U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Pro Football
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-19-2013, 04:52 PM
 
Location: VA
689 posts, read 340,046 times
Reputation: 267

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by manderly6 View Post
27 points is the least amount they have scored all year. It was Manning's third lowest yardage total of the year and his lowest in TDs . Sounds like a decent effort.
I agree... especially with the D
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-19-2013, 10:45 PM
 
Location: The 719
14,636 posts, read 22,481,443 times
Reputation: 13913
Quote:
Originally Posted by manderly6 View Post
27 points is the least amount they have scored all year. It was Manning's third lowest yardage total of the year and his lowest in TDs . Sounds like a decent effort.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bosco55David View Post
We also played an extremely conservative game.
Quote:
Originally Posted by manderly6 View Post
And why do you think that was?
Because the Broncos had the lead for the whole game. You-play-to-win-the-game, not-to-pad-the-stats.

Also, the Denver Broncos Defense decided to join the party this year... finally, and their special teams play against the Chiefs was stellar, darn near blocking some of those punts.

Yup, the Broncos got after it and took care of first things first, hand a 9-0 team and fellow AFC rival and fellow thorn-in-their-side their first loss.

Sorry stats geeks and fantasy football players... NOT!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2013, 05:20 AM
 
Location: NJ
17,579 posts, read 39,870,044 times
Reputation: 16148
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog View Post
Because the Broncos had the lead for the whole game. You-play-to-win-the-game, not-to-pad-the-stats.

Also, the Denver Broncos Defense decided to join the party this year... finally, and their special teams play against the Chiefs was stellar, darn near blocking some of those punts.

Yup, the Broncos got after it and took care of first things first, hand a 9-0 team and fellow AFC rival and fellow thorn-in-their-side their first loss.

Sorry stats geeks and fantasy football players... NOT!
It was a 7 point lead at the half and I don't think they ever had more than a 2 score lead. Give some credit to the KC defense. There were other games where they had larger leads in the second half and scored way more points.Were they not playing to win those games? Were they padding stats those games?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2013, 07:06 AM
Status: "Fill the days." (set 6 days ago)
 
Location: Fredericksburg/Virginia Beach, VA
10,719 posts, read 11,137,480 times
Reputation: 14178
Quote:
Originally Posted by manderly6 View Post
It was a 7 point lead at the half and I don't think they ever had more than a 2 score lead. Give some credit to the KC defense. There were other games where they had larger leads in the second half and scored way more points.Were they not playing to win those games? Were they padding stats those games?
It was a very conservative game as evidenced by the draw plays on 3rd and long situations and the team's commitment to the ground game. They ran more in that game than any other. If the Chiefs offense had been successful against the Broncos defense, I have no doubt the Broncos offense could have responded. But with a rematch just two weeks away, it was smart to get a lead and let the defense help you control the game. They did not do more than they had to, and even though the Chiefs defense deserves some credit, there is no question in my mind the Broncos could have put up 40+ had they needed to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2013, 07:13 AM
 
584 posts, read 661,015 times
Reputation: 764
The problems wasn't the defense, they put forth a very good show. The issue was the offense. The offense had too many short series. Had more of those turned into even short drive we would have seen a different result. The defense would have been better rested.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2013, 09:26 AM
 
Location: Tampa (by way of Omaha)
13,930 posts, read 19,205,979 times
Reputation: 9178
Quote:
Originally Posted by manderly6 View Post
And why do you think that was?
Late in the season against a far inferior opponent. No reason to show off more of the playbook than necessary.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2013, 10:17 AM
 
Location: NJ
17,579 posts, read 39,870,044 times
Reputation: 16148
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bosco55David View Post
Late in the season against a far inferior opponent. No reason to show off more of the playbook than necessary.
How much of the playbook do you think they have held back so far this season?

I get it. Any less than stellar performance by the offense was obviously a choice they made and nothing to do with the defense. Makes total sense.

EDIT:It was also Manning's second lowest completion % of the season just barely ahead of the game they lost. They probably didn't want to let other teams know this late in the season how accurate he is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2013, 03:00 PM
 
Location: The 719
14,636 posts, read 22,481,443 times
Reputation: 13913
Quote:
Originally Posted by manderly6 View Post
Give some credit to the KC defense.
No.

Scoreboard.

Besides, Prater missed a field goal which would have given them a two score lead earlier.

Besides, they were playing an offense which doesn't score much.

Besides, they were playing a team which has been relying on a defense that scores tds themselves, and the Broncos weren't going to let that happen, and if they did, Peyton and Company would just crank up another TD if need be, thus putting more wear on his ankles which are healing up as we speak.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nealrm View Post
The issue was the offense. The offense had too many short series. Had more of those turned into even short drive we would have seen a different result. The defense would have been better rested.
Now a lot of people are going to put a lot of credence to KCs ability to move the ball and the unfortunate dropped passes which may have stalled some drives but what they aren't noticing about the Bronco defense is how well it stiffened as the Chiefs' offense got closer to the Red Zone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by manderly6 View Post
EDIT:It was also Manning's second lowest completion % of the season just barely ahead of the game they lost.
Are we here to credit KCs seeming ability to slow Manning down or to take notice of the Broncos trying to spare Manning some minutes on the field, let him heal up a bit and just try and get through the game with the W?

Quote:
Originally Posted by iknowftbll View Post
Well said.
TY.

Last edited by McGowdog; 11-20-2013 at 03:11 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2013, 03:04 PM
Status: "Fill the days." (set 6 days ago)
 
Location: Fredericksburg/Virginia Beach, VA
10,719 posts, read 11,137,480 times
Reputation: 14178
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog View Post
No.

Scoreboard.

Besides, Prater missed a field goal which would have given them a two score lead earlier.

Besides, they were playing an offense which doesn't score much.

Besides, they were playing a team which has been relying on a defense that scores tds themselves, and the Broncos weren't going to let that happen, and if they did, Peyton and Company would just crank up another TD if need be, thus putting more wear on his ankles which are healing up as we speak.
Well said.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2013, 03:19 PM
 
Location: NJ
17,579 posts, read 39,870,044 times
Reputation: 16148
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog View Post
No.

Scoreboard.

Besides, Prater missed a field goal which would have given them a two score lead earlier.

Besides, they were playing an offense which doesn't score much.

Besides, they were playing a team which has been relying on a defense that scores tds themselves, and the Broncos weren't going to let that happen, and if they did, Peyton and Company would just crank up another TD if need be, thus putting more wear on his ankles which are healing up as we speak.



Now a lot of people are going to put a lot of credence to KCs ability to move the ball and the unfortunate dropped passes which may have stalled some drives but what they aren't noticing about the Bronco defense is how well it stiffened as the Chiefs' offense got closer to the Red Zone.



Are we here to credit KCs seeming ability to slow Manning down or to take notice of the Broncos trying to spare Manning some minutes on the field, let him heal up a bit and just try and get through the game with the W?



TY.
This post seems like some random stuff that doesn't address what I posted. But carry on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Pro Football
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top