|
Delicious storylines and cross-pollination Guess I'll turn the TV back off...
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2015 22:36
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 07:37 |
|
|
Manning's played pretty bad today but I don't think he's done. His arm looked healthier than it has in recent weeks, to be honest. He just missed the throws. Pretty poor showing all around
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2015 01:26
|
|
|
Aye Doc posted:he has thrown two passes beyond 10 yards in the second half and both were dead in the air. they are calling exclusively screens and short throws because they know Peyton can't go even medium, let alone deep In the first half he threw 15+ yards downfield multiple times and overthrew all of them. Are you even watching the game or just having fun jumping on Manning?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2015 01:28
|
|
|
Kalli posted:If the Broncos lose, it'll be the 5th time he's lost his first playoff game with a bye which has to be a record. Yes, Manning lost this game for sure
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2015 01:31
|
|
|
Silly Burrito posted:First the Super Bowl, now this game. Yeah, not only last year's Super Bowl but the one he played against the Saints when the Colts had to drive downfield for a touchdown in the final minutes just to tie, not even take the lead.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2015 01:33
|
|
|
Silly Burrito posted:I do remember Peyton throwing a nice pass to Tracy Porter. I quite enjoyed that one. Yeah, and Reggie Wayne ran a perfect route and definitely did not give up on the play
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2015 01:35
|
|
|
Also Peyton has already stated that he plans on returning in 2015 and considering he didn't leave this game injured, I don't see that changing. So look forward to the same song and dance next year, everybody! 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2015 01:36
|
|
|
I know this makes me sound like a big crybaby, but it really makes me feel bad to read all these posts ripping Manning to shreds.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2015 01:48
|
|
|
wheez the roux posted:♪ tarnishing my legacy ♪ Having fun I see
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2015 01:54
|
|
|
Manning played pretty badly but as far as how far he could heave it downfield, I was actually kind of impressed. If he decides to play another year, one can only hope he works on his touch during the offseason. The accuracy just wasn't there. He's thrown pretty ugly balls since he came to Denver, and today's were only different in the sense that they weren't on target. e: On the bright side though, with Del Rio likely taking the Oakland job and Gase possibly leaving as well, if Elway fires Fox (please do this, Elway) we can maybe stop having to overcome the opposing team AND our offensively bland schemes.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2015 02:16
|
|
|
INSPECTAH DECK posted:Firing Fox would be insane, and you are out of your loving mind if you think the problem today was an offensively bland scheme. It was one of many problems, as our coaching staff has shown time and time again that they are terrible at making adjustments in-game. You're either saying that this loss is entirely on Manning's shoulders, or that all-around, we were outplayed (especially at the QB position), and if it's the second, then how can you disagree with what I said? The defense is stacked with studs from top to bottom. They have a few depth issues, but as far as talent is concerned, Denver is tops in the league. The fact of the matter is, in big games, their coaching staff routinely gets outcoached.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2015 02:26
|
|
|
warcrimes posted:That offensive line is still poo poo and Manning seems to have aged right into retirement right before our very eyes in the last two months. I'd be really surprised if he didn't announce his retirement soon. Good luck with Brock Osswieler or whatever his name is. Well, I guess I'm drinking the Kool-Aid because I thought Peyton looked healthy and capable. He just didn't play well. Though I gotta say I'm at least a little worried that he will retire, because despite saying he intended on playing next season, he reneged on that in his post-game presser. Was this really such a bad loss that it's beginning to put things into perspective for him? If I'm wrong and it wasn't just a bad game, then it's scary how quickly you can go from throwing for nearly 5000 yards and 40 touchdowns to "I'm done".
