ryan, Palmer, Newton, and many other QB's were asked to do the same in the start of their careers. Sanchez also comes to mind. So pointing to one exceptional half of play isn't the answer, either. A lot of his big passes were because the WR's got wide open and he made some of the easiest throws in the entire game. When you're throwing to a spot it's literally as easy as it can be. If you don't believe me, ask the HC and starting QB in Baltimore as they will tell you the same thing.

I like the guy. As a person. I like him enough as a game manager. But coming into this game he was an up and down type of guy, more so than other QB's in analogous situations. Now, the line sucks ass. God it sucks ass. Our tackles are shit. Lord knows the loss of Anderson really hurt. Lord knows Kubiak often has questionable playcalling, too. TS is in a strange situation. So be it.

Last year we had a whiny giraffe and broken down old man as our starting QB. They did random shit all the time - moments were often calling us to go 'Manning...no....NOOOOOOOOOOO!' and Brock had flashes of brilliance and putrid play. It happens. But this reminds me of a friend of mine who was a quasi-Bears fan who literally only wanted to blame the Bears line and OC for everything and nothing on Cutler. often times he was right. Other times it was so wrong it was obvious to anyone but him.

The situation is as follows: most QB's in the game would kill to be where he's at via the franchise and the team...including the line.

[Poet]

My bad, it was just three days ago you took a dig at me by claiming you had me on ignore. Anyway, we are supposed to be talking football, not about each other. Gem is trying to keep it on track. So, let's stick to football.

Yup.

[wayninja]

And you act like we're 4-7 not 7-4....Yes we've lost, but honestly, if you'd have told me we would be 7-4 after winning the SB and losing several key players. I'd have been alright with that in the offseason. I'm alright with it now even though i'm really pissed off at this game right now.

No, I'm not acting like that at all.

we are 7-4 in the best conference in football. So, we are in 3rd place out of 4.

We are going to have to work hard to make the playoffs. That's exactly what I'm "acting" like.

If it makes you feel better about the loss to justify it by comparing TS to other players, or to qualify the loss via expection, so be it.

[Tned]

It just feels to me like we should just be happy expecting to lose, because, first year.

Yeah, I don't give a shit about the stats on that.

Not me, I've never said that. What I've said is that since he's a first year starter, there is going to be ups and downs, and there is no doubt that Kubiak is preaching above all, protect the ball and don't turn it over. The Broncos have a great defense (although the last few games it's hard to tell) and as such, what they need the first year starter to do is not lose the game, and every once in a while, go out and try and win it. In those short few games, he nearly had his third fourth quarter come back (he should have).

Beyond that, he was clearly playing hurt, and his accuracy dropped way off after the injury. This game, when he had time, and especially in the second half, he had that accuracy back. He had a couple bad throws, but mostly his balls were right where you wanted them this game and he threw into multiple tight windows. And, the response isn't, "if he's hurt, he shouldn't be playing," because clearly the coaches think the dinged up Siemian gives them a better chance of winning than Lynch, which just goes to show how far away Lynch is right now.

[MOtorboat]

I've brought it up before, I feel like it should be brought up again.

I've seen so many just act like what we have is what we get with Trevor and to be clear ahead of time, I'm not comparing him to these players, I'm not saying he can or will be as good as them, I'm just trying to set a benchmark in your minds for first year starters.

Through 10 games TS has 2,396 yards, 15 TD 7 INT's and roughly a 60 percent completion percentage.
Other notable QB's through 10 games

Brees 1,999 yards 12 TD 11 INT's and 61.8 comp %
Carr 2,075 yards 13 TD 9 INT's and 59.5%
Big Ben 1,719 yards 12 TD 6 INt's and 65.7%
Brady 2,644 yards 21 TD's 10 INT's and 65%
Manning 2,289 yards 15 TD's 30 INT's and 55.55%
Rivers 2,307 yards 15 TD 5 INT's and 67.3%
Elway 1,518 yards 9 TD 8 INT's and 58.2%
Rogers 2,351 yards 15 TD's 6 INT's and 65.4%

Outside of Brady, none of the QB's listed did were far better better than TS in their first 10 games as the full time starter (my stats did not include games where they came in as relief. This is first 10 games starting as the QB for the team.)

Again, this isn't to say that TS is going to be as good as any of the aforementioned players, it is to point out that you guys have unreasonably high expectations of TS as a first year starter. Historically first year starters aren't going to play any better than the level Trevor is at now.

Most on that list played like they did without having a line that was complete and utter garbage and a lot of them had a solid run game to keep drives going.

The performance of those quarterbacks continues to have no bearing on Siemian's performance.

He was well above average in the first four games, and has been below average since. He may be a first-time starter, but he has not performed consistently, and in my view a player who doesn't perform consistently isn't performing well. Tonight was a perfect example of this. He was awful in the first half, passes all over the place, holding on to the ball, not even trying to make reads downfield and just worrying about pass pro. He was so much better in the second half. He scanned the field, made pre-snap reads correctly and played and threw the ball really well.

These assessments are regardless of the performance of the offensive line.

Now, 10 games in, we have to get a full game. It has to happen. The only complete game we've seen from Siemian is Cincinnati, so maybe it's there. I will continue to praise him when he deserves it and criticize him when he deserves it. I don't really care how he stacks up to others.

[Freyaka]

No, I'm not acting like that at all.

we are 7-4 in the best conference in football. So, we are in 3rd place out of 4.

We are going to have to work hard to make the playoffs. That's exactly what I'm "acting" like.

If it makes you feel better about the loss to justify it by comparing TS to other players, or to qualify the loss via expection, so be it.

If it makes you feel better to say the sky is falling go for it.

We're still in the running for the playoffs and by all rights we probably shouldn't even be where we are right now. This team has played hard and we've only lost 4 games. We've got a tough road to get a wildcard spot, but the other teams we're competing against have an even tougher road.

It makes me feel better keeping a calm rational head on my shoulders rather than knee jerking during a tough loss that sucks monkey balls.

[Joel]

If anyone cares, Siemian was 20/34 for 368 yds, 3 TDs and 0 Ints, with a passer rating of 125.6. He also ran for a yard more than Bibbs on half as many carries. Despite literally pitiful "protection" and nonexistent run support, against a top D with first rate pass rushers.

[Freyaka]

If anyone cares, Siemian was 20/34 for 368 yds, 3 TDs and 0 Ints, with a passer rating of 125.6. He also ran for a yard more than Bibbs on half as many carries. Despite literally pitiful "protection" and nonexistent run support, against a top D with first rate pass rushers.

The problem is that no one does care outside of the few of us that aren't looking for a scapegoat to throw under the bus...

[wayninja]

If it makes you feel better to say the sky is falling go for it.

What? Where did I say anything remotely like that?


We're still in the running for the playoffs and by all rights we probably shouldn't even be where we are right now. This team has played hard and we've only lost 4 games. We've got a tough road to get a wildcard spot, but the other teams we're competing against have an even tougher road.

Yeah, in the running, and hurt our chances by a lot tonight. That's the reality.


It makes me feel better keeping a calm rational head on my shoulders rather than knee jerking during a tough loss that sucks monkey balls.

What knee jerk reaction? That Siemian had a much better second half than the first half? Wow, I need to dial that back, I guess.

[Poet]

In Cam Newton's first year he had multiple games where he was largely irrelevant at the start and went bonkers during garbage time with yardage and scores. In numerous games he would have been close to that stat sheet.

Point being, that stat sheet implies that TS had a hell of a game instead one hell of a half.

[Valar Morghulis]

I don't really care how he stacks up to others.

Neither do I, but I think as a fan base we are not tolerant of the idea that he could develop.... Yet seem to be all in on lynch bring a project guy which is kind of weird to me

These stats show that many players look average or worse yet go on to be very very good

[wayninja]

Neither do I, but I think as a fan base we are not tolerant of the idea that he could develop.... Yet seem to be all in on lynch bring a project guy which is kind of weird to me

These stats show that many players look average or worse yet go on to be very very good

I haven't actually done the research, so I suppose this could be wrong, but I bet you could find NFL busts with better or similar stats.

