PDA

View Full Version : Marshall says McDaniels hug was “for show”



DenBronx
08-09-2012, 12:39 PM
Relax, this has Broncos news in the report. I found it to be interesting how alot of guys on that team wanted to stay together and didnt like what McDaniels was doing to them. Anyhow here's the report.






Even if the Dolphins had been willing to trade receiver Brandon Marshall within the division, the Patriots likely wouldn’t have been interested. Even if the Dolphins had offered to send picks to get the Pats to take him.

In an interview with Michael Silver of Yahoo! Sports, the current Bears wideout talks about issues with Patriots offensive coordinator Josh McDaniels that plagued their mutual time in Denver.

The relationship was poisoned from the get-go by the former head coach’s out-of-the-gates decision to trade quarterback Jay Cutler.

READ MORE HERE:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/08/09/marshall-says-mcdaniels-hug-was-for-show/

TXBRONC
08-09-2012, 01:04 PM
This guy has the history ass backwards:



mike83ri says:Aug 9, 2012 12:36 PM

Talk about revisionist history. McDaniels wasn’t the GM, and Cutler demanded a trade… It wasn’t THAT long ago Brandon, we all know the facts.

And if thinking you’re going to get accused of something causes you to throw a temper tamtrum and kick footballs everywhere during practice is your way of getting even… well let’s just say that your own admittance of a mental/social disability seems like a more valid explaination of why you did those things.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/08/09/marshall-says-mcdaniels-hug-was-for-show/

It's also a horseshit excuse to bitch about Cutler asking for a trade. McDaniels was proven to be a liar so why should anyone believe anything he said. The facts about what happened with Cutler are indispute. Even if Cutler or any player under contract demands you don't have to oblige them. If McDaniels hadn't of been such inmature little twerp things might have been able to be worked out.

DenBronx
08-09-2012, 01:20 PM
This guy has the history ass backwards:




It's also a horseshit excuse to bitch about Cutler asking for a trade. McDaniels was proven to be a liar so why should anyone believe anything he said. The facts about what happened with Cutler are indispute. Even if Cutler or any player under contract demands you don't have to oblige them. If McDaniels hadn't of been such inmature little twerp things might have been able to be worked out.

Absolutely. I think the players or in this case the core 4 (Cutler, Marshall, Hillis and Sheff) wanted to stay Broncos.

Ravage!!!
08-09-2012, 01:22 PM
Like I said, he was one of the very darkest moments of this franchises history that I've ever been associated with. I literally jumped up and down and cheered to the skies when I heard McDaniels was fired. I was soooooooooo happy!

hotcarl
08-09-2012, 01:33 PM
delete thread

Softskull
08-09-2012, 01:48 PM
This is a fine opportunity to whoop McDaniels one more time and far be it from me to miss such a set up, but Brandon was a complete knucklehead during the mentioned time. There were very few here that didn't want to beat the young man...frequently. It looks like he's starting to get his act together and I wish him the very best, but I cant say I really miss him.

BroncoBJ
08-09-2012, 01:58 PM
Like I said, he was one of the very darkest moments of this franchises history that I've ever been associated with. I literally jumped up and down and cheered to the skies when I heard McDaniels was fired. I was soooooooooo happy!

Yea, i was 1 of the few people who did like him I think and didn't want to see him get fired. But looking back, if we went another year with him, who knows how we would have been.

Looks like we got things turned around, and after a playoff berth last year, we now have 1 of the best qbs in the league if hes healthy. So things are looking like they turned out for the best. Those McDaniels years were pretty brutal though. :lol:

Bugs Baloney
08-09-2012, 02:10 PM
I have tried very hard to block any thought or memory that that slime-ball McDaniels was
here or had anything to do with our great team.

Northman
08-09-2012, 02:14 PM
I have no doubt that all those players would of wanted to stay in Denver. They had great chemistry together and had a lot of fun out on the field playing. Im so glad that JE is here now, i was tired of McDump.

camdisco24
08-09-2012, 03:01 PM
I've tried to erase the McD memories but every time I think about the team he inherited and then destroyed, I cringe.

Honestly though, now that we have Manning and we had our fun with Tebow and B. Llyod, the only 2 players I still really miss are Hillis and Sheff.

Imagine Manning, McGehee, Hillis, Thomas, Decker, and Sheff all together on one offense. :cool:

BroncoBJ
08-09-2012, 03:44 PM
I've tried to erase the McD memories but every time I think about the team he inherited and then destroyed, I cringe.

Honestly though, now that we have Manning and we had our fun with Tebow and B. Llyod, the only 2 players I still really miss are Hillis and Sheff.

Imagine Manning, McGehee, Hillis, Thomas, Decker, and Sheff all together on one offense. :cool:

And Lloyd and BMarsh. Imagine that offense :laugh: Its crazy how all he had to do was fix the defense though. :fight: Its like he got mad at Shanny for saying leave the offense alone and just fix the defense.

rationalfan
08-09-2012, 04:03 PM
yeah, i too was one of the few who liked mcD (in theory, anyways). but it's hard to defend/understand the rationale for most of what he did. having typed that, i still think marshall, cutler, hillis and sheffler were a bunch of knuckleheads whose egos were more advanced than their talents. there seems to be this revisionist history of how great they were. marshall's the only one i'd classify as "great." the others were fun to watch, but they still had a lot of room to grow (and, it seems, cutler did grow).

Ravage!!!
08-09-2012, 04:45 PM
yeah, i too was one of the few who liked mcD (in theory, anyways). but it's hard to defend/understand the rationale for most of what he did. having typed that, i still think marshall, cutler, hillis and sheffler were a bunch of knuckleheads whose egos were more advanced than their talents. there seems to be this revisionist history of how great they were. marshall's the only one i'd classify as "great." the others were fun to watch, but they still had a lot of room to grow (and, it seems, cutler did grow).

Exactly. I don't think anyone said they were "great." I think the understanding is that they were some of the most talented players we've had in Denver, and certainly the most talented drafted at their positions since Elway (in Denver). That meant getting to watch them grow together, as a unit. We wouldn't be rebuilding now, but for sure reloading as we would be one of the top teams in the AFC (if not the NFL) had we kept that nucleus and built around it instead of trying to replace everythign we already had.

Northman
08-09-2012, 05:07 PM
Exactly. I don't think anyone said they were "great." I think the understanding is that they were some of the most talented players we've had in Denver, and certainly the most talented drafted at their positions since Elway (in Denver). That meant getting to watch them grow together, as a unit. We wouldn't be rebuilding now, but for sure reloading as we would be one of the top teams in the AFC (if not the NFL) had we kept that nucleus and built around it instead of trying to replace everythign we already had.

Exactly.

It seemed like everyone on the planet knew what Denver really needed to work on except for McDaniels himself. If Josh ever HC's again he better take a lesson from what he did wrong in Denver because he will always fail if he tries to do what he did here.

Ravage!!!
08-09-2012, 05:12 PM
Exactly.

It seemed like everyone on the planet knew what Denver really needed to work on except for McDaniels himself. If Josh ever HC's again he better take a lesson from what he did wrong in Denver because he will always fail if he tries to do what he did here.

IMO, he'll always fail as a HC. 1) he doesn't get along with others 2) he doesn't get along with others because he thinks he's so much smarter than everyone else.... including his assistant coaches. 3) He's not a leader that people will want to follow.

Canmore
08-09-2012, 05:18 PM
Exactly.

It seemed like everyone on the planet knew what Denver really needed to work on except for McDaniels himself. If Josh ever HC's again he better take a lesson from what he did wrong in Denver because he will always fail if he tries to do what he did here.

I don't think he will learn. I feel and I know it's only a feeling, that he believes he was right. If, and I think that is a big if, he ever gets another gig he will fail just as miserably.

Dzone
08-09-2012, 05:23 PM
Denver talk shows discussing the Cutler trade. What might have been. The worst trade in Franchise history

DenBronx
08-09-2012, 06:21 PM
Having Elway and Manning makes me forget the mess we had.

No QB controversy, no ego maniac as a head coach, no more shipping away 1st and 2nds carelessly and no more signing 30 or so scrubs just to fill the roster. Elway will put a premium on franchise players and so far he has shown nothing but a will to bring us back to glory.

sneakers
08-09-2012, 11:01 PM
Yes, but we did win a playoff game last year. Has cutler ever done this?

MOtorboat
08-09-2012, 11:24 PM
Yes, but we did win a playoff game last year. Has cutler ever done this?

One in six. He's awesome.

Simple Jaded
08-10-2012, 01:42 AM
The Broncos are better off at QB and will be just fine at WR. It would have been nice if they didn't waste all those premium draft picks tho.......

Northman
08-10-2012, 04:46 AM
Yes, but we did win a playoff game last year. Has cutler ever done this?

Yes but in Chicago.

BroncoWave
08-10-2012, 11:18 AM
Absolutely. I think the players or in this case the core 4 (Cutler, Marshall, Hillis and Sheff) wanted to stay Broncos.

It's not like those four players have boomed elsewhere. Hills and Scheffler are both no-names now, Marshall was dumped by another team, and Cutler has been decent but certainly not elite. I know people want to overrate the talent of the players McD let go because they hate him so much, but it's not like he got rid of Brees, Peterson, Calvin, and Gates.

BroncoWave
08-10-2012, 11:22 AM
I've tried to erase the McD memories but every time I think about the team he inherited and then destroyed, I cringe.

Honestly though, now that we have Manning and we had our fun with Tebow and B. Llyod, the only 2 players I still really miss are Hillis and Sheff.

Imagine Manning, McGehee, Hillis, Thomas, Decker, and Sheff all together on one offense. :cool:

But why? Hillis got let go of by the freaking Browns. If a team as talent-deprived as the Browns lets you walk, you are not very good. And Scheffler hasn't even cracked 400 yards in a season with Detriot. I just don't get the fascination with those two players. They aren't that good.

rationalfan
08-10-2012, 11:38 AM
Exactly. I don't think anyone said they were "great." I think the understanding is that they were some of the most talented players we've had in Denver, and certainly the most talented drafted at their positions since Elway (in Denver). That meant getting to watch them grow together, as a unit. We wouldn't be rebuilding now, but for sure reloading as we would be one of the top teams in the AFC (if not the NFL) had we kept that nucleus and built around it instead of trying to replace everythign we already had.

But that's where i don't agree. there's this popular assumption that if cutler/marshall/hillis/scheffler wouldn't have been traded the broncos would have one of the best offenses in the league. i don't think they were as good as some people thought (especially hillis and scheff), and i don't think their egos/maturation would have allowed them to become great together. while culter and marshall can play nice together now, they had to be split apart to grow to this point. the mcd years were full of bad chemistry; but the final two seasons of shanny's reign were just as horrible. and i think that had more to do with the players he accumulated than how shanny was running things.

camdisco24
08-10-2012, 11:42 AM
But why? Hillis got let go of by the freaking Browns. If a team as talent-deprived as the Browns lets you walk, you are not very good. And Scheffler hasn't even cracked 400 yards in a season with Detriot. I just don't get the fascination with those two players. They aren't that good.

It's all about being in the right situation. In Denver, all these guys were used properly and they shined. You're absolutely right that they haven't been even remotely impressive removed from Denver, but they went to some pretty weak teams. It's hard for anyone to be successful on the Browns... Miami has had awful QB's... Detroit is improving but their offense certainly overshadows TE's. Aside from Cutler, all these guys have faded, but I don't think that would have happened had they all remained in Denver.

None of us know that for sure though, so its pointless to debate. I was simply stating that it would be pretty cool to have Manning on the same field as some of the guys who impressed us before McD traded them. I know you hate Hillis, but he was a truck and a ton of fun to watch. Sheff was a clutch TE and we haven't had one since he left honestly, that's why I mentioned those two specifically. WR's are replaceable, I don't miss BM at all. Cutler was a baby, so same feeling there. But I can't sit here and pretend all these guys didn't make a pretty awesome offense when they were together.

Northman
08-10-2012, 11:45 AM
But that's where i don't agree. there's this popular assumption that if cutler/marshall/hillis/scheffler wouldn't have been traded the broncos would have one of the best offenses in the league. i don't think they were as good as some people thought (especially hillis and scheff), and i don't think their egos/maturation would have allowed them to become great together. while culter and marshall can play nice together now, they had to be split apart to grow to this point. the mcd years were full of bad chemistry; but the final two seasons of shanny's reign were just as horrible. and i think that had more to do with the players he accumulated than how shanny was running things.

Nah, cant agree with you there. The offense was one of the best in the league, just needed tweeking when it came into the redzone. The defense was a whole other matter alltogether but that could of been built with time. Shanny had worn out his welcome but i dont think any outside of McDaniels would of come in and totally dismantled the team without seeing what they could of done with it. While a couple of those guys had ego issues it wasnt something that hindered their play on the field. While Hillis takes a lot of heat for what has happened in Cleveland i look at it as just another place that players go to die. People forget that Randy Moss went to the Raiders and did diddly only to go to NE and be an impact. Hillis i think can still be a very good player given the right circumstances and had he remained in Denver i think he would of been a force in tandem with whatever other back we have or would have gotten. Sheff did very well working with Cutler and is even doing well in Detroit. Not his fault he splits time with their other TE Pettigrew (i think thats his name).

Ravage!!!
08-10-2012, 11:47 AM
But why? Hillis got let go of by the freaking Browns. If a team as talent-deprived as the Browns lets you walk, you are not very good. And Scheffler hasn't even cracked 400 yards in a season with Detriot. I just don't get the fascination with those two players. They aren't that good.

Doesn't matter what they did on other teams. Scheff was better than anything we had, and have had up until THIS season. So we've spent resources, and draft choices, trying to replace what we already had. Hillis COULD absolutely be an every down back. Hillis was let go because the Browns, again, had a top 5 draft choice and picked a RB that has had the highest rating since Peterson. Not exactly like they dumped him for..oh... Moreno. The Chiefs have absolutely GAINED by having Hillis on the roster, even if its a complimentary player to Charles. WHy do you think that top complimentary players aren't needed.

Cutler is absolutely "that good" that you don't trade him away. IF we didn't get lucky, we would still be stuck with the likes of Tebow as our starting QB, and drafting others to find his eventual replacement. Elway has stated "you don't trade away a Cutler." Marshall is a no brainer. Most talented WR we've ever had on the Broncos.

PUt them TOGETHER... which is the important factor. Lots of talented players were BETTER when mixed with other talented players. Marshall and Cutler were GREAT together. Scheff wasn't a top TE in the NFL, but with those two, he was pretty good. Hillis, teamed with another RB, is a GREAT guy to have in the backfield. Not only is a a HUGE runner, a tough runner, a great guy for the goal line, but he's a FANTASTIC receiver out of the backfield. When given the chance, he's done nothing but produce (unless injured, which has been his downfall).

The FASCINATION with those players, is that they were YOUNG, Drafted by Denver, and the most talented offense we've had since the 1998 Broncos. Mix in Royal, and you have a YOUNG core of players that had the chance to be one of the very tops in the NFL. Instead, the rest of the AFC West was CHEERING for McDaniels at ever trade he made, and LAUGHING at us as we watched that core be completely... COMPLETELY.. dismantled.

Thnikkaman
08-10-2012, 11:48 AM
What a waste of time this thread is.

BroncoWave
08-10-2012, 11:49 AM
Nah, cant agree with you there. The offense was one of the best in the league, just needed tweeking when it came into the redzone. The defense was a whole other matter alltogether but that could of been built with time. Shanny had worn out his welcome but i dont think any outside of McDaniels would of come in and totally dismantled the team without seeing what they could of done with it. While a couple of those guys had ego issues it wasnt something that hindered their play on the field. While Hillis takes a lot of heat for what has happened in Cleveland i look at it as just another place that players go to die. People forget that Randy Moss went to the Raiders and did diddly only to go to NE and be an impact. Hillis i think can still be a very good player given the right circumstances and had he remained in Denver i think he would of been a force in tandem with whatever other back we have or would have gotten. Sheff did very well working with Cutler and is even doing well in Detroit. Not his fault he splits time with their other TE Pettigrew (i think thats his name).

All I see are a bunch of excuses for Hillis and Schef's lack of talent. The Browns didn't even TRY to bring Hillis back. That tells me all I need to know.

BroncoWave
08-10-2012, 11:50 AM
Doesn't matter what they did on other teams. Scheff was better than anything we had, and have had up until THIS season. So we've spent resources, and draft choices, trying to replace what we already had. Hillis COULD absolutely be an every down back. Hillis was let go because the Browns, again, had a top 5 draft choice and picked a RB that has had the highest rating since Peterson. Not exactly like they dumped him for..oh... Moreno. The Chiefs have absolutely GAINED by having Hillis on the roster, even if its a complimentary player to Charles. WHy do you think that top complimentary players aren't needed.

Cutler is absolutely "that good" that you don't trade him away. IF we didn't get lucky, we would still be stuck with the likes of Tebow as our starting QB, and drafting others to find his eventual replacement. Elway has stated "you don't trade away a Cutler." Marshall is a no brainer. Most talented WR we've ever had on the Broncos.

PUt them TOGETHER... which is the important factor. Lots of talented players were BETTER when mixed with other talented players. Marshall and Cutler were GREAT together. Scheff wasn't a top TE in the NFL, but with those two, he was pretty good. Hillis, teamed with another RB, is a GREAT guy to have in the backfield. Not only is a a HUGE runner, a tough runner, a great guy for the goal line, but he's a FANTASTIC receiver out of the backfield. When given the chance, he's done nothing but produce (unless injured, which has been his downfall).

The FASCINATION with those players, is that they were YOUNG, Drafted by Denver, and the most talented offense we've had since the 1998 Broncos. Mix in Royal, and you have a YOUNG core of players that had the chance to be one of the very tops in the NFL. Instead, the rest of the AFC West was CHEERING for McDaniels at ever trade he made, and LAUGHING at us as we watched that core be completely... COMPLETELY.. dismantled.

The Browns got rid of Hillis before they drafted Richardson. Nice revisionist history though.

Ravage!!!
08-10-2012, 11:56 AM
Manning was dropped...so was McGahee. The COlts didn't try to get Tamme. Seems a guy by the name of Brandon Lloyd is making his way onto another team now. LT was let go, and they didn't even TRY to keep Micheal Turner. Brett Favre was traded away, and the let go. Kurt Warner was bypassed MANY times, and Vermeil even left him on the list to be taken for FREE by the expansion teams (and they passed on him).

What other teams do, or don't do, really has nothing to do with much. Circumstances (such as drafting a top 2 RB in the draft) are different everywhere, every year.

Northman
08-10-2012, 12:02 PM
All I see are a bunch of excuses for Hillis and Schef's lack of talent. The Browns didn't even TRY to bring Hillis back. That tells me all I need to know.

Your certainly entitled to your opinion. I feel the very same way about a certain somebody else we've discussed before.

Ravage!!!
08-10-2012, 12:06 PM
The Browns got rid of Hillis before they drafted Richardson. Nice revisionist history though.

:lol: Really? What year waas Richardson drafted, and when was Hillis let go? http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2012/03/peyton-hillis-leaves-browns-for-chiefs/1

that was written March 15th, the draft was April 28th. You don't think they knew who they were drafting by then??? :lol: SO you are saying, that letting Hillis go had nothing to do with them having the ability/availability to draft Richardson? Really?

Well, thats not trying to have a blind eye at all.

OH.. by the way.. the Browns DID 'TRY' to resign Hillis.

Thnikkaman
08-10-2012, 12:09 PM
You guys need to go get laid or something. This is pathetic.

Chef Zambini
08-10-2012, 12:14 PM
try ing to watch my recorded NFL channel re-broadcast;

its all from the chicago annoncers, difficult to get a name from the bronco players with so many wearing their hair to conceal their names !
I need a roster !

haine, why does this guy even have a roster spot?
I would like to see weber work with the first team, haine is just taking away reps from legitimate QBs on our roster !
running game, we are going to have to say good-by to a very good RB ! even moreno looked good in a very small sample size! I can see why bell is listed as the #2 back, he cant wait to hit somebody as a blocker !
looking forward to seeing hillman in some game action, hopefully next week !
defense looks good, no missed assignments, some very good efforts by linemen and LBs.
caution: we did not see their #1 QB or RB in the game ! a good first showing, PM looked pedestrian, but we all know that will get better !


its so nice to start a season withoiut concerns about the special teams !
Our returners still looks like an open competition, hopefully somebody can step up and distinguish themselves as a top contender both punt and K>O>
not a bad result for our first PS game, our broncos looked well prepared !

Northman
08-10-2012, 12:16 PM
You guys need to go get laid or something. This is pathetic.

Thanks dad.

BroncoWave
08-10-2012, 12:21 PM
:lol: Really? What year waas Richardson drafted, and when was Hillis let go? http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2012/03/peyton-hillis-leaves-browns-for-chiefs/1

that was written March 15th, the draft was April 28th. You don't think they knew who they were drafting by then??? :lol: SO you are saying, that letting Hillis go had nothing to do with them having the ability/availability to draft Richardson? Really?

Well, thats not trying to have a blind eye at all.

OH.. by the way.. the Browns DID 'TRY' to resign Hillis.

They had no way of knowing if Richardson would fall to them. If they though anything of Hillis they would have kept him instead of hoping a guy fell to them in the draft. Why create another hole to have to draft for if you think you have a good player in Hillis?

Northman
08-10-2012, 12:24 PM
I think Hillis was on the outs because he didnt like what they were offering him contract wise. Even if the Browns didnt get Richardson i think they had planned to move on from Hillis but it wasnt because they all of a sudden thought he sucked. It was because he was getting injured a lot and they didnt want to dump more money into him.

Thnikkaman
08-10-2012, 12:24 PM
Thanks dad.

And get a haircut too you damned hippy!!!

Chef Zambini
08-10-2012, 12:26 PM
cutler, still recovering from child bearing?
too easy.

BroncoWave
08-10-2012, 12:27 PM
I think Hillis was on the outs because he didnt like what they were offering him contract wise. Even if the Browns didnt get Richardson i think they had planned to move on from Hillis but it wasnt because they all of a sudden thought he sucked. It was because he was getting injured a lot and they didnt want to dump more money into him.

We'll just see how he does in KC. He certainly won't have the excuse of having no talent around him. While Cassell isn't very good, that offense still has some pretty good pieces on it.

Ravage!!!
08-10-2012, 12:53 PM
They had no way of knowing if Richardson would fall to them. If they though anything of Hillis they would have kept him instead of hoping a guy fell to them in the draft. Why create another hole to have to draft for if you think you have a good player in Hillis?

Wait.. what??? Please try to think before you post. The Browns picked THIRD (3rd) in teh draft. They were basically picking 1st, since EVERYONE AND THEIR CAT knew that Luck and RGIII were going 1 & 2. This "hope" that Richardson was falling to them wasn't exactly trying to rely on the lottery. Did you even watch the draft?

BroncoJoe
08-10-2012, 12:55 PM
I think BTB's point is if Hillis is "all that", the need for Richardson is zero.

Ravage!!!
08-10-2012, 01:01 PM
I think BTB's point is if Hillis is "all that", the need for Richardson is zero.

Richardson is one of the highest rated RBs to come out of college in the last decade. Highest since Adrian Peterson. Throw in the fact that Hillis wasn't under contract... and you have a no brainer. NO ONE is saying that Hillis is THAT kind of RB. You would REALLY have to be "all that" for them not to take Richardson. There are just a very FEW RBs in the league that would make you keep them over a RB like Richardson.

What I think BTB is completely missing, is that although people think Hillis is good, we don't necessarily think he's the greatest. He's good enough to rush for 1600 yrds for a Browns team that was absolutely terrible. That says a TON on Hillis' ability and skills. WHen he's healthy, and in the lineup, he produces. Thats been proved time and time again. Give him an offense, even as a complimentary RB like he was in Denver, and the guy is a flat out football player. A Beast that is VERY hard to bring down. The combination of Charles' speed, and Hillis' power, is actually a very threatening and scary combo.

BroncoWave
08-10-2012, 01:03 PM
Richardson is one of the highest rated RBs to come out of college in the last decade. Highest since Adrian Peterson. Throw in the fact that Hillis wasn't under contract... and you have a no brainer. NO ONE is saying that Hillis is THAT kind of RB. You would REALLY have to be "all that" for them not to take Richardson. There are just a very FEW RBs in the league that would make you keep them over a RB like Richardson.

What I think BTB is completely missing, is that although people think Hillis is good, we don't necessarily think he's the greatest. He's good enough to rush for 1600 yrds for a Browns team that was absolutely terrible. That says a TON on Hillis' ability and skills. WHen he's healthy, and in the lineup, he produces. Thats been proved time and time again. Give him an offense, even as a complimentary RB like he was in Denver, and the guy is a flat out football player. A Beast that is VERY hard to bring down. The combination of Charles' speed, and Hillis' power, is actually a very threatening and scary combo.

I must have missed his 1600 yard season with the Browns. Or are you talking about his two year total?

BroncoWave
08-10-2012, 01:04 PM
Wait.. what??? Please try to think before you post. The Browns picked THIRD (3rd) in teh draft. They were basically picking 1st, since EVERYONE AND THEIR CAT knew that Luck and RGIII were going 1 & 2. This "hope" that Richardson was falling to them wasn't exactly trying to rely on the lottery. Did you even watch the draft?

Oops, I forgot they picked third. Regardless, you don't think they'd like to have two talented RBs? That's the norm in today's NFL. Since you are arguing that his perfect role is as a complementary back, wouldn't that have been his role in Cleveland?

Slick
08-10-2012, 03:50 PM
The Cutler trade didn't piss me off nearly as much as what we did with the picks we acquired for him.

Northman
08-10-2012, 04:55 PM
Good to see you around Slickster. \m/

rationalfan
08-10-2012, 05:18 PM
a couple things to add in another pointless hillis debate:

- the browns didn't have the third pick in the draft until the day or day before. the vikings traded down, one slot, with the browns, who moved up to get richardson.
- as for hillis, two denver coaches didn't like him (remember, shanny had him at fourth string RB) and cleveland had several chances to re-sign the guy or extend his contract and they didn't (probably because he refused to play due to "injury" and felt his past was enough to guarantee his future). that means at least three sets of coaches and coordinators didn't like the guy for various reasons. three's a trend.

again, this is my opinion, hillis is a bozo. i don't understand the continued fascination and defense of a guy who was a marginal player (droughns had better stats) for a very brief time in denver. then factor in some very apparent diva behavior in cleveland (the kind of stuff that other broncos are routinely criticized for) and he's still regarded as some type of folk hero by various people on this board.

we're all entitled to our own opinions, i just don't comprehend the one that defends hillis.

BroncoWave
08-10-2012, 05:49 PM
a couple things to add in another pointless hillis debate:

- the browns didn't have the third pick in the draft until the day or day before. the vikings traded down, one slot, with the browns, who moved up to get richardson.
- as for hillis, two denver coaches didn't like him (remember, shanny had him at fourth string RB) and cleveland had several chances to re-sign the guy or extend his contract and they didn't (probably because he refused to play due to "injury" and felt his past was enough to guarantee his future). that means at least three sets of coaches and coordinators didn't like the guy for various reasons. three's a trend.

again, this is my opinion, hillis is a bozo. i don't understand the continued fascination and defense of a guy who was a marginal player (droughns had better stats) for a very brief time in denver. then factor in some very apparent diva behavior in cleveland (the kind of stuff that other broncos are routinely criticized for) and he's still regarded as some type of folk hero by various people on this board.

we're all entitled to our own opinions, i just don't comprehend the one that defends hillis.

I've been absolutely villified on this board for holding this opinion. I've never been more baffled by anything than by the blind praise this guy gets. It's even worse than the Tebow fanboys IMO. At least Tebow has contributed to a winning team. What has Hillis ever done?

The only thing I can think of is that people hate McDaniels so much they just put whomever he got rid of on some ridiculous pedestal to try to justify their criticism of McD getting rid of them.

Ravage!!!
08-10-2012, 05:49 PM
Shanahan did not have him as a 4th string. Thats a lie. He was the starting FB and didn't start him at TB until they needed him to. He didn't start at TB because he was a FB, thus wasn't even practicing at a tail back. HE was drafted as a FB, not as a tail back. He played FB in college, not tail back. WHEN he did start, he was the only player to rush for over a 100yrd for us that season (I believe).

McDoosh then spent a 1st round pick on a RB. Who's he going to try and start? How well did that work out? Its EASY to see who the better RB is between Hillis and Moreno, yet McDoosh had to try and justify his pick.

The defense on Hillis isn't so much just HIM (but people want to zoom in on him because people didn't like that HE was let go). The point is that it was a GROUP of people that were good together. Shanahan LOVED Hillis, as not only was it said, but shown as well since SHanahan used Hillis from game one in the backfield. Its the combo of things that come down to the release of Hillis that as just the "straw" for some. Not only did Hillis give us some fire behind the RB position when he was starting AS the Tail-back....but the Hillis trade after already losing Cutler.. and Marshall.. and Scheff. The release from teh Broncos was because Hillis and Scheff didn't seem to "support" the coach publically, and weren't kissing McDoosh's ass. McDoosh was clearing house of the entire offense that had been drafted and gathered, and it was a player that was well liked because he BUSTED his ass on the field. He plowed through, around, past, and literally OVER the defensive players trying to tackle him. He brought ROARS from the stands because of his style of football that has always been PURE hard-nosed, in your face, and over your body.

His injuries hurt him in Cleveland. The Browns traded away a QB they didn't want to get him and they already had a 2nd round RB on the roster to back up Richardson (of which Hillis had beaten out, but Monterio is under contract while Hillis wasn't). They offered a 1 year contract to Hillis, but no RB is really willing to sign a 1 year contract when they can get more elsewhere.

Hillis's departure isn't purely JUST about Hillis himself, although many of us could see just how valuable a weapon he could have been. No, his departure, how it happened, and the fact that McDick refused to play him despite NEEDING some RB support was just a total show of biting his nose to spite his face. The Hillis trade is just an example of just how EFFING stupid McDoosh-wad was, and the Hillis trade was just the CHERRY on top of everything else that the total Dooosh did to this up-n-coming team.

BroncoWave
08-10-2012, 05:52 PM
Shanahan did not have him as a 4th string. Thats a lie. He was the starting FB and didn't start him at TB until they needed him to. He didn't start at TB because he was a FB, thus wasn't even practicing at a tail back. HE was drafted as a FB, not as a tail back. He played FB in college, not tail back. WHEN he did start, he was the only player to rush for over a 100yrd for us that season (I believe).

McDoosh then spent a 1st round pick on a RB. Who's he going to try and start? How well did that work out? Its EASY to see who the better RB is between Hillis and Moreno, yet McDoosh had to try and justify his pick.

The defense on Hillis isn't so much just HIM (but people want to zoom in on him because people didn't like that HE was let go). The point is that it was a GROUP of people that were good together. Shanahan LOVED Hillis, as not only was it said, but shown as well since SHanahan used Hillis from game one in the backfield. Its the combo of things that come down to the release of Hillis that as just the "straw" for some. Not only did Hillis give us some fire behind the RB position when he was starting AS the Tail-back....but the Hillis trade after already losing Cutler.. and Marshall.. and Scheff. The release from teh Broncos was because Hillis and Scheff didn't seem to "support" the coach publically, and weren't kissing McDoosh's ass. McDoosh was clearing house of the entire offense that had been drafted and gathered, and it was a player that was well liked because he BUSTED his ass on the field. He plowed through, around, past, and literally OVER the defensive players trying to tackle him. He brought ROARS from the stands because of his style of football that has always been PURE hard-nosed, in your face, and over your body.

His injuries hurt him in Cleveland. The Browns traded away a QB they didn't want to get him and they already had a 2nd round RB on the roster to back up Richardson (of which Hillis had beaten out, but Monterio is under contract while Hillis wasn't). They offered a 1 year contract to Hillis, but no RB is really willing to sign a 1 year contract when they can get more elsewhere.

Hillis's departure isn't purely JUST about Hillis himself, although many of us could see just how valuable a weapon he could have been. No, his departure, how it happened, and the fact that McDick refused to play him despite NEEDING some RB support was just a total show of biting his nose to spite his face. The Hillis trade is just an example of just how EFFING stupid McDoosh-wad was, and the Hillis trade was just the CHERRY on top of everything else that the total Dooosh did to this up-n-coming team.

This post excellently proves my point. You want so badly for him to be good so that your villification of McD can be justified that you will make every excuse in the book for him. What will your excuse be when he flames out in KC?

Northman
08-10-2012, 06:24 PM
It's even worse than the Tebow fanboys IMO.

Not even close mate. Come on now. :lol:

BroncoWave
08-10-2012, 06:25 PM
Not even close mate. Come on now. :lol:

The Tebow fanboys were worse in that they were more vocal and made the board a worse place to post, but I think the Hillis supporters have less of a leg to stand on. What has he ever accomplished?

Northman
08-10-2012, 06:31 PM
The Tebow fanboys were worse in that they were more vocal and made the board a worse place to post, but I think the Hillis supporters have less of a leg to stand on. What has he ever accomplished?

It really isnt even about what he has accomplished. Its about what he can do when the situation is right. At least thats MY personal outlook on it. To be honest, i was surprised he did anything in Cleveland because of how bad that franchise is. The reality is, if he tanks in KC (if he stays healthy) than your guess is good he wont ever be anything more. But, if he flourishes than he will be doing what some of us thought he could all along.

Thnikkaman
08-10-2012, 07:06 PM
It's worse than arguing about players that are no longer on this team, and arguing about past events that you can't change that involved management and coaches that are no longer with the organization.

BroncoWave
08-10-2012, 07:42 PM
It really isnt even about what he has accomplished. Its about what he can do when the situation is right..

So you support him based on his potential? This sounds a LOT like the same excuse you bash Tebow supporters for making.

Northman
08-10-2012, 07:51 PM
So you support him based on his potential? This sounds a LOT like the same excuse you bash Tebow supporters for making.

Bash? Who do i bash?

I simply state my own opinion and disagree with those who see it differently. And for the record BTB there is plenty of "bashing" done to me yet im not going to spend time crying about it. I just debate and argue my points like everyone else, no whining necessary as there is no right or wrong. Just opinion.

BroncoWave
08-10-2012, 08:04 PM
Bash? Who do i bash?

I simply state my own opinion and disagree with those who see it differently. And for the record BTB there is plenty of "bashing" done to me yet im not going to spend time crying about it. I just debate and argue my points like everyone else, no whining necessary as there is no right or wrong. Just opinion.

Good job dodging my point. When someone says Tebow was in a less than ideal situation (with a team that didn't fully support or believe in him) and that he would excel elsewhere, the retort of many, including you, is that he just isn't that good.

But when it comes to Hillis, you are using literally that exact same excuse for him. Grade A hypocrisy.

At least you are finally admitting that Hillis really hasn't accomplished anything though. That's a step.

Northman
08-10-2012, 08:09 PM
Good job dodging my point. When someone says Tebow was in a less than ideal situation (with a team that didn't fully support or believe in him) and that he would excel elsewhere, the retort of many, including you, is that he just isn't that good.

But when it comes to Hillis, you are using literally that exact same excuse for him. Grade A hypocrisy.

At least you are finally admitting that Hillis really hasn't accomplished anything though. That's a step.

I never made the claim he had, thats a problem on your end G, not mine. lol

And sorry, Tebow in Denver is FAR better than being in Cleveland. To think otherwise is insane.

As to the first sentence, ive always said that its my opinion. I dont think Tebow is that good....as a QB. But ive always contended he is a great athlete.

rationalfan
08-10-2012, 10:25 PM
Hillis had good stats tonight. We'll see if he maintain it.

I think I figured out the Hillis fandom; pure bromance.

Simple Jaded
08-11-2012, 12:21 AM
I think BTB's point is if Hillis is "all that", the need for Richardson is zero.

Te point is that Hillis didn't have to be "all that", just good enough to not have to waste the 12th overall pick on The Next Kevin Faulk. Which he certainly was. Richardson would have been drafted by the Browns whether they were able to resign Hillis or not, at the 3rd overall you are looking for a player that is all that regardless of position and that offense needed talent everywhere.

Hillis is to Richardson what Michael Bush is to Matt Forte, certainly good enough to feature in the NFL.......

Simple Jaded
08-11-2012, 12:29 AM
Good job dodging my point. When someone says Tebow was in a less than ideal situation (with a team that didn't fully support or believe in him) and that he would excel elsewhere, the retort of many, including you, is that he just isn't that good.

But when it comes to Hillis, you are using literally that exact same excuse for him. Grade A hypocrisy.

At least you are finally admitting that Hillis really hasn't accomplished anything though. That's a step.Hillis and Tebow have a lot in common.......

Ravage!!!
08-11-2012, 11:36 AM
This post excellently proves my point. You want so badly for him to be good so that your villification of McD can be justified that you will make every excuse in the book for him. What will your excuse be when he flames out in KC?

No. As usual, you missed the point entirely. You do realize that the ONLY people that have defended the Hillis move/trade, are those that defend McDoosh, right?

Lets not forget, Hillis didn't have a very big name when being traded for Quinn (brilliant move). In fact, the only people that really knew much about Hillis were Arkansas fans (whom, btw, love him)...and Denver Bronco fans (who loved him). YET, after just one year in Cleveland, the entire football nation, voted him onto the cover of Madden. Why is that? You think that the "McDaniel haters" were so broad and wide that they, by themselves, voted Hillis onto the popular voted cover? Of course not.

Hillis' style of running is FUN to watch. He's tough, he's powerful, he's fast, and he gives out more punishment than he takes. He was the best runner we had on our roster, and still was until McGahee. McDoosh HATED the fact that our press kept asking about Hillis each and ever week after our completely inept running game kept failing (and made it clear by telling the press not to ask about Hillis). McDoosh didn't like players that had too much star power, especially if he didn't draft them. He was BRILLIANT with talent.

So what are you going to say when he succeeds in KC? Let me guess, you won't give him credit for shit.

Thnikkaman
08-13-2012, 09:00 AM
In the time I would have wasted reading Ravages' post about his love for an ex-Bronco, I took a dump.

It kind of looked like this thread.

Ravage!!!
08-13-2012, 10:09 AM
In the time I would have wasted reading Ravages' post about his love for an ex-Bronco, I took a dump.

It kind of looked like this thread.

You sure do a lot of bitching about whats typed in threads. I Have a plan for you thnik, stop going into threads you don't want to read. All you do is bitch bitch bitch about what other people are posting.

Thnikkaman
08-13-2012, 10:20 AM
You sure do a lot of bitching about whats typed in threads. I Have a plan for you thnik, stop going into threads you don't want to read. All you do is bitch bitch bitch about what other people are posting.

But then I can't troll those of you that use no logic in your arguments, and just speak on passion. You keep doing what you're doing, and I'll keep making fun of your opinions. :coffee:

Simple Jaded
08-14-2012, 03:05 AM
Defending the Hillis trade is basically the same thing as taking a dump, only you're talking outta your ass.......

sneakers
08-14-2012, 05:44 AM
For about 4 months I had totally forgotten that McDaniels existed. Thanks for the thread!

muse
08-14-2012, 08:47 AM
Shanahan did not have him as a 4th string. Thats a lie. He was the starting FB and didn't start him at TB until they needed him to. He didn't start at TB because he was a FB, thus wasn't even practicing at a tail back. HE was drafted as a FB, not as a tail back. He played FB in college, not tail back. WHEN he did start, he was the only player to rush for over a 100yrd for us that season (I believe).

He wasn't the starting FB, he was 2nd string to Spencer Larsen until around Week 7-8.




McDoosh then spent a 1st round pick on a RB. Who's he going to try and start? How well did that work out? Its EASY to see who the better RB is between Hillis and Moreno, yet McDoosh had to try and justify his pick.

The defense on Hillis isn't so much just HIM (but people want to zoom in on him because people didn't like that HE was let go). The point is that it was a GROUP of people that were good together. Shanahan LOVED Hillis, as not only was it said, but shown as well since SHanahan used Hillis from game one in the backfield. Its the combo of things that come down to the release of Hillis that as just the "straw" for some. Not only did Hillis give us some fire behind the RB position when he was starting AS the Tail-back....but the Hillis trade after already losing Cutler.. and Marshall.. and Scheff. The release from teh Broncos was because Hillis and Scheff didn't seem to "support" the coach publically, and weren't kissing McDoosh's ass. McDoosh was clearing house of the entire offense that had been drafted and gathered, and it was a player that was well liked because he BUSTED his ass on the field. He plowed through, around, past, and literally OVER the defensive players trying to tackle him. He brought ROARS from the stands because of his style of football that has always been PURE hard-nosed, in your face, and over your body.

His injuries hurt him in Cleveland. The Browns traded away a QB they didn't want to get him and they already had a 2nd round RB on the roster to back up Richardson (of which Hillis had beaten out, but Monterio is under contract while Hillis wasn't). They offered a 1 year contract to Hillis, but no RB is really willing to sign a 1 year contract when they can get more elsewhere.

Hillis's departure isn't purely JUST about Hillis himself, although many of us could see just how valuable a weapon he could have been. No, his departure, how it happened, and the fact that McDick refused to play him despite NEEDING some RB support was just a total show of biting his nose to spite his face. The Hillis trade is just an example of just how EFFING stupid McDoosh-wad was, and the Hillis trade was just the CHERRY on top of everything else that the total Dooosh did to this up-n-coming team.

I don't think that Shanny necessarily did love Hillis, y'know. He was drafted as am FB and got beaten out by a newly-converted LB because he sucked at run blocking. Sure, the guy has GREAT hands, but if you're doing absolutely nothing as a blocker, it's hard to keep you out as a starting FB. I've heard a lot of rumblings about Hillis' poor work ethic in practice, both from Denver and Cleveland. Ultimately, yeah, the trade was pretty stupid, but as good a player as Hillis is, he's not exactly a coach's player and he seems to have trouble picking up offensive schemes and knowing assignments etc. In both Denver and Cleveland he reached the top of the depth charts through injury, not through earning it. That in itself is a flag - can you count on the guy to know what he's doing on the field?

As I said before, yeah, stupid trade, but I don't get why Hillis and Scheffler are treated with such reverence.

MNPatsFan
08-14-2012, 09:38 AM
Ravage, I didn't follow or analyze the trade AT THE TIME the trade was MADE to have an opinion whether it was a good or bad trade. The trade has to analyzed at the TIME of the trade though, NOT AFTER the trade.

In your post, you contradict yourself:
Lets not forget, Hillis didn't have a very big name when being traded for Quinn . . . .

McDoosh didn't like players that had too much star power, especially if he didn't draft them.How can Hillis have had too much star power when he didn't have a very big name when he was traded?:confused:

He couldn't ... he either had too much star power as you claim or he didn't have a very big name;)

Although Quinn has essentially been a bust, Hillis has only had ONE good year or season. Moreover, based on reports I have read from members of the Broncos and Browns team while Hillis was there, Hillis has attitude issues and is an internal distraction and "cancer". So I don't think the trade is clearly as bad or stupid as you claim.

I'm interested to see how Hillis does in KC. If Hillis has one or more good to great seasons with the Chiefs then I will agree with you. If Hillis, however, has a one or more average or poor seasons and continues to exhibit attitude issues and be an internal distraction and "cancer", then I think the trade will look better and better if for no other reason than addition by subtraction.

Ravage!!!
08-14-2012, 09:52 AM
In your post, you contradict yourself:How can Hillis have had too much star power when he didn't have a very big name when he was traded?:confused:

He couldn't ... he either had too much star power as you claim or he didn't have a very big name;)

Ahh... let me explain. Hillis didn't have much of a name OUTSIDE of Denver and Arkansas (where he played college), but with the Denver fans, he absolutely had star power. THe fans and media LOVED Hillis. That was what I meant. McDork hated players that he didn't draft, that were more popular with the fans/media than he was. He was trying to copy Bill so much, that he wanted to mimic right down to the scenario of wanting to get rid of Cutler (just as Bill wanted to get rid of Bledsoe). Bill didn't get along with Bledsoe, but knew he coudln't sit him because he was the locker room leader (this is all from Bill's mouth). The injury saved Bill, but McDick thought he would just bypass it all by making a trade.

Anyhow, our run game was absolutely horrendous that season, and McDaniels had Hillis on the sidelines (to the point that rumors started about Hillis hitting on McDick's wife) to play his drafted Moreno. Each and every week, the media would constantly bombard McDoosh with questions about Hillis. McD made it VERY clear that he was tired of the questions (much like everyone was with Tebow), and wanted them to stop asking about his participation. He never could/would give explanations as to why he wasn't playing, though.


Although Quinn has essentially been a bust, Hillis has only had ONE good year or season. Moreover, based on reports I have read from members of the Broncos and Browns team while Hillis was there, Hillis has attitude issues and is an internal distraction and "cancer". So I don't think the trade is clearly as bad or stupid as you claim.

He was by FAR their most productive player (not to mention runner) as the starter for the Browns before the injury. What did Quinn do at all??? Not only did we lose a stud runner, but gave away a draft pick on top of it. So I'm pretty certain that we gained absolutely nothing, while losing and losing on the trade.


I'm interested to see how Hillis does in KC. If Hillis has one or more good to great seasons with the Chiefs then I will agree with you. If Hillis, however, has a one or more average or poor seasons and continues to exhibit attitude issues and be an internal distraction and "cancer", then I think the trade will look better and better if for no other reason than addition by subtraction.

Well, he's obviously not going to be the starter in KC unless theirs goes down with injury again. I absolutely believe, even as a complimentary runner to Charles, that Hillis will be a stud and make his presence known, as he's always done when healthy.

Simple Jaded
08-14-2012, 06:50 PM
Again, nobody was saying that Peyton Hillis was Joe Riggins, just that he was a good back. He remained Denver's best runner and receiving back right up until the second McDaniels traded him. And making an argument about his injury issues makes next to no sense considering the player that McDaniels drafted to play Hillis' position has been just about the biggest glass vag on the Denver roster.

This is the point, McDaniels wasted valuable resources replacing perfectly good starters that he had no business replacing. Peyton Hillis was legitimately one of those players, even if he wasn't Mike Alstott.......

Chef Zambini
08-15-2012, 01:58 AM
Exactly.

It seemed like everyone on the planet knew what Denver really needed to work on except for McDaniels himself. If Josh ever HC's again he better take a lesson from what he did wrong in Denver because he will always fail if he tries to do what he did here.mc doosh will always fail because he is a worthless piece of shit!even fertilizer has value,JMCD is worthless!