PDA

View Full Version : Best of NFL: AFC West coaches



Denver Native (Carol)
06-29-2011, 04:53 PM
From article:


Best X's and O's: I’m going to give the nod to Fox, the new head man in Denver. Don’t be swayed by the fact that the Carolina Panthers were awful in 2010. Fox earned a strong reputation as fine coach in his nine seasons with the Panthers. He is a defensive specialist who is aggressive and detailed-oriented. On offense, Fox is a big believer in running the ball down opponents’ throats. He sticks to his plan and is very organized. The Broncos will be well-coached in 2011.

full article - write up on all NFL coaches - http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/tag/_/name/best-of-the-nfl-summer-2011

silkamilkamonico
06-29-2011, 09:20 PM
If Fox can come in and win, I will stomach his ultra conservative offense gladly.

chazoe60
06-29-2011, 09:41 PM
I am very excited about Fox. Funny how people forget that when we were winning under Shanny it was because we were always in the top 3 rushing teams in the league, now that Fox is here and he has a reputation of being a run first guy people have to "stomach" his offense.

I for one would love to see a little smash mouth football here.

TXBRONC
06-29-2011, 10:00 PM
If Fox can come in and win, I will stomach his ultra conservative offense gladly.

While I don't think he's the kind of guy who will go bombs away. I do think he perfers more balance in his run to pass ratio.

Lonestar
06-29-2011, 10:42 PM
i'd rather have a wide open offense, live by the pass die by the pass.

To hell with boring football.

topscribe
06-29-2011, 10:47 PM
i'd rather have a wide open offense, live by the pass die by the pass.

To hell with boring football.

That's what we had last year, my friend. At times, the Broncos had the #1
passing offense in the league. How did that work out?

-----

chazoe60
06-29-2011, 10:49 PM
i'd rather have a wide open offense, live by the pass die by the pass.

To hell with boring football.

Yeah, remember how boring it was watching T.D rush for 2,000 yards?

Lonestar
06-29-2011, 10:50 PM
That's what we had last year, my friend. At times, the Broncos had the #1
passing offense in the league. How did that work out?

-----

seems to me the defense was dead last

how did that work out..

Keep the O and fix the D things will not be like they were last year..

BTW rumor has it that the playbook is the same one they used last year..

topscribe
06-29-2011, 10:50 PM
From article:



full article - write up on all NFL coaches - http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/tag/_/name/best-of-the-nfl-summer-2011

Best Xs & Os coach in the AFCW. That would be nice. We haven't had that
since Shanny. They didn't cover that category for the NFCE, but I think Shanny
is the best Xs & Os coach in football. (And yes, I understand, and agree about,
his weaknesses as a GM.)

-----

topscribe
06-29-2011, 10:52 PM
seems to me the defense was dead last

how did that work out..

Keep the O and fix the D things will not be like they were last year..

BTW rumor has it that the playbook is the same one they used last year..

LS, the defense wasn't the only problem. You know all about the running game,
right? I'm not talking about the Broncos' running game since they didn't have
one . . .

-----

chazoe60
06-29-2011, 10:54 PM
seems to me the defense was dead last

how did that work out..

Keep the O and fix the D things will not be like they were last year..

BTW rumor has it that the playbook is the same one they used last year..

So, the three and outs and poor field position didn't help the defense along to that last ranking?

How about we get back to fundamental football that has worked for decades. Control the clock, keep your defense fresh, run the ball, stop the run, clutch QB play, and you win. Just look at GB, they were a middle of the pack team until they got their running game going late then they won the SB.

topscribe
06-29-2011, 10:56 PM
So, the three and outs and poor field position didn't help the defense along to that last ranking?

How about we get back to fundamental football that has worked for decades. Control the clock, keep your defense fresh, run the ball, stop the run, clutch QB play, and you win. Just look at GB, they were a middle of the pack team until they got their running game going late then they won the SB.

That's possible, and partly true, of course. But the defense's biggest problem
was that they just could not stop the run. Period. Which, BTW, further
accentuates how effective a good running game can be . . .

-----

Denver Native (Carol)
06-29-2011, 10:57 PM
What is the old saying - the run sets up the pass (something like that).

broncohead
06-29-2011, 10:58 PM
seems to me the defense was dead last

how did that work out..

Keep the O and fix the D things will not be like they were last year..

BTW rumor has it that the playbook is the same one they used last year..

We were also 19th in scoring... seems offense needs some work also

BroncoStud
06-29-2011, 11:16 PM
I am very excited about Fox. Funny how people forget that when we were winning under Shanny it was because we were always in the top 3 rushing teams in the league, now that Fox is here and he has a reputation of being a run first guy people have to "stomach" his offense.

I for one would love to see a little smash mouth football here.

Comparing Shanahan's offenses to Fox's offenses is a bit of a stretch. Mike always had GREAT systems that utilized the strengths and weaknesses of his quarterbacks and he got a LOT out of the passing game, and in a lot of ways kept defenses very much off balance with his bootlegs and playaction.

Fox pretty much just runs a boring Dan Reeves-type offense. I am just hoping that he will keep his hands off the offense and worry about the defense.

Not at all excited about the hire, thought we settled, but I UNDERSTAND the move. He is a solid all-around choice. Hopefully it was Delhomme that held back his offenses and not Fox.

HORSEPOWER 56
06-30-2011, 07:55 AM
I just want wins. Boring ones, exciting ones, blowouts or close games... all that matters to me is the "W". Getting us back to having more Ws than Ls is what I'm hoping Fox can bring.

Since the start of football, the keys to success have been to run the ball effectively and play good defense. Fox believes in these principles. Hopefully they pan out for us.

For those who wish for a dominant passing game and don't care as much for the run, ask San Diego how that is going for them. Someone tell me they aren't missing LT. Since he left, they've stunk in the redzone and have struggled to win close games... even with one of the top rated passing offenses and the top defense. We almost beat them with a rookie QB for Heaven's sake...

zbeg
06-30-2011, 08:04 AM
I just want wins. Boring ones, exciting ones, blowouts or close games... all that matters to me is the "W". Getting us back to having more Ws than Ls is what I'm hoping Fox can bring.

Since the start of football, the keys to success have been to run the ball effectively and play good defense. Fox believes in these principles. Hopefully they pan out for us.

For those who wish for a dominant passing game and don't care as much for the run, ask San Diego how that is going for them. Someone tell me they aren't missing LT. Since he left, they've stunk in the redzone and have struggled to win close games... even with one of the top rated passing offenses and the top defense. We almost beat them with a rookie QB for Heaven's sake...

While I agree with you that winning boring is just as good to me, IMO, as winning exciting, I think the run-first/play-defense thing isn't necessary the way it was a decade (or more) ago. The Packers, Colts, Patriots, and Saints have all won SBs recently without having a strong running game.

San Diego's problem is that they have a chump for a coach (okay, and they're getting old), which I think is a much bigger contributor to their lack of success than the fact that they lost LT.

FanInAZ
06-30-2011, 08:11 AM
What is the old saying - the run sets up the pass (something like that).

Works great when you got a RB that can move the chains and forces the opposing D to put 8 or 9 in the box. However, it doesn't work so well if your RB keeps putting the O in 3rd & 7 or longer and can swamp the passing game with blitzes or flooding the passing lanes with DBs.

By the way, the pass can set up the run if it can force the opposing D to put extra DBs on the field. In other words, use whoever is your strongest players to set up your not as strong players. When you to use your not as strong players to set up your strongest players, you get the Dan Reeves era Broncos.

silkamilkamonico
06-30-2011, 08:30 AM
I am very excited about Fox. Funny how people forget that when we were winning under Shanny it was because we were always in the top 3 rushing teams in the league, now that Fox is here and he has a reputation of being a run first guy people have to "stomach" his offense.

I for one would love to see a little smash mouth football here.

We were "winning" under Shanny because of the G.O.A.T, in #7, not because of top rushing teams. We don't need to look past the Clinton Portis era, TD averaging 3.5 ypc when Elway retired, and basically the turn of the millennium to figure that one out.

Juriga72
06-30-2011, 08:39 AM
Let me see IF I have this right....

The ONLY NFL HC who has a worse w/l record than McDummy the last two years... and "He's the BEST coach in the AFCW"???

wow....

tomjonesrocks
06-30-2011, 10:29 AM
I don't think Fox's offense is going to work--at least not with the personnel we have in Fox's first season.

Moreno can't hold up an offense like Fox wants to run. He's going to have to throw, or else this team is going to be be punting a lot.

Get DWill here and we'll talk.

topscribe
06-30-2011, 10:48 AM
We were "winning" under Shanny because of the G.O.A.T, in #7, not because of top rushing teams. We don't need to look past the Clinton Portis era, TD averaging 3.5 ypc when Elway retired, and basically the turn of the millennium to figure that one out.

Silk, in 1998, TD's YPA was 5.1, and the team average was 4.7. The Broncos
ranked #2 in the league in rushing that year, in both total yards and YPA.

In 1997, TD's YPA was 4.7, and the team average was 4.6. While the team was
#16 in the league in total yards, the more telling statistic had them ranked #2
in YPA.

Those, of course, were the years of their Super Bowl victories.

-----

Canmore
06-30-2011, 10:57 AM
Silk, in 1998, TD's YPA was 5.1, and the team average was 4.7. The Broncos
ranked #2 in the league in rushing that year, in both total yards and YPA.

In 1997, TD's YPA was 4.7, and the team average was 4.6. While the team was
#16 in the league in total yards, the more telling statistic had them ranked #2
in YPA.

Those, of course, were the years of their Super Bowl victories.

-----

We ran the ball down peoples throats even when we lined up and told them. Those were the days.

Ravage!!!
06-30-2011, 11:07 AM
seems to me the defense was dead last

how did that work out..

Keep the O and fix the D things will not be like they were last year..

BTW rumor has it that the playbook is the same one they used last year..

Really? So the defense, that was sitting on the sidelines, is what kept us from scoring??? :confused: Our defense kept us from getting first downs?

Also, the TRUTH of the matter is, our OC was trying to run McD's offense last season. What do you suppose is going to happen now that lil Mcpoleon is gone? Do you think he's going to continue to run the offense that completely failed, or do you suppose he's going to revert back to the offense that he was running while in Carolina, as the assistant HC, with our CURRENT HC (not the one that was kicked and shipped out of town)?

Lonestar
06-30-2011, 11:18 AM
LS, the defense wasn't the only problem. You know all about the running game,
right? I'm not talking about the Broncos' running game since they didn't have
one . . .

-----

actually they did once all the OLINE was in place and everyone was healthy. They had some decent runs when they were called.

I'll take the spread type passing offense anyday over stick in the mud run run run. saw enough of that under Dany Boy. and as far as mikey he also had red zone issues for much if not all of his time here after TD and that SB OL retired.


we need to e able to run IF we have to not just run to be running. that is boring as hell.

Fix the D leave the O alone..and for Gods sake fix the STs area .

claymore
06-30-2011, 11:21 AM
I hope McDaniels 3 & Out offense is gone.

Lonestar
06-30-2011, 11:24 AM
We were also 19th in scoring... seems offense needs some work also
IIRC pretty much dead last in defending the run, and points allowed.

I'll take 19th in both of those areas anyday ove what we have had the past decade on defense.. How many record setting days did RB have on us over those years.. I can think of at least 2 and each time someone different beating the last guys mark that was set on us..

offense wins games, Defense wins the ring IMO.

LordTrychon
06-30-2011, 11:26 AM
actually they did once all the OLINE was in place and everyone was healthy. They had some decent runs when they were called.

I'll take the spread type passing offense anyday over stick in the mud run run run. saw enough of that under Dany Boy. and as far as mikey he also had red zone issues for much if not all of his time here after TD and that SB OL retired.


we need to e able to run IF we have to not just run to be running. that is boring as hell.

Fix the D leave the O alone..and for Gods sake fix the STs area .

I'm not sure any real coach would do that. ;) But thanks for the laughs. Love hearing that from you.

Lonestar
06-30-2011, 11:28 AM
I just want wins. Boring ones, exciting ones, blowouts or close games... all that matters to me is the "W". Getting us back to having more Ws than Ls is what I'm hoping Fox can bring.

Since the start of football, the keys to success have been to run the ball effectively and play good defense. Fox believes in these principles. Hopefully they pan out for us.

For those who wish for a dominant passing game and don't care as much for the run, ask San Diego how that is going for them. Someone tell me they aren't missing LT. Since he left, they've stunk in the redzone and have struggled to win close games... even with one of the top rated passing offenses and the top defense. We almost beat them with a rookie QB for Heaven's sake...
IIRC LT was for the most part their first or second leading receiver most of those years.

BTW it is "norv" that is holding them back in the playoff just like marty did.. no Balls play not to lose more than play to win..

Ravage!!!
06-30-2011, 11:28 AM
offense wins games, Defense wins the ring IMO.

Tell that to INdy and N.O.

An old cliche that doesn't support the "spread offense is the way to go" mentality.

Ravage!!!
06-30-2011, 11:31 AM
BTW it is "norv" that is holding them back in the playoff just like marty did.. no Balls play not to lose more than play to win..

So marty taking three different, LOSING, teams to the AFC Championship game is "losing" in the playoffs? Hmmm. Its true though. Marty is the one that couldn't get to Elway during that drive, Marty is the one that fumbled the ball on the 1, and Marty is the DB that fumbled the ball after the INT...giving the ball back to Brady.

topscribe
06-30-2011, 11:33 AM
actually they did once all the OLINE was in place and everyone was healthy. They had some decent runs when they were called.

I'll take the spread type passing offense anyday over stick in the mud run run run. saw enough of that under Dany Boy. and as far as mikey he also had red zone issues for much if not all of his time here after TD and that SB OL retired.


we need to e able to run IF we have to not just run to be running. that is boring as hell.

Fix the D leave the O alone..and for Gods sake fix the STs area .

I cannot imagine Fox and McCoy running just to be running.

They will run to WIN . . . something that wasn't accomplished very often last
year. I agree with HP: They could go through a game without throwing a
single pass, and I will be happy if I look up at the scoreboard and see a bigger
number on the Broncos' side . . .

-----

Lonestar
06-30-2011, 11:53 AM
I cannot imagine Fox and McCoy running just to be running.

They will run to WIN . . . something that wasn't accomplished very often last
year. I agree with HP: They could go through a game without throwing a
single pass, and I will be happy if I look up at the scoreboard and see a bigger
number on the Broncos' side . . .

-----

I want to see more than dany boys offense on the field run run pass to save your ass


but I suspect that boring it will be.. just hope we do not know which running play will be called because we are so predictable.

love to see wins but just do not want to bored to the point of napping during the game.

silkamilkamonico
06-30-2011, 12:01 PM
Silk, in 1998, TD's YPA was 5.1, and the team average was 4.7. The Broncos
ranked #2 in the league in rushing that year, in both total yards and YPA.

In 1997, TD's YPA was 4.7, and the team average was 4.6. While the team was
#16 in the league in total yards, the more telling statistic had them ranked #2
in YPA.

Those, of course, were the years of their Super Bowl victories.

-----




yes. thank god for hall of fame qb and arguably one of the greatest of all time, john elway.

silkamilkamonico
06-30-2011, 12:10 PM
again, if fox wins in denver, this conversation is irrelevant and everyone is happy. if fox loses, you better be damn sure people are going to attack his offense much in the same manner they did with mcdaniels. the worst part about that is we would be a losing team with a boring offense, surrounded be divisional teams with at least dynamic ones.

Ravage!!!
06-30-2011, 12:17 PM
The Chiefs last year won because of their running game, not their passing game. The Chargers are the passing team in the AFCW, and the Raiders were/are certainly not dynamic.

NightTerror218
06-30-2011, 12:48 PM
So the Broncos are just not making it in the AFC West voting.....

http://espn.go.com/blog/afcwest/post/_/id/28571

here is another link similar to the coaches

topscribe
06-30-2011, 12:54 PM
yes. thank god for hall of fame qb and arguably one of the greatest of all time, john elway.

Of course, Silk. No question about that. But you just made my point.

Even that HOF QB needed run support to win the Big One. It's pretty much
consensus that, without TD, the Broncos come in second place in SB XXXII.



again, if fox wins in denver, this conversation is irrelevant and everyone is happy. if fox loses, you better be damn sure people are going to attack his offense much in the same manner they did with mcdaniels. the worst part about that is we would be a losing team with a boring offense, surrounded be divisional teams with at least dynamic ones.

Two of those teams with "dynamic" offenses were the top two rushing teams in
football (KC #1, Oak #2). Why, KC's running game made even Cassel look good . . .

-----

Lonestar
06-30-2011, 03:38 PM
Of course, Silk. No question about that. But you just made my point.

Even that HOF QB needed run support to win the Big One. It's pretty much
consensus that, without TD, the Broncos come in second place in SB XXXII.




Two of those teams with "dynamic" offenses were the top two rushing teams in
football (KC #1, Oak #2). Why, KC's running game made even Cassel look good . . .

-----


or could it have been they played us twice with the last rated running defense in the world..
SAN must have been #3 ?

no no rivers just passed a gazillion yards on us.. with the ALmost last passing defense in the world.

topscribe
06-30-2011, 04:09 PM
or could it have been they played us twice with the last rated running defense in the world..
SAN must have been #3 ?

no no rivers just passed a gazillion yards on us.. with the ALmost last passing defense in the world.

But was that from overcompensation toward the run, since the Broncos were
so bad against the run? Besides, if you look down SD's game log, you will see
that the Broncos did about as well as anybody else against SD's passing. But
SD's #15 running game (#22 in YPA) pretty well dominated against the Broncos.

So the Chiefs and Raiders played Denver twice. That means they each played
14 games against someone else. Granted, they got a lot of rushing yardage
against the Broncos (except for the first KC game, when the Broncos held KC
to 51 yards), but two games do not constitute being the best in the league
by season's end . . .

-----

Lonestar
06-30-2011, 11:17 PM
But was that from overcompensation toward the run, since the Broncos were
so bad against the run? Besides, if you look down SD's game log, you will see
that the Broncos did about as well as anybody else against SD's passing. But
SD's #15 running game (#22 in YPA) pretty well dominated against the Broncos.

So the Chiefs and Raiders played Denver twice. That means they each played
14 games against someone else. Granted, they got a lot of rushing yardage
against the Broncos (except for the first KC game, when the Broncos held KC
to 51 yards), but two games do not constitute being the best in the league
by season's end . . .

-----
man no sense of humor at all anymore..