PDA

View Full Version : What would you have done differently?



Slick
07-26-2010, 02:35 PM
You can go back in time and undo all the wrongs of the last season and two off seasons.

You're Pat Bowlen.


Do you even fire Shanahan?


Who do you hire if you do?


How do you make this team better?

BroncoWave
07-26-2010, 02:42 PM
I don't think Pat Bowlen has done anything wrong over the past 2 seasons. The only mistake I think he made was waiting a season or 2 long to fire Shanahan. Other than that though, he was right in finally letting him go and he hired the best coach available that offseason IMO.

Now McD probably should have done a thing or 2 differently but Bowlen's moves have been spot on IMO.

BORDERLINE
07-26-2010, 02:44 PM
i would have wished mcD would have prepared the broncos coming off of a bye mind you and taken care of the ravens...not the loss but the way we lost was deflating and it started that damn 4 game losing streak that ended with the bolts kicking our a**

Slick
07-26-2010, 02:47 PM
I don't think Pat Bowlen has done anything wrong over the past 2 seasons. The only mistake I think he made was waiting a season or 2 long to fire Shanahan. Other than that though, he was right in finally letting him go and he hired the best coach available that offseason IMO.

Now McD probably should have done a thing or 2 differently but Bowlen's moves have been spot on IMO.

Feel free to elaborate on what you think McDaniels should have done differently if you feel like he was the right choice at the time.

claymore
07-26-2010, 02:54 PM
You can go back in time and undo all the wrongs of the last season and two off seasons.

You're Pat Bowlen.


Do you even fire Shanahan?


Who do you hire if you do?


How do you make this team better?

Since I was pro McD and Nolan......

We would have McD, Nolan, Cutler, Marshall and draft picks for Doom right now. Basically opposite of our current situation.

I would also have the Goodmans on staff. Bobby Turner would be gone, so would rick dennison, and the majority of the hold over coaches.

McD was given far to much control so early. He would have got a spank down early, and made aware that all latitude was earned.

Lonestar
07-26-2010, 02:55 PM
not sure I would have fired mikey as much as hired a professional GM that had experience to oversee the personnel side.

Thus allowing mike to concentrate on being a HEAD coach. I would have insisted on a REAL DC be hired and allowed to run the D with the GM getting players for both sides of the LOS.

Since that would not have worked and perhaps that is why he had to fire mike then I'd have probably hired a GM to run it and have him hire a HC .

Stayed out of trying to make peace with jay. Let the GM or HC deal with it.

topscribe
07-26-2010, 02:56 PM
You can go back in time and undo all the wrongs of the last season and two off seasons.

You're Pat Bowlen.


Do you even fire Shanahan?

Yup. Actually, I was pissed at the time. But, now looking back, I can see a lot of
things I could not back then: defense, Slowik, Cutler, Marshall, for starters.
That is why Bowlen is where he is: he knows what he is doing.


Who do you hire if you do?


McDaniels. I know, I've said I'm not particularly a fan of his, and the jury's still
out on him, IMO. But I believe he was the best available, and I do see a
winning season this next year - and that is what counts: wins.


How do you make this team better?

Exactly what he has done: Hire the best coach I can find, jettison the baggage,
and be ready with the bucks when needed.


Am I ecstatic with everything that has taken place? No. But I can't imagine how
I would be happy with everything, no matter what anybody is doing. The big
picture is what is important, and when I step away an look at the canvas, it
doesn't seem to look all that bad . . .

-----

CrazyHorse
07-26-2010, 02:58 PM
I hire Rex Ryan.

underrated29
07-26-2010, 03:00 PM
I would not have fired shanny....However, assuming I can not go back that far.....I would not have traded Jay cutler.

I still would have taken moreno in the first, and I would not have traded for phonz or quinn. I would have taken LB and DL with those extra picks.


I also would not have run the same stupid trap play to the right on every first down and 3rd and short. Or try to run up the guy when our C and LG blew...

I still would have traded Marshall for 2 2nds.



I would have taken T.Cody over Zane beadle. The rest of the draft is pretty much exactly the way I wanted it to go.

I would have taken Dez B over DT but all is fine and well as, DT has a higher ceiling (apparantly).



I would have used eddie royal a shit ton more than he was last year, but i also blame a lot of that on Orton. I think the trading of a 4/5th for santonio holmes might have been worth it.


I also would have blitzed the hell out of rivers in game 2 like we did in game 1. That guy cracks under pressure! Finally I would not have traded scheffler, unless he was causing a big problem in the lockerroom/ sidelines.

BroncoWave
07-26-2010, 03:04 PM
Feel free to elaborate on what you think McDaniels should have done differently if you feel like he was the right choice at the time.

Well the topic was Bowlen but since you ask, I probably wouldn't have traded away a future 1 for Smith or traded up for Dick Quinn.

I may have also tried to handle the Cutler situation better but I think once Cutler heard he was being shopped he made up his mind right then that he wanted out regardless of what McD could have done.


Other than that, I wouldn't change much else. I have liked all his FA signings and I think he had a great draft this year. I also think he handled the Marshall/Scheffler situations perfectly. I think he learned from the mistakes he made in his first year and is going to be a great coach for this team for years to come.

HORSEPOWER 56
07-26-2010, 03:05 PM
Man that's a tough call because I like the direction the team seems to be going, but I still disagree with a lot of what happened last year.

M'kay, here goes. First, I probably don't fire Shanny (I do fire Slowik, though). I strip him of his GM/VP of football ops/unlimited control powers or whatever you want to call them.

Second, I hire a strong personnel guy to be the new GM and have him get me the best DC he can. (hell, they may have even been Mike Nolan).

If Shanny doesn't like it, too bad. He either quits or continues to be the HC. If he quits I need to find a new HC. If he doesn't, so much the better.

I don't think Mike would've quit, not with the offense primed for greatness. This means we keep Cutler and Marshall, Scheffler, and Royal continue to develop in the offense and the offense improves to not just top 5 in yardage, but top 5 in scoring.

I would've then focused primarily on defense in FA and the draft and tried to acquire the guys to fit the new DC's system (we did need a true RB though so either Moreno or Wells would've been mine in the 1st but almost every other pick would've been defense).

After all that, the chips would fall where they may. I just think of the 2008 offense playing with the 2009 defense and go, "man, what could've been".

Lonestar
07-26-2010, 03:10 PM
Man that's a tough call because I like the direction the team seems to be going, but I still disagree with a lot of what happened last year.

M'kay, here goes. First, I probably don't fire Shanny (I do fire Slowik, though). I strip him of his GM/VP of football ops/unlimited control powers or whatever you want to call them.

Second, I hire a strong personnel guy to be the new GM and have him get me the best DC he can. (hell, they may have even been Mike Nolan).

If Shanny doesn't like it, too bad. He either quits or continues to be the HC. If he quits I need to find a new HC. If he doesn't, so much the better.

I don't think Mike would've quit, not with the offense primed for greatness. This means we keep Cutler and Marshall, Scheffler, and Royal continue to develop in the offense and the offense improves to not just top 5 in yardage, but top 5 in scoring.

I would've then focused primarily on defense in FA and the draft and tried to acquire the guys to fit the new DC's system (we did need a true RB though so either Moreno or Wells would've been mine in the 1st but almost every other pick would've been defense).

After all that, the chips would fall where they may. I just think of the 2008 offense playing with the 2009 defense and go, "man, what could've been".

you put it better than I did but much the same.

Although looking at your idea with that finesse ZBS not sure we would have every been top 5 in scoring unless it was from outside the redzone.

that has been a probelm since forever when the SUPER OLine and TD left we have stunk it up down there.

Bosco
07-26-2010, 03:14 PM
The one thing I'd change? When Jay Cutler decided to start his little PR war, I would have given him one right back. Rather than trying to take the high road, I would have exposed him for the lying little **** he is. THEN, I would have traded his ass out of town.

GEM
07-26-2010, 03:20 PM
The one thing I'd change? When Jay Cutler decided to start his little PR war, I would have given him one right back. Rather than trying to take the high road, I would have exposed him for the lying little **** he is. THEN, I would have traded his ass out of town.

Cue Clay to Cutler's rescue...

:lol:

Slick
07-26-2010, 03:23 PM
I'd really love to hear from all of the heavyweights of optimism that continue to derail every thread in Broncos Talk in one way or another.

Let it all hang out guys. This is a thread you can vent in.

Tned
07-26-2010, 03:26 PM
You can go back in time and undo all the wrongs of the last season and two off seasons.

You're Pat Bowlen.


Do you even fire Shanahan?


Who do you hire if you do?


How do you make this team better?

I would fire Shanahan. I would hire McDaniels.

When the Cassel trade fiasco went down, I would have stepped in and sat Cutler and McDaniels down and made it clear we weren't leaving until the hatchet was buried. I would also make it clear to Cutler that he was under contract and he would not be traded, so we needed to all be on the same page.

That's probably about it, because I think overall McDaniels has done far more good than bad. I think he handled Marshall badly, in terms of relegating him to the scout team as a punt gunner and safety, prior to the punting incident, and I think he made a bonehead move at season's end with Marshall that just hurt his trade value, but I'm not sure I would have stepped in on that, other than to maybe council him.

rationalfan
07-26-2010, 03:31 PM
i would have put peyton hillis in the ring of fame.

GEM
07-26-2010, 03:50 PM
Hmmmmm..

Yes on firing Shanny.

I would have given serious thought to Spags or Ryan prior to McDaniels.

I would have shipped Cutler to Zimbabwe and Marshall I would have locked in a rubber room if he wasn't on the field, only to come out for games or practice.

I dunno. I like the direction I am seeing now and who and how we are building. I don't believe it can happen overnight, but I also don't want to give this a test run for 2-3 more seasons if we don't see some positives.

I would be doing about anything in my power to get Orton off the field. I like the guy as a guy, but I can't stand watching him play football.

tomjonesrocks
07-26-2010, 04:06 PM
Another vote for the "wouldn't have fired Shanahan but would have forced a real GM on him and insisted Slowik fired".

Cutler would still be here for sure, Moreno would not, and Cutler's presence would have most likely changed how the Marshall thing played out so it's hard to say what would have happened there.

My feeling is if the Broncos had kept the major pieces of the offense as-is and worked on defense these past 2 offseasons in the draft--we'd be in year 2 of Nolan or another capable Slowik replacement and would have been a serious threat to dethroning the Chargers right about now.

Instead, here we are, talent depleted, with Elway telling us not to expect much from these guys soon. Yep--I'm frustrated.

The only way Shanahan *might* have been fired was if I had Cowher in the bag. But Spags--ah, who am I kidding--just about ANYBODY--over McD would have had this team far more competitive *today* than it is now because we would not have made history by trading a franchise QB away for probably-wasted picks.

arapaho2
07-26-2010, 04:26 PM
two totaly diffenrant teams


team one pre 09

for one i would have given shanny the ultimatem back in 08....relinquish the total power and get back to the basics of coaching

if he refused than id start with a new GM....followed by a jointed agreement on new coach..vrs the 09 approch

if he agreed..than the first step would be a in control GM...who hires a DC

if we are talking post 08

hire a competent GM first and formost...assuming i was unhappy with the present situation...hire a coach..if thats MCD fine

i would then have put my foot down on the cutler issue...told josh i didnt bring him here to trade our franchise qb...MAKE IT RIGHT WHAT EVER YOU HAVE TO DO
i also tell him his job is to coach...not trade...not fire...thats the gms job...coach this team back to the top

i think thats about it

Tned
07-26-2010, 05:09 PM
I would fire Shanahan. I would hire McDaniels.

When the Cassel trade fiasco went down, I would have stepped in and sat Cutler and McDaniels down and made it clear we weren't leaving until the hatchet was buried. I would also make it clear to Cutler that he was under contract and he would not be traded, so we needed to all be on the same page.

That's probably about it, because I think overall McDaniels has done far more good than bad. I think he handled Marshall badly, in terms of relegating him to the scout team as a punt gunner and safety, prior to the punting incident, and I think he made a bonehead move at season's end with Marshall that just hurt his trade value, but I'm not sure I would have stepped in on that, other than to maybe council him.

One thing I left out was I would have kept my promise of having a true GM and a real separation of powers. It appears very clear, and supported by the beat reporters, that McDaniels has basically the same power that Shanny had. He makes the final decision on all player/personnel decisions, but gets input from Xanders.

Not knowing what happened with the Goodman's, it's impossible to say if firing them was a good or bad move, but ultimately I think there should have been a real GM installed, like Bowlen said in the press conference announcing Shanahan's firing. If this was done, mistakes like drafting A. Smith might not have happened.

In addition, the real GM might have been able to step in and deal with some of the coach/player relationship problems.

atwater27
07-26-2010, 05:13 PM
not sure I would have fired mikey as much as hired a professional GM that had experience to oversee the personnel side.

Thus allowing mike to concentrate on being a HEAD coach. I would have insisted on a REAL DC be hired and allowed to run the D with the GM getting players for both sides of the LOS.

Since that would not have worked and perhaps that is why he had to fire mike then I'd have probably hired a GM to run it and have him hire a HC .

Stayed out of trying to make peace with jay. Let the GM or HC deal with it.

Surprisingly I agree with most of your post.

atwater27
07-26-2010, 05:24 PM
I would have told Shanahan that I love his offense, hate his defense, and if he woudln't fire slowik, I would. i would have said, look, you fire slowik and continue to be GM, but if you make me fire him, I tak away your GM abilities. If he quits, I hire a new coach. Since my team is great on offense and shitty on defense, I lean towards a defensive minded HC. If that doesn't work, McDaniels could work. With one caveat. I tell McD under no uncertain terms that the goodmans are here to satay, since their recent draft work was absolutely phenomenal. i also remind him that Cutler IS the franchise, which would have completely avoided CassellGate. I would have still dumped Marshall, because he is a bitch. I would have kept Schefflerand Hillis and even Torain. I would not have signed a new longsnapper, as the one we had was working just fine, would have drafted defensively the 1st year and targeted Ryan Matthews and more defense this year. I would have most definitely not drafted Alphonso, especially where he was taken, and otherwise squandered high value picks in such an irresponsible way, and most definitely would not have reached for a QB that resembles Eric Crouch more than Peyton Manning.

NightTrainLayne
07-26-2010, 05:27 PM
One thing I left out was I would have kept my promise of having a true GM and a real separation of powers. It appears very clear, and supported by the beat reporters, that McDaniels has basically the same power that Shanny had. He makes the final decision on all player/personnel decisions, but gets input from Xanders.

Not knowing what happened with the Goodman's, it's impossible to say if firing them was a good or bad move, but ultimately I think there should have been a real GM installed, like Bowlen said in the press conference announcing Shanahan's firing. If this was done, mistakes like drafting A. Smith might not have happened.

In addition, the real GM might have been able to step in and deal with some of the coach/player relationship problems.

While I agree with you that McD has way more power than Pat intimated a new coach would after the change, I have to disagree with you that "all the beat writers" are in consensus that McD "makes the final decision" and only "gets input" from Xanders.

My argument here is only one of degree, so don't think that I'm really trying to argue with you, I just think it's more middle-of-the-road than that, and I believe that is supported by the articles I've seen.

Nomad
07-26-2010, 05:28 PM
Drafted Ngata instead of Cutler!!

Slick
07-26-2010, 05:35 PM
I think I still would have fired Shanahan. I loved him as a coach, and I still think his system can win in the NFL, but I seriously doubt he would have agreed to a demotion. I agree with a lot of you, I feel like it was time for him to simply coach or move on. His failed free agency signings and dead cap money had run it's course.

I would have loved to have hired Cowher. I just like the way his teams played football. Since that wasn't an option, and I don't know who the hot coaches in college were I can't really argue with the hiring of McDaniels. Rex Ryan would have gotten some consideration although I don't think he would have achieved the same success here as he did in NY in year one.

I wouldn't have traded Cutler either, but if he forced my hand, I deal him. I wouldn't want a guy who wasn't ready to buy into my system.

Marshall, I have mixed feelings on. Loved him as a player, but I really don't think he is worth all of the headaches. Plenty of teams make it to, and win superbowls with a group of decent receivers. Noone should be bigger than the team.

Sheffler I liked also (a great compliment to Graham IMO), but I wouldn't have extended him or signed him to a new deal simply because of his durability issues.


If I am basically forced to deal Cutler, I do, to the highest bidder. I don't trade for Alphonso Smith, I draft Ray Malauga instead. I think we screwed that up big time.

After all of that wheeling and dealing on draft day the following off season, if it was Tebow that I had my eye on, I take him with my original 1st round pick and hold on to the stockpile of picks I got, finding my receiver later on down the line.

It has definitely been a wild ride since our new coach took over, and I have accepted that all the complaining I might want to do, will never change what happened over the last year.

I have scratched my head, yelled at the TV, spouted some obscenities from time to time, but at the end of the day, I honestly believe that this team needed a pretty extreme overhaul to be competitive again, especially in the trenches on both sides of the ball.

Maybe we could have turned it around leaving the offense basically intact and trying to re tool the defense, and anyone who agrees with that logic, I can't really find fault in it.

I am optimistic about the offensive line additions we made this off season but I still worry about the defensive line. How long have we been looking for some big uglies to play up front? Seems like forever.

jhildebrand
07-26-2010, 05:42 PM
Tned said most of what I would.

Shanny's time was due, 3 seasons overdue IMHO.

A true, old school GM was and still is needed.

Denver Native (Carol)
07-26-2010, 05:58 PM
If I remember correctly, it was written in Shanahan's contract that he was the GM, he was the decision maker - therefore, I can not see him agreeing to a new contract to relinquish the GM powers - also, Bowlen ask him to fire Slowick, and he would not - therefore, Shanahan was fired.

TXBRONC
07-26-2010, 06:58 PM
If I remember correctly, it was written in Shanahan's contract that he was the GM, he was the decision maker - therefore, I can not see him agreeing to a new contract to relinquish the GM powers - also, Bowlen ask him to fire Slowick, and he would not - therefore, Shanahan was fired.

Even if was written into Shanahan's contract Bowlen could have taken it away from any time he chose too.

Denver Native (Carol)
07-26-2010, 07:07 PM
Even if was written into Shanahan's contract Bowlen could have taken it away from any time he chose too.

Don't think it would have been that simple - contracts are legally binding, and if they are changed, both sides have to agree to the change.

jhildebrand
07-26-2010, 07:15 PM
Shanahan wanted gone as much as Bowlen wanted him gone.

The cat and mouse game that ensued was whether Shanahan was going to accomplish getting gone while still getting paid. He won that battle unfortunately.

BroncoWave
07-26-2010, 07:20 PM
Don't think it would have been that simple - contracts are legally binding, and if they are changed, both sides have to agree to the change.

You would be correct. Once a legal contract is signed one side can't just change the terms at their whim. Both sides must agree to the change and a new contract must be signed by both parties.

Tned
07-26-2010, 07:44 PM
If I remember correctly, it was written in Shanahan's contract that he was the GM, he was the decision maker - therefore, I can not see him agreeing to a new contract to relinquish the GM powers - also, Bowlen ask him to fire Slowick, and he would not - therefore, Shanahan was fired.

I believe that Bowlen denied this. I can't remember if it was the interview he did where he said McDaniels made rookie mistakes (Cutler/draft time frame) or if it was in the press conference after the firing, but I am pretty sure he denied he asked Shanahan to fire anyone and simply felt it was time to make a change.


While I agree with you that McD has way more power than Pat intimated a new coach would after the change, I have to disagree with you that "all the beat writers" are in consensus that McD "makes the final decision" and only "gets input" from Xanders.

My argument here is only one of degree, so don't think that I'm really trying to argue with you, I just think it's more middle-of-the-road than that, and I believe that is supported by the articles I've seen.

Ok, "all" was a bit over the top, but Schwab and some others that followed them closely said that the balance of power is pretty much the same as it was with Shanahan.

Tempus Fugit
07-26-2010, 08:39 PM
It's tough to play the "should have" game in a situation like the one the Broncos faced, where one move impacts another.

For example:

"Should have sent Cutler, Marshall and Scheffler packing along with Shanahan, giving a new coach a clean slate."

The problem with that would be that you'd have to wonder whether or not McDaniels would still have taken the gig.

Northman
07-26-2010, 08:50 PM
Since I was pro McD and Nolan......

We would have McD, Nolan, Cutler, Marshall and draft picks for Doom right now. Basically opposite of our current situation.

I would also have the Goodmans on staff. Bobby Turner would be gone, so would rick dennison, and the majority of the hold over coaches.

McD was given far to much control so early. He would have got a spank down early, and made aware that all latitude was earned.


Mine is pretty close to yours. Great thread Slick.

First off, i didnt mind McD as a choice of HC considering that Shanahan wasnt going to relinquish his GM duties and wasnt going to fire Slowik. So, it was time to cut him loose despite his improvement on draft day which i attribute more to the Goodmans. Bates would of been gone regardless but in the Cutler situation i would of (as Bowlen) gotten involved far earlier and gone out and visited Jay to straighten it out. Obviously i dont think Bowlen would of thought Jay was going to melt down like that but in order to correct the fubar that Mcd did by initially lying about the phone call.

As far as the play on the field, its hard to say how the team would of turned out with Jay at the helm. We may not have lost some games considering the Qb position would of been an upgrade to Orton. But, had the result been the same i would have made sure Nolan was still on staff and allowed to have more players to work with going into this year. Simply trying to make water into wine there was bound to be a problem with the defense when the offense wasnt producing like it should.

As far as Marshall, i dont think he could of been saved. His attitude just was up and down and he could never be relied upon to keep his head straight and you just cant have that in the lockeroom. With Cutler here i doubt Sheff would of been a problem like he was and obviously i would of still been wondering why Hillis couldnt be used more. As far as Doom, its worked out well the way it should so i wouldnt change that at all. In the long run had i changed some things the only difference would of been the Marshall trade. But, with McD's supposed offensive genius im sure he could of gotten Cutler to play at a elite level and get more receivers involved.

titan
07-26-2010, 09:03 PM
Good question. If I were Pat Bowlen I would have:

1. Been more upfront with Mike Shanahan that I was unhappy with the team's direction. Maybe Pat did this, but I got the impression the firing took Shanahan completely by surprise. I sensed Shanahan was getting too comfortable and slacked off some in his last year. His statement "Slowik will be back" the day before he was fired seemed arrogant, instead of saying something like "every coach will be evaluated as I am sure Pat Bowlen will evaluate me"

I do think Shanahan is a good coach, and I see a renewed drive in him since he was fired.

Given where the team was at the end of 2008 and Shanahan's lack of passion, I would have fired Shanahan too.

2. I would have named a GM first, and then let the GM hire the coach. I would have done everything I could to find the best available player personnel man in the business and hire him as GM.

I'm rooting for McDaniels and I like alot of his philosophy (develop a smart, tough football team with good character) but ultimately Josh's success or failure in Denver will be if he cashes in on his draft picks. It's too early to say McD is a bad drafter, but the returns so far have been mixed (both in the players acquired and in his trading away of draft picks)

I'm wondering if Kansas City got it right by hiring Pioli first.

Lonestar
07-26-2010, 09:08 PM
I'm not all that sure jay would have excelled in a contolled passing game like NE had.

I until proven other wise blieve he will continue to force the ball and leave open recievers on the field. We all know that would have not went well had he tossed a lot of picks.

But then I believe he is a coach killer also. Gonna do it his way whethr the coach likes it or not.

I may moderate that opinion IF Martz makes him a better QB but not holding my breath.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

TXBRONC
07-26-2010, 09:27 PM
Don't think it would have been that simple - contracts are legally binding, and if they are changed, both sides have to agree to the change.

I know contracts are legally binding but it's still Bowlen's team. If said Mike I want you step down as GM and Mike refused he has two choices. He could fire him or take away the authority of GM and create a new position.

broncophan
07-26-2010, 09:30 PM
You can go back in time and undo all the wrongs of the last season and two off seasons.

You're Pat Bowlen.


Do you even fire Shanahan?


Who do you hire if you do?


How do you make this team better?

I would make sure the team played the last 10 games last season, like they played the first 6.....:D

I would have given Shanahan one more year....

I'm o.k. with McD

I think this team will be better.....I was happy with our draft.....but who knows......I remember last season we all thought the team would start the season slow....and play better toward the end......and we started 6-0.

Denver Native (Carol)
07-26-2010, 09:40 PM
I know contracts are legally binding but it's still Bowlen's team. If said Mike I want you step down as GM and Mike refused he has two choices. He could fire him or take away the authority of GM and create a new position.

I agree with he could fire him - which he did. If Shanahan's contract stated that he was head coach and GM, how do you take that away, with it being in a contract, without Shanahan agreeing to it? You can not state that Shanahan is the GM, but take away the authority, I don't believe. And even if you could, I would expect that some of the money Shanahan was making was for both positions, so you give him the same amount of money for one position only, and add more to the payroll by bringing in someone else and giving them GM responsibilities?

Lonestar
07-26-2010, 09:41 PM
I would have hired pioli in a heart beat. I would have hired him first before getting a HC

As I believe the GM should have MOST of the authority. But he also has to get along with the HC and the HC has to have final say of players initally after he has proven himslef.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

TXBRONC
07-26-2010, 09:55 PM
I agree with he could fire him - which he did. If Shanahan's contract stated that he was head coach and GM, how do you take that away, with it being in a contract, without Shanahan agreeing to it? You can not state that Shanahan is the GM, but take away the authority, I don't believe. And even if you could, I would expect that some of the money Shanahan was making was for both positions, so you give him the same amount of money for one position only, and add more to the payroll by bringing in someone else and giving them GM responsibilities?

Bowlen couldn't change Shanahan's pay willy nilly but he could take the authority of a GM away from him at point.

When Bowlen fired Shanahan he still had to paid him plus McDaniels whatever he's paying him plus when Xanders was promoted I bet he got a raise.

horsepig
07-26-2010, 10:22 PM
My thoughts are:
1} The '08 defense was the worst unit I have ever had the considerable displeasure of having to root for.
2} The '07 defense was almost as bad.
3} 115 DC's in 5 years. FFS, can't somebody get a grip on this shit? Reminds me of an old country/train song where the singer asks, "Who's got their hand on the throttle?".
4} I like defense and have been pulling my hair out for 10 years.
5} I wanted change, very baddly!
6} I would have picked Ryan for several reasons, but after Ryan McD's my guy.

Denver Native (Carol)
07-26-2010, 10:30 PM
Bowlen couldn't change Shanahan's pay willy nilly but he could take the authority of a GM away from him at point.

When Bowlen fired Shanahan he still had to paid him plus McDaniels whatever he's paying him plus when Xanders was promoted I bet he got a raise.

We will never know for sure if Bowlen could have taken the GM authority away from Shanahan, without knowing how the contract was written.

Lonestar
07-26-2010, 10:40 PM
My thoughts are:
1} The '08 defense was the worst unit I have ever had the considerable displeasure of having to root for.
2} The '07 defense was almost as bad.
3} 115 DC's in 5 years. FFS, can't somebody get a grip on this shit? Reminds me of an old country/train song where the singer asks, "Who's got their hand on the throttle?".
4} I like defense and have been pulling my hair out for 10 years.
5} I wanted change, very baddly!
6} I would have picked Ryan for several reasons, but after Ryan McD's my guy.

good post I'm not so sure about Ryan being all that great lets see in a few years how he does. He certainly came from good genes. But Defense is always the easiest to fix and he started out with some decent talent.

I was surprised about the O being remodeled when Josh first talked about it.
Initially I was not wanting Josh, because he came from NE like 90% of our fans. While I respected their winning record(jealous). I still did not like Belicheck. I figured that he was going to make a few adjustments to the O, after all it was the #2 rated O in the league the year before.

But then when I heard what he considered to be the problem it mirrored what I had been complaining about for years NO BEEF on the oline. or for that matter LOS.

then he was going to scrap the ZBS or modify it into the PBS he was used to. Was not initially happy about that till I started to look at where those #2 offense came from between the 20's then it all made sense.

Mike had bitched about getting better in the rezone the previous 3-4 years maybe even longer.

So when he said we have to get BIGGER , Faster, stronger and SMARTER that was music to my ears.

I was disappointed that Spags was not hired (initially I had thought the D was our only problem) but also happy after I heard that his interview was putrid.

Overall I'm pretty stoked about what Josh is attempting to do. after not wanting him because he came from NE like 90% of our fans.

atwater27
07-26-2010, 11:53 PM
Great thread, I can feel ice melting and fences being mended.... But that could change in a heartbeat.

BroncoWave
07-26-2010, 11:57 PM
Great thread, I can feel ice melting and fences being mended.... But that could change in a heartbeat.

Agreed, I'm actually shocked at how civil this thread has been. This is a pretty groundbreaking moment.

As for how long this will last, that just depends on how many games we win or lose this year! :lol:

Lonestar
07-27-2010, 01:36 AM
Admiting you have a problem is the first step in any recovery plan.

Lots of folks did that today, now we can move on.

Great thread probably needs to be stickie so it does not get buried.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Bosco
07-27-2010, 03:34 AM
So it seems like there are some consensus beliefs here. Paraphrased and quoted for the ease of discussion.


"Keep Shanahan but make him give up GM duties"

I don't see anyway this is plausible. Not only was Shanahan's duties likely written into the contract, the man is simply a control freak. He's not interested in a job where he doesn't control most of what goes on and trying to forcibly strip him of that power would undoubtedly create a very, very bad work environment.


"Keep Shanahan but hire a real DC" Implausible for the same reasoning above.


"Keep the Goodmans on staff" This was also not possible. Jeff Goodman and Brian Xanders effectively shared the GM spot in 2008 but Jeff was not well liked by many in the front office, Xanders included, who McDaniels did like. Thus, the decision was made to release Goodman and let Xanders be the sole GM.

There is pretty solid speculation that Bowlen did not want to put Jim Goodman in the compromising position of choosing his career with the Broncos or loyalty to his son, so he released Jim as well, which meant he was entitled to his salary which would not have been the case had he resigned.


"Hire another coach besides McDaniels" This one is certainly plausible, although it's hard to imagine making a better choice than McDaniels. Of all the first year coaches, only Rex Ryan had a comparably impressive resume. He was handed a far, far less difficult task and his team only topped us by a single regular season win.


"Hire McDaniels, but also hire a "real" GM to handle personnel matters" Highly unlikely. Josh McDaniels is a Bill Belichick disciple, who himself is a Bill Parcells disciple. Those guys believe in having pretty much final say over the players on the field and their assistant coaches, period. Their GM's are essentially there to provide consultation and keep the financial books in order. That's pretty much Xander's job description to a T.


"Do whatever was needed to keep Cutler" This is somewhat implausible because Cutler made up his mind he didn't want to be a Bronco when Jeremy Bates was fired.

Secondly, it's a bad idea because it sends the message that the inmates run the asylum and that any one player can be above the team. Both of these were serious problems under Shanahan. I believe Bowlen, Josh and Co. all handled this correctly, with the sole exception of letting Cutler beat them in the PR war.

In short, I'm extremely happy with hiring Josh and the direction he brought to this team. While there are plenty of legitimate debates about his choices (draft picks mainly) I see and understand where he's going with this team and it's the direction I think we need to go.

Slick
07-27-2010, 07:38 AM
You're certainly welcome to shoot down someone else's plan/ideas Bosco, but that really wasn't the point.

Overall I'm pretty happy with the direction we are headed as well, but I was hoping we could have a little fun with this.

So there's nothing you would change if you could, nothing you would have done differently?

Tned
07-27-2010, 07:43 AM
You're certainly welcome to shoot down someone else's plan/ideas Bosco, but that really wasn't the point.

Overall I'm pretty happy with the direction we are headed as well, but I was hoping we could have a little fun with this.

So there's nothing you would change if you could, nothing you would have done differently?

Oh yea, I forgot. If I was Bowlen, I would say, "Damn it Josh, stop being a control freak, let the fans and media use their cell phone and send out their little Tweety birds or whatever that stuff is called. They are watching the practice anyway, so what does it matter if they send out the information during practice or an hour later. Come on little guy, lighten up on these rules...."

Ok, that was fun.. ;)

Dreadnought
07-27-2010, 08:10 AM
I do not fire Shanny, but unilaterally fire Slowick if Shanny won't do it - and since we are talking fantasy I hire Dick Nolan to be his DC. The Cutler trade does not happen. Moreno is not drafted, nor Smith, nor Quinn, with the picks used for defensive front seven help. The Goodmans remain on staff, as does Bobby Turner. Brandon Marshall is traded. Andra Davis is signed and then kept. Dawkins is signed. Mike Leach remains a Bronco. Tony Scheffler is given a contract, as is Tatum Bell, Selvin Young, Peyton Hillis, and the rest of that whole mob of perfectly fine RB's. I would bring in Buckhalter to join 'em, but not Lamont Jordan, to join my RBBC. Nate Webster is cut, as is Marquand Manual, and Marlon McRee. I might resign Calvin Lowry just so I can cut him again. I might have kept Jamie Winborn for ST. Russ Hochstein looks elsewhere for work, as does Lonnie Paxton

Elevation inc
07-27-2010, 08:13 AM
I would have fired shanny after the 2007 season.....but thats just me. I belive our downhill slide started in 2006 when we brought cutler in for plummer. even though we were struggling at times that season i have no doubt we would have slid into the playoffs that year with Plummer.....i belive it was to soon for cutler and all we did was feed that huge ego he has....and yes he has a EGO.......i also would have kept coyer.....had we done that i belive we would be on a far different path than we are now....FFWD to 2008......FYi keep in mind Joe ellis wanted Shanny gone after the 2007 season...

It was time for shanny to go.....i wanted Rex ryan but was fine With MCD.....i thought it was hilarious Cutler freaked how he did.....and honestly MCD didnt trade Cutler becasue he wanted to in the end....he traded cutler because bowlen and ELLIS!!!! said get it done.....he didnt trade marshall because he had to. He Traded marshall because bowlen and Ellis said get it done....its hilarious to me how many think MCD runs everything in the FO.....the reality is that the bronco's FO is run by Joe ellis.....PERIOD!!!!! you wanna blame anyone for the trades you blame Joe ellis.....

MCD's faults fall with his ego and being a rookie coach at times, but this guy demands respect and teamwork.....i love that.....i dont always agree with every decision he made in the draft(smith, quinn), but i love every FA move he has made except Lamont jordan, and i love most of his draft picks.....in fact in his last 2 drafts i was stoked about more picks than i have been from the shanny regimes last 5 years of picks....i also respect him becasue he does not waver from what he belives in.....I wish more people could be strong like that.

I have yet to see if this is going to benefit us long term in the win column, but he has shown me enough personal character and belief building this team, that i respect him, and am willing to give him his 2-3 year window to build a team.....

hopefully the wins pile up and we can all get back to being on the same page, but for now im fine with what has happened in denver so far....and it still hasnt stopped me from hoping cutler and BMarsh do well in there next locations.....i could care less about what hillis and sheffler do though....they are just bit players and always have been.....cutler and bmarsh are pro bowl players, but sometimes change is needed....

Elevation inc
07-27-2010, 08:14 AM
I do not fire Shanny, but unilaterally fire Slowick if Shanny won't do it - and since we are talking fantasy I hire Dick Nolan to be his DC. The Cutler trade does not happen. Moreno is not drafted, nor Smith, nor Quinn, with the picks used for defensive front seven help. The Goodmans remain on staff, as does Bobby Turner. Brandon Marshall is traded. Andra Davis is signed and then kept. Dawkins is signed. Mike Leach remains a Bronco. Tony Scheffler is given a contract, as is Tatum Bell, Selvin Young, Peyton Hillis, and the rest of that whole mob of perfectly fine RB's. I would bring in Buckhalter to join 'em, but not Lamont Jordan, to join my RBBC. Nate Webster is cut, as is Marquand Manual, and Marlon McRee. I might resign Calvin Lowry just so I can cut him again. I might have kept Jamie Winborn for ST. Russ Hochstein looks elsewhere for work, as does Lonnie Paxton


this is a good natured clowing post dread take it as such.....


Selvin Young really??????? Mr...2000....lol

and if shanny is still here you really want him and the goodman's to draft defensive line help again.......Marcus Thomas, Tim crowder, Jarvis Moss, Carlton Powell......really????? with that track record you want them to keep at the DL......

you do know RB and DL are 2 positions the goodmans and Shanny could care less About....we got lucky with dumervil but even he was a rd 4 pick......

Tony sheffler gets a contract????.....Mr i cant stay healthy and i cant block anything, but i sure look pretty catching balls sometimes....

Andra Davis had a huge drop off in performance(kenny peterson style) his last eight games......the tape doesnt lie, thats why he aint here no more......



I DONT LIKE YOUR FANTASY AT ALL........ :LOL:.....J/k

Dreadnought
07-27-2010, 08:20 AM
Selvin Young really??????? Mr...2000....lol

and if shanny is still here you really want him and the goodman's to draft defensive help again.......marcus Thomas, Tim crowder, Jarvis Moss, Carlton Powell......really????? with that track record you want them to keep at the DL......

Go back and look at Young's work. I have some of those 2007 and 2008 games on TiVo and rewatch them from time to time. Moreno was never at any point last year as effective as Young, certainly in 07. And I'm not saying Young should start either, but join an already capable stable of backs.

As for the Goodman's, you cherry picked a few bad picks made during the Sundquist era - and I'm becoming convinced our 2009 draft was every bit as bad as them anyways. 2010 has real promise, but the 2009 draft was as bad as any we've had IMO.

PS - I hadn't thought of it until this moment, but I didn't save any TiVo'ed 2009 games at all...must mean something :D

Elevation inc
07-27-2010, 08:28 AM
Go back and look at Young's work. I have some of those 2007 and 2008 games on TiVo and rewatch them from time to time. Moreno was never at any point last year as effective as Young, certainly in 07. And I'm not saying Young should start either, but join an already capable stable of backs.

As for the Goodman's, you cherry picked a few bad picks made during the Sundquist era - and I'm becoming convinced our 2009 draft was every bit as bad as them anyways. 2010 has real promise, but the 2009 draft was as bad as any we've had IMO.


young was horrible in short yardage, couldnt score at all,couldnt stay healthy and was a poor mans tatum bell......he also couldnt block for crap.....moreno at least scored more than 2 TD's in a season, he also rushed for more yds.....


Cherry picked a few bad picks???? every Dl pick and FA DL we have had since 2006 outside of dumervil was a joke by the former regime, that aint cherry picking thats a joke.....

if you belive our draft is really that bad for 2009 after 1 year, you should evaluate many teams first drafts in year 1, you would be suprised how many teams suck by your standards......including pitt and New orleans both recent SB winners.....lol


yes becasue TIVO tells all......LOL.......

Elevation inc
07-27-2010, 08:31 AM
2 Words......JOE ELLIS......your a hater of whats going on right now????? thats your main target, MCD shouldnt even be a blip on your radar outside of his EGO......this franchises's ultimate FO decisions start and stop with JOE ellis and have since Shanny was recommend to be fired by ELLIS himself.....

Lonestar
07-27-2010, 09:54 AM
Just curiuos how do you come to JOe Ellis being the bad guy?
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Elevation inc
07-27-2010, 10:09 AM
Just curiuos how do you come to JOe Ellis being the bad guy?
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Joe Ellis was the key guy to recommend Shanny being fired, as well as the Goodmans being released. Especially Since Jim goodman loved Cutler, and Ellis didnt like the way Cutler was playing Bowlen.....

He also was key in the MCD and XANDERS hires

He ALSO was the Key decioin maker next to bowlen in the Cutler and Marshall Trades.



I have no issue with what went down so dont go there....My point was that those blaming MCD should look to Ellis before they look at MCD.....MCD doesnt run denvers FO.....Ellis does.....and its been that way since Shanny's 2008 Collapse.....

Lonestar
07-27-2010, 10:54 AM
And how do you know this other than the blurb about Joe giving Josh the final interview. I have heard almost nothing about Joe.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Elevation inc
07-27-2010, 12:57 PM
And how do you know this other than the blurb about Joe giving Josh the final interview. I have heard almost nothing about Joe.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

then you havent been paying attention...Ellis has been in Bowlens ear since 2007.......many sources including the DP(paige/Kizla/Armstrong/Jones), sheffler and Lombardi have stated Ellis has more pull than many realize.....its quite clear MCD doesnt make front office decisions and its been that way since shanny was fired and Ellis was given the president of operations role.....

not to many presidents i know sit down and shut up....dont expect ellis to be any different.....

Im sure josh has input, but the ultimate decisions with regards to trades in that front office dont go down unless bowlen and Ellis say so.....

I have no beef with joe or MCD...but i dont like that people are blaming MCD for many big time decisions that ultimaetly werent his final call.....

jhildebrand
07-27-2010, 01:27 PM
then you havent been paying attention...Ellis has been in Bowlens ear since 2007.......many sources including the DP(paige/Kizla/Armstrong/Jones), sheffler and Lombardi have stated Ellis has more pull than many realize.....its quite clear MCD doesnt make front office decisions and its been that way since shanny was fired and Ellis was given the president of operations role.....

not to many presidents i know sit down and shut up....dont expect ellis to be any different.....

Im sure josh has input, but the ultimate decisions with regards to trades in that front office dont go down unless bowlen and Ellis say so.....

I have no beef with joe or MCD...but i dont like that people are blaming MCD for many big time decisions that ultimaetly werent his final call.....

While I agree that Ellis has an enormous amount of sway within the organization, I don't believe for one moment that he is a de-facto GM in any way, nor is there any evidence to support such a claim.

Bowlen's biggest strength in my opinion is his ability to hire people and then step back and allow that person to do their job as they see fit. In fact, Bowlen, in year's past, has admitted to that being the biggest single reason in not supporting a true GM type role with his team.

Finally, if it was so widely known that Ellis is the one who wanted Cutler gone, Marshall gone, Scheffler gone, Hillis gone, Tebow drafted, Nolan "mutually resigned" etc... then why would the press, the same people you mentioned, be so ignorant of that fact? :confused:

After all, they around the team on a daily basis almost year round. I would think they would at least lob a question or two Ellis' way as to why HE had those things done as opposed to McDaniels.

Buff
07-27-2010, 01:33 PM
I might resign Calvin Lowry just so I can cut him again.

I didn't agree with everything you said, but this is gold. Maybe the single best idea anyone's ever had on BF. I'd like to do it w/ Webster too. Those guys singlehandedly lost 3-4 games for us that season.

Lonestar
07-27-2010, 01:36 PM
then you havent been paying attention...Ellis has been in Bowlens ear since 2007.......many sources including the DP(paige/Kizla/Armstrong/Jones), sheffler and Lombardi have stated Ellis has more pull than many realize.....its quite clear MCD doesnt make front office decisions and its been that way since shanny was fired and Ellis was given the president of operations role.....

not to many presidents i know sit down and shut up....dont expect ellis to be any different.....

I'm sure josh has input, but the ultimate decisions with regards to trades in that front office dont go down unless bowlen and Ellis say so.....

I have no beef with joe or MCD...but i don't like that people are blaming MCD for many big time decisions that ultimately weren't his final call.....

I knew he was CFO watching the money but had not seen his promotion to Operations.

I knew that he had Pats ear after seeing that he had the final interview with Josh. I did not see that as THE decision making role just a final Final chit chat probably about money as I believe that Pat was sold on him before that talk.

I also believed that the manning chart was PAT with Joe, Xman and Josh reporting to HIM, on an "equals" basis.

there is no doubt that he has influence and that MOST if not all BIG Money decisions have to go through him as CFO. But I'm not totally sure that he is calling all the moves. Probably OKing them financially but so far I have not seen any moves that suggest that he is masterminding the TEAM.

I do know that mikey and him did not swap spit and I'm sure that Joe was on his case all the time for all the wasted money so in that regards maybe he was the one that helped to oust him. I would see NO reason to believe that PAt does not trust his judgment nor Joshs,

Elevation inc
07-27-2010, 02:06 PM
I knew he was CFO watching the money but had not seen his promotion to Operations.

I knew that he had Pats ear after seeing that he had the final interview with Josh. I did not see that as THE decision making role just a final Final chit chat probably about money as I believe that Pat was sold on him before that talk.

I also believed that the manning chart was PAT with Joe, Xman and Josh reporting to HIM, on an "equals" basis.

there is no doubt that he has influence and that MOST if not all BIG Money decisions have to go through him as CFO. But I'm not totally sure that he is calling all the moves. Probably OKing them financially but so far I have not seen any moves that suggest that he is masterminding the TEAM.

I do know that mikey and him did not swap spit and I'm sure that Joe was on his case all the time for all the wasted money so in that regards maybe he was the one that helped to oust him. I would see NO reason to believe that PAt does not trust his judgment nor Joshs,



i see no reason to distrust there judgement either....i simply know that a president is higher ranking than the GM and a rookie coach......i do know that bowlen said trade cutler and trade marshall cause we aint ever gonan give him that contract he wants...and ellis told Xanders and MCD find a deal.....

so that tells me the prez and bowlen make the calls not MCd and xanders....While all 4 are suppose to have the equal share its foolhardy to believe its josh running things.....it aint happening...not yet...

Bowlen is a great owner and does step aside, but i dont think he will step aside nor joe Ellis and let MCD and xanders have full reign untill they prove they can do it......that hasnt happened yet, which is why its impossible for me to belive that the trade cutler and marshall BS came from him directly....was he upset eitehr player is gone??? doubtful....did he orchestrate it from top to bottom??? not likely....

for anyone beliveing that is foolhardy......

Elevation inc
07-27-2010, 02:08 PM
While I agree that Ellis has an enormous amount of sway within the organization, I don't believe for one moment that he is a de-facto GM in any way, nor is there any evidence to support such a claim.

Bowlen's biggest strength in my opinion is his ability to hire people and then step back and allow that person to do their job as they see fit. In fact, Bowlen, in year's past, has admitted to that being the biggest single reason in not supporting a true GM type role with his team.

Finally, if it was so widely known that Ellis is the one who wanted Cutler gone, Marshall gone, Scheffler gone, Hillis gone, Tebow drafted, Nolan "mutually resigned" etc... then why would the press, the same people you mentioned, be so ignorant of that fact? :confused:

After all, they around the team on a daily basis almost year round. I would think they would at least lob a question or two Ellis' way as to why HE had those things done as opposed to McDaniels.


actually no one has been around the team in depth media type outside of lombardi, paige or sheffler....and its funny all 3 of them buy off on MCD.....

i aint gonna argue with you here...i see things differently and i have no faith in the fact that a rookie head coach who went 8-8 the year after bowlen fired his best friend has the control many think....its just naive to think that....

Ravage!!!
07-27-2010, 02:33 PM
So it was a coincidence that the coach that came from NE, wanted to trade for Cassel? :confused:

Ravage!!!
07-27-2010, 03:03 PM
I would want Bowlen to hire McD with the FULL understanding that he will NOT trade for Cassel. That would be the number one thing I would do. Make it part of the interview process, and have him sign it in pen if that's the only way McD would be sure to understand. No Cassel, no way. Period.

I think McD knows football, but doesn't know how to handle people. I think he doesn't know how to delegate authority, and doesn't understand that respect is something that is earned, not given..... no matter what your position/title is. Thats just people skills he doesn't have. Therefore, I believe this is another reason I hire a GM that is in charge of such things. Someone that has the experience, the age, and the maturity (I don't think McD is mature yet) to be the go-between man. Some coaches need this.. especially young coaches. McD's age showed, and I think he fell into the trap that so many young people do when moving into a managerial position at such a young age. They come in loud, thumping their chest, and demanding people bow because they 'feel' inside that they need to demand it. This is something I feel needs to be addressed.

So, I would hire someone other than the numbers cruncher for a GM. Someone that would be in charge of players, other than the coach. I honestly think its pretty clear who's in charge of player personnel, and it starts and finishes with the HC. This was the biggest problem during the SHanahan regime and started to look INCREDIBLY better with the Goodmans on staff. Which leads to..

keep the best thing that's happened to the drafting for this team in a decade ON the staff!! This to me is a no-brainer, and one I personally feel has already taken toll.

We had the makings of an amazing, young, offense that would grow together and become a perennial force year in and year out. I would be sure we kept this unit of Cutler, Marshall, Royal, Scheffler, Clady, and Hillis together.

I wouldn't have fired Shanahan, but would step in and fire Slowik while bringing in a well known DC. I don't believe the 34 is the End all of defenses, and would then concentrate the draft on the defense since we would still have a young, stud, nucleus offense. Although, no way we move up and waste a pick on Smith, nor do we waste a pick on some blocking TE.

I absolutely would bring in Dawkins and Goodman, but wouldn't bring in some long snapper.

I would not use a first round pick on a running back. Davis would still be here (still stunned that he's not) but the B-boy Webster would be fired over and over again... with a new press-release every week just to remind and celebrate that he's no longer on the team.

jhildebrand
07-27-2010, 03:10 PM
actually no one has been around the team in depth media type outside of lombardi, paige or sheffler....and its funny all 3 of them buy off on MCD.....

i aint gonna argue with you here...i see things differently and i have no faith in the fact that a rookie head coach who went 8-8 the year after bowlen fired his best friend has the control many think....its just naive to think that....

I'm not looking to argue as much as I am looking for you to back up what you assert as fact not to mention address the actual rebuttal i raised.

I think history has shown McDaniels has no problem pointing the finger when he feels criticism is pointed at him when it wasn't warranted. For example, he was quick to label Shauin Phillips the aggressor in a simple, silly spat.

Now when it comes to personnel decisions McDaniels is just a bystander and a willing one at that?

jhildebrand
07-27-2010, 03:12 PM
By the way, if the ship sinks, can we expect Joe Ellis to be fired before McDaniels?

TXBRONC
07-27-2010, 04:34 PM
I might resign Calvin Lowry just so I can cut him again.


I didn't agree with everything you said, but this is gold. Maybe the single best idea anyone's ever had on BF. I'd like to do it w/ Webster too. Those guys singlehandedly lost 3-4 games for us that season.

:tsk: I'm sorry guys there can be only ONE Chad Mustard. :lol:

Bosco
07-27-2010, 05:42 PM
So there's nothing you would change if you could, nothing you would have done differently?

Sure, there are a few. In chronological order...

1) Throw the ZBS completely by the wayside. None of this trying to mesh it and the man blocking scheme to appease the fanbase shit. That means that even though I think Dennison is a good coach, he's looking for a job. Bobby Turner gets to stay another year but when Studesville became available I'd still bring him in.

2) Dom Capers, not Mike Nolan, would have been my DC.

3) Already mentioned, but Jay Cutler would have received a very public beatdown for trying to start a PR war with the team. I would have suspended and/or fined him for contract detrimental to the team after his very first interview and then ordered him back to Denver to meet with Bowlen and McDaniels (which would be "leaked" to the media) and if he didn't comply, punt his ass off to some other team with his balls stuffed in his mouth.

Sure, we probably don't get nearly as awesome trade value as we did, but sending the message to the players that force would be met with total and overwhelming force would definitely be worth it.

Other than that, I can't say there is much I would have changed.

atwater27
07-27-2010, 08:24 PM
and if he didn't comply, punt his ass off to some other team with his balls stuffed in his mouth.

.

Sure you would. The only stuffed balls would have been yours when he bent you into a pretzel and mushroom stamped you in the forehead.

Bosco
07-27-2010, 10:19 PM
Sure you would. The only stuffed balls would have been yours when he bent you into a pretzel and mushroom stamped you in the forehead.

Are you talking about me, or the hypothetical Josh McDaniels?

If it's me, I am not worried.

If it's Josh, good luck with that. Jay Cutler didn't have a whole lot of support for his little stunt and a whole slew of players would have taken none too kindly to someone attempting to get violent against their coach, much less a punk like Jay Cutler.

atwater27
07-28-2010, 12:05 AM
Are you talking about me, or the hypothetical Josh McDaniels?

If it's me, I am not worried.

If it's Josh, good luck with that. Jay Cutler didn't have a whole lot of support for his little stunt and a whole slew of players would have taken none too kindly to someone attempting to get violent against their coach, much less a punk like Jay Cutler.

Well, i suggest you take it up with Jay if it is so personal. You might have a chance if he has low blood sugar.

Elevation inc
07-28-2010, 01:12 AM
I'm not looking to argue as much as I am looking for you to back up what you assert as fact not to mention address the actual rebuttal i raised.

I think history has shown McDaniels has no problem pointing the finger when he feels criticism is pointed at him when it wasn't warranted. For example, he was quick to label Shauin Phillips the aggressor in a simple, silly spat.

Now when it comes to personnel decisions McDaniels is just a bystander and a willing one at that?

no when it comes to big time pro bowlers being traded i dont belive he had near enough pull in those trades the majority of the fanbase belives.....he has alot of pull....but not for that cutler and marshall were tarded becasue bowklen and Ellis had enough....like i said MCD probally didnt care they were traded, but i am 100% certain he wasnt the lead decision maker for either trade

Im simply stating that Ellis has huge pull.....you arent instrumental in the firing of shanny(which he was) if you dont have big pull like he did.....thats not assumption its fact and was reported in the DP by many sources shortly after shanny was fired.....

And shaun phillips was the agressor, thats the kind of player he is.......

WARHORSE
07-28-2010, 01:14 AM
Okay, Im gonna weigh in.

6'4', 284


Looking back in hindsight is easy, because this is about changing what you view as bad.

On the front end of it all, I didnt like any of it initially.

Today, I think Shanahan needed to be fired. For his good as much as ours.

He is hands down one of the best coaches in this league. Top three imo.

He knows how to make a QB better, and he knows his system inside and out.

But I also think much of what happened to Mike was due to Bowlen as well. See, all the coaches understand that to keep your players on their toes, you bring in competition to scare em.

Bowlen grew complacent with Shanahan. Thats where he went wrong imo.


After the two superbowls, Shanny was a god. He could do no wrong. Pat said he could coach here as long as he wanted........that was his first mistake.

It wasnt until I saw McDaniels that I understood why Bowlen hired him, and why I would still fire Shanny today.

McDaniels is a ravenous wolf. This man is hungry like I havent seen in a long time. This man reminds me of Jimmy Johnson. He wants nothing WORSE, than winning.

Shanahan had that edge when he came here. He got spanked by Al Davis and he had a fire lit up under his rear end. All you gotta do is watch him on the sidelines during the first three years here. The man was a machine.

McDaniels has that same drive. He has it so bad, he is meticulous in EVERYTHING. He will not be satisfied with losing. He will not be satisfied with second best. He is involved in every aspect, not because he wants to lord it over everyone, but because he has a plan, and he knows that he knows it better than anyone else.

Special teams. Offense. Defense. Drafting for very specific skillsets that fit his scheme.

I dont begrudge Shanahan a single draft, unless he were to say there was a draft that he didnt do his homework on. Every team in the league has draft ups and downs. Every, single, one.

Shanahans drafts gained little sometimes, and others he hit the jackpot.

You cant be a genius one day and an idiot another, thats public opinion flip flopping, not the man.

1 (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/breakdowns/by_round/1.html)11(11)Jay Cutler (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/players/815.html)QB (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/breakdowns/by_position/qb.html)Vanderbilt (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/breakdowns/by_school/vandy.html)
2 (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/breakdowns/by_round/2.html)29(61)Tony Scheffler (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/players/18336.html)TE (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/breakdowns/by_position/te.html)W Michigan (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/breakdowns/by_school/westmi.html)
4 (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/breakdowns/by_round/4.html)22(119)Brandon Marshall (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/players/2846.html)WR (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/breakdowns/by_position/wr.html)UCF (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/breakdowns/by_school/ucf.html)
4 (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/breakdowns/by_round/4.html)29(126)Elvis Dumervil (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/players/47859.html)OLB (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/breakdowns/by_position/olb.html)Louisville (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/breakdowns/by_school/lou.html)
4 (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/breakdowns/by_round/4.html)33(130)Domenik Hixon (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/players/2831.html)WR (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/breakdowns/by_position/wr.html)Akron (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/breakdowns/by_school/akron.html)
5 (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/breakdowns/by_round/5.html)28(161)Chris Kuper (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/players/47929.html)OG (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/breakdowns/by_position/og.html)North Dakota (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/breakdowns/by_school/northdakota.html)
6 (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/breakdowns/by_round/6.html)29(198)Greg Eslinger (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/players/47839.html)C (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/breakdowns/by_position/c.html)Minnesota (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2006/draft/breakdowns/by_school/minnes.html)

This has to be one of the best drafts of all time.

Top Ten at a minimum.

Anyway, back to McD.

I would have done Marshall exaclty the way he did. If I were Bowlen, and I called Cutler a bunch of times like he did with no response.....goodbye diaper boy.

I never would have hired Nolan. But I would have done the same with Dennison and Turner. Its obvious they couldnt handle the intensity of McD, and they had the same disease Shanny did. Goodbye. Great coaches. But goodbye.

Considering everything, and putting it in perspective, I like what McDis doing. I like it cause I think hes building a very, very solid foundation to win on.

Elevation inc
07-28-2010, 01:16 AM
So it was a coincidence that the coach that came from NE, wanted to trade for Cassel? :confused:

??????

confused where your going with this RAV we already know that happened......but inquiries happen all over the NFL when coaches feel comfortable with a certain player....Cutler got but hurt. Its his right, but he handled it way wrong, and MCD showed his rookie coach ways in that scenario....but MCd didnt trade cutler. Bowlen Did and i guarentee Ellis had a part since he also was key in getting the goodmans let go....which is interesting because both goodmans were lead advocates for cutler before the trade.....

Elevation inc
07-28-2010, 01:19 AM
I would want Bowlen to hire McD with the FULL understanding that he will NOT trade for Cassel. That would be the number one thing I would do. Make it part of the interview process, and have him sign it in pen if that's the only way McD would be sure to understand. No Cassel, no way. Period.

I think McD knows football, but doesn't know how to handle people. I think he doesn't know how to delegate authority, and doesn't understand that respect is something that is earned, not given..... no matter what your position/title is. Thats just people skills he doesn't have. Therefore, I believe this is another reason I hire a GM that is in charge of such things. Someone that has the experience, the age, and the maturity (I don't think McD is mature yet) to be the go-between man. Some coaches need this.. especially young coaches. McD's age showed, and I think he fell into the trap that so many young people do when moving into a managerial position at such a young age. They come in loud, thumping their chest, and demanding people bow because they 'feel' inside that they need to demand it. This is something I feel needs to be addressed.

So, I would hire someone other than the numbers cruncher for a GM. Someone that would be in charge of players, other than the coach. I honestly think its pretty clear who's in charge of player personnel, and it starts and finishes with the HC. This was the biggest problem during the SHanahan regime and started to look INCREDIBLY better with the Goodmans on staff. Which leads to..

keep the best thing that's happened to the drafting for this team in a decade ON the staff!! This to me is a no-brainer, and one I personally feel has already taken toll.

We had the makings of an amazing, young, offense that would grow together and become a perennial force year in and year out. I would be sure we kept this unit of Cutler, Marshall, Royal, Scheffler, Clady, and Hillis together.

I wouldn't have fired Shanahan, but would step in and fire Slowik while bringing in a well known DC. I don't believe the 34 is the End all of defenses, and would then concentrate the draft on the defense since we would still have a young, stud, nucleus offense. Although, no way we move up and waste a pick on Smith, nor do we waste a pick on some blocking TE.

I absolutely would bring in Dawkins and Goodman, but wouldn't bring in some long snapper.

I would not use a first round pick on a running back. Davis would still be here (still stunned that he's not) but the B-boy Webster would be fired over and over again... with a new press-release every week just to remind and celebrate that he's no longer on the team.



Hilarious:beer:

jhildebrand
07-28-2010, 11:33 AM
And shaun phillips was the agressor, thats the kind of player he is.......
That's my point Elevation! When faced with a situation that drew criticism and heat, McDaniels had no qualms whatsoever pointing the finger and laying blame.

I don't think the Cutler or Marshall situation would be any different.

Furthermore, let's all remember McDaniels was a rookie coach. If what you are proposing is true, I would think Pat and Joe themselves would put themselves in front of the press for some of the bright lights to relieve some of the pressure on a rookie HC-especially considering they had a chance at the PO's!

Finally we all know McDaniels brought in Dawkins and Williams. He has had some AMAZING FA hauls. Are we now to believe that is more the work of Joe Ellis? :confused:

no when it comes to big time pro bowlers being traded i dont belive he had near enough pull in those trades the majority of the fanbase belives.....he has alot of pull....but not for that cutler and marshall were tarded becasue bowklen and Ellis had enough....like i said MCD probally didnt care they were traded, but i am 100% certain he wasnt the lead decision maker for either trade

Im simply stating that Ellis has huge pull.....you arent instrumental in the firing of shanny(which he was) if you dont have big pull like he did.....thats not assumption its fact and was reported in the DP by many sources shortly after shanny was fired.....


I agree on the Ellis being instrumental in the firing and hiring. I am just not so sure he had any say on the personnel decisions. Again, Bowlen likes his coaches to sink or swim on their own accord.

I believe there are enough quotes from McDaniels on the Marshall and Cutler trades to discern who was in control. However, the one quote that might support your theory is when McDaniels said something along the lines to NFLN: we just didn't feel he was a player we could commit that kind of money to.

It always stuck with me because it seemed McDaniels was beginning to answer one way than a much rehearsed answer came out along the lines of what I posted above.

At the end of the day, this seems like a concerted effort to take the heat off of McDaniels for those moves. Even if what you suggest is true, I don't think it relieves McDaniels in the least! If Ellis pulled the strings on the Marshall, Cutler, and other deals, than McDaniels was clearly on board. At no point did he ever advocate for the "player" or mention that he preferred to keep them. Ultimately, his roster is his alone and he appears to be ok with it as is.

arapaho2
07-28-2010, 12:18 PM
That's my point Elevation! When faced with a situation that drew criticism and heat, McDaniels had no qualms whatsoever pointing the finger and laying blame.

I don't think the Cutler or Marshall situation would be any different.

Furthermore, let's all remember McDaniels was a rookie coach. If what you are proposing is true, I would think Pat and Joe themselves would put themselves in front of the press for some of the bright lights to relieve some of the pressure on a rookie HC-especially considering they had a chance at the PO's!

Finally we all know McDaniels brought in Dawkins and Williams. He has had some AMAZING FA hauls. Are we now to believe that is more the work of Joe Ellis? :confused:


I agree on the Ellis being instrumental in the firing and hiring. I am just not so sure he had any say on the personnel decisions. Again, Bowlen likes his coaches to sink or swim on their own accord.

I believe there are enough quotes from McDaniels on the Marshall and Cutler trades to discern who was in control. However, the one quote that might support your theory is when McDaniels said something along the lines to NFLN: we just didn't feel he was a player we could commit that kind of money to.

It always stuck with me because it seemed McDaniels was beginning to answer one way than a much rehearsed answer came out along the lines of what I posted above.

At the end of the day, this seems like a concerted effort to take the heat off of McDaniels for those moves. Even if what you suggest is true, I don't think it relieves McDaniels in the least! If Ellis pulled the strings on the Marshall, Cutler, and other deals, than McDaniels was clearly on board. At no point did he ever advocate for the "player" or mention that he preferred to keep them. Ultimately, his roster is his alone and he appears to be ok with it as is.


basically the run down condensed would be

Good off season moves...JOSH did it

bad or questionalble moves..ellis did it

thats about correct right?

Ravage!!!
07-28-2010, 12:19 PM
??????

confused where your going with this RAV we already know that happened......but inquiries happen all over the NFL when coaches feel comfortable with a certain player....Cutler got but hurt. Its his right, but he handled it way wrong, and MCD showed his rookie coach ways in that scenario....but MCd didnt trade cutler. Bowlen Did and i guarentee Ellis had a part since he also was key in getting the goodmans let go....which is interesting because both goodmans were lead advocates for cutler before the trade.....

McD traded Cutler. He traded Cutler because he wanted Cassel. He was looking to trade for Cassel, and tried to do it before anyone knew or heard about it, and it BLEW up in his face. Teams don't "inquire" about a 3rd year, 26 yr old, pro-bowl QB for trade.... unless they already know he's up for trade. So I don't think its a coincidence that McD comes in, and the attempt to trade for Cassel happens and it was Ellis that was manipulating the strings in it. I believe you are COMPLETELY minimizing McD's hand in all of this, and minimizing his role in all the personnel moves. That, or exaggerating Ellis' role...maybe both.

I'm not going to hijack the thread about this topic, because its been hashed over and over. But to go back on topic...... If I were to change something, I would have Bowlen absolutely let McD know from MOMENT ONE, that he was NOT to trade for Matt Cassel if hired to be the HC. THat would have ended McD's fantasy of bringing Cassel over (or at least squashed the attempts to make that fantasy come true).

Slick
07-28-2010, 12:43 PM
Sorry if you did not like the thread sneakers.

I thought it could be a good idea to see how we as a group felt or thought about how and where we went wrong. It could help us understand each other a little better when we bicker in some of the other threads in Broncos talk.

I appreciate everyone's input. Personally I feel like I understand where some of you are coming from and why you are unhappy or happy with the way things are going.

I'd still love to hear from more of you guys.

dogfish, TX, anyone else care to chime in?

Dreadnought
07-28-2010, 01:12 PM
Sorry if you did not like the thread sneakers.

I thought it could be a good idea to see how we as a group felt or thought about how and where we went wrong. It could help us understand each other a little better when we bicker in some of the other threads in Broncos talk.

I appreciate everyone's input. Personally I feel like I understand where some of you are coming from and why you are unhappy or happy with the way things are going.

I'd still love to hear from more of you guys.

dogfish, TX, anyone else care to chime in?

Its been an outstanding thread, Slick. Far less sarcasm and personal slamming that one might have suspected would be the case. Posters on all sides have mostly conducted themselves without becoming snotty or obnoxious, and its been a good read because of that. What a concept! I wonder if it will catch on?

claymore
07-28-2010, 01:16 PM
Can we agree that if McD is indeed building a better team, then we should see a winning team this year?

Slick
07-28-2010, 01:41 PM
Can we agree that if McD is indeed building a better team, then we should see a winning team this year?

If we avoid injuries, if the some of the rookies can contribute even a little, if Bannan and Jamal end up improving our defensive line play, if Ayers can be even half the force Dumervil is on the other side, if the interior offensive line play improves then we should be at least a .500 ball club.

Why?

Do you have high expectations for this year clay?

TXBRONC
07-28-2010, 02:17 PM
Can we agree that if McD is indeed building a better team, then we should see a winning team this year?

Do you mean jus going at least 9-7 or do you mean that the team has to be in the playoffs?

Elevation inc
07-28-2010, 02:42 PM
basically the run down condensed would be

Good off season moves...JOSH did it

bad or questionalble moves..ellis did it

thats about correct right?

no actually alphonso smith was a MCD hiccup, not using sheff enough was a MCD hiccup, drafting quinn was a hiccup, not taking any top tier DL talent in the draft the last 2 years was his fault.


See how that works nice try hero!!!!:coffee:

Lonestar
07-28-2010, 02:49 PM
no actually alphonso smith was a MCD hiccup, not using sheff enough was a MCD hiccup, drafting quinn was a hiccup, not taking any top tier DL talent in the draft the last 2 years was his fault.


See how that works nice try hero!!!!:coffee:

I see the draft last year as a learning experience.

Not sure what anyone expected

for the whole year the scouts were looking for mikeys shopping list.

When Josh came to town and had an entirely different outlook on players for the most part their work was kaput.

They had to start all over and grade the players on Joshes scale.

SO when players were picked some may have been a reach IN your eyes but Josh knew what he wanted and for the most part got them.

Please show me ONE team in the NFL that consistently has great drafts.

Even NE who drafts pretty good has had a few lean years.

With the exception of not getting a DL guy this year unless these guys that look so good right now are DUDs this was a superb group taken.

LoyalSoldier
07-28-2010, 03:03 PM
I would have said "Screw the Broncos" and retired with my massive fortune to a nice home in the Bahamas. :)

Elevation inc
07-28-2010, 03:07 PM
McD traded Cutler. He traded Cutler because he wanted Cassel. He was looking to trade for Cassel, and tried to do it before anyone knew or heard about it, and it BLEW up in his face. Teams don't "inquire" about a 3rd year, 26 yr old, pro-bowl QB for trade.... unless they already know he's up for trade. So I don't think its a coincidence that McD comes in, and the attempt to trade for Cassel happens and it was Ellis that was manipulating the strings in it. I believe you are COMPLETELY minimizing McD's hand in all of this, and minimizing his role in all the personnel moves. That, or exaggerating Ellis' role...maybe both.

I'm not going to hijack the thread about this topic, because its been hashed over and over. But to go back on topic...... If I were to change something, I would have Bowlen absolutely let McD know from MOMENT ONE, that he was NOT to trade for Matt Cassel if hired to be the HC. THat would have ended McD's fantasy of bringing Cassel over (or at least squashed the attempts to make that fantasy come true).



i believ you and J are both misunderstanding my thought process, perhaps its my own fault for that:beer:....i have no doubt MCd called about Cassell...none what so ever, but new regimes are allowed to do that period....this wasnt peyton manning we were talking about here.....it was a unproven winner with a ego who made the pro bowl off stats, but doesnt take care of the football....thats great and all but not all coaches have to keep a Qb becasue of stats or follow what the fans or media want.

it kinda sucked losing cutler, and having orton installed.....i aint a fan of that...but i fully belive that MCd was actually trying to work through the error he made by puffing his chest to jay....i dont even blame jay for puffing back at MCD...thats fine coaches and players have tiffs and have still won SB's together.....it could have worked both were being a bit egoish and immature.....the NFL is a business always has been always will be...not everyone is in love with MCD fine......but you do know it was both bowlen and Ellis who told MCD to find a deal once Cutler pulled his act on bowlen.....the deal doesnt go down if Ellis and bowlen dont say so.....like i said was mcd happy to see cutler leave? he actually probally was like crap, but whatever at least i can build my own team now....

There are 2 incident's....the marshall tarde and cutler trade i belive MCD didnt have the final say in.....i think he could have worked with either player. that being said i do feel bowlen and Ellis both were the ones to make the decsion on cutler and marshall.....that leads me to say i dont think MCD has full responsibility for those 2 trades....we got solid value back, but i still belive the trigger was pulled in the end becasue of ellis and Bowlen, not because of MCD.....


lets break it down....just so you know i aint always pro MCD....dont know why people assume that just becasue i bring up a opposing view that doesnt fall in the line with the guys that cant stand MCD.....



personnel decisions i dislike or disliked and blame MCD directly for

-Trading how We did for Smith
-Trading for Quinn the TE
-Drafting Blake Schuleter-
-Drafting Knowshon(i actually wanted to trade up for Raji or trade back period!!, and we should have)that being said i see good things in knowshon's future
-Getting Lamont jordan(horrible)
-Getting Paxton(although the dude can snap like a beast....LOL)
-Getting andra davis(i didnt like this at all....he did good for the first seven games but he sucked the last half...thats why he aint here)
-Starting peterson at RDE
-Playing Thomas at NT
-The value we got in the Sheff trade(horrible)
-getting Ty law of the street(thanks phonz...lol)
-The Lekevin smith deal
-Keeping Moss on the team
-Not keeping tatum Bell

Personnel decisions i belive went down becasue of Bowlen and Joe Ellis, gave the final say so.

-Trade cutler
-Trade Marshall

Good things MCD has done with Personnel in my view

-95% of our first year FA haul....
-100% of our second year FA haul
-The move to the 3-4
-Getting Studesville
-Getting Wayne nunnely
-Getting Wink
-Hiring nolan last year
-Moving Wink to DC this year
-getting good value in the marshall and cutler deals after bowlen and Ellis said get it done...
- Robert Ayers, Darcel Mcbath, David Bruton, Seth Olsen, Kenny Mckinnely
Our 2009 UDFA's
our 2010 UDFA's
-Tim tebow, DT, Decker, Beadles, Walton, Eric olsen, Cox, Kirlew, Thompson(this is by far my favorite draft since 2006)
-Changing to a power scheme
-moving royal to slot

see how this goes aint all just about MCD.....i just belive those 2 big trades were decided by bowlen and Ellis and they told Josh find a deal....josh played a part yes, but he didn't decide to make the final say to tarde cutler or marshall.....bowlen did, with Ellis right there in his ear....


hope that clears up my views on MCD a bit for ya:beer:

claymore
07-28-2010, 03:08 PM
If we avoid injuries, if the some of the rookies can contribute even a little, if Bannan and Jamal end up improving our defensive line play, if Ayers can be even half the force Dumervil is on the other side, if the interior offensive line play improves then we should be at least a .500 ball club.

Why?

Do you have high expectations for this year clay?

I have low expectations. I see question marks at almost every position. I feel good about Bailey, Doom, and....... THats it.

I keep hearing people say that McD is building a team for the future, but all I see is question marks. LT, LG, RT Center, WR, NT, TE, LB..... Safety.... geez, so many things would have to go our way....

claymore
07-28-2010, 03:09 PM
Do you mean jus going at least 9-7 or do you mean that the team has to be in the playoffs?

9-7 at the very least. Anything less than that and I would hope people would put the koolaid down for awhile.

Elevation inc
07-28-2010, 03:12 PM
9-7 at the very least. Anything less than that and I would hope people would put the koolaid down for awhile.

i would probally lean from my 70% pro MCD state to 51 Percent Against Him if we go less than 9-7:beer:



:D

TXBRONC
07-28-2010, 03:31 PM
Sorry if you did not like the thread sneakers.

I thought it could be a good idea to see how we as a group felt or thought about how and where we went wrong. It could help us understand each other a little better when we bicker in some of the other threads in Broncos talk.

I appreciate everyone's input. Personally I feel like I understand where some of you are coming from and why you are unhappy or happy with the way things are going.

I'd still love to hear from more of you guys.

dogfish, TX, anyone else care to chime in?

If I were Bowlen I probably would have done anything differently as far as the firing of Shanahan and the hiring of McDaniels.

However I would have been more actively involved in what was happening between McDaniels and Cutler. I would have taken McDaniels aside and told him to find a way smooth things out with kid and let him know we're not trading him in no uncertain terms.

If that had happened I think issues with Marshall and Scheffler might not have never materialized.

That being said, I'm pining away for Shanahan, Cutler, Marshall, or Scheffler.

arapaho2
07-28-2010, 06:28 PM
If we avoid injuries, if the some of the rookies can contribute even a little, if Bannan and Jamal end up improving our defensive line play, if Ayers can be even half the force Dumervil is on the other side, if the interior offensive line play improves then we should be at least a .500 ball club.

Why?

Do you have high expectations for this year clay?

thaats alot of ifs just to be a .500 team:confused:

point should be regardless of injuries..shanny or cutler got no excuse for the defensive or rb injuries in 08...or the oline injuries in 07..why should josh

if he's built this team to be better..that means better depth too

if we are again at .500 then josh needs to fire himself and we move to get a competent coach...if were 9-7 or above and make the playoffs..even with injuries..then he's improved the team

Bosco
07-28-2010, 06:33 PM
That's my point Elevation! When faced with a situation that drew criticism and heat, McDaniels had no qualms whatsoever pointing the finger and laying blame.

I fail to see what your gripe is here. Shaun Phillips went out and was telling the story to anyone in the media who would listen, and his account was pretty damn dishonest, so McDaniels came out and told the truth to defend himself.

Can you honestly say you wouldn't do the same thing?


McD traded Cutler. He traded Cutler because he wanted Cassel. You realize the Cassel/Vrabel to KC trade was long done by the time we moved Cutler, right?


Teams don't "inquire" about a 3rd year, 26 yr old, pro-bowl QB for trade.... unless they already know he's up for trade. Teams inquire about players all the time and you rarely hear about it. McD himself even said that Cutler was just one player they got calls on, and to this day we don't know for sure which ones. Do you really think that a few teams didn't sit down and go "hey, we got these early picks that we don't really want, McD and Cassel have a great relationship and Cutler is more proven than either Stafford or Sanchez, so let's see if we can pull off a three way trade here"?

Secondly, if you believe that McD, Bowlen, Xanders, Schefter, King...etc, were all lying about the calls being inbound, then how do you explain no one from either the Bucs or Lions coming out and denying those claims? Their silence is pretty damn telling.


I'm not going to hijack the thread about this topic, because its been hashed over and over. But to go back on topic...... If I were to change something, I would have Bowlen absolutely let McD know from MOMENT ONE, that he was NOT to trade for Matt Cassel if hired to be the HC. THat would have ended McD's fantasy of bringing Cassel over (or at least squashed the attempts to make that fantasy come true). During the interview process, all coaching candidates were required to have rather specific plans in place for, among other things, how they'd fit current talent within their plans and how they would want as assistant coaches. I can guarantee you with absolute certainty that Cutler was a big topic in that discussion.

With that in mind, there are only three likely scenarios.

a) McD made Bowlen aware that he wanted to trade for Cassel and Bowlen was on board. Pretty unlikely, because then we would have been in on the trade talks from day one instead of getting calls literally hours before the deal was completed with another team.

b) McD tried to trade for Cassel without Bowlen's consent or knowledge. Even less likely because Bowlen would have gone apeshit and the fallout would have leaked out to media sources.

or c) The team's version of events is true.

jhildebrand
07-29-2010, 12:53 AM
I fail to see what your gripe is here. Shaun Phillips went out and was telling the story to anyone in the media who would listen, and his account was pretty damn dishonest, so McDaniels came out and told the truth to defend himself.

Can you honestly say you wouldn't do the same thing?

Well here's the deal. The story was first reported based on Shaun Phillips words. The reporter who got wind of it followed McDaniels to his car post game to try to get a take. McDaniels simply stated Phillips started it. This was all BEFORE the Phillips story really broke or before there was any traction.

The point is still the same and remains a valid one in context to my argument to Elevation. If McDaniels isn't going to let something as meaningless, petty, and trite fly like the situation with Phillips then why on God's green earth would he sit back and let a person make moves, that he may not agree with, moves that could in the not too distant future cost him his job, AND NOT SAY A SINGLE THING? :confused: It doesn't make sense.

If McDaniels weren't in full control of this roster, I am sure there would have been some moves that he is not happy with and we would know for certain that Ellis is not only in a position of power but using it!

Elevation inc
07-29-2010, 02:12 AM
Well here's the deal. The story was first reported based on Shaun Phillips words. The reporter who got wind of it followed McDaniels to his car post game to try to get a take. McDaniels simply stated Phillips started it. This was all BEFORE the Phillips story really broke or before there was any traction.

The point is still the same and remains a valid one in context to my argument to Elevation. If McDaniels isn't going to let something as meaningless, petty, and trite fly like the situation with Phillips then why on God's green earth would he sit back and let a person make moves, that he may not agree with, moves that could in the not too distant future cost him his job, AND NOT SAY A SINGLE THING? :confused: It doesn't make sense.

If McDaniels weren't in full control of this roster, I am sure there would have been some moves that he is not happy with and we would know for certain that Ellis is not only in a position of power but using it!


you really need to read my post a few post back...to get my correct viewpoint, i never said MCD probally wasnt happy when cutler was gone, but cutler or masrhall doesnt get traded if Ellis and bowlen dont say make the deal......its pretty simple.....

Bosco
07-29-2010, 04:30 AM
Well here's the deal. The story was first reported based on Shaun Phillips words. The reporter who got wind of it followed McDaniels to his car post game to try to get a take. McDaniels simply stated Phillips started it. This was all BEFORE the Phillips story really broke or before there was any traction.

The point is still the same and remains a valid one in context to my argument to Elevation. If McDaniels isn't going to let something as meaningless, petty, and trite fly like the situation with Phillips then why on God's green earth would he sit back and let a person make moves, that he may not agree with, moves that could in the not too distant future cost him his job, AND NOT SAY A SINGLE THING? :confused: It doesn't make sense.

If McDaniels weren't in full control of this roster, I am sure there would have been some moves that he is not happy with and we would know for certain that Ellis is not only in a position of power but using it!

Ok, I see what you're saying. I agree that McDaniels, with the exception of being ordered to trade Cutler, is running the personnel side of things.

Tned
07-29-2010, 06:56 AM
Can we agree that if McD is indeed building a better team, then we should see a winning team this year?


9-7 at the very least. Anything less than that and I would hope people would put the koolaid down for awhile.

From what I have seen, most of the people you call koolaid drinkers have said it would take 2-3 years to rebuild the team, so would not see anything less than a winning season this year as a failure.

In my mind, I think it could go either way. If we wind up with a 4-6 win season, I'll be very dissapointed. If we are in the 7-9 to 9-7 range, a lot will depend on 'how' we were around .500. Were we in most, if not all, the games. Did we start off great again, and then lose 8 or 10 again?

I disagree with some of the main McDaniels supporters in that I don't see him just building a team for the future. Both years, he has brought in a lot of veterans, especially on defense that clearly are supposed to win now. Yes, there are some youngsters behind them, but in many cases, questionable as to whether they are starter material or depth in case of injury.

McDaniels made it very clear last offseason that he was not rebuilding to win years down the road, that he planned on having a winning team last year. One would have to presume then that this year, he also expects to put a winning team on the field, so us fans should expect no less.

I see this team, as long as we can get solid O-line and QB play, capable of winning 7-11 games this season.

Slick
07-29-2010, 07:21 AM
thaats alot of ifs just to be a .500 team:confused:

point should be regardless of injuries..shanny or cutler got no excuse for the defensive or rb injuries in 08...or the oline injuries in 07..why should josh

if he's built this team to be better..that means better depth too

if we are again at .500 then josh needs to fire himself and we move to get a competent coach...if were 9-7 or above and make the playoffs..even with injuries..then he's improved the team

Yes, I realize that is a lot of ifs. I think the stars will have to align for us. I don't think we're going to be very good this year.

Tned
07-29-2010, 07:51 AM
Yes, I realize that is a lot of ifs. I think the stars will have to align for us. I don't think we're going to be very good this year.

There is no reason that the team shouldn't be substantially improved on defense. We have two years of defensive free agents (Dawkins, Goodman, Hill, 4+ guys on the D-line, plus some of our hold overs), add that to what should be a solid group of starting LB's (Doom, DJ, Hagen and Ayers).

This defense should be somewhere between good and very good, but short of great.

On offense, we have taken many, many steps back and there are a ton of ????. The o-line has a very good and great tackle coming of injury (lot's of questions around Clady), Kuper should be solid at RG, but LG and C are very big question marks.

WR is very big ??, as Gaffney has only a few great games in his entire 8 year career, we still don't know exactly what we have in terms of Royal taking on a major role in the offense, and Stokely is getting long in the tooth. Nobody knows how quickly Decker and Thomas can contribute, but it is the exception, not the rule, when WR's are productive as rookies.

RB will hopefully be solid, but QB is obviously a question. With so many questions for the offensive players on the line or just off (WR, line, TE's other than Graham), that puts even more pressure on the QB to be able to make plays, even if protection is breaking down and receivers are struggling. That hasn't proved to be Orton's strength.

So, to summarize this rambling, the defense should be expected to be very productive and keep is most games. However, the offense could be solid or horrendous. We have a TON of questions on offense

Elevation inc
07-29-2010, 07:53 AM
Ok, I see what you're saying. I agree that McDaniels, with the exception of being ordered to trade Cutler, is running the personnel side of things.

EXACTLY:beer:

JaxBroncoGirl
07-29-2010, 08:58 AM
If I were Bowlen I probably would have done anything differently as far as the firing of Shanahan and the hiring of McDaniels.

However I would have been more actively involved in what was happening between McDaniels and Cutler. I would have taken McDaniels aside and told him to find a way smooth things out with kid and let him know we're not trading him in no uncertain terms.

If that had happened I think issues with Marshall and Scheffler might not have never materialized.



That being said, I'm pining away for Shanahan, Cutler, Marshall, or Scheffler.

As a new Bronco fan, I have always wanted to know exactly what happened between Cutler and Marshall to have them traded. I was too scared I would open a can of worms, but I am trying to learn more about the current team. Being a team player means you play with your team as a team and you play under the guidelines of the coach. That being said, what was the deal with both players? A simple answer will be fine. :beer:

Tned
07-29-2010, 09:02 AM
Ok, I see what you're saying. I agree that McDaniels, with the exception of being ordered to trade Cutler, is running the personnel side of things.

It really isn't clear whether he was 'ordered' or Bowlen simply gave him some cover. It's been very convenient for people to say, "McDaniels didn't fire Cutler, Bowlen did."

There are a couple problems with that. First, the Broncos would never have reached the 'phone calls not returned' stage, if the failure to trade for Cassel hadn't occurred. Second, ignoring what Cutler and his agent claim that McDaniels told Cutler, once the failed trade did happen, McDaniel's public comments about anyone can be traded if it improves the team, and stuff like that, did nothing to heal the wounds.

So, we have no idea if McDaniels went to Bowlen and said Cutler needs to be moved, or if McDaniels was all for trying to rehabilitate him, but it was simply the disrespect to the owner that led to Bowlen saying, "I don't care if you want to work with Cutler, I want him off the team", as some people tend to imply to give McDaniels cover on the issue.

The fact is that one of the MAJOR responsibilities of a head coach is dealing with players, including high strung, prima donna type players. If every other team just traded every disgruntled player that asked for a trade (even if it was prompted by a team/coach's action), there would be a lot more big name players being traded around the league. Many, many big name players have publicly stated they wanted to be traded, but are never traded because they are under contract.

Anyway, unless you have some inside information you would like to share, I don't see how a realistic case can be made that Bowlen forced/ordered Cutler to be traded, as if McDaniels had no part in the decision.

turftoad
07-29-2010, 09:52 AM
You can go back in time and undo all the wrongs of the last season and two off seasons.

You're Pat Bowlen.


Do you even fire Shanahan?


Who do you hire if you do?


How do you make this team better?

If I did fire Shanahan, I would have hired Rex Ryan. Left the offense alone and fixed the defense.

Tned
07-29-2010, 10:10 AM
If I did fire Shanahan, I would have hired Rex Ryan. Left the offense alone and fixed the defense.

While I quickly warmed up to McDaniels as head coach, especially with the hiring of Nolan at DC, when he was first hired, Ryan was the way I thought we should go. I thought bring in a defensive minded guy, who would primarily leave the offense alone, just tweak the offense a little.

claymore
07-29-2010, 10:10 AM
It really isn't clear whether he was 'ordered' or Bowlen simply gave him some cover. It's been very convenient for people to say, "McDaniels didn't fire Cutler, Bowlen did."

There are a couple problems with that. First, the Broncos would never have reached the 'phone calls not returned' stage, if the failure to trade for Cassel hadn't occurred. Second, ignoring what Cutler and his agent claim that McDaniels told Cutler, once the failed trade did happen, McDaniel's public comments about anyone can be traded if it improves the team, and stuff like that, did nothing to heal the wounds.

So, we have no idea if McDaniels went to Bowlen and said Cutler needs to be moved, or if McDaniels was all for trying to rehabilitate him, but it was simply the disrespect to the owner that led to Bowlen saying, "I don't care if you want to work with Cutler, I want him off the team", as some people tend to imply to give McDaniels cover on the issue.

The fact is that one of the MAJOR responsibilities of a head coach is dealing with players, including high strung, prima donna type players. If every other team just traded every disgruntled player that asked for a trade (even if it was prompted by a team/coach's action), there would be a lot more big name players being traded around the league. Many, many big name players have publicly stated they wanted to be traded, but are never traded because they are under contract.

Anyway, unless you have some inside information you would like to share, I don't see how a realistic case can be made that Bowlen forced/ordered Cutler to be traded, as if McDaniels had no part in the decision.

Remember the movie "Sum of all fears" ? THe russians Gassed chechnia, but it wasnt ordered by the new President. He still had to take credit for it because it made it look like no one was in control of the military.

Tned
07-29-2010, 10:11 AM
Remember the movie "Sum of all fears" ? THe russians Gassed chechnia, but it wasnt ordered by the new President. He still had to take credit for it because it made it look like no one was in control of the military.

How could I ever forget a book/movie that blew up the Denver football stadium? (actually I think the movie blew up a DC area stadium, but in the movie it was a Denver NFL arena).

claymore
07-29-2010, 10:15 AM
How could I ever forget a book/movie that blew up the Denver football stadium? (actually I think the movie blew up a DC area stadium, but in the movie it was a Denver NFL arena).

It was Baltimore in the movie. I never read that Clancy book. Maybe I should.

Northman
07-29-2010, 10:21 AM
It was Baltimore in the movie. I never read that Clancy book. Maybe I should.

Well, we really dont want you to hurt yourself mate. ;)

claymore
07-29-2010, 10:24 AM
Well, we really dont want you to hurt yourself mate. ;)

I am an accomplished reader. Im just a terrible writer. :(

Ravage!!!
07-29-2010, 10:51 AM
You realize the Cassel/Vrabel to KC trade was long done by the time we moved Cutler, right?
You DO realize this has nothing to do with anything. You DO realize that Cassel wasn't traded when McD was attempting to trade for him. You DO realize that he even said he was late for the dance. You DO realize that simply because Cassel was traded by the time Cutler was traded away... has nothing to do with anything.... right?


Teams inquire about players all the time and you rarely hear about it. McD himself even said that Cutler was just one player they got calls on, and to this day we don't know for sure which ones. Do you really think that a few teams didn't sit down and go "hey, we got these early picks that we don't really want, McD and Cassel have a great relationship and Cutler is more proven than either Stafford or Sanchez, so let's see if we can pull off a three way trade here"?

I find it cute when people try to say this. Its interesting, since McD said himself how excited he was to work with Cutler, and he was one of the major reasons he wanted to come to Denver. If these are the PUBLIC things stated, then why would anyone assume differently unless something was being said behind closed doors? When it wasn't even sure if Brady could/would come back, and the Patriots had Cassel for CHEAP and didn't have to trade him, why would any team be inquiring about trading for a young stud QB on one team, and then assuming the third would be taken? Doesn't hold water... at ALL. You don't hear to teams "trying to acquire" a young, pro-bowl, QB that still has 3-4 years left on his contract unless there are REASONS to call. Such as them knowing that McD was putting the word out. Why would THEY, the third party, initiate a three-way trade? Just reading those words makes me laugh. Its absurd to even suggest....unless you are just LOOKING to make reasons. I think we can all see that you have a tendency to do that. Teams only try three way trades when they already know 2 of the players are in play. Otherwise, you are trying to get two other teams to agree to a deal for players that you don't even know are available? :lol:


Secondly, if you believe that McD, Bowlen, Xanders, Schefter, King...etc, were all lying about the calls being inbound, then how do you explain no one from either the Bucs or Lions coming out and denying those claims? Their silence is pretty damn telling.

Never denied calls coming in. I'm saying they didn't come out of the blue, without already knowing there was interest in trading away Cutler. THey knew, and not from some random 'hey lets try' thought that popped into all their heads at the SAME TIME.


During the interview process, all coaching candidates were required to have rather specific plans in place for, among other things, how they'd fit current talent within their plans and how they would want as assistant coaches. I can guarantee you with absolute certainty that Cutler was a big topic in that discussion.

With that in mind, there are only three likely scenarios.

a) McD made Bowlen aware that he wanted to trade for Cassel and Bowlen was on board. Pretty unlikely, because then we would have been in on the trade talks from day one instead of getting calls literally hours before the deal was completed with another team.

b) McD tried to trade for Cassel without Bowlen's consent or knowledge. Even less likely because Bowlen would have gone apeshit and the fallout would have leaked out to media sources.

or c) The team's version of events is true.

You think Bowlen would have gone apeshit?? Really? This is an owner that has never gone "apeshit" publically about anything. Where do you get off even suggesting such ridiculousness??? Maybe... just MAYBE you would have ONE team call for Cutler with the absurd idea of working out a three way trade for a 26 yr old, pro-bowl QB, that still has 3-4 years on his contract... but more than one? No. THats because McD let it be known he was looking to trade away... thats the ONLY reason you get calls.

So just "picking up the phone" is true because thats the physical actions someone does when the phone rings, however, what isn't mentioned is McD let them know he wanted to be called.

EVERYONE knows that McD tried to trade for Cassel. THats a given. Thats an understood. There is no way you can say this isn't fact. It was reported after it was found out by the press, and McD was trying to keep it quiet. If McD was only "answering the phone" and didn't go to the press to tell him he got calls (after already telling the press "no comment" when asked about it the day of)....it was leaked that other teams were simply calling about Cutler, when (as you said) inquiries come all the time? If thats the case, then how come the inquire about Cutler got such press?

jhildebrand
07-29-2010, 11:09 AM
How did team's know there was a shot at Cutler, as Rav, has mentioned?

The Lions had approached McDaniels at the combine and February.

Elevation inc
07-29-2010, 11:11 AM
It really isn't clear whether he was 'ordered' or Bowlen simply gave him some cover. It's been very convenient for people to say, "McDaniels didn't fire Cutler, Bowlen did."

There are a couple problems with that. First, the Broncos would never have reached the 'phone calls not returned' stage, if the failure to trade for Cassel hadn't occurred. Second, ignoring what Cutler and his agent claim that McDaniels told Cutler, once the failed trade did happen, McDaniel's public comments about anyone can be traded if it improves the team, and stuff like that, did nothing to heal the wounds.

So, we have no idea if McDaniels went to Bowlen and said Cutler needs to be moved, or if McDaniels was all for trying to rehabilitate him, but it was simply the disrespect to the owner that led to Bowlen saying, "I don't care if you want to work with Cutler, I want him off the team", as some people tend to imply to give McDaniels cover on the issue.

The fact is that one of the MAJOR responsibilities of a head coach is dealing with players, including high strung, prima donna type players. If every other team just traded every disgruntled player that asked for a trade (even if it was prompted by a team/coach's action), there would be a lot more big name players being traded around the league. Many, many big name players have publicly stated they wanted to be traded, but are never traded because they are under contract.

Anyway, unless you have some inside information you would like to share, I don't see how a realistic case can be made that Bowlen forced/ordered Cutler to be traded, as if McDaniels had no part in the decision.


thats not whats being assumed here...i completely belive MCD picked up the phone and listened about Cassel.....i Completely belive cutler got Offended, and puff his chest, I completely believe MCD and his EGO puffed right back.

I then Belive Bowlen told MCD fix it and smooth things over. MCD did that by doing the PR spin and trying to get ahold of cutler. Cutler said F'it i dont wanna be here screw Denver, bowlen, Josh, and the fans.....Bowlen Said no screw you jay for disrespecting me....and told josh trade cutler for real...dont just listen to offers....:beer:


see how that works, many dont dispute that MCd had involvement in the situation becasue he did, whats disputed is that ultimaetly the decision to trade him came from bowlen and Ellis not Josh....same with Marshall.....

if people wanna be upset because a rookie coach listened to a offer for a guy he liked and was extremely comfortable with and had just come off a 11-5 season with...so be it...if people wanna be upset with him becasue he has a ego and went up against jay so be it.....but i do not belive the final decisions for marshall and jay to be finally dealt were his calls to make....

Thats how i feel about it any way


EDIT...N/m TNED it wasnt my post you quoted....LOL.....^^^^ still how i feel though....HAHA

jhildebrand
07-29-2010, 11:22 AM
you really need to read my post a few post back...to get my correct viewpoint, i never said MCD probally wasnt happy when cutler was gone, but cutler or masrhall doesnt get traded if Ellis and bowlen dont say make the deal......its pretty simple.....

I coompletely understand what you are saying and what you mean, Elevation. I even offered the idea that there could be some truth to it with what I felt was a canned response to NFLN re Marshall.

At the end of the day, I believe McDaniels has complete autonomy especially with regard to personnel. That has always been Bowlen's M.O. and biggest strength as an owner.

If what you are saying is true, I can't see any scenario where McD goes to Bowlen or Ellis wanting to trade a guy and them saying No. It would become too much of a problem for McDaniels.

Elevation inc
07-29-2010, 12:01 PM
I coompletely understand what you are saying and what you mean, Elevation. I even offered the idea that there could be some truth to it with what I felt was a canned response to NFLN re Marshall.

At the end of the day, I believe McDaniels has complete autonomy especially with regard to personnel. That has always been Bowlen's M.O. and biggest strength as an owner.

If what you are saying is true, I can't see any scenario where McD goes to Bowlen or Ellis wanting to trade a guy and them saying No. It would become too much of a problem for McDaniels.

thats just it he never went to bowlen about trading either player, it was bowlen....and Ellis had a part who told MCD trade those players....MCD would have coached the same regardless who was here....marshall was gonna be gone regardless of what MCD did....Bowlen was not giving a new contract to marshall period!!! and it would have just escalated at least we got something for him in return....

the same for cutler the sitaution cutler took to a whole new level.....its his right but MCD never even went for a approval.....thre was a inquiry and talks but nothing substantial.....jays ego took a hit and he started a PR war...MCD being a tad naive to the situation puffed back.....Eventually cutler completely shut down even to teh owner and Bowlen said ship his ass outta here....

i do completly belive MCD has full control over players...but i do not belive the end reuslt of the trades of cutler and marshall was becasue MCD said im trading these guys period regardless of what the prez and owner think.....

Tned
07-29-2010, 12:12 PM
thats not whats being assumed here...i completely belive MCD picked up the phone and listened about Cassel.....i Completely belive cutler got Offended, and puff his chest, I completely believe MCD and his EGO puffed right back.

I then Belive Bowlen told MCD fix it and smooth things over. MCD did that by doing the PR spin and trying to get ahold of cutler. Cutler said F'it i dont wanna be here screw Denver, bowlen, Josh, and the fans.....Bowlen Said no screw you jay for disrespecting me....and told josh trade cutler for real...dont just listen to offers....:beer:


see how that works, many dont dispute that MCd had involvement in the situation becasue he did, whats disputed is that ultimaetly the decision to trade him came from bowlen and Ellis not Josh....same with Marshall.....

if people wanna be upset because a rookie coach listened to a offer for a guy he liked and was extremely comfortable with and had just come off a 11-5 season with...so be it...if people wanna be upset with him becasue he has a ego and went up against jay so be it.....but i do not belive the final decisions for marshall and jay to be finally dealt were his calls to make....

Thats how i feel about it any way


EDIT...N/m TNED it wasnt my post you quoted....LOL.....^^^^ still how i feel though....HAHA

Even though I didn't quote you, I will give a few thoughts.

First, when McD started to 'fix it', he made stupid comments to the press about how anyone can be traded and such. Something along the lines of, "Jay's our QB, but anyone on the team can be traded if it helps the team." The second part goes without saying, so WHY say it?

Second, it's purely an assumption that Bowlen finally said, trade him. Just like so many people 'assume' that the final straw for firing Shanahan was that he refused to fire Slowik, when there is ZERO evidence of that effect. Sometimes we like to "fill in the dots" to make stories more interesting, or vilify or protect individuals.

Third, McDaniels had initial discussions about moving Cutler at the combine, so it isn't like this was a completely out of the blue phone call that he took and said, "no thanks". Even McDaniels has NEVER said that was all that happened.

I am not demonizing a rookie head coach for being interested in his former QB or listening to trade options. However, when it went to shit, it was HIS job to fix it, even if it meant eating some shit publicly, rather than bowing up his back and telling the world on ESPN that "anyone on the team can be traded if it makes us better." That is putting your ego ahead of the team.

Tned
07-29-2010, 12:16 PM
thats just it he never went to bowlen about trading either player, it was bowlen....and Ellis had a part who told MCD trade those players....MCD would have coached the same regardless who was here....marshall was gonna be gone regardless of what MCD did....Bowlen was not giving a new contract to marshall period!!! and it would have just escalated at least we got something for him in return....

the same for cutler the sitaution cutler took to a whole new level.....its his right but MCD never even went for a approval.....thre was a inquiry and talks but nothing substantial.....jays ego took a hit and he started a PR war...MCD being a tad naive to the situation puffed back.....Eventually cutler completely shut down even to teh owner and Bowlen said ship his ass outta here....

i do completly belive MCD has full control over players...but i do not belive the end reuslt of the trades of cutler and marshall was becasue MCD said im trading these guys period regardless of what the prez and owner think.....

I have to say you are looking at these events from only one perspective. Take week 17, by McDaniels demonizing Marshall in the press and basically accusing him of faking an injury, the ONLY thing he accomplished was decreasing his trade value. McDaniels was universally slammed in the media by ex-players and GM's for how he handled Marshall in week 17.

To say McDaniels didn't play a role in what happened to Cutler and Marshall, other than 'following orders' appears to just be a VERY pro-McDaniels slant to looking at the events that happened last year.

Ravage!!!
07-29-2010, 12:19 PM
Even though I didn't quote you, I will give a few thoughts.

First, when McD started to 'fix it', he made stupid comments to the press about how anyone can be traded and such. Something along the lines of, "Jay's our QB, but anyone on the team can be traded if it helps the team." The second part goes without saying, so WHY say it?

Second, it's purely an assumption that Bowlen finally said, trade him. Just like so many people 'assume' that the final straw for firing Shanahan was that he refused to fire Slowik, when there is ZERO evidence of that effect. Sometimes we like to "fill in the dots" to make stories more interesting, or vilify or protect individuals.

Third, McDaniels had initial discussions about moving Cutler at the combine, so it isn't like this was a completely out of the blue phone call that he took and said, "no thanks". Even McDaniels has NEVER said that was all that happened.

I am not demonizing a rookie head coach for being interested in his former QB or listening to trade options. However, when it went to shit, it was HIS job to fix it, even if it meant eating some shit publicly, rather than bowing up his back and telling the world on ESPN that "anyone on the team can be traded if it makes us better." That is putting your ego ahead of the team.

The one thing that really, to me, showed that McD was just too stubborn to fix it by simply saying the right thing... was during the TV interview when everything was LOUD in the press, and McD said "Jay is our QB." When the female interviewer asked him "is he your QB of the future?" He just smiled and said "Jay is our QB.. for now." As if to just BLATANTLY refuse to simply say something like "Yes, Jay is our QB."

To me, he was telling EVERYONE (including Jay) I don't want to fix this, I'm too stubborn to say the right thing, I'm going to trade you. He refused to say the right thing to the media, in an one-on-one interview. How could I believe (for a SINGLE MOMENT) that the meeting with Jay and him went ANY differently when in private? There was absolutely no desire to fix it, and the pure desire to hold his guns to his statement and not back off a tiny bit.

Lonestar
07-29-2010, 12:34 PM
While I quickly warmed up to McDaniels as head coach, especially with the hiring of Nolan at DC, when he was first hired, Ryan was the way I thought we should go. I thought bring in a defensive minded guy, who would primarily leave the offense alone, just tweak the offense a little.

I had initially thought that also.

but then who would be running that O

Who would be the guy thinking up NEW ways to beat a specific defense .

That was mikey not BT or Bates or Rick..

so we then keep the ZBS and the play book but who makes the adjustments that mikey did?

If we would still have had Kubes on The payroll perhaps.

I believe EVERYONE on here knows that the ZBS and playbook would have folded without mikey here. Might not have been this coming year but it would not have taken long before it did.

Tned
07-29-2010, 12:45 PM
I had initially thought that also.

but then who would be running that O

Who would be the guy thinking up NEW ways to beat a specific defense .

That was mikey not BT or Bates or Rick..

so we then keep the ZBS and the play book but who makes the adjustments that mikey did?

If we would still have had Kubes on The payroll perhaps.

I believe EVERYONE on here knows that the ZBS and playbook would have folded without mikey here. Might not have been this coming year but it would not have taken long before it did.

Yep, which is why after thinking about the McDaniels pick for a few days, and actually seeing the parallels to when Shanahan was hired, I quickly warmed up to the pick.

Then, even after the 'rookie mistakes' as Bowlen called them, with Cutler and the draft, I loved the way he ran training camp. McDaniels brings a lot to the table to be excited about.


The one thing that really, to me, showed that McD was just too stubborn to fix it by simply saying the right thing... was during the TV interview when everything was LOUD in the press, and McD said "Jay is our QB." When the female interviewer asked him "is he your QB of the future?" He just smiled and said "Jay is our QB.. for now." As if to just BLATANTLY refuse to simply say something like "Yes, Jay is our QB."

To me, he was telling EVERYONE (including Jay) I don't want to fix this, I'm too stubborn to say the right thing, I'm going to trade you. He refused to say the right thing to the media, in an one-on-one interview. How could I believe (for a SINGLE MOMENT) that the meeting with Jay and him went ANY differently when in private? There was absolutely no desire to fix it, and the pure desire to hold his guns to his statement and not back off a tiny bit.

Yep, that's the ego/rookie part of McDaniels handling of the Cutler thing that I think was REALLY. Again, the "for now" part never has to be said. Saying that anyone on the team can be traded if it's in the best interest of the team, doesn't have to be said. Those are always on the table for a team/coach/GM, but it is VERY bad form to voice them publicly.

Lonestar
07-29-2010, 12:46 PM
Even though I didn't quote you, I will give a few thoughts.

First, when McD started to 'fix it', he made stupid comments to the press about how anyone can be traded and such. Something along the lines of, "Jay's our QB, but anyone on the team can be traded if it helps the team." The second part goes without saying, so WHY say it?

Second, it's purely an assumption that Bowlen finally said, trade him. Just like so many people 'assume' that the final straw for firing Shanahan was that he refused to fire Slowik, when there is ZERO evidence of that effect. Sometimes we like to "fill in the dots" to make stories more interesting, or vilify or protect individuals.

Third, McDaniels had initial discussions about moving Cutler at the combine, so it isn't like this was a completely out of the blue phone call that he took and said, "no thanks". Even McDaniels has NEVER said that was all that happened.

I am not demonizing a rookie head coach for being interested in his former QB or listening to trade options. However, when it went to shit, it was HIS job to fix it, even if it meant eating some shit publicly, rather than bowing up his back and telling the world on ESPN that "anyone on the team can be traded if it makes us better." That is putting your ego ahead of the team.



It had to be made clear in everyone's mind that IF they felt they could improve the TEAM everyone and anyone was available for a trade.



I was shocked when I first heard it as LIKE everyone I thought jay would be untouchable,but after hearing him state it, I came a way with a new appreciation for the guy as he had balls. Jay needed to be put in his place as a PLAYER on a TEAM. that he was NOT bigger than the TEAM was.
But after 3-4 years of mikey blowing smoke up his skirt he did not believe he was untouchable.

With a little forethought, I would have said the same thing.

Tned
07-29-2010, 12:56 PM
It had to be made clear in everyone's mind that IF they felt they could improve the TEAM everyone and anyone was available for a trade.



I was shocked when I first heard it as LIKE everyone I thought jay would be untouchable,but after hearing him state it, I came a way with a new appreciation for the guy as he had balls. Jay needed to be put in his place as a PLAYER on a TEAM. that he was NOT bigger than the TEAM was.
But after 3-4 years of mikey blowing smoke up his skirt he did not believe he was untouchable.

With a little forethought, I would have said the same thing.

Doing it publicly helped nothing. It diminishes trade value. Makes it virtually impossible to reconcile. There is zero upside, unless your ONLY motivation is to make sure that you and the player don't reconcile and he is moved.

All the things he said go without saying, so therefore as a coach, you SHOULDN'T say them. If he wanted to send a message to the team, then tell Dawkins, Bailey, Graham and other team leaders and let them spread the message to the team, don't play the "anyone can be traded" card in the national media.

Tned
07-29-2010, 01:00 PM
It had to be made clear in everyone's mind that IF they felt they could improve the TEAM everyone and anyone was available for a trade.



I was shocked when I first heard it as LIKE everyone I thought jay would be untouchable,but after hearing him state it, I came a way with a new appreciation for the guy as he had balls. Jay needed to be put in his place as a PLAYER on a TEAM. that he was NOT bigger than the TEAM was.
But after 3-4 years of mikey blowing smoke up his skirt he did not believe he was untouchable.

With a little forethought, I would have said the same thing.

P.S. There are times when balls and enthusiasm are great attributes. The now infamous "we're trying to win a ******* game here" or ripping Orton on the sideline with "I don't want to hear anymore about what you are trying to do" or whatever it was he said. Going for it on fourth down multiple times in a two game stretch and failing each time, but determined to keep doing it until executed correctly.

However, when it comes to managing players, especially publicly, the egos and balls should be set aside, and brains and cunning need to be on the forefront. Big dollar star players don't take kindly to being ripped in the media, which is why McDaniels took so much public criticism over the handling of Cutler and Marshall.

Elevation inc
07-29-2010, 01:09 PM
Even though I didn't quote you, I will give a few thoughts.

First, when McD started to 'fix it', he made stupid comments to the press about how anyone can be traded and such. Something along the lines of, "Jay's our QB, but anyone on the team can be traded if it helps the team." The second part goes without saying, so WHY say it?

i already stated MCD was told to fix it and puffed his chest at cutler with the whole we can trade anyone bit...i already get that part...

Second, it's purely an assumption that Bowlen finally said, trade him. Just like so many people 'assume' that the final straw for firing Shanahan was that he refused to fire Slowik, when there is ZERO evidence of that effect. Sometimes we like to "fill in the dots" to make stories more interesting, or vilify or protect individuals.

No actually in bowlens letter to the fans he made it quite clear who traded jay and who's decision it was not to mention every media outlet stated the reason he was traded was becasue he didnt call bowlen....what now MCD has authority over bowlen? dont think so....

Third, McDaniels had initial discussions about moving Cutler at the combine, so it isn't like this was a completely out of the blue phone call that he took and said, "no thanks". Even McDaniels has NEVER said that was all that happened.

I never stated that....i said he took a call and fielded offers but nothing formal was ever brought to the table to be approved by bowlen(so in actuallity unless it gets put up for approval to the boss, MCd didnt really try and tarde cutler he just shopped around...its his right he is the new coach(just like shanny shoppd around the most dominant DL player in the pros in February when he was hired)....its naive to think all players arent up for discussion when a new regime comes in thats fact and reality...Why else would teh eagles tarde a proven Qb like Mcnabb to a division rival????..i bet you even champs name came up....the difference is the media hacks didnt take that and run with it.....

I am not demonizing a rookie head coach for being interested in his former QB or listening to trade options. However, when it went to shit, it was HIS job to fix it, even if it meant eating some shit publicly, rather than bowing up his back and telling the world on ESPN that "anyone on the team can be traded if it makes us better." That is putting your ego ahead of the team.


whats funny is he has every right to say that just as much as players have the right to talk shit in the media about there rough life contracts to play a game....is it mature no...but cutler certainly wasnt doing himself any favors either and any player can be traded...new regimes owe nothing to fans or the media or those players.....they dont.....period!!!! thats life.....it aint the best thing but it is reality...

dont knbow why you keep hashing i have some conspiracy plan, when i freely admit MCd not only has aego, but made mistakes.....*shrugs*


in red.......:beer:

Elevation inc
07-29-2010, 01:11 PM
P.S. There are times when balls and enthusiasm are great attributes. The now infamous "we're trying to win a ******* game here" or ripping Orton on the sideline with "I don't want to hear anymore about what you are trying to do" or whatever it was he said. Going for it on fourth down multiple times in a two game stretch and failing each time, but determined to keep doing it until executed correctly.

However, when it comes to managing players, especially publicly, the egos and balls should be set aside, and brains and cunning need to be on the forefront. Big dollar star players don't take kindly to being ripped in the media, which is why McDaniels took so much public criticism over the handling of Cutler and Marshall.

Big star players should also act like professionals and role models they are the ones getting the big bucks to play a game and be a team player.....it goes both ways....

Elevation inc
07-29-2010, 01:18 PM
Doing it publicly helped nothing. It diminishes trade value. Makes it virtually impossible to reconcile. There is zero upside, unless your ONLY motivation is to make sure that you and the player don't reconcile and he is moved.

All the things he said go without saying, so therefore as a coach, you SHOULDN'T say them. If he wanted to send a message to the team, then tell Dawkins, Bailey, Graham and other team leaders and let them spread the message to the team, don't play the "anyone can be traded" card in the national media.

actually in both instances doing it publicly didnt effect trade value at all......

with cutler we got 2 1st rd picks and a starting qb(most thought we would get 1st rd pick and a low key vet qb)....who actually didnt play that bad....he is limited yes, and i dont like him, but we all were not expecting a decent season from him lets be honest, especially in year 1 of a complex system.....he suprised me at times.


and with marshall i dont care what anyone says...he had to be traded (for himslef and for denver)...regardless of how MCD handles things marshall was being a petulant child about his contract...and he wasnt going to stop his antics.....its naive to think that....he was walking next year for free......most thought we would get 1 second rd pick....we got 2....


in both trades MCD finagled more out out of both trades than many people in the NFL thought possible...so really the trade value effect isnt reality.....


i mean for example donovan mcnabb a proven very legit pro bowl Qb was tarded for 1 second rd pick.....and he is a winner.....was jay?????


the value thing is way overplayed....we lost no value in either tarde, by MCD's attitude in the media......he was wrong yes, but he didnt efeect the value at all.....

Ravage!!!
07-29-2010, 01:24 PM
Why isn't Ellis getting credit for the trade value of Cutler instead of McD, if it was Ellis the one that was behind the trade to begin with??

I readily admit that both the player and the coach didn't handle things correctly. However, I expect MORE from an HC in maturity than I do a 26 yr old football player. I WANT the HC, of all people, to be the mature one in these situations. He should be the one with the level head.

I know McD learned from that debacle... from both the Cutler and the Marshall debacle. But I'm hoping it didn't happen at the detriment of the Broncos. Because ultimately, imo, thats the loser in the "mistakes" that were made. We can proclaim the learning curve all we want, but all that learning has cost Denver a lot of "had" talent in the meantime.

Elevation inc
07-29-2010, 01:32 PM
Why isn't Ellis getting credit for the trade value of Cutler instead of McD, if it was Ellis the one that was behind the trade to begin with??

I readily admit that both the player and the coach didn't handle things correctly. However, I expect MORE from an HC in maturity than I do a 26 yr old football player. I WANT the HC, of all people, to be the mature one in these situations. He should be the one with the level head.

I know McD learned from that debacle... from both the Cutler and the Marshall debacle. But I'm hoping it didn't happen at the detriment of the Broncos. Because ultimately, imo, thats the loser in the "mistakes" that were made. We can proclaim the learning curve all we want, but all that learning has cost Denver a lot of "had" talent in the meantime.



thats juts it...Ellis and bowlen told MCD find a deal after cutler punked bowlen...MCD did that....not Ellis or Bowlen...but But bowlen and Ellis were the ones who finally said find a deal to begin with...MCD didnt just do it on his own without permission...see where im going here......

MCd fielded offers and listened on numerous players we had....media took player X and ran with it, Cutler had to find out from some one other than MCD and was understandably pissed....HE copped a attitude and the coach copped one right back....Cutler said F this and MCD said anyone can be traded...Bowlen said work it out...MCD simmered....Cutler didnt....and blew bowlen off....Bowlen said screw it right abck and told MCD find a deal for cutler for real now....


thast all im saying i aint cooking up some garnd scheme here. I am just seeing that MCD doesnt make the cutler trade official untill Bowlen with Ellis in his ear..said so....



oh and TNED FYI.....Shanny's demise didnt stem from not firing slowik...it started with our 31-10 blowout to the raiders at home that year. That was when Ellis really started in on bowlens ear....The endorsement for slowik at seasons end by shanny was just the cherry on top....

Ravage!!!
07-29-2010, 01:40 PM
I don't think McD simmered. I firmly believe he escalated the problem, and did it intentionally. He didn't just "field offers"..he was looking to trade FOR Cassel.... thats actively looking to trade and not just sitting back listening.

As far as Bowlen giving the final say.. probably so. But it didn't seem to stop the attempts to trade FOR Cassel. That was McD. Whether or not he would then have to go and ask 'permission' to get the "said deal" done... is speculation.

Also, its speculation that Ellis is the one "in the ear" for the trade. But hey... I don't have any qualms with you believing that. I just think you believe McD has less say and Ellis has more than the reality. Thats what I believe. I think you give too much to Ellis, and take far too much away from McD. McD is pulling the strings on this, and he isn't a puppet that only does what Ellis gives him permission to do.

Elevation inc
07-29-2010, 01:41 PM
Why isn't Ellis getting credit for the trade value of Cutler instead of McD, if it was Ellis the one that was behind the trade to begin with??

I readily admit that both the player and the coach didn't handle things correctly. However, I expect MORE from an HC in maturity than I do a 26 yr old football player. I WANT the HC, of all people, to be the mature one in these situations. He should be the one with the level head.

I know McD learned from that debacle... from both the Cutler and the Marshall debacle. But I'm hoping it didn't happen at the detriment of the Broncos. Because ultimately, imo, thats the loser in the "mistakes" that were made. We can proclaim the learning curve all we want, but all that learning has cost Denver a lot of "had" talent in the meantime.


keep in mind though rav this is a 32 year old rookie coach from the belicheck tree, im certain some of the attitude from the patriots carried over especially after MCD stomped jay and denver 44-7 in NEw england that year prior...is it right? not at all.....but i understand why both parties copped there attitudes and i personally understand why they were at odds.....but not calling back the owner and continuing it after MCD reached out at bowlens request....that aint cool.....

we were the team that drafted you at 11 in 2006 when many said you would drop, Cutler got a sweet contract having never had a winning season in College.....im sorry but at least show the owner who gave you your money and you job some respect......that was just wrong...the mcd vs cutler thing...understandable....players dont always like there coaches....and vice versa.....

both were young and both made mistakes.....i belive both will be better for it. The marshall thing.....marshall acted like a little brat all year and had diminished his value to our franchise finacially every year....even if MCd and marshall didnt have issues....Marshall would have left for free, becasue bowlen was not extending him.......not after all the drama with trouble players in shann'ys regime....

Elevation inc
07-29-2010, 01:46 PM
I don't think McD simmered. I firmly believe he escalated the problem, and did it intentionally. He didn't just "field offers"..he was looking to trade FOR Cassel.... thats actively looking to trade and not just sitting back listening.

As far as Bowlen giving the final say.. probably so. But it didn't seem to stop the attempts to trade FOR Cassel. That was McD. Whether or not he would then have to go and ask 'permission' to get the "said deal" done... is speculation.

Also, its speculation that Ellis is the one "in the ear" for the trade. But hey... I don't have any qualms with you believing that. I just think you believe McD has less say and Ellis has more than the reality. Thats what I believe. I think you give too much to Ellis, and take far too much away from McD. McD is pulling the strings on this, and he isn't a puppet that only does what Ellis gives him permission to do.

he did simmer.....he tried to reach out to jay to talk after bowlen slapped his pepee and told him not cool.....in case you forget Cassel was well on his way to KC during the offical media blowups....so he wasnt continuing to actively shop jay....he listened and was contemplating prior to the culmination about a trade but nothing ever crossed bowlens desk for approval while cassel was still very much available....


and Nope i belive MCd now has 75% of the say......i belive in the marshall trade he had a 20% say, and in the cutler trade he had a 20% say:D

Ravage!!!
07-29-2010, 01:57 PM
he did simmer.....he tried to reach out to jay to talk after bowlen slapped his pepee and told him not cool.....in case you forget Cassel was well on his way to KC during the offical media blowups....so he wasnt continuing to actively shop jay....he listened and was contemplating prior to the culmination about a trade but nothing ever crossed bowlens desk for approval while cassel was still very much available....


and Nope i belive MCd now has 75% of the say......i belive in the marshall trade he had a 20% say, and in the cutler trade he had a 20% say:D

Exactly :lol:

The two biggest trades and you take away his say, give him credit for the amount of value, and give him credit for 'simmering' when he absolutely refused to interject a single word of confidence to ease the tensions! He intentionally REFUSED to simply say "Jay is and will be our QB".. purely because he was either too stubborn to say it, or just too foolhardy. Either way, he did NOT try to "Reach out" at all. That has to be a joke :lol:

Lets be honest here, Inc... your mind is clouded heavily :elefant::lol:

Ravage!!!
07-29-2010, 02:02 PM
I also don't see what his college record has to do with anything in regards to his contract. Its irrelevant. He was taken with the 11th overall pick. Its not like he was given more money than any 11th overall pick in history. He fell into slot.

Also, he's STILL the best QB out of that class, and played fantastically in college despite not having a "winning season" (which I find to absolutely hilarious that people even mention, as if the college records have a SINGLE thing to do with their NFL Career or their play). I can bring up a LOT of "winning NCAA QBs" that absolutely failed in the NFL. So please, don't tell me it makes a difference the other way around.

Tned
07-29-2010, 02:17 PM
whats funny is he has every right to say that just as much as players have the right to talk shit in the media about there rough life contracts to play a game....is it mature no...but cutler certainly wasnt doing himself any favors either and any player can be traded...new regimes owe nothing to fans or the media or those players.....they dont.....period!!!! thats life.....it aint the best thing but it is reality...

dont knbow why you keep hashing i have some conspiracy plan, when i freely admit MCd not only has aego, but made mistakes.....*shrugs*


in red.......:beer:

The red was almost impossible to read on the blue background. Sandy brown is much easier, at least on my monitors.

Skimming it, it isn't about a conspiracy, it's just about assuming everything that came out of the Broncos camp was 100% gospel, but everything that came out of the Cutler camp was lies. I just tend to be more in the "both camps made mistakes" in how they handled things.

As to Bowlen's letter/statements. First, based on what we saw, it likely would never have gotten to that point without McDaniels actions. Second, Bowlen, like any boss, could very easily have said something designed to take heat off of his rookie coach who he himself said made rookie mistakes and who was getting bashed in the press.


Big star players should also act like professionals and role models they are the ones getting the big bucks to play a game and be a team player.....it goes both ways....

I've never said that Cutler was faultless. It's just that most longer tenured coaches know that you have to mentor and manipulate these immature millionaires, not get into public pissing contests with them.


actually in both instances doing it publicly didnt effect trade value at all......

with cutler we got 2 1st rd picks and a starting qb(most thought we would get 1st rd pick and a low key vet qb)....who actually didnt play that bad....he is limited yes, and i dont like him, but we all were not expecting a decent season from him lets be honest, especially in year 1 of a complex system.....he suprised me at times.


and with marshall i dont care what anyone says...he had to be traded (for himslef and for denver)...regardless of how MCD handles things marshall was being a petulant child about his contract...and he wasnt going to stop his antics.....its naive to think that....he was walking next year for free......most thought we would get 1 second rd pick....we got 2....


in both trades MCD finagled more out out of both trades than many people in the NFL thought possible...so really the trade value effect isnt reality.....


i mean for example donovan mcnabb a proven very legit pro bowl Qb was tarded for 1 second rd pick.....and he is a winner.....was jay?????


the value thing is way overplayed....we lost no value in either tarde, by MCD's attitude in the media......he was wrong yes, but he didnt efeect the value at all.....

On the Cutler one, I agree that in the end it didn't hurt his trade value, because McDaniels was just seen as an out of control rookie coach, and PLENTY of other teams wanted Jay.

With Marshall, we will never know, but there is NO WAY it helped the trade value, and while it's possible it didn't change, it likely hurt it. When every other team knows that you have NO plans to reconcile with the player, then they can play hard ball with the negotiations. It happens in every sport, whether the coach/GM makes it clear they have to move the player or when the player demands a trade and says he won't play.

I'm just not in the camp of viewing Broncos history so that every action by a former player was horrible, and every action by the Broncos was either great, or within their rights or something along those lines.

Elevation inc
07-29-2010, 02:19 PM
Exactly :lol:

The two biggest trades and you take away his say, give him credit for the amount of value, and give him credit for 'simmering' when he absolutely refused to interject a single word of confidence to ease the tensions! He intentionally REFUSED to simply say "Jay is and will be our QB".. purely because he was either too stubborn to say it, or just too foolhardy. Either way, he did NOT try to "Reach out" at all. That has to be a joke :lol:

Lets be honest here, Inc... your mind is clouded heavily :elefant::lol:

no actually after the blow up he tried to message and call jay but jay didnt answer.....and didnt answer bowlen either.....im not making anything up here that did happen.....and of course i am takin gaway full responsibility for the actual trade....the decsion came to a pass becasue bowlen said so....

Elevation inc
07-29-2010, 02:21 PM
The red was almost impossible to read on the blue background. Sandy brown is much easier, at least on my monitors.

Skimming it, it isn't about a conspiracy, it's just about assuming everything that came out of the Broncos camp was 100% gospel, but everything that came out of the Cutler camp was lies. I just tend to be more in the "both camps made mistakes" in how they handled things.

As to Bowlen's letter/statements. First, based on what we saw, it likely would never have gotten to that point without McDaniels actions. Second, Bowlen, like any boss, could very easily have said something designed to take heat off of his rookie coach who he himself said made rookie mistakes and who was getting bashed in the press.

I've never said that Cutler was faultless. It's just that most longer tenured coaches know that you have to mentor and manipulate these immature millionaires, not get into public pissing contests with them.



On the Cutler one, I agree that in the end it didn't hurt his trade value, because McDaniels was just seen as an out of control rookie coach, and PLENTY of other teams wanted Jay.

With Marshall, we will never know, but there is NO WAY it helped the trade value, and while it's possible it didn't change, it likely hurt it. When every other team knows that you have NO plans to reconcile with the player, then they can play hard ball with the negotiations. It happens in every sport, whether the coach/GM makes it clear they have to move the player or when the player demands a trade and says he won't play.

I'm just not in the camp of viewing Broncos history so that every action by a former player was horrible, and every action by the Broncos was either great, or within their rights or something along those lines.

no with marshall we do know vincent jackson has to hold out for ten games just to get a contract....no one traded for him as a RFA........

and like i said MCD has responsibility and error in both trades...i have already stated that, but the final call wasnt his....

Elevation inc
07-29-2010, 02:23 PM
You all must think I am a koolaid lover the way you are talking please read below....i posted this earlier...


personnel decisions i dislike or disliked and blame MCD directly for

-Trading how We did for Smith
-Trading for Quinn the TE
-Drafting Blake Schuleter-
-Drafting Knowshon(i actually wanted to trade up for Raji or trade back period!!, and we should have)that being said i see good things in knowshon's future
-Getting Lamont jordan(horrible)
-Getting Paxton(although the dude can snap like a beast....LOL)
-Getting andra davis(i didnt like this at all....he did good for the first seven games but he sucked the last half...thats why he aint here)
-Starting peterson at RDE
-Playing Thomas at NT
-The value we got in the Sheff trade(horrible)
-getting Ty law of the street(thanks phonz...lol)
-The Lekevin smith deal
-Keeping Moss on the team
-Not keeping tatum Bell

Personnel decisions i belive went down becasue of Bowlen and Joe Ellis, gave the final say so.

-Trade cutler
-Trade Marshall

Good things MCD has done with Personnel in my view

-95% of our first year FA haul....
-100% of our second year FA haul
-The move to the 3-4
-Getting Studesville
-Getting Wayne nunnely
-Getting Wink
-Hiring nolan last year
-Moving Wink to DC this year
-getting good value in the marshall and cutler deals after bowlen and Ellis said get it done...
- Robert Ayers, Darcel Mcbath, David Bruton, Seth Olsen, Kenny Mckinnely
Our 2009 UDFA's
our 2010 UDFA's
-Tim tebow, DT, Decker, Beadles, Walton, Eric olsen, Cox, Kirlew, Thompson(this is by far my favorite draft since 2006)
-Changing to a power scheme
-moving royal to slot

see how this goes aint all just about MCD.....i just belive those 2 big trades were decided by bowlen and Ellis and they told Josh find a deal....josh played a part yes, but he didn't decide to make the final say to tarde cutler or marshall.....bowlen did, with Ellis right there in his ear....


hope that clears up my views on MCD a bit for ya

Elevation inc
07-29-2010, 02:26 PM
I also don't see what his college record has to do with anything in regards to his contract. Its irrelevant. He was taken with the 11th overall pick. Its not like he was given more money than any 11th overall pick in history. He fell into slot.

Also, he's STILL the best QB out of that class, and played fantastically in college despite not having a "winning season" (which I find to absolutely hilarious that people even mention, as if the college records have a SINGLE thing to do with their NFL Career or their play). I can bring up a LOT of "winning NCAA QBs" that absolutely failed in the NFL. So please, don't tell me it makes a difference the other way around.

RAV as a college football lover i know Jay was considered a late 1st rd pick....we took him at 11....i am simply stating his college record was a factor in where scouts had him pegged to go...we took him at 11and gave him a big payday more than anyone thought he would get....he owed bowlen a phone call period!!!!!!! that was my point....

Lonestar
07-29-2010, 02:42 PM
Doing it publicly helped nothing. It diminishes trade value. Makes it virtually impossible to reconcile. There is zero upside, unless your ONLY motivation is to make sure that you and the player don't reconcile and he is moved.

All the things he said go without saying, so therefore as a coach, you SHOULDN'T say them. If he wanted to send a message to the team, then tell Dawkins, Bailey, Graham and other team leaders and let them spread the message to the team, don't play the "anyone can be traded" card in the national media.

I guess I'm a little more hard core and In all eh jobs I was presented with I had to go in STRONG, to clean up the mess. It was easier than starting mild and trying to ratchet it up always easier to be a ******* and then mellow once the Employees knew they could not get way with crap like they had been.


P.S. There are times when balls and enthusiasm are great attributes. The now infamous "we're trying to win a ******* game here" or ripping Orton on the sideline with "I don't want to hear anymore about what you are trying to do" or whatever it was he said. Going for it on fourth down multiple times in a two game stretch and failing each time, but determined to keep doing it until executed correctly.

However, when it comes to managing players, especially publicly, the egos and balls should be set aside, and brains and cunning need to be on the forefront. Big dollar star players don't take kindly to being ripped in the media, which is why McDaniels took so much public criticism over the handling of Cutler and Marshall.


See above, we will have to agree to disagree.:salute:


Third, McDaniels had initial discussions about moving Cutler at the combine, so it isn't like this was a completely out of the blue phone call that he took and said, "no thanks". Even McDaniels has NEVER said that was all that happened.


Just where did you come up with this gem?



The red was almost impossible to read on the blue background. Sandy brown is much easier, at least on my monitors.

Skimming it, it isn't about a conspiracy, it's just about assuming everything that came out of the Broncos camp was 100% gospel, but everything that came out of the Cutler camp was lies. I just tend to be more in the "both camps made mistakes" in how they handled things.

As to Bowlen's letter/statements. First, based on what we saw, it likely would never have gotten to that point without McDaniels actions. Second, Bowlen, like any boss, could very easily have said something designed to take heat off of his rookie coach who he himself said made rookie mistakes and who was getting bashed in the press.



I've never said that Cutler was faultless. It's just that most longer tenured coaches know that you have to mentor and manipulate these immature millionaires, not get into public pissing contests with them.



On the Cutler one, I agree that in the end it didn't hurt his trade value, because McDaniels was just seen as an out of control rookie coach, and PLENTY of other teams wanted Jay.

With Marshall, we will never know, but there is NO WAY it helped the trade value, and while it's possible it didn't change, it likely hurt it. When every other team knows that you have NO plans to reconcile with the player, then they can play hard ball with the negotiations. It happens in every sport, whether the coach/GM makes it clear they have to move the player or when the player demands a trade and says he won't play.

I'm just not in the camp of viewing Broncos history so that every action by a former player was horrible, and every action by the Broncos was either great, or within their rights or something along those lines.


and some tenured HCs would have come in and set the punk straight, because they were the BOSS.

Jay thought he had more mojo with Pat than he did thought he could pull some crap and then git his dick caught in the door.

Guess it is a matter style and I think he handled it about a good as it was going to get.

Tned
07-29-2010, 02:49 PM
I guess I'm a little more hard core and In all eh jobs I was presented with I had to go in STRONG, to clean up the mess. It was easier than starting mild and trying to ratchet it up always easier to be a ******* and then mellow once the Employees knew they could not get way with crap like they had been.


Yes, but you didn't issue corporate press conferences or likely even memo's circulated around the company detailing the butt kicking. Plus, you weren't dealing with young, dumb, freshly minted millionaires.



Just where did you come up with this gem?

I've posted the quote from McDaniels multiple times.


and some tenured HCs would have come in and set the punk straight, because they were the BOSS.

Jay thought he had more mojo with Pat than he did thought he could pull some crap and then git his dick caught in the door.

Guess it is a matter style and I think he handled it about a good as it was going to get.

I have no problem with setting him straight. I have said all along that McDaniels and Bowlen should have told him, shut up and play, or sit out and lose a year of service. Your under contract, deal with it.

My issue was with McDaniels liking to wage war in the media.

Lonestar
07-29-2010, 02:51 PM
You all must think I am a koolaid lover the way you are talking please read below....i posted this earlier...


personnel decisions i dislike or disliked and blame MCD directly for

-Trading how We did for Smith
-Trading for Quinn the TE
-Drafting Blake Schuleter-
-Drafting Knowshon(i actually wanted to trade up for Raji or trade back period!!, and we should have)that being said i see good things in knowshon's future
-Getting Lamont jordan(horrible)
-Getting Paxton(although the dude can snap like a beast....LOL)
-Getting andra davis(i didnt like this at all....he did good for the first seven games but he sucked the last half...thats why he aint here)
-Starting peterson at RDE
-Playing Thomas at NT
-The value we got in the Sheff trade(horrible)
-getting Ty law of the street(thanks phonz...lol)
-The Lekevin smith deal
-Keeping Moss on the team
-Not keeping tatum Bell

Personnel decisions i belive went down becasue of Bowlen and Joe Ellis, gave the final say so.

-Trade cutler
-Trade Marshall

Good things MCD has done with Personnel in my view

-95% of our first year FA haul....
-100% of our second year FA haul
-The move to the 3-4
-Getting Studesville
-Getting Wayne nunnely
-Getting Wink
-Hiring nolan last year
-Moving Wink to DC this year
-getting good value in the marshall and cutler deals after bowlen and Ellis said get it done...
- Robert Ayers, Darcel Mcbath, David Bruton, Seth Olsen, Kenny Mckinnely
Our 2009 UDFA's
our 2010 UDFA's
-Tim tebow, DT, Decker, Beadles, Walton, Eric olsen, Cox, Kirlew, Thompson(this is by far my favorite draft since 2006)
-Changing to a power scheme
-moving royal to slot

see how this goes aint all just about MCD.....i just belive those 2 big trades were decided by bowlen and Ellis and they told Josh find a deal....josh played a part yes, but he didn't decide to make the final say to tarde cutler or marshall.....bowlen did, with Ellis right there in his ear....


hope that clears up my views on MCD a bit for ya


I'm not so sure that those defensive picks and choice should fall totally into joshes pocket since there is NO doubt in my mind that Nolan was given a pretty free hand in picking up FA's as well as driving the D. The reason I say that is I do not believe for a nano second that Josh EVER thought fields was going to get the job done at NT as a starter all year long and probably thought that Thomas would have been a better choice there. as he ALMOST has the size to play that spot.

I could be all wrong but that seems to be a better scenario than Josh making those picks for the D.

Lonestar
07-29-2010, 02:58 PM
Yes, but you didn't issue corporate press conferences or likely even memo's circulated around the company detailing the butt kicking. Plus, you weren't dealing with young, dumb, freshly minted millionaires.




I've posted the quote from McDaniels multiple times.



I have no problem with setting him straight. I have said all along that McDaniels and Bowlen should have told him, shut up and play, or sit out and lose a year of service. Your under contract, deal with it.

My issue was with McDaniels liking to wage war in the media.


I can't say I have ever seen the Gem.

as for jay I would have been hard core and sat his ass and allowed him to sit out and loss a year on his salary as well as tenure.

But then NONE of us know FOR SURE what his attitude was like about the new playbook. or if he was giving lip while on the premises before all of this started.

I suspect he was not the angel some think he is.

I also suspect that he hinted that he was promised along with marshall a new contract, by mikey this coming spring .

But that is just speculation on my part.

silkamilkamonico
07-29-2010, 03:05 PM
RAV as a college football lover i know Jay was considered a late 1st rd pick....we took him at 11....i am simply stating his college record was a factor in where scouts had him pegged to go...we took him at 11and gave him a big payday more than anyone thought he would get....he owed bowlen a phone call period!!!!!!! that was my point....

Jay Cutler was not a late first round prospect. He was a top 15 player, and many scouts had him as a top 10 talent on their big board with an even higher growth potential. His record wasn't a factor at all because he had enough individual credentials voted on by the coaches of the SEC to show the scouts that he was legit. He shot into the first round after the combine, and continued to climb when teams saw him workout at his pro days, and then went back and asked him to work out for them more.

Many scouts had him higher than Lienart when the draft rolled around, mainly because Lienart did not have a very high ceiling because of his noodle arm. He was a player that was stricly living off his accomplishments from a loaded team, and his value regressed from the year before, where he would have been the #1 overall pick.

Bosco
07-29-2010, 03:13 PM
It really isn't clear whether he was 'ordered' or Bowlen simply gave him some cover. It's been very convenient for people to say, "McDaniels didn't fire Cutler, Bowlen did."

There are a couple problems with that. First, the Broncos would never have reached the 'phone calls not returned' stage, if the failure to trade for Cassel hadn't occurred. Second, ignoring what Cutler and his agent claim that McDaniels told Cutler, once the failed trade did happen, McDaniel's public comments about anyone can be traded if it improves the team, and stuff like that, did nothing to heal the wounds.

