PDA

View Full Version : Would you mind the Broncos sucking if it meant McDaniels getting fired?


Kaylore
04-11-2009, 02:52 PM
Vote!

It is not public (I know, I know) but I didn't want to turn this into a witch hunt.

OBF1
04-11-2009, 02:57 PM
You are kidding right? Get back to your wife's honeydo list .

Punisher
04-11-2009, 02:57 PM
Lets hope he doesn't fail.

oubronco
04-11-2009, 02:59 PM
hard question but I love the Broncos and Hate McDaniels so there is no way would I want them to suck at all except for the cheerleaders of course :wiggle:

Hogan11
04-11-2009, 03:03 PM
You almost had me believing you were actually serious for a moment there.

BroncoBuff
04-11-2009, 03:04 PM
Vote!

It is not public (I know, I know) but I didn't want to turn this into a witch hunt.

NOT PUBLIC KHAN .... IT PROVES NOTHING.

The pro-Josh people will vote opposite.


Sorry.

Kaylore
04-11-2009, 03:06 PM
NOT PUBLIC KHAN .... IT PROVES NOTHING.

The pro-Josh people will vote opposite.


Sorry.
No they won't. Why would they? No one has voted that way yet. And if I made it public people would have complained I was running a witch hunt.

Broncos_OTM
04-11-2009, 03:10 PM
Dude there is nothing we can take back. Jay is gone McD for better or worse is our couch. I'll give him ample time before i go on a witch hunt.

After all i am a broncos fan first. and will continue to root for the broncos.

Punisher
04-11-2009, 03:12 PM
Dude there is nothing we can take back. Jay is gone McD for better or worse is our couch. I'll give him ample time before i go on a witch hunt.

After all i am a broncos fan first. and will continue to root for the broncos.

preach on brother :afro:

BroncoBuff
04-11-2009, 03:12 PM
No they won't. Why would they? No one has voted that way yet. And if I made it public people would have complained I was running a witch hunt.

Fair enough on the witch-hunt point, although not many people around here care what they're thought of I don't think.

My point is there was an ARGUMENT about this in another thread when you had the idea for this poll (great idea btw). So I suspect that, just to win the argument, somebody will vote opposite.

I wonder if TJ can see who votes what?

Crushaholic
04-11-2009, 03:20 PM
I hope McDaniels takes us to the Super Bowl every year...:believeit

footstepsfrom#27
04-11-2009, 03:22 PM
29-2...debate over.

Los Broncos
04-11-2009, 03:22 PM
Jay is gone, I'm over that, moving forward I will be pulling for the Broncos no matter what.

Whoever the coach is, is beyond my control.

The Joker
04-11-2009, 03:26 PM
If Cutler wasn't a really dislikeable character then I could somewhat see the logic.

But he is, so as much as I appreciated his talent I find it hard to really feel bad that he's gone.

He's going to be a good QB for years to come, but not an elite one whose trade we'll be haunted by for years.

So yeah, can't really understand the logic in people wanting McD out yet.

TheReverend
04-11-2009, 03:45 PM
Pre-Cutler trade it truly would've been tempting. As is, the damage is done, imo, let's hope they draft well and implement something very special.

Popps
04-11-2009, 04:01 PM
Vote!

It is not public (I know, I know) but I didn't want to turn this into a witch hunt.

Those who would be fine with a little bit of failure to prove their "point" aren't likely the types to admit it, even in an anonymous poll. But, you can pretty much pick up on who they are, anyway.

scttgrd
04-11-2009, 04:01 PM
I hope he takes us to the superbowl, but till he does show me something. It's easy to break something, hard as hell to fix. So fix it McDaniels.

Archer81
04-11-2009, 04:02 PM
Every coach we have had since the late 70's has had some success with the team, either playoff runs or superbowl appearances/wins. I dont see that trend stopping with Josh.


:Broncos:

MechanicalBull
04-11-2009, 04:19 PM
I don't care who coaches the team or who plays for the team. I am a BRONCO fan not a fan of players or coaches. I hope for success and the superbowl every single year.

BroncoBuff
04-11-2009, 04:20 PM
Betcha a million dollars Popps voted "If that's what it takes."

Popps
04-11-2009, 04:22 PM
Betcha a million dollars Popps voted "If that's what it takes."

See if Taco has a way of checking. He probably does.

But, make it friendly. Make it something you can pay.

$500?

Let's see if he can check it, but will you put up $500 before we ask him?

Should we go double or nothing on what you chose?

Yes or no?

NYBronco
04-11-2009, 04:23 PM
Go Broncos...

Popps
04-11-2009, 04:25 PM
Buff, still there?

Before Taco answers... $500?

Popps
04-11-2009, 04:34 PM
Well, look at that. Buff went bye-bye. Shocker, there.

Anyway, why are you taking this so personally, Buff? This thread doesn't have your name on it, and yet... here you are, going crazy, taking it very personally.

Hmmm.

OBF1
04-11-2009, 04:35 PM
Popps would not want McDaniels gone. SoCalBronco on the other hand :)

BroncoBuff
04-11-2009, 04:50 PM
Only a sucker bets on something that the guy who knows as fact is challenging him on.

Sorry there, flamey.




But I'll acknowledge my accusation of you was wrong. Sorry ;D

scttgrd
04-11-2009, 04:52 PM
Im interested in how people feel about McDaniels getting full GM power. I didn't think it was a good idea for Shanny to have it, now a new coach gets it and no one is the least bit concerned? I don't get that. There was a call to strip Shanny of GM duties here, so what happened? Are those people drinking the kool-aid or what?

Florida_Bronco
04-11-2009, 05:02 PM
No. I want the Broncos to succeed and by proxy, that means McDaniels too.

BroncoBuff
04-11-2009, 05:02 PM
Im interested in how people feel about McDaniels getting full GM power. I didn't think it was a good idea for Shanny to have it, now a new coach gets it and no one is the least bit concerned? I don't get that. There was a call to strip Shanny of GM duties here, so what happened? Are those people drinking the kool-aid or what?

Exctly, exactly! I've worn out my fingers posting about this, about how foolish this is/was.

Yes, Shanahan's full powers were a serious problem for Mike and for the team - even though unlike Josh, he had tons of experience in the league. Many people here accurately (imo) called for a real GM to be hired to join the team. When Mike was fired, Bowlen acknowledged this, and promised a "power sharing" structure. But then along came Josh McDaniels, and then suddenly Goodman was fired, and suddenly Xanders became Ted Sundquist II.

In the first place, I was shouted down over and over and over when I said Josh had near-Shanahan powers. But then along came Bowlen's letter to the season-ticket holders, wherein he discussed "Josh's vision," "Josh's mission," "Josh's authority," and only mentioned Xanders once, and then merely as a tack-on to Josh. Then Bears GM Jerry Angelo did a psot-mortem on the trade, and he talked about dealing only with Josh, never even mentioned his GM couterpart here. And that was VERY telling.

We know this - Josh never made a trade or dealt with an agent before the Cassel thing. And we saw how that turned out.

Popps
04-11-2009, 05:04 PM
Only a sucker bets on something that the guy who knows as fact is challenging him on.

Sorry there, flamey.




But I'll acknowledge my accusation of you was wrong. Sorry ;D



Fair enough.

TDmvp
04-11-2009, 05:08 PM
I really don't like Josh ... But I didn't vote either way .

would hate to watch us lose a lot , But really dislike Josh , I live in Ohio and have heard about his family for years and just because he has been around great coaches does not mean he is one , and i don't think he should have been handed the power to gut a team at this point ... Jay aside cause from looks of all that it was both sides .... but going forward I would rather someone else be running the show .


I have been around ton of people who achieved a lot in their lives , and as much of that that may of rubbed off still don't make me ready to do their job... So I'm guessing Josh will bust hardcore ... If he don't , good for us ...

Archer81
04-11-2009, 05:10 PM
I really don't like Josh ... But I didn't vote either way .

would hate to watch us lose a lot , But really dislike Josh , I live in Ohio and have heard about his family for years and just because he has been around great coaches does not mean he is one , and i don't think he should have been handed the power to gut a team at this point ... Jay aside cause from looks of all that it was both sides .... but going forward I would rather someone else be running the show .


I have been around ton of people who achieved a lot in their lives , and as much of that that may of rubbed off still don't make me ready to do their job... So I'm guessing Josh will bust hardcore ... If he don't , good for us ...


They said the same thing about Mike Shanahan.


:Broncos:

Popps
04-11-2009, 05:10 PM
Im interested in how people feel about McDaniels getting full GM power.

NFL.com......

The last time he spoke with Cutler was at a face-to-face meeting last month at team headquarters in which Cutler insisted on having his agent present. One day later, Cutler asked to be traded.

Why didn't McDaniels just clear the room that day -- Broncos general manager Brian Xanders also was in attendance -- and sit down with his quarterback one-on-one?

"Impossible," McDaniels said.

Why?

"Because Bus Cook was going to be there," McDaniels said. "I'd love to do that."

So, was Cook the problem?

"No idea. No idea," McDaniels said. "This wasn't about a contract, so I have no idea if Bus Cook was the problem or not."



You guys need to quit pulling this "full GM power" stuff out of your a-holes.


Cutler shows up with his daddy (agent) to a one one one meeting. So, what does McDaniels do? He brings in Xanders. Why would a guy with "full GM power" need to call ANYONE into the room in that situation?

Answer: He wouldn't.

Get that ****ing **** out of here.

DenverBrit
04-11-2009, 05:12 PM
Wanting the Broncos to fail because some don't like the HC is..........ridiculous.

Those who do, should run along and find another team to not support.

Northman
04-11-2009, 05:14 PM
Im interested in how people feel about McDaniels getting full GM power. I didn't think it was a good idea for Shanny to have it, now a new coach gets it and no one is the least bit concerned? I don't get that. There was a call to strip Shanny of GM duties here, so what happened? Are those people drinking the kool-aid or what?

I was a little perturbed by that too. I thought that was Shanny's downfall in the long run. A little surprising considering Bowlen said he was going to be more active.

frerottenextelway
04-11-2009, 05:15 PM
I don't want to see the Broncos suck which is why I wanted McDaniels fired.

scttgrd
04-11-2009, 05:17 PM
If you are Cutler and you don't bring some kind or repesentative you are a fool. If you think that McDaniels didn't have a major say in what went down then you just aren't paying attention. Get your head out of your duffel bag and come back to reality. I know you are smarter than this, try showing it. But I know McDaniels can do no wrong so im not holding my breath.

Bronco X
04-11-2009, 05:18 PM
Im interested in how people feel about McDaniels getting full GM power. I didn't think it was a good idea for Shanny to have it, now a new coach gets it and no one is the least bit concerned? I don't get that. There was a call to strip Shanny of GM duties here, so what happened? Are those people drinking the kool-aid or what?

I think Bowlen is making a mistake giving him so much power. It's a huge gamble. Especially given how things went down with Shanny, and how fresh and inexperienced McDaniel's is, it's a baffling decision by Bowlen

As for McDaniels as a coach, I wasn't a big fan of the hiring... I thought they should have brought in a defensive minded coach. And he's done some very dumb things although I think some people are giving him too much blame for the Cutler mess (I'd probably rank him fourth in culpability behind Cutler, Cook and Bowlen).

But it's all over and I'm not going to be standing on a ledge with a grenade in my mouth like a good portion of Bronco Nation. For all his promise Cutler wasn't worthy of such a reaction, and the reaction is irritating me more now than any of McDaniel's missteps. I want more than anything for McDaniel's and Orton to make everyone who believes Cutler took all the pride and glory of the Denver Broncos franchise with him look like fools.

scttgrd
04-11-2009, 05:21 PM
I was a little perturbed by that too. I thought that was Shanny's downfall in the long run. A little surprising considering Bowlen said he was going to be more active.

This is my real concern with this whole thing. I want to see success, but replicating the last regime is not the way to make changes. I guess im just a hater, oh well. Forbid any questions of the new leadership.:thanku:

Archer81
04-11-2009, 05:22 PM
Our HC does not have full GM powers...He has a bit of a say, but he alone does not decide the roster...or does Xanders having "GM" in front of his name throw some of you off?

:Broncos:

broncofan7
04-11-2009, 05:22 PM
We ALL are going to mind going 5-11 or 6-10 next year--this board will have record participation week in and week out next season and McD's scalp will ultimately be called for. He said it himself--judge him by wins and losses. Hopefully he makes me eat crow like Eddie Royal did(I wanted Desean Jackson) but as of right now, with what we have on this roster and the common opponents known--it is not looking good at all in this Bronco fan's eyes.

Broncos4tw
04-11-2009, 05:29 PM
What kind of stupid poll is this?

If McD does well, why would anyone want him fired? Bottom line for any actual Bronco fan is that we win games (and hopefully make our own identity, and not seen as Pats ver 2.0).

If he wins game, I'll think he knows what he is doing after all, and I'll be happy he is here. If he handles the team like he has handled the Cutler affair, I'm worried. I'm also worried about his ideas on how to better build this team.

But if in spite of all that, he kicks ass, I'll back him to the end.

Unlike some who have some irrational hate for a QB, I have no hate for McD. I'm just baffled by his decisions so far, his professionalism (lack thereof) makes me leery, and he IS inexperienced. I don't know why people are so high on a guy who hasn't done one thing for this team so far.

Popps
04-11-2009, 05:32 PM
I think Bowlen is making a mistake giving him so much power. It's a huge gamble. Especially given how things went down with Shanny.

Again, there's no proof that he's "given him so much power." I've already just laid out the clearest, most irrefutable example of a prime situation where a "full power" guy wouldn't bring in his GM, which McDaniels DID.

Second, as for "how things went down with Shanahan,".... we won two Superbowls.

So, the last time Bowlen gave "full power" to anyone, we won two Suerpbowls.

The problem was Shanahan either losing his touch or changing his philosophy, whichever you choose to believe. (I believe it was both.)

There's no credibility to this "too much power" argument, whatsoever.

Rohirrim
04-11-2009, 05:37 PM
Again, there's no proof that he's "given him so much power." I've already just laid out the clearest, most irrefutable example of a prime situation where a "full power" guy wouldn't bring in his GM, which McDaniels DID.

Second, as for "how things went down with Shanahan,".... we won two Superbowls.

So, the last time Bowlen gave "full power" to anyone, we won two Suerpbowls.

The problem was Shanahan either losing his touch or changing his philosophy, whichever you choose to believe. (I believe it was both.)

There's no credibility to this "too much power" argument, whatsoever.

Given that Bowlen fired Shanahan, brought in McD, and then blew past McD holding up that Cutler jersey to trade Jay you should look a little higher on the food chain to find who is in charge of this team.

Atwater His Ass
04-11-2009, 05:43 PM
We ALL are going to mind going 5-11 or 6-10 next year--this board will have record participation week in and week out next season and McD's scalp will ultimately be called for. He said it himself--judge him by wins and losses. Hopefully he makes me eat crow like Eddie Royal did(I wanted Desean Jackson) but as of right now, with what we have on this roster and the common opponents known--it is not looking good at all in this Bronco fan's eyes.

Not baja. Check out his thread. He's not concerned with W's and L's.

HEAV
04-11-2009, 05:46 PM
NOT PUBLIC KHAN .... IT PROVES NOTHING.

The pro-Josh people will vote opposite.


Sorry.

You and Socal are such F*ck-Tards.

BroncoMan4ever
04-11-2009, 06:00 PM
i completely dislike the bastard, but his success currently coincides with the Broncos. like him or not, him succeeding is best for the team. i think he has made a few mistakes to begin his career, but i am not going to wish failure on the guy while he is our coach. now once he is no longer our coach be it in 4 years or 14 years, i could care less if he never wins another game, but as long as he represents Denver, i want him to win.

tsiguy96
04-11-2009, 06:04 PM
Not baja. Check out his thread. He's not concerned with W's and L's.

watching a team that doesnt fade down the stretch is a start. a team that is competitive for 4 quarters instead of 3 would be nice.

every HC bowlen has ever had was given almost full control of the team. thats how he prefers to run his team, and its not a bad choice given the HC can handle it. until he proves he cannot, there is no reason to not let him do it. he had a great FA period, look at the defensive signings. good contributors who filled out the defense so we can take BPA on defense in the draft.

SouthStndJunkie
04-11-2009, 06:16 PM
Dumb thread.

I think McDaniels is a douche....but I would never root for the Broncos to lose just because I think the head coach is a tool.

OABB
04-11-2009, 06:20 PM
l am rooting for MCD and the broncos to win...



I am also rooting for MCD to get surprise butt secks with a lead pipe as well.

Taco John
04-11-2009, 06:27 PM
NFL.com......

The last time he spoke with Cutler was at a face-to-face meeting last month at team headquarters in which Cutler insisted on having his agent present. One day later, Cutler asked to be traded.

Why didn't McDaniels just clear the room that day -- Broncos general manager Brian Xanders also was in attendance -- and sit down with his quarterback one-on-one?

"Impossible," McDaniels said.

Why?

"Because Bus Cook was going to be there," McDaniels said. "I'd love to do that."

So, was Cook the problem?

"No idea. No idea," McDaniels said. "This wasn't about a contract, so I have no idea if Bus Cook was the problem or not."



You guys need to quit pulling this "full GM power" stuff out of your a-holes.


Cutler shows up with his daddy (agent) to a one one one meeting. So, what does McDaniels do? He brings in Xanders. Why would a guy with "full GM power" need to call ANYONE into the room in that situation?

Answer: He wouldn't.

Get that ****ing **** out of here.



That was a lot of typing to prove nothing. Xanders doesn't have the power in Dove Valley, and everybody knows it.

Taco John
04-11-2009, 06:34 PM
Again, there's no proof that he's "given him so much power." I've already just laid out the clearest, most irrefutable example of a prime situation where a "full power" guy wouldn't bring in his GM, which McDaniels DID.



You've got an odd definition of "irrefutable." You're example proved absolutely nothing. Shanahan had the full reigns in any situation in Denver, but he'd still bring in "his people" in situations where the player is bringing in his own.

SouthStndJunkie
04-11-2009, 06:34 PM
That was a lot of typing to prove nothing. Xanders doesn't have the power in Dove Valley, and everybody knows it.

Xanders is probably not even allowed to pick a topping when they order pizza at Dove Valley.

Taco John
04-11-2009, 06:35 PM
Xanders is probably not even allowed to pick a topping when they order pizza at Dove Valley.

He'd probably be the guy calling the order in, though... :clown:

Taco John
04-11-2009, 06:40 PM
So seriously, outside of McDaniels calling him in as a seceratary to take notes when Bus Cook was in the room, what other examples of "power" have we seen from Xanders? How many of "his guys" do we have on the team now - as opposed to McDaniel's guys? Care to hazard a guess on this one Popps?

BroncoMan4ever
04-11-2009, 06:47 PM
He'd probably be the guy calling the order in, though... :clown:

and McDaniels probably makes him pay for it.

lostknight
04-11-2009, 06:50 PM
The fools that think that McDaniels must be gotten rid of any cost, are just as misguided as the morons who keep on insisting that Jay is somehow doomed to fail now, or isn't a better (to the tune of two firsts and a third) QB then Orton.

Drek
04-11-2009, 06:51 PM
This thread turned in a pretty funny direction didn't it?

McDaniels doesn't have half the power Shanahan did. He's got heavy say on the roster, but Mike Shanahan effectively ran the entire organization. Pat Bowlen is doing that now, and McDaniels answers to him.

When Shanahan was here he didn't answer to anyone, even though Pat Bowlen in fact owned the team.

Ratboy
04-11-2009, 07:17 PM
This thread turned in a pretty funny direction didn't it?

McDaniels doesn't have half the power Shanahan did. He's got heavy say on the roster, but Mike Shanahan effectively ran the entire organization. Pat Bowlen is doing that now, and McDaniels answers to him.

When Shanahan was here he didn't answer to anyone, even though Pat Bowlen in fact owned the team.

McDaniels has full power. I am not sure why people keep dancing around that. Pat Bowlen said he supports his coach 100%. McDaniels got rid of our best player, and Pat Bowlen backed him all the way through.

McDaniels has just as much power as Shanahan did, the only difference, Pat Bowlen wants to "hear" it before it happens.

Rock Chalk
04-11-2009, 07:18 PM
So seriously, outside of McDaniels calling him in as a seceratary to take notes when Bus Cook was in the room, what other examples of "power" have we seen from Xanders? How many of "his guys" do we have on the team now - as opposed to McDaniel's guys? Care to hazard a guess on this one Popps?

Whats that got to do with overall power Taco?

Every head coach in the league gets to bring in his guys. With or without GM duties (and since most of them have no GM duties, Id say that argument is stupid).

If McDaniels had full control, how come Bowlen stepped in and forced the Cutler trade when McDaniels wanted to work things out?

I dont udnerstand you people.

Rock Chalk
04-11-2009, 07:19 PM
McDaniels has full power. I am not sure why people keep dancing around that. Pat Bowlen said he supports his coach 100%. McDaniels got rid of our best player, and Pat Bowlen backed him all the way through.

McDaniels has just as much power as Shanahan did, the only difference, Pat Bowlen wants to "hear" it before it happens.

No, PAT BOWLEN GOT RID OF A WHINEY 2ND RATE QB.

McDaniels wanted to continue and try to work it out. But when CUTLER refused to answer the OWNERS phone calls. BOWLEN forced the ****ing trade.

You people are ****ing retarded.

Ratboy
04-11-2009, 07:23 PM
No, PAT BOWLEN GOT RID OF A WHINEY 2ND RATE QB.

McDaniels wanted to continue and try to work it out. But when CUTLER refused to answer the OWNERS phone calls. BOWLEN forced the ****ing trade.

You people are ****ing retarded.

Yes, that's how it went. :unamused:

You hippies don't even read between the lines.

Seriously 2nd rate? Are you high?

Cito Pelon
04-11-2009, 07:32 PM
So seriously, outside of McDaniels calling him in as a seceratary to take notes when Bus Cook was in the room, what other examples of "power" have we seen from Xanders? How many of "his guys" do we have on the team now - as opposed to McDaniel's guys? Care to hazard a guess on this one Popps?

Pretty good for once, TJ. Bide your time.

tsiguy96
04-11-2009, 07:36 PM
so now the new reason to hate mcdaniels is because bowlen gave him essentially the same power that shanahan had?

keep reaching morons.

Popps
04-11-2009, 07:49 PM
So seriously, outside of McDaniels calling him in as a seceratary to take notes when Bus Cook was in the room, what other examples of "power" have we seen from Xanders? How many of "his guys" do we have on the team now - as opposed to McDaniel's guys? Care to hazard a guess on this one Popps?

Oh, sorry man... go ahead and post McDaniel's quote that Xanders is his "secretary." I must have missed that quote.

As for who thought of what guys, there are the obvious examples of ex-pats who came to Denver. Like Shanahan, Kubiak or any coach... a new coach brings some of his guys with him.

Do you know that McDaniels thought of Dawkins? Fields? Davis? These are just guys we signed, like any team.
Outside of that, you have no proof that McDaniels wields any more power than any other coach in the league.

You should start a sub-forum with the other sad, jilted types around here where you could all put forth your conspiracy theories and talk about how the team's going to fail for years to come.

Popps
04-11-2009, 07:50 PM
That was a lot of typing to prove nothing. Xanders doesn't have the power in Dove Valley, and everybody knows it.

Really? Gosh, thanks for the interesting straw-man, buddy.

Hey Taco, the moon isn't made of green cheese!

Duh.

(How's that?)

Popps
04-11-2009, 07:55 PM
Whats that got to do with overall power Taco?

Every head coach in the league gets to bring in his guys. With or without GM duties .

Exactly.

But, Taco and his jilted minions need to vilify the new Broncos staff with every weapon possible. That means creating falsehoods... and allowing them to grow into accepted realities around here.

There's zero proof that McDaniels has more proof than any other coach in the league, but... since when has proof stopped Taco from doing anything.

Whats that got to do with overall power Taco?

If McDaniels had full control, how come Bowlen stepped in and forced the Cutler trade when McDaniels wanted to work things out?
.


Exactly... and if he had full control, why did he insist that Xanders attend a personnel-related meeting if Cutler insisted on having his agent there?

Why? Because he's not a GM, nor is he pretending to be one. He brought his GM into the room when GM-duties seemed to be necessary.


I dont udnerstand you people.


There's no understanding people who create falsehoods as the basis of their reasoning. You can't understand untruths.

OABB
04-11-2009, 08:08 PM
I like cheese.

Swedish Extrovert
04-11-2009, 08:09 PM
Vote!

It is not public (I know, I know) but I didn't want to turn this into a witch hunt.

Another drunk night for me, but here is my two cents...

We could hope that McD sucks and gets fired.... or we can hope he does well.... either way, its better than going 8-8 every year under Shanahan

Bronx33
04-11-2009, 08:09 PM
10 people here have zero patience :rofl:

baja
04-11-2009, 08:14 PM
Not baja. Check out his thread. He's not concerned with W's and L's.

Shouldn't there be an entry level IQ test to be a Bronco fan, just sayin.

Archer81
04-11-2009, 08:19 PM
It would bother me alot to watch the team completely fall apart just to get rid of McDaniels. In fact, that concept is so ridiculous to me I cannot believe an entire thread exists to support this thesis and actually have some people defend this lack of logic as a "good thing". McDaniels has not even coached ONE practice yet and some of you want him fired because our "franchise" QB acted like a bitch and by his own choice got shipped out of town. Do you care about the actual franchise or the players that come and go?

:Broncos:

baja
04-11-2009, 08:21 PM
That was a lot of typing to prove nothing. Xanders doesn't have the power in Dove Valley, and everybody knows it.

I love how you make these grand sweeping statements as you know something. Dude you might have a neet fan web site but truth is you have no real idea where McDaniels power ends or where Xanders begins. All you got is an educated guess so no it's not "everyone knows it".

Atlas
04-11-2009, 08:22 PM
Vote!

It is not public (I know, I know) but I didn't want to turn this into a witch hunt.

The Broncos are going to suck, thus I hope McFailure gets fired.

tsiguy96
04-11-2009, 08:25 PM
The Broncos are going to suck, thus I hope McFailure gets fired.

and if the broncos are good?

baja
04-11-2009, 08:30 PM
So seriously, outside of McDaniels calling him in as a seceratary to take notes when Bus Cook was in the room, what other examples of "power" have we seen from Xanders? How many of "his guys" do we have on the team now - as opposed to McDaniel's guys? Care to hazard a guess on this one Popps?

I thought Bowlen explained it very clearly, Josh was to have a lot of input on player personal as the head coach but the final decision had to be a joint agreement between the HC & the GM with Bowlen weighing in as the tie breaker if needed. Bowlen believes in giving the HC what he needs to win but I doubt if McDaniels has Shanahan power yet he'll have to wait until he wins a SB.

Popps
04-11-2009, 08:34 PM
I love how you make these grand sweeping statements as you know something..

How dare you question Taco's ability to make accurate predictions as to the state of front office affairs.



http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=75466&highlight=shanahan



12-29-2008


Pretty soon, though, it's going to be clear that Shanahan is going nowhere, and the focus will no longer be on whether Shanahan should be here or not, but what happens next.

So get it out now, but please - when that focus shifts to reality





...

12-30-08
Denver Broncos Fire Mike Shanahan

http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2008/12/30/denver-broncos-fire-mike-shanahan/

footstepsfrom#27
04-11-2009, 08:34 PM
Well a rookie mans BOTH the GM and the HC spots regardless of who has the power.

SoCalBronco
04-11-2009, 08:36 PM
I thought Bowlen explained it very clearly, Josh was to have a lot of input on player personal as the head coach but the final decision had to be a joint agreement between the HC & the GM with Bowlen weighing in as the tie breaker if needed. Bowlen believes in giving the HC what he needs to win but I doubt if McDaniels has Shanahan power yet he'll have to wait until he wins a SB.

I dunno baja....it seems as if this was the case, we wouldn't have hired Kidd to run the scouting side (at least the pro scouting side, I don't think they have said who is running the college scouting). Kidd is CLEARLY a McDaniels guy. He hasn't had a real scouting job since he was working with the Patriots a few years back with guess who........McDaniels. McDaniels is clearly filling the FO with his types, people HE gets along with. I mean after all, they ditched the Goodmans and it was noted by Bowlen himself that among the reasons this was done was because Xanders worked well with McDaniels (which implies that the Goodmans did not...or at least not as much).

All of this strongly suggests that the lion's share of the power resides in the HC's seat, which is not really a whole lot different than before.

BroncoBuff
04-11-2009, 08:39 PM
Again, there's no proof that he's "given him so much power."

There's no credibility to this "too much power" argument, whatsoever.

Please stop acting like such an angry knothead, Flamey.

There's nothing BUT credibilty in that theory if you read the info:

Read Pat Bowlen's letter to season ticket holders ... it's very very clear that Josh is all in charge. He talks about "Josh's mission," "Josh's plan," etc etc. He mentions Xanders only once ... and then only as a tack-on to mentioning Josh.
Bears GM Jerry Angelo did a post-mortem interview on the trade, and it was crystal clear: he dealt with McDaniels only. He barely mentioned his GM counterpart Xanders. And that is very telling ... old-school guys like Angelo follow protocol I think, and had Xanders been involved, he would've mentioned his fellow GM more.

These are words straight from the "horses'" mnouths. And they mean something. Like TJ said, everybody knows Josh is in charge, and Xanders has no real power (think Shanahan-Sundquist).

The important question is: Did the entrustment of Shanahan-like power in the hands of the 2nd youngest head coach in NFL history contribute to the losses of Goodman and Cutler? I'm thinking it did. You can't blame Josh for soaking up all the power he can get ... we all do that. But you can be realistic in recognizing that his inexperience - when thrust into control - almost certainly was a big contributor to these costly losses.

Popps
04-11-2009, 08:39 PM
McDaniels. McDaniels is clearly filling the FO with his types, people HE gets along with. I mean after all, they ditched the Goodmans and it was noted by Bowlen himself that among the reasons this was done was because Xanders worked well with McDaniels (which implies that the Goodmans did not...or at least not as much).

All of this strongly suggests that the lion's share of the power resides in the HC's seat, which is not really a whole lot different than before.

No it doesn't.

It suggests that the owner wants the coach to have the best tools available at his disposal, and if the coach works more effectively with certain personnel guys, then so be it.

This is how business is done. Guys come in and bring their own guys. No surprises here. It was highly unlikely that many elements of the old staff were going to remain, no matter who was hired.

This is NFL business as usual, being turned into some sort of silly conspiracy.

Circle Orange
04-11-2009, 08:40 PM
The concept might appeal to bitter fans, I think. ;D

That being said, there's still the season to win or lose.

Popps
04-11-2009, 08:44 PM
You are such a knothead, Flamey.


Wow, still calling names after your ass got beat down in this very thread?

You talked ****, then couldn't back it up when it came time to put a little $$ on the line.

Now you're name-calling again? No wonder people are so tired of your routine.

As for your dribble about the trade, coaches being involved in player-trades doesn't mean they are drunk with power. It means they are NFL head coaches.


Honestly, do you guys just not watch the game? Do you people really believe that other coaches around the league sit idle, like school-children, waiting for those around them to make decisions about personnel and then tell them later?

Beyond that, who cares if McDaniels has some say over personnel.

GOOD.

He's been front in center with a winning franchise for years. If he wants to bring some of that winning culture over with him like Shanahan did, then so be it.

If **** goes south, we'll revisit this conversation in a few years and perhaps we'll discuss mistakes he's made. But, for now... this is a bunch of bored housewives yammering on about total bull****.

Taco John
04-11-2009, 08:49 PM
Whats that got to do with overall power Taco?



Everything.

SoCalBronco
04-11-2009, 08:49 PM
No it doesn't.

It suggests that the owner wants the coach to have the best tools available at his disposal, and if the coach works more effectively with certain personnel guys, then so be it.

This is how business is done. Guys come in and bring their own guys. No surprises here. It was highly unlikely that many elements of the old staff were going to remain, no matter who was hired.

This is NFL business as usual, being turned into some sort of silly conspiracy.

