PDA

View Full Version : The case for Kyle Orton as an upgrade


Pony Boy
05-11-2009, 02:52 PM
Warning this thread is about the Broncos. This is an interesting article and brings up some valid points, some my find it a good read and some may not. I know someone will say "nothing here that hasn't been said before, so if that's the case just sit back and let your pups suck and read about sausages and favorite rock bands.

http://www.indenvertimes.com/2009/05/11/the-case-for-kyle-orton-as-an-upgrade/

PRBronco
05-11-2009, 02:56 PM
Hey this article isn't negative! Get out of here Pony Boy! Go back to Soda Pop and Darry and Emilio Estevez!

Popps
05-11-2009, 02:56 PM
sausages

LOL

Pony Boy
05-11-2009, 03:13 PM
Hey this article isn't negative! Get out of here Pony Boy! Go back to Soda Pop and Darry and Emilio Estevez!

No, not going to the negative side yet! I'm on the bandwagon with all the new changes, unless McDaniels trades Hillis. If that happens I will move to the dark side. :~ohyah!:

Gcver2ver3
05-11-2009, 03:15 PM
beautiful article...

telluride
05-11-2009, 03:21 PM
I too think that Orton will do quite well here.

Now, on to something more important. Who teaches these people to write? This is a lede?

"There is now an unmistakable intertwinement lashing the New England Patriots to the Denver Broncos."

Mogulseeker
05-11-2009, 03:22 PM
I too think that Orton will do quite well here.

Now, on to something more important. Who teaches these people to write? This is a lede?

"There is now an unmistakable intertwinement lashing the New England Patriots to the Denver Broncos."

Poorly written article, but some good material.

footstepsfrom#27
05-11-2009, 03:23 PM
Pure fluff.

telluride
05-11-2009, 03:24 PM
The second sentence is even worse!

"When the second-biggest name in Broncos history walked away from the sidelines after an abysmal home stretch that saw the franchise drown in the wake of a possible playoff birth, Pat Bowlen turned to the Patriots and happily plucked their freshest face."

Huh?

telluride
05-11-2009, 03:25 PM
"The rest of the rope comes from seemingly parallel circumstances that, on the surface, appeared damning to the future success of each program. "

What?

telluride
05-11-2009, 03:25 PM
"But for the Broncos, the saga was more grueling, more excruciating, and so scintillatingly drawn out. Watching McDaniels and Jay Cutler slowly dig the trench between them was a tedious task."

Ack.

telluride
05-11-2009, 03:26 PM
(This is fun.)

"Now there is a new hope, though at first glance his springs seem less eternal."

:(

footstepsfrom#27
05-11-2009, 03:30 PM
Didn't know Chicago had a "vertical" offense. Whatever...

Popps
05-11-2009, 03:34 PM
This is a quarterback who put up 31 touchdowns against only five interceptions in a collegiate offense that more closely resembles what McDaniels will do than any other offense in the league.

telluride
05-11-2009, 03:37 PM
This is a quarterback who put up 31 touchdowns against only five interceptions in a collegiate offense that more closely resembles what McDaniels will do than any other offense in the league.

Hey, no fair quoting sentences that actually make sense! But I'll cover for you:

"There is a back to each end zone that provides more intelligent quarterbacks with a safe haven for the ball when the receivers are hidden behind defenders."

Paladin
05-11-2009, 04:11 PM
OMG!!!!! OMG!!!!!!

A positive article!!!!!

OMG!!!!!

What's next? Armageddon?

OMG!!!!!!!

Blueflame
05-11-2009, 04:15 PM
The second sentence is even worse!

"When the second-biggest name in Broncos history walked away from the sidelines after an abysmal home stretch that saw the franchise drown in the wake of a possible playoff birth, Pat Bowlen turned to the Patriots and happily plucked their freshest face."

Huh?

Um.... the correct word here would be "berth"; not "birth"....

DenverBrit
05-11-2009, 04:17 PM
Um.... the correct word here would be "berth"; not "birth"....

Not if you 'lay an egg'. Ha!

telluride
05-11-2009, 04:18 PM
Um.... the correct word here would be "berth"; not "birth"....

Tell it to "Hunter Ansley"!

Blueflame
05-11-2009, 04:26 PM
Not if you 'lay an egg'. Ha!

Laying an unfertilized egg would still result in no "birth".... it would have to be fertilized and then hatch... :P

elsid13
05-11-2009, 04:35 PM
Didn't know Chicago had a "vertical" offense. Whatever...

They don't. Turner runs version of WCO

“It’s all West Coast offense, so it’s really similar to what I’m already used to [from playing with the Broncos]. The way it’s phrased is different. What we called stuff in Denver might be a little different here. But the way you spit it out is the same.” - Cutler

http://www.chicagobears.com/news/NewsStory.asp?story_id=5810

TheReverend
05-11-2009, 04:43 PM
Dude needs to tone down the thesaurus work. Shift+F7 only goes so far...

DenverBrit
05-11-2009, 05:16 PM
Laying an unfertilized egg would still result in no "birth".... it would have to be fertilized and then hatch... :P



When the second-biggest name in Broncos history walked away from the sidelines after an abysmal home stretch that saw the franchise drown in the wake of a possible playoff birth,

'Laid an egg'
2. Fig. [for someone] to do something bad or poorly; to perform poorly on stage. .....or in a Stadium.

;D

telluride
05-11-2009, 05:23 PM
They don't. Turner runs version of WCO

“It’s all West Coast offense, so it’s really similar to what I’m already used to [from playing with the Broncos]. The way it’s phrased is different. What we called stuff in Denver might be a little different here. But the way you spit it out is the same.” - Cutler

http://www.chicagobears.com/news/NewsStory.asp?story_id=5810

No matter how you phrase it, a red zone pick is still a red zone pick....

Blueflame
05-11-2009, 05:36 PM
'Laid an egg'
2. Fig. [for someone] to do something bad or poorly; to perform poorly on stage. .....or in a Stadium.

;D

Surely you're not suggesting that Jay Cutler was the only player on our roster who underachieved during the month of December when a single win would have clinched a playoff berth? My own take is that there were at least 10 defensive players who should be placed ahead of Cutler in the culpability-for-the-collapse line.

Furthermore, I'd also challenge the assertion that Cutler was the "second-biggest name in Broncos history".... I think I'd place TD, Shannon, Rod, Steve Atwater, Randy Gradishar, and Floyd Little (just to name a few off the top of my head) above him. While Jay had the potential to maybe develop to where he might have justified that characterization, it simply didn't happen and the characterization therefore is bogus. IMHO.

telluride
05-11-2009, 05:42 PM
Surely you're not suggesting that Jay Cutler was the only player on our roster who underachieved during the month of December when a single win would have clinched a playoff berth? My own take is that there were at least 10 defensive players who should be placed ahead of Cutler in the culpability-for-the-collapse line.

Furthermore, I'd also challenge the assertion that Cutler was the "second-biggest name in Broncos history".... I think I'd place TD, Shannon, Rod, Steve Atwater, Randy Gradishar, and Floyd Little (just to name a few off the top of my head) above him. While Jay had the potential to maybe develop to where he might have justified that characterization, it simply didn't happen and the characterization therefore is bogus. IMHO.

Cutler had three games to try to win one; he couldn't do it. Crappy defense or not, that's on him.

Also, I think Hunter Ansley was referring to Shanny in the 2nd biggest name reference. Hard to tell when the writing is so bad, tho.

Tombstone RJ
05-11-2009, 05:43 PM
Warning this thread is about the Broncos. This is an interesting article and brings up some valid points, some my find it a good read and some may not. I know someone will say "nothing here that hasn't been said before, so if that's the case just sit back and let your pups suck and read about sausages and favorite rock bands.

http://www.indenvertimes.com/2009/05/11/the-case-for-kyle-orton-as-an-upgrade/

Wow, nice read. It's kinda what a lot of posters here have been saying for a while... I, for example, have been saying the Orton looked good last year when he was playing, and that the bears defense just ain't that great.

Blueflame
05-11-2009, 05:51 PM
Cutler had three games to try to win one; he couldn't do it. Crappy defense or not, that's on him.

Also, I think Hunter Ansley was referring to Shanny in the 2nd biggest name reference. Hard to tell when the writing so bad, tho.

Football is a team game and every single one of those losses was a team loss. You wanna lay blame for a loss on an individual, perhaps you should watch golf. In that "sport" a win is an individual accomplishment.

Perhaps he was referring to Shanahan... as you said, however... the writing was at like a 6th grade level.

telluride
05-11-2009, 05:56 PM
Football is a team game and every single one of those losses was a team loss. You wanna lay blame for a loss on an individual, perhaps you should watch golf. In that "sport" a win is an individual accomplishment.

Perhaps he was referring to Shanahan... as you said, however... the writing was at like a 6th grade level.

True enough. The team did collapse. However, in his three seasons here, we failed to see Cutler elevate his game for the occasion on any occasion. Never once did he take over a critical game and will his team to a win. Perhaps he can. I'm not sure. But he had ample opportunity in Denver, and he failed every time.

ludo21
05-11-2009, 05:57 PM
I think Orton will do well here.

But Cutler would have done better, he is by far the better QB.

DenverBrit
05-11-2009, 06:05 PM
Surely you're not suggesting that Jay Cutler was the only player on our roster who underachieved during the month of December when a single win would have clinched a playoff berth? My own take is that there were at least 10 defensive players who should be placed ahead of Cutler in the culpability-for-the-collapse line.

Furthermore, I'd also challenge the assertion that Cutler was the "second-biggest name in Broncos history".... I think I'd place TD, Shannon, Rod, Steve Atwater, Randy Gradishar, and Floyd Little (just to name a few off the top of my head) above him. While Jay had the potential to maybe develop to where he might have justified that characterization, it simply didn't happen and the characterization therefore is bogus. IMHO.


It was a play on words that apparently needed an explanation......and as the old adage goes: 'It isn't funny if you have to explain it.' :clown:

elsid13
05-11-2009, 06:09 PM
True enough. The team did collapse. However, in his three seasons here, we failed to see Cutler elevate his game for the occasion on any occasion. Never once did he take over a critical game and will his team to a win. Perhaps he can. I'm not sure. But he had ample opportunity in Denver, and he failed every time.

It took Elway almost 4 season until he got that signature win. Cutler was starter for 2 1/2 season, that not a long time on very crappy team.

Blueflame
05-11-2009, 06:16 PM
True enough. The team did collapse. However, in his three seasons here, we failed to see Cutler elevate his game for the occasion on any occasion. Never once did he take over a critical game and will his team to a win. Perhaps he can. I'm not sure. But he had ample opportunity in Denver, and he failed every time.

The defense was an abomination in both of Cutler's full seasons in Denver. In 2007, opposing teams scored 409 points and racked up 5376 yards, for an average gain of 6.3 yards per play. Then with Slowik as DC in 2008, they gave up 448 points and 5993 yards... a whopping 6.1 yards per play. Now that's 857 points (nearly 27 per game avg.) and 11369 yards (avg. 355 per game). Yet you want to lay that on Cutler? Too funny.

Blueflame
05-11-2009, 06:17 PM
It was a play on words that apparently needed an explanation......and as the old adage goes: 'It isn't funny if you have to explain it.' :clown:

LOL For the record, I did "get it"... just in an opinionated/argumentative mood today, I guess. ;D

watermock
05-11-2009, 06:20 PM
The fact is I warned about the collapse right after Bowe fumbled the onside kick.

Cutler ble a wide open Royal, but sandiched beteen were Carolina and SD on the road, andf a pitiful defense.

Noone other than morons thought we were a contender anyway.

Bowlen could of fired Slowick over his head and made him resign.

I don't particuliarly like Nolan either. we'll see,but considering our scum at D, I don't expect more than 25 in defense.

Jesterhole
05-11-2009, 06:26 PM
I still hate the trade on all points, but given that I can't reverse time I have to say that having Orton instead of just Simms gives me just a bit of hope for the season. He isn't near the QB Jay is, but at least he has won in the league, and knows what it takes.

elsid13
05-11-2009, 06:30 PM
Doesn't scare anyone that Chicago was always bringing in new QBs to win the job and wasn't willing to stick with Orton? They drafted Chris Leak and put him ahead of Orton two years ago.

Drek
05-11-2009, 06:30 PM
It took Elway almost 4 season until he got that signature win. Cutler was starter for 2 1/2 season, that not a long time on very crappy team.

By signature win you mean one of the greatest playoff victories of all time. That ignores the 33-15 record his first three seasons, the two playoff berths he produced in three years, and the 19-5 home record he produced through his first three seasons.

He was never a statistical wonder in any of those seasons either. If anything Cutler is the anti-Elway. Good personal numbers but always just coming up short of playoff victories and defending the home turf.

Doesn't scare anyone that Chicago was always bringing in new QBs to win the job and wasn't willing to stick with Orton? The drafted Chris Leak and put him ahead of Orton two years ago.

And Orton kept taking the job back.

They didn't want Orton to succeed. They where obsessed with practice field super hero Rex Grossman, to the point where after Orton carried them into the playoffs they benched him for Grossman.

It was Doug Flutie v. Rob Johnson part II. They kept picking the guy they thought was just waiting to have that "it" game, instead passing on the guy who might have won ugly, but at least consistently won.

broncosteven
05-11-2009, 06:31 PM
True enough. The team did collapse. However, in his three seasons here, we failed to see Cutler elevate his game for the occasion on any occasion. Never once did he take over a critical game and will his team to a win. Perhaps he can. I'm not sure. But he had ample opportunity in Denver, and he failed every time.

I dunno, Atlanta and Cleveland were pretty critical at the time we played them. He did fumble the ball vs SD but had the presence of mind to not only throw a TD the next play but hit Royal again for the 2 point conversion if he was a total waste he could have imploded then.

I am guessing the NO near comeback was his fault.

If he had a backup RB that wasn't selling cell phones the week before maybe we win the Buffalo game. I thought he gave 100% in the Buffalo game considering all the designed QB keepers that they were forced to run.

broncosteven
05-11-2009, 06:38 PM
Doesn't scare anyone that Chicago was always bringing in new QBs to win the job and wasn't willing to stick with Orton? The drafted Chris Leak and put him ahead of Orton two years ago.

I am thinking Orton will start to become an issue next year. He is the perfect guy to come in for a rebuilding team.

No pressure at all, no one expects him to win, whereas Cutler was expected to put the team on his shoulders and win, something not even John could do in his prime with a 30th ranked D which had tremendous turnover and is implementing a new system.

The real upside is that Orton is playing for a contract and will be motivated to get his payday, here or somewhere else.

If McStalin is the real deal and turns the rest of the team around I am guessing he will be looking for a QB next offseason.

watermock
05-11-2009, 06:45 PM
If McStalin is the real deal and turns the rest of the team around I am guessing he will be looking for a QB next offseason.

No, he won't.

He's got the next Tom B. to groom and won't trade up for Bradford OR McCoy.

OR Mt.Cody.

McDish!t is gonna do it his way.

jhat01
05-11-2009, 07:15 PM
No, he won't.

He's got the next Tom B. to groom and won't trade up for Bradford OR McCoy.

OR Mt.Cody.

McDi**** is gonna do it his way.

And that's the way he should do it.

gyldenlove
05-11-2009, 07:26 PM
Cutler had three games to try to win one; he couldn't do it. Crappy defense or not, that's on him.

Also, I think Hunter Ansley was referring to Shanny in the 2nd biggest name reference. Hard to tell when the writing is so bad, tho.

Why did we fire Shanahan then if losing is Cutlers fault?

Broncos4tw
05-11-2009, 07:31 PM
Orton is in no way, shape or form, an upgrade over Cutler. Cutler is the superior player, and at the end of the day, he is going to have greater success.

"But nay... not in this system!"

Baloney. Unless he utterly sucks as a QB coach, Cutler would have much greater success in this new system than Orton will. Spinning it any other way is just that.. spinning it, trying to make it sound like we did a "smart thing."

It was not smart, it was stupid. We downgraded the most important position on the team. And I'm willing to live with it ('cause what choice do I have really), but I wish people would stop trying to pain some pretty picture. There isn't one. Orton is not, and will never be, a Cutler.

Tombstone RJ
05-11-2009, 08:12 PM
Orton is in no way, shape or form, an upgrade over Cutler. Cutler is the superior player, and at the end of the day, he is going to have greater success.

"But nay... not in this system!"

Baloney. Unless he utterly sucks as a QB coach, Cutler would have much greater success in this new system than Orton will. Spinning it any other way is just that.. spinning it, trying to make it sound like we did a "smart thing."

It was not smart, it was stupid. We downgraded the most important position on the team. And I'm willing to live with it ('cause what choice do I have really), but I wish people would stop trying to pain some pretty picture. There isn't one. Orton is not, and will never be, a Cutler.


Yah, I know what you mean. Orton has actually lead a team to the playoffs, Cutler never did that. In fact, Cutler was the leader of two teams that should have made the playoffs, but didn't.

IMHO, that sucks, no matter how you paint it.

The Cutlerites will say "it wasn't his fault, it was the crappy defense that is to blame, blah, blah, blah..." My rebuttle is simple: 2 opportunities lost by Cutler and the Broncos to make the post season. The first time a Cutler lead team blew it was in 2006/07 when the team just needed to beat the worthless 49ers to make the playoffs. Instead, they lost to a terrible team and went home. This last season was even worse. All the Broncos had to do is win one of the last 3 games of the season, and they are in. That's it, just one of three. But NOOOOOOOOOOO! The team folded worse than a beat up paper bag.

watermock
05-11-2009, 08:45 PM
They played an 11-5 carolina team away and a SD team on a roll away.

Cutler did miss twice a wide open Royal in the Buffalo game tho.

ludo21
05-11-2009, 10:11 PM
Yah, I know what you mean. Orton has actually lead a team to the playoffs, Cutler never did that. In fact, Cutler was the leader of two teams that should have made the playoffs, but didn't.

IMHO, that sucks, no matter how you paint it.

The Cutlerites will say "it wasn't his fault, it was the crappy defense that is to blame, blah, blah, blah..." My rebuttle is simple: 2 opportunities lost by Cutler and the Broncos to make the post season. The first time a Cutler lead team blew it was in 2006/07 when the team just needed to beat the worthless 49ers to make the playoffs. Instead, they lost to a terrible team and went home. This last season was even worse. All the Broncos had to do is win one of the last 3 games of the season, and they are in. That's it, just one of three. But NOOOOOOOOOOO! The team folded worse than a beat up paper bag.


"Led" his team, bwahahaha

footstepsfrom#27
05-11-2009, 11:02 PM
This last season was even worse. All the Broncos had to do is win one of the last 3 games of the season, and they are in. That's it, just one of three. But NOOOOOOOOOOO! The team folded worse than a beat up paper bag.
37.3 ppg against...yes that was clearly the QB. Brilliant!

https://www.epsb.net/~lbraithw/monkey/brilliant_idea.jpg

GreatBronco16
05-11-2009, 11:45 PM
McDi**** is gonna do it his way.


I'm sorry, should he do it the way the message board knowitalls would do it? I mean, you are sooooo much smarter right?

footstepsfrom#27
05-12-2009, 01:45 AM
I'm sorry, should he do it the way the message board knowitalls would do it? I mean, you are sooooo much smarter right?
Interesting question...

Are there fans who are smarter than this (or other) NFL coaches?

Yes...obviously there are...a lot of doctors, engineers, lawyers and physicists come to mind...unless of course you want to suggest that football coaches are generally smarter than everyone else in the population, which I doubt you do. I'd be willing to wager a larger number of people in the fan base than you suspect are considerably smarter than the head coach or GM of the team they root for. Equally obvious...they don't have the time spent in the field of coaching or exposure to the inner workings of an NFL front office, which is really the point you're making isn't it?

However, not all decisions made by coaches have anything to do with knowledge of the game do they? Some decisions require other skills and cognitive capabilities. Take for example, understanding how to deal with people...how to lead people by generating confidence in your personal credibility, how to inspire people towards intrinsic motivation rather than creating robotic responses based on external pressure or heavy handed authoritarian tactics. We could include factors not related to standard IQ testing as well, perhaps the ability to recognize one's own weaknesses and blind spots, the humility to accept constructive criticism, the willingness to ward of pride and admit when you make mistakes...the recognition that sometimes leaders need to say they're sorry, the understanding that multiple minds working in convergence produces superior results...all these are unrelated to being "smart"...and they're probably just as or more important.

I mention this since any good business executive knows they're generally more crucial than raw IQ or pure brainpower. Success or failure in a lot of endeavors hinges on these factors more than it does on one's IQ level. That said...there are legions of people who, if they chose to do so, could transfer their mental and emotional intelligence skills into NFL front offices with time spent in experience and find success just as they have in other careers. There are probably thousands of people in the fan base of any NFL team with the raw smarts to do the same job had they gone that direction. ;D

baja
05-12-2009, 04:46 AM
Pure fluff.

27's definition of fluff = anything that is contrary to his opinion.

Mogulseeker
05-12-2009, 05:33 AM
The fact is I warned about the collapse right after Bowe fumbled the onside kick.



You warned about collapse every time Shanahan blinked his eyes.

I had a broken watch once, and it was right twice a day.

gyldenlove
05-12-2009, 05:59 AM
Interesting question...

Are there fans who are smarter than this (or other) NFL coaches?

Yes...obviously there are...a lot of doctors, engineers, lawyers and physicists come to mind...unless of course you want to suggest that football coaches are generally smarter than everyone else in the population, which I doubt you do. I'd be willing to wager a larger number of people in the fan base than you suspect are considerably smarter than the head coach or GM of the team they root for. Equally obvious...they don't have the time spent in the field of coaching or exposure to the inner workings of an NFL front office, which is really the point you're making isn't it?

However, not all decisions made by coaches have anything to do with knowledge of the game do they? Some decisions require other skills and cognitive capabilities. Take for example, understanding how to deal with people...how to lead people by generating confidence in your personal credibility, how to inspire people towards intrinsic motivation rather than creating robotic responses based on external pressure or heavy handed authoritarian tactics. We could include factors not related to standard IQ testing as well, perhaps the ability to recognize one's own weaknesses and blind spots, the humility to accept constructive criticism, the willingness to ward of pride and admit when you make mistakes...the recognition that sometimes leaders need to say they're sorry, the understanding that multiple minds working in convergence produces superior results...all these are unrelated to being "smart"...and they're probably just as or more important.

I mention this since any good business executive knows they're generally more crucial than raw IQ or pure brainpower. Success or failure in a lot of endeavors hinges on these factors more than it does on one's IQ level. That said...there are legions of people who, if they chose to do so, could transfer their mental and emotional intelligence skills into NFL front offices with time spent in experience and find success just as they have in other careers. There are probably thousands of people in the fan base of any NFL team with the raw smarts to do the same job had they gone that direction. ;D

It is an interesting discussion, we have heard this argument come up again and again from Mcdaniels supporters that since he is an NFL head coach and we are only fans, he knows a lot better and we should just pipe down and love him unconditionally since he knows best.

I can't say wether or not that is true, I haven't seen the man in action long enough to make any serious judgement about his abilities as a head coach. What I can say, and with a lot of certainty is that I could do at least as well as Matt Millen or Rod Marinelli, and they were GM and HC in the NFL respectively - in fact I will bet anyone here that I could would not do any worse than they did in 2008 if given the chance to coach any team at any level, and all I have is my natural mental capabilities, I have no experience with football directly.

In general the argument that because someone has made it and has been appointed an NFL head coach that they somehow know better than anyone else doesn't hold water, if that really was the case there wouldn't be as many as 10 head coaches fired annually. Shanahan had a fairly impressive resume as a head coach, and he got fired and replaced, so clearly he didn't know better.

Broncos4tw
05-12-2009, 06:05 AM
The Cutlerites will say "it wasn't his fault, it was the crappy defense that is to blame, blah, blah, blah..."

You don't think our defense was a key reason why we lost? It's kind of laughable that people dismiss our incredibly pathetic efforts on D that didn't help Cutler at all. We had a whopping (last place) 6 ints on the year. Yea.. he was given so many shots to make something happen! LOL

But I'm not even talking about that. Just talking raw skills. Culter wins over Orton hands down. As much as people are crying that Cutler is a baby, he was never a 'baby' when playing. He was gutsy and always gave it his all. With the right coaching, the right system, he could thrive. That people think he has a TO complex just makes me laugh my ass off. He is NOTHING like those primadonnas. Had he been given the chance to play in a solid system, he may have been amazing here.

dbfan21
05-12-2009, 06:06 AM
Pat Bowlen works in mysterious ways. Though it may have been viewed as literally dropping the ball, missing out on Cassell was the best thing that could have happened to this franchise. If Cutler’s departure was a foregone conclusion, and it was, then bringing in a quarterback who fits McDaniels’ system as well as his former New England protégé was a coup.

I found this comment pretty thought-provoking. If that Cassell-Cutler trade thingy went down immediately, we would have been in full meltdown mode becuase Jay would have been the patron saint of football and satan himself traded him to another team. By virtue of the whole trade saga dragging on and on, we were able to see another side of Cutler (the backside, that is), which helped many of us "let go" without the intensely harsh feelings towards the FO.

TonyR
05-12-2009, 06:09 AM
Orton is in no way, shape or form, an upgrade over Cutler. Cutler is the superior player, and at the end of the day, he is going to have greater success.

...

It was not smart, it was stupid. We downgraded the most important position on the team...

This wasn't about upgrading the QB position, it was about upgrading the football team. We've replaced an extremely talented but very inconsistent QB, who will win you some games and lose you some others, with a QB who should be more than good enough to get the job done in the offensive system they'll run. We also got draft picks to fill some other needs. Without this trade the Broncos probably don't pick Moreno at 12 and only come away with only one potential difference maker in the first round. You've got to look at the bigger picture.

footstepsfrom#27
05-12-2009, 06:14 AM
27's definition of fluff = anything that is contrary to his opinion.
Actually lots of things contrary to my opinon aren't fluff...they're wrong...but they're not fluff. ;D

My definition of "fluff" is something that purports to say something of substance but really says nothing...you should be pretty familiar with that.

The piece is flawed on multiple fronts, including the amateurish way he attempts to connect statistics unrelated to each other in order to somehow prove...what? That Orton's an upgrade on...was it Cutler or Cassel?...it wasn't even clear on that point. If it's Cutler...he's a moron. If he meant an upgrade on Cassel...who cares? He's a Chief.

Any twit on the Mane could have produced this tripe.

Dagmar
05-12-2009, 06:35 AM
I like it, the haters can't criticize the content, just the way it was written. Certain people here are very dull.

kamakazi_kal
05-12-2009, 07:15 AM
I'm done with this junk ...... I've said where I stand lots o' times.

Now I'm willing to wait for week 1. For now nobodys right ... not popps not 27 not me.

Will anyone be at TC this year?

footstepsfrom#27
05-12-2009, 07:36 AM
I like it, the haters can't criticize the content, just the way it was written. Certain people here are very dull.
Anybody paying attention can easily criticize the content.

Pony Boy
05-12-2009, 07:44 AM
That people think he has a TO complex just makes me laugh my ass off. He is NOTHING like those primadonnas. Had he been given the chance to play in a solid system, he may have been amazing here.

Cutler was given the chance to play in a solid offensive system in Denver and he had plenty of weapons at his disposal. He played every well but was short of amazing. Now he will get the chance to play in a "not so solid" system in Chicago and will have to carry the load by himself. Orton on the other hand will now get the chance to play in a solid ofensive system which is really the whole point of the article.

broncobum6162
05-12-2009, 08:38 AM
Laying an unfertilized egg would still result in no "birth".... it would have to be fertilized and then hatch... :P

Well, in the words of Dortoh and his thread...."f@#$% that!ROFL!

Tombstone RJ
05-12-2009, 09:16 AM
37.3 ppg against...yes that was clearly the QB. Brilliant!

In the Broncos losses during the 2008 season, Cutlers average QB rating was 68.25. Not very good.

In the Broncos wins during the 2008 season, Cutlers average QB rating was 106.04. Pretty awesome.

That's a huge disparity. During the last three games of the season when Cutler should have been at his best, his QB rating averaged 73.87. That's a subpar rating during the teams fight for a playoff berth.

I agree that Cutler is a way more talented and physically gifted QB than Orton, but I'm not sold on the fact that Cutler has what it takes to consistently lead his team to the playoffs and produce wins in the playoffs. Perhaps I'm wrong. But, I like what Orton brings to the table, especially in this new spread offense.

SonOfLe-loLang
05-12-2009, 09:23 AM
In the Broncos losses during the 2008 season, Cutlers average QB rating was 68.25. Not very good.

In the Broncos wins during the 2008 season, Cutlers average QB rating was 106.04. Pretty awesome.

That's a huge disparity. During the last three games of the season when Cutler should have been at his best, his QB rating averaged 73.87. That's a subpar rating during the teams fight for a playoff berth.

I agree that Cutler is a way more talented and physically gifted QB than Orton, but I'm not sold on the fact that Cutler has what it takes to consistently lead his team to the playoffs and produce wins in the playoffs. Perhaps I'm wrong. But, I like what Orton brings to the table, especially in this new spread offense.

That's a really interesting stat. I suppose its a nice retort when someone blames the D for the losses.

TonyR
05-12-2009, 09:49 AM
That's a really interesting stat. I suppose its a nice retort when someone blames the D for the losses.

Yep, the D certainly was the team's larger problem but the offense deserves far more of the blame than most want to admit.

In the 8 wins the offense averaged 30.75 points, while in the 8 losses averaged 15.5. You're not going to win many games in this league averaging 15.5 points.

The offense turned the ball over 23 times in the 8 losses. Jay Cutler had 13 of his 18 int's in those losses.

The offense was both inconsistent and often not productive enough. Some prime examples:
In the KC loss the offense gained 446 yards but only put up 19 points.
In the Jac loss the offense gained 416 yards but only put up 17 points.
In the Buf loss the offense gained 532 yards but only put up 23 points.

Ironlung
05-12-2009, 10:42 AM
I liked Cutler but he is a turnover machine. He simply refuses to throw the ball out of bounds when there's nothing there. Way too many forced passes.

Popps
05-12-2009, 10:51 AM
I'm done with this junk ...... I've said where I stand lots o' times.

Now I'm willing to wait for week 1. For now nobodys right ... not popps not 27 not me.

Will anyone be at TC this year?


Just curious, when you say I'm not "right," what do you assume my position to be? What do you think I'm proclaiming myself "right" about?

Hulamau
05-12-2009, 11:24 AM
Just curious, when you say I'm not "right," what do you assume my position to be? What do you think I'm proclaiming myself "right" about?

I was wondering the same thing?

Have you been making specific predictions on Orton's TD/INT ratio or how many yards he is going to toss yet Popps? Or maybe laid down your wager on how many wins we get this year?

I may have well missed it because I'm not here so much and don't read every thread by a long shot. However, I don't even recall you proclaiming the team as Super Bowl bound, as yet, nor that McD is absolutely the best coach there is... only that you like what you see from him and are on board with supporting his efforts to impove the team and get us back on the winning track by building a solid disciplined football team from the bench on up, even if it takes a couple years to get there.

Nor do I recall you proclaiming that Orton walks on water, at least not yet, but enlighten me please if I missed any of that? :wave:

gyldenlove
05-12-2009, 11:33 AM
Yep, the D certainly was the team's larger problem but the offense deserves far more of the blame than most want to admit.

In the 8 wins the offense averaged 30.75 points, while in the 8 losses averaged 15.5. You're not going to win many games in this league averaging 15.5 points.

The offense turned the ball over 23 times in the 8 losses. Jay Cutler had 13 of his 18 int's in those losses.

The offense was both inconsistent and often not productive enough. Some prime examples:
In the KC loss the offense gained 446 yards but only put up 19 points.
In the Jac loss the offense gained 416 yards but only put up 17 points.
In the Buf loss the offense gained 532 yards but only put up 23 points.

So you are saying the offense should win every single game?

Isn't it funny that the offense won 7 games last year, and the defense won how many? 0 (I am attributing 1 win to Hochuli). I love the way to run a team when the offense has to win every single game and the defense can just lean back and take a beating.

At least the offense came to play in half the games we played, the defense never did.

Blueflame
05-12-2009, 11:58 AM
Actually lots of things contrary to my opinon aren't fluff...they're wrong...but they're not fluff. ;D

My definition of "fluff" is something that purports to say something of substance but really says nothing...you should be pretty familiar with that.

The piece is flawed on multiple fronts, including the amateurish way he attempts to connect statistics unrelated to each other in order to somehow prove...what? That Orton's an upgrade on...was it Cutler or Cassel?...it wasn't even clear on that point. If it's Cutler...he's a moron. If he meant an upgrade on Cassel...who cares? He's a Chief.

Any twit on the Mane could have produced this tripe.

Not quite true... some of us twits on the Mane have higher than sixth-grade language skills and are capable of proper word usage, grammar and spelling. Which means our tripe would have been superior... and more reader-friendly. :approve:

TonyR
05-12-2009, 12:00 PM
At least the offense came to play in half the games we played, the defense never did.

You've reasserted my point right there. The defense was clearly the bigger problem but the offense was also a problem. Coming to play in "half the games" is not showing up enough. Poor offensive productivity put more pressure on a bad defense. Hopefully this year's offense will be more productive and show up more often than half the time.

Blueflame
05-12-2009, 12:00 PM
Well, in the words of Dortoh and his thread...."f@#$% that!ROFL!

Ha! ;D :rofl:

oubronco
05-12-2009, 12:08 PM
Bottom line Orton SUCKS he couldn't even start for the Bears!!!

How some here can say he's an upgrade over Cutler is mind boggling and pure stupidity

gyldenlove
05-12-2009, 12:14 PM
You've reasserted my point right there. The defense was clearly the bigger problem but the offense was also a problem. Coming to play in "half the games" is not showing up enough. Poor offensive productivity put more pressure on a bad defense. Hopefully this year's offense will be more productive and show up more often than half the time.

So you are saying you would rather fix a unit that wins 7 games, than a unit that wins 0 games?

Here is what makes sense: get the unit that wins 0 games to win 3 games and leave the other unit alone, you will win 10 games.

footstepsfrom#27
05-12-2009, 12:16 PM
Not quite true... some of us twits on the Mane have higher than sixth-grade language skills and are capable of proper word usage, grammar and spelling. Which means our tripe would have been superior... and more reader-friendly. :approve:
Touche...but I use the word "twit" judiciously. ;)

Broncos4tw
05-12-2009, 12:17 PM
This wasn't about upgrading the QB position, it was about upgrading the football team. We've replaced an extremely talented but very inconsistent QB, who will win you some games and lose you some others, with a QB who should be more than good enough to get the job done in the offensive system they'll run. We also got draft picks to fill some other needs. Without this trade the Broncos probably don't pick Moreno at 12 and only come away with only one potential difference maker in the first round. You've got to look at the bigger picture.

How was removing a QB with his #'s in any way, 'improving our team?' Unless we turn out to have an astounding draft, at best, it's a wash. Except.. we have Orton, not Cutler.

Now, aside from some super-talented defense teams, how many team with an average or even slightly above average QB win the SB on a regular basis? Or in fact, ever?

I still think people are putting too much stock into a system that the Pats coach has a lot more to do with imo, than Josh. We are not the Patriots. People are counting on the 'system' to work miracles. It still has to be done with players at the end of the day.

Even prior and during the draft, I did not hear ONE analyst that said that getting rid of Jay was a smart move. I heard EVERY one that mentioned it, as being a pretty boneheaded move for our front office and coach. He was the better player, in the most important position on the team.

I'll support these guys 'til the end. Even McD. I'm just saying, prepare for disappointment. I'll be honestly pleasantly surprised if we do a lot better than I expect, and will give McD his due. I have nothing personal invested in Cutler, I just feel he was the much better QB. Inconsistent you can coach. He just has much better talents.

I still hope Chicago somehow folds like a cheap card table next year, but I'm not counting on it.

Blueflame
05-12-2009, 12:50 PM
Touche...but I use the word "twit" judiciously. ;)

That you did... and you also used it correctly with the realization that vowels are not interchangeable and substituting a different vowel in the word would significantly alter the word's meaning. ;D

TonyR
05-12-2009, 12:59 PM
I still think people are putting too much stock into a system that the Pats coach has a lot more to do with imo, than Josh. We are not the Patriots. People are counting on the 'system' to work miracles. It still has to be done with players at the end of the day.


Well, ask yourself this question: man for man, after Tom Brady went down, who had more offensive talent, last year's Pats or this years Broncos? Would you agree that they're close talent wise, with perhaps a slight edge to Denver? If yes, and if you agree that NE's offense was pretty good last year (5th in yards, 8th in points), then your question is answered.

Tombstone RJ
05-12-2009, 01:01 PM
How was removing a QB with his #'s in any way, 'improving our team?' Unless we turn out to have an astounding draft, at best, it's a wash. Except.. we have Orton, not Cutler.

Now, aside from some super-talented defense teams, how many team with an average or even slightly above average QB win the SB on a regular basis? Or in fact, ever?

I still think people are putting too much stock into a system that the Pats coach has a lot more to do with imo, than Josh. We are not the Patriots. People are counting on the 'system' to work miracles. It still has to be done with players at the end of the day.

Even prior and during the draft, I did not hear ONE analyst that said that getting rid of Jay was a smart move. I heard EVERY one that mentioned it, as being a pretty boneheaded move for our front office and coach. He was the better player, in the most important position on the team.

I'll support these guys 'til the end. Even McD. I'm just saying, prepare for disappointment. I'll be honestly pleasantly surprised if we do a lot better than I expect, and will give McD his due. I have nothing personal invested in Cutler, I just feel he was the much better QB. Inconsistent you can coach. He just has much better talents.

I still hope Chicago somehow folds like a cheap card table next year, but I'm not counting on it.

People seem to be arguing two different things. 1. that Cutler is a more talented QB than Orton and 2. that Cutler is a better QB in the Spread Offense than Orton.

On the first argument, I am not denying Cutler's talent at all. He's the closest thing to Elway since, well, Elway in terms of sheer talent. And, he's got brains too. He is the best young QB in the game IMHO.

On the second argument, we simply don't know if Cutler is the better fit for the new system. Neither Orton nor Cutler is a known commodity in the Spread Offense. Is Cutler a strong armed, mobil, lethal threat with the ball in his hands, absolutely! Is Cutler a more efficient manager of the game than Orton, under McD's system--we just don't know!

Throw in the fact that Jay wanted out. He wanted out. He wanted out. And I think you might be inclined to accept the fact that Orton is the best QB for the job at this point and time.

oubronco
05-12-2009, 01:01 PM
Well, ask yourself this question: man for man, after Tom Brady went down, who had more offensive talent, last year's Pats or this years Broncos? Would you agree that they're close talent wise, with perhaps a slight edge to Denver? If yes, and if you agree that NE's offense was pretty good last year (5th in yards, 8th in points), then your question is answered.

now do the same to the Defenses and then your question is answered

footstepsfrom#27
05-12-2009, 01:06 PM
People seem to be arguing two different things. 1. that Cutler is a more talented QB than Orton and 2. that Cutler is a better QB in the Spread Offense than Cutler.
I definitely see Cutler as better than Cutler in the spread, but I do admit that Orton's better than Orton in the WCO.
And I think you might be inclined to accept the fact that Orton is the best QB for the job at this point and time.
I don't know about that but he's a damn sight better than Orton

RubberDuckie24
05-12-2009, 01:07 PM
Surely you're not suggesting that Jay Cutler was the only player on our roster who underachieved during the month of December when a single win would have clinched a playoff berth? My own take is that there were at least 10 defensive players who should be placed ahead of Cutler in the culpability-for-the-collapse line.

Furthermore, I'd also challenge the assertion that Cutler was the "second-biggest name in Broncos history".... I think I'd place TD, Shannon, Rod, Steve Atwater, Randy Gradishar, and Floyd Little (just to name a few off the top of my head) above him. While Jay had the potential to maybe develop to where he might have justified that characterization, it simply didn't happen and the characterization therefore is bogus. IMHO.


lol, the author wasn't saying Cutler was the second biggest name in Broncos history, he was saying Mike Shannahan was (2nd to Elway), which I would agree with.

SonOfLe-loLang
05-12-2009, 01:12 PM
Bottom line Orton SUCKS he couldn't even start for the Bears!!!

How some here can say he's an upgrade over Cutler is mind boggling and pure stupidity

Orton started for the bears last year, what are you talking about?

And yes, i agree Orton being better than Cutler for the system is a long stretch, i dont think he'll be the disaster you think he'll be

gyldenlove
05-12-2009, 01:12 PM
now do the same to the Defenses and then your question is answered

NE has more talent on the defensive line than we have on our total defense.

Tombstone RJ
05-12-2009, 01:15 PM
I definitely see Cutler as better than Cutler in the spread, but I do admit that Orton's better than Orton in the WCO.

I don't know about that but he's a damn sight better than Orton

:rofl: I get it, my bad!

Blueflame
05-12-2009, 01:18 PM
lol, the author wasn't saying Cutler was the second biggest name in Broncos history, he was saying Mike Shannahan was (2nd to Elway), which I would agree with.

That was already clarified about 2 pages ago... along with the observation that superior writing skills would have helped in expressing the author's thoughts.:wave:

BroncoBuff
05-12-2009, 01:21 PM
Interesting thoughts, but it doesn't matter.

Chris Simms will win the job. There's a reason Orton couldn't beat out Griese or Grossman. I'm conflicted about Orton ... he has a poor completion percentage, but he wins alotta games. ???

He'll be an excellent backup, though.

colonelbeef
05-12-2009, 01:34 PM
Guys and girls- this is not a debate. Jay Cutler is better in every way imaginable than Kyle "couldn't win the Bears job outright" Orton. There is no debate. Stop making yourselves look foolish homers and accept this simple fact.

Blueflame
05-12-2009, 01:44 PM
Guys and girls- this is not a debate. Jay Cutler is better in every way imaginable than Kyle "couldn't win the Bears job outright" Orton. There is no debate. Stop making yourselves look foolish homers and accept this simple fact.

I'm finding it really interesting reading the spin that a guy who was benched in favor of Brian Griese is an "upgrade" over Cutler.... oh, and let me just mention right now that there's no team in the league that would have given up 2 #1 draft picks for Kyle Orton.

Drek
05-12-2009, 01:53 PM
Guys and girls- this is not a debate. Jay Cutler is better in every way imaginable than Kyle "couldn't win the Bears job outright" Orton. There is no debate. Stop making yourselves look foolish homers and accept this simple fact.

I'd say that Orton won the job outright several times with the Bears, starting in '05 with his rookie season.

The argument you're trying to apply here is that Lovie Smith and Ron Turner know better and that was why they kept going back to Rex Grossman time after time.

In reality they had some crazy ass infatuation with Grossman based on him being a practice field super hero, ignoring the fact that Orton out played him on Sundays 80% of the time and just won games.

The notion that Orton is a better raw talent at anything on a football field than Jay Cutler is laughable. But then Jay Cutler didn't want to play here, for this coach, this owner, this organization, or its fans. Pining over him is like having a crush on a girl who thinks you're a massive loser. Its pretty damn pathetic.

Orton should fit well in McDaniels' offense though, and make no mistake, it is McDaniels' offense. He took over when Wies left and the offense has only improved since. It has gone through various changes in personnel, scheme, and style yet it continues to be a top offense. That rests pretty heavily on the guy who is game planning, installing, and play calling said offense. That was McDaniels, nearly completely, since 2005. Its his baby and Pats fans are more worried about what their offense will look like without him than we should about ours with him.

The Joker
05-12-2009, 02:45 PM
If there's one thing the Bears are great at, it's evaluating QB's...

He did win the job last year, the first time they had a fair competition for it, by the way.

That said, I don't think anyone can sanely argue that Cutler isn't a vastly better QB at this point in time and if he wasn't such a pansy I'd have him back in a flash.

Orton is actually a better fit for what McD wants to do, but if McDaniels and Cutler had gelled and Cutler had bought in to what McDaniels wants to do then the results could have been awesome.

But they didn't and now Jay's gone, I've moved on and think we'll be fine.

If Moreno can work out like people think then it'll offset the downgrade at the QB position. Had we not had two firsts then I doubt we can afford to take a RB in the first.

elsid13
05-12-2009, 02:51 PM
If there's one thing the Bears are great at, it's evaluating QB's...

He did win the job last year, the first time they had a fair competition for it, by the way.

That said, I don't think anyone can sanely argue that Cutler isn't a vastly better QB at this point in time and if he wasn't such a pansy I'd have him back in a flash.

Orton is actually a better fit for what McD wants to do, but if McDaniels and Cutler had gelled and Cutler had bought in to what McDaniels wants to do then the results could have been awesome.

But they didn't and now Jay's gone, I've moved on and think we'll be fine.

If Moreno can work out like people think then it'll offset the downgrade at the QB position. Had we not had two firsts then I doubt we can afford to take a RB in the first.

Folks are making that statement in bold, but no one ever provides any reasons behind it. How is Cutler not a better fit for this offense? What does Orton bring to the game that Cutler doesn't?

Blueflame
05-12-2009, 02:57 PM
Folks are making that statement in bold, but no one ever provides any reasons behind it. How is Cutler not a better fit for this offense? What does Orton bring to the game that Cutler doesn't?

We have a downgrade at the QB position.... I think what we're seeing is an effort to rationalize this fact in order to minimize the impact and retain optimism. "It won't be that bad; maybe he'll perform as well as Cutler would have. Who knows, maybe he'll be even better"... while the realist knows this probably is ludicrous, the eternal optimist will buy every word.

DenverBrit
05-12-2009, 02:57 PM
Folks are making that statement in bold, but no one ever provides any reasons behind it. How is Cutler not a better fit for this offense? What does Orton bring to the game that Cutler doesn't?

Draft picks. ;D

BroncoBuff
05-12-2009, 03:00 PM
Folks are making that statement in bold, but no one ever provides any reasons behind it. How is Cutler not a better fit for this offense? What does Orton bring to the game that Cutler doesn't?

Cutler is a better fit for any offense, period. There is no skill Orton has more of than Cutler.

The question is: are Robert Ayers, Alphonso Smith and Kyle Orton a sufficient return for Jay?

Personally I'm doubting it. But we must admit that it's entirely possible that Smith and Ayers turn into mega-stalwarts on defense ... maybe even Pro-Bowlers. I think Simms will beat out Orton, but at the very least Kyle is an excellent backup quarterback.

There's NO chance Orton is better than Cutler. At anything.

But there is at least SOME chance we'll win that trade in the end.

The Joker
05-12-2009, 03:11 PM
Folks are making that statement in bold, but no one ever provides any reasons behind it. How is Cutler not a better fit for this offense? What does Orton bring to the game that Cutler doesn't?

If you'll read my post again you'll see that I say that Jay's potential in McDaniels' offense, as in any offense, is higher than that of Orton.

But it's not his natural game, he'd need to really buy in to what McDaniels wants to do and adjust his game. Take the checkdown when the big play isn't there, don't force the ball where it's going to be hard for it to go.

Had he done that, he could have been unstoppable.

Orton on the other hand is exactly that type of quarterback, won't try anything too crazy for the most part, mainly because he can't. He's a very good fit for what McD wants from a QB. He'll likely never make the Pro-Bowl, but he'll play within the system and most likely be pretty solid good with the talent he has around him.

Hence, a better "fit".

It's not the same as being a better player.

elsid13
05-12-2009, 03:22 PM
If you'll read my post again you'll see that I say that Jay's potential in McDaniels' offense, as in any offense, is higher than that of Orton.

But it's not his natural game, he'd need to really buy in to what McDaniels wants to do and adjust his game. Take the checkdown when the big play isn't there, don't force the ball where it's going to be hard for it to go.

Had he done that, he could have been unstoppable.

Orton on the other hand is exactly that type of quarterback, won't try anything too crazy for the most part, mainly because he can't. He's a very good fit for what McD wants from a QB. He'll likely never make the Pro-Bowl, but he'll play within the system and most likely be pretty solid good with the talent he has around him.

Hence, a better "fit".

It's not the same as being a better player.

What you are talking is the maturation of any pro-QB. There is no reason to believe that Cutler wouldn't follow the same develop curve of all NFL QB, learning to take what the defense give him and when to force it. That comes from experience and playing the game. Cutler is just starting to come into his own and most of the stupid mistake people are whining about will shortly be gone from his game.

The Joker
05-12-2009, 03:47 PM
What you are talking is the maturation of any pro-QB. There is no reason to believe that Cutler wouldn't follow the same develop curve of all NFL QB, learning to take what the defense give him and when to force it. That comes from experience and playing the game. Cutler is just starting to come into his own and most of the stupid mistake people are whining about will shortly be gone from his game.

All QB's progress differently, it's not like every single QB in the league has ironed out all their mistakes by the time they hit year 5.

Very few do, in fact.

Doesn't mean they can't still be quality QB's. Brett Favre, for instance, probably made as many dumb throws in year 10 as he did in year 3.

From what I saw of Jay last year I'm not sure how well he'll ever learn to curb his gunslinger mentality. I'm sure he'll evolve to some extent, but my guess is he'll always be the kind of guy that will have the ability to win you games on his own when in form, and make some costly mistakes more often than you'd like.

gyldenlove
05-12-2009, 08:44 PM
All QB's progress differently, it's not like every single QB in the league has ironed out all their mistakes by the time they hit year 5.

Very few do, in fact.

Doesn't mean they can't still be quality QB's. Brett Favre, for instance, probably made as many dumb throws in year 10 as he did in year 3.

From what I saw of Jay last year I'm not sure how well he'll ever learn to curb his gunslinger mentality. I'm sure he'll evolve to some extent, but my guess is he'll always be the kind of guy that will have the ability to win you games on his own when in form, and make some costly mistakes more often than you'd like.

Last year Cutler had to win every game, if you put him on a team where he doesn't have to score on every series to win, he won't make as many mistakes. The more pressure you are under, the more chances you have to take.

Popps
05-12-2009, 08:57 PM
Interesting thoughts, but it doesn't matter.

Chris Simms will win the job. There's a reason Orton couldn't beat out Griese or Grossman. I'm conflicted about Orton ... he has a poor completion percentage, but he wins alotta games. ???

He'll be an excellent backup, though.

Count me in the camp that thinks we'll have a true competition at QB this year, and don't put it past McDaniels to start the rookie if he plays the best. (Which is highly unlikely.) Simms has some skills, and it really comes down to how healthy he is. He's also been away from the game for a while as far as playing-time.

What I like about Orton: Winning percentage, tough QB, good intermediate arm, knows the system, his teammates love him.

What concerns me: He had a poor 4th quarter QB rating. Now, that may be no big deal... especially considering his record. But, Cutler had a great rating in the 4th quarter, despite making big mistakes at key times last year.

If Orton starts, he'll need to be able to play complete games and can't struggle late in games.

footstepsfrom#27
05-12-2009, 09:15 PM
We have a downgrade at the QB position.... I think what we're seeing is an effort to rationalize this fact in order to minimize the impact and retain optimism. "It won't be that bad; maybe he'll perform as well as Cutler would have. Who knows, maybe he'll be even better"... while the realist knows this probably is ludicrous, the eternal optimist will buy every word.
Exactly...all this denial is so laughable. If Orton were traded out of here next week for a 5th rounder and Brandstater or whatever his name is was promoted, half this place would be singing his praises as the next Brady because his name's Tom.

Blueflame
05-12-2009, 09:24 PM
Exactly...all this denial is so laughable. If Orton were traded out of here next week for a 5th rounder and Brandstater or whatever his name is was promoted, half this place would be singing his praises as the next Brady because his name's Tom.

Yes, because some do believe in McDaniels to be able to make chicken soup out of chicken sh*t.... or turn water into wine or some other such miraculous feat just because he spent a couple of years on Belicheat's staff. Me, I say "prove it".

GreatBronco16
05-12-2009, 11:08 PM
I would still have rather had Cutler. But Cutler got what he wanted. Which to me seems like out of Elway town. Now I just hope that McDaniels can put this together and make a winning team out of Denver. The last few years have just been hard to watch. Interesting, but hard to watch nonetheless.

Hulamau
05-12-2009, 11:21 PM
People seem to be arguing two different things. 1. that Cutler is a more talented QB than Orton and 2. that Cutler is a better QB in the Spread Offense than Orton.

On the first argument, I am not denying Cutler's talent at all. He's the closest thing to Elway since, well, Elway in terms of sheer talent. And, he's got brains too. He is the best young QB in the game IMHO.

On the second argument, we simply don't know if Cutler is the better fit for the new system. Neither Orton nor Cutler is a known commodity in the Spread Offense. Is Cutler a strong armed, mobil, lethal threat with the ball in his hands, absolutely! Is Cutler a more efficient manager of the game than Orton, under McD's system--we just don't know!

Throw in the fact that Jay wanted out. He wanted out. He wanted out. And I think you might be inclined to accept the fact that Orton is the best QB for the job at this point and time.

Exactlamente Tombstone!

No one is denying that Cutler has rare physical talents and its a damn shame we cant see them blossom here with good coaching. I was as die hard a fan of him as ANY one here from the moment Shanny drafted him. Go look up my posts on draft day 2006. I had been following Jay for some time and was dreaming we would get him but never really thought it would be possible. It was a gutsy solid move by Shanny to move up for him and I was happy as a clam!

Even at the Pro bowl events this year I went out of my way to talk to Cutler and tell him how happy I was he was a Bronco and good job etc. He was decent enough and it was a nice moment. But I also recognized watching him interacting with some of the Pro Bowl guys around the pool at the hotel, while I was having lunch there, what I had gleaned in the first three years in press reports, and that is the arrogance and smug aloofness he displayed just interacting with some of the players.

He seemed to be deferential to Payton Manning, but just the way he carried himself around some of the other guys you could tell he felt he was God's Gift to Humanity. Maybe it was the hubris of being in that elite crowd as one of them for the first time or whatever. It was no big deal for me at the time and at least he was OUR smug arrogant stud QB!:-)

And I remember cheering him on while he stunk up his performance in the Pro Bowl, and easily rationalized that away as, 'Who cares, its just an exhibition game', and yet I remember driving home after the game with that same gnawing feeling I've had on a number of occasions when Cutler has failed to really fill Elway's shoes and snatch victory away from the jaws of defeat, even when he still had a clear chance regardless of how crappy the D was playing. And that gnawing feeling was that I hope Cutler can learn to develop a real passion for winning !

Even coming out of Vanderbilt you could tell he liked to win and loved to perform well, but he was always so quick to rationalize any defeat and minimize it. Almost as if it was just par for the course , which I could understand growing up in the SEC playing at Vandy. I suppose he HAD to develop some of that attitude to survive there.

But I still just have this feeling he hasn't taken that next step in maturity as a player where he is DETERMINED to win and drag the team through Hell and High water to get it done no matter what.

You could even see this poor attitude in his blaming the D right after the last game in San Diego this year. Sure, the D stunk it up and in that game he truly had no chance and technically he was right, but to come out and say that first thing reveals a mind set that you don't often see in the rare true elite QBs ( like Elway) who have learned to consistently win ... and lead!

In any event, then watching the very sad debacle of his pout fest out of town and revealing plain as day just how self-centered, immature and not ready to be a leader in the trenches he really was, with such a pathetic performance in such high stakes poker when the good of his own teammates was also on the line. And when he had EVERY freaking opportunity in the world to save face and come back in and all would have been forgiven inside of 24 hours! Hell McD nearly gave Cutler a blow job at the Owners meeting with every press outlet in the world reporting his every word in prime time!

And yet when it was 4th down and goal to go on the one Cutler coughed up another one and looked like a FOOL doing it not returning Bowlen's urgent calls!

Continued on next post

Hulamau
05-12-2009, 11:23 PM
(continued) .... It IS a damn shame we well never get to see how good Jay could have become had he been smart enough and willing enough to set his ego on the sideline just long enough to really submit himself to McDaniel's QB transformation. Its really a Damn Shame! Jay might have become one of the all time greats. Maybe even the best ever if he had had the good sense to allow a stud QB coach like McD is to hold him accountable and not treat him like a prima donna while showing him what it takes in the fine details of the game, as well as the psychology and character to force your WILL on the game!

That is the real tragedy here. Sure Jay may go on to do good or even great things eventually in Chicago, and yet there is at least a 50-50 chance, if not greater, that he becomes another Jeff Georgian caricature as well!

Always tantalizingly close on the cusp of doing something great , with many fabulous plays and stunning games to tease the hell out of Bears fans, but still managing to shoot himself as well as his team in the foot time and again because he never learned that one little thing of laying it all on the line and making winning not just a nice thing, but the ONLY thing!

In any event, after it became clear Cutler was going to Manipulate his way out of town no matter what, of course most of us, with some real regret at the loss and uncertainty, looked to the future and what was possible .. Cutler clearly was NO LONGER POSSIBLE! Get it?!

And unlike the increasingly few shallow, rigid, stuck in the mud, Doom and Gloomer Cutler suckers still alive here who seem absolute mired in some fantasy land of regret and despondency, mixed with truly irrational hatred for McD as that guy who 'stole your CANDY', most of the rest of us have taken the time to really LOOK at what Kyle Orton is and might realistically become here, and discovered what he has done when he is healthy and protected.

Orton has NEVER had an offense like this around him, such a QB friendly system and a steller coach like McD and with this Oline, WR and stable of RB's with two stud like Hillis and Moreno among them.

You few seem to fail to have watched or even read the details of any of those first 7 games last year before he had the terrible high ankle sprain that cost him only one game and yet he was back out playing and was very limited very immobile and with not as much juice on the ball for much of the rest of the season with an injury as serious and debilitating as a broken leg! And yet he gave it his all still.

Those first games last year, and some in his first season when he had 10 wins as a rookie before the idiot defensive-minded coaches in Chicago got mesmerized by Grossman's big arm and yanked him before the playoffs, clearly show a QB in charge and playing at a high level even with a porous Oline and terrible WRs!

Then when you carefully look at his career at Purdue where he was in a system much closer to McD's and ran a spread type offense with great skill and success, it isn't hard to imagine where some of us who do more than just fix your rigid position and then TOTALLY ignore any facts or suggestions to the contrary, get our healthy optimism for the future, even while still waiting and seeing how it all turns out.

It doesn't mean it will all work out, or that Orton will be the answer. Maybe he wont, maybe the whole experiment with McD fails, we don't know? But there IS a hell a of a lot more reasons for seeing this glass half full than there are good rationales for seeing it drained dry and broken as a few of you serotonin-challenged 'fans' seem hell bent on holding onto!

Anyway, maybe its just your coping strategy because you've been disappointed so often in your lives and just don't have it in you to look beneath the surface of your doubting selves and see if there is even a single ray of hope possible!?!

Whatever, I'll never say you aren't true fans ... perhaps a bit dysfunctional ... and certainly more than a little sour, but hey to each his or her own and all power to ya!

Drek
05-13-2009, 03:41 AM
Folks are making that statement in bold, but no one ever provides any reasons behind it. How is Cutler not a better fit for this offense? What does Orton bring to the game that Cutler doesn't?

He isn't, period. Its a BS argument.

In reality the gap between the two from a talent standpoint is closed significantly within McDaniels' system, as opposed to the WCO or whatever the crap we ran last year was supposed to be.

Orton is a pretty savvy QB who makes his reads quickly and distributes the ball. His completion percentage over his career isn't great, but then he's also been on a team where for much of his time there Desmond Clark has been the best receiving threat on the roster (yep, our former #2 TE). He showed significant improvement last year, especially prior to playing through an ankle injury.

Thats basically what McDaniels' offense calls for. Someone who can make the right pre-snap reads, sit in the pocket after the snap, feel the pressure coming, and get the ball out to the first available playmaker in a chance to make a play. In his offense the QB plays primarily a distribution role while the receivers make it into something. Its a lot like the old school WCO in that regard, but ran out of the spread.

Those requirements go pretty strongly against the grain of what Cutler's game is all about. He doesn't like to look for his first available option, he likes to look downfield and only check down when forced to. He tries to make plays with his legs to avoid pressure and keep the play alive, still looking for the big play. He also isn't the best decision maker in the world.

There is no way Orton compares even remotely closely to Cutler absent a specific scheme's requirements, but with a specific scheme in mind (McDaniels) the comparison is a whole lot closer.

Doesn't mean that if Cutler hadn't decided to burn his bridges on the way out of town that McDaniels' offense wouldn't have been tweaked and modified to better serve Cutler, while also making him a more responsible QB with the ball. But Cutler didn't want to be part of that. He wanted out, and he got his wish.

fontaine
05-13-2009, 04:52 AM
Orton is a pretty savvy QB who makes his reads quickly and distributes the ball. His completion percentage over his career isn't great, but then he's also been on a team where for much of his time there Desmond Clark has been the best receiving threat on the roster (yep, our former #2 TE). He showed significant improvement last year, especially prior to playing through an ankle injury.

Thats basically what McDaniels' offense calls for. Someone who can make the right pre-snap reads, sit in the pocket after the snap, feel the pressure coming, and get the ball out to the first available playmaker in a chance to make a play. In his offense the QB plays primarily a distribution role while the receivers make it into something. Its a lot like the old school WCO in that regard, but ran out of the spread.

Yes, but it's also about making those intermediate throws. From what I've seen of the Patriots offense it's not just a collection of plays geared towards always throwing to the first or safest pass option. It's also about setting up the defense for longer, intermediate throws.

They implement a lot of one step passes right out of the snap to the WRs at the line of scrimmage to see if the CBs start playing closer to the line of scrimmage, so that it can open up longer passes if the WRs are good enough to beat the jam and get behind the CBs. I think Orton can run a simple offense that throws to the safest option but to me that just reeks of dink and dunk.

Sooner or later every QB in the NFL, regardless of the system, has to make those tough sideline passes, the 15-20 yard intermediate throws, the 2nd/3rd and long passes that open up the running game and force defenses to cover the entire field. Without this any decent defense can slow you down on first/second downs and force you into a 3rd and long situation.

And in this regard Cutler and Orton are complete opposites. Cutler's best completion percentages are on 2nd/3rd and long situations where he's one of the leagues best at completing those passes because of this strong arm and accurate ability to squeeze the ball into tough spots. Orton, at least in Chicago, couldn't. Orton downright sucked on 2nd/3rd and long situations when he can't just check down and throw safe passes to Forte.

Let's hope with better coaching, more time in the pocket and skilled Wideouts he can improve. Otherwise we just gave up the future for the next SOB.

cutthemdown
05-13-2009, 05:23 AM
trying to argue that we haven't lost a lot at that QB spot is laughable. Of course we have. You can still say we can win, but to say Orton is an upgrade over Cutler is silly.

Broncos will have to make due. The only reason I say we can be as good is because I think we can have a combo of better defense, better running game, better special teams, less turnovers from the QB spot, more turnovers on defense.

All of those things doable and could offset the big plays and one of a kind throws Cutler can make.

fontaine
05-13-2009, 07:22 AM
trying to argue that we haven't lost a lot at that QB spot is laughable. Of course we have. You can still say we can win, but to say Orton is an upgrade over Cutler is silly.

Broncos will have to make due. The only reason I say we can be as good is because I think we can have a combo of better defense, better running game, better special teams, less turnovers from the QB spot, more turnovers on defense.

All of those things doable and could offset the big plays and one of a kind throws Cutler can make.

I'm skeptical about that. An average defense, and a great running game, isn't going to make up for a lack of big plays by the QB. From what I've seen/read about Orton he has no problem making those high percentage dink and dunk passes to RBs/TEs. But that's only going to get you so far. Sooner or later the offense will have to convert some 2nd/3rd and long plays otherwise defenses will figure us out and honestly there aren't too many teams that thrive in the NFL with that sort of QB play.

The good thing is we've got the guys that will give Orton every chance to succeed. With a great pass blocking line and guys like Marshall/Royal/Scheff/Gaffney there will be guys that get open on those intermediate passes. Whether Orton can make it happen, well, that's up to him.

gyldenlove
05-13-2009, 07:40 AM
He isn't, period. Its a BS argument.

In reality the gap between the two from a talent standpoint is closed significantly within McDaniels' system, as opposed to the WCO or whatever the crap we ran last year was supposed to be.

Orton is a pretty savvy QB who makes his reads quickly and distributes the ball. His completion percentage over his career isn't great, but then he's also been on a team where for much of his time there Desmond Clark has been the best receiving threat on the roster (yep, our former #2 TE). He showed significant improvement last year, especially prior to playing through an ankle injury.

Thats basically what McDaniels' offense calls for. Someone who can make the right pre-snap reads, sit in the pocket after the snap, feel the pressure coming, and get the ball out to the first available playmaker in a chance to make a play. In his offense the QB plays primarily a distribution role while the receivers make it into something. Its a lot like the old school WCO in that regard, but ran out of the spread.

Those requirements go pretty strongly against the grain of what Cutler's game is all about. He doesn't like to look for his first available option, he likes to look downfield and only check down when forced to. He tries to make plays with his legs to avoid pressure and keep the play alive, still looking for the big play. He also isn't the best decision maker in the world.

There is no way Orton compares even remotely closely to Cutler absent a specific scheme's requirements, but with a specific scheme in mind (McDaniels) the comparison is a whole lot closer.

Doesn't mean that if Cutler hadn't decided to burn his bridges on the way out of town that McDaniels' offense wouldn't have been tweaked and modified to better serve Cutler, while also making him a more responsible QB with the ball. But Cutler didn't want to be part of that. He wanted out, and he got his wish.

I am still confused as to why people think the watered down actually quite average offense that the Patriots ran last year is a true depiction of what Mcdaniels wants to do. Is that all you want? an offense that can get you close to the playoffs if you have a super defense? because last year we had an offense that got us close to the playoffs with no defense at all.

If you compare the Brady led Patriots offense to what we ran last year, they are quite similar, you use a combination of short routes and quick passes to keep the defense close to the line of scrimmage and the you use the long passes to keep the safeties deep. Orton clearly can't run that offense.

Orton is a lot worse than Cutler talentwise, he doesn't have the power, doesn't have the ability to evade the pressure, doesn't have the tight spiral to put the ball on the money when going downfield, and he never will. The only reason he has won more games and made fewer mistakes is because he has been asked to do much less, he has been able to rely heavily on defense, special teams and run game to help him out.

Cito Pelon
05-13-2009, 07:51 AM
Interesting thoughts, but it doesn't matter.

Chris Simms will win the job. There's a reason Orton couldn't beat out Griese or Grossman. I'm conflicted about Orton ... he has a poor completion percentage, but he wins alotta games. ???

He'll be an excellent backup, though.

Can you ever get the facts straight?

Orton won the starting job last year over Grossman and Griese (Griese being traded to TB prior to the draft).

At some point I hope pride kicks in and you strive to get the facts straight instead of making things up to fit your agenda.

Drek
05-13-2009, 07:52 AM
I am still confused as to why people think the watered down actually quite average offense that the Patriots ran last year is a true depiction of what Mcdaniels wants to do. Is that all you want? an offense that can get you close to the playoffs if you have a super defense? because last year we had an offense that got us close to the playoffs with no defense at all.

If you compare the Brady led Patriots offense to what we ran last year, they are quite similar, you use a combination of short routes and quick passes to keep the defense close to the line of scrimmage and the you use the long passes to keep the safeties deep. Orton clearly can't run that offense.

Orton is a lot worse than Cutler talentwise, he doesn't have the power, doesn't have the ability to evade the pressure, doesn't have the tight spiral to put the ball on the money when going downfield, and he never will. The only reason he has won more games and made fewer mistakes is because he has been asked to do much less, he has been able to rely heavily on defense, special teams and run game to help him out.

See, this here's the damn problem with this entire debate.

One side is seriously trying to justify Kyle Orton being an upgrade (system relative) to Jay Cutler.

The other is trying to say that Kyle Orton shouldn't even be a starting QB in the NFL.

I love how supposedly Tom Brady is some cannon armed down field attacker a la Peyton Manning and Jay Cutler. Tom Brady might have had the weakest arm of any QB in his graduating class. He worked on it, improved what he could, and with the help of McDaniels refined his intermediate to deep game into a deadly weapon, but at no point does he fire off lasers across his body to the opposite sideline 20 yards down field.

Kyle Orton has comparable intermediate ability to Brady or Cassel. He could use a bit of tweaking and refinement in his deep ball, but its still capable of forcing a defense to respect it and play honest in coverage.

You'd think he was some scrub 3rd stringer the way some of you talk about him, and others would make you think he's a multi-year all-pro. He's a solidly average starting QB who hasn't had much in the way of a supporting cast or coaching to date in his career. He's got a solid base of well rounded QB skills, but he's not particularly exceptional at any one thing. He isn't an amazing raw talent like Cutler but the guy is more than capable of being the starting QB on a very good, maybe even great, offense.

He's a hell of a lot like a taller Drew Brees, and Brees sure has found himself a good home in a spread offense.

Cito Pelon
05-13-2009, 08:03 AM
Folks are making that statement in bold, but no one ever provides any reasons behind it. How is Cutler not a better fit for this offense? What does Orton bring to the game that Cutler doesn't?

Mental toughness and a winner's mentality.

gyldenlove
05-13-2009, 08:15 AM
Mental toughness and a winner's mentality.

I know, Orton has played 3 seasons through a neckbeard that makes the Australian outback look like a nicely groomed scottish lawn, while all Cutler has had to deal with is a bit beetus.

gyldenlove
05-13-2009, 08:22 AM
See, this here's the damn problem with this entire debate.

One side is seriously trying to justify Kyle Orton being an upgrade (system relative) to Jay Cutler.

The other is trying to say that Kyle Orton shouldn't even be a starting QB in the NFL.

I love how supposedly Tom Brady is some cannon armed down field attacker a la Peyton Manning and Jay Cutler. Tom Brady might have had the weakest arm of any QB in his graduating class. He worked on it, improved what he could, and with the help of McDaniels refined his intermediate to deep game into a deadly weapon, but at no point does he fire off lasers across his body to the opposite sideline 20 yards down field.

Kyle Orton has comparable intermediate ability to Brady or Cassel. He could use a bit of tweaking and refinement in his deep ball, but its still capable of forcing a defense to respect it and play honest in coverage.

You'd think he was some scrub 3rd stringer the way some of you talk about him, and others would make you think he's a multi-year all-pro. He's a solidly average starting QB who hasn't had much in the way of a supporting cast or coaching to date in his career. He's got a solid base of well rounded QB skills, but he's not particularly exceptional at any one thing. He isn't an amazing raw talent like Cutler but the guy is more than capable of being the starting QB on a very good, maybe even great, offense.

He's a hell of a lot like a taller Drew Brees, and Brees sure has found himself a good home in a spread offense.

Brady is quite underrated as a downfield passer, he passes downfield about as often as Cutler did last year (a LOT more often than Orton and Cassel) and while he is not a guy who can fire a laser 40 yard downfield, he has amazing touch.

Orton may very well have the same touch and accuracy as Brady (a stretch) and Cassel (seems about right) on passes of about 10 yards, but on passes longer than 20 yards he is significantly worse than Brady.

Mcdaniels had very little to do with Bradys development, he was groomed under Charlie Weis.

Cito Pelon
05-13-2009, 08:27 AM
I would still have rather had Cutler. But Cutler got what he wanted. Which to me seems like out of Elway town. Now I just hope that McDaniels can put this together and make a winning team out of Denver. The last few years have just been hard to watch. Interesting, but hard to watch nonetheless.

Yup.

alkemical
05-13-2009, 08:34 AM
I know, Orton has played 3 seasons through a neckbeard that makes the Australian outback look like a nicely groomed scottish lawn, while all Cutler has had to deal with is a bit beetus.

It looks like cutler's drinking to forget the diabetes.

Drek
05-13-2009, 08:43 AM
Brady is quite underrated as a downfield passer, he passes downfield about as often as Cutler did last year (a LOT more often than Orton and Cassel) and while he is not a guy who can fire a laser 40 yard downfield, he has amazing touch.

Orton may very well have the same touch and accuracy as Brady (a stretch) and Cassel (seems about right) on passes of about 10 yards, but on passes longer than 20 yards he is significantly worse than Brady.

Mcdaniels had very little to do with Bradys development, he was groomed under Charlie Weis.

Tom Brady's development from a solid QB who had a knack for coming up big in big games, into an elite QB with as you put it "amazing touch" directly corresponds to when McDaniels took over as QB coach and continued to a further extent when McDaniels became the offensive coordinator.

When McDaniels became the QB coach Brady's average yards per pass jumped by nearly a whole yard. His 20+ yard passes per season went up about 20%. His QB rating went up on average about 7 points. Those numbers didn't waver a bit when Weis left, and in '07 they shattered them all again.

Tom Brady himself gives McDaniels credit for him becoming the QB that he is. Just because a lot of people on this board want to hate on our new HC because he didn't want to play grab ass with our old emo kid QB doesn't mean that he isn't the singularly most successful offensive coordinator in the NFL over the last five years. He made a very good QB into an elite QB, and he made a waiver wire level backup into a starting QB who received a $15M franchise tag. Both QBs give him a ton of the credit. Maybe, just maybe, he knows more about what it takes to play QB in the NFL, and whether or not Kyle Orton can provide that, than all of us do?

TonyR
05-13-2009, 09:14 AM
Brady is quite underrated as a downfield passer...

Is Brady as underrated as Cutler is overrated? More? Less?

Seriously, some people really have built up the legend of Jay Cutler in their minds. Many have created this image of the QB they wanted/expected him to become that doesn't jive with, and frankly may never jive with, what he is at this point or may become at some future point. Lots of tantalizing ability to go along with lots of frustrating inconsistency.

Br0nc0Buster
05-13-2009, 09:14 AM
Tom Brady's development from a solid QB who had a knack for coming up big in big games, into an elite QB with as you put it "amazing touch" directly corresponds to when McDaniels took over as QB coach and continued to a further extent when McDaniels became the offensive coordinator.

When McDaniels became the QB coach Brady's average yards per pass jumped by nearly a whole yard. His 20+ yard passes per season went up about 20%. His QB rating went up on average about 7 points. Those numbers didn't waver a bit when Weis left, and in '07 they shattered them all again.

Tom Brady himself gives McDaniels credit for him becoming the QB that he is. Just because a lot of people on this board want to hate on our new HC because he didn't want to play grab ass with our old emo kid QB doesn't mean that he isn't the singularly most successful offensive coordinator in the NFL over the last five years. He made a very good QB into an elite QB, and he made a waiver wire level backup into a starting QB who received a $15M franchise tag. Both QBs give him a ton of the credit. Maybe, just maybe, he knows more about what it takes to play QB in the NFL, and whether or not Kyle Orton can provide that, than all of us do?

Preposterous, he didnt draft enough defensive tackles, he fails at life

TheReverend
05-13-2009, 09:20 AM
Preposterous, he didnt draft any defensive tackles

Fixed...

gyldenlove
05-13-2009, 09:29 AM
Tom Brady's development from a solid QB who had a knack for coming up big in big games, into an elite QB with as you put it "amazing touch" directly corresponds to when McDaniels took over as QB coach and continued to a further extent when McDaniels became the offensive coordinator.

When McDaniels became the QB coach Brady's average yards per pass jumped by nearly a whole yard. His 20+ yard passes per season went up about 20%. His QB rating went up on average about 7 points. Those numbers didn't waver a bit when Weis left, and in '07 they shattered them all again.

Tom Brady himself gives McDaniels credit for him becoming the QB that he is. Just because a lot of people on this board want to hate on our new HC because he didn't want to play grab ass with our old emo kid QB doesn't mean that he isn't the singularly most successful offensive coordinator in the NFL over the last five years. He made a very good QB into an elite QB, and he made a waiver wire level backup into a starting QB who received a $15M franchise tag. Both QBs give him a ton of the credit. Maybe, just maybe, he knows more about what it takes to play QB in the NFL, and whether or not Kyle Orton can provide that, than all of us do?

Mcdaniels was only an OC for 3 years.

Interestingly, Mcdaniels as an OC turned Brady from a 3 time super bowl winner and twice super bowl MVP into an elite QB who hasn't won a super bowl since.

If you look at Tom Bradys seasons, the only one that stands out is 2007, which was more due to Randy Moss and Wes Welker than any coach (given that he had the same coaches in 2007 that he had in 2006).

He made a low round draft pick into a guy who was traded with an elite LB for a 2nd round draft pick, even if we discount Vrabel in that trade, Mcdaniels turned a 7th round pick into a 2nd round pick. Jeremy Bates turned a 1st round pick into 2 1st round picks and a 3rd round pick. Certainly for value, Jeremy Bates did better.

Br0nc0Buster
05-13-2009, 09:30 AM
Fixed...

Would you of complained if he drafted Chris Baker in like the 5th or 6th round?

TonyR
05-13-2009, 09:36 AM
Interestingly, Mcdaniels as an OC turned Brady from a 3 time super bowl winner and twice super bowl MVP into an elite QB who hasn't won a super bowl since.


Fair point but at the same time the play of the offense certainly wasn't the reason the Pats didn't win the Super Bowl while McD was the OC. The Pats defense aged considerably for one thing, and other teams in the conference got better for another.

Br0nc0Buster
05-13-2009, 09:37 AM
Mcdaniels was only an OC for 3 years.

Interestingly, Mcdaniels as an OC turned Brady from a 3 time super bowl winner and twice super bowl MVP into an elite QB who hasn't won a super bowl since.

If you look at Tom Bradys seasons, the only one that stands out is 2007, which was more due to Randy Moss and Wes Welker than any coach (given that he had the same coaches in 2007 that he had in 2006).

He made a low round draft pick into a guy who was traded with an elite LB for a 2nd round draft pick, even if we discount Vrabel in that trade, Mcdaniels turned a 7th round pick into a 2nd round pick. Jeremy Bates turned a 1st round pick into 2 1st round picks and a 3rd round pick. Certainly for value, Jeremy Bates did better.

So you are saying its more impressive to make a good player out of elite talent than it is to make a good player out of marginal talent?

Granted Cutler is better than Cassel, but Bates had a lot more to work with with Cutler than McDaniels did with Cassel.

The Joker
05-13-2009, 09:56 AM
It's funny how people slam Orton's deep ball when Cutler couldn't hit one to save his life all of last year. Bills game he missed a couple of guys wide open deep, Raiders game he tried half a dozen deep balls without any success, and there were plenty of other games where he missed deep too.

Where we'll really miss Jay is on the 3rd and longs, his ability to bullet in a 10 or 15 yard pass before the defender had a chance to react. Orton's not awful at this, but Jay was amazing there.

Going deep though, Orton won't be a downgrade on Cutler. Not because his deep ball is any good, rather that Jay kinda sucked at it.

TheReverend
05-13-2009, 10:12 AM
Would you of complained if he drafted Chris Baker in like the 5th or 6th round?

Absolutely. I'm a PSU fan and not the least bit excited about that scum bag.

Drek
05-13-2009, 10:31 AM
Mcdaniels was only an OC for 3 years.

Interestingly, Mcdaniels as an OC turned Brady from a 3 time super bowl winner and twice super bowl MVP into an elite QB who hasn't won a super bowl since.

If you look at Tom Bradys seasons, the only one that stands out is 2007, which was more due to Randy Moss and Wes Welker than any coach (given that he had the same coaches in 2007 that he had in 2006).

He made a low round draft pick into a guy who was traded with an elite LB for a 2nd round draft pick, even if we discount Vrabel in that trade, Mcdaniels turned a 7th round pick into a 2nd round pick. Jeremy Bates turned a 1st round pick into 2 1st round picks and a 3rd round pick. Certainly for value, Jeremy Bates did better.
McDaniels was the QB coach in '04, when they won a title.

Also, though he wasn't officially the OC, it has been pretty solidly confirmed that Belichick had him doing the entire OC job, while still being the QB coach, in '05. So he was running the entire offense there as of then, for the next four years.

In that time Tom Brady went from a consistent 85 or 86 QB rating to two 92 QB rating seasons, an 87, and a 117. How is that not massive improvement? Most of that was done with equal or lesser weapons at every position too, FYI, and an inconsistently healthy OL.

McDaniels knows more about football than you, anyone on this board, your man crush Jay Cutler, or his man crush Jeremy Bates. He's got the credentials to back it up. Deal with it.

Blueflame
05-13-2009, 10:35 AM
McDaniels was the QB coach in '04, when they won a title.

Also, though he wasn't officially the OC, it has been pretty solidly confirmed that Belichick had him doing the entire OC job, while still being the QB coach, in '05. So he was running the entire offense there as of then, for the next four years.

In that time Tom Brady went from a consistent 85 or 86 QB rating to two 92 QB rating seasons, an 87, and a 117. How is that not massive improvement? Most of that was done with equal or lesser weapons at every position too, FYI, and an inconsistently healthy OL.

McDaniels knows more about football than you, anyone on this board, your man crush Jay Cutler, or his man crush Jeremy Bates. He's got the credentials to back it up. Deal with it.

It's been "pretty solidly confirmed" by whom? Proof, please.

TonyR
05-13-2009, 10:52 AM
It's funny how people slam Orton's deep ball when Cutler couldn't hit one to save his life all of last year. Bills game he missed a couple of guys wide open deep, Raiders game he tried half a dozen deep balls without any success, and there were plenty of other games where he missed deep too.


He was particularly brutal in that Raiders game.

Punisher
05-13-2009, 10:55 AM
Warning this thread is about the Broncos. This is an interesting article and brings up some valid points, some my find it a good read and some may not. I know someone will say "nothing here that hasn't been said before, so if that's the case just sit back and let your pups suck and read about sausages and favorite rock bands.

http://www.indenvertimes.com/2009/05/11/the-case-for-kyle-orton-as-an-upgrade/

Hey! How dare you! :twitch:

TonyR
05-13-2009, 10:56 AM
It's been "pretty solidly confirmed" by whom? Proof, please.

Here's a little something, though nothing completely definitive.

August 26, 2005
McDaniels role in focus
Those wondering who might be taking a leading role in offensive play-calling might have been tipped off by the attire worn by Patriots coaches on the sidelines tonight.

Quarterbacks coach Josh McDaniels is wearing blue while other offensive coaches are in white. Patriots head coach Bill Belichick is also wearing blue. Last week, McDaniels and Belichick were both in gray, while the rest of the offensive coaches were in white.

That's a strong sign McDaniels is taking a leading role in the offensive play-calling.

On other side of the ball, defensive coordinator Eric Mangini is wearing red to distinguish himself from his fellow defensive coaches, who are in white shirts.

More to come.

--Mike

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss_pieces/2005/08/mcdaniels_role.html

Blueflame
05-13-2009, 11:19 AM
Here's a little something, though nothing completely definitive.

August 26, 2005
McDaniels role in focus
Those wondering who might be taking a leading role in offensive play-calling might have been tipped off by the attire worn by Patriots coaches on the sidelines tonight.

Quarterbacks coach Josh McDaniels is wearing blue while other offensive coaches are in white. Patriots head coach Bill Belichick is also wearing blue. Last week, McDaniels and Belichick were both in gray, while the rest of the offensive coaches were in white.

That's a strong sign McDaniels is taking a leading role in the offensive play-calling.

On other side of the ball, defensive coordinator Eric Mangini is wearing red to distinguish himself from his fellow defensive coaches, who are in white shirts.

More to come.

--Mike

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/reiss_pieces/2005/08/mcdaniels_role.html

"Taking a leading role" is not the same thing as "doing the entire OC job"... even if I did buy the idea that wearing blue instead of white meant something important.

Inkana7
05-13-2009, 11:26 AM
"Taking a leading role" is not the same thing as "doing the entire OC job"... even if I did buy the idea that wearing blue instead of white meant something important.

It's pretty widely accepted that McDaniels was the un-official OC for awhile. From what I understand, it's because Belichick didn't want a 29-year old exposed to the media too much.

TonyR
05-13-2009, 11:33 AM
It's pretty widely accepted that McDaniels was the un-official OC for awhile.

Yes, I've read/heard the same. The '05 season, post Weis, when there wasn't an "official" OC.

Punisher
05-13-2009, 11:39 AM
Yeah, Cutler threw more interceptions…because that is what happens when you throw the ball more, 616 times!
Retarded logic at its best.

I kind of got to agree with this reader Comment......

Blueflame
05-13-2009, 11:41 AM
It's pretty widely accepted that McDaniels was the un-official OC for awhile. From what I understand, it's because Belichick didn't want a 29-year old exposed to the media too much.

Well, I'm not a Patriot fan so I wouldn't know. And won't accept a vague "it's pretty widely accepted" as proof either.

Popps
05-13-2009, 11:57 AM
Well, I'm not a Patriot fan so I wouldn't know. And won't accept a vague "it's pretty widely accepted" as proof either.

It's been written about many times. Doesn't mean it's true, but McDaniels was the hottest coaching prospect on the market this year, and that's not without some reason. He's established a reputation for himself around the league and it's one of respect.

I don't blame people for questioning some of his moves. People questioned Shanahan's move when he came in. I do believe people drastically overestimate the effect he had on the Cutler situation. I believe Jay and his agent had their minds made up going into the off-season. (Post Shanahan.)
But, that's another discussion.

The point is, McDaniels rose to the top of the potential coaching crop over a period of years, really starting a decade ago. That didn't happen by accident.
People here can tear him down before he ever coaches a game, if they'd like... but it's not really prudent and it's obviously baseless.

I see a lot of sore, tender asses around here on people who saw players or coaches leave, whom they wanted to stay. Those sore asses are keeping people from having ANY sort of objectivity.

I loved Shanahan and I wanted the Cutler thing to work out. It didn't, and it's time to move on with life. There's football to discuss, draft picks to analyze, training camp to dissect and a new beginning for the franchise.

As I've said before, people can keep living in the past and predicting failure at every turn for the Broncos. Just don't expect all of us fans to join you.

Hulamau
05-13-2009, 12:06 PM
"Taking a leading role" is not the same thing as "doing the entire OC job"... even if I did buy the idea that wearing blue instead of white meant something important.

Its amazing to what degree you will contort your brain these days to try and down play any skill or experience McD might have! Especially when it is clear you are speaking from almost to total ignorance on the matter. People give some evidence that McD was a key cog in the Patriot machine, at least as early as 2005, and yet without offering ANY shred of your own evidence to the contrary to undermine his position and influence then, you simply can't wait to throw mud (or it that crap?) all over it!

Do you just want to be argumentative for arguments sake BF? Or do you have a point in all of this? ... That is other than your absolute conviction that the Broncos are doomed with McD and he will be selling underwear at Macy's next autumn? :sunshine:

BroncoBuff
05-13-2009, 12:07 PM
McDaniels rose to the top of the potential coaching crop over a period of years, really starting a decade ago.
A decade ago ... when he first legally purchased an alcoholic beverage?


I wanted the Cutler thing to work out.
Liar liar

Have you no shame sir?

gyldenlove
05-13-2009, 12:08 PM
McDaniels was the QB coach in '04, when they won a title.

Also, though he wasn't officially the OC, it has been pretty solidly confirmed that Belichick had him doing the entire OC job, while still being the QB coach, in '05. So he was running the entire offense there as of then, for the next four years.

In that time Tom Brady went from a consistent 85 or 86 QB rating to two 92 QB rating seasons, an 87, and a 117. How is that not massive improvement? Most of that was done with equal or lesser weapons at every position too, FYI, and an inconsistently healthy OL.

McDaniels knows more about football than you, anyone on this board, your man crush Jay Cutler, or his man crush Jeremy Bates. He's got the credentials to back it up. Deal with it.

That is true, but Weis was the OC and Belichick was the HC, so he was at least 2 steps down the ladder and the funny thing is that 2004 is the ONLY super bowl Brady has won when he wasn't named MVP - that COULD be a coincidence, but it is remarkable that the more power Mcdaniels has gotten, the futher Tom Brady has gotten from being a super bowl MVP.

How is going from an 86 (85, 86 and 86) average to a 91 (87, 92, 92) average a massive improvement? If you think Mcdaniels has more to do with 2007 than Randy Moss and Wes Welker, you are frankly dumber than my hamster.

I am sorry you had to resort to personal attacks, so let me give you a word of advice next time you feel like you have to stoop to something like that: just accept that you have no factual arguments and are probably wrong. It will save yourself and the rest of us a lot of grief and time.

gyldenlove
05-13-2009, 12:10 PM
It's pretty widely accepted that McDaniels was the un-official OC for awhile. From what I understand, it's because Belichick didn't want a 29-year old exposed to the media too much.

Considering that no Patriot coordinator has ever been exposed to the media, that seems like a bit of a stretch. Belichick is the guy in Boston and considering how open the Patriots organization as a whole is with the press, I would say there is probably another and bigger reason why he wasn't made OC.

Remarkably, if the Patriots had made Mcdaniels OC, they could have made it harder for other teams to sign him as they could only offer him a deal if they were going to make him HC.

Popps
05-13-2009, 12:14 PM
A decade ago ... when he first legally purchased an alcoholic beverage?
?

He started working under Saban 10 years ago.


Liar liar

Have you no shame sir?

Look up my posts, dippy. Particularly early in the saga, I thought Jay was being a douche... but wanted it to work out and actually though it probably would. I pretty much retained that stance until he demanded a trade and stopped talking to the team. At that point, it became apparent that he had never planned to return without a huge contract and a lot of ass-kissing.

2KBack
05-13-2009, 12:17 PM
That is true, but Weis was the OC and Belichick was the HC, so he was at least 2 steps down the ladder and the funny thing is that 2004 is the ONLY super bowl Brady has won when he wasn't named MVP - that COULD be a coincidence, but it is remarkable that the more power Mcdaniels has gotten, the futher Tom Brady has gotten from being a super bowl MVP.

How is going from an 86 (85, 86 and 86) average to a 91 (87, 92, 92) average a massive improvement? If you think Mcdaniels has more to do with 2007 than Randy Moss and Wes Welker, you are frankly dumber than my hamster.

I am sorry you had to resort to personal attacks, so let me give you a word of advice next time you feel like you have to stoop to something like that: just accept that you have no factual arguments and are probably wrong. It will save yourself and the rest of us a lot of grief and time.

Forgive me for asking, but what exactly are you arguing? Are you arguing that despite Tom Brady's improved statistics, and personal endorsement of McDaniels, that Tom Brady is worse under his tutelage due to a lack of SB MVP trophies? Is this in defense of Cutler, or in prosecution of McD? I don't see how anyone could blame the OC or QB coach for a lack of championships especially when the positions he specifically coaches are excelling. Especially if in the next breath is defending Cutler record by blaming other parts of the team.

Blueflame
05-13-2009, 12:25 PM
Its amazing to what degree you will contort your brain these days to try and down play any skill or experience McD might have! Especially when it is clear you are speaking from almost to total ignorance on the matter. People give some evidence that McD was a key cog in the Patriot machine, at least as early as 2005, and yet without offering ANY shred of your own evidence to the contrary to undermine his position and influence then, you simply can't wait to throw mud (or it that crap?) all over it!

Do you just want to be argumentative for arguments sake BF? Or do you have a point in all of this? ... That is other than your absolute conviction that the Broncos are doomed with McD and he will be selling underwear at Macy's next autumn? :sunshine:

Drek made a claim that I don't necessarily believe is true (as noted, I didn't/don't follow the Patriots; can't stand 'em) ...I genuinely would like to read something a bit more substantial than "it is generally accepted". And no evidence has yet been presented to support the claim. I'm still waiting....

footstepsfrom#27
05-13-2009, 12:27 PM
It's pretty widely accepted that McDaniels was the un-official OC for awhile. From what I understand, it's because Belichick didn't want a 29-year old exposed to the media too much.
What's the basis for this understanding?

Blueflame
05-13-2009, 12:29 PM
What's the basis for this understanding?

Yeah. We wanna see the Belicheat quote.... :P

gyldenlove
05-13-2009, 12:37 PM
Forgive me for asking, but what exactly are you arguing? Are you arguing that despite Tom Brady's improved statistics, and personal endorsement of McDaniels, that Tom Brady is worse under his tutelage due to a lack of SB MVP trophies? Is this in defense of Cutler, or in prosecution of McD? I don't see how anyone could blame the OC or QB coach for a lack of championships especially when the positions he specifically coaches are excelling. Especially if in the next breath is defending Cutler record by blaming other parts of the team.

I am trying to show 2 things:

1. Mcdaniels is not the second coming. He is a very capable coach, but he is not the saviour that some people seem to believe, and he is not someone who can turn a lump of very mediocre football player with neckbeard like Orton into a superstar.

2. If you think the QB and coach is all important in terms of winning (as some seem to say in justifying the Cutler trade), then Mcdaniels is the wrong choice. If on the other hand the QB is just another player and the coach is just a small part of the team, then fact is that we are less talented now with Orton instead of Cutler and Mcdaniels is not going to be able to make up for that lack of talent.

2KBack
05-13-2009, 12:46 PM
Drek made a claim that I don't necessarily believe is true (as noted, I didn't/don't follow the Patriots; can't stand 'em) ...I genuinely would like to read something a bit more substantial than "it is generally accepted". And no evidence has yet been presented to support the claim. I'm still waiting....

it's from this article. you are obviously free to choose not to believe it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/30/sports/football/30patriots.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=josh%20mcdaniels&st=cse

He arrived just in time to witness another meteoric rise: Tom Brady’s. By 2004, McDaniels was his quarterbacks coach. When Charlie Weis left the Patriots for Notre Dame after that season, McDaniels was given control of play-calling, although Belichick did not name him offensive coordinator and kept the identity of the play-caller a mystery, perhaps to shield McDaniels, whose youthful countenance belies his deep coaching experience.

DenverBrit
05-13-2009, 12:51 PM
Well, I'm not a Patriot fan so I wouldn't know. And won't accept a vague "it's pretty widely accepted" as proof either.

Unless it's a vague negative about coach McPoopyPants! ;D

2KBack
05-13-2009, 12:52 PM
I am trying to show 2 things:

1. Mcdaniels is not the second coming. He is a very capable coach, but he is not the saviour that some people seem to believe, and he is not someone who can turn a lump of very mediocre football player with neckbeard like Orton into a superstar.

2. If you think the QB and coach is all important in terms of winning (as some seem to say in justifying the Cutler trade), then Mcdaniels is the wrong choice. If on the other hand the QB is just another player and the coach is just a small part of the team, then fact is that we are less talented now with Orton instead of Cutler and Mcdaniels is not going to be able to make up for that lack of talent.

It sounds like you are talking in circles a bit, and simply don't believe McDaniels is the right guy for the job at all. Which is an opinion you are entitled to, but there is little logic to your arguments beyond simple dislike for the guy.

If the Qb is all important, you say McD is the wrong guy. If Qb's are just cogs in the system, you say McD is the wrong guy.

Here is a direct example of how a downgrade in physical ability, turned out to be an upgrade for the team: Drew Bledsoe getting injured and Tom Brady taking over.

Blueflame
05-13-2009, 12:53 PM
it's from this article. you are obviously free to choose not to believe it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/30/sports/football/30patriots.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=josh%20mcdaniels&st=cse

Thank you. That is all I was asking for... ::)

footstepsfrom#27
05-13-2009, 01:26 PM
I don't blame people for questioning some of his moves. People questioned Shanahan's move when he came in. I do believe people drastically overestimate the effect he had on the Cutler situation.
What Shanahan moves were questioned when he took over the HC job? As I recall, the only controversy surrounding Shanny up till this point was his association with Elway which R66v6s raised when he accused him of trying to undermine his authority while Mike was the OC here. Al Davis obviously had issues with Shanahan but that surely isn't what you're referring to. Please elaborate, because I can't recall a single move Shanahan made in his first year that even remotely comes close to the panic inducing confusion we've seen in the early stages of this regime.
People here can tear him down before he ever coaches a game, if they'd like... but it's not really prudent and it's obviously baseless.
Baseless? Not exactly. I think you're mixing apples and oranges here. He rose to prominence as a COACH, but for the most part it's not his coaching ability that's under the microscope here. It's his decision making processes, his ability to manage relationships with tact and skill, his ability to intelligently conduct the draft, etc...none of those things contributed to his rise to being a hot coaching prospect in New England.
I see a lot of sore, tender asses around here on people who saw players or coaches leave, whom they wanted to stay. Those sore asses are keeping people from having ANY sort of objectivity.
Many of the same people questioning his moves also suggested it was time for Shanahan to leave, including me, so you're attempt to automatically associate these two things as intertwined is illegitimate. Both the Cutler situation and his draft moves have drawn questions throughout the entire league...yet you're telling us that "no objectivity" is what's driving impartial observers as well as long time Bronco fans to question this stuff?

Drek
05-13-2009, 01:27 PM
It's been "pretty solidly confirmed" by whom? Proof, please.
Dig into any one of a dozen Boston Globe, Tribune, NY Times, etc. articles on McDaniels. Unless there is some massive east coast conspiracy to oversell the guy's role in the '05 Patriots team he was for all intents and purposes the OC.

That is true, but Weis was the OC and Belichick was the HC, so he was at least 2 steps down the ladder and the funny thing is that 2004 is the ONLY super bowl Brady has won when he wasn't named MVP - that COULD be a coincidence, but it is remarkable that the more power Mcdaniels has gotten, the futher Tom Brady has gotten from being a super bowl MVP.
1. winning a title is as much about luck and getting hot at the right time as anything else. McDaniels lead Pats teams didn't show the slumps that Wies' teams did however. They also ranked better in points and yards as a team every single year with McDaniels involved than they did when it was just Weis.

How is going from an 86 (85, 86 and 86) average to a 91 (87, 92, 92) average a massive improvement?
If you don't see how a 5 point pickup in QB rating is a massive improvement, well, I just don't know what to say. Quarterbacks 2-7 are all separated by less than 5 points. As are 8-14. If Cutler had been another 5 points better he's in the top 10 of the league in QB rating.

If you think Mcdaniels has more to do with 2007 than Randy Moss and Wes Welker, you are frankly dumber than my hamster.
Wes Welker in 2006: 67 receptions, 687 yards, 1 TD.
Wes Welker in 2007: 112 receptions, 1175 yards, 8 TDs.

Randy Moss's average season from 2004-2006: 50 receptions, 775 yards, 8 TDs.
Randy Moss in 2007: 98 receptions, 1493 yards, 23 TDs.

I don't know, both of their careers took pretty massive turns for the better suddenly. And it isn't like Randy Moss was playing with scrubs in his prime with Minnesota, but he never put up a 23 TD season.

So who's dumber than your hamster? The person who thinks those players did all that themselves, or that maybe, just maybe, the offensive game plan and coaching had something to do with it.

I am sorry you had to resort to personal attacks, so let me give you a word of advice next time you feel like you have to stoop to something like that: just accept that you have no factual arguments and are probably wrong. It will save yourself and the rest of us a lot of grief and time.
I didn't see a personal attack in there, just facts. You obviously are blinded vis a vie McDaniels and Orton because of being a Cutler fan, and are ignoring the fact that McDaniels has proven himself, at the highest levels anyone can attain without actually being an HC, that he is of exceptional skill and knowledge as it pertains to the QB position and its role in an offense as a whole.

If you think its personally attacking you to say so then I guess that just can't be helped.

broncosteven
05-13-2009, 01:45 PM
1. winning a title is as much about luck and getting hot at the right time as anything else. McDaniels lead Pats teams didn't show the slumps that Wies' teams did however. They also ranked better in points and yards as a team every single year with McDaniels involved than they did when it was just Weis.


Weiss didn't choke in the SB.

cutthemdown
05-13-2009, 02:01 PM
[/B]

I'm skeptical about that. An average defense, and a great running game, isn't going to make up for a lack of big plays by the QB. From what I've seen/read about Orton he has no problem making those high percentage dink and dunk passes to RBs/TEs. But that's only going to get you so far. Sooner or later the offense will have to convert some 2nd/3rd and long plays otherwise defenses will figure us out and honestly there aren't too many teams that thrive in the NFL with that sort of QB play.

The good thing is we've got the guys that will give Orton every chance to succeed. With a great pass blocking line and guys like Marshall/Royal/Scheff/Gaffney there will be guys that get open on those intermediate passes. Whether Orton can make it happen, well, that's up to him.

Obviously with team struggling last few yrs we are all skeptical. Funny though most times the longest 3rd down you hope to pick up is about 3-10. Not to many plays designed to go 20 yrds or more. Most times when it's 3-20 teams just runa play then punt.

Also Orton is a pro qb and IMO can make most of the throws.

Blueflame
05-13-2009, 02:20 PM
Obviously with team struggling last few yrs we are all skeptical. Funny though most times the longest 3rd down you hope to pick up is about 3-10. Not to many plays designed to go 20 yrds or more. Most times when it's 3-20 teams just runa play then punt.

Also Orton is a pro qb and IMO can make most of the throws.

I've seen a lot of instances when our defense got the other team to like 3rd and 22... and then gave up 23 yards.

oubronco
05-13-2009, 02:28 PM
I've seen a lot of instances when our defense got the other team to like 3rd and 22... and then gave up 23 yards.

or a long TD

Blueflame
05-13-2009, 02:37 PM
or a long TD

That, too.

cutthemdown
05-13-2009, 02:40 PM
I've seen a lot of instances when our defense got the other team to like 3rd and 22... and then gave up 23 yards.

Orton could for sure get a 3-23 vs last yrs defense. You think all the qbs that did that were strong armed like Cutler? Don't you remember some of the scrubs who did that to us? If anything your statement proves its all about the defense being good or not when it comes to QBS completing 3 and 23.

Besides Cutler and Orton score almost the same amount of points when they lead on offense. Cutler better in that regard but not so much that we don't have a chance.

Sorry you won't convince me that the world is over because cry baby Cutler got his way.

alkemical
05-13-2009, 02:47 PM
Weiss didn't choke in the SB.

ugh - i know shannys been choking since john retired.

gyldenlove
05-13-2009, 02:48 PM
It sounds like you are talking in circles a bit, and simply don't believe McDaniels is the right guy for the job at all. Which is an opinion you are entitled to, but there is little logic to your arguments beyond simple dislike for the guy.

If the Qb is all important, you say McD is the wrong guy. If Qb's are just cogs in the system, you say McD is the wrong guy.

Here is a direct example of how a downgrade in physical ability, turned out to be an upgrade for the team: Drew Bledsoe getting injured and Tom Brady taking over.

It seems perfectly logical.

If the QB is all important, then fact is that Brady win 3 super bowls and 2 super bowl MVPs without Mcdaniels calling the shots and nothing but a league trophy with Mcdaniels calling the shots. So clearly Mcdaniels has done nothing in terms of winning for Tom Brady.

If a QB is just another player, then Mcdaniels is not going to have much positive effect. I am not saying he is the wrong guy in that case, I am just saying that getting a supposed QB guru seems a little pointless if you don't believe that the QB is the be all end all to team success.

Blueflame
05-13-2009, 02:51 PM
Orton could for sure get a 3-23 vs last yrs defense. You think all the qbs that did that were strong armed like Cutler? Don't you remember some of the scrubs who did that to us? If anything your statement proves its all about the defense being good or not when it comes to QBS completing 3 and 23.

Besides Cutler and Orton score almost the same amount of points when they lead on offense. Cutler better in that regard but not so much that we don't have a chance.

Sorry you won't convince me that the world is over because cry baby Cutler got his way.

Don't think I made any mention of which QBs could or could not have gained enough to make a first down on 3rd and long against our defense. All I said was that it has happened all too frequently and it's frustrating to watch them shut down the other team on 1st and 2nd only to give it up on 3rd and very long.

2KBack
05-13-2009, 03:13 PM
It seems perfectly logical.

If the QB is all important, then fact is that Brady win 3 super bowls and 2 super bowl MVPs without Mcdaniels calling the shots and nothing but a league trophy with Mcdaniels calling the shots. So clearly Mcdaniels has done nothing in terms of winning for Tom Brady.

If a QB is just another player, then Mcdaniels is not going to have much positive effect. I am not saying he is the wrong guy in that case, I am just saying that getting a supposed QB guru seems a little pointless if you don't believe that the QB is the be all end all to team success.

So we are ignoring the fact that McDaniels was Tom Brady's QB coach in 2004 when the patriots has arguably their best overall season? Then was his OC for arguably the single best statistical season in NFL history?

You are arguing that McD is nothing special essentially because a no name WR caught a miracle pass against his helmet in the superbowl to prevent the first 19-0 season in history.

Not only that but your logic regarding the role of a QB is exteremely narrow minded. Even if the QB is a cog in the system, isn't it important to have someone make sure that cog does it's job right? Not only that, a guru who has a system that not only makes the QB piece look damn good, but scores points like no offense ever before?

Damn people, I understand being skeptical about the guys decision making, but there is absolutely nothing in his coaching record to attack right now. Trying to make **** up is sad.

BroncoBuff
05-13-2009, 03:18 PM
I think you're mixing apples and oranges here. He rose to prominence as a COACH, but for the most part it's not his coaching ability that's under the microscope here. It's his decision making processes, his ability to manage relationships with tact and skill, his ability to intelligently conduct the draft, etc...none of those things contributed to his rise to being a hot coaching prospect in New England.

^5

Inkana7
05-13-2009, 03:21 PM
Some of the attempts to spin the greatest offense in NFL history are rather clever.

gyldenlove
05-13-2009, 03:27 PM
1. winning a title is as much about luck and getting hot at the right time as anything else. McDaniels lead Pats teams didn't show the slumps that Wies' teams did however. They also ranked better in points and yards as a team every single year with McDaniels involved than they did when it was just Weis.

We all know that yards have nothing to do with winning, that is why we got rid of Cutler. Patriots points from 2002 to 2007: 381, 348, 437, 379, 385, 589.

The Mcdaniels years are bolded. The Moss/Welker year is in red. They scored an average of 389 before Mcdaniels and 382 with Mcdaniels, no difference. Suddenly with Welker and Moss, they score 200 points more than they did the previous 5 years. So clearly Mcdaniels made NO difference in terms of points, significant difference in terms of lombardi trophies 3 vs 0.

If you don't see how a 5 point pickup in QB rating is a massive improvement, well, I just don't know what to say. Quarterbacks 2-7 are all separated by less than 5 points. As are 8-14. If Cutler had been another 5 points better he's in the top 10 of the league in QB rating.

I don't think 5 points in QB rating is that massive. Orton is a career 71 rating, Cutler is a career 87 rating and we are told that Orton is an upgrade. Kidding aside though, it is funny how you managed to pick 2 and 7 and 8 and 14. There are more than 5 point difference between number 1 and 5 and more than 5 points between 5 and 10. 16 points separate top and bottom of the top 10. Culter would have beaten guys like Seneca Wallace and Shaun Hill if he had a 5 point better rating, but would you really take Wallace and Hill over Cutler? 5 points just isn't that much.

Wes Welker in 2006: 67 receptions, 687 yards, 1 TD.
Wes Welker in 2007: 112 receptions, 1175 yards, 8 TDs.

Randy Moss's average season from 2004-2006: 50 receptions, 775 yards, 8 TDs.
Randy Moss in 2007: 98 receptions, 1493 yards, 23 TDs.

I don't know, both of their careers took pretty massive turns for the better suddenly. And it isn't like Randy Moss was playing with scrubs in his prime with Minnesota, but he never put up a 23 TD season.

So who's dumber than your hamster? The person who thinks those players did all that themselves, or that maybe, just maybe, the offensive game plan and coaching had something to do with it.

Simple facts:

Points per game were unchanged in 2005 and 2006 compared to 2002-2004. Suddenly they go up by more than 50%, and you want me to believe that a guy who couldn't changed the points per game AT ALL in 2 years suddenly found an extra 50% out of thin air? or maybe just maybe, the reason they could score all those points are the players they picked up that year.

See, I am a scientist, and if I review an article that says that a dramatic effect (increase by 50% in points) is attributed to factor X (Mcdaniels) that in independent experiments (2005 and 2006) have shown to have no effect (identical points to 2002-2004), but factor Y (Moss and Welker) has a negligible effect despite not being present in previous experiments that showed no significance. I will send that back with 1 comment: rewrite.

I didn't see a personal attack in there, just facts. You obviously are blinded vis a vie McDaniels and Orton because of being a Cutler fan, and are ignoring the fact that McDaniels has proven himself, at the highest levels anyone can attain without actually being an HC, that he is of exceptional skill and knowledge as it pertains to the QB position and its role in an offense as a whole.

If you think its personally attacking you to say so then I guess that just can't be helped.

McDaniels knows more about football than you, anyone on this board, your man crush Jay Cutler, or his man crush Jeremy Bates. He's got the credentials to back it up. Deal with it.

A couple of things, I am not sure what you tried to say, but vis a vie is nonsense in every language. You claim I have a man-crush on Cutler and Bates, despite the fact that I haven't said anything unfactual about either, but I guess that facts aren't all that big in America these days. I am sorry, I forgot everything you said was fact, that is my bad.

Mcdaniels credentials:

1. 0 super bowl victories (which is impressive since the team won 3 of 4 before he started calling the shots).

2. Turning Matt Cassel into an average QB.

Mcdaniels has proven that he is a capable OC, I have never said anything to the contrary, in fact I have said numerous times that I believe Mcdaniels is a solid coach. It does seem however that some people have taken the fact that Mcdaniels is a solid offensive coordinator and interpreted that as if he knows everything you need to know to run a football team.

Fact: Mcdaniels has no experience evaluating players.
Fact: Mcdaniels has no experience running a team.
Fact: Mcdaniels has no front office experience.

Yet you want me to believe that he is an amazing head coach? I will believe when I see it, and he hasn't shown me yet.

summerdenver
05-13-2009, 03:30 PM
So we are ignoring the fact that McDaniels was Tom Brady's QB coach in 2004 when the patriots has arguably their best overall season?

Wasn't Weis still with Patriots in 2004? Just saying ....

Inkana7
05-13-2009, 03:31 PM
You forgot to add the 410 points the Pats scored last year.

gyldenlove
05-13-2009, 03:38 PM
So we are ignoring the fact that McDaniels was Tom Brady's QB coach in 2004 when the patriots has arguably their best overall season? Then was his OC for arguably the single best statistical season in NFL history?

You are arguing that McD is nothing special essentially because a no name WR caught a miracle pass against his helmet in the superbowl to prevent the first 19-0 season in history.

Not only that but your logic regarding the role of a QB is exteremely narrow minded. Even if the QB is a cog in the system, isn't it important to have someone make sure that cog does it's job right? Not only that, a guru who has a system that not only makes the QB piece look damn good, but scores points like no offense ever before?

Damn people, I understand being skeptical about the guys decision making, but there is absolutely nothing in his coaching record to attack right now. Trying to make **** up is sad.

Giving Mcdaniels credit for anything that happened in 2004 with the Patriots is beyond a reach. Mcdaniels was so far down the coaching totempole that year, it is remarkable that he could build a tan.

Read my previous post about why Moss and Welker had a LOT more to do with 2007 than Mcdaniels did.

If a QB is just a coq, I would rather have a coach who could teach the other 21 starters and leave the QB alone. If all positions are equal, then being good at 21 positions and bad at QB is a lot better than being good at QB and bad at the other 21. We all know that QB is an important position, but clearly winning or losing is not down to who you have at QB, I don't think any QB would have made us into a 12-4 or better team last year.

Mcdaniels managed to make Cassel look average. Considering that Shaun Hill managed to put very similar per game numbers and with a LOT less surrounding talent, maybe that isn't such a big feat. Mcdaniels managed to put exactly the same amount of points in 2005 and 2006 that Weis had put up in 2002-2004, Weis has 3 Lombardi trophies as a coordinator, Mcdaniels has none. All in all, Weis was more experienced, had more championship pedigree and he still failed. Mcdaniels on the other hand, has no championship pedigree as a coordinator, he managed to match Weis numbers and then ride Moss and Welkers coat tails into the history books in 2007 and you want me to believe he is going to be a that much better head coach than Weis?

gyldenlove
05-13-2009, 03:39 PM
Wasn't Weis still with Patriots in 2004? Just saying ....

The QB coach is clearly more important than the HC and OC, at least when his name is Mcdaniels....

2KBack
05-13-2009, 03:40 PM
Wasn't Weis still with Patriots in 2004? Just saying ....

As was McD though, and as the direct QB coach. The debate then becomes who had more influence on the QB's performance. I don't think is way to really determine that one though.

2KBack
05-13-2009, 03:42 PM
The QB coach is clearly more important than the HC and OC, at least when his name is Mcdaniels....

and the wide receivers are clearly more important than the OC right?

2KBack
05-13-2009, 03:59 PM
Giving Mcdaniels credit for anything that happened in 2004 with the Patriots is beyond a reach. Mcdaniels was so far down the coaching totempole that year, it is remarkable that he could build a tan.

Read my previous post about why Moss and Welker had a LOT more to do with 2007 than Mcdaniels did.

If a QB is just a coq, I would rather have a coach who could teach the other 21 starters and leave the QB alone. If all positions are equal, then being good at 21 positions and bad at QB is a lot better than being good at QB and bad at the other 21. We all know that QB is an important position, but clearly winning or losing is not down to who you have at QB, I don't think any QB would have made us into a 12-4 or better team last year.

Mcdaniels managed to make Cassel look average. Considering that Shaun Hill managed to put very similar per game numbers and with a LOT less surrounding talent, maybe that isn't such a big feat. Mcdaniels managed to put exactly the same amount of points in 2005 and 2006 that Weis had put up in 2002-2004, Weis has 3 Lombardi trophies as a coordinator, Mcdaniels has none. All in all, Weis was more experienced, had more championship pedigree and he still failed. Mcdaniels on the other hand, has no championship pedigree as a coordinator, he managed to match Weis numbers and then ride Moss and Welkers coat tails into the history books in 2007 and you want me to believe he is going to be a that much better head coach than Weis?

That's hilarious dude, Moss and welkers numbers DOUBLED when they came to New England. So there's the question again, is it the system or the players? Here's a hint, it's both. Is it Offense or Defense that wins championships? Another hint, it's both. you cannot pin the fact that New England hasn't won a championship on McDaniels, no matter how much you try, and it's ridiculous to attempt it. He has been undeniably successful with his jobs so far. First with a Wr that was all but washed up and a glorified kick returner, second with a QB that has never started a game of football outside of highschool. As a coach he has earned every right to be respected as a football mind. Even the fans who are the most vocal with their hate of McD recognize that he has good coaching credentials.

I won't argue when people say they hate how he has handled the management side of his job, but to question his coaching at this juncture just doesn't make any sense.

summerdenver
05-13-2009, 04:02 PM
As was McD though, and as the direct QB coach. The debate then becomes who had more influence on the QB's performance. I don't think is way to really determine that one though.

I had to believe Weis/BB had significant impact on the Patriots offense till 2004 by which time Brady was already a HOF QB. McDaniels deserves all the credit in the world for developing Cassel and also taking their offense to the next level with Moss/Welker but anything more is hyperbole IMHO.

DarkHorse30
05-13-2009, 04:09 PM
If a QB is just a coq, I would rather have a coach who could teach the other 21 starters and leave the QB alone. If all positions are equal, then being good at 21 positions and bad at QB is a lot better than being good at QB and bad at the other 21. We all know that QB is an important position, but clearly winning or losing is not down to who you have at QB, I don't think any QB would have made us into a 12-4 or better team last year.


.....so having Cutler doesn't matter?

Popps
05-13-2009, 04:09 PM
What Shanahan moves were questioned when he took over the HC job?

He went after a lot of non-mainstream players and there were certainly questions as to whether or not he had done enough. I recall there being a lot of big names out there in free agency, and we brought in guys like Alfred Williams. As it turns out, great moves. But, he wasn't without his criticism... and if you want to talk about a guy who ran the entire organization with an iron fist... as young coach, Mike Shanahan was your guy.

That said, he certainly had no Cutler-like situations to deal with. But, Elway wasn't trying to hold out and quit on the team, either.


Baseless? Not exactly. I think you're mixing apples and oranges here. He rose to prominence as a COACH, but for the most part it's not his coaching ability that's under the microscope here. It's his decision making processes,

Again, baseless. We haven't seen a single pre-season game. You're telling me there's concrete proof that his decision-making is poor?

How many people knew Romanowski and Eddie Mac would make huge impacts on Shanahan's teams?

I'll guarantee you not one mother****er on any message board could have predicted the impact of either one of those guys.

As for Cutler, again... we can argue all day, but I don't believe McDaniels had nearly the impact on Cutler bailing the Broncos you do. So, I can't buy into that as "bad decision making." Handled perfectly? Probably not. Cause for Jay to take his toys and go home? Of course not.

So, to see the unbridled hatred of our coach before his team plays a single pre-season game just smells much more like people with axes to grind than it does real football analysis.

2KBack
05-13-2009, 04:12 PM
I had to believe Weis/BB had significant impact on the Patriots offense till 2004 by which time Brady was already a HOF QB. McDaniels deserves all the credit in the world for developing Cassel and also taking their offense to the next level with Moss/Welker but anything more is hyperbole IMHO.

The patriots weren't even much of an offensive powerhouse until after the championships were in the rear view mirror. I think a lot of the credit for the new shiny offense should get passed around, but to deny that McDaniels had as large a hand as anyone is a reach.

TheReverend
05-13-2009, 04:13 PM
Romo was pretty ****ing good in San Fran, and still well above average in Philly...

Drek
05-13-2009, 04:18 PM
Yet you want me to believe that he is an amazing head coach? I will believe when I see it, and he hasn't shown me yet.

Think what you want man, at this point I feel like your rebuttles are just proving my original point. That too many people on here are either in the self-delusional stages of the off-season (trying to convince themselves that Orton is an upgrade) or doing just the opposite (arguing that Orton couldn't possibly be even a remotely decent NFL QB, no way, no how, and that McDaniels is a scrub who never achieved anything without riding someone else's coat tails, despite all of his previous co-workers and bosses saying exactly the opposite).

You clearly fall in the later. Your entire response to what I've posted in this thread proves it, as you're actively trying to discredit a coach who Tom Brady said made him into a vastly better QB, Matt Cassel said made him into a vastly better QB, Bill Belichick said made his offense significantly better, and who orchestrated probably the greatest single season offense of all time.

Highly qualified professionals in this field are saying "McDaniels kicks ass at offensive coaching". Yet you keep trying to argue that he in fact is only living off what Weis and Brady did before him. Yet you think you have a lucid argument, so you keep prattling on ignoring facts.

Keep at it, you're just another of the braying sheep on a board that gets more idiotic by the day.

elsid13
05-13-2009, 04:49 PM
Think what you want man, at this point I feel like your rebuttles are just proving my original point. That too many people on here are either in the self-delusional stages of the off-season (trying to convince themselves that Orton is an upgrade) or doing just the opposite (arguing that Orton couldn't possibly be even a remotely decent NFL QB, no way, no how, and that McDaniels is a scrub who never achieved anything without riding someone else's coat tails, despite all of his previous co-workers and bosses saying exactly the opposite).

You clearly fall in the later. Your entire response to what I've posted in this thread proves it, as you're actively trying to discredit a coach who Tom Brady said made him into a vastly better QB, Matt Cassel said made him into a vastly better QB, Bill Belichick said made his offense significantly better, and who orchestrated probably the greatest single season offense of all time.

Highly qualified professionals in this field are saying "McDaniels kicks ass at offensive coaching". Yet you keep trying to argue that he in fact is only living off what Weis and Brady did before him. Yet you think you have a lucid argument, so you keep prattling on ignoring facts.

Keep at it, you're just another of the braying sheep on a board that gets more idiotic by the day.

Drek we understand that he was very good coordinator, but there major difference between a coordinator and being the man. Right now it's understandable why folks can be concerned with some of the actions of the front office, and McDaniels in particular. For folks to make argument that he going to be good HC because he was good OC doesn't have much substance, both have different roles and responsibilities in professional football team. McDaniels has admitted in interviews with Denver Post and RMN, before it folded, that he didn't realize all the decisions he had to make outside just coaching.

So right now, we have to hope that McDaniels is smart enough to figure all the aspects of being Head Coach and time demands outside coaching football. If he doesn't he just another failed "brilliant" coordinator, that couldn't make it as head coach.

gyldenlove
05-13-2009, 04:52 PM
That's hilarious dude, Moss and welkers numbers DOUBLED when they came to New England. So there's the question again, is it the system or the players? Here's a hint, it's both. Is it Offense or Defense that wins championships? Another hint, it's both. you cannot pin the fact that New England hasn't won a championship on McDaniels, no matter how much you try, and it's ridiculous to attempt it. He has been undeniably successful with his jobs so far. First with a Wr that was all but washed up and a glorified kick returner, second with a QB that has never started a game of football outside of highschool. As a coach he has earned every right to be respected as a football mind. Even the fans who are the most vocal with their hate of McD recognize that he has good coaching credentials.

I won't argue when people say they hate how he has handled the management side of his job, but to question his coaching at this juncture just doesn't make any sense.

The Patriots scored 390 points per year under Weis.

The Patriots scored 390 points per year under Mcdaniels without Moss and Welker. The system is clearly a 390 points per year system.

Did Moss and Welker account for all 590 points? no. Did they account for the majority of the 200 points the Patriots scored more in 2007 than in 2002-2006? Yes. Unless you want to try to argue that the coach is more important than the talent level of the players, you are just not going to be able to put it any other way.

Moss had more yards in Minnesota than in New England, so it is not like he was a nobody. Welker was a young guy who was developing, you can't compare his numbers in Miami to the numbers New England.

So it is not his fault that the Patriots did not win a championship, yet it is his fault that the offense had a huge year in 2007? That doesn't make sense, you are selectively giving him credit for all the good and not holding him responsible for any of the bad.

Nolan made Shaun Hill play as well in San Fran, Hill is not a better QB than Cassel, and has significantly worse supporting players, but we are not considering Nolan to be an offensive genious and a QB wizard.

I have said he is a good coach several times in this thread.

gyldenlove
05-13-2009, 04:55 PM
Think what you want man, at this point I feel like your rebuttles are just proving my original point. That too many people on here are either in the self-delusional stages of the off-season (trying to convince themselves that Orton is an upgrade) or doing just the opposite (arguing that Orton couldn't possibly be even a remotely decent NFL QB, no way, no how, and that McDaniels is a scrub who never achieved anything without riding someone else's coat tails, despite all of his previous co-workers and bosses saying exactly the opposite).

You clearly fall in the later. Your entire response to what I've posted in this thread proves it, as you're actively trying to discredit a coach who Tom Brady said made him into a vastly better QB, Matt Cassel said made him into a vastly better QB, Bill Belichick said made his offense significantly better, and who orchestrated probably the greatest single season offense of all time.

Highly qualified professionals in this field are saying "McDaniels kicks ass at offensive coaching". Yet you keep trying to argue that he in fact is only living off what Weis and Brady did before him. Yet you think you have a lucid argument, so you keep prattling on ignoring facts.

Keep at it, you're just another of the braying sheep on a board that gets more idiotic by the day.

Highly qualified people also said Bernie Madoff was an outstanding investor and he was often refered to as a genious. Now he is refered to by his inmate number.

Highly qualified people can be wrong, very wrong. I have only been citing facts, go ahead and find a quote where I base an argument on something that isn't a fact.

Belichick and all the New England brass had a lot of praise for Charlie Weis and Romeo Crennel, and they did really well. I am going to need someone who has a bit better track record than that at recommending coaches. In fact the only assistant Belichick didn't recommend is the one who has the most success.

watermock
05-13-2009, 05:04 PM
The worst of it is, we might start off 3-0 and have to listen the the bullshe!t thru October.

summerdenver
05-13-2009, 05:06 PM
I think a lot of the credit for the new shiny offense should get passed around, but to deny that McDaniels had as large a hand as anyone is a reach.

I think you did not even read my post. I think lot of credit for the new offense especialy 2006-2008 should got McDainels. They incorporated different things during that time and clearly he deservs credit. But Brady was HOF and Pats won 3 superbowls under with weis as OC. For all I know McDaniels was still being groomed for his role during that time.

Popps
05-13-2009, 05:10 PM
The worst of it is, we might start off 3-0 and have to listen the the bullshe!t thru October.

I know, that would suck if we won games, right?

watermock
05-13-2009, 05:19 PM
I know, that would suck if we won games, right?

You'll be sportin' wood!

1 Sun. Sept. 13th at Cincinnati CBS4
2 Sun. Sept. 20th vs Cleveland CBS4
3 Sun. Sept. 27th at Oakland CBS4


Of course then comes weeks


4 Sun. Oct. 4th vs Dallas FOX
5 Sun. Oct. 11th vs New England CBS4
6 Mon. Oct. 19th at San Diego ESPN
7 BYE
8 Sun. Nov. 1st at Baltimore CBS4
9 Mon. Nov. 9th vs Pittsburgh ESPN
10 Sun. Nov. 15th at Washington CBS4
11 Sun. Nov. 22nd vs San Diego CBS4
12 Thurs. Nov. 26th vs N.Y. Giants NFLN

Luckily, we play 5 of 8 @ home, and NOONE CAN BEAT US AT HOME, RIGHT?

We also travel to early games 6 times.

Denver will have a much easier scedule in 2010 tho.

footstepsfrom#27
05-13-2009, 05:46 PM
He went after a lot of non-mainstream players and there were certainly questions as to whether or not he had done enough.
I don't know what "non manstream" free agents are, but Shanahan took over a team that had a .500 record over the previous 3 seasons and the players of note that differed on the '95 roster (his first) included Tyrone Braxton, Byron Chamberlain, Terrell Davis, Mike Lodish, Ed McCaffrey, Michael Dean Perry, Mark Schlereth, Rod Smith and Maa Tanuvasa. Which "non mainstream" free agents are you referencing? I don't recall any such controversy, certainly nothing even remotely approaching the current situation.
I recall there being a lot of big names out there in free agency, and we brought in guys like Alfred Williams. As it turns out, great moves. But, he wasn't without his criticism... and if you want to talk about a guy who ran the entire organization with an iron fist... as young coach, Mike Shanahan was your guy.
I'm not arguing that point.

Williams didn't come until 1996, and whatever "controversy" (if any) he generated was to minimal to mention. He also added Romanowski, Crocket and Lionell Washington that year...four new guys who started on defense.
Again, baseless. We haven't seen a single pre-season game. You're telling me there's concrete proof that his decision-making is poor?
Did you listen to what I said in the previous post? The criticism he's receiving has nothing to do with his COACHING decisions...we have nothing to base that on. It's his decisions in other areas...the ones I listed...that raise controversy. Nothing Shanny did in his GM role raised so much as a blip on the radar compared to this stuff.
How many people knew Romanowski and Eddie Mac would make huge impacts on Shanahan's teams?

I'll guarantee you not one mother****er on any message board could have predicted the impact of either one of those guys.
That has nothing to do with what we're talking about.
As for Cutler, again... we can argue all day, but I don't believe McDaniels had nearly the impact on Cutler bailing the Broncos you do. So, I can't buy into that as "bad decision making." Handled perfectly? Probably not. Cause for Jay to take his toys and go home? Of course not.

So, to see the unbridled hatred of our coach before his team plays a single pre-season game just smells much more like people with axes to grind than it does real football analysis.
This discussion was about whether or not these concerns were "baseless" and not based on objectivity. The fact that you think X or Y related to these issues doesn't negate these concerns or place them into the category of something that by obvious default has no merrit. The "unbridled hatred" you're speaking of is the direct result of not one, but several decisions this guy's made off the field. Nobody came into this was an axe to grind, but people see what's going on and as the primary decision maker he's going to get scrutiny, which is as it should be.

TonyR
05-13-2009, 05:59 PM
The worst of it is, we might start off 3-0 and have to listen the the bullshe!t thru October.

You cannot possibly be for real. It's just not possible. It's just not.

watermock
05-13-2009, 07:08 PM
Grow a brain. What is exactly impossible? That we could be 3-0 in sept, or 3-9 by december?

Granted we brought in a formidable "RB, which would of brought us the playoffs last year, But we gave up our QB.

The QB handles the ball every snap, unlike a RB.

oubronco
05-13-2009, 07:16 PM
You'll be sportin' wood!



Of course then comes weeks


4 Sun. Oct. 4th vs Dallas FOX Loss
5 Sun. Oct. 11th vs New England CBS4 Loss
6 Mon. Oct. 19th at San Diego ESPN Loss
7 BYE
8 Sun. Nov. 1st at Baltimore CBS4 Loss
9 Mon. Nov. 9th vs Pittsburgh ESPN Loss
10 Sun. Nov. 15th at Washington CBS4 Winnable
11 Sun. Nov. 22nd vs San Diego CBS4 Loss
12 Thurs. Nov. 26th vs N.Y. Giants NFLN Loss

Luckily, we play 5 of 8 @ home, and NOONE CAN BEAT US AT HOME, RIGHT?

We also travel to early games 6 times.

Denver will have a much easier scedule in 2010 tho.

Damn it's going to be a tough year to watch as long as they get better each week is all we can hope for

Popps
05-13-2009, 09:24 PM
Romo was pretty ****ing good in San Fran, and still well above average in Philly...

I agree, and got to see him play first hand in SF. I was a fan, though even I didn't realize what a great impact he'd have on our defense.

The point was, it's very difficult to make definitive judgments this early in the off-season. A guy like Andra Davis could be a huge upgrade and a great signing, or just sort of fizzle. We just don't know.

Popps
05-13-2009, 09:27 PM
Damn it's going to be a tough year to watch as long as they get better each week is all we can hope for

Again, it was going to be a tough year, anyway.

Most likely, Mike Shanahan and Co. would have gone out and signed another group like Boss Bailey, Marlon McCree and Niko Totallyworthless... and we would been watching a Nintendo offense try to dig our team out of holes all season long.

It could still be that way, but there's a new concept being put forth in Denver and some of us are buying into it. Some aren't.

But, this coming season wouldn't have been any easier with Shanahan at the helm, and Cutler's 7 more TDs than INTs probably wouldn't have made much difference this year, either.

DarkHorse30
05-13-2009, 09:42 PM
Grow a brain. What is exactly impossible? That we could be 3-0 in sept, or 3-9 by december?

Granted we brought in a formidable "RB, which would of brought us the playoffs last year, But we gave up our QB.

The QB handles the ball every snap, unlike a RB.

Can you possibly name 2 big games that Cutler won for Denver? How is it that an average QB like Rivers could get so far into Jay's puny melon, that Jay not only couldn't think straight....but more importantly...... couldn't beat his biggest rival ONE time without a gigantic-rule-changing blunder by the ref.

GreatBronco16
05-13-2009, 10:25 PM
The worst of it is, we might start off 3-0 and have to listen the the bullshe!t thru October.

Yeah, you should just go ahead and get your username created over at the Bears message board and save us from your incoherent posts in the future.

Blueflame
05-13-2009, 10:50 PM
Yeah, you should just go ahead and get your username created over at the Bears message board and save us from your incoherent posts in the future.

I nominate this for the lamest-of-the-lame post......

Hulamau
05-13-2009, 11:01 PM
He went after a lot of non-mainstream players and there were certainly questions as to whether or not he had done enough. I recall there being a lot of big names out there in free agency, and we brought in guys like Alfred Williams. As it turns out, great moves. But, he wasn't without his criticism... and if you want to talk about a guy who ran the entire organization with an iron fist... as young coach, Mike Shanahan was your guy.

That said, he certainly had no Cutler-like situations to deal with. But, Elway wasn't trying to hold out and quit on the team, either.



Again, baseless. We haven't seen a single pre-season game. You're telling me there's concrete proof that his decision-making is poor?

How many people knew Romanowski and Eddie Mac would make huge impacts on Shanahan's teams?

I'll guarantee you not one mother****er on any message board could have predicted the impact of either one of those guys.

As for Cutler, again... we can argue all day, but I don't believe McDaniels had nearly the impact on Cutler bailing the Broncos you do. So, I can't buy into that as "bad decision making." Handled perfectly? Probably not. Cause for Jay to take his toys and go home? Of course not.

So, to see the unbridled hatred of our coach before his team plays a single pre-season game just smells much more like people with axes to grind than it does real football analysis.


'nuff said!

GreatBronco16
05-13-2009, 11:24 PM
I nominate this for the lamest-of-the-lame post......

So I've out done you? Wow, I am amazing.::)

watermock
05-13-2009, 11:53 PM
Yeah, you should just go ahead and get your username created over at the Bears message board and save us from your incoherent posts in the future.

FU.

I'm not a Bears fan, and if I were I could give a flying f.

We have an idiot runnging the FO, everyone knows it, and are just waiting to laugh at Denver.

6 of 9 draft choices going to offense and giving youir #1 away to seattle is proof enough.

Do you know this OL was designed for pass blocking?

Do you think we will be effective in man blocking?


Besies the fact we are changing to a 3/4 when we have ZERO talent at OLB?

We should of brought in Spags and strenthened our 4/3.

Who in the hell is going to play DT and OLB? Fields, Powell?

We traded up for a blocking TE when it was 1 of our strengths.

We are paying Graham 10 million to block!

We traded our #1 next year when we could of gotten Mt.
Cody or Bradford. In an uncapped year.

Your full of it.

Blueflame
05-13-2009, 11:57 PM
So I've out done you? Wow, I am amazing.::)

And now Mock's replied. You've been served, noob.

Popps
05-14-2009, 12:21 AM
Williams didn't come until 1996, and whatever "controversy".

It wasn't a controversy in the sense Cutler was, of course. It just wasn't a big-name free-agent.

Shanahan made a big splash early with guys like Perry, but then went on a rip signing a bunch of quality players who didn't necessarily make themselves apparent until later on. You mentioned guys like Maa, Lodish, etc. These were brilliant signings. But, the whole point here is... no one in their right mind would have deemed Shanahan's team championship caliber after seeing most of the players we brought in. So, people around this board attempting to label the new staff as failures before playing a single pre-season game are just blowing hot air. Again, there is no basis outside of... "I'm a message board expert guy."

I He also added Romanowski, Crocket and Lionell Washington that year...four new guys who started on defense.
.

No.

I The criticism he's receiving has nothing to do with his COACHING decisions...we have nothing to base that on. It's his decisions in other areas...the ones I listed...that raise controversy. ..

And I've pointed out that no one on this board has proven themselves as any sort of NFL guru to such an extent that they can deem our moves as failures before they ever see them put in place. You're questioning this guy's judgement and haven't seen a single real practice, much less a full season to evaluate these moves.

It's fine to say you don't like them. Just don't confuse that as any sort of factual information about his judgment.

Nothing Shanny did in his GM role raised so much as a blip on the radar compared to this stuff..

Really? Like the Brister situation? Like drafting Clarette? Like being fined by the league for injury report manipulation? Like the Plummer/Cutlers situation? iHop? Travis Henry? The lie detector test nonsense? Javon Walker?

Dumping Shannon Sharpe and signing Dale Carter?

Yea, Shanahan has never been involved in any controversy.

::)

watermock
05-14-2009, 12:36 AM
Your confusing the past with the present.

The whining about shanny ended about 5 months ago moron, except those that knew we were a RB and a Front 4 that could hold the line.

You wonder why Cutler held his head? BECAUSE HE KNEW WE COULDN'T STOP A WALKER.


Our defense was the worst possibly EVER.

Other than DJ, and Bailey, both injured, and some UDFA's.

WTF did we have?

This was the year to draft defense and get some impact FA's.

Moreno has no speed. I would of rather taken Green in round 3. Same speed.

watermock
05-14-2009, 01:02 AM
And I've pointed out that no one on this board has proven themselves as any sort of NFL guru to such an extent that they can deem our moves as failures before they ever see them put in place. You're questioning this guy's judgement and haven't seen a single real practice, much less a full season to evaluate these moves.

It's fine to say you don't like them. Just don't confuse that as any sort of factual information about his judgment.



There is plenty of "factual" critique of his judgement. Numorous sourses call them "Bizzare".

Simply saying we haven't yet seen failure when many signs point in that direction, including severakl members of this board, Well, we will see how good Knowshown is I guess.

I think he's going to run into a wall, and doesn't have the moves of a Portis Circa 2005

GreatBronco16
05-14-2009, 01:02 AM
FU.

I'm not a Bears fan, and if I were I could give a flying f.

We have an idiot runnging the FO, everyone knows it, and are just waiting to laugh at Denver.

6 of 9 draft choices going to offense and giving youir #1 away to seattle is proof enough.

Do you know this OL was designed for pass blocking?

Do you think we will be effective in man blocking?


Besies the fact we are changing to a 3/4 when we have ZERO talent at OLB?

We should of brought in Spags and strenthened our 4/3.

Who in the hell is going to play DT and OLB? Fields, Powell?

We traded up for a blocking TE when it was 1 of our strengths.

We are paying Graham 10 million to block!

We traded our #1 next year when we could of gotten Mt.
Cody or Bradford. In an uncapped year.

Your full of it.


Wow, this post speaks of pure stupidity. Add in the fact that Blueflame thinks it served me somehow just adds to the dumbness of the post.

watermock
05-14-2009, 01:11 AM
Wow, some rebuttal.

Your response is impotent.

GreatBronco16
05-14-2009, 01:17 AM
Wow, some rebuttal.

Your response is impotent.

It's not worth yet another one. This has been your constant whinning for months now, and it has been shot down over and over again. The very fact that you don't get it yet is besides the point. I'm not going to rehash it all over again. You want to continue to post your idiotic ramblings, go right ahead. I'll just continue to get a big laugh out of them.

Or better yet, I could just go classic Mock on you.

STFU. Ive forgoten more about football then you will eva know. Your an idiot. STFU.

Now I bet you can relate to that can't you?

watermock
05-14-2009, 01:21 AM
This has been your constant whinning for months now, and it has been shot down over and over again. The very fact that you don't get it yet is besides the point. I'm not going to rehash it all over again. You want to continue to post your idiotic ramblings, go right ahead. I'll just continue to get a big laugh out of them.


Laugh away, the rest of the media is right behind you.

watermock
05-14-2009, 01:31 AM
BTW, we sjhould of hired Spags and left thge offense alone sans a RB.

We are going to be a joke running the 3/4., in fact, the FO is allready hedging about it.

fontaine
05-14-2009, 03:18 AM
Think what you want man, at this point I feel like your rebuttles are just proving my original point. That too many people on here are either in the self-delusional stages of the off-season (trying to convince themselves that Orton is an upgrade) or doing just the opposite (arguing that Orton couldn't possibly be even a remotely decent NFL QB, no way, no how, and that McDaniels is a scrub who never achieved anything without riding someone else's coat tails, despite all of his previous co-workers and bosses saying exactly the opposite).

You clearly fall in the later. Your entire response to what I've posted in this thread proves it, as you're actively trying to discredit a coach who Tom Brady said made him into a vastly better QB, Matt Cassel said made him into a vastly better QB, Bill Belichick said made his offense significantly better, and who orchestrated probably the greatest single season offense of all time.

Highly qualified professionals in this field are saying "McDaniels kicks ass at offensive coaching". Yet you keep trying to argue that he in fact is only living off what Weis and Brady did before him. Yet you think you have a lucid argument, so you keep prattling on ignoring facts.

Keep at it, you're just another of the braying sheep on a board that gets more idiotic by the day.

A great OC doesn't necessarily make a great HC.

That's all some of us are saying. As far as what he did with the Patriots, yeah that's great and all but WTF cares?

If previous history is a sure fire indicator to the future then why didn't Weis and other coordinators have a great impact as HCs?

The only thing we know for sure at this point is that McDaniels chose Orton over other options like Campbell and he believes he can have success with neckbeard.

That's good enough for me, but if this experiment fails then McDaniels has no one to blame but himself.

watermock
05-14-2009, 04:15 AM
That too many people on here are either in the self-delusional stages of the off-season (trying to convince themselves that Orton is an upgrade) or doing just the opposite (arguing that Orton couldn't possibly be even a remotely decent NFL QB, no way, no how, and that McDaniels is a scrub who never achieved anything without riding someone else's coat tails, despite all of his previous co-workers and bosses saying exactly the opposite).

You clearly fall in the later. Your entire response to what I've posted in this thread proves it, as you're actively trying to discredit a coach who Tom Brady said made him into a vastly better QB, Matt Cassel said made him into a vastly better QB, Bill Belichick said made his offense significantly better, and who orchestrated probably the greatest single season offense of all time.

Highly qualified professionals in this field are saying "McDaniels kicks ass at offensive coaching". Yet you keep trying to argue that he in fact is only living off what Weis and Brady did before him. Yet you think you have a lucid argument, so you keep prattling on ignoring facts.

Keep at it, you're just another of the braying sheep on a board that gets more idiotic by the day.


NE didn't even make the playoffs dumbass.

That was 2007. and they lost with a nintendo offense.

As far as riding coattails, from the general consensus, noone is riding his dick anywhere. Except some fools.

100 on his draft board? RU kidding me? We could of drafted "Green in 3 instead of getting a slow back in Morono. (See his work).

This line isn't that good at line blocking.

Why did we spend half our picks on offense?

Not only that, we traded a top 10 pick to seattle. In an uncapped year.

Boy Genius.
Pitt won.

watermock
05-14-2009, 04:25 AM
McDummy was a waterboy in 2001. Buy a vowel.

NE hasn't won since 2004. Under Weiss. STFU. And we know how he's done at ND, or Crenell for that matter.

McDummy hasn't even won 1 game in the NFL.

alkemical
05-14-2009, 05:40 AM
Romo was pretty ****ing good in San Fran, and still well above average in Philly...

Agreed. The guy has 4 rings. HOF for me.

TonyR
05-14-2009, 06:13 AM
McDummy was a waterboy in 2001. Buy a vowel.

NE hasn't won since 2004. Under Weiss. STFU. And we know how he's done at ND, or Crenell for that matter.

McDummy hasn't even won 1 game in the NFL.

Wow. Over 70,000 posts. I really hope this current streak of yours isn't representative of the overall quality of what you've contributed here. Maybe you should consider hanging it up? Just a thought.

Hulamau
05-14-2009, 06:17 AM
I've seen a lot of instances when our defense got the other team to like 3rd and 22... and then gave up 23 yards.

You're right here BF and it was pathetic to watch. Not many of those were from long runs ( a few were) but most of those 3 and 22 conversions by the other team were quick slants or 15 to 20 yard outs and with piss poor secondary tackling the opponents guys made the play.

As I recall one or two were long ball conversions, but I remember most were quick passes with big RAC due to LB's out of position and/or over pursing and safeties, plus Dre Bly not being able to tackle if their lives depended on it.

We've addressed a good part of that equation already and don't expect to see so many embarrassing moments this year. Not with guys like Andra Davis, second year Woodyard & Larsen, a healthy DJ, Wolverine, Renaldo, Goodman, The Fonze and Champ back there. And not even mentioning Ayers, Thomas, Powell Chris Baker and a few of these other guys up front which just by breathing will be a significant upgrade to last year with that chaos of musical chairs schemes they were asked to run .. in panic mode from one week to the next!

I think we are not only going to be better balanced on Offense, and Special teams will be a big upgrade, but the Defense is going to make the biggest leap forward of all the phases (granted, there is not much way to go but up from here) .

If we get lucky on the injury front for a change, with a little mercy from the foot ball gods, I think its still quite possible we can even make the playoffs, in spite of this brutal schedule.

In most cases when you see a schedule as daunting as ours up front , at least half those teams under perform expectations. Granted it isn't going to be easy and we could take a while to gel with so many moving pieces. But if we are making sold progress by years end I'll be happy this year.

BroncoInSkinland
05-14-2009, 06:35 AM
Would you of complained if he drafted Chris Baker in like the 5th or 6th round?

I've seen this batted around a few times and would like to reply. Yes, I would still complain in that scenario, though I think question as opposed to complain is a better term. I was hoping three of the first four picks would be devoted to the line or LB positions, BPA be damned. Our line needs help desperately, and thinking you can get the job done with UDFA's looks exactly like one of the few faults I did find with Shanny during his tenure here.

Knowshon looks good and I can let that one slide, but Brace in place of Smith would have been much better than Baker in the 5th. Now I am not down on Smith for his size, and think he does have the potential to be a very good CB, but moving to a 3-4 with the personel we have seems like a stretch to me. Sticking with the 4-3 base, or going with a hybrid seems like what we are planning on, but we didn't get a lot of talent up front for that scheme either. Now as many people love to point out, our FO knows WAY more about football than I do, so at this point I have moved to wait and see mode. I certainly hope we can get pressure with the front 7 McDaniels has decided to go with, but I doubt it.

The UDFA's look like great guys, and I am hoping that Davis in particular works out for us. How can you not like the looks of a marine that is so tough a semi ran over his legs and didn't break a bone. At the same point in time, these guys went undrafted for a reason, and 32 teams passing on a player doesn't leave me with a warm fuzzy feeling that he will suddenly transform into a double digit sack machine.

PS: Also not to go grammar Nazi on you, but you broke Kaylores rule of have/of. It is "Would you HAVE complained if " etc.

TheReverend
05-14-2009, 07:02 AM
Wow. Over 70,000 posts. I really hope this current streak of yours isn't representative of the overall quality of what you've contributed here. Maybe you should consider hanging it up? Just a thought.

Too new to know the true greatness of Mock, Tony.

2KBack
05-14-2009, 07:42 AM
I think you did not even read my post. I think lot of credit for the new offense especialy 2006-2008 should got McDainels. They incorporated different things during that time and clearly he deservs credit. But Brady was HOF and Pats won 3 superbowls under with weis as OC. For all I know McDaniels was still being groomed for his role during that time.

I read your post, so what is your point? Is it that because there was previous success then the success attributed to McDaniels isn't valid? What do the previous championships (that McDaniels was present for, but whose contributions are debatable) have to do with McDaniels abilities as a coach?

As for Goldenglove or whatever. I'm sorry, but your constant claims that Welker and Moss are the reasons for single most potent offense in NFL just don't fly with me. You are giving all the credit to 2 players on the team. Not to mention your isolated and surface level attempts at points analysis which takes into account the arrival of Moss and Welker but ignores the constant turnover of players every other year.

Also what doesn't make sense about this statement? The offensive coordinator contols the offense, not the entire team. That is why he gets credit for the offenses success, but not the blame for overall team success.

You've answered the question I had when I stepped into the ring in the thread though. There are some looney people on here.

TonyR
05-14-2009, 07:53 AM
Too new to know the true greatness of Mock, Tony.

All greats become former greats.

Tombstone RJ
05-14-2009, 07:58 AM
Wow. Over 70,000 posts. I really hope this current streak of yours isn't representative of the overall quality of what you've contributed here. Maybe you should consider hanging it up? Just a thought.

Unfortunately the post you quoted is pretty much on par with the rest of mocks dribble... 70,000 posts and 69,995 of them are pretty much worthless.

TheReverend
05-14-2009, 08:05 AM
All greats become former greats.

When he hangs the keyboard up, it'll be time to discuss.

Hulamau
05-14-2009, 08:16 AM
I've seen this batted around a few times and would like to reply. Yes, I would still complain in that scenario, though I think question as opposed to complain is a better term. I was hoping three of the first four picks would be devoted to the line or LB positions, BPA be damned. Our line needs help desperately, and thinking you can get the job done with UDFA's looks exactly like one of the few faults I did find with Shanny during his tenure here.

Knowshon looks good and I can let that one slide, but Brace in place of Smith would have been much better than Baker in the 5th. Now I am not down on Smith for his size, and think he does have the potential to be a very good CB, but moving to a 3-4 with the personnel we have seems like a stretch to me. Sticking with the 4-3 base, or going with a hybrid seems like what we are planning on, but we didn't get a lot of talent up front for that scheme either. Now as many people love to point out, our FO knows WAY more about football than I do, so at this point I have moved to wait and see mode. I certainly hope we can get pressure with the front 7 McDaniels has decided to go with, but I doubt it.

The UDFA's look like great guys, and I am hoping that Davis in particular works out for us. How can you not like the looks of a marine that is so tough a semi ran over his legs and didn't break a bone. At the same point in time, these guys went undrafted for a reason, and 32 teams passing on a player doesn't leave me with a warm fuzzy feeling that he will suddenly transform into a double digit sack machine.

PS: Also not to go grammar Nazi on you, but you broke Kaylores rule of have/of. It is "Would you HAVE complained if " etc.

Okay I follow your questions and fair enough. But lets take the Brace question. The main reason ( if not the only one) Chris Baker wasn't a solid first round NT pick (or high second at worst) was this character issue and the two alleged fights he was in at PSU.

He claims its mistaken identity. But that he was around the wrong crowd just not THE guy swing punches. A few other coaches and teachers vouch for the guy and he has been a model citizen at Hampton ever since, not to mention playing solid ball as a NT/DT for the most part.

He has ideal body type for the nose and is known as both a solid run stopper gap plug as well as able to wreck havoc in the backfield. Just supposed McD and Xanders did there due diligence on this kind ( remember) they DID check him out before the draft.

And suppose they really liked what they saw!?! Knowing full well he was likely gonna slip quite possibly out of the draft, as the only other caveat mentioned on him was his coach at Hampton supported him but wished he could have played one more year. AS much to get more distance between him and the scandal to up his odds for a better draft position.

They also know that many teams draft based on the Mel Kiper popularlity contest ala fantasy football and so their odds of grabbing him either late in the draft or as an UDFA were high.

If indeed they were satisfied there ether was more smoke than fire to his controversy, and they were impressed enough with his potential even if he needs a bit of polishing THEN Chris Baker could turn out to be one of the steals of the year.

In fact he may well be better than Brace as a NT as it is. Brace has never played nose and there is at least a fat chance his skills were amplified by opposing offenses having to deal with Raji on every down as well so Brace was never the center of attention from the Oline like he will be in the NFL.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if Baker becomes a much better NT than Brace ever does, evn if it takes him a year to gel. We may well ALREADY have anchored our D line while a few of these guys (and gals too ...lets not forget BF :) are gnashing their teeth and kicking their dogs when they get home each night presumably because McD failed to draft ANY defensive players on their Nintendo board!

Same with Davis, Lee Robinson and Everett P.( too screwy a name to spell) if one, two or all three of those guys make the team along with Baker and the join up with Ayers Fonze and McBath and Burton, then we've gone a LONG way to addressing either our D starters and/or our backups and building a solid bench, which is just as critical to building a solid LASTING championship team.

So before getting too overly concerned lets at least get through preseason before a few folks here start slitting their wrists., which to your credit I see you have done BroncoinSkinland!

fontaine
05-14-2009, 08:21 AM
I'm not really concerned about the upcoming season. New QB, new HC, new defense, new offensive system.

Sure there were going to be a ton of issues to sort out even if Cutler had stayed. The only thing that matters right now is the long term view of how we get back to the SuperBowl, and my biggest concern is that McDaniels stubbornly sticks with Orton beyond this year if neckbeard doesn't perform.

To me, this is just a one year try out. Orton has to show something real this year or we break the draft bank next year for a QB. It would have been nice to have that extra 1st to do that but none the less, I hope McDaniels doesn't let his ego hang onto Orton beyond this season if we need to go to a new direction.

Hulamau
05-14-2009, 08:37 AM
I'm not really concerned about the upcoming season. New QB, new HC, new defense, new offensive system.

Sure there were going to be a ton of issues to sort out even if Cutler had stayed. The only thing that matters right now is the long term view of how we get back to the SuperBowl, and my biggest concern is that McDaniels stubbornly sticks with Orton beyond this year if neckbeard doesn't perform.

To me, this is just a one year try out. Orton has to show something real this year or we break the draft bank next year for a QB. It would have been nice to have that extra 1st to do that but none the less, I hope McDaniels doesn't let his ego hang onto Orton beyond this season if we need to go to a new direction.

I don't think you have too much to worry about with this one Fontaine.

McD's favorite position is QB and he will be intimately involved in shaping all of these guys. He is already starting to groom Brandstater as well who, though raw, has some real potential too at this level in such a system.

But Orton being a 5th year guy, McD will know full well by the end of this year (if not sooner) if Orton has what it takes to excel in this system longer term.

If not, I just don't see where McD is shy about moving on at QB very quickly :-)!

gyldenlove
05-14-2009, 08:44 AM
I'm not really concerned about the upcoming season. New QB, new HC, new defense, new offensive system.

Sure there were going to be a ton of issues to sort out even if Cutler had stayed. The only thing that matters right now is the long term view of how we get back to the SuperBowl, and my biggest concern is that McDaniels stubbornly sticks with Orton beyond this year if neckbeard doesn't perform.

To me, this is just a one year try out. Orton has to show something real this year or we break the draft bank next year for a QB. It would have been nice to have that extra 1st to do that but none the less, I hope McDaniels doesn't let his ego hang onto Orton beyond this season if we need to go to a new direction.

The problem really is in terms of QBs that Simms hasn't played in quite a while and was not exactly Peyton Manning when he did play. Orton has played some, and doesn't look like Peyton Manning, moreover he is due a new contract next season if he deserves one. Tom Brandstater is a project, and considering how many 6th round QBs ever make it big, it is a pretty big project.

As an added bonus, if we really suck this year, we won't be able to take advantage of that high draft pick that would come with it and get a top QB.

Really we just have to hope that Mcdaniels can make something out of Captain Neckbeard and Spleenless Mcgee or that Tom B is the next Elway.

fontaine
05-14-2009, 09:00 AM
The problem really is in terms of QBs that Simms hasn't played in quite a while and was not exactly Peyton Manning when he did play. Orton has played some, and doesn't look like Peyton Manning, moreover he is due a new contract next season if he deserves one. Tom Brandstater is a project, and considering how many 6th round QBs ever make it big, it is a pretty big project.

As an added bonus, if we really suck this year, we won't be able to take advantage of that high draft pick that would come with it and get a top QB.

Really we just have to hope that Mcdaniels can make something out of Captain Neckbeard and Spleenless Mcgee or that Tom B is the next Elway.

That's just it isn't it?

Tom Brady wasn't exactly a pile of puke before McDaniels got involved. No amount of coaching is going to be a substitute for real talent, and that's where I'm skeptical. I don't see Orton as a long term starter no matter how good the offense around him or the coaching. Not because he sucks or anything, just because I don't see the kind of talent in Orton. He'll no doubt get better in this spread offense with real weapons and a great line though.

As far as the draft next year? If Orton/Simms don't look like long term solutions then you gotta pay the price for a real prospect rather than wasting time with a journeyman QB, or some other late round project, or even worse pay a long term deal to Orton.

baja
05-14-2009, 09:09 AM
He started working under Saban 10 years ago.



Look up my posts, dippy. Particularly early in the saga, I thought Jay was being a douche... but wanted it to work out and actually though it probably would. I pretty much retained that stance until he demanded a trade and stopped talking to the team. At that point, it became apparent that he had never planned to return without a huge contract and a lot of ass-kissing.

Actually he started working with his father, a well respected HC coach, when he was 5 years old.

Drek
05-14-2009, 09:34 AM
A great OC doesn't necessarily make a great HC.

That's all some of us are saying. As far as what he did with the Patriots, yeah that's great and all but WTF cares?

If previous history is a sure fire indicator to the future then why didn't Weis and other coordinators have a great impact as HCs?

The only thing we know for sure at this point is that McDaniels chose Orton over other options like Campbell and he believes he can have success with neckbeard.

That's good enough for me, but if this experiment fails then McDaniels has no one to blame but himself.
Totally agree. I think there is significantly larger than zero chance that McDaniels flops as a HC. But there is at least as much of a chance that he's a standout HC.

My problem is with how polarized this site has become where a bunch of people try arguing that Orton is somehow a better QB than Cutler in some theoretical system, and their opposites trying to paint Orton as some kind of waiver wire scrub and McDaniels as a clueless hack who did nothing of any amount in the NFL and had no right to the position he currently has.

Its a bull**** argument from both sides, but about 60% of this board (if not more) is firmly entrenched on one side or the other.

That's just it isn't it?

Tom Brady wasn't exactly a pile of puke before McDaniels got involved. No amount of coaching is going to be a substitute for real talent, and that's where I'm skeptical. I don't see Orton as a long term starter no matter how good the offense around him or the coaching. Not because he sucks or anything, just because I don't see the kind of talent in Orton. He'll no doubt get better in this spread offense with real weapons and a great line though.

As far as the draft next year? If Orton/Simms don't look like long term solutions then you gotta pay the price for a real prospect rather than wasting time with a journeyman QB, or some other late round project, or even worse pay a long term deal to Orton.

So you agree that he'll likely be better than '08, but you don't think he could actually be a standout QB in this league?

I'm not saying he will, for sure, be a top tier QB in this league, or even decent. But the guy wasn't a bad QB last year, he was just incredibly inconsistent, and that is typically the first thing good coaching turns around.

The first half of the season he had a QB rating in the low 90's, and while that included a 121.4 game against Detroit, it also included a 114.5 game against Minnesota, who is an elite defense in the NFL.

He had a 102.8 QB rating on passes between 21-30 yards, so the myth that he can't be effective deep doesn't seem to hold much weight.

He was significantly better out of two TE formations (94.3 QB rating), which tells us that he benefited from superior pass protection (which we won't need two TEs to give him) and some bigger short yardage targets (which we also can give him both in and out of a two TE set thanks to Marshall and Scheffler's versatility).

There are a lot of positive signs to take from Kyle Orton's first year as a full time starter. If McDaniels can just coax some consistency out of him and pair that with effective use of the talent around him, this offense will be a top 10 unit. There is a lot of potential for success there, just because its less than what a committed Cutler would've given us doesn't mean its trash.

gyldenlove
05-14-2009, 09:53 AM
So you agree that he'll likely be better than '08, but you don't think he could actually be a standout QB in this league?

I'm not saying he will, for sure, be a top tier QB in this league, or even decent. But the guy wasn't a bad QB last year, he was just incredibly inconsistent, and that is typically the first thing good coaching turns around.

The first half of the season he had a QB rating in the low 90's, and while that included a 121.4 game against Detroit, it also included a 114.5 game against Minnesota, who is an elite defense in the NFL.

He had a 102.8 QB rating on passes between 21-30 yards, so the myth that he can't be effective deep doesn't seem to hold much weight.

He was significantly better out of two TE formations (94.3 QB rating), which tells us that he benefited from superior pass protection (which we won't need two TEs to give him) and some bigger short yardage targets (which we also can give him both in and out of a two TE set thanks to Marshall and Scheffler's versatility).

There are a lot of positive signs to take from Kyle Orton's first year as a full time starter. If McDaniels can just coax some consistency out of him and pair that with effective use of the talent around him, this offense will be a top 10 unit. There is a lot of potential for success there, just because its less than what a committed Cutler would've given us doesn't mean its trash.

Some sense.

Calling Minnesota a good pass defense is at best incorrect, but I am nitpicking.

This is really at core of the matter, how much will Orton improve and considering the talent level of the rest of the team will it be enough.

I think there is a very important distinction to be made here between teams that need a decent QB to win and teams that need a superb QB to win. I don't think anybody would try to argue that Vince Young and Kerry Collins are the reason that Tennessee have been winning games the last few years. Likewise I don't think anyone would make the argument that Indianapolis could win games without Peyton Manning.

The question me is in short, wether we can improve the rest of the team enough that we can win games without QB heroics or if we are going to have to rely on the QB to do it all. Clearly last year Cutler was relied on to win games, you can argue that the defense won the Tampa Bay game, but other than that game they didn't do much to win. I think if Orton is relied on to win games this year, we are not going to get to .500, that is my argument. If Orton is relied on to be good enough to keep up with a decent defense, then we can win games and .500 is certainly not unrealistic.

Keeping the above in mind, I don't think we have done what we should this offseason to become a team that relies on the QB to only get to a certain amount of points per game and letting the defense win the game. My feeling is that we are still going to be a team that is going to need offensive fireworks to win games, and I am not sold on our current QBs delivering that often enough.

fontaine
05-14-2009, 09:54 AM
My problem is with how polarized this site has become where a bunch of people try arguing that Orton is somehow a better QB than Cutler in some theoretical system, and their opposites trying to paint Orton as some kind of waiver wire scrub and McDaniels as a clueless hack who did nothing of any amount in the NFL and had no right to the position he currently has.

Its a bull**** argument from both sides, but about 60% of this board (if not more) is firmly entrenched on one side or the other.



Yeah, offseason sucks. But wait till Orton wins/blows a game for us.

So you agree that he'll likely be better than '08, but you don't think he could actually be a standout QB in this league?

I'm not saying he will, for sure, be a top tier QB in this league, or even decent. But the guy wasn't a bad QB last year, he was just incredibly inconsistent, and that is typically the first thing good coaching turns around.


Yes, I think he will be much better. But I still have concerns about his accuracy.

The first half of the season he had a QB rating in the low 90's, and while that included a 121.4 game against Detroit, it also included a 114.5 game against Minnesota, who is an elite defense in the NFL.

He had a 102.8 QB rating on passes between 21-30 yards, so the myth that he can't be effective deep doesn't seem to hold much weight.

He was significantly better out of two TE formations (94.3 QB rating), which tells us that he benefited from superior pass protection (which we won't need two TEs to give him) and some bigger short yardage targets (which we also can give him both in and out of a two TE set thanks to Marshall and Scheffler's versatility).

There are a lot of positive signs to take from Kyle Orton's first year as a full time starter. If McDaniels can just coax some consistency out of him and pair that with effective use of the talent around him, this offense will be a top 10 unit. There is a lot of potential for success there, just because its less than what a committed Cutler would've given us doesn't mean its trash.

I don't think he's trash. It actually made me feel pretty good knowing that McDaniels had real options here. To go via the draft, Campbell, Orton etc rather than having the decision made for him. I like the fact that our QB oriented coach wanted Orton on the team.

But let's be honest. It wasn't as if McDaniels got to Denver, woke up, and said "I want neckbeard." No the first choice was Cutler, then maybe Cassell, then Orton. So by McDaniel's own progression, Orton isn't exactly the belle of the ball, more like the practice girl.

I'm just not sold that Orton can put his inconsistency and accuracy issues behind him. Didn't he have accuracy issues in his collegiate seasons as well?

fontaine
05-14-2009, 10:01 AM
Keeping the above in mind, I don't think we have done what we should this offseason to become a team that relies on the QB to only get to a certain amount of points per game and letting the defense win the game. My feeling is that we are still going to be a team that is going to need offensive fireworks to win games, and I am not sold on our current QBs delivering that often enough.

Well, unless we broke the bank for Haynesworth, Canty, and sent our 1st for Suggs that was never going to happen in one offseason. It's a tough situation but the draft being weak along the DL didn't help.

The way I look at it though is slightly different, and for this I give some kudos to McDaniels. While he didn't fully address the front 7 issue through the draft or FA what he did was the next best thing in getting a top flight RB behind our OL.

As long as our running game produces, and I mean, top 5 if not top 3, which there's a very good chance it will, we've got a good shot at .500 as long as Orton doesn't give the ball away.

The defense will still have to be spoonfed along because it's going to take another two season to get very good (and that's if our Defensive drafts don't bust like Moss/Crowder).

gyldenlove
05-14-2009, 10:16 AM
Well, unless we broke the bank for Haynesworth, Canty, and sent our 1st for Suggs that was never going to happen in one offseason. It's a tough situation but the draft being weak along the DL didn't help.

The way I look at it though is slightly different, and for this I give some kudos to McDaniels. While he didn't fully address the front 7 issue through the draft or FA what he did was the next best thing in getting a top flight RB behind our OL.

As long as our running game produces, and I mean, top 5 if not top 3, which there's a very good chance it will, we've got a good shot at .500 as long as Orton doesn't give the ball away.

The defense will still have to be spoonfed along because it's going to take another two season to get very good (and that's if our Defensive drafts don't bust like Moss/Crowder).

Getting the RB was key. What I didn't like is that we didn't go after a 3-4 starter, I know they come at a steep price, but right now we don't have any player with significant starting experience in the 3-4.

My problem is especially when I review the DL, right now here are the guys I imagine will get a shot at the roster: Ryan Mcbean, Carlton Powell, Marcus Thomas, Ron Fields, Kenny Peterson and a rookie to be named later.

Mcbean is essentially a PS scrub, he has some tools it is very raw. Powell has yet to take a competitive snap in the NFL. Thomas is servicable in the 4-3, but has no 3-4 experience. Fields has some 3-4 experience, but couldn't take the starting job in San Fran. Peterson has some experience in 4-3, but is a backup quality player. The rookie is going to be undrafted, that much is a given. That just doesn't give me confidence, even with an improved secondary and run game.

I hope that Nolan and co will be able to coach some contribution and improvement out of these guys, we have some young guys who could still step up: Mcbean, Powell, Thomas, Baker, Pedescleaux, Davis, Moss, Crowder, Ayers.

Really I just doubt that Orton or Simms will be able to do enough in the face the pressure that they have to keep up with a presumably leaky defense.

TonyR
05-14-2009, 10:20 AM
My problem is with how polarized this site has become where a bunch of people try arguing that Orton is somehow a better QB than Cutler in some theoretical system, and their opposites trying to paint Orton as some kind of waiver wire scrub and McDaniels as a clueless hack who did nothing of any amount in the NFL and had no right to the position he currently has.


I think there are very few people making the argument bolded above. I think what most are saying is that Orton should do fine, or better than many think, in said theoretical system.

I agree with the haters that there will be plenty of times we'll miss Cutler's arm this season. When Orton unleashes a clunker we'll think "Jay could have made that throw!" But I don't think that over the course of the season the fall-off will be as big as many think because for almost every time Jay played well enough to propel the team to win a game last season he played poor enough for us to lose a game. In our losses his avg QB rating was ~68 and he threw 15 of his 18 interceptions. Very inconsistent. Too bad we'll never find out if McD could have helped make him consistently better...

Blueflame
05-14-2009, 12:23 PM
Wow, this post speaks of pure stupidity. Add in the fact that Blueflame thinks it served me somehow just adds to the dumbness of the post.

It's very good to see flashes of "the old Mock".

What's incredibly lame is the "go root for another team" card.... it's usually played immediately before or after the "I'm a better fan than you" card. Both suck.

TheReverend
05-14-2009, 12:34 PM
I think there are very few people making the argument bolded above. I think what most are saying is that Orton should do fine, or better than many think, in said theoretical system.

I agree with the haters that there will be plenty of times we'll miss Cutler's arm this season. When Orton unleashes a clunker we'll think "Jay could have made that throw!" But I don't think that over the course of the season the fall-off will be as big as many think because for almost every time Jay played well enough to propel the team to win a game last season he played poor enough for us to lose a game. In our losses his avg QB rating was ~68 and he threw 15 of his 18 interceptions. Very inconsistent. Too bad we'll never find out if McD could have helped make him consistently better...

Don't forget when our line looks worse, receiving options suddenly aren't getting open and yards per carry dip despite a better RB.

GreatBronco16
05-14-2009, 05:53 PM
It's very good to see flashes of "the old Mock".

What's incredibly lame is the "go root for another team" card.... it's usually played immediately before or after the "I'm a better fan than you" card. Both suck.

Well excuse me for calling out a 'Fan' that is upset that Denver might start off 3-0. Maybe you can buy him an Cutler jersey for being the greatest fan ever with that statement. I'd expect to get slammed for saying something like that too.

And yes it is good to see flashes of the old Mock. I missed being able to laugh like this.

Hulamau
05-14-2009, 10:26 PM
My problem is with how polarized this site has become where a bunch of people try arguing that Orton is somehow a better QB than Cutler in some theoretical system, and their opposites trying to paint Orton as some kind of waiver wire scrub and McDaniels as a clueless hack who did nothing of any amount in the NFL and had no right to the position he currently has.


The argument isn't that Orton is a better physical talent than Cutler at QB, he isn't! Cutler has some rare skills there no doubt. And many of us have acknowledged what a shame it is we can never see how good Cutler could have become here under the expert QB guidance and discipline of McD.

But the argument IS worth looking at that it is possible the 'real-world' Orton can make at least as good as, if not better, fit for this team and scheme than a 'real-world' Cutler (meaning a self-centered, arrogant know it all gunslinger who is UNCOMMITTED to McD and would have friction with him on some level all year).

Also, a very serious argument can be made that Orton MAY be smarter and more adaptable in the huddle and at the line before the snap and make better (meaning 'winning') decisions with his complex options in a spread offense similar to what Orton ran very well at Purdue compared with Cutler (locking on Marshall or Royal who ever is the top read).

Orton won't be the guy that drills 35 yard lasers in triple coverage and completes a good many of them like Jay, but he'll throw less INTs in the process as well. We wont see as many 70 yard in the air bombs from him as we might have from Cutler, though I seriously doubt that was going to be as big a part of McD's play calling anyway, no matter who is at QB ... and specially after looking at last years film how often Cutler missed on those in any event.

There were any number of guys who had more talent and raw QB skills than Joe Montana, but Joe was the perfect guy for the then new west coast offense that didn't depend on a rocket arm but needed accuracy with the ball and uncanny cool and smarts under pressure which he had in spades.

Montana was 6'2" (in high heels) 200lbs (when wet) and yet he DOMINATED for almost a decade in that system. ... Now before a few of you have a conniption fit, I'm NOT saying Orton = Montana. But its also true that in Chicago's offense last year Joe Montana would never have become THE Montana we all remember and admire either!

We saw that the physical talent superiority of Steve Young could ALSO excel in that same system and even put up some better stats over all. However Young also is a better decision maker than Cutler and was ALWAYS more careful with the ball than Jay has been so far and better at checking down, though perhaps McD could have brought that out in Jay as well).

The point being that in spite of Jay's obvious sheer talent edge over Kyle, this may well be a case of Orton being at least an solid and very successful fit here, and yes perhaps even a better fit than Cutler!?! Indeed in the REAL world its obvious Orton is a better fit because he IS here and Jay pouted his way out of town and likely is nursing a hang over in Chicago as we speak.

Indeed, I think the ENTIRE fiasco was set in motion by Jay's uncomfortable recognition that with McD in charge and no longer having his adoring cheer-leader squad in Shanny and Bates to coddle him he might not be able to do what he liked best and might not fit so well himself in this style of play.

Be careful what you wish for Jay .. and enjoy Lovey's and Ron Turners wide open offense :-)!

There are a lot of positive signs to take from Kyle Orton's first year as a full time starter. If McDaniels can just coax some consistency out of him and pair that with effective use of the talent around him, this offense will be a top 10 unit. There is a lot of potential for success there, just because its less than what a committed (meaning fantasy) Cutler would've given us doesn't mean its trash.

That's the bottom line, most folks here are seeing too .. except the myopic, 'glass is empty and in the trash' die-hard Cutler suckers that is.

Hulamau
05-14-2009, 10:39 PM
Don't forget when our line looks worse, receiving options suddenly aren't getting open and yards per carry dip despite a better RB.

That is PRECISELY the scenario Orton has faced his whole career at Chicago.. plus his receivers were crap to begin with and he had ZERO time to get the ball away.

Now Orton has died and gone to heaven and we get a chance to see just how effective he can be with some real weapons all around him.

I promise you if Jay had been Chicago's QB last year he would NOT have thrown 4,500 yards and may well have tossed even more INTs always running for his life and having S*** for brains WR running crappy routes and dropping balls.

GreatBronco16
05-14-2009, 10:55 PM
Jay Cutler is the RoXXoRs!!! Leave Jay alone. He can't help it that he wanted a trade, got traded, then wondered why he got traded. He has such rare talent. Like a strong arm, and........well.......he can really throw the ball hard and that's reminded me of having Elway back just a little, and now that is crushed.

Hulamau
05-14-2009, 11:01 PM
Getting the RB was key. What I didn't like is that we didn't go after a 3-4 starter, I know they come at a steep price, but right now we don't have any player with significant starting experience in the 3-4.


What is Ayers may I ask?

Also this D will be substantially improved over last year and our offense should be at least as good, as I seriously doubt we''ll have the RB issues we've had the past couple years, and last year in particular, that stalled us in the red-zone time and again and got us off the field too often putting even more pressure on our schizophrenic defense.

Blueflame
05-14-2009, 11:04 PM
Well excuse me for calling out a 'Fan' that is upset that Denver might start off 3-0. Maybe you can buy him an Cutler jersey for being the greatest fan ever with that statement. I'd expect to get slammed for saying something like that too.

And yes it is good to see flashes of the old Mock. I missed being able to laugh like this.

Perhaps you missed the part where I've said that due to free agency, I will never, ever buy the jersey of any current player. I don't own a Cutler jersey and won't be buying Mock one, much as I like him.

BroncoBuff
05-15-2009, 05:32 AM
Drek we understand that he was very good coordinator, but there major difference between a coordinator and being the man. Right now it's understandable why folks can be concerned with some of the actions of the front office, and McDaniels in particular. For folks to make argument that he going to be good HC because he was good OC doesn't have much substance, both have different roles and responsibilities in professional football team. McDaniels has admitted in interviews with Denver Post and RMN, before it folded, that he didn't realize all the decisions he had to make outside just coaching.
Great post, that is a big problem ... that too many people are conflating these two issues: They're taking our criticisms of McD's front office moves, and through specious reasoning, painting those criticisms as attacks on his coaching.

But they're two different things of course. Popps. Just like the rest of us keep our skepticism about moves separate for our love for the team, we can also keep our evaluations of coaching and FO moves separate.



So right now, we have to hope that McDaniels is smart enough to figure all the aspects of being Head Coach and time demands outside coaching football. If he doesn't he just another failed "brilliant" coordinator, that couldn't make it as head coach.
Reality is a byach, and the reality is that the vast majority of head coaches last less than three or four years. We can hope for better, and I definitely do hope for better, but my eyes are wide open.

The Joker
05-15-2009, 05:37 AM
Have faith in the McAttack.

Orton for the HOF, first ballot.

Write that down.

alkemical
05-15-2009, 05:39 AM
Perhaps you missed the part where I've said that due to free agency, I will never, ever buy the jersey of any current player. I don't own a Cutler jersey and won't be buying Mock one, much as I like him.

I dunno, mock beat peanutbutter. That's legendary. You should only buy jersey's that represent hero's. Buy a Mock jersey.

Drek
05-15-2009, 07:00 AM
Great post, that is a big problem ... that too many people are conflating these two issues: They're taking our criticisms of McD's front office moves, and through specious reasoning, painting those criticisms as attacks on his coaching.

But they're two different things of course. Popps. Just like the rest of us keep our skepticism about moves separate for our love for the team, we can also keep our evaluations of coaching and FO moves separate.
Thats not what I was doing at all. I was rebutting comments made by posters in this very thread that McDaniels:
A. had very little to do with the large step forward Tom Brady took from '04, to '05 and '06, and again in '07. Despite Tom Brady saying that he did.

B. had very little to dow ith the large step forward that Matt Cassel took because Cassel was a top high school prospect, had all those weapons, etc.

C. had very little to do with the success of Wes Welker (who basically doubled his career production instantly in McDaniels' offense) and Randy Moss (who pulled his career back from the brink after three below average years).

D. was living off Charlie Wies' legacy despite the Patriots offense taking a major step forward in basically every way with by and large equal or inferior talent until the 2007 season.

I'm not saying he's a lock to be a great HC, or that he's been doing gang busters all off-season at building a team. But his resume holds up with ANY first time HC in recent NFL history. The notion that he isn't the most qualified, most capable person to make that transition in the NFL today is simply not supported by the facts. He might fall flat on his face, but it won't be from a lack of credentials or sub-par qualifications.

Hulamau
05-15-2009, 07:30 AM
Great post, that is a big problem ... that too many people are conflating these two issues: They're taking our criticisms of McD's front office moves, and through specious reasoning, painting those criticisms as attacks on his coaching.

But they're two different things of course. Popps. Just like the rest of us keep our skepticism about moves separate for our love for the team, we can also keep our evaluations of coaching and FO moves separate.


Reality is a byach, and the reality is that the vast majority of head coaches last less than three or four years. We can hope for better, and I definitely do hope for better, but my eyes are wide open.

That's fair enough BB but what I don't get is that , sure complain and all about moves you either don't like, don't understand or just question but some folks need to realize he is going to make some mistakes along the way, particularly as a young guy who is very skilled in a lot of areas and maybe THE next great coaching institution.

Let him make a few 'mistakes' in your eyes and STILL support him and the team. Did people agree with everything Shanny did? Not by long shot but most of us still wished him the best in getting us to the SB.

But some folks what to run McD our of town based on their not so brilliant 'hunches' or 'bad feelings' at this point so early on before training camp has even started, without giving him ANY benefit of the doubt and ANY support at all in this HUGE task of rebuilding this team and getting it going in the right direction.

It feels like some of the die-hard gloomers here are from the Rush Limbaugh school of doing everything you can to UNDERMINE and NOT support the leader of their team (country) solely because he wasn't their favorite guy at the prom!

Question, even criticize the FO decisions you guys( or gal :) don't like if you want! That's fine, but wishing him ill will and failure is childish and self-destructive if they really want this team to win. And its those few here who do that who need some personality adjustments .. or perhaps just some good re-parenting they may have missed out on .. or long forgotten! :flower:

BroncoBuff
05-15-2009, 07:49 AM
A. had very little to do with the large step forward Tom Brady took from '04, to '05 and '06, and again in '07. Despite Tom Brady saying that he did.
If Brady says so, that's good enough for me.


B. had very little to dow ith the large step forward that Matt Cassel took because Cassel was a top high school prospect, had all those weapons, etc.
Anybody who said that is certifiably nuts.


C. had very little to do with the success of Wes Welker (who basically doubled his career production instantly in McDaniels' offense) and Randy Moss (who pulled his career back from the brink after three below average years).Both Moss and Welker owe McD an enormous debt of gratitude. I'd be interested to know whether it was McD who identified this average Dolphins WR and brought him in .... actually I'm guessing that was Bill.


D. was living off Charlie Wies' legacy despite the Patriots offense taking a major step forward in basically every way with by and large equal or inferior talent until the 2007 season.
Belichik/Weis definitely built the machine, they had GGREAT success before McD was there. But McD had to teach it to all-new personnel, at least at the skill positions ... Maroney, Welker, Moss and Cassel all came aboard on his watch. And he molded them into a record-breaking offense.


I'm not saying he's a lock to be a great HC, or that he's been doing gang busters all off-season at building a team. But his resume holds up with ANY first time HC in recent NFL history. The notion that he isn't the most qualified, most capable person to make that transition in the NFL today is simply not supported by the facts. He might fall flat on his face, but it won't be from a lack of credentials or sub-par qualifications.
I'm totally excited about McD the coach, I've never said anything else. Can't wait to see this offense.

But on the other hand, I do think he was given too much front office power too soon.

The front office season is basically over now ... so now is the gravy. The on-field stuff we should all be pretty psyched up for. ^5

fontaine
05-15-2009, 09:06 AM
That's fair enough BB but what I don't get is that , sure complain and all about moves you either don't like, don't understand or just question but some folks need to realize he is going to make some mistakes along the way, particularly as a young guy who is very skilled in a lot of areas and maybe THE next great coaching institution.

Let him make a few 'mistakes' in your eyes and STILL support him and the team. Did people agree with everything Shanny did? Not by long shot but most of us still wished him the best in getting us to the SB.

But some folks what to run McD our of town based on their not so brilliant 'hunches' or 'bad feelings' at this point so early on before training camp has even started, without giving him ANY benefit of the doubt and ANY support at all in this HUGE task of rebuilding this team and getting it going in the right direction.

It feels like some of the die-hard gloomers here are from the Rush Limbaugh school of doing everything you can to UNDERMINE and NOT support the leader of their team (country) solely because he wasn't their favorite guy at the prom!

Question, even criticize the FO decisions you guys( or gal :) don't like if you want! That's fine, but wishing him ill will and failure is childish and self-destructive if they really want this team to win. And its those few here who do that who need some personality adjustments .. or perhaps just some good re-parenting they may have missed out on .. or long forgotten! :flower:

So Bowlen fired a hall of fame coach to hire a young guy to get work experience and learn on the job?

Hell no. McDaniels was hired here to win SuperBowls, not get a couple of practice shots at being HC. He's going to get kicked in a$$ for making dumb a$$ mistakes just like the way Shanahan got kicked in the a$$.