If you can't judge a guy in the first 10 games, that goes both ways.

[Valar Morghulis]

I haven't actually done the research, so I suppose this could be wrong, but I bet you could find NFL busts with better or similar stats. If you can't judge a guy in the first 10 games, that goes both ways.

That would be good research. I hope someone does it for us lol

[MOtorboat]

Neither do I, but I think as a fan base we are not tolerant of the idea that he could develop.... Yet seem to be all in on lynch bring a project guy which is kind of weird to me

These stats show that many players look average or worse yet go on to be very very good

And it's no indication whether Siemian will or won't go on to anything. It's literally irrelevant.

We're 10 games in now. It's time to start to see some development from where he was at the beginning of the season. There's some of it, but not a ton. For me, I'd like to see a whole game of consistency. Tonight was not that night.

[Freyaka]

Neither do I, but I think as a fan base we are not tolerant of the idea that he could develop.... Yet seem to be all in on lynch bring a project guy which is kind of weird to me

These stats show that many players look average or worse yet go on to be very very good

That's the point i'm getting at...Everyone's looking past Trevor as if he's just some loser in the way of Paxton. We don't know if either of them have what it takes to be successful, but the point i'm getting at is we also don't have enough information to say for sure that they don't have what it takes. Yes Trevor's been inconsistent and rough, but that doesn't mean that the level he's performing at right now is the best that he's capable of. If it did, none of those QB's would have likely made it in the NFL either.

It'd be nice if people would support the starter, have patience and see what happens. I would ask people to do the same if it was Paxton out there. I'm not a fan of a specific player, I'm a fan of the team and I would like to see can develop given the opportunity. It'd be great if we had a true battle between Paxton and Trevor in the offseason. Having two starting quality QB's is a good problem to have in most situations.

[MOtorboat]

I haven't actually done the research, so I suppose this could be wrong, but I bet you could find NFL busts with better or similar stats.

If you can't judge a guy in the first 10 games, that goes both ways.

Yes. You could.

[dogfish]

For what it's worth, I still think we're a 10-win playoff team. But there's NO margin of error now, and this was easily our best chance to beat KC: At home, fresh off our bye, with several of their key players hurt.


If anyone cares, Siemian was 20/34 for 368 yds, 3 TDs and 0 Ints, with a passer rating of 125.6. He also ran for a yard more than Bibbs on half as many carries. Despite literally pitiful "protection" and nonexistent run support, against a top D with first rate pass rushers.


joel has become the voice of reason around here. . .



god bless you all, every one!

:salute: :defense:

[GEM]

Were talking about the game, wtf

No, actually there we're some personal attacks going on. Sorry You missed them.

[Freyaka]

And it's no indication whether Siemian will or won't go on to anything. It's literally irrelevant.

We're 10 games in now. It's time to start to see some development from where he was at the beginning of the season. There's some of it, but not a ton. For me, I'd like to see a whole game of consistency. Tonight was not that night.

Tonight was a pretty good indicator of what could be there. Don't forget that KC isn't some terrible defense. They are by no means on our level, but to hang over 350 yards and 3 TD's on them isn't anything to sneeze at. I'm with you, I want to see him play a complete game start to finish, but he still played a very solid game tonight despite the rough start.

[Tned]

I haven't actually done the research, so I suppose this could be wrong, but I bet you could find NFL busts with better or similar stats.

If you can't judge a guy in the first 10 games, that goes both ways.

Ninja, I think you are completely missing the point. It's not that his stats are better or worse than other first year starters, it's that as a rule, with few exceptions, first year starters are inconsistent and tend to have a bad TD/INT ratio and just rarely are good their first year.

Take Big Ben. They had the luxury of a great defense and running game, so most games they only asked him to pass the ball 20-25 times, if I remember correctly. I bet Siemian has more attempts already than Ben had that whole year. Siemian has had to go over 30 attempts 7 times (one was 50 attempts) in 9.5 starts. I bring up Ben because he's first year was a model year that's often referred to as a great year for a first year starter, but also one where the team was able to protect him and not ask him to do much.

[Freyaka]

I haven't actually done the research, so I suppose this could be wrong, but I bet you could find NFL busts with better or similar stats.

If you can't judge a guy in the first 10 games, that goes both ways.

I think I've been pretty clear that it does go both ways. I've said multiple times that we don't know what he can develop into. It could easily go both ways, but it's too early to throw in the towel on him just like it's too early to throw it in for Paxton as well.

[Poet]

joel has become the voice of reason around here. . .



god bless you all, every one!

:salute: :defense:

No, as per usual I'm brilliant and totally correct. It's hard being the greatest poster of all time, but if you peons could do it anyone else could. :D

[Tned]

No, as per usual I'm brilliant and totally correct. It's hard being the greatest poster of all time, but if you peons could do it anyone else could. :D

And like a broken 30 day clock, you are right once a month... ;)

[Freyaka]

Ninja, I think you are completely missing the point. It's not that his stats are better or worse than other first year starters, it's that as a rule, with few exceptions, first year starters are inconsistent and tend to have a bad TD/INT ratio and just rarely are good their first year.

Take Big Ben. They had the luxury of a great defense and running game, so most games they only asked him to pass the ball 20-25 times, if I remember correctly. I bet Siemian has more attempts already than Ben had that whole year. Siemian has had to go over 30 attempts 7 times (one was 50 attempts) in 9.5 starts. I bring up Ben because he's first year was a model year that's often referred to as a great year for a first year starter, but also one where the team was able to protect him and not ask him to do much.

Big Ben had 295 attempts, not counting today's game Trevor had 291

[Poet]

And like a broken 30 day clock, you are right once a month... ;)

We have super low standards. Thank god.

[MOtorboat]

Tonight was a pretty good indicator of what could be there. Don't forget that KC isn't some terrible defense. They are by no means on our level, but to hang over 350 yards and 3 TD's on them isn't anything to sneeze at. I'm with you, I want to see him play a complete game start to finish, but he still played a very solid game tonight despite the rough start.

I don't see how it was solid. It was just OK. There was lots of yards and no turnovers. But he got sacked in the endzone and fumbled and produced 3 points in the first half. Evaluations are more than stat lines. Getting sacked and pressured in the first half isn't solely on Sambrailo. He was not playing well.

[Poet]

Big Ben had 295 attempts, not counting today's game Trevor had 291

The shift in philosophy of NFL rules had not occurred. The running game in Pittsburgh was more reliable. The system there was built to do nothing but run whereas the Kubiak system is designed to be far more adaptable. TS is not shouldering much more of a burden than Big Ben with all things considered, sans the line. Big Ben had a great line coming into the league.

[Simple Jaded]

One thing that doesn't get mentioned enough is the OL coaching.

As much as I hated the Sampro pick he's never been this bad, Stephenson played D Ware as well as anyone last season, Okung is a 6 year vet that just gives up an easy stunt with no one on the outside to confuse him. Their technique is shit and the communication is shit. These aren't undrafted FA's, there's zero reason for the OL to be this ******* inept.

[Freyaka]

I don't see how it was solid. It was just OK. There was lots of yards and no turnovers. But he got sacked in the endzone and fumbled and produced 3 points in the first half. Evaluations are more than stat lines. Getting sacked and pressured in the first half isn't solely on Sambrailo. He was not playing well.

We must be watching different games, because hell ya it was... There was maybe 1-2 that were on Trevor for not reacting quick enough...Justin Houston ate sombraro's lunch...

[Watchthemiddle]

We have super low standards. Thank god.

