Why I'm thrilled that McDaniels is our coach, and will be our coach for the future

[RunYouOver]

Don't mean to keep this whole annoying debate going on, but as always, I have my opinion, and since I can't keep my posts short, I had to make this thread. Deal with it ;)

If you've watched enough football, have enough football intelligence, and have been around the game enough to be a part of an organization....then you know that at certain points, it becomes time to make a change. Shanahan was a fantastic coach, and I was very mad when he was fired. However, his message was getting stale here...we had a LOT of talent, but couldn't pull it out down the stretch, and for the second straight year, collapsed. It was time for a change, it really was.

Now, people who say that a) we never should've fired Shanny and b) our team last year was amazing, why would McD break it up...you guys have yourselves in a hole.

If Shanny really was the perfect person for this team, then how did he collapse with such a great team? OR, if those guys were true team players and winners, how could a coach like Shanny not get them into the playoffs?

I happen to believe Shanny was a great coach, and, looking back on it, it's more on the players.

If Kyle Orton can lead us to 8-8, then one of 2 things is apparent: Either a) Jay Cutler was incredibly overrated (see: 2009 Chicago Bears) or b) McDaniels has a LOT of potential as a head coach...think of our team this year with a top quarterback.

This time, I think it's a combination of both...Orton clearly isn't the answer, but how is it that we can substitute Orton for Cutler and wind up with the same result? Sure, the defense improved, but statistically speaking, Kyle Orton ran just as productive an offense as Cutler.

Don't believe me? Don't look at the yardage, because that was misleading. Last year, under Shanny, our team was miserable in the red zone. Despite having the #2 passing offense in football, we were 16th in scoring. This year, we were 20th in scoring. OK, so last year was a little better, but--our TO ratio last year: -17. This year? +7. That's a HUGE difference. Last year, 24 was the difference between the first place team in TOs, and the 26th.

So was our defense that horrible last year? Looking only at the obvious statistics, yes. When you think about the average field position, total number of possessions against and plays from scrimmage, you'll see otherwise.

Our defense had some of the WORST starting field position in football, often putting them in a real tough spot. We GAVE the other team the ball THIRTY times last year, not even including missed fourth downs, of which we had eight.

If you don't think Cutler's play put our defense in a significant hole, you're just not looking at the right statistics.

So back to my point, it was more of the players than it was Shanahan, but NOW, McDaniels is leading a productive team despite lacking a major talent at the most important position.

We WERE 6-0, with a really crappy team, in my opinion. Yes, we fell apart down the stretch, but damn, what were the expectations before the season? In my opinion, a good coach is one who exceeds the expectations for a team, or one who gets their team deep into the playoffs. In our case, we DOUBLED our projected win total in many predictions.

You can't just give a guy ONE year and expect him to turn everything around. Not gonna happen. If it does, it was because they inherited a great team. I give McDaniels 3 years to get us to be a SB contender. This guy can coach, he's young and he wants a team full of winners, and there is NOTHING wrong with that. If you think it's more important to let one selfish player take over your team, you're wrong, and that's why you're not in the business.

I have total confidence McDaniels will get us into the playoffs next year, likely as a wild card. Unfortunately, I'm sure that won't even be good for some fans.

The good news? The Broncos aren't firing him because a bunch of impatient fans expect immediate results and "don't like his attitude." The fact that he's young means he'll continue to learn more and more every year, and he's the kind of coach I expect to remain with us for as long as Shanahan did.

Don't forget...he EXCEEDED expectations. At one point this season, we were talked about as a potential super bowl team. Yes, we collapsed, that sucks, everyone knows that...the point is...would a crappy coach even get us to 6-0, with a team led by Kyle Orton?

I don't think so.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

GREAT post :salute: I can not find anything I disagree with.

[BroncoWave]

What Carol said. Best post I have seen in a while.

[silkamilkamonico]

Cue the "he finished the season 2-8" people, which will argue that religeously while completely ignoring the fact that we started out 6-0, played some of the most fundamentally sound footbal Denver's seen in over 10 years, and had some very good wins against some very good playoff teams,

[Superchop 7]

Yeah, he is great.

[LoyalSoldier]

Sorry our defense was that bad last year.

13 turnovers = 3rd worst total of any defense in 16 years.

We weren't just bad, we were nearly record setting. If you don't believe our defense was just bad all around then you are trying to ignore every statistic.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Sorry our defense was that bad last year.

13 turnovers = 3rd worst total of any defense in 16 years.

We weren't just bad, we were nearly record setting. If you don't believe our defense was just bad all around then you are trying to ignore every statistic.

From 1st post in this thread:

"So was our defense that horrible last year? Looking only at the obvious statistics, yes. When you think about the average field position, total number of possessions against and plays from scrimmage, you'll see otherwise.

Our defense had some of the WORST starting field position in football, often putting them in a real tough spot. We GAVE the other team the ball THIRTY times last year, not even including missed fourth downs, of which we had eight.

If you don't think Cutler's play put our defense in a significant hole, you're just not looking at the right statistics."

[LoyalSoldier]

From 1st post in this thread:

"So was our defense that horrible last year? Looking only at the obvious statistics, yes. When you think about the average field position, total number of possessions against and plays from scrimmage, you'll see otherwise.

Our defense had some of the WORST starting field position in football, often putting them in a real tough spot. We GAVE the other team the ball THIRTY times last year, not even including missed fourth downs, of which we had eight.

If you don't think Cutler's play put our defense in a significant hole, you're just not looking at the right statistics."

Yea I read it and I am calling BS. Our defense was as bad as everyone made them out to be. It didn't matter if they had 20 or 99 yards, they would still give up a score. I did the stats quite extensively a year ago.

Say what you want about Cutler, but we were that bad on defense.

[Ziggy]

Yea I read it and I am calling BS. Our defense was as bad as everyone made them out to be. It didn't matter if they had 20 or 99 yards, they would still give up a score. I did the stats quite extensively a year ago.

Say what you want about Cutler, but we were that bad on defense.

I agree with the soldier on this one. Our defense was that bad last season. Despite the finish, it's much improved this year with a bunch of nobody's on the D-line. This is yet another reason that the future of this team is bright. 1 offseason is not long enough to bring in the talent needed along the LOS. You can bet that coach McD will be adressing it more this offseason. I think it will take a minimum of 3 seasons to adress all of the changes needed along the trenches.

If anyone disagrees with just how poor the talent level of this team was overall last season, look at where the players that were let go are now. Yes, they were replaced, but that doesn't mean that they were replaced with the candidates that McD wanted. Just the best ones available at the time, which weren't ideal in all cases.

[silkamilkamonico]

Our defense was that bad last year, but I don't see the thread starter saying otherwise.

[The Glue Factory]

If anyone disagrees with just how poor the talent level of this team was overall last season, look at where the players that were let go are now. Yes, they were replaced, but that doesn't mean that they were replaced with the candidates that McD wanted. Just the best ones available at the time, which weren't ideal in all cases.

I concur! I don't think more than a very small handful made it to other teams and I don't think ANY of them were starters.

[slim]

I agree with the soldier on this one. Our defense was that bad last season. Despite the finish, it's much improved this year with a bunch of nobody's on the D-line. This is yet another reason that the future of this team is bright. 1 offseason is not long enough to bring in the talent needed along the LOS. You can bet that coach McD will be adressing it more this offseason. I think it will take a minimum of 3 seasons to adress all of the changes needed along the trenches.

If anyone disagrees with just how poor the talent level of this team was overall last season, look at where the players that were let go are now. Yes, they were replaced, but that doesn't mean that they were replaced with the candidates that McD wanted. Just the best ones available at the time, which weren't ideal in all cases.

What he said.

[LoyalSoldier]

Our defense was that bad last year, but I don't see the thread starter saying otherwise.

Here


So was our defense that horrible last year? Looking only at the obvious statistics, yes. When you think about the average field position, total number of possessions against and plays from scrimmage, you'll see otherwise.

[silkamilkamonico]

Here

Looks to me like he's pointing out games like Miami, where the defense actually did show up, and if it wasn't for Cutler single handilly giving Miami half of their total points, Denver would have won that game. In spite of the offense.

[slim]

Yea I read it and I am calling BS. Our defense was as bad as everyone made them out to be. It didn't matter if they had 20 or 99 yards, they would still give up a score. I did the stats quite extensively a year ago.

Say what you want about Cutler, but we were that bad on defense.

How bad were we?

Did we give up 200 yards rushing to Oak and KC last year?

[LoyalSoldier]

How bad were we?

Did we give up 200 yards rushing to Oak and KC last year?

As a matter of fact. We did give up 200 yards to KC last year. We gave up 198 yards to Larry Johnson. Then we also made Brady Quinn look like a probowler in his first NFL start.

[slim]

As a matter of fact. We did give up 200 yards to KC last year. We gave up 198 yards to Larry Johnson. Then we also made Brady Quinn look like a probowler in his first NFL start.

And we had a "franchise QB" to boot.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

I would like to find the total time of possession for the Broncos last year, vs opponents. I am sure that would be telling. I did find it for the last game of the year - Broncos 23:53, Chargers 36:07. That is as much offense's fault, or more, than the defense.

[pnbronco]

What he said.

What they said....

Nice to see you here Slim...

[Tned]

I'm excited about the future and think that McDaniels has the 'potential' to be a very good coach for the Broncos, but let's not get too carried away with the 'sugar coating'.

As to RYO's OP, I had expected the Broncos to have between 7-9 wins, but certainly not in the way they went 8-8. Like most people, I upped my expectation after the 6-0 start. The fact is a lot of luck played into the 6-0 start, but more than anything, they had to play nearly perfect, especially on defense.

Now, as good as the 6-0 start was, the 2-8 finish was a near historic collapse. If you give the coach the credit for the 6-0 start and the defensive remake, then you have to hold him responsible for the 10 game collapse, which included to four game losing streaks, and the offensive ineptitude.

As to claiming the offense was as productive as last year. Anyone that watched the games this year knows that isn't true. The running game was weaker and the passing game was weaker. The only thing that kept the team from complete disaster was defense and on occasion, special teams.

Orton and the offense simply couldn't move the ball when they 'had' to move it. The only time the offense was successful was early in the year when the team was able to run at will.

Now, much of that blame needs to land squarely on McDaniels shoulders. His game plans in the second half the of the year barely changed. Run up the middle, run up the middle, bubble screen, punt.

As to turnovers. Yes, Orton didn't turn the ball over much, but most QBs that rely solely on very short, dink and dunk passing, have limited interceptions, but also very limited production, as was the case with Orton.

Now, was that Orton's lacking or poor play calling from McDaniels? I honestly don't know.

So, in summary, The last 11 months of so has had a lot of ups and downs with McDaniels. He showed his rookie colors many times, including with the Cutler fiasco. Not the fact he traded him, but how it happened. He showed his rookie colors with his poor play calling and inability to right the ship in the ten game collapse, and in his multiple public pissing contests with players, which should have been kept in house. He showed his rookie colors in throwing the O-line and players under the bus, when his play calling was very suspect. He needs to get his ego in check and use the football smarts he clearly has.

On the bright side, the reports out of training camp indicated that he is building a fundamentally sound team. He appears to both have an incredible enthusiasm for the game and is very football smart. If he can learn how to communicate and mentor players, rather than getting into pissing contests and 'proving' he's right and he is the boss via the press, he could turn into a very good head coach.

[Tned]

P.S. My apologies for throwing the cold water of reality onto the love fest happening in this thread.

[broncophan]

I feel the same about McD as I did......Reeves,Phillips, and Shanahan......(o.k......not Phillips......I never wanted him as a head coach)..........................give them 3 years....and if there is no improvement, and if the team is not successful.....then it is time for him to go...I know that is kind of vague......but you know what I mean....Hopefully McD is here as long as Reeves and Shanahan were....

[pnbronco]

P.S. My apologies for throwing the cold water of reality onto the love fest happening in this thread.

Yup....you should have to come up with a smiley all shivering, oh wait you let Denver and don't remember how that feels.

We were going to sing around the fire, bring out the marshmallows and now what.......:smack:

:D.......glad you made it home safe.........:D

[Tned]

I feel the same about McD as I did......Reeves,Phillips, and Shanahan......(o.k......not Phillips......I never wanted him as a head coach)..........................give them 3 years....and if there is no improvement, and if the team is not successful.....then it is time for him to go...I know that is kind of vague......but you know what I mean....Hopefully McD is here as long as Reeves and Shanahan were....

I agree with this. I'm not part of the fire McDaniels crowd. He clearly made mistaks, probably due to youth and first time as HC, more than anything else, but even with the mistakes, he did a lot well and has to be given time to put his team and scheme in place.

Most head coaches are fired in 2-3 years, because that is the time they are given to produce. I hope the McDaniels is the coach here for 10+ years, meaning he does produce in that 2-3 year period and doesn't get the axe. I really don't want Denver to join the rank of teams that have a revolving door at head coach.

[honz]

P.S. My apologies for throwing the cold water of reality onto the love fest happening in this thread.

I agree with several points in your post, but it is your opinion, not necessarily "reality".

[Tned]

I agree with several points in your post, but it is your opinion, not necessarily "reality".

It's my reality. ;)

[RunYouOver]

I'm excited about the future and think that McDaniels has the 'potential' to be a very good coach for the Broncos, but let's not get too carried away with the 'sugar coating'.

As to RYO's OP, I had expected the Broncos to have between 7-9 wins, but certainly not in the way they went 8-8. Like most people, I upped my expectation after the 6-0 start. The fact is a lot of luck played into the 6-0 start, but more than anything, they had to play nearly perfect, especially on defense.
Now, as good as the 6-0 start was, the 2-8 finish was a near historic collapse. If you give the coach the credit for the 6-0 start and the defensive remake, then you have to hold him responsible for the 10 game collapse, which included to four game losing streaks, and the offensive ineptitude.

And I totally agree with you tned. To start off, it is OK to up your expectations after hot starts or winning streaks, as we all did, but you can't forget the original expectation, that's the one that matters most to me. At least in his rookie coaching season.

Now, as for the credit on the coach...I couldn't agree more. I'm putting a great deal of blame on McDaniels for the failed ending, but also a good deal of credit for the hot start. Luck has a funny way of evening out in the end, so I tend to cancel out that confounding variable. To start a season 6-0 with SO much pressure on him, so much drama surrounding the team...to me, that's very impressive. The losing streaks? They were horrible, and while I don't blame the entire thing on him, the bulk of the blame will fall on him, as it should.

But that's what I'm saying...the potential is there, we all saw it. This guy can coach, and he's going to have to get used to the league, he still has plenty of learning to do, as the end of the season showed, and I think this will only help him for the future. But Bowlen knew when he hired him this wasn't going to be a one year turnaround. He wants to win soon, of course, but he's also trying to rebuild a dynasty. Give McDaniels 5 years, and we could be perennial contenders. Is that too much to ask for right now? Yeah, but I wouldn't rule it out. He's a football guy...his whole life is football, he seems to be pretty smart with the game. Give him the experience, and I don't doubt he can succeed in this league.



As to claiming the offense was as productive as last year. Anyone that watched the games this year knows that isn't true. The running game was weaker and the passing game was weaker. The only thing that kept the team from complete disaster was defense and on occasion, special teams.

Orton and the offense simply couldn't move the ball when they 'had' to move it. The only time the offense was successful was early in the year when the team was able to run at will.

Now, much of that blame needs to land squarely on McDaniels shoulders. His game plans in the second half the of the year barely changed. Run up the middle, run up the middle, bubble screen, punt.

As to turnovers. Yes, Orton didn't turn the ball over much, but most QBs that rely solely on very short, dink and dunk passing, have limited interceptions, but also very limited production, as was the case with Orton.

Now, was that Orton's lacking or poor play calling from McDaniels? I honestly don't know.

So, in summary, The last 11 months of so has had a lot of ups and downs with McDaniels. He showed his rookie colors many times, including with the Cutler fiasco. Not the fact he traded him, but how it happened. He showed his rookie colors with his poor play calling and inability to right the ship in the ten game collapse, and in his multiple public pissing contests with players, which should have been kept in house. He showed his rookie colors in throwing the O-line and players under the bus, when his play calling was very suspect. He needs to get his ego in check and use the football smarts he clearly has.

On the bright side, the reports out of training camp indicated that he is building a fundamentally sound team. He appears to both have an incredible enthusiasm for the game and is very football smart. If he can learn how to communicate and mentor players, rather than getting into pissing contests and 'proving' he's right and he is the boss via the press, he could turn into a very good head coach.


But in the end, points are going to be what wins you games, and in terms of scoring, we replaced quarterbacks and systems, and went from dead middle in the league, to lower-middle in the league, a difference of only 3 points. Was the offensive game fun to watch? No, it was ugly, it was gross and it was frustrating.

And it's not so much that Orton's dink-and-dunk limited the offense, thus limiting turnovers but also production, making us less effective--that outside concept was my entire point. We started 6-0 with this guy at QB, and I love Orton but god knows he is NOT leading any team to a superbowl win...we're going to change QBs at some point, and once we find that QB who McDaniels can mold perfectly into his system, our offense will become fun to watch again.

The collapse down the stretch, like I said, was McDaniels showing his inexperience coaching. The initial success was McDaniels proving he can coach. Once the experience plays in, and he gains experience gameplanning, that's when we can expect to see better play later in the season. That's why anyone who thinks this year proved McD can't coach shouldn't be allowed to voice that opinion. Every coach gains something from experience, every coach needs more than one year, unless they are immediately given one of the top teams in the league.

Look at all the greats...not all of them got off to fast starts, by any stretch.


Straying away from your post now tned, I think it's unbelievable how posters can misconstrue the entire subject of last year's defense to this year's defense. I wasn't arguing last year's defense was good...they sucked. But they didn't get ANY help from the offense, and the lesser known statistics prove that.

But my point wasn't how good the defense was, it was how the players this season, this year's team in my opinion was definitely worse than last year's, and we still wound up 8-8, with a rookie head coach in his 30s, with a new system, with a new, crappy quarterback. And at one point, we were beating everyone.

That's what impressed me about McDaniels and this team this year.

[Northman]

But in the end, points are going to be what wins you games, and in terms of scoring, we replaced quarterbacks and systems, and went from dead middle in the league, to lower-middle in the league, a difference of only 3 points.

So in other words, Jay wasnt the answer and neither is Orton correct? Because we had the exact same problems last year that we did this year in the redzone.

[RunYouOver]

So in other words, Jay wasnt the answer and neither is Orton correct? Because we had the exact same problems last year that we did this year in the redzone.

That's what I said, yeah.

I think Orton is a nice little 1-2 year plug...but he's certainly not going to be the QB to get us to the superbowl...

[Tned]

Straying away from your post now tned, I think it's unbelievable how posters can misconstrue the entire subject of last year's defense to this year's defense. I wasn't arguing last year's defense was good...they sucked. But they didn't get ANY help from the offense, and the lesser known statistics prove that.

But my point wasn't how good the defense was, it was how the players this season, this year's team in my opinion was definitely worse than last year's, and we still wound up 8-8, with a rookie head coach in his 30s, with a new system, with a new, crappy quarterback. And at one point, we were beating everyone.

That's what impressed me about McDaniels and this team this year.

I agree with most of that, but there are a few areas I disagree.

First, I don't think the team was significantly worse. There was a big upgrade in defensive personnel, from the relative 'no names' on the line, to Hagen and Davis at LB and obviously the three guys with Champ in the secondary were huge upgrades over last year. While the team had to learn a new scheme, the talent level on defense was much better.

On offense, depending on which side of the fence you are on, Orton was either a big upgrade, big downgrade or a push with Cutler. So, no sense in even going there. As to the rest of the offense, we returned the same line, but with the two Ryan's and Kuper being more experienced than last year. Running backs were greatly upgraded with Buckhalter and first rounder in Moreno, while returning our top three WR's plus adding Gaffney.

So, with the exception of QB, which is a debate as to whether Orton is or isn't an improvement, this team had more talent on both sides of the ball than in '08.

So, that only leaves two factors. Scheme changes and schedule. While the NFC east didn't turn out to be the beast it was expected to be, we still had a tough schedule, IMO, this year than last, and that can't be discounted.

One final note on the offense. As you said, there are many stats that can be looked at. Two I like to look at are time of possession (which can be misleading) and third downs.

Our time of possession was better this year, which helps get the defense off the field, but that doesn't always tell the whole story, as more of a 'quick strike' team will tend to have lower TOP.

I think a big eye opener between last years offense and this years, which backs up our 'seat of the pants' feel of not seeing an offense that could move the ball when it had to, is the third down stats. The '09 team had 15 more third down attempts (215 to 200), but the 3rd down conversion rate was significantly lower. In '08 the 3rd down conversion rate was 48%, but it was only 36% in '09.

So, a team that brought back it's O-line, and had an upgraded receiving and running back corp, was woeful on third downs. As we all know, low 3rd down conversions are often a reflection of failing on first and second down, as well as it is a reflection on the QB and play calling. All can and often do play a factor.

So, I fully agree that McDaniels has to be given time to make his team. He will likely get 2-3 years (like most HC's) to put a winner on the field. He clearly has a learning curve, and hopefully when he is watching film and evaluating the players, he will see his own mistakes (many bad play calls -- calling the same play that had failed multiple times before) and learn from them. That's the sign of a good head coach.

[Tned]

So in other words, Jay wasnt the answer and neither is Orton correct? Because we had the exact same problems last year that we did this year in the redzone.

Fewer red zone turnovers this year, but similar success in terms of scoring (I don't have the stats, but my gut says they were about the same in scoring efficiency).

[RunYouOver]

I agree with most of that, but there are a few areas I disagree.

First, I don't think the team was significantly worse. There was a big upgrade in defensive personell, from he relative 'no names' on the line, to Hagen and Davis at LB and obviously the three guys with Champ were huge upgrades over last year. While the team had to learn a new scheme, the talent level on defense was much better.

On offense, depending on which side of the fence you are on, Orton was either a big upgrade, big downgrade or a push with Cutler. So, no sense in even going there. As to the rest of the offense, we returned the same line, but with the two Ryan's and Kuper being more experienced than last year. Running backs were greatly upgraded with Buckhalter and first rounder in Moreno, while returning our top three WR's plus adding Gaffney.

So, with the exception of QB, which is a debate as to whether Orton is or isn't an improvement, this team had more talent on both sides of the ball than in '08.

So, that only leaves two factors. Scheme changes and schedule. While the NFC east didn't turn out to be the beast it was expected to be, we still had a tought schedule, IMO, this year than last, and that can't be discounted.

One final note on the offense. As you said, there are many stats that can be looked at. Two I like to look at are time of possession (which can be misleading) and third downs.

Our time of posession was better this year, which helps get the defense off the field, but that doesn't always tell the whole story, as more of a 'quick strike' team will tend to have lower TOP.

I think a big eye opener between last years offense and this years, which backs up our 'seat of the pants' feel of not seeing an offense that could move the ball when it had to, is the third down stats. The '09 team had 15 more third down attempts (215 to 200), but the 3rd down conversion rate was significantly lower. In '08 the 3rd down conversion rate was 48%, but it was only 36% in '09.

So, a team that brough back it's O-line, and had an upgraded receiving and running back corp, was woeful on third downs. As we all know, low 3rd down conversions are often a reflection of failing on first and second down, as well as it is a reflection on the QB and play calling. All can and often do play a factor.

So, I fully agree that McDaniels has to be given time to make his team. He will likely get 2-3 years (like most HC's) to put a winner on the field. He clearly has a learning curve, and hopefully when he is watching film and evaluating the players, he will see his own mistakes (many bad play calls -- calling the same play that had failed multiple times before) and learn from them. That's the sign of a good head coach.


I agree with what you have to say here...and yeah, I don't think we were significantly worse either, I just think we were in a significantly worse position. I think the team itself was only slightly worse, but with the schedule and brand new scheme and coaching inexperience (like you said), we were much worse off this year than last.

Now, if McDaniels sucks again next year (8-8 or worse), I'll start to be a little skeptical, but not give up yet. If TWO seasons from now we aren't in the playoffs and at least a threat, then I'll second-guess myself.

For now though, I'm confident McD is the right guy.

[Tned]

I agree with what you have to say here...and yeah, I don't think we were significantly worse either, I just think we were in a significantly worse position. I think the team itself was only slightly worse, but with the schedule and brand new scheme and coaching inexperience (like you said), we were much worse off this year than last.

Now, if McDaniels sucks again next year (8-8 or worse), I'll start to be a little skeptical, but not give up yet. If TWO seasons from now we aren't in the playoffs and at least a threat, then I'll second-guess myself.

For now though, I'm confident McD is the right guy.

I think Cutler is a better QB, so I think we downgraded at QB. I would rather have a QB that can make plays, even if he throws a few pics, then a guy that will fail unless your RB's rack up 150+ yards. QB aside, I don't see any way you can look at the roster and not consider it significantly upgraded at each position.

That said, when you turnover 2/3 of the roster, or whatever it was, and implement new offensive and defensive schemes, there are learning curves, so that ads to being in a worse position. That was McDaniels decision (as he could have kept Cutler, Bates and modified the existing offensive scheme, rather than complete overhaul -- but I fully understand why he went the direction he did).

Most of the 'worst position this year than last' was McDaniels choice to tear it down and rebuild it. Hopefully, that pays dividends in '10 and beyond. If not, he will pay the price for his decisions, which is why he gets paid the semi-big bucks.

As to the future, I a cautiously optimistic. I think the guy knows football, and love what he and Nolan did in training camp. However, the unknown in my book is how quickly he will get his youth and ego under control. That's all I see standing in his way of success. He cannot continue to get into public pissing contests with players -- like managers in the corporate world, he has to learn there is a difference between being boss and being bossy.

[RunYouOver]

As to the future, I a cautiously optimistic. I think the guy knows football, and love what he and Nolan did in training camp. However, the unknown in my book is how quickly he will get his youth and ego under control. That's all I see standing in his way of success. He cannot continue to get into public pissing contests with players -- like managers in the corporate world, he has to learn there is a difference between being boss and being bossy.

Yep.

The only reason I'm even cautious with my optimism is that I think McDaniels might be great...after we let him go a few years in and he gets a second shot with another team.

[Tned]

Offense

'09 ---- '08
Clady = Clady
Hamilton = Hamilton
Wiegman = Wiegman
Kuper = Kuper
Harris = Harris (obviously went down with injury)
Graham = Graham
Marshall = Marhsall
Royal = Royal
Stokely/Gaffney > Stokely/Jackson (and the various 4th WR's we had)
Buck/Moreno > Pittman/Young/et al
Orton ??? Cutler

'09 ---- '08
Champ = Champ
Goodman > Bly
Dawkins/Hill >>> various safety combos in '08

While you can't draw a direct comparison to the 4-3 and 3-4 front seven, I think everyone will agree it was significantly upgraded and that Davis and Hagan (becoming a starter) were great additions, as was movin Dumervil to OLB.

Anyway you cut it, outside of QB, the talent on the team was significantly upgraded in '09 over '08.

[Lonestar]

So in other words, Jay wasnt the answer and neither is Orton correct? Because we had the exact same problems last year that we did this year in the redzone.


the real reason we have sucked in the RZ was lack of beef on the OLINE..

when the defense only has 30 max yards they have to defend the stick closer to the LOS before releasing into patterns.. They do not have to worry at all about deep threats.. and the closer you get to the Goal line the more beef they stack on the DL.

when they know you can't overpower them they set back and wait out the FG that elam used to kick.

they will take 3 over 7 points all day long.

The good red zone teams have great OLINES usually much bigger than ours and with more time together developing repair.


Give us good pulling guards and the middle of the OLINE that can keep the DT's and NT at bay and we will get better int eh RZ..


t

[Tned]

Yep.

The only reason I'm even cautious with my optimism is that I think McDaniels might be great...after we let him go a few years in and he gets a second shot with another team.

It happens a lot. A HC doesn't do great at his first gig, as he is learning the ropes. The owner cuts him loose after the normal 2-3 years, right as the pieces that the rook HC put in place are just about ready to pay off. The HC goes on to have success elsewhere, while his new team hires new coach that starts over with his new philosophy and starts that 2-3 year cycle of failure all over again.

It's the reason so many teams have coaching carousels and so few teams ever have coaches with tenures like Fisher, Shanahan and Cowher.

