McDaniels looks to continue winning ways

[Magnificent Seven]

Josh McDaniels said he is not familiar with losing and will not let the Broncos fail.

Josh McDaniels is not interested in "changing the culture" or "building a philosophy" as he embarks on his first head-coaching job at the age of 33. Buzz words don't interest him. He wants to cut to the chase.

"It's all very simple what my motive is: winning," said McDaniels, who parlayed wild success as New England's offensive coordinator into the top spot in Denver. "That is the only reason I'm here. I'm not interested in talking about anything else but. Every minute of this job is done with winning in mind. That's all I talk to the team about. Winning is always the message. That's the only message."

Winning is all McDaniels has ever done. He was part of three championship teams in eight seasons with the Patriots.

"I've never been on a loser -- never," McDaniels said. "I've never even been .500. Ever. I'm thinking all the way back to youth basketball. Never. I don't know what losing is like and I don't want to know what it is like. That's what I'm trying to teach here."

While he is fully involved in his duties in Denver, McDaniels admits he is still smarting over the fact that New England failed to make the playoffs last season, as well as the loss to the New York Giants in the Super Bowl two seasons ago. McDaniels said he is "dying to get back into a Super Bowl."

While observing McDaniels' first training camp as a head coach, it doesn't take long to realize he means business. McDaniels is very detail-oriented and is hardly easing into the job. He conducts fast-paced, crisp practice every day. Former coach Mike Shanahan was known for a more relaxed camp setting.

McDaniels made all of his players pass a conditioning test before they started to practice. The players who failed didn't practice until they passed. McDaniels also has his veterans stay at a local hotel, rather than at home, during camp. That never happened under Shanahan.

Every practice is an exercise in game situations. McDaniels figures he is preparing his team for competition, so they might as well work under game conditions. His practices are heavy on two-minute and red-zone drills.

"I like what is going on," cornerback Champ Bailey said. "It's different, but coach McDaniels knows what he wants. I can really tell all the guy is interested in is winning. That's good. Because that's all I care about too."

Added veteran receiver Brandon Stokley, who was on Super Bowl winning teams in Baltimore and Indianapolis: "It's reinvigorating. Coach McDaniels knows what he wants and he has a system that has worked elsewhere. He's gotten everyone's attention."

It didn't take long for McDaniels to get his players' attention. He began his tenure by feuding with and eventually trading Pro Bowl quarterback Jay Cutler. McDaniels basically told players that the only ones who would stick around would be the ones who bought into his system.
He says he believes he can win with the team he has and is not looking back. The Broncos went 8-8 last season and lost the AFC West title by losing three straight games to end the season.

Not much is expected from McDaniels' team. There's the quarterback issue, of course, and Denver's defense has yet to prove it can improve on last season's sorry effort. Plus, the Broncos have a very difficult schedule.

But McDaniels is unfazed.

"This team can win," he said. "I expect it to win. That's the only thing I expect."

McDaniels laughs long and hard when he is told that his job is the most closely watched position in football-crazed Colorado.

"The fan base is very passionate and I love it," he said. "A lot is expected from me. That was one of the draws of this job. I come from a town in Canton, Ohio that it is all pro football and high school football. It's in my blood and it's in Denver's blood. They want to win here and that's why I came here. Everything I do in this camp is to help the Broncos win. That's it."

McDaniels' motives are clear. Now, let's see if he can duplicate his New England magic in a more difficult environment.

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/afcwest/0-3-2681/McDaniels-looks-to-continue-winning-ways.html

[silkamilkamonico]

Awesome article.

"Changing the culture". Key phrase. Sounds like the players have rfeally bought into his system.

[Broncos Mtnman]

Josh McDaniels said he is not familiar with losing and will not let the Broncos fail.

Well, as the old saying goes, there's a first time for everything.

[Lonestar]

Good article that shows he believes in what he is doing and puts winning and those folks that want to win above those that are just collecting a paycheck..

[Magnificent Seven]

"I've never been on a loser -- never," McDaniels said. I like what he said.

[red98]

"I've never been on a loser -- never," McDaniels said. I like what he said.

He's never been the guy in charge either.


Good attitude though.

[claymore]

Its put up or shut up for this guy. I dont expect him to say he likes losing. Win tonight. SHOW us. Dont romance us.

Matter of fact, ensure our starting QB doesnt throw an INT against a base Defense.

[Superchop 7]

Falls out of chair laughing.

[Northman]

Josh McDaniels said he is not familiar with losing and will not let the Broncos fail.




Sweet. When do we get started?

[Northman]

Well, as the old saying goes, there's a first time for everything.

:lol::lol:

That was so ******* funny. That was good BM.

[Tned]

It's this kind of confidence, some might call it a cocky attitude, which leaves many fans feeling that having a couple losing seasons won't be acceptable. His moves in the off season (old secondary, for instance) were win now, type moves. He has routinely said he plans to win this year -- never talks about a long road to getting back on top.

Then, you add in the Cutler trade (regardless of what you think about it) and it further raises the bar of expectation.

Anything other than a winning, or near .500, season will bring a lot of heat down on McDaniels, and it will be almost completely related to his 'confidence' and the moves he made.

[Northman]

It's this kind of confidence, some might call it a cocky attitude, which leaves many fans feeling that having a couple losing seasons won't be acceptable. His moves in the off season (old secondary, for instance) were win now, type moves. He has routinely said he plans to win this year -- never talks about a long road to getting back on top.

Then, you add in the Cutler trade (regardless of what you think about it) and it further raises the bar of expectation.

Anything other than a winning, or near .500, season will bring a lot of heat down on McDaniels, and it will be almost completely related to his 'confidence' and the moves he made.

Lets just hope he has a good portion of Humble Pie if we fail to even win a game.

[Requiem / The Dagda]

I think this past years draft was a good indicator of the Broncos actually leaping towards winning in the future. With the hopes that the players they added can be starters and contribute down the road.

[Northman]

I think this past years draft was a good indicator of the Broncos actually leaping towards winning in the future. With the hopes that the players they added can be starters and contribute down the road.

Well, every draft is like that to be honest.

[Tned]

Lets just hope he has a good portion of Humble Pie if we fail to even win a game.

Yea, but I hope we won't have to find out whether or not he will be humbled by an 0-16 season.

[Lonestar]

have said it before that the reason Pat made the change is this team left alot to be desired and was not as good as some folks thought..

we have a long road to hoe and it is not going to turn around fast.. we will get a couple of wins that perhaps we should not this year.. but I would not think from the almost total change in personnel, schemes and coaches that we will see great games until mid season.. that is not to say we may not win any just they will not be pretty..

All I care about is we win more than we lose at home and we do not get blown out anymore by teams like DET and OAK.. and last but not least we get better each week..

[dogfish]

It's this kind of confidence, some might call it a cocky attitude, which leaves many fans feeling that having a couple losing seasons won't be acceptable. His moves in the off season (old secondary, for instance) were win now, type moves. He has routinely said he plans to win this year -- never talks about a long road to getting back on top.

Then, you add in the Cutler trade (regardless of what you think about it) and it further raises the bar of expectation.

Anything other than a winning, or near .500, season will bring a lot of heat down on McDaniels, and it will be almost completely related to his 'confidence' and the moves he made.


yep. . . he ran off our franchise QB, did very little to improve the front seven which most people considered the team's biggest weakness, and completely ignored conventional wisdom in his approach to the draft, burning a ton of value to trade up again and again for "his guys". . . now he has our best receiver running with the scout team. . . . he is definitely talking the talk, he needs to back it up and walk the walk. . .

[Northman]

have said it before that the reason Pat made the change is this team left alot to be desired and was not as good as some folks thought..

we have a long road to hoe and it is not going to turn around fast.. we will get a couple of wins that perhaps we should not this year.. but I would not think from the almost total change in personnel, schemes and coaches that we will see great games until mid season.. that is not to say we may not win any just they will not be pretty..

All I care about is we win more than we lose at home and we do not get blown out anymore by teams like DET and OAK.. and last but not least we get better each week..


Ive always had this mantra that usually 10 wins gets you into the playoffs. Usually. And considering out of 16 games you have 8 at home that leaves only 2 road games that you really have to win to reach the 10 mark. If i was any coach i would stress how important it is to win at home. That would be my first lesson to my players. If you remember that second coach (actor) who came into Notre Dame in the movie "Rudy" he made the statement "No one, and i mean no one comes in our house and pushes us around". That statement should ring true for our Broncos. We need to regain our homefield advantage before anything else.

[Northman]

yep. . . he ran off our franchise QB, did very little to improve the front seven which most people considered the team's biggest weakness, and completely ignored conventional wisdom in his approach to the draft, burning a ton of value to trade up again and again for "his guys". . . now he has our best receiver running with the scout team. . . . he is definitely talking the talk, he needs to back it up and walk the walk. . .

Word my brutha.

[Requiem / The Dagda]

I'd really like to hear what constitutes as conventional wisdom in the NFL Draft.

[Northman]

I'd really like to hear what constitutes as conventional wisdom in the NFL Draft.

What do you mean?

[camdisco24]

Great article... but lets hope he didn't write a check that he cant cash. If he backs up saying stuff like this, I think we'll all be more than happy. I just wanna see a real game, with the starting team in, to see what they can do.

[scott.475]

I hate these kind of articles, they are simply puff pieces. This guy is the teams coach, would you expect him to say much else? If you went to a car dealer to look around would you really expect the guy to say "Yeah, that car has good lines, but it handles terrible, is way underpowered, the seats are quite uncomfortable, and it gets 8 miles to the gallon"?

But, the coach is right, his NFL career has been nothing but a stunning success...on a team with a young and already HOF QB, and that QB's name is not "Orton".

[Requiem / The Dagda]

What do you mean?

Dogfish alluded that McDaniels steered away from conventional wisdom in the NFL Draft by giving up an extreme amount of value to get the players he wants. I'm just wondering what conventional wisdom is. Sitting at your picks and not making moves? Not sure I'm in favor of that.

Given the hiatus Ayers and Moreno had from camp this year with their hold-outs, and the ever-increasing salaries for rookies and the uncertainty with the CBA -- it's completely understandable why McDaniels opted to trade a first-rounder next year to get a player they thought highly of in this draft. They felt he was a first round talent and by all accounts from camp it seemed like he was proving his worth in that regard.

Furthermore, the financial responsibility in regards to Smith is significantly less than it would have been had we kept that pick and used it on a player in 2010. (I'm expecting we'd have a top fifteen selection.) IIRC, this was a reason stated by one of the head honchos as to why we did what we did. Paying out money to four first-round picks (likely in the top twenty selections) would have been a huge investment for the team, upwards of 100 million dollars. A little much if you ask me.

I'm not sure if coupling two thirds to get a second (Quinn) and a fourth (Olsen) are figured into this slide past "conventional wisdom" -- and sure hope they aren't because it would already make the argument more ridiculous than it already appears to be.

[LRtagger]

I'd really like to hear what constitutes as conventional wisdom in the NFL Draft.

Well, for starters you have to grade the draft after the second preseason game.

Then you have to wait 5 years and look at who was drafted after the guys you picked and say "Geez we could have had (ex. Tom Brady) instead of that guy."

[Requiem / The Dagda]

FWIW, people can stop bitching about us not adequately addressing the front seven either. The team brought in multiple free agents, used a first-round selection and grabbed several other UDFA's to help the team. This wasn't a strong draft on the defensive line (in particular) for three-four talent. Had we used a fourth rounder on Baker instead of grabbing him as a UDFA, the arguments about not addressing the front-seven would have probably ceased.

[dogfish]

Dogfish alluded that McDaniels steered away from conventional wisdom in the NFL Draft by giving up an extreme amount of value to get the players he wants. I'm just wondering what conventional wisdom is. Sitting at your picks and not making moves? Not sure I'm in favor of that.

Given the hiatus Ayers and Moreno had from camp this year with their hold-outs, and the ever-increasing salaries for rookies and the uncertainty with the CBA -- it's completely understandable why McDaniels opted to trade a first-rounder next year to get a player they thought highly of in this draft. They felt he was a first round talent and by all accounts from camp it seemed like he was proving his worth in that regard.

Furthermore, the financial responsibility in regards to Smith is significantly less than it would have been had we kept that pick and used it on a player in 2010. (I'm expecting we'd have a top fifteen selection.) IIRC, this was a reason stated by one of the head honchos as to why we did what we did. Paying out money to four first-round picks (likely in the top twenty selections) would have been a huge investment for the team, upwards of 100 million dollars. A little much if you ask me.

I'm not sure if coupling two thirds to get a second (Quinn) and a fourth (Olsen) are figured into this slide past "conventional wisdom" -- and sure hope they aren't because it would already make the argument more ridiculous than it already appears to be.


how frequently do you see teams trade up four times in one draft?


it's an unconventional approach. . .

[Requiem / The Dagda]

Well, for starters you have to grade the draft after the second preseason game.

Then you have to wait 5 years and look at who was drafted after the guys you picked and say "Geez we could have had (ex. Tom Brady) instead of that guy."

"Man, I can't believe we drafted Knowshon Moreno at #12 when we could have had Joe Dillon from Alcorn State University, he is tearing it up!" :lol:

[dogfish]

Well, for starters you have to grade the draft after the second preseason game.

Then you have to wait 5 years and look at who was drafted after the guys you picked and say "Geez we could have had (ex. Tom Brady) instead of that guy."

tagger, i sure hope you're not accusing me of doing this, because i've never had anything but praise for the moreno and ayers picks. . .


and FTR, i'm not "bitching" about the front seven. . . merely pointing out that mcdaniels didn't take the approach that most people (both fans and analysts) thought he would. . . we invested far more in the secondary than the front seven, that's undeniable. . . read any pre-season analysis/predictions out there, and the majority of them will mention that the team may not have done enough to address the front seven-- this isn't just my opinion, and i didn't bring it up to complain about it. . .

mcdaniels is the coach, they're his decisions to make--and when we start playing games that count, he needs to justify them with wins. . . if we get back to the playoffs this year then you have to admit that his approach was a success-- if we go 4-12, 5-11 people are going to really question the wisdom of reconfiguring an offense that showed flashes of brilliance last year, had elite young talent in place at quarterback, wide receiver and several key spots on the O-line-- a group that many felt would only continue to grow and improve with experience, and was probably one quality RB away from being one of the best units in the league for years to come. . .

but i didn't make those comments to rehash all of that old stuff. . . it's done, it's past, and now mcdaniels and the FO are about to get their chance to prove that those were the right moves. . . i've said on a number of occasions, substance is more important to me than style. . . i have my preferences, just like anybody else, but in the end results justifyany approach, and winning cures everything else. . . .

[LRtagger]

tagger, i sure hope you're not accusing me of doing this, because i've never had anything but praise for the moreno and ayers picks. . .


No not you....or anyone here really.

People on OM are already clammoring that we got ripped off by taking Moreno at #12 because he didnt play last night and that Ayers is a bust because he doesnt have any sacks yet.

Also I am seeing a lot of people say we should have taken Orakpo at 12 because he has played well in one preseason game.

[Northman]

Dogfish alluded that McDaniels steered away from conventional wisdom in the NFL Draft by giving up an extreme amount of value to get the players he wants. I'm just wondering what conventional wisdom is. Sitting at your picks and not making moves? Not sure I'm in favor of that.

Given the hiatus Ayers and Moreno had from camp this year with their hold-outs, and the ever-increasing salaries for rookies and the uncertainty with the CBA -- it's completely understandable why McDaniels opted to trade a first-rounder next year to get a player they thought highly of in this draft. They felt he was a first round talent and by all accounts from camp it seemed like he was proving his worth in that regard.

Furthermore, the financial responsibility in regards to Smith is significantly less than it would have been had we kept that pick and used it on a player in 2010. (I'm expecting we'd have a top fifteen selection.) IIRC, this was a reason stated by one of the head honchos as to why we did what we did. Paying out money to four first-round picks (likely in the top twenty selections) would have been a huge investment for the team, upwards of 100 million dollars. A little much if you ask me.

I'm not sure if coupling two thirds to get a second (Quinn) and a fourth (Olsen) are figured into this slide past "conventional wisdom" -- and sure hope they aren't because it would already make the argument more ridiculous than it already appears to be.


Yea, im not upset by the Moreno or Ayers picks. And im not a anti-Smith fan but i do think we could of gotten a player of his calibur at our current position in the second round. And i do think it was huge reach for Quinn especially for what we gave up. Although i understand that McD got the guys he wanted but i think the conventional wisdom that Dog is eluding too is that this team has a lot of holes and it would of been best served to get as many draft picks as possible. Its just really odd on how McD went about it because his mentor is just the opposite in NE.

[MOtorboat]

he needs to back it up and walk the walk. . .

Will anyone give him the time to do it without roasting him?

[Northman]

No not you....or anyone here really.

People on OM are already clammoring that we got ripped off by taking Moreno at #12 because he didnt play last night and that Ayers is a bust because he doesnt have any sacks yet.

Also I am seeing a lot of people say we should have taken Orakpo at 12 because he has played well in one preseason game.

Hence why i love it here. OM is a shitstorm of total meltdown and nonsense. Even with the people who are not happy here at least they bring solid arguements for their cause. Most of the idiots on the Mane are worthless which brings the quality of the site down. Long live BF. :beer:

[dogfish]

Will anyone give him the time to do it without roasting him?


i can't answer for anyone else, but show me my posts where i'm "roasting him?" :noidea: if you read my comments in any of the threads discussing last night's game, they've actually been more positive than what a lot of other people are saying. . .

[MOtorboat]

i can't answer for anyone else, but show me my posts where i'm "roasting him?" :noidea: if you read my comments in any of the threads discussing last night's game, they've actually been more positive than what a lot of other people are saying. . .

I'm sorry, the comment wasn't personal.

[Requiem / The Dagda]

We didn't give up much for Quinn. Two thirds and received a second and a fourth. Quinn was rated as a early third round pick on the WRS value board (compromised of an outlook on where teams rate players) and the Texans were poised to take him with their third round selection and other teams were interested in him as well. We still got two players. Two picks for two picks. Sounds fine to me.

[Northman]

We didn't give up much for Quinn. Two thirds and received a second and a fourth. Quinn was rated as a early third round pick on the WRS value board (compromised of an outlook on where teams rate players) and the Texans were poised to take him with their third round selection and other teams were interested in him as well. We still got two players. Two picks for two picks. Sounds fine to me.

i think we will have to agree to disagree there mate.

[Requiem / The Dagda]

Conventional wisdom in regards to holes: We drafted ten players. That is a lot. A lot of them at places where we needed help or will need help in the future. Not to mention all the undrafted players we brought in. I think we did our job in the draft.

[Requiem / The Dagda]

how frequently do you see teams trade up four times in one draft?

A lot of teams make moves on draft day. I'm not going to bust McDaniels balls or any coaches who is aggressive in the draft. Especially picking up players at positions where we'll need help in those trade ups.

[Tned]

I hate these kind of articles, they are simply puff pieces. This guy is the teams coach, would you expect him to say much else? If you went to a car dealer to look around would you really expect the guy to say "Yeah, that car has good lines, but it handles terrible, is way underpowered, the seats are quite uncomfortable, and it gets 8 miles to the gallon"?

But, the coach is right, his NFL career has been nothing but a stunning success...on a team with a young and already HOF QB, and that QB's name is not "Orton".

Not every coach comes in and says, "I've never been on a losing team, even back to highschool and don't plan to now" or whatever it was he said.

Take lovie smith when he took over the Bears. He said, we have some work ahead of us, I don't know how long it will take, but our first goal is to beat Green Bay, if we do that, it will be a successful season. That might not have been exactly what he said, but it's close.

Many head coaches come in and talk about the fact they have a lot of work ahead of them and it might take some time. McDaniels has set the bar high, but that is his doing, he set the bar, and he will be judged by where he set that bar.

[Tned]

Also, only time will tell (I know, I am a broken record with that phrase) whether or not Smith turns out to be a stud, dud or somewhere in between. But, the fact remains that giving up the first could be a major blow next year if Orton and Simms both bomb.

I know some will say there are plenty of QBs and we can take one late in the first or second and be fine, but that sounds good, but if you want to be set at QB both quickly and for a long time, your odds are much better picking a QB early in the draft. Having two first round picks next year would have given us a lot of flexibility.

If we have 3-5 wins, as many are predicting, that high pick would have either given us a chance to pick a QB, or get value by trading back.

What's done is done, and I have read some good things about Smith, so I am hoping he quickly becomes a good slot/nickel DB and maybe can take over for Goodman after next year if Goodman is as bad as many talking heads think, but that doesn't chance the fact that we might have given up a top 5 pick for him.

[NightTrainLayne]

There's just no satisfying Broncos fans. McD saying that he'd never been on a losing team is simply the truth. Should he make up an alternate version to satisfy us?

Had McD come in and said "we have a lot of work to do" he would have been crucified worse than he has. Most fans would not have accepted that at all. All I've heard since his hire is how close we were to a great team. How we had all the pieces on offense, and just needed to solidify the D-line.

Nobody here who has criticized McD believes that we had a lot of work to do before Shanny was fired. So, by extension those folks certainly wouldn't have accepted any notion of a lot of work to do. McD saying that there is a lot of work to do would have simply been siezed on my these same folks as an admission that he was not the right guy to hire, because, afterall we had all the pieces ready for him.

He's in a no-win situation. He's going to get criticized either way, and by the same negative outlook folks.

[Requiem / The Dagda]

Picking a quarterback in the late first or the second is still early. The number of high pick quarterbacks who bust are quite high. Spending an early pick on a quarterback doesn't guarantee he'll be a good player. If Denver wants to move up and get a quarterback, they can do it. And on trading back. . . How many people have traded down out of the top several picks in the past 10 years? Not many. Broken record indeed.

[Tned]

Picking a quarterback in the late first or the second is still early. The number of high pick quarterbacks who bust are quite high. Spending an early pick on a quarterback doesn't guarantee he'll be a good player. If Denver wants to move up and get a quarterback, they can do it. And on trading back. . . How many people have traded down out of the top several picks in the past 10 years? Not many. Broken record indeed.

Yes, all of that may be true, but you have to agree we have less flexibility by not having our pick.

Further, if this team is as far away from being good as many people think, and best case we are a 3-6 win team, then that pick we gave up has lots of value, whether used or traded.

If on the other hand, McDaniels can put a winning team on the field this year, it isn't as bit a blow, losing that pick.

[Requiem / The Dagda]

Of course we have less flexibility, but not having that pick isn't indicative of a zero-sum game which would state the Broncos can't land a franchise guy or find a quarterback early on. What if Chicago does worse than expected? What if they're a 5-11 team? It's all up in the air right now. The picks we'll have, the progression of our rookies, etc. I just hope for the best. I want this team to be successful, as do all of you.

[Tned]

Of course we have less flexibility, but not having that pick isn't indicative of a zero-sum game which would state the Broncos can't land a franchise guy or find a quarterback early on. What if Chicago does worse than expected? What if they're a 5-11 team? It's all up in the air right now. The picks we'll have, the progression of our rookies, etc. I just hope for the best. I want this team to be successful, as do all of you.

I didn't say using that pick means it can't be done, just that it's a high price to pay, unless the team can win this year.

I brought it up, because it is fairly directly tied to the article in the OP. If you believe that the Broncos can win this year, possibly even make a playoff run, then using that pick for at worst a nickel back, and at best a ball hawk, starting CB, could turn out to be a good move. If on the other hand you think that the Broncos will be a 3-5 win team, as many fans and 'experts' believe, then it is hard to see that as anything other than a VERY steep price to pay -- both in terms of the cost to get Smith, and the resulting reduction in flexibility to fill remaining holes next season.

[Requiem / The Dagda]

If the Broncos win 3-5 games this year and Smith is a starting CB on this team for a long time, it's still a quality trade in my eyes.

[Tned]

If the Broncos win 3-5 games this year and Smith is a starting CB on this team for a long time, it's still a quality trade in my eyes.

I know you view it that way, but many don't. A lot depends on whether he is a starting CB like Goodman or like Bailey or where in the spectrum between him he lands.

[Northman]

Had McD come in and said "we have a lot of work to do" he would have been crucified worse than he has. Most fans would not have accepted that at all. All I've heard since his hire is how close we were to a great team. How we had all the pieces on offense, and just needed to solidify the D-line.

Nobody here who has criticized McD believes that we had a lot of work to do before Shanny was fired. So, by extension those folks certainly wouldn't have accepted any notion of a lot of work to do. McD saying that there is a lot of work to do would have simply been siezed on my these same folks as an admission that he was not the right guy to hire, because, afterall we had all the pieces ready for him.



I know for me that isnt true. I knew there was a lot of work to do. But on the defensive side of the ball. And i think a lot of people felt the same way. I think the general idea was to get a definitive RB to go along with Hillis, maybe another wideout and improve the defense and i think we were set to go. But the defense had a lot of problems starting with the cordinator on down. If McD had said that coming in i would of agreed with him. Now, we definitely have a lot of work to do but now a good portion of that is due to him tearing down the offense in the process. At the very least he should of gone at least 1 year without dismantling the offense because i think he could of saved himself a lot of grief. Now, the expectations are going to be enormous considering he expects to win this year.

[Overtime]

Well, as the old saying goes, there's a first time for everything.

yep because with our horrendous QB situation, and the drafting of No-Show Moreno, we'll be doing a lot of losing this year, and next year too if Orton is still here, and we don't somehow find a way to draft Colt McCoy.

[Requiem / The Dagda]

McCoy? The last thing we need is another noodle arm at QB.

[NightTrainLayne]

McCoy? The last thing we need is another noodle arm at QB.

McCoy's improved his arm-strength quite a bit, but I still don't think he's the answer.