PDA

View Full Version : Would you rather



Pages : [1] 2

rcsodak
10-11-2010, 06:38 PM
Would you rather have the present roster or Cutler/Hillis?


....Discuss.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

UnderArmour
10-11-2010, 06:41 PM
Uh... It seems kind of hard to play a game with 2 players.

gobroncsnv
10-11-2010, 06:43 PM
Don't know I'd want Cutler back, but I'm scratching my head as to why Hillis didn't work out. But neither Shanny nor McD ever had him as their #1 back. Hard to not like what the guy brings on gameday, though.

Day1BroncoFan
10-11-2010, 06:48 PM
cutler no, Hillis maybe.

rcsodak
10-11-2010, 06:54 PM
Don't know I'd want Cutler back, but I'm scratching my head as to why Hillis didn't work out. But neither Shanny nor McD ever had him as their #1 back. Hard to not like what the guy brings on gameday, though.
Mangino didn't either. 0/3. Maybe they just run him til his wheels fall off. Hard to believe shanny didnt/doesnt trade for him.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

rcsodak
10-11-2010, 06:55 PM
Uh... It seems kind of hard to play a game with 2 players.
I get it. You're being sarcastic...........right? :confused:
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

spikerman
10-11-2010, 06:56 PM
Some guys are not great practice players, but they always show up on game day. Hillis strikes me as that type of player.

KCL
10-11-2010, 06:59 PM
Uh... It seems kind of hard to play a game with 2 players.

oh noessssssssssssssssss....another cutty thread.

Tned
10-11-2010, 07:12 PM
Hmmm, they complain about all the Hillis threads, unless of course they start them... ;)

spikerman
10-11-2010, 07:14 PM
Hmmm, they complain about all the Hillis threads, unless of course hey start them... ;)

Nobody starts a Hillis thread. Usually there have to be six or seven failed threads before Hillis has one. :D

Northman
10-11-2010, 07:19 PM
oh noessssssssssssssssss....another cutty thread.

Who would of thunk it? Not like we ever had one of these before. :lol:

oubronco
10-11-2010, 07:33 PM
I just want a balanced offense I don't give a rats ass if it's Shanny's or McD's

honz
10-11-2010, 07:36 PM
Hillis. Cutler. Scheffler. Marshall.

The Glue Factory
10-11-2010, 07:52 PM
I just want a balanced offense I don't give a rats ass if it's Shanny's or McD's

I don't give a flying flip whether it's balanced or not, I just want wins!

oubronco
10-11-2010, 07:55 PM
I don't give a flying flip whether it's balanced or not, I just want wins!

Amen Brotha

Tned
10-11-2010, 08:03 PM
I don't give a flying flip whether it's balanced or not, I just want wins!

damn ******* straight!

I don't care about balanced offenses.

I don't care about a team of goody two shoes with no 'character' problems.

I don't care about shit other than wins.

This, well, we might not be winning, but we have a team of Boy Scouts shit is getting old.

jhildebrand
10-11-2010, 09:24 PM
Multiple blowout losses per season, regardless of regime, is getting really old to me!

I could care less if in some games we don't run the ball and others we don't pass so long as we are winning or at least look like we belong on the same field.

By the way, seeing how this is your thread RC, I think you should post another ridiculously large picture.

sneakers
10-12-2010, 03:05 AM
How 'bout Jake Plummer/Mike Anderson?

Buff
10-12-2010, 03:11 AM
Glyn Milburn.

Elevation inc
10-12-2010, 03:25 AM
i just dont get the point off all this stuff...its done over with those players are gone. all these threads do is create tension among us all.....whats the point......doesnt matter if someone wants em back....deal is done deal with it and move on.....

Slick
10-12-2010, 07:47 AM
I'd rather have #7 and #30 if we're living in the past.

rcsodak
10-12-2010, 07:59 AM
Multiple blowout losses per season, regardless of regime, is getting really old to me!

I could care less if in some games we don't run the ball and others we don't pass so long as we are winning or at least look like we belong on the same field.

By the way, seeing how this is your thread RC, I think you should post another ridiculously large picture.
Thats your brother. :coffee:










:couch:
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

SR
10-12-2010, 08:14 AM
I'd rather have the current players we have. I'd rather have different running backs, but I don't think Cutler and/or Hillis are, ever were, or ever will be the answer. Cutler has a ton of skill, but he's not ever going to get to the promise land in the NFL IMO. He's not a winner. Hillis is good, but so could be Moreno and/or Buckhalter.

Say what you will, but I like McDaniels and I'm okay with the vast majority of the moves he's making. I have faith in his intentions. He's smart as hell. He's got the team's best interest in mind and he wants to win as bad as all of us want the Broncos to win. I'm okay with the whole "Patriots West" thing because a) the Patriots win and b) if you don't want to have a track record like the Patriots have had for the past 8-10 years, then you're dumb.

rcsodak
10-12-2010, 08:49 AM
I'd rather have the current players we have. I'd rather have different running backs, but I don't think Cutler and/or Hillis are, ever were, or ever will be the answer. Cutler has a ton of skill, but he's not ever going to get to the promise land in the NFL IMO. He's not a winner. Hillis is good, but so could be Moreno and/or Buckhalter.

Say what you will, but I like McDaniels and I'm okay with the vast majority of the moves he's making. I have faith in his intentions. He's smart as hell. He's got the team's best interest in mind and he wants to win as bad as all of us want the Broncos to win. I'm okay with the whole "Patriots West" thing because a) the Patriots win and b) if you don't want to have a track record like the Patriots have had for the past 8-10 years, then you're dumb.
Nail/Hammer. :thumb:
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

rcsodak
10-12-2010, 08:51 AM
Hmmm, they complain about all the Hillis threads, unless of course they start them... ;)
You gave me the idea, T. :cheers:

:D
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

GEM
10-12-2010, 10:09 AM
Ahhh ffs...this couldn't fit into one of the other freaking 100 threads? :brickwall:

If it's minutely close to one of the other 100 threads, just put it there instead of killing us with multiple threads of the same freaking context of bullshit.

BroncoWave
10-12-2010, 10:31 AM
:tsk:

atwater27
10-12-2010, 05:56 PM
Would you rather have the present roster or Cutler/Hillis?


....Discuss.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

I'd rather have Cutler, Hillis, Scheffler, Torain, The Goodmans, Mike Leach and Mike Shanahan. I would gladly take them over their current replacements.

arapaho2
10-12-2010, 06:00 PM
Would you rather have the present roster or Cutler/Hillis?


....Discuss.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

i would rather have hillis and moreno, rather than moreno and buck...and shceffler rather than gronkowski

CHARLIEADAMSFAN
10-12-2010, 07:09 PM
I'd rather have Cutler, Hillis, Scheffler, Torain, The Goodmans, Mike Leach and Mike Shanahan. I would gladly take them over their current replacements.

I don't like living in the past at all, but man do I wish Shanny was still around. He should have had his front office position revoked or lessened before getting fired. McD could be a great coach in the future unfortunately it probably won't be in his term here.

BroncoWave
10-12-2010, 07:19 PM
I'd rather have Cutler, Hillis, Scheffler, Torain, The Goodmans, Mike Leach and Mike Shanahan. I would gladly take them over their current replacements.

Yeah, I miss being mediocre and going nowhere too.

spikerman
10-12-2010, 07:19 PM
Yeah, I miss being mediocre and going nowhere too.

How can you miss it? Just watch the team on Sundays.

BroncoWave
10-12-2010, 07:26 PM
How can you miss it? Just watch the team on Sundays.

We may be mediocre right now but I think we are at least heading in the right direction. Can't say that about Shanahan's final years here.

Although we are 2-3, we have had a brutal schedule so far. The Jags are better this year, the Seahawks are better, the Colts and Titans are both very good, and the Ravens are one of the top 2 or 3 teams in the league. If the Raiders win this week, we won't face a team with a losing record until week 8.

If we handle the Raiders and 49ers like we should we'll be 4-4 (5-3 if we can upset the Jets) headed into the bye with a much more favorable schedule over the last half of the season.

Tned
10-12-2010, 07:40 PM
We may be mediocre right now but I think we are at least heading in the right direction. Can't say that about Shanahan's final years here.

Although we are 2-3, we have had a brutal schedule so far. The Jags are better this year, the Seahawks are better, the Colts and Titans are both very good, and the Ravens are one of the top 2 or 3 teams in the league. If the Raiders win this week, we won't face a team with a losing record until week 8.

If we handle the Raiders and 49ers like we should we'll be 4-4 (5-3 if we can upset the Jets) headed into the bye with a much more favorable schedule over the last half of the season.

It's not just the 2-3 this year, it's the 4-11 in the last 15, which is among the worst 15 game stretch in Broncos history.

Saying "I miss being mediocre and going nowhere" when the team is in a near all time low in terms of wins/losses just furthers the McDaniels is great/McDaniels is crap war.

For the record, I agree that McDaniels is trying to build a solid team. I don't agree with every move he's made along the way, and believe some of his decisions have increased how long it will take to be a winning ball club, but that's why he's paid the big bucks and why his job is on the line.

What I don't understand and will NEVER understand is why if I believe McDaniels is doing a good job, then I HAVE to bash Shanahan and his players. I'll never get that logic.

What's worse, regardless of whether I get it, as long as you guys keep doing it, we will have petty bickering that goes on forever.

nevcraw
10-12-2010, 07:51 PM
if were up to me we would have the Broncos all time greats as our roster with Hillis splitting carries with TD and Floyd.

but that's me..

BroncoWave
10-12-2010, 07:52 PM
It's not just the 2-3 this year, it's the 4-11 in the last 15, which is among the worst 15 game stretch in Broncos history.

Saying "I miss being mediocre and going nowhere" when the team is in a near all time low in terms of wins/losses just furthers the McDaniels is great/McDaniels is crap war.

For the record, I agree that McDaniels is trying to build a solid team. I don't agree with every move he's made along the way, and believe some of his decisions have increased how long it will take to be a winning ball club, but that's why he's paid the big bucks and why his job is on the line.

What I don't understand and will NEVER understand is why if I believe McDaniels is doing a good job, then I HAVE to bash Shanahan and his players. I'll never get that logic.

What's worse, regardless of whether I get it, as long as you guys keep doing it, we will have petty bickering that goes on forever.

Other than maybe one or two posters who uses that logic?

Tned
10-12-2010, 07:58 PM
Other than maybe one or two posters who uses that logic?

Come on. The fan police has spent 12+ months attacking anyone that doesn't bash former players and Shanahan. Those same folks who miss the former players are bashing McDaniels and some current players.

For FAR too many, it's an either/or.

nevcraw
10-12-2010, 08:01 PM
It's not just the 2-3 this year, it's the 4-11 in the last 15, which is among the worst 15 game stretch in Broncos history.

Saying "I miss being mediocre and going nowhere" when the team is in a near all time low in terms of wins/losses just furthers the McDaniels is great/McDaniels is crap war.

For the record, I agree that McDaniels is trying to build a solid team. I don't agree with every move he's made along the way, and believe some of his decisions have increased how long it will take to be a winning ball club, but that's why he's paid the big bucks and why his job is on the line.
What I don't understand and will NEVER understand is why if I believe McDaniels is doing a good job, then I HAVE to bash Shanahan and his players. I'll never get that logic.

What's worse, regardless of whether I get it, as long as you guys keep doing it, we will have petty bickering that goes on forever.

right on the money.. I think some fear that if they do not fullly worship the new regime and fully reject the old -- then they are somehow stating or outloud admitting that the new one will not work.. but in reality it just doesn't work that way..

DenBronx
10-12-2010, 08:29 PM
Guys I would gladly join in this discussion but my brain can't take it anymore.


My hopes are having a better record than the raiders at this point. That's all I care about. I live around too many cocky raider fans and I want them to suck for as long as possible. I don't care about ex players/coaches vs the new crappy or injury prone ones we have...it's all one big cluster ****.

spikerman
10-12-2010, 08:31 PM
We may be mediocre right now but I think we are at least heading in the right direction. Can't say that about Shanahan's final years here.

Although we are 2-3, we have had a brutal schedule so far. The Jags are better this year, the Seahawks are better, the Colts and Titans are both very good, and the Ravens are one of the top 2 or 3 teams in the league. If the Raiders win this week, we won't face a team with a losing record until week 8.

If we handle the Raiders and 49ers like we should we'll be 4-4 (5-3 if we can upset the Jets) headed into the bye with a much more favorable schedule over the last half of the season.

Are you saying that although the Broncos can't beat the upper echelon teams, they can get "healthy" record-wise by beating the weaker teams? If so, that, to me, is the very definition of mediocre.

spikerman
10-12-2010, 08:33 PM
Guys I would gladly join in this discussion but my brain can't take it anymore.


My hopes are having a better record than the raiders at this point. That's all I care about. I live around too many cocky raider fans and I want them to suck for as long as possible. I don't care about ex players/coaches vs the new crappy or injury prone ones we have...it's all one big cluster ****.

I was going to say that you should aim higher than having a better record than the Raiders, but then I wondered if any 49ers might be reading this thread and I didn't want to hurt anybody's feelings. :D

BroncoWave
10-12-2010, 09:37 PM
Are you saying that although the Broncos can't beat the upper echelon teams, they can get "healthy" record-wise by beating the weaker teams? If so, that, to me, is the very definition of mediocre.

We HAVE beaten 2 pretty good teams so far though. That's my point. If we make it to the bye week at 4-4 with the schedule we've played I will be very happy.

Oldschoolcrush
10-12-2010, 09:59 PM
Hillis. Cutler. Scheffler. Marshall.

That is a huge list..... Seriously...... It would be interesting to list exactly what we have "gained" from each of these; I'm embarrassed to say that I don't know exactly.
Anyone up to the challenge?
I'd like to see what it looks like on paper; I know the Hillis trade was bust, I'd like to see what future picks are still in the horizon.

Oldschoolcrush
10-12-2010, 10:43 PM
This is ridiculous, I did some research.....

Broncos traded away a 5th round pick to acquire LeKevin Smith from the Pats....
Scheffler and a 7th round pick went to Detroit for a 5th round pick from the Phillies in a three way deal.... Follow?
Essentially, we gave away Scheffler AND a 7th round pick to replace the 5th round pick traded for LeKevin Smith....??????

BUST!

Oldschoolcrush
10-12-2010, 10:48 PM
Peyton Hillis, a 2011 sixth-round draft pick and a conditional pick in 2012 was the trade deal for Brady Quinn......
Yeah, we still owe on that one!
What do you think we can get for Quinn now?

BUST!

Broncos Mtnman
10-12-2010, 10:58 PM
I'd rather have Cutler, Hillis, Scheffler, Torain, The Goodmans, Mike Leach and Mike Shanahan. I would gladly take them over their current replacements.

:dito:

Broncos Mtnman
10-12-2010, 11:01 PM
Yeah, I miss being mediocre and going nowhere too.

Mickey is a .500 coach and a VERY impressive 4-11 over the last 15 games.

Yeah, I see what you mean.

:coffee:

silkamilkamonico
10-12-2010, 11:19 PM
Mickey is a .500 coach and a VERY impressive 4-11 over the last 15 games.

Yeah, I see what you mean.

:coffee:

Kind of like how Mike Shanahan's worst 3 year tenure in Denver was with the almighty Cutler/Marshall/etc....

Who would have thought that the best thing for Jay Cutler's career would be to get away from Mike Shanahan?

Tned
10-12-2010, 11:25 PM
Kind of like how Mike Shanahan's worst 3 year tenure in Denver was with the almighty Cutler/Marshall/etc....

Who would have thought that the best thing for Jay Cutler's career would be to get away from Mike Shanahan?

Flip side is that this 15 game stretch is one of the worst in franchise history.

I'm optimistic about the future, but just based on performance on the field, it doesn't make much sense to hold up McDaniels tenure as better than Shanahan's -- even his last three years.

silkamilkamonico
10-12-2010, 11:28 PM
Flip side is that this 15 game stretch is one of the worst in franchise history.

I'm optimistic about the future, but just based on performance on the field, it doesn't make much sense to hold up McDaniels tenure as better than Shanahan's -- even his last three years.

On a serious note, the organization has been stagnant (maybe with some ups I would say, like 2005, but unfortunately Shanahan couldn't build on it) since Elway retired. McDaniels hs continued that yes. The frustrating thing is Shanahan's last 10 years, along with McDaniels first 2, have had little stretches and glimpses of a dynamic team, and then it just goes back to the inconsistency that it is.

McDaniels tenure has quickly turned into the exact same frustrating team to watch.

SR
10-12-2010, 11:35 PM
Other than maybe one or two posters who uses that logic?

I definitely don't follow that logic. My whole thing is you can't go forward if you don't remember where you've been. Shanahan took us to the promise land twice. He is widely regarded as one of the best head coaches in history. The last couple of years the team was stagnant under Shanny. I've drawn the comparison of Shanny in his last couple of years with Bob Hartley of the Avs during his last couple of years after the Avs won the cup in '01. The team quit listening to him and his coaching style failed to reach the players. Me thinks that is what happened with Shanny. I loved Shanahan and I like McD a lot. As a team, the Broncos are heading in the right direction. It's not black and white for me. If people can't like McD without hating Shanny, or visa-versa, then that's just ignorant. If it's justified, it's justified, but otherwise it's stupid.

SR
10-12-2010, 11:36 PM
This is ridiculous, I did some research.....

Broncos traded away a 5th round pick to acquire LeKevin Smith from the Pats....
Scheffler and a 7th round pick went to Detroit for a 5th round pick from the Phillies in a three way deal.... Follow?
Essentially, we gave away Scheffler AND a 7th round pick to replace the 5th round pick traded for LeKevin Smith....??????

BUST!

You win some you lose some, but the Phillies are a baseball team.

SR
10-12-2010, 11:37 PM
Mickey is a .500 coach and a VERY impressive 4-11 over the last 15 games.

Yeah, I see what you mean.

:coffee:

So our record is entirely the coach's fault? Right. I follow your logic there. :rolleyes:

Buff
10-12-2010, 11:37 PM
Flip side is that this 15 game stretch is one of the worst in franchise history.

I'm optimistic about the future, but just based on performance on the field, it doesn't make much sense to hold up McDaniels tenure as better than Shanahan's -- even his last three years.

And the flip side of that flip side is that McD got the team off to the second best start in franchise history last year. Can we just agree that the sample size is not really big enough to draw any real conclusions and the constant comparisons to the Shanahan era, though inevitable, are tiresome?

silkamilkamonico
10-12-2010, 11:40 PM
So our record is entirely the coach's fault? Right. I follow your logic there. :rolleyes:

I do believe he is responsible for a big portion of it, and the starting QB Orton as well.

I think the ironic thing is a lot of other people feel this way too, like MtnMan, but refuse to acknowledge that for whatever reason in the Mike Shanahan/Jay Cutler era.

"Give that guy a pass! He has a stronger arm than John Elway!"

Tned
10-12-2010, 11:41 PM
On a serious note, the organization has been stagnant (maybe with some ups I would say, like 2005, but unfortunately Shanahan couldn't build on it) since Elway retired. McDaniels hs continued that yes. The frustrating thing is Shanahan's last 10 years, along with McDaniels first 2, have had little stretches and glimpses of a dynamic team, and then it just goes back to the inconsistency that it is.

McDaniels tenure has quickly turned into the exact same frustrating team to watch.

While I was shocked at Shanahan's firing, I quickly got on board with "it was time for a change'. However, I am not one of those that believes that Shanan's last 10 years were so horrible.

Granted, not many playoff wins, but when you look at the number of losing seasons, number of years in the playoffs, trip to the AFCCG, the fact is that we had a better 10 year run than all but a handful of NFL teams.

It goes back to Broncos fans being spoiled and not realizing how good we've had it during the Bowlen era, and how many other teams (I believe it would be none) can equal our consistency and lack of losing seasons.

Even in Shanahan's horrible last 10 years, it was two losing seasons, four playoff appearances and one championship game.

Good or bad, Shanahan managed to turnover the roster without a true rebuilding period. We didn't have the 1, 2 or 3 or 5 win season like so many other teams have had over the last 15 years. However, the price a team pays for not having the normal NFL cyclical horrible period is that you don't get high draft picks and you rely more heavily on FA's and can't afford to play as many young guys, because you are competing for a playoff spot every year (compared to a 4 win team that can focus on building for the future).

Anyway, IMHO, things weren't as bad as some make it out to be, and the future's not as dark as others make it to be.

Broncos Mtnman
10-12-2010, 11:44 PM
While I was shocked at Shanahan's firing, I quickly got on board with "it was time for a change'. However, I am not one of those that believes that Shanan's last 10 years were so horrible.

Granted, not many playoff wins, but when you look at the number of losing seasons, number of years in the playoffs, trip to the AFCCG, the fact is that we had a better 10 year run than all but a handful of NFL teams.

It goes back to Broncos fans being spoiled and not realizing how good we've had it during the Bowlen era, and how many other teams (I believe it would be none) can equal our consistency and lack of losing seasons.

Even in Shanahan's horrible last 10 years, it was two losing seasons, four playoff appearances and one championship game.

Good or bad, Shanahan managed to turnover the roster without a true rebuilding period. We didn't have the 1, 2 or 3 or 5 win season like so many other teams have had over the last 15 years. However, the price a team pays for not having the normal NFL cyclical horrible period is that you don't get high draft picks and you rely more heavily on FA's and can't afford to play as many young guys, because you are competing for a playoff spot every year (compared to a 4 win team that can focus on building for the future).

Anyway, IMHO, things weren't as bad as some make it out to be, and the future's not as dark as others make it to be.

And in two of those non-playoff seasons, our record was the same as the division winner. We lost out due to tie-breakers.

silkamilkamonico
10-12-2010, 11:46 PM
While I was shocked at Shanahan's firing, I quickly got on board with "it was time for a change'. However, I am not one of those that believes that Shanan's last 10 years were so horrible.

Granted, not many playoff wins, but when you look at the number of losing seasons, number of years in the playoffs, trip to the AFCCG, the fact is that we had a better 10 year run than all but a handful of NFL teams.

It goes back to Broncos fans being spoiled and not realizing how good we've had it during the Bowlen era, and how many other teams (I believe it would be none) can equal our consistency and lack of losing seasons.

Even in Shanahan's horrible last 10 years, it was two losing seasons, four playoff appearances and one championship game.

Good or bad, Shanahan managed to turnover the roster without a true rebuilding period. We didn't have the 1, 2 or 3 or 5 win season like so many other teams have had over the last 15 years. However, the price a team pays for not having the normal NFL cyclical horrible period is that you don't get high draft picks and you rely more heavily on FA's and can't afford to play as many young guys, because you are competing for a playoff spot every year (compared to a 4 win team that can focus on building for the future).

Anyway, IMHO, things weren't as bad as some make it out to be, and the future's not as dark as others make it to be.

I don't think it was horrible by any means. I just think it was stagnant.

Shanahan "built" a AFCCG team in 2005, and then tore it up which was his downfall. I have acknowledged that. but instead of building that off his success, he inserts a young QB that wasn't ready to win with a veteran team, and othe factors led to 3 stagnant seasons of borderline .500 record.

Broncos Mtnman
10-12-2010, 11:47 PM
So our record is entirely the coach's fault? Right. I follow your logic there. :rolleyes:

So, bears no responsibility for the personnel decisions? No responsibility for the playcalling?

Right. I follow your logic there. :rolleyes:

SR
10-12-2010, 11:50 PM
He doesn't get a pass by any means, but it's as much the people on the field's fault as it is his. Period.

Tned
10-12-2010, 11:50 PM
And the flip side of that flip side is that McD got the franchise off to the second best start in franchise history last year. Can we just agree that the sample size is not really big enough to draw any real conclusions and the constant comparisons to the Shanahan era, though inevitable, are tiresome?

Yes, 2nd best start, but how many teams have finished 2-8? None in the 26 or so years that I have been following the Broncos. The old timers might be able to answer the question. That was a colossal collapse. It made some of my Mets' collapses seem like winning streaks in comparison.

As to the Shanny comparisons, I'm all for being forward looking. I go there only in response to the constant Shanny bashing that has been en vogue for the last 18 months of so.

The fact is that because McDaniels and most of the players don't have a positive enough record to use to defend any criticism aimed at them, the 'defenders' resort to bashing Shanny and the ex-Broncos players as a means of deflecting criticism.

I don't see McDaniels standing up at the pressers and defending losses and a non existent running game by bashing Shanahan and the ex-Broncos, so I'm not sure why fans feel they have to defend it that way. I guess I am too simple minded to see the logic in that approach.

atwater27
10-12-2010, 11:54 PM
I don't think it was horrible by any means. I just think it was stagnant.

Shanahan "built" a AFCCG team in 2005, and then tore it up which was his downfall. I have acknowledged that. but instead of building that off his success, he inserts a young QB that wasn't ready to win with a veteran team, and othe factors led to 3 stagnant seasons of borderline .500 record.

Wasn't ready to win with a veteran team?! Dude played his lights out. Which was why Shanny got fired. Even with Cutty droppin 30 points, the D always gave up 37.

silkamilkamonico
10-12-2010, 11:54 PM
So, bears no responsibility for the personnel decisions? No responsibility for the playcalling?

Right. I follow your logic there. :rolleyes:

In all actuality, the decisions he has made has almost been a wash, which is why you are seeing the exact same results.

He traded off a QB that could throw for mega yards but couldn't score points, and has brought in a Qb that can throw mega yards, but can't score points.

He traded off a dynamic duo of Marshall and Scheffler, and exchanged them for what's arguably the best WR core in the NFL.

He traded off Hillis which is indeed a question mark, but has replaced Hillis with upgrading the worst defense in the history of the organization to at least a mid level defense, even with all the injuries.

It's all equalled out to a wash, and an organization that is no better, or no worse than before he was hired.

Tned
10-13-2010, 12:02 AM
I don't think it was horrible by any means. I just think it was stagnant.

Shanahan "built" a AFCCG team in 2005, and then tore it up which was his downfall. I have acknowledged that. but instead of building that off his success, he inserts a young QB that wasn't ready to win with a veteran team, and othe factors led to 3 stagnant seasons of borderline .500 record.

I don't have time to do it, but does anyone know how many teams were worse (or better) than 2 losing seasons, 4 playoff appearances and 1 AFFCG?

My guess is that there are maybe 5-8 other teams that only had 2 losing seasons in that stretch, and I would be willing to bet that most of those 5-8 had more than 2 losing seasons in the 14 year stretch of Shanny's tenure.

As an example, in that same ten year period, the Cowboys had 4 losing seasons, and they were three 5 win seasons, and one 6 win season. Three playoff seasons, and far less total wins.

Another example, the defending SB champs, the Saints, had three losing seasons during that stretch, but it included a 3 win season. Only three winning seasons, and 2 playoff appearances.

Again, I don't mean it as a slam, just a fact, but we are spoiled. I have said it for years. Our terrible stretch is Shanny's last 10 years where we had 90 wins, or his final three where we were .500 and missed the playoffs three years in a row.

The fans of all but a few NFL teams would LOVE to have that kind of run as their 'bad' times.

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 12:03 AM
Wasn't ready to win with a veteran team?! Dude played his lights out. Which was why Shanny got fired. Even with Cutty droppin 30 points, the D always gave up 37.

Cutler was 2-3 while Plunger was 7-4 with that team. Cutler also went from averaging 30 points per game his rookie season, to averaging 20 points a game in 2007, to only +3 in 2008 at 23 ppg.

Cutler's best stretch of football with Denver was his 5 game stretch as a rookie. I'm still wondering wtf happened to him.

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 12:04 AM
I don't have time to do it, but does anyone know how many teams were worse (or better) than 2 losing seasons, 4 playoff appearances and 1 AFFCG?

My guess is that there are maybe 5-8 other teams that only had 2 losing seasons in that stretch, and I would be willing to bet that most of those 5-8 had more than 2 losing seasons in the 14 year stretch of Shanny's tenure.

As an example, in that same ten year period, the Cowboys had 4 losing seasons, and they were three 5 win seasons, and one 6 win season. Three playoff seasons, and far less total wins.

Another example, the defending SB champs, the Saints, had three losing seasons during that stretch, but it included a 3 win season. Only three winning seasons, and 2 playoff appearances.

Again, I don't mean it as a slam, just a fact, but we are spoiled. I have said it for years. Our terrible stretch is Shanny's last 10 years where we had 90 wins, or his final three where we were .500 and missed the playoffs three years in a row.

The fans of all but a few NFL teams would LOVE to have that kind of run as their 'bad' times.

I'm sorry, but this is a matter of perception.

I don't take pride in the "we might not be winning playoff games, but at least we are 4-12 every year" argument.

I think it's fine if you do, and that's your opinion as well.

Tned
10-13-2010, 12:14 AM
I'm sorry, but this is a matter of perception.

I don't take pride in the "we might not be winning playoff games, but at least we are 4-12 every year" argument.

I think it's fine if you do, and that's your opinion as well.

That's my point, your spoiled. It's GREAT that in the Bowlen era we can be so spoiled that winning seasons and always being in the chase for the playoffs isn't enough, like it is for virtually every other franchise. It's great that a winning season is nothing, because you haven't had to endure 4 win seasons -- you don't know the pain of being a Bengals fan or Browns fan or Patriots fan or Colts fan or Cowboys fans or any of those other teams that had 1, 2, 3 or 5 win seasons over the last 25 years.

Name one other team that's been able to have that length of long term consistency.... Hence the reason we are spoiled.

Now, you can make an argument that we would be better to have the 1, 3, 3, 4, and 6 win seasons in the 10 year stretch prior to Indy's great run or the 2, 5, 5, 6, 6 win seasons the Pats had in the '90s, before their great run.

You say that not having 4 win seasons is not something to be happy about, but that's because you haven't had to endure REAL rebuilding periods.

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 12:21 AM
Consistency of what?

Chargers consistency?

They have had more playoff wins in one season, twice, in the last 10 years then Denver has playoff wins combined.

Baltimore, Pittsburgh, San Diego, Indianapolis, New England, Philadelphia had a great stretch, Seattle had a great stretch, all since 2000. That's almost 22% of the entire NFL right there.

I think I'm in the majority of most general Denver fans who aren't asking for SuperBowl success, but to have consistent teams we know can not only get to the playoffs almost every year, but possibly win a playoff game every year.

1 playoff win in 10 years isn't my idea of "competing". I'm not interested in avoiding losing seasons, I'm interested in competing for SuperBowls. We have merely competed for a playoff game since 1999.

I'm not arguing against being spoiled. But I am arguing removing a great coach like Shanahan who has struggled to compete like the above teams for 12 years. not 3, 4, or 5. But 12 years. Just hoping for something better.

atwater27
10-13-2010, 07:17 AM
Cutler was 2-3 while Plunger was 7-4 with that team. Cutler also went from averaging 30 points per game his rookie season, to averaging 20 points a game in 2007, to only +3 in 2008 at 23 ppg.

Cutler's best stretch of football with Denver was his 5 game stretch as a rookie. I'm still wondering wtf happened to him.

You forgot to mention the PPG allowed by the defense during those seasons. What do you mean WTF happened to him? He is a promising young QB who got ****** over by a young punk HC and shipped to a Mike Martz QB graveyard.

Tned
10-13-2010, 07:19 AM
Consistency of what?

Chargers consistency?

They have had more playoff wins in one season, twice, in the last 10 years then Denver has playoff wins combined.

Baltimore, Pittsburgh, San Diego, Indianapolis, New England, Philadelphia had a great stretch, Seattle had a great stretch, all since 2000. That's almost 22% of the entire NFL right there.

I think I'm in the majority of most general Denver fans who aren't asking for SuperBowl success, but to have consistent teams we know can not only get to the playoffs almost every year, but possibly win a playoff game every year.

1 playoff win in 10 years isn't my idea of "competing". I'm not interested in avoiding losing seasons, I'm interested in competing for SuperBowls. We have merely competed for a playoff game since 1999.

I'm not arguing against being spoiled. But I am arguing removing a great coach like Shanahan who has struggled to compete like the above teams for 12 years. not 3, 4, or 5. But 12 years. Just hoping for something better.

Ok, now you've upped the anti to a level not worth even debating. It's one point to say winning seasons and being the playoff hunt mean nothing (quite a few Denver fans say that), but to go with Seattle who just had 4 and 5 win seasons, and to up the anti from saying Shanahan has struggled not for 10 years, but for 12 years, which includes the back to back Super Bowls, makes absolutely no sense to me.

atwater27
10-13-2010, 07:21 AM
Consistency of what?

Chargers consistency?

They have had more playoff wins in one season, twice, in the last 10 years then Denver has playoff wins combined.Wait a minute... I thought you wanted to compete for a super bowl?

Baltimore, Pittsburgh, San Diego, Indianapolis, New England, Philadelphia had a great stretch, Seattle had a great stretch, all since 2000. That's almost 22% of the entire NFL right there.That's impressive. Think we're on track with those numbers with the current regime?

I think I'm in the majority of most general Denver fans who aren't asking for SuperBowl success,Wait a minute, I thought you said you wanted to compete for the super bowl? but to have consistent teams we know can not only get to the playoffs almost every year, but possibly win a playoff game every year.

1 playoff win in 10 years isn't my idea of "competing". I'm not interested in avoiding losing seasons, I'm interested in competing for SuperBowls. We have merely competed for a playoff game since 1999.

I'm not arguing against being spoiled. But I am arguing removing a great coach like Shanahan who has struggled to compete like the above teams for 12 years. not 3, 4, or 5. But 12 years. Just hoping for something better.

Hoping for something better? Guess we missed the mark on that one.

atwater27
10-13-2010, 07:36 AM
Are you Jay Cutler's agent or something? The excuses you make for him are hysterical. I'm sure it's the defenses fault that he's toward the top of the league in picks every year too.


With that unfortunate advice out of the way,
Yeah, Jay throws a lot of pics. Which is something he would get better with in the right offense with experience, like all the gunslinger QB's of the past. Unfortunately, he is with the absolute worst personell right now, which could pretty much ruin him for his career. I hope not. Either way, if he had the right QB coach and OC, he would thrive. And who knows, maybe Josh would have been good for him.. Too bad Josh threw away the chance with his treatment and disrespect of a franchise QB. Let's not forget he wanted Matt Cassel before he 'settled' for Kyle Orton (and afterwards freaking out and bringing in Quinn and reaching for Tebow)

That's why i root for the guy. He got a raw deal when Shanny left. Sorry if I don't root for his death, his injury or pure failure like some of the wonderful folks that post here. I'm not that kind of guy.

Elevation inc
10-13-2010, 07:50 AM
With that unfortunate advice out of the way,
Yeah, Jay throws a lot of pics. Which is something he would get better with in the right offense with experience, like all the gunslinger QB's of the past. Unfortunately, he is with the absolute worst personell right now, which could pretty much ruin him for his career. I hope not. Either way, if he had the right QB coach and OC, he would thrive. And who knows, maybe Josh would have been good for him.. Too bad Josh threw away the chance with his treatment and disrespect of a franchise QB. Let's not forget he wanted Matt Cassel before he 'settled' for Kyle Orton (and afterwards freaking out and bringing in Quinn and reaching for Tebow)

That's why i root for the guy. He got a raw deal when Shanny left. Sorry if I don't root for his death, his injury or pure failure like some of the wonderful folks that post here. I'm not that kind of guy.



lets not also forget jay cutler was just as much at fault in how he handled the situation...if MCD and jay had both stopped being babies and acted like grown men he would still be here and yes maybe even thriving....

reality though is he wanted gone and was stoked to go back to chicago...where your correct his career will probally be ruined...meanwhile MCd is ressurecting orton's career and making him into a top 10 QB.....

so maybe Jay should have realized calls get made in new regimes, he should be a man and stuff his ego....and MCD certainly shouldnt have had the ego he did......

lets not just glorify one side of a 2 sided affair for your arguement here.....

broncophan
10-13-2010, 07:59 AM
That's my point, your spoiled. It's GREAT that in the Bowlen era we can be so spoiled that winning seasons and always being in the chase for the playoffs isn't enough, like it is for virtually every other franchise. It's great that a winning season is nothing, because you haven't had to endure 4 win seasons -- you don't know the pain of being a Bengals fan or Browns fan or Patriots fan or Colts fan or Cowboys fans or any of those other teams that had 1, 2, 3 or 5 win seasons over the last 25 years.

Name one other team that's been able to have that length of long term consistency.... Hence the reason we are spoiled.

Now, you can make an argument that we would be better to have the 1, 3, 3, 4, and 6 win seasons in the 10 year stretch prior to Indy's great run or the 2, 5, 5, 6, 6 win seasons the Pats had in the '90s, before their great run.

You say that not having 4 win seasons is not something to be happy about, but that's because you haven't had to endure REAL rebuilding periods.

Have been a fan for 33 years....but I think "spoiled" might be the wrong word.I, as a fan, for some reason, look at it as better... or higher expectations.....from us and the organization/Bowlen.Bowlen will never let the organization "slide" to 3.....4......5.......win seasons year after year.....at least not without doing what he thinks he needs to do.....maybe I am wrong...but here in Ohio...for example...it seems as if the browns/bengals organizations just did not react...and just accepted the fact that they did not win....esp. in the early 80's (I think)....it just seemed like Ruitigliano and Forrest Gregg were around forever.....and just not very successful.......and then more recently...all the arrests for the bengals year after year....what kind of owner would let that go on....??.....and then of course...Modell leaving Cleveland....and the clowns have been horrible for the many years since.

Not spoiled.......just lucky to be a fan of an organization who has a owner who has high expectations.....there are not too many....

oh yea.....I'll take our current team.....Cutler can stay away....

Tned
10-13-2010, 08:01 AM
lets not also forget jay cutler was just as much at fault in how he handled the situation...if MCD and jay had both stopped being babies and acted like grown men he would still be here and yes maybe even thriving....

reality though is he wanted gone and was stoked to go back to chicago...where your correct his career will probally be ruined...meanwhile MCd is ressurecting orton's career and making him into a top 10 QB.....

so maybe Jay should have realized calls get made in new regimes, he should be a man and stuff his ego....and MCD certainly shouldnt have had the ego he did......

lets not just glorify one side of a 2 sided affair for your arguement here.....

Your first and last paragraph were dead on, but then in the middle you decide to pretty lay it all on Jay. It is nothing but speculation to claim that Cutler wanted out of Denver. We don't know all the facts in what went down, so we shouldn't really present theories and speculation as facts.

Elevation inc
10-13-2010, 08:27 AM
Your first and last paragraph were dead on, but then in the middle you decide to pretty lay it all on Jay. It is nothing but speculation to claim that Cutler wanted out of Denver. We don't know all the facts in what went down, so we shouldn't really present theories and speculation as facts.

um no its not sepculation his own words stated that, and he requested the trade, so yeah he wanted gone, you dont request a trade if you want to stay. I dont lay anything on jay anymore than MCD they booth screwed the pooch and our probally paying for it in different ways....i think they were both tools in the whole ordeal.....

Elevation inc
10-13-2010, 08:30 AM
Your first and last paragraph were dead on, but then in the middle you decide to pretty lay it all on Jay. It is nothing but speculation to claim that Cutler wanted out of Denver. We don't know all the facts in what went down, so we shouldn't really present theories and speculation as facts.

personally i think jay came out worse than MCD which is sad because together the QB talent and the Qb whisperer could have been something special:lol:

Mike
10-13-2010, 08:33 AM
personally i think jay came out worse than MCD which is sad because together the QB talent and the Qb whisperer could have been something special:lol:

I don't think so. The QBs head would have gotten in the way.

atwater27
10-13-2010, 08:36 AM
um no its not sepculation his own words stated that, and he requested the trade, so yeah he wanted gone, you dont request a trade if you want to stay. I dont lay anything on jay anymore than MCD they booth screwed the pooch and our probally paying for it in different ways....i think they were both tools in the whole ordeal.....

It comes down to the role and responsibility of the issue. Jay's job is to throw the football and lead the offense. Josh's job is to coach, encourage, teach, manage relationships. It starts and stops with the head coach. His inability and unwillingness to manage the situation in a constructive, respectful and positive manner was a failure as a head coach. Right off the bat.

BroncoWave
10-13-2010, 08:47 AM
It comes down to the role and responsibility of the issue. Jay's job is to throw the football and lead the offense. Josh's job is to coach, encourage, teach, manage relationships. It starts and stops with the head coach. His inability and unwillingness to manage the situation in a constructive, respectful and positive manner was a failure as a head coach. Right off the bat.

Really? That's all Cutler's job is? As an employee of the Broncos, it wasn't also part of his job to obey what his superiors (McD and Bowlen) told him to do? He was completely in the right in ignoring Bowlen's phone calls and refusing to go to Denver for a meeting? Whatever you say bro.

Tned
10-13-2010, 08:52 AM
um no its not sepculation his own words stated that, and he requested the trade, so yeah he wanted gone, you dont request a trade if you want to stay. I dont lay anything on jay anymore than MCD they booth screwed the pooch and our probally paying for it in different ways....i think they were both tools in the whole ordeal.....

I agree they both showed their youth, immaturity and ego. If "greater resposibility" is going to be placed anywhere, it has to be the head coach, because they are paid big dollars to manage young, high strung talent. However, I don't even feel it's necessary to hang that on McD.

It just gets old to see this not only rehashed, but theories used to fill in the blanks (because 95%+ of the events that took place are in fact blanks), because none of us REALLY know what happened.


We don't know what happened between them when McD first took the job.
We don't know what happened at the combine when McD was approached about trading for Cassel (and from what I understand moving Jay in a three way).
We don't know what happened when he got the calls, but was "late to the game".
We don't know whether Jay's claim that McDaniels denied discussing a trade was true.


We simply have almost no facts as to what REALLY happened, so to fill in the blanks with speculation just serves to continue an argument that can't be won, because we don't know what happened.

In 30+ years when McDaniels retires and rights his auto-biography, then we might finally know what really happened. Until then, we don't.

Tned
10-13-2010, 08:55 AM
Well, we've made RC's day. He made the yellow snowballs, left them laying around in this thread, and we've all obliged by picking them up and throwing them around.

Looks like the only winner in this was RC.

Congrats, RC: We who are about to die, :salute: you.....

rcsodak
10-13-2010, 09:23 AM
Kind of like how Mike Shanahan's worst 3 year tenure in Denver was with the almighty Cutler/Marshall/etc....

Who would have thought that the best thing for Jay Cutler's career would be to get away from Mike Shanahan?
Should havekept jake to come back and traded cutler 2yrs earlier for a 6pk and a DT. I find it funny (almost ironic) that some of the people that despised jake so much are the same ones that are pissed that shanny was fired....because he couldnt get over the .500 hump and into the playoffs WITHOUT Jake. LMAO.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

rcsodak
10-13-2010, 09:26 AM
You win some you lose some, but the Phillies are a baseball team.
lmao.... :lol:
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

rcsodak
10-13-2010, 09:49 AM
I don't have time to do it, but does anyone know how many teams were worse (or better) than 2 losing seasons, 4 playoff appearances and 1 AFFCG?
My guess is that there are maybe 5-8 other teams that only had 2 losing seasons in that stretch, and I would be willing to bet that most of those 5-8 had more than 2 losing seasons in the 14 year stretch of Shanny's tenure.
Again, I don't mean it as a slam, just a fact, but we are spoiled. I have said it for years. Our terrible stretch is Shanny's last 10 years where we had 90 wins, or his final three where we were .500 and missed the playoffs three years in a row.
Said that same shit til blue in the face, in defense of shanny, T. And listened to the "I can accept 2-3 losing seasons under a new HC". I called BS then, and was right. I dont hate shanny. Never have/will. But I will use him as a basis for comparisons when it's worthy, when defending McD. Believe I'm speaking for others as well.
[size=1][i]Mobile Post via Mobile.Bro

rcsodak
10-13-2010, 10:07 AM
Well, we've made RC's day. He made the yellow snowballs, left them laying around in this thread, and we've all obliged by picking them up and throwing them around.

Looks like the only winner in this was RC.

Congrats, RC: We who are about to die, :salute: you.....
Well, it wasn't for lack of trying, but I DID try to copy/paste your 1996 emoticons from another reply to me, but we mere mortals are restrictrd from such over exhuberance. *sigh*
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Tned
10-13-2010, 10:14 AM
Well, it wasn't for lack of trying, but I DID try to copy/paste your 1996 emoticons from another reply to me, but we mere mortals are restrictrd from such over exhuberance. *sigh*
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Yes, but you have to admit that 1996 was the start of a great run for Broncos fans... ;)

Tned
10-13-2010, 10:18 AM
I was saying that same shit til blue in the face, in defense of shanny, T. And listened to the "I can accept 2-3 losing seasons under a new HC". I called BS then, and was right. I dont hate shanny. Never have/will. But I will use him as a basis for comparisons when it's worthy, when defending McD. Believe I'm speaking for others as well.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

That's the spoiled part I am talking about. People say, "I don't care if we have two or three really bad seasons, it's part of rebuilding", but if it actually started happening (based on the last 15 games, it might be), then they likely will sing a different tune.

Now, while even Pat Bowlen said McDaniels made rookie mistakes, McDaniels should be given a lot of credit for cutting/replacing about 2/3 of the roster and replacing about 1/2 of the starters and for the most part fielding a competitive team.

Regardless of whether or not you agree with replacing 1/2 the starters, the fact that he did it and is 10-11 in his time here is pretty impressive.

Lonestar
10-13-2010, 10:34 AM
That's my point, your spoiled. It's GREAT that in the Bowlen era we can be so spoiled that winning seasons and always being in the chase for the playoffs isn't enough, like it is for virtually every other franchise. It's great that a winning season is nothing, because you haven't had to endure 4 win seasons -- you don't know the pain of being a Bengals fan or Browns fan or Patriots fan or Colts fan or Cowboys fans or any of those other teams that had 1, 2, 3 or 5 win seasons over the last 25 years.

Name one other team that's been able to have that length of long term consistency.... Hence the reason we are spoiled.

Now, you can make an argument that we would be better to have the 1, 3, 3, 4, and 6 win seasons in the 10 year stretch prior to Indy's great run or the 2, 5, 5, 6, 6 win seasons the Pats had in the '90s, before their great run.

You say that not having 4 win seasons is not something to be happy about, but that's because you haven't had to endure REAL rebuilding periods.

There are a few of us that know losing, with no hope of a winning season.

So while mike spoiled some of you, many others are happy playing competitive ball when/if we lose a close one to a good opponent, I'm not devastated like some of the younger fans.

While I do not like to lose any time some times the elite teams (Which IMO we are building towards) just have to many horses pulling the wagon to beat. Losing to one when we play great error free ball is not the end of the world. at least to me.

I see a lot of light at the end of what for me has been a long dark tunnel. I no longer feel that or day one draft choices are going to be busts and if they are they are cut or traded, to make room on the roster for other players. We have a coach for the most part that winning is the only thing and there seems to be no stigma of admitting a mistake in personnel decisions. Unlike holding onto a player for a couple of years and then cutting them in TC. When the fan base knew up front the clown was a clown almost from the time he/she was drafted.

Josh has gotten coaches and players that have up side and has treated the defensive line like it is part of the team. Not just an after thought to the LBing core. Same applies to the OLINE has gotten some beef up there to at least give us a chance at redzone or third and short. Now it is up to the players to make it happen.

Like I said I see light at the end of the tunnel .

jhildebrand
10-13-2010, 10:35 AM
I wouldn't mind losing another 2-3 seasons, even under McD, if we are truly rebuilding.

I am sorry I don't buy the rebuilding argument. Where is the youth aside from the offensive line? :confused:

9 of 11 starters on D are WELL OVER 30! Even then we have not really drafted on D in the higher rounds save for Ayers.

Lloyd, while he has been great, this is his 8th or 9th season in the league all while Decker and Thomas have sat for the most part.

Tebow is a Bronco and i will support him but part of me will always wonder exactly what team we would/could be fielding right now had we used all those picks McD gained on players instead of one.

I will buy the rebuilding argument when we are a young team across the board i.e. KC and TB.

EDIT: I do agree with Tned in that a 10-11 record is impressive considering the roster shuffle that has taken place.

Northman
10-13-2010, 10:39 AM
personally i think jay came out worse than MCD which is sad because together the QB talent and the Qb whisperer could have been something special:lol:

This i agree with and always have. Jay could of easily made McD look like the fool but with his actions took the spotlight away and came out looking like a huge douche.

arapaho2
10-13-2010, 10:49 AM
Yeah, I miss being mediocre and going nowhere too.


yeah finishing 8-8 and being below .500 this year really fixed that mediocre problem didnt it:lol:

Dzone
10-13-2010, 10:51 AM
In my college football days, I loafed in practice and would come to life on saturday afternoon and go crazy. I sucked as a practice player and the coaches hated it and benched me a few times. I had to come off the bench a few times because of poor practices.LOL..Maybe Hillis is a bad practice player and who rises to the occasion on game day
Hillis was a HUGE mistake...even from a fan standpoint...everybody loved Hiilllis

rcsodak
10-13-2010, 10:52 AM
That's the spoiled part I am talking about. People say, "I don't care if we have two or three really bad seasons, it's part of rebuilding", but if it actually started happening (based on the last 15 games, it might be), then they likely will sing a different tune.

Now, while even Pat Bowlen said McDaniels made rookie mistakes, McDaniels should be given a lot of credit for cutting/replacing about 2/3 of the roster and replacing about 1/2 of the starters and for the most part fielding a competitive team.

Regardless of whether or not you agree with replacing 1/2 the starters, the fact that he did it and is 10-11 in his time here is pretty impressive.
I apologize for this, T, but we agree more than disagree. :T shoots self in head:
:D
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

BroncoWave
10-13-2010, 10:59 AM
yeah finishing 8-8 and being below .500 this year really fixed that mediocre problem didnt it:lol:

Because when a team overhauls it's entire coaching staff and half its roster and puts in an entirely new system it should be expected to have a better record than the previous year in year 1! :lol:

Josh McDaniels basically rebuilt a team on the fly and still had them in playoff contention last season.

I'm REALLY glad some on here don't own this team or else we would be firing coaches every year we didn't win the Super Bowl.

arapaho2
10-13-2010, 11:00 AM
Cutler was 2-3 while Plunger was 7-4 with that team. Cutler also went from averaging 30 points per game his rookie season, to averaging 20 points a game in 2007, to only +3 in 2008 at 23 ppg.

Cutler's best stretch of football with Denver was his 5 game stretch as a rookie. I'm still wondering wtf happened to him.


the same thing that you all are blaming ortons 4 game skid on last year...a defense allowing 28 points per game

you all cant bash cutler for the teams record specially 08 when we had so many people on IR and a defense that bled points ...and then have people defende last years collapse by blaming the defense

NightTrainLayne
10-13-2010, 11:07 AM
I wouldn't mind losing another 2-3 seasons, even under McD, if we are truly rebuilding.

I am sorry I don't buy the rebuilding argument. Where is the youth aside from the offensive line? :confused:

9 of 11 starters on D are WELL OVER 30! Even then we have not really drafted on D in the higher rounds save for Ayers.

Lloyd, while he has been great, this is his 8th or 9th season in the league all while Decker and Thomas have sat for the most part.

Tebow is a Bronco and i will support him but part of me will always wonder exactly what team we would/could be fielding right now had we used all those picks McD gained on players instead of one.

I will buy the rebuilding argument when we are a young team across the board i.e. KC and TB.

EDIT: I do agree with Tned in that a 10-11 record is impressive considering the roster shuffle that has taken place.

9 of 11 defensive starters are "WELL OVER" 30? :confused:

Vickerson < 30
Hunter < 30
DJ < 30
Haggan = 30
Ayers < 30

So, that's really 5 of 11 starters from last week's game that are either WELL UNDER 30 or Haggan @ 30.

Virtually all of our depth is WELL UNDER 30, to wit: McBean, Thomas, Woodyard, Mays, Cox, Bruton, McBath, Jones, Thompson, Vaughn and even. . .Moss.

So. . .6 of 11 starters are well over 30. . .and play pretty damn well. Well enough to not be supplanted by the younger guys yet, but the younger guys have some great players to learn their positions from.

McD I think, is actually going about this the smart way. Being young across the board is probably actually a sign that you didn't plan for rebuilding, and instead waited too long to do so and are now stuck with a bunch of rookies and little leadership.

I've seen random folks ask the Post writers several times why Decker and Thomas haven't played much yet. . .well, Lloyd et al are doing so damn well they can't crack the lineup, and that's saying something because I think they are REALLY talented guys.

We are rebuilding, and our roster has a LOT of youth on it. Not all of that youth is starting, but they are grooming a lot of young guys to step up down the road.

arapaho2
10-13-2010, 11:11 AM
Because when a team overhauls it's entire coaching staff and half its roster and puts in an entirely new system it should be expected to have a better record than the previous year in year 1! :lol:

Josh McDaniels basically rebuilt a team on the fly and still had them in playoff contention last season.

I'm REALLY glad some on here don't own this team or else we would be firing coaches every year we didn't win the Super Bowl.

umm when was we in contention after week 10 when the bolts overtook us?
josh didnt build a team on the fly...he took a .500 team loaded with young improving talent on offense and a horrible defense...and dismantled it and built it back into the same .500 team

he didnt have to fix the offense...he coulda got a quality back...improved the oline...fixed the dline

instead he tore it down ...he didnt have to...we had talent...rex inherited a weak team...he kept the good, improved the bad, changed the coaching staff, changed the scheme....and was a true contender in year one...look at KC this season in haleys year 2

you also must question the staff overhaul...did we need to let turner and dennisen walk?...did he need to challenge nolans authority over the defense? no
you think haley is dictating the defense to romeo?

topscribe
10-13-2010, 11:15 AM
damn ******* straight!

I don't care about balanced offenses.

I don't care about a team of goody two shoes with no 'character' problems.

I don't care about shit other than wins.

This, well, we might not be winning, but we have a team of Boy Scouts shit is getting old.

Tned, you've got to learn to speak your mind . . .

-----

topscribe
10-13-2010, 11:17 AM
How 'bout Jake Plummer/Mike Anderson?

Craig Morton/Haven Moses?

-----

rcsodak
10-13-2010, 11:40 AM
yeah finishing 8-8 and being below .500 this year really fixed that mediocre problem didnt it:lol:
more fuzzy math...... Lol
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

rcsodak
10-13-2010, 11:45 AM
In my college football days, I loafed in practice and would come to life on saturday afternoon and go crazy. I sucked as a practice player and the coaches hated it and benched me a few times. I had to come off the bench a few times because of poor practices.LOL..Maybe Hillis is a bad practice player and who rises to the occasion on game day
Hillis was a HUGE mistake...even from a fan standpoint...everybody loved Hiilllis
10 carries 28yds. Now injured and not practicing. What many have said, Concerning his running style.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

arapaho2
10-13-2010, 11:48 AM
more fuzzy math...... Lol
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums


my bad we are below mediocre

i believe the math is correct..we ended the season at 8-8

i believe right now were are 2-3...:listen: psssst...thats below .500

maybe you could give us a math lesson showing how we are not..mediocre considering in mcds tenure we are 10-11...please enlighten us:lol:

Tned
10-13-2010, 11:54 AM
Tned, you've got to learn to speak your mind . . .

-----

I'm working on it...

Elevation inc
10-13-2010, 01:53 PM
It comes down to the role and responsibility of the issue. Jay's job is to throw the football and lead the offense. Josh's job is to coach, encourage, teach, manage relationships. It starts and stops with the head coach. His inability and unwillingness to manage the situation in a constructive, respectful and positive manner was a failure as a head coach. Right off the bat.

right so lets just let football players act like petulant kids while making millions...great role models, dude couldnt even call the owner of the team tha tdrafted him, jays job was to obey his contract and play football. he let his mouth get in the way...MCd's job was to coach and build a team, he let his mouth get in the way.....i fault each 50-50 period they both were tools and im still pissed at both for it. thank goodness orton is playing lights out and not making us look absolutely oakland raider foolish in that trade

Elevation inc
10-13-2010, 01:55 PM
I agree they both showed their youth, immaturity and ego. If "greater resposibility" is going to be placed anywhere, it has to be the head coach, because they are paid big dollars to manage young, high strung talent. However, I don't even feel it's necessary to hang that on McD.

It just gets old to see this not only rehashed, but theories used to fill in the blanks (because 95%+ of the events that took place are in fact blanks), because none of us REALLY know what happened.


We don't know what happened between them when McD first took the job.
We don't know what happened at the combine when McD was approached about trading for Cassel (and from what I understand moving Jay in a three way).
We don't know what happened when he got the calls, but was "late to the game".
We don't know whether Jay's claim that McDaniels denied discussing a trade was true.


We simply have almost no facts as to what REALLY happened, so to fill in the blanks with speculation just serves to continue an argument that can't be won, because we don't know what happened.

In 30+ years when McDaniels retires and rights his auto-biography, then we might finally know what really happened. Until then, we don't.

your right and i agree those 4 bullets no one has facts to as far as i can tell. but jay did ask out he demanded a trade thats asking out thats not speculation.....i wish he wouldnt have for both him and MCd's sake.....karma is biting them both a little it seems....

Elevation inc
10-13-2010, 02:00 PM
I wouldn't mind losing another 2-3 seasons, even under McD, if we are truly rebuilding.

I am sorry I don't buy the rebuilding argument. Where is the youth aside from the offensive line? :confused:

9 of 11 starters on D are WELL OVER 30! Even then we have not really drafted on D in the higher rounds save for Ayers.

Lloyd, while he has been great, this is his 8th or 9th season in the league all while Decker and Thomas have sat for the most part.

Tebow is a Bronco and i will support him but part of me will always wonder exactly what team we would/could be fielding right now had we used all those picks McD gained on players instead of one.

I will buy the rebuilding argument when we are a young team across the board i.e. KC and TB.

EDIT: I do agree with Tned in that a 10-11 record is impressive considering the roster shuffle that has taken place.

i dont buy rebuilding either chiefs rebuilt and our a WR and Qb away, seems we are still trying to win now....fine but lets see some results and wins....

i think he had a really good last draft and im still quite high on moreno(he better learn to stay healthy though)/ayers/Mcbath/Bruton...so i see some youth, but he had damn well better address our DL and front seven next draft and maybe guard or i will be quite mad....

TXBRONC
10-13-2010, 02:09 PM
your right and i agree those 4 bullets no one has facts to as far as i can tell. but jay did ask out he demanded a trade thats asking out thats not speculation.....i wish he wouldnt have for both him and MCd's sake.....karma is biting them both a little it seems....

Yes Jay did ask however that really means nothing. Just because Jay asked didn't mean that the front office had to oblige because he was under contract. Chad Johnson demanded a traded for two or three years but the Bengals did not give in just because he demanded it.

BroncoWave
10-13-2010, 02:14 PM
Yes Jay did ask however that really means nothing. Just because Jay asked didn't mean that the front office had to oblige because he was under contract. Chad Johnson demanded a traded for two or three years but the Bengals did not give in just because he demanded it.

Ochocinco and Cutler's situations had literally nothing in common other than the fact that both asked for trades.

TXBRONC
10-13-2010, 02:24 PM
Ochocinco and Cutler's situations had literally nothing in common other than the fact that both asked for trades.

I never said their situation were exactly alike nor does that matter. Both players were contract so bottom line is neither team had to give to the player's demand.

rcsodak
10-13-2010, 02:32 PM
my bad we are below mediocre

i believe the math is correct..we ended the season at 8-8

i believe right now were are 2-3...:listen: psssst...thats below .500

maybe you could give us a math lesson showing how we are not..mediocre considering in mcds tenure we are 10-11...please enlighten us:lol:
I would, rap, if = thought you'd actually read and digest it. But others have tried and you're still saying the same thing. Time to agree to disagree and wait it out to see who's "feelings" are correct.
The "fuzzy math" comment was a joke from 1 "shallow skinned" poster to the other. :D
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

rcsodak
10-13-2010, 02:37 PM
Yes Jay did ask however that really means nothing. Just because Jay asked didn't mean that the front office had to oblige because he was under contract. Chad Johnson demanded a traded for two or three years but the Bengals did not give in just because he demanded it.
True. But a brand new HC coming in doesnt need the added drama, vs an ingrained HC who's habitually dealt with the player and his antics, imo.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Tned
10-13-2010, 03:27 PM
your right and i agree those 4 bullets no one has facts to as far as i can tell. but jay did ask out he demanded a trade thats asking out thats not speculation.....i wish he wouldnt have for both him and MCd's sake.....karma is biting them both a little it seems....

Actually, there are differing accounts of if, or when, or how, Jay asked for a trade.

At 4-11 in the last 15 games for the Broncos and Jay getting treated like a crash dummy by his O-line, I guess you are right that Karma is biting both McDaniels and Jay a bit.

I Eat Staples
10-13-2010, 03:35 PM
I'll take 08 offense with a side of 10 defense, please.

And if it's not too much to ask, just replace Cutler with Orton.

BroncoWave
10-13-2010, 04:01 PM
I never said their situation were exactly alike nor does that matter. Both players were contract so bottom line is neither team had to give to the player's demand.

So you're saying that Denver traded him for the sole reason that he asked them to? I don't buy that.

TXBRONC
10-13-2010, 04:04 PM
True. But a brand new HC coming in doesnt need the added drama, vs an ingrained HC who's habitually dealt with the player and his antics, imo.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Imo Jay isn't the only one responsible for the drama that unfolded.

I Eat Staples
10-13-2010, 04:11 PM
Attempting to trade Cutler to bring in Cassell was literally the dumbest move McD has ever made or tried to make. Can we all agree Matt Cassell is one of the worst, if not the worst, starting QBs in the league?

TXBRONC
10-13-2010, 04:13 PM
So you're saying that Denver traded him for the sole reason that he asked them to? I don't buy that.

That's not what I said. Regardless of the dynamics that surrounded each situation player the Bengals and the Broncos both had the right to either meet the demand or not too.

BroncoWave
10-13-2010, 05:03 PM
That's not what I said. Regardless of the dynamics that surrounded each situation player the Bengals and the Broncos both had the right to either meet the demand or not too.

And the Broncos got a great deal and pulled the trigger and the Bengals didn't. In hindsight both teams made the correct decision with how things turned out.

TXBRONC
10-13-2010, 05:23 PM
And the Broncos got a great deal and pulled the trigger and the Bengals didn't. In hindsight both teams made the correct decision with how things turned out.

We'll see.

atwater27
10-13-2010, 06:01 PM
Because when a team overhauls it's entire coaching staff and half its rosterThat's the point. it was entirely unecessary and counterproductive to overhaul what didn't need to be overhauled. and puts in an entirely new system it should be expected to have a better record than the previous year in year 1! :lol:

Josh McDaniels basically rebuilt a team on the fly and still had them in playoff contention last season.

I'm REALLY glad some on here don't own this team or else we would be firing coaches every year we didn't win the Super Bowl.

Not really. Actually, I don't know anyone on here that would want to do that.

BroncoWave
10-13-2010, 06:40 PM
http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:eq7yMJty0d7DMM:http://i480.photobucket.com/albums/rr163/NinjaShade_04/CoolStoryBro.jpg&t=1

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 07:40 PM
Ok, now you've upped the anti to a level not worth even debating. It's one point to say winning seasons and being the playoff hunt mean nothing (quite a few Denver fans say that), but to go with Seattle who just had 4 and 5 win seasons, and to up the anti from saying Shanahan has struggled not for 10 years, but for 12 years, which includes the back to back Super Bowls, makes absolutely no sense to me.

Ok, I will keep this simple.

1 playoff win in 10 seasons.

Try arguing your way out of that one.

atwater27
10-13-2010, 07:45 PM
http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:eq7yMJty0d7DMM:http://i480.photobucket.com/albums/rr163/NinjaShade_04/CoolStoryBro.jpg&t=1

I don't understand. What do you mean?

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 07:46 PM
Hoping for something better? Guess we missed the mark on that one.

Not yet. Josh McDaniels still has 9 seasons, including the rest of this year, to get 1 playoff win. He would then equal Shanahan's final 10 years in Denver, which is pathetic.

If I would have known that winning 2 consecutive SuperBowls with the GOAT#7 would have translated to 1 playoff win over the course of the next 10 seasons, I would have emailed that to Pat Bowlen, who could have shipped Shanahan's ass out the door the day Elway retired and never looked back.

Then we would be past this entire mess, instead of right in the middle of it.

spikerman
10-13-2010, 07:49 PM
Not yet. Josh McDaniels still has 9 seasons, including the rest of this year, to get 1 playoff win. He would then equal Shanahan's final 10 years in Denver, which is pathetic.

If I would have known that winning 2 consecutive SuperBowls with the GOAT#7 would have translated to 1 playoff win over the course of the next 10 seasons, I would have emailed that to Pat Bowlen, who could have shipped Shanahan's ass out the door the day Elway retired and never looked back.

Then we would be past this entire mess, instead of right in the middle of it.

Wait, we're still in the middle of it? Shanahan is still the coach? This is still Shanahan's problem? Have I just been having a season + 4 games nightmare? Silk, you've given me a good reason to wake up tomorrow. Thanks! :beer:

atwater27
10-13-2010, 07:49 PM
Not yet. Josh McDaniels still has 9 seasons, including the rest of this year, to get 1 playoff win. He would then equal Shanahan's final 10 years in Denver, which is pathetic.

If I would have known that winning 2 consecutive SuperBowls with the GOAT#7 would have translated to 1 playoff win over the course of the next 10 seasons, I would have emailed that to Pat Bowlen, who could have shipped Shanahan's ass out the door the day Elway retired and never looked back.

Then we would be past this entire mess, instead of right in the middle of it.

If only I had the sports almanac several decades from the future, I could be a quadrillionaire and own the world. O well, guess I'll settle for Shanahan being 10 times the coach Josh will ever be.

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 07:51 PM
Wait, we're still in the middle of it? Shanahan is still the coach? This is still Shanahan's problem? Have I just been having a season + 4 games nightmare? Silk, you've given me a good reason to wake up tomorrow. Thanks! :beer:

If Bowlen would have done the right thing, and reasonably fired Shanahan around 2003-2004 when he was single handidly getting his ass kicked by a young QB who couldn't win a playoff game in Peyton Manning, we might have even possibly have won one more than 1 playoff game since, which would equal the amount of playoff wins Shanahan has without John GOAT#7 Elway.

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 07:53 PM
If only I had the sports almanac several decades from the future, I could be a quadrillionaire and own the world. O well, guess I'll settle for Shanahan being 10 times the coach Josh will ever be.

Considering you don't have the sports almanac several decades from the futue, you can do no such thing.

Northman
10-13-2010, 07:55 PM
Wait, we're still in the middle of it? Shanahan is still the coach? This is still Shanahan's problem?

You didnt get that memo?

And thus far, Mcd is off to a good start with no playoff appearances and on his way to a second. 9 years should pass by very fast at this rate. :lol:

Tned
10-13-2010, 07:56 PM
Not yet. Josh McDaniels still has 9 seasons, including the rest of this year, to get 1 playoff win. He would then equal Shanahan's final 10 years in Denver, which is pathetic.

If I would have known that winning 2 consecutive SuperBowls with the GOAT#7 would have translated to 1 playoff win over the course of the next 10 seasons, I would have emailed that to Pat Bowlen, who could have shipped Shanahan's ass out the door the day Elway retired and never looked back.

Then we would be past this entire mess, instead of right in the middle of it.

So, does that also mean that you would trade the SBs for the seven years before them with only ONE playoff win?

Or, how about the EIGHT years before the '86 SB loss where there were NO playoff wins?

Like I said, spoiled. The Bowlen/Elway years spoiled Broncos fans into believing that UNLIKE the rest of the NFL, playoff wins and SB appearances were a birth right for Broncos fans.

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 07:58 PM
John GOAT#7 Elway has more SuperBowl appearances without Mike Shanahan then Mike Shanahan has playoff wins without John GOAT#7 Elway!

Ravage!!!
10-13-2010, 07:59 PM
ITs absurd. We had one of the highest winning percentages in the NFL over that 10 years. I can do it again, but I can show where some of the greatest coaches in the NFL have never had the winning % of Shanahan after losing their HoF coach. I can show FRANCHISES that continued to change coach after coach after coach to try and get the wins they had when having that talent, yet NEVER had the success Shanahan had.

Personally. I KNOW we are a better franchise having kept Shanahan during those ten years and not succumbing to the losing seasons that EVERY franchise has suffered after losing HoF talent.

We didn't suffer through the merri-go-round of coaches, and succeeded in times that MANY have failed... and succeeded with one of the highest winning percentage in the entire NFL when attempting to replace the GOAT. Something no one else has done.

Criticizing that kind of success, in my opinion, is ludicrous.

Ravage!!!
10-13-2010, 08:00 PM
John GOAT#7 Elway has more SuperBowl appearances without Mike Shanahan then Mike Shanahan has playoff wins without John GOAT#7 Elway!

Mike was the OC.

Northman
10-13-2010, 08:00 PM
John GOAT#7 Elway has more SuperBowl appearances without Mike Shanahan then Mike Shanahan has playoff wins without John GOAT#7 Elway!

All losses of course.

But, dont let me get in the way of your Shanahan bashing. :salute:

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 08:02 PM
Mike was the OC.

That doesn't count. Remember, it doesn't count for Josh McDaniels when he was the OC in the Patriots SuperBowl.

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 08:03 PM
All losses of course.

But, dont let me get in the way of your Shanahan bashing. :salute:

Great point.

Who cares about watching yout team in the SuperBowl when you can go every year without finishing 4-12.

If Josh McDaniels can find a way to get to 7+ wins this year, we can chalk it up to another great year.

Northman
10-13-2010, 08:04 PM
That doesn't count. Remember, it doesn't count for Josh McDaniels when he was the OC in the Patriots SuperBowl.

Exactly. Thats why Shanny gets credit for the 2 SB wins.

Ravage!!!
10-13-2010, 08:04 PM
That doesn't count. Remember, it doesn't count for Josh McDaniels when he was the OC in the Patriots SuperBowl.

Sure it counts. He lost as well. But the difference is that the Patriots WON the SUper Bowls before McD took over as the OC, and had their only loss in this period with Brady when he was.

At least shanahan won a Super Bowl with San Fran as their OC, and won 2 as HC in Denver.

Northman
10-13-2010, 08:05 PM
Great point.

Who cares about watching yout team in the SuperBowl when you can go every year without finishing 4-12.

If Josh McDaniels can find a way to get to 7+ wins this year, we can chalk it up to another great year.

So, you admit that you would of been happier being at Raider level instead of at least competing and above average. Wonderful. This place never ceases to amaze me.

Tned
10-13-2010, 08:05 PM
Great point.

Who cares about watching yout team in the SuperBowl when you can go every year without finishing 4-12.

If Josh McDaniels can find a way to get to 7+ wins this year, we can chalk it up to another great year.

The best sarcasm is based in truth -- just a tip for future attempts.

P.S. 7 wins isn't a winning season.

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 08:05 PM
Exactly. Thats why Shanny gets credit for the 2 SB wins.

Why all the hate on John GOAT#7 Elway?

Northman
10-13-2010, 08:06 PM
Why all the hate on John GOAT#7 Elway?

Who's hating? He was 0-3 in SB's before Shanny arrived. Pretty simple if you ask me.

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 08:07 PM
So, you admit that you would of been happier being at Raider level instead of at least competing and above average. Wonderful. This place never ceases to amaze me.

Since the year 2000, the Raiders have more playoff wins in one season that Denver has total. Only in Denver are we happy finishing "2nd place" apparently, or in our case, somewhere around 15th.

HORSEPOWER 56
10-13-2010, 08:07 PM
damn ******* straight!

I don't care about balanced offenses.

I don't care about a team of goody two shoes with no 'character' problems.

I don't care about shit other than wins.

This, well, we might not be winning, but we have a team of Boy Scouts shit is getting old.

Not to mention, but if this team struggles down the stretch and ends up in the 5-6 win range, we'll get to see how these "boy scouts" react. Will the locker room still be strong and still be buying into the coach and his message if we don't win with him?

No matter what people think of Shanahan, the two SB rings bought him a ton of credibility for what he was coaching and his vision for the team to FAs and young players in that if we had a down year, there was always hope to turn it around. Lots of fans here wouldn't mind having a coach like Cowher, or Gruden... why? Because they won a SB, that's why. Cowher was the HC of the Steelers for how many years? He gave them one SB win in 2 appearances and is seen as the hottest commodity of potentially available coaches every off-season. Why? Because he's been there, done that, got the T-shirt.

If the Broncos struggle, will the players still trust McDaniels to get them there and play hard for him? Or will they become apathetic and frustrated with not ever being good enough to compete and start looking elsewhere? It's a lot easier to retain talented potential FAs and lure new ones if you are competitive. Coaches like Shanahan, Bellichick, Cowher, and Dungy (when he was still in Indy) got a longer leash and were guys that people wanted to play for because they were proven winners. McDaniels has SB rings... but only as an assistant coach. His success as an assisnt coach in NE looks good on a resume, but it will only last so long for the players and Bowlen if he can't produce wins and playoff appearances. He's less proven then Gary Kubiak who, if the Texans don't make thew playoffs this year, will probably lose his job.

Even the New England luster has worn off as of late. Guys like Randy Moss and Adalius Thomas were chomping at the bit to go there and "win a Championship". Now, both are gone because they realized that New England is going backwards instead of forward and spoke out about it. Years of not paying top talent and trying to replace them with mediocre draft picks has finally taken its toll on the Pats. Their defense is a hollow shell of what it formerly was and their best O-lineman wants the hell out of there.

The bottom line here is, winning cures all ills and losing only creates more. It will be very enlightening to see how the players react if things don't work out like they think it will. Even if offered a contract, will Champ want to stay if we're a 5 win team? What about Orton? If he has the type of season it looks like he will, will he want to stay if we can't help him with a running game and having to always look over his shoulder at Tebow breathing down his neck to start?

If we don't win (playoff spot) and if there's a lockout next year, I won't be surprised to see this roster BLOWN UP in 2011, including the coaching staff and a new one installed for 2012. if there's one thing Bowlen has shown, it's that he's not going to wait long for wins. Reeves and Shanahan got slack from playoff and SB appearances, Phillips... not so much. McDaniels? Still yet to be seen.

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 08:08 PM
The best sarcasm is based in truth -- just a tip for future attempts.

P.S. 7 wins isn't a winning season.

I understand that. I try and tell that to the Shanahan + Cutler lovers, but they don't seem to want to listen.

Northman
10-13-2010, 08:08 PM
Since the year 2000, the Raiders have more playoff wins in one season that Denver has total. Only in Denver are we happy finishing "2nd place" apparently, or in our case, somewhere around 15th.

I thought we were happy at least being at a competitive level. Guess its better to be bottom of the barrell for 9 out 10 years rather than in the thick of it. Great logic.

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 08:09 PM
Who's hating? He was 0-3 in SB's before Shanny arrived. Pretty simple if you ask me.

That almost as impressive as Shanahan's 1 playoff win in 10 years without the GOAT, but in a backwards kind of way. It is very simple.

Northman
10-13-2010, 08:10 PM
That almost as impressive as Shanahan's 1 playoff win in 10 years without the GOAT, but in a backwards kind of way. It is very simple.

What was his total w/l record in that time again? I forget.

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 08:10 PM
I thought we were happy at least being at a competitive level. Guess its better to be bottom of the barrell for 9 out 10 years rather than in the thick of it. Great logic.

That's just the thing. If 15th out of 32 NFL teams is your idea of "competing", what about the teams like Chargers that are consisntently in that 6-12 range? "Greatness"?

Ravage!!!
10-13-2010, 08:11 PM
Great point.

Who cares about watching yout team in the SuperBowl when you can go every year without finishing 4-12.

If Josh McDaniels can find a way to get to 7+ wins this year, we can chalk it up to another great year.

Just shows how hard it is to win after trying to replace that kind of talent. Some of the greatest of ALL TIME were unable to do it.

So obviously you are a Shanahan fan. You feel he should have been able to do what San Fran, Dallas, Miami, Buffalo, Pittsburgh were completely unable to do. Not to mention all the other franchises that can't seem to win a single Super Bowl...even when having HoF QBs.

claymore
10-13-2010, 08:12 PM
Shanny is a Bronco great. It was time for him to go though. We needed new blood. If McDaniels isnt it, Im more than fine with bringing in the next guy until we find someone as good as a young Shanahan.

My greatest fear is that Bowlen hangs on to McD for longer than he should because of what he invested in him.

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 08:12 PM
What was his total w/l record in that time again? I forget.


That ties into the "we might not be winning anything of significance in the playoffs, but at least we have a good regular season record.

At least an organization like the Vikings, who have a very simliar up and down stretch to Denver since 2000, understand that sometimes the regular season just isn't good enough.

Tned
10-13-2010, 08:13 PM
Since the year 2000, the Raiders have more playoff wins in one season that Denver has total. Only in Denver are we happy finishing "2nd place" apparently, or in our case, somewhere around 15th.

So, just to be clear, you are saying you would trade the Broncos 10 years following the SB wins for those three years of playoff wins by the Raiders, including a Super Bowl loss, and could care less that the seven seasons that followed the SB losss were five or less wins (4, 5, 4, 2, 4, 5 and 5)?

Really, that's your story?

Rather than SB win, SB win, and then having 10 seasons averaging close to 10 wins a season, four playoff appearances and one AFCCG appearance, you would rather be like the Raiders with three playoff seasons, a SB loss, followed by 7 seasons averaging 4 wins a season?

Really, that's your story and you're sticking with it? :confused:

spikerman
10-13-2010, 08:14 PM
I've gotten completely lost in this thread. Can anyone explain to me what Shanahan's record in Denver over the past 10 years has to do with McDaniels currently having an overall record of 10-13 - including having a better record than only the Lions and Rams over the final 10 games last year? I don't want to have to reread the entire thread to try to figure it out.

Northman
10-13-2010, 08:15 PM
That ties into the "we might not be winning anything of significance in the playoffs, but at least we have a good regular season record.

At least an organization like the Vikings, who have a very simliar up and down stretch to Denver since 2000, understand that sometimes the regular season just isn't good enough.


Might not be the ultimate high but at least to this Bronco fan it beats what the Raiders are doing. But, so far nothing has changed so i guess your pretty pissed at McD too. I mean, he is so mediocre afterall. :lol:

Northman
10-13-2010, 08:16 PM
I've gotten completely lost in this thread. Can anyone explain to me what Shanahan's record in Denver over the past 10 years has to do with McDaniels currently having an overall record of 10-13 including having a better record than only the Lions and Rams over the final 10 games last year? I don't want to have to reread the entire thread to try to figure it out.

Because certain individuals feel the need to trash a Bronco great in order to make the new guy look like a genius.

spikerman
10-13-2010, 08:17 PM
Might not be the ultimate high but at least to this Bronco fan it beats what the Raiders are doing. But, so far nothing has changed so i guess your pretty pissed at McD too. I mean, he is so mediocre afterall. :lol:

Not quite. If he can go 3-0 over the next 3 games he will achieve mediocrity. I think he can do it, but I'm an optimist!

Northman
10-13-2010, 08:17 PM
So, just to be clear, you are saying you would trade those three years of playoff wins by the Raiders, including a Super Bowl loss, and could care less that the seven seasons that followed were five or less wins (4, 5, 4, 2, 4, 5 and 5)?

Really, that's your story?



Yes, thats what he is saying.

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 08:17 PM
Just shows how hard it is to win after trying to replace that kind of talent. Some of the greatest of ALL TIME were unable to do it.

So obviously you are a Shanahan fan. You feel he should have been able to do what San Fran, Dallas, Miami, Buffalo, Pittsburgh were completely unable to do. Not to mention all the other franchises that can't seem to win a single Super Bowl...even when having HoF QBs.

I understand that, and obviously Shanahan wasn't able to do it, unless your happy with just regular seasoon results.

I'm a Shanahan fan. I honestly hope he does well in Washington, and I really think he will. I had very mixed feelings when he was fired. I at least always loved watching Denver play because the offense was dynamic. But at some point, you just have to say this isn't working for an organization that wants a little more than an occasional playoff appearance coupled with blowout losses.

I will continue to play the devils advocate to the fans that hate on McDaniels for the state of the organization, when it isn't really any different then what's been happening since John Elway retired. Nobody can argue that.

If McDaniels is here for 10 seasons, I am pretty sure he could win at least 1 playoff game too, while having a handfuil of these 7-9, and 9-7 seasons that Shanahan gave us.

spikerman
10-13-2010, 08:18 PM
Because certain individuals feel the need to trash a Bronco great in order to make the new guy look like a genius.

Oh, I forgot. Thanks!

Oh, I see how this is done. Have I told anybody lately that Terrell Davis couldn't hold Knowshon Moreno's jockstrap?

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 08:20 PM
So, just to be clear, you are saying you would trade those three years of playoff wins by the Raiders, including a Super Bowl loss, and could care less that the seven seasons that followed were five or less wins (4, 5, 4, 2, 4, 5 and 5)?

Really, that's your story?

Rather than SB win, SB win, and then having 10 seasons averaging close to 10 wins a season, four playoff appearances and one AFCCG appearance, you would rather be like the Raiders with three playoff seasons, a SB loss, followed by 7 seasons averaging 4 wins a season?

Really, that's your story and you're sticking with it? :confused:

No. Please keep up. In honest mentality, I would say thanks for the 2 SuperBowls, but you just weren't able to get us back to the top after 10 seasons.

I mean seriously. How much time does a coach get to figure it out. Shanahan had 10 seasons, and left without figuring it out. What, 4 playoff blowout losses weren't enough for you?

You seriously need to look at Ravage's posts. He's the most objective pro Shanahan anti McDaniels member in your camp.

Northman
10-13-2010, 08:21 PM
Oh, I forgot. Thanks!

Oh, I see how this is done. Have I told anybody lately that Terrell Davis couldn't hold Knowshon Moreno's jockstrap?

See dude, now you know how it works. I mean, Kyle has blown John's passing record out of the water (Jake did too) so Elway was garbage. Just ask Silk.

spikerman
10-13-2010, 08:21 PM
By the way... I just want to go on record as saying that I'm just messing around. I normally think Silk has a lot of good takes - I'm just in a mood to give people crap tonight I guess. No hard feelings.

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 08:21 PM
Not quite. If he can go 3-0 over the next 3 games he will acheive mediocrity. I think he can do it, but I'm an optimist!

He will be right on par with the Shanahan + Cutler tenure.

How about that for "special"?

spikerman
10-13-2010, 08:22 PM
See dude, now you know how it works. I mean, Kyle has blown John's passing record out of the water (Jake did too) so Elway was garbage. Just ask Silk.

So now Elway is the #2 GOAT???? :confused:

Northman
10-13-2010, 08:22 PM
He will be right on par with the Shanahan + Cutler tenure.

How about that for "special"?


Going by your logic why wait 9 more years. Fire him now. :lol:

Northman
10-13-2010, 08:23 PM
So now Elway is the #2 GOAT???? :confused:

Get it right, Jake is #2. Elway is now #3 and sharing the bench with Quinn.

Tned
10-13-2010, 08:23 PM
No. Please keep up. In honest mentality, I would say thanks for the 2 SuperBowls, but you just weren't able to get us back to the top after 10 seasons.

I mean seriously. How much time does a coach get to figure it out. Shanahan had 10 seasons, and left without figuring it out. What, 4 playoff blowout losses weren't enough for you?

You seriously need to look at Ravage's posts. He's the most objective pro Shanahan anti McDaniels member in your camp.

So again, since you recounted how much BETTER the Raiders have done with their more playoff wins in one season than Shanahan had in ten years, you clearly think that those playoff wins are woth the price. Right?

You would have no problem averaging 4 wins a season, you know that 4-12 you have posted in numerous threads, and having 7 straight seasons of 5 or less wins. Right? But, they had more playoff wins in those ten years than Shanahan and the Broncos.

So, we're clear, right?

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 08:25 PM
See dude, now you know how it works. I mean, Kyle has blown John's passing record out of the water (Jake did too) so Elway was garbage. Just ask Silk.

That's just absurd. You have obviously not been paying attention. Kyle Orton is too much like Jay Cutler to ever be compared to John Elway. John Elway won games. Kyle Orton and Jay Cutler threw for mega yards and couldn't score. Just because Jay Cutler thinks he has a stronger arm than John Elway doesn't mean you should be sipping the kool aid of him being better than John Elway. Or Kyle Orton for that matter.

Northman
10-13-2010, 08:26 PM
So again, since you recounted how much BETTER the Raiders have done with their more playoff wins in one season than Shanahan had in ten years, you clearly think that those playoff wins are woth the price. Right?




Im still baffled by his statements. He criticizes holding onto Shanahan for too long because we had too many average and above average seasons but then when wonderboy is doing no better we should hold onto him because of why again?....

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 08:27 PM
Going by your logic why wait 9 more years. Fire him now. :lol:

I agree. At least he did Denver a favor and got rid of a star studded offense who could get mega yards with no points. The only problem is he replaced them with other players who can get mega yards but can't score points.

Northman
10-13-2010, 08:27 PM
That's just absurd. You have obviously not been paying attention. Kyle Orton is too much like Jay Cutler to ever be compared to John Elway. John Elway won games. Kyle Orton and Jay Cutler threw for mega yards and couldn't score. Just because Jay Cutler thinks he has a stronger arm than John Elway doesn't mean you should be sipping the kool aid of him being better than John Elway. Or Kyle Orton for that matter.

Never stated Cutler was better than John. In fact, i never even brought Jay's name up.

Northman
10-13-2010, 08:28 PM
I agree. At least he did Denver a favor and got rid of a star studded offense who could get mega yards with no points. The only problem is he replaced them with other players who can get mega yards but can't score points.

And yet thats progress to you. :confused:

Tned
10-13-2010, 08:29 PM
Im still baffled by his statements. He criticizes holding onto Shanahan for too long because we had too many average and above average seasons but then when wonderboy is doing no better we should hold onto him because of why again?....

Well, for the record, I think we should hold on to wondeboy. I just think it's ridiculous to make claims such as the Raiders did better in that 10 year stretch than the Broncos. They were one of the worst teams in the NFL for 7 straight years and counting.

It's ridiculous the way fans lash out at Shanahan and former Broncos as a 'defense' of McDaniels.

TXBRONC
10-13-2010, 08:30 PM
So again, since you recounted how much BETTER the Raiders have done with their more playoff wins in one season than Shanahan had in ten years, you clearly think that those playoff wins are woth the price. Right?

You would have no problem averaging 4 wins a season, you know that 4-12 you have posted in numerous threads, and having 7 straight seasons of 5 or less wins. Right? But, they had more playoff wins in those ten years than Shanahan and the Broncos.

So, we're clear, right?

If you're team is consistently in the top 10 of the draft it usually means you have seriously wrong with your core group players.

shank
10-13-2010, 08:31 PM
a was a fan of and supported mike shanahan, despite some things that i disagreed with that he did.

i am a fan of and support josh mcdaniels, despite some things that i have disagreed with that he has done.

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 08:32 PM
So again, since you recounted how much BETTER the Raiders have done with their more playoff wins in one season than Shanahan had in ten years, you clearly think that those playoff wins are woth the price. Right

You would have no problem averaging 4 wins a season, you know that 4-12 you have posted in numerous threads, and having 7 straight seasons of 5 or less wins. Right? But, they had more playoff wins in those ten years than Shanahan and the Broncos.

So, we're clear, right?

Please quit baiting. That's all you do on these boards. I said nothing about the Raiders being "better" then Denver and the Broncos. I'm talking playoff wins.

And at least I'm not like you, where I cheerfully wait for the 8th win of the season, blindly call it a success at that point, and then pick up my ball and go home.

Northman
10-13-2010, 08:33 PM
Well, for the record, I think we should hold on to wondeboy. I just think it's ridiculous to make claims such as the Raiders did better in that 10 year stretch than the Broncos. They were one of the worst teams in the NFL for 7 straight years and counting.

It's ridiculous the way fans lash out at Shanahan and former Broncos as a 'defense' of McDaniels.

Obviously, it would be silly to fire him after a season and 4 games. I just get sick of the trashing of Shanahan because he was able to be at least competitive. The Raiders have spent what? 6-7 years with 4-5 wins and have a Super Bowl appearance in which they lost? How are those terrible seasons for Detroit, Cleveland, and Cincy working out? No thanks. I want a team i can at least be proud of for at least "trying" to win.

Northman
10-13-2010, 08:35 PM
a was a fan of and supported mike shanahan, despite some things that i disagreed with that he did.

i am a fan of and support josh mcdaniels, despite some things that i have disagreed with that he has done.

Absolutely agree.

I just wish members of the board could respect when you have differing opinions that happen with McD without trashing the last guy.

Tned
10-13-2010, 08:36 PM
And at least I'm not like you, where I cheerfully wait for the 8th win of the season, blindly call it a success at that point, and then pick up my ball and go home.

And you accuse me of baiting???

:lol: :laugh: :lol: :laugh: :lol: :laugh: :lol: :laugh::lol: :laugh: :lol: :laugh::lol: :laugh: :lol:

If you are going to use the 'baiter' label on others, I suggest you read YOUR posts. Might need to self apply that label. ;)

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 08:37 PM
Never stated Cutler was better than John. In fact, i never even brought Jay's name up.

My apologizes. You stated passing records and we've been talking about throwing for a lot of yards yet still not winning. I thought the Jay Cutler tenure in Denver was quite obvious with those comments.

Tned
10-13-2010, 08:38 PM
Please quit baiting. That's all you do on these boards. I said nothing about the Raiders being "better" then Denver and the Broncos. I'm talking playoff wins.


Silk meet Silk....


Since the year 2000, the Raiders have more playoff wins in one season that Denver has total. Only in Denver are we happy finishing "2nd place" apparently, or in our case, somewhere around 15th.

Tned
10-13-2010, 08:40 PM
Obviously, it would be silly to fire him after a season and 4 games. I just get sick of the trashing of Shanahan because he was able to be at least competitive. The Raiders have spent what? 6-7 years with 4-5 wins and have a Super Bowl appearance in which they lost? How are those terrible seasons for Detroit, Cleveland, and Cincy working out? No thanks. I want a team i can at least be proud of for at least "trying" to win.

Yep, it's easy to trash Shanahan's record when the benchmark you use to measure him against is HIS success. Hey, then again, maybe having a 7 year stretch of 4 win seasons wouldn't be too bad. We would get guys like Hayworth-bay and just think how excited we would be when we got that next playoff win....


a was a fan of and supported mike shanahan, despite some things that i disagreed with that he did.

i am a fan of and support josh mcdaniels, despite some things that i have disagreed with that he has done.

Agreed, is this concept so foreign to some?

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 08:40 PM
And you accuse me of baiting???

:lol: :laugh: :lol: :laugh: :lol: :laugh: :lol: :laugh::lol: :laugh: :lol: :laugh::lol: :laugh: :lol:

If you are going to use the 'baiter' label on others, I suggest you read YOUR posts. Might need to self apply that label. ;)

True dat! but then again, I'm not starting up "can't we all just get along" threads, knowing fully well that they will get out of hand, waiting for it, and then pulling out the "I told you so" card.

Tned
10-13-2010, 08:42 PM
True dat! but then again, I'm not starting up "can't we all just get along" threads, knowing fully well that they will get out of hand, waiting for it, and then pulling out the "I told you so" card.

No, you just enter those threads and slam ex-players and coaches to start fights. Hi Dr. kettle, or is that Mr. Pot???

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 08:42 PM
Silk meet Silk....

Where is the word "better" in that post? ....oh!


That statement is a mere fact, of how uncompetitive Denver has been in the playoffs since the year 2000. But then again, when you pick up your ball and go home after the 8th win, you wouldn't know that.

Northman
10-13-2010, 08:44 PM
My apologizes. You stated passing records and we've been talking about throwing for a lot of yards yet still not winning. I thought the Jay Cutler tenure in Denver was quite obvious with those comments.


Nah, to my knowledge even in 08' i dont think that Jay passed any of John's records for Denver. I know Jake did it in 05' and Orton is certainly tearing it up at the moment so most likely he will do it.

The thing that gets me is that while McD is facing similiar issues that Shanahan faced its like we arent supposed to say anything negative about it. Even though Shanny himself took a lot of heat for his DC moves, problems in the playoffs, etc. So what i dont get is if it was ok to smash Shanahan why isnt ok to smash McD for the questionable moves he makes? There is only maybe 3-4 guys i can list who just dont like the guy because of his character but most of us who have questioned his moves we would LOVE to see him succeed. But, its not like he hasnt been a lightning rod for contraversy with some of his decisions. But none of those are related to Shanahan as he is gone. New coach, new problems. Or same problems but same concerns for Bronco fans. I dont know why we cant just keep the topic on the guy at hand.

Ravage!!!
10-13-2010, 08:45 PM
I understand that, and obviously Shanahan wasn't able to do it, unless your happy with just regular seasoon results.

I'm a Shanahan fan. I honestly hope he does well in Washington, and I really think he will. I had very mixed feelings when he was fired. I at least always loved watching Denver play because the offense was dynamic. But at some point, you just have to say this isn't working for an organization that wants a little more than an occasional playoff appearance coupled with blowout losses.

I will continue to play the devils advocate to the fans that hate on McDaniels for the state of the organization, when it isn't really any different then what's been happening since John Elway retired. Nobody can argue that.

If McDaniels is here for 10 seasons, I am pretty sure he could win at least 1 playoff game too, while having a handfuil of these 7-9, and 9-7 seasons that Shanahan gave us.

So you see yourself as a crusader then?

Silk... you know I was a Shanahan guy, but I too understood it was time to move on.

My problem is when I read someone complaining (or when you are purely playing the devil's advocate)about proved success when compared to the very best of all time, while trying to defend....no success.

Sustained and continued success is MUCH much harder than doing it for a season, two, or three.

People want to talk about Tony Dungy. He had one of the greatest QB of all-time, and has TERRIBLE playoff record. Cowher was going to be run out of Pittsburgh before finding Rothlesburger. Success only lasts for so long without trophies, but you have to actually HAVE success before you can simply compare.

Tned
10-13-2010, 08:48 PM
Where is the word "better" in that post? ....oh!


That statement is a mere fact, of how uncompetitive Denver has been in the playoffs since the year 2000. But then again, when you pick up your ball and go home after the 8th win, you wouldn't know that.

I think they say when you have to resort to personal insults you've lost the debate...

Anymore you need to get out of your system to help you feel better about yourself and your positions?

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 08:48 PM
Nah, to my knowledge even in 08' i dont think that Jay passed any of John's records for Denver. I know Jake did it in 05' and Orton is certainly tearing it up at the moment so most likely he will do it.

The thing that gets me is that while McD is facing similiar issues that Shanahan faced its like we arent supposed to say anything negative about it. Even though Shanny himself took a lot of heat for his DC moves, problems in the playoffs, etc. So what i dont get is if it was ok to smash Shanahan why isnt ok to smash McD for the questionable moves he makes? There is only maybe 3-4 guys i can list who just dont like the guy because of his character but most of us who have questioned his moves we would LOVE to see him succeed. But, its not like he hasnt been a lightning rod for contraversy with some of his decisions. But none of those are related to Shanahan as he is gone. New coach, new problems. Or same problems but same concerns for Bronco fans. I dont know why we cant just keep the topic on the guy at hand.

Shanahan's career in Denver is written, and IMHO it's ok to criticize his moves because of just that. He could not get over the hump. My criticizing of Shanahan is really his 2002-2008 era. McDaniels, we don't know how his moves will play out. but yes, if things don't change for him, and soon, I will most definetely be criticizing him too.

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 08:50 PM
So you see yourself as a crusader then?

Silk... you know I was a Shanahan guy, but I too understood it was time to move on.

My problem is when I read someone complaining (or when you are purely playing the devil's advocate)about proved success when compared to the very best of all time, while trying to defend....no success.

Sustained and continued success is MUCH much harder than doing it for a season, two, or three.

People want to talk about Tony Dungy. He had one of the greatest QB of all-time, and has TERRIBLE playoff record. Cowher was going to be run out of Pittsburgh before finding Rothlesburger. Success only lasts for so long without trophies, but you have to actually HAVE success before you can simply compare.

I'm hardly a crusader. I've been tired of the hate that's been going on, specially when it's been a continued process of the last 10 years. It's like some of the bashers just woke up, saw the state of the organization, and started criticizing. Were they not fans for the last 7-8 years?

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 08:51 PM
I think they say when you have to resort to personal insults you've lost the debate...

Anymore you need to get out of your system to help you feel better about yourself and your positions?

No more, but feel free to pull out your "I told you so" card.

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 08:55 PM
No, you just enter those threads and slam ex-players and coaches to start fights. Hi Dr. kettle, or is that Mr. Pot???

I'm not even in those threads 75% of the time. And I always join in progress. You really do not pay attention do you?

Northman
10-13-2010, 08:56 PM
Shanahan's career in Denver is written, and IMHO it's ok to criticize his moves because of just that. He could not get over the hump. My criticizing of Shanahan is really his 2002-2008 era. McDaniels, we don't know how his moves will play out. but yes, if things don't change for him, and soon, I will most definetely be criticizing him too.

But wouldnt you say that McDaniels has been more polarizing his first 2 seasons than Shanahan ever was? Down the stretch it was easy to see why Shanny took some heat. But early on, McDaniels really hasnt done himself any favors because despite the moves and decisions he has made thus far he hasnt fixed the problems that have plagued us from before. Bottom line, its easier to criticize McD right now because he came in making far more questionable decisions than Shanahan did when he came in. The fanbase has no choice but to wait it out but its not like the criticisms arent warranted. He's just been a polarizing figure since he has arrived. I would be the first to say it wouldnt be such a big deal if i actually saw wins or improvement from those moves. If it happens great, but right now there's nothing to go on.

Broncos Mtnman
10-13-2010, 08:56 PM
Nah, to my knowledge even in 08' i dont think that Jay passed any of John's records for Denver. I know Jake did it in 05' and Orton is certainly tearing it up at the moment so most likely he will do it.

The thing that gets me is that while McD is facing similiar issues that Shanahan faced its like we arent supposed to say anything negative about it. Even though Shanny himself took a lot of heat for his DC moves, problems in the playoffs, etc. So what i dont get is if it was ok to smash Shanahan why isnt ok to smash McD for the questionable moves he makes? There is only maybe 3-4 guys i can list who just dont like the guy because of his character but most of us who have questioned his moves we would LOVE to see him succeed. But, its not like he hasnt been a lightning rod for contraversy with some of his decisions. But none of those are related to Shanahan as he is gone. New coach, new problems. Or same problems but same concerns for Bronco fans. I dont know why we cant just keep the topic on the guy at hand.


I agree with most of this.

By the way, Jay set the single season record with 4526 passing yards in '08.

Just an FYI.....

Tned
10-13-2010, 08:57 PM
No more, but feel free to pull out you "I told you so" card.

Here's the search button, find where I have used the "I told you so" card:

http://www.broncosforums.com/downloads/search.jpg

I post because I am passionate about the Broncos, not to win arguments or belittle others or say "I told you so".

1 win or SB win, I will be a Broncos fan. I've been one or 25+ years and I will be until the day I stop breathing.

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 08:58 PM
But wouldnt you say that McDaniels has been more polarizing his first 2 seasons than Shanahan ever was? Down the stretch it was easy to see why Shanny took some heat. But early on, McDaniels really hasnt done himself any favors because despite the moves and decisions he has made thus far he hasnt fixed the problems that have plagued us from before. Bottom line, its easier to criticize McD right now because he came in making far more questionable decisions than Shanahan did when he came in. The fanbase has no choice but to wait it out but its not like the criticisms arent warranted. He's just been a polarizing figure since he has arrived. I would be the first to say it wouldnt be such a big deal if i actually saw wins or improvement from those moves. If it happens great, but right now there's nothing to go on.

I'd say simply McDaniels better get his shit together and start winning. He made questionable moves all over the place last year, and he still finished on par with what was happening in Denver the last 3 years leading up to him. It's one of the reasons I've stayed trying to support him.

I criticized him plenty and the end of last year, but people (in general) conveniently seem to look past that.

Tned
10-13-2010, 08:58 PM
I agree with most of this.

By the way, Jay set the single season record with 4526 passing yards in '08.

Just an FYI.....

Krieger did an article today talking about the similarities about the '08 and '10 teams, and talked about Jay's passing record, and Kyle being on pace to eclipse it (and the NFL record).

Northman
10-13-2010, 08:59 PM
I agree with most of this.

By the way, Jay set the single season record with 4526 passing yards in '08.

Just an FYI.....

Did he? I dont remember much buzz about that aspect but i guess thats because Jake threw for 4700 or something to that effect? He had a good year though.

Ravage!!!
10-13-2010, 09:01 PM
I'm hardly a crusader. I've been tired of the hate that's been going on, specially when it's been a continued process of the last 10 years. It's like some of the bashers just woke up, saw the state of the organization, and started criticizing. Were they not fans for the last 7-8 years?

Again. I'm sorry if I don't see having one of the highest win percentages in the NFL, failure. I get that the LARGEST success is Playoff wins and Super Bowl trophies. But that doesn't mean anything less is complete failure.

I get it. I used to have the "super bowl or nothing" mantra. I understand what you are saying. But when you look around the NFL, the history of the NFL, you understand that continued, sustained success is so much harder to obtain than anything else. The NFL is circular.

The Patriots were NOT successful before Brady. The Colts, were bottom dwellers before Manning. We know what the Saints have been. We've also seen what happened to the Cowboys after Aikman, the 49ers after Young, the Bills after Kelly. Look how many years it took for the 4 time, Super Bowl Champion, Pittsburgh Steelers to get that trophy again since winning in the '70s.

Shanahan's tenure NEVER put us in the bottoms like those teams have been, despite losing a ton of talent. That is absolutely, success. Was it time for him to go, yes. But even the coaches of late get the benefit of Shanahan coaching the last ten years

Tned
10-13-2010, 09:02 PM
I'd say simply McDaniels better get his shit together and start winning. He made questionable moves all over the place last year, and he still finished on par with what was happening in Denver the last 3 years leading up to him. It's one of the reasons I've stayed trying to support him.

I criticized him plenty and the end of last year, but people (in general) conveniently seem to look past that.

They probably forget it because of how often you trash Shanahan --- "Shanahan destroyed a top 5 defense in Washington in 3 games" --- any time any criticism of McDaniels is raised.

As to "matching" Shanny's three year records. Maybe you would like to share with us which season Shanahan finished with 8 losses in the last 10 games, or which 15 game stretch he had with 11 losses.

Tned
10-13-2010, 09:03 PM
Again. I'm sorry if I don't see having one of the highest win percentages in the NFL, failure. I get that the LARGEST success is Playoff wins and Super Bowl trophies. But that doesn't mean anything less is complete failure.

I get it. I used to have the "super bowl or nothing" mantra. I understand what you are saying. But when you look around the NFL, the history of the NFL, you understand that continued, sustained success is so much harder to obtain than anything else. The NFL is circular.

The Patriots were NOT successful before Brady. The Colts, were bottom dwellers before Manning. We know what the Saints have been. We've also seen what happened to the Cowboys after Aikman, the 49ers after Young, the Bills after Kelly. Look how many years it took for the 4 time, Super Bowl Champion, Pittsburgh Steelers to get that trophy again since winning in the '70s.

Shanahan's tenure NEVER put us in the bottoms like those teams have been, despite losing a ton of talent. That is absolutely, success. Was it time for him to go, yes. But even the coaches of late get the benefit of Shanahan coaching the last ten years

:salute: Stated much more succinctly than I have been able to accomplish.

NightTrainLayne
10-13-2010, 09:04 PM
Maybe instead of challenging each other to up the ante, we can just move on from this argument. It's off-topic from the thread purpose anyways.

Broncos Mtnman
10-13-2010, 09:06 PM
Did he? I dont remember much buzz about that aspect but i guess thats because Jake threw for 4700 or something to that effect? He had a good year though.

Well, if Jake had 4700, Jay wouldn't have set a record.

By the way, 4089 yards in 2004 was the total for the Snake.

TXBRONC
10-13-2010, 09:06 PM
Did he? I dont remember much buzz about that aspect but i guess thats because Jake threw for 4700 or something to that effect? He had a good year though.

Actually mate Jake threw for 4,089 which was the single season record until Jay broke it '08. :salute:

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 09:07 PM
Here's the search button, find where I have used the "I told you so" card:

http://www.broncosforums.com/downloads/search.jpg

I post because I am passionate about the Broncos, not to win arguments or belittle others or say "I told you so".

1 win or SB win, I will be a Broncos fan. I've been one or 25+ years and I will be until the day I stop breathing.

Right. We've been through this before. I'm not wasting my time digging up another previous post of yours that you "conveniently" seem to forget when we are arguing something. Your selective memory is your problem, not mine.

TXBRONC
10-13-2010, 09:10 PM
Right. We've been through this before. I'm not wasting my time digging up another previous post of yours that you "conveniently" seem to forget when we are arguing something. Your selective memory is your problem, not mine.

Silk I'm not trying to pile on but brother I can't recall Tned ever pulling out the I told you so card.

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 09:11 PM
Again. I'm sorry if I don't see having one of the highest win percentages in the NFL, failure. I get that the LARGEST success is Playoff wins and Super Bowl trophies. But that doesn't mean anything less is complete failure.

I get it. I used to have the "super bowl or nothing" mantra. I understand what you are saying. But when you look around the NFL, the history of the NFL, you understand that continued, sustained success is so much harder to obtain than anything else. The NFL is circular.

The Patriots were NOT successful before Brady. The Colts, were bottom dwellers before Manning. We know what the Saints have been. We've also seen what happened to the Cowboys after Aikman, the 49ers after Young, the Bills after Kelly. Look how many years it took for the 4 time, Super Bowl Champion, Pittsburgh Steelers to get that trophy again since winning in the '70s.

Shanahan's tenure NEVER put us in the bottoms like those teams have been, despite losing a ton of talent. That is absolutely, success. Was it time for him to go, yes. But even the coaches of late get the benefit of Shanahan coaching the last ten years

This is the problem. We are arguing opinions. You have an opinion that the lack of playoff wins since 2000 is ok because of a hgih regular season winning %.

I simply do not share that opinion. I am concerned with playoff wins.

Shanahan had his chance. In fact he had 10 years. I've said this plenty of times in these arguments. It's simply a matter of perception, if you're happy with the regular season success, or unhappy with the lack of playoff success.

Northman
10-13-2010, 09:11 PM
Actually mate Jake threw for 4,089 which was the single season record until Jay broke it '08. :salute:

Shame on me for giving Jake too much credit.

Ravage!!!
10-13-2010, 09:12 PM
Shame on me for giving Jake too much credit.

Oh HELL yeah.... thats just going to get another up and coming "Jake got screwed over" debate!! :beer:

silkamilkamonico
10-13-2010, 09:15 PM
They probably forget it because of how often you trash Shanahan --- "Shanahan destroyed a top 5 defense in Washington in 3 games" --- any time any criticism of McDaniels is raised.

As to "matching" Shanny's three year records. Maybe you would like to share with us which season Shanahan finished with 8 losses in the last 10 games, or which 15 game stretch he had with 11 losses.

That's part of your problem. You're in the "criticize McDaniels all you want, but stay away from Mike Shanahan" group.

Shanahan + Cutler were 2-3(2006), 7-9(2007), and 8-8(2008). That's a 17-20 record. McDaniels was 8-8 last year. This year he is 2-3. It's not really that hard to look at and compare, really.

Tned
10-13-2010, 09:21 PM
That's part of your problem. You're in the "criticize McDaniels all you want, but stay away from Mike Shanahan" group.

Shanahan + Cutler were 2-3(2006), 7-9(2007), and 8-8(2008). That's a 17-20 record. McDaniels was 8-8 last year. This year he is 2-3. It's not really that hard to look at and compare, really.

Did you see NTL's request that we knock it off, and that he pointed out that this topic isn't even the topic of the thread?

That's why I ignored your last personal slam on me (that was after and ignored NTL's post). I will respect his directive.

Northman
10-13-2010, 09:22 PM
Ofcourse, it's always the people bashing Shanahan and the ex-players that get called out for it, because he falls into the other "classification of posters", or something to that degree.


Probably because its always those individuals who derail threads with the bashing of former players/coaches. Whenever there is any criticism of Mcd the past coach/players are the first to be brought up even though they have zero to do with the problems of this regime. As i said, when Shanahan was coach he took criticism for his time in Denver for whatever decisions he made. It should be no different for McD.

Tned
10-13-2010, 09:24 PM
For anyone that missed it or possible doesn't know that NTL is a MOD, here it is again....


Maybe instead of challenging each other to up the ante, we can just move on from this argument. It's off-topic from the thread purpose anyways.

topscribe
10-13-2010, 11:21 PM
Shame on me for giving Jake too much credit.

Bless Mtnman's heart . . . I know from past, longstanding, heated wars with him
over Jake that giving Jake any credit is too much . . . :lol:


*sorry NTL, I couldn't help myself* :redface: :focus:

-----

Poet
10-14-2010, 01:08 AM
Yes Jay did ask however that really means nothing. Just because Jay asked didn't mean that the front office had to oblige because he was under contract. Chad Johnson demanded a traded for two or three years but the Bengals did not give in just because he demanded it.

FWIW, Cincinnati opted to not trade Ocho because the cap hit was 10+ million and it would have hindered signing their rookies that year. That was a killer because to get him they wanted a first rounder. Brilliant move by Mike Brown, demand to get a player for your guy that you can't pay.

TXBRONC
10-14-2010, 06:33 AM
FWIW, Cincinnati opted to not trade Ocho because the cap hit was 10+ million and it would have hindered signing their rookies that year. That was a killer because to get him they wanted a first rounder. Brilliant move by Mike Brown, demand to get a player for your guy that you can't pay.

Each player has their own unique set of circumstances but at the end of day they're still under contract and it's organizations choice as to whether they want to keep the player or trade him.

rcsodak
10-14-2010, 08:19 AM
If only I had the sports almanac several decades from the future, I could be a quadrillionaire and own the world. O well, guess I'll settle for Shanahan being 10 times the coach Josh will ever be.
bias much?
McD also knows defense. Let me know when shanny does.
Don't make us hate on shanny like ya'll have done with hillis.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

atwater27
10-14-2010, 08:23 AM
bias much?It's called FACT
McD also knows defense.How's that? Let me know when shanny does.
Don't make us hate on shanny like ya'll have done with hillis.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Bring it.

rcsodak
10-14-2010, 09:04 AM
That ties into the "we might not be winning anything of significance in the playoffs, but at least we have a good regular season record.

At least an organization like the Vikings, who have a very simliar up and down stretch to Denver since 2000, understand that sometimes the regular season just isn't good enough.
Keep it all in perspective, silk...as you're debating with some who also love Marty "I only win regular season games" schottenheimer.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

rcsodak
10-14-2010, 10:07 AM
I've gotten completely lost in this thread. Can anyone explain to me what Shanahan's record in Denver over the past 10 years has to do with McDaniels currently having an overall record of 10-13 - including having a better record than only the Lions and Rams over the final 10 games last year? I don't want to have to reread the entire thread to try to figure it out.
More fuzzy math? 16 games + 5 games = 23???
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

frenchfan
10-14-2010, 10:11 AM
Would you rather have the present roster or Cutler/Hillis?


....Discuss.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forumsI'd rather having this O and a great D... Give us the Ravens or the Jets D then we'll make a deal ;) :D

rcsodak
10-14-2010, 10:18 AM
Because certain individuals feel the need to trash a Bronco great in order to make the new guy look like a genius.
Nice spin. :rolleyes:
I feel shanny lost his team the moment he pulled jake. He threw in the proverbial white towel in the middle of the fight.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Northman
10-14-2010, 10:29 AM
Nice spin. :rolleyes:
I feel shanny lost his team the moment he pulled jake. He threw in the proverbial white towel in the middle of the fight.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums


Originally Posted by NightTrainLayne http://www.broncosforums.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.broncosforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1091204#post1091204)
Maybe instead of challenging each other to up the ante, we can just move on from this argument. It's off-topic from the thread purpose anyways.


Just in case you missed it the last 2 times it was posted. :beer:

rcsodak
10-14-2010, 10:35 AM
Im still baffled by his statements. He criticizes holding onto Shanahan for too long because we had too many average and above average seasons but then when wonderboy is doing no better we should hold onto him because of why again?....
lol. The only baffling statements being said are by those that think 21games (less for some of you) is enough of a sampling to decide a HC's worth. Simply baffling. :rolleyes:
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

rcsodak
10-14-2010, 10:51 AM
Absolutely agree.

I just wish members of the board could respect when you have differing opinions that happen with McD without trashing the last guy.
ugh. :tsk: When did COMPARING become the same as trashing?
Here's a clue: when shanny became a martyr, and his followers tried to make him a saint. Lol

Shanny couldnt daft and was horrible in the personnel dept (gm). In his early days, could call a mean game. But, IMO, he started getting outcoached. And then he became desparate. And then he became flat and lost bowlen's faith. Just how I see it.
his year off and visiting different team camps,tho, might just be what the Dr ordered. I hope he does well.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

turftoad
10-14-2010, 11:02 AM
lol. The only baffling statements being said are by those that think 21games (less for some of you) is enough of a sampling to decide a HC's worth. Simply baffling. :rolleyes:
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Not so baffling when you consider the what new coaching staffs have done in New York (Jets) and KC.
Who arguably had less talent than we did when they took over.

NightTrainLayne
10-14-2010, 11:10 AM
Not so baffling when you consider the what new coaching staffs have done in New York (Jets) and KC.
Who arguably had less talent than we did when they took over.

They look good so far. But are you willing to guarantee that this level of success will continue? Would they be as successful if they had the number of injuries that we have?

Nobody knows the answer to that now. That's why it's generally a good idea to see a few seasons play out to see how a coach and his staff react to different circumstances, and see their plan fully develop.

rcsodak
10-14-2010, 11:15 AM
Bring it.
Before you unabashedly trash somebody, you might know something about them first. Just a thought. :rolleyes:
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

rcsodak
10-14-2010, 11:17 AM
I'd rather having this O and a great D... Give us the Ravens or the Jets D then we'll make a deal ;) :D
THAT, frenchy, could be construed as a wet dream, and OFF TOPIC! :D
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

turftoad
10-14-2010, 11:19 AM
They look good so far. But are you willing to guarantee that this level of success will continue? Would they be as successful if they had the number of injuries that we have?

Nobody knows the answer to that now. That's why it's generally a good idea to see a few seasons play out to see how a coach and his staff react to different circumstances, and see their plan fully develop.

I agree. Just don't like what I've seen thus far. As far as seeing a few seasons play out, we really don't have a choice so we have to grin and bear it. :D

spikerman
10-14-2010, 08:54 PM
More fuzzy math? 16 games + 5 games = 23???
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

hahaha.. yep.. it was a typo.. it was supposed to be 10-11. That's much better, right?

spikerman
10-14-2010, 08:55 PM
lol. The only baffling statements being said are by those that think 21games (less for some of you) is enough of a sampling to decide a HC's worth. Simply baffling. :rolleyes:
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

It's not the record, it's the lack of improvement over that span that concerns me.

TXBRONC
10-14-2010, 09:03 PM
It's not the record, it's the lack of improvement over that span that concerns me.

I think some would argue that we are better in the passing game. But I don't see much improvement any other aspect of the team.

jhildebrand
10-14-2010, 09:05 PM
It's not the record, it's the lack of improvement over that span that concerns me.


They look good so far. But are you willing to guarantee that this level of success will continue? Would they be as successful if they had the number of injuries that we have?

Nobody knows the answer to that now. That's why it's generally a good idea to see a few seasons play out to see how a coach and his staff react to different circumstances, and see their plan fully develop.

It's not the record. There is also no guarantee that KC or the Jets will keep it up. Chances are the Jets will. I don't have too many reservations about the Chiefs either. But I digress.

For me, at least, it is about trending. After starting 6-0 McDaniels and this team are 4-11 while KC strung together some nice wins at the end of last season as did the Jets. Both our trend and their's seems to have carried over into this season. I am even more concerned that by all accounts this season's schedule was supposedly so much easier!

As for the injuries, hey they happen. All teams have them. KC is without Tyson Jackson. The Jets lost Jenkins on the first series of their first game. I am not one to make injuries an excuse especially considering how many picks this team had or should have had.

Finally, I don't like Haley in KC too much. However, he did find a way to get two big name coordinators there (or Pioli did) and it is working wonders. They deserve credit for that.

KCL
10-14-2010, 10:24 PM
It's not the record. There is also no guarantee that KC or the Jets will keep it up. Chances are the Jets will. I don't have too many reservations about the Chiefs either. But I digress.

For me, at least, it is about trending. After starting 6-0 McDaniels and this team are 4-11 while KC strung together some nice wins at the end of last season as did the Jets. Both our trend and their's seems to have carried over into this season. I am even more concerned that by all accounts this season's schedule was supposedly so much easier!

As for the injuries, hey they happen. All teams have them. KC is without Tyson Jackson. The Jets lost Jenkins on the first series of their first game. I am not one to make injuries an excuse especially considering how many picks this team had or should have had.

Finally, I don't like Haley in KC too much. However, he did find a way to get two big name coordinators there (or Pioli did) and it is working wonders. They deserve credit for that.

I'd say it was probably Pioli who brought in the OC and the DC..Since he was already familiar with both of them and he knows more about putting a team together than Haley does...I didn't care for some of the calls in the Colts game but I love what Romeo has done with the D...So far so good.

jhildebrand
10-14-2010, 10:41 PM
I'd say it was probably Pioli who brought in the OC and the DC..Since he was already familiar with both of them and he knows more about putting a team together than Haley does...I didn't care for some of the calls in the Colts game but I love what Romeo has done with the D...So far so good.

Romeo has done a great job with that D. They are young and aggressive. Let's see what happens with them as the season progresses.

My comment was simply in the light that, although I don't like Haley (cocky arrogant) he has found a way to actually work with these guys and make it work.

It isn't easy to have a big name, former HC, coordinator for a first time coach. Haley is reaping the rewards and in the end will look all the better for it!

KCL
10-14-2010, 11:03 PM
Romeo has done a great job with that D. They are young and aggressive. Let's see what happens with them as the season progresses.

My comment was simply in the light that, although I don't like Haley (cocky arrogant) he has found a way to actually work with these guys and make it work.

It isn't easy to have a big name, former HC, coordinator for a first time coach. Haley is reaping the rewards and in the end will look all the better for it!

Yes he has done a great job...I am liking what I am seeing in them...Flowers has done very well...I hope to see Berry get better with each game.

I agree with you about Haley...glad he isn't calling the plays now although he did do a good job in their last game in Denver..surprised the hell out of me that KC played so well that day.My husband isn't a Haley fan at all.I know he wants to win of course and is getting the team ready each week...Colts didn't beat us by much.The game was actually closer than the score showed.
I am just hoping that KC gets better with each game and if they can make the playoffs I will be happy.The team still has a long ways to go.

rcsodak
10-15-2010, 11:53 AM
It's not the record, it's the lack of improvement over that span that concerns me.

#1 Passing Offense in the league is a "lack of improvement"? :eek:

Ridding the roster of the turds that were on it?

Adding the young WR's? Cox? Thompson? DLine FA's?

I see plenty of improvements. The difficult part is waiting for them to play together as a team. But I don't think this team is going backwards, and once the running game kicks in, I see no more standing pat.

Ravage!!!
10-15-2010, 12:14 PM
#1 Passing Offense in the league is a "lack of improvement"? :eek:

Ridding the roster of the turds that were on it?

Adding the young WR's? Cox? Thompson? DLine FA's?

I see plenty of improvements. The difficult part is waiting for them to play together as a team. But I don't think this team is going backwards, and once the running game kicks in, I see no more standing pat.

When you throw the ball 43 times a game, its not hard to have top passing numbers. Thats the problem with that one stat, its being looked at through a vaccume. Of course our team is putting up big passing yards. Thats all we do, is throw the ball. Thats on pace to throw the ball over 680 times this season. Its absurd. The average number of passes in the NFL over a season is 27 times a game, or 450 a year.

The same turds that are producing for other teams? Not to mention the FA's are all older.

Plus, until these players that you mentioned IMPROVE the team, its not improvement.... its HOPE.

Once the running game kicks in? Kicks in? :lol:

topscribe
10-15-2010, 01:11 PM
When you throw the ball 43 times a game, its not hard to have top passing numbers. Thats the problem with that one stat, its being looked at through a vaccume. Of course our team is putting up big passing yards. Thats all we do, is throw the ball. Thats on pace to throw the ball over 680 times this season. Its absurd. The average number of passes in the NFL over a season is 27 times a game, or 450 a year.

The same turds that are producing for other teams? Not to mention the FA's are all older.

Plus, until these players that you mentioned IMPROVE the team, its not improvement.... its HOPE.

Once the running game kicks in? Kicks in? :lol:

Hmmm . . . agree and disagree. When you have no running game and you have
to pass 43 times a game, the passing game becomes harder. The defense
doesn't necessarily have to honor the run, so they can drop more back into
coverage, and the D-line can pin their ears back and meet at the quarterback . . .
and, oh, grab a running back on the way if you see one.

It is true that more passes can mean more completions, which can mean more
yardage. But that is if you complete those passes. A couple telling numbers to
me are completion percentage and YPC. The Broncos are near the top in both:
66.2% and 8.1.

Now, if they can just become a little more effective in the Red Zone . . .

-----

BroncoNut
10-15-2010, 01:19 PM
Hmmm . . . agree and disagree. When you have no running game and you have
to pass 43 times a game, the passing game becomes harder. The defense
doesn't necessarily have to honor the run, so they can drop more back into
coverage, and the D-line can pin their ears back and meet at the quarterback . . .
and, oh, grab a running back on the way if you see one.

It is true that more passes can mean more completions, which can mean more
yardage. But that is if you complete those passes. A couple telling numbers to
me are completion percentage and YPC. The Broncos are near the top in both:
66.2% and 8.1.

Now, if they can just become a little more effective in the Red Zone . . .

-----

I think you mean YAC and not YPC. it would be nice if you were correct and I were mistaken though

topscribe
10-15-2010, 01:49 PM
I think you mean YAC and not YPC. it would be nice if you were correct and I were mistaken though

Thanks for pointing that out, but actually it refers to Yards Per Completion. :)

-----

jhildebrand
10-15-2010, 01:52 PM
#1 Passing Offense in the league is a "lack of improvement"? :eek:

Ridding the roster of the turds that were on it?


Quite honestly NO! The 2008 offense was #2 in total yards and they were much more balanced. We were told yards didn't matter points do. We were told the yards were skewed because Cutler threw 616 times!

So now we are supposed to see this as improvement? :confused:

Sorry, I just don't agree with that idea. McDaniels changed the roster of his own accord and there is nothing wrong with that. However, to throw the guy a ticker tape parade for restoring one small part of the offense to where it was is silly IMO.

Some could easily argue that with all the holes on this team he inherited he needlessly created more with the O.

topscribe
10-15-2010, 01:59 PM
Quite honestly NO! The 2008 offense was #2 in total yards and they were much more balanced. We were told yards didn't matter points do. We were told the yards were skewed because Cutler threw 616 times!

So now we are supposed to see this as improvement? :confused:

Sorry, I just don't agree with that idea. McDaniels changed the roster of his own accord and there is nothing wrong with that. However, to throw the guy a ticker tape parade for restoring one small part of the offense to where it was is silly IMO.

Some could easily argue that with all the holes on this team he inherited he needlessly created more with the O.

You are right, IMO, in that, until all those yards translate to points, the concept of
improvement will remain questionable. However, most of the changes McDaniels
made in the offense was more attributable to the passing game, where the
Broncos are one of the top two in the league at present.

It's the running game with the massive holes right now. McDaniels shipped off
Hillis, true, but the RBs are not the problem, IMO. The problem is that Wiegmann
and Hamilton got old, and injuries took down the other three veterans for
significant amounts of time. That wasn't McDaniels' fault, either . . .

-----

turftoad
10-15-2010, 02:04 PM
#1 Passing Offense in the league is a "lack of improvement"? :eek:

Ridding the roster of the turds that were on it?

.

And....... LAST in Rushing Offense. I suppose thats quite an improvement also.

No balance whatsoever. That is not an improvement.

rcsodak
10-15-2010, 02:05 PM
Quite honestly NO! The 2008 offense was #2 in total yards and they were much more balanced. We were told yards didn't matter points do. We were told the yards were skewed because Cutler threw 616 times!

So now we are supposed to see this as improvement? :confused:

Sorry, I just don't agree with that idea. McDaniels changed the roster of his own accord and there is nothing wrong with that. However, to throw the guy a ticker tape parade for restoring one small part of the offense to where it was is silly IMO.

Some could easily argue that with all the holes on this team he inherited he needlessly created more with the O.
Can't argue.

But....


Orton>cutler




:D
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

arapaho2
10-15-2010, 05:15 PM
#1 Passing Offense in the league is a "lack of improvement"? :eek:

Ridding the roster of the turds that were on it?

Adding the young WR's? Cox? Thompson? DLine FA's?

I see plenty of improvements. The difficult part is waiting for them to play together as a team. But I don't think this team is going backwards, and once the running game kicks in, I see no more standing pat.

we were the 2nd total offense and 3rd passing offense and 12th ranked rush offense when mcd took over

we are now the 1st ranked passing offense with even worse redzone production...4th ranked total ofense and 32nd ranked rush offense
i believe week five we were the #1 passing offense then two

so his dismantleing...fixing...creating issues...solving issues...basicaly got us...NOWHERE!!!

AND THOSE DLINE FREE AGENTS HAVE US AT 25TH IN RUSH D AND 31ST IN SACKS...RIGHT ABOUT WHERE SLOWICK LEFT OFF:lol::lol:

football is a game of inches,,yards, points and stats....and there is little after two years to see thats better from 2008...potential...but we had potential then too

silkamilkamonico
10-15-2010, 05:25 PM
we were the 2nd total offense and 3rd passing offense and 12th ranked rush 16th ranked ppg offense when mcd took over

we are now the 1st ranked passing offense with even worse redzone production...4th ranked total ofense and 32nd ranked rush offense
i believe week five we were the #1 passing offense then two

so his dismantleing...fixing...creating issues...solving issues...basicaly got us...NOWHERE!!!

AND THOSE DLINE FREE AGENTS HAVE US AT 25TH IN RUSH D AND 31ST IN SACKS...RIGHT ABOUT WHERE SLOWICK LEFT OFF:lol::lol:


fixed it for you.