[bcbronc]

Offense

'09 ---- '08
Clady = Clady
Hamilton = Hamilton
Wiegman = Wiegman
Kuper = Kuper
Harris = Harris (obviously went down with injury)
Graham = Graham
Marshall = Marhsall
Royal = Royal
Stokely/Gaffney > Stokely/Jackson (and the various 4th WR's we had)
Buck/Moreno > Pittman/Young/et al
Orton ??? Cutler

'09 ---- '08
Champ = Champ
Goodman > Bly
Dawkins/Hill >>> various safety combos in '08

While you can't draw a direct comparison to the 4-3 and 3-4 front seven, I think everyone will agree it was significantly upgraded and that Davis and Hagan (becoming a starter) were great additions, as was movin Dumervil to OLB.

Anyway you cut it, outside of QB, the talent on the team was significantly upgraded in '09 over '08.

I don't agree with your rating this year's oline as even with last year's. imo there was a big drop in play right across the board this season.

There is no doubt Hamilton and Wiegman had disappointing seasons. Whether because of age, system, or a combination of both, I don't know, but their play certainly slipped.

Kuper might be the same, hard to say. Maybe playing between a pro-bowl centre and Harris made Kupe look better than he is (having a QB that could escape pressure up the middle and a system that moved the pocket probably helped as well). Or its possible the discontinuity due to the injuries/replacements coupled with learning/re-learning a new blocking scheme make this season just a blip on Kuper's development.

Clady wasn't as good either. He was still great, but not all-world like he was as a rookie. I expect him to be great again next year though, and establish himself as best LT in the game.

and of course Harris missed a bunch of games, which count in the end of season stats. He looked great before he got hurt, but clearly Polumbus<Harris.

and of course inferior oline play impacts all the skill positions. I do agree that McDaniel's play-calling and game-planning wasn't perfect and needs to get better (I think it will), but I disagree that McD had the same offense simply because our oline play decreased so drastically.

[Ziggy]

Harris was hurt this year, Kup was playing injured most of the year, and the play of both Hamilton and Weigman declined. Our O-line was nowhere near the level it was last season. Although I was an advocate of trading Cutler, he did avoid sacks much better than Orton. At times he has a quick release, he has more mobility, and can make throws down the field with only a small window. Hence, he made the offensive line look better in pass protection than they actually were.

[Nomad]

I feel the same about McD as I did......Reeves,Phillips, and Shanahan......(o.k......not Phillips......I never wanted him as a head coach)..........................give them 3 years....and if there is no improvement, and if the team is not successful.....then it is time for him to go...I know that is kind of vague......but you know what I mean....Hopefully McD is here as long as Reeves and Shanahan were....

I agree! You should have written this out in 10 paragraphs to get your point across! :glasses:
j/k RYO!!:D

[broncofaninfla]

I wasn't thrilled at all with Mcd's 2009 Broncos but I am tryig to be optimistic about 2010 given some of the things Mcd said in the end of the season presser.

[Northman]

I agree with most of that, but there are a few areas I disagree.

First, I don't think the team was significantly worse. There was a big upgrade in defensive personnel, from the relative 'no names' on the line, to Hagen and Davis at LB and obviously the three guys with Champ in the secondary were huge upgrades over last year. While the team had to learn a new scheme, the talent level on defense was much better.

On offense, depending on which side of the fence you are on, Orton was either a big upgrade, big downgrade or a push with Cutler. So, no sense in even going there. As to the rest of the offense, we returned the same line, but with the two Ryan's and Kuper being more experienced than last year. Running backs were greatly upgraded with Buckhalter and first rounder in Moreno, while returning our top three WR's plus adding Gaffney.

So, with the exception of QB, which is a debate as to whether Orton is or isn't an improvement, this team had more talent on both sides of the ball than in '08.

So, that only leaves two factors. Scheme changes and schedule. While the NFC east didn't turn out to be the beast it was expected to be, we still had a tough schedule, IMO, this year than last, and that can't be discounted.

One final note on the offense. As you said, there are many stats that can be looked at. Two I like to look at are time of possession (which can be misleading) and third downs.

Our time of possession was better this year, which helps get the defense off the field, but that doesn't always tell the whole story, as more of a 'quick strike' team will tend to have lower TOP.

I think a big eye opener between last years offense and this years, which backs up our 'seat of the pants' feel of not seeing an offense that could move the ball when it had to, is the third down stats. The '09 team had 15 more third down attempts (215 to 200), but the 3rd down conversion rate was significantly lower. In '08 the 3rd down conversion rate was 48%, but it was only 36% in '09.

So, a team that brought back it's O-line, and had an upgraded receiving and running back corp, was woeful on third downs. As we all know, low 3rd down conversions are often a reflection of failing on first and second down, as well as it is a reflection on the QB and play calling. All can and often do play a factor.

So, I fully agree that McDaniels has to be given time to make his team. He will likely get 2-3 years (like most HC's) to put a winner on the field. He clearly has a learning curve, and hopefully when he is watching film and evaluating the players, he will see his own mistakes (many bad play calls -- calling the same play that had failed multiple times before) and learn from them. That's the sign of a good head coach.

This is the best post you've had this year. :salute:

[pnbronco]

Great post Tned, but I do have to agree with Ziggy and BC about our O line. Hamilton was not the same guy if he was he would not have been replaced, he and Casey just were getting thrown around. Also we have gone over a bunch the difference with Harris out there and him not being out there. I think he and Kuper had a much better chemistry. I does all begin in the trenches, both sides.

The thing I'm hoping is that Coach learns from his mistakes. The first is to keep it all behind closed doors. The second is to learn that you may have a scheme but adjustments to deal with current personal is smart management.

[Tned]

I don't agree with your rating this year's oline as even with last year's. imo there was a big drop in play right across the board this season.

There is no doubt Hamilton and Wiegman had disappointing seasons. Whether because of age, system, or a combination of both, I don't know, but their play certainly slipped.

Kuper might be the same, hard to say. Maybe playing between a pro-bowl centre and Harris made Kupe look better than he is (having a QB that could escape pressure up the middle and a system that moved the pocket probably helped as well). Or its possible the discontinuity due to the injuries/replacements coupled with learning/re-learning a new blocking scheme make this season just a blip on Kuper's development.

Clady wasn't as good either. He was still great, but not all-world like he was as a rookie. I expect him to be great again next year though, and establish himself as best LT in the game.

and of course Harris missed a bunch of games, which count in the end of season stats. He looked great before he got hurt, but clearly Polumbus<Harris.

and of course inferior oline play impacts all the skill positions. I do agree that McDaniel's play-calling and game-planning wasn't perfect and needs to get better (I think it will), but I disagree that McD had the same offense simply because our oline play decreased so drastically.

I didn't say the line played as well, clearly they played less. My point was that talent wise, except at QB, across the board we have the same players as last year or have upgraded. QB is the only position where we potentially downgraded. Every other offensive and defensive spot returned the same player or was upgraded.

[The Glue Factory]

It happens a lot. A HC doesn't do great at his first gig, as he is learning the ropes. The owner cuts him loose after the normal 2-3 years, right as the pieces that the rook HC put in place are just about ready to pay off. The HC goes on to have success elsewhere, while his new team hires new coach that starts over with his new philosophy and starts that 2-3 year cycle of failure all over again.

It's the reason so many teams have coaching carousels and so few teams ever have coaches with tenures like Fisher, Shanahan and Cowher.

If that's the case with McDaniels, how long would you give him in Denver if 2 or 3 years from now we're finishing 9-7, 8-8? With that you're saying I'm willing to give him at least 4 or 5 years but years 4 and 5 had better include at least one trip to the playoffs (even if it's one and done.)

