PDA

View Full Version : Two a days AFC West



Lonestar
07-15-2009, 06:43 PM
1. First and foremost, what the heck is going on in Denver these days?


Sure seems like things have gone a bit bananas up in Colorado, right? The Josh McDaniels era hasn't exactly started off with a quiet run-of-the-mill offseason. What's going on in Denver reminds me of "The Office" when young Ryan Howard took over for Jan in corporate. New kid in town, new ballgame. The results? Well, we'll have to wait and see. At 32, McDaniels has come in and made an immediate impact. He's also made a few headlines along the way.

The Jay Cutler fiasco was a disaster, and no, Denver is not — regardless of what Broncos fans and beat writers might tell you — better off for it. Some other unorthodox happenings? Well, the Broncos went out and signed former Cardinals running back J.J. Arrington to a four-year, $10 million deal back in March. Then they released him less than three months later, citing a failed physical and a balky right knee. On the move, McDaniels told reporters, "It just got to the point where we realized and he realized that it wasn't going to work out for him this year with the injury. He was great for us when he was here, had a great attitude and great approach." All 60 days?

The latest noteworthy player personnel move? Boss Bailey, Champ's brother and a six-year veteran linebacker, was released a week ago. Coming off microfracture surgery, the move is understandable and you can't fault McDaniels if the guy's not healhty enough to go. But you can't help but think Bailey would have been a nice OLB piece for the Broncos 3-4 defense.

Then there are the unhappy parties. First it was Cutler, who took a beating in the media for being a "prima donna" and overly sensitive. Now it's the Broncos No. 1 wideout, Brandon Marshall. Nicknamed "Beast" for his superhuman physical skills and the recipient of 100-plus catches the past two seasons, Marshall has demanded a trade. His reasons? Well, money, of course. Then there were the trust issues with the Broncos medical staff. Marshall, naturally, went to his blog with his complaints and thoughts. "The hardest thing was hearing Mr. B (Broncos owner Pat Bowlen) wish me luck in the future, but we both came to the conclusion that this is probably the best thing for me to grow on and off the field," Marshall wrote last week.

Huh?

Beneath all this are countless front-office departures this offseason that the media hasn't given nearly as much attention to: de facto general manager Jim Goodman, his son assistant GM Jeff Goodman, and scout Tyler Goodman were all shown the door. West Coast scout Bobby Beers is gone, too.

The black clouds hovering over Denver this offseason are evident.

But it's easy to take a glass half-empty approach. No one takes kindly to mass changes. Perhaps there are some positives in all this. After all, Mike Shanahan and Jay Cutler's Broncos hadn't gone to the playoffs in three seasons. It's not like McDaniels is retooling and tinkering a Super Bowl champion team. No, this was a below-average squad the past few years. McDaniels was hired for a reason. Change was needed.
Additions Correll Buckhalter, Lamont Jordan and Knowshon Moreno will all make immediate impacts on the offense. The defense adds veterans Brian Dawkins, Andra Davis, Renaldo Hill, Andre Goodman and Darrell Reid. Rookies Alphonso Smith and Robert Ayers should see action next season in the 3-4.

When Ryan took over in "The Office," the young kid eventually buckled under the pressure and sent the company down the tubes.

Broncos fans can only hope what happened in Scranton won't happen in Denver.


2. Is Al Davis nuts for giving a CB franchise QB money?
Okay, let's first go over just how much freaking money this is. Astronomical, really. Asomugha signed a 3-year deal for an unheard of $45.3 million in February. Close to $28 million of that is guaranteed. Asomugha's now the highest-paid defensive back in NFL history. By a landslide. Sure seems like a lot for a six-year veteran who's never played in a postseason game, has never lost less than 11 games in a season, and who is rarely among the league leaders in interceptions.


The sick part? I think he's worth every penny.

Asomugha's the best corner in the game. Hands down. The reason his interception numbers are so unimpressive (one INT in 2008) is because quarterbacks avoid him like the plague. DeAngelo Hall, Oakland's big free-agent pickup last offseason, got picked on mercilessly last year. He was eventually released by midseason. Opposing quarterbacks had no choice, though. They couldn't risk throwing the ball near Asomugha.

If his football skills were the whole story, I might be skeptical of the money. But Asomugha's the rare player — the once in a generation guy — who transcends the sport. His philanthropy efforts and community presence, well documented this offseason in a Sports Illustrated profile, are beyond impressive. He takes Oakland area kids on college campus tours in cities all along the East Coast, sets up scholarship funds that pave ways for new opportunities, and has been an active partner and leading voice for the Clinton Global Initiative University. This past offseason, Asomugha appeared on a few ESPN pre-draft specials. He blew me away. Far more impressive, insightful and interesting than fellow panel members Marcellus Wiley and James Hasty. Asomugha made for Must-See TV.

Raiders fans know what they have in Asomugha. The rest of the nation might not. He's certainly not a household name yet (frankly, his ain't the easiest name, am I right people?).

This isn't the head-scratching Javon Walker deal of '08. This one is completely sensible. Asomugha is worth every cent of that $45.3 million.

He just needs to break that damn six-win mark.


3. What's LaDainian Tomlinson have left in the tank?
When I penned my "Top 99 players of '09" piece two weeks ago, I got bombarded with all sorts of e-mails. Some were predictable. I was surprised, however, with the backlash I got for slotting Tomlinson in the top 30.


"He's washed up!" wrote Jen Hamers of Silver Springs, Md.

"Tomlinson? Really? He might not be a top-99 player this year, let alone top 30. Hell, I'd put Darren Sproles over him this year," wrote Jeff Jones of Manhattan, Kan. (Yes, I know Sproles went to Kansas State)

I was blown away by all the "hate" around Tomlinson. As recent as last August, he was the top pick in every fantasy football draft in America and a preseason favorite for MVP. Now? To critics like Jen and Jeff, he's apparently just another 30-year-old running back with his best seasons in his rearview mirror.

To be certain, 2008 marked career lows for Tomlinson in carries (292), rushing yards (1,110) and 100-yard rushing games (two). He was a non-factor for the second postseason campaign in a row.

But Tomlinson was banged up last season. He's healthy now. After some minor deliberation, the Chargers restructured the former MVP's contract, exhibiting their faith in the highly paid back. From all accounts, Tomlinson's all healed up, recharged and playing with something you can't value — a desire to prove his doubters wrong.

He will. Expect a big year out of Tomlinson and the Chargers.

Regardless of where he's taken in your fantasy football draft this August.


4. Will the Chiefs have something that at least almost resembles a defense this year?
It sure was a sight for sore eyes, huh? The 2008 Chiefs had less quarterback sacks than any team in NFL history (since the league began calculating the statistic, at least). The Kansas City defense had just 10 sacks in 532 passing plays, or one every 53.2 plays. Ugh. Horrifying factoid, right there.

They also gave up the third-most rushing yards per game, the second most total yards, and finished last in the league in third-down defense. Not fun.

So there were changes. Lots of them. Herm Edwards got the boot. Clancy Pendergrast, formerly of the NFC champion Cardinals, replaced Gunther Cunningham as defensive coordinator. Gary Gibbs, a former defensive coordinator in New Orleans who worked with Pendergast in Dallas, is now coaching the linebackers. Player personnel-wise, the Chiefs made significant upgrades across the board. Kansas City spent its first three 2009 draft picks on defense and brought in noted veterans Mike Vrabel and Zach Thomas. Travis Daniels joins the cornerback corps.

Will the 2009 Chiefs defense be among the league's best? Probably not. Will they be one of the worst of all time? No.


At least I don't think so.


5. Jeff Garcia or JaMarcus Russell? Who's it going to be opening day vs. San Diego?
Coach Tom Cable has gone to great lengths to reconfirm that there is not an open competition at quarterback in Oakland — it's Russell's job. But Garcia's never been one to just sit and quietly watch from the sidelines.

Veteran safety Keith Davis shared his thoughts with Sirius Satellite Radio last week: "If I had to play right now, I'd take Jeff Garcia because I know what he's going to bring to the table and I've watched him bring it to the table. "A month from now, two months into the season, my answer may be different. But if I had to play right now, it would be Jeff Garcia. That's no knock against JaMarcus at all."

Nope, not at all.

My gut? Russell starts opening day vs. the Chargers on Sept. 14. Come Week 2, Sept. 20 at Kansas City?

Well, that's another story.



http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/9716592#afcwest

dogfish
07-15-2009, 10:12 PM
West Coast scout Bobby Beers is gone, too.


mcdaniels hates beers!


i knew there was a reason i didn't like the guy. . . . :tsk:

Chica_Ang
07-16-2009, 01:28 AM
After all, Mike Shanahan and Jay Cutler's Broncos hadn't gone to the playoffs in three seasons. It's not like McDaniels is retooling and tinkering a Super Bowl champion team. No, this was a below-average squad the past few years. McDaniels was hired for a reason. Change was needed.


A freakin men

Dean
07-16-2009, 08:17 AM
This is strickly conjecture on my part but I believe that Shanahan had re-tooled the offense and this season would make major changes in the defense.

Things around Dove Valley were not static. Change had been taking place. There was a much greater dependence upon the draft over free agency. A much more successful series of drafts had been taking place.

LRtagger
07-16-2009, 08:31 AM
But you can't help but think Bailey would have been a nice OLB piece for the Broncos 3-4 defense.

Yes you can.

Mike
07-16-2009, 08:34 AM
This is strickly conjecture on my part but I believe that Shanahan had re-tooled the offense and this season would make major changes in the defense.

Things around Dove Valley were not static. Change had been taking place. There was a much greater dependence upon the draft over free agency. A much more successful series of drafts had been taking place.

Like sticking with the poorest excuse in the history of football for a defensive coord? :confused: That alone was inexcusable.

Maybe draft/free agency wise there were changes. But on the field, I didn't see much of it. All I saw was consistently under-prepared teams who consistently got beat (sometimes demolished) by both very good and very bad teams, and players who showed no motivation, passion, guts, balls, or love for the game and most importantly no physicality. It was time for change.

Thnikkaman
07-16-2009, 08:41 AM
This is strickly conjecture on my part but I believe that Shanahan had re-tooled the offense and this season would make major changes in the defense.

Things around Dove Valley were not static. Change had been taking place. There was a much greater dependence upon the draft over free agency. A much more successful series of drafts had been taking place.

I recall that the reason why Shanahan was fired in the first place was that he was refusing to make changes to his Defensive staff. Slowick wasn't going to recover from putting the worst D in the league out on the field. At leas that is what Bowlen and many other people believed.

broncohead
07-16-2009, 10:23 AM
I recall that the reason why Shanahan was fired in the first place was that he was refusing to make changes to his Defensive staff. Slowick wasn't going to recover from putting the worst D in the league out on the field. At leas that is what Bowlen and many other people believed.

I hate losing Shanny but I would rather have McD/Nolan then Shanny/Slowick. I believe we have a better chance at winning in the long run.

Ravage!!!
07-16-2009, 10:36 AM
I hate losing Shanny but I would rather have McD/Nolan then Shanny/Slowick. I believe we have a better chance at winning in the long run.

You don't know that yet, at all (and I say this simply because people use the 'lets wait and see' anytime there are criticisms of this offseason).

I can't believe, for a second, that McDaniels is going to have the same kind of offensive production in Denver without Brady and that patriot offense.. simply because he coached Brady and the Pats offense. Losing Cutler is a catastrophe. Shanahan proved over MANy years and many offenses that he can be one of the most brilliant offensive minds in the game. McDaniels is only 32, and this is his first HC job (which by odds, is likely to be a failing gig).

Nolan has failed all over the NFL, and we are switching to a defensive scheme that is hard to change to, and doing it without the proper defensive front to do it with.

I'm with Dean on this one. Our offensive talent last season was amongst the top in the NFL, and it seemed that things were making a drastic change in philosophy that was working in the right direction. Our last number or drafts had been solid, and the scouts that were providing such talent are now gone as well. Hard to say that there wasn't change going on with Shanahan and the team when you look at the offensive side of this team and the talent it had accrued in the last 4 years.

The defense obviously needed some TLC, but changes were being made and we weren't simply being stagnant.

Dean
07-16-2009, 11:50 AM
Like sticking with the poorest excuse in the history of football for a defensive coord? :confused: That alone was inexcusable.

I don't understand what you are trying to say.



Maybe draft/free agency wise there were changes. But on the field, I didn't see much of it. All I saw was consistently under-prepared teams who consistently got beat (sometimes demolished) by both very good and very bad teams, and players who showed no motivation, passion, guts, balls, or love for the game and most importantly no physicality. It was time for change.

It appears to me that the Broncos have been trying to rebuild since 2006 season without going through those 2-14 and 4-12 years. Things are going to be unstable in that scenario but we still went 24-24 even during this last 3 year stretch.

LRtagger
07-16-2009, 01:22 PM
The defense obviously needed some TLC, but changes were being made and we weren't simply being stagnant.

Right, but I would have rather been stagnant than REGRESSING which is what this defense had done over the past 3 years. Going through coordinator after coordinator and then finally when Mike decides to give one of them longer than a few months to implement a real system, he picks the absolute WORST one in franchise history (possibly even league history).

I mean we are talking about a guy that gameplanned having his CB's 7-10 yards off the LOS and even in the middle of the game places our FS 40 yards off the LOS.

If the defense hadn't regressed, we would have easily been a playoff team last year and Mike would still have a job. Unfortunately his poor mismanagement of not only defensive talent, but also defensive staff led to his demise.

To suggest the defense was improving is completely false.

Lots of people are tough on Mike, but I doubt you would find many (if any) people that would say Mike was not an offensive genius...because he was. But ultimately he had no clue how to evaluate defensive talent or put together a defensive gameplan. And unfortunately he left the defensive decision making to a moron.

powderaddict
07-16-2009, 01:29 PM
Wait, did the writer really compare McDaniels abilty to handle stress to a fictional TV character? :lol:

Lonestar
07-16-2009, 02:17 PM
Right, but I would have rather been stagnant than REGRESSING which is what this defense had done over the past 3 years. Going through coordinator after coordinator and then finally when Mike decides to give one of them longer than a few months to implement a real system, he picks the absolute WORST one in franchise history (possibly even league history).

I mean we are talking about a guy that gameplanned having his CB's 7-10 yards off the LOS and even in the middle of the game places our FS 40 yards off the LOS.

If the defense hadn't regressed, we would have easily been a playoff team last year and Mike would still have a job. Unfortunately his poor mismanagement of not only defensive talent, but also defensive staff led to his demise.

To suggest the defense was improving is completely false.

Lots of people are tough on Mike, but I doubt you would find many (if any) people that would say Mike was not an offensive genius...because he was. But ultimately he had no clue how to evaluate defensive talent or put together a defensive gameplan. And unfortunately he left the defensive decision making to a moron.


Great post but let me add..

For an offensive genius that was able to exploit any defense, why would it have not been easy for him to reverse engineer it and find a way to beat any offense.. I really thought that was what he was doing when he fired Bates as DC and changed the D at the bye that year..

He said he was not happy with what was going on on D and they were going to fix it.. when he put "his" defense in and had the stooge elevated I assumed (I now bad thing to do) he was going to reverse engineer by looking at the offenses we were going to face and implement fixes to take them out..

well we now know that did not happen and if it did it failed.. hope he enjoys his 35K+ sq ft house in cherry hills..

Dean
07-16-2009, 02:58 PM
Great post but let me add..

For an offensive genius that was able to exploit any defense, why would it have not been easy for him to reverse engineer it and find a way to beat any offense.. I really thought that was what he was doing when he fired Bates as DC and changed the D at the bye that year..

He said he was not happy with what was going on on D and they were going to fix it.. when he put "his" defense in and had the stooge elevated I assumed (I now bad thing to do) he was going to reverse engineer by looking at the offenses we were going to face and implement fixes to take them out..

well we now know that did not happen and if it did it failed.. hope he enjoys his 35K+ house in cherry hills..

I haven't been to Denver for two years but there are no $35000 houses in Cherry Hills Park Lane or Cherry Creek either for that matter.

For a look at what he is leaving go to:

http://virtualglobetrotting.com/map/37424/

Lonestar
07-16-2009, 03:28 PM
I haven't been to Denver for two years but there are no $35000 houses in Cherry Hills Park Lane or Cherry Creek either for that matter.

For a look at what he is leaving go to:

http://virtualglobetrotting.com/map/37424/

Sorry but it was meant to say 35k+ square foot house.. the comment was made that mike had said it was more like 50K sq ft..

broncohead
07-16-2009, 06:27 PM
You don't know that yet, at all (and I say this simply because people use the 'lets wait and see' anytime there are criticisms of this offseason).

I can't believe, for a second, that McDaniels is going to have the same kind of offensive production in Denver without Brady and that patriot offense.. simply because he coached Brady and the Pats offense. Losing Cutler is a catastrophe. Shanahan proved over MANy years and many offenses that he can be one of the most brilliant offensive minds in the game. McDaniels is only 32, and this is his first HC job (which by odds, is likely to be a failing gig).

Nolan has failed all over the NFL, and we are switching to a defensive scheme that is hard to change to, and doing it without the proper defensive front to do it with.

I'm with Dean on this one. Our offensive talent last season was amongst the top in the NFL, and it seemed that things were making a drastic change in philosophy that was working in the right direction. Our last number or drafts had been solid, and the scouts that were providing such talent are now gone as well. Hard to say that there wasn't change going on with Shanahan and the team when you look at the offensive side of this team and the talent it had accrued in the last 4 years.

The defense obviously needed some TLC, but changes were being made and we weren't simply being stagnant.

I guess you missed the part where I said "I believe" meaning thats my opinion. You can't win without a defense and we weren't going to have a solid D with Slowick.

horsepig
07-16-2009, 09:31 PM
Greg Robinson (just what in the hell was wrong here?), Ray Rhodes, Larry Coyer, Bates, and, finally Slowit. Give me an effing break!

Mike was looking for scape goats.

Sure the 49's teams were great, but they also had something Mike completely ignored; defenses and ST's.

He thought he could recreate those teams with offense alone. Ridiculous, couldn't see the forest for the trees.

MOtorboat
07-16-2009, 09:44 PM
Greg Robinson (just what in the hell was wrong here?), Ray Rhodes, Larry Coyer, Bates, and, finally Slowit. Give me an effing break!

Mike was looking for scape goats.

Sure the 49's teams were great, but they also had something Mike completely ignored; defenses and ST's.

He thought he could recreate those teams with offense alone. Ridiculous, couldn't see the forest for the trees.

Yeah, Greg Robinson was so horrible that he won two Super Bowls with the Broncos.

Good lord.

Criticize Shanahan for his ability as a GM all you want, but the whining about defensive coordinators has gone far enough.

Some people need to learn some perspective.

rcsodak
07-16-2009, 11:06 PM
I recall that the reason why Shanahan was fired in the first place was that he was refusing to make changes to his Defensive staff. Slowick wasn't going to recover from putting the worst D in the league out on the field. At leas that is what Bowlen and many other people believed.

To be fair, Thnikk....I believe that was pure speculation.

At least I never saw where either Mr B or Shanny acknowledged that.

Only that "there needed to be a change....both for the team, and for Mike".

rcsodak
07-16-2009, 11:17 PM
You don't know that yet, at all (and I say this simply because people use the 'lets wait and see' anytime there are criticisms of this offseason).

I can't believe, for a second, that McDaniels is going to have the same kind of offensive production in Denver without Brady and that patriot offense.. simply because he coached Brady and the Pats offense.
Why not? It's not like he had Brady last year. But instead, a college BACKUP QB that hadn't started a game since his High School days. And he was 11-5 last year.

Losing Cutler is a catastrophe. Shanahan proved over MANy years and many offenses that he can be one of the most brilliant offensive minds in the game. McDaniels is only 32, and this is his first HC job (which by odds, is likely to be a failing gig). I'd say that McD has shown to be just as offensive minded as Shanny did. I don't recall Shanny EVER being on an offense with a 50TD QB.


Nolan has failed all over the NFL, and we are switching to a defensive scheme that is hard to change to, and doing it without the proper defensive front to do it with. Really? Nolan has failed where, other than his 1 and only HC gig? In the circumstances he was under, with constant turmoil at QB, and at OC. So where else has he "failed", rav?


I'm with Dean on this one. Our offensive talent last season was amongst the top in the NFL, and it seemed that things were making a drastic change in philosophy that was working in the right direction. Our last number or drafts had been solid, and the scouts that were providing such talent are now gone as well. Hard to say that there wasn't change going on with Shanahan and the team when you look at the offensive side of this team and the talent it had accrued in the last 4 years.

The defense obviously needed some TLC, but changes were being made and we weren't simply being stagnant.

Having a buttload of yards isn't the same as being "amongst the top", rav. It's points scored. When will you cut-n-run'er lovers acknowledge that FACT?

I think this team is better off with a QB that can actually throw with touch, and not high and hard.

rcsodak
07-16-2009, 11:26 PM
Right, but I would have rather been stagnant than REGRESSING which is what this defense had done over the past 3 years. Going through coordinator after coordinator and then finally when Mike decides to give one of them longer than a few months to implement a real system, he picks the absolute WORST one in franchise history (possibly even league history).

I mean we are talking about a guy that gameplanned having his CB's 7-10 yards off the LOS and even in the middle of the game places our FS 40 yards off the LOS.

If the defense hadn't regressed, we would have easily been a playoff team last year and Mike would still have a job. Unfortunately his poor mismanagement of not only defensive talent, but also defensive staff led to his demise.

To suggest the defense was improving is completely false.

Lots of people are tough on Mike, but I doubt you would find many (if any) people that would say Mike was not an offensive genius...because he was. But ultimately he had no clue how to evaluate defensive talent or put together a defensive gameplan. And unfortunately he left the defensive decision making to a moron.

Is it just me, or do people not understand the difference between press cover and zone?

Champ plays better 'off the line'. He's said so himself....he can see the play better. But he was hurt.

Having Bly and rookies that are afraid to allow a big play, and no pass rush is the reason for those gains.....not the 7-10 yds cushions.

I'm not giving Slowick a pass, but one only has to watch the games to see that if a wr busts through press coverage at the LOS, he's most likely free and clear for a long gainer and/or TD, with the piss poor safety's that they've had the last gazillion years.

Elevation inc
07-17-2009, 01:29 AM
Is it just me, or do people not understand the difference between press cover and zone?

Champ plays better 'off the line'. He's said so himself....he can see the play better. But he was hurt.

Having Bly and rookies that are afraid to allow a big play, and no pass rush is the reason for those gains.....not the 7-10 yds cushions.

I'm not giving Slowick a pass, but one only has to watch the games to see that if a wr busts through press coverage at the LOS, he's most likely free and clear for a long gainer and/or TD, with the piss poor safety's that they've had the last gazillion years.

lol...yep that 40 yd cover BS by the FS was pure genius.....lets give him 30 yds by the time the safety meets him so we only get docked a 30 yd gain instead of a TD...lol Slowik= complete fail......Safeties last year= more failure.....Cb's = Chopping block


FYI many of those 7-10 yd covers were actually 12-15 the majority of the season....while Cb's should play off especially ours, thats way to excessive....its the main reason a guy like greg camarillo gains 120 plus yds on us on 8 plus receptions.....seriously....Cb's are getting the raw end of the deal a bit, but lets not forget they had plenty of problems last year as well as the rest of the defense....