PDA

View Full Version : Eddie Royal having a second-year slump for Broncos



Lonestar
12-15-2009, 04:04 PM
Analysis:
By Jeff Legwold
The Denver Post

Posted: 12/15/2009 01:00:00 AM MST


Eddie Royal (Denver Post file photo)A lot of fans have filled cyberspace and the airwaves with "where's Peyton Hillis?" questions, but during the past few weeks, a lot of football people throughout the league have tossed up this question:

What has happened to Eddie Royal?

Last season, Royal finished with 91 catches for 980 yards. Those 91 catches were the second-highest total posted by a rookie in NFL history.

Yet, with three games remaining in the regular season, Royal has 34 catches for 317 yards, a pedestrian 9.3 yards-per catch average and no receiving touchdowns.

The only times Royal has scored this year were on a punt return and a kickoff return in the Broncos' Oct. 19 win over the Chargers in San Diego.

That certainly wasn't expected from a quality route runner who was thought to suit Josh McDaniel's catch-and-run passing offense very well before the season began. Royal has nine games this season in which he has caught two or fewer passes and has had seven games, by my own unofficial review, when the ball has been thrown his way four or fewer times.

Pro personnel executives who have studied the Broncos personnel have a couple of theories. The first is that Royal is getting more attention from opposing defenses. So, instead of giving him some space to work, they are closing the distance and not letting him work free coming out of his breaks.

The other theory is that being a full-time returner, taking punts and kickoffs, and also a full-time receiver is a difficult job in today's NFL as players continue to get bigger and faster in the open field. And with the salary cap restrictions continuing to siphon players off special-teams units each season, there isn't much continuity in the blocking schemes, and returners may be taking more big hits.

The theory is that even the Bears' Devin Hester, who was the most dominant special-teams player in the league before Chicago made him a full-time receiver, has had a difficult time with the two jobs. And the numbers show that.

Hester has had at least 50 receptions in each of the last two seasons, but did not return a punt or a kickoff for a touchdown in 2008 and has not so far this season, either.

In 2006, when he had no receptions and was not a consideration on offense, he had three punt returns for touchdowns and two kickoff returns for scores. In 2007, when the Bears used him sparingly on offense and he finished with 20 catches, he had four punt returns for scores and two kickoff returns for touchdowns.

Seems all the punishment a returner takes, especially on kickoffs, with defenders coming full-tilt and with plenty of field to gather momentum, may impact how they do one job or the other if they are asked to do both.

A couple of personnel executives from other teams have also speculated that Royal doesn't appear "100 percent" to them, but he has said he's fine and has not been listed recently on the Broncos' injury report.

Royal is currently 17th in the league in kickoff returns at 23.9 per return and is one of just 12 players to have scored on a kickoff return this year, while being seventh in punt returns at 11.1 and one of six players who have scored on a punt return.

But of the 42 players in the league who have at least 50 receptions right now, none is a team's primary punt and kickoff returner. The Vikings' Percy Harvin, a rookie, is the closest with 34 of the Vikings' 44 kickoff returns this season — he has two touchdowns — to go with 48 receptions.

But Harvin, who does not return punts, has also missed time with migraine headaches this season.

Not sure there is any definitive answer on Royal in all of that, but it's certainly worth consideration.

Jeff Legwold: 303-954-2359 or jlegwold@denverpost.com


http://www.denverpost.com/premium/broncos/ci_13996031

underrated29
12-15-2009, 04:15 PM
Orton never throws to him. Ever.

This is what really bugs me about Orton, he goes to marshall to much. If he glances and our guys isnt wide open he will stare down brandon until brandon opens up.


Orton needs to just progress through his reads and hit the open man. I know a lot of our stuff is based off timing, but serioulsy, man give him some passes.

Also- more on coach than anything, if you see a 1 on 1 take it, go deep. I like our WR (marshall, royal,gaffney) against any DB 1 on 1. We have so much serious talent on Offense, there is no reason we should not be lighting it up every week.




Look at the saints, colston/henderson/meachum/moore
Look at us- marshall/royal/gaffney/stokes

Our guys are a lot lot better imo- yet we are nothing and they are dominating! It comes down to QB, but brees, hits the open man, he scans hits the open man, and also throws in anticipation that the wr will be free.

topscribe
12-15-2009, 04:20 PM
Obviously, I'm not a coach, but if I have only one question of the present
coaching regime, it is about the usage of the personnel, from putting Hillis (a
true RB, IMO) at FB and not using him in short yardage and red zone, to not
putting Barrett on TEs (such as Clark), to running Royal on STs.

I don't pretend to know more than the coaches, but I can't help thinking those
thoughts . . .

-----

topscribe
12-15-2009, 04:22 PM
Orton never throws to him. Ever.

This is what really bugs me about Orton, he goes to marshall to much. If he glances and our guys isnt wide open he will stare down brandon until brandon opens up.


Orton needs to just progress through his reads and hit the open man. I know a lot of our stuff is based off timing, but serioulsy, man give him some passes.

Also- more on coach than anything, if you see a 1 on 1 take it, go deep. I like our WR (marshall, royal,gaffney) against any DB 1 on 1. We have so much serious talent on Offense, there is no reason we should not be lighting it up every week.




Look at the saints, colston/henderson/meachum/moore
Look at us- marshall/royal/gaffney/stokes

Our guys are a lot lot better imo- yet we are nothing and they are dominating! It comes down to QB, but brees, hits the open man, he scans hits the open man, and also throws in anticipation that the wr will be free.

I'm not going to place that on Orton. Royal himself said it's like an open
basketball player who has the hot hand: you keep feeding him (in this case,
Marshall) until the defense can stop him. It would have been silly, in the Indy
game, to stop throwing to Marshall, or even slow it down.

-----

underrated29
12-15-2009, 04:51 PM
oh no doubt, go with the hot hand always.


But i am not talking about the indy game. I am talking about all games in general. I dont know how many targets eddie has, but it has to be as low as danny grahams. Maybe even lower.

