PDA

View Full Version : You Better Win J-MAC



WARHORSE
03-27-2009, 04:25 AM
Armstrong: Gosh, Josh, you had better win

By Jim Armstrong
The Denver Post
Posted: 03/26/2009 12:30:00 AM MDT
Updated: 03/26/2009 12:32:48 AM MDT


At the risk of telling you something you already knew, the Broncos have produced more than their share of soap operas through the years.
Daryl Gardener punching out a Waffle House patron. Gerald Perry impersonating a cop.

Rick Massie's fear of flying. The adventures of Brian Griese and his faithful dog, Bella. Big-name veterans walking past picket lines during the 1987 strike. Jake Plummer's ambidextrous exploits on the field. And, of course, John Elway vs. Dan Reeves, the grandaddy of all Broncos soap operas.
Until now.

Never have we seen the likes of the Jay Cutler-Josh McDaniels spat. Not when you factor in the part about McDaniels having only been on the job for a couple of months. So much for that honeymoon period, J-Mac. If these two are already going at it, how are they supposed to co-exist five years from now?

Of course, we don't know if, to put it in Joshspeak, the coach or the player will be around in five years. But there is one thing you can be sure of: McDaniels' only way out of this mess is to win and be quick about it. Take it from Reeves, who once went to war with his quarterback.

"Believe me, there's so much pressure on a coach to win," Reeves said. "I don't care if you're 32 or 52, the pressure is there and you have to deal with that. And that's under normal circumstances. I think he's a really good coach and, if given the chance, he can be a really good head coach. But he's certainly off to a rocky start."

McDaniels basically has painted himself into a corner. Seldom if ever has a rookie head coach been under the kind of pressure he must be feeling. Until further notice, he'll be viewed with a cynical eye by media, fans and, for all we know, a certain owner who hired him.

If he loses, like all those Bill Belichick disciples before him, he already has written his coaching obit in Denver. Essentially, it would say that he came in and screwed everything up. He infuriated his quarterback, alienated part of the Broncos' fan base and didn't get the job on the field.

Ah, but if he wins . . .
Then there's peace in the Valley of the Dove. Whether Cutler is here or not, everything works out and everyone is happy. You know the drill. The spin doctors will say it was all a big misunderstanding. It was blown out of proportion by the media.

It was all about selling newspapers and getting ratings, not telling the truth.
So how will it play out in the end? I have no idea, but it sure is going to be interesting to watch.

LordTrychon
03-27-2009, 04:45 AM
Pretty spot on...

Although I wonder how things would have played out in the media with John and Reeves if the media was the same then...

Thanks for the post.

:salute:

Lonestar
03-27-2009, 04:45 AM
I think the last paragraph speaks about 90 of the issue ratings ad vertising and the rush to get the scoop.

fcspikeit
03-27-2009, 04:55 AM
Mistakes happen, I just hope he's big enough to learn from this.. If he is he will come out of this a better coach..

He is a rookie and I think sometimes people forget that.. Sure he is supposed to be a leader of men and we expect him to be qualified for the job. But we forgive rookie players for making mistakes, I think the fans will forgive him as long as he's man enough to do whatever it takes to fix his mistake..

Den21vsBal19
03-27-2009, 05:08 AM
Pretty spot on...

Although I wonder how things would have played out in the media with John and Reeves if the media was the same then...

Thanks for the post.

:salute:
:lol: Ain't that the truth ....................

It's only in the last ten years or so I've been able to listen to every game/press conference and read the local press..................

It's only the last five years that I've been able to watch them all.....................

24 hour, negative spin media community :tsk:

Hell, last year I got a book of Drew Litton's cartoon's on Elway's career..................some of them were....................brutal

fcspikeit
03-27-2009, 05:24 AM
Pretty spot on...

Although I wonder how things would have played out in the media with John and Reeves if the media was the same then...

Thanks for the post.

:salute:

Yeah I think a lot of the greats would have looked less great in the information age.

Nothing goes unseen and reported now days. I was reading an article in the San Fran paper about this situation.. 20 years ago that simply wouldn't have happened.

Because of all the available information, the majority of the fans today are more educated on the game then they were back then. Therefore there are more people looking over your shoulder and pointing out your mistakes, not to mention there are more fans in general.

