PDA

View Full Version : Getting it Done (McDaniels in year two)



WARHORSE
03-11-2010, 03:47 AM
By Gray Caldwell
DenverBroncos.com

ENGLEWOOD, Colo. -- Since Head Coach Josh McDaniels got into coaching, he hasn't experienced a losing season. He hadn't even been a part of a .500 year, as he accumulated a 121-36 record heading into his first season as a head coach.

The day after a Week 17 loss dropped the Broncos to 8-8 in 2009, McDaniels spoke about the way his inaugural season on the job came to a close.

"It doesn't feel very good," he said. "I want to do better, I can do better and I think we all can do better. That will be what drives us this whole year."

Team captain Champ Bailey wasn't happy with the ending to 2009, either, especially after a 6-0 start. But he said he got a feel for where the team could be headed under McDaniels moving forward, and he is excited about the prospects.

"One thing I do know is we didn't get in the playoffs, and I know (McDaniels is) going to feel like it's a disappointing year, and obviously everybody in here does," Bailey said. "But the guy knows football, and when he has everybody on the same page doing the things he asks us to do on Wednesday mornings to win games, when we do that, then we're going to be a good team."

To Bailey's point, McDaniels said the finish to the season was "not acceptable," but called the 2009 Broncos "a team that was close to doing something that we wanted to get done."

Fellow team captain Mario Haggan agreed on both counts, and said he has high hopes for next season. He expects he and the team as a whole to progress under McDaniels, who he called a "straight-forward coach."

"I'm with him -- I buy into it," Haggan said. "He's a good coach. Sometimes it's hard to get it done in the first year. Do I think we could've done better? Yes. Do I think Josh has done a great job? Yes. I buy into what he's preaching. I think Mr. (President and CEO Pat) Bowlen made a great decision bringing Josh here. He holds everybody accountable, and if you want to play on this team, if you want to be a part of what he has going, you have to be accountable, you have to be trusted, you have to be smart and you have to play the game like it's supposed to be played. A coach like that, you can't go against him, and I just think this will work out."

But McDaniels isn't just hoping it will work out. He and the front office are actively doing "everything we can between now and the beginning of next year to change what we think we need to change to improve the team in every area."

That starts with evaluating every aspect of the team.

"Nobody is going to say it's going to be easy," McDaniels said. "It never is. But if you stand there and do nothing and just hope that it is going to change on its own, it usually doesn't. Now, we enter into another phase. It will be our first offseason where the system has been implemented, and I'm looking forward to going through making tweaks and corrections and identifying the next challenges ahead for our roster and all the decisions we need to make."

Those tweaks began immediately after the season, when the team signed nine players to future contracts -- Baraka Atkins, Lance Ball, DAnthony Batiste, Marquez Branson, Mitch Erickson, Dustin Fry, Braxton Kelley, Matt McChesney and A.J. Trapasso -- between January 4 and February 2. All nine players are now officially on the roster.

It then moved on to tough decisions, like releasing veterans Casey Wiegmann and LaMont Jordan, and crucial moves heading into free agency, like tendering qualifying offers to five restricted free agents -- Elvis Dumervil, Chris Kuper, Brandon Marshall, Kyle Orton and Tony Scheffler.

Now in the thick of free agency, the team has re-signed Russ Hochstein and Brandon Lloyd and brought defensive linemen Justin Bannan, Jarvis Green and Jamal Williams, cornerback Nathan Jones and running back J.J. Arrington on board.

With the team's offseason conditioning program set to begin on Monday and the NFL Draft a little more than a month away, the preparations for the 2010 campaign are well underway. And McDaniels is ready to build on his first season on the job.

"We've got an opportunity," he said. "Every time you don't make the playoffs, I think it's very disappointing, but it's also an opportunity to look at how far you have to go to be able to be one of those teams that's still playing in January. Until we're there, until we're competing at that level and until we're playing in January and competing for championships and Super Bowls, I won't be happy with what we're doing and what we've done. I think that our team and our staff and our organization have exactly that same philosophy and feeling right now as I do."

Bailey shares that philosophy, and said that while last year was a building block, he's prepared for the team to put it all together in 2010.

"I'm happy with the potential that we have, but I don't want this to be potentially a good thing three years from now," he said. "I want it to be a good thing next year."

gobroncsnv
03-11-2010, 07:50 AM
Champ is not only a great player, he's such a great soldier as well. Just makes me all the more want to see us get that man his ring. One of Shanny's better FA decisions, but Champ didn't go south on us with the regime change. Just one of the best, that's all he is.

Lonestar
03-11-2010, 09:46 AM
Seems to me the message is getting out via the actions Josh has taken so far, status quo is not good enough. Where we were willing but just not physically able, he is moving in the right direction with fresh talent.

He is filling holes that needed to filled with seasoned vets from winning
Programs.

While some feel all is well with it now, that we do not have to draft their replacement yet and can get sexy players instead, we need to go after younger guys so they can be ready when these guys are ready or have to hang them up.

Lets all hope that we get some big, mean and nasty guys in the draft this year.

Since this was a broncos.com writer Que the detractors. Three
Two
One




Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel

rationalfan
03-11-2010, 10:59 AM
yes, the writing is terribly subjective. but what excites me about this article are the quotes from the players.

without making this a mcd/shanny divide, i don't ever remember players talking about shanny that way. they may have talked about his offensive genius or play calling, but they didn't ever reference him like a respected general. and that's what bailey and haggan did.

also, if you read the subtext of their quotes you find players praising a coach trying to break the schisms in the locker room. more and more i'm believing the problem with shanny in the final four-five years was that he didn't treat his team like a team. he treated his team like a caste system.

claymore
03-11-2010, 11:04 AM
Seems to me the message is getting out via the actions Josh has taken so far, status quo is not good enough. Where we were willing but just not physically able, he is moving in the right direction with fresh talent.

