PDA

View Full Version : Fox at DIA said...



PAINTERDAVE
01-12-2011, 03:09 PM
Look what Fox had to say at DIA...

http://twitter.com/MaxBroncos

Quote:
Fox took CAR from 1-15 to SB in 2 yrs: "I have a blueprint that we executed in Carolina, and I don't see any reason why it can't work here."

underrated29
01-12-2011, 03:43 PM
I am starting to tie my noose as we speak.

camdisco24
01-12-2011, 03:45 PM
I hope that blue print has "FIX DEFENSE" in big bold letters.

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 03:53 PM
His "blueprint" pretty much = mediocrity. He is .500 for his career. I loved how his "blueprint" got him run out of town in favor of Ron Rivera.

John can keep his "blueprint" handy for his next gig, which hopefully is nowhere NEAR Denver.

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 03:56 PM
Someone very conspicuous is in the room for Fox's interview. Someone who was very conspicuous in his absence at all the previous interviews.

Can you tell me who it is (he's at the head of the table)?

http://twitpic.com/3pg7co

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 03:58 PM
His "blueprint" pretty much = mediocrity. He is .500 for his career. I loved how his "blueprint" got him run out of town in favor of Ron Rivera.

John can keep his "blueprint" handy for his next gig, which hopefully is nowhere NEAR Denver.

No, his ownership got him run out of town. It's going to be VERY interesting to see what Rivera does with an NFL franchise that has determined that they're more about saving money than winning football games. The Carolina ownership jerked the rug out from under Fox and got rid of almost all of his talent. Now we'll see if it was Fox or the ownership...

BroncoJoe
01-12-2011, 03:59 PM
Someone very conspicuous is in the room for Fox's interview. Someone who was very conspicuous in his absence at all the previous interviews.

Can you tell me who it is (he's at the head of the table)?

http://twitpic.com/3pg7co

We don't know he wasn't in the previous interviews. Perhaps he came in after everyone said hello, and was ready to get down to business.

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 04:00 PM
No, his ownership got him run out of town. It's going to be VERY interesting to see what Rivera does with an NFL franchise that has determined that they're more about saving money than winning football games. The Carolina ownership jerked the rug out from under Fox and got rid of almost all of his talent. Now we'll see if it was Fox or the ownership...

Great... Excuses... Just what we need, fans who are trying to justify hiring a coach by excusing his lack of winning on ownership. Has anyone even pulled the salary cap numbers for Carolina over the past 10 years to see how they compare to other franchises in that span?

Probably not.

People made excuses for Orton for 2 years, it looks like Fox is the next recipient of this nonsense.

DenBronx
01-12-2011, 04:01 PM
Here's a photo from the interview.

Bowlen also sat in on this one. Elway making a style statement with the maroon pants....

I have a feeling Fox will get the job. If any of you had the time to read maxdenvers report you will notice that all Fox did was rave on Denvers fan base, home field advantage, how proud this organization is and had alot of good things to say about Tebow.

http://twitpic.com/3pg7co

slim
01-12-2011, 04:01 PM
I just want to know why Greek is sitting in on the interviews.

Am I the only one that finds this strange?

Agent of Orange
01-12-2011, 04:02 PM
Someone very conspicuous is in the room for Fox's interview. Someone who was very conspicuous in his absence at all the previous interviews.

Can you tell me who it is (he's at the head of the table)?

http://twitpic.com/3pg7co

Maybe he's lost? Maybe he thought he was in the cafeteria?

Ziggy
01-12-2011, 04:02 PM
I hope that blue print has "FIX DEFENSE" in big bold letters.

It did in Carolina. In 2001 before Fox arrived the Panthers were dead last in the league (32nd) on defense. His first year there they were 2nd in the NFL in defense.

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 04:03 PM
I think Fox gets the job... Not excited about it I just think it's going to happen.

dogfish
01-12-2011, 04:04 PM
I hope that blue print has "FIX DEFENSE" in big bold letters.


We don't know he wasn't in the previous interviews. Perhaps he came in after everyone said hello, and was ready to get down to business.

sneaky!

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 04:05 PM
Great... Excuses... Just what we need, fans who are trying to justify hiring a coach by excusing his lack of winning on ownership. Has anyone even pulled the salary cap numbers for Carolina over the past 10 years to see how they compare to other franchises in that span?

Probably not.

People made excuses for Orton for 2 years, it looks like Fox is the next recipient of this nonsense.

As opposed to a guy who has only ever been the OC to offensive minded HCs and has never run ANYTHING? Rick Dennison is like a career politician who has never actually been elected to anything. He's NEVER been responsible for anything and all of his jobs have been because of connections vice performance. Oh, 2 of his 3 previous bosses have also been fired (Shanny and McD) for failing to fix the defense and the 3rd will be probably after this season (Kubes).

That's the guy I'm supposed to be excited about?

DenBronx
01-12-2011, 04:05 PM
It did in Carolina. In 2001 before Fox arrived the Panthers were dead last in the league (32nd) on defense. His first year there they were 2nd in the NFL in defense.

In his 9 years he only had 1 year that wasnt a top 15 defense overall and that was this year.

We lack in the run game and we desperately lack on defense. If he can help solidify that then we will be a good team again. Who knows Bailey might even be sold and want to stay here.

DenBronx
01-12-2011, 04:07 PM
Someone very conspicuous is in the room for Fox's interview. Someone who was very conspicuous in his absence at all the previous interviews.

Can you tell me who it is (he's at the head of the table)?

http://twitpic.com/3pg7co


Bowlen and he seems highly interested.

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 04:10 PM
You guys do realize that Fox had Peppers, Jenkins, Rucker, Minter, Fields, and a lot of other talented defensive players to work with as well..? It's a lot easier to throw together a solid defense with players like that at your disposal.

dogfish
01-12-2011, 04:10 PM
I hope that blue print has "FIX DEFENSE" in big bold letters.

i'm guessing it would. . . he's a defensive-minded head coach and former DC-- i can't believe he could possibly look at this abortion and not make fixing it his top priority. . .

he didn't have final say over the roster in carolina, but we can assume he had input. . . they were very balanced over his tenure in terms of drafting-- for example, four first rounders spent on offense, and four on defense (of course, their needs weren't nearly as lop-sided as ours are right now). . . when they had the top pick, they took julius peppers. . . the fox regime did a solid job developing defensive players, featuring success stories like kris jenkins, dan connor, charles godfrey, chris gamble, richard marshall and jon beason. . .

in ine years in carolina, fox's defenses never once finished outside the top half in scoring defense before this debacle season. . . in terms of having a proven defensive rebuild on the resume, that's probably about as good as you're going to get unless we hire wade phillips. . .

Lancane
01-12-2011, 04:10 PM
I can't wait for the epic meltdown, especially when we never surpass mediocre offensively, the man is so conservative he makes the 'Tea Party' look liberal.

Well, I have no say in the process, but I really hope he's not the next head coach.

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 04:12 PM
I can't wait for the epic meltdown, especially when we never surpass mediocre offensively, the man is so conservative he makes the 'Tea Party' look liberal.

Well, I have no say in the process, but I really hope he's not the next head coach.

I'm with you on this. Some of the fans are so desperate that they are willing to accept mediocrity with open arms right now...

Even at the expense of developing Tebow and having a good offense. Hopefully Elway is smarter than this.

Riveralution
01-12-2011, 04:14 PM
No, his ownership got him run out of town. It's going to be VERY interesting to see what Rivera does with an NFL franchise that has determined that they're more about saving money than winning football games. The Carolina ownership jerked the rug out from under Fox and got rid of almost all of his talent. Now we'll see if it was Fox or the ownership...

Okay, I've been perusing these forums for a few days now and I've gotta put an end to this bogus myth right here.

As a long-tenured Panthers fan, I can assure you Richardson's number one priority is winning. Period. If you'd stay more informed, you'd have learned the reason The Big Cat cut all the dead weight last season.

For starters, as he stated, Fox has been stubbornly loyal to his Vets throughout his entire tenure here. The only way to get our young players on the field was to eliminate the veterans in front of them.
Secondly, the impending CBA situation and the lack of a cap last year enabled us to cut all that dead weight without taking any cap fines.

For you to say Richardson is cheap, is ignorant.
This is the same man who gave Jake a fat, long-term contract after the '08 Playoff debacle.
This is the same man who offered to make Pep the highest paid defensive player in history.

Shall I go on?

The point is this:

Foxy is a decent coach. Not really good or great, but decent.
In the years where we didn't have the exact personnel for his type of scheme=he failed.
He wasn't able to adapt his coaching.
In the year where we did, we did alright.

Now I'm glad that Foxy has gotten an interview, he's an incredibly nice guy, but I'd appreciate it if you'd stay informed before you went posting nonsense about our so called "cheap" owner.

dogfish
01-12-2011, 04:15 PM
You guys do realize that Fox had Peppers, Jenkins, Rucker, Minter, Fields, and a lot of other talented defensive players to work with as well..? It's a lot easier to throw together a solid defense with players like that at your disposal.

yea. . . and some of those guys were developed under his regime-- but i guess you won't give him credit for that, or for replacing the vets that departed. . .

because "he's the worst coach EVAR!omg111!!!111!!"

come on, enough of the over-the-top hyperbole already. . .

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 04:16 PM
You guys do realize that Fox had Peppers, Jenkins, Rucker, Minter, Fields, and a lot of other talented defensive players to work with as well..? It's a lot easier to throw together a solid defense with players like that at your disposal.

Of those guys you listed, how many were on the roster when FOx got there other than Minter? I don't think any were. Fox built that defense after the sorry-assed shape that George Seifert left it in.

The bottom line is this, Fox is a defensive coach... our defense sucks.

All I need to know is that he got the Panthers to the SUPERBOWL with Jake F'n Delhomme. 2 years ago the Panthers won their division which included a resurgent Atlanta and a soon to be Superbowl champion New Orleans.

This year, his FO crippled him personnel wise and he was a lame duck going into the season knowing it was his last all the while he was given Moore and Clausen to win with... Really? He still won 2 games and was NEVER blown out 59-14!!!

That's all I need to know!

What else does the guy need to put on his resume?

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 04:18 PM
yea. . . and some of those guys were developed under his regime-- but i guess you won't give him credit for that, or for replacing the vets that departed. . .

because "he's the worst coach EVAR!omg111!!!111!!"

come on, enough of the over-the-top hyperbole already. . .

I never said that... I've said all along he's mediocre, as his record indicates. Seems lik you're the one "over the top"...

slim
01-12-2011, 04:18 PM
yea. . . and some of those guys were developed under his regime-- but i guess you won't give him credit for that, or for replacing the vets that departed. . .

because "he's the worst coach EVAR!omg111!!!111!!"

come on, enough of the over-the-top hyperbole already. . .

You mean like saying that all of Dennison's ST units sucked ass or failing to give him any credit for the success of the Texans offense?

Is that the kind of thing you are talking about?

Lancane
01-12-2011, 04:18 PM
You guys do realize that Fox had Peppers, Jenkins, Rucker, Minter, Fields, and a lot of other talented defensive players to work with as well..? It's a lot easier to throw together a solid defense with players like that at your disposal.

Don't speak common sense to fanatics, they believe only what they want to, never what really is.

Let's see what his offenses have ranked during his tenure, shall we?

2002, 30th overall
2003, 15th overall
2004, 13th overall
2005, 8th overall
2006, 27th overall
2007, 26th overall
2008, 7th overall
2009, 21st overall
2010, 32nd overall

Oh yeah, he'll do wonders for Tebow, well at least we'll be able to run the F'n ball and have a good F'n defense!

:coffee:

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 04:19 PM
Of those guys you listed, how many were on the roster when FOx got there other than Minter? I don't think any were. Fox built that defense after the sorry-assed shape that George Seifert left it in.

The bottom line is this, Fox is a defensive coach... our defense sucks.

All I need to know is that he got the panthers to the SUPERBOWL with Jake F'n Delhomme. 2 years ago the Panthers won their division which included a resurgent Atlanta and a soon to be Superbowl champion New Orleans.

This year, his FO crippled him personnel wise and he was a lame duck going into the season knowing it was his last all the while he was given Moore and Clausen to win with... Really? He still won 2 games and was NEVER blown out 59-14!!!

That's all I need to know!

What else does the guy need to put on his resume?

What else does he need on his resume?

How about more wins, better offense, more willingness to play younger talent, more willingness to adapt his systems... I don't know, the things that REALLY good coaches do... He knows defense, but there's a hell of a lot more to being a good football team than just defense.

underrated29
01-12-2011, 04:20 PM
I like fox as a HC, just not for our offense as I keep saying. I think he will kill it and possibly tebow as well.




But i did forget one thing that might soften me up a bit. If we get fox, we are more than likely at leas in the running for deangelo. While I still think he ends up in Green Bay, Fox could really start off on the right foot by bringing him in here.

Still only want him as a DC though.

dogfish
01-12-2011, 04:21 PM
You mean like saying that all of Dennison's ST units sucked ass or failing to give him any credit for the success of the Texans offense?

Is that the kind of thing you are talking about?

i never gave an opinion on dennison's impact on the texans, you're thinking of someone else on that. . .

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 04:21 PM
I can't wait for the epic meltdown, especially when we never surpass mediocre offensively, the man is so conservative he makes the 'Tea Party' look liberal.

Well, I have no say in the process, but I really hope he's not the next head coach.

You mean like the epic meltdown that the Ravens and Steelers have been for the past decade? Neither of those teams are very "explosive" on offense, but they play some hella defense and are perennial playoff contenders. I'll take that to being the #2 offense, the #30 defense, and 8-8 every year EVERY TIME!

They RUN THE BALL and PLAY DEFENSE. Damn, I wish we could do that. Without Manning or Brady and at least a reasonable defense, the whole "wide open offense" thing makes you 4-12. We're living proof!

Slick
01-12-2011, 04:22 PM
Don't speak common sense to fanatics, they believe only what they want to, never what really is.

Let's see what his offenses have ranked during his tenure, shall we?

2002, 30th overall
2003, 15th overall
2004, 13th overall
2005, 8th overall
2006, 27th overall
2007, 26th overall
2008, 7th overall
2009, 21st overall
2010, 32nd overall

Oh yeah, he'll do wonders for Tebow, well at least we'll be able to run the F'n ball and have a good F'n defense!

:coffee:

Most of that with who playing QB?


Yeah, nevermind.

You're a fan just like the rest of us. Don't go getting all high and mighty on us 'Cane.

slim
01-12-2011, 04:22 PM
i never gave an opinion on dennison's impact on the texans, you're thinking of someone else on that. . .

Oh, my bad.

I hope they make a decision by the end of the week.

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 04:23 PM
Don't speak common sense to fanatics, they believe only what they want to, never what really is.

Let's see what his offenses have ranked during his tenure, shall we?

2002, 30th overall
2003, 15th overall
2004, 13th overall
2005, 8th overall
2006, 27th overall
2007, 26th overall
2008, 7th overall
2009, 21st overall
2010, 32nd overall

Oh yeah, he'll do wonders for Tebow, well at least we'll be able to run the F'n ball and have a good F'n defense!

:coffee:

Hideous. Even worse than i thought it would be. It's sad how desperate the Broncos fans are right now... Josh really did a number on us it seems.

Riveralution
01-12-2011, 04:24 PM
Most of that with who playing QB?


Yeah, nevermind.

You're a fan just like the rest of us. Don't go getting all high and mighty on us 'Cane.

Jake Delhomme, who, until a few years ago, was a pretty good QB.
Very good in '03, Pro-Bowl in '05..

Man some of you Bronco fans have short memories..

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 04:24 PM
You mean like the epic meltdown that the Ravens and Steelers have been for the past decade? Neither of those teams are very "explosive" on offense, but they play some hella defense and are perennial playoff contenders. I'll take that to being the #2 offense, the #30 defense, and 8-8 every year EVERY TIME!

They RUN THE BALL and PLAY DEFENSE. Damn, I wish we could do that. Without Manning or Brady and at least a reasonable defense, the whole "wide open offense" thing makes you 4-12. We're living proof!

Umm, the Steelers have a very good offense and an open passing playbook. The Ravens haven't won a Super Bowl since they had the greatest defense of all-time less the 1985 Chicago Bears...

Pittsburgh has no problem opening up the playbook and throwing the ball.

Warhawk
01-12-2011, 04:25 PM
Don't speak common sense to fanatics, they believe only what they want to, never what really is.

That's exactly how I feel when I see BroncoStud's posts hating on Fox for issues that are really rooted in decisions made by the Panther's ownership.



Let's see what his offenses have ranked during his tenure, shall we?


This is the real reason to hate on Fox. He is very, very conservative on offense.

Lancane
01-12-2011, 04:25 PM
I like fox as a HC, just not for our offense as I keep saying. I think he will kill it and possibly tebow as well.




But i did forget one thing that might soften me up a bit. If we get fox, we are more than likely at leas in the running for deangelo. While I still think he ends up in Green Bay, Fox could really start off on the right foot by bringing him in here.

Still only want him as a DC though.

I wouldn't want Fox driving a busload of kids with down syndrome, he probably would just run it off the cliff and be about his way. I would rather we hire Fewell and risk he doesn't know shit then hire this defensive Dan Reeves' clone.

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 04:25 PM
Most of that with who playing QB?


Yeah, nevermind.

You're a fan just like the rest of us. Don't go getting all high and mighty on us 'Cane.

Jake Delhomme was one of the better QB's in the NFL until 2008 when he developed "dead-arm"...

Agent of Orange
01-12-2011, 04:27 PM
I'm trying to keep an open mind about this but, I have to say, Fox and Studesville would be the guys I'm least enthused about. I'd love to have Fox as a DC but, I cant help but think he's worn down after the past couple of years in Caroline. And the fact that he said he would use the same blueprint just makes me feel this way even more. If Fox was fresh and recharged, I'm guessing his blueprint would look different.

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 04:27 PM
Umm, the Steelers have a very good offense and an open passing playbook. The Ravens haven't won a Super Bowl since they had the greatest defense of all-time less the 1985 Chicago Bears...

Pittsburgh has no problem opening up the playbook and throwing the ball.

But why do they win? DEFENSE. What is FOx's specialty? DEFENSE. What's one thing you can't win in the playoffs without? DEFENSE. What have Rick Dennison's teams in the last decade NOT had? DEFENSE.

What is the Broncos #1 problem? DEFENSE.

Why are we even thinking about an offensively minded HC?????

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 04:28 PM
That's exactly how I feel when I see BroncoStud's posts hating on Fox for issues that are really rooted in decisions made by the Panther's ownership.



This is the real reason to hate on Fox. He is very, very conservative on offense.

I don't hate John Fox, I have stated over and over again, he is mediocre. His record indicates just that, and blaming ownership is just creating an excuse.

Ownership decided to go young because Fox wasn't getting anywhere with his expensive veterans who were aging. It was a smart move by Carolina.

jhildebrand
01-12-2011, 04:28 PM
Someone very conspicuous is in the room for Fox's interview. Someone who was very conspicuous in his absence at all the previous interviews.

Can you tell me who it is (he's at the head of the table)?

http://twitpic.com/3pg7co

I saw Bowlen in the video for Studesville. He at least greeted him and shook his hand.

BroncoJoe
01-12-2011, 04:28 PM
But why do they win? DEFENSE. What is FOx's specialty? DEFENSE. What's one thing you can't win in the playoffs without? DEFENSE. What have Rick Dennison's teams in the last decade NOT had? DEFENSE.

What is the Broncos #1 problem? DEFENSE.

Why are we even thinking about an offensively minded HC?????

2% difference.

Riveralution
01-12-2011, 04:28 PM
Jake Delhomme was one of the better QB's in the NFL until 2008 when he developed "dead-arm"...


Tommy Jone, as we like to call him.

(although, to his credit, he did rebound from Tommy-John very well..until...that one game. At the end..:tsk:)

Lancane
01-12-2011, 04:29 PM
Most of that with who playing QB?


Yeah, nevermind.

You're a fan just like the rest of us. Don't go getting all high and mighty on us 'Cane.

Could say the same to you Slick, just remember that respect and common courtesy is a two-way street.

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 04:30 PM
But why do they win? DEFENSE. What is FOx's specialty? DEFENSE. What's one thing you can't win in the playoffs without? DEFENSE. What have Rick Dennison's teams in the last decade NOT had? DEFENSE.

What is the Broncos #1 problem? DEFENSE.

Why are we even thinking about an offensively minded HC?????

No, the Steelers "win" because of good defense AND Big Ben. Do you really think a QB standing in the pocket and not making plays would carry the Steelers to Super Bowls? Hell no.

Big Ben won a Super Bowl with the worst offensive line in the NFL. He ran for his life and made play after play. If the Steelers didn't open it up on offense they wouldn't be a Super Bowl contender.

How many rings does Bill Cowher have without Big Ben?? Any idea? ZERO.

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 04:32 PM
Jake Delhomme was one of the better QB's in the NFL until 2008 when he developed "dead-arm"...

You are out of your mind. Delhomme is and always has been Kyle Orton. He had one weapon (Steve Smith who was pound for pound the best WR in the league for 4 years) and a DOMINANT offensive line and running game with guys like Steven Davis, Deangelo Williams, and Jonathan Stewart to lean on, and a top defense to back him up and cover for him every year.

Delhomme? Really? You of all Orton haters should bite your damned tongue...

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 04:32 PM
Tommy Jone, as we like to call him.

(although, to his credit, he did rebound from Tommy-John very well..until...that one game. At the end..:tsk:)

The 5 turnover game? :laugh:

Slick
01-12-2011, 04:32 PM
Jake Delhomme, who, until a few years ago, was a pretty good QB.
Very good in '03, Pro-Bowl in '05..

Man some of you Bronco fans have short memories..

I lived in South Charlotte from 1997 to 2007, and Jake Delhomme was trash. Period.

Those two years he had a horseshoe up his ass, and Smith was playing lights out.

Lancane
01-12-2011, 04:33 PM
But why do they win? DEFENSE. What is FOx's specialty? DEFENSE. What's one thing you can't win in the playoffs without? DEFENSE. What have Rick Dennison's teams in the last decade NOT had? DEFENSE.

What is the Broncos #1 problem? DEFENSE.

Why are we even thinking about an offensively minded HC?????

Because how many teams have won a championship with just defense? It takes two to tango HP, balance is the key and Fox never really seemed to grasp that concept. It's not all about Defense, Defense, Defense. You'll understand in the end, if Baltimore and Chicago have grasped it I'm sure the fans so dead set on defense being the only problem will too, eventually.

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 04:33 PM
No, the Steelers "win" because of good defense AND Big Ben. Do you really think a QB standing in the pocket and not making plays would carry the Steelers to Super Bowls? Hell no.

Big Ben won a Super Bowl with the worst offensive line in the NFL. He ran for his life and made play after play. If the Steelers didn't open it up on offense they wouldn't be a Super Bowl contender.

How many rings does Bill Cowher have without Big Ben?? Any idea? ZERO.

The Steelers went 3-1 WITHOUT BIG BEN to start the season. They have a worse record when Polamalu doesn't play than when Rapeslesburger doesn't. Check your facts! Pittsburgh is BUILT ON DEFENSE!!!!

Riveralution
01-12-2011, 04:34 PM
You are out of your mind. Delhomme is and always has been Kyle Orton. He had one weapon (Steve Smith who was pound for pound the best WR in the league for 4 years) and a DOMINANT offensive line and running game with guys like Steven Davis, Deangelo Williams, and Jonathan Stewart to lean on, and a top defense to back him up and cover for him every year.

Delhomme? Really? You of all Orton haters should bite your damned tongue...

Sigh...You just aren't gonna get it until you see it for yourself I guess.
Fine.

If you wanna do this the hard way.

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 04:35 PM
You are out of your mind. Delhomme is and always has been Kyle Orton. He had one weapon (Steve Smith who was pound for pound the best WR in the league for 4 years) and a DOMINANT offensive line and running game with guys like Steven Davis, Deangelo Williams, and Jonathan Stewart to lean on, and a top defense to back him up and cover for him every year.

Delhomme? Really? You of all Orton haters should bite your damned tongue...

Delhomme had pretty good years from 2002 - 2008. He has done something that Orton probably will never do, start a Super Bowl.

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 04:36 PM
Because how many teams have won a championship with just defense? It takes two to tango HP, balance is the key and Fox never really seemed to grasp that concept. It's not all about Defense, Defense, Defense. You'll understand in the end, if Baltimore and Chicago have grasped it I'm sure the fans so dead set on defense being the only problem will too, eventually.

Uhhh, yeah. And our offense put up over 20 PPG with Mike McCoy running it the last 3 games... Had our defense not allowed over 30 PPG in two of them, we might actually have WON! What a concept?!

If we can get a defense that gives up 20 or less PPG, I don't care who your QB is, you can win games. The Broncos 6-0 run in 2009 is all the proof you need.

Riveralution
01-12-2011, 04:36 PM
I lived in South Charlotte from 1997 to 2007, and Jake Delhomme was trash. Period.

Those two years he had a horseshoe up his ass, and Smith was playing lights out.

I don't care if you were snapping the ball to Delhomme himself.
Your wrong. Period. Take it from a Panthers fan, I know a little bit more about my team than you do..

Delhomme at a time was a decent QB, but as I said in the post above this one..if you wanna do this the hard way, then you'll see for yourself.

Run. Run. Pass. Punt.

Enjoy it! :lol:

And P.S. I'm a Foxy fan too!! How ironic!

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 04:37 PM
Sigh...You just aren't gonna get it until you see it for yourself I guess.
Fine.

If you wanna do this the hard way.

Hell yeah I do! Bring on some DEFENSE in DENVER!!!! :defense::defense::defense:

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 04:37 PM
The Steelers went 3-1 WITHOUT BIG BEN to start the season. They have a worse record when Polamalu doesn't play than when Rapeslesburger doesn't. Check your facts! Pittsburgh is BUILT ON DEFENSE!!!!

How many Super Bowls have the Steelers won without Big Ben in the past 20 years? :elefant:

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 04:38 PM
Hell yeah I do! Bring on some DEFENSE in DENVER!!!! :defense::defense::defense:

You don't have to hire a mediocre Head Coach who runs BAD offenses to have a defense in Denver. A smart approach might be to DRAFT good defensive players. Jim Bates, Larry Coyer, Mike Nolan - ALL respected DC's who didn't last in Denver because of the lack of talent, not coaching.

jhildebrand
01-12-2011, 04:39 PM
Sometimes I wonder if Broncos fans are expecting too much from the next coach.

How many people think the next coach will be the one who gets the Broncos back to the Super Bowl? :confused:

Maybe I am wrong but I am looking at the next coach to be a steward or caretaker if you will. The ideal coach will be able to work with this team and roster while the rebuilding takes place. It will be the following coach who will go far.

So seeing how I look at it like that, I would be totally ok with a guy like Fox. He has the HC experience and he built a very good defensive team in Carolina. Personally, I would be okay with Fewell and Studesville. Dennison worries me a bit.

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 04:40 PM
Delhomme had pretty good years from 2002 - 2008. He has done something that Orton probably will never do, start a Super Bowl.

Why don't you look up where his running game was ranked during those years... I'm sure it's enlightening. Check out his team's defensive ranks, too.

Then look up Delhomme's TD/Int percentage along with Steve Smith's stats. I'm sure you'll be entertained.

jhildebrand
01-12-2011, 04:41 PM
You don't have to hire a mediocre Head Coach who runs BAD offenses to have a defense in Denver. A smart approach might be to DRAFT good defensive players. Jim Bates, Larry Coyer, Mike Nolan - ALL respected DC's who didn't last in Denver because of the lack of talent, not coaching.

2 no less than 2 of those names referenced didn't leave this tesam due to a lack of talent :lol: In fact, 3 out of the 3 listed didn't leave because of talent.

underrated29
01-12-2011, 04:42 PM
Run. Run. Pass. Punt.





This sounds so familiar to us.

Except it is usually-

Run. run. bubble screen. punt

next series-

Run, run. pass to the sidelines. Punt

Next series-

Run. pass, pass, Tebow on 4th down RUN. Turn over on downs.

Ravage!!!
01-12-2011, 04:42 PM
I'm still floored that Studeville is a viable option, but Dennison worries you :lol: I mean, more power to you, but it just.. knocks me over!

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 04:42 PM
Why don't you look up where his running game was ranked during those years... I'm sure it's enlightening. Check out his team's defensive ranks, too.

Then look up Delhomme's TD/Int percentage along with Steve Smith's stats. I'm sure you'll be entertained.

I have... He had decent years. Have you? You sure are losing this debate hand over fist because it's emotional to you. Lancane and I just don't want to see a 1-dimensional HC hired because it isn't in the best interest of the Broncos, you seem to think John Fox is the only coach on Earth that can fix this defense...

Like I said, Fox has NEVER had a defense with this little talent on it. This year would be the closest and his defense is mediocre at best.

jhildebrand
01-12-2011, 04:43 PM
Finish this phrase:

offense wins games, defense wins _______ ?

topscribe
01-12-2011, 04:43 PM
No, the Steelers "win" because of good defense AND Big Ben. Do you really think a QB standing in the pocket and not making plays would carry the Steelers to Super Bowls? Hell no.

Big Ben won a Super Bowl with the worst offensive line in the NFL. He ran for his life and made play after play. If the Steelers didn't open it up on offense they wouldn't be a Super Bowl contender.

How many rings does Bill Cowher have without Big Ben?? Any idea? ZERO.

Are you talking about 2008 when the Steelers had the #1 defense in the
league, or 2004 when they were #4 in defense and #3 in rushing offense?

-----

Ravage!!!
01-12-2011, 04:44 PM
Give me a stud offense with a medium defense any day of the week, and I'll beat a team with a stud defense and a medium offense.

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 04:44 PM
You don't have to hire a mediocre Head Coach who runs BAD offenses to have a defense in Denver. A smart approach might be to DRAFT good defensive players. Jim Bates, Larry Coyer, Mike Nolan - ALL respected DC's who didn't last in Denver because of the lack of talent, not coaching.

And you don't have to believe that Rick Dennison will save the franchise just because he worked for Mike Shanahan and Gary Kubiak and he's a former Bronco.

MIKE WAS FIRED BECAUSE THE SHIT HAD GOTTEN STALE HERE! Do you really want to go back to that? WCO/ZBS and NO DEFENSE????

**** that!

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 04:45 PM
2 no less than 2 of those names referenced didn't leave this tesam due to a lack of talent :lol: In fact, 3 out of the 3 listed didn't leave because of talent.

They were shipped out because of the lack of talent. Even Nolan was getting his defense worked after midseason last year. The truth is that Denver has had too many DC's and not done enough to build the defense through the draft. I can't remember the last time Denver had a young, fast safety that was good.

Ravage!!!
01-12-2011, 04:45 PM
Finish this phrase:

offense wins games, defense wins _______ ?

Adages aren't facts just because you repeat them.

Riveralution
01-12-2011, 04:45 PM
Why don't you look up where his running game was ranked during those years... I'm sure it's enlightening. Check out his team's defensive ranks, too.

Then look up Delhomme's TD/Int percentage along with Steve Smith's stats. I'm sure you'll be entertained.

Yeah, why don't you?
How in '05 when we were down to our 7th string RB ( and no, that isn't an exaggeration) and Smitty was at times being triple covered because there was no other even adequate WR on the field..?

Smitty was a monster no doubt, but seriously?
The ride to the NFCCG was fun that year..

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 04:46 PM
Are you talking about 2008 when the Steelers had the #1 defense in the
league, or 2004 when they were #4 in defense and #3 in rushing offense?

-----

No, I'm asking you to tell me how many Super Bowl rings the mighty Bill Cowher has WITHOUT Big Ben... Can anyone do that?

topscribe
01-12-2011, 04:46 PM
Give me a stud offense with a medium defense any day of the week, and I'll beat a team with a stud defense and a medium offense.

I wonder if any of the Chicago Bears said that after the 2006 season . . .

-----

Ravage!!!
01-12-2011, 04:46 PM
And you don't have to believe that Rick Dennison will save the franchise just because he worked for Mike Shanahan and Gary Kubiak and he's a former Bronco.

MIKE WAS FIRED BECAUSE THE SHIT HAD GOTTEN STALE HERE! Do you really want to go back to that? WCO/ZBS and NO DEFENSE????

**** that!

Thats BS. Please. Just because a coach learned under another doesn't make him the same person, NOR does it mean the same approach. Thats ridiculous!!!

Ravage!!!
01-12-2011, 04:47 PM
I wonder if any of the Chicago Bears said that after the 2006 season . . .

-----

Probably.. since they got trounced in the Super Bowl by a good offense and a medium defense.

Slick
01-12-2011, 04:47 PM
Give me a stud offense with a medium defense any day of the week, and I'll beat a team with a stud defense and a medium offense.

Shanahan pretty much had that Rav, yet his teams always got their asses handed to them by the physical teams of the league.

Give me smashmouth football.


I'll go out on a limb here... If we hire Dennison and he brings us that, I'll tattoo his name on dogfish's ass.

:bandit:

topscribe
01-12-2011, 04:48 PM
No, I'm asking you to tell me how many Super Bowl rings the mighty Bill Cowher has WITHOUT Big Ben... Can anyone do that?

No, you made the statement, "Big Ben won a Super Bowl with the worst
offensive line in the NFL." I asked you which year you were talking about: the
2008 season when the Steelers were #1 in the league in defense or the 2005
season when they were #4 in defense and #5 in rushing offense . . .

-----

Ravage!!!
01-12-2011, 04:50 PM
No, I'm asking you to tell me how many Super Bowl rings the mighty Bill Cowher has WITHOUT Big Ben... Can anyone do that?

People seem to forget that it wasn't the defense that led them to those late game comebacks... and in the Super Bowl comeback. Seems they have forgotten taht the Indy Colts whipped a good defense in Chicago, and they didn't do it with defense.

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 04:50 PM
No, you made the statement, "Big Ben won a Super Bowl with the worst
offensive line in the NFL." I asked you which year you were talking about: the
2008 season when the Steelers were #1 in the league in defense or the 2005
season when they were #4 in defense and #5 in rushing offense . . .

-----

In 2008, the worst PASS-BLOCKING line I've ever witnessed in a Super Bowl. He ran for his life all season long, ran for his life in the actual Super Bowl. I forgot that pass-blocking wasn't a requirement of being an offensive lineman.

topscribe
01-12-2011, 04:50 PM
Probably.. since they got trounced in the Super Bowl by a good offense and a medium defense.

So I guess they didn't play a team with a good offense in any of the prior 18 games?

-----

jhildebrand
01-12-2011, 04:50 PM
I'm still floored that Studeville is a viable option, but Dennison worries you :lol: I mean, more power to you, but it just.. knocks me over!

As far as studesville goes see my position on what I think the function/purpose of the next HC will be.

Also, at least Studesville got a win with a team that had no business winning and damn near stole the season finale from the chargers (thankfully he didn't because the #2 pick will be nice). The team responded to him. IMHO Studesville will be a HC in this league at some point and my guess is he will be very good.

As for Dennison, what's there to like. It seems to be all smoke and mirrors with that guy. One moment it's "look at what he did for Houston's offense" and the next some of the Dennison supporters are tripping all over themselves! "He was just a clipboard holder in Houston, etc..."

What one concrete thing is there on Dennison's resume that you can point to that justifies making him a HC? It was Shanahan's sytem here. It was Kubiak's in Houston. Our line was terrible with him here under McDaniels. I just don't see it. He seems to be a guy who has benefitted from the good ol boy system.

Finally, one thing that worries me with Dennison is his affinity for ZBS. If it means we will go back to that full time (all teams utilize it to some degree) and possibly back to undersized, fast O linemen, then count me out. The league has past that by a long time ago. Defenses are simply too big and fast anymore for that to work. The Gilbert Brown's are gone replaced by guys like J Peppers.

topscribe
01-12-2011, 04:51 PM
In 2008, the worst PASS-BLOCKING line I've ever witnessed in a Super Bowl. He ran for his life all season long, ran for his life in the actual Super Bowl.

Okay, so you mean 2008. The Steelers won the Super Bowl with a relatively
bad pass-blocking O-line and the #1 defense in the league.

Glad we got that cleared up . . .

-----

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 04:52 PM
Thats BS. Please. Just because a coach learned under another doesn't make him the same person, NOR does it mean the same approach. Thats ridiculous!!!

So you expect Dennison to run the shotgun spread offense and man/power scheme?

Come on, man!

Rick will do what he's learned to do. Run the same offense that Shanny and Kubes run. I don't have a problem with that, but how many of the coaches in the playoffs right now are offensive-minded HCs?

Let's see, Mike McCarthy... and? Oh yeah, McCarthy has one of the BEST defenses and DCs in the league to lean on, too.

Lancane
01-12-2011, 04:53 PM
Finish this phrase:

offense wins games, defense wins _______ ?

Yes, and how many teams won championships with mediocre offenses and stellar defenses?

:coffee:

jhildebrand
01-12-2011, 04:53 PM
They were shipped out because of the lack of talent. Even Nolan was getting his defense worked after midseason last year. The truth is that Denver has had too many DC's and not done enough to build the defense through the draft. I can't remember the last time Denver had a young, fast safety that was good.

That's simply false! It is well known that McDaniels wanted say so with the Defensive game plan and no sooner than he began putting his stamp on the D the D began to fail.

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 04:53 PM
Okay, so you mean 2008. The Steelers won the Super Bowl with a relatively
bad pass-blocking O-line and the #1 defense in the league.

Glad we got that cleared up . . .

-----

Oh yeah, didn't the DEFENSE score a TD in that game, too?

Agent of Orange
01-12-2011, 04:54 PM
So you expect Dennison to run the shotgun spread offense and man/power scheme?

Come on, man!

Rick will do what he's learned to do. Run the same offense that Shanny and Kubes run. I don't have a problem with that, but how many of the coaches in the playoffs right now are offensive-minded HCs?

Let's see, Mike McCarthy... and? Oh yeah, McCarthy has one of the BEST defenses and DCs in the league to lean on, too.

I dont think thats what he's talking about. Its quite possible he could be talking about staffing and management. But since you mentioned it, it is a pretty awesome system.

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 04:54 PM
What I like about Studesville is the fact that he allowed the coordinators to coordinate and the players were drawn to him, played their asses off for him. Barry Switzer had that ability at OU, he let his assistants coach and the players loved him.

topscribe
01-12-2011, 04:54 PM
Probably.. since they got trounced in the Super Bowl by a good offense and a medium defense.


So I guess they didn't play a team with a good offense in any of the prior 18 games?

-----

What about the 2002 Tampa Bay Bucs? - Defense #1, offense #24.

-----

Ravage!!!
01-12-2011, 04:54 PM
Shanahan pretty much had that Rav, yet his teams always got their asses handed to them by the physical teams of the league.

Give me smashmouth football.


I'll go out on a limb here... If we hire Dennison and he brings us that, I'll tattoo his name on dogfish's ass.

:bandit:

When did he have that after Elway retired? :confused:

We never had that. We never had a GOOD QB behind center for long with Shanahan. Its not a coincidence that the playoff teams have QB by the names of Manning, Brady, Brees, Rodgers, Cutler, Vick,Flacco, Ryan....

I'm saying, if I had a choice.. I'd choose to be the team that is hard to keep from scoring, since thats how you win games... outscoring. I'm never going to deny wanting BOTH.. a stud offense and a stud defense....but that just doesn't happen.

Give me a stud offense over a stud defense. Who has the best defenses in the NFL right now.. Baltimore? Steelers? Chicago?.... who here would pick any of these teams against New England?

getlynched47
01-12-2011, 04:56 PM
His blueprint is probably as sure of a thing as the Raiders' "commitment to excellence" :lol:

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 04:57 PM
That's simply false! It is well known that McDaniels wanted say so with the Defensive game plan and no sooner than he began putting his stamp on the D the D began to fail.

Nothing I said is false, not one thing. Nolan did a great job with the defense for the first half of the year but the second half saw a decline in their performance, and it wasn't all on him. McDaniels jumped the gun and was a *****, but Nolan's Denver defense was by no means good. It was better, but no one feared it.

Bates and Coyer were just dealt bad hands, Coyer had talent until he lost Al Wilson and the defense never recovered.

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 04:57 PM
People seem to forget that it wasn't the defense that led them to those late game comebacks... and in the Super Bowl comeback. Seems they have forgotten taht the Indy Colts whipped a good defense in Chicago, and they didn't do it with defense.

What, you're going to use Peyton Manning, Marvin Harrison, Reggie Wayne, and Dallas Clark as your lone example? C'mon.

BTW, why don't you talk about how it was the Colts' DEFENSE that played lights out in the playoffs that year that even allowed them to get to the superbowl or that the game turned on a pick 6 by the Colts DEFENSE?

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 04:58 PM
What, you're going to use Peyton Manning, Marvin Harrison, Reggie Wayne, and Dallas Clark as your lone example? C'mon.

BTW, why don't you talk about how it was the Colts' DEFENSE that played lights out in the playoffs that year that even allowed them to get to the superbowl or that the game turned on a pick 6 by the Colts DEFENSE?

Your very won Denver Broncos won Super Bowls allowing 5 yards per carry. :salute:

Ravage!!!
01-12-2011, 04:58 PM
What about the 2002 Tampa Bay Bucs? - Defense #1, offense #24.

-----

Great... that and the Ravens. I'll take the odds on the other side with better offenses and weaker defenses if I have 2 examples out of the last 20 that are like the TB and Ravens win.

I'm not saying that defenses CAN"T win Super Bowls. I'm saying that if I have a choice, give me the stud offense to take against a stud defense. Give me a stud offense to take against any team, and I'll outscore them.

Like I said. Are you going to pick the Jets to beat the Patriots this coming weekend?

jhildebrand
01-12-2011, 04:59 PM
Adages aren't facts just because you repeat them.

Where have I repeated this? :confused: In fact, that is the first time I have ever posted that on any forum :lol:

By the way, several players and coaches, past and present subscribe to this thought. Apparently there must be some truth to it.


Yes, and how many teams won championships with mediocre offenses and stellar defenses?

:coffee:

You guys are looking at this too cut and dry. It's not one or the other or one over the other.

Offense will win you a lot of games-see the shanahan era. At the end of the day you need a defense. Look at our first SB win. It was the D that sealed the victory. Favre completes that pass and it is a whole different ball game and possibly outcome.

A good offense is what gets you to the playoffs. But in the playoffs when thee games are tight and every call is conservative and more about field position, you better have a damn good defense! Don't give me the Colts crap either because Manning is a once in a generation player and their SB win was preceeded by playoff exits due to poor defense.

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 04:59 PM
When did he have that after Elway retired? :confused:

We never had that. We never had a GOOD QB behind center for long with Shanahan. Its not a coincidence that the playoff teams have QB by the names of Manning, Brady, Brees, Rodgers, Cutler, Vick,Flacco, Ryan....

I'm saying, if I had a choice.. I'd choose to be the team that is hard to keep from scoring, since thats how you win games... outscoring. I'm never going to deny wanting BOTH.. a stud offense and a stud defense....but that just doesn't happen.

Give me a stud offense over a stud defense. Who has the best defenses in the NFL right now.. Baltimore? Steelers? Chicago?.... who here would pick any of these teams against New England?

Flacco? Really? The guy who averages about 150 yds a game? How about those stars like Sanchez and Rex Grossman? They got there on pure talent, huh?

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 05:00 PM
Maybe if they say it enough they'll actually start to believe that Fox is more than a 1-dimensional coach with a mediocre career record... Just maybe.

topscribe
01-12-2011, 05:00 PM
Oh yeah, didn't the DEFENSE score a TD in that game, too?

Yes, IIRC. And, of course, it would be hard to fathom how the Steelers would have
even gotten that far without that defense.

Of course, there was the Super Bowl following the 2005 season, in which Roethisberger's
QBR was 22.5. Remember that? But they won! How'd that happen?

-----

Ravage!!!
01-12-2011, 05:02 PM
What, you're going to use Peyton Manning, Marvin Harrison, Reggie Wayne, and Dallas Clark as your lone example? C'mon.

BTW, why don't you talk about how it was the Colts' DEFENSE that played lights out in the playoffs that year that even allowed them to get to the superbowl or that the game turned on a pick 6 by the Colts DEFENSE?

:lol:

Horse.. what are you talking about? Are you saying we have a better ahnce of building a 2000 Ravens defense? I'm saying that we saw a stud offense go agaisnt a stud defense in that Super Bowl.. and who won??

Your example of the Colt's defense scoring in that Super Bowl, just makes MY point for me. That Colt defense wasn't considered to be tops, but yet it could make plays against a mediocre offense. The STUD defense, couldn't stop the stud offense.

This weekend we have the Jets playing the Patriots. One has a stud defense, you picking them to win?

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 05:02 PM
Flacco? Really? The guy who averages about 150 yds a game? How about those stars like Sanchez and Rex Grossman? They got there on pure talent, huh?

Actually, Flacco averaged 226 yards per game and had a better statistical season than Orton did... But, I know, details get in the way of the facts, right? :salute:

Ravage!!!
01-12-2011, 05:03 PM
Flacco? Really? The guy who averages about 150 yds a game? How about those stars like Sanchez and Rex Grossman? They got there on pure talent, huh?

Yeah. I'll give you Flacco... I'm not a big fan of his, either. But he did look good this LAST weekend in the playoffs. But I'll give you that one. But I think you are just trying to nitpick at something that doesn't really make a difference on the point.

Lancane
01-12-2011, 05:03 PM
Look, I'm not opposed to fixing the defense, nor am I opposed to hiring a defensive minded head coach, I wanted Rivera and he's now in Carolina. But Fox is conservative and there is a reason that he's only seen the post-season three times in the many years in Carolina, his offenses were horrid, it didn't make a shit of difference how good his defense was. All anyone cares about is that he's proven something, well so did Shanahan before going to Washington and a slew of others that have literally been worse after they have done as much.

It's a balancing act, the best defense is a good offense, remember that. There is a reason that the majority of teams to win a championship have had franchise quarterbacks, because they needed offense to get their asses to that point. Of the last fifteen Super Bowls, how many MVP's have been on defense? Try only three! How many in the last twenty have been offensive players? Try sixteen, one was a special teams standout. That should prove that offense is just as important, I'm sure New England's defensive players and former All-Pros will tell you that they won championships because of defense and in no way shape or form was because they had a great offense, right?

jhildebrand
01-12-2011, 05:04 PM
When did he have that after Elway retired? :confused:

We never had that. We never had a GOOD QB behind center for long with Shanahan. Its not a coincidence that the playoff teams have QB by the names of Manning, Brady, Brees, Rodgers, Cutler, Vick,Flacco, Ryan....

I'm saying, if I had a choice.. I'd choose to be the team that is hard to keep from scoring, since thats how you win games... outscoring. I'm never going to deny wanting BOTH.. a stud offense and a stud defense....but that just doesn't happen.

Give me a stud offense over a stud defense. Who has the best defenses in the NFL right now.. Baltimore? Steelers? Chicago?.... who here would pick any of these teams against New England?

Of the teams that were in the top 5 in total offense this year, 3 didn't make the playoffs (SD, NYG, Houston) the other two were eliminated in WC weekend (Philly, Indy).

I Eat Staples
01-12-2011, 05:05 PM
I'll post here what I posted in another thread. I think Fox was a good coach and I think he'll be a good coach again, but it won't be this year. He's been coaching for a long time, and after losing his success and his job in Carolina, he needs a few years off before he's ready to build a championship team.

At this point, I'm surprised he doesn't want to take at least a year off. He'll be a good coach again someday, but I hope we aren't the team to make him realize he needs some time away from the game.

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 05:06 PM
Of the teams that were in the top 5 in total offense this year, 3 didn't make the playoffs (SD, NYG, Houston) the other two were eliminated in WC weekend (Philly, Indy).

San Diego also had the #1 ranked defense - GO FIGURE

Houston has NO defense

The Giants won 10 games but the Philly OFFENSE kept them out of the playoffs in the 2nd half of their game.

Ravage!!!
01-12-2011, 05:07 PM
Where have I repeated this? :confused: In fact, that is the first time I have ever posted that on any forum :lol:

By the way, several players and coaches, past and present subscribe to this thought. Apparently there must be some truth to it.
Jhil.. when you say an adage, even if its a first time, its repeating it because its a known adage.




You guys are looking at this too cut and dry. It's not one or the other or one over the other.

Offense will win you a lot of games-see the shanahan era. At the end of the day you need a defense. Look at our first SB win. It was the D that sealed the victory. Favre completes that pass and it is a whole different ball game and possibly outcome.

A good offense is what gets you to the playoffs. But in the playoffs when thee games are tight and every call is conservative and more about field position, you better have a damn good defense! Don't give me the Colts crap either because Manning is a once in a generation player and their SB win was preceeded by playoff exits due to poor defense.

Ok.. then I'm going to look at the Super Bowls oer the last 20 years. I'm going to look at last years Super Bowl. Defenses CAN win Super Bowls, but generally speaking, its the offensive power that leads teams to the Championship.

Your example of us winning our first Super Bowl... the Packers wouldn't have been in a position of MUST pass if our offense didn't take over that game. Our offense won that first Super Bowl.... hand down. Of course it takes an effort on both sides of the ball, but realistically, it was Elway and Davis that dominated that Super Bowl.

I Eat Staples
01-12-2011, 05:08 PM
Unfortunately, offense wins super bowls these days. I hate it, but it's true. You can win a super bowl just by having a good QB and nothing else. See: Colts and Saints.

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 05:11 PM
:lol:

Horse.. what are you talking about? Are you saying we have a better ahnce of building a 2000 Ravens defense? I'm saying that we saw a stud offense go agaisnt a stud defense in that Super Bowl.. and who won??

Your example of the Colt's defense scoring in that Super Bowl, just makes MY point for me. That Colt defense wasn't considered to be tops, but yet it could make plays against a mediocre offense. The STUD defense, couldn't stop the stud offense. The Colts defense was bad that season, but if you look at the stats, they turned it on in the playoffs and even Manning himself credited them for their playoff wins.
This weekend we have the Jets playing the Patriots. One has a stud defense, you picking them to win?


What I'm talking about is for 10 Goddamned years, we've neglected the defense in this town. So much so that we've finally hit ROCK BOTTOM. Griese, Plummer, Cutler, Orton, and now Tebow were/are called on, and called out, to win with a defense that ranks in the bottom 1/4 EVERY YEAR because we REFUSE to fix it properly.

Say what you want about Fox, but he's been to a Superbowl and won his division more recently than we have and he did it with DEFENSE and a RUNNING GAME and a scrub QB named Delhomo.

BTW, Both the Jets and Patriots have STUD defenses and STUD DEFENSIVE HCs!!!!! EVERY playoff team right now has a defensive minded HC except for Green Bay, and they have Dom Capers running their defense! That should tell you something.

Ravage!!!
01-12-2011, 05:11 PM
The rules are built around the offense succeeding.

Give me a stud offense, and a medium defense, and I'll BEAT the stud defense with a mediocre offense.

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 05:11 PM
Unfortunately, offense wins super bowls these days. I hate it, but it's true. You can win a super bowl just by having a good QB and nothing else. See: Colts and Saints.

NFL rules have been amended to give offenses the advantage these days. The Lester Hayes bump-n-hold days are a thing of the past. WR's get a lot of breaks and it shows on Sundays.

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 05:12 PM
The rules are built around the offense succeeding.

Give me a stud offense, and a medium defense, and I'll BEAT the stud defense with a mediocre offense.

Tell that to the Saints, they just got eliminated by a team with a mediocre offense and defense but a vicious pass-rush...

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 05:14 PM
Tell that to the Saints, they just got eliminated by a team with a mediocre offense and defense but a vicious pass-rush...

So 1 upset in a game which saw a total of 77 points scored means the NFL is not catering to offenses? Come on, this is getting comical...

jhildebrand
01-12-2011, 05:14 PM
Nothing I said is false, not one thing. Nolan did a great job with the defense for the first half of the year but the second half saw a decline in their performance, and it wasn't all on him. McDaniels jumped the gun and was a *****, but Nolan's Denver defense was by no means good. It was better, but no one feared it.

Bates and Coyer were just dealt bad hands, Coyer had talent until he lost Al Wilson and the defense never recovered.

We had the #1 D going into the Pittsburgh game! Despite the so called 'breakdown' the D still finished 7th in overall D. Yet somehow that D wasn't good? PLEASE! The fact they were on the field for 22 of 30 minutes in the second half of games because the Offense could only go 3 and out was their problem. Also, if you know McDaniels insisted on Nolan running the D McDaniels wanted, why then do you place the D's 'downfall' on Nolan and not McDaniels especially considering what Nolan did with Miami's D this year?

Coyer had a D line with three high #1 draft picks on it and had to rely on smoke and mirrors which any Broncos player will tell you-Lynch has mentioned it, Alfred Williams has mentioned it as have others.

Your bias speaks through in your comment-Coyer gets a pass because Wilson got hurt despite there being talent all over that roster while Nolan took over a unit that was a 3 year project IF EVERYTHING went right yet his 7th overall D wasn't good. :tsk:

I can only imagine what Nolan would have done with Coyer's roster.

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 05:15 PM
Unfortunately, offense wins super bowls these days. I hate it, but it's true. You can win a super bowl just by having a good QB and nothing else. See: Colts and Saints.

Really? So Tracy Porter's pick six and the onsides kick had nothing to do with the outcome of the game last year? Color me confused... I thought NO's defense leading the NFL in turnovers and their running game being ranked 7th last year had more to do with their success and SB win the one dimensional Colts who could ONLY throw the ball and couldn't stop the run? :confused:

Obviously it was just Manning vs Brees throwing BOMBS out there all game...

topscribe
01-12-2011, 05:15 PM
Unfortunately, offense wins super bowls these days. I hate it, but it's true. You can win a super bowl just by having a good QB and nothing else. See: Colts and Saints.

Whoa, pardner . . . you mean the receivers and O-lines didn't have anything
to do with it? - that the fact that NO was #6 in offensive rushing and that
Harrison, Wayne, Clark, and Stokley, and that the Colts were #6 in rushing,
didn't make any difference?

I don't care if the QB's name is Manning, Brees, Elway, or Unitas, the QB
cannot win anything with "nothing else."

-----

CoachChaz
01-12-2011, 05:17 PM
Fox, Dennison, Fewell, Koetter...


...does it really matter? SHow me where any of them stand head and shoulders above the other and I'll support the decision. Until then, expect the coporate "YES" man to get the job and for the defense to continue to be ignored.

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 05:17 PM
We had the #1 D going into the Pittsburgh game! Despite the so called 'breakdown' the D still finished 7th in overall D. Yet somehow that D wasn't good? PLEASE! The fact they were on the field for 22 of 30 minutes in the second half of games because the Offense could only go 3 and out was their problem. Also, if you know McDaniels insisted on Nolan running the D McDaniels wanted, why then do you place the D's 'downfall' on Nolan and not McDaniels especially considering what Nolan did with Miami's D this year?

Coyer had a D line with three high #1 draft picks on it and had to rely on smoke and mirrors which any Broncos player will tell you-Lynch has mentioned it, Alfred Williams has mentioned it as have others.

Your bias speaks through in your comment-Coyer gets a pass because Wilson got hurt despite there being talent all over that roster while Nolan took over a unit that was a 3 year project IF EVERYTHING went right yet his 7th overall D wasn't good. :tsk:

I can only imagine what Nolan would have done with Coyer's roster.

I'm not giving anyone a pass, especially Coyer. But the truth is, and you can literally follow the statline to see this, the Denver defense fell apart when Al Wilson went down, and it has NEVER recovered. Coyer had more talent to work with than Wink does now, by a lot, but successive horrible defensive drafts have left this team so weak on defense that it can't be overcome by schemes.

Ravage!!!
01-12-2011, 05:17 PM
What I'm talking about is for 10 Goddamned years, we've neglected the defense in this town. So much so that we've finally hit ROCK BOTTOM. Griese, Plummer, Cutler, Orton, and now Tebow were/are called on, and called out, to win with a defense that ranks in the bottom 1/4 EVERY YEAR because we REFUSE to fix it properly.

Say what you want about Fox, but he's been to a Superbowl and won his division more recently than we have and he did it with DEFENSE and a RUNNING GAME and a scrub QB named Delhomo.

BTW, Both the Jets and Patriots have STUD defenses and STUD DEFENSIVE HCs!!!!! EVERY playoff team right now has a defensive minded HC except for Green Bay, and they have Dom Capers running their defense! That should tell you something.

So you are getting excited because you think Fox is the answer.

What were the playoffs last year, where they the same with defenses? Were the Super Bowl teams offense or defense?

The Patriots defense, this year, is NOT stud.. AT ALLL. I don't know where you got that, but its wrong.

Nearly every team in the playoffs right now, has a top QB..... THAT should tell you something. 10 of the 12 teams in the playoffs this year, were coached by someone that had NO prior HC experience before takign over their respective teams... THAT should tell you something as well. Re-tred coaches aren't necessarily the way to success. Fox's experience doesn't mean, nor prove, anything to me.

Ravage!!!
01-12-2011, 05:19 PM
Tell that to the Saints, they just got eliminated by a team with a mediocre offense and defense but a vicious pass-rush...

Yeah.. not your best example, Horse.

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 05:19 PM
So you are getting excited because you think Fox is the answer.

What were the playoffs last year, where they the same with defenses? Were the Super Bowl teams offense or defense?

The Patriots defense, this year, is NOT stud.. AT ALLL. I don't know where you got that, but its wrong.

Nearly every team in the playoffs right now, has a top QB..... THAT should tell you something. 10 of the 12 teams in the playoffs this year, were coached by someone that had NO prior HC experience before takign over their respective teams... THAT should tell you something as well. Re-tred coaches aren't necessarily the way to success. Fox's experience doesn't mean, nor prove, anything to me.

Fox's experience as a Head Coach tells me that he was given an opportunity, and he proved to be mediocre in that opportunity. It clearly illustrates that.

I would prefer to give the opportunity to someone qualified who has yet to prove their worth as a Head Coach than settle for mediocrity.

Ravage!!!
01-12-2011, 05:21 PM
We had the #1 D going into the Pittsburgh game! Despite the so called 'breakdown' the D still finished 7th in overall D. Yet somehow that D wasn't good? PLEASE! The fact they were on the field for 22 of 30 minutes in the second half of games because the Offense could only go 3 and out was their problem.

EXACTLY how an offense helps out a defense be better and why a stud offense is what I want!!

(oops, wrong discussion?)

jhildebrand
01-12-2011, 05:22 PM
I'm not giving anyone a pass, especially Coyer. But the truth is, and you can literally follow the statline to see this, the Denver defense fell apart when Al Wilson went down, and it has NEVER recovered. Coyer had more talent to work with than Wink does now, by a lot, but successive horrible defensive drafts have left this team so weak on defense that it can't be overcome by schemes.

Which is precisely why Dennison worries me. If this team has suffered because of the loss of Al Wilson as you surmise, than it stands to reason this team wouldn't be in this position if they drafted better on D or on D at all-see Demaryius Thomas, Knowshon Moreno, Tim Tebow.

If Dennison comes in and wants a ZBS with small fast O lineman then we are going to need to redraft there as well.

Your post is precisely why some support John Fox! He has built a D and turned Carolina around because of that D-which is precisely what this team needs.

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 05:22 PM
So you are getting excited because you think Fox is the answer.

What were the playoffs last year, where they the same with defenses? Were the Super Bowl teams offense or defense?

The Patriots defense, this year, is NOT stud.. AT ALLL. I don't know where you got that, but its wrong.

Nearly every team in the playoffs right now, has a top QB..... THAT should tell you something. 10 of the 12 teams in the playoffs this year, were coached by someone that had NO prior HC experience before takign over their respective teams... THAT should tell you something as well. Re-tred coaches aren't necessarily the way to success. Fox's experience doesn't mean, nor prove, anything to me.

Part of defense is turnovers, yes? What defense leads the league in turnovers? Would it surprise you to know the Pats have the highest turnover differential at +38?

Ravage!!!
01-12-2011, 05:23 PM
We used the ZBS in '08 with Clady, Kuper, and the other Ryan.

(be back in a bit)

jhildebrand
01-12-2011, 05:24 PM
EXACTLY how an offense helps out a defense be better and why a stud offense is what I want!!

(oops, wrong discussion?)

An O can be your best D-our super bowl years. They kept the opposing offense off the field.

A good D can be your best O as well-Baltimore and Chicago D's who had good takeaway numbers leading to more scoring chances.

(oops, another adage :D)

Ravage!!!
01-12-2011, 05:24 PM
Part of defense is turnovers, yes? What defense leads the league in turnovers? Would it surprise you to know the Pats have the highest turnover differential at +38?

Would it surprise you to let you know that its because the NE offense puts the other team in a position where they MUST pass?

That doesn't make them a stud defense. They aren't.

dogfish
01-12-2011, 05:25 PM
Tell that to the Saints, they just got eliminated by a team with a mediocre offense and defense but a vicious pass-rush...


So 1 upset in a game which saw a total of 77 points scored means the NFL is not catering to offenses? Come on, this is getting comical...

i don't really have a horse in this race, and i agree that the NFL does cater to offenses, but the saints loss is hardly the only recent example of a high-powered offense losing to a high-powered defense. . . the ravens stomped the patriots horribly just last year in the playoffs, not to mention the giants pass rush shutting down the highest-scoring offense of all time for all the marbles just a few years back. . . the jets just beat the colts this weekend, etc etc. . .

it goes both ways-- there isn't just one successful model for NFL franchises. . . the colts, patriots and steelers have some serious differences in their approach (as well as obvious similarities) and all are among the league's elite organizations. . .

jhildebrand
01-12-2011, 05:26 PM
We used the ZBS in '08 with Clady, Kuper, and the other Ryan.

(be back in a bit)

Yes and Shanahan publicly throttled that line for their inability to run block. In fact, it wasn't until the Carolina game that Shanahan heaped any praise on Clady for his run blocking. He said it was the first time he felt Clady was going to be an effective run blocker.

That line was a great pass blocking line and not so good run blocking.

ZBS with big ol physical o linemen and I am ok with it so long as we run well and often so Tebow doesn't have to shoulder the O like Cutler did.

ZBS with the little guys and count me out.

BroncoStud
01-12-2011, 05:27 PM
Which is precisely why Dennison worries me. If this team has suffered because of the loss of Al Wilson as you surmise, than it stands to reason this team wouldn't be in this position if they drafted better on D or on D at all-see Demaryius Thomas, Knowshon Moreno, Tim Tebow.

If Dennison comes in and wants a ZBS with small fast O lineman then we are going to need to redraft there as well.

Your post is precisely why some support John Fox! He has built a D and turned Carolina around because of that D-which is precisely what this team needs.

Fox was successful because he had PLAYERS, good ones. His defense this season was not a good one because he lacked PLAYERS.

It all comes down to PLAYERS. The 2000 Ravens had a boatload of talent. It wasn't the schemes that won a Championship, it was the PLAYERS.

What has Mavin Lewis done without those Raven players in Cinci? Not a damn thing...

What did Mangini do with the JETS or Browns without the Patriots talent? Got fired twice...

FFS, Greg Robinson won 2 Super Bow'sl because he had a great offense and good talent on defense!!! Look what he did a few years later with the Chiefs? He was a laughing stock because Carl Peterson didn't provide him TALENT ON DEFENSE.

This is NOT difficult to grasp guys, it's really not. History tells us, along with many coaches, that PLAYERS win Championships, not schemes.

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 05:34 PM
Fox's experience as a Head Coach tells me that he was given an opportunity, and he proved to be mediocre in that opportunity. It clearly illustrates that.

I would prefer to give the opportunity to someone qualified who has yet to prove their worth as a Head Coach than settle for mediocrity.

Fox's experience as a HC tells me that he got his team to a Superbowl (how many HC have done that?). It tells me he won his division few times and got his team to the playoffs a couple times, too. He did it with Defense and a running game which I value as tried and true methods for winning.

Give me someone who's proven over a wing and a prayer guy, every time. At least Fox won't make us any worse. Any of those other coordinator type guys? It's a crapshoot. It's not like I'm raving to hire Marvin Lewis, here. Fox has PROVEN he can get a team to a Superbowl, make the playoffs, and compete regularly. What has Rick Dennison proven?

That's my counter argument...

JDL
01-12-2011, 05:34 PM
Fox's experience as a Head Coach tells me that he was given an opportunity, and he proved to be mediocre in that opportunity. It clearly illustrates that.

I would prefer to give the opportunity to someone qualified who has yet to prove their worth as a Head Coach than settle for mediocrity.

Let me know when we interview that guy because we haven't yet.

I Eat Staples
01-12-2011, 05:35 PM
Really? So Tracy Porter's pick six and the onsides kick had nothing to do with the outcome of the game last year? Color me confused... I thought NO's defense leading the NFL in turnovers and their running game being ranked 7th last year had more to do with their success and SB win the one dimensional Colts who could ONLY throw the ball and couldn't stop the run? :confused:

Obviously it was just Manning vs Brees throwing BOMBS out there all game...

That's not the point. Take Brees off the Saints and take Manning off the Colts, and neither of those teams even make the playoffs. They didn't have more talent overall than other teams in their conferences. Just great QBs.


Whoa, pardner . . . you mean the receivers and O-lines didn't have anything
to do with it? - that the fact that NO was #6 in offensive rushing and that
Harrison, Wayne, Clark, and Stokley, and that the Colts were #6 in rushing,
didn't make any difference?

I don't care if the QB's name is Manning, Brees, Elway, or Unitas, the QB
cannot win anything with "nothing else."

-----

O-Line definitely matters, you're right about that. But WR is the least important position, Peyton Manning can make any receiver look good and a good receiver is nothing without a good QB.

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 05:39 PM
O-Line definitely matters, you're right about that. But WR is the least important position, Peyton Manning can make any receiver look good and a good receiver is nothing without a good QB.

You mean like he did this past weekend when the Jets took away Wayne and there was nobody else left?

Perhaps when the Colts defense was challenged to stop the Jets on their final drive and win the game they should've done a better job? So you're saying the lack of Colts defense let Peyton down? I completely agree... :beer:

topscribe
01-12-2011, 05:41 PM
O-Line definitely matters, you're right about that. But WR is the least important position, Peyton Manning can make any receiver look good and a good receiver is nothing without a good QB.

Now that you mentioned it, it is interesting that the two years that Lloyd has
performed best was in 2008 (before he was injured) and 2010, both years
with Orton at QB, isn't it?

-----

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 05:43 PM
The Fox interview is up now.

http://www.denverbroncos.com/

JDL
01-12-2011, 05:44 PM
Fox was successful because he had PLAYERS, good ones. His defense this season was not a good one because he lacked PLAYERS.

It all comes down to PLAYERS. The 2000 Ravens had a boatload of talent. It wasn't the schemes that won a Championship, it was the PLAYERS.

What has Mavin Lewis done without those Raven players in Cinci? Not a damn thing...

What did Mangini do with the JETS or Browns without the Patriots talent? Got fired twice...

FFS, Greg Robinson won 2 Super Bow'sl because he had a great offense and good talent on defense!!! Look what he did a few years later with the Chiefs? He was a laughing stock because Carl Peterson didn't provide him TALENT ON DEFENSE.

This is NOT difficult to grasp guys, it's really not. History tells us, along with many coaches, that PLAYERS win Championships, not schemes.

Actually, Ray Lewis sucked at first when they transitioned to a 3-4... they had to alter the scheme to adjust for his weaknesses shedding blocks. that was well-reported back when they made that change.

Nolan came in and in one year... made the defense very respectable... it was NOT because he had all the players and talent in the world ... it was scheme and getting the most out of your players... DJ Williams in part never lived up to his draft position because with every new scheme came a new position to learn along with terminology and everything else... if one of the all-time great LBs struggles with that.. how are even good let alone average players going to do very well when constantly shifting schemes?

A defensive-minded head coach brings stability that a DC will not, can estabilish a system (like the Ravens have) that can be carried forward from one DC to the next... Steelers have had different DCs but run the same system.. thing is you HAVE to have a guy who can develop that system and teach the coaches who will run after they leave. Fox can establish a defensive system where scouts know what they are looking for year in and year out, players know what their position is and merely have to worry about improving, rather than learning how to play an entirely new system and/or position.

The offense isn't going to change much, essentially McCoy is retained Jeff Davidson (a former Bronco and very good OL/OC guy) will be brought over from the Panthers staff and we will go to work... if progress isn't sufficient McCoy can be let go and we can bring Kubiak back home after he is fired from Houston next year (because there is a 50/50 chance he will be) or we can bring someone like Jeremy Bates back, if we didn't already burn that bridge... this organization has offensive connections to bring in to help Tebow... hell Tebow has a few of his own... but this organization and coaching staff have ZERO pipelines to good defensive coaching talent... THAT is what this team is missing and needs to replace.


I am resigned to the fact Dennison is the next HC... but the prosepcts aren't good for it because no defensive coach worth his salt wants to take on such a mess with a front office they don't know they can trust... why do think Cleveland is suddenly such an attractive destination? Holmgren has respect and connections around the league... people know what they get... know highly rated defensive coach is going to want to possibly derail their career entering a situation where you don't know what type of support you'll have...everyone is part of the Broncos club, etc... what you'll get is someone like Frank Bush who Dennison has worked with before and things will get ugly because ever since Robinson left we have been trying to find good defensive coaching help... and we've cycled through a ton and Dennison until he shows differently (and I HOPE he does) is going to be more of the same.

Lancane
01-12-2011, 05:50 PM
Actually, Ray Lewis sucked at first when they transitioned to a 3-4... they had to alter the scheme to adjust for his weaknesses shedding blocks. that was well-reported back when they made that change.

Nolan came in and in one year... made the defense very respectable... it was NOT because he had all the players and talent in the world ... it was scheme and getting the most out of your players... DJ Williams in part never lived up to his draft position because with every new scheme came a new position to learn along with terminology and everything else... if one of the all-time great LBs struggles with that.. how are even good let alone average players going to do very well when constantly shifting schemes?

A defensive-minded head coach brings stability that a DC will not, can estabilish a system (like the Ravens have) that can be carried forward from one DC to the next... Steelers have had different DCs but run the same system.. thing is you HAVE to have a guy who can develop that system and teach the coaches who will run after they leave. Fox can establish a defensive system where scouts know what they are looking for year in and year out, players know what their position is and merely have to worry about improving, rather than learning how to play an entirely new system and/or position.

The offense isn't going to change much, essentially McCoy is retained Jeff Davidson (a former Bronco and very good OL/OC guy) will be brought over from the Panthers staff and we will go to work... if progress isn't sufficient McCoy can be let go and we can bring Kubiak back home after he is fired from Houston next year (because there is a 50/50 chance he will be) or we can bring someone like Jeremy Bates back, if we didn't already burn that bridge... this organization has offensive connections to bring in to help Tebow... hell Tebow has a few of his own... but this organization and coaching staff have ZERO pipelines to good defensive coaching talent... THAT is what this team is missing and needs to replace.

I've already formed my own opinion, and it is thus...I would rather I suffer swallowing sulphuric acid or asphyxiate on my own vomit the to see us hire John Fox...the end.

topscribe
01-12-2011, 05:52 PM
I've already formed my own opinion, and it is thus...I would rather I suffer swallowing sulphuric acid or asphyxiate on my own vomit the to see us hire John Fox...the end.

So . . . are you saying you don't want Fox, Cane?

-----

Lancane
01-12-2011, 05:58 PM
So . . . are you saying you don't want Fox, Cane?

-----

Yes, good ole' buddy I am, and in the most articulate manner I can think of.

;)

Cugel
01-12-2011, 06:09 PM
Someone very conspicuous is in the room for Fox's interview. Someone who was very conspicuous in his absence at all the previous interviews.

Can you tell me who it is (he's at the head of the table)?

http://twitpic.com/3pg7co

Damn! Damn! Damn! Bowlen is going to screw this up again! I can just feel it.

Conversation at Dove Valley after the interview:

Pat Bowlen: "Wow I really LOVE this McDaniels kid!"

Elway: "Uh, Pat, we just interviewed John Fox, McDaniels was the guy we just fired a month ago!"

Pat: "Oh, yeah! Sorry about that, sometimes my Alzheimers gets the better of me. Now who were we interviewing again?"

Elway: "John Fox, the former Carolina Panthers head coach."

Pat: "Oh, right! I like him. He's great! Let's hire him!" :coffee:

Lancane
01-12-2011, 06:12 PM
Damn! Damn! Damn! Bowlen is going to screw this up again! I can just feel it.

Conversation at Dove Valley after the interview:

Pat Bowlen: "Wow I really LOVE this McDaniels kid!"

Elway: "Uh, Pat, we just interviewed John Fox, McDaniels was the guy we just fired a month ago!"

Pat: "Oh, yeah! Sorry about that, sometimes my Alzheimers gets the better of me. Now who were we interviewing again?"

Elway: "John Fox, the former Carolina Panthers head coach."

Pat: "Oh, right! I like him. He's great! Let's hire him!" :coffee:

Remember Deep Blue Sea, the movie about the scientists genetically screwing around with sharks to find a cure for Alzheimer's? Don't you just wish we had a shark of our own, to either cure his ass or to take a bite out of it!

:lol:

Dzone
01-12-2011, 06:21 PM
Well, they are certainly interviewing guys with ZERO CHARISMA...not that it matters, but none of these guys are going to win any public speaking contests...Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

T.K.O.
01-12-2011, 06:23 PM
i'm gonna go out on a limb here and PROMISE.....no matter who the new coach is,the broncos will improve on their 4-12 mark.....YEAR ONE !:beer::elefant::salute:

BroncoJoe
01-12-2011, 06:23 PM
The animosity toward Bowlen shocks me. Just don't get it fellas.

weazel
01-12-2011, 06:23 PM
i am starting to tie my noose as we speak.

lol

Cugel
01-12-2011, 06:26 PM
Nolan came in and in one year... made the defense very respectable... it was NOT because he had all the players and talent in the world ... it was scheme and getting the most out of your players... DJ Williams in part never lived up to his draft position because with every new scheme came a new position to learn along with terminology and everything else... if one of the all-time great LBs struggles with that.. how are even good let alone average players going to do very well when constantly shifting schemes?

Teams can only have continuity if they're successful. As you can see in Carolina right now, there's NO continuity! Instead, Ron Rivera is going to install HIS defensive scheme -- the one they ran in San Diego. He is NOT going to continue John Fox's scheme. So there goes your entire argument down in flames! Carolina is NOT going to continue John Fox's defensive system. Instead they've concluded that it failed, and they are bringing in Ron Rivera to completely CHANGE that system -- probably to a 3-4.

They need to blow up that team and start from scratch anyway -- what else can you do when you're 2-14?


Also, if Fox comes in he will probably switch the defense back to the 4-3, which is "constantly shifting schemes" once again (for the 2nd time in the last 3 years). I don't see how this helps. :coffee:

This is one of those theories that SOUNDS great -- until you look at what happens in the real world and realize that unless John Fox is wildly successful and then retires, like Bill Cowher, leaving a great DC to take his place -- none of this "continuity" is going to happen. Period. :coffee:

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 06:29 PM
Teams can only have continuity if they're successful. As you can see in Carolina right now, there's NO continuity! Instead, Ron Rivera is going to install HIS defensive scheme -- the one they ran in San Diego. He is NOT going to continue John Fox's scheme. So there goes your entire argument down in flames! Carolina is NOT going to continue John Fox's defensive system. They're bringing in Ron Rivera to completely CHANGE that system.

They need to blow up that team and start from scratch anyway -- what else can you do when you're 2-14?


Also, if Fox comes in he will probably switch the defense back to the 4-3, which is "constantly shifting schemes" once again (for the 2nd time in the last 3 years). I don't see how this helps. :coffee:

This is one of those theories that SOUNDS great -- until you look at what happens in the real world and realize that unless John Fox is wildly successful and then retires, like Bill Cowher, leaving a great DC to take his place -- none of this "continuity" is going to happen. Period. :coffee:

Perhaps you should look into Fox a little more. He has no problem staying with the 3-4...

http://maxdenver.com/blog1/2011/01/12/fox-experience-his-selling-point/

Lancane
01-12-2011, 06:31 PM
Perhaps you should look into Fox a little more. He has no problem staying with the 3-4...

http://maxdenver.com/blog1/2011/01/12/fox-experience-his-selling-point/

Good for him, does he want a Brownie Point?

:laugh:

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 06:32 PM
Good for him, does he want a Brownie Point?

:laugh:

Maybe he does. I'd be willing to bet he knows a little more about the 3-4 than Dennison does... Being a DEFENSIVE HC and all... :D

Lancane
01-12-2011, 06:37 PM
Maybe he does. I'd be willing to bet he knows a little more about the 3-4 than Dennison does... Being a DEFENSIVE HC and all... :D

Sorry, I'm being spiteful, but I really don't want Fox as the head coach.

Lancane
01-12-2011, 06:38 PM
Maybe he does. I'd be willing to bet he knows a little more about the 3-4 than Dennison does... Being a DEFENSIVE HC and all... :D

Dennison was a linebacker under Collier, Phillips and Nolan, so I doubt Fox knows shit about the 3-4 compared to Dennison.

dogfish
01-12-2011, 06:40 PM
Good for him, does he want a Brownie Point?

:laugh:

no, he wants a f'n nosetackle. . .

and preferrably a couple decent five-techniques and maybe an ILB. . .


:cool:

Cugel
01-12-2011, 06:50 PM
The animosity toward Bowlen shocks me. Just don't get it fellas.

Well, I'll try to put it in large BLOCK LETTERS for you:

#1 -- During a period when he's (unfortunately) medically suffering from symptoms of progressive and irreversible senility, Bowlen gave Shanahan total power over player personnel decisions for 10 years despite his repeated failures to draft a defense in the draft. Never did anything about it. Team falls to 8-8 despite having a Pro-Bowl QB, an Offense filled with Studs like Brandon Marshall, an O-Line that only gave up 11 sacks despite the lack of a running game, all because the DEFENSE sucked (#28).

#2 -- In January 2009 he fires Shanahan saying that he was "committed to excellence." And that the old system with Shanahan in charge of everything "wasn't working." He vows that the new HC "will NOT" be given that kind of authority.

#3 -- Amid much skepticism and incredulity from league sources, Bowlen lets Joe Ellis and Xanders go out and hire the wildly inexperienced McDaniels. Bowlen is wildly enthusiastic about him apparently.

#4 -- Within 4 months, McDaniels stages a "bloodless coup" (Sandy Clough) and seizes total control over all aspects of football operations. Neither Bowlen NOR his crony Joe Ellis does anything about it. Xanders now claims he opposed all McDaniels draft decisions but did nothing about them either.

#5 -- Titanic after hitting iceberg, sinks with entire franchise aboard.

#6 -- Unable to stand the carnage any longer, Joe Ellis fires McDaniels. Pat is nowhere to be seen at the press-conference.

#7 -- Outside of a routine, short appearance at Elway's announcement Bowlen is once again invisible. In his brief remarks at the conference he seems old and mentally confused.

#8 -- Despite announcing that the Broncos would be hiring a GM, the team never bothers to even interview any strong GM candidates. Instead, Bowlen continues to rely on his business crony Joe Ellis' who casually promotes Brian Xanders, who has never done the job before, amid many leaks from sources in Dove Valley all claiming (with WILD IMPROBABILITY) that Xanders had NOTHING whatever to do with McDaniels' mistakes! Bowlen also promotes Joe Ellis to head the organization -- in a classic example of "failing your way to the top."

#9 -- Elway announces a lack-luster group of HC candidates. At least THREE of them refuse to even interview with the team! Bowlen sits out all the interviews, except he suddenly shows up at Fox's interview, leading to speculation that, once again, Pat's senility is going to impact the team once again.

Is that enough for you? :coffee:

GEM
01-12-2011, 06:53 PM
Well, I'll try to put it in large BLOCK LETTERS for you:

#1 -- During a period when he's (unfortunately) medically suffering from symptoms of progressive and irreversible senility, Bowlen gave Shanahan total power over player personnel decisions for 10 years despite his repeated failures to draft a defense in the draft. Never did anything about it. Team falls to 8-8 despite having a Pro-Bowl QB, an Offense filled with Studs like Brandon Marshall, an O-Line that only gave up 11 sacks despite the lack of a running game, all because the DEFENSE sucked (#28).

#2 -- In January 2009 he fires Shanahan saying that he was "committed to excellence." And that the old system with Shanahan in charge of everything "wasn't working." He vows that the new HC "will NOT" be given that kind of authority.

#3 -- Amid much skepticism and incredulity from league sources, Bowlen lets Joe Ellis and Xanders go out and hire the wildly inexperienced McDaniels. Bowlen is wildly enthusiastic about him apparently.

#4 -- Within 4 months, McDaniels stages a "bloodless coup" (Sandy Clough) and seizes total control over all aspects of football operations. Neither Bowlen NOR his crony Joe Ellis does anything about it. Xanders now claims he opposed all McDaniels draft decisions but did nothing about them either.

#5 -- Titanic after hitting iceberg, sinks with entire franchise aboard.

#6 -- Unable to stand the carnage any longer, Joe Ellis fires McDaniels. Pat is nowhere to be seen at the press-conference.

#7 -- Outside of a routine, short appearance at Elway's announcement Bowlen is once again invisible. In his brief remarks at the conference he seems old and mentally confused.

#8 -- Despite announcing that the Broncos would be hiring a GM, the team never bothers to even interview any strong GM candidates. Instead, Bowlen continues to rely on his business crony Joe Ellis' who casually promotes Brian Xanders, who has never done the job before, amid many leaks from sources in Dove Valley all claiming (with WILD IMPROBABILITY) that Xanders had NOTHING whatever to do with McDaniels' mistakes! Bowlen also promotes Joe Ellis to head the organization -- in a classic example of "failing your way to the top."

#9 -- Elway announces a lack-luster group of HC candidates. At least THREE of them refuse to even interview with the team! Bowlen sits out all the interviews, except he suddenly shows up at Fox's interview, leading to speculation that, once again, Pat's senility is going to impact the team once again.

Is that enough for you? :coffee:


Ya know....you can make your point without being rude....it's really not that hard. You should try it sometime. :rolleyes:

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 07:04 PM
Dennison was a linebacker under Collier, Phillips and Nolan, so I doubt Fox knows shit about the 3-4 compared to Dennison.

Just cause he played in it 25 years ago doesn't mean he really knows shit about it or can either:

a) coach it himself

or

b) find someone who can through all of his "contacts"

BTW, I'm just being spiteful too.

I'm not nut swinging on Fox so much as I am nut swinging on a guy with HC experience who is defensive minded. Our last boy-wonder coordinator absolutely ruined this team so I'm terrified of going that way again. Dennison has been doing this a long time to be never offered a job higher than OC for offensive minded (and controlling) HCs for me not to wonder WTF is up with this guy?

Seriously, if Rico gets the job, who are his assistants going to be? Where is his "tree"? The only people he knows are ex-Shahanan or Kubiak guys. Who would want to work for him?

The reason I like Fox and the reason that Fewell would be my second choice right now is that they are defense minded and they aren't "polluted" by the Shanahan family tree credo of "offense first, STs sometimes, defense never".

That's the MOST important thing to me. I guess I'd rather see us become a team that resembles the Ravens or Steelers than the Colts or Texans. Everyone knows the only reason that the Colts are even a team with a winning record is because of Peyton. As he goes they go. The day Peyton hangs them up or gets injured is the day that Indy ceases to be relevant. Houston has a great offense and a terrible defense. Kubes was almost fired for failing to fix the same thing that his mentor was fired for. but no, Kubes just figured he could "out offense" everybody and ignore the defense.

Seriously, though Cane. Who could Dennison reasonable get to fix/coach the defense? Manusky? Ryan? Mangini? You really think they'd come work for Dennison?

That's my #1 concern. I would think it would be everyone's. Personally, I think the best way to fix the defense is to start with a defensive minded HC and let the offense get figured out second. I just can't take another year of having the 32nd ranked defense... It will completely break my will as a fan.

Dzone
01-12-2011, 07:05 PM
Elway with matching Maroon pants and maroon shoes with no socks...Who dressed him this morning?

Cugel
01-12-2011, 07:05 PM
Great... that and the Ravens. I'll take the odds on the other side with better offenses and weaker defenses if I have 2 examples out of the last 20 that are like the TB and Ravens win.

I'm not saying that defenses CAN"T win Super Bowls. I'm saying that if I have a choice, give me the stud offense to take against a stud defense. Give me a stud offense to take against any team, and I'll outscore them.

Like I said. Are you going to pick the Jets to beat the Patriots this coming weekend?

The 2000 Ravens had the greatest scoring defense in modern NFL history. The 2002 Bucs had the SECOND best scoring defense since the '85-'86 Bears.

If you have one of the top 3 defenses in NFL history you can win the SB with Trent Dilfer or Brad Johnson. Otherwise you need an ELITE QB:

Rest of the QBs to win SBs in recent years?

Aikman (3)
Steve Young
Brett Favre
Elway (2)
Kurt Warner
Tom Brady (3) (and counting)
Peyton Manning
Eli Manning
Ben Roethlisberger (2)
Drew Brees

Most of those guys either already ARE in the Hall of Fame or soon will be when they retire. The rules are slanted in favor of passing. Hence it takes an elite passing QB to win the SB and especially more than 1 SB.

So, unless we're planing on finding a bunch of players like (young) Warren Sapp, Simeon Rice, Dexter Jackson, John Lynch, et. al, or Tony Siragusa, Raw Lewis, etc. etc. we better hope Tebow becomes a Hall of Famer or at least top 5 QB! :coffee:

claymore
01-12-2011, 07:10 PM
People need to give Bowlen credit for swallowing his pride and putting a tournaqutte on the bleeding stump that McDaniels caused.

Bowlen gambled big and lost. I disagreed with it big time, but he had the balls to cut it off.

He has also shown he loves the Broncos, Denver, and the fans. I couldnt be more proud of him.

Lancane
01-12-2011, 07:13 PM
People need to give Bowlen credit for swallowing his pride and putting a tournaqutte on the bleeding stump that McDaniels caused.

Bowlen gambled big and lost. I disagreed with it big time, but he had the balls to cut it off.

He has also shown he loves the Broncos, Denver, and the fans. I couldnt be more proud of him.

Well hiring Fox would negate his remorseful firing of McDaniels in my eyes.

Cugel
01-12-2011, 07:15 PM
Ya know....you can make your point without being rude....it's really not that hard. You should try it sometime. :rolleyes:

My apologies. I'm just pissed off at Bowlen who seems to have a knack for disappearing for months, then stepping in at the exact wrong time and getting some incomprehensible fixation that leads to disaster. He's getting more and more senile and should either permanently retire before we officially become the Raiders or else sell the team to someone with the mental capacity to run the franchise.

claymore
01-12-2011, 07:18 PM
Well hiring Fox would negate his remorseful firing of McDaniels in my eyes.

I really dont think Fox is the guy. Im not to worried about it. I think Its Dennisons job to lose.

Lancane
01-12-2011, 07:19 PM
I really dont think Fox is the guy. Im not to worried about it. I think Its Dennisons job to lose.

I hope your right...hell I pray you are. ;)

claymore
01-12-2011, 07:29 PM
I hope your right...hell I pray you are. ;)

It couldnt be any worse than McDisaster if im wrong. :eek:

dogfish
01-12-2011, 07:36 PM
I hope your right...hell I pray you are. ;)

i wouldn't sweat it if i were you-- really think we'll shell out for fox?

i have NFL total access on, jason la canfora just said dennison is the favorite (big surprise!). . . i'm sure you'll get your guy. . .


god help us. . .

:facepalm:

Cugel
01-12-2011, 07:47 PM
Seriously, though Cane. Who could Dennison reasonable get to fix/coach the defense? Manusky? Ryan? Mangini? You really think they'd come work for Dennison?


It's not that hard to hire a Defensive Coordinator if you have a job opening, and are willing to let the guy build his own defense. He doesn't have to be someone from Dennison's "coaching tree."

Josh McDaniels was so young he had very few people to call on. He managed to find Mike Nolan. (Of course he couldn't get along with him, and let him go, which more than anything cost him his job), but that's another story.

Dennison could find a decent DC in the league and hire him with the promise of being able to build a defense and run it with minimal interference from Dennison, who would mainly be taking charge of the offense, reinstalling the ZBS, getting the most out of Tebow, finding a TE and installing a scheme that could get the Broncos back to having a top 10 offense again, just as they did in 2008.

That DC would be able to pad his resume for a HC position by building the defense. Ideally, finding a GOOD DC who is serving under a defensive minded coach and not allowed to do his own thing would probably love to come here and be given more freedom.

claymore
01-12-2011, 07:49 PM
Dennison is the Tebow of coaches IMO. He isnt going to fail from a lack of trying. He has been learning from some smart SOB's, im sure he saw things to improve upon in the past 20 years.

Cugel
01-12-2011, 07:51 PM
i wouldn't sweat it if i were you-- really think we'll shell out for fox?

i have NFL total access on, jason la canfora just said dennison is the favorite (big surprise!). . . i'm sure you'll get your guy. . .
god help us. . .

:facepalm:

Pat Bowlen didn't show up for Dennison's meeting. He did for Fox's. In fact the entire Broncos brain trust was there, as opposed to some of the other interviews where there was just Brian Xanders and Elway and some other guy (not Joe Ellis and not Bowlen) in the room.

That worries me that they are more seriously considering Fox. I'd like a guy who hasn't already conspicuously failed please. A 51% winning percentage over 10 years is not all that great a reason to hire a HC. :coffee:

Maybe Dennison isn't that guy but surely there's SOME coordinator somewhere in the league who could come in and coach this team! Do they REALLY need to rely on the guy who just got fired from the only team in football WORSE than the Denver Broncos?

Agent of Orange
01-12-2011, 07:59 PM
Pat Bowlen didn't show up for Dennison's meeting. He did for Fox's. In fact the entire Broncos brain trust was there, as opposed to some of the other interviews where there was just Brian Xanders and Elway and some other guy (not Joe Ellis and not Bowlen) in the room.

That worries me that they are more seriously considering Fox. I'd like a guy who hasn't already conspicuously failed please. A 51% winning percentage over 10 years is not all that great a reason to hire a HC. :coffee:

Maybe Dennison isn't that guy but surely there's SOME coordinator somewhere in the league who could come in and coach this team! Do they REALLY need to rely on the guy who just got fired from the only team in football WORSE than the Denver Broncos?

One thing to consider is that Fox probably costs a lot more than everyone else. And, for that reason, Bowlen probably has a bigger reason to sit in for Fox's meeting. He might think that if he's going to spend this much on a guy, he wants to be involved. Otherwise, when they cost a lot less, he might defer to Elway/Ellis.

Lancane
01-12-2011, 08:01 PM
Who would Dennison hire as defensive coordinator? People tend to forget that he was a linebacker under three of the better defensive minds of the modern era in Collier, Nolan and Phillips. Phillips is in Houston, I'm sure they've spoken before he had his interview and since then as well.

Right now I have a feeling that it would be Greg Manusky, he coached under Phillips in San Diego and under Nolan in San Fran, he knows Nunnely our current defensive line coach as well as some others on our staff.

chazoe60
01-12-2011, 08:01 PM
The "Bowlen was only at Fox's interview" thing is a myth that was dispelled via twitter earlier in the day. Bowlen was at all the interviews, the only one he happened to be caught on camera at was Fox's, but it was just happenstance.

Medford Bronco
01-12-2011, 08:03 PM
i'm guessing it would. . . he's a defensive-minded head coach and former DC-- i can't believe he could possibly look at this abortion and not make fixing it his top priority. . .

he didn't have final say over the roster in carolina, but we can assume he had input. . . they were very balanced over his tenure in terms of drafting-- for example, four first rounders spent on offense, and four on defense (of course, their needs weren't nearly as lop-sided as ours are right now). . . when they had the top pick, they took julius peppers. . . the fox regime did a solid job developing defensive players, featuring success stories like kris jenkins, dan connor, charles godfrey, chris gamble, richard marshall and jon beason. . .

in ine years in carolina, fox's defenses never once finished outside the top half in scoring defense before this debacle season. . . in terms of having a proven defensive rebuild on the resume, that's probably about as good as you're going to get unless we hire wade phillips. . .

he got to the Super Bowl with Jake Freaking Dellome, Doesnt that stand for something:confused:

Lancane
01-12-2011, 08:05 PM
he got to the Super Bowl with Jake Freaking Dellome, Doesnt that stand for something:confused:

No...

He's too conservative offensively, and he's had some solid defenses, but other then two times his offenses have been either mediocre or absolutely horrid.

dogfish
01-12-2011, 08:10 PM
Who would Dennison hire as defensive coordinator? People tend to forget that he was a linebacker under three of the better defensive minds of the modern era in Collier, Nolan and Phillips. Phillips is in Houston, I'm sure they've spoken before he had his interview and since then as well.

Right now I have a feeling that it would be Greg Manusky, he coached under Phillips in San Diego and under Nolan in San Fran, he knows Nunnely our current defensive line coach as well as some others on our staff.

we better get it in gear if we want manusky-- he interviewed with the cards yesterday, and is reportedly in consideration for the san diego job as well. . .

Lancane
01-12-2011, 08:16 PM
we better get it in gear if we want manusky-- he interviewed with the cards yesterday, and is reportedly in consideration for the san diego job as well. . .

Well, we'll see...but until we hear who has another interview or who will be hired outright for the head coach position we can not figure out or even guess really anything regarding the staff.

I Eat Staples
01-12-2011, 10:15 PM
Dennison is the Tebow of coaches IMO.

Don't say that, I was just starting to want him.

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 10:23 PM
If Dennison was so frickin' awesome, you'd think that somebody out there would've given him a chance to be more than just a placeholder for the past 25 years. The guy hasn't had a meaningful job since he was our STs coordinator.

Say what you want, but being the OC for Shanny, McDaniels, and Kubiak does NOT bring me any confidence in his ability nor does it apparently to ANYONE else seeing as how we're the only one who's interviewed him, ever.

Jesus Christ, Shanahan even picked Jeremy Bates (the QB coach) OVER Dennison to call the plays in '08. So, instead of "passing the torch" to his boy Dennison, he shit all over him and gave the responsibility to Bates?

What a vote of confidence by the Mastermind! Probably why Bates is actually working as an active OC for a playoff team and Dennison had to follow Kubes to get a job...

TXBRONC
01-12-2011, 10:34 PM
Maybe he does. I'd be willing to bet he knows a little more about the 3-4 than Dennison does... Being a DEFENSIVE HC and all... :D

Dennison played in a 3-4 defense for his entire playing career.

DenBronx
01-12-2011, 10:34 PM
Now I sort of wish Kubiak would have got fired.


Fox seems to be our best and only choice.

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 10:48 PM
It's not that hard to hire a Defensive Coordinator if you have a job opening, and are willing to let the guy build his own defense. He doesn't have to be someone from Dennison's "coaching tree."

Josh McDaniels was so young he had very few people to call on. He managed to find Mike Nolan. (Of course he couldn't get along with him, and let him go, which more than anything cost him his job), but that's another story.

Dennison could find a decent DC in the league and hire him with the promise of being able to build a defense and run it with minimal interference from Dennison, who would mainly be taking charge of the offense, reinstalling the ZBS, getting the most out of Tebow, finding a TE and installing a scheme that could get the Broncos back to having a top 10 offense again, just as they did in 2008.

That DC would be able to pad his resume for a HC position by building the defense. Ideally, finding a GOOD DC who is serving under a defensive minded coach and not allowed to do his own thing would probably love to come here and be given more freedom.

Cool, until Elway and Ellis look at Dennison and say, "we want you to hold onto Wink and give him another year for the sake of defensive continuity" (spoken: we don't want to spend money on a new DC when Wink is already under contract). Dennison will say "okay" :doh:. <- That's what I'm most worried about.

I doubt Fox or Fewell would (because they'd want their own people) and even if they did, they'd actually be able to fix Wink's broke-assed schemes and calls. This team will not improve until we make a serious commitment to the defense both in personnel and coaching. No more lip service, no more band-aids, no more bullshit.

The way you do that is to hire coaches that know defense. If you could give me any indication that anyone other than Fox or Fewell have any hope of improving our defense, maybe I'll listen, but you can't, so I won't.

Everyone's blind faith that Dennison can somehow be our white night just because he's been here before is just scary and completely unfounded, IMO. Every coach we interviewed at some point has HC experience, even if just interim...

Except Rick Dennison.

jhildebrand
01-12-2011, 11:14 PM
So many, myself included, criticised McDaniels for surrounding himself with "yes men."

I am not so sure hiring Dennison is any different. Obviously time will tell but the first smell test says to me this is a yes man hire. If so, then this move should be criticised just as sharply.

Lancane
01-12-2011, 11:39 PM
So many, myself included, criticised McDaniels for surrounding himself with "yes men."

I am not so sure hiring Dennison is any different. Obviously time will tell but the first smell test says to me this is a yes man hire. If so, then this move should be criticised just as sharply.

So we should go with the dull and conservative head coach candidate, which could lead to a much greater chance of hindering Tebow's development and all for the sake of a better defense? Do I have that right?

Fine, I'm close to saying F' it at hope that those hoping for Fox get their wish, let's hire his ass...he's only fielded five top ten defensive units during his tenure, and only two top ten offenses in that time, most of his offenses were usually near the bottom of the league. He's not a defensive mastermind that has fielded juggernaut defenses continually, and let's see him retain McCoy and the offensive staff, hamper Tebows career to see fans turn on him in a couple years for lack of a F'n offense, because let's face it...this league is not offensive friendly at all. Then when the fans start to boo his ass we could see us doing this once again. I would hope he pulls his head out of his ass, stay away from the offense and hire a true offensive coordinator and quarterbacks coach, but it's not likely. But he has the experience, even though his own fans who do love him think he could be in the end to conservative and very detrimental to our team!

HORSEPOWER 56
01-12-2011, 11:47 PM
So we should go with the dull and conservative head coach candidate, which could lead to a much greater chance of hindering Tebow's development and all for the sake of a better defense? Do I have that right?

Fine, I'm close to saying F' it at hope that those hoping for Fox get their wish, let's hire his ass...he's only fielded five top ten defensive units during his tenure, and only two top ten offenses in that time, most of his offenses were usually near the bottom of the league. He's not a defensive mastermind that has fielded juggernaut defenses continually, and let's see him retain McCoy and the offensive staff, hamper Tebows career to see fans turn on him in a couple years for lack of a F'n offense, because let's face it...this league is not offensive friendly at all. Then when the fans start to boo his ass we could see us doing this once again. I would hope he pulls his head out of his ass, stay away from the offense and hire a true offensive coordinator and quarterbacks coach, but it's not likely. But he has the experience, even though his own fans who do love him think he could be in the end to conservative and very detrimental to our team!

Or, we could go back to having a top ten offense, bottom 3 defense and be stuck around 8-8 or worse while we try to figure out why we keep drafting offensive guys to run Rick Dennison's or Dirk Koetter's new and improved offensive scheme that is different than McDaniels' offensive scheme and so we need a complete overhaul for the 3rd time in 2 years while the defense is completely neglected and Dennison hires a friend like Bush or just Keeps Wink around to run the sorry excuse for a defense we continue to field and can't figure out why we can't win...

Honestly, bro I'd take your dilemma to mine every time. Top 10 defense and a conservative offense to a high flying (but low scoring) offense and a shitty defense? Sounds like a NO BRAINER! :welcome:

Lancane
01-12-2011, 11:55 PM
Or, we could go back to having a top ten offense, bottom 3 defense and be stuck around 8-8 or worse while we try to figure out why we keep drafting offensive guys to run Rick Dennison's or Dirk Koetter's new and improved offensive scheme that is different than McDaniels' offensive scheme and so we need a complete overhaul for the 3rd time in 2 years while the defense is completely neglected and Dennison hires a friend like Bush or just Keeps Wink around to run the sorry excuse for a defense we continue to field and can't figure out why we can't win...

Honestly, bro I'd take your dilemma to mine every time. Top 10 defense and a conservative offense to a high flying (but low scoring) offense and a shitty defense? Sounds like a NO BRAINER! :welcome:

Yeah because that lead him to being such a great coach, what is his overall record? 73-71, with only three seasons above .500! That's exactly what we need...mediocrity with an emphasis on defense, yeah...I see us beating San Diego, Indianapolis, New England, NY Jets, NY Giants and so on, of F' wait, he's the same coach that went 2-14 this year and has had six seasons with a record of .500 or worse. I'd rather have a top ten offense to be honest and a middle of the road defense compared to a good defense and mediocre offense!

:coffee:

chazoe60
01-13-2011, 12:09 AM
The funny thing to me is, it seems like the Coordinator appointments are more important than the HC. I find reasons to like all of our candidates but I keep saying to myself "I like him but only if he hires the right ____ coordinator"

Dennison would be awesome but he needs to hire the right DC
Fox would be awesome but only if he hires the right OC
Same with all the others.

Just my two cents.


Also, for some reason tonight I'm feeling really good about Koetter. I'll probably have a different feeling tomorrow. At least all the guys we brought in seem like the type who will deligate instead of being egomaniacal little shit stains like the last fool.

gobroncsnv
01-13-2011, 12:18 AM
No DC will look good until he has a solid Dline. Same for an OC unless the front 5 are solid. Those are immutable laws of nature... if you give them nothing to work with, don't expect too much.

topscribe
01-13-2011, 02:06 AM
No DC will look good until he has a solid Dline. Same for an OC unless the front 5 are solid. Those are immutable laws of nature... if you give them nothing to work with, don't expect too much.

The very reason the Broncos have been through half the DCs in the league.

But give them a break . . . they have been smart enough to ship out people such as Trevor Pryce . . . http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh256/AZDynamics/Smilies/thgoofy.gif

-----

DenBronx
01-13-2011, 02:30 AM
The very reason the Broncos have been through half the DCs in the league.

But give them a break . . . they have been smart enough to ship out people such as Trevor Pryce . . . http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh256/AZDynamics/Smilies/thgoofy.gif

-----

I have a feeling Top that no matter who we hire these boards will be devided. The only way it will ever get better is for us to start winning again. We have beaten each other down for the past few years on coaches, qb's, contract issues, draft choices ect.

In the end we all have to trust and get behind whoever it is. I for one long for unity among the fan base...it has grown tiresome.

BroncoStud
01-13-2011, 03:11 AM
Or, we could go back to having a top ten offense, bottom 3 defense and be stuck around 8-8 or worse while we try to figure out why we keep drafting offensive guys to run Rick Dennison's or Dirk Koetter's new and improved offensive scheme that is different than McDaniels' offensive scheme and so we need a complete overhaul for the 3rd time in 2 years while the defense is completely neglected and Dennison hires a friend like Bush or just Keeps Wink around to run the sorry excuse for a defense we continue to field and can't figure out why we can't win...

Honestly, bro I'd take your dilemma to mine every time. Top 10 defense and a conservative offense to a high flying (but low scoring) offense and a shitty defense? Sounds like a NO BRAINER! :welcome:

What if Denver had a top 10 offense, a top 20 defense, and decent special teams?

Why does it have to be that if Denver doesn't hire Fox their defense is going to keep sucking? The problem with the defense is the lack of talent on the defensive front and at safety. Fox won't be able to help either if the talent on the roster doesn't improve.

Such a ridiculous argument. If the offense returns to form under Tebow and the defense is middle of the pack, Denver could be a playoff team.

topscribe
01-13-2011, 04:35 AM
I have a feeling Top that no matter who we hire these boards will be devided. The only way it will ever get better is for us to start winning again. We have beaten each other down for the past few years on coaches, qb's, contract issues, draft choices ect.

In the end we all have to trust and get behind whoever it is. I for one long for unity among the fan base...it has grown tiresome.

That's an honorable wish, Den. But when I first joined a football message
board, the Broncos were winning, and the board was still divided over issues.
So the process would be to (1) win, then (2) change human nature.

We may well get back to achieving the former someday, but I have serious
doubts about the latter . . .

-----

gobroncsnv
01-13-2011, 08:06 AM
The very reason the Broncos have been through half the DCs in the league.

But give them a break . . . they have been smart enough to ship out people such as Trevor Pryce . . . http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh256/AZDynamics/Smilies/thgoofy.gif

-----

Well, to be fair, Pryce was shipped out at a time when his play was pretty non-spectacular, due to back troubles. I can't imagine trying to play DT with that going on... But it was almost up there with the Bolts giving up on Brees because of his shoulder, in terms of comparing varying degrees of hosing something up. Trevor came roaring back, due to better surroundings.
But the Broncs also gave up on Berry and Hayward far too soon, and I'm afraid they'll be doing the same with Dumervil if they keep up the approach of only having one solid pass rusher... The Giants are solid 4 across on their line, each guy raising the others' game. Pryce benefitted from the same when he got to Baltimore. Right now, our dline is a yawner, providing VERY occasional and unreliable pressure. We have doomed our past bunch of DC's to fail before they even put the dry erase marker on the whiteboard.