Sad right? People, not me, have a low standard of putting in a player who is not ready to run the SB50 team. Im glad coach Kub and Elway, with all their rings and QB experience, don't listen to and read posts on a firum.

[wayninja]

I think I've been pretty clear that it does go both ways. I've said multiple times that we don't know what he can develop into. It could easily go both ways, but it's too early to throw in the towel on him just like it's too early to throw it in for Paxton as well.

You can't have it both ways. You literally posted a stat comparison to Siemian to show how some of these players that went on to have good careers stack up against Siemian.

If you concede that you can't judge, then the comparison is meaningless. Unless the point is just that it doesn't matter what his stats are. If that's the argument, then I totally agree.

I'm not even talking about Paxton. I think that's the real thing here. As soon as someone is even slightly critical of Siemian, the assumption is that the person being critical must be in love with Lynch. Siemian having stretches of inconsistency or poor play has absolutely nothing to do with Lynch. Or Davis Austin.

[dogfish]

Getting sacked and pressured in the first half isn't solely on Sambrailo. He was not playing well.

for effin' sure!

if we're going to waste time w/ the blame game, put it where it belongs-- square on the coaches who wouldn't either help him or bench him, when it was clear his T-rex self couldn't even make a halfway decent attempt at slowing down houston. . .

[Valar Morghulis]

Someone do that research ninja mentioned.... First year starters with great stats that go on to be busts

I got rg3 and cassell of the top of my head

[Tned]

You can't have it both ways. You literally posted a stat comparison to Siemian to show how some of these players that went on to have good careers stack up against Siemian.

If you concede that you can't judge, then the comparison is meaningless. Unless the point is just that it doesn't matter what his stats are. If that's the argument, then I totally agree.

I'm not even talking about Paxton. I think that's the real thing here. As soon as someone is even slightly critical of Siemian, the assumption is that the person being critical must be in love with Lynch. Siemian having stretches of inconsistency or poor play has absolutely nothing to do with Lynch. Or Davis Austin.

As I said in my last post, I think you are missing the point.

[Simple Jaded]

The silver lining with Sampro is that Lammey been saying he had him rated as a 1st round pick as a RT, which may someday be true (stranger things), but it's a total ****ing lie.

#exposed
#fantasyfootballgeek
#Ichartplays

[Simple Jaded]

Someone do that research ninja mentioned.... First year starts with great stats that go on to be busts

I got rg3 and cassell of the top of my head

1, 2, 3 not it!

[Watchthemiddle]

The silver lining with Sampro is that Lammey been saying he had him rated as a 1st round pick as a RT, which may someday be true (stranger things), but it's a total ****ing lie.

#exposed
#fantasyfootballgeek
#Ichartplays

One fraud evaluating another. One is on the radio with a voice, the other is always hurt.

[Freyaka]

Someone do that research ninja mentioned....

First year starts with great stays that go on to be busts

I got rg3 and cassell of the top of my head

Charlie Frye 1,959 9 TD 12 INT's
RGIII 2,193 12 TD 3 INT
Cassell 2,200 10 TD 7 INT
Leinart 2,171 10 TD 10 INT
Grossman 2,214 18 TD 11 INT
Leftwich 1,815 8 TD 12 INT
Losman 1,838 10 TD 7 INT.

Again though, this really doesn't hinder the point I was making...It's too early to make judgments because he's a first year starter and is playing on par with the expectations of players in their first year (Both those that went on to play well, and those who did not)

People expect him to either be a world beater or start Lynch, but the same thing you can expect of TS, you can expect of Lynch (if not worse) It's very tough to be successful your first year as the starting QB. Right now I think TS is doing as good of a job as can be expected all things considered.

[Valar Morghulis]

Charlie Frye 1,959 9 TD 12 INT's RGIII 2,193 12 TD 3 INT Cassell 2,200 10 TD 7 INT Leinart 2,171 10 TD 10 INT Grossman 2,214 18 TD 11 INT Leftwich 1,815 8 TD 12 INT Losman 1,838 10 TD 7 INT. Again though, this really doesn't hinder the point I was making...It's too early to make judgments because he's a first year starter and is playing on par with the expectations of players in their first year (Both those that went on to play well, and those who did not) People expect him to either be a world beater or start Lynch, but the same thing you can expect of TS, you can expect of Lynch (if not worse) It's very tough to be successful your first year as the starting QB. Right now I think TS is doing as good of a job as can be expected all things considered.

none of those are better than Trevor, is that right?

[Freyaka]

Charlie Frye 1,959 9 TD 12 INT's
RGIII 2,193 12 TD 3 INT
Cassell 2,200 10 TD 7 INT
Leinart 2,171 10 TD 10 INT
Grossman 2,214 18 TD 11 INT
Leftwich 1,815 8 TD 12 INT
Losman 1,838 10 TD 7 INT.

Again though, this really doesn't hinder the point I was making...It's too early to make judgments because he's a first year starter and is playing on par with the expectations of players in their first year (Both those that went on to play well, and those who did not)

People expect him to either be a world beater or start Lynch, but the same thing you can expect of TS, you can expect of Lynch (if not worse) It's very tough to be successful your first year as the starting QB. Right now I think TS is doing as good of a job as can be expected all things considered.

I will say though. You compare this list to the list of those that were successful, outside of RGII and Grossman, there are some terrible TD to INT ratios where the successful group has a decent TD to INT.

[Watchthemiddle]

Charlie Frye 1,959 9 TD 12 INT's
RGIII 2,193 12 TD 3 INT
Cassell 2,200 10 TD 7 INT
Leinart 2,171 10 TD 10 INT
Grossman 2,214 18 TD 11 INT
Leftwich 1,815 8 TD 12 INT
Losman 1,838 10 TD 7 INT.

Again though, this really doesn't hinder the point I was making...It's too early to make judgments because he's a first year starter and is playing on par with the expectations of players in their first year (Both those that went on to play well, and those who did not)

People expect him to either be a world beater or start Lynch, but the same thing you can expect of TS, you can expect of Lynch (if not worse) It's very tough to be successful your first year as the starting QB. Right now I think TS is doing as good of a job as can be expected all things considered.

Let's look at a team that either won the previous SB or went to the AFCCG, was 7-4, made a qb switch for a highly touted QB, split the locker room, got the HC fired, and went on to not make the playoffs.ß

[Freyaka]

none of those are better than Trevor, is that right?

No, outside of RGIII and Grossman all of the QB's listed had a higher INT count, but again...None of this really matters much. You cannot properly determine what a QB will become long term in his first year.

Trevor has IMO show flashes of the ability to be a good QB in this league, he's show some bad as well, but I think there is enough there that we have to stick with him the rest of the season and I would like to see him and Paxton both get an equal shot at winning the starting gig next year.

Everyone wants to jump right into the Paxton era, but it could be either of these guys that ends up being our future, nothing is set in stone and either QB could be "the guy"

[wayninja]

I've totally lost what point is being made.

All of this reinforces the idea that the jury is still out on Siemian. Therefore, the data is just noise at this point.

[Watchthemiddle]

I've totally lost what point is being made.

All of this reinforces the idea that the jury is still out on Siemian. Therefore, the data is just noise at this point.

Yup...math, data, and facts are hard

[Tned]

I've totally lost what point is being made.

All of this reinforces the idea that the jury is still out on Siemian. Therefore, the data is just noise at this point.

The point, which he lays out below (quoting his earlier post), is that what we are seeing from Trevor is pretty normal for first year starters, which is inconsistent play.




Again though, this really doesn't hinder the point I was making...It's too early to make judgments because he's a first year starter and is playing on par with the expectations of players in their first year (Both those that went on to play well, and those who did not)

People expect him to either be a world beater or start Lynch, but the same thing you can expect of TS, you can expect of Lynch (if not worse) It's very tough to be successful your first year as the starting QB. Right now I think TS is doing as good of a job as can be expected all things considered.

