Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rate the new defense

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Rate the new defense

    Did you like it?

    Why or why not?

    I really liked the new defense first half wise.

    I liked the blitz's and the non-prevent coverage.

    The second half was too conservative for my liking.

    Due to the potential there is though, I give the new defense a B.
    39
    A
    10.26%
    4
    B
    51.28%
    20
    C
    30.77%
    12
    D
    5.13%
    2
    F
    2.56%
    1
    MMA News
    MMA News 247

  • #2
    I gave them a C

    on 1st and 2nd down they looked pretty good.

    But it seemed like on every 3rd down (long, short or what ever) they gave up enough yard for Pitt. to get the first.

    Not only does that extend drives which is tiresome our D, it does not help the moral for both the players and fans.

    Its takes the fans right out of it.

    As john said, we still need some work.

    And DJ played great... again.
    sigpic

    Comment


    • #3
      You mean the new D that gave up 21 points in the 2nd half and did not get one stop? Ya I give them an F.

      Some of you guys are just too easy to please. It took Pitt one half to adjust to 8 in the box (since we had not done it before) and we took advantage in the first half by forcing 3 turnovers (could have been 5) to build up a 14 point lead.

      If we played Pitt again with the same D they score 40+.

      I'm thrilled with the win, but I think it was a quick fix and we would have been better served by making the players get it right in Bates' system instead of going back to the smoke and mirrors of Coyer. Which as history has proved, will not beat good teams once they have game film on it.

      Shanny can not stand to lose so he goes for the quick fix, really my one knock on him. We have seen this from him with the Browncos, constantly switching D coordinators, and signing marginal players for big $$$ only to hurt our future salary cap.

      If we would have stayed true to the system, I think we would may have lost against Pitt and maybe even ended the year with a worse record; however we would have begun next year with a core group of players that knew what to do and could have went out and found the missing pieces so the personnel matched the system. NE and Pitt have great D's because they have worked a long time in the same system, not by fooling teams by dong something different each week.

      R Ayers - B Cofield - A Haynesworth - CJ ohnson
      J Anderson - J Beason - DJ Williams
      R Bailey - P Amukamara - R Hill - A Goodman

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Cutler2007 View Post
        You mean the new D that gave up 21 points in the 2nd half and did not get one stop? Ya I give them an F.

        Some of you guys are just too easy to please. It took Pitt one half to adjust to 8 in the box (since we had not done it before) and we took advantage in the first half by forcing 3 turnovers (could have been 5) to build up a 14 point lead.

        If we played Pitt again with the same D they score 40+.

        I'm thrilled with the win, but I think it was a quick fix and we would have been better served by making the players get it right in Bates' system instead of going back to the smoke and mirrors of Coyer. Which as history has proved, will not beat good teams once they have game film on it.

        Shanny can not stand to lose so he goes for the quick fix, really my one knock on him. We have seen this from him with the Browncos, constantly switching D coordinators, and signing marginal players for big $$$ only to hurt our future salary cap.

        If we would have stayed true to the system, I think we would may have lost against Pitt and maybe even ended the year with a worse record; however we would have begun next year with a core group of players that knew what to do and could have went out and found the missing pieces so the personnel matched the system. NE and Pitt have great D's because they have worked a long time in the same system, not by fooling teams by dong something different each week.
        All over the NFL teams tend too let up in the 2nd half. Its nothing new. The last to drives bugged me but I dont think you can read to much in to it without just plain being one of those negitive bronco bashing people. Lets give them a chance.


        :salute!: !!Get well soon!!:salute!:

        Comment


        • #5
          I wouldn't call it a "new" defense yet. Lets wait and see what they do against Green Bay.

          Comment


          • #6
            Not saying we are the patriots but no one criticized their D when the colts came back on them last year. Our D played great and while we may not have had every stop like we would all like we won the game. To expect us to stop every team on every drive is a bit homer. We won because we opened the play book, we blitzed and we did some bootlegs, we got back to bronco football, the only thing we truely lacked was a solid run game but that is just my opinion.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by SlyBronco View Post
              All over the NFL teams tend too let up in the 2nd half. Its nothing new. The last to drives bugged me but I dont think you can read to much in to it without just plain being one of those negitive bronco bashing people. Lets give them a chance.
              I tried to look at how the D played as a whole. We stopped two drives on downs the entire game. That is only two times we forced a punt. I'm thrilled with the turnovers, but I do not think they are something for a D to count on. When a defense can go out and not allow first downs, then they are a good defense.

              I think we are sacrificing building a good solid defense in order to get a couple more wins. By changing what we want to do for the quick fix, and that quick fix lasted all of one half.

              I'm not trying to be negative, I was super happy with the win, but would have felt better about it if we had stuck with the system and improved.

              R Ayers - B Cofield - A Haynesworth - CJ ohnson
              J Anderson - J Beason - DJ Williams
              R Bailey - P Amukamara - R Hill - A Goodman

              Comment


              • #8
                I liked it more than the complete travesty that preceded it. That isn't a glowing endorsement though. I felt like I was watching the D from last year in all their can't-stop-anyone-on-third-down glory.
                Only fools bet against Tim Tebow.

                Team Tebow #108

                Yards, without points, mean nothing.

                Comment


                • #9
                  We have to remember it is the first time this year that our team as a whole has stepped up to make anything happen. We expect so much of this team, we just have to give them another day to build. I personally think we will own the packers game, farve will throw a few to many picks and not so many TD's. I dont care if we changed the system or just fixed it, I want to see the defense come out and improve on this game. We actually did something that worked now we will see if we can reproduce it.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Yes once the Steelers figured out all they had to do was dump off/short yard plays, just like last year teams did to us after they figured out the "bend and give up a lot of yards" defense.....I was feeling a little nauseaus. Hopefully they'll get some mix of what they were shooting for w/ bates and yet not quite the conservative bending/disheartening D

                    Turnovers, while a D can't count on them...it does seem to feed itself, other teams that go on turnover binges like Cincy last year or the Bears

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I think we started out great allowing 7 points/13 first downs to Buffalo and 11 points/11 first downs to Oakland. Then we started to face better offenses and they took advantage of blown assignments. If we could have taken care of the blown assignments and gotten better tackling I think we would have been fine.

                      Now I feel like we will constantly be trying to fool the other team instead of out playing them, which makes me nervous...what happens when they are not fooled? (see 2005 AFCC game vs Pitt) and will start from scratch next year.

                      R Ayers - B Cofield - A Haynesworth - CJ ohnson
                      J Anderson - J Beason - DJ Williams
                      R Bailey - P Amukamara - R Hill - A Goodman

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        We were missing Champ which is huge I give htem a B-.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by champbronc2 View Post
                          Did you like it?

                          Why or why not?

                          I really liked the new defense first half wise.

                          I liked the blitz's and the non-prevent coverage.

                          The second half was too conservative for my liking.

                          Due to the potential there is though, I give the new defense a B.
                          __________________________________________________ ____________________________

                          What you don't understand is this......

                          During the bye week they scrapped most of what they were doing.

                          They created a new scheme.

                          So, when you say "new" defense are you referring to what we have been seeing from week 1, or are you referring to what we saw in the Steelers game ?

                          Source (John Lynch, the insider program, aired tonight)

                          I think Shanny put his foot down.

                          I'm glad he did, the team responded, they flat out got after it in the first half.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            You all saw it. They were playing some form of prevent in the second half for the most part. I really hate when that happens. Getting after them was working so well in the first half so wouldn't it make sense to keep that up and see what happens first? Then adjust to what they do to it. I think the reason they were able to get the underneth stuff because our corners play off so far most of the time.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Cire72 View Post
                              You all saw it. They were playing some form of prevent in the second half for the most part. I really hate when that happens. Getting after them was working so well in the first half so wouldn't it make sense to keep that up and see what happens first? Then adjust to what they do to it. I think the reason they were able to get the underneth stuff because our corners play off so far most of the time.
                              __________________________________________________ _____________________

                              What happens when you don't create pressure is you "allow" plays to develop, this is what we saw in the second half.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X