PDA

View Full Version : Fire slowik immediatly



broken12
11-23-2008, 07:00 PM
Fire him who cares what happens the rest of the way bring in someone to teach the basics and fundamentals such as if a rb goes in motion either a linebacker or safety must cover!

Northman
11-23-2008, 07:03 PM
Slowik was hardly the problem today.

Retired_Member_001
11-23-2008, 07:04 PM
Slowik was hardly the problem today.

But we would be better off without him, no?

BeefStew25
11-23-2008, 07:04 PM
Goodbye world.

Northman
11-23-2008, 07:05 PM
But we would be better off without him, no?

Hard to say, what if the next guy sucks just as much or worse? :lol:

All i heard last year was that Bates sucked, before that Coyer sucked. Right now its just a bunch of suckiness. But today the offense let the defense down.

haroldthebarrel
11-23-2008, 07:07 PM
hell yeah he is. He lets a goddamn qb who has sucked throw ten for eleven.
We start the game playing run defense but there is no fire or consistency in the second quarter.
When the going gets tough and we are down the defense under Slowik ******* always gives up the run.

It was a mistake to give him the job. Hell we probably loose more than that since he is a great secondary coach. Just a sucky cordinator just like Turner can coach offense but not hold the HC gig.

Get him the **** out of here already, and I dont give a flying **** if I get suspended for this because it would be more than worth it.
This game made me so sick to my stumach I had to vomit, and thats the damn truth.

Magnificent Seven
11-23-2008, 07:10 PM
Mike Nolan!!!!

broken12
11-23-2008, 07:29 PM
thats why you bring a proven d coordinator who cares what it cost proven when is the last time we had one of them or even interviewed one bates is the last and wasnt givin time to implament it all of em have been inside men!

G_Money
11-23-2008, 07:42 PM
broken -

as a favor to me, can you please use some punctuation in your posts?

You're killin me man. It's really hard to understand you. I do agree with bringing in a new DC, but I don't need somebody who is "proven." I need somebody with a good eye for talent who can scheme for what we have now as well as what he wants to have in the future. A flexible coordinator who can adjust when his first plan isn't working to a plan that DOES work would be great.

Whoever that guy is doesn't have to have been a DC for a bunch of years with some rings on his fingers. He just has to be good.

~G

broken12
11-23-2008, 07:46 PM
broken -

as a favor to me, can you please use some punctuation in your posts?

You're killin me man. It's really hard to understand you. I do agree with bringing in a new DC, but I don't need somebody who is "proven." I need somebody with a good eye for talent who can scheme for what we have now as well as what he wants to have in the future. A flexible coordinator who can adjust when his first plan isn't working to a plan that DOES work would be great.

Whoever that guy is doesn't have to have been a DC for a bunch of years with some rings on his fingers. He just has to be good.

~G
oops, I guess I should do a better job with the punctuation. But as a reminder, the period in "proven." should be outside the quotes. Also if the guy just has to be good coordinator wouldn't that make him proven?

haroldthebarrel
11-23-2008, 07:46 PM
thats why you bring a proven d coordinator who cares what it cost proven when is the last time we had one of them or even interviewed one bates is the last and wasnt givin time to implament it all of em have been inside men!

Well at least you can see the obvious.

Change for change sake rarely pans out. Consistency and longevity along with talent is the future.
Dont tell me Coughlin is a genious, because a lot of people wanted to can him up until last year. Same with Fisher and a few others.

As far as Coughlin is concerned. Watch the Giants fall back to just above mediocrity the time Spagnulo gets a HC gig.
Just hope and pray he doesnt end up in AFCW.

Broncogator
11-23-2008, 07:52 PM
What the hell does the Slowik have to do with Cutler spraying the ball everywhere but
where
his receivers are???

broken12
11-23-2008, 07:55 PM
Well at least you can see the obvious.

Change for change sake rarely pans out. Consistency and longevity along with talent is the future.
Dont tell me Coughlin is a genious, because a lot of people wanted to can him up until last year. Same with Fisher and a few others.

As far as Coughlin is concerned. Watch the Giants fall back to just above mediocrity the time Spagnulo gets a HC gig.
Just hope and pray he doesnt end up in AFCW.

Well, Slowik has been consistant I guess, consistantly horrible on every team he has coached, if thats what you want, you have. As for the other coaches you mention they have had consistantly good teams that get to the playoffs year in and out, maybe missed one. I do think we have some talent on this team to build off of, but when I see offenses go in motion on us and we look totally confused and mostly out of place leads me to believe that they arent being properly prepared!! Denver has allowed record number of completion percentage, its obviouse (spelling) that the defensive scheme of ours is simple and easy to read!!

haroldthebarrel
11-23-2008, 07:58 PM
What the hell does the Slowik have to do with Cutler spraying the ball everywhere but
where
his receivers are???

How about a season 50 percent passer go 10 for 11?
How about having a team run at will on us when the game is one the line?
How about all teams having better games against us than their season average?
How about letting a team score twice their average against us?
How about making all his cordinated teams play worse than the year before?

haroldthebarrel
11-23-2008, 08:05 PM
Well, Slowik has been consistant I guess, consistantly horrible on every team he has coached, if thats what you want, you have. As for the other coaches you mention they have had consistantly good teams that get to the playoffs year in and out, maybe missed one. I do think we have some talent on this team to build off of, but when I see offenses go in motion on us and we look totally confused and mostly out of place leads me to believe that they arent being properly prepared!! Denver has allowed record number of completion percentage, its obviouse (spelling) that the defensive scheme of ours is simple and easy to read!!

The Titans, Giants, Patriots, Colts all have had a lot of their coaches for years along with a basic system.

Not surprisingly especially the Giants and the Titans are contenders now that their talent level is improved. The schemes are the same.
Gregg Williams' Jags defense sucks now, but watch them improve next year.

On offense we have a system in place, but why the hell we wont do that on defense is beyond me. It totally pisses me off that we canned Coyer just for the sake of it. Look what he has done to the Bucs defensive line.

I mean go over the teams that are consistently good and you find consistency at coaching. Heck, the Ravens are good because their defense is good, and despite Flacco. Not surprisingly they didnt fire their DC when they fired their HC.

This is not an attack on you at all, but I wish people would just look at the stats and rosters and try to find the common denominators.
I am tired of doing this argument.

broken12
11-23-2008, 08:10 PM
this is what slowik consistantly brings, this is his coaching history.


Bob Slowik Must Be Fired

On January 16, 2004 Green Bay Packers coach Mike Sherman fired defensive coordinator Ed Donatell, making him the official scapegoat for his team's 4th-and-26 meltdown against the Philadelphia Eagles in the Packers' 20-17 loss of last year's NFC divisional playoff game.

To replace Donatell, Sherman promoted defensive backs coach Bob Slowik.

Slowik, who previously coordinated middling defenses in Chicago and Cleveland, drew up a high-pressure, high-risk, blitz-heavy scheme that was to be the identity of the 2004 Packers defense. After giving up 5 TD passes in the first half vs. Indianapolis in Week 3, his scheme was abandoned. Still, his defense gave up 5 TD passes in the first half in Week 13 against Philadelphia.

But twice giving up 5 TD passes in the first half is not why Bob Slowik must be fired. Nor is it his glaring lack of takeaways, or the insanely high opponents' passer rating. No. Bob Slowik must be fired because he schemed a defense that set many records -- in a bad way -- in the history of the Packer franchise.

Bob Slowik All-Time Records
Bob Slowik's defense is one for the history books. In a really, really bad way.

Record Slowik
Record Broken
Record
Fewest Opponent Turnovers, Season 15 16 (1995)
Fewest Passes Intercepted By, Season 8 13 (1980, 1995, 1998)
Fewest Forced Fumbles, Season 11 12 (1995)
Most First Downs Allowed, Passing, Season 228 188 (1995)
Most Yards Allowed, Net Passing, Season 3,943 3,762 (1983)
Most Yards Allowed, Passing, Game 464 448 (2004)
Most TD Allowed Passing, Season 33 31 (1986)
Highest Opponents' Passer Rating, Season 99.1 86.1 (1958)



Close-But-No-Cigar Bob Slowik All-Time Records
Thanks to Rich Wingo, Ezra Johnson, Estes Hood, and Ken Stills, Slowik finished second all-time in these categories:

Record Slowik
Record All-Time
Record
Most First Downs Allowed, Season 354 366 (1983)
Most First Downs Allowed, Penalty, Season 28 29 (2002)
Highest Completion Percentage Allowed, Season 60.6 63.45 (1989)



Likely Bob Slowik All-Time Records
Here are a few other likely records that I could not verify. Please send me an email if you have source info.

Fewest fumbles recovered, season
7. 2nd-lowest in NFL.
Opponents' 3rd down conversion percentage, season
47.3. 2nd-worst in NFL.
Opponents' passing yards/attempt, season
7.61. 4th-worst in NFL.
Opponents' passing yards/completion, season
12.6. 3rd-worst in NFL.
Most passing TDs allowed, first half
5. But you knew that.
Most passing TDs, first half
5. Indianapolis franchise record.
Most passing TDs, first half
5. Philadelphia franchise record.
Most completions, start a game
14. Philadelphia franchise record. Confirmed.
Most passing yards, game
464. Philadelphia franchise record. Confirmed.

BroncoJoe
11-23-2008, 08:13 PM
Anyone blaming Slowik today is stupid.

broken12
11-23-2008, 08:15 PM
Anyone blaming Slowik today is stupid.

Anyone not is blind and cannot see the downfall of this team!!!

fcspikeit
11-23-2008, 08:16 PM
The Titans, Giants, Patriots, Colts all have had a lot of their coaches for years along with a basic system.

Not surprisingly especially the Giants and the Titans are contenders now that their talent level is improved. The schemes are the same.
Gregg Williams' Jags defense sucks now, but watch them improve next year.

On offense we have a system in place, but why the hell we wont do that on defense is beyond me. It totally pisses me off that we canned Coyer just for the sake of it. Look what he has done to the Bucs defensive line.

I mean go over the teams that are consistently good and you find consistency at coaching. Heck, the Ravens are good because their defense is good, and despite Flacco. Not surprisingly they didn't fire their DC when they fired their HC.

This is not an attack on you at all, but I wish people would just look at the stats and rosters and try to find the common denominators.
I am tired of doing this argument.


Are you saying we should keep Slowik?

I agree you need to give a DC a couple years to see what he can do. The problem is, I see no hope for slowik. He has sucked every where he has been. Why and the hell did mikey promote such a proven loser? When I see LB's trying to cover WR's, I've seen enough. He doesn't have a clue. His scheme sucks! He needs to go.

We could have 11 pro bowlers on D and we would still suck. Guys just can't do what he ask's them to. He doesn't give them a chance to make plays with his system

BroncoJoe
11-23-2008, 08:17 PM
Anyone not is blind and cannot see the downfall of this team!!!

10 points by the offense. Two turnovers - resulting in scores.

End of story.

broken12
11-23-2008, 08:20 PM
In the early games we won this season it was very obviouse that we were gonna struggle on defense. We got very good leads on teams and let teams get back into it when we knew what was going to happen. I really hate the fact that we are going through defensive coordinators year in and out. But that said I have not seen any improvement on defense this year at all. We are very lucky to have the offense we do, because if not I really believe that we only have a couple of wins this season.

atwater27
11-23-2008, 08:22 PM
The only stat that matters.......

From NFL.com.....

Key stat
The Raiders hadn't scored an offensive touchdown in 15 consecutive quarters -- 206 plays -- but scored three touchdowns in 18 plays during the second half.

BroncoJoe
11-23-2008, 08:22 PM
the offense was more offensive than the defense today. Anyone that disputes that doesn't understand football.

broken12
11-23-2008, 08:22 PM
10 points by the offense. Two turnovers - resulting in scores.

End of story.

Ten Ten in the 3rd quarter I really thought we would stop em and win. Then in comes, a long pass to lelie, td, 3 and out denver, game over.

haroldthebarrel
11-23-2008, 08:23 PM
Are you saying we should keep Slowik?

I agree you need to give a DC a couple years to see what he can do. The problem is, I see no hope for slowik. He has sucked every where he has been. Why and the hell did mikey promote such a proven loser? When I see LB's trying to cover WR's, I've seen enough. He doesn't have a clue. His scheme sucks! He needs to go.

We could have 11 pro bowlers on D and we would still suck. Guys just can't do what he ask's them to. He doesn't give them a chance to make plays with his system

Why is it so difficult to read more than one post?

How many times have I said we should can him? I said before the season we shouldnt have hired him, I said at the offweek we should have fired him and I have said numerous times today we should fire him.
Firing Slowik has nothing to do with having consistency at coaching!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!

Is that clear now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

BroncoJoe
11-23-2008, 08:24 PM
Ten Ten in the 3rd quarter I really thought we would stop em and win. Then in comes, a long pass to lelie, td, 3 and out denver, game over.

That's the problem.

WARHORSE
11-23-2008, 08:26 PM
What the hell does the Slowik have to do with Cutler spraying the ball everywhere but
where
his receivers are???

Its true Cutler was off, but the recievers were giving second hand efforts, except for Stokes. Marshall, Scheffler, Royal and Graham all sucked in their routes today. If the ball wasnt coming to them, they played half-***ed. NO EFFORT today.

broken12
11-23-2008, 08:26 PM
That's the problem.

Yep your right game over because the defense could not come up with a stop thank you!

MOtorboat
11-23-2008, 08:27 PM
Yep your right game over because the defense could not come up with a stop thank you!

There is absolutely no way the defense should be put in that situation, but nice try.

Northman
11-23-2008, 08:28 PM
the offense was more offensive than the defense today. Anyone that disputes that doesn't understand football.


Yep. We go as the offense goes and right now when we score less than 20 points a game we lose.

WARHORSE
11-23-2008, 08:28 PM
Where the heck are the crossing routes on this offense? We shoulda killed the fairies. Not only that, the defense gave up in the second half after the second TD..........the Dline stunk it up, and gave it up.

broken12
11-23-2008, 08:29 PM
There is absolutely no way the defense should be put in that situation, but nice try.

What situation? Stopping the other team is what they are on the field to do. And dont say that its impossible to put them in that situation cuz I have seen many teams stop the raiders.

MOtorboat
11-23-2008, 08:30 PM
What situation? Stopping the other team is what they are on the field to do. And dont say that its impossible to put them in that situation cuz I have seen many teams stop the raiders.

Ugh...do you not understand that this offense should have been able to score more points than 10 by that point in the game?

Are you that blinded for your hate for our defensive coordinator.

I didn't even see the game and can tell you that this loss is not on the defense.

haroldthebarrel
11-23-2008, 08:32 PM
Right and having a season fifty percent passer go ten for eleven is acceptable?

If our offense sucks, why cant we also say the defense sucks when they suck?

broken12
11-23-2008, 08:32 PM
Thats no excuse for the defense allowing teams to allow record completion percentages and passing yards. Its sad to say that we have a team that cannot win a game 17-10 or 14-10 to a raiders team that has been horrible on offense this season. If our defense cannot stop the raiders who can they stop??

MOtorboat
11-23-2008, 08:33 PM
Right and having a season fifty percent passer go ten for eleven is acceptable?

If our offense sucks, why cant we also say the defense sucks when they suck?

Sure didn't have a good day, but its no reason to fire the defensive coordinator.

Bottom line is, the offense was pathetic.

Change for change's sake is NOT good.

Northman
11-23-2008, 08:33 PM
Right and having a season fifty percent passer go ten for eleven is acceptable?

If our offense sucks, why cant we also say the defense sucks when they suck?

Because we know the defense has problems which is why its VERY important for the offense to shoulder the load which they failed to do today. That is the point that is being made to you and Broken.

MOtorboat
11-23-2008, 08:34 PM
Thats no excuse for the defense allowing teams to allow record completion percentages and passing yards.

Record number of passing yards?

Whatever...

BTW, he only threw 11 passes. Maybe we should give some credit to JaMarcus Russell.

Meanwhile, our offense was atrocious.

broken12
11-23-2008, 08:36 PM
Because we know the defense has problems which is why its VERY important for the offense to shoulder the load which they failed to do today. That is the point that is being made to you and Broken.

Its not fair for the defense to be asked to stop the lowly raiders on an off day for the offense, but its ok to ask the offense to have to score over 30 to win a football game??

Northman
11-23-2008, 08:38 PM
Its not fair for the defense to be asked to stop the lowly raiders on an off day for the offense, but its ok to ask the offense to have to score over 30 to win a football game??

They did it in all of our wins including the first Oakland game so why a problem now? Unless your totally clueless and believe that our defense is actually better than it is i cant help you with the simple math of how this team needs to operate this year to be successful.

jlarsiii
11-23-2008, 08:40 PM
We sucked it up on both sides of the ball today. We had costly turnovers and missed field goals. We had interesting offensive playcalling with no crossing routes and no screen plays when the fade were blitzing every damn play. I don't know about the rest of you but Cutler looked off on most of his throws today as well.

We had a defense that could not stop the run today. We also have a d-coordinator in love with playing a lot of zone coverage and man off coverage without pressing.

I find it interesting how many d-coordinators we go through without giving thought that the player personell has been mostly the same throughout. Coaches can only do so much. Unfortunately we lack talent as well as great coaching at the moment.

Unless the offense is firing on all cylinders and our defense manages to play consistently it is going to be hard to win any games right now.

haroldthebarrel
11-23-2008, 08:41 PM
Because we know the defense has problems which is why its VERY important for the offense to shoulder the load which they failed to do today. That is the point that is being made to you and Broken.

If the defense cannot hold a player to or near his season avg they arent doing their job, and while the offense sucked so did the defense.

I am tired arguing with you. Your username is offensive!

Northman
11-23-2008, 08:42 PM
Unless the offense is firing on all cylinders and our defense manages to play consistently it is going to be hard to win any games right now.

This is the key phrase here. When we click offensively, we win its not rocket science. For people to cry and whine that this defense all of a sudden this year needs to be the crutch of this team hasnt been paying attention at all this year. Its sad that they cant grasp that simple concept.

broken12
11-23-2008, 08:44 PM
They did it in all of our wins including the first Oakland game so why a problem now? Unless your totally clueless and believe that our defense is actually better than it is i cant help you with the simple math of how this team needs to operate this year to be successful.

That first raider game was a fluke its obviouse the way the raiders have played since especially on defense. They stopped the jets and chargers, two of the best offenses in the league. We have an inept defense that cannot stop anyone, when a team has a stagnent offense they circle the date when they play denver cause they can get it rolling on ours. Its unfair to expect denver to score over 30 every game. Thats were the turnovers on offense come from is the pressure to have to make plays on O because the D cannot perform.

Northman
11-23-2008, 08:44 PM
If the defense cannot hold a player to or near his season avg they arent doing their job, and while the offense sucked so did the defense.

I am tired arguing with you. Your username is offensive!


The defense has never held a team to their season avg. Hence why they are ranked at the bottom of the league. We have won because we have OUTSCORED everyone else. And why are you offended by my username? :lol:

Northman
11-23-2008, 08:47 PM
That first raider game was a fluke its obviouse the way the raiders have played since especially on defense. They stopped the jets and chargers, two of the best offenses in the league. We have an inept defense that cannot stop anyone, when a team has a stagnent offense they circle the date when they play denver cause they can get it rolling on ours. Its unfair to expect denver to score over 30 every game. Thats were the turnovers on offense come from is the pressure to have to make plays on O because the D cannot perform.


:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

uh yea, ok. Im done with you. At least Harold has some common sense with his approach.

broken12
11-23-2008, 08:51 PM
:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

uh yea, ok. Im done with you. At least Harold has some common sense with his approach.

well whatever man, but all you need to do is look up the stats. The reason the raiders have a losing record is because their offense cannot score, they actuallly have a good defense as it showed today. Hate to say it cuz i love the broncos but, if there is no change made we can expect more of the same of our defense. The raiders had the ball for over 11 minutes in the fourth qt.

Northman
11-23-2008, 08:54 PM
well whatever man, but all you need to do is look up the stats. The reason the raiders have a losing record is because their offense cannot score, they actuallly have a good defense as it showed today. Hate to say it cuz i love the broncos but, if there is no change made we can expect more of the same of our defense.

Dude, their defense is ranked 25th!!!!!!!!

Thats nowhere near as good as you make them out to be. Come on.

broken12
11-23-2008, 08:57 PM
Dude, their defense is ranked 25th!!!!!!!!

Thats nowhere near as good as you make them out to be. Come on.

well i should have been more clear, talking bout them when they help up against the chargets and jets, and many of them yards and points they allow are from the fourth quarter after they been on the field all game due to a bad offense.

Slick
11-23-2008, 08:58 PM
I'm not a huge fan of Slowick but we can't expect him to cook a 5 star meal with rotten groceries or an empty cupboard.

haroldthebarrel
11-23-2008, 08:59 PM
The defense has never held a team to their season avg. Hence why they are ranked at the bottom of the league. We have won because we have OUTSCORED everyone else. And why are you offended by my username? :lol:

I am norwegian. Called nordmann in norwegian which directly translates as northman.
Your username for some reason more than bugs me, but that may be because I am so filled with stinking emotions off the loss and other stuff.

Northman
11-23-2008, 09:02 PM
well i should have been more clear, talking bout them when they help up against the chargets and jets, and many of them yards and points they allow are from the fourth quarter after they been on the field all game due to a bad offense.

Ok, so i dont get it. You'll give the Raider defense a pass because they have a bad offense but hammer our defense (when we know they are bad) when our offense has been equally as bad? Kind of contradictory dont you think? If the Raider defense is their crutch then you have to know that our offense is our crutch. Is this to take anything away from the Raiders executing today? No. But it just goes back to my pointing out that our offense needs to be able to score on anyone in order to win. And considering we have scored on this team before should not matter. They were just better prepared for us. The loss sucks but the defense was put in a bad spot to begin with.

broken12
11-23-2008, 09:04 PM
raiders offense:
32 scoring 12.8 pts game, 257 yds game 30th, 138 pass yrds game 32nd, 10th running offense, thats why their defensive stats look bad i would trade our defense for theirs man 4 man and coordinator straight up and am willing to bet that we would have a better record.

Northman
11-23-2008, 09:04 PM
I am norwegian. Called nordmann in norwegian which directly translates as northman.
Your username for some reason more than bugs me, but that may be because I am so filled with stinking emotions off the loss and other stuff.

Ahhh, well you should be complimented. I love Norway and the wife and i want to go there. We would like to move there but word is they wont allow anymore citizens to live there. Not too mention i love a lot of bands from there as well as Viking mythology. So, its not a slight at norwegian people.

G_Money
11-23-2008, 09:05 PM
We can't expect him to cook a 3 star meal.

All we're gonna get from Slowik are zero, one, or two-star meals. Expect a one star, and a two-star one can be a pleasant surprise (see the last couple of weeks prior to this one).

This was about 1.5 stars. It was a 2.5 star first half, followed by a .5 star second half once the offense packed it in.

If we can blame this loss directly on Slowik, then there is no loss all season that isn't on Slowik.

As terrible a DC as I believe he is, his D gave up 10 points in 45 minutes. What else do you want from your under-manned, badly-schemed defense?

Turnovers? We're not gettin' em. Slowik's D is anti-turnover. We don't want those things.

Goal line stands? Made em.

Getting the ball back to the O without points getting on the board? Did that too.

If our "world-class" offensive geniuses can't get a top-3 receiving corps with a top-5 statistical QB who is NEVER sacked to score more than 10 points in a game, the loss will almost always be on them.

In the end, the D folded.

The O was an origami swan before the game even started.

If Slowik's pathetic, then how bad does that make our offensive coaches today?

~G

Northman
11-23-2008, 09:05 PM
raiders offense:
32 scoring 12.8 pts game, 257 yds game 30th, 138 pass yrds game 32nd, 10th running offense, thats why their defensive stats look bad i would trade our defense for theirs man 4 man and coordinator straight up and am willing to bet that we would have a better record.

And if they had our offense they would be leading the division. And? :lol:

broken12
11-23-2008, 09:11 PM
Ok, so i dont get it. You'll give the Raider defense a pass because they have a bad offense but hammer our defense (when we know they are bad) when our offense has been equally as bad? Kind of contradictory dont you think? If the Raider defense is their crutch then you have to know that our offense is our crutch. Is this to take anything away from the Raiders executing today? No. But it just goes back to my pointing out that our offense needs to be able to score on anyone in order to win. And considering we have scored on this team before should not matter. They were just better prepared for us. The loss sucks but the defense was put in a bad spot to begin with.

and who prepares the players, thats my argument. The defense is never put in position to make a play we sit back and wait for mistakes instead of forcing em like they did on us. They consistantly blitzed and put pressure on Jay forcing him to get rid of the ball early.

ChampWJ
11-23-2008, 09:14 PM
and who prepares the players, thats my argument. The defense is never put in position to make a play we sit back and wait for mistakes instead of forcing em like they did on us. They consistantly blitzed and put pressure on Jay forcing him to get rid of the ball early.

I've been to the last 2 Raider games here, and both games their defensive line tossed around our O-line like they were practice squad players. They schemed us well today, and we made absolutely ZERO adjustments as usual. From the stands, all the players (and fans) looked like a deer in the headlights most of the day.

broken12
11-23-2008, 09:22 PM
I'm not a huge fan of Slowick but we can't expect him to cook a 5 star meal with rotten groceries or an empty cupboard.

Well I guess youre saying champ, elvis, dwayne, marcus, dj, dre are rotten huh, because when we were at full force I didnt see anything different.

G_Money
11-23-2008, 09:26 PM
I've been to the last 2 Raider games here, and both games their defensive line tossed around our O-line like they were practice squad players. They schemed us well today, and we made absolutely ZERO adjustments as usual. From the stands, all the players (and fans) looked like a deer in the headlights most of the day.

Their huge guys were definitely moving us, especially inside. Wiegmann and Hamilton were being shoved backward all day.

But our YPC was better against them than they were against us.

And Jay wasn't sacked, nor was he running for his life. He had plenty of time to throw those incomplete 30+ yard passes downfield.

They played man pretty much all day. All we had to do was get some crossing routes going, or throw some screens when they were trying to kill Jay, and make them pay.

It never happened.

I don't think Bates like screens. I know he doesn't like 7 yard passes over the middle.

Must not be glamorous enough. It was working with Stokley early to move the chains, and we never went back to it.

Just a strange game. Poor play, bad play-calls, no energy...and against a division rival to boot, after ALREADY having one division-rival wakeup call against the Chiefs earlier this year.

There really ARE no excuses today. Nobody was ready to win this game. The defense came out willing to play, but none of them believe they can win a game for this team. Sadly, they're probably right, but they view their job as "don't lose this for your offense."

It's on the O to win every game. And they really don't seem cut out for it after that 3 game hot start. Not for 60 minutes surely, but in games like this and KC, not at all.

That's a problem, especially since that's the side of the ball we're building around.

~G

Northman
11-23-2008, 09:29 PM
Well I guess youre saying champ, elvis, dwayne, marcus, dj, dre are rotten huh, because when we were at full force I didnt see anything different.

So is it really Slowik or the players?

Slick
11-23-2008, 09:36 PM
Well I guess youre saying champ, elvis, dwayne, marcus, dj, dre are rotten huh, because when we were at full force I didnt see anything different.

Yeah, pretty much. Outside of Champ and DJ, there's not much talent there IMO.

G_Money
11-23-2008, 09:44 PM
So is it really Slowik or the players?

Little of column A, little of column B.

Okay, a LOT of column A, but Slowik would look better with the talent on the Giants D, I'm sure. But not nearly as good as Spagnaulo looks.

Slowik doesn't know what to do with the tools he's given.

He hasn't been given a LOT of tools, but even in the beginning of the season with everyone healthy he wasn't blitzing DJ, wasn't committing the safeties to run defense (their supposed strength) and instead had them devoted to pass coverage (their undeniable weakness).

Thomas and Robertson have started to shore up the run game at least a little bit. The rookie LBs are better than the vets, which speaks poorly of both the vets and Slowik. Paymah is not good but was only put in position to fail against Miami. We aren't talent-rich on defense, but I don't believe we're abominable either. At least I hope not, or playoff success is even further away. A new coach will hopefully let us know how bad our recent defensive drafts are or are not. Under Slowik, I just can't tell. He can't do anything to maximize whatever talent he would have on the field.

If we need to have awesome talent for Slowik to be any good, then he might as well walk now, because the odds are we won't have an entire D full of awesome talent. At best we'll have some good scheme players and a couple of Pro Bowlers. Giving Slowik more time for us to get better players is like hoping the Germans will stand still long enough for us to get these stupid guns in the Maginot Line turned around.

Our talent on defense will hopefully get better over the next couple of years, but we're not ever gonna be the Giants with a devastating defense. Shanahan has never had a devastating D, and wouldn't know what to do with one if it came to him.

And even if it DID come to him, Slowik would make it less-than-devastating.

But he's still not the main reason we lost today. ;)

~G

broken12
11-23-2008, 09:50 PM
Little of column A, little of column B.

Okay, a LOT of column A, but Slowik would look better with the talent on the Giants D, I'm sure. But not nearly as good as Spagnaulo looks.

Slowik doesn't know what to do with the tools he's given.

He hasn't been given a LOT of tools, but even in the beginning of the season with everyone healthy he wasn't blitzing DJ, wasn't committing the safeties to run defense (their supposed strength) and instead had them devoted to pass coverage (their undeniable weakness).

Thomas and Robertson have started to shore up the run game at least a little bit. The rookie LBs are better than the vets, which speaks poorly of both the vets and Slowik. Paymah is not good but was only put in position to fail against Miami.

If we need to have awesome talent for Slowik to be any good, then he might as well walk now, because the odds are we won't have an entire D full of awesome talent. At best we'll have some good scheme players and a couple of Pro Bowlers. Giving Slowik more time for us to get better players is like hoping the Germans will stand still long enough for us to get these stupid guns in the Maginot Line turned around.

Our talent on defense will hopefully get better over the next couple of years, but we're not ever gonna be the Giants with a devastating defense. Shanahan has never had a devastating D, and wouldn't know what to do with one if it came to him.

And even if it DID come to him, Slowik would make it less-than-devastating.

But he's still not the main reason we lost today. ;)

~G

no way he would do any better with dif talent. I watched some of the cardinals game and the giants run stunts and blitzes on defense, something denver doesnt. When you play a young qb you should try and confuse him not sit back and react. I dont think that we are coached to cause havok they only react to what happens. This completely SUCKS, cmon the raiders offense 31 points please no excuse for that! I really wish that shannahan would consider bringing in a new coordinator, I really wouldnt even mind seeing robinson come back, I remember when he faced a young qb he would zone dawg, blitz, stunt dlineman and force mistakes, which cause turnovers. Week in and out all i see is the read and react d, hate it. We need an aggressive scheme with the speed we have on defense I really think we could do something.

G_Money
11-23-2008, 09:55 PM
I don't disagree with you, broken. I've been a charter member of the Fire Slowik Brigade.

But of all the things that are fixable and not fixable about the current season, our defense is not fixable. Slowik can stay the rest of the year, or get canned and replaced by a mechanical monkey clanging cymbals and it won't make an appreciable difference. No DC is gonna be able to come in here from outside the org and implement a better system in the remaining weeks. Can't be done.

The offense, OTOH, CAN be improved this year. We can get better playcalling, and better communication between QB and WR, and more efficient use of the red zone.

These things can happen. After a game like this when those things went awry, we should be looking to fix those things.

The D will hopefully take care of itself the day the season is over and Shanny cans his friend Slowik and hires a real DC to a guaranteed, can't-be-fired-for-3-years contract.

But for right now, Slowik's D is just a problem that will continue to burn my retinas for the remaining weeks.

I would like the offense to stop contributing to my cataracts, and that SHOULD be doable. Soon.

~G

Slick
11-23-2008, 09:59 PM
Don't think I'm trying to let Slow off the hook here broken. This was a bad loss. It stings. I can't decide if I feel worse now, or after the KC ass whopping. I just can't single him out today. The whole team stunk.

As far as firing coaches, I don't think anything happens until the end of the season. As shitty as some of the losses have been, we still control our own destiny. I just don't see any knee-jerk reactions coming from Shanahan or Bowlen until the season is over. You may get your wish then, and I surely wouldn't complain.

broken12
11-23-2008, 10:14 PM
Don't think I'm trying to let Slow off the hook here broken. This was a bad loss. It stings. I can't decide if I feel worse now, or after the KC ass whopping. I just can't single him out today. The whole team stunk.

As far as firing coaches, I don't think anything happens until the end of the season. As shitty as some of the losses have been, we still control our own destiny. I just don't see any knee-jerk reactions coming from Shanahan or Bowlen until the season is over. You may get your wish then, and I surely wouldn't complain.

well now that I had time to eat I see some points here. Firing him now would do us no good but, it wouldnt hurt us either. I would really like to see us go to a tampa 2 or bring in someone from the eagles defensive staff.

MOtorboat
11-23-2008, 10:15 PM
well now that I had time to eat I see some points here. Firing him now would do us no good but, it wouldnt hurt us either. I would really like to see us go to a tampa 2 or bring in someone from the eagles defensive staff.

We don't have the front line to go Tampa 2.

broken12
11-23-2008, 10:19 PM
We don't have the front line to go Tampa 2.

well indy two would be good enough. With the offense we go if we had a mediocre d it would be nice. A defense that could take away something, pass or run either or@!

G_Money
11-23-2008, 10:19 PM
No, but there are some good Tampa 2 DL in the draft.

I'd still like to bring in the DB coach for the Bucs as our new DC.

Maybe we can get Coyer back here with a bigger title to help out with the D-Line, too.

~G

MOtorboat
11-23-2008, 10:20 PM
well indy two would be good then!!

Still don't have the personnel.

G_Money
11-23-2008, 10:22 PM
MB... we don't have the personnel to run ANY scheme well right now.

That's part of the point of getting a new DC, so we can get some players to fit his scheme in the future while he tries to make something better than we currently have as we wait for all the pieces to be in place.

~G

broken12
11-23-2008, 10:23 PM
Still don't have the personnel.

what does indy have that denver dont.

MOtorboat
11-23-2008, 10:23 PM
MB... we don't have the personnel to run ANY scheme well right now.

That's part of the point of getting a new DC, so we can get some players to fit his scheme in the future while he tries to make something better than we currently have as we wait for all the pieces to be in place.

~G

A new DC won't change the talent.

MOtorboat
11-23-2008, 10:24 PM
what does indy have that denver dont.

Players.
Specifically Bob Sanders and Dwight Freeney.

G_Money
11-23-2008, 10:26 PM
A new DC won't change the talent.

A new DC can figure out a better way to utilize our current talent.

And if our next draft is gonna be a defensive draft, then I don't want Slowik's input for what he needs to make his scheme work, because his scheme doesn't work.

I'd like a scheme that DOES work before we start drafting and signing players for it.

~G

MOtorboat
11-23-2008, 10:27 PM
A new DC can figure out a better way to utilize our current talent.

And if our next draft is gonna be a defensive draft, then I don't want Slowik's input for what he needs to make his scheme work, because his scheme doesn't work.

I'd like a scheme that DOES work before we start drafting and signing players for it.

~G

Four coordinators in four years haven't figured out the talent, so I'm still trying to figure out how No. 5 will hit the magic button.

broken12
11-23-2008, 10:30 PM
Players.
Specifically Bob Sanders and Dwight Freeney.

the colts dont have bob sanders either, or a bailey or a bly or a dj williams, dtackle that weighs 240 and starts. cmon, I really believe that we have plenty of talent on defense and if they were schemed to make plays instead of reacting to what offenses run we would be in better shape. When we force dthe action against the falcons we looked good, when we waited it didnt look good.

BroncoTech
11-23-2008, 10:32 PM
What baffles me is our goal line stands have been stellar all year. Yet our D-line sucks. I'm wondering if all this attention on the D line is without merit and the real problem lays at safety. Both? :listen:

G_Money
11-23-2008, 10:54 PM
Four coordinators in four years haven't figured out the talent, so I'm still trying to figure out how No. 5 will hit the magic button.

Who's our 4th coordinator?

Coyer was DC for 4 years, then Bates for one, then Slowik for one.

Coyer wasn't canned, he resigned. Shanahan wanted him to make staff changes after a season where Bates went passive and refused to blitz, and teams started to cut us apart in the 2nd half of the year.

He refused out of loyalty and resigned his position. Shanahan still respects him for that, btw.

Then we brought in Bates, who has only ever had success in one scheme and took FOREVER to become a DC. He couldn't modify his scheme to fit our personnel and Shanahan didn't like him personally.

He did like Slowik, so when Jim fell on the sword Bob got his shot. And he's proving what he did in Cleveland and Green Bay: he may be a decent positional coach but he's a terrible DC.

Not much of that has to do with personnel. We obviously need a lot of it, and we've switched out most of it over the last 3 seasons to little avail.

Shanahan's acquisitions for the Bates defense were terrible. His safeties and LB added for Slowik were similarly awful. If those two guys were advocating those players, then they should stop advising.

However, I thought our defensive draftees and UDFAs were decent this year even though our actual FAs were terrible. Was that Slowik, or the Goodmans? I tend to say it was the Goodmans, simply because Slowik hasn't proven to be good at anything else, while the Goodmans seem to be definitively proving that they ARE good at the draft.

I'm not looking for a magic button from a new DC.

Just one who understands that we need to pressure the QB. Front 4, blitzes, I don't care. Either get the right personnel for a no-blitz scheme or teach the ones we do get how to stunt and blitz correctly.

Adding better personnel to a defense that refuses to blitz and has run-stopping safeties in coverage won't help matters much. Not unless they're world beaters, and in how many drafts have we gotten a bunch of defensive world beaters?

A large part of our future success on D will have to be scheme and execution.

If you think Slowik can handle those things, then you and I will have to agree to disagree, because he has never shown that he can. Ever.

If we could get a bunch of great coaches for DL, LB, and DBs, then Slowik would probably improve. But why not let a new coach handle that? Since these are Slowik's guys, and they can't teach anybody anything, why would I believe he can find better coaches if he's retained long-term?

I want a long-term coach on defense. Just not this one. There are plenty of better options. No sense wasting any more years than we have to with our current worthless option.

And dammit, I spent most of this thread arguing against blaming Slowik for this loss. All that's undone now I guess... :tsk:

~G

broken12
11-23-2008, 10:57 PM
Lol

Foochacho
11-23-2008, 11:00 PM
What baffles me is our goal line stands have been stellar all year. Yet our D-line sucks. I'm wondering if all this attention on the D line is without merit and the real problem lays at safety. Both? :listen:

I would agree with this if we could get some pressure on the qb. We can clog up the middle on short yardage goal line plays but our Dline gets manhandled in the middle of the field. Well really our whole defense does.

Slick
11-23-2008, 11:01 PM
G, you're a badass. Can I get a signed copy of your next novel?

G_Money
11-23-2008, 11:02 PM
If I ever get a novel published, I'll freight one down to Mexico for you.

It'll be worth a little less than the paper it's printed on, but it'll be signed.

~G

fcspikeit
11-23-2008, 11:51 PM
Why is it so difficult to read more than one post?

How many times have I said we should can him? I said before the season we shouldnt have hired him, I said at the offweek we should have fired him and I have said numerous times today we should fire him.
Firing Slowik has nothing to do with having consistency at coaching!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!

Is that clear now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

UNBELIEVABLE! The only way your post could be understood is if you don't compare it to any of your other post's. Your talking in circles! One minute your saying we need to fire our DC, then when someone else says the same exact thing you reply with

"I mean go over the teams that are consistently good and you find consistency at coaching. Heck, the Ravens are good because their defense is good, and despite Flacco. Not surprisingly they didnt fire their DC when they fired their HC.

This is not an attack on you at all, but I wish people would just look at the stats and rosters and try to find the common denominators.
I am tired of doing this argument."

How does wanting to fire Slowik our 3rd DC in 3 years bring "consistency at coaching" :confused:

I guess it was my fault for trying to make sense of all the contractions in your post. That wont happen again! There are many who post simply because they like seeing their name in the thread. Who am I to stop you, have fun with that :salute:

broken12
11-24-2008, 12:00 AM
You know I didnt say much to start the year out thinking there was maybe a chance some adjustments would be made. That being said it just all built up and seeing the same thing every week its not hard for teams to figure out what we are doing. Its so upsetting that theres a loss for words, lol. The question is, if hes not fired what can he do to improve the pass rush and lower completion percentages of opposing qbs?

scott.475
11-24-2008, 12:32 AM
That our D is worse than it was last year is simply stunning, but I used "stunning" several times today, so I had to find some more to describe how I feel about our D: aghast, amazed, astonished, astounded, bewildered, blown away, bowled over, breathless, confounded, confused, dismayed, dumbfounded, flabbergasted, floored, frozen, numb, overcome, overwhelmed, shocked, speechless, startled, stumped, stupefied, surprised, taken aback.

I agree that our O was terrible today. We abandoned the run early to focus on deep balls the entire game, whatever that was about, and they looked like they simply expected to roll over the Raiders like we did earlier (I had a feeling this might happen). but the fact is, every once in awhile, a team should be able to win by scoring 10, 13 or 14 points. If someone simply gave us 14 points to start the game with, we still would not be able to feel good about our chances of winning with this D.

If we had lost, say, 14-10, I would be perfectly happy to lay all the blame on the O, but the fact that we let the 2008 Raiders score 31 points leaves me aghast, amazed, astonished, astounded, bewildered, blown away, bowled over, breathless, confounded, confused, dismayed, dumbfounded, flabbergasted, floored, frozen, numb, overcome, overwhelmed, shocked, speechless, startled, stumped, stupefied, surprised, taken aback. It has been this way all year, we should NOT have to score 30 points every game in order to win.

I know I am venting, and I certainly no longer expect Slowik to be fired before the end of the season, but this D is truly abhorrent, abominable, antipathetic, contemptible, despicable, despisable, detestable, disgusting, foul, infamous, loathsome, lousy, low, nasty, nefarious, obnoxious, odious, repugnant, rotten, shabby, vile and I do not think the D players even have any respect for their coach or in the scheme, and once that is gone there is really no fixing it.

sneakers
11-24-2008, 12:37 AM
Greg Robinson is now available.

scott.475
11-24-2008, 12:46 AM
Greg Robinson is now available.

Couldn't be worse. Of course, I said that last year, but this year I really think it is true

broken12
11-24-2008, 01:06 AM
The broncos are the only division leader to be outscored by opponents, like i said high scoring offense and yet we are still being outscored llucky to be 6-5

Lonestar
11-24-2008, 02:14 AM
Sorry I have not had time to read the thread so If I step on someone Else's ideas great minds think alike..

what happened today was not all slowick fault but it was obvious that after a pretty good first half they were not prepared to play after half time..

We have had 3 Dc over the past few years.. Coyer a brilliant tactician that schemed well considering the drought of talent form draft days since he got here..

Mikey has always loved fast LB's and all of his Defenses have been built around LB's..
In 2003 we were exposed by Manning in the playoffs because we played off the WR and allowed pass after pass to be completed under our coverage..

We brought in the best shut down corner in the market and wallah everything was supposedly fixed until next year when manning nailed us again..

The we had the PIT PO loss .. each time someone els got blamed for th real failure and that was the same issue we had had since mikey got here.. NO pass rush.

As I said coyer was brilliant in his scheme in the first half of every game and then when the OC changed stuff up in the second half we bombed almost every game we were not up by 50 points a half time..:laugh::laugh:

We brought in Bate a great DC in two other cities after I might add promoting slowick to DC we made bates an assistant HC defense..
something about Bates addition tells me it was not an original thought of mikey..

Well Bates was gone at the bye and we have double sucked since..

We seem to be loaded with young aggressive talent at most all positions, why are we using losers like MM and MM a safety?

Is it now time just to play the kiddies come what may and see what we have prior to mikeys inevitable EOS press conference where he blows smoke up everyones ass with the tired and UNTRUE "we are just two players away from a super bowl run"

With that Good nite to all..

BroncoTech
11-24-2008, 04:43 AM
We complain about rushing the passer and we've only been sacked 7 times in 10 games, If passing time in the pocket wins games we're going to the super bowl, right?. There's only 3 or 4 guys in the NFL that can get sacks game after game, and we don't have one of them. Obviously most teams don't have a pass rush.

With the rules they have now, you can't hit them high, and you can't hit them low. It's not the same game we grew up loving.

haroldthebarrel
11-24-2008, 08:00 AM
UNBELIEVABLE! The only way your post could be understood is if you don't compare it to any of your other post's. Your talking in circles! One minute your saying we need to fire our DC, then when someone else says the same exact thing you reply with

"I mean go over the teams that are consistently good and you find consistency at coaching. Heck, the Ravens are good because their defense is good, and despite Flacco. Not surprisingly they didnt fire their DC when they fired their HC.

This is not an attack on you at all, but I wish people would just look at the stats and rosters and try to find the common denominators.
I am tired of doing this argument."

How does wanting to fire Slowik our 3rd DC in 3 years bring "consistency at coaching" :confused:

I guess it was my fault for trying to make sense of all the contractions in your post. That wont happen again! There are many who post simply because they like seeing their name in the thread. Who am I to stop you, have fun with that :salute:



One of the problem we have and have had is different schemes each year.
We have one coach who has shown over the years he cant do his job.
What I want is to get a coach who has talent and give him years.
Coyer did the job with less talent, yet we fired him.
Slowick on the other hand has proven he cannot do this. But still, it would not be good to change cordinator every other year, since new schemes make some players good, and lots of other unfit for this scheme.

It is entirely possible to fire the man, and give a new man more time to do his job.
Learn what a contradiction is! And if you are talking about contractions I have no idea what the heck you are talking about. contractions are added string of words and have nothing to do with logical syllogisms.

gobroncsnv
11-24-2008, 08:02 AM
With the rules they have now, you can't hit them high, and you can't hit them low. It's not the same game we grew up loving.

This is not a rules problem... we can't even hit them at all...

But with the players we've got, in conjunction with the coaches we've got, a change of coaching staff will not make this a top 10 D... Sad to think, we'd even settle for top 25 right now.

Here's the REAL problem... Tear down the cupcake castle called Invesco Field at Mile High, and rebuild the REAL Mile High Stadium again... That would fix our problems.

Any port in a storm, right?

Fan in Exile
11-24-2008, 08:04 AM
UNBELIEVABLE! The only way your post could be understood is if you don't compare it to any of your other post's. Your talking in circles! One minute your saying we need to fire our DC, then when someone else says the same exact thing you reply with

"I mean go over the teams that are consistently good and you find consistency at coaching. Heck, the Ravens are good because their defense is good, and despite Flacco. Not surprisingly they didnt fire their DC when they fired their HC.

This is not an attack on you at all, but I wish people would just look at the stats and rosters and try to find the common denominators.
I am tired of doing this argument."

How does wanting to fire Slowik our 3rd DC in 3 years bring "consistency at coaching" :confused:

I guess it was my fault for trying to make sense of all the contractions in your post. That wont happen again! There are many who post simply because they like seeing their name in the thread. Who am I to stop you, have fun with that :salute:

I'm tired of this argument as well, because you're getting cause and effect messed up. Sure the great teams do have consistent coaching. However, that's because their coaches don't suck so they don't get fired.

Good coaching leads to good play which leads to continuity. You can't just say that if you keep any DC for five/ten years that he's going to put together a good defense just because he has time. SLowick has had plenty of time plenty of places, now it's time to bring in somebody good, so that we can keep him for years.

haroldthebarrel
11-24-2008, 08:16 AM
These are my arguments in a nutshell.

1. I want to have a new cordinator.
1a. Because Slowik has proven over his career and this year he is not the man for the job.
1b I preferably want one who has a proven record; but I also want one who is better at motivation and talent finding than scheming if I had to choose between the two.

2. I want the new cordinator to get more than two years to find the players and put the people in position to play consistent defense.

2a Based on the premise that the good teams all have consistency.
2b based on the fact that we have consistency at HC and offense but not defense.
2c based on the premise that we did have a defense under Coyer that was above average but didnt have much talent on the line, it was a mistake to let him go.


I challenge you and everybody else to find any contradictions there!

Btw the very definition of a contradiction is saying something is true and untrue at the same time. Not arguing in circles.

Fan in Exile
11-24-2008, 08:25 AM
These are my arguments in a nutshell.

1. I want to have a new cordinator.
1a. Because Slowik has proven over his career and this year he is not the man for the job.
1b I preferably want one who has a proven record; but I also want one who is better at motivation and talent finding than scheming if I had to choose between the two.

2. I want the new cordinator to get more than two years to find the players and put the people in position to play consistent defense.

2a Based on the premise that the good teams all have consistency.
2b based on the fact that we have consistency at HC and offense but not defense.
2c based on the premise that we did have a defense under Coyer that was above average but didnt have much talent on the line, it was a mistake to let him go.


I challenge you and everybody else to find any contradictions there!

Btw the very definition of a contradiction is saying something is true and untrue at the same time. Not arguing in circles.

Harold I would argue with the premise in 2a, not because it's a contradiction but because I think you're getting cause and effect mixed up. People stay at one place for a while not in order to have a good defense but because they put together a good one.

With that being said I would however argue that we need to keep a DC for at least 3 years, because it takes time to see how they draft and put people into their scheme.

In addition to that if we have to replace the next DC it will be a lot easier to find one if he knows that he's going to get a chance.

haroldthebarrel
11-24-2008, 08:35 AM
Harold I would argue with the premise in 2a, not because it's a contradiction but because I think you're getting cause and effect mixed up. People stay at one place for a while not in order to have a good defense but because they put together a good one.

With that being said I would however argue that we need to keep a DC for at least 3 years, because it takes time to see how they draft and put people into their scheme.

In addition to that if we have to replace the next DC it will be a lot easier to find one if he knows that he's going to get a chance.

I dont dispute that at all. it is a risk to hire any new guy.
Your argument is absolutely correct, and btw that is the reason I did not want to fire Coyer. I wanted him to get better talent in the trenches first.

On the other hand, that premise should also be tied up to 1c, which incidently is why I am advocating going after Nolan and Singletary number one, and the defensive line coach in Tn and Secondary coach in Tb second should we want to take a higher risk/reward outlet.

But we cannot start getting new guys in and out with different schemes every other year. That way we risk the free agents and drafted players not panning out since they are drafted for one scheme but very often does not fit a new one. You cant play TB cover2 base for instance with Casey Hampton and Jamal Williams at the DT no matter how immovable they are.
I.e look at Moss and Crowder who would definately fit the Bates scheme but particularly Crowder may be in the doghouse now since he might fit the new scheme the least.

Fan in Exile
11-24-2008, 08:41 AM
Harold,

I totally agree with you Nolan or Singletary would be great. I would love the D-line coach from the Titans if he could teach our guys to play like theirs.

Fan in Exile
11-24-2008, 08:44 AM
So I looked him up and his name is Jim Washburn. I really liked this part of his profile.

"Over the years, Washburn has demonstrated the ability to develop talent, molding players like Kyle Vanden Bosch, Jevon Kearse, John Thornton, Robaire Smith, Antwan Odom, Kevin Carter, Albert Haynesworth and Tony Brown into top-flight producers. During his tenure, four of his players (Kearse, Vanden Bosch, Carter, Haynesworth) have earned a total of seven Pro Bowl selections."

broncofaninfla
11-24-2008, 09:02 AM
Yesterday, we were out coached by the Raiders on BOTH sides of the ball. Almost every QB that has faced us this year has had a career game against us and Bates play calling on offense make me wonder if he is actually a Raider fan. No way he could be that stupid.

Traveler
11-24-2008, 09:35 AM
Here's hoping all or most of the defensive position coaches get replaced after the season except Slowik. Keep him as DB coach.

I will say it seems as though Larsen & Woodyard should remain starters for the remainder of the season. Just switch Woodyard to SAM. Linebacker play has improved with the kiddies in the lineup.

broken12
11-24-2008, 12:16 PM
Anyone notice that the raiders were 7-7 on third downs in the second half. Denver allows record 3rd down conversion percentage and this all comes from scheme!!

MOtorboat
11-24-2008, 12:31 PM
Anyone notice that the raiders were 7-7 on third downs in the second half. Denver allows record 3rd down conversion percentage and this all comes from scheme!!

That's a a ridiculous statement. Anyone who has gone 7-7 or 8-8 or 9-9 would hold that "record."

Northman
11-24-2008, 12:43 PM
That's a a ridiculous statement. Anyone who has gone 7-7 or 8-8 or 9-9 would hold that "record."

Brunell has that record i believe at 22 straight completions or something like that. Against the Jags no less.

MOtorboat
11-24-2008, 12:47 PM
Brunell has that record i believe at 22 straight completions or something like that. Against the Jags no less.

I think he meant on third down...

But doesn't Gannon own the consecutive completions with 39 straight against us, no less.

I know Brunell didn't miss in a game, but Gannon went 39 straight against us on a Monday or Sunday night game, I think.

Northman
11-24-2008, 12:49 PM
I think he meant on third down...

But doesn't Gannon own the consecutive completions with 39 straight against us, no less.

I know Brunell didn't miss in a game, but Gannon went 39 straight against us on a Monday or Sunday night game, I think.

Maybe, i cant remember. Wouldnt surprise me though. Good thing the Bills took away our trophy for most turnovers in a Super Bowl so outside of that im ok with anything. :lol:

broken12
11-24-2008, 12:51 PM
Meanwhile, Denver's defense became increasingly sluggish as the Raiders held the ball for nearly 20 minutes in the second half, compared to about 10 minutes for the Broncos' offense.

Oakland, whose backs rushed 27 times in the second half, converted seven consecutive third-down opportunities after halftime. The Raiders converted only 1-of-5 third downs in the first half.

"It was a drastic change," Broncos coach Mike Shanahan said. "Obviously they executed much better, and I am disappointed on our part in third downs







when im talking bout 7-7 im talking about the third down conversions against our defense in the second half!!!!

Northman
11-24-2008, 12:55 PM
Meanwhile, Denver's defense became increasingly sluggish as the Raiders held the ball for nearly 20 minutes in the second half, compared to about 10 minutes for the Broncos' offense.

Oakland, whose backs rushed 27 times in the second half, converted seven consecutive third-down opportunities after halftime. The Raiders converted only 1-of-5 third downs in the first half.

"It was a drastic change," Broncos coach Mike Shanahan said. "Obviously they executed much better, and I am disappointed on our part in third downs







when im talking bout 7-7 im talking about the third down conversions against our defense in the second half!!!!


Welcome to football. You either make plays or you dont.

MOtorboat
11-24-2008, 12:59 PM
Welcome to football. You either make plays or you dont.

Same thing with the offense, especially on the first drive of the game.

Raiders go three and out, the defense does a great job of getting off the field, force Russell to complete a dump-off pass on third down, get a good tackle and force a punt.

Everything is set up for a perfect game-opening, Mike Shanahan-style death grip type rhythm game, and what happens? Cutler fumbles the ball on the freakin' seven yard line.

Was that the defense's fault. Hell no. Turnovers lead to tired defenses. Tired defenses lead to second halves like the one we saw yesterday. The inability of the offense to get in a rhythm, allowed Oakland's offense to get in a rhythm and game over from there.

broken12
11-24-2008, 01:03 PM
Welcome to football. You either make plays or you dont.

thats the problem, this defense never does. Is it the players, no, its the scheme we had worse players under coyer and seemed to make plays. Thats why I beleive a change is necessary. We are never even close to making plays. If we were close to making plays it would lead me to believe that maybe its the personnel. I reallly liked what we did against the Falcons, it seemed to work I dont understand why we didnt stick with that!! We were not prepared, everytime the raiders went to spread formation it was mass confusion.

Lonestar
11-24-2008, 01:04 PM
Meanwhile, Denver's defense became increasingly sluggish as the Raiders held the ball for nearly 20 minutes in the second half, compared to about 10 minutes for the Broncos' offense.

Oakland, whose backs rushed 27 times in the second half, converted seven consecutive third-down opportunities after halftime. The Raiders converted only 1-of-5 third downs in the first half.

"It was a drastic change," Broncos coach Mike Shanahan said. "Obviously they executed much better, and I am disappointed on our part in third downs

when im talking bout 7-7 im talking about the third down conversions against our defense in the second half!!!!

and the reeeeeeally bad news was of those 10 in the second half we got almost 6 of them in the first drive of the half..

Lonestar
11-24-2008, 01:09 PM
thats the problem, this defense never does. Is it the players, no, its the scheme we had worse players under coyer and seemed to make plays. Thats why I beleive a change is necessary. We are never even close to making plays. If we were close to making plays it would lead me to believe that maybe its the personnel. I reallly liked what we did against the Falcons, it seemed to work I dont understand why we didnt stick with that!! We were not prepared, everytime the raiders went to spread formation it was mass confusion.


please forget coyer while great schemer once the OC for the other side figured it out he was NEVER able to make counter adjustments in the second half to beat the other team..

How many games did we have a good lead going into the second half only to see it go down the toilet in the second half and in many cases have to have a last second come back to win..

coyer was not that great a DC, I'm not sure he could do this well with the exsisting talent we have..

Northman
11-24-2008, 01:09 PM
thats the problem, this defense never does. Is it the players, no, its the scheme we had worse players under coyer and seemed to make plays. Thats why I beleive a change is necessary. We are never even close to making plays. If we were close to making plays it would lead me to believe that maybe its the personnel. I reallly liked what we did against the Falcons, it seemed to work I dont understand why we didnt stick with that!! We were not prepared, everytime the raiders went to spread formation it was mass confusion.


You cant stick with the same game plan everytime. I know there used to be this mantra that you go with what works until it doesnt but every team is different and it becomes a chess match. Im not saying Slowik is a great Dcordinator, im just saying that the defense was hardly the real issue yesterday. You like stats right? Go look at the Cutler Maturity thread that was started a while ago and look at his numbers from games we win and lose. If his Qb percentage is high we win, if not we lose.

I would love to have a shutdown defense but i know we dont, and i know we have a lot of young guys on this team. But the offense right now is our crutch and if they dont perform well there is no way our defense is going to step up enough (with a scheme or not) to win a game. Even against AtL we gave up 20 points so its not like the defense was the key to that game. Our offense kept putting pressure on THEIR defense which in turn put pressure on their offense and we managed to come up with good defensive plays. But if your offense is off forget about it, it just isnt happening.

So, we can talk about Slowik at the end of the year and i would be all for him going but right now i know that the defensive issues are there regardless. Its just a matter of how our offense does to whether or not we win ball games. Sad but true.

broken12
11-24-2008, 01:43 PM
Denver is supposed to promote Bob Slowik to their DC position. WOW, they are screwed. Granted Jim Bates was hired as assistant head coach, but I doubt Bates will be around their for long, maybe a year or two. Whenever Bates leaves the Broncos are seriously screwed on defense with Slowik as DC. Some of the most horrific play calling I've ever seen when he was in GB. I mean after the first game it looked like he couldn't call one correct defensive play. I think if a lay person were given a sheet with a few defensive calls on it and was asked to randomly call the game, he could get a few more right calls the Slowik did. I just find it weird that such an intelligent coach like Shannahan would make that bad of a hire.


thats from a gb post over a year ago, someone could see the future

MOtorboat
11-24-2008, 01:47 PM
Denver is supposed to promote Bob Slowik to their DC position. WOW, they are screwed. Granted Jim Bates was hired as assistant head coach, but I doubt Bates will be around their for long, maybe a year or two. Whenever Bates leaves the Broncos are seriously screwed on defense with Slowik as DC. Some of the most horrific play calling I've ever seen when he was in GB. I mean after the first game it looked like he couldn't call one correct defensive play. I think if a lay person were given a sheet with a few defensive calls on it and was asked to randomly call the game, he could get a few more right calls the Slowik did. I just find it weird that such an intelligent coach like Shannahan would make that bad of a hire.


thats from a gb post over a year ago, someone could see the future

I could probably find someone who said Mike Tomlin was a bad hire too. You can find that with any coaching change.

Since you're randomly searching team web sites to see what people think of certain hires, you got anything about Mike Heimerdinger in Tennessee?

I know a lot of people around here thought he was a bum, and I wasn't overly fond of him either, but he's 10-1 right now.

MOtorboat
11-24-2008, 01:49 PM
P.S. Both Belicheck and Shanahan were idiots who would only be coordinators after their first head gigs...now both are multiple-time Super Bowl Champions.

Northman
11-24-2008, 01:50 PM
I could probably find someone who said Mike Tomlin was a bad hire too. You can find that with any coaching change.

Since you're randomly searching team web sites to see what people think of certain hires, you got anything about Mike Heimerdinger in Tennessee?

I know a lot of people around here thought he was a bum, and I wasn't overly fond of him either, but he's 10-1 right now.

Or Coyer,

Tampa Bay's Defense is ranked 4th in the league.

broken12
11-24-2008, 01:54 PM
I could probably find someone who said Mike Tomlin was a bad hire too. You can find that with any coaching change.

Since you're randomly searching team web sites to see what people think of certain hires, you got anything about Mike Heimerdinger in Tennessee?

I know a lot of people around here thought he was a bum, and I wasn't overly fond of him either, but he's 10-1 right now.

the problem with your argument is that these guys have proven otherwise, tomlin winning, hiemerburger winning too. slowik isnt or hasnt proven anyone wrong about the promotion to dc, was a bad choice. I thought with shannahans friendship with fisher that maybe he would pick a guy off his staff. Everywere slowik has been bad defense follows.

Lonestar
11-24-2008, 01:55 PM
Or Coyer,

Tampa Bay's Defense is ranked 4th in the league.

might be because the DL in decent.. better than he had in DEN..

When the HC believes in D he gets you talent.. outside of LB's every third year or so how many DL guys did mikey allow to be drafted in the number one slot..

I wonder if his D wilts in the second half after OC had a chance to dissect it and make changes at half time..

broken12
11-24-2008, 01:58 PM
Bob Slowik, the Broncos D-coordinator, should be ready to schlep his resume somewhere else, and again, barring some bizarre turnaround after the bye, he will get that offer when Mike Shanahan issues him his walking papers come the end of the season. There’s not enough of a pass rush, even with six sacks of Cassel. The linebacking crops is probably undersized, Bailey and Dre’ Bly are getting beat regularly, and the team has safeties that don’t help well, paricualarly if the play goes deep. If it comes to pass, that will make three defensive coordinators in the past three years (technically, Slowik held the position in 2007, but Jim Bates was in charge of the defense as associate head coach/defense after Larry Coyer was let go in 2006.)

Here is how much the defense allows in offensive yardage by its opponents, week to week:

Oakland: 317
San Diego: 486 (Denver had 30 fewer, won only due to Ed Hochuli)
New Orleans: 502
Kansas City: 370 (outgained by Denver, still won — with 200 of those yards belonging to Larry Johnson)
Tampa Bay: 307
Jacksonville: 417
New England: 404
You just can’t gunsling your way out of that, especially with the fumbling propensity evident on this team. As for the Patriots? We still really know nothing. They get beat by San Diego, they beat up on Denver — who can tell what’s the real version of this team with Cassel under center?

Northman
11-24-2008, 02:01 PM
might be because the DL in decent.. better than he had in DEN..

When the HC believes in D he gets you talent.. outside of LB's every third year or so how many DL guys did mikey allow to be drafted in the number one slot..

I wonder if his D wilts in the second half after OC had a chance to dissect it and make changes at half time..

Im sure the DL has a hand it in also. But it goes back to my theory that we havent given these DC's more than a couple of years to try and get this defense back on track. Every year this defense has to learn a new scheme. Remember last year? The second half of the season Bates had to dump his original scheme because the players just werent getting a grasp on it. Not too mention putting guys in positions they shouldnt really be playing anyway. I was going to say that the Bucs didnt have any real names on the DLine (as i never hear much about them) but looking at the roster i would be dead wrong. Adams, Hovan, and Carter are a nice solid group. So maybe the line has more to do with it but it still doesnt explain why we dump a guy if the problem is players, not the coach. :confused:

DenverBronkHoes
11-24-2008, 02:02 PM
we can stop the run now.... the defense is much better

MOtorboat
11-24-2008, 02:03 PM
Bob Slowik, the Broncos D-coordinator, should be ready to schlep his resume somewhere else, and again, barring some bizarre turnaround after the bye, he will get that offer when Mike Shanahan issues him his walking papers come the end of the season. There’s not enough of a pass rush, even with six sacks of Cassel. The linebacking crops is probably undersized, Bailey and Dre’ Bly are getting beat regularly, and the team has safeties that don’t help well, paricualarly if the play goes deep. If it comes to pass, that will make three defensive coordinators in the past three years (technically, Slowik held the position in 2007, but Jim Bates was in charge of the defense as associate head coach/defense after Larry Coyer was let go in 2006.)

Here is how much the defense allows in offensive yardage by its opponents, week to week:

Oakland: 317
San Diego: 486 (Denver had 30 fewer, won only due to Ed Hochuli)
New Orleans: 502
Kansas City: 370 (outgained by Denver, still won — with 200 of those yards belonging to Larry Johnson)
Tampa Bay: 307
Jacksonville: 417
New England: 404
You just can’t gunsling your way out of that, especially with the fumbling propensity evident on this team. As for the Patriots? We still really know nothing. They get beat by San Diego, they beat up on Denver — who can tell what’s the real version of this team with Cassel under center?

It sounds like you are quoting something...if so, I'd like a link to see the context.

broken12
11-24-2008, 02:13 PM
It sounds like you are quoting something...if so, I'd like a link to see the context.

http://s2nblog.wordpress.com/2008/10/21/bob-slowik-will-be-looking-for-a-job-next-year/


just another blog

jrelway
11-24-2008, 02:14 PM
fire him now, get a D coordinator that can scout true defensive talent in the draft and let him build upon that. slowik obviously cannot adjust and scheme the right way. let him scheme for KC, SD, or oakland. scheme them right into off season misery like hes doing for us.

broken12
11-24-2008, 02:24 PM
envers efense is allowing 27.5 pts, 380.4 yds, 235 pass, 144 rush yard a game, very sad

Entering Week 12, Oakland is last in the NFL in scoring offense (12.8 points per game), passing offense (136.9 yards per game), completion percentage (49.6), touchdowns (10), rushing touchdowns (3), passing touchdowns (6), and third-down percentage (22.1).The Raider o-line has struggled for much of the year, allowing 32 sacks, including six last week.

http://www.sacbee.com/1192/story/1415272.html


10-11 against denver, 7-7 on third downs against denver, 31 pts against denver. no sacks, wow we have some future with this defensive scheme.

Northman
11-24-2008, 02:27 PM
envers efense is allowing 27.5 pts, 380.4 yds, 235 pass, 144 rush yard a game, very sad

Entering Week 12, Oakland is last in the NFL in scoring offense (12.8 points per game), passing offense (136.9 yards per game), completion percentage (49.6), touchdowns (10), rushing touchdowns (3), passing touchdowns (6), and third-down percentage (22.1).

http://www.sacbee.com/1192/story/1415272.html


10-11 against denver, 7-7 on third downs against denver, 31 pts against denver. wow we have some future with this defensive scheme.

And yet our 3rd ranked offense only managed 10 points against the 25th ranked defense yesterday. Now, thats SAD.

broken12
11-24-2008, 02:31 PM
And yet our 3rd ranked offense only managed 10 points against the 25th ranked defense yesterday. Now, thats SAD.

with that said at least the offense has good days the defense dont and that is bad, i hope things get turned around, but from what i have seen from last to this year i doubt.

Lonestar
11-24-2008, 02:46 PM
I'm sure the DL has a hand it in also. But it goes back to my theory that we haven't given these DC's more than a couple of years to try and get this defense back on track. Every year this defense has to learn a new scheme. Remember last year? The second half of the season Bates had to dump his original scheme because the players just weren't getting a grasp on it. Not too mention putting guys in positions they shouldn't really be playing anyway. I was going to say that the Bucs didnt have any real names on the DLine (as i never hear much about them) but looking at the roster i would be dead wrong. Adams, Hovan, and Carter are a nice solid group. So maybe the line has more to do with it but it still doesnt explain why we dump a guy if the problem is players, not the coach. :confused:

that should read MIKEY.

Do you really think deep down that Bates was mikeys and only mickeys choice?

I firmly believe that Bates was brought in against mikeys wishes..

He had already promoted slowick to DC.. as going to go with his ideas (or for that matter mikeys ideas being foisted on the club as slowick).

a few weeks later it is announced to the world that Bate would become an assistant HC Defense kinda like Dinger was on O since dennison was already the OC..

While mikey humored Bates in players both as FA and draft. I did not think for a minute that Pat did not have a HUGE hand in what happened..

To draft 3 of only four choices for the DL was so out of character from mikey that sent up flares to anyone that cared to think about it..

It was rumored that no one on D liked the new system to complicated in the same report was all of the DB's really liked slow... he was a great DB coach..

I think mikey went along with it long enough to let him fail, justifying it to Pat and at the bye he put slow back in charge to finish out the season....

Northman
11-24-2008, 02:53 PM
that should read MIKEY.

Do you really think deep down that Bates was mikeys and only mickeys choice?

I firmly believe that Bates was brought in against mikeys wishes..

He had already promoted slowick to DC.. as going to go with his ideas (or for that matter mikeys ideas being foisted on the club as slowick).

a few weeks later it is announced to the world that Bate would become an assistant HC Defense kinda like Dinger was on O since dennison was already the OC..

While mikey humored Bates in players both as FA and draft. I did not think for a minute that Pat did not have a HUGE hand in what happened..

To draft 3 of only four choices for the DL was so out of character from mikey that sent up flares to anyone that cared to think about it..

It was rumored that no one on D liked the new system to complicated in the same report was all of the DB's really liked slow... he was a great DB coach..

I think mikey went along with it long enough to let him fail, justifying it to Pat and at the bye he put slow back in charge to finish out the season....


Again, maybe. I dont know the whole story on Shanny's and Bates relationship. Dont get me wrong, i think it is time for the buck to stop at Shanahan considering he gets a lot of credit for the success here just like he should also get some of the blame if not most of it.

Lonestar
11-24-2008, 03:03 PM
Again, maybe. I dont know the whole story on Shanny's and Bates relationship. Dont get me wrong, i think it is time for the buck to stop at Shanahan considering he gets a lot of credit for the success here just like he should also get some of the blame if not most of it.

Bravo Bravo :standing ovation:

switching DC after a short time is indeed wrong..

But I think everyone but perhaps mikey KNOW that slowick is not the answer..

he has had control of this for over a year now and so far I see no lasting changes in schemes using existing personnel that show any evidence of working..

The talent level is not on the moon but IMHO it is above #27 in the league level......


All pro WLB and all world CB plus some good DL guys and a bunch of younger kiddies that have not seen the playing field except for the mokes that were playing and are now on IR.. or should be..

LRtagger
11-24-2008, 03:10 PM
I wont delve into this too much again because I have pointed this out time and time again and I think everyone knows what my opinion on the matter is...but

for those that seem to think that we need to keep Slowik in as DC to have some continuity need to go back and look at his past stints as DC. That should answer any questions people might have about whether it is talent or coaching. Sorry, but it is not a coincidence that Slowik has been one-and-done no matter where he has been and has put some of the worst defenses in NFL history on the field.

We don't have the best talent in the league, but we certainly dont have the worst as we sometimes show on the field. When a team goes from holding one of the most potent offenses in check one week and then gives up 31 to the worst offense in the league with the same players on the field, I think it doesnt take much to realize scheming and coaching is a problem.

We were the laughing stock of the Packers when he promoted Slowik...I'm still trying to comprehend what Mike was and is still thinking putting this clown in charge of our D.

gobroncsnv
11-24-2008, 07:51 PM
Too much slowness, poor man coverage, too many gaps over-ran, too many over-reactions, not holding contain at the edge...
Sorry, can't bring myself to see that just a coaching change gets us where we NEED to be. Would we improve? I don't doubt that. Would we get in the top 5 or 10 in defense? I DO doubt that.
BRING BACK COYER AND GIVE HIM SOME PLAYERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Lonestar
11-24-2008, 08:53 PM
Too much slowness, poor man coverage, too many gaps over-ran, too many over-reactions, not holding contain at the edge...
Sorry, can't bring myself to see that just a coaching change gets us where we NEED to be. Would we improve? I don't doubt that. Would we get in the top 5 or 10 in defense? I DO doubt that.
BRING BACK COYER AND GIVE HIM SOME PLAYERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

so why not bring in a legit DC that can adjust during game time and GET THEM new players.. that is win win,

Instead of win (new players), lose (old ideas that work only during the first half)..

atwater27
11-24-2008, 10:11 PM
the offense was more offensive than the defense today. Anyone that disputes that doesn't understand football.

No. You are just so used to watching a shitty defense every Sunday that it has deadened your senses on the matter.

MOtorboat
11-24-2008, 10:13 PM
No. You are just so used to watching a shitty defense every Sunday that it has deadened your senses on the matter.

We scored 10 points against a team giving up 32 points per game.

FYI. If we had scored 32 points, we would have won the game.

slim
11-24-2008, 10:15 PM
The offense was an embarrassment yesterday. Defense played well in the first half.

MOtorboat
11-24-2008, 10:18 PM
The offense was an embarrassment yesterday. Defense played well in the first half.

And were too tired in the second half to do much.

Denver's rhythm is so important to the game. If Denver scores on its first drives, more often than not (quite overwhelmingly actually) they win the game. Shanahan gets in a rhythm as a play-caller. If he does not get the chance to do that, Denver struggles, and everyone blames it on the defense.

We should all know by now that everything begins and ends with offense in Denver.

slim
11-24-2008, 10:23 PM
And were too tired in the second half to do much.

Denver's rhythm is so important to the game. If Denver scores on its first drives, more often than not (quite overwhelmingly actually) they win the game. Shanahan gets in a rhythm as a play-caller. If he does not get the chance to do that, Denver struggles, and everyone blames it on the defense.

We should all know by now that everything begins and ends with offense in Denver.

I agree...that fumble on the first drive really screwed us. Add to that the missed FG and the special team breakdowns...we should have been up by at least 17 points at half time. The defense is the only unit that actually played well yesterday.

MOtorboat
11-24-2008, 10:25 PM
I agree...that fumble on the first drive really screwed us. Add to that the missed FG and the special team breakdowns...we should have been up by at least 17 points at half time. The defense is the only unit that actually played well yesterday.

P.S. I don't even have to see the game to know that's how it went down.

:coffee: