PDA

View Full Version : Slowik speaks



broken12
12-29-2008, 09:07 PM
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/new...season-begins/

SAN DIEGO — Shell-shocked.

That’s the only way Bob Slowik’s demeanor could be described after the collapse of his Denver Broncos defense Sunday night.

The coordinator tried gallows humor, reminding his inquisitor that, yes, he did know that his group allowed 52 points in a winner-take-all, AFC West showdown with the San Diego Chargers.

At the same time, he acknowledged there was nothing remotely funny about how Denver’s defense responded when the stakes were highest.

The Broncos allowed season-highs in total yards (491), rushing yards (289) and points (52), capping off a year in which the defense ranked 29th overall. It finished a season ranked 24th or worse in 16 major defensive categories listed in the league’s official statistics. The only area Denver was better was fourth down efficiency (18th).

“The disappointing thing is there was no mystery to what the Chargers were doing,” Slowik said. “They were running the ball. We never worked harder on the run – ever, anywhere I’ve ever been in 17 years of coaching. You have to execute fundamentally in big games – read your keys, believe your keys, get off your blocks and make tackles, things like that.

“I really don’t have an answer.”

Yet Slowik can bet there will be, and already are, plenty of questions about how to get a group that’s allowed 409 and 448 points, respectively, the last two seasons – only the 1963-64 teams were worse back-to-back – to a respectable level.

One big piece already has been decided, apparently, when coach Mike Shanahan announced that Slowik would stay past his first season overseeing the defense, averting the past fates of Greg Robinson, Ray Rhodes, Larry Coyer and Jim Bates since 2000. But Slowik knows in the public realm his scheme will be dissected and that he’ll become a scapegoat to many.

“Sure, and that’s no problem,” he said. “It’s a bottom line business. Everybody that coaches knows that. In the end, how you perform on the field is a reflection of what kind of coaching they have.”

Other items such as personnel, or a lack thereof, can’t be overlooked, either; nor can a lack of continuity. Replacing Slowik along with the roster overhaul on defense brings everything back to square one again, given all the previous changes. At some point there has to be some sense of permanence on that side of the ball in terms of approach.

“It’s one of those things where I mean it when I say it, because it would be very easy to say this under the situation we’re talking about right here that it’s the obvious answer,” Slowik said.

“But continuity is something that sooner or later is going to have to be established with this group, so that they can draw from experience and say, ‘Yeah, we know exactly what you’re talking about,’ and the terminology remains the same. And I’m not pleading any case. That’s the fact. Anybody in the whole NFL would tell you that. So hopefully that will be the case.”

Denver’s defense hit its lowest point Sunday night in season replete with less-than-stellar moments. San Diego’s 296 rushing yards was the worst performance by a Broncos team since an infamous 407-yard debacle vs. the Cincinnati Bengals in ’00 that contributed to Robinson’s firing. The five Chargers rushing TDs tied for the most ever against Denver.

It’s the third time this season the Broncos have allowed 200-plus rushing yards but first occasion since the Oct. 20 bye. Ten times this year the Broncos gave up at least 139 yards on the ground and finished 27th overall at 146.1 per game.

“I’m shocked, friggin’ flabbergasted, whatever words you can use, completely surprised,” Slowik said about the poor tackling and lack of gap integrity vs. the Chargers. “If they would have thrown the ball for an extraordinary amount of yards then that would have been different, because so much has been put into the run defense. But when it happens this way, after your whole emphasis from Day 1 has been to stop the run, play the run better, play tough, be physical, and not get it done in a big game is disheartening as a coach.”

There were plenty of those feelings to go around in ’08. In the end, Denver finished with a franchise-low 13 takeaways all season. Its 67.3 percent completion rate allowed broke the team-record high of 63.6 set in 2002. The number of first downs allowed (327) smashed the 1995 record. The yield of 26 rushing touchdowns was five more than the ’65 season.

“Defensively we’ve got a lot of work to do,” Broncos coach Mike Shanahan said. “We’ll try to do that this off-season.”

How deep the personnel changes go remains to be seen. But it’s safe to say the safety position and defensive front will be emphasized, both in free agency and in the draft, where Denver has nine draft picks, including No. 12 overall.

The Broncos also will look to find a spot for promising rookie linebacker Wesley Woodyard, perhaps even necessitating another shift by D.J. Williams back to the middle.

But the main point of emphasis – an eight-man front to curtail the run out of a base 4-3 alignment is fundamentally sound in Slowik’s view. It comes down to execution, and ultimately, expansion of principles.

“The point there is when you’re starting a scheme in the first year and you simplify the scheme to establish fundamentals, techniques and terminology, that’s just the beginning,” Slowik said, alluding to an early-season switch out of a 3-4 look. “If you can maintain continuity then you can grow and expand from there. But until you get a base that you’re comfortable in and the players are comfortable in, that they know how to execute, then you don’t have a chance.”

broken12
12-29-2008, 09:08 PM
Im speachless!!!!

Medford Bronco
12-29-2008, 09:17 PM
This guy has no clue really.

Why not play your cornerbacks 15 yards off on every play.

Scheme. lol what scheme the scheme that they are soft and got picked apart but such future HOFers (tongue in cheek) Jemarcus Russel, Trent Edwards and Tyler Thigpen

I wish I could fail at my job as bad as Slowbrain and still have a job. :mad:

Requiem / The Dagda
12-29-2008, 09:18 PM
Kiss my ass Slowik. You didn't say much at all. Hope you enjoy getting fired.

weazel
12-29-2008, 09:25 PM
you can scheme all you want, but please go back and watch the games this season. Only two people on the defensive side of the ball even know HOW to tackle. 9 times out of 10, the defender is reaching or diving. When they did somehow got to the ball carrier, they couldnt take him down and needed 4 other "men" to help tackle.

