IAOFM - Broncos reportedly interested in Falcons’ Mularkey

[itsalloverfatman]

Broncos reportedly interested in Falcons’ Mularkey

Douglas A. Lee Dec 15, 2010 1:00 PM



According to a report from Adam Schefter on ESPN's Sunday NFL Countdown, the Broncos may have interest in Falcons OC Mike Mularkey (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/coaches/MulaMi0.htm) for their head coaching position. Mularkey, who was head coach of the Buffalo Bills in 2004 and 2005, has been the Falcons' OC for three seasons. The 11-2 Falcons are fifth in the NFL this season in scoring with 335 points and ninth in yardage.
Mularkey told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution (http://blogs.ajc.com/atlanta-falcons-blog/2010/12/14/mularkey-focused-on-falcons-not-landing-a-new-job/) that while unaware of Schefter's report or of any interest from the Broncos, he is indeed interested in becoming a head coach again. When asked specifically about pursuing a HC job, Mularkey said (http://www.ajc.com/sports/atlanta-falcons/falcons-mularkey-hasnt-heard-777178.html),

I would like the opportunity again. I would, if it ever presents itself.
Without going into further detail, ESPN's Pat Yasinskas writes that Denver could fit the profile (http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcsouth/post/_/id/16469/atlantas-success-could-harm-coaching-staff) of what Mularkey might seek in terms of a franchise's ownership and front-office structure. Apparently, Yasinskas has no idea what's been going on in Denver...
In Mularkey's first two seasons as Atlanta's OC, the Falcons ranked 10th in points and 6th in yards (2008) and 13th in points and 16th in yards (2009). Mularkey also coordinated the 2006 Dolphins offense, one that ranked 29th in points and 20th in yards.
Mularkey has been referred to (http://blogs.ajc.com/atlanta-falcons-blog/2010/06/24/mike-mularkey-dusting-off-his-inspector-gadget-material/) by the nickname "Inspector Gadget" thanks to his penchant for trick plays. He earned the nickname during his time as the Steelers' OC from 2001 to 2003, when he had the versatile Antwaan Randle El, Kordell Stewart and Hines Ward at his disposal. Earlier this year, Steelers blog Steel Curtain Rising (http://steelcurtainrising.blogspot.com/2010/05/worst-steelers-offensive-coordinator.html) wrote:

...while Mularkey perhaps got a little too captivated with his own innovations, Pittsburgh’s offense enjoyed a lot of success during his tenure.
As Buffalo's head coach, Mularkey led the Bill to a 9-7 record in 2004 before slipping to a 5-11 record in 2005. He surprisingly resigned (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2289987) from his position in January of 2006 after HOF coach Marv Levy was appointed GM. Mularkey reportedly cited concerns with the structure of the organization, which of course is a source of great concern and mystery in Denver.

[slim]

I guess I missed the press conference announcing the new GM.

[vandammage13]

Mularkey does nothing to excite me about the future....Please get someone else.

[Italianmobstr7]

Why would be interested in ANOTHER Offensive Coordinator for a head coach? We really need to hire a defensive minded head coach!

[SOCALORADO.]

NO, no and no.

[silkamilkamonico]

Gag.

I cannot stand watching that offense. Please god no.

[BORDERLINE]

If he takes on the Mike Smith mold i wouldn't mind.
ATL playcalling is really good

[Ravage!!!]

Gag.

I cannot stand watching that offense. Please god no.

Really? What bout their offense makes you gag watching it? I love their offense.

[BroncoStud]

No thanks, next option?

[silkamilkamonico]

Really? What bout their offense makes you gag watching it? I love their offense.

Power runs and play actions. Not a fan of that offense at all. IMHO it's an offense that's built around the running back. I certainly wouldn't complain if it wins, but man I cannot get excited watching it.

[BroncoStud]

Mularky wasn't any good in Buffalo. He has Michael Turner, Matt Ryan, Roddy White, and Tony Gonzalez to call plays for in Atlanta - does it get much easier than that?

I'm sure it's just hot-air but that would absolutely suck if he became the next HC here, though it wouldn't surprise me. Hell, I will be shocked if we even get a GM. I bet the same thing happens all over again.