He is filling holes that needed to filled with seasoned vets from winning
Programs.

While some feel all is well with it now, that we do not have to draft their replacement yet and can get sexy players instead, we need to go after younger guys so they can be ready when these guys are ready or have to hang them up.

Lets all hope that we get some big, mean and nasty guys in the draft this year.

Since this was a broncos.com writer Que the detractors. Three
Two
One




Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel

Alphonso Smith.

Lancane
03-11-2010, 11:06 AM
Yeah because what Bailey says should be the open sentiment of the whole team. Not to be rude, but let's remember Bailey also said Slowik was the best defensive coordinator he ever worked under...I take what he says with a grain of salt, as should everyone. He says what is needed as a positive to the team, others did the same till they went elsewhere; it's sort of expected. And Haggan is a career journeyman who has now found himself a starting role in this regime, and you don't bite the hand that feeds you. Let us not forget that fan favorite Peyton Hillis refused to comment on an interview on KOA about the issues with the new regime and what he felt was wrong with, the same with a couple other players...

claymore
03-11-2010, 11:17 AM
Yeah because what Bailey says should be the open sentiment of the whole team. Not to be rude, but let's remember Bailey also said Slowik was the best defensive coordinator he ever worked under...I take what he says with a grain of salt, as should everyone. He says what is needed as a positive to the team, others did the same till they went elsewhere; it's sort of expected. And Haggan is a career journeyman who has now found himself a starting role in this regime, and you don't bite the hand that feeds you. Let us not forget that fan favorite Peyton Hillis refused to comment on an interview on KOA about the issues with the new regime and what he felt was wrong with, the same with a couple other players...

Bailey is a company man who is owed 12 million dollars. He would say McDaniels ass is made out of sunshine if asked, as would I in the same situation.

Traveler
03-11-2010, 11:21 AM
Not to be rude, but let's remember Bailey also said Slowik was the best defensive coordinator he ever worked under...I take what he says with a grain of salt, as should everyone.

Close. I too would understand that Champ is just being a professional.

Here is what Champ actually said:

Champ Bailey believes Bob Slowik is the right man to run the Broncos' defense.

In fact, Bailey has believed that for a year.

"To tell the truth, I think this is a year too late," Bailey said Wednesday at the Pro Bowl. "Nothing against (Jim) Bates, but Slowik is the right fit for this defense."

Slowik has been the Broncos' secondary coach since 2005. He was promoted to defensive coordinator early in 2007 but Bates, who was hired in January 2007, was in charge of the defense. When Bates and the team mutually parted ways last month, Slowik was promptly promoted. He has been a defensive coordinator with Green Bay, Chicago and Cleveland.

Bailey said Slowik's familiarity with the players is going to help.

"He's been here for a while, and he knows how it all works," Bailey said. "I think there will be more consistency. I think Bates was a good coach, but we didn't have the personnel for what he ran. It just didn't work. We were all over the place. He'd have starters get cut. It was no consistency there."

Bailey said he hopes the Broncos spend their free-agency money and draft choices on defensive players. He said the team needs help at defensive tackle and perhaps linebacker.

"We need a few more players," Bailey said. "Hopefully, we get that help."

Of prime concern is linemen who can pressure the quarterback, he said.

"The Giants won the Super Bowl with a pass rush," Bailey said. "That's how you win. . . . Hopefully, we can do something like that."

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_8189969

Lonestar
03-11-2010, 12:37 PM
Alphonso Smith.

And this is an example of what, a rookie CB that did not become a all pro in his first year.

Most Rookie CB stink it up their first couple of years.

Time will tell on his choices. Then we can talk about it OK.

Lonestar
03-11-2010, 12:38 PM
Yeah because what Bailey says should be the open sentiment of the whole team. Not to be rude, but let's remember Bailey also said Slowik was the best defensive coordinator he ever worked under...I take what he says with a grain of salt, as should everyone. He says what is needed as a positive to the team, others did the same till they went elsewhere; it's sort of expected. And Haggan is a career journeyman who has now found himself a starting role in this regime, and you don't bite the hand that feeds you. Let us not forget that fan favorite Peyton Hillis refused to comment on an interview on KOA about the issues with the new regime and what he felt was wrong with, the same with a couple other players...


I think the comment by bailey was he was a hell of a DB coach and he looked forward to his being a DC.as for the rest well time will tell if they come around.

e-Lou-sive1
03-11-2010, 12:44 PM
If Bailey thinks the Broncos need help on defense then that needs to be the primary concern of JMD other than that the offensive line.Whatever happens to Marshall so be it just concentrate on our weaknesses and If we do get a high draft pick from Seattle use it to get a future Qb or a top defensive LB.

Denver is making a statement by shopping early and shoring up their defense hopefully they can do the same when it comes to rebuilding their offense.I'll admit I still have my doubts about Mc Daniels but so far he seems to be addressing the right concerns.

Ravage!!!
03-11-2010, 12:51 PM
Yeah because what Bailey says should be the open sentiment of the whole team. Not to be rude, but let's remember Bailey also said Slowik was the best defensive coordinator he ever worked under...I take what he says with a grain of salt, as should everyone. He says what is needed as a positive to the team, others did the same till they went elsewhere; it's sort of expected. And Haggan is a career journeyman who has now found himself a starting role in this regime, and you don't bite the hand that feeds you. Let us not forget that fan favorite Peyton Hillis refused to comment on an interview on KOA about the issues with the new regime and what he felt was wrong with, the same with a couple other players...

Thats a great point. I love Bailey's attitude and personality, but he's one that is a 'company man'.. saying the right things about anyone who's in charge.

Why didn't we hear these things about Shanahan? Because of the situation, the team is being asked about McDaniels differently than Shanahan was. Reporters can see and hear the comments about McD. They know the tension that some of his decisions have caused with the fans, and are then going to ask them about the coach BECAUSE of Mike SHanahan. Who did Mike follow? Mike was the only coach/OC that took Elway to the Super Bowl. He was already liked and accomplished when coming here.

Champ's a great guy, but he's only going to say the good things about anyone.

WARHORSE
03-11-2010, 03:18 PM
Thats a great point. I love Bailey's attitude and personality, but he's one that is a 'company man'.. saying the right things about anyone who's in charge.

Why didn't we hear these things about Shanahan? Because of the situation, the team is being asked about McDaniels differently than Shanahan was. Reporters can see and hear the comments about McD. They know the tension that some of his decisions have caused with the fans, and are then going to ask them about the coach BECAUSE of Mike SHanahan. Who did Mike follow? Mike was the only coach/OC that took Elway to the Super Bowl. He was already liked and accomplished when coming here.

Champ's a great guy, but he's only going to say the good things about anyone.


The 'company' man is the one you want. Thats why veterans are needed. They understand that you HAVE to get behind the coaches in order to have success, and they are preaching that to the younger players. All you need is a few players not doing what theyre told, and thats it.....no success on a team level.

Its only PROFESSIONAL to understand that the HC is the HC. Its his job to do things his way, and your job to do what youre told.


Notice that all the malcontents are pretty much younger players coming from the loyalty level of Shanahan.

Shanahan played favorites, plain and simple.

If youre on good terms, you'll get paid. If not, youre in the doghouse.

With McD, its not about whether you and the HC are buddies, its about you and the HC are co-workers, and hes your boss.

Do your job.

If you cant do your job, I want someone that CAN.

turftoad
03-11-2010, 03:51 PM
He has got nothing done as of yet.

turftoad
03-11-2010, 03:53 PM
And this is an example of what, a rookie CB that did not become a all pro in his first year.

Most Rookie CB stink it up their first couple of years.

Time will tell on his choices. Then we can talk about it OK.

They're not supposed to when they are first rounders. Thats what we gave up for him.
First rounders are supposed to produce sooner than two years.

claymore
03-11-2010, 04:57 PM
And this is an example of what, a rookie CB that did not become a all pro in his first year.

Most Rookie CB stink it up their first couple of years.

Time will tell on his choices. Then we can talk about it OK.

He was passed on the depth chart by a UDFA that was picked up in the 14th week of the season.

He was a massive flop. 9 tackles.

The only thing that made the Quinn trade look good was the Smith trade.

TXBRONC
03-11-2010, 06:00 PM
And this is an example of what, a rookie CB that did not become a all pro in his first year.

Most Rookie CB stink it up their first couple of years.

Time will tell on his choices. Then we can talk about it OK.

Right. You never gave 2nd round picks that kind of leeway before. Every other ALL you ever did was bitch now all of sudden they should get a break. Hypocritical of you to say the least.

Ravage!!!
03-11-2010, 06:07 PM
And this is an example of what, a rookie CB that did not become a all pro in his first year.

Most Rookie CB stink it up their first couple of years.

Time will tell on his choices. Then we can talk about it OK.

This coming from the guy that said EVERY WR taken in the first or 2nd round is EXPECTED to be better than Rod Smith since they were given so much money? This coming from the guy that has stated on many occasions that first round picks should be perennial pro-bowlers??

So, now that its McD making the picks, its "ok" that players taken with first round selections get beat out by undrafted players, and its "ok" that they stink for couple years? Hmmm... OK

Lonestar
03-11-2010, 08:16 PM
They're not supposed to when they are first rounders. Thats what we gave up for him.
First rounders are supposed to produce sooner than two years.

So if he does not produce this year neuter him.

Most CBs do noy step in and play right away if they do it is because they are thrown to the wolves.

Since we already have TWO starters we have the luxury to bring him along slower than others.

If he busts after next year then remind me about it. OK?


Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel

turftoad
03-11-2010, 08:19 PM
So if he does not produce this year neuter him.

Most CBs do noy step in and play right away if they do it is because they are thrown to the wolves.

Since we already have TWO starters we have the luxury to bring him along slower than others.

If he busts after next year then remind me about it. OK?


Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel

Not when you draft one in the first round. Thats what we gave up for him. They are supposed to produce in the first year.

At least in the nickle. But....... Josh drafted him so he gets a pass. I forgot.

Lonestar
03-11-2010, 08:29 PM
So I guess the anti smith society is hot and heavy to nite.

As for first day draft choices. Generally I believe that they should be starters almost day one.

As for smith he had one HOF CB in front of him and one pretty good veteran opposite of him.

Did you expect him the start? Did he play a position he is used to playing at nickle yes. Could be some learning curve there.

As for bringing in Ty Law what is the issue. A 5-6 time pro bowler. BTW was not an UDFA but a UFA. He had been drafted and played well for a long time.

Before we run him out of town on a rail perhaps we can give him longer than one season.

But then that only seems fair and the logical thing to do.

I was right about ashley when he was a second year player and it must smart to have to dig that stuff up. Weak at best.

Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel

claymore
03-11-2010, 08:47 PM
So I guess the anti smith society is hot and heavy to nite.

As for first day draft choices. Generally I believe that they should be starters almost day one.

As for smith he had one HOF CB in front of him and one pretty good veteran opposite of him.

Did you expect him the start? Did he play a position he is used to playing at nickle yes. Could be some learning curve there.

As for bringing in Ty Law what is the issue. A 5-6 time pro bowler. BTW was not an UDFA but a UFA. He had been drafted and played well for a long time.

Before we run him out of town on a rail perhaps we can give him longer than one season.

But then that only seems fair and the logical thing to do.

I was right about ashley when he was a second year player and it must smart to have to dig that stuff up. Weak at best.

Sent from my BlackBerry Smartphone provided by Alltel
I think what everyone is stating that it was a hell of a time to draft for depth (with a first round pick) when we had so many other holes to fill.

It was a gamble. It was an Ill advised gamble. And it didnt pay off. Maybe it will down the road, but the bottom line was there is far better talent this year at 14 than smith provides us with.

turftoad
03-11-2010, 08:54 PM
I think what everyone is stating that it was a hell of a time to draft for depth (with a first round pick) when we had so many other holes to fill.

It was a gamble. It was an Ill advised gamble. And it didnt pay off. Maybe it will down the road, but the bottom line was there is far better talent this year at 14 than smith provides us with.

Exactly!!

Young and dumb and jumping the gun.

Was like a little kid in a candy store. Just couldn't help himself.

spikerman
03-11-2010, 09:37 PM
As for bringing in Ty Law what is the issue. A 5-6 time pro bowler. BTW was not an UDFA but a UFA. He had been drafted and played well for a long time.

I think the UDFA was a reference to Tony Carter, who also passed Smith on the depth chart, not Ty Law.

Tned
03-11-2010, 09:48 PM
They're not supposed to when they are first rounders. Thats what we gave up for him.
First rounders are supposed to produce sooner than two years.

Not to mention we had to sign a 36 year old (or something like that) off of the 'couch' wire, because he wasn't cutting it, and another guy off the practice squad for when the old guy got tired.

Not to impressive value for the 14th overall pick we gave up for him.

turftoad
03-11-2010, 10:00 PM
Not to mention we had to sign a 36 year old (or something like that) off of the 'couch' wire, because he wasn't cutting it, and another guy off the practice squad for when the old guy got tired.

Not to impressive value for the 14th overall pick we gave up for him.

But, but, but....... Josh drafted him so we have to give him a break.

Ravage!!!
03-11-2010, 10:02 PM
Did you expect him the start? Did he play a position he is used to playing at nickle yes. Could be some learning curve there.

As for bringing in Ty Law what is the issue. A 5-6 time pro bowler. BTW was not an UDFA but a UFA. He had been drafted and played well for a long time.



Did I expect him to start? After using the 14th pick in the draft for him? Yes. After releasing Jack from the team for him? Yes.

We had to bring in an old corner from sitting at home, to replace him at nickle, and when that didn't work, Smith was then beaten out by and UNDRAFTED Free Agent, Tony Carter! Tony wasn't a UFA. He wasn't someoen that had played well. He wasn't the 'vet" that was considered to be good, but a rookie (like smith) that wasn't even good enough to be drafted, not to mention moving UP and using the 14th pick on.

Maybe thats the problem, you didn't even seem to know about Carter.

Tned
03-11-2010, 10:16 PM
But, but, but....... Josh drafted him so we have to give him a break.

Yea, but, McDaniels inherited all of these problems from Mikey... It's Mikey's fault that Smith failed last year, not McDaniels!!!!

TXBRONC
03-11-2010, 11:22 PM
This coming from the guy that said EVERY WR taken in the first or 2nd round is EXPECTED to be better than Rod Smith since they were given so much money? This coming from the guy that has stated on many occasions that first round picks should be perennial pro-bowlers??

So, now that its McD making the picks, its "ok" that players taken with first round selections get beat out by undrafted players, and its "ok" that they stink for couple years? Hmmm... OK

Sadly some people live by a double standard.

Tempus Fugit
03-11-2010, 11:43 PM
Not when you draft one in the first round. Thats what we gave up for him. They are supposed to produce in the first year.

At least in the nickle. But....... Josh drafted him so he gets a pass. I forgot.

He was a 2nd round pick, not a 1st. All the projecting and screwing around with traded pick won't change that.

Denver Native (Carol)
03-11-2010, 11:44 PM
I guess many forget all of the draft failures the previous Broncos' coach had also.

turftoad
03-11-2010, 11:47 PM
I guess many forget all of the draft failures the previous Broncos' coach had also.


He was a 2nd round pick, not a 1st. All the projecting and screwing around with traded pick won't change that.

Josh thought he was worth a first, thats why he gave this years for him.

TXBRONC
03-11-2010, 11:56 PM
He was a 2nd round pick, not a 1st. All the projecting and screwing around with traded pick won't change that.

McDaniel traded a first round pick for Smith, so essence it makes Smith a first round pick.

Second McDaniels in his words viewed Smith as a first round pick. For that matter I remember that several people on this board at various times justified Smith it deal by saying Smith would have been taken in the first round in almost any other draft. That can't be proven but some people did say it.

Tempus Fugit
03-12-2010, 12:02 AM
McDaniel traded a first round pick for Smith, so essence it makes Smith a first round pick.

Second McDaniels in his words viewed Smith as a first round pick. For that matter I remember that several people on this board at various times justified Smith it deal by saying Smith would have been taken in the first round in almost any other draft. That can't be proven but some people did say it.

McDaniels could trade every pick for the next 425 seasons, and that player will still be a pick in the round he's chosen. Smith is a second round pick.

It's telling about people to see how far they will go in order to satisfy their need to bash others.