Dirk
03-27-2009, 06:52 AM
I can see McD being taken to the Colorado border if a trade does happen (I don't think it will but if), and they have a losing season. The fans will ask for his head!

silkamilkamonico
03-28-2009, 05:26 PM
I don't agree with the article.

Even with the debacle that's going on that makes both Cutler and McDaniels look bad, I don't want to lose a potential good coach because he "blew up" an average organization over a 3 year span.

We don't know if he can coach yet, but the decisions he's made to make the entire organization stronger is already significantly better than Shanahan's approach of building the offense and then patchworking the rest of the team, which clearly didn't work.

He was not hired to win right away. He was hired to build a lasting organization that competes for SuperBowls on a yearly basis, not playoffs.

If it doesn't work with McDaniels, then we're right back where we were in January. No where with an average football team.

bud
03-28-2009, 06:06 PM
Every coach is hired to win right away.

All Broncos fans wanted out of the deal was a new defense.

Don't assume that Denver is suddenly going to become a patient town because of McDaniels. He hasn't done anything as a head coach--or here in Denver.

That's just reality. McDaniels has to turn the team around in the next couple of seasons. With or without the Cutler drama, people are expecting McDaniels to fix the defense and win.

silkamilkamonico
03-28-2009, 06:08 PM
Every coach is hired to win right away.

All Broncos fans wanted out of the deal was a new defense.

Don't assume that Denver is suddenly going to become a patient town because of McDaniels. He hasn't done anything as a head coach--or here in Denver.

That's just reality. McDaniels has to turn the team around in the next couple of seasons. With or without the Cutler drama, people are expecting McDaniels to fix the defense and win.


If Bowlen wanted to immediately win, he wouldn't have hired a 32 year old offensive coordinator.

I'm not saying he's going to get 2-3 years to rebuild, but Bowlen isn't going to fire him after this next season regardless of how the team does.

bud
03-28-2009, 06:13 PM
If Bowlen wanted to immediately win, he wouldn't have hired a 32 year old offensive coordinator.

I'm not saying he ist going to get 2-3 years to rebuild, but Bowlen isn't going to fire him after this next season regardless of how the team does.

I disagree.

Disaster could end McDaniels' days in Denver before he even gets started.

He needs to show improvement this year. If the Broncos win less than six games, fall apart on offense, and don't improve the defense--McDaniels will be on the hot seat.

He's got to give a reason to believe.

silkamilkamonico
03-28-2009, 06:17 PM
I disagree.

Disaster could end McDaniels' days in Denver before he even gets started.

He needs to show improvement this year. If the Broncos win less than six games, fall apart on offense, and don't improve the defense--McDaniels will be on the hot seat.

He's got to give a reason to believe.

The improvement he needs to show will be staying competitive, not winning and losing.

If Shanahan can have underachieving years consistently, coupled with the yearly blowouts to pi$$ poor teams, I don't see why anyone needs to come in and be immediately better, especially considering the terrible state of the organization Shanahan left it in.

omac
03-28-2009, 06:29 PM
If Bowlen wanted to immediately win, he wouldn't have hired a 32 year old offensive coordinator.

I'm not saying he's going to get 2-3 years to rebuild, but Bowlen isn't going to fire him after this next season regardless of how the team does.

Actually, Bowlen mindset in his previous interviews is that he's always looking to win the superbowl each year. Maybe someone can find a link to that article. He won't be content with the Herm Edwards approach; that's just not his philosophy. That's why Shanahan fit his ideology for so many years, because Shanahan thinks the same way.

McDaniels expects to win right away, and that is his selling point to veterans he tries to get this offseason. Again, there's a link for that too, where a veteran (maybe Dawkins) said that was the selling point of going to Denver.

I'm pretty sure Bowlen expects and believes McDaniels can win right away; by what McDaniels has been saying when he tries to get veteran FAs, he probably believes that too. At the same time, though, no way will Bowlen fire him in the unlikelihood that McDaniels has a bad 1st season.

Den21vsBal19
03-28-2009, 06:50 PM
The improvement he needs to show will be staying competitive, not winning and losing.

If Shanahan can have underachieving years consistently, coupled with the yearly blowouts to pi$$ poor teams, I don't see why anyone needs to come in and be immediately better, especially considering the terrible state of the organization Shanahan left it in.
That's the thing.........................too many times over the last few years, when things haven't been going well, the heads start to drop and any appearance of heart, orginisation and desire's gone out of the window................

silkamilkamonico
03-28-2009, 06:53 PM
That's the thing.........................too many times over the last few years, when things haven't been going well, the heads start to drop and any appearance of heart, orginisation and desire's gone out of the window................

That's what I'll be looking for.

Can McDaniels field a team that is resilient enough to want to play hard and stay in games. If so there's no reason to think he can't be successful once he gets his players for his system.

If not, well I'm not sure what's going on with the near future of the organization.

horsepig
03-28-2009, 06:59 PM
I think Herm had the right idea in KC. Build a young defense from the bottom up.

I realize that goes against the "new" way of just magically turning a dog into a 9-12 win wonder. Where will the Phins be next year, the Falcons? They both are flukes.

I just want a coach that understands that ST's are actually 1/3 of the game.

Defense is actually about 1/2 half of the game, and offense is for the fans.

Lonestar
03-28-2009, 07:10 PM
The improvement he needs to show will be staying competitive, not winning and losing.

If Shanahan can have underachieving years consistently, coupled with the yearly blowouts to pi$$ poor teams, I don't see why anyone needs to come in and be immediately better, especially considering the terrible state of the organization Shanahan left it in.

I agree if anyone really thinks that Pat does not know how bad this team really was and thinks he will drop the Axe on this new coach they have expectations that are foolish..

Pat knows what Josh got left with and gave him a mandate to fix it.. Pat may not be a hands on owner but he is down the hall from Josh and Xman and if he has seen something that he really has not liked I'll bet dollars to donuts he has asked WHAT hell is going on..

Pat is also smart enough to know that you can't fix the issues that mikey left behind in one year.. Perhaps not even in 2-3 years..

But he will be expecting signs of improvement..

I know lots of folks/everyone thought all he had to do was fix the defense and we would be instant super bowl winners..

But Pat did not see that or he would have fired mikey as GM/VP, left mikey alone as HC/OC and hired a GM, DC that report to him..... But folks that did not happen because he knew that there are more issues in Dove Valley than a lousy Defense..

If Y'all are not smart enough to see that then sorry for you and your mikey withdrawal.. it is going to be a long time before you get it.. unless some one is dumb enough to hire mikey as Lord and prince of their Kingdom, if they do please please follow him there....

I for one will be watching my Broncos and hoping they will become consistent winners again..

Lonestar
03-28-2009, 07:17 PM
I think Herm had the right idea in KC. Build a young defense from the bottom up.

I realize that goes against the "new" way of just magically turning a dog into a 9-12 win wonder. Where will the Phins be next year, the Falcons? They both are flukes.

I just want a coach that understands that ST's are actually 1/3 of the game.

Defense is actually about 1/2 half of the game, and offense is for the fans.



Well I will not go as far as you in offense is only for fans but I will say offense wins games and defense wins championships..

ST have been a joke in Den for as long as I can remember other than having Elam as FG kicker we have not been serious on field position ever..

As for MIA and ATL they may not be as good as they were last year cause they caught some folks off guard but they are building solid teams with their draft choices..

MIA in particular has a class act as a GM and they will be winners as long as Parcels is there.. Maybe not super bowls but will contend for the spotlight as they add more draft choices..

horsepig
03-28-2009, 07:22 PM
Good Lord, fixing this defense is gonna be a multiple-year enterprise. FA's, hell that's all we have.

Champ and, uh, who? Elvis, DJ (HA!), and uh..., uh..., oh yeah-Nate!

horsepig
03-28-2009, 07:26 PM
Well I will not go as far as you in offense is only for fans but I will say offense wins games and defense wins championships..

ST have been a joke in Den for as long as I can remember other than having Elam as FG kicker we have not been serious on field position ever..

As for MIA and ATL they may not be as good as they were last year cause they caught some folks off guard but they are building solid teams with their draft choices..

MIA in particular has a class act as a GM and they will be winners as long as Parcels is there.. Maybe not super bowls but will contend for the spotlight as they add more draft choices..

Parcells preaches just what our guy is; big in the middle, fast on the outside with people who want IT!

Lonestar
03-28-2009, 07:57 PM
Parcells preaches just what our guy is; big in the middle, fast on the outside with people who want IT!

Josh comes from the Parcels coaching tree.. I suspect we will be more like his old teams, than the Bill Walsh version.. we are used to seeing small, fast and smart..

slim
03-28-2009, 08:30 PM
I think Herm had the right idea in KC. Build a young defense from the bottom up.

