View Full Version : Time to fire McDanials
masoner
10-10-2010, 03:07 PM
It is now time to fire this no talent ass clown. Offensive genius??? We are barely averaging 20 points a game, and that average was helped by a 31 point beating of a group of lesser ass clowns. I would like to see Pat Bolen's point of view on this guy, but I cannot get my head that far up my ass.
broken12
10-10-2010, 03:22 PM
alphonso smith is reason enough to get fired, he tearing it up in detroit, mcd didnt give him chance and our defense is too basic!!!!! no creativity whatsoeva!!!! in this day and age gotta be creative
I've seen better first posts.
scott.475
10-10-2010, 03:24 PM
I've seen better first posts.
Rarely have I seen worse.
broncobryce
10-10-2010, 03:25 PM
alphonso smith is reason enough to get fired, he tearing it up in detroit, mcd didnt give him chance and our defense is too basic!!!!! no creativity whatsoeva!!!! in this day and age gotta be creative
I'll let Bowlen know immediately.
DenBronx
10-10-2010, 03:50 PM
At least spell his name right.
Shazam!
10-10-2010, 03:53 PM
Worst first post ever.
If Denver was 0-5, maybe Id understand the sentiment better.
But the Broncos over the last decade have not matched up well with Ball.
McD will be on the Denver sidelines in 2011, barring a 4 win season. Get used to it.
broken12
10-10-2010, 03:55 PM
no fire mcd keep him around till ticket prices get cheaper and i move up the waiting list for season tickets then fire him!
Check it out. Dustin Hoffman, 'Rain Man,' look retarded, act retarded, not retarded. Counted toothpicks, cheated cards. Autistic, sho'. Not retarded. You know Tom Hanks, 'Forrest Gump.' Slow, yes. Retarded, maybe. Braces on his legs. But he charmed the pants off Nixon and won a ping-pong competition. That ain't retarded. Peter Sellers, "Being There." Infantile, yes. Retarded, no. You went full retard, man. Never go full retard. You don't buy that? Ask Sean Penn, 2001, "I Am Sam." Remember? Went full retard, went home empty handed...
underrated29
10-10-2010, 03:59 PM
Here we go again.........
Denver Native (Carol)
10-10-2010, 04:04 PM
It is now time to fire this no talent ass clown. Offensive genius??? We are barely averaging 20 points a game, and that average was helped by a 31 point beating of a group of lesser ass clowns. I would like to see Pat Bolen's point of view on this guy, but I cannot get my head that far up my ass.
Hey - where were you last week :confused:
Denver Native (Carol)
10-10-2010, 04:06 PM
no fire mcd keep him around till ticket prices get cheaper and i move up the waiting list for season tickets then fire him!
AND - where were you last week? :eek:
dogfish
10-10-2010, 04:20 PM
http://img832.imageshack.us/img832/1407/thisthreadsucks.jpg (http://img832.imageshack.us/i/thisthreadsucks.jpg/)
Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)
broncofaninfla
10-10-2010, 04:21 PM
Too soon to pull the plug on Mcd just yet but we clearly got out played and outcoached today. Baltimore showed how important it is to have balance on offense and Mcd continues to show he is lost in putting together a viable rushing threat. The fact that Hochstien is on this team much less starting is pathetic. Just two years ago we had arguably the best offensive in football. Now we have the worst in running the ball, everything about the running game sucks with Denver. The o line suck, the running backs suck, the scheme sucks and the play calling sucks. Mcd should study baltimore instead of his beloved patriots because they are doing it right
I understand the fustrations about Mcd, he was brought I to make Denver a better team and we're not. Maybe we are headed in the right direction, time will tell but right now Baltimore plays our scheme way better than we do.
Dzone
10-10-2010, 04:24 PM
McD is a lousy coach. It doesnt take a genius to see that.
Lonestar
10-10-2010, 04:29 PM
Here we go again.........
maybe the mods will merge it over on tne OTHER forum as I'm sure there are several of them there.e
Too soon to pull the plug on Mcd just yet but we clearly got out played and outcoached today. Baltimore showed how important it is to have balance on offense and Mcd continues to show he is lost in putting together a viable rushing threat. The fact that Hochstien is on this team much less starting is pathetic. Just two years ago we had arguably the best offensive in football. Now we have the worst in running the ball, everything about the running game sucks with Denver. The o line suck, the running backs suck, the scheme sucks and the play calling sucks. Mcd should study baltimore instead of his beloved patriots because they are doing it right
I understand the fustrations about Mcd, he was brought I to make Denver a better team and we're not. Maybe we are headed in the right direction, time will tell but right now Baltimore plays our scheme way better than we do.
Yep we did have a great between the 20's offense, but nor so sure it is any worse than today other than in the running game.
I'm not sure what the real cause is for the lack of running, but passing, WELL give me more.
broken12
10-10-2010, 04:52 PM
mcd gets lost in the game, for instance that third down completion he failed to challenge! calling the plays and coaching just too hard to do with the play clock and all! could have made it a closer game at that point, wouldnt have mattered though i think. we have no depth on the defensive line and no pass rush, reason we lose the close ones!
