PDA

View Full Version : I don't understand...



sneakers
12-22-2009, 12:33 AM
Not being a smart ass or sarcastic here....

What do people mean when they say that coach McD needs to let go of his ego? (or some variation of that) I don't get it.

Grover
12-22-2009, 12:46 AM
What I interpret that to mean is that McDaniels has his views on how a team should look, or how a team should be, and he's trying to make this particular team fit that mold.

The problem is that we may not have the exact players needed to fulfill his vision, yet he's still trying to make this team into something that maybe it's not.

Some examples:

Our offensive line was fantastic last year. We kept the same players, and same coach (Dennison), but we changed up the scheme to fit McDaniel's desires - more man blocking and less zone blocking. Now we are saying that the offensive line is one of the worst parts of our team. How did we go from strength to weakness in one season with all the same parts in place. McDaniel's wants to run things his way without looking at the strength of the pieces. Ego.

Next example is Hillis. Last year he was a brighg spot at running back - our leading rusher. This year he can't get within sweating distance of a football. How did he go from hard working, power smashmouth runner to a neglected asset the next? The answer is McDaniels runs things his way whether or not there is evidence to do so. Ego.

silkamilkamonico
12-22-2009, 12:51 AM
They are saying that he is intentionally throwing these games by playing lesser players because he doesn't agree with real NFL guru's that make up the posters on this forum who know football better than the people who've been doing it their entire life and work around it 100 hours or so a week.

GEM
12-22-2009, 12:54 AM
They are saying that he is intentionally throwing these games by playing lesser players because he doesn't agree with real NFL guru's that make up the posters on this forum who know football better than the people who've been doing it their entire life and work around it 100 hours or so a week.

Well, ya kind of have to wonder when the team is failing miserably. Why not try some of the things that worked before? Could it be any worse for trying? What's the worst....we lose to the Raiders in our house? Oh wait...

silkamilkamonico
12-22-2009, 01:08 AM
Well, ya kind of have to wonder when the team is failing miserably. Why not try some of the things that worked before? Could it be any worse for trying? What's the worst....we lose to the Raiders in our house? Oh wait...

I don't think the players are executing.

McDaniels obviously feels restricted.

Our short yardage situations have gone from play action, to running it up the middle, to now QB sneaks. We'd probably be better off just lining up shotgun and running a normal play.

SHort yardage situations should be a high percentage play up the middle. It's a low percentage play for us.

McDaniels has even handcuffed scoring situations and 2 minute drills, because we have no consistent flow with our offense. We can run 3 good plays for 45 yards, and then go 3 and out.

In wake of our poor pass protection, Orton has shown he isn't very good at recognizing blitzes and helping the oline identify packages. When the QB is getting sacked from blitz without even seeing the player, missed assignemnt or not, he has to see that coming. If nothing else, to manipulate the pocket.

getagrip
12-22-2009, 10:01 AM
Hi,

I have said this in another thread here but what I see being an outsider is his ego, he and Belichek(sp). He even wears the hoddies.. come on... he did good in NE due to what he had to work with which is different then Denver. Not say their guys are better then the Bronco's but it's the system. Doesn't mean that system will work here or ever again.

I think the bronco's problems are on the Coach and his playcalling

Just my opinion

CoachChaz
12-22-2009, 10:09 AM
It's interesting to me that we beat 3 of the tougher oponents on our schedule with this system (Dal, NE, SD) and now we cant beat Oak and Wash. Hmmm...is it the system, the play-calling or the execution?

Ravage!!!
12-22-2009, 10:22 AM
It's interesting to me that we beat 3 of the tougher oponents on our schedule with this system (Dal, NE, SD) and now we cant beat Oak and Wash. Hmmm...is it the system, the play-calling or the execution?

All the above.

At the same time.. we see Dal, NE, and SD get BETTER as the season progresses (well, NE went up and is now going down again). Lets be honest, we faced all three at the RIGHT time. If Dal was playing like they are NOW, we get slaughtered. SD showed us, by whipping us at home, that the first time was luck (and we DID have two kicks for TDs) of the timing.

There were several posters that got RIPPED on the boards because they expressed that a lot of the first 6 wins was due to luck. Now that our team isn't shutting teams completely out in the second half, we aren't getting multible kick-returns for TDs, and not getting the bounces off players in the last seconds of the game.....things are looking so good.

So is it the playcalling, is it the system, or the execution? I would say its all three. The system is NOT going to score a lot of points. Not with the tiny pass plays. The play-calling IS the system, and the execution can be said for every play in the NFL. If you execute every play properly, then no team could ever stop you. Execution is not ONLY on the players, in the long run, it comes down to the coaching.

Ravage!!!
12-22-2009, 10:23 AM
To answer the Opening post.... I think Grover nailed it on the head as far as WHAT PEOPLE MEAN when/if they use that expression.

broncophan
12-22-2009, 10:24 AM
It's interesting to me that we beat 3 of the tougher oponents on our schedule with this system (Dal, NE, SD) and now we cant beat Oak and Wash. Hmmm...is it the system, the play-calling or the execution?

It is the NFL......and the parody.....that the NFL wants.

1.how do the raiders beat the bengals, eagles, steelers, and broncos??

2. How do the broncos beat the giants....and lose to the skins....watching that Monday night game makes me wonder.

3. How did the broncos beat the Pats and Cowboys and Chargers.

I guess we can say the team is not prepared....coaches are not prepared etc....poor execution.....who knows...

just so hard to predict from week to week or game to game,for the most part, what the outcome will be....

GO BRONCOS!!

Medford Bronco
12-22-2009, 10:27 AM
It's interesting to me that we beat 3 of the tougher oponents on our schedule with this system (Dal, NE, SD) and now we cant beat Oak and Wash. Hmmm...is it the system, the play-calling or the execution?

Its both but I really think the O Line is not set up for McDs style right now.

Medford Bronco
12-22-2009, 10:29 AM
It is the NFL......and the parody.....that the NFL wants.

1.how do the raiders beat the bengals, eagles, steelers, and broncos??

2. How do the broncos beat the giants....and lose to the skins....watching that Monday night game makes me wonder.

3. How did the broncos beat the Pats and Cowboys and Chargers.

I guess we can say the team is not prepared....coaches are not prepared etc....poor execution.....who knows...

just so hard to predict from week to week or game to game,for the most part, what the outcome will be....

GO BRONCOS!!

I also think in 2009 that the NFL as you pointed out is so much different than in 1999 or 1989. Pete Rozelle would be smiling now


I still dont know how Cleveland beat the Steelers last week.

Maybe Denver shocks and wins in Philly. It can happen. Go Broncos :beer:

CoachChaz
12-22-2009, 10:29 AM
All the above.

At the same time.. we see Dal, NE, and SD get BETTER as the season progresses (well, NE went up and is now going down again). Lets be honest, we faced all three at the RIGHT time. If Dal was playing like they are NOW, we get slaughtered. SD showed us, by whipping us at home, that the first time was luck (and we DID have two kicks for TDs) of the timing.

There were several posters that got RIPPED on the boards because they expressed that a lot of the first 6 wins was due to luck. Now that our team isn't shutting teams completely out in the second half, we aren't getting multible kick-returns for TDs, and not getting the bounces off players in the last seconds of the game.....things are looking so good.

So is it the playcalling, is it the system, or the execution? I would say its all three. The system is NOT going to score a lot of points. Not with the tiny pass plays. The play-calling IS the system, and the execution can be said for every play in the NFL. If you execute every play properly, then no team could ever stop you. Execution is not ONLY on the players, in the long run, it comes down to the coaching.

This part intrigues me.

I can buy that it comes down to all three. But I get the sense that not many others can. The combination sounds alot to me like a new head coach and new players trying to rebuild an organization. Errors and growing pais WILL happen. Does that mean we should lynch the coach and the players? I dont think so.

Improve the personnel and the play-calling can improve. Like I said in a previous post...you cant make an omelet without an egg.

broncophan
12-22-2009, 10:32 AM
All the above.

At the same time.. we see Dal, NE, and SD get BETTER as the season progresses (well, NE went up and is now going down again). Lets be honest, we faced all three at the RIGHT time. If Dal was playing like they are NOW, we get slaughtered. SD showed us, by whipping us at home, that the first time was luck (and we DID have two kicks for TDs) of the timing.

There were several posters that got RIPPED on the boards because they expressed that a lot of the first 6 wins was due to luck. Now that our team isn't shutting teams completely out in the second half, we aren't getting multible kick-returns for TDs, and not getting the bounces off players in the last seconds of the game.....things are looking so good.

So is it the playcalling, is it the system, or the execution? I would say its all three. The system is NOT going to score a lot of points. Not with the tiny pass plays. The play-calling IS the system, and the execution can be said for every play in the NFL. If you execute every play properly, then no team could ever stop you. Execution is not ONLY on the players, in the long run, it comes down to the coaching.

The only win we had that was "luck" was vs. the Bengals.....although successful teams need luck as well throughout the season...

broncophan
12-22-2009, 10:35 AM
I also think in 2009 that the NFL as you pointed out is so much different than in 1999 or 1989. Pete Rozelle would be smiling now


I still dont know how Cleveland beat the Steelers last week.

Maybe Denver shocks and wins in Philly. It can happen. Go Broncos :beer:

I agree.....he would love that 6 teams are 7-7 and in the hunt for a wildcard.
If the broncos team that beat the giants shows up in Philly....than the broncos will win.....imo...

Mike
12-22-2009, 10:44 AM
Its both but I really think the O Line is not set up for McDs style right now.

So do you continue to pound a square peg into a round hole or do you realize that ain't working and try to adjust it?

Ravage!!!
12-22-2009, 10:45 AM
This part intrigues me.

I can buy that it comes down to all three. But I get the sense that not many others can. The combination sounds alot to me like a new head coach and new players trying to rebuild an organization. Errors and growing pais WILL happen. Does that mean we should lynch the coach and the players? I dont think so.

Improve the personnel and the play-calling can improve. Like I said in a previous post...you cant make an omelet without an egg.

But this goes right with the topic of the thread, and why people state about the ego.

We all can see that McDaniel's isn't using the play that fits his team, but rather the play that he wishes he had. We don't have the lineman to ignore the zbs. We had one of the best WR duo's in the NFL last year. Can we say that now? Why not? Isn't this 'system' designed to spread the ball around??

I think a LOT of the problem is on the "system" (and I think thats the most over-used expression on the message boards). Improve the personnel? This is something that interests me. Last year we had a great WR duo, the best OL in the NFL, a good pass catching TE with a stud 250 FB that plays like a TB and had the best hands on the team. We supposedly improved the RB position by the draft and FA. How do we go one season with NONE of that being the case? The system, the playcalling, or the execution?

I think most of it DOES come down to having a rookie coach.

broncophan
12-22-2009, 10:46 AM
Hi,

I have said this in another thread here but what I see being an outsider is his ego, he and Belichek(sp). He even wears the hoddies.. come on... he did good in NE due to what he had to work with which is different then Denver. Not say their guys are better then the Bronco's but it's the system. Doesn't mean that system will work here or ever again.

I think the bronco's problems are on the Coach and his playcalling

Just my opinion

We are 8-6 with a first year coach and alot of changes made the past offseason.Sure we started 6-0 and have gone 2-6 since then.Over all.....he has done o.k.......honestly.....alot more "problems" were expected around here..

CoachChaz
12-22-2009, 10:47 AM
So do you continue to pound a square peg into a round hole or do you realize that ain't working and try to adjust it?

You run a system until something works. Let's be honest...McD's offense couldnt possibly be more vanilla than it is right now and we're still saying he needs to switch things up to utilize the talent he has? If professional football players cant run the plays we're seeing out there...then we have more roster work to do than we thought

Ravage!!!
12-22-2009, 11:06 AM
You run a system until something works. Let's be honest...McD's offense couldnt possibly be more vanilla than it is right now and we're still saying he needs to switch things up to utilize the talent he has? If professional football players cant run the plays we're seeing out there...then we have more roster work to do than we thought

YOu and I both know that we very much identified that our OL wasn't meant to run the "system" he wanted in the offseason. Why didn't he? Thats the 'ego' part of the question from the OP. I think we both can see that McDaniels is a high-ego person. He wants things HIS way.. and thats fine if he makes it work. But once you want things YOUR way, and YOUR way is showing to have some serious flaws.... then you will be questioned on that.

