Quote:
Originally Posted by Mile High Mania
A few things... you're assuming I'm trying to make an excuse. I get the fact that on the one fumble, it was essentially the same as going for it on 4th and missing it, creating a turnover on downs. Yes, Gordon has a knack for fumbling.
My point was - two goal line fumbles, remove one of them and it's a different story. But, you can't remove one of them, I get that. Yes, Denver's red zone offense has had issues. Hell, Washington caught a TD pass that was called back for holding I believe. Lots of stupid ass self-destructing actions have killed them.
The penalties... they've had 12 per game which is inexcusable. I'm not using it as an excuse.
And, no I'm not expecting all of that to just magically disappear. Anyway, I'm gonna let you guys beat up on Knowmo... later, enjoy the weekend.
|
C'mon...you guys are constantly saying or implying that Denver only lost to Seattle/struggled with Houston due to the penalties and fumbles.
Again, even if Gordon and Williams had both held onto the ball, you're still looking at a maximum of 7 points from those drives, and that's only if they converted 4th and 4ish. It's far more likely that he would have kicked the FG.
Two PIs set them up with 1st and goal, and they failed to get into the endzone each time. That's all there really is to it.
I've seen a lot of "if we clean up the mistakes, we're fine" comments. What if the opponents cleaned up their mistakes? Houston's penalties gave Denver 4 first downs. Houston only got two first downs from penalties. What if Geno doesn't fail on 4th and inches (or if they got a better spot or took the FG, etc). What if they didn't fumble and give Denver a short field? Or drop easy interception balls.
I watched both games start to finish, and I just don't agree with the narrative that Denver was the far superior team that would have won going away if they hadn't shot themselves in the foot. I think the quality of those three teams is a lot closer than you guys want to admit.