PDA

View Full Version : Broncos suspected Nolan Tampering



rationalfan
01-25-2010, 02:43 PM
Per PFT:

A week after Broncos defensive coordinator Mike Nolan left the team, details are still trickling out regarding the circumstances that led to his 24-hour journey from Denver to Miami. (Or was it Milan to Minsk?)

Per a league source, the Broncos immediately suspected upon receiving a form requesting permission to interview Nolan for the same job in Miami that the Dolphins had been talking to Nolan, which would be a clear violation of the tampering rules.

But the source says the Broncos didn't care, because they were ready to part ways with Nolan. Nolan and coach Josh McDaniels were "too much alike," the source said, and so they routinely butted heads.

So, as Jason La Canfora of NFL.com recently reported, the split didn't occur because McDaniels told Nolan that the Broncos were going to stop blitzing, but because McDaniels and Nolan simply could no longer coexist. Miami's attempt to hire Nolan simply provided both sides with an escape route.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/01/25/broncos-suspected-tampering-but-were-happy-to-let-nolan-go/

Lonestar
01-25-2010, 02:53 PM
QUE boo birds.

Three

Two.

One.

This should be fun to read.


Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel.

Nomad
01-25-2010, 02:59 PM
I don't care anymore, just want the BRONCOS to move forward and start thinking FA and draft and fixing these lines!!

Overtime
01-25-2010, 03:00 PM
i hope the Fins are guilty, so they can give us a draft pick as compensation. we'll take that first rounder off your hands....:D

topscribe
01-25-2010, 03:04 PM
i hope the Fins are guilty, so they can give us a draft pick as compensation. we'll take that first rounder off your hands....:D

True, come to think of it.

Maybe they should go after the Dolphins for that reason alone . . .

-----

Denver Native (Carol)
01-25-2010, 03:24 PM
Claymore posted this article by Florio in an existing thread, and in that thread, I made the following post:

just found a few more tidbits in regards to Dolphins tampering - both in this article:

http://www.thephins.com/2010/01/19/d...th-mike-nolan/


"No tampering evidence yet. But this Dolphins regime tends to bend rules. It did so with the Ayodele/Fasano trade and does so w/ injuries."

AND -

"Would the Dolphins even know to tamper with Nolan if they didn’t first get word that he wanted out of Denver?"

KyleOrtonArmySoldier#128
01-25-2010, 03:26 PM
Second, third, and fourth rounders please.

G_Money
01-25-2010, 04:31 PM
The only benefit I can see to Nolan being gone is that he had no clue how to build a D-Line in SF, so I was doubting our ability to correct that deficiency here.

Now we'll get to find out if McDaniels or the new DC can (this post assumes McDaniels isn't the new DC too).

As to whether he was tampered with...if he was happy with McDaniels there would be nothing to tamper with. *shrugs* I don't care if he was tampered with or not, Josh did his own tampering during the season from all appearances, and that set the stage for this.

It's his right - he's the head man. He can tamper with the roster and coaches and FO staff to his heart's content, because no one's telling him otherwise. Now we'll see if it was the right move. Eventually he's gonna have to make a right move...

~G

Hoser
01-25-2010, 04:34 PM
I blame McDaniels! It's all his fault!

G_Money
01-25-2010, 04:44 PM
Maybe Nolan's impossible to work with, as he just lost his HC job and saw a punk kid raised above him.

Maybe philosophically they couldn't get along.

Ditka couldn't stand Buddy Ryan, but he let the dude coach a SB defense for him.

Again, I'm waiting for the "Josh McDaniels tosses problem X overboard and gets better because of it" moment. If his relationship with Nolan was a problem for either personal or professional reasons, then he's solved it by ditching Nolan.

Now I want to see a defense that still stops the pass and improves against the run in some significant way that Nolan couldn't or wouldn't do because of his scheme.

I'm not wedded to any coach or player on the Broncos - I just don't want to see us fall further down the food chain in the AFC. We want to move up, not down, and I will get behind any change that makes that happen.

Tossing out the first good DC we've had in a few years seems like a bad solution to a problem. Maybe the replacement will be better than Nolan could have been.

