PDA

View Full Version : Good Article: McDaniels interviewed twice; Broncos to ease up a bit


Inkana7
01-10-2009, 08:04 PM
McDaniels interviewed twice; Broncos to ease up a bit
By Jeff Legwold, Rocky Mountain News

http://media.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/content/img/photos/2009/01/08/437488822_t220.jpg
New England Patriots offensive coordinator Josh McDaniels looks on from the sidelines during a game against the Miami Dolphins.

Broncos officials, including owner Pat Bowlen, huddled Saturday and continued to narrow the path to a new head coach.

New England Patriots offensive coordinator Josh McDaniels, Minnesota Vikings defensive coordinator Leslie Frazier and Tampa Bay Buccaneers defensive coordinator Raheem Morris have received the most attention in the most recent discussions, and it is McDaniels who has had a second interview with the team.

Thursday night, Broncos chief operating officer Joe Ellis traveled to Providence, R.I. — team officials had interviewed McDaniels there on Sunday — almost immediately after the team’s interview with Miami Dolphins assistant head coach/secondary Todd Bowles in the Broncos’ Dove Valley complex.

Ellis and McDaniels met for several hours and covered a wide variety of topics.

The 32-year-old McDaniels was the coordinator for the Patriots’ record-setting offense in 2007 — a single-season scoring mark to go with Tom Brady’s record 50 touchdown passes — and this season guided Matt Cassel, who hadn’t started a game since high school, to a 3,000-yard passing season.

McDaniels also has been defensive assistant for Bill Belichick, having coached the secondary for another of the Patriots’ Super Bowl teams.

While the second interview can be interpreted as putting McDaniels at the front of the line, team officials broke their meeting Saturday having agreed to take a step back Sunday with everything from naming a head coach to bringing another candidate or two in for another interview Monday.

By doing that, the Broncos, who also have New York Giants defensive coordinator Steve Spagnuolo high on their list, also would have the opportunity to see the outcome of the Giants’ game Sunday afternoon. The Broncos have gathered plenty of information on Spagnuolo, who was the first of seven candidates interviewed, and received almost universally favorable reports.

By league rules for assistants in playoff games this weekend, if the Philadelphia Eagles upset the Giants, the Broncos could re-interview Spagnuolo as soon as Sunday night, while if the Giants win, the Broncos would have to wait until the week after the conference championship games.

Should the Giants win, the Broncos have discussed moving ahead with the candidates they already have spoken to.

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2009/jan/10/mcdaniels-interviewed-twice-broncos-ease-bit/

TonyR
01-10-2009, 08:07 PM
This makes it sound like they're interested in Spags but don't want to wait. And if that's the case I don't get it because I think it's worth waiting a few weeks to get the right guy.

Lestat
01-10-2009, 08:11 PM
that assumes that they feel Spags is the right guy. they may have him as being even with 1-2 other candidates. if you can get a guy you feel just as good about then why wait another few weeks.

that said i kinda hope the Giants get bounced because if he's high on the list then he needs a second interview before you announce a new HC imo.

TonyR
01-10-2009, 08:18 PM
Good take, Lestat. Don't you get the feeling that if the Giants lose tomorrow we'll start hearing Spagnuolo's name as one of the "favorites" again? A guy can hope...

tsiguy96
01-10-2009, 08:18 PM
that assumes that they feel Spags is the right guy. they may have him as being even with 1-2 other candidates. if you can get a guy you feel just as good about then why wait another few weeks.

that said i kinda hope the Giants get bounced because if he's high on the list then he needs a second interview before you announce a new HC imo.

i think they dont want to wait too long, if we wait for spags we could lose mcdaniels or morris, and if spags decides to coach elsewhere we would be stuck with the #3 or #4 choice candidate. we need the giants to lose sunday.

that said, we need to wait....

theAPAOps5
01-10-2009, 08:24 PM
This makes it sound like they're interested in Spags but don't want to wait. And if that's the case I don't get it because I think it's worth waiting a few weeks to get the right guy.

Who says Spags is the right guy.

ludo21
01-10-2009, 08:27 PM
McD.. ugh... If this is the hire it will take some warming up to from me. Whatever, as long he can bring in a good DC, and not mess up the offense im happy.

Jeremy Summers
01-10-2009, 10:13 PM
Where does all this love for the offense come from. Yes we can move the ball, but we can't seem to score when we need to. It seems the offense also lacks the ability to put a game away. Mcdaniels with a good D cord. may be what we need. Mcdaniels to help the offense continue to progress and a solid D- cord to overhall the D.:thumbs: :thumbs:

colonelbeef
01-10-2009, 10:28 PM
Good take, Lestat. Don't you get the feeling that if the Giants lose tomorrow we'll start hearing Spagnuolo's name as one of the "favorites" again? A guy can hope...

Why? Spagnulo is terribly overrated

watermock
01-10-2009, 10:36 PM
McDaniels also has been defensive assistant for Bill Belichick, having coached the secondary for another of the Patriots’ Super Bowl teams.


This I did not know.

Hopefully Spags team surrnders 40 then we talk.

SoCalBronco
01-10-2009, 10:37 PM
It is a matter of the lesser of many evils now.

tsiguy96
01-10-2009, 10:40 PM
It is a matter of the lesser of many evils now.

no, it really isnt. its not like our only options are a bunch of losers. a very good DC, a very good OC, a very charismatic person who is said to be an awesome motivator (morris) and i dunno anything about frazier.

SoCalBronco
01-10-2009, 10:52 PM
no, it really isnt. its not like our only options are a bunch of losers. a very good DC, a very good OC, a very charismatic person who is said to be an awesome motivator (morris) and i dunno anything about frazier.

Charisma and motivation can take you only so far. There was another charasmatic individual who also coached the Buccaneers secondary a while back who was thought to be this great rising star merely because he had a great relationship with his players. He too, lacked even a year coordinating an NFL defense. He was also elevated to the position of head coach with no experience, and with no reputation as a tactician of any kind. For the most part, he has been an abject failure as a head football coach. This does not mean the same fate awaits Morris, but it does illustrate the limits of glamour. It also illustrates the pathetic human fascination with things that have emotional surface appeal.

This is the NFL. This is where the best and brightest coach. You've got to be sharp as a tack. I'm not convinced that Morris is seasoned enough to be able to combat our opponents successfully. It is far, far more important to be able to outthink and outcoach your opponent than merely to razzle your guys up.

footstepsfrom#27
01-10-2009, 11:17 PM
Charisma and motivation can take you only so far. There was another charasmatic individual who also coached the Buccaneers secondary a while back who was thought to be this great rising star merely because he had a great relationship with his players. He too, lacked even a year coordinating an NFL defense. He was also elevated to the position of head coach with no experience, and with no reputation as a tactician of any kind. For the most part, he has been an abject failure as a head football coach. This does not mean the same fate awaits Morris, but it does illustrate the limits of glamour. It also illustrates the pathetic human fascination with things that have emotional surface appeal.

This is the NFL. This is where the best and brightest coach. You've got to be sharp as a tack. I'm not convinced that Morris is seasoned enough to be able to combat our opponents successfully. It is far, far more important to be able to outthink and outcoach your opponent than merely to razzle your guys up.
I agree completely, though from all accounts Morris is considered extremely sharp, not just personal. The Pats system makes me wonder how much McDaniel had to do with anything. Any 32 year old coach makes me wonder...I'm still holding out for UM however. :thumbs:

Cito Pelon
01-11-2009, 12:09 AM
It is a matter of the lesser of many evils now.

Hang loose, dude. Bowlen perceived the team was in a rut, as indeed it was, it was high time the team was shaken out of that nice comfortable rut. You internets guys have been out of touch. The reality was in Colorado - the center of Broncoland - most people wanted out of that rut. Bowlen perceived that, and since Colorado is the base of his support, he had to get the locals interested in the Broncos again.

The tell should have been obvious when Alec/Rock Chalk right after the termination pointed out that Colorado was the only state in an ESPN poll that thought the termination was correct.

lex
01-11-2009, 06:44 AM
Where does all this love for the offense come from. Yes we can move the ball, but we can't seem to score when we need to. It seems the offense also lacks the ability to put a game away. Mcdaniels with a good D cord. may be what we need. Mcdaniels to help the offense continue to progress and a solid D- cord to overhall the D.:thumbs: :thumbs:

The team would have been in ok shape with this offense if the defense wouldnt have been so dreadful. Hiring an offensive coach does nothing to address the defensive problem. We just fired a hall of fame offensive coach. What exactly is Pat fixing by hiring another (and extremely likely lesser) offensive coach?

Dedhed
01-11-2009, 07:09 AM
Charisma and motivation can take you only so far. There was another charasmatic individual who also coached the Buccaneers secondary a while back who was thought to be this great rising star merely because he had a great relationship with his players. He too, lacked even a year coordinating an NFL defense. He was also elevated to the position of head coach with no experience, and with no reputation as a tactician of any kind. For the most part, he has been an abject failure as a head football coach. This does not mean the same fate awaits Morris, but it does illustrate the limits of glamour. It also illustrates the pathetic human fascination with things that have emotional surface appeal.

This is the NFL. This is where the best and brightest coach. You've got to be sharp as a tack. I'm not convinced that Morris is seasoned enough to be able to combat our opponents successfully. It is far, far more important to be able to outthink and outcoach your opponent than merely to razzle your guys up.

Shanahan can out think anyone in the league, and that's gotten us effectively no where in the last decade. What's your point?

For every scenario you can find an example of a guy who demonstrates the exact opposite of what you're pointing out. John Harbaugh was never even a coordinator before taking over the Ravens, and they're playing in the AFC Championship game next week.

watermock
01-11-2009, 07:27 AM
They allready had a veteran defense with ED REED.

elsid13
01-11-2009, 07:29 AM
The team would have been in ok shape with this offense if the defense wouldnt have been so dreadful. Hiring an offensive coach does nothing to address the defensive problem. We just fired a hall of fame offensive coach. What exactly is Pat fixing by hiring another (and extremely likely lesser) offensive coach?

Remember one of the rumored requests of all candidates was to provide a list of thier potential assistants, position coaches and coordinators. Along with thier goals, strategies and vision. If that was the case, it very possible that McDanials came in extremely prepared with detailed "get well" strategy. That could be why Spags isn't on the top of the list, because he only had dinner and not detailed presention that he need to win over Bowlen and crew. Dennison is civil engineer and I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't have well thought out logical system that also helped him.

Dedhed
01-11-2009, 07:39 AM
The team would have been in ok shape with this offense if the defense wouldnt have been so dreadful. Hiring an offensive coach does nothing to address the defensive problem. We just fired a hall of fame offensive coach. What exactly is Pat fixing by hiring another (and extremely likely lesser) offensive coach?

Pat is fixing what was broken, which had as much to do with Shanahan's inability to put together people (players and coaches) who could build a legitimate defense.

Whether we go with a defensive or offensive minded HC, an entirely overstated concept imo, there are going to be wholesale changes in who is putting together that defense, which absolutely addresses the defensive problem. The DC has never had much power in Denver with Shanny around, and that would change dramatically if a young guy like McDaniels were to come in.

Beyond the defensive issues, Shanahan's message and preparation system had clearly staled over the years. We've seen the exact same issues for the last decade. A team that struggles on defense overall, but also struggles on offense in the red zone, and struggles as a team for the entire middle portion of the season, and on both sides of the ball we've shown an inability to make adjustments to the game plan on the fly. For whatever reasons, they were consistent issues under Shanahan and you have to attribute that to the way he goes about running the team.

A new coach will change everything about the way things are done. The way training camp goes, they way practices are run, the way weight training is structured. Regardless of who it ends up being, things will be different. The key is change.

pokenation
01-11-2009, 08:17 AM
This makes it sound like they're interested in Spags but don't want to wait. And if that's the case I don't get it because I think it's worth waiting a few weeks to get the right guy.

I agree, its not like we are a college team losing out on potential recruits if we wait a week or two.

~Crash~
01-11-2009, 08:19 AM
who cares how long it takes ?

Broncoman13
01-11-2009, 08:29 AM
Remember one of the rumored requests of all candidates was to provide a list of thier potential assistants, position coaches and coordinators. Along with thier goals, strategies and vision. If that was the case, it very possible that McDanials came in extremely prepared with detailed "get well" strategy. That could be why Spags isn't on the top of the list, because he only had dinner and not detailed presention that he need to win over Bowlen and crew. Dennison is civil engineer and I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't have well thought out logical system that also helped him.


Great points elsid!!! When Spags has an opportunity to put together his plan including assistants and personnel choices/reasoning he may put himself back to the top of the list. I like the idea of a young guy like McDaniels, but I'm certainly open to a guy like Spags or Frazier as well. Like several on the Mane, I know that it is much more than just the HC. Who will be his assistants and what Free Agents will we acquire... that will help to determine our draft plan.

Right now the speculation is we're going after a Mike LB. What if Vilma or Peterson come in via free agency? Does your focus change to DT/DE/S... of course! It's fun to speculate at this point, but that is all we can do until this all unfolds.

lex
01-11-2009, 08:37 AM
Pat is fixing what was broken, which had as much to do with Shanahan's inability to put together people (players and coaches) who could build a legitimate defense.

Whether we go with a defensive or offensive minded HC, an entirely overstated concept imo, there are going to be wholesale changes in who is putting together that defense, which absolutely addresses the defensive problem. The DC has never had much power in Denver with Shanny around, and that would change dramatically if a young guy like McDaniels were to come in.

Beyond the defensive issues, Shanahan's message and preparation system had clearly staled over the years. We've seen the exact same issues for the last decade. A team that struggles on defense overall, but also struggles on offense in the red zone, and struggles as a team for the entire middle portion of the season, and on both sides of the ball we've shown an inability to make adjustments to the game plan on the fly. For whatever reasons, they were consistent issues under Shanahan and you have to attribute that to the way he goes about running the team.

A new coach will change everything about the way things are done. The way training camp goes, they way practices are run, the way weight training is structured. Regardless of who it ends up being, things will be different. The key is change.

Like I said before. Firing Shanahan was more about getting rid of Shanahan and less about fixing the biggest problem.

Dedhed
01-11-2009, 08:39 AM
Like I said before. Firing Shanahan was more about getting rid of Shanahan and less about fixing the biggest problem.

So you're assuming that Shanahan himself wasn't the biggest problem?

lex
01-11-2009, 08:39 AM
Shanahan can out think anyone in the league, and that's gotten us effectively no where in the last decade. What's your point?

For every scenario you can find an example of a guy who demonstrates the exact opposite of what you're pointing out. John Harbaugh was never even a coordinator before taking over the Ravens, and they're playing in the AFC Championship game next week.

Blah, blah, blah,...just like Mike Tomlin...the problem is that Tomlin and Harbaugh both went to teams with the defense in place. Denver is so far from that its nowhere close to an apples to apples comparison.

lex
01-11-2009, 08:41 AM
So you're assuming that Shanahan himself wasn't the biggest problem?

No, youre reading that assumption into it. Its not about what I think was the biggest problem. The comment youre citing is more about where Pat was coming from and has nothing to do with what I believe was the biggest problem.

TonyR
01-11-2009, 08:41 AM
Firing Shanahan was more about getting rid of Shanahan and less about fixing the biggest problem.

Outside of lack of talent, particularly on defense, Shanahan may have been the "biggest problem".

Rock Chalk
01-11-2009, 08:42 AM
Vilma? No thanks. Even SoCal the Miami U Homer doesnt like him.

Broncoman13
01-11-2009, 08:43 AM
And neither one of them had great offenses. In fact, you could easily argue that Baltimore's offense was going straight to hell in the same fashion our defense is. A new HC, OC, and a rookie QB and look at the difference. For us, a new HC, DC, and MLB and we'll see a noticeable difference. I have a feeling we'll see much more than just a Mike Linebacker though. I think we'll see a new DT, a new DE, a new Mike, and a new safety... along with a completely new strategy.

Broncoman13
01-11-2009, 08:44 AM
Vilma? No thanks. Even SoCal the Miami U Homer doesnt like him.

I'm not saying that I want Vilma I'm saying that you don't know what FAs we acquire and so it's difficult to look at the future.

Here's another analogy. If we go grab Haynesworth in free agency then you can probably count on not drafting a DT early in the draft. A lot has to play out before we know what direction we're going to go in April.

elsid13
01-11-2009, 08:44 AM
Great points elsid!!! When Spags has an opportunity to put together his plan including assistants and personnel choices/reasoning he may put himself back to the top of the list. I like the idea of a young guy like McDaniels, but I'm certainly open to a guy like Spags or Frazier as well. Like several on the Mane, I know that it is much more than just the HC. Who will be his assistants and what Free Agents will we acquire... that will help to determine our draft plan.

Right now the speculation is we're going after a Mike LB. What if Vilma or Peterson come in via free agency? Does your focus change to DT/DE/S... of course! It's fun to speculate at this point, but that is all we can do until this all unfolds.

I can just see McDaniels coming with org chart of coaches (including Denver offense coaches), who interested or not, what type of defense and offense system he would run, what players he think should stay/go, what players he thinks Denver should target in FA, and what type of player he wants the Goodmans to go after in the draft. A guy comes in with that stuff and he good chance to go to top of the list.

Broncoman13
01-11-2009, 08:46 AM
Vilma? No thanks. Even SoCal the Miami U Homer doesnt like him.

For the record, and SoCal is a good buddy... he thinks the world of DJ Williams too. Just saying.

lex
01-11-2009, 08:46 AM
I can just see McDaniels coming with org chart of coaches (including Denver offense coaches), who interested or not, what type of defense and offense system he would run, what players he think should stay/go, what players he thinks Denver should target in FA, and what type of player he wants the Goodmans to go after in the draft. A guy comes in with that stuff and he good chance to go to top of the list.

Along with a personal pledge to run the same WR screen we're all fond of at least 30 times a game.

Broncoman13
01-11-2009, 08:49 AM
I can just see McDaniels coming with org chart of coaches (including Denver offense coaches), who interested or not, what type of defense and offense system he would run, what players he think should stay/go, what players he thinks Denver should target in FA, and what type of player he wants the Goodmans to go after in the draft. A guy comes in with that stuff and he good chance to go to top of the list.

No doubt. I wonder what the computer illiterate Mike Shanahan does for this in the future. Hand drawn org charts perhaps? He said recently that he's never had to send out his own email and doesn't even know how to do that. While I think that's probably a bit of a stretch, I do believe that he's relatively computer illiterate.

It will be interesting to see how Spags does with his opportunity.

I wonder if Jay will throw a monster fit if Bates is cut loose?

I'd love to see our offensive production with someone like McDaniels putting his thoughts together with Bates' and Dennison's. I think we could really have a dynamic offense... I'm enjoying this process.

elsid13
01-11-2009, 08:50 AM
Along with a personal pledge to run the same WR screen we're all fond of at least 30 times a game.

A lot teams ran that play this year. I have no problem with it, because it getting the ball in the hands of our best weapons (Marshall, Royal, Scheffer) and forcing the defense to defend the field horizontally and should open up the running lanes.

Broncoman13
01-11-2009, 08:50 AM
Along with a personal pledge to run the same WR screen we're all fond of at least 30 times a game.

Eddie Royal is everybit as good as Wes Welker and Welker has had extreme success with that play. If we had the same success with Eddie running it, you would complain?

elsid13
01-11-2009, 08:53 AM
No doubt. I wonder what the computer illiterate Mike Shanahan does for this in the future. Hand drawn org charts perhaps? He said recently that he's never had to send out his own email and doesn't even know how to do that. While I think that's probably a bit of a stretch, I do believe that he's relatively computer illiterate.

It will be interesting to see how Spags does with his opportunity.

I wonder if Jay will throw a monster fit if Bates is cut loose?

I'd love to see our offensive production with someone like McDaniels putting his thoughts together with Bates' and Dennison's. I think we could really have a dynamic offense... I'm enjoying this process.

That one of the things that really struck me that Shanahan was unable to do that. You need to be computer literate to communicate with the Generation Y crowd. Shanahan might have the same problem a lot of senior leaders have now in business world, finding a way to effectively communicate with the younger workforce.

lex
01-11-2009, 08:58 AM
A lot teams ran that play this year. I have no problem with it, because it getting the ball in the hands of our best weapons (Marshall, Royal, Scheffer) and forcing the defense to defend the field horizontally and should open up the running lanes.

Running out of the shotgun...another one of my favorites. Like I said, Shanahan could run the ball out of base formations. This guy has to run this mickey mouse stuff to accomplish what Shanahan did out of base formations.

elsid13
01-11-2009, 09:09 AM
Running out of the shotgun...another one of my favorites. Like I said, Shanahan could run the ball out of base formations. This guy has to run this mickey mouse stuff to accomplish what Shanahan did out of base formations.

Maybe you didn't notice, we ran a lot out of the shotgun formation. Much more then I liked but not like Denver was only going with the tradtional power I or offset I.

Dedhed
01-11-2009, 09:12 AM
Blah, blah, blah,...just like Mike Tomlin...the problem is that Tomlin and Harbaugh both went to teams with the defense in place. Denver is so far from that its nowhere close to an apples to apples comparison.
What about the offense? Or is football just a one sided game in your mind?

Harbaugh went to a team that ranked 22nd in the league in 2007 in scoring defense and 24th in scoring on offense. How exactly does that correlate into a defense "in place"? They moved to 3rd on defense and 11th on offense.

They had a more potent offense than the Broncos. But how can the offense improve with a "defensive minded" coach? That isn't possible.

The Steelers improved more on offense than they did on defense when Tomlin took over. But how is that possible, he's a defensive coach?

The Pats became the offensive juggernaut they are today under Belichik. But how can that happen he's a defensive coach?

You have no point.

Ironlung
01-11-2009, 09:16 AM
What a surprise, lex whinin like the b*tch that he is.

lex
01-11-2009, 09:16 AM
What about the offense? Or is football just a one sided game in your mind?

Harbaugh went to a team that ranked 22nd in the league in 2007 in scoring defense and 24th in scoring on offense. How exactly does that correlate into a defense "in place"? They moved to 3rd on defense and 11th on offense.

They had a more potent offense than the Broncos. But how can the offense improve with a "defensive minded" coach? That isn't possible.

The Steelers improved more on offense than they did on defense when Tomlin took over. But how is that possible, he's a defensive coach?

The Pats became the offensive juggernaut they are today under Belichik. But how can that happen he's a defensive coach?

You have no point.


Wow, you really are dumb.

lex
01-11-2009, 09:18 AM
What a surprise, lex whinin like the b*tch that he is.


Does anyone in Kansas enunciate? I wonder if theres a correlation between not enunciating and eating tumbleweed soup.

Dedhed
01-11-2009, 09:18 AM
No, youre reading that assumption into it. Its not about what I think was the biggest problem. The comment youre citing is more about where Pat was coming from and has nothing to do with what I believe was the biggest problem.

I'm assuming nothing. You can't make your statement without the assumption that there was a bigger problem than Shanahan.

Dedhed
01-11-2009, 09:19 AM
Wow, you really are dumb.

Impressive comeback. Well reasoned and thought out. I guess you're right after all.

lex
01-11-2009, 09:23 AM
Maybe you didn't notice, we ran a lot out of the shotgun formation. Much more then I liked but not like Denver was only going with the tradtional power I or offset I.


Yeah, and it sucks. Thats one of the reasons its obvious that the YPC is misleading. It goes back to overrelying on the pass.

lex
01-11-2009, 09:24 AM
Impressive comeback. Well reasoned and thought out. I guess you're right after all.

Im more for accuracy and bottomlinging than I am verboseness.