Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Team will be better without Marshall

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

  • #46
    and the calvaliers will be better with out lebron.... you dont get better losing your best talent.. marshall was a probowl superstar talent.. who was just coming into his own. a horible move. and the only person who had a prob with him was mcdaniels. like someone else said. if the broncos are better this year its because of the other moves we made. not getting rid of our best player
    sigpic

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by broncobuss View Post
      and the calvaliers will be better with out lebron.... you dont get better losing your best talent.. marshall was a probowl superstar talent.. who was just coming into his own. a horible move. and the only person who had a prob with him was mcdaniels. like someone else said. if the broncos are better this year its because of the other moves we made. not getting rid of our best player
      Comparing a 1000 yd WR in football to a 30 PPG PF in basketball. That's just silly.

      Losing Lebron would be like if the Chargers lost Phillip Rivers. That's a team breaker.

      I think you seriously overestimate Marshall's value to our team...

      By a lot...
      Only fools bet against Tim Tebow.

      Team Tebow #108

      Yards, without points, mean nothing.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by DancingHorsey View Post
        Run blocking in a PBS is going to be the easiest part of their jobs as rookies. Considering how bad the guys they are replacing were last year, I tend to feel pretty confident we'll be improved in that area.

        What I would be concerned about is their pass blocking...
        You are right... about run blocking is the easiest part of the game for the rookies. But remember neither of these players were highly touted (you do not get NFL ready talent in the 2nd and 4th rounds usually). But you are expecting both to come in and make a difference? That is a big task. But back to the blocking. Yes run blocking is easier, but teams pass nearly 60% of the time. Pass blocking is going to be the hardest part of their game. They are going to be eaten alive causing pressure on a very immobile QB. Losing BM is going to mean that D's are going to be able to stack up against the run effectively shutting us down, and they are going to be able to play our WR 1 on 1 cause none of them are play makers.... So while you are right that the passing game became one dimensional focusing in on BM. But also remember he was able to get open. There just isn't a WR on this roster that is going to be able to do it. This is a team that was so dominate down the stretch last season that we closed out at 2-8, then we lose our best WR.......Thinking that we are going o be better is just asinine
        Thanx Blondie79 for the sweet Sig....Love it and I will rock it with pridesigpic

        Comment


        • #49
          It's simply a fact that we played better over his career when Marshall was off the field than when he was on. And when he did play, we did better when he caught fewer passes.

          The basic statistical story of Marshall's career is that the less you saw of him the better.

          Comment


          • #50
            Unless I'm mistaken, Brandon Marshall was the #1 WR in the Red Zone last season. An absolute beast. And let's remember we've been a terrible red zone offense for a few years now.

            Sure, we'll probably have no issue moving the chains 20-to-20, but I do expect us to go backwards even more when it comes to getting into the endzone.

            Now I wont lie; sit here and claim that Marsh was Mr. Touchdown. We all know that was far from the case.

            NOW, we've added a possible hiccup with Tim Tebow, who might help us regain some potential to get 6 points.

            -------------

            Now to be optimistic: The success of our offense depends more on the OL, than it matters on losing B-Marsh. When Orton was running for his life, or dropping to the ground the moment he saw the white's of the DL eyes.... Wouldn't help to have Jerry Rice & Michael Irving.

            If this new, power-blocking scheme can give Orton 4 seconds to make a decision, then we'll be fine.

            WE ALL KNOW IT.... Mcdaniels will have Gaffney-Lloyd-Stokley as our big-3 to start the year. MAYBE Royal works his way into some sort of role (but Orton wont look his way b/c he's nto accurae enough to squeeze it into that tight space).

            WE ALL KNOW that opposing defenses will stack the box and force us to pass; thus making it even harder to run the ball.

            Expect more of those bubble screens, posing as running plays. Gaffney will be the possession WR, with Lloyd the deep threat. This duo wont scare anyone, but if the OL opens lanes for Moreno and gives Orton a moment to wait for somebody to run their route, we'll move the chains.

            HOWEVER, this won't work in the Red Zone. BUt we were bad with Marshall here anyway, so as long as the OL, Moreno & Tebow step up.... We'll be good to go!

            Comment


            • #51
              I presented these stats in an earlier thread about Marshall's impact on our early season run last year. Now, these are not indicative of his career, or prove that he is not an impact player. I for one loved everything about him in his first year or two.....

              Here goes:

              2009 Total

              101 receptions for 1,120 yards
              Avg - 6.7 receptions and 74.7 yards per game played


              First 6 Games (when we went 6 and 0)

              29 receptions for 332 yards
              Avg - 4.8 receptions and 55.3 yards per game played

              Conclusion - Well, these are not conclusive stats, as anyone who knows the science can attest, but they do provide some evidence that Brandon was not a major player in our 6 and 0 start. And, if you take out his 21 reception game (in a loss to Indy), his receptions per game played drop from 6.7 to 5.7. Big games that are part of a loss, especially passing related "come from behind" offensive types are good for stats but often fall short of the true mark - winning.

              Anyway, I thought these were interesting stats, even though not conclusive. The guy has talent.

              (Note: I think D is a great place to invest......it had an incredible influence on the 6 and 0 start!!)
              Last edited by CanDB; 07-30-2010, 08:04 AM.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by I Eat Staples View Post
                You don't get better by trading your best receiver. Doesn't happen. If we do improve it's obviously because we made other improvements, but sadly there are people who will think Marshall being gone helped us improve if we do. There's a reason he was force fed the ball. I'll let you guys figure out why. :thumb:

                There's just no logical way losing a dominate weapon makes you a better team. It doesn't.
                Whats this you say? Lose talent and your not better because of it??? That is one heck of a concept.

                Yea, let me break this down a bit more... the "team first" concept that you all seem to hold onto like some floatation device in the middle of a hurricane only goes so far. You need talented SKILL POSITION players to win games. Brandon Marshall, while maybe immature and selfish, is widely considered one of the best WR's in the NFL.

                Let me flip the question... is Miami now WORSE for having him? Is thier offense now one dimesional because the have a legitimate #1 WR? Or let me take this another way... Andre Johnson is the only WR weapon, for all intents and purposes, that the Texans have. Especially when thier TE went down last year. He's been "force fed" the ball his entire career. Would the Texans be a more rounded, better offensive team if they got rid of him and replaced him with two injured rookies and two old #3 WR's?
                Last edited by Buenacolt11; 07-30-2010, 08:41 AM.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Amari24 View Post
                  You could've considered Royal "Dominant" based off his Rookie season, but Orton didn't pass him the ball as much, as Cutler did. Or at least, McD didn't use him effectively in his offense, so you never know. Like I said, it's tough to judge them, Orton and Jay, locked on to Marshall most of the time. What's so hard to understand about that?

                  And lol "Games aren't won in the locker room" That's very funny.
                  So what you are saying is that Brandon marshall is not a #1 receiver ?

                  because with this type of nonsense you and other are claiming thats what you are saying .

                  Did Matt Ryan LOCK onto Roddy White ?

                  What about Tony Romo and Miles Austin ?

                  What about Schaub and Johnson ?

                  What about Warner and Fitz ?

                  The fact is that Brandon Marshall is a #1 receiver so hes going to get targeted more than everyone else thats why they call him the #1 .

                  This year Royal and gaffney SPLIT REPS up until Royal got injured

                  Stokes Role was reduced with the addition of Gaffney



                  In 2008 Marshall ,Royal,Stoke were on the field basically every snap so of course there numbers from 2008 are gonna be inflated from that season .

                  If you take Eddies numbers and gaffneys numbers leading up until the last game that Eddie played the numbers are looking an awful lot like Eddies numbers from 2008 which they should because they were splitting time in a position eddie once took all the snaps for .

                  Now if we took Gaffney,Royal,Lloyd and didnt play anyone else more than a snap or two every other game and threw 600 times there numbers would inflated.

                  I dont get why this is routinely ignored in favor of Marshall was locked onto and we didnt pass anyone else the ball.
                  "(Touchdowns) are the goal," Orton said. "You can run for as many yards as you want, throw for as many yards as you want, but you have to convert to seven points. I think we're going to be explosive, be dynamic, be versatile."

                  "Perception is everything in this league, and a lot of times, unless you're a self-promoter, it can become negative," - Kyle Orton

                  Kyle Orton Army member #83 :logo: :smug:

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    I look at it this way

                    No more having to have Stokely run over and control Brandon before he makes a dumb move and costs us a penalty. I Know I am not the only one to have seen this last year. It was even brought up on the board.

                    No more having to wonder if today is the day he gets in trouble again, and gets an 8 game suspension.

                    No more me, me, me. When I saw the highlight where he chastises Orton for not throwing the ball to him, when the play called was entirely different. I thought to myself wow we have mini-T.O.

                    No more having team captains going to the head coach, and saying hey come on take a hard line with this guy, he isn't doing his part.

                    So ya I think we will be better off without him. Yes the production may drop off. But I have high hopes especially in Decker. When you pick up a receiver that has only dropped 3 passes in his college career, well I would call that guy a special player. Even if he is unproven in the NFL yet.
                    Last edited by tacmale; 07-30-2010, 09:25 AM. Reason: punctuation
                    People should not be afraid of their governments, governments should be afraid of their people.



                    sigpic

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Buenacolt11 View Post
                      Whats this you say? Lose talent and your not better because of it??? That is one heck of a concept.

                      Yea, let me break this down a bit more... the "team first" concept that you all seem to hold onto like some floatation device in the middle of a hurricane only goes so far. You need talented SKILL POSITION players to win games. Brandon Marshall, while maybe immature and selfish, is widely considered one of the best WR's in the NFL.

                      Let me flip the question... is Miami now WORSE for having him? Is thier offense now one dimesional because the have a legitimate #1 WR? Or let me take this another way... Andre Johnson is the only WR weapon, for all intents and purposes, that the Texans have. Especially when thier TE went down last year. He's been "force fed" the ball his entire career. Would the Texans be a more rounded, better offensive team if they got rid of him and replaced him with two injured rookies and two old #3 WR's?
                      #1. Maybe. We will see. Perhaps Miami will be a better situation for Marshall. He may be more content that he is no longer in Denver where a certain incident seemed to haunt him. Or maybe it will lead to more trouble. Whatever happens, it seemed best for both Marshall and the Broncos to move on from each other.

                      #2. Andre Johnson is better than Marshall and he isn't a knucklehead. I strongly doubt the Texans feel he has ever been a problem. It's nice to have guys that have a lot of talent AND a lot of character.
                      Show your joy

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Everyone had a feelin B Marsh was leaving i bought his jersey knowing he was leaving are we better without him as far as a team yes he held out on us all season long he was only doing it for stats n hey if KO was gonna target him all day he was gonna get him but i thing the rookies we have Bay bay n deck are gonna be solid player im taking a long shot but dosent seem like resurections of Rod smith n ed Mccaffrey dnt get me wrong no one is ever gonna compare wit them guys but give it it a thought do am i happy B Marsh is gone i wish him luck in Miami but i hope we dnt have to deal wit him in da postseason cuz i dnt think we have ne one to cover him

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by KO8pectate View Post
                          So what you are saying is that Brandon marshall is not a #1 receiver ?

                          because with this type of nonsense you and other are claiming thats what you are saying .

                          Did Matt Ryan LOCK onto Roddy White ?

                          What about Tony Romo and Miles Austin ?

                          What about Schaub and Johnson ?

                          What about Warner and Fitz ?

                          The fact is that Brandon Marshall is a #1 receiver so hes going to get targeted more than everyone else thats why they call him the #1 .

                          This year Royal and gaffney SPLIT REPS up until Royal got injured

                          Stokes Role was reduced with the addition of Gaffney



                          In 2008 Marshall ,Royal,Stoke were on the field basically every snap so of course there numbers from 2008 are gonna be inflated from that season .

                          If you take Eddies numbers and gaffneys numbers leading up until the last game that Eddie played the numbers are looking an awful lot like Eddies numbers from 2008 which they should because they were splitting time in a position eddie once took all the snaps for .

                          Now if we took Gaffney,Royal,Lloyd and didnt play anyone else more than a snap or two every other game and threw 600 times there numbers would inflated.

                          I dont get why this is routinely ignored in favor of Marshall was locked onto and we didnt pass anyone else the ball.
                          It seems like you missed my whole point, so I'm going to say it once again.

                          If you watched any of our games last season, Orton's main target was our #1 receiver/Marshall. Most of the time, Marshall was getting the ball. Now if you look at the KC game, Gaffney was #1, Orton threw him the ball about 20 times IIRC. That's my point. There's a reason McD admited, we have to spread the ball this year. You can't just lock on to your #1 receiver all year long and expect it to work out like that. Guys like Manning, Rivers, and Ryan, can spread the ball to their #2s and Slots.

                          I don't know where you got the idea I was implying Marshall not being #1..

                          But to my original point, there could be a lot of dominant receivers on our team, if Royal played the way he did in his rookie year, if not better, then you can consider him dominant. If Demaryius comes out and play as good as Marshall, then you can consider him dominant as well.
                          Last edited by Amari24; 07-30-2010, 10:04 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by tacmale View Post
                            No more having to have Stokely run over and control Brandon before he makes a dumb move and costs us a penalty. I Know I am not the only one to have seen this last year. It was even brought up on the board.

                            No more having to wonder if today is the day he gets in trouble again, and gets an 8 game suspension.

                            No more me, me, me. When I saw the highlight where he chastises Orton for not throwing the ball to him, when the play called was entirely different. I thought to myself wow we have mini-T.O.

                            No more having team captains going to the head coach, and saying hey come on take a hard line with this guy, he isn't doing his part.

                            So ya I think we will be better off without him. Yes the production may drop off. But I have high hopes especially in Decker. When you pick up a receiver that has only dropped 3 passes in his college career, well I would call that guy a special player. Even if he is unproven in the NFL yet.
                            Great post, :thumb:

                            I feel like this whole thing with Marshall is like breaking up with a dime of a girlfriend.

                            Sure, she may be smokin' hot, great in bed, all while making you look good in public (NFL game days).

                            Yet, she may be fake as hell, annoying, and a troublemaker behind close doors.

                            ------------------------

                            I'm quite excited to see this group of receivers play. Who cares who gets 100 catches, or 10000 yards. Who cares?

                            I'm sick of pro bowl players (even though many of our boys deserve the respect). I want team players that can actually propel us to... the playoffs?

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by CanDB View Post
                              I presented these stats in an earlier thread about Marshall's impact on our early season run last year. Now, these are not indicative of his career, or prove that he is not an impact player. I for one loved everything about him in his first year or two.....

                              Here goes:

                              2009 Total

                              101 receptions for 1,120 yards
                              Avg - 6.7 receptions and 74.7 yards per game played


                              First 6 Games (when we went 6 and 0)

                              29 receptions for 332 yards
                              Avg - 4.8 receptions and 55.3 yards per game played

                              Conclusion - Well, these are not conclusive stats, as anyone who knows the science can attest, but they do provide some evidence that Brandon was not a major player in our 6 and 0 start. And, if you take out his 21 reception game (in a loss to Indy), his receptions per game played drop from 6.7 to 5.7. Big games that are part of a loss, especially passing related "come from behind" offensive types are good for stats but often fall short of the true mark - winning.

                              Anyway, I thought these were interesting stats, even though not conclusive. The guy has talent.

                              (Note: I think D is a great place to invest......it had an incredible influence on the 6 and 0 start!!)
                              If we get out to an early lead and our D is playing great, we're not going to throw the ball as much. Of course Marshall will have big stats when we're playing from behind, since we're going to be desperate and throwing the ball almost every play. You should look into stats for other receivers and even QBs, I'll bet you'll be surprised to find that their stats in wins and losses are similar to Marshall's.

                              As for chemistry vs. talent...I'll say it again, name one championship team in any sport that wasn't talented. The goal is to build a talented team, and then build chemistry between them. Character doesn't always = chemistry. You can't build a team around chemistry, chemistry doesn't come until the team is together. You get the most talented guys you can find and hope you have a coach who can put it all together. You hope the team gels.

                              Someone mentioned the Chargers and Cowboys. The Cowboys through the years have had some chemistry problems, not so much the Chargers. The reason these teams don't win championships is because coaching is important as well. Coaching holds these teams back, not chemistry. Lol you don't win 12 straight games and then lose in the playoffs because of "poor chemistry".

                              If you think character and chemistry is more important than talent, then I ask again, please name one championship team in any sport that wasn't talented.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by I Eat Staples View Post
                                If we get out to an early lead and our D is playing great, we're not going to throw the ball as much. Of course Marshall will have big stats when we're playing from behind, since we're going to be desperate and throwing the ball almost every play. You should look into stats for other receivers and even QBs, I'll bet you'll be surprised to find that their stats in wins and losses are similar to Marshall's.

                                As for chemistry vs. talent...I'll say it again, name one championship team in any sport that wasn't talented. The goal is to build a talented team, and then build chemistry between them. Character doesn't always = chemistry. You can't build a team around chemistry, chemistry doesn't come until the team is together. You get the most talented guys you can find and hope you have a coach who can put it all together. You hope the team gels.

                                Someone mentioned the Chargers and Cowboys. The Cowboys through the years have had some chemistry problems, not so much the Chargers. The reason these teams don't win championships is because coaching is important as well. Coaching holds these teams back, not chemistry. Lol you don't win 12 straight games and then lose in the playoffs because of "poor chemistry".

                                If you think character and chemistry is more important than talent, then I ask again, please name one championship team in any sport that wasn't talented.
                                And name me any championship team in sports, that didn't have good chemistry. Like I said, Chemistry is just as important as talent.. You can't only have one of them, and expect to win a Championship. It doesn't work like that, in any sports. And bad character can effect chemistry a lot, especially if the person with the bad character is causing problems with another team mate.
                                Last edited by Amari24; 07-30-2010, 10:37 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X