Well which one is it, Popps? You have made two points and they do not necessarily go hand in hand. The first pointw as that the owner wants the coach to have the best tools available at his disposal. And I agree, he should. Even Bowlen agreed, if you take him at his word. He publicly praised the efforts of Jim Goodman at the final Shanahan press conference and noted that he was doing a fine job. If you believe Bowlen's estimate of Jim Goodman's abilities and most fans do (at least to the extent of drafting offensive players), then he's certainly not living up to his wish that the coach to have the best (human resource) tools available. It is important not to confuse having the best tools available with having yes men that he feels good around.

The other point you made is more correct. A guy is putting in his place his men. That's fine. We aren't disputing that this is the case. In fact, that's what I'm saying: that Xanders got promoted almost entirely because he was buddy-buddy with McDaniels which suggests that he has no real, independent power of his own. It would strain even the outermost boundaries of credulity to suggest that Xanders deserved this promotion purely on merit. He has NEVER scouted on the ground before and has been largely just a cap guy...not unlike Mike Tannenbaum of the Jets. He's clearly not well rounded and even his former boss pointed that out.

BroncoBuff
04-11-2009, 08:49 PM
Dear Broncos Fan,

I am writing this letter today because I feel compelled to give our community and our fans an explanation regarding the Jay Cutler situation.

One of my directives to Josh McDaniels upon his hiring was that he consider everything possible to return the Broncos to the level which you and I both expect, and this certainly includes making a fair evaluation of every opportunity presented to us which might improve the team. He and General Manager Brian Xanders have had my complete support throughout, and they have it now. It is important that you know that at all times we represented ourselves to Jay with honesty and integrity.

I assure you both Josh and I made repeated attempts to reach out to Jay, and I can not speak for him as to why he chose to limit his response. Ultimately, given his unwillingness to speak with either of us directly in the last 12 days- at the same time his agent clearly stating to us Jay's intentions- it became very apparent to me personally that he no longer wanted to play for the Denver Broncos. As such, we elected to trade him.

[two paragraphs edited out]

Thank you for taking the time to read this and for your understanding and continued support.

Sincerely,

Pat Bowlen


STRAGHT FROM THE HORSE'S MOUTH ....

CASE CLOSED.

tsiguy96
04-11-2009, 08:50 PM
Please stop acting like such an angry knothead, Flamey.

There's nothing BUT credibilty in that theory if you read the info:

Read Pat Bowlen's letter to season ticket holders ... it's very very clear that Josh is all in charge. He talks about "Josh's mission," "Josh's plan," etc etc. He mentions Xanders only once ... and then only as a tack-on to mentioning Josh.
Bears GM Jerry Angelo did a post-mortem interview on the trade, and it was crystal clear: he dealt with McDaniels only. He barely mentioned his GM counterpart Xanders. And that is very telling ... old-school guys like Angelo follow protocol I think, and had Xanders been involved, he would've mentioned his fellow GM more.

These are words straight from the "horses'" mnouths. And they mean something. Like TJ said, everybody knows Josh is in charge, and Xanders has no real power (think Shanahan-Sundquist).

The important question is: Did the entrustment of Shanahan-like power in the hands of the 2nd youngest head coach in NFL history contribute to the losses of Goodman and Cutler? I'm thinking it did. You can't blame Josh for soaking up all the power he can get ... we all do that. But you can be realistic in recognizing that his inexperience - when thrust into control - almost certainly was a big contributor to these costly losses.

the loss of cutler is 100% on cutler. mcdaniels made every single attempt at getting a hold of cutler directly and indirectly through the media. cutler would not even talk to pat bowlen he had his panties in such a knot. cutler is gone because he wanted to be gone, because there was finally a coach in town who would not baby him like shanahan. shanahans babying is possibly why we saw very little progress from cutler from week 1 to week 17, a regression if anything.

Taco John
04-11-2009, 08:54 PM
How dare you question Taco's ability to make accurate predictions as to the state of front office affairs.



It wasn't a prediction. I had it on good authority that Shanahan was Bowlen's coach for life.

BroncoBuff
04-11-2009, 08:54 PM
the loss of cutler is 100% on cutler. mcdaniels made every single attempt at getting a hold of cutler directly and indirectly through the media. cutler would not even talk to pat bowlen he had his panties in such a knot. cutler is gone because he wanted to be gone, because there was finally a coach in town who would not baby him like shanahan. shanahans babying is possibly why we saw very little progress from cutler from week 1 to week 17, a regression if anything.

I believe Jay Cutler is more at fault than Josh for his departure ... I have posted that time and time and time again.

But Jay is a 25-year old star ... he does something only a dozen guys on the planet can do as well as him. And thus, the onus was on management to make it work out (unless of course Jay was a bad employee, which he was not).

Had we left the Cutler problem to an experienced management type (instead of an infant), we wouldn't be suffering now with having lost him.

SoCalBronco
04-11-2009, 08:57 PM
Had we left the Cutler problem to an experienced management type (instead of an infant), we wouldn't be suffering now with having lost him.

I agree. If we had someone more mature in charge, they might have tried an alternative strategy rather than trying to get into a public "my dick is bigger than yours" contest with Jay, which unfortunately included a number of leaked smears that might make the leaking party feel like he socked it to Jay but were ultimately additional barriers in the way of a resolution.

BroncoBuff
04-11-2009, 09:03 PM
Every head coach in the league gets to bring in his guys. With or without GM duties (and since most of them have no GM duties, Id say that argument is stupid).

Bill Parcells calls the personnel shots in Miami, son. Pioli in KC, Savage in Cleveland, on on and on around the league. The all-powerful coach over personnel, like Shanahan/Josh is the exception.


If McDaniels had full control, how come Bowlen stepped in and forced the Cutler trade when McDaniels wanted to work things out?

Nobody said he had power over Bowlen ... but make no mistake, Bowlen is the ONLY check on Josh's power now.

Xanders is Sundquist.

tsiguy96
04-11-2009, 09:05 PM
I believe Jay Cutler is more at fault than Josh for his departure ... I have posted that time and time and time again.

But Jay is a 25-year old star ... he does something only a dozen guys on the planet can do as well as him. And thus, the onus was on management to make it work out (unless of course Jay was a bad employee, which he was not).

Had we left the Cutler problem to an experienced management type (instead of an infant), we wouldn't be suffering now with having lost him.

they repeatedly tried to get meetings, phone calls, anything to cutler yet he refused. what more are they supposed to do?

they should NOT bow to every will of a player on a team of 53 because his feelings are hurt, it would undermine all authority they had. they did what tehy could and what was WITHIN REASON to get a hold of an unhappy player but it was not enough for cutler, and as soon as he dissed the owner, he was gone.

BroncoBuff
04-11-2009, 09:11 PM
unfortunately included a number of leaked smears that might make the leaking party feel like he socked it to Jay but were ultimately additional barriers in the way of a resolution.

Bingo. I don't think Jay was trying to win any PR battle, it never seemed like that to me, it seemed like he was offended. He thought Josh misled/lied to him. And I think Josh DID mislead/lie to Jay about the level of trade discussions. Josh is so inexperienced, he probably didn't realize how the info spreads, and was prolly surprised when Jay confronted him ... and once he had misled/lied, he got stubborn and refused to yield. I'll bet that's exactly what happened at that disastrous Saturday meeting. Jay wanted a 'mea culpa,' and Josh stuck to his original denial.

We pretty much know now - from around the league (including those strange stories about the Vikes nixing a trade) - that Josh was deeply involved at least in talks. Funny part is - HE DID NOTHING WRONG! HE DIDN'T HAVE TO MISLEAD/LIE! But my opinion is he got stubborn when Jay confronted/surprised him, and refused to yielkd, and that's why Jay crapped his diaper.

This is ALL SPECULATION, Cito ;D

Just my guess......



(And along these "motivation" lines, the nonsense theory about Jay and Bus angling for a new contract was crushed to death when Bus said they'd wait til next offseason to negotiate. Don't hold your breath for the "contract conspiracy theorists" to cop to the theory being discredited, though :~ohyah!:)

Atwater His Ass
04-11-2009, 09:19 PM
Shouldn't there be an entry level IQ test to be a Bronco fan, just sayin.

Your thread is the type that is always prominent on the boards of fans such as the chiefs, raiders, lions, and other perennial losers. It's nothing more than attempting to brainwash yourself and others into thinking it's ok to lose and, hell, is even good for us. It's ****ing pathetic. Just sayin.

Popps
04-11-2009, 09:46 PM
Well which one is it, Popps? You have made two points and they do not necessarily go hand in hand. The first pointw as that the owner wants the coach to have the best tools available at his disposal. And I agree, he should. Even Bowlen agreed, if you take him at his word. He publicly praised the efforts of Jim Goodman at the final Shanahan press conference and noted that he was doing a fine job. If you believe Bowlen's estimate of Jim Goodman's abilities and most fans do (at least to the extent of drafting offensive players).

I believe Bowlen said nice things about the Goodmans because he meant them.

I also believe that Bowlen wants the current staff to have all of the pieces in place to allow the coach to be the most effective. If Bowlen surmised that the best means to do that was to move Xanders into his current position, then so be it.

Let's not make any mistake, here. It's McDaniels' team... but that's ALWAYS the case with any good head coach. If you just want some blank, figurehead in there... we could have hired Herm Edwards.

Bowlen and his associates came out of their meeting with McDaniels blown away. They couldn't hire him fast enough. The obviously believe he has a vision and they're willing to help facilitate that vision. If the Goodmans weren't part of that vision, then get the guys in there that help our coach operate most effectively.

At the end of the day, McDaniels is the guy. It doesn't mean he's drunk with power, or that our GM has no input.. it just means that like any good head coach, he's got a vision.

Beyond that, the Goodmans had a good draft and brought in some nice offensive players. I wouldn't say they've changed the face of the NFL or anything. Are either one of them working yet? If they're the be-all GMs some have made them out to be, they should be hired somewhere.

Popps
04-11-2009, 09:56 PM
STRAGHT FROM THE HORSE'S MOUTH ....

CASE CLOSED.

Dude, "case closed?"

You're a riot.


"Josh and I" are the people that need to talk to Cutler. How hard is that to understand? The perceived dispute was between Cutler and McDaniels. THOSE TWO are the guys who had to talk to sort out the issue.

Again, you're choosing to jump to conclusions to fit the needs of some anti-Broncos staff agenda you have going. Bitch and cry all you want, but it doesn't make the bull**** you're spouting any more logical.

footstepsfrom#27
04-11-2009, 09:58 PM
Bowlen and his associates came out of their meeting with McDaniels blown away. They couldn't hire him fast enough. The obviously believe he has a vision and they're willing to help facilitate that vision. If the Goodmans weren't part of that vision, then get the guys in there that help our coach operate most effectively.
Sounds great...except that Bowlen first indicated they WERE part of that vision. Bowlen specifically stated that there would be no change in the front office leadership, and then he fired the Goodmans.

When you say one thing and do another, people stop taking you at your word...so since Pat proved himself willing to mislead the fans on this issue, what makes you think anything else he's stated can be trusted?

tsiguy96
04-11-2009, 10:08 PM
Sounds great...except that Bowlen first indicated they WERE part of that vision. Bowlen specifically stated that there would be no change in the front office leadership, and then he fired the Goodmans.

When you say one thing and do another, people stop taking you at your word...so since Pat proved himself willing to mislead the fans on this issue, what makes you think anything else he's stated can be trusted?

because hes been to 5 super bowls in 25 years, winning 2. probably has the best winning % as any owner in the league and has been referred to as the best owner in sports by basically anyone who has ever dealt with him. pat has earned the right to do whatever he feels is best for this team.

footstepsfrom#27
04-11-2009, 10:16 PM
because hes been to 5 super bowls in 25 years, winning 2. probably has the best winning % as any owner in the league and has been referred to as the best owner in sports by basically anyone who has ever dealt with him. pat has earned the right to do whatever he feels is best for this team.
Sure he can...it's his team...but Jerry Jones has won more Super Bowls that Bowlen in a shorter time frame, and he's got a reputation of saying one thing and doing another also. People don't think he can be trusted to speak the truth because he has demonstrated otherwise.

Your answer has nothing to do with the question I asked. Bowlen has won Super Bowls...what's that got to do with whether his word can be trusted or not?

Answer...nothing at all.

tsiguy96
04-11-2009, 10:18 PM
Sure he can...it's his team...but Jerry Jones has won more Super Bowls that Bowlen in a shorter time frame, and he's got a reputation of saying one thing and doing another also. People don't think he can be trusted to speak the truth because he has demonstrated otherwise.

Your answer has nothing to do with the question I asked. Bowlen has won Super Bowls...what's that got to do with whether his word can be trusted or not?

Answer...nothing at all.

who cares, what it does prove is taht he knows what it takes to, as an owner, get to the dance. thats all that really matters in the grand scheme of things, so i trust he will be able to do it again.

have a little faith instead of being a whiny pussy.

UberBroncoMan
04-11-2009, 10:30 PM
McTard has rocked the boat and ****ed around with enough **** already. I can't see things getting much worse.

I'd rather see McTard succeed and see the Broncos WIN than see McTard get fired and know that NOT ONLY is the HC gone, but Cutler as well.

Being back at coach hunting square 1 without our franchise QB would ****ing suck... so that ****er of a coach better win and win NOW just as he told all the FA's like Dawkins.

watermock
04-11-2009, 10:32 PM
He's allready pulled several very questionable moves, knee jerk moves. and outright assertions proven as at best, misleading, at worst, outright lies.

I can't name one good FA signed.

And I don't expect anything out ogf Nolan's " read and react" defense.

footstepsfrom#27
04-11-2009, 10:35 PM
who cares, what it does prove is taht he knows what it takes to, as an owner, get to the dance. thats all that really matters in the grand scheme of things, so i trust he will be able to do it again.

have a little faith instead of being a whiny p***Y.
OK internet tough guy... :moon:

Popps opened the door to the question by suggesting the Goodman's didn't fit the coaches vision...yet Bowlen FIRST indicated they were going to be here. How is this possible? Bowlen says they're staying...then he fires them. Two possibiities: 1) Bowlen deliberately mislead the fans; 2) Someone suggested the Goodmans needed to go and he changed his mind.

Being successful doesn't make you ethical or trustworthy. So I repeat my question...if Bowlen's word can't be trusted on the Goodman's, why should we believe him on Cutler or anything else?

baja
04-11-2009, 10:44 PM
Your thread is the type that is always prominent on the boards of fans such as the chiefs, raiders, lions, and other perennial losers. It's nothing more than attempting to brainwash yourself and others into thinking it's ok to lose and, hell, is even good for us. It's ****ing pathetic. Just sayin.

Dude you didn't even get what I was talking about, It was about not embarrassing your self on the field like the Broncos did the last three games. My take was give me a good game with first class effort and I can live with a few loses in trade for building a well balanced team that shows up to play. like the Orange Crush did.

BroncoBuff
04-11-2009, 10:50 PM
"Josh and I" are the people that need to talk to Cutler. How hard is that to understand? The perceived dispute was between Cutler and McDaniels. THOSE TWO are the guys who had to talk to sort out the issue.

Again, you're choosing to jump to conclusions to fit the needs of some anti-Broncos staff agenda you have going. b**** and cry all you want, but it doesn't make the bull**** you're spouting any more logical.

"Perceived" dispute ... really?

When you're Flaming post includes multiple four-asterisked words, and several other insults as well, you've already lost.

Popps
04-11-2009, 11:05 PM
"Perceived" dispute ... really?

When you're Flaming post includes multiple four-asterisked words, and several other insults as well, you've already lost.

Lost? What did I lose, back-tracker?

I believe any insults in this thread would have been brought about by you opening your fat mouth and calling me names, and then cowering when it came time to put up or shut up.

Beyond that, yes... perceived dispute. The issue here was the perception of the dispute. Bowlen was speaking to the pubic, who (accurately) perceived the dispute to be between Jay/Josh. So, Bowlen was dealing with perception when he mentioned those two people.

This is really simple stuff, not that I should expect you to follow.

BroncoBuff
04-11-2009, 11:05 PM
Now you're name-calling again? No wonder people are so tired of your routine.

