A relative newcomer's point of view

[Tempus Fugit]

Just a few things that I wanted to note here, I was going to post it in a thread, but I didn't want it to get lost.....

When Parcells/Belichick tree members go to new teams, there is usually a period of bloodletting and turmoil as players who don't fit are weeded out. Denver fans are seeing this with Cutler and Marshall: Patriots fans saw it with Terry Glenn, etc....

The same happens in the other direction. These coaches/front office guys also bring along people they feel they can trust. Parcells brought people like Dave Meggett to New England and Pepper Johnson to New York. Pioli brought Vrabel, Cassel and others with him to Kansas City. They know that these players understand what's required of them and will do their best to instill the right mindset in the locker room.

McDaniels has done the same thing here in Denver. The difference is that Denver had a couple of Prima Donnas who thought they were above the team and the coaches. Cutler pouted when Shanahan got the axe and thought he should get to choose who would be the O.C. when the new coach came in. Marshall likes to smack women around and complain about his contract and the team's medical staff (he could have gotten a second opinion).

Having to move Cutler will impact the franchise for years. Cutler may now finally grow up and become what so many Denver fans mistakenly think he already is: a truly top shelf NFL quarterback. Getting back Orton, even with two first round picks, won't remove the sting of that, unless the team lucks into a top shelf QB in the next year or two.

Marshall, on the other hand, would be just a blip if it wasn't for Cutler. After the T.O. nonsense, it's almost expected that some percentage of wide receivers will just get stupid and need to be moved despite their talent. The team could trade Marshall tomorrow and fix that problem with a trade in the next offseason. Really, this is all about Cutler, his butthurt, and the overreaction of his fans

In Kansas City, Brian Waters got all out of joint too:


Chiefs Pro Bowl guard Brian Waters asked the organization Thursday to release or trade him this offseason, according to a source with knowledge of the situation.

Waters asked for his release two days after a brief meeting with new head coach Todd Haley and after being told by first-time general manager Scott Pioli that he had no interest in meeting with Waters, the source said.

Waters, according to the source, was offended and shocked by the arrogance of Haley and Pioli. Waters’ meeting with Haley and follow-up phone conversations confirmed in the nine-year vet’s mind that the negative reports about Haley that he heard from Arizona Cardinals players while at the Pro Bowl were accurate, according to the source.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=203213&highlight=waters

The difference between this incident and the Cutler incident is that Waters didn't lose his mind the way Cutler did. He showed up at the mandatory OTAs (out of shape) and has kept his mouth shut. Mr. Cutler and his agent couldn't find a microphone they didn't love.

K.C. also had problems with its #1 wideout, and Bowe was actually demoted:

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=211731&highlight=bowe+string

Again, the difference was that he didn't act like Marshall has, and he's been working his tail off to win his coach's trust and faith.

Haley is a first time head coach, just as McDaniels is. Unlike McDaniels, he's known to be rude, confrontational and arrogant. Also unlike McDaniels, he wasn't stuck with the same level of clown at the QB and wide receiver positions.

Shanahan let his team collapse around him and McDaniels is now stuck having to fix the problems. Instead of acting every bit as petulant and childish as the QB and WR that they've blindly supported for years, it's time for the Denver fans to stop complaining about the coach and to give him an honest chance to fix the team.

[Dean]

I guess one has to ask the question. Is what he is doing fixing the team?

I can't see it from here and it goes far beyond Cutler and Marshall.

[claymore]

I guess one has to ask the question. Is what he is doing fixing the team?

I can't see it from here and it goes far beyond Cutler and Marshall.

Has there been a successful coach that was a branch off of the Belichick tree?


Romeo Crennel, Cleveland Browns (2005–2008)
Al Groh, New York Jets (2000)
Josh McDaniels, Denver Broncos (2009–present)
Eric Mangini, New York Jets (2006–2008), Cleveland Browns (2009–present)
Nick Saban, Miami Dolphins (2005–2006)
Jim Schwartz, Detroit (2009–present)

That list doesnt jump out at you and scream success.

What I think, is that these guys try and emulate the way Parcells and Belichick treat people before they achieve anything.

You cant do that, you cannot come in being a hard ass when your a 33 year old cherry head coach. Produce a winning season before you purge the team of its best players.

[Tned]

Has anyone that branched off from Belicheck won? I'm not aware of any, so it is hard to say yet if the model is proven, or if Belicheck is just that good.

[claymore]

Has anyone that branched off from Belicheck won? I'm not aware of any, so it is hard to say yet if the model is proven, or if Belicheck is just that good.

I posted the list. It doesnt look good. None have outlived their first contract with their team.

[Tned]

I posted the list. It doesnt look good. None have outlived their first contract with their team.

Duh. I'm still half asleep. I saw the stuff in the quotes, but my brain kind of skipped over it.

Those are all the Parcells guys as well?

Obviously, Parcells has been successful in multiple places. Belicheck, in one. While I hold no real opinion of Belicheck himself, certainly not the negative one many here have always had, I do respect what NE has done, which has been very impressive over the last 10 years or so.

It doesn't seem anyone that has learned under Belicheck has been successful, but at the same time, circumstances can play a big role. Go to a franchise with enough trouble, and a couple bad moves or bad breaks can keep you from getting it back on track.

Anyway, I hope McDaniels is the first successful Belicheck disciple.

[claymore]

Duh. I'm still half asleep. I saw the stuff in the quotes, but my brain kind of skipped over it.

Those are all the Parcells guys as well?

Obviously, Parcells has been successful in multiple places. Belicheck, in one. While I hold no real opinion of Belicheck himself, certainly not the negative one many here have always had, I do respect what NE has done, which has been very impressive over the last 10 years or so.

It doesn't seem anyone that has learned under Belicheck has been successful, but at the same time, circumstances can play a big role. Go to a franchise with enough trouble, and a couple bad moves or bad breaks can keep you from getting it back on track.

Anyway, I hope McDaniels is the first successful Belicheck disciple.

Just Belicheck guys. I would also like to point out that Belicheck hasnt won anything without Brady, like what is said about Shannahan and Elway.

[CoachChaz]

I posted the list. It doesnt look good. None have outlived their first contract with their team.

Look at the franchises they took over. NO ONE wins with the Jets, Browns, Lions or Notre Dame.

[claymore]

Look at the franchises they took over. NO ONE wins with the Jets, Browns, Lions or Notre Dame.

All of those franchises were proud at one time, as was Notre Dame.


Not a single winner as of yet from the belichick tree. JMCD might be different but, If he takes us below 8-8, we know right away.

[NightTrainLayne]

Duh. I'm still half asleep. I saw the stuff in the quotes, but my brain kind of skipped over it.

Those are all the Parcells guys as well?

Obviously, Parcells has been successful in multiple places. Belicheck, in one. While I hold no real opinion of Belicheck himself, certainly not the negative one many here have always had, I do respect what NE has done, which has been very impressive over the last 10 years or so.

It doesn't seem anyone that has learned under Belicheck has been successful, but at the same time, circumstances can play a big role. Go to a franchise with enough trouble, and a couple bad moves or bad breaks can keep you from getting it back on track.

Anyway, I hope McDaniels is the first successful Belicheck disciple.

I was listening to Sirius NFL last week sometime, and they were discussing this topic in relation to McDaniels.

They said that the key for ANY new head coach was to hire a good staff and especially good, experienced Coordinators around him. I believe it was Solomon Wilcotts speaking who said that a lot of Bellichick's disciples have made the mistake of hiring first-time coordinators to be their offensive and defensive coordinators and that for a rookie HC that this amounts to suicide.

He mentioned though, on the other hand, that McDaniels has hired a pretty experienced staff, with both coordinators having coordinating experience, and Nolan even Head Coaching experience.

Wilcotts is certainly not sold on the Cutler trade, but this discussion made it seem as though at least the guys talking at the time (it may not have even been Wilcotts because it's been a week and I didn't write it down at the time) thought that McDaniels had done something that none of the other Bellichick tree had done and that was in hiring a very experienced staff around him.

[CoachChaz]

All of those franchises were proud at one time, as was Notre Dame.


Not a single winner as of yet from the belichick tree. JMCD might be different but, If he takes us below 8-8, we know right away.


Yes they were...but not when those guys were hired.

I have a hard time believing Cowher, Shanny, Lombardi, anyone could make us a winner this year. 7-9 or 6-10 is realistic for anyone in this situation. Growing pains. Storms come before rainbows

[CoachChaz]

I was listening to Sirius NFL last week sometime, and they were discussing this topic in relation to McDaniels.

They said that the key for ANY new head coach was to hire a good staff and especially good, experienced Coordinators around him. I believe it was Solomon Wilcotts speaking who said that a lot of Bellichick's disciples have made the mistake of hiring first-time coordinators to be their offensive and defensive coordinators and that for a rookie HC that this amounts to suicide.

He mentioned though, on the other hand, that McDaniels has hired a pretty experienced staff, with both coordinators having coordinating experience, and Nolan even Head Coaching experience.

Wilcotts is certainly not sold on the Cutler trade, but this discussion made it seem as though at least the guys talking at the time (it may not have even been Wilcotts because it's been a week and I didn't write it down at the time) thought that McDaniels had done something that none of the other Bellichick tree had done and that was in hiring a very experienced staff around him.

Pat Kirwan was talking about the same thing the other day and says he doesnt expect miracles from Denver, but expects the team to improve and become very good each year.

Not that Wilcotts or Kirwan are God, but I'll listen to Kirwan over most of the media idiots

[Dortoh]

Just a few things that I wanted to note here, I was going to post it in a thread, but I didn't want it to get lost.....

When Parcells/Belichick tree members go to new teams, there is usually a period of bloodletting and turmoil as players who don't fit are weeded out. Denver fans are seeing this with Cutler and Marshall: Patriots fans saw it with Terry Glenn, etc....

The same happens in the other direction. These coaches/front office guys also bring along people they feel they can trust. Parcells brought people like Dave Meggett to New England and Pepper Johnson to New York. Pioli brought Vrabel, Cassel and others with him to Kansas City. They know that these players understand what's required of them and will do their best to instill the right mindset in the locker room.

McDaniels has done the same thing here in Denver. The difference is that Denver had a couple of Prima Donnas who thought they were above the team and the coaches. Cutler pouted when Shanahan got the axe and thought he should get to choose who would be the O.C. when the new coach came in. Marshall likes to smack women around and complain about his contract and the team's medical staff (he could have gotten a second opinion).

Having to move Cutler will impact the franchise for years. Cutler may now finally grow up and become what so many Denver fans mistakenly think he already is: a truly top shelf NFL quarterback. Getting back Orton, even with two first round picks, won't remove the sting of that, unless the team lucks into a top shelf QB in the next year or two.

Marshall, on the other hand, would be just a blip if it wasn't for Cutler. After the T.O. nonsense, it's almost expected that some percentage of wide receivers will just get stupid and need to be moved despite their talent. The team could trade Marshall tomorrow and fix that problem with a trade in the next offseason. Really, this is all about Cutler, his butthurt, and the overreaction of his fans

In Kansas City, Brian Waters got all out of joint too:



http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=203213&highlight=waters

The difference between this incident and the Cutler incident is that Waters didn't lose his mind the way Cutler did. He showed up at the mandatory OTAs (out of shape) and has kept his mouth shut. Mr. Cutler and his agent couldn't find a microphone they didn't love.

K.C. also had problems with its #1 wideout, and Bowe was actually demoted:

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=211731&highlight=bowe+string

Again, the difference was that he didn't act like Marshall has, and he's been working his tail off to win his coach's trust and faith.

Haley is a first time head coach, just as McDaniels is. Unlike McDaniels, he's known to be rude, confrontational and arrogant. Also unlike McDaniels, he wasn't stuck with the same level of clown at the QB and wide receiver positions.

Shanahan let his team collapse around him and McDaniels is now stuck having to fix the problems. Instead of acting every bit as petulant and childish as the QB and WR that they've blindly supported for years, it's time for the Denver fans to stop complaining about the coach and to give him an honest chance to fix the team.

You and me have not exactly gotten off on the right foot around here :laugh:

That said I hope you are correct sir. My gut tells me were in deep shit and I honestly hope to find that I've never been more wrong in my life.

[Tned]

Yes they were...but not when those guys were hired.

I have a hard time believing Cowher, Shanny, Lombardi, anyone could make us a winner this year. 7-9 or 6-10 is realistic for anyone in this situation. Growing pains. Storms come before rainbows

In this situation, right now, yes. The team we had at the end of last year, who knows. Since many of us weren't impressed with Slowick, it's hard to imagine how the defense would have gotten better during the offseason, but that was all that was needed to make the Broncos a serious contender.

However, that's not how things panned out.

Since, McDaniels pretty much blew up the team (not meant in a derogatory way, but a descriptive one) and more or less started from scratch, by bringing in some of his own guys, trading the QB, switching to a 3-4 (not to mention a new offensive scheme), will have roughly 11 new starters (13 starters that are either new or playing a new position), I don't think you can expect him to have the same kind of 2009 Shanahn 'might' have had with his 'rebuild on the fly' approach.

McDaniels basically stripped it to its frame, and rebuilt the team from the ground up. Very few teams, if any, that take that approach win right away. Some, never win, and instead the head coach goes three and out, so to speak.

With the changes we have made, and the schedule we face, if we are anywhere in the 6-8 win range, I will consider it a great success by McDaniels, if we are in the 4-5 win range, I will look at that as "you can't be too surprised, with the changes made, it takes time to rebuild". If we are in the 1-3 range, then I think it is truly a failure. Conversly, if with this player/scheme turnover and the schedule, if he manages a winning season, I think it will be a monumental success.

Now, don't get me wrong, if we hadn't rebuilt the team, if Shanny was still here, or even a head coach that decided to "just fix the defense", then I think anything less than a playoff appearance would have been a failure, but with these types of fundamental changes, that should pay dividends down the road, we can't say if he doesn't win this season, he failed.

[claymore]

Yes they were...but not when those guys were hired.

I have a hard time believing Cowher, Shanny, Lombardi, anyone could make us a winner this year. 7-9 or 6-10 is realistic for anyone in this situation. Growing pains. Storms come before rainbows

BS. those guys wouldnt have made the mess JMCD made. The storms before rainbows doesnt work with me.

Making the team worse, will not make it better.

[Dortoh]

I think it is pretty obvious what Josh is trying to accomplish and I honestly dont have any idea if it will work or not. Hell none of us do we all have are opinons and pretty much know where everyone else stands right now.

I think the real danger right now is losing the locker room. IF and IMO its a huge IF this bird is gonna fly every member of the team and FO had better buy into the "system".

[Ravage!!!]

Yes they were...but not when those guys were hired.

I have a hard time believing Cowher, Shanny, Lombardi, anyone could make us a winner this year. 7-9 or 6-10 is realistic for anyone in this situation. Growing pains. Storms come before rainbows

Sure.. with the situation we are in now. BUt you couldn't tell me we were a 6 win team going into this season if Shanahan was still here... or any of those other coaches for that matter... had Cutler not been traded.

McDaniels is the one responsible (yes yes, I believe responsible, we'll save taht ongoing debate for another place/time), but that doesn't mean any of the other coaches would have done the same thing. I feel pretty confident NONE of them would have tried to bring in Cassel over Cutler. I don't think any smart coach would.

Thus we would still have an incredibly dynamic offense with an abundance of talent. We don't know what kind of defensive talent would have been brought in, or the changes. We couldn't believe that we would go into a season with 7 RBs on IR again as well.

Our young offense was good enough to run with anyone in the NFL.

[Northman]

I guess one has to ask the question. Is what he is doing fixing the team?

I can't see it from here and it goes far beyond Cutler and Marshall.


Overnight? No. But then again i highly doubt he was put in place to fix it in one day.

[Mike]

Sure.. with the situation we are in now. BUt you couldn't tell me we were a 6 win team going into this season if Shanahan was still here... or any of those other coaches for that matter... had Cutler not been traded.

McDaniels is the one responsible (yes yes, I believe responsible, we'll save taht ongoing debate for another place/time), but that doesn't mean any of the other coaches would have done the same thing. I feel pretty confident NONE of them would have tried to bring in Cassel over Cutler. I don't think any smart coach would.

Thus we would still have an incredibly dynamic offense with an abundance of talent. We don't know what kind of defensive talent would have been brought in, or the changes. We couldn't believe that we would go into a season with 7 RBs on IR again as well.

Our young offense was good enough to run with anyone in the NFL.

We know Slowick would have been here, which speaks volumes. We also have several years of history to see how the defense would be addressed.

Our young offense was good enough to run with anyone in the NFL, just not put points up.

Denver was a lot worse than their record showed last year. Likely, the team would have been 8-8, 7-9 this season. Which is better than they will probably finish under McD, but still out of the playoffs either way.

[CoachChaz]

Sure.. with the situation we are in now. BUt you couldn't tell me we were a 6 win team going into this season if Shanahan was still here... or any of those other coaches for that matter... had Cutler not been traded.

McDaniels is the one responsible (yes yes, I believe responsible, we'll save taht ongoing debate for another place/time), but that doesn't mean any of the other coaches would have done the same thing. I feel pretty confident NONE of them would have tried to bring in Cassel over Cutler. I don't think any smart coach would.

Thus we would still have an incredibly dynamic offense with an abundance of talent. We don't know what kind of defensive talent would have been brought in, or the changes. We couldn't believe that we would go into a season with 7 RBs on IR again as well.

Our young offense was good enough to run with anyone in the NFL.

Well, we won 8 games last year with a reasonable schedule. Take that team and give it this years schedule and I think being a 6 win team is a possibility. Dont forget we were given gifts by Hochuli and a certain Saints kicker. otherwise...we were a 6 win team last year.

[Kaylore]

I guess one has to ask the question. Is what he is doing fixing the team?

I can't see it from here and it goes far beyond Cutler and Marshall.

The answer: We don't know yet so quit whining about it.

My biggest problems with the McDaniels haters are 1) They won't give him space to do his thing and 2) They are in complete denial with how crappy we were last year.

For the past three years we've been below average. We've been in the teens offensively and the 20's defensively and the bottom of the league in special teams. We suffered the worst melt down in NFL history after loosing to a team we should have beat. We lost at home to the 4 win Jags, the 5 win Raiders and were one of the Chiefs 2 wins. That's to say nothing of our nationally televised beat downs like @San Diego and @New England where we didn't even look like we belonged on the field.

Yet the McDaniels haters talk about him "ruining the team."

http://www.sconefest.com/john/blog/harris-hurst.jpg

"What Team!??! NOBODY plays!"

If it was the end of the year and we were getting any better then I'd get the anger, but I think this is people too comfortable with Shanahan and typical Mile High QB worship. The team sucked. It needed to be gutted. No one is pointing out how we have had more sacks in preseason then we had all of last year or how our special teams is light years better than it played last year already. Or how we look physical and have been in every game. You look at teams like Oakland who get beat out of their own house and at least we're hanging around.

I see a team that is becoming more tough, and more fundamentally sound. The team's football IQ is going up. We don't have Jamie Winborn dancing on the field after a six yard tackle after they get the first down. Training camp is hard again and we finally have some assistant coaches who here because they are qualified teachers of football and not nepotistic place holders with their finger up butt collecting a pay check.

I see more that I like than I don't and I see a team that needed, and is getting a rebuild. I want McDaniels to be allowed to do his rebuild before I get my pitchfork out.

[claymore]

The answer: We don't know yet so quit whining about it.

My biggest problems with the McDaniels haters are 1) They won't give him space to do his thing and 2) They are in complete denial with how crappy we were last year.

For the past three years we've been below average. We've been in the teens offensively and the 20's defensively and the bottom of the league in special teams. We suffered the worst melt down in NFL history after loosing to a team we should have beat. We lost at home to the 4 win Jags, the 5 win Raiders and were one of the Chiefs 2 wins. That's to say nothing of our nationally televised beat downs like @San Diego and @New England where we didn't even look like we belonged on the field.

Yet the McDaniels haters talk about him "ruining the team."

http://www.sconefest.com/john/blog/harris-hurst.jpg

"What Team!??! NOBODY plays!"

If it was the end of the year and we were getting any better then I'd get the anger, but I think this is people too comfortable with Shanahan and typical Mile High QB worship. The team sucked. It needed to be gutted. No one is pointing out how we have had more sacks in preseason then we had all of last year or how our special teams is light years better than it played last year already. Or how we look physical and have been in every game. You look at teams like Oakland who get beat out of their own house and at least we're hanging around.

I see a team that is becoming more tough, and more fundamentally sound. The team's football IQ is going up. We don't have Jamie Winborn dancing on the field after a six yard tackle after they get the first down. Training camp is hard again and we finally have some assistant coaches who here because they are qualified teachers of football and not nepotistic place holders with their finger up butt collecting a pay check.

I see more that I like than I don't and I see a team that needed, and is getting a rebuild. I want McDaniels to be allowed to do his rebuild before I get my pitchfork out.
Shannahan needed to go I agree with that. But nobody here thought at any point that the reason we were bad was Jay Cutler or Brandon Marshall.

It was our Defense and ST's.

We all thought that we had an offense that was pretty much set besides the running back position.

I am pissed because McDaniels blew up the only thing we had. He makes the decisions, he gets the blame.

I think its silly to believe our defense will play as hard as they did on Sunday if our offense cannot score TD's.

IMO the players that bought into the Patriots West mentality need to see wins in order for them to keep believing.

IMO this team is worse than it was last year. JMCD would have to be one special coach to be able to win 8 games with this offense. If he does, than I will buy in as well.

But until then he deserves the ridicule he has received.

[Ravage!!!]

We know Slowick would have been here, which speaks volumes. We also have several years of history to see how the defense would be addressed.

Our young offense was good enough to run with anyone in the NFL, just not put points up.

Denver was a lot worse than their record showed last year. Likely, the team would have been 8-8, 7-9 this season. Which is better than they will probably finish under McD, but still out of the playoffs either way.

They DIDN'T put the points up, but that doesn't mean that wouldn't improve with the maturation of players.. not to mention the probability of RBs staying somewhat healthy.... if not healthier.

I'm not defending the choice of Slowick...but that doesn't mean we wouldn't have improved.. OR.. improved in some places as far as talent.

So no... I think our team last year was BETTER than the record showed...not worse by ANY means.

[Ravage!!!]

Well, we won 8 games last year with a reasonable schedule. Take that team and give it this years schedule and I think being a 6 win team is a possibility. Dont forget we were given gifts by Hochuli and a certain Saints kicker. otherwise...we were a 6 win team last year.

we also gave away games that we shouldn't have. So you can't simply take the games given to us and not TAKE the games we gave away... ifyou are going to throw out guesses.

[claymore]

I think it is pretty obvious what Josh is trying to accomplish and I honestly dont have any idea if it will work or not. Hell none of us do we all have are opinons and pretty much know where everyone else stands right now.

I think the real danger right now is losing the locker room. IF and IMO its a huge IF this bird is gonna fly every member of the team and FO had better buy into the "system".

The system has to work for that to happen. Things can go from bad to worse once we start losing.

First three games are so crucial.

[CoachChaz]

The system has to work for that to happen. Things can go from bad to worse once we start losing.

First three games are so crucial.

I think you have it backwatds. NO system will be successful until the players buy into it first. Based on recent history, I dont see where any of them have any reason not to believe it works.

[claymore]

I think you have it backwatds. NO system will be successful until the players buy into it first. Based on recent history, I dont see where any of them have any reason not to believe it works.

What I meant was it has to work for them to continue to believe. If they half ass believe and lose at first, they wont continue to half ass believe. They need to win to fully buy into this.

[CoachChaz]

What I meant was it has to work for them to continue to believe. If they half ass believe and lose at first, they wont continue to half ass believe. They need to win to fully buy into this.

Again, they have to completely buy into the system before it works at all. if they halfway buy into it..it will halfway work and that just wont cut it.

[Kaylore]

Shannahan needed to go I agree with that. But nobody here thought at any point that the reason we were bad was Jay Cutler or Brandon Marshall.

It was our Defense and ST's.

We all thought that we had an offense that was pretty much set besides the running back position.
This is the biggest myth there is. We finished sixteenth in scoring. If you take out the first few games of the year we finished 24th. We racked up a ton of yards because our defense sucked so bad we were throwing every down. It wasn't all our running back injuries, either. It was Cutler being one of the worst redzone QB's in the league, and us being one of the worst giveaway teams in the league. That's not something a running back can fix. That's a team deficiency. When McDaniels explained this to him, Cutler got pissed because he, like you, wrongly believed he was perfect and "not the problem" and was looking for a way out.


I am pissed because McDaniels blew up the only thing we had. He makes the decisions, he gets the blame.
No he didn't! Where are you getting this? Most of the best and most important parts of our offense, Bobby Turner, Rick Dennison, Clady, Kuper, Wiegmann, Harris, Hamilton, Royal, Stokely, Graham, Scheffler and even whiner boy, are all still here. He added some good running backs. That's hardly "blown up."


I think its silly to believe our defense will play as hard as they did on Sunday if our offense cannot score TD's.
Based on what? They're already way better than last year.


IMO the players that bought into the Patriots West mentality need to see wins in order for them to keep believing.
I agree, winning will help.


IMO this team is worse than it was last year.
Again, based on what? What crap hole are you pulling this out of? One QB? Cutler didn't play special teams or defense. How did we get worse at every other position by trading away a QB despite upgrading the running backs, secondary, linebackers, coaches and increased the size on the front seven? How can we look better on defense and special teams and you still throw a tantrum "this team is worse" than last year?


But until then he deserves the ridicule he has received.
Stupid comment based purely on your personal anger. He doesn't deserve either praise or criticism until the team hits the field and the final product is on display. You're like a little kid who won't eat a new dish because he "doesn't like it" even though he's never tasted it and is just scared of something new.

[Lonestar]

Again, they have to completely buy into the system before it works at all. if they halfway buy into it..it will halfway work and that just wont cut it..


as we saw with the Jim Bates trial.. they did not buy in because they liked slowitt more..

[Kaylore]

They DIDN'T put the points up, but that doesn't mean that wouldn't improve with the maturation of players.. not to mention the probability of RBs staying somewhat healthy.... if not healthier.

I'm not defending the choice of Slowick...but that doesn't mean we wouldn't have improved.. OR.. improved in some places as far as talent.

So no... I think our team last year was BETTER than the record showed...not worse by ANY means.

No, we sucked. What good teams did we beat? In what way did we show we were better than our record? Was it when we became the first team to lost a 3-game division lead with the three games to spare? was it when we got raped by the Patriots on national television? Or was it when we got beat down by the two win Chiefs? Or maybe it was when we barely beat them at home? Was it when we lost to the Raiders at home? Or was it when we lost the Bills? Or how about 4 win Jacksonville at home? When we imploded against them did we show our stuff?

We lost to crappy teams and got obliterated by good ones. Sure, we had our moments like against the average Jets and Browns. However ultimately there is no evidence at all that we were, as you say, "better than our record" last year. None. Many of our loses were by double digits, and all but one of our wins were by the skin of our teeth. And your assumption that with Slowick somehow we magically would get better is baseless as well. All evidence suggests that we would continue the trend we had established since Kubiak left town; Lots of yardage, not a lot of points, poor defense, no turnovers, below average special teams, and a generally soft, finesse team that leads the league in soft tissue injuries in the preseason.

Shanahan had shown that he didn't know how to draft players for defensive and our horrible coaching staff was so inept that even if we found a gem, we wouldn't be able to develop them. We gave the ball away the most and took it away the least. We imploded in the redzone and couldn't make plays in the clutch. We sucked, and Bronco fans are in complete denial about it.

[Lonestar]

This is the biggest myth there is. We finished sixteenth in scoring. If you take out the first few games of the year we finished 24th. We racked up a ton of yards because our defense sucked so bad we were throwing every down. It wasn't all our running back injuries, either. It was Cutler being one of the worst redzone QB's in the league, and us being one of the worst giveaway teams in the league. That's not something a running back can fix. That's a team deficiency. When McDaniels explained this to him, Cutler got pissed because he, like you, wrongly believed he was perfect and "not the problem" and was looking for a way out.


No he didn't! Where are you getting this? Most of the best and most important parts of our offense, Bobby Turner, Rick Dennison, Clady, Kuper, Wiegmann, Harris, Hamilton, Royal, Stokely, Graham, Scheffler and even whiner boy, are all still here. He added some good running backs. That's hardly "blown up."


Based on what? They're already way better than last year.


I agree, winning will help.


Again, based on what? What crap hole are you pulling this out of? One QB? Cutler didn't play special teams or defense. How did we get worse at every other position by trading away a QB despite upgrading the running backs, secondary, linebackers, coaches and increased the size on the front seven? How can we look better on defense and special teams and you still throw a tantrum "this team is worse" than last year?


Stupid comment based purely on your personal anger. He doesn't deserve either praise or criticism until the team hits the field and the final product is on display. You're like a little kid who won't eat a new dish because he "doesn't like it" even though he's never tasted it and is just scared of something new.


good post but most folks expected Josh to come in here and KEEP mikes offense because they were #2 in yards last year..

I think if anyone would stop and really think about that I know of NO new HC that came in and learned the old system so he would not upset the existing team..

[Kaylore]

good post but most folks expected Josh to come in here and KEEP mikes offense because they were #2 in yards last year..

I think if anyone would stop and really think about that I know of NO new HC that came in and learned the old system so he would not upset the existing team..
That's another thing people want to do that is a huge error: Hiring a head coach to fix how a team is in that condition. You a hire a head coach to be a good head coach under any circumstance because a team's circumstances change from year to year. And that's what the Broncos did.

This "Don't touch the offense and just fix the defense and we go to the super bowl" crap that people were telling each other was the biggest bunch of hooey being passed around Bronco fans. A good coach has an eye on everything and has a plan to address it.

[claymore]

That's another thing people want to do that is a huge error: Hiring a head coach to fix how a team is in that condition. You a hire a head coach to be a good head coach under any circumstance because a team's circumstances change from year to year. And that's what the Broncos did.

This "Don't touch the offense and just fix the defense and we go to the super bowl" crap that people were telling each other was the biggest bunch of hooey being passed around Bronco fans. A good coach has an eye on everything and has a plan to address it.

You hire a new coach to win. If we lose more than 8 games you guys are wrong. If we win more than 8 games Im wrong. That is the great thing about this situation.


We will all have an answer.

[CoachChaz]

You hire a new coach to win. If we lose more than 8 games you guys are wrong. If we win more than 8 games Im wrong. That is the great thing about this situation.


We will all have an answer.

Maybe I'm of the minority (doubt it), but I'd hire a new coach to change the mentality and reshape the direction and course of a regularly mediocre team. I also understand that results arent achieved immediately.

[claymore]

Maybe I'm of the minority (doubt it), but I'd hire a new coach to change the mentality and reshape the direction and course of a regularly mediocre team. I also understand that results arent achieved immediately.

Would you hire a coach to lose more games?

[Lonestar]

You hire a new coach to win. If we lose more than 8 games you guys are wrong. If we win more than 8 games Im wrong. That is the great thing about this situation.


We will all have an answer.


just curious why you have this magical #8 wins on your mind.. as the fail point..

[Mike]

You hire a new coach to win. If we lose more than 8 games you guys are wrong. If we win more than 8 games Im wrong. That is the great thing about this situation.


We will all have an answer.

Asinine logic considering it is a new headcoach with new players and a new system. If you continue to have such expectations this year you will be disappointed.

Give the guy more than 1 season before you rush to judgement. He is going to be here at least that long, so either you deal with it or it will be hell supporting the Broncos over the next few seasons.

[NightTrainLayne]

You hire a new coach to win. If we lose more than 8 games you guys are wrong. If we win more than 8 games Im wrong. That is the great thing about this situation.


We will all have an answer.

Remember back in the nineties when the Cowboys were the cream of the crop?

Jimmy Johnson won two super bowls and then decided to retire.

At the time, everyone and their mother believed that virtually anyone could win the Super Bowl with the talent that JJ had put together.

Before you read any further. .. keep in mind that I am a big OU fan.

So, why 5 years later were the Cowboys at the bottom of the barrell again? Why have they not won a playoff game since the Nineties glory years?

Why?

Because Jerry Jones hired a care-taker coach named Barry Switzer. Switzer did a fine job of taking Jimmy Johnsons players and after a year won another Super Bowl.

And then Switzer did a smart thing and retired too, because he really wasn't an NFL coach.

And since then, the Cowboys haven't been successful again. A round-robin of several different coaching staffs, but none of the success they had in the Nineties.

Why? Because Jerry Jones traded short-term success with a care-taker coach who wasn't going to rock the Aikman/Smith/Irvin boat and let them win another super bowl, for a long-term plan with a real NFL coach with a long-term plan for what to do after those guys were gone.

The result was another SB win, but then a decade of sub-par performance in salary-cap hell.

Here, we're asking the new HC to be a "care-taker" of an offense that ranked 16th in points scored, and possibly the worst defense in NFL history, and only revamp the defense, and expect a Super Bowl.

I'm sorry, but Jerry Jones was wrong to hire Switzer as a care-taker, and Bowlen would have been just as wrong to hire a care-taker here.

[Dortoh]

No, we sucked. What good teams did we beat? In what way did we show we were better than our record? Was it when we became the first team to lost a 3-game division lead with the three games to spare? was it when we got raped by the Patriots on national television? Or was it when we got beat down by the two win Chiefs? Or maybe it was when we barely beat them at home? Was it when we lost to the Raiders at home? Or was it when we lost the Bills? Or how about 4 win Jacksonville at home? When we imploded against them did we show our stuff?

We lost to crappy teams and got obliterated by good ones. Sure, we had our moments like against the average Jets and Browns. However ultimately there is no evidence at all that we were, as you say, "better than our record" last year. None. Many of our loses were by double digits, and all but one of our wins were by the skin of our teeth. And your assumption that with Slowick somehow we magically would get better is baseless as well. All evidence suggests that we would continue the trend we had established since Kubiak left town; Lots of yardage, not a lot of points, poor defense, no turnovers, below average special teams, and a generally soft, finesse team that leads the league in soft tissue injuries in the preseason.

Shanahan had shown that he didn't know how to draft players for defensive and our horrible coaching staff was so inept that even if we found a gem, we wouldn't be able to develop them. We gave the ball away the most and took it away the least. We imploded in the redzone and couldn't make plays in the clutch. We sucked, and Bronco fans are in complete denial about it.

Ouch thats going to leave more then a few marks.

Yet it does not change the fact that McD has made some rookie HC mistakes IMO

I'm actually good with the Shanny release and hopeful that McD will become a good coach for us. None of that changes the fact that he did take a huge step back when he lost Jay regardless of who is at fault. He is the leader and the buck stops with him.

[claymore]

Asinine logic considering it is a new headcoach with new players and a new system. If you continue to have such expectations this year you will be disappointed.

Give the guy more than 1 season before you rush to judgement. He is going to be here at least that long, so either you deal with it or it will be hell supporting the Broncos over the next few seasons.
So, what is defined as a personal attack? Anyone that has an opinion that differs with pro JMCD members seems to include harsh tones like yours. Should I report it, or can I call someone a freaking moron for thinking that hiring a coach to lose more games than you did the year before is a great Idea.

I can assure you Bowlen doesnt feel that its best for the organization to only win 4-7 games this year.

I understand the point you guys are trying to get across. I disagree with it, but i do not get personal.


Remember back in the nineties when the Cowboys were the cream of the crop?

Jimmy Johnson won two super bowls and then decided to retire.

At the time, everyone and their mother believed that virtually anyone could win the Super Bowl with the talent that JJ had put together.

Before you read any further. .. keep in mind that I am a big OU fan.

So, why 5 years later were the Cowboys at the bottom of the barrell again? Why have they not won a playoff game since the Nineties glory years?

Why?

Because Jerry Jones hired a care-taker coach named Barry Switzer. Switzer did a fine job of taking Jimmy Johnsons players and after a year won another Super Bowl.

And then Switzer did a smart thing and retired too, because he really wasn't an NFL coach.

And since then, the Cowboys haven't been successful again. A round-robin of several different coaching staffs, but none of the success they had in the Nineties.

Why? Because Jerry Jones traded short-term success with a care-taker coach who wasn't going to rock the Aikman/Smith/Irvin boat and let them win another super bowl, for a long-term plan with a real NFL coach with a long-term plan for what to do after those guys were gone.

The result was another SB win, but then a decade of sub-par performance in salary-cap hell.

Here, we're asking the new HC to be a "care-taker" of an offense that ranked 16th in points scored, and possibly the worst defense in NFL history, and only revamp the defense, and expect a Super Bowl.

I'm sorry, but Jerry Jones was wrong to hire Switzer as a care-taker, and Bowlen would have been just as wrong to hire a care-taker here.

There was more to the Jimmy Johnson firing. It involved JJ getting Drunk and talking smack to Jerry, or vice versa.

Noone has ever said it was a good Idea to fire Johnson. And Ive never said it was a bad Idea to fire Shannhan.

I said it was a bad Idea for JMCD to come in and replace the face of the franchise before he ever won a game.

[Tempus Fugit]

Ouch thats going to leave more then a few marks.

Yet it does not change the fact that McD has made some rookie HC mistakes IMO

I'm actually good with the Shanny release and hopeful that McD will become a good coach for us. None of that changes the fact that he did take a huge step back when he lost Jay regardless of who is at fault. He is the leader and the buck stops with him.

No offense to you, but I'm getting tired of the "rookie mistakes" assertions. It avoids response by being completely noncommittal even as it serves as a dig against the guy. Every head coach makes mistakes, every year. Every person on the planet makes mistakes. It's part of being human.

McDaniels has had months to look at the Cutler situation. Cutler threw out the "both sides made mistakes that I'm sure they'd change" and McDaniels gave that line the one finger salute. His response when asked about it during the Broncos/Bears broadcast was to say that he wouldn't change anything he'd done in that scenario. Nobody knows what 'rookie mistakes' Bowlen was talking about. If it was about Cutler, though, he'd better convince McDaniels that there were mistakes there, because the new coach doesn't seem to buy into that theory.

Now, having pointed that out, I'd love to hear about the "rookie mistakes" you think McDaniels made. Could you kindly list them?

[Kaylore]

You hire a new coach to win. If we lose more than 8 games you guys are wrong. If we win more than 8 games Im wrong. That is the great thing about this situation.


We will all have an answer.

No. You hire a new coach build a system that consistently produces success. The system doesn't show up overnight. You need the right personnel and the right coaches to make that work. We are currently assembling those pieces and it will take a season to see what's working and what isn't and an offseason to fill those holes. If the team is improving and the parts are coming together then we're moving in the right direction.

Pointing to just wins in loses in the first year of rebuilding as proof that coach did well or poorly is only one factor to be considered. I want to see the team play physically, get better as the season moves along, and play our best football in December - all things we did not do in recent history. Now if we win two or three games, I'll be the first to suggest that McDaniels is in trouble. However I also understand the situation and recognize that to build something substantive in terms of system of role players that work cohesively to make each unit function takes more than one offseason at least, and expect some growing pains as all the new pieces learn the new system.


Ouch thats going to leave more then a few marks.

Yet it does not change the fact that McD has made some rookie HC mistakes IMO

I'm actually good with the Shanny release and hopeful that McD will become a good coach for us. None of that changes the fact that he did take a huge step back when he lost Jay regardless of who is at fault. He is the leader and the buck stops with him.
There's no question that McD has made mistakes. He'll probably make some more. I'm willing to be patient with a rookie head coach. I've said before the Cutler situation was compounded by a rookie HC and GM on watch at the same time.

I think we took a step back at the QB position, and I think everywhere else we've taken steps forward. Some are bigger than others, but I can point to every position on the team and see improvement from last year to this year.

[Dortoh]

No offense to you, but I'm getting tired of the "rookie mistakes" assertions. It avoids response by being completely noncommittal even as it serves as a dig against the guy. Every head coach makes mistakes, every year. Every person on the planet makes mistakes. It's part of being human.

McDaniels has had months to look at the Cutler situation. Cutler threw out the "both sides made mistakes that I'm sure they'd change" and McDaniels gave that line the one finger salute. His response when asked about it during the Broncos/Bears broadcast was to say that he wouldn't change anything he'd done in that scenario. Nobody knows what 'rookie mistakes' Bowlen was talking about. If it was about Cutler, though, he'd better convince McDaniels that there were mistakes there, because the new coach doesn't seem to buy into that theory.

Now, having pointed that out, I'd love to hear about the "rookie mistakes" you think McDaniels made. Could you kindly list them?

Actually I think we should go into business together. Screw this arguing crap. I will get a load of coal and shove it up your ass. Your so anal that in a week I bet we will be in the diamond business.

Ok I guess this is going to get me into trouble but I'm starting to fear you are a stalker :shocked:

[Kaylore]

So, what is defined as a personal attack? Anyone that has an opinion that differs with pro JMCD members seems to include harsh tones like yours.
If you think what someone said is stupid, then attack the comment. Always attack the comment, not the poster.

[Dortoh]

If you think what someone said is stupid, then attack the comment. Always attack the comment, not the poster.

Nice timing thanks :laugh:

[Kaylore]

.


as we saw with the Jim Bates trial.. they did not buy in because they liked slowitt more..

And we all saw how much liking the coordinator helped. They liked Slowick because he undermined Coyer and Bates by making them the bad guy and then went easy on them in practice. The result was a soft defense that thought their coordinator was a really cool guy. Woopty-freaking-doo!

[Tempus Fugit]

Actually I think we should go into business together. Screw this arguing crap. I will get a load of coal and shove it up your ass. Your so anal that in a week I bet we will be in the diamond business.

Ok I guess this is going to get me into trouble but I'm starting to fear you are a stalker :shocked:

Great. I hope we get rich.

Now, could you kindly list those rookie mistakes?





P.S. as for stalking you..... I started this thread for crying out loud. Do you expect me not to read it afterwards and respond as I feel appropriate?

[Dortoh]

Great. I hope we get rich.

Now, could you kindly list those rookie mistakes?





P.S. as for stalking you..... I started this thread for crying out loud. Do you expect me not to read it afterwards and respond as I feel appropriate?

Nah I'm just being a smart ass.

Look one mistake would be letting your Pro Bowl QB out of town. If anything he should have handled Cutler like he is Brandon.

[Northman]

No offense to you, but I'm getting tired of the "rookie mistakes" assertions. It avoids response by being completely noncommittal even as it serves as a dig against the guy. Every head coach makes mistakes, every year. Every person on the planet makes mistakes. It's part of being human.

McDaniels has had months to look at the Cutler situation. Cutler threw out the "both sides made mistakes that I'm sure they'd change" and McDaniels gave that line the one finger salute. His response when asked about it during the Broncos/Bears broadcast was to say that he wouldn't change anything he'd done in that scenario. Nobody knows what 'rookie mistakes' Bowlen was talking about. If it was about Cutler, though, he'd better convince McDaniels that there were mistakes there, because the new coach doesn't seem to buy into that theory.

Now, having pointed that out, I'd love to hear about the "rookie mistakes" you think McDaniels made. Could you kindly list them?

Yea, i think if there was any issue in that senario it hangs on Bowlens head. I think Bowlen was trying to ride the fence with both of them but then when he tried to correct it Jay wasnt having any part of it. I think the Anti-McDaniels crowd is throwing their anger at the wrong guy. Bowlen comes out and says he is going to take a more hands on approach to his team and then makes statements that he has to come back and explain one way or the other. But, at the same time those are the same things that Jay should of gone to Bowlen and cleared up and not pout and whine his way out of town.

[Northman]

Nah I'm just being a smart ass.

Look one mistake would be letting your Pro Bowl QB out of town. If anything he should have handled Cutler like he is Brandon.

Different senarios and different value. If Brandon's issue was taking place before the draft i can guarantee you he would already be gone.

[Dortoh]

Ok Tempus how do you like giving up a future #1 for an undersized nickel corner?

How about IMO mishandling Cutlergate
How about baiting your star Wr into a meltdown so you can suspend him.
How about his inability to sit down one on one with Jay and not have Jay leave asking for a trade. Seems as thou his "my shit dont stink, high horse" personality is a turn off to players. He needs to learn how to handle different folks IE one glove does not fit all when dealing with human beings.

How about bringing in a long snapper for more $ when the position was a strength to start with. The new guy might be great but that didnt help in the locker room I'd bet money on it.

Most important IMO is he needs to learn some people skills

[Kaylore]

Ok Tempus how do you like giving up a future #1 for an undersized nickel corner?

How about IMO mishandling Cutlergate
How about baiting your star Wr into a meltdown so you can suspend him.
How about his inability to sit down one on one with Jay and not have Jay leave asking for a trade. Seems as thou his "my shit dont stink, high horse" personality is a turn off to players. He needs to learn how to handle different folks IE one glove does not fit all when dealing with human beings.

How about bringing in a long snapper for more $ when the position was a strength to start with. The new guy might be great but that didnt help in the locker room I'd bet money on it.

Most important IMO is he needs to learn some people skills
You listed Jay twice and then, just to be clear, tried to argue that Marshall's immaturity is McDaniels fault for "baiting him," Which in my opinion is the stupidest take on this Marshall fiasco going around.

I agree on how Cutlergate was handled. I think could have done a better job. But I put all the blame on Cutler. And I agree on Paxton. That was a stupid, expensive move. I also agree that we overspent for the players we drafted, but I took some solace in the fact that the players we took were good players. Really though, the jury on that will be out until a few seasons from now. So you've got Cutlergate and Paxton as rookie errors. And Paxton/kicking Leach is an example of a coach that brings "his guys" into a team and estranges the ones that aren't. And frankly that is not a rookie coach thing, that's just a coaching change things.

[Northman]

Tempus will probably answer, but ill answer as well.


Ok Tempus how do you like giving up a future #1 for an undersized nickel corner?

I didnt like it because i thought we could get another decent DB later in the round if necessary. However, i have seen some things ive liked from Smith and i think he will be Bailey's eventual replacement. Time will tell.


How about IMO mishandling Cutlergate

It was handled badly by everyone involved. But the onus is on the guy who was the leader of the team to show that leadership and bite his tongue and practice what he preached which was to play for his teammates, not ask for a trade.


How about baiting your star Wr into a meltdown so you can suspend him.

Brandon was already asking for a trade so in reality, why waste time putting him with the starters if he doesnt plan on being there much longer? Other receivers who are there need the practice more.


How about his inability to sit down one on one with Jay and not have Jay leave asking for a trade.

He tried that but Cutler needed his babysitter Cook there which defeated his purpose.


Seems as thou his "my shit dont stink, high horse" personality is a turn off to players.

It is? Or just to players who personalities are just as egotistical and hardheaded?


Most important IMO is he needs to learn some people skills

He will probably learn as time goes on, but im sure he also takes solace in the fact that NE never put up with prima donnas acting like jackasses and going beyond the "team" concept which is why he has a very low tolerance

[Tempus Fugit]

Ok Tempus how do you like giving up a future #1 for an undersized nickel corner?

1.) The Patriots have gone with a lot of shorter corners because they want quickness over height. McDaniels is doing the same thing. I don't consider Smith undersized when it's part of a deliberate decision.

2.) Why would I have a problem trading a future pick that's one round higher than the received pick? It happens all the time. What's even funnier to me is the panic about "What if Denver sucks and it's a top pick?" when all we heard leading up to the last draft was about how the teams at the top wanted to get out of their because the contracts are ridiculous. People are acting as if this stuff never happens because they want to bash McDaniels. I've got news for people: McDaniels is not the first to do this, and good teams (Panthers) have used this approach. People may wish to take notice that Belichick traded out of the 1st round and used 4 second round picks this past draft. It's just possible that there was value in that second round.

3.) The Broncos still have a first round pick for next season.


How about IMO mishandling Cutlergate

You are making an assertion here when you don't know the facts. McDaniels says that he wouldn't change how he handled the Cutler situation. Either he's clueless about his mistake, too stubborn to admit to a mistake, or not guilty of making the 'mistake'. Given that it was Bowlen who pulled the trigger when Cutler wouldn't return his calls, blaming McDaniels seems more than just a little bit silly.


How about baiting your star Wr into a meltdown so you can suspend him.

How did McDaniels 'bait' his star wr? Was it when he didn't crucify him for being a jerk and skipping the OTAs? Was it when he didn't misdiagnose Marshall's injury? Was it when he didn't commit battery against women and end up in court right next to Marshall? Was it when he defended Marshall about the 'playbook' kerfuffle?


How about his inability to sit down one on one with Jay and not have Jay leave asking for a trade. Seems as thou his "my shit dont stink, high horse" personality is a turn off to players. He needs to learn how to handle different folks IE one glove does not fit all when dealing with human beings.

Umm..... go back and look at the comments that were published during the time this stuff was all going down. McDaniels publicly stated that he tried to have one-to-one sit downs with Cutler. Cutler and his agent wouldn't allow it to happen. If you consider this a 'mistake', kindly send McDaniels a blueprint for kidnapping Cutler without criminal liability.

As for his personality, you know nothing about it. Oddly enough, Rodney Harrison, a former player who's shown no reticence about speaking his mind, gave McDaniels glowing reports about his personality even as he was calling the Cutler trade a mistake.


How about bringing in a long snapper for more $ when the position was a strength to start with. The new guy might be great but that didnt help in the locker room I'd bet money on it.

"The new guy" knew what was going to be required of the players on the team. Coaches who come from other teams frequently like to bring in some of the players from that team to help with the transition. "The new guy" is among the very best in the league at his position, is a hard worker, and was a free agent.


Most important IMO is he needs to learn some people skills

Says you from a position of ignorance as a complete outsider. See the earlier comment regarding an insider named Harrison.

[Tned]

good post but most folks expected Josh to come in here and KEEP mikes offense because they were #2 in yards last year..

I think if anyone would stop and really think about that I know of NO new HC that came in and learned the old system so he would not upset the existing team..

Other than a few people that felt McDaniels was making a mistake throwing out the ZBS, I don't know of anyone that expected McDaniels to adopt Shanahans offense. Maybe one or two posters said that, but I have never seen that as a prevelant belief.

Possibly keep Bates, who was close to Cutler, and could be mentored the way McDaniels was mentored by Belicheck? sure. But, that is a far cry from saying that McDaniels should adopt the offense of the departed coach. I have never seen this stated.

[CoachChaz]

Keep in mind, the ZBS is like any other offensive scheme. Eventually defenses figure it out. Something that has been happening SIGNIFICANTLY with the ZBS for those that pay attention to defensive schemes.

Another year or so and the ZBS will be dead in the NFL

[Ravage!!!]

More teams are adopting the ZBS than those that are not using it anymore. I think three teams adopted it this year. Good blocking is like any other scheme. It works if the players execute. Defenses may 'understand' everything there is to understand about the opposing offense, but that doesn't mean they can keep them from executing the play.

[TXBRONC]

good post but most folks expected Josh to come in here and KEEP mikes offense because they were #2 in yards last year..

I think if anyone would stop and really think about that I know of NO new HC that came in and learned the old system so he would not upset the existing team..

Barry Switzer did just that. He changed nothing when he became the head coach of the Cowboys.

[TXBRONC]

Other than a few people that felt McDaniels was making a mistake throwing out the ZBS, I don't know of anyone that expected McDaniels to adopt Shanahans offense. Maybe one or two posters said that, but I have never seen that as a prevelant belief.

Possibly keep Bates, who was close to Cutler, and could be mentored the way McDaniels was mentored by Belicheck? sure. But, that is a far cry from saying that McDaniels should adopt the offense of the departed coach. I have never seen this stated.

When Shanahan was replaced with a offensive minded coach rather than defensive minded coach I fully expected that there would be changes. I had hoped he would keep the zone blocking scheme but right now it doesn't look like we will be doing much of that.

[Tned]

You hire a new coach to win. If we lose more than 8 games you guys are wrong. If we win more than 8 games Im wrong. That is the great thing about this situation.


We will all have an answer.

You hire a new coach to win, but every owner out there knows that most likely that coach will not win the first season, which is why most new head coaches get about three years to prove they can win, and then are replaced.

McDaniels and Nolan made wholesale changes on offense and defense, both in terms of personnel and schemes. Now, while it is VERY easy to argue that McDaniels should not have traded Cutler, and then there wouldn't have been such major personnel changes on the offense, there still would have been a major disruption in terms of the new scheme.

Shanahan always talked about a QB not being really comfortable in a new scheme until his third year, I have seen talking heads on TV say something similar, so even if Cutler was still on the Broncos, there is no guarantee the offense wouldn't have had its struggles this year. Cutler should still be on the team, but that is a different conversation.


If you think what someone said is stupid, then attack the comment. Always attack the comment, not the poster.

Yes, it seems that this shouldn't be too hard a concept for people to grasp. :salute:


You listed Jay twice and then, just to be clear, tried to argue that Marshall's immaturity is McDaniels fault for "baiting him," Which in my opinion is the stupidest take on this Marshall fiasco going around.

I agree on how Cutlergate was handled. I think could have done a better job. But I put all the blame on Cutler. And I agree on Paxton. That was a stupid, expensive move. I also agree that we overspent for the players we drafted, but I took some solace in the fact that the players we took were good players. Really though, the jury on that will be out until a few seasons from now. So you've got Cutlergate and Paxton as rookie errors. And Paxton/kicking Leach is an example of a coach that brings "his guys" into a team and estranges the ones that aren't. And frankly that is not a rookie coach thing, that's just a coaching change things.

While I took some solace in the camp reports you guys did, I think the jury is still out on if the Smith move was a great move or complete blunder or someplace in between. Since as most of us have been saying, with these wholesale changes and the brutal schedule, the Broncos could be looking at a pretty rough season in terms of wins, which means that pick that we traded to Seattle could be a top 10 or even top 5 pick.

Based on what was known at the draft, and even now, was Smith really woth a top 5 or top 10 pick?

What we do know, is that Bowlen felt that McDaniels took too few defensive players and that in his first few months as head coach, made "rookie mistakes", but he didn't elaborate on what.

Picking up on something in one of your earlier posts.

Bowlen talked about the separation of the HC/GM jobs, being more involved, etc. A short time later, that he already had his GM's in place in the Goodmans. Then, somehow (again, we don't have details), McDaniels and the Goodmans can't get along and Xanders is given the GM job, but from the outside looking in, I think we can all agree that it looks like a one man show, just like under Shanahan, which Bowlen said he was not gong to have again.

I'm not convinced yet that it is wrong, Josh will prove that fact out one way or another in the next few years, I just think it's ironic that it was one of the knocks about Shanny, and Josh seems to have just as much control.

[Tned]

Keep in mind, the ZBS is like any other offensive scheme. Eventually defenses figure it out. Something that has been happening SIGNIFICANTLY with the ZBS for those that pay attention to defensive schemes.

Another year or so and the ZBS will be dead in the NFL

Also, every team where Gibbs installed the ZBS, they did very well, among the best running teams in the league, but within a few years of him moving on, the team was not nearly as effective.

If you listen to quotes from Schlereth and others who talked about Gibbs, it was probably as much a testament to how good a coach he was, rather than just the scheme.

[CoachChaz]

More teams are adopting the ZBS than those that are not using it anymore. I think three teams adopted it this year. Good blocking is like any other scheme. It works if the players execute. Defenses may 'understand' everything there is to understand about the opposing offense, but that doesn't mean they can keep them from executing the play.

Kind of like the run and shoot, wishbone and option offenses. Watch how fast the wildcat dies, too. Defensive adjustments eventually blow up schemes...it happens and I doubt the ZBS is the exception to this rule. Will it work in the future? Sure. Will it fade from being an every down system? guaranteed.

If nothing else, the increase in rules to "protect the players" will eventually eliminate the ability to cut block and once that goes...so goes the ZBS

[Ravage!!!]

Kind of like the run and shoot, wishbone and option offenses. Watch how fast the wildcat dies, too. Defensive adjustments eventually blow up schemes...it happens and I doubt the ZBS is the exception to this rule. Will it work in the future? Sure. Will it fade from being an every down system? guaranteed.

If nothing else, the increase in rules to "protect the players" will eventually eliminate the ability to cut block and once that goes...so goes the ZBS

well. I see the ZBS to be something much different than the wildcat. Either way, it always comes down to execution.

But I dont'think they will ever eliminate cut blocks. I don't see how they can, and STILL expect to protect the QB (which is the NFL's main concern). Lineman on the move need to cut, and RBs need to cut to take down Blitzing LBs. Some running plays just simply can't be run without relying on a cut, and EVERY team in the NFL cuts because they have to.

Considering the dangers of putting the QBs at more risk, I don't see the cut block ever being eliminated from the NFL.

[TXBRONC]

Kind of like the run and shoot, wishbone and option offenses. Watch how fast the wildcat dies, too. Defensive adjustments eventually blow up schemes...it happens and I doubt the ZBS is the exception to this rule. Will it work in the future? Sure. Will it fade from being an every down system? guaranteed.

If nothing else, the increase in rules to "protect the players" will eventually eliminate the ability to cut block and once that goes...so goes the ZBS

No I don't agree that it's a guarantee. The 3-4 defense has been around since the 1950's. I don't know exactly when is became popularized in the NFL but I don't think it has ever fallen into complete disfavor since the late '70s. The West Coast Offense has been around for nearly 30 years.

[Ravage!!!]

No I don't agree that it's a guarantee. The 3-4 defense has been around since the 1950's. I don't know exactly when is became popularized in the NFL but I don't think it has ever fallen into complete disfavor since the late '70s. The West Coast Offense has been around for nearly 30 years.

We know the ZBS alone has been in Denver (and this wasn't the first) for 14 years.. and is actually growing in the number of team using it in the NFL. All good points.

I think solid schemes stick aroudn because they aren't simply gimmicks. They aren't limited, and when executed, it doesn't matter if you "know" whats coming. You still have to defend it. The ZBS isn't something of a gimmick.

[CoachChaz]

No I don't agree that it's a guarantee. The 3-4 defense has been around since the 1950's. I don't know exactly when is became popularized in the NFL but I don't think it has ever fallen into complete disfavor since the late '70s. The West Coast Offense has been around for nearly 30 years.

No such thing. if you look at the schemes, tendencies and plays used by teams that claim to use the WCO, you'll see that NONE of them are exactly the same. Shanny, Reid, Holmgren...all of their offenses are WCO and all fo them are completely different.

As far as a 3-4 or a 4-3...they are basic and will never vary in their purest sense, but you'll see a million different variations in the ways in which they are used and how personnel are used in them.

Again, I wont say the ZBS will disappear completely, but it will fade significantly

[Dreadnought]

No I don't agree that it's a guarantee. The 3-4 defense has been around since the 1950's. I don't know exactly when is became popularized in the NFL but I don't think it has ever fallen into complete disfavor since the late '70s. The West Coast Offense has been around for nearly 30 years.

True to a point, but there is still evolution going on. The 3-4 was nearly extinct in the mid 90's but seems to be reviving as the next "It" defense. In any event it is a very different animal now from what the Broncos played in 1977. The Wildcat is almost like a revival of the ancient Single Wing. Its gimmicky and it works for now because defenses haven't solved it for the time being. In a year or two it will be as dead as smelt once there's enough film out there.

[TXBRONC]

No such thing. if you look at the schemes, tendencies and plays used by teams that claim to use the WCO, you'll see that NONE of them are exactly the same. Shanny, Reid, Holmgren...all of their offenses are WCO and all fo them are completely different.

As far as a 3-4 or a 4-3...they are basic and will never vary in their purest sense, but you'll see a million different variations in the ways in which they are used and how personnel are used in them.

Again, I wont say the ZBS will disappear completely, but it will fade significantly

I beg to differ with you Shanahan, Reid, Holmgren's versions of the west coast offense have not been completely different each other. It's just like you're argument about the 3-4 and 4-3 there millions of variations in how personnel is used but at it's core it's still the same. What Bill Walsh popularized as the west coast offense is based off of what he learned under Paul Brown.

[CoachChaz]

I beg to differ with you Shanahan, Reid, Holmgren's versions of the west coast offense have not been completely different each other. It's just like you're argument about the 3-4 and 4-3 there millions of variations in how personnel is used but at it's core it's still the same. What Bill Walsh popularized as the west coast offense is based off of what he learned under Paul Brown.

Do you watch football? If you look at all the teams that run a WCO and pay attention to formations, plays and tendencies...you'll wonder why WCO is even used as a term.

Yes a 3-4 and a 4-3 are the same at their core...every scheme is. Regardless of how you use an offense, you still have to have at least 5 lineman. EVERYTHING has a basic core..it's how it's used that makes the differences.

[TXBRONC]

Do you watch football? If you look at all the teams that run a WCO and pay attention to formations, plays and tendencies...you'll wonder why WCO is even used as a term.

Yes a 3-4 and a 4-3 are the same at their core...every scheme is. Regardless of how you use an offense, you still have to have at least 5 lineman. EVERYTHING has a basic core..it's how it's used that makes the differences.

Yeah I watch football do you? You don't need to get snotty.

[Ravage!!!]

Same with the ZBS. Its just as much a 'core' as traditional blocking methods. Its been around for decades, and has GROWN in popularity the last few seasons. Every "scheme" is just a variation off of something else they know. Walsh used plays he learned when in college to win the Super Bowls while coaching in San Fran. Basic football is football.

There has been no signs of the ZBS fading away.... not when more teams are adapting/using/changing to it.

I think of the ZBS as much of a core blocking schem as any "traditional" blocking scheme. It comes down to how its coached and how its executed. There is no way a defense can simply "figure it out" and defend it. If that were the case, they could "figure out" the traditional blocking schemes and make that obsolete.

[CoachChaz]

Yeah I watch football do you? You don't need to get snotty.

Is that you, jay?

[CoachChaz]

Same with the ZBS. Its just as much a 'core' as traditional blocking methods. Its been around for decades, and has GROWN in popularity the last few seasons. Every "scheme" is just a variation off of something else they know. Walsh used plays he learned when in college to win the Super Bowls while coaching in San Fran. Basic football is football.

There has been no signs of the ZBS fading away.... not when more teams are adapting/using/changing to it.

I think of the ZBS as much of a core blocking schem as any "traditional" blocking scheme. It comes down to how its coached and how its executed. There is no way a defense can simply "figure it out" and defend it. If that were the case, they could "figure out" the traditional blocking schemes and make that obsolete.

Watch houston and Carolina this year and focus on the games they have trouble running in. My bet is the defenses schemed to render the ZBS useless. When that happens, it catches on like wildfire.

Like I said, it will never disappear, but adjustments will have to be made to the adjustments being made against it. Eventually it creates something completely different...just like the WCO

[CoachChaz]

Perhaps.

[Ravage!!!]

Watch houston and Carolina this year and focus on the games they have trouble running in. My bet is the defenses schemed to render the ZBS useless. When that happens, it catches on like wildfire.

Like I said, it will never disappear, but adjustments will have to be made to the adjustments being made against it. Eventually it creates something completely different...just like the WCO

This doesn't make sense. THey may scheme to make an offense useless, but tnot the ZBS. If that were the case, no ZBS blocking team could run on anyone...yet they do. Why? Because they execute. Just like any blocking scheme. If the Carolina defense is able to scheme against the Houston playres/team/coaches.. fine.

Thats like saying the Giants put forth the blue-print on how to negate the traditional blocking scheme when they beat the Patriots on the Super Bowl.

If what you are saying is true.. How is it Denver (while shanahan was here) had continued to have EXTREMELY high success with the ZBS...despite changing personnel on the OL and at RB for 15 yrs????? People couldn't coach over the last 15 years and "counter" the ZBS?

I'm sorry. I just don't think you are backing up your guess with anything factual. The ZBS is picking up in popularity. If what you are saying is remotely correct, teams wouldn't be adopting it.

[TXBRONC]

This doesn't make sense. THey may scheme to make an offense useless, but tnot the ZBS. If that were the case, no ZBS blocking team could run on anyone...yet they do. Why? Because they execute. Just like any blocking scheme. If the Carolina defense is able to scheme against the Houston playres/team/coaches.. fine.

Thats like saying the Giants put forth the blue-print on how to negate the traditional blocking scheme when they beat the Patriots on the Super Bowl.

If what you are saying is true.. How is it Denver (while shanahan was here) had continued to have EXTREMELY high success with the ZBS...despite changing personnel on the OL and at RB for 15 yrs????? People couldn't coach over the last 15 years and "counter" the ZBS?

I'm sorry. I just don't think you are backing up your guess with anything factual. The ZBS is picking up in popularity. If what you are saying is remotely correct, teams wouldn't be adopting it.

Simply put it's about execution.

[frenchfan]

it's time for the Denver fans to stop complaining about the coach and to give him an honest chance to fix the team.Great advice...

People just have to remember that since 2006 we are 8-8 average (9-7 / 7-9 / 8-8 / 8-8) with no playoffs...
During that time we were ran by a great coach.

How can people think any coach will come in town and change this team in a playoff contender easily?
It was time to do something and build the future of our team.
The only real mistake I've seen is the Culter affair. This apart, I can't complain too much about McDaniels... How horrible is to want players to give 100% (or more) on the field and to have a team spirit or to pratice harder?

I expect a tough and long year (especially with our brutal schedule)... My only expectation is about attitude and how we will develop during the season...
But there will be no miracle... With or without Cutler, we have so many issues to solve to become a SB contender back.

I don't know if he is right or wrong, but at least McD has a plan, execute it and is dedicated to our team... I'll give him his chance and some time for sure and I hope he is right.

Go Broncos.