PDA

View Full Version : Question: what about Bates?



omac
12-25-2007, 12:50 PM
http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_7787961


[B]Question: what about Bates?
The usually wildly successful defensive guru finds himself in an unfamiliar spot with the Broncos - on the hot seat
By Mike Klis
The Denver Post
Article Last Updated: 12/23/2007 01:07:31 AM MST

Jim Bates' defense did not meet expectations in 2007. (Steve Nehf, Denver Post file photo )

Jim Bates was a good defensive coach before he joined the Broncos this year. The Broncos consistently played good defense in the years before Bates arrived.

Another example, perhaps, why there is no such thing as the perfect couple.

For whatever reason, and for many reasons, Bates' defensive philosophy didn't mesh with the Broncos' players in their first season together. Entering their Christmas Eve game against the AFC West champion San Diego Chargers, the Broncos rank 29th in the 32-team NFL in defending the run and 30th in defending the score.

This is nothing short of a free-fall for a defense that just two years ago ranked No. 2 against the run and No. 3 in points allowed.

With all but the schedule finished for the Denver Broncos in 2007, the defense will become priority No. 1 as the Broncos plan their rebound for 2008. Significant changes will be made.

"It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out," Broncos defensive back Domonique Foxworth said. "If it's broke, fix it."

Every player will be evaluated at season's end. Mike Shanahan, as the head coach, will evaluate every assistant. The most immediate question regards Bates and his defensive philosophy. One may stay, but probably not both.

"Jim Bates can coach football," Broncos safety John Lynch said. "His resume speaks for itself. We struggled playing the scheme he's accustomed to. You can argue whether we did much better since we went another way. But I think a lot of things go into what happened."

Throughout this trying season, Bates has been a man. He has faced the media without ever losing his temper. He has accepted blame. He doesn't read the newspapers, but he answers all the questions.

Almost every question. When asked about the future of the Broncos' defense, and for himself personally, Bates politely stated it would be more appropriate if he waited until after these final two games, Monday against the Chargers, and six days later against the Minnesota Vikings.

"Any time you have a season like we've had, there's going to be speculation," Bates said. "Just like there's speculation in 20 other NFL cities right now."

It's just this is the first time Bates has been in the same room with a hot seat. He brought in a system featuring seven men in the box, enormous tackles and man-to-man coverage.

There are three players going to the Pro Bowl from other teams — Green Bay's Aaron Kampman and Al Harris, and Miami's Jason Taylor — who previously have sworn by Bates' system.

Bates had a good run as defensive coordinator with the Miami Dolphins from 2000-04. And the Packers are fighting for the No. 1 seed in the NFC using Bates' system, introduced during his lone season there in 2005.

"He has an amazing track record," Foxworth said. "I would say this last season was an aberration. It was definitely not the norm in his career. I would say he's not the problem."

But after the Broncos were trampled through four preseason games and five regular-season games, there was little choice but to trash Bates' system. The primary issue was stopping the run. It was heave-the-cap, slam-the-clipboard bad.

Two problems

Actually, there are two problems with failing to stop the run. Not only does it put the opponent in position to score, it prevents Shanahan's offense from getting in rhythm.

It's hard for an offense to get in sync when it's forever watching from the sideline. It's why the foundation of Shanahan's offense is establishing the run.

During their bye week, the 2-3 Broncos decided to add an eighth man to the box. The systematic switch in turn led to several in-season alterations in defensive line personnel.

The results were mixed. The Broncos played superb defense in two victories against Kansas City, and in a loss at Chicago. They got stampeded in losses to Detroit, Oakland and Houston.

"If you change, obviously something wasn't working," said Alvin McKinley, the only veteran tackle from training camp who survived the defensive overhaul. "So we had to bring that other guy down in the box. After that, for the most part we did pretty good. But then there was always something, here and there. We should have been more like that team that showed up and played the Kansas City Chiefs."

What's next?

What will the Broncos do about their defense for 2008? Shanahan offers little hint.

"We'll look at the film and evaluate what we need to do in terms of free agency and the draft," he said. "Just like we do every year."

Not every thought will advocate upheaval. D.J. Williams is about to complete his first season at middle linebacker. Wouldn't he be a better middle linebacker in his second year? Bates proved he's not so wedded to his system that he couldn't teach another. Will his previous success earn him a mulligan?

"One of the great things I learned from Tony Dungy is, he said when things don't work, everyone wants to change, change, change," said Lynch, speaking about his former Tampa Bay Buccaneers coach. "He was more, 'We're going to stick with what we've got and make it better.' I think there's been so much change here that sometimes sticking to something will make things better.

"Now, someone has to step back and say, either we have the horses or we don't. That's for other people to decide. And one thing I've always liked about the Broncos is, I used to be frustrated and think, 'Come on, let's go get some free agents.' Here, you know they're going to go after people.

"But I think there's a fine line there. You can't scrap everything and start all over."

Soon, the Broncos' season will end. Much sooner than expected, the offseason will begin. There's no sense sugarcoating the first question of the Broncos' offseason: Does Bates get to start over?

Mike Klis: 303-954-1055 or mklis@denverpost.com

SR
12-25-2007, 12:51 PM
Fact: Bates gets one more year.

Krugan
12-25-2007, 12:55 PM
My concern is, we arent using Bates scheme now, and the changes that are required to make it work are numerous, why even bother keeping the guy here?

Its plain obvious to me, we dont have the personal in the front 7 to operate under what Bates like to run.

Sorry, but I dont see us able to make the leap from what we have, to what bates requires to do his thing.

TXBRONC
12-25-2007, 12:56 PM
Thanks for the read omac. Although the scheme was a disaster all the blame can't be put on Bates. In my opinion we obviously didn't have all the pieces we needed to make his scheme work.

Bronco9798
12-25-2007, 12:58 PM
The NFL has outgrown Bates and his system. We need to find some DT's that can penetrate and make some plays in the backfield and get to the QB. That two gap system is worthless in my opinion in todays NFL. We need athletes at the DT position not a bunch of 350 pound fat slobs trying to stand their man and creating a gap. Just a worthless system.

TXBRONC
12-25-2007, 01:01 PM
The NFL has outgrown Bates and his system. We need to find some DT's that can penetrate and make some plays in the backfield and get to the QB. That two gap system is worthless in my opinion in todays NFL. We need athletes at the DT position not a bunch of 350 pound fat slobs trying to stand their man and creating a gap. Just a worthless system.


If the NFL has outgrown his system then why is it working in Green Bay?

haroldthebarrel
12-25-2007, 01:13 PM
If the NFL has outgrown his system then why is it working in Green Bay?

They dont play the same system as Bates did in GB anymore. Corey Williams who many including me wanna make a push for in free agency is a typical one gap DT, and he plays one gap.

I dont think the system is outdated like 9798 says, but there needs to be put a lot of effort on the line to make it work. If you have two DTs that can hold their ground you can put the ends wider thus getting more pressure on the qb.

I said before that I didnt like firing Coyer just for sake of change. Bates D has performed far and away beyond expectations so he should be on the hot seat. I wouldnt fire him just for one reason and that is we need some stability in our defensive system. If we finally get that, then it will be easier to draft players that fit our profile.
Since Robinson we have had a lot of different systems. I think coyer had a different system every year. On the other hand teams like TB has stability and a set system. That enables them to draft players later in the draft like Tarnard Jackson that really fits their system well.

We have the same stabillity on offense. I dont get why some wanna change that but thats another story. The point is that we often find gems on offense because we have such a stability.

Bronco9798
12-25-2007, 01:22 PM
If the NFL has outgrown his system then why is it working in Green Bay?

I agree it is a similar system in GB, it's not the same though. I guess they did a better job of tweeking it and making it work. I personally don't like it. I like DT's that can make a play and that's just me. I hate the system he employs.

haroldthebarrel
12-25-2007, 01:26 PM
I agree it is a similar system in GB, it's not the same though. I guess they did a better job of tweeking it and making it work. I personally don't like it. I like DT's that can make a play and that's just me. I hate the system he employs.

me too. I think the system could work, but Id much rather have a one gap attacking system.
I love seeing one gap DTs blow up plays, and it is always cool to see players like Kevin Williams and Kris Jenkins blow through on the snap and tackle during the handoff.

TXBRONC
12-25-2007, 01:28 PM
They dont play the same system as Bates did in GB anymore. Corey Williams who many including me wanna make a push for in free agency is a typical one gap DT, and he plays one gap.

I dont think the system is outdated like 9798 says, but there needs to be put a lot of effort on the line to make it work. If you have two DTs that can hold their ground you can put the ends wider thus getting more pressure on the qb.

I said before that I didnt like firing Coyer just for sake of change. Bates D has performed far and away beyond expectations so he should be on the hot seat. I wouldnt fire him just for one reason and that is we need some stability in our defensive system. If we finally get that, then it will be easier to draft players that fit our profile.
Since Robinson we have had a lot of different systems. I think coyer had a different system every year. On the other hand teams like TB has stability and a set system. That enables them to draft players later in the draft like Tarnard Jackson that really fits their system well.

We have the same stabillity on offense. I dont get why some wanna change that but thats another story. The point is that we often find gems on offense because we have such a stability.

According to what I read in article earlier this year the Packers still think they do. In fact one their defensive lineman said as much. Also Thomas isn't a two gap tackle but Denver drafted him away.

haroldthebarrel
12-25-2007, 01:38 PM
According to what I read in article earlier this year the Packers still think they do. In fact one their defensive lineman said as much. Also Thomas isn't a two gap tackle but Denver drafted him away.

That is strange because i have read and seen the opposite. Perhaps they mix up more, I dont know...

I think the reason they drafted Thomas was the value. He had the talent to play both one gap and two gap coming out. Isnt he 315?

I just looked at the GB stats and the tackles have a lot of tackles to play a two gap system.... last year they had more sacks too. I dont know, but they probably mix up a lot more than Bates do here and did there.

Tned
12-25-2007, 02:44 PM
Fact: Bates gets one more year.

I would agree, if not longer. We have held on to some pretty questionable defensive coaches over the years. I would imagine this offseason they will focus on getting some d-linemen and other defenders that better fit his scheme, along with using the OTA's and training camp to get the current guys better aquainted with it.

Bronco9798
12-25-2007, 03:27 PM
I would agree, if not longer. We have held on to some pretty questionable defensive coaches over the years. I would imagine this offseason they will focus on getting some d-linemen and other defenders that better fit his scheme, along with using the OTA's and training camp to get the current guys better aquainted with it.

Problem is, we've been saying this same thing over and over. We all heard in the off-season, camp, and pre-season how this defense would "gel" by week 6 or so. You could tell early on this defense had problems and it was going to be a long year. I thought the offense was going to be good enough to disguise the deficiencies of this defense and we could still compete. With what we came into the season with, it was easy to see these guys up front weren't going to be very good.

Every year it's the same old story. We need a pass rush, we need to up-grade, we need better players up front, and every year we fail to generate any type of consistent pass rush. Now, here we go again, same old song and dance. You have to get to the QB, apply pressure, and cause turnovers to win in the the NFL. Almost every playoff team leads the leagues in takeaways/giveaways ratio. I hate stats, but these stats speak for themselves. If you ever pay attention to one stat in the NFL, it's this one. You have to generate sacks and get turnovers to consistently win in this league.

These guys had all of camp, pre-season, and 16 games to get it right. Most got released during the season. It was another debacle by another poor D.C. One day Shanny is going to bring in a young guy that plays a modern defense and instill some energy into his defense, but until he does, it's going to be the same old story every year. I get tited of seeing the same problem every year. You win games by win the wars up front, that's where it all belongs. Who knows, maybe one day somebody will get it right.

TXBRONC
12-25-2007, 05:53 PM
Problem is, we've been saying this same thing over and over. We all heard in the off-season, camp, and pre-season how this defense would "gel" by week 6 or so. You could tell early on this defense had problems and it was going to be a long year. I thought the offense was going to be good enough to disguise the deficiencies of this defense and we could still compete. With what we came into the season with, it was easy to see these guys up front weren't going to be very good.

Every year it's the same old story. We need a pass rush, we need to up-grade, we need better players up front, and every year we fail to generate any type of consistent pass rush. Now, here we go again, same old song and dance. You have to get to the QB, apply pressure, and cause turnovers to win in the the NFL. Almost every playoff team leads the leagues in takeaways/giveaways ratio. I hate stats, but these stats speak for themselves. If you ever pay attention to one stat in the NFL, it's this one. You have to generate sacks and get turnovers to consistently win in this league.

These guys had all of camp, pre-season, and 16 games to get it right. Most got released during the season. It was another debacle by another poor D.C. One day Shanny is going to bring in a young guy that plays a modern defense and instill some energy into his defense, but until he does, it's going to be the same old story every year. I get tited of seeing the same problem every year. You win games by win the wars up front, that's where it all belongs. Who knows, maybe one day somebody will get it right.

Bates has solid reputation and resume that he can rely on. He deserves to have at least one more year. Maybe he does get fired at the end of season but I really doubt it.

Requiem / The Dagda
12-25-2007, 06:02 PM
Telling Bates to go out and run this defense is like asking Vincent Van Gogh to paint without hands.

Bronco9798
12-25-2007, 07:23 PM
Bates has solid reputation and resume that he can rely on. He deserves to have at least one more year. Maybe he does get fired at the end of season but I really doubt it.

I doubt he gets fired too. Most all coaches are hired on reputation or potential though.

TXBRONC
12-25-2007, 08:05 PM
I doubt he gets fired too. Most all coaches are hired on reputation or potential though.

One thing is for sure there will be some serious changes once this season is over.

Bronco9798
12-25-2007, 08:24 PM
One thing is for sure there will be some serious changes once this season is over.

There should be. Somebody has to get this thing right. When we got to the AFC Championship game in 05, we pressured the QB pretty good during the season but never really got many sacks. We got by though and made it work. But in reality, we haven't had a decent DL in years that really got after it and made plays in the backfield. Robinsons defenses at least blitzed and applied pressure and those weren't great defenses back then either but we were effective enough to make guys like Ray Crockett and Darrien Gordon look good.

It takes so much pressure off your secondary if you can get pressure on the QB and we just can't do it. That's why I hate this system Bates employs. You have to rely on your DE's and your LB's to make the plays up front. We need DT's that can play upfield and make some plays behind the LOS. Just my opinion.

BeefStew25
12-25-2007, 08:44 PM
There should be. Somebody has to get this thing right. When we got to the AFC Championship game in 05, we pressured the QB pretty good during the season but never really got many sacks. We got by though and made it work. But in reality, we haven't had a decent DL in years that really got after it and made plays in the backfield. Robinsons defenses at least blitzed and applied pressure and those weren't great defenses back then either but we were effective enough to make guys like Ray Crockett and Darrien Gordon look good.

It takes so much pressure off your secondary if you can get pressure on the QB and we just can't do it. That's why I hate this system Bates employs. You have to rely on your DE's and your LB's to make the plays up front. We need DT's that can play upfield and make some plays behind the LOS. Just my opinion.

So, in a nutshell, we need to trade for Gerard Warren. :mad:

TXBRONC
12-25-2007, 08:56 PM
There should be. Somebody has to get this thing right. When we got to the AFC Championship game in 05, we pressured the QB pretty good during the season but never really got many sacks. We got by though and made it work. But in reality, we haven't had a decent DL in years that really got after it and made plays in the backfield. Robinsons defenses at least blitzed and applied pressure and those weren't great defenses back then either but we were effective enough to make guys like Ray Crockett and Darrien Gordon look good.

It takes so much pressure off your secondary if you can get pressure on the QB and we just can't do it. That's why I hate this system Bates employs. You have to rely on your DE's and your LB's to make the plays up front. We need DT's that can play upfield and make some plays behind the LOS. Just my opinion.

If you have defensive scheme where the corners are to play bump and run oh yeah you better get pressure up front. If you're going leave your corners dangling in the wind.

gobroncsnv
12-25-2007, 09:06 PM
There should be. Somebody has to get this thing right. When we got to the AFC Championship game in 05, we pressured the QB pretty good during the season but never really got many sacks. We got by though and made it work. But in reality, we haven't had a decent DL in years that really got after it and made plays in the backfield. Robinsons defenses at least blitzed and applied pressure and those weren't great defenses back then either but we were effective enough to make guys like Ray Crockett and Darrien Gordon look good.

It takes so much pressure off your secondary if you can get pressure on the QB and we just can't do it. That's why I hate this system Bates employs. You have to rely on your DE's and your LB's to make the plays up front. We need DT's that can play upfield and make some plays behind the LOS. Just my opinion.


But IN the AFC Champ game, our dline looked like the one we have now, with multiple multiple multiple blitzes, and Roth still had ALL freakin' day to throw back there. Our dline has been suspect since our SB years in my opinion, steadily declining to the point where we are now. Robinson had Pryce (in his prime) and Traylor, in addition to Smith and Williams. Right now, we don't come close to that kind of quality. Bates can only employ his system with the players we have, but when he gets the guys he needs, the pressure has been there. I don't understand how anybody could be more satisfied with our dline players than someone with Bates' cred. :confused:

Tned
12-25-2007, 09:17 PM
There should be. Somebody has to get this thing right. When we got to the AFC Championship game in 05, we pressured the QB pretty good during the season but never really got many sacks. We got by though and made it work. But in reality, we haven't had a decent DL in years that really got after it and made plays in the backfield. Robinsons defenses at least blitzed and applied pressure and those weren't great defenses back then either but we were effective enough to make guys like Ray Crockett and Darrien Gordon look good.

It takes so much pressure off your secondary if you can get pressure on the QB and we just can't do it. That's why I hate this system Bates employs. You have to rely on your DE's and your LB's to make the plays up front. We need DT's that can play upfield and make some plays behind the LOS. Just my opinion.

In '05, we had to rely on heavy, heavy blitzing and by the end of the year, teams were starting to go max protect to hold off the blitz, and then get favorable matchups in the secondary. Two games that really stand out from that year was the Philly game where we had almost no sacks, but McNabb hit the dirt on nearly every pass play, but we brought 9 guys a couple times. The other one was Washington, where they went max protect and their QB was able to pick us apart fairly effectively, because we were relying 100% on the blitz to get pressure.

Until we get linemen capable of creating pressure without blitzes, we will continue to talk about our defensive woes.

Bronco9798
12-25-2007, 09:20 PM
Bottom line, we need improvements on both lines to compete next year. This year was horrible. It was disturbing and painful to watch.

dogfish
12-25-2007, 09:36 PM
Telling Bates to go out and run this defense is like asking Vincent Van Gogh to paint without hands.


no doubt-- our front seven personnel is a bad freaking joke. . .


jim bates is a damn good coordinator, and he'll do well here if we get some NFL-caliber DTs. . .

Lonestar
12-25-2007, 10:21 PM
I would agree, if not longer. We have held on to some pretty questionable defensive coaches over the years. I would imagine this offseason they will focus on getting some d-linemen and other defenders that better fit his scheme, along with using the OTA's and training camp to get the current guys better aquainted with it.

I'm going to jump in on this one I have not read past this post so if I step on someones thought sit was not meant that way..

1. klis rarely has a coherent thought in his mind IMO. He is not Schefter should not be considered in the same realm, not even sure he should write for a major paper.

Bates is a proven winner and probably the only reason he did not get the HC job in MIA was the owner at the time wanted a big name..

We have had bum of the month club coaches except for Ray Rhodes, that mikey brought in that used to be the HC in Philly but got fired, he went on to turn SEA around defensively, a couple of years after he left DEN... Mikey and he did not see eye to eye because he was not a yes man. Therefore mikey has had his "boys" he developed under his thumb forever..

Finally figured out that coyer an ex LB and LB coach while a brilliant design man, he had serious supervisory skills issues. After a near player revolt a couple of years ago made some changes to the defensive scheme that worked for awhile. AMazing what happens when players are motivated. BUT the clown could not adjust if his fly was open..

Now it is true that coyer was in the top 5 in some areas namely run defense but then the pass defense was less than kosher. There is the old adage "That figures never lie but LIARS ALWAYS FIGURE"..

We have NEVER placed a BIG emphasis on DEFENSE in DEN (except Rhodes). It has always be been bend but do not break, great fast LB's, always looking for a CB..

This year hiring an OUTSIDER he made a commitment to upgrading the D drafted 3 of 4 choices on D All top quality PICKS IMO. Made changes in our vaunted LB corp, signed FAs and traded for players THOUGHT to have the skills and MOTIVATION to play BATES BALL.

Mistakes were made and he adjusted his scheme to fit the players we had, did so and made a difference IMO. Was the defense as good as we wanted HELL NO. but it did not cause the offense to implode as the Writer suggested..

Mikey caused that by not calling good games IMO. Or adjusting to what the defense gave them.. Something that coyer never did make adjustments. SO who is at fault here.. Would you ask someone to work miracles with the eh DL he was dealt. ANYONE with a minute amount of football knowledge sees that we do not have the players needed to stop the run.. IS that Bates fault ONLY HIM and MIKEY knows FOR SURE, who wanted to get rid of Kennedy and Warren.. Was it Bates or Mikey?

Would they have made a difference this year? I do not think they could have hurt this team. NO matter how bad they played..

LET me add I hope mikey does not do something stupid like bring in another YES man to replace him if he is stupid enough to fire him. And I'm hoping that Bates is not going to fall on his sword to protect mikey and his almost decade of neglect of acquiring quality DL guys..

Lonestar
12-25-2007, 10:25 PM
There should be. Somebody has to get this thing right. When we got to the AFC Championship game in 05, we pressured the QB pretty good during the season but never really got many sacks. We got by though and made it work. But in reality, we haven't had a decent DL in years that really got after it and made plays in the backfield. Robinsons defenses at least blitzed and applied pressure and those weren't great defenses back then either but we were effective enough to make guys like Ray Crockett and Darrien Gordon look good.

It takes so much pressure off your secondary if you can get pressure on the QB and we just can't do it. That's why I hate this system Bates employs. You have to rely on your DE's and your LB's to make the plays up front. We need DT's that can play upfield and make some plays behind the LOS. Just my opinion.


Did you watch the same game I did PIT QB could have taken a dump of the sidelines with all the time he had. They picked up every blitz we threw at him.

I think he holds the 3 and long record for completions that day.. I think you must be thinking of some other Defense.. Or game..

Bronco4ever
12-25-2007, 10:38 PM
Did you watch the same game I did PIT QB could have taken a dump of the sidelines with all the time he had. They picked up every blitz we threw at him.

I think he holds the 3 and long record for completions that day.. I think you must be thinking of some other Defense.. Or game..

Actually I think he was talking about that entire season minus that game. We definitely did not get pressure on Ben that day and I doubt he would make that assumption.

Lonestar
12-25-2007, 10:44 PM
Actually I think he was talking about that entire season minus that game. We definitely did not get pressure on Ben that day and I doubt he would make that assumption.


Well that was the defining moment was it not..




Offense wins games,

Defense wins championships!!!

NameUsedBefore
12-25-2007, 10:54 PM
I'd give Bates one more year. I don't really like his scheme at all (no blitzing?), but I'd give him one more chance.

Bronco4ever
12-25-2007, 10:55 PM
Well that was the defining moment was it not..




Offense wins games,

Defense wins championships!!!

Technically, yes, I guess so. That ended our championship aspirations and that's the lasting image from the season, but it wasn't the only game we played that year. For the majority of that season, our defense played well and put pressure on the QB. Plus I recall 4 Jake Plummer turnovers in that game. It's hard for your defense to play well when they are constantly on the field and have a short field to work with.

omac
12-25-2007, 11:07 PM
no doubt-- our front seven personnel is a bad freaking joke. . .


jim bates is a damn good coordinator, and he'll do well here if we get some NFL-caliber DTs. . .

Maybe not the whole front 7; I think the ends are good, just a bit inexperienced; if Thomas really works out, maybe we're just one DT away from a good, run-stuffing defense, like the Titans are when they have Haynesworth.

Lonestar
12-25-2007, 11:08 PM
Technically, yes, I guess so. That ended our championship aspirations and that's the lasting image from the season, but it wasn't the only game we played that year. For the majority of that season, our defense played well and put pressure on the QB. Plus I recall 4 Jake Plummer turnovers in that game. It's hard for your defense to play well when they are constantly on the field and have a short field to work with.

You must be a democrat spinning the Jake cycle..


It was a combo that lost us the game yes we got some pressures that year but few sacks..

But our defense gave up alot of yards between the 20s also.. It has every year coyer was around..

Now the same crapola can be said this year the defense did not allow the offense to get into rhythm. I think some moron from the RMN is spread that crap.

Unless you are coyers son or daughter there is NO reason to memorialize his piss poor defenses of the past couple of years.. He was a mikey yes man and is complicit in the damaging effects of poor player acquisitions for almost a decade under king mikeys rule..

Broncolingus
12-25-2007, 11:11 PM
Denvers issues are less about a coach and more about a lack of a consistent physical presence on both the O and D lines...

Fact.

Lonestar
12-25-2007, 11:19 PM
Denver's issues are less about a coach and more about a lack of a consistent physical presence on both the O and D lines...

Fact.

Actually I think your correct but it also has to do more importantly IMO with the lack a of a full time REAL GM..

Broncolingus
12-25-2007, 11:22 PM
Actually I think your correct but it also has to do more importantly IMO with the lack a of a full time REAL GM..

No argument here...

Lonestar
12-25-2007, 11:25 PM
No argument here...


BTW welcome to the blue zone..:salute:

Broncolingus
12-25-2007, 11:26 PM
BTW welcome to the blue zone..:salute:

Appreciate it, 'Jr'...thx.

Bronco4ever
12-25-2007, 11:34 PM
You must be a democrat spinning the Jake cycle..


It was a combo that lost us the game yes we got some pressures that year but few sacks..

But our defense gave up alot of yards between the 20s also.. It has every year coyer was around..

Now the same crapola can be said this year the defense did not allow the offense to get into rhythm. I think some moron from the RMN is spread that crap.

Unless you are coyers son or daughter there is NO reason to memorialize his piss poor defenses of the past couple of years.. He was a mikey yes man and is complicit in the damaging effects of poor player acquisitions for almost a decade under king mikeys rule..

First, I'm in no way a democrat. I'm about as conservative as you can be, but really... don't bring that in this thread. That has no place in this conversation.

Secondly, I was talking specifically about that season and not the next. I know Coyer was crap. He couldn't make halftime adjustments to save his life. Never once did I say Coyer was a great DC so I don't know why you'd assume that off the bat. What my point was that our defense what atleast some what respectable in 05 compared to this season. You could point that to injuries, average players, and the loss of players like Al and Big Money, but a lot of the blame should be put on Bates as well. The players haven't "gelled" yet like we all heard in preseason. It makes my eyes sore just looking at our defensive rankings this season. I don't care if he comes back for a 2nd season, but I better see some major improvements. This defense is just plain embarrassing. I'm not satisfied with the work he's done and I hope you aren't either.

omac
12-25-2007, 11:40 PM
First, I'm in no way a democrat. I'm about as conservative as you can be, but really... don't bring that in this thread. That has no place in this conversation.

Secondly, I was talking specifically about that season and not the next. I know Coyer was crap. He couldn't make halftime adjustments to save his life. Never once did I say Coyer was a great DC so I don't know why you'd assume that off the bat. What my point was that our defense what atleast some what respectable in 05 compared to this season. You could point that to injuries, average players, and the loss of players like Al and Big Money, but a lot of the blame should be put on Bates as well. The players haven't "gelled" yet like we all heard in preseason. It makes my eyes sore just looking at our defensive rankings this season. I don't care if he comes back for a 2nd season, but I better see some major improvements. This defense is just plain embarrassing. I'm not satisfied with the work he's done and I hope you aren't either.

Great point; I don't remember Coyer's defense looking as bad consistently during the season as this one. What I remember from Coyer's was that he couldn't get pressure on the QB; I don't remember him always needing to put 8 in the box just to stop the run.

With this season in retrospect, I'd rather have a defense that can't stop the pass, than a defense that can't stop the run.

Hopefully, Bates can fix that with the proper personnel next season, but what concerns me is that we aren't even implementing Bates' system, so there's nothing to build on for next season. We'll be starting almost from scratch again. :eek:

Bronco4ever
12-25-2007, 11:49 PM
Great point; I don't remember Coyer's defense looking as bad consistently during the season as this one. What I remember from Coyer's was that he couldn't get pressure on the QB; I don't remember him always needing to put 8 in the box just to stop the run.

With this season in retrospect, I'd rather have a defense that can't stop the pass, than a defense that can't stop the run.

Hopefully, Bates can fix that with the proper personnel next season, but what concerns me is that we aren't even implementing Bates' system, so there's nothing to build on for next season. We'll be starting almost from scratch again. :eek:

Agreed. And I'd like to clarify that in a previous post when I mentioned we got good pressure upfront in 05, I only meant that it was better than this season. Against Detroit, the team with the most sacks given up this season, we could only muster up 1 measly sack. We have had our spurts but we have had too many dry spells to count. A lot of our sacks this season have been in garbage time.

omac
12-26-2007, 12:03 AM
Agreed. And I'd like to clarify that in a previous post when I mentioned we got good pressure upfront in 05, I only meant that it was better than this season. Against Detroit, the team with the most sacks given up this season, we could only muster up 1 measly sack. We have had our spurts but we have had too many dry spells to count. A lot of our sacks this season have been in garbage time.

I think our weakness with sacks this season, as well as all our other defensive woes, like Champ and Bly getting beaten when it counts the most, all stem from the fact that everyone is busy covering up against our weakness against the run. If we can have even just an average (top 16-20) rush defense without having to commit an extra man there, and without everyone else trying to cover up for the run, then I think our pass rush as well as corner coverage would be just fine.

Bronco4ever
12-26-2007, 12:15 AM
I think our weakness with sacks this season, as well as all our other defensive woes, like Champ and Bly getting beaten when it counts the most, all stem from the fact that everyone is busy covering up against our weakness against the run. If we can have even just an average (top 16-20) rush defense without having to commit an extra man there, and without everyone else trying to cover up for the run, then I think our pass rush as well as corner coverage would be just fine.

Again, I agree. Minnesota has a very good run stopping D, and sometimes their woes in the secondary are blanketed because they don't need to give extra support to the run. They can sit back and focus on stopping the pass. It never really seems to work the other way around with a stout secondary. Even with a very solid corner combination here in Denver, we are getting burnt because they are looking to stop the run too often. You can't really blame them because our run D stinks and teams are willing to pound the rock on us all game long.

dogfish
12-26-2007, 12:29 AM
Maybe not the whole front 7; I think the ends are good, just a bit inexperienced; if Thomas really works out, maybe we're just one DT away from a good, run-stuffing defense, like the Titans are when they have Haynesworth.



yea, exaggeration on my part-- sorry about that. . . i just get pissed when i look at our defense. . . :mad:


obviously, elvis and dj look like keepers, and hopefully thomas, crowder and moss can prove to be as well. . .

we do need some significant help at DT and OLB. . .

Simple Jaded
12-26-2007, 12:36 AM
"But I think there's a fine line there. You can't scrap everything and start all over."--John Lynch


The Broncos absolutely have to start building some kind of stability on defense.

Bring in players that fit his system and let him do his thing.

I really like Bates philosophy, bigger DT's and edge rushers, LB's that can tackle.

The Broncos need to bring in tougher players, though, I've seen enough of Gold and Foxworth to last me a lifetime......

omac
12-26-2007, 12:41 AM
Again, I agree. Minnesota has a very good run stopping D, and sometimes their woes in the secondary are blanketed because they don't need to give extra support to the run. They can sit back and focus on stopping the pass. It never really seems to work the other way around with a stout secondary. Even with a very solid corner combination here in Denver, we are getting burnt because they are looking to stop the run too often. You can't really blame them because our run D stinks and teams are willing to pound the rock on us all game long.

Yeah, someone posted in another thread about how it's better to have a good line than it is to have good corners, and this season is proving just that. Though Minnesotta is about last in pass defense, most of the time, their defense can look dominating because of how good their line is, and how dominant they are against the run. Add that to the fact that they have a top tier running attack and they're pretty difficult to beat.

When Denver faces them, they'll go to town on our defensive line, running at will. Then they'll have good success at stopping our rushing attack. That will force us to pass more, even though our line seems to be getting worse at pass protection as the season progresses. The only way for Denver to win is by big plays; Cutler has to be near perfect with very little protection, and Marshall, Stokley, and Scheffler have to catch everything thrown their way, since Denver will most likely lose the time of possesion battle.

omac
12-26-2007, 12:44 AM
"But I think there's a fine line there. You can't scrap everything and start all over."--John Lynch


The Broncos absolutely have to start building some kind of stability on defense.

Bring in players that fit his system and let him do his thing.

I really like Bates philosophy, bigger DT's and edge rushers, LB's that can tackle.

The Broncos need to bring in tougher players, though, I've seen enough of Gold and Foxworth to last me a lifetime......

Yeah, I never really liked the way Foxy tackles, and I've seen enough of Gold using his super speed to whiff by ball carriers. :D

Watchthemiddle
12-26-2007, 01:30 AM
"One of the great things I learned from Tony Dungy is, he said when things don't work, everyone wants to change, change, change," said Lynch, speaking about his former Tampa Bay Buccaneers coach. "He was more, 'We're going to stick with what we've got and make it better.' I think there's been so much change here that sometimes sticking to something will make things better.

I think I would listen to Lynch and Dungy.

It seems we have had a revolving door at D.C. since the Super Bowl years...and now we have a revolving door on defense.

One thing needs to stay constant...coaching.

We don't have the talent to play in this system. Isn't that obvious??

I mean, who can't see that with their own eyes??

Bate's system is proven..its a proven system just like many current Broncos's say it is. The problem is is that we don't have the players in place to have it work.

If we continuesly go through coordinator after coordinator year after year, we are not going to get anywhere and guys like CHamp and Culter's carriers are going to be wasted.

gobroncsnv
12-26-2007, 01:34 AM
Technically, yes, I guess so. That ended our championship aspirations and that's the lasting image from the season, but it wasn't the only game we played that year. For the majority of that season, our defense played well and put pressure on the QB. Plus I recall 4 Jake Plummer turnovers in that game. It's hard for your defense to play well when they are constantly on the field and have a short field to work with.

Yeah, the entire remainder of the team had the game of their lives that day. The oline, Champ, Rod, Alexander, Dline, LB's.... Darn Plummer was the only one to do anything wrong that day.

Sorry, but there was NO part of that game where any aspect of the team looked good, before, or after any of the turnovers. It was lost before the coin toss.

gobroncsnv
12-26-2007, 01:38 AM
With this season in retrospect, I'd rather have a defense that can't stop the pass, than a defense that can't stop the run.



So you've enjoyed our games against the Colts??? How about just having an all around great defense? I just don't see anything wrong with that.

gobroncsnv
12-26-2007, 01:41 AM
Yeah, I never really liked the way Foxy tackles, and I've seen enough of Gold using his super speed to whiff by ball carriers. :D

Fox just doesn't have the build to be a safety. He's not gonna strike fear in anyone's heart. And I'm in agreement about Gold. Just not NEARLY enough consistency with him to be able to count on much. We need to do better.

Bronco4ever
12-26-2007, 01:52 AM
Yeah, the entire remainder of the team had the game of their lives that day. The oline, Champ, Rod, Alexander, Dline, LB's.... Darn Plummer was the only one to do anything wrong that day.

I wish people would stop misunderstanding what I'm saying. I never said nobody played bad except Plummer. Why would you even think I meant that? Sorry I didn't break down the entire game for you in one small post. The point is that when your QB coughs it up 4 times in a championship game, you probably won't be champions, regardless of what the other units are doing. He set them up pretty nicely for some easy scores. It's not impossible to over come that, but unlikely.

Bronco4ever
12-26-2007, 01:54 AM
Yeah, the entire remainder of the team had the game of their lives that day. The oline, Champ, Rod, Alexander, Dline, LB's.... Darn Plummer was the only one to do anything wrong that day.

Sorry, but there was NO part of that game where any aspect of the team looked good, before, or after any of the turnovers. It was lost before the coin toss.

I just see your edit. I was gonna add in your last part into my post. The entire team looked flat and uninspired. It looked like they were looking past Pitt. It still doesn't help though when your QB gives the other team 4 gifts.

Tned
12-26-2007, 02:04 AM
I wish people would stop misunderstanding what I'm saying. I never said nobody played bad except Plummer. Why would you even think I meant that? Sorry I didn't break down the entire game for you in one small post. The point is that when your QB coughs it up 4 times in a championship game, you probably won't be champions, regardless of what the other units are doing. He set them up pretty nicely for some easy scores. It's not impossible to over come that, but unlikely.

The two fumbles were completely out of Plummer's control. The line was abyssmal. The two INTs were another story.

Lonestar
12-26-2007, 02:04 AM
First, I'm in no way a democrat. I'm about as conservative as you can be, but really... don't bring that in this thread. That has no place in this conversation.

Secondly, I was talking specifically about that season and not the next. I know Coyer was crap. He couldn't make halftime adjustments to save his life. Never once did I say Coyer was a great DC so I don't know why you'd assume that off the bat. What my point was that our defense what at least some what respectable in 05 compared to this season. You could point that to injuries, average players, and the loss of players like Al and Big Money, but a lot of the blame should be put on Bates as well. The players haven't "gelled" yet like we all heard in preseason. It makes my eyes sore just looking at our defensive rankings this season. I don't care if he comes back for a 2nd season, but I better see some major improvements. This defense is just plain embarrassing. I'm not satisfied with the work he's done and I hope you aren't either.


Glad to know your not a liberal spin doctor..

Please do not blame Jake for all the woes this team had, because we all KNOW especially this year the lack of talent on the OLINE and lack of RBs and WR was an issue back then.. IN SPITE of a 13-3 record..
Jake is gone let it rest


Am I satisfied with how the D turned out this year NO.

Am I satisfied of the talent level on the D with one or two maybe 3 exceptions yes..

Has mikey ignored D except the last season I think so out side of 1998 and 4 LBs he took high.

He has relied on FA has beens, two trades and the browncos for the most part during his tenure here..


We have the makings of a top defense IF he can plug the gapping hole at DT, WLB and a future FS for John. Next to that gapping hole at DT, we may have a really great DT in Thomas and I think he learned a BUNCH this year considering he really did not play the year before and the one before that was a 13 game schedule.

omac
12-26-2007, 02:07 AM
So you've enjoyed our games against the Colts??? How about just having an all around great defense? I just don't see anything wrong with that.

LOL, no. :D But this season was quite the opposite with the Colts. Our defense started out good against them when they were in pass first mode; I think we got them to go 2 or 3 3-and-outs. Then they decided to run the ball, and everything went easily downhill from there.

Sure I'd like an overall great defense, but now, if I had to choose which part we'd be very weak against, I'd choose very weak against the pass versus very weak against the run. We might be able to keep it close with a high powered offense, but if we were very weak against the run, like we are this season, the offense won't be able to get into much of a rythm because of poor time of possesion.

Bronco4ever
12-26-2007, 02:08 AM
The two fumbles were completely out of Plummer's control. The line was abyssmal. The two INTs were another story.

The line was pretty awful that day. Jake was being abused all game. What I'm really trying to say is that turnovers in general were probably the single biggest factor for the loss. You can't score when you give the other team the ball. The defense doesn't get an excuse for that, but it's probably demoralizing to a team when your defense has to go out there so often.

Tned
12-26-2007, 02:16 AM
The line was pretty awful that day. Jake was being abused all game. What I'm really trying to say is that turnovers in general were probably the single biggest factor for the loss. You can't score when you give the other team the ball. The defense doesn't get an excuse for that, but it's probably demoralizing to a team when your defense has to go out there so often.

I can't disagree with that, but I am sure it was demoralizing for the offense to see the defense allow Big Ben to convert something like 85% of the third downs in the first half. I can't remember what the exact percentage was, but it was insane, and many of them were 3rd and long.

If the defense wasn't allowing Pitt to move the ball and get first downs at will, and wasn't already up by two TD's and if the offense wasn't 'demoralized', then maybe Jake doesn't try and 'force' the throw at the end of the first half resulting in the late TD to put them up by three TDs.

omac
12-26-2007, 02:18 AM
The line was pretty awful that day. Jake was being abused all game. What I'm really trying to say is that turnovers in general were probably the single biggest factor for the loss. You can't score when you give the other team the ball. The defense doesn't get an excuse for that, but it's probably demoralizing to a team when your defense has to go out there so often.

Just wondering was that Steeler team much better at defense than the current Steeler team? Against the Steelers this season, Steeler fans were complaining that they couldn't get much pressure on Cutler.

I think our DE's this season were able to get more pressure on Roethlisburger than they were able to in the AFC championship, so maybe the current Steelers O-line isn't as good as it used to be, or our ends are better at pressuring the QB, or both.

Bronco4ever
12-26-2007, 02:18 AM
Glad to know your not a liberal spin doctor..

Please do not blame Jake for all the woes this team had, because we all KNOW especially this year the lack of talent on the OLINE and lack of RBs and WR was an issue back then.. IN SPITE of a 13-3 record..
Jake is gone let it rest


Am I satisfied with how the D turned out this year NO.

Am I satisfied of the talent level on the D with one or two maybe 3 exceptions yes..

Has mikey ignored D except the last season I think so out side of 1998 and 4 LBs he took high.

He has relied on FA has beens, two trades and the browncos for the most part during his tenure here..


We have the makings of a top defense IF he can plug the gapping hole at DT, WLB and a future FS for John. Next to that gapping hole at DT, we may have a really great DT in Thomas and I think he learned a BUNCH this year considering he really did not play the year before and the one before that was a 13 game schedule.

I didn't mean to come across that way. I enjoyed Jake's time here for the most part. We won a lot of games with Jake running the show. I just think that a combination of sloppy QB play and terrible pass blocking killed any shot of winning that day.

As far as the defense goes, I concur sir. I like our young DE's and I think with time, they could all be very solid for us. I wish we had kept Warren around but what can you do? It should be interesting to see our young D-line develop next year with a year under their belts. We could also get an upgrade at both OLB's and youth at safety. Time will tell us how our defense will be, but at least we only can go up from here.

Bronco4ever
12-26-2007, 02:31 AM
I can't disagree with that, but I am sure it was demoralizing for the offense to see the defense allow Big Ben to convert something like 85% of the third downs in the first half. I can't remember what the exact percentage was, but it was insane, and many of them were 3rd and long.

If the defense wasn't allowing Pitt to move the ball and get first downs at will, and wasn't already up by two TD's and if the offense wasn't 'demoralized', then maybe Jake doesn't try and 'force' the throw at the end of the first half resulting in the late TD to put them up by three TDs.

You are probably right on all that. I honestly tried to forget the game as much as possible. I was pretty amped to get to the Super Bowl and it was a huge let down. It's funny though, I kinda got picked on in this thread for saying the defense sucked that day and then later I got twisted into saying turnovers caused the loss. Oh well. We lost. Hopefully I can forget about it again after this.

Tned
12-26-2007, 02:38 AM
You are probably right on all that. I honestly tried to forget the game as much as possible. I was pretty amped to get to the Super Bowl and it was a huge let down. It's funny though, I kinda got picked on in this thread for saying the defense sucked that day and then later I got twisted into saying turnovers caused the loss. Oh well. We lost. Hopefully I can forget about it again after this.

The reality is the entire team played bad. The Broncos couldn't run the ball, they couldn't pass block, Plummer couldn't throw it only to his players, the defense couldn't get near Big Ben, and let him convert third downs like crazy. I think he finished the half with around 200 yards passing.

To add to that, the coaches didn't have a game plan for playing from behind. When they came out in the second half, down by three TDs, they were calling play action, after play action, with NO runs in between. All that accomplished was creating worse pass blocking issues. The RB doesn't pass block, he puts his head down and plays the fake, then after passing the QB, tries to pickup a rusher ---- toooo late-----, the tackles would fake a run block, before dropping back into pass coverage, resulting in ends blowing by them, and Plummer would have his back to these rushing ends/LBs playing out the fake, only to turn around and plant around the time the ends/LBs were reaching him. Thoroughly HORRIBLE play calling to accompany poor play on both sides of the ball.

Yes, forgetting that game is a very wise move...

Bronco9798
12-26-2007, 05:36 AM
Did you watch the same game I did PIT QB could have taken a dump of the sidelines with all the time he had. They picked up every blitz we threw at him.

I think he holds the 3 and long record for completions that day.. I think you must be thinking of some other Defense.. Or game..

I clearly stated during the 05 season we brought pressure, not the Pitt game. BTW, yeah I watched that game.

Bronco9798
12-26-2007, 05:38 AM
Actually I think he was talking about that entire season minus that game. We definitely did not get pressure on Ben that day and I doubt he would make that assumption.

Thank you, guess he cant read what he bolded in my post. Good grief. I guess he watched one game that year and that was the Pitt game.

Lonestar
12-26-2007, 12:20 PM
I didn't mean to come across that way. I enjoyed Jake's time here for the most part. We won a lot of games with Jake running the show. I just think that a combination of sloppy QB play and terrible pass blocking killed any shot of winning that day.

As far as the defense goes, I concur sir. I like our young DE's and I think with time, they could all be very solid for us. I wish we had kept Warren around but what can you do? It should be interesting to see our young D-line develop next year with a year under their belts. We could also get an upgrade at both OLB's and youth at safety. Time will tell us how our defense will be, but at least we only can go up from here.

Well Not so sure there are 3 slots behind us in Run defense..

Lonestar
12-26-2007, 12:24 PM
I clearly stated during the 05 season we brought pressure, not the Pitt game. BTW, yeah I watched that game.

I misread your quote Touché'

That game was not pretty for anyone but a stealer fan..

When the defensive guy was in the backfield before your QB is and meets him as he gets to his 5 step drop well you know you have a protection problem. I truly understand why Jake headed for the hills..

gobroncsnv
12-26-2007, 12:29 PM
Now we just need to keep Jay from heading to the hospital... last I saw, the Vikes have a pretty gnarly pass rush.

Requiem / The Dagda
12-26-2007, 12:33 PM
In 2005 we had pressure because we used a defensive system that was balls to the wall, high risk - high reward. I'm surprised it worked. It was a system used to make up for the poor defensive line we had.

gobroncsnv
12-26-2007, 12:34 PM
I clearly stated during the 05 season we brought pressure, not the Pitt game. BTW, yeah I watched that game.

but if you will remember, we had a lot of concern about no sacks that year also, and the FO spin was that it was ok to just pressure the QB... not worry about the sacks. This is too easy to resolve among us though... I think everyone on the boards sees that we need to improve the dline, and have needed to since about 98.

haroldthebarrel
12-26-2007, 12:37 PM
What about getting some real talent up front instead of blaming all them d-cords all the time.
I really mean this, but unless we draft some great talent at the tackle position all the lbs we will likely draft in the future will be near waste..... at least to what could have been.


Man, it still bites that we didnt trade up for Tommie Harris. Ill go rampant if we have a shot at for instance Dorsey and we pass up.

Broncolingus
12-26-2007, 12:53 PM
What about getting some real talent up front instead of blaming all them d-cords all the time.
I really mean this, but unless we draft some great talent at the tackle position all the lbs we will likely draft in the future will be near waste..... at least to what could have been.


Man, it still bites that we didnt trade up for Tommie Harris. Ill go rampant if we have a shot at for instance Dorsey and we pass up.

I agree...

I'll get nuked for this, but we've changed D-coord how many times since 2000 and it's been the same problem consistently?

1. Inability to pressure the QB with our DL, and...
2. Inability to compete against physical offensive lines/teams...

Now, that problem has spread to the O-line as well and our D can't stop the run anymore...

I get that you need speed, but you can't loose/ignore the physical-play part as well...

JMO

haroldthebarrel
12-26-2007, 01:52 PM
I agree...

I'll get nuked for this, but we've changed D-coord how many times since 2000 and it's been the same problem consistently?

1. Inability to pressure the QB with our DL, and...
2. Inability to compete against physical offensive lines/teams...

Now, that problem has spread to the O-line as well and our D can't stop the run anymore...

I get that you need speed, but you can't loose/ignore the physical-play part as well...

JMO

Look at all the teams that have won the superbowl and all of them was dominant on at least one side in the trenches and better than average on the other.
I think I have learned one thing all these years watching football and typing on the internet, and that is you dont win without winning the trenches.

For goodness sake, look how good the Chefs became when they traded a frigging third rounder for Roaf.
We even could have had Jenkins for a second this offseason, and while I think Crowder has really outplayed my expectations, I also think we would have won at least two more games with him in the middle.

But I think in the long run this season'¨s collapse is a good thing. It may finally have taught Shanahan that you need to invest great talent on the defensive line, and not pick up character guys and avg to backup players and think you can scheme around it.

Tned
12-26-2007, 01:59 PM
In 2005 we had pressure because we used a defensive system that was balls to the wall, high risk - high reward. I'm surprised it worked. It was a system used to make up for the poor defensive line we had.

With the Philly game being the most so (still in the first half of '05, I think). In that game, we actually brought 9, that's right 9, guys at least twice, and had 9 guys on the LOS several other times before dropping them into coverage.

That is definatley high risk, high reward.

haroldthebarrel
12-26-2007, 02:03 PM
In 2005 Coyer played a lot of zero blitzes to create pressure. When that fails, it usually go downhill very fast. In fact, it was kinda surprising we were in the Pitt game that long considering we gambled so much on blitzes.

No, pressure needs to be created by the front four, and the blitzes is just to confuse. One cannot live on the blitz alone.
Look at all the good teams in the league today, and all but maybe Indianapolis has a great front four(or five if its 3-4 with the two OLbs).

Lonestar
12-26-2007, 03:27 PM
In 2005 Coyer played a lot of zero blitzes to create pressure. When that fails, it usually go downhill very fast. In fact, it was kinda surprising we were in the Pitt game that long considering we gambled so much on blitzes.

No, pressure needs to be created by the front four, and the blitzes is just to confuse. One cannot live on the blitz alone.
Look at all the good teams in the league today, and all but maybe Indianapolis has a great front four(or five if its 3-4 with the two OLbs).

But then again why would we want to follow the pack.. The mastermind at work AGAIN..
.
Lets keep DAFTING LB's they will solve the issue

MileHighWrath
12-26-2007, 04:45 PM
The presence of a dominating line, be it offense or defense, makes the coaching staff look like genius. Everything comes to gether when you win the battle in the trenches. That's the true weakness this team has shown on both sides of the ball.

Coaches need schemes that make the best use of the talent they have. Not stubborn coaches that are hell bent on a certain system. Without flexibility the team is doomed. At the very least, Bates did adjust, too late perhaps, but in the end, they just don't have that presence on the line to make the big difference needed.

Watchthemiddle
12-26-2007, 05:38 PM
In 2005 Coyer played a lot of zero blitzes to create pressure. When that fails, it usually go downhill very fast. In fact, it was kinda surprising we were in the Pitt game that long considering we gambled so much on blitzes.

No, pressure needs to be created by the front four, and the blitzes is just to confuse. One cannot live on the blitz alone.
Look at all the good teams in the league today, and all but maybe Indianapolis has a great front four(or five if its 3-4 with the two OLbs).

I agree that you can't live on the blitz alone, but it seems like we went from doing it 90% of the time to 10% of the time.

When we blitz and put serious pressure on the QB, they make bad throws and guys like CHamp get 10+ ints a season. When they have 7-8 seconds to survey the field, they make CHamp look human.

Somehow this coaching staff needs to find a good mix. A happy medium. SD didn't blitz us every down last week, but when they did it made us make mistakes or they got a sack. We didn't keep anyone guessing this year. You have to keep offenses guessing when it comes to the blitz. Our front 4 can't do it all on their own...obviuosly.

Stargazer
12-27-2007, 02:53 AM
Bates deserves atleast 1 more year.

haroldthebarrel
12-27-2007, 01:53 PM
I agree that you can't live on the blitz alone, but it seems like we went from doing it 90% of the time to 10% of the time.

When we blitz and put serious pressure on the QB, they make bad throws and guys like CHamp get 10+ ints a season. When they have 7-8 seconds to survey the field, they make CHamp look human.

Somehow this coaching staff needs to find a good mix. A happy medium. SD didn't blitz us every down last week, but when they did it made us make mistakes or they got a sack. We didn't keep anyone guessing this year. You have to keep offenses guessing when it comes to the blitz. Our front 4 can't do it all on their own...obviuosly.

the fact that we only did it 10 percent was much due to max protection and then it is imo the right thing to do. HOwever, i agree that we should do it more.

I agree with you on the guessing. To watch a game when Bellichick is in his ace is just wonderful. The time he took everybody off the line and the confusion thereafter was priceless.

My point on the line is that we need more talent. And to get more talent you need to spend high draft picks since they all go very high in general.

Imagine how our back seven would look if we had a front four like Houston. Kubiak has really put an effort into his lines.
I think Moss is a keeper if he doesnt get much injured the two upcoming years.(or really I sincerely hope so) Elvis is a situation delight and Crowder might also be a good one.
But what is really important is the tackles. Imagine us with Minnesotas tackles. Or Baltimore.

Ricky
12-27-2007, 01:55 PM
Imagine us with any tackles.

CoachChaz
12-27-2007, 01:57 PM
I still think Thomas has a ton of potential...he's just in the wrong system. Put him in a situation to be a penetrator and he'll be much better.
________
BUY SILVERSURFER VAPORIZER (http://vaporizer.org/reviews/silver-surfer)

gobroncsnv
12-27-2007, 05:07 PM
The presence of a dominating line, be it offense or defense, makes the coaching staff look like genius. Everything comes to gether when you win the battle in the trenches. That's the true weakness this team has shown on both sides of the ball.

Football 101 right here, EXACTLY right!



Coaches need schemes that make the best use of the talent they have. Not stubborn coaches that are hell bent on a certain system. Without flexibility the team is doomed. At the very least, Bates did adjust, too late perhaps, but in the end, they just don't have that presence on the line to make the big difference needed.

Bates did make adjustments to the scheme, that is true... but the problem was not having anybody to adjust WITH. Let's see if we go another year without getting a quality DT... That would close in on about 10 in a row. Then again, Thomas may turn out ok, but we did not finish the job by only getting one good (we hope) one.

Broncolingus
12-27-2007, 05:18 PM
I'm not necessarily pro-Bates, but I do agree that we’ve changed D-coordinators like DC changes his Depends, and the results have been the same…weak, non-physical, and quick-to-get-worn-out linemen that can not consistently put pressure on the QB rushing just four.

We need to get some physical players in here on both lines that can punch the other guys in the mouth and move THEM back.

That’s the fix…

Simple Jaded
12-28-2007, 01:26 AM
I'm more than willing to endure more Gold/Foxworth watching pain if the offensive and defensive lines are the focal point of the next two offseasons.

Give the DC what he needs, even if that includes losing a few position coaches to bring in his guy's......And then let him do what he does best.

As for Shanahan, he truly needs to scrap his Mini-Me offensive line philosophy, imo, it is suffocating his entire offense.

If these two things happen, Denver is right back where they're supposed to be.

But giving Bates what he needs and another year to prove himself is only fair......

Timmy!
12-28-2007, 04:42 AM
On Christmas morning I was very upset with Santa. All I wanted for Christmas was Jim Bates head so I could mount it on my wall. This idiot has to go. I was willing to give this guy time, to let the defense "gel." I thought Bates would bring good things to the defense. I WAS WRONG. Face it people, this guy is an idiot, there are no excuses. Here are the facts: because of Bates, we trade our best DT to the Raiders because he doesn't fit the "system." We bring in Adams and Kennedy because they fit the "system." The Denver Broncos give up the most points in a season since Shanny has been the HC, (with a game still to play!!!). I mean come on people, a drunken monkey could call better defensive plays than this idiot. 1 more year is 2 years too many.

Bronco9798
12-28-2007, 07:31 AM
People still believe in this guy and his worthless scheme. He'll get another shot, I'm just not buying into it. I think we went the wrong direction bringing Bates to Denver. A lot of people think he deserves another shot, I don't. Now we get to see what other mistakes he makes this off-season and we can all wait for the "gelling" process to take us through the first part of the season again next year.

All we heard from Bates during the pre-season and the first few weeks was how they were coming together and it was a process. Yeah, no kidding it was a process. A failed process. He couldn't even get the right people in here to fit his quagmire of a scheme and now we get to watch him do it all over again. I'm excited....

CoachChaz
12-28-2007, 08:08 AM
How many overweight, complete busts will be in camp next year trying to fill a DT spot?

We have a stud DT in Thomas just being wasted because of this retarded scheme that has seen better days.
________
Easy vape reviews (http://vaporizer.org/reviews/easy-vape)

Jwalk - JayCutty6Goes - CasinoRoyal
12-28-2007, 06:47 PM
Ill give bates the benefit of doubt, He tried any and everything any coach could do to make this thing work, Nothing worked because his schemes are built around having dominant front 7's, Well we all know our front 7 is trash.

BroncoJoe
12-28-2007, 06:59 PM
Our front 7 just might be the worst in Broncos history. Doom the only exception.

All this love for DJ I just don't get. Dude hasn't done diddly, yet he's the next coming. He SHOULD NOT be in the middle.

Broncolingus
12-28-2007, 07:03 PM
I think the loss of Ekuban hurt somewhat this year also, but the last time I really thought Denver's defensive line was dominant, was the late 70s...

The mid-80s defenses were good sure, but we've never had anything close to the front-7 like we did back then...

Jwalk - JayCutty6Goes - CasinoRoyal
12-28-2007, 07:09 PM
DJ Williams is a impact weakside LB, Hes just a borderline good MLB if not average MLB. He should be moved back to weakside for GOOD. You dont go and try fixing something thats not broke, Shanny went and did it though!!! DJ was just fine and a impact player at weakside and Shanny makes another bold boneheaded GM move and brings back the bum Ian Gold who can only play DJ position and is just a average player. Makes me sick

HolyDiver
12-28-2007, 07:17 PM
Bates deserves atleast 1 more year.

Why does he DESERVE another year? .................Because our Defense is the worst it's been in a decade and we have more talent Defensively this season that we had with Coyer? .................Not Having Wilson hurt.....But then add Dre Bly and a more experienced Elvis Dumervil. We have plenty enough talent, but our players were put into a terrible scheme. We went from one of the best Run Defenses in the league to the worst..............And Al Wilson is not the reason. ...............So I'm sorry, but I don't think he deserves a damn thing. In fact, he should be lucky to even finish out the season as our DC.

BroncoJoe
12-28-2007, 07:19 PM
Why does he DESERVE another year? .................Because our Defense is the worst it's been in a decade and we have more talent Defensively this season that we had with Coyer? .................Not Having Wilson hurt.....But then add Dre Bly and a more experienced Elvis Dumervil. We have plenty enough talent, but our players were put into a terrible scheme. We went from one of the best Run Defenses in the league to the worst..............And Al Wilson is not the reason. ...............So I'm sorry, but I don't think he deserves a damn thing. In fact, he should be lucky to even finish out the season as our DC.

First, welcome!!! We will be proud to have you post here, HD.

2nd, you are absolutely right. Bates didn't earn a 2nd year. His scheme is crap, he sent some of our best players packing and likes d ick.

Anyway, glad you made it over - stick around.

TXBRONC
12-28-2007, 07:57 PM
Well I think he should get at least one more year. We played badly. Was it his scheme that's crap? Maybe but he has successfully employed the same scheme for other teams and from what I've heard its taken those teams time to adjust .

gobroncsnv
12-28-2007, 09:07 PM
Our defense needs better players and continuity of scheme for a while more than anything else. We need to quit changing DC's because the people we have keep getting blocked and can't tackle. Shed the blocks, make the tackles. Pretty sure that is what they are getting paid and coached to do.

TXBRONC
12-28-2007, 09:17 PM
Our defense needs better players and continuity of scheme for a while more than anything else. We need to quit changing DC's because the people we have keep getting blocked and can't tackle. Shed the blocks, make the tackles. Pretty sure that is what they are getting paid and coached to do.

Absolutely. :salute:

gobroncsnv
12-28-2007, 09:24 PM
Absolutely. :salute:

TX, as long as Bowlen and Shanny remain convinced of the above, that is all I'm concerned with. But you can sure point to a lot of franchises that change coaches like socks, just KILLING any traction that can be gained from experience in a given system. IF I had to choose between a better scheme, or better players, I'd go with players every time. No doubt, football is a very cerebral game, but that doesn't mean the athleticism takes the back seat. Just about any "system" can work if the right guys are playing it.

TXBRONC
12-28-2007, 09:47 PM
TX, as long as Bowlen and Shanny remain convinced of the above, that is all I'm concerned with. But you can sure point to a lot of franchises that change coaches like socks, just KILLING any traction that can be gained from experience in a given system. IF I had to choose between a better scheme, or better players, I'd go with players every time. No doubt, football is a very cerebral game, but that doesn't mean the athleticism takes the back seat. Just about any "system" can work if the right guys are playing it.

Exactly. I don't see Shanahan giving Bates the boot. All that would is another set back.

gobroncsnv
12-28-2007, 10:00 PM
All that would provide is another set back.

and I REALLY doubt we are willing to put up with another one of those. we already have too many cases of cyber-cide.

Lonestar
12-30-2007, 02:07 AM
Exactly. I don't see Shanahan giving Bates the boot. All that would is another set back.



While I agree with you here mikey has been know to find scape goats out there for less..

This has been a crap year at best unless he can slide thorugh on the injuries were responsible someones head will have to roll. IMO

SoCoPoCo
12-30-2007, 05:54 AM
continuity. I, for one, am getting tired of the revolving door, flavor-of-the-month DC's. Shanahan hired Bates and although this is by far the worst defense I've seen in 40 years of watching the Broncos, I think he gets another year to show what he can do. We will draft heavy on the defensive side - again - but I think this year we will bring in some FA's who have had success in Bates' system ala Miami and GB.

Tned
12-30-2007, 05:59 AM
continuity. I, for one, am getting tired of the revolving door, flavor-of-the-month DC's. Shanahan hired Bates and although this is by far the worst defense I've seen in 40 years of watching the Broncos, I think he gets another year to show what he can do. We will draft heavy on the defensive side - again - but I think this year we will bring in some FA's who have had success in Bates' system ala Miami and GB.

Welcome to the message board, Soco.

I think you make a good point. The defense was bad, but if they bought into bates system and track record, you have to give it more than one year. Use the offseason to get players that fit the system.

haroldthebarrel
12-30-2007, 06:39 AM
There are rumours that Ryan, the raiders d-cordinator might be sacked.
My point on these firings subject is that you dont fire unless there is somebody way better on the marked.
Bates results this year are so bad he should maybe get fired... at least if Ryan becomes our next coach. Wouldnt even have to ruin Thomas in a two gap as well.

Bronco9798
12-30-2007, 07:17 AM
continuity. I, for one, am getting tired of the revolving door, flavor-of-the-month DC's. Shanahan hired Bates and although this is by far the worst defense I've seen in 40 years of watching the Broncos, I think he gets another year to show what he can do. We will draft heavy on the defensive side - again - but I think this year we will bring in some FA's who have had success in Bates' system ala Miami and GB.

What about the revolving door on the DL'men every year. Who's fault is that? Every year we are bringing in new guys up front and it fails. Look at our D line the past several years and look at all the mistakes. Now, we get to try it again next year. Will it bring the same results? We not only need continuity in coaching, we need the same continuity with the guys that play up front on the D line. Somebody has to get this thing right one day or we'll continue every year with the same results.

TXBRONC
12-30-2007, 10:07 AM
continuity. I, for one, am getting tired of the revolving door, flavor-of-the-month DC's. Shanahan hired Bates and although this is by far the worst defense I've seen in 40 years of watching the Broncos, I think he gets another year to show what he can do. We will draft heavy on the defensive side - again - but I think this year we will bring in some FA's who have had success in Bates' system ala Miami and GB.


Like Tned said welcome to Broncos Forums. I too agree with you about keeping continuity. Besides that Bates' resume and reputation is too good fire him because of one bad season.

HolyDiver
12-30-2007, 11:33 AM
What about the revolving door on the DL'men every year. Who's fault is that? Every year we are bringing in new guys up front and it fails. Look at our D line the past several years and look at all the mistakes. Now, we get to try it again next year. Will it bring the same results? We not only need continuity in coaching, we need the same continuity with the guys that play up front on the D line. Somebody has to get this thing right one day or we'll continue every year with the same results.

I think Dumervil, Crowder, Thomas and Moss can all be here for several years..............So, that's a good start. Now draft a top DT and go after a Defensive coordinator with fresh ideas and REAL enthusiasm..................I've said it 100 times but I'll say it again.......Ken Norton jr for DC and how about Seth Joiner as our Linebacker coach? A former Bronco that is coaching somewhere right now, I forget. It may even be highschool..............But I think he's coaching college..........Anyone know for sure? ............ I think McKinley is worth keeping and hopefully Ekuban comes back 100%. He was a solid player for us. Engelberger can be let go unless he could be switched to Linebacker..............Maybe have him get down to 245 and it could work. If not, he really serves no purpose.................I agree with Mclark that Red Bryant ( DT from Texas A&M) is worthy of our second round pick.

eessydo
12-30-2007, 01:23 PM
I think everyone in here can agree that when you start to make changes to ANYTHING, you can expect a step backwards prior to a step forwards. For example, golf swings. You try to make changes to your swing and more often than not, your score goes up before it goes down. But if you keep at it you far exceed your previous ceiling of ability.

For example, your score is consistently in the low 90's. You make some changes with a proven golf professional and you scores start hitting 105 / 110. SO your choice is you can ditch the coach and go back to what you did before OR you can be patient and eventually you start shooting consistently in the high 80's, low 90's. Your potential is endless because you have modified your swing and stuck with it.

Well here is our choice, ditch the system, and an opportunity to build a GB defense (which prior to last year and this year was FREAKING awful) or a miami defense (which prior to bates arrival was known for Dan Marino's offense and a defense that couldn't carry them deep into the playoffs).

Bates has the scheme and tangible results from preivous teams. He has the ability to possibly change our identity from an offensive team to a defensive team. But like fine wine or scotch, it takes time to mature.

Bronco9798
12-30-2007, 01:33 PM
I think everyone in here can agree that when you start to make changes to ANYTHING, you can expect a step backwards prior to a step forwards. For example, golf swings. You try to make changes to your swing and more often than not, your score goes up before it goes down. But if you keep at it you far exceed your previous ceiling of ability.

For example, your score is consistently in the low 90's. You make some changes with a proven golf professional and you scores start hitting 105 / 110. SO your choice is you can ditch the coach and go back to what you did before OR you can be patient and eventually you start shooting consistently in the high 80's, low 90's. Your potential is endless because you have modified your swing and stuck with it.

Well here is our choice, ditch the system, and an opportunity to build a GB defense (which prior to last year and this year was FREAKING awful) or a miami defense (which prior to bates arrival was known for Dan Marino's offense and a defense that couldn't carry them deep into the playoffs).

Bates has the scheme and tangible results from preivous teams. He has the ability to possibly change our identity from an offensive team to a defensive team. But like fine wine or scotch, it takes time to mature.

I can understand that if we were improving each game, but we weren't. We had to scrap his scheme and start putting 8 in the box just to stop the run. Bottom line, we're going to be going from scratch again with his system again next year. This year was a total failure, not an improvement from week to week. I'm not buying into all of that. I don't like his system personally and I think we're in for a long season on the defense again next year if we have to wait and start all over again next year.

Timmy!
12-30-2007, 03:17 PM
After AP runs for 200 yard in the 1st half today, hopefully Bates will be fired at halftime.....

broncogirl7
12-30-2007, 03:24 PM
Just heard on another site that 850 KOA was reporting rumors that Bates may retire! Anyone else heard anything to substantiate this?

Bronco9798
12-30-2007, 03:25 PM
Just heard on another site that 850 KOA was reporting rumors that Bates may retire! Anyone else heard anything to substantiate this?

That would make my off-season. Maybe Shanny would go after a young guy with some modern ideas.

broncogirl7
12-30-2007, 03:30 PM
That would make my off-season. Maybe Shanny would go after a young guy with some modern ideas.

It would definately make my off-season! That's exactly what I am hoping...young guy, new ideas.
I was also pondering how cool it would be to get a new quarterback coach......like Elway. We need one to help groom Cutler to the next level of greatness and I can't imagine what the future would hold with Elway as his teacher. I get the shivers just thinking about it!:eek:

Bronco9798
12-30-2007, 03:31 PM
It would definately make my off-season! That's exactly what I am hoping...young guy, new ideas.
I was also pondering how cool it would be to get a new quarterback coach......like Elway. We need one to help groom Cutler to the next level of greatness and I can't imagine what the future would hold with Elway as his teacher. I get the shivers just thinking about it!:eek:

Elway is too busy with his adventures. He would never come back to coach. Being a great QB doesn't make you a great coach either. I don't see John having any interest in getting back on the sidelines.

broncogirl7
12-30-2007, 03:33 PM
Elway is too busy with his adventures. He would never come back to coach. Being a great QB doesn't make you a great coach either. I don't see John having any interest in getting back on the sidelines.

Damn 9'nr! Let me have my dreams!:laugh:

Bronco9798
12-30-2007, 03:34 PM
Damn 9'nr! Let me have my dreams!:laugh:

Nice dream...:cool:

BroncoJoe
12-30-2007, 03:35 PM
I agree with 9'er re: Elway coaching. Great player more often than not does not equate great coach. I can't think of one "great player" that turned into a great coach. Ditka the only possible exception - I don't think he was "great" at either.

Broncospsycho77
12-30-2007, 03:35 PM
The thing that bothers me and really splits my perception of the situation is the personnel. We have two outstanding corners who can play one on one more than other corners, so why do we consistently choose NOT to blitz the passer or rusher? We live by smaller, athletic defensemen, so why hire a guy who focuses on putting space filler tackles to clog up the line for linebackers? It was a match made in hell to begin with, so giving him another year to find his guys just seems two steps back for two steps forward.

I was content with Coyer, and I was content with Rhodes, but having to reshape our entire defense, when our original defense was just a tweak and a new player from top 5 in the league, to an awful, vanilla mess of a defense, is completely nonsensical.

broncogirl7
12-30-2007, 03:37 PM
I agree with 9'er re: Elway coaching. Great player more often than not does not equate great coach. I can't think of one "great player" that turned into a great coach. Ditka the only possible exception - I don't think he was "great" at either.

What about Kubiak?

Timmy!
12-30-2007, 03:42 PM
The thing that bothers me and really splits my perception of the situation is the personnel. We have two outstanding corners who can play one on one more than other corners, so why do we consistently choose NOT to blitz the passer or rusher? We live by smaller, athletic defensemen, so why hire a guy who focuses on putting space filler tackles to clog up the line for linebackers? It was a match made in hell to begin with, so giving him another year to find his guys just seems two steps back for two steps forward.

I was content with Coyer, and I was content with Rhodes, but having to reshape our entire defense, when our original defense was just a tweak and a new player from top 5 in the league, to an awful, vanilla mess of a defense, is completely nonsensical.

Yup. Just think, in another year with Bates we could go from vanilla to the ever popular cardboard flavor.

Bronco9798
12-30-2007, 03:47 PM
What about Kubiak?

When was Kubiak a great player? I missed those years and I've been a Bronco fan for 30 years.

Lonestar
12-30-2007, 11:52 PM
I agree with 9'er re: Elway coaching. Great player more often than not does not equate great coach. I can't think of one "great player" that turned into a great coach. Ditka the only possible exception - I don't think he was "great" at either.

Just few come to minf

Paul Brown
Tom Landry
Mike Tomlin
Bill Crowder
Herm Edwards
Tony Dungy

I'm sure there are many more but these jumped off the page at me..

omac
12-30-2007, 11:55 PM
Just few come to minf

Paul Brown
Tom Landry
Mike Tomlin
Bill Crowder
Herm Edwards
Tony Dungy

I'm sure there are many more but these jumped off the page at me..

Were they all great players, though? Seems like the average ones are the ones who turn out to be pretty good coaches, like the benchwarmer Kubes.

Lonestar
12-31-2007, 12:02 AM
Were they all great players, though? Seems like the average ones are the ones who turn out to be pretty good coaches, like the benchwarmer Kubes.


Seems to me they were in numerous pro bolws or played on championship teams. I do not think that HOF should be the only measuring stick do you?

Art shell, Dennis geeen add to the list. I even think Marty played way back..

broncogirl7
01-08-2008, 03:21 PM
Bump...Nfl network reported Bates fired today and when I tried to find an article about it...NOTHING. WTH is going on? Is he fired or not?

BigDaddyBronco
01-08-2008, 03:22 PM
It would make my day.

broncogirl7
01-08-2008, 03:23 PM
It would make my day.

Mine also. I want to jump for joy, but can't find anything to back it up yet.

JONtheBRONCO
01-08-2008, 03:28 PM
The NFL has outgrown Bates and his system. We need to find some DT's that can penetrate and make some plays in the backfield and get to the QB. That two gap system is worthless in my opinion in todays NFL. We need athletes at the DT position not a bunch of 350 pound fat slobs trying to stand their man and creating a gap. Just a worthless system.

Agreed...

Unless your running a 3-4, two gap DT's don't fit in a 4-3. Thats why you see guys like Albert Haynesworth for the Titans tearing it up in a 4-3, because he runs wild. A guy like Vince Wilfork in the 3-4 gets doubled every time, making him a two gap player, so that scheme works. I am not suggesting a change to the 3-4, I just hope we address the DT position asap.

BOSSHOGG30
01-08-2008, 03:31 PM
http://www.denverbroncos.com/

Bates steps down!

http://blog.denverbroncos.com/mason/2008/01/08/jim-bates-will-not-return-in-2008/

BOSSHOGG30
01-08-2008, 03:32 PM
In a statement, Bates said that he had the chance to remain with the Broncos but opted to stand down after just one season in Denver.

“I’m very thankful for the opportunity and very saddened that things did not work out,” he said.

“I had the opportunity to stay. (Head Coach) Mike (Shanahan) has been very fair with me, and the final decision, for the Broncos and for me, was to step aside.”

BOSSHOGG30
01-08-2008, 03:34 PM
Why do I even post this stuff in a thread? I guess I should just create new ones all the time

MOtorboat
01-08-2008, 03:34 PM
It's Karma. Quit questioning my penis size.

HolyDiver
01-08-2008, 03:40 PM
It's Karma. Quit questioning my penis size.

I'll say..................under 5" ..............Oh, sorry, I thought this was a serious question.

broncogirl7
01-08-2008, 03:45 PM
Why do I even post this stuff in a thread? I guess I should just create new ones all the time

Don't feel bad Boss. That's why I spent the last 1/2hour going thru old threads to bump the previous Bates thread and then it was like wildfire spreading. I hate so many new threads being started for the same thing...