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2015 02:35
|
|
|
INSPECTAH DECK posted:They had the exact opposite of a bland scheme today, they had a ton of long passes where the receivers got open and it resulted in a lot of incomplete passes. Manning had a bad day. It's never solely on one guy but whole new game if he can make any throw at all. Why would I have a very high opinion of Fox because we signed Aqib Talib, Demarcus Ware, TJ Ward etc.? Where he fails as a coach is exactly that - turning talent into gains on the football field. The same applies to Del Rio. You give them all these great players, and they can't do anything with them. Fox is great at developing players. He's great at rebuilding a football team and a culture, which is what Denver needed at the time. But in terms of in-game adjustments and drawing up a gameplan, he's just not. No, they didn't get outcoached last year in the AFCCG. They played a Patriots team without its biggest playmaker at home. That was the difference. No question that Fox and JDR coached a better game that day than this one - I never said they were buffoons. But they're no longer the right fit for this team. Also, yes, we've won a handful of playoff games with Manning and Fox at the helm. This is hardly surprising considering our aforementioned stacked roster and homefield advantage the past two years. When everything falls into place just so, like playing the decidedly average Chargers in the Divisional round last year, then advancing to play a hobbled New England team at Denver, they win big games. When the chips are stacked against them, they lose. e: In the first half, receivers did get open downfield and Manning missed them. That was a refreshing change of pace for the offense, but aside from that little wrinkle, what else did you see out of them? And the defense?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2015 02:48
|
|
|
Before I respond to this post, I feel the need to clarify I'm not salt-posting, just looking for some healthy conversation about the game.INSPECTAH DECK posted:Well that he developed a lot of great players, and that's a large part of why the Broncos are stacked. And of course lots of teams sign guys to big money but it doesn't work out. Fox/JDR should be given credit for doing that. I mean Denver's defense was brutal worst in the league before Fox arrived, now they're among the best in the league, and the offense only suffered with Peyton's downturn (and they still won 12 games), that should be worth a lot of credit no matter how you want to wave that off. John Fox can develop players, did develop players, and they are now well-developed players. I know that. That's why I said he was a great hire at the time, he did exactly what he needed to. He retooled this team into a contender. In sports, it's not uncommon for a coach who builds a team over the course of a few years and gets them close to or to contender status to be fired. You hear it all the time, they needed a new coach to "get over the hump." I definitely believe Fox did his job and I give him all the credit in the world for that. But as we've seen, being able to develop players simply isn't enough. Going to the playoffs for 4 straight years is great. Going to the Super Bowl was great. Some teams hardly even sniff those things. That can't keep a team that does from making hard decisions, though. An anecdote - 1. Leading up to the Super Bowl last year, Fox held practices without any simulated noise. First of all, what kind of a retard makes this decision? Against Seattle, whose fans are the loudest in the league, in the Super Bowl, and you don't practice with simulated noise? And second of all, how'd that turn out? A safety on the first snap of the game, and the offense looked completely confused out there the rest of the way because they couldn't deal with the noise. quote:The Patriots had a really great offense even without Gronk, and the defense which looked decent for most of the season got abused. They played at home because they had a dominant 13 win season. I don't see any sane reason why they're a worse fit now than before. Really great offense? Are you serious? Amendola has played great no doubt, and Edelman continues to amaze, but NE's offense without Gronk is a dumpster fire, especially when you take into consideration the looks those players see because of the defense's required focus on Gronk. The Patriots simply had nothing to work with last year, at least in terms of the rest of the playoff teams. Yes, they were still good, they made it to the AFCCG after all. But the better team won - talent prevailed. Denver didn't beat NE because Fox outcoached Belichick, that's for drat sure. quote:They don't win big games, except when they do, but those don't count? I don't think the Ravens loss or the loss today were poor coaching efforts, either, . This just seems like whining that they haven't won a Superbowl yet in a 3 year span. I think I explained why "those don't count", though I don't remember saying they didn't count, nor do I remember saying that Denver never wins big games. Of course they do. The Ravens loss was not entirely a result of poor coaching, though poor coaching factors into most every loss for both teams so it was still a factor. Rahim Moore's gently caress up was clearly the defining reason that game. Today's game was different. The team played like dogshit in comparison to the Ravens game, which as you remember was high-scoring and fun and fabulous. Yeah, a couple receivers had their defenders beat in the first half for big gains, maybe even TDs, but what about all the other snaps on offense? They couldn't get separation, couldn't hold onto the ball, and the offense was entirely one-dimensional as it always has been. Involving the run isn't anything new for Denver - Moreno carried as much of the load if not more than CJ did the last year he was here. Basically, the only thing that changed in Denver after the Super Bowl loss were the names on the back of the jerseys. quote:I don't know what you think other teams do, but outside of running a trick play once in a while I don't know what you're expecting. They called a lot of good plays, they would've resulted in big gains/touchdowns if Manning could make the throw, he couldn't, now all they had left was an ok-ish running game and a lot of short passes that were getting camped on, which is hard to win with. They called the same exact plays they always called. Even the potential big plays downfield were just plays that have been in the playbook since time immemorial but instead of taking the underneath throw on them, Manning went deep. Take a look at this tweet - david r tarver @dave_tarver 20 minutes ago @OU_CoachStoops - Vontae Davis said they followed Seattle's blueprint in taking Denver's receivers out the game Basically, Indianapolis knew exactly how to beat the Broncos going in, and the Broncos were completely unprepared for the idea that the opposing team might scheme for them the same way the Seahawks have in the past, both games in which the Seahawks won handily. And yes, I watched the rematch in the regular season - without absurd Peyton Manning heroics, it would've been a beatdown all the same. That right there should tell you all you need to know about the coaching staff. Also, think back to that Super Bowl last year. After the game, multiple Seahawks players came out and basically said they knew everything Denver was going to do in the game. They had studied and deciphered the playcalls, the signals. When your team can only play one type of game, they aren't going to last long in the postseason.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2015 03:50
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 07:37 |
|
|
INSPECTAH DECK posted:I don't think the job of developing players ever stops and this is doubly true in the NFL where most players are on very short term contracts. The Broncos need more Chris Harris type success stories, because along with having an elite QB, getting those constant is the best way to field a contending team. If you're paying fair money for all your good players than you are not going to win the Superbowl, and the idea that the job of developing players is done seems to run counter to that. Change coaches and my guess is that defense will drop like a stone and the offense will continue to degrade unless Manning's arm is rejuvenated. John Fox was hired to do just what you said, but the plans changed when we signed Peyton Manning. A "win now" mentality and all that. Developing players isn't done, and I never said it was, but we're discussing the right fit for this team, currently I imagine, and this team no longer needs development to win games. At least, the primary strength of a contender's coach shouldn't be that he develops players. That's the type of person you hire to turn around your organization. Fox is great at that, but I definitely don't think we lost this game because we don't have enough homegrown talent like Chris Harris. quote:Varied playcalling is really about attacking different parts of the field in different ways and once Manning could not make those throws is when they became predictable. I don't think that when Denver's offense was running smooth, as it was for 2.5 years of the Manning era, that there's any concern for variety. They have receivers for every route under the sun, they mix the run in well, Manning's obvious strength with the audible makes it dangerous to guess what they're doing, and really for the most part Manning's arm has held up pretty well. And that kind of goes into another point I should've made earlier; the playcaller for Denver is not Fox, and it's not really Gates either, it's Manning. So if you have an issue with the play calls, shouldn't a lot of that be with the guy who gets final say? Also, unlike the Superbowl, I don't think Manning was at all under siege from the pass rush, he definitely had time to set up throws and for routes to develop. Plus the running game was fine today. Denver's offense ran "smooth" for all of one season last year, and the records show it. Any time a player gets hobbled, the whole loving offense burns down. If it's not DT's foot, it's JT's ankle. And when the defense lost Brandon Marshall during the regular season, the cracks started to show there too. Our offense has been effective since Manning's arrival, but running smooth? Hard to say. I'm getting the feeling you think winning games equates to running smooth, so I can see why you'd think that. Denver's receivers surely can run every route under the sun, but do they? If you don't watch many Broncos games, you should start, man, because the routes the Denver receivers run are nothing but standard and ordinary. And "they mix the run in well?" Like, you can't seriously believe that if you've ever watched more than a few Broncos games. Denver is NOT GOOD at mixing the run in, in fact, they're so bad at it they had to make a concentrated effort to be better at it in the last third of the season. Denver definitely ran a few really stupid runs today when they had the pass working, so I don't know how you can say that. I think "Gates" as you put it does call the plays. Since Peyton came to Denver, he's relinquished more and more control to his OC. He's been all about working with his coaches and all that jazz since he's gotten here, and hasn't dictated any changes to the coaching staff or offense as far as I'm aware of. He has authority at the line and can check out of and into plays, yeah, but I'm almost positive that the calls do come from Gase on the sideline. And yeah, some of the responsibility is put on Manning when he checks into a bad run or whatever. Manning wasn't pressured nearly as much as in the Super Bowl, but he's been pressured a LOT more this season than last, and in today's game, he still didn't have a lot of time to throw. At times he did, he wasn't sacked a whole lot or beat up, but the fumble was completely on the O-line, and while Manning threw more than a few balls that I'm sure he'd like to have back, his receivers weren't getting a lick of separation. quote:That tweet is meaningless. It's not like teams didn't try the Seahawks strategy early in this season, or that it's a particularly novel strategy to begin with. And in the Colts case did in fact get beat on a lot of deep routes, but yeah, when you can't actually connect on those when they're wide open any sensible defense is going to take note. Every DB's going to look like Richard Sherman if you can't go down the field and all that. Your point about the rematch this year does not make much sense. The Seahawks did not win handily, and the big difference between that game and the Superbowl was that Peyton played far better which tells you... what, exactly? It's not meaningless, man. It's a perfect example of how this team can't make adjustments. It's been almost a year and they haven't made any changes save for the names on the back of the jerseys. The Colts were definitely not beat on a "lot" of deep routes, though I feel like I have to keep stating, yes, Manning missed the few deep throws he took. Yet, Fox is the one who states after the game that he was unhappy with how often we went deep. You don't think that might have something to do with why they didn't look back downfield in the second half? The Seahawks did win handily, and the big difference between that game and the Super Bowl was that Peyton played far better for the last like, 5 minutes. I keep harping on this, but like, you watched the game, correct? Of course a Super Bowl that ends with a 35-point differential is an outlier, but nobody really thinks Denver had a chance in that game, and that didn't change when Denver played them in the regular season. Bringing the game within a few points in the final seconds after spending the first 50 minutes sucking it up isn't "playing far better" in my opinion. Perpetual Ascent fucked around with this message at 08:37 on Jan 12, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2015 08:34
|
|