Real Talk: The Defense

[ToxSocks]

Originally Posted by DenverChief

I'd say if we gave up 500 yards passing to any quarterback but made them punt or take FG's I would take that anyday.


I absolutely hated the way the D played against the Raiders - too many scores and absolutely no reason to let them back in the game the way we did

If you give up 500 yards to a Qb, the odds are good that they've scored a lot of points and aren't punting.

Not every Qb is gonna be turnover prone like Matt McGloin.

[DenverChief]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

If you give up 500 yards to a Qb, the odds are good that they've scored a lot of points and aren't punting.

Not every Qb is gonna be turnover prone like Matt McGloin.

I wouldn't necessarily disagree but like I said I would make that trade you can have all the passing yards you want but no points and it happened with Campbell, Keenum and Fitzpatrick but none of them could generate more than 17 points offense and in order to win in the NFL you have to be able to score more than 17 points

[ToxSocks]

Originally Posted by DenverChief

I wouldn't necessarily disagree nut like I said I would make that trade you can have all the passing yards you want but no points and it happened with Campbell, Keenum and Fitzpatrick but none of them could generate more than 17 points offense and in order to win in the NFL you have to be able to score more than 17 points

Back to the original point, lol. They couldn't generate points because they weren't quality starting QB's. Yes, they didn't score. But you could SEE the obvious deficiencies in the Defense. That's OTWP's entire point. The writing was on the wall. You could see how easily this D could be exposed by starting caliber QB's.

When the Chiefs faced Manning/Rivers they got Gaped, cummed in and left on the curb.

[DenverChief]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

When the Chiefs faced Manning/Rivers they got Gaped, cummed in and left on the curb.

it's true but how much of that was because we weren't blitzing as much and relying on coverage sacks vs just not getting there in time OR calling blitzes in the wrong situations

[milkman]

Originally Posted by DenverChief

it's true but how much of that was because we weren't blitzing as much and relying on coverage sacks vs just not getting there in time OR calling blitzes in the wrong situations

Once again, your friend is wrong.

We've blitzed more post-bye than pre-bye.