I am not saying Slowik is not at fault, Im saying that you need able players, otherwise we would all be playing in the NFL.

G_Money
12-29-2008, 09:35 PM
Denver’s defense hit its lowest point Sunday night in season replete with less-than-stellar moments. San Diego’s 296 rushing yards was the worst performance by a Broncos team since an infamous 407-yard debacle vs. the Cincinnati Bengals in ’00 that contributed to Robinson’s firing. The five Chargers rushing TDs tied for the most ever against Denver.

It’s the third time this season the Broncos have allowed 200-plus rushing yards but first occasion since the Oct. 20 bye. Ten times this year the Broncos gave up at least 139 yards on the ground and finished 27th overall at 146.1 per game.

“I’m shocked, friggin’ flabbergasted, whatever words you can use, completely surprised,” Slowik said about the poor tackling and lack of gap integrity vs. the Chargers. “If they would have thrown the ball for an extraordinary amount of yards then that would have been different, because so much has been put into the run defense. But when it happens this way, after your whole emphasis from Day 1 has been to stop the run, play the run better, play tough, be physical, and not get it done in a big game is disheartening as a coach.”

There were plenty of those feelings to go around in ’08. In the end, Denver finished with a franchise-low 13 takeaways all season. Its 67.3 percent completion rate allowed broke the team-record high of 63.6 set in 2002. The number of first downs allowed (327) smashed the 1995 record. The yield of 26 rushing touchdowns was five more than the ’65 season.

“Defensively we’ve got a lot of work to do,” Broncos coach Mike Shanahan said. “We’ll try to do that this off-season.”

How deep the personnel changes go remains to be seen. But it’s safe to say the safety position and defensive front will be emphasized, both in free agency and in the draft, where Denver has nine draft picks, including No. 12 overall.

The Broncos also will look to find a spot for promising rookie linebacker Wesley Woodyard, perhaps even necessitating another shift by D.J. Williams back to the middle.

But the main point of emphasis – an eight-man front to curtail the run out of a base 4-3 alignment is fundamentally sound in Slowik’s view. It comes down to execution, and ultimately, expansion of principles.

“The point there is when you’re starting a scheme in the first year and you simplify the scheme to establish fundamentals, techniques and terminology, that’s just the beginning,” Slowik said, alluding to an early-season switch out of a 3-4 look. “If you can maintain continuity then you can grow and expand from there. But until you get a base that you’re comfortable in and the players are comfortable in, that they know how to execute, then you don’t have a chance.”

So the guy who played the 4-3, the 3-4, the 4-4 stack, the 7 DB look and other assorted nonsense says he figured out that making ONE look work might be better than changing every week?

Genius.

His excuses for the failure are comical. "I have no idea why they couldn't stop the run. I mean, I told them to play hard. Can't figure out why that didn't fix it."

It's gonna be a long offseason if I have to read more of Slowik's nonsense. :tsk: Planning on him being back sours the whole draft leadup for me.

~G

jlarsiii
12-29-2008, 09:37 PM
Slowik should change his title from DC to Epic Failure.
At least the article points out that it is a known fact that a lot of work needs to be done on the defensive side of the ball.

Mike
12-29-2008, 09:44 PM
“I really don’t have an answer.”

This quote sums up about every reason there is to fire this guy.

Jaded
12-29-2008, 09:47 PM
“I really don’t have an answer.”--Bob Slowik.

Ya don't say? Steve Wonder can see that.......

G_Money
12-29-2008, 09:49 PM
It just frustrates me that the amount of defensive coaching talent on the market this year is pretty damn interesting, and we're not gonna add any of it.

If God loved me he'd let us hire Mangini as a DL coach or something, the way the Chargers added Rivera, so that when Slowik's defense is an abominable failure next season we have somebody in house to turn to instead of just setting ourselves on fire.

~G

lex
12-29-2008, 09:50 PM
This guy is a dishonorable ***** who has been throwing his players under the bus along with an incompetent defensive coordinator. I like how he states his case by emphasizing continuity. Yeah, thats true but only if you know the guy is not a dud, which Slowik is.

Superchop 7
12-29-2008, 09:51 PM
It's not all coaching.

Our players were terrible.

G_Money
12-29-2008, 09:58 PM
Nope, it's not all coaching.

But coaching made a bad thing worse, which is pretty much the opposite of the point.

~G

Jaded
12-29-2008, 09:59 PM
It just frustrates me that the amount of defensive coaching talent on the market this year is pretty damn interesting, and we're not gonna add any of it.

If God loved me he'd let us hire Mangini as a DL coach or something, the way the Chargers added Rivera, so that when Slowik's defense is an abominable failure next season we have somebody in house to turn to instead of just setting ourselves on fire.

~G

Mangini was Belichicks DB's coach before getting the Pats DC job.

Mangini as DB's coach, Rod Marinelli as DL coach and Gunther Cunningham (If the Chefs new Gm cleans house) as DC/LB's would be a pretty decent coaching staff, but way too good to be true.......

Superchop 7
12-29-2008, 09:59 PM
Let me clarify, for the record.

I was pissed at this guy in the beginning of the year.

He did the same things Bates did, try and fit a square peg in a round hole.

But, unlike Bates, he did his best to change the scheme and put players in a position to win.

Unfortunately, at the end of the day.....we just don't have the guys.

Tned
12-29-2008, 10:00 PM
It just frustrates me that the amount of defensive coaching talent on the market this year is pretty damn interesting, and we're not gonna add any of it.

If God loved me he'd let us hire Mangini as a DL coach or something, the way the Chargers added Rivera, so that when Slowik's defense is an abominable failure next season we have somebody in house to turn to instead of just setting ourselves on fire.

~G

The offense will be ready to win next year, they were almost ready this year. Change DC again, and your back to square one. Keeping the coaching staff/scheme in place, and getting the special teams talent out of the starting lineup, and the Broncos have the best chance of winning next season.

spikerman
12-29-2008, 10:00 PM
The problem is that we, as fans, can't say, "well maybe Slowik and the defense just had an off year". Slowik's history suggests that this is as good as it gets. That's what's truly depressing.

Broncos Mtnman
12-29-2008, 10:03 PM
The offense will be ready to win next year, they were almost ready this year. Change DC again, and your back to square one. Keeping the coaching staff/scheme in place, and getting the special teams talent out of the starting lineup, and the Broncos have the best chance of winning next season.

So, according to you, we've changed DCs so often, that we now have to keep the worst one we've ever had in order to avoid getting worse?

Sorry, doesn't make sense.

Medford Bronco
12-29-2008, 10:06 PM
The offense will be ready to win next year, they were almost ready this year. Change DC again, and your back to square one. Keeping the coaching staff/scheme in place, and getting the special teams talent out of the starting lineup, and the Broncos have the best chance of winning next season.

I disagree Tned, what about these teams that have whole new
defensive coaching staffs (Atlanta, Balt and Miami) and they all made the playoffs.

I would take my chances on bringing in a DC with a clue that does not have a track record of sucking everywhere he goes.

yes a lot of the players suck as well but they need to be led by somone other than this guy

NameUsedBefore
12-29-2008, 10:14 PM
“I really don’t have an answer.”

Well then, what more needs to be said? Why hasn't the man already been shown the door?

Tned
12-29-2008, 10:17 PM
So, according to you. We've changed DCs so often, that we now have to keep the worst one we've ever had in order to avoid getting worse?

Sorry, doesn't make sense.

Maybe changing coordinators annually has something to do with things getting 'worse'.

I wouldn't have been disspointed if Shanahan fired Slowick, but I do know that it would likely hurt us in the short run (next year) and 'maybe' help us in the long run.

The fact is that we need new talent on the defensive side of the ball. Would a different coordinator forced our current players to tackle better?

Maybe. Would a different scheme have gotten more out of the special teamers we had starting? Maybe.

Clearly, Shanahan, Bowlen and company feel that the fastest path to winning is keeping some consistancy in the coaching staff and likely focusing on actually putting starting-quality players on the field next year.

Mike
12-29-2008, 10:22 PM
Maybe changing coordinators annually has something to do with things getting 'worse'.

I wouldn't have been disspointed if Shanahan fired Slowick, but I do know that it would likely hurt us in the short run (next year) and 'maybe' help us in the long run.

The fact is that we need new talent on the defensive side of the ball. Would a different coordinator forced our current players to tackle better?

Maybe. Would a different scheme have gotten more out of the special teamers we had starting? Maybe.

Clearly, Shanahan, Bowlen and company feel that the fastest path to winning is keeping some consistancy in the coaching staff and likely focusing on actually putting starting-quality players on the field next year.

Correction, Shanahan feels that keeping his "yes men" is important. It is his MO.

If this were Bates or any other coach I would be likely to agree. But Slowick is not, nor ever will be, capable of being a defensive coordinator. Nothing on his resume says otherwise.

There is nothing to lose defensive wise with firing this guy. Nothing. I do not think that it is possible to get worse.

Make the change. Hire somebody with the balls to tell Shanahan to piss off when it comes to the defensive side of the ball and let them install their system then stick with it.

Medford Bronco
12-29-2008, 10:26 PM
Correction, Shanahan feels that keeping his "yes men" is important. It is his MO.

If this were Bates or any other coach I would be likely to agree. But Slowick is not, nor ever will be, capable of being a defensive coordinator. Nothing on his resume says otherwise.

There is nothing to lose with the defense with firing this guy. Nothing. I do not think that it is possible to get worse.

Make the change. Hire somebody with the balls to Shanahan to piss off when it comes to the defensive side of the ball and let them install their system then stick with it.

We can be worse, we can be the 1981 Baltimore Colts who gave up over 500 pts, including 3 games in a row of over 40 pts and 4 in 5 games

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1981/

okay being a wiseass but it would be catastrophic to be wore than this team

Tned
12-29-2008, 10:29 PM
Correction, Shanahan feels that keeping his "yes men" is important. It is his MO.


Some of you guys have been saying this for a while now, but I have seen Shanny keep firing these guys. He fired his buddy, Heimerdinger. He fired Bates. He fired Coyer (while it still isn't clear exactly what happened).

It's possible that is the reason Shanahan makes his coaching moves. Based on what I have seen, I doubt it. It is the very fact that he has such a big ego and wants to win so bad, that I think he makes coaching and player decisions that he thinks gives the team the best chance of winning. Many times, the short-term focused decisions (win now vs. build for tomorrow) have back fired, where he gets a team 'almost' good enough, but not quite, but I believe (which is all any of us can do -- guess, think, believe) that his decisions are made based on what he thinks will give him the best chance of winning NOW, not what will make him look best.

G_Money
12-29-2008, 10:30 PM
The offense will be ready to win next year, they were almost ready this year. Change DC again, and your back to square one. Keeping the coaching staff/scheme in place, and getting the special teams talent out of the starting lineup, and the Broncos have the best chance of winning next season.

I believe the opposite. Add a good RB and the offense should be almost perfect, yes.

But just as we wasted it this year, we'll waste it next year with a man who has no business being a DC.

And if he has no business being a DC, why would I trust his input on the player personnel we're going to add for his side of the ball?

We have the best chance of winning by adding the best talent - on the field and on the sideline.

Slowik is the Ryan Leaf of Defensive Coordinators. Why on Earth would you think that by giving Ryan Leaf better talent around him he could be successful?

Slowik just makes the same mistakes over, and over and over. That's when he's not changing the scheme once a half.

He did the exact same thing in Green Bay. Tentative, wishy-washy, never stuck with a specific scheme for more than a few games, never made adjustments once other teams saw what he was doing, all of his guys were always out of position and played with a distinct lack of heart.

That's his defense. Everyone has a limit. Slowick is a positional coach at best who simply cannot mastermind a defense.

Never has, never will.

Thinking that talent is the sole excuse simply wastes another year.

Talent is the reason our defense could not have been more than adequate. It is not the reason we were abominable.

We would have been adequate-to-bad with any DC. But we weren't adequate, and we weren't bad. We were mind-bogglingly horrible at every crucial moment, and the only times we weren't it was because the New Kids hadn't been fully schooled in what Slowik wanted them to do.

Wishing for stability by keeping Slowik is insane. We WILL be stable - we'll remain exactly where we were last year, and we'll wonder why Spikes and Chung look so damn average and why our $40 million defensive line addition isn't producing.

I'm going to trust the Goodmans to add quality talent to this team, regardless of what happens during Slowik's defensive blunders. Try not to judge the kids before our next DC comes in.

Because Slowik won't last, and that continuity you're hoping for will have to be upset in order for us to ever become a threat.

~G

NameUsedBefore
12-29-2008, 10:35 PM
The argument to keep Slowik is hard to make considering he has been terrible elsewhere. Had he been a solid coordinator in some other organization then, yes, I think we'd give him the benefit of the doubt at least for awhile; but that isn't the case.

Tned
12-29-2008, 10:43 PM
Because Slowik won't last, and that continuity you're hoping for will have to be upset in order for us to ever become a threat.

~G

Nice post. One comment. Let's not forget, as I have said multiple times, I am not a fan of Slowicks, and would not have been upset with him being fired. I am simply laying out what I believe is the rationale Shanahan, and ultimately Bowlen, is using for keeping him on.

Are they wrong, and you right? Very possibly. By the end of next year, we might not that answer.

I think Shanahan has many times been short-sighted in his "win now" approach to making decisions, whether it is in drafting or FA moves. On the bright side, it has led to nearly no losing seasons, but until recently has left us constantly rotating through aging veterans on the downside of their career. On the offensive side of the ball, we now have an almost exclusively young, talented core of players.

I believe, that Shanahan 'believes', he can make that same transition on defense this off season, via the draft and some free agent moves. Clearly, he, and again likely Bowlen, believe the fastest way to get from here to there, is to keep Slowick in place and upgrade the talent.

Since this is the path they seem to be set on, I hope they are right and you are wrong.

G_Money
12-29-2008, 10:59 PM
Keeping Slowik isn't the worst thing, as long as he's not in the draft room.

It makes me angry, because it means we won't be playing for real next year. It'll be another Monopoly Money year where we don't pass go and don't collect $200, instead of cashing out in Vegas for big, REAL bucks, but as long as we add the right talent we can improve our defensive talent while simultaneously proving that Slowik really is that terrible.

After the last year and a half I'd think it would have proven itself out, but I guess not.

There are certainly better things, but as long as we add the right talent I can try to grit my teeth and bear another rebuilding year. It's just stupid and blatantly unnecessary. It's like watching John right before Shanahan got here, when you knew he was just killing time til the next coach came in. Thank God it was the right one.

Hopefully the next "right one" for DC is not on the market this year, and that's why we have to suffer through Slowik in order to kill time until he arrives.

After all, I'm sure God plots all this out so that we can win another championship. He has nothing better to do... ;)

~G

Slick
12-29-2008, 11:00 PM
Let me clarify, for the record.

I was pissed at this guy in the beginning of the year.

He did the same things Bates did, try and fit a square peg in a round hole.

But, unlike Bates, he did his best to change the scheme and put players in a position to win.

Unfortunately, at the end of the day.....we just don't have the guys.

As much as I blame Slowick, I think this is spot on. When I hear our defensive coach talking about fundamentals....

Fundamentals being taught to professional football players, LMFAO. That's what high school and college are for.

scott.475
12-29-2008, 11:02 PM
This guy would make a better DC, he doesn't have a clue either:

http://sidesalad.net/archives/AirplaneMovieOttoPilotInflatable.jpg

Superchop 7
12-29-2008, 11:04 PM
Heimerdinger was allowed to leave. (Not the same as fired)

Slowik speaks ??

Umm ok.

Can he sit, roll over, play dead ??

Sorry, couldn't help myself.

Jaded
12-29-2008, 11:54 PM
Heimerdinger was allowed to leave. (Not the same as fired)

Slowik speaks ??

Umm ok.

Can he sit, roll over, play dead ??

Sorry, couldn't help myself.
Where do you think this defense learned it?.......

fcspikeit
12-30-2008, 02:35 AM
Maybe changing coordinators annually has something to do with things getting 'worse'.

I wouldn't have been disspointed if Shanahan fired Slowick, but I do know that it would likely hurt us in the short run (next year) and 'maybe' help us in the long run.

The fact is that we need new talent on the defensive side of the ball. Would a different coordinator forced our current players to tackle better?

Maybe. Would a different scheme have gotten more out of the special teamers we had starting? Maybe.

Clearly, Shanahan, Bowlen and company feel that the fastest path to winning is keeping some consistancy in the coaching staff and likely focusing on actually putting starting-quality players on the field next year.

There is no way keeping him can by about winning, there is just no way. Shanahan can't be that dumb, the man has won 2 Superbowls...

Maybe he thinks firing him will make himself look bad because he was his guy? But there is no way he can possibly think Slowic is a good DC..

This is so dumb, you can see our defenders don't respect him, they wont play hard for him. There has been more then a couple times our defenders have dropped comment about his so called schemes..

He speaks of continuity? How many different schemes did we run this year?

Even if Slowic isn't the worst DC in the NFL, he will never be a good one. At best he could shock all of us and be average.. Why are we settling for that? think about any of the good DC in the league. Can you imagine them ever having a defense that is as bad as ours?

As long as slowic's coaching our defense we're doomed! I just can't believe we're going to waist another year or 2 on this guy :frusty:

If there was 1 good thing he brought to the table it would at least be something, but I can't honestly think of one good reason to keep him. Please anyone, name one good thing about his defense.. Anything!

I don't think I have ever been this frustrated. There must be another reason Shanahan is keeping this guy. I don’t believe he thinks keeping him is in the best interests of the Broncos, he can’t be that dumb… I’m not sure of the direction he is taking this team, anyone can see where it is going under Slowic, the question is why is Shanahan allowing him to take us there?

Tned
12-30-2008, 02:47 AM
There is no way keeping him can by about winning, there is just no way. Shanahan can't be that dumb, the man has won 2 Superbowls...

Maybe he thinks firing him will make himself look bad because he was his guy? But there is no way he can possibly think Slowic is a good DC..



Some variation of this line of reasoning has been used by people for several years now. Before the season, people were predicting that Slowick would be fired (another DC casualty) to cover up Shanahan's bad personell moves on the defensive side of the ball.

FWIW, in the 14 years I have watched Shanahan run this team, I have not seen a guy that makes decisions based on what will make him look good.

I have seen a guy that makes mistakes, such as thinking Griese was the next Montana and signing him to a huge contract, but then when the time was right, he cut him, took the salary cap hit and the 'mastermind' abuse and moved on. Daryl Gardner, Dale Carter, the list goes on. Same with coordinators. His good friend Heimerdinger. The guru Bates that he brought in, etc., etc.

There is no way being on his third DC in three years makes him look good, so based on that rationale, Bates or Coyer should still be running the show.

I think Shanahan has a big ego and believes strongly in himself and his decisions. He seems like he can sell himself on a player, and I imagine the same with a coach. So, while I might by that Shanahan has sold or convinced himself that Slowick is a good DC, with bad talent to work with, I have not seen any evidence that Shanahan would keep Slowick just to not highlight his bad decision in giving him the job.

As I said, there is a long, long list of moves Shahanan has made both with coaches and players that by making them, he had to admit to decisions that didn't work out and were having to be cleaned up.

fcspikeit
12-30-2008, 03:57 AM
Some variation of this line of reasoning has been used by people for several years now. Before the season, people were predicting that Slowick would be fired (another DC casualty) to cover up Shanahan's bad personell moves on the defensive side of the ball.

FWIW, in the 14 years I have watched Shanahan run this team, I have not seen a guy that makes decisions based on what will make him look good.

I have seen a guy that makes mistakes, such as thinking Griese was the next Montana and signing him to a huge contract, but then when the time was right, he cut him, took the salary cap hit and the 'mastermind' abuse and moved on. Daryl Gardner, Dale Carter, the list goes on. Same with coordinators. His good friend Heimerdinger. The guru Bates that he brought in, etc., etc.

There is no way being on his third DC in three years makes him look good, so based on that rationale, Bates or Coyer should still be running the show.

I think Shanahan has a big ego and believes strongly in himself and his decisions. He seems like he can sell himself on a player, and I imagine the same with a coach. So, while I might by that Shanahan has sold or convinced himself that Slowick is a good DC, with bad talent to work with, I have not seen any evidence that Shanahan would keep Slowick just to not highlight his bad decision in giving him the job.

As I said, there is a long, long list of moves Shahanan has made both with coaches and players that by making them, he had to admit to decisions that didn't work out and were having to be cleaned up.

I didn't say I thought that was the reason, But that is more believable then him actually thinking Slowic will help this team win.. I don't know what is wrong with him Tned? Maybe he has lost his mind? It could be Slowic took some nasty photos of the night they both had to much to drink? :confused:

Any of those reasons or more believable then him actually thinking Slowic gives us the best chance to win. If he honestly believes that he is the one who should be fired.. Any moron can see how bad slowic is as a DC. It's as dumb as thinking Webster played better this year then Larson at Mike, Yet week after week Webster was starting when he was able.

Also I think he would look worse firing his 4th DC in 4 years. I mean who does that? Someone who don't know a thing about defense and probably shouldn't be the HC of a football team. He will look even worse after next year when our defense is just as bad as ever and he has to fire slowic.

Why didn't he give Bates more time? He only gave him 5 weeks. Our defense is just as bad and Slowic has had 29. I don't think Bates was his guy, I believe Pat told him to hire him... That's why he was so quick to demote him.

Tned
12-30-2008, 04:10 AM
As much as I blame Slowick, I think this is spot on. When I hear our defensive coach talking about fundamentals....

Fundamentals being taught to professional football players, LMFAO. That's what high school and college are for.

Like the quote I posted somewhere from Reggie Rivers. He said more times than not, the right guy was in the right spot at the right moment, but didn't make the play at the point of attack. The guy opposite him was more talented. The Broncos were in position, but out talented (not sure if that is a word, but he used it).

So, while I, like many us are driven crazy by the DB's playing off the ball, there may very well be a rationale for that madness, like safeties that can't cover, or no pass rush. I don't know.

However, I think some of what Reggie says is correct. We have seen for a couple years now horrible tackling, our undersized linebackers being tossed around, and our linemen not able to get a push, which leads to no sacks. And did I mention missed tackles, well it bears mentioning again.

Nate Webster, a career special teamer at MLB, the most important LB position. Boss bailey, an oft injured player who while fast, never reached the hyped potential surrounding him when he first arrived in the NFL. Mcree and manual? Don't need to say anything about those cast offs from other teams.

Thomas and Robertson seemed to do a solid job, but Dumvervil was held in check all year, maybe with film on them, they now can neutralize his speed rush, maybe he had an off year. Engleberger? Servicable, but maybe if he spent less time smoking on the sidelines, he would have more burst. A few years back, Engleberger was our pass rush specialist. Now, he is our anchor, all purpose DE? That seems like a problem to me. So, clearly we need at least one every down, stud DE.

So, whether with in house talent (Woodyard, Larsen, DJ), we need to fill the MLB and SLB spots, and safety spots (Barrett?). We need at least one pass/rush, stud DE.

With a stud DE, along with Thomas, robertson, and a rotation of Doom, Moss or others, we should begin to get pressure with the front four, but more important, we an upgrade at MLB and SLB and safety, we will be better prepared to blitz.

Once we get some pressure on the QB, then Bly will all of a sudden become a better corner, and a healthy Champ will once again cut off half the field. That means our one deep cover safety will cover the middle and backup bly, and the SS will spend a lot of time in the box stopping the run.

Assuming Barrett is ready to start, we need one safety. Assuming woodyard or larsen are ready, we need one linebacker (none, if they move woodyard to WLB, DJ to MLB and Larsen to SLB). We need a stud DE through FA and/or the draft, but both would be best, uless we pick up a stud MLB with our first pick.

We saw some flashes on defense when the young guys were in there. Still not great, but flashes. Our defense doesn't need to be blown up, we need 3-5 impact players, depending on how many of these rookies are ready to start next year.

Tned
12-30-2008, 04:15 AM
I didn't say I thought that was the reason, But that is more believable then him actually thinking Slowic will help this team win.. I don't know what is wrong with him Tned? Maybe he has lost his mind? It could be Slowic took some nasty photos of the night they both had to much to drink? :confused:

Any of those reasons or more believable then him actually thinking Slowic gives us the best chance to win. If he honestly believes that he is the one who should be fired.. Any moron can see how bad slowic is as a DC. It's as dumb as thinking Webster played better this year then Larson at Mike, Yet week after week Webster was starting when he was able.

Also I think he would look worse firing his 4th DC in 4 years. I mean who does that? Someone who don't know a thing about defense and probably shouldn't be the HC of a football team. He will look even worse after next year when our defense is just as bad as ever and he has to fire slowic.

Why didn't he give Bates more time? He only gave him 5 weeks. Our defense is just as bad and Slowic has had 29. I don't think Bates was his guy, I believe Pat told him to hire him... That's why he was so quick to demote him.

I think it is just the frustration of seeing such a horrible defense, that makes people think that Shanny has lost it, or start thinking the conspiracy/cover his butt line of thinking. It's understandable, it was a tough season to sit through.

However, like I pointed out in my last post, we are only a handful of players away from having a massive turnaround on defense. With nine draft picks (I think that's what we have) and maybe enough cash to land a FA DE, we should be in a position to fill those five key defensive positions that will turn things around.

fcspikeit
12-30-2008, 07:16 AM
I think it is just the frustration of seeing such a horrible defense, that makes people think that Shanny has lost it, or start thinking the conspiracy/cover his butt line of thinking. It's understandable, it was a tough season to sit through.

However, like I pointed out in my last post, we are only a handful of players away from having a massive turnaround on defense. With nine draft picks (I think that's what we have) and maybe enough cash to land a FA DE, we should be in a position to fill those five key defensive positions that will turn things around.

It was a very tough season so sit through... It's one thing to know your not very good, there is some level of acceptance knowing your team is giving it all they have and just falling short.. As Broncos fans we all have been there..

The thing with this season is it just felt like it didn't have to be that way. At the beginning of the year, I couldn't believe Webster was our starting Mike, he was terrible last year. He sucked it up week after week, all the while I am saying, there must be someone better on this team then Webster. Put the rookie in! The word is, "Shanahan don't have him out there so he must not be ready, in practice Webster must be out playing him. Webster gets hurt, Larson comes in and all of a sudden there are plays being made by the Mike. He wasn't perfect but 10 times better then Webster.. I am left scratching my head :confused: Why hasn't he been out there all season?

Webster heals up and sure enough he gets his job back. At that moment I pretty much lost it for Slowic.. How could he not see that Larson was better? I chose to blame Slowic thinking Shanahan must be following his lead. I blamed Slowic for the 12 yard cushions on 3rd and 7 after the Phins game, and pretty much every game since.. But at some point someone has to stand up and say, IT ISN'T WORKING!!!!!!!!!!!!! Everything Slowic tried to do this year didn't work. Yet week after week he kept doing the same thing.

Now we're at the end of the year, someone has to be held accountable Tned. There is so much blame to go around, it's true, we lack talent on the D-line. knowing that, why didn't we blitz more? Why did we go into games with the same failed game plan week after week? When we did blitz against the Bills in the first half, it worked. So in the second half we go back to the same crap that hasn't worked all year. WHY? Couldn't he see the press coverage and blitzing was working?

Beings we can't seem to evaluate what works and what doesn't daring the year. The hope is that at least now, maybe Shanahan can look back over all of Slowics epic failures and see how dumb he is. Yet he can't/won't.

Which makes me wonder, how much of this is Slowics fault and how much is shanahans fault? Maybe he wont fire him because he was just doing what he was told? After all, he said he and Slowic shared the same philosophy on defense. We know after 2005 it was Shanahan who told Coyer to make a scheme that didn't rely on the blitz. In 2006 our D wasn't half what it was in 2005. Then he fired coyer for doing exactly what he wanted him to do. Play bend don't brake...

In short, I have no faith Slowic can even see talent on the football field, as was the case with Larson. Beings Shanahan wont fire Slowic, I am losing all faith in his ability to see talent.

It's not rocket science, everyone can see how dumb our defensive philosophy was. Whoever was to blame for that should get fired. Or at least demoted, so someone who knows what their doing can come in and fix this huge problem Shanahan has been ignoring all year and by not firing Slowic is continuing to do so

roomemp
12-30-2008, 08:53 AM
I think we need to go after at least one of the elite defensive talents this year. If we could add a Suggs, Haynesworth, or Peppers (if he is not taged), then we can pick up a MLB with our first rounder and a safety with our 2nd. With those 3 additions amongst other smaller signings, I think our defensive might be able to survive next year.

broncofaninfla
12-30-2008, 09:28 AM
Being we need to upgrade multiple positions on defense NOW is the time for a new DC. Pick a proven DC, build around his system and stick with him. I'm still floored about us keeping Slowick. Even if we were able to load the defensive side of the ball with studs at every position we would never reach our full potential with Slowick calling the defensive plays. You would thik Shannahan noticed the impact Rivera had with the Bolts and would realize the difference a real DC could make.

Traveler
12-30-2008, 10:34 AM
If it hasn't been said already, I'll say it. If Slowik is to reamain our Dc, shouldn't he at least have the opportunity to pick his assistants?

I'm still waiting to read where our DL and Secondary coaches have been terminated. Neither of those units have improved over the last 3-4 years.

Since their arrival, both Jarvis Moss and Tim Crowder haven't gotten better as players. You just don't forget how to play football. Two years and the one pass rush move is the bull rush. I can't blame all on a lack of talent. It's more of a lack of teaching/coaching and not settling on one particular scheme IMO.

I've said I thought Denver would become a formidable team in 2010-11. My guess is that time table will need to be pushed back. 2009 season results will probably similar to this years. And the possibility that Bowlen will finally step in and make the much needed change will set this team back becuase they didn't make the required change this offseason.

When your DC says, "I don't have the answer", as to why your defense is so atrocious for two consecutive years, he shouldn't be employed. If/When he does get canned after next season, he should at least go down with assistants he had the opportunity to select.

LRtagger
12-30-2008, 10:34 AM
I like the part where he says it would have been OK if we gave up all the yards passing instead of running...LMAO What a joke of a coach.

D1g1tal j1m
12-30-2008, 10:51 AM
When you combine bad coaching and play calling on D along with a group of undersized Defenders this is what you get.

We need more beef and playmakers on D bottom line. It's easy to miss a tackle on the running back when they average around 6' 1" 230 and our LB's average around 6' and 233. When your Starting ML is listed at 6' 0" and 232 lbs (but we all know he is 1 inch shorter and about 10 lbs lighter) and can't tackle a guy unless he hits him straight on at the knees you are in trouble. To see Nate try to stop LT at the goal line and get pushed back into the end zone and watch him scream at the official that he stopped LT was laughable. To see LT's reaction to the replay on the scoreboard of him pushing Nate into the endzone was priceless. When the opponents don't fear or respect you, it's time for a change.

Tned
12-30-2008, 10:59 AM
It was a very tough season so sit through... It's one thing to know your not very good, there is some level of acceptance knowing your team is giving it all they have and just falling short.. As Broncos fans we all have been there..

The thing with this season is it just felt like it didn't have to be that way. At the beginning of the year, I couldn't believe Webster was our starting Mike, he was terrible last year. He sucked it up week after week, all the while I am saying, there must be someone better on this team then Webster. Put the rookie in! The word is, "Shanahan don't have him out there so he must not be ready, in practice Webster must be out playing him. Webster gets hurt, Larson comes in and all of a sudden there are plays being made by the Mike. He wasn't perfect but 10 times better then Webster.. I am left scratching my head :confused: Why hasn't he been out there all season?

Webster heals up and sure enough he gets his job back. At that moment I pretty much lost it for Slowic.. How could he not see that Larson was better? I chose to blame Slowic thinking Shanahan must be following his lead. I blamed Slowic for the 12 yard cushions on 3rd and 7 after the Phins game, and pretty much every game since.. But at some point someone has to stand up and say, IT ISN'T WORKING!!!!!!!!!!!!! Everything Slowic tried to do this year didn't work. Yet week after week he kept doing the same thing.

Now we're at the end of the year, someone has to be held accountable Tned. There is so much blame to go around, it's true, we lack talent on the D-line. knowing that, why didn't we blitz more? Why did we go into games with the same failed game plan week after week? When we did blitz against the Bills in the first half, it worked. So in the second half we go back to the same crap that hasn't worked all year. WHY? Couldn't he see the press coverage and blitzing was working?

Beings we can't seem to evaluate what works and what doesn't daring the year. The hope is that at least now, maybe Shanahan can look back over all of Slowics epic failures and see how dumb he is. Yet he can't/won't.

Which makes me wonder, how much of this is Slowics fault and how much is shanahans fault? Maybe he wont fire him because he was just doing what he was told? After all, he said he and Slowic shared the same philosophy on defense. We know after 2005 it was Shanahan who told Coyer to make a scheme that didn't rely on the blitz. In 2006 our D wasn't half what it was in 2005. Then he fired coyer for doing exactly what he wanted him to do. Play bend don't brake...

In short, I have no faith Slowic can even see talent on the football field, as was the case with Larson. Beings Shanahan wont fire Slowic, I am losing all faith in his ability to see talent.

It's not rocket science, everyone can see how dumb our defensive philosophy was. Whoever was to blame for that should get fired. Or at least demoted, so someone who knows what their doing can come in and fix this huge problem Shanahan has been ignoring all year and by not firing Slowic is continuing to do so

No question, Larsen seemed to play much better than Webster, but it is very possible when they break down the game day tape that while Larsen seemed great, and was always around the ball, that he might not have been maintaining his gap responsibility. Maybe while he made 'highlight reels' and thrilled fans, when reviewing game tape Larsen was making mistakes, and they didn't feel he was ready full time.

Maybe they fealt the need at FB was greater than what he could bring at MLB.

My point is that I would asume that there is a lot that goes on behind the scenes every week that we don't see or understand, and these decisions aren't made lighltly but have reasons behind them.

If we see Larsen or Woodyard out there making plays, I'm pretty sure Shanahan and Bowlen do. Bowlen has said that his office is right next to (or down the hall from) Shanahah, and he is very involved in football operations, so I am sure he is asking "why aren't we starting Larsen" and getting a satisfactory response.

Tned
12-30-2008, 11:12 AM
When your DC says, "I don't have the answer", as to why your defense is so atrocious for two consecutive years, he shouldn't be employed. If/When he does get canned after next season, he should at least go down with assistants he had the opportunity to select.

I think his "I don't have an answer" has been taken a bit out of context.

First, while he has been DC for two years, last year was Bates defense, and while his scheme was abandoned at the bye last year, we don't know how they moved to the 8 man fronts last year. We don't know if they started implementing Slowick's scheme or Bates changed his scheme or if he continued to run the defense, but with an 8 men in the box approach.

Second, as to the "I don't have an answer". He was talking about the frustration of how they had worked harder against the run than anyplace he had coached and pointed out the fact you have to "execute fundamentally in big games – read your keys, believe your keys, get off your blocks and make tackles", yet the chargers ran all over them.

There was some context to that quote, that everyone seems to be ignoring. The fact is that just like the offense can call up a play and call it, but if Jay over throws the receiver, or Marshall drops the ball, it was all for nought, the same is true on the defense. If they call a play, and there is a player in front of Sproles or LT, and that player failes to make a tackle, or if Bailey is about to wrap up a receiver and Barrett knocks him out of the way, then all is for nought.

fcspikeit
12-30-2008, 04:13 PM
No question, Larsen seemed to play much better than Webster, but it is very possible when they break down the game day tape that while Larsen seemed great, and was always around the ball, that he might not have been maintaining his gap responsibility. Maybe while he made 'highlight reels' and thrilled fans, when reviewing game tape Larsen was making mistakes, and they didn't feel he was ready full time.

Maybe they fealt the need at FB was greater than what he could bring at MLB.

My point is that I would asume that there is a lot that goes on behind the scenes every week that we don't see or understand, and these decisions aren't made lighltly but have reasons behind them.

If we see Larsen or Woodyard out there making plays, I'm pretty sure Shanahan and Bowlen do. Bowlen has said that his office is right next to (or down the hall from) Shanahah, and he is very involved in football operations, so I am sure he is asking "why aren't we starting Larsen" and getting a satisfactory response.

Larson was out of position a couple times, and gave up some yards, I'm sure there were even more times that I couldn't see.. None of that changes how much Webster was out of position, He was out of position all the time. The simple fact is that we were better at stopping the run when Larson was in there... We actually could stop the run up the gut when we knew they were going to run there, He even made some plays on the edge. When Webster is in there, it didn't matter if they run up the gut every play. They got 4 - 50 yards every time... He wasn't making the tackles or even plugging the hole..

His problem is that he waits back and lets the Lineman get on him 5 yards up field. If he would attack his gap he could close it while being blocked and force the runner to move horizontally.. He did the same thing last year.. He would wait for the blocker to get on him and seal off the inside, the runner was always able to get around the edge...

broncofaninfla
12-30-2008, 04:20 PM
I have a lost a lot of respect and confidence in the Bronco coaching staff by them choosing Webster over Larsen at MLB. It wasn't even close, Larsen was the better MLB by far. Heck, he could be our long term answer as well but we'll have to wait until next year to see. Even then there isn't a guarantee he will even get a chance if they chose to keep him at FB.

fcspikeit
12-30-2008, 04:51 PM
I have a lost a lot of respect and confidence in the Bronco coaching staff by them choosing Webster over Larsen at MLB. It wasn't even close, Larsen was the better MLB by far. Heck, he could be our long term answer as well but we'll have to wait until next year to see. Even then there isn't a guarantee he will even get a chance if they chose to keep him at FB.

It's worse then that, They might keep Webster at Mike. Who knows with this bunch of clowns?

Broncolingus
12-30-2008, 05:22 PM
Slow-lick and the defensive personnel are not the only problem here, folks...I'm looking higher.

MileHighWrath
12-30-2008, 05:47 PM
... it's all mute now!

C YA Slowik!

fcspikeit
12-30-2008, 08:23 PM
I guess Pat must have seen some of what I have been saying...