[Simple Jaded]

Speaking of OL coaching, if Paradis isn't going to snap the ball when they jump offsides why are they going to a hard count? Happened at least twice again tonight.

[Joel]

The point, which he lays or below (quoting his earlier post), is that what we are seeing from Trevor is pretty normal for first year starters, which is inconsistent play.
Which also incidentally means that if/when Lynch takes over we can expect all the same. Including great games that bring his fans out to declare him the best QB since Sammy Baugh and awful ones that bring his critics out to declare him worse than most HS backups. Like all young QBs, their future depends on 4 things:

1) Talent,
2) Work ethic,
3) Coaching
4) Blocking, both to protect them long enough they don't become scared fragile rabbits and provide run support to spend more time in 3rd and 3 than 3rd and 7.

Name three positions where you can reasonably expect late picks and bargain basement castoffs to be quality starters. If you said OT, G and C, you're probably John Elway, who really ought to know better considering the very different endings of his '80s seasons in his prime and '90s seasons as he faded.

[wayninja]

Yup...math, data, and facts are hard

Not as hard as reading, apparently.

[Valar Morghulis]

Which also incidentally means that if/when Lynch takes over we can expect all the same.

True.

[Simple Jaded]

I did some research, 48 seconds between the failed 3rd down and when they snapped the ball on that FG they took off the board.

[Freyaka]

I did some research, 48 seconds between the failed 3rd down and when they snapped the ball on that FG they took off the board.

That's insane....It shouldn't take that long for a penalty to come to light.

[Joel]

I did some research, 48 seconds between the failed 3rd down and when they snapped the ball on that FG they took off the board.
They brought back the 45 second clock... and added 3 more. Also, I still think that last regulation "TD" was caught before he crossed the goal line, where he was clearly down (what kind of BS call is that anyway?) At the very least, I dispute that the replay showed conclusive evidence to the contrary.

[Freyaka]

They brought back the 45 second clock... and added 3 more. Also, I still think that last regulation "TD" was caught before he crossed the goal line, where he was clearly down (what kind of BS call is that anyway?) At the very least, I dispute that the replay showed conclusive evidence to the contrary.

Refs had to make up for the Saints game apparently...

[Simple Jaded]

They brought back the 45 second clock... and added 3 more. Also, I still think that last regulation "TD" was caught before he crossed the goal line, where he was clearly down (what kind of BS call is that anyway?) At the very least, I dispute that the replay showed conclusive evidence to the contrary.

Totally agree, never seen the refs stop play with one second to play and the play should stand as called. If anything it could've gone either way they chose to overrule the call. At least one of the PI's on that drive were weak as ****.

But these are judgement calls, which means they're just supposed to B.O.H.I.C.A

[Simple Jaded]

Going into the game the Broncos defense had given up a 4th qtr lead once. They did it twice in this game.

[Jaws]

FWIW, i was totally unboard with the field goal try. . . play with some balls, especially at home-- we have a mandate from the top guy in the organization. . . you go down kicking and screaming-- play to win, and don't apologise. . . i was sitting in front of my TV urging him to try it, so no second guessing here. . . oakland still has hard road games ahead of them, so i personally won't concede anything. . .

I guess we all would have been on Kubes's case calling him a coward had he opted for the punt/tie option.
Make that kick he would be a hero.
Such fine margins.

[Jaws]

chazoe is one of my favorites , same as you, dog.! Never liked BBJ, but that's just me. :)

Don't go to upstate NY or you'll get arrested ;)

[Broncoknight30]

I've totally lost what point is being made.

All of this reinforces the idea that the jury is still out on Siemian. Therefore, the data is just noise at this point.

Stats are like bikinis.

What they reveal is suggestive. What they conceal is vital.

https://www.waterbabiesbikini.com/competition-bikinis/images/Crystal/Creamsicle_custom%20bikinis.jpg

I will challenge anyone to look at the highights of Prescott. Watch how often he is passing from a nice clean pocket. He makes plays and all of that, but he makes a lot of throws from a nice clean pocket.

Watch when Siemian goes back to pass. It is RARE when he is not under intense pressure. A few things he did last night that I did not see very much of the whole season. He MADE PLAYS. He did not just go to the check down on a 3rd 10 to a guy that had no chance of getting a first down. I saw him scrambling, looking down field and making plays. Turning chicken shit into chicken salad a few times.

Siemian had his best game last night. The Bengals game was probably a bit better STATISTICALLY, but stats will not reveal how much pressure he was under against the Chiefs when he made certain plays.

[Jaws]

Sad right? People, not me, have a low standard of putting in a player who is not ready to run the SB50 team. Im glad coach Kub and Elway, with all their rings and QB experience, don't listen to and read posts on a firum.

Fine line between putting a player in too early and destroying their confidence and putting them in for experience.
Too early now IMO.

[Northman]

I guess we all would have been on Kubes's case calling him a coward had he opted for the punt/tie option.
Make that kick he would be a hero.
Such fine margins.


Pretty much.

[Northman]

Stats are like bikinis.

What they reveal is suggestive. What they conceal is vital.

https://www.waterbabiesbikini.com/competition-bikinis/images/Crystal/Creamsicle_custom%20bikinis.jpg

I will challenge anyone to look at the highights of Prescott. Watch how often he is passing from a nice clean pocket. He makes plays and all of that, but he makes a lot of throws from a nice clean pocket.

Watch when Siemian goes back to pass. It is RARE when he is not under intense pressure. A few things he did last night that I did not see very much of the whole season. He MADE PLAYS. He did not just go to the check down on a 3rd 10 to a guy that had no chance of getting a first down. I saw him scrambling, looking down field and making plays. Turning chicken shit into chicken salad a few times.

Siemian had his best game last night. The Bengals game was probably a bit better STATISTICALLY, but stats will not reveal how much pressure he was under against the Chiefs when he made certain plays.


Im sorry, what was this post about again?

[EastCoastBronco]

I guess we all would have been on Kubes's case calling him a coward had he opted for the punt/tie option.
Make that kick he would be a hero.
Such fine margins.

When Kubiak made that call I was thinking of the "Half a loaf" game from waaaay back.
Choosing to play for the tie got that coach fired.
I believe that you should always go for the win.
No regrets here.

[Joel]

Totally agree, never seen the refs stop play with one second to play and the play should stand as called. If anything it could've gone either way they chose to overrule the call. At least one of the PI's on that drive were weak as ****.

But these are judgement calls, which means they're just supposed to B.O.H.I.C.A
What gets me is that they reversed the field ruling, not just on whether he had possession, was down and was touched, but WHEN each of those things happened: Those are all VERY subjective and debatable, so I just can't see any way to make a conclusive argument from they video that we can tell each of them that precisely. That is, there's no way to have "indisputable evidence." Had the initial call been a TD it would've been the same deal: Not enough to reverse.

Yet the initial call was NOT a TD, and they reversed it ANYWAY. Everything after that, including the imaginary PI on Webster in OT, should've been superfluous.

[Northman]

I thought he was down by contact but obviously the refs felt differently. Either way, the defense allowed them to march right down the field on them so it is what it is.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Speaking of OL coaching, if Paradis isn't going to snap the ball when they jump offsides why are they going to a hard count? Happened at least twice again tonight.

Any player on the line of scrimmage can move to get the offsides call. It doesn't require the ball being snapped. Although it could give us a free play.

[I Eat Staples]

It was definitely a TD, and why was Roby on their best receiver other than Kelce? Got beat by him twice, and looked like he was barely going through the motions on the 4th and 10 play.

Also the guy who caught the 2PAT got away with way more contact than we were called for 3 times on that same drive.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

It was definitely a TD, and why was Roby on their best receiver other than Kelce? Got beat by him twice, and looked like he was barely going through the motions on the 4th and 10 play.

Also the guy who caught the 2PAT got away with way more contact than we were called for 3 times on that same drive.

