PDA

View Full Version : McDanials: Not a great communicator.



Pages : [1] 2

turftoad
03-28-2010, 12:48 PM
McDaniels, Brady once went three weeks without talking in New England
Posted by Mike Florio on March 28, 2010 12:55 PM ET

The Denver Post takes a close look at second-year coach Josh McDaniels, the former Patriots offensive coordinator who arrived with much fanfare in 2009, and who then took the locals on a roller-coaster ride that ultimately ended in failure.

And here's a nugget from Mike Klis that won't make Broncos fans feel much better about their Boy Wonder. During McDaniels' first year as de facto offensive coordinator with the Patriots, McDaniels and quarterback Tom Brady once went three weeks without talking to each other.

Head coach Bill Belichick did a great job of keeping the spat under wraps, but the notion of player and coach not communicating for such a long stretch suggests that one of the two men has a personality flaw, or two. The fact that McDaniels has had public issues with multiple players in Denver suggests that McDaniels, not Brady, was the problem.

So what's wrong with this picture? Boomer Esiason of CBS tells Klis that McDaniels is trying to behave like Belichick before earning the ability to do so. "All these [coaches] are taking what Bill did in New England and trying to bring that with them wherever they go," Esiason said. "The one thing they're missing, though, is the credibility Bill Belichick has. The Super Bowl rings lead the players to believe he's leading them to victory."

Initially, it looked like McDaniels would be able to make the transition easily, as he led the team to six victories to start the season. But a 2-8 mark down the stretch has prompted folks to look more critically at McDaniels -- and it has many wondering whether the head coach will be inching toward the hot seat come 2010.

Ravage!!!
03-28-2010, 12:54 PM
Interesting...

topscribe
03-28-2010, 12:56 PM
It probably would have been good to accompany the article with a link.

-----

Northman
03-28-2010, 12:59 PM
It probably would have been good to accompany the article with a link.

-----

Ditto.

turftoad
03-28-2010, 01:00 PM
It probably would have been good to accompany the article with a link.

-----

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/category/rumor-mill/

Northman
03-28-2010, 01:12 PM
PFT. lmao

turftoad
03-28-2010, 01:16 PM
PFT. lmao

He was quoting Klis from the Post North. They didn't talk for 3 weeks. That's not good. Tells me about some peoples egos.

turftoad
03-28-2010, 01:18 PM
PFT. lmao

Here is this better. :D

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/28/mcdaniels-brady-once-went-three-weeks-without-talking-in-new-england/


nbcsports.com :beer:

Northman
03-28-2010, 01:20 PM
Here is this better. :D

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/28/mcdaniels-brady-once-went-three-weeks-without-talking-in-new-england/


nbcsports.com :beer:


Unfortuantely, i have a real hard time when the writer refers to a head coach as "The Boy Wonder". The story is probably true but i have to wonder how much bias went into it with that comment. :lol:

T.K.O.
03-28-2010, 01:22 PM
maybe brady called him "McMuffin":D

Lancane
03-28-2010, 01:29 PM
maybe brady called him "McMuffin":D

Or maybe McDaniels calls Orton his personal french tickler 'it's all neckbeard', maybe his personal ball boy?

:lol:

claymore
03-28-2010, 01:41 PM
"The truth will set me free."

Claymore
3/28/2010

Shazam!
03-28-2010, 01:44 PM
What year was it that they didnt talk again?

Also, when Shanahan finished .500 or less, or when Denver got crushed in the playoffs, was it considered a 'failure'?

atwater27
03-28-2010, 01:51 PM
What year was it that they didnt talk again?

Also, when Shanahan finished .500 or less, or when Denver got crushed in the playoffs, was it considered a 'failure'?

I swear, if you shanahaters had your way, we'd still be 0 and 4 in the super bowl.

Denver Native (Carol)
03-28-2010, 01:57 PM
He was quoting Klis from the Post North. They didn't talk for 3 weeks. That's not good. Tells me about some peoples egos.

They didn't talk for 3 weeks. Much left there unknown. Did Brady try to talk to Coach McD, and Coach McD would not talk? Did Coach McD try to talk to Brady, and Brady would not talk?

Also, this is a topic on the Pats board, and here is one of the comments from there:

well that was three weeks in 2005....then what happened?

typical shoddy reporting from Klis.

Another comment from Pats board

apparently for a few weeks back in 2005. who knew?

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/330340-brady-mcdaniels-hated-each-other.html

Lancane
03-28-2010, 02:16 PM
Well, let's look at the 'Big Oomph' theory, it's a personal theory of mine, but it makes way too much fricking sense; it is based on football being a farm league within itself, not farming of players, but of teams. Belichick is headed for the Hall of Fame, it can not be denied that he is the most famous coach of the modern era...but is his success all his? That is the big question...and the answer is no. Bill Parcells, Belichicks old friend and mentor had begun changing New England's philosophy, they are both tough, team orientated coaches who demand the best of any and all players on the roster. They worked together in New York to mold one of the better teams of late 80's, but they always remained close. So the philosophy and the players that were use to the strict demands that Belichick would demand were somewhat in place. In 1996 Belichick rejoined Parcells in New England, for one season before both headed to the Jets. By the time that he returned to take over the philosophy was still somewhat set in, but was yet to fully succeed, all he had to do was finish the product. A couple good drafts later he had a plethura of talent and they finally came together to be the defecto dynasty of the modern era.

Shanahan had Reeves', Cowher had Chuck Noll, Johnson had Tom Landry, Seifart had Bill Walsh and so on. The most dominant teams at times were already molded but missing particular pieces which took a two to three years to put in place. But they succeeded because of such to a level unmatched by those completely building on their own and it can continue...look at Tomlin in Pittsburgh, that is the 'Big Oomph' theory and it tends to play out at the collegiate level as well, that is why we see several teams stay dominant head coach after head coach. McDaniels likely would have won the division and more had he kept Cutler and not made the waves he did, now he has to account for what he has done and may not have the time in which to fix it and prove himself. Let's just hope Bowlen finds someone that can take what he has done and succeed with it.

claymore
03-28-2010, 02:35 PM
They didn't talk for 3 weeks. Much left there unknown. Did Brady try to talk to Coach McD, and Coach McD would not talk? Did Coach McD try to talk to Brady, and Brady would not talk?

Also, this is a topic on the Pats board, and here is one of the comments from there:

well that was three weeks in 2005....then what happened?

typical shoddy reporting from Klis.

Another comment from Pats board

apparently for a few weeks back in 2005. who knew?

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/330340-brady-mcdaniels-hated-each-other.html

Its further evidence of a pattern that many of us are beyond concerned about. To deny the fact that McDaniels doesnt get along well with others is almost ridiculous at this point.

honz
03-28-2010, 02:44 PM
I swear, if you shanahaters had your way, we'd still be 0 and 4 in the super bowl.

I guess according to you I would be considered a "Shanahater"...so I will answer this question.

The answer is obviously a big NO. Many of us are simply pointing out that we had been a mediocre team for years before McD, yet Shanny got the benefit of the doubt. Now with a new coach many fans are ripping on and wanting McD gone for having the same record as the coach before him...remember many fans were outraged over Shanny being fired, or at least a little upset.

We're simply pointing out the double standard there.

Lonestar
03-28-2010, 02:45 PM
I guees Y'all missed the part that they seemed to have gotten over it and Josh coached him to a record year and almost a perfect season the next year.

But then why would we want to here that part of the story.

Do Y'all think that mike talked to all of his players daily and what about the famous mike's dog house.

Folks everyone puts there pants on the same way just do not understand why mike gets a pass after all the NON playoff years he had.

Denver Native (Carol)
03-28-2010, 02:49 PM
Its further evidence of a pattern that many of us are beyond concerned about. To deny the fact that McDaniels doesnt get along well with others is almost ridiculous at this point.

I am not denying anything - but the article does not come out and state that Brady tried to talk with Coach McD, but Coach McD would not talk, anymore than the article states that Coach McD tried to talk to Brady, but Brady would not talk - that's all I was stating.

Northman
03-28-2010, 02:51 PM
All i know is Brady never requested a trade because of it.

turftoad
03-28-2010, 02:55 PM
All i know is Brady never requested a trade because of it.

McD wasn't the head coach either.

Reminds me, Belichick kept that whole thing under control. It wasn't leaked out to the media or brough to the forefront. Maybe McD can start learning how to do that cuz he didn't bring it with him to Denver.

Tned
03-28-2010, 02:56 PM
I guees Y'all missed the part that they seemed to have gotten over it and Josh coached him to a record year and almost a perfect season the next year.

But then why would we want to here that part of the story.

Do Y'all think that mike talked to all of his players daily and what about the famous mike's dog house.

Folks everyone puts there pants on the same way just do not understand why mike gets a pass after all the NON playoff years he had.

First, I have no idea if the story is true or not, and I know each of us tends to put more or less weight on stories, depending on whether or not they support our personal opinions.

That said, in general, as a head coach, a coach might not talk to his players daily, because he has coordinators and position coaches. As a new OC (or QB coach, whatever he was that year), it would not be 'normal' to not talk to your QB for three weeks.

That, that said, the guy was barely out of high school in '05, so I am not going to be too concerned with what he did five years ago. He's a young coach, who clearly has a big ego (which I think is a good trait for an HC), which he still has to learn to keep in check.

topscribe
03-28-2010, 03:50 PM
Its further evidence of a pattern that many of us are beyond concerned about. To deny the fact that McDaniels doesnt get along well with others is almost ridiculous at this point.

I don't consider it a fact. There is evidence, yes, but that does not constitute fact.

-----

topscribe
03-28-2010, 03:52 PM
McD wasn't the head coach either.

Reminds me, Belichick kept that whole thing under control. It wasn't leaked out to the media or brough to the forefront. Maybe McD can start learning how to do that cuz he didn't bring it with him to Denver.

I have a lot of respect for you, Turf, but you seem to be assuming a lot here . . .

-----

claymore
03-28-2010, 03:57 PM
I have a lot of respect for you, Turf, but you seem to be assuming a lot here . . .

-----
Im speechless. What will it take for some of you guys to see what McDaniels is?

Denver Native (Carol)
03-28-2010, 04:00 PM
McD wasn't the head coach either.

Reminds me, Belichick kept that whole thing under control. It wasn't leaked out to the media or brough to the forefront. Maybe McD can start learning how to do that cuz he didn't bring it with him to Denver.

No McD was not the head coach; however we both know that if Belichick felt that it was McD causing a MAJOR problem, Belichick would have fired him. Apparently was not that BIG of a deal to Belichick.

NightTrainLayne
03-28-2010, 04:01 PM
I'll take the same end result as Brady and the Patriots offense enjoyed after this supposed three-week spat that was never reported in New England.

How do you suppose that Klis breaks that story? 4-5 years ago in New England, and Klis is the guy that knows what happened? Weird.

Ziggy
03-28-2010, 04:05 PM
Here's a great article in Belichick. People forget how hated he was when he was head coach in Cleveland. Now guys like Klis want to say that McD wants to act like Belichick without having earned the respect. It's about having a way of doing things that CAUSES the success, which brings the respect. Belichick was no different.

Failure: The Pathway to Success
How One Football Coach Handled Failure

Bill the Failure

The Cleveland Browns' head coach was one unpopular guy. In five years he'd produced only one winning season. As if losing games wasn't bad enough, he fired Cleveland's favorite quarterback.

The press crucified him. At games, fans would chant, "Bill must go! Bill must go!" Bumper stickers called him an idiot. It got so bad that his children couldn't ride the bus to school because of other students' cruel comments. He received so many death threats that the police had to stake out near his home. He endured for four long years. But in the end, he probably did well to escape Cleveland with his life.

From One Failure to Another

After such a horror story in Cleveland, you might wonder why anyone would risk repeating it. But Bill loved football. At age nine he was already scouting teams with his dad and studying film of teams. His dad didn't push him into coaching. It was Bill's passion. In school and at home he incessantly talked football, studied football and dreamed up plays. And getting older didn't put out his fire for the game.

So he refused to give up. When things got tough, he just worked harder.

But it takes more than football knowledge to be a head coach. Maybe Bill didn't have what it takes to motivate players, deal with the public, and chat with the press.

So everyone, including Bill, must have worried that his next head coaching job might be a repeat of the last. But he took the chance by accepting the invitation to lead the New England Patriots. The first year looked like another failure - a dismal 5 wins and 11 losses, the same record as his last season in Cleveland.

On Top of the World

But he still refused to give up.

Rather than believe the crowds and the press in Cleveland, rather than listen to the detractors who doubted him in New England, he kept on working. He learned from his failures. And behind the scenes, he was building a coaching staff and a team for the future. Not a team built around a couple of flashy superstars, but a team of dedicated players who worked as a team, thought as a team and got credit as a team.

And it worked.

Today, Bill Belichick is universally acknowledged as a brilliant strategist - one of the top coaches to ever coach pro football. His Patriots are one of only two teams to have ever won three Super Bowls in four years. As I write, they have won every game of their regular season - a feat only equaled by one other team in pro football history. Now they've won the playoffs and are on the way to another Super Bowl. Two of his Super Bowl defensive game plans are in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. His Patriots dominate the world of professional football, having won five straight division titles (six overall).

But it could have never happen had he thrown in the towel after five humiliating years in Cleveland and a horrid first year in New England.

Ziggy
03-28-2010, 04:06 PM
Im speechless. What will it take for some of you guys to see what McDaniels is?

What will it take for you to see that he's putting in a proven system, albeit not the way YOU would?

Tned
03-28-2010, 04:10 PM
Rather than believe the crowds and the press in Cleveland, rather than listen to the detractors who doubted him in New England, he kept on working. He learned from his failures. And behind the scenes, he was building a coaching staff and a team for the future. Not a team built around a couple of flashy superstars, but a team of dedicated players who worked as a team, thought as a team and got credit as a team.

And it worked.


Based on what you bolded in the article you posted, it appears you are attempting to depress us all, saying that all of McDaniels 'failures' in Denver will pay dividends for him in his next job. :sad:

Ziggy
03-28-2010, 04:14 PM
Well, let's look at the 'Big Oomph' theory, it's a personal theory of mine, but it makes way too much fricking sense; it is based on football being a farm league within itself, not farming of players, but of teams. Belichick is headed for the Hall of Fame, it can not be denied that he is the most famous coach of the modern era...but is his success all his? That is the big question...and the answer is no. Bill Parcells, Belichicks old friend and mentor had begun changing New England's philosophy, they are both tough, team orientated coaches who demand the best of any and all players on the roster. They worked together in New York to mold one of the better teams of late 80's, but they always remained close. So the philosophy and the players that were use to the strict demands that Belichick would demand were somewhat in place. In 1996 Belichick rejoined Parcells in New England, for one season before both headed to the Jets. By the time that he returned to take over the philosophy was still somewhat set in, but was yet to fully succeed, all he had to do was finish the product. A couple good drafts later he had a plethura of talent and they finally came together to be the defecto dynasty of the modern era.

Shanahan had Reeves', Cowher had Chuck Noll, Johnson had Tom Landry, Seifart had Bill Walsh and so on. The most dominant teams at times were already molded but missing particular pieces which took a two to three years to put in place. But they succeeded because of such to a level unmatched by those completely building on their own and it can continue...look at Tomlin in Pittsburgh, that is the 'Big Oomph' theory and it tends to play out at the collegiate level as well, that is why we see several teams stay dominant head coach after head coach. McDaniels likely would have won the division and more had he kept Cutler and not made the waves he did, now he has to account for what he has done and may not have the time in which to fix it and prove himself. Let's just hope Bowlen finds someone that can take what he has done and succeed with it.

It's a well intended theory Lan, but your examples of "Shanhan had Reeves and Johnson had Landry" are absurd. Shanhan and Johnson came in and changed nearly everything thier predecessors had done. New systems, philosiphies, player types, and just about everything else. Either you are too young to have seen these changes yourself, or you weren't paying attention.

Ziggy
03-28-2010, 04:17 PM
Based on what you bolded in the article you posted, it appears you are attempting to depress us all, saying that all of McDaniels 'failures' in Denver will pay dividends for him in his next job. :sad:

No, I'm saying that he is installing a system that works. Hopefully he will have success in a shorter time period than Bill did. Those that think it can be done in a year or 2 don't understand how the NFL works. Unless you are inheriting a completely talent-laden team, rebuilding takes time. Does anyone really think that the Broncos aren't rebuilding?

Lancane
03-28-2010, 04:19 PM
What will it take for you to see that he's putting in a proven system, albeit not the way YOU would?

A proven system? That is unfounded horseshit Zig, it's not proven. To be such it has to succeed in more then one area and in that it has not. Only one team has succeeded in the modern era using the 'team' based philosophy not to mention the Pro-Spread offensive scheme, that team is Belichick's Patriots. And I'm not saying it will not work, but that is yet to be seen, most teams that have tried either using a similar philosophy or offensive scheme have failed and drastically. The last team to win using the 'team' philosophy before Belicheck was the New York Giants of the late 80's and before them it was Oakland Raiders under Hall of Famer John Madden. Mangini could not do it, Weis is currently trying to install the Pro-Spread in K.C., but again it's not proven, neither the philosophy or scheme, as we know Belichick is the only one who has instilled both with success. McDaniels will look like a failure if Kansas City finds quicker success with the spread or if he can not get the 'team' philosophy to stick. That is why I said he tried to do too much at one time, and it could end up biting him in his backside.

Ziggy
03-28-2010, 04:27 PM
A proven system? That is unfounded horseshit Zig, it's not proven. using the 'team' based philosophy not to mention the Pro-Spread offensive scheme, that teaTo be such it has to succeed in more then one area and in that it has not. Only one team has succeeded in the modern eram is Belichick's Patriots.

Ever hear of a team called the Pittsburgh Steelers?

Lancane
03-28-2010, 04:40 PM
It's a well intended theory Lan, but your examples of "Shanhan had Reeves and Johnson had Landry" are absurd. Shanhan and Johnson came in and changed nearly everything thier predecessors had done. New systems, philosiphies, player types, and just about everything else. Either you are too young to have seen these changes yourself, or you weren't paying attention.

Actually I am dead on, Shanahan brought the West-Coast offense which was derived from in part of the Run N' Gun which Reeves used. You forget that Shanahan was as much a product of Reeves' mentoring as he was of Walsh...if you believe otherwise then you don't know the history of football all that well! Johnson inherited a team with issues, but it still had some of the cournerstone building blocks, he was able to trade to use to add more. All he had to do was install his own philosophy...between the talent he added and what remained he was capable of creating a dominant team, let alone he inherited a mindset of a team that is well beloved and was considered even at it's worst times as 'America's Team'.

Back to Shanahan...he was better off then Johnson though, he had Elway, Sharpe, Atwater, Crocket, Braxton, Zimmerman, Nalen, Hasselbach, Habib, Carswell, Aldridge and Burns...they were all on the team before he became the head coach and all played parts in the Super Bowl years. He added the missing pieces, but the cornerstones were already here...

One could argue Johnsons' case far better then Shanahan's.

Nickademus
03-28-2010, 04:45 PM
I get so tired of Florio attempting to make news instead of report it.

Ziggy
03-28-2010, 04:45 PM
Actually I am dead on, Shanahan brought the West-Coast offense which was derived from in part of the Run N' Gun which Reeves used.

You're killing me Lan. Run N' Gun? Reeves?!? Reeves' offense was run on 1st, run on 2nd, have Elway try to bail our butt out on 3rd. Shanahan was accused of scripting plays with Elway behind Reeves' back by Dan in his last year of Ocoordinator here when he tried to inject some life into this offense. Reeves' offense was about as far from run and gun as you can get. It was prehistoric.

Lancane
03-28-2010, 04:45 PM
Ever hear of a team called the Pittsburgh Steelers?

Yes, I know the Steelers well...but even though they had a 'Team' philosophy, one player had been a thorn to the philosophy...Terry Bradshaw. Noll benched Bradshaw for his outlandish behavior and extreme ways, his hissy-fits as the media called them, and this is common knowledge. Noll gave into Bradshaw a lot of times, because he gave them a better chance to win. A lot of people do not realize how often that he was benched...so that would be more of an example of a coach knowing that he had to play a talented athlete above his own football philosophy and thus why I discounted it.

Lancane
03-28-2010, 04:52 PM
You're killing me Lan. Run N' Gun? Reeves?!? Reeves' offense was run on 1st, run on 2nd, have Elway try to bail our butt out on 3rd. Shanahan was accused of scripting plays with Elway behind Reeves' back by Dan in his last year of Ocoordinator here when he tried to inject some life into this offense. Reeves' offense was about as far from run and gun as you can get. It was prehistoric.

It was the 'Run N' Gun', there is a reason why the Run half is before the Gun part, it was a run first system. Anyone who knows offensive schemes knows this, the West-Coast offense is derived from three systems: Air Coryell, Vertical and Run N' Gun, mainly factoring the shotgun part of the scheme. Just so you know, the Run N' Gun is also the grandfather system to the Spread offensive philosophy. Also known as the Run and Shoot offense, it was utilized by the Denver Gold and then by Dan Reeves of the Denver Broncos.

topscribe
03-28-2010, 04:53 PM
Im speechless. What will it take for some of you guys to see what McDaniels is?

I haven't seen enough evidence to know for sure what McDaniels is.

Neither have you. You only think you have . . .

-----

Ziggy
03-28-2010, 04:53 PM
You forget that Shanahan was as much a product of Reeves' mentoring as he was of Walsh...if you believe otherwise then you don't know the history of football all that well! Johnson inherited a team with issues, but it still had some of the cournerstone building blocks, he was able to trade to use to add more.