Denver Native (Carol)
10-10-2010, 04:57 PM
mcd gets lost in the game, for instance that third down completion he failed to challenge! calling the plays and coaching just too hard to do with the play clock and all! could have made it a closer game at that point, wouldnt have mattered though i think. we have no depth on the defensive line and no pass rush, reason we lose the close ones!
The coaches up in the box TELL the head coach whether to challenge or not - and WHY - they have a wide open view of the field
Northman
10-10-2010, 04:59 PM
Too soon to pull the plug on Mcd just yet but we clearly got out played and outcoached today. Baltimore showed how important it is to have balance on offense and Mcd continues to show he is lost in putting together a viable rushing threat. The fact that Hochstien is on this team much less starting is pathetic. Now we have the worst in running the ball, everything about the running game sucks with Denver. The o line suck, the running backs suck, the scheme sucks and the play calling sucks. Mcd should study baltimore instead of his beloved patriots because they are doing it right
I understand the fustrations about Mcd, he was brought I to make Denver a better team and we're not. Maybe we are headed in the right direction, time will tell but right now Baltimore plays our scheme way better than we do.
I agreed with most of what you had to say here as that is the crux of it. Firing McD now would serve no purpose and would only add confusion and more turmoil to the team. I think we can bet on at least 3 years with McD win, lose, or draw.
BroncoBJ
10-10-2010, 05:00 PM
lol, as usual. The idiots and their threads arrive. :salute:
gobroncsnv
10-10-2010, 05:01 PM
Yeah, let's become one of those franchises that changes head coaches every few years. We could become the Rocky Mountain Raiders... BRILLIANT!
Northman
10-10-2010, 05:11 PM
Yeah, let's become one of those franchises that changes head coaches every few years. We could become the Rocky Mountain Raiders... BRILLIANT!
Not sure it would be THAT bad but i get what your saying. I think Wade only got a couple of years before he was replaced by Shanahan. So not every replacement is a bad thing. But i do believe McD will have at least this year to finish before its even considered.
Shazam!
10-10-2010, 05:27 PM
I think Wade only got a couple of years before he was replaced by Shanahan.
Wade was only a placeholder for Shanahan. He was the first choice but he decided to go to SF first. Denver coach was his (then) dream job.
Wade only lasted one season because the team clearly went backwards and the D from bad to the worst in the NFL.
McD was brought n here to build a contender. No way he's not here next year and IMO probably 2012 too.
gobroncsnv
10-10-2010, 05:29 PM
My main point is that you get more traction when you leave the wheels on the ground. Teams that keep changing philosophies, identities, coaches, coordinators are usually doomed to failure. AZ, Detroit, and others were in the doldrums for about 30 years for those very reasons. Are there some successful first year coaches? Absolutely. Are they rare? Even more absolutely.
I don't know of too many that can "turn it around" inside of 3 years. Also don't know of too many who can go through so many injuries on oline or RB that have had much success, either. If Josh doesn't get at LEAST one more year after this, Bowlen is the one who needs to be replaced. If the "program" doesn't begin to get more traction next year, and the next, then I'm ok with the change of cast.
spikerman
10-10-2010, 05:29 PM
Wade was only a placeholder for Shanahan. He was the first choice but he decided to go to SF first. Denver coach was his (then) dream job.
Wade only lasted one season because the team clearly went backwards and the D from bad to the worst in the NFL.
McD was brought n here to build a contender. No way he's not here next year and IMO probably 2012 too.
Too many more efforts like today and I can't see him lasting through next year. Hopefully we really will eventually see this team improve, but it has a looong way to go.
Northman
10-10-2010, 05:42 PM
Too many more efforts like today and I can't see him lasting through next year. Hopefully we really will eventually see this team improve, but it has a looong way to go.
Yea, thats how i feel. I dont agree with Shaz about "building a contender" because that wasnt what Bowlen stated when Shanahan was fired. Bowlen doesnt want to wait 5 years to get back into playoff contention and the SB. Its already been over a decade since we were in the SB when we use to make an appearance at least once or twice a decade. Sure, #7 was a big reason for that but Bowlen is no different than the fans when it comes to not wanting to becoming stale and rundown like the Browns or Lions. And as you said Spike, if we go on from here getting blown out and only win 4-5 games thats a step back and not progress. Will be interesting to see how the team responds as last year it was not very good.
spikerman
10-10-2010, 05:43 PM
My main point is that you get more traction when you leave the wheels on the ground. Teams that keep changing philosophies, identities, coaches, coordinators are usually doomed to failure. AZ, Detroit, and others were in the doldrums for about 30 years for those very reasons. Are there some successful first year coaches? Absolutely. Are they rare? Even more absolutely.
I don't know of too many that can "turn it around" inside of 3 years. Also don't know of too many who can go through so many injuries on oline or RB that have had much success, either. If Josh doesn't get at LEAST one more year after this, Bowlen is the one who needs to be replaced. If the "program" doesn't begin to get more traction next year, and the next, then I'm ok with the change of cast. I think it's easier than it used to be to turn a team around. For example,
Mike Smith - Atlanta Falcons - took over a team that was 4-12 the previous year
2008 - 11-5
2009 - 9-7
2010 - 4-1 so far
Sean Payton - NO Saints - took over a team that was 3-13 the previous year
2006 - 10-6
2007 - 7-9
2008 - 8-8
2009 - 13-3
2010 - Either 4-1 or 3-2 depending how the game comes out today
Tony Sporano - takes over a 1-15 team and has them in the playoffs the next year. Granted they had a little bit of a falloff the next year, but the point is that teams can be turned around very quickly nowdays.
rcsodak
10-10-2010, 05:46 PM
It is now time to fire this no talent ass clown. Offensive genius??? We are barely averaging 20 points a game, and that average was helped by a 31 point beating of a group of lesser ass clowns. I would like to see Pat Bolen's point of view on this guy, but I cannot get my head that far up my ass.
Isn't there a rule about having multiple sign-ons? :coffee:
I think it's easier than it used to be to turn a season around. For example,
Mike Smith - Atlanta Falcons - took over a team that was 4-12 the previous year
2008 - 11-5
2009 - 9-7
2010 - 4-1 so far
Sean Payton - NO Saints - took over a team that was 3-13 the previous year
2006 - 10-6
2007 - 7-9
2008 - 8-8
2009 - 13-3
2010 - Either 4-1 or 3-2 depending how the game comes out today
Tony Sporano - takes over a 1-15 team and has them in the playoffs the next year. Granted they had a little bit of a falloff the next year, but the point is that teams can be turned around very quickly nowdays.
I think the turn around depends on the foundation the coach is inheriting and whether or not the coach is changing schemes.
I am not sold on McD. But Denver always gets their butts handed to them by Baltimore. It is still too early to make a call on him. McD will start taking heat towards the end of this season and especially into next season.
spikerman
10-10-2010, 05:51 PM
I think the turn around depends on the foundation the coach is inheriting and whether or not the coach is changing schemes.
I am not sold on McD. But Denver always gets their butts handed to them by Baltimore. It is still too early to make a call on him. McD will start taking heat towards the end of this season and especially into next season. I agree, but I remember very distinctly that all of the NFL "experts" said that Denver was the most attractive of the NFL job openings because of all of the talent already on the team. Now, much of that talent is no longer in Denver for a variety of reasons. If winning immediately really was the goal, I'm not sure more of an effort shouldn't have been made to keep it together. Like the signs in the stores say - "you break it, you bought it."
rcsodak
10-10-2010, 05:52 PM
I think it's easier than it used to be to turn a team around. For example,
Mike Smith - Atlanta Falcons - took over a team that was 4-12 the previous year
2008 - 11-5
2009 - 9-7
2010 - 4-1 so far
Sean Payton - NO Saints - took over a team that was 3-13 the previous year
2006 - 10-6
2007 - 7-9
2008 - 8-8
2009 - 13-3
2010 - Either 4-1 or 3-2 depending how the game comes out today
Tony Sporano - takes over a 1-15 team and has them in the playoffs the next year. Granted they had a little bit of a falloff the next year, but the point is that teams can be turned around very quickly nowdays.
How many HC's at Oak?
How many HC's at DET?
How many HC's at Wash?
How many HC's at ST Louis?
How many HC's at Sea?
How many HC's at KC?
How many HC's at TB?
How many HC's at CLE?
How many HC's at SF?
:coffee:
spikerman
10-10-2010, 05:57 PM
How many HC's at Oak?
How many HC's at DET?
How many HC's at Wash?
How many HC's at ST Louis?
How many HC's at Sea?
How many HC's at KC?
How many HC's at TB?
How many HC's at CLE?
How many HC's at SF?
:coffee:
So you want to compare the ownership in those towns with Pat Bowlen? The point is that if you know what you're doing, it can be turned around quickly. Also, don't look now, but TB, Washington, and KC are pretty good.
NightTrainLayne
10-10-2010, 07:08 PM
If you would have told me three weeks ago that we would go 1-1 in consecutive road games at Tennessee and Baltimore it would have generated a big smile on my face.
We just went 1-1 on the road in consecutive weeks agains two of the premier teams in the league. . .and someone wants to fire the guy. smh.
Italianmobstr7
10-10-2010, 07:10 PM
McD is a lousy coach. It doesnt take a genius to see that.
You have a lousy opinion. It doesn't take much to see that.
Who is the "McDanials" that the OP speaks of? Equipment manager? Fire him. McDaniels on the other hand should stay. We had a bad game, it happens. Bad coaching, bad play, bad mistakes. It happens. Next up: Jets
Bosco
10-10-2010, 07:15 PM
lol, as usual. The idiots and their threads arrive. :salute:
Yep.
broncobryce
10-10-2010, 07:15 PM
feri macdnaialas
Watchthemiddle
10-10-2010, 07:19 PM
If you would have told me three weeks ago that we would go 1-1 in consecutive road games at Tennessee and Baltimore it would have generated a big smile on my face.