It was within 5 yards of the LOS. The TE didn't break any rules. Harris shouldn't have been on him.

[I Eat Staples]

It was within 5 yards of the LOS. The TE didn't break any rules. Harris shouldn't have been on him.

I thought he was pushing Harris while the ball was in the air.

Either way, I don't think PI should have been called, but they called 3 VERY ticky tacky calls on us on the same drive. Let the players play.

[capt. Jack]

"The Chiefs are who we thought they were" And we let them off the hook!

That was kinda disgraceful.

Trevor showed me alot last night.

We are a good team, just not a great team.

[chazoe60]

By the way, anyone who thinks going for the win last night was a mistake is dead wrong. You play to win the game, ties are for tic-tac-toe and soccer. Kubes made a ballsy call and I appreciate him for it.

[MasterShake]

When Kubiak made that call I was thinking of the "Half a loaf" game from waaaay back.
Choosing to play for the tie got that coach fired.
I believe that you should always go for the win.
No regrets here.

Yeah I didn't have too much of a problem with the call, but I think you have a higher percentage chance of getting the 1st down than you do kicking the field goal but hindsight and all that. I like that they went for the win and not the tie. Bottom line that was a great game, a classic even, but I hated being on the losing end. This just reinforces how special last season was. This team needs so much to go right for it to win and they just came up short. This division is an absolute beast and the best we can hope for is to split the division games which will be tough with a game at Kansas City.

I just have to remember my expectations for this year were tempered for this year (I think I had them going 8-8 or 9-7) and there is a LOT of football left. Heartbreaking loss, but at least we are still in the chase. At this point I want them to bounce back the next few weeks, the next big test will be New England. That is a MUST win to even sniff the playoffs probably.

[Freyaka]

By the way, anyone who thinks going for the win last night was a mistake is dead wrong. You play to win the game, ties are for tic-tac-toe and soccer. Kubes made a ballsy call and I appreciate him for it.

I don't think going for the win was a mistake...Kicking was a mistake. There was a significantly higher probability that we get the 1st down than us making the fieldgoal. play the safer odds and throw the freaking ball.

[Northman]

I still have zero problems kicking it.

[Tned]

Yeah I didn't have too much of a problem with the call, but I think you have a higher percentage chance of getting the 1st down than you do kicking the field goal but hindsight and all that. I like that they went for the win and not the tie. Bottom line that was a great game, a classic even, but I hated being on the losing end. This just reinforces how special last season was. This team needs so much to go right for it to win and they just came up short. This division is an absolute beast and the best we can hope for is to split the division games which will be tough with a game at Kansas City.

I just have to remember my expectations for this year were tempered for this year (I think I had them going 8-8 or 9-7) and there is a LOT of football left. Heartbreaking loss, but at least we are still in the chase. At this point I want them to bounce back the next few weeks, the next big test will be New England. That is a MUST win to even sniff the playoffs probably.

Or, at least night, the glass half full viewing what be how much had to go wrong for the Chief's to win. Muff punt, backed up on goal line, safety. Free kick, TD return. Punt that would give Broncos a short field bounces off Norwood, almost certainly taking away three and possibly seven points. False start down near the goal line and the team ultimately settling for a FG. Holding the Chiefs to a FG, but then having the Chief's awarded a first down because the Broncos had an overloaded line with seven defenders on the line lined up on one side.

Take away any single one of those blunders and the Broncos win the game. So much had to go wrong. Granted, in other games, we've needed the breaks, like a missed FG in game one (but the reality is that they should never have been awarded first down on 4th and 20, because Benjamin was guilty of hands to the face to Harris before he held Benjamin) or the blocked extra point, but then again the Broncos would have had a minute to get a FG in that game.

I think any time you don't have a dominating offense that can put up 30-35 points, you are going to quite often have games come down to good and bad breaks and which side of those you fall on.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

DENVER -- With the clock draining in regulation, the defense found itself in the situation in which it flourished so many times in the last two seasons: backs against the wall, protecting a slim lead.

Time and time again, it came through -- and three times succeeded in the exact scenario it faced Sunday night against Kansas City: up eight points, with the opponent needing a touchdown and a two-point conversion to tie it up and force overtime.

In Chicago last November, against the Patriots in the 2015 AFC Championship Game and against the Chargers last month, the defense got it done.

This time, it failed.

This time, the Chiefs drove 75 yards in 13 plays, wiggling out of second-and-17 and later converting a fourth-and-10 pass en route to a 3-yard touchdown pass to Tyreek Hill. This time, Denver's defense gave the Chiefs 15 yards on three penalties, two of which gave them automatic first downs. This time, Alex Smith found Demetrius Harris in the end zone for the game-tying two-point conversion.

And then in the ensuing overtime, the Chiefs gashed the Broncos some more. On two series, they faced just one first down. The Broncos gave the Chiefs 10 more yards on two penalties.

"We beat ourselves," CB Chris Harris Jr. said.

Denver held the Chiefs to just 3.6 yards per play and 3.8 yards per pass play, sacked Alex Smith six times ... and still lost, 30-27, in part because the defense could not push Kansas City off the field as it had done to so many other teams in the game's dying moments.

"The coverages were great calls. It was just us," Harris said. "We didn't execute the call. It's like we just went brain-dead as a defense on that last drive."

rest - http://www.denverbroncos.com/news-and-blogs/article-1/Why-did-Broncos-squander-late-lead-to-Chiefs-Reason-is-simple-We-beat-ourselves/4dbffc63-43a8-4d68-8d22-7b324baa931a

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Troy Renck ‏@TroyRenck 10h

#Broncos @Millerlite40 told @DenverChannel "We did everything to lose. And we did. Been other end of a lot of these games. We didn't finish"

Troy Renck ‏@TroyRenck 10h

#broncos McManus said knew kick had no chance when hit ground before ball. @DenverChannel

[BroncoWave]

By the way, anyone who thinks going for the win last night was a mistake is dead wrong. You play to win the game, ties are for tic-tac-toe and soccer. Kubes made a ballsy call and I appreciate him for it.

I'm going to save this post for when we miss the playoffs on a tiebreaker and the tie last night would have gotten us in by half a game.

There is nothing wrong with a tie when the alternative is almost a sure loss. McManus probably doesn't even hit that kick 20% of the time.

I think kicking was actually a gutless decision, not a ballsy one. I'm sure he knew punting was more statistically correct, but he knew he would get trashed by meat heads for "not going for the win", so he took a the easy way out and went for the fg. It's disappointing, really.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

James Palmer ‏@JamesPalmerTV 2h2 hours ago

Kubiak: "My thing is we're going to try to win around here and I made that decision and it just didn't work out” Here’s why players like him

Vic Lombardi ‏@VicLombardi 2h2 hours ago

exactly. i don't understand this #FieldDay mentality. it's couch potato talk.

Eric
‏@ehaglund @VicLombardi the "play for the tie" mentality is why John Fox isn't the coach anymore. Kubiak made the right call

[BroncoJoe]

I'm going to save this post for when we miss the playoffs on a tiebreaker and the tie last night would have gotten us in by half a game.

There is nothing wrong with a tie when the alternative is almost a sure loss. McManus probably doesn't even hit that kick 20% of the time.

I think kicking was actually a gutless decision, not a ballsy one. I'm sure he knew punting was more statistically correct, but he knew he would get trashed by meat heads for "not going for the win", so he took a the easy way out and went for the fg. It's disappointing, really.

There's so much wrong with this post, it's comical.

[BroncoWave]

Those tweets basically prove my last post 100%.

Think of it this way, imagine that situation happens in the middle of the 2nd quarter. Ball on the 44, 4th and 10. Kubiak would get absolutely trashed for kicking the fg from there, because everyone knows that is the worst decision from that part of the field.

The fact that that situation presented itself at the end of the game and Kubiak could "go for the win" doesn't make it the right call.