I emplore you to quit while you're behind Lan. Shanahan was in no way a product of Reeves. He worked for him, but outside of that, they were nothing alike and neither were thier styles. Shanahan, after a short stop in Oakland, went to San Fran. He learned the WCO there, and brought it to Denver, along with most of thier other philosiphies. Reeves and Shanahan were, are, and always will be night and day apart in every way.

Johnson inherited one good player. His name was Hershell Walker. He traded him for top picks, and parlayed those picks into more picks and great players. He drafted Emmit Smith, Troy Aikman, and just about every other good Cowboy player at the time. Heck, Aikman went 1-15 his first season. Johnson built that team from the ground up and did it with great trades and draft picks.

Ziggy
03-28-2010, 04:56 PM
It was the 'Run N' Gun', there is a reason why the Run half is before the Gun part, it was a run first system. Anyone who knows offensive schemes knows this, the West-Coast offense is derived from three systems: Air Coryell, Vertical and Run N' Gun, mainly factoring the shotgun part of the scheme. Just so you know, the Run N' Gun is also the grandfather system to the Spread offensive philosophy. Also known as the Run and Shoot offense, it was utilized by the Denver Gold and then by Dan Reeves of the Denver Broncos.

So Dan Reeves ran the run and shoot offense in Denver? Old timers, step in here please. JR, Top, Tned, help me out here.

turftoad
03-28-2010, 05:08 PM
So Dan Reeves ran the run and shoot offense in Denver? Old timers, step in here please. JR, Top, Tned, help me out here.

Eway would have been thrilled if Reeves ran the run and shoot. Pretty much he ran the opposite. He was more of a run, run, run up the gut guy. Man, talk about the frustration.

Anyway, this is one of the reasons that Reeves and Elway didn't get along. Elway felt that Reeves was ruining his career with style of offense he was running.

Tned
03-28-2010, 05:11 PM
So Dan Reeves ran the run and shoot offense in Denver? Old timers, step in here please. JR, Top, Tned, help me out here.

Of course Reeves never ran the run and shoot in Denver. He didn't run anything close to a run and shoot offense.

Ziggy
03-28-2010, 05:20 PM
Eway would have been thrilled if Reeves ran the run and shoot. Pretty much he ran the opposite. He was more of a run, run, run up the gut guy. Man, talk about the frustration.

Anyway, this is one of the reasons that Reeves and Elway didn't get along. Elway felt that Reeves was ruining his career with style of offense he was running.

Thanks Turf. I forgot that you are one of us Alzheimers.....er...old timers.

Lancane
03-28-2010, 05:29 PM
Of course Reeves never ran the run and shoot in Denver. He didn't run anything close to a run and shoot offense.


In 1981 Dan Reeves was hired as the Head Coach of the Denver Broncos and immediately installed the Tom Landry's offense, a dynamic offense which derived from three different offensive philosophies, the Wing T, Run and Gun and the better known Pro System.


The Run and Shoot or Run N' Gun as it came to be known in the 80's was the system that focused on shotgun formations in the passing game. It showed variable success, the most famous quarterback to succeed in the system was John Elway who was known to call shotgun audibles at the line of scrimmage in a run heavy Pro System ran by Dan Reeves.

:coffee:

We can argue all day...no point Zig, we will just have to disagree. The main factor of my argument was the talent which Reeves had left for Shanahan, for some it's the philosophy, the system and sometimes the talent.

Ravage!!!
03-28-2010, 05:32 PM
Lan.. you know I agree with most of what your thoughts are....but...

how did Shanahan have Reeves to follow? He didn't follow Reeves, there were coaches in between. He ran something completely different. Shanahan, at the time, was revolutionary in the way he used the free-agents to build a team.

I liked the theory, but at the same time, I could point out failing teams that have followed great coaching. Such as the Bills, the 49ers, Noll was a complete failure after Bradshaw retired, Dallas after Johnson... teams that had great coaches but fail.

topscribe
03-28-2010, 05:44 PM
So Dan Reeves ran the run and shoot offense in Denver? Old timers, step in here please. JR, Top, Tned, help me out here.

It was, as you implied, more like the run, run, and gun system, if you get my drift.

Then, along came the 4th quarter, and it was gun, gun, gun because they had
fallen behind from the run, run, and gun. I think that got a little old for Elway . . .

-----

BigBroncLove
03-28-2010, 05:47 PM
Well here's my take on the McDaniels issue. I don't really think he is a great communicator. Currently the only source of this is Klis, in which the rest of the media is building stories off of. Klis of course gives no specific reason for the split between Brady and McDaniels so we're left to sit here and speculate like everyone else. However Klis does seem to elude to the issue at hand and that is...


To get his team to perform under pressure, McDaniels asks his players to be tough mentally. And that means being able to handle criticism.

After New England won its third Super Bowl in four years at the end of the 2004 season, Charlie Weis left as the Patriots' offensive coordinator to become head coach at Notre Dame. McDaniels was promoted from defensive assistant to essentially Weis' replacement as offensive coordinator, although he was given the title of quarterbacks coach.

So what happened in McDaniels' first season of coaching Brady, the league's best quarterback? The two went three weeks without speaking to each other. Brady went on to have a Pro Bowl season, and the Patriots made the playoffs. And, two years later, McDaniels, by then officially promoted to offensive coordinator, helped Brady set an NFL record with 50 touchdown passes in a season.

The thing is, this is the very issue that Cutler brought up when he was on the outs with McDaniels as well. He said McDaniels criticized portions of his performance in 2008 in a meeting designed to mend the relationship between the two. I don't want to get into the whole Cutler/McDaniels ordeal, but it compounds the idea that this is a driving issue.

Personally I think It's good that he isn't afraid to criticize aspects of players performance, regardless of their tenure or ability. If you want to get better you have to look at where you can enhance your performance, and no player is perfect. I do imagine however that how he chooses to do it, or when he chooses to do it, is likely not always ideal. He's had to shove his foot in his mouth more than once, and that's with the media. Behind closed doors, who knows how often.

I do believe McDaniels is a great mind when it comes to the systems/implementation of football and game planning. Everyone who has ever written about him always compliments him on his diverse and able knowledge of football. However his personal skills and tact does seem to be wanting. This was something that Shannahan was great at, which in his latter years with the Broncos can be debated led to a softness in discipline.

Personally, I don't mind to much about the shift in mentality for the team. I feel let him build the core personality that he envisoned. It won't be pretty. Shifting from a more relaxed team environment to a disciplined one will ruffle more feathers than the other way around. Just don't let it get to much more costly then what we have at present (Cutler, Marshall, and Scheffler... maybe not marshall but we'll see). You can only blood let so far before you bleed the team dry.

Ravage!!!
03-28-2010, 05:50 PM
there is a time for everything. I won't even gesture for a moment to believe what would have caused rift between McD and Brady.

But every player that has played since elementary school knows how to take criticism. Critisism in itself is NEVER a problem with an athlete that has played sports their entire life. Thats part of it, everyone (every athlete) knows it. But there is such a thing as timing as to when its said, and how its said. Thats where communication can work for and against you.

Lancane
03-28-2010, 05:51 PM
Lan.. you know I agree with most of what your thoughts are....but...

how did Shanahan have Reeves to follow? He didn't follow Reeves, there were coaches in between. He ran something completely different. Shanahan, at the time, was revolutionary in the way he used the free-agents to build a team.

I liked the theory, but at the same time, I could point out failing teams that have followed great coaching. Such as the Bills, the 49ers, Noll was a complete failure after Bradshaw retired, Dallas after Johnson... teams that had great coaches but fail.

It's the point of inheritance, some inherit talent, some the standard of an organization and so on. Not just a single thing...Noll still passed on the standard of the team as well as some talent, the base philosophy of the organization, which Cowher admits that he is a student of Nolls'. Shanahan inherited the cornerstone players of his Super Bowl teams. Johnson inherited the Cowboys standard and enough talent to move around and trade and build off of, he inherited the most beloved football team in America...Seifert had received as much from Bill Walsh, AI the talent, philosophy and standards of the organization itself.

We have seen it at the collegiate level as well, not always...but if you look at those teams that continually succeed they inherit the standard and legacy of a team, many times a similar philosophy and so forth. Ever notice how some teams no matter the coaches continue to be more dominant then others. Like Notre Dame during the Golden Years, no matter who coached they found success, we see it with teams like Texas, Oklahoma, Florida and other big time schools. Some coaches do not have that, Holmgren would be one and Saban would be another, they have had to earn success. Bill Belichick is not the only set cause to his success, whereas Bill Walsh and Tom Landry are, both known for creating new philosophies and bringing change to the game itself. That does not mean I don't believe that Belichick is a good coach, I think he is a great coach and deserves to be in the Hall of Fame.

Anyways, the point I was bringing up is that McDaniels inherited some good offensive talent and obviously the standards of the organization. He quickly dissmantled what he inherited instead of going with it and succeeding, making it much harder for himself. If he does succeed then he will prove more then I think he is capable of, and no matter who we are will have to show some respect...he is taking the hard road, maybe even harder then Johnson had when he was hired by Dallas.

JDL
03-28-2010, 05:53 PM
Im speechless. What will it take for some of you guys to see what McDaniels is?

Breaking into their mother's home and beating her dog with a McDonald's wrapper.... most likely.

Nomad
03-28-2010, 06:08 PM
I swear, if you shanahaters had your way, we'd still be 0 and 4 in the super bowl.

I don't believe anyone here hates Shanny and respects/appreciates what he did and has done for the BRONCOS! We may be critical in certain points of his career and positions here in Denver but Shanny will always be a great coach in my book

Denver Native (Carol)
03-28-2010, 06:16 PM
You're killing me Lan. Run N' Gun? Reeves?!? Reeves' offense was run on 1st, run on 2nd, have Elway try to bail our butt out on 3rd. Shanahan was accused of scripting plays with Elway behind Reeves' back by Dan in his last year of Ocoordinator here when he tried to inject some life into this offense. Reeves' offense was about as far from run and gun as you can get. It was prehistoric.

That is exactly what I was thinking. Run on 1st, run on 2nd, and Elway try to bail us out on 3rd down. I went to every home game when Reeves was coaching, and it became a joke in the stands, as to who would run the ball on 1st down, vs. 2nd down. The ONLY time it was anything but, was when we were behind, and Reeves turned John loose to try and win the game = which, as we know, equaled all of John's comeback wins. The way Reeves ran the offense was exactly what caused the problems between him and John. I am sure that John would have loved a 14 point lead with 2 minutes to go, rather than doing everything he could do to pull out a win.

TXBRONC
03-28-2010, 06:19 PM
No McD was not the head coach; however we both know that if Belichick felt that it was McD causing a MAJOR problem, Belichick would have fired him. Apparently was not that BIG of a deal to Belichick.

Afraid not Carol. If they are suppose to communicating regularly and they went three weeks that's not good. Is wasn't a big deal Belichick? How do you know? They got it worked out but that in no way shape or form tells me that Belicheck flippant about it. All it tells us for sure is that there was problem and they got it resolved before it spun out of control. (N.B. I'm in no way assigning blame to anyone.)

TXBRONC
03-28-2010, 06:27 PM
Of course Reeves never ran the run and shoot in Denver. He didn't run anything close to a run and shoot offense.

That's right Reeves offense was more like a refrigerator with a Lamborghini engine and four square tires.

Bosco
03-28-2010, 06:33 PM
Its further evidence of a pattern that many of us are beyond concerned about. To deny the fact that McDaniels doesnt get along well with others is almost ridiculous at this point.

Who does he not get along with?

Denver Native (Carol)
03-28-2010, 06:52 PM
Afraid not Carol. If they are suppose to communicating regularly and they went three weeks that's not good. Is wasn't a big deal Belichick? How do you know? They got it worked out but that in no way shape or form tells me that Belicheck flippant about it. All it tells us for sure is that there was problem and they got it resolved before it spun out of control. (N.B. I'm in no way assigning blame to anyone.)

My response were to those pointing the finger solely at Coach McD, without considering possibly it was Brady not wanting to talk - i.e. if Belichick FELT Coach McD was SOLELY to blame - he would have fired him.

TXBRONC
03-28-2010, 07:06 PM
My response were to those pointing the finger solely at Coach McD, without considering possibly it was Brady not wanting to talk - i.e. if Belichick FELT Coach McD was SOLELY to blame - he would have fired him.

Carol you have no better idea what Belichick was feeling than anyone else does. To say Belichick didn't fire McDaniels means he didn't feel McDaniels was SOLELY to blame is grasping at straws. Feeling someone is in the wrong doesn't automatically mean you're get a pink slip. As I said previously the only thing we know for sure is that they got it worked out before it got out of hand.

Denver Native (Carol)
03-28-2010, 07:12 PM
Carol you have no better idea what Belichick was feeling than anyone else does. To say Belichick didn't fire McDaniels means he didn't feel McDaniels was SOLELY to blame is grasping at straws. Feeling someone is in the wrong doesn't automatically mean you're get a pink slip. As I said previously the only thing we know for sure is that they got it worked out before it got out of hand.

Then only the three who were involved are the only ones who know what happened back in 2005. No more need for opinions.

silkamilkamonico
03-28-2010, 07:15 PM
Who cares that McDaniels didn't get along with Brady, that was what, 3-4 years ago? That's so yesterday....

atwater27
03-28-2010, 07:17 PM
No more need for opinions.

If not for opinions, you wouldn't have a website to moderate.

Denver Native (Carol)
03-28-2010, 07:20 PM
If not for opinions, you wouldn't have a website to moderate.

I don't right now - I am not a mod on here

atwater27
03-28-2010, 07:28 PM
You know what I mean. This site would have zero traffic without opinions and people with them.

sakic_avs
03-28-2010, 08:01 PM
Im speechless. What will it take for some of you guys to see what McDaniels is?

http://colunistas.ig.com.br/magaiver/files/2008/11/haironfire.jpg

rcsodak
03-28-2010, 08:40 PM
I swear, if you shanahaters had your way, we'd still be 0 and 4 in the super bowl.

So using Shanny's tenure as a barometer makes us "shanahaters"?

Gotcha.

:coffee:

arapaho2
03-28-2010, 08:40 PM
No, I'm saying that he is installing a system that works. Hopefully he will have success in a shorter time period than Bill did. Those that think it can be done in a year or 2 don't understand how the NFL works. Unless you are inheriting a completely talent-laden team, rebuilding takes time. Does anyone really think that the Broncos aren't rebuilding?

there lies the problem for alot of us.....there was no need to rebuild a solid young offense with a franchise 25 yr old qb

defense yes...but what he did was last year start the dismantling of the offense and probably will finish it this season...to get us what..average?

rcsodak
03-28-2010, 08:44 PM
I am not denying anything - but the article does not come out and state that Brady tried to talk with Coach McD, but Coach McD would not talk, anymore than the article states that Coach McD tried to talk to Brady, but Brady would not talk - that's all I was stating.

Nor does it say who 'exposed' this tidbit. Brady? Doubtful. McD? Doubtful. Belicek? Doubtful.
Custodian? Hmmmmm.......

Lonestar
03-28-2010, 08:47 PM
IIRC mike got fired from the broncos for going behind Reeves back and trying to stab him while being Johns BUD.

IIRC mike got fired from the raiders because he was a bull headed know it all that wanted things done his way.

IIRC mike had a dg house that to the best of my knowledge NO ONE got out of.

IIRC mike was called a little napoleon by more that one ex player. (maybe even a few existing ones)

IIRC mike got fired in DEN because he did not fire slowitt

Not sure why mike is used as standard here in DEN as if his excrement did not stink.

OH I remember he won two Superbowls with a crap load of HOF players more than a decade ago and failed to win more than one playoff games since.

Shazam!
03-28-2010, 08:53 PM
What year was it that they didnt talk again?

Also, when Shanahan finished .500 or less, or when Denver got crushed in the playoffs, was it considered a 'failure'?


I swear, if you shanahaters had your way, we'd still be 0 and 4 in the super bowl.

At (and everyone else), that's a fair point I made and if you took it as a bashing of Shanahan, it's just because of all the unreasonable hatred of Josh McDaniels.

I was grateful for what Shanahan delivered to Denver in the 1990's and I'll never, ever forget it, but his methods clearly were no longer effective and Denver fielded practically the worst defense in the League two straight years. Catasrophic injuries. .500 over 3 years. C'mon.

It's likely McDaniels can yield identical Seasons as Shanahan from 2000-2008 and it would be considered a failure, but Shanahan got a pass. One playoff win, one division title, 3 wild card berths all resulting in embarassing losses in nine seasons is not success.

It is the McHaters who are irrational. My assessment was fair and didnt clobber Shanny OR McDaniels.

rcsodak
03-28-2010, 08:58 PM
There are so many subtleties, but a simple way of looking at it is that West Coast is a modern pro style offense with a (generally) fairly static, throwing QB and a running FB or TB to keep the defense off balance. The plays for a west coast offense are scripted in advance and it's generally a quick release, mid to long distance pass to a fast route-running receiver, or a run by one of the backs.

Run N Gun, is often more flexible and relies on having a mobile quarterback. The spread offense favored by Florida and a number of other college teams is an example of one type of run n gun. The QB is able to move out of the pocket, pass downfield, dump short for a screen, run the ball himself or toss or hand-off the ball to a supporting runner. Spirier used to run it at Florida and created such an explosive offense with 2 (and sometimes 3 in one game) interchangeable passing and running QB's that they called it the "fun'n'gun". He tried to take it to the NFL and it failed miserably.

The speed of pro defenses generally makes run'n'gun less applicable to the NFL as the longer passing plays rely less on QB accuracy and arm strength and more on blown coverage or slower linemen & LB's on defense.

Found this.... :D

Lonestar
03-28-2010, 09:04 PM
It's the point of inheritance, some inherit talent, some the standard of an organization and so on. Not just a single thing...Noll still passed on the standard of the team as well as some talent, the base philosophy of the organization, which Cowher admits that he is a student of Nolls'. Shanahan inherited the cornerstone players of his Super Bowl teams. Johnson inherited the Cowboys standard and enough talent to move around and trade and build off of, he inherited the most beloved football team in America...Seifert had received as much from Bill Walsh, AI the talent, philosophy and standards of the organization itself.

We have seen it at the collegiate level as well, not always...but if you look at those teams that continually succeed they inherit the standard and legacy of a team, many times a similar philosophy and so forth. Ever notice how some teams no matter the coaches continue to be more dominant then others. Like Notre Dame during the Golden Years, no matter who coached they found success, we see it with teams like Texas, Oklahoma, Florida and other big time schools. Some coaches do not have that, Holmgren would be one and Saban would be another, they have had to earn success. Bill Belichick is not the only set cause to his success, whereas Bill Walsh and Tom Landry are, both known for creating new philosophies and bringing change to the game itself. That does not mean I don't believe that Belichick is a good coach, I think he is a great coach and deserves to be in the Hall of Fame.

Anyways, the point I was bringing up is that McDaniels inherited some good offensive talent and obviously the standards of the organization. He quickly dissmantled what he inherited instead of going with it and succeeding, making it much harder for himself. If he does succeed then he will prove more then I think he is capable of, and no matter who we are will have to show some respect...he is taking the hard road, maybe even harder then Johnson had when he was hired by Dallas.


Good post overall.

Johnson going into DAL was pretty easy as they had several losing seasons IIRC before Landry was cut loose.

Of course JJ had the undying love of the new owner JJ and an almost unlimited access to talent especially after the Walker trade.

His being new to the NFL and just coming out of college from one of the best hotbeds of college ball if they players were not on his team they played his team or he had tried to recruit them out of HS he had contacts up the yin yang with other college coaches so got all of the hot scoop on players he was ready to draft.


So with those extra picks they got from MIN they were loaded for bear look at his picks

1988 - Dallas Cowboys
Rd Sel # Player Position School
1 11 Michael Irvin WR Miami (Fla.)
2 41 Ken Norton LB UCLA
3 67 Mark Hutson -- Oklahoma
4 94 Dave Widell T Boston College
1989 - Dallas Cowboys
Rd Sel # Player Position School
1 1 Troy Aikman QB UCLA
2 29 Steve Wisniewski G Penn State
2 39 Daryl Johnston RB Syracuse
3 57 Mark Stepnoski C Pittsburgh
3 68 Rhondy Weston DE Florida
4 85 Tony Tolbert DE Texas-El Paso
1991 - Dallas Cowboys
Rd Sel # Player Position School
1 1 Russell Maryland DT Miami (Fla.)
1 12 Alvin Harper WR Tennessee
1 20 Kelvin Pritchett DT Mississippi
2 37 Dixon Edwards LB Michigan State
3 62 Godfrey Myles LB Florida
3 64 James Richards -- California
3 70 Erik Williams T Central State (Ohio)
4 97 Curvin Richards RB Pittsburgh
4 106 Bill Musgrave QB Oregon
4 108 Tony Hill DE Tennessee-Chattanooga
4 110 Kevin Harris DE
1992 - Dallas Cowboys
Rd Sel # Player Position School
1 17 Kevin Smith CB Texas A&M
1 24 Robert Jones MLB East Carolina
2 36 Jimmy Smith WR Jackson State
2 37 Darren Woodson DB Arizona State
3 58 Clayton Holmes DB Carson-Newman
3 82 James Brown T Virginia State
4 109 Tom Myslinski G

28 picks in those first few years all under the top 110 picks mickey the mope could have stock piled a team with those picks:D

Lonestar
03-28-2010, 09:15 PM
Eway would have been thrilled if Reeves ran the run and shoot. Pretty much he ran the opposite. He was more of a run, run, run up the gut guy. Man, talk about the frustration.

Anyway, this is one of the reasons that Reeves and Elway didn't get along. Elway felt that Reeves was ruining his career with style of offense he was running.


There is very little doubt in my mind that dan slowed Johns progress ans was a primary reason John won so many come from behind games.

IIRC he was run run getting a couple each time and then hey John pull my ass out of the fire by making something happen on 3rd and long 5+ yards.

