Thread: Broncos' defense has most impressive game of year against 49ers

Originally Posted by BroncoJoe

Joel.

Yes, sad how often the threads titles are misleading as to content therein. Whether he's a lightning rod or instigator, it's unclear, but either way it's highly correlated.

Originally Posted by SeeingRed

So effing what? The score was 42-10 heading in to the fourth. What exactly are you trying to argue? We won the friggin game 42-17. Are rankings THAT important to you?! Even you have stated that being up by a lot and forcing teams to pass has a negative effect on our rankings thus rendering our defensive ranking a tad skewed. I don't get why you try so hard to argue the DUMBEST points.

The highlighted part's why I brought it all up—so the "Joel hates Denver" crowd's "explaining" MY OWN POINT to me because they didn't bother READING it, just skimmed for an excuse to shout, "J'ACCUSE!"

Originally Posted by LawDog

No, I responded to what you ACTUALLY wrote in your post, using FACTS not what I THOUGHT. I will leave prevent alone because you just can't help but contradict yourself in the same paragraph. As for the punts however - you claimed that we "ABRUPTLY" started punting... "A LOT". That is just false. We only punted 4 times in the game, which is the precise average number of punts we've had at home this year. We have averaged 8 punts per game on the road. Yes we punted twice late, but that isn't a lot nor was it abrupt.

Fine: When the second team came in we didn't start punting "abruptly"—even though our previous 3 drives were TDs. We also didn't start punting "a lot"—even though we NEVER GOT ANOTHER FIRST DOWN.

Originally Posted by Hawgdriver

Yeah I just don't get it. Maybe I'm not looking hard enough. Seemed like the Broncos had a 32 point lead and prioritized resting key players and letting backups get some reps while running out the clock. What's the issue here?

The issue is you or anyone else can say that, but if I say it the same ol' handful o' folks declare it a stealth attack on all things Denver, and prima facie proof I hate the Broncos. And, yeah, that same small group does pretty much ANYWHERE I post, EVERY time. Maybe it's not lightning I draw; lightning doesn't cuss people out, fling ad homs and then order Mods to ban someone ELSE.

Originally Posted by Joel

The highlighted part's why I brought it all up—so the "Joel hates Denver" crowd's "explaining" MY OWN POINT to me because they didn't bother READING it, just skimmed for an excuse to shout, "J'ACCUSE!" Fine: When the second team came in we didn't start punting "abruptly"—even though our previous 3 drives were TDs. We also didn't start punting "a lot"—even though we NEVER GOT ANOTHER FIRST DOWN. The issue is you or anyone else can say that, but if I say it the same ol' handful o' folks declare it a stealth attack on all things Denver, and prima facie proof I hate the Broncos. And, yeah, that same small group does pretty much ANYWHERE I post, EVERY time. Maybe it's not lightning I draw; lightning doesn't cuss people out, fling ad homs and then order Mods to ban someone ELSE.

Again I say...you're arguing what point EXACTLY.


Who is number one in the power rankings in Vegas and otherwise? Duh Brawncos. All this crap you're saying is dumb. The team is 5-1, has won three in a row and five of six against all teams that had 10 wins or more last year except the Jets, and are widely considered the best and most complete team in football. What in god's name do you really have to complain about? Except maybe the Texans being embarrassed on MNF.

Joel's point is that we should have kept Phillips and used the savings to improve the O line. Not a popular suggestion, but it's an interesting point to debate.

I think a concise rebuttal with a hard-hitting point would be more effective for Joel compared to a rebuttal treatise. There's a groan factor associated with the rebuttal treatises and that's when things go sideways for Joel.

Originally Posted by Hawgdriver

Joel's point is that we should have kept Phillips and used the savings to improve the O line. Not a popular suggestion, but it's an interesting point to debate.

I think a concise rebuttal with a hard-hitting point would be more effective for Joel compared to a rebuttal treatise. There's a groan factor associated with the rebuttal treatises and that's when things go sideways for Joel.

I'm sure that was discussed in the Bronco war room. I was hoping we'd grab a guard in the first round if a stud was available but it's pretty hard to argue the Roby pick.