[rcsodak]

Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[rcsodak]

I'm waiting for mike nolan name to get thrown in. Lol
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[slim]

I thought they were going to hire a GM first?

WTF are they looking at coaches?

This makes no sense.

[Dzone]

9 of the last 11 Super Bowl winning coaches were on their second gig as HC.

[Lonestar]

Any speculation I hope is just that.

I hope that the Broncos do not reach out to anyone or their agent until it is legal to do so.

Do not wish to be fined nor lose draft choices. For any informal chats.
As for this mope. I'll pass. With that line up if he is not leading the league on scoring, yardage,and any other meaningful stat, is not worth looking at.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[dogfish]

I thought they were going to hire a GM first?

WTF are they looking at coaches?

This makes no sense.

slim, you're such a dreamer. . .

[slim]

slim, you're such a dreamer. . .

Ima gonna be pissed, if this is true.

[G_Money]

I don't want to hear head-coach talk until we have a GM in place either, slim.

But speculation takes up column inches and is far easier than doing research.

I expect to hear a lot about potential coaches from "journalists" who are meeting a deadline.

Let's hope it's all smoke and mirrors til the GM gets here.

~G

[slim]

I don't want to hear head-coach talk until we have a GM in place either, slim.

But speculation takes up column inches and is far easier than doing research.

I expect to hear a lot about potential coaches from "journalists" who are meeting a deadline.

Let's hope it's all smoke and mirrors til the GM gets here.

~G

From your keyboard to God's ears :pray:

[Traveler]

From your keyboard to God's ears :pray:

Or at least Bowlen's.

[BORDERLINE]

Mularky wasn't any good in Buffalo. He has Michael Turner, Matt Ryan, Roddy White, and Tony Gonzalez to call plays for in Atlanta - does it get much easier than that?

I'm sure it's just hot-air but that would absolutely suck if he became the next HC here, though it wouldn't surprise me. Hell, I will be shocked if we even get a GM. I bet the same thing happens all over again.

True,
Mat Rayan is a beast , so is Turner....Gonzalez is a very reliable T.E, but Roddy White get's help from Ryan.

he puts those passes in great spots and even then White drops a few.

Tebow can sling it...Moreno/Landale White maybe can produce a similar attack..D.T should be on the up and up next year we all know what we have in royal and Decker is only getting better. We need a T.E

[Lancane]

Adam Schefter is just throwing names out there, Mularkey has little to no ties with the organization, unless Studesville gave him an endorsement. And Schefter also mentioned him as a candidate for the Houston job should it open up.

Personally, I don't want Gary Kubiak, but I'd take Kubiak over Mularkey in a F'n second...we're talking about the man who was Miami's offensive coordinator for a year and then was demoted back to tight ends coach? Atlanta's offense had many key components in place to be successful, what about a team that is in our position?

I'd be fairly pissed off at this hiring to be honest, and it would reek of desperation in my opinion.

[Ravage!!!]

Adam Schefter is just throwing names out there, Mularkey has little to no ties with the organization, unless Studesville gave him an endorsement. And Schefter also mentioned him as a candidate for the Houston job should it open up.

Personally, I don't want Gary Kubiak, but I'd take Kubiak over Mularkey in a F'n second...we're talking about the man who was Miami's offensive coordinator for a year and then was demoted back to tight ends coach? Atlanta's offense had many key components in place to be successful, what about a team that is in our position?

I'd be fairly pissed off at this hiring to be honest, and it would reek of desperation in my opinion.

I'm with you on all points. I DO think Mularkey is a veyr good OC, but I don't want him as an HC. I do believe that he probably has learned a lot from his stint as an HC, and would be better this go-around. But I'm not sold on him.

I'm also not one that wants Kubiak back as HC.

[Lancane]

I'm with you on all points. I DO think Mularkey is a veyr good OC, but I don't want him as an HC. I do believe that he probably has learned a lot from his stint as an HC, and would be better this go-around. But I'm not sold on him.

I'm also not one that wants Kubiak back as HC.

Well, it seems to me that the lack of information being reported to the media regarding Elway's new executive position, general manager and head coaching candidates has stirred them into speculative consternation.

Bowlen said he wanted to get back to 'Broncos' Football', that could be taken in several different ways; could mean by traditions or with former personnel, strength offensively and so on, or all the above.

There are a plethora of coaches better suited for the head coaching position throughout the league, and why choose another controversial figure? That would be the ultimate sign of desperation or at least I would see it that way.

Especially with the likes of Ron Rivera, Joe Lombardi, Greg Manusky, Jim Fassel, Rick Dennison, Chuck Cecil, Mike Pettine, Steve Mariucci, Wade Wilson, Pat Flaherty, Dick LeBeau, Jason Garrett, Dirk Koetter, Rob Ryan, John Teerlinck, Sean McDermott, George Catavolos, Dave DeGuglielmo, Mike Nolan, Marty Mornhinweg, and Brian Schottenheimer still out there, some just waiting for the opportunity for such a position.

[jhildebrand]

I'm waiting for mike nolan name to get thrown in. Lol
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

It already has been mentioned. : |

[cuzz4169]

OMG I hope not!!!!! I live in Buffalo this guy was a JOKE!!!!

[Superchop 7]

Broncos Football

West Coast Offense

Superior O-line and Quarterback

Zone Blocking Scheme

Mediocre receivers and running backs that benefit from outstanding O-line.



A Reminder of defense.




Mike Powell/Getty Images A common philosophy has been that a good offense wins games but defenses wins championships.

That saying is evident by the fact that 65 of the 80 teams to make the Super Bowl since 1970 finished in the top 10 in points allowed.





This slideshow is to remember the top ten defenses since 1985.

Please note that the last slide is our "All-Quarter Century" team.



Hope you enjoy.

NFL Top Defense #10: 1989 Denver Broncos
George Rose/Getty Images The Broncos defense reached its peaked in 1989 when they finished first in points allowed and third in yards allowed.

The defense was able to match the productivity of the John Elway led-offense. This wasn't the case in 1986 & 1987 when the defense, respectively, finished 15th and 7th in the NFL.

The Broncos finished with a total of 14 interceptions, led by defensive back Tyrone Braxton (six interceptions), defensive back Wymon Henderson (3) and rookie safety Steve Atwater (3).

Drafting first round pick Steve Atwater, prior to the season, was one of the moves that help to achieve this success. Atwater quickly became known for being the hardest hitting free safety in the NFL.

Denver's defensive line was one of the top in the NFL, with newcomer Ron Holmes (career high nine sacks), who came over from Tampa Bay, Pro Bowler Greg Kragen and Alphonso Carreker (5.5)

Linebacker Simon Fletcher led the team with 12 sacks and was joined by Michael Brooks, Karl Mecklenburg (7.5 sacks), and Rick Dennison.

The Broncos sent four defensive players to the Pro Bowl.

Source: Bleacher Report

[Superchop 7]

The only guy with both the defensive knowledge, offensive knowledge, zone blocking knowledge, and history of the Broncos knowledge that "I" would hire is Rick Dennison.

[T.K.O.]

i hear shanahan has a really BIG house ......in denver:D

[Superchop 7]

(Source.....Football Future Forum) (argument on Dennison)



With all respect, I feel you're absolutely wrong.

he learned the 3-4 from Joe Collier and played in it. He learned the OL from Alex Gibbs and coached it. He learned the WCO from Shanahan and Reeves style from Reeves.

he has an amazing pedigree, been a part of the Bronco's since 1982, and is absolutely what we need!


I think what he was referring to is that Dennison would need to revamp to bring the WCO and ZBS BACK to Denver and our personnel doesn't fit due to what McD has done.

Also, Dennison was never exceptional in the 3-4 so your assumption that Collier 'taught' it ito him s a bit of a leap. And going 'old school' isn't always the prudent move just because he has past ties. As OC for the Broncos we were very mediocre during his tenure anyway IMO.


Quite true in some respects. Dennison's career as an ILB was sandwiched between Gradishar and Mecklenburg. Pretty hard to break that lineup. he only had a few years as a starter but 8 years under Collier as an ILB has to count.
Alex Gibbs said Dennison had the highest football IQ he'd ever seen. Seems like he proved that by carrying on Alex' tradition.

He's a leader and would have the highest IQ of any coach ever! (thats actually a fact. the guys a genius)

He's a Montana kid ,ex CSU star, and bleeds blue and orange.

Thats who I want!

[Cugel]

I thought they were going to hire a GM first?

WTF are they looking at coaches?

This makes no sense.

Unfortunately it makes a very HORRIBLE kind of sense! :coffee:

They may simply appoint Brian Xanders as the permanent GM with Joe Ellis sticking around to handle the business end of things.

There've already been rumors to that effect in the Post, but fans discount them because it's been too appalling to believe it.

If they hire a coach without even MENTIONING a new GM, then that's a BIG indication that they are planning to keep the organization they have and blame McDaniels for everything.

That would doom Denver to years more frustration, but I can see Bowlen being convinced by Ellis to do just that!

He would say "the mistake we made was in not giving Brian Xanders the power over player personnel. So, this time we make sure he has the decision making authority to succeed."

This would ignore the fact that Xanders couldn't recognize talent if it bit him on the A**! But, I can easily see this organization doing exactly that!

Bowlen has given ample indication over the past 2 years that he's become a clueless half-wit who relies on Joe Ellis for everything, and this would cement the deal! :coffee:

[silkamilkamonico]

Does revamping back to a ZBS (which I do not want) mean that Walton and Beadles all of a sudden do not fit?

[HORSEPOWER 56]

I know that Bowlen said he wants to get back to "Broncos Football" but I don't think you can take that to be as literal as some here are. I honestly don't think he means we have to return to a time of the ZBS, naked bootlegs, the WCO, and a defense that's bend but don't break.

He said get back to "Broncos Football" not, Shanahan football... I think he means winning, competitive football. It was still "Broncos Football" when Reeves was here and he was nothing like Shanahan. Why is it everyone thinks that by saying "Broncos Football" Bowlen meant that it absolutely had to be someone with prior ties to Shanahan or the organization. This is all just WILD speculation by guys like Adam Schefter who gets way too much credit around here. Schefter really hasn't had the inside scoop about the Broncos since he joined E!SPN.

Bowlen wants to get back to winning. I'd like to believe he'll do everything he can to hire a GM and HC that he feels can do that, ties to Shanahan or not. He got suckered, like others before him in the Bellicheat way and the Bellicheat coaching tree. I doubt he'll make the same mistakes again, but I also doubt our next HC has to be Shanahan, Fassel, Kubiak, Dennison, or someone who has worked here before.

We're going to hear a lot of names kicked around between now and the day we hire a new staff. Until then, I wouldn't be inclined to believe anything you read, least of all from supposed "insiders". Don't forget, 3 weeks ago there was no way Bowlen would pay 3 HCs and mcDaniels would be given another year (Adam Schefter) and last week Troy Calhoun was the new HC of the Broncos (Les Shapiro). I'll believe it when it comes out at the press conference...

[T.K.O.]

tampering ?:shocked:

[horsepig]

(Source.....Football Future Forum) (argument on Dennison)



With all respect, I feel you're absolutely wrong.

he learned the 3-4 from Joe Collier and played in it. He learned the OL from Alex Gibbs and coached it. He learned the WCO from Shanahan and Reeves style from Reeves.

he has an amazing pedigree, been a part of the Bronco's since 1982, and is absolutely what we need!


I think what he was referring to is that Dennison would need to revamp to bring the WCO and ZBS BACK to Denver and our personnel doesn't fit due to what McD has done.

Also, Dennison was never exceptional in the 3-4 so your assumption that Collier 'taught' it ito him s a bit of a leap. And going 'old school' isn't always the prudent move just because he has past ties. As OC for the Broncos we were very mediocre during his tenure anyway IMO.


Quite true in some respects. Dennison's career as an ILB was sandwiched between Gradishar and Mecklenburg. Pretty hard to break that lineup. he only had a few years as a starter but 8 years under Collier as an ILB has to count.
Alex Gibbs said Dennison had the highest football IQ he'd ever seen. Seems like he proved that by carrying on Alex' tradition.

He's a leader and would have the highest IQ of any coach ever! (thats actually a fact. the guys a genius)

He's a Montana kid ,ex CSU star, and bleeds blue and orange.

Thats who I want!

Jeeze, Chop, you sold me. I'm a CSU alum who was there when he played and enjoyed watching him on the field.

Joe Collier was the absolute nut as a DC, I've never seen one better. Same class as Lebeau, pretty rare company. Dan Reeves taught the ultimate conservative game, no turnovers, get a 3 point lead and milk the clock. Boring, but very, very successful. Reeves was one of those guys that won with low draft position year after year, and just kept on winning.

Alexc Gibbs is, IMO, the best OLine coach ever. You are quite correct, Rick has a very, very strong pedigree, plus he is undoubtedly the best educated coach in the NFL.

I can think of one Hell of a lot of other guys I don't want. Dennison kind of strikes a nice chord with me. We could (and probably will) do worse.

[horsepig]

Does revamping back to a ZBS (which I do not want) mean that Walton and Beadles all of a sudden do not fit?

Hell, no, they'd be perfect fits. I love the ZBS with its athletic linemen, no reason they have to be smallish, just athletic.

[dogfish]

i definitely think beadles is a fit-- IMO he might fit better as a ZBS lineman than as a straight power scheme guy-- i think he's athletic and mobile enough, and just as importantly i think he's smart enough. . .

i'm not as positive on walton being a great fit-- i think he's a fairly average athlete-- but he could probably make it work. . .

i suspect that the direction the new regime decides to go with harris will go a long way towards determing what type of scheme they want to run predominantly. . .

[horsepig]

Another thing, to me "Broncos football" means DEFENSE!

The '77 team that started it all was ALL defense. Reeves teams were defense first. Those are the teams that put Denver football on the map. Shanny came along and inherited a pretty damn good program and turned Elway loose. His smartest move ever as a coach. Shanny is no genius, just a guy that was in the right place at the right time and had John Elway as his QB. What made Shanny so smart in SanFran? A great organization, great HC, great personell.

[Lancane]

Another thing, to me "Broncos football" means DEFENSE!

The '77 team that started it all was ALL defense. Reeves teams were defense first. Those are the teams that put Denver football on the map. Shanny came along and inherited a pretty damn good program and turned Elway loose. His smartest move ever as a coach. Shanny is no genius, just a guy that was in the right place at the right time and had John Elway as his QB. What made Shanny so smart in SanFran? A great organization, great HC, great personell.

Hate to disagree with you Horsepig...but you're wrong. Dan Reeves was an offensive minded coach, Shanahan was an offensive minded coach, McDaniels was an offensive minded coach, Eric Studesville is an offensive minded coach...Wade Phillips was a defensive minded coach...fired to make way for an offensive minded coach after only two seasons.

Those have been the only head coaches at the helm during Bowlen's tenure as owner, that is what he knows. Dan Reeves had fielded only three real superior defensive units in 84', 89' and 91', the defense always played well but the team was more balanced, but offense is what we were known for, even with such balance.

The days of the Orange Crush had gone before he had purchased the controlling stock, And Bowlen has long been an offensive minded owner and the past and his own actions are proof of that. From 84' on, after Bowlen's purchase of the team, the Denver Broncos had produced 18 top ten offensive units in a 26 year span, and the defenses as I said have been good, alright and seriously shitty within that same time frame. Even the Orange Crush weren't as good as they appeared, they were good...don't get me wrong - but they were near dead last in pass defense, but the best against the run...so a bend don't break defense.

So Bronco football to Pat Bowlen would be a powerful offense with a solid defense if we take the term literally in terms of on the field production.

[Lonestar]

i definitely think beadles is a fit-- IMO he might fit better as a ZBS lineman than as a straight power scheme guy-- i think he's athletic and mobile enough, and just as importantly i think he's smart enough. . .

i'm not as positive on walton being a great fit-- i think he's a fairly average athlete-- but he could probably make it work. . .

i suspect that the direction the new regime decides to go with harris will go a long way towards determing what type of scheme they want to run predominantly. . .

Lets hope it is OUT of here.. I'll take the 3 rd comp pick for him in a heart beat.

Unless of course he wants to play OG at an OG pay scale.

For me I hope they crap can the ZBS, as it is vulnerable to the 3-4 defense as well as close to the goal line..

[Lonestar]

Hate to disagree with you Horsepig...but you're wrong. Dan Reeves was an offensive minded coach, Shanahan was an offensive minded coach, McDaniels was an offensive minded coach, Eric Studesville is an offensive minded coach...Wade Phillips was a defensive minded coach...fired to make way for an offensive minded coach after only two seasons.

Those have been the only head coaches at the helm during Bowlen's tenure as owner, that is what he knows. Dan Reeves had fielded only three real superior defensive units in 84', 89' and 91', the defense always played well but the team was more balanced, but offense is what we were known for, even with such balance.

The days of the Orange Crush had gone before he had purchased the controlling stock, And Bowlen has long been an offensive minded owner and the past and his own actions are proof of that. From 84' on, after Bowlen's purchase of the team, the Denver Broncos had produced 18 top ten offensive units in a 26 year span, and the defenses as I said have been good, alright and seriously shitty within that same time frame. Even the Orange Crush weren't as good as they appeared, they were good...don't get me wrong - but they were near dead last in pass defense, but the best against the run...so a bend don't break defense.

So Bronco football to Pat Bowlen would be a powerful offense with a solid defense if we take the term literally in terms of on the field production.

I 'll beg to differ about the 77 defense..

it was hardly a slouch for the passing side unless you want to base all of your stats on passing yardage given up. That they were 25th.

But if you look at total tds given up as passes #7 giving up 11 td's BTW on rushing they gave up 5 TD's.

No offense that is not a lot of difference. so While they were worse they were hardly as bad as YOU Seem to be saying they are.

I guess I will base my thoughts on actual scoring. opposed to yards given up.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?offensiveStatisticCategory=null&archive=false&seasonType=REG&defensiveStatisticCategory=TOUCHDOWNS&d-447263-o=1&conference=null&d-447263-s=TOUCHDOWNS_RUSHING&d-447263-n=1&season=1977&qualified=true&Submit=Go&tabSeq=2&role=OPP&d-447263-p=1

[Lancane]

I 'll beg to differ about the 77 defense..

it was hardly a slouch for the passing side unless you want to base all of your stats on passing yardage given up. That they were 25th.

But if you look at total tds given up as passes #7 giving up 11 td's BTW on rushing they gave up 5 TD's.

No offense that is not a lot of difference. so While they were worse they were hardly as bad as YOU Seem to be saying they are.

I guess I will base my thoughts on actual scoring. opposed to yards given up.

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?offensiveStatisticCategory=null&archive=false&seasonType=REG&defensiveStatisticCategory=TOUCHDOWNS&d-447263-o=1&conference=null&d-447263-s=TOUCHDOWNS_RUSHING&d-447263-n=1&season=1977&qualified=true&Submit=Go&tabSeq=2&role=OPP&d-447263-p=1

I'm not saying they were horrid by any means of the imagination...I still credit that defense as one of the league's all-time best. But I'll be honest and not a blind homer. It wasn't a balanced defense, they were terrific against the run, they played soft against the pass...but the Orange Crush was by all means of the term a true red-zone defense. So in fact a 'Bend don't Break' defense.

And even then, Bowlen had nothing to do with that unit, he didn't own the team until 84', and since that time the Broncos have been an offensive heavy team, we've had some solid defenses...the last time we had the best overall defense in the league was back in 84'.

[Sinthor]

I could see them making Xanders or someone else currently with the organization the GM. Especially if they want to give Tebow a shot. That way they don't have to worry about someone coming in and dumping him without giving him a chance, actually (which is my biggest fear right now). As for coaches, I could live with a completely new guy like Mularkey. Someone mentioned Mariucchi though... Did he not want to coach after Detroit or was the consensus just that he didn't make it as a coach? I've been surprised no one had picked him up before now..

I could see him being able to work with and even liking/wanting to work with Tebow during an evaluation period in any case. He seems like a really good and smart guy at any rate. I'll reserve judgment on almost anyone until I see the results. My one big fear with all of this though has been that someone will come in with their mind made up and ditch Tebow without even giving him a shot. You can't dictate to a GM/Coach combo who they will work with. If this happened, I could see the ultimate irony in the kid doing well elsewhere and coming back to haunt this franchise once or maybe even twice a year. Wouldn't it be the ultimate irony if Tebow was the ONE great move McD made and the organization just ditched him before finding that out? I'm really nervous about that though. Just want to see him given a chance. Then we'll see if he can make it or not.

[Lancane]

I could see them making Xanders or someone else currently with the organization the GM. Especially if they want to give Tebow a shot. That way they don't have to worry about someone coming in and dumping him without giving him a chance, actually (which is my biggest fear right now). As for coaches, I could live with a completely new guy like Mularkey. Someone mentioned Mariucchi though... Did he not want to coach after Detroit or was the consensus just that he didn't make it as a coach? I've been surprised no one had picked him up before now..

I could see him being able to work with and even liking/wanting to work with Tebow during an evaluation period in any case. He seems like a really good and smart guy at any rate. I'll reserve judgment on almost anyone until I see the results. My one big fear with all of this though has been that someone will come in with their mind made up and ditch Tebow without even giving him a shot. You can't dictate to a GM/Coach combo who they will work with. If this happened, I could see the ultimate irony in the kid doing well elsewhere and coming back to haunt this franchise once or maybe even twice a year. Wouldn't it be the ultimate irony if Tebow was the ONE great move McD made and the organization just ditched him before finding that out? I'm really nervous about that though. Just want to see him given a chance. Then we'll see if he can make it or not.

I'm not sure if Brian Xanders will end up the General Manager or not. But even if he does, don't think that others won't have a say. Bowlen is not going to let him run with the ball unchecked, not after all that has happened. Bowlen himself, Elway, the next head coach, Ellis if he retains his position, Keith Kidd and probably someone designated as an assistant general manager will all be a part of decisions made and Xanders will have to listen to their input. After all, we can not have another dictator running the franchise and I don't believe Bowlen would name him to the position if he felt that was the case.

I wouldn't be surprised if Brian Xanders was promoted to a position more befitting his talents, such as Director of Football Operations becoming the executives' eyes and ears in the Football Operations under Elway and Ellis, working directly with all facets of operations including the General Manager and his staff. But time will tell, no one expects the for them to wait until the Super Bowl is over, not unless there is someone they really want from one of the two organizations that make it there. Hell, we could have some questions answered in as little as four weeks regarding the staff and next regime.

As for Mularkey, I don't think you'll see a lot of fans supporting his hire, it will be met with more criticism then when Calhoun was rumored to be the next head coach, hell I think Steve Mariucci would be a wiser choice. At this point I believe that Jim Fassel will be the one given the head coach position. Bowlen was going to hire him for the job if Shanahan did not wish to take the position, he's been apart of this organization and he's close to Elway, he and Pat have a fairly good relationship.

[Traveler]

The only guy with both the defensive knowledge, offensive knowledge, zone blocking knowledge, and history of the Broncos knowledge that "I" would hire is Rick Dennison.

As HC? Are you serious?

[Medford Bronco]

I thought they were going to hire a GM first?

WTF are they looking at coaches?

This makes no sense.

When was the last time Denver did anything that made sense:confused:

The Champ Bailey trade:shocked:

[horsepig]

Hate to disagree with you Horsepig...but you're wrong. Dan Reeves was an offensive minded coach, Shanahan was an offensive minded coach, McDaniels was an offensive minded coach, Eric Studesville is an offensive minded coach...Wade Phillips was a defensive minded coach...fired to make way for an offensive minded coach after only two seasons.

Those have been the only head coaches at the helm during Bowlen's tenure as owner, that is what he knows. Dan Reeves had fielded only three real superior defensive units in 84', 89' and 91', the defense always played well but the team was more balanced, but offense is what we were known for, even with such balance.

