Peyton Manning struggling with throws to right side?

[Deus Irae]

The Broncos collectively rushed for just under 2,000 yards when you remove Tebow's numbers. You may want to re-think your comment. McGahee alone rushed for nearly 1,200 yards.

Broncos rushing yards, game by game, pre-Tebow:

38
131
59
119

McGahee's numbers, pre-Tebow: 69 attempts, 259 yards (3.75 ypc)


McGahee's full season numbers: 249 carries, 1199 yards (4.82 ypc)

Once Tebow took over the offense, McGahee saw more than a full yard per carry increase.

 

[ausbacker]

Broncos rushing yards, game by game, pre-Tebow:

38
131
59
119

McGahee's numbers, pre-Tebow: 69 attempts, 259 yards (3.75 ypc)


McGahee's full season numbers: 249 carries, 1199 yards (4.82 ypc)

Once Tebow took over the offense, McGahee saw more than a full yard per carry increase.

The Broncos philosophy on offense appeared to change with the introduction of Tebow. Whether that's Tebow or John Fox's decision is a topic for discussion.

 

[Deus Irae]

The Broncos philosophy on offense appeared to change with the introduction of Tebow. Whether that's Tebow or John Fox's decision is a topic for discussion.

Not in the context of your claim, it isn't. Like it or not, no Tebow, no decent running game for the Broncos.

 

[ausbacker]

Not in the context of your claim, it isn't. Like it or not, no Tebow, no decent running game for the Broncos.

It's perfectly legitimate. You're being argumentative for the sake of it. There's a surprise.

 

[Deus Irae]

It's perfectly legitimate. You're being argumentative for the sake of it. There's a surprise.

I'm not being argumentative at all. I noted the reality of the Broncos running game without Tebow, including McGahee's running. You came back with the comment about Fox v. Tebow. I simply pointed out the irrelevance of that response in the context of your claim. You cannot separate Tebow from the running game, post game 4.

The available data shows that the Broncos running game was not good until Tebow took over, and that his appearance coincides with a significant improvement in McGahee's per carry numbers.

 

[ausbacker]

I'm not being argumentative at all. I noted the reality of the Broncos running game without Tebow, including McGahee's running. You came back with the comment about Fox v. Tebow. I simply pointed out the irrelevance of that response in the context of your claim. You cannot separate Tebow from the running game, post game 4.

Who said anything about separating Tebow from the running game? That's an invention all of your own. I made the contention about the Broncos running game, their rushing total and the discussion being one driven by Tebow's effectiveness under center as a runner or the decision by Fox to move to that offense given its effectiveness.

You're being argumentative for the sake of it. Feel free to have the last word.

 

[Deus Irae]

Who said anything about separating Tebow from the running game? That's an invention all of your own. I made the contention about the Broncos running game, their rushing total and the discussion being one driven by Tebow's effectiveness under center as a runner or the decision by Fox to move to that offense given its effectiveness.

You're being argumentative for the sake of it. Feel free to have the last word.

Again, I'm not arguing. I did nothing more than set out the data and then respond to a comment of yours with an observation that was in no way argumentative. As for separating Tebow from the running game:

From Avenger:

Denver has a bad OL and a mediocre run game, the run game was good last year because of Tebow, and the OL had many worts hidden by the fact that they didn't pass and Tebow was mobile, look at when Orton was QB, they have a terrible OL.

Your response:

The Broncos collectively rushed for just under 2,000 yards when you remove Tebow's numbers. You may want to re-think your comment. McGahee alone rushed for nearly 1,200 yards.

It is what it is.

 

[ausbacker]

Again, I'm not arguing. I did nothing more than set out the data and then respond to a comment of yours with an observation that was in no way argumentative. As for separating Tebow from the running game:

From Avenger:

Your response:

It is what it is.

Do you have a point or are you going to keep posting nothing answers to fill some time in your day? The Broncos rushed for over 2,600 yards with Tebow and a smidgeon under 2,000 without his numbers. That's a direct result of Tebow, the rushing attack and John Fox's decision to move to that offense.

Unless you plan on making a point move on.

 

[unoriginal]

Do you have a point or are you going to keep posting nothing answers to fill some time in your day? The Broncos rushed for over 2,600 yards with Tebow and a smidgeon under 2,000 without his numbers. That's a direct result of Tebow, the rushing attack and John Fox's decision to move to that offense.

Unless you plan on making a point move on.

We were just wondering what exactly in Avenger's comment needed rethinking.

I think we all agree that the Denver offense pre-Tebow was not very effective in that phase of the game. And I think we all agree that Peyton Manning cannot run the zone-read offense effectively, and therefore John Fox is unlikely to ask him to. Given that, it's difficult determining what in Avenger's observation you considered misleading.

 

[captain stone]

I got it!!!

Manning can't throw to his right...Sanchez can't throw to his left...take a chainsaw and cut both of them down the middle...then superglue half a Manning to the other half a Sanchez...now all you got to do is play the right Manchez with the right team...it's simple really...

But what do you do with the unused halves?

 

[ausbacker]

We were just wondering what exactly in Avenger's comment needed rethinking.

I think we all agree that the Denver offense pre-Tebow was not very effective in that phase of the game. And I think we all agree that Peyton Manning cannot run the zone-read offense effectively, and therefore John Fox is unlikely to ask him to. Given that, it's difficult determining what in Avenger's observation you considered misleading.

The Broncos run game was not mediocre. The run game whilst sparked by the inclusion of Tebow was ultimately John Fox's decision (given the lack of success by the Orton minus McDaniels O). It's misleading to say the Broncos run game was effective because of Tebow. The Broncos run game was already decent however, Fox's decision to install Tebow helped spark it at the appropriate time.

I fully acknowledge it as a combination of factors, Tebow being a large figure in that.

 

[BradyManny]

You did not argue that Faulk was the best RB Manning ever played with. That would have been correct.

You argued that the only reliable RB Manning had played with was Faulk. That was insane.

Just a little nugget to support your argument: Edgerin James has 4 of the top 5 single-season yardage tallies for the Colts. (Sort by yards)

The guy topped 1500 yards four times.

For reference, Brady has only had a back do that in his offense one time (Dillon).

Put another way, Brady has had three 1000 yard rushers (and one of those was by 8 yards).

Peyton has had 10 backs eclipse that (Edge six times, Faulk once, Rhodes once, Addai twice).

So, the notion that Peyton hasn't had some workhorse backs alongside him just doesn't ring true. At all. The Colts have probably had some of the best talent at RB across the league for several decades now.

 

[Sfpat]

I just rewatched the 1st quarter of the Broncos-Seahawks game. Manning was 5 for 5 on throws to his right. Didn't seem to have a problem.

 

[Off The Grid]

not since Faulk left in 1999 has Peyton had any reliable backs to ease the burden of the whole offense.

Dude!!

You should probably say you were kidding, at this point!!

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Dude!!

You should probably say you were kidding, at this point!!

Vulcans follow football! Who knew?
Kudos to Ian for getting his site visibility throughout the galactic inter-webs.