Playing your game, Smith was a 2010 first round pick. By that metric, he's played more minutes than other player drafted in his round, and has been a much better NFL performer than any of them.

turftoad
03-12-2010, 12:08 AM
McDaniels could trade every pick for the next 425 seasons, and that player will still be a pick in the round he's chosen. Smith is a second round pick.

It's telling about people to see how far they will go in order to satisfy their need to bash others.

Playing your game, Smith was a 2010 first round pick. By that metric, he's played more minutes than other player drafted in his round, and has been a much better NFL performer than any of them.

He was traded for a first rounder, which turned out to be the #14 this year. That makes him a first rounder in Josh regime.
He had 3 freeking tackles. Is he that much better than the rest of last years first rounders?

Tempus Fugit
03-12-2010, 12:16 AM
He was traded for a first rounder, which turned out to be the #14 this year. That makes him a first rounder in Josh regime.
He had 3 freeking tackles. Is he that much better than the rest of last years first rounders?

He was a second round pick. You can try playing all the childish games you want. He'll still have been a second round pick.

turftoad
03-12-2010, 12:20 AM
He was a second round pick. You can try playing all the childish games you want. He'll still have been a second round pick.

How is that childish. Josh traded him for a first, making him a first round talent in Josh's book. Thus he's a Broncos first round draft pick. Matter of fact, the number 14 overall.
That was worth it, wasn't it?

Again, Josh traded this first for him. Thats a first rounder, right? Guess you have to be an adult to understand that.

TXBRONC
03-12-2010, 12:22 AM
McDaniels could trade every pick for the next 425 seasons, and that player will still be a pick in the round he's chosen. Smith is a second round pick.

It's telling about people to see how far they will go in order to satisfy their need to bash others.

Playing your game, Smith was a 2010 first round pick. By that metric, he's played more minutes than other player drafted in his round, and has been a much better NFL performer than any of them.

I didn't bash Smith or McDaniels I simply reminding you of a couple of facts. One, McDaniels traded a future first round pick to move in the second round to take him. So without McDaniels saying a word he obviously thought Smith was worth a first round pick. Not only that he said as much.

Tempus Fugit
03-12-2010, 12:23 AM
How is that childish. Josh traded him for a first, making him a first round talent in Josh's book. Thus he's a Broncos first round draft pick. Matter of fact, the number 14 overall.
That was worth it, wasn't it?

Again, Josh traded this first for him. Thats a first rounder, right?

How pathetic are you in your fandom that you have to go this far to bash the coach of your team?

As I noted, if you play your ridiculous game, Smith was a 2010 first round pick and got into NFL games well ahead of projections. In fact, to date, he's had far more impact in the NFL than any other first round pick in his his 2010 draft, including Suh and McCoy.

Tempus Fugit
03-12-2010, 12:24 AM
I didn't bash Smith or McDaniels I simply reminding you of a couple of facts. One, McDaniels traded a future first round pick to move in the second round to take him. So without McDaniels saying a word he obviously thought Smith was worth a first round pick. Not only that he said as much.

Smith is not, and was not, a first round pick. It's that simple.

Ravage!!!
03-12-2010, 12:25 AM
McDaniels could trade every pick for the next 425 seasons, and that player will still be a pick in the round he's chosen. Smith is a second round pick.

It's telling about people to see how far they will go in order to satisfy their need to bash others.

Playing your game, Smith was a 2010 first round pick. By that metric, he's played more minutes than other player drafted in his round, and has been a much better NFL performer than any of them.

You are looking at it literally on the pay scale. He was taken in the second, thus we pay him as a second round pick. But in doing so, gave up first round value. So its like a balloon-loan.

You are taking out a loan of 10 dollars today, that balloons to pay back 100 dollars the next year.

You drafted the guy in the 2nd round, by giving up 1st round value the next. Thats equivalent of giving a first round pick for the guy, NO MATTER HOW YOU TRY to justify it or twist it.

turftoad
03-12-2010, 12:26 AM
How pathetic are you in your fandom that you have to go this far to bash the coach of your team?

As I noted, if you play your ridiculous game, Smith was a 2010 first round pick and got into NFL games well ahead of projections. In fact, to date, he's had far more impact in the NFL than any other first round pick in his his 2010 draft, including Suh and McCoy.

What Smith are you talking about? The same one that had 3 tackles as a rookie?

Suh and McCoy haven't even played an NFL game yet. I don't understand where you are comming from.

Tned-Mobile
03-12-2010, 12:27 AM
I guess many forget all of the draft failures the previous Broncos' coach had also.

No, they aren't forgotten. There are a few posters on here that keep bringing them up. However, those same posters make excuses for any mistakes that Josh makes and doesn't apply the same standards to both coaches.

It's the incessant negativity and bashing of the previous coach, aka the man that brought the Lombardi trophy to Denver -- Mike Shanahan, by those revisionist history guys that in turn leads to a lot of the backlash and highlighting of McDaniel's mistakes.

Ravage!!!
03-12-2010, 12:28 AM
Smith is not, and was not, a first round pick. It's that simple.

Right. Its worse. He was taken in the second round by giving away a first round pick. Thus moving backwards even more so. :salute:

TXBRONC
03-12-2010, 12:30 AM
Smith is not, and was not, a first round pick. It's that simple.

You seem to be having a very hard time comprehending my posts. I said he was viewed as a first round pick by McDaniels.

Lonestar
03-12-2010, 12:59 AM
I think what everyone is stating that it was a hell of a time to draft for depth (with a first round pick) when we had so many other holes to fill.

It was a gamble. It was an Ill advised gamble. And it didnt pay off. Maybe it will down the road, but the bottom line was there is far better talent this year at 14 than smith provides us with.


think we all forget because of all the turmoil that DEN did not have all that many folks on their draft board to make "better" choices from.

IIRC They said they graded him as a number one choice so since he was available in the second they jumped on him.

We all know that many coaches and GM's have done this type of stuff in the past and will do it in the future.

Frankly we had more holes to fill than draft choices, and with a lack of players on the board they made a call.

Was it ill advised only time will tell on this.

I realize that many feel that Josh has many reasons to dislike him.

I tend think that over the past couple of decades of failed day one choices that many here have raved about, Y'all may just want to give the guy a break, like so many did others.

But then that is just me, a glass 3/4 full type of guy.:D

xzn
03-12-2010, 01:33 AM
I'm as disappointed with Alphonso's rookie lack of production as anyone but it is way, way too early to make a call on his career.

Bill Walsh said: it doesn't matter where a player is taken, it matters if he can play.

I'm still hoping that Alphonso will be a long-term replacement for Champ and that he will contribute a lot more in sub-packages and on kicking teams than he did last year. A LOT MORE.

TXBRONC
03-12-2010, 02:13 AM
I'm as disappointed with Alphonso's rookie lack of production as anyone but it is way, way too early to make a call on his career.

Bill Walsh said: it doesn't matter where a player is taken, it matters if he can play.

I'm still hoping that Alphonso will be a long-term replacement for Champ and that he will contribute a lot more in sub-packages and on kicking teams than he did last year. A LOT MORE.

I don't think anyone will disagree with you that it's to early to make a call on Smith's career. What has been discussed doesn't have to do with where he was taken but means by which he was taken.

xzn
03-12-2010, 02:19 AM
You're missing the point. It doesn't matter if he was taken in the second or valued as a first. All that matters is if he can contribute now and in the future.

But if y'all want to keep bickering about something that can't be changed, don't let me stop ya...

TXBRONC
03-12-2010, 02:29 AM
You're missing the point. It doesn't matter if he was taken in the second or valued as a first. All that matters is if he can contribute now and in the future.

But if y'all want to keep bickering about something that can't be changed, don't let me stop ya...

No I haven't missed the point by a long shot.

T.K.O.
03-12-2010, 11:25 AM
sure it would be nice to "cash in" all our bad draft choices ,and get them back to use in this years draft but i dont think the league allows it?
we could get a #14 back for moss,a #20 for foster,a 3rd rndr for clarrett....the list goes on and on but 1 year with a new system and guys like champ mf bailey on the team definately does'nt prove we overspent for smith.
if we don't see him progressing and being used more next year...maybe we got burned,but its WAAAAAAAY too soon to tell.

Nomad
03-12-2010, 12:37 PM
sure it would be nice to "cash in" all our bad draft choices ,and get them back to use in this years draft but i dont think the league allows it?
we could get a #14 back for moss,a #20 for foster,a 3rd rndr for clarrett....the list goes on and on but 1 year with a new system and guys like champ mf bailey on the team definately does'nt prove we overspent for smith.
if we don't see him progressing and being used more next year...maybe we got burned,but its WAAAAAAAY too soon to tell.

Draft Ngata instead of Cutler!!

Lancane
03-12-2010, 12:58 PM
Draft Ngata instead of Cutler!!

I would trade all of last years picks to get Cutler back...lol. But there is always a could or would with draft picks. How many teams wished they drafted Marshall in the 4th round over us or Cutler, that is the benchmark of the NFL, until it is said and done, who really knows how these kids will transition to the pro level.

Nomad
03-12-2010, 01:08 PM
I would trade all of last years picks to get Cutler back...lol. But there is always a could or would with draft picks. How many teams wished they drafted Marshall in the 4th round over us or Cutler, that is the benchmark of the NFL, until it is said and done, who really knows how these kids will transition to the pro level.

I didn't like Cutler from the beginning and in that draft I wanted a defensive lineman for that pick!! But yes, you are correct that you never know what you'll get from the draft at least we had an idea that Marshall would be a problem child!! Marshall's a great football player and you can't take that away from him but he is what he is when he's not on the field and that's gonna hurt any team when his next episode occurs! I told my sons if they decided to be problem children (which they are not) I'd give them 3 chances and if I couldn't control them it's off to military school in Harlingen, TX!! So Marshall's had his chances he needs to take his antics elsewhere!!

broncofaninfla
03-12-2010, 01:16 PM
If Denver tried to trade Knowshon, would we get anything better than a late 2nd or early 3rd for him now?

CoachChaz
03-12-2010, 01:26 PM
If Denver tried to trade Knowshon, would we get anything better than a late 2nd or early 3rd for him now?

Ask me in 2 years when he's had more time to learn the game and transistion to the NFL and this offense.

CoachChaz
03-12-2010, 01:29 PM
I don't think anyone will disagree with you that it's to early to make a call on Smith's career. What has been discussed doesn't have to do with where he was taken but means by which he was taken.

...and if he ends up like and Asante Samyel or Cortland Finnegan...who didnt see the field as rookies...no one will care about the means by which he was drafted.

Too many people expect miracles immediately.

Slick
03-12-2010, 01:52 PM
...and if he ends up like and Asante Samyel or Cortland Finnegan...who didnt see the field as rookies...no one will care about the means by which he was drafted.

Too many people expect miracles immediately.

True, although I can't blame posters for being upset that we paid a first round price for a player that was replaced by Ty Law on the depth chart.

We can't write the kid off yet but he will always be under the microscope whether he deserves it or not.

claymore
03-12-2010, 01:53 PM
think we all forget because of all the turmoil that DEN did not have all that many folks on their draft board to make "better" choices from.
IIRC They said they graded him as a number one choice so since he was available in the second they jumped on him.

We all know that many coaches and GM's have done this type of stuff in the past and will do it in the future.

Frankly we had more holes to fill than draft choices, and with a lack of players on the board they made a call.

Was it ill advised only time will tell on this.

I realize that many feel that Josh has many reasons to dislike him.

I tend think that over the past couple of decades of failed day one choices that many here have raved about, Y'all may just want to give the guy a break, like so many did others.

But then that is just me, a glass 3/4 full type of guy.:D
How does it make sense to trade a future number one pick, for a 2nd round pick in 09 when we were admittedly unprepared???


Again. We had a ton of holes, as you admit. Why in the hell did we trade a future #1 for a 2nd round guy who couldnt be anything but depth???

You are a guy defending something completley ridiculous. It was one of the dumbest draft moves ever.

Richard Quinn is the luckiest guy on the roster cause the Smith trade makes the retarded QUinn trade look like a good deal.

claymore
03-12-2010, 02:01 PM
...and if he ends up like and Asante Samyel or Cortland Finnegan...who didnt see the field as rookies...no one will care about the means by which he was drafted.

Too many people expect miracles immediately.

Your just playing devils advocate.

In no way do I believe that you really think trading this years pick for Smith was good value, or a smart draft day move.

It was retarded and you know it.

CoachChaz
03-12-2010, 02:25 PM
Your just playing devils advocate.

In no way do I believe that you really think trading this years pick for Smith was good value, or a smart draft day move.

It was retarded and you know it.

It was questionable, I agree. But I'm not ready to write the kid off yet...and if he ends up being a Pro Bwl player...my hindsight will be okay with the gamble that was taken.

Tned
03-12-2010, 02:36 PM
It was questionable, I agree. But I'm not ready to write the kid off yet...and if he ends up being a Pro Bwl player...my hindsight will be okay with the gamble that was taken.

I agree. He showed a few flashes of being the ballhawk he was touted to be, and taking a couple years to mature wouldn't be unheard of. It's just that when your team has so many holes, trading a first on that pick was as you say, questionable.

claymore
03-12-2010, 02:37 PM
It was questionable, I agree. But I'm not ready to write the kid off yet...and if he ends up being a Pro Bwl player...my hindsight will be okay with the gamble that was taken.

Dont get me wrong. I love the kid. I love Alphonso Smith, and HOPE he works out for years to come.

I just think it was a stupid ass move. It was the trade itself, not Smith that pissed me off.

Slick
03-12-2010, 02:41 PM
Dont get me wrong. I love the kid. I love Alphonso Smith, and HOPE he works out for years to come.

I just think it was a stupid ass move. It was the trade itself, not Smith that pissed me off.

That's basically where I stand. Why blow everything you got for Cutler in one draft day?

We know corners don't make the biggest impact, hell we've had one of the best for years and our defense still sucks. Obviously hindsight is 20/20, but if I'm a new coach and I trade away a player for 2 number 1 draft picks, I might want to wait and see what I have after one season before I blow my whole load in an hour or two.

Ravage!!!
03-12-2010, 02:43 PM
True, although I can't blame posters for being upset that we paid a first round price for a player that was replaced by Ty Law on the depth chart.

We can't write the kid off yet but he will always be under the microscope whether he deserves it or not.

This is true. I'm not even that bothered by being replaced by law.. but... it UDFA is kinda bothersome. I mean, that kid didn't have any more time to "learn" the NFL than Smith did, yet he was on the field instead of Alphonso.

claymore
03-12-2010, 02:49 PM
That's basically where I stand. Why blow everything you got for Cutler in one draft day?

We know corners don't make the biggest impact, hell we've had one of the best for years and our defense still sucks. Obviously hindsight is 20/20, but if I'm a new coach and I trade away a player for 2 number 1 draft picks, I might want to wait and see what I have after one season before I blow my whole load in an hour or two.McDaniels admittedly was uprepared for the draft. But he knowingly morgaged a future draft for last years. FML.

That, and the events surrounding the Marshall benching is what really makes me believe he (JMCD) makes poor decisions based off of personal feelings.


This is true. I'm not even that bothered by being replaced by law.. but... it UDFA is kinda bothersome. I mean, that kid didn't have any more time to "learn" the NFL than Smith did, yet he was on the field instead of Alphonso.

Not to mention we already had his clone JMFW on the roster...

Tned
03-12-2010, 02:52 PM
That's basically where I stand. Why blow everything you got for Cutler in one draft day?

We know corners don't make the biggest impact, hell we've had one of the best for years and our defense still sucks. Obviously hindsight is 20/20, but if I'm a new coach and I trade away a player for 2 number 1 draft picks, I might want to wait and see what I have after one season before I blow my whole load in an hour or two.

Which also sums up my concern about moving Marshall, especially for anything less than a first rounder. The chances of us getting anything even close to Marshall's talent out of the draft is very slim.

Tned
03-12-2010, 02:53 PM
McDaniels admittedly was uprepared for the draft. But he knowingly morgaged a future draft for last years. FML.


If he was unprepared for the draft, then it was that much worse a decision to mortgage a future draft to reach for a player like Smith.

claymore
03-12-2010, 02:56 PM
If he was unprepared for the draft, then it was that much worse a decision to mortgage a future draft to reach for a player like Smith.

And thats my point. The draft is already a gamble. Why make it worse. Especially when its an uniformed gamble.

Tned
03-12-2010, 03:27 PM
And thats my point. The draft is already a gamble. Why make it worse. Especially when its an uniformed gamble.

But, it's an uninformed gamble, but a guy with a pretty incredible football mind.

Lancane
03-12-2010, 06:31 PM
But, it's an uninformed gamble, but a guy with a pretty incredible football mind.

I once heard a general manager say that coaches are just that, they can help talent develop, coach players within schemes and even help them overcome their weaknesses, but they are awful at judging talent. If not then we would see alot more teams vying for national championships at the collegiate level. And that should make alot of sense to us Denver fans, especially when you think back on Shanahan and his drafts.

If McDaniels gets rid of Marshall then the most talented person we have offensively is Clady. And while a left tackle is important, we need more then a good o-line to win. Sometimes offensive coaches believe they can win with mediocre talent on the offense compared to the defense, I admit I am worried that Josh may be sliding into that mindset.

dogfish
03-12-2010, 06:40 PM
It was questionable, I agree. But I'm not ready to write the kid off yet...and if he ends up being a Pro Bwl player...my hindsight will be okay with the gamble that was taken.

i kinda hate to kick this dead thing any more, but just once for old time's sake. . .

different perspective: seattle just called-- they want to send us #14 for phonse. . . you gonna take it?

Tned
03-12-2010, 06:57 PM
I once heard a general manager say that coaches are just that, they can help talent develop, coach players within schemes and even help them overcome their weaknesses, but they are awful at judging talent. If not then we would see alot more teams vying for national championships at the collegiate level. And that should make alot of sense to us Denver fans, especially when you think back on Shanahan and his drafts.


I think you are making a great point here.

You think back to some of Shanahan's biggest critics and it was about his drafting/GM role. By all accounts, in the last few years of the Shanahan regime, when the Goodmans were more active in the draft, the results were much greater.

Shanahan never liked drafting RBs or OL's early, thinking he could take players later in the draft that other GMs weren't impressed with and that Shanny's system would turn them into productive players.

Presumably, it was a combination of Shanahan's draft misses, along with his questionable decisions related hiring/firing coordinators that led Pat Bowlen to promise fans that with Shanahan's firing, the GM and head coaching positions would now be separate and the next head coach wouldn't have full control of anything.

We saw that lasted a month or two and then the Goodmans were fired and McDaniels took full control of football operations. Based on year one, McDaniels, like Shanahan, seems to have that same problem with judging talent and possibly hiring/firing/keeping good coordinators.

T.K.O.
03-12-2010, 07:08 PM
We saw that lasted a month or two and then the Goodmans were fired and McDaniels took full control of football operations. Based on year one, McDaniels, like Shanahan, seems to have that same problem with judging talent and possibly hiring/firing/keeping good coordinators.

yeah....based on one year when you have absolutely no proof that xanders didnt make most of the decisions you are questioning...way to be objective there :tsk:
in fact the only thing ive heard from mcD and bowlen supports the opposite

Tned
03-12-2010, 07:18 PM
yeah....based on one year when you have absolutely no proof that xanders didnt make most of the decisions you are questioning...way to be objective there :tsk:
in fact the only thing ive heard from mcD and bowlen supports the opposite

Really, you're joking. Right? :confused:

Ravage!!!
03-12-2010, 07:27 PM
yeah....based on one year when you have absolutely no proof that xanders didnt make most of the decisions you are questioning...way to be objective there :tsk:
in fact the only thing ive heard from mcD and bowlen supports the opposite

I haven't heard a SINGLE comment that would suggest that McD doesn't have complete control of player personnel. McD is the one pulling the strings, and there has been absolutely NO clue, no hint, no evidence whatsoever that would suggest X is anything other than a contract lawyer. How could you seriously pose this question?

Tned
03-12-2010, 07:31 PM
I haven't heard a SINGLE comment that would suggest that McD doesn't have complete control of player personnel. McD is the one pulling the strings, and there has been absolutely NO clue, no hint, no evidence whatsoever that would suggest X is anything other than a contract lawyer. How could you seriously pose this question?

Of course there hasn't, not when it comes to personnel decisions or coaching hiring/firings. Few ppl would actually try and argue that Xanders is a full-functioning GM.

Ravage!!!
03-12-2010, 07:36 PM
Of course there hasn't, not when it comes to personnel decisions or coaching hiring/firings. Few ppl would actually try and argue that Xanders is a full-functioning GM.

I go to the Cutler and now Marshall situations on this. McD tried to trade for Cassel. Why would Xanders do this? On the Marshall situation, Bowlen has stated that he would like to see Marshall here, but 'trusts his coach.' He didn't say he trusts Xanders..or even trusts both. He is flat out letting McD do the call on the player personnel decisions. Which absolutely stunned me considering Shanahan's biggest critics (as you guys stated) were about player personnel. Shanahan was a fantastic coach doing with the talent he had. Problem was, his drafts didn't give him the talent. Until the Goodmans started to get involved... and that really started to turn around. Now we are right back in the same boat. :confused:

xzn
03-13-2010, 03:37 AM
No one is defending the move last year to trade up... if there is a poster that wants to say that it was a smart move then speak up... but he's on the team and it is clearly too early to tell if he is a "bust"... if he ends up being a player... if... then it will NOT matter by which means he was taken or if it was good value.

The problem is, if he does end up being Jarvis Moss level useless it will hurt even worse that he was acquired via a misguided trade.

Tned
03-13-2010, 08:01 AM
No one is defending the move last year to trade up... if there is a poster that wants to say that it was a smart move then speak up... but he's on the team and it is clearly too early to tell if he is a "bust"... if he ends up being a player... if... then it will NOT matter by which means he was taken or if it was good value.

The problem is, if he does end up being Jarvis Moss level useless it will hurt even worse that he was acquired via a misguided trade.

There were a lot that previously defended trading up for him. Stating that a future one wasn't worth that much, so it wasn't as bad a trade as people were making it out to be.