We just went 1-1 on the road in consecutive weeks agains two of the premier teams in the league. . .and someone wants to fire the guy. smh.
Add east coast early games to that and go 1-1
dogfish
10-10-2010, 07:25 PM
http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/858/threadstillsucks.jpg (http://img29.imageshack.us/i/threadstillsucks.jpg/)
Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)
gobroncsnv
10-10-2010, 07:31 PM
I agree, but I remember very distinctly that all of the NFL "experts" said that Denver was the most attractive of the NFL job openings because of all of the talent already on the team. Now, much of that talent is no longer in Denver for a variety of reasons. If winning immediately really was the goal, I'm not sure more of an effort shouldn't have been made to keep it together. Like the signs in the stores say - "you break it, you bought it."
Not so sure what was attractive about our defense...
I think the main thing is Bowlen's track record that made Denver attractive. He keeps coaches around, (other than Phillips...) gives them the rope they need, and the TIME they need to turn things around. Most coaches like as much autonomy, or at least, as much freedom to work as they can get. Detroit, Oakland, Dallas, all had upper management issues that make for a toxic head coach environment. Many speculate that Shanny turned down Dallas for a second shot at replacing Phillips because of Jones.
If you want to see long-term and fairly consistent team success, look no further than Pittsburgh. There is a lot about their model that we could follow. Long tenured coaches, build the team via the draft, and keep a hard nose philosophy about defense, especially the front 7 - they have been like that since the days of Chuck Noll... Do those things, and a lot of the other stuff takes care of itself, and multiple rings follow.
BigDaddyBronco
10-10-2010, 08:12 PM
Nice first post. Have you been working with paint thinner in the garage or something?
Are you a fan of the Raiders or the Bills or something? Those are the types of teams that fire their head coach in the middle of the season. How do they look year in and year out?
Watch some more football before you post again.
spikerman
10-10-2010, 08:24 PM
Not so sure what was attractive about our defense...
I think the main thing is Bowlen's track record that made Denver attractive. He keeps coaches around, (other than Phillips...) gives them the rope they need, and the TIME they need to turn things around. Most coaches like as much autonomy, or at least, as much freedom to work as they can get. Detroit, Oakland, Dallas, all had upper management issues that make for a toxic head coach environment. Many speculate that Shanny turned down Dallas for a second shot at replacing Phillips because of Jones.
If you want to see long-term and fairly consistent team success, look no further than Pittsburgh. There is a lot about their model that we could follow. Long tenured coaches, build the team via the draft, and keep a hard nose philosophy about defense, especially the front 7 - they have been like that since the days of Chuck Noll... Do those things, and a lot of the other stuff takes care of itself, and multiple rings follow. Admittedly, the defense was light on talent which is why a lot of people hoped that would be the unit that was overhauled. McDaniels chose not to go that route. The offense; however, in a lot of the "experts" minds was primed and ready. Yes, it had red zone problems, but there was a lot of talent there. I do like what they've done in Pittsburgh and you could say that consistency with the head coaching position is one reason. One other way they've been consistent, though, is success. The Rooneys are patient, but their coaches have typically had success year in and year out which is not something the Broncos can claim. Having a coach in place for a long time doesn't guarantee championships - see Fisher, Jeff (although I am a fan of his).
I also want to go on record to say that I don't think McDaniels should be fired this year, but I think if there isn't definite improvement by the end of this year, he needs to be reevaluated. I just don't believe a three year term should be automatic.
Admittedly, the defense was light on talent which is why a lot of people hoped that would be the unit that was overhauled. McDaniels chose not to go that route. The offense; however, in a lot of the "experts" minds was primed and ready. Yes, it had red zone problems, but there was a lot of talent there. I do like what they've done in Pittsburgh and you could say that consistency with the head coaching position is one reason. One other way they've been consistent, though, is success. The Rooneys are patient, but their coaches have typically had success year in and year out which is not something the Broncos can claim. Having a coach in place for a long time doesn't guarantee championships - see Fisher, Jeff (although I am a fan of his).
I also want to go on record to say that I don't think McDaniels should be fired this year, but I think if there isn't definite improvement by the end of this year, he needs to be reevaluated. I just don't believe a three year term should be automatic.
I've never run the stats, but my 'gut' is that most head coaches, especially rookies, get 2-3 years, depending on how bad the first two years are and what the expectations of the team were that they took over (taking over a 1-15 team tends to result in more rope than taking over an 8-8 team).
rationalfan
10-10-2010, 08:32 PM
times like this i wish pat bowlen would call up his "stupid" fans and "fire" them.
times like this i wish pat bowlen would call up his "stupid" fans and "fire" them.
Nahhh, we don't want to see you go root for another team... ;)
spikerman
10-10-2010, 08:38 PM
I've never run the stats, but my 'gut' is that most head coaches, especially rookies, get 2-3 years, depending on how bad the first two years are and what the expectations of the team were that they took over (taking over a 1-15 team tends to result in more rope than taking over an 8-8 team).
That's probably accurate. That's why I think he should be reevaluted at the end of this this year to see if he deserves that 3rd year. Maybe by the end of the year the team will be on the upswing. I'm definitely not sold on McDaniels, but I'm still taking a wait and see approach. I would much rather have to eat crow and have my favorite team be successful than the other way around.
jhildebrand
10-10-2010, 09:02 PM
Fire McDaniels? :confused:
Why? The guy just had his 21st game! Is there stuff not to like? Sure. However, there is a lot to like as well. Orton has progressed immensely and I can only wonder what a 3rd year will do for the guy. The offense, by most accounts, did not need to be revamped. He did it and for the most parts has done well so far.
Again, be critical of the guy if you wish but at least be somewhat rational.
For instance, criticising him for moving Alph is silly to me. We all saw Alph wasn't going to do anything here. The change of scenery paid off for him. Great for Alph. It happens. Criticise McD for not getting more for the guy if you want but I would rather him be gone than have another Jarvis Moss on this roster.
Let's see how the rest of this season plays out prior to calling for jobs.
Bosco
10-10-2010, 09:13 PM
Fire McDaniels? :confused:
Why? The guy just had his 21st game! Is there stuff not to like? Sure. However, there is a lot to like as well. Orton has progressed immensely and I can only wonder what a 3rd year will do for the guy. The offense, by most accounts, did not need to be revamped. He did it and for the most parts has done well so far.
Again, be critical of the guy if you wish but at least be somewhat rational.
For instance, criticising him for moving Alph is silly to me. We all saw Alph wasn't going to do anything here. The change of scenery paid off for him. Great for Alph. It happens. Criticise McD for not getting more for the guy if you want but I would rather him be gone than have another Jarvis Moss on this roster.
Let's see how the rest of this season plays out prior to calling for jobs.
Good post.
spikerman
10-10-2010, 09:15 PM
Fire McDaniels? :confused:
Why? The guy just had his 21st game! Is there stuff not to like? Sure. However, there is a lot to like as well. Orton has progressed immensely and I can only wonder what a 3rd year will do for the guy. The offense, by most accounts, did not need to be revamped. He did it and for the most parts has done well so far.
Again, be critical of the guy if you wish but at least be somewhat rational.
For instance, criticising him for moving Alph is silly to me. We all saw Alph wasn't going to do anything here. The change of scenery paid off for him. Great for Alph. It happens. Criticise McD for not getting more for the guy if you want but I would rather him be gone than have another Jarvis Moss on this roster.
Let's see how the rest of this season plays out prior to calling for jobs. On the bright side, Jarvis Moss actually had his name called today!!!!!!!! Granted, it was for being offsides, but hey, you gotta take what you can get.
On the bright side, Jarvis Moss actually had his name called today!!!!!!!! Granted, it was for being offsides, but hey, you gotta take what you can get.
And how the hell can you not look over at the ball and realize that you are past it? :confused:
spikerman
10-10-2010, 09:23 PM
And how the hell can you not look over at the ball and realize that you are past it? :confused:
I know.. I was yelling at the tv for Moss to get back! That dude just doesn't listen to me.
I know.. I was yelling at the tv for Moss to get back! That dude just doesn't listen to me.
I think it was last game that I was yelling at the tv....my 4 year old daughter looks over at me and says, "they can't hear you, dada." :laugh:
Lonestar
10-10-2010, 09:27 PM
The coaches up in the box TELL the head coach whether to challenge or not - and WHY - they have a wide open view of the field
Called this one right. While it is joshes ultimate call. If they did not tell him after seeing the replay then they are at fault. Could have been that they/he did not want to chance it with BAL refs either.
The way the game was being called I doubt I would have.
Way to easy to say it was inconclusive. .
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums
spikerman
10-10-2010, 09:29 PM
I think it was last game that I was yelling at the tv....my 4 year old daughter looks over at me and says, "they can't hear you, dada." :laugh: Oh man.... I need to remember you daughter's advice next time. I just had a cat sitting next to me and he wasn't saying anything.
Lonestar
10-10-2010, 10:08 PM
I agree, but I remember very distinctly that all of the NFL "experts" said that Denver was the most attractive of the NFL job openings because of all of the talent already on the team. Now, much of that talent is no longer in Denver for a variety of reasons. If winning immediately really was the goal, I'm not sure more of an effort shouldn't have been made to keep it together. Like the signs in the stores say - "you break it, you bought it."
and most of the experts are arm chair QB's also. or they would have a job on the sidelines. MAke sense.
Yes we had a lot of talent that were not exactly in the mind to play a controlled passing offense, they had no fore sight and decided they did not want to play ball with Josh in in said offense.
I will repeat this as many times as I have to.
Pat wanted Josh to come in and make this team based on the NE model. H knew that (in spite of the winning now comments) it was not going to happen over night.
When they drafted Tebow he also knew that he was a LONG term solution that would take at least two years to come on line. PAT Wanted NE west or he would have hired Sparano or one of the other candidates they talked to. Dennison would have been Mike lite offensively, so all the wonder kids would still be here. God only knows what the locker room would be like. Also who knows what would have happened on Defense.
Sparano would have most likely left the O alone and elevated Dennison to run it taking charge of the D.
So in both of those situations our defense may or may not have improved, but the offense would be great between the 20's with NO hope of it getting better down the road, in the red zone. Still be doing the ZBS with 285 pound online.
Pat knows it will take time.
Right now if I was him I'd be asking who the OL coaches are and if they could find their ass with two hands. :laugh::laugh::laugh:
SO unless he craps himself on the sideline, he is here for the long haul, with Pat knowing that it will take more time than he originally thought.
gobroncsnv
10-10-2010, 10:52 PM
Really, was anybody expecting the instant success thing? We still have alot to do for our D, and obviously, need to figure out how to keep RB's out of intensive care units. And Orton has figured out and gotten comfortable with the offense much more quickly than the oline figuring out how to power block. And our offense wasn't exactly a world-beater the previous few years.
And I'm still a big fan of Shanny (coach)... Kinda fun watching him turning the NFC East upside down. But the same ole same ole wasn't going to get us there. It was time...
and most of the experts are arm chair QB's also. or they would have a job on the sidelines. MAke sense.
Yes we had a lot of talent that were not exactly in the mind to play a controlled passing offense, they had no fore sight and decided they did not want to play ball with Josh in in said offense.
I will repeat this as many times as I have to.
Pat wanted Josh to come in and make this team based on the NE model. H knew that (in spite of the winning now comments) it was not going to happen over night.
When they drafted Tebow he also knew that he was a LONG term solution that would take at least two years to come on line. PAT Wanted NE west or he would have hired Sparano or one of the other candidates they talked to. Dennison would have been Mike lite offensively, so all the wonder kids would still be here. God only knows what the locker room would be like. Also who knows what would have happened on Defense.
Sparano would have most likely left the O alone and elevated Dennison to run it taking charge of the D.
So in both of those situations our defense may or may not have improved, but the offense would be great between the 20's with NO hope of it getting better down the road, in the red zone. Still be doing the ZBS with 285 pound online.
Pat knows it will take time.
Right now if I was him I'd be asking who the OL coaches are and if they could find their ass with two hands. :laugh::laugh::laugh:
SO unless he craps himself on the sideline, he is here for the long haul, with Pat knowing that it will take more time than he originally thought.
Since I know you don't live in Denver, do Jake and Pat video conference you in to their meetings? Just curious, because you know the 'exact facts', which none of the press or anyone outside of the Broncos organization know.
sneakers
10-11-2010, 12:58 AM
http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/uploads/Thread-Gay-1950s.jpg
sneakers
10-11-2010, 01:03 AM
It would be nice for once, if when a I'monlypostinghereafterthebroncoslose trolls show up and start creating threads such as this one, it would have 0 replies....we should try it next month after the broncos lose their next game.
TimTebow15MVP
10-11-2010, 01:25 AM
the only game of the year that wee basically never had a chance in and you wanna fire him? this is the first non competitive game ive seen out of the broncos so im not going to jump off the bridge. i know we have an competitive group. the broncos will win the next 3 games and then sail into the bye week.
Magnificent Seven
10-11-2010, 01:27 AM
Pat Bowlen is eyeing on Bill Cowher? Coach Cowher knows how to beat Colts and Ravens.
TimTebow15MVP
10-11-2010, 02:11 AM
so did the patriots.......
silkamilkamonico
10-11-2010, 02:15 AM
Bill Cowher is Brian Billick v 2.0. Had a plethora of underachieving years, has 1 year where it all comes together, retires, Pittsburgh hires Tomlin who's a better coach, and doesn't miss a beat.
I've seen better first posts.
you have to wonder who this guy really is. Ok, which one wasnt man enough to put your regular handle to the thread? Weak sauce big time.
Thnikkaman
10-11-2010, 09:14 AM
I'm glad these people have no influence on the team. We would be the Panthers or the 49ers right now.
jhildebrand
10-11-2010, 11:01 AM
On the bright side, Jarvis Moss actually had his name called today!!!!!!!! Granted, it was for being offsides, but hey, you gotta take what you can get.
Moss just doesn't belong on D. I know that sounds silly. The guy is tall, lanky, and freakishly athletic. He just doesn't have an NFL defense type body.
Seeing how this offense relies heavily on a blocking TE, I would try him there for shits and giggles. See if you can't get SOMETHING out of the guy.
rationalfan
10-11-2010, 11:21 AM
Nahhh, we don't want to see you go root for another team... ;)
i made that one too easy for you. i should probably get an assist on that zinger.
rationalfan
10-11-2010, 11:24 AM
and most of the experts are arm chair QB's also. or they would have a job on the sidelines. MAke sense.
Yes we had a lot of talent that were not exactly in the mind to play a controlled passing offense, they had no fore sight and decided they did not want to play ball with Josh in in said offense.
I will repeat this as many times as I have to.
Pat wanted Josh to come in and make this team based on the NE model. H knew that (in spite of the winning now comments) it was not going to happen over night.
When they drafted Tebow he also knew that he was a LONG term solution that would take at least two years to come on line. PAT Wanted NE west or he would have hired Sparano or one of the other candidates they talked to. Dennison would have been Mike lite offensively, so all the wonder kids would still be here. God only knows what the locker room would be like. Also who knows what would have happened on Defense.
Sparano would have most likely left the O alone and elevated Dennison to run it taking charge of the D.
So in both of those situations our defense may or may not have improved, but the offense would be great between the 20's with NO hope of it getting better down the road, in the red zone. Still be doing the ZBS with 285 pound online.
Pat knows it will take time.
Right now if I was him I'd be asking who the OL coaches are and if they could find their ass with two hands. :laugh::laugh::laugh:
SO unless he craps himself on the sideline, he is here for the long haul, with Pat knowing that it will take more time than he originally thought.
i'm too busy to dig into those things called "facts," but i think you're confused. if my memory is correct, sparano was coaching the dolphins during shanahan's final season. he wasn't a candidate for the broncos' opening. are you thinking of spagnuolo?
i made that one too easy for you. i should probably get an assist on that zinger.
:lol: Yea, that was a soft ball.... :D
So in both of those situations our defense may or may not have improved, but the offense would be great between the 20's with NO hope of it getting better down the road, in the red zone.
I don't get it. Why was there no hope? The majority of that offense was rookie to third year players. You are really claiming they had no upside and couldn't improve? I would say that is pretty ridiculous.
Do you also claim that this much more experienced offense has a better shot of getting good? You do know that they are playing the exact same way, only worse, right?
Lonestar
10-11-2010, 04:01 PM
I don't get it. Why was there no hope? The majority of that offense was rookie to third year players. You are really claiming they had no upside and couldn't improve? I would say that is pretty ridiculous.
Do you also claim that this much more experienced offense has a better shot of getting good? You do know that they are playing the exact same way, only worse, right?
my contention was that mike over a 10 year period or so sucked in the red zone with only one or two RB ever getting a TD inside the 5. MA and Mike Bell.
there was not a year that Elam did not lead the team in scoring or was out of the top 5 of kickers because we could not finish it inside the red zone.
every year his goal for the next year was improving the red zone woes, in hid EOY presser.
SO did I have any hopes of it getting better with our story assed ZBS light weights no had not faith they could improve RED zone scoring and certainly nothing inside the 5 or maybe even the 10.
Do you believe they would ever improve consistently?
arapaho2
10-11-2010, 04:42 PM
my contention was that mike over a 10 year period or so sucked in the red zone with only one or two RB ever getting a TD inside the 5. MA and Mike Bell.
there was not a year that Elam did not lead the team in scoring or was out of the top 5 of kickers because we could not finish it inside the red zone.
every year his goal for the next year was improving the red zone woes, in hid EOY presser.
SO did I have any hopes of it getting better with our story assed ZBS light weights no had not faith they could improve RED zone scoring and certainly nothing inside the 5 or maybe even the 10.
Do you believe they would ever improve consistently?
:lol::lol::lol: funny...please give us another fact...i could use more humour in my day
rouban drougns ring a Bell? 6 rz Tds in 04
07... 7 rz tds from henry and a couple other
08...hillis 5..pittman 4..young 1..thats ten redzone tds
and yet you still have the nerve to chastize shannies rz offense when mcds has been drastically worse?? now thats rich:lol:
:lol::lol::lol: funny...please give us another fact...i could use more humour in my day
rouban drougns ring a Bell? 6 rz Tds in 04
07... 7 rz tds from henry and a couple other
08...hillis 5..pittman 4..young 1..thats ten redzone tds
and yet you still have the nerve to chastize shannies rz offense when mcds has been drastically worse?? now thats rich:lol:
Never let the facts get in the way of some good 'ole fashion hatred....
TXBRONC
10-11-2010, 05:44 PM
Bill Cowher is Brian Billick v 2.0. Had a plethora of underachieving years, has 1 year where it all comes together, retires, Pittsburgh hires Tomlin who's a better coach, and doesn't miss a beat.
While I don't know everything there is to know about Cowher but what I do know is that Cowher had a coaching career that is lightyears away from underachieving.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums
Thnikkaman
10-11-2010, 07:53 PM
While I don't know everything there is to know about Cowher but what I do know is that Cowher had a coaching career that is lightyears away from underachieving.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums
Did you watch Cowhers career? His talent evaluation? Slash? He got lucky with Rothlesburger and hired a great defensive coach in Mike Tomlin. Cowher ended on a high note, and I would bet the bank that if he coaches again, he doesn't get another SB ring.
And you are right, he Overachieved.
Did you watch Cowhers career? His talent evaluation? Slash? He got lucky with Rothlesburger and hired a great defensive coach in Mike Tomlin. Cowher ended on a high note, and I would bet the bank that if he coaches again, he doesn't get another SB ring.
And you are right, he Overachieved.