Unfortunately Orton, looks for Brandon more than he should imo. I am a results person, if brandon is open on every play and eats the defense alive, then screw royal and everyone else. However, we have really only seen that a couple times this year.


We have way to much firepower on Offense to just be shooting out sparks. Eddie needs more balls. Not force fed, but give him a chance, let him fight for some balls. Get him in the game early and see if he can go off is all i am saying.

BroncoWave
12-15-2009, 04:55 PM
Obviously, I'm not a coach, but if I have only one question of the present
coaching regime, it is about the usage of the personnel, from putting Hillis (a
true RB, IMO) at FB and not using him in short yardage and red zone, to not
putting Barrett on TEs (such as Clark), to running Royal on STs.

I don't pretend to know more than the coaches, but I can't help thinking those
thoughts . . .

-----

Did you listen to McD's press conference yesterday? Larsen got injured very early in the game and Hillis was the only player left on the roster who could play FB. McD wasn't going to risk losing his other FB when he was content giving Moreno and Buck all the carries at RB.

He did say, though, if Buck can't go next week Hillis will likely see extended time at RB. (Once again, probably assuming that Larsen can play too.)

He also said that the way we blocked on short yardage Sunday, they could have put Franco Harris back there and he wouldn't have gotten a first down. Hillis probably wouldn't have converted on any of those short yardage situations that Moreno didn't convert.

topscribe
12-15-2009, 05:04 PM
Did you listen to McD's press conference yesterday? Larsen got injured very early in the game and Hillis was the only player left on the roster who could play FB. McD wasn't going to risk losing his other FB when he was content giving Moreno and Buck all the carries at RB.

He did say, though, if Buck can't go next week Hillis will likely see extended time at RB. (Once again, probably assuming that Larsen can play too.)

He also said that the way we blocked on short yardage Sunday, they could have put Franco Harris back there and he wouldn't have gotten a first down. Hillis probably wouldn't have converted on any of those short yardage situations that Moreno didn't convert.

I listened to every word of it. I wrote that post after listening to it.

So, obviously, I stand by what I wrote . . . :coffee:

-----

Dortoh
12-15-2009, 05:06 PM
Speaking of MIA where the hell has Stokley been? Did he hit an age wall or something?

BroncoWave
12-15-2009, 05:26 PM
I listened to every word of it. I wrote that post after listening to it.

So, obviously, I stand by what I wrote . . . :coffee:

-----

So basically you're saying Hillis is superman and could have overcome 2-3 defenders in his face the second he touched the ball unlike Moreno? Gotcha! :2thumbs:

JDL
12-15-2009, 05:43 PM
oh no doubt, go with the hot hand always.


But i am not talking about the indy game. I am talking about all games in general. I dont know how many targets eddie has, but it has to be as low as danny grahams. Maybe even lower.

Unfortunately Orton, looks for Brandon more than he should imo. I am a results person, if brandon is open on every play and eats the defense alive, then screw royal and everyone else. However, we have really only seen that a couple times this year.


We have way to much firepower on Offense to just be shooting out sparks. Eddie needs more balls. Not force fed, but give him a chance, let him fight for some balls. Get him in the game early and see if he can go off is all i am saying.

I agree... also, we never seem to run plays for Royal... a lot of the WR bubbles go to Marshall... if you have a guy like Royal so damn dangerous with the ball in his hands you'd think you'd run more WR screens and reverses to him like New England does... I think Orton just isn't accurate enough and is more confident throwing to a guy like Marshall where he doesn't have to throw a perfect pass.

Look at that 3rd down play to Royal... Orton was WAY inside on the throw and missed an open Royal... however, Marshall is so big that he actually would probably have made that difficult catch.

topscribe
12-15-2009, 05:54 PM
I agree... also, we never seem to run plays for Royal... a lot of the WR bubbles go to Marshall... if you have a guy like Royal so damn dangerous with the ball in his hands you'd think you'd run more WR screens and reverses to him like New England does... I think Orton just isn't accurate enough and is more confident throwing to a guy like Marshall where he doesn't have to throw a perfect pass.

Look at that 3rd down play to Royal... Orton was WAY inside on the throw and missed an open Royal... however, Marshall is so big that he actually would probably have made that difficult catch.

That is really interesting because, in his interview with 104.3 The Fan (http://www.fm1043thefan.com/channels/audioOnDemand/Story.aspx?id=1175625), Marshall
was asked what he attributed most to his 21 catches. He nearly interrupted the
interviewer with his answer: "Kyle Orton," he responded. Marshall went on to say
that he was amazed at Kyle's placement of the ball, where he, and only he,
could get it.

It seems the guy directly on the other end of Orton's passes disagrees with you . . .

-----

titan
12-15-2009, 06:13 PM
Royal's lack of production has been puzzling. He had a decent preseason (4 catches in each of the first 2 preseason games and 5 catches in the 3rd) which indicated to me he'd be a big part of the offense. This article hits on a few things I agree with:

Royal's invoivement in the return game has hurt him as a receiver. If you ever get a chance to watch the 2008 Bronco highlight film there is a segment with McDaniels at the spring workouts telling Eddie that he's going to get a lot more work on returns this year (2009).

Royal may not be totally healthy as the article hints at - something doesn't seem quite right with him. And I think once he started struggling he started pressing - he seems to be showing frustration more on the field this year (over non-interference calls)

I said to a friend the player that misses Jay Cutler most is Eddie Royal. Royal isn't a big target and he hooked up on some long plays with Cutler last year that were just great throws (the Jets td was one). While I have liked Orton's performance overall, he just doesn't have the arm to connect with the smaller Royal downfield as much as Jay.

topscribe
12-15-2009, 06:27 PM
In an interview today (http://www.fm1043thefan.com/channels/audioOnDemand/Story.aspx?id=1176016), Shannon Sharpe said he is absolutely shocked at Royal's
season so far this year. He said he didn't know whether or not the Broncos are
using Royal right, but he said Royal can do everything Wes Welker can do.

