John Fox

[MileHiWildcat]

Failure as a NFL Head Football coach. He can identify with Neckbeard though - because their records are strikingly similar (as in terrible).

[Clipworthy]

They look so good in practice though

[MOtorboat]

Awesome thread.

[Slick]

It's been four games guys. He is a good coach.

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[MileHiWildcat]

It's been four games guys. He is a good coach.

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

If you say so...

[BroncoWave]

John Fox sucks. We should have just kept McD if that's the best we were going to replace him with.

[MOtorboat]

Bowlen is an idiot. He should have hired Belicheck.

[hotcarl]

Bowlen is an idiot. He should have hired Belicheck.

agreed. fire pat bowlen!

[Clipworthy]

Fox put his job in the hands of Orton.

You reap what you sow.

[Agent of Orange]

John Fox sucks. We should have just kept McD if that's the best we were going to replace him with.

No way.

[Timmy!]

lolz.

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[getlynched47]

John Fox sucks. We should have just kept McD if that's the best we were going to replace him with.

Overreact much? :coffee:

Josh McDouchebag was the worse thing to happen to the Broncos in the last 30 years. Why the hell would you want him back?

Fox needs to clean the mess that McDouche left, and he definitely won't do it in 1 year.

[Simple Jaded]

Fox put his job in the hands of Orton.

You reap what you sow.

Fox didn't choose Orton. If any NFL HC could choose their QB do you think he'd start with Kyle Orton? Orton just happens to be the best option Fox has.

If you ask me Fox should get be sainted for agreeing to deal with the whirlpool of bullshit that is Denver's QB situation. l sincerely doubt is job is tied to either of these QB's, but he could do worse than Kyle Orton.......

[BroncoWave]

In McDaniels' two years as a head coach he had more wins than John Fox in those 2 years, and that was while coaching 3 less games.

[BeefStew25]

In McDaniels' two years as a head coach he had more wins than John Fox in those 2 years, and that was while coaching 3 less games.

Oh dear. Not you.

[BroncoStud]

Fox didn't choose Orton. If any NFL HC could choose their QB do you think he'd start with Kyle Orton? Orton just happens to be the best option Fox has.

If you ask me Fox should get be sainted for agreeing to deal with the whirlpool of bullshit that is Denver's QB situation. l sincerely doubt is job is tied to either of these QB's, but he could do worse than Kyle Orton.......

Load of crap. Fox didn't have any options. He just went 2-14 and got his ass fired. Teams weren't lining up to hire this guy. Harbaugh had options. Fox did not. Fox is a defensive coordinator playing Head Coach. He has the creativity of an igenous rock.

[Tned]

In McDaniels' two years as a head coach he had more wins than John Fox in those 2 years, and that was while coaching 3 less games.

It took McDaniels two years to fully dismantle what was a promising offense.

[BroncoStud]

So now we're comparing what a coach SHOULD be to Josh McDaniels? Way to aim high guys...

[Simple Jaded]

Load of crap. Fox didn't have any options. He just went 2-14 and got his ass fired. Teams weren't lining up to hire this guy. Harbaugh had options. Fox did not. Fox is a defensive coordinator playing Head Coach. He has the creativity of an igenous rock.

It's not a load of crap, you're just piling on a 1-3 HC. Make no mistake, Fox is very well respected, he could have sat out a year instead of taking this POS job.

And what creativity is he supposedly lacking? The Defense looks pretty improved to me, l'm just wondering.......

[BroncoStud]

It's not a load of crap, you're just piling on a 1-3 HC. Make no mistake, Fox is very well respected, he could have sat out a year instead of taking this POS job.

And what creativity is he supposedly lacking? The Defense looks pretty improved to me, l'm just wondering.......

John Fox was 2-14 last year and everyone wants to blame ownership. But when Carolina somehow makes it to a Super Bowl 10 years ago everyone wants to credit John Fox... Cake and eating too.

Fox is 74-73 for his career now, an AVERAGE coach. He has 3 winning seasons since 2002, yes, 3 winning seasons since 2002.

Denver is now 23rd in total defense and I'm not sure why everyone (including me) was so eager to pump up his improvement on D. We played the Raiders (who gashed us), the Bengals with a rookie QB, and the Titans. Now that we are playing good offenses the defensive rank is not going to get any better.

Being a respected coach is one thing, being a GOOD coach is another. Right now I don't know how you can argue that Fox is anything better than AVERAGE. By the way, I didn't like the hire when it happened so there is no piling on here.

[Simple Jaded]

John Fox was 2-14 last year and everyone wants to blame ownership. But when Carolina somehow makes it to a Super Bowl 10 years ago everyone wants to credit John Fox... Cake and eating too.

Fox is 74-73 for his career now, an AVERAGE coach. He has 3 winning seasons since 2002, yes, 3 winning seasons since 2002.

Denver is now 23rd in total defense and I'm not sure why everyone (including me) was so eager to pump up his improvement on D. We played the Raiders (who gashed us), the Bengals with a rookie QB, and the Titans. Now that we are playing good offenses the defensive rank is not going to get any better.

Being a respected coach is one thing, being a GOOD coach is another. Right now I don't know how you can argue that Fox is anything better than AVERAGE. By the way, I didn't like the hire when it happened so there is no piling on here.

I won't argue with your facts, all l'm saying is he is a very good coach who is well respected and the Broncos defense is noticably better and that the D certainly does not lack creativity.

l'm not his biggest fan either but Jerry Richardson purposely gutted that team and left Fox with next to nothing. I actually like the mentallity he has brought to Denver, no more spread and a commitment to the run are a couple more obvious improvements.......

[getlynched47]

Stop being idiots. Geez.

The dude has 4 games with the Denver Broncos.

His coaching record in Carolina is IRRELEVANT. Can you imagine if we cared what Mike Shanahan's record was when he was the head coach for the Raiders?

John Fox has a clean slate. I'll give him time to implement his plan. To start crying like a lil bitch after 4 games into Fox's Bronco career is freakin dumb.

Give the guy at least 1 season. Good grief. Bunch of whiners.

[atwater27]

John Fox sucks. We should have just kept McD if that's the best we were going to replace him with.

Every time I decide to start taking you seriously, you go and say something like that.:eek:

[atwater27]

In McDaniels' two years as a head coach he had more wins than John Fox in those 2 years, and that was while coaching 3 less games.

That offense he has goin in St Louis is a STEAMROLLER!:laugh:

[Bosco]

To date, I've been very disappointed with Fox, mainly for his stubborn insistence on a conservative offense. That said, I would not be so quick to lay this whole deal on his door step. The problem with this franchise goes higher than Fox, McDaniels, Shanahan or any other head coach we could ever bring in. Until we get a legitimate talent evaluator as a GM, this team has nothing but mediocrity in it's future.

[Day1BroncoFan]

Fox will have to earn respect from me. I don't care what he did anywhere else. I have not seen anything that makes me want to give him that especially his stance on Orton, whom I also gave a chance to earn my respect and so far he has failed.

When I say this I am saying it in reference to their football playing/coaching abilities.

[silkamilkamonico]

I think Fox's handling of the QB situation thus far is one of the main reasons people are reacting the way they are against him.

I am honestly concerned, if in week 9 and the Broncos are 2-7 and out of the playoffs, does John Fox continue to play Kyle Orton because "he gives us the best chance to win?"

Win what? What about the long term wealth of this organization, especially at the QB position? I mean, is Kyle Orton in the plans beyond this year? If not, why is Tebow at least not seeing the field more, especially with the game on the line? Is he not in the plans either? Brady Quinn?

Here's a better question.....Does John Fox even know where we are going with the future of this organization at the QB position? Has he even considered it?

[silkamilkamonico]

To date, I've been very disappointed with Fox, mainly for his stubborn insistence on a conservative offense.

I honestly thought they showed balls on offense today, by opening it up with the passing game while maintaining the run. The problem is we do not have any dynamic players on offense, outside of a WR or 2 that needs the ball in an area he can catch it.

It was the inability to give Tebow some series when the game was already over early in the 4th quarter that changed my tune on their offensive "adjustments".

[Bosco]

I honestly thought they showed balls on offense today, by opening it up with the passing game while maintaining the run. The problem is we do not have any dynamic players on offense, outside of a WR or 2 that needs the ball in an area he can catch it.

It was the inability to give Tebow some series when the game was already over early in the 4th quarter that changed my tune on their offensive "adjustments".

The situation largely forced their hand though. The Packers quite literally have one of the worst pass defenses in the NFL but the run defense is tops in the league. Even a retardedly stubborn and conservative coach like Fox would go pass happy there.

[wayninja]

It's been four games guys. He is a good coach.

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

How many losses til it's a fair statement?

[Lancane]

I won't argue with your facts, all l'm saying is he is a very good coach who is well respected and the Broncos defense is noticably better and that the D certainly does not lack creativity.

l'm not his biggest fan either but Jerry Richardson purposely gutted that team and left Fox with next to nothing. I actually like the mentallity he has brought to Denver, no more spread and a commitment to the run are a couple more obvious improvements.......

Completely disagree, Fox isn't as respected as you seem to believe. No one was clamoring to hire Fox, in fact most of those searching for head coaches this past off-season had candidates they were pretty much sold on before even planning on meeting with Fox, Shurmur was pretty much a shoe in, in Cleveland before Fox even had a scheduled interview. He's had three winning seasons in nine years, soon to be ten? His defenses have continuously been stout 'Bend don't break' in nature, but rarely have they been ranked as elite...in fact during his nine seasons in Carolina his defenses only ranked in the Top 10 four times I believe, his offenses were in the Top 10 only two times. Most of the squads he put on the field were the epitome of mediocrity or middle of the road and that is a simple fact.

