PDA

View Full Version : SI's Michael Silver: Belichick Disciples Alienating Players & Others


footstepsfrom#27
06-10-2009, 01:31 AM
Eight players and several management people...all with similar experiences and opinions resulting from the same issues with disciples of Bill Belichick. This is an interesting story, by a respected sports writer whose covered the NFL for some of the best publications out there for a long time...the conclusions are not encouraging.

Michael Silver, a senior writer for Sports Illustrated, joined the magazine in November 1994. He is one of SI's lead pro football writers, having authored the magazine's past 12 Super Bowl game stories. He also regularly pens in-depth profiles of some of the most intriguing characters in sports...He also covered the 49ers for the Sacramento Union and served as a correspondent for Pro Football Weekly and The Sporting News.

Mangini, Belichick disciples alienate players

By Michael Silver, Yahoo! Sports
May 22, 12:27 pm EDT

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ms-thegameface052209&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

Joshua Cribbs is a popular man in the Cleveland Browns’ locker room, an undrafted free agent from nearby Kent State who developed into a Pro Bowl kick returner. He is also the team’s unofficial social coordinator, which is of no small importance in a city where success has been scarce in recent years.

“We all love Cribbs,” one Browns veteran said Thursday of the speedy fifth-year receiver, who might also have a future as a defensive back. “He’s the guy who always throws the Halloween parties and the Christmas bashes, so yeah, he’s very popular.”

In light of recent developments, that would make Browns coach Eric Mangini the Grinch – and the man who hired him, owner Randy Lerner, Ebeneezer Scrooge.

Cribbs and his bosses are currently locked in what seems on the surface to be a typical NFL contract dispute between a player who has outperformed his long-term deal and a team that is in no hurry to provide an upgrade. In reality, this is a credibility dispute between a dependable, accountable athlete and an abrasive coach consumed with flexing his newly acquired power.

It’s the latest testament to Mangini’s apparent lack of tact and people skills, personality traits he honed under his estranged mentor, New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick. Like two other Belichick disciples, new Kansas City Chiefs general manager Scott Pioli and neophyte Denver Broncos coach Josh McDaniels, Mangini has marked his arrival at a new organization this offseason by alienating established leaders while projecting a self-assuredness that borders on arrogance.

With three Super Bowl titles as a head coach and a prior record of success as a brainy defensive coordinator, Belichick, a future Hall of Famer, can get away with his power trip. Whether Mangini, Pioli and McDaniels are able to pull it off will depend upon how many football games their respective teams win, something that often depends upon the men in uniform buying into the program.

In the meantime, in Cleveland, Kansas City and Denver, the new guys in charge seem to be consumed with winning mind games, a strategy I’m not so sure will serve them well over the long haul.

In Denver, McDaniels’ sloppy handling of his interactions with Jay Cutler after an unsuccessful attempt to trade him at the start of free agency led to the loss of a franchise quarterback, largely because the 33-year-old coach was obsessed with demonstrating his unquestioned authority.

In K.C., Pioli’s arrival as the all-powerful general manager after years as Belichick’s right-hand personnel man was soon followed by a less-publicized incident involving a star player. According to Kansas City Star columnist Jason Whitlock, perennial Pro Bowl guard and locker-room leader Brian Waters asked to be traded or released after becoming offended by the arrogant attitudes of Pioli and his newly hired coach, Todd Haley.

Waters, a source told Whitlock, flew to Kansas City in February specifically to meet with the new GM and coach in an effort to become familiar with their leadership plans. The source said Pioli told Waters he had no interest in meeting and that Haley began a hallway conversation with the player by proclaiming that 22 guys off the street could win two games, as the Chiefs had in ’08.

Mangini, fresh off a 1-4 finish with the Jets that got him fired after three seasons – he had a 23-26 overall record (including a playoff loss) in New York – arrived in Cleveland with a similar swagger. One of his first moves was to orchestrate the firing of director of pro personnel T.J. McCreight, the highest-ranking personnel man remaining after Lerner’s dismissal of general manager Phil Savage, and one of the people who’d interviewed to replace Savage. (Mangini, hired while the GM job was still open, successfully lobbied Lerner to choose Ravens personnel executive George Kokinis.)

McCreight, a source said, was called into the office of team president Mike Keenan, who pulled out cell-phone records showing that McCreight had engaged in conversations with reporters – an act frowned upon by the paranoid Mangini. McCreight explained that speaking with the media was among the duties with which he’d been entrusted by Savage, but he was nonetheless terminated; he has since been hired as the Cardinals’ director of pro personnel.

A team source said Mangini, upon his arrival in Cleveland, was brusque when dealing with other Browns employees and spent most of his time in his office with the door closed. Early on Mangini, according to multiple reports, alienated the team’s top performer from 2008, Pro Bowl defensive tackle Shaun Rogers, by failing to acknowledge him on a pair of occasions: once in the team’s training room and once at a local awards show.

Rogers reportedly asked the team not to pay him a $6 million bonus and to trade or release him. Mangini, who claimed he didn’t notice Rogers at the awards show, apparently patched up the relationship; Rogers recently said the two had put aside their differences “just like grown men do.”

It’s unclear how another Browns defensive lineman, Shaun Smith, feels about Mangini, who a source said told the player during their first interaction at the team’s facility, “Lose some weight and lose the attitude.”

The latest coach-player dustup involves Cribbs, who signed a six-year, $6.7 million contract extension in 2006 and, after a Pro Bowl ’07 season, began earning comparisons to the Chicago Bears’ ultra-explosive breakaway threat Devin Hester. Last July Hester signed a four-year contract extension worth a reported $40 million, which did not go unnoticed by Cribbs.

When Cribbs’ representatives at All-Pro Sports and Entertainment approached Savage last summer about their client’s desire for a new deal, they were told the team was amenable to adjusting his salary following the ’08 season because Cribbs was deserving and was a positive locker-room influence.

Two sources say Lerner, too, was on board with the decision and that the owner, after firing Savage and coach Romeo Crennel immediately after a season-ending defeat at Pittsburgh last December, called Cribbs on the team bus to assure him that regardless of the moves he would honor his word and address the player’s contract situation.

Yet after Mangini’s arrival, no one in the organization expressed interest in negotiating a new deal. Frustrated by the team’s unresponsiveness, Cribbs decided to skip this week’s voluntary minicamp. The Browns then issued a statement that disputed Cribbs’ reported perspective, saying, “no one from the current Browns organization, including Owner Randy Lerner, has ever made any promises to Josh Cribbs with regard to his contract status.”

That, said a source close to Cribbs, “took his anger from Defcon 3 to Defcon 1.” Cribbs, through his representatives, has since asked for a trade, a request the Browns said they were not amenable to honoring.

On Thursday, Cribbs was asked to come to the facility for a meeting with Mangini. The player complied, explaining to the coach that he wouldn’t participate in voluntary offseason activities until the team honors its promise to adjust his contract. Mangini, according to a source familiar with the conversation, said little in return. Cribbs then attended a team meeting before departing the facility, leaving teammates wondering if a resolution is in sight.

“They need to figure out a way to get that fixed,” the aforementioned unnamed Browns player said Thursday, “because the guy is a special player.”

Could the situation be handled any more clumsily? Whatever Mangini’s perception of Cribbs’ value, he should be especially sensitive to the player’s contention that the team broke its promise to upgrade his deal. During Mangini’s tenure with the Jets, three players no longer with the team – guard Pete Kendall, tight end Chris Baker and wideout Laveranues Coles – went public with similar accusations.

Why would a team do business this way? Why did Lerner, with no other NFL franchises in pursuit of Mangini as a head coach, rush to make the hire before naming a GM and then grant him so much control over the team’s football operations? Why is a franchise, whose powerbrokers are paranoid enough to check an employee’s cell-phone records, be so rattled by a player’s absence from a voluntary minicamp that it put out a public statement essentially calling one of its model citizens a greedy liar?

“The whole thing is so screwy,” said one former Browns employee. “I think it’s about control. If the fans knew what was really going on over there, they wouldn’t even buy a ticket.”

Football, of course, is a bottom-line business. Fan support will persist if Mangini, despite his warped methodology, turns the Browns into a winner, as he did with the Jets in his first season. The same goes for Pioli and Haley in K.C. and for McDaniels and his handpicked GM, Brian Xanders, in Denver.

I wonder whether Mangini, Pioli or McDaniels can attain the type of immediate success enjoyed last year in Atlanta under first-year general manager Thomas Dimitroff, another former Pats employee who approached his new job with a far less contentious management style.

If not, it won’t be a very merry Christmas for them or their affronted employees. It’s safe to say that in Mangini’s case, there’s one popular party to which he likely won’t be receiving an invitation.

Archer81
06-10-2009, 01:41 AM
So let me understands this. McDaniels is the same as mangini because he got rid of a player who thought he was more important then the other 52 guys on the roster? Who won nothing, and was acting like a bitch. Sucks for the Browns, but the comparison is a bit weak.

:Broncos:

telluride
06-10-2009, 01:41 AM
Jesus, let it go #27. Either find another team to root for, or just admit that you're rooting against the Broncos. But this gleeful posting of every anti Denver article is getting tiresome.

footstepsfrom#27
06-10-2009, 01:43 AM
So let me understands this. McDaniels is the same as mangini because he got rid of a player who thought he was more important then the other 52 guys on the roster? Who won nothing, and was acting like a b****. Sucks for the Browns, but the comparison is a bit weak.

:Broncos:
Eight players...all with the same basic story, plus assorted managerial people. The story in case you missed it...is not about Denver, nor is it about McDaniels.

It's about a pattern.

footstepsfrom#27
06-10-2009, 01:44 AM
Jesus, let it go #27. Either find another team to root for, or just admit that you're rooting against the Broncos. But this gleeful posting of every anti Denver article is getting tiresome.
Your beef is with Michael Silver. Not surprisingly...you attack me for posting what he wrote.

The story is not about Denver.

Archer81
06-10-2009, 01:45 AM
Eight players...all with the same basic story, plus assorted managerial people. The story in case you missed it...is not about Denver, nor is it about McDaniels.

It's about a pattern.


Then why post the ****ing article if it has nothing to do with Denver or McDaniels? Its a pattern with Bellichek and Mangini, not Pioli or McDaniels. Get the sand out of your vag dude.


:Broncos:

AZBroncomaniac
06-10-2009, 01:50 AM
Then why post the ****ing article if it has nothing to do with Denver or McDaniels? Its a pattern with Bellichek and Mangini, not Pioli or McDaniels. Get the sand out of your vag dude.


:Broncos:

Talk about sand in a vag....

Bitch about the article, not the one posting it. Maybe you should ask for an end to birthday posts since they have nothing to do with the Broncos. Argue the discussion at hand, or move to the next thread.

footstepsfrom#27
06-10-2009, 01:50 AM
Then why post the ****ing article if it has nothing to do with Denver or McDaniels? Its a pattern with Bellichek and Mangini, not Pioli or McDaniels. Get the sand out of your vag dude.


:Broncos:
I didn't say it had nothing to do with McDaniels...obviously it does. Did you actually read it? Apparently not or you wouldn't suggest it's got nothing to do with Pioli or McDaniels. The core of the story is about a group of people all connected with Belichick...that includes McDaniels.

As I said...your beef is with Michael Silver. I suppose I should have pretended I didn't see this right?

footstepsfrom#27
06-10-2009, 01:52 AM
Talk about sand in a vag....

b**** about the article, not the one posting it. Maybe you should ask for an end to birthday posts since they have nothing to do with the Broncos. Argue the discussion at hand, or move to the next thread.
Rep.

Better yet...dispute what he said with some facts to back it up rather than just bitching about it or calling the writer an idiot.

Pretty sure that's wishful thinking...

Archer81
06-10-2009, 01:53 AM
Talk about sand in a vag....

b**** about the article, not the one posting it. Maybe you should ask for an end to birthday posts since they have nothing to do with the Broncos. Argue the discussion at hand, or move to the next thread.


I only oppose birthday threads created by the birthday boy/girl. Its just common sense.

As for the article, if the poster of the friggin article says it has nothing to do with Denver, then why post it unless its a criticism of the current coaching staff?

:Broncos:

footstepsfrom#27
06-10-2009, 01:54 AM
I only oppose birthday threads created by the birthday boy/girl. Its just common sense.

As for the article, if the poster of the friggin article says it has nothing to do with Denver, then why post it unless its a criticism of the current coaching staff?
Come back when you've read the article. I didn't say it had nothing to do with Denver.

Archer81
06-10-2009, 01:55 AM
I didn't say it had nothing to do with McDaniels...obviously it does. Did you actually read it? Apparently not or you wouldn't suggest it's got nothing to do with Pioli or McDaniels. The core of the story is about a group of people all connected with Belichick...that includes McDaniels.

As I said...your beef is with Michael Silver. I suppose I should have pretended I didn't see this right?


One sentence about McDaniels and you post it. Why? McDaniels has never been a head coach. He has no history or established way of doing things. So obviously the only remaining reason you posted this was to attack, yet again, the new Broncos HC. Passive aggressive behavior at its finest.

:Broncos:

footstepsfrom#27
06-10-2009, 01:57 AM
One sentence about McDaniels and you post it. Why? McDaniels has never been a head coach. He has no history or established way of doing things. So obviously the only remaining reason you posted this was to attack, yet again, the new Broncos HC. Passive aggressive behavior at its finest.

:Broncos:
McDaniels is just as much part of this as the rest of them, and easily the most visible and publicized example.

There's nothing passive aggressive about me...I'll tell you exactly what I think every time.

AZBroncomaniac
06-10-2009, 01:59 AM
I only oppose birthday threads created by the birthday boy/girl. Its just common sense.

As for the article, if the poster of the friggin article says it has nothing to do with Denver, then why post it unless its a criticism of the current coaching staff?

:Broncos:

I hear ya' on the birthday posts.

I think Footsteps' point was that the article was not entirely based on the Broncos. Most of us know his stance on the current state of affairs, and where most of his posts are going to be directed. I think it's fruitless to bitch about a post, when anyone on this forum can see who started the post, whether they agree with the poster or not.

epicSocialism4tw
06-10-2009, 02:01 AM
This was McD's MO from day one, and to ignore that is to ignore the truth.

footstepsfrom#27
06-10-2009, 02:02 AM
I hear ya' on the birthday posts.

I think Footsteps' point was that the article was not entirely based on the Broncos. Most of us know his stance on the current state of affairs, and where most of his posts are going to be directed. I think it's fruitless to b**** about a post, when anyone on this forum can see who started the post, whether they agree with the poster or not.
The thing is...it doesn't matter who started the post, because I didn't write the article. This is probably the single most relevant piece I've seen this offseason on the state of affairs we're looking at, and it's written by a real NFL writer, not some blogger with an orange hard on.

People can scream at me all they want...now let's see some responses directed to the issues Silver raises.

Archer81
06-10-2009, 02:04 AM
McDaniels is just as much part of this as the rest of them, and easily the most visible and publicized example.

There's nothing passive aggressive about me...I'll tell you exactly what I think every time.


You are grasping at straws man. Mangini and McDaniels are completely different men, in completely different situations. The only similarity is they both worked in NE and worked for an asshole. Mangini has continued to be a dick, while we have no clue about how McDaniels will be. So you dug for an article that has little to do with the Broncos to bring up some convoluted halfassed theory that McDaniels will be just as pricklike as Mangini and Bellicheat, without any evidence to support the claim.

Which makes you passive aggressive.

:Broncos:

footstepsfrom#27
06-10-2009, 02:07 AM
You are grasping at straws man. Mangini and McDaniels are completely different men, in completely different situations. The only similarity is they both worked in NE and worked for an a-hole.
That's hardly irrelevant. You didn't read the article did you?
Mangini has continued to be a dick, while we have no clue about how McDaniels will be. So you dug for an article that has little to do with the Broncos to bring up some convoluted halfassed theory that McDaniels will be just as pricklike as Mangini and Bellicheat, without any evidence to support the claim.

Which makes you passive aggressive.

:Broncos:
I didn't dig for anything. I found it surfing for material, like I find everything.

Go look up what "passive aggressive" means.

GreatBronco16
06-10-2009, 03:22 AM
Ok, first you need to look at this thread. http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=79471

Second.

"In Denver, McDaniels’ sloppy handling of his interactions with Jay Cutler after an unsuccessful attempt to trade him at the start of free agency led to the loss of a franchise quarterback, largely because the 33-year-old coach was obsessed with demonstrating his unquestioned authority."

McDaniels sloppy handling of his interactions? Oh please, McDaniels tried nearly everything to talk to Jay. Jay was the one not returning the calls. Sorry, but he is clearly clueless on this matter. And he was obsessed with demonstrating his 'unquestioned' authority??? ROFL. I guess McDaniels should have just walked in and said hey guys, you just do what you want to do, I'm just a coach here.

footstepsfrom#27
06-10-2009, 04:04 AM
Ok, first you need to look at this thread. http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=79471

Second.

"In Denver, McDaniels’ sloppy handling of his interactions with Jay Cutler after an unsuccessful attempt to trade him at the start of free agency led to the loss of a franchise quarterback, largely because the 33-year-old coach was obsessed with demonstrating his unquestioned authority."

McDaniels sloppy handling of his interactions? Oh please, McDaniels tried nearly everything to talk to Jay. Jay was the one not returning the calls. Sorry, but he is clearly clueless on this matter. And he was obsessed with demonstrating his 'unquestioned' authority??? ROFL. I guess McDaniels should have just walked in and said hey guys, you just do what you want to do, I'm just a coach here.
I think perhaps you're missing the elephant in the room here.

You...and every other individual on this board has formed an opinion about who was right, who was wrong, and what actually happened...not on the basis of what you (or I) KNOW to be true...but on the basis of what you (and I) BELEIVE based on WHO we choose to trust.

That is a stone cold, undeniable fact...one of the few we actually have.

The issue in this article, is that Silver...who is not some blogging idiot but an accomplished writer...is presenting you with a pattern...one that if you actually read carefully what he's saying...shows evidence of repeating itself in every one of Belichicks disciples. The fact that strong threads of similarity dominate the actions and attitudes of these coaches and executives as reported by the players themselves who associate with them, is a powerful commentary on where probability lies when trying to deciper who said what to who and who is believable.

When you have almost identical issues accross the board reported by these players, including those related to respect, ownership instantly offering power to these individuals out of the blue, making statements in the press to the fan base about the players, behind the scenes firing of former execs in the midst of power struggles, and the general milieu of what Silver depicts as unbridled arrogance...that is worth noting, and that is worth examining in light of the fact we have reports of the same identical problems here. You can choose to do whatever you wish with this story, but saying that Silver doesn't know what he's talking about represents that you do...and like all of us...you don't know more than what you've read, and your opinion like mine...comes down to who you've chosen to believe.

You can't ignore the ramifications of the story. The common denominators are to numerous, to closely mirroring one another, and to significant to merely assign this to either coincidence, stupidity, bias or ineptness on the part of the writer.

If you say he's wrong...prove why he's wrong, and it has to be something other than simple heresay, which is what we're working with right now. I don't think all these players are making up the same story.

Do you?

GreatBronco16
06-10-2009, 04:17 AM
I don't have to prove if he is wrong on McDaniels. He needs to prove that he is right. He is the one making 'assumptions' about how he is some power hungry punk that had an agenda from day one. Everything he wrote is just his opinion thrown in with some sources from players who use to work under Mangini who don't anymore because they didn't get what they wanted. Gee go figure they wouldn't have anything nice to say.

meangene
06-10-2009, 04:42 AM
I read the article and it would have been interesting if it were just about Mangini because he has a history of these types of actions as a head coach and a number of issues already in Cleveland that leave you scratching your head. But, the author needed a more entertaining hook than that so he made a huge stretch to link McDaniels and Pioli. Pioli was on the job for many years in New England and I don't recall a single incident of this type. McDaniels has been involved in one issue - Cutler, in which it is vogue for the head-line seeking national media to blame him. Any fault he may have is, at best, questionable but the media just glosses over the details and the unknowns in the whole Cutler situation. It is vogue to just say McDaniel's ran Cutler out of town, the Broncos will suck and Cutler is a great quarterback. Let's just ignore the fact that there is absolutely no indication that McDaniels is alienating the players in Denver and that everything you read or hear from the players indicates a real enthusiasm for the system and optimism for the upcoming season. Another shoddy piece of SI "journalism" just like the recent Marshall witch hunt on ESPN and some of those ridiculous rankings of head coaches who have yet to coach an NFL game by TSN. I guess it's the offseason and there is nothing else to talk about than another Brett Favre comeback.

BroncoInSkinland
06-10-2009, 04:49 AM
Let me take a shot at it as Devils advocate. I am not fond of McDaniels moves so far this off season, but this deserves some kind of response. Let's assume the article is spot on and that the assertations it makes are completely true.

With three Super Bowl titles as a head coach and a prior record of success as a brainy defensive coordinator, Belichick, a future Hall of Famer, can get away with his power trip. Whether Mangini, Pioli and McDaniels are able to pull it off will depend upon how many football games their respective teams win, something that often depends upon the men in uniform buying into the program. Given the talent levels on the three teams in question, I would say the Broncos have the best shot at winning enough games to "pull it off".

Why would a team do business this way? Why did Lerner, with no other NFL franchises in pursuit of Mangini as a head coach, rush to make the hire before naming a GM and then grant him so much control over the team’s football operations? A team would do business this way because it is financially advantageous to them, and because a similar approach has been used in NE resulting in the most recent football dynasty. Say what you want about Belichick, he puts a winning team on the field with consistancy.

So, it is a gamble. I will not try to refute the article, though I would say its basis in fact is reliant upon hearsay from disgruntled players and an argument could be made from that standpoint. Instead I will accept the article at face value and point out that it could work out well for the Broncos. If McDaniels is able to string together a few wins, and get the players to truely believe in the system and his leadership, we could have the start of a future dynasty on our hands. If the Broncos post anything near New Englands 2000's numbers in the 2010's the management style will be vindicated. Further, if any of the three teams have a good level of success the same could be said. In that case it might suck for the Broncos, but the rationale behind taking the gamble will be evident.

footstepsfrom#27
06-10-2009, 05:25 AM
I don't have to prove if he is wrong on McDaniels. He needs to prove that he is right. He is the one making 'assumptions' about how he is some power hungry punk that had an agenda from day one. Everything he wrote is just his opinion thrown in with some sources from players who use to work under Mangini who don't anymore because they didn't get what they wanted. Gee go figure they wouldn't have anything nice to say.
It would be nice if we could explain it away like that, but it's not tht easy. First of all, it's not just Mangini, it's also Pioli and McDaniels, as well as the ownership in both Denver and Cleveland, as well as the testimony of players in New York plus the other three teams. It's 8 players singing the same tune and on top of that he didin't just pull this opinion out of his butt, he researched it. He spoke to sources on the teams, and he tells you this in the article. Second, it's not just that "they don't have anything nice to say" as you put it...it's the fact that they all have the SAME thing to say. It's not like their story's differ from one another...they match. A few months ago it's Cutler...now we have Weigman talking about what was promised him...a theme that sounds like the one echoed by Cribbs. Then you have the remarkably similar examples of upper mangement being fired in Denver and Cleveland where TJ McCreight, fresh off an interview for the vacant GM job, was summarily fired after Mangini got to town and lobbied for Ravens exec George Kokinis as his personal choice for GM...a pattern followed with Denver when they hired promoted Xanders.

Does all this prove McDaniels is a carbon copy? No...it doesn't. But what it does do...is offer one of the few actual pieces of evidence we have that is supported by coraborating testimonials from other places on the nature of how the "New England way" is planted outside the Pats organization. It's a strong indicator that for the first time, casts real doubt on the offical version of things that doesn't just come from Jay Cutler, and can't just be dismissed as one immature player having a tantrum.

Silver's a credible writer, not a hack like Woody Paige or the drama queens we see on ESPN. He spoke to players and people in these organizations, and had access we don't. Whether you choose to believe it or not is up to you, but the door's been opened to questions on a wider level with the existence of multiple other Belichick coaching tree issues rising to the surface that mirror the ones we've seen here.

footstepsfrom#27
06-10-2009, 05:31 AM
I read the article and it would have been interesting if it were just about Mangini because he has a history of these types of actions as a head coach and a number of issues already in Cleveland that leave you scratching your head. But, the author needed a more entertaining hook than that so he made a huge stretch to link McDaniels and Pioli. Pioli was on the job for many years in New England and I don't recall a single incident of this type. McDaniels has been involved in one issue - Cutler, in which it is vogue for the head-line seeking national media to blame him. Any fault he may have is, at best, questionable but the media just glosses over the details and the unknowns in the whole Cutler situation. It is vogue to just say McDaniel's ran Cutler out of town, the Broncos will suck and Cutler is a great quarterback. Let's just ignore the fact that there is absolutely no indication that McDaniels is alienating the players in Denver and that everything you read or hear from the players indicates a real enthusiasm for the system and optimism for the upcoming season. Another shoddy piece of SI "journalism" just like the recent Marshall witch hunt on ESPN and some of those ridiculous rankings of head coaches who have yet to coach an NFL game by TSN. I guess it's the offseason and there is nothing else to talk about than another Brett Favre comeback.
This is the writer whose done the last 12 Super Bowl game stories for the #1 sports magazine in the country. Accusing him of shoddy journalism because you don't like his conclusions is unreasonable, unsupportable and smacks of denial. As for there being "absolutely no indication that McDaniels is alienating the players in Denver"...does Cutler count? He was after all...the best player on the team at the most important position on the team. Now we're hearing Weigman starting to make some rumblings about his contract and what he thinks was promised him...we are still early here...Mangini had more time to show what he was going to do. If nothing else it forces an aknowledgement that this is something to keep an eye on.

footstepsfrom#27
06-10-2009, 05:45 AM
Let me take a shot at it as Devils advocate. I am not fond of McDaniels moves so far this off season, but this deserves some kind of response. Let's assume the article is spot on and that the assertations it makes are completely true.

So, it is a gamble. I will not try to refute the article, though I would say its basis in fact is reliant upon hearsay from disgruntled players and an argument could be made from that standpoint.
First of all, thanks for an intellectually honest approach to the article instead of just conveniently demonzing the writer, who has credibility on his side.

I will point out however...that EVERY sports story is essentially "hearsay" brought forward from the writer quoting players. That's why they write in the first place...to find the story behind the scenes that we as fans don't have access to otherwise. As to this being possibly about disgruntled players...that's possible. But how is it that they all say the same things? How is it that the managerial moves reflect similar styles and the same approach we see in the coach being given power over executive personnel moves? Why would this seem unreasonable since we already know that Bowlen deliberately endowed Shanahan with the same power? Why would we doubt that Mangini, Pioli and McDaniels all reflect Belichick's style in dealing with people since we are hearing repeated testimony from multiple players on four different teams that confirms a common denominator? I can buy that they're disgruntled...but are they all disgruntled over the exact same thing? And what about the other player sources he interviewed on these teams confirming this who were not in the position of being denied what they wanted? Some of these sound like inside employees, not players. These are unamed for obvious reasons...but are they also lying? More to the point...are they also lying about the exact same things?
Instead I will accept the article at face value and point out that it could work out well for the Broncos. If McDaniels is able to string together a few wins, and get the players to truely believe in the system and his leadership, we could have the start of a future dynasty on our hands. If the Broncos post anything near New Englands 2000's numbers in the 2010's the management style will be vindicated. Further, if any of the three teams have a good level of success the same could be said. In that case it might suck for the Broncos, but the rationale behind taking the gamble will be evident.
I think the fundamental issue here is one that I raised on this board several weeks ago when I stated that my problem with McDaniels has nothing to do with his abilities as a coach or even his GM type choices...but rather than I doubted his leadership abilities in working with people...the intangible things that have nothing to do with what you know about football. Those things are critical for success and this may offer us a clue as to why we've not seen Belichick's success replicated by his understudies. Might McDaniels prove an exception to this? Sure...but that does not change the fact that being able to work with people...certainly the issue of engendering trust and having respect for people who work for you...as well as the issue of honesty...those are things that I consider crucial for ultimate success and they are far more important than who we got in the draft this year or what offense we run. They are fundamentally the same skills that produce success in business as well...or lack of it sometimes. Time will tell if this continues or we see things quiet down for good...I hope the latter.

meangene
06-10-2009, 06:12 AM
This is the writer whose done the last 12 Super Bowl game stories for the #1 sports magazine in the country. Accusing him of shoddy journalism because you don't like his conclusions is unreasonable, unsupportable and smacks of denial. As for there being "absolutely no indication that McDaniels is alienating the players in Denver"...does Cutler count? He was after all...the best player on the team at the most important position on the team. Now we're hearing Weigman starting to make some rumblings about his contract and what he thinks was promised him...we are still early here...Mangini had more time to show what he was going to do. If nothing else it forces an aknowledgement that this is something to keep an eye on.

We have hashed and rehashed the Cutler issue on this board and everyone has an opinion in regard to fault, blame, etc. Fact is, there are a lot of facts in dispute in the issue and a lot of unknowns. I don't care who the author is, if he fails to even mention that it is shoddy journalism. Weigman was, apparently, promised a new deal by the old regime - not McDaniels. Nevertheless, there are ongoing negotiations and no indications that McDaniels misrepresented anything to Weigman or has been disrespectful to him in any way. Maybe McDaniels needs to see him perform in training camp some before committing more money to him? Maybe it's just an issue of negotiating a number of contracts before training camp including a whole lot of rookie deals? The only issue discussed in regard to McDaniels in the whole article is Cutler. That alone does not lump him in the Mangini category. There are a number of players in Cleveland and New York expressing similar concerns with Mangini - that part of the story is substantiated. I don't see that in Denver. In fact, I see the opposite. My opinion has to do with the facts as I know them to be and is not unreasonable or unsupported. You talk about having an exchange of ideas based on the article and then turn around express that opinions that differ from your smack of denial? I stand by my opinion in regard to the story. Lumping Pioli and McDaniels with Mangini is not supported by the facts.

dbfan21
06-10-2009, 06:18 AM
This is the writer whose done the last 12 Super Bowl game stories for the #1 sports magazine in the country. Accusing him of shoddy journalism because you don't like his conclusions is unreasonable, unsupportable and smacks of denial. As for there being "absolutely no indication that McDaniels is alienating the players in Denver"...does Cutler count? He was after all...the best player on the team at the most important position on the team. Now we're hearing Weigman starting to make some rumblings about his contract and what he thinks was promised him...we are still early here...Mangini had more time to show what he was going to do. If nothing else it forces an aknowledgement that this is something to keep an eye on.

I agree with some of wehat you're saying here, but on the other hand, what factual insight does Silver have that backs up his claims about McDaniels' actions during the Cutler saga? He wrote this piece as if he was sitting in Bowlen's office the entire time.

My point is, how do we know this was 100% McD's fault for the Cutler fiasco? You know, Jay seemed to be the one demanding a trade, pouting in Nashville, going public with his dissatisfaction via Bus and the media, etc, etc. And Bowlen is the one who pulled the trigger on the trade, not Josh.

bpc
06-10-2009, 06:20 AM
Hard to argue with this article one bit.

Now we see McDaniels attempting the same bull**** with Casey Weigman.

BroncoInSkinland
06-10-2009, 06:20 AM
But how is it that they all say the same things?

Possibly the time of year. It is negotiation time, and everyone loves money. I also believe that the NE approach involves very tight contract negotiations. Tom Brady took a salary cut for the benefit of the team. With that kind of marquee player being willing to play ball is it any suprise that many of the Belichick offshoots are tightfisted and don't understand why thier players aren't willing to "take one for the team"? This could indicate not arrogance, but simply how these coaches believe they will win in this league, and that as a result, they assume the players WANT to do the same.

How is it that the managerial moves reflect similar styles and the same approach we see in the coach being given power over executive personnel moves? Why would this seem unreasonable since we already know that Bowlen deliberately endowed Shanahan with the same power? Why would we doubt that Mangini, Pioli and McDaniels all reflect Belichick's style in dealing with people since we are hearing repeated testimony from multiple players on four different teams that confirms a common denominator?

First, I am not convinced Bowlen knew what he was getting into when he fired Shanahan. I think it was a gut feeling on Pat's part, and that when the situation was broached with Mike, the genie was already out of the bottle. Even if Bowlen did know what he was getting into, as you said this was SOP for him during the Shanahan time period. I doubt he thought that giving a coach this kind of power would result in the off-season we have experienced, after all Shanahan had the same power and it didn't turn out like this.

I can buy that they're disgruntled...but are they all disgruntled over the exact same thing? And what about the sources he named on the other teams confirming this? These are unamed for obvious reasons...but are they also lying? More to the point...are they also lying about the exact same things?

Belichick has been around the league for years pulling these exact same kind of moves. The agents of the players involved have probably all dealt with him at some point in time, or at the very least have colleagues giving them advice who have. I imagine on the tight lipped Patriots team there are plenty of these stories, but thanks to Bills anti-press campaign not many see the light of day. In other organizations where there are still loose lips a disproportionate number see press time, and voila what was the "accepted" method of dealing with the contract negotiations now becomes the Cutler/Cribbs/Weigman/etc. story of the day.

I think the fundamental issue here is one that I raised on this board several weeks ago when I stated that my problem with McDaniels has nothing to do with his abilities as a coach or even his GM type choices...but rather than I doubted his leadership abilities in working with people...the intangible things that have nothing to do with what you know about football. Those things are critical for success and this may offer us a clue as to why we've not seen Belichick's success replicated by his understudies. Might McDaniels prove an exception to this? Sure...but that does not change the fact that being able to work with people...certainly the issue of engendering trust and having respect for people who work for you...as well as the issue of honesty...those are things that I consider crucial for ultimate success and they are far more important than who we got in the draft this year or what offense we run. They are fundamentally the same skills that produce success in business as well...or lack of it sometimes. Time will tell if this continues or we see things quiet down for good...I hope the latter.

Personally I agree with you 100%, I think the management style is horrible, and more likely to backfire on you than generate any sort of success. But for the point of the argument, it has had success, the most success of any franchise over the past decade (pretty much the most success in the salary cap era) for that matter. It didn't work out well for Mangini in NY, but that isn't a condemnation equal to the Petriots success.

One thing that is not pointed out in the article which offers further room for doubt. Crennell. Romeo did not use the Patriots approach, he was a friendly coach, with the reputation of being a good positive motivator with a psychological background that aided him in dealing with player situations effectively. It ended with a team that went 10-6 one year and 4-12 the next. The team was falling apart around him and half his players quit on him in the middle of games. Given the option between Manginis Jets and Romeos Browns, I will take Mangini any day of the week.

chrisp
06-10-2009, 06:32 AM
Your reason for posting the article, and the basis for its relevance to this board (OK, we're in offseason mode anyway but you know what I mean..) is that 1) there is a trend amongst ex-bellichick coaches and that 2) McDaniels is a further example of this trend

Yet the only real 'example' of this trend with respect to McDaniels is his supposed 'alienation' of Jay Cutler. To say that this was all McDaniel's fault makes quite a massive assumption: there is a very strong case for suggesting that Pat Bowlen and Jay Himself had more than a little influence over events. This possibility is not even contemplated becuase it doesn't fit the author's view of the world.

Outside of that one so-called example, there is absolutely NO further evidence resented in this article that McDaniels is alienating anyone and furthering this supposed trend.

So in that respect, the article is substituting conjecture for analysis, which in my opinion is an example of weak and lazy journalism. To be fair, this kind of weak and lazy journalism is often passed off as GOOD journalism because it sells papers & magazines, hence the supposed 'credibilility' of the source.....

Certainly Dove Valley, as you might expect, has probably gone into 'lockdown' mode from a PR standpoint, but there does seem to be a real indication of harmony within the camp since the Jay saga was brought to an end. Now an absence of evidence does not PROVE everything is alright (not least for the reasonjust quoted), but it does at least introduce enough room for doubt that allegations of McDaniels alienating players need to be presented as rumour, not fact.

BroncoInSkinland
06-10-2009, 06:43 AM
Outside of that one so-called example, there is absolutely NO further evidence resented in this article that McDaniels is alienating anyone and furthering this supposed trend.

Its not in the article I will agree, but there is possibly something with Marshall and Weigmann that would add support to the argument.

lex
06-10-2009, 07:01 AM
I didn't say it had nothing to do with McDaniels...obviously it does. Did you actually read it? Apparently not or you wouldn't suggest it's got nothing to do with Pioli or McDaniels. The core of the story is about a group of people all connected with Belichick...that includes McDaniels.

As I said...your beef is with Michael Silver. I suppose I should have pretended I didn't see this right?

This is why he asks you to help him understand it. His reasoning/comprehension/reading skills fail him. He asks you to help him only so he can disagree with you. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

oubronco
06-10-2009, 07:27 AM
This was McD's MO from day one, and to ignore that is to ignore the truth.

:thumbsup:

kamakazi_kal
06-10-2009, 07:28 AM
If Denver starts slow I fear Mcd will start to lose some of the vets. If that happens I think you'll see some more stories like this come out but with Denver in place of Cleveland and Mcd in place of Mangina.

Allot of Mcd (not just cutler) moves have left me scratching my head this offseason and I think it a tad nearsighted for people to bash those of us who haven't just "bought in". This offseason as a whole has been the strangest since I've been a fan.

I'm hoping I'm wrong I've said it many times. The last thing I want is for this team to start a coaching or QB carousel. That being said, for those of you think Mcd didn't buy himself a big pair of pants to fill are fooling themselves into an offseason joy joy mode.

OHHH and what's with the "Xanders being picked by Mcd as GM" bit come from. It seems like dude is just a puppet but, I thought that was one of Bowlen's complaints about Mike?

mr007
06-10-2009, 07:33 AM
Why is it that anytime someone posts some material that makes a statement that can be perceived as negative about McDaniels, draft picks, or anything else, they get bombarded by a few of the same members on the board every time?

There are a few people that are just a blanket of optimism around here and to hell with anyone who posts something that doesn't have something amazing to say about everything that's going on around Broncoland. It really makes it difficult for those of us that would like to engage in a reasonable discussion.

TonyR
06-10-2009, 07:42 AM
Why is it that anytime someone posts some material that makes a statement that can be perceived as negative about McDaniels, draft picks, or anything else, they get bombarded by a few of the same members on the board every time?


Oh, I don't know, maybe for the same reasons that any time somebody posts something positive about an FA acquistion, draft pick, or coach they get bombarded by the idiots who can't get over the Shanahan dismissal and/or Cutler trade. And it's pretty funny that anyone would take the side of those who go out of their way to criticize the team and be negative over those who go out of their way to compliment the team and be positive.

lex
06-10-2009, 07:42 AM
Why is it that anytime someone posts some material that makes a statement that can be perceived as negative about McDaniels, draft picks, or anything else, they get bombarded by a few of the same members on the board every time?

There are a few people that are just a blanket of optimism around here and to hell with anyone who posts something that doesn't have something amazing to say about everything that's going on around Broncoland. It really makes it difficult for those of us that would like to engage in a reasonable discussion.


They feel like its their obligation to get out in front of it and spin it appropriately. Most of them are simpletons who see things in black and white. What I like is when the go into the Mike Shanahan or Jay Cutler diatribe. Its like its a board full of Gabby Johnsons.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ke5Mr5eCF2U

cmhargrove
06-10-2009, 08:08 AM
Possibly the time of year. It is negotiation time, and everyone loves money. I also believe that the NE approach involves very tight contract negotiations. Tom Brady took a salary cut for the benefit of the team. With that kind of marquee player being willing to play ball is it any suprise that many of the Belichick offshoots are tightfisted and don't understand why thier players aren't willing to "take one for the team"? This could indicate not arrogance, but simply how these coaches believe they will win in this league, and that as a result, they assume the players WANT to do the same.

Great point BIS.

This shows one of the major logical flaws with the original article in the first place. When a player signs a contract, and then wants more morey, why is it always the coaches fault? How many people here are going to work today to demand they get more money than they agreed upon? Such is the farsical world of professional sports. Write the escalators into your contract in the first place if you want to get paid.

Second major logical error - did the original author show that these behaviors were any different around the league? How many "upset" players are there? Why does that all have to get blamed on Belichek? With no league comparison, this article is just a shot in the dark.

Finally. I like giving new information the "gut check" test. The media may be taking a collective crap on McD, but the players sure aren't. Everyone is on board (maybe minus Marshall and Weigmann for monetary reasons). Players are excited, players are enthusiastic, players say they are learning and feel good about the systems. Excited, talented players + good coaching usually = good season.

We will find out in August.

bronco militia
06-10-2009, 08:21 AM
http://kissingsuzykolber.lg1x8.simplecdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/lol-brady-2.jpeg

http://kissingsuzykolber.lg1x8.simplecdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/lol-brady.jpg

http://kissingsuzykolber.lg1x8.simplecdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/lol-douche.jpg

bronco militia
06-10-2009, 08:22 AM
http://kissingsuzykolber.lg1x8.simplecdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/lol-lucas.jpg

http://kissingsuzykolber.lg1x8.simplecdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/lol-old.jpg

TonyR
06-10-2009, 08:29 AM
Second major logical error - did the original author show that these behaviors were any different around the league? How many "upset" players are there? Why does that all have to get blamed on Belichek? With no league comparison, this article is just a shot in the dark.


Very true. The Philadelphia Eagles, for example, take a very hard line, business like approach with their players, perhaps more so than any team in the league, and they've had a very successful decade. It's not just the Pats and the "Belichick disciples".

Bronco Rob
06-10-2009, 08:56 AM
Waters, a source told Whitlock, flew to Kansas City in February specifically to meet with the new GM and coach in an effort to become familiar with their leadership plans. The source said Pioli told Waters he had no interest in meeting and that Haley began a hallway conversation with the player by proclaiming that 22 guys off the street could win two games, as the Chiefs had in ’08.





:rofl: :rofl:

tsiguy96
06-10-2009, 09:02 AM
alrighty....so mangini is a ****ty head coach, therefore mcdaniels will be a ****ty head coach.

we know this before the season even starts. good call.

alkemical
06-10-2009, 09:08 AM
Eight players and several management people...all with similar experiences and opinions resulting from the same issues with disciples of Bill Belichick. This is an interesting story, by a respected sports writer whose covered the NFL for some of the best publications out there for a long time...the conclusions are not encouraging.

Michael Silver, a senior writer for Sports Illustrated, joined the magazine in November 1994. He is one of SI's lead pro football writers, having authored the magazine's past 12 Super Bowl game stories. He also regularly pens in-depth profiles of some of the most intriguing characters in sports...He also covered the 49ers for the Sacramento Union and served as a correspondent for Pro Football Weekly and The Sporting News.

Mangini, Belichick disciples alienate players

By Michael Silver, Yahoo! Sports
May 22, 12:27 pm EDT

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ms-thegameface052209&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

Joshua Cribbs is a popular man in the Cleveland Browns’ locker room, an undrafted free agent from nearby Kent State who developed into a Pro Bowl kick returner. He is also the team’s unofficial social coordinator, which is of no small importance in a city where success has been scarce in recent years.

“We all love Cribbs,” one Browns veteran said Thursday of the speedy fifth-year receiver, who might also have a future as a defensive back. “He’s the guy who always throws the Halloween parties and the Christmas bashes, so yeah, he’s very popular.”

In light of recent developments, that would make Browns coach Eric Mangini the Grinch – and the man who hired him, owner Randy Lerner, Ebeneezer Scrooge.

Cribbs and his bosses are currently locked in what seems on the surface to be a typical NFL contract dispute between a player who has outperformed his long-term deal and a team that is in no hurry to provide an upgrade. In reality, this is a credibility dispute between a dependable, accountable athlete and an abrasive coach consumed with flexing his newly acquired power.

It’s the latest testament to Mangini’s apparent lack of tact and people skills, personality traits he honed under his estranged mentor, New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick. Like two other Belichick disciples, new Kansas City Chiefs general manager Scott Pioli and neophyte Denver Broncos coach Josh McDaniels, Mangini has marked his arrival at a new organization this offseason by alienating established leaders while projecting a self-assuredness that borders on arrogance.

With three Super Bowl titles as a head coach and a prior record of success as a brainy defensive coordinator, Belichick, a future Hall of Famer, can get away with his power trip. Whether Mangini, Pioli and McDaniels are able to pull it off will depend upon how many football games their respective teams win, something that often depends upon the men in uniform buying into the program.

In the meantime, in Cleveland, Kansas City and Denver, the new guys in charge seem to be consumed with winning mind games, a strategy I’m not so sure will serve them well over the long haul.

In Denver, McDaniels’ sloppy handling of his interactions with Jay Cutler after an unsuccessful attempt to trade him at the start of free agency led to the loss of a franchise quarterback, largely because the 33-year-old coach was obsessed with demonstrating his unquestioned authority.

In K.C., Pioli’s arrival as the all-powerful general manager after years as Belichick’s right-hand personnel man was soon followed by a less-publicized incident involving a star player. According to Kansas City Star columnist Jason Whitlock, perennial Pro Bowl guard and locker-room leader Brian Waters asked to be traded or released after becoming offended by the arrogant attitudes of Pioli and his newly hired coach, Todd Haley.

Waters, a source told Whitlock, flew to Kansas City in February specifically to meet with the new GM and coach in an effort to become familiar with their leadership plans. The source said Pioli told Waters he had no interest in meeting and that Haley began a hallway conversation with the player by proclaiming that 22 guys off the street could win two games, as the Chiefs had in ’08.

Mangini, fresh off a 1-4 finish with the Jets that got him fired after three seasons – he had a 23-26 overall record (including a playoff loss) in New York – arrived in Cleveland with a similar swagger. One of his first moves was to orchestrate the firing of director of pro personnel T.J. McCreight, the highest-ranking personnel man remaining after Lerner’s dismissal of general manager Phil Savage, and one of the people who’d interviewed to replace Savage. (Mangini, hired while the GM job was still open, successfully lobbied Lerner to choose Ravens personnel executive George Kokinis.)

McCreight, a source said, was called into the office of team president Mike Keenan, who pulled out cell-phone records showing that McCreight had engaged in conversations with reporters – an act frowned upon by the paranoid Mangini. McCreight explained that speaking with the media was among the duties with which he’d been entrusted by Savage, but he was nonetheless terminated; he has since been hired as the Cardinals’ director of pro personnel.

A team source said Mangini, upon his arrival in Cleveland, was brusque when dealing with other Browns employees and spent most of his time in his office with the door closed. Early on Mangini, according to multiple reports, alienated the team’s top performer from 2008, Pro Bowl defensive tackle Shaun Rogers, by failing to acknowledge him on a pair of occasions: once in the team’s training room and once at a local awards show.

Rogers reportedly asked the team not to pay him a $6 million bonus and to trade or release him. Mangini, who claimed he didn’t notice Rogers at the awards show, apparently patched up the relationship; Rogers recently said the two had put aside their differences “just like grown men do.”

It’s unclear how another Browns defensive lineman, Shaun Smith, feels about Mangini, who a source said told the player during their first interaction at the team’s facility, “Lose some weight and lose the attitude.”

The latest coach-player dustup involves Cribbs, who signed a six-year, $6.7 million contract extension in 2006 and, after a Pro Bowl ’07 season, began earning comparisons to the Chicago Bears’ ultra-explosive breakaway threat Devin Hester. Last July Hester signed a four-year contract extension worth a reported $40 million, which did not go unnoticed by Cribbs.

When Cribbs’ representatives at All-Pro Sports and Entertainment approached Savage last summer about their client’s desire for a new deal, they were told the team was amenable to adjusting his salary following the ’08 season because Cribbs was deserving and was a positive locker-room influence.

Two sources say Lerner, too, was on board with the decision and that the owner, after firing Savage and coach Romeo Crennel immediately after a season-ending defeat at Pittsburgh last December, called Cribbs on the team bus to assure him that regardless of the moves he would honor his word and address the player’s contract situation.

Yet after Mangini’s arrival, no one in the organization expressed interest in negotiating a new deal. Frustrated by the team’s unresponsiveness, Cribbs decided to skip this week’s voluntary minicamp. The Browns then issued a statement that disputed Cribbs’ reported perspective, saying, “no one from the current Browns organization, including Owner Randy Lerner, has ever made any promises to Josh Cribbs with regard to his contract status.”

That, said a source close to Cribbs, “took his anger from Defcon 3 to Defcon 1.” Cribbs, through his representatives, has since asked for a trade, a request the Browns said they were not amenable to honoring.

On Thursday, Cribbs was asked to come to the facility for a meeting with Mangini. The player complied, explaining to the coach that he wouldn’t participate in voluntary offseason activities until the team honors its promise to adjust his contract. Mangini, according to a source familiar with the conversation, said little in return. Cribbs then attended a team meeting before departing the facility, leaving teammates wondering if a resolution is in sight.

“They need to figure out a way to get that fixed,” the aforementioned unnamed Browns player said Thursday, “because the guy is a special player.”

Could the situation be handled any more clumsily? Whatever Mangini’s perception of Cribbs’ value, he should be especially sensitive to the player’s contention that the team broke its promise to upgrade his deal. During Mangini’s tenure with the Jets, three players no longer with the team – guard Pete Kendall, tight end Chris Baker and wideout Laveranues Coles – went public with similar accusations.

Why would a team do business this way? Why did Lerner, with no other NFL franchises in pursuit of Mangini as a head coach, rush to make the hire before naming a GM and then grant him so much control over the team’s football operations? Why is a franchise, whose powerbrokers are paranoid enough to check an employee’s cell-phone records, be so rattled by a player’s absence from a voluntary minicamp that it put out a public statement essentially calling one of its model citizens a greedy liar?

“The whole thing is so screwy,” said one former Browns employee. “I think it’s about control. If the fans knew what was really going on over there, they wouldn’t even buy a ticket.”

Football, of course, is a bottom-line business. Fan support will persist if Mangini, despite his warped methodology, turns the Browns into a winner, as he did with the Jets in his first season. The same goes for Pioli and Haley in K.C. and for McDaniels and his handpicked GM, Brian Xanders, in Denver.

I wonder whether Mangini, Pioli or McDaniels can attain the type of immediate success enjoyed last year in Atlanta under first-year general manager Thomas Dimitroff, another former Pats employee who approached his new job with a far less contentious management style.

If not, it won’t be a very merry Christmas for them or their affronted employees. It’s safe to say that in Mangini’s case, there’s one popular party to which he likely won’t be receiving an invitation.

more offseason fluff

BroncoInSkinland
06-10-2009, 09:19 AM
alrighty....so mangini is a ****ty head coach, therefore mcdaniels will be a ****ty head coach.

we know this before the season even starts. good call.

Now that there are others here to support the argument, I can switch back to the side I am more comfortable playing. Yes, that is what the article was essentially saying, but don't let the extra 20 or so paragraphs of supporting information and documentation sway your or anything, you have your opinion and gosh darn it you are gonna be right if it kills you.

tsiguy96
06-10-2009, 09:24 AM
Now that there are others here to support the argument, I can switch back to the side I am more comfortable playing. Yes, that is what the article was essentially saying, but don't let the extra 20 or so paragraphs of supporting information and documentation sway your or anything, you have your opinion and gosh darn it you are gonna be right if it kills you.

i just think its curious that people automatically assume that the new england proteges are all of the same personality, coaching type, and presumptions of how a team should be run, especially based on an article that is exclusively about eric mangini.

so because eric mangini sucks, mcdaniels will too, according to you. even though its perfectly obvious that the reason cutler is not in denver is no one elses but cutlers fault, he shares all the same qualities as mangini including being a dick that no one likes. weve heard LOTS of complaints from the players this offseason havent we? there has been zero praise or the offensive players are not excited to score a ton of points, and mike nolan, im assuming you will call him historically insufficient, is not the perfect man to get this team decent again. good call.

SonOfLe-loLang
06-10-2009, 09:24 AM
Do you think footsteps whacks off while he reads these?

outdoor_miner
06-10-2009, 09:26 AM
There are a number of players in Cleveland and New York expressing similar concerns with Mangini - that part of the story is substantiated. I don't see that in Denver. In fact, I see the opposite. My opinion has to do with the facts as I know them to be and is not unreasonable or unsupported. You talk about having an exchange of ideas based on the article and then turn around express that opinions that differ from your smack of denial? I stand by my opinion in regard to the story. Lumping Pioli and McDaniels with Mangini is not supported by the facts.

Good posting. Mangini is pretty clearly an a-hole. However, what about Weiss? He's a good natured guy. Crennel was never considered to be a jerk as far as I know. McDaniels has a single incident, of which we do not know the facts. It is way, way too early to lump him in with Mangini. I also like how the main crux of the Pioli story revolves around Haley, a dude who has nothing to do with New England. Some coaches are jerks and some aren't. Simple as that.

TheReverend
06-10-2009, 09:27 AM
Very true. The Philadelphia Eagles, for example, take a very hard line, business like approach with their players, perhaps more so than any team in the league, and they've had a very successful decade. It's not just the Pats and the "Belichick disciples".

As do the Steelers.

What's important to note about these successful franchises and their style of business:

They establish a talented core group of players and do what's necessary to keep them together, and they install role/system players around them that may look flashy but are, in fact, expendable.

We cut the center of our core out...

Pseudofool
06-10-2009, 09:28 AM
It's about a pattern.That doesn't constitute a pattern, or at least it's a pattern which has yet include McD. Come on. Stop with the thin logical threshold. You seem like a guy with intellectual standards. The inference your making about McD doesn't pass the smell test.

TheReverend
06-10-2009, 09:32 AM
Oh, I don't know, maybe for the same reasons that any time somebody posts something positive about an FA acquistion, draft pick, or coach they get bombarded by the idiots who can't get over the Shanahan dismissal and/or Cutler trade. And it's pretty funny that anyone would take the side of those who go out of their way to criticize the team and be negative over those who go out of their way to compliment the team and be positive.

I think you're turning a blind eye to how many questionable things happened this off-season...

Ex: We're fielding a starting DL that has a combined total of 10 games started in their NFL careers at their positions. The depth has absolutely none.

Only 1 LB has any experience in a 3-4.

Every starter in our 2ndary is over 30.

Personally, I think there were MANY decisions that could've been made to make this team significantly more competitive this season.

Those that feel the same way get bombarded by people who then play their attacks off as a "wait and see" approach, when really that's not they're mindset whatsoever.

SonOfLe-loLang
06-10-2009, 09:33 AM
And this all presupposes that the "Cutler Fiasco" was all McDaniels doing and fault. I STILL don't believe this to be true and if Jay Cutler had the maturity of a man his age, he'd still be the QB of the Denver Broncos. There's some revisionist history going on here and people are talking as if McDaniels came to denver, tweaked his curled mustache, and started playing mad scientist! It's simply not true! Also, when Jay Cutler left, you didnt see hordes of broncos coming to his defense. In fact, i think the only person who did was scheffler and now he seems to be on board with the McD plan.

SonOfLe-loLang
06-10-2009, 09:35 AM
I think you're turning a blind eye to how many questionable things happened this off-season...

Ex: We're fielding a starting DL that has a combined total of 10 games started in their NFL careers at their positions. The depth has absolutely none.

Only 1 LB has any experience in a 3-4.

Every starter in our 2ndary is over 30.

Personally, I think there were MANY decisions that could've been made to make this team significantly more competitive this season.

Those that feel the same way get bombarded by people who then play their attacks off as a "wait and see" approach, when really that's not they're mindset whatsoever.


I'm in the wait and see catagory and I can't see how that's not my mindset. Yes, some of the moves have been unorthodox, i'vebeen preaching for a strong, big D-line for years. But, the man seems very focused and has put together a great coaching staff...so yes, i will wait and see what this broncos team looks like before killing it.

outdoor_miner
06-10-2009, 09:36 AM
Now we see McDaniels attempting the same bull**** with Casey Weigman.

So, any time a player wants to renegotiate a contract, the Broncos should trip over themselves to accommodate??? That's a good strategy... Let's give all players a raise as soon as they want it! Perhaps they are currently negotiating the best price they can, just like any other team would do? If Weigman isn't here for Training Camp and Preseason, then please feel free to start bitching. Otherwise, this is just like the "Hillis is going to be traded by McDingleberry" garbage that people were spewing.

Does this also mean that we can fairly consider any coach who has a player that is unhappy with his contract to be a little Belichick clone? Let's see... We've got Boldin in Arizona, Sheldon Brown in Philadelphia, Julius Pepper in Carolina, etc etc etc. I guess all those coaches are little Napoleons trying to demonstrate their power.

TheReverend
06-10-2009, 09:43 AM
I'm in the wait and see catagory and I can't see how that's not my mindset. Yes, some of the moves have been unorthodox, i'vebeen preaching for a strong, big D-line for years. But, the man seems very focused and has put together a great coaching staff...so yes, i will wait and see what this broncos team looks like before killing it.

Unorthodox is a gentle way of putting it. Regardless, if you feel that way, but are sticking by this "wait and see" approach to avoid personal skepticism, then why attacking people that are open about their own doubt?

BroncoInSkinland
06-10-2009, 09:46 AM
i just think its curious that people automatically assume that the new england proteges are all of the same personality, coaching type, and presumptions of how a team should be run, especially based on an article that is exclusively about eric mangini. Those presumptions are precisely what the article was noting, and the link between the coaches was established mutliple times through. Further we have multiple cases here in Denver that support the case that weren't even cited in the article, Weigman, Marshall, one could even say Leach. Further the names Pioli and McDaniels were used in the article multiple times, so that whole exclusive angle isn't true.

so because eric mangini sucks, mcdaniels will too, according to you. No actually, according to the writer, because Mangini, Pioli, Belichick, and McDaniels have similar habits regarding personel, it is likely that thier personality types and management styles will be similar. Given the amount of evidence and the number of specific incidents in the article, that is difficult to argue.

even though its perfectly obvious that the reason cutler is not in denver is no one elses but cutlers fault, he shares all the same qualities as mangini including being a dick that no one likes. So if Cribbs leaves the Browns it is entirely Cribbs fault then? How about if Marshall leaves here? Weigman? The patterns of behavior indicate that probably the guys who all have a common link (Belichick) probably have something to do with these situations.

weve heard LOTS of complaints from the players this offseason havent we? there has been zero praise or the offensive players are not excited to score a ton of points, and mike nolan, im assuming you will call him historically insufficient, is not the perfect man to get this team decent again. good call.

Actually we have heard complaints from multiple players, Cutler, Marshall, and Weigman, among others. Some of them turned the complaints around and are now on board with McDaniels. Some are still finding thier way, and some are now elsewhere.

I don't recall mentioning Nolan, but I like him a lot, and have more faith in him to turn this defense around than most. I don't think he is off to a great start thanks to lack of premier talent on the line, but I am sure he will have them as ready as possible. I have mentioned this multiple other places, but hopefully this time it will stick for you.

TheReverend
06-10-2009, 09:46 AM
So, any time a player wants to renegotiate a contract, the Broncos should trip over themselves to accommodate??? That's a good strategy... Let's give all players a raise as soon as they want it! Perhaps they are currently negotiating the best price they can, just like any other team would do? If Weigman isn't here for Training Camp and Preseason, then please feel free to start b****ing. Otherwise, this is just like the "Hillis is going to be traded by McDingleberry" garbage that people were spewing.

Does this also mean that we can fairly consider any coach who has a player that is unhappy with his contract to be a little Belichick clone? Let's see... We've got Boldin in Arizona, Sheldon Brown in Philadelphia, Julius Pepper in Carolina, etc etc etc. I guess all those coaches are little Napoleons trying to demonstrate their power.

Arizona flat out can't afford to pay Boldin, Sheldon has not outperformed his pay level in any sense of the word, and Peppers is making 17+ million.

How those apply to this situation is beyond me.

rugbythug
06-10-2009, 09:50 AM
Why is everyone so personally invested in Jay Cutler? He is no longer a here. And he could not beat the Raiders, Chiefs or Sparklers consistently. Each of those teams has just as bad a defense as we fielded. Yet the mighty Broncos Unshakable offense split with them time and time again.

Other than Jay Cutler not one Player has had a problem with McD. And many players have raved on him-Including Jay's Homoerotus Tony.

One player does not make a trend.

tsiguy96
06-10-2009, 09:50 AM
Unorthodox is a gentle way of putting it. Regardless, if you feel that way, but are sticking by this "wait and see" approach to avoid personal skepticism, then why attacking people that are open about their own doubt?

because being doubtful and being a straight moronic hater are two different things.

Smiling Assassin27
06-10-2009, 09:52 AM
Eight players...all with the same basic story, plus assorted managerial people. The story in case you missed it...is not about Denver, nor is it about McDaniels.

It's about a pattern.

Bellichick was the same way when he got to New England. He built an elite team with that 'attitude' and demands more of his players than you or this hack writer seem to think he should. Alienating players is not necessarily a bad thing, particularly players that think they deserve special treatment and/or have ulterior motives. These NE alums are trying to build a team identity that only Bellichick has, not the country club atmosphere that exists in many NFL clubhouses, and considering Denver's country club has crapped out the last few years, I'm willing to give McD a shot to do it his way.

TheReverend
06-10-2009, 09:54 AM
because being doubtful and being a straight moronic hater are two different things.

No one has brought less to the conversation than you, for sure.

outdoor_miner
06-10-2009, 09:55 AM
Arizona flat out can't afford to pay Boldin, Sheldon has not outperformed his pay level in any sense of the word, and Peppers is making 17+ million.

How those apply to this situation is beyond me.

bpc was saying that McDaniels is on a power trip because he hasn't renegotiated Weigman's contract. All I was doing is pointing out that there are hundreds of examples of players across the league that are or have been unhappy with their contract. It is not an uncommon occurrence, and not something that should be used as an example of what a tyrant McDaniels is. All teams and coaches go through this.

SonOfLe-loLang
06-10-2009, 10:04 AM
Unorthodox is a gentle way of putting it. Regardless, if you feel that way, but are sticking by this "wait and see" approach to avoid personal skepticism, then why attacking people that are open about their own doubt?

I don't attack people with a dissenting opinion, i criticize them when they spew incoming failure as fact. In actuality, the dissenting opinion shouldn't be all that different than mine. I choose the optimistic approach. I see a guy who possesses a clear vision and focus. So i'll wait and see and hope he knows what he's doing. Others question his views, they should wait and see with skepticism. But to say he's screwed everything up before you even see the product is insane.

And one thing definitely must not be forgotten. McDaniels didnt restructure a super bowl contender here.

broncofan2438
06-10-2009, 10:07 AM
So let me understands this. McDaniels is the same as mangini because he got rid of a player who thought he was more important then the other 52 guys on the roster? Who won nothing, and was acting like a b****. Sucks for the Browns, but the comparison is a bit weak.

:Broncos:

Exactly......this story can have so many ins and outs. Im tired of reading about it. Cutler is not a Bronco anymore and well see how we do without him

gyldenlove
06-10-2009, 10:08 AM
Bellichick was the same way when he got to New England. He built an elite team with that 'attitude' and demands more of his players than you or this hack writer seem to think he should. Alienating players is not necessarily a bad thing, particularly players that think they deserve special treatment and/or have ulterior motives. These NE alums are trying to build a team identity that only Bellichick has, not the country club atmosphere that exists in many NFL clubhouses, and considering Denver's country club has crapped out the last few years, I'm willing to give McD a shot to do it his way.

That attitude doesn't really have an amazing track record though, Belichick succeeded with it in New England, but failed in Cleveland, Mangini failed in New York and is not off to a stellar start in Cleveland, Crennel failed in Cleveland (maybe Cleveland is the problem), Weis isn't doing too well for himself down in South Bend and Pioli is not off to a stellar start in Kansas City.

SonOfLe-loLang
06-10-2009, 10:08 AM
Actually we have heard complaints from multiple players, Cutler, Marshall, and Weigman, among others. Some of them turned the complaints around and are now on board with McDaniels. Some are still finding thier way, and some are now elsewhere.

I don't recall mentioning Nolan, but I like him a lot, and have more faith in him to turn this defense around than most. I don't think he is off to a great start thanks to lack of premier talent on the line, but I am sure he will have them as ready as possible. I have mentioned this multiple other places, but hopefully this time it will stick for you.

Where did marshall say he was discontented? We read an article that claimed he might be in orlando due toa contract issue, but there was no quote and his agent specifically said this wasnt a contract issue. It was a ****ty doctor issue (and the broncos do have some ****ty ass doctors!) On record, Marshall has only said the right things unless i missed something

Pseudofool
06-10-2009, 10:13 AM
I like how all things that are remotely negative for the team (Weigman's contract, Marshall?) end up being a result of this hereditary personality features that McD acquired from new england.

All this evidence is specious, hearsay, and the kind of the thing bloggers and pseudo-journalists drum up for some controversy.

Look, we could take a look at ANY coaching tree and collect all the negative things that happen to football teams over a number of years and conclude that it's a pattern whose source is within the personality of the original coach. Anyone who has any kind of rhetorical penchant can make that argument.

I'm surprised so many OMers have such watered-down logical thresholds.

BroncoInSkinland
06-10-2009, 10:15 AM
Where did marshall say he was discontented? We read an article that claimed he might be in orlando due toa contract issue, but there was no quote and his agent specifically said this wasnt a contract issue. It was a ****ty doctor issue (and the broncos do have some ****ty ass doctors!) On record, Marshall has only said the right things unless i missed something

You caught me on that one. I associate the potential holdout with dissatisfaction, and think it is probably one of those "quiet" situations that NE has managed to keep in house, but you are correct, to the best of my knowledge Marshall hasn't come out and definatively said anything negative on the record, or even off it for that matter. There might have been a small blurb when Cutler left, but hardly worth noting.

colonelbeef
06-10-2009, 10:16 AM
"In Denver, McDaniels’ sloppy handling of his interactions with Jay Cutler after an unsuccessful attempt to trade him at the start of free agency led to the loss of a franchise quarterback, largely because the 33-year-old coach was obsessed with demonstrating his unquestioned authority."

I still cant believe that went down. I've been saying this since the beginning, McDaniels is pulling the same garbage that Mangini did in New York. 6-10 and McDaniels needs to be fired immediately.

Popps
06-10-2009, 10:23 AM
Hey everyone, look. Footsteps is posting more negative, gloom-and-doom drivel.

How interesting!

He's not a one-trick pony, though. Don't you dare say that he is.

Lolad
06-10-2009, 10:23 AM
That doesn't constitute a pattern, or at least it's a pattern which has yet include McD. Come on. Stop with the thin logical threshold. You seem like a guy with intellectual standards. The inference your making about McD doesn't pass the smell test.

How is it only 1 incident?

1. Signed a Long Snapper when we already had one that was just as good
2. Traded our Franchise QB
3. Gave away our 1st rd pick next year (Arrogance)
4. Tried to trade our best receiving TE
5. Refuses to give our Center a new contract

Now before you Homers full of optimism come bashing me. I will say this, I want our team to succeed! Have I bought in yet? No I haven't, this offseason is just full of question marks

Gort
06-10-2009, 10:23 AM
Eight players...all with the same basic story, plus assorted managerial people. The story in case you missed it...is not about Denver, nor is it about McDaniels.

It's about a pattern.

8 people, so it must be true?

how about this... 39 people (almost 5x as many as you cite!) believed that a giant spaceship was following the Hale-Bopp comet and would "beam them up" after they committed suicide and protect them from getting recylced with the rest of planet Earth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven's_Gate_(cult)

39 people believed it, so they can't have all been nutcases, right? by your logic, there must be some truth to it if that many people were willing to off themselves, huh?

TheReverend
06-10-2009, 10:25 AM
Hey everyone, look. Footsteps is posting more negative, gloom-and-doom drivel.

How interesting!

He's not a one-trick pony, though. Don't you dare say that he is.

Oh the irony...

jayman_37
06-10-2009, 10:25 AM
Is this Cribbs thing kind of similar to Weigman's situation? He was promised an extension by the previous regime and now he is still sitting with his old contract.

Mangini does have some similarities in how he has handled things to McDaniels, but I don't think McDaniels is as bad as Mangini though.

SonOfLe-loLang
06-10-2009, 10:27 AM
"In Denver, McDaniels’ sloppy handling of his interactions with Jay Cutler after an unsuccessful attempt to trade him at the start of free agency led to the loss of a franchise quarterback, largely because the 33-year-old coach was obsessed with demonstrating his unquestioned authority."

I still cant believe that went down. I've been saying this since the beginning, McDaniels is pulling the same garbage that Mangini did in New York. 6-10 and McDaniels needs to be fired immediately.

Last time i checked, McDaniels was hired to be an authority figure. You cant let the inmates run the asylum, especially when the inmates are being combatitive and questioning your authority. I'll say this for the hundreth time.

When the cutler fiasco first went down, Jay:

1) Lost no money
2) Lost no playing time
3) was still the focal point of the offense.

The only thing bruised was his ego...and the thing that actually brusied it was something thats fairly commonplace in pro sports.

TheReverend
06-10-2009, 10:27 AM
8 people, so it must be true?

how about this... 39 people (almost 5x as many as you cite!) believed that a giant spaceship was following the Hale-Bopp comet and would "beam them up" after they committed suicide and protect them from getting recylced with the rest of planet Earth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven's_Gate_(cult)

39 people believed it, so they can't have all been nutcases, right? by your logic, there must be some truth to it if that many people were willing to off themselves, huh?

Both arguments are silly. Footsteps legitimately doesn't have legs, imo, but to play Devil's Advocate, your response is the same. I realize you're playing off of the absurdity but it can be spun to say the current players that are silent equate to the Heaven's Gate people.

Silly on both sides.

TheReverend
06-10-2009, 10:29 AM
Last time i checked, McDaniels was hired to be an authority figure. You cant let the inmates run the asylum, especially when the inmates are being combatitive and questioning your authority. I'll say this for the hundreth time.

When the cutler fiasco first went down, Jay:

1) Lost no money
2) Lost no playing time
3) was still the focal point of the offense.

The only thing bruised was his ego...and the thing that actually brusied it was something thats fairly commonplace in pro sports.

Cutler claims that he knew for a fact the team was still trying to trade him.

Also says will report for all mandatory team activities.

Gets traded anyways.

End result is the same no matter how you look at it. We lost our best player for no reason.

TonyR
06-10-2009, 10:32 AM
1. Signed a Long Snapper when we already had one that was just as good
2. Traded our Franchise QB
3. Gave away our 1st rd pick next year (Arrogance)
4. Tried to trade our best receiving TE
5. Refuses to give our Center a new contract


1. Is this really that big of a deal?
2. Bowlen made the call.
3. Just gave it away? Question the move all you want, I don't love it either. But we didn't "give it away". We did get something in return.
4. Really? Tell us more about this.
5. "Refuses"? Do we know this for sure?

I think your list is a little bit flimsy.

SonOfLe-loLang
06-10-2009, 10:32 AM
How is it only 1 incident?

1. Signed a Long Snapper when we already had one that was just as good
2. Traded our Franchise QB
3. Gave away our 1st rd pick next year (Arrogance)
4. Tried to trade our best receiving TE
5. Refuses to give our Center a new contract

Now before you Homers full of optimism come bashing me. I will say this, I want our team to succeed! Have I bought in yet? No I haven't, this offseason is just full of question marks

Seriously, why are some of those a huge deal:

1) He paid 200,000 to bringi n his guy, maybe he's a good leader, locker room guy
2) This is more on cutler and bowlen than McD
3) Its a strategy move to get a guy they had very highly rated...why is this arrogance??
4) We dont know to what level. Last time i checked, Scheff is still here
5) I don't think its a "refusal"...thats being dramatic.

SonOfLe-loLang
06-10-2009, 10:35 AM
Cutler claims that he knew for a fact the team was still trying to trade him.

Also says will report for all mandatory team activities.

Gets traded anyways.

End result is the same no matter how you look at it. We lost our best player for no reason.

Cutler is still the one that handled this incredibly poorly, regardless of what he knew or thought he knew. he should have shut up, played football, and called the owner back:) The same exact thing happened to Jason Campbell and Campbell said all the right things. Cutler has some weird ass entitlement issue which is curious for a guy who is 17-20 for his career. Now, im not saying he's not a great talent, he is, but he's a huge primadonna that was probably a divisive figure in the locker room (judging by the lack of teammate support when he was shipped out).

Gort
06-10-2009, 10:37 AM
Cutler claims that he knew for a fact the team was still trying to trade him.

Also says will report for all mandatory team activities.

Gets traded anyways.

End result is the same no matter how you look at it. We lost our best player for no reason.

before he "knew for a fact" that the team was trying to trade him, he was trying to get traded himself, even asking the Broncos to trade him basically the same day that Shanny was fired. i don't see how anybody in their right mind can come away from what REALLY happened not thinking that Cutler is/was a giant douche about the whole situation.

before McD was ever hired, Cutler asked to be traded. that is an undisputed fact that his agent admitted to. it was his knee jerk reaction to losing Shanny and his QB coach. he wanted to take his ball and go home if he couldn't have his way.

his next instinct was probably to go get drunk, but that's another story... ;)

Smiling Assassin27
06-10-2009, 10:39 AM
That attitude doesn't really have an amazing track record though, Belichick succeeded with it in New England, but failed in Cleveland, Mangini failed in New York and is not off to a stellar start in Cleveland, Crennel failed in Cleveland (maybe Cleveland is the problem), Weis isn't doing too well for himself down in South Bend and Pioli is not off to a stellar start in Kansas City.


Pioli notwithstanding (he's only been there what, 3 months?), I won't waste time making excuses for the failures of weis, mangini, and crennel (for the record, crennel didn't have this reputation as a tyrant). My take on this is that when a player complains, it's probably because they have been thrust out of their comfort zone. A good example in another sport is Scotty Bowman. This guy comes in like a bear and demands certain things of his players. So does Mike Babcock. There were guys who complained rather than buy into the culture and new demands on them, and so they were given the opportunity to play elsewhere, so this style can and does work. If character guys like Bailey, Dawkins, etc. were complaining, it'd be a different story. With Marshall, his complaints (if that's what you'd call them) are akin to TO--to be taken with a grain of salt. Same with Cutler, as I don't believe he's shown himself to be very mature.

This is the stage of rebuilding where a coach must install his organizational culture, which includes laying out expectations of every player in their play and in their roles. McD is doing that. There will always be some reistance and so you get what you got this off-season--one of our cornerstone players jettisoned.

Not to mention that McD will likely ease up when he's comfortable with player buy in. I, for one, am glad that there's unease in Dove Valley. But if i'm coaching a team and my job rides on my team's results, you'd better believe I'm gonna do it my way and succeed of fail with my style.

TheReverend
06-10-2009, 10:41 AM
Cutler is still the one that handled this incredibly poorly, regardless of what he knew or thought he knew. he should have shut up, played football, and called the owner back:) The same exact thing happened to Jason Campbell and Campbell said all the right things. Cutler has some weird ass entitlement issue which is curious for a guy who is 17-20 for his career. Now, im not saying he's not a great talent, he is, but he's a huge primadonna that was probably a divisive figure in the locker room (judging by the lack of teammate support when he was shipped out).

How so?

His criticism is not have "it" and a losing record. Now he has a defense and is playing on his childhood team, and is playing for a city that doesn't get ignored by NFL accolades.

The Denver Broncos lost a great player, and us fans suffer, but if being angry over the team you're being loyal to trying to trade you and then lie to you is handling it wrong, then you're completely right. But handling it "wrong" got him exactly what he wanted, and now we have Kyle Orton.

So who won?

TheReverend
06-10-2009, 10:42 AM
before he "knew for a fact" that the team was trying to trade him, he was trying to get traded himself, even asking the Broncos to trade him basically the same day that Shanny was fired. i don't see how anybody in their right mind can come away from what REALLY happened not thinking that Cutler is/was a giant douche about the whole situation.

before McD was ever hired, Cutler asked to be traded. that is an undisputed fact that his agent admitted to. it was his knee jerk reaction to losing Shanny and his QB coach. he wanted to take his ball and go home if he couldn't have his way.

his next instinct was probably to go get drunk, but that's another story... ;)

If you completely buy into the company line, then sure. However, they lied about nearly everything this off-season, so how you take it in 100% faith is beyond me.

Please show a legitimate source about Cutler asking to be traded before McD was hired?

...but none exist.

TonyR
06-10-2009, 10:43 AM
So who won?

Kyle Orton?

TheReverend
06-10-2009, 10:45 AM
Kyle Orton?

The way Denver treats it's QBs, I wouldn't be surprised if he hangs himself by week 5.

SonOfLe-loLang
06-10-2009, 10:52 AM
How so?

His criticism is not have "it" and a losing record. Now he has a defense and is playing on his childhood team, and is playing for a city that doesn't get ignored by NFL accolades.

The Denver Broncos lost a great player, and us fans suffer, but if being angry over the team you're being loyal to trying to trade you and then lie to you is handling it wrong, then you're completely right. But handling it "wrong" got him exactly what he wanted, and now we have Kyle Orton.

So who won?

We'll have to see. Maybe Kyle Orton will play very well in this offense, we don't know, none of us have seen. While im sure cutler could have been great in this offense eventually, his current game does not fit it. He often locks on receivers (marshall), never checks down, he relies more on his skill than his smarts. Not saying he couldn't have adapted, but i bet his decisions would have made mcd pull his hair out.

And again, ill say it: Cutler lost no money, playing time, and was still the focal part of the offense. We don't know the extent of these trade talks and Cutler has to accept that this is a business. He handled this incredibly poorly, from lashing out to the media before hearing the story to not calling the owner back, this was not how a player should handle a situation. I personally thought Cutler had an agenda...whether it was getting a new contract or trying to get traded, he knew what he was doing.

SonOfLe-loLang
06-10-2009, 10:53 AM
The way Denver treats it's QBs, I wouldn't be surprised if he hangs himself by week 5.

Why do you think he treats them badly? In fact, he seems togive them all the attention they need. He's incredibly detail oriented and is doing everything he can to make them both mentally and mechanically better. This is bad how?

Gort
06-10-2009, 10:53 AM
If you completely buy into the company line, then sure. However, they lied about nearly everything this off-season, so how you take it in 100% faith is beyond me.

Please show a legitimate source about Cutler asking to be traded before McD was hired?

...but none exist.

2 seconds with Google, the very first hit...

http://www.scoresreport.com/2009/03/02/king-cutler-had-already-asked-to-be-traded/

according to Peter King. or do you need more evidence?

Dos Rios
06-10-2009, 10:53 AM
Goodmans.

gyldenlove
06-10-2009, 10:53 AM
Pioli notwithstanding (he's only been there what, 3 months?), I won't waste time making excuses for the failures of weis, mangini, and crennel (for the record, crennel didn't have this reputation as a tyrant). My take on this is that when a player complains, it's probably because they have been thrust out of their comfort zone. A good example in another sport is Scotty Bowman. This guy comes in like a bear and demands certain things of his players. So does Mike Babcock. There were guys who complained rather than buy into the culture and new demands on them, and so they were given the opportunity to play elsewhere, so this style can and does work. If character guys like Bailey, Dawkins, etc. were complaining, it'd be a different story. With Marshall, his complaints (if that's what you'd call them) are akin to TO--to be taken with a grain of salt. Same with Cutler, as I don't believe he's shown himself to be very mature.

This is the stage of rebuilding where a coach must install his organizational culture, which includes laying out expectations of every player in their play and in their roles. McD is doing that. There will always be some reistance and so you get what you got this off-season--one of our cornerstone players jettisoned.

Not to mention that McD will likely ease up when he's comfortable with player buy in. I, for one, am glad that there's unease in Dove Valley. But if i'm coaching a team and my job rides on my team's results, you'd better believe I'm gonna do it my way and succeed of fail with my style.

You can come in and be fire and brimstone if you have had proven success, such as Bowman did, or if you take over a team that is on the crapper, like Babcock did in Anaheim, I would even say the way that Pioli has taken over the Chiefs does give him more license to do what he wants since it can't get much worse. Mangini doesn't have the success that Bowman did (for instance he is not in the hall of fame and doesn't have a handful of rings as a head coach) and Cleveland was not a team in dire straits when he took over, there was quite a bit of talent in the organization.

I am deliberately leaving Mcdaniels out of my argument since he has to my knowledge not reneged on any promise made by the previous management team (maybe the Wiegman situation) and while I don't agree with the way he handled the Cutler situation, it clearly was not entirely his doing that it ended the way it did.

alkemical
06-10-2009, 10:54 AM
I don't and didn't like trading cutler.

But at the same time i found him Emo. So while i think it was a bad idea, at the same time - i wouldn't mind if we could build a team that is run as a team.

I'd like to have gotten a pick in return for getting alphonso - but if the dude works out - i can't bitch.

gyldenlove
06-10-2009, 10:55 AM
Why do you think he treats them badly? In fact, he seems togive them all the attention they need. He's incredibly detail oriented and is doing everything he can to make them both mentally and mechanically better. This is bad how?

Is it Denver Mcdaniels now? I think he meant the fans and media much more than the coach, he would probably have written Mcdaniels if he meant the coach.

TheReverend
06-10-2009, 11:00 AM
2 seconds with Google, the very first hit...

http://www.scoresreport.com/2009/03/02/king-cutler-had-already-asked-to-be-traded/

according to Peter King. or do you need more evidence?

Yes. I said "legitimate source". That P King article was worn to death after it came out on this site. If you think King making that statement and citing unnamed source is legitimate, then boy do I have real estate for you. I've got great unnamed references too.

bronco militia
06-10-2009, 11:01 AM
The way Denver treats it's QBs, I wouldn't be surprised if he hangs himself by week 5.

LOL.....he had it coming

BroncoInSkinland
06-10-2009, 11:01 AM
Why do you think he treats them badly? In fact, he seems togive them all the attention they need. He's incredibly detail oriented and is doing everything he can to make them both mentally and mechanically better. This is bad how?

He who? The reference was to the fans. Bronco nation has been eating QB's alive since Elway left. Happened with Jake (who I liked), happened with Cutler (who I thought had great potential, and up until he started crying liked), and it will probably happen with the next QB. A thought I had earlier today is that I really hope McDaniels succedes, or we could have a coaching shadow from Shanahan in addition to the QB shadow.

TheReverend
06-10-2009, 11:01 AM
Why do you think he treats them badly? In fact, he seems togive them all the attention they need. He's incredibly detail oriented and is doing everything he can to make them both mentally and mechanically better. This is bad how?

Strong confusion and lack of reading comprehension.

Denver does not = McDaniels.

Or was that a Freudian slip?

TheReverend
06-10-2009, 11:02 AM
LOL.....he had it coming

Can't wait for the "Caption This" on that one, LOL

SonOfLe-loLang
06-10-2009, 11:08 AM
Strong confusion and lack of reading comprehension.

Denver does not = McDaniels.

Or was that a Freudian slip?

Thats not reading comprehension, thats just a mistake on my part. I figured you meant Denver as an organization, not the city itself.

TheReverend
06-10-2009, 11:09 AM
Thats not reading comprehension, thats just a mistake on my part. I figured you meant Denver as an organization, not the city itself.

No, sir. I meant what I said, but I can see how that was open to interpretation. How you did interpret it though, IS telling from a Freudian POV.

bronco militia
06-10-2009, 11:09 AM
Can't wait for the "Caption This" on that one, LOL

Ha!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/be/Carradine.jpg/220px-Carradine.jpg

Kyle Orton after week 5 in Denver

SonOfLe-loLang
06-10-2009, 11:21 AM
No, sir. I meant what I said, but I can see how that was open to interpretation. How you did interpret it though, IS telling from a Freudian POV.

Why is that telling from a freudian POV? I often refer to the team as "denver" and considering we were consistently discussing Cutler V. McDaniels, I was assuming we were still talking about this. It was a conscious decision on my part to make this assumption. Not freudian at all.

TheReverend
06-10-2009, 11:26 AM
Why is that telling from a freudian POV? I often refer to the team as "denver" and considering we were consistently discussing Cutler V. McDaniels, I was assuming we were still talking about this. It was a conscious decision on my part to make this assumption. Not freudian at all.

Because Freud would interpret that as you being gay.

Br0nc0Buster
06-10-2009, 11:27 AM
Ha!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/be/Carradine.jpg/220px-Carradine.jpg

Kyle Orton after week 5 in Denver

The guy off Beverly Hills Cop?

SonOfLe-loLang
06-10-2009, 11:29 AM
Because Freud would interpret that as you being gay.

You still got it, Rev <rolls eyes>

gyldenlove
06-10-2009, 11:30 AM
Because Freud would interpret that as you being gay.

That doesn't make him particularly unique....

telluride
06-10-2009, 11:34 AM
Actually we have heard complaints from multiple players, Cutler, Marshall, and Weigman, among others.

Interesting that our 3 "Pro Bowl" players, all of whom want or wanted more money, are the same players who seem to be having the most issues with McD's team-first-there-are-no-stars approach.

lex
06-10-2009, 11:39 AM
Interesting that our 3 "Pro Bowl" players, all of whom want or wanted more money, are the same players who seem to be having the most issues with McD's team-first-there-are-no-stars approach.


What makes you so sure the team first isnt codeword for "it's about McDaniels". See, if the stars play well and get the attention, thats less to go around for the coach.

Rohirrim
06-10-2009, 11:40 AM
In Denver, McDaniels’ sloppy handling of his interactions with Jay Cutler after an unsuccessful attempt to trade him at the start of free agency led to the loss of a franchise quarterback, largely because the 33-year-old coach was obsessed with demonstrating his unquestioned authority.

Media 101: Repeat the same bs over and over again and sooner or later, it becomes fact.

TheReverend
06-10-2009, 11:42 AM
You still got it, Rev <rolls eyes>

Sorry... I do that anytime someone asks me what a dream means too.

kamakazi_kal
06-10-2009, 11:45 AM
Kyle Orton?

well, he won for at least one year......ick.

telluride
06-10-2009, 11:48 AM
What makes you so sure the team first isnt codeword for "it's about McDaniels". See, if the stars play well and get the attention, thats less to go around for the coach.

I think the team-first approach has been proven by NE over the past 6 years or so. After the disaster that has been the Broncos for the past three years, I'm happy that we're building a team with fewer prima donnas and more players.

lex
06-10-2009, 11:50 AM
I think the team-first approach has been proven by NE over the past 6 years or so. After the disaster that has been the Broncos for the past three years, I'm happy that we're building a team with fewer prima donnas and more players.

...which is codeword for its not about the players, its about the coach.

Spider
06-10-2009, 11:52 AM
The lex be good stick ......... https://www.ecoupons.com/show_image.php?n=http://www.baseballrampage.com%2Fproductphotos%2Ff3-3a_display.jpg

SonOfLe-loLang
06-10-2009, 12:04 PM
What makes you so sure the team first isnt codeword for "it's about McDaniels". See, if the stars play well and get the attention, thats less to go around for the coach.

Scientists should study your brain. It works in very odd ways

HEAV
06-10-2009, 12:25 PM
It's about a pattern.


So are 99.9 % of your posting...same as Mock, Lex, (enter McDaniel hater name)

lex
06-10-2009, 12:48 PM
So are 99.9 % of your posting...same as Mock, Lex, (enter McDaniel hater name)

Another person who sees things in black and white.

telluride
06-10-2009, 01:10 PM
...which is codeword for its not about the players, its about the coach.

Actually, it's about winning. Something Denver hasn't been too good at for the last three years.

lex
06-10-2009, 01:13 PM
Actually, it's about winning. Something Denver hasn't been too good at for the last three years.

Il Duce better win. The vultures are already circling.

GreatBronco16
06-10-2009, 03:09 PM
Cutler: "Trade Me"

Cutler: "I really didn't want it to get this far. I didn't want to be traded"


I think Cutler has some sort of mental illness too.

summerdenver
06-10-2009, 03:53 PM
Media 101: Repeat the same bs over and over again and sooner or later, it becomes fact.

I think this is actually working for Broncos. I would not be surprised if it was slowly revelaed during the year that Broncos never were convinced about Jay and thats why did not make a concerted effort to get him back.

Br0nc0Buster
06-10-2009, 04:02 PM
Cutler: "Trade Me"

Cutler: "I really didn't want it to get this far. I didn't want to be traded"


I think Cutler has some sort of mental illness too.

He is just a whiney baby

Jay is a young millionaire who plays a sport for a profession, and still finds ways to whine and cry......no wonder Lex is so upset, that is his idol

footstepsfrom#27
06-10-2009, 04:26 PM
Predictably, this thread’s broken down into another us vs. them discussion, and where it hasn’t, it’s mostly addressing other issues, not the ones the writer does. After reading all 100+ posts in here, the contrary opinion responses I see that don’t deviate from the topic seem to break down like this:

1) Attack the OP (me) on the basis of motive
2) Attack the writer’s credibility or methodology
3) Distort the implication of the story by skewing/ignoring facts
4) Postulate that the end justifies the means

Ignoring the first of these for obvious reasons, I’ll start with #2.

Silver’s credibility has already been established by virtue of two things; first, he is not a sensation monger like Paige or the various media hacks trying to build a rep by generating controversy. Second, his record in sports journalism is impressive and varied enough to warrant him receiving the initial benefit of the doubt. He’s covered the NFL for probably 20 years, he’s written books on individual athletes like Jerry Rice, he’s documented personal stories many times and he’s experienced at what makes a good reporter. This is not inconsequential because it explains why people might be willing to talk with him off the record, because it explains why people might be willing to talk with him off the record…because of the fact they know he’s been credible and professional in the past. Why…in a story of this nature, would he cut corners and make stuff up or deviate from what he’s done in the past to build a reputation that has him on top the sports journalism world?

Most of the attacks on him center on method, but these mostly take the approach that he failed to consider the facts of the situation in Denver, or illegitimately lumped McDaniels in with Mangini when only one player situation (Cutler) mirrors the Mangini problems. This of course ignores the fact that McDaniels just got here. Time-wise, he’s had the job nowhere near as long, yet in spite of this the 2009 offseason has been by far the most controversial in Broncos history, and the biggest NFL story so far this year.

The point’s been made that his credibility is in doubt since he failed to consider the true facts of the situation here, yet these are at the end of the day, the very points he is attempting to counteract, and the facts are ultimately unknown to any of us given that our information rests on only the team’s reports. The entire crux of his article is that these organizations are modeling the Patriots’ shut down approach to management, a top down, heavy handed approach that closes off information and treats people with disrespect. Quoting the party line here hardly negates his credibility in truth since his argument rests on multiple sources of people on 4 different teams that spoke off the record, revealing things none of us have access to.

Obviously the whole point of speaking off the record is that people don’t want their public opinions known. The very nature of his report suggest that a closed corporate culture exists on the Belichick branches of the coaching tree, one reflecting Belichick himself…hence one would expect that just as in the case of the cell phone incident where the Personnel Director was fired for u sing a cell phone to speak to reporters, a similar approach anywhere else would yield equally dubious and apprehensive feelings about the information coming from team headquarters. Hence…what you now have is another I say/you say scenario…only this one is not with other OM posters working off the basis of their personal views based on how they took to accept or reject the Bronco’s official version of events, but rather with a guy who spent time actually talking to various team employees, conceivably across all four organizations. Nobody here can claim they have access to the same information he had.

Other approaches attempt to discredit him based on suggestions this had to do merely with contract negotiations, a fact of life in the NFL for all teams. Yet the writer didn’t focus on what the posters here have, the desire to get paid more. He focused instead of the issue of broken promises and the fact that team officials publicly disputed the player’s account of their communications, something that literally defines the Cutler/McDaniels-Bowlen dispute. We’ve already heard Weigman suggest (tactfully so far) that he expected some things based on his prior conversations with the team when Shanahan was here. That hasn’t turned nasty…yet…but again, we are VERY early in this administration and in terms of where they stand with players, it can be argued they’re still in honeymoon mode for practical purposes. In fact one would expect that to be the case at this point.

#3…skewing/ignoring facts to distort the implications of the story:

Multiple posters chose to focus on only narrow portions of the story, notably ignoring the implications of the behavior by Cleveland Browns owner Randy Lerner, whose firing of their Personnel Director followed immediately on the heels of Mangini taking the job, and resulted in Mangini hand picking his successor. This was shortly after the same guy was actually interviewed for a higher position…GM…an almost exact replica of how Goodman left the Broncos. One day we heard that no change would be made in executive management, and no GM was going to be hired. Shortly after Josh gets here Goodman’s gone and all we have is a vague explanation about his son influencing his decision to leave.

Silver cites financial motives for Lerner…it’s an established and widely reported fact now that Bowlens’ been having similar problems on a level far worse than what most fans knew. The “New England way” has proven to be one where players are jettisoned when their contract demands begin to match on-field performance. Early returns on Marshall (no offer tended yet with FA around the corner) and the seemingly unconcerned approach from McDaniels over Weigman’s issue, and of course Cutler’s probable expectations next year…all this leaves open the door of suspicion that Xanders was hand-picked in order to fall in line with the coaches expectations just like Mangini’s GM was.

Then you have the facts related to contractual negotiations being used to overshadow the crux of what both Brian Waters and Josh Cribbs were truly upset about…disrespect on the part of the team’s coach or GM (Pioli), a position also taken by Sean Rogers, who took the highly unusual step of actually telling the team NOT to pay his $6 million bonus due him but to release him instead…a step he took only after accusing Mangini of treating him with disdain on more than one occasion. One poster suggested that 8 people do not make a pattern, yet this twists facts also. It wasn’t 8 people…it was 8 PLAYERS speaking on the record, because their gripes became public…backed up by multiple sources including team employees…in some cases multiple sources speaking on the same question with the same team. That IS a pattern, one we could reasonably expect a legitimate journalist like Silver would probably demand of himself…corroborating evidence…before he printed a story like this.

#4…the end justifies the means.

Posters argued that the prior regime was unworthy of continuation, that Cutler’s attitude justified his release, that McDaniels was building a team approach…etc, etc…all points previously made throughout this endless discussion for months, but none of this is germane to the current discussion and it adds up to “anything is Ok as long as it produces the desired results.” One poster noted Belichick’s been successful using this approach so McDaniels might be also…a point that Silver also made at the end of his story. How does that negate the implications of what he’s reported however? Justifying current behavior or philosophical mistakes on the basis that something might happen in the future hardly seems like a strong position to take. This is exceptionally ironic given that the same success hoped for as a product of “the New England way”…ignores the fact that this end justifies the means argument is the same one most people in here have been critical of “Belicheat” for in the first place…only weeks before McDaniels got here in fact.

joe9999
06-10-2009, 04:56 PM
Then why post the ****ing article if it has nothing to do with Denver or McDaniels? Its a pattern with Bellichek and Mangini, not Pioli or McDaniels. Get the sand out of your vag dude.


:Broncos:

This was an interesting article relevant to the Broncos. There is no need to make personal attacks on the poster. The patern with Belichick associates is is hard to deny.

elsid13
06-10-2009, 05:13 PM
To think that McDaniels and the rest of those mentioned are not trying act like their mentor is very naive. All the guys grew up in culture were they saw Belicheck be very successfully acting this way and treating folks in manner that some find to be offensive. Why would they not try to follow a pattern they seen be successful in NE elsewhere. When VPs were hire away from GE they alll tried to be Jack Welsh.

Problem is that every environment is different and you can just do the same thing. Charlie Weis at ND finally admitted that he had to treat the kids different because the Generation Y didn't work with the coaching style he brought with him from NE.

Hulamau
06-10-2009, 05:23 PM
McD is much more personable both with the press and the plays than Mangini or Belichick. I'm betting he's taking the best from NE and including his own personality in the mix and will be fine.

meangene
06-10-2009, 06:00 PM
Predictably, this thread’s broken down into another us vs. them discussion, and where it hasn’t, it’s mostly addressing other issues, not the ones the writer does. After reading all 100+ posts in here, the contrary opinion responses I see that don’t deviate from the topic seem to break down like this:

1) Attack the OP (me) on the basis of motive
2) Attack the writer’s credibility or methodology
3) Distort the implication of the story by skewing/ignoring facts
4) Postulate that the end justifies the means

Ignoring the first of these for obvious reasons, I’ll start with #2.

Silver’s credibility has already been established by virtue of two things; first, he is not a sensation monger like Paige or the various media hacks trying to build a rep by generating controversy. Second, his record in sports journalism is impressive and varied enough to warrant him receiving the initial benefit of the doubt. He’s covered the NFL for probably 20 years, he’s written books on individual athletes like Jerry Rice, he’s documented personal stories many times and he’s experienced at what makes a good reporter. This is not inconsequential because it explains why people might be willing to talk with him off the record, because it explains why people might be willing to talk with him off the record…because of the fact they know he’s been credible and professional in the past. Why…in a story of this nature, would he cut corners and make stuff up or deviate from what he’s done in the past to build a reputation that has him on top the sports journalism world?

Most of the attacks on him center on method, but these mostly take the approach that he failed to consider the facts of the situation in Denver, or illegitimately lumped McDaniels in with Mangini when only one player situation (Cutler) mirrors the Mangini problems. This of course ignores the fact that McDaniels just got here. Time-wise, he’s had the job nowhere near as long, yet in spite of this the 2009 offseason has been by far the most controversial in Broncos history, and the biggest NFL story so far this year.

The point’s been made that his credibility is in doubt since he failed to consider the true facts of the situation here, yet these are at the end of the day, the very points he is attempting to counteract, and the facts are ultimately unknown to any of us given that our information rests on only the team’s reports. The entire crux of his article is that these organizations are modeling the Patriots’ shut down approach to management, a top down, heavy handed approach that closes off information and treats people with disrespect. Quoting the party line here hardly negates his credibility in truth since his argument rests on multiple sources of people on 4 different teams that spoke off the record, revealing things none of us have access to.

Obviously the whole point of speaking off the record is that people don’t want their public opinions known. The very nature of his report suggest that a closed corporate culture exists on the Belichick branches of the coaching tree, one reflecting Belichick himself…hence one would expect that just as in the case of the cell phone incident where the Personnel Director was fired for u sing a cell phone to speak to reporters, a similar approach anywhere else would yield equally dubious and apprehensive feelings about the information coming from team headquarters. Hence…what you now have is another I say/you say scenario…only this one is not with other OM posters working off the basis of their personal views based on how they took to accept or reject the Bronco’s official version of events, but rather with a guy who spent time actually talking to various team employees, conceivably across all four organizations. Nobody here can claim they have access to the same information he had.

Other approaches attempt to discredit him based on suggestions this had to do merely with contract negotiations, a fact of life in the NFL for all teams. Yet the writer didn’t focus on what the posters here have, the desire to get paid more. He focused instead of the issue of broken promises and the fact that team officials publicly disputed the player’s account of their communications, something that literally defines the Cutler/McDaniels-Bowlen dispute. We’ve already heard Weigman suggest (tactfully so far) that he expected some things based on his prior conversations with the team when Shanahan was here. That hasn’t turned nasty…yet…but again, we are VERY early in this administration and in terms of where they stand with players, it can be argued they’re still in honeymoon mode for practical purposes. In fact one would expect that to be the case at this point.

#3…skewing/ignoring facts to distort the implications of the story:

Multiple posters chose to focus on only narrow portions of the story, notably ignoring the implications of the behavior by Cleveland Browns owner Randy Lerner, whose firing of their Personnel Director followed immediately on the heels of Mangini taking the job, and resulted in Mangini hand picking his successor. This was shortly after the same guy was actually interviewed for a higher position…GM…an almost exact replica of how Goodman left the Broncos. One day we heard that no change would be made in executive management, and no GM was going to be hired. Shortly after Josh gets here Goodman’s gone and all we have is a vague explanation about his son influencing his decision to leave.

Silver cites financial motives for Lerner…it’s an established and widely reported fact now that Bowlens’ been having similar problems on a level far worse than what most fans knew. The “New England way” has proven to be one where players are jettisoned when their contract demands begin to match on-field performance. Early returns on Marshall (no offer tended yet with FA around the corner) and the seemingly unconcerned approach from McDaniels over Weigman’s issue, and of course Cutler’s probable expectations next year…all this leaves open the door of suspicion that Xanders was hand-picked in order to fall in line with the coaches expectations just like Mangini’s GM was.

Then you have the facts related to contractual negotiations being used to overshadow the crux of what both Brian Waters and Josh Cribbs were truly upset about…disrespect on the part of the team’s coach or GM (Pioli), a position also taken by Sean Rogers, who took the highly unusual step of actually telling the team NOT to pay his $6 million bonus due him but to release him instead…a step he took only after accusing Mangini of treating him with disdain on more than one occasion. One poster suggested that 8 people do not make a pattern, yet this twists facts also. It wasn’t 8 people…it was 8 PLAYERS speaking on the record, because their gripes became public…backed up by multiple sources including team employees…in some cases multiple sources speaking on the same question with the same team. That IS a pattern, one we could reasonably expect a legitimate journalist like Silver would probably demand of himself…corroborating evidence…before he printed a story like this.

#4…the end justifies the means.

Posters argued that the prior regime was unworthy of continuation, that Cutler’s attitude justified his release, that McDaniels was building a team approach…etc, etc…all points previously made throughout this endless discussion for months, but none of this is germane to the current discussion and it adds up to “anything is Ok as long as it produces the desired results.” One poster noted Belichick’s been successful using this approach so McDaniels might be also…a point that Silver also made at the end of his story. How does that negate the implications of what he’s reported however? Justifying current behavior or philosophical mistakes on the basis that something might happen in the future hardly seems like a strong position to take. This is exceptionally ironic given that the same success hoped for as a product of “the New England way”…ignores the fact that this end justifies the means argument is the same one most people in here have been critical of “Belicheat” for in the first place…only weeks before McDaniels got here in fact.

I don't care if the article came down from above on stone tablets to Mt. Sinai and then translated by the apostle Silver, it's still crap. ;D

Gcver2ver3
06-10-2009, 06:03 PM
when the Broncos are winning ballgames i'm gonna be bumping so many threads like this one, it's gonna make my head spin...

NYBronco
06-10-2009, 06:03 PM
Time will tell but from what I have seen Josh seems to be very reasonable and level headed.

fdf
06-10-2009, 07:24 PM
Like two other Belichick disciples, new Kansas City Chiefs general manager Scott Pioli and neophyte Denver Broncos coach Josh McDaniels, Mangini has marked his arrival at a new organization this offseason by alienating established leaders while projecting a self-assuredness that borders on arrogance.


McDaniels may have alienated Jay Cutler. But he didn't alienate any team leaders.

gyldenlove
06-10-2009, 07:40 PM
I think the team-first approach has been proven by NE over the past 6 years or so. After the disaster that has been the Broncos for the past three years, I'm happy that we're building a team with fewer prima donnas and more players.

I would say the star approach has been proven to work as well, I mean it is not like Elway wasn't a star on his team and he only went to 5 super bowls, it is not like Rice and Montana and Young weren't stars, it is not like Irvin, Smith and Aikman weren't stars.

If all the teams that had success did it with a team first approach I would buy it, but as long as you have Peyton Mannings out there, Michael Strahans, Larry Fitzgeralds you can't say that the system of having star players is broken.

Sure, it works with a team approach in some places, but it works with a star approach in other places.

Northman
06-10-2009, 07:55 PM
Come back when you've read the article. I didn't say it had nothing to do with Denver.

Um, not to nitpick here but.....

From post #4.

Eight players...all with the same basic story, plus assorted managerial people. The story in case you missed it...is not about Denver, nor is it about McDaniels.

It's about a pattern.

TonyR
06-10-2009, 08:31 PM
Sure, it works with a team approach in some places, but it works with a star approach in other places.

FYI, the Pats have "stars". Perhaps you've heard of Tom Brady? Randy Moss? Just to name a couple? The difference is that those players buy into the so called "team approach" and aren't above the team. Probably the reason Moss, who's been a headache everywhere else he's been, hasn't seemed to be a problem in NE.

footstepsfrom#27
06-10-2009, 08:51 PM
Um, not to nitpick here but.....

From post #4.
The story was not specifically about Denver, it was about the Belichick coaching tree, of which McDaniels is a part.

Archer81
06-10-2009, 10:10 PM
This was an interesting article relevant to the Broncos. There is no need to make personal attacks on the poster. The patern with Belichick associates is is hard to deny.


Yeah. Grand total of 2 of them. What about Crennel or Charlie Weis? McDaniels has shown nothing to this point to be compared to Bill B. or Mangini. Its a stretch to assume McDaniels is anything like any other coach who worked for Bellichek, he has 0 history. So its a sick form of masturbation to make the McDaniels haters feel better.

Its almost as if some people on this board are offended that denver has a HC that is not Mike Shanahan, and are completely perplexed that this guy wont run the offense the same way or coddle "star" players the same way.

:Broncos:

rastaman
06-11-2009, 05:18 AM
I'm in the wait and see catagory and I can't see how that's not my mindset. Yes, some of the moves have been unorthodox, i'vebeen preaching for a strong, big D-line for years. But, the man seems very focused and has put together a great coaching staff...so yes, i will wait and see what this broncos team looks like before killing it.

I'm in the wait and see category as well. However, if history is any indication....when was the last time a 32-33 year old coach was successfull with their first HC job?

Point is, HC's in the NFL do not start winning until they've reached their 40's and 50's. The departure of Cutler and the replacement with Orton/Simms only further makes it likely that McDaniels will not be successfull for the next 3 to 4 years and that spells the Fans must endure some frustrating loosing seasons.

We all know McD will not be able to duplicate Shanahans record during his first 4 years. McDaniels will even have trouble attaining the record of Shanahans last 4 years.

Simply put, McD has dug a whole for himself and may find his stay in Denver as HC as a learning experience and may find himself back as the OC for the N.E. in 4-6 years.

footstepsfrom#27
06-11-2009, 05:36 AM
Yeah. Grand total of 2 of them.
You say 2 only because you extract Cutler's situation on the basis of information you assume is correct...the same information the writer says is basically tainted due to the closed nature of the NE style of team management. We are very early in this regime, yet nobody would claim arrogance and the respect issue have not been talked about at length on this board. Whether you believe that or not...it's obviously been an issue that has dominated the conversation here.
So its a sick form of masturbation to make the McDaniels haters feel better.
I'm pretty sure the writer had nothing like that in mind.
Its almost as if some people on this board are offended that denver has a HC that is not Mike Shanahan, and are completely perplexed that this guy wont run the offense the same way or coddle "star" players the same way.
If you mean me...I assume you do...check prior posts. I've been 1) a supporter of a coaching change for a long time, 2) a supporter of a new offensive system since I think the SZB running game is no longer as effective with team's catching on to it and more teams using it meaning more are fishing the talent pool for those players, 3) a consistent critic of bad character guys being brought in here and made excuses for.

All three of these things eliminate me as your stereotypical McD hater. My concerns are 100% based on what he's done here since he came, not the desire to keep Shanahan. That said...I did not post this to hate on McD. I posted it because this particular story is the only serious effort at delving into facts and the story behind the story that we've seen emerge since this all went down. Nearly every scrap of information we've read prior to now has been based exclusively on what the three primary principles in this story had to say. This one went beyond that and when you have a senior writer at a respected national publication like SI who researches multiple teams, coaches and player testimonials, it's newsworty for this board.

I realize I'm a bad guy for bringing it to the board's attention...pretty sure you know I don't care. If it's relevant to the story...it deserves a hearing on this board.

alkemical
06-11-2009, 06:59 AM
I'm in the wait and see category as well. However, if history is any indication....when was the last time a 32-33 year old coach was successfull with their first HC job?

Point is, HC's in the NFL do not start winning until they've reached their 40's and 50's. The departure of Cutler and the replacement with Orton/Simms only further makes it likely that McDaniels will not be successfull for the next 3 to 4 years and that spells the Fans must endure some frustrating loosing seasons.

We all know McD will not be able to duplicate Shanahans record during his first 4 years. McDaniels will even have trouble attaining the record of Shanahans last 4 years.

Simply put, McD has dug a whole for himself and may find his stay in Denver as HC as a learning experience and may find himself back as the OC for the N.E. in 4-6 years.


Mike Tomlin?

TonyR
06-11-2009, 07:00 AM
However, if history is any indication....when was the last time a 32-33 year old coach was successfull with their first HC job?

Point is, HC's in the NFL do not start winning until they've reached their 40's and 50's.


What does age have to do with it? Jon Gruden and Mike Tomlin are two coaches who won Super Bowls in their 30's. And if you're going to counter with the experience card, just last season Ken Whisenhunt, Mike Smith, John Harbaugh, Tony Sparano, and the aforementioned Mike Tomlin did pretty well as first or second year head coaches. An unknown Andy Reid, the QB coach in Green Bay at the time, took over the Philadelphia Eagles in 1999 and has been very (although not ultimately) successful. I'm sure with a little effort I could come up with several more examples.

Try again.

kamakazi_kal
06-11-2009, 08:47 AM
Predictably, this thread’s broken down into another us vs. them discussion, and where it hasn’t, it’s mostly addressing other issues, not the ones the writer does. After reading all 100+ posts in here, the contrary opinion responses I see that don’t deviate from the topic seem to break down like this:

1) Attack the OP (me) on the basis of motive
2) Attack the writer’s credibility or methodology
3) Distort the implication of the story by skewing/ignoring facts
4) Postulate that the end justifies the means

Ignoring the first of these for obvious reasons, I’ll start with #2.

Silver’s credibility has already been established by virtue of two things; first, he is not a sensation monger like Paige or the various media hacks trying to build a rep by generating controversy. Second, his record in sports journalism is impressive and varied enough to warrant him receiving the initial benefit of the doubt. He’s covered the NFL for probably 20 years, he’s written books on individual athletes like Jerry Rice, he’s documented personal stories many times and he’s experienced at what makes a good reporter. This is not inconsequential because it explains why people might be willing to talk with him off the record, because it explains why people might be willing to talk with him off the record…because of the fact they know he’s been credible and professional in the past. Why…in a story of this nature, would he cut corners and make stuff up or deviate from what he’s done in the past to build a reputation that has him on top the sports journalism world?

Most of the attacks on him center on method, but these mostly take the approach that he failed to consider the facts of the situation in Denver, or illegitimately lumped McDaniels in with Mangini when only one player situation (Cutler) mirrors the Mangini problems. This of course ignores the fact that McDaniels just got here. Time-wise, he’s had the job nowhere near as long, yet in spite of this the 2009 offseason has been by far the most controversial in Broncos history, and the biggest NFL story so far this year.

The point’s been made that his credibility is in doubt since he failed to consider the true facts of the situation here, yet these are at the end of the day, the very points he is attempting to counteract, and the facts are ultimately unknown to any of us given that our information rests on only the team’s reports. The entire crux of his article is that these organizations are modeling the Patriots’ shut down approach to management, a top down, heavy handed approach that closes off information and treats people with disrespect. Quoting the party line here hardly negates his credibility in truth since his argument rests on multiple sources of people on 4 different teams that spoke off the record, revealing things none of us have access to.

Obviously the whole point of speaking off the record is that people don’t want their public opinions known. The very nature of his report suggest that a closed corporate culture exists on the Belichick branches of the coaching tree, one reflecting Belichick himself…hence one would expect that just as in the case of the cell phone incident where the Personnel Director was fired for u sing a cell phone to speak to reporters, a similar approach anywhere else would yield equally dubious and apprehensive feelings about the information coming from team headquarters. Hence…what you now have is another I say/you say scenario…only this one is not with other OM posters working off the basis of their personal views based on how they took to accept or reject the Bronco’s official version of events, but rather with a guy who spent time actually talking to various team employees, conceivably across all four organizations. Nobody here can claim they have access to the same information he had.

Other approaches attempt to discredit him based on suggestions this had to do merely with contract negotiations, a fact of life in the NFL for all teams. Yet the writer didn’t focus on what the posters here have, the desire to get paid more. He focused instead of the issue of broken promises and the fact that team officials publicly disputed the player’s account of their communications, something that literally defines the Cutler/McDaniels-Bowlen dispute. We’ve already heard Weigman suggest (tactfully so far) that he expected some things based on his prior conversations with the team when Shanahan was here. That hasn’t turned nasty…yet…but again, we are VERY early in this administration and in terms of where they stand with players, it can be argued they’re still in honeymoon mode for practical purposes. In fact one would expect that to be the case at this point.

#3…skewing/ignoring facts to distort the implications of the story:

Multiple posters chose to focus on only narrow portions of the story, notably ignoring the implications of the behavior by Cleveland Browns owner Randy Lerner, whose firing of their Personnel Director followed immediately on the heels of Mangini taking the job, and resulted in Mangini hand picking his successor. This was shortly after the same guy was actually interviewed for a higher position…GM…an almost exact replica of how Goodman left the Broncos. One day we heard that no change would be made in executive management, and no GM was going to be hired. Shortly after Josh gets here Goodman’s gone and all we have is a vague explanation about his son influencing his decision to leave.

Silver cites financial motives for Lerner…it’s an established and widely reported fact now that Bowlens’ been having similar problems on a level far worse than what most fans knew. The “New England way” has proven to be one where players are jettisoned when their contract demands begin to match on-field performance. Early returns on Marshall (no offer tended yet with FA around the corner) and the seemingly unconcerned approach from McDaniels over Weigman’s issue, and of course Cutler’s probable expectations next year…all this leaves open the door of suspicion that Xanders was hand-picked in order to fall in line with the coaches expectations just like Mangini’s GM was.

Then you have the facts related to contractual negotiations being used to overshadow the crux of what both Brian Waters and Josh Cribbs were truly upset about…disrespect on the part of the team’s coach or GM (Pioli), a position also taken by Sean Rogers, who took the highly unusual step of actually telling the team NOT to pay his $6 million bonus due him but to release him instead…a step he took only after accusing Mangini of treating him with disdain on more than one occasion. One poster suggested that 8 people do not make a pattern, yet this twists facts also. It wasn’t 8 people…it was 8 PLAYERS speaking on the record, because their gripes became public…backed up by multiple sources including team employees…in some cases multiple sources speaking on the same question with the same team. That IS a pattern, one we could reasonably expect a legitimate journalist like Silver would probably demand of himself…corroborating evidence…before he printed a story like this.

#4…the end justifies the means.

Posters argued that the prior regime was unworthy of continuation, that Cutler’s attitude justified his release, that McDaniels was building a team approach…etc, etc…all points previously made throughout this endless discussion for months, but none of this is germane to the current discussion and it adds up to “anything is Ok as long as it produces the desired results.” One poster noted Belichick’s been successful using this approach so McDaniels might be also…a point that Silver also made at the end of his story. How does that negate the implications of what he’s reported however? Justifying current behavior or philosophical mistakes on the basis that something might happen in the future hardly seems like a strong position to take. This is exceptionally ironic given that the same success hoped for as a product of “the New England way”…ignores the fact that this end justifies the means argument is the same one most people in here have been critical of “Belicheat” for in the first place…only weeks before McDaniels got here in fact.

wow ... that post is like Chuck Norris strong.

kamakazi_kal
06-11-2009, 08:51 AM
FYI, the Pats have "stars". Perhaps you've heard of Tom Brady? Randy Moss? Just to name a couple? The difference is that those players buy into the so called "team approach" and aren't above the team. Probably the reason Moss, who's been a headache everywhere else he's been, hasn't seemed to be a problem in NE.

Winning cures everything. It's easy to be a "team" player when your team is really really good.

kamakazi_kal
06-11-2009, 08:56 AM
when the Broncos are winning ballgames i'm gonna be bumping so many threads like this one, it's gonna make my head spin...

I hope I'm the first to admit I'm wrong about what has transpired this offseason.

TonyR
06-11-2009, 09:01 AM
Winning cures everything.

To an extent, yes. But it also creates some issues. When you consistently win the value of your better players goes up and they become harder to keep. You can't pay everybody. So maintaining a winning team is extremely difficult.

gyldenlove
06-11-2009, 09:03 AM
FYI, the Pats have "stars". Perhaps you've heard of Tom Brady? Randy Moss? Just to name a couple? The difference is that those players buy into the so called "team approach" and aren't above the team. Probably the reason Moss, who's been a headache everywhere else he's been, hasn't seemed to be a problem in NE.

How many super bowls have Moss won in New England? I wouldn't call him an integral part of that dynasty. Speaking of Moss, you may want to check into this mythical place called Minnesota, Moss was a happy camper there for a while too.

Sure, Brady is a star, but is he the face of the franchise? is he the one who makes statements on behalf of the team, does he have better connections to the owner than the coach and front office people?

misturanderson
06-11-2009, 10:19 AM
"In Denver, McDaniels’ sloppy handling of his interactions with Jay Cutler after an unsuccessful attempt to trade him at the start of free agency led to the loss of a franchise quarterback, largely because the 33-year-old coach was obsessed with demonstrating his unquestioned authority."

This quote is exactly why nobody, whose opinion of McDaniels isn't directly supported by it, is taking this story seriously. Stating, as fact, that the whole Jay Cutler ordeal was due to an obsession with demonstrating his unquestioned authority removes all credibility from the story.

Obviously McDaniels wouldn't have made as many concessions to get Cutler to come back before Bowlen finally forced the trade if he was "obsessed with demonstrating his unquestioned authority." This quote about the Broncos clearly demonstrates an ignorance about the facts and will alienate anyone who reads it and knows the true details, regardless of the legitimacy of the Clevland and KC angles.

We all know (even if some of us want to pretend it isn't the case so that McDaniels looks bad) that McD wanted Cutler to come back after the trade with the Patriots fell through. That the trade wasn't to show authority, but to get a player he was comfortable with and additional draft picks to improve the team.

How is it so hard to see why people would write this story off as sensationalist garbage when the only quote most people here truly care about is Bulls***?

TheReverend
06-11-2009, 10:30 AM
This quote is exactly why nobody, whose opinion of McDaniels isn't directly supported by it, is taking this story seriously. Stating, as fact, that the whole Jay Cutler ordeal was due to an obsession with demonstrating his unquestioned authority removes all credibility from the story.

Obviously McDaniels wouldn't have made as many concessions to get Cutler to come back before Bowlen finally forced the trade if he was "obsessed with demonstrating his unquestioned authority." This quote about the Broncos clearly demonstrates an ignorance about the facts and will alienate anyone who reads it and knows the true details, regardless of the legitimacy of the Clevland and KC angles.

We all know (even if some of us want to pretend it isn't the case so that McDaniels looks bad) that McD wanted Cutler to come back after the trade with the Patriots fell through. That the trade wasn't to show authority, but to get a player he was comfortable with and additional draft picks to improve the team.

How is it so hard to see why people would write this story off as sensationalist garbage when the only quote most people here truly care about is Bulls***?

Kind of like how there's no reason to bother reading your post past "anyone who knows the true details"

lex
06-11-2009, 10:34 AM
A while back I posted a transcript from Bowlens speech at the press conference where he fired Shanahan and highlighted many of his lies. It was full of them. Why do people constantly ignore the possibility that the lack of trust where Cutler was concerned was as much with Bowlen as anyone else? First you have all the lies at the press conference and then, who knows what else Pat told Jay in their own conversations. Then he hires a coach from a team that is notorious for playing mind games with players. So, first you have Pat and his lies and then you have his coach and his mind games. People act like the phone call to trade Cutler was the beginning. Im I the only one who thinks this is highly naive? I guess Pat gets a pass because he is an owner and people feel like he is above suspicion because he is an owner. Please.

TonyR
06-11-2009, 10:39 AM
Kind of like how there's no reason to bother reading your post past "anyone who knows the true details"

Other than that, however, I think the post was right on the money. I'd be curious to hear why you, or anyone, thinks otherwise.

TonyR
06-11-2009, 10:41 AM
Then he hires a coach from a team that is notorious for playing mind games with players. So, first you have Pat and his lies and then you have his coach and his mind games.

Can you elaborate on the concept bolded above? What do the Pats do that others don't?

lex
06-11-2009, 10:47 AM
Can you elaborate on the concept bolded above? What do the Pats do that others don't?


Im going to have to think about it. With you, I question whether or not its worth it and Ill show you specifically why.

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=2441091&postcount=104

TonyR
06-11-2009, 10:53 AM
Im going to have to think about it.

In other words, folks, he doesn't have an answer. He's pleading the Fifth.

lex
06-11-2009, 10:58 AM
In other words, folks, he doesn't have an answer. He's pleading the Fifth.

This was the same thing you did in the post I cited. Again, problems with reading comprehension.

No, in other words, you and your problems with reading comprehension arent in a position to demand answers. Because also, if I even bothered, I question whether or not youll actually be responding to something that was said or something you invented so that you can fashion a response.

lex
06-11-2009, 12:11 PM
BTW, kind of getting back to the orginal post, has it occurred to anyone that McDaniels and Bowlen have discussed a PR issue that goes back to the Cutler situation? If not for that, do you still think McDaniels acts the same either to the fans or the media? He did a lot of interviews when the Cutler thing was happening. Its not very consistent with someone from the Belicheat tree.

kamakazi_kal
06-11-2009, 12:31 PM
This was the same thing you did in the post I cited. Again, problems with reading comprehension.

No, in other words, you and your problems with reading comprehension arent in a position to demand answers. Because also, if I even bothered, I question whether or not youll actually be responding to something that was said or something you invented so that you can fashion a response.

Your awnser will be spun into a cutler lover or mcd hater bash.

scttgrd
06-11-2009, 12:48 PM
Does anyone know the situation with season tickets? I just heard an ad for Broncos club level season tickets being available. I thought they had a waiting list of 25,000 or so. Just kind of surprised me to hear.

footstepsfrom#27
06-11-2009, 02:11 PM
In other words, folks, he doesn't have an answer. He's pleading the Fifth.
I can answer that.

I think misturanderson is reading way to much into the language; here's the quote:

Originally Posted by GreatBronco16
"In Denver, McDaniels’ sloppy handling of his interactions with Jay Cutler after an unsuccessful attempt to trade him at the start of free agency led to the loss of a franchise quarterback, largely because the 33-year-old coach was obsessed with demonstrating his unquestioned authority."

When I read this in no way did I make the preposterous leap of logic that the writer is suggesting that McDaniels consciously schemed a way to directly throw down some kind of ego gauntlett to show Cutler who was boss in Denver. Only an utter nitwit would do that. To illustrate what probably happened, let's look at the most famous case in the NFL of ego gone awry...

Jerry Jones and Jimmy Johnson are at a party following their 2nd straight Lombardi. Jones (probably intoxicated) does something that Johnson takes offense at and considers a slight. Jones adds to the problem with a now famous quote:

"There are 500 guys out there who can coach this team to the Super Bowl. I could go hire Barry Switzer to do the same thing."

Does anyone in his right mind think Jones deliberately meant to drive Johnson out of Dallas, or that he had any inkling where his mouth would take him at the time? Of course not. He didn't plan it consciously but Jones ego none-the-less jumped off it's chain at an inopportune moment and the rest is history. It's probably the same thing here. Think about it like this for a minute; McDaniels is the son of a legendary high school football coach. He grew up at his knee watching his father snap orders to "big boys" (bigger than him) from the time he was old enough to be aware of what he was doing. He probably saw his dad as the ultimate authoritarian figure and wished to emulate him. This is not conjecture on my part, because I posted a story in here several weeks ago that went largely unnoticed. It was an interview with McD where he point blank says he's striving to use his dad as a model for how he coaches even today. Then fresh out of college, he starts landing his own gigs in an NFL organization also working on creating a legendary legacy. That organization has the ultimate ego running it...and a guy who we already know functions in this system where players are basically cogs.

In other words, I think the point Silver is making is that his ego got him into trouble unconsciously before he realized how serious the clash would become. I think he even qualified it that way with the words, "largely because" preceeding the statment. In other words, he's telling you this was the major influence, albeit an unconscious one, not some pre-designed master plan to engage Cutler in a game of high stakes chicken. That in fact is what nearly ALWAYS gets people into trouble when ego gets in the way. Two years ago I lost a significant business deal because the principle on the other side of the table from me got upset because I used her first name in front of a subordinate...even though we were both on a first name basis and sat on the same board together. Her ego dashed the project...you can bet she didn't plan it that way.

Look at how this post plays out according to the 4 defenses I listed in my earlier post:

This quote is exactly why nobody, whose opinion of McDaniels isn't directly supported by it, is taking this story seriously. Stating, as fact, that the whole Jay Cutler ordeal was due to an obsession with demonstrating his unquestioned authority removes all credibility from the story.
That's attack strategy #2; attack the writer's credibility or methodology.

Even if this single line were truly representing what MA says it is, that hardly removes ALL credibility from this story written by a senior sports writer at the top sports magazine in the country. Part of it? OK. All of it...no.

Here's another example of the defense mechanisms employed:
Obviously McDaniels wouldn't have made as many concessions to get Cutler to come back before Bowlen finally forced the trade if he was "obsessed with demonstrating his unquestioned authority."
This is defnese strategy #3; skewing or ignoring facts to distort the implications of the story. Start with the out of context quote lifting out the words "largely because", which define the entire perspective radically. Then look at the fact that MA offers assumptions as facts, focusing on the many "concessions" McDaniels made. This represents a subtle twist of terminology..."concessions" implies giving in to someone else, assuming the inferior position, accepting a less than hoped for response...we have no idea what was said to Jay, let alone that it involved "concessions". This is done to doctor the discussion with assumptions that result in distoring the implications of the story. Here's another example:
This quote about the Broncos clearly demonstrates an ignorance about the facts and will alienate anyone who reads it and knows the true details, regardless of the legitimacy of the Clevland and KC angles.
MA is suggesting that HE knows the "true details" and the sports writer who spent time interviewing numerous insiders is ignorant of the "facts". Only the truth is...NOBODY knows the "true details" other than Bowlen, McDaniels and Cutler, which is why he interviewed insiders in the first place; in order to dig behind the offical press statements. This an attempt to assault the writer's methodology, which in turn is an another attempt to remove credibility...defense strategy #2 again with elements of #3 mixed in (distorting the implications). More...
We all know (even if some of us want to pretend it isn't the case so that McDaniels looks bad) that McD wanted Cutler to come back after the trade with the Patriots fell through.
"We all KNOW"...really? How? Because we were told that? Why try to trade Jay in the first place if he's wanted so badly? (defense strategy #3)
That the trade wasn't to show authority, but to get a player he was comfortable with and additional draft picks to improve the team.
This contradicts the earlier statement that McD wanted him on the team. (#3 again)
How is it so hard to see why people would write this story off as sensationalist garbage when the only quote most people here truly care about is Bulls***?
Defense strategy #2 and #3...accuse the writer of "sensationalist garbage", (inflamatory wording) thus attacking credibility on the basis of motive...even though Silver has no history of sensationalism like some writers do...and then distort the facts by ascribing value ONLY to this singular quote. Frankly this is NOT the only quote I cared about...and in fact it was near the bottom of the totem pole for me. I was far more interested in what the players had to say than this obvious linguistic tool meant to contextualize facts rather than build a core theme, which is what MA thinks it was. So no...this is far from the only quote anyone cares about, nor is it sensationalistic garbage just because fans of the team say it is. It may or may not be completely accurate, but I see no motive here to sensationalize the story. This guy has no history of that, he has a reputation built on quality not generating controversy, and he's at the top of his profession. Where is the motive to do that? It doesn't exist.

And that about does it.

outdoor_miner
06-11-2009, 03:19 PM
A few points to footsteps:

1. In your lengthy explanation, you defend everything via the use of "largely because"... Yet, you completely ignore his use of loaded words: "obsessed with demonstrating his unquestioned authority." "Obsessed"... What does that tell you about the writer's intent? Silver sure isn't "impartial" here, and he is not trying to say that McDaniels unconsciously drove Cutler out as you did. He's painting the picture of McDaniels as a tyrant, just like Mangini.

2. Given that this is the only real reference to McDaniels in the entire story, I don't understand how you can not say that this article is essentially worthless from a Broncos fan perspective. Sure, it's an interesting article about Mangini and what an a-hole he is. However, this article only has one reference to anything Josh McDaniels has done to date, and that reference is completely and totally one sided, as evidenced by #1 above. I think that the article's tie-in to Pioli and McDaniels is a total stretch, and reflects the writer's attempt to find a new angle to the Mangini story (which has been reported pretty extensively of late).

3. You act like Silver's credibility is unassailable. What about Peter King, who has taken a decidedly pro-McDaniels/anti-Cutler approach in his telling of this story? I don't like his writing at all, but King is probably the most highly respected Football writer at SI. He has said that Cutler requested to be traded before McDaniels was even hired. King said that Bowlen has never been so offended as he was by Cutler. King has pretty clearly placed the blame at Jay Cutler's feet. So, we can play the credibility game with King and Silver. Who do you trust? In the end, it doesn't really matter... I just think Silver has really stretched to tie together McDaniels, Pioli, and Mangini in a nefarious plot to destroy football. (now I'm using loaded words. :thumbs: )

UltimateHoboW/Shotgun
06-11-2009, 03:26 PM
sorry i've been without internet for the past couple of weeks, but damn good article. it pinpoints what is exactly wrong with mcd.

here's another thing. why hasn't anybody truely questioned mcd about spygate? he was there when it happened.

rastaman
06-11-2009, 03:38 PM
Mike Tomlin?

Sure Mike Tomlin has won immediately.....but can't we all agree Tomlin's situation is an abberation!

In fact, Tomlin is a turn-key HC meaning everything was already set up and ready to go. Unlike McD, Tomlin didn't arrive in Steeler town and begin to build the Steelers in his own image!

Also, Tomlin managed to hit it off right with his FRANCHISE QB unlike McD. Tomlin adapted to the Steelers---not the Steelers adapting to an egotistical Tomlin. McDaniels situation is just the opposite of Tomlin in this regard.

Unless McD can prove otherwise, the glaring egotistical mistake the 33 year old unproven Rookie HC has made thus far was tinker and screw up his relationship with his Franchise Qb and let the QB coach/Offen. Coord leave as well. McD would have been better served to leave have left the Culter-Bates realtionship alone while he eased his own system in over a two year period.

McD may surprise.....but I doubt it.

footstepsfrom#27
06-11-2009, 04:11 PM
A few points to footsteps:

1. In your lengthy explanation, you defend everything via the use of "largely because"... Yet, you completely ignore his use of loaded words: "obsessed with demonstrating his unquestioned authority." "Obsessed"... What does that tell you about the writer's intent? Silver sure isn't "impartial" here, and he is not trying to say that McDaniels unconsciously drove Cutler out as you did. He's painting the picture of McDaniels as a tyrant, just like Mangini.
I never said he wasn't painting him as tyranical...maybe "authoritarian" is a better word. Absolutely he is...but that of itself does not make him partial rather than impartial. I think we can assume that upon completion of his investigation he had an opinion, otherwise he would not have written the article. But impartiality does not imply one keep a neutral position AFTER looking at evidence. We would want him to be impartial/neutral BEFORE investigating the story, but we can hardly expect that after he's accumulated his evidence. That's an expectation that is unreasonable, and no feature news or editorial writer...what he is...would do that. I think he used "obsessed" deliberately, because he believes he is obsessed with authority. You may not agree with his analysis, but his method of going about getting to that point is based on his research and the interviews he did with people inside these organizations...as it should be. I see nothing wrong with either his choice of language or his method since his conclusioins were supported by his evidence.
2. Given that this is the only real reference to McDaniels in the entire story, I don't understand how you can not say that this article is essentially worthless from a Broncos fan perspective.
I think I addressed this earlier. McDaniels has been on the job a few months....and the controversy we constantly address here occurred in his first few days. Obviously Silver had less information to work with on McDaniels in terms of the number of disgruntled players because Mangini has a longer track record. That hardly negates the ipresense of the close association here that impacts a story that is remarkably similar to Mangini's issues...one that occurred immediately when McDaniels came to Denver. As I noted, words like ego...pride...arrogance...trust...lies...these exact components that define everything he says about Mangini, have been the same issues debated in here. Silver documented both the Cutler and the Winters issue with the information he had available, and both those situations do match what people in the Jets and Browns organizations had to say about Mangini...thus he concludes...I think with solid grounds...that the Belichick influence is replicting itself in all these individual cases.
I think that the article's tie-in to Pioli and McDaniels is a total stretch, and reflects the writer's attempt to find a new angle to the Mangini story (which has been reported pretty extensively of late).
You have two rookies, one a coach and one a GM, and both get themselves into immediate controversy with star players, controversies that the players themselves say were about trust and respect. That is not a total stretch. You would have a stronger point on the writer's motives, if we were reading Woody Paige or someone with a history of trying to embellish things for effect. I see nothing wrong with the conclusions he arrived at based on how he went about gathering his evidence...personal interviews with numerous people inside the organizations.
3. You act like Silver's credibility is unassailable. What about Peter King, who has taken a decidedly pro-McDaniels/anti-Cutler approach in his telling of this story? I don't like his writing at all, but King is probably the most highly respected Football writer at SI. He has said that Cutler requested to be traded before McDaniels was even hired. King said that Bowlen has never been so offended as he was by Cutler. King has pretty clearly placed the blame at Jay Cutler's feet. So, we can play the credibility game with King and Silver. Who do you trust? In the end, it doesn't really matter... I just think Silver has really stretched to tie together McDaniels, Pioli, and Mangini in a nefarious plot to destroy football. (now I'm using loaded words. :thumbs: )
Peter King's a high profile, respected writer, but he didn't do the research on the Belichick coaching tree that went into this story. I'm not sure what King's sources were, but he obviously spoke to Bowlen since you just stated what Bowlen told him.

Something most people have ignored on Bowlen...and I think this story also implicates him....he has a recent history of saying some very questionable things outside the limelight of the press, including stuff that appears both decietful and missleading. Several weeks ago I posted a thread in here about the stuff I found out researching his court case with Edgar Kaiser and his personal financial position with the Broncos. The facts were eye opening...and it revealed a side of Bowlen most Bronco fans never see. Bowlen essentially has been functioning in his role as minority owner (not majority) with an extensive corporate shield around him based on a lot of very clever and meticulous efforts to hide the true nature of his financial position as well as other things related to the legal standing he's been functioning under with Kaiser's lawsuit. The lawsuit in fact, is the only reason any of this came to light. Suffice to say...I was struck by the lengths Bowlen's gone to in order to remain outside the glare of public scrutiny in his business dealings; one that seems designed to hide things. I saw a side of him emerge by looking at this stuff that suggests he's not only been functioning very close to the ethical boundaries of the league, but has painted a picture of himself that is not particuarly accurate, with the true nature of his issues represnting something not terribly flattering. This leads me to question other things he's said and done, including his role in this current mess.

TonyR
06-11-2009, 04:22 PM
1. In your lengthy explanation, you defend everything via the use of "largely because"... Yet, you completely ignore his use of loaded words: "obsessed with demonstrating his unquestioned authority." "Obsessed"... What does that tell you about the writer's intent? Silver sure isn't "impartial" here, and he is not trying to say that McDaniels unconsciously drove Cutler out as you did. He's painting the picture of McDaniels as a tyrant, just like Mangini.


EXACTLY! The point that McD did what he did because he was "obsessed with demonstrating his unquestioned authority" is ridiculous conjecture and renders the entire argument questionable at best. footsteps could have saved himself a lot of time by realizing this, but his own bias won't allow it.

footstepsfrom#27
06-11-2009, 04:31 PM
EXACTLY! The point that McD did what he did because he was "obsessed with demonstrating his unquestioned authority" is ridiculous conjecture and renders the entire argument questionable at best. footsteps could have saved himself a lot of time by realizing this, but his own bias won't allow it.
See post 161

outdoor_miner
06-11-2009, 05:51 PM
I think we can assume that upon completion of his investigation he had an opinion, otherwise he would not have written the article. But impartiality does not imply one keep a neutral position AFTER looking at evidence. We would want him to be impartial/neutral BEFORE investigating the story, but we can hardly expect that after he's accumulated his evidence.
......
You may not agree with his analysis, but his method of going about getting to that point is based on his research and the interviews he did with people inside these organizations...as it should be. I see nothing wrong with either his choice of language or his method since his conclusioins were supported by his evidence.
.......
I see nothing wrong with the conclusions he arrived at based on how he went about gathering his evidence...personal interviews with numerous people inside the organizations.

Good rebuttal post. Here's my problem, though... While it's clear that the writer did some research into the Mangini situation, he doesn't appear to have done any whatsoever on McDaniels. He and Pioli are basically thrown into the story haphazardly... Which would be fine if it was a side comment. But it wasn't. McDaniels and Pioli are both central to Silver's thesis about "Belichick Disciples". I mean - all Silver has done on McDaniels is briefly comment on a single story that has already been well documented. There are no new quotes. No evidence of any "research". Here is everything Silver said about McDaniels in the article:

Like two other Belichick disciples, new Kansas City Chiefs general manager Scott Pioli and neophyte Denver Broncos coach Josh McDaniels, Mangini has marked his arrival at a new organization this offseason by alienating established leaders while projecting a self-assuredness that borders on arrogance...
Whether Mangini, Pioli and McDaniels are able to pull it off will depend upon how many football games their respective teams win, something that often depends upon the men in uniform buying into the program...
In the meantime, in Cleveland, Kansas City and Denver, the new guys in charge seem to be consumed with winning mind games, a strategy I’m not so sure will serve them well over the long haul...
In Denver, McDaniels’ sloppy handling of his interactions with Jay Cutler after an unsuccessful attempt to trade him at the start of free agency led to the loss of a franchise quarterback, largely because the 33-year-old coach was obsessed with demonstrating his unquestioned authority...
The same goes for Pioli and Haley in K.C. and for McDaniels and his handpicked GM, Brian Xanders, in Denver...
I wonder whether Mangini, Pioli or McDaniels can attain the type of immediate success enjoyed last year in Atlanta under first-year general manager Thomas Dimitroff, another former Pats employee who approached his new job with a far less contentious management style.

If McDaniels is going to be included here... Where are the "insider quotes" that Silver managed to get about Mangini? Where is the unnamed Broncos player b****ing about McDaniels? Or a front office employee? Anything??? All he does is mention the Cutler situation, which had plenty of blame to go around. Furthermore, all we are hearing recently from the Broncos is positive news from the players. Call it "fluff" or whatever, but everyone really does seem to be on the same page. That is a far cry from the Browns, where there has been a steady stream of negative reports stemming from players and others inside the organization.

So - basically Silver claims McDaniels was "obsessed with demonstrating his unquestioned authority" based upon what has been previously published about the Cutler situation. That's it. To me, that indicates a guy who did not go into this story with an open mind, as you claim. He went in with an angle and an agenda, and I've read enough of those articles lately. :)

Lastly - let me just say that I understand your skepticism of McDaniels, and that the Cutler situation is a red flag. McDaniels almost certainly has a huge ego (as does any person that rises to the top of his profession), and that no doubt played a roll in Cutler leaving. However, all coaches have egos, and I just think this article is way premature. Mangini is a jerk. McDaniels is a ? Could it be revealed over time that he is an egomaniac? Sure. However, we could also find out the opposite. Like I said - it is way too early for this article.

watermock
06-11-2009, 06:48 PM
False, Mcdummy started off putting himself in the same powerfull position as Shanny, except firing the team that had produced the 2 best drafts in amore than a decade for a yes man in xanders.

Beyond the Cutler fiasco, he has Weigman, Marshall and Scheff, none are even in any sort of negotiation, he brought in 3 backs along with bonus' and then drafted another, RB, then traded a probabnle top 10 pick in a stronger draft for a nickle corner, and undersized 3/4 DE and Orton.

No, it's not too soon to question his decisions, and I'm still waiting for those articles defending his methods, besides the classic "team" mantra. Germany was a team too...

footstepsfrom#27
06-11-2009, 07:00 PM
Good rebuttal post. Here's my problem, though... While it's clear that the writer did some research into the Mangini situation, he doesn't appear to have done any whatsoever on McDaniels. He and Pioli are basically thrown into the story haphazardly... Which would be fine if it was a side comment. But it wasn't. McDaniels and Pioli are both central to Silver's thesis about "Belichick Disciples". I mean - all Silver has done on McDaniels is briefly comment on a single story that has already been well documented. There are no new quotes. No evidence of any "research".
I understand the point you're making, but I think the strength of the argument does not lay in the number of people he could quote as sources in Denver...obviously it would be highly unlikely that in the short time McD has been in Denver, you would find multiple off-the-record sources in the front office, and certainly not with players still on a honeymoon. That's an unreasonable expectation for a guy who just got here.

The strength of his argument lies in the uncanny similarites...actually that's not a strong enough word here...let's say IDENTICAL circumstances. These are not merely stories with the same themes...mistrust, disrespect, dishonesty, financial motives of owners...they're stories with exactly the same factual content. Pioli's dispute with Winters mirrors almost perfectly the same events expressed by Cribbs in Cleveland regarding how the owner went back on his promise to him after the new coach/GM arrived and then disputed his version in the press. The treatment of Winters by Pioli is virtually identical to that given Shaun Rogers (and Shaun Smith as well) in Cleveland by Mangini down to the fact that all these incidents involved high profile players considered team leaders and occured almost immediately when these guys got to their new teams. In that respect Cutler's situation also matches the other three on several fronts, with arrogance and a perceived sleight being the common themes, as well as a public denial of what happened by the coach expressed through the highly unusual step of Bowlen sending a personal letter to the season ticket holders.

On top of this, Bowlen's handling of the Goodmans is a near carbon copy of how Randy Lerner handled firing TJ McCreight. Both guys were riding a wave of favor with the team's owner until Mangini in Cleveland and McDaniels in Denver arrived, and both new hires appear to be the hand picked puppets of the new Belichick disciples. Both owners face financial situations that make the "Patriot Way" seem like a viable alternative to how they previously handled players while stll suggesting a winning strategy. Recall that when McDaniels was first hired, Bowlen trumped his strategic plan as the thing that sealed the deal...one wonders now if that plan had financial implications attached that promised to reduce player contractual expenses by letting established stars leave.

Even though it's true that the Cutler situation has been discussed to death, the overwhelming basis for those discussions has been rooted on simple he said/he said stuff...not a comparative breakdown on how issues are handled by people coming from the Belichick coaching pool. This is the element that makes this story rise beyond the same old/same old information already repeated in the Cutler saga. For obvious reasons the examples of corraboration in Denver and KC are severely limited due to the length of time these guys have been here, but the obvious paralells in both themes and the factual content of these supposedly unrelated events shares only one common denominator...all these guys are fruit from the saem tree...a tree that many commentators have previously noted has been wildly successful at the roots, but has so far surprisingly failed where the branches are. In this respect the Belichick tree seems different from the Landry or Walsh trees...where others have followed in their footsteps and won titles.

So what we have here apart from the number of complaints, is the same exact themes expressed, the same factual content and an approach that has called into question not just the coaches but the owners who've hired them and they're handling of personnel at both the player and managerial levels.

All this IMO adds up to enough coincidence that it seems legitimate to believe that there is evidence these issues are not mere random occurences unrelated to each other, but instead share common denominators expressed through the philosophical positions each of these guys approaches the game with...and that goes back to Belichick.

lex
06-11-2009, 07:05 PM
See post 161

See post 151.

GreatBronco16
06-11-2009, 07:19 PM
Well this is what it has come down to. Both sides now have to break down every single letter in every word and try to make it sound like it's one way or the other.

And Mock. Sober the hell up.

fdf
06-11-2009, 07:22 PM
Well this is what it has come down to. Both sides now have to break down every single letter in every word and try to make it sound like it's one way or the other.

Agreed. Very silly stuff.

outdoor_miner
06-11-2009, 07:29 PM
Agreed. Very silly stuff.

It is of critical import that we dissect every word and hash this out. The fate of Bronco Nation depends on it! :strong:

I'm bored, and it's fun to argue sometimes. I agree the topic is done to death. Oh well... Got me through the afternoon.

watermock
06-11-2009, 07:33 PM
Well this is what it has come down to. Both sides now have to break down every single letter in every word and try to make it sound like it's one way or the other.

And Mock. Sober the hell up.


STFU and read what Lex is trying once again to explain.

The Billicheat tree bears no fruit.

Look at ND. Look at NY. Look at Cleveland. Look at Spygate. Remember McDummy was assistant DB coach and scout during that time...

and waterboy.

And it's not a matter of breaking down every word. That's for lipreaders. Are you a lip reader?

tsiguy96
06-11-2009, 07:34 PM
ok. we should fire mcdaniels because other BB proteges (especially mangini hes a dick) did not work out. get him out now.

watermock
06-11-2009, 07:44 PM
Bowlen is too busy paying off Shanny's mansion.

TonyR
06-11-2009, 07:47 PM
Both sides now have to break down every single letter in every word and try to make it sound like it's one way or the other.


It is ridiculous. And be sure to note which "side" has somebody writing multiple 1,000+ word posts purporting to educate everyone on the merits of an article. That and which side mock and lex are on...

TonyR
06-11-2009, 07:50 PM
Bowlen is too busy paying off Shanny's mansion.

I have to admit, that's a good one.

lex
06-11-2009, 07:52 PM
STFU and read what Lex is trying once again to explain.

The Billicheat tree bears no fruit.

Look at ND. Look at NY. Look at Cleveland. Look at Spygate. Remember McDummy was assistant DB coach and scout during that time...

and waterboy.

And it's not a matter of breaking down every word. That's for lipreaders. Are you a lip reader?


Didnt exactly say that but when you have a profession that asks men to give you a lot, they have expectations in return and when you play mind games, it can easily blow up in your face. Ultimately it comes down to your own acumen more than mimicing someone who has the necessary acumen. Its akin to people thinking theyre Michael Jordan because they can dunk like him.

TheReverend
06-11-2009, 07:52 PM
I have to admit, that's a good one.

I lold irl

TonyR
06-11-2009, 08:10 PM
...and when you play mind games, it can easily blow up in your face...

I'll ask you again to explain. I'm honestly interested to know more about this. I'm not just playing mind games...

lex
06-11-2009, 08:14 PM
I'll ask you again to explain. I'm honestly interested to know more about this. I'm not just playing mind games...

Ask someone else who has been paying attention for the past 5 months.

footstepsfrom#27
06-11-2009, 08:14 PM
It is ridiculous. And be sure to note which "side" has somebody writing multiple 1,000+ word posts purporting to educate everyone on the merits of an article. That and which side mock and lex are on...
It was you who asked for an explanation...was it not? I assumed you wanted something more than additional smack.

My bad.

Archer81
06-11-2009, 08:38 PM
Wouldnt it be more accurate to call it the Parcells tree? Just sayin...


:Broncos:

TonyR
06-11-2009, 08:46 PM
I assumed you wanted something more than additional smack.


You're right, I did and I do. Agree or disagree, probably more often the latter, I often appreciate your contributions and approach. But in retrospect I think in this case you may be trying too hard to find a condemnation of McD in this article.

footstepsfrom#27
06-11-2009, 08:56 PM
Wouldnt it be more accurate to call it the Parcells tree? Just sayin...


:Broncos:
That's probably true. The Tuna kind of exemplfies the same thing...one reason I knew he and Jones wouldn't last.

~Crash~
06-11-2009, 09:16 PM
Originally Posted by telluride
Jesus, let it go #27. Either find another team to root for, or just admit that you're rooting against the Broncos. But this gleeful posting of every anti Denver article is getting tiresome.

I got this **** head on ignore because I so sick of his ****ing ass wine and moaning about firing Shanahan go **** your self pussy !

watermock
06-11-2009, 09:27 PM
Ignorance is bliss.

Archer81
06-11-2009, 10:07 PM
Originally Posted by telluride
Jesus, let it go #27. Either find another team to root for, or just admit that you're rooting against the Broncos. But this gleeful posting of every anti Denver article is getting tiresome.

I got this **** head on ignore because I so sick of his ****ing ass wine and moaning about firing Shanahan go **** your self p***Y !


As i was told several times, its apparently rude to attack the poster personally. Or some such BS.

:Broncos:

Archer81
06-11-2009, 10:08 PM
Ignorance is bliss.


Hello kettle.


:Broncos:

watermock
06-11-2009, 10:21 PM
http://www.orangemane.com/BB/image.php?u=3142&dateline=1243638920

Nice argument.

footstepsfrom#27
06-11-2009, 10:33 PM
I got this **** head on ignore because I so sick of his ****ing ass wine and moaning about firing Shanahan go **** your self p***Y !
I've never complained about firing Shanahan...I advocated doing it.

GreatBronco16
06-12-2009, 12:56 AM
STFU and read what Lex is trying once again to explain.

The Billicheat tree bears no fruit.

Look at ND. Look at NY. Look at Cleveland. Look at Spygate. Remember McDummy was assistant DB coach and scout during that time...

and waterboy.

And it's not a matter of breaking down every word. That's for lipreaders. Are you a lip reader?


Glad you think my post was directed to Lex when it wasn't. But the STFU is really a nice touch.

And a lip reader? Mock, get you two fingers that you use to type with out of the peanut butter jar. Seriously.

Archer81
06-12-2009, 01:18 AM
http://www.orangemane.com/BB/image.php?u=3142&dateline=1243638920

Nice argument.


Thanks. It covers a multitude of topics.


:Broncos:

alkemical
06-12-2009, 06:44 AM
Sure Mike Tomlin has won immediately.....but can't we all agree Tomlin's situation is an abberation!

In fact, Tomlin is a turn-key HC meaning everything was already set up and ready to go. Unlike McD, Tomlin didn't arrive in Steeler town and begin to build the Steelers in his own image!

Also, Tomlin managed to hit it off right with his FRANCHISE QB unlike McD. Tomlin adapted to the Steelers---not the Steelers adapting to an egotistical Tomlin. McDaniels situation is just the opposite of Tomlin in this regard.

Unless McD can prove otherwise, the glaring egotistical mistake the 33 year old unproven Rookie HC has made thus far was tinker and screw up his relationship with his Franchise Qb and let the QB coach/Offen. Coord leave as well. McD would have been better served to leave have left the Culter-Bates realtionship alone while he eased his own system in over a two year period.

McD may surprise.....but I doubt it.

What does age have to do with it? Jon Gruden and Mike Tomlin are two coaches who won Super Bowls in their 30's. And if you're going to counter with the experience card, just last season Ken Whisenhunt, Mike Smith, John Harbaugh, Tony Sparano, and the aforementioned Mike Tomlin did pretty well as first or second year head coaches. An unknown Andy Reid, the QB coach in Green Bay at the time, took over the Philadelphia Eagles in 1999 and has been very (although not ultimately) successful. I'm sure with a little effort I could come up with several more examples.

Try again.

he had some good examples

kamakazi_kal
06-12-2009, 08:30 AM
It is ridiculous. And be sure to note which "side" has somebody writing multiple 1,000+ word posts purporting to educate everyone on the merits of an article. That and which side mock and lex are on...

cmon, your just as bad .... you just picked the majority side.

vancejohnson82
06-12-2009, 08:33 AM
He's now our coach so .... all should be forgiven and actions go unquestioned.

No, no no....

I think we should spend hours upon hours talking about how he screwed up, how he is responsible for the downfall of the franchise, how he let go a shoe-in hall of famer, how he is alieanting the players, how he is being flippant to fans, how he is a cheater, how he is a liar, how he hasnt won anythign yet as a head coach, how he messed up the draft, how he couldnt score against eh Giants in the Super Bowl..

Did I cover it all? I'm sure theres more

worm
06-12-2009, 08:41 AM
I've never complained about firing Shanahan...I advocated doing it.

His comment was about Telluride....and all his whining for YEARS....

Having Telluride complain about somebody whining is irony at its finest.

elsid13
06-12-2009, 08:47 AM
His comment was about Telluride....and all his whining for YEARS....

Having Telluride complain about somebody whining is irony at its finest.

I almost as funny as watching Puppydog2144 (Wolf) defend the Head Coach.

fdf
06-12-2009, 11:20 AM
It is of critical import that we dissect every word and hash this out. The fate of Bronco Nation depends on it! :strong:



LOL

footstepsfrom#27
06-15-2009, 11:17 PM
Bump...seemed appropriate right now.

✡✡ JOSHUA ✡✡
07-01-2009, 01:43 PM
I like mcdaniels' system because it is built on jewish principles. when belichick went to new england in 2000, he adopted many best practices to football that robert kraft advised him to implement. kraft was a successful businessman using these best practices that were based on a foundation of jewish tenets and philosophies. and belichick passed them down to mcdaniels and he brought him here to denver! i am so happy!

NFLBRONCO
07-01-2009, 02:10 PM
I think this stuff brings up valid points on disciples of Belicheck. Let's also point out 90% of players prefer coaches who don't hold them accountable for their play or actions etc they prefer players coddle coaches so this is where this stuff comes from. Proves how soft and spoiled today's players are.

watermock
07-01-2009, 02:21 PM
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/jOKAkMDK5wc&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/jOKAkMDK5wc&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>.