Hey, he proved Reeve's right about Tommy Maddox... ;)
Lonestar
10-11-2010, 09:22 PM
Did you watch Cowhers career? His talent evaluation? Slash? He got lucky with Rothlesburger and hired a great defensive coach in Mike Tomlin. Cowher ended on a high note, and I would bet the bank that if he coaches again, he doesn't get another SB ring.
And you are right, he Overachieved.
Always thought of him as a cheerleader for the team. an empty suit as a coach. he had a lot of talented coordinators around him. and a superb FO to get him talent.
and last but not least a winning tradition in the city.
gobroncsnv
10-11-2010, 09:32 PM
Not sure about ol' Bill... Pburgh had multiple years where they got close, went to 2 SB's with him, won one of them... the other with Neil O'Donnell. If you can get a SB appearance out of him, you can do something right. But he was smart enough to keep their traditions happening, and had a very tough team that usually competed well. I wasn't all that high on him as well, but you could sure do worse.
Nevertheless, if i'm Bowlen, you leave McD there long enough to see that his program, ONCE IN PLACE, sinks or swims. I don't think anyone REALLY believes that he's got the team he wants yet, nor would a quick turnaround last for very long. Again, look to our friends in AZ for the moral to that story. Their thrill is gone.
Just my opinion.
hamrob
10-11-2010, 09:52 PM
We really have only one thing going for us:
Chiefs 3-1
Broncos 2-3
Chargers 2-3
Raiders 2-3
The fact that we haven't played one division game yet and are right in the thick of it, means we still have a shot at the division.
As bad as we are (in several areas)...I don't see us be any worse than the rest of this group. If we can somehow find a way to run block (QB of the Oline is the Center and he's a rookie) then, I think we can go 4-2 against this group. 9-7 just might win this division folks! The question is: Are we good enough to go 7-4 the remainder of the season?
jhildebrand
10-11-2010, 10:04 PM
Not sure about ol' Bill... Pburgh had multiple years where they got close, went to 2 SB's with him, won one of them... the other with Neil O'Donnell. If you can get a SB appearance out of him, you can do something right. But he was smart enough to keep their traditions happening, and had a very tough team that usually competed well. I wasn't all that high on him as well, but you could sure do worse.
Nevertheless, if i'm Bowlen, you leave McD there long enough to see that his program, ONCE IN PLACE, sinks or swims. I don't think anyone REALLY believes that he's got the team he wants yet, nor would a quick turnaround last for very long. Again, look to our friends in AZ for the moral to that story. Their thrill is gone.
Just my opinion.
So in one thread you are killing me for my Marty comment but here you are posting this? :confused:
You do realize Cowher is a Marty disciple right? You also realize his MO is all but the same? Right.
Pittsburgh's success has been LeBeau and their ability to draft well especially on D.
Magnificent Seven
10-12-2010, 12:32 AM
Moss just doesn't belong on D. I know that sounds silly. The guy is tall, lanky, and freakishly athletic. He just doesn't have an NFL defense type body.
Seeing how this offense relies heavily on a blocking TE, I would try him there for shits and giggles. See if you can't get SOMETHING out of the guy.
I think they should move Moss back to DL.
I think they should move Moss back to DL.
Yes, this way he can line up in the neutral zone more often.
gobroncsnv
10-12-2010, 06:51 AM
So in one thread you are killing me for my Marty comment but here you are posting this? :confused:
You do realize Cowher is a Marty disciple right? You also realize his MO is all but the same? Right.
Pittsburgh's success has been LeBeau and their ability to draft well especially on D.
You do remember that Cowher has 2 SB's under his belt, winning one of them? And do you also remember Marty's Mantra when it comes to the playoffs? One and done...
I didn't criticize Schottman for an inability to put a team together, because I don't question that he DID put some great teams together... But for all that ability, he proved (and for the life of me, I don't know why) he couldn't get a team through the playoffs. But given that it happened in all 3 places where he had any kind of chance to build his program, the outcome was the same for each team. He couldn't win the games that would get him to the SB.
It's not intended as a poke at you personally, just looking back over his body of work, the results are the same each time... and that is enough to give me pause as to the wisdom of bringing him here.
jhildebrand
10-12-2010, 11:37 AM
You do remember that Cowher has 2 SB's under his belt, winning one of them? And do you also remember Marty's Mantra when it comes to the playoffs? One and done...
I didn't criticize Schottman for an inability to put a team together, because I don't question that he DID put some great teams together... But for all that ability, he proved (and for the life of me, I don't know why) he couldn't get a team through the playoffs. But given that it happened in all 3 places where he had any kind of chance to build his program, the outcome was the same for each team. He couldn't win the games that would get him to the SB.
It's not intended as a poke at you personally, just looking back over his body of work, the results are the same each time... and that is enough to give me pause as to the wisdom of bringing him here.
Cowher was no different in the playoffs. The difference is his owner was much more patient and willing to spend in FA which Marty never had. Cowher is a Marty clone.
Also, the idea that Marty was 1 and done is a misnomer. He has a few AFC CG appearances.
None of that matters when I am looking for Brian Schottenheimer to be given the shot. Nobody knows what he can do other than be a damn good OC.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.4 Release Candidate 2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.