PDA

View Full Version : lets look at the team today...are we better than the team that shannahan was fired for?



arapaho2
10-27-2010, 01:04 PM
this isnt a condemnation of mcd..although personaly i think he sucks
but to really look at the team. shanny was fired because the team seemed stale, we couldnt finsih games, we couldnt finish seasons, our defense sucked donkeywangs..i supported his departure with the idea that we had a superb young nucleus on offense and needed a true defensive cord to solidify the team

enter MCD...he has his plan, his vision that seemenly didnt include any of mikes solid picks, and was more apt to lean towrds belichecks castoffs. he dismantled the team, the system, the staff..its now his from top to the bottom

so are we a better team now?

coaching staff....i give the overwhelming nod to 2008 despite the horrendous weight of slowick. Had nolan, turner, and dennison still been here...easily it would be the current..but they are not

team preperations...i say is a wash...both teams got hammered plenty...both teams got beat by teams they have no business getting beat by

offensive talent..again i give the nod to the 08 team..marshall... royal..scheffler..cutler... hillis are better overall as a unit than orton, gaff, llyod and moreno, and gronkowski

defensive talent...current team by a land slide

offensive scheme..once again i have to give the nod to the 08 team...we are now improved in passing yards, but that was the knock on cutlers 08 team..all yards..no scores, right?..we have dropped in scoreing, rush yards, redzone%...at least the 08 team had the run game to keep the defense semi honest.
oline...talent is better today with more beef, but changing run blocking from ZB to PB as well as what ever we changed in pass protection has seriously put the downgrade on line preformance...08 all the way

QB..as a indevidule talent and potential aside...current orten beats 08 cutler
wrs...08..we just about had 2 1000 yard,100 catch recievers, as well as a solid pass catching TE, marshall was a game changer..remember this is a unit we are compareing...thomas and decker may have potential...but that isnt winning games yet...i give it to the 08 unit

( through 7 games 08...10)
08 team had ..1862 passing yards...13 tds..7 ints...record 4-3
1curent team ..2140 passing yards...11 tds..4 ints...record 2-5

rbs..hard to compare 08 with this team...talent wise on paper the current team has the edge over the slew of rbs shanny was forced to utilize in 08...however i would take hillis and torain over moreno/buck today.. h2h...so would anybody not infatuated with the current coach

defense scheme...i give the nod to the current team...i preferr the 3-4
althought the current defense is on the verge of being even worse than the famed suck that was slowick

dline....current team ..more talent...bigger..stronger...the preformance is really not better, but i attribute that to the coaching and not overall talent
secondary...no question the current team is better any way you see it than the 08 team


so in my view...the defense has a better scheme...3-4 verses 4-3...better dline, better 2ndary...yet is just as dismall as the 08 teams

meanwhile the offense is worse off than the 08 team despite the fact the coach came in and dismantled it

so are we better?...in my eyes... no

Lonestar
10-27-2010, 01:33 PM
Yes in all respect except running game but then it sucked on short yardage and in the red zone also.

Just a very young team with 25+ being in the pros less than 3 years.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

SOCALORADO.
10-27-2010, 01:39 PM
Shanny fired himself. Its that simple.
You wanna talk about teams and compare them, go ahead, that doesnt matter.
Shanahan was fired for insubordination. He deliberately disobeyed what Pat Bowlen
told him to do. Fire Slowdick.

Dean
10-27-2010, 01:52 PM
Shanny fired himself. Its that simple.
You wanna talk about teams and compare them, go ahead, that doesnt matter.
Shanahan was fired for insubordination. He deliberately disobeyed what Pat Bowlen
told him to do. Fire Slowdick.

I have read this time and time again over the last two years. However, nowhere have I seen any verification that is what actually occured. If anyone out there has this direct information, I for one would like to see it.

Northman
10-27-2010, 01:56 PM
I have read this time and time again over the last two years. However, nowhere have I seen any verification that is what actually occured. If anyone out there has this direct information, I for one would like to see it.


Yea, there was major speculation from the fanbase that Pat asked Mike to fire Slowik and he declined but that was only speculation.

MasterShake
10-27-2010, 02:03 PM
It wasn't the 08 team he was fired for, it was the 1999-2004, then the 2006-2008 TEAMS. It was a a long time coming from a patient owner. I'd wager to say even McDaniels gets one more year. Its not cheap to hire an entire coaching staff, and perilous with the looming possibility of a strike year.

SOCALORADO.
10-27-2010, 02:08 PM
I have read this time and time again over the last two years. However, nowhere have I seen any verification that is what actually occured. If anyone out there has this direct information, I for one would like to see it.

You'll keep reading it too. Forever. Until you finally put it to bed.
Mike is gone. And there aint nothin anyone can do about it now.
It doesnt matter which team sucks(ed) more.
Mike was doing stupid things every year with more and more
frequency, and with more and more of Bowlens $$$.
Failed FA's, failed draft picks, failed D-Coordinators (for whatever reason
he came up with that year), and it just got outta control.
Like all long time tenured HC's, it was time for Mike to move on. Its just
that simple. Slokdick was the straw that broke the camels back.
Is MCD an improvement?
It doesnt matter, cause no matter what, Mike was getting fired.

I think DEN fans need to look at the present situation as just that,
the present situation.
No need to look back at past HC's, cause theres no reason to.

Now, should DEN stick with MCD or look for another HC?
Thats the question.

Dean
10-27-2010, 02:19 PM
You'll keep reading it too. Forever. Until you finally put it to bed.
Mike is gone. And there aint nothin anyone can do about it now.
It doesnt matter which team sucks(ed) more.
Mike was doing stupid things every year with more and more
frequency, and with more and more of Bowlens $$$.
Failed FA's, failed draft picks, failed D-Coordinators (for whatever reason
he came up with that year), and it just got outta control.
Like all long time tenured HC's, it was time for Mike to move on. Its just
that simple. Slokdick was the straw that broke the camels back.
Is MCD an improvement?
It doesnt matter, cause no matter what, Mike was getting fired.

I think DEN fans need to look at the present situation as just that,
the present situation.
No need to look back at past HC's, cause theres no reason to.

Now, should DEN stick with MCD or look for another HC?
Thats the question.

You brought up that Mike fired himself by refusing to fire Slowick, not me. I just wanted to know if there was any evidence that Mike had been asked to fire Slowick and had refused. Get over yourself.:confused:

Ravage!!!
10-27-2010, 02:26 PM
You'll keep reading it too. Forever. Until you finally put it to bed.
Mike is gone. And there aint nothin anyone can do about it now.
It doesnt matter which team sucks(ed) more.
Mike was doing stupid things every year with more and more
frequency, and with more and more of Bowlens $$$.
Failed FA's, failed draft picks, failed D-Coordinators (for whatever reason
he came up with that year), and it just got outta control.
Like all long time tenured HC's, it was time for Mike to move on. Its just
that simple. Slokdick was the straw that broke the camels back.
Is MCD an improvement?
It doesnt matter, cause no matter what, Mike was getting fired.

I think DEN fans need to look at the present situation as just that,
the present situation.
No need to look back at past HC's, cause theres no reason to.

Now, should DEN stick with MCD or look for another HC?
Thats the question.

Actually, since you brought it up.... NO... that is NOT the question. If you read the thread OP again, you can CLEARLY see that is not the topic of discussion, that is NOT the question, and NOWHERE did Dean even remotely suggest we should bring back Mike.

If you want to bring up something that is off-topic, realize it that YOUR question isn't relevant in THIS thread. Its that simple.

rationalfan
10-27-2010, 02:35 PM
i like the purpose of this thread, but it's heavy with the weight of nostalgia.

personally, i think most of the reason McD is so controversial/despised is because he's not afraid to make change. too many football fans fear change. so when your team's coach trades beloved players and "lets go" familiar coaches he earns the frustration of his team's followers.

i truly believe if McD had spent one prior season in denver as anything - from OC to water boy, people would have welcomed him more. he would have been a favored memory, not a striking reminder that the world changes around every single day.

ok. i'm done. return this thread to its regularly programmed mindset.

SOCALORADO.
10-27-2010, 02:53 PM
You brought up that Mike fired himself by refusing to fire Slowick, not me. I just wanted to know if there was any evidence that Mike had been asked to fire Slowick and had refused. Get over yourself.:confused:

Let it go. Mike is gone and he aint comin back, ever.
Go find your own evidence yourself.

arapaho2
10-27-2010, 02:59 PM
Yes in all respect except running game but then it sucked on short yardage and in the red zone also.

Just a very young team with 25+ being in the pros less than 3 years.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums


we had a very young offense then to

arapaho2
10-27-2010, 03:01 PM
Shanny fired himself. Its that simple.
You wanna talk about teams and compare them, go ahead, that doesnt matter.
Shanahan was fired for insubordination. He deliberately disobeyed what Pat Bowlen
told him to do. Fire Slowdick.


who gives a shit why shanny isnt here...is that what i asked?...i asked for your opinions if the team is better today then the team shanny was fired for...simple

personally i think the team as a whole got worse

arapaho2
10-27-2010, 03:08 PM
i like the purpose of this thread, but it's heavy with the weight of nostalgia.

personally, i think most of the reason McD is so controversial/despised is because he's not afraid to make change. too many football fans fear change. so when your team's coach trades beloved players and "lets go" familiar coaches he earns the frustration of his team's followers.

i truly believe if McD had spent one prior season in denver as anything - from OC to water boy, people would have welcomed him more. he would have been a favored memory, not a striking reminder that the world changes around every single day.

ok. i'm done. return this thread to its regularly programmed mindset.

i dont agree...i think the defineing point was soon after mcd announced his acceptance of the job proclaiming it was because of the chance to work with cutler with the young offense shanny had built...then proceeded to try and trade him

had that not happened mcd would have been openly welcomed even more than he was...he set the table.

as it is what we see is a young coach dismantleing what was the makeings of a super offense...rebuilding a team in his vision....and going 4-13 since winning his opening six games

whether he worked here or not has no bearing on my dislike...results is what i look for

arapaho2
10-27-2010, 03:17 PM
Yes in all respect except running game but then it sucked on short yardage and in the red zone also.

Just a very young team with 25+ being in the pros less than 3 years.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums


maybe you forgot... the 2008 starting unit consisted of 8 players on offense with 3 years or less ....our offense today has 3 starters of 3 years or less

so i kinda fail to see how the youth excuse works in this setting?

BigDaddyBronco
10-27-2010, 03:27 PM
I'll try and be as objective as possible.

As a GM - McDaniels (not sure on the draft pick end yet, but way better FA's)
as a HC on game day- Shanny
as a HC in preseason, training camp, practice - leaning McD

QB - McD
Running Game - Shanny
WR's - McD
OLine - Shanny
TE's - Shanny
Overall Offense - Shanny

DLine - McD
LB's - McD
Secondary - McD
Overall Defense - McD

ST - toss up

I think the other off the field stuff like media relations, player relations, etc. - Shanny
Except for off the field disclipline - heavily McD


I wish we could combine the strengths of the two, what a awesome HC that would be.

arapaho2
10-27-2010, 03:44 PM
I'll try and be as objective as possible.

As a GM - McDaniels (not sure on the draft pick end yet, but way better FA's)
as a HC on game day- Shanny
as a HC in preseason, training camp, practice - leaning McD

QB - McD
Running Game - Shanny
WR's - McD
OLine - Shanny
TE's - Shanny
Overall Offense - Shanny

DLine - McD
LB's - McD
Secondary - McD
Overall Defense - McD

ST - toss up

I think the other off the field stuff like media relations, player relations, etc. - Shanny
Except for off the field disclipline - heavily McD


I wish we could combine the strengths of the two, what a awesome HC that would be.


good enough...close to what i see...but the burning question, combine all that are we better today?

BigDaddyBronco
10-27-2010, 03:46 PM
good enough...close to what i see...but the burning question, combine all that are we better today?Hard to say with all the injuries on defense. At the end of the season, I'll tell you...:lol:

rationalfan
10-27-2010, 03:50 PM
i dont agree...i think the defineing point was soon after mcd announced his acceptance of the job proclaiming it was because of the chance to work with cutler with the young offense shanny had built...then proceeded to try and trade him

had that not happened mcd would have been openly welcomed even more than he was...he set the table.

as it is what we see is a young coach dismantleing what was the makeings of a super offense...rebuilding a team in his vision....and going 4-13 since winning his opening six games

whether he worked here or not has no bearing on my dislike...results is what i look for

this is ridiculous. you're basing your opinion of a coach by what he says at press conferences? that's when liars are at their best - bending the truth to avoid media damage control, saying the opposite of what they're thinking just in case their opponents are listening, withholding all but the least important information, etc.

do you also believe cutler has a stronger arm than elway because he said it during an interview?

trust me on this: don't believe most of what athletes say through the media. it's almost all said with hidden intent (except whenever Ron Artest speaks).

arapaho2
10-27-2010, 03:51 PM
Hard to say with all the injuries on defense. At the end of the season, I'll tell you...:lol:


2008 we had 13 starters and role players on IR...injury excuse aside

look rationaly aside from the additional 39 pass yards per game more today...are we a better team

arapaho2
10-27-2010, 03:57 PM
this is ridiculous. you're basing your opinion of a coach by what he says at press conferences? that's when liars are at their best - bending the truth to avoid media damage control, saying the opposite of what they're thinking just in case their opponents are listening, withholding all but the least important information, etc.

do you also believe cutler has a stronger arm than elway because he said it during an interview?

trust me on this: don't believe most of what athletes say through the media. it's almost all said with hidden intent (except whenever Ron Artest speaks).


look when a freshly hired coach with no reason to lie comes in and spouts off about the reasons he chose this job...then does what he did...your saying as fans we should expect to be lied to?...sorry not i...i pay alot of money in support of my team...i dont think that we need to be lied to

the facts are the facts...

as for cutler..i believe he believed that...doesnt matter if i follow along does it...he said it, he believed it, he wasnt lieing about it...he believes he has a bigger arm than elway

totaly differan than a coach doing what your saying is ok...comeing and and deliberatly lieing to the bronco fan base

BigDaddyBronco
10-27-2010, 04:00 PM
2008 we had 13 starters and role players on IR...injury excuse aside

look rationaly aside from the additional 39 pass yards per game more today...are we a better team
8 of them were RB's and Shanny's system allowed anyone to play RB.

If our entire pass rush and secondary wasn't decimated by injury, our defense would be heads and tails above the 2008 team. That alone would make the team better.

As it stands now with the team we have, no, but if I rolled out of the gate in 2008 with a healthy team and 2010 with a healthy team, I think the 2010 team would be better.

rationalfan
10-27-2010, 04:19 PM
look when a freshly hired coach with no reason to lie comes in and spouts off about the reasons he chose this job...then does what he did...your saying as fans we should expect to be lied to?...sorry not i...i pay alot of money in support of my team...i dont think that we need to be lied to

the facts are the facts...

as for cutler..i believe he believed that...doesnt matter if i follow along does it...he said it, he believed it, he wasnt lieing about it...he believes he has a bigger arm than elway

totaly differan than a coach doing what your saying is ok...comeing and and deliberatly lieing to the bronco fan base

not to get into this tired topic again, but people can change their minds from one day to the other. perhaps, after mcd watched more tape on cutler, and discovered he had a poor attitude, the coach decided it wouldn't work with cutler. change can happen.

or to use your example, perhaps mcd "believed" that when he said it at the introductory press conference. novel idea, eh?

i have to clarify, i'm not trying to defend mcd, or start "an issue" with you; just trying to break through myopic thought patterns. speaking from a position of (middle) management, one of the first things you do when stepping into a new situation is to analyze what you're walking into and try to fix the problems. yes, it's hard for people to believe cutler or bobby turner or the lack of the orange jerseys were problems, but mcd did. argue about not thinking his moves were right, but resenting him for one statement at a press conference is very ignorant.

and, just because you pay money toward the team doesn't mean you have right to hear the truth. coaches are paid to be deceptive and discreet. every wonder why they hide their mouths while calling plays?

sorry to burst your bubble, but the world isn't what was taught in sunday school.

Bosco
10-27-2010, 04:28 PM
Good thread, but...


coaching staff....i give the overwhelming nod to 2008 despite the horrendous weight of slowick. Had nolan, turner, and dennison still been here...easily it would be the current..but they are not

How do you figure this? Going down the assistants list I see only two clear advantages to the 2008 team, and those were both Turner and Dennison. Everybody else is a pretty clear upgrade from 2008.


offensive scheme..once again i have to give the nod to the 08 team...we are now improved in passing yards, but that was the knock on cutlers 08 team..all yards..no scores, right?..we have dropped in scoreing, rush yards, redzone%...at least the 08 team had the run game to keep the defense semi honest. At best you'd have to give this a wash. The 2008 Broncos offense since Jay Cutler and Jeremy Bates openly admitted to copying many elements of Josh's 2007 Patriots offense for use in 2008.

The schemes were very, very similar.

arapaho2
10-27-2010, 04:33 PM
8 of them were RB's and Shanny's system allowed anyone to play RB.

If our entire pass rush and secondary wasn't decimated by injury, our defense would be heads and tails above the 2008 team. That alone would make the team better.

As it stands now with the team we have, no, but if I rolled out of the gate in 2008 with a healthy team and 2010 with a healthy team, I think the 2010 team would be better.


correct without ifs and buts

arapaho2
10-27-2010, 04:39 PM
not to get into this tired topic again, but people can change their minds from one day to the other. perhaps, after mcd watched more tape on cutler, and discovered he had a poor attitude, the coach decided it wouldn't work with cutler. change can happen.

or to use your example, perhaps mcd "believed" that when he said it at the introductory press conference. novel idea, eh?

i have to clarify, i'm not trying to defend mcd, or start "an issue" with you; just trying to break through myopic thought patterns. speaking from a position of (middle) management, one of the first things you do when stepping into a new situation is to analyze what you're walking into and try to fix the problems. yes, it's hard for people to believe cutler or bobby turner or the lack of the orange jerseys were problems, but mcd did. argue about not thinking his moves were right, but resenting him for one statement at a press conference is very ignorant.

and, just because you pay money toward the team doesn't mean you have right to hear the truth. coaches are paid to be deceptive and discreet. every wonder why they hide their mouths while calling plays?

sorry to burst your bubble, but the world isn't what was taught in sunday school.

who gives a crap whats tauaght on sunday...you stated that had mcd worked here prior to being named the HC people might not be so polorized or something to that effect

i simple stated i think that was wrong..aside from the shanny stalwarts ...i think the polorizing apsect was when he started the cutler fiasco..simple right?

im not defending him or cutler...simply saying alot of unneeded grief and emotions started soon after he said what he said then tried to trade him...at that point..then..he set himself up to be judged

working here prior had nothing to do with it

weazel
10-27-2010, 04:41 PM
Shanahan wasn't fired for the team he had in his last year! He was fired for the results over the past few years. There was no progress.

arapaho2
10-27-2010, 04:43 PM
Good thread, but...



How do you figure this? Going down the assistants list I see only two clear advantages to the 2008 team, and those were both Turner and Dennison. Everybody else is a pretty clear upgrade from 2008.

At best you'd have to give this a wash. The 2008 Broncos offense since Jay Cutler and Jeremy Bates openly admitted to copying many elements of Josh's 2007 Patriots offense for use in 2008.

The schemes were very, very similar.

really?...you might wanna check winks defensive standings
as it stands i believe we are the 25th ranked defense already

where do our special teams rank now as opposed to then...worse?

oline coaching?..certainly worse

the offensive scheme was shannies not bates...also im sure you could look at the pats offense and find elements of shannies...as it stands today aside from the 39 more yards per game in passing...is the offensive scheme working or producing more than shannies 08

even you got to say no

arapaho2
10-27-2010, 04:44 PM
Shanahan wasn't fired for the team he had in his last year! He was fired for the results over the past few years. There was no progress.


not the topic...but thanks for your input:D

HORSEPOWER 56
10-27-2010, 06:14 PM
IMO, personnel are personnel. The rules put in place to ensure parity of the league really mean that it's still more about coaching than players. The draft and FA help and there are always a few Peyton Manning type special players out there, but by and large any team should be able to beat any other team on any given day of the week. Every team has a weakness somewhere on their roster personnel wise that they must scheme and compensate for. If it was just based on talent alone, then why would guys who sucked on one team magically be probowlers on another and vice versa? The talent is pretty evenly distributed league wide.

As far as is the team better now? No. I don't care how you try to spin it, Shanahan's teams never had a stretch of 4-13 in their last 17 games and I'd be willing to guess they never would.

Shanahan had plenty of flaws as a head coach (more specifically as a GM or HC with absolute power), but the one thing the guy could do was coach the offense. You NEVER saw the same gameplan twice and you NEVER saw the same 3 or 4 tired plays over and over if they weren't working.

He had too many draft picks that didn't pan out and was pretty lousy most times with his choices of FAs and DCs, but you could almost always count on the offense to be competitive and keep you in games even if the defense struggled.

As for the McDaniels era which is still pretty young, I've seen a coach who is as stubborn and arrogant about his decisions always being the right ones as any other coach I can think of. He has the Shanahan/Parcells type of swagger with nothing to back it up except empty promises and guarantees.

McDaniels has shown either a lack of ability to or an unwillingness to make adjustments to other teams' game plans. He's content to just keep doing the same things, repeatedly calling the same plays and watching the team lose when they don't work.

Had Shanahan's time in Denver run its course? Probably. Has McDaniels'? IMO, yes. No matter how you feel about the players he's selected for this team, good or bad, you cannot deny that he has not shown the ability to coach them or lead them to victory, especially when the going gets tough. It's been one controversy after another since McDaniels has been here. You don't hear a whole lot about players on the police blotter which is an improvement, but we have yet to see them play well enough to win either, and that looks almost as bad. In short, I'd probably trust this team to take my daughter out to dinner before I'd trust them to win a football game.

I think the team is worse, personally.

rationalfan
10-27-2010, 08:29 PM
who gives a crap whats tauaght on sunday...you stated that had mcd worked here prior to being named the HC people might not be so polorized or something to that effect

i simple stated i think that was wrong..aside from the shanny stalwarts ...i think the polorizing apsect was when he started the cutler fiasco..simple right?

im not defending him or cutler...simply saying alot of unneeded grief and emotions started soon after he said what he said then tried to trade him...at that point..then..he set himself up to be judged

working here prior had nothing to do with it

the snob in me is loathe to write this; but this is the most sense you've made in this thread. dig.

Lonestar
10-27-2010, 08:46 PM
not to get into this tired topic again, but people can change their minds from one day to the other. perhaps, after mcd watched more tape on cutler, and discovered he had a poor attitude, the coach decided it wouldn't work with cutler. change can happen.

or to use your example, perhaps mcd "believed" that when he said it at the introductory press conference. novel idea, eh?

i have to clarify, i'm not trying to defend mcd, or start "an issue" with you; just trying to break through myopic thought patterns. speaking from a position of (middle) management, one of the first things you do when stepping into a new situation is to analyze what you're walking into and try to fix the problems. yes, it's hard for people to believe cutler or bobby turner or the lack of the orange jerseys were problems, but mcd did. argue about not thinking his moves were right, but resenting him for one statement at a press conference is very ignorant.

and, just because you pay money toward the team doesn't mean you have right to hear the truth. coaches are paid to be deceptive and discreet. every wonder why they hide their mouths while calling plays?

sorry to burst your bubble, but the world isn't what was taught in sunday school.

Great logical post.

We all know deep down that Josh had watched film of jay and the team. In his days as a OC and D coach in NE. He knew that he could possibly have one of the best but he also knew that jay had flaws. Thinks that he could fix those issuses. But then in coversations with him when he gets here and talks about the spread O and goes over the playbook with him. Guessing that is when he started to have doubts whether he wanted to make the change and become a disciplined passer. Maybe that is when jay told him that mike had promised to redo his contract in the spring. That him BM, Kuper and Ts had been promised a BIG kiss.

Just throwing that in as I never got warm and fuzzy vibes out of jay considering he asked to be traded after hearing mikey was fired
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Bosco
10-27-2010, 10:12 PM
really?...you might wanna check winks defensive standings
as it stands i believe we are the 25th ranked defense already I understand that, but this is Wink's first year running a defense that itself is only in year two of a 4-3 to 3-4 transition which muddies the waters.

Martindale might turn out to be a failure as a DC, but he is a better option than the guy who has failed as a DC at four different stops.


where do our special teams rank now as opposed to then...worse? You know, on second thought I'll give you a 3rd one here. Scott O'Brien > Mike Priefer in everything but developing kickers. That brings the tally to two position coaches a special teams coordinator that were better than their counterparts under McDaniels.


oline coaching?..certainly worse It's certainly starting to look that way.


the offensive scheme was shannies not bates... This is true, however he had ceded (much to my dismay...believe me) much of the game planning and almost all of the play calling by 2000. As a result, Kubiak, Heimerdinger and Bates all ran different variations of the West Coast Offense. If you go back through my posts, you can find a link to where both Cutler and Bates were interviewed and spoke about reverse engineering alot of the 2007 Patroits offense.


also im sure you could look at the pats offense and find elements of shannies... Most of the short crossing routes that made Welker a 100+ catch a year guy are borrowed from West Coast Offenses, so you are correct in that regard.

silkamilkamonico
10-28-2010, 12:11 AM
I don't bu the comparisons this thread is trying to make

Shanahan had what, 15 years of drafts, and free agency's to get fired for a team that was 8-8? McDaniels has had what, 2 years?

Jake Klug
10-28-2010, 12:15 AM
4-13 and 59-14 is all the analysis that is needed.

Canmore
10-28-2010, 01:26 AM
4-13 and 59-14 is all the analysis that is needed.

I think that sums it up. No, we are not better than the team Shanahan was fired for, we are worse. I thought this team was going to be 8-8 with progress. We are not.

Jake Klug
10-28-2010, 01:30 AM
I think that sums it up. No, we are not better than the team Shanahan was fired for, we are worse. I thought this team was going to be 8-8 with progress. We are not.

Yeah, and even 8-8 cant remove the stink thats on this team now.

Bosco
10-28-2010, 01:56 AM
I think that sums it up. No, we are not better than the team Shanahan was fired for, we are worse. I thought this team was going to be 8-8 with progress. We are not.

I'm not sure how you can say that. Shanahan last three seasons here were 9-7, 6-10 and 8-8. It's not like Josh took over for a team that was a legit contender.

Canmore
10-28-2010, 02:12 AM
I'm not sure how you can say that. Shanahan last three seasons here were 9-7, 6-10 and 8-8. It's not like Josh took over for a team that was a legit contender.

We were 9-7, 7-9 and 8-8.

Jake Klug
10-28-2010, 02:16 AM
We were 9-7, 7-9 and 8-8.

Yeah, .500 is a problem but 4-13 isnt? Sure. OK.

Canmore
10-28-2010, 02:20 AM
Yeah, .500 is a problem but 4-13 isnt? Sure. OK.

4-13 is a huge problem. Am I missing something?

Bosco
10-28-2010, 02:26 AM
We were 9-7, 7-9 and 8-8.

You're right. Good catch.


Yeah, .500 is a problem but 4-13 isnt? Sure. OK.

Selective cherry picking of stats is always fun.

Canmore
10-28-2010, 02:28 AM
you're right. Good catch.



Selective cherry picking of stats is always fun.

lol.

Jake Klug
10-28-2010, 02:45 AM
You're right. Good catch.



Selective cherry picking of stats is always fun.

How is it cherry picking? If you look at the last 17 games, which is a significant sample size, Denver has won 23% of its games. If you focus only on this year, Denver has won 29% of its games.

Its basically the same.

Canmore
10-28-2010, 02:52 AM
How is it cherry picking? If you look at the last 17 games, which is a significant sample size, Denver has won 23% of its games. If you focus only on this year, Denver has won 29% of its games.

Its basically the same.

What about that six percent?:D Actuallly it's five percent. Denver has won 24% of it's last 17 games.

Bosco
10-28-2010, 02:55 AM
How is it cherry picking? If you look at the last 17 games, which is a significant sample size, Denver has won 23% of its games. If you focus only on this year, Denver has won 29% of its games.

Its basically the same.

And how convenient that your sample size includes the 6-0 start to 2009, right?

We're 10-13 a little under halfway through Josh's 2nd season. That's certainly very unacceptable from a fan's standpoint but we're only a few games off .500 in a small sample size. Let's not act like we're worse off than we really are.

Jake Klug
10-28-2010, 02:57 AM
What about that six percent?:D

Different denominator.

Jake Klug
10-28-2010, 02:59 AM
And how convenient that your sample size includes the 6-0 start to 2009, right?

We're 10-13 a little under halfway through Josh's 2nd season. That's certainly very unacceptable from a fan's standpoint but we're only a few games off .500 in a small sample size. Let's not act like we're worse off than we really are.



OK, the 17 games Im mentioning are both a bigger sample size than the 6, and theyre also more recent. The 17 is a more valid assessment of where the team is going.

Bosco
10-28-2010, 03:03 AM
OK, the 17 games Im mentioning are both a bigger sample size than the 6, and theyre also more recent. The 17 is a more valid assessment of where the team is going.

And my complete sample size trumps your 17 games. Got any other cute tricks?

Jake Klug
10-28-2010, 03:06 AM
And my complete sample size trumps your 17 games. Got any other cute tricks?

No. Ill reiterate what I pointed out before about it being both larger than the 6 and also more recent.

Bosco
10-28-2010, 03:10 AM
No. Ill reiterate what I pointed out before about it being both larger than the 6 and also more recent.

Follow me closely here. I'm using his complete record, every game from week 1 of 2009 to current.

23 games > 6 games

Jake Klug
10-28-2010, 03:10 AM
Im talking about the 17 being larger than the 6, just as I was saying before.

Bosco
10-28-2010, 03:11 AM
Im talking about the 17 being larger than the 6, just as I was saying before.

In that case...

23 > 17

Jake Klug
10-28-2010, 03:13 AM
Follow me closely here. I'm using his complete record, every game from week 1 of 2009 to current.

23 games > 6 games

Yeah, I saw what youre using. That has no value to me. If Im looking at the direction this team is going, the last 17 games has more weight than the first 6 games. And again, Ill point out that if you look at the 7 games this year, the win % is consistent with the last 17 games.

Jake Klug
10-28-2010, 03:14 AM
In that case...

23 > 17

In addition to it being more recent.

Bosco
10-28-2010, 03:24 AM
That has no value to me. Of course not. You just showed up here and so far you've done more complaining than a teenage girl on her period so it's not real surprising to me that you'd want to select a sample size spanning two seasons but not include the winning streak so as to make it appear the team is in a more dire situation than it really is.

Josh McDaniel's career coaching record is 10-13. That's under-performing, no debate, but only 3 games off .500 coming off an absolutely brutal schedule with 9 games left to play.

Bottom line, let's all chill the **** out and see what happens from here on out. For all we know this is where the team finds their stride and pulls together a nice win streak to finish out the season.

Canmore
10-28-2010, 03:33 AM
Of course not. You just showed up here and so far you've done more complaining than a teenage girl on her period so it's not real surprising to me that you'd want to select a sample size spanning two seasons but not include the winning streak so as to make it appear the team is in a more dire situation than it really is.

Josh McDaniel's career coaching record is 10-13. That's under-performing, no debate, but only 3 games off .500 coming off an absolutely brutal schedule with 9 games left to play.

Bottom line, let's all chill the **** out and see what happens from here on out. For all we know this is where the team finds their stride and pulls together a nice win streak to finish out the season.

What you say is true. I thought we were going to be an 8-8 team, but since the winning streak ended we are abysmal. Doesn't this trend concern you, or do you think that it is just an anomoly?

Bosco
10-28-2010, 03:52 AM
What you say is true. I thought we were going to be an 8-8 team, but since the winning streak ended we are abysmal. Doesn't this trend concern you, or do you think that it is just an anomoly?

I do believe it's an anomaly, but I have slight concerns that it isn't.

This team played a very good game against a tough Colts team, beat a tough Titans team, looked at least competitive for about 3/4 of the Ravens game and then outplayed the vaunted Jets until that 4th down penalty. Then they turn around and get completely wasted by weak ass Raiders team. You can pretty easily chock that up a case of "any given Sunday".

My personal opinion on the matter is that we have a rather solid football team that has been decimated by injuries to the point where it's near critical levels and we're starting to get exposed, especially on defense. We need to get a win over the 49'ers, get as healthy as possible over the bye week and then mount a serious stand down the stretch. If we do that, McD and company will be deserving of some serious props. If we continue the slide, some very serious evaluation needs to take place. McDaniels can't be expected to work miracles with a team that practically needs it's own infirmary, but I expect to see some tough, physical and smart play down the stretch.

Jake Klug
10-28-2010, 03:55 AM
Of course not. You just showed up here and so far you've done more complaining than a teenage girl on her period so it's not real surprising to me that you'd want to select a sample size spanning two seasons but not include the winning streak so as to make it appear the team is in a more dire situation than it really is.

Of course Im complaining. If youre not, I have to question whether or not youre really a Broncos fan.



Josh McDaniel's career coaching record is 10-13.

I realize that and at no point have I said his career record should omit the first 6 games. When Josh moves on in the future and they list the records of all the Broncos coaches, the first 6 games shouldnt be omitted. But what youre not able to grasp is that we're discussing the direction of the team. Thats where the 17 games comes into play. Its not cherry picking. 17 games is one more than a season worth of games.


That's under-performing, no debate, but only 3 games off .500 coming off an absolutely brutal schedule with 9 games left to play.

Yeah, and last year after Denver started 6-0 everyone thought they had it made in the shade because of all the division games remaining at home and because they were supposed to be easy. Its hard to blame the brutal schedule when youre losing the "easy" games. And getting blown out 59-14 on top of that.


Bottom line, let's all chill the **** out and see what happens from here on out.
The train has left the station and youre not on it. People are free to get on board when they want but the longer you wait, the more youll be bandwagoning.

Canmore
10-28-2010, 04:08 AM
I do believe it's an anomaly, but I have slight concerns that it isn't.

This team played a very good game against a tough Colts team, beat a tough Titans team, looked at least competitive for about 3/4 of the Ravens game and then outplayed the vaunted Jets until that 4th down penalty. Then they turn around and get completely wasted by weak ass Raiders team. You can pretty easily chock that up a case of "any given Sunday".

My personal opinion on the matter is that we have a rather solid football team that has been decimated by injuries to the point where it's near critical levels and we're starting to get exposed, especially on defense. We need to get a win over the 49'ers, get as healthy as possible over the bye week and then mount a serious stand down the stretch. If we do that, McD and company will be deserving of some serious props. If we continue the slide, some very serious evaluation needs to take place. McDaniels can't be expected to work miracles with a team that practically needs it's own infirmary, but I expect to see some tough, physical and smart play down the stretch.

I hope you are right, and every thing you say I agree with, but the blow out to the Raiders has me more than a little concerned. Will we be competitive on Sunday? I really hope we are. This is a team we have to beat if we are going to be relevant this season.

My little brother has been saying since preseason that we will be lucky to win six games and he predicts four. I keep telling him we are an 8-8 team. Now I wonder.

Lonestar
10-28-2010, 07:40 AM
Yeah, .500 is a problem but 4-13 isnt? Sure. OK.

Seems to me that Josh is 10-13 at not even mid point of his second season for all you know We could wind up 19_13.

But I'm sure more would prefer we lose out do we can rid our team of anything NE.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Mike
10-28-2010, 07:58 AM
Seems to me that Josh is 10-13 at not even mid point of his second season for all you know We could wind up 19_13.

But I'm sure more would prefer we lose out do we can rid our team of anything NE.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

I think most would find that record acceptable if the wins were coming up on the back end of that stat.

arapaho2
10-28-2010, 10:32 AM
I think we are getting off course...simple concept...all teams have injuries...so we need some to cut the excuses...teams face tuff teams every week...to say McDonald gets leeway cause we played a hard schedule so far is a excuse also...I recall the team we are compareing faced one of the hardest schedules in 08....with multiple playoff teams...I thinking we also played the hardest defensive schedule then

The current excuses aside...are we a better team.....team means depth...stats...record...staff

BroncoNut
10-28-2010, 10:34 AM
Shanny wasn't fired for a team. He was fired because he failed to improvise and be creative.

TXBRONC
10-28-2010, 10:36 AM
I think most would find that record acceptable if the wins were coming up on the back end of that stat.

Exactly. Knowing the context makes a world of difference imho. In and of itself it looks fine but when you look at where the losses started mounting up it's clear the team has regressed imho.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Jake Klug
10-28-2010, 12:15 PM
Seems to me that Josh is 10-13 at not even mid point of his second season for all you know We could wind up 19_13.

But I'm sure more would prefer we lose out do we can rid our team of anything NE.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

And the more time goes on, the closer the winning % gets to 25%. Thats what it was since the bye week last year and thats what it is this year. Theres statisical validity in saying Denver is a .250 team. 17 games is a full seasons worth of games plus one.

Youre the one who is supporting the losing.

You must be a Josh McDaniels fan more than a Broncos fan.

Superchop 7
10-28-2010, 01:10 PM
I told you back then, get Mike Nolan for a d-co-ord.

We would be talking Super Bowl right now had they done it.

(I also told you that Haslett was a stupid move for Shanny)

I'm like the Amazing Kreskin.

arapaho2
10-28-2010, 01:50 PM
I told you back then, get Mike Nolan for a d-co-ord.

We would be talking Super Bowl right now had they done it.

(I also told you that Haslett was a stupid move for Shanny)

I'm like the Amazing Kreskin.

nolan being one of two highly sought after dc's in 09 does not make you nostrodumus

there were a huge calling for nolan to be hired...too bad the boy genuois couldnt share the glory

Lonestar
10-29-2010, 07:15 PM
How is it cherry picking? If you look at the last 17 games, which is a significant sample size, Denver has won 23% of its games. If you focus only on this year, Denver has won 29% of its games.

Its basically the same.
and without cherry picking 43% of all of his games as a head coach.


that is really close to 50% of mikes last 48 games. after he had 14years to remodel, rebuild, reload or as many of us think destroy the talent level save 3 players on this team.

Jake Klug
10-29-2010, 07:18 PM
and without cherry picking 43% of all of his games as a head coach.


that is really close to 50% of mikes last 48 games. after he had 14years to remodel, rebuild, reload or as many of us think destroy the talent level save 3 players on this team.

Its not cherry picking. Stop acting like the last 17 games dont mean anything. Theyre 4-13. They were just defeated by the Raiders at home 59-14.

There is nothing you can say thats going to spin this to make things look good.

Lonestar
10-29-2010, 08:35 PM
Its not cherry picking. Stop acting like the last 17 games dont mean anything. Theyre 4-13. They were just defeated by the Raiders at home 59-14.

There is nothing you can say thats going to spin this to make things look good.

It is to cherry picking.

Just like saying he was 6-0 for his first games.

any time you take stats out that favor your arguement it is cherry picking.

There is an old slogan

" Figures never lie

But liars always figure. "

you either compare apples to apples or it is not a valid comparison.

Cherry pick all you like most of us like facts not fiction.

broncohead
10-29-2010, 08:38 PM
08 was a better team no doubt. If anybody denies it they need to take off the glasses

broncohead
10-29-2010, 08:40 PM
It is to cherry picking.

Just like saying he was 6-0 for his first games.

any time you take stats out that favor your arguement it is cherry picking.

There is an old slogan

" Figures never lie

But liars always figure. "

you either compare apples to apples or it is not a valid comparison.

Cherry pick all you like most of us like facts not fiction.

The stat does indicate that we are seriously regressing though no doubt

Canmore
10-29-2010, 08:47 PM
It is to cherry picking.

Just like saying he was 6-0 for his first games.

any time you take stats out that favor your arguement it is cherry picking.

There is an old slogan

" Figures never lie

But liars always figure. "

you either compare apples to apples or it is not a valid comparison.

Cherry pick all you like most of us like facts not fiction.

We are 4-13 in our last 17 games. That is a horrid trend. We are not picking cherries we are picking lemons and they taste really sour.

Lonestar
10-29-2010, 08:58 PM
The stat does indicate that we are seriously regressing though no doubt

I guess but then if you logically look at the reasons. for some of that slide.

Our D was found out last year and could not stop the run whatsoever late in the year.

they were on the field to long, they were undersized, It has been said the DC quit on us before the EOS.

then on the O side Orton was hobbled by to high ankle sprains, WR that did not run precise routes, a new scheme, ineffective smallish OLINE learning a new scheme that they were not cut out for, a OL coach that has never played OL trying to teach a scheme he knew nothing about.

Could also have to do with playing the 2nd hardest schedule so far this season, with a M.A.S.H. unit for OLINE and RB. Lots of reasons for failure there.

The last game to me was the perfect storm, playing a dead last team after a really tough schedule so far, while professing to being prepared we all know that there was no way the players thought this would be anything but a cake walk after the horrendously strong teams they played in the first 6 games.

The classic trap game and then down 21 points before they had a chance to think.

They youth on the team buckled

BTW I posted this in another thread.


If you have not figured out yet this is a YOUNG team.



# Name Pos. Ht. Wt. Age Exp. College
58 Alexander, Kevin LB 6-4 265 23 R Clemson
68 Beadles, Zane OL 6-4 305 23 R Utah
32 Cox, Perrish CB 6-0 198 23 R Oklahoma State
87 Decker, Eric WR 6-3 220 23 R Minnesota
34 McCarthy, Kyle S 6-1 210 24 R Notre Dame
69 Olsen, Eric OL 6-3 305 22 R Notre Dame
15 Tebow, Tim QB 6-3 245 23 R Florida
88 Thomas, Demar WR 6-3 229 22 R Georgia Tech
22 Thompson, Syd' CB 5-9 191 23 R California
41 Vaughn, Cassius CB 5-11 195 22 R Mississippi
50 Walton, J.D. OL 6-3 305 23 R Baylor
75 Clark, Chris OL 6-5 315 25 1 Southern Mississippi
64 Daniels, Stanley OL6-4 320 25 1 Washington
56 Ayers, Robert LB 6-3 274 25 2 Tennessee
30 Bruton, David S 6-2 211 23 2 Notre Dame
4 Colquitt, Britton P 6-3 205 25 2 Tennessee
82 Gronkowski, Da TE 6-5 255 25 2 Maryland
31 McBath, Darcel S 6-1 198 24 2 Texas Tech
27 Moreno, Knows RB 5-11 210 23 2 Georgia
81 Quinn, Richard TE 6-4 255 24 2 North Carolina
78 Clady, Ryan OL 6-6 325 24 3 Boise State
46 Larsen, Spence FB 6-2 243 26 3 Arizona
51 Mays, Joe LB 5-11 246 25 3 North Dakota State
98 McBean, Ryan DL 6-5 297 26 3 Oklahoma State
19 Royal, Eddie WR 5-10 180 24 3 Virginia Tech
59 Woodyard, Wes LB 6-0 222 24 3 Kentucky
74 Harris, Ryan OL 6-5 300 25 4 Notre Dame
94 Moss, Jarvis LB 6-7 257 26 4 Florida
5 Prater, Matt K 5-10 187 26 4 Central Florida
9 Quinn, Brady QB 6-3 235 25 4 Notre Dame
79 Thomas, Marcu DL 6-3 316 25 4 Florida
52 Hunter, Jason LB 6-4 271 27 5 Appalachian State
73 Kuper, Chris OL 6-4 303 27 5 North Dakota
26 Maroney, Laure RB 5-11 220 25 5 Minnesota
99 Vickerson, Ke DL 6-5 321 27 5 Michigan State
91 Fields, Ronald DL 6-2 314 29 6 Mississippi State
8 Orton, Kyle QB 6-4 225 27 6 Purdue
33 Jones, Nate CB 5-10 185 28 7 Rutgers
55 Williams, D.J. LB 6-1 242 28 7 Miami (Fla.)
57 Haggan, Mario LB 6-3 267 30 8 Mississippi State
84 Lloyd, Brandon WR 6-0 194 29 8 Illinois
97 Bannan, Justin DL 6-3 310 31 9 Colorado
10 Gaffney, Jabar WR 6-2 200 29 9 Florida
21 Goodman, Andr CB 5-10 184 32 9 South Carolina
89 Graham, Daniel TE 6-3 257 31 9 Colorado
28 buckhalter, Correll RB 6-0 223 32 10 Nebraska
23 Hill, Renaldo S 5-11 205 31 10 Michigan State
71 Hochstein, Russ OL 6-4 305 33 10 Nebraska
66 Paxton, Lonie LS 6-2 265 32 11 Sacramento State
24 Bailey, Champ CB 6-0 192 32 12 Georgia
76 Williams, Jamal DL 6-3 348 34 13 Oklahoma State
20 Dawkins, Brian S 6-0 210 37 15 Clemson
Practice Squad
# Name Pos. Ht. Wt. Age Exp. College
35 Ball, Lance RB 5-9 220 25 2 Maryland
63 Byers, Jeff OL 6-3 301 25 R USC
17 Davis, Britt WR 6-3 205 24 1 Northern Illinois
83 Geer, Riar TE 6-4 250 23 R Colorado
86 Nalbone, John TE 0
13 Riley, Eron WR 0
54 Robinson, Lee LB 6-2 256 23 1 Alcorn State
96 Unrein, Mitch DL 0
Injured Reserve
# Name Pos. Ht. Wt. Age Exp. College
92 Dumervil, Elvis LB 5-11 248 26 5 Louisville
25 White, LenDale RB 6-1 235 25 5 USC
12 Willis, Matthew WR 6-0 190 26 3 UCLA
Reserve/Not With Team
# Name Pos. Ht. Wt. Age Exp. College
Garland, Ben DL 6-5 275 22 R Air Force


7 players over 10 years exprience one of which sat out all last season.

49 players with less than 10 years.

11 rookies
2 second year men
7 third year guys
4 4 year guys.
5 5 year

If I counted correctly 29 guys with less than 5 years experience. on the active roster

With those on the IR, PS squad averaging 22.2 years.

Open your hatred filled eyes and see that this team is rebuilding and YOUNG. the starting offense has a total of 57 years exprience not starting experience but years in the league.

the only starters that have extensive starting experience on this unit are Clady 3 (playing hurt), Kuper 5 (playing hurt), Orton 6th year but did not start a couple of them, Graham 9 years, gaffeny 9 none starting, lloyd 8 none starting. take those starting years out and the rest of the squad has 24 years total.
.

When you have this kind of youth and are rebuilding shit happens lets hope it all happened last Sunday and we got it out of our system.

BTW two of those veteran oldies did not play in the game Dawkins the heart and soul leader of the team and Goodman, whose replacement was concussed during the game. SO Veteran leadership was on the sideline not on the field.

I just do not see the hoopla of the OAK game like some of you do. it was bad but it was ONE GAME.

If we get blown out more times this year then we can whine about it more. till then it was a loss. no more important than any other loss. Unless getting your ass kicked counts more in the W-L standings, than a loss..

Dean
10-29-2010, 09:16 PM
I guess but then if you logically look at the reasons. for some of that slide.

Our D was found out last year and could not stop the run whatsoever late in the year.

they were on the field to long, they were undersized, It has been said the DC quit on us before the EOS.

then on the O side Orton was hobbled by to high ankle sprains, WR that did not run precise routes, a new scheme, ineffective smallish OLINE learning a new scheme that they were not cut out for, a OL coach that has never played OL trying to teach a scheme he knew nothing about.

Could also have to do with playing the 2nd hardest schedule so far this season, with a M.A.S.H. unit for OLINE and RB. Lots of reasons for failure there.

The last game to me was the perfect storm, playing a dead last team after a really tough schedule so far, while professing to being prepared we all know that there was no way the players thought this would be anything but a cake walk after the horrendously strong teams they played in the first 6 games.

The classic trap game and then down 21 points before they had a chance to think.

They youth on the team buckled

BTW I posted this in another thread.



When you have this kind of youth and are rebuilding shit happens lets hope it all happened last Sunday and we got it out of our system.

BTW two of those veteran oldies did not play in the game Dawkins the heart and soul leader of the team and Goodman, whose replacement was concussed during the game. SO Veteran leadership was on the sideline not on the field.

I just do not see the hoopla of the OAK game like some of you do. it was bad but it was ONE GAME.

If we get blown out more times this year then we can whine about it more. till then it was a loss. no more important than any other loss. Unless getting your ass kicked counts more in the W-L standings, than a loss..


You seem to have forgotten some of your past posts concerning big losses. They bothered you then.;)

Lonestar
10-29-2010, 09:26 PM
You seem to have forgotten some of your past posts concerning big losses. They bothered you then.;)

Not sure which ones you had in mind but if they were blow outs with mike at the helm after 10-14 years in build a team. Those would be a bit more justified IMO.

I do seem to remember a 44-3 blowout by a 0 and gazillion loss team the loins his last year, just a bit more to be incensed about than this one IMHO.

But then call me over sensitive.:laugh::laugh::laugh:

Not overly concerned with this last one.

If you want to be be my guest.

Lets see what happens the rest of the year.

broncohead
10-29-2010, 09:43 PM
I guess but then if you logically look at the reasons. for some of that slide.

[QUOTE]Our D was found out last year and could not stop the run whatsoever late in the year.

they were on the field to long, they were undersized, It has been said the DC quit on us before the EOS.


Everyone has their own opinion about last years D. Mine is that McD wanted the D ran his way. To each their own


then on the O side Orton was hobbled by to high ankle sprains, WR that did not run precise routes, a new scheme, ineffective smallish OLINE learning a new scheme that they were not cut out for, a OL coach that has never played OL trying to teach a scheme he knew nothing about.

I believe new scheme had a lot to do with last seasons troubles but what about this season? We shouldn't be having the issues we are currently having. No RZ offense, lack of a running game, and an OL (that was very good under shanny except the 2 rooks) that can't block.

Could also have to do with playing the 2nd hardest schedule so far this season, with a M.A.S.H. unit for OLINE and RB. Lots of reasons for failure there.

The last game to me was the perfect storm, playing a dead last team after a really tough schedule so far, while professing to being prepared we all know that there was no way the players thought this would be anything but a cake walk after the horrendously strong teams they played in the first 6 games.

The classic trap game and then down 21 points before they had a chance to think.

They youth on the team buckled

BTW I posted this in another thread.




When you have this kind of youth and are rebuilding shit happens lets hope it all happened last Sunday and we got it out of our system.

We never had to rebuild before. With the exception of 05, we were always in it till the last few games (to make the playoffs).

BTW two of those veteran oldies did not play in the game Dawkins the heart and soul leader of the team and Goodman, whose replacement was concussed during the game. SO Veteran leadership was on the sideline not on the field.


I just do not see the hoopla of the OAK game like some of you do. it was bad but it was ONE GAME.

If we get blown out more times this year then we can whine about it more. till then it was a loss. no more important than any other loss. Unless getting your ass kicked counts more in the W-L standings, than a loss..

No it doesn't effect the WL standings anymore but it does show where we are at as a team imo. Injuries are part of the game so coaches need to be prepared to deal with them

Lonestar
10-29-2010, 10:19 PM
[QUOTE=Jrwiz;1105735]I guess but then if you logically look at the reasons. for some of that slide.



Everyone has their own opinion about last years D. Mine is that McD wanted the D ran his way. To each their own



I believe new scheme had a lot to do with last seasons troubles but what about this season? We shouldn't be having the issues we are currently having. No RZ offense, lack of a running game, and an OL (that was very good under shanny except the 2 rooks) that can't block.

Could also have to do with playing the 2nd hardest schedule so far this season, with a M.A.S.H. unit for OLINE and RB. Lots of reasons for failure there.

The last game to me was the perfect storm, playing a dead last team after a really tough schedule so far, while professing to being prepared we all know that there was no way the players thought this would be anything but a cake walk after the horrendously strong teams they played in the first 6 games.

The classic trap game and then down 21 points before they had a chance to think.

They youth on the team buckled

BTW I posted this in another thread.





We never had to rebuild before. With the exception of 05, we were always in it till the last few games (to make the playoffs).

BTW two of those veteran oldies did not play in the game Dawkins the heart and soul leader of the team and Goodman, whose replacement was concussed during the game. SO Veteran leadership was on the sideline not on the field.



No it doesn't effect the WL standings anymore but it does show where we are at as a team imo. Injuries are part of the game so coaches need to be prepared to deal with them
as for injuries yep they happen and you have to be prepared.

But then we seem to have more than what you can prepare for.

NOT once in TC/Pre season did we have all the "starters" available to really practice the run game.

kind of hard to get any timing down when this happens. I some cases we had at least one OT if not both and one OG out not to mention RB's.

you get no consistency that way.

IMO we should have just rebuilt way back instead of what everyone wanted to say reload. might have saved mikeys job.

that and hiring a real DC for a change and leaving him alone to do his job.
but that also seems to be water under the bridge.

Bosco
10-30-2010, 01:51 AM
as for injuries yep they happen and you have to be prepared.

But then we seem to have more than what you can prepare for.

That's exactly it.

Yeah, injuries happen. It's the coaches job to layer safety nets (usually young, developing talents) behind his starters in case that happens. However when even your safety nets are going down, there isn't a whole lot you can do. There's only 53 roster spots available.

jhildebrand
10-30-2010, 01:58 AM
the loins his .

Freudian slip? :confused:

Canmore
10-30-2010, 01:59 AM
[QUOTE=Jrwiz;1105758]

That's exactly it.

Yeah, injuries happen. It's the coaches job to layer safety nets (usually young, developing talents) behind his starters in case that happens. However when even your safety nets are going down, there isn't a whole lot you can do. There's only 53 roster spots available.

The injuries on defense hurt but that's no excuse for the pasting Oakland put on us last week. This team needs to put forth the kind of effort that it did against the Jets on Sunday or I think you can mail in the season and Josh's job with it.

jhildebrand
10-30-2010, 02:02 AM
There's only 53 roster spots available.

And then you can start dishing out draft picks for "has beens" RB's :D

TimTebow15MVP
10-30-2010, 03:53 AM
Yes but is it good enough yet? No......i love our 3-4 with ayers and dooms healthy. and a nice draft.

offensively were gonna be awesome. exspecially when tebow steps in and the rookies get the year out the way. hopefully we adress the RB position. this OL is gonna be dominant next year and we need another back with moreno (who wont ever be healthy an entire season)...... i want somebody explosive who will hit the huge holes next year and take it to the house. moreno can be the chain mover........

Canmore
10-30-2010, 04:31 AM
Yes but is it good enough yet? No......i love our 3-4 with ayers and dooms healthy. and a nice draft.

offensively were gonna be awesome. exspecially when tebow steps in and the rookies get the year out the way. hopefully we adress the RB position. this OL is gonna be dominant next year and we need another back with moreno (who wont ever be healthy an entire season)...... i want somebody explosive who will hit the huge holes next year and take it to the house. moreno can be the chain mover........

Moreno can't stay healthy enough to load a U-Haul much less move the chains on a regular basis, but I agree we need a new rb who is what Moreno was suppose to be.

claymore
10-30-2010, 07:10 AM
[QUOTE=broncohead;1105749]
as for injuries yep they happen and you have to be prepared.

But then we seem to have more than what you can prepare for.

NOT once in TC/Pre season did we have all the "starters" available to really practice the run game.

kind of hard to get any timing down when this happens. I some cases we had at least one OT if not both and one OG out not to mention RB's.

you get no consistency that way.

IMO we should have just rebuilt way back instead of what everyone wanted to say reload. might have saved mikeys job.

that and hiring a real DC for a change and leaving him alone to do his job.
but that also seems to be water under the bridge.

We are missing a couple mediocre players that wouldnt start on a good team. Ayers hasnt produced anything. Dawkins is the heart and soul of this team, but he is almost 40. ANd he breaks down every other game.

Even if we had all of our guys healthy and back in the game, we still couldnt stop the run,. or run the football.

None of the hurt guys put points on the board which is 80% of the reason we have lost.

HORSEPOWER 56
10-30-2010, 09:35 AM
The bottom line is, these same results wouldn't have been acceptable under Shanahan. Everyone, even the most staunch Shanahan supporter would be questioning him right now if he were the head coach and would be calling for his head.

I can't think of a coach in the league right now who wouldn't be criticized and spoken of potentially being fired had he gone 4-13 in the last 17 games and lost 59-14 at home vs a hated division rival.

You can use the injury excuse all day long but in the end, there is a practice squad and there are FAs just sitting at home awaiting a call if our current players can't get the job done. Our defense can't pressure the QB and can't stop the run, but for some reason we haven't called someone like Adalius Thomas who is not playing and is better than anyone we have on our current, healthy roster.

Our running game continues to struggle, and everyone uses the "time to gel" excuse but the coach has now seen fit to start shuffling the O-line (Daniels replaced by Hochstein, Harris replaced by Beadles all on different weeks so I don't think we've fielded the same O-line more than 2 weeks in a row this season) which hasn't improved anything and just looks like the actions of a desperate, and over matched man, not someone who's trying to get the O-line to "gel" by playing together more.

Most importantly, as far as I'm concerned, lets talk about draft picks... I'm not even talking about past drafts, I'm talking about what we are looking at going in to the upcoming draft. No 4th rounder, traded for Maroney. No 5th rounder, traded for 2 7ths in this years draft to get Kirlew (who is no longer a Bronco) and Thompson. No 6th rounder, traded with Hillis for Brady Quinn. What else am I missing? The Seahawks traded a 4th for Marshawn Lynch after we traded ours for Maroney? Really?

I understand a coach trading a pick for an impact player, but not one of our player/pick trades has panned out to actually improve this team this season.

The injury excuse only really applies to the defense thus far. The offense is still struggling to score over 20 points in a game and has only done so twice. I could almost buy the injury excuse had we lost to Oakland say, 59-48 or something. Then the defense just flat let the team down, but when your offense only scores 14 points in a rout like that, both sides of the ball are ineffective. This isn't our first time being blown out by an "inferior" opponent (honestly, we can't call anyone inferior to us right now, can we?) under this regime's short reign. That in itself tells the whole story.

Lonestar
10-30-2010, 11:12 AM
Hey I have an idea to all the MMQB submit your resume and past exprience and what you ideas for the future is to Pat.

I'm sure he would give it the consideration it would deserve. :wink:
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Lonestar
10-30-2010, 11:13 AM
Let me add that would be file 13. :laugh:
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

claymore
10-30-2010, 11:23 AM
Hey I have an idea to all the MMQB submit your resume and past exprience and what you ideas for the future is to Pat.

I'm sure he would give it the consideration it would deserve. :wink:
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

I think some of us could produce better results if we leaned on quality assistants.

frauschieze
10-30-2010, 11:34 AM
Hey I have an idea to all the MMQB submit your resume and past exprience and what you ideas for the future is to Pat.

I'm sure he would give it the consideration it would deserve. :wink:
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[/moderation mode]

Why be such a facetious ass? This forum EXISTS for Monday morning quarterbacking! It's here to discuss every little facet about a team we all love.

Also, I'm sure Pat always reads the forums. There's football AND comedy gold in here. :D

[moderation mode]

Dzone
10-30-2010, 11:36 AM
No we are not as good a team as shannahan had at the end...maybe in a year, but not now

Lonestar
10-30-2010, 11:47 AM
[/moderation mode]

Why be such a facetious ass? This forum EXISTS for Monday morning quarterbacking! It's here to discuss every little facet about a team we all love.

Also, I'm sure Pat always reads the forums. There's football AND comedy gold in here. :D

[moderation mode]

guess I'm tired of all the anonymous know it alls, that really think they know more about what is going on at dove valley than the coaching staff.

NONE of them know what plays have been called, nor do they know for sure what caused the play to fail, since they do not have a clue about what was called in the first place.

I suspect that Josh has a good handle on it and is spending alot of quality time away from home, in the office trying to fix it.

way to much thinking going on and not enough logic.

If they know so much let them put their plan into action, maybe Pat would hire one as an intern or probably a tackling dummy.

Sorry but reading some of this stuff is beyond "comedy gold" IMO.

I doubt seriously that Pat spends any time browsing the forums for ideas. I suspect he spends more time looking for that girl that spins straw into gold..


now that was funny :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

/rant

Lonestar
10-30-2010, 11:48 AM
No we are not as good a team as shannahan had at the end...maybe in a year, but not now

then show us where we are worse like I asked you to do in another thread.

HORSEPOWER 56
10-30-2010, 11:48 AM
Hey I have an idea to all the MMQB submit your resume and past exprience and what you ideas for the future is to Pat.

I'm sure he would give it the consideration it would deserve. :wink:
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Okay, That makes about as much sense as McDaniels doing my job (nuclear engineer) or your job for that matter back when you were a Submariner. Who do you think is more qualified? The thing is, if my job performance was a sub par as his has been my employer surely would be looking to replace me. Excuses don't fly in my line of work. If you screw up, people get hurt and/or government agencies tend to shut your ass down so maybe I'm a little more critical of obvious mistakes that aren't being corrected than I could be, but I'm not being paid $2 mil a year to do a job, either. If you were paying my salary to deliver a good product, wouldn't you expect more?

I don't doubt that McDaniels is trying to do his best and do what he thinks is right, but if that's the case then, obviously, he's not getting it done.

Lonestar
10-30-2010, 11:51 AM
Okay, That makes about as much sense as McDaniels doing my job (nuclear engineer) or your job for that matter back when you were a Submariner. Who do you think is more qualified? The thing is, if my job performance was a sub par as his has been my employer surely would be looking to replace me. Excuses don't fly in my line of work. If you screw up, people get hurt and/or government agencies tend to shut your ass down so maybe I'm a little more critical of obvious mistakes that aren't being corrected than I could be, but I'm not being paid $2 mil a year to do a job, either.

I don't doubt that McDaniels is trying to do his best and do what he thinks is right, but if that's the case then, obviously, he's not getting it done.

Well I applaud your job (almost did that myself while in the navy) and frankly IF you screw up people die, if the team biffs it just a lot of drunks to worry about. Not quite on the same level IMO.

I just do not see it as his job being sub par, I think he has a goal and is working towards it I also believe that Pat has the same goals and will take action IF and WHEN those goals are not met. That said I also believe that Pat knows that injuries have played a huge part in our performance so far this year. And UNLIKE the injuries happen and you have to be ready for them crowd. Knows that it is an anomaly to have as many folks go down as we have had.

He also knows the state of the franchise when mike left it. the dour straights we had in depth let alone quality depth. nothing on D but a few starters nothing behind them. as for Offense a Qb, second string FB, first string FB/LB, Royal, Marshal and the oline that was getting ready to come apart age wise. one TE that could block and one TE that supposedly was a game changer yet he made little if any difference in the red zone.

We had loads of offense till the red zone but nothing behind said starters NADA.
BTW do you glow at night, any kids with two heads.:D

HORSEPOWER 56
10-30-2010, 12:02 PM
Well I applaud your job (almost did that myself while in the navy) and frankly IF you screw up people die, if the team biffs it just a lot of drunks to worry about. Not quite on the same level IMO.

BTW do you glow at night, any kids with two heads.:D

Three beautiful kids... one head each.

I do glow, though... especially the nether regions. Helps my aim in the dark. ;)

spikerman
10-30-2010, 01:20 PM
I think some of us could produce better results if we leaned on quality assistants.

You don't have any brothers who need a job do you?

broncohead
10-30-2010, 02:56 PM
guess I'm tired of all the anonymous know it alls, that really think they know more about what is going on at dove valley than the coaching staff.

NONE of them know what plays have been called, nor do they know for sure what caused the play to fail, since they do not have a clue about what was called in the first place.

I suspect that Josh has a good handle on it and is spending alot of quality time away from home, in the office trying to fix it.

way to much thinking going on and not enough logic.

If they know so much let them put their plan into action, maybe Pat would hire one as an intern or probably a tackling dummy.

Sorry but reading some of this stuff is beyond "comedy gold" IMO.

I doubt seriously that Pat spends any time browsing the forums for ideas. I suspect he spends more time looking for that girl that spins straw into gold..


now that was funny :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

/rant

Anyone with a decent football knowledge can look at a play and see what the offense/defense is trying to do. So I don't buy that argument. Josh may have a plan and thats just dandy but I don't have any hope he will turn it around.

Also people come here to talk football and voice their opinions. Thats sounds like a forum to me. If you don't want to then dont post. Pretty simple really.

Dean
10-30-2010, 03:22 PM
guess I'm tired of all the anonymous know it alls, that really think they know more about what is going on at dove valley than the coaching staff.

NONE of them know what plays have been called, nor do they know for sure what caused the play to fail, since they do not have a clue about what was called in the first place.

I suspect that Josh has a good handle on it and is spending alot of quality time away from home, in the office trying to fix it.

way to much thinking going on and not enough logic.

If they know so much let them put their plan into action, maybe Pat would hire one as an intern or probably a tackling dummy.

Sorry but reading some of this stuff is beyond "comedy gold" IMO.

I doubt seriously that Pat spends any time browsing the forums for ideas. I suspect he spends more time looking for that girl that spins straw into gold..


now that was funny :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

/rant

Here is Ron Woodson's take on the situation. He is not anonymous(?) and has watched enough film to tell what is going on.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-total-access/09000d5d81bb766d/Losing-it-in-London

Ron's brutal but honest take on our problems is close to the front of the segment.

Ravage!!!
10-30-2010, 03:35 PM
Here is Ron Woodson's take on the situation. He is not anonymous(?) and has watched enough film to tell what is going on.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-total-access/09000d5d81bb766d/Losing-it-in-London

Ron's brutal but honest take on our problems is close to the front of the segment.

Ron Woodson is just a HoF player... and one of the greatest to ever (if not the greatest) play the DB position. What does the know about football? He doesn't know what he's looking at when he reviews game film. He doesnt' know what is called, or what the team is trying to do. How can he possibly make such negative comments about the vision of which McD is obviously forming? :elefant:

Bosco
10-30-2010, 04:14 PM
You can use the injury excuse all day long but in the end, there is a practice squad and there are FAs just sitting at home awaiting a call if our current players can't get the job done. And how many of those guys are even up to the challenge of being role players, much less injury replacement starters?

There is a reason they are not on active NFL rosters. Expecting coaching staffs to start pulling miracles off the streets is pretty un*******realistic.

Ravage!!!
10-30-2010, 05:14 PM
Injuries is just an excuse. Every team has them, every team deals with them. If we were a well coached team, we would be doing a better job of adjusting and dealing. Thats what coaching does. We are NOT a good team, period. We were NOT a good team for the last 10 games of last year. Blaming injuries is just an excuse to deflect away from the glaring spotlight that is shining on our coach.

Lonestar
10-30-2010, 05:26 PM
Anyone with a decent football knowledge can look at a play and see what the offense/defense is trying to do. So I don't buy that argument. Josh may have a plan and thats just dandy but I don't have any hope he will turn it around.

Also people come here to talk football and voice their opinions. Thats sounds like a forum to me. If you don't want to then dont post. Pretty simple really.

can you for sure KNOW what was called by the coach and what Orton might have changed it to just by seeing what happens on the field.

Considering that most of the plays have 8-10 permutations of them I doubt that very much.

You might figure out about what it was supposed to be, but even then with all of the permutations in them do you know for sure which player biffed it?

Or better yet which Defensive player blew it up?

Unless you have access to game footage, beyond a DVR and have access to the plays called you or anyone else is just guessing.

I have not issues with folks voicing an opinion when they act as if it is a fact that is when I have some issues with it.

Your welcome to voice an Opinion of Josh all day long. Just do not put those that think your full of shit down either.

You know do as I say not do as I do.:laugh::laugh::laugh:

I will always give the benefit to the coaching staff as to know what they are talking about over someone with a DVR at home thinking he knows what he is talking about.

Lonestar
10-30-2010, 05:35 PM
Here is Ron Woodson's take on the situation. He is not anonymous(?) and has watched enough film to tell what is going on.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-total-access/09000d5d81bb766d/Losing-it-in-London

Ron's brutal but honest take on our problems is close to the front of the segment.

Ron Woodson the paragon of knowledge in the NFL.:laugh:

his analysis sounds like he read a few of our posts on here about dismantling the team. jay, Bm, TS and nolan.

ahahahahahaha

does he know the NFL, sure, is he hired to be a talking face, sure, do the networks strive to create controversy to sell ad space, absolutely.

The only one that counts is Pat. So far he and Xman have had a free hand in making the changes necessary to make this a TEAM.

Coach, do you think that any of those players were really making the team better?

spikerman
10-30-2010, 05:41 PM
I will always give the benefit to the coaching staff as to know what they are talking about over someone with a DVR at home thinking he knows what he is talking about. Do you feel that way about every coaching staff or just the current one?

spikerman
10-30-2010, 05:47 PM
Ron Woodson the paragon of knowledge in the NFL.:laugh:

his analysis sounds like he read a few of our posts on here about dismantling the team. jay, Bm, TS and nolan.

ahahahahahaha

does he know the NFL, sure, is he hired to be a talking face, sure, do the networks strive to create controversy to sell ad space, absolutely.

The only one that counts is Pat. So far he and Xman have had a free hand in making the changes necessary to make this a TEAM.

Coach, do you think that any of those players were really making the team better?

Ok, I admit I haven't watched the video yet, but can I assume it's actually Rod Woodson?

So now a guy who played and knows the NFL is only creating controversy to sell ad space? Is that because anybody who really knows football couldn't possibly help but be enamored with McDaniels?

Finally, if I can be so bold as to parrot one of your lines with one exception I think you ALMOST hit the nail on the head.....
"The only one that counts is Pat. So far he and Xman have had a free hand in making the changes necessary to make this a crappy TEAM.

Lonestar
10-30-2010, 06:00 PM
Do you feel that way about every coaching staff or just the current one?


Overall after seeing our playbook I have to say our coaching staff has a lot more knowledge than does the average fan with a DVR.

In years past there was very little change in the weekly playbook for the up coming team the basic plays were all the same with the only difference was a man in motion one week to get a look from the week before.

one of the announcers said it well in one of the games the broncos have about 6 plays disguised inside 30 or 40 minor changes in looks. but it always boiled down to those 6 basic plays.

I will give the coaches the leg up on any and all of our posters. sorry MMQB in this case don't make it so.

Lonestar
10-30-2010, 06:03 PM
Ok, I admit I haven't watched the video yet, but can I assume it's actually Rod Woodson?

So now a guy who played and knows the NFL is only creating controversy to sell ad space? Is that because anybody who really knows football couldn't possibly help but be enamored with McDaniels?

Finally, if I can be so bold as to parrot one of your lines with one exception I think you ALMOST hit the nail on the head.....
"The only one that counts is Pat. So far he and Xman have had a free hand in making the changes necessary to make this a crappy TEAM.

see now your just being emotional after a huge loss

How about we wait to see what the rest of the season brings.

IF we continue to get blown out I might join y'all. but see I do not think that will happen. everyone is depressed because we lost some games to the teams that have the second toughest schedule . What did they expect to happen with all these injuries?

spikerman
10-30-2010, 06:20 PM
Overall after seeing our playbook I have to say our coaching staff has a lot more knowledge than does the average fan with a DVR.

In years past there was very little change in the weekly playbook for the up coming team the basic plays were all the same with the only difference was a man in motion one week to get a look from the week before.

one of the announcers said it well in one of the games the broncos have about 6 plays disguised inside 30 or 40 minor changes in looks. but it always boiled down to those 6 basic plays.

I will give the coaches the leg up on any and all of our posters. sorry MMQB in this case don't make it so.

Do you not think that the last coaching staff also knew more than "any and all of our posters"?

spikerman
10-30-2010, 06:23 PM
see now your just being emotional after a huge loss

How about we wait to see what the rest of the season brings.

IF we continue to get blown out I might join y'all. but see I do not think that will happen. everyone is depressed because we lost some games to the teams that have the second toughest schedule . What did they expect to happen with all these injuries?

I'm not emotional at all about the last game. I'm way too old and have too many actually important things in my life to take NFL football too seriously. This comes from looking at this team having one of the worst records in football after a "flukey" 6-0 start last year - and yes I think it's accurate to say the 6-0 start was a fluke since it's 4-13 since.

Dean
10-30-2010, 06:25 PM
I can only assume that you are talking about the rushing offense here. So my remarks will be limited to that.


Overall after seeing our playbook I have to say our coaching staff has a lot more knowledge than does the average fan with a DVR.

In years past there was very little change in the weekly playbook for the up coming team the basic plays were all the same with the only difference was a man in motion one week to get a look from the week before.


After the scripted plays were run, it was determined how the defense would align to play each formation. After theat the motion was run to move the defense to creat a man advantage or a mismatch for the offense.


one of the announcers said it well in one of the games the broncos have about 6 plays disguised inside 30 or 40 minor changes in looks. but it always boiled down to those 6 basic plays.

IMO that is an oversimplification but even if it were 100% correct doesn't it show how effective it was. To only run 6 plays and be significantly better than what we run now is amazing.


I will give the coaches the leg up on any and all of our posters. sorry MMQB in this case don't make it so.

That is your perogative. However, they are not dieties they are made of flesh and blood just like the rest of us. They are playing people of equal calibre. Sometimes they just screw up.:coffee:

broncohead
10-30-2010, 08:28 PM
can you for sure KNOW what was called by the coach and what Orton might have changed it to just by seeing what happens on the field.

Considering that most of the plays have 8-10 permutations of them I doubt that very much.

You might figure out about what it was supposed to be, but even then with all of the permutations in them do you know for sure which player biffed it?

Or better yet which Defensive player blew it up?

Unless you have access to game footage, beyond a DVR and have access to the plays called you or anyone else is just guessing.

I have not issues with folks voicing an opinion when they act as if it is a fact that is when I have some issues with it.

Your welcome to voice an Opinion of Josh all day long. Just do not put those that think your full of shit down either.

You know do as I say not do as I do.:laugh::laugh::laugh:

I will always give the benefit to the coaching staff as to know what they are talking about over someone with a DVR at home thinking he knows what he is talking about.

It's impossible to know what play the QB or defense audibles to but we do see the play on film and it's not hard to see what we were trying to do. Not saying i'm a genius but it's pretty simple to spot a missed block, missed running lane, QB/WR on two different pages or blown coverage.

Lonestar
10-30-2010, 08:59 PM
Do you not think that the last coaching staff also knew more than "any and all of our posters"?

probably so but then mike did not have a new offense either.

his was old and predictable and lousy in the red zone.

My issue with mikey was not his coaching as much as it was his refusal to get a defense and his piss poor drafting and FA acquisitions, the way he burned through money and lost much of it to dead cap space.

spikerman
10-30-2010, 09:01 PM
My issue with mikey was not his coaching as much as it was his refusal to get a defense and his piss poor drafting and FA acquisitions...

Fair enough, as I have the exact same issues with McDaniels except that I don't care for his coaching (play calling) much either.

Lonestar
10-30-2010, 09:19 PM
Fair enough, as I have the exact same issues with McDaniels except that I don't care for his coaching (play calling) much either.

I can't say I have a real problem with them this year, although late in the game last week, I was not overly happy, for that matter I would have been in hurry up offense all game to wear those oak slobs out by half time.

there is no reason not to use the hurry up at home no huddle and run those ******** into the ground.

Ravage!!!
10-30-2010, 10:29 PM
In years past there was very little change in the weekly playbook for the up coming team the basic plays were all the same with the only difference was a man in motion one week to get a look from the week before.

I'll take the word of guys like Ron Jawarski, that ABSOLUTELY raved about how Shanahan would have an entirely different playbook for each and every game, absolutely MAXIMIZING matchups. He's one of the best in the game about breaking down game film. So I'll say, that I'm pretty sure its MUCH safer to take his perception of Shanahan's ability to change the game-plan and playbook for each game of your layman's perception.


one of the announcers said it well in one of the games the broncos have about 6 plays disguised inside 30 or 40 minor changes in looks. but it always boiled down to those 6 basic plays.
You are exaggerating. Its more than 6 plays, but do you know how many plays/combinations that can be run out of the same formation of 2 WRs, 1 slot, and 1 TE if they all know the exact same 7 routes? HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS. Literally. Thats without even changing formations with the same number of people on the field. Thats with ONLY 7 routes. 30-40 MINOR changes, are HUGE.

Interestingly enough, Brian Billick was just shown breaking dwn the Broncos passing offense, and showed just how often we run out of the 'trips bunch' set on 3rd down... yet showing just small changes in formations and routes. :lol:


I will give the coaches the leg up on any and all of our posters. sorry MMQB in this case don't make it so.
Exactly. I'll give the Billick's and the Jaworski's a MUCH bigger leg up than the posters on teh board when it comes to telling us about how offenses are actually used :wink:

spikerman
10-30-2010, 10:32 PM
I think Bill Belichick used to say that Mike Shanahan was the toughest coach for him to prepare for. His record against Shanahan backs that up.

Ravage!!!
10-30-2010, 11:47 PM
I think Bill Belichick used to say that Mike Shanahan was the toughest coach for him to prepare for. His record against Shanahan backs that up.

That coming from the greatest Defensive mind in NFL history.

UrbanBounca
10-30-2010, 11:53 PM
In my opinion, we're comparing (a) a bad team to (b) another bad team. Shanny wasn't getting it done, and we needed a change. I agree with the change, and I still agree with the change. However, it's getting to the point where another change may need to be made.

Broncos Mtnman
10-31-2010, 01:02 AM
When you have this kind of youth and are rebuilding shit happens lets hope it all happened last Sunday and we got it out of our system.

BTW two of those veteran oldies did not play in the game Dawkins the heart and soul leader of the team and Goodman, whose replacement was concussed during the game. SO Veteran leadership was on the sideline not on the field.

I just do not see the hoopla of the OAK game like some of you do. it was bad but it was ONE GAME.

If we get blown out more times this year then we can whine about it more. till then it was a loss. no more important than any other loss. Unless getting your ass kicked counts more in the W-L standings, than a loss..

The age thing is a lame excuse.

The average age of the Broncos according to the NFL (July/2010) is 26.31.

Younger teams in the NFL (note that they are all winning teams) are:

Tampa Bay - 25.10
Indianapolis Colts - 25.14
Philadelphia Eagles - 25.20
Houston Texans - 25.62
Kansas City Chiefs - 25.66
NY Giants - 25.71
Tennessee Titans - 25.74
Chicago Bears - 25.83
Miami Dolphins - 25.84
Green Bay Packers - 25.88
New York Jets - 26.13
Atlanta Falcons - 26.16
Seattle Seahawks - 26.18
New Orleans Saints - 26.29


You could be right about age being a factor in one area though.

Mickey is younger than the coaches of all these teams.

:coffee:

Bosco
10-31-2010, 01:33 AM
Fair enough, as I have the exact same issues with McDaniels except that I don't care for his coaching (play calling) much either.

I'm not sure how you can have an issue with Josh getting us a defense. To date he's made pretty significant investments in the D with guys like Dawkins, Hill, Goodman, Dumervil (big extension) Bannan, Green, Jamal Williams, Ayers, Alphonso, McBath...etc. Sure, some of those moves haven't panned out but it's pretty clear he's not going to let the defense be an afterthought.

Lonestar
10-31-2010, 02:05 AM
The age thing is a lame excuse.

The average age of the Broncos according to the NFL (July/2010) is 26.31.

Younger teams in the NFL (note that they are all winning teams) are:

Tampa Bay - 25.10
Indianapolis Colts - 25.14
Philadelphia Eagles - 25.20
Houston Texans - 25.62
Kansas City Chiefs - 25.66
NY Giants - 25.71
Tennessee Titans - 25.74
Chicago Bears - 25.83
Miami Dolphins - 25.84
Green Bay Packers - 25.88
New York Jets - 26.13
Atlanta Falcons - 26.16
Seattle Seahawks - 26.18
New Orleans Saints - 26.29


You could be right about age being a factor in one area though.

Mickey is younger than the coaches of all these teams.

:coffee:



If you have not figured out yet this is a YOUNG team.



# Name Pos. Ht. Wt. Age Exp. College
58 Alexander, Kevin LB 6-4 265 23 R Clemson
68 Beadles, Zane OL 6-4 305 23 R Utah
32 Cox, Perrish CB 6-0 198 23 R Oklahoma State
87 Decker, Eric WR 6-3 220 23 R Minnesota
34 McCarthy, Kyle S 6-1 210 24 R Notre Dame
69 Olsen, Eric OL 6-3 305 22 R Notre Dame
15 Tebow, Tim QB 6-3 245 23 R Florida
88 Thomas, Demar WR 6-3 229 22 R Georgia Tech
22 Thompson, Syd' CB 5-9 191 23 R California
41 Vaughn, Cassius CB 5-11 195 22 R Mississippi
50 Walton, J.D. OL 6-3 305 23 R Baylor
75 Clark, Chris OL 6-5 315 25 1 Southern Mississippi
64 Daniels, Stanley OL6-4 320 25 1 Washington
56 Ayers, Robert LB 6-3 274 25 2 Tennessee
30 Bruton, David S 6-2 211 23 2 Notre Dame
4 Colquitt, Britton P 6-3 205 25 2 Tennessee
82 Gronkowski, Da TE 6-5 255 25 2 Maryland
31 McBath, Darcel S 6-1 198 24 2 Texas Tech
27 Moreno, Knows RB 5-11 210 23 2 Georgia
81 Quinn, Richard TE 6-4 255 24 2 North Carolina
78 Clady, Ryan OL 6-6 325 24 3 Boise State
46 Larsen, Spence FB 6-2 243 26 3 Arizona
51 Mays, Joe LB 5-11 246 25 3 North Dakota State
98 McBean, Ryan DL 6-5 297 26 3 Oklahoma State
19 Royal, Eddie WR 5-10 180 24 3 Virginia Tech
59 Woodyard, Wes LB 6-0 222 24 3 Kentucky
74 Harris, Ryan OL 6-5 300 25 4 Notre Dame
94 Moss, Jarvis LB 6-7 257 26 4 Florida
5 Prater, Matt K 5-10 187 26 4 Central Florida
9 Quinn, Brady QB 6-3 235 25 4 Notre Dame
79 Thomas, Marcu DL 6-3 316 25 4 Florida
52 Hunter, Jason LB 6-4 271 27 5 Appalachian State
73 Kuper, Chris OL 6-4 303 27 5 North Dakota
26 Maroney, Laure RB 5-11 220 25 5 Minnesota
99 Vickerson, Ke DL 6-5 321 27 5 Michigan State
91 Fields, Ronald DL 6-2 314 29 6 Mississippi State
8 Orton, Kyle QB 6-4 225 27 6 Purdue
33 Jones, Nate CB 5-10 185 28 7 Rutgers
55 Williams, D.J. LB 6-1 242 28 7 Miami (Fla.)
57 Haggan, Mario LB 6-3 267 30 8 Mississippi State
84 Lloyd, Brandon WR 6-0 194 29 8 Illinois
97 Bannan, Justin DL 6-3 310 31 9 Colorado
10 Gaffney, Jabar WR 6-2 200 29 9 Florida
21 Goodman, Andr CB 5-10 184 32 9 South Carolina
89 Graham, Daniel TE 6-3 257 31 9 Colorado
28 buckhalter, Correll RB 6-0 223 32 10 Nebraska
23 Hill, Renaldo S 5-11 205 31 10 Michigan State
71 Hochstein, Russ OL 6-4 305 33 10 Nebraska
66 Paxton, Lonie LS 6-2 265 32 11 Sacramento State
24 Bailey, Champ CB 6-0 192 32 12 Georgia
76 Williams, Jamal DL 6-3 348 34 13 Oklahoma State
20 Dawkins, Brian S 6-0 210 37 15 Clemson
Practice Squad
# Name Pos. Ht. Wt. Age Exp. College
35 Ball, Lance RB 5-9 220 25 2 Maryland
63 Byers, Jeff OL 6-3 301 25 R USC
17 Davis, Britt WR 6-3 205 24 1 Northern Illinois
83 Geer, Riar TE 6-4 250 23 R Colorado
86 Nalbone, John TE 0
13 Riley, Eron WR 0
54 Robinson, Lee LB 6-2 256 23 1 Alcorn State
96 Unrein, Mitch DL 0
Injured Reserve
# Name Pos. Ht. Wt. Age Exp. College
92 Dumervil, Elvis LB 5-11 248 26 5 Louisville
25 White, LenDale RB 6-1 235 25 5 USC
12 Willis, Matthew WR 6-0 190 26 3 UCLA
Reserve/Not With Team
# Name Pos. Ht. Wt. Age Exp. College
Garland, Ben DL 6-5 275 22 R Air Force


7 players over 10 years exprience one of which sat out all last season.
Players that started the last few games all with less the 6 years experience.
49 players with less than 10 years.

11 rookies
2 second year men
7 third year guys
4 4 year guys.
5 5 year

If I counted correctly 29 guys with less than 5 years experience. on the active roster

With those on the IR, PS squad averaging 22.2 years.

Open your eyes and see that this team is rebuilding and YOUNG. the starting offense has a total of 57 years experience not starting experience but years in the league.

the only starters that have extensive starting experience on this unit are Clady 3 (playing hurt), Kuper 5 (playing hurt), Orton 6th year but did not start a couple of them, Graham 9 years, gaffeny 9 none starting, lloyd 8 none starting. take those starting years out and the rest of the squad has 24 years total.


guess you kissed the memo huh. the overall team average is not that your but the actual starters are.

Dzone
10-31-2010, 07:41 AM
then show us where we are worse like I asked you to do in another thread.
What is our record over the last 17 games? Theres my answer

Lonestar
10-31-2010, 08:26 AM
What is our record over the last 17 games? Theres my answer

Easy cop out.

Since we really are 10-13 since Josh came to town.

After playing a new scheme last year with a gimpy QB.

This year playing the second hardest schedule.

But then getting beat up in one game is that the real reason your pissed.

Oak has palyed us tough for a number of years beat up on us more than once and if aldavis would hire a real coach and stop meddling that will be a good team. One of the most talented teams in the league.

But then blind hatered of them has your mind skewed that even a poorly coached/managed team can't win a game from time to time.

So we got beat up with the youth on this team and the number of veterans out of the last game it is no wonder the game got out of hand as quick as it did.

Me I'll wait til the season is over before whining about it. Unless that is if last weeks performance winds up being the norm.

The softer side of the schedule is coming up. With light at the end of the tunnel if you care to look for it.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

TXBRONC
10-31-2010, 08:36 AM
The age thing is a lame excuse.

The average age of the Broncos according to the NFL (July/2010) is 26.31.

Younger teams in the NFL (note that they are all winning teams) are:

Tampa Bay - 25.10
Indianapolis Colts - 25.14
Philadelphia Eagles - 25.20
Houston Texans - 25.62
Kansas City Chiefs - 25.66
NY Giants - 25.71
Tennessee Titans - 25.74
Chicago Bears - 25.83
Miami Dolphins - 25.84
Green Bay Packers - 25.88
New York Jets - 26.13
Atlanta Falcons - 26.16
Seattle Seahawks - 26.18
New Orleans Saints - 26.29


You could be right about age being a factor in one area though.

Mickey is younger than the coaches of all these teams.

:coffee:

Except for Morris I pretty sure he's just a little bit younger than McDaniels. :behindsofa:

Ravage!!!
10-31-2010, 10:26 AM
Except for Morris I pretty sure he's just a little bit younger than McDaniels. :behindsofa:

and has a better team in Tampa

LTC Pain
10-31-2010, 10:37 AM
OMG, just looked in after being gone a week. Another McDaniels versus Shanahan thread. Good grief people, can we move forward PLEASE!!!

spikerman
10-31-2010, 12:20 PM
I'm not sure how you can have an issue with Josh getting us a defense. To date he's made pretty significant investments in the D with guys like Dawkins, Hill, Goodman, Dumervil (big extension) Bannan, Green, Jamal Williams, Ayers, Alphonso, McBath...etc. Sure, some of those moves haven't panned out but it's pretty clear he's not going to let the defense be an afterthought.

And through his moves the defense is minimally (if at all) better than recent Denver defenses. I think that goes back to his talent evaluation. I would say that he's gotten the defense older instead of better. Too bad he doesn't focus on it in the draft. Actually, that may be a good thing because he would probably draft a project in a position he doesn't necessarily need.

Dean
10-31-2010, 03:24 PM
I just do not see the hoopla of the OAK game like some of you do. it was bad but it was ONE GAME.

If we get blown out more times this year then we can whine about it more. till then it was a loss. no more important than any other loss. Unless getting your ass kicked counts more in the W-L standings, than a loss..

Still no worries???????:tsk:

UrbanBounca
10-31-2010, 03:33 PM
Easy cop out.

Since we really are 10-13 since Josh came to town.

After playing a new scheme last year with a gimpy QB.

This year playing the second hardest schedule.

But then getting beat up in one game is that the real reason your pissed.

Oak has palyed us tough for a number of years beat up on us more than once and if aldavis would hire a real coach and stop meddling that will be a good team. One of the most talented teams in the league.

But then blind hatered of them has your mind skewed that even a poorly coached/managed team can't win a game from time to time.

So we got beat up with the youth on this team and the number of veterans out of the last game it is no wonder the game got out of hand as quick as it did.

Me I'll wait til the season is over before whining about it. Unless that is if last weeks performance winds up being the norm.

The softer side of the schedule is coming up. With light at the end of the tunnel if you care to look for it.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Do you still stand by your post? :tsk:

BroncoNut
10-31-2010, 04:15 PM
OMG, just looked in after being gone a week. Another McDaniels versus Shanahan thread. Good grief people, can we move forward PLEASE!!!

exactly.

oubronco
10-31-2010, 06:52 PM
Are we better than the team Shanny was fired for...................NO!!