Mike Shanahan Gets Out-Foxed In Denver: Broncos roll 45-21

[BSN Denver]

The Broncos greeted Mike Shanahan with a standing ovation after playing a nice tribute video on Sunday Afternoon. The head-to-head matchup with the Redskins followed.

The game started off as a little bit of a snoozer in the first half. If I told you the final score of the game was 45-21. You probably wouldn’t believe the score was 7-7 at half time.

The Broncos forced a three-and-out on the Redskins first possession and then responded with a goal line touchdown pass to Wes Welker on their first possession.

The Broncos would only see three more possessions in the first half and all would end in a punt. It was very noticeable that Orlando Franklin was playing injured. He was having a very difficult time moving and was getting beaten off of the line often.

The Redskins first four possessions ended in a punt. The fifth one however would prove to be the tempo changer. The Redskins would embark on a 95 yard, 16 play drive, that took seven minutes and ended in touchdown.

Both teams entered halftime tied up at 7-7. The offense vs. offense matchup that we had talked about all week was turning into a....CONTINUE READING (http://www.brandonspano.com/headlines.html?entry=mike-shanahan-gets-out-foxed)

[SR]

I'm tired of John Fox. I don't think he's running a very tight ship.

[Ravage!!!]

I'm tired of John Fox. I don't think he's running a very tight ship.

seriously?

[NightTrainLayne]

I'm tired of John Fox. I don't think he's running a very tight ship.

Really?

The guy took over a mess. .. .retooled mid-season to accomodate Tebow, won 6 in a row and got us to the playoffs, where we beat the Steelers.

Then completely retools again for Manning. Oh. . .also has to hire another DC and OC along the way due to losing the guys to HC jobs. Wins us 13 games.

Now, this season we're setting records left and right etc. but you're "tired" of Fox? I think you have a very short memory. Just three years ago we were the worst team in the NFL.

[Dreadnought]

Really?

The guy took over a mess. .. .retooled mid-season to accomodate Tebow, won 6 in a row and got us to the playoffs, where we beat the Steelers.

Then completely retools again for Manning. Oh. . .also has to hire another DC and OC along the way due to losing the guys to HC jobs. Wins us 13 games.

Now, this season we're setting records left and right etc. but you're "tired" of Fox? I think you have a very short memory. Just three years ago we were the worst team in the NFL.

Agreed totally. That was one of the sillier things I've read here. Fox was an excellent coach in Carolina, and is an excellent coach here. He wins with mediocre talent, he wins even more with good talent. His teams are fundamentally sound. they can win as running football teams. they win as passing football teams. I would not trade him for ANY coach in the NFL right now. Not one. Good Lord.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

I think people seem to forget that Fox does not call the offensive plays - Gase and Manning do. Fox does not set up the defensive game scheme - DelRio, maybe with the assistance of the other defensive coaches, does. I once read where Fox wears two hats - a father figure, and also the one who lowers the boom on a player.

Also, I know there are some upset with Fox as far as throwing challenge flags, and losing the challenge - from an article:


He must also decide quickly. He usually hasn't seen the play clearly from the sidelines. He may receive advice from an assistant coach in the booth who's watching the network television feed. Or he may heed his players who were close to the action. Knowing that the time to decide is limited, an offensive team receiving a favorable call might snap ball quickly to close off the possibility of a review.

http://entertainment.howstuffworks.com/nfl-review-rules2.htm

I think there are some who blame Fox for everything that goes wrong.

[OrangeHoof]

If you'd just seen the final score, you'd have figured the Broncos ran away and hid instead of having to overcome a 14-pt second half deficit.

[ForgettingBrandonMarshall]

My problem with Fox (this season only) has been not only the challenge issue, but the undisciplined style of play I've seen at times. Why does Vickerson think he can act like a dirty ******* for 2 weeks IN A ROW with no recourse. Also, we are ranked pretty high in the league in penalty yards/penalties per game. FFS, the Raiders are more disciplined than us at this point in the season.

[wayninja]

Really?

The guy took over a mess. .. .retooled mid-season to accomodate Tebow, won 6 in a row and got us to the playoffs, where we beat the Steelers.

Then completely retools again for Manning. Oh. . .also has to hire another DC and OC along the way due to losing the guys to HC jobs. Wins us 13 games.

Now, this season we're setting records left and right etc. but you're "tired" of Fox? I think you have a very short memory. Just three years ago we were the worst team in the NFL.

'Retooled'? Hardly. McCoy called a lot of running/option plays to limit how much Tebow would throw. I'd hardly call that 'retooling'. If Fox were smart, he would have started Tebow in the first place. He only put Tebow in to kill 2 birds with one stone, show the fans how bad Tebow was so he could get rid of him, and get a higher draft pick. You don't go from your 1st QB to your 3rd QB unless you have an agenda. That backfired in his face, yet he gets credit for winning after denying him the chance to start?

No, Fox isn't very good. He's supported by a good cast of players that make him look better than he is. I'm surprised he hasn't said some stupid shit about how 'screwed' we be without Manning yet, given we've won 6 now. It's a good thing for him that Elway was able to convince Manning to come to Denver and pull his bacon out of the fire.

Flame away.

[DenBronx]

I'm tired of John Fox. I don't think he's running a very tight ship.

Can't tell if sarcastic or not.

[DenBronx]

Either way, my take on John Fox, he is a damn good Head Coach.

[broncohead]

'Retooled'? Hardly. McCoy called a lot of running/option plays to limit how much Tebow would throw. I'd hardly call that 'retooling'. If Fox were smart, he would have started Tebow in the first place. He only put Tebow in to kill 2 birds with one stone, show the fans how bad Tebow was so he could get rid of him, and get a higher draft pick. You don't go from your 1st QB to your 3rd QB unless you have an agenda. That backfired in his face, yet he gets credit for winning after denying him the chance to start?

No, Fox isn't very good. He's supported by a good cast of players that make him look better than he is. I'm surprised he hasn't said some stupid shit about how 'screwed' we be without Manning yet, given we've won 6 now. It's a good thing for him that Elway was able to convince Manning to come to Denver and pull his bacon out of the fire.

Flame away.

Tebow sucks and Fox is the head coach. He has a say and his hand in everything. We won with Tebow so I'm sure Fox and Co would have found a way to win with another QB

[wayninja]

Tebow sucks and Fox is the head coach. He has a say and his hand in everything. We won with Tebow so I'm sure Fox and Co would have found a way to win with another QB

Just not Orton or Quinn

[DenBronx]

Just not Orton or Quinn

I don't think anyone is going to win with those guys. There is the Tim Tebows, The Mark Sanchez and Vince Young, there's 50 feet of crap and then there is Kyle Orton.

HiB9L3dG-Aw

[Ravage!!!]

My problem with Fox (this season only) has been not only the challenge issue, but the undisciplined style of play I've seen at times. Why does Vickerson think he can act like a dirty ******* for 2 weeks IN A ROW with no recourse. Also, we are ranked pretty high in the league in penalty yards/penalties per game. FFS, the Raiders are more disciplined than us at this point in the season.

Actually, Vick was immediately pulled from the game after he got the penalty on RG3. It was shown on TV Fox pulling and chewing him. As far as Vick "doing it a second time"...what is the coach supposed to do other than get on his ass after the first time? he can't hold his hand while on the field. Vick CHOSE to make another stupid choice and as a result, got pulled. After that, You adn I have absolutely NO idea what kind of "recourse" there will be. I think its pretty blind to believe that there won't be recourse, and also pretty naive to think that a HC can control grown men like children. A man can only do so much.

[powderaddict]

' He only put Tebow in to kill 2 birds with one stone, show the fans how bad Tebow was so he could get rid of him, and get a higher draft pick. You don't go from your 1st QB to your 3rd QB unless you have an agenda. That backfired in his face, yet he gets credit for winning after denying him the chance to start?



This is just a silly load of crap!

If Fox wanted to lose as you state here, then why change the entire offense around to accommodate his style of play? They could have kept the same offense they had been running, which was a disaster for Tebow (as evidenced in the Detroit game that year) and merrily kept on losing, which is what you are saying Fox wanted. Instead, they redesigned the entire playbook around his unique talents and went on a WINNING streak. So basically what actually happened in real life is the complete opposite of the nonsense I just quoted.

[Ravage!!!]

This is just a silly load of crap!

If Fox wanted to lose as you state here, then why change the entire offense around to accommodate his style of play? They could have kept the same offense they had been running, which was a disaster for Tebow (as evidenced in the Detroit game that year) and merrily kept on losing, which is what you are saying Fox wanted. Instead, they redesigned the entire playbook around his unique talents and went on a WINNING streak. So basically what actually happened in real life is the complete opposite of the nonsense I just quoted.

Agreed. If you TRULY wanted to show how bad Tebow is, and wanted to "lose"...then you don't change the entire offense to fit him. You leave him in the offense you had been working on the entire offseason with Orton. Make him drop back, make him read defenses, and make him throw the ball from the pocket. We changed everything to compliment Tim to the fullest, and our coaches did a FANTASTIC job of that. Eventually, teams caught on as to the limitations of Tim.

[Northman]

Lmao, i cant believe Ninja is still going on about how great Tebow is. Ive never seen a player who is "supposedly" so awesome yet no team wants him. People like Ninja are just flat out comical. Unreal. You just cant make this shit up.

[Ravage!!!]

Lmao, i cant believe Ninja is still going on about how great Tebow is. Ive never seen a player who is "supposedly" so awesome yet no team wants him. People like Ninja are just flat out comical. Unreal. You just cant make this shit up.

Yeah... just goes to show that a guy that is obviously very intelligent can turn completely stupid when emotions get in the way. For some reason, Tebow is 'ninja's thinking 'cryptonite', and I don't get it.

[wayninja]

Lmao, i cant believe Ninja is still going on about how great Tebow is. Ive never seen a player who is "supposedly" so awesome yet no team wants him. People like Ninja are just flat out comical. Unreal. You just cant make this shit up.

Show me where I said how great Tebow is or how I went on and on about it?

[wayninja]

Agreed. If you TRULY wanted to show how bad Tebow is, and wanted to "lose"...then you don't change the entire offense to fit him. You leave him in the offense you had been working on the entire offseason with Orton. Make him drop back, make him read defenses, and make him throw the ball from the pocket. We changed everything to compliment Tim to the fullest, and our coaches did a FANTASTIC job of that. Eventually, teams caught on as to the limitations of Tim.

Making your offense 1 dimensional isn't exactly conducive to a winning strategy.

Seriously, why did he go with the number 3 QB which forced him to 'change the entire offense' instead of going with the number 2 QB who you don't have to do that for?

Until someone can answer this, then my point about the agenda stands. Either Fox was admitting that the fans were smarter than him and put Tebow in acquiescence of their collectively superior coaching ability, or he was hoping Tebow would fall on his face to show them how dumb they were. Which is it?

[Northman]

Making your offense 1 dimensional isn't exactly conducive to a winning strategy.

Seriously, why did he go with the number 3 QB which forced him to 'change the entire offense' instead of going with the number 2 QB who you don't have to do that for?

Until someone can answer this, then my point about the agenda stands. Either Fox was admitting that the fans were smarter than him and put Tebow in acquiescence of their collectively superior coaching ability, or he was hoping Tebow would fall on his face to show them how dumb they were. Which is it?

Because Tebow was a first round draft choice. But they knew what his weaknesses were so they werent going to let him air it out 40-50 times a game. They kept the offense suited to his strengths and for most of the year it worked.

[wayninja]

Because Tebow was a first round draft choice. But they knew what his weaknesses were so they werent going to let him air it out 40-50 times a game. They kept the offense suited to his strengths and for most of the year it worked.

He took over for Orton in the Miami game and came back to win that game without having the offense changed. But that's really beside the point. You don't get someone into rhythm with an offense that you've been practicing (even as 3rd string) for all of camp, preseason, and 5 games into the season by changing it in middle. Weaknesses or no, you aren't going to convince me they were doing Tebow a favor by changing it up mid-way through to let him throw 10 times a game.

I firmly believe that we won those games despite the tinkering, not because of it.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

I can not believe that Tebow is still a topic when it comes to the Broncos. The Broncos gave him every chance they could - much more of a chance than the Jets or Patriots gave him. He is still not with an NFL team. If it were only the Broncos who felt he would never make it as an NFL QB, he would still be with the Jets or Patriots, or he would be with another team. The Rams were down to one QB - they could have signed Tebow - but they did not. Jacksonville is terrible - they could sign Tebow to see if he could turn things around, but so far they have not.

[wayninja]

I can not believe that Tebow is still a topic when it comes to the Broncos. The Broncos gave him every chance they could - much more of a chance than the Jets or Patriots gave him. He is still not with an NFL team. If it were only the Broncos who felt he would never make it as an NFL QB, he would still be with the Jets or Patriots, or he would be with another team. The Rams were down to one QB - they could have signed Tebow - but they did not. Jacksonville is terrible - they could sign Tebow to see if he could turn things around, but so far they have not.

You guys are turning this into a 'Tebow is great' thread (or rather the opposite of that), not me. My point was about John Fox and I used Tebow to illustrate. So let's just be clear on that. I didn't even bring up Tebow, I just balk at the notion that Fox gets 'credit' for his success when Fox did almost everything he could to scuttle Tebow.

[powderaddict]

Making your offense 1 dimensional isn't exactly conducive to a winning strategy.

Except it was a winning strategy. They went on to win the division in spite of starting in a 1-5 hole, and won only the second playoff game since Elway retired. I'm not sure what part of "winning" proves a strategy isn't a "winning" strategy?


Seriously, why did he go with the number 3 QB which forced him to 'change the entire offense' instead of going with the number 2 QB who you don't have to do that for?

Until someone can answer this, then my point about the agenda stands. Either Fox was admitting that the fans were smarter than him and put Tebow in acquiescence of their collectively superior coaching ability, or he was hoping Tebow would fall on his face to show them how dumb they were. Which is it?

Or maybe they already knew what they had in Quinn and wanted to adequately assess the 1st round pick they had in Tebow? And who cares what some online depth chart says? When Orton got benched vs SD, they brought in Tebow, not Quinn, so I think that pretty much shows who they had as #2 on their depth chart.

You can keep on thinking Fox wanted to lose games. If he wanted to lose games, there was a perfectly good QB on the roster that had demonstrated he was very good at losing games in Orton. If he wanted to "prove the fans wrong" as you laughably state, he wouldn't of tried to mold an offense around Tebow's strengths. I think it's pretty obvious to any rational person that Fox & Co were trying to win as many games as they could with the roster they had. And they did a damn fine job of it IMO.

[Northman]

He took over for Orton in the Miami game and came back to win that game without having the offense changed. But that's really beside the point. You don't get someone into rhythm with an offense that you've been practicing (even as 3rd string) for all of camp, preseason, and 5 games into the season by changing it in middle. Weaknesses or no, you aren't going to convince me they were doing Tebow a favor by changing it up mid-way through to let him throw 10 times a game.

No, they were doing the team a favor and limiting the chance for turnovers. In games against the Lions, Bills, and Pats we got behind by large margins and that isnt Tebow's strength. So the idea was to keep the game close and hope that by the end if Denver was behind it was close enough for Tebow to make a play. But if the opposition was ahead by a few scores they knew that Teebs couldnt throw to get back in it. I guarantee you had Fox just let Tebow try to rip it open with his arm Denver would of never made it too 8-8 let alone the playoffs (which we still needed help from SD and Oak to make). Even for one moment if you think that somehow Denver did Tebow wrong what explanation do you have for his failures in NY and NE? Surely not every HC in the NFL is a moron even if you dont buy what Fox is selling. You just cant be that blind.

[wayninja]

Except it was a winning strategy. They went on to win the division in spite of starting in a 1-5 hole, and won only the second playoff game since Elway retired. I'm not sure what part of "winning" proves a strategy isn't a "winning" strategy?

Yep, we won more than we lost. I don't see how that proves the strategy was the cause for success. We eeked out very close wins on near miracle drives/plays.


You can keep on thinking Fox wanted to lose games. If he wanted to lose games, there was a perfectly good QB on the roster that had demonstrated he was very good at losing games in Orton. If he wanted to "prove the fans wrong" as you laughably state, he wouldn't of tried to mold an offense around Tebow's strengths. I think it's pretty obvious to any rational person that Fox & Co were trying to win as many games as they could with the roster they had. And they did a damn fine job of it IMO.

Like I said, it was 2 birds with 1 stone. Not 1 bird.

I think Tebow did a fine job with the shit position he was handed.

[wayninja]

No, they were doing the team a favor and limiting the chance for turnovers. In games against the Lions, Bills, and Pats we got behind by large margins and that isnt Tebow's strength. So the idea was to keep the game close and hope that by the end if Denver was behind it was close enough for Tebow to make a play. But if the opposition was ahead by a few scores they knew that Teebs couldnt throw to get back in it. I guarantee you had Fox just let Tebow try to rip it open with his arm Denver would of never made it too 8-8 let alone the playoffs (which we still needed help from SD and Oak to make). Even for one moment if you think that somehow Denver did Tebow wrong what explanation do you have for his failures in NY and NE? Surely not every HC in the NFL is a moron even if you dont buy what Fox is selling. You just cant be that blind.


His failures in NE and NY? He barely got to play at all. I wouldn't consider his performances there even worthy of judging.

You can't know what would have happened. IIRC you were one of the ones insisting week after week that Tebow couldn't even keep winning, so let's not pretend you would have known what would have happened in a different reality.

You can't evaluate what you have if you change your entire offense to 'suite' him. If you do that, you've basically all but admitted you don't want him as a QB. So if that's the case, why play him at all?

The answer seems obvious to me, but I'm blind, apparently.

In any event, I've already said my peace on Tebow, I'm not going to keep re-hashing it. In my mind, Fox gets almost no credit for Tebow's success here, and that's the only point I was trying to make. Trying to insinuate that Fox is a good coach because of Tebow is absurd IMHO.

[Northman]

His failures in NE and NY? He barely got to play at all. I wouldn't consider his performances there even worthy of judging.

You can't know what would have happened. IIRC you were one of the ones insisting week after week that Tebow couldn't even keep winning, so let's not pretend you would have known what would have happened in a different reality.

You can't evaluate what you have if you change your entire offense to 'suite' him. If you do that, you've basically all but admitted you don't want him as a QB. So if that's the case, why play him at all?

The answer seems obvious to me, but I'm blind, apparently.


Well, thats part of your problem. You think that just by a player playing that is how he i judged or wins a starting job which isnt the case. He failed in NY and NE because he failed to prove to those coaches that he could,

a) Understand the playbook which is something that was talked about when the Pats let him go.

b) When he did play he obviously didnt do enough to give them hope or faith that he could be THE guy.

Whether its from his time in Denver or to NE there were CONSTANT issues brought up about his mechanics, his ability to learn the playbook, his pass accuracy, etc. As too evaluating what you have to change the offense to suite them? Are you crazy. So your telling me that Fox should take the offense that Tebow ran and use that for Manning? Is that what your telling me? That a HC and organization cant look at a players performance in practice and mental aptitude to understand what it is or isnt they can do? Come on man thats hogwash and you know it.

The funny thing about all this for a guy (you) who says he isnt claiming Tebow to be all great you sure go to great lengths to provide excuses as too why he isnt a starter. As Carol pointed out, Tebow had PLENTY of chances to prove to teams he can be a starting calibur QB and failed to do so. The onus is on him to prove he can do it, not the other way around.

[GEM]

Making your offense 1 dimensional isn't exactly conducive to a winning strategy.

Seriously, why did he go with the number 3 QB which forced him to 'change the entire offense' instead of going with the number 2 QB who you don't have to do that for?

Until someone can answer this, then my point about the agenda stands. Either Fox was admitting that the fans were smarter than him and put Tebow in acquiescence of their collectively superior coaching ability, or he was hoping Tebow would fall on his face to show them how dumb they were. Which is it?

If your qb is one dimensional, kind of hard to make your offense anything but one dimensional.

Why did he do it? Because Brady Quinn sucks. At least with Tim, there was a chance. A chance that he wouldn't lose his job over 1 season. How long did they stick with Tim is the better question.

[wayninja]

Well, thats part of your problem. You think that just by a player playing that is how he i judged or wins a starting job which isnt the case. He failed in NY and NE because he failed to prove to those coaches that he could,

a) Understand the playbook which is something that was talked about when the Pats let him go.

b) When he did play he obviously didnt do enough to give them hope or faith that he could be THE guy.

Whether its from his time in Denver or to NE there were CONSTANT issues brought up about his mechanics, his ability to learn the playbook, his pass accuracy, etc. As too evaluating what you have to change the offense to suite them? Are you crazy. So your telling me that Fox should take the offense that Tebow ran and use that for Manning? Is that what your telling me? That a HC and organization cant look at a players performance in practice and mental aptitude to understand what it is or isnt they can do? Come on man thats hogwash and you know it.

The funny thing about all this for a guy (you) who says he isnt claiming Tebow to be all great you sure go to great lengths to provide excuses as too why he isnt a starter. As Carol pointed out, Tebow had PLENTY of chances to prove to teams he can be a starting calibur QB and failed to do so. The onus is on him to prove he can do it, not the other way around.

And you go to great lengths to discount any success he had and attribute it to someone else. But I didn't say anything about him being a starter or not being a starter, so having a conversation with you when you are clearly predisposing everything is a bit silly.

Winning a playoff game against the number 1 ranked defense is a pretty good resume to me. But again, I'm done talking Tebow. You clearly want to 'prove' his inability to play, which should go against Fox's credibility as a 'good coach', but yet when the table is flipped like that, you make it out to be that he took a player that was awful and somehow made him win a bunch of games. So go head and explain why, if Fox had that ability, he didn't start the 2011 season out that way?

Oh right. We are being selective.

[GEM]

He took over for Orton in the Miami game and came back to win that game without having the offense changed. But that's really beside the point. You don't get someone into rhythm with an offense that you've been practicing (even as 3rd string) for all of camp, preseason, and 5 games into the season by changing it in middle. Weaknesses or no, you aren't going to convince me they were doing Tebow a favor by changing it up mid-way through to let him throw 10 times a game.

I firmly believe that we won those games despite the tinkering, not because of it.

We aren't going to convince you of anything in regards to Tebow, because for some reason, you are far too emotionally invested in your argument and your love of Tebow.

[GEM]

Yep, we won more than we lost. I don't see how that proves the strategy was the cause for success. We eeked out very close wins on near miracle drives/plays.



Like I said, it was 2 birds with 1 stone. Not 1 bird.

I think Tebow did a fine job with the shit position he was handed.

And Fox did a fine job with the shit position he was handed.

[wayninja]

We aren't going to convince you of anything in regards to Tebow, because for some reason, you are far too emotionally invested in your argument and your love of Tebow.

And you in your hatred. I'll say for the 3rd time. My point wasn't, isn't, hasn't been about Tebow in this thread. You silly folks keep wanting to make it about him though!

[GEM]

And you go to great lengths to discount any success he had and attribute it to someone else. But I didn't say anything about him being a starter or not being a starter, so having a conversation with you when you are clearly predisposing everything is a bit silly.

Winning a playoff game against the number 1 ranked defense is a pretty good resume to me. But again, I'm done talking Tebow. You clearly want to 'prove' his inability to play, which should go against Fox's credibility as a 'good coach', but yet when the table is flipped like that, you make it out to be that he took a player that was awful and somehow made him win a bunch of games. So go head and explain why, if Fox had that ability, he didn't start the 2011 season out that way?

Oh right. We are being selective.

Why does it have to be attributed to either/or? This is a team sport, right? Tebow's one dimension put into an offense that McCoy/Fox tooled for the most amount of success won us some games. Neither was more or less instrumental. A whole lot of coaches wouldn't even give Tebow a whiff because they aren't willing to tool a team around a style of play that doesn't spell success. Hence why Tebow is still sitting at home after all the qb injuries, after all the terrible qb play, he's still at home.

[Northman]

And you go to great lengths to discount any success he had and attribute it to someone else. But I didn't say anything about him being a starter or not being a starter, so having a conversation with you when you are clearly predisposing everything is a bit silly.

Winning a playoff game against the number 1 ranked defense is a pretty good resume to me. But again, I'm done talking Tebow. You clearly want to 'prove' his inability to play, which should go against Fox's credibility as a 'good coach', but yet when the table is flipped like that, you make it out to be that he took a player that was awful and somehow made him win a bunch of games. So go head and explain why, if Fox had that ability, he didn't start the 2011 season out that way?

Oh right. We are being selective.

All incorrect.

Ive stated MANY times that Tebow is a gifted athlete. Just not a very good QB. And yes, Fox took a guy who had some serious limitations but had a lot of heart and was able to win a handful of games including a playoff game. But ill only point to a guy like Derek Anderson who had one great year (and made the playoffs) for the Browns before falling back to mediocrity. One miracle year (which was fun to watch) does not make Tebow a great player nor make him the only reason that team won. You seem to be forgetting that outside of Tim's heroics there were many other things that had to happen for us to even win ballgames and to even make the playoffs. In the end Tebow did what he does best that year and that was be a motivational leader, and make a play here or there when he could when the game was able to be won but he had a LOT of help along the way. He was a part of it, but not the only part and he certainly wasnt held back as you would like to imply. Thats just borderline retarded.

[GEM]

And you in your hatred. I'll say for the 3rd time. My point wasn't, isn't, hasn't been about Tebow in this thread. You silly folks keep wanting to make it about him though!

Who hates? I don't hate Tebow. I love the guy. I don't really care for the qb.

You brought him up in relation to Fox. Don't like it, don't bring it up, ninja.

[wayninja]

Who hates? I don't hate Tebow. I love the guy. I don't really care for the qb.

You brought him up in relation to Fox. Don't like it, don't bring it up, ninja.

Read the thread, Gem. I didn't bring it up.

[GEM]

Really?

The guy took over a mess. .. .retooled mid-season to accomodate Tebow, won 6 in a row and got us to the playoffs, where we beat the Steelers.

Then completely retools again for Manning. Oh. . .also has to hire another DC and OC along the way due to losing the guys to HC jobs. Wins us 13 games.

Now, this season we're setting records left and right etc. but you're "tired" of Fox? I think you have a very short memory. Just three years ago we were the worst team in the NFL.


'Retooled'? Hardly. McCoy called a lot of running/option plays to limit how much Tebow would throw. I'd hardly call that 'retooling'. If Fox were smart, he would have started Tebow in the first place. He only put Tebow in to kill 2 birds with one stone, show the fans how bad Tebow was so he could get rid of him, and get a higher draft pick. You don't go from your 1st QB to your 3rd QB unless you have an agenda. That backfired in his face, yet he gets credit for winning after denying him the chance to start?

No, Fox isn't very good. He's supported by a good cast of players that make him look better than he is. I'm surprised he hasn't said some stupid shit about how 'screwed' we be without Manning yet, given we've won 6 now. It's a good thing for him that Elway was able to convince Manning to come to Denver and pull his bacon out of the fire.

Flame away.

Read it. Layne mentioned Tebow once and you went all out and at the end of the quote said "Flame away"

Once you said what you said, people are now sticking up for Fox because they think your opinion is wrong.

Looks more like you instigated it and now want it to just go away.

[Northman]

Read the thread, Gem. I didn't bring it up.

True, but you were the only one to go all ape-shit about it.

[wayninja]

All incorrect.

Ive stated MANY times that Tebow is a gifted athlete. Just not a very good QB. And yes, Fox took a guy who had some serious limitations but had a lot of heart and was able to win a handful of games including a playoff game. But ill only point to a guy like Derek Anderson who had one great year (and made the playoffs) for the Browns before falling back to mediocrity. One miracle year (which was fun to watch) does not make Tebow a great player nor make him the only reason that team won.

Again, you must be quoting me accidentally, for I never said in this thread anywhere how Tebow is a great player. Nor do I understand what this has do to with the conversation at hand.


You seem to be forgetting that outside of Tim's heroics there were many other things that had to happen for us to even win ballgames and to even make the playoffs. In the end Tebow did what he does best that year and that was be a motivational leader, and make a play here or there when he could when the game was able to be won but he had a LOT of help along the way. He was a part of it, but not the only part and he certainly wasnt held back as you would like to imply. Thats just borderline retarded.

Yes, he had a LOT of help, I don't deny that. I do deny that almost ANY of that help came from John Fox. Which has been my only point.

[wayninja]

True, but you were the only one to go all ape-shit about it.

Stating my opinion is going Ape shit? What else you got?

[GEM]

John Fox is the head coach...if he doesn't want it to happen, it don't happen. It's not too big of a concept. All that happened with Tebow had to go through Fox, so yes, he is instrumental in what happened with Tebow.

[Dreadnought]

The only bearing i think Tebow has in re: Fox is that his partial success in 2011 proves that Fox is not inflexible and is not stubborn. He does not fall in love with his own plan, and he can help construct an intelligent usable game play using the assets available. Remember the Chiefs game in 2011 where they had Tebow threw all of 8 passes, and hit on exactly 2? It was a win. I also remember when we really unveiled our own read option and ate up the Faid in one of our funniest wins evah. Now 2 years later we are running a supercharged high octane passing attack, maybe the best ever. Same mostly even keeled coach behind all of it (though i think watching him peel Big Vick's ass was the first sideline outburst I've seen from him. Not that I like those...but...I understand given the circumstances)

[wayninja]

The only bearing i think Tebow has in re: Fox is that his partial success in 2011 proves that Fox is not inflexible and is not stubborn. He does not fall in love with his own plan, and he can help construct an intelligent usable game play using the assets available. Remember the Chiefs game in 2011 where they had Tebow threw all of 8 passes, and hit on exactly 2? It was a win. I also remember when we really unveiled our own read option and ate up the Faid in one of our funniest wins evah. Now 2 years later we are running a supercharged high octane passing attack, maybe the best ever. Same mostly even keeled coach behind all of it (though i think watching him peel Big Vick's ass was the first sideline outburst I've seen from him. Not that I like those...but...I understand given the circumstances)


I admit that Fox's ability to be flexible is admirable, but I really do question the motives. Even if I am totally wrong, and the motives were pure, doesn't McCoy get most of that credit?

I did really enjoy that game, it was pretty funny.

I believe our passing attack with this personnel would be the largely unchanged regardless of almost any head coach inserted (with the exception of Schiano). Manning is doing more of the coaching IMHO anyway. I wish he could carry the red flags in his handwarmer.

[powderaddict]

Yep, we won more than we lost. I don't see how that proves the strategy was the cause for success. We eeked out very close wins on near miracle drives/plays.

You seriously believe that Fox wanted to lose games, but couldn't accomplish that?

So losing in the NFL is pretty hard to do, eh? :laugh:

[GEM]

You seriously believe that Fox wanted to lose games, but couldn't accomplish that?

So losing in the NFL is pretty hard to do, eh? :laugh:

If he wanted to lose games, he would have started Quinn.

[powderaddict]

So Fox installs a running based gameplan to sabotage Tebow, yet has nothing to do with the current wins as "Manning is doing more of the coaching anyways" :laugh:

Seems legit.

[wayninja]

You seriously believe that Fox wanted to lose games, but couldn't accomplish that?

So losing in the NFL is pretty hard to do, eh? :laugh:

Are you going to read what I wrote or just keep taking me out of context? AND/OR logic isn't your strong suite...

[wayninja]

So Fox installs a running based gameplan to sabotage Tebow, yet has nothing to do with the current wins as "Manning is doing more of the coaching anyways" :laugh:

Seems legit.

Yeah, why not? Manning is calling way more audibles and plays than almost any QB in the league and he's clearly being given leeway to do so. Your point?

My contention is that he wanted Tebow to fail. He wants Manning to succeed. I don't see the discrepancy.

[powderaddict]

Are you going to read what I wrote or just keep taking me out of context? AND/OR logic isn't your strong suite...

You said Fox wanted to lose so he started Tebow. Not much context there. I'm just pointing out the ridiculousness of your statements.

[Dreadnought]

I admit that Fox's ability to be flexible is admirable, but I really do question the motives. Even if I am totally wrong, and the motives were pure, doesn't McCoy get most of that credit?

I did really enjoy that game, it was pretty funny.

I believe our passing attack with this personnel would be the largely unchanged regardless of almost any head coach inserted (with the exception of Schiano). Manning is doing more of the coaching IMHO anyway. I wish he could carry the red flags in his handwarmer.

Oh, I think Foxey's job is pretty easy, to the extent being an NFL head coach can ever be easy. Let McCoy/Gase and PMFM do what they do. Let Del Rio do what he does. He hired competent subordinates, so now it is time to let them do their jobs - without micromanaging or second guessing them. On second thought, that can actually be kind of hard and sometimes demands some self discipline. Its almost always the immature douches like McDaniels who are quite sure they have to do everything themselves because they are surrounded by incompetents who **** things up completely

[Ravage!!!]

Are you going to read what I wrote or just keep taking me out of context? AND/OR logic isn't your strong suite...

You can't keep saying that Fox started Tebow to LOSE games and didn't allow him to throw, and then say someone ELSE'S logic isn't strong. You pretty much blew all your credibility on this discussion by taking that perspective.

[powderaddict]

Yeah, why not? Manning is calling way more audibles and plays than almost any QB in the league. So?

Yep, calling audibles and plays is the same as being a head coach. Since he calls audibles, he is doing more of the coaching than Fox. got it.

:laugh:

[wayninja]

If he wanted to lose games, he would have started Quinn.

How would that have shown fans that Tebow sucks?

[wayninja]

Yep, calling audibles and plays is the same as being a head coach. Since he calls audibles, he is doing more of the coaching than Fox. got it.

:laugh:

No, Fox is doing the other stuff like challenges. So... good point.

[Ravage!!!]

Oh, I think Foxey's job is pretty easy, to the extent being an NFL head coach can ever be easy. Let McCoy/Gase and PMFM do what they do. Let Del Rio do what he does. He hired competent subordinates, so now it is time to let them do their jobs - without micromanaging or second guessing them. On second thought, that can actually be kind of hard and sometimes demands some self discipline. Its almost always the immature douches like McDaniels who are quite sure they have to do everything themselves because they are surrounded by incompetents who **** things up completely

Mannings offense isn't the same as last years, either. So I think we need to give our OC some credit as well.

Also to add to your point... EVERY HC in the NFL that has a top QB has an easier job. Belicheck wasn't very good as an HC before Brady. Landry and Noles both looked bad when they lost their HoF QB. Fox is doing a great job, and as you pointed out, allowing your subordinates to do the job they are experts in, and keeping that cohesive, is the job of the HC. Doing that WELL, can be hard enough on its own. Fox has had success wherever he's coached. He's proved to be a good leader of leaders.

[wayninja]

You can't keep saying that Fox started Tebow to LOSE games and didn't allow him to throw, and then say someone ELSE'S logic isn't strong. You pretty much blew all your credibility on this discussion by taking that perspective.

That makes no sense.

The AND/OR I'm referring to isn't wanting to lose AND not allowing tebow to throw. But I wasn't talking to you anyway, so if you don't want to read the discussion, don't comment on it.

[Ravage!!!]

How would that have shown fans that Tebow sucks?

*hands you your tin-foil hat*

[Dreadnought]

You said Fox wanted to lose so he started Tebow. Not much context there. I'm just pointing out the ridiculousness of your statements.

Seems to me you are kind of beating a dead horse. Or arguing against a straw man. Or youse guys are talking past each other. You can pick your own overworked cliche here. I'm just not sure where I think Wayninja advocated some kind of Jagsbch-ian conspiracy theory about us throwing games. Orton sucked. Quinn sucked even more. Tebow? Unknown quantity in early 2011. Lets find out. If he loses its just like starting Orton or Quinn, no worse, and we move on in 2012. Turns out he won some games - more than anyone expected - but I get the impression that while he was in some ways gifted and sometimes played inspired he was damned near unteachable - and that was the real problem going into 2012.

[Ravage!!!]

That makes no sense.

The AND/OR I'm referring to isn't wanting to lose AND not allowing tebow to throw. But I wasn't talking to you anyway, so if you don't want to read the discussion, don't comment on it.

It does make sense. You actually stated that Fox wanted to LOSE games, and in doing so limited Tebow in the passing game. The fact that you ACTUALLY take that stance, completely takes away from your credibility in this discussion, and ABSOLUTELY takes away your right to say someone ELSE doesn't have logic. That stance on Fox's decision to play Tebow, and your "reasons" behind it, is the MOST Illogical thing posted on this board and SCREAMS "I'm a crazy illogical thinker that believes in conspiracy theories."

So if you don't want people to see how illogical you are in this discussion, don't post such ridiculous statements. :coffee:

[powderaddict]

Mannings offense isn't the same as last years, either. So I think we need to give our OC some credit as well.

Also to add to your point... EVERY HC in the NFL that has a top QB has an easier job. Belicheck wasn't very good as an HC before Brady. Landry and Noles both looked bad when they lost their HoF QB. Fox is doing a great job, and as you pointed out, allowing your subordinates to do the job they are experts in, and keeping that cohesive, is the job of the HC. Doing that WELL, can be hard enough on its own. Fox has had success wherever he's coached. He's proved to be a good leader of leaders.

He took a team with Delhomme to the Superbowl and another NFC Championship game, took a team that was 1-5 and put Tebow in and they made the playoffs (and won a playoff game!), and completely redesigned the team around Manning and has the team 20-4 over the last 2 seasons.

Terrible record for a coach whose goal is to lose games. Losing - he's doing it wrong.

[GEM]

How would that have shown fans that Tebow sucks?

Because that wasn't his agenda. It's your made up one.

[wayninja]

*hands you your tin-foil hat*

Yeah, it so far fetched to think that Fox changed strategies after starting 1-4 and skipping over the 2nd stringer with billboards going up to start Tebow. So far fetched. Good coaching too.

It's far more likely that he did all of that because he was smart enough to realize that Tebow was actually a better fit all along than Orton and that not practicing the 're-tooled' offense would make for a much more emotional season after pulling the starting QB out 1/3 through the season. That must be it.

[GEM]

No, Fox is doing the other stuff like challenges. So... good point.

You do know that most challenges come from the booth, right? :confused:

[GEM]

seems to me you are kind of beating a dead horse. Or arguing against a straw man. You can pick your own overworked cliche here. I'm just not sure where I think Wayninja advocated some kind of Jagsbch-ian conspiracy theory about throwing games. Orton sucked. Quinn sucked even more. Tebow? Unknown quantity in early 2011. Lets find out. If he loses its just like starting Orton or Quinn, and we move on in 2012. Turns out he won some games - more than anyone expected - but I get the impression that while he was in some ways gifted and sometimes played inspired he was damned near unteachable - and that was the real problem going into 2012.

That isn't the issue. It's the point he's trying to make that the only reason Fox started Tebow was to prove to fans that Tebow sucked.

[NightTrainLayne]

And you go to great lengths to discount any success he had and attribute it to someone else. But I didn't say anything about him being a starter or not being a starter, so having a conversation with you when you are clearly predisposing everything is a bit silly.

Winning a playoff game against the number 1 ranked defense is a pretty good resume to me. But again, I'm done talking Tebow. You clearly want to 'prove' his inability to play, which should go against Fox's credibility as a 'good coach', but yet when the table is flipped like that, you make it out to be that he took a player that was awful and somehow made him win a bunch of games. So go head and explain why, if Fox had that ability, he didn't start the 2011 season out that way?

Oh right. We are being selective.

WayNinja, you've constructed a great "heads I win, tails everybody else loses" argument. It is rock-solid in it circular logic.

By saying Fox retooled the offense, I wasn't making a slam at Tebow. Just acknowledging the reality that we ran a completely different offense after the bye week, which evolved over the rest of that season to play to Tebow's strengths, and minimize his weaknesses.

Me saying Fox retooled the offense for Tebow, doesn't take away Tebow's great accomplishments in being the QB at the helm of that offense. Some will make the argument that Tebow can't play QB. Well, he can. .. but he can't QB the same offense that Peyton Manning runs. And that's okay, he can do things that Manning can't even dream of doing.

However, when you complain that no other coaches (NE, Jets) even gave Tebow a chance, you are ignoring the one guy who did. Fox not only gave him a chance, but gave him a real chance. Fox and the staff put him in a spot that accentuated his strengths and minimized his weaknesses, and collectively we won a bunch of games that we would not have had a chance to win if they had asked Tebow to run the offense that even Orton was running.

To me, that a positive for a coaching staff. So many coaches try to fit round pegs players into their square peg "proven systems" and lose, and then blame the players for not executing their perfectly planned scheme. Well, Fox et al didn't do that.

And just as quickly, when management gave them Manning, they went in another completely different direction.

I think that these are signs of a good coach, and coaching staff. You think the opposite apparently. Fine, we disagree.

[powderaddict]

I'm just not sure where I think Wayninja advocated some kind of Jagsbch-ian conspiracy theory about throwing games.

I guess you missed this post on page 1 of this thread:


' He only put Tebow in to kill 2 birds with one stone, show the fans how bad Tebow was so he could get rid of him, and get a higher draft pick. You don't go from your 1st QB to your 3rd QB unless you have an agenda. That backfired in his face, yet he gets credit for winning after denying him the chance to start?



He stated that Fox put in Tebow, to "get a higher draft pick", among other reasons. So yes, he stated that Fox wanted to throw games. I can't think of any other way to "get a higher draft pick" than to lose games.

This is ludicrous. I'm pointing out that the team after failing miserably with Tebow as the QB in the existing offense, completely re-did the offense to suit his strengths. Does this sound like the actions of a coach who was trying to "get a higher draft pick"? That offense was successful enough to help the team make the playoffs, even winning a playoff game. I'm not arguing a strawman, I'm arguing the point he tried to make that Fox was trying to intentionally throw games "for a higher draft pick".

So you think Fox started Tebow so the team would lose?

[wayninja]

You do know that most challenges come from the booth, right? :confused:

You don't need the booth to tell you that challenging over 7 yards when a first down is achieved either way is a silly challenge.

[wayninja]

I guess you missed this post on page 1 of this thread:



He stated that Fox put in Tebow, to "get a higher draft pick", among other reasons. So yes, he stated that Fox wanted to throw games. I can't think of any other way to "get a higher draft pick" than to lose games.

This is ludicrous. I'm pointing out that the team after failing miserably with Tebow as the QB in the existing offense, completely re-did the offense to suit his strengths. Does this sound like the actions of a coach who was trying to "get a higher draft pick"? That offense was successful enough to help the team make the playoffs, even winning a playoff game. I'm not arguing a strawman, I'm arguing the point he tried to make that Fox was trying to intentionally throw games "for a higher draft pick".

So you think Fox started Tebow so the team would lose?

I don't think Fox 'wanted' the team to lose so much as he expected it to. This would have the effect of being able to ditch Tebow without fan uproar and possibly put you in the Luck sweepstakes. I don't see why, after starting 1-4, and putting in an 'awful' QB, that is so absurd.

[GEM]

You don't need the booth to tell you that challenging over 7 yards when a first down is achieved either way is a silly challenge.

How many challenge flags has Fox thrown since being in Denver? How many were won and how many were lost? How many of them were that bone headed? Just a couple out of how many? Oh yea....you proved your point. He tossed in Tebow to lose games and prove fans wrong. He threw a bad challenge flag....he's horrible.


But ignore the disaster he walked into, what he made out of the disaster he walked into and where we are now.

He's a terrible coach. Got it. :laugh:

[powderaddict]

I don't think Fox 'wanted' the team to lose so much as he expected it to. This would have the effect of being able to ditch Tebow without fan uproar and possibly put you in the Luck sweepstakes. I don't see why, after starting 1-4, and putting in an 'awful' QB, that is so absurd.

That in itself is not absurd other than his actions after that shows he was trying to win games, and not "suck for luck". By creating gameplans that worked to Tebow's strengths, the team WON GAMES AND MADE THE PLAYOFFS. If they truly wanted to Suck for Luck, they were doing it wrong. If you want to show how sucky a QB is and lose games, you don't play to that QB's strengths. They could of had Tebow dropping back to pass 30-40 times a game and that would have accomplished exactly what you are stating they wanted to do.

But that's NOT what they did. And that is why your stance that Fox put in Tebow to prove how bad he is and get a better draft pick is completely unfounded. You can believe it all you want, but it flies in the face of the actions and productivity of the 2011 team.

[GEM]

I don't think Fox 'wanted' the team to lose so much as he expected it to. This would have the effect of being able to ditch Tebow without fan uproar and possibly put you in the Luck sweepstakes. I don't see why, after starting 1-4, and putting in an 'awful' QB, that is so absurd.

You don't ditch Tebow without fan uproar. He knew what he was getting into when he named him starter, and he stuck with the decision and planned a football team around it accordingly. You don't do that if you are planning on losing. You keep everything as is, lose games and suck for Luck. Better yet, if that were his plan, forget Tebow and just put Quinn on the field.

[wayninja]

WayNinja, you've constructed a great "heads I win, tails everybody else loses" argument. It is rock-solid in it circular logic.

I'm not making the logic circular, the arguments against me are. Tebow sucks, but fox is a good coach for giving him a chance. Fox is a good coach because he retooled the offense for Tebow, even though Tebow had won prior to that. Fox is a good coach because he has a winning record, but Tebow is a bad QB despite having a winning record.

It's pretty simple. If Fox could win with Tebow, why did he start Orton the first 5 games? Ok, maybe that's unfair, Tebow didn't look good in practice, how could he have known? But then why start the guy that is 3rd string, awful in practice, and requiring a 're-tool' on offense when you have another QB you could plug into the same offense?


By saying Fox retooled the offense, I wasn't making a slam at Tebow. Just acknowledging the reality that we ran a completely different offense after the bye week, which evolved over the rest of that season to play to Tebow's strengths, and minimize his weaknesses.

I wasn't accusing you of slamming Tebow, nor do I care if you were. That isn't the issue. The issue is giving Fox credit for wins because of the 're-tooled' offense. The offense wasn't re-tooled. When I think of 'tools' in an offense, I think of players. Players weren't changed to accommodate Tebow, the only thing that was changed was the play-calling. IMHO the play-calling largely sucked after the read/option emphasis. Run, run, run, punt. I know everyone wants to claim that was done to protect the ball etc, etc, but I just don't buy it. Going 3 and out over and over and over, yet still winning, is winning despite the play-calling, not because of it.


Me saying Fox retooled the offense for Tebow, doesn't take away Tebow's great accomplishments in being the QB at the helm of that offense. Some will make the argument that Tebow can't play QB. Well, he can. .. but he can't QB the same offense that Peyton Manning runs. And that's okay, he can do things that Manning can't even dream of doing.

Like I said, I don't think Fox did Tebow any favors by changing the offense. We shouldn't have been winning. We only were winning by miracle drives or crazy happenstance. That's largely on Tebow's inability to score, which is largely on the emphasis of a one-dimensional offense. If you don't let the kid throw, then you don't know what you have, and aside from miracles, the offense wasn't working... so why continue with it? It wasn't good coaching in my opinion. You can't 'coach' how we won games last year and in my opinion, we did not put ourselves in the best position to win, despite having won.


However, when you complain that no other coaches (NE, Jets) even gave Tebow a chance, you are ignoring the one guy who did. Fox not only gave him a chance, but gave him a real chance. Fox and the staff put him in a spot that accentuated his strengths and minimized his weaknesses, and collectively we won a bunch of games that we would not have had a chance to win if they had asked Tebow to run the offense that even Orton was running.

Well, again, does that make Fox a good coach? He put in a guy who no-one else in the league would play. That's supposed to support the argument that he is a good coach? Again, I still don't buy that Fox put him in a position to win. At best he put Tebow in a position to not blow games. At best. I just don't see how I can give credit to Foxy for those wins. It still looks to me like the team won despite being put in a really bad spot. It's a difficult argument to make, because we just don't know how things would have played out had Tebow stuck to the same style offense he ran against Miami and SD and the year before against the Texans. It's easy to claim you know, but given how it turned out against everyone's predictions, it's tough to justify. The bottom line is that I don't think it's good coaching to change an offense mid-way through the season. I don't think that gave us the best chance to win.


To me, that a positive for a coaching staff. So many coaches try to fit round pegs players into their square peg "proven systems" and lose, and then blame the players for not executing their perfectly planned scheme. Well, Fox et al didn't do that.

Again, I would give Fox more credit if I didn't question his motives. I know I'm in the vast minority there, but Fox does have a motive in my theory, so it's not completely baseless regardless of how much people call me crazy.


And just as quickly, when management gave them Manning, they went in another completely different direction.

I think that these are signs of a good coach, and coaching staff. You think the opposite apparently. Fine, we disagree.

Again, I see almost any coaching staff playing dominating football with this player roster. So I guess we disagree. From what I see with my eyes, looking beyond the results, I don't think Fox is that great of a coach. Average at best. It's not like it's a big secret how you win ballgames with PFM.

[wayninja]

That in itself is not absurd other than his actions after that shows he was trying to win games, and not "suck for luck". By creating gameplans that worked to Tebow's strengths, the team WON GAMES AND MADE THE PLAYOFFS. If they truly wanted to Suck for Luck, they were doing it wrong. If you want to show how sucky a QB is and lose games, you don't play to that QB's strengths. They could of had Tebow dropping back to pass 30-40 times a game and that would have accomplished exactly what you are stating they wanted to do.

But that's NOT what they did. And that is why your stance that Fox put in Tebow to prove how bad he is and get a better draft pick is completely unfounded. You can believe it all you want, but it flies in the face of the actions and productivity of the 2011 team.

But you are looking at this with the benefit of hindsight. Yes, we won games. We won crazy games that we had no business winning. Putting in a QB that Fox didn't want, undermined publicly during the season, after skipping over another 1st round draft that didn't need to have custom gameplans doesn't exactly sound like the best strategy for winning games, does it? Tebow did win games before they 're-tooled' the offense. He almost came back to win in SD and did come back to win against Miami. We had no chance in the world of beating Detroit that year regardless of what gameplan was used.

Again, don't look at it with hindsight, look at it from the perspective of being 1-4, then maybe what I'm saying will make more sense.

[Dreadnought]

As far as Fox in 2011 and our offense, we were the number one running attack in the entire League, over 2600 yards and 4.8 YPC. Now, I will admit I am old, but I loved it. I don't see that as a recipe for failure myself - its my own favorite brand of football to watch. That wasn't setting Tebow up to fail IMO, it was us doing a thing really really well and rolling with it - and it even opened up some nice opportunities to hit some deep balls that year.


I would still dearly love to see us run 35 - 40 times a game in my heart of hearts. I have since made my peace with watching PMFM throw for 350+ and 4 TD's a game, mind you :D As long as I don't have to watch Orton hit 4 yard passes on 3rd and 7 anymore I can be content.

[GEM]

Doesn't take hindsight to see that the pluses for Tebow over Quinn. Quinn has sucked since he came in the league. Watching him is about as miserable as watching paint dry. People knew what he was, there was no questions about it. Why even bother when you had someone like Tebow on the bench.

Tebow, on the other hand, for all of his faults, is exciting. He has attributes that bring life back into an organization. It has been shown that it was not sustainable over a long period of time, or rather, as soon as the buzz wore off, but anyone with half a brain could see the choice to make between the two.

That isn't hindsight, that's just logical.

Perhaps Fox didn't want Tebow, but he didn't draft him in the first round. So to say that you are going to go with someone else's first round flop instead of giving the teams first round choice a shot is just silly.

[Northman]

Yeah, why not? Manning is calling way more audibles and plays than almost any QB in the league and he's clearly being given leeway to do so. Your point?

My contention is that he wanted Tebow to fail. He wants Manning to succeed. I don't see the discrepancy.


Elway, Brady, Aikman and so on call audibles too.

[Dreadnought]

Doesn't take hindsight to see that the pluses for Tebow over Quinn. Quinn has sucked since he came in the league. Watching him is about as miserable as watching paint dry. People knew what he was, there was no questions about it. Why even bother when you had someone like Tebow on the bench.

Tebow, on the other hand, for all of his faults, is exciting. He has attributes that bring life back into an organization. It has been shown that it was not sustainable over a long period of time, or rather, as soon as the buzz wore off, but anyone with half a brain could see the choice to make between the two.

That isn't hindsight, that's just logical.

Perhaps Fox didn't want Tebow, but he didn't draft him in the first round. So to say that you are going to go with someone else's first round flop instead of giving the teams first round choice a shot is just silly.

Unlike everyone's least favorite Coach, Fox's ego did not demand that he indiscriminately flush the entire roster so he could refill it with his own creatures. Fox took a look, kept some guys (Woodyard, DT, Decker, David Bruton, et al.) got rid of some stiffs, and here we are now at 7 - 1

[GEM]

But he threw a dumb challenge flag.


:laugh:

[Dreadnought]

But he threw a dumb challenge flag.


:laugh:

He's thrown a few. Its not his strong suit apparently :D

[G_Money]

He went for it on 4th down twice in ONE GAME though. Fox is trying to prepare himself for those "risk-taking" calls in the playoffs that he botched last year. Glad to see him getting in the right mindset early in this year.

If "throwing the worst challenge flags in the history of everything" is his weakness, I'll take it.

~G

[GEM]

He's thrown a few. Its not his strong suit apparently :D

Dumb challenge flag or burning down a franchise,I'll take a few dumb challenge flags 13-3 and 7-1. Done and done. Gimme Fox all day, errrrrrryday!!

[GEM]

G's right....weren't some bitching about him not taking chances just last season. Dude can't win, there will always be finicky fans.

[powderaddict]

But you are looking at this with the benefit of hindsight. Of course I am. I am letting history impact my thought process on whether I feel John Fox is a good coach or not. I think any reasonable person would look at a person's past decisions and their results when making a judgement on them. I think results are a much better data point than someone's gut feelings, don't you?


Yes, we won games. We won crazy games that we had no business winning. Putting in a QB that Fox didn't want, undermined publicly during the season, after skipping over another 1st round draft that didn't need to have custom gameplans First, you have no idea what the gameplans would have been for Quinn. Every QB has his strengths and weaknesses. You have no idea what the gameplans with Quinn would have looked like, since Quinn didn't start any games.

Second, you say they had "no business" winning those games. The final score of those games they won would indicate they did. "No business" is a subjective statement. "Scoreboard" is objective. There's an important difference between the two. Regardless if you don't feel they any "business" winning those games, THEY WON THEM. So I think it's pretty obvious they DID have business winning those games.


doesn't exactly sound like the best strategy for winning games, does it?

Um, they DID win, so what part of "winning" would indicate those strategies were not good strategies for "winning" :confused:


Tebow did win games before they 're-tooled' the offense. He almost came back to win in SD and did come back to win against Miami. We had no chance in the world of beating Detroit that year regardless of what gameplan was used. Tebow did almost win that game against SD. He was terrible in Miami, but the team won. You don't know if they had no chance beating Detroit, but Fox felt that changing the offense at that point gave them a better chance to win. He stated such in interviews. AND THEY WON. If he wanted to prove how terrible Tebow was and get "better draft picks" as you claim, he would have kept changing the offense until they found one that didn't work. They didn't.


Again, don't look at it with hindsight, look at it from the perspective of being 1-4, then maybe what I'm saying will make more sense. No, I'm not going to completely ignore 3 successful years of Broncos football with Fox as the Head Coach in order to make sense of the senseless. But this does explain where you are coming from - you are admittedly ignoring huge pieces of data that are required to make a logical judgement!

[Lancane]

If you'd just seen the final score, you'd have figured the Broncos ran away and hid instead of having to overcome a 14-pt second half deficit.

Shanahan was simply reminded of that thing called 'Mile High Magic'.

[wayninja]

Of course I am. I am letting history impact my thought process on whether I feel John Fox is a good coach or not. I think any reasonable person would look at a person's past decisions and their results when making a judgement on them. I think results are a much better data point than someone's gut feelings, don't you?

Not necessarily. You can hit on 18 in blackjack, and get a three. It doesn't make that a winning strategy.


First, you have no idea what the gameplans would have been for Quinn. Every QB has his strengths and weaknesses. You have no idea what the gameplans with Quinn would have looked like, since Quinn didn't start any games.

That's true, but I don't really need to know what the game plan would be like to know that Quinn is a far better fit for the offense vacated by Orton then Tebow was.


Second, you say they had "no business" winning those games. The final score of those games they won would indicate they did. "No business" is a subjective statement. "Scoreboard" is objective. There's an important difference between the two. Regardless if you don't feel they any "business" winning those games, THEY WON THEM. So I think it's pretty obvious they DID have business winning those games.

No, I really just don't buy this argument at all. We won by some of the most miraculous plays and unlikely scenarios that I have ever seen in over 20 years of watching football. When I say we didn't have any business winning some of those games, I know what I'm saying, and I mean it. I think you know what I'm saying too, and believe you are just being argumentative.




Um, they DID win, so what part of "winning" would indicate those strategies were not good strategies for "winning" :confused:

Please. Stop being so rigid in your argument. See blackjack above.


Tebow did almost win that game against SD. He was terrible in Miami, but the team won. You don't know if they had no chance beating Detroit, but Fox felt that changing the offense at that point gave them a better chance to win. He stated such in interviews. AND THEY WON. If he wanted to prove how terrible Tebow was and get "better draft picks" as you claim, he would have kept changing the offense until they found one that didn't work. They didn't.

Well, he basically told everyone how terrible he was, so yeah. Again the odds for Tebow to fail stayed with him not changing anything IMHO.


No, I'm not going to completely ignore 3 successful years of Broncos football with Fox as the Head Coach in order to make sense of the senseless. But this does explain where you are coming from - you are admittedly ignoring huge pieces of data that are required to make a logical judgement!

Fox's has not been the head coach for three years. The majority of time Fox has been here, he's been gifted probably the greatest quarterback of all time. Don't worry, I'm not ignoring that crucial piece of data.

[wayninja]

But he threw a dumb challenge flag.


:laugh:

And letting Hillman carry on the colt 2 yard line with the game on the line?

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

And letting Hillman carry on the colt 2 yard line with the game on the line?

That's on Gase and Manning. They were in the hurry up and thought the defense would be too exausted to stop the play.....yes with a 195lb tailback. :laugh:

[wayninja]

That's on Gase and Manning. They were in the hurry up and thought the defense would be too exausted to stop the play.....yes with a 195lb tailback. :laugh:

Gem has told me in no uncertain terms that nothing happens without Fox wanting it to.

[Ravage!!!]

That's on Gase and Manning. They were in the hurry up and thought the defense would be too exausted to stop the play.....yes with a 195lb tailback. :laugh:

Bingo. It was trying to keep the defensive personnel on the field and not let them change. We didn't have the "big" set in, and I actually blame that call on Manning.

[Ravage!!!]

Gem has told me in no uncertain terms that nothing happens without Fox wanting it to.

Now who's trying to be argumentative?

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Bingo. It was trying to keep the defensive personnel on the field and not let them change. We didn't have the "big" set in, and I actually blame that call on Manning.

That's what I was originally going to say, but I toned it down a little bit by spreading the blame around. :D

[GEM]

Gem has told me in no uncertain terms that nothing happens without Fox wanting it to.

Bait someone else, Ninja.

[GEM]

And letting Hillman carry on the colt 2 yard line with the game on the line?

He's a draft pick, you've got to at least try to get him carries and not kill his confidence. Where is Hillman sitting now? FFS Ninja...at this point you're grasping.

[wayninja]

He's a draft pick, you've got to at least try to get him carries and not kill his confidence. Where is Hillman sitting now? FFS Ninja...at this point you're grasping.

Using examples to point out mistakes is grasping. Lol.

[wayninja]

Bait someone else, Ninja.

I wasn't bating. I responded to you, and someone else responded on your behalf. I simply wanted to state that my response was for you, because you said that nothing happens without Fox wanting it to. That's not baiting, thats simple logic.

[GEM]

Using examples to point out mistakes is grasping. Lol.

It is when the player you mentioned is now not even dressing out.

[GEM]

I wasn't bating. I responded to you, and someone else responded on your behalf. I simply wanted to state that my response was for you, because you said that nothing happens without Fox wanting it to. That's not baiting, thats simple logic.

It was baiting. Hoping for a reaction. No one responded to me, they responded to you. AlWilson4Mayor. He responded to YOUR Hillman comment. I had nothing to do with that conversation, so don't bring me into it.

Don't twist words in order to make your point.

Ninja, I never guessed you were such a baby when it came to football arguments.

[GEM]

At this point, I'm letting this shit go.

Ninja, you think Fox is a bad coach, I strongly disagree. And I'm leaving it at that.

[wayninja]

It was baiting. Hoping for a reaction. No one responded to me, they responded to you. AlWilson4Mayor. He responded to YOUR Hillman comment. I had nothing to do with that conversation, so don't bring me into it.

Gem, I'll ask you again to read the thread. You keep doing this. My hillman comment was a response to you. I quoted you in that comment. It was FOR you. I was clarifying that for Al.


Don't twist words in order to make your point.

I'm not.


Ninja, I never guessed you were such a baby when it came to football arguments.

Don't use ad-hominems to make your point.

[claymore]

Fox IMO is the definiton of a good coach. He lets his coordinators coordinate. Something that is a breath of fresh air after McD, and Shanahan. Our front office seems like a team more than a dick-tater-ship.

[powderaddict]

So when the team is winning it's "Manning is really the coach anyways, because of the audibles".

Manning audibles into a run and the RB that Elway drafted fumbles the ball it's because of "Fox".

Tebow wins a bunch of games "Fox held him back". Fox changes the offense to fit Tebow's abilities "Fox sucks because he wouldn't of had to change the offense as much for Quinn".

Fox wins games with Tebow as QB, enough games to get to the playoffs in spite of a 1-5 start, but those wins didn't have a "winning strategy".

Dude, you are all over the map.

[TXBRONC]

You guys are turning this into a 'Tebow is great' thread (or rather the opposite of that), not me. My point was about John Fox and I used Tebow to illustrate. So let's just be clear on that. I didn't even bring up Tebow, I just balk at the notion that Fox gets 'credit' for his success when Fox did almost everything he could to scuttle Tebow.

Ah no you're the one that turned this into a Tebow pissing contest.

I can see you're one of those people with mindset don't give facts I've already made up my mind.

[Ravage!!!]

Ah no you're the one that has.

yeah.. somehow he didn't even bring up Tebow....yet then explains how was illustrating how Fox got successful credit by trying to discredit Tebow?? :confused:

[Lancane]

I'm not a fan of John Fox's, it's no secret that I hoped someone else would be named the HC of the Broncos over him. That said, despite his conservative nature, there is no arguing that he has been a pretty solid Head Coach thus far and that the team could do far worse. Would I rather have Mike Shanahan or Dan Reeves? Without question, but I would also prefer Elway as the VP/GM over Sundquist or Xanders or even Shanahan as the GM.