PDA

View Full Version : Did Bowlen Fire Shanahan 3 Years Too Soon?



Npba900
11-06-2011, 10:24 AM
Shanahan should have been allowed to coach out the last 3 years remaining on his contract. This is the respect Bowlen should have shown the only and last coach in Bowline's life time to have won him two consecutive Super Bowls.

Bowlen hastily firing Shanahan, foolishly hiring a 32 Prima Donna as the HC to replace Shanny, while standing idly by and failing to get involve with stopping the Trade of Cutler; the last Pro Bowler QB since John Elway.

Now fast forward 3 years later. Shanny would not have allowed the Broncos to have fallen upon such bad times we all witness today. For although he did not field good-great defenses; Shanny had great offenses that kept the Broncos in the hunt for the playoffs and a guaranteed a consistent 8-11 wins while in rebuilding mode.

If EFX fail to bring this once proud franchise back to winning and respectability........Fans will be longing for the return of Shanahan or out right admit the Shanny was fired 3 years too early.

Locnar
11-06-2011, 10:30 AM
Hindsight is always 20/20..

But yes I think he pulled the trigger way too soon. Mediocrity was better than pure SUCK. :tsk:

camdisco24
11-06-2011, 10:32 AM
It hate ifs.... but IF we kept Shanny I would guess we'd be MUCH MUCH better off today.

nflfan
11-06-2011, 11:02 AM
Bowlen firing Shanahan was an emotional, knee-jerk reaction to missing the playoffs. Usually a really bad idea to make important decisions in a highly emotional state.

Offense would have been great, but barring great defensive and special teams coaching hires, the offense might have had to continue carrying the whole team.

SoCalImport
11-06-2011, 11:24 AM
I was behind the choice at the time. The regret comes in when I see what choices were made AFTER letting Shanny go. It's been a cluster *%#K of epic proportions.

Ravage!!!
11-06-2011, 11:26 AM
I said it at the the time.. BECAUSE of the current offensive talent that he had FINALLY been able to put together. I understand that fans were ready to move on, but youhad one of the best offensive minds in the NFL finally put together a group of YOUNG talent together that could have made us a force in the NFL. I was worried about the coaching carousal that we would succumb too.

broncofaninfla
11-06-2011, 11:27 AM
It goes without saying. Firing Shanahan was arguably the worst mistake this franchise has ever made rivaled only by the hiring of Mcdirtbag. Sure wish Shanny would have canned Slowick the year before, can't help but think we wouldn't be in this mess if he had.

silkamilkamonico
11-06-2011, 11:37 AM
No. Shanahan had 9 years after the GOAT#7 retired to figure it out. How much time does a guy sucking huge money every year want?

And yes, I know our organization is in the shitter since he's gone. But he isn't lighting up Washington by any means, which in a way justifies his firing, IMHO.

silkamilkamonico
11-06-2011, 11:39 AM
It goes without saying. Firing Shanahan was arguably the worst mistake this franchise has ever made rivaled only by the hiring of Mcdirtbag. Sure wish Shanny would have canned Slowick the year before, can't help but think we wouldn't be in this mess if he had.

That's the issue and his downfall. He just wasn't going to do that. I don't care how great our offense might have been under Shanahan with Cutler (and I think it could have been great), our defense was always going to be among the NFL's worst, simply because Shanahan couldn't let being a control freak go.

BORDERLINE
11-06-2011, 12:06 PM
:deadhorse:

SR
11-06-2011, 12:12 PM
Shanahan's message was getting stale with the team and players weren't as responsive to his style as they used to be. I think it was needed. If they wouldn't have fired him when they did, it was sure to come the year after. Same situations as the Avalanche with Bob Hartley.

jhildebrand
11-06-2011, 12:19 PM
I think Bowlen should have fired Shanahan the minute it became clear that he flirted with Florida and the job was his to take. He was u/c here. I just think it shows his heart wasn't totally into the job here. Instead, Bowlen read the tea leaves to mean Shanahan needed extra assurances and made him "coach for life" and extended him farther.

