[QUOTE=jerryaldini;14353741]It's gonna be fun to watch them turn on Flacco. Keesum was somewhat shielded by the VJ hate. Without VJ, they will have to acknowledge it's the personnel that suck.[/QUOTE]
And the meathead Elway who is responsible for fielding that garbage [Reply]
Originally Posted by TEX:
So your argument is ONE year in 10??? :-)
The past two Bronco teams have been SHIT. Without their heavily loaded early season home schedule, they would have finished even worse and would have been completely out of contention by mid October... So, let's just see how they start this season. I'm betting it's not going to be anywhere near the past two - even though they're supposed to be a better team. You and I have been waiting for this - so let's sit back and enjoy the show.
No, just poining out that their best achievement during this last decade had nothing to do with scheduling. As I've said, whether the games are early or late -- at the end of the year, if the team is bad, the record will reflect it.
In 2018, they had 4 of 6 in Denver and went 2-2. (beat SEA and OAK)
In 2017, they had 4 of 5 in Denver, went 3-1 (beat LAC, DAL, OAK) and then proceeded to lose a ton when they played better teams home or away.
In 2016, they had 3 of 6 in Denver, went 2-1 (beat CAR, IND)
I won't worry much about the Manning years because those teams were solid and I don't believe location and timing played as critical of a role as some would like to think.
So, in 2017 when they had an absurd 4 out of 5 early... winning 3, they still only won 5 total games. Am I really to think that beating LAC (finished 9-7), DAL (finished 9-7) and OAK (finished 6-10) in that early stretch was a scheduling gift? Oakland is Oakland... Dallas wasn't prolific, they lost to the Chargers in Dallas and dropped some games they should have won. Same for LAC, they started 0-4 and dropped some games they should have won. neither of those 2 were dominant enough where you could say it was early altitude sickness.
Again, I get the argument... getting 4 out of 5 early is absurd. I guess if the argument is they won 5 games and should have only won 4... have at it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mile High Mania:
No, just poining out that their best achievement during this last decade had nothing to do with scheduling. As I've said, whether the games are early or late -- at the end of the year, if the team is bad, the record will reflect it.
In 2018, they had 4 of 6 in Denver and went 2-2. (beat SEA and OAK)
In 2017, they had 4 of 5 in Denver, went 3-1 (beat LAC, DAL, OAK) and then proceeded to lose a ton when they played better teams home or away.
In 2016, they had 3 of 6 in Denver, went 2-1 (beat CAR, IND)
I won't worry much about the Manning years because those teams were solid and I don't believe location and timing played as critical of a role as some would like to think.
So, in 2017 when they had an absurd 4 out of 5 early... winning 3, they still only won 5 total games. Am I really to think that beating LAC (finished 9-7), DAL (finished 9-7) and OAK (finished 6-10) in that early stretch was a scheduling gift? Oakland is Oakland... Dallas wasn't prolific, they lost to the Chargers in Dallas and dropped some games they should have won. Same for LAC, they started 0-4 and dropped some games they should have won. neither of those 2 were dominant enough where you could say it was early altitude sickness.
Again, I get the argument... getting 4 out of 5 early is absurd. I guess if the argument is they won 5 games and should have only won 4... have at it.
I agree with the Manning teams. They were very good regardless. My argument has always been with the fringe Denver teams. Fact is Denver most always got more home games early and it has helped them get off to good starts. The past two seasons are the most recent examples. Many donktards were even fooled into thinking they were playoff teams. :-) While MANY here saw the schedule and predicted the collapse once the road show began. I remember back in 2017, you were in full denial and refused to label anything a collapse. Um...you couldn't have been more wrong.
Why don't you check out how many times they started the season with two road games and compare that to the rest of the division. Might amaze you... [Reply]
Sitting in the front row at Broncos training camp practice is someone wearing a Chiefs Tyreek Hill jersey. Bold. (Pic by @gchristus) pic.twitter.com/cYT9j7pxvv
Why don't you check out how many times they started the season with two road games and compare that to the rest of the division. Might amaze you...
I pointed this out last year...….Denver has not started with 3 of 4 on the road (1st quarter of season) since 1962, the other three teams have done it an average of 15 times.
Chiefs start (for the second year in a row) with 3 of 4 on the road this season, and before mule tool says something about finishing with more at home, we only have two of our last four at home. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mile High Mania:
Yet, in 2015... the last year of true relevance, they started with 2 of the first 6 at home and only 5 of 12. But, I know... the refs and stuff. There's never a loss for reasons why.
Thanfully, 2019 looks different although I've already witnessed scheduling whining.
I figured that's the one you would focus on...while it's 2 of first 6, it's also 2 of first 4 and the first 4 are key. In the last two years, Denver has had 3 of 4 at home the first four weeks. In addition, your bye week in 2015 was week 7 and after the bye was a home game.
Not to mention that the 4th road game in week 6 was against the vaunted 3-13 Cleveland Browns. It's a miracle ya'll made the SB that year. [Reply]
