Originally Posted by MagicHef (Post 9818815)

I'm impressed by the amount of wrong you managed to pack into a relatively short post.

117 tackles, 5.5 sacks and 3 interceptions from our WLB and 18.5 sacks from our SLB doesn't seem putrid to me.

Our CBs are old? Name 2 old corners on the Broncos.

Our DL had 10 sacks (outside of Doom) last year, and played extremely well against the run. I don't care if you know their names, they're playing well.

Manning thrived on the deep ball all season long. Baltimore's defensive plan was to take away everything deep and make Peyton dink and dunk down the field. It worked, too. Peyton threw 43 passes, and only 2 of them were over 20 yards.

Denver did not have the easiest schedule in the league, Atlanta did. In fact, Denver's schedule (25th) was not much easier than KC's (23rd).

Originally Posted by Mile High Mania (Post 9818981)

I do think Champ is a liability at times deep, that's hard to argue otherwise.

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 9818407)

I call it a fact.

Fasano is a solid player.
Moeaki has made one big play.

The rest are nothing more than unrealized potential at this point.

Until, and unless, any of them realize that potential, to call them playmakers is nothing more than fantasy.

Originally Posted by Saccopoo (Post 9818413)

No, I am not.

The Broncos defense is suspect at best, with the only marquee player being Von Miller. The linebacking corps are putrid, your CB's are old and your defensive line is a long list of nobodies (best being Derek Wolfe).

The offense is nice, but it's contingent upon a 38 year old QB with a now suspect arm and four neck surgeries. As well, the running back crew is basically the same guy - pedestrian speed, no lateral moves straight ahead runner. The offensive line is pretty darn good, especially the left side.

Manning is going to wear his arm completely out this season as you are going to see a lot of teams do what the Ravens did in the playoffs and force him deep by playing strong zone in the short to intermediate range.

Last year was a much an anomaly from a win-loss record as the Chiefs were. The Broncos benefitted from the easiest schedule in the league and teams still played back on Manning. That ain't happening this year and your defense is going to be forced to hold teams, especially on the road, and I don't think that they are capable of doing it.

10-6. And that's being generous.

Originally Posted by Chris Meck (Post 9819023)

I look for their defense to really struggle. The loss of Dumervil will make Miller less effective. The secondary is suspect, and will struggle to cover speed receivers deep, especially with a diminished pass rush.
I think the signing of Welker will help Manning some as I do think his arm is diminished, but I don't think it's going to be enough.

Originally Posted by MagicHef (Post 9819002)

He got toasted twice in the playoffs, but I don't remember it happening in the regular season. Did it?

Originally Posted by MagicHef (Post 9819136)

Please explain why the secondary is suspect.

Originally Posted by BossChief (Post 9818380)

Most teams are adding second tight ends and unfortunately, Moeaki was coming off a lost year to a torn acl and has a long injury history. His knee was giving him trouble this offseason, too...hence the Fasano signing and the drafting of Kelce with a high pick.

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 9818407)

I call it a fact.

Fasano is a solid player.
Moeaki has made one big play.

The rest are nothing more than unrealized potential at this point.

Until, and unless, any of them realize that potential, to call them playmakers is nothing more than fantasy.

Originally Posted by Fat Elvis (Post 9819195)

You can't say that Fasano is a solid player and Moeaki isn't; well you can since Moeaki is often injured, but statwise, Moeaki is a better player that goes beyond that one spectacular play. He is also a solid blocker. Will he be on the team? I don't know.

I think the term "potential playmakers" may be better than what I had originally use for clarification purposes. They will be the players who Reid will try to get the ball in their hands and make plays. Our previous regime and QB had zero idea of how to do that. Give them the opportunity and they will, in all likelihood, be much better players than their former stats would suggest.

Originally Posted by Mile High Mania (Post 9819170)

I view 'suspect' as being maybe not as 'consistently dominant' as one might hope for from a team with SB aspirations. Upside is very nice though.

Originally Posted by MagicHef (Post 9819263)

I could agree with that definition of suspect.

I don't think that's what he meant, though, because he lists that as one of two reasons that he expects the defense to really struggle.

Originally Posted by Mile High Mania (Post 9819539)

Yeah, who knows... Denver's defense is far from elite and while statistically they finished strong and ranked high last year, this is 2013. I don't care about last year. I have some concerns - they won't suck, but we need them to be consistently top 10 every week.

Originally Posted by R8ers (Post 9821635)

Still laughing at that Dumervil Snafu