Name-calling is your area there, Flamey.

You are well in charge of the insults and four asterisk words.


And I'm not worried about people "tiring" of my "routine" ... although I do know you wouldn't beat anybody on this board in a polpularity contest right now. So please can the insults and 4* words.

Popps
04-11-2009, 11:11 PM
Name-calling is your area there, Flamey.


Oh really, boss?

Better do a little homework.

I hadn't even addressed you in this thread. Yet, you jumped on me...

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=2378467&postcount=20

I then asked you to put your $$ where your ignorant mouth was. You backed down like the pussy you are.

Then, after that... you came back at me for ANOTHER round of name-calling which YOU instigated...

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=2378728&postcount=83

I linked to my response to you.

This is particularly funny, because after you chose to call me a name with no instigation, you later went back and changed it to "acting like," likely with hopes that you could continue with this facade you have that I call people names and you don't.

:rofl:

But, I quoted it before you elected to change your wording to make yourself appear to be free of name-calling... in spite of being the instigator.

Really dude, you're just coming off as pathetic, now. I'm not sure why you're bothering with this. You just keep digging yourself in deeper.

But, again... your name was never mentioned in this thread, and yet... you took it personally. I wonder why?

Atwater His Ass
04-11-2009, 11:11 PM
ya footsteps, you're just not a good enough fan see?

Popps
04-11-2009, 11:14 PM
Hey Buff,

So, now you're name-calling in my Rep?!?

Your rep to me: "dude, I think you're disturbed, I really do"


So, you're chasing me around... starting fights with me, calling me names... and then claiming that I am disturbed?

O.K. sport!

BroncoBuff
04-11-2009, 11:15 PM
Hey Buff,

So, now you're name-calling in my Rep?!?

Your rep to me: "dude, I think you're disturbed, I really do"


So, you're chasing me around... starting fights with me, calling me names... and then claiming that I am disturbed?

O.K. sport!

I stand by that.

Popps
04-11-2009, 11:18 PM
I stand by that.

I'm sure you do. Chasing me around all day calling me names, and then accusing me of being a name-caller is definitely obsessed behavior. I have no doubt that your reality-perception is skewed heavily. That's apparent by your football takes, if nothing else.

As I said, there's a reason you felt it necessary to respond to a post about poor fan behavior when your name wasn't mentioned. You took it personally, and people have been calling you out on other threads.

Why you're taking this out on me is anyone's guess.

Again, trace the thread above. I said not ONE word to you, and you attacked... twice.

Yea, I'm disturbed. O.K. chief.

baja
04-11-2009, 11:37 PM
I think you both are disturbed that's what I like about ya.

BroncoBuff
04-11-2009, 11:39 PM
I think you both are disturbed that's what I like about ya.

YOU PEEKED!!

What Popps and I do while we're off this board is of nobody's concern!

baja
04-11-2009, 11:41 PM
Not that there's anything wrong with that...

Popps
04-11-2009, 11:45 PM
YOU PEEKED!!

What Popps and I do while we're off this board is of nobody's concern!

Dude, you know we've been mostly friendly in the past. But, you're playing sniper a lot, lately... and you know I'm always going to bring the heavy artillery if under attack. :~ohyah!:

I'd much rather stay within the confines of actual discourse. I love debate, obviously... especially if it's stuff like this that I'm passionate about. But, I'm also fine tossing a few grenades if I need to.

So, stick to the subject matter and let's have at it. You'll thank me later for setting you straight on all of this stuff. I look forward to the days when we're a winning franchise again and you're apologizing to me for this whole thing. :thumbs:

Denver Crush
04-12-2009, 12:07 AM
Absolutely Ridiculous.

OABB
04-12-2009, 10:51 AM
Absolutely Ridiculous.

this.

broncofan7
04-12-2009, 11:18 AM
On to the DRAFT! Please McD, don't **** this up too.........

bronco610
04-12-2009, 11:46 AM
Gee, what else can we argue about now ? I know, Its all Bowlens fault that Invesco isn't as cool as Mile High was.

Okay, Popps you take Invesco side and Buff you take Mile High. The rest cant pick sides...........Ready Go !!!

BroncoBuff
04-12-2009, 12:20 PM
PEACE OFFERING ......

http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/7118/mcdaniels.jpg

:peace:

HEAV
04-12-2009, 12:51 PM
It's going to be great when this team wins and all the Shanny/Taco nut huggers have to spin the other way...

footstepsfrom#27
04-12-2009, 12:52 PM
PEACE OFFERING ......

http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/7118/mcdaniels.jpg

:peace:


He looks like he's gloating.

footstepsfrom#27
04-12-2009, 12:54 PM
It's going to be great when this team wins and all the Shanny/Taco nut huggers have to spin the other way...
I started breaking with Shanahan from my first post on this board...doesn't mean I have to like this guy either.

Broncomutt
04-12-2009, 01:01 PM
Something just occurred to me. hmmm... hmmm... hmmm...

I've read opinions from alot of people on the whole Cutler/McDaniels-Bowlen situation except for one--Shanny. The one person who would know Jay as well as anyone from a coaching perspective and I can't recall one interview with him. Just strikes me as odd I haven't heard anything, not a peep, from him.

I remember Shanny commenting once before about Cutler's maturity last season. When a broadcaster asked Shanny about Cutler's comments on having a stronger arm than Elway, Shanny grinned and said, "Yeah, we're working on that."

Is the "Mastermind" quietly biding his time, remaining neutral, positioning himself for a great comeback? Knowing the truly diplomatic position is not to knock the current regime lest he look petty, but not criticizing Cutler either, his "Golden Boy".

Or is he waiting quietly at home, reliving his glory days of the 90s on his betamax VCR, a permanent exile to NFL irrelevance? A once great mind, now placed on the shelf to gather dust. Staring at a phone that just doesn't ring anymore.

Perhaps I missed it, I'm sure somebody would know and could possibly help me out with a link to an article where Shanny sounded off. Truly makes me wonder though.

hmmm... hmmm... hmmm...

Tombstone RJ
04-12-2009, 01:01 PM
I started breaking with Shanahan from my first post on this board...doesn't mean I have to like this guy either.

Translation: I'm an instigator...

Circle Orange
04-12-2009, 01:07 PM
I've been kind of wondering where he is in all this too, since part of Jay's "Public Persona" we owe to Shanny. Why? Because he was somewhat responsible for Jay's big head in the first place. Confidence in your guy is one thing, but it has to happen on the field. No one cares about puff and hype when the W-L column is in the red. But I wonder if Shanny felt stressed to make a 'splash' with Jay, as a career rejuvination move? The whole bit with restoring the franchise to glory?

Well, that road's turned to dust.

LOL, did Shanny mean Jay had to work on his ego or arm strength? Ha!

Elway > Cutler, no matter how people strain to make comparisons.

Broncos4tw
04-12-2009, 01:11 PM
If McD hadn't pursued the entire Cassel thing, would Jay still be our QB? Yup. And anyone who feels that the limit of entire affair was a random phone call that was quickly brushed off is gullible. He obviously pursued the guy he wanted, and it fell apart. Had none of that happened, we'd still have our QB.

He SHOULD have been focusing soley on our anemic defense and special teams. He SHOULD have been giving our QB, even if he was being petulant, every indication he would work with him, and that he would make him a great QB that was part of a successful system. He didn't do these things, which makes me wonder if he can handle this job.

Anyone who think Orton would do "better" in this system... well, I won't even go there, except to say that you are massively delusional. Jay would have given us much greater success.

But we'll see. I'll root for the team as I always do, and only time will tell if I support McD or call him an idiot every week. Wins cure all ills. But unforunately for him, he started on such a bad level, that if the team bombs early, it's going to continue to bomb, and the fanbase will be calling for his head in a hurry.

HEAV
04-12-2009, 01:22 PM
Translation: I'm an instigator...

More he's a bandwagon jumper waiting for the next coach to arrive.

HEAV
04-12-2009, 01:24 PM
If McD hadn't pursued the entire Cassel thing, would Jay still be our QB? Yup. And anyone who feels that the limit of entire affair was a random phone call that was quickly brushed off is gullible. He obviously pursued the guy he wanted, and it fell apart. Had none of that happened, we'd still have our QB.

He SHOULD have been focusing soley on our anemic defense and special teams. He SHOULD have been giving our QB, even if he was being petulant, every indication he would work with him, and that he would make him a great QB that was part of a successful system. He didn't do these things, which makes me wonder if he can handle this job.

Anyone who think Orton would do "better" in this system... well, I won't even go there, except to say that you are massively delusional. Jay would have given us much greater success.

But we'll see. I'll root for the team as I always do, and only time will tell if I support McD or call him an idiot every week. Wins cure all ills. But unforunately for him, he started on such a bad level, that if the team bombs early, it's going to continue to bomb, and the fanbase will be calling for his head in a hurry.



Again, I cannot wait until all you trolls go back under your rocks when this teams wins.

Circle Orange
04-12-2009, 01:24 PM
I think we should cling to the past and rage about things we can't change. Hilarious!

Popps
04-12-2009, 01:31 PM
If McD hadn't pursued the entire Cassel thing, would Jay still be our QB? .

Again, if Cutler is such a coward and a head-case that he can't handle simple NFL business discussions, then he's not someone you want leading your franchise, anyway.

So, if your little theory is correct... the guy just ran himself out of town because he's a ****-brain. You want us fans to get upset over that?


He SHOULD have been focusing soley on our anemic defense and special teams. .

Really? You mean, like signing 6 or so defensive players in the first couple of weeks of free agency? That kind of focus?

Jay would have given us much greater success..

You don't know that. Jay took a **** in our biggest game of the season, and hasn't managed a winning season yet. He threw only 7 more TDs than INTs.
That's ****ty. He sneaked in the back door to the Pro Bowl because of his yardage numbers, leaving Rivers out... and Rivers was a much better QB this year.


But we'll see. I'll root for the team as I always do, and only time will tell if I support McD or call him an idiot every week. .


I'm sure the squeaky wheels around here will be bitching up a storm every game we lose, claiming we would be undefeated with Cutler. It's just a message board given. The people who can't get with the reality of this situation are going to continue to create myths and unrealistic expectations to maintain their position.

As I said, we can win a Superbowl next year, and the usual suspects around here will be crediting it to Shanahan and Goodman. Write it down.

Popps
04-12-2009, 01:32 PM
Again, I cannot wait until all you trolls go back under your rocks when this teams wins.

They won't, though. If we win 10 games this year, they'll claim we would have won 14 with Cutler and Shanahan.


There are NO circumstances where these people will come in and credit McDaniels and Bowlen for success. None.

You know that, right?

bronco610
04-12-2009, 01:44 PM
They won't, though. If we win 10 games this year, they'll claim we would have won 14 with Cutler and Shanahan.


There are NO circumstances where these people will come in and credit McDaniels and Bowlen for success. None.

You know that, right?

Some maybe, but the inteligent posters of this board will eat their crow I believe.

footstepsfrom#27
04-12-2009, 01:50 PM
They won't, though. If we win 10 games this year, they'll claim we would have won 14 with Cutler and Shanahan.


There are NO circumstances where these people will come in and credit McDaniels and Bowlen for success. None.

You know that, right?
I advocated Shanahan getting the axe, but that's an entirely different issue than this one. You keep lumping the two together as if only the Shanahan supporters are supportive of Jay Cutler, which is not the case. Shanahan EARNED the right to have the fans loyalty and the benefit of the doubt based on his record and accomplishments with the team.

McDaniels has done nothing yet to earn such loyalty, yet the mere fact he's been hired by Bowlen has ensured that regardless of his decisions he's entitled to not be questioned?

That's irrational and based on nothing but some misguided devotion to a faulty understanding of what constitutes being a "good fan". Like the morons who say Cutler wasn't a winner and Orton is based on two seasons (as if those things have nothing to do with any other aspect on the team besides the quarterback) your logic breaks down the more you keep explaining it.

We'll live with McDaniels and if he wins and achieves the pincacle of success with Orton as QB I will be first in line to admit I was wrong. In the meantime I maintain I'll expect the same from you if he fails.

bronco610
04-12-2009, 01:55 PM
I advocated Shanahan getting the axe, but that's an entirely different issue than this one. You keep lumping the two together as if only the Shanahan supporters are supportive of Jay Cutler, which is not the case. Shanahan EARNED the right to have the fans loyalty and the benefit of the doubt based on his record and accomplishments with the team.

McDaniels has done nothing yet to earn such loyalty, yet the mere fact he's been hired by Bowlen has ensured that regardless of his decisions he's entitled to not be questioned?

That's irrational and based on nothing but some misguided devotion to a faulty understanding of what constitutes being a "good fan". Like the morons who say Cutler wasn't a winner and Orton is based on two seasons (as if those things have nothing to do with any other aspect on the team besides the quarterback) your logic breaks down the more you keep explaining it.

We'll live with McDaniels and if he wins and achieves the pincacle of success with Orton as QB I will be first in line to admit I was wrong. In the meantime I maintain I'll expect the same from you if he fails.

My point exactly aboput the intelligent posters here.

broncofan7
04-12-2009, 03:01 PM
They won't, though. If we win 10 games this year, they'll claim we would have won 14 with Cutler and Shanahan.


There are NO circumstances where these people will come in and credit McDaniels and Bowlen for success. None.

You know that, right?

WRONG. I created a thread about how we should have drafted DeSean Jackson instead of Eddie Royal and was fed a swift plate of crow after openning night last season and I admitted that I was wrong. I would glady do so again and I am HOPING LIKE HELL that McD does infact prove me wrong. But my $$ says 6 or fewer wins as our roster currently stands...........

tsiguy96
04-12-2009, 03:06 PM
We'll live with McDaniels and if he wins and achieves the pincacle of success with Orton as QB I will be first in line to admit I was wrong. In the meantime I maintain I'll expect the same from you if he fails.

you truely do not understand do you? none of us view mcdaniels as the savior of the franchise, however we will give him a chance to see what product he puts on the field. people like you, however, have already considered him a failure. how will me or popps or anyone ever have to eat crow if all we are saying lets wait and see how the team turns out before we start screaming the sky is falling?

we sure as **** wont have to, its so stupid and irrational to consider this whole project a bust when essentially every player has said nothing but good things about jay, we should have a better defense and hopefully a better then 16th ranked offense. wait to see how the team turns out before you starting screaming doom and gloom, makes sense doesnt it?

Killericon
04-12-2009, 03:18 PM
Exctly, exactly! I've worn out my fingers posting about this, about how foolish this is/was.

Yes, Shanahan's full powers were a serious problem for Mike and for the team - even though unlike Josh, he had tons of experience in the league. Many people here accurately (imo) called for a real GM to be hired to join the team. When Mike was fired, Bowlen acknowledged this, and promised a "power sharing" structure. But then along came Josh McDaniels, and then suddenly Goodman was fired, and suddenly Xanders became Ted Sundquist II.

In the first place, I was shouted down over and over and over when I said Josh had near-Shanahan powers. But then along came Bowlen's letter to the season-ticket holders, wherein he discussed "Josh's vision," "Josh's mission," "Josh's authority," and only mentioned Xanders once, and then merely as a tack-on to Josh. Then Bears GM Jerry Angelo did a psot-mortem on the trade, and he talked about dealing only with Josh, never even mentioned his GM couterpart here. And that was VERY telling.

We know this - Josh never made a trade or dealt with an agent before the Cassel thing. And we saw how that turned out.

I'm sorry...How do we know that McDaniels has GM powers?

footstepsfrom#27
04-12-2009, 03:34 PM
you truely do not understand do you? none of us view mcdaniels as the savior of the franchise, however we will give him a chance to see what product he puts on the field. people like you, however, have already considered him a failure. how will me or popps or anyone ever have to eat crow if all we are saying lets wait and see how the team turns out before we start screaming the sky is falling?

we sure as **** wont have to, its so stupid and irrational to consider this whole project a bust when essentially every player has said nothing but good things about jay, we should have a better defense and hopefully a better then 16th ranked offense. wait to see how the team turns out before you starting screaming doom and gloom, makes sense doesnt it?
It always helps if you read the prior context to a post you decide to comment on...here ya go:

They won't, though. If we win 10 games this year, they'll claim we would have won 14 with Cutler and Shanahan.


There are NO circumstances where these people will come in and credit McDaniels and Bowlen for success. None.

You know that, right?

BroncoBuff
04-12-2009, 03:37 PM
I'm sorry...How do we know that McDaniels has GM powers?

::)

tsiguy96
04-12-2009, 04:39 PM
why the **** does it matter if he has GM powers, bowlen always has and always will run his teams with HC first mentality. its worked pretty well so far and its working pretty good now too, just let it go until we get some results over a few years.

BroncoBuff
04-12-2009, 04:46 PM
why the **** does it matter if he has GM powers, bowlen always has and always will run his teams with HC first mentality. its worked pretty well so far and its working pretty good now too, just let it go until we get some results over a few years.

Disagree completely... I think it matters GREATLY, and I think the power should always be split. Josh should be out on the field teaching his offense. 24/7. And I was arguing 2000-2008 that we needed a personnel guy with some clout. Mike was a part-time personnel guy, and it showed in his draft and free agent results. Let's hope Josh is better at multi-tasking than Mike was (I'm not holding my breath though, nbased on the results so far).

Yeah ... I think a big reason why Bowlen's "power sharing" promise fell apart was because Bowlen had become so accustomed to and comfortable with dealing with one person only - Reeves, then Shanahan. Neither John Beake nor Ted Sundquist had any real clout. And now McDaniels-Xanders appears to follow that same structure.

I just wish Pat had put his foot down on Jim Goodman ... we could really use him weekend after next :(

tsiguy96
04-12-2009, 05:07 PM
Disagree completely... I think it matters GREATLY, and I think the power should always be split. Josh should be out on the field teaching his offense. 24/7. And I was arguing 2000-2008 that we needed a personnel guy with some clout. Mike was a part-time personnel guy, and it showed in his draft and free agent results. Let's hope Josh is better at multi-tasking than Mike was (I'm not holding my breath though, nbased on the results so far).

Yeah ... I think a big reason why Bowlen's "power sharing" promise fell apart was because Bowlen had become so accustomed to and comfortable with dealing with one person only - Reeves, then Shanahan. Neither John Beake nor Ted Sundquist had any real clout. And now McDaniels-Xanders appears to follow that same structure.

I just wish Pat had put his foot down on Jim Goodman ... we could really use him weekend after next :(

pat was the one who fired goodman, i gaurantee mcdaniels did not come in and decide to fire the GM. he is not the VP of football operations like mike was, mike had control of every aspect of the team including GMs etc. mcdaniels not yet.

either way, it is another type of model used in the NFL by quite a few teams that have a lot of success, you just need the right coach to handle it, and im hoping mcdaniels is that coach.

footstepsfrom#27
04-12-2009, 06:20 PM
why the **** does it matter if he has GM powers, bowlen always has and always will run his teams with HC first mentality. its worked pretty well so far and its working pretty good now too, just let it go until we get some results over a few years.
Actually the only time it's worked that well was with Elway/Davis/Sharpe etc...a 3 year period where the talent was there and ready to win it all. Since then it's failed to produce. You can argue that's because the game passed Shanahan by or it was something else, but the simple fact is...the All Powerful Coach model has been a failure for a decade here. In fact Bowlen himself indicated he was going to avoid that model in the future.

Given that Bowlen backtracked on his initial statement that the Goodman's were staying put, we are left to wonder if that decision was in deference to McDaniels or if he merely mislead the fans. If it was due to McDaniel's influence, then it's a sign that McDaniels has power approaching Shanahan's, whether or not it's being advertised or not.

Popps
04-12-2009, 06:23 PM
Again, we have no proof that he has "full GM powers."

That's a message board wive's tale.

Taco John
04-12-2009, 09:44 PM
They won't, though. If we win 10 games this year, they'll claim we would have won 14 with Cutler and Shanahan.




You're right about that. If we win 10 games this year with Orton, I will most definitely hold the belief that we would have won 14 with Cutler. That's just a no-brainer.

I'd be thrilled with a 10 game outcome though. That would be pretty sweet. McDaniels would definitely deserve props if he's able to pull that off after taking a sledge hammer to our team in the offseason.

tsiguy96
04-12-2009, 09:54 PM
You're right about that. If we win 10 games this year with Orton, I will most definitely hold the belief that we would have won 14 with Cutler. That's just a no-brainer.

I'd be thrilled with a 10 game outcome though. That would be pretty sweet. McDaniels would definitely deserve props if he's able to pull that off after taking a sledge hammer to our team in the offseason.

a sledge hammer to a team that needed it, mind you. one of the worst defenses the NFL has seen in awhile and a very inefficient offense, theres no reason not to blow that up.

Popps
04-12-2009, 10:25 PM
You're right about that. If we win 10 games this year with Orton, I will most definitely hold the belief that we would have won 14 with Cutler. That's just a no-brainer.


Really?

Has Jay Cutler proven himself to be a winner in the NFL? What clutch games has he won, to this point?

Beyond that, did it ever occur to you that other factors besides the quarterback position influence the outcome of games?

What makes you sure that a 10-win season had so much to do with the QB position, as opposed to an improved defense? Running game? Effective red-zone scoring, better turnover ratio?


I know you're a QB-only guy, but there's more to football than that. Assuming we would have won 14 games instead of 10 because of Cutler is ridiculous, and shows a lack of insight.

footstepsfrom#27
04-12-2009, 10:39 PM
Has Jay Cutler proven himself to be a winner in the NFL? What clutch games has he won, to this point?

Beyond that, did it ever occur to you that other factors besides the quarterback position influence the outcome of games?
What a strange two statements to link together.

Got a question for you; is there a QB in the NFL you think could have won with the defense we've had the last two years? If so...who might that be?

BroncoBuff
04-12-2009, 11:10 PM
If we win 10 games this year with Orton, I will most definitely hold the belief that we would have won 14 with Cutler. That's just a no-brainer.

Definitely. The anti-Jay crowd seems to forget the Chicago Bears gave up two 1sts PLUS Orton to get Cutler. Thats because Jay Cutler is a better quarterback than Kyle Orton. Period.

Why that gets lost on these people, I have no idea.

footstepsfrom#27
04-13-2009, 01:32 AM
Definitely. The anti-Jay crowd seems to forget the Chicago Bears gave up two 1sts PLUS Orton to get Cutler. Thats because Jay Cutler is a better quarterback than Kyle Orton. Period.

Why that gets lost on these people, I have no idea.
It's becaue they have to believe everything is roses even when it smells like dog crap. We saw the same thing happen when they drafted Maurice Clarett.

Here's another oddity in their thinking...

1) McDaniels is an offensive brainiac.
2) Cutler's a loser and overrated.
3) McDaniels wanted Cutler to be his QB but Jay wanted out.

Question: If Cutler realy is a loser and he's overrated, a bad fit for the offense, etc...then why did Josh McDaniels allegedly want him to be his QB? Isn't he the supreme judge of QB talent?

Was McDaniels lying or does he disagree with the geniuses who think Cutler's not a guy you can win with?

You can't have it both ways.

baja
04-13-2009, 06:31 AM
It well not help to repeat for the thousandth time no one ever said they thought Orton was a better QB than Cutler. Now could Orton be a better fit for what McD wants to do? Orton will do as he is coached to do and Jay loves to be the hero and takes risks with the ball that Shanny could not coach out of him so yes Orton will help Denver win more games because he wants to be here and buys into the system and jay did not. Is there something hard about that to understand?

A question for you Foot27, So Cal and Buff, if the Broncos have made such a huge mistake as you seem to think why is the locker room so excited about McDaniels and what he wants to bring here.

footstepsfrom#27
04-13-2009, 06:55 AM
It well not help to repeat for the thousandth time no one ever said they thought Orton was a better QB than Cutler. Now could Orton be a better fit for what McD wants to do? Orton will do as he is coached to do and Jay loves to be the hero and takes risks with the ball that Shanny could not coach out of him so yes Orton will help Denver win more games because he wants to be here and buys into the system and jay did not. Is there something hard about that to understand?
Please...are you kidding?...there's all kinds of crap on here about how overrated Cutler is, how he threw to many picks into triple coverage, how he didn't win, how he was a locker room loner...blah blah blah...what are you talking about?
A question for you Foot27, So Cal and Buff, if the Broncos have made such a huge mistake as you seem to think why is the locker room so excited about McDaniels and what he wants to bring here.
I saw the same thing when Jim Bates got here. What difference does it make? Some suggest they're toeing the party line...I tend to think it's the nature of some people to want to believe the best about things when change happens if they weren't successful prior to that or reaching the goals they wanted. Some of it's not logical...take Marshall's interview for example; he goes into how it's more important to win than to throw for 4500 yards and you need to be a team leader...etc...this from a guy who had to be admonished by Cutler to straighten his OWN act out after multiple off season issues of dumb-assery. Then he calls little hoodie the brightest coach in the game...(mastermind?) as if he's played for anyone else but Shanny and would know squat about the rest of them.

See how stupid some of this stuff is? There are 32 NFL HC's and dozens of young assistants waiting to be the next "brightest coach in the game" and a guy who is waiting to see if the NFL is going to suspend him for another off season problem is telling us we have the next Bill Walsh before he's lined up for so much as a single snap or drafted one player. McDaniels might be the reincarnation of Tom Landry and Paul Brown, or he might be the next failure from Belicheat's system to crap the bed sheets. Well know soon enough...but either way I doubt Marshall has any more idea than you or I do until the guy does something on his own.

Keep drinking the koolaid.

baja
04-13-2009, 07:14 AM
Please...are you kidding?...there's all kinds of crap on here about how overrated Cutler is, how he threw to many picks into triple coverage, how he didn't win, how he was a locker room loner...blah blah blah...what are you talking about?

I saw the same thing when Jim Bates got here. What difference does it make? Some suggest they're toeing the party line...I tend to think it's the nature of some people to want to believe the best about things when change happens if they weren't successful prior to that or reaching the goals they wanted. Some of it's not logical...take Marshall's interview for example; he goes into how it's more important to win than to throw for 4500 yards and you need to be a team leader...etc...this from a guy who had to be admonished by Cutler to straighten his OWN act out after multiple off season issues of dumb-assery. Then he calls little hoodie the brightest coach in the game...(mastermind?) as if he's played for anyone else but Shanny and would know squat about the rest of them.

See how stupid some of this stuff is? There are 32 NFL HC's and dozens of young assistants waiting to be the next "brightest coach in the game" and a guy who is waiting to see if the NFL is going to suspend him for another off season problem is telling us we have the next Bill Walsh before he's lined up for so much as a single snap or drafted one player. McDaniels might be the reincarnation of Tom Landry and Paul Brown, or he might be the next failure from Belicheat's system to crap the bed sheets. Well know soon enough...but either way I doubt Marshall has any more idea than you or I do until the guy does something on his own.

Keep drinking the koolaid.

I am going to make it a point to remind you of these posts mid season.

I'm going to call you guys the "We like pretty passes who cares if we win " group.

footstepsfrom#27
04-13-2009, 07:22 AM
I am going to make it a point to remind you of these posts mid season.

I'm going to call you guys the "We like pretty passes who cares if we win " group.
That cuts two ways doesn't it?

Dude...nowhere on this board will you find a post from me stating that I know McDaniels is going to fail or hope he fails. I hope he wins the freaking Super Bowl and gets coach of the year. I'm just tired of people closing their eyes to what has been a very poor start and a complete screw up with all the BS about a guy who a few months ago we were only to thrilled to see selected to the pro bowl and figured we could ride to multiple titles. Now suddenly we all knew he wasn't a winner, etc...etc...

It's an established FACT that to be a top Super Bowl competitor year in and year out it almost always takes a great QB to do so. It takes some teams decades (like us) to find one. We had one...now we don't. Why I'm supposed to be gleeful about that is something I really don't understand.

baja
04-13-2009, 07:29 AM
That cuts two ways doesn't it?

Dude...nowhere on this board will you find a post from me stating that I know McDaniels is going to fail or hope he fails. I hope he wins the freaking Super Bowl and gets coach of the year. <b> I'm just tired of people closing their eyes to what has been a very poor start and a complete screw up </b> with all the BS about a guy who a few months ago we were only to thrilled to see selected to the pro bowl and figured we could ride to multiple titles. Now suddenly we all knew he wasn't a winner, etc...etc...

It's an established FACT that to be a top Super Bowl competitor year in and year out it almost always takes a great QB to do so. It takes some teams decades (like us) to find one. We had one...now we don't. Why I'm supposed to be gleeful about that is something I really don't understand.

Cutler wanted out why can't you see that? McD did nothing to cause Jay to react the way he did to the extent he did. We are better off without Jay and he did us a big favor to show his colors now before all the time was invested in him to learn McDs new system. Speaking about the new system how do you reconcile Cutler did not even travel with his play book?

footstepsfrom#27
04-13-2009, 07:51 AM
Cutler wanted out why can't you see that? McD did nothing to cause Jay to react the way he did to the extent he did.
You know this...how? Because Pat Bowlen sent out a nice letter to the fans blaming Cutler? Hmmm...I remember not long ago when Pat said, "Mike Shanahan has a job for life here." Then he fired him. I remember when Pat said, "We're not looking to hire a new GM". Then he fired the Goodmans. Pat's credibility here is in question. Pat is a businessman who needs to fill seats to make money, especially since it's apparent he's not doing so well these days. What's he going to say?...maybe something like: "The 32 year old guy I hired as HC doesn't know how to keep his big mouth shut so he ****ed up the communications with our star QB and now I have to trade him because he found out he'd rather have a guy he coached before...I'm so sorry I failed to take the leadership on this team like I said I would when I fired Mike Shanahan".

Right.
We are better off without Jay and he did us a big favor to show his colors now before all the time was invested in him to learn McDs new system. Speaking about the new system how do you reconcile Cutler did not even travel with his play book?
No...we're not better off without him.

Who gives a crap about the playbook? Maybe he scanned it into his hard drive. Maybe he had an extra copy. Maybe he merely wanted to piss off little hoodie so he FED-EX'd it to his dad...who cares?

You're worried about playbooks. I'm worried about the difference between Cutler's sack numbers and those we'll see from an immobile QB with no consistent running game to back him up.

baja
04-13-2009, 08:28 AM
You know this...how? Because Pat Bowlen sent out a nice letter to the fans blaming Cutler? Hmmm...I remember not long ago when Pat said, "Mike Shanahan has a job for life here." Then he fired him. I remember when Pat said, "We're not looking to hire a new GM". Then he fired the Goodmans. Pat's credibility here is in question. Pat is a businessman who needs to fill seats to make money, especially since it's apparent he's not doing so well these days. What's he going to say?...maybe something like: "The 32 year old guy I hired as HC doesn't know how to keep his big mouth shut so he ****ed up the communications with our star QB and now I have to trade him because he found out he'd rather have a guy he coached before...I'm so sorry I failed to take the leadership on this team like I said I would when I fired Mike Shanahan".

Right.

No...we're not better off without him.

Who gives a crap about the playbook? Maybe he scanned it into his hard drive. Maybe he had an extra copy. Maybe he merely wanted to piss off little hoodie so he FED-EX'd it to his dad...who cares?

You're worried about playbooks. I'm worried about the difference between Cutler's sack numbers and those we'll see from an immobile QB with no consistent running game to back him up.

I going to save us both 50 pages of posting and say we are never going to change one other's mind so I'm going to let the play on the field decide who has the correct perception on this.

footstepsfrom#27
04-13-2009, 08:33 AM
I going to save us both 50 pages of posting and say we are never going to change one other's mind so I'm going to let the play on the field decide who has the correct perception on this.
You saved me one more post.

baja
04-13-2009, 08:41 AM
You saved me one more post.

It's appears I didn't.

Broncos4tw
04-13-2009, 10:46 AM
The idea that there is a system where a less talented QB will do better than a more talented QB is ridiculous. Where do you people come up with this stuff?

If Cutler has better skill and natural ability, the actual PLAY of that QB can be taught by I dunno. a QB COACH maybe? You people act as if Cutler is incapable of learning a new system. He was allowed to play as he did under Shanahan. There is NO doubt in my mind under a "good" system, that ANY QB who is more talented than another is going to do better, end of story.