Shanahan defintely had it much easier when he inherited Elway. I wonder what things had been like if he hadn't have come in until after Elway had retired.

[Tned]

Great post Tned, but I do have to agree with Ziggy and BC about our O line. Hamilton was not the same guy if he was he would not have been replaced, he and Casey just were getting thrown around. Also we have gone over a bunch the difference with Harris out there and him not being out there. I think he and Kuper had a much better chemistry. I does all begin in the trenches, both sides.

The thing I'm hoping is that Coach learns from his mistakes. The first is to keep it all behind closed doors. The second is to learn that you may have a scheme but adjustments to deal with current personal is smart management.

Of course the line didn't play as well, but we moved from a zone blocking scheme where a small LG like Hamilton can hold his own (barely) to a slow devloping, power blocking scheme. We also switched from a mobile QB to a completely immobile QB, which effectively made our pass protection worse. Last year, Cutler would have left the pocket before most of those guys that eventually got passed Clady got to the QB. Most of the times when Clady is beat, it is someone who is pushed outside and circles completely around, in a very slow developing sack.

Also, before we completely trash the O-line, let's remember that Buckhalter was able to get 5.4 YPC, which puts him 11th in the league in '09.

Much of the 'failure' of the line is based on Moreno's 3.9 YPC and poor play calling (or at least un-imaginative) on the goal line.

That aside, again, my point was that except at QB, every position on defense and offense returned the same player or was upgraded. If the team was worse, it was due to the change in scheme, not because the talent level was worse.

Now, certainly the defensive scheme change was needed and resulted in better play. That paid off immediately in just about all ways you measure a defense.

On offense, it's a different story. A scheme change wasn't necessary. It's certainly understandable that a new, offensive minded head coach would want to change to his scheme, but it wasn't necessary. Coach McDaniels changed the QB, changed the scheme and the offense struggled greatly. You can't blame that on Hamilton and Wiegmen, you certainly can't blame it on a worse group of players (as he changed the QB, and the RB's were upgraded and everyone else were the same), so the offensive woes are fully on the coach's shoulders.

Now, as I have said, I am not even saying his decisions are wrong. I accept that when a coach comes in he is going to want to rebuild the team (players and scheme) in a way that he thinks will ultimatly produce a winner, but you simply can't blame it on the talent being worse in '09 than '08, because it isn't true.

If McDaniels had been able to have the same immediate results on his talented offense, as Nolan had on the defensive side of the ball, we would be talking about Denver's playoff game this weekend.

[Ravage!!!]

Shanahan may not have come here. We may have never won a Super Bowl, either. Elway never even went to a Super Bowl when Shanahan wasn't either the OC or HC.

[Tned]

If that's the case with McDaniels, how long would you give him in Denver if 2 or 3 years from now we're finishing 9-7, 8-8? With that you're saying I'm willing to give him at least 4 or 5 years but years 4 and 5 had better include at least one trip to the playoffs (even if it's one and done.)

Shanahan defintely had it much easier when he inherited Elway. I wonder what things had been like if he hadn't have come in until after Elway had retired.

Hard to say, it would probably depend on if the team appears to be improving or treading water.

I think coaching carosels are bad for a team, but so is being stuck with the wrong head coach.

While I think Orton is a stand up guy, I am not sure if the problems this year are from Orton or McDaniels play calling. If the problem is Orton, unless we can produce a league-leading type running game, we likely will not win the way we stand now.

Trading away our first rounder this year from a second round draft pick, was not very smart and takes away a lot of maneuving this year that could address the QB spot, as well as other spots (probably why Bowlen referred to McDaniels making rookie mistakes, when he was interviewed right after the draft).

I don't think you can say today, that McDaniels should get 4-5 years, but if in '10 and '11, the Broncos look like they are close, maybe just a QB away from being dominant, then hopefully Bowlen has the patience to give him another year or two.

While I am critical of some of what McDaniels has done (I don't believe in orange colored glasses where you must be 100% positive), I am very bullish on him as a coach in general.

[EMB6903]

Looks to me like he's pointing out games like Miami, where the defense actually did show up, and if it wasn't for Cutler single handilly giving Miami half of their total points, Denver would have won that game. In spite of the offense.

I do remember our defense giving up a 3rd and 24 in the 4th quarter of that game.

[HORSEPOWER 56]

I know a lot of folks seem to be content with how the year turned out because many weren't giving us much chance to be successful with a new HC, so 8-8 was a success to many.

The only thing I'd like to point out is that Bowlen fired Shanahan because of inability to make the playoffs and his inflexibility when it came to his coaching decisions (specifically Slowik).


It really doesn't matter what WE think about McDaniels' job this year. Bowlen expressed support for McD, but I guarantee you that it was Bowlen being Bowlen. Bowlen told Shanahan he pretty much could stay "as long as he liked" and then fired him 2 years later. Bowlen always supports his coach publicly. Bowlen did not fire Shanahan and bring in McDaniels to go 8-8. Bowlen expected better. He's not looking to find a coach to "rebuild". He wants to win, NOW. I don't think McD gets 3-4 years to build a contender. I think he gets this year and that's it. Bowlen is tired of waiting for playoff teams, hence why he fired Shanahan. He won't wait for McD. If there are no playoff wins this year, I don't think McDaniels gets another year.

[Northman]

I know a lot of folks seem to be content with how the year turned out because many weren't giving us much chance to be successful with a new HC, so 8-8 was a success to many.

The only thing I'd like to point out is that Bowlen fired Shanahan because of inability to make the playoffs and his inflexibility when it came to his coaching decisions (specifically Slowik).


It really doesn't matter what WE think about McDaniels' job this year. Bowlen expressed support for McD, but I guarantee you that it was Bowlen being Bowlen. Bowlen told Shanahan he pretty much could stay "as long as he liked" and then fired him 2 years later. Bowlen always supports his coach publicly. Bowlen did not fire Shanahan and bring in McDaniels to go 8-8. Bowlen expected better. He's not looking to find a coach to "rebuild". He wants to win, NOW. I don't think McD gets 3-4 years to build a contender. I think he gets this year and that's it. Bowlen is tired of waiting for playoff teams, hence why he fired Shanahan. He won't wait for McD. If there are no playoff wins this year, I don't think McDaniels gets another year.

See ya in 2 years.

[HORSEPOWER 56]

See ya in 2 years.

What happens in two years?

[Tned]

What happens in two years?

He means McDaniels is safe for '10 and '11, and won't be fired after '10, even if we don't win any playoff games. I agree with North. It's VERY unlikely McDaniels would be fired after '10. It would take a monumentally bad '10 to get McDaniels fired.

[Lonestar]

Harris was hurt this year, Kup was playing injured most of the year, and the play of both Hamilton and Weigman declined. Our O-line was nowhere near the level it was last season. Although I was an advocate of trading Cutler, he did avoid sacks much better than Orton. At times he has a quick release, he has more mobility, and can make throws down the field with only a small window. Hence, he made the offensive line look better in pass protection than they actually were.

while cutler was more mobile I doubt even he could have avoided most of those sacks this year.. the middle of the online was getting forced back into the pocket, and when the DE's or outside blitz was going on Orton had no where to go but down..

hamilton has been a liability for years against good to Great DT/NT do not know how many times he was pushed back into the QB starting with dingier change in 2006, to pocket drop back passing style of O..