Originally Posted by Slick

I'm sure that was discussed in the Bronco war room. I was hoping we'd grab a guard in the first round if a stud was available but it's pretty hard to argue the Roby pick.

It had to be, right? Like TX said, you can't have everything. And I think Ware's presence alone, outside of his production, is a valuable asset. He helps give the defense an identity and that might justify his price tag.

Originally Posted by SeeingRed

Again I say...you're arguing what point EXACTLY.

Overall, this is a good example of why stats can be misleading

That is, if we play our best defensive game all year (as we did) yet FALL from 4th to 6th in statistical defense rankings, that shows stats CAN'T "show" everything. Here, they don't show we beat SF so BADLY they spent most of the second half frantically throwing deep in a desperate but vain try to make the final respectable, and we cheerfully gave them the middle of the field to trade yards for time. The stats don't show our second team offense played the whole 4th qtr running plunges and the CLOCK against a good run D. So SD leapfrogged us in defensive stats despite LOSING while we CRUSHED SF.

I KNOW you didn't miss that, because you REFERENCED it; if you can read it all yet inexplicably turn it into "Joel still says we suck," you'll do so with WHATEVER I say, however positive: YOU JUST DID.

Originally Posted by SeeingRed

Who is number one in the power rankings in Vegas and otherwise? Duh Brawncos. All this crap you're saying is dumb. The team is 5-1, has won three in a row and five of six against all teams that had 10 wins or more last year except the Jets, and are widely considered the best and most complete team in football. What in god's name do you really have to complain about? Except maybe the Texans being embarrassed on MNF.

Power rankings are worthless; we've been over that, too. House power rankings are EXTRA worthless, because all they show is how much Vegas must favor each team to ensure equal numbers bet both sides so the house ALWAYS wins no matter what happens on the field. The Texans have nothing to do with that; bringing them up is just a cheap shot at me (i.e. personal) because I'm from Houston.

Originally Posted by Hawgdriver

Joel's point is that we should have kept Phillips and used the savings to improve the O line. Not a popular suggestion, but it's an interesting point to debate.

Thanks for taking the time to see it; reasonable men can differ, but it's a lot more fun when they do so reasonably.

Originally Posted by Hawgdriver

I think a concise rebuttal with a hard-hitting point would be more effective for Joel compared to a rebuttal treatise. There's a groan factor associated with the rebuttal treatises and that's when things go sideways for Joel.

I've tried that; it just ends with accusations I ignored points and/or made broad generalizations that don't account for exceptions. If someone wants a fight badly enough, they'll INVENT a reason.

Joel I think you'd get more respect if you respected your readership's time and effort by trying to advance the discussion with your most concise and impactful statements to each issue. The extra words don't help your cause in my opinion.

Not that you asked for an editor, but I'd say:

My point was that stats are misleading. I made it, let's move on unless you disagree.

I've got some power rankings for you:

1. Joel
2. Seeing Red

Now please quit attacking my fanhood. Go Broncos!

Ah man now my ish is going sideways.

Prevent is not even a ******* scheme.

Originally Posted by Hawgdriver

It had to be, right? Like TX said, you can't have everything. And I think Ware's presence alone, outside of his production, is a valuable asset. He helps give the defense an identity and that might justify his price tag.

More or less, I feel comfortable with the FO's choice to shuffle a couple guys on our O-Line to put a solid line in front of Manning while spending big on the defense. It's working. Might not be a great run blocking O-Line, but Peyton Manning isn't a running back. Build the team to the strengths that are already on the roster and do what you can with what you have to make the weaknesses on the team (the running game) work. Seems like a pretty logical approach to me.

Originally Posted by Joel

Thanks for taking the time to see it; reasonable men can differ, but it's a lot more fun when they do so reasonably. I've tried that; it just ends with accusations I ignored points and/or made broad generalizations that don't account for exceptions. If someone wants a fight badly enough, they'll INVENT a reason.

If that's your point, say that and not 19,928 other words that hopscotch around your point.

Originally Posted by SeeingRed

It's working.

The bottom line, mf'ers.