If not, then I'm not wedded to McDaniels as the guy who should call the shots either - especially if he doesn't start making some of these called shots.

~G

CoachChaz
01-25-2010, 04:49 PM
Maybe Nolan's impossible to work with, as he just lost his HC job and saw a punk kid raised above him.

Maybe philosophically they couldn't get along.

Ditka couldn't stand Buddy Ryan, but he let the dude coach a SB defense for him.

Again, I'm waiting for the "Josh McDaniels tosses problem X overboard and gets better because of it" moment. If his relationship with Nolan was a problem for either personal or professional reasons, then he's solved it by ditching Nolan.

Now I want to see a defense that still stops the pass and improves against the run in some significant way that Nolan couldn't or wouldn't do because of his scheme.
I'm not wedded to any coach or player on the Broncos - I just don't want to see us fall further down the food chain in the AFC. We want to move up, not down, and I will get behind any change that makes that happen.

Tossing out the first good DC we've had in a few years seems like a bad solution to a problem. Maybe the replacement will be better than Nolan could have been.

If not, then I'm not wedded to McDaniels as the guy who should call the shots either - especially if he doesn't start making some of these called shots.

~G

This only happens with better personnel...and when we get the better personnel and improve the defense...the better personnel will be the reason why we improved...Not because McD made a change.

It's a no win situation founded on the fact that fans fear change and expect miracles. makes sense though

Dean
01-25-2010, 04:59 PM
I would have liked them to file a grievance. Maybe you get nothing out of it; maybe you end up with a pick.

G_Money
01-25-2010, 05:11 PM
If we improve the personnel and get better, then you can't really talk about how Nolan "would have done better."

It works both ways tho - if Nolan goes berzerk in Miami and has a stellar D down there, then people who support that move can say "well, we didn't have that personnel here, so we still shouldn't have kept him." I'm sure firing Shanahan from the Raiders was fine because they didn't have the personnel at the time to win anything, so what good could Shanny really have done?

I want to see improvement with a new scheme. Bringing in better players? Well maybe Nolan would have advised Josh to take different players, so having the new DC with a bigger voice will help get the better personnel in. But if we still suck on the DL and switch back to run-blitzing to try to solve our problems, then there will have been no improvements made - other than Josh having fewer people disagreeing with him on the coaching staff.

Which might allow him to coach the O better, who knows?

I'm just waiting to understand the plan. We moved away from the ZBS without the proper players to do so, traded QBs to no net effect except draft picks, then took one and parlayed what would have been perhaps the top corner in the draft into one who can't figure out slot coverage because we didn't do a lot of homework on the draft...because we fired our draft people...

...Stacked our draftpicks and FA acquisitions in the defensive backfield where Nolan knows what he's doing, then parted ways with Nolan because he did exactly what we hoped he would do as a coach with the personnel we gave him...

There's just a lot of strange moves. It's pretty remarkable that we were .500 this year. I still think it was about as good a year as I could have expected, but I wanted to have it while locking up our FA receiver and OG and OLB, allowing our good coaching hires to get settled and improve, etc.

Instead several members of the coaching staff decided they'd like it better elsewhere, and several players apparently feel the same.

Which leaves us patching holes instead of making progress.

I try not to hold things against McDaniels that he hasn't done. But since nothing in the org happens without his approval, that means everything is by his design. And I can't figure out the design. It's obscure and convoluted, and absolutely not the shortest path between the two points of losing and winning.

As long as we get to winning, I'll take the bumpy road.

How long are you willing to wait for the winning before you make a call as to the odds of getting there, Coach? That's not about placing blame, that's about judging risk.

Dumping Nolan? It increases the risk. Maybe he wanted to be dumped, or arranged to be dumped, but regardless betting on a new DC is riskier than sticking with the one we had.

Hopefully it pays off with a nice reward. We could use it.

~G

broncofaninfla
01-25-2010, 05:22 PM
Nolan turned down Packers gig last year

Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on January 25, 2010 3:22 PM ET
We love reading local coverage of the Packers because it's obvious the readership (and writers) love everything about football: the backstories, the strategy, the profile on the 47th guy on the roster.

We love the minutia too, which is a long way of explaining why we're posting an item on Mike Nolan turning down the Packers . . . a year ago. If Packers fans care, so do we.

Greg A. Bedard of the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reports that Nolan turned down Packers coach Mike McCarthy when he offered the defensive coordinator position last offseason. Ultimately, the gig went to Dom Capers.

Nolan said he made the decision to turn the job down for family reasons.

"You could say, 'Well, now you're in Miami so I'm not really buying that reason,'" Nolan said. "But I had a son who was a senior [in high school] and it was important for me to stay close."

Nolan would up leaving Denver after just one season because he wasn't able to work with Josh McDaniels. Capers did quite well until the playoffs. And that's the rest of the story.

NightTrainLayne
01-25-2010, 05:24 PM
Nolan turned down Packers gig last year

Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on January 25, 2010 3:22 PM ET
We love reading local coverage of the Packers because it's obvious the readership (and writers) love everything about football: the backstories, the strategy, the profile on the 47th guy on the roster.

We love the minutia too, which is a long way of explaining why we're posting an item on Mike Nolan turning down the Packers . . . a year ago. If Packers fans care, so do we.

Greg A. Bedard of the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reports that Nolan turned down Packers coach Mike McCarthy when he offered the defensive coordinator position last offseason. Ultimately, the gig went to Dom Capers.

Nolan said he made the decision to turn the job down for family reasons.

"You could say, 'Well, now you're in Miami so I'm not really buying that reason,'" Nolan said. "But I had a son who was a senior [in high school] and it was important for me to stay close."

Nolan would up leaving Denver after just one season because he wasn't able to work with Josh McDaniels. Capers did quite well until the playoffs. And that's the rest of the story.

Was Nolan's son going to High School in Denver?

Northman
01-25-2010, 05:25 PM
PFT. lmao

Lonestar
01-25-2010, 05:26 PM
If we improve the personnel and get better, then you can't really talk about how Nolan "would have done better."

It works both ways tho - if Nolan goes berzerk in Miami and has a stellar D down there, then people who support that move can say "well, we didn't have that personnel here, so we still shouldn't have kept him." I'm sure firing Shanahan from the Raiders was fine because they didn't have the personnel at the time to win anything, so what good could Shanny really have done?

I want to see improvement with a new scheme. Bringing in better players? Well maybe Nolan would have advised Josh to take different players, so having the new DC with a bigger voice will help get the better personnel in. But if we still suck on the DL and switch back to run-blitzing to try to solve our problems, then there will have been no improvements made - other than Josh having fewer people disagreeing with him on the coaching staff.

Which might allow him to coach the O better, who knows?

I'm just waiting to understand the plan. We moved away from the ZBS without the proper players to do so, traded QBs to no net effect except draft picks, then took one and parlayed what would have been perhaps the top corner in the draft into one who can't figure out slot coverage because we didn't do a lot of homework on the draft...because we fired our draft people...

...Stacked our draftpicks and FA acquisitions in the defensive backfield where Nolan knows what he's doing, then parted ways with Nolan because he did exactly what we hoped he would do as a coach with the personnel we gave him...

There's just a lot of strange moves. It's pretty remarkable that we were .500 this year. I still think it was about as good a year as I could have expected, but I wanted to have it while locking up our FA receiver and OG and OLB, allowing our good coaching hires to get settled and improve, etc.

Instead several members of the coaching staff decided they'd like it better elsewhere, and several players apparently feel the same.

Which leaves us patching holes instead of making progress.

I try not to hold things against McDaniels that he hasn't done. But since nothing in the org happens without his approval, that means everything is by his design. And I can't figure out the design. It's obscure and convoluted, and absolutely not the shortest path between the two points of losing and winning.

As long as we get to winning, I'll take the bumpy road.

How long are you willing to wait for the winning before you make a call as to the odds of getting there, Coach? That's not about placing blame, that's about judging risk.

Dumping Nolan? It increases the risk. Maybe he wanted to be dumped, or arranged to be dumped, but regardless betting on a new DC is riskier than sticking with the one we had.