I realize that goes against the "new" way of just magically turning a dog into a 9-12 win wonder. Where will the Phins be next year, the Falcons? They both are flukes.

I just want a coach that understands that ST's are actually 1/3 of the game.

Defense is actually about 1/2 half of the game, and offense is for the fans.

Herm has never been right about anything. :welcome:

Shazam!
03-28-2009, 09:24 PM
I love the 'He wasn't hired to win right away' nonsense. This team, for all it's defenive awfulness, was an 8-8 team on the brink of making the Playoffs in an awful division with one bonafide heavyweight. I'm sure Bowlen expects at least an 8-8 season in McDaniel's first year and doesn't wan to see the team go backwards substantially. 9-7 or better and then we're really on to something. I see that as possible too despite a tough schedule. This team has a lot of young players but the talent is there.

I'll take Mike Nolan, Champ Bailey and 10 rookies other than the defense that was fielded the last seasons. All Denver's success is contingent on the QB. Nobody knows what the situation will be there yet but we'll know soon. The longer this has dragged on, I think the better the chance that Cutler will stay. If there is no news before Draft day, we'll be holding our breaths that morning... Aside from the Cutler mess, I like what I have seen this offseason. Otherwise, I see big beautiful blue and orange skies on the horizon.

Lonestar
03-28-2009, 09:31 PM
I love the 'He wasn't hired to win right away' nonsense. This team, for all it's defenive awfulness, was an 8-8 team on the brink of making the Playoffs in an awful division with one bonafide heavyweight. I'm sure Bowlen expects at least an 8-8 season in McDaniel's first year and doesn't wan to see the team go backwards substantially. 9-7 or better and then we're really on to something. I see that as possible too despite a tough schedule. This team has a lot of young players but the talent is there.

I'll take Mike Nolan, Champ Bailey and 10 rookies other than the defense that was fielded the last seasons. All Denver's success is contingent on the QB. Nobody knows what the situation will be there yet but we'll know soon. The longer this has dragged on, I think the better the chance that Cutler will stay. If there is no news before Draft day, we'll be holding our breaths that morning... Aside from the Cutler mess, I like what I have seen this offseason. Otherwise, I see big beautiful blue and orange skies on the horizon.

I think Pat will take improvement in not getting our ass kick especially at home.. and I also believe he NOW knows how shallow the talent pool on this team is..

consistent play is what he is looking for and with a couple of great drafts a super bowl in years 3-4..

Superchop 7
03-28-2009, 10:35 PM
Pat should have put his foot down and hired Nolan to coach the defense.

Told the Goodmans to draft defense only.

I think his relationship with Mike would have been fine.

dogfish
03-28-2009, 10:43 PM
We don't know if he can coach yet, but the decisions he's made to make the entire organization stronger is already significantly better than Shanahan's approach of building the offense and then patchworking the rest of the team, which clearly didn't work.




wait, so how is trying to tear down and rebuild the offense and patchworking the rest better than building the offense and patchworking the rest? if doogie drafts 3-5 studs for the defensive front seven then we can say his approach is better than shanahan's, but until then he hasn't done anything significantly different to address the _efense. . . so far all he's done is add aging journeymen-type free agents and one big name vet on his last legs, which looks awfully similar to what shanahan did. . . unless ronald fields can play at a much higher level here than he did in SF, not one of the defensive FAs we just signed is likely to be here more than two years. . . if that isn't patchworking, i don't know what is. . . . i hope doogie can actually find some genuine building blocks for the defense in the draft, but i'm not going to give him credit for it before he actually does it. . . .

skycoyote
03-28-2009, 11:24 PM
So who do the Bronco's hire in two years?

Lonestar
03-29-2009, 12:49 AM
wait, so how is trying to tear down and rebuild the offense and patchworking the rest better than building the offense and patchworking the rest? if doogie drafts 3-5 studs for the defensive front seven then we can say his approach is better than shanahan's, but until then he hasn't done anything significantly different to address the _efense. . . so far all he's done is add aging journeymen-type free agents and one big name vet on his last legs, which looks awfully similar to what shanahan did. . . unless ronald fields can play at a much higher level here than he did in SF, not one of the defensive FAs we just signed is likely to be here more than two years. . . if that isn't patchworking, i don't know what is. . . . i hope doogie can actually find some genuine building blocks for the defense in the draft, but i'm not going to give him credit for it before he actually does it. . . .

If he does get 3-4 studs on defense this year good chance with 9 picks as we stand.. when those aging vets retire in two years they will be ready to take over..

BTW not much worth taking out there in FA ville except for a 100 million dollar man.. we still have money available and the draft and jun 1 cuts that are gonna happen..

How about we wait till we see what the plan really is before heating up the tar and plucking the chickens..

dogfish
03-29-2009, 01:30 AM
If he does get 3-4 studs on defense this year good chance with 9 picks as we stand.. when those aging vets retire in two years they will be ready to take over..

BTW not much worth taking out there in FA ville except for a 100 million dollar man.. we still have money available and the draft and jun 1 cuts that are gonna happen..

How about we wait till we see what the plan really is before heating up the tar and plucking the chickens..


i don't think that's so-- IMO, there were a number of defensive FAs in their prime that would have been quality additions to this team for a number of years. . . chris canty's at the top of the list, and he got half what haynesworth did-- the rest of them got considerably less than canty. . . igor olshansky, colin cole, bart scott, kevin burnett, sean jones, bryant mcfadden, jabari greer, lee bodden and philip buchanon-- any of them would have been longer-term investments than the guys we brought in, but jim leonhard was the ONLY younger player we pursued at all. . .

oh well, it's done now, and there's nothing we can do about it-- i really wish that with 30 million in cap space we could have filled at least one or two holes with more than one-two year stopgaps instead of trying to rebuild the entire defense overnight, all with aging vets. . . but the die is cast, now we wait to see how the draft plays out. . . i'm not tar and feathering anyone yet-- just pointing out that patching the _efense with a bunch of vets on or approaching the downside of their careers isn't exactly some big deviation from what shenanigans had been doing. . . doogie simply had more cap room and did it on a bigger scale. . . . i'm not saying that it can't work-- i was just responding to a post that said doogie's approach is significantly better than shanahan's, which i'm less than convinced of to this point. . . actually kinda looks like pretty much the same approach to me. . . just because he got rid of a bunch of shanny's stiffs doesn't necessarily mean the guys he replaced 'em with are guaranteed to be all THAT much better. . . . modest upgrade? i can agree to that, but i sure wouldn't go any farther. . . . we'll see what happens. . . .

Lonestar
03-29-2009, 01:35 AM
i don't think that's so-- IMO, there were a number of defensive FAs in their prime that would have been quality additions to this team for a number of years. . . chris canty's at the top of the list, and he got half what haynesworth did-- the rest of them got considerably less than canty. . . igor olshansky, colin cole, bart scott, kevin burnett, sean jones, bryant mcfadden, jabari greer, lee bodden and philip buchanon-- any of them would have been longer-term investments than the guys we brought in, but jim leonhard was the ONLY younger player we pursued at all. . .

oh well, it's done now, and there's nothing we can do about it-- i really wish that with 30 million in cap space we could have filled at least one or two holes with more than one-two year stopgaps instead of trying to rebuild the entire defense overnight, all with aging vets. . . but the die is cast, now we wait to see how the draft plays out. . . i'm not tar and feathering anyone yet-- just pointing out that patching the _efense with a bunch of vets on or approaching the downside of their careers isn't exactly some big deviation from what shenanigans had been doing. . . doogie simply had more cap room and did it on a bigger scale. . . . i'm not saying that it can't work-- i was just responding to a post that said doogie's approach is significantly better than shanahan's, which i'm less than convinced of to this point. . . actually kinda looks like pretty much the same approach to me. . . just because he got rid of a bunch of shanny's stiffs doesn't necessarily mean the guys he replaced 'em with are guaranteed to be all THAT much better. . . . modest upgrade? i can agree to that, but i sure wouldn't go any farther. . . . we'll see what happens. . . .

I was not quite inferring you were, but many on here are..

Shazam!
03-29-2009, 02:22 AM
Even if McD does exactly what Mikey did it doesn't matter, maybe he can do what Mikey didn't- Provide leadership and motivation, two things that were sorely missing the last two years. Too many times we watched this team fall flat, get shellacked at home and just look dejected. If he can bring an energy to this team and have them playing with fire again, he'll be hailed as the hottest Coach in the NFL as Shanahan was called in 1996... then everyone will stop calling him McD________, regardless of who is the QB.

Northman
03-29-2009, 11:22 AM
All i want is a better record than 8-8 this year. That would show me improvement.

BroncoJoe
03-29-2009, 11:31 AM
I think McDaniels will be a very good coach for us - just a gut feeling.

Next year could be brutal though with our schedule.

silkamilkamonico
03-29-2009, 01:25 PM
wait, so how is trying to tear down and rebuild the offense and patchworking the rest better than building the offense and patchworking the rest? if doogie drafts 3-5 studs for the defensive front seven then we can say his approach is better than shanahan's, but until then he hasn't done anything significantly different to address the _efense. . . so far all he's done is add aging journeymen-type free agents and one big name vet on his last legs, which looks awfully similar to what shanahan did. . . unless ronald fields can play at a much higher level here than he did in SF, not one of the defensive FAs we just signed is likely to be here more than two years. . . if that isn't patchworking, i don't know what is. . . . i hope doogie can actually find some genuine building blocks for the defense in the draft, but i'm not going to give him credit for it before he actually does it. . . .

1)He's tearing down the mentality of a team that hasn't won in over 3 years. Winning breeds similiar confidence. Just like losing. Just like being average.

2)You don't honestly expect McDaniels, or any coach that's hired, to come in and continue to run Shanahan's offense do you?

Forget "yards" on offense. He's trying to put together an offense that can actually score points. Get an offense that can score points, over an offense that gets huge yards and turns the ball over, and you might actually win a few more games.

3)He's already brought in Brian Dawkins to play a role in giving the defense a meaner streak and a sense of purpose. Something Shanahan failed to do miserably. I can almost promise you one thing. You won't see any jackazzes on defense celebrating after every tackle when the team is down by double digits anymore.

Shanahan's idea of "patchworking" the defense is signing sensational special teamer Nike Koutavidas and old safeties that can't play. McDaniels is bringing guys in that play with a chip on their shoulder and set examples. That's a HUGE difference, IMHO. He hasn't even had a chance to actually build the defense. He's building it through the draft, which is the correct way.

Did I mention Shanahan's wonderful ways of "patchworking" the team led to almost 20% of dead money against the cap this year. Almost 20%. Almost 20% of Denver's cap went to players who weren't even on the team this year. Shanahan's wonderful job of "patchworking" gave us the worst defense of all time in the franchise, and actually created more holes.

Shazam!
03-29-2009, 01:31 PM
I think McDaniels will be a very good coach for us - just a gut feeling.

Next year could be brutal though with our schedule.

It all happens in cycles though. Teams that were Playoff teams one year may not be the next season. The NYG are due for a step back. The one team that is definitely due to take a step down the AFC totem pole is SD. They've won the Division the last three years and flopped in the Playoffs. Someone is due to rise up in the West- Denver is the closest team.

broncophan
03-29-2009, 01:37 PM
It all happens in cycles though. Teams that were Playoff teams one year may not be the next season. The NYG are due for a step back. The one team that is definitely due to take a step down the AFC totem pole is SD. They've won the Division the last three years and flopped in the Playoffs. Someone is due to rise up in the West- Denver is the closest team.

I hope you are right....but just what has this team done during the off season to make you think we will rise up in the West???

Maybe 6-10 will win the division this season......

Shazam!
03-29-2009, 02:04 PM
I have said it before, leadership at the top and a new defensive scheme alone will help improve this team. Shanahan wasn't a motivator, and too many times he has said "If you need motivation in this League, you are in the wrong line of work". That isn't enough. Too many times we watched this team be an embarassment. I remember in 2007, CBS switched coverage of the SD @ Denver game because they were getting completely hammered and switched to Baltimore @ Tampa. This is the first time I have ever seen this and was one of the more embarassing moments of the last two seasons. I think the final was like 42-3? Disgraceful.

Also, Dawkins will fill the leadership void left by Lynch.

I am confident 2009 will be an exciting year.

DenBronx
04-15-2009, 03:04 PM
regardless of our schedule. regardless of new schemes, a new qb, new cordinators/coaches/gm/personel, players, long snapper. you still better win McD. if we do not do better than 8-8 then he will be an epic failure.

josh, i hope you did your homework for weeks 4-12. pressures on....hope you sleep well at night. enjoy mikeys office while it last and keep the seat warm for cowher for us.

kthnxby.

powderaddict
04-15-2009, 03:14 PM
and keep the seat warm for cowher


nothnx

broncohead
04-15-2009, 03:24 PM
1)He's tearing down the mentality of a team that hasn't won in over 3 years. Winning breeds similiar confidence. Just like losing. Just like being average.

2)You don't honestly expect McDaniels, or any coach that's hired, to come in and continue to run Shanahan's offense do you?

Forget "yards" on offense. He's trying to put together an offense that can actually score points. Get an offense that can score points, over an offense that gets huge yards and turns the ball over, and you might actually win a few more games.

What will help us win games is a better defense. We have small holes on offense that can be fixed easily.

[QUOTE]3)He's already brought in Brian Dawkins to play a role in giving the defense a meaner streak and a sense of purpose. Something Shanahan failed to do miserably. I can almost promise you one thing. You won't see any jackazzes on defense celebrating after every tackle when the team is down by double digits anymore.

So what was the Lynch signing a few years ago?


Shanahan's idea of "patchworking" the defense is signing sensational special teamer Nike Koutavidas and old safeties that can't play. McDaniels is bringing guys in that play with a chip on their shoulder and set examples. That's a HUGE difference, IMHO. He hasn't even had a chance to actually build the defense. He's building it through the draft, which is the correct way.

Didn't we just sign 2 old safeties?


Did I mention Shanahan's wonderful ways of "patchworking" the team led to almost 20% of dead money against the cap this year. Almost 20%. Almost 20% of Denver's cap went to players who weren't even on the team this year. Shanahan's wonderful job of "patchworking" gave us the worst defense of all time in the franchise, and actually created more holes.

That's great but Shanny isn't here anymore and now it's McD problem. McD also let go a few players this year. Won't that create dead cap? There is nothing different with the FA signing then in years past. A lot of middle or over the road players to patch holes on defense. When we actually take a step in fixing the defense I'll be a little more optomistic.

broncfn90
04-15-2009, 04:05 PM
if we do better then last year... i will eat crow big time

Broncolingus
04-15-2009, 04:48 PM
The Bronco's problems go a whole lot deeper than McDaniels and Cutler...

Idiocy that so many people cannot understand that, but he's right - if Denver goes 5-11, most 'everyone' will blame McDaniels.

Peerless
04-15-2009, 04:50 PM
The Bronco's problems go a whole lot deeper than McDaniels and Cutler...

Idiocy that so many people cannot understand that, but he's right - if Denver goes 5-11, most 'everyone' will blame McDaniels.

The Broncos MAIN problem was the defense.

We really had ONE job to fix this off-season, and that was the defense.

But I guess it was better to **** with the #2 offense in the NFL, the same offense that only needed a couple of years to mature together to get better.


BUT... I guess that's not going to happen.

broncfn90
04-15-2009, 05:00 PM
The Broncos MAIN problem was the defense.

We really had ONE job to fix this off-season, and that was the defense.

But I guess it was better to **** with the #2 offense in the NFL, the same offense that only needed a couple of years to mature together to get better.


BUT... I guess that's not going to happen.

not to mention we had a no running back and we still were the number two O

G_Money
04-15-2009, 05:11 PM
Next year is not the year to win.

It's the year to mark progress.

Shanahan was 8-8 his first year here, but you could SEE the potential of what he was building. And it blew up into an incredible 3-year run for us.

Josh has a new offense to install, a new defense to install, new special teams, new players, new habits and practices and terminology, and he still has to finish gutting what wasn't working with Shanahan and replacing it with something that hopefully works better.

He can't turn over all the players he probably needs to. Whether or not he's been gutting some things that didn't need gutting, he still has work to do, and we don't seem to have a creampuff schedule next year, unlike some of the other recent 1-year turnarounds.

We'll see. I expect 7-9 at best, but that record is not what I'm looking for as a be-all, end-all for defining the 2009 season. I'm looking for progress on all three sides of the ball, for players to stand out and become studs so we don't have to pay outside studs more money to come in and patch holes, for key needs (see QB, RB, DL, etc) to be filled with at-least-capable players so that we're not trying to overhaul all the same positions with more failed draftpicks one more time...

Progress. I'm looking for progress. If Shanahan had come back with Slowik as his DC, I couldn't have had progress. So now maybe I'll get some.

If we don't, well...we know where the buck stops - back with the head coach, just like in the last regime.

~G