[HORSEPOWER 56]

He means McDaniels is safe for '10 and '11, and won't be fired after '10, even if we don't win any playoff games. I agree with North. It's VERY unlikely McDaniels would be fired after '10. It would take a monumentally bad '10 to get McDaniels fired.

That really depends how Bowlen sees it, i guess. I got this feeling last year when Shanahan was fired and McDaniels was hired that Bowlen was tired of mediocre football in Denver. Not losing football, mind you. We haven't been perennial losers in over a quarter century. Bowlen expects wins, period.

There are too many big name coaches on the market if McDaniels doesn't get us back in the win column. I think Bowlen wants a quick fix. I think if he doesn't get his way, there's a very good chance that we have a new HC sooner than later. Why else do you pull the trigger on firing your SB winning coach after an 8-8 season? Jeff Fisher and Bill Cowher have had down years and they were always given leeway. Both have had worse years than Shanahan ever did with Denver, but yet they stayed on. Bowlen wants wins. Shanahan wasn't getting them and wasn't improving the team fast enough. I just don't think he's going to give McDaniels very long to work his Bellichick magic here. If McDaniels ends up 8-8 or less this year, I think he's on the hot seat at least. The year after? He's gone.

[Tned]

while cutler was more mobile I doubt even he could have avoided most of those sacks this year.. the middle of the online was getting forced back into the pocket, and when the DE's or outside blitz was going on Orton had no where to go but down..


Sometimes there was no place to go but down, but many times he could have stepped out of the pocket, if he had the mobility to do so, but he didn't.

Take most of the Clady sacks (or when Clady was beat, even if the sack wasn't charged against him). A guy rushes on the outside, Clady shoves him wide, he circles deep and around Clady, while Orton just stands there. Finally, Orton takes a step or two forward, and if he can't find a receiver, gets sacked by the guy beating Clady or another linemen. In many cases, he could have stepped up and to the left, out of the pocket, as Clady was pushing the guy to the righ and around the pocket.

Think how bad the line was with Jake and Cutler's first two years, and how few sacks there was, because those guys got out of the pocket before it collapsed. Not saying either of them would have done better this year, don't want to start that discussion, but in terms of mobility and sacks, mobility clearly reduces sacks and helps the O-line.

[HORSEPOWER 56]

while cutler was more mobile I doubt even he could have avoided most of those sacks this year.. the middle of the online was getting forced back into the pocket, and when the DE's or outside blitz was going on Orton had no where to go but down..

hamilton has been a liability for years against good to Great DT/NT do not know how many times he was pushed back into the QB starting with dingier change in 2006, to pocket drop back passing style of O..

For all the times you've said it, JR, I just don't remember all this "offensive line being pushed into the pocket and into Orton's face" stuff. The Offensive line was weak at running in the middle late in the season, but short of poor blitz pickup, opposing defenses weren't just blowing up the middle of the O-line and getting into Orton's face every play. Most of his sacks were from the outside because Clady, Harris or Polumbus pushed the DE's outside the pocKet and Orton didn't step up he stood there, let the DE swoop around the tackle and grab him.

There were no fast developing pass plays longer than 5 yards from this offense this year. Almost all of Orton's sacks could've been avoided by pocket presence.

[TXBRONC]

For all the times you've said it, JR, I just don't remember all this "offensive line being pushed into the pocket and into Orton's face" stuff. The Offensive line was weak at running in the middle late in the season, but short of poor blitz pickup, opposing defenses weren't just blowing up the middle of the O-line and getting into Orton's face every play. Most of his sacks were from the outside because Clady, Harris or Polumbus pushed the DE's outside the pocKet and Orton didn't step up he stood there, let the DE swoop around the tackle and grab him.

There were no fast developing pass plays longer than 5 yards from this offense this year. Almost all of Orton's sacks could've been avoided by pocket presence.

It happened occasionally, certainly not with frequency that is being claimed. This year when sacks came from the middle it was more because of a missed assignment in picking up the blitz or and the running back getting over powered by the blitzer. Even that being true, Orton has tendency to hold onto the ball to long.

[Tned]

It happened occasionally, certainly not with frequency that is being claimed. This year when sacks came from the middle it was more because of a missed assignment in picking up the blitz or and the running back getting over powered by the blitzer. Even that being true, Orton has tendency to hold onto the ball to long.

There were plenty of times when Orton could have taken off running and picked up a first down, or at least 5 yards or so, and I only remember him doing it once.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

There were plenty of times when Orton could have taken off running and picked up a first down, or at least 5 yards or so, and I only remember him doing it once.

Before or after ankle injury?

[Northman]

Before or after ankle injury?

Honestly, i have to agree with Tned ankle injury or not. If we expect other players to step and make plays than that applies to Orton as well. I didnt get to see the last few games but judging by what i was reading there were instances where Orton could of ran for a first instead of trying to pass. When the playoffs and game is on the line you have to make plays. I know Orton isnt Manning but when the opportunity is there you have to know when to do it yourself.

[Tned]

Before or after ankle injury?

Both.

[Tned]

Honestly, i have to agree with Tned ankle injury or not. If we expect other players to step and make plays than that applies to Orton as well. I didnt get to see the last few games but judging by what i was reading there were instances where Orton could of ran for a first instead of trying to pass. When the playoffs and game is on the line you have to make plays. I know Orton isnt Manning but when the opportunity is there you have to know when to do it yourself.

I thnk it was the Philly game, where he kind of broke out of the pocket, the field wide open in front of him, where there was a solid chance to pick up the first, he then pulled up at the LOS, danced there for a bit, then fired a rocket low and away from a receiver for an incompletion.

Actually, changing gears a bit, seeing some of the heaters he has thrown on short passes (often resulting in incompletions, because they were too hard for such a short pass), I am still baffled why we had no mid-to-deep passing game. He clearly has the arm strength to make the throws (not when on the run, but when making a proper throw, stepping in to it), but they threw the deep ball only a couple times a game (sometimes not even that much).

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Honestly, i have to agree with Tned ankle injury or not. If we expect other players to step and make plays than that applies to Orton as well. I didnt get to see the last few games but judging by what i was reading there were instances where Orton could of ran for a first instead of trying to pass. When the playoffs and game is on the line you have to make plays. I know Orton isnt Manning but when the opportunity is there you have to know when to do it yourself.

I was not disagreeing - I remember a few times after the ankle injury, but could not remember if there were times he could have run before the injury, but did not.

[TXBRONC]

Before or after ankle injury?

He did it the last game of year so that definitey was after he injuried his ankle.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

I remember watching other quarterbacks - whether Broncos or quarterbacks on other teams, and after they threw an incompleted pass or even an interception, to me it was obvious that they could have ran the ball themselves.

[Tned]

I remember watching other quarterbacks - whether Broncos or quarterbacks on other teams, and after they threw an incompleted pass or even an interception, to me it was obvious that they could have ran the ball themselves.

Nobody said he was the only QB to never tuck the ball and run, just that he had many opportunities to do so where he didn't. Also, that his lack of mobility and lack of pocket presence led to many sacks where our previous mobile QBs wouldn't have been sacked.

[TXBRONC]

I remember watching other quarterbacks - whether Broncos or quarterbacks on other teams, and after they threw an incompleted pass or even an interception, to me it was obvious that they could have ran the ball themselves.

The quarterbacks of other teams are irrelevant. Orton's shortcoming in this area is all that matter. Besides the fact that he's Denver's starting quarterback it's a consistent problem for him.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Nobody said he was the only QB to never tuck the ball and run, just that he had many opportunities to do so where he didn't. Also, that his lack of mobility and lack of pocket presence led to many sacks where our previous mobile QBs wouldn't have been sacked.

I know that no one said that he was the only QB to never tuck the ball and run. I simply made a statement, based on my observations. I know that is why some quarterbacks are labeled as "mobile", and some are not.

[Tned]

I know that no one said that he was the only QB to never tuck the ball and run. I simply made a statement, based on my observations. I know that is why some quarterbacks are labeled as "mobile", and some are not.

No, 'mobile' is more related to whether they stand like a statue in the pocket or can slide out and avoid the sack. Tucking and running isn't something that has to be done on every play. There are a few QBs that run as their first or second option, but they are rare.

What we are talking about is that when the play breaks down and the fields is wide open in front of them, taking the option of picking up 5-10 yards.

More important than even running for a first down here or there is having the pocket presence to get out of the pocket when it's breaking down. Orton didn't do that much this year. More times than not he hung in the pocket until he was sacked, even when he had the opportunity to extend the play by moving.

[spikerman]

There's been a little discussion about whether McDaniels should get one or two (or more) years. I have to admit that I'm not sold on him. Yes the 6-0 start was great (I started sipping the koolaid), but the fact that the Broncos finished the last 10 games only slightly better than the Rams and Lions really tarnishes the season in my eyes.

That being said, I agree that the Broncos have to give him at least one more year. If the team is much improved that would be great and I would happily back McD. After all, the name of the game is winning and if he makes the team win I'd be a big fan of his. Now, for the people who are wholeheartedly supporting him, how much, if any, improvement does the team have to show in 2010 to guarantee a third year? Do you believe that no matter what, he should automatically get three; or, if the team shows no improvement or regresses, should a change be considered?

Personally, I think he has to show improvement next year. I think the team has to make the playoffs with a better than 8-8 record to bring him back. This year he can say he was installing the "system" and had to work with a lot of inherited players, but next year I think he has to take ownership of the results. I'll also be very interested to see how his public interaction with the players changes. Basically, I think he has to show how much he learned this year before that third year should be guaranteed.

Of course, PB has "hung his hat" on McDaniels and I'm not sure he'd be quick to admit a mistake if McDaniels can't improve on this year.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

With one year being under Coach's belt, I would hope this year would be much easier for him to evaluate the talent on the team, to evaluate which players fit his scheme, which don't. I would think it would be much easier to evaluate talent from actual games. This year, besides last year's game films, which may not have served much purpose, as the schemes were different, before the season started, all he had to evaluate on was training camp. I am willing to give him his 3 years. Even if he knows where the team lacked talent, will he be able to bring in enough free agents, will he be able to draft everyone he wants, will he be able to trade for players he wants, all before the next season starts?

[spikerman]

With one year being under Coach's belt, I would hope this year would be much easier for him to evaluate the talent on the team, to evaluate which players fit his scheme, which don't. I would think it would be much easier to evaluate talent from actual games. This year, besides last year's game films, which may not have served much purpose, as the schemes were different, before the season started, all he had to evaluate on was training camp. I am willing to give him his 3 years. Even if he knows where the team lacked talent, will he be able to bring in enough free agents, will he be able to draft everyone he wants, will he be able to trade for players he wants, all before the next season starts?

I see where you're coming from, but sometimes part of being a successful coach is winning with the players you have and not necessarily with the players you want.

[Ravage!!!]

Next season will be telling. You bring a lot of criticisms on yourself when you get rid of a pro-bowl QB, then follow that up with trading away a 2time pro-bowl WR, both under the age of 25 in your first two seasons as an NFL coach.

If that works, then you have quieted the critics. But until it works, you have brought more eyes watching you, and given more ammo to be fired back at you.

If McD is able to improve the offense despite losing talent, then he obviously earns another season, without question. If the offense continues to drop at this rate again next season, then you have to take a cynical look.

Then there is the defense, of course. This year we had the benefit of shutting teams out in the second half for 5 consecutive games. We lost when we weren't able to do that. So what defense do we have next season is again a question mark.

As of right now.....no matter whom you wish to blame... the Broncos have MORE holes to fill this coming season than they did last year.

[spikerman]

All I know is next year I'm not getting my hopes up until I see the Broncos win a game in December.

[frauschieze]

Completely unrelated to the thread topic but I
would really like to say it's SO wonderfully nice to read a
discussion of the team. There's disagreement and
dissension, but it's civil and much more debate like.

Thank you everyone. It's a pleasant change from the way
things were for much of the season.

[silkamilkamonico]

I do remember our defense giving up a 3rd and 24 in the 4th quarter of that game.

OIf Jay Cutler didn't say "f it" and throw that interception for the TD earlier the defense wouldn;t have been in that position. He should have known our defense wasn't that good.

[HORSEPOWER 56]

I thnk it was the Philly game, where he kind of broke out of the pocket, the field wide open in front of him, where there was a solid chance to pick up the first, he then pulled up at the LOS, danced there for a bit, then fired a rocket low and away from a receiver for an incompletion.

Actually, changing gears a bit, seeing some of the heaters he has thrown on short passes (often resulting in incompletions, because they were too hard for such a short pass), I am still baffled why we had no mid-to-deep passing game. He clearly has the arm strength to make the throws (not when on the run, but when making a proper throw, stepping in to it), but they threw the deep ball only a couple times a game (sometimes not even that much).

JDL made a fantastic post about Orton's throwing ability last week. He points out that Orton doesn't do a good job hitting receivers in stride and displays several compelling arguments. We run the type of offense we do because of Orton's lack of downfield accuracy. It's also a reason smaller, faster WRs like Stokely and Royal haven't been as effective in this offense because their effectiveness is based on movement and speed, not on just being a big target like Marshall and Gaffney. The reason for all the curls and screens are so Orton can throw at a stationary target (a WR at the top of a route). Even then his short passes are rarely perfect and the WRs often have to compensate and adjust their body or go up or down for over/under thrown balls.

[TXBRONC]

I am still baffled why we had no mid-to-deep passing game.

Some people wont like the question and will take offense but I wonder if has anything to do with what McDaniels believes about Orton's abilities?

[arapaho2]

With one year being under Coach's belt, I would hope this year would be much easier for him to evaluate the talent on the team, to evaluate which players fit his scheme, which don't. I would think it would be much easier to evaluate talent from actual games. This year, besides last year's game films, which may not have served much purpose, as the schemes were different, before the season started, all he had to evaluate on was training camp. I am willing to give him his 3 years. Even if he knows where the team lacked talent, will he be able to bring in enough free agents, will he be able to draft everyone he wants, will he be able to trade for players he wants, all before the next season starts?

problem with this in my eyes, is great coaches plan a offense or defense around a great player rather then chase them off because they dont fit into the mold you want..you tweek it to utilize them

whats next?..based on 09 clady, kuper dont fit the power run scheme very well...so lets trade them

[nevcraw]

I will stick to my preseason take.. if not 9-7 or better. Fail.

it was playoffs or bust.. they didnt make it. it's no longer a patient landscape.