Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 47
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Las Manzanitas, NM
    Posts
    31,505
    New offense, new coaches and new players. Am looking forward to seeing it/them on the field. Hoping for a healthy season for everyone.
    "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Left of Colorado
    Posts
    1,248
    Quote Originally Posted by rst08tierney View Post
    Its been done 6 times since 1972

    Broncos almost got it with Anderson & Bell in 2005
    Wow! Thanks for setting me straight rst08tierney. I'm embarrassed that I didn't google that before I posted. I assumed that it hadn't been done because some team possibilities/stats seem too improbable. The following is very close but not exact but it will put this stat in perspective. With 26 teams in 1972 to 32 teams in 2019, that's an average of 29 teams per year for 48 seasons. Multiply that average by the the number of seasons starting in 1972 and it equates to 1,392 seasons where it was possible for a team with 2 backs and each of them to rush for 1,000+ yards.
    That's 0.43% (6 times in 1,392 seasons), less than half of 1%.

    Is that surprising or not very much? Or is it a "nobody cares" meaningless stat. You be the judge.

    Note: In 1978 the NFL increased the number of games in a season from 14 to 16 games. Those 2 additional games would obviously increase the chances for 2 backs on all teams to attain the 1,000 yards each.

    Somebody, PLEASE check my math. I know it's not exact but I think the 0.43% is very close.
    Utah Bronco Freak

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Eastern Seaboard
    Posts
    3,493
    125 Rushing yards per game, for 16 games between the two of them. If they both Average,
    62.5 YPG for Gordon and 62.5 YPG for Lindsey.
    Then they could each get to 1000 Yards each.
    It would be great if we could run the ball with consistency again.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Left of Colorado
    Posts
    1,248
    Quote Originally Posted by Capt. Jack View Post
    125 Rushing yards per game, for 16 games between the two of them. If they both Average,
    62.5 YPG for Gordon and 62.5 YPG for Lindsey.
    Then they could each get to 1000 Yards each.
    It would be great if we could run the ball with consistency again.
    If we can get a high quality offensive front line to consistently open up some gaps it's possible.
    Utah Bronco Freak

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Eastern Seaboard
    Posts
    3,493
    For the Broncos to be successful again (IMO) we need to be able to run the ball first, and then bury them with the passing game!

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Las Manzanitas, NM
    Posts
    31,505
    Based on his last eleven offenses, I would guesstimate Pat Shurmur's 2020 Denver O to:
    ~ average 62 plays per game;
    ~ be 57.5% pass and 42.5% run;
    ~ average 35 pass plays per game;
    ~ average 27 run plays per game;
    ~ average 4.1 yards per rushing attempt

    That would be around 1800 rushing yards. Since Melvin Gordon may be in for more short yardage/GL attempts, his number of yards would be less, so I'd guess about 800 yards for him and about 1000 for Phillip. Not sure about receptions, but I would imagine Buzz might throw more to Melvin, so he might get more receiving yards than Phillip. Melvin may catch 50 or more, and Phillip maybe 30-40. Just a guess. Maybe something like 1300 all-purpose yards for each with Phillip having more rushing and Melvin more receiving. Hard to predict.
    Last edited by samparnell; 04-07-2020 at 08:34 AM. Reason: correction
    "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    4,552
    One thing to consider is soon there will be 17 games which will likely contribute to more players reaching 1000 yards.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Las Manzanitas, NM
    Posts
    31,505
    Quote Originally Posted by lvbronx View Post
    One thing to consider is soon there will be 17 games which will likely contribute to more players reaching 1000 yards.
    That's in 2021, right?
    "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    36,001
    Quote Originally Posted by samparnell View Post
    That's in 2021, right?
    Earliest…...

  10. #40
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,426
    Lindsay has been very productive in spite of horrible offense. Coordination has been bad, o-line has been bad. Horrible play calling. Ive been pretty disappointed with how poorly hes been utilized. In spite of all of this, hes been the most productive player on offense for 2 seasons.

    Pundits have been criticizing his stats, especially when it comes to receiving stats. IMO, that has been a result of the OC not using Lindsay properly. All of us have been complaining during the season that hes not getting enough opportunity when it comes to receiving out of the back field, screen game, etc. For some reason, as soon as the season ends, everyone just looks at stats and completely forgets about the context. This offense has been anemic and poorly coached.

    I think Lindsays biggest knock is his size. Based on his size, it is assumed he should be in a 3rd down back, COP, scat back role. In all seriousness, thats exactly how hes been treated, he just outshines the other backs and ends up being the starter. A productive starter at that.

    I truly hope Gordon provides the dynamics were hoping for in the ground game. Maybe they can be that 1,2 punch weve been hoping for. I am all for making this team and offense better, even if that means a lesser role for Lindsay.

    However, I completely disagree with the notion that Lindsay is somehow a bad receiving back and hes somehow a weak runner. Hes performed beyond my expectations so far. I believe his game is much better than hes being given credit for. I also believe people discredit his overall game based mostly on his size.

    I expect Gordon to be our bell cow back. He better be considering his salary and overall fanfare. Im not counting out Taz, though. I think he will continue to surprise us in spite of a lesser role.

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    36,001
    Quote Originally Posted by RocketArm006 View Post
    Lindsay has been very productive in spite of horrible offense. Coordination has been bad, o-line has been bad. Horrible play calling. I’ve been pretty disappointed with how poorly he’s been utilized. In spite of all of this, he’s been the most productive player on offense for 2 seasons.

    Pundits have been criticizing his stats, especially when it comes to receiving stats. IMO, that has been a result of the OC not using Lindsay properly. All of us have been complaining during the season that he’s not getting enough opportunity when it comes to receiving out of the back field, screen game, etc. For some reason, as soon as the season ends, everyone just looks at stats and completely forgets about the context. This offense has been anemic and poorly coached.

    I think Lindsay’s biggest knock is his size. Based on his size, it is assumed he should be in a 3rd down back, COP, scat back role. In all seriousness, that’s exactly how he’s been treated, he just outshines the other backs and ends up being the starter. A productive starter at that.

    I truly hope Gordon provides the dynamics we’re hoping for in the ground game. Maybe they can be that 1,2 punch we’ve been hoping for. I am all for making this team and offense better, even if that means a lesser role for Lindsay.

    However, I completely disagree with the notion that Lindsay is somehow a bad receiving back and he’s somehow a weak runner. He’s performed beyond my expectations so far. I believe his game is much better than he’s being given credit for. I also believe people discredit his overall game based mostly on his size.

    I expect Gordon to be our “bell cow” back. He better be considering his salary and overall fanfare. I’m not counting out Taz, though. I think he will continue to surprise us in spite of a lesser role.
    Hey pal....good to hear from you.

    I am not sure how many folks are critical of Lindsay, but there are always going to be those types. But for an undrafted, smaller back, he has exceeded expectations, and then some. In his first year I was saying that he should conserve some of that after play energy, but that's just him. The fact he gives 100% all the time is also a great trait, though I wondered if he could carry the load for a long time, given his body type. So in that regard, it is good to have another quality back, to work in tandem with him. Might add a year or more to his career.

    No matter what happens, one can never challenge his effort, and his production to date. It still amazes me how much better he is than anticipated (on my part). That's the biggest compliment one can give!

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    676
    I'm figuring Gordon gets 2 series to every 1 Lindsey gets and probably a majority of the 3rd downs and goal lines as well. I'm figuring 1,100 yrds rushing and 300 rec 15TDs for Gordon with a game or 2 missed and 600/100 yards 7 TD's for Lindsey

  13. #43
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,426
    Quote Originally Posted by CanDB View Post
    Hey pal....good to hear from you.

    I am not sure how many folks are critical of Lindsay, but there are always going to be those types. But for an undrafted, smaller back, he has exceeded expectations, and then some. In his first year I was saying that he should conserve some of that after play energy, but that's just him. The fact he gives 100% all the time is also a great trait, though I wondered if he could carry the load for a long time, given his body type. So in that regard, it is good to have another quality back, to work in tandem with him. Might add a year or more to his career.

    No matter what happens, one can never challenge his effort, and his production to date. It still amazes me how much better he is than anticipated (on my part). That's the biggest compliment one can give!
    I expected very little from an undrafted FA. He far exceeded any of my expectations. And as the old adage goes, you cant measure heart.

    Like I said, I am all for improving the team. I just think hes better all around back than he gets credit for. That said, if Gordon brings some more power to the running game, Im all for it.

    We shall see. I personally think Gordon hes a little over rated based on his draft status. If he can live up to the hype, we should be seeing an excellent ground game.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Winnipeg
    Posts
    36,001
    Quote Originally Posted by RocketArm006 View Post
    I expected very little from an undrafted FA. He far exceeded any of my expectations. And as the old adage goes, you can’t measure heart.

    Like I said, I am all for improving the team. I just think he’s better all around back than he gets credit for. That said, if Gordon brings some more power to the running game, I’m all for it.

    We shall see. I personally think Gordon he’s a little over rated based on his draft status. If he can live up to the hype, we should be seeing an excellent ground game.
    Not a really positive thing to say, but this also is an insurance policy in case one of them gets hurt. If so, we would still have a pretty good backfield.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,426
    Quote Originally Posted by CanDB View Post
    Not a really positive thing to say, but this also is an insurance policy in case one of them gets hurt. If so, we would still have a pretty good backfield.
    Injuries are part of the game. Not really a negative assessment. If this offense can start averaging around 24 points a game, Ill be happy. I honestly dont care how they get there. A good running game and o-line are usually a good start.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •