Flat against the Lions because. . . .

fortdick

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,496
Reaction score
745
I can't help thinking we were offensively flat against the Lions because we didn't spend enough time time preparing for them. Bledsoe just seemed to be playing it safe and let our running game take the game over. The defense dominated a Detriot running game that is supposed to be one of the best. I can;t help but think it was because we were planning for Denver as much, or more, than the Lions.

Emphasis on stopping the run. Not seeming prepared for the Lions banged up secondary. Henry not on the field. We played a nice, safe game, and got the win.

Parcells indicated they would spend part of last week preparing for the Broncos. It was a short week on top of that. I can't help believing that we will be better prepared Thursday then we were Sunday.
 

theogt

Surrealist
Messages
45,846
Reaction score
5,912
fortdick said:
I can't help thinking we were offensively flat against the Lions because we didn't spend enough time time preparing for them. Bledsoe just seemed to be playing it safe and let our running game take the game over. The defense dominated a Detriot running game that is supposed to be one of the best. I can;t help but think it was because we were planning for Denver as much, or more, than the Lions.

Emphasis on stopping the run. Not seeming prepared for the Lions banged up secondary. Henry not on the field. We played a nice, safe game, and got the win.

Parcells indicated they would spend part of last week preparing for the Broncos. It was a short week on top of that. I can't help believing that we will be better prepared Thursday then we were Sunday.
Flat? I don't think so. If we had taken chances and they had not paid off then I say we were flat. When we got the lead we played conservative. Surprise. There was nothing flat about it. The running game was as good as one can hope for. The passing game was just fine but there weren't big plays because we didn't need to take the risk.

Also, two plays would have made a world of difference in people's eyes. Had the DE not been offisides on that pass to Witten he would have ran in for a touchdown. Second, had the Lions not had a false start on that Glenn INT that touchdown would have counted.
 

joseephuss

Well-Known Member
Messages
28,041
Reaction score
6,920
Julius' fumble on the second series also led to a little more conservative approach the rest of the game.
 

Doomsday101

Well-Known Member
Messages
107,762
Reaction score
39,034
I think part of the reason was the Lions were playing the backers off the line fairly deep as well as their safeties. To me it appeared they were daring Dallas to run the ball and that is exactly what we did. It may have been to protect their own troubles in the secondary
 

fortdick

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,496
Reaction score
745
theogt said:
Flat? I don't think so. If we had taken chances and they had not paid off then I say we were flat. When we got the lead we played conservative. Surprise.

You are right, I used a term that has been commonly used here to describe our performance. I personally agree with you. The game plan was perfect to defeat the Lions. My point was Bledsoe dod not have as good a game as usual, I think because we didn't spend the time to exploit their secondary. It was a "don't make a mistake" type of passing game. Lots of safe throws.

My point was that we prolly spent more time studying the Broncos secondary than the Lions. I thought the defense's focus on stopping the run and letting Harringtom makes a few throws was also prepping for Denver. Certainly keeping Henry off the field was to save him for Thursday!
 

Tuna Helper

Benched
Messages
2,049
Reaction score
0
If we play 60 minutes of football the way we did on the opening drive against the Lions, Cards, and Philly (1st game), then the Broncos are in trouble. Against the Lions, we consumed 8 minutes on the opening drive, and scored 7 points.

I think we got conservative after that because we did not gameplan for the Lions. I read somewhere that BP spent 10 minutes on a gameplan for the Lions...hence a reason for the mousetraps.
 

Doomsday101

Well-Known Member
Messages
107,762
Reaction score
39,034
fortdick said:
You are right, I used a term that has been commonly used here to describe our performance. I personally agree with you. The game plan was perfect to defeat the Lions. My point was Bledsoe dod not have as good a game as usual, I think because we didn't spend the time to exploit their secondary. It was a "don't make a mistake" type of passing game. Lots of safe throws.

My point was that we prolly spent more time studying the Broncos secondary than the Lions. I thought the defense's focus on stopping the run and letting Harringtom makes a few throws was also prepping for Denver. Certainly keeping Henry off the field was to save him for Thursday!

And Denver is not going to play the same style of defense. Lions were keeping guys back to protect aginst the pass but in doing that the allowed Dallas to put up 150 yards of rushing.
 

lkelly

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,950
Reaction score
6,417
When did Parcells say he spent part of last week preparing for the Broncos? That would shock me. The talent level in the NFL is too close to be overlooking any team.
 

Thick 'N Hearty

Active Member
Messages
2,359
Reaction score
0
Sunday wasn't a flat effort, but, I hate that they don't have that killer instint to put the game away. Yes, the defense was playing great. But, with the Lions banged up secondary, we should've taken more than the two or three shots down the field. Over the course of the game, there is no way their secondary could keep up with our receivers. I don't know if it's coaching or what, but this team won't last in the playoffs long if they don't learn how to put a game away and do it early in the game. The first game against Philly is a perfect example. We put that game away early.
 

Doomsday101

Well-Known Member
Messages
107,762
Reaction score
39,034
Tuna Helper said:
If we play 60 minutes of football the way we did on the opening drive against the Lions, Cards, and Philly (1st game), then the Broncos are in trouble. Against the Lions, we consumed 8 minutes on the opening drive, and scored 7 points.

I think we got conservative after that because we did not gameplan for the Lions. I read somewhere that BP spent 10 minutes on a gameplan for the Lions...hence a reason for the mousetraps.

But Dallas ran it 11 times and passed 3 times on that opening drive. Isn't that conservative?
 

joseephuss

Well-Known Member
Messages
28,041
Reaction score
6,920
Tuna Helper said:
If we play 60 minutes of football the way we did on the opening drive against the Lions, Cards, and Philly (1st game), then the Broncos are in trouble. Against the Lions, we consumed 8 minutes on the opening drive, and scored 7 points.

I think we got conservative after that because we did not gameplan for the Lions. I read somewhere that BP spent 10 minutes on a gameplan for the Lions...hence a reason for the mousetraps.

I think it would be difficult to game plan for the Lion's defense. They were missing so many starters that it would be hard to know what to expect from that unit. In that case, instead of spending too much time game planning for the unknown, you just try to perfect what your offense can do.

I am not sure if that is what happened last week, but I think my theory is a good one. :D
 

Longboysfan

hipfake08
Messages
13,316
Reaction score
5,797
Also to add to the mix...
You can't always tap into a big speach to drive your team every week.
You can't always be saying in the press we have to improve.

What you can do is hold back and see how the team handles the week.

Then for the big game give the big talk....
Drive it home.
National TV. :starspin :starspin :starspin
We should come out firing on T day.
 

fortdick

Well-Known Member
Messages
6,496
Reaction score
745
lkelly said:
When did Parcells say he spent part of last week preparing for the Broncos? That would shock me. The talent level in the NFL is too close to be overlooking any team.

HE said it in a PC after the Eagles game. If i wasn't so lazy, I would dig it out of the archives.
 

Doomsday101

Well-Known Member
Messages
107,762
Reaction score
39,034
aardvark said:
If it works, GET R DONE!!!

;)

You got it. Bill was accused of playing some boring ball in NY with the ground game. It was not exciting football in the eyes of some but it got them 2 SB victories. I firmly believe Bill knows what he is doing.
 

Thick 'N Hearty

Active Member
Messages
2,359
Reaction score
0
aardvark said:
If it works, GET R DONE!!!

;)

You mean like the 3 straight rushing attempts that were stopped at the goal line? The runs didn't work and they didn't "get r done." The only real way this offense can beat an 8-2 team is by coming out of the locker room firing, just like we did against Philly. I'm all about ball control, but, I also believe taking shots down the field will pull the defense back and keep them honest. We didn't need to do that against the Lions (although I think we should have), but we better do it against the Broncos. If they get a two TD lead, the game's over.
 

BlueStar22

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,192
Reaction score
3,938
joseephuss said:
Julius' fumble on the second series also led to a little more conservative approach the rest of the game.
yep, that's when the offense stalled.
 

AbeBeta

Well-Known Member
Messages
35,680
Reaction score
12,392
lkelly said:
When did Parcells say he spent part of last week preparing for the Broncos? That would shock me. The talent level in the NFL is too close to be overlooking any team.

Do you really think BP would overlook a team?

BP spent time in the bye week on Denver and Detroit. Because of the short week he needed to spend some of his time on Denver last week as well.

But you can be sure that BP didn't sacrifice prep for Detroit to get ready for Denver -- He likely worked a ton of extra hours (and made the assistants do the same) to get ready.

The players might have been flat -- but you can be sure it wasn't about a lack of prep.
 

theogt

Surrealist
Messages
45,846
Reaction score
5,912
the DoNkEy PuNcH said:
We didn't need to do that against the Lions (although I think we should have), but we better do it against the Broncos. If they get a two TD lead, the game's over.
Luckily we haven't had to do this often, but how many times have we "needed" to do it and failed? I can think of once during the year and that was against Oakland. In that instance we actually did drive the ball but couldn't punch it in. When we need to throw the ball by and large we've done it. Just because Parcells chooses not to doesn't mean we don't have the ability.
 

NMfan

Active Member
Messages
316
Reaction score
37
Doomsday101 said:
I think part of the reason was the Lions were playing the backers off the line fairly deep as well as their safeties. To me it appeared they were daring Dallas to run the ball and that is exactly what we did. It may have been to protect their own troubles in the secondary
:hammer:
The Lions knew they were vulnerable in the secondary and played it deep all day. The smart thing was to run on them until they pulled up the safeties. They never did so they choose their poison. It was a slower death and ugly to watch.
 
Top