So, we have no idea if McDaniels went to Bowlen and said Cutler needs to be moved, or if McDaniels was all for trying to rehabilitate him, but it was simply the disrespect to the owner that led to Bowlen saying, "I don't care if you want to work with Cutler, I want him off the team", as some people tend to imply to give McDaniels cover on the issue.

The fact is that one of the MAJOR responsibilities of a head coach is dealing with players, including high strung, prima donna type players. If every other team just traded every disgruntled player that asked for a trade (even if it was prompted by a team/coach's action), there would be a lot more big name players being traded around the league. Many, many big name players have publicly stated they wanted to be traded, but are never traded because they are under contract.

Anyway, unless you have some inside information you would like to share, I don't see how a realistic case can be made that Bowlen forced/ordered Cutler to be traded, as if McDaniels had no part in the decision.

Me and Jhildebrand just discussed this the other day. Yes, Bowlen did in fact state on camera that he made the choice to trade Cutler. Where the confusion comes from is that he let Josh handle how the trade went down. In essence, he said "I want that bitch off the team. You can decide where he goes and what we get for him, but I want him gone" and that directly corresponds with the time he started ignoring Pat's phone calls.


I find it cute when people try to say this. Its interesting, since McD said himself how excited he was to work with Cutler, and he was one of the major reasons he wanted to come to Denver. If these are the PUBLIC things stated, then why would anyone assume differently unless something was being said behind closed doors? When it wasn't even sure if Brady could/would come back, and the Patriots had Cassel for CHEAP and didn't have to trade him, why would any team be inquiring about trading for a young stud QB on one team, and then assuming the third would be taken? Doesn't hold water... at ALL. You don't hear to teams "trying to acquire" a young, pro-bowl, QB that still has 3-4 years left on his contract unless there are REASONS to call. Such as them knowing that McD was putting the word out. Why would THEY, the third party, initiate a three-way trade? Just reading those words makes me laugh. Its absurd to even suggest....unless you are just LOOKING to make reasons. I think we can all see that you have a tendency to do that. Teams only try three way trades when they already know 2 of the players are in play. Otherwise, you are trying to get two other teams to agree to a deal for players that you don't even know are available? :lol:



Never denied calls coming in. I'm saying they didn't come out of the blue, without already knowing there was interest in trading away Cutler. THey knew, and not from some random 'hey lets try' thought that popped into all their heads at the SAME TIME.

You think Bowlen would have gone apeshit?? Really? This is an owner that has never gone "apeshit" publically about anything. Where do you get off even suggesting such ridiculousness??? Maybe... just MAYBE you would have ONE team call for Cutler with the absurd idea of working out a three way trade for a 26 yr old, pro-bowl QB, that still has 3-4 years on his contract... but more than one? No. THats because McD let it be known he was looking to trade away... thats the ONLY reason you get calls.

So just "picking up the phone" is true because thats the physical actions someone does when the phone rings, however, what isn't mentioned is McD let them know he wanted to be called.

EVERYONE knows that McD tried to trade for Cassel. THats a given. Thats an understood. There is no way you can say this isn't fact. It was reported after it was found out by the press, and McD was trying to keep it quiet. If McD was only "answering the phone" and didn't go to the press to tell him he got calls (after already telling the press "no comment" when asked about it the day of)....it was leaked that other teams were simply calling about Cutler, when (as you said) inquiries come all the time? If thats the case, then how come the inquire about Cutler got such press?
So again, where is the smoking gun? Why has NO ONE come forward and said "Josh McDaniels was sending out trade feelers to us before this all went down"...? The ONLY people supporting Cutler/Cook's side are the people he was out giving interviews to and declaring he had no interest in hearing the Bronco's side literally hours after the trade talks supposedly happened. You would have thought with all this mass conspiracy, Cutler/Cook could have found one single independent third party to verify their claims. They haven't, as all those people are backing up the Broncos' version of events.

You talk about other teams not sending out inquiries without reason, and one thing literally just dawned on me. We've had solid reports of Cutler telling the Broncos he wanted to be traded after Bates wasn't kept, and that almost certainly filtered down into the NFL circles, making it all that more plausible for TB/DET to try pulling off a three-way trade.

If you're looking for a conspiracy, it's much more likely that the guy (Cutler) who lied multiple times during the fiasco and whose agent (Cook) has run similar shell games with two other quarterbacks should be the one under scrutiny.

Elevation inc
07-29-2010, 05:11 PM
my head hurts from all this reading...LOL

arapaho2
07-29-2010, 05:41 PM
no actually after the blow up he tried to message and call jay but jay didnt answer.....and didnt answer bowlen either.....im not making anything up here that did happen.....and of course i am takin gaway full responsibility for the actual trade....the decsion came to a pass becasue bowlen said so....


actually after the famous face to face meeting in which all was hoped to be resolved...josh took the stubbern control freak attitude

cutler left that meeting and imediatly asked to be traded. instead of reconciling in a private meeting josh choose to reinforce the fact ...he would still trade cutler if he could

you dont set up a face to face to settle it after you tell your probowl qb you never tried to trade him...which was a lie...tell the media jays our qb..were not tradeing him...then instead of assureing him it was all a mistake in the face to face....tell him i will still trade you if i can make the team better

so hows tradeing a 25 year old pro bowl qb makeing the team better...what message does that tell the player ..."i have no faith in you, i dont want you, i dont think i can win with you?"

if josh fully wanted cutler...that was the chance behind closed doors..no media...tell him i ****** up...dont know what i was thinking...and settle it
be the adult, take the blame, and move on...you dont make shit worse..josh did

Bosco
07-29-2010, 05:50 PM
actually after the famous face to face meeting in which all was hoped to be resolved...josh took the stubbern control freak attitude

cutler left that meeting and imediatly asked to be traded. instead of reconciling in a private meeting josh choose to reinforce the fact ...he would still trade cutler if he could

you dont set up a face to face to settle it after you tell your probowl qb you never tried to trade him...which was a lie...tell the media jays our qb..were not tradeing him...then instead of assureing him it was all a mistake in the face to face....tell him i will still trade you if i can make the team better

so hows tradeing a 25 year old pro bowl qb makeing the team better...what message does that tell the player ..."i have no faith in you, i dont want you, i dont think i can win with you?"

if josh fully wanted cutler...that was the chance behind closed doors..no media...tell him i ****** up...dont know what i was thinking...and settle it
be the adult, take the blame, and move on...you dont make shit worse..josh did

First off, let's remember that Cutler's version of that meeting was highly disputed by the Broncos. Given Cutler's willingness to lie, he has hardly earned the benefit of the doubt.

Secondly, I love how you're faulting McD for lying, then faulting him for telling the truth. Cutler wanted to be reassured he would never be traded and Josh refused to do so, telling him that no one was above being traded if it was best for the team. Was he supposed to kneel down and kiss Cutler's ass and do whatever it took to keep him here?

I think not.

arapaho2
07-29-2010, 06:02 PM
First off, let's remember that Cutler's version of that meeting was highly disputed by the Broncos. Given Cutler's willingness to lie, he has hardly earned the benefit of the doubt.

Secondly, I love how you're faulting McD for lying, then faulting him for telling the truth. Cutler wanted to be reassured he would never be traded and Josh refused to do so, telling him that no one was above being traded if it was best for the team. Was he supposed to kneel down and kiss Cutler's ass and do whatever it took to keep him here?

I think not.

im saying...you dont go to champ and say your the best cb we have....but if i can shake a couple drafts picks i'd trade you in a instant

no matter your dislike of cutler...the fact is...cutler didnt instigate the issue...mcd did...he tried to trade his pro bolw qb for a career backup...and admitted it when he stated he was late for the dance

you may expect a 25 yr old star to be butt hurt over it...however we shouldnt expect our head coach to act just as childish...

if he took the high road...just flat out told jay "hey it was spur of the moment..the calls came, im trying to build a team, your worth alot to many teams" but it didnt go that far...franchise qbs are rare and your the broncos...more than likely its over

he didnt...he got into a childish na, na,na naa naa fight with jay:throwrock: in the media and the problem snoballed

and lets not act like mcds versions of anything are bible truths

Tned
07-29-2010, 06:49 PM
I can't say I have ever seen the Gem.

I posted it a couple times. Once here: http://www.broncosforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=817874


McDaniels is just as adamant that he never even considered trading Cutler until Detroit and Tampa Bay approached him at the NFL combine in late February and asked about acquiring the quarterback. Then on Feb. 26, McDaniels says, one of the teams proposed a three-way trade in which the Broncos would give up Cutler for high draft choices they would then trade for Cassel. The next day McDaniels began exploring a trade for Cassel, but "we were late to the dance," he said; New England already had a deal with Kansas City. As evidence that the Broncos were not close to making the trade, McDaniels says he didn't discuss such a deal with owner Pat Bowlen, as he would have been obligated to do, and Bowlen concurs.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1153631/index.htm



as for jay I would have been hard core and sat his ass and allowed him to sit out and loss a year on his salary as well as tenure.

But then NONE of us know FOR SURE what his attitude was like about the new playbook. or if he was giving lip while on the premises before all of this started.

I suspect he was not the angel some think he is.

I also suspect that he hinted that he was promised along with marshall a new contract, by mikey this coming spring .

But that is just speculation on my part.

As you say, that is pure speculation on your part. Possible, but so are so many other possibilities.

As I have said since the day this stuff broke, I felt the Broncos should play hard ball with him. My issue is with the public "we can trade anyone/anytime" type statements, which shouldn't have happened.

I can fully understand McDaniels being enamored with the thought of getting his guy, which he admitted to. Was it smart? Should he have risked alienating Cutler, the starting QB? Who knows? If you're right and Cutler is the next Jeff George, then it is no loss. If most of the NFL experts that feel he is MUCH more than that, then it was a bad move on McDaniels part. Regardless, he could have handled the aftermath of this blundered trade attempt much better.

Tned
07-29-2010, 06:52 PM
Me and Jhildebrand just discussed this the other day. Yes, Bowlen did in fact state on camera that he made the choice to trade Cutler. Where the confusion comes from is that he let Josh handle how the trade went down. In essence, he said "I want that bitch off the team. You can decide where he goes and what we get for him, but I want him gone" and that directly corresponds with the time he started ignoring Pat's phone calls.



We tend to pick and choose which public statements are gospel, vs. which are just PR and such. In this case you are considering it gospel, when it is VERY likely that it is giving McDaniels cover or the realization that McDaniels failed attempt at trading for Cassel had caused an irreconcilable situation.

Tempus Fugit
07-29-2010, 06:54 PM
We tend to pick and choose which public statements are gospel, vs. which are just PR and such. In this case you are considering it gospel, when it is VERY likely that it is giving McDaniels cover or the realization that McDaniels failed attempt at trading for Cassel had caused an irreconcilable situation.

You're speculating against the weight of all the evidence and calling that VERY likely. We do, indeed, pick and choose.

Lonestar
07-29-2010, 07:00 PM
I posted it a couple times. Once here: http://www.broncosforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=817874






As you say, that is pure speculation on your part. Possible, but so are so many other possibilities.

As I have said since the day this stuff broke, I felt the Broncos should play hard ball with him. My issue is with the public "we can trade anyone/anytime" type statements, which shouldn't have happened.

I can fully understand McDaniels being enamored with the thought of getting his guy, which he admitted to. Was it smart? Should he have risked alienating Cutler, the starting QB? Who knows? If you're right and Cutler is the next Jeff George, then it is no loss. If most of the NFL experts that feel he is MUCH more than that, then it was a bad move on McDaniels part. Regardless, he could have handled the aftermath of this blundered trade attempt much better.


wow how the hell did I ever miss this


McDaniels is just as adamant that he never even considered trading Cutler until Detroit and Tampa Bay approached him at the NFL combine in late February and asked about acquiring the quarterback.

buried in the 7th paragraph of an quoited post.

must be going blind...;)

Tned
07-29-2010, 07:01 PM
You're speculating against the weight of all the evidence and calling that VERY likely. We do, indeed, pick and choose.

Virtually ALL comments about the events that took place last March/April are pure speculation based on a few pubic comments. What form each person's speculation takes is based PURELY on their preconceived notions on the subject.

Just like the crowd that insists McDaniels took a phone call with a trade offer for Cutler and simply listened and said no. The weight of the evidence is completely against that.

Just like the crowd that says Cutler whined his way out of town, when there is no evidence of that happening.

The list of "just likes" goes on and on.

If you want to point out my 'speculation', please be sure you apply that label to everyone that is doing it, which is EVERYONE that is discussing those events.

Tned
07-29-2010, 07:05 PM
wow how the hell did I ever miss this



buried in the 7th paragraph of an quoited post.

must be going blind...;)

Don't know, I poted it multiple times and it formed the basis of one of the reasons I felt it wasn't accurate to go with the "he just got a phone call and said no" version of what happened.

Tempus Fugit
07-29-2010, 07:21 PM
If you want to point out my 'speculation', please be sure you apply that label to everyone that is doing it, which is EVERYONE that is discussing those events.

You are the one who made the claim about "VERY likely" while jabbing at Jrwiz. Why on Earth would I feel a need to label everyone?

Tned
07-29-2010, 07:25 PM
You are the one who made the claim about "VERY likely" while jabbing at Jrwiz. Why on Earth would I feel a need to label everyone?

First of all, I was not taking a jab at Jr. This is one of the most civil discussions that he and I have had, and we have been agreeing on far more than disagreeing, despite you attempt to rile shit up -- again.

As to your "why on Earth" question, it has to do with being honest in your debate and discussion. If you want to accuse me of speculating, then be honest enough to admit that EVERYONE that discusses the events of last March and April are speculating, because we simply don't know what really happened behind the closed doors.

Honesty and integrity is nothing to be afraid of.

BroncoWave
07-29-2010, 07:26 PM
Oh well, this thread was nice for a little while at least!

Tempus Fugit
07-29-2010, 07:36 PM
First of all, I was not taking a jab at Jr. This is one of the most civil discussions that he and I have had, and we have been agreeing on far more than disagreeing, despite you attempt to rile shit up -- again.

As to your "why on Earth" question, it has to do with being honest in your debate and discussion. If you want to accuse me of speculating, then be honest enough to admit that EVERYONE that discusses the events of last March and April are speculating, because we simply don't know what really happened behind the closed doors.

Honesty and integrity is nothing to be afraid of.

1.) I have done my very best to avoid speculation about that situation. Go back and find my posts, and you'll find that to be the case.

2.) I was responding to your post, not to everyone's.

3.) I wasn't attempting to rile anything up. This was your statement:


In this case you are considering it gospel, when it is VERY likely that it is giving McDaniels cover or the realization that McDaniels failed attempt at trading for Cassel had caused an irreconcilable situation.

That's clearly a jab. My response was essentially noting that you were doing what you were claiming that Jrwiz was doing, with the only real difference being that you were doing it against the weight of the known evidence.

Now, rather than take this down a hostile avenue, I'll leave it at that.

Tned
07-29-2010, 07:41 PM
That's clearly a jab. My response was essentially noting that you were doing what you were claiming that Jrwiz was doing, with the only real difference being that you were doing it against the weight of the known evidence.


That was not clearly a jab, but instead a case of YOU speculating on what my intentions or motivations were. To bad your wild speculation was off topic.


Now, rather than take this down a hostile avenue, I'll leave it at that.

The best statemnt you have made in this thread. Great idea.

jhildebrand
07-29-2010, 10:08 PM
I expect MORE from an HC in maturity than I do a 26 yr old football player. I WANT the HC, of all people, to be the mature one in these situations. He should be the one with the level head.

Perfectly stated. That was always my issue.



I know McD learned from that debacle... from both the Cutler and the Marshall debacle. But I'm hoping it didn't happen at the detriment of the Broncos. Because ultimately, imo, thats the loser in the "mistakes" that were made. We can proclaim the learning curve all we want, but all that learning has cost Denver a lot of "had" talent in the meantime.

After the final Marshall incident late last year, I am not convinced he has learned his lesson. IMO, he still is a guy who ships anybody out who dares disagree with him. I wont proclaim he has learned from it until I see something more. The Belichick tree is supposed to be so strong in part due to Parcells influence. Yet none of the Belichick tree has shown the ability to hangle players and issues the way Parcells has.

jhildebrand
07-29-2010, 10:14 PM
wow how the hell did I ever miss this


Really? :confused:

I remember hearing a blip about the combine talk and was surprised it didn't get more traction immediately.

The mere fact that Josh even listened at the combine as opposed to shutting the conversation down showed teams they would listen. It was the wrong message to send.

Elevation inc
07-29-2010, 11:39 PM
i do have to say for the most part this has been one of the much more civil conversations, with regards to all these issues we have so many different opinions on...hats off to alot of you contributing in this thread......

Bosco
07-30-2010, 02:48 AM
im saying...you dont go to champ and say your the best cb we have....but if i can shake a couple drafts picks i'd trade you in a instant Why not? Neither one is mutually exclusive. The difference is that Champ is a professional and wouldn't throw a public bitch fit over it.


no matter your dislike of cutler...the fact is...cutler didnt instigate the issue...mcd did...he tried to trade his pro bolw qb for a career backup...and admitted it when he stated he was late for the dance

you may expect a 25 yr old star to be butt hurt over it...however we shouldnt expect our head coach to act just as childish...

if he took the high road...just flat out told jay "hey it was spur of the moment..the calls came, im trying to build a team, your worth alot to many teams" but it didnt go that far...franchise qbs are rare and your the broncos...more than likely its over

he didnt...he got into a childish na, na,na naa naa fight with jay:throwrock: in the media and the problem snoballed Again though, there was never any serious consideration of trading Cutler. No one who isn't involved with Cutler/Cook has been able to come out and provide evidence to the contrary.

And why do you keep forgetting that Cutler went on TV and told people he had no interest in hearing the Broncos side? He heard a rumor and didn't even care to ask his boss if it was true or not, instead taking to the airwaves to trash the team. Maybe if he had any interest in staying in Denver he would have done that, he would have known the truth and the issue is solved before it even becomes a problem.


and lets not act like mcds versions of anything are bible truths Just like anyone else, I objectively look at the relevant statements they make, looking for previous contradictions, plausibility, supporting evidence and claims...etc.

To date, Josh McDaniels has proven to me to be an honest man, possibly even to a fault. While that earns him the benefit of the doubt, it doesn't mean I blindly swallow his words.


We tend to pick and choose which public statements are gospel, vs. which are just PR and such. In this case you are considering it gospel, when it is VERY likely that it is giving McDaniels cover or the realization that McDaniels failed attempt at trading for Cassel had caused an irreconcilable situation. But then you'd have to ignore the fact that it wasn't until Jay drug Pat Bowlen into the situation and ignored him that Bowlen did a 180 and gave Josh the order to move him.

Tned
07-30-2010, 06:57 AM
But then you'd have to ignore the fact that it wasn't until Jay drug Pat Bowlen into the situation and ignored him that Bowlen did a 180 and gave Josh the order to move him.

Not really. For you to take that position, you have to assume that McDaniels and company did nothing wrong. That everything Cutler's camp said were outright lies. Ignore the fact that McDaniels went on TV and said Cutler his QB "now" and stuff like that.

I have NEVER said Cutler was an angel in this or acted maturely. Based on the 'tiny' amount of public information, it looks to me like both sides made mistakes and dug their heels into the point where it became irreconcilable. However, I'm not going to go the orange-colored glasses route of assuming it was all Cutler's fault.

I also don't take the position that it was all McDaniels' fault. However, the fact that we DON'T know all the details that led up to the alleged refusal to return phone calls, we really don't know what happened, or even if Bowlen really made the final decision, or just signed off on it and made the public statement to give his rookie head coach cover, just like any good boss would do.

Slick
07-30-2010, 07:24 AM
Can I unsubscribe from my own thread now?