The days of the Orange Crush had gone before he had purchased the controlling stock, And Bowlen has long been an offensive minded owner and the past and his own actions are proof of that. From 84' on, after Bowlen's purchase of the team, the Denver Broncos had produced 18 top ten offensive units in a 26 year span, and the defenses as I said have been good, alright and seriously shitty within that same time frame. Even the Orange Crush weren't as good as they appeared, they were good...don't get me wrong - but they were near dead last in pass defense, but the best against the run...so a bend don't break defense.

So Bronco football to Pat Bowlen would be a powerful offense with a solid defense if we take the term literally in terms of on the field production.

You make some unarguable and good points. Reeves was known for his multiplke shifts and so-on on offense, but when it came down to it Dan was 3 yards and a cloud of dust guy. No TURNOVERS was Reevees's mantra, along with a very solid defense. Sammy Winder and the M&M connection. Not really wide open offense.

[horsepig]

You are also correct about the Orange Crush. GREAT goal line defense. I watched Fouts throw for 460 yards against that defense and the Broncos won 7-0. They did not stuff everything up, they just made the plays, and lots of'em, when they needed to.

[Lancane]

You make some unarguable and good points. Reeves was known for his multiplke shifts and so-on on offense, but when it came down to it Dan was 3 yards and a cloud of dust guy. No TURNOVERS was Reevees's mantra, along with a very solid defense. Sammy Winder and the M&M connection. Not really wide open offense.

I really like Reeves despite what others feel about him, three AFC Championship titles, three Super Bowl trips, and we were continually a threat in the AFC West, no Denver Broncos' head coach led the team to more AFC West titles then Reeves. But, one could argue that the reason we were so good offensively was not so much the system he ran but the fact that Elway was the quarterback.

Then again, Dan Reeves during his tenure produced more defensive Pro-Bowlers then offensive All-Pros, but if you look at the statistics, there seemed to be some media bias against some very good Broncos' players during his years here, because a number of them deserved Pro-Bowl honors and didn't even get rewarded with but a single vote or two.

[Lancane]

You are also correct about the Orange Crush. GREAT goal line defense. I watched Fouts throw for 460 yards against that defense and the Broncos won 7-0. They did not stuff everything up, they just made the plays, and lots of'em, when they needed to.

There have been some good 'Red Zone' and 'Goal Line' defenses over the years, but Denver's 'Bend don't Break' has always been sort of mythological in my eyes. They'd crush the run, get to the quarterbacks and still the other teams would be pass happy but to no avail, because they got their mean-on once you crossed the 20 yard line, that was their territory...and you had to love it.

Hell, one of the best plays that represented the 'Bend don't Break' was in Super Bowl XXXII, that last defensive series where we made our stand...no fan can ever forget those last few plays that ended up not only giving us our first Lombardi trophy, but also snapping the AFC's thirteen year losing streak.

And I'm not one that believes we need a dominant defense...the problem is that for so long we've had defenses that are less then sub-par and we've watched good balanced teams with superior defensive talent winning the championship and we wanted that too. Problem is that we've long lacked any really great talented defensive players give Bailey, don't get me wrong D.J. is solid, but he was no Al Wilson and then of course we got Dumervil.

For over thirteen years I played on defense, I love that side of the ball...the punishing hitting, the rush of knocking someone back into a state of retardation. But it's never been Denver's forte, but I'd like to see us add some key players that bring back at least the a solid unit that could stop anyone on any given day. The defenses we've had mostly over the last couple years do well and then lose heart and just vanish.

If for any other reason that I hope Tebow is the franchise quarterback of tomorrow, it's because I'd love to see us use at least three picks and especially that first one on a mean-ass defensive player, and that doesn't mean a cornerback like some are hoping for, I mean a solid defensive end like Dareus or Fairley, someone who can actually make a difference...you know?

[dogfish]

the one year we've been relevant post-elway was also the one year since 1991 that we've had a top five scoring defense. . .

coincidence? i think not. . .


:elefant: