Analysis: Questionable personnel decisions could force long rebuilding process

[broncofaninfla]

From the DP:


http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_16772187




Most of the deals the Broncos have made over the last two years also have involved shipping out draft picks in either the 2010, 2011 or 2012 drafts — picks the Broncos will not have moving forward, including the deal with the Browns that involved sending running back Peyton Hillis, a sixth-round pick in the '11 draft and a conditional pick in the '12 draft in exchange for quarterback Brady Quinn.
It's all part of why, no matter what choices Broncos officials make at the end of the season on the direction of the franchise, there are many in the league who believe the team is still facing a potentially difficult, multiyear rebuilding job.

[TXBRONC]

From the DP:


http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_16772187

If memory serves me right when Shanahan was hired he was faced with having just a few picks for his first draft and he didn't have a number one pick that year either.

[Jake Klug]

If memory serves me right when Shanahan was hired he was faced with having just a few picks for his first draft and he didn't have a number one pick that year either.

Well that was Shanahan. He could get a lot out of a little on offense.

[claymore]

Its our whole organization that needs rebuilt. Not just the players. We most likely have some lean years like this one ahead, but as long as we are moving forward and not embarrasing ourselves, then we will be good.

[Jake Klug]

Its our whole organization that needs rebuilt. Not just the players. We most likely have some lean years like this one ahead, but as long as we are moving forward and not embarrasing ourselves, then we will be good.

That wasnt the case two years ago but because of a series of massive gaffes, it is now. Its sad really. But for the most part, it goes back to Ellis and Bowlen...mainly Bowlen. Bowlen said the right things but then lost his way and gave in to the boy king.

Bowlen really needed to stay true to what he initially said about having a real GM. Goodman was also a big mistake.

He put all his money on Josh when he should have hedged his bets with having an improved structure. But he reverted to more of the same, only with a less competent coach.

[jhildebrand]

Glad to see some people are paying attention. I have been saying it over and over again. This team IS NOT rebuilding as evidenced by their actions.

Rebuilding teams place a premium on picks and use those picks. This regime has gone after FA's and thrown picks around like confetti at a ticker tape parade.

Let's hope this team can maneuver in the first again to pick up a couple quality picks.

[Jake Klug]

Glad to see some people are paying attention. I have been saying it over and over again. This team IS NOT rebuilding as evidenced by their actions.

Rebuilding teams place a premium on picks and use those picks. This regime has gone after FA's and thrown picks around like confetti at a ticker tape parade.

Let's hope this team can maneuver in the first again to pick up a couple quality picks.

Trading down isnt necessarily the way to go. The team needs to invest in quality defense, namely defensive linemen. If its at rebuild, they should be looking to trade veterans and acquiring picks that way.

[OrangeHoof]

I don't think it will be fixed overnight but the NFL stands for "Not For Long". Look how quickly the Falcons bounced back with a new coach, Matt Ryan and some good FAs a few seasons ago. We have some good young pieces, we just needed to make smarter personnel decisions and get some better coaching. That may take a few years or there may be a flashpoint where it all ignites like the 1977 Broncos did.

[Jake Klug]

I don't think it will be fixed overnight but the NFL stands for "Not For Long". Look how quickly the Falcons bounced back with a new coach, Matt Ryan and some good FAs a few seasons ago. We have some good young pieces, we just needed to make smarter personnel decisions and get some better coaching. That may take a few years or there may be a flashpoint where it all ignites like the 1977 Broncos did.

There's no foundation on defense other than Doom. Some may want to say Ayers and I guess I can agree with that but he's not in the same category of Doom. Even Thomas has done a solid job in spite of being a 4-3 one gapper when he came to Denver. Still though, theres not much to go one where defense is concerned. The defense is mostly aging players and stopgaps.

If you invest in defensive line, it often takes a couple of years to pay off.

[NightTrainLayne]

There's no foundation on defense other than Doom. Some may want to say Ayers and I guess I can agree with that but he's not in the same category of Doom. Even Thomas has done a solid job in spite of being a 4-3 one gapper when he came to Denver. Still though, theres not much to go one where defense is concerned. The defense is mostly aging players and stopgaps.

If you invest in defensive line, it often takes a couple of years to pay off.

It seems as though both regimes for the past 5-6 years have said to themselves, "Aw **** it. Look at what a mess that defense is. There's no hope for fixing it this year, and it takes so long to develop d-linemen. Lets make the offense as good as it can be and we'll work on the defense later."

Someday, someone is going to have the bite the bullet, and while that will be a good thing long-term, it will lead to more growing pains.

Quite possibly that was McD's idea, to get the offense exactly how he wanted it to provide a band-aid to keep us in games once they started on defense. I don't think that was a great idea if it was his idea, but I can see the attraction of such a plan.

The defense is one hell of a project though. We don't have much to build on, no foundation, as Jake said above, and defense is rarely a "plug and play" proposition for new players.

[Lancane]

I don't really remember the team mentioned in this one article, it was in regards to of the one of the teams in the MLB, but I do remember what it was about. Stating that there is no excuse for a manager and coach not to be able to prove themselves within a two-year period. That between free-agency and the draft, there was more then enough talent that a good solid coach could show signs of major improvement in a two year period.

The reason I remember it so well, is that I felt the NFL should be no different, nor is it different for professional soccer or hockey. You build through the draft, but you stay competitive through players already part of that franchise, adding free agents to the roster to continue to that trend. Solid teams in the NFL use all three phases to succeed, utilizing who is on the roster, adding the right veterans and continually building through the draft. McDaniels' first major mistake was trying to ignore the base model of success for professional sports teams, by utilizing the best players on the roster and building off those athletes...instead he was trying hard to ignore it the current model of success, he made mistakes in free agency - not horrid ones', but not really moves that solidified going in the right direction and of course, his drafts have been just as much a conundrum as his other moves. And that's not even looking at iffy trades he's made. He has to take responsibility for those mistakes, because in the end...they've led us to the point were at more then his coaching.

I don't know what he was trying to prove, it felt to me as if he was trying to prove the current model that the league follows is inadequate, or that one solid coach was more important then the talent of the players on a teams roster. But, it backfired...whatever he was trying to prove, his model has thus far shown nothing but excessive failure.

Three years is not the basis for grading a regime at the pro level, it's two. It's alright to use that three-year mark for high schools, collegiate teams or even semi-pro organizations, but the professional level is wholly different...the apologists should understand this, and yes...before someone starts spouting that top free agents or current top athletes cost major money to keep on a roster, then someone should look at what draftees over the last three or four years make if they are drafted in the first or second round.

Under Josh McDaniels we have drafted four first round picks and four second round picks, there is a reason that many teams don't try and draft multiple first rounders...the cost. Have any of our first rounders been worth the money? Moreno (Solid but not a right fit for the blocking scheme, doesn't look to be a franchise-esque player at this time) - Ayers (Has been solid more against the run, not a good fit for the base scheme, has been more effective outside the base scheme and injured for most his second season) - Thomas (Drafted to replace a proven wideout, has shown flashes but seems too delicate to be successful and seems to be injury prone) - Tebow (Has the tangibles to be a solid quarterback, but has not proven anything, questionable when not even given clean-up time, even more so when the coach seems to be reaching and signed the starting quarterback to an extension)...have any one of those four really proven to be worth the money? While we see the likes of others for instance Matthews or Bryant who have shown they are worth the money? And his second round additions are even more questionable? Smith, McBath, Quinn and Beadles, at least two of them look to contribute a bit more to the team, Beadles is by in far the most solid of the group. That is a lot of money, then add in the free agents...Dawkins went from solid to horrendous in one season, Hill and Goodman are off and on, but look at injuries and missed plays. Our secondary has been torn apart by mundane quarterbacks making them look like All-Pros, look at the defensive line!

We've dished out a lot of money in those two phases instead of keeping the core intact and building off that, we've used over four picks and the trading of a few players to add four quarterbacks that nobody but a select few are sold on and one that we cut after his rookie season? That's four picks that could have been used otherwise, players that would not have been needed if not for the coach.

The article is dead-on, no matter which direction we take, we could be in for a long haul, especially more so if McDaniels get's one more year to create more damage, he's already set us back...and only his faithful fans believe otherwise. So, it will not pretty the answer will not be here soon, but right now we're not headed down the right path which makes our current situation even graver.

[Jake Klug]

It seems as though both regimes for the past 5-6 years have said to themselves, "Aw **** it. Look at what a mess that defense is. There's no hope for fixing it this year, and it takes so long to develop d-linemen. Lets make the offense as good as it can be and we'll work on the defense later."

Someday, someone is going to have the bite the bullet, and while that will be a good thing long-term, it will lead to more growing pains.

Quite possibly that was McD's idea, to get the offense exactly how he wanted it to provide a band-aid to keep us in games once they started on defense. I don't think that was a great idea if it was his idea, but I can see the attraction of such a plan.

The defense is one hell of a project though. We don't have much to build on, no foundation, as Jake said above, and defense is rarely a "plug and play" proposition for new players.

Except the difference is, when you look at the offense in 2005 -2007, it needed to be turned over. Shanahan and Goodman did a remarkable job turning over the offense while remaining competitive. The framework for a good offense was already in place when Josh took over. The offensive makeover wasnt even necessary, and to be honest, this offense isnt even as good.

But the thing is, the best players on the defense have been from the Shanahan era. Bailey, Doom, and Thomas. Even Moss, as much as people like to complain about him, stuck around for almost 2 years. I think Josh has used a grand total of 2 picks on the front 7. And I think only one of those was inthe first 3 rounds.

[Northman]

I think its pretty evident that McD has screwed the pooch coming and made things worse than better. So there is no question that this team is a LONG way from being a contender. However, you just cant keep this guy in place to keep making mistakes so Denver needs to get a coach and GM in here who knows what he is doing.

[Jake Klug]

I don't really remember the team mentioned in this one article, it was in regards to of the one of the teams in the MLB, but I do remember what it was about. Stating that there is no excuse for a manager and coach not to be able to prove themselves within a two-year period. That between free-agency and the draft, there was more then enough talent that a good solid coach could show signs of major improvement in a two year period.

The reason I remember it so well, is that I felt the NFL should be no different, nor is it different for professional soccer or hockey. You build through the draft, but you stay competitive through players already part of that franchise, adding free agents to the roster to continue to that trend. Solid teams in the NFL use all three phases to succeed, utilizing who is on the roster, adding the right veterans and continually building through the draft. McDaniels' first major mistake was trying to ignore the base model of success for professional sports teams, by utilizing the best players on the roster and building off those athletes...instead he was trying hard to ignore it the current model of success, he made mistakes in free agency - not horrid ones', but not really moves that solidified going in the right direction and of course, his drafts have been just as much a conundrum as his other moves. And that's not even looking at iffy trades he's made. He has to take responsibility for those mistakes, because in the end...they've led us to the point were at more then his coaching.

I don't know what he was trying to prove, it felt to me as if he was trying to prove the current model that the league follows is inadequate, or that one solid coach was more important then the talent of the players on a teams roster. But, it backfired...whatever he was trying to prove, his model has thus far shown nothing but excessive failure.

Three years is not the basis for grading a regime at the pro level, it's two. It's alright to use that three-year mark for high schools, collegiate teams or even semi-pro organizations, but the professional level is wholly different...the apologists should understand this, and yes...before someone starts spouting that top free agents or current top athletes cost major money to keep on a roster, then someone should look at what draftees over the last three or four years make if they are drafted in the first or second round.

Under Josh McDaniels we have drafted four first round picks and four second round picks, there is a reason that many teams don't try and draft multiple first rounders...the cost. Have any of our first rounders been worth the money? Moreno (Solid but not a right fit for the blocking scheme, doesn't look to be a franchise-esque player at this time) - Ayers (Has been solid more against the run, not a good fit for the base scheme, has been more effective outside the base scheme and injured for most his second season) - Thomas (Drafted to replace a proven wideout, has shown flashes but seems too delicate to be successful and seems to be injury prone) - Tebow (Has the tangibles to be a solid quarterback, but has not proven anything, questionable when not even given clean-up time, even more so when the coach seems to be reaching and signed the starting quarterback to an extension)...have any one of those four really proven to be worth the money? While we see the likes of others for instance Matthews or Bryant who have shown they are worth the money? And his second round additions are even more questionable? Smith, McBath, Quinn and Beadles, at least two of them look to contribute a bit more to the team, Beadles is by in far the most solid of the group. That is a lot of money, then add in the free agents...Dawkins went from solid to horrendous in one season, Hill and Goodman are off and on, but look at injuries and missed plays. Our secondary has been torn apart by mundane quarterbacks making them look like All-Pros, look at the defensive line!

We've dished out a lot of money in those two phases instead of keeping the core intact and building off that, we've used over four picks and the trading of a few players to add four quarterbacks that nobody but a select few are sold on and one that we cut after his rookie season? That's four picks that could have been used otherwise, players that would not have been needed if not for the coach.

The article is dead-on, no matter which direction we take, we could be in for a long haul, especially more so if McDaniels get's one more year to create more damage, he's already set us back...and only his faithful fans believe otherwise. So, it will not pretty the answer will not be here soon, but right now we're not headed down the right path which makes our current situation even graver.

Yeah, good thoughts. Its a debacle. And the sad thing is, a real GM would have intervened and put the emphasis on fixing what was necessary. What a colossal error Bowlen and Ellis made in putting so much trust in this guy. And this is coming off of the Shanahan era, where there was a similar issue but with a better head coach. There are really no excuses for Pat and Joe to make this kind of mistake. Its really sad that they were played by Josh and its even sadder that they feel like they have to save face by sticking with him. Dark days.

[TXBRONC]

Well that was Shanahan. He could get a lot out of a little on offense.

Shanahan didn't come in with idea that he had to re-invent the wheel. He kept the partsthat worked and discarded the things that didn't.

[spikerman]

There's no foundation on defense other than Doom. Some may want to say Ayers and I guess I can agree with that but he's not in the same category of Doom. Even Thomas has done a solid job in spite of being a 4-3 one gapper when he came to Denver. Still though, theres not much to go one where defense is concerned. The defense is mostly aging players and stopgaps.

If you invest in defensive line, it often takes a couple of years to pay off.

I guess I don't see the big upside in Ayers that everybody else does (although you sound skeptical as well). He's looked improved over his rookie year, but it would have been damn tough NOT to look better after that season.

I just haven't seen anything that convinces me that he's the future and not another potential bust. Hopefully he continues to improve, but he's got a long way to go.

[Jake Klug]

I guess I don't see the big upside in Ayers that everybody else does (although you sound skeptical as well). He's looked improved over his rookie year, but it would have been damn tough NOT to look better after that season.

I just haven't seen anything that convinces me that he's the future and not another potential bust. Hopefully he continues to improve, but he's got a long way to go.

Yeah, I can see both sides of the argument on Ayers. He's hardly bad but I can see why people think like you do. But on the other hand, he's been solid and I dont blame people for seeing some upside. And at the same time, how many times have you heard about a players upside? What does that really mean? How long do you cling to the notion of upside? I guess the answer to that lies in looking at the lack of young talent on our defense.

[Bosco]

Bad personnel decisions, especially in the draft, have been killing this team for the better part of a decade. That said, Josh had a far improved draft this year and has done well in free agency. Our depth in much better than it was when he got here and will be even better next year when guys like Vickerson and Hunter are backups instead of starters.

[spikerman]

Bad personnel decisions, especially in the draft, have been killing this team for the better part of a decade. That said, Josh had a far improved draft this year and has done well in free agency. Our depth in much better than it was when he got here and will be even better next year when guys like Vickerson and Hunter are backups instead of starters.

I think it's far too early to say that McDaniels had an improved draft this year unless you're comparing it only to his draft last year. If that's the case I would agree with you. Of course, I think Mike Ditka's trading of an entire draft for Ricky Williams was better than McDaniels' draft last year. IMO, none of the draft picks have stood out from this year's, or last year's draft.

He made a bigger splash in free agency this year, but the results have not been good. A lot was made of the FA acquistions of defensive lineman. All of his moves have resulted in a worse defense than last year. I just don't see where he has improved the team.

[OrangeHoof]

Except the difference is, when you look at the offense in 2005 -2007, it needed to be turned over. Shanahan and Goodman did a remarkable job turning over the offense while remaining competitive. The framework for a good offense was already in place when Josh took over. The offensive makeover wasnt even necessary, and to be honest, this offense isnt even as good.

But the thing is, the best players on the defense have been from the Shanahan era. Bailey, Doom, and Thomas. Even Moss, as much as people like to complain about him, stuck around for almost 2 years. I think Josh has used a grand total of 2 picks on the front 7. And I think only one of those was inthe first 3 rounds.

We could be further along rebuilding the defense if we hadn't used three picks to take Tim Tebow.

[Jake Klug]

We could be further along rebuilding the defense if we hadn't used three picks to take Tim Tebow.

About a million other things bother me more than that. And to be honest, trading up doesnt bother me as long as its for someone good. Take 2011 for example, its possible to get too cute by trading down when there might be defensive linemen worth taking in the top 10.

[dogfish]

Trading down isnt necessarily the way to go. The team needs to invest in quality defense, namely defensive linemen. If its at rebuild, they should be looking to trade veterans and acquiring picks that way.


About a million other things bother me more than that. And to be honest, trading up doesnt bother me as long as its for someone good. Take 2011 for example, its possible to get too cute by trading down when there might be defensive linemen worth taking in the top 10.

agreed. . . acquiring additional picks is all well and good, but i want fairley or dareus to rebuild our defensive front around. . .

[TXBRONC]

Bad personnel decisions, especially in the draft, have been killing this team for the better part of a decade. That said, Josh had a far improved draft this year and has done well in free agency. Our depth in much better than it was when he got here and will be even better next year when guys like Vickerson and Hunter are backups instead of starters.

I don't agree. First of all whatever happen prior to McDaniels becoming coach does give him pass drafting poorly. Second, we don't know if either one his first two are worth shit because it takes about three to evaluate a draft. Third if our depth so good we would be struggling as badly as we are especially on defense. All McDaniels is EXACTLY what Shanahan did on defense he went out and got second tier players and veterans that are well past their prime.

[Jake Klug]

agreed. . . acquiring additional picks is all well and good, but i want fairley or dareus to rebuild our defensive front around. . .

Yeah, and along those lines, Pat's pocket book has me nervous. Hopefully, they get a CBA done that doesnt make Pat scared of opening up his wallet.

[dogfish]

I guess I don't see the big upside in Ayers that everybody else does (although you sound skeptical as well). He's looked improved over his rookie year, but it would have been damn tough NOT to look better after that season.

I just haven't seen anything that convinces me that he's the future and not another potential bust. Hopefully he continues to improve, but he's got a long way to go.

i'm not sure quite what to expect from him as a pass rusher, but he was proving to be probably the best run defender on the team when he got hurt, IMO. . . he's as tough as predicted setting the edge-- i'm thinking of the tennessee game in particular, when ayers was consistently dominating that left side, denying CJ the edge and funneling him back to the pursuit. . .

i'm not convinced that he has the explosive first step and closing burst to really be a stud rusher, but he does have some potential in that area also. . . he's obviously not nearly as far along in his development there, but that's no surprise-- he was a more polished run defender in college, scouts pretty much predicted he'd contribute more quickly in that area in the pros as well. . .

and we do have doom, so it's not like ayers has to be the primary pass rusher going forward-- we'll be in adequate shape if he can take advantage of enough one-on-ones to get 5-6 sacks a year we'll be in decent shape. . . we realistically need to add at least one more OLB this offseason either way, and with hunter looking like a decent rotational run stopper, that guy should probably be another pass rusher. . . maybe darrell reid will be healthy enough to come back. . .

i'm certainly NOT saying ayers is some type of star, he's obviously far from that to this point-- and he absolutely has to prove himself over a longer basis-- but i feel like i've seen enough from him in run defense this year to say that he's not a bust, at any rate. . . JMO, of course. . . and that doesn't mean that i don't still want to see a lot more from him to justify his draft status. . . we'll see. . . i actually think our full, healthy LB corps would look pretty decent if we could improve the D-line play in front of them. . .

[spikerman]

Good post Dog, and good analysis. I'm not sure I agree with all of it, but I haven't seen enough to contradict it.

[Bosco]

I think it's far too early to say that McDaniels had an improved draft this year unless you're comparing it only to his draft last year. How can it not be? Three of them are currently starters already. Thomas would be had Brandon Lloyd not decided to have a career year and when he has been used in the offense he's been a rather explosive player. Decker was the top receiver in preseason but has been buried behind veterans on the depth chart, so he's made most of his impact on special teams. Tebow is obviously meant for the future but his impact on the goal line is clear and Squid is looking like a promising nickleback for the future.

To date, the only ones who haven't made some impact are Olsen and Kirlew, who got cut. That's a pretty impressive haul.


He made a bigger splash in free agency this year, but the results have not been good. A lot was made of the FA acquistions of defensive lineman. All of his moves have resulted in a worse defense than last year. I just don't see where he has improved the team. So because the defense as a whole has slipped some, his D-Line acquisitions were bad. Talk about twisted reasoning.

The truth of the matter is that while Bannan and Williams haven't been real good, they were still substantial upgrades over the players we had there last year. The only one who wasn't (Green) was beat up by a young developing prospect.

[Canmore]

Its our whole organization that needs rebuilt. Not just the players. We most likely have some lean years like this one ahead, but as long as we are moving forward and not embarrasing ourselves, then we will be good.

We are the laughingstock of the entire league. I see nothing but lean years ahead as long as we keep McDaniels.

[Bosco]

I don't agree. First of all whatever happen prior to McDaniels becoming coach does give him pass drafting poorly.

Who said it did? I'm simply pointing out how the previous staff's drafting failures have resulted in a severely depleted level of core talent, especially on defense, which is a pretty big problem for McDaniels to clean up and certainly not going to happen over night.

[Cugel]

If memory serves me right when Shanahan was hired he was faced with having just a few picks for his first draft and he didn't have a number one pick that year either.

The situation was entirely different. At that time few teams were really taking advantage of free agency, which was relatively new.

Shanahan was hyper-aggressive and went out and got amazing veteran free-agents like DE Neil Smith, LB Alfred Williams and Hall of Fame LT Gary Zimmerman.

All these guys together would cost over $100 million today, but Shanahan faced little competition in signing them to reasonable contracts.

He formed the backbone of his quick turnaround with smart FA pickups. (In fact he was so successful that for the next 10 years he tried to duplicate his success -- even when every other team in the league started bidding up the FA market to the point where it became prohibitively expensive).

You could say this became Shanahan's Achilles Heel in later years. But, in his first 2 seasons he made it work.

Today you have to have smart drafting for several YEARS before you see real results on the field. There's going to be a LONG period of 6-10 or 7-9 seasons for the Broncos before they can rebuild a solid core of veterans and younger players who can compete for a championship.

Maybe in 2014-15? :coffee:

[Cugel]

Who said it did? I'm simply pointing out how the previous staff's drafting failures have resulted in a severely depleted level of core talent, especially on defense, which is a pretty big problem for McDaniels to clean up and certainly not going to happen over night.

Certainly on DEFENSE, but Shanahan's OFFENSIVE drafting was little short of brilliant (Cutler, Sheffler, Marshall, Harris, Clady, Royal, etc., etc.) He found all kinds of talent even in the later rounds (Marshall for instance was a 4th round pick and of those mentioned only Cutler and Clady were 1st rounders).

That's damn good drafting. And McDaniels came in and just threw away all those good players (with the exception of Clady who doesn't seem a terribly good fit with the new blocking scheme) NONE of them is starting for the Broncos today.

McDaniels is like the Hayman Fire! He comes in and destroys everything, leaving only charred stumps.

http://www.fao.org/docrep/w4086e/w4086e0c.jpg

[Bosco]

Certainly on DEFENSE, but Shanahan's OFFENSIVE drafting was little short of brilliant (Cutler, Sheffler, Marshall, Harris, Clady, Royal, etc., etc.) He found all kinds of talent even in the later rounds (Marshall for instance was a 4th round pick and of those mentioned only Cutler and Clady were 1st rounders).

That's damn good drafting. And McDaniels came in and just threw away all those good players (with the exception of Clady who doesn't seem a terribly good fit with the new blocking scheme) NONE of them is starting for the Broncos today.

Of the six players you listed, three of them are still here and starting, not just one. That would be Harris, Royal, and Clady unless you lost track. Claiming Clady isn't a fit for the new blocking scheme is an insurmountable level of absurd by itself, made only worse by the fact that he earned his 2nd All Pro and 1st Pro Bowl berths playing in the scheme last year. The other three were moved for draft resources and replaced by statistical upgrades, although to be fair Scheffler's production was shifted to the receivers rather than another tight end.

Oh, and your Broncos history is a little lacking. Gary Zimmerman was acquired through trade (not free agency) in 1993, two full years before Shanahan returned to Denver.

[TXBRONC]

The situation was entirely different. At that time few teams were really taking advantage of free agency, which was relatively new.

Shanahan was hyper-aggressive and went out and got amazing veteran free-agents like DE Neil Smith, LB Alfred Williams and Hall of Fame LT Gary Zimmerman.

All these guys together would cost over $100 million today, but Shanahan faced little competition in signing them to reasonable contracts.

He formed the backbone of his quick turnaround with smart FA pickups. (In fact he was so successful that for the next 10 years he tried to duplicate his success -- even when every other team in the league started bidding up the FA market to the point where it became prohibitively expensive).

You could say this became Shanahan's Achilles Heel in later years. But, in his first 2 seasons he made it work.

Today you have to have smart drafting for several YEARS before you see real results on the field. There's going to be a LONG period of 6-10 or 7-9 seasons for the Broncos before they can rebuild a solid core of veterans and younger players who can compete for a championship.

Maybe in 2014-15? :coffee:

From what remember Cugel lots of teams were taking advantage of free agency at that time. One of the reasons we were in such mess is because Phillips' free agent signings.

[TXBRONC]

Who said it did? I'm simply pointing out how the previous staff's drafting failures have resulted in a severely depleted level of core talent, especially on defense, which is a pretty big problem for McDaniels to clean up and certainly not going to happen over night.

When Shanahan came he basically had the same problem and cleaned up two years.

[Lancane]

Of the six players you listed, three of them are still here and starting, not just one. That would be Harris, Royal, and Clady unless you lost track. Claiming Clady isn't a fit for the new blocking scheme is an insurmountable level of absurd by itself, made only worse by the fact that he earned his 2nd All Pro and 1st Pro Bowl berths playing in the scheme last year. The other three were moved for draft resources and replaced by statistical upgrades, although to be fair Scheffler's production was shifted to the receivers rather than another tight end.

Oh, and your Broncos history is a little lacking. Gary Zimmerman was acquired through trade (not free agency) in 1993, two full years before Shanahan returned to Denver.

Actually Bosco, you're right and wrong...as are others.

Ryan Clady, Chris Kuper, Ryan Harris, Eddie Royal, Spencer Larson and Daniel Graham were all additions under Shanahan, so the offense is about 50/50 for both regimes, it is not arguable that the offense is worse now, because the statistics would back that up, you can't argue it because the record reflects it as much as the stats. Ryan Clady earned his second All-Pro honor and first Pro-Bowl in the Zone Blocking Scheme that McDaniels continued to utilize, this year we have switched almost completely to Man-to-Man and again, statistics back up the fact that he is neither as good as he was in the ZBS nor as bad as some want to make him out to be in the new power scheme. Clady is a solid tackle, going from years and years of being in a zone blocking scheme, then switching is not easy. However, there is proof that we've been hurt due to the change in schemes; Harris, Kuper and Clady all had issues with it, the run game has suffered tremendously from it, but then again...Moreno doesn't fit well in the scheme either, it should be evident from the difference between last year and this year.

And you're right, Gary Zimmerman was not acquired under Shanahan, Zimmerman, Habib, Thompson and Nalen were here before he was named head coach. His additions were the zone blocking scheme itself and All-Pro left-guard Mark Schlereth, followed by David Diaz-Infante, Dan Neil, Harry Swayne and All-Pro Tony Jones. It's fair to say that Shanahan has always been good at finding offensive line talent, and McDaniels must agree...all but two of the current starters were brought in by Shanahan.

Shanahan proved to be better then some want to credit, he added some of the best linebackers that Denver had seen since Reeves' hay-day. Romanowski, Cadrez, Wilson, Mobley and Williams. He was without a doubt better at finding tailbacks till he got it in his head that the system was better then the talent, but for a long-while it did work. Shanahan was great with quarterbacks, helping three individual quarterbacks win the NFL Passing Title, in as many years as he had been an offensive coordinator, but...he did lack in some areas, granted he brought Smith up from the practice squad and added Ed McCaffrey, but he wasn't the best judge when it came to wide receivers or defensive backs, he fared no better with the defensive line give his free agent additions and two solid playmakers in Trevor Pryce and Reggie Hayward. So all in all, we can not say he was horrid, but far from great. And McDaniels is so far showing that same lacking ability, even worse when you add that he unlike every other intelligent coach who built off what he was given, decided to tinker with it and partially dismantle it, because he thought it best...and it hurt us.

[Bosco]

it is not arguable that the offense is worse now, because the statistics would back that up, you can't argue it because the record reflects it as much as the stats. Not by any significant margin. The difference between the 2008 and 2010 offenses is less than a single point and 30 yards per game. The 2010 offense will probably surpass the 2008 offense by years end as this year the performance is improving, while in 2008 it got worse as the season went on.


Ryan Clady earned his second All-Pro honor and first Pro-Bowl in the Zone Blocking Scheme that McDaniels continued to utilize We were a power blocking team last year that used the zone blocking at about a 60/40 split. We will never be completely without the ZBS scheme.


this year we have switched almost completely to Man-to-Man and again, statistics back up the fact that he is neither as good as he was in the ZBS nor as bad as some want to make him out to be in the new power scheme. Clady is a solid tackle, going from years and years of being in a zone blocking scheme, then switching is not easy. However, there is proof that we've been hurt due to the change in schemes; Harris, Kuper and Clady all had issues with it, the run game has suffered tremendously from it, but then again...Moreno doesn't fit well in the scheme either, it should be evident from the difference between last year and this year.
Every single one of those players have been injured this year. All but Kuper had significant injuries and missed a large amount of time. Now that they are getting healthy, their performances are getting back close to what they should be.


And you're right, Gary Zimmerman was not acquired under Shanahan, Zimmerman, Habib, Thompson and Nalen were here before he was named head coach. His additions were the zone blocking scheme itself and All-Pro left-guard Mark Schlereth, followed by David Diaz-Infante, Dan Neil, Harry Swayne and All-Pro Tony Jones. It's fair to say that Shanahan has always been good at finding offensive line talent, and McDaniels must agree...all but two of the current starters were brought in by Shanahan. Agreed.


Shanahan proved to be better then some want to credit, he added some of the best linebackers that Denver had seen since Reeves' hay-day. Romanowski, Cadrez, Wilson, Mobley and Williams. He was without a doubt better at finding tailbacks till he got it in his head that the system was better then the talent, but for a long-while it did work. Shanahan was great with quarterbacks, helping three individual quarterbacks win the NFL Passing Title, in as many years as he had been an offensive coordinator, but...he did lack in some areas, granted he brought Smith up from the practice squad and added Ed McCaffrey, but he wasn't the best judge when it came to wide receivers or defensive backs, he fared no better with the defensive line give his free agent additions and two solid playmakers in Trevor Pryce and Reggie Hayward. So all in all, we can not say he was horrid, but far from great. I don't think anyone can deny that Shanahan was a great coach. He's borderline Hall of Fame worthy and outside of John Elway and Pat Bowlen, he's the greatest thing to ever happen to the Denver Broncos.

[spikerman]

How can it not be? Three of them are currently starters already. Thomas would be had Brandon Lloyd not decided to have a career year and when he has been used in the offense he's been a rather explosive player. Decker was the top receiver in preseason but has been buried behind veterans on the depth chart, so he's made most of his impact on special teams. Tebow is obviously meant for the future but his impact on the goal line is clear and Squid is looking like a promising nickleback for the future.

To date, the only ones who haven't made some impact are Olsen and Kirlew, who got cut. That's a pretty impressive haul.
Just because rookies are starting for this team does not mean that they are an improvement over what was here before. Two of those rookies are starting on an offensive line that's ranked 30th in the NFL in rushing, and while 4th in passing yards, has given up 29 sacks which is better than only six teams. Just because a player starts for a less talented team it doesn't mean they're "good". They may well turn out to be, but it's way too early to tell. As for Thomas, I do like what I see from him, but has he had a game yet where he hasn't gotten hurt? Maybe it just seems like he gets hurt every game. The fact that Decker can't beat out Gaffney is worrisome to me.


So because the defense as a whole has slipped some, his D-Line acquisitions were bad. Talk about twisted reasoning.

The truth of the matter is that while Bannan and Williams haven't been real good, they were still substantial upgrades over the players we had there last year. The only one who wasn't (Green) was beat up by a young developing prospect.Denver has several players starting or getting significant playing time that could not start or play much for other teams. Vickerson was a backup. Mays was a special teams player, Hunter was a practice squad player. The list goes on. I'm not sure what "young developing prospect" you're talking about. If it's Vickerson, he's been in the league 5 years and had only started 2 games before this year. He also has a grand total of 2.5 career sacks. What's sad is that he probably has been the best DL, but again, if you're the best of a weak group, that doesn't necessarily make you strong.

[TXBRONC]

Just because rookies are starting for this team does not mean that they are an improvement over what was here before. Two of those rookies are starting on an offensive line that's ranked 30th in the NFL in rushing, and while 4th in passing yards, has given up 29 sacks which is better than only six teams. Just because a player starts for a less talented team it doesn't mean they're "good". They may well turn out to be, but it's way too early to tell. As for Thomas, I do like what I see from him, but has he had a game yet where he hasn't gotten hurt? Maybe it just seems like he gets hurt every game. The fact that Decker can't beat out Gaffney is worrisome to me.
Denver has several players starting or getting significant playing time that could not start or play much for other teams. Vickerson was a backup. Mays was a special teams player, Hunter was a practice squad player. The list goes on. I'm not sure what "young developing prospect" you're talking about. If it's Vickerson, he's been in the league 5 years and had only started 2 games before this year. He also has a grand total of 2.5 career sacks. What's sad is that he probably has been the best DL, but again, if you're the best of a weak group, that doesn't necessarily make you strong.

Agreed just because Beadles and Walton are starting doesn't mean their great, it only means that they are better than the others on the roster. Walton struggled early in the season but I think he's starting to turn the corner. Beadles lets not forget that he started off as starter in camp but was bumped either during camp or during preseason for other players and when he got a shot a playing RT while we waited for Harris to get back he didn't do a very good job. In camp and preseason couldn't beat out Russ Hochstein for the left guard position. Hochstein proved last year he's not starter material. When Thomas has been able to be on the field I like what I have seen but the problem is he has learned how to play hurt. Hopefully he will. I like Decker as well but he hasn't been able to get onto the field but just a couple times. I'm willing to give him time to develop but he can't push Gaffney for playing that could problematic because I don't see Gaffney as anything more 4th or 5th option.

On defense as mentioned Vickerson has been the League five years and was a career back up until he came here and Bannan the same thing.

[Lancane]

Agreed just because Beadles and Walton are starting doesn't mean their great, it only means that they are better than the others on the roster. Walton struggled early in the season but I think he's starting to turn the corner. Beadles lets not forget that he started off as starter in camp but was bumped either during camp or during preseason for other players and when he got a shot a playing RT while we waited for Harris to get back he didn't do a very good job. In camp and preseason couldn't beat out Russ Hochstein for the left guard position. Hochstein proved last year he's not starter material. When Thomas has been able to be on the field I like what I have seen but the problem is he has learned how to play hurt. Hopefully he will. I like Decker as well but he hasn't been able to get onto the field but just a couple times. I'm willing to give him time to develop but he can't push Gaffney for playing that could problematic because I don't see Gaffney as anything more 4th or 5th option.

On defense as mentioned Vickerson has been the League five years and was a career back up until he came here and Bannan the same thing.

Let's be fair, Beadles and Walton were thrown to the wolves sort to speak, one was given a starter position because he was the best center we possibly had when the rest looked pathetic, Walton really needs time to develop...it also doesn't help that the blocking scheme is in a continual transitioning state. Beadles got tossed in due to lack of talent and injury...but if you look at the stats, he's really begun to find his niche at the left-guard position, but he is likewise hindered by the ever changing blocking scheme. As Bosco mentioned, we still utilize parts of the zone even with almost using the power near 90% of the time. We utilized it more last year, which is evident by the better line play and the running game which was far superior last season compared to now. To be fare, we shouldn't misjudge either one of those two young lineman when a lot of this rests on McDaniels', Bosco may disagree...but Moreno was a horrific back to draft if he planned on going with the man-to-man blocking scheme more and more. Moreno benefited by the zone, in a power scheme it's best to utilize bigger all-around tailbacks.

And I have to completely agree on the Thomas pick, it was utterly stupid, or at least that is what I believe. He's fragile, even though he has tremendous upside and physical talent, a lot of people argued his transitional ability to the pro-level, but teams did also have concerns in regards to his health, he would have likely slipped farther down because of the risk. If we were going to select a wideout that high, Bryant was the better pick. It would have been smarter to draft Tebow with the 22nd pick and then used the other on Odrick or Williams in my honest opinion. Eric Decker looks to be better then Thomas, not based on physical talent, Thomas has the edge but on physical toughness and football smarts, Decker looks to be a solid possession receiver. If Lloyd has really matured to how his numbers look, then Decker was more then enough to transition to the number two position with Royal in the slot...of course that's opinionative.

I would also agree with your assessment of the defensive line...Vickerson was a seventh round pick, who has been used in rotation and his playing time has been more due to injury then promise. It took nearly four years for him to see significant playing time before now, even now he's questionable at best. Bannan was a rotational guy...but I admit one of the better additions, most of the guys that make up our dismal defensive line are retreads who couldn't find a starting job elsewhere. Williams is completely a stop-gap solution and will be hampered next year, because we're likely to lose Ronald Fields to free agency. The defensive line is a patchwork at best right now. The only real solid group we have defensively is the linebackers, the addition of Mays has been a huge help to that group...but there are some glaring questions even there.

[Bosco]

If we were going to select a wideout that high, Bryant was the better pick. It would have been smarter to draft Tebow with the 22nd pick and then used the other on Odrick or Williams in my honest opinion. Eric Decker looks to be better then Thomas, not based on physical talent, Thomas has the edge but on physical toughness and football smarts, Decker looks to be a solid possession receiver. If Lloyd has really matured to how his numbers look, then Decker was more then enough to transition to the number two position with Royal in the slot...of course that's opinionative. Dez Bryant and Demaryius Thomas are different types of players. Bryant does not have the deep speed to be a true X receiver in this offense. He would have been ideal for the role Marshall played in 2009 and Gaffney plays this year, but that would have been too much investment for what is essentially the #3 receiver here. As it was, we were able to nab Decker as a huge steal in the 3rd and he projects perfectly to that role. That gives us starter quality talent at all three receiver positions.

[Lancane]

Dez Bryant and Demaryius Thomas are different types of players. Bryant does not have the deep speed to be a true X receiver in this offense. He would have been ideal for the role Marshall played in 2009 and Gaffney plays this year, but that would have been too much investment for what is essentially the #3 receiver here. As it was, we were able to nab Decker as a huge steal in the 3rd and he projects perfectly to that role. That gives us starter quality talent at all three receiver positions.

Bryant is a different type of player when compared to Thomas, their physical abilities and overall talent separate them. Demaryius Thomas was drafted because he had a similar physical abilities and skill-set to that of Brandon Marshall, so IE a clone. The difference is that Marshall was a proven gamebreaker, they're hoping that he can do what Brandon had done for the Broncos. However, being that he hails from an Option offensive scheme, some worry how he'll transition to the NFL, let alone that there are health concerns, which has been evident thus far to many of the fans.

You claim Dez Bryant doesn't have the break away speed to be the split end receiver, when actually he's proven to have not only that but good overall instincts for the position.

And we really did not need a split end receiver anyways if Lloyd has matured and this season is not a fluke he would have been fine. We needed a flank receiver, that is where Thomas if he could match up with Marshall's overall talent and ability would have been better set, because not only are they the primary targets but usually face more jamming and coverage then the other given receiver positions...but Lloyd has done pretty good overall in the flank when he's played at the position. Decker would have been fine in my honest opinion in the flank, especially with how we utilize the shorter routes for the position more times then not and being that his size gives him an advantage and his possession skills are up there. Royal is really the best overall receiver to line-up in the slot, his ability to cut and even juke gives him an edge, and his overall break away speed is good...Decker could play in the slot if needed, he has the skill-set to be a security blanket for his quarterback. Gaffney in my honest opinion is fodder, no better then a backup at any one of the given positions...but then again, he gives us some depth.

I just think Thomas was too much a risk, for what seems nothing but fragile potential. We got a steal with Decker in the third round, there were others just as much upside as Thomas later on for less then a first round pick, but again that is what I believe.

[Bosco]

Bryant is a different type of player when compared to Thomas, their physical abilities and overall talent separate them. Demaryius Thomas was drafted because he had a similar physical abilities and skill-set to that of Brandon Marshall, so IE a clone. The difference is that Marshall was a proven gamebreaker, they're hoping that he can do what Brandon had done for the Broncos. However, being that he hails from an Option offensive scheme, some worry how he'll transition to the NFL, let alone that there are health concerns, which has been evident thus far to many of the fans. Other than their size, Marshall and Thomas don't share many similarities. Thomas is much faster, while Marshall is stronger and a better runner after the catch.


You claim Dez Bryant doesn't have the break away speed to be the split end receiver, when actually he's proven to have not only that but good overall instincts for the position. Bryant is developing into a very good player, but he definitely does not have that deep speed. He's a 4.6/4.5 kind of guy (about what Marshall was) while Thomas was running a 4.35 before his foot injury. Miles Austin is the deep threat in Dallas' Air Coryell style offense, and Bryant is a perfect fit for the split end role in that offense.


And we really did not need a split end receiver anyways if Lloyd has matured and this season is not a fluke he would have been fine. We needed a flank receiver, that is where Thomas if he could match up with Marshall's overall talent and ability would have been better set, because not only are they the primary targets but usually face more jamming and coverage then the other given receiver positions...but Lloyd has done pretty good overall in the flank when he's played at the position. Decker would have been fine in my honest opinion in the flank, especially with how we utilize the shorter routes for the position more times then not and being that his size gives him an advantage and his possession skills are up there. Royal is really the best overall receiver to line-up in the slot, his ability to cut and even juke gives him an edge, and his overall break away speed is good...Decker could play in the slot if needed, he has the skill-set to be a security blanket for his quarterback. Gaffney in my honest opinion is fodder, no better then a backup at any one of the given positions...but then again, he gives us some depth. Lloyd was far from a sure bet going into this season, and considering that 6'3 200+ receivers with 4.3 speed are a bit of a rarity, it made too alot of sense to draft Thomas. We also must remember that Lloyd is no spring chicken. Royal, depending on the personnel grouping, occupies the flanker position in our two wide sets and moves down into the slot in the three wide, a la Wes Welker. Whenever we go three wide, Gaffney is usually on the flank and he's very good in that role, but it's hard to imagine that Decker won't be just as good or better.

Josh is clearly setting up this offense to mirror his 2007 offense with Lloyd/Thomas playing the Randy Moss role, Royal as our Wes Welker and Gaffney taking the same role he had then until Decker beats him out.


I just think Thomas was too much a risk, for what seems nothing but fragile potential. We got a steal with Decker in the third round, there were others just as much upside as Thomas later on for less then a first round pick, but again that is what I believe. I don't think we have much to worry about. He's been dinged up a couple times this year, but nothing real major and to my knowledge he never had any injury issues in college.

[rcsodak]

I don't really remember the team mentioned in this one article, it was in regards to of the one of the teams in the MLB, but I do remember what it was about. Stating that there is no excuse for a manager and coach not to be able to prove themselves within a two-year period. That between free-agency and the draft, there was more then enough talent that a good solid coach could show signs of major improvement in a two year period.

The reason I remember it so well, is that I felt the NFL should be no different, nor is it different for professional soccer or hockey. You build through the draft, but you stay competitive through players already part of that franchise, adding free agents to the roster to continue to that trend. Solid teams in the NFL use all three phases to succeed, utilizing who is on the roster, adding the right veterans and continually building through the draft. McDaniels' first major mistake was trying to ignore the base model of success for professional sports teams, by utilizing the best players on the roster and building off those athletes...instead he was trying hard to ignore it the current model of success, he made mistakes in free agency - not horrid ones', but not really moves that solidified going in the right direction and of course, his drafts have been just as much a conundrum as his other moves. And that's not even looking at iffy trades he's made. He has to take responsibility for those mistakes, because in the end...they've led us to the point were at more then his coaching.

I don't know what he was trying to prove, it felt to me as if he was trying to prove the current model that the league follows is inadequate, or that one solid coach was more important then the talent of the players on a teams roster. But, it backfired...whatever he was trying to prove, his model has thus far shown nothing but excessive failure.

Three years is not the basis for grading a regime at the pro level, it's two. It's alright to use that three-year mark for high schools, collegiate teams or even semi-pro organizations, but the professional level is wholly different...the apologists should understand this, and yes...before someone starts spouting that top free agents or current top athletes cost major money to keep on a roster, then someone should look at what draftees over the last three or four years make if they are drafted in the first or second round.

Under Josh McDaniels we have drafted four first round picks and four second round picks, there is a reason that many teams don't try and draft multiple first rounders...the cost. Have any of our first rounders been worth the money? Moreno (Solid but not a right fit for the blocking scheme, doesn't look to be a franchise-esque player at this time) - Ayers (Has been solid more against the run, not a good fit for the base scheme, has been more effective outside the base scheme and injured for most his second season) - Thomas (Drafted to replace a proven wideout, has shown flashes but seems too delicate to be successful and seems to be injury prone) - Tebow (Has the tangibles to be a solid quarterback, but has not proven anything, questionable when not even given clean-up time, even more so when the coach seems to be reaching and signed the starting quarterback to an extension)...have any one of those four really proven to be worth the money? While we see the likes of others for instance Matthews or Bryant who have shown they are worth the money? And his second round additions are even more questionable? Smith, McBath, Quinn and Beadles, at least two of them look to contribute a bit more to the team, Beadles is by in far the most solid of the group. That is a lot of money, then add in the free agents...Dawkins went from solid to horrendous in one season, Hill and Goodman are off and on, but look at injuries and missed plays. Our secondary has been torn apart by mundane quarterbacks making them look like All-Pros, look at the defensive line!

We've dished out a lot of money in those two phases instead of keeping the core intact and building off that, we've used over four picks and the trading of a few players to add four quarterbacks that nobody but a select few are sold on and one that we cut after his rookie season? That's four picks that could have been used otherwise, players that would not have been needed if not for the coach.

The article is dead-on, no matter which direction we take, we could be in for a long haul, especially more so if McDaniels get's one more year to create more damage, he's already set us back...and only his faithful fans believe otherwise. So, it will not pretty the answer will not be here soon, but right now we're not headed down the right path which makes our current situation even graver.

You and GMoney should learn the value of brevity. :coffee:

[Lancane]

You and GMoney should learn the value of brevity. :coffee:

And why is that RC? It's quite simple, if you don't want to spend the time reading such long-winded post, just read the next short one. Sometimes people have a lot more to say.

:coffee: