Sea= Mediocre offense, vs DEN= unstoppable offense??

[Omaha]

In the playoffs, Broncos have been trying to keep the ball for longer to protect their defense (lessons from the regular season). Both SD and NE had good enough QBs and weapons to rip the our defense a new one.

Yes, Denver offense could put up quick scores, but it would have likely backfired with our defense tiring out faster. We used the game plan we thought would get us the W and it did.

We moved the ball at will against both defenses and controlled the game.

Evidence:
v SD: 8 drives 0 punts (TOP=35 mins)
v NE: 8 drives 1 punt (TOP = 35 mins)

The improved ball control is one of the reasons our defense has been playing better, but rest assured our offense could have scored more points and more quickly if needed.

No punts vs SD but wasn't there 3 turnovers? Not exactly "at will"

there were 2 (not 3) turnovers against SD - a questionable fumble by JT in which the ball was ripped out after a first down completion, and an INT in the end zone. Neither is relevant to the ability to move the ball imo.

 

[Omaha]

So you're saying your offense went conservative but effective against some poor defenses in order to protect their below average defense?

What happens when they try to go conservative vs a significantly better defense?

You kinda proved the point of this thread

Dont see how I have proved the point of the thread (assuming there was a point in the first place)

In football, your game plan is highly dependent on the opposition and the game flow.

There is no need for the Broncos to be conservative offensively against the seahawks - seattle do not pose the quick and high scoring offensive threats that SD and NE did.

In fact quite the opposite, Seahawks want to hold the ball and pound it with Beastmode. The best counter to that is to try to turn it into a high scoring game and try to force them to abandon the run.

 

[kidhawk]

In the playoffs, Broncos have been trying to keep the ball for longer to protect their defense (lessons from the regular season). Both SD and NE had good enough QBs and weapons to rip the our defense a new one.

Yes, Denver offense could put up quick scores, but it would have likely backfired with our defense tiring out faster. We used the game plan we thought would get us the W and it did.

We moved the ball at will against both defenses and controlled the game.

Evidence:
v SD: 8 drives 0 punts (TOP=35 mins)
v NE: 8 drives 1 punt (TOP = 35 mins)

The improved ball control is one of the reasons our defense has been playing better, but rest assured our offense could have scored more points and more quickly if needed.

No punts vs SD but wasn't there 3 turnovers? Not exactly "at will"

there were 2 (not 3) turnovers against SD - a questionable fumble by JT in which the ball was ripped out after a first down completion, and an INT in the end zone. Neither is relevant to the ability to move the ball imo.

Seahawks LED THE LEAGUE in turnovers. Moving the football is absolutely meaningless if you turn the ball over. When you talk about not scoring because you are purposely slowing things up, but you leave out turnovers that would have changed the score had you not turned it over, then you aren't telling the whole story. Seattle's defense may give up 300 yards or so to Denver's offense, but a few key turnovers will change the outcome of the game. Count on it

 

[plyka]

To the OP, you can't really take such a small sample size as 2 playoff games, and such a narrow stat such as points. Of course points are the most important stat, but perhaps not in predicting, and by "narrow" i mean it's just 1 stat.

The truth of the matter is that over the season the Seahawks have been a mediocre offense and the Denver offense has been steller. But, the Seahawks offense has played against the best defenses in the league, while the Denver offense has played the easiest defensive schedule in the NFL. That's why when you take advanced stats, the Seahawks offense is pretty good, rated 8th i believe.

Also Denver has not played against an offense like this before. If the Seahawks play this right, I think their offense will run up the score pretty well.

 

[amill87]

Seattle defense is a MUCH better defense than Denver's by far... but Denver is peaking at the right time

Are they? Or was it more a case of the following:

New England's offense has been decimated with injuries and couldn't get anything going. Brady was throwing to guys like Austin Collie instead of the Gronk.

San Diego were missing their key running back, Ryan Mathews.

I know Denver were also missing several key defensive starters, but your offense was able to dominate early against two very weak defenses (more on that in a moment) and neither SD or NE could sustain a drive to get any early rhythm.

Neither Brady or Rivers is mobile enough to exploit the lack of contain your d-line allowed -- and their desire to sit in the pocket played right into the hands of your best healthy defensive player -- Knighton. Had Kaepernick (and to a lesser extent, Wilson) been playing you in the AFC Championship game, they would've had a minimum of 60-70 rushing yards.

In both cases, your offense absorbed so much TOP and built early leads because they were facing (according to DVOA) the #32 defense (San Diego) and the #21 defense (New England) -- with the Pats defense losing virtually all its playmakers to injury on D.

It makes life easier for a defense when the offense can do what you guys did to two terrible units.

I looked at the performance of your defense across the season and you've given up a ton of points. The offensive DVOA rankings are in brackets:

27 vs Baltimore (#30)
23 vs New York Giants (#31)
21 vs Oakland (#28)
48 vs Dallas (#11)
33 vs Indianapolis (#13)
21 vs Washington (#23)
34 vs New England (#4)
28 vs Kansas City (#15)
28 vs Tennessee (#16)

Maybe you are just peaking at the right time, but that seems unlikely without suddenly your best corner and the continued absence of Miller/Wolfe.

I think it's more a product of your opponents. And in Seattle, you get the #1 defense and the #7 offense. Not two injury hit, productive offenses and two of the worst defenses in the NFL.

I'll chip in with San Diego and the Patriots had highly ranked offenses (3rd and 4th respectively) but "defenses win championships" is said for a reason. The Broncos had an edge in defense over both teams. That allowed them to slow down their offense to protect their defense.

The Seahawks are going to do something similar to Denver. Denver can't do that vs Seattle because they don't hold the offensive and defensive advantage.

there were 2 (not 3) turnovers against SD - a questionable fumble by JT in which the ball was ripped out after a first down completion, and an INT in the end zone. Neither is relevant to the ability to move the ball imo.

So you're implying turnovers don't matter? I will bet you that unlike the Chargers game, if the Broncos lose the turnover battle on Sunday, they lose this game. Don't forget Manning threw a pick on their first TD drive that the defender just flat out dropped. If he throws a duck like that again, it'll be picked.

 

[Omaha]

Seahawks LED THE LEAGUE in turnovers. Moving the football is absolutely meaningless if you turn the ball over. When you talk about not scoring because you are purposely slowing things up, but you leave out turnovers that would have changed the score had you not turned it over, then you aren't telling the whole story. Seattle's defense may give up 300 yards or so to Denver's offense, but a few key turnovers will change the outcome of the game. Count on it

Yes Seahawks led the league in INTs but then you can also counter that they played against poorer QBs and offenses.

The drive stats were presented to support that the offense moved the ball well but played more conservatively as opposed to an aggressive quick scoring approach. Turnovers dont change that. Yes they could have scored more points (after all they kicked a significant number of FGs that could have been TDs) but that is a different issue. The game played out to our advantage and we could stick to our game plan.

Main point is that the # of points scored by Broncos in the 2 playoffs game is more indicative of the game plan and game flow than it is of the capability of the offense. If you want to gauge their full capabilities, you would have to review the entire season (by which the numbers speak for themselves).

 

[amill87]

So you're saying your offense went conservative but effective against some poor defenses in order to protect their below average defense?

What happens when they try to go conservative vs a significantly better defense?

You kinda proved the point of this thread

Dont see how I have proved the point of the thread (assuming there was a point in the first place)

In football, your game plan is highly dependent on the opposition and the game flow.

There is no need for the Broncos to be conservative offensively against the seahawks - seattle do not pose the quick and high scoring offensive threats that SD and NE did.

In fact quite the opposite, Seahawks want to hold the ball and pound it with Beastmode. The best counter to that is to try to turn it into a high scoring game and try to force them to abandon the run.

The Seahawks aren't as good as NE or SD on offense but it's not like we don't have offensive threats. We were the #7 offense for a reason.

The difference in this game is the Broncos have not played a team that is as well rounded as Seattle. If you somehow can score on our defense, our offense can and has stepped it up. It's why Seattle is here, they can win in just about every possible fashion.

The most balanced team the Broncos played was the Chiefs. They ranked 15th in offense, 9th in defense, and 1st in special teams. The Hawks rank 7th in offense, 1st in defense, and 5th in special teams.

On the flip side, the most balanced team the Hawks played was the Niners. They ranked 8th in offense, 13th in defense, and 7th in special teams. The Broncos rank 1st in offense, 15th in defense, and 21st in special teams.

Let's be real. The Broncos are nowhere near balanced. They have a historic QB and passing offense. They do one thing and do it extremely well. The Hawks do a lot of things really well and play defense extremely well. At the end of the day, it's a team game. The Broncos are a one man show (I know their receivers are good but are the Broncos in the Super Bowl without Manning?). The Hawks are a entire team and no matter what angle you look at it, the Hawks are a better overall team.

 

[Omaha]

So you're implying turnovers don't matter? I will bet you that unlike the Chargers game, if the Broncos lose the turnover battle on Sunday, they lose this game. Don't forget Manning threw a pick on their first TD drive that the defender just flat out dropped. If he throws a duck like that again, it'll be picked.

For the context being discussed, yes the turnovers in question were irrelevant.

As to manning throwing a 'pick' against SD, given the defender didnt complete the catch, it was NOT a pick! Its like saying that SF would be in the SB if the pass to Craptree would have been an inch higher - it wasnt and they aint.

Manning threw a lot of wobbly passes all season, but he also threw a lot of wobbly TDs. Until the seahawks actually make a pick in the game, it is silly to be stating with any certainty that they would make any. They could pick Manning 5 times and they could end up with 0 INTs - we will have to wait till Sunday to find out.

 

[amill87]

As to manning throwing a 'pick' against SD, given the defender didnt complete the catch, it was NOT a pick! Its like saying that SF would be in the SB if the pass to Craptree would have been an inch higher - it wasnt and they aint.

That's not apples to apples. Crabtree never touched the ball. The defender had the ball fall into his lap and just dropped it. I can sense how desperately you are grasping at straws here. You are better off walking away now.

 

[DtownNative]

I don't disagree with many points on this thread from both sides. But let's face it, this game will VERY LIKELY be a close game... I have predicted all week that regardless of whether Seattle's offense is underrated or Denver's is overhyped, I don't see a blowout or either team scoring 30+ points.

Vegas agrees, according to current line.

 

[Omaha]

The Seahawks aren't as good as NE or SD on offense but it's not like we don't have offensive threats. We were the #7 offense for a reason.

The difference in this game is the Broncos have not played a team that is as well rounded as Seattle. If you somehow can score on our defense, our offense can and has stepped it up. It's why Seattle is here, they can win in just about every possible fashion.

The most balanced team the Broncos played was the Chiefs. They ranked 15th in offense, 9th in defense, and 1st in special teams. The Hawks rank 7th in offense, 1st in defense, and 5th in special teams.

On the flip side, the most balanced team the Hawks played was the Niners. They ranked 8th in offense, 13th in defense, and 7th in special teams. The Broncos rank 1st in offense, 15th in defense, and 21st in special teams.

Let's be real. The Broncos are nowhere near balanced. They have a historic QB and passing offense. They do one thing and do it extremely well. The Hawks do a lot of things really well and play defense extremely well. At the end of the day, it's a team game. The Broncos are a one man show (I know their receivers are good but are the Broncos in the Super Bowl without Manning?). The Hawks are a entire team and no matter what angle you look at it, the Hawks are a better overall team.

Being rounded is of little of little consequence when compared to matchups. You dont get points for being rounded. in fact in the NFL, you are usually better served by being very good in one phase of the game and being as good as you can be in the others.

If (for whatever reason) the broncos passing offense overruns the seahawks defense, it wouldnt matter if the broncos defense is just average, as long they prevent the seahawks offense from scoring as much. At the end of the game, the W goes to the team with the higher points total, be it 7-3, 30-7, 45-44 or any other combo you can think of.

 

[Omaha]

That's not apples to apples. Crabtree never touched the ball. The defender had the ball fall into his lap and just dropped it. I can sense how desperately you are grasping at straws here. You are better off walking away now.

Grasping at straws - really? That is quite funny.

You called a play that was never made a pick and I called a pass that was never made a catch - those are not so different as they are both hypothetical and never happened. How close it came to happening is irrelevant cos they didnt.

Using 'IF' scenarios as premise are just silly imo and simply showed you why.

 

[amill87]

The Seahawks aren't as good as NE or SD on offense but it's not like we don't have offensive threats. We were the #7 offense for a reason.

The difference in this game is the Broncos have not played a team that is as well rounded as Seattle. If you somehow can score on our defense, our offense can and has stepped it up. It's why Seattle is here, they can win in just about every possible fashion.

The most balanced team the Broncos played was the Chiefs. They ranked 15th in offense, 9th in defense, and 1st in special teams. The Hawks rank 7th in offense, 1st in defense, and 5th in special teams.

On the flip side, the most balanced team the Hawks played was the Niners. They ranked 8th in offense, 13th in defense, and 7th in special teams. The Broncos rank 1st in offense, 15th in defense, and 21st in special teams.

Let's be real. The Broncos are nowhere near balanced. They have a historic QB and passing offense. They do one thing and do it extremely well. The Hawks do a lot of things really well and play defense extremely well. At the end of the day, it's a team game. The Broncos are a one man show (I know their receivers are good but are the Broncos in the Super Bowl without Manning?). The Hawks are a entire team and no matter what angle you look at it, the Hawks are a better overall team.

Being rounded is of little of little consequence when compared to matchups. You dont get points for being rounded. in fact in the NFL, you are usually better served by being very good in one phase of the game and being as good as you can be in the others.

If (for whatever reason) the broncos passing offense overruns the seahawks defense, it wouldnt matter if the broncos defense is just average, as long they prevent the seahawks offense from scoring as much. At the end of the game, the W goes to the team with the higher points total, be it 7-3, 30-7, 45-44 or any other combo you can think of.

So the average Broncos defense only has to stop a unit that is better than them? You're asking for a lot.

IF the Broncos can pass on the best pass defense in the league. IF the average defense can hold an above average offense (that just added perhaps the most dynamic player in the league btw), they can score more points and win the game? Thanks for the analysis, Madden.

Just because Manning passes for some yards, doesn't mean the mediocre Denver defense has a better chance to hold our more dynamic offense. Don't be like the mindless drones at ESPN. This offense can score points and will have an easier time at it than Denver's offense.

 

[HawkGA]

His arm will be like Papa John "n00dles" after they have been boiled for hours on end.

And his offensive production will be "weak sauce" just like that crap Papa Johsons's puts on their pizza!.

Don't you dare insult Papa Johns' pizza!