MMQB - Back-stabbing in Bronco-land

[itsalloverfatman]

"McDaniels is adamant that he didn't trash the Patriots in his staff meeting Friday...McDaniels seems to know he's got a traitor in his midst...None of this will matter if the Broncos keep losing, like they did Sunday to St. Louis...If the Broncos lose out, McDaniels is probably done...The Broncos did him no favors by giving him an inexperienced GM, Brian Xanders, who clearly hasn't been strong enough to save him from making some bad personnel calls. The team should have invested in a savvy, veteran GM to help McDaniels navigate his way early."

As you know, we spend a good deal of time at IAOFM mocking King, but there's some actual journalism in today's MMQB and it is an important read for Broncos fans. What stands out from the above snippets is the line regarding Xanders - is this McDaniels' way of laying the blame at the GM's feet, and/or a way to let us know that McDaniels did not handpick Xanders as has been previously portrayed?

Back-stabbing in Bronco-land; how NFL will handle Texans-Titans fight (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/peter_king/11/28/week-12-monday-morning-qb/index.html)

[broncofaninfla]

Mcd is getting a lot of flack for a lot of things and deservedly so BUT it's good to see Xanders finally get mention by the national press. IMO, Xanders needs to go first and foremost. We need a real GM and Mcd needs to be reduced to just coaching.

[itsalloverfatman]

Familiar tune, right?

[topscribe]

I don't believe McDaniels was lying about the taping incident, and that should
not have an effect on his tenure here, IMO. And if a strong, knowledgeable
GM with a good reputation were brought in, that would help to solve some of
the personnel problems.

However, there are still the play-calling issues and the apparent attempts to
fit the personnel to the system instead of the system to the personnel. And I
wonder how much McDaniels can't seem to keep his hands out of the defense,
when he ought to just hand the reins over to the DC and tend to what he
knows: the offense. (Maybe that's why Nolan booked?)

Whatever happens in the FO, go or stay, it is going unsettling - not something
to which I look forward, to be sure. But I don't think we will be rooting for
a Super Bowl team soon . . .

-----

[BigDaddyBronco]

I don't believe McDaniels was lying about the taping incident, and that should
not have an effect on his tenure here, IMO. And if a strong, knowledgeable
GM with a good reputation were brought in, that would help to solve some of
the personnel problems.

However, there are still the play-calling issues and the apparent attempts to
fit the personnel to the system instead of the system to the personnel. And I
wonder how much McDaniels can't seem to keep his hands out of the defense,
when he ought to just hand the reins over to the DC and tend to what he
knows: the offense. (Maybe that's why Nolan booked?)

Whatever happens in the FO, go or stay, it is going unsettling - not something
to which I look forward, to be sure. But I don't think we will be rooting for
a Super Bowl team soon . . .

-----

Most of this can be fixed by giving McDaniels a GM who is the boss and has the say on assistant coaches, etc. I'm just wondering who they could bring into this mess?

[jhildebrand]

Hmmm interestng considering he was strong enough to run the Goodman's out of town. The Goodmans were more experienced than Xanders as actual GM types. He has also referenced his ability to work closely with Xanders. Sounds like a possible attempt to scape goat yet another individual.

This is going to get much worse before it gets better.

[honz]

When does Bowlen begin to take blame for giving a first time HC so much responsibility?

[honz]

Hmmm interestng considering he was strong enough to run the Goodman's out of town. The Goodmans were more experienced than Xanders as actual GM types. He has also referenced his ability to work closely with Xanders. Sounds like a possible attempt to scape goat yet another individual.

This is going to get much worse before it gets better.
Scape goat? Peter King is the only one that mentioned any names.

[rationalfan]

The Goodmans were more experienced than Xanders as actual GM types.

source? proof?

this is getting ridiculous. the goodman's became folk heroes in the minds of some fans for their hand in scouting for 1 1/2 good drafts. they'r credited with finding dumervil, chris kuper, brandon marshall, etc. yet, those years of poor drafting that preceded the good haul are blamed on shanahan. this isn't right. the goodmans weren't bad, but they weren't ozzie newsome. they weren't gil brandt.

sheesh.

[rationalfan]

i like how peter king calls mcd out for some poor personnel moves, but i also think this needs to be remembered:

"But in the end, it'll be sad because half of Broncos Nation decided when Jay Cutler got traded and later when Brandon Marshall started acting 11 that it was all McDaniels' fault, and he had to go. It was not all his fault. Cutler never gave McDaniels a fair chance to build a relationship, and then an angry owner, Pat Bowlen -- not McDaniels -- directed that he be traded. Marshall wanted a new contract, thought he had been promised it by Bowlen, didn't get it, and then acted up. I don't see how either of those departures constitutes being run off by McDaniels, but legions of Bronco fans do."

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/peter_king/11/28/week-12-monday-morning-qb/index.html#ixzz16gjUkppp

[topscribe]

Most of this can be fixed by giving McDaniels a GM who is the boss and has the say on assistant coaches, etc. I'm just wondering who they could bring into this mess?

I'm not as familiar with the GMs around the league as I should be.

Maybe give Parcells an offer he can't refuse?

-----

[frauschieze]

source? proof?

this is getting ridiculous. the goodman's became folk heroes in the minds of some fans for their hand in scouting for 1 1/2 good drafts. they'r credited with finding dumervil, chris kuper, brandon marshall, etc. yet, those years of poor drafting that preceded the good haul are blamed on shanahan. this isn't right. the goodmans weren't bad, but they weren't ozzie newsome. they weren't gil brandt.

sheesh.

Ummm...Xanders was a salary cap guy. The elder Goodman was assistant GM before getting promoted, IIRC.

P.S. If you want to talk draft blame, why don't you look at who was GM at the time, and when he lost his power, then get back to me. Hint: It explains why the Goodmans get credit for those drafts and not the ones from prior.

[topscribe]

i like how peter king calls mcd out for some poor personnel moves, but i also think this needs to be remembered:

"But in the end, it'll be sad because half of Broncos Nation decided when Jay Cutler got traded and later when Brandon Marshall started acting 11 that it was all McDaniels' fault, and he had to go. It was not all his fault. Cutler never gave McDaniels a fair chance to build a relationship, and then an angry owner, Pat Bowlen -- not McDaniels -- directed that he be traded. Marshall wanted a new contract, thought he had been promised it by Bowlen, didn't get it, and then acted up. I don't see how either of those departures constitutes being run off by McDaniels, but legions of Bronco fans do."

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/peter_king/11/28/week-12-monday-morning-qb/index.html#ixzz16gjUkppp

I never did blame the departures of Cutler and Marshall on McDaniels.

Nonetheless, amid the plenty other personnel failures by McDaniels/Xanders,
those incidences are not needed to see that something must be done . . .

-----

[rationalfan]

Ummm...Xanders was a salary cap guy. The elder Goodman was assistant GM before getting promoted, IIRC.

P.S. If you want to talk draft blame, why don't you look at who was GM at the time, and when he lost his power, then get back to me. Hint: It explains why the Goodmans get credit for those drafts and not the ones from prior.

good point. i think you're correct, actually. but, i still believe the lovefest for the goodmans is overblown.

[G_Money]

I find all of this sad. I know McDaniels fairly well, and my gut feeling is he neither watched the videotape nor ordered the taping. He's a smart kid with a very strong family background who's made some terrible personnel decisions; Peyton Hillis for Brady Quinn, trading a 2010 first-rounder to choose Alphonso Smith in 2009 -- and then dealing him for next-to-nothing a year later. But he's a smart offensive strategist. The Broncos did him no favors by giving him an inexperienced GM, Brian Xanders, who clearly hasn't been strong enough to save him from making some bad personnel calls. The team should have invested in a savvy, veteran GM to help McDaniels navigate his way early.

Um...

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_16643427


Q: The question concerns the firing of Jim Goodman, approximately one month after the hiring of Broncos coach Josh McDaniels (in 2009). I don't remember too many of the details getting out about why he was fired. It seemed strange after McDaniels said Goodman would have the final say in personnel matters. What really happened in that month to cost Goodman his job? I thought the Broncos' drafts in 2006, '07 and '08 turned out pretty well and Goodman had a lot to do with them.

A: Bret, the answer is McDaniels wanted more say in personnel than he publicly admitted when he was hired and, shortly after saying they likely wouldn't have a coach who called the shots in personnel as well, the team elected to give that power to him.

As a result, Jim Goodman and his son, Jeff, were then fired.

Jeff Goodman had also clashed with some folks in the building during his tenure as assistant general manager and when McDaniels revamped the team's football staff, the Goodmans no longer fit.

Now Pat said when he fired the Goodmans that he wanted to go with Xanders as the GM - a guy who does contracts and is a salary cap whiz - that Xanders is what he considered a "true GM."

I really can't see how that's been the case. We HAD people in place to help Josh with personnel, but Josh didn't want their help and got them fired. We made a career assistant into our titular GM and gave Josh personnel and scouting control, which he has then fumbled all over the place.

There's nothing much left to say about it. Josh wanted his voice to be the only voice in the building, and it has been.

Now he's getting drowned out by the boos of the fans and the back-biting whispers of his underlings.


"What we've got here is a failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach. So you get what we had here last week, which is the way he wants it... well, he gets it. I don't like it any more than you men."

If yours is the only voice, it had better be a visionary one. Josh set himself up for failure, Pat allowed it, and now Josh is failing.

If Josh has lost the coaches and office personnel as well, that doesn't help matters. Hubris is a funny thing. By fighting so hard to eliminate the oppositional voices he's made sure that no one can help him fix this. Josh has to change, or he's done for.

And if there's one thing Josh has proven in the last 2 years it's that he's stubborn enough about doing things "his way" that he'll cut off his own nose to spite his face.

He's about to be one ugly Picasso-looking ex-coach.

~G

[G_Money]

You can't get Parcells. He'd hire his own coach, so McDaniels would be gone. Parcells take a guy from the Belichick coaching tree and help him make good? Not likely after the finger he gave Parcells in NJ.

There's NO top GM who would come work here without getting his own choice at head coach. Who wants to come into this disaster and turn it around for McDaniels? The acrimony in the city towards Josh is cresting. There's no way a new GM wants to go down with him, especially when the reward is getting to work with a guy who pulls power plays, takes no advice from anyone and fires people over disagreements.

If you want a new GM, you need a new head coach.

Check that...if you want a GM with actual GM powers who's good at his job, you need a new head coach. If you want a different guy with a GM title who just does what Josh says, then I'm sure there's another member of his family somewhere who'd like a gig.

~G

[frauschieze]

good point. i think you're correct, actually. but, i still believe the lovefest for the goodmans is overblown.

It may be, but it was a dispute between McDaniels and the younger that ultimately ended with both Goodmans being dismissed, under the guise of "we want to go another direction".

I don't know what that dispute was about, but given the timing, it almost certainly was personnel and/or the draft.

The idea of getting rid of people who were showing good drafting after the franchise had suffered from years of horrid drafting resulted in.....Alphonso Smith. Richard Quinn. A draft board with only 100 players on it. It was a bad move then, most people recognized it as a bad move at the time, and it's hard in hindsight, with all the very bad personnel moves made, not to glorify two of the only people in the past decade who didn't screw things up.

[Broncolingus]

I have absolutely no issue with what PK wrote here...

JMO...

[cuzz4169]

Xanders looks and talks like a used car salesman.

[jhildebrand]

source? proof?

this is getting ridiculous. the goodman's became folk heroes in the minds of some fans for their hand in scouting for 1 1/2 good drafts. they'r credited with finding dumervil, chris kuper, brandon marshall, etc. yet, those years of poor drafting that preceded the good haul are blamed on shanahan. this isn't right. the goodmans weren't bad, but they weren't ozzie newsome. they weren't gil brandt.

sheesh.

And precisely who has Xanders drafted or brought in via FA? :confused:

The Goodmans, especially the elder, are widely respected around the league. The more these incidents happen, the more it becomes clear McD is running off those stronger than him or with influence.

I will take their good 1.5 drafts, as you proclaim, in their 2+ seasons here :lol:

Their drafts are far better than McD's two.

[jhildebrand]

Scape goat? Peter King is the only one that mentioned any names.

You're right. However, King more than almost any other media personality has the most access to this team and McDaniels in particular. He has been a strong proponent for McDaniels. I find it hard to believe he doesn't know how Xanders came about and the fact that Josh has the FO how he wants it.

Painting McDaniels as a helpless victim of the FO is simply silly. King has been a proponent of McD and anything Patriot. He more than almost any other media personality knows McD and tends to get better access.

This team is where it currently is because of McDaniels. This is his roster, his staff, his FO, and HIS results. Trying to deflect now is simply silly.

[elsid13]

It may be, but it was a dispute between McDaniels and the younger that ultimately ended with both Goodmans being dismissed, under the guise of "we want to go another direction".

I don't know what that dispute was about, but given the timing, it almost certainly was personnel and/or the draft.



Before Jeff Goodman got promoted to Assistant GM he was the Broncos Scout for the SouthEast Region of the United States (which included all the teams for the SEC and ACC). Who was our first pick in the 2006 Draft? What happened that off season after the Goodmans were fired?

[Italianmobstr7]

i like how peter king calls mcd out for some poor personnel moves, but i also think this needs to be remembered:

"But in the end, it'll be sad because half of Broncos Nation decided when Jay Cutler got traded and later when Brandon Marshall started acting 11 that it was all McDaniels' fault, and he had to go. It was not all his fault. Cutler never gave McDaniels a fair chance to build a relationship, and then an angry owner, Pat Bowlen -- not McDaniels -- directed that he be traded. Marshall wanted a new contract, thought he had been promised it by Bowlen, didn't get it, and then acted up. I don't see how either of those departures constitutes being run off by McDaniels, but legions of Bronco fans do."

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/peter_king/11/28/week-12-monday-morning-qb/index.html#ixzz16gjUkppp

Love the quote from the article. I think McD is to blame for a lot, but he's also not to blame for a lot. I think he should get 1 more year here as our HC (even if we bring in a GM which I think we should do). Constant change isn't good (ask the Raiders). Sucks that we're having such a bad season but it doesn't mean it can't be changed this offseason and through the draft. Also, like King mentions, what if the next HC we get doesn't like Tebow? Then we restart ALL over again. We need to see what McD can do with Tebow before we make any decisions on a new coach IMO.

[jhildebrand]

Love the quote from the article. I think McD is to blame for a lot, but he's also not to blame for a lot. I think he should get 1 more year here as our HC (even if we bring in a GM which I think we should do). Constant change isn't good (ask the Raiders). Sucks that we're having such a bad season but it doesn't mean it can't be changed this offseason and through the draft. Also, like King mentions, what if the next HC we get doesn't like Tebow? Then we restart ALL over again. We need to see what McD can do with Tebow before we make any decisions on a new coach IMO.

That simply shows that King bought McD's version of events. :coffee: