PDA

View Full Version : Jason Whitlock: McDaniels' mishandling of Cutler might've destroyed a Super Bowl team


Pages : 1 [2]

hambone13
10-09-2009, 12:53 AM
Now I'm not bagging on you for this.... we're all fans here... but you gotta keep it in context. You're making too much out of it. Sure, Cutler has very good upside (whether he ever matures to this level remains to be seen) but he's never going to be an Elway, manning, Young, Marion, etc...

He also developed a very serious health condition.

Players get hurt, get traded, lose their mojo, retire etc...

Not all is lost here. If Orton doesn't work out then we'll find someone else. Someone tailor made for our system for the upcoming years.

The only thing that's going to suck is for faider, chefs and lightning bug fans watching our domination.

Mark it down!

The force is not strong w/ you.....

ZONA
10-09-2009, 01:08 AM
The biggest reason why this article is lame, is because there is nothing anybody can do about Cutler right now. It's fricken over and done with. I'm sure it will be brought up again even next year or the year after. If we get to the playoffs next year and lose in the championship game, it will be "only if they had Cutler", as if Cutler was a savy vet with playoff leadership..............don't make me laugh. Cutler is a good QB but he hasn't proven anything as far as post season play so to say this would have been a superbowl team with him is BS.

cutthemdown
10-09-2009, 01:33 AM
Not having a QB like Cutler might cost us being good enough to win Superbowl. But had Cutler stayed who knows if the teams defense would be playing like this. Seems like the Cutler thing brought the team together. For all we know a lot of the players didn't like Cutler and that was keeping the team from being a team.

Also it's debatable that it's Mcdaniels fault. A better thread may have been Cutlers antics and crying may have cost him playing for a Superbowl team.

In any even our Broncos are relevant again, we aren't a joke, people are talking about us, people are starting to worry when they play us.

It's time to smack NE in the friggin mouth and bloody there faces all up. We do that and the talking heads, fans of other teams, will wonder what happened to there little worlds. In there minds Broncos were a joke this yr, they can't figure out whats going on.

ZONA
10-09-2009, 02:05 AM
It's time to smack NE in the friggin mouth and bloody there faces all up.



THAT. F them up. Bloody that MF nose.

http://nbcsportsmedia2.msnbc.com/j/apmegasports/200808232010726258241-pf.hmedium.jpg

fontaine
10-09-2009, 05:35 AM
No
Josh brought in the players
Elvis said Josh personally helped him during the OTAs as far as transitioning from DE to OLB
Josh knows defense also, he started out on defense with the Patriots

Show me where Josh has GM duties. I thought Bowlen specifically got rid of Shanahan due to his GM power (in not firing Slowik) than Shanahan the coach.

If Josh purely/singlehandedly brought in every single player then yes he should get the credit but somehow I doubt it was all him.

But that's nice about Josh talking to Elvis in OTAs.

Meanwhile:

Oct 8th/2009
The Broncos defensive front, overseen by DC Mike Nolan, has featured considerable pre-snap movement, aimed at confusing blocking schemes and taking advantage of Denver's athleticism. "He's a mad scientist at cooking up fronts and schemes and being on us about how (we need to be) disciplined," end Le Kevin Smith said.

fontaine
10-09-2009, 05:47 AM
OOooohhhh wait, during the off-season, all I was told is that he was a tyrant and our GM was a figurehead. That's changed, now? Wow, you guys need to get your story straight. Suddenly now that we've done well in FA and the draft... McDaniels isn't involved.

Tell you want, figure out which it is... then we'll regroup and talk about it again.

Personally, I'd suspect it's like most organizations... where a good coach coordinates these things with his front office staff. Not rocket science.


"You guys need to get your story straight?"

I barely posted all offseason, in part to avoid the circle jerk arguments where you just label someone for having an opinion. So since know all about "us guys" why don't you tell me what my story is on McDaniels? I would be curious to know because I haven't fully made up my mind yet simply because we don't know the inner workings of his circle as to who made the decisions on personel/schemes etc and it's too soon to tell.

But yeah, you suspect, that's great. That's another way of saying "I don't know" but you have no problem giving him the credit right? So suspect away, you're bound to be right sooner or later.


Yea, I know. I've been defending Bowlen all off-season against the likes of yourself who chose to **** all over him.

Nice, I barely posted all off-season. Before the Cutler trade I basically said Bowlen shouldn't get involved personally in player dealings (and it turns out I was right) but there you go, somehow in Popps world I was sh*tting all over him.

I'm a fan of our coach and our team. I'm not pining after some dude who quit on the team and tearing down our own team in the process.

So, the lingo isn't the same.

Yeah good for you. I've openly said that the OL pass protection is more of a worry than Orton's play and I've defended him here but I guess what I really meant was "Please Jay come back"

Uhh

fontaine
10-09-2009, 05:52 AM
McDaniels may have started off the problem but it was Jay who finished it and did so very badly.

Whatever about the situation, I'm betting Cutler is looking at this defense now and wishes he hadn't acted like such a childish douche in wanting out of Denver.

Oh and as far as Fatlock is concerned, it's just blatantly stupid to be comparing Orton and Cutler. Orton may not be as talented but he's with a brand new coaching staff in a brand new offensive system and it takes time. That's something the ADD suffering idiots don't realize. The offense won't hit it's peak for a good while yet but if we're lucky and the players buy into the system they can really make a run in December.

I made this post a couple of pages ago, but apparently, according to Popps what I meant to say was that "I'm still pining after Jay."

Maybe TJ can setup a seperate forum here for posters like Popps that constantly go around with "Dumba$$" setting turned to ON. Where you can argue all day about who's a "Jay Gay" or a Josh Homer and can leave the rest of us to talk about, you know, football instead.

colonelbeef
10-09-2009, 06:56 AM
he is 100% correct.

The reason Royal is nonexistant this year is because Orton simply does not have the ability to hit the receivers in stride. Eddie isn't going to outleap or outrebeound people for the ball- he needs to be hit in space with room to dance.

Orton never hits anybody in stride. Ever.

colonelbeef
10-09-2009, 07:00 AM
I love the 4-0 start as much as anybody, but it's like the elephant in the room you can't ignore it. We would all love the have the killer defense and still have, Culter, Marshall and Royal hanging 40 on our opponents....

Yep.

Not only that, but they were all so young. Imagine if they had a few years together to grow. They'd be absolute monsters, the foundation of a modern dynasty.

colonelbeef
10-09-2009, 07:08 AM
Original hater argument: McD sucks, we're doomed, the franchise has been set back at least 10 years, the defense hasn't been addressed, we'll be lucky to win 3 games, we gave up a top 5 draft pick, total fail.

New hater argument: Maybe we've improved significantly but we could've been Super Bowl contenders if we didn't get rid of Jay Cutler.

In other words, wrong about almost everything but clinging to the one thing they may have been right about.

The franchise has no QB. Therefore, as difficult as franchise QBs are to come by, and considering the fact that we had a 26 year old Pro bowler in house, the Denver Broncos have been set back a significant amount of time by his loss.

The defense could have been and should have been improved- this is totally unrelated to losing the QB. Losing Cutler was still a horrible decision.

Is this really so difficult to grasp? Having the D improve and keeping Cutler are not two mutually exclusive scenarios. In fact, they have absolutely nothing to do with one another.

ColoradoDarin
10-09-2009, 07:26 AM
Kyle Orton is 17-3 in those situations.I'm actually suprised that Cutler has been in 23 games that the defense held the other team to 20 or less.

Wait a sec. The stat thrown out was that the Jay led Broncos were 20-3 when the D gave up 20 or fewer, right?

But he only had 17 wins here. Am I missing something?

Br0nc0Buster
10-09-2009, 07:27 AM
Show me where Josh has GM duties. I thought Bowlen specifically got rid of Shanahan due to his GM power (in not firing Slowik) than Shanahan the coach.

If Josh purely/singlehandedly brought in every single player then yes he should get the credit but somehow I doubt it was all him.

But that's nice about Josh talking to Elvis in OTAs.

Meanwhile:

Oct 8th/2009

Josh had a say in who was brought in
Why do you think guys like Lamont Jordan, Jabar Gaffney, Lonnie Paxton, etc... are on the team
It just so happens that Xanders thought those guys were the best out there?

No, Josh brought them in
I know what Pat said, but it looks like Josh is going to have a say in personell matters, again he was a scout, so its not like he has no experience in the area

Josh also said he watched EVERY single snap Kyle Orton ever took before they traded Cutler....every snap
Josh had a big influence on what coaches and players were added to this roster, it is obvious

TailgateNut
10-09-2009, 07:34 AM
he is 100% correct.

The reason Royal is nonexistant this year is because Orton simply does not have the ability to hit the receivers in stride. Eddie isn't going to outleap or outrebeound people for the ball- he needs to be hit in space with room to dance.

Orton never hits anybody in stride. Ever.


....another Cutlerian chimes in....It's a wonder you guys can talk with your lips attached to Cutlers ass 24-7.

No one knows if Cutler would have bought into the "no one is better than the rest of the team" concept. He is as "stuck" on himself as is Brady. All the stats and guesses of his future "greatness", are just that. GUESSES, just like my guess that the asswipe will not achieve the greatness his lovers predict.

Drek
10-09-2009, 07:35 AM
Show me where Josh has GM duties. I thought Bowlen specifically got rid of Shanahan due to his GM power (in not firing Slowik) than Shanahan the coach.

If Josh purely/singlehandedly brought in every single player then yes he should get the credit but somehow I doubt it was all him.


Josh did choose who to bring in while Xanders did his thing and negotiated the financials and managed the cap budgeting.

Bowlen didn't fire Shanahan because he wasn't willing to fire Slowik. He fired Shanahan because minutes after Slowik's D embarassed the entire organization and let us be the first team to lose a three game division lead with three weeks left in the season Shanahan stood in a presser and said he was not going to make a change at DC.

That, along with choking away the division, were just the last straws for Bowlen. He didn't fire Shanahan the GM or Shanahan the coach. He fired Shanahan the executive who had been running every single facet of this team with complete autonomy without even checking with Bowlen.

In short, Bowlen got sick of paying the bills for Mike Shanahan's football team.

Now McDaniels makes the personnel decisions, Xanders makes the financial ones, and both report to Bowlen who is actually in the loop.

McDaniels chose who to bring in across the board, including the coaches. Mike Nolan even said as much the day after he was hired in an interview on Sirius. He said McDaniels literally cold called him a week before he was officially the HC of the Broncos and said that if he got the HC position would Nolan be interested in working as his DC.

TailgateNut
10-09-2009, 07:36 AM
The franchise has no QB. Therefore, as difficult as franchise QBs are to come by, and considering the fact that we had a 26 year old Pro bowler in house, the Denver Broncos have been set back a significant amount of time by his loss.

The defense could have been and should have been improved- this is totally unrelated to losing the QB. Losing Cutler was still a horrible decision.

Is this really so difficult to grasp? Having the D improve and keeping Cutler are not two mutually exclusive scenarios. In fact, they have absolutely nothing to do with one another.


Hilarious!


You are a "Broken Record".

TheElusiveKyleOrton
10-09-2009, 07:45 AM
he is 100% correct.

The reason Royal is nonexistant this year is because Orton simply does not have the ability to hit the receivers in stride. Eddie isn't going to outleap or outrebeound people for the ball- he needs to be hit in space with room to dance.

Orton never hits anybody in stride. Ever.

You like fiction. I prefer fact.

Royal isn't getting open with the regularity that he did last season. With Marshall's re-emergence, we should see some more single coverage on Royal, which should let him separate. We shall see.

Right now, Royal is being blanketed, and they're not even throwing to him all that much because of the coverage on him. McDaniels has repeatedly said that this offense relies on hitting the open man, and they're not going to throw risky passes to get one guy involved.

Note: I have Eddie on my fantasy team, and I want him to do well from that perspective as well. I really don't think the blame is on Orton. Sorry.

chrisp
10-09-2009, 07:47 AM
the Broncos scored 21 or fewer points 8 TIMES in 2008. they scored 24 or fewer points 11 TIMES.

this whole idea that Cutler made the Broncos a potent offense is a myth. he was a human turnover machine, especially in the red zone. they could march up and down the field all day, but they couldn't score to save their life or their season.

This is sadly true. I don't hold with the notion that the offense was fine and all we needed was a defense. If that was the case, then why did we only score 10POINTS at HOME against the fecking FAIDERS????

That game was a big alarm bell for me after that fast start. Truth is, they often didn't "march up and down the field all day". All too often we went 3 and out multiple times untill finally making a big play where we either scored or got down to the goalline and that made the yardage stats respectable, but not so the time of posession.....

Dagmar
10-09-2009, 07:49 AM
Only a couple more pages until my 14 page prediction!

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_sIvWMQvGKyA/SVqqMqybPLI/AAAAAAAABxM/X264IvgZk8w/s400/emo+jay+cutler.jpg

http://sports.popcrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/bratty-jay-cutler-traded-to-chicago.jpg

I figured no one else is contributing anything new to the discussion, why should I!

http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/9486/jaycutlerbears.gif

BroncoInSkinland
10-09-2009, 08:03 AM
It's time to smack NE in the friggin mouth and bloody there faces all up. We do that and the talking heads, fans of other teams, will wonder what happened to there little worlds. In there minds Broncos were a joke this yr, they can't figure out whats going on.

I love the sentiment, but I don't think NE will do it, there will be another excuse, RB out, snow affecting their passing game, sand in Brady's mangina, you name it. SD in SD might do it, but probably we will hear about how SD always starts slow there. Bal in Bal might do it if Bal only has the questionable loss to NE. If there is one team that the commentators love to put the black hat on, it is the Ravens (somewhat deservedly), and I could see them using that as momentum to turn the Broncos into media darlings, at least for a week or to til they find something else to bag on.

fontaine
10-09-2009, 08:22 AM
he is 100% correct.

The reason Royal is nonexistant this year is because Orton simply does not have the ability to hit the receivers in stride. Eddie isn't going to outleap or outrebeound people for the ball- he needs to be hit in space with room to dance.

Orton never hits anybody in stride. Ever.

To be fair a lot of the pass plays were sideline routes, button hooks, and comebacks so it's not like it's a big majority of the pass plays called.

Also, in the 2nd half of the Dallas game, and I think the Raiders game the offense shifted to a power formation with three TEs sets over WR spreads so there simply haven't been a big volume of timing pass plays for WRs to catch and run in stride.

fontaine
10-09-2009, 08:25 AM
Josh had a say in who was brought in
Why do you think guys like Lamont Jordan, Jabar Gaffney, Lonnie Paxton, etc... are on the team
It just so happens that Xanders thought those guys were the best out there?

No, Josh brought them in
I know what Pat said, but it looks like Josh is going to have a say in personell matters, again he was a scout, so its not like he has no experience in the area

Josh also said he watched EVERY single snap Kyle Orton ever took before they traded Cutler....every snap
Josh had a big influence on what coaches and players were added to this roster, it is obvious

And I agree 100%. Having a say in players brought in is completely different than saying Josh brought those players and should get the credit. That's the only point I was making.

fontaine
10-09-2009, 08:29 AM
Josh did choose who to bring in while Xanders did his thing and negotiated the financials and managed the cap budgeting.

Bowlen didn't fire Shanahan because he wasn't willing to fire Slowik. He fired Shanahan because minutes after Slowik's D embarassed the entire organization and let us be the first team to lose a three game division lead with three weeks left in the season Shanahan stood in a presser and said he was not going to make a change at DC.

That, along with choking away the division, were just the last straws for Bowlen. He didn't fire Shanahan the GM or Shanahan the coach. He fired Shanahan the executive who had been running every single facet of this team with complete autonomy without even checking with Bowlen.

In short, Bowlen got sick of paying the bills for Mike Shanahan's football team.

Now McDaniels makes the personnel decisions, Xanders makes the financial ones, and both report to Bowlen who is actually in the loop.

McDaniels chose who to bring in across the board, including the coaches. Mike Nolan even said as much the day after he was hired in an interview on Sirius. He said McDaniels literally cold called him a week before he was officially the HC of the Broncos and said that if he got the HC position would Nolan be interested in working as his DC.

As far as coaches go, it wasn't as simple as McDaniels choosing who to bring in across the board. Didn't Bowlen say Turner and someone else would be kept? But yes, he got to hire the rest of his coaching staff.

And as far as individual players go, then no, I don't believe McDaniels has complete power, simply because no one outside the organization knows that definitively.

TonyR
10-09-2009, 08:31 AM
Show me where Josh has GM duties.

This is particularly comical because all offseason when people thought the personnel decisions were awful it was all McD's fault. Now that they don't look so awful McD doesn't get the credit. You really can't have it both ways.

rastaman
10-09-2009, 08:41 AM
Why doesn't anyone give Orton any love at all? No picks!!

The picks will come over the next 12 games! Lets just hope Ortey doesn't throw them in the 4th qtr when a TD or FG could have won the game. Remember the Defense is playing lights out.....but all it takes is for Orton to lose a couple of games due to costly turn overs (interceptions, fumbles, or incomplete) despite the defense keeping it close enough to win games....and now we have problems.

rastaman
10-09-2009, 08:49 AM
You like fiction. I prefer fact.

Royal isn't getting open with the regularity that he did last season. With Marshall's re-emergence, we should see some more single coverage on Royal, which should let him separate. We shall see.

Right now, Royal is being blanketed, and they're not even throwing to him all that much because of the coverage on him. McDaniels has repeatedly said that this offense relies on hitting the open man, and they're not going to throw risky passes to get one guy involved.

Note: I have Eddie on my fantasy team, and I want him to do well from that perspective as well. I really don't think the blame is on Orton. Sorry.

Well Royal is either being blanketed as you say b/c Marshall has yet to get untracked or its b/c Orton has the inability to complete passes to Royal when he's open! WR's in the NFL aren't opened for very long! The QB must have the ability to possess a hair trigger release to complete passes to their WR's in the NFL. Oh well we have 12 games left to see who's right in this regard.

TheReverend
10-09-2009, 09:02 AM
He lost a fumble in the Raiders game that we lost, so my point is still valid, but you're right, he didn't lose very many last year in games where we gave up more than 30. His only other lost fumble was against Jacksonville.

Touche. Missed that one putting it together, I guess. Still that leaves only 3 2 turnover games in defensive inept performances. Not sure how someone can hang that on 1-2 turnovers.

That's weird since one of the teams we beat on the road beat the packers at Lambeau the very next week and then they actually went and beat Pittsburgh right after that. Eerie.

You can say this, and I understand what you're saying, but you also know you don't even believe it. And I've called the Bengals my sleeper team since the draft.

spdirty
10-09-2009, 09:05 AM
It is what it is, and will be debated and argued till Cutler either retires or shows he isnt a franchise qb. I think after overreacting in week 1 Chicago fans have been pretty happy with his performance over there.

Orton though, he makes me miss Brian Griese. I can see why Grossman kept beating him out for starter over there.

We're 4-0 though so, lets just be happy about that right now and not think about Cutler. Thinking about Cutler just makes me want to punch another hole in my wall.

jhns
10-09-2009, 09:11 AM
I love how people try convincing everyone they are over jay but then get really upset every time he is mentioned. They act like 5 year olds and start in with name calling and constant crying. I know I get reall upset every time someone mentions something I don't care about..... Riiiight.

outdoor_miner
10-09-2009, 09:17 AM
As far as coaches go, it wasn't as simple as McDaniels choosing who to bring in across the board. Didn't Bowlen say Turner and someone else would be kept? But yes, he got to hire the rest of his coaching staff.

And as far as individual players go, then no, I don't believe McDaniels has complete power, simply because no one outside the organization knows that definitively.

First - McDaniels had complete authority over assistants. After Shanahan was fired, I'm 99% sure Bowlen said that none of the assistants were safe. They would all be evaluated. McD chose to bring back Turner, Dennison, Tuten, and Burns (I think).

Second - You can believe it if you want, but Xanders is NOT an all powerful personnel man. That is clear. He is absolutely relying on McDaniels for that. There was a lot of debate around here if McD had too much power at a young age. Xanders background is in finances/salary cap. There is no way he is 100% in charge of bringing in free agents. It's pretty clear that McD and Xanders work closely together on that.

rastaman
10-09-2009, 09:20 AM
Well, he chose the D coordinator, told him what style of D he wanted and helped pick an immediate transfer to the 3-4 (according to interviews with Nolan), was a big factor in Dawkins coming here (according to Dawkins), and worked with the GM to bring in the free agents who turned it around. What specifically are you looking for? Hill, Goodman, and Holliday are likely brought in thanks to his familiarity with them, as well as the Pat D lineman. I don't know who selected the D position coaches or put the emphasis on relearning the basics at camp, but since offense shows the same approach it is a fair bet he had some influence on it.

The factors you presented are all true. However, we can't dismiss the facts that a another aspect-major reason the Broncos are 4-0 is the fact that Shanny has left McDaniels an outstanding infrustructure to build upon and to win "Right Now With.

Shanny and the Goodmans drafted key impact players between 2005-2008, and those players are paying dividends right now. So far Doom has rachet up this Defense to another level not seen since the 2000 Ravens Defense.

Then there's Bmarsh who is a world beater and can change the fortune of any game on a single throw. You have Schefter at TE position who will be mis-match nightmare if utilized properly.

Now of course, there is Royal who is going thru a sophomre slump or an adjustment to a new Qb and offensive scheme.....but this guy is another Shanny drafted player who has a world of potential if utilized in the correct way. If you were to ask Royal who would he rather having passes thrown to him btwn Orton or Cutler......hands down Royal would privately say Cutler. B/c of Cutlers ability to get him the ball at the precise right moment in time.

Then you Hillis if utilized properly would add another dimension of mis-matches and offensive production if "Utilized" as FB-HB (running btwn and off tackle) or a receiving threat coming out of the backfield.....instead wasting time on ST's. Hillis is "RED ZONE" weapon.

And we haven't even mentioned the Shanny drafted and developed Offensive Line that is now coming into its own! You have Clady who is a top 5 left tackle in the league. All these guys were drafted by Shanhan and now the crops are finally bearing fruit!

You can't give all the credit to McDaniels and ignore what his predessor has already built upon. In two years from now lets see how 1st round picks Moreno and Ayers pan out for McDaniels b/c those were his guys.

Point is folks the positive or negative outcome of the 2009 season will not be squarely on McDaniel's shoulders.......Shanny will shoulder the success or failure of the 09 season as well even though he's no longer here.

BlaK-Argentina
10-09-2009, 09:26 AM
The picks will come over the next 12 games! Lets just hope Ortey doesn't throw them in the 4th qtr when a TD or FG could have won the game. Remember the Defense is playing lights out.....but all it takes is for Orton to lose a couple of games due to costly turn overs (interceptions, fumbles, or incomplete) despite the defense keeping it close enough to win games....and now we have problems.

You mean like Cutler would have? Because that's what he's still doing.

EDIT: Thought you were talking about the redzone. ;D

In any case, I can't believe people are discussing this topic. Cutler makes no team a Super Bowl team. We're not talking Manning here. He's just a guy with potential that still has to show he can do it.

fontaine
10-09-2009, 09:27 AM
This is particularly comical because all offseason people when people thought the personnel decisions were awful it was all McD's fault. Now that they don't look so awful McD doesn't get the credit. You really can't have it both ways.

I don't really care about the offseason or having it both ways because I wasn't posting much at all.

But go ahead, carry on with the he said, she said game. If on the other hand you want to talk about football then I'd welcome it.

jhns
10-09-2009, 09:27 AM
This is sadly true. I don't hold with the notion that the offense was fine and all we needed was a defense. If that was the case, then why did we only score 10POINTS at HOME against the fecking FAIDERS????

That game was a big alarm bell for me after that fast start. Truth is, they often didn't "march up and down the field all day". All too often we went 3 and out multiple times untill finally making a big play where we either scored or got down to the goalline and that made the yardage stats respectable, but not so the time of posession.....

That is not a very good argument. Look through the league and look at how many times all the other offenses put up 24 or more. Then look at the turnovers and field position the offenses that were better than us had. There aren't even many that did any better, especially if you take out defensive and special teams scores(which wouldn't change that stat for us).

Anyways, the facts don't support the rest of your argument. We had 4 red zone interceptions. That is 4 to many but it isn't close to the number of drives we had and isn't close to being all the time. We drove the furthest per drive in the league. We had the fewest punts per drive in the league. That would suggest we did more than one big play and even if it was that, we did better than everyone else at moving up and down the field. The 3 and out line you had is completely wrong though.

Did you also know our defense saw the fewest drives in the league and still was the worst defense this team has ever had? They had the 16th best starting field position while pur offense had the 32nd. That is a lot of room the offense made up and that is with a crappy special teams.

And again, that offense was all rookie-third year players and had injuries. You guys are still talking like experience means nothing. As if the offense wasn't going to improve on the mistakes as they grew together.

The last thing that makes that argument just sound dumb is our 8-8 record. If we had the franchises worst ever defense and a bad special teams, how did we win while also having a bad offense. What team has ever won half their games while playing bad in all 3 phases of the game? How does this make sense to anyone?

rastaman
10-09-2009, 09:30 AM
I'm not reading seven pages of current-era OM material, sorry.

However, enough's enough. Give the guy a ****ing break. Yeah, he mishandled the situation. He also turned the worst defense in the NFL into, so far, THE BEST.
I'm sure most of us have thought, "What if we had Cutler this year..." at some point, but at some point you have to forget about it.

You only forget about Culter when Orton or the next franchise Qb's performance make you! So far Orton hasn't done that yet. But this isn't to say that Kyle can't do so.

Drek
10-09-2009, 09:34 AM
As far as coaches go, it wasn't as simple as McDaniels choosing who to bring in across the board. Didn't Bowlen say Turner and someone else would be kept? But yes, he got to hire the rest of his coaching staff.

And as far as individual players go, then no, I don't believe McDaniels has complete power, simply because no one outside the organization knows that definitively.
Multiple reports from when FAs came in here was of them meeting with McDaniels first, then Xanders. So McDaniels was always the first face they saw (other than a limo driver) off the plane. That is rather telling.

All the Cutler trade works went through him, that has been mentioned in multiple reports.

He doesn't have complete power like Shanahan did. Now Bowlen does. But he's delegated all player personnel matters to McDaniels and all financial matters to Xanders. They both report to him, often, but they call the shots and Bowlen approves. The only time he's deviated from letting McDaniels do his thing is when they traded Cutler, and once he decided he wanted Cutler off his team he put it entirely in McDaniels hands again with regards to how that was to be accomplished.

As for Turner and Dennison, I'm sure if McDaniels wanted them gone they would have been. Not only have they stayed, but McDaniels has let them be intricately involved in our player selection process. Everyone on the football side gives input, we saw that in how Moreno talked about working out with Turner and Ayers talked about how much Martindale assured him he was their pick, but McDaniels pulls the trigger as long as the financials allow (Xanders end) and Bowlen doesn't have a particular issue with a move.

rastaman
10-09-2009, 09:37 AM
You mean like Cutler would have? Because that's what he's still doing.

EDIT: Thought you were talking about the redzone. ;D

In any case, I can't believe people are discussing this topic. Cutler makes no team a Super Bowl team. We're not talking Manning here. He's just a guy with potential that still has to show he can do it.

The season is still young....got 12 more games to go! Lets just hope the Shannahan drafted WR's and offensive line will allow the Kyle Orton Chinderella story to continue! :pimp:

jhns
10-09-2009, 09:40 AM
Multiple reports from when FAs came in here was of them meeting with McDaniels first, then Xanders. So McDaniels was always the first face they saw (other than a limo driver) off the plane. That is rather telling.

All the Cutler trade works went through him, that has been mentioned in multiple reports.

He doesn't have complete power like Shanahan did. Now Bowlen does. But he's delegated all player personnel matters to McDaniels and all financial matters to Xanders. They both report to him, often, but they call the shots and Bowlen approves. The only time he's deviated from letting McDaniels do his thing is when they traded Cutler, and once he decided he wanted Cutler off his team he put it entirely in McDaniels hands again with regards to how that was to be accomplished.

As for Turner and Dennison, I'm sure if McDaniels wanted them gone they would have been. Not only have they stayed, but McDaniels has let them be intricately involved in our player selection process. Everyone on the football side gives input, we saw that in how Moreno talked about working out with Turner and Ayers talked about how much Martindale assured him he was their pick, but McDaniels pulls the trigger as long as the financials allow (Xanders end) and Bowlen doesn't have a particular issue with a move.

I agree with this in regards to this issue. The only thing I would change is that I don't think Bowlen is doing any more than he did with Shanny. He used that same line of "I have final say on everything" the entire time Shanahan was here. He has also said that he doesn't know as much as he would need to about this stuff and pays coaches/GMs to guide his decisions. I think the power structure on the Broncos is exactly as it always has been.

fontaine
10-09-2009, 09:42 AM
Multiple reports from when FAs came in here was of them meeting with McDaniels first, then Xanders. So McDaniels was always the first face they saw (other than a limo driver) off the plane. That is rather telling.

All the Cutler trade works went through him, that has been mentioned in multiple reports.

He doesn't have complete power like Shanahan did. Now Bowlen does. But he's delegated all player personnel matters to McDaniels and all financial matters to Xanders. They both report to him, often, but they call the shots and Bowlen approves. The only time he's deviated from letting McDaniels do his thing is when they traded Cutler, and once he decided he wanted Cutler off his team he put it entirely in McDaniels hands again with regards to how that was to be accomplished.

As for Turner and Dennison, I'm sure if McDaniels wanted them gone they would have been. Not only have they stayed, but McDaniels has let them be intricately involved in our player selection process. Everyone on the football side gives input, we saw that in how Moreno talked about working out with Turner and Ayers talked about how much Martindale assured him he was their pick, but McDaniels pulls the trigger as long as the financials allow (Xanders end) and Bowlen doesn't have a particular issue with a move.

Yes, I agree with all of that. I don't think McDaniels has complete power either. That's why I can't agree with saying McDaniels should get the credit. It's been a collective effort and that's the way it should be rather than one guy calling all the shots.

Drek
10-09-2009, 10:06 AM
I agree with this in regards to this issue. The only thing I would change is that I don't think Bowlen is doing any more than he did with Shanny. He used that same line of "I have final say on everything" the entire time Shanahan was here. He has also said that he doesn't know as much as he would need to about this stuff and pays coaches/GMs to guide his decisions. I think the power structure on the Broncos is exactly as it always has been.

Except the closest he ever came to exercising it with Shanahan was telling Mike he wouldn't pay for a new practice facility less than half a decade after paying for the current one.

This off-season we saw Cutler call McDaniels a liar publicly multiple times. We saw his agent call McDaniels a liar multiple times. We watched them wage a full on PR war in the local media against McDaniels. No reaction. The day Cutler changes the song and dance from "this coach" to "this franchise" he gets calls from Bowlen, ignores them, and the next week he's gone. That was Bowlen exercising a high level of control and power in his own office.

It was his own words after firing Shanahan that he wanted control of his team back. He admits to having let Shanahan basically act like the owner of the Denver Broncos because Shanahan delivered two titles a decade ago. Maybe Bowlen did it because he thought Shanahan got complacent. Maybe he's trying to pad his own HOF credentials. Or maybe he just got sick of losing. But Bowlen himself has said he had almost no role in the previous regime, other than signing checks.

Yes, I agree with all of that. I don't think McDaniels has complete power either. That's why I can't agree with saying McDaniels should get the credit. It's been a collective effort and that's the way it should be rather than one guy calling all the shots.

So when a fund manager on Wall St. has a record setting year with other people's money he doesn't get any credit for it? He called the shots on how it was invested, he just used other people's funds and they entrusted him to get the job done.

McDaniels is at the top of the power pyramid as it applies to football personel. Xanders is at the top of a smaller pyramid focused on financial matters. McDaniels isn't a dictator and takes input from all his staff, but ultimately he calls the shots. Does Bowlen have veto power? Sure does, but he's only used it once.

McDaniels deserves the lion's share of the credit on all our FA acquisitions and our current 4-0 record. Nolan, Dawkins, and all the rest deserve a pretty good sized bit of credit for doing their jobs, but it was McDaniels who gave them the opportunity to do that here and outlined what their jobs would entail. Just like Bowlen deserves a lot of the credit for bringing McDaniels here to start with.

TonyR
10-09-2009, 10:32 AM
However, we can't dismiss the facts that a another aspect-major reason the Broncos are 4-0 is the fact that Shanny has left McDaniels an outstanding infrustructure to build upon and to win "Right Now With.

Shanny and the Goodmans drafted key impact players between 2005-2008, and those players are paying dividends right now.

I'm having a hard time figuring out a way to give Shanahan and the Goodmans more credit for the defensive turnaround then McD and Nolan, if that's what you're trying to say here. They certainly didn't leave an "outstanding" infrastructure on the defensive side of the football, which is why most of the former "infrastructure" was put on the curb and taken away in a garbage truck.

Mr.Meanie
10-09-2009, 12:47 PM
I'm quite sure if McD was 0-4 you wouldn't have any problem hanging that on him fully, rasta...

misturanderson
10-09-2009, 12:48 PM
Touche. Missed that one putting it together, I guess. Still that leaves only 3 2 turnover games in defensive inept performances. Not sure how someone can hang that on 1-2 turnovers.
I don't know, he did turn the ball over at least once in every one of those poor defensive performance and in the games that he didn't turn the ball over (only 3 games all year), we tended to do very well defensively (the worst defensive performance was giving up 20 to Atlanta who definitely averaged more than 20 per game last year). How much of this is on him is impossible to tell without going back and seeing how each of those turnovers affected momentum, etc. Was he throwing picks because we were behind and was forcing it? Possibly. Did his picks put the defense in a bad spot that eventually led to their giving up a ton of points? Also possible.

One thing I defeinitely felt like he needed to work on was how many picks or bad passes into coverage he threw when he really wasn't under much pressure. It seemed like he would have all day to throw and then would still throw a pick, usually on first or second down when throwing it away was a reasonable option. I don't think trying to make a play because he was playing from behind is a reasonable excuse for that kind of carelessness.

You can say this, and I understand what you're saying, but you also know you don't even believe it. And I've called the Bengals my sleeper team since the draft.

I really do believe that the bengals are a better team than the packers, absolutely. They've only beaten the bears, with a major assist from Cutler, and the worst team in the league. Their offensive line sucks and I don't think they are strong enough at any other position to make up for that in the long run. I mean they have 5 sacks to their opponents' 20. They also aren't making a very smooth transition to the 3-4 and have just a middle of the road defense (especially when they aren't being gifted the ball 4 times in a game).

Pittsburgh, I don't know about. I think Roethlisberger is a clutch QB, but he seems to be just average until the game is on the line. He also throws too many picks. Their running game and defense are not top 5 like they're used to either. If they can turn around their -4 turnover ratio, then they will definitely be better than the bengals. Until then, I think they could beat anyone if they play lights out, but I also think they could lose to anyone in the top 3/4 of the league if they don't play really well.

Also (just in case someone argues that we shouldn't have beaten the bungles), I believe that the Broncos outplayed the bengals that entire game and, had it not been for some major assists by the zebras, they wouldn't have even been a position to take the lead when they did. We won on a lucky play, but we didn't win because we were lucky. We won because we were clearly the better team that day.

TheReverend
10-09-2009, 01:23 PM
I really do believe that the bengals are a better team than the packers, absolutely. They've only beaten the bears, with a major assist from Cutler, and the worst team in the league. Their offensive line sucks and I don't think they are strong enough at any other position to make up for that in the long run. I mean they have 5 sacks to their opponents' 20. They also aren't making a very smooth transition to the 3-4 and have just a middle of the road defense (especially when they aren't being gifted the ball 4 times in a game).

Pittsburgh, I don't know about. I think Roethlisberger is a clutch QB, but he seems to be just average until the game is on the line. He also throws too many picks. Their running game and defense are not top 5 like they're used to either. If they can turn around their -4 turnover ratio, then they will definitely be better than the bengals. Until then, I think they could beat anyone if they play lights out, but I also think they could lose to anyone in the top 3/4 of the league if they don't play really well.

Also (just in case someone argues that we shouldn't have beaten the bungles), I believe that the Broncos outplayed the bengals that entire game and, had it not been for some major assists by the zebras, they wouldn't have even been a position to take the lead when they did. We won on a lucky play, but we didn't win because we were lucky. We won because we were clearly the better team that day.

Like I said, I picked the Bengals as my darkhorse play off team and have been pumping them up since the draft, so you don't have to sell me on them.

Your points about the Packers are good ones, however those OL injuries you're basing the majority of your point on didn't exist in week 1, and they were a significantly better team then.

And I'm very glad the game turned out the way it did in week 1, but I couldn't disagree with your bolded statement more. Whiffed FG snaps, rusty Carson Palmer, a ton of rookies and 2nd year players on key defensive spots, and it still took a miraculous 90 yard TD catch to win...

misturanderson
10-09-2009, 01:57 PM
And I'm very glad the game turned out the way it did in week 1, but I couldn't disagree with your bolded statement more. Whiffed FG snaps, rusty Carson Palmer, a ton of rookies and 2nd year players on key defensive spots, and it still took a miraculous 90 yard TD catch to win...

Yeah, but we played like crap too with a completely retooled team,a totally new coaching staff, an injured QB and our best WR having just come off a of a team-imposed suspension, so I don't think that is an excuse that they get to use, but we don't. Both teams have played much better since week 1.

And the only reason we weren't up AT LEAST 9-0 before they scored was because they got a phantom false start penalty and a phantom holding call to help them push us out of field goal range with the Orton sack. We should have been inside the 20 yard line with a 1st and 10, but because THEY got lucky, we had a 3rd and 16 from the 35 which they capitalized on with a 7 yard sack.

TheReverend
10-09-2009, 02:06 PM
Yeah, but we played like crap too with a completely retooled team,a totally new coaching staff, an injured QB and our best WR having just come off a of a team-imposed suspension, so I don't think that is an excuse that they get to use, but we don't. Both teams have played much better since week 1.

And the only reason we weren't up AT LEAST 9-0 before they scored was because they got a phantom false start penalty and a phantom holding call to help them push us out of field goal range with the Orton sack. We should have been inside the 20 yard line with a 1st and 10, but because THEY got lucky, we had a 3rd and 16 from the 35 which they capitalized on with a 7 yard sack.

Expand on your bolded sentence fragment please.

The defense was fantastic. So WHO played like crap?

Hint: His initials are KO, and he's the main topic of this thread.

ColoradoDarin
10-09-2009, 02:08 PM
Expand on your bolded sentence fragment please.

The defense was fantastic. So WHO played like crap?

Hint: His initials are KO, and he's the main topic of this thread.

And wasn't that the first time playing with a glove on the zipper finger?

misturanderson
10-09-2009, 02:16 PM
Expand on your bolded sentence fragment please.

The defense was fantastic. So WHO played like crap?

Hint: His initials are KO, and he's the main topic of this thread.

I was actually thinking more along the lines of players with the initials ER, BM, BS and PH (there may have been more, but these are the ones I remember specifically).

You know? The ones that all dropped at least one ball that hit them in the hands.

Kyle didn't play amazingly well (led receivers into hits a couple times and got a couple passes batted down at the line), but he sure as hell didn't get any help in that first game.

TheReverend
10-09-2009, 02:18 PM
I was actually thinking more along the lines of players with the initials ER, BM, BS and PH (there may have been more, but these are the ones I remember specifically).

You know? The ones that all dropped at least one ball that hit them in the hands.

Kyle didn't play amazingly well (led receivers into hits a couple times and got a couple passes batted down at the line), but he sure as hell didn't get any help in that first game.

:rofl:

Seriously?

misturanderson
10-09-2009, 02:18 PM
And wasn't that the first time playing with a glove on the zipper finger?

Yes.

misturanderson
10-09-2009, 02:20 PM
:rofl:

Seriously?

Yeah, seriously.

How much better would the offense have looked if Marshall hadn't let that 30 yard pass fly through his hands? Or if Hillis had caught that pass in the flat where he would have easily picked up the first down, but we ended up having to punt instead?

We had 7 ****ing dropped balls that game, at least 3 of which would have been drive-extending. Add to that our whopping 75 yards rushing at a fantastic 3.7 YPC. How do you put all of that on the QB?

TheReverend
10-09-2009, 02:24 PM
Yeah, seriously.

How much better would the offense have looked if Marshall hadn't let that 30 yard pass fly through his hands? Or if Hillis had caught that pass in the flat where he would have easily picked up the first down, but we ended up having to punt instead?

We had 7 ****ing dropped balls that game, at least 3 of which would have been drive-extending. How do you put all of that on the QB.

The Marshall ball I'll give you. Out of 7 drops a minimum of 5 were extremely off target, behind, into great coverage, etc.

We'll just have to agree to disagree because I apparently saw something entirely different that game.

outdoor_miner
10-09-2009, 02:32 PM
And wasn't that the first time playing with a glove on the zipper finger?

You are forgetting that only other teams have excuses for poor play. The fact that most people said it would be impossible for Orton to play due to his finger should be completely ignored.

skpac1001
10-09-2009, 04:04 PM
The factors you presented are all true. However, we can't dismiss the facts that a another aspect-major reason the Broncos are 4-0 is the fact that Shanny has left McDaniels an outstanding infrustructure to build upon and to win "Right Now With.

Shanny and the Goodmans drafted key impact players between 2005-2008, and those players are paying dividends right now. So far Doom has rachet up this Defense to another level not seen since the 2000 Ravens Defense.

Then there's Bmarsh who is a world beater and can change the fortune of any game on a single throw. You have Schefter at TE position who will be mis-match nightmare if utilized properly.

Now of course, there is Royal who is going thru a sophomre slump or an adjustment to a new Qb and offensive scheme.....but this guy is another Shanny drafted player who has a world of potential if utilized in the correct way. If you were to ask Royal who would he rather having passes thrown to him btwn Orton or Cutler......hands down Royal would privately say Cutler. B/c of Cutlers ability to get him the ball at the precise right moment in time.

Then you Hillis if utilized properly would add another dimension of mis-matches and offensive production if "Utilized" as FB-HB (running btwn and off tackle) or a receiving threat coming out of the backfield.....instead wasting time on ST's. Hillis is "RED ZONE" weapon.

And we haven't even mentioned the Shanny drafted and developed Offensive Line that is now coming into its own! You have Clady who is a top 5 left tackle in the league. All these guys were drafted by Shanhan and now the crops are finally bearing fruit!

You can't give all the credit to McDaniels and ignore what his predessor has already built upon. In two years from now lets see how 1st round picks Moreno and Ayers pan out for McDaniels b/c those were his guys.

Point is folks the positive or negative outcome of the 2009 season will not be squarely on McDaniel's shoulders.......Shanny will shoulder the success or failure of the 09 season as well even though he's no longer here.

I can't find anything to disagree with here. I think McDaniels has taken what he was given and done a terrific job as a head coach on D and special teams, as well as putting the finishing touches on the run game. He has also brought toughness and fighting spirit to the team as a whole. I think he should get his fair share of credit for it. I also think that if the offense does not improve, he should get just about all the blame for that. I love the no turnovers and renewed emphasis on the running game, but this team has way too much talent (yes even without Cutler) on offense to be average at scoring, and if and when it shows up in the loss column I have no problem with him taking the heat for it. With the turnover, new scheme and Orton's injury I am going to give him some time, but if we are not scoring better as the year goes on then he should get hammered for it.

fontaine
10-09-2009, 04:48 PM
McDaniels is at the top of the power pyramid as it applies to football personel. Xanders is at the top of a smaller pyramid focused on financial matters. McDaniels isn't a dictator and takes input from all his staff, but ultimately he calls the shots. Does Bowlen have veto power? Sure does, but he's only used it once.

McDaniels deserves the lion's share of the credit on all our FA acquisitions and our current 4-0 record. Nolan, Dawkins, and all the rest deserve a pretty good sized bit of credit for doing their jobs, but it was McDaniels who gave them the opportunity to do that here and outlined what their jobs would entail.

This is where we disagree. I see McDaniels on the sidelines talking to Orton and chewing him out when he took the sack that put us out of FG range against the Bengals. I see him talking to the OL, the offense etc.

It's Nolan that makes the defensive calls, when to blitz when not to, what to change up and so on. It's because the defense that we're on top and yes, Nolan should get most of the credit here.

Would you give Nolan any credit for Orton not throwing any ints or the rushing game doing so well? Why not? It's pretty much the same thing when you give McDaniels the lion's share of the credit for what has been a defensive 4-0.

Or to put it simply, Nolan has far lesser talent on Defense and has produced far greater results compared to the kind of talent and ability present in the offense under McDaniels and how they are producing.

Baba Booey
10-09-2009, 04:53 PM
Yawn

baja
10-09-2009, 05:00 PM
This is where we disagree. I see McDaniels on the sidelines talking to Orton and chewing him out when he took the sack that put us out of FG range against the Bengals. I see him talking to the OL, the offense etc.

It's Nolan that makes the defensive calls, when to blitz when not to, what to change up and so on. It's because the defense that we're on top and yes, Nolan should get most of the credit here.

Would you give Nolan any credit for Orton not throwing any ints or the rushing game doing so well? Why not? It's pretty much the same thing when you give McDaniels the lion's share of the credit for what has been a defensive 4-0.

Or to put it simply, Nolan has far lesser talent on Defense and has produced far greater results compared to the kind of talent and ability present in the offense under McDaniels and how they are producing.

Do you blame Slowick or Shanahan for the bad defense last year.

Mr.Meanie
10-09-2009, 05:10 PM
This is where we disagree. I see McDaniels on the sidelines talking to Orton and chewing him out when he took the sack that put us out of FG range against the Bengals. I see him talking to the OL, the offense etc.

It's Nolan that makes the defensive calls, when to blitz when not to, what to change up and so on. It's because the defense that we're on top and yes, Nolan should get most of the credit here.

Would you give Nolan any credit for Orton not throwing any ints or the rushing game doing so well? Why not? It's pretty much the same thing when you give McDaniels the lion's share of the credit for what has been a defensive 4-0.

Or to put it simply, Nolan has far lesser talent on Defense and has produced far greater results compared to the kind of talent and ability present in the offense under McDaniels and how they are producing.

I agree that Nolan should get a ton of credit for how the Defensive schemes are being run. The entire defensive coaching staff should get a ton of credit for how coached up the players are.

But McD is specifically responsible for bringing in most of the FA's that we hit on. Dawkins said McD is the one who convinced him to come over here. McD talked about how Goodman and Hill gave him problems in Miami, and he set out to get them in FA. Holliday came over because of Dawkins, LeKevin Smith came over via trade... the only one I can remember reading about that came directly because of Nolan is Fields.

McD also gets a ton of credit for practicing the team in pads, coaching up the secondary on the type of offensive looks they'll be seeing, and the absolutely insane amount of attention to detail in practice and preparation. Champ said they knew exactly what Romo was going to run the last 2 plays, he didn't even have to get the call in the huddle because they practiced it so much the week before.

I believe McD put together a tremendous coaching staff, and they all work as a team together... but he is a huge reason why the defense is doing so well right now. What's sad is if the Defense were playing terrible at this point... all the haters who want to give Nolan 100% of the credit would place the blame entirely on McDaniels.

DarkHorse30
10-09-2009, 05:11 PM
Did he just imply that McDaniels might of destroyed a superbowl team?

Everyone was picking this team to be dog**** throughout the offseason, now all of a sudden we are a Cutler away from winning the Superbowl?

its pretty clear this offense has room to improve, this offense is in no way a finished product

Ill wait until the end of the year before claiming Cutler would fix all our problems

Good post.

Look at how much Denver's "cutler-enabled" offense scored down the stretch last year.

Nearly enough to not look like the biggest chokers of all time.

The long and short of it is CUTLER and BRONCO TEAM were not really compatible, apparently in the baby's little mind. The guy didn't have his **** together enough to answer a phone call. The rest of "the saga" means diddly.... and here's why.

Let's say McD convinced the baby that he should stay. Miracle of miracles, ALL of DENVER'S troubles (and they were numerous, just look at a few games toward the end of last year).

BUT.....what happens in a month or two if the baby thinks that McD isn't giving him his bottle on time? or what if the baby thinks the other babies are getting more food? Or what if the baby thinks that JBates mixed a better bottle? I would venture that there would never be a guarantee that the baby would grow up.

I like the scenario we have much better. Team team team, it's fun to watch (even in cartoony uniforms :rofl:)

dextermilo
10-09-2009, 05:15 PM
To those hating on Orton (TheReverand) for the Bengals game. Here are all of Orton's throws from that game:

- Incomplete to Marshall, WR screen (hit him in the gut).

- Incomplete to Stokely. Pass interefence should have been called, still got his hands on it.

- Incomplete, deflected by Odom at line of scrimmage.

- Complete to Marshall over the middle. 8 yards.

- Complete to Gaffney. 1 yard.

- Incomplete deep to Marshall, through his hands.

- Complete to Jabar Gaffney off the deflection. 2 yards.

- Complete short to Eddie Royal. 7 yards.

- Incomplete to Royal. Batted away, double coverage.

- Complete to Buckhalter, screen play. 6 yards.

- Incomplete to Gaffney, deep out. Broken up.

- Complete to Royal, WR screen. 8 yards.

- Complete to Gaffney. 20 yards.

- Incomplete to Scheffler. Dropped (was on target and "caught" but ripped out by DB).

-- Begin 2nd Half --

- Complete to Marshall over the middle. 8-ish yards.

- Complete to Graham over the middle. 10 yards.

- Complete to Marshall over the middle. 4 yards.

- Incomplete to Hillis. Slightly behind him, hit both hands, should have caught it...

- Complete to Scheffler. 29 yards.

- Incomplete to Stokely. Dropped wtf.

- Complete to Hillis out of the backfield. 6 yards.

- Incomplete to Royal. Keith Rivers about kills him to knock the ball out.

- Complete to Marshall. 9 yards.

- Complete to Graham. 10 yards.

- Complete to Graham. 20 yards.

- Incomplete to Marshall down the sideline.

- Complete off the deflection to Stokely. 87 yards touchdown.


I can't find the numerous bad throws. Not exactly a great game from Orton. Overall poor performance from the WRs and Oline in this game.

The fact that we don't give him any props for playing hurt kinda bothers me...

BroncoInferno
10-09-2009, 05:37 PM
I think its more of a team inversion than anything.

Last year, great offense, horrid D

This year, mediocre offense, great D

I dunno, the ice cream analogy didn't really hit that home for me.

We did not have a great offense last season. 16th in scoring (24th in scoring over the final 13 games). 2nd worst team in committing turnovers. The offense was AT BEST mediocre.

TonyR
10-09-2009, 05:43 PM
...if we are not scoring better as the year goes on then he should get hammered for it.

Even if we're outscoring our opponents more often than not? Because the larger goal is to outscore your opponent, not just to score.

TonyR
10-09-2009, 05:45 PM
We did not have a great offense last season.

Agree. We had an offense that was inconsistent and very good at times, and better overall than this year's offense has been thus far, but it wasn't "great". While admitting that the offense has a lot of room for improvement, I'm more focused on the fact that this team is better than last year's.

Br0nc0Buster
10-09-2009, 06:15 PM
Our offense only averaged like 20 ppg after the first 3 games last year

Hopefully this year can be the reverse, start slow but finish strong

Bronco Yoda
10-09-2009, 06:32 PM
We ran up and down the field last year. Unfortunately we hit a brick wall in the red zone time and time again.

Guess which position on offense makes it's bread and butter on 3rd downs and in the red zone?

Without success in the Red Zone the rest really doesn't add up to too many wins.

Popps
10-09-2009, 06:57 PM
We did not have a great offense last season. 16th in scoring (24th in scoring over the final 13 games). 2nd worst team in committing turnovers. The offense was AT BEST mediocre.

Our offensive production is virtually unchanged from last year... except we seem to score when we need to and we're not sloppy with the ball.

Odd, considering we lost a "franchise" quarterback, huh?

TailgateNut
10-09-2009, 07:06 PM
Our offensive production is virtually unchanged from last year... except we seem to score when we need to and we're not sloppy with the ball.

Odd, considering we lost a "franchise" quarterback, huh?


It the Kryptonite effect