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!

     

No one has given a legit reason why the Broncos would beat us


GoobyPls

Recommended Posts

You want to see turnovers? Wait for 39 year old neck surgery immobile Peyton to start taking hits. He's going to chuck dead ducks like a damn Labrador retriever. And let's not forget about their butter fingers RB. Good lord. He's pretty stupid at taking hand offs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are legitimate rationales out there but I haven't heard much of them. To play a little devil's advocate:

1. Special Teams - We've had blocked field goals in the past. Heck, we had an extra point blocked that the Saints returned for 2 points. Let's not forget the dumb penalties we occasionally make that gives the opponent more field position. Nortman hasn't been perfect either. That bad one against the Cardinals could've been big except we got a major break in our favor. Finally, we've given up big returns like the one against the Seahawks that started their comeback.

Counter: It's not Bersin fielding punts. Ginn has almost broken off returns for touchdowns. Some of the aforementioned issues were noticed in the regular season and hasn't crept up lately.

2. Shula - The man we once torched hasn't given us reason to do so lately. Of course, who knows if he tries being too cute in the biggest stage or is too stubborn to go away with plays that aren't working, especially if our protection isn't holding up well.

Counter: Cam has more control of the offense now. Shula has improved in making adjustments.

3. Death by a Thousand Slices - Rather than the Denver offense trying to go vertical, they'll dink and dunk their way down the field. We let Luke McCown, a journeyman, almost take us down only for Norman to make the saving interception. Don't forget how often we get opponents to third and longs and allow a first down with a slant, crossing pattern or similar.

Counter: Peyton Manning isn't Drew Brees or Tom Brady. He can try but he won't be consistent enough, resulting in opportunities for interceptions.

4. Bad Cam - Denver defense could get him into bad habits such as poor mechanics, running way too far back for costly sacks or forcing him to throw on the run where his accuracy is more suspect. Additionally, Denver could be working to clog up those passing lanes since that has been a problem in the past.

Counter: Cam has found ways to get out of 2nd and 20 scenarios before and even with wobblers, have made big plays throw while running. He's got the cushion of the run game and our defense in case he's not at his best.

I can come up with more but I think you get the point. There are ways for Denver to win but their path to victory is a lot more narrow. Therefore, there should be multiple factors listed. Otherwise, it's like how people thought the Cubs were finally going to win the World Series because Back to the Future predicted it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is funny.   I had posted in another thread about the great Denver Defense.  They talk and talk and talk about how we haven't faced anyone.  I was running stats through NFL.com and noticed the following.

Based on YPG.

Denver had face 10 games where the opponent was in 20 or below in YPG.  Two were in the lower teens and the remaining 6 games they played were against top 10 and 2 of those games were in the playoffs.   5-1 against those teams BTW. (Three Teams Twice)

For Carolina it was pretty much the opposite.  We had 10 games against top 10 offenses, 4 teens and 4 below 20.

While good I don't think they are as historically great like some might think.  

In PPG they were 4th and we were 6th.  IMO a more telling stat on who is better defensively.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

It is funny.   I had posted in another thread about the great Denver Defense.  They talk and talk and talk about how we haven't faced anyone.  I was running stats through NFL.com and noticed the following.

Based on YPG.

Denver had face 10 games where the opponent was in 20 or below in YPG.  Two were in the lower teens and the remaining 6 games they played were against top 10 and 2 of those games were in the playoffs.   5-1 against those teams BTW. (Three Teams Twice)

For Carolina it was pretty much the opposite.  We had 10 games against top 10 offenses, 4 teens and 4 below 20.

While good I don't think they are as historically great like some might think.  

In PPG they were 4th and we were 6th.  IMO a more telling stat on who is better defensively.

 

Considering how awful Denver offense has been, I think Denver D has been phenomenal this season, Usually a great D is followed by a ball control offense, Denver offense is the opposite of ball control 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, hammertime said:

Perhaps because Denver has the #1 passing defense, and the #1 rushing defense in the NFL. 

Skewed stats.  Our team played off coveragse and allowed pass and rush yards after the games were well in hand.

Dirty little secret, our D is better than Denver's.  Doesn't mean they aren't good but this perceived advantage is smoke and mirrors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Didn't you known the Denver is just better? I mean if you can't agree with that than you have been fooled by the media and are delusional."

That has been passed around here a few times here by supposed "realists." looking at the season stats, both Panthers and Broncos benefited from playing bad teams. But the stats show that if you keep runnignon Denver's vaunted D, you score points. And who is the better running team akin this game? Yeah...

Run the ball, play good defense l, control the clock.

Denver Will win if they score more points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every scenario that I have seen requires about 4 or 5 "ifs."  if denever wins the turnover battle, if they contain our rushing attack, if they get to cam in the backfield, if they get a big special teams play.

No one has said "if denver plays an ordinary game they will win."  However, if the panthers play their average game they will win.  We are far more talented on offense and closer to equal on defense.  Bottom line is we win by two scores unless we make a lot of mistakes and denver plays it's best game.  See the Atlanta game - that's their only formula.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, pantherj said:

We should be able run on Denver's defense rather well. Taking out the fact that I'm a Panthers fan I still think we should win. If I had to bet by picking the winner there is no way in hell I would pick Denver.

How in the world are experts picking against us? They don't even offer good reasons as to why we should lose. It's unfuging believable. I have to wonder if you forced these experts to put money on the game if they would change their tune. It's like when experts came out picking the Jags to beat us. What the fug? Didn't even give good reasons why we should lose. It's Panthers hate. It's hatred toward the South. Or it's inexplicable. The tip is that they don't give good reasons why they are making their pick. They give "I feel a tickle in my balls about Denver" type reasons. Unreal. They should be fired. God I would fire them in a heartbeat for being incompetent.

Nostalgia and wistful thinking long on Peyton remembrance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ThPantherFan said:

Hasn't it been mentioned that defense wins superbowls?  Of course, not this time.

That still may be true, and we have the defense to do it. 

I think Denver has too much focus on pressure Cam or contain Cam. Arizona made that their game plan too and we see how it worked out. Carolina goes to play Carolina football and win. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, cookinbrak said:

"Number One Defense vs Number One Offense"....

Fine. Let them negate each other. Our defense would still score more than their offense.

Stats are for losers. You know we're better than the Broncos. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Biggest reasons.

 

1: It's football, and they are really good at it too.

2: Bright lights.  Our most important players have never seen them this bright.

3:  Defense always travels.  Typically this would be the biggest issue, however, it's not normal that a top offensive team is also a top defensive team.\

We should win, but I don't think it will be as easy as many on this board are expecting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Would Morgan or Beason have been HOFers' if injuries hadn't derailed their careers?  I was not a close watcher of the game when Morgan was in his prime but I thought Beason had a few seasons at close to Lukes' level of play.
    • Franchise QBs feast when things are rolling and the tide that raises boats when things are going sideways.  Bryce isn't that. He's a complimentary player, that's it.  When the defense and STs are on point, he plays loose and it shows.  When we are in a dog fight and things haven't gone our way, he struggles.  It's that simple. He's not a horrible QB, but he's not top tier either.  So the question begs, is this worthy of a second contract?  The answer should be no.  It definitely is my answer. Bryce will never be a QB that can produce wins largely on his arm.  That's a FRANCHISE QB, any other QB is simply a placeholder at the starter's position until that guy can be found.   At some point the excuses of lack of weapons will be a straw man.  Heck, it's nearly there now.  I mean if he doesn't look even better than last year will we blame it on the TE position?  'Well if Bryce only had a player like Kelce, Kittle or Gronk on this team...'  Are we really going to do that?  
    • When I arrived at college, I was 18, not too much younger than some of these draft picks.  It was not a huge school, but there were guys on the team who were 21, 22, 23....playing ahead of me.  I was seventh on the depth chart.  Those guys have been through a few seasons, were stronger, more knowledgeable.  I was a better raw player than some of them, but those other factors matter.  As I grew stronger, more familiar with the playbook, and learned what it was like to play in college, I gradually improved and with that, I rose up the depth chart.  It took most of my freshman year for the light to come on.  Had the coach thrown me into the starting lineup day 1, I would have probably failed.    And that was college.  So I agree with you based on my experience on a much lower level.  Frankly, I think that is why so many kids drafted to fill huge gaps bust.  The teams are desperate.  Anyone who looks to fill vacancies in the starting lineup through the draft is desperate.  You draft depth to develop.  For this reason, I say, "Let Walker start for a while."  Maybe Brazzell can be our WR 4.  Throw Hunter into a rotation and ask him to do one or two things.  Freeling needs some strength and he needs to work on run blocking.
×
×
  • Create New...