You're buying into the hysteria of Carolina's fan base, they wanted to blame Richardson or Hurney and not John Fox, like we did with Ellis and Xanders with McDaniels - instead of seeing how much control John Fox had within that organization. I know a couple close people to the situation and John Fox had nearly as much control in Carolina as Reeves did in Denver during his tenure, it wasn't absolute but as close as you can get without full control. Carolina and Denver are two very similar franchises, Denver has long been in the hands of those who are better with finances then actually talent evaluation and drafting, that's exactly the same in Carolina! John Fox had more say in the roster, player evaluations and drafting then any of the fans could comprehend and once you realize that and compare Fox's drafts to that of Shanahan, Shanahan looked like a draft guru. Fox was the one who pushed to draft Clausen over McCoy and others, in fact Fox tried to trade up for Clausen like Denver did to get Tebow in the back end of the first round, but no one was willing.

And regarding the rest of the situation between Fox and Carolina's management...John Fox was continually asked to fix the offensive issues in Carolina, it wasn't the defense that concerned them and he stubbornly refused to listen, that's why eventually the management fired some of the staff and Fox replaced them with even more questionable coaches! Fox needs no excuses, he needs to be held accountable. I am just glad he has far less power here then he did in Carolina, the problem is that we have Xanders who is a question mark at this time and Elway in charge of Football Operations, however we should still be concerned because we have to ask how much sway does Fox have over those two individuals? I am not sure I can remain optimistic! I said I would give Fox a chance, even though I thought it was a bad hire, but less of a leash if he kept McCoy and ran a similar offense to what he did in Carolina and thus far he's done just that and so the little optimism I did have is almost nil at this point.

Fox is running this team like we're still in the 80's or 90's, where the run game was so important as was the defense, but teams like Denver proved that the league was changing that teams could win with great offenses and solid bend don't break defenses, not elite defenses. This league is a pass happy league now, it will likely remain as such until someone comes along to revolutionize the game once more. Phil Simms pointed this out during the Green Bay game, it wasn't about defense, it wasn't about the running game...it's about the man behind center and the passing attack, if you can have a solid run game and a great passing attack, even with a weak defense, then you can still win and win big and Green Bay proved it on the field against us, Fox will remain stubborn and believe he knows best even while the rest of the league leaves us behind.

[Slick]

How many losses til it's a fair statement?

I'd say more than 75% of the posters here, including me, predicted that this game wouldn't even be close. Most of the posters also predicted that we'd win between 2 and 6 games this year. You ALL know we suck, yet you get mad when we actually do suck.


The cupboards are bare in Denver, and it has nothing to do with John Fox.


Tim Tebow isn't going to save the season. I'd still like to see him play, but it's not going to change much. This is a really bad football team.

[BeefStew25]

I'd say more than 75% of the posters here, including me, predicted that this game wouldn't even be close. Most of the posters also predicted that we'd win between 2 and 6 games this year. You ALL know we suck, yet you get mad when we actually do suck.


The cupboards are bare in Denver, and it has nothing to do with John Fox.


Tim Tebow isn't going to save the season. I'd still like to see him play, but it's not going to change much. This is a really bad football team.

Lock the thread mods. Slick's work here is done.

[Shazam!]

I told every one when talking Football this week that the Broncos were going to be cut to ribbons in GB.

Fox inherited a team of backups with several standouts.

A cash strapped team with more bad moves and acquisitions than we will ever see the Broncos make in our lifetime.

A mediocre veteran QB and an untested yet talented (near) rookie behind him that fans are clamoring for, just to see an end to the same old Orton that we are all so used to seeing.

Now and the last year, this is the worst of the Denver Broncos football since the early 70's.

[BeefStew25]

UqctRN_lO2s

[nevcraw]

Fox is now stubbornly backing Orton is what makes me wonder about his decisions..
He did this same thing with delohme in Carolina.. It's Absurd..

[BroncoStud]

Stop being idiots. Geez.

The dude has 4 games with the Denver Broncos.

His coaching record in Carolina is IRRELEVANT. Can you imagine if we cared what Mike Shanahan's record was when he was the head coach for the Raiders?

John Fox has a clean slate. I'll give him time to implement his plan. To start crying like a lil bitch after 4 games into Fox's Bronco career is freakin dumb.

Give the guy at least 1 season. Good grief. Bunch of whiners.

A guy's past credentials don't indicate future success? Shanahan was given no time in Oakland, Fox had almost a decade in Carolina... Not really the same huh?

Belichik is the exception to the rule, but guess what the Patriots were nothing special until Tom Brady took over for an injured Drew Bledsoe. As I said before, it ALL goes back to the QB. Belichik understands 2011 football, John Fox does not, he still approaches it like it's 1983. The rules are different and the systems are evolved.

[vandammage13]

Fox's last 20 games: 3-17

McD's last 20 games: 5-15

Maybe we should dump Fox after this year and pick up Tony Sparano...Yikes!!

[BeefStew25]

McD hasn't won a game, so we already improved.

Quit spazzing out.

[BroncoStud]

Fox's last 20 games: 3-17

McD's last 20 games: 5-15

Maybe we should dump Fox after this year and pick up Tony Sparano...Yikes!!

Pretty amazing isn't it... Hire a guy that is 3-17 in his last 20 games... :laugh:

Kind of redefines that whole "let's reward you for suckage" concept. :elefant:

[Shazam!]

Bowlen is like a God compared to Richardson. The Panthers owner is one of the worst in the NFL.

He did not want to provide Fox with the tools to win his last few years.

The comparison is unfair.

In Denver the Broncos brass gave McD all the flexibility and everything he wanted.

[BroncoStud]

Bowlen is like a God compared to Richardson. The Panthers owner is one of the worst in the NFL.

He did not want to provide Fox with the tools to win his last few years.

The comparison is unfair.

In Denver the Broncos brass gave McD all the flexibility and everything he wanted.

Specifically what did Richardson DO that supports that? If you're referring to Julius Peppers I can see it, maybe, but Chicago gave him a nice payday and he was ready to leave.

[TXBRONC]

Specifically what did Richardson DO that supports that? If you're referring to Julius Peppers I can see it, maybe, but Chicago gave him a nice payday and he was ready to leave.

And you know exactly how things went done in the Panther's front office?

[BroncoStud]

And you know exactly how things went done in the Panther's front office?

I'm asking those who say Richardson didn't give Fox the tools to win in Carolina to explain specifically what they are referring to? It's just a question, I don't know enough about their front office circumstances to know either way. We do know that Fox had a hand in all their drafts.

[BroncoWave]

McD hasn't won a game, so we already improved.

Quit spazzing out.

McD is not the Rams HC and that team has been decimated by injuries.

[BroncoStud]

McD is not the Rams HC and that team has been decimated by injuries.

Still, I'm glad to see his offense in such disarray. I hope he gets what he deserves. Tom Brady made Josh McDaniels.

[GEM]

He's coaching a team that is limited in the talent department. He didn't cause that limit, but is forced to play with it. It's his first year, he's got Kyle freaking Orton as a QB and he's got some dudes named Vickerson and McBean on his defensive line. What the hell do some expect? :lol:

[BeefStew25]

McD is not the Rams HC and that team has been decimated by injuries.

Oh. Our's hasn't. My bad.

[GEM]

Who gives a rat's ass about that dwarfed midget retard McDaniels? Go sputter on his unit in the other teams thread, because thank the heavens, that moron is gone.

[silkamilkamonico]

St Louis Rams have 18 dropped passes through 4 games, which leads the NFL. They have also played without their best RB the majority of the year.

McDaniels and the Rams have their own problems in St Louis, but it's not even close to our problems here in Denver.

[lgenf]

Fox is not horrible

the D is clearly better, and Fox doesn't seem to have much to do with Offense, so it's as bad as it was last year - WHY? - oh becasue the same guy is calling the plays that called them for McD

if there was any failure this offseason from the Broncos FO - it's not replacing the OC for this team

Fox is a D coordinator and it shows - he's improved the D - we have some injuries and they are not helping matters, but the D is better

He gets three years to prove the team is better, this is the first 1/4 of his first year, we just need to relax a bit here

[Lancane]

Fox is not horrible

the D is clearly better, and Fox doesn't seem to have much to do with Offense, so it's as bad as it was last year - WHY? - oh becasue the same guy is calling the plays that called them for McD

if there was any failure this offseason from the Broncos FO - it's not replacing the OC for this team

Fox is a D coordinator and it shows - he's improved the D - we have some injuries and they are not helping matters, but the D is better

He gets three years to prove the team is better, this is the first 1/4 of his first year, we just need to relax a bit here

You seem to not grasp the meat of the situation Igenf...Fox was fired by Carolina not because the defense sucked, but because his offenses were continually mediocre and he refused to fix it. His conservative offensive philosophy was the cause of the team's strife and failure far more then anything he did personally and he hasn't changed obviously. McCoy's running the offense in accordance to Fox's philosophy, Fox wanted Mike McCoy as his Offensive Coordinator, because he knew what Coach Fox wanted, Elway thought that keeping McCoy would help as well, causing minor change...that's what he gets for thinking! You act like Fox holds no responsibility and that's the gravest mistake you can make, he holds just as much as McCoy, if not more because he is the head coach.

[lgenf]

You seem to not grasp the meat of the situation Igenf...Fox was fired by Carolina not because the defense sucked, but because his offenses were continually mediocre and he refused to fix it. His conservative offensive philosophy was the cause of the team's strife and failure far more then anything he did personally and he hasn't changed obviously. McCoy's running the offense in accordance to Fox's philosophy, Fox wanted Mike McCoy as his Offensive Coordinator, because he knew what Coach Fox wanted, Elway thought that keeping McCoy would help as well, causing minor change...that's what he gets for thinking! You act like Fox holds no responsibility and that's the gravest mistake you can make, he holds just as much as McCoy, if not more because he is the head coach.


This is the only response necessary to post after what you posted above


IT"S BEEN 4 GAMES

[NightTerror218]

Is losing my respect over the season. I like what he has done with the defense.....except they are still being eaten alive.

[Bosco]

He's coaching a team that is limited in the talent department. He didn't cause that limit, but is forced to play with it. It's his first year, he's got Kyle freaking Orton as a QB and he's got some dudes named Vickerson and McBean on his defensive line. What the hell do some expect? :lol:

Fox lost the ability to blame the previous regime when he decided to ultimately field what was basically same team and a large portion of the coaching staff in the wake of the best free agency period in the history of the NFL.

[Tned]

Who gives a rat's ass about that dwarfed midget retard McDaniels? Go sputter on his unit in the other teams thread, because thank the heavens, that moron is gone.

Oh, I read something about dwarfed, midget and thought you were trashing Dumervil, the midget, one-trick pony.

[TXBRONC]

Fox lost the ability to blame the previous regime when he decided to ultimately field what was basically same team and a large portion of the coaching staff in the wake of the best free agency period in the history of the NFL.

No because unlike joshy boy Fox understands you don't try 60% of your roster in fell swoop. He and Elway have wisely gotten rid a lot shit player that joshy boy brought in.

[vandammage13]

You seem to not grasp the meat of the situation Igenf...Fox was fired by Carolina not because the defense sucked, but because his offenses were continually mediocre and he refused to fix it.

If you ask Fox, he wasn't fired by Carolina...His contract just ran out.

[spikerman]

Fox lost the ability to blame the previous regime when he decided to ultimately field what was basically same team and a large portion of the coaching staff in the wake of the best free agency period in the history of the NFL.

My guess is that, unlike McDaniels, Fox wasn't the ultimate decision maker in free agency.

[GEM]

Fox lost the ability to blame the previous regime when he decided to ultimately field what was basically same team and a large portion of the coaching staff in the wake of the best free agency period in the history of the NFL.

Nope. This regime understands that you don't pay for washed up FA and you build through the draft. You don't just grab players to grab players and end up in cap space hell AGAIN. I know people want a win now....but look at the Eagles, they went out and went ape shit crazy in FA...where are they? 1-3.

We did that year in and year out. Did it get us anywhere? No it got us Sam Adams, Jamal Williams, and who was that defensive end we got that everyone was excited about and did absolute jack squat...Sineon Rice. And that's just to name a few. You want to look way back, look at Dale Carter, Daryl Gardener and Courtney Brown. You want to look recent, LenDale White, Henry Travis and Dre Bly.

We need to stay the hell away from FA until we at least have a good evaluator of talent. FA is just too damn expensive to be making mistakes in and mistakes seem to be all we make in FA. No thanks.

[WARHORSE]

He's coaching a team that is limited in the talent department. He didn't cause that limit, but is forced to play with it. It's his first year, he's got Kyle freaking Orton as a QB and he's got some dudes named Vickerson and McBean on his defensive line. What the hell do some expect? :lol:

Championship.:coffee:







:D

[Lancane]

If you ask Fox, he wasn't fired by Carolina...His contract just ran out.

Of course he can claim that, but if you called Richardson up and asked him if he'd ever hire John Fox again, he'd probably say "Not a F'n chance in hell!" and then slam the phone down on the receiver for good measure. And Hurley talked about this nearly two years back, I don't remember the interviewing tabloid, but he said that Fox was done in Carolina...that they were waiting for the right time to make a change.

[WARHORSE]

Unfortunately for Fox, hes gonna get the brunt of it this year.


No one can fault him for the team on the field, because he didnt build it, and he hasnt even had a chance to coach it.

People, he didnt have an offseason.


So I dont think we should blame Fox for everything.


But one thing I WILL blame Fox for, is not putting Tebow in at the goaline.


And if he continues to lose this year, and still never puts him under center, then I will rip him for that mistake.


I hope that Fox doesnt dig in his heels on not playing Tebow simply because he feels pressure to defend his decision to play Orton in the first place, and wants to prove right.


Yet Im getting that feeling after hearing him say, 'We played Tim, and we took a yard loss.'


Unfortunately, we have to watch as this all plays out.:tsk:

[Bosco]

No because unlike joshy boy Fox understands you don't try 60% of your roster in fell swoop. He and Elway have wisely gotten rid a lot shit player that joshy boy brought in.

No one said you need to build your roster in one fell swoop, so why speak in such hyperbole? That said, when you basically sit in your office jerking off while the rest of the league takes advantage of a spectacular free agency period that will likely never happen again, then THEY must shoulder the blame. Consider the problems this team had going into this year.

No veteran depth (outside of Hochstein) on the OL to challenge the young guys or act as safety nets in the event of injury? What is Fox's solution? Do nothing. Consequence? If we lose any member of our OL for an extended time, we're ******.

No legitimate defensive tackles on the roster? Let's go trade for a chronically underachieving DT who just got cut by arguably the best DL coach in the game and sign a broken down 30 year old, 300+lb player who spent his entire career in the 30 front, hasn't played a real game since 2009 while giving him roughly the same money that would have pulled in a young talent like MeBane or Jenkins. Now granted, the Bunkley acquisition has been a pleasant surprise, but Warren predictably made it through about two preseason games before falling apart. How much better would this team have looked if we'd been proactive and signed any combination of Mebane, Cofield, Jenkins, Franklin or Gregg instead of using the scrubs we have now?

How about the problem at MLB? Mays can be a battering ram, but is only a two down player at most and a 3rd round rookie isn't going to contribute right away. There were many options available in free agency (Posluszny, Morrison, Tatupu, Bradley, Spikes) who could have been short or even long term solutions and significant upgrades for this team at a reasonable price.

Or what about at corner? Sure you got a stud in Champ, but Goodman fell off in 2010 and there was no real depth behind him considering Cox's legal troubles. Did we make a run at any of the solid cornerbacks that hit the market? Someone like Jonathan Joesph, Richard Marshall, Eric Wright, Ike Taylor, Carlos Rogers, or Drayton Florence would have come at a reasonable price and would be VERY favorable to having to line up Cassius Vaughn against someone's starting receiver and watching him get lit up.

There is simply no amount of mental gymnastics that one could perform which would allow them to view our offseason as anything other than an abject failure. This team could have been substantially improved for relatively little investment and our amateur front office did literally nothing. Our only significant additions outside of the draft picks were a old but solid running back and the aforementioned Bunkley. That is absolutely unacceptable given the circumstances.

And what players of Josh's has Fox got rid of? The entire starting offense is a carryover from Josh save for Franklin and the tight end. The defense is also mostly carryovers too.

[Bosco]

My guess is that, unlike McDaniels, Fox wasn't the ultimate decision maker in free agency.

Quite possibly, but then you just shift blame from him to Elway and Xanders, and I'm fine with that as I think both are very poor at their respective jobs.


Nope. This regime understands that you don't pay for washed up FA and you build through the draft. You don't just grab players to grab players and end up in cap space hell AGAIN. I know people want a win now....but look at the Eagles, they went out and went ape shit crazy in FA...where are they? 1-3.

We did that year in and year out. Did it get us anywhere? No it got us Sam Adams, Jamal Williams, and who was that defensive end we got that everyone was excited about and did absolute jack squat...Sineon Rice. And that's just to name a few. You want to look way back, look at Dale Carter, Daryl Gardener and Courtney Brown. You want to look recent, LenDale White, Henry Travis and Dre Bly.

We need to stay the hell away from FA until we at least have a good evaluator of talent. FA is just too damn expensive to be making mistakes in and mistakes seem to be all we make in FA. No thanks.

The problem with this is that it's completely void of context and views the situation in a vacuum. As my previous post pointed out, The CBA situation made this free agency period extremely unique. There was a shitload of above average, starting quality young players available this year at very reasonable prices, and we failed to bring in any of them. Wanting to build through the draft is all fine and dandy, but FA is a crucial part of building a team as well. That does NOT mean you go out and take the Shanahan/Jerry Jones approach, but that is also not the only approach.

[Shazam!]

I think we need to give them more than 4 games before blame is shifted unto Fox or the FO.

We're used to eing stung after the McDaniels debacle, after all, I MYSELF was the 'We gotta give him a chance' for nearly a year and a half... We're not even halfway through the Season and already are killing Coach and FO.

My only REAL gripe is Orton and not seeing TT play with the future of the Franchise in mind. Deep down, we all knew this team was not that good.

...and as far as roster moves, McD set this team back financially several years.

Lockout hurt this team terribly too.

If Tebow was playing mistake-prone due to inexperience but showing bursts of brilliance and what could be in the future, I'd be happy with that. But anyone thinking this team were going to win 10 or 11 games this year is nuts.

[GEM]

Bosco, you are correct in a lot of that. But seeing who we did pick up in FA it's probably better that we didn't get more. :lol: I am happy with Bunkley so far. Warren...I really don't know why they did that one. Once a lineman loses his knees game over.

[Bosco]

Bosco, you are correct in a lot of that. But seeing who we did pick up in FA it's probably better that we didn't get more. :lol: I am happy with Bunkley so far. Warren...I really don't know why they did that one. Once a lineman loses his knees game over.

Exactly. Pre-injury Warren would have been a very solid pickup.

[Softskull]

The problem with this is that it's completely void of context and views the situation in a vacuum. As my previous post pointed out, The CBA situation made this free agency period extremely unique. There was a shitload of above average, starting quality young players available this year at very reasonable prices, and we failed to bring in any of them. Wanting to build through the draft is all fine and dandy, but FA is a crucial part of building a team as well. That does NOT mean you go out and take the Shanahan/Jerry Jones approach, but that is also not the only approach.

Free agency helps polish a good team for a playoff push. We need a year or two to get to that level. Which reasonably priced FA were going to make us substantially better this year? Green Bay and Pittsburg built this way. We drafted well this year, hopefully we do again next year. It's way too early to get too crazy on Fox.

[SmilinAssasSin27]

Nope. This regime understands that you don't pay for washed up FA and you build through the draft. You don't just grab players to grab players and end up in cap space hell AGAIN. I know people want a win now....but look at the Eagles, they went out and went ape shit crazy in FA...where are they? 1-3.

We did that year in and year out. Did it get us anywhere? No it got us Sam Adams, Jamal Williams, and who was that defensive end we got that everyone was excited about and did absolute jack squat...Sineon Rice. And that's just to name a few. You want to look way back, look at Dale Carter, Daryl Gardener and Courtney Brown. You want to look recent, LenDale White, Henry Travis and Dre Bly.

We need to stay the hell away from FA until we at least have a good evaluator of talent. FA is just too damn expensive to be making mistakes in and mistakes seem to be all we make in FA. No thanks.


THIS!

It's a process folks. For all the Fox bashing, he did kinda make it to a SB this decade...w/ a chance to win. I don't pretend to know what happens in Carolina's front office, but it appears they basically stopped trying.

We may be 1-3, but I'd still take the 2011 version vs the 2010 squad any day head to head. We have hope on defense. We can actually run the ball. McD's bums have mostly left and the good ones he grabbed are contributing. I don't blame him for playing Orton, who is a better option at this point. Maybe not in 3 weeks, but for now he is.

Our squad is either elderly or green. There seems to be very little middle ground. The elders need to move on and the youth needs to mature...especially on defense. Which is what wins championships...usually.

[Bosco]

Free agency helps polish a good team for a playoff push. We need a year or two to get to that level. Which reasonably priced FA were going to make us substantially better this year? Green Bay and Pittsburg built this way. We drafted well this year, hopefully we do again next year. It's way too early to get too crazy on Fox.

In normal years, I would agree. Not this year though. There are several guys we could have picked up for a reasonable price that would have had a big impact on our team. I really wanted Cofield at DT, but Mebane would have been perfectly acceptable. Both of them are above average to very good players with enough tread on the tires to be a somewhat long term solution. Jenkins, Franklin or Gregg would have been viable short term solutions and all of them are better than the Vickerson, McBean and Thomas Scrub Parade.

I would have happily taken Posluszny or Kirk Morrison at MLB. Both of them have 4-3 experience and would have been upgrades. Posluszny was borderline elite at one point and his contract only had $15 million in guaranteed money over 6 years. Morrison signed for even less IIRC. How about Richard Marshall at CB? He's very solid and dependable corner a la Goodman in 2007-2009. He signed a pretty cap friendly 1 year deal with the Cardinals, knew Fox from Carolina and would have been an excellent #2 across from Champ. Joesph and Wright would have been solid choices as well, and Wright was a personal favorite of mine.

Just signing one of those guys for each position (DT, MLB, CB) would have been a big boost to this defense and all of them would have been had for very fair market, cap friendly value. How about on offense? We could have re-signed Maroney for the vet minimum and given him a chance to compete with Moreno and McGahee in a zone block scheme that made him very successful in college. There were several OL we could have picked up as well. Gaither would have been a solid pickup to compete with Franklin and he went to the Chiefs for very little due to missing 2010 with an injury. Andre Gurode would have been another solid option, and he got all of $3 million from the Ravens.

[atwater27]

No one said you need to build your roster in one fell swoop, so why speak in such hyperbole? That said, when you basically sit in your office jerking off while the rest of the league takes advantage of a spectacular free agency period that will likely never happen again, then THEY must shoulder the blame. Consider the problems this team had going into this year.

No veteran depth (outside of Hochstein) on the OL to challenge the young guys or act as safety nets in the event of injury? What is Fox's solution? Do nothing. Consequence? If we lose any member of our OL for an extended time, we're ******.

No legitimate defensive tackles on the roster? Let's go trade for a chronically underachieving DT who just got cut by arguably the best DL coach in the game and sign a broken down 30 year old, 300+lb player who spent his entire career in the 30 front, hasn't played a real game since 2009 while giving him roughly the same money that would have pulled in a young talent like MeBane or Jenkins. Now granted, the Bunkley acquisition has been a pleasant surprise, but Warren predictably made it through about two preseason games before falling apart. How much better would this team have looked if we'd been proactive and signed any combination of Mebane, Cofield, Jenkins, Franklin or Gregg instead of using the scrubs we have now?

How about the problem at MLB? Mays can be a battering ram, but is only a two down player at most and a 3rd round rookie isn't going to contribute right away. There were many options available in free agency (Posluszny, Morrison, Tatupu, Bradley, Spikes) who could have been short or even long term solutions and significant upgrades for this team at a reasonable price.

Or what about at corner? Sure you got a stud in Champ, but Goodman fell off in 2010 and there was no real depth behind him considering Cox's legal troubles. Did we make a run at any of the solid cornerbacks that hit the market? Someone like Jonathan Joesph, Richard Marshall, Eric Wright, Ike Taylor, Carlos Rogers, or Drayton Florence would have come at a reasonable price and would be VERY favorable to having to line up Cassius Vaughn against someone's starting receiver and watching him get lit up.

There is simply no amount of mental gymnastics that one could perform which would allow them to view our offseason as anything other than an abject failure. This team could have been substantially improved for relatively little investment and our amateur front office did literally nothing. Our only significant additions outside of the draft picks were a old but solid running back and the aforementioned Bunkley. That is absolutely unacceptable given the circumstances.

And what players of Josh's has Fox got rid of? The entire starting offense is a carryover from Josh save for Franklin and the tight end. The defense is also mostly carryovers too.

I totally feel your pain on the D-lineman we passed up this offseason. I really don't get why we didn't try as hard as possible to secure young, solid D lineman like Cofield and Mebane.

[Magnificent Seven]

I wish they could hire Mike Shanahan back as HC and move Coach Fox to defensive coordinator.

[Bosco]

I wish they could hire Mike Shanahan back as HC and move Coach Fox to defensive coordinator.

I'd rather keep Dennis Allen as the DC. I really like that guy, think he has a very bright future ahead of him and love the 4-3 zone blitz system he's using.

[Buff]

Fox's Kyle Orton led offense is about as fun to watch as Shanahan's Nate Webster led defense.

Would it be too much to ask to get a guy who knows both sides of the ball?

[atwater27]

McD is not the Rams HC and that team has been decimated by injuries.

He's doing a great job with Sam Bradford. Some QB guru.

[rcsodak]

It's been four games guys. He is a good coach.

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums
Just imagine if he'd started out 6-0!

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[rcsodak]

In McDaniels' two years as a head coach he had more wins than John Fox in those 2 years, and that was while coaching 3 less games.
Really? How did he do that?

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[rcsodak]

It's not a load of crap, you're just piling on a 1-3 HC. Make no mistake, Fox is very well respected, he could have sat out a year instead of taking this POS job.

And what creativity is he supposedly lacking? The Defense looks pretty improved to me, l'm just wondering.......
They cry when offensive minded coaches have shit defenses, so the opposite only makes sense....


.....right? :confused:

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[rcsodak]

John Fox was 2-14 last year and everyone wants to blame ownership. But when Carolina somehow makes it to a Super Bowl 10 years ago everyone wants to credit John Fox... Cake and eating too.

Fox is 74-73 for his career now, an AVERAGE coach. He has 3 winning seasons since 2002, yes, 3 winning seasons since 2002.

Denver is now 23rd in total defense and I'm not sure why everyone (including me) was so eager to pump up his improvement on D. We played the Raiders (who gashed us), the Bengals with a rookie QB, and the Titans. Now that we are playing good offenses the defensive rank is not going to get any better.

Being a respected coach is one thing, being a GOOD coach is another. Right now I don't know how you can argue that Fox is anything better than AVERAGE. By the way, I didn't like the hire when it happened so there is no piling on here.
Raiders are "gashing everybody (til last wk).
Cinci beat undefeated Buff.
Tenn was missing a qb and now have one.
GB is the best team in the league.

Denver has the 4th most difficult schedule.

I'm more worried about RT Franklin. Did somebody slap him in the back of the head when he was a child?

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[spikerman]

They cry when offensive minded coaches have shit defenses, so the opposite only makes sense....


.....right? :confused:

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

To be fair, the last offensive coach also had a shit offense.

[vandammage13]

He's doing a great job with Sam Bradford. Some QB guru.

To be fair, Orton has somehow managed to look even worse since McD left.

At least when McD was coach, Orton wasn't turning the ball over "at a record shattering pace."

[Bosco]

To be fair, Orton has somehow managed to look even worse since McD left.

At least when McD was coach, Orton wasn't turning the ball over "at a record shattering pace."

Of course. He doesn't have Josh programming him like a robot anymore.

[rcsodak]

I'm asking those who say Richardson didn't give Fox the tools to win in Carolina to explain specifically what they are referring to? It's just a question, I don't know enough about their front office circumstances to know either way. We do know that Fox had a hand in all their drafts.
Richardson was skeletonizing that team. With no cap/floor, he was all about gutting it and starting anew. This really is yesterdays news.

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[rcsodak]

You seem to not grasp the meat of the situation Igenf...Fox was fired by Carolina not because the defense sucked, but because his offenses were continually mediocre and he refused to fix it. His conservative offensive philosophy was the cause of the team's strife and failure far more then anything he did personally and he hasn't changed obviously. McCoy's running the offense in accordance to Fox's philosophy, Fox wanted Mike McCoy as his Offensive Coordinator, because he knew what Coach Fox wanted, Elway thought that keeping McCoy would help as well, causing minor change...that's what he gets for thinking! You act like Fox holds no responsibility and that's the gravest mistake you can make, he holds just as much as McCoy, if not more because he is the head coach.
Link?

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[rcsodak]

In normal years, I would agree. Not this year though. There are several guys we could have picked up for a reasonable price that would have had a big impact on our team. I really wanted Cofield at DT, but Mebane would have been perfectly acceptable. Both of them are above average to very good players with enough tread on the tires to be a somewhat long term solution. Jenkins, Franklin or Gregg would have been viable short term solutions and all of them are better than the Vickerson, McBean and Thomas Scrub Parade.

I would have happily taken Posluszny or Kirk Morrison at MLB. Both of them have 4-3 experience and would have been upgrades. Posluszny was borderline elite at one point and his contract only had $15 million in guaranteed money over 6 years. Morrison signed for even less IIRC. How about Richard Marshall at CB? He's very solid and dependable corner a la Goodman in 2007-2009. He signed a pretty cap friendly 1 year deal with the Cardinals, knew Fox from Carolina and would have been an excellent #2 across from Champ. Joesph and Wright would have been solid choices as well, and Wright was a personal favorite of mine.

Just signing one of those guys for each position (DT, MLB, CB) would have been a big boost to this defense and all of them would have been had for very fair market, cap friendly value. How about on offense? We could have re-signed Maroney for the vet minimum and given him a chance to compete with Moreno and McGahee in a zone block scheme that made him very successful in college. There were several OL we could have picked up as well. Gaither would have been a solid pickup to compete with Franklin and he went to the Chiefs for very little due to missing 2010 with an injury. Andre Gurode would have been another solid option, and he got all of $3 million from the Ravens.

How do you know who the FO did/did not contact?
Its pretty common for players to tell their agents to shy away from the bottom dwelling/rebuilding teams. Sometimes money can't buy happiness.

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[rcsodak]

Fox's Kyle Orton led offense is about as fun to watch as Shanahan's Nate Webster led defense.

Would it be too much to ask to get a guy who knows both sides of the ball?
You mean McD?

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

[SmilinAssasSin27]

He's doing a great job with Sam Bradford. Some QB guru.

StL leads the league in dropped passes...just sayin.

[nevcraw]

fox is hardly a sure thing at coach just because our man Elway wanted lower risk.

He has not won much in a very long time.
He's basically the jim fassell of defensive minded head coaches.
he has a history on sitting on terrible qb play way past the time to pull the hook
his offensive philosophy could be called tired and antiquated
as the most senior football guy in his FO, he couldn't get a solid not injury prone DT?

having said all that he's doing alright but not exactly a Mike Smith type start in Denver...

[Oldschoolcrush]

In McDaniels' two years as a head coach he had more wins than John Fox in those 2 years, and that was while coaching 3 less games.
McDummy is actually a great offensive coordinator, but he was a terrible director where personnel was concerned.....
This lackluster pound it up the middle we are seeing from Fox is not going to accomplish anything with what this year in the NFL has to offer.
This is the year of the offense where prolific quarterbacks air it out and use the running game to deal the final blow.... You can join it or be left in the dust..... If you think you can manage the opposition running it up the gut and slowing down the tempo, you better do it really well and keep the opposition off the field to gain that advantage.... Still don't see it working!
I actually think the defense has the talent to deal with this type of prolific offense.... Ask them to do it entirely from their side of the field and you have not understood where success is coming from this season. Offense has to be able to answer; it allows the defense to take chances.... jump routes, bring the house or drop everyone back... ATTACK! This is what sets a prolific offense off their course.... You can't do this on D when you are protecting the scoreboard because your offense can't put up numbers....
Zone, no risk and watch them slowly pick you to pieces until you buckle entirely...... Sound familiar? How many years now?
McCoy and Fox need to get together and figure out their relationship and the future of the offense..... Do I think Tebow is mature enough to take the reigns? It doesn't really matter.... What comes from the coaching staff won't utilize his mobility and defenses will eat him for breakfast and sh*t him out on the field when they're done. McCoy and Fox are the antithesis of what Tebow can bring to the field.

[MOtorboat]

McDummy is actually a great offensive coordinator, but he was a terrible director where personnel was concerned.....
This lackluster pound it up the middle we are seeing from Fox is not going to accomplish anything with what this year in the NFL has to offer.
This is the year of the offense where prolific quarterbacks air it out and use the running game to deal the final blow.... You can join it or be left in the dust..... If you think you can manage the opposition running it up the gut and slowing down the tempo, you better do it really well and keep the opposition off the field to gain that advantage.... Still don't see it working!
I actually think the defense has the talent to deal with this type of prolific offense.... Ask them to do it entirely from their side of the field and you have not understood where success is coming from this season. Offense has to be able to answer; it allows the defense to take chances.... jump routes, bring the house or drop everyone back... ATTACK! This is what sets a prolific offense off their course.... You can't do this on D when you are protecting the scoreboard because your offense can't put up numbers....
Zone, no risk and watch them slowly pick you to pieces until you buckle entirely...... Sound familiar? How many years now?
McCoy and Fox need to get together and figure out their relationship and the future of the offense..... Do I think Tebow is mature enough to take the reigns? It doesn't really matter.... What comes from the coaching staff won't utilize his mobility and defenses will eat him for breakfast and sh*t him out on the field when they're done. McCoy and Fox are the antithesis of what Tebow can bring to the field.

The Broncos have thrown the ball in nearly 60 percent of the offensive pass plays they've run.

But, in an effort to not be so contrarian, I will say the three straight run plays against the Titans in the goal to go situation were bad.

[Oldschoolcrush]

oh yeah..... first n ten.... Tebow in with a delay run it up the gut? Anyone see that coming? Need I say more?

[MOtorboat]

oh yeah..... first n ten.... Tebow in with a delay run it up the gut? Anyone see that coming? Need I say more?

I don't want to disagree with you, but that was just one play. A poor play call, for sure, but it's not like they are calling the same run up the middle on every play.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

I can't remember who said it, but they said if one of the lineman had made his tackle, McGahee could have walked into the end zone - so apparently, not bad play calling, but bad execution.

Oh - I think it was Alfred Williams who said it.

[MOtorboat]

I can't remember who said it, but they said if one of the lineman had made his tackle, McGahee could have walked into the end zone - so apparently, not bad play calling, but bad execution.

Oh - I think it was Alfred Williams who said it.

That's a great point, Carol.

My real contention was going for it on 4th down there. That said, they did score it twice inside the five by spreading it out, earlier in the game.

[Oldschoolcrush]

The Broncos have thrown the ball in nearly 60 percent of the offensive pass plays they've run.

But, in an effort to not be so contrarian, I will say the three straight run plays against the Titans in the goal to go situation were bad.
Not to be sucked in by the mindless regurgitation of the average stat whore.... Eh hem..... necessity playing catch up in a game where the score board is well out of hand..... Doesn't it make sense to abandon the running game? Imagine that!
Should we talk about the play action pass that directly mimicked the run up the middle? One dimensional at best!
Even the pass plays are geared towards the run, until it only makes sense in catch up mode.

[MOtorboat]

Not to be sucked in by the mindless regurgitation of the average stat whore.... Eh hem..... necessity playing catch up in a game where the score board is well out of hand..... Doesn't it make sense to abandon the running game? Imagine that!
Should we talk about the play action pass that directly mimicked the run up the middle? One dimensional at best!
Even the pass plays are geared towards the run, until it only makes sense in catch up mode.

If we're only talking about the Packers game, then I understand your point.

Against Tennessee, though, even after they went up, they chucked it all over the field. That huge drive had a lot of short passes on it. And, I think, the three and out before the Tennessee score, was all passes.

If anything at this point, in my opinion, although that's probably wrong, the offense has been too pass heavy, and I think McCoy has panicked to early in the Raiders and Packers game when the run game is concerned.

[Oldschoolcrush]

I can't remember who said it, but they said if one of the lineman had made his tackle, McGahee could have walked into the end zone - so apparently, not bad play calling, but bad execution.

Oh - I think it was Alfred Williams who said it.Isn't the design of every play called on offense to put the RB into the secondary or the WR to gain at least what is designated in their route?
If the OL is blown up by the defense, it was probably a bit more than simply bad execution.

[Oldschoolcrush]

If we're only talking about the Packers game, then I understand your point.

Against Tennessee, though, even after they went up, they chucked it all over the field. That huge drive had a lot of short passes on it. And, I think, the three and out before the Tennessee score, was all passes.

If anything at this point, in my opinion, although that's probably wrong, the offense has been too pass heavy, and I think McCoy has panicked to early in the Raiders and Packers game when the run game is concerned.
Again, one dimensional..... Trust me, I'm all about the run but where is the misdirect? Were they successful with the run? Was it consistent?
I'm seeing the Broncos abandon the run because it is the same over and over..... How many stunts can come from the OL running it up the gut before the defense starts shooting the gaps? And then what? It opens the passing game? How multidimensional does the passing game become when there has been no misdirection in what has proceeded it. You've brought the defense in, the response is to hit the deep ball, but why would the defensive line stop shooting the gaps? Zero motion from the quarterback, no running to the outside..... Why do you think in the Green Bay game Orton threw so many picks? The defense was jumping routes..... The one deep ball that was wide open.... WEIRD!.... was so severely under thrown what should have been a waltz into the end zone looked sloppy. How many times do you air it out before they begin tightening up there? And then what, back up the gut?

[Oldschoolcrush]

No balance in offense and so few different looks..... The Raiders game? I f***ing hate the Raiders and I found myself mesmerized by their offensive play calling..... It was a work of art! Purely!

[Simple Jaded]

Completely disagree, Fox isn't as respected as you seem to believe. No one was clamoring to hire Fox, in fact most of those searching for head coaches this past off-season had candidates they were pretty much sold on before even planning on meeting with Fox, Shurmur was pretty much a shoe in, in Cleveland before Fox even had a scheduled interview. He's had three winning seasons in nine years, soon to be ten? His defenses have continuously been stout 'Bend don't break' in nature, but rarely have they been ranked as elite...in fact during his nine seasons in Carolina his defenses only ranked in the Top 10 four times I believe, his offenses were in the Top 10 only two times. Most of the squads he put on the field were the epitome of mediocrity or middle of the road and that is a simple fact.

You're buying into the hysteria of Carolina's fan base, they wanted to blame Richardson or Hurney and not John Fox, like we did with Ellis and Xanders with McDaniels - instead of seeing how much control John Fox had within that organization. I know a couple close people to the situation and John Fox had nearly as much control in Carolina as Reeves did in Denver during his tenure, it wasn't absolute but as close as you can get without full control. Carolina and Denver are two very similar franchises, Denver has long been in the hands of those who are better with finances then actually talent evaluation and drafting, that's exactly the same in Carolina! John Fox had more say in the roster, player evaluations and drafting then any of the fans could comprehend and once you realize that and compare Fox's drafts to that of Shanahan, Shanahan looked like a draft guru. Fox was the one who pushed to draft Clausen over McCoy and others, in fact Fox tried to trade up for Clausen like Denver did to get Tebow in the back end of the first round, but no one was willing.

And regarding the rest of the situation between Fox and Carolina's management...John Fox was continually asked to fix the offensive issues in Carolina, it wasn't the defense that concerned them and he stubbornly refused to listen, that's why eventually the management fired some of the staff and Fox replaced them with even more questionable coaches! Fox needs no excuses, he needs to be held accountable. I am just glad he has far less power here then he did in Carolina, the problem is that we have Xanders who is a question mark at this time and Elway in charge of Football Operations, however we should still be concerned because we have to ask how much sway does Fox have over those two individuals? I am not sure I can remain optimistic! I said I would give Fox a chance, even though I thought it was a bad hire, but less of a leash if he kept McCoy and ran a similar offense to what he did in Carolina and thus far he's done just that and so the little optimism I did have is almost nil at this point.

Fox is running this team like we're still in the 80's or 90's, where the run game was so important as was the defense, but teams like Denver proved that the league was changing that teams could win with great offenses and solid bend don't break defenses, not elite defenses. This league is a pass happy league now, it will likely remain as such until someone comes along to revolutionize the game once more. Phil Simms pointed this out during the Green Bay game, it wasn't about defense, it wasn't about the running game...it's about the man behind center and the passing attack, if you can have a solid run game and a great passing attack, even with a weak defense, then you can still win and win big and Green Bay proved it on the field against us, Fox will remain stubborn and believe he knows best even while the rest of the league leaves us behind.

Agree to disagree. Personally, l know exactly zero people close to the Carolina situation, all l know is what l read/hear about Fox/Richardson over the years and (fwiw) what l've seen of Carolina.

What l can tell you is that 5 teams that are built like were still in the 80's and 90's (Strong defense and dominant run game) have won 6 SB's over the last decade, 4 of those teams beating a team that threw the ball all over the place. So lets not that you have to be spread offense/pass happy fags like the Colts and Patriots to win SB's in the 2010's.

When it comes to football philosophy l'll take the Ravens/Stealers model over most anything else the modern era has to offer. l'll take James Harrison's fines and Rashard Mendenhall's impossibly stupid world views over spread offense QB's that are coached to make one read and run and RB's that can't break a tackle from my mother.

John Fox brings a style of play that suits me right down to the ground, a tough defense and a commitment to the run.......hali-*******-luya. Especially if that means l don't have to suffer thru watching an offense tailored to whatever Tebow's strengths are supposed to be at this point.

If the Broncos will be featuring more goal line jump passes l'll be playing a lot more golf.......

[Bosco]

What l can tell you is that 5 teams that are built like were still in the 80's and 90's (Strong defense and dominant run game) have won 6 SB's over the last decade, 4 of those teams beating a team that threw the ball all over the place.

Yeah, and what teams are those exactly?

[HORSEPOWER 56]

Yeah, and what teams are those exactly?

i can count 5, but not 6. Baltimore, Tampa Bay, Pittsburgh (x2), and NYG.

[Lancane]

i can count 5, but not 6. Baltimore, Tampa Bay, Pittsburgh (x2), and NYG.

Baltimore...yes, but then again that season they still had a middle of the road offense that was capable of putting up yards through the air, or do we really believe Sharpe had nothing to do with that? They were still 14th overall offensively and between Dilfer and Banks still had over 3,000 yards through the air, so it's disputable.

Tampa Bay were 18th overall offensively, but Brad Johnson still had well over 3,000 yards passing and Keyshawn Johnson had a 1,000 yard season, unlike Baltimore the Bucs did not have a 1,000 yard rusher that season, the closest to that mark was Pittman with 718 overall yards. So Links assessment is already disputable, because Tampa statistically was a far better passing offense then rushing offense.

Pittsburgh could be argued, I admit that they we're a better rushing team during their run for the Super Bowl XL championship, but we're a far better passing offense during their run for Super Bowl XLIII title. They've always been a rather solid rushing team, but it took them getting a legit franchise quarterback to cross the threshold.

As for the New York Giants, that's beyond questionable since their offense was ranked better then their defense and both were ranked in the middle of the road that season; Manning had a tremendous season and the numbers for Toomer, Burress and Shokey were above average and other then Jacobs 1,000 yard season their rushing attack at times floundered.

I don't know where Link is getting his information but other then Baltimore in 00' and the 05' Pittsburgh squads those other teams were far better in the air then on the ground, and New York had the 17th overall defense so they really can't be compared to Baltimore, Tampa Bay or Pittsburgh.

[Bosco]

Baltimore...yes, but then again that season they still had a middle of the road offense that was capable of putting up yards through the air, or do we really believe Sharpe had nothing to do with that? They were still 14th overall offensively and between Dilfer and Banks still had over 3,000 yards through the air, so it's disputable.

Tampa Bay were 18th overall offensively, but Brad Johnson still had well over 3,000 yards passing and Keyshawn Johnson had a 1,000 yard season, unlike Baltimore the Bucs did not have a 1,000 yard rusher that season, the closest to that mark was Pittman with 718 overall yards. So Links assessment is already disputable, because Tampa statistically was a far better passing offense then rushing offense.

Pittsburgh could be argued, I admit that they we're a better rushing team during their run for the Super Bowl XL championship, but we're a far better passing offense during their run for Super Bowl XLIII title. They've always been a rather solid rushing team, but it took them getting a legit franchise quarterback to cross the threshold.

As for the New York Giants, that's beyond questionable since their offense was ranked better then their defense and both were ranked in the middle of the road that season; Manning had a tremendous season and the numbers for Toomer, Burress and Shokey were above average and other then Jacobs 1,000 yard season their rushing attack at times floundered.

I don't know where Link is getting his information but other then Baltimore in 00' and the 05' Pittsburgh squads those other teams were far better in the air then on the ground, and New York had the 17th overall defense so they really can't be compared to Baltimore, Tampa Bay or Pittsburgh.

Exactly. It would be disingenuous to try to label the Steelers as a conservative, run heavy offense. They do have a solid running game, no doubt, but Ken Whisenhunt and Bruce Arians have brought many spread concepts to the Erhardt-Perkins offense. Hell, much of that was probably inspired by what Charlie Weis and Josh McDaniels did to the same offense from 2004-2006.

That 2000 Baltimore team was really the only one that won with the model Link is advocating for, and as you pointed out, that offense was pretty underrated.

[Lancane]

Exactly. It would be disingenuous to try to label the Steelers as a conservative, run heavy offense. They do have a solid running game, no doubt, but Ken Whisenhunt and Bruce Arians have brought many spread concepts to the Erhardt-Perkins offense. Hell, much of that was probably inspired by what Charlie Weis and Josh McDaniels did to the same offense from 2004-2006.

That 2000 Baltimore team was really the only one that won with the model Link is advocating for, and as you pointed out, that offense was pretty underrated.

Link also compared them to teams of the 80's and 90's, and in truth that can be questionable outlook, without a doubt back then it was just as important to have a good running attack, but then again he forgets the likes of Joe Montana and Jerry Rice, Phil Simms and Mark Bavaro, Mark Rypien along with Gary Clark and Art Monk, Steve Young and Jerry Rice, Troy Aikman along with Michael Irving and Jay Novacek or Brett Favre and Antonio Freeman and so on. The teams that have found the most success are not teams that have offenses that control the clock, but are teams that have offenses that are able to score and score often, even while under pressure.

Another mishap on his part would be to consider that Allen and Fox's defense is capable of putting up numbers such as Baltimore and Pittsburgh...it's almost that he doesn't comprehend that the Broncos' defense, Fox's defense and even Allen's model from his time in New Orleans are 'Bend Don't Break' in both philosophy and scheme. And 'Bend Don't Break' defenses have to rely on solid offenses to be successful, even if we had a great running attack, we'd still need a solid passing attack to be successful, because the defenses can be good, but good offenses will still be able to score.

[Simple Jaded]

Yeah, and what teams are those exactly?

Giants, Stealers twice, Ravens, Bucs and l would even say the first Patriots Championship team. That's actually six beating 7 video game offenses, my bad.......

[Simple Jaded]

Baltimore...yes, but then again that season they still had a middle of the road offense that was capable of putting up yards through the air, or do we really believe Sharpe had nothing to do with that? They were still 14th overall offensively and between Dilfer and Banks still had over 3,000 yards through the air, so it's disputable.

Tampa Bay were 18th overall offensively, but Brad Johnson still had well over 3,000 yards passing and Keyshawn Johnson had a 1,000 yard season, unlike Baltimore the Bucs did not have a 1,000 yard rusher that season, the closest to that mark was Pittman with 718 overall yards. So Links assessment is already disputable, because Tampa statistically was a far better passing offense then rushing offense.

Pittsburgh could be argued, I admit that they we're a better rushing team during their run for the Super Bowl XL championship, but we're a far better passing offense during their run for Super Bowl XLIII title. They've always been a rather solid rushing team, but it took them getting a legit franchise quarterback to cross the threshold.

As for the New York Giants, that's beyond questionable since their offense was ranked better then their defense and both were ranked in the middle of the road that season; Manning had a tremendous season and the numbers for Toomer, Burress and Shokey were above average and other then Jacobs 1,000 yard season their rushing attack at times floundered.

I don't know where Link is getting his information but other then Baltimore in 00' and the 05' Pittsburgh squads those other teams were far better in the air then on the ground, and New York had the 17th overall defense so they really can't be compared to Baltimore, Tampa Bay or Pittsburgh.

I never said these teams offenses suck, or even that the run game and Defense were their strongest asset, l said they're built the way 80's and 90's teams were built, with or around strong defense and dominant running game.

The Giants didn't just win on the arm of Eli Manning and they never win that SB if the defense doesn't knock Brandy's dick in the dirt. They go to and win that SB because of defense, Brandon Jacobs AND Eli Manning. They were certainly balanced, but Jacobs had the entire league buzzing.

The point is, you don't have to sling it all over the ballpark with "innovative" 2000's and 2010's passing attacks to win SB's. Far from it.

I never said anything about world-class defenses/running games and pathetic passing attacks with no franchise QB. How many people expect John Fox to build/develop that kind of Ravens/Bucs defense, anyway? Those are the rarest of Championship teams and the previous decades were hardly defined by teams like Ravens and Bucs, even the Steel Curtain team put 2-3 QB's/WR's in the HoF. Maybe it's your definition of an 80's or 90's team that l'm missing, but l hope you're not saying that Fox is trying to build Bucs/Ravens. During the Panthers SB run Jake Delhomme had people saying that the Denver Broncos signed the wrong Jake, they had a damn good passing game, especially in the SB.

And the Stealers? They won that 1st SB almost entirely on Defense and Running Game, R-berger even stunk it up in the SB itself. They were and still are built around their defense and running game, it's when they get pass happy that they get into trouble. Bruce Arians is about the least popular Stealer in Pittsburgh.

I don't know what exactly it is about the way Fox runs a football team that you dislike, but give me a franchise QB and l'll build a John Fox team around him and win a lotta ******* games.

So really, all your analysis boils down to is telling me that your definition of an 80's and 90's team is different than mine.......

[SmilinAssasSin27]

Baltimore...yes, but then again that season they still had a middle of the road offense that was capable of putting up yards through the air, or do we really believe Sharpe had nothing to do with that? They were still 14th overall offensively and between Dilfer and Banks still had over 3,000 yards through the air, so it's disputable.

Tampa Bay were 18th overall offensively, but Brad Johnson still had well over 3,000 yards passing and Keyshawn Johnson had a 1,000 yard season, unlike Baltimore the Bucs did not have a 1,000 yard rusher that season, the closest to that mark was Pittman with 718 overall yards. So Links assessment is already disputable, because Tampa statistically was a far better passing offense then rushing offense.

Pittsburgh could be argued, I admit that they we're a better rushing team during their run for the Super Bowl XL championship, but we're a far better passing offense during their run for Super Bowl XLIII title. They've always been a rather solid rushing team, but it took them getting a legit franchise quarterback to cross the threshold.

As for the New York Giants, that's beyond questionable since their offense was ranked better then their defense and both were ranked in the middle of the road that season; Manning had a tremendous season and the numbers for Toomer, Burress and Shokey were above average and other then Jacobs 1,000 yard season their rushing attack at times floundered.

I don't know where Link is getting his information but other then Baltimore in 00' and the 05' Pittsburgh squads those other teams were far better in the air then on the ground, and New York had the 17th overall defense so they really can't be compared to Baltimore, Tampa Bay or Pittsburgh.

Didn't Bmore go 6 consecutive games w/o a TD that year?

[horsepig]

Wow, I love it. Keep going guys.

[BeefStew25]

I guess Derek Dooley walks on water now.

[horsepig]

Baltimore...yes, but then again that season they still had a middle of the road offense that was capable of putting up yards through the air, or do we really believe Sharpe had nothing to do with that? They were still 14th overall offensively and between Dilfer and Banks still had over 3,000 yards through the air, so it's disputable.

Tampa Bay were 18th overall offensively, but Brad Johnson still had well over 3,000 yards passing and Keyshawn Johnson had a 1,000 yard season, unlike Baltimore the Bucs did not have a 1,000 yard rusher that season, the closest to that mark was Pittman with 718 overall yards. So Links assessment is already disputable, because Tampa statistically was a far better passing offense then rushing offense.

Pittsburgh could be argued, I admit that they we're a better rushing team during their run for the Super Bowl XL championship, but we're a far better passing offense during their run for Super Bowl XLIII title. They've always been a rather solid rushing team, but it took them getting a legit franchise quarterback to cross the threshold.

As for the New York Giants, that's beyond questionable since their offense was ranked better then their defense and both were ranked in the middle of the road that season; Manning had a tremendous season and the numbers for Toomer, Burress and Shokey were above average and other then Jacobs 1,000 yard season their rushing attack at times floundered.

I don't know where Link is getting his information but other then Baltimore in 00' and the 05' Pittsburgh squads those other teams were far better in the air then on the ground, and New York had the 17th overall defense so they really can't be compared to Baltimore, Tampa Bay or Pittsburgh.

Timing, baby, timing.

[Bosco]

Giants, Stealers twice, Ravens, Bucs and l would even say the first Patriots Championship team. That's actually six beating 7 video game offenses, my bad.......

And as Lancane and I pointed out, those offenses were nothing like what you portray them as. That first Patriots team was still a Charlie Weis coached Erhardt-Perkins offense, and while they were considerably more conservative than the 2003-current variant of that offense, they still utilized a host of multiple receiver sets and Weis has always been an aggressive play caller. Ditto for the Steelers and Giants. They utilize essentially the same Erhardt-Perkins offense. Gilbride tends to use more two back sets with the Giants but they've also used plenty of spread sets when the personnel has allowed them too, including that 2007 team. The Bucs? Jon Gruden ran that offense, and he's NEVER been very conservative.

[Simple Jaded]

And as Lancane and I pointed out, those offenses were nothing like what you portray them as. That first Patriots team was still a Charlie Weis coached Erhardt-Perkins offense, and while they were considerably more conservative than the 2003-current variant of that offense, they still utilized a host of multiple receiver sets and Weis has always been an aggressive play caller. Ditto for the Steelers and Giants. They utilize essentially the same Erhardt-Perkins offense. Gilbride tends to use more two back sets with the Giants but they've also used plenty of spread sets when the personnel has allowed them too, including that 2007 team. The Bucs? Jon Gruden ran that offense, and he's NEVER been very conservative.

Those teams are exactly what l'm talking about because l'm the one talking about them. l never said anything about whatever you think l'm talking about. I will take these teams over the spread crap we see a lot of today. If they way these teams do things is wrong l don't wanna be right. Lancane said that Fox wants to build a team like they did in the 80's and 90's like it's a bad thing, it suits me right down to the ground.

I wouldn't call those Pitt/NE/NY's teams pass happy, they were and/or still are built around defense and run game. I never said anything about a concervative offense, l like offenses that make a commitment to the run and not just run a few from under center when they're not running some draw plays outta the shotun. The Colts couldn't run the ball to save their ass and their defense is useless unless Manning spots them a 2 TD lead. Phili and NE can run but are more interested in throwing up to 70% of the time, meanwhile they either throw too much or too little money at their defense an expect it to be a recipe for SB parades. To these teams the bubble-screens and gimmick plays is their running game most of the time.

For for the purposes of this discussion, I don't care what passing schemes these 6 teams ran because l don't have a problem with their passing systems. Ya'll must think l said l prefer Vince Lombardi's "3 yards and a cloud of dust" combined with fairytale defenses like Ravens/Bucs, l don't know where you got that.

I'm talking about teams built like they were in the 80's and 90's, these teams were. l never said a word about conservative, l said you don't have to sling it around the field like pass happy fools to win SB's. Far from it. Give me the way Ravens, Stealers and Giants are doing it, none of these teams are conservative, and neither is Fox. l could watch Stealers v Ravens all day long, thats my kind of football.

Erhardt and Perkins coached into the early 80's, l think, so by definition they are coaches that built teams like they did in the 80's, if not the 90's. So again, all you're saying is that your definition is probably different than mine. I think?

Thanks tho.......

[horsepig]

I also could watch the old grind it out defense. If the offense comes up with something (ala Pats, Greatest Show on Turf, etc...) you can't stop, well you find a way to contain it.

I grew up watching the pre Red Miller Broncos. I actually remember the "half a loaf" game from Lou Saban, a real tough football guy.

The team at the time had no real headquarters, the Phipps Bros. construction Co. owned the franchise and they met in the truck yard.

Really, it's quite amazing how small time the AFL and the Broncos were at the time, considering they started right off selling out a pretty good sized field.

They eventually came to play at Bears Stadium, the home of the minor league Denver Bears baseball team.

Man, in those days it was like the old west at Mile High Stadium. I brought binocs to the games mostly to watch the cheerleaders, but also to watch the all-out fights, mostly in the south stands, where big fat badboys would get drunked-up and fight all the way to the bottom of the stairs, and evewrybody else kept yelling shit at the ******* Raiders and Chiefs (the Sparklers never really mattered, except for Bambi, and later the Air Coryell stuff).

Them came Ralston, his sharp drafting (Louie Wright, the earliest CB ever drafted at that time) and his nrahrah style. The Broncos finished 7-6-1, the first non-losing in franchise history.

The players revolted against Ralston's rahrah shit and he was eventually fired. The next year my friends and I witnessed something unbelievable, they won their first 6 and went to Oakland 6-0! They destroyed ther hated Raiders 38-6 and the famous TJ "it's all over fatman" thing was actually a middle finger and "**** you fat man".

That team finished 12-2 and lost to Dallas in the Bowl.

BUT,MAN, we were here! Hey, coach, you better start scheming pretty hard when you go to MileHigh, else you gonna get beat!

Reeves came along and won year after year without any high draft picks. 3 SB's later Shanny came in and the rest is history.

Are we spoiled, Hell yes. Build us a mean- assed team and get a QB and fill that cheesy assed stadium up with Bronco loonies!

See Ya'll tomorrow.

[Bosco]

Those teams are exactly what l'm talking about because l'm the one talking about them. l never said anything about whatever you think l'm talking about. I will take these teams over the spread crap we see a lot of today. If they way these teams do things is wrong l don't wanna be right. Lancane said that Fox wants to build a team like they did in the 80's and 90's like it's a bad thing, it suits me right down to the ground. And for the third time now, those teams were spread teams to a very significant degree, and the spread offenses that were forming in those days are direct predecessors to the spread offenses we have today.

You might as well face the fact that this is a pass happy league now and the spread offense variants will be here to stay.


I wouldn't call those Pitt/NE/NY's teams pass happy, they were and/or still are built around defense and run game. I never said anything about a concervative offense, l like offenses that make a commitment to the run and not just run a few from under center when they're not running some draw plays outta the shotun. The Colts couldn't run the ball to save their ass and their defense is useless unless Manning spots them a 2 TD lead. Phili and NE can run but are more interested in throwing up to 70% of the time, meanwhile they either throw too much or too little money at their defense an expect it to be a recipe for SB parades. To these teams the bubble-screens and gimmick plays is their running game most of the time.What teams are throwing 70% of the time? It sure as hell isn't New England. Even their record setting 2007 offense only slightly favored the pass (55/45 ratio IIRC) and they were top 10 in rushing attempts and top 15 in rushing yards.


For for the purposes of this discussion, I don't care what passing schemes these 6 teams ran because l don't have a problem with their passing systems. Ya'll must think l said l prefer Vince Lombardi's "3 yards and a cloud of dust" combined with fairytale defenses like Ravens/Bucs, l don't know where you got that.

I'm talking about teams built like they were in the 80's and 90's, these teams were. l never said a word about conservative, l said you don't have to sling it around the field like pass happy fools to win SB's. Far from it. Give me the way Ravens, Stealers and Giants are doing it, none of these teams are conservative, and neither is Fox. l could watch Stealers v Ravens all day long, thats my kind of football.

Erhardt and Perkins coached into the early 80's, l think, so by definition they are coaches that built teams like they did in the 80's, if not the 90's. So again, all you're saying is that your definition is probably different than mine. I think?

Thanks tho.......

So you want a team that places value on the run game and defense? That's every single team in the NFL. Always has been, always will be. That is not mutually exclusive to being a pass happy spread offense.

[Agent of Orange]

I never said these teams offenses suck, or even that the run game and Defense were their strongest asset, l said they're built the way 80's and 90's teams were built, with or around strong defense and dominant running game.

The Giants didn't just win on the arm of Eli Manning and they never win that SB if the defense doesn't knock Brandy's dick in the dirt. They go to and win that SB because of defense, Brandon Jacobs AND Eli Manning. They were certainly balanced, but Jacobs had the entire league buzzing.

The point is, you don't have to sling it all over the ballpark with "innovative" 2000's and 2010's passing attacks to win SB's. Far from it.
I never said anything about world-class defenses/running games and pathetic passing attacks with no franchise QB. How many people expect John Fox to build/develop that kind of Ravens/Bucs defense, anyway? Those are the rarest of Championship teams and the previous decades were hardly defined by teams like Ravens and Bucs, even the Steel Curtain team put 2-3 QB's/WR's in the HoF. Maybe it's your definition of an 80's or 90's team that l'm missing, but l hope you're not saying that Fox is trying to build Bucs/Ravens. During the Panthers SB run Jake Delhomme had people saying that the Denver Broncos signed the wrong Jake, they had a damn good passing game, especially in the SB.

And the Stealers? They won that 1st SB almost entirely on Defense and Running Game, R-berger even stunk it up in the SB itself. They were and still are built around their defense and running game, it's when they get pass happy that they get into trouble. Bruce Arians is about the least popular Stealer in Pittsburgh.

I don't know what exactly it is about the way Fox runs a football team that you dislike, but give me a franchise QB and l'll build a John Fox team around him and win a lotta ******* games.

So really, all your analysis boils down to is telling me that your definition of an 80's and 90's team is different than mine.......

Lancane is right in acknowledging the 80s and 90s demanded more balance. The truth is, it was probably better football back then. But you're also right here. Even in recent history, teams have made it to and won SBs by being more balanced. The Cardinals were a pass happy team the year they made it to the SB but what people often forget is that they were more dedicated to running the ball in the playoffs. The same can be said to the Saints. The year before they made it to the SB, Brees almost set the record for yards passing. They went 8-8. The next year they were a more balanced team and won the SB. Last year the Saints were less balanced and less successful and you would often hear Payton talk about needing more balance. This is why they drafted Ingram. Even when the Colts won the SB, Rhoades should have been the MVP.

Why do these teams acknowledge the importance of running the ball? It's because, at the highest level, the more one dimensional you are, the better chance there is of running into a team who can defend that one thing you do. Balance makes you harder to defend.

Lancane is wrong in not valuing the ability to control the clock. It is important and its value should not be diminished. In basketball there is this concept in statistical analysis involving "rate of play". Apparently people analysing football statistics are slow to apply this. 25 points for a running team might be the equivalent of 35 points to a passing tam.

[Lancane]

Lancane is wrong in not valuing the ability to control the clock. It is important and its value should not be diminished. In basketball there is this concept in statistical analysis involving "rate of play". Apparently people analysing football statistics are slow to apply this. 25 points for a running team might be the equivalent of 35 points to a passing tam.
I don't dis-value controlling the clock, that's an easy misconception, it's not uncommon in the modern era of football to have a better time of possession and still lose the game, indeed for some offenses it can lead to a loss just as much, particularly when you're unable to score - take Denver for example, if you look at the time of possession you'll notice that Denver did well in three of their four contests, the problem is that Denver can not capitalize on it. Whereas against Green Bay or for that matter against other high powered offenses it's more than conceivable that Denver controlling the clock will hinder their chances for victory...Denver has a 'Bend don't break' defense, eventually it's rather easy to believe that the Broncos will be playing from behind and the more time gone without the ability to score, the more time is wasted grinding out the clock. The modern era of football caters to more high powered offenses then it did in the 80's or 90's, rarely are defensive juggernauts capable of winning it all, and not just because balance or the lack thereof. Simply put, controlling the clock is a benefit for teams with the capability to drive down the field and score more then those who can not and Denver can not.

[BeefStew25]

Game day. Let's go.

[Agent of Orange]

I don't dis-value controlling the clock, that's an easy misconception, it's not uncommon in the modern era of football to have a better time of possession and still lose the game, indeed for some offenses it can lead to a loss just as much, particularly when you're unable to score - take Denver for example, if you look at the time of possession you'll notice that Denver did well in three of their four contests, the problem is that Denver can not capitalize on it. Whereas against Green Bay or for that matter against other high powered offenses it's more than conceivable that Denver controlling the clock will hinder their chances for victory...Denver has a 'Bend don't break' defense, eventually it's rather easy to believe that the Broncos will be playing from behind and the more time gone without the ability to score, the more time is wasted grinding out the clock. The modern era of football caters to more high powered offenses then it did in the 80's or 90's, rarely are defensive juggernauts capable of winning it all, and not just because balance or the lack thereof. Simply put, controlling the clock is a benefit for teams with the capability to drive down the field and score more then those who can not and Denver can not.



This is also not true. Go back to the Dallas-San Fran NFC Championship games from the early 90s. In the very first game, which was at Candlestick, Dallas won the game and one of the biggest reasons, according to Steve Young, was that they needed to score TDs and not FGs. Quite honestly, both of those teams might be better than a lot of the recent teams who have been in and won SBs. It's also not a coincidence that Dallas was more balanced than San Fran, which better allowed them to score TDs (and not FGs) while having a defense that prevented San Fran from scoring TDs once they had less field to work with.

Now fast forward 20 years and you're saying its better to come away with TDs and not FGs. Both then and now, balance better equips you to do that. Balance also results in using more clock than being a pass happy team. Before you make bold declarations about scoring more points, you should really understand whether or not its because of a rate of play disparity or whether its because they really are better at scoring in the red zone. Either way, its not a coincidence that even pass happy teams start running the ball more in the playoffs.

[Bosco]

This is also not true.

It is. In all matters of offense, Scoring > T.O.P.

Always.

[SmilinAssasSin27]

I guess Derek Dooley walks on water now.

Could YOU pull off those orange pants?

[BeefStew25]

Could YOU pull off those orange pants?

Yes. I could. But he is putting style over substance.

Neyland is growing uneasy and empty.

[SmilinAssasSin27]

All will be fine. I'm amused that everyone understood during the pre-season that we were still too young to legitimately compete, but when we actually lose the games we are supposed to lose (after losing our best player to injury mind you), they all freak out and call for his head. Fulmer ruined this team and Kiffin buried it. After arrests, dropouts and transfers, there are only a few of Kiffin's boys remaining. And even fewer of them actually contribute.

Fresh and Sophs do not have the physical maturity, nor the weightroom time to contribute in the mass volume that is being asked of them. Vols are strating 80% fresh and soph on both sides.

I believe Dooley is finally someone WITH substance. Kiffin is the one you describe, not DD. 2 top 10 recruiting classes wiht another on the way. Vols will be fine. The idiots just need to exercise some patience.

[NorCalBronco7]

Failure as a NFL Head Football coach. He can identify with Neckbeard though - because their records are strikingly similar (as in terrible).

Your argument against John Fox is as revoluationary as the wildcat offense.

[silkamilkamonico]

All will be fine. I'm amused that everyone understood during the pre-season that we were still too young to legitimately compete, but when we actually lose the games we are supposed to lose (after losing our best player to injury mind you), they all freak out and call for his head.

I think this statement is a myth. Defensively, other than Miller who has a very long way to go, I don't see a lot of young potential on this team. Dumervil has turned out to be a big question mark on his future with this organization, and Rahim Moore is the only young player who even remotely has a chance to be some kind of role player. Who is the next "young" talent? Joe Mays? Does he even count?

[SmilinAssasSin27]

I think this statement is a myth. Defensively, other than Miller who has a very long way to go, I don't see a lot of young potential on this team. Dumervil has turned out to be a big question mark on his future with this organization, and Rahim Moore is the only young player who even remotely has a chance to be some kind of role player. Who is the next "young" talent? Joe Mays? Does he even count?

except that I was talking about a college coach... :hi: