PDA

View Full Version : Coach McDaniels' 'win now' pitch in peril with Broncos' QB controversy


Taco John
03-20-2009, 01:31 AM
Coach McDaniels' 'win now' pitch in peril with Broncos' QB controversy

ENGLEWOOD, Colo. -- One reason the Denver Broncos have been the busiest team is free agency is the pitch that new coach Josh McDaniels has used to land his 16 recruits: Let's win now and leave the rebuilding to someone else.

"I didn't want to go into no situation where a team's going to be rebuilding again," new Broncos linebacker Andra Davis said.

But can the Broncos realistically expect to win right away if Pro Bowl quarterback Jay Cutler gets his wish to be traded?

Could they win with another established quarterback they might land by granting their best player his request? Can Denver return to the playoffs after a three-year drought behind newcomer Chris Simms, who has thrown just two passes since 2006?

What if the Broncos go with a rookie passer plucked from the college ranks on draft day?

It's not something Davis wanted to contemplate Thursday after running wind sprints at high altitude.

"I've been through a lot of quarterback controversies in Cleveland and I play defense. The quarterbacks and the management, they handle all that," Davis said. "Whatever's going to happen is going to happen. We just have to focus on ourselves. We can't worry about nobody else."

Cutler asked for a trade through his agent, Bus Cook, after talks with McDaniels failed to soothe his hurt feelings, which stemmed from the coach bringing up the quarterback's name in trade talks for Matt Cassel, his protege in New England and who was dealt to the Kansas City Chiefs instead.

McDaniels, who spent the past three seasons as the Patriots' offensive coordinator, would rather iron things out with Cutler than trade him on his terms.

Several teams need a quarterback of Cutler's caliber, however, and McDaniels and Broncos general manager Brian Xanders are sure to be approached by prospective suitors when the NFL owners gather Sunday in Dana Point, Calif., for their annual meeting.

Cutler is just 17-20 as a starter, but that's a deceiving record: The Broncos have had horrendous defenses ever since he took over from Jake Plummer late in 2006.

In games that the Broncos have allowed 21 points or fewer, Cutler is an impressive 13-1, and that only loss was to Green Bay in 2007 when the Packers won the coin toss and Brett Favre threw an 82-yard touchdown pass on the first play of overtime.

Cutler is skipping Denver's voluntary offseason training program, where players have been running and lifting weights this week and answering questions about their AWOL quarterback.

"All I know is it would be nice to have Jay here and it would be nice if Jay and the coaching staff can work out what they need to work out," defensive lineman Darrell Reid said Thursday. "Coach McDaniels, this organization, this staff, they have a vision for where they want this team to be, and I'm just glad to be a part of that vision."

But is that vision altered if Cutler receives his walking papers? Or can the refurbished Broncos quickly return to respectability with someone else under center?

"Obviously, you need a good quarterback," Reid said. "Let me say this first: I come from the Indianapolis Colts, OK? Let me say that first. I come from the Indianapolis Colts, where Peyton Manning is the quarterback. So, for me to sit here and say, 'Oh, you can win without a good quarterback?' Who am I to say that? I can't make that determination because I've never been on a team ... with decent, average quarterbacks."

And he's hoping he won't be this season, either.

"We had a Hall of Fame quarterback in Indianapolis, so I would say you do need a good quarterback to win in this league, especially in the playoffs," Reid said. "You go back as far as you want, Super Bowl teams, I think Baltimore might have been the last one that won without a good quarterback."

The Broncos haven't been to the playoffs since 2005, a drought that led to Mike Shanahan's ouster as coach and the hiring of McDaniels, who chose to use free agency as his primary tool for fixing the franchise that has won only one playoff game in the past decade.

McDaniels' first foray into free agency landed Brian Dawkins, who had spent his entire 13-year career with the Philadelphia Eagles and was one of the first free agents to hear the coach's spiel about winning right away.

"We're not trying to rebuild something. We're trying to build right now and to win right now," Dawkins said after signing a five-year, $17 million contract. "That's one of the reasons I bought in. At this point in my career, I'm not looking to really go to places that are rebuilding. Obviously, they wouldn't be bringing me in here if they were rebuilding, anyway, because they'd want to get young and start from there."

Dawkins added: "I know what they have on the offensive side of the ball and I wanted to help bring something to the defensive side of the ball."

While Dawkins was making those comments at his introductory news conference Feb. 28, Cutler was being informed that his name had come up in trade talks, igniting the firestorm the Broncos find themselves trying to put out.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d80f59fe8&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

BroncoInferno
03-20-2009, 01:36 AM
You are extremely dishonest,Taco.You pretend to be a down the middle guy, but posts like the prove beyond a shadow of a doubt your dishonesty.

Taco John
03-20-2009, 01:39 AM
You are extremely dishonest,Taco.You pretend to be a down the middle guy, but posts like the prove beyond a shadow of a doubt your dishonesty.

What are you talking about? I didn't write the article. I just found it and posted it.

What a drama queen.

Killericon
03-20-2009, 01:40 AM
You are extremely dishonest,Taco.You pretend to be a down the middle guy, but posts like the prove beyond a shadow of a doubt your dishonesty.

Yeah, name-calling over posting a goddamned article. That's real helpful man. Way to raise the bar of discussion for all of us. Good work! :thumbs:

BroncoInferno
03-20-2009, 01:43 AM
What are you talking about? I didn't write the article. I just found it and posted it.

What a drama queen.

Uh huh, I am sure you would have posted this article if it had (rightly) said that Jay ****ed this entire situation up with his cry baby antics. Sure, you would have posted the article then. Go on pretending to play the middle road, Taco...no one buys it.

BroncoInferno
03-20-2009, 01:44 AM
Yeah, name-calling over posting a goddamned article. That's real helpful man. Way to raise the bar of discussion for all of us. Good work! :thumbs:

Perhaps you can show me the name I called him, genius. I only said he was being dishonest...and I'm right.

TDmvp
03-20-2009, 01:44 AM
http://www.learningresources.com/images/en_US/local/products/detail/prod3183_dt.jpg

this could have helped avoid this whole thing ...

Taco John
03-20-2009, 01:45 AM
...and for that matter, the article is pretty well fact based. I don't proclaim to be "down the middle." I only care about the facts of the current situation. I don't choose to decieve myself with homer delusions that paint a story as rosey as possible.

I'm definitely not a "down the middle guy." The middle is for suckers.

I'll go where the facts go.

BroncoInferno
03-20-2009, 01:48 AM
...and for that matter, the article is pretty well fact based. I don't proclaim to be "down the middle." I only care about the facts of the current situation. I don't choose to decieve myself with homer delusions that paint a story as rosey as possible.

I'm definitely not a "down the middle guy." The middle is for suckers.

Just the facts, ma'am...

Yeah...and you don't care about facts...your dishonesty aside. Fact is, there is no proof that McD lied about anything, which means the entire Jay suck fest has no teeth whatsoever. No one, yourself included, has ANY proof of ANY wrong doing by McD. NONE. You lose on a factual basis. Sorry.

Popps
03-20-2009, 01:50 AM
What are you talking about? I didn't write the article. I just found it and posted it.

What a drama queen.

No, he just means that your obvious slant has been to be as down as possible on the team and their chances.

It's your right to be that way... he just means that you pretend that it's not the case. (Evident by your denial of his charge.)

That wolfe guy is a one-trick-pony, but at least he doesn't claim to be otherwise. It's disingenuousness that irks people, Taco... particularly when it's plainly transparent.

Taco John
03-20-2009, 01:50 AM
Yeah...and you don't care about facts...your dishonesty aside. Fact is, there is no proof that McD lied about anything, which means the entire Jay suck fest has no teeth whatsoever. No one, yourself included, has ANY proof of ANY wrong doing by McD. NONE. You lose on a factual basis. Sorry.


That's actually not what this thread is about. It's pretty clear that you didn't even read the story. You just got SOOOOOO mad that somoene posted something that might be construed as negative towards poor mistreated Josh and you were going to come in here and give me a piece of your mind.

Isn't there a support thread here for that kind of thing so that you don't have to wreck threads with articles that make interesting points?

Taco John
03-20-2009, 01:51 AM
That wolfe guy is a one-trick-pony, but at least he doesn't claim to be otherwise. It's disingenuousness that irks people, Taco... particularly when it's plainly transparent.


You should know something about disingenuousness considering your reputation around this place.

MagicHef
03-20-2009, 01:54 AM
Yeah...and you don't care about facts...your dishonesty aside. Fact is, there is no proof that McD lied about anything, which means the entire Jay suck fest has no teeth whatsoever. No one, yourself included, has ANY proof of ANY wrong doing by McD. NONE. You lose on a factual basis. Sorry.

Please do not mix those particular metaphors.

BroncoInferno
03-20-2009, 01:55 AM
That's actually not what this thread is about. It's pretty clear that you didn't even read the story. You just got SOOOOOO mad that somoene posted something that might be construed as negative towards poor mistreated Josh and you were going to come in here and give me a piece of your mind.

Isn't there a support thread here for that kind of thing so that you don't have to wreck threads with articles that make interesting points?

OK, Taco, we'll see if you ever have enough integrity to back up this BS by posting a positive McD article. I don't believe you do. Prove me wrong.

Taco John
03-20-2009, 01:56 AM
OK, Taco, we'll see if you ever have enough integrity to back up this BS by posting a positive McD article. I don't believe you do. Prove me wrong.


There aren't any this news cycle.

BroncoInferno
03-20-2009, 01:59 AM
There aren't any this news cycle.

Uh huh. There have been plenty down the pike. You haven't posted one. I am sure that is a coincidence Uhh

Popps
03-20-2009, 01:59 AM
As for the meat of the article, it's built on shaky ground. Very few coaches sell their teams to free agents as...

"Hey, we really want to win in three years! How do you feel about sucking for the next two, at least!?"

So, given what we've seen in places like Miami, Atlanta and others... winning in a hurry is very possible, and last I checked... neither of those QBs went to a Pro Bowl.



In fact, 8 of the 12 playoff teams this year did not feature a Pro Bowl QB.

3 of the 4 teams in the championship games did not have a Pro Bowl QB.

The Superbowl winning team did not have a Pro Bowl QB this year... nor did the Superbowl winning team the year before.

Popps
03-20-2009, 02:00 AM
You should know something about disingenuousness considering your reputation around this place.

Yea, I hear you saying that... and maybe your pocket pet.

Meanwhile, you are getting called out by someone different every day. Pretty comical.

Hopefully no one will ask you to put your money where your mouth is again. That was painful for everyone to watch.

Killericon
03-20-2009, 02:01 AM
Perhaps you can show me the name I called him, genius. I only said he was being dishonest...and I'm right.

Yeah, you called him dishonest, and it has taken this thread to dizzying heights of stimulating conversation about the Denver Broncos. We all appreciate it.

This place is like World War 1. You guys post thread after thread that eventually becomes shooting from the same damn trenches. Have any of your arguments ever convinced anyone, other than those who already believed such to begin with, that you were right? Has your debates over Cutler v McDaniels gotten you guys anywhere? Has calling each other dishonest or disreputable gotten you anything other than a hardon over how right you are? This thread isn't even about Josh vs Jay anymore, it's about "honesty". What the hell? You guys talk like politicians. You're just slamming each other, over and over, no matter how well you cover it up with examples or cleverness. That's really all this thread is, a catfight. You're all freaking pundits. ****ing message board drama, man.

http://www.forumspile.com/Blank-Picard_Facepalm.jpg

If you ask me, the article raises a good point about why certain free agents were brought in, but it's hard to say that this situation's rise indicates that McDaniels or Xanders misrepresented themselves to the FAs when they sold us as a "win-now" team. Of course, if we're losing, then locker room chemistry/discontentment that could be caused by certain veterans feeling lied to won't matter much, but this whole thing started with trying to get Cassel, and an intent to pull THAT trigger doesn't seem like showing that you want to go into rebuilding mode, does it?

watermock
03-20-2009, 02:02 AM
You are extremely dishonest,Taco.You pretend to be a down the middle guy, but posts like the prove beyond a shadow of a doubt your dishonesty.

Wow.

You just called him not only biased, but a liar.

Ratboy
03-20-2009, 02:02 AM
Excellent article.

The players came onboard thinking the offense was complete and the only thing needed was a defense, may not end up that way.

BroncoInferno
03-20-2009, 02:03 AM
As for the meat of the article, it's built on shaky ground. Very few coaches sell their teams to free agents as...

"Hey, we really want to win in three years! How do you feel about sucking for the next two, at least!?"

So, given what we've seen in places like Miami, Atlanta and others... winning in a hurry is very possible, and last I checked... neither of those QBs went to a Pro Bowl.



In fact, 8 of the 12 playoff teams this year did not feature a Pro Bowl QB.

3 of the 4 teams in the championship games did not have a Pro Bowl QB.

The Superbowl winning team did not have a Pro Bowl QB this year... nor did the Superbowl winning team the year before.

Goddamn you and your facts, Popps! Taco's panties might get in a twist if you aren't careful (actually, more likely, he will give some dishonest spin of these facts and declare victory).

BroncoInferno
03-20-2009, 02:06 AM
Excellent article.

The players came onboard thinking the offense was complete and the only thing needed was a defense, may not end up that way.

Anyone who thought our 16th rated scoring and 8th worst turnover producing offense was "complete" is beyond stupid.

Killericon
03-20-2009, 02:07 AM
Goddamn you and your facts, Popps! Taco's panties might get in a twist if you aren't careful (actually, more likely, he will give some dishonest spin of these facts and declare victory).

Good one! This "Taco John" fellow must surely feel like an idiot after you guys point out THAT THE ****ING QUARTERBACK IS IMPORTANT! HOW PERCEPTIVE OF YOU! I'M SURE TJ NEVER THOUGHT OF THAT! BY POINTING OUT THAT PRO BOWL QUARTERBACKS ARE VALUABLE, YOU HAVE SURELY SCORED A POINT FOR YOUR SIDE!!

Augh. I really, really wish I could quit you, Orangemane.

Taco John
03-20-2009, 02:07 AM
Also, I should note: I don't care to prove you wrong. I can't imagine a more empty goal.

The person who needs to be proving people wrong is the person who you think that I should be blindly defending. Let me make this clear: I think Josh McDaniel's hiring was a mistake. I wanted us to hire someone with more experience dealing with players, personalities, and situations. But he's here, and I'm all about giving this guy a fair chance, because the Broncos are only going to win if he has his s*** together. So far, his tenure has been a disaster, and he's proving me right. That won't mean anything until games are played though - the proof is in the product.

I want the guy to get over on everybody and prove that he's everything he's cracked up to be, and not just another failed branch off of the Belichick coaching tree. But I'm not just going to throw my mind away in the process and ignore the fact that the house is on fire.

When Josh does somthing that I think is noteworthy, damn straight I'll give him praise. In my mind, signing Dawkins counts. Everything else has either been uncompelling, or disasterous. It's my sincere hope that he can pull it all together, and get the fan base behind him - but right now, it's not looking so great.

Blueflame
03-20-2009, 02:09 AM
You are extremely dishonest,Taco.You pretend to be a down the middle guy, but posts like the prove beyond a shadow of a doubt your dishonesty.

If you have a problem with the article, I suggest that you take it up with nfl.com....

Blueflame
03-20-2009, 02:12 AM
Perhaps you can show me the name I called him, genius. I only said he was being dishonest...and I'm right.

No, you're not right. :nono:

watermock
03-20-2009, 02:13 AM
Anyone who thought our 16th rated scoring and 8th worst turnover producing offense was "complete" is beyond stupid.

Let's see how the nintendo offense works in the red zone.

I'm sure Chrissy Simms will be able to rifle those passes between 3 defenders,.

BroncoInferno
03-20-2009, 02:17 AM
Also, I should note: I don't care to prove you wrong. I can't imagine a more empty goal.

The person who needs to be proving people wrong is the person who you think that I should be blindly defending. Let me make this clear: I think Josh McDaniel's hiring was a mistake. I wanted us to hire someone with more experience dealing with players, personalities, and situations. But he's here, and I'm all about giving this guy a fair chance, because the Broncos are only going to win if he has his s*** together. So far, his tenure has been a disaster, and he's proving me right. That won't mean anything until games are played though - the proof is in the product.

I want the guy to get over on everybody and prove that he's everything he's cracked up to be, and not just another failed branch off of the Belichick coaching tree. But I'm not just going to throw my mind away in the process and ignore the fact that the house is on fire.

When Josh does somthing that I think is noteworthy, damn straight I'll give him praise. In my mind, signing Dawkins counts. Everything else has either been uncompelling, or disasterous. It's my sincere hope that he can pull it all together, and get the fan base behind him - but right now, it's not looking so great.

Translation: WAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAA!!!!!! THAT DRUNKEN IDIOT BOWLEN FIRED MY BELOVED SHANNY!!!!!!!!!! WAAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !

Killericon
03-20-2009, 02:17 AM
Let's see how the nintendo offense works in the red zone.

I'm sure Crissy Simms will be able to rifle those passes between 3 defenders,.

http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/5646/55980908.jpg (http://img27.imageshack.us/my.php?image=55980908.jpg)

Yeah, the "Nintendo" offense couldn't score if its life depended on it.

Killericon
03-20-2009, 02:18 AM
Translation: WAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAA!!!!!! THAT DRUNKEN IDIOT BOWLEN FIRED MY BELOVED SHANNY!!!!!!!!!! WAAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !

Yeah, man. You don't call people names. You're above that.

Popps
03-20-2009, 02:18 AM
Augh. I really, really wish I could quit you, Orangemane.

ROFL!

Ahhhh... it's good fun.

I feel your frustration, though. We're all there in some way or another with regards to this team.

I'm actually fairly optimistic, though... as are a lot of people, and even THAT is frustrating because you're fighting against a bunch of fans who insist that there is NO chance of improvement. None.

Sorry, I'm just not down for the mass suicide around here. This was a sub-.500 team the past few seasons. We're flushing out some crap and trying to get this thing going again. We haven't even friggin' drafted yet, and people are ready to throw away the next couple of years.

Just watch, man. Attitudes will change around here. Jay, or not. (Most) fans will get back to being fans again.

BroncoInferno
03-20-2009, 02:19 AM
Let's see how the nintendo offense works in the red zone.

I'm sure Chrissy Simms will be able to rifle those passes between 3 defenders,.

Nintendo offense? You do realize we threw the ball 616 times last season versus New England's 516 don't you? Who is Nintendo again?

Popps
03-20-2009, 02:19 AM
Let's see how the nintendo offense works in the red zone.

I'm sure Chrissy Simms will be able to rifle those passes between 3 defenders,.

He's been named our starter?

****, did someone post that to the main page? That's big news.

Popps
03-20-2009, 02:19 AM
Nintendo offense? You do realize we threw the ball 616 times last season versus New England's 516 don't you? Who is Nintendo again?

Oops.

Yea, well... McDouche.

See that? I put "douche" where Daniels should have been.

:thumbsup:

Blueflame
03-20-2009, 02:20 AM
Wow.

You just called him not only biased, but a liar.

It's all good, Mock... personal attacks occurred within 5 posts of the OP. And... if one's debate position is reasonably defensible, there is no need to resort to personal attacks, cursing or crude sexual innuendo... the first poster who "goes there" essentially admits defeat.

BroncoInferno
03-20-2009, 02:20 AM
If you have a problem with the article, I suggest that you take it up with nfl.com....

I take it up with the guy who pretends to play things down the middle but is being dishonest and has a slant he's playing...which this article demonstrates yet again.

BroncoInferno
03-20-2009, 02:24 AM
No, you're not right. :nono:

Maybe dishonest is not the right word...disingenuous is probably better. My apologies to Taco for calling him dishonest when he was actually being disingenuous.

Ratboy
03-20-2009, 02:25 AM
Nintendo offense? You do realize we threw the ball 616 times last season versus New England's 516 don't you? Who is Nintendo again?

They also had like 200 more rushing attemps.

We were forced to pass.

BroncoInferno
03-20-2009, 02:26 AM
It's all good, Mock... personal attacks occurred within 5 posts of the OP. And... if one's debate position is reasonably defensible, there is no need to resort to personal attacks, cursing or crude sexual innuendo... the first poster who "goes there" essentially admits defeat.

Can you hear that? It's the world's smallest violin playing.

Bob's your Information Minister
03-20-2009, 02:26 AM
And you guys wonder why I visit this site.

cutthemdown
03-20-2009, 02:26 AM
The fact is that even if Mcdaniels lied to Cutler about the trade, Cutler should still get over it. Mcdaniels I would say should learn from it. I still like the Mcdaniels hire, but like I said many times before I feel Shanny should have gotten one more yr, even if that meant keeping Slowik.

I think Mcdaniels would call some slick plays for Jay, that would make Jay look very very good.

I will say though that last yr Shanny.Bates had a lot of WR open. Jay had time and some really open WR. It tightened as yr went on but the coaching staff had a lot of yrds left on the field by the players IMO. Dropped balls everywhere and a ton of stupid turnovers.

It sucks it has come to this. Cutler is on the verge of being really, really good. Cut out about 5 picks, add about 5 tds, get the defense to give up 10-15 less tds, get special teams to play better and Broncos might have been pretty decent.

Now who knows.

Blueflame
03-20-2009, 02:26 AM
I take it up with the guy who pretends to play things down the middle but is being dishonest and has a slant he's playing...which this article demonstrates yet again.

I don't think he does pretend to play things down the middle... even though he's the site owner here, he posts like everyone else... y'know just expressing his personal viewpoints.

Taco John
03-20-2009, 02:27 AM
Maybe dishonest is not the right word...disingenuous is probably better. My apologies to Taco for calling him dishonest when he was actually being disingenuous.


I'm a big boy. I can take it.

Popps
03-20-2009, 02:30 AM
And you guys wonder why I visit this site.

No, we know why.

What the f#ck else are you going to do?

http://thinkmoult.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/fat_geek.jpg

hambone13
03-20-2009, 02:30 AM
The fact is that even if Mcdaniels lied to Cutler about the trade, Cutler should still get over it. Mcdaniels I would say should learn from it. I still like the Mcdaniels hire, but like I said many times before I feel Shanny should have gotten one more yr, even if that meant keeping Slowik.

I think Mcdaniels would call some slick plays for Jay, that would make Jay look very very good.

I will say though that last yr Shanny.Bates had a lot of WR open. Jay had time and some really open WR. It tightened as yr went on but the coaching staff had a lot of yrds left on the field by the players IMO. Dropped balls everywhere and a ton of stupid turnovers.

It sucks it has come to this. Cutler is on the verge of being really, really good. Cut out about 5 picks, add about 5 tds, get the defense to give up 10-15 less tds, get special teams to play better and Broncos might have been pretty decent.

Now who knows.

That was AWESOME. Just Awesome. Thanks for coming out!

Popps
03-20-2009, 02:31 AM
It's all good, Mock... personal attacks occurred within 5 posts of the OP. And... if one's debate position is reasonably defensible, there is no need to resort to personal attacks, cursing or crude sexual innuendo... the first poster who "goes there" essentially admits defeat.

:rofl:

But bringing people's kids and parenting into football conversations is just fine, particularly if you're a moderator.

But, it's cool... just deny that you meant anything by it.

:thumbsup:

Popps
03-20-2009, 02:33 AM
The fact is that even if Mcdaniels lied to Cutler about the trade, Cutler should still get over it. Mcdaniels I would say should learn from it. I still like the Mcdaniels hire, but like I said many times before I feel Shanny should have gotten one more yr, even if that meant keeping Slowik.

I think Mcdaniels would call some slick plays for Jay, that would make Jay look very very good.

I will say though that last yr Shanny.Bates had a lot of WR open. Jay had time and some really open WR. It tightened as yr went on but the coaching staff had a lot of yrds left on the field by the players IMO. Dropped balls everywhere and a ton of stupid turnovers.

It sucks it has come to this. Cutler is on the verge of being really, really good. Cut out about 5 picks, add about 5 tds, get the defense to give up 10-15 less tds, get special teams to play better and Broncos might have been pretty decent.

Now who knows.


It's an angle rarely discussed around here.

No one called better offenses the past couple years than McDaniels. God forbid Jay wanted to make himself a part of that.

People see Jay as a commodity, but don't see the staff as one at all.

I think the future will prove that a big error in judgment.

Blueflame
03-20-2009, 02:35 AM
:rofl:

But bringing people's kids and parenting into football conversations is just fine, particularly if you're a moderator.

But, it's cool... just deny that you meant anything by it.

:thumbsup:

Yeah, I know... 'cause if you're a moderator, you can't discuss your own kids...

(btw, it's pretty much common knowledge here on the Mane that I'm a mom of 6)

BroncoInferno
03-20-2009, 02:36 AM
The fact is that even if Mcdaniels lied to Cutler about the trade

Well, yeah...just one problem: no one has proven that McDaniels lied about anything.

Killericon
03-20-2009, 02:38 AM
Well, yeah...just one problem: no one has proven that McDaniels lied about anything.

That's why he gave the condition "even if", so as to directly address the issue you just brought up.

Bob's your Information Minister
03-20-2009, 02:39 AM
No, we know why.

What the f#ck else are you going to do?

http://thinkmoult.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/fat_geek.jpg

I won't be here tomorrow night.

I'm going to a sorority party.

How about you?

BroncoInferno
03-20-2009, 02:41 AM
That's why he gave the condition "even if", so as to directly address the issue you just brought up.

Thanks for that "proof" packed post...oh, wait...

DBroncos4life
03-20-2009, 02:41 AM
Anyone who thought our 16th rated scoring and 8th worst turnover producing offense was "complete" is beyond stupid.

Darn right if Jay wouldn't have turned the ball over so many times when we were behind who knows how many games we could have won. I mean our D was out there busting its ass off every week to make sure that the other QB's passing rating was well over their season avg that it was way to busy to force a turnover of their own.

I mean what coach wouldn't have come in here and looked at the mess Shanny left and went right to work in fixing this worthless young O we have here.

Popps
03-20-2009, 02:42 AM
I won't be here tomorrow night.

I'm going to a sorority party.

How about you?

Dude, I've forgotten more than you'll ever dream about getting. Don't you worry about me.

Anyway, delivering pizza to a sorority party doesn't count as "going."

Bob's your Information Minister
03-20-2009, 02:44 AM
The past doesn't count, Popps. Only the present.

Popps
03-20-2009, 02:46 AM
The past doesn't count, Popps. Only the present.

Well, there are benefits to being married, Boob. You may or may not familiarize yourself with them some day. But, let's just say there's no "wondering" what will happen tomorrow night.

Anyway, are you going with the ladder up to the window route, or sneaking in the back door? How do you plan to stalk them?

hambone13
03-20-2009, 02:46 AM
Dude, I've forgotten more than you'll ever dream about getting. Don't you worry about me.

Anyway, delivering pizza to a sorority party doesn't count as "going."

I have to go with KC at home on this one. It's sad when you have to admit that Bob's charm out does your own Popps.... even when he is normally a bigger ass than yourself. It must suck walking around with that helmet on. Not because we all know you're short bus special but because you have to worry about being beat about the head and neck around every corner......

Killericon
03-20-2009, 02:46 AM
Thanks for that "proof" packed post...oh, wait...

http://www.forumspile.com/Blank-Picard_Facepalm.jpg

BroncoInferno
03-20-2009, 02:48 AM
Darn right if Jay wouldn't have turned the ball over so many times when we were behind who knows how many games we could have won. I mean our D was out there busting its ass off every week to make sure that the other QB's passing rating was well over their season avg that it was way to busy to force a turnover of their own.

I mean what coach wouldn't have come in here and looked at the mess Shanny left and went right to work in fixing this worthless young O we have here.

Uh huh. Great explanation for why 16 teams scored more points than they did and only 7 committed fewer turnovers.

Bob's your Information Minister
03-20-2009, 02:49 AM
Well, there are benefits to being married, Boob.

I'm sure one of them isn't sorority parties.

Popps
03-20-2009, 02:54 AM
I'm sure one of them isn't sorority parties.

As I said, just try not to get maced.

Bob's your Information Minister
03-20-2009, 03:01 AM
As I said, just try not to get maced.

Too much of a pussy to get maced. You know that.

GreatBronco16
03-20-2009, 03:04 AM
I'm sure one of them isn't sorority parties.

So you're going to the Omega Mu party?

http://www.vat19.com/blog/fat-women-bbw-singles.jpg


You go boy.:thumbsup:

DBroncos4life
03-20-2009, 03:04 AM
Uh huh. Great explanation for why 16 teams scored more points than they did and only 7 committed fewer turnovers.

Would the fact that we were in the top ten for the first 7 weeks help? Would the fact that we only had 2 100 yard rushing games be a clue? Would the fact that we had 7 RBs go on IR not affect the game plan from week to week just a tad?

You do know we allowed more points (448) then these teams

Bengals won 4 games
Oakland won 5 games
KC won 2 games
Bills won 7 games
Browns won 4 games
Packers won 6 games
49ers won 7 games
Seahawks won 4 games

Only 2 NFL teams allowed more points then us and that was the Rams and Lions who combined for 2 wins last year.

Since the 2000 season only 4 teams us included have had .500 records of those four teams only one was above .500 and that was the 2000 Rams.

BroncoInferno
03-20-2009, 03:07 AM
Would the fact that we were in the top ten for the first 7 weeks help? Would the fact that we only had 2 100 yard rushing games be a clue? Would the fact that we had 7 RBs go on IR not affect the game plan from week to week just a tad?

You do know we allowed more points (448) then these teams

Bengals won 4 games
Oakland won 5 games
KC won 2 games
Bills won 7 games
Browns won 4 games
Packers won 6 games
49ers won 7 games
Seahawks won 4 games

Only 2 NFL teams allowed more points then us and that was the Rams and Lions who combined for 2 wins last year.

Since the 2000 season only 4 teams us included have had .500 records of those four teams only one was above .500 and that was the 2000 Rams.

Did I give any excuse for Shanny's wretched defense? No. That doesn't excuse his mediocre 16th rated scoring offense or 8th rated offensive turnover factory either.

DBroncos4life
03-20-2009, 03:16 AM
Did I give any excuse for Shanny's wretched defense? No. That doesn't excuse his mediocre 16th rated scoring offense or 8th rated offensive turnover factory either.

Turnovers happen when you are behind. Not many teams throw the ball when they have the lead and more often then not QBs force things when they are behind. But I know you don't want to agree with that.
And AGAIN our O was scoring when we had a running game.

chaz
03-20-2009, 03:26 AM
Yeah...and you don't care about facts...your dishonesty aside. Fact is, there is no proof that McD lied about anything, which means the entire Jay suck fest has no teeth whatsoever. No one, yourself included, has ANY proof of ANY wrong doing by McD. NONE. You lose on a factual basis. Sorry.

Thanks for that "proof" packed post...oh, wait...

http://www.afunnystuff.com/forumpics/notagain.jpg

My God you are mind-numbingly stupid....enough with the proof routine already, it's well established neither side has any real proof. give it up. :deadhorse

BroncoInferno
03-20-2009, 03:37 AM
http://www.afunnystuff.com/forumpics/notagain.jpg

My God you are mind-numbingly stupid....enough with the proof routine already, it's well established neither side has any real proof. give it up. :deadhorse

No, I won't give up asking for proof when folks make factual assertions. That would be stupid.

hambone13
03-20-2009, 03:40 AM
No, I won't give up asking for proof when folks make factual assertions. That would be stupid.

Stupid is as stupid does Forest.....

You have two stats that you roam around here with and they're weak.

Blueflame
03-20-2009, 03:45 AM
No, I won't give up asking for proof when folks make factual assertions. That would be stupid.

Yet, none of the Patriot's assertions seem to require any proof....

Atwater His Ass
03-20-2009, 03:52 AM
Stupid is as stupid does Forest.....

You have two stats that you roam around here with and they're weak.

It's way past comical with him now.

He thinks if he just keeps repeating himself enough, he'll "win".

lex
03-20-2009, 03:58 AM
It's way past comical with him now.

He thinks if he just keeps repeating himself enough, he'll "win".

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v359/lexlucid/bknight3.jpg

broncoflicker is obviously the black knight.

ELEVATION
03-20-2009, 04:13 AM
MCD messed up plain and simple, there is no other facts, other than that he backed jay, jay left for tennesse, he tried to trade jay, then when confronted lied about it untill a couple days ago.

it was a rookie coaching mistake. the problem is he isnt just the coach its obvious he is the GM as well. Xanders is his puppet. MCD helped get rid of the goodmans who were responsible for all the talent this team has of late?
its no coincedence bowlen wasnt upfront with the fans through all this. its clear MCD has full power. So bowlen never really did take his team back as previously stated

Cutlers faults in this.....being 25 and letting emotion take over. the actual intial fault and error lies with the front office of the denver broncos plain and simple. they commit to jay, and jay will play its really quite simple. MCd needs to stop banging his chest. he can act like no one is untouchable but are we really gonna win if he pisses of guys like DJ williams, Champ bailey, Marhshall, royal etc....he can send them packing...but then what.

MCd is very close to alienating this entire team, simply because of his no one is untouchable attitude. There is a time for that, and right now this wasnt it with a 25 year old start pro bowl Qb. you tell the Qb you took the job becasue of him then try and trade him....then instead of simple words like Jay my bad lets press for next year...you pound your chest in a face to face like no one is untouchable.....well 31 GM's would argue that when you have a franchise guy like cutler he is untradeable.


in fact 31 Gm's would argue you dont even pick up the phone and listen.....

cutthemdown
03-20-2009, 04:13 AM
Well, yeah...just one problem: no one has proven that McDaniels lied about anything.

Right I know, so am saying even if that is true Cutler should be man enough to say **** it let's play ball. I'm not saying trust the he will give you a reach around, just trust that he will help you score points and look good. Just like Bates and Shanny did. Mcdaniels has a creative way of using formations, motion, and personnel to get great matchups for his players.

I think with the Broncos oline Mcdaniels can design some really potent medium range routes that are Cutlers best routes. That and he will get the Rbs involved in the passing game. I love how Shanny used TE. I like that method as well. But there is something to be said for using RBS in passing game. They have that run after catch ability that allowed pats to rack up close to 1000 yrds each of the last couple yrs in passing game.

I hope Cutler wises up, get's over it, Mcdaniels learns from it and becomes more wily, and the Broncos go on to be a good team again.

UberBroncoMan
03-20-2009, 04:16 AM
As for the meat of the article, it's built on shaky ground. Very few coaches sell their teams to free agents as...

"Hey, we really want to win in three years! How do you feel about sucking for the next two, at least!?"

So, given what we've seen in places like Miami, Atlanta and others... winning in a hurry is very possible, and last I checked... neither of those QBs went to a Pro Bowl.



In fact, 8 of the 12 playoff teams this year did not feature a Pro Bowl QB.

3 of the 4 teams in the championship games did not have a Pro Bowl QB.

The Superbowl winning team did not have a Pro Bowl QB this year... nor did the Superbowl winning team the year before.

Yep, god damn you and your facts.

Hey, speaking of facts... why don't you list THE RANK OF THE DEFENSE FOR ALL THE PLAYOFF AND CHAMPIONSHIP TEAMS.

hmmm lets see... Pit... #1... Balt... #2... Philly #3... oh my! (3 of the 4 Champ game teams)

Let's keep going!

NYG #4, Minn, #6, Tenn, #7,

- leftover is Miami, #15 and AZ #19.

Wait though that's just yards allowed... how about POINTS allowed.

Pit #1, Tenn #2, Balt #3, Philly #4, NYG #5, Miami #9, Minn #13, AZ #28.

Gosh... something seems to be prevalent in these statistics...

Oh wait one more thing...

Arizona and their bleh defense HAD a Pro-Bowl QB. They got to the Super Bowl.

That's the problem with people like you and fools like BroncoInferno (seriously your attempt to spin your stupidity on calling out Taco over nothing in order to "save face" only made you look completely ignorant). Many of you list the facts on one side, but you completely ignore the reason for it.

We don't have a defense right now. We're literally building it from scratch. Thus if we downgrade to a ****ty/average QB with our stop gap defense we are NOT going to "win right away." Hell you might as well not even watch the Broncos next year with our schedule. Josh was told he had to win right away, he has declared that is the goal. If the team sucks, that whole kool-aid talk about winning right away is going to evaporate within the locker room and Josh's ability to energize the locker room is going to *poof* vanish, since credibility is lost.

Notice practically EVERY team that was in the playoffs had an amazing defense... and 3 of the top 4 teams (or 3 if you look at yards) were represented in the championship games.

Again the one team that didn't have an amazing D had a Pro-Bowl QB to carry them. That said... it should be noted that Arizona created a massive amount of turnovers during their playoff run... very much reminiscent of the Indianapolis Super Bowl run.

D wins championships, and having a Pro Bowl QB with an amazing D only makes it easier to keep winning them OVER and OVER... case in point.

Tom Brady and the Patriots, Joe Montana and the 49ers, John Elway and the Denver Broncos.

Oh and Popps... I should point out Miami had the easiest schedule in the NFL last year on top of playing both the AFC West and NFC West. Atlanta on the other hand faced the pathetic AFC West along with the mediocre NFC North, the Falcons went .500 in their division though so I guess that's alright. There are always reasons that help contribute to "fast turnarounds" that are not always thought about. The ease of schedules ESPECIALLY MIAMI's, was a big reason why. I'll give credit to Atlanta though for drafting a future Stud QB (and still having him) and getting Turner.

Blueflame
03-20-2009, 04:24 AM
Yep, god damn you and your facts.

Hey, speaking of facts... why don't you list THE RANK OF THE DEFENSE FOR ALL THE PLAYOFF AND CHAMPIONSHIP TEAMS.

hmmm lets see... Pit... #1... Balt... #2... Philly #3... oh my! (3 of the 4 Champ game teams)

Let's keep going!

NYG #4, Minn, #6, Tenn, #7,

- leftover is Miami, #15 and AZ #19.

Wait though that's just yards allowed... how about POINTS allowed.

Pit #1, Tenn #2, Balt #3, Philly #4, NYG #5, Miami #9, Minn #13, AZ #28.

Gosh... something seems to be prevalent in these statistics...

Oh wait one more thing...

Arizona and their bleh defense HAD a Pro-Bowl QB. They got to the Super Bowl.

That's the problem with people like you and fools like BroncoInferno (seriously your attempt to spin your stupidity on calling out Taco over nothing in order to "save face" only made you look completely ignorant). Many of you list the facts on one side, but you completely ignore the reason for it.

We don't have a defense right now. We're literally building it from scratch. Thus if we downgrade to a ****ty/average QB with our stop gap defense we are NOT going to "win right away." Hell you might as well not even watch the Broncos next year with our schedule. Josh was told he had to win right away, he has declared that is the goal. If the team sucks, that whole kool-aid talk about winning right away is going to evaporate within the locker room and Josh's ability to energize the locker room is going to *poof* vanish, since credibility is lost.

Notice practically EVERY team that was in the playoffs had an amazing defense... and 3 of the top 4 teams (or 3 if you look at yards) were represented in the championship games.

Again the one team that didn't have an amazing D had a Pro-Bowl QB to carry them. That said... it should be noted that Arizona created a massive amount of turnovers during their playoff run... very much reminiscent of the Indianapolis Super Bowl run.

D wins championships, and having a Pro Bowl QB with an amazing D only makes it easier to keep winning them OVER and OVER... case in point.

Tom Brady and the Patriots, Joe Montana and the 49ers, John Elway and the Denver Broncos.

... and when the #1 priority is defense, the Patriot decides to overhaul the offense......::)

Killericon
03-20-2009, 04:29 AM
... and when the #1 priority is defense, the Patriot decides to overhaul the offense......::)

A change at QB =/= overhauling the offense.

watermock
03-20-2009, 04:38 AM
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/mjEcj8KpuJw&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/mjEcj8KpuJw&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Blueflame
03-20-2009, 04:40 AM
A change at QB =/= overhauling the offense.

He also dedicated 3 FA signings to scrub RBs... (Buckhalter, Arrington, and Jordan) and two more to: WR Gaffe and QB Chris Simms.

ELEVATION
03-20-2009, 04:47 AM
He also dedicated 3 FA signings to scrub RBs... (Buckhalter, Arrington, and Jordan) and two more to: WR Gaffe and QB Chris Simms.

buckhalter and jordan are scrubs yes, but the yare a upgrade over our current scrubs....selvin/hall/boyd

as for arrington he brings a dynamic return ability to the team we havent had for some time, as well as great speed from the spread on 3rd downs.....


and i would rather give chris simms a shot a back-up Qb then bring back ramsey again...lol

Blueflame
03-20-2009, 05:16 AM
buckhalter and jordan are scrubs yes, but the yare a upgrade over our current scrubs....selvin/hall/boyd

as for arrington he brings a dynamic return ability to the team we havent had for some time, as well as great speed from the spread on 3rd downs.....


and i would rather give chris simms a shot a back-up Qb then bring back ramsey again...lol

Did the offense need addressed? (No, we needed defense)

watermock
03-20-2009, 05:25 AM
He's going to redo the offense.

That's obvious to even the ignorant.

Problem is, his former coach made a fool out of him, or was waiting for a first rounder.

Regardless, BB and Pioli made McDummy look like a 32 y/o rook within two weeks of the hire.

And Bowlen for that matter.

ELEVATION
03-20-2009, 05:38 AM
Did the offense need addressed? (No, we needed defense)

i know this....i didnt say anything about defense, but the fact of the matter is in a way our offense did need addressed. if you were comfortable with hall/boyd/selvin as our RB depth the so be it i wasnt i was happy with torain and eitehr hillis or pittman but we had no depth so Rb depth was a need. we also have a need at interior OL, as well as possibly Blocking TE depth if sheff leaves.

We also were horrendous in terms of back-up Qb and he was a FA anyway so yes back-up Qb was a need.

i am more pissed about the 5 year contracts to 31 year old andre goodman and 36 year old brian dawkins(at least they have the ability to terminate the contract at 2 years) as well as the LS than i am with the offense additions


its no secret this team needs defense and we have taken a not so smart approach in some aspects... but to say the offense didnt need depth is insane.


We did get safety and DB help, we did get NT help, we did get ILB help, We did get special teams DE, and OLB help as well.....so we did adress this defense


I would say MC's biggest faults were getting the LS from New england for 5 million and contemplating a trade for matt cassel over jay cutler...a trade in which 31 Gm's wouldnt have even picked up the phone for.....

Broncoman13
03-20-2009, 06:38 AM
Uh huh, I am sure you would have posted this article if it had (rightly) said that Jay ****ed this entire situation up with his cry baby antics. Sure, you would have posted the article then. Go on pretending to play the middle road, Taco...no one buys it.

Dude, you're losing it!!! I'm laughing my ass off everytime I see one of your posts. You should really, (NO REALLY!!!) consider taking the weekend off from posting. You're going to look back at your posts eventually and think, "Damn, I'm an IDIOT!".

Seriously, as a fellow Bronco Brother, you need a reality check.

lex
03-20-2009, 06:41 AM
i know this....i didnt say anything about defense, but the fact of the matter is in a way our offense did need addressed. if you were comfortable with hall/boyd/selvin as our RB depth the so be it i wasnt i was happy with torain and eitehr hillis or pittman but we had no depth so Rb depth was a need. we also have a need at interior OL, as well as possibly Blocking TE depth if sheff leaves.

We also were horrendous in terms of back-up Qb and he was a FA anyway so yes back-up Qb was a need.

i am more pissed about the 5 year contracts to 31 year old andre goodman and 36 year old brian dawkins(at least they have the ability to terminate the contract at 2 years) as well as the LS than i am with the offense additions


its no secret this team needs defense and we have taken a not so smart approach in some aspects... but to say the offense didnt need depth is insane.


We did get safety and DB help, we did get NT help, we did get ILB help, We did get special teams DE, and OLB help as well.....so we did adress this defense


I would say MC's biggest faults were getting the LS from New england for 5 million and contemplating a trade for matt cassel over jay cutler...a trade in which 31 Gm's wouldnt have even picked up the phone for.....

I dont like any of the RBs we brought in. I still like Hillis the most. It seems like we paid a lot to only become marginally better at RB.

ELEVATION
03-20-2009, 07:06 AM
I dont like any of the RBs we brought in. I still like Hillis the most. It seems like we paid a lot to only become marginally better at RB.

most of you should rember how good lamont jordan was against us....when healthy he is good depth, he can block as well something hall and selvin cant do..as for buckhalter he hasnt been injured in 3 years and is one of the top back-up RB's in the league....he actually is a great recieving back as well. most of us dont realize that if it wasnt for buckhalter philly wouldnt have won a bunch of the games the ydid when westbrook was hurt.

and like i said with arrington he is a dynamic kick returner who brings explosive playmaking to the offense. he also has great vision and the zone blocking scheme thrives of backs with good vision.

the money may seem like a lot, but the only foolish money was spent on the LS, and 5 year contracts for goodman and dawkins.....2 would have been fine.....

lex
03-20-2009, 07:11 AM
most of you should rember how good lamont jordan was against us....when healthy he is good depth, he can block as well something hall and selvin cant do..as for buckhalter he hasnt been injured in 3 years and is one of the top back-up RB's in the league....he actually is a great recieving back as well. most of us dont realize that if it wasnt for buckhalter philly wouldnt have won a bunch of the games the ydid when westbrook was hurt.

and like i said with arrington he is a dynamic kick returner who brings explosive playmaking to the offense. he also has great vision and the zone blocking scheme thrives of backs with good vision.

the money may seem like a lot, but the only foolish money was spent on the LS, and 5 year contracts for goodman and dawkins.....2 would have been fine.....


Like I said. It seems like we spent a lot to end up with meh.

MplsBronco
03-20-2009, 07:11 AM
What are you talking about? I didn't write the article. I just found it and posted it.

What a drama queen.

Clearly you are hoping the team fails so that you can finally appear correct on something.

ELEVATION
03-20-2009, 07:16 AM
Like I said. It seems like we spent a lot to end up with meh.

meh i think the contracts were done well. its the 5 year crap that bothers me for guys in there 30's.


we need the depth. i highly belive we will be targeting andre brown/rahshard jennings/and donald brown in the draft.....and moreno could very well be a last ditch option for BPA at pick 12 if defense is MIA.....

i feel good about the depth at RB i would just like a impact guy in the first 3 rds of the draft...if that doesnt happen i will certainly start scratching my head....but maybe on tape torain just looks that good to MCD.....

MplsBronco
03-20-2009, 07:21 AM
Yep, god damn you and your facts.

Hey, speaking of facts... why don't you list THE RANK OF THE DEFENSE FOR ALL THE PLAYOFF AND CHAMPIONSHIP TEAMS.

hmmm lets see... Pit... #1... Balt... #2... Philly #3... oh my! (3 of the 4 Champ game teams)

Let's keep going!

NYG #4, Minn, #6, Tenn, #7,

- leftover is Miami, #15 and AZ #19.

Wait though that's just yards allowed... how about POINTS allowed.

Pit #1, Tenn #2, Balt #3, Philly #4, NYG #5, Miami #9, Minn #13, AZ #28.

Gosh... something seems to be prevalent in these statistics...

Oh wait one more thing...

Arizona and their bleh defense HAD a Pro-Bowl QB. They got to the Super Bowl.

That's the problem with people like you and fools like BroncoInferno (seriously your attempt to spin your stupidity on calling out Taco over nothing in order to "save face" only made you look completely ignorant). Many of you list the facts on one side, but you completely ignore the reason for it.

We don't have a defense right now. We're literally building it from scratch. Thus if we downgrade to a ****ty/average QB with our stop gap defense we are NOT going to "win right away." Hell you might as well not even watch the Broncos next year with our schedule. Josh was told he had to win right away, he has declared that is the goal. If the team sucks, that whole kool-aid talk about winning right away is going to evaporate within the locker room and Josh's ability to energize the locker room is going to *poof* vanish, since credibility is lost.

Notice practically EVERY team that was in the playoffs had an amazing defense... and 3 of the top 4 teams (or 3 if you look at yards) were represented in the championship games.

Again the one team that didn't have an amazing D had a Pro-Bowl QB to carry them. That said... it should be noted that Arizona created a massive amount of turnovers during their playoff run... very much reminiscent of the Indianapolis Super Bowl run.

D wins championships, and having a Pro Bowl QB with an amazing D only makes it easier to keep winning them OVER and OVER... case in point.

Tom Brady and the Patriots, Joe Montana and the 49ers, John Elway and the Denver Broncos.

Oh and Popps... I should point out Miami had the easiest schedule in the NFL last year on top of playing both the AFC West and NFC West. Atlanta on the other hand faced the pathetic AFC West along with the mediocre NFC North, the Falcons went .500 in their division though so I guess that's alright. There are always reasons that help contribute to "fast turnarounds" that are not always thought about. The ease of schedules ESPECIALLY MIAMI's, was a big reason why. I'll give credit to Atlanta though for drafting a future Stud QB (and still having him) and getting Turner.

Fine, it's about atrocious defense. Yet Taco, Blueflame and probably yourself still think Shanny should be here. You can't have it both ways.

ELEVATION
03-20-2009, 07:22 AM
Fine, it's about atrocious defense. Yet Taco, Blueflame and probably yourself still think Shanny should be here. You can't have it both ways.

shanny would still be here if he fired slowik mid season like the chargers did to there D-cordinator....lol

MplsBronco
03-20-2009, 07:24 AM
most of you should rember how good lamont jordan was against us....when healthy he is good depth, he can block as well something hall and selvin cant do..as for buckhalter he hasnt been injured in 3 years and is one of the top back-up RB's in the league....he actually is a great recieving back as well. most of us dont realize that if it wasnt for buckhalter philly wouldnt have won a bunch of the games the ydid when westbrook was hurt.

and like i said with arrington he is a dynamic kick returner who brings explosive playmaking to the offense. he also has great vision and the zone blocking scheme thrives of backs with good vision.

the money may seem like a lot, but the only foolish money was spent on the LS, and 5 year contracts for goodman and dawkins.....2 would have been fine.....

Correct, if anyone pays attention to how McD will run his offense, he uses a multitude of formations and he likes different backs for different formations. We are going to see a lot more creativity than the stale BS we've gotten used to over the last 10 years. I expect to see several RBs get significant playing time. A true RB by committee that will play to the strengths of each instead of plugging in one after the other into the same role.

lex
03-20-2009, 07:26 AM
meh i think the contracts were done well. its the 5 year crap that bothers me for guys in there 30's.


we need the depth. i highly belive we will be targeting andre brown/rahshard jennings/and donald brown in the draft.....and moreno could very well be a last ditch option for BPA at pick 12 if defense is MIA.....

i feel good about the depth at RB i would just like a impact guy in the first 3 rds of the draft...if that doesnt happen i will certainly start scratching my head....but maybe on tape torain just looks that good to MCD.....

Im not averse to taking a RB at 12. Seeing this whole situation with Jay is yet another indication of how we have become overreliant on the pass. As it is now, he is our whole offense. Im not comfortable with that. I like Hillis a lot but I dont think its wise to bank on him being the featured back...at least not at this point. I can see signing one of these guys for depth but not all three of them. We need a guy to be #1 on the depth chart more than we need a guy to be #4.

Broncomutt
03-20-2009, 07:30 AM
Did the offense need addressed? (No, we needed defense)

Both need "addressing" actually. But don't let Dawkins or the fact that the draft hasn't even occurred yet dissuade you from your witch hunt of "the Patriot".

TheReverend
03-20-2009, 07:30 AM
Fine, it's about atrocious defense. Yet Taco, Blueflame and probably yourself still think Shanny should be here. You can't have it both ways.

Don't forget me, please

lex
03-20-2009, 07:31 AM
Correct, if anyone pays attention to how McD will run his offense, he uses a multitude of formations and he likes different backs for different formations. We are going to see a lot more creativity than the stale BS we've gotten used to over the last 10 years. I expect to see several RBs get significant playing time. A true RB by committee that will play to the strengths of each instead of plugging in one after the other into the same role.


Meh, that approach sucks. It was better when we had a RB and dictated terms. This patchwork running game that is set up by the Welker screen isnt as good. The problem with our running game in recent years is that we tried to get by on lesser talent.

MplsBronco
03-20-2009, 07:35 AM
Don't forget me, please

How could I?

MplsBronco
03-20-2009, 07:37 AM
Meh, that approach sucks. It was better when we had a RB and dictated terms. This patchwork running game that is set up by the Welker screen isnt as good. The problem with our running game in recent years is that we tried to get by on lesser talent.

The days of TD are long gone once we got rid of Portis.

ELEVATION
03-20-2009, 07:43 AM
Im not averse to taking a RB at 12. Seeing this whole situation with Jay is yet another indication of how we have become overreliant on the pass. As it is now, he is our whole offense. Im not comfortable with that. I like Hillis a lot but I dont think its wise to bank on him being the featured back...at least not at this point. I can see signing one of these guys for depth but not all three of them. We need a guy to be #1 on the depth chart more than we need a guy to be #4.

i agree but i see both sides and the days of 1 back in the patriot offense dont exist....since thats our offense the way we went made sense the days of a franchise back are long gone unless torain/hillis/draft pick or buckhalter prove otherwise......but i see your side as well trust me....

ELEVATION
03-20-2009, 07:44 AM
Meh, that approach sucks. It was better when we had a RB and dictated terms. This patchwork running game that is set up by the Welker screen isnt as good. The problem with our running game in recent years is that we tried to get by on lesser talent.

this is true and MCD's ticket out of town will probally be trying to get by with lesser Qb's the way shanny did with RB's...lol

rugbythug
03-20-2009, 07:51 AM
Not Sure how anyone could have a problem with the Moves that have happened this Offseason. Every Player that has walked into Dove Valley is better than the one Leaving.

Safety=Much Better
Back Up QB=Much Better
Running Back=Much Better
DL=Much Better

lex
03-20-2009, 07:55 AM
i agree but i see both sides and the days of 1 back in the patriot offense dont exist....since thats our offense the way we went made sense the days of a franchise back are long gone unless torain/hillis/draft pick or buckhalter prove otherwise......but i see your side as well trust me....

When I advocate Wells or Moreno or whoever, its more what I think we should do and not what I anticipate we will do. I dont at all subscribe to the theory that RBs are interchangeable parts. I also dont see the RBBC as devaluing a RB. I think its good to have a rotation but I dont see why that implies that both can or should be mediocre. I think you should have one top of the line RB getting around 300 carries and another getting 150-200, like Minnesota.

BTW, the approach Josh has taken to the running game scares me. Its neglect was its achilles heel and a major reason why they lost to the Giants in the SB. He was a little more committed to it last year, which has me slightly more optimistic but his running game was still too mickey mouse. Too much of it flowed through the Welker screen and was run out of SG.

ELEVATION
03-20-2009, 08:00 AM
When I advocate Wells or Moreno or whoever, its more what I think we should do and not what I anticipate we will do. I dont at all subscribe to the theory that RBs are interchangeable parts. I also dont see the RBBC as devaluing a RB. I think its good to have a rotation but I dont see why that implies that both can or should be mediocre. I think you should have one top of the line RB getting around 300 carries and another getting 150-200, like Minnesota.

BTW, the approach Josh has taken to the running game scares me. Its neglect was its achilles heel and a major reason why they lost to the Giants in the SB. He was a little more committed to it last year, which has me slightly more optimistic but his running game was still too mickey mouse. Too much of it flowed through the Welker screen and was run out of SG.

this is also what bother me about the patriot way....they havent won the SB since 2004 and since then have had a good offense with a old vet defense and poor run game. I also dont like not having a franchsie back, because as has been shown a good defense and run trumps even the best passing offense.

RaiderH8r
03-20-2009, 08:05 AM
I dont like any of the RBs we brought in. I still like Hillis the most. It seems like we paid a lot to only become marginally better at RB.

Better depth but given our current stable I would still hope Hillis performs well enough to be our starter. I really like his style, no messing about, great toughness and downhill style. Always seems to move the pile and get positive yards, and has a great nose for the sticks on 3rd down. Big motor, big heart. Humble pie. I like Hillis.

ELEVATION
03-20-2009, 08:06 AM
Not Sure how anyone could have a problem with the Moves that have happened this Offseason. Every Player that has walked into Dove Valley is better than the one Leaving.

Safety=Much Better
Back Up QB=Much Better
Running Back=Much Better
DL=Much Better

lets not exaggerate- dawkins is a upgrade in leadership and vet abilites but his coverage is as poor as john lynches was.....he is a upgrade but abilites wise isnt as great as some of these fans think....hill is better than fox/lowery/manuel and mcree but he isnt a huge playmaker either.

i agree our Back-up Qb is better but how can you know he is much better. the guy hasnt started a game since 2006

running backs are better

DL- we added a NT that hasnt started a game, we resigned Kenny peterson so there was actually no change there, and we adde reid who is a special teams ace. our loss big loss was ekuban who was our best run stopper and a very good LDe but he doesnt fit the 3-4.....who did we add to stop the run??? thomas isnt great at it and neither is peterson. powell is shot in the dark coming off severe injury..

I would say we improved....but got much better.....thats a stretch

RaiderH8r
03-20-2009, 08:10 AM
Not Sure how anyone could have a problem with the Moves that have happened this Offseason. Every Player that has walked into Dove Valley is better than the one Leaving.

Safety=Much Better
Back Up QB=Much Better
Running Back=Much Better
DL=Much Better

RB-Marginally better
S-Stop gap vet with some tread left
2nd QB-Certainly an upgrade over Ramsey.
DL-Remains to be seen.

Without the Cutler mess we've had a quietly solid offseason making decent moves to address areas of need. I particularly liked landing Dawkins. Leadership and class in the locker room. Jettisoning Leach in favor of Paxton was a real headscratcher and a move I do not like. Leach is a staple in Denver, a solid LS and utilitarian contributor to our team. I don't like signing Paxton for the sake of signing Paxton and right now that's what seems to have happened.

Simms is making more than Cutler, that right there means the FO should extend/rework Jay's contract, give him a no trade clause and set his mind at ease as the starter. We can then get back to the business of the draft.

Or the FO is playing this up, keeping the extension/rework option open through the draft but leading up to it leaving the trade option on the table in the event they get an offer they can't refuse. Yep, that's the game I'd play right there.

Drek
03-20-2009, 08:14 AM
... and when the #1 priority is defense, the Patriot decides to overhaul the offense......::)

Could you look at this with a more myopic view?

The entire reason the FO even considered Cutler for Cassel was to bring in additional draft value that could then be used to fix the defense.

He also dedicated 3 FA signings to scrub RBs... (Buckhalter, Arrington, and Jordan) and two more to: WR Gaffe and QB Chris Simms.
We lost what, 7 or 8 RBs to IR last year? You don't think that unit needed an overhaul?

Gaffeny is a WR he knows the offense and will play a useful role in getting the rest of the receivers up to speed on the scheme. And Chris Simms was supposed to be just a damn good backup, something any NFL team should aim for because you never know when you might lose your starting QB to injury.

Meanwhile we signed two significantly upgrades at safety, a CB who is a better fit to play opposite Champ (less of a risk taker than Bly was), and a solid ILB vet who knows how to play in a 3-4. We brought back Kenny Peterson, who is a good 5-tech DE fit, and we signed the best NT available in this FA class (which tells you a lot about how few quality fron seven players were available this off-season).

What would you prefer that they have done? Give Chris Canty $7M a year when every other 3-4 team in the league saw that it was too rich a deal for a 5-tech? Sign Colin Cole, a 4-3 NT that his former team didn't want because they were moving to a 3-4? Go after Peppers so everyone can bitch about him only giving full effort on 5-10 plays a game? Sign Haynesworth and play him out of position for the next four years?

There weren't better defensive moves to be made. What moves they have made are all solid and have already improved the D. The draft is the best chance to make a big step forward in total defensive talent though, and the "overhaul of the offense" was only even considered because of the additional leverage it would give us come late April.

bpc
03-20-2009, 08:20 AM
So you're going to the Omega Mu party?

http://www.vat19.com/blog/fat-women-bbw-singles.jpg


You go boy.:thumbsup:

KC's finest offerings.

worm
03-20-2009, 08:39 AM
Correct, if anyone pays attention to how McD will run his offense, he uses a multitude of formations and he likes different backs for different formations. We are going to see a lot more creativity than the stale BS we've gotten used to over the last 10 years. I expect to see several RBs get significant playing time. A true RB by committee that will play to the strengths of each instead of plugging in one after the other into the same role.

You really think the offense has been 'stale bs' for 10 years? Really? Pretty harsh criticism for the #2 offense last year.

However, the ONE thing that I don't doubt with McD is his offensive Xs and Os ability.

wandlc
03-20-2009, 09:58 AM
As for the meat of the article, it's built on shaky ground. Very few coaches sell their teams to free agents as...

"Hey, we really want to win in three years! How do you feel about sucking for the next two, at least!?"

So, given what we've seen in places like Miami, Atlanta and others... winning in a hurry is very possible, and last I checked... neither of those QBs went to a Pro Bowl.



In fact, 8 of the 12 playoff teams this year did not feature a Pro Bowl QB.

3 of the 4 teams in the championship games did not have a Pro Bowl QB.

The Superbowl winning team did not have a Pro Bowl QB this year... nor did the Superbowl winning team the year before.

As the saying goes figures don't lie liars figure, 3 of the 4 QBs have been to at least 1 pro bowl in their careers, the other was a rookie whose team had already won one Super Bowl without a good QB.

Atlas
03-20-2009, 10:11 AM
In fact, 8 of the 12 playoff teams this year did not feature a Pro Bowl QB.

3 of the 4 teams in the championship games did not have a Pro Bowl QB.

The Superbowl winning team did not have a Pro Bowl QB this year... nor did the Superbowl winning team the year before.


That is a ridiculous post Popps. Only 6 QBs make the Probowl SO OBVIOUSLY there are going to be more teams make the playoffs that didn't have Probowl QBs.

Just because the QBs didn't make the Probowl this year does not mean they are not a probowl QBs.

Curt Warner, Ben Roethlessberger, McNabb, Warner, Manning are all Probowl QBs. That is obvious.

The only teams that made the playoffs last year without a Probowl QB are the Falcons, Dolphins, Vikings, Ravens. At least off the top of my head.

And notice most of those teams didn't make it out of the first round.

The fact is Great QBs come up big in playoffs. That has been how it has always been. Chris Simms is not going to make history in the playoffs. Jay Cutler almost certainly will.

MplsBronco
03-20-2009, 10:32 AM
You really think the offense has been 'stale bs' for 10 years? Really? Pretty harsh criticism for the #2 offense last year.

However, the ONE thing that I don't doubt with McD is his offensive Xs and Os ability.

Perhaps it was a bit harsh. Doesn't change the fact that I think things had grown stale around here and a change needed to be made. And you paint this offense to be much better than it actually is, btw.

rastaman
03-20-2009, 11:07 AM
The fact is that even if Mcdaniels lied to Cutler about the trade, Cutler should still get over it. Mcdaniels I would say should learn from it. I still like the Mcdaniels hire, but like I said many times before I feel Shanny should have gotten one more yr, even if that meant keeping Slowik.

I think Mcdaniels would call some slick plays for Jay, that would make Jay look very very good.

I will say though that last yr Shanny.Bates had a lot of WR open. Jay had time and some really open WR. It tightened as yr went on but the coaching staff had a lot of yrds left on the field by the players IMO. Dropped balls everywhere and a ton of stupid turnovers.

It sucks it has come to this. Cutler is on the verge of being really, really good. Cut out about 5 picks, add about 5 tds, get the defense to give up 10-15 less tds, get special teams to play better and Broncos might have been pretty decent.

Now who knows.

Rep!

DrFate
03-20-2009, 12:08 PM
That is a ridiculous post Popps.

Are you familiar with the expression 'par for the course'?

epicSocialism4tw
03-20-2009, 12:27 PM
Also, I should note: I don't care to prove you wrong. I can't imagine a more empty goal.

The person who needs to be proving people wrong is the person who you think that I should be blindly defending. Let me make this clear: I think Josh McDaniel's hiring was a mistake. I wanted us to hire someone with more experience dealing with players, personalities, and situations. But he's here, and I'm all about giving this guy a fair chance, because the Broncos are only going to win if he has his s*** together. So far, his tenure has been a disaster, and he's proving me right. That won't mean anything until games are played though - the proof is in the product.

I want the guy to get over on everybody and prove that he's everything he's cracked up to be, and not just another failed branch off of the Belichick coaching tree. But I'm not just going to throw my mind away in the process and ignore the fact that the house is on fire.

When Josh does somthing that I think is noteworthy, damn straight I'll give him praise. In my mind, signing Dawkins counts. Everything else has either been uncompelling, or disasterous. It's my sincere hope that he can pull it all together, and get the fan base behind him - but right now, it's not looking so great.


Josh McDaniels looks like the Obama administration out of the gates...one disaster after the next.

epicSocialism4tw
03-20-2009, 12:28 PM
Not Sure how anyone could have a problem with the Moves that have happened this Offseason. Every Player that has walked into Dove Valley is better than the one Leaving.

Safety=Much Better
Back Up QB=Much Better
Running Back=Much Better
DL=Much Better

The DL is WORSE.

BroncoInferno
03-20-2009, 12:34 PM
Josh McDaniels looks like the Obama administration out of the gates...one disaster after the next.

Belichek's story confirms McDaniels version of events. So, there was no disaster, only Cutler slinging baseless accusations at the front office and then crying about it.

Eldorado
03-20-2009, 12:41 PM
It's all good, Mock... personal attacks occurred within 5 posts of the OP. And... if one's debate position is reasonably defensible, there is no need to resort to personal attacks, cursing or crude sexual innuendo... the first poster who "goes there" essentially admits defeat.

There is always a need to resort to crude sexual innuendo.

Always.

WolfpackGuy
03-20-2009, 12:45 PM
I wonder if any of the free agents signed will have second thoughts (okay, a second thought) if Cutler leaves?
Chris Simms hardly instills the feeling of being on a contender.

Broncos4tw
03-20-2009, 12:49 PM
Wow, what a lot of emotional, non-logical, ridiculous posts.

Let's cover a few facts. First, you will NOT win the big game with a mediocre QB, unless your defense is well above par. WELL above. Ours is second to the last in the NFL. If we raise our defense say I dunno, 10 spots.. and our offense drops 10 spots, we hare absolutely no chance to win the SB. NONE.

Jay, while acting a bit too butthurt over this entire thing, is a very valuable commodity, and one that shouldn't just be kicked to the curb because McD's pride and ego won't let him make amends. Make no mistake, he could absolutely correct this problem.

Anyone who thinks McD didn't try to initiate the trade for Cassel is deluding themselves. I dunno what you are smoking, but c'mon now.. he has tried to bring in other Pat coaches and players, and it's pretty clear he has a good thing with Cassel. The fact that they were 'late to the party' (McD's own words), just proves that our new head coach initiated this entire thing.

Cutler isn't a "problem child," that's spinning this in the extreme. He has never been a trouble player. He gets along with the players, he is developing, he is a solid talent. He is apparently a problem child for being PO'd that he was outright lied to by the owner and new head coach. Yea.. he is just out of control, omg, I can't see how any team could possibly want him... lmao.

We do not have the RB, defense, or special teams to have a shot at winning even a playoff game, if we don't have a very solid QB. We will be lucky to hit 500. And I DO recognize that McD could eventually put together a team that plays in a system that allows us to win lots of games. Pity with his moronic trade ploy, it could take years and years before this becomes a reality.

For supposedly a front office that is 'just doing business,' it's taking them a surprisingly long time to give Jay assurances, apologies, a contract, or whatever else it takes, to sign him back into the team. Even if he doesn't DESERVE one, if that's your opinions (and the coaches), they still should, because it's in the best interest of this team.

They really should just do business.. and get him back.. whatever it takes.

Eldorado
03-20-2009, 12:52 PM
WAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAA!!!!!! Leave my mcdoogie ALONE!!!!!!!!!! WAAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !

http://www.podcastingnews.com/content/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/leave-britney-alone-guy.jpg

Eldorado
03-20-2009, 12:53 PM
Fine, it's about atrocious defense. Yet Taco, Blueflame and probably yourself still think Shanny should be here. You can't have it both ways.

Throw me in there too.

rugbythug
03-20-2009, 12:53 PM
The DL is WORSE.

Your Opinion of J Engleberger, and Dewayne Robertson is a little high. Just the Fact that we have the same guys for 3 holes makes it better.

baja
03-20-2009, 12:54 PM
You should know something about disingenuousness considering your reputation around this place.

Having menstrual cramps today ???

rugbythug
03-20-2009, 12:55 PM
Wow, what a lot of emotional, non-logical, ridiculous posts.

Let's cover a few facts. First, you will NOT win the big game with a mediocre QB, unless your defense is well above par. WELL above. Ours is second to the last in the NFL. If we raise our defense say I dunno, 10 spots.. and our offense drops 10 spots, we hare absolutely no chance to win the SB. NONE.

Jay, while acting a bit too butthurt over this entire thing, is a very valuable commodity, and one that shouldn't just be kicked to the curb because McD's pride and ego won't let him make amends. Make no mistake, he could absolutely correct this problem.

Anyone who thinks McD didn't try to initiate the trade for Cassel is deluding themselves. I dunno what you are smoking, but c'mon now.. he has tried to bring in other Pat coaches and players, and it's pretty clear he has a good thing with Cassel. The fact that they were 'late to the party' (McD's own words), just proves that our new head coach initiated this entire thing.

Cutler isn't a "problem child," that's spinning this in the extreme. He has never been a trouble player. He gets along with the players, he is developing, he is a solid talent. He is apparently a problem child for being PO'd that he was outright lied to by the owner and new head coach. Yea.. he is just out of control, omg, I can't see how any team could possibly want him... lmao.

We do not have the RB, defense, or special teams to have a shot at winning even a playoff game, if we don't have a very solid QB. We will be lucky to hit 500. And I DO recognize that McD could eventually put together a team that plays in a system that allows us to win lots of games. Pity with his moronic trade ploy, it could take years and years before this becomes a reality.

For supposedly a front office that is 'just doing business,' it's taking them a surprisingly long time to give Jay assurances, apologies, a contract, or whatever else it takes, to sign him back into the team. Even if he doesn't DESERVE one, if that's your opinions (and the coaches), they still should, because it's in the best interest of this team.

They really should just do business.. and get him back.. whatever it takes.

If he was initiating the hole thing Then why was KC the only team interested at the Combine? If McD was initiating it Cassell would be a bronco.

epicSocialism4tw
03-20-2009, 12:57 PM
Your Opinion of J Engleberger, and Dewayne Robertson is a little high. Just the Fact that we have the same guys for 3 holes makes it better.

Ekuban was our best player. If he has been resigned then I apologize, but nobody McD has brought in has been anywhere close to Ekuban's ability, much less an improvement.

The DL will not improve until it gets proper attention.

gyldenlove
03-20-2009, 12:57 PM
...and for that matter, the article is pretty well fact based. I don't proclaim to be "down the middle." I only care about the facts of the current situation. I don't choose to decieve myself with homer delusions that paint a story as rosey as possible.

I'm definitely not a "down the middle guy." The middle is for suckers.

I'll go where the facts go.

Hah, the middle is for hamburgers

Blueflame
03-20-2009, 01:54 PM
Fine, it's about atrocious defense. Yet Taco, Blueflame and probably yourself still think Shanny should be here. You can't have it both ways.

Not quite. If keeping Shanahan also meant keeping Slowik, then Shanahan had to go. That is totally unrelated to my lack of confidence in the Patriot... my issue with him is his lack of experience which makes me believe he's in over his head and unable to adequately handle the massive amount of power the gutless drunk has put into his hands.

So I'll take choice number 3... someone else at HC, perhaps Gruden or Mooch.

gyldenlove
03-20-2009, 02:07 PM
Not Sure how anyone could have a problem with the Moves that have happened this Offseason. Every Player that has walked into Dove Valley is better than the one Leaving.

Safety=Much Better
Back Up QB=Much Better
Running Back=Much Better
DL=Much Better

Safety we agree on.

I have no idea how you conclude that Simms is much better than Ramsey, but I strongly disagree.

If Buckhalter, Arrington and Jordan are so much better than what we had last year then how the hell did we gain so many yards on the ground? I will go as far as saying we are no worse off then last year, but saying we are much improved is definitely not right.

DL? How the F are we better on the defensive line? we have brought in a couple of backups and that is it.

Lets not paint a picture so rosey that we can't see the truth any more.

gyldenlove
03-20-2009, 02:14 PM
As for the meat of the article, it's built on shaky ground. Very few coaches sell their teams to free agents as...

"Hey, we really want to win in three years! How do you feel about sucking for the next two, at least!?"

So, given what we've seen in places like Miami, Atlanta and others... winning in a hurry is very possible, and last I checked... neither of those QBs went to a Pro Bowl.



In fact, 8 of the 12 playoff teams this year did not feature a Pro Bowl QB.

3 of the 4 teams in the championship games did not have a Pro Bowl QB.

The Superbowl winning team did not have a Pro Bowl QB this year... nor did the Superbowl winning team the year before.

The base line for the NFL is 6 pro bowl QBs divided among 32 teams, that means about 19% of the teams in the league will have a pro bowl QB.

33% of the playoff teams featured a pro bowl QB, while only 10% of the non-playoff teams had a pro bowl QB.

25% of the teams in the championship games had a pro bowl QB compared to only 18% for the non-champhionship game teams.

50% of the super bowl teams had a pro-bowl QB compared to 17% of the non-superbowl teams.

This seems like an argument FOR having a probowl QB.

baja
03-20-2009, 02:19 PM
Not quite. If keeping Shanahan also meant keeping Slowik, then Shanahan had to go. That is totally unrelated to my <b> lack of confidence in the Patriot... my issue with him is his lack of experience which makes me believe he's in over his head</b> and unable to adequately handle the massive amount of power the gutless drunk has put into his hands.

So I'll take choice number 3... someone else at HC, perhaps Gruden or Mooch.

According to reports the Denver Bronco players do not agree with you sans Jay who has an ill advised self serving agenda.

WolfpackGuy
03-20-2009, 02:20 PM
Unless you have a standout defense, without a good QB, you're pretty much dekcuf with regards to getting to the Super Bowl.

Blueflame
03-20-2009, 02:25 PM
According to reports the Denver Bronco players do not agree with you sans Jay who has an ill advised self serving agenda.

With all due respect, Baja... I think most of the players are keeping their opinions on this "civil war" to themselves. Going on record to take either side would only mean allowing themselves to be caught up in a sh*tstorm that doesn't personally involve them while that can be avoided by simply keeping quiet.

Drek
03-20-2009, 02:26 PM
I have no idea how you conclude that Simms is much better than Ramsey, but I strongly disagree.

He lead a pretty mediocre Bucs team to the playoffs earlier in his career. Thats more than Ramsey ever managed.

If Buckhalter, Arrington and Jordan are so much better than what we had last year then how the hell did we gain so many yards on the ground? I will go as far as saying we are no worse off then last year, but saying we are much improved is definitely not right.
Hillis, Torain, and Young are still on the roster. What we basically have is Hall, Aldrige, and Pittman being replaced by the above three. I'd consider that an upgrade since Hall can't hang onto a damn football in real NFL action, Aldrige has never seen any, and Pittman isn't likely to even play next season for anyone.

DL? How the F are we better on the defensive line? we have brought in a couple of backups and that is it.
We've added one legitimate nose tackle who belongs in some sort of DL rotation. Thats more than you can say for most of DL players last year.

We aren't better off at DL, but then we aren't really worse off either since most of our DL failed to play at anything approaching an acceptable level. We'll see how they address the DL going forward, but there really weren't any better options available heading into the off-season and the options in the draft are pretty sparse as well. The FO can only work with what's available.

baja
03-20-2009, 02:31 PM
With all due respect, Baja... I think most of the players are keeping their opinions on this "civil war" to themselves. Going on record to take either side would only mean allowing themselves to be caught up in a sh*tstorm that doesn't personally involve them while that can be avoided by simply keeping quiet.

I'm not talking about taking sides I'm saying many players have expressed excitement with McD's plan to win now and do it as a team where everyone is treated the same and judged on play and attitude.

baja
03-20-2009, 02:32 PM
Blue I predict someday within this calender year you will become one of McDaniels biggest supporters because you are a great fan and he will win you over ;D

gyldenlove
03-20-2009, 02:37 PM
He lead a pretty mediocre Bucs team to the playoffs earlier in his career. Thats more than Ramsey ever managed.


That pretty average Bucs team gave up the lowest amounts of yards in the league that year and was top 10 in points gainst. They were bottom half in points scored and not even top 25 in passing yards. I would say that didn't have a lot to do with Simms.



Hillis, Torain, and Young are still on the roster. What we basically have is Hall, Aldrige, and Pittman being replaced by the above three. I'd consider that an upgrade since Hall can't hang onto a damn football in real NFL action, Aldrige has never seen any, and Pittman isn't likely to even play next season for anyone.


We've added one legitimate nose tackle who belongs in some sort of DL rotation. Thats more than you can say for most of DL players last year.

We aren't better off at DL, but then we aren't really worse off either since most of our DL failed to play at anything approaching an acceptable level. We'll see how they address the DL going forward, but there really weren't any better options available heading into the off-season and the options in the draft are pretty sparse as well. The FO can only work with what's available.

Blueflame
03-20-2009, 02:43 PM
Blue I predict someday within this calender year you will become one of McDaniels biggest supporters because you are a great fan and he will win you over ;D

While I'm not one to say "never".... that's a very tall order, Baja... but I genuinely hope you're right.

orinjkrush
03-20-2009, 02:48 PM
In a weird way, I think the situation will cause both McLiar and Jay Drama Queen to grow up a little, regardless of how it plays out. Both are going to have to change their interpersonal behaviors somewhat.

Can't guess if Bowlen, Bus or Xanders are learning anything from this, though.

MplsBronco
03-20-2009, 03:06 PM
Not quite. If keeping Shanahan also meant keeping Slowik, then Shanahan had to go. That is totally unrelated to my lack of confidence in the Patriot... my issue with him is his lack of experience which makes me believe he's in over his head and unable to adequately handle the massive amount of power the gutless drunk has put into his hands.

So I'll take choice number 3... someone else at HC, perhaps Gruden or Mooch.

I don't know why you insist on heaping all the blame on Slowik. He didn't bring in the scrubs we had on D. Put the blame where it belongs.

As for McD, you act like he has free reign to trade Jay and betrayed Bronco nation. None of which is true. Why don't you have a little faith in Bowlen, you know the guy who brought in Shanny to begin with and who runs a first class organization. Give McD some time and expect more from Cutler. It gets clearer and clearer every day that Jay and his agent are acting like clowns in this whole mess.

You just come off as a spurned lover and it's pretty sad.

Blueflame
03-20-2009, 03:19 PM
I don't know why you insist on heaping all the blame on Slowik. He didn't bring in the scrubs we had on D. Put the blame where it belongs.

As for McD, you act like he has free reign to trade Jay and betrayed Bronco nation. None of which is true. Why don't you have a little faith in Bowlen, you know the guy who brought in Shanny to begin with and who runs a first class organization. Give McD some time and expect more from Cutler. It gets clearer and clearer every day that Jay and his agent are acting like clowns in this whole mess.

You just come off as a spurned lover and it's pretty sad.

So did you want Shanahan/Slowik fired or not? ??? (your first post complained of others still wanting Shanahan, now you're still critical when told that's not true... )

Can you really have all that much faith in Bowlen after watching his speech at Zim's HOF induction, adding in the press conference announcing that Shanahan was fired and his subsequent flip-flop on almost every thing he said in that presser.... and now "not remembering" talking to Cutler? As I've said before, I'm wondering if the man is ill.

All rookie HCs have to prove themselves.

TheReverend
03-20-2009, 03:23 PM
He lead a pretty mediocre Bucs team to the playoffs earlier in his career. Thats more than Ramsey ever managed.

Mediocre enough to be 5-1 with Brian Griese under center?

5-1 with Griese... 6-4 with Simms.

Forgive me for not being nearly as inspired as you basking in that greatness...

baja
03-20-2009, 04:13 PM
Mediocre enough to be 5-1 with Brian Griese under center?

5-1 with Griese... 6-4 with Simms.

Forgive me for not being nearly as inspired as you basking in that greatness...

So your saying we should go after Griese than, I like it.

Blueflame
03-20-2009, 04:18 PM
So your saying we should go after Griese than, I like it.

That move would relieve offseason boredom on the Mane, to be sure....

worm
03-20-2009, 04:23 PM
So I'll take choice number 3... someone else at HC, perhaps Gruden or Mooch.

I will take choice number 4....McD at HC....and a strong, experienced GM.

Blueflame
03-20-2009, 04:38 PM
I will take choice number 4....McD at HC....and a strong, experienced GM.

That would certainly be better than what we currently have...

gadlaw
03-20-2009, 04:49 PM
You shouldn't try to speak for everyone. And even if dude is on one side or the other, he's not a Priest. At least I don't think he's a Priest. Taco dude are you a Priest? Anyways, speaking of everyone, speaking for everyone is not cool dude. You should say, 'In my opinion' cause what you are giving, that's your own opinion.

Uh huh, I am sure you would have posted this article if it had (rightly) said that Jay ****ed this entire situation up with his cry baby antics. Sure, you would have posted the article then. Go on pretending to play the middle road, Taco...no one buys it.

Killericon
03-20-2009, 04:59 PM
Mediocre enough to be 5-1 with Brian Griese under center?

5-1 with Griese... 6-4 with Simms.

Forgive me for not being nearly as inspired as you basking in that greatness...

Griese was good during that stretch, don't kid yourself.

Popps
03-20-2009, 05:16 PM
That is a ridiculous post Popps. Only 6 QBs make the Probowl SO OBVIOUSLY there are going to be more teams make the playoffs that didn't have Probowl QBs.

I agree, and that's why the assumption that you MUST have a Pro Bowl QB to win meaningful games is ridiculous.

TheReverend
03-20-2009, 05:47 PM
Griese was good during that stretch, don't kid yourself.

If you call 7 TDs, 7 Ints, and a pair of fumbles while teams are the stacking the box to stop ROY Cadillac Williams good, then you're right!

Me, I call that "More Brian Griese", but I guess I'm kidding myself, huh?

Killericon
03-20-2009, 05:59 PM
If you call 7 TDs, 7 Ints, and a pair of fumbles while teams are the stacking the box to stop ROY Cadillac Williams good, then you're right!

Me, I call that "More Brian Griese", but I guess I'm kidding myself, huh?

I apologize, I confused that stretch with the year before.

To be fair, Simms has better stats than Griese, despite the worse record.

Dedhed
03-20-2009, 06:55 PM
What this article leaves out is the fact that this whole thing started because McDaniels was intrigued about bringing in a guy who would have aided in his "Win Now" campaign.

TheReverend
03-20-2009, 06:59 PM
What this article leaves out is the fact that this whole thing started because McDaniels was intrigued about bringing in a guy who would have aided in his "Win Now" campaign.

I have a bridge I'd love to sell you...

Drek
03-20-2009, 08:12 PM
Mediocre enough to be 5-1 with Brian Griese under center?

5-1 with Griese... 6-4 with Simms.

Forgive me for not being nearly as inspired as you basking in that greatness...

If Brian Griese was up for being our backup I'd be all for it, FYI.

Simms and Griese are both in about the same class, fringy starters who have seen some success but not enough to be considered a definite starter on any team they're on. They're worlds better than Patrick Ramsey who only got his few starts because the 'skins were a horribly run organization with no clue at that point in time. Simms is a better backup than what most teams have, and he's still young enough to have some remaining upside.

TheReverend
03-20-2009, 08:15 PM
If Brian Griese was up for being our backup I'd be all for it, FYI.

Simms and Griese are both in about the same class, fringy starters who have seen some success but not enough to be considered a definite starter on any team they're on. They're worlds better than Patrick Ramsey who only got his few starts because the 'skins were a horribly run organization with no clue at that point in time. Simms is a better backup than what most teams have, and he's still young enough to have some remaining upside.

I'd lump them all in the same category, but edge for Griese due to experience.

However, as bad as we've seen Ramsey to be in the pre-season and vs Detroit, the Bucc's were in just as bad a shape for Simms to get his start, when his competition was Griese and Gradkowski, and still couldn't win the job without a season ending injury to Brian...

Popps
03-20-2009, 08:35 PM
I'm not as down on Simms as most people. I love him as a back-up. As a starter, he'll be limited... but I wouldn't rule out McDanilel's ability to make him competitive behind our line, and in his system.

That said, if bowl-haircut flees town, we'll need to bring in competition for the gig, obviously.

baja
03-20-2009, 09:08 PM
Maybe Jake would come back

DAN_BRONCO_FAN
03-20-2009, 10:26 PM
umm isnt this a discussion board and umm aint people including mods entitled to their opinion on this cutler mcdaniels fiasco and well he listed the link to the story so he didnt mkae it up now did he. now why are people acting soo angry over peoples diffenet opinions over this cutler macdaniels screw up. it silly to hate someone cause they dont like the way cutler or mcdaniels are acting . btw im on the cutler side of things so nyah to the people who will flame me over hopin and wishin the best qb since elway will play in denver for many years. but he will never be better than elway . like how many qbs do ya kno can do what elway did in his career. i can only think of one qb and thats elway.

Bob's your Information Minister
03-21-2009, 01:55 AM
Popps, I ended up not going to the sorority party. I suck, eh?

Popps
03-21-2009, 02:00 AM
Popps, I ended up not going to the sorority party. I suck, eh?

Good lord, dude. I figured you'd at least put up an effort and fake some pictures or something. Maybe go to Hooters... or photoshop something together.

What about strip clubs. I believe women are contractually obligated to speak to you there.

Bob's your Information Minister
03-21-2009, 02:08 AM
Oh, I attempted to go. As I pulled into the parking lot I was destroyed in a car accident. So, my fun-filled evening with progressive and a fat tow truck man was splendid.

Popps
03-21-2009, 02:10 AM
Oh, I attempted to go. As I pulled into the parking lot I was destroyed in a car accident. So, my fun-filled evening with progressive and a fat tow truck man was splendid.

That was god trying to protect the women.

I'm glad you weren't hurt, badly. I wouldn't mind if you had minor injuries, though.

Did you at least get the tow truck driver's digits?

Archer81
03-21-2009, 02:14 AM
That was god trying to protect the women.

I'm glad you weren't hurt, badly. I wouldn't mind if you had minor injuries, though.

Did you at least get the tow truck driver's digits?



Yeah Bob, did you?

:Broncos:

GreatBronco16
03-21-2009, 03:04 AM
umm isnt this a discussion board and umm aint people including mods entitled to their opinion on this cutler mcdaniels fiasco and well he listed the link to the story so he didnt mkae it up now did he. now why are people acting soo angry over peoples diffenet opinions over this cutler macdaniels screw up. it silly to hate someone cause they dont like the way cutler or mcdaniels are acting . btw im on the cutler side of things so nyah to the people who will flame me over hopin and wishin the best qb since elway will play in denver for many years. but he will never be better than elway . like how many qbs do ya kno can do what elway did in his career. i can only think of one qb and thats elway.


"I'll take hooked on phonics for $100 Alex"

GreatBronco16
03-21-2009, 03:06 AM
Oh, I attempted to go. As I pulled into the parking lot I was destroyed in a car accident. So, my fun-filled evening with progressive and a fat tow truck man was splendid.

I bet you **** up your own wet dreams.

Dedhed
03-21-2009, 04:15 AM
I have a bridge I'd love to sell you...
If you're of the belief that Cassel, with four years experience in this system, and clearly a better attitude about it wouldn't have had a better chance at immediate success, then you're the one shopping for bridges.

And that doesn't even mention the extra impact player(s) we would have gotten in the deal for Cutler either.

Great views of Brooklyn and Manhattan by the way, but you can only see them without your head in a dark place.