Hell my old mother in law could call the plays as they were going in to the huddle. and she was right about 80% of the time. BTW she was a seamstress and knew nothing about football and was a better coach than reeves IMO

I firmly believe that had mike been here all of Johns career he would have held all of the passing records that marion held before Farve broke them.

OrangeHoof
03-28-2010, 09:54 PM
If you're not talking to the QB, you aren't central to the game-planning. But it was several years ago and probably is irrelevant now.

But it does seem to be one more piece of the mosaic that says McD might not have been mature enough to be a successful head coach. For all the talk about "no player is bigger than the team", smart coaches know when to bend those rules for the stars. There's nothing so black and white in head coaching that you can't bend a bit for the good of the team.

turftoad
03-28-2010, 09:59 PM
If you're not talking to the QB, you aren't central to the game-planning. But it was several years ago and probably is irrelevant now.

But it does seem to be one more piece of the mosaic that says McD might not have been mature enough to be a successful head coach. For all the talk about "no player is bigger than the team", smart coaches know when to bend those rules for the stars. There's nothing so black and white in head coaching that you can't bend a bit for the good of the team.

I agree with the "no player is bigger than the team" theory, however, the same thing goes for young egomaniac head coaches also.

Lonestar
03-28-2010, 10:12 PM
I agree with the "no player is bigger than the team" theory, however, the same thing goes for young egomaniac head coaches also.


Guess that means mike also, perhaps billy and then there is coughlin, singletary, and the new guy int SEA.

I don't think that Josh has the franchise on EGO.

LEt it go deep breath it will get better.:salute:

turftoad
03-28-2010, 10:21 PM
Guess that means mike also, perhaps billy and then there is coughlin, singletary, and the new guy int SEA.

I don't think that Josh has the franchise on EGO.

LEt it go deep breath it will get better.:salute:

A lot of other people do. Is they're opionon more wrong thaan yours?

Lonestar
03-28-2010, 10:24 PM
A lot of other people do. Is they're opionon more wrong thaan yours?


Perhaps not, but I think (option here) that most of the HC in the NFL are ego, headstrong as Josh is.

The ones listed are know not to take any crap from anyone. there may be more of them I just know of these guys.

NightTrainLayne
03-28-2010, 11:39 PM
:coffee:

We can argue all day...no point Zig, we will just have to disagree. The main factor of my argument was the talent which Reeves had left for Shanahan, for some it's the philosophy, the system and sometimes the talent.

Talent that Reeves left for Shanahan? :confused:

sneakers
03-29-2010, 12:45 AM
Well, maybe if Tom Brady wouldn't be such a douche.....

dogfish
03-29-2010, 01:35 AM
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/1fuDDqU6n4o&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/1fuDDqU6n4o&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>


so do we put marshall in the box until he gets his mind right, or josh "we're just tryin' to win a ^#*^_@#! game" mcmadniels?

or both?

Lancane
03-29-2010, 01:45 AM
Talent that Reeves left for Shanahan? :confused:

Yeah, which included Elway, Atwater, Braxton, Crocket and Sharpe to name a few. Unless you think those players were nothing but crap!

:coffee:

KyleOrtonArmySoldier#128
03-29-2010, 02:21 AM
Was this written by somebody who actually knows Josh McDaniels?

I think not, and clearly it is hearsay to ever question the character of somebody you know nothing about.

Elevation inc
03-29-2010, 04:21 AM
lol MCd was what 27-28 when this incident occured and a green Qb coach....why is this even pertinent, because a wack ass blog writer is bored????

Both brady and MCd are different people than they were back then...had to be because both moved on learned and put down the greatest reg season performance by any team in history over a 16 game season....

maybe brady just didnt like the fact a young'un was telling him how to play Qb after he just won 3 Sb's.....maybe he had a bit of a attitude and thats why they didnt talk...but hey its always the coaches right???? players never get there feelings hurt from crticism or get but hurt right???

Elevation inc
03-29-2010, 04:44 AM
Brady went on to have a Pro Bowl season, and the Patriots made the playoffs. And, two years later, McDaniels, by then officially promoted to offensive coordinator, helped Brady set an NFL record with 50 touchdown passes in a season.

Clearly, McDaniels and Brady got past their spat


this is actually a key part of the actual article not a hypothesis from florio

claymore
03-29-2010, 06:25 AM
What will it take for you to see that he's putting in a proven system, albeit not the way YOU would?

Good Drafts, a winning season, a good offense, not making weird trades and pissing players and coaches off. You know, standard stuff good coaches do.

NightTrainLayne
03-29-2010, 06:44 AM
Yeah, which included Elway, Atwater, Braxton, Crocket and Sharpe to name a few. Unless you think those players were nothing but crap!

:coffee:

You do realize that a guy named Wade Phillips was Denver's HC prior to Shanahan, not Reeves. By your logic Jim "Playoffs!?!?" Mora left some great players like Peyton Manning for Jim Caldwell in Indianapolis.

In-com-plete
03-29-2010, 07:14 AM
McDanials is a ******* liar!

Period.

SoCalImport
03-29-2010, 07:18 AM
Clearly, McDaniels and Brady got past their spat


this is actually a key part of the actual article not a hypothesis from florio

Actually that last part is an assumption.

claymore
03-29-2010, 07:37 AM
lol MCd was what 27-28 when this incident occured and a green Qb coach....why is this even pertinent, because a wack ass blog writer is bored????

Both brady and MCd are different people than they were back then...had to be because both moved on learned and put down the greatest reg season performance by any team in history over a 16 game season....

maybe brady just didnt like the fact a young'un was telling him how to play Qb after he just won 3 Sb's.....maybe he had a bit of a attitude and thats why they didnt talk...but hey its always the coaches right???? players never get there feelings hurt from crticism or get but hurt right???

The Patriots offensive explosion coincides with Welker and Moss's arrival. Not McDaniels.

The Patriots actually got worse when McD took over, Until Moss was signed.

They have been in the top 5 ever since, and Welker has been the #1, #2, & #1 in the league all 3 years moss has been there.

broncofaninfla
03-29-2010, 08:20 AM
There seems to be a pattern with Mcd and his reported lack of people skills.

Shazam!
03-29-2010, 08:23 AM
The Patriots offensive explosion coincides with Welker and Moss's arrival. Not McDaniels.

The Patriots actually got worse when McD took over, Until Moss was signed.

They have been in the top 5 ever since, and Welker has been the #1, #2, & #1 in the league all 3 years moss has been there.

If you're using that as a measuring stick, if McD had nothing to do with NE's success offensively those years, then Mike Shanahan was nothing without John Elway.

Man, rational logic really sucks.

All this bullshit in this thread over nothing...

claymore
03-29-2010, 08:37 AM
If you're using that as a measuring stick, if McD had nothing to do with NE's success offensively those years, then Mike Shanahan was nothing without John Elway.

Man, rational logic really sucks.

All this bullshit in this thread over nothing...

I dont see how you came up with that. Elway's best years were under Shanahan.

Elevation inc
03-29-2010, 08:47 AM
Actually that last part is an assumption.

come on bro....Bradys own words have described MCD in a awsome light...lets not get fancy here, when reality is they did get past there so called beef....

Elevation inc
03-29-2010, 08:50 AM
The Patriots offensive explosion coincides with Welker and Moss's arrival. Not McDaniels.

The Patriots actually got worse when McD took over, Until Moss was signed.

They have been in the top 5 ever since, and Welker has been the #1, #2, & #1 in the league all 3 years moss has been there.


you do know brady also had his best year as well under MCD....he was a much better passing qb as well than when he won SB.....yes welker and moss helped...but really watching and studying brady its clear he was a better overall qb than his early sb wins....he developed into a much better passer, not just becasue of his surroundings...

i get you hate MCD and i respect that, but lets not undermine the fact MCD did develop brady into a better Qb than he was....

Shazam!
03-29-2010, 08:55 AM
I dont see how you came up with that. Elway's best years were under Shanahan.

10 seasons without Elway - One playoff win

That's how.

Elevation inc
03-29-2010, 08:59 AM
There seems to be a pattern with Mcd and his reported lack of people skills.

i agree there is a pattern but whats it to say its not just high profile players, getting but hurt becasue of critique....*shrugs*


i personally belive talking about a tiff between brady and MCD 5 years ago...is retarded...especially when they got past it, brady clearly stated how fond of MCD he is, and how much better and well rounded a Qb he became with MCd....


i know its off-season and people are anxious and pissy and worried, and unsure, but this is a little extrem....it was 5 years ago....im sure every coach has done something in there past they aint proud of....

heck i can think of shanny and his vouching of clarrett as a prime example....:lol:

the point is MCd's actions 5 years ago arent really relative here, becasue no one knows why they didnt talk at all....writers are simply creating hypothesis for what they think is the issue, but there hasnt been a ounce of proof posted other than the fact they moved on and brady became a better QB....thats fact not speculation...the rest is!!!


i also think people need to realize just how much accountability MCD has taken for last years collapse, just listen without bias to many of his recent interviews and you can clearly here, i need to get better as a coach, we need to get better as a team, and there are things all of us need to work on to improve....that tells me he can learn from his mistakes and is willing to listen to crticism and improve on deficiencies....blind hate aside if some people would look past there bias they would see him taking responsibility in alot of ways for last years collapse....

now does that mean next year will be a success....no way to know right now, but it does show a coach that wants to learn and move on with getting this team ready for next season....his FA's have been impressive both last year and this.....and the draft wasnt great last year, but we have no evidence yet for this year...and while we tanked last season, there are many factors outsdie of MCd telling sheffler and marshall the lay of the land....

claymore
03-29-2010, 09:03 AM
you do know brady also had his best year as well under MCD....he was a much better passing qb as well than when he won SB.....yes welker and moss helped...but really watching and studying brady its clear he was a better overall qb than his early sb wins....he developed into a much better passer, not just becasue of his surroundings...

i get you hate MCD and i respect that, but lets not undermine the fact MCD did develop brady into a better Qb than he was....

No, not really.

I see an offense that spiked in 2007 with the aqusition of welker and moss and a league that didnt know how to deal with Brady having 2 Very good WR's. Brady's second best year ever was last year. Without McDaniels.

Brady was sepcial before he knew who McD was. We all see how Cassell is doing without Moss and Welker.

claymore
03-29-2010, 09:13 AM
10 seasons without Elway - One playoff win

That's how.
Same can be said about a slew of players. This team wasnt a SB champion because of one player.

SB years kill teams. It takes time.

Elevation inc
03-29-2010, 09:17 AM
No, not really.

I see an offense that spiked in 2007 with the aqusition of welker and moss and a league that didnt know how to deal with Brady having 2 Very good WR's. Brady's second best year ever was last year. Without McDaniels.

Brady was sepcial before he knew who McD was. We all see how Cassell is doing without Moss and Welker.


right because no teams have 2 good wr's i mean look at the colts and manning or arizona and warner...or GB and rodgers right???? haha

yes brady was special before MCd, but i see alot of refined things in brady that our much stronger now than when he didnt have MCD....

and KC has no defense or a OL that could block, and had no running game, untill haley figured out jamaal charles shouldnt be on the bench....

Elevation inc
03-29-2010, 09:18 AM
Same can be said about a slew of players. This team wasnt a SB champion because of one player.

SB years kill teams. It takes time.

i agree with that in a sense, but then i look at teams like new england, indy, pitt, and i see teams shanny just didnt have a clue how to emulate....

claymore
03-29-2010, 09:34 AM
right because no teams have 2 good wr's i mean look at the colts and manning or arizona and warner...or GB and rodgers right???? haha
yes brady was special before MCd, but i see alot of refined things in brady that our much stronger now than when he didnt have MCD....

and KC has no defense or a OL that could block, and had no running game, untill haley figured out jamaal charles shouldnt be on the bench....
I dont get your point. None of those teams got Randy Moss and Wes Welker in the same year.

If you gave any team Boldin and Fitzgerald in the same year there would be a boost in offense as well. Until teams learned how to stop it.

i agree with that in a sense, but then i look at teams like new england, indy, pitt, and i see teams shanny just didnt have a clue how to emulate....
None of those teams lost its HOF talent. All those teams are pretty much still intact. Offensive line, QB, Defense etc...

Lets see how those teams do when they lose their great players.

Elevation inc
03-29-2010, 09:41 AM
I dont get your point. None of those teams got Randy Moss and Wes Welker in the same year.

If you gave any team Boldin and Fitzgerald in the same year there would be a boost in offense as well. Until teams learned how to stop it.

None of those teams lost its HOF talent. All those teams are pretty much still intact. Offensive line, QB, Defense etc...

Lets see how those teams do when they lose their great players.

thats just it shanny didnt know how to keep his key players


trevor pryce, reggie heyward etc.....

claymore
03-29-2010, 09:47 AM
thats just it shanny didnt know how to keep his key players


trevor pryce, reggie heyward etc.....

Im pissed about Pryce, Berry, and Hayward. No defending that, but I also dont know the salary cap numbers for those years off the top of my head.

Losing those guys were bad. Yet we paid Bailey all these years. FML.

broncobryce
03-29-2010, 09:48 AM
Who's Mcdanials?

claymore
03-29-2010, 09:49 AM
Who's Mcdanials?

Zactly! :laugh:

Elevation inc
03-29-2010, 09:52 AM
Im pissed about Pryce, Berry, and Hayward. No defending that, but I also dont know the salary cap numbers for those years off the top of my head.

Losing those guys were bad. Yet we paid Bailey all these years. FML.

:lol: yeah shanny just didnt know a DL from a FB....that and his Fa' choices are what led to his demise....if it wasnt for the goodmans, he wouldnt have left denver with the talent every is clamoring about either...it was them who were key in the drafts after sundquist left not shanny....

claymore
03-29-2010, 09:55 AM
:lol: yeah shanny just didnt know a DL from a FB....that and his Fa' choices are what led to his demise....if it wasnt for the goodmans, he wouldnt have left denver with the talent every is clamoring about either...it was them who were key in the drafts after sundquist left not shanny....

Shanahan's biggest weakness is loyalty. Sundquist got to much of it. Sundquist deserves more blame than he gets for the SB slump. I was so happy when He was fired.

Ravage!!!
03-29-2010, 09:59 AM
if we haven't seen McD have some emotional, and immature, handling of situations already in his 1 year stay here, with TWO big name players on the team.... then this article wouldn't have an ounce of weight to it and we could simply say "yeah, it was probably Brady."

But thats not the case. The ONLY reason this blog has any kind of reaction, either from the McD "hater" crowd, or the McD "defender" crowd, is because we really CAN see patterns, whether we want to admit it or not. Otherwise, there would be no debate here, but there is. THe blog DOES hit home and DOES make you see/wonder.

Brady was already a 3 time Super Bowl Champion by this time, and he certainly wasn't going to be worried about McD's criticisms/comments/complaints or whatevers (if that was the start of the problem).... for we ABSOLUTELY know that if Belicheck was going to pick one to stay (not to mention the owner)... McD would be out the door fast enough to make your head spin. No reason for Brady to worry about the security of HIS job. McD didn't have an ounce of clout in that situation. Not an OUNCE.

Point being. If there wasn't already a pattern shown to Denver fans about McD's "problem" with getting along with big name players on a team, then there wouldn't be any room for the "haters" to talk nor the "defenders" feeling they have to defend.

Elevation inc
03-29-2010, 10:49 AM
if we haven't seen McD have some emotional, and immature, handling of situations already in his 1 year stay here, with TWO big name players on the team.... then this article wouldn't have an ounce of weight to it and we could simply say "yeah, it was probably Brady."

But thats not the case. The ONLY reason this blog has any kind of reaction, either from the McD "hater" crowd, or the McD "defender" crowd, is because we really CAN see patterns, whether we want to admit it or not. Otherwise, there would be no debate here, but there is. THe blog DOES hit home and DOES make you see/wonder.

Brady was already a 3 time Super Bowl Champion by this time, and he certainly wasn't going to be worried about McD's criticisms/comments/complaints or whatevers (if that was the start of the problem).... for we ABSOLUTELY know that if Belicheck was going to pick one to stay (not to mention the owner)... McD would be out the door fast enough to make your head spin. No reason for Brady to worry about the security of HIS job. McD didn't have an ounce of clout in that situation. Not an OUNCE.

Point being. If there wasn't already a pattern shown to Denver fans about McD's "problem" with getting along with big name players on a team, then there wouldn't be any room for the "haters" to talk nor the "defenders" feeling they have to defend.



meh haters...lovers...., issue was 5 years ago.....with no evidence in between untill a young qb cried and wanted out of town and a WR wants 10 mil a year, but aint worth that much....

the pattern isnt exactly as prevelent as some suggest.....many leaders on the team and young guys get along just fine with MCD.....2 players out of 80 and its a pattern????

topscribe
03-29-2010, 10:54 AM
No, not really.

I see an offense that spiked in 2007 with the aqusition of welker and moss and a league that didnt know how to deal with Brady having 2 Very good WR's. Brady's second best year ever was last year. Without McDaniels.

Brady was sepcial before he knew who McD was. We all see how Cassell is doing without Moss and Welker.

Bad logic again. Last year, Brady had already been through several years with
McDaniels. He wasn't a young, developing QB. He was a seasoned pro by then.

-----

claymore
03-29-2010, 11:08 AM
Bad logic again. Last year, Brady had already been through several years with
McDaniels. He wasn't a young, developing QB. He was a seasoned pro by then.

-----

How is it bad logic?

1. Brady was a SB champion before he knew who McD was.

2. Brady's numbers went down when McD took over as QB coach.

3. His numbers spiked signifigantly when Moss and Welker were aquired.

4. Last year was Tom Brady's 2nd best year ever, coming off a huge injury. McD wasnt there...

Brady owes nothing to McDaniels. He was great before he met him, and he is just as good or better without him.

BTW Patriots had the #3 offense in the league last year, and welker was number one in receptions again.

T.K.O.
03-29-2010, 11:15 AM
How is it bad logic?



4. Last year was Tom Brady's 2nd best year ever, coming off a huge injury. McD wasnt there...

.

the team did'nt go 16-0 reg season and did'nt win (or get to) the superbowl ,so i doubt brady considers it his 2nd best year.......just sayin':confused:

Elevation inc
03-29-2010, 11:18 AM
How is it bad logic?

1. Brady was a SB champion before he knew who McD was.

2. Brady's numbers went down when McD took over as QB coach.

3. His numbers spiked signifigantly when Moss and Welker were aquired.

4. Last year was Tom Brady's 2nd best year ever, coming off a huge injury. McD wasnt there...

Brady owes nothing to McDaniels. He was great before he met him, and he is just as good or better without him.

BTW Patriots had the #3 offense in the league last year, and welker was number one in receptions again.


and we beat them....with MCd....just saying;)

claymore
03-29-2010, 11:19 AM
the team did'nt go 16-0 reg season and did'nt win (or get to) the superbowl ,so i doubt brady considers it his 2nd best year.......just sayin':confused:

Individual record. Not team record. So Im sure Brady is smart enough to look at his name on NFL.com, look at the statistical data next to the year 2009 and say "yeah, that was my 2nd best year".

claymore
03-29-2010, 11:20 AM
and we beat them....with MCd....just saying;)

It was McDaniels SB, he showcased the Wildhorse that lasted 2 weeks cause noone was scared of Orton doing a deep post, and the refs bailed us out at the end.

Elevation inc
03-29-2010, 11:27 AM
It was McDaniels SB, he showcased the Wildhorse that lasted 2 weeks cause noone was scared of Orton doing a deep post, and the refs bailed us out at the end.

wild horses:beer:

topscribe
03-29-2010, 11:43 AM
How is it bad logic?

1. Brady was a SB champion before he knew who McD was.

Rex Grossman and Trent Dilfer were SB champions, too.


2. Brady's numbers went down when McD took over as QB coach.

3. His numbers spiked signifigantly when Moss and Welker were aquired.I thought you weren't into stats . . . oh, that is unless you can use them, right?

You do need to study those stats a little closer, though, and come to a better
understanding of statistics. Many factors go into statistics. Some that may
seem insignificant may be significant, and vice versa. One cannot take a single
factor and go on that without considering all the others. To say a coach took
over and that is why the numbers went down is taking a significant chance at
drawing an invalid conclusion.


4. Last year was Tom Brady's 2nd best year ever, coming off a huge injury. McD wasnt there... Brady was in his 10th year in the NFL. It is a good thing for him that he would
not need McDaniels by then to succeed, wouldn't you say?


Brady owes nothing to McDaniels. He was great before he met him, and he is just as good or better without him.You are drawing a lot of conclusions for which you have developed no basis.


BTW Patriots had the #3 offense in the league last year, and welker was number one in receptions again.There you go again, with those stats. So you now like stats?

-----

claymore
03-29-2010, 11:54 AM
Rex Grossman and Trent Dilfer were SB champions, too.

I thought you weren't into stats . . . oh, that is unless you can use them, right?

You do need to study those stats a little closer, though, and come to a better
understanding of statistics. Many factors go into statistics. Some that may
seem insignificant may be significant, and vice versa. One cannot take a single
factor and go on that without considering all the others. To say a coach took
over and that is why the numbers went down is taking a significant chance at
drawing an invalid conclusion.

Brady was in his 10th year in the NFL. It is a good thing for him that he would
not need McDaniels by then to succeed, wouldn't you say?

You are drawing a lot of conclusions for which you have developed no basis.

There you go again, with those stats. So you now like stats?

-----

I love stats. I am a supporter of stats. You might have me confused with someone else.

I cant believe you compared Brady to Grossman (who hasnt won a Super Bowl) and Dilfer.

The fact that Brady's numbers shot thru the roof when the Patriots aquired Moss and Welker are not a coincidence.

