Azazello1313 Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 Hey splash splash_bag maybe you should be considering yourself lucky you won, your sorry @$$ team should have been blown out, if not for the clock mgmnt (which Jets fans warned us about) your team was terrible yesterday, the better team did not win, keep telling yourself whatever and I will do the same. I know my team is in trouble........but the Chiefs played that well BECAUSE of Herm, he game planned well. The Donks D couldn't stop LJ even when they knew what was coming, Larry might as well have pointed to the direction he was going to go All I have heard the last what 5-6 years is how terrible the Chiefs D is, well they just played better than anyone has in mile high/invesco, whatever you want to call that dump, in a long time. I never came in here other than for my team to get a little respect, the defense is better, we are down our franchise QB who started for 81 straight games. Did anyone give the Chiefs a chance, nope.....did anyone give them props for the way they played.....nope...just shows the class of you Oprah_tards...and Menudo, don't get involved in something that's none of your business, I never do that to you......and I have for the most part always backed you up, maybe I should re-think that uhh, the chiefs lost. you know that. right? even though the broncos played like total dog chit, they were still better than the chiefs. i guess it's cool if you're able to feel good about that and everything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolf Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 it's apparent for any D-coordinator with a pulse at this point. EXACTLY...I mean Herman Freakin' Edwards saw this... Wake up, Shanny...Mike Bell should be the man. Grow a pair and make a decision. This is like Tom Landry alternating every series between the guy who was there, Craig Morton, and the new guy, Roger Staubach. Team fell flat on its face until he picked Roger the Dodger. Your team is flat right now. Tatum Bell just wants to be KNOWN as the man...not actually PRODUCE like the man. He thinks he's entitled to it but has not proved it. I really believe that Mike Bell will prove it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 (edited) Hey splash splash_bag maybe you should be considering yourself lucky you won, your sorry @$$ team should have been blown out, if not for the clock mgmnt (which Jets fans warned us about) your team was terrible yesterday, the better team did not win, keep telling yourself whatever and I will do the same. I know my team is in trouble........but the Chiefs played that well BECAUSE of Herm, he game planned well. The Donks D couldn't stop LJ even when they knew what was coming, Larry might as well have pointed to the direction he was going to go All I have heard the last what 5-6 years is how terrible the Chiefs D is, well they just played better than anyone has in mile high/invesco, whatever you want to call that dump, in a long time. I never came in here other than for my team to get a little respect, the defense is better, we are down our franchise QB who started for 81 straight games. Did anyone give the Chiefs a chance, nope.....did anyone give them props for the way they played.....nope...just shows the class of you Oprah_tards...and Menudo, don't get involved in something that's none of your business, I never do that to you......and I have for the most part always backed you up, maybe I should re-think that Wow, you seem like a good guy, but, I think you are being a bit thin-skinned here. Edited September 18, 2006 by Menudo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 (edited) hi, my name is tony and i'm a mike bell owner. everyone: hi tony! Edited September 18, 2006 by tonorator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bring Back Pat!!! Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 The point that BB was trying to make was not what the division of carries is, but HOW the division is made. I'll explain: Right now Tatum has 31 and Mike 23 carries. The way those were obtained was on a rotation within a game. One series for Mike, one series for Tatum. That plan will not work for the offense over the long haul as neither back gets into a rhythm and the o-line doesn't get used to the way one back likes to run. If in game one tatum carries the ball 31 times and then yesterday Mike went for 23 carries, BB is saying (and I agree) the results would have been different for all the reasons mentioned in the original post. Just looking at the number of carries and saying that it's the same as years past does nothing. You have to look at HOW and WHEN those carries are distributed. And right now Shanny is missing the boat, and I'll say it again, he's too darn smart for this to last all season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfish247 Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 The point that BB was trying to make was not what the division of carries is, but HOW the division is made. agreed... 60/40 is fine by me too just as long as the 60/40 results in success. as it is now, it ain't happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Cheezhead Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 I, for one, think there's some credence to BB's point about how having T. Bell in the game affects the designed rollout plays by Plummer. Those plays are CRITICAL to the success of the passing game -- and Plummer's psyche, for that matter -- and it makes sense that they would be flushed out more often if the DL and/or LBs are spreading out. The goal of any NFL offense -- personnel, formation, & play design combined -- is to make the defenders wonder what's coming next. As BB detailed, that's not happening with T. Bell in the game. So, the different styles of each RB seems to be the only pertinent issue here -- not necessarily the distribution of carries. That being said, I wonder what Az has to say about it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 The point that BB was trying to make was not what the division of carries is, but HOW the division is made. I'll explain: Right now Tatum has 31 and Mike 23 carries. The way those were obtained was on a rotation within a game. One series for Mike, one series for Tatum. That plan will not work for the offense over the long haul as neither back gets into a rhythm and the o-line doesn't get used to the way one back likes to run. If in game one tatum carries the ball 31 times and then yesterday Mike went for 23 carries, BB is saying (and I agree) the results would have been different for all the reasons mentioned in the original post. Just looking at the number of carries and saying that it's the same as years past does nothing. You have to look at HOW and WHEN those carries are distributed. And right now Shanny is missing the boat, and I'll say it again, he's too darn smart for this to last all season. last year, in 10 games out of 16, BOTH mike anderson and tatum bell each had 8 or more carries. and ron dayne had 8 or more carries in 5 of the remaining 6 weeks. there wasn't a single week last season where one back got 80% or more of the carries. not a single week. i'm sorry, but RBBC is NOT a new situation for the denver broncos. the argument against RBBC has ALWAYS been that "neither back gets in a rhythm", but that didn't seem to hurt them too much last year. and since they're 4th in the league so far this year, you can't really say it's hurting them now either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 I, for one, think there's some credence to BB's point about how having T. Bell in the game affects the designed rollout plays by Plummer. Those plays are CRITICAL to the success of the passing game -- and Plummer's psyche, for that matter -- and it makes sense that they would be flushed out more often if the DL and/or LBs are spreading out. The goal of any NFL offense -- personnel, formation, & play design combined -- is to make the defenders wonder what's coming next. As BB detailed, that's not happening with T. Bell in the game. So, the different styles of each RB seems to be the only pertinent issue here -- not necessarily the distribution of carries. That being said, I wonder what Az has to say about it... that part i agree with. the play calling in general has been predictable and bad. they can't have two different playbooks for each back, makes them way too easy to defend. this has hurt their passing game more than their running game, but it has hurt both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Cheezhead Posted September 18, 2006 Share Posted September 18, 2006 that part i agree with. the play calling in general has been predictable and bad. they can't have two different playbooks for each back, makes them way too easy to defend. this has hurt their passing game more than their running game, but it has hurt both. So, you agree with the "main" point of BB's initial post, which pretty much means you agree that Shanahan bears a large part of the responsibility here... I'm thinking you and BB are kinda on the same page, and y'all need to do the hand-shake/man-hug thing. Then show some unified support for your team! I think Huddle homers need to stick together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Wow, you seem like a good guy, but, I think you are being a bit thin-skinned here. I might die of irony... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 I might die of irony... You think I'm thin-skinned ? I take more of a beating around here than ANYONE else. Not saying I don't deserve it, but, I've been able to take everything that has come my way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 You think I'm thin-skinned ? I take more of a beating around here than ANYONE else. Not saying I don't deserve it, but, I've been able to take everything that has come my way. ...but thanks for making my point... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 ...but thanks for making my point... : Don't be mad because I out-scored you in Bling Bling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 (edited) : Don't be mad because I out-scored you in Bling Bling. I'm not mad at all. if I make 2-0, and my team is performing okay...then I will be all EDIT: 174 is a nice week, though....good thing someone suggested starting Toomer. Edited September 19, 2006 by Caveman_Nick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 (edited) I'm not mad at all. if I make 2-0, and my team is performing okay...then I will be all Well, after a very poor 1st year, and a loss in Week 1, having a league leading (so far) point output in week 2 has me like this..... By the way, Week # 3 - Zug Zug vs. Chunky Monkey Lucky Bastage, you get me on LT & Gates by week......... Edited September 19, 2006 by Menudo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Well, after a very poor 1st year, and a loss in Week 1, having a league leading (so far) point output in week 2 has me like this..... By the way, Week # 3 - Zug Zug vs. Chunky Monkey Lucky Bastage, you get me on LT & Gates by week......... And Bledsoe's bye... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 And Bledsoe's bye... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Might you be at all interested in acquiring the services of Kitna or Losman? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Might you be at all interested in acquiring the services of Kitna or Losman? Ben against the Bengals is usually a shootout and a good play so, I'll be o.k. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcat2334 Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Welcome to yet another Menudo hijacking....... somehow ended up with a post about Ben and the Steelers. Incredible Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 Welcome to yet another Menudo hijacking....... somehow ended up with a post about Ben and the Steelers. Incredible I don't know if I'm incredible, but, I appreciate your kind words. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Neutron Posted September 19, 2006 Share Posted September 19, 2006 I think Billy has this right with regard to the Bells, but there are other problems on the Denver offense. Jake Plummer is looking over his shoulder. Let's face it, he doesn't play well when the pressure is on. He's great as long as his team is in the lead, but they have not looked good and there are already calls for Cutler. The WRs and TEs are not helping Jake much - not a lot of separation so far. I don't think Walker has his speed back and Rod has been dinged up. Scheffler is still learning how to be a pro. They better get it together soon, SD is leaving in 5th gear. The good news is, we get OAK twice. IT does my heart good to see the Raiders suck this bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.