Practice / press conference notes - week 3 (Packers week)

[VonDoom]

They’ll practice and talk later but here are some TV maps. Early start this week remember:

https://506sports.com/nfl.php?yr=2019&wk=3

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Sanders: 'I’m going to talk to Bolles and see if we can get him right'

https://www.9news.com/article/sports/nfl/denver-broncos/mike-klis/sanders-im-going-to-talk-to-bolles-and-see-if-we-can-get-him-right/73-435d7e27-0a73-4369-97e0-258c19fc2e35

[NightTrainLayne]

Sanders: 'I’m going to talk to Bolles and see if we can get him right'

https://www.9news.com/article/sports/nfl/denver-broncos/mike-klis/sanders-im-going-to-talk-to-bolles-and-see-if-we-can-get-him-right/73-435d7e27-0a73-4369-97e0-258c19fc2e35

Lol.

[MOtorboat]

Didn’t realize it was a noon kick. Good times.

[MOtorboat]

Lol.

You know, kudos to Emmanuel for not “no commenting” that. Fangio is going to apparently “Isaiah McKenzie” him at left tackle for some inexplicable reason, so what other choice do the team leaders and veterans have but to keep trying to get through to him?

[VonDoom]

Nicki Jhabvala @NickiJhabvala 1h
Vic Fangio said Todd Davis will practice. Bryce Callahan, Andy Janovich and Joe Jones will be limited.


Vic Lombardi @VicLombardi 1h
Fangio on Broncos lack of sacks. Zero through two games. “All I’ll say is that I was disappointed in our rush on the last drive”.

Troy Renck @TroyRenck 1h
#Broncos Flacco believes this offense can be dynamic with weapons he has. But it is a process #Denver7

[MOtorboat]

Already pretty concerning comments:

https://twitter.com/nickijhabvala/status/1174396489101185025?s=21

:whoknows:

[spikerman]

I wonder if a team has ever gone through an entire season without a sack.

[Hawgdriver]

I wonder if a team has ever gone through an entire season without a sack.

I'd call that an unusual season as it relates to pass rush.

[MOtorboat]

I wonder if a team has ever gone through an entire season without a sack.

The 2008 Chiefs had 10. Second least were the Baltimore Colts in 1982 with 11 and the 1982 Bills with 12. The Raiders had 13 in 2018 and Colts had 13 in 1981. I went back to 1965.

[underrated29]

Callahan is going to help with the sacks. I still only see us as a 4 win team, but I also have this feeling.....like things are coming together.

[Davii]

Callahan is going to help with the sacks. I still only see us as a 4 win team, but I also have this feeling.....like things are coming together.

I feel like they improved week to week. They were more competitive, etc. If we can ever score teams will have to drop back to throw something other than a super quick pass and maybe the.rush can have an effect.

Offense has been our MAIN issue. The D has held both teams under 20, that simply must result in a win.

Granted, the D blew the lead.

[VonDoom]

Nicki Jhabvala @NickiJhabvala 14m
Vic Fangio said Todd Davis “stands a good chance of playing” Sunday at Green Bay. Bryce Callahan is still questionable. Andy Janovich and Joe Jones will not play.

Ryan Koenigsberg @RyanKoenigsberg 11m
Vic Fangio on If Von is frustrated by the lack of sacks: “I’m sure he lets you guys and everybody else get into his head a little bit... but I’ve talked to him and hopefully he listens to me more than the thousands of others.”

Troy Renck @TroyRenck 10m
#Broncos Fangio said has patience with Bolles. Munchak and Fangio talked with him earlier in the week, with Munchak talking to him extensively. They need improvement and the elimination of penalties. Has 26 over first 34 games #Denver7

Troy Renck @TroyRenck 2m
#Broncos Scangarello said they have prioritized taking care of ball. Had no turnovers for 7 1/2 quarters, “and we needed 8. We have to play complementary football and be better in red zone. We need results.” #Denver7

[NightTrainLayne]

Offense has been our MAIN issue. The D has held both teams under 20, that simply must result in a win.


Oakland scored 24.

[Davii]

Oakland scored 24.

Yeah, you're right. I still can't say "this is on the D".

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Nicki Jhabvala Retweeted
Joe Rubino
‏Verified account @RubinoJC
33m33 minutes ago

Oh snap! @johnElway says @NFL officials admitted to him this week that they were “Dead wrong” on the Bradley Chubb roughing the passer call vs Chicago.

[spikerman]

Nicki Jhabvala Retweeted
Joe Rubino
‏Verified account @RubinoJC
33m33 minutes ago

Oh snap! @johnElway says @NFL officials admitted to him this week that they were “Dead wrong” on the Bradley Chubb roughing the passer call vs Chicago.
Yep, they were.

