Broncos/Patriots matchup

[mgcolby]

I've heard starting to come together....Peaking etc... in reference to the Broncos. How is a team that loses 3 straight games to end the season, then upset a Steelers team who lost 2 of its starting DL in the first quarter, not to mention all the other injuries, considered to be peaking?

 

[PatriotSeven]

I've heard starting to come together....Peaking etc... in reference to the Broncos. How is a team that loses 3 straight games to end the season, then upset a Steelers team who lost 2 of its starting DL in the first quarter, not to mention all the other injuries, considered to be peaking?

See above. Denver was already an efficient offense prior to their last 3 games. They were ranked 11th in offensive efficiency with Tim Tebow at QB, which is a better indicator of a team winning a game than just about any other stat in football.

They had a pretty crappy 3 game streak, but that wasn't the norm for them. And the way it happens is the same way Atlanta went from being a team with a very efficient and effective offense all season long, just outside the top 10, to posting the worst numbers I have seen this season against the Giants.

Offensive efficiency is hardly an indicator of your opponent's D as much as it is of your own ability to execute and opponent's offensive efficiency. Simply put, Atlanta beat itself. Denver beat itself against 3 average teams, and beat a Pittsburgh team that was ranked bottom of the league in offensive efficiency.

They didn't really get any better. They executed better. That's what it ultimately comes down to. So it's very easy to come together and start executing better at any point in the season. The trend can happen today, tomorrow or on Sunday. It can occur at any point they begin to click. It can happen in the 2nd quarter of a football game, which it did for them. Denver was already clicking though far before their skid. They simply went back to being their usual self against Pittsburg(if you listen to Fox even he will tell you they changed NOTHING). And the team that made them stop clicking was the Patriots D in the first place.

You had 3 games where Tebow and the Broncos turned over the ball versus 8 games where Tebow threw only 2 picks. That was the difference maker in their winning and losing. Tebow didn't throw a pick against Pittsburg. Tebow is known for not throwing interceptions. He did this, not just over the 8 game streak in the beginning of the season but for his entire 3 year college career. The same thing that made Tom Brady damn good. The same thing most people overlook.

The one weak area Tebow did have though, was fumbles, most likely due to concentrating too much on avoiding the interception and looking to pass while scrambling which leaves you open to fumble. QB's are rarely scrutinized for fumbles, but as far as football and turnovers are concerned, they're no different than an interception. Sometimes worse. He needed to clean that up as well if he really wanted to be efficient and he did against Pittsburg.

That's how the Patriots got the first game. A Tebow fumble will blow the game wide open. He was so careful with the picks all season long that he forgot about the fumble. He may not be so careless this time around.

So yeah they aren't "starting to come together". The did. And they did it before. They executed perfectly for 60 minutes to win and it's not the first time this season.

PS: Another huge problem Denver had was their special teams punt and kick-off return coverage. It was a problem in all 3 of their losses giving up great field position to their opponents. That was another huge difference maker against Pittsburgh. They didn't allow any returns, put up 3 instead of punting, and didn't give up the kind of killer field position they did against the Pats, KC and the Bills. So now the Pats have to figure out a different way to get to them. Like Brady said, the game that took place 4 weeks ago, has no bearing on the game coming up this week.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Dude i had my heart broken these last 5 patriot seasons. I'm pessimistic about their chances because of how they failed to play like themselves

Their seems to be a blueprint on how to shutout the pats that's only being used in the postseason.

Exactly. I think all the other teams in the league were holding back just waiting to meet the Patriots in the playoffs at which point they'd pull out their decoder rings in order to read the blueprint for a postseason victory.

 

[Deus Irae]

...You had 3 games where Tebow and the Broncos turned over the ball versus 8 games where Tebow threw only 2 picks. That was the difference maker in their winning and losing. Tebow didn't throw a pick against Pittsburg. Tebow is known for not throwing interceptions. He did this, not just over the 8 game streak in the beginning of the season but for his entire 3 year college career. The same thing that made Tom Brady damn good. The same thing most people overlook....

Indeed. As I pointed out in a post earlier today (can't remember which thread), the Broncos won every game where they played even or ahead in the turnover battle.

 

[mgcolby]

See above. Denver was already an efficient offense prior to their last 3 games. They were ranked 11th in offensive efficiency with Tim Tebow at QB, which is a better indicator of a team winning a game than just about any other stat in football.

They had a pretty crappy 3 game streak, but that wasn't the norm for them. And the way it happens is the same way Atlanta went from being a team with a very efficient and effective offense all season long, just outside the top 10, to posting the worst numbers I have seen this season against the Giants.

Offensive efficiency is hardly an indicator of your opponent's D as much as it is of your own ability to execute and opponent's offensive efficiency. Simply put, Atlanta beat itself. Denver beat itself against 3 average teams, and beat a Pittsburgh team that was ranked bottom of the league in offensive efficiency.

They didn't really get any better. They executed better. That's what it ultimately comes down to. So it's very easy to come together and start executing better at any point in the season. The trend can happen today, tomorrow or on Sunday. It can occur at any point they begin to click. It can happen in the 2nd quarter of a football game, which it did for them. Denver was already clicking though far before their skid. They simply went back to being their usual self against Pittsburg(if you listen to Fox even he will tell you they changed NOTHING). And the team that made them stop clicking was the Patriots D in the first place.

You had 3 games where Tebow and the Broncos turned over the ball versus 8 games where Tebow threw only 2 picks. That was the difference maker in their winning and losing. Tebow didn't throw a pick against Pittsburg. Tebow is known for not throwing interceptions. He did this, not just over the 8 game streak in the beginning of the season but for his entire 3 year college career. The same thing that made Tom Brady damn good. The same thing most people overlook.

The one weak area Tebow did have though, was fumbles, most likely due to concentrating too much on avoiding the interception and looking to pass while scrambling which leaves you open to fumble. QB's are rarely scrutinized for fumbles, but as far as football and turnovers are concerned, they're no different than an interception. Sometimes worse. He needed to clean that up as well if he really wanted to be efficient and he did against Pittsburg.

That's how the Patriots got the first game. A Tebow fumble will blow the game wide open. He was so careful with the picks all season long that he forgot about the fumble. He may not be so careless this time around.

So yeah they aren't "starting to come together". The did. And they did it before. They executed perfectly for 60 minutes to win and it's not the first time this season.

PS: Another huge problem Denver had was their special teams punt and kick-off return coverage. It was a problem in all 3 of their losses giving up great field position to their opponents. That was another huge difference maker against Pittsburgh. They didn't allow any returns, put up 3 instead of punting, and didn't give up the kind of killer field position they did against the Pats, KC and the Bills. So now the Pats have to figure out a different way to get to them. Like Brady said, the game that took place 4 weeks ago, has no bearing on the game coming up this week.

That is all fine. But a team that plays its 3 of its worst games to end the season is not peaking in my book. The Steelers handed them a gift yesterday with an absolutely idiotic game plan and idiotic freelancing by Troy. I give Tebow credit for the throw in the corner of the end zone that was a great throw. And he hit his open receivers for the most part when they got behind the corners. But damn you can't leave your corners out to dry like that, especially when you are not getting to him when you do bring pressure.

They lose to Chicago if Barber isn't a moron with Hanie at QB. If Barber stays in bounds or doesn't fumble they are 6-5 after the bye and end the season on a 4 game losing streak. They averaged 18.5 PPG over that stretch, I'm sorry but if that makes them 11th in offensive efficiency (where do you find this stat? Because I have no idea what that consists of) then it must not put a lot of weight on the most important stat on offense.

Not trying to pick on the stat, and I fully understand the turnover dynamic. But that offense is not good and he will not be facing 10 in the box in Man 0 this week. Which means he may complete a nice 20+ yard completion or two, and lead them on a TD drive or two. But he is not going to torch us like that and odds are he will turn the ball over 2 or more times in this game.

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

#1 Green Bay - 11.6 Last game 12.2
#2 San Francisco - 13.1 Last game: 9.4
#4 New England - 13.4 Last game: 9.8
#8 Baltimore - 14.8 Last game: 14.5

Playoffs game results:
Cincinnati - 30.0 - Houston 11.0
Detroit - 14.7 - New Orleans 13.9
Pittsburgh - 17.4 - Denver 15.4
Atlanta 123.5 - Giants 18.4

The more efficient offense won every game, as is typically the case, regardless of defensive rankings.

Glad Atlanta got 2 points as you would have hada divide by zero error :bricks:.

It will be interesting how the Patriots will approach this game as they've already put a game plan against Tebow already. Though BB usually does better the 2nd time vs a team i nthe same season.

Another motivator (for Denver HC) going into this is the John Fox angle and when he lost the superbowl.

 

[Deus Irae]

That is all fine. But a team that plays its 3 of its worst games to end the season is not peaking in my book. The Steelers handed them a gift yesterday with an absolutely idiotic game plan and idiotic freelancing by Troy. I give Tebow credit for the throw in the corner of the end zone that was a great throw. And he hit his open receivers for the most part when they got behind the corners. But damn you can't leave your corners out to dry like that, especially when you are not getting to him when you do bring pressure.

They lose to Chicago if Barber isn't a moron with Hanie at QB. If Barber stays in bounds or doesn't fumble they are 6-5 after the bye and end the season on a 4 game losing streak. They averaged 18.5 PPG over that stretch, I'm sorry but if that makes them 11th in offensive efficiency (where do you find this stat? Because I have no idea what that consists of) then it must not put a lot of weight on the most important stat on offense.

Not trying to pick on the stat, and I fully understand the turnover dynamic. But that offense is not good and he will not be facing 10 in the box in Man 0 this week. Which means he may complete a nice 20+ yard completion or two, and lead them on a TD drive or two. But he is not going to torch us like that and odds are he will turn the ball over 2 or more times in this game.

In all the Tebow starts this season, even including that 3 game stretch you're so focused on, the Broncos are only 50/50 to commit 2 turnovers or more. And, again, the Denver Tebows haven't yet lost a game this season when they've been even or better in the turnover battle (Yes, "yet" is a word that can obviously change in just one game). Given the general lack of turnovers that the Patriots commit (only a turnover in half their games, 1 turnover or fewer in 13 of 16 games), that's still pretty good for the Patriots, but all it takes is an off game from Brady for that to be problematic, and Brady hasn't exactly been turnover free in the playoffs of late.

 

[PatriotSeven]

There's nothing all that mind-boggling about the Pats playoffs losses and blueprints.

2009
Baltimore turnovers: 2 Offensive efficiency: 8.1(lower the better)
Patriots turnovers: 4 Offensive efficiency: 14.0
Brady: 3 interceptions.

2010:
Jets turnovers: 0 Offensive efficiency: 11.2
Patriots turnovers: 1 Offensive Efficiency: 17.7
Brady: 1 interception

The more efficient offense along with the fewer turnovers won. Same blueprint that hasn't changed nor will ever change since football existed. There's not too many teams in this league that can overcome turnovers and still manage to post efficient offensive numbers and win the game. The Saints do it against your average team but not even the Saints can do this against another efficient offense like Green Bay or Patriots or playoff caliber teams.

Simply put: Don't turn over the ball. Execute. Forget all your other stats. Yards. Defense. Home field advantage. None of those matters compared to those 2. The offense who executes better and doesn't turn the ball over(fumbles, interceptions as well as 3 and outs) will win. If they can get some help from the defense or special teams, then that's a bonus, but don't depend on that to save you in the playoffs. Pittsburgh's a perfect example of that. A team who relied on their defense for their regular season wins to make up for a mistake-prone, bottom of the league inefficient offense. They couldn't even keep up with Denver in the playoffs because Tebow...just doesn't throw picks-at least not usually. And he'll continue to take that 47% completion percentage and keep that interception column at 0 every single Sunday if he can.

Patriots lost due to their offensive execution, or lack of, and turnovers in their playoff losses. If they lose this weekend it will be for the same reason. I am getting the feeling a lot of the pressure to win the game is being placed solely on Brady's throwing arm and this year more than ever. Tom's not beyond mistakes even though he's one of the best in the game at limiting them and as was evident in 2010 even one turnover can kill you. The same happened earlier this season between the Saints and GB. All it took was one turnover by the Saints and GB had them. Tom and the passing game could use some help in the running department this weekend and throughout the playoffs. The Pats have been, and have become even more one dimensional lately. That can be just as bad as being a one dimensional run team. And the Bills exposed that earlier in the season.

But basically the Pats have to do that which is what earned them the title of being one of the best for so many years, and what it takes to be that team in the NFL: play and execute damn near perfect. Especially in the playoffs. One or two interceptions by Tom just won't cut it even against a team like the Broncos. Even if they can overcome them against Denver, they won't further into the playoffs. Not against the NFC powerhouses. I can see Brees throwing picks but don't bet on Rodgers giving anyone freebies and frankly, don't bet on Tebow doing it. Tom's just gotta remember what made him so damn good. Just a tad bit more careful Tom.

 

[pherein]

In all the Tebow starts this season, even including that 3 game stretch you're so focused on, the Broncos are only 50/50 to commit 2 turnovers or more. And, again, the Denver Tebows haven't yet lost a game this season when they've been even or better in the turnover battle (Yes, "yet" is a word that can obviously change in just one game). Given the general lack of turnovers that the Patriots commit (only a turnover in half their games, 1 turnover or fewer in 13 of 16 games), that's still pretty good for the Patriots, but all it takes is an off game from Brady for that to be problematic, and Brady hasn't exactly been turnover free in the playoffs of late.

I think its funny you call them "Denver Tebows" , but why are attributing any of these wins, and they are only wins, not stats supporting Tebow or DEN is a great team., to Tebow?
Tebow didn't do much of anything to win these games. His #'s are really bad, if anything the DEN team has carried Tebow. With a QB like even Ryan, they would be far better off. Just interested.

 

[Deus Irae]

I think its funny you call them "Denver Tebows" , but why are attributing any of these wins, and they are only wins, not stats supporting Tebow or DEN is a great team., to Tebow?
Tebow didn't do much of anything to win these games. His #'s are really bad, if anything the DEN team has carried Tebow. With a QB like even Ryan, they would be far better off. Just interested.

I'm calling them the Denver Tebows in order to distinguish the games started by Tebow from the games not started by Tebow, nothing more.

However, the notion that Tebow didn't do much to win those games is absurd.

 

[PatriotSeven]

That is all fine. But a team that plays its 3 of its worst games to end the season is not peaking in my book. The Steelers handed them a gift yesterday with an absolutely idiotic game plan and idiotic freelancing by Troy. I give Tebow credit for the throw in the corner of the end zone that was a great throw. And he hit his open receivers for the most part when they got behind the corners. But damn you can't leave your corners out to dry like that, especially when you are not getting to him when you do bring pressure.

They lose to Chicago if Barber isn't a moron with Hanie at QB. If Barber stays in bounds or doesn't fumble they are 6-5 after the bye and end the season on a 4 game losing streak. They averaged 18.5 PPG over that stretch, I'm sorry but if that makes them 11th in offensive efficiency (where do you find this stat? Because I have no idea what that consists of) then it must not put a lot of weight on the most important stat on offense.

Not trying to pick on the stat, and I fully understand the turnover dynamic. But that offense is not good and he will not be facing 10 in the box in Man 0 this week. Which means he may complete a nice 20+ yard completion or two, and lead them on a TD drive or two. But he is not going to torch us like that and odds are he will turn the ball over 2 or more times in this game.

I'm sorry but the numbers disagree with you. That offense is good, because they are generally efficient and don't turn over the ball. Are they the type to put up 400 yards a game every game? No. But they don't have to. Are they the type to put up more points than your average team and be more efficient over the course of the game while protecting the football? Yes. Is that ultimately what decides who wins? Yeah....

But I do agree with you on one thing. The more efficient offense won.. but not because of Pittsburg's defense, but because Pittsburg's offense has been ranked bottom of the league all season long.

Pittsburgh only managed 2 FG's in the first quarter and Ben got picked off and sacked all game long.

Ben: 22/40 289 7.2 1 1 75.9
Tebow: 10/21 316 15.0 2 0 125.6 + 1 rushing TD.

Simply put. Tebow was by far the better passer and the better quarterback. Not even close on Sunday.

Denver was, once again, ranked 11th in offensive efficiency for most of the season with Tebow under center. Pittsburg never crawled out of the 20's all season long and finished at 27. Their defense has been dragging a dead weight. In the playoffs they got exposed. Denver has no dead weights.

They're not as explosive or as traditional as other offenses but they can put up 38-40 points as easy as anyone else if you turn over the ball...they can put up 30 against Pittsburg if you turn over the ball. They just may not always need 500 yards to do it...which makes them even more scary.

 

[nabwong]

Let's see, to stop a college QB, you need a college D! Can we sign Alabama's D? They're killing LSU right now.

 

[PatriotSeven]

Let's see, to stop a college QB, you need a college D! Can we sign Alabama's D? They're killing LSU right now.

Nah, they couldn't stop Tebow in college. What you need is an NFL elite QB. Ben was hardly that Sunday. Tom is one of those with the rare exception of when he puts up a stinker. It happens rarely, and I hope the game against the Bills was his one ugly game this season.

We need Tom to show Tebow why experience and consistency still rules in the NFL, and it's completely attainable, by doing it again. That's all I ask. Just do it again. And I know...it's only the hardest thing to do in the NFL but he's gotta be salivating for that ring #4. Joe Montana had 4 Tom. You know you want at least 5 when it's all said and done. You know you don't Rodgers to get 2 in 3 years cause that dude has his entire career ahead of him. Let's do this.

 

[mgcolby]

In all the Tebow starts this season, even including that 3 game stretch you're so focused on, the Broncos are only 50/50 to commit 2 turnovers or more. And, again, the Denver Tebows haven't yet lost a game this season when they've been even or better in the turnover battle (Yes, "yet" is a word that can obviously change in just one game). Given the general lack of turnovers that the Patriots commit (only a turnover in half their games, 1 turnover or fewer in 13 of 16 games), that's still pretty good for the Patriots, but all it takes is an off game from Brady for that to be problematic, and Brady hasn't exactly been turnover free in the playoffs of late.

I'm focused on the three games because they lost three straight games and then upset the Steelers. And some folks in the media and players on the Broncos have stated that they are peaking. If that is peaking then I would hate to see what skidding is.

When they can stay tight and run the ball they do a good job at limiting the turnovers, but once they start getting behind Tebow and Co. start to become turnover prone. It happened in our game, the Bills game and even in a close game against KC Tebow managed to turn it over twice a fumble and an INT.

They almost certainly won't have Decker and are down a starting OG, and they had a hard time limiting the pressure the last time. My question is how do they improve that? And a lot of the pressures were due to coverage (not ****ting ya). I see him pressing, especially knowing he has to keep up with Brady and Co on the road in what certainly will be a hostel environment, in the cold etc...

I don't know what your love affair is with Tebow and the Broncos....but you defend them to the death. I like Tebow, think he is good for football, but you have to call a spade a spade. He is not accurate, throws an ugly ball most of the time. The only big passing game he has had so far, was more of a product of the stupidity and arrogance of the opponent, than Tebow's throwing prowess. But they won't be able to score enough running the ball to win the game, he will have to do something he hasn't done yet and that is consistantly beat traditional coverage in the NFL.

 

[Deus Irae]

....I don't know what your love affair is with Tebow and the Broncos....but you defend them to the death.

I like Tebow, think he is good for football, but you have to call a spade a spade. He is not accurate, throws an ugly ball most of the time. The only big passing game he has had so far, was more of a product of the stupidity and arrogance of the opponent, than Tebow's throwing prowess. But they won't be able to score enough running the ball to win the game, he will have to do something he hasn't done yet and that is consistantly beat traditional coverage in the NFL.

I hate stupid arguments, whether against the Patriots or anyone else. It's not that I love Tebow, it's that the anti-Tebow people are, mostly, completely prejudiced and making stupid arguments.

As I've noted, the Patriots should be the favorites. That doesn't mean it's smart to ignore what the Broncos have been able to do with Tebow as QB, or to ignore what they were able to do against the Steelers. And this "accurate" crap is probably the biggest load of garbage the world has ever seen. It's completely meaningless without context.

And Tebow just beat the hell out of "traditional coverage". Perhaps you saw the game. He shredded a team that essentially shut down Tom Brady, despite Brady's more 'accurate' game.

 

[PatriotSeven]

I'm focused on the three games because they lost three straight games and then upset the Steelers. And some folks in the media and players on the Broncos have stated that they are peaking. If that is peaking then I would hate to see what skidding is.

When they can stay tight and run the ball they do a good job at limiting the turnovers, but once they start getting behind Tebow and Co. start to become turnover prone. It happened in our game, the Bills game and even in a close game against KC Tebow managed to turn it over twice a fumble and an INT.

They almost certainly won't have Decker and are down a starting OG, and they had a hard time limiting the pressure the last time. My question is how do they improve that? And a lot of the pressures were due to coverage (not ****ting ya). I see him pressing, especially knowing he has to keep up with Brady and Co on the road in what certainly will be a hostel environment, in the cold etc...

I don't know what your love affair is with Tebow and the Broncos....but you defend them to the death. I like Tebow, think he is good for football, but you have to call a spade a spade. He is not accurate, throws an ugly ball most of the time. The only big passing game he has had so far, was more of a product of the stupidity and arrogance of the opponent, than Tebow's throwing prowess. But they won't be able to score enough running the ball to win the game, he will have to do something he hasn't done yet and that is consistantly beat traditional coverage in the NFL.

That's the case for most quarterbacks though, not just Tebow. The only difference is some teams can still hang after a turnover against your average offense despite a turnover, but even then, most lose.

And Tebow is very accurate. A QB that can throw 10 passes a game and hit his receivers square in the stomach, hands, chest....is an accurate passer especially when you take the time to take into consideration the passes he missed...3-4 balls purposely thrown away, 2 perfectly thrown dropped passes, and one pass on 3rd and long that he placed in the middle of the field in the middle of his throwing lane, that, while far out of reach for his defender, also happened to be far out of the possibility of getting undercut for an interception(something Ben didn't do a couple of possessions before that and got picked off because of it). Just because he chooses to take a sack, throw the ball away, or be extremely conservative and makes good decisions and doesn't have the best receivers around him or a pass-oriented team...doesn't make him inaccurate. It just makes him have a bad completion % and a bunch of people using it to point to the fact he's inaccurate.

Tebow was not inaccurate in college. And he's not inaccurate in the NFL. The media and a couple of miss-used stats have managed to fool the general public into believing that he is inaccurate which is why it's such a "MIRACLE" when he does it.

It's no miracle. Wake up. The kid's accurate and can throw the ball. Always could. What he is, is a dual rush/passer that's unaccustomed to playing NFL style defenses and plays overly conservative to avoid throwing interceptions(which just happen to be one of the main reasons for winning games).

An inaccurate quarterback throws a lot of picks. An accurate one doesn't. An accurate quarterback who throws the ball away, plays overly conservative and plays with the 32nd worse receiving corps in dropped passes has a bad completion %. That's all this has been this season. An illusion.

The funniest thing about Tebowmania, is that he lets people talk and doesn't take up for himself even when they call him inaccurate to his face. He smiles, cause he knows better and it plays into the message he's trying to deliver. John Fox also knows this. So do his receivers.

You help it right along. I mean at what point are people going to wake up and realize that when he's nailing these 30, 40, 50 yard bombs, a lot of them through the air, every other week....he might just be an accurate quarterback?

 

[mgcolby]

I'm sorry but the numbers disagree with you. That offense is good, because they are generally efficient and don't turn over the ball. Are they the type to put up 400 yards a game every game? No. But they don't have to. Are they the type to put up more points than your average team and be more efficient over the course of the game while protecting the football? Yes. Is that ultimately what decides who wins? Yeah....

But I do agree with you on one thing. The more efficient offense won.. but not because of Pittsburg's defense, but because Pittsburg's offense has been ranked bottom of the league all season long.

Pittsburgh only managed 2 FG's in the first quarter and Ben got picked off and sacked all game long.

Ben: 22/40 289 7.2 1 1 75.9
Tebow: 10/21 316 15.0 2 0 125.6 + 1 rushing TD.

Simply put. Tebow was by far the better passer and the better quarterback. Not even close on Sunday.

Denver was, once again, ranked 11th in offensive efficiency for most of the season with Tebow under center. Pittsburg never crawled out of the 20's all season long and finished at 27. Their defense has been dragging a dead weight. In the playoffs they got exposed. Denver has no dead weights.

They're not as explosive or as traditional as other offenses but they can put up 38-40 points as easy as anyone else if you turn over the ball...they can put up 30 against Pittsburg if you turn over the ball. They just may not always need 500 yards to do it...which makes them even more scary.

Ok, I still don't know where you get this offensive efficiency from. But they were 25th in scoring, that is not putting up more points than your average team and any offense that is completely reliant upon its defense and ST's to set them up for a score is not very good. But the numbers do back that up, the Broncos defense caused 18 turnovers good enough for 29th in the league. On the other hand the highest scoring offense in the league only received 17 turnovers from its defense. Which one would you rather have?

A side note: Pittsburgh ironically enough only caused 15 turnovers tied for last in the league.

And Ben standing in the pocket throwing off his back foot is not going to be a very good passer. In fact any QB unable to follow through and plant his front foot, forcing him to throw off his back foot, is not going to be an efficient passer. That helped the Denver defense as much as anything.

But yes bottom line, Tebow made the throws he had to last night, good for him. But lets not act as if he was carving up a cover 2 zone or something. In the majority of his 10 completions, he was chucking the ball up to a very fast receiver who got a step on the CB over the middle, who was covering the receiver without a soul behind him.

Look I'm a stat guy and believe they tell part of the story. But it doesn't tell the whole story. And your offensive efficiency clearly excludes the other two phases of the game.

 

[Ring 6]

I'm sorry but the numbers disagree with you. That offense is good, because they are generally efficient and don't turn over the ball. Are they the type to put up 400 yards a game every game? No. But they don't have to. Are they the type to put up more points than your average team and be more efficient over the course of the game while protecting the football? Yes. Is that ultimately what decides who wins? Yeah....

Huh? How can being 25th in points mean you score more than the average offense? And by the way, they averaged more points with Orton at QB.

They have scored 17 or less in 7 of their last 11 games.

They have also turned it over 13 times in their last 6 games, and for the season have 30 tirnovers which ranks 25th (8th worst) so I'm not sure 'protect the ball' is accurate either. By comparison, the Patriots have 17 turnovers all season.

But I do agree with you on one thing. The more efficient offense won.. but not because of Pittsburg's defense, but because Pittsburg's offense has been ranked bottom of the league all season long.

Pittsburghs offense is bad.

Pittsburgh only managed 2 FG's in the first quarter and Ben got picked off and sacked all game long.

Ben: 22/40 289 7.2 1 1 75.9
Tebow: 10/21 316 15.0 2 0 125.6 + 1 rushing TD.

Simply put. Tebow was by far the better passer and the better quarterback. Not even close on Sunday.

It is one of the few if not only games of the season where Tebow was an above average QB. Still he had zero passing yards in the first quarter and was at 8 very late into the 3rd. I don't know how Demarius Thomas doesn't get a lot of the credit.

Denver was, once again, ranked 11th in offensive efficiency for most of the season with Tebow under center.

Based on what?

Pittsburg never crawled out of the 20's all season long and finished at 27. Their defense has been dragging a dead weight. In the playoffs they got exposed. Denver has no dead weights.

Denver has one if you have to drop back and pass on 3rd and 10.

They're not as explosive or as traditional as other offenses but they can put up 38-40 points as easy as anyone else

What? They can put up 38 points as easily as the Patriots? Saints? Packers?
Why did they only do it once then?

if you turn over the ball...they can put up 30 against Pittsburg if you turn over the ball. They just may not always need 500 yards to do it...which makes them even more scary.

Did you seriously just call Denvers offense scary?
What does it mean that they don't need 500 yards to do it? Do they have some quality on offense where they move the ball without getting credited for yards?
I know they played well yesterday, but to calll this offense anything more than one that generally struggles to get out of its own way is an interesting take.

 

[Deus Irae]

...But lets not act as if he was carving up a cover 2 zone or something. In the majority of his 10 completions, he was chucking the ball up to a very fast receiver who got a step on the CB over the middle, who was covering the receiver without a soul behind him....

Not specifically aimed at you, but to your argument:

I love how this part of the Anti-Tebow argument has changed. Before it was how he could only hit passes to players who were wide open, and so the way to shut him down was to play strong man against the Broncos, because NFL man results in much tighter coverage.

Now that Tebow's shown that trying that is a good way to get smoked like salmon, we're suddenly seeing the transition to "but... cover 2!".

You want to beat Tebow the young QB? Blitz him from his left, keep him in the pocket, and force him to throw under pressure from the pocket all day long. Zone or man doesn't matter. He's not advance enough to beat this consistently. Most first and second year QBs aren't.

Let him get outside the pressure, especially to his left, and he's going to beat you. Zone or man doesn't matter. At that point, he'll kill you running or throwing.


P.S. Jay and I disagree on this. He doesn't think Tebow's got the arm to beat that zone. I think that, if he's free, he'll beat it or get you with the run. Time's going to tell on this one.

 

[The-Hooded-One]

You help it right along. I mean at what point are people going to wake up and realize that when he's nailing these 30, 40, 50 yard bombs, a lot of them through the air, every other week....he might just be an accurate quarterback?

When he completes 46% of his passes, he just might not be an accurate QB.