Shanahan either needed one more season to work or to go one season earlier than he had.

The problem with keeping Shanahan is Slowick and Bates as DC's and his insistance to keep them in their current position despite their massive failures. Have people forgotten DB's 10 yards off a WR on 3rd and 5? :confused:

Also, I am not so sure it was Bowlen's idea to can Shanny. I think the idea was formulated and pushed through by one Joe Ellis.

I was, and still am ok, with the firing. What I wanted was the team to be very diligent in their hiring. If Bowlen was going to insist on going without a GM, which is the model he is clearly the most comfortable with, then I wanted someone who has a lot of experience in that role or spent a lot of time around it. BUT Bowlen, in his address to the fans said he was going to change the model. It appeared the team would get a GM. I wanted the GM to be hired and then the coach. I guess what I am trying to say is the mistake wasn't firing Shanahan. The mistake was not having a clear and concise direction afterward!

Northman
11-06-2011, 01:59 PM
Had Shanahan not been so headstrong on keeping Slowik he may still be the Bronco's HC. While we started adding some talent to the team it was clear Mike just wasnt doing enough on the defensive side as far as getting a good DC to improve that part of it. Would i take Shanny over McD and Fox? Oh yea. But i think people have to understand that Mike just wasnt budging enough where he should to warrant giving him more time.

Tned
11-06-2011, 02:05 PM
Hindsight is always 20/20..

But yes I think he pulled the trigger way too soon. Mediocrity was better than pure SUCK. :tsk:

Yes, but it didn't take hindsight to anticipate a big drop off after firing Shanahan.

bcbronc
11-06-2011, 02:20 PM
No. Every coach in every professional league has a shelf life. Shanny was past his. He goes down as one of the all-time great coaches in my books, but he and the organization were stuck in a rut and the change was needed.

Yes, we're in a low point right now but the league's history book is filled with franchises that turn a few down years into a Superbowl or even a dynasty. Time to let the past go, grit and bear the present and look forward to the future.

BroncoStud
11-06-2011, 02:23 PM
I'm OK with firing Shanahan, but the 2 coaches since then have been HORRIBLE hires. So in hindsight, the end result = SUCKAGE.

BroncoJoe
11-06-2011, 02:41 PM
Old news. Time to move on.

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

BigSarge87
11-06-2011, 02:52 PM
If you love her, let her go.

Lancane
11-06-2011, 03:00 PM
Old news. Time to move on.

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

That would be great Joe, if Denver had an owner who wasn't thrift minded about free agency and about fifteen or so draft picks...otherwise this will be a lingering effect because where we are at now compared to then.

bcbronc
11-06-2011, 03:07 PM
That would be great Joe, if Denver had an owner who wasn't thrift minded about free agency and about fifteen or so draft picks...otherwise this will be a lingering effect because where we are at now compared to then.

meh, we weren't in the playoffs then, we aren't in the playoffs now. Sure, some will say missing the playoffs at 8-8 is much superior to missing the playoffs at 2-14. Personally, I'm of the mindset that a 16 game season is a 16 game season, full stop.

Lancane
11-06-2011, 03:13 PM
meh, we weren't in the playoffs then, we aren't in the playoffs now. Sure, some will say missing the playoffs at 8-8 is much superior to missing the playoffs at 2-14. Personally, I'm of the mindset that a 16 game season is a 16 game season, full stop.

Don't get me wrong BC, I am one to admit that Shanahan's philosophies both offensively and defensively had run stale. With that said, I'd rather be in the precarious position where we at least won more games then we lost on a consistent basis and had some talent. Now we are severely without talent more then before and losing more often. And being how much we need, we don't have the resources we'd like to get there...that was my point.

BroncoJoe
11-06-2011, 03:15 PM
That would be great Joe, if Denver had an owner who wasn't thrift minded about free agency and about fifteen or so draft picks...otherwise this will be a lingering effect because where we are at now compared to then.

Bowlen can be called a lot of things - cheap isn't one of them. Just maybe he's become tired of spending big money with zero return?

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

Lancane
11-06-2011, 03:19 PM
Bowmen can be called a lot of things - cheap isn't one of them. Just maybe he's become tired of spending big money with zero return?

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

Maybe Joe...but when you lack talent at the level we do, then you can not consider competing with the lack of talent and not utilizing free agency as much as the draft in the process, nor improve at the rate that an owner like Bowlen would like.

DenBronx
11-06-2011, 03:26 PM
This horse has been beaten to death.


Nothing we can do about it.


Our downfall was not hiring Harbaugh this offseason.

Tned
11-06-2011, 03:29 PM
Maybe Joe...but when you lack talent at the level we do, then you can not consider competing with the lack of talent and not utilizing free agency as much as the draft in the process, nor improve at the rate that an owner like Bowlen would like.

The Broncos set a cash budget each year, which is equivalent to the salary cap that year. That's how much 'cash' they spend. Sometimes that will result in spending right up to the cap, sometimes like this year, when they sign players to extensions that have pro-rated signing bonuses, they might spend all of their cash, but not use up all of their cap.

This is the way the Broncos have handled their budgets for a long time.

bcbronc
11-06-2011, 03:38 PM
Don't get me wrong BC, I am one to admit that Shanahan's philosophies both offensively and defensively had run stale. With that said, I'd rather be in the precarious position where we at least won more games then we lost on a consistent basis and had some talent. Now we are severely without talent more then before and losing more often. And being how much we need, we don't have the resources we'd like to get there...that was my point.

I guess I'm just more optimistic than most in the direction of this team. I still think we're going in the right direction, but you just can't win games with the QB play we've had this season coupled with the injuries. I mean if we had even a top 20 starter in the league, we'd probably have another win or two under our belts. Then keep guys like Champ, DJ, Doom, Moreno, McGahee, DT, MThomas, Vickerson and GWarren healthy, who knows.

Injuries are going to happen, granted. But get a real QB up in here and the talent we do have on this roster will be much improved instantly. But as you know, you can't play football without a real QB and imo that's our biggest issue right now.

Lancane
11-06-2011, 03:44 PM
The Broncos set a cash budget each year, which is equivalent to the salary cap that year. That's how much 'cash' they spend. Sometimes that will result in spending right up to the cap, sometimes like this year, when they sign players to extensions that have pro-rated signing bonuses, they might spend all of their cash, but not use up all of their cap.

This is the way the Broncos have handled their budgets for a long time.

It's just weird T, there are avenues of options to improve and Denver for a long time has seemed to always take the one route that leads to a dead end or road construction site which halts the team to a stop.

This year is no exception, we have a plethora of free agents which includes a number of starters and good amount of depth...Denver could extend some and build through the draft which could be a long drawn out process, they could let them go without so much as an offer and or trying to upgrade through free agency which then negates the draft, because then we're stuck with not only needing to improve as they needed before but now with more holes of near greater importance. Example: Fox cutting Bannan and Williams, leaving us in a precarious bind to need defensive tackles, not drafting anyone and then forced to overpay for one who barely saw the field, trade for another and really not improve. However, had we kept Bannan traded for Bunkley as they did and kept Williams we'd have been in a far better spot regarding the position.

Npba900
11-08-2011, 08:49 AM
Had Shanahan not been so headstrong on keeping Slowik he may still be the Bronco's HC. While we started adding some talent to the team it was clear Mike just wasnt doing enough on the defensive side as far as getting a good DC to improve that part of it. Would i take Shanny over McD and Fox? Oh yea. But i think people have to understand that Mike just wasnt budging enough where he should to warrant giving him more time.

Agreed. Shanahan's achilles(sp) heel was the Defense. Defense was not his expertise and he should have had enough trust and confidence to hire a proven veteran defensive coordinator to build the defense and draft players to fit the DC scheme.

In the end Shanny's stubborness and complete control was his undoing in the end.

He took a year off to reflect on his failings. Now as the Redskins HC, he's given control and more responsibility over his DC. Shanahan needs to find a legite QB and decent WR's to get back to winning again.

Npba900
11-08-2011, 09:04 AM
This horse has been beaten to death.


Nothing we can do about it.


Our downfall was not hiring Harbaugh this offseason.

I don't think Harbaugh would have come to Denver b/c the 49ers was a better fit.....they had much more talent.

Also, didn't Elway offer the job to Harbaugh and he turned it down?

Point is, the 49ers had suck for so long they were able to draft the best talent in the top 5 since 2000. Harbaugh went to a 49ers team stacked with talent.

The Broncos are basically devoid of talent at this stage which probably played a large role in Harbaugh not coming to Denver.

rcsodak
11-08-2011, 09:16 AM
2yrs too late, imo.

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

LordTrychon
11-08-2011, 09:20 AM
Ok, who honestly thinks that Slowick would still be with the Broncos had Shanny been given a few more years?

Eventually, he would have been gone if the D didn't turn around. Everyone knew part of the problem was the revolving door at DC, and he decided to go ahead and try to be consistent for once. I'm not saying it was the right move... but that didn't mean Slowick was going to be here forever either. He'd have been gone after another season.

We rode to the AFC Championship on a darn good defense and an above average offense, btw... and it wasn't holdovers from the team he inherited either.

Defense wasn't his strong suit, but it wasn't like we were doomed to be in the bottom 10 forever as long as he was here, either.

Jsteve01
11-08-2011, 09:39 AM
I think Bowlen should have fired Shanahan the minute it became clear that he flirted with Florida and the job was his to take. He was u/c here. I just think it shows his heart wasn't totally into the job here. Instead, Bowlen read the tea leaves to mean Shanahan needed extra assurances and made him "coach for life" and extended him farther.

Shanahan either needed one more season to work or to go one season earlier than he had.

The problem with keeping Shanahan is Slowick and Bates as DC's and his insistance to keep them in their current position despite their massive failures. Have people forgotten DB's 10 yards off a WR on 3rd and 5? :confused:

Also, I am not so sure it was Bowlen's idea to can Shanny. I think the idea was formulated and pushed through by one Joe Ellis.

I was, and still am ok, with the firing. What I wanted was the team to be very diligent in their hiring. If Bowlen was going to insist on going without a GM, which is the model he is clearly the most comfortable with, then I wanted someone who has a lot of experience in that role or spent a lot of time around it. BUT Bowlen, in his address to the fans said he was going to change the model. It appeared the team would get a GM. I wanted the GM to be hired and then the coach. I guess what I am trying to say is the mistake wasn't firing Shanahan. The mistake was not having a clear and concise direction afterward!

When are people going to lay off of Bates? The guy was a fantastic defensive coordinator everywhere else he coached. The problem here was zero talent that fit his scheme.

zbeg
11-08-2011, 10:13 AM
I'm OK with firing Shanahan, but the 2 coaches since then have been HORRIBLE hires. So in hindsight, the end result = SUCKAGE.

Fox is half a season in where he was handed a team devoid of talent - what did you expect? The Broncos to be 6-2 at this point because John Fox would magically make the Broncos more talented and make all the wasted draft picks be sprinkled with fairy dust and win the Super Bowl!!!!

What exactly did you expect?

jhildebrand
11-08-2011, 12:26 PM
When are people going to lay off of Bates? The guy was a fantastic defensive coordinator everywhere else he coached. The problem here was zero talent that fit his scheme.

He, IIRC, was the one who wanted Simeon Rice. Shanahan made that happen. Bates' probelms weren't relegated to only personnel. He had issues playing nice with Shanahan. The guy flat out sucked. Where is he now? :confused:

Shazam!
11-08-2011, 03:09 PM
How ' bout those Redskins?