Stop trying to convince yourself that Orton is a "better fit" than Culter would been. Accept the fact that the new face of the front office did entertain trading away Cutler for McD's favorite QB, and it blew up in their face.

Now, we can still be successful under a solid system, I guess we'll see how solid. I still am not sure we can win the big game without a top 5 D, if our QB is middle of the road.

baja
04-13-2009, 10:55 AM
Cutler did not seem to buy into Mcdaniels plan. It is not a question of could Cutler be better than Orton in McDs system it is a question of would he be willing to. His actions say no.

broncofan2438
04-13-2009, 11:00 AM
Clearly we would rather see a better season than seeing McStupid get fired. We haven't even seen him on the field yet as a coach. I say give the poor bastard a chance and see what he can do with what he has. Cutler screwed up as well. He could have had a great year, but whatever.......

Dagmar
04-13-2009, 11:06 AM
7 pages. Jesus wept.

TheReverend
04-13-2009, 11:21 AM
7 pages. Jesus wept.

Well said!

colonelbeef
04-13-2009, 11:52 AM
I think he is a snake in the grass, but I want him to succeed, regardless of his filthy Cheatriot roots.

It will take a lot for me to root for McDaniels on a personal level, but I will always root for the team to do well. This does not, however, mean that I agree with the moves that have been made this offseason.

BroncoBuff
04-13-2009, 12:43 PM
I think he is a snake in the grass, but I want him to succeed, regardless of his filthy Cheatriot roots.

It will take a lot for me to root for McDaniels on a personal level, but I will always root for the team to do well. This does not, however, mean that I agree with the moves that have been made this offseason.

My feelings exactly, word for word.

footstepsfrom#27
04-13-2009, 01:12 PM
The idea that there is a system where a less talented QB will do better than a more talented QB is ridiculous. Where do you people come up with this stuff?

If Cutler has better skill and natural ability, the actual PLAY of that QB can be taught by I dunno. a QB COACH maybe? You people act as if Cutler is incapable of learning a new system. He was allowed to play as he did under Shanahan. There is NO doubt in my mind under a "good" system, that ANY QB who is more talented than another is going to do better, end of story.

Stop trying to convince yourself that Orton is a "better fit" than Culter would been. Accept the fact that the new face of the front office did entertain trading away Cutler for McD's favorite QB, and it blew up in their face.

Now, we can still be successful under a solid system, I guess we'll see how solid. I still am not sure we can win the big game without a top 5 D, if our QB is middle of the road.
Can you post another 20,000 times please?

Never Trust a Snake
04-13-2009, 02:06 PM
McDaniels is already toast. There is no sense in waiting through three years of 4-12, 5-11, and 6-10 to finally realize that he's way over his head.

1-15 right off the bat would make it quicker and lot less painless.

broncocalijohn
04-13-2009, 02:17 PM
Lex was rooting against the Broncos in a Chicago bar when we played the Vikings for no more than pride so we would have a "better" draft pick (seems we did a o.k. with Clady!) and I could see the Anti-McDaniel crowd go against their team for a few years just to penalize our coach. I wonder what happens when he takes this team and wins without Cutler. How could those "fans" actually stick around and watch their hate go to dribble? Those few better find a back up team. I wish I knew those few.

broncocalijohn
04-13-2009, 02:18 PM
McDaniels is already toast. There is no sense in waiting through three years of 4-12, 5-11, and 6-10 to finally realize that he's way over his head.

1-15 right off the bat would make it quicker and lot less painless.

Seems this might be a double (or triple) account TJ. Look this one up.

Never Trust a Snake
04-13-2009, 02:29 PM
Seems this might be a double (or triple) account TJ. Look this one up.

You need to be investigated by law enforcement for ticket scalping fraud.

BroncoBuff
04-13-2009, 02:31 PM
You need to be investigated by law enforcement for ticket scalping fraud.

THERE'S A CLUE, bcj ... he knows your ticket history.

I wonder who it is?

Dortoh has done this so often and so effectively, ("Good point, Mr. Watermock..." :~ohyah!:), but I doubt he'd pull the same trick outta his bag.


Who is it? hmmm...

Tom A Hawk
04-13-2009, 02:37 PM
Jay is gone, I'm over that, moving forward I will be pulling for the Broncos no matter what.

Whoever the coach is, is beyond my control.

that is a good position to take, but you wouldn't take that position if Herm was your coach...wow am I glad that is over.

footstepsfrom#27
04-13-2009, 02:49 PM
that is a good position to take, but you wouldn't take that position if Herm was your coach...wow am I glad that is over.
That's a valid point. Hopefully we won't have to get that desperate.

Cito Pelon
04-13-2009, 03:32 PM
McDaniels has full power. I am not sure why people keep dancing around that. Pat Bowlen said he supports his coach 100%. McDaniels got rid of our best player, and Pat Bowlen backed him all the way through.

McDaniels has just as much power as Shanahan did, the only difference, Pat Bowlen wants to "hear" it before it happens.

That's a big difference. Josh doesn't have near the long leash Shanny had, no way.

Cito Pelon
04-13-2009, 03:59 PM
I agree. If we had someone more mature in charge, they might have tried an alternative strategy rather than trying to get into a public "my dick is bigger than yours" contest with Jay, which unfortunately included a number of leaked smears that might make the leaking party feel like he socked it to Jay but were ultimately additional barriers in the way of a resolution.

Jay probably would have pulled the same act no matter who was brought in. The kid actually thought he was the team. Look at the first statement he made, "the guys love to play for me, just watch and see what will happen if they trade me," implying the lockerroom would revolt.

The kid made a power-play before the trade even, stating he should have been consulted before Bowlen fired Shanny. Then he continued to make power-plays. The kid was a bad apple.

And so much for the lockerroom revolt.

Cito Pelon
04-13-2009, 04:29 PM
Bill Parcells calls the personnel shots in Miami, son. Pioli in KC, Savage in Cleveland, on on and on around the league. The all-powerful coach over personnel, like Shanahan/Josh is the exception.




Nobody said he had power over Bowlen ... but make no mistake, Bowlen is the ONLY check on Josh's power now.

Xanders is Sundquist.

I disagree. Xanders may be a neophyte to the level of power he now has, but he's not Josh' butt-boy. It has been stated by cooler heads that what the FO is looking for is consensus on who they bring in, and Bowlen can nix anything. Bowlen isn't f'ing around, he's been around a long, long time, he's seen players and coaches come and go, he's not gonna allow total stupidity again, Xanders and Josh will have to deal through Bowlen. And, I'll add that trading Jay was not total stupidity. They had plenty good reason to trade Jay.

Cito Pelon
04-13-2009, 04:41 PM
Bingo. I don't think Jay was trying to win any PR battle, it never seemed like that to me, it seemed like he was offended. He thought Josh misled/lied to him. And I think Josh DID mislead/lie to Jay about the level of trade discussions. Josh is so inexperienced, he probably didn't realize how the info spreads, and was prolly surprised when Jay confronted him ... and once he had misled/lied, he got stubborn and refused to yield. I'll bet that's exactly what happened at that disastrous Saturday meeting. Jay wanted a 'mea culpa,' and Josh stuck to his original denial.

We pretty much know now - from around the league (including those strange stories about the Vikes nixing a trade) - that Josh was deeply involved at least in talks. Funny part is - HE DID NOTHING WRONG! HE DIDN'T HAVE TO MISLEAD/LIE! But my opinion is he got stubborn when Jay confronted/surprised him, and refused to yielkd, and that's why Jay crapped his diaper.

This is ALL SPECULATION, Cito ;D

Just my guess......



(And along these "motivation" lines, the nonsense theory about Jay and Bus angling for a new contract was crushed to death when Bus said they'd wait til next offseason to negotiate. Don't hold your breath for the "contract conspiracy theorists" to cop to the theory being discredited, though :~ohyah!:)

You mutt.

Cito Pelon
04-13-2009, 04:50 PM
Sure he can...it's his team...but Jerry Jones has won more Super Bowls that Bowlen in a shorter time frame, and he's got a reputation of saying one thing and doing another also. People don't think he can be trusted to speak the truth because he has demonstrated otherwise.

Your answer has nothing to do with the question I asked. Bowlen has won Super Bowls...what's that got to do with whether his word can be trusted or not?

Answer...nothing at all.

I'm sorely tempted to say get lost, and don't find your way back.

BroncoBuff
04-13-2009, 05:39 PM
You mutt.

http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/6734/africanwilddog.jpg
WOOF!

BroncoBuff
04-13-2009, 05:40 PM
That's a big difference. Josh doesn't have near the long leash Shanny had, no way.

No he doesn't, I agree, not yet.

In fact - even if Josh had come to an agreement on a trade for Cassel - I'm thinking Bowlen wouldda vetoed it. Just a guess, but I don't think Pat was aware Josh was negotiating the Cutler/Cassel thing.

BroncoBuff
04-13-2009, 05:49 PM
"Josh and I" are the people that need to talk to Cutler. How hard is that to understand? The perceived dispute was between Cutler and McDaniels. THOSE TWO are the guys who had to talk to sort out the issue.

Yes - those are the two who needed to talk, because Josh had been negotiating a trade for Cutler ... because Josh has that power. Now do you get it? Nobody ever said anything about Xanders through any of this ... because Xanders does not negotiate trades, Josh does.

Jerry Angelo made that crystal clear.

McDaniels is Shanahan, Xanders is Sundquist.

Pat Bowlen's letter made THAT crystal clear - as you pointed out it was Josh who needed to speak with Jay, not Brian.

Bowlen surely has Josh on a shorter leash than Mike, but I think, in my opinion, after 25 years of Reeves/Beake and Shanahan/Sundquist, Pat is just more comfortable with dealing with one guy - with seeing one guy having coaching AND personnel power together.

BroncoBuff
04-13-2009, 06:08 PM
McDaniels has full power. I am not sure why people keep dancing around that. Pat Bowlen said he supports his coach 100%. McDaniels got rid of our best player, and Pat Bowlen backed him all the way through.
Exactly ... rep.

Why do people dance around this simple, obvious truth? It's not a crime to give Josh coaching AND personnel power. It might be foolish in that he's so young and inexperienced, but it's not a crime or anything. People are avoiding this truth so hard ... why? It's not a crime to put Josh in charge!

Alec is one of them in such denial ... he actually responded to your post there by saying, "NO HE DOESN'T HAVE ALL THE POWER, PAT BOWLEN HAS ALL THE POWER!" Yeah, no kidding Einstein :~ohyah!:


McDaniels has just as much power as Shanahan did, the only difference, Pat Bowlen wants to "hear" it before it happens.

Yeah ... I just posted that same thing a couple posts above. In my (speculative) opinion, Pat would've nixed any Cutler trade Josh might have brought to him. I firmly believe Josh's negotiating happened without Pat knowing about it ... remember, Josh is a brash, high energy kid, and the 2nd youngest head coach in NFL history. He was probably THRILLED BEYOND IMAGINATION to be actually negotiating trades. He's a small college coach's kid. You can imagine what a rush it must have been for him to have been fielding real calls from real NFL teams about starting QB trades.

Personally, I can't blame him for talking ... but like you said, Pat would've wanted to hear first, and I trust he would've nixed the deal. He only banished Jay after he acted a fool a week longer than Pat was prepared to tolerate.

lex
04-13-2009, 07:22 PM
Exactly ... rep.

Why do people dance around this simple, obvious truth? It's not a crime to give Josh coaching AND personnel power. It might be foolish in that he's so young and inexperienced, but it's not a crime or anything. People are avoiding this truth so hard ... why? It's not a crime to put Josh in charge!

Alec is one of them in such denial ... he actually responded to your post there by saying, "NO HE DOESN'T HAVE ALL THE POWER, PAT BOWLEN HAS ALL THE POWER!" Yeah, no kidding Einstein :~ohyah!:




Yeah ... I just posted that same thing a couple posts above. In my (speculative) opinion, Pat would've nixed any Cutler trade Josh might have brought to him. I firmly believe Josh's negotiating happened without Pat knowing about it ... remember, Josh is a brash, high energy kid, and the 2nd youngest head coach in NFL history. He was probably THRILLED BEYOND IMAGINATION to be actually negotiating trades. He's a small college coach's kid. You can imagine what a rush it must have been for him to have been fielding real calls from real NFL teams about starting QB trades.

Personally, I can't blame him for talking ... but like you said, Pat would've wanted to hear first, and I trust he would've nixed the deal. He only banished Jay after he acted a fool a week longer than Pat was prepared to tolerate.

I dont even know why so much emphasis is put on what McDaniels did or didnt do as it relates to "entertaining" offers. Such an emphasis kind of suggests that this was the genesis of it all, when there is enough out there to suggest it started well before that. If entertaining trade offers/pursuing trades wasnt the beginning, then it doesnt matter what really happened. What becomes more important than what actually happened, is what one might perceive to have happened. This is a case of appearance being more important than fact and McDaniels' failure to recognize this, is a colossal failure at his feet.

BroncoBuff
04-13-2009, 07:49 PM
I dont even know why so much emphasis is put on what McDaniels did or didnt do as it relates to "entertaining" offers. Such an emphasis kind of suggests that this was the genesis of it all, when there is enough out there to suggest it started well before that. If entertaining trade offers/pursuing trades wasnt the beginning, then it doesnt matter what really happened. What becomes more important than what actually happened, is what one might perceive to have happened. This is a case of appearance being more important than fact and McDaniels' failure to recognize this, is a colossal failure at his feet.

Interesting angle, another angle that could be explained by his inexperience ... but who cares if he talked/fielded/even negotiated? THAT'S HIS JOB! But lying/misleading Jay, that was the real issue.

Josh was probably so thrilled to be negotiating such big star QB trades (who could blame him?), it was such an adrenalin rush, he didn't even think about bringing Jay into the loop. My opinion - an opinion I will not be swayed from unless solid contrary facts come to light - is that that Josh's inexperience with trades/agents meant he didn't realize/appreciate how info circulates thru back-channels in the league. After the negotiations for Cassel fell through, Josh probably thought Jay would never find out ....

Here was their first conversation:

JAY: "Coach, are you trying to trade me?"
JOSH: "What? No, no way, you're my guy!"
JAY: "That's funny, because I hear you've been talking about me with Tampa, Detroit, New England and Minnesota this week."
JOSH: "What, no!"

Josh was shocked that Jay knew! And his knee-jerk reaction was dishoesty, denial (reminds me of Rick Neuheisel actually). Josh's inexperience meant he didn't realize the news would get to Jay ... and he denied, denied, denied. And brash, young, stubborn Josh budged on that original denial only very slightly a few days later ... he said they "fielded calls and said no." But Jay wanted a FULL admission to what he knew were pretty in-depth talks. Jay cried and threw a tantrum when he didn't get that admission. Josh held his ground, kept his cool, and he went into "macho denial" on Jay's ass in that Saturday meeting ... in response to which Jay wet his diaper and left town. (And none of it even mattered because I fully believe Pat Bowlen would've vetoed any Cutler trade McD would've brought to him.)

End of story.

lex
04-13-2009, 08:07 PM
Interesting angle, another angle that could be explained by his inexperience ... but who cares if he talked/fielded/even negotiated? THAT'S HIS JOB! But lying/misleading Jay, that was the real issue.
I think its probably more accurate to say that the fact that what Cutler (or anyone else) might perceive, is the greater issue. This inability to recognize this speaks to his ability (or inability) to manage conflict (including avoiding conflict). Whether or not Josh is telling the truth on this specific event, is less important than the larger issue of managing conflict.


Josh was probably so thrilled to be negotiating such big star QB trades (who could blame him?), it was such an adrenalin rush, he didn't even think about bringing Jay into the loop. My opinion - an opinion I will not be swayed from unless solid contrary facts come to light - is that that Josh's inexperience with trades/agents meant he didn't realize/appreciate how info circulates thru back-channels in the league. After the negotiations for Cassel fell through, Josh probably thought Jay would never find out ....
I think there was a lot in play. He was too caught up in this sort of machiavellian power play of his. His obsession with this (because thats what they did in New England) caused him to not recognize a situation that calls for a velvet glove as opposed to a mallet. Josh was too busy making people bow down to him, although, Im sure he would prefer to frame it as "putting a team above the individual".

Here was their first conversation:

JAY: "Coach, are you trying to trade me?"
JOSH: "What? No, no way, you're my guy!"
JAY: "That's funny, because I hear you've been talking about me with Tampa, Detroit, New England and Minnesota this week."
JOSH: "What, no!"

Josh was shocked that Jay knew! And his knee-jerk reaction was dishoesty, denial (reminds me of Rick Neuheisel actually). Josh's inexperience meant he didn't realize the news would get to Jay ... and he denied, denied, denied. And brash, young, stubborn Josh budged on that original denial only very slightly a few days later ... he said they "fielded calls and said no." But Jay wanted a FULL admission to what he knew were pretty in-depth talks. Jay cried and threw a tantrum when he didn't get that admission. Josh held his ground, kept his cool, and he went into "macho denial" on Jay's ass in that Saturday meeting ... in response to which Jay wet his diaper and left town. (And none of it even mattered because I fully believe Pat Bowlen would've vetoed any Cutler trade McD would've brought to him.)

End of story.

It feels like Nero and Caligula are running the team.

Cito Pelon
04-13-2009, 08:09 PM
. . . . . He was probably THRILLED BEYOND IMAGINATION to be actually negotiating trades. He's a small college coach's kid. You can imagine what a rush it must have been for him to have been fielding real calls from real NFL teams about starting QB trades.

Personally, I can't blame him for talking ... but like you said, Pat would've wanted to hear first, and I trust he would've nixed the deal. He only banished Jay after he acted a fool a week longer than Pat was prepared to tolerate.

That was pretty good.

BroncoInferno
04-13-2009, 08:21 PM
Interesting angle, another angle that could be explained by his inexperience ... but who cares if he talked/fielded/even negotiated? THAT'S HIS JOB! But lying/misleading Jay, that was the real issue.

Josh was probably so thrilled to be negotiating such big star QB trades (who could blame him?), it was such an adrenalin rush, he didn't even think about bringing Jay into the loop. My opinion - an opinion I will not be swayed from unless solid contrary facts come to light - is that that Josh's inexperience with trades/agents meant he didn't realize/appreciate how info circulates thru back-channels in the league. After the negotiations for Cassel fell through, Josh probably thought Jay would never find out ....

Here was their first conversation:

JAY: "Coach, are you trying to trade me?"
JOSH: "What? No, no way, you're my guy!"
JAY: "That's funny, because I hear you've been talking about me with Tampa, Detroit, New England and Minnesota this week."
JOSH: "What, no!"

Josh was shocked that Jay knew! And his knee-jerk reaction was dishoesty, denial (reminds me of Rick Neuheisel actually). Josh's inexperience meant he didn't realize the news would get to Jay ... and he denied, denied, denied. And brash, young, stubborn Josh budged on that original denial only very slightly a few days later ... he said they "fielded calls and said no." But Jay wanted a FULL admission to what he knew were pretty in-depth talks. Jay cried and threw a tantrum when he didn't get that admission. Josh held his ground, kept his cool, and he went into "macho denial" on Jay's ass in that Saturday meeting ... in response to which Jay wet his diaper and left town. (And none of it even mattered because I fully believe Pat Bowlen would've vetoed any Cutler trade McD would've brought to him.)

End of story.

You spin a great yarn, Buff. You should write novels Hilarious!

Cito Pelon
04-13-2009, 08:21 PM
Interesting angle, another angle that could be explained by his inexperience ... but who cares if he talked/fielded/even negotiated? THAT'S HIS JOB! But lying/misleading Jay, that was the real issue.

Josh was probably so thrilled to be negotiating such big star QB trades (who could blame him?), it was such an adrenalin rush, he didn't even think about bringing Jay into the loop. My opinion - an opinion I will not be swayed from unless solid contrary facts come to light - is that that Josh's inexperience with trades/agents meant he didn't realize/appreciate how info circulates thru back-channels in the league. After the negotiations for Cassel fell through, Josh probably thought Jay would never find out ....

Here was their first conversation:

JAY: "Coach, are you trying to trade me?"
JOSH: "What? No, no way, you're my guy!"
JAY: "That's funny, because I hear you've been talking about me with Tampa, Detroit, New England and Minnesota this week."
JOSH: "What, no!"

Josh was shocked that Jay knew! And his knee-jerk reaction was dishoesty, denial (reminds me of Rick Neuheisel actually). Josh's inexperience meant he didn't realize the news would get to Jay ... and he denied, denied, denied. And brash, young, stubborn Josh budged on that original denial only very slightly a few days later ... he said they "fielded calls and said no." But Jay wanted a FULL admission to what he knew were pretty in-depth talks. Jay cried and threw a tantrum when he didn't get that admission. Josh held his ground, kept his cool, and he went into "macho denial" on Jay's ass in that Saturday meeting ... in response to which Jay wet his diaper and left town. (And none of it even mattered because I fully believe Pat Bowlen would've vetoed any Cutler trade McD would've brought to him.)

End of story.

And then you f it up.

BroncoInferno
04-13-2009, 08:25 PM
I think its probably more accurate to say that the fact that what Cutler (or anyone else) might perceive, is the greater issue. This inability to recognize this speaks to his ability (or inability) to manage conflict (including avoiding conflict). Whether or not Josh is telling the truth on this specific event, is less important than the larger issue of managing conflict.

So, if Jay perceives he was lied to but it wasn't true, then what could McD possibly have done to assuage him? Nothing short of admitting to a lie that was never told would have satisfied Jay in this scenario. That's crazy. If it's my perception that my boss lied to me, I better have more than my "perception" to go on.

BroncoBuff
04-13-2009, 08:27 PM
You spin a great yarn, Buff. You should write novels Hilarious!

I ADMITTED ALL ALONG IT WAS MY "SPECULATIVE OPINION!"

What more do I have to say to avoid your "Sophist" missiles? ::)



And more to the point ... isn't that a plausible reconstruction?

BroncoInferno
04-13-2009, 08:29 PM
I ADMITTED ALL ALONG IT WAS MY "SPECULATIVE OPINION!"

What more do I have to say to avoid your "Sophist" missiles? ::)



And more to the point ... isn't that a plausible reconstruction?

Settle down, Buff. Just funnin ya ;D

summerdenver
04-13-2009, 10:21 PM
I ADMITTED ALL ALONG IT WAS MY "SPECULATIVE OPINION!"

What more do I have to say to avoid your "Sophist" missiles? ::)



And more to the point ... isn't that a plausible reconstruction?

I like your Avy Buff.

Cito Pelon
04-13-2009, 11:22 PM
I ADMITTED ALL ALONG IT WAS MY "SPECULATIVE OPINION!"

What more do I have to say to avoid your "Sophist" missiles? ::)



And more to the point ... isn't that a plausible reconstruction?

Stop posting, that would end your sophistry. No big deal, you go on and on, you go here, there, everywhere. Have a good time. To each his own. It takes all kinds.

broncocalijohn
10-28-2009, 08:59 PM
He's allready pulled several very questionable moves, knee jerk moves. and outright assertions proven as at best, misleading, at worst, outright lies.

I can't name one good FA signed.

And I don't expect anything out ogf Nolan's " read and react" defense.

oh, the classics.

Bronx33
10-28-2009, 09:04 PM
oh, the classics.


I ended up reading the whole thread ( its full of classics)

Karenin
10-28-2009, 09:26 PM
Wow, look at that, another thread in which cumguzzler mcbuff completely embarrasses himself and says a bunch of things that he's currently pretending he didn't say.

TheReverend
10-28-2009, 09:30 PM
Well said!

Kind of pointless post, but you are so gorgeous I just can't be mad at you.

Rock Chalk
10-28-2009, 10:02 PM
Yes, that's how it went. :unamused:

You hippies don't even read between the lines.

Seriously 2nd rate? Are you high?

Obviously not.

Rock Chalk
10-28-2009, 10:03 PM
The Broncos are going to suck, thus I hope McFailure gets fired.

Where is Atlas anyway?

TheReverend
10-28-2009, 10:09 PM
Where is Atlas anyway?

Busy making sure Kyla Cole doesn't manage to get out of the ropes and escape his basement

Rock Chalk
10-28-2009, 10:10 PM
You're right about that. If we win 10 games this year with Orton, I will most definitely hold the belief that we would have won 14 with Cutler. That's just a no-brainer.

I'd be thrilled with a 10 game outcome though. That would be pretty sweet. McDaniels would definitely deserve props if he's able to pull that off after taking a sledge hammer to our team in the offseason.

After seeing how Cutler has played throughout his career and how this offense needs to be played to work, do you still believe this?

Im not pointing fingers or rubbing anything in here Taco, I found this to be a curious post.

On the surface, at the time, I dont think even I would ahve disagreed with you because of what I didn't know about McD's offense nor what I knew about how Cutler would perform elsewhere.

What I know now leads me to believe that not only would Cutler not have won 14 games with this offense, he wouldn't be 6-0 right now like Orton is.

Rock Chalk
10-28-2009, 10:11 PM
Busy making sure Kyla Cole doesn't manage to get out of the ropes and escape his basement

Thats a good hobby to have I guess. Certainly better than bantering with the local tards on a message board.

TheReverend
10-28-2009, 10:12 PM
Thats a good hobby to have I guess. Certainly better than bantering with the local tards on a message board.

<---Just waiting for sleeping pills to kick in









...or at least that's how I'm justifying it.

Florida_Bronco
10-28-2009, 10:15 PM
After seeing how Cutler has played throughout his career and how this offense needs to be played to work, do you still believe this?

Im not pointing fingers or rubbing anything in here Taco, I found this to be a curious post.

On the surface, at the time, I dont think even I would ahve disagreed with you because of what I didn't know about McD's offense nor what I knew about how Cutler would perform elsewhere.

What I know now leads me to believe that not only would Cutler not have won 14 games with this offense, he wouldn't be 6-0 right now like Orton is.

With Jay and Shanny here, I think we're probably 3-3. We likely lose to the Pats, Chargers and Bengals.

Rock Chalk
10-28-2009, 10:17 PM
With Jay and Shanny here, I think we're probably 3-3. We likely lose to the Pats, Chargers and Bengals.

No, throw Shanny out of the equation. We would be 2-4 with Shanny and Jay because the defense would still suck.

Taco was talking about Jay in McD's offense.

I dont think he could play in it. I think there may be a system for him but its not in the NFL anymore. The Run and Shoot.

HAT
10-28-2009, 10:19 PM
Busy making sure Kyla Cole doesn't manage to get out of the ropes and escape his basement

Haha....You know...without the avy's I've barely missed him.

R8R H8R
10-28-2009, 11:21 PM
No, throw Shanny out of the equation. We would be 2-4 with Shanny and Jay because the defense would still suck.

Taco was talking about Jay in McD's offense.

I dont think he could play in it. I think there may be a system for him but its not in the NFL anymore. The Run and Shoot.

Actually, I think there is a system for Jay...it's called the raiders "system", if that's what you want to call it.

Think about it--just throw the ball a mile, and nothing else matters.

scorpio
10-28-2009, 11:45 PM
The Broncos are going to suck, thus I hope McFailure gets fired.

http://imgur.com/V2KFp.gif

Archer81
10-28-2009, 11:48 PM
Oh oh oh its magic...


:Broncos:

Kaylore
10-28-2009, 11:54 PM
There were a lot of people calling in on the local radio shows when I made this thread wishing the Broncos to suck. I also still think more here wanted McDaniels to fail than are being honest about it.

broncocalijohn
10-29-2009, 12:02 AM
we havent heard from atlas or steeledude. I liked Atlas and I hope he comes back. I just think he doesnt like the taste of Crow and he will need to eat a whole helping of it. He is such a huge Broncos fan and I am afraid he went over to the Texans since he lives in Texas. Oh, the horra! (If you are reading this Atlas, I got a piece of bologna for that Broncos video collection).

Taco John
10-29-2009, 12:08 AM
After seeing how Cutler has played throughout his career and how this offense needs to be played to work, do you still believe this?

Im not pointing fingers or rubbing anything in here Taco, I found this to be a curious post.

On the surface, at the time, I dont think even I would ahve disagreed with you because of what I didn't know about McD's offense nor what I knew about how Cutler would perform elsewhere.

What I know now leads me to believe that not only would Cutler not have won 14 games with this offense, he wouldn't be 6-0 right now like Orton is.


No, I think it's fair to ask about this.

I think it's hard to say what McDaniels could get out of Jay. I don't think that 6-0 is inconceivable. The thing that I think is clear is that Shanahan became more of an administrator, where Josh is still freshly immersed in coaching. This is something that my attachment to Shanahan blinded me from, and I fully admit that I acted like a little punk with regards to my criticism of Bowlen for firing Shanahan. I knew it the night that I did it, but i did what I did in the heat of the moment.

Anyway - I don't see any reason why Jay couldn't run this offense. I think he might actually excel in it, given that the offense is based on making a pre-snap read, and finding the mismatch. With the chemistry that Jay has with these receivers, I think he'd actually be pretty good. It's just a matter of McDaniels coaching the force the ball tendency out of him.

From my perspective, I think Shanahan probably gave Jay too much freedom to push down the field, remembering that this is the sort of thing that frustrated he and Elway way back when. Certainly, Jay has made some pretty amazing deep throws in tight spaces. But that's not what this offense is about. This offense is about taking the mismatch for the easy gain, and drawing the defense in until you get a match up on the outside that you want and taking your shot with it. Rinse and repeat. I dont' see any reason why Josh couldn't have gotten Jay sold on the program. In fact, if the indications in early February matter, Jay was in during his vacation time studying the offense, saying he was sold on it.

It's hard to say whether we'd be 6-0 with Cutler. He doesn't have the tools in Chicago that he has here. That offensive line, those receivers, and Matt Forte sure aren't helping him out any. But at the very least I believe that Josh would have been able to get more out of Jay than Lovie is, and given the amount of talent Jay has, the sky would have been the limit.

bap454
10-29-2009, 12:29 AM
I think the question that needs to be focused on is.....If Jay were still here do you think he would have had only one interception to date. Absolutely not. No chance of us being 6 -0 with the interception machine here.

Kaylore
10-29-2009, 01:00 AM
No, I think it's fair to ask about this.

I think it's hard to say what McDaniels could get out of Jay. I don't think that 6-0 is inconceivable. The thing that I think is clear is that Shanahan became more of an administrator, where Josh is still freshly immersed in coaching. This is something that my attachment to Shanahan blinded me from, and I fully admit that I acted like a little punk with regards to my criticism of Bowlen for firing Shanahan. I knew it the night that I did it, but i did what I did in the heat of the moment.

Anyway - I don't see any reason why Jay couldn't run this offense. I think he might actually excel in it, given that the offense is based on making a pre-snap read, and finding the mismatch. With the chemistry that Jay has with these receivers, I think he'd actually be pretty good. It's just a matter of McDaniels coaching the force the ball tendency out of him.

From my perspective, I think Shanahan probably gave Jay too much freedom to push down the field, remembering that this is the sort of thing that frustrated he and Elway way back when. Certainly, Jay has made some pretty amazing deep throws in tight spaces. But that's not what this offense is about. This offense is about taking the mismatch for the easy gain, and drawing the defense in until you get a match up on the outside that you want and taking your shot with it. Rinse and repeat. I dont' see any reason why Josh couldn't have gotten Jay sold on the program. In fact, if the indications in early February matter, Jay was in during his vacation time studying the offense, saying he was sold on it.

It's hard to say whether we'd be 6-0 with Cutler. He doesn't have the tools in Chicago that he has here. That offensive line, those receivers, and Matt Forte sure aren't helping him out any. But at the very least I believe that Josh would have been able to get more out of Jay than Lovie is, and given the amount of talent Jay has, the sky would have been the limit.

I think in the abstract you're right in that Jay could have played here and should have excelled because he's more naturally gifted than Orton and would have had chemistry with guys like Scheffler, Royal and Marshall to have the offense going right away sooner. He made calls at the line in college and set up his own protections schemes. So theoretically it could have worked.

However I don't think in reality things would have been pretty. Cutler was pretty upset that McDaniels not only didn't act like Cutler was God's gift to football, but told him there were a lot of areas he needed to improve on and that the offense wasn't "fine". I personally feel this conversation was the genesis of the rift that would become his being traded.

Secondly, whether you believe that McDaniels "has the worst people skills in the world" or that Cutler didn't want to be treated the same as his teammates, regardless you're looking at a situation where Cutler doesn't want to listen to and take instruction from McDaniels. I think you would have seen a tug-o-war all season with those two bonking heads on what to do.

I think Cutler is who he is. He's always going to be a guy that throws for a lot of yards and while he'll have 25 touchdowns, he'll have 18 interceptions, many in the redzone, and a few fumbles. I don't think He would have played within McDaniels system and while he would have made some nice throws, I think his excessive freelancing would have caused disdain between the two that would have bled into the team environment.

I also believe that the two would have warred with each other right into the season. Cutler's poor attitude and immature nature would have killed the great chemistry we have right now. Nate Jackson and Jeb Putzier said that Jay was directly responsible for a noticeable rift in the locker room and that cliques had formed on the team.

I believe all these factors would have contributed to a team that probably wouldn't have won as much with Cutler than with Orton.

uplink
10-29-2009, 01:24 AM
If McD has a problem it is he is too good. Has he made a single mistake since taking over? I bet Shanny feels like he has something to prove now when he coaches again.

I thought that replacing the long snapper was a mistake before but you could say that move was good since Paxon can fill in on the O-Line if needed during a game and is familiar with McDs Offense and the Pats way of doing things.

Hulamau
10-29-2009, 02:20 AM
I think in the abstract you're right in that Jay could have played here and should have excelled because he's more naturally gifted than Orton and would have had chemistry with guys like Scheffler, Royal and Marshall to have the offense going right away sooner. He made calls at the line in college and set up his own protections schemes. So theoretically it could have worked.

However I don't think in reality things would have been pretty. Cutler was pretty upset that McDaniels not only didn't act like Cutler was God's gift to football, but told him there were a lot of areas he needed to improve on and that the offense wasn't "fine". I personally feel this conversation was the genesis of the rift that would become his being traded.

Secondly, whether you believe that McDaniels "has the worst people skills in the world" or that Cutler didn't want to be treated the same as his teammates, regardless you're looking at a situation where Cutler doesn't want to listen to and take instruction from McDaniels. I think you would have seen a tug-o-war all season with those two bonking heads on what to do.

I think Cutler is who he is. He's always going to be a guy that throws for a lot of yards and while he'll have 25 touchdowns, he'll have 18 interceptions, many in the redzone, and a few fumbles. I don't think He would have played within McDaniels system and while he would have made some nice throws, I think his excessive freelancing would have caused disdain between the two that would have bled into the team environment.

I also believe that the two would have warred with each other right into the season. Cutler's poor attitude and immature nature would have killed the great chemistry we have right now. Nate Jackson and Jeb Putzier said that Jay was directly responsible for a noticeable rift in the locker room and that cliques had formed on the team.

I believe all these factors would have contributed to a team that probably wouldn't have won as much with Cutler than with Orton.

Outstanding post Kaylore! I agree entirely. Also with Alec ... I understand where Taco is coming from and you are right that on paper his argument has some truth to it.

But the larger reality of the kind of dynamic likely around Jay and Josh, I seriously doubt would have resulted in as tight a discipline and 'all for one and one for all' attitude that has been at the core of what is happening here.

I'm sure Josh got the drift on that early in his interactions with Jay, especially seeing Jay's unhappy response to Shanny being fired, his likely asking for a trade behind closed doors ... And Jay Demanding almost that Bates be kept on as O.C. etc etc ... maybe also the reports of his heavy drinking and hearing the stories of Jay's surly and arrogant locker room attitude where he was more of a loner or hanging only with a small clique of friends and rubbing a lot of the teammates the wrong way.

I can imagine all of that made Josh wary where when he signed on as HC he had been enthusiastic to work with Jay as evident in his first press conference.

Josh knew exactly what he wanted to create here and Orton was by far the best available OB out there to fit that bill!

No way in Heaven Cutler has zero real picks after 6 games ....

And I doubt the kind of chemistry we have now would be there with Jay at the helm. Besides Jay wouldn't have gone through what humiliation he has so far in the whole blow up and trade to Chicago and so probably would have been even more insufferable now as 'God's Gift to Football' in his own mind ... That would been an impossible pill for Josh to swallow ... and rightly so!

Orton, on the other hand, is tailored made with the intellect and temperment to fit right in. And his teammates truly respect and love the guy both in Chicago and now here.

Jay can become a good QB on a consistent basis if and when he really buckles down to learn the finer points of his craft, but who is going to teach him that now?? .... Ron Turner ??? Hardly!

Chicago is on the way down the toilet this year with the tougher part of their schedule ahead and they have no draft picks to start repairing their major issues that are only going to get worse with time as their aging defense continues to decline. Orlando is already starting to suck wind and wishing he had retired and they have ten more games to go! So Enjoy your time there Jay!

Jay screwed his own pooch punching his ticket out of here.

And we are all the better for it as a team.

Drek
10-29-2009, 04:35 AM
If McD has a problem it is he is too good. Has he made a single mistake since taking over? I bet Shanny feels like he has something to prove now when he coaches again.

I thought that replacing the long snapper was a mistake before but you could say that move was good since Paxon can fill in on the O-Line if needed during a game and is familiar with McDs Offense and the Pats way of doing things.

Paxton wasn't brought in because he can play OL in a pinch. He was brought in because McDaniels knew Paxton had long ago bought into the "just do your job, the team always comes first" mindset he was looking to install. Its why we went after Gaffney, Jordan, LeKevin Smith, and Hochstein.

Its also why we got Brian Dawkins, Renaldo Hill, and Andre Goodman. The first is an obvious leader, the other two where in a much more impressive turnaround (from worst in the league to division champs) with Miami the year before, they where savvy vets who'd "been there, done that".

The primary reason the Broncos are 6-0 is that McDaniels completely changed the attitude and approach of this organization. Now its about showing up and doing your own job to the best of your abilities, within the system. No freelancing or taking risks for big plays. You just do what your job entails and the scheme suddenly looks rock solid.

The NFL is 90% about exploiting the mistakes of the opposition. If you make fewer mistakes you almost always win. McDaniels brought the locker room mindset conducive to that kind of play, and then he and Nolan put in offensive and defensive schemes that lets every player know exactly what is and is not expected of them.

After that its all about McDaniels and Nolan out game planning the opposition, which is a hell of a lot easier when your guys still to the plan.

UberBroncoMan
10-29-2009, 04:49 AM
Seriously who were the 22 people who said yes to this. Even I was pissed at McDaniels over the **** this off-season and said hell no to this.

Killericon
10-29-2009, 05:38 AM
Seriously who were the 22 people who said yes to this. Even I was pissed at McDaniels over the **** this off-season and said hell no to this.

http://tomroeser.com/blog/img/f24336/Joseph_McCarthy.jpg

We need to root out the enemy within.

BroncoInferno
10-29-2009, 06:30 AM
You're right about that. If we win 10 games this year with Orton, I will most definitely hold the belief that we would have won 14 with Cutler. That's just a no-brainer.

I'd be thrilled with a 10 game outcome though. That would be pretty sweet. McDaniels would definitely deserve props if he's able to pull that off after taking a sledge hammer to our team in the offseason.

Well, you got the no-brain part right, Taco ;D No way we'd be doing as well with Cutler as our QB serving up picks like McDonald's serves Big Macs.

TonyR
10-29-2009, 06:34 AM
oh, the classics.

Indeed. Funny to see these frauds so exposed by their embarrassing offseason tantrums.

BroncoInferno
10-29-2009, 06:46 AM
No, I think it's fair to ask about this.

I think it's hard to say what McDaniels could get out of Jay. I don't think that 6-0 is inconceivable. The thing that I think is clear is that Shanahan became more of an administrator, where Josh is still freshly immersed in coaching. This is something that my attachment to Shanahan blinded me from, and I fully admit that I acted like a little punk with regards to my criticism of Bowlen for firing Shanahan. I knew it the night that I did it, but i did what I did in the heat of the moment.

Anyway - I don't see any reason why Jay couldn't run this offense. I think he might actually excel in it, given that the offense is based on making a pre-snap read, and finding the mismatch. With the chemistry that Jay has with these receivers, I think he'd actually be pretty good. It's just a matter of McDaniels coaching the force the ball tendency out of him.

From my perspective, I think Shanahan probably gave Jay too much freedom to push down the field, remembering that this is the sort of thing that frustrated he and Elway way back when. Certainly, Jay has made some pretty amazing deep throws in tight spaces. But that's not what this offense is about. This offense is about taking the mismatch for the easy gain, and drawing the defense in until you get a match up on the outside that you want and taking your shot with it. Rinse and repeat. I dont' see any reason why Josh couldn't have gotten Jay sold on the program. In fact, if the indications in early February matter, Jay was in during his vacation time studying the offense, saying he was sold on it.

It's hard to say whether we'd be 6-0 with Cutler. He doesn't have the tools in Chicago that he has here. That offensive line, those receivers, and Matt Forte sure aren't helping him out any. But at the very least I believe that Josh would have been able to get more out of Jay than Lovie is, and given the amount of talent Jay has, the sky would have been the limit.

Reasonable take, Taco.

I think Josh would have ultimately been frustrated with Jay as his QB. He just isn't patient enough to execute this offense. Perhaps Josh could have coached that out of him, we'll never know. But some guys just have that gunslinger mentality and no amount of coaching will break them of that. Sure, Jay can play the game manager here and there (the Steelers game this season, for instance), but I just don't believe he would have been able to CONSISTENTLY accept executing the short passing passing game and waiting for the right matchup to take down field shots. I don't think he would have had the patience to execute the 98 yard drive against the Pats like Orton did. Orton coolly took what was there and was happy to do it. I think Jay would have gotten impatient and tried to force it downfield at some point. Maybe he wouldn't have turned it over, but gunslinging doesn't just hurt you with increased risk of turnovers...it also leads to low percentage pass attempts that can kill drives if the gamble doesn't pay off and the passes fall incomplete. I think Jay is what he is and for this offense we have the better fit.

R8R H8R
10-29-2009, 02:31 PM
I think in the abstract you're right in that Jay could have played here and should have excelled because he's more naturally gifted than Orton and would have had chemistry with guys like Scheffler, Royal and Marshall to have the offense going right away sooner. He made calls at the line in college and set up his own protections schemes. So theoretically it could have worked.

However I don't think in reality things would have been pretty. Cutler was pretty upset that McDaniels not only didn't act like Cutler was God's gift to football, but told him there were a lot of areas he needed to improve on and that the offense wasn't "fine". I personally feel this conversation was the genesis of the rift that would become his being traded.
Secondly, whether you believe that McDaniels "has the worst people skills in the world" or that Cutler didn't want to be treated the same as his teammates, regardless you're looking at a situation where Cutler doesn't want to listen to and take instruction from McDaniels. I think you would have seen a tug-o-war all season with those two bonking heads on what to do.
I think Cutler is who he is. He's always going to be a guy that throws for a lot of yards and while he'll have 25 touchdowns, he'll have 18 interceptions, many in the redzone, and a few fumbles. I don't think He would have played within McDaniels system and while he would have made some nice throws, I think his excessive freelancing would have caused disdain between the two that would have bled into the team environment.

I also believe that the two would have warred with each other right into the season. Cutler's poor attitude and immature nature would have killed the great chemistry we have right now. Nate Jackson and Jeb Putzier said that Jay was directly responsible for a noticeable rift in the locker room and that cliques had formed on the team.

I believe all these factors would have contributed to a team that probably wouldn't have won as much with Cutler than with Orton.

Good take, pretty much my feelings.

However, with that said, I would give a week's paycheck to see the reaction of cutler if he was the QB during the cowboys game and McD yells at him:

I'm not talking about "My Bad" anymore! Just make the damn play!

I think we get one of three reactions:

1. cutler starts to tear up and gets his feelings hurt, and all of a sudden he complains of a bad hammy.
2. cutler takes a punch at McD.
3. cutler goes back on the field and immediately throws a pick to show Josh who's boss, and don't ever talk to him like that again.

Archer81
10-29-2009, 02:56 PM
Sometimes I wonder if Jay listens to the coach, knows the reads and makes the adjustments; but when he gets on the field, and they bring pressure, if he just forgets what he was just told.

:Broncos:

Doggcow
10-29-2009, 03:46 PM
This should have been public :P

HEAV
10-29-2009, 03:55 PM
You and Socal are such ****-Tards.

:welcome:



I so wish this poll was public!ROFL!

Hotrod
10-29-2009, 03:57 PM
So happy I avoided this thread Ha!

HEAV
10-29-2009, 04:00 PM
Originally Posted by Atlas
The Broncos are going to suck, thus I hope McFailure gets fired.




Where is Atlas anyway?



Globe has posted in the political forum...but no where near the football side of the Mane. He hasn't updated his website etheir still stuck in 97-98:~ohyah!:

uplink
10-29-2009, 04:01 PM
Paxton wasn't brought in because he can play OL in a pinch. He was brought in because McDaniels knew Paxton had long ago bought into the "just do your job, the team always comes first" mindset he was looking to install. Its why we went after Gaffney, Jordan, LeKevin Smith, and Hochstein.

I did say Paxton may have been an upgrade since he was familiar with the 'Pats way of doing things'. Also, I bet he is more useful as an emergency game day fill in than Leach was since he can play on the O-Line if a bunch of guys get hurt in a game.

Broncomutt
10-29-2009, 04:12 PM
Good take, pretty much my feelings.

However, with that said, I would give a week's paycheck to see the reaction of cutler if he was the QB during the cowboys game and McD yells at him:

I'm not talking about "My Bad" anymore! Just make the damn play!

I think we get one of three reactions:

1. cutler starts to tear up and gets his feelings hurt, and all of a sudden he complains of a bad hammy.
2. cutler takes a punch at McD.
3. cutler goes back on the field and immediately throws a pick to show Josh who's boss, and don't ever talk to him like that again.

I'd agree with that asessment. Although I admit I thought BM would intentionally drop a game winning TD pass to show Josh who's boss. Seems I was wrong on that.

Maybe that's why Jay got handed his hat while BM got a lesson in adulthood.

I couldn't be happier.

Dreadnought
10-29-2009, 04:26 PM
Sometimes I wonder if Jay listens to the coach, knows the reads and makes the adjustments; but when he gets on the field, and they bring pressure, if he just forgets what he was just told.

:Broncos:

That actually makes some sense to me. A possible side effect of years at Vandy, where any success he had (and he had a lot) was a result of freelancing and high risk/high reward play, and where he was improvising while running for his life? Thats pretty much what we saw. Cutler at his best could make throws like nothing I've seen before in Denver, and thats I think why a lot of his supporters had a lot of optimism that he could rein in his game and learn to operate with more discipline.

We'll never know, so I guess its moot - and the Bears problem now. So far Ron Turner seems clueless as to what to do with the guiy.

What is 100% certain is that McD has made three times the QB out of Orton than I ever thought was possible. Some credit to the O-Line, receiving corps and Orton himself for that obviously.

leon
10-29-2009, 04:40 PM
shannahan sucked!!! Mcdaniels rules!!!

Raidersbane
10-29-2009, 07:38 PM
Well something needs to be done. This team can't possibly get any worse......all is lost, all is lost!

Popps
10-29-2009, 10:54 PM
you're right about that. If we win 10 games this year with orton, i will most definitely hold the belief that we would have won 14 with cutler. That's just a no-brainer.
.

:spit:

Popps
10-29-2009, 11:00 PM
Holy crap, it's hysterical reading back through this thread. People with their "too much power" conspiracy bull****, etc.

It sounded stupid then, and it's just plain funny, now.

HAT
10-29-2009, 11:05 PM
:spit:

Taco logic:

Orton=10
Cutler=14
Griese=19

broncocalijohn
10-30-2009, 11:30 AM
Taco logic:
Plummer 3
Orton=10
Cutler=14
Griese=19

added one for ya.