[BroncoJoe]

Those tweets basically prove my last post 100%.

Think of it this way, imagine that situation happens in the middle of the 2nd quarter. Ball on the 44, 4th and 10. Kubiak would get absolutely trashed for kicking the fg from there, because everyone knows that is the worst decision from that part of the field.

The fact that that situation presented itself at the end of the game and Kubiak could "go for the win" doesn't make it the right call.

It was the right call. McManus can hit those. He took a bad swing.

Your "if / but" statements get old.

[Lynch12]

rest - http://www.denverbroncos.com/news-and-blogs/article-1/Why-did-Broncos-squander-late-lead-to-Chiefs-Reason-is-simple-We-beat-ourselves/4dbffc63-43a8-4d68-8d22-7b324baa931a

The last thing I wanna hear from any of the guys is how they beat themself this late in the season, it only makes them look worse. Now if they play KC next time and beat them down badly then ill accept it, they also have to stomp Oakland out as well. As a matter of fact if denver does not win out they are finished. I kinda think we're finished already after losing at home coming out of a bye week. One more loss and Paxton will get the knod.

[Freyaka]

It was the right call. McManus can hit those. He took a bad swing.

Your "if / but" statements get old.

The right call would have been trying to pass for the first down to go for the win. Worst case scenario if we don't get it, it puts them 8 yards farther away from fieldgoal range than us kicking the fieldgoal (because they get the ball where the kicker was, not the LOS)

[Tned]

I'm going to save this post for when we miss the playoffs on a tiebreaker and the tie last night would have gotten us in by half a game.

There is nothing wrong with a tie when the alternative is almost a sure loss. McManus probably doesn't even hit that kick 20% of the time.

I think kicking was actually a gutless decision, not a ballsy one. I'm sure he knew punting was more statistically correct, but he knew he would get trashed by meat heads for "not going for the win", so he took a the easy way out and went for the fg. It's disappointing, really.

Will you also bump that post if you find that neither the tie nor the loss would get the Broncos in, and it would have taken a win in that game to get in?

[BroncoJoe]

The right call would have been trying to pass for the first down to go for the win. Worst case scenario if we don't get it, it puts them 8 yards farther away from fieldgoal range than us kicking the fieldgoal (because they get the ball where the kicker was, not the LOS)

8 yards wouldn't have made a difference.

[BroncoWave]

It was the right call. McManus can hit those. He took a bad swing.

Your "if / but" statements get old.

Can he? Sure. Is he likely to? Not at all.

Also, you're the one making an "if/but" statement. IF he just doesn't kick the ground, then MAYBE he can hits the fg. The fact is he missed the fg and the fact is that field goals of that distance are usually missed.

Another fact is that coaches almost never ever call field goals of that distance because, again, they are almost always missed.

Everything I'm saying is factual. I'm sorry you don't like the facts.

Even if you want to be aggressive, go for the 4th down. There are much higher odds of converting the 4th down than hitting the fg. There were 3 options in that situation, and kubes picked the one that gave us the worst odds of either getting the win/tie.

[BroncoJoe]

Right. Because we've never had a kicker in Denver hit those from that distance.

Oh wait...

Go for the win. Rely on your defense to stop them.

Personally, I'm torn on the issue, but to just lay it out that the decision was wrong is wrong. It was a gutsy move, but made a bit more realistic knowing the strength of your kickers leg, and faith in your defense. At home. At altitude.

[GEM]

I thought it was dumb for a couple of reasons:

Long Snapper was picked up this week.
It was friggen cold.
The % of chance that he would actually make it from that distance.

But, it's not my choice. I just don't think it was all that gutsy when the probability of it working out were very low.

[BroncoWave]

Right. Because we've never had a kicker in Denver hit those from that distance.

Joe, you are better than being dishonest in your arguments. I never said or even implied that a Broncos kicker had never hit a kick from that distance.

I did specially say that McManus CAN hit that kick, it's just not likely he hits that kick. He's been really shaky from 50+ this year. It stands to reason that he would be even more shaky from 60+.

Believe me, I am the biggest fan in the world of playing to win rather than not to lose. Teams don't go for 4th downs nearly enough, for example. But in this case, playing to win all but guaranteed a loss. There's playing to win, then there is being insanely over aggressive for the sake of being over aggressive.

I love kubes, but he made the wrong decision last night. He just did.

[BroncoWave]

I thought it was dumb for a couple of reasons:

Long Snapper was picked up this week.
It was friggen cold.
The % of chance that he would actually make it from that distance.

But, it's not my choice. I just don't think it was all that gutsy when the probability of it working out were very low.

Fully agree. Punting would have been far more gutsy, because you know everyone in the world would be trashing that decision this morning. Like I said, I think he took the easy way out by kicking. You may lose, but no one will criticize your decision the next morning.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Troy Renck ‏@TroyRenck 10h

#broncos McManus said knew kick had no chance when hit ground before ball. @DenverChannel

[Tned]

Fully agree. Punting would have been far more gutsy, because you know everyone in the world would be trashing that decision this morning. Like I said, I think he took the easy way out by kicking. You may lose, but no one will criticize your decision the next morning.

Well, nobody, except everyone. Look at the questions from the beat writers, the comments on this forum, etc. You might not agree with the call, because there is a strong argument that it was a bad call (I liked the call, but I understand the arguments about playing for the tie), but to say he would be questioned more for punting then trying a 62 yard FG makes no sense.

[I Eat Staples]

Troy Renck ‏@TroyRenck 10h

#broncos McManus said knew kick had no chance when hit ground before ball. @DenverChannel

This is common on long field goals, because you have to kick them so low and hard.

[BroncoJoe]

If there's even a slight possibility of winning, why not try it? McManus and the ST coach said the were confident (not proven, but you could see the ST coach in Kubiak's ear during the timeout). How many hail-marys work out? Small percentage, so why do teams even try?

Either way, it was gutsy because people would either be praising the decision or trashing it the morning after.

The kick had plenty of distance (unlike other attempts I've seen), and McManus hit the dirt on his swing. It sucks, but I would have had a really hard time deciding what to do in that same decision. Clearly, he felt reasonably sure McManus was going to make it.

[BroncoWave]

Troy Renck ‏@TroyRenck 10h

#broncos McManus said knew kick had no chance when hit ground before ball. @DenverChannel

Which is part of the insane risk of 62 yard field goals. You have to hit the ball absolutely perfectly, or there is no chance of it going in. And I had forgotten GEM's excellent point of the new long snapper. Just one of more factor reducing the odds of the making the kick.

There is a very good reason teams almost never attempt kicking 60 yard field goals. Can anyone think of a single instance of a 60 yard field goal being attempted other than at the very end of a half or game when there is no downside to missing? I can't.

In this case, there was insane downside to missing, and that downside presented itself.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Denver Broncos ‏@Broncos 11h

“I’m 100 percent behind Kube there (going for the 62-yd OT FG) … I wouldn’t just play for the tie either. B-Mac is the man.” - @Millerlite40

To me, it's much more important how the players feel, rather than certain fans

[BroncoWave]

Well, nobody, except everyone. Look at the questions from the beat writers, the comments on this forum, etc. You might not agree with the call, because there is a strong argument that it was a bad call (I liked the call, but I understand the arguments about playing for the tie), but to say he would be questioned more for punting then trying a 62 yard FG makes no sense.

It's basically me and Staples vs 10 people in this thread. Kicking the fg was clearly the more popular decision.

[BroncoJoe]

Which is part of the insane risk of 62 yard field goals. You have to hit the ball absolutely perfectly, or there is no chance of it going in. And I had forgotten GEM's excellent point of the new long snapper. Just one of more factor reducing the odds of the making the kick.

There is a very good reason teams almost never attempt kicking 60 yard field goals. Can anyone think of a single instance of a 60 yard field goal being attempted other than at the very end of a half or game when there is no downside to missing? I can't.

In this case, there was insane downside to missing, and that downside presented itself.

Using the word insane discounts your argument.

[VonDoom]

Cameron Wolfe ‏@CameronWolfe 13m13 minutes ago

Ty Sambrailo played 22 RT snaps before Donald Stephenson replaced him - played 62 reps. Stephenson was better & should be #Broncos RT.

Cameron Wolfe ‏@CameronWolfe 18m18 minutes ago

#Broncos TE Jeff Heuerman was active, but did not play last night. A.J. Derby has overtaken him & played 48% of snaps. Virgil Green 63%.

Cameron Wolfe ‏@CameronWolfe 20m20 minutes ago

#Broncos RB rotation was the closest split it's been since Devontae Booker's began starting. Booker played 58% of snaps. Kapri Bibbs 37%.

Cecil Lammey ‏@CecilLammey 1h1 hour ago

Air-yards-per-attempt average in Wk12 #NFL Trevor Siemian 11.74 (5th) Alex Smith 4.39 (29th) - #Broncos QB more willing to go deep vs KC

Cameron Wolfe ‏@CameronWolfe 7m7 minutes ago

#Broncos outgained the Chiefs 464 to 273, but lost. That's a tough pill to swallow.

[Buff]

Well, nobody, except everyone. Look at the questions from the beat writers, the comments on this forum, etc. You might not agree with the call, because there is a strong argument that it was a bad call (I liked the call, but I understand the arguments about playing for the tie), but to say he would be questioned more for punting then trying a 62 yard FG makes no sense.

Oh I fully agree with Wave. Conventional wisdom says, "Oh look at the river boat gambler Kubiak going for the win and not settling for the tie." And then people generally accept that narrative.

It's always impossible to prove a counter-factual - but if he punts there and we tie then the narrative is probably more about how he didn't play to win the game (ignoring that avoiding a loss is actually probably the better statistical play there).

[BroncoWave]

Using the word insane discounts your argument.

If that's the biggest problem you can find with my argument, then I think I have a pretty good argument.

[Tned]

See below, QB pressure on half the passes, and I bet if you broke it down, it was much more than half in the first half and less than half in the second half, as Stephenson played better in the second half.

Also, according the PFF, Siemian consistently performs very well against the blitz, but not when under pressure. So, when teams are blitzing, he exposes them, when they get pressure without blitzing (which happens regularly, especially against RT), and he doesn't have the mismatches that come from blitzing, he doesn't do as well.

RT @CecilLammey Blitz per dropback percentage Wk12 Trevor Siemian 31% (10th most) but pressure felt per dropback a whopping 52.4% (2nd most) #Broncos

[Tned]

Oh I fully agree with Wave. Conventional wisdom says, "Oh look at the river boat gambler Kubiak going for the win and not settling for the tie." And then people generally accept that narrative.

It's always impossible to prove a counter-factual - but if he punts there and we tie then the narrative is probably more about how he didn't play to win the game (ignoring that avoiding a loss is actually probably the better statistical play there).

Maybe, and we will never know, but his contention that only two people on here are questioning the decision is ludicrous.

[BroncoWave]

Oh I fully agree with Wave. Conventional wisdom says, "Oh look at the river boat gambler Kubiak going for the win and not settling for the tie." And then people generally accept that narrative.

It's always impossible to prove a counter-factual - but if he punts there and we tie then the narrative is probably more about how he didn't play to win the game (ignoring that avoiding a loss is actually probably the better statistical play there).

Yep, guys like Vic are sucking him off for the decision. I haven't really seen anyone in the media giving him huge heat for it.

[BroncoJoe]

If that's the biggest problem you can find with my argument, then I think I have a pretty good argument.

It's more from the standpoint that you unequivocally believe it was the worst decision ever - and an insane one. It's just a huge exaggeration, but that's usually what you do.

It was a decision. Nothing more, nothing less. Had that kick gone through (yes, I'm playing the "if" game now) we'd all be praising the decision.

It's my opinion that no matter what Kubiak did, and we lost, he'd be ridiculed.

[Freyaka]

8 yards wouldn't have made a difference.

The kicker doinked and barely made it...It could have made the difference...

[Freyaka]

Right. Because we've never had a kicker in Denver hit those from that distance.

Oh wait...

Go for the win. Rely on your defense to stop them.

Personally, I'm torn on the issue, but to just lay it out that the decision was wrong is wrong. It was a gutsy move, but made a bit more realistic knowing the strength of your kickers leg, and faith in your defense. At home. At altitude.

What we've had previously is irrelevant.... McManus isn't Prater/Elam...

[BroncoJoe]

The kicker doinked and barely made it...It could have made the difference...

They could have also called much more aggressive play calls to get into FG position, or just scored a TD on the punt return. I mean, it's not like the latter hadn't happened already in this game....

We both can play the "could have" game.

[Freyaka]

If there's even a slight possibility of winning, why not try it? McManus and the ST coach said the were confident (not proven, but you could see the ST coach in Kubiak's ear during the timeout). How many hail-marys work out? Small percentage, so why do teams even try?

Either way, it was gutsy because people would either be praising the decision or trashing it the morning after.

The kick had plenty of distance (unlike other attempts I've seen), and McManus hit the dirt on his swing. It sucks, but I would have had a really hard time deciding what to do in that same decision. Clearly, he felt reasonably sure McManus was going to make it.

Because there is an even better possibility of winning if you try to get the first down instead of try an insanely stupid kick that guarantees a loss if you miss?

[BroncoJoe]

What we've had previously is irrelevant.... McManus isn't Prater/Elam...

Duh. And Prater/Elam weren't Dempsy/Janikowski either.

[HORSEPOWER 56]

Attempting the FG or even going for it on 4th down was the right call. You play to win, not to not lose. Had Kubes punked out and played to tie he would've lost some respect from the players (a "you don't trust us to make plays" mentality). The thing is, had we punted, there's no guarantee that KC wouldn't have gotten into FG range anyway. Would've been a little harder for them but it's not like we had stopped them the 2 previous drives and they had over a minute with a timeout.

Had Kubiak played for the tie and we still lost everyone on this board would be shitting on him this morning calling him John Fox. We all wanted Kubes to take some chances, go for it on 4th down, attempt some long FGs. He did. Had McManus hit the kick, Kubes would be the hero, genius coach who knew his kicker could make it. McManus missed so Kubes is being second guessed and will be for the rest of the season unless we win the Super Bowl again.

[Freyaka]

They could have also called much more aggressive play calls to get into FG position, or just scored a TD on the punt return. I mean, it's not like the latter hadn't happened already in this game....

We both can play the "could have" game.

And we could have intercepted those more aggressive calls...Bottom line, you don't give your opponent that field position with the game on the line...They had to get one first down to be in fieldgoal range....

[Buff]

See below, QB pressure on half the passes, and I bet if you broke it down, it was much more than half in the first half and less than half in the second half, as Stephenson played better in the second half.

Also, according the PFF, Siemian consistently performs very well against the blitz, but not when under pressure. So, when teams are blitzing, he exposes them, when they get pressure without blitzing (which happens regularly, especially against RT), and he doesn't have the mismatches that come from blitzing, he doesn't do as well.

RT @CecilLammey Blitz per dropback percentage Wk12 Trevor Siemian 31% (10th most) but pressure felt per dropback a whopping 52.4% (2nd most) #Broncos

That makes some sense - he seems to be pretty good at finding man coverage and giving our WRs a chance to win the matchup when they are 1:1. Most of his success this year seems to be in those deep lobs exploiting the blitz.

To use a basketball analogy - he's like a good transition or fast break point guard - he can make stuff happen on the run... But when he has to run a half court set and the defense is ready for him, he's not good at creating on his own. That's how I feel about our offense in general - at some point there aren't enough smoke and mirrors to hide the fact that we're below average in every offensive position other than WR. Teams are better off playing us straight up and daring us to beat them.

[BroncoJoe]

Because there is an even better possibility of winning if you try to get the first down instead of try an insanely stupid kick that guarantees a loss if you miss?

I guess I missed the rule change that missing a FG attempt automatically guarantees a loss. Guess I need to brush up on the NFL rule book.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

It’s a situation Denver Broncos kicker Brandon McManus said any field goal artist dreams about: a 60-yarder to win the game.

With just over a minute left in overtime Sunday, Broncos head coach Gary Kubiak had the confidence in giving McManus that opportunity to win the game — 62 yards to beat AFC West rival Kansas City Chiefs.

“We’re going to try to win. I’ve seen ‘B-Mac’ do that many times in practice,” Kubiak said after the game. “It’s on me. I just gave them a chance. I thought we could do it, and we didn’t get it done.”

Indeed, the normally fairly sure-footed McManus left the kick short, giving the Chiefs the ball near midfield with time to drive down an kick a game-winning field goal — which they did as time expired.

“(Kubiak’s) seen me do it in practice. I was grateful for the opportunity. As a kicker, you dream of a 60-yard field goal to win,” McManus said after the game. “I’m disappointed in my effort for the result.”

McManus said he kicked the ground before striking the ball, which the kicker said he did on his successful attempt in early overtime.

“I kicked the ground, and with that distance you can’t kick the ground. I can probably make that kick eight or nine out of 10 times, so I’m disappointed in that,” McManus said. “When you’re that far, you just want to hit a good ball and give it a chance. From that distance, if you kick the ground you probably have a 5 percent chance to make it.”

Kubiak said after the game he made the decision to kick partly due to circumstances — there were no timeouts left and a punt did not guarantee they’d see the ball again.

However, Kubiak said he had confidence that McManus could make it, and after the game the kicker’s teammates echoed that.

“I wouldn’t just play for the tie, either. I’m 100-percent behind ‘Kube’ and the coaching staff,” linebacker Von Miller said after the game. “‘B-Mac’ is the man. It’s a tough position that he was in, but he can make those. If we had to do it all over again, I would do it again.

http://1043thefan.com/151795/broncos-mcmanus-disappointed-missed-kick/

[Freyaka]

They could have also called much more aggressive play calls to get into FG position, or just scored a TD on the punt return. I mean, it's not like the latter hadn't happened already in this game....

We both can play the "could have" game.

Except for that you are being asinine and ignoring my statements... Never once did I say we should have punted... Play to win, sure , but go for a first which puts our kicker in a reasonable situation to score...

[Tned]

That makes some sense - he seems to be pretty good at finding man coverage and giving our WRs a chance to win the matchup when they are 1:1. Most of his success this year seems to be in those deep lobs exploiting the blitz.

To use a basketball analogy - he's like a good transition or fast break point guard - he can make stuff happen on the run... But when he has to run a half court set and the defense is ready for him, he's not good at creating on his own. That's how I feel about our offense in general - at some point there aren't enough smoke and mirrors to hide the fact that we're below average in every offensive position other than WR. Teams are better off playing us straight up and daring us to beat them.

Not being a basketball guy, I half get your comparison.

I would disagree in one regard. I think clearly the man beast known as hammerhead is the other position we are above average.

[BroncoJoe]

And we could have intercepted those more aggressive calls...Bottom line, you don't give your opponent that field position with the game on the line...They had to get one first down to be in fieldgoal range....

Or, we could have stopped them from gaining any yards too, which is clearly what Kubiak was counting on.

They needed two first downs to get in to what you would call (by your previous posts) a reasonable FG range. Against one of the best defenses in the league.

[Freyaka]

I guess I missed the rule change that missing a FG attempt automatically guarantees a loss. Guess I need to brush up on the NFL rule book.

Joe...You are being petulant right now.... You know that what I'm saying has nothing to do with a "rule" you give your opponent 10 yards to get in range...9 times out of 10 the odds aren't in your favor to win that game. It doesn't take a lot of thinking to grasp this thought process....

[BroncoWave]

It's more from the standpoint that you unequivocally believe it was the worst decision ever - and an insane one. It's just a huge exaggeration, but that's usually what you do.

It was a decision. Nothing more, nothing less. Had that kick gone through (yes, I'm playing the "if" game now) we'd all be praising the decision.

It's my opinion that no matter what Kubiak did, and we lost, he'd be ridiculed.

I would not have praised the decision had he made the kick. I would have been happy it worked out, but still would have pointed out how reckless it was.

[Freyaka]

Or, we could have stopped them from gaining any yards too, which is clearly what Kubiak was counting on.

They needed two first downs to get in to what you would call (by your previous posts) a reasonable FG range. Against one of the best defenses in the league.

Who hadn't done a good job at stopping them AT all in the end of the game which is why we were in the position we were...Trust your QB to get it done....

[BroncoJoe]

Except for that you are being asinine and ignoring my statements... Never once did I say we should have punted... Play to win, sure , but go for a first which puts our kicker in a reasonable situation to score...

And, you're ignoring my statement that 8 yards wouldn't have made a difference.

Both of our statements are OPINIONS. I don't have to accept yours, and you don't have to accept mine. It's all good.

[BroncoJoe]

Except for that you are being asinine and ignoring my statements... Never once did I say we should have punted... Play to win, sure , but go for a first which puts our kicker in a reasonable situation to score...


Joe...You are being petulant right now.... You know that what I'm saying has nothing to do with a "rule" you give your opponent 10 yards to get in range...9 times out of 10 the odds aren't in your favor to win that game. It doesn't take a lot of thinking to grasp this thought process....

Your petty insults aren't required. We are disagreeing, and I am not calling you names, or insulting you.

[I Eat Staples]

Or, we could have stopped them from gaining any yards too, which is clearly what Kubiak was counting on.

They needed two first downs to get in to what you would call (by your previous posts) a reasonable FG range. Against one of the best defenses in the league.

10 yards gives them a very reasonable shot at winning with no risk of them losing, and 15+ yards is basically a sure thing.

Our defense made it easy on them, and they completely shit the bed in the 4th quarter and OT, but expecting to stop a team from gaining 15 yards in 55 seconds is unreasonable.

[Freyaka]

Your petty insults aren't required. We are disagreeing, and I am not calling you names.

I'm not insulting you, I'm not calling you names, I'm calling out a behavior. Feel free to report it, but you are acting childish in your responses... I'm not saying you are childish...I'm saying right now in this specific situation you are acting that way. You are perfectly capable of not acting this way in almost every other interaction we've had, but today...for whatever reason you are not.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Have not had time to read all the comments posted here after the game. I would think there should be more comments on how the Broncos defense did not stop KC, right before time ran out, and again in OT, could not make them go 3 and out, etc. and give the ball back to the offense to see if they could win the game.

[BroncoJoe]

I'm not insulting you, I'm calling out a behavior. Feel free to report it, but you are acting childish in your responses...

Dude, you're the one throwing out insulting comments. And once again in this exact quote.

How about we just discuss the matter and avoid making comments about each other?

[BroncoJoe]

10 yards gives them a very reasonable shot at winning with no risk of them losing, and 15+ yards is basically a sure thing.

Our defense made it easy on them, and they completely shit the bed in the 4th quarter and OT, but expecting to stop a team from gaining 15 yards in 55 seconds is unreasonable.

10 yards would still have been a 56 yard FG. You're right that 15 would have been better - 51 yard FG. Neither is guaranteed, as he had to "doink" the final one from 34 yards.

[Freyaka]

Dude, you're the one throwing out insulting comments. And once again in this exact quote.

How about we just discuss the matter and avoid making comments about each other?

If it's insulting to point out a behavior, like I said report it...

At this point I'm done interacting with you. Your responses in this thread have pissed me off more than the game itself. I normally like you as a poster...but for right now...We'll just agree to disagree.