I believe we've been running 'some' ZBS throughout the year. So why would it be changing much to work towards our strengths? Better question, why did we move away from it THIS season? Is it pounding a square peg into a round hole simply because he wants the peg to be round?

I don't understand why is it you think this team has NO eggs for the omlett when just LAST season we had one of the most up-an-coming offenses in the NFL with a HUGE amount of young talent?

CoachChaz
12-22-2009, 12:23 PM
YOu and I both know that we very much identified that our OL wasn't meant to run the "system" he wanted in the offseason. Why didn't he? Thats the 'ego' part of the question from the OP. I think we both can see that McDaniels is a high-ego person. He wants things HIS way.. and thats fine if he makes it work. But once you want things YOUR way, and YOUR way is showing to have some serious flaws.... then you will be questioned on that.

I believe we've been running 'some' ZBS throughout the year. So why would it be changing much to work towards our strengths? Better question, why did we move away from it THIS season? Is it pounding a square peg into a round hole simply because he wants the peg to be round?

I don't understand why is it you think this team has NO eggs for the omlett when just LAST season we had one of the most up-an-coming offenses in the NFL with a HUGE amount of young talent?


Our talent was perfect for a WCO...McDaniels doesnt run that. So the suggestion here is that we should go out and either find a coach that is exactly like the one we just fired...or expect the new one to learn a system he's never run and implement it? neither really makes sense.

Defensively, we are running a completely different system with people playing new positions...but that has improved. Why not the offense? I'm still waiting for someone to convince me WHO on the o-line, other than Hamilton has played EXCLUSIVELY in a ZBS system throughout their college and professional careers. So much so that they are incapable of a straigh block scheme.

Great WR's? I'm still waiting for Eddie to get open. Only 47% of the passes to Eddie have been completed this year. Is that how we're going to win games?

claymore
12-22-2009, 12:29 PM
Our talent was perfect for a WCO...McDaniels doesnt run that. So the suggestion here is that we should go out and either find a coach that is exactly like the one we just fired...or expect the new one to learn a system he's never run and implement it? neither really makes sense.

Defensively, we are running a completely different system with people playing new positions...but that has improved. Why not the offense? I'm still waiting for someone to convince me WHO on the o-line, other than Hamilton has played EXCLUSIVELY in a ZBS system throughout their college and professional careers. So much so that they are incapable of a straigh block scheme.

Great WR's? I'm still waiting for Eddie to get open. Only 47% of the passes to Eddie have been completed this year. Is that how we're going to win games?
If it isnt the lineman's fault its the coaching Chaz.

Not going to research every collegiate career of all of our lineman, but thinking back on their drafts, I would say that they all came from ZBS offenses in college. To include Clady.

JMCD is the head coach why not hire a competent OC that knows ZBS, and a West Coast offense if thats what it takes?

underrated29
12-22-2009, 12:31 PM
To me it comes down to 3 things. I will list them imo of importance and or need.

OL play
Play calling
QB


I think mcd, will fix the OL this offseason. Actually, I know he will! So that is done with.

I think once that is fixed, he might see that some of his plays really are so dam predictable, and they dont work because the D, knows whats coming. Not because the OL didnt block.


Then there is Kyle, i like him he is great, but there is something missing with him. He reminds me of Kerry collins for Ten (before he got benched for VY) or Jake delholme of Car. Good but isnt a game changer and very system oriented. Not to be relied upon.


If QB is the most important position in football, then maybe we should try to fill that position with the most talented player we can find...... it doesnt have to be this year, because we can win with Kyle, but he to me, just is not the long term answer for us.

broncophan
12-22-2009, 12:52 PM
To me it comes down to 3 things. I will list them imo of importance and or need.

OL play
Play calling
QB


I think mcd, will fix the OL this offseason. Actually, I know he will! So that is done with.

I think once that is fixed, he might see that some of his plays really are so dam predictable, and they dont work because the D, knows whats coming. Not because the OL didnt block.


Then there is Kyle, i like him he is great, but there is something missing with him. He reminds me of Kerry collins for Ten (before he got benched for VY) or Jake delholme of Car. Good but isnt a game changer and very system oriented. Not to be relied upon.


If QB is the most important position in football, then maybe we should try to fill that position with the most talented player we can find...... it doesnt have to be this year, because we can win with Kyle, but he to me, just is not the long term answer for us.

We have not had a long term answer for qb since Elway...we need to keep a veteran qb and have a young qb learn from him....for 3 years or so.....a Roethlisberger or even Flacco does not come around too often.

Not sure what you mean by Orton not being reliable......sure he is not flashy.....but he is adequate.......and I think reliable.

CoachChaz
12-22-2009, 01:05 PM
If it isnt the lineman's fault its the coaching Chaz.

Not going to research every collegiate career of all of our lineman, but thinking back on their drafts, I would say that they all came from ZBS offenses in college. To include Clady.

JMCD is the head coach why not hire a competent OC that knows ZBS, and a West Coast offense if thats what it takes?

Wiegmann didnt run it in KC, Harris didnt run it at Notre Dame, Hochstein didnt run it in NE, I doubt North Dakota ran it during Kuper's tenure and Boise State uses a version of the ZBS that utilizes combination blocks, but regardless...it doesnt affect a LT nearly as much

underrated29
12-22-2009, 01:10 PM
We have not had a long term answer for qb since Elway...we need to keep a veteran qb and have a young qb learn from him....for 3 years or so.....a Roethlisberger or even Flacco does not come around too often.

Not sure what you mean by Orton not being reliable......sure he is not flashy.....but he is adequate.......and I think reliable.




No no no, i said not to be relied upon. As in if the game is on the line and we need to move into scoring position in 2 min or less. He is not to be relied upon in those circumstances.

He is not someone we can put the team on his shoulders and go out and get points if absolutely necessary. He is not to be relied upon to orchestrate game winning drives.

yes, he has done them before, even this year. Most Qbs have some, but I think its safe to say he is not someone that can take over a game.





(imo a good a Sb contending team should have one of those at their QB position)

Ravage!!!
12-22-2009, 01:13 PM
We have not had a long term answer for qb since Elway...we need to keep a veteran qb and have a young qb learn from him....for 3 years or so.....a Roethlisberger or even Flacco does not come around too often.

Not sure what you mean by Orton not being reliable......sure he is not flashy.....but he is adequate.......and I think reliable.

I completely disagree with this.

We do NOT need to sit a rookie QB for three years. That just doesn't make sense, and you are seeing throughout the NFL that this doesn't need to be the case.

Breese, McNabb, Brady,P.Manning, E. Manning, Rothlesburger, Palmer, Flacco, Ryan, Sanchez, Stafford, Young........ are just some off the top of my head that didn't sit for three years. Most didn't sit a single year (Of this list, ONLY Brady and Palmer sat a single season).

CoachChaz
12-22-2009, 01:14 PM
No no no, i said not to be relied upon. As in if the game is on the line and we need to move into scoring position in 2 min or less. He is not to be relied upon in those circumstances.

He is not someone we can put the team on his shoulders and go out and get points if absolutely necessary. He is not to be relied upon to orchestrate game winning drives.

yes, he has done them before, even this year. Most Qbs have some, but I think its safe to say he is not someone that can take over a game.





(imo a good a Sb contending team should have one of those at their QB position)



I think a QB like that is a luxury. Teams can win big games and Super Bowls without guys like that, but you'd better have a monster defense to go with it.

That being said...we have neither...






...yet

Ravage!!!
12-22-2009, 01:16 PM
I think a QB like that is a luxury. Teams can win big games and Super Bowls without guys like that, but you'd better have a monster defense to go with it.

That being said...we have neither...






...yet

Absolutely. Which is why you don't see MONSTER defenses that can win a SB without an top talent at QB, very often. Its MUCH MUCH easier to win by building around a top QB than to try and build a defense to make UP for a QB.

Which is why I don't think Defense wins Super Bowls. Offense does. I would MUCH rather have a STUD offense and a "pretty good" defense, than try to have a Stuf Defense and an ok offense.

D1g1tal j1m
12-22-2009, 01:19 PM
I do believe that McD has an Ego, all HC have Egos (or they wouldn't be good HCs). He has a vision of what his team should be and how he wants to play, but he came into a team that was run by the same guy for 13 years. I will give him more than 3/4th of a season to prove his system works. He needs his own guys to run his system, this is a transition year (and maybe next year too) and we were all spoiled by the 6-0 start. I am wiling to bet we will get much bigger on the OL and DL this off-season and move completely away from the ZBS that Shan had in place.
McD's Ego got us the 6-0 start, injuries and lack of depth have contributed to our 2-6 record the following 8 games. I'd rather our HC have an Ego than someone who doesn't.

CoachChaz
12-22-2009, 01:23 PM
I do believe that McD has an Ego, all HC have Egos (or they wouldn't be good HCs). He has a vision of what his team should be and how he wants to play, but he came into a team that was run by the same guy for 13 years. I will give him more than 3/4th of a season to prove his system works. He needs his own guys to run his system, this is a transition year (and maybe next year too) and we were all spoiled by the 6-0 start. I am wiling to bet we will get much bigger on the OL and DL this off-season and move completely away from the ZBS that Shan had in place.
McD's Ego got us the 6-0 start, injuries and lack of depth have contributed to our 2-6 record the following 8 games. I'd rather our HC have an Ego than someone who doesn't.

Ahhh...the voice of reason

underrated29
12-22-2009, 01:31 PM
I think a QB like that is a luxury. Teams can win big games and Super Bowls without guys like that, but you'd better have a monster defense to go with it.

That being said...we have neither...






...yet



right. Orton and our defense to start the year. Is Great with me. But our defense is not that anymore. Still good and respectable, just like Orton, but basically i am argueing the same thing. When the D shows up, Orton shows he can win. When the D doesnt show up, Orton has a tough time winning.

monster defense and ORton, or Current defense and Monster QB.I am good with either. I just think one position is easier to fill then a whole side of the ball. (not that we arent a few key d players away though)

CoachChaz
12-22-2009, 01:34 PM
right. Orton and our defense to start the year. Is Great with me. But our defense is not that anymore. Still good and respectable, just like Orton, but basically i am argueing the same thing. When the D shows up, Orton shows he can win. When the D doesnt show up, Orton has a tough time winning.

monster defense and ORton, or Current defense and Monster QB.I am good with either. I just think one position is easier to fill then a whole side of the ball. (not that we arent a few key d players away though)

But in the time it takes to wait and produce the next Manning, Brady, Roeth, etc...you could put together one hell of a defense. JMO

underrated29
12-22-2009, 02:01 PM
But in the time it takes to wait and produce the next Manning, Brady, Roeth, etc...you could put together one hell of a defense. JMO



Cant argue with that. But call me a skeptic. We havent seen a dominant Defense here in a long time. And with the way the Flaccos, Ryans, and i will even say cutlers have played it might not take any time at all either.

broncophan
12-22-2009, 02:14 PM
I completely disagree with this.

We do NOT need to sit a rookie QB for three years. That just doesn't make sense, and you are seeing throughout the NFL that this doesn't need to be the case.

Breese, McNabb, Brady,P.Manning, E. Manning, Rothlesburger, Palmer, Flacco, Ryan, Sanchez, Stafford, Young........ are just some off the top of my head that didn't sit for three years. Most didn't sit a single year (Of this list, ONLY Brady and Palmer sat a single season).

What a surprise.....Ravage disagrees.....

While,as I mentioned, some qb's have success without sitting......way more often than not....learning while sitting is better in the long run......and if we do draft a top 10 or 15 qb qb and don't sit him.....we better have a helluva team to surround him with.

Sanchez and Stafford do nothing to help you make a case for starting their first year....they are terrible.......Vince Young is nothing to brag about either,

underrated29
12-22-2009, 02:18 PM
I havent watched a whole lot of stafford, but he seems to be doing alright so far. lets not forget he is playing on the lions.

broncophan
12-22-2009, 02:36 PM
I havent watched a whole lot of stafford, but he seems to be doing alright so far. lets not forget he is playing on the lions.

Exactly........it makes it even worse when they play for a horrible team......not sure what is considered "alright".....but he sure has gotten the hell beat out of him this season...

underrated29
12-22-2009, 02:52 PM
Exactly........it makes it even worse when they play for a horrible team......not sure what is considered "alright".....but he sure has gotten the hell beat out of him this season...



well, by that i mean. From the few plays and highlights and stuff he seems to possess what they were looking for. A rook being thrown into the fire- esp the det fire, with lack of OL and everything else. I think he has faired nicely.

I dont know his TD/INT but he doesnt look like a bust or a big project.

Ravage!!!
12-22-2009, 03:21 PM
But in the time it takes to wait and produce the next Manning, Brady, Roeth, etc...you could put together one hell of a defense. JMO

Thats not true. Brady was Brady in his second season, so was Roth. It not only takes a lot of luck to build that kind of defense, but its VERY hard. How many defenses have you seen like the Ravens in the last 20 years?

Yet we have Ryan, Flacco, Roth and others taking there team to the playoffs in their first season. So there isn't any more "waiting" for a rookie to develop than there is on waiting for Orton to develop.

Ravage!!!
12-22-2009, 03:55 PM
What a surprise.....Ravage disagrees.....

While,as I mentioned, some qb's have success without sitting......way more often than not....learning while sitting is better in the long run......and if we do draft a top 10 or 15 qb qb and don't sit him.....we better have a helluva team to surround him with.

Sanchez and Stafford do nothing to help you make a case for starting their first year....they are terrible.......Vince Young is nothing to brag about either,

Surprise surprise, you can't make a point that doesn't deserve to be countered. Surprise surprise you aren't making any sense.

I disagree because you haven't shown ANYTHING that backs up your point that we need to sit a QB for three years. I've given you the TOP QBs in the ENTIRE NFL right now, and none of them sat behind anyone for three years. Want me to go back in history???

Actually.... Stafford VERY MUCH makes My point. He is good. VY went to the playoffs his rookie year, and just now is on a 7 game win streak? Thats not making my point? Give me as many examples, as I've given you, that proves your point that "sitting for 3 years" is whats needed??? You said its better off and "More often than not" so I'm going to assume its going to be easy for you to name off quality QBs that sat for three years. I'll start you off..... Phillip Rivers and Aaron Rodgers. Now... Go. I'll wait here :coffee:

broncophan
12-22-2009, 04:41 PM
Surprise surprise, you can't make a point that doesn't deserve to be countered. Surprise surprise you aren't making any sense.

I disagree because you haven't shown ANYTHING that backs up your point that we need to sit a QB for three years. I've given you the TOP QBs in the ENTIRE NFL right now, and none of them sat behind anyone for three years. Want me to go back in history???

Actually.... Stafford VERY MUCH makes My point. He is good. VY went to the playoffs his rookie year, and just now is on a 7 game win streak? Thats not making my point? Give me as many examples, as I've given you, that proves your point that "sitting for 3 years" is whats needed??? You said its better off and "More often than not" so I'm going to assume its going to be easy for you to name off quality QBs that sat for three years. I'll start you off..... Phillip Rivers and Aaron Rodgers. Now... Go. I'll wait here :coffee:

Look....most of the time successful qb's learn from veteran qb's....I know there are exceptions....as I mentioned......no....I am not going to go check every or any(for that matter) qb to prove my point.....this is just a message board.....not trying to find a cure for cancer or anything like that.....and I don't care if you agree or not.

The fact is most owners want to have the rookie qb's play right away.....as they are paid an enormous amount of money.....so i realize sitting for 2 or 3 years for a top draft pick do not happen like they used to.....even 5 years ago or so......but if you think a qb starting without veteran leadership is a good thing .....and you want to use Stafford to "very much" make your point......sobeit....and if you want to say Young is successful because his team went to the playoffs his first year.....sobeit..



Now.....that said....I will not deal with you anymore.....I had enough of that at the old message board...which is one reason why I chose not to go there anymore...

GEM
12-22-2009, 04:47 PM
Exactly........it makes it even worse when they play for a horrible team......not sure what is considered "alright".....but he sure has gotten the hell beat out of him this season...

He could be a seasoned vet on the Lions and get the hell beat out of him. He's done very well for playing on that team. If he played for any of the upper tier teams, he'd be an absolute super star.

sanluis
12-22-2009, 04:53 PM
Not being a smart ass or sarcastic here....

What do people mean when they say that coach McD needs to let go of his ego? (or some variation of that) I don't get it.

I think a coach to be a good leader must believe in his plan or vision if you will. As others have said .. how can others believe in you if you do not believe. It takes a healthy ego to stick to your guns.

I think that it boils down to not agreeing with McD's plan. That is what some people mean IMO when they have a problem with him and his ego. I for one think he has shown some real skill right out the gate. Given time he is going to have Denver right in the mix just like Denver is now barring injuries.

just my two cents :D

The Glue Factory
12-22-2009, 07:28 PM
Look....most of the time successful qb's learn from veteran qb's....I know there are exceptions....as I mentioned......no....I am not going to go check every or any(for that matter) qb to prove my point.....this is just a message board.....not trying to find a cure for cancer or anything like that.....and I don't care if you agree or not.

The fact is most owners want to have the rookie qb's play right away.....as they are paid an enormous amount of money.....so i realize sitting for 2 or 3 years for a top draft pick do not happen like they used to.....even 5 years ago or so......but if you think a qb starting without veteran leadership is a good thing .....and you want to use Stafford to "very much" make your point......sobeit....and if you want to say Young is successful because his team went to the playoffs his first year.....sobeit..



Now.....that said....I will not deal with you anymore.....I had enough of that at the old message board...which is one reason why I chose not to go there anymore...


Actually the farther back in NFL history you go the more likely it is that rookie QBs started from game 1. Elway, Marino, Moon, Kelly. That's just 25 years ago.

frenchfan
12-23-2009, 05:04 AM
I don't understand why people seem so disapointed now. Shouldn't we be something like 4-12 this year with our schedule, Kyle Orton and a rookie HC???? :confused:

Damn, we are 8-6 and we still have a chance to make the playoffs...
What a cruel year indeed ! :tsk: :laugh:

yeah, I am mad we lost that game against the Raiders... That's true... but I keep in mind we are still fighthing this season instead of playing garbage games...

So yeah, McD sucks... Orton sucks... Moreno sucks... our OL sucks... Our offense sucks... Our D sucks... We suck as a whole... :rolleyes:

Be real and fair guys... Who would have bet we would be in that position at this time of the season? Not a lot of people for sure...

I agree McD & co have made some mistakes all the year... Mcd has some ego? I think many people in the NFL has en ago... We've also done a great job too... We are far away from being perfect... We have a lot of work to do to think of a SB... That's true.... Let's see it in 2 or 3 years... This year is not bad... It could have been great with a win vs Raiders (and Chiefs)... Now, we have 2 playoffs games to play... Go and win against the Eagles and finish the job against Chiefs ! :D
(I can drink some kool aid ;)).

Go Broncos ! :defense:

CoachChaz
12-23-2009, 08:05 AM
Thats not true. Brady was Brady in his second season, so was Roth. It not only takes a lot of luck to build that kind of defense, but its VERY hard. How many defenses have you seen like the Ravens in the last 20 years?

Yet we have Ryan, Flacco, Roth and others taking there team to the playoffs in their first season. So there isn't any more "waiting" for a rookie to develop than there is on waiting for Orton to develop.

I dont recall saying it required a Ravens defense. Just a very good one along with a serviceable QB. Get an offense that can generate 20 points a game and a defense that allows 14 and things look good.

Plus...how many drafts supply you with Rivers, Eli and Roeth or Ryan and Flacco at the same time? More likely it ends up being Young, Cutler and Leinart