PDA

View Full Version : Now that sometime has passed has you feelings changed on the firing of Shanahan?


baja
02-20-2009, 06:02 AM
How do you feel today compared to when the firing of Shanahan went down?

bowtown
02-20-2009, 09:15 AM
How do you feel today compared to when the firing of Shanahan went down?

Until this new regime proves something and Bowlen can prove that he isn't just blindly throwing darts, then I'll still feel the same. We would be better off with Shanahan at the helm.

wolf754life
02-20-2009, 09:26 AM
refreshed.

Popcorn Sutton
02-20-2009, 09:27 AM
I'm more confused about the Goodman's at this point...

cmhargrove
02-20-2009, 09:29 AM
So far, so good. I really won't have a strong feeling until I see this year's draft class (and how the new regime approaches free agency).

denvernut1
02-20-2009, 09:30 AM
i feel gud shanny kepted getting losers n busts on defense..
n pay them large dollas for no production.. this mcdaniels is cleaning house about dam time... whooooo let the new d smash......

DenverBrit
02-20-2009, 09:35 AM
i feel gud shanny kepted getting losers n busts on defense..
n pay them large dollas for no production.. this mcdaniels is cleaning house about dam time... whooooo let the new d smash......

i fell gud 2 cos da knew couch am gonna kic but an tak nams

Garcia Bronco
02-20-2009, 09:42 AM
I still think it was dumb. It either should have been done two years ago or a year from now provided there was no improvement.

SonOfLe-loLang
02-20-2009, 09:48 AM
I feel the same. Love shanny for the 2 super bowls, but this team desperately needed a culture change. Hopefully McDaniels can provide that. I do like the d-purge!

loborugger
02-20-2009, 09:53 AM
I am more onboard with it after a month of hindsight than I was when it initially happened.

Once the rose colored glasses are off, you see that in this decade (8 years), you have only 1 season - 1 season - where we didnt fizzle in stretch. In our 4 play off appearances since 2000, we are 1 & 4, with each lose being dismal... poor offense and poor defense. Its like they werent even up for the game.

I will miss Shanny's venom for Oakland. However, if McD can field a team that regularly puts Oakland in its place, then more power to us.

DenverBrit
02-20-2009, 09:56 AM
I feel the same. Love shanny for the 2 super bowls, but this team desperately needed a culture change. Hopefully McDaniels can provide that. I do like the d-purge!

ditto. :thumbsup:

bronco militia
02-20-2009, 09:59 AM
still to early

montrose
02-20-2009, 10:00 AM
Sentimentally, I'm still sad to see him go.

I'm not yet sold on the new regime, but am at the least glad that things seem to be streamlined and there seems to be more accountability from the personnel. Also, I'm very stoked at the coaching staff put together, especially on defense.

As much as I love Shanny, his decision to retain Slowik and recent defensive moves made me question if he would ever get us back to the big game. That's not to say McDaniels/Xanders will, but now that time has passed I think it may have been the right decision to move on. I suppose the only thing I would've liked to have seen go differently was firing the Goodman's immediately and going hard after Scott Pioli as our GM, then bringing in McDaniels as HC. At this point, I'm not sold on Xanders being anything more than our new Ted Sundquist.

SoDak Bronco
02-20-2009, 10:08 AM
we will see in a few years if this move was smart...right now I like it, but am worried more about Xanders then McD

Rohirrim
02-20-2009, 10:46 AM
A change was due. In fact, Bowlen probably waited too long.

Broncomutt
02-20-2009, 11:05 AM
I was calling for his head before the axe finally came down, so I was pleased when it happened. I am even more pleased now that it seems Shanny's staleness is finally being "aired out" of Dove Valley.

The new regime worries me though......Yikes!

baja
02-20-2009, 11:21 AM
As news tidbits trickle in I feel more and more pleased with the change and with the new regime.

I too was a little miffed at the Goodmens being let go but after it was explained it made sense. I am happy with all the FO moves so far.

HorseHead
02-20-2009, 11:34 AM
I was bummed at first, but I think this guy (McDaniels) is going to work out...I really do...

I like the fact that his Dad was a coach, his Grandfather was a coach, he grew up in Canton Ohio for crying out loud...

Of course he could end up sucking major ba-ls, and we jettison him in two years and hire some College hot shot...

Bottom line, I love my team...

Kaylore
02-20-2009, 11:35 AM
Shanahan's first mistake was firing Larry Coyer. I trusted Shanahan at that point (we were both wrong) and things began to get worse.

The meltdown was a big blow to my faith in Shanahan. An historic collapse of that nature is inexcusable. I was trying to talk myself into keeping faith because of the RB injury issues. Then the Slowik incident happened. Slowik goes on record saying he doesn't know what to do and then Shanahan says he's coming back.

At that point I was done. I didn't even want to watch the team in '09. It was like knowing the team was going to be awful and the leadership liked it that way. I was officially off the bandwagon at that point.

I like our current coaching staff. Xanders I am still very skeptical on. I fully expect this next draft to suck, actually.

BroncoMan4ever
02-20-2009, 11:42 AM
i am of the same thought as i was when it went down. sad to see him go but the move had to be done and was at least a few seasons overdue.

plus i am enjoying watching McDaniels, his staff and Xanders cutting off the dead weight, something Mike didn't do that much of.

outdoor_miner
02-20-2009, 11:47 AM
I still think that Shanahan's time had passed, and am happy that we are moving forward. I am really hopeful for McDaniels. He seems to have a plan and a vision for the team. I like the inital "purge" on defense, and look forward to the moves we will make once Free Agency starts. Only time will tell, though...

I'm not real happy with the GM situation, but then again, I wasn't real happy with it before the Goodmans were fired, either (I think they are getting WAY too much credit for 2006 & 2008 drafts). I want a strong GM. Someone who is fully accountable for player moves. Someone that the coach works closely with, but ultimately defers to in talent evaluation. It helps balance the power in my opinion. Maybe Xanders and McDaniels can create a relationship like what they had in New England. However, I'm a little skeptical of Xanders.

Natedog24
02-20-2009, 12:15 PM
I've become a lot more comfortable with the firing of Shanahan now. I think McDaniels should be a good coach and I can't wait for him to start working with Cutler. I'm also very excited to see what Nolan can do on defense.

The firing of the Goodman's however has me a tad worried, I'm hoping for the best with this Xander's guy but I'm overall pretty sour on this move. Hope he can prove me wrong.

Pick Six
02-20-2009, 01:24 PM
It's the same feeling I had from the very beginning. I appreciate the two Super Bowl victories, but change is good...

Tombstone RJ
02-20-2009, 01:31 PM
How do you feel today compared to when the firing of Shanahan went down?

I feel very good about the transition. Shanny had his time, now it's McD's time.

OrangeRising
02-20-2009, 02:04 PM
I was angry at the firing, then came around to see it as a time to make a change.Then the Goodman firings, followed by an interview I saw with Xanders this last week or so.

In the course of a ten minute wandering interview, he said nothing substantive about any plan for FA and the draft and just sounded like he doesn't have a clue. Added to the senseless release of Bly considering his negligible effect on the cap, and I am not at all impressed with this guy.Actually, I'm worried. Sorry, just my intuition. Bad feeling.

OBF1
02-20-2009, 03:11 PM
I feel the exact same, It was time for him to go..... a year or 2 late in my opinion, but I look forward to the future, Could not be any worse that what we saw this season.

BroncoBuff
02-20-2009, 03:16 PM
I have finally moved on from the Shanahan firing ... nothing else to do.

Now though, I'm stressing over the firing of Jim Goodman. Couldn't we wait til after the draft? I hope he left his player eval notes in the desk ....

wolf754life
02-20-2009, 03:35 PM
buff, you need to realize that other people are capable of evaluating talent besides the goodmans, its going to be ok, i promise.

~Crash~
02-20-2009, 08:23 PM
I still think it was dumb. It either should have been done two years ago or a year from now provided there was no improvement.

this is me strange cause I thought no one thought the same .

Punisher
02-20-2009, 08:58 PM
i was mad at first,but looks like the right move for management.

SoCalBronco
02-20-2009, 08:59 PM
No.

Florida_Bronco
02-20-2009, 09:03 PM
I was pretty unhappy about it, but it's clear that Shanahan was letting his GM duties distract from his coaching duties and he was promoting/hiring friends rather than qualified coaches.

I think a reboot might be the best thing for this franchise.

Taco John
02-20-2009, 09:13 PM
The meltdown was a big blow to my faith in Shanahan. An historic collapse of that nature is inexcusable. I was trying to talk myself into keeping faith because of the RB injury issues. Then the Slowik incident happened. Slowik goes on record saying he doesn't know what to do and then Shanahan says he's coming back.

I think you put way too much stock into that throw-away comment after a tough loss. It wasn't like it was a press conference. The guy was just trying to get out of the spotlight and regain his senses.

baja
02-20-2009, 09:40 PM
I think you put way too much stock into that throw-away comment after a tough loss. It wasn't like it was a press conference. The guy was just trying to get out of the spotlight and regain his senses.

So how do you feel today about the changes you have witnessed?

bronco610
02-20-2009, 10:05 PM
I am ok with it. The only thing constant in life is change. Shanny is gone. The Broncos are still here. Just as any other team, coaches come and go. The true fans and the team always remain.

Kaylore
02-20-2009, 10:11 PM
I think you put way too much stock into that throw-away comment after a tough loss. It wasn't like it was a press conference. The guy was just trying to get out of the spotlight and regain his senses.

I know you think it was in the moment, and maybe it was, but I think it was clear to everyone that Slowik really didn't have any answers. Regardless, inviting Slow back for another season was insanity. Even you have to admit Shanahan's blunders with his defensive coordinator were his biggest downfall.

BroncoBuff
02-20-2009, 10:41 PM
I think you put way too much stock into that throw-away comment after a tough loss. It wasn't like it was a press conference. The guy was just trying to get out of the spotlight and regain his senses.

That's correct I think, it was basically a throwaway statement. But the way these guys played, I think there was some truth to it. Our defense seemed without a coherent plan/approach, except in the Atlanta game maybe.

footstepsfrom#27
02-20-2009, 10:51 PM
Cautiously optimistic that we're on the right track and it might take 3 years to get to the top but at least we can probably say we're not continuing to plummet to earth like we were before.

Atlas
02-20-2009, 11:18 PM
I'm pissed. Bowlen sucks.

Popps
02-21-2009, 01:17 AM
http://faculty.ucc.edu/biology-ombrello/Images/grafted%20cactus.jpg

dbroncos31
02-21-2009, 04:47 AM
I'm still disappointed because I really like Shanny but I will withhold judgment until after the draft and FA. It's still way too early to see. Honestly we probably won't be able to tell for a few years.

Cito Pelon
02-21-2009, 10:08 AM
It's interesting to see that many of the posters that were repeatedly and emphatically saying six months ago, "anybody who thinks Shanahan should be fired are idiots" are now saying, "he should have been fired two years ago."

doonwise
02-21-2009, 09:47 PM
i fell gud 2 cos da knew couch am gonna kic but an tak nams

:rofl:

Blueflame
02-22-2009, 01:48 AM
No.

Exactly.... nothing at all has happened yet to inspire any confidence whatsoever in the new coach or his staff. We're rebuilding and will be lucky to avoid the division cellar this year. IMHO.

In all candor, I hate it that our new coach was connected to Belicheat and the Cheatriots... and I will be quite disillusioned if it becomes apparent that he's still adhering to the concept that the end justifies the means.

"Apprehensive" is a good descriptive adjective for the way I feel going into 2009.

Rohirrim
02-22-2009, 07:10 AM
I feel the same way I do when I'm watching Lost. I have no ****ing idea what's going on. ???

TheElusiveKyleOrton
02-22-2009, 07:40 AM
I was upset about it the day it went down. Now that I've had some time to look back and reflect on things, I'm actually glad for the change of culture and feeling in the locker room.

If you haven't read it, pick up Stefan Fatsis' excellent book, "A Few Seconds of Panic." It's an inside look at the 2006 Broncos under Shanahan, and was pretty eye-opening with regard to players' feelings for Shan. A great read.

Seriously. Read the book.

gunns
02-22-2009, 08:20 AM
I feel the same. Love shanny for the 2 super bowls, but this team desperately needed a culture change. Hopefully McDaniels can provide that. I do like the d-purge!

Feel the same.

Northman
02-22-2009, 08:27 AM
Emm, i feel about the same way right now. Although with the firing of the Goodman's im not quite as optimistic. I thought for sure Shanahan should of gotten at least another year to see if he could right the ship after a last couple of good years in the draft. But, i do know he was on borrowed time anyway so its understandable and i can accept that. However, if McD was brought in too turn the bus around i am expecting a playoff appearance this year considering we were on the verge of it last year with one of the NFL's worst defenses. So, if we finish worse than last year im going to be questioning Bowlen's decision making.

hades
02-22-2009, 09:23 AM
I wasn't upset then and I still am not upset. It was time for a change. We had become predictable IMO. It's like the other teams knew what plays were were calling half the game.

When I was in Vegas for New Years I had probably 15 different people ask me about his firing. I have 2 jackets, both are Bronco jackets, so no matter where I go, if it is cold/cool I wear one. I still get asked here in the Dallas area on a weekly basis. I was at Wichwich yesterday and someone asked me how I felt about him being fired!

Taco John
02-22-2009, 09:58 AM
I know you think it was in the moment, and maybe it was, but I think it was clear to everyone that Slowik really didn't have any answers. Regardless, inviting Slow back for another season was insanity. Even you have to admit Shanahan's blunders with his defensive coordinator were his biggest downfall.

I"m the one who said that firing Coyer might eventually be the downfall of Shanahan, while everyone else was praising the move. This board has schizophrenia when it comes to the defense. We have the same guys who cry about the talent level of our defense also crying about the coaching and schemes that the DC is forced to use to cover the talent level.

There was nothing more Slowick could do with this talent level. Of course he had no answers. All the resources had gone to the offense, with future resources being allocated to defense. I'm not big on Slowick - I was a Coyer guy, and didn't think that DC was the problem, I've thought it was the talent level - but I think that it's unfair to judge Slowick on this first season of being a DC. Nobody is going to feel like judging Nolan as harshly in his first season as DC, despite the fact that he's going to get a full offseason dedicated to his side of the ball (that was going to happen whether it was Shanahan or McDaniels as HC).

You're right that DC was Shanahan's biggest downfall, but I think it's shallow analysis to use Slowick as some prime example of that. The guy flat never had a chance.

At this point it doesn't matter because we've got a new braintrust. But so far, we're hearing a lot more about how great Cutler is going to be under the guy, and not as much about what they plan on doing with defense.

BroncoBuff
02-22-2009, 10:13 AM
I feel the same way I do when I'm watching Lost. I have no ****ing idea what's going on. ???

Just wait Roh ....

In a minute there'll be a huge flash of light in the sky, Mac Speedie will be the coach, the uniforms will be mustard and brown, and the OrangeMane will simply .... d i s a p p e a r . . . .

baja
02-22-2009, 11:15 AM
I"m the one who said that firing Coyer might eventually be the downfall of Shanahan, while everyone else was praising the move. This board has schizophrenia when it comes to the defense. We have the same guys who cry about the talent level of our defense also crying about the coaching and schemes that the DC is forced to use to cover the talent level.

There was nothing more Slowick could do with this talent level. Of course he had no answers. All the resources had gone to the offense, with future resources being allocated to defense. I'm not big on Slowick - I was a Coyer guy, and didn't think that DC was the problem, I've thought it was the talent level - but I think that it's unfair to judge Slowick on this first season of being a DC. Nobody is going to feel like judging Nolan as harshly in his first season as DC, despite the fact that he's going to get a full offseason dedicated to his side of the ball (that was going to happen whether it was Shanahan or McDaniels as HC).

You're right that DC was Shanahan's biggest downfall, but I think it's shallow analysis to use Slowick as some prime example of that. The guy flat never had a chance.

At this point it doesn't matter because we've got a new braintrust. But so far, we're hearing a lot more about how great Cutler is going to be under the guy, and not as much about what they plan on doing with defense.

We have to find at least 8 defensive starters this season whose fault is that, not the players that is for sure. Shanahan was in charge.

Cito Pelon
02-22-2009, 11:33 AM
I"m the one who said that firing Coyer might eventually be the downfall of Shanahan, while everyone else was praising the move. This board has schizophrenia when it comes to the defense. We have the same guys who cry about the talent level of our defense also crying about the coaching and schemes that the DC is forced to use to cover the talent level.

There was nothing more Slowick could do with this talent level. Of course he had no answers. All the resources had gone to the offense, with future resources being allocated to defense. I'm not big on Slowick - I was a Coyer guy, and didn't think that DC was the problem, I've thought it was the talent level - but I think that it's unfair to judge Slowick on this first season of being a DC. Nobody is going to feel like judging Nolan as harshly in his first season as DC, despite the fact that he's going to get a full offseason dedicated to his side of the ball (that was going to happen whether it was Shanahan or McDaniels as HC).

You're right that DC was Shanahan's biggest downfall, but I think it's shallow analysis to use Slowick as some prime example of that. The guy flat never had a chance.

At this point it doesn't matter because we've got a new braintrust. But so far, we're hearing a lot more about how great Cutler is going to be under the guy, and not as much about what they plan on doing with defense.

Yah, defense sure was Shanny's downfall, and blaming Coyer for it was certainly part of it. I've posted this before, so lets take a look at the Bronco drafts from 1999-2007:

'99 - 3 of first four picks were D players.
'00 - 4 of first five picks were D players.
'01 - 3 of first 3 picks were D players.
'02 - 2 of first four picks were D players.
'03 - 3 of first five picks were D players.
'04 - 3 of first five picks were D players.
'05 - 3 of first three picks were D players.
'06 - 1 of first four picks were D players.
'07 - 3 of first four picks were D players.
Total: 24 of first 37 picks were D players from 1999-2007. 65% of the top draft picks were D players.

Despite all that, the 2007 & 2008 D's were the worst in Broncoland since 1967.

Bowlen finally made the correct move, but about eight years too late. He should have fired Shanahan in 2001.

I was on the Shanahan bandwagon in 1998 like everybody else, then he gave that huge contract to Dale Carter. I knew right then Shanny had idiot tendencies, severe idiot tendencies.

Next, along with Marcus Nash, Toviessi, Willie Middlebrooks, Shanny awards Brian Griese that huge contract, what was it 7 years, $36 million? That just confirmed Shanny was an idiot. Next, he trades a tailback that netted 31 TD's in his first 25 games started.

I told people back in 2001 Shanny was an idiot, opinion confirmed over and over and over. By 2006 he's trading the 56 pick for a receiver coming off an ACL, gives him a big contract. Stupid. He's the biggest player for Travis Henry, who isn't an impressive tailback at all. Gives him a big contract. Good riddance.

DarkHorse30
02-22-2009, 12:10 PM
It's Bowlen's team....not Shanahan's; therefore it is entirely in Bowlen's right to change things up when you think your coach has grown stale.

I like the idea of having a completely different coach for the offense. We have a very young group with a lot of talent, so it shouldn't be that big of a deal to "re-learn" or be directed differently by a new coach.

On the defense, Shanahan was batting zero; so any change here is a good one. Nolan can build his own defense and the pressure is low. It kind of reminds me of what it takes for Parcells to take a job....the expectations have to be unbelievably low - so that ANY improvement is attributed to him. Nolan's got a blank slate to build whatever he wants, and will likely have the time to prove himself.

In conclusion; Thanks Shanahan....and goodbye.

BroncoBuff
02-22-2009, 12:56 PM
Taco John is right of course, all four of Coyer's Bronco defenses finished Top 10 in the league, despite Shanny's horrible defensive drafting. And he managed an AFC Runner-up defense with five castoff D-linemen from Cleveland.

I was talking to a Seahawk-fan buddy of mine recently and he asked what happened with Shanny, and in answering him it became clear to me, too ... it was a classic case of an offensive-minded HC who devoted a lopsided amount of resources to his own offense while the defense withered in a talent-less dead zone.

Popps
02-22-2009, 01:27 PM
Taco John is right of course, all four of Coyer's Bronco defenses finished Top 10 in the league, despite Shanny's horrible defensive drafting. And he managed an AFC Runner-up defense with five castoff D-linemen from Cleveland.

I was talking to a Seahawk-fan buddy of mine recently and he asked what happened with Shanny, and in answering him it became clear to me, too ... it was a classic case of an offensive-minded HC who devoted a lopsided amount of resources to his own offense while the defense withered in a talent-less dead zone.

But... he was GETTING READY to build a defense.


Really.

SoCalBronco
02-22-2009, 01:43 PM
Taco John is right of course, all four of Coyer's Bronco defenses finished Top 10 in the league, despite Shanny's horrible defensive drafting. And he managed an AFC Runner-up defense with five castoff D-linemen from Cleveland.

I was talking to a Seahawk-fan buddy of mine recently and he asked what happened with Shanny, and in answering him it became clear to me, too ... it was a classic case of an offensive-minded HC who devoted a lopsided amount of resources to his own offense while the defense withered in a talent-less dead zone.

I don't think that's quite the case. You've got to look at how the pendulum swings. Shanny was committed to trying ANY combination that would help him win. We've got through different periods of philosophy on how to apportion the team's resources.

Not too long ago, Shanny was being accused of doing the exact opposite. When we brought in Champ and traded Portis, it represented another swing of the pendulum. We were now going to emphasize defense, specifically pass defense, since we were actually quite decent against the run in 02 and 03, but we're getting torched in the air (OAK 02, IND 03). We brought in Champ, Lynch, devoted the first three picks in a draft to CBs, etc. Shanahan made a decision to win with defense and play a no-mistake Jake offense, gambling that he could make do with less resources on offense because he was so creative with gameplanning and scheming. We had success doing that, but it was limited, there was a ceiling that we could never break through with this strategy. It was clear we couldn't win it all this way. It was clear that we could win 10 games a year and make the playoffs this way and with a bunch of lucky bounces and four years worth of forced red zone turnovers in a single year, we could actually advance so far as the AFCCG, bot no more. So the pendulum then swung another way. Shanahan had tried it one way...now he had to try it another way...to build up his offense...to arm it to the teeth. Actually, even if they didn't shift to that philosophy, something HAD to be done on offense as it was beginning to fall into disrepair. The OL had gotten old, there were no TEs of value, Smith was just about done, Jake's limitations had become as clear as ever, and there was nothing of value in the backfield.

So we had to turn around and devote alot to the offense. It wasn't just Shanny "forgetting about the defense". He had tried it that way and he had built them up and now he had to keep his offense afloat. And there was alot to fix. It took three years to get the OL he wanted back in there, to get some recievers, to get a big time recieving TE, to get a franchise QB. The problem is that the defense fell faster and harder than anticipated. Some of that was beyond Shanahan's control even if he didn't start trying to devote more resources to the offense (which was the right move on the merits, IMO), after all, D-Will got murdered and Al's career ended due to injury. There was also the problem of a lack of continuity. It is hard to succeed changing schemes every year. In the beginning, when they made this shift in thinking, I'm sure the hope/"plan" was that by the time we had repaired the offense, the defense would have not slipped past average vis a vis where it was earlier, but it fell faster than that. And he realized it and despite trying to repair his offense, he nonetheless DID try to prop the D up as it was falling. He devoted his top 2 picks in 07 to the DE position. He added a DT. He brought in what most agreed was a decent DT when healthy and he also traded trash for what most thought was a very good no. 2 cornerback. Many of these things did not pan out, but its not due to lack of effort.

TheReverend
02-22-2009, 01:56 PM
I don't think that's quite the case. You've got to look at how the pendulum swings. Shanny was committed to trying ANY combination that would help him win. We've got through different periods of philosophy on how to apportion the team's resources.

Not too long ago, Shanny was being accused of doing the exact opposite. When we brought in Champ and traded Portis, it represented another swing of the pendulum. We were now going to emphasize defense, specifically pass defense, since we were actually quite decent against the run in 02 and 03, but we're getting torched in the air (OAK 02, IND 03). We brought in Champ, Lynch, devoted the first three picks in a draft to CBs, etc. Shanahan made a decision to win with defense and play a no-mistake Jake offense, gambling that he could make do with less resources on offense because he was so creative with gameplanning and scheming. We had success doing that, but it was limited, there was a ceiling that we could never break through with this strategy. It was clear we couldn't win it all this way. It was clear that we could win 10 games a year and make the playoffs this way and with a bunch of lucky bounces and four years worth of forced red zone turnovers in a single year, we could actually advance so far as the AFCCG, bot no more. So the pendulum then swung another way. Shanahan had tried it one way...now he had to try it another way...to build up his offense...to arm it to the teeth. Actually, even if they didn't shift to that philosophy, something HAD to be done on offense as it was beginning to fall into disrepair. The OL had gotten old, there were no TEs of value, Smith was just about done, Jake's limitations had become as clear as ever, and there was nothing of value in the backfield.

So we had to turn around and devote alot to the offense. It wasn't just Shanny "forgetting about the defense". He had tried it that way and he had built them up and now he had to keep his offense afloat. And there was alot to fix. It took three years to get the OL he wanted back in there, to get some recievers, to get a big time recieving TE, to get a franchise QB. The problem is that the defense fell faster and harder than anticipated. There was also the problem of a lack of continuity. It is hard to succeed changing schemes every year. The hope was that by the time we had repaired the offense, the defense would have not slipped past average vis a vis where it was earlier, but it fell faster than that. And he realized it and despite trying to repair his offense, he DID try to prop the D up as it was falling. He devoted his top 2 picks in 07 to the DE position. He added a DT. He brought in what most agreed was a decent DT when healthy. Many of these did not pan out, but its not due to lack of effort.

POY

Spider
02-22-2009, 02:45 PM
How do you feel today compared to when the firing of Shanahan went down?

I have been avoiding this thread for several reasons ........
1. I dont like Shanny getting fired ......
2. I didnt like losing seasons ......
3. I have no clue as to what this new guy will do ..... but willing to give him chance ........
4. i was waiting for another Bowlen you gutless drunk thread ;D

rastaman
02-22-2009, 03:17 PM
Shanahan is gone, but this doesn't mean by any stretch that McDaniel's will turn things around. After all, Belecheck's assistants who have become head coaches, have yet to prove they can win!

But I'm in agreement with most of you guys.......Shanny was not a great Identifier of talent when it came to Defensive personnel-draft-FA and defensive schemes.

Lastly, Shanahan is an offensive mastermind given the right players. However, Shanahan needs to concentrate on calling plays on game day and leave Defensive decisions, schemes, the drafting of players to a proven defensive coordinators backed by a notch Front office of player personnel decisions.

DBroncos4life
02-22-2009, 03:57 PM
Cito Pelon Javon played his way to the contract that he got. He played for pretty much nothing during the first year here, and played well. The next year he was off to a great pace and got hurt and his career was over from there.

Cito Pelon
02-22-2009, 04:10 PM
I don't think that's quite the case. You've got to look at how the pendulum swings. Shanny was committed to trying ANY combination that would help him win. We've got through different periods of philosophy on how to apportion the team's resources.

Not too long ago, Shanny was being accused of doing the exact opposite. When we brought in Champ and traded Portis, it represented another swing of the pendulum. We were now going to emphasize defense, specifically pass defense, since we were actually quite decent against the run in 02 and 03, but we're getting torched in the air (OAK 02, IND 03). We brought in Champ, Lynch, devoted the first three picks in a draft to CBs, etc. Shanahan made a decision to win with defense and play a no-mistake Jake offense, gambling that he could make do with less resources on offense because he was so creative with gameplanning and scheming. We had success doing that, but it was limited, there was a ceiling that we could never break through with this strategy. It was clear we couldn't win it all this way. It was clear that we could win 10 games a year and make the playoffs this way and with a bunch of lucky bounces and four years worth of forced red zone turnovers in a single year, we could actually advance so far as the AFCCG, bot no more. So the pendulum then swung another way. Shanahan had tried it one way...now he had to try it another way...to build up his offense...to arm it to the teeth. Actually, even if they didn't shift to that philosophy, something HAD to be done on offense as it was beginning to fall into disrepair. The OL had gotten old, there were no TEs of value, Smith was just about done, Jake's limitations had become as clear as ever, and there was nothing of value in the backfield.

So we had to turn around and devote alot to the offense. It wasn't just Shanny "forgetting about the defense". He had tried it that way and he had built them up and now he had to keep his offense afloat. And there was alot to fix. It took three years to get the OL he wanted back in there, to get some recievers, to get a big time recieving TE, to get a franchise QB. The problem is that the defense fell faster and harder than anticipated. Some of that was beyond Shanahan's control even if he didn't start trying to devote more resources to the offense (which was the right move on the merits, IMO), after all, D-Will got murdered and Al's career ended due to injury. There was also the problem of a lack of continuity. It is hard to succeed changing schemes every year. In the beginning, when they made this shift in thinking, I'm sure the hope/"plan" was that by the time we had repaired the offense, the defense would have not slipped past average vis a vis where it was earlier, but it fell faster than that. And he realized it and despite trying to repair his offense, he nonetheless DID try to prop the D up as it was falling. He devoted his top 2 picks in 07 to the DE position. He added a DT. He brought in what most agreed was a decent DT when healthy and he also traded trash for what most thought was a very good no. 2 cornerback. Many of these things did not pan out, but its not due to lack of effort.

That was a nice synopsis, SoCal. The bottom line is dude f'd things up. Denver should have been sitting on at least one more Lombardi now in 2009. Three more AFC Titles also. The object is to be the winningest team in the NFL.

Cito Pelon
02-22-2009, 04:18 PM
Cito Pelon Javon played his way to the contract that he got. He played for pretty much nothing during the first year here, and played well. The next year he was off to a great pace and got hurt and his career was over from there.

Sure, he tried hard, and accomplished. But you don't trade for a WR coming off an ACL. Not a 2nd. Maybe a 5th. The shelf life is short.

Kaylore
02-22-2009, 04:23 PM
I don't think that's quite the case. You've got to look at how the pendulum swings. Shanny was committed to trying ANY combination that would help him win. We've got through different periods of philosophy on how to apportion the team's resources.

Not too long ago, Shanny was being accused of doing the exact opposite. When we brought in Champ and traded Portis, it represented another swing of the pendulum. We were now going to emphasize defense, specifically pass defense, since we were actually quite decent against the run in 02 and 03, but we're getting torched in the air (OAK 02, IND 03). We brought in Champ, Lynch, devoted the first three picks in a draft to CBs, etc. Shanahan made a decision to win with defense and play a no-mistake Jake offense, gambling that he could make do with less resources on offense because he was so creative with gameplanning and scheming. We had success doing that, but it was limited, there was a ceiling that we could never break through with this strategy. It was clear we couldn't win it all this way. It was clear that we could win 10 games a year and make the playoffs this way and with a bunch of lucky bounces and four years worth of forced red zone turnovers in a single year, we could actually advance so far as the AFCCG, bot no more. So the pendulum then swung another way. Shanahan had tried it one way...now he had to try it another way...to build up his offense...to arm it to the teeth. Actually, even if they didn't shift to that philosophy, something HAD to be done on offense as it was beginning to fall into disrepair. The OL had gotten old, there were no TEs of value, Smith was just about done, Jake's limitations had become as clear as ever, and there was nothing of value in the backfield.

So we had to turn around and devote alot to the offense. It wasn't just Shanny "forgetting about the defense". He had tried it that way and he had built them up and now he had to keep his offense afloat. And there was alot to fix. It took three years to get the OL he wanted back in there, to get some recievers, to get a big time recieving TE, to get a franchise QB. The problem is that the defense fell faster and harder than anticipated. Some of that was beyond Shanahan's control even if he didn't start trying to devote more resources to the offense (which was the right move on the merits, IMO), after all, D-Will got murdered and Al's career ended due to injury. There was also the problem of a lack of continuity. It is hard to succeed changing schemes every year. In the beginning, when they made this shift in thinking, I'm sure the hope/"plan" was that by the time we had repaired the offense, the defense would have not slipped past average vis a vis where it was earlier, but it fell faster than that. And he realized it and despite trying to repair his offense, he nonetheless DID try to prop the D up as it was falling. He devoted his top 2 picks in 07 to the DE position. He added a DT. He brought in what most agreed was a decent DT when healthy and he also traded trash for what most thought was a very good no. 2 cornerback. Many of these things did not pan out, but its not due to lack of effort.

I agree except two major issues that there's no way around.


Why fire Coyer? Our defense was never as consistently good under Shanahan as it was during Coyer's tenure. It didn't make any sense.
Effort does not equate to success. If you're drafting and signing free agents, that's one thing. If they are never working out that's another. Being wrong is just as bad as doing nothing because the result is the same.


Shanahan tried, but the things he was trying were the wrong things. Wasted draft picks. High priced free agents that never lived up to their contracts. Some of them made the defense worse, like changing systems three times in three years. I can appreciate effort and urgency but there's a fine line between that and desperation.

Shanahan's a top three coach in this league, and probably HOF worthy. His weaknesses were his overall philosophy on building a team and his inability to draft defensive talent.

Rock Chalk
02-22-2009, 04:26 PM
Shanahans failure in the defensive swing SoCal is not understanding that no matter who you have in the secondary, your pass defense will not improve if Peyton Manning has all day to throw the ball.

He never understood it and I dont think he will ever understand it unless its handed to him on a platter that way already.

lostknight
02-22-2009, 04:27 PM
I think I would have been okay with the canning of Shanahan. The fact that we are in the combine without a complete staff, with a GM that has given us no serious proof of being intellegent, and without our best eyes for talent gives me the heebie jeebies.

TDmvp
02-22-2009, 04:28 PM
I hope Josh does well , and I'll always be a fan , but i still don't like the firing and as of right now I'm just hoping by the season that it still feels the same when i watch ...

Meck77
02-22-2009, 06:20 PM
Ran into someone I know who works on the Administrative side with the Broncos. Apparently there is a sense of calm within the organization now that shanny is gone. They drescribed the vibe under Shanny as "We were all walking on eye shells".

Apparently McD did a speech in front of the entire organization outlining his 5 values he will bring to the organization and what is expected from everyone.

Maybe just a honeymoon phase but it sounds like a divorce had to happen to freshen up the air within the organization. As for my personal opinion. It's the same when I heard the news. It was time.

BroncoBuff
02-22-2009, 07:05 PM
I don't think that's quite the case. You've got to look at how the pendulum swings. Shanny was committed to trying ANY combination that would help him win. We've got through different periods of philosophy on how to apportion the team's resources.

Not too long ago, Shanny was being accused of doing the exact opposite. When we brought in Champ and traded Portis, it represented another swing of the pendulum. We were now going to emphasize defense, specifically pass defense, since we were actually quite decent against the run in 02 and 03, but we're getting torched in the air (OAK 02, IND 03). We brought in Champ, Lynch, devoted the first three picks in a draft to CBs, etc. Shanahan made a decision to win with defense and play a no-mistake Jake offense, gambling that he could make do with less resources on offense because he was so creative with gameplanning and scheming. We had success doing that, but it was limited, there was a ceiling that we could never break through with this strategy. It was clear we couldn't win it all this way. It was clear that we could win 10 games a year and make the playoffs this way and with a bunch of lucky bounces and four years worth of forced red zone turnovers in a single year, we could actually advance so far as the AFCCG, bot no more. So the pendulum then swung another way. Shanahan had tried it one way...now he had to try it another way...to build up his offense...to arm it to the teeth. Actually, even if they didn't shift to that philosophy, something HAD to be done on offense as it was beginning to fall into disrepair. The OL had gotten old, there were no TEs of value, Smith was just about done, Jake's limitations had become as clear as ever, and there was nothing of value in the backfield.

So we had to turn around and devote alot to the offense. It wasn't just Shanny "forgetting about the defense". He had tried it that way and he had built them up and now he had to keep his offense afloat. And there was alot to fix. It took three years to get the OL he wanted back in there, to get some recievers, to get a big time recieving TE, to get a franchise QB. The problem is that the defense fell faster and harder than anticipated. Some of that was beyond Shanahan's control even if he didn't start trying to devote more resources to the offense (which was the right move on the merits, IMO), after all, D-Will got murdered and Al's career ended due to injury. There was also the problem of a lack of continuity. It is hard to succeed changing schemes every year. In the beginning, when they made this shift in thinking, I'm sure the hope/"plan" was that by the time we had repaired the offense, the defense would have not slipped past average vis a vis where it was earlier, but it fell faster than that. And he realized it and despite trying to repair his offense, he nonetheless DID try to prop the D up as it was falling. He devoted his top 2 picks in 07 to the DE position. He added a DT. He brought in what most agreed was a decent DT when healthy and he also traded trash for what most thought was a very good no. 2 cornerback. Many of these things did not pan out, but its not due to lack of effort.
I guess we just disagree on this. And it's not fair to quote me saying Shanahan "forgot about the defense," I don't think that. I just think he threw draft picks and free agents and coordinators at the defense, and in the end failed utterly and completely. He was a head coach, not an OC, and when the defense was horrible yet again, he must be accountable. Maybe I'm too wishy-washy, but my initial anger at the firing of Shanahan has changed pretty markedly. I'm not sold on Josh yet, but our defense this year was humiliating, and when he said postgame in SD that Slowick was coming back, I wish I'd had the guts to be ahead of the curve and called for his firing right then. I wish I had been, because that was completely unacceptable.

You say "the pendulum swings both ways," but honestly that sounds a bit like a Shanahan apologist. I don't think there is a pendulum ... imo you have to focus on both sides at all times. Sure, his defensive draft picks failed at an alarming rate in the early '00's, but that doesn't mean he can "swing back" to offense, that means he must keep investing resources into the D to make up for those failures. Put another way, when Middlebrooks, Toviessi and Pierce fail, you can't just fire the DC, fly in the Browncos, and go back to the draft room to focus on offense. And yet that is exactly what he did! We had 7 picks in the 2006 draft ... and SIX were made on offense. SIX OUT OF SEVEN! We all got so excited about the jackpot of offensive talent, we didn't see the tsunami coming.


Like I said in another thread, the current Broncos have the most lopsided offense-to-defense talent distribution of any roster I have ever seen in my life. Shanahan should be praised for the offense, but he also must be accountable for the defense. Cutler, Clady and Scheffler are serving the team very well, but how much better might '07 and '08 have been with, say, Patrick Willis, Haloti Ngata and Jerod Mayo?

Yes, your example of trading our 1500-yard All-Pro RB for a shut-down CB sounds like a serious approach to the defensive side. But in hindsight now, it also sounds kinda like a guy who has little interest in defense, and simply makes big dramatic moves, hoping the problem goes away ... a la Dale Carter, Darryl Gardener, Browncos, 3 CBs in the '05 draft, and revolving-door free agents like Kenard Lang, Marquand Manuel, Ellis Johnson, Hamza Abdullah, Lenny Walls, Nate Webster, John Engleberger, Kelly Herndon, Michael Myers, Vernon Fox, Jamie Winborn, and on and on and on and on and on. We have NEVER had a bunch of nobodys like that on offense.

The reality is that more than half our starting defense this year were street free agents and rookies. That doesn't cut it, and that's why he's gone.

DBroncos4life
02-22-2009, 07:20 PM
I think Shanny was trying to build the team the way the Colts did and just ran out of time. IMHO McDainels walked right into something similar to what Dungy did in Indy.

SoCalBronco
02-22-2009, 07:22 PM
I think I would have been okay with the canning of Shanahan. The fact that we are in the combine without a complete staff, with a GM that has given us no serious proof of being intellegent, and without our best eyes for talent gives me the heebie jeebies.

Let this be a lesson for the youth in this country. Excessive drinking is not "cool". The state of our team kind of reminds me of those old DARE commercials from the 80s where they had some eggs in a pan and said "this is your brain on drugs". Well, we've now given the keys to the porsche to little kids, we've endorsed even further levels of nepotism, we've trashed the whole idea of bifurcation of power and pissed in the face of qualified and loyal talent evaluators.

http://www.myspacebrand.com/funny_pictures/alcohol-images/_img/alcohol21.JPG

DenverBrit
02-22-2009, 07:28 PM
I think I would have been okay with the canning of Shanahan. The fact that we are in the combine without a complete staff, with a GM that has given us no serious proof of being intellegent, and without our best eyes for talent gives me the heebie jeebies.

You have to be able to spell 'intelligent' for your argument to work. ;D

BroncoBuff
02-22-2009, 07:30 PM
Think of the Shanahan firing this way: Other than rookies, we have just three keepers on defense - Champ, DJ and Marcus Thomas. We could LITERALLY WAIVE EVERY OTHER DEFENSIVE PLAYER without getting worse. And that is unacceptable.

DenverBrit
02-22-2009, 07:32 PM
Think of the Shanahan firing this way: Other than rookies, we have just three keepers on defense, Champ, DJ and Marcus Thomas. We could LITERALLY WAIVE EVERY DEFENSIVE PLAYER. And that is unacceptable.

Sad and true. Not to mention the effect the lack of talent has had on special teams.

BroncoBuff
02-22-2009, 07:41 PM
Sad and true. Not to mention the effect the lack of talent has had on special teams.
True. And when I say "other than rookies," let's get serious: Larsen, Woodyard and Barrett are two late-round picks and a CFA. We got lucky there, our D would have been even worse without Jim Goodman hauling in that trio.

TheReverend
02-22-2009, 07:42 PM
Like I said in another thread, the current Broncos have the most lopsided offense-to-defense talent distribution of any roster I have ever seen in my life. Shanahan should be praised for the offense, but he also must be accountable for the defense. Cutler, Clady and Scheffler are serving the team very well, but how much better might '07 and '08 have been with, say, Patrick Willis, Haloti Ngata and Jerod Mayo?

And we still have Plummer? Probably a wash. AND that's including that it would've been impossible to get the three of them.

If we trade everything to move up to get Willis, we also have no Harris, so now we're out two tackles and starting Polumbus and Pears who are blocking for... Jake Plummer?!?! That's a recipe for the 28th ranked OFFENSE in the league

Yes, your example of trading our 1500-yard All-Pro RB for a shut-down CB sounds like a serious approach to the defensive side. But in hindsight now, it also sounds kinda like a guy who has little interest in defense, and simply makes big dramatic moves, hoping the problem goes away ... a la Dale Carter, Darryl Gardener, Browncos, 3 CBs in the '05 draft, and revolving-door free agents like Kenard Lang, Marquand Manuel, Ellis Johnson, Hamza Abdullah, Lenny Walls, Nate Webster, John Engleberger, Kelly Herndon, Michael Myers, Vernon Fox, Jamie Winborn, and on and on and on and on and on. We have NEVER had a bunch of nobodys like that on offense.

I hope your last bolded statement is sarcasm...

TheReverend
02-22-2009, 07:44 PM
True. And when I say "other than rookies," let's get serious: Larsen, Woodyard and Barrett are two late-round picks and a CFA. We got lucky there, our D would have been even worse without Jim Goodman hauling in that trio.

The first three rounds are all "qualified NFL players", after that they're called "scout rounds" for a reason. That's where the Goodmans' excelled because they were GREAT TALENT EVALUATORS. Not lucky.

SoCalBronco
02-22-2009, 07:50 PM
Think of the Shanahan firing this way: Other than rookies, we have just three keepers on defense - Champ, DJ and Marcus Thomas. We could LITERALLY WAIVE EVERY OTHER DEFENSIVE PLAYER without getting worse. And that is unacceptable.

Nobody is saying that we've drafted or played the FA game great on that side of the ball. Personally, I thought Bly was a pretty good player and oddly enough he played like we thought he would play during the period that Champ was out. In any case, obviously Shanny's moves in FA re: the defense were inadequate. And it was wrong to fire Coyer, a point that I made at the time. I don't think all of this justified his firing though. The point was made that since Shanny said that Slowik would return, this by itself merited the firing. I disagree with that. Did Jim Bates suddenly become stupid when he came here? No. It was noted at the outset that we were going to go back to a style that we had run under Coyer this year. We didn't have the proper talent to execute that. So we changed things. We changed things each week, lookign for something that would work. We didnt have the talent to make any kind of scheme consistently work. That's not necessarily on Slowik.

That we have only 3 or 4 guys worth anything is an indictment on Shanny. I agree with that. In recent years, he realized that from a defensive perspective, you have to build from the front four going backwards not vice versa. That's why we began to make a big investment from a drafting perspective on the DL in 2007 (and also with Doom in 06, although the investment in that case wasn't as big). It is not Shanahan's fault that our DL in this last draft got hurt before the season started. The point is that he realized, as Alec said, that you gotta build from the line first. They got the evaluation wrong in 2007 for the most part (although as you said, Thomas is not bad, he still has alot of upside IMO and is a decent player already). It is been argued that while the Goodman's can draft on offense, they supposedly "can't draft defense". It is true that our offensive hit rate is much better, but that doesnt mean that the defensive hit rate has been poor. If you compare hits to overall picks in the last five years, the ratio is not that bad. It's probably middle of the road. The issue has been in terms of numbers. We had to devote most of the numbers to offense because it fell into disrepair.

Now that Bowlen did what he did, we have a cap guy in charge, a columnist on the pro scouting guy and really nothing in place so far as a chief figure on the college scouting side. We're the only team in the entire league that doesn't have one as the draft is approaching...and you are going to have a cap and contracts guy make the final call on evaluations? How is this an improvement from what we had? If the rationale for firing Shanny is bad scouting for defense or inadequate filling of needs there, how can it be said that this is an improvement? We're going to have someone from ESPN who's been out of a real job for 5 years make the final recommendations on FA's? We're going to have a void on the draft? Who's going to arbitrate between the scouts? It can't be Xanders, because he'd just be choosing an opinion out of a hat. It can't be McDaniels, because he was just the NFL equivalent of a GA some 6 years ago and Bowlen has tried to create the appearance of a bifurcation of power.

The point is its stupid to get rid of someone unless you have a coherent, smart structure in place about how you are going to improve. We are running like a chicken with its head cut off right now. There are competence questions everywhere. Basic competency issues.

Pat wanted to "take back" his team. Ok...let's see how it works.

TheReverend
02-22-2009, 07:55 PM
Nobody is saying that we've drafted or played the FA game great on that side of the ball. Personally, I thought Bly was a pretty good player and oddly enough he played like we thought he would play during the period that Champ was out. In any case, obviously Shanny's moves in FA re: the defense were inadequate. And it was wrong to fire Coyer, a point that I made at the time. I don't think all of this justified his firing though. The point was made that since Shanny said that Slowik would return, this by itself merited the firing. I disagree with that. Did Jim Bates suddenly become stupid when he came here? No. It was noted at the outset that we were going to go back to a style that we had run under Coyer this year. We didn't have the proper talent to execute that. So we changed things. We changed things each week, lookign for something that would work. We didnt have the talent to make any kind of scheme consistently work. That's not necessarily on Slowik.

That we have only 3 or 4 guys worth anything is an indictment on Shanny. I agree with that. In recent years, he realized that from a defensive perspective, you have to build from the front four going backwards not vice versa. That's why we began to make a big investment from a drafting perspective on the DL in 2007 (and also with Doom in 06, although the investment in that case wasn't as big). It is not Shanahan's fault that our DL in this last draft got hurt before the season started. The point is that he realized, as Alec said, that you gotta build from the line first. They got the evaluation wrong in 2007 for the most part (although as you said, Thomas is not bad, he still has alot of upside IMO and is a decent player already). It is been argued that while the Goodman's can draft on offense, they supposedly "can't draft defense". It is true that our offensive hit rate is much better, but that doesnt mean that the defensive hit rate has been poor. If you compare hits to overall picks in the last five years, the ratio is not that bad. It's probably middle of the road. The issue has been in terms of numbers. We had to devote most of the numbers to offense because it fell into disrepair.

Now that Bowlen did what he did, we have a cap guy in charge, a columnist on the pro scouting guy and really nothing in place so far as a chief figure on the college scouting side. We're the only team in the entire league that doesn't have one as the draft is approaching...and you are going to have a cap and contracts guy make the final call on evaluations? How is this an improvement from what we had? If the rationale for firing Shanny is bad scouting for defense or inadequate filling of needs there, how can it be said that this is an improvement? We're going to have someone from ESPN who's been out of a real job for 5 years make the final recommendations on FA's? We're going to have a void on the draft? Who's going to arbitrate between the scouts? It can't be Xanders, because he'd just be choosing an opinion out of a hat. It can't be McDaniels, because he was just the NFL equivalent of a GA some 6 years ago and Bowlen has tried to create the appearance of a bifurcation of power.

The point is its stupid to get rid of someone unless you have a coherent, smart structure in place about how you are going to improve. We are running like a chicken with its head cut off right now. There are competence questions everywhere. Basic competency issues.

Pat wanted to "take back" his team. Ok...let's see how it works.

Destroying your competition this week, I see.

I'll wait till you lose your game before engaging you in any DJ discussions this off-season. :)

Ray Finkle
02-22-2009, 07:56 PM
Nobody is saying that we've drafted or played the FA game great on that side of the ball. Personally, I thought Bly was a pretty good player and oddly enough he played like we thought he would play during the period that Champ was out. In any case, obviously Shanny's moves in FA re: the defense were inadequate. And it was wrong to fire Coyer, a point that I made at the time. I don't think all of this justified his firing though. The point was made that since Shanny said that Slowik would return, this by itself merited the firing. I disagree with that. Did Jim Bates suddenly become stupid when he came here? No. It was noted at the outset that we were going to go back to a style that we had run under Coyer this year. We didn't have the proper talent to execute that. So we changed things. We changed things each week, lookign for something that would work. We didnt have the talent to make any kind of scheme consistently work. That's not necessarily on Slowik.

That we have only 3 or 4 guys worth anything is an indictment on Shanny. I agree with that. In recent years, he realized that from a defensive perspective, you have to build from the front four going backwards not vice versa. That's why we began to make a big investment from a drafting perspective on the DL in 2007 (and also with Doom in 06, although the investment in that case wasn't as big). It is not Shanahan's fault that our DL in this last draft got hurt before the season started. The point is that he realized, as Alec said, that you gotta build from the line first. They got the evaluation wrong in 2007 for the most part (although as you said, Thomas is not bad, he still has alot of upside IMO and is a decent player already). It is been argued that while the Goodman's can draft on offense, they supposedly "can't draft defense". It is true that our offensive hit rate is much better, but that doesnt mean that the defensive hit rate has been poor. If you compare hits to overall picks in the last five years, the ratio is not that bad. It's probably middle of the road. The issue has been in terms of numbers. We had to devote most of the numbers to offense because it fell into disrepair.

Now that Bowlen did what he did, we have a cap guy in charge, a columnist on the pro scouting guy and really nothing in place so far as a chief figure on the college scouting side. We're the only team in the entire league that doesn't have one as the draft is approaching...and you are going to have a cap and contracts guy make the final call on evaluations? How is this an improvement from what we had? If the rationale for firing Shanny is bad scouting for defense or inadequate filling of needs there, how can it be said that this is an improvement? We're going to have someone from ESPN who's been out of a real job for 5 years make the final recommendations on FA's? We're going to have a void on the draft? Who's going to arbitrate between the scouts? It can't be Xanders, because he'd just be choosing an opinion out of a hat. It can't be McDaniels, because he was just the NFL equivalent of a GA some 6 years ago and Bowlen has tried to create the appearance of a bifurcation of power.

The point is its stupid to get rid of someone unless you have a coherent, smart structure in place about how you are going to improve. We are running like a chicken with its head cut off right now. There are competence questions everywhere. Basic competency issues.

Pat wanted to "take back" his team. Ok...let's see how it works.

who is to say that Xanders didn't play a big part in last years personnel selections....

BroncoBuff
02-22-2009, 07:57 PM
I hope your last bolded statement is sarcasm...
Nope, dead serious. We have started very few nobodys on offense the past 5-6 years. ZERO this year and last. Even the crappy offensive players we've started were draft picks ... like Lelie, Putzier, Foster and Bell. Even Blake Brockermeyer was a former Pro Bowler, and our castoffs Cooper Carlisle, Chris Myers and Cornell Green went on to start elsewhere.

TheReverend
02-22-2009, 07:59 PM
Nope, dead serious. We have started very few nobodys on offense this . ZERO this year and last. Even the crappy offesive players we've started the last 5 years or so were draft picks ... like Lelie, Putzier, Foster and Bell. Even Blake Brockermeyer was a former Pro Bowler.

Okay, so you throw out names like Ellis Johnson to prove your point on D, and then limit the offensive side of the ball the past two years?

I see you play fair...

Regardless i'll stand by your completely and massively skewed rules and raise you: Eric Pears, Montrae Holland, Chris Myers, Glen Martinez, Cecil Sapp, Michael Pittman, Selvin Young, Andre Hall, and more.

SoCalBronco
02-22-2009, 07:59 PM
Destroying your competition this week, I see.

I'll wait till you lose your game before engaging you in any DJ discussions this off-season. :)

;D

TheReverend
02-22-2009, 07:59 PM
who is to say that Xanders didn't play a big part in last years personnel selections....

Because he wasn't here...

BroncoBuff
02-22-2009, 08:04 PM
Destroying your competition this week, I see.

I'll wait till you lose your game before engaging you in any DJ discussions this off-season. :)

"Destroying your competition"? Read it again, he agreed with me and/or backpedalled on almost every point.

SoCalBronco
02-22-2009, 08:07 PM
who is to say that Xanders didn't play a big part in last years personnel selections....

Because Xanders is a cap guy and its common knowledge that his main line of work was to work with Mike Bleum on cap and contracts. Also because Bowlen has PUBLICLY given Goodman props for it, that's why.

For Bowlen to say that because he worked well with McDaniels and maybe because it would have rubbed the Goodmans the wrong way to keep them there under an elevated to GM Xanders justified promoting him and kicking them out is the height of stupidity...its a little too stupid, even for Bowlen.

Why did anyone have to be elevated over the other? There were starting to be clear lines of authority. Goodmans had the draft and FA, Xanders was in charge of getting the contracts and stuff in order, and McDaniels coached the team. Why do we need to upset the apple cart? Each had jurisdiction within his own domain of expertise. I don't see what the problem is here. And if you have to elevate someone to arbitrate disputes across jurisdictional lines, as between the three, Goodman should have been the one elevated to the top. Not some numbers crunching 37 year old kid, who worked along time in a franchise that was in the dumps for virtually the whole time he was there. What makes him so special?

Because he's a young kid like the coach and they seem to work together? That's a weak rationale. It's nonsensical. We have a serious void in scouting talent right now. We have a serious void in FA evaluation talent right now. In fact, I'd pick Shanny to make FA choices over some douchebag from ESPN who hasn't been able to find ANY kind of real employment in FIVE years.

Saying the things that have been done are well thought out and well planned is like saying Marek Malik is an All Star. :)

TheReverend
02-22-2009, 08:10 PM
"Destroying your competition"? Read it again, he agreed with me and/or backpedalled on almost every point.

........................

Hilarious!

Rock Chalk
02-22-2009, 08:10 PM
Taco John is right of course, all four of Coyer's Bronco defenses finished Top 10 in the league, despite Shanny's horrible defensive drafting. And he managed an AFC Runner-up defense with five castoff D-linemen from Cleveland.

I was talking to a Seahawk-fan buddy of mine recently and he asked what happened with Shanny, and in answering him it became clear to me, too ... it was a classic case of an offensive-minded HC who devoted a lopsided amount of resources to his own offense while the defense withered in a talent-less dead zone.

I would have thought so too but Cito brought up an excellent point (I know, its surprising that douche had a good point) a couple of posts before yours. 24 of the first 37 picks from 01-08 (I think thats the years he used) were defensive draft picks. Its not that he let the defense wither in a talentless dead zone, its that Shanny as the Head Honcho was a talentless hack for picking defensive talent. He has had a few hits here and there. Al Wilson, i suppose DJ Williams, Darrent Williams likely would have been great, Trevor Pryce, but by and large he was absolutely horrendous at picking talent.

And if his coordinators had any say whatsoever, they too were absolutely horrendous at it and for that alone should be fired for opening their mouths.

I feel better today than I did the day he got fired. I was a mixed bag the day he got fired. Was more or less in shock I guess. Wasnt unhappy, wasnt happy, just numb to the fact. He was our coach for so long it was kind of surreal that he was gone.

Now that he is gone, and I have looked back at the post Superbowl years, Im grateful he is gone. I loved what he did for John Elway, I loved that he brought us two superbowls, but the farther removed we got from it the less that mattered to me. I want the team I root for to be a contender again.

Will McKid do that? I dont know. Doubtful that he can do it this year. He has to fix a completely busted defense, retool a stagnant offense that was unable to score and did not play well under pressure consistently and fix a special teams that hasnt worked in nearly two decades. Thats a lot of fixing for one season and a budget conscious owner now.

We might be screwed for a few years, but quite frankly with Shanahan at the helm, I think we would have been screwed anyway.

TheReverend
02-22-2009, 08:11 PM
Because Xanders is a cap guy and its common knowledge that his main line of work was to work with Mike Bleum on cap and contracts. Also because Bowlen has PUBLICLY given Goodman props for it, that's why.

For Bowlen to say that because he worked well with McDaniels and maybe because it would have rubbed the Goodmans the wrong way to keep them there under an elevated to GM Xanders justified promoting him and kicking them out is the height of stupidity...its a little too stupid, even for Bowlen.

Why did anyone have to be elevated over the other? There were starting to be clear lines of authority. Goodmans had the draft and FA, Xanders was in charge of getting the contracts and stuff in order, and McDaniels coached the team. Why do we need to upset the apple cart? Each had jurisdiction within his own domain of expertise. I don't see what the problem is here. And if you have to elevate someone to arbitrate disputes across jurisdictional lines, as between the three, Goodman should have been the one elevated to the top. Not some numbers crunching 37 year old kid, who worked along time in a franchise that was in the dumps for virtually the whole time he was there. What makes him so special?

Because he's a young kid like the coach and they seem to work together? That's a weak rationale. It's nonsensical. We have a serious void in scouting talent right now. We have a serious void in FA evaluation talent right now. In fact, I'd pick Shanny to make FA choices over some douchebag from ESPN who hasn't been able to find ANY kind of real employment in FIVE years.

Saying the things that have been done are well thought out and well planned is like saying Marek Malik is an All Star. :)

You forgot one pretty important fact...

Xanders wasn't even offered a job until April 29th, after both FA AND the draft.

BroncoBuff
02-22-2009, 08:14 PM
Okay, so you throw out names like Ellis Johnson to prove your point on D, and then limit the offensive side of the ball the past two years?
I didn't "limit it" to anything, you post whatever you like.

I see you play fair ....
Save "The Art of War" for someplace else ... this is just a football fan debate, right?

Regardless i'll stand by your completely and massively skewed rules and raise you: Eric Pears, Montrae Holland, Chris Myers, Glen Martinez, Cecil Sapp, Michael Pittman, Selvin Young, Andre Hall, and more.
"Completely and massively skewed? Again, lighten up.

And you can't count our own draft pick Chris Myers, or our own CFAs like Young, Pears and Hall. First of all, NONE of the four are street free agents, but more importantly, THREE ARE STILL ON OUR ROSTER, and Chris Myers is an excellent player who we got a pick for - Spencer Larsen! As to the other whopping THREE guys you mentioned, Glen Martinez never started (except as an injury fill-in), and we got a draft pick for Montrae Holland.

Good point on Cecil Sapp, though ;D

TheReverend
02-22-2009, 08:17 PM
And you can't count our own draft pick Chris Myers, or our own CFAs like Young, Pears and Hall. First of all, NONE of the four are street free agents, but more importantly, THREE ARE STILL ON OUR ROSTER, and Chris Myers is excellent, and we got a pick for him - Spencer Larsen! As to the other whopping THREE guys you mentioned, Glen Martinez never started (except as an injury fill-in), and we got a draft pick for Montrae Holland.

Good point on Cecil Sapp, though ;D

Okay, so now we can't count our own draft picks or UFAs? Is this another new rule that only fits your side of the argument, because you have no problem ignoring your own caveats...

Buff's rule list for future reference:
Buff can use defensive players from the past decade, but any opposition must only use the past two years
Buff can use drafted/UFA players, but any opposition cannot.

Other rules you want me to add?

Ray Finkle
02-22-2009, 08:17 PM
Because Xanders is a cap guy and its common knowledge that his main line of work was to work with Mike Bleum on cap and contracts. Also because Bowlen has PUBLICLY given Goodman props for it, that's why.

For Bowlen to say that because he worked well with McDaniels and maybe because it would have rubbed the Goodmans the wrong way to keep them there under an elevated to GM Xanders justified promoting him and kicking them out is the height of stupidity...its a little too stupid, even for Bowlen.

Why did anyone have to be elevated over the other? There were starting to be clear lines of authority. Goodmans had the draft and FA, Xanders was in charge of getting the contracts and stuff in order, and McDaniels coached the team. Why do we need to upset the apple cart? Each had jurisdiction within his own domain of expertise. I don't see what the problem is here. And if you have to elevate someone to arbitrate disputes across jurisdictional lines, as between the three, Goodman should have been the one elevated to the top. Not some numbers crunching 37 year old kid, who worked along time in a franchise that was in the dumps for virtually the whole time he was there. What makes him so special?

Because he's a young kid like the coach and they seem to work together? That's a weak rationale. It's nonsensical. We have a serious void in scouting talent right now. We have a serious void in FA evaluation talent right now. In fact, I'd pick Shanny to make FA choices over some douchebag from ESPN who hasn't been able to find ANY kind of real employment in FIVE years.

Saying the things that have been done are well thought out and well planned is like saying Marek Malik is an All Star. :)

that is low....

Xanders had a hand in all the FA's that were brought in last year. How long has Goodman been with the Broncos? How many good drafts have he/they hit on? Cutler (Shanahan driven), Schef? Jury is still out. Hit on Marshall and Kuper. Dumervil is still up in the air (best DE on a crap stick D line does not predict future success). Other then Harris and maybe Thomas, the 07 draft blew. Clady, Royal, Hillis, and maybe Woodyard, can be all pro but I am not going to explode in my pants after one season (Mike Croel effect).

If they take a punter with the first pick, then lets all riot but until then....

TheReverend
02-22-2009, 08:20 PM
that is low....

Xanders had a hand in all the FA's that were brought in last year.

Jesus, I'm talking a wall, Ray...

XANDERS WAS HIRED APRIL 30TH OF 2008, AFTER THE DRAFT AND FREE AGENCY.

http://www.denverpost.com/sports/ci_9100102

SoCalBronco
02-22-2009, 08:22 PM
You forgot one pretty important fact...

Xanders wasn't even offered a job until April 29th, after both FA AND the draft.

Good point. I didnt even know that. So he had ZERO input in our 2008 class and furthermore, we therefore had already started implementing the policy of being more prudent in FA before he even got here. I don't see what value Xanders has, personally.

Maybe he's sleeping with McDaniels, I don't know. I'm trying to think of a reason why he got elevated and those other guys that Bowlen just said were his trusted advisors and loyal and competent servants got kicked out. Really...that's all I can think of. He has to be sleeping with McDaniels. There's really no other way to put 2 and 2 together. There's no basis in fact to justify this promotion and its effect on the Goodmans. Past experience doesn't justify it. He had no role in our change of financial philosophy or our killer draft. Can someone give me a reason why Xanders is the GM? I'm waiting to hear one valid reason other than sex or the bottle.

BroncoBuff
02-22-2009, 08:25 PM
Okay, so now we can't count our own draft picks or UFAs? Is this another new rule that only fits your side of the argument, because you have no problem ignoring your own caveats...

Buff's rule list for future reference:
Buff can use defensive players from the past decade, but any opposition must only use the past two years
Buff can use drafted/UFA players, but any opposition cannot.

Other rules you want me to add?
I'm not sure why you're getting worked up, Rev ... but to clarify, I was talking about "street free agent nobodys." Guys the Denver Broncos draft or sign as CFAs are hardly "street free agents" or "nobodys."

Ellis Johnson is the only guy you mention out of the 12 or so guys I listed as "street free agent nobodys," and that's interesting .... because I can play a name-game of Broncos NOBODY defensive starters with Ellis Johnson's name: Ellis Johnson ... Raylee Johnson ... Ellis Johnson ... Luther Ellis. Rev, this was our starting D-Line the year before the Browncos came in!!! Okay, that year Trevor missed with the back injury, but still. That is awful.

bowtown
02-22-2009, 08:25 PM
Good point. I didnt even know that. So he had ZERO input in our 2008 class and furthermore, we therefore had already started implementing the policy of being more prudent in FA before he even got here. I don't see what value Xanders has, personally.

Maybe he's sleeping with McDaniels, I don't know. I'm trying to think of a reason why he got elevated and those other guys that Bowlen just said were his trusted advisors and loyal and competent servants got kicked out. Really...that's all I can think of. He has to be sleeping with McDaniels. There's really no other way to put 2 and 2 together. There's no basis in fact to justify this promotion and its effect on the Goodmans. Past experience doesn't justify it. He had no role in our change of financial philosophy or our killer draft. Can someone give me a reason why Xanders is the GM? I'm waiting to hear one valid reason other than sex or the bottle.

http://media.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/content/img/photos/2008/03/17/435929980_t220.jpg

"Annd jusht what ezzactly are (hicup) are you implllying?"

Kaylore
02-22-2009, 08:29 PM
I guess I can see both sides. I think Shanahan had to go. It just kept getting worse and worse.

The Goodman's getting canned and Xanders promotion doesn't make a lot of sense to me. That doesn't mean that Xanders can't be good, it just means that there's no reason to believe he will be. All the good draft picks the last several years were a result of the Goodman's. Xanders hand no hand in it. I suspect this will be a McDaniels-influenced staff, so hopefully both he and Xanders will have enough knowledge to get some good guys, but as I said, I don't expect anything more than average at best.

When Shanahanw was coach I didn't trust the staff to develop defensive talent even if we found some good ones. Now I trust the staff and am expecting some stupid picks. I hope I'm wrong.

Fusionfrontman
02-22-2009, 08:30 PM
I think the difference with the Street free ageents arguement going on is that Guys like Hall, Young, Holland, Sapp, ect were brought in as competition for positions that had no clear cut winner, like RB the last couple of years. Or used to spell guys and serve as depth (Martinez). However with the guys on Defense mentioned I'd say a good part of them (Simeon RICE for example) were brought in to start. They came in to be that cheap priced Diamond Shanny thought he would find. Those guys were all but handed the job. I mean, Courtney Brown?

TheReverend
02-22-2009, 08:32 PM
I think the difference with the Street free ageents arguement going on is that Guys like Hall, Young, Holland, Sapp, ect were brought in as competition for positions that had no clear cut winner, like RB the last couple of years. Or used to spell guys and serve as depth (Martinez). However with the guys on Defense mentioned I'd say a good part of them (Simeon RICE for example) were brought in to start. They came in to be that cheap priced Diamond Shanny thought he would find. Those guys were all but handed the job. I mean, Courtney Brown?

Oh no you didn't....

bowtown
02-22-2009, 08:32 PM
Those guys were all but handed the job. I mean, Courtney Brown?

Oh the guy that put in a tough as nails season for us and played a big role in us going to the AFC Championship Game? What about him?

TheReverend
02-22-2009, 08:34 PM
Oh the guy that put in a tough as nails season for us and played a big role in us going to the AFC Championship Game? What about him?

Oddly enough, he was the only personnel change from the 2005 D to the 2006 D... and the rush D went from top 5 to middle of the road...

Wow, he must've sucked!

SoCalBronco
02-22-2009, 08:35 PM
I guess I can see both sides. I think Shanahan had to go. It just kept getting worse and worse.

The Goodman's getting canned and Xanders promotion doesn't make a lot of sense to me. That doesn't mean that Xanders can't be good, it just means that there's no reason to believe he will be. All the good draft picks the last several years were a result of the Goodman's. Xanders hand no hand in it. I suspect this will be a McDaniels-influenced staff, so hopefully both he and Xanders will have enough knowledge to get some good guys, but as I said, I don't expect anything more than average at best.

When Shanahanw was coach I didn't trust the staff to develop defensive talent even if we found some good ones. Now I trust the staff and am expecting some stupid picks. I hope I'm wrong.

You know what we have here....I've been thinking about this Kidd thing more. Basically, we've elevated Bob to Pro Personnel Chief. If it were phrased in that way, this site would be melting down...justifiably. Imagine if Pat Bowlen said that Josh McDaniels knew Bob from the days when they were both at Winchell's early in the morning fighting off the cops for the fresh glazed donuts and as such, he is the new FA guru.

Imagine how we would have reacted? It's how we SHOULD react now. Because its NO DIFFERENT than hiring Bob. Both Kidd and Bob have spent the last few years WITHOUT REAL EMPLOYMENT writing articles for MICKEY MOUSE organizations. There's no difference there....except that, while both are equally unqualified, at least Bob wasn't getting in through the back door though nepotism.

Bowlen makes me sick. He makes me ****ing sick. He's a ****ing liar. He promised a real difference between the GM and HC and what we have here is nothing but bull**** and circle jerk's and increased nepotism and consolidation of power in the hands of toddlers.

gyldenlove
02-22-2009, 08:43 PM
I think Shanahan the GM had to go, his track record in terms of signing FAs and drafting was sub-par and the team was clearly in a state of deterioration in terms of talent level. If it hadn't been for a good staff of offensive position coaches and Shanahan's considerable skill as an offensive coach it would have looked even worse.

The Goodman situation is unfortunate, I think Bowlen was looking to correct the mistake he made by having Shanahan do both the GM and HC job, so he couldn't fire an unsuccessful GM without also letting go one of the best HC in the game. Having a 3 headed monster run the front office is not good in terms of responsiblity, what would happen in a couple of years if we brought in some high priced free agents who tanked, who would be responsible? You need to have a clear chain of command and chain of responsibility so you can build a strong organization.

I was sad to see the Goodmans go, I think they did some splendid work for us recently and frankly I thought Jim Goodman would have been elevated to GM in title and power. However when Xanders was promoted there is no doubt it would have been dangerous to have the Goodmans around even if they had been willing to stay, so with the way things worked out they had to go.

To some extend I think Xanders makes sense, he worked with Dimitroff last year who is another Belichik diciple and I think that will help in his work with McDaniels. I am not really familiar with Kidd, but he does have a Patriots background and it seems to fit with the Xanders promotion that they bring in people who have experience with the Patriots way of doing things.

gyldenlove
02-22-2009, 08:45 PM
You know what we have here....I've been thinking about this Kidd thing more. Basically, we've elevated Bob to Pro Personnel Chief. If it were phrased in that way, this site would be melting down...justifiably. Imagine if Pat Bowlen said that Josh McDaniels knew Bob from the days when they were both at Winchell's early in the morning fighting off the cops for the fresh glazed donuts and as such, he is the new FA guru.

Imagine how we would have reacted? It's how we SHOULD react now. Because its NO DIFFERENT than hiring Bob. Both Kidd and Bob have spent the last few years WITHOUT REAL EMPLOYMENT writing articles for MICKEY MOUSE organizations. There's no difference there....except that, while both are equally unqualified, at least Bob wasn't getting in through the back door though nepotism.

Bowlen makes me sick. He makes me ****ing sick. He's a ****ing liar. He promised a real difference between the GM and HC and what we have here is nothing but bull**** and circle jerk's and increased nepotism and consolidation of power in the hands of toddlers.

At least Kidd doesn't weigh 2 metrics tons and lives with his mom.... :peace:

Kaylore
02-22-2009, 08:45 PM
You know what we have here....I've been thinking about this Kidd thing more. Basically, we've elevated Bob to Pro Personnel Chief. If it were phrased in that way, this site would be melting down...justifiably. Imagine if Pat Bowlen said that Josh McDaniels knew Bob from the days when they were both at Winchell's early in the morning fighting off the cops for the fresh glazed donuts and as such, he is the new FA guru.

Imagine how we would have reacted? It's how we SHOULD react now. Because its NO DIFFERENT than hiring Bob. Both Kidd and Bob have spent the last few years WITHOUT REAL EMPLOYMENT writing articles for MICKEY MOUSE organizations. There's no difference there....except that, while both are equally unqualified, at least Bob wasn't getting in through the back door though nepotism.

Bowlen makes me sick. He makes me ****ing sick. He's a ****ing liar. He promised a real difference between the GM and HC and what we have here is nothing but bull**** and circle jerk's and increased nepotism and consolidation of power in the hands of toddlers.

Calm down! I'm as skeptical as you on Kidd. I would love to know why he was out of football for so long and why hacking out crap for ESPN doesn't immediately disqualify him from doing anything professional again. But let's remember that he does actually have experience in pro-scouting. Granted there weren't any trades or free agents I liked that he made for the Patriots. And I wasn't even in the country for the Browns era, and didn't care about football enough to notice while he was with the Cards. And granted, both those teams sucked rancidness while he was there. However it's a total reach to suggest that Bob and he are comparable. Not everyone that pens things for ESPN is pulling crap out of their arse.

We have a GM and a new head coach. More importantly, we have a defined vision of what the team is supposed to look like and how it's going to get there. We have set systems in place that we're going to commit to and draft personnel that match. That's not something we've had in a very long time. If the overall road map is there, then as the other elements show to be flawed they can be removed. I have as little faith in the personnel staff as you do, but I also know that as of right now they have a clean record. Let's wait and see before condemn Bowlen and the football team. If they're in the playoffs next year and playing well then it will have been the right move.

BroncoBuff
02-22-2009, 08:47 PM
"Destroying your competition"? Read it again, he agreed with me and/or backpedalled on almost every point.........................

Hilarious!
What tf is up, Rev? You're really peeing on my leg tonight. Okay, you asked for this (no offense, SoCal):


Nobody is saying that we've drafted or played the FA game great on that side of the ball. Backpedals Personally, I thought Bly was a pretty good player and oddly enough he played like we thought he would play during the period that Champ was out. good point, I agree In any case, obviously Shanny's moves in FA re: the defense were inadequate. Agrees AND backpedals And it was wrong to fire Coyer, a point that I made at the time. Agrees I don't think all of this justified his firing though. The point was made that since Shanny said that Slowik would return, this by itself merited the firing. I disagree with that. We disagree there (but not a "destruction") Did Jim Bates suddenly become stupid when he came here? No. It was noted at the outset that we were going to go back to a style that we had run under Coyer this year. Not an issue We didn't have the proper talent to execute that. Agrees So we changed things. We changed things each week, lookign for something that would work. We didnt have the talent to make any kind of scheme consistently work. Agrees, agrees and agrees That's not necessarily on Slowik. We disagree there (but again not a "destruction).

That we have only 3 or 4 guys worth anything is an indictment on Shanny. I agree with that. Agrees In recent years, he realized that from a defensive perspective, you have to build from the front four going backwards not vice versa Backpedals to justify Shanahan That's why we began to make a big investment from a drafting perspective on the DL in 2007 (and also with Doom in 06, although the investment in that case wasn't as big). It is not Shanahan's fault that our DL in this last draft got hurt before the season started. Backpedals to justification Shanahan The point is that he realized, as Alec said, that you gotta build from the line first. They got the evaluation wrong in 2007 for the most part (although as you said, Thomas is not bad, he still has alot of upside IMO and is a decent player already). It is been argued that while the Goodman's can draft on offense, they supposedly "can't draft defense". It is true that our offensive hit rate is much better, cause we invest so many more picks there, roundabout agrees but that doesnt mean that the defensive hit rate has been poor. Not a backpedal, but he avoided my point that 6 of 7 picks in '06 were offense, that was the problem. If you compare hits to overall picks in the last five years, the ratio is not that bad. It's probably middle of the road. A bit off the topic, I loved Jim Goodman, as did SoCal - I agreed with his post on Jim Goodman/Bowlen doubletalk earlier today The issue has been in terms of numbers. We had to devote most of the numbers to offense because it fell into disrepair. Had to? Nope. Chose to.

Now that Bowlen did what he did, we have a cap guy in charge, a columnist on the pro scouting guy and really nothing in place so far as a chief figure on the college scouting side. We're the only team in the entire league that doesn't have one as the draft is approaching...and you are going to have a cap and contracts guy make the final call on evaluations? How is this an improvement from what we had? Again, a criticism of the Goodman firing and Bowlen doubletalk, we DEFINITELY DO agree there. If the rationale for firing Shanny is bad scouting for defense or inadequate filling of needs there, how can it be said that this is an improvement? We're going to have someone from ESPN who's been out of a real job for 5 years make the final recommendations on FA's? We're going to have a void on the draft? Who's going to arbitrate between the scouts? It can't be Xanders, because he'd just be choosing an opinion out of a hat. It can't be McDaniels, because he was just the NFL equivalent of a GA some 6 years ago and Bowlen has tried to create the appearance of a bifurcation of power. Again, a criticism of the Goodman firing and Bowlen doubletalk, we DEFINITELY DO agree there.

The point is its stupid to get rid of someone unless you have a coherent, smart structure in place about how you are going to improve. We are running like a chicken with its head cut off right now. There are competence questions everywhere. Basic competency issues. AND YET AGAIN ... a criticism of the Goodman firing and Bowken doubletalk, we DEFINITELY DO agree ONE HUNDRED PERCENT there. I wish Jim Goodman had won ... his three drafts are like crack to me, and I fear I'll have withdrawal symptoms soon ;D.

Pat wanted to "take back" his team. Ok...let's see how it works.


Dang, he really "destroyed" me there, Rev.....


(Again, no offense, SoCal).

Ray Finkle
02-22-2009, 09:00 PM
Jesus, I'm talking a wall, Ray...

XANDERS WAS HIRED APRIL 30TH OF 2008, AFTER THE DRAFT AND FREE AGENCY.

http://www.denverpost.com/sports/ci_9100102

Rev....post April....

SoCalBronco
02-22-2009, 09:00 PM
http://tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:AFrFthiIjOtQjM:http://www.afterelton.com/archive/elton/TV/2006/photos/ambiguously%2520gay%2520duo/ambiguously_gay_duo_5_1.jpg

Somebody needs to photoshop a McDonald's golden arch on one of the shirts and an X on the other.

BroncoBuff
02-22-2009, 09:13 PM
The Goodman's getting canned and Xanders promotion doesn't make a lot of sense to me. That doesn't mean that Xanders can't be good, it just means that there's no reason to believe he will be.
And we already know that Jim Goodman was good.

All the good draft picks the last several years were a result of the Goodman's. Xanders hand no hand in it. I suspect this will be a McDaniels-influenced staff, so hopefully both he and Xanders will have enough knowledge to get some good guys, but as I said, I don't expect anything more than average at best.
Definitely ... I wish Bowlen had waited until after the draft, we needed one more Goodman draft, especially with a full load of picks.

I can't help but think this was an infighting thing. Plus, I never understood why, after his excellent drafts and the canning of Ted Sundquist, that Jim Goodman was not promoted to GM last summer. There was definitelky an opening ???

Cito Pelon
02-22-2009, 09:23 PM
I would have thought so too but Cito brought up an excellent point (I know, its surprising that douche had a good point) a couple of posts before yours. 24 of the first 37 picks from 01-08 (I think thats the years he used) were defensive draft picks. Its not that he let the defense wither in a talentless dead zone, its that Shanny as the Head Honcho was a talentless hack for picking defensive talent. He has had a few hits here and there. Al Wilson, i suppose DJ Williams, Darrent Williams likely would have been great, Trevor Pryce, but by and large he was absolutely horrendous at picking talent.

And if his coordinators had any say whatsoever, they too were absolutely horrendous at it and for that alone should be fired for opening their mouths.

I feel better today than I did the day he got fired. I was a mixed bag the day he got fired. Was more or less in shock I guess. Wasnt unhappy, wasnt happy, just numb to the fact. He was our coach for so long it was kind of surreal that he was gone.

Now that he is gone, and I have looked back at the post Superbowl years, Im grateful he is gone. I loved what he did for John Elway, I loved that he brought us two superbowls, but the farther removed we got from it the less that mattered to me. I want the team I root for to be a contender again.

Will McKid do that? I dont know. Doubtful that he can do it this year. He has to fix a completely busted defense, retool a stagnant offense that was unable to score and did not play well under pressure consistently and fix a special teams that hasnt worked in nearly two decades. Thats a lot of fixing for one season and a budget conscious owner now.

We might be screwed for a few years, but quite frankly with Shanahan at the helm, I think we would have been screwed anyway.

The King thanks you for agreeing with The King.

bpc
02-22-2009, 09:29 PM
I'm still coming to grips with Shanny being gone. I have a hard time believing that McDaniels is going to outcoach him. Surprisingly, it was Shanahan's coaching ability which kept us in the running all these years for AFC West championships despite having inferior talent to most of our competitors.

On the other hand, he his era was dominated by pathetic free agent spending highlighted by guys like Niko, Bailey, Colbert, and Travis Henry most recently. You can search back to names like Dale Carter, Daryl Gardener and many others. The list goes on and on. What really did Mike in though was the drafting during his time. We got better after awhile but for a period of about 5 years in the early 2000's, we blew pick after pick.

Time will tell if Bowlen made the right move. Right now i'm skeptical. It's hard for any 32 year to succeed right out the gates. It's hardly ever been done. Guys like Bill Walsh, Bill Parcels, Mike Shanahan, Jon Gruden and others have all severely struggled with their jobs that initial season.

Cito Pelon
02-22-2009, 09:42 PM
You know what we have here....I've been thinking about this Kidd thing more. Basically, we've elevated Bob to Pro Personnel Chief. If it were phrased in that way, this site would be melting down...justifiably. Imagine if Pat Bowlen said that Josh McDaniels knew Bob from the days when they were both at Winchell's early in the morning fighting off the cops for the fresh glazed donuts and as such, he is the new FA guru.

Imagine how we would have reacted? It's how we SHOULD react now. Because its NO DIFFERENT than hiring Bob. Both Kidd and Bob have spent the last few years WITHOUT REAL EMPLOYMENT writing articles for MICKEY MOUSE organizations. There's no difference there....except that, while both are equally unqualified, at least Bob wasn't getting in through the back door though nepotism.

Bowlen makes me sick. He makes me ****ing sick. He's a ****ing liar. He promised a real difference between the GM and HC and what we have here is nothing but bull**** and circle jerk's and increased nepotism and consolidation of power in the hands of toddlers.

Nice rant. There's a wee bit of merit in it.

wolf754life
02-22-2009, 09:59 PM
You know what we have here....I've been thinking about this Kidd thing more. Basically, we've elevated Bob to Pro Personnel Chief. If it were phrased in that way, this site would be melting down...justifiably. Imagine if Pat Bowlen said that Josh McDaniels knew Bob from the days when they were both at Winchell's early in the morning fighting off the cops for the fresh glazed donuts and as such, he is the new FA guru.

Imagine how we would have reacted? It's how we SHOULD react now. Because its NO DIFFERENT than hiring Bob. Both Kidd and Bob have spent the last few years WITHOUT REAL EMPLOYMENT writing articles for MICKEY MOUSE organizations. There's no difference there....except that, while both are equally unqualified, at least Bob wasn't getting in through the back door though nepotism.

Bowlen makes me sick. He makes me ****ing sick. He's a ****ing liar. He promised a real difference between the GM and HC and what we have here is nothing but bull**** and circle jerk's and increased nepotism and consolidation of power in the hands of toddlers.


whaaaaaaaaaaaa, whaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, you whiny little punk.

Taco John
02-22-2009, 10:12 PM
You know what we have here....I've been thinking about this Kidd thing more. Basically, we've elevated Bob to Pro Personnel Chief. If it were phrased in that way, this site would be melting down...justifiably. Imagine if Pat Bowlen said that Josh McDaniels knew Bob from the days when they were both at Winchell's early in the morning fighting off the cops for the fresh glazed donuts and as such, he is the new FA guru.

Imagine how we would have reacted? It's how we SHOULD react now. Because its NO DIFFERENT than hiring Bob. Both Kidd and Bob have spent the last few years WITHOUT REAL EMPLOYMENT writing articles for MICKEY MOUSE organizations. There's no difference there....except that, while both are equally unqualified, at least Bob wasn't getting in through the back door though nepotism.

Bowlen makes me sick. He makes me ****ing sick. He's a ****ing liar. He promised a real difference between the GM and HC and what we have here is nothing but bull**** and circle jerk's and increased nepotism and consolidation of power in the hands of toddlers.

Haha... Wow. That's an agressive way to put it - but you make an interesting observation. Bob is working for scout, and that's where this guy is coming from? That's certainly eye-brow raising.

theAPAOps5
02-22-2009, 10:20 PM
You know what we have here....I've been thinking about this Kidd thing more. Basically, we've elevated Bob to Pro Personnel Chief. If it were phrased in that way, this site would be melting down...justifiably. Imagine if Pat Bowlen said that Josh McDaniels knew Bob from the days when they were both at Winchell's early in the morning fighting off the cops for the fresh glazed donuts and as such, he is the new FA guru.

Imagine how we would have reacted? It's how we SHOULD react now. Because its NO DIFFERENT than hiring Bob. Both Kidd and Bob have spent the last few years WITHOUT REAL EMPLOYMENT writing articles for MICKEY MOUSE organizations. There's no difference there....except that, while both are equally unqualified, at least Bob wasn't getting in through the back door though nepotism.

Bowlen makes me sick. He makes me ****ing sick. He's a ****ing liar. He promised a real difference between the GM and HC and what we have here is nothing but bull**** and circle jerk's and increased nepotism and consolidation of power in the hands of toddlers.

SoCal you are one of my favorite posters but this **** is getting old. Bowlen has NEVER had a strong GM who runs the organization. Its always been a strong Coach and silent GM. And who are you to doubt it. Bowlen is the only owner to bring Denver a SB x 2.

Its becoming clear that McDaniels and the rest of the staff will never amount to squat to you because of Shanahan. Seriously look back with an open mind and tell me that Shanny the GM deserved to stay because of Shanny the Coach. If you look at things you will understand that it was getting tired and predictable. So far McDaniels has done what Shanny was too damn scared to do. He blew the Defense up. He cut the dead weight. He took the step that Shanahan was too timid yet arrogant to do. Shanny was too confident in his offense that he neglected defense. We finally have a coach who appreciates both sides and you want to go drama queen?

Take a deep breath and focus because so far McDaniels has done everything right.

theAPAOps5
02-22-2009, 10:23 PM
Haha... Wow. That's an agressive way to put it - but you make an interesting observation. Bob is working for scout, and that's where this guy is coming from? That's certainly eye-brow raising.

Thats crap TJ. Bob doesn't work for scout. I understand you have a soft spot for tubby which clouds your judgment but give me a break. Bob works for War Paint Illustrated HOSTED on Scout. Kidd, well he is a real GM and a real Writer for ESPN not SCOUT. We all know you and Bob are pals but don't go out of your way to validate a second rate hack when it comes to "journalism"

SoCalBronco
02-22-2009, 10:23 PM
Haha... Wow. That's an agressive way to put it - but you make an interesting observation. Bob is working for scout, and that's where this guy is coming from? That's certainly eye-brow raising.

To be fair, Kidd is coming from ESPN, but in my eyes, scout and ESPN are both equally worthless.

Taco John
02-22-2009, 10:31 PM
Nobody is saying that we've drafted or played the FA game great on that side of the ball. Personally, I thought Bly was a pretty good player and oddly enough he played like we thought he would play during the period that Champ was out. In any case, obviously Shanny's moves in FA re: the defense were inadequate. And it was wrong to fire Coyer, a point that I made at the time. I don't think all of this justified his firing though. The point was made that since Shanny said that Slowik would return, this by itself merited the firing. I disagree with that. Did Jim Bates suddenly become stupid when he came here? No. It was noted at the outset that we were going to go back to a style that we had run under Coyer this year. We didn't have the proper talent to execute that. So we changed things. We changed things each week, lookign for something that would work. We didnt have the talent to make any kind of scheme consistently work. That's not necessarily on Slowik.

That we have only 3 or 4 guys worth anything is an indictment on Shanny. I agree with that. In recent years, he realized that from a defensive perspective, you have to build from the front four going backwards not vice versa. That's why we began to make a big investment from a drafting perspective on the DL in 2007 (and also with Doom in 06, although the investment in that case wasn't as big). It is not Shanahan's fault that our DL in this last draft got hurt before the season started. The point is that he realized, as Alec said, that you gotta build from the line first. They got the evaluation wrong in 2007 for the most part (although as you said, Thomas is not bad, he still has alot of upside IMO and is a decent player already). It is been argued that while the Goodman's can draft on offense, they supposedly "can't draft defense". It is true that our offensive hit rate is much better, but that doesnt mean that the defensive hit rate has been poor. If you compare hits to overall picks in the last five years, the ratio is not that bad. It's probably middle of the road. The issue has been in terms of numbers. We had to devote most of the numbers to offense because it fell into disrepair.

Now that Bowlen did what he did, we have a cap guy in charge, a columnist on the pro scouting guy and really nothing in place so far as a chief figure on the college scouting side. We're the only team in the entire league that doesn't have one as the draft is approaching...and you are going to have a cap and contracts guy make the final call on evaluations? How is this an improvement from what we had? If the rationale for firing Shanny is bad scouting for defense or inadequate filling of needs there, how can it be said that this is an improvement? We're going to have someone from ESPN who's been out of a real job for 5 years make the final recommendations on FA's? We're going to have a void on the draft? Who's going to arbitrate between the scouts? It can't be Xanders, because he'd just be choosing an opinion out of a hat. It can't be McDaniels, because he was just the NFL equivalent of a GA some 6 years ago and Bowlen has tried to create the appearance of a bifurcation of power.

The point is its stupid to get rid of someone unless you have a coherent, smart structure in place about how you are going to improve. We are running like a chicken with its head cut off right now. There are competence questions everywhere. Basic competency issues.

Pat wanted to "take back" his team. Ok...let's see how it works.



I freaking love this guy. Seriously. I want to have your babies SoCal. But I can't. Do you have a dog? I want to get a dog and have it have your dog's babies.

This is a great post which highlights a lot of why I'm having trouble with this whole thing.

I would have felt about a million times better if Pat had fired Shanahan and had a GM ready to take his place - I mean a real GM. Someone with real power to run the organization. Like Pioli. That to me would have signalled a plan.

But this whole circus where we're still dealing with power struggles the week before the Indianapolis combine, and we're rushing to get scouts in place for one of the most pivotal drafts this franchise has had in the last two decades... It doesn't inspire a ton of confidence.

Taco John
02-22-2009, 10:33 PM
Thats crap TJ. Bob doesn't work for scout. I understand you have a soft spot for tubby which clouds your judgment but give me a break. Bob works for War Paint Illustrated HOSTED on Scout.

How can you seperate the two? War Paint Illustrated is a Scout affiliate.


See, check it out:

http://kan.scout.com/

Bob is writing for Scout.

Cito Pelon
02-22-2009, 10:46 PM
I freaking love this guy. Seriously. I want to have your babies SoCal. But I can't. Do you have a dog? I want to get a dog and have it have your dog's babies.

This is a great post which highlights a lot of why I'm having trouble with this whole thing.

I would have felt about a million times better if Pat had fired Shanahan and had a GM ready to take his place - I mean a real GM. Someone with real power to run the organization. Like Pioli. That to me would have signalled a plan.

But this whole circus where we're still dealing with power struggles the week before the Indianapolis combine, and we're rushing to get scouts in place for one of the most pivotal drafts this franchise has had in the last two decades... It doesn't inspire a ton of confidence.

Travis Goodman is still lending expertise, so relax.

FireFly
02-22-2009, 11:17 PM
I feel the same. Love shanny for the 2 super bowls, but this team desperately needed a culture change. Hopefully McDaniels can provide that. I do like the d-purge!

I think that's the most important thing. I think things were begining to feel stale. The infusion of new blood can't be bad.

wolf754life
02-22-2009, 11:32 PM
taco, socal, doubt the change, resist it if you must....

i told you it had to be done. change for change sakes isn't good.

however, change for the sake of dramatic overhaul with nothing to lose is a good thing. Pat Bowlen (who deserves every broncos fans unconditional loyalty) fired everyone related to shanahan, he completely cleaned house.

everyone of shanahans players is on notice to keep their jobs. our new defense will at the very least play hard and with passion, be aggressive, attack instead of react.

don't judge our front office till you see who we draft/sign, don't judge our coaches till we play some games.

you crybabies make me sick, and if you had your way this franchise would never have had the chance to improve.

make no mistake you guys can b**** and moan but things have changed and they have changed for the better~!

Taco John
02-23-2009, 12:18 AM
taco, socal, doubt the change, resist it if you must....

i told you it had to be done. change for change sakes isn't good.

however, change for the sake of dramatic overhaul with nothing to lose is a good thing.



This is where I stopped reading. If I believed we had nothing to lose, I wouldn't care.

Just after Shanahan was fired, we took a poll on this site, and the majority of folks here said that they believe that this team was within two years of being in Superbowl contention. I'd wager that if we took that same poll today, most people wouldn't pick two years.

Blueflame
02-23-2009, 12:42 AM
This is where I stopped reading. If I believed we had nothing to lose, I wouldn't care.

Just after Shanahan was fired, we took a poll on this site, and the majority of folks here said that they believe that this team was within two years of being in Superbowl contention. I'd wager that if we took that same poll today, most people wouldn't pick two years.

I say go for it and post the poll....

TheReverend
02-23-2009, 04:28 AM
SoCal you are one of my favorite posters but this **** is getting old. Bowlen has NEVER had a strong GM who runs the organization. Its always been a strong Coach and silent GM. And who are you to doubt it. Bowlen is the only owner to bring Denver a SB x 2.

And Shanahan was the only coach... and I'd say that takes a little more of him than it does the owner.

You are becoming the opposite of Wolf. Its becoming clear that McDaniels and the rest of the staff will never amount to squat to you because of Shanahan. Seriously look back with an open mind and tell me that Shanny the GM deserved to stay because of Shanny the Coach. If you look at things you will understand that it was getting tired and predictable. Whats funny is you spout off about Bowlen yet he has flipped this organization on its head. So far McDaniels has done what Shanny was too damn scared to do. He blew the Defense up. He cut the dead weight. He took the step that Shanahan was too timid yet arrogant to do. Shanny was too confident in his offense that he neglected defense. We finally have a coach who appreciates both sides and you want to go drama queen?

Take a deep breath and focus because so far McDaniels has done everything right.

Defensive turnover and "blowing the defense up" was rampant under Shanahan. Absolutely nothing new here.

I still this move was plainly very dumb all the way around, but hopefully optimistic and giving these new fruits a chance. Regardless, everything Socal has said is true, and more accurate than the half truths of this post.

TheReverend
02-23-2009, 04:41 AM
Rev....post April....

Nothing happened post April... unless you want to adorn him with frankensence and miir (I'm sure both their spelling is horrid) for the DJ Williams extension...?

theAPAOps5
02-23-2009, 05:44 AM
And Shanahan was the only coach... and I'd say that takes a little more of him than it does the owner.



Defensive turnover and "blowing the defense up" was rampant under Shanahan. Absolutely nothing new here.

I still this move was plainly very dumb all the way around, but hopefully optimistic and giving these new fruits a chance. Regardless, everything Socal has said is true, and more accurate than the half truths of this post.

He blew it up because he as GM continued to swing and miss on FA and drafts when it came to the D.

TheReverend
02-23-2009, 06:13 AM
He blew it up because he as GM continued to swing and miss on FA and drafts when it came to the D.

I disagree whole-heartedly.

The guys you're calling swings and misses, if you look at their pay rate, were only brought in to be back-ups and depth to begin with.

Guys like Courtney Brown, Al Wilson, Lynch, Dre Bly were all big play-makers. Two of which had their careers cut short due to freak injuries, and would still be playing at a very high level had that not been the case.

You can actually watch our run D stat drop significantly when Courtney ended, and then watch it fall from bad to worsT when Al's neck breaks. In the meantime, NO great middle linebacker has been available, until this upcoming draft.

DarkHorse30
02-23-2009, 08:28 AM
I'm not convinced the Goodman's should be given credit for our last two "respectable" drafts. Nobody knows how much control Shanahan gave up. He may have made the calls on all of the picks in 2006, 2007 and 2008.

Just because Denver nailed a draft or two, doesn't mean that the scouting team is that much better than any other scouting team. It may only mean that Shanahan changed his gambling ways and went conventional.

And about Xanders, we were in cap hell before he showed up 9 months ago...and now we are in cap heaven. Is this a problem?

TheReverend
02-23-2009, 08:43 AM
I'm not convinced the Goodman's should be given credit for our last two "respectable" drafts. Nobody knows how much control Shanahan gave up. He may have made the calls on all of the picks in 2006, 2007 and 2008.

Just because Denver nailed a draft or two, doesn't mean that the scouting team is that much better than any other scouting team. It may only mean that Shanahan changed his gambling ways and went conventional.

And about Xanders, we were in cap hell before he showed up 9 months ago...and now we are in cap heaven. Is this a problem?

Actually Shanahan gave every ounce of credit to the Goodman's for the past three drafts.

And per your bolded statement, Xanders may have been involved in ONE contract. Count it, ONE. So how he took us from "cap hell" (which is completely untrue) to "cap heaven" by restructuring DJs deal... go figure.

DarkHorse30
02-23-2009, 09:12 AM
Actually Shanahan gave every ounce of credit to the Goodman's for the past three drafts.

And per your bolded statement, Xanders may have been involved in ONE contract. Count it, ONE. So how he took us from "cap hell" (which is completely untrue) to "cap heaven" by restructuring DJs deal... go figure.

Shanahan always gave credit to his staff and players.

The "hell" was all of the dead money that Denver carried around year after year. Last year was the first year that they let it all hit in one year. If Xanders was the new cap guy in May, then doesn't he get credit?

TheReverend
02-23-2009, 09:43 AM
Shanahan always gave credit to his staff and players.

The "hell" was all of the dead money that Denver carried around year after year. Last year was the first year that they let it all hit in one year. If Xanders was the new cap guy in May, then doesn't he get credit?

Xanders came in AFTER every single ****ing contract last season, EXCEPT DJ's extension. Period.

He had ZERO impact on anything you're talking about, dude.

bowtown
02-23-2009, 10:03 AM
Xanders came in AFTER every single ****ing contract last season, EXCEPT DJ's extension. Period.

He had ZERO impact on anything you're talking about, dude.

Rev, I think you should start a poll to find out what other historic things people think Xanders should get credit for, even though he had nothing to do with them. Flight perhaps? All Western literature? Christianity? If he came on in May, I'm guessing he is at least responsible for the invention of the Internet.

TheReverend
02-23-2009, 10:22 AM
Rev, I think you should start a poll to find out what other historic things people think Xanders should get credit for, even though he had nothing to do with them. Flight perhaps? All Western literature? Christianity? If he came on in May, I'm guessing he is at least responsible for the invention of the Internet.

Well, the date was actual April 30th, which means he had a day before the internet to get something else done...

I'm thinking the polio vaccine?

DarkHorse30
02-23-2009, 10:40 AM
Xanders came in AFTER every single ****ing contract last season, EXCEPT DJ's extension. Period.

He had ZERO impact on anything you're talking about, dude.

you have to look at players cut, and players allowed to leave via FA, not just contracts signed.

TheReverend
02-23-2009, 11:55 AM
you have to look at players cut, and players allowed to leave via FA, not just contracts signed.

You really think that wasn't going to happen anyways?

DarkHorse30
02-23-2009, 12:56 PM
You really think that wasn't going to happen anyways?

I think it's surprising that so many players have been cut in the last month, and it's saving quite a bit of money on the cap. Isn't Xanders, as the GM, and as the assistant GM last year, responsible for cutting our dead money in the cap down to only 1.8M in 2009?

Interesting that Tyler Goodman is still a scout with Denver.

Taco John
02-23-2009, 01:00 PM
I'm not convinced the Goodman's should be given credit for our last two "respectable" drafts. Nobody knows how much control Shanahan gave up. He may have made the calls on all of the picks in 2006, 2007 and 2008.

Just because Denver nailed a draft or two, doesn't mean that the scouting team is that much better than any other scouting team. It may only mean that Shanahan changed his gambling ways and went conventional.

And about Xanders, we were in cap hell before he showed up 9 months ago...and now we are in cap heaven. Is this a problem?



It's long been known that this was going to be a good cap year for us. This isn't a post-Xanders development.

I'm not intending to take anything away from Xanders, but let's not get carried away giving him credit that he doesn't deserve.

Bronco Yoda
02-23-2009, 03:44 PM
I know for a fact that Xanders invented velcro and the electric toothbrush.

Popps
02-23-2009, 05:44 PM
You really think that wasn't going to happen anyways?

Oh, I wouldn't assume anything....

https://s.foxsports.com/fe/img/NFL/Headshots/140x170/5064.jpg

leon
02-24-2009, 01:04 PM
It Was Time, Probably Long Over-due In Fact!!!, Shanny Had His Time, In Fact What More Could He Has Asked For While He Was There. He Had Complete Control And Everyone Kissing His Ass.