[NightTrainLayne]

Yep, they were.

How were they wrong?

[Valar Morghulis]

How were they wrong?

by being incorrect?

[VonDoom]

Sutton didn’t practice today with sore ribs

[underrated29]

Sutton didn’t practice today with sore ribs

Hes been taking a pounding!
I really like him. Id like to see winfree in there and less of hamilton.

[spikerman]

How were they wrong?

That wasn’t roughing the passer. There was no intent to punish the QB.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Von Miller to 'grind harder' as Broncos look for sacks, win vs. Packers

video and article
https://www.denverbroncos.com/news/von-miller-to-grind-harder-as-broncos-look-for-sacks-win-vs-packers

[VonDoom]

https://twitter.com/aricdilalla/status/1175128494323326977?s=21

[NightTrainLayne]

That wasn’t roughing the passer. There was no intent to punish the QB.

I want to understand this. I'm asking questions, not to argue, but to gain understanding.

Do the rules ask the referees to determine an "intent to punish" the QB as part of the penalty? That seems likely impossible. I've previously, from last year, understood that the issue was when a player let all of their weight come down on the QB. But you seem to be saying that if it didn't appear that the defensive player "intended to punish" the QB that having their weight come down on the QB wouldn't be a penalty.

Am I understanding that right? If so, I like the spirit of that, but can't see how that can be enforced as it's entirely subjective.

[spikerman]

I want to understand this. I'm asking questions, not to argue, but to gain understanding.

Do the rules ask the referees to determine an "intent to punish" the QB as part of the penalty? That seems likely impossible. I've previously, from last year, understood that the issue was when a player let all of their weight come down on the QB. But you seem to be saying that if it didn't appear that the defensive player "intended to punish" the QB that having their weight come down on the QB wouldn't be a penalty.

Am I understanding that right? If so, I like the spirit of that, but can't see how that can be enforced as it's entirely subjective.

I’m not a referee so I don’t know if they use the word “punish,” but you’re looking for intent or dangerous hits (i.e. low). In both the Chubb call and the roughing call last night (and maybe the call on the Bears - I don’t remember clearly) it was obvious that the players did not intend to land with their full weight on the QB. It was a normal take down and was not late. When someone wants to use their body weight on a player it seems pretty obvious. The player may flop on the QB or drive him into the ground. It was fairly obvious (to me) that none of that was happening.

[Nomad]

They’ll practice and talk later but here are some TV maps. Early start this week remember:

https://506sports.com/nfl.php?yr=2019&wk=3

Alright, alright, alright........get to watch the Broncos beat the Packers at Lambeau.

[Cugel]

You know, kudos to Emmanuel for not “no commenting” that. Fangio is going to apparently “Isaiah McKenzie” him at left tackle for some inexplicable reason, so what other choice do the team leaders and veterans have but to keep trying to get through to him?

It's not "for some reason" it's because Elway didn't give him another T he could use, and he went into the season with only 1 backup T on the roster (not counting Rogers whom they apparently can't use).

So once Wilkinson had to fill in for injured James at RT there was nobody left to replace Bolles. Unless James comes back or they sign somebody off waivers or trade for a guy they are stuck with Bolles.

They got nobody else.

[Nomad]

It's not "for some reason" it's because Elway didn't give him another T he could use, and he went into the season with only 1 backup T on the roster (not counting Rogers whom they apparently can't use).

So once Wilkinson had to fill in for injured James at RT there was nobody left to replace Bolles. Unless James comes back or they sign somebody off waivers or trade for a guy they are stuck with Bolles.

They got nobody else.

Bring back the tiger for your avi.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Mike Klis
‏Verified account @MikeKlis
3h3 hours ago

Officially, neither the Bears’ Goldman or Broncos’ Chubb we’re fined for their roughing-the-passer penalties last week. #9sports

[Cugel]

Actual intent to injure the QB isn't required for a penalty and fine. They're not allowed to land on the QB or drive him into the ground even on a sack. If the QB has released the ball, they're not supposed to land on him or knock him down. Even if very little force is used that can be a penalty.

Chubb was pushed into the QB by the OL who was trying to push him past the QB and pushed into the QB. The only real penalty that should have been called was a block in the back by the OL.

That's why the league admitted to Elway that they blew the call.

[spikerman]

Actual intent to injure the QB isn't required for a penalty and fine. They're not allowed to land on the QB or drive him into the ground even on a sack. If the QB has released the ball, they're not supposed to land on him or knock him down. Even if very little force is used that can be a penalty.

Chubb was pushed into the QB by the OL who was trying to push him past the QB and pushed into the QB. The only real penalty that should have been called was a block in the back by the OL.

That's why the league admitted to Elway that they blew the call.
That was in the free blocking zone. You would not have a block in the back in that situation.