Hopefully it pays off with a nice reward. We could use it.

~G


Perhaps you are on to something here. Maybe he found out that him and Josh were not a marriage made in heaven and after the Bye week when the defense seemed to fall apart he got so much heat for improvement that he decided to put out feelers about moving on, If any came back positive maybe he did to do all he could those last few games?

Just throwing out an Idea here , nothing to back it up when I read that comment it struck me as MAYBE. Nothing else really makes sense.

broncofaninfla
01-25-2010, 05:28 PM
If the Fins were guilty of tampering, Mcd would have called them out publicly, he's proven he loves to do that.

Ziggy
01-25-2010, 06:22 PM
Even if the Fins did tamper and get picks taken away, they don't go to us. The Fins just lose them.

Lonestar
01-25-2010, 06:48 PM
Even if the Fins did tamper and get picks taken away, they don't go to us. The Fins just lose them.


Are you sure we do not get compensation?

Crush05
01-25-2010, 08:03 PM
All I have to say is if he did not want to be here then we are better of to have someone who wants to be here. Good Luck Nolan!

dogfish
01-25-2010, 08:37 PM
So, as Jason La Canfora of NFL.com recently reported, the split didn't occur because McDaniels told Nolan that the Broncos were going to stop blitzing, but because McDaniels and Nolan simply could no longer coexist. Miami's attempt to hire Nolan simply provided both sides with an escape route.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/01/25/broncos-suspected-tampering-but-were-happy-to-let-nolan-go/

oh. . . well, that's reassuring!

:laugh:

nevcraw
01-25-2010, 09:21 PM
If we improve the personnel and get better, then you can't really talk about how Nolan "would have done better."

It works both ways tho - if Nolan goes berzerk in Miami and has a stellar D down there, then people who support that move can say "well, we didn't have that personnel here, so we still shouldn't have kept him." I'm sure firing Shanahan from the Raiders was fine because they didn't have the personnel at the time to win anything, so what good could Shanny really have done?

I want to see improvement with a new scheme. Bringing in better players? Well maybe Nolan would have advised Josh to take different players, so having the new DC with a bigger voice will help get the better personnel in. But if we still suck on the DL and switch back to run-blitzing to try to solve our problems, then there will have been no improvements made - other than Josh having fewer people disagreeing with him on the coaching staff.

Which might allow him to coach the O better, who knows?

I'm just waiting to understand the plan. We moved away from the ZBS without the proper players to do so, traded QBs to no net effect except draft picks, then took one and parlayed what would have been perhaps the top corner in the draft into one who can't figure out slot coverage because we didn't do a lot of homework on the draft...because we fired our draft people...

...Stacked our draftpicks and FA acquisitions in the defensive backfield where Nolan knows what he's doing, then parted ways with Nolan because he did exactly what we hoped he would do as a coach with the personnel we gave him...
There's just a lot of strange moves. It's pretty remarkable that we were .500 this year. I still think it was about as good a year as I could have expected, but I wanted to have it while locking up our FA receiver and OG and OLB, allowing our good coaching hires to get settled and improve, etc.

Instead several members of the coaching staff decided they'd like it better elsewhere, and several players apparently feel the same.
Which leaves us patching holes instead of making progress.

I try not to hold things against McDaniels that he hasn't done. But since nothing in the org happens without his approval, that means everything is by his design. And I can't figure out the design. It's obscure and convoluted, and absolutely not the shortest path between the two points of losing and winning.

As long as we get to winning, I'll take the bumpy road.

How long are you willing to wait for the winning before you make a call as to the odds of getting there, Coach? That's not about placing blame, that's about judging risk.

Dumping Nolan? It increases the risk. Maybe he wanted to be dumped, or arranged to be dumped, but regardless betting on a new DC is riskier than sticking with the one we had.

Hopefully it pays off with a nice reward. We could use it.

~G

Spot on G.

It appears as though the coach decided that wholesale destruction of former team was essential, but didn't choose to do it last year.?.

The frustrating part for fans is the logic is untraceable nor explained. The coach has also shown an early pattern for conflict.

If the result equals win then the why's and how's mean little but if not they will mean everything...