PDA

View Full Version : Schefter: Ellis met with McDaniels Thursday, Frazier & Morris still in running


montrose
01-10-2009, 12:29 PM
Denver narrows list of coaching candidates
By Adam Schefter

At this time last week, in this space, it was suggested that New England offensive coordinator Josh McDaniels was the leading candidate for the Broncos head coaching job. The point is still valid, only now itís stronger.

Broncos chief operating officer Joe Ellis spent five and a half hours in Massachusetts on Thursday night, conducting a second interview with McDaniels in which he was said to be just as impressive as he was in his first meeting with a full contingent of Denver officials.

Now there is a growing concern in Foxboro, Mass., that the Patriots are on the verge of losing their offensive coordinator, the man who is in charge of the offense and helped elevate the play of quarterbacks Tom Brady and Matt Cassel.

Though Denver refuses to say anything, it clearly has McDaniels in its list of a select few finalists. The others are thought to be Vikings defensive coordinator Leslie Frazier and Buccaneers defensive coordinator Raheem Morris.

But Denver has been so busy this week that is is possible, even likely, that it will make its move as early as Monday and introduce the next coach of the Broncos early this week.

The Broncos also have made it clear that, even though their defense is in disrepair, they want to hire the best head coach, even if he doesnít come from the defensive side of the football.

http://blogs.nfl.com/2009/01/10/denver-narrows-list-of-coaching-candidates/

watermock
01-10-2009, 12:35 PM
I just popped an ambien and a couple xanax.

I don't need restraints.
http://images.amazon.com/images/P/630529142X.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

SpringStein
01-10-2009, 12:36 PM
Was just going to post this. I trust Schefter more than Mort.

telluride
01-10-2009, 12:39 PM
Ah, Spags. We never knew you.

This kinda sucks. I don't really want any of these guys. And if it's McDaniels, prepare yourself for another five years of crappy defenses.

Boy, I really had hoped that Denver could get some of that NFC East toughness in it. Guess we're going to try to win with twinkletoes offense. Of course, we've seen that Spags' defense can stop McDaniel's offense, so tell me again why we aren't hiring Spags?

frerottenextelway
01-10-2009, 12:41 PM
Our next head coach:

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/064277Nb49bFp/610x.jpg

LonghornBronco
01-10-2009, 12:41 PM
I was just reading this article. It sounds like McDaniel, which is ok IMO, he has experience on both sides of the ball, and broke some NFL records on the Off side of the ball. He's young but I think a good hire.

Here is some more info on him...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josh_McDaniels

SouthStndJunkie
01-10-2009, 12:43 PM
I would take McDaniels over Frazier if he brings in a DC like Dom Capers.

SonOfLe-loLang
01-10-2009, 12:50 PM
Ah, Spags. We never knew you.

This kinda sucks. I don't really want any of these guys. And if it's McDaniels, prepare yourself for another five years of crappy defenses.

Boy, I really had hoped that Denver could get some of that NFC East toughness in it. Guess we're going to try to win with twinkletoes offense. Of course, we've seen that Spags' defense can stop McDaniel's offense, so tell me again why we aren't hiring Spags?

Your logic here is completely flawed. Just because we hire an offensive guy, it doesnt mean he'll ignore the defense. This isnt some role playing computer game. He could hire an experienced defensive coordinator and they could gear the draft and free agent signings towards defense. Brian Billick was an O-coordinator, yet Baltimore always had great D's. We just need a leader and a culture change. Who says McDaniels cant bring that

illbroncsfn
01-10-2009, 01:00 PM
I would take McDaniels over Frazier if he brings in a DC like Dom Capers.

And I believe McDaniels is wise enough to follow through w/this plan...

TonyR
01-10-2009, 01:03 PM
Your logic here is completely flawed. Just because we hire an offensive guy, it doesnt mean he'll ignore the defense. This isnt some role playing computer game. He could hire an experienced defensive coordinator and they could gear the draft and free agent signings towards defense. Brian Billick was an O-coordinator, yet Baltimore always had great D's. We just need a leader and a culture change. Who says McDaniels cant bring that

Exactly. I'm not in favor of the McDaniels hire either (I want Spags) but this "our defense is going to suck if we hire this guy" nonsense is just stupid. Our defense is going to suck no matter what we do if we don't get some players.

LonghornBronco
01-10-2009, 01:09 PM
I'm hoping we get Romeo Crennel for DC
:pray:

orange crusher
01-10-2009, 01:13 PM
I would take McDaniels over Frazier if he brings in a DC like Dom Capers.

I'm with you there. At first I wanted to see Spags, but I've been leaning more towards McDaniels after I read the rumor about Capers. I've been wishing that we would go back to the 3-4 for years and Capers was instrumental in putting Pittsburgh's D together. I think we have just as many needs trying to build a 4-3 as we do a 3-4 at this point. If it is down to McDaniels/ Morris/Frazier, I'm all in for McDaniels. I think Frazier has only done a so so job with the defense in MN & as far as Morris, I'm just not thrilled with someone who really hasn't been a coordinator.

Killericon
01-10-2009, 01:16 PM
I'm hoping we get Romeo Crennel for DC
:pray:

Just say no to the 3-4.

McLuvin
01-10-2009, 01:17 PM
Exactly. I'm not in favor of the McDaniels hire either (I want Spags) but this "our defense is going to suck if we hire this guy" nonsense is just stupid. Our defense is going to suck no matter what we do if we don't get some players.

No our defense lacks great coaching. You bring in an offensive minded guy who cant motivate a team as a whole like a HC is suppose to do. SOmething Shanny failed @ doing.

Get ready for the hire and fire games of DC's the next couple years. Defensive minded coaches bring toughness and attitude to a team as a unit. What is the point in hiring an offensive minded coach and shanny is a offensive minded guru?? For all that we should just promote Bates to HC....I mean hes one of the young bright minds in the NFL on the offensive side of the ball.

McLuvin
01-10-2009, 01:18 PM
And who is Dom Capers? The guy that failed in Houston?

Br0nc0Buster
01-10-2009, 01:19 PM
And who is Dom Capers? The guy that failed in Houston?

yeah at HC he failed, but he would be a coordinator in this scenario

Broncojef
01-10-2009, 01:21 PM
If McDaniels is the pick we need to get a very serious DC to pair with him...I wonder if McDaniels with Morris is a possibility.

~Crash~
01-10-2009, 01:25 PM
Ah, Spags. We never knew you.

This kinda sucks. I don't really want any of these guys. And if it's McDaniels, prepare yourself for another five years of crappy defenses.

Boy, I really had hoped that Denver could get some of that NFC East toughness in it. Guess we're going to try to win with twinkletoes offense. Of course, we've seen that Spags' defense can stop McDaniel's offense, so tell me again why we aren't hiring Spags?

you should just STFU last I checked you had a orgasim not all that long ago go cuddle on a bear rug and STFU

orange crusher
01-10-2009, 01:26 PM
And who is Dom Capers? The guy that failed in Houston?

If I remember correctly, Capers was the head coach at Houston. We're talking about Capers as the defensive coordinator here, not the head coach. He's the person mostly responsible for designing Pittsburgh's 3-4 defense.

Dagmar
01-10-2009, 01:26 PM
If McDaniels is the pick we need to get a very serious DC to pair with him...I wonder if McDaniels with Morris is a possibility.

I would weep tears of joy.

yerner
01-10-2009, 01:28 PM
I'm shocked. Bowlen picks the white guy.

SonOfLe-loLang
01-10-2009, 01:29 PM
No our defense lacks great coaching. You bring in an offensive minded guy who cant motivate a team as a whole like a HC is suppose to do. SOmething Shanny failed @ doing.

Get ready for the hire and fire games of DC's the next couple years. Defensive minded coaches bring toughness and attitude to a team as a unit. What is the point in hiring an offensive minded coach and shanny is a offensive minded guru?? For all that we should just promote Bates to HC....I mean hes one of the young bright minds in the NFL on the offensive side of the ball.

So just because McDaniels is an offensive guy, now he's weak willed and can't motivate? Are you just making this **** up as you go along? Lets say they brought in Capers to run the D. Experienced, head coach twice, would automatically get respect. Whats your problem with that?

TonyR
01-10-2009, 01:29 PM
No our defense lacks great coaching.

Yes, that's why you bring in a good DC and assistants. Just as one example of why your theory doesn't hold water, how was "offensive minded" Brian Billick's defense in Baltimore? Going the other direction, how is/was "defensive minded" Tony Dungy's offense in Indy?

TonyR
01-10-2009, 01:31 PM
If McDaniels is the pick we need to get a very serious DC to pair with him...I wonder if McDaniels with Morris is a possibility.

Probably not since he's the DC in Tampa, but it is a nice thought. But I actually prefer the Jim Johnson/Steve Spagnuolo brand of D over the Tampa 2.

montrose
01-10-2009, 01:32 PM
yeah at HC he failed, but he would be a coordinator in this scenario

What I've been preaching the past few days. Another example of a great X's and O's coordinator failing as a HC.

Yes, that's why you bring in a good DC and assistants. Just as one example of why your theory doesn't hold water, how was "offensive minded" Brian Billick's defense in Baltimore? Going the other direction, how is/was "defensive minded" Tony Dungy's offense in Indy?

Thank you Tony. Thank you...

lex
01-10-2009, 01:46 PM
This blows. Bowlen really blew it on this one. Asshole!

i4jelway7
01-10-2009, 02:00 PM
Please god not Mcdonalds :) (especially with Dom Deluise Capers as the DC)or Frazier... only Spags IMO anyone else is going to suck

BroncoBuff
01-10-2009, 02:17 PM
I would take McDaniels over Frazier if he brings in a DC like Dom Capers.
Agreed ....

HC - McDaniels
DC - Capers
OC - Bates
GM - Jim Goodman

That'll work ... :thumbs:

Drek
01-10-2009, 02:22 PM
Agreed ....

HC - McDaniels
DC - Capers
OC - Bates
GM - Jim Goodman

That'll work ... :thumbs:

I'd be fine with that. Or like I said in the other thread:

HC - Morris
DC - Marinelli
OC - Bates/Dennison
GM - Goodman

I really like the idea of getting one of these two young coaches and then pairing them with a DC who has proven success as a defensive coach and some trial by fire pains as a HC. That gives them not only a big hand in getting the defense on track but also an excellent sounding board who has been the top dog before and can offer some perspective.

I'd really like the quoted scenario if we could replace Dom Capers with Mike Nolan, but there isn't a real obvious tie between McDaniels and Nolan so that might be tough.

NFLBRONCO
01-10-2009, 02:23 PM
You think Mcd will keep Bates

BroncoBuff
01-10-2009, 02:26 PM
I really like the idea of getting one of these two young coaches and then pairing them with a DC who has proven success as a defensive coach and some trial by fire pains as a HC.
Definitely ... good combination.

What's the diufferences between Marinelli and Capers? You said Marinelli is an excellent developer of D-line talent ...

Drek
01-10-2009, 02:31 PM
You think Mcd will keep Bates

I could see it. He might not but he'll need someone for OC and/or QB coach and Bates knows the personnel and is already on the payroll. If Bowlen says something like "you can bring in your own OC, or we'll have an extra million to spend on a player you get to help pick" I could see where he'd be leaning towards keeping Bates.

An interesting comment from a Pats fan on a NE sports board I frequent:

I will never understand the McDaniels bashing on this board. He's done three very good jobs in a row with very different teams.

2006: Pats are 7th in the NFL in scoring. A 32 year old Corey Dillon is the leading rusher; Reche Caldwell, a 35 year old Troy Brown, Doug Gabriel and Ben Watson are the leading receiving threats.

2007: Offensive coordinator for the greatest offensive team in NFL history. Arguably calls a crappy super bowl, although injuries to Neal, Kazcur and (perhaps) Brady have something to do with this, and, as we've learned from the 2008 season, that Giants defense had some real players.

2008: Gets Matt Cassel led offense to score 25.6 ppg, 8th in the NFL. Matt Cassel.

Ratboy
01-10-2009, 02:32 PM
You think Mcd will keep Bates

You honestly think Bowlen will let him go? I doubt it.

Hercules Rockefeller
01-10-2009, 02:34 PM
I must have missed it, but where did the Capers rumor come from?

Drek
01-10-2009, 02:41 PM
Definitely ... good combination.

What's the diufferences between Marinelli and Capers? You said Marinelli is an excellent developer of D-line talent ...

Marinelli was the long time Tampa Bay DL coach who eventually moved up to Asst. Coach with a lot of the same duties under Kiffin before taking over the Lions.

He's pretty unanimously regarded as the guy who developed Simeon Rice, Warren Sapp, and the other excellent DL play Tampa has had during their last decade or so of stand out defensive play.

On our team I think he'd find two excellent parallels to his crowning achievements in Jarvis Moss and Marcus Thomas.

Capers I don't know so much about really. He was a defensive backs coach on his way up pretty much without exception, but he got some very impressive results in Carolina for an expansion team until they let him start running the personnel side of things. Same in Texas really, some nice immediate spark but he just makes bad personnel moves and is white bread as white bread gets on offense.

It won't necessarily be Capers though if you ask me. I wouldn't be surprised at all if it was Crennel instead. Capers is in his first year in NE, but McDaniels was a defensive assistant under Crennel for two years before moving to the offensive side of the ball. He's actually worked with Romeo Crennel in a direct fashion on defensive matters. That seems like a real good fit.

Drek
01-10-2009, 02:41 PM
I must have missed it, but where did the Capers rumor come from?

Some fluff rumor a few days ago saying that we were going to bring in McDaniels and Capers as a package.

Probably just about as legit as the "Spagnuolo and Heckert" package.

Dukes
01-10-2009, 02:41 PM
The idea of McDaniels elevating Cutlers play is intriguing. Just hope he can find a competent DC if hired.

TonyR
01-10-2009, 02:44 PM
Regarding Marinelli, he's no longer an option at DC.

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/01/10/marinelli-lands-with-the-bears/

MARINELLI LANDS WITH THE BEARS
Posted by Mike Florio on January 10, 2009, 4:04 p.m. EST
Adam Schefter of NFL Network reports that former Lions coach Rod Marinelli has agreed to join Lovie Smithís staff in Chicago.

Marinelliís title will be assistant head coach/defensive line.

The Seahawks and the Texans also had been pursuing Marinelli, who was 10-38 in three years as the head coach in Detroit.

Possible next step? Marinelliís son-in-law, Joe Barry, could be the teamís new linebackers coach.

One thing we know for sure is that heíd cherish the opportunity.

Of course, this thing would really become bizarre if Rob Parker were to be hired by the Chicago Tribune or the Sun-Times.

barryr
01-10-2009, 02:51 PM
I'm ok with McDaniels as head coach though I would prefer a defensive-minded type coach, but I don't want Capers as DC. A 3-4 defense needs big DE's and OLB's that are natural pass rushers and the Broncos would need to totally change the personnel and I don't think the current personnel is as bad as they have showed the last few years. It's the coaching that has been bad.

telluride
01-10-2009, 03:05 PM
you should just STFU last I checked you had a orgasim not all that long ago go cuddle on a bear rug and STFU

Excellent post. Very well thought out.

What is it with people on this board and personal attacks? It's really gotten bad over the years.

Drek
01-10-2009, 03:40 PM
I'm ok with McDaniels as head coach though I would prefer a defensive-minded type coach, but I don't want Capers as DC. A 3-4 defense needs big DE's and OLB's that are natural pass rushers and the Broncos would need to totally change the personnel and I don't think the current personnel is as bad as they have showed the last few years. It's the coaching that has been bad.

If you think the talent is solid then why couldn't Thomas move out to DE and Moss/Dumervil move to OLB?

Hamrob
01-10-2009, 03:47 PM
I'm cool as long as it isn't Spags Reaves! The last thing I want to see is a ball control offense! We've been spoiled with Mike Shanahan at the helm.

Let's bring in the young gun...get a true defensive minded guru to run the defense and play ball!

McLuvin
01-10-2009, 03:55 PM
Yes, that's why you bring in a good DC and assistants. Just as one example of why your theory doesn't hold water, how was "offensive minded" Brian Billick's defense in Baltimore? Going the other direction, how is/was "defensive minded" Tony Dungy's offense in Indy?

You sold me. Thanks.

MVP-06
01-10-2009, 04:27 PM
Will he sport the hoodie?

barryr
01-10-2009, 04:32 PM
If you think the talent is solid then why couldn't Thomas move out to DE and Moss/Dumervil move to OLB?

Actually, I think Thomas could play DE in a 3-4, but neither Moss and Dumervil strike me as OLB types in a 3-4 and need to be 4-3 DE's.

Sir_Robin
01-10-2009, 05:10 PM
I must have missed it, but where did the Capers rumor come from?

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=76018

R8R H8R
01-10-2009, 05:12 PM
I'm cool as long as it isn't Spags Reaves! The last thing I want to see is a ball control offense! We've been spoiled with Mike Shanahan at the helm.

Let's bring in the young gun...get a true defensive minded guru to run the defense and play ball!

Actually, I would have loved Spags if he would've agreed to keep the current off. staff & philosophy. However, I think that may have been the sticking point with him. In other words, it wasn't that he interveiwed poorly, it was that maybe he wouldn't budge on how he wanted the offense to be run.

And apparently the Broncos brass wants to keep the wide open offensive approach. Thus the 3 guys that are left are 3 guys that have expressed that in the interviews.

Or at least that's my theory. 8')

Dedhed
01-10-2009, 05:34 PM
The idea of McDaniels elevating Cutlers play is intriguing. Just hope he can find a competent DC if hired.
I agree. I think the McDaniels hire makes more sense given the talent out there at DC this year. Gregg Williams, Doms Capers, Romeo Crennel, etc

theAPAOps5
01-10-2009, 05:36 PM
I pray to God that its McDaniels. I can't wait to watch Lex meltdown. It will be 10 times more glorious than his draft day meltdown! :)

lex
01-10-2009, 05:38 PM
I pray to God that its McDaniels. I can't wait to watch Lex meltdown. It will be 10 times more glorious than his draft day meltdown! :)


....and back on ignore you go.

theAPAOps5
01-10-2009, 05:41 PM
....and back on ignore you go.

LOL, didn't you see the smilie face!

ScottXray
01-10-2009, 06:13 PM
Well, I wanted a Defensive minded coach, and Spags was my favorite.

But I can live with McDaniels IF he brings in a strong DC and uses the draft and FA to improve that side of the ball.

Positives:
1. Knows how to develope and maximise the QB play. This is something that
Cutler needs.
2. Will Add new wrinkles to our offense that only a successful O coordinator could. With McDaniels our offensive output should go up, not down. This should result in Better Red Zone output, and more points.
3. This year we tried to copy their O from 07. If we want to run their offense he is the best one to teach it to us.
4. Knows Offensive X's and O's very well. Apparently can get max output out of what he HAS, even if his #1 QB goes down.
5. Mediator approves of him (from thread last week) as a possible 10 type HC and motivator.
6. Young. He could be here for a LONG time.
7. Comes from a franchise that is probably the cream of the NFL right now.
They are obviously doing something right up there.

Negatives.
1. Unknown Defensive skillls. Apparently has some secondary coaching experience.
2. Young. How will defensive players react?
3. 3-4 in NE is probably not a good fit here, if we want to compete right away.
4. Failure or limited success by some NE coordinators in the last few years.
Is Bellicheat the real mastermind of that franchise?

lex
01-10-2009, 06:17 PM
Well, I wanted a Defensive minded coach, and Spags was my favorite.

But I can live with McDaniels IF he brings in a strong DC and uses the draft and FA to improve that side of the ball.

Positives:
1. Knows how to develope and maximise the QB play. This is something that
Cutler needs.
2. Will Add new wrinkles to our offense that only a successful O coordinator could. With McDaniels our offensive output should go up, not down. This should result in Better Red Zone output, and more points.
3. This year we tried to copy their O from 07. If we want to run their offense he is the best one to teach it to us.
4. Knows Offensive X's and O's very well. Apparently can get max output out of what he HAS, even if his #1 QB goes down.
5. Mediator approves of him (from thread last week) as a possible 10 type HC and motivator.
6. Young. He could be here for a LONG time.
7. Comes from a franchise that is probably the cream of the NFL right now.
They are obviously doing something right up there.

Negatives.
1. Unknown Defensive skillls. Apparently has some secondary coaching experience.
2. Young. How will defensive players react?
3. 3-4 in NE is probably not a good fit here, if we want to compete right away.
4. Failure or limited success by some NE coordinators in the last few years.
Is Bellicheat the real mastermind of that franchise?


I cant.

ScottXray
01-10-2009, 06:40 PM
I cant.

So, you'll be in the melt down camp if they pick him, then?

I agree that picking an offensive guy to replace Shanny doesn't SEEM to make a lot of sense. But lets face it....An offensive guy , especially from a team whos offense we were trying to recreate, should know what needs to happen on that side, and how to make use of the players we have, and what else we need that maybe ISN"T quite there.

I DON"T like the fact he seems to use a pass heavy scheme, as a Solid RB will take a lot of pressure off Cutler, and balance the offense. And NE has never been all that successful running the ball. They also seem to have the idea that RBs are easily obtained and good enough is just that. As part of the deal he would have to keep Dennison, Bates and Tuener and the ZBS. If he has a good head he would realise that.

But he is going to be the HEAD coach, not the O-coordinator. And if he brings a good to great D-coordinator in and turns most of that side over to whoever it is, we should still see improvement.

I would be willing to see how it goes, and don't think there would be substantial difference between the teams that McDaniels and Spagnuolu would field. I do think Spagnuolu would make more of a difference on D, but if he wanted to go to a run heavy scheme (rumored), it would eventually mean scrapping the ZBS and parts of the O-line. It also means putting resources into a premier back at some point Early on.
I don't think those two things were acceptable to Bowlen at this point (if the rumors that spags interview wasn't that great).

Whatever happens , it will be interesting to see how our current roster is evaluated out by a new coaching staff. I could see 15-20 current players not on our roster next year, but we could see tremendous improvement in the ones that are left.

I'm not going to melt down unless it ends up being Garrett, a guy that got the least out of his tema this year.

2KBack
01-10-2009, 06:43 PM
Why would a run heavy schem change the o-line and Running backs? Denver has been a run heavy team with those tools for years.

baja
01-10-2009, 06:44 PM
I have it on good word it is going to be Dennison

Well don't be surprised anyway.

Broncoman13
01-10-2009, 06:45 PM
I would take McDaniels over Frazier if he brings in a DC like Dom Capers.

Exactly, there is no way McDaniels comes into town thinking he can improve the defense on his own. I like the chances of a Crennel/Capers/Nolan type joining the team to fix the defense and McDaniels partnering with Dennison/Bates to complete the offense!

Rulon Velvet Jones
01-10-2009, 07:00 PM
Nolan would be delicious.

MechanicalBull
01-10-2009, 07:12 PM
Isn't Nolan already signed or just about to sign with GB?

I want Spags but wouldn't be upset with McDaniels. Lots of people are upset that if they bring in an Offensive mind that means the D will still be crap. Bowlen knows the defense needs to change and I'm guessing if it is McDaniels we will still get a new DC.

If you get a good/great DC to fix the problems then it doesn't matter if the HC is an O or D guy.

lex
01-10-2009, 07:23 PM
So, you'll be in the melt down camp if they pick him, then?

I agree that picking an offensive guy to replace Shanny doesn't SEEM to make a lot of sense. But lets face it....An offensive guy , especially from a team whos offense we were trying to recreate, should know what needs to happen on that side, and how to make use of the players we have, and what else we need that maybe ISN"T quite there.

I DON"T like the fact he seems to use a pass heavy scheme, as a Solid RB will take a lot of pressure off Cutler, and balance the offense. And NE has never been all that successful running the ball. They also seem to have the idea that RBs are easily obtained and good enough is just that. As part of the deal he would have to keep Dennison, Bates and Tuener and the ZBS. If he has a good head he would realise that.

We're a dominant running game away from having a great offense. We dont need McDaniels to deliver us there as much as we need someone who will commit to the run and wont be too pass happy...someone like Spagnuolo.

But he is going to be the HEAD coach, not the O-coordinator. And if he brings a good to great D-coordinator in and turns most of that side over to whoever it is, we should still see improvement.

If he hires an offensive head coach, he is providing something the team doesnt really need (offensive vision) and needs to make an additional hire to get that defensive vision. I also think that if you fire Shanahan and then hire an offensive head coach, the move was more about getting rid of Shanahan and less about fixing the Broncos.

I would be willing to see how it goes, and don't think there would be substantial difference between the teams that McDaniels and Spagnuolu would field. I do think Spagnuolu would make more of a difference on D, but if he wanted to go to a run heavy scheme (rumored), it would eventually mean scrapping the ZBS and parts of the O-line. It also means putting resources into a premier back at some point Early on.
I don't think those two things were acceptable to Bowlen at this point (if the rumors that spags interview wasn't that great).
Im not willint to see how it goes. Like I said, if Bowlen hires someone who is less qualified and he doesnt have his **** together from the outset, I will be among the loudest booing and the most openly critical. If Bowlen ****s this up, Im going to be Tellurides replacement.


Whatever happens , it will be interesting to see how our current roster is evaluated out by a new coaching staff. I could see 15-20 current players not on our roster next year, but we could see tremendous improvement in the ones that are left.

Yeah it will be interesting. We had better keep the ZBS. It works and thats what our personnel is suited to play. If they start playing with this, my criticism will intensify. Trust me.

I'm not going to melt down unless it ends up being Garrett, a guy that got the least out of his tema this year.

Garrett is really no worse than McDaniels or even Morris. He's not a motivational guru like Morris but if he is smart enough to not start thinking he knows more about the offense than he actually does, he could be ok.

lex
01-10-2009, 07:25 PM
Isn't Nolan already signed or just about to sign with GB?

I want Spags but wouldn't be upset with McDaniels. Lots of people are upset that if they bring in an Offensive mind that means the D will still be crap. Bowlen knows the defense needs to change and I'm guessing if it is McDaniels we will still get a new DC.

If you get a good/great DC to fix the problems then it doesn't matter if the HC is an O or D guy.

Youre not getting it. If Bowlen hires an offensive minded head coach, that means firing Shanahan was more about getting rid of Shanahan and less about fixing the Broncos. And I dont even see how you could deny that.

Taco John
01-10-2009, 07:28 PM
Picking McDaniels would just confirm for me that Bowlen is losing his marbles. He might as well start shopping for a white jump suit and Paris Hilton shades.

MechanicalBull
01-10-2009, 07:31 PM
Youre not getting it. If Bowlen hires an offensive minded head coach, that means firing Shanahan was more about getting rid of Shanahan and less about fixing the Broncos. And I dont even see how you could deny that.

I totally understand what you are saying and in agreement with you to an extent.

In another thread I said that if Shanahan keeping Slowik was the straw that finally broke Bowlen's back then why would Bowlen keep Slowik after firing Shanahan?

Replacing Shanny with another offensive mind might mean it's something more or it could also be something simple like possibly going 24-24 in the last 3 seasons and blowing a 3 game lead with 3 games to go. I thought Shanahan would last at least one more year but sometimes you have to make a change if the team isn't improving year after year and the defense is getting worse each and every year.

KillerBronco#76
01-10-2009, 07:44 PM
McDaniels is a great choice and were lucky that he wants to coach our team. 1st off, think of what he can do for an offense that was trying to imitate the offense he ran and also Bates has already proven he can call it pretty well himself after last year. McDaniels Bates and cutler would get along great.

secondly, Lets not forget he made his patriots Debut as a personnel Assistant Meaning he must have made a name for himself for spotting talent to get that job.

3rd, at first i hated the idea of crennel but upon further thought i kind of like the idea these would be the same two that helped build the patriots defense to what it is now at least personnel wise.

Play2win
01-10-2009, 08:33 PM
McDaniels is a great choice and were lucky that he wants to coach our team. 1st off, think of what he can do for an offense that was trying to imitate the offense he ran and also Bates has already proven he can call it pretty well himself after last year. McDaniels Bates and cutler would get along great.

secondly, Lets not forget he made his patriots Debut as a personnel Assistant Meaning he must have made a name for himself for spotting talent to get that job.

3rd, at first i hated the idea of crennel but upon further thought i kind of like the idea these would be the same two that helped build the patriots defense to what it is now at least personnel wise.

Exactly.

A lot of people here think that we have to get rid of Bates, or that McDaniels and Bates would have a combative relationship, if McDaniels was to come here...

Maybe, just maybe McDaniels and Bates work together to make an even greater Offense than either had before, work on the strengths of each other to make each other, and our offense stronger...

That is what I am hoping for... And for us to get a single, experienced DC that is proven, that brings along a proven system that will solidify the Denver Defensive scheme for years to come... :thumbsup:

ScottXray
01-10-2009, 08:48 PM
Why would a run heavy schem change the o-line and Running backs? Denver has been a run heavy team with those tools for years.

Because Spags is used to a Standard run game like Dallas and the Giants run, not the ZBS. But, I could be wrong, just going on a report that he wants to cut back the passing and concentrate on the run more. That also could be BS. If the Broncos don't name another coach before the giants are out, then it's probable they are waiting for their man to finish the year out.

Kid A
01-10-2009, 08:59 PM
Youre not getting it. If Bowlen hires an offensive minded head coach, that means firing Shanahan was more about getting rid of Shanahan and less about fixing the Broncos. And I dont even see how you could deny that.

I agree with the first part, but not with the second.

Bowlen didn't fire Shanahan just because he wanted a better defense. If Bowlen truly believed that Shanahan was the perfect head coach/offensive mind for the team, but just needed to fix the defense, Mike wouldn't have gotten fired.

Shanahan was fired because Bowlen believed he was no longer the best man to lead the organization as a whole; offense, defense, special teams, GM...the whole shabang. You may completely disagree with the decision, but understanding this makes sense of the coaching search. Bowlen is looking to find a new head for the organization, not just a renewed dedication to defense or something like that.

Based on Reeves (12 years) and Shanahan (14 years) it also isn't surprising Bowlen might favor a younger coach who could be a long-term solution. My guess is that in Pat's mind this is a decision based on the next decade, not just the next couple years.

lex
01-10-2009, 09:05 PM
I agree with the first part, but not with the second.

Bowlen didn't fire Shanahan just because he wanted a better defense. If Bowlen truly believed that Shanahan was the perfect head coach/offensive mind for the team, but just needed to fix the defense, Mike wouldn't have gotten fired.

Shanahan was fired because Bowlen believed he was no longer the best man to lead the organization as a whole; offense, defense, special teams, GM...the whole shabang. You may completely disagree with the decision, but understanding this makes sense of the coaching search. Bowlen is looking to find a new head for the organization, not just a renewed dedication to defense or something like that.

Based on Reeves (12 years) and Shanahan (14 years) it also isn't surprising Bowlen might favor a younger coach who could be a long-term solution. My guess is that in Pat's mind this is a decision based on the next decade, not just the next couple years.

Im not sure what youre disagreeing with. You say you disagree but then you go on to say that you think Bowlen was getting rid of Shanahan. And Ive already stated Bowlen hiring an offensive coach is an indication of that...so again, Im not sure what youre disagreeing with.

~Crash~
01-10-2009, 09:09 PM
Picking McDaniels would just confirm for me that Bowlen is losing his marbles. He might as well start shopping for a white jump suit and Paris Hilton shades.

Orange Taco

~Crash~
01-10-2009, 09:11 PM
I wonder if they make fur coats in orange ? rUSTY WERE IS A GOOD PIC TO POINT OUT THIS HELP A FAN OUT...

Broncoman13
01-10-2009, 09:15 PM
I cant.

Can you promise to have a complete meltdown and get banned for a year the very minute he is hired... you know, get all the BS out of the way up front and then save us from having to listen to your teenaged BS constantly.

Kid A
01-10-2009, 09:15 PM
Im not sure what youre disagreeing with. You say you disagree but then you go on to say that you think Bowlen was getting rid of Shanahan. And Ive already stated Bowlen hiring an offensive coach is an indication of that...so again, Im not sure what youre disagreeing with.

Well, I guess it seems you think it has to be some personal conflict between Bowlen and Shanahan as opposed to Bowlen having genuine doubt in Shanahan's ability to run the entire organization as whole. Personally I believe Bowlen is doing it because he thinks it is in the team's best interest, not a personal vendetta.

Obviously this is something we will never know, but I think it's a little presumptuous to assume a personal reason. It may well be a huge mistake, but I think Bowlen at the very least believes he is doing the right thing for the Broncos.

My other point was to show why I don't think picking a defensive mind is that big of a deal in the mind of Bowlen. The HC search is about more than just fixing the defense, it is about fixing multiple flaws that Bowlen sees within the organization. Once again, he may be proven wrong, but I don't see any reason to suspect selfish reasons on Pat's part. EDIT: this part wasn't addressed so much to your post, Lex, as it was the discussion in general.

lex
01-10-2009, 09:19 PM
Well, I guess it seems you think it has to be some personal conflict between Bowlen and Shanahan as opposed to Bowlen having genuine doubt in Shanahan's ability to run the entire organization as whole. Personally I believe Bowlen is doing it because he thinks it is in the team's best interest, not a personal vendetta.

Obviously this is something we will never know, but I think it's a little presumptuous to assume a personal reason. It may well be a huge mistake, but I think Bowlen at the very least believes he is doing the right thing for the Broncos.

My other point was to show why I don't think picking a defensive mind is that big of a deal in the mind of Bowlen. The HC search is about more than just fixing the defense, it is about fixing multiple flaws that Bowlen sees within the organization. Once again, he may be proven wrong, but I don't see any reason to suspect selfish reasons on Pat's part.

Yeah, I guess youre right. I do lean toward that take...that either Bowlen wanted Slowik gone...or there was some falling out. But when you look at the 24-24 that is a result of a lot of Shanahans poor decision the foremost of which was tolerating Sundquist and Slowik too long. I dont think anyone we get is a better X and O guy and so it points to other things.

lex
01-10-2009, 09:20 PM
Can you promise to have a complete meltdown and get banned for a year the very minute he is hired... you know, get all the BS out of the way up front and then save us from having to listen to your teenaged BS constantly.

What are you putting in the pot?

Broncoman13
01-10-2009, 09:49 PM
What are you putting in the pot?

For you to meltdown and get a substantial ban... I'll throw a pair of game worn gloves in the pot!

Inkana7
01-10-2009, 09:54 PM
Well, I wanted a Defensive minded coach, and Spags was my favorite.

But I can live with McDaniels IF he brings in a strong DC and uses the draft and FA to improve that side of the ball.

Positives:
1. Knows how to develope and maximise the QB play. This is something that
Cutler needs.
2. Will Add new wrinkles to our offense that only a successful O coordinator could. With McDaniels our offensive output should go up, not down. This should result in Better Red Zone output, and more points.
3. This year we tried to copy their O from 07. If we want to run their offense he is the best one to teach it to us.
4. Knows Offensive X's and O's very well. Apparently can get max output out of what he HAS, even if his #1 QB goes down.
5. Mediator approves of him (from thread last week) as a possible 10 type HC and motivator.
6. Young. He could be here for a LONG time.
7. Comes from a franchise that is probably the cream of the NFL right now.
They are obviously doing something right up there.

Negatives.
1. Unknown Defensive skillls. Apparently has some secondary coaching experience.
2. Young. How will defensive players react?
3. 3-4 in NE is probably not a good fit here, if we want to compete right away.
4. Failure or limited success by some NE coordinators in the last few years.
Is Bellicheat the real mastermind of that franchise?

Where did Med support him? I'm curious to read what he said.

baja
01-10-2009, 10:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco John
Picking McDaniels would just confirm for me that Bowlen is losing his marbles. He might as well start shopping for a white jump suit and Paris Hilton shades.




Orange Taco

More like "As The Taco Turns."

theAPAOps5
01-10-2009, 10:53 PM
Where did Med support him? I'm curious to read what he said.

Med supported Morris but I didn't see him support McDaniels. I am interested to see that too.

theAPAOps5
01-10-2009, 10:54 PM
For you to meltdown and get a substantial ban... I'll throw a pair of game worn gloves in the pot!

You don't even have to bet him. The kiddie is going to melt down and its going to be AWESOME

BroncoInferno
01-10-2009, 11:45 PM
This kinda sucks. I don't really want any of these guys. And if it's McDaniels, prepare yourself for another five years of crappy defenses.

Yeah, because it's impossible that an offensive coach could hire a quality DC and field a good defense, right? You're an idiot.

lex
01-11-2009, 06:38 AM
For you to meltdown and get a substantial ban... I'll throw a pair of game worn gloves in the pot!


No, dude. How about, if I dont get banned, then you voluntarily leave for a year?

lex
01-11-2009, 06:39 AM
Yeah, because it's impossible that an offensive coach could hire a quality DC and field a good defense, right? You're an idiot.

What is Bowlen fixing by firing Shanahan and then hiring an offensive coach?

Broncoman13
01-11-2009, 08:11 AM
Med supported Morris but I didn't see him support McDaniels. I am interested to see that too.

Med thinks along the same lines with McDaniels. Maybe a year away from being totally ready, but I think he would approve of the selection.

Broncoman13
01-11-2009, 08:13 AM
No, dude. How about, if I dont get banned, then you voluntarily leave for a year?

Yeah, that's gonna happen.

Broncoman13
01-11-2009, 08:14 AM
What is Bowlen fixing by firing Shanahan and then hiring an offensive coach?

The defense b/c EVERYONE (outside of Shanny) knows the defense was in big trouble and needs a true "guru" to fix it. We either hire that guru for HC (in which case he won't be able to focus 100% of his time on defense) or a DC that is a guru that WILL be able to focus 100% of his time on fixing the D.

lex
01-11-2009, 08:42 AM
Yeah, that's gonna happen.

Well, thanks for yet another inane post.

BroncoInferno
01-11-2009, 09:53 AM
What is Bowlen fixing by firing Shanahan and then hiring an offensive coach?

It's a bit myopic to suggest that firing Shanny was ONLY to get the defense fixed. Certainly, that was part of it, but there are other factors as well. One is the ability to motivate a team, which is something that was never a Shanny strong suit. How many times in recent years have we watched this team come out flat and not only lose to an inferior opponent, but get outright embarrassed? Another reason was to bring in a fresh approach. The same methods become stale after awhile, particularly if they don't produce results. The entire organization needed to be reenergized, and that as much as the defense led to Shanny's exit. If McDaniels is brought in, I'm not sure why it's a foregone conclusion that he would not have a solid plan in place to get the defense fixed that could include an excellent DC. Keep in mind that McDaniels was also the secondary coach for the Pats at one time, so it isn't like he is completely ignorant about defense.

lex
01-11-2009, 10:02 AM
It's a bit myopic to suggest that firing Shanny was ONLY to get the defense fixed. Certainly, that was part of it, but there are other factors as well. One is the ability to motivate a team, which is something that was never a Shanny strong suit. How many times in recent years have we watched this team come out flat and not only lose to an inferior opponent, but get outright embarrassed? Another reason was to bring in a fresh approach. The same methods become stale after awhile, particularly if they don't produce results. The entire organization needed to be reenergized, and that as much as the defense led to Shanny's exit. If McDaniels is brought in, I'm not sure why it's a foregone conclusion that he would not have a solid plan in place to get the defense fixed that could include an excellent DC. Keep in mind that McDaniels was also the secondary coach for the Pats at one time, so it isn't like he is completely ignorant about defense.

I could say the same thing. You could say its myopic to rule out that Pat was getting rid of Shanahan. How many times did he say "Im in charge" at his press conference?

BroncoInferno
01-11-2009, 10:10 AM
I could say the same thing. You could say its myopic to rule out that Pat was getting rid of Shanahan. How many times did he say "Im in charge" at his press conference?

If Pat turns into Jerry Jones, I'll be as pissed as anybody. But Pat has owned the team for a couple of decades now and never operated that way, so I'm not sure why you think he would start now. I think he wanted to give the organization a boost of energy with a fresh approach. And, like I said, it's silly to suggest that hiring an offensive coach means that the defense can't improve. Harbaugh, for example, is a defensive minded coach, yet you saw great improvement from the Baltimore offense this season as well as defense. Part of that was bringing in a quality OC in Cam Cameron. If McDaniels brings along a quality DC to the staff, there is no reason at all to not have a reasonable expectation of improvement.

broncofan7
01-11-2009, 10:19 AM
What is Bowlen fixing by firing Shanahan and then hiring an offensive coach?

Nothing. These people don't get it--and most are the same people that called us crazy telling everyone that it was time for Shanny to go. "thank God Pat isn't THAT stoooopid!" , "Go ahead and vent here on the Mane because it will never happen, blah, blah blah." If we do not bring in a defensive minded coach who can transform our defensive mentality, roster and gameplans to reach even a medicore level --then it WAS pointless to get rid of Shanny.

I keep on reading how people consider Romeo Crennel and Dom Capers excellent choices to be defensive coordinators. Crennel's defense in Cleveland was it's achilles heal and and beyond a 2 yr stint in PIT from 1992-94--Dom's defensive resume is subpar at best.

Spagnuolo needs to be our next coach--anytime a coaching change is made--it is essentially a gamble--why not bet on the guy with the superbowl winning track record who spent the better part of a decade under one of the past decades most innovative and succesful coordinators--Jim Johnson. It worked when we signed Shanny away from SF--

ScottXray
01-11-2009, 10:52 AM
Where did Med support him? I'm curious to read what he said.

I think it was in one of the first threads about Morris. He stated that Morris was a potentially great pick , but that he would prefer McDaniels I beleive.

I'll try to find it.

ScottXray
01-11-2009, 10:59 AM
Where did Med support him? I'm curious to read what he said.
http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=75761

Post # 70 in the Its time we had a Raheem Morris thread

Mediator12
OM analyst


DL Bandwagon !!!


Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: INDY
Posts: 6,793

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Bill Romanowski

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:


I like Morris, but he would not be my number 1 Candidate. Mcdaniels would be at this point. Then, Stoops. Stoops has been going to DEN's Training Camps with his staff for years and copying the Zone running scheme and getting ideas. He knows this team already and is all that Morris would bring to the table with more experience.

Morris MIGHT be a better coach in the long run though Stoops certainly could be as well in DEN. I like all 3, plus I am intrigued by Spagnuolo as he certainly knows Defense starts up front with pressure. Spagnuolo would be the best immediate defensive overhauler, but what would happen with the offense and who would he retain to run it, or would he bring in someone from the outside. That is why he is lower on my list. I think he would bring in a WHOLE new staff and not retain the Offensive assistants, while The other three would.

End quote.

Of course this was earlier on and he might have changed his mind somewhat.

telluride
01-11-2009, 11:15 AM
Yeah, because it's impossible that an offensive coach could hire a quality DC and field a good defense, right? You're an idiot.

Again with the name calling. What is it with you people? First, did my post really demand that you start name calling? And second, was your response not strong enough without the name calling?

This place is really getting out of hand with all the personal attacks and juvenile behavior. It's like the comment section on YouTube or Fark. Very sad, really.

broncofan7
01-11-2009, 11:47 AM
Again with the name calling. What is it with you people? First, did my post really demand that you start name calling? And second, was your response not strong enough without the name calling?

This place is really getting out of hand with all the personal attacks and juvenile behavior. It's like the comment section on YouTube or Fark. Very sad, really.

Who cares about name calling? Stick to your points and hammer him with them.

outdoor_miner
01-11-2009, 12:16 PM
What is Bowlen fixing by firing Shanahan and then hiring an offensive coach?

Mike Shanahan the coach isn't the only one that was fired. It was also Mike Shanahan the GM (and probably even moreso). I personally have no problems with them hiring another offensive coach if Bowlen believes that McDaniels is the best one to run the entire team. However, don't forget that we'll also have a new person in charge of acquiring talent and building the team (whether that be the Goodman's or an outside person). The GM will have just as big a role as the coach in the future success of our team.

I believe that Bowlen was firing Shanahan the GM more than Shanahan the coach. I think he was/is a top 5 coach in the league, but possibly also a bottom 5 GM. If you bring in someone who is a top 10 coach, and then also have a top 10 GM to go along with it, I believe we are better off then we were with Shanahan in both roles.

lex
01-11-2009, 12:25 PM
Mike Shanahan the coach isn't the only one that was fired. It was also Mike Shanahan the GM (and probably even moreso). I personally have no problems with them hiring another offensive coach if Bowlen believes that McDaniels is the best one to run the entire team. However, don't forget that we'll also have a new person in charge of acquiring talent and building the team (whether that be the Goodman's or an outside person). The GM will have just as big a role as the coach in the future success of our team.

I believe that Bowlen was firing Shanahan the GM more than Shanahan the coach. I think he was/is a top 5 coach in the league, but possibly also a bottom 5 GM. If you bring in someone who is a top 10 coach, and then also have a top 10 GM to go along with it, I believe we are better off then we were with Shanahan in both roles.

Theres really no need to make the coach/GM distinction. Shanahan was both or neither and Bowlen chose neither. So its kind of silly to make this distinction. Ultimately it was his stubbornness/ego that was his undoing. He had too many yes men of questionable competence on his staff. Normally a coach picks his staff.

Additionally, he probabaly kept Sundquist around too long. Since his firing, Shanahan has admitted the Goodmans were in charge of the last 3 drafts (something that was often speculated about here) and Bowlen has insisted that theyre not going anywhere. So Bowlen knows and appreciates their worth to the organization. Acquiring talent is their specialty. Bowlen has already put that out there. Whoever the new GM is will be working within the framework that the Goodmans are in charge of acquiring talent.

cutthemdown
01-11-2009, 12:30 PM
What is Bowlen fixing by firing Shanahan and then hiring an offensive coach?

It's called time to move on. It's called been in one place for too long. Things get stale etc etc.

If the board got the defensive coach they crave and then Broncos went out and misused Cutler, made him ball control, and the offense got boring you would all piss and moan.

Mcdaniels is a perfect fit for what Broncos need to do and that's score points without turnovers.

outdoor_miner
01-11-2009, 12:43 PM
Theres really no need to make the coach/GM distinction. Shanahan was both or neither and Bowlen chose neither. So its kind of silly to make this distinction. Ultimately it was his stubbornness/ego that was his undoing. He had too many yes men of questionable competence on his staff. Normally a coach picks his staff.

Additionally, he probabaly kept Sundquist around too long. Since his firing, Shanahan has admitted the Goodmans were in charge of the last 3 drafts (something that was often speculated about here) and Bowlen has insisted that theyre not going anywhere. So Bowlen knows and appreciates their worth to the organization. Acquiring talent is their specialty. Bowlen has already put that out there. Whoever the new GM is will be working within the framework that the Goodmans are in charge of acquiring talent.

I guess that my point was that coaching wasn't the biggest/only problem (I was answering your question about what the point of firing Shanahan and then hiring a coach with an offensive background). I think that the ideal situation would have been a scenario where Shanahan stayed as coach and the Broncos assigned a new GM. However, as you stated, that was impossible. So, now you are looking for a new coach. But, you don't have to go in the exact opposite direction. I think we all know that success depends on balance on both sides of the ball. You can't ignore the defense, but you also can't ignore the offense (especially when you have so much talent their as the Broncos already do). So, the head coach needs be able to balance both sides. That's what you're looking for. Maybe Spags is too defensive focused. The Patriots have historically had good defenses, so there's no reason to believe that McDaniels doesn't believe you need a great defense to win...

lex
01-11-2009, 12:52 PM
I guess that my point was that coaching wasn't the biggest/only problem (I was answering your question about what the point of firing Shanahan and then hiring a coach with an offensive background). I think that the ideal situation would have been a scenario where Shanahan stayed as coach and the Broncos assigned a new GM. However, as you stated, that was impossible. So, now you are looking for a new coach. But, you don't have to go in the exact opposite direction. I think we all know that success depends on balance on both sides of the ball. You can't ignore the defense, but you also can't ignore the offense (especially when you have so much talent their as the Broncos already do). So, the head coach needs be able to balance both sides. That's what you're looking for. Maybe Spags is too defensive focused. The Patriots have historically had good defenses, so there's no reason to believe that McDaniels doesn't believe you need a great defense to win...

No. One of the necessary improvements on the offense also helps the defense. To that end, passing more would be a detriment. We actually need to run more and, again, we're a dominant running game away from having a great offense. We dont need Josh McDaniels to deliver us there. A dominant running game would also help the defense more than an even more pass happy offense. I also hate how NE runs its offense with its rinky dink plays and SG formations. Shanahan was able to run the ball out of base formations. He didnt need to resort to gimmicry.

outdoor_miner
01-11-2009, 01:08 PM
No. One of the necessary improvements on the offense also helps the defense. To that end, passing more would be a detriment. We actually need to run more and, again, we're a dominant running game away from having a great offense. We dont need Josh McDaniels to deliver us there. A dominant running game would also help the defense more than an even more pass happy offense. I also hate how NE runs its offense with its rinky dink plays and SG formations. Shanahan was able to run the ball out of base formations. He didnt need to resort to gimmicry.

Hmm... I guess I just see it differently. On some levels, I agree with you. I believe that the thing that the Broncos offense missed the most this year was the running game (I knew the season was over once Hillis got hurt). With a good running game, we would have been the best offense in the NFL. However, New England had one of the most dominant offenses in the history of the NFL last year. They were 2 miracle plays away from winning the Super Bowl (Tyree's catch and Asante Sammuel's dropped sure interception). I would not call that team or philosophy a failure. Yes, ultimately, you want to win the Super Bowl. However, they were in position to do that, and barely missed it. All you can ask the coaches to do is put your team in that type of position.

Can McDaniels put us in that position? I have no idea, and none of us really do. However, I don't think coming from (what I believe to be) an extremely successful offensive background precludes him from that.

Dedhed
01-11-2009, 02:40 PM
Youre not getting it. If Bowlen hires an offensive minded head coach, that means firing Shanahan was more about getting rid of Shanahan and less about fixing the Broncos. And I dont even see how you could deny that.

Of course it was about getting rid of Shanahan, but that in no way means it was less about fixing the Broncos. Shanahan was the Broncos, therefore the lack of success is his.

If your take was accurate, then it doesn't matter who we choose to coach because the success of the team and the man in charge of it are mutually exclusive. Not sure how you come up with that.