Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Broncos run D; Smoke and mirriors?

heelinfine

By heelinfine,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

heelinfine Newbie

heelinfine

Posted
Posted

Once again an opposing fan base useing our perceived "weak" schedule to disparage our record. Well we can play that game too.

Lets take a look at Denver's opponents rushing ranks.

Bal 26th

KC 6th x2

Det 32nd

Minn 4th

Oak 28th x2

Clev 22nd

GB 12th

Ind 29th

Chi 11th

N.E. 30th

S.D. 31st x2

Pitt 16th

Cincy 13th.

Only two in the top 10, KC and Minny. KC. rushed for 144yds and 116yds, and the Vikes rushed for 144yds. They got Chi without Forte and the Steelers without Bell.

The majority of the teams they faced are well the bottom half of the League in rushing.

It will be interesting to see how they handle the best and most verstile running game in tge NFL.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jayflip Proficient

jayflip

Posted
Posted

Bro, good points and great research. Easy formatting and easy to read. 

I'm glad you put this together, as I was worried about their elite D and run defense. However, knowing what the Chiefs and Vikings did to that run D gives me hope that Shula and co will craft up a mighty fine game plan that will dominate them. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mbarbour21 Proficient

mbarbour21

Posted
Posted

This is a very good point. Not only is our ranking better, but our scheme is more complex. KC and Minny both have QBs who are not immobile. Both Teddy and Alex can take off when needed. However, their run game is pretty much traditional. Our run game is much more complex. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
heelinfine Newbie

heelinfine

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, jayflip said:

Bro, good points and great research. Easy formatting and easy to read. 

But 22th? (Cleveland)

I'm glad you put this together, as I was worried about their elite D and run defense. However, knowing what the Chiefs and Vikings did to that run D gives me hope that Shula and co will craft up a mighty fine game plan that will dominate them. 

 

lol kind got carried away with the th.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
heelinfine Newbie

heelinfine

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, mbarbour21 said:

This is a very good point. Not only is our ranking better, but our scheme is more complex. KC and Minny both have QBs who are not immobile. Both Teddy and Alex can take off when needed. However, their run game is pretty much traditional. Our run game is much more complex. 

I don't believe they have any idea what's about to hit them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jayflip Proficient

jayflip

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, mbarbour21 said:

This is a very good point. Not only is our ranking better, but our scheme is more complex. KC and Minny both have QBs who are not immobile. Both Teddy and Alex can take off when needed. However, their run game is pretty much traditional. Our run game is much more complex. 

According to @tarheels since Denver already played the Vikes, and Teddy B is basically Cam... WE ARE DOOOOOOOOOMED!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mbarbour21 Proficient

mbarbour21

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, heelinfine said:

I don't believe they have any idea what's about to hit them.

Me either. I'm not gonna be too over confident, but Cam is a monster. Let's not forget that this defense has gotten hot. If our pass rush can generate half the pressure it did against AZ. Whew...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mbarbour21 Proficient

mbarbour21

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, UKPanther94 said:

Trying to stop our offense is like trying to plug a leaky dam, sure you might think you've stopped one thing, but that just opens up something else, and eventually they just get overwhelmed 

I think that is truly the thing. It's such a multifaceted offense that if one starts working and you try to stop it, you open up an opportunity for the other facet to shine. Stop Cam's running opens up Stewart or the pass. Stop Stewart, then u could lose contain on Cam or free up Olsen/WRs. Very tough to defend. You have to make the right choice EVERY TIME. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
heelinfine Newbie

heelinfine

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 minutes ago, mbarbour21 said:

Me either. I'm not gonna be too over confident, but Cam is a monster. Let's not forget that this defense has gotten hot. If our pass rush can generate half the pressure it did against AZ. Whew...

Im trying not to be over confident because the Broncos do have a talented defense,  and anything can happen on the big stage. But I feel more optimistic about how we match up with Denver than I have felt against any other big time game we've ever played.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
csx Grand Master

csx

Posted
Posted

I don't really understand the point of downplaying your upcoming opponent. The game will be played out on the field not with stats. It's similar to saying the team you just beat sucks and at the same time complaining about people questioning your schedule. I am not saying this was done by the thread starter but just in general.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Jackie Lee
      If you wanted Danny Dimes here’s the chance

      By Jackie Lee · Posted

      Strange, every news article and tweet I just searched all mentioned waivers. It is definitely his sixth year of at least 6 games. All I was trying to think of earlier was at the vet min could he beat out Bryce in camp next year lol. He's kinda got the old Darnold issue where he can obviously launch deep balls and qb run at a level Bryce will never achieve, but it sounds like he would be content being like a Josh Allen backup who doesn't throw the whole game plan out the window if he has to come in for a series or two. If we had him and for some reason still wanted to start Bryce he would kinda do what Justin Fields was doing the other night with Dangeruss, coming in for designed runs and maybe some play action/triple option rpo things to go deep. That would be so obvious and sad though. At least Russ can still sling it 40 yards in the air with a flick of the wrist
    • strato
      If you wanted Danny Dimes here’s the chance

      By strato · Posted

      Too late to edit above but the quote is from this Diane Russini article in the Athletic: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5941684/2024/11/23/russinis-what-im-hearing-the-day-the-jets-fell-apart-and-the-broncos-rallied-belichick-best-fits/ Okay.. there you have sorry I left that out the first post.  Also waivers keep the contract intact. That is the major difference in released and waived. It's all in that link from the other post.
    • strato
      If you wanted Danny Dimes here’s the chance

      By strato · Posted

      Okay so I am reading something in The Athletic and it says that Jones had to pass through waivers. So I don't know. I looked this stuff up when we were number one there all offseason and I thought it said 4 years in the league got you vested, as they call it.  Vested gets you out of waivers as I understood it. I probably got something wrong, but when I think about the slack quality of journalism these days I wonder about that. So I went and looked, again. Well, well.  For everyone: "When a player has accrued at least four seasons in the NFL, they are considered a vested veteran. When these vested veterans get cut, they are released and their contract is terminated. When a vested veteran is released, they are an unrestricted free agent that can sign with any NFL team, and the team that released them doesn’t need to provide any additional compensation." It runs it all down here, where the quotes came from: https://www.profootballnetwork.com/waived-vs-released-nfl/ As far as Jones, the team turned down his 5th year option so I knew that meant he had 4 years in, because they re-signed him anyway, after turning down the much cheaper extra year.  The Athletic is owned by the New York Times so I shouldn't be surprised. That paper was an institution once upon a time but they let their standards go.
×
×
  • Create New...