I dont need to re look at the numbers because it doesnt fit your argument. They are what they are.

frauschieze
03-29-2010, 12:04 PM
Where do people get this notion that McDaniels groomed Brady and is responsible for his development?

T.K.O.
03-29-2010, 12:05 PM
who was the oc when brady threw 50 td's ?
that stat counts as a "pretty good year:D

Elevation inc
03-29-2010, 12:13 PM
Where do people get this notion that McDaniels groomed Brady and is responsible for his development?

brady wasnt groomed by MCD he was refined.....

BigBroncLove
03-29-2010, 12:20 PM
Where do people get this notion that McDaniels groomed Brady and is responsible for his development?

Well we all know Giselle is a big part of Brady's development. They started dating in 2007. That's right! the year of the 50 td's and 16-0 regular season. She groomed Brady. :D

Really I don't care about who did or did not help Brady get to that next level as a QB. I'm only interested in how the Broncos QB's develop. One year is not enough to make an educated decision IMO. I want to see this year personally before I start drawing conclusions.

Ravage!!!
03-29-2010, 12:42 PM
meh haters...lovers...., issue was 5 years ago.....with no evidence in between untill a young qb cried and wanted out of town and a WR wants 10 mil a year, but aint worth that much....

the pattern isnt exactly as prevelent as some suggest.....many leaders on the team and young guys get along just fine with MCD.....2 players out of 80 and its a pattern????

Yes...

Seems that anytime there is a strong personality, it becomes a media event. Its not just Marshall and Cutler.. its Nolan.. and Scheffler. Its not that he doesn't just 'get along'.. its that when he doesn't, it becomes HEADLINES. Nothing seems to be worked out. Its public benchings and media comments. Its firings and tradings.

If it wasn't something of a pattern, Inc... the news media wouldn't have spotted it as well as the fans have. You do hear ex-players on radio and/or TV talking about these things. ITs not a coincidence that they continue to happen to the SAME coach. Its not like he's the first coach to run across problems with players. Yet...seems to be the one that is making a BIG splash with the way its handled. You ca't tell me that he just had 'bad luck' and its not just as much his doing.

If the story is correct.... three weeks not talkign with your position coach is a LONG time. I guess everyone that is around McD is a premadona baby, and McD is purely the innocent party?

TXBRONC
03-29-2010, 01:05 PM
who was the oc when brady threw 50 td's ?
that stat counts as a "pretty good year:D

And who was he throwing to? :rolleyes:

T.K.O.
03-29-2010, 01:24 PM
And who was he throwing to? :rolleyes:

apparently everybody

topscribe
03-29-2010, 01:31 PM
And who was he throwing to? :rolleyes:

You're right. Any old bum could have done what Brady did with those receivers.

And McDaniels just stood around sucking his thumb. :beer:

-----

topscribe
03-29-2010, 01:32 PM
Where do people get this notion that McDaniels groomed Brady and is responsible for his development?

Where do people get the idea that McDaniels had absolutely nothing to do with it?

-----

dogfish
03-29-2010, 01:34 PM
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/I3WwTLYNSec&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/I3WwTLYNSec&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

claymore
03-29-2010, 01:43 PM
You're right. Any old bum could have done what Brady did with those receivers.

And McDaniels just stood around sucking his thumb. :beer:

-----
Exactly!


Where do people get the idea that McDaniels had absolutely nothing to do with it?

-----

Because there was no drop off when he left!!!

Elevation inc
03-29-2010, 01:46 PM
Yes...

Seems that anytime there is a strong personality, it becomes a media event. Its not just Marshall and Cutler.. its Nolan.. and Scheffler. Its not that he doesn't just 'get along'.. its that when he doesn't, it becomes HEADLINES. Nothing seems to be worked out. Its public benchings and media comments. Its firings and tradings.

If it wasn't something of a pattern, Inc... the news media wouldn't have spotted it as well as the fans have. You do hear ex-players on radio and/or TV talking about these things. ITs not a coincidence that they continue to happen to the SAME coach. Its not like he's the first coach to run across problems with players. Yet...seems to be the one that is making a BIG splash with the way its handled. You ca't tell me that he just had 'bad luck' and its not just as much his doing.

If the story is correct.... three weeks not talkign with your position coach is a LONG time. I guess everyone that is around McD is a premadona baby, and McD is purely the innocent party?



first off seffler deserved his spank through and through!!!! dude was a bitch...wanting the season to be over when his team was fighting its ass off...that dude can rot in oak for all i care...he was being a piss poor teammate here becasue he wasnt being used as much when he was shannys toy.....sounds like lelie...

Nolan and MCd had philosophicaly different views including how to run a defense, like run blitzes and when to be aggressive..it also was a mutual split..whats the conspiracy there rav.....thats not a personality confilct but simply differences on the job...i see that everyday....lets not blow that into this conspiracy to man....

outside of cutler and marshall its been pretty rosy with players...unless we count the trade of all pro peyton hillis:lol:

and no not everyone is a prima donna around MCD, the players that do matter and the leaders on the team that bust there ass everyday, have no problem with him.....he could have done things differently with cutler and he could have not called marshall out in public, but marshall has earned everything negative that has come his way by his own actions....and cutler asked to be dealt...

topscribe
03-29-2010, 01:46 PM
Because there was no drop off when he left!!!

Why would there be? As I said more than once, Brady is a ten-year veteran. If
there would be a drop off, there would have to be something wrong with Brady,
no matter what kind of guru had left.

:tsk:

-----

Elevation inc
03-29-2010, 01:46 PM
Exactly!



Because there was no drop off when he left!!!

maybe becasue MCD refined brady on the finishing touches of his skills:cool::lol:.....

topscribe
03-29-2010, 02:05 PM
I'm not saying McDaniels is solely responsible for Brady's success. It is a no-brainer
that Brady's talent factors in immensely, and so does the talent level of his receivers.

But those who seem to be telling us that McDaniels was ineffective with the QBs are
actually calling Belichick an idiot. If it is true McDaniels was not all that good, then why
did Belichick promote McDaniels to OC?

Is it hard to believe, also, that Mr. Bowlen had investigated McDaniels' entire coaching
career before hiring him? Would Mr. Bowlen have been so enthused with McDaniels,
had McDaniels been an ineffective QBs coach and/or OC?

Really, I think the truth in the McDaniels/Brady debate is somewhere in the middle.

-----

claymore
03-29-2010, 02:09 PM
first off seffler deserved his spank through and through!!!! dude was a bitch...wanting the season to be over when his team was fighting its ass off...that dude can rot in oak for all i care...he was being a piss poor teammate here becasue he wasnt being used as much when he was shannys toy.....sounds like lelie...

Nolan and MCd had philosophicaly different views including how to run a defense, like run blitzes and when to be aggressive..it also was a mutual split..whats the conspiracy there rav.....thats not a personality confilct but simply differences on the job...i see that everyday....lets not blow that into this conspiracy to man....

outside of cutler and marshall its been pretty rosy with players...unless we count the trade of all pro peyton hillis:lol:

and no not everyone is a prima donna around MCD, the players that do matter and the leaders on the team that bust there ass everyday, have no problem with him.....he could have done things differently with cutler and he could have not called marshall out in public, but marshall has earned everything negative that has come his way by his own actions....and cutler asked to be dealt...
Not going to dig for articles, or transcripts, but I know Hillis has said no comment before when asked, and Team leaders have grumbled about McD before as well.

Some have footing to talk shit, some do not. And Some (Bailey) keep their mouth shut so they can get their final year of their contract paid (which he isnt worth).

Why would there be? As I said more than once, Brady is a ten-year veteran. If
there would be a drop off, there would have to be something wrong with Brady,
no matter what kind of guru had left.

:tsk:

-----
I dont know what else to tell you. You want to believe that McD is a good coach. It feels safer in the bubble.

maybe becasue MCD refined brady on the finishing touches of his skills:cool::lol:.....
:laugh:

broncofaninfla
03-29-2010, 02:10 PM
The Mcd I'll address is the Mcd we've seen in Denver, what New England did when Mcd was pretty impressive at times but Mcd's first year here in Denver was anything but IMO. I was expecting a good offensive game planner and play caller and I didn't see that at all. Hopefully 2010 is much better but in 2009 the offense didn't scare anybody.

topscribe
03-29-2010, 02:16 PM
Not going to dig for articles, or transcripts, but I know Hillis has said no comment before when asked, and Team leaders have grumbled about McD before as well.

Some have footing to talk shit, some do not. And Some (Bailey) keep their mouth shut so they can get their final year of their contract paid (which he isnt worth).

I dont know what else to tell you. You want to believe that McD is a good coach. It feels safer in the bubble.

:laugh:

No, I want to believe the truth. You seem to want to believe McD is a bad coach.

But, as I said, I cannot accept that Belichick promoted McDaniels to OC, despite
McDaniels' being a bad coach. That is just asinine.

But what I believe is that you cannot rightly judge McDaniels off one year's
performance. That is the stand you have taken with Orton and with McDaniels,
despite what those of us--who have paid attention--have learned about the
two- or three-year process in developing those positions in a new environment.

In both cases, I prefer to wait and see--which you seem to think is foolish.

-----

claymore
03-29-2010, 02:30 PM
No, I want to believe the truth. You seem to want to believe McD is a bad coach.

But, as I said, I cannot accept that Belichick promoted McDaniels to OC, despite
McDaniels' being a bad coach. That is just asinine.

But what I believe is that you cannot rightly judge McDaniels off one year's
performance. That is the stand you have taken with Orton and with McDaniels,
despite what those of us--who have paid attention--have learned about the
two- or three-year process in developing those positions in a new environment.

In both cases, I prefer to wait and see--which you seem to think is foolish.

-----
I attribute the success of NE's offense to Tom Brady, Randy Moss, and Wes Welker. Success that they had with or without Josh McDaniels.

After watching his lame ass playcalling, childish rants, multiple personality conflicts, crazy stupid draft day trades, immature game day stunts, I have formulated an opinion that he is over rated and immature.

Orton will never be elite. If we are going to have an OK QB, It might as well be Orton. Id rather take a chance on someone that has a legitimate chance at being special though.

topscribe
03-29-2010, 02:32 PM
I attribute the success of NE's offense to Tom Brady, Randy Moss, and Wes Welker. Success that they had with or without Josh McDaniels.

After watching his lame ass playcalling, childish rants, multiple personality conflicts, crazy stupid draft day trades, immature game day stunts, I have formulated an opinion that he is over rated and immature.

Orton will never be elite. If we are going to have an OK QB, It might as well be Orton. Id rather take a chance on someone that has a legitimate chance at being special though.

Fine. I accept that as your opinion.

But I'm not into such predictions. I still prefer to wait and see . . .

-----

claymore
03-29-2010, 02:34 PM
Fine. I accept that as your opinion.

But I'm not into such predictions. I still prefer to wait and see . . .

-----

In all seriousness what would it take before you would ask WTF is McD doing????

TXBRONC
03-29-2010, 02:42 PM
Where do people get the idea that McDaniels had absolutely nothing to do with it?

-----

Maybe from the fact Brady was already established as one best quarterbacks in League before McDaniels became the offensive coordinator. And maybe from fact that Brady had won three Super Bowls before McDaniels ever became his offensive coordinator.

TXBRONC
03-29-2010, 02:52 PM
In all seriousness what would it take before you would ask WTF is McD doing????

If McDaniels benched Orton Top might come unglued.

topscribe
03-29-2010, 02:56 PM
Maybe from the fact Brady was already established as one best quarterbacks in League before McDaniels became the offensive coordinator. And maybe from fact that Brady had won three Super Bowls before McDaniels ever became his offensive coordinator.

So you're one of those who believes McDaniels was absolutely no help to Brady.

So you have no idea that McDaniels was a coach in NE long before he became OC.

You are so far off the chart that someone who says the truth is probably
somewhere in the middle is radical to you.

Gotcha. :coffee:

-----

topscribe
03-29-2010, 02:57 PM
If McDaniel's benched Orton Top might come unglued.

What else do you know about me? Would you care to write my biography? False
reporting seems the norm these days . . .

-----

topscribe
03-29-2010, 02:58 PM
In all seriousness what would it take before you would ask WTF is McD doing????

Another year, as I have already said . . .

-----

claymore
03-29-2010, 02:59 PM
Another year, as I have already said . . .

-----

OK, When Im right at the end of the year, I want you to back me with all your goat strength. :D

CoachChaz
03-29-2010, 02:59 PM
In all seriousness what would it take before you would ask WTF is McD doing????

The answer to this question is a double-edged sword.

If you are of the ilk that believes everything that McD has done from day one is "shady" and questionable...then you'll have one answer.

If your opinion is that there is alot more to the stories than what we'll ever know...then you might have another answer.


Personally, I'm one of those crazy people that would like to see or hear more than stories and theories passed along by other people before I make a decision on something. That goes for religion, politics, football, everything.

TXBRONC
03-29-2010, 03:00 PM
So you're one of those who believes McDaniels was absolutely no help to Brady.

So you have no idea that McDaniels was a coach in NE long before he became OC.

You are so far off the chart that someone who says the truth is probably
somewhere in the middle is radical to you.

Gotcha. :coffee:

-----

:lol: Do you need a shovel dig your head out of this pile of b.s.?

Yes I know he was on the coaching staff as defensive assistant coach Mr. Know-it-all.

claymore
03-29-2010, 03:03 PM
The answer to this question is a double-edged sword.

If you are of the ilk that believes everything that McD has done from day one is "shady" and questionable...then you'll have one answer.

If your opinion is that there is alot more to the stories than what we'll ever know...then you might have another answer.


Personally, I'm one of those crazy people that would like to see or hear more than stories and theories passed along by other people before I make a decision on something. That goes for religion, politics, football, everything.

So there is no pattern so far for you? You think everything has been normal?

To be fair I disliked him from the start, the rest of this is just salt in the wound.

T.K.O.
03-29-2010, 03:08 PM
So there is no pattern so far for you? You think everything has been normal?

To be fair I disliked him from the start, the rest of this is just salt in the wound.

you did'nt like him when we were 6-0 ?.....c'mon i bet you warmed up to the idea then;)

CoachChaz
03-29-2010, 03:08 PM
So there is no pattern so far for you? You think everything has been normal?

To be fair I disliked him from the start, the rest of this is just salt in the wound.

Well, most that disliked him from the start are the ones that buy into Cutlergate. personally, I see explanations within that scenario that could create a very reasonable doubt about him intentionally mishandling the scenario. There are alot of details that none of us will ever know the truth about.

The 2009 draft...McD himself has admitted they made mistakes based on limited preparation time.

The season finale benching of Marshall...McD is suppose to take the last game and potential playoff deciding game seriously...but Marshall didnt have to?

A lot of this is stuff that is lost in translation and in all fairness...if it were Shanny or even another tenured coach on another team, it wouldnt be under the microscope as much as it has been with the rookie coach, McD. To ignore that fact is proposterous.

So...let's see what happens. Maybe a year from now, things balance out and the ship is righted and we're back on course. If not....

topscribe
03-29-2010, 03:11 PM
:lol: Do you need a shovel dig your head out of this pile of b.s.?

Yes I know he was on the coaching staff as defensive assistant coach Mr. Know-it-all.

Hey, I was on the receiving end of your insinuation. I said, right here in Broncos
Forums (ask Tned--he saluted it), if Quinn beat out Orton I would be tickled
because it would mean an upgrade to the QB position, which would mean a
better team. But call me a liar if you want to, then call B.S.

And before you call me "Mr. know-it-all" (I've never heard that from anyone older
than a juvenile before), consider that I am not the one making predictions . . . :coffee:

-----

topscribe
03-29-2010, 03:13 PM
The answer to this question is a double-edged sword.

If you are of the ilk that believes everything that McD has done from day one is "shady" and questionable...then you'll have one answer.

If your opinion is that there is alot more to the stories than what we'll ever know...then you might have another answer.


Personally, I'm one of those crazy people that would like to see or hear more than stories and theories passed along by other people before I make a decision on something. That goes for religion, politics, football, everything.

Careful, Coach. Taking the reasonable middle road can be treacherous around here . . .

-----

CoachChaz
03-29-2010, 03:15 PM
Careful, Coach. Taking the reasonable middle road can be treacherous around here . . .

-----

I've been a political fencesitter and an Agnostic for many years...why should this BS be any different?

claymore
03-29-2010, 03:18 PM
you did'nt like him when we were 6-0 ?.....c'mon i bet you warmed up to the idea then;)
No, Not really. I got drunk and happy one night, and then the 4 game slide happened, then we won two, followed by the other 4 game slide.



Well, most that disliked him from the start are the ones that buy into Cutlergate. personally, I see explanations within that scenario that could create a very reasonable doubt about him intentionally mishandling the scenario. There are alot of details that none of us will ever know the truth about.

The 2009 draft...McD himself has admitted they made mistakes based on limited preparation time.

The season finale benching of Marshall...McD is suppose to take the last game and potential playoff deciding game seriously...but Marshall didnt have to?

A lot of this is stuff that is lost in translation and in all fairness...if it were Shanny or even another tenured coach on another team, it wouldnt be under the microscope as much as it has been with the rookie coach, McD. To ignore that fact is proposterous.

So...let's see what happens. Maybe a year from now, things balance out and the ship is righted and we're back on course. If not....
We will never know all the details.

The Marshall thing was handled poorly for one reason. He could have preserved Marshall's value by letting Marshall "rehab". To much controversey prior to the game when he could have hid the whole marshall thing.

Making a point prior to trying to dump a player and win a play off game is retarded.

As for the draft, knowingly going into it unprepared, then trading a future #1 pick is even more retarded.

The weird emotional decisions are numerous. He has even stated he has a hard time controling his emotions.

rcsodak
03-29-2010, 03:33 PM
Good Drafts, a winning season, a good offense, not making weird trades and pissing players and coaches off. You know, standard stuff good coaches do.

We talking about Shanny or McD? :lol:

rcsodak
03-29-2010, 03:41 PM
10 seasons without Elway - One playoff win

That's how.

Sometimes the QB makes the HC. I'd say proof is in the pudding as far as the Elway-Shanny scenario goes. Otherwise, wouldn't Cutler have won Shanny another SB? err Division? err Playoff game?

Tned
03-29-2010, 03:45 PM
Hey, I was on the receiving end of your insinuation. I said, right here in Broncos
Forums (ask Tned--he saluted it), if Quinn beat out Orton I would be tickled
because it would mean an upgrade to the QB position, which would mean a
better team. But call me a liar if you want to, then call B.S.

And before you call me "Mr. know-it-all" (I've never heard that from anyone older
than a juvenile before), consider that I am not the one making predictions . . . :coffee:

-----

I saw it, I saluted it. I think all Broncos fans would feel like you, Top. If Quinn beats out Orton, that means the team would be better off with Quinn under center.

Assuming that doesn't mean Orton pulls an '06 Plummer (really, really struggles), but instead plays like he did last year, or better, if Quinn beats him out, then our team will be better for it.

CoachChaz
03-29-2010, 03:46 PM
We will never know all the details.

The Marshall thing was handled poorly for one reason. He could have preserved Marshall's value by letting Marshall "rehab". To much controversey prior to the game when he could have hid the whole marshall thing.

Making a point prior to trying to dump a player and win a play off game is retarded.

As for the draft, knowingly going into it unprepared, then trading a future #1 pick is even more retarded.

The weird emotional decisions are numerous. He has even stated he has a hard time controling his emotions.

I dont know. Personally, i dont think anyone sees "less value" in Marshall because of the year end situation. If there is no interest, it's because of Marshall's own baggage combined with his desire for a huge contract and the cost to get him.

"trying to dump a player"? Come on man...that is nothing but speculation
and opinion.

Trading a future #1 for a player that many teams and scouts had rated as #1 talent...maybe not the greatest decision, but retarded? Tell me a coach that hasnt had a bad draft or made a bad draft day decision.

Controlling emotions...again, is he the only coach in history with that issue?




So, even with everything you said...it still leaves open questions and nothing directly points to him being the worst coach in history...especially only after a year. Just not enough fact to go on to make that decision...at least not for me...yet

rcsodak
03-29-2010, 03:46 PM
No, not really.

I see an offense that spiked in 2007 with the aqusition of welker and moss and a league that didnt know how to deal with Brady having 2 Very good WR's. Brady's second best year ever was last year. Without McDaniels.

Brady was sepcial before he knew who McD was. We all see how Cassell is doing without McD as his coach.

Fixed your faux pax, clay. ;)

claymore
03-29-2010, 03:48 PM
Fixed your faux pax, clay. ;)

Well I would glady send him there. ;) Id rather watch McD fail in KC than in Denver.

rcsodak
03-29-2010, 03:48 PM
Same can be said about a slew of players. This team wasnt a SB champion because of one player.

SB years kill teams. It takes time.

Didn't kill NE. Didn't kill Pitt. Didn't kill Indy.

But losing Elway DID kill Denver.

claymore
03-29-2010, 03:51 PM
I dont know. Personally, i dont think anyone sees "less value" in Marshall because of the year end situation. If there is no interest, it's because of Marshall's own baggage combined with his desire for a huge contract and the cost to get him.

"trying to dump a player"? Come on man...that is nothing but speculation
and opinion.

Trading a future #1 for a player that many teams and scouts had rated as #1 talent...maybe not the greatest decision, but retarded? Tell me a coach that hasnt had a bad draft or made a bad draft day decision.

Controlling emotions...again, is he the only coach in history with that issue?




So, even with everything you said...it still leaves open questions and nothing directly points to him being the worst coach in history...especially only after a year. Just not enough fact to go on to make that decision...at least not for me...yet
It raises the eyebrows so high they wanna pop off!!! If he turns out to be a good coach, it would almost be shocking at this point.

As for the Dump a player... That was mostly redneck jive for "Knowing that you will be putting a 1st rd tender on a guy, and needing to maximize his value'...

:D

rcsodak
03-29-2010, 03:52 PM
I dont get your point. None of those teams got Randy Moss and Wes Welker in the same year.

If you gave any team Boldin and Fitzgerald in the same year there would be a boost in offense as well. Until teams learned how to stop it.

None of those teams lost its HOF talent. All those teams are pretty much still intact. Offensive line, QB, Defense etc...

Lets see how those teams do when they lose their great players.

Funny, but I thought we were talking about HC's being the reason? :confused:

claymore
03-29-2010, 03:54 PM
Didn't kill NE. Didn't kill Pitt. Didn't kill Indy.

But losing Elway DID kill Denver.

Any team that loses a HOF QB, TE, LT and RB within a year or two will suffer.

NE, Pitt, and Indy have all won SB's with relatively young teams.

rcsodak
03-29-2010, 03:56 PM
Im pissed about Pryce, Berry, and Hayward. No defending that, but I also dont know the salary cap numbers for those years off the top of my head.

Losing those guys were bad. Yet we paid Bailey all these years. FML.

LMAO!

Pryce? Unless he's surrounded by great players, he's average.
Berry? He was injured more than anything, and take away shitty teams, and his sack stats are pedestrian.
Heyward? He's the worst of all three!

I was personally thinking those were some of the SMARTEST moves by Shanny. All were overpaid when they left, simply because they played good in their contract years, albeit Pryce was ALREADY overpaid, and admitted asmuch.

claymore
03-29-2010, 03:57 PM
[/B]
Funny, but I thought we were talking about HC's being the reason? :confused:

No idea what you are talking about.

claymore
03-29-2010, 03:58 PM
LMAO!

Pryce? Unless he's surrounded by great players, he's average.
Berry? He was injured more than anything, and take away shitty teams, and his sack stats are pedestrian.
Heyward? He's the worst of all three!

I was personally thinking those were some of the SMARTEST moves by Shanny. All were overpaid when they left, simply because they played good in their contract years, albeit Pryce was ALREADY overpaid, and admitted asmuch.

Worst post ever. Do some research and come back tomorrow.

rcsodak
03-29-2010, 04:02 PM
meh haters...lovers...., issue was 5 years ago.....with no evidence in between untill a young qb cried and wanted out of town and a WR wants 10 mil a year, but aint worth that much....

the pattern isnt exactly as prevelent as some suggest.....many leaders on the team and young guys get along just fine with MCD.....2 players out of 80 and its a pattern????

More like 2 players who THINK they're megastars.

And guess what, kiddies.....looking at how Belicek runs his team, he doesn't WANT megastars. Especially if they're going to upset the apple cart every time they receive accolades from beat writers, or out-stat their teammates.

Moss has turned his ego inside out, from when he was with the Vikes/Raiders. Now he has money in his pocket and SB rings on his finger(s). He should be the example that BM follows. Not cutler or TO.

rcsodak
03-29-2010, 04:04 PM
How is it bad logic?

1. Brady was a SB champion before he knew who McD was.

2. Brady's numbers went down when McD took over as QB coach.

3. His numbers spiked signifigantly when Moss and Welker were aquired.

4. Last year was Tom Brady's 2nd best year ever, coming off a huge injury. McD wasnt there...

Brady owes nothing to McDaniels. He was great before he met him, and he is just as good or better without him.

BTW Patriots had the #3 offense in the league last year, and welker was number one in receptions again.

Who was the OC when they went 16-0 and he threw for 50TD's?

rcsodak
03-29-2010, 04:11 PM
The Mcd I'll address is the Mcd we've seen in Denver, what New England did when Mcd was pretty impressive at times but Mcd's first year here in Denver was anything but IMO. I was expecting a good offensive game planner and play caller and I didn't see that at all. Hopefully 2010 is much better but in 2009 the offense didn't scare anybody.

When was the last time it did? (inside the 20's, that is) :rolleyes:

claymore
03-29-2010, 04:12 PM
More like 2 players who THINK they're megastars.

And guess what, kiddies.....looking at how Belicek runs his team, he doesn't WANT megastars. Especially if they're going to upset the apple cart every time they receive accolades from beat writers, or out-stat their teammates.

Moss has turned his ego inside out, from when he was with the Vikes/Raiders. Now he has money in his pocket and SB rings on his finger(s). He should be the example that BM follows. Not cutler or TO.
Do you watch football? You havent stated a single correct fact today.

I mean common knowledge stuff.


Who was the OC when they went 16-0 and he threw for 50TD's?Who was the OC last year when they had the #3 offense in the NFL? Answer..... Some dipshit who nobody really thinks to much about.

T.K.O.
03-29-2010, 04:15 PM
More like 2 players who THINK they're megastars.

And guess what, kiddies.....looking at how Belicek runs his team, he doesn't WANT megastars. Especially if they're going to upset the apple cart every time they receive accolades from beat writers, or out-stat their teammates.

Moss has turned his ego inside out, from when he was with the Vikes/Raiders. Now he has money in his pocket and SB rings on his finger(s). He should be the example that BM follows. Not cutler or TO.

when did moss get sb rings ?or should i say where did he buy them ?

rcsodak
03-29-2010, 04:16 PM
Well, most that disliked him from the start are the ones that buy into Cutlergate. personally, I see explanations within that scenario that could create a very reasonable doubt about him intentionally mishandling the scenario. There are alot of details that none of us will ever know the truth about.

The 2009 draft...McD himself has admitted they made mistakes based on limited preparation time.

The season finale benching of Marshall...McD is suppose to take the last game and potential playoff deciding game seriously...but Marshall didnt have to?

A lot of this is stuff that is lost in translation and in all fairness...if it were Shanny or even another tenured coach on another team, it wouldnt be under the microscope as much as it has been with the rookie coach, McD. To ignore that fact is proposterous.

So...let's see what happens. Maybe a year from now, things balance out and the ship is righted and we're back on course. If not....

I think the hatred against McD is two-fold.

1. He's from NE
2. He's the same age/younger than most of the hater.

Hell, I'll add another:
His wife is HOT!

rcsodak
03-29-2010, 04:25 PM
Any team that loses a HOF QB, TE, LT and RB within a year or two will suffer.

NE, Pitt, and Indy have all won SB's with relatively young teams.

Doesn't address my point, though, clay.

If Shanny were HALF the HC you make him out to be, he should have had them back within...ehh....5 years....hell, even 10! But instead, he had them waddling in mediocrity, at .500.

Just saying that a first year HC, with a first year QB, with a rookie RB, 7/8 all new players on D, new OC, new DC....and he MATCHES the mastermind!?!?

He's not as bad as you are making him out to be, imho.

rcsodak
03-29-2010, 04:26 PM
No idea what you are talking about.

Obviously.

rcsodak
03-29-2010, 04:27 PM
Worst post ever. Do some research and come back tomorrow.

Put more effort into your posts, clay.

You know....like AFTER making an accusation, BACKING IT UP! :rolleyes:

oh....wait........ :coffee:

rcsodak
03-29-2010, 04:30 PM
Do you watch football? You havent stated a single correct fact today.

I mean common knowledge stuff.

Who was the OC last year when they had the #3 offense in the NFL? Answer..... Some dipshit who nobody really thinks to much about.

Give me a break! By now, that offense is running on memory! Just like Indy. Do you REALLY think if they lost their OC, it'd hurt them?


And again, how about backing up your empty 'charges'.

rcsodak
03-29-2010, 04:32 PM
when did moss get sb rings ?or should i say where did he buy them ?

:confused:

You mean Moss ISN'T the reason for Brady's success?

Listening to some on here, his success was BECAUSE of Moss/Welker.

(thank you. thank you very much) :D

arapaho2
03-29-2010, 04:42 PM
:confused:

You mean Moss ISN'T the reason for Brady's success?

Listening to some on here, his success was BECAUSE of Moss/Welker.

(thank you. thank you very much) :D

i guess in your vast bank of knowledge you can produce a snapshot of mosses ring...i've seen bradys...show us moss's

that is what you said marshall should follow moss's lead behave and like moss get a sb ring

Ravage!!!
03-29-2010, 04:50 PM
want me to show you where Shanahan's winning percentage is/was better than any coach/franchise that lost a HoF QB again? I guess those other HoF coaches weren't 'half' the HC clay makes THEM out to be either? Probably better assumed you are just making more inaccurate statements.

TXBRONC
03-29-2010, 04:51 PM
I saw it, I saluted it. I think all Broncos fans would feel like you, Top. If Quinn beats out Orton, that means the team would be better off with Quinn under center.

Assuming that doesn't mean Orton pulls an '06 Plummer (really, really struggles), but instead plays like he did last year, or better, if Quinn beats him out, then our team will be better for it.

Yep that's the way I feel. I haven't predicted that Quinn will beat out Orton, if Quinn does we are the better for it and if doesn't I don't were any worse off at quarterback.

T.K.O.
03-29-2010, 04:55 PM
:confused:

You mean Moss ISN'T the reason for Brady's success?

Listening to some on here, his success was BECAUSE of Moss/Welker.

(thank you. thank you very much) :D

actually there were articles printed about the very real possibility that the addition of moss actually hurt the team as a whole.
though his "stats" were great,having one reciever getting so much attention often hurts the balance of a team (as we saw last year in denver).
it was asked who is tom brady's favorite reciever?
the answer"the open one"
well that needs to be true for any team to succeed.that was part of our problem last year orton spent way too much time finding marshall when ignoring other options.
the indy game was a perfect example.set an all time record with one reciever and get your butt kicked in the process.
hopefully next season the entire team (especially orton) will be more versed in the playbook and have much better timing and route running.we also saw once bucky got hurt that we NEED a much better run game to open up the passing game.which i believe will happen with a beefed up o-line and moreno having a year at nfl speed+i think we will bring in a bruiser for short yardage runs.
you can't use the "spread" offense w/o spreading the ball around well.:salute:

Ravage!!!
03-29-2010, 04:57 PM
Weird considering Welker usually catches more passes in a season than Moss does. I wonder why they aren't stating that Welker hurt them?? :confused: Or maybe, having both Welker and Moss hurt them, and the articles could suggest a team should not have any good WRs on the roster.

T.K.O.
03-29-2010, 05:05 PM
Weird considering Welker usually catches more passes in a season than Moss does. I wonder why they aren't stating that Welker hurt them?? :confused: Or maybe, having both Welker and Moss hurt them, and the articles could suggest a team should not have any good WRs on the roster.

well i dont know that i totally agree with their assumptions but,it is a proven fact that if one particular player is over utilized on a team.they rarely if ever get to the promised land.you need a solid group and a balanced attack to win consistantly in the nfl.i think we can all agree on that.
thats why guys like barry sanders never got a ring.
if your the only weapon on the offense,other teams will let you play just well enough to look great while losing.

Elevation inc
03-29-2010, 05:07 PM
Not going to dig for articles, or transcripts, but I know Hillis has said no comment before when asked, and Team leaders have grumbled about McD before as well.

Some have footing to talk shit, some do not. And Some (Bailey) keep their mouth shut so they can get their final year of their contract paid (which he isnt worth).

I dont know what else to tell you. You want to believe that McD is a good coach. It feels safer in the bubble.

:laugh:

lol i dont want to belive MCD is a good coach....i do believe...but i can respect the bubble and the haters for there views as well....i dont agree and im fine with that....

i dont belive MCD has given the lovers side enough to warrant heaps of praise, but i also dont belive there is enough evidence other than grown mans hurt feelings:lol: to warrant super negative talk..albeit i freely admit he has done a few things as a first year coach that irked me, but i didnt do so well in my first year of my job either with a whole new staff it took some time...so perhaps my perspective is based off personal events more than anything..the bubble seems the best spot right now..i mean it is only march:lol:......i just wish people knew how to argue or debate constructively using that bubble because this one side or the other is kinda cliche and lame...us agaisnt the world...really...lol...what is wrong with us:beer:

Ravage!!!
03-29-2010, 05:24 PM
well i dont know that i totally agree with their assumptions but,it is a proven fact that if one particular player is over utilized on a team.they rarely if ever get to the promised land.you need a solid group and a balanced attack to win consistantly in the nfl.i think we can all agree on that.
thats why guys like barry sanders never got a ring.
if your the only weapon on the offense,other teams will let you play just well enough to look great while losing.

I think its the chicken and the egg... and a combination of such.

What came first, the player being over utilized, or not having anyone else around them to be utilized along with them?

Which goes completely against the Moss theory, since he's had Welker. Some say that Marshall was too much the emphasis to the offense, thus it hurt our team.... but the year prior, we had another WR catch 90 passes along with Marshall. So who is the one over-utilizing the individual player, the coach or the QB? That again goes to questioning the players around.

So really... its not so much a proven fact at all, because there can be so many variables to the game and how it is played. Its a theory, but at the same time, every sport wants the ball in their best player's hands as much as possible. That just makes sense.

Bosco
03-29-2010, 06:12 PM
The Patriots offensive explosion coincides with Welker and Moss's arrival. Not McDaniels.

The Patriots actually got worse when McD took over, Until Moss was signed.

They have been in the top 5 ever since, and Welker has been the #1, #2, & #1 in the league all 3 years moss has been there.

What did Wes Welker do before coming to the Patriots? How about Moss? His production had been down for several years before coming to the Patriots. Besides, don't you think McDaniels had significant input on bringing those players to New England?

The bottom line is that McDaniels took a couple players who had been solid but unspectacular performers for the previous years, adjusted his offense to fit their specific skill set and those players enjoyed career years while being a part of the most dominant offense the NFL had ever seen.

rcsodak
03-29-2010, 06:19 PM
want me to show you where Shanahan's winning percentage is/was better than any coach/franchise that lost a HoF QB again? I guess those other HoF coaches weren't 'half' the HC clay makes THEM out to be either? Probably better assumed you are just making more inaccurate statements.

Oh, so now it's just "winning percentage"? Is that by which you're NOW going to grade a HC?

If that's the case, then McD is JUST AS GOOD in his FIRST YEAR of Head Coaching, as Shanny was in his last 3! With a "journeyman QB", no less. (your words, not mine, or else Cutler would have to be called the same)

Thanks, rav. Couldn't have made my point without your "vast knowledge". :D

T.K.O.
03-29-2010, 06:19 PM
well in moss' defense he only sucked in oakland......like the rest of the team:laugh:

turftoad
03-29-2010, 06:20 PM
What did Wes Welker do before coming to the Patriots? How about Moss? His production had been down for several years before coming to the Patriots. Besides, don't you think McDaniels had significant input on bringing those players to New England?

The bottom line is that McDaniels took a couple players who had been solid but unspectacular performers for the previous years, adjusted his offense to fit their specific skill set and those players enjoyed career years while being a part of the most dominant offense the NFL had ever seen.

You mean like Eddie Royal?

rcsodak
03-29-2010, 06:37 PM
actually there were articles printed about the very real possibility that the addition of moss actually hurt the team as a whole.
though his "stats" were great,having one reciever getting so much attention often hurts the balance of a team (as we saw last year in denver).
it was asked who is tom brady's favorite reciever?
the answer"the open one"
well that needs to be true for any team to succeed.that was part of our problem last year orton spent way too much time finding marshall when ignoring other options.
the indy game was a perfect example.set an all time record with one reciever and get your butt kicked in the process.
hopefully next season the entire team (especially orton) will be more versed in the playbook and have much better timing and route running.we also saw once bucky got hurt that we NEED a much better run game to open up the passing game.which i believe will happen with a beefed up o-line and moreno having a year at nfl speed+i think we will bring in a bruiser for short yardage runs.
you can't use the "spread" offense w/o spreading the ball around well.:salute:

I agree....kinda. I don't think it's healty for 1 wr to be getting 100 catches every year. Especially when his TD's don't match. It shows a dependence, and allows the defense to just sit back and gang tackle him. It's not keeping the defense honest. It reminds me of the early years of Jordan. He'd score a gazillion points, but had little help. The team sucked, but his stats didn't. It wasn't until they brought in other scorers/role players that they were able to win. Same with the Cavaliers.

And it's not like this is Orton's fault, and/or McD's. He had the same numbers under Shanny/Cutler. With the same results---mediocrity and field goals.

The part I disagree with, is Moss had 23TD's in his big year with Brady. Almost 1TD for every 4rcpts! In his 3yrs with NE, he avg's almost a TD every 5rcpts! Hellsbells, he had more TD's (11) the year he only had 69rcpts than BM has had with his 100+. So it's not really fair to say he's "hurt" the team. IMO.

For the record, BM takes over 13rcpts to get a TD, not including his rookie season.

Bosco
03-29-2010, 06:38 PM
You mean like Eddie Royal?

Unfortunately, Eddie played out of place because he was the only receiver on the roster with the deep speed to stretch the defense. He is tailor made for the Wes Welker role.

T.K.O.
03-29-2010, 06:40 PM
You mean like Eddie Royal?

well to be fair marshall and orton did have their best year as a pro

Ravage!!!
03-29-2010, 06:45 PM
Oh, so now it's just "winning percentage"? Is that by which you're NOW going to grade a HC?

If that's the case, then McD is JUST AS GOOD in his FIRST YEAR of Head Coaching, as Shanny was in his last 3! With a "journeyman QB", no less. (your words, not mine, or else Cutler would have to be called the same)

Thanks, rav. Couldn't have made my point without your "vast knowledge". :D

rc.. normally I just ignore your posts... but today you are proving to be just plain drunk. You haven't realized that Moss didn't win a ring, that Andre Johnson doesn't play for Detroit, and now you want to use a single season compared to 13. Keep posting for me rc, and you'll continue to prove to everyone what I've known about you for years. :coffee:

Lancane
03-29-2010, 06:59 PM
well to be fair marshall and orton did have their best year as a pro

Well, it's fairly obvious or to most that Orton had a career year thanks to both the system and Marshall.

T.K.O.
03-29-2010, 07:17 PM
I think its the chicken and the egg... and a combination of such.

What came first, the player being over utilized, or not having anyone else around them to be utilized along with them?

Which goes completely against the Moss theory, since he's had Welker. Some say that Marshall was too much the emphasis to the offense, thus it hurt our team.... but the year prior, we had another WR catch 90 passes along with Marshall. So who is the one over-utilizing the individual player, the coach or the QB? That again goes to questioning the players around.

So really... its not so much a proven fact at all, because there can be so many variables to the game and how it is played. Its a theory, but at the same time, every sport wants the ball in their best player's hands as much as possible. That just makes sense.

absolutely....but you better hope you have more than one !;)

claymore
03-29-2010, 07:29 PM
What did Wes Welker do before coming to the Patriots? How about Moss? His production had been down for several years before coming to the Patriots. Besides, don't you think McDaniels had significant input on bringing those players to New England?
Bellicheck said he was a Patriot killer. How many times have you seen Bellicheck trade a #2 for anyone?


The bottom line is that McDaniels took a couple players who had been solid but unspectacular performers for the previous years, adjusted his offense to fit their specific skill set and those players enjoyed career years while being a part of the most dominant offense the NFL had ever seen.I cant believe you actually believe that. Its so ridiculous to me that you guys actually believe this shit.
I dont even know what to say.,,

T.K.O.
03-29-2010, 07:41 PM
Bellicheck said he was a Patriot killer. How many times have you seen Bellicheck trade a #2 for anyone?

I cant believe you actually believe that. Its so ridiculous to me that you guys actually believe this shit.
I dont even know what to say.,,

whoa....whoa.....whoa whhhhhhhoooooooaaaaaa!:D(in my best peter griffin voice)
i'm not one of "those guys"
sure i think mcD may end up being a great coach,and the broncos might be better off w/o some players but i don't think you will find a "long" line of people standing behind that statement

claymore
03-29-2010, 07:45 PM
What did Wes Welker do before coming to the Patriots? How about Moss? His production had been down for several years before coming to the Patriots. Besides, don't you think McDaniels had significant input on bringing those players to New England?

The bottom line is that McDaniels took a couple players who had been solid but unspectacular performers for the previous years, adjusted his offense to fit their specific skill set and those players enjoyed career years while being a part of the most dominant offense the NFL had ever seen.

So McD took Brady, Moss and Welker, as well as their O line, Watson and Maroney... took this rag tag bunch of misfits and formed them into a top offense. LMFAO...........


Hahahahahahah!!!!!!111:laugh:

Oh goodness.

:laugh:

claymore
03-29-2010, 07:46 PM
whoa....whoa.....whoa whhhhhhhoooooooaaaaaa!:D(in my best peter griffin voice)
i'm not one of "those guys"
sure i think mcD may end up being a great coach,and the broncos might be better off w/o some players but i don't think you will find a "long" line of people standing behind that statement

We need gauges for signatures on how sold we are on McD. The fence sitters confuse me. :D

T.K.O.
03-29-2010, 07:50 PM
We need gauges for signatures on how sold we are on McD. The fence sitters confuse me. :D

thats cuz were the ones who are'nt drunk:D at least not at the moment anyway

the "kool-aid-o-meter"

rcsodak
03-29-2010, 09:27 PM
rc.. normally I just ignore your posts... but today you are proving to be just plain drunk. You haven't realized that Moss didn't win a ring, that Andre Johnson doesn't play for Detroit, and now you want to use a single season compared to 13. Keep posting for me rc, and you'll continue to prove to everyone what I've known about you for years. :coffee:

Evade and deflect.

You should be in politics.

The stealth attack, well...that just you.

rcsodak
03-29-2010, 09:28 PM
Well, it's fairly obvious or to most that Orton had a career year thanks to both the system and Marshall.

As did Cutler.

Lancane
03-29-2010, 10:44 PM
As did Cutler.

What an ignorant comment RC...you are above that, or so I thought.