Shannon did express that he wasn't necessarily talking about yesterday's game.
He said that, as long as Marshall had the hot hand, he should have gotten the
ball. But he said he believed a team can do better by spreading the ball around.

Sharpe also had kind words for Tony Scheffler as a player.

Regarding Marshall, Sharpe said Marshall is one of the top five receivers in
football today. He then went on to imply that Marshall is one of the top three,
saying that, if Marshall, Fitzgerald, and Andre Johnson were put into a bag, and
he would be stuck with whichever one fell out, he would be happy with any one
of them.

-----

weazel
12-15-2009, 06:30 PM
I'll say it first...

we need a real offensive coordinator.

Requiem / The Dagda
12-15-2009, 06:32 PM
75 targets for Royal and only 35 catches. No drops for Eddie though. Read between the lines peepz.

topscribe
12-15-2009, 06:34 PM
Yeah, read between the lines, Shannon! What's wrong with you?

-----

Requiem / The Dagda
12-15-2009, 06:42 PM
That goes for you too. 75 targets and only 35 catches. No drops. 40 of those balls didn't have the opportunity to hit Eddie in the hands. Guess who may have to do with a little of Eddie's downfall?

topscribe
12-15-2009, 06:43 PM
Why don't you give Shannon a call and tell him all about that?

Be prepared, however, for the lecture about oversimplification . . .

-----

Requiem / The Dagda
12-15-2009, 06:48 PM
I don't need to talk things over with Shannon Sharpe to realize Orton's implications on receivers other than Marshall not getting the ball in their hands on a consistent basis.

topscribe
12-15-2009, 06:48 PM
:coffee:

-----

HORSEPOWER 56
12-15-2009, 06:56 PM
It's not a slump, it's a snub. Every week his opportunities get less and less as Orton zeros in on Marshall. Eddie is a playmaker and we don't even use him. I don't know why we don't, but not getting him the ball is stupid.

Requiem / The Dagda
12-15-2009, 06:57 PM
Kyle Orton has thrown the 410 times with 258 completions. Thus, 152 incomplete passes. Eight of them interceptions. Eight of them batted down at the line. Fifty of them counted as "poor throws." The Broncos have dropped 13 passes this year. Forty-four of the incomplete passes "defended" by opposing players. Thirty four other ones count as other.

I have a major problem with 33% of his incomplete passes coming as a result of a poor throw. Add in the interceptions and it goes up to 38%. Batted down passes are bring his overall incomplete pass percentage based on mistakes to 43%. Either way, statistics clearly illustrate Orton's inefficiency in the passing game.

Requiem / The Dagda
12-15-2009, 07:01 PM
It's not a slump, it's a snub. Every week his opportunities get less and less as Orton zeros in on Marshall. Eddie is a playmaker and we don't even use him. I don't know why we don't, but not getting him the ball is stupid.

Marshall receives 33% of the teams passes.

topscribe
12-15-2009, 07:01 PM
Kyle Orton has thrown the 410 times with 258 completions. Thus, 152 incomplete passes. Eight of them interceptions. Eight of them batted down at the line. Fifty of them counted as "poor throws." The Broncos have dropped 13 passes this year. Forty-four of the incomplete passes "defended" by opposing players. Thirty four other ones count as other.

I have a major problem with 33% of his incomplete passes coming as a result of a poor throw. Add in the interceptions and it goes up to 38%. Batted down passes are bring his overall incomplete pass percentage based on mistakes to 43%. Either way, statistics clearly illustrate Orton's inefficiency in the passing game.

http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh256/AZDynamics/Smilies/BIGrofl2-1.gif

Got to hand it to you . . . master of the twisted stats . . .

Thanks for the laugh. It brightened my day. http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh256/AZDynamics/Smilies/thdrink.gif

-----

Requiem / The Dagda
12-15-2009, 07:03 PM
If you have a problem with Stats Inc., I suggest you take it up with them. Don't want to debate about it? Don't bother responding. Being condescending isn't going to help you any.

Requiem / The Dagda
12-15-2009, 07:08 PM
If you want to insult and bait me, you'll have to do a better job than that.

topscribe
12-15-2009, 07:20 PM
So basically you're saying Hillis is superman and could have overcome 2-3 defenders in his face the second he touched the ball unlike Moreno? Gotcha! :2thumbs:

Basically, you are once again putting words into my mouth and making me say something I have never said nor believed?

Gotcha! :2thumbs:

-----

BroncoWave
12-15-2009, 07:29 PM
Basically, you are once again putting words into my mouth and making me say something I have never said nor believed?

Gotcha! :2thumbs:



Oh well . . . that's your M.O. No surprise . . . :coffee:



-----

Maybe you're reading skills have declined over the years, but I clearly put a question mark at the end of that sentence, in effect asking you to clarify that that was what you were saying. Because if that's not what you're saying, I fail to see your point in saying that Hillis should get the short yardage carries.

And funny how you always call me out for personally attacking you, but you are the first one to go personal in this thread. Gotta love the hypocrisy! :beer:

topscribe
12-15-2009, 07:34 PM
Maybe you're reading skills have declined over the years, but I clearly put a question mark at the end of that sentence, in effect asking you to clarify that that was what you were saying. Because if that's not what you're saying, I fail to see your point in saying that Hillis should get the short yardage carries.

And funny how you always call me out for personally attacking you, but you are the first one to go personal in this thread. Gotta love the hypocrisy! :beer:

It's "your" reading skills, not "you're" reading skills.

So, I guess you missed the question mark at the end of my sentence?

Anyway, I only questioned why Hillis wasn't being used, then provided my
opinion and made the suggestion. I also qualified it by saying I'm not a coach,
but only had the thoughts.

At any rate, since several posters have suggested that, as well as half of the
Denver Broncos fan base, according to the Denver Post, I certainly understand
why you singled me out. http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh256/AZDynamics/Smilies/wink-2.gif

-----

topscribe
12-15-2009, 08:08 PM
Kyle Orton has thrown the 410 times with 258 completions. Thus, 152 incomplete passes. Eight of them interceptions. Eight of them batted down at the line. Fifty of them counted as "poor throws." The Broncos have dropped 13 passes this year. Forty-four of the incomplete passes "defended" by opposing players. Thirty four other ones count as other.

I have a major problem with 33% of his incomplete passes coming as a result of a poor throw. Add in the interceptions and it goes up to 38%. Batted down passes are bring his overall incomplete pass percentage based on mistakes to 43%. Either way, statistics clearly illustrate Orton's inefficiency in the passing game.

Okay, I'll play . . .

Here's what bothers me on that: Orton passed Royal's way 75 times and
completed only 35, with no drops. That makes for a 47% completion ratio on
passes to Royal.

Orton's overall percentage so far is 62.9%. Now, that means his completion
ratio elsewhere, other than Royal, then, is significantly greater than 62.9%.

So Orton has attempted 410 passes so far this year. Take away 75, and now
you have 335 passes. He has completed 258 overall. Take away 35 he sent
to Royal, and now you have 223. So that comes to 335 ATT and 223 COMP.
The completion percentage now stands at 66.6%.

Now, narrowing it down to BMarsh, he was targeted 132 times, catching 86.
That's 65.2%.

Let's organize these respective completion percentages:

Team: 62.9
Marshall: 65.2
Team minus Royal: 66.6
Team minus Marshall and Royal: 68.0
Royal: 47.0

The question, then, remains: What has happened to Fast Eddie? :confused:


BTW, as a side comment, here's a statistic from last year: Marshall was
targeted 181 times and caught 104, for a 57.5% comp ratio. Interesting, eh?

-----

Lonestar
12-15-2009, 08:55 PM
http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh256/AZDynamics/Smilies/BIGrofl2-1.gif

Got to hand it to you . . . master of the twisted stats . . .

Thanks for the laugh. It brightened my day. http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh256/AZDynamics/Smilies/thdrink.gif

-----

wonder how many of those passes were while he was wearing a glove the first 4-5 games of the year..

also have to wonder just how many of those other passes were to the correct spot and the WR was out of position..

some folks seem to realize that QB should be perfect at all time during all games regardless of the weather and whether the players know the routes..

how silly will some look at the end of year and Josh does not spend a top 10 pick on something other than a QB..

Requiem / The Dagda
12-15-2009, 09:06 PM
You mean, how silly will people look when Josh doesn't take a QB #1? Nothing in my post indicates that is the case. I don't feel we are going to, nor need to take a quarterback high. I just don't think we will settle for mediocrity much longer.

topscribe
12-15-2009, 09:07 PM
Okay, I'll play . . .

Here's what bothers me on that: Orton passed Royal's way 75 times and
completed only 35, with no drops. That makes for a 47% completion ratio on
passes to Royal.

Orton's overall percentage so far is 62.9%. Now, that means his completion
ratio elsewhere, other than Royal, then, is significantly greater than 62.9%.

So Orton has attempted 410 passes so far this year. Take away 75, and now
you have 335 passes. He has completed 258 overall. Take away 35 he sent
to Royal, and now you have 223. So that comes to 335 ATT and 223 COMP.
The completion percentage now stands at 66.6%.

Now, narrowing it down to BMarsh, he was targeted 132 times, catching 86.
That's 65.2%.

Let's organize these respective completion percentages:

Team: 62.9
Marshall: 65.2
Team minus Royal: 66.6
Team minus Marshall and Royal: 68.0
Royal: 47.0

The question, then, remains: What has happened to Fast Eddie? :confused:


BTW, as a side comment, here's a statistic from last year: Marshall was
targeted 181 times and caught 104, for a 57.5% comp ratio. Interesting, eh?

-----


You mean, how silly will people look when Josh doesn't take a QB #1? Nothing in my post indicates that is the case. I don't feel we are going to, nor need to take a quarterback high. I just don't think we will settle for mediocrity much longer.

Noooo!! Does that mean Eddie's out?? :eek:

-----

Requiem / The Dagda
12-15-2009, 09:13 PM
I don't think Eddie has been mediocre this year at all. He isn't getting as many looks as he did last year in the receiving game and is being used as our primary return on PR and KR. Eddie is on pace for 1,500 yards of total yardage. Nothing to be ashamed of.

TXBRONC
12-15-2009, 09:51 PM
Speaking of MIA where the hell has Stokley been? Did he hit an age wall or something?

No an ostrich ate him.

rcsodak
12-15-2009, 10:26 PM
That goes for you too. 75 targets and only 35 catches. No drops. 40 of those balls didn't have the opportunity to hit Eddie in the hands. Guess who may have to do with a little of Eddie's downfall?

NO DROPS!?!?!?

That's the most disingenuous statement I've read, to date.

:rolleyes:

There isn't a player ALIVE, that's never had a drop in a season, that I know of. And if there is, I'd like to know who.

Good grief.

rcsodak
12-15-2009, 10:32 PM
Kyle Orton has thrown the 410 times with 258 completions. Thus, 152 incomplete passes. Eight of them interceptions. Eight of them batted down at the line. Fifty of them counted as "poor throws." The Broncos have dropped 13 passes this year. Forty-four of the incomplete passes "defended" by opposing players. Thirty four other ones count as other.

I have a major problem with 33% of his incomplete passes coming as a result of a poor throw. Add in the interceptions and it goes up to 38%. Batted down passes are bring his overall incomplete pass percentage based on mistakes to 43%. Either way, statistics clearly illustrate Orton's inefficiency in the passing game.

"Statistics are for losers." -Bellichek

:coffee:

"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts... for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang (1844-1912)

Requiem / The Dagda
12-16-2009, 02:16 AM
Have your concerns, RC? Contact Stats Inc., and the Washington Post.

topscribe
12-16-2009, 03:06 AM
Have your concerns, RC? Contact Stats Inc., and the Washington Post.

Dream is absolutely right, RC.

I found such sources very handy when I was writing Post #30 in this thread . . . :coffee:

-----

bcbronc
12-16-2009, 05:01 AM
I like Royal returning punts, but would rather see someone else taking care of KOR. other than that, just a sophmore slump and not something I'm overly concerned about. Would like to see more screens run to Royal though, if just to mix things up a little. maybe fake a screen to Marshall.....and run it to Royal instead!

I'm practically an offensive genius. :elefant:

Dirk
12-16-2009, 07:51 AM
Have your concerns, RC? Contact Stats Inc., and the Washington Post.

I went and did a comparison. Orton Versus Brady at the Washington Post (Stats)

Orton's stats are better than Brady's this year.


I'm tellin' you, give Orton a solid O-Line to get the running game top notch and excellent pass protection and he will win - win - win!

Dirk
12-16-2009, 07:54 AM
As far as Eddie's year, I'm not sure. I get so wrapped up in the game I don't look to see if he is getting separation and how well he is being covered. I hope it is just a Sophomore slump and he comes back balls to the walls next year!

rationalfan
12-17-2009, 01:52 PM
We have way to much firepower on Offense to just be shooting out sparks.

i'm not sure about that. in many ways, i think our perception of offensive talent is overrated.

one thing this season has reminded me of is how great shanahan is at designing offenses. i'm not saying he shouldn't have been fired, but it was way too easy to take his offensive genius for granted.

underrated29
12-17-2009, 02:10 PM
i'm not sure about that. in many ways, i think our perception of offensive talent is overrated.

one thing this season has reminded me of is how great shanahan is at designing offenses. i'm not saying he shouldn't have been fired, but it was way too easy to take his offensive genius for granted.


i'll agree about the shanny part. But look at our O talent.

OL- solid- until we changed schemes, but still overall one of the better groups.
OT- best set imo in the league (when harris didnt break his toe)
RB-moreno, buck,hillis?,jordan-not tops in league but upper echelon
TE-scheff,graham,quinn-all can catch, two can block like OL
WR-marshall,royal,gaff,stokes,lloyd,mckinley- best overall depth and talent,imo
QB- Orton- average

Point is we have a solid wall of OL to give time and open holes (when we dont make them something they are not).

We have superior WR, TE receiving threats. We have an awesome 1-2 punch at RB.

Compared to league O leaders we should be doing a lot better.

I listed saints before, but how about

bolts-VJ,flloyd,davis,legadu..,gates,LT sproles. They are putting up tons of points per game yet we have better players at most positions. NOT AT QB though! Rivers- is a good qb- i hate saying that.

We have such great talent all over the place yet we dont do much with it.


I find it hard to believe that stokes, royal etc all of a sudden this year cant get off coverage and get open. When those two excell at it. But every time we pass its to brandon. We need more.

silkamilkamonico
12-17-2009, 02:25 PM
i'll agree about the shanny part. But look at our O talent.

OL- solid- until we changed schemes, but still overall one of the better groups.
OT- best set imo in the league (when harris didnt break his toe)
RB-moreno, buck,hillis?,jordan-not tops in league but upper echelon
TE-scheff,graham,quinn-all can catch, two can block like OL
WR-marshall,royal,gaff,stokes,lloyd,mckinley- best overall depth and talent,imo
QB- Orton- average

Point is we have a solid wall of OL to give time and open holes (when we dont make them something they are not).

We have superior WR, TE receiving threats. We have an awesome 1-2 punch at RB.

Compared to league O leaders we should be doing a lot better.

I listed saints before, but how about

bolts-VJ,flloyd,davis,legadu..,gates,LT sproles. They are putting up tons of points per game yet we have better players at most positions. NOT AT QB though! Rivers- is a good qb- i hate saying that.

We have such great talent all over the place yet we dont do much with it.


I find it hard to believe that stokes, royal etc all of a sudden this year cant get off coverage and get open. When those two excell at it. But every time we pass its to brandon. We need more.

I agree. And I think you have to look at the QB position. Everyone says Orton has been doing a great job this year, if that's the case where do we upgrade? WR's not good enough? RB's not getting the job done? Oline could be better, but it could also be a lot worse.

I honestly don't know how anyone can look at our offense and say QB isn't holding it back. And I think Orton has done a good job this year for his expectations, but the bottom line is we need better production out of the QB position.

Lonestar
12-17-2009, 02:37 PM
I think everyone needs to realize the O we installed is gonna take some time for a parties to be on the same page all the time and just because we did well between the 20's last year we were not scoring like the yards gained. #2 vs IIRC #19 in points.

And they had been in the same scheme for a decade and most of the players save Eddie and Ryan atleast a year or two playing it.

Plugging one or two newbies into it is different than 11 plus and having everyone reacting automatically without "thinking" what am I supposed to do on this route.

As for marshall getting the ball a lot. I'm glad he is it is not like is is bad at catching the ball and just falls down after catching it. Like players we have had in years past.

Remember folks that we have had a RED zone issue since TD, Poortis left except one year when Mike Bell was the short yard TD machine. Jason Elam saved a lot of games for us.

Josh upgraded the Oline Beef wise and it will get another upgrade this next year at OLG and C bet we will see a couple of 310 plus guys there next year.

Not saying that is the only problem but if we fix the LOS players that will get us a couple more wins a year.


Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel.

claymore
12-17-2009, 02:39 PM
wonder how many of those passes were while he was wearing a glove the first 4-5 games of the year..

also have to wonder just how many of those other passes were to the correct spot and the WR was out of position..

some folks seem to realize that QB should be perfect at all time during all games regardless of the weather and whether the players know the routes..

how silly will some look at the end of year and Josh does not spend a top 10 pick on something other than a QB..

I will only feel silly/queazy if McDaniels signs Orton to a long term mega deal. If the CBA doesnt go thru and we stick orton with a 3 mill year deal Im good.

T.K.O.
12-17-2009, 02:50 PM
wonder how many of those passes were while he was wearing a glove the first 4-5 games of the year..

also have to wonder just how many of those other passes were to the correct spot and the WR was out of position..

some folks seem to realize that QB should be perfect at all time during all games regardless of the weather and whether the players know the routes..

how silly will some look at the end of year and Josh does not spend a top 10 pick on something other than a QB..

we also need to factor in the times orton was willing to sacrifice his stats by throwing the ball away.i admit sometimes i was a bit pissed about it ,but then realized he was playing "smart" football,as he was coached to do.
something we hav'nt seen around here in a while !
and again we have to remember this guy has played through a dislocated and torn index finger on his throwing hand and an ankle sprain this year.
he probably threw 20 balls in the dirt in the first 6 games of the season while everyone (including marshall) was learning the offense.
it is a simple fact that some of us as fans forgot during our transition from "what a horrible offseason,were gonna be lucky to win 5 games" to "anything but a division title and the playoffs will be a total failure"
this team is in its embryonic stage.this is a group of guys who have yet to play an entire season together,with a whole new scheme on offense and defense.ask anyone who has played the game of football on a proffessional level and i would bet they say it takes at least 2 seasons working together as a unit to really know what the hell is going on out there.
i'm not making excuses for orton.i'm merely stating that for the most part this team has over acheived where by most accounts it was widely considered that the previous team under acheived.
if orton gets us to the playoffs its gravy at this point and as they say....
"it aint over til' the fat lady sings" anything can happen if we get to the "second season"
and i like our chances ,even with orton's sub-par play at qb .;)
i think he had a higher qb rating than manning in our loss last week (not sure) so i still cant put all the blame for our loss on him.

JDL
12-17-2009, 03:01 PM
Have your concerns, RC? Contact Stats Inc., and the Washington Post.


Again, this goes back to Eddie being a smaller WR. Cutler could hit Eddie very easily in stride. When Orton throws slants and attempts to hit moving targets, he is generally off. Let me support that statement by directing people's attention to when are the most common times you see Gaffney or Royal thrown the ball? They are on either comeback, curl or screen routes. Routes where Orton is essentially not having to adjust for the horizontal movement of his WR, he can just line up the throw and try and hit his guy between the numbers. Marshall seems to be the only one that he commonly targets on slant routes or out routes (or he is the only one Orton can successfully complete those routes to.) They tried to go to Royal on a critical 3rd down in the last game on an out route and Orton totally missed a wide open Royal way back to the inside. Orton just doesn't seem to have the accuracy to hit a smaller WR with those routes, but those are the routes that are really the staple of the Patriots passing game. No offense to Orton but accuracy has never really been his thing, he is a gutsy guy, good leader, and imo has plenty of arm, but lacks consistent accuracy on most routes. Marshall has routinely bailed him out making spectacular catches behind him, over his head and almost in the ground. Another problem, is the WR screen... Orton doesn't throw it very well and his throws are routinely low (because he is rushing and his mechanics really are not good enough to rush throws.)

I actually like Orton, but I don't see him as the future, because we simply have to be able to throw all the routes, particularly slant routes accurately and consistently. It's not really Orton's game and the offense will always be somewhat limited with him. That means assets like Royal, Scheffler and Moreno (RB screens) will be underutilized. Orton is a pro, he is smart, the failure to consistently throw these routes and utilize them to other WRs is not a product of him being new to the system or anyone being new, these routes are a staple of most every NFL system. It is just a case where smaller WRs require more accuracy to hit consistently. Unfortunately for Royal Orton is not really that guy... I still think we need to get him more involved and force some of the play-calling his way as he is too valuable a weapon to not make use of.

Lonestar
12-17-2009, 03:02 PM
Yes I'm sure that Kyles QB rating and % of completed passes was better than payton's.

Payton was less than 50% for the game inspite of the first three drives of being at 80% and then his last drive was pretty good also.

But we still lost for the lack of consistent play on O.

IIRC we also had more yards overall than they did.

We failed in the RED Zone again maybe the play calling or overall play (Best Yoda voice) it was.


Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel.

silkamilkamonico
12-17-2009, 03:04 PM
We failed in the RED Zone again maybe the play calling or overall play (Best Yoda voice) it was.


can't emphasis this enough.

JDL
12-17-2009, 03:05 PM
BTW,

Being on pace for just 92 targets this year after a 129 last year does not help. He's tied for 52nd in the league for targets!!! That is not good.

missingnumber7
12-17-2009, 03:09 PM
I think Royals struggles have more to do with Gaff coming in and knowing the system and knowing where to go. I think that Royal needs to watch Gaffney and see how he does things because that is where he is going to fit into the offense.

TXBRONC
12-17-2009, 03:33 PM
I think Royals struggles have more to do with Gaff coming in and knowing the system and knowing where to go. I think that Royal needs to watch Gaffney and see how he does things because that is where he is going to fit into the offense.

Gaffney being has anything to do with Royal's numbers being way down. It has everything to do with fact that Royal is getting the vast majority of his touches via kick returns and punt returns. For the enitire year he had a total of 37 combined kick and punt returns. This year he has a total of 55 with three games to go.

missingnumber7
12-17-2009, 03:37 PM
Gaffney being has anything to do with Royal's numbers being way down. It has everything to do with fact that Royal is getting the vast majority of his touches via kick returns and punt returns. For the enitire year he had a total of 37 combined kick and punt returns. This year he has a total of 55 with three games to go.

And that has what to do with him having a down year in OFFENSIVE FORMATIONS?

honz
12-17-2009, 03:38 PM
Eddie Royal is a solid WR...nothing more.

missingnumber7
12-17-2009, 03:40 PM
Eddie Royal is a solid WR...nothing more.

I love the fact that a young WR is sitting watching two vets during practice, sitting talking to them after drives, and learning how he can make an impact and you can see his improvement because of it.

claymore
12-17-2009, 03:41 PM
Yes I'm sure that Kyles QB rating and % of completed passes was better than payton's.

Payton was less than 50% for the game inspite of the first three drives of being at 80% and then his last drive was pretty good also.

But we still lost for the lack of consistent play on O.

IIRC we also had more yards overall than they did.

We failed in the RED Zone again maybe the play calling or overall play (Best Yoda voice) it was.


Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel.

Manning was 100% in the redzone though, and 98% of Marshals yards were YAC.

TXBRONC
12-17-2009, 03:50 PM
And that has what to do with him having a down year in OFFENSIVE FORMATIONS?

Yes because not being used as much and it has nothing to do with him not run pass routes.

topscribe
12-17-2009, 03:51 PM
Again, this goes back to Eddie being a smaller WR. Cutler could hit Eddie very easily in stride. When Orton throws slants and attempts to hit moving targets, he is generally off. Let me support that statement by directing people's attention to when are the most common times you see Gaffney or Royal thrown the ball? They are on either comeback, curl or screen routes. Routes where Orton is essentially not having to adjust for the horizontal movement of his WR, he can just line up the throw and try and hit his guy between the numbers. Marshall seems to be the only one that he commonly targets on slant routes or out routes (or he is the only one Orton can successfully complete those routes to.) They tried to go to Royal on a critical 3rd down in the last game on an out route and Orton totally missed a wide open Royal way back to the inside. Orton just doesn't seem to have the accuracy to hit a smaller WR with those routes, but those are the routes that are really the staple of the Patriots passing game. No offense to Orton but accuracy has never really been his thing, he is a gutsy guy, good leader, and imo has plenty of arm, but lacks consistent accuracy on most routes. Marshall has routinely bailed him out making spectacular catches behind him, over his head and almost in the ground. Another problem, is the WR screen... Orton doesn't throw it very well and his throws are routinely low (because he is rushing and his mechanics really are not good enough to rush throws.)

I actually like Orton, but I don't see him as the future, because we simply have to be able to throw all the routes, particularly slant routes accurately and consistently. It's not really Orton's game and the offense will always be somewhat limited with him. That means assets like Royal, Scheffler and Moreno (RB screens) will be underutilized. Orton is a pro, he is smart, the failure to consistently throw these routes and utilize them to other WRs is not a product of him being new to the system or anyone being new, these routes are a staple of most every NFL system. It is just a case where smaller WRs require more accuracy to hit consistently. Unfortunately for Royal Orton is not really that guy... I still think we need to get him more involved and force some of the play-calling his way as he is too valuable a weapon to not make use of.

That's interesting, in view of Marshall's comments that he is amazed at Orton's accuracy . . .

-----

claymore
12-17-2009, 03:55 PM
That's interesting, in view of Marshall's comments that he is amazed at Orton's accuracy . . .

-----

Marshall is saying all the right things in a contract year while we are winning. Im not shocked at all.

Orton doesnt even look accurate on screens.

nevcraw
12-17-2009, 03:57 PM
Did you listen to McD's press conference yesterday? Larsen got injured very early in the game and Hillis was the only player left on the roster who could play FB. McD wasn't going to risk losing his other FB when he was content giving Moreno and Buck all the carries at RB.

He did say, though, if Buck can't go next week Hillis will likely see extended time at RB. (Once again, probably assuming that Larsen can play too.)

He also said that the way we blocked on short yardage Sunday, they could have put Franco Harris back there and he wouldn't have gotten a first down. Hillis probably wouldn't have converted on any of those short yardage situations that Moreno didn't convert.

That was a totsl BS explanation. As I stated elsewhere the coach is willing to risk Champ Bailey on KO in a blowout in KC but wouldn't risk the second string FB in non FB heavy offense?? Rediculous..

56crash
12-17-2009, 03:58 PM
That's interesting, in view of Marshall's comments that he is amazed at Orton's accuracy . . .

-----

If true why does he always seem behind in throowing it to royal

claymore
12-17-2009, 03:59 PM
If true why does he always seem behind in throowing it to royal

Yeah, I wanna hear Royal say he's accurate. :laugh:

topscribe
12-17-2009, 05:20 PM
Marshall is saying all the right things in a contract year while we are winning. Im not shocked at all.

Orton doesnt even look accurate on screens.

That doesn't fly. Marshall was asked, generically, to what he attributed his
success on the day he broke the record. He could have complimented his
coaches, O-line, fellow receivers, and, oh yeah, Orton, too. But, as I said, he
nearly interrupted the interviewer with his answer with two words: "Kyle Orton."
That is not a "saying the right thing" demeanor. That is a sincere answer.

And Orton does look accurate to me on screens, except for one pass. I repeat:
One (1) pass . . . where he had get rid of it in a huge hurry because he was
about to be greeted by the Sweeney/Mathis reception committee.

Your pessimism has become so severe, Clay, it appears you're not even seeing
things right . . .

-----

topscribe
12-17-2009, 05:21 PM
If true why does he always seem behind in throowing it to royal

Why are you taking that up with me? Marshall said it. Argue with him.

He has a website. Take it up with him there. :coffee:


I can't believe how some people on this board want to start arguing with the messenger . . .

-----

Northman
12-17-2009, 05:23 PM
That doesn't fly. Marshall was asked, generically, to what he attributed his
success on the day he broke the record. He could have complimented his
coaches, O-line, fellow receivers, and, oh yeah, Orton, too. But, as I said, he
nearly interrupted the interviewer with his answer with two words: "Kyle Orton."
That is not a "saying the right thing" demeanor. That is a sincere answer.

And Orton does look accurate to me on screens, except for one pass. I repeat:
One (1) pass . . . where he had get rid of it in a huge hurry because he was
about to be greeted by the Sweeney/Mathis reception committee.

Your pessimism has become so severe, Clay, it appears you're not even seeing
things right . . .

-----

Wow, i havent been in this thread for a while but people are now trying to say that Brandon is just complimenting his Qb for the sake of doing it? When will the hate end for that guy?

topscribe
12-17-2009, 05:26 PM
Wow, i havent been in this thread for a while but people are now trying to say that Brandon is just complimenting his Qb for the sake of doing it? When will the hate end for that guy?

I remember when Plummer nearly set the NFL record for the number of passes
thrown without an interception. Not even during that period did some people
cease their denigrating of him.

It's not going to happen, North . . . :coffee:

-----

Dean
12-17-2009, 06:29 PM
The Plummer Wars like a phoenix rises from the cold ashes reborn after apparent annihilation. ;) :D

BroncoWave
12-17-2009, 08:27 PM
Why are you taking that up with me? Marshall said it. Argue with him.

He has a website. Take it up with him there. :coffee:


I can't believe how some people on this board want to start arguing with the messenger . . .

-----

Why don't you give us your opinion instead of hiding behind Marshall's? :confused:

56crash
12-17-2009, 10:31 PM
Yeah, I wanna hear Royal say he's accurate. :laugh:

IU have seen royal say it is timing that is off ..

topscribe
12-17-2009, 11:47 PM
Why don't you give us your opinion instead of hiding behind Marshall's? :confused:

Why would my opinion be any different than the man who is on the receiving end of Orton's passes?

Or do you profess to know more about it than Marshall does?

Now, do you have something worthy to contribute to the thread, or was your purpose just to call me out?

-----

BroncoWave
12-18-2009, 12:03 AM
Why would my opinion be any different than the man who is on the receiving end of Orton's passes?

Or do you profess to know more about it than Marshall does?

Now, do you have something worthy to contribute to the thread, or was your purpose just to call me out?

See now you've created a trap to make it impossible to argue with you. You claim to fully agree with Marshall's opinion but when someone calls you out on it you say "don't look at me, Marshall said it". You must think you're so clever.

And I would love to debate you're opinion but all you're going to do is deflect it to Marshall's quote and refuse to discuss it any further.

topscribe
12-18-2009, 12:42 AM
See now you've created a trap to make it impossible to argue with you. You claim to fully agree with Marshall's opinion but when someone calls you out on it you say "don't look at me, Marshall said it". You must think you're so clever.

And I would love to debate you're opinion but all you're going to do is deflect it to Marshall's quote and refuse to discuss it any further.

And, once again, you have made me the topic.

As I very clearly said (how could you miss it?), my opinion coincides with
Marshall's. How could it not? You see, I, for one, concede he knows more about
it than do I.

So what is there to argue? I believe it because Marshall believes it. Could it be
any more simple than that? So the next step for you would be to go onto
BMarsh's website and take issue with him. He reads the comments there.

Go ahead . . . show him you know more about it than he does . . . :coffee:

-----

BroncoWave
12-18-2009, 01:02 AM
And, once again, you have made me the topic.

As I very clearly said (how could you miss it?), my opinion coincides with
Marshall's. How could it not? You see, I, for one, concede he knows more about
it than do I.

So what is there to argue? I believe it because Marshall believes it. Could it be
any more simple than that? So the next step for you would be to go onto
BMarsh's website and take issue with him. He reads the comments there.

Go ahead . . . show him you know more about it than he does . . . :coffee:

-----

I'm not saying I disagree with you or Marshall. But seeing as you post on this message board and Marshall doesn't and seeing as you have said you two have the same opinion, why not back it up with your own info instead of telling us to "take it up with Marshall" which you know is very impractical. If you're going to post your opinion and when someone challenges it you say "don't ask me, ask Marshall" you might as well not post anything at all because you are simply wasting anyone's time who tries to have a discussion with you.

topscribe
12-18-2009, 01:11 AM
I'm not saying I disagree with you or Marshall. But seeing as you post on this message board and Marshall doesn't and seeing as you have said you two have the same opinion, why not back it up with your own info instead of telling us to "take it up with Marshall" which you know is very impractical. If you're going to post your opinion and when someone challenges it you say "don't ask me, ask Marshall" you might as well not post anything at all because you are simply wasting anyone's time who tries to have a discussion with you.

Okay, now verrrrry slowly: Read...Marshall's...opinion...and...you...have...m ine.

So now, there it is. What is it you want? :noidea:

-----

claymore
12-18-2009, 07:27 AM
That doesn't fly. Marshall was asked, generically, to what he attributed his
success on the day he broke the record. He could have complimented his
coaches, O-line, fellow receivers, and, oh yeah, Orton, too. But, as I said, he
nearly interrupted the interviewer with his answer with two words: "Kyle Orton."
That is not a "saying the right thing" demeanor. That is a sincere answer.

And Orton does look accurate to me on screens, except for one pass. I repeat:
One (1) pass . . . where he had get rid of it in a huge hurry because he was
about to be greeted by the Sweeney/Mathis reception committee.

Your pessimism has become so severe, Clay, it appears you're not even seeing
things right . . .

-----

Watched it again, he did look alot more accurate than I gave him credit for. He also threw alot less screens.

Requiem / The Dagda
12-18-2009, 11:27 AM
Dream is absolutely right, RC.

I found such sources very handy when I was writing Post #30 in this thread . . . :coffee:

-----

Weren't you one of the posters saying Lenny Walls was the next great thing? LOL. Come again?

topscribe
12-18-2009, 11:42 AM
Weren't you one of the posters saying Lenny Walls was the next great thing? LOL. Come again?

No.

Nonetheless, what does that have to do with the topic of this thread?

-----

Requiem / The Dagda
12-18-2009, 11:57 AM
No.


But my, aren't you digging deep into history to find facts to twist . . . :coffee:


Not twisting them, pretty sure I see them right now!

Requiem / The Dagda
12-18-2009, 12:04 PM
I am here to support Eddie Royal.

Requiem / The Dagda
12-18-2009, 12:13 PM
Okay, now that you have said that, tell me: What does Lenny Walls have to do with Eddie Royal?

It ain't about the size of dog in the fight, it is the sight of the fight in the dog. Eddie Royal is small, but he is still awesome. He has sharp return skills and catches the ball pretty well for a wee one. Lenny Walls was big but was terrible. Not nearly as good as Surtain, Woodson, Law and any of those guys back in the day. Size doesn't matter!

Requiem / The Dagda
12-18-2009, 12:15 PM
I'm pretty sure my MHS said, "You too were a Walls supporter!!!!!" or something like that. (Cause well, you were.) You can go ahead and report me for that if you'd like.

Requiem / The Dagda
12-18-2009, 12:22 PM
Righteous man. Peace of Christ be with you!