Cutler is not a product of a system like Orton, the West-Coast offense is if nothing else a flawed albeit an explosive offensive system. Quarterbacks in the West-Coast tend to have not only more touchdowns but also more interceptions, it's a riskier offense compared to the spread which is quarterback friendly because of the shorter passing game it commands to succeed, which pads a quarterbacks numbers...that is why I think nothing more of Orton's success in it, it's a joke...if we eliminated Marshall as his primary weapon then we not only lose more games, but it would show his flaws and did at many times.

Bosco
03-29-2010, 10:50 PM
Bellicheck said he was a Patriot killer. How many times have you seen Bellicheck trade a #2 for anyone? And that changes what? I'm pretty sure when Welker got to New England his production basically doubled.


I cant believe you actually believe that. Its so ridiculous to me that you guys actually believe this shit. I dont even know what to say.,, So why don't you offer up a counterpoint instead "nope ur wrong, nurrrr!". If you want to debate football like retards then you'll have to find someone else.


So McD took Brady, Moss and Welker, as well as their O line, Watson and Maroney... took this rag tag bunch of misfits and formed them into a top offense. LMFAO...........


Hahahahahahah!!!!!!111:laugh:

Oh goodness.

:laugh: What the **** do you think he did? Last time I checked he was the offensive coordinator, had significant input on the personnel he acquired, set the game plans and called the plays. Surely he don't deserve any credit, right?

Seriously, why don't you actually bring some legitimate debate to the table? At this point you've come up pretty empty handed.

topscribe
03-29-2010, 10:57 PM
What an ignorant comment RC...you are above that, or so I thought.

Cutler is not a product of a system like Orton, the West-Coast offense is if nothing else a flawed albeit an explosive offensive system. Quarterbacks in the West-Coast tend to have not only more touchdowns but also more interceptions, it's a riskier offense compared to the spread which is quarterback friendly because of the shorter passing game it commands to succeed, which pads a quarterbacks numbers...that is why I think nothing more of Orton's success in it, it's a joke...if we eliminated Marshall as his primary weapon then we not only lose more games, but it would show his flaws and did at many times.

You seemed to have ruled out Gaffney.

Anyway, it's kind of tough to talk about Orton's flaws, when he had more
passing yards, far less INTs, and a significantly higher QB rating than Cutler.
Don't get me wrong: I believe Cutler will eventually be a good QB. But Im just
saying . . .

-----

Lancane
03-29-2010, 11:50 PM
You seemed to have ruled out Gaffney.

Anyway, it's kind of tough to talk about Orton's flaws, when he had more
passing yards, far less INTs, and a significantly higher QB rating than Cutler.
Don't get me wrong: I believe Cutler will eventually be a good QB. But Im just
saying . . .

-----

Gaffney is a farse, in eight seasons three of which were playing with arguably one of the league's best quarterbacks he never had more then fifty-five catches nor got close to a 1,000 yards in a season. He is no more then a secondary option at receiver at best. And I do not buy into that he can be a primary receiver at the pro level, so I do discount him...I don't buy into the talent behind Marshall like some other fans do; Lloyd, Royal, Gaffney and Stokely? Lloyd if anything is less successful then Gaffney, we do not know if Royal will succeed with McDaniels at the helm and Stokely is nearing the end and is at best a slot receiver, that's not promising but a sign of possible disaster!

As for the whole Cutler vs Orton argument, I think you missed the point of what I stated. Orton's numbers were due to a system that pads stats, because it's a safer offense and that is the reason it's known as a quarterback friendly system. Let's not forget Cutler had a questionable offensive line and who at receiver? Orton had Marshall which was his primary target...what do you think Cutler would have had if Brandon had been with him in Chicago, he would have been just as dominant as would have been Cutler's numbers...you tend to have more interceptions in the West-Coast, let alone when you have crap receivers. Your buying too much into the player and not the system, there is a difference between Tom Brady and Kyle Orton; Brady owns the system and uses for success whilst Orton did well in the system and nothing more. Let's not forget the difference in schemes as I stated, the West-Coast being more flawed and riskier and the spread being a safer system, and that's common knowledge.

If Marshall is traded and we do not get a possible replacement in the draft, then I expect a lot of fans to be utterly floored when the offense is even less effective then last year and depends far more on rushing the ball because of it and his numbers take a turn for the worse...though it's my opinion till it happens though.

;)

topscribe
03-30-2010, 12:09 AM
Gaffney is a farse, in eight seasons three of which were playing with arguably one of the league's best quarterbacks he never had more then fifty-five catches nor got close to a 1,000 yards in a season. He is no more then a secondary option at receiver at best. And I do not buy into that he can be a primary receiver at the pro level, so I do discount him...I don't buy into the talent behind Marshall like some other fans do; Lloyd, Royal, Gaffney and Stokely? Lloyd if anything is less successful then Gaffney, we do not know if Royal will succeed with McDaniels at the helm and Stokely is nearing the end and is at best a slot receiver, that's not promising but a sign of possible disaster!

I don't care what Gaffney did or did not do in NE. I saw him play this year.
That is what I am basing his performance on: this year. For the Broncos.

Moreover, you are arguing the talent behind Marshall with the wrong poster.
Best you pay attention to what I post. I said nothing about anybody outside
Gaffney, except I have said several times the Broncos should keep Marshall.



As for the whole Cutler vs Orton argument, I think you missed the point of what I stated. Orton's numbers were due to a system that pads stats, because it's a safer offense and that is the reason it's known as a quarterback friendly system. Let's not forget Cutler had a questionable offensive line and who at receiver? Orton had Marshall which was his primary target...what do you think Cutler would have had if Brandon had been with him in Chicago, he would have been just as dominant as would have been Cutler's numbers...you tend to have more interceptions in the West-Coast, let alone when you have crap receivers. Your buying too much into the player and not the system, there is a difference between Tom Brady and Kyle Orton; Brady owns the system and uses for success whilst Orton did well in the system and nothing more. Let's not forget the difference in schemes as I stated, the West-Coast being more flawed and riskier and the spread being a safer system, and that's common knowledge.

Cutler had a questionable O-line and who at receiver, but did he also have a
compound dislocation of the index finger on his throwing hand or a high ankle
sprain? You are buying too much into the system and not the player.

So let me phrase that: Even though Orton had a compound dislocation on the
index finger of his throwing hand the first of the season, and a high ankle
sprain during the last half of the season, he still had more yards, far less INTs,
and a significantly higher QBR than did a healthy Cutler. Oh yes, and Orton's
O-line wasn't so hot the second half of the season, either.

-----

Lancane
03-30-2010, 12:39 AM
I don't care what Gaffney did or did not do in NE. I saw him play this year.
That is what I am basing his performance on: this year. For the Broncos.

Moreover, you are arguing the talent behind Marshall with the wrong poster.
Best you pay attention to what I post. I said nothing about anybody outside
Gaffney, except I have said several times the Broncos should keep Marshall.

You should care what Gaffney did or did not do in New England and Houston, it points to his contribution to a team...he could not even be the primary receiver in one of the league's worst offenses in Houston. So you are in fact arguing that he is capable to be a primary, then maybe we should sign Lelie as a secondary receiver, even he has had more success then Gaffney at the pro level. The point I was making to you Top, is that behind Marshall, Gaffney included we do not have a primary capable wideout and then even the secondary and third options are at this time questionable.


Cutler had a questionable O-line and who at receiver, but did he also have a compound dislocation of the index finger on his throwing hand or a high ankle sprain? You are buying too much into the system and not the player.

So let me phrase that: Even though Orton had a compound dislocation on the
index finger of his throwing hand the first of the season, and a high ankle
sprain during the last half of the season, he still had more yards, far less INTs,
and a significantly higher QBR than did a healthy Cutler. Oh yes, and Orton's
O-line wasn't so hot the second half of the season, either.

Orton still had a better offensive line then Cutler, that should not even be an argument. And he still had a better primary target then Cutler did at receiver as well...and it's not a matter of injury, it a matter of that Orton played in a padded system that makes him look better then he really is, he does not make the offensive scheme better by his play! Safer scheme which pads numbers, better offensive line and better receivers...I can see where that makes Orton better then Cutler, not saying Cutler has reached his potential or will...but that is not a very sound argument at all.

;)

topscribe
03-30-2010, 12:52 AM
You should care what Gaffney did or did not do in New England and Houston, it points to his contribution to a team...he could not even be the primary receiver in one of the league's worst offenses in Houston. So you are in fact arguing that he is capable to be a primary, then maybe we should sign Lelie as a secondary receiver, even he has had more success then Gaffney at the pro level. The point I was making to you Top, is that behind Marshall, Gaffney included we do not have a primary capable wideout and then even the secondary and third options are at this time questionable.

Once again, what impresses me is how Gaffney played for the Broncos, not for
NE or Houston. And I witnessed his heroics and indeed came away impressed.
No, he's not Marshall, but he's better than you think, IMO.



Orton still had a better offensive line then Cutler, that should not even be an argument. And he still had a better primary target then Cutler did at receiver as well...and it's not a matter of injury, it a matter of that Orton played in a padded system that makes him look better then he really is, he does not make the offensive scheme better by his play! Safer scheme which pads numbers, better offensive line and better receivers...I can see where that makes Orton better then Cutler, not saying Cutler has reached his potential or will...but that is not a very sound argument at all.


Cane, if a QB's bone to his index finger--his guiding finger--is protruding through
the skin, it is going to affect his passing.

If a QB has a high ankle sprain, it is going to affect his passing . . . and his mobility.

I have been thoroughly impressed with the way Orton played through those serious
injuries and still achieved the number he did. Made me want to see him one more
year, only now healthy, with what I believe will be a better O-line, running game,
and defense, and more familiar with the system to where he can now do more
playing and less thinking.

And rationalize it away all you like, but Orton did have a better season than Cutler . . .

-----

Lancane
03-30-2010, 01:12 AM
Once again, what impresses me is how Gaffney played for the Broncos, not for NE or Houston. And I witnessed his heroics and indeed came away impressed. No, he's not Marshall, but he's better than you think, IMO.

If that's all it took to succeed in the NFL then no one would be looking for primary receivers...so I heartily disagree and I was not impressed by what he did in Denver. We'll just have to disagree on this as we do on the Orton issue.



Cane, if a QB's bone to his index finger--his guiding finger--is protruding through the skin, it is going to affect his passing.

If a QB has a high ankle sprain, it is going to affect his passing . . . and his mobility.

I have been thoroughly impressed with the way Orton played through those serious injuries and still achieved the number he did. Made me want to see him one more year, only now healthy, with what I believe will be a better O-line, running game, and defense, and more familiar with the system to where he can now do more playing and less thinking.

And rationalize it away all you like, but Orton did have a better season than Cutler . . .

There is no argument that playing with those injuries is difficult, but like flaws it can be hidden by certain factors. I give kuddos' to Orton for the games he played well in, injured or otherwise. But at no time did I find his play to be stellar or the defacto reason of victory. He was good even injured in the system, but he did not nor will he by his own play be great in the same said scheme. Believe what you want Top, I'm not hear to change your mind or your views, it would make me a shitty friend! You have always been more open to success with who the team has on the roster and have always been a bit of a 'koolaid drinker', but I'm not. I personally think that people are going to be calling for his head, especially without Marshall because I see him being less successful then last season. Not of his own volition either, simply put, I believe we will see that without the right weapons that he was nothing more then a system quarterback...again it's my opinion.

Kaylore
03-30-2010, 07:34 AM
Mike Florio hates the Broncos. Always has and always will.

claymore
03-30-2010, 08:30 AM
Belichick said he was a Patriot killer. How many times have you seen Belichick trade a #2 for anyone?

I can't believe you actually believe that. Its so ridiculous to me that you guys actually believe this shit.
I don't even know what to say.,,


And that changes what? I'm pretty sure when Welker got to New England his production basically doubled.

So why don't you offer up a counterpoint instead "nope ur wrong, nurrrr!". If you want to debate football like retards then you'll have to find someone else.

What the **** do you think he did? Last time I checked he was the offensive coordinator, had significant input on the personnel he acquired, set the game plans and called the plays. Surely he don't deserve any credit, right?

Seriously, why don't you actually bring some legitimate debate to the table? At this point you've come up pretty empty handed.
I think I've stated my point pretty clearly. McDaniel's gets more credit than I think he deserves.

Wes Welker became a starter in Miami in 2005. He had a total of 5 QB's in his 2 years there. All of which att. at least 60 passes.

Bill Belichick traded a 2nd and a 7th rd pick for Wes Welker in 2007. Welker's numbers immediately doubled. I think this was due to stability and Tom Effin Brady.

We all know how Moss did in Oak. But none of us should question what Moss brings to the table when he wants to. So I will leave that alone for the most part.

The 2007 offensive explosion the Patriots demonstrated was because of Randy Moss and Wes Welker not Josh McDaniel's.



Miami QB's
2005


Gus Frerotte 494 257 2996 52.0 6.1 18 3.6 13 2.6 60 26 158 71.9
Sage Rosenfels 61 34 462 55.7 7.6 4 6.6 3 4.9 77 0 0 81.5


2006


Joey Harrington 388 223 2236 57.5 5.8 12 3.1 15 3.9 48 15 116 68.2
Daunte Culpepper 134 81 929 60.4 6.9 2 1.5 3 2.2 52 21 150 77.0
Cleo Lemon 68 38 412 55.9 6.1 2 2.9 1 1.5 38 5 24 77.6


Clearly a rag tag bunch. I don't think anyone can fault Welker for having Reche Caldwell esque numbers. I think he did pretty damn good making a name for himself under these conditions.


Here is the offensive rankings of the Patriots during McD's notable years. In 2004 McDaniel's became the QB's coach. He called plays in 2005 and became the OC in 2006.


Patriots offensive ranking
2004 #7 (Weis last year)
2005 #7 (McD took over play calling)
2006 #11 (McD named offensive coordinator)
2007 #1 (Randy Moss and Wes Welker first year)
2008 #5 (Lost Brady for the year)
2009 #3 (McD doesnt work there any more)

Welker's stats shot thru the roof while playing with Tom Brady and having the luxury of Randy Moss drawing double sometimes triple coverage.


Welker's ranking
2007 #1 Receptions #11 Yards
2008 #2 Receptions #9 Yards (Brady Out)
2009 #1 Receptions #2 Yards (McD Gone)
Total TD's 15

Moss's stats definitely went down with the injury of Brady. I was shocked to see how low his receptions were overall. But he can and does take it to the house seemingly at will.


Moss's Ranking
2007 #8 Reception's #2 Yards
2008 #28 Receptions #21 Yards (Brady Out)
2009 #12 Receptions #5 Yards (McD Gone)
Total TD's 47
Brady's numbers


Brady's QB rating & ranking
2004 92.6 (#9)
2005 92.3 (#6)
2006 87.9 (#9)
2007 117.2 (#1)
2008 89.4 (#10) Matt Cassel
2009 96.2 (#9)


I do not believe McDaniel's made Brady, Moss or Welker better. I do not believe he had anything to do with the acquisition of Welker, or Moss.

McDaniel's was a place holder OC. A seemingly never ending interchangeable NE coordinator.

The Patriots havent suffered since he left. Because he didnt offer anything special in the first place.

Pretty steady rankings in a pass first offense. I don't know if Dillon just wore down in 05, or if it was the play calling. Dillon averaged 3.5 yards a carry and Maroney was taken in 06 I believe.


Rushing Ranking for giggles
2009 #12
2008 #6
2007 #13
2006 #12
2005 #24
2004 #7

It's all my opinion. It's not blind hate. I just think McD isn't that good of a coach. His emotional instability and personal skills are another subject entirely.

Tned
03-30-2010, 09:01 AM
I think the hatred against McD is two-fold.

1. He's from NE
2. He's the same age/younger than most of the hater.

Hell, I'll add another:
His wife is HOT!

I found this on my computer, half typed. I think it was from yesterday, don't remember for sure. :lo:

First, the vast, vast majority of people you and others term 'haters' are not.

Second, the criticisms of McDaniels are based on what he has done and said, not due to where he comes from or his age. Sometimes people attribute would appears to be arrogance to his NE upgringing, and his mistakes to his age, but he is not 'hated' for those two things (yes, a few people hate NE enough to hold it against him, but that is small minority from what I can see).

topscribe
03-30-2010, 09:26 AM
If that's all it took to succeed in the NFL then no one would be looking for primary receivers...so I heartily disagree and I was not impressed by what he did in Denver. We'll just have to disagree on this as we do on the Orton issue.



There is no argument that playing with those injuries is difficult, but like flaws it can be hidden by certain factors. I give kuddos' to Orton for the games he played well in, injured or otherwise. But at no time did I find his play to be stellar or the defacto reason of victory. He was good even injured in the system, but he did not nor will he by his own play be great in the same said scheme. Believe what you want Top, I'm not hear to change your mind or your views, it would make me a shitty friend! You have always been more open to success with who the team has on the roster and have always been a bit of a 'koolaid drinker', but I'm not. I personally think that people are going to be calling for his head, especially without Marshall because I see him being less successful then last season. Not of his own volition either, simply put, I believe we will see that without the right weapons that he was nothing more then a system quarterback...again it's my opinion.

What I don't understand is how you are trying to get me to "believe" something.
I believe we wait and see. That is what I believe. I'm trying to take the middle
road on the whole affair. So I guess those who try to be reasonable and
consider both sides on this board are kool-aide drinkers.

If you think that unreasonable, I'm sorry for you.

-----

Northman
03-30-2010, 12:28 PM
You should care what Gaffney did or did not do in New England and Houston, it points to his contribution to a team...he could not even be the primary receiver in one of the league's worst offenses in Houston. So you are in fact arguing that he is capable to be a primary, then maybe we should sign Lelie as a secondary receiver, even he has had more success then Gaffney at the pro level. The point I was making to you Top, is that behind Marshall, Gaffney included we do not have a primary capable wideout and then even the secondary and third options are at this time questionable.



Orton still had a better offensive line then Cutler, that should not even be an argument. And he still had a better primary target then Cutler did at receiver as well...and it's not a matter of injury, it a matter of that Orton played in a padded system that makes him look better then he really is, he does not make the offensive scheme better by his play! Safer scheme which pads numbers, better offensive line and better receivers...I can see where that makes Orton better then Cutler, not saying Cutler has reached his potential or will...but that is not a very sound argument at all.

;)


You do realze that last year Orton still had a better QB rating and a better TD/INT ratio than Cutler did this year in Chicago right? And Orton didnt even have Knox or anyone like that last year. Im not saying that Orton is better than Cutler talent wise but to simply place blame on the rest of the team and not on Cutler is ignorant at best.

topscribe
03-30-2010, 01:20 PM
You do realze that last year Orton still had a better QB rating and a better TD/INT ratio than Cutler did this year in Chicago right? And Orton didnt even have Knox or anyone like that last year. Im not saying that Orton is better than Cutler talent wise but to simply place blame on the rest of the team and not on Cutler is ignorant at best.

Another thing: Cutler's problems this year in Chicago may indicate that when
Orton did struggle there last year it may not have all been Orton . . .

-----

Tned
03-30-2010, 01:20 PM
You do realze that last year Orton still had a better QB rating and a better TD/INT ratio than Cutler did this year in Chicago right? And Orton didnt even have Knox or anyone like that last year. Im not saying that Orton is better than Cutler talent wise but to simply place blame on the rest of the team and not on Cutler is ignorant at best.

Cutler had a horrible year. I'm sure there is some blame to go around, like the line, OC, lack of receiving depth, but doesn't change the fact he had a horrible year.

At the same time, that doesn't mean, as some indicate, that it's proof that getting rid of Cutler was the right move, because he is worse than Orton. There is still a lot to be written in terms of the history of Cutler, and whether he will be Jeff George, as many proclaim, or Brett Favre, or something in between.

topscribe
03-30-2010, 01:25 PM
Cutler had a horrible year. I'm sure there is some blame to go around, like the line, OC, lack of receiving depth, but doesn't change the fact he had a horrible year.

At the same time, that doesn't mean, as some indicate, that it's proof that getting rid of Cutler was the right move, because he is worse than Orton. There is still a lot to be written in terms of the history of Cutler, and whether he will be Jeff George, as many proclaim, or Brett Favre, or something in between.

Which goes to show that comparisons are ludicrous (even though I did
compare). What if Cutler would have stayed in Denver? He might have had
another Pro Bowl year, yet he might have had a horrible year here, too. Who
knows?

In all cases, the previous year is history and proves nothing for the upcoming
year. It's wait and see, and that is all it is . . .

-----

arapaho2
03-30-2010, 02:27 PM
Cane, if a QB's bone to his index finger--his guiding finger--is protruding through
the skin, it is going to affect his passing.

if his passing number backed that up you might have a point,,sadly for you top they dont

his best games were early in the season....

If a QB has a high ankle sprain, it is going to affect his passing . . . and his mobility.

I
-----

his finger might be a legit excuse it the stats backed it up..they dont

his first six games..where you you think his glove , the injury in preseason would back up him struggling with accuracy and preformance dont folow the excuse lines

he had a average 100.9 qb rating...244 yards per game aver..and a 9-1 td/int ratio..WHEN HIS FINGER WAS INJURED!!!
opposed to
87.4qbr....266ypg and a 10-7 td/int ratio, including two pick 6's

maybe orton should dislocate his finger on purpose? seems to play better

as for the ankle...the injury wasnt to his plant foot...so that shouldnt effect his passing...he already was immobile so thats not like he was gonna get plummer like yards rushing without it...so no

topscribe
03-30-2010, 02:41 PM
his finger might be a legit excuse it the stats backed it up..they dont

his first six games..where you you think his glove , the injury in preseason would back up him struggling with accuracy and preformance dont folow the excuse lines

he had a average 100.9 qb rating...244 yards per game aver..and a 9-1 td/int ratio..WHEN HIS FINGER WAS INJURED!!!
opposed to
87.4qbr....266ypg and a 10-7 td/int ratio, including two pick 6's

maybe orton should dislocate his finger on purpose? seems to play better

as for the ankle...the injury wasnt to his plant foot...so that shouldnt effect his passing...he already was immobile so thats not like he was gonna get plummer like yards rushing without it...so no

Yes, Orton had a 100 QBR with an injured finger. Fantastic, wasn't it? You
made my point.

And a high ankle sprain to either foot is going to affect the passing. The push-
off foot is more critical, yes, but the plant foot still affects the passing. And
Orton is NOT immobile. That is where you have it allllllllll wrong. If you knew
anything about Orton, you would not be saying that. As I have said, he is not
another Fran Tarkenton, but when he is healthy he can move. I have seen it.

-----

claymore
03-30-2010, 02:51 PM
Yes, Orton had a 100 QBR with an injured finger. Fantastic, wasn't it? You
made my point.

And a high ankle sprain to either foot is going to affect the passing. The push-
off foot is more critical, yes, but the plant foot still affects the passing. And
Orton is NOT immobile. That is where you have it allllllllll wrong. If you knew
anything about Orton, you would not be saying that. As I have said, he is not
another Fran Tarkenton, but when he is healthy he can move. I have seen it.

-----

He averages 3.3 rushing yards a game over his career. We can all run if someone is shooting at us. But it takes someoneshooting at us to get some of us to run.

Lonestar
03-30-2010, 02:58 PM
He averages 3.3 rushing yards a game over his career. We can all run if someone is shooting at us. But it takes someoneshooting at us to get some of us to run.


I have to wonder if he was hired to be a RB or a QB that hands the ball off or passes it to someone else.

Actually last year his stats were 3.0 running the ball. Might have been the lack of blocking for the OLINE. and then of course the kneel downs that he took could have some NEGavtive yards on those runs also.

No one is saying he is a scrambling QB that he is fleet afoot, but he is not paid to run the ball but of pass it off.

claymore
03-30-2010, 03:10 PM
I have to wonder if he was hired to be a RB or a QB that hands the ball off or passes it to someone else.

Actually last year his stats were 3.0 running the ball. Might have been the lack of blocking for the OLINE. and then of course the kneel downs that he took could have some NEGavtive yards on those runs also.

No one is saying he is a scrambling QB that he is fleet afoot, but he is not paid to run the ball but of pass it off.

I was responding to Top saying he was not "immobile". 3.3 rushing yards a game kinda says he is pretty statue esque. IMO. Not trying to piss you guys off.

Lancane
03-30-2010, 03:16 PM
What I don't understand is how you are trying to get me to "believe" something.
I believe we wait and see. That is what I believe. I'm trying to take the middle
road on the whole affair. So I guess those who try to be reasonable and
consider both sides on this board are kool-aide drinkers.

If you think that unreasonable, I'm sorry for you.

-----

I'm not trying to get you to believe anything, in all the years that you have known me for you to think so of me now? I really am not trying to get you to change your mind or your opinion, I simply implied my view of it all...whether or not you agree with me and I'm sorry you feel otherwise.

The middle road is one thing, but you have always had faith in the front office, coaches and those on the roster. It's not a bad thing, it's your way and you always see the best in people no matter the issues which is not bad thing either...but yes, those who have blind faith are the 'Koolaid Drinkers', and as you know I'm friends with several of them. And like with you we don't agree on everything and that is just the way of it.

;)

Lonestar
03-30-2010, 03:17 PM
I was responding to Top saying he was not "immobile". 3.3 rushing yards a game kinda says he is pretty statue esque. IMO. Not trying to piss you guys off.


Then you will really be pleased to know that Quinn has a 5.1 average last year.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=false&seasonType=REG&d-447263-o=2&conference=null&statisticCategory=RUSHING&d-447263-s=RUSHING_AVERAGE_YARDS&experience=null&d-447263-n=1&season=2009&Submit=Go&qualified=true&tabSeq=0&d-447263-p=2

ahahahahahahahaha

claymore
03-30-2010, 03:19 PM
Then you will really be pleased to know that Quinn has a 5.1 average last year.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=false&seasonType=REG&d-447263-o=2&conference=null&statisticCategory=RUSHING&d-447263-s=RUSHING_AVERAGE_YARDS&experience=null&d-447263-n=1&season=2009&Submit=Go&qualified=true&tabSeq=0&d-447263-p=2

ahahahahahahahaha

That Nancy can sure move!

Lancane
03-30-2010, 03:19 PM
Then you will really be pleased to know that Quinn has a 5.1 average last year.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=false&seasonType=REG&d-447263-o=2&conference=null&statisticCategory=RUSHING&d-447263-s=RUSHING_AVERAGE_YARDS&experience=null&d-447263-n=1&season=2009&Submit=Go&qualified=true&tabSeq=0&d-447263-p=2

ahahahahahahahaha

Well if you played for the Browns wouldn't you be running for your life also?

:lol:

Lonestar
03-30-2010, 03:20 PM
I'm not trying to get you to believe anything, in all the years that you have known me for you to think so of me now? I really am not trying to get you to change your mind or your opinion, I simply implied my view of it all...whether or not you agree with me and I'm sorry you feel otherwise.

The middle road is one thing, but you have always had faith in the front office, coaches and those on the roster. It's not a bad thing, it's your way and you always see the best in people no matter the issues which is not bad thing either...but yes, those who have blind faith are the 'Koolaid Drinkers', and as you know I'm friends with several of them. And like with you we don't agree on everything and that is just the way of it.

;)


While I have not been one to always believed what the front office, HC, or pseudo GM have said .. I am willing to give the new guys and befit of doubt UNTIL they re proved ineffectual.

I only hope that YOU can have an open mind also. :salute:

Lancane
03-30-2010, 03:48 PM
While I have not been one to always believed what the front office, HC, or pseudo GM have said .. I am willing to give the new guys and befit of doubt UNTIL they re proved ineffectual.

I only hope that YOU can have an open mind also. :salute:

I'm open minded on most additions, but I also am more of a realist then others may be... Some will label me a so-called 'hater' because of it, but I really do not care. I have high hopes for last years draft class and for those we added this off-season. But I will never be completely sold on Orton or Gaffney, and I will admit that I want McDaniels to succeed, but with what he has done and how he conducts himself it's hard for me to keep that faith.

Lonestar
03-30-2010, 03:59 PM
I'm open minded on most additions, but I also am more of a realist then others may be... Some will label me a so-called 'hater' because of it, but I really do not care. I have high hopes for last years draft class and for those we added this off-season. But I will never be completely sold on Orton or Gaffney, and I will admit that I want McDaniels to succeed, but with what he has done and how he conducts himself it's hard for me to keep that faith.


I felt much the same way about mike after his really lousy drafting screwed the club for almost a decade.

I never trusted his player judgement especially after the ashley choice.
that was kind of the wake up call for me.

I hope that all can succeed and orton, quinn or TB turns into a great QB, note I did not say Franchise QB as I do not believe you have to have one to win all the marbles.

topscribe
03-30-2010, 04:35 PM
I'm not trying to get you to believe anything, in all the years that you have known me for you to think so of me now? I really am not trying to get you to change your mind or your opinion, I simply implied my view of it all...whether or not you agree with me and I'm sorry you feel otherwise.

The middle road is one thing, but you have always had faith in the front office, coaches and those on the roster. It's not a bad thing, it's your way and you always see the best in people no matter the issues which is not bad thing either...but yes, those who have blind faith are the 'Koolaid Drinkers', and as you know I'm friends with several of them. And like with you we don't agree on everything and that is just the way of it.

;)

I guess I did not express that well. I wasn't saying you were trying to get me
to believe something. I was saying you were representing me as believing
something that I do not necessarily believe.

But that has been what several here have been trying to do: put me into a
category. They represent me as being almost an Orton groupie. I am not. All
I have done was to challenge the mistruths and myths about him because I
have learned differently through all the research, to which I should not have
wasted my time.

For instance, they were implying that Orton has a "rag arm" when I had found
out he has a very strong arm (and proved it this year). They said he is a
statue with no mobility when I found out he has decent mobility (watch the
final game against KC, then understand "I told you so"). They have said Orton
is "inaccurate" when I had seen different and, after the conclusion of the
season, McDaniels volunteered that one of the things he likes about Orton is
that he is accurate.

All I have done is argue the facts because I knew the facts from my research
of Orton (having started with a negative impression of him) to whom I have
devoted no other (and never will again).

But they had me with Orton in the HOF when I still am in a "wait and see"
mode with him.

Now is the same with McDaniels. You all seem to claim that he cannot get
along with players. Yet I have recently listened to interviews of Lonie Paxton
and Jarvis Greene, and previous interviews with Jabar Gaffney, LaMont Jordan,
and Kenny Peterson, all who have played for or with McDaniels, and all who
said one of the reasons they came here was because of McDaniels.

You all have expressed McDaniels is not a good coach and had little effect
where he has been, which makes Belichick and idiot because Belichick is the
one who promoted him through the ranks.

So, while I am not arguing on McDaniels' behalf, I am taking the position of
"wait and see," not drinking Kool-Aid, as you have stated.

Now, if this is unreasonable to you, then you need to take a look at yourself
because having allllllll the facts that one can get before making a judgment is
what I have learned and taught in my career because that is the right
approach.

And that is not debatable . . .

-----

topscribe
03-30-2010, 04:36 PM
I was responding to Top saying he was not "immobile". 3.3 rushing yards a game kinda says he is pretty statue esque. IMO. Not trying to piss you guys off.

Clay, have you ever had a high ankle sprain? I have.

-----

topscribe
03-30-2010, 04:43 PM
Yes, Orton had a 100 QBR with an injured finger. Fantastic, wasn't it? You
made my point.

And a high ankle sprain to either foot is going to affect the passing. The push-
off foot is more critical, yes, but the plant foot still affects the passing. And
Orton is NOT immobile. That is where you have it allllllllll wrong. If you knew
anything about Orton, you would not be saying that. As I have said, he is not
another Fran Tarkenton, but when he is healthy he can move. I have seen it.

-----

Come to think of it, Orton was spotted with both ankles wrapped last season
at one point after his injury. I had forgotten about that.

-----

Bosco
03-30-2010, 04:45 PM
I think I've stated my point pretty clearly. McDaniel's gets more credit than I think he deserves. Then you disagree with a plethora of Patriot players and coaches who credit him with their offensive success.


Wes Welker became a starter in Miami in 2005. He had a total of 5 QB's in his 2 years there. All of which att. at least 60 passes.

Bill Belichick traded a 2nd and a 7th rd pick for Wes Welker in 2007. Welker's numbers immediately doubled. I think this was due to stability and Tom Effin Brady. **EDITED PERSONAL ATTACK**


The 2007 offensive explosion the Patriots demonstrated was because of Randy Moss and Wes Welker not Josh McDaniel's.

I'm new here, but it's pretty clear that you have some kind of axe to grind against McD and there for refuse to give him any credit for the greatest offense in NFL history despite him being the offensive coordinator.

I'd be curious to go back through your posts and see how much credit you gave Shanahan for our offensive successes over the years. THAT could be some major comedy. :lol:

Here is the offensive rankings of the Patriots during McD's notable years. In 2004 McDaniel's became the QB's coach. He called plays in 2005 and became the OC in 2006.

Welker's stats shot thru the roof while playing with Tom Brady and having the luxury of Randy Moss drawing double sometimes triple coverage.

Moss's stats definitely went down with the injury of Brady. I was shocked to see how low his receptions were overall. But he can and does take it to the house seemingly at will.

Brady's numbers[/QUOTE] All these quotes are a perfect example of your piss poor football knowledge. You take the numbers from the one year McD hasn't been there and go "HA! SEE THEY WERE STILL GOOD SO IT WASN'T MCD MAKING THEM GOOD!" yet you completely ignore the fact that A) the teachings that McD gave those players (especially Brady) don't just vanish when he lives. B) The Patriots have been running the same base offensive system since Weis was there and C) they have multiple players and coaches who watched McD implement his offense and can now attempt to carry on that system.


I do not believe McDaniel's made Brady, Moss or Welker better. That's funny. Tom Brady (you know, the guy who worked with McD for the better part of the decade) has repeatedly credited McDaniels for him being able to take the next step as a quarterback. I bet you know better than him, right? :tsk:

Did he make Welker and Moss better? Maybe not in the direct way he made Brady better as he wasn't the WR coach, but he did design his offense to take advantage of their skill sets and as a result, you get the greatest offense ever.


I do not believe he had anything to do with the acquisition of Welker, or Moss. Stick your head in the sane all you want, but if you don't think he at least had some input on who was acquired for his offense, your football knowledge is even worse than I thought.


McDaniel's was a place holder OC. A seemingly never ending interchangeable NE coordinator. The only other offensive coordinator to leave under Belichick was Weis, and he went to college football which isn't exactly a good comparison. The rest of the coordinators were defensive coordinators where they were nothing more than Belichick's wingmen.


The Patriots havent suffered since he left. Because he didnt offer anything special in the first place. Wow, another horrible take.

McD has only been gone one year. Do you honestly think that is even close to a reasonable sample size to discern what effect his leaving might have?

[I]Pretty steady rankings in a pass first offense.[/QUOTE] You clearly never watched McD's offense. They were a very balanced team in 2005 and 2006, went to a big aerial attack in 2007 and more of a dink and dunk offense in 2008 when Cassel was under center and they didn't have a reliable running back to carry the load.

McDaniels has run his offense in three very different ways with three very different teams. Categorizing it as a "pass first" offense is about as uninformed as you can get.


It's all my opinion. It's not blind hate. I just think McD isn't that good of a coach. His emotional instability and personal skills are another subject entirely. What "emotional instability"?

And what is your complaint with his "personal skills"?

Northman
03-30-2010, 04:53 PM
Cutler had a horrible year. I'm sure there is some blame to go around, like the line, OC, lack of receiving depth, but doesn't change the fact he had a horrible year.

At the same time, that doesn't mean, as some indicate, that it's proof that getting rid of Cutler was the right move, because he is worse than Orton. There is still a lot to be written in terms of the history of Cutler, and whether he will be Jeff George, as many proclaim, or Brett Favre, or something in between.

Maybe, maybe not. Although i do think the talent is there the numbers kind of speak for themselves. Sure, some of those things you mentioned play a part just like the played a part with Kyle Orton both in Denver and in Chicago. The problem is out of the two thus far i see one guy making better decisions with the ball. Time will tell but right now you simply cant say that he is better than he is based on potential alone and i think that is what many of us have tried to explain to a few of you who keep saying that letting him go was a mistake. Its only a mistake if he becomes a HOF and SB winning QB and right now he is not one.

claymore
03-30-2010, 05:55 PM
Then you disagree with a plethora of Patriot players and coaches who credit him with their offensive success.


Find me quotes, and thank you.


I'm new here, but it's pretty clear that you have some kind of axe to grind against McD and there for refuse to give him any credit for the greatest offense in NFL history despite him being the offensive coordinator.

I'd be curious to go back through your posts and see how much credit you gave Shanahan for our offensive successes over the years. THAT could be some major comedy. :lol:
If it wasnt Moss and Welker that changed the dynamics of that team why didnt McDaniels make the 2006 team put up those numbers with Rechelle Caldwell and Ben Watson?




All these quotes are a perfect example of your piss poor football knowledge. You take the numbers from the one year McD hasn't been there and go "HA! SEE THEY WERE STILL GOOD SO IT WASN'T MCD MAKING THEM GOOD!" yet you completely ignore the fact that A) the teachings that McD gave those players (especially Brady) don't just vanish when he lives. B) The Patriots have been running the same base offensive system since Weis was there and C) they have multiple players and coaches who watched McD implement his offense and can now attempt to carry on that system.
Brady's QB rtg went down the first 3 years McD coached him. It spiked to a whole new level (117) when Welker and Moss got there.


That's funny. Tom Brady (you know, the guy who worked with McD for the better part of the decade) has repeatedly credited McDaniels for him being able to take the next step as a quarterback. I bet you know better than him, right? :tsk:Ive also heard Brady say Josh leaving is no big deal. You dont say that when someone great leaves the organization.


Did he make Welker and Moss better? Maybe not in the direct way he made Brady better as he wasn't the WR coach, but he did design his offense to take advantage of their skill sets and as a result, you get the greatest offense ever. I thought you said it was Weis system?


Stick your head in the sane all you want, but if you don't think he at least had some input on who was acquired for his offense, your football knowledge is even worse than I thought. Bill Belichick controls that. If McD mentioned Moss or Welker in passing... Whatever there is no way to prove it or disprove it. We do know that as many coordinators that NE has had, it would be retarded for Belichick to let them bring in their guys.


The only other offensive coordinator to leave under Belichick was Weis, and he went to college football which isn't exactly a good comparison. The rest of the coordinators were defensive coordinators where they were nothing more than Belichick's wingmen. Please at least read what I said. I said "Coordinators" That covers Weis, Crennel, Mangini, and McDaniels.


Wow, another horrible take.

McD has only been gone one year. Do you honestly think that is even close to a reasonable sample size to discern what effect his leaving might have? The team actually doing better than the year before? Yes.


You clearly never watched McD's offense. They were a very balanced team in 2005 and 2006, went to a big aerial attack in 2007 and more of a dink and dunk offense in 2008 when Cassel was under center and they didn't have a reliable running back to carry the load.2005, um no they were 24th in Rushing. 2006 the offense as a whole got worse. 2007 You know who was signed. And suddenley they went fromn the #11 offense to the #1 offense.


McDaniels has run his offense in three very different ways with three very different teams. Categorizing it as a "pass first" offense is about as uninformed as you can get. What 3 teams?


What "emotional instability"?

And what is your complaint with his "personal skills"?
I will let you calm down before we cover this.


BTW, your welcome for cleaning up that mess you called a post.

Lancane
03-30-2010, 06:47 PM
I guess I did not express that well. I wasn't saying you were trying to get me
to believe something. I was saying you were representing me as believing
something that I do not necessarily believe.

But that has been what several here have been trying to do: put me into a
category. They represent me as being almost an Orton groupie. I am not. All
I have done was to challenge the mistruths and myths about him because I
have learned differently through all the research, to which I should not have
wasted my time.

For instance, they were implying that Orton has a "rag arm" when I had found
out he has a very strong arm (and proved it this year). They said he is a
statue with no mobility when I found out he has decent mobility (watch the
final game against KC, then understand "I told you so"). They have said Orton
is "inaccurate" when I had seen different and, after the conclusion of the
season, McDaniels volunteered that one of the things he likes about Orton is
that he is accurate.

All I have done is argue the facts because I knew the facts from my research
of Orton (having started with a negative impression of him) to whom I have
devoted no other (and never will again).

But they had me with Orton in the HOF when I still am in a "wait and see"
mode with him.

Now is the same with McDaniels. You all seem to claim that he cannot get
along with players. Yet I have recently listened to interviews of Lonie Paxton
and Jarvis Greene, and previous interviews with Jabar Gaffney, LaMont Jordan,
and Kenny Peterson, all who have played for or with McDaniels, and all who
said one of the reasons they came here was because of McDaniels.

You all have expressed McDaniels is not a good coach and had little effect
where he has been, which makes Belichick and idiot because Belichick is the
one who promoted him through the ranks.

So, while I am not arguing on McDaniels' behalf, I am taking the position of
"wait and see," not drinking Kool-Aid, as you have stated.

Now, if this is unreasonable to you, then you need to take a look at yourself
because having allllllll the facts that one can get before making a judgment is
what I have learned and taught in my career because that is the right
approach.

And that is not debatable . . .

-----

Ehhh?

I think you and I are both confusing one another and not stating our points clear enough for the other to understand. So let me explain a bit better, then maybe you'll understand my point of view more clearly.

On the Orton issue, I credit him with being tough in both physical and mental aspects. He has a fair arm, nothing spectacular and he is not the most accurate quarterback in the league, especially long-range; that is not an opinion that is a proven assessment from some of the most respected scouts in the business, it's an issue he has had long before his collegiate days and never succeeded in being coached out of. His mechanics are an issue as well, he can throw a tight spiral more often then not, but his field of vision and fakes at times are very questionable...and I don't believe I ever said he was not mobile? Cutler in my opinion can make all the throws, he too has issues with his field of vision and fakes, but he is far more accurate and has a more powerful arm. As to being able to stay in the pocket or being mobile, even toughness I think they are a lot more similar then people will credit. The one area where I give Orton the edge is his ability to protect the ball, he is a safer quarterback.

Is Orton the best quarterback in the league? No. Is Cutler? No. But we can not fairly distinguish which is better or not, not only because of their individual play but because the systems they play in and the cast around them. McDaniels' system is a padded system that is quarterback friendly becuase it is a safer scheme in itself, it's not arguable either, it's been fairly proven at both the pro and collegiate levels. It is based on a short accurate passing game, but it can not be exploited to it's full potential without the long-range passing game. But those quick short passes bolster a quarterbacks numbers. Whilst Cutler is a 'Gunslinger' in every sense of the term, the west-coast is not a padded safe scheme which bolsters the numbers, infact of all the offensive philosophies the 'Ohio River Offense' or west-coast is more volatile, and usually is the cause for more interceptions. I don't believe Orton will ever be able to exploit McDaniels offense to it's full capability.

If Chicago had a Marshall-esque receiver and a better offensive line I would bet my left nut that he would be putting up MVP type numbers. Where as McDaniels knows that Orton's long-range accuracy is poorous and will not risk it that often and why we did not see much of such this past year. A lot of plays were made by receivers then by the quarterback himself, or at least that is how I saw it.

As to the whole McDaniels debate, I think people tend to forget that when we were looking at coaches that I was one of his biggest supporters whilst others were going balistic for Spagnuolo and others. The reason I was all for him being hired is the offense he would run, I thought it would be better for Cutler and I knew he would bring the 3-4 to Denver as well.

I lost a whole hell of a lot of respect for him when he lied, and continued do so. It was as though he did not learn from his mistakes, and I do not buy for a minute that people called on Cutler, he shopped him. We had no one of starting capability behind Cutler such as Philadelphia has, and Bowlen pretty much had him as the teams posterboy before McDaniels hiring; hell, we had a lot of coaches wanting to come here because they had a lot of pieces in place...then when he is caught in the lies he acts as though it's nothing, he is arrogant and dissrespectful to the fans and that is something you just don't do. He might as well have just grabbed a microphone and declared that Colorado was full of inbred rednecks. And I could have chaulked it up as a rookie mistake, except he continues to be arrogant and continues to alienate playmakers. I understand he wants to implement a 'Team first philosophy', but besides Belichick no one has been capable of such in the modern era, it takes talent as much as good coaching. And I think he is a good coach, I just will not credit him with the little good he's done when the bad choices outweights it. I do hope he turns it around, but if he can not learn from his mistakes, remains arrogant and bullheaded then he will not likely change it during his tenure as Denver's head coach.

topscribe
03-30-2010, 08:00 PM
Ehhh?

I think you and I are both confusing one another and not stating our points clear enough for the other to understand. So let me explain a bit better, then maybe you'll understand my point of view more clearly.

On the Orton issue, I credit him with being tough in both physical and mental aspects. He has a fair arm, nothing spectacular and he is not the most accurate quarterback in the league, especially long-range; that is not an opinion that is a proven assessment from some of the most respected scouts in the business, it's an issue he has had long before his collegiate days and never succeeded in being coached out of. His mechanics are an issue as well, he can throw a tight spiral more often then not, but his field of vision and fakes at times are very questionable...and I don't believe I ever said he was not mobile? Cutler in my opinion can make all the throws, he too has issues with his field of vision and fakes, but he is far more accurate and has a more powerful arm. As to being able to stay in the pocket or being mobile, even toughness I think they are a lot more similar then people will credit. The one area where I give Orton the edge is his ability to protect the ball, he is a safer quarterback.

Is Orton the best quarterback in the league? No. Is Cutler? No. But we can not fairly distinguish which is better or not, not only because of their individual play but because the systems they play in and the cast around them. McDaniels' system is a padded system that is quarterback friendly becuase it is a safer scheme in itself, it's not arguable either, it's been fairly proven at both the pro and collegiate levels. It is based on a short accurate passing game, but it can not be exploited to it's full potential without the long-range passing game. But those quick short passes bolster a quarterbacks numbers. Whilst Cutler is a 'Gunslinger' in every sense of the term, the west-coast is not a padded safe scheme which bolsters the numbers, infact of all the offensive philosophies the 'Ohio River Offense' or west-coast is more volatile, and usually is the cause for more interceptions. I don't believe Orton will ever be able to exploit McDaniels offense to it's full capability.

If Chicago had a Marshall-esque receiver and a better offensive line I would bet my left nut that he would be putting up MVP type numbers. Where as McDaniels knows that Orton's long-range accuracy is poorous and will not risk it that often and why we did not see much of such this past year. A lot of plays were made by receivers then by the quarterback himself, or at least that is how I saw it.

As to the whole McDaniels debate, I think people tend to forget that when we were looking at coaches that I was one of his biggest supporters whilst others were going balistic for Spagnuolo and others. The reason I was all for him being hired is the offense he would run, I thought it would be better for Cutler and I knew he would bring the 3-4 to Denver as well.

I lost a whole hell of a lot of respect for him when he lied, and continued do so. It was as though he did not learn from his mistakes, and I do not buy for a minute that people called on Cutler, he shopped him. We had no one of starting capability behind Cutler such as Philadelphia has, and Bowlen pretty much had him as the teams posterboy before McDaniels hiring; hell, we had a lot of coaches wanting to come here because they had a lot of pieces in place...then when he is caught in the lies he acts as though it's nothing, he is arrogant and dissrespectful to the fans and that is something you just don't do. He might as well have just grabbed a microphone and declared that Colorado was full of inbred rednecks. And I could have chaulked it up as a rookie mistake, except he continues to be arrogant and continues to alienate playmakers. I understand he wants to implement a 'Team first philosophy', but besides Belichick no one has been capable of such in the modern era, it takes talent as much as good coaching. And I think he is a good coach, I just will not credit him with the little good he's done when the bad choices outweights it. I do hope he turns it around, but if he can not learn from his mistakes, remains arrogant and bullheaded then he will not likely change it during his tenure as Denver's head coach.

Pretty decent analysis, except that I believe the guys who worked with Orton
every single day over scouts who did not (although not all scouts agree
with you to the degree you put it). McDaniels was asked what he liked most
about working with Orton, after the last game of the season, and he used the
word "accurate" right after he said "smart." Moreover, Lloyd, who worked with
Orton in Chicago as well as here, said Orton can make "all the throws."
Gaffney also said in another interview that Orton can make "all the throws."

Now, I haven't seen Orton and Cutler throwing side-by-side, so I'm not going
to say who is more accurate, but the respective completion rates (which
some in the anti-Orton crowd have used to try to demonstrate Orton's alleged
inaccuracy) are very comparable.

This last year, Orton completed 62.1% of his passes, as opposed to Cutler's
60.5%. (Now, if you included completions also to players on the other team,
then Cutler would close that gap very quickly.)

Okay, so enter your argument Orton had a better O-line and receivers
(although Orton played through two serious injuries, whereas Cutler was
healthy). So here was Orton's 2008 completion rate with the Bears: 58.5%.
That was with 12 INTs (as opposed to 26, of course). Same team, except
Orton did not have Knox, but he had a high ankle sprain in the last half of
that year. (Remember, Cutler was healthy.)

It's amazing, BTW, that you et al. always bring up Cutler's more powerful arm.
Cutler has a more powerful arm than than either Peyton Manning or Brady, too.
And Jeff George had a more powerful arm than Joe Montana. The thing about
it is, Orton, while not as powerful as Cutler, also has a more powerful arm
than the other three. Now, you've talked about scouts: One of the attributes
for which Orton was recruited into Purdue was for his powerful arm. When
Orton was a high school senior (i.e., not fully developed), he threw the ball
74 yards in a QB contest. Contrast that to the 2002 QB Challenge where
Manning threw the ball 68 yards and Brady 67 (both full grown). Those are the
facts. Your declarations are not.

Orton did have long distance issues regarding accuracy, that is true. However,
reports came out of camp that he has improved significantly in that area, and
he demonstrated that in the final KC game, in which he threw two passes 50+
yards in the air to a tightly contested Gaffney, on the money. So he is
apparently eventually putting away that issue, also. In fact, both McDaniels
and Orton said they would have a deeper game this year.

Regarding Cutler, I am not one of his bashers. Actually, I can't help but to
remain a bit of a fan of his. Moreover, I do expect him eventually to become
a fine QB.

Will either become "elite"? Well, I sincerely believe both have the potential.
But potential means nothing. Hell, Ryan Leaf had "potential." So, converse to
you, I am not going to make any predictions, one way or the other. It's still
wait and see . . .

-----

T.K.O.
03-30-2010, 08:18 PM
This last year, Orton completed 62.1% of his passes, as opposed to Cutler's
60.5%. (Now, if you included completions also to players on the other team,
then Cutler would close that gap very quickly.)


-----

awesome....quote of the week in my book !
also found this on orton before being hurt his last year in chicago adds to your point i think

"Bears not surprised with Orton's strong performance
By: Larry Mayer | Last Updated: 10/8/2008 1:36 PM

LAKE FOREST, Ill. – Judging from the stories being written by the national media this week, Kyle Orton’s emergence has surprised a lot of people throughout the NFL. But don’t count the quarterback’s teammates among them.

“Kyle’s a good quarterback,” said receiver Rashied Davis. “He did a lot of great things in college and he did well in his first year here [in 2005] before he was put on the backburner. No one’s surprised in this organization.”


Kyle Orton's .652 winning percentage (15-8) is the sixth highest among current NFL quarterbacks who have at least 16 starts.
As Orton prepares for Sunday’s game against the Falcons in Atlanta, he hopes to build off the best statistical performance of his career. In his 23rd pro start, the 6-4, 216-pounder set personal highs with 24 completions, 334 yards and a 121.4 passer rating in last weekend’s 34-7 rout of the Lions.

Orton helped the Bears increase their lead from 3-0 to 21-0 by completing 11 of 14 passes for 184 yards and two touchdowns on three TD drives bridging the second and third quarters.

“I think we did a great job executing each play,” Orton said. “We left a couple out there, so the goal is to try to get better and make those plays that we didn’t make the last time.”

Known as a game manager who rarely makes mistakes, the former Purdue star has demonstrated an ability to make big plays. He completed six passes of at least 20 yards against the Lions, including gains of 52, 34, 32 and 30 yards to four different receivers.

“He studies exceptionally well,” Davis said. “He knows what’s going on, he knows what adjustments he should make.

"What he’s done tremendously this year that probably I guess was one of the knocks when he was a rookie was he throws the ball with a lot more touch. He can drop the ball over people now whereas before it was all fire.”

To put it in baseball parlance, the 25-year-old has added a repertoire of pitches to his live fastball.

"He's been progressing really well, which he should," said offensive coordinator Ron Turner. "It's his fourth year in the system. He's really improved his techniques and fundamentals. He's playing with a lot of confidence right now and he's throwing the ball with much better accuracy and good touch on it."

Dating back to late last season, Orton has compiled a better passer rating than the opposing quarterback in seven of eight starts. Even more impressive is that those players include Brett Favre, Peyton Manning, Drew Brees and Jake Delhomme, a quartet of quarterbacks that has been voted to a combined 18 Pro Bowls."

topscribe
03-30-2010, 08:23 PM
"What he’s done tremendously this year that probably I guess was one of the knocks when he was a rookie was he throws the ball with a lot more touch. He can drop the ball over people now whereas before it was all fire.”

To put it in baseball parlance, the 25-year-old has added a repertoire of pitches to his live fastball.


Oh? :confused:

-----

rcsodak
03-30-2010, 09:28 PM
I think I've stated my point pretty clearly. McDaniel's gets more credit than I think he deserves.

Wes Welker became a starter in Miami in 2005. He had a total of 5 QB's in his 2 years there. All of which att. at least 60 passes.

Bill Belichick traded a 2nd and a 7th rd pick for Wes Welker in 2007. Welker's numbers immediately doubled. I think this was due to stability and Tom Effin Brady.

We all know how Moss did in Oak. But none of us should question what Moss brings to the table when he wants to. So I will leave that alone for the most part.

The 2007 offensive explosion the Patriots demonstrated was because of Randy Moss and Wes Welker not Josh McDaniel's.




Here is the offensive rankings of the Patriots during McD's notable years. In 2004 McDaniel's became the QB's coach. He called plays in 2005 and became the OC in 2006.



Welker's stats shot thru the roof while playing with Tom Brady and having the luxury of Randy Moss drawing double sometimes triple coverage.



Moss's stats definitely went down with the injury of Brady. I was shocked to see how low his receptions were overall. But he can and does take it to the house seemingly at will.


Brady's numbers




I do not believe McDaniel's made Brady, Moss or Welker better. I do not believe he had anything to do with the acquisition of Welker, or Moss.

McDaniel's was a place holder OC. A seemingly never ending interchangeable NE coordinator.

The Patriots havent suffered since he left. Because he didnt offer anything special in the first place.

Pretty steady rankings in a pass first offense. I don't know if Dillon just wore down in 05, or if it was the play calling. Dillon averaged 3.5 yards a carry and Maroney was taken in 06 I believe.



It's all my opinion. It's not blind hate. I just think McD isn't that good of a coach. His emotional instability and personal skills are another subject entirely.

Evidently you glossed by 'canes explanation to all of that.

It's all in the system.

:rolleyes:

Bosco
03-31-2010, 12:17 AM
Find me quotes, and thank you. You're joking right? This has been repeatedly discussed since the fanbase first found out we were interviewing McDaniels.

If you weren't paying attention I guess that's your problem. I'm not about to go trudging through a year's worth of threads to dig up the relevant quotes.


If it wasnt Moss and Welker that changed the dynamics of that team why didnt McDaniels make the 2006 team put up those numbers with Rechelle Caldwell and Ben Watson? Ben Watson had his best year in 2006, and set his career high for touchdown receptions in 2007 despite missing 4 games.

And he didn't run a wide open aerial attack in 2006 because the talent wasn't there. He coached to the talent he did have and their offense still ranked in the top third of the NFL.


Brady's QB rtg went down the first 3 years McD coached him. It spiked to a whole new level (117) when Welker and Moss got there.

Wrong again. Here are Brady's rating numbers, with the McD years bolded.


86.5
85.7
85.9
92.6
92.3
87.9
117.2

Now granted I'm not great at math, but I'm pretty sure that the highest pre-McD number (86.5) is actually less than the lowest (87.9) number attained with McD there.


Ive also heard Brady say Josh leaving is no big deal. You dont say that when someone great leaves the organization. I ran through this through Google and found nothing, so I have no idea what the context was or if it was even said at all.


I thought you said it was Weis system? If you want to get downright technical about it, it's the Earhart-Perkins system.

Weis brought that system to New England, and Josh McDaniels learned under that. When Weis left and he took over, he ran the same system but added his own wrinkles and innovations to it, just the same as many coaches (like Shanahan) have done with the WCO. We call it "Shanahan's offense" but in reality it's just a branch of the WCO offense tree, albeit a very successful one.


Bill Belichick controls that. If McD mentioned Moss or Welker in passing... Whatever there is no way to prove it or disprove it. We do know that as many coordinators that NE has had, it would be retarded for Belichick to let them bring in their guys. First off, I never said Josh was the one deciding to bring them in. I said that Josh was almost certainly given input into the situation. I know a couple very knowledgeable Pats fans who say that Belichick allowed McD to be part of their draft war room, so it's not far fetched to think he got McD's input on free agency.

But as you admitted, it's almost impossible to prove either way.


If you call me a dimwit, please at least read what I said. I said "Coordinators" That covers Weis, Crennel, Mangini, and McDaniels. And I'm pretty sure I addressed the reasons why Josh McDaniels situation is unique.


The team actually doing better than the year before? Yes. You mean the year before when they lost Brady and had to start a guy who hadn't started a football game since high school? That's the bar they had to clear?

Good lord.


2005, um no they were 24th in Rushing. Do you know how to read a stat book? :confused: That 24th ranking was in yards per carry. They were 18th in rushing attempts (the stats that matter when determining a balanced offense) with 27.4 attempts per game. They were 2nd in passing attempts (35.2 per game) but that number was inflated due to missing Corey Dillon for a significant portion of the season.


2006 the offense as a whole got worse. No they didn't. They went from 10th to 7th.


2007 You know who was signed. And suddenley they went fromn the #11 offense to the #1 offense. Again, it was 7th to 1st.


What 3 teams? The 2005-2006 teams. The 2007 team. The 2008 team. All three ran their offenses quite different from the others.


I will let you calm down before we cover this. I'm perfectly calm. I don't get wound up over this.

Shazam!
03-31-2010, 12:42 AM
Wow. Clay got pwned. lol

Just kidding Clay.

topscribe
03-31-2010, 12:45 AM
Bosco, let's address the issues. Don't attack Clay. He and I don't agree very often
on football, but he's my bud and just about everybody else's on the board . . . :)

-----

Bosco
03-31-2010, 01:33 AM
Bosco, let's address the issues. Don't attack Clay. He and I don't agree very often
on football, but he's my bud and just about everybody else's on the board . . . :)

-----

I'm sure he's a good guy, and hell, we're all Broncos fans here, but some of his takes are just so far off the map they need to be called out.

Nothing personal though.

claymore
03-31-2010, 07:52 AM
You're joking right? This has been repeatedly discussed since the fanbase first found out we were interviewing McDaniels.

If you weren't paying attention I guess that's your problem. I'm not about to go trudging through a year's worth of threads to dig up the relevant quotes. No I wasnt joking. If you arent going to produce it, then dont expect me to take your word for it.


Ben Watson had his best year in 2006, and set his career high for touchdown receptions in 2007 despite missing 4 games.
Randy Moss tends to make other offensive weapons look good.


And he didn't run a wide open aerial attack in 2006 because the talent wasn't there. He coached to the talent he did have and their offense still ranked in the top third of the NFL.
You just proved my point. He didnt have the talent. 2007 season was because of Moss and Welker. They didnt need McD. Thank you.


Wrong again. Here are Brady's rating numbers, with the McD years bolded. Now granted I'm not great at math, but I'm pretty sure that the highest pre-McD number (86.5) is actually less than the lowest (87.9) number attained with McD there.
Did you notice the second highest QB rating was the year McD left?


I ran through this through Google and found nothing, so I have no idea what the context was or if it was even said at all.

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss_pieces/2009/01/brady_on_rehab.html


“There is change every year and I think you have to get used to that in the NFL. You look at Tony Dungy, for the Colts, the head coach, he retired. … Every team deals with it. We dealt with it about three or four years ago with our two coordinators, Charlie Weis and Romeo Crennel. Eric Mangini left. This year, it’s different defections. They’re incredible coaches that have been a huge part of our success, they get opportunities. People who work hard deserve those opportunities. They take with them all the great memories and experiences they’ve had from our team. It’s the responsibility of the people who are still with the Patriots to worry about the Patriots. As long as we have Robert and Jonathan Kraft, and as long as we have Coach Belichick, I would think we’re going to be just fine.”


If you want to get downright technical about it, it's the Earhart-Perkins system.

Weis brought that system to New England, and Josh McDaniels learned under that. When Weis left and he took over, he ran the same system but added his own wrinkles and innovations to it, just the same as many coaches (like Shanahan) have done with the WCO. We call it "Shanahan's offense" but in reality it's just a branch of the WCO offense tree, albeit a very successful one.
:rolleyes: McD ran Weis system. Period. Nothing new. "Just drive the car, and dont scratch it."



First off, I never said Josh was the one deciding to bring them in. I said that Josh was almost certainly given input into the situation. I know a couple very knowledgeable Pats fans who say that Belichick allowed McD to be part of their draft war room, so it's not far fetched to think he got McD's input on free agency.

But as you admitted, it's almost impossible to prove either way.
OK.


And I'm pretty sure I addressed the reasons why Josh McDaniels situation is unique. If you have a valid reason as to why you believe McD is any better than Weis, Mangini or Crennel please let me know. If you already posted it I missed it.


You mean the year before when they lost Brady and had to start a guy who hadn't started a football game since high school? That's the bar they had to clear?

Good lord.
Hey youre the one that believes McDaniels is a difference maker, not me... The 2010 offense will do better than the 05, 06 and maybe the 09 offense as well. (Keep this post for later)


Do you know how to read a stat book? :confused: That 24th ranking was in yards per carry. They were 18th in rushing attempts (the stats that matter when determining a balanced offense) with 27.4 attempts per game. They were 2nd in passing attempts (35.2 per game) but that number was inflated due to missing Corey Dillon for a significant portion of the season. I read it wrong. My fault.


No they didn't. They went from 10th to 7th.
Check again. 7th to 11th.


Again, it was 7th to 1st.
Check again. Link provided.
2005 (http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=true&conference=null&role=TM&offensiveStatisticCategory=GAME_STATS&defensiveStatisticCategory=null&season=2005&seasonType=REG&tabSeq=2&qualified=true&Submit=Go)
2006 (http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=true&conference=null&role=TM&offensiveStatisticCategory=GAME_STATS&defensiveStatisticCategory=null&season=2006&seasonType=REG&tabSeq=2&qualified=true&Submit=Go)



The 2005-2006 teams. The 2007 team. The 2008 team. All three ran their offenses quite different from the others.
So I take your word for it? How? Please explain??? I can say the 2007 team would be different because they got RANDY MOSS and WES WELKER! They were able to do alot more things then they could in 2005-2006. Their QB was hurt in 2008 Im sure they ran the ball alot more.

Other than that, what offensive genius did McD install?

I'm perfectly calm. I don't get wound up over this.
Then act like it.

Lancane
03-31-2010, 08:56 AM
Evidently you glossed by 'canes explanation to all of that.

It's all in the system.

:rolleyes:

You know the intelligence of a community can be surmised by the statements that hold no weight or challenge those that do. It's a fact, one based on proven data from those in and around the sport, not a guesstaimation, we do understand the difference don't we?

The reason why the spread offensive philosophy is considered the friendliest quarterback system is because it does pad numbers and thus makes the signal callers look better then they are. Perfect example would be the NFL Draft, in the last ten years, name a spread quarterback that has succeeded at the pro level and lived up to the hype of his draft stock? Now name the failures from that same said system? The successes are far outweighed by those who were utterly inept at the pro level, because in the end they did not translate to other pro formation offensive schemes; therein they are products of a system. Of those that have run a spread offense at the pro level and there have been a few tries, the only one to succeed using it was infact New England under Charlie Weis...for all of you that are confused, you really don't think it was Belichick that installed the pro-spread offense in New England do you? It was all on Weis, Belichick while well rounded is a defensive mastermind not offensive. McDaniels is a student of Weis and those who were likewise students before him. He is not the system, the scheme was neither improved or made worse by his coaching.

And before we go on about his time as a coordinator at New England, the offense was pretty much set before he got the position, he may have changed one or two things, but the whole of the scheme stayed well intact. And we can neither prove nor disprove that he is a good offensive mind until he succeeds at proving such in Denver. If the offense does not improve this season, then it would go a long way in any argument against him being such. And if the same happens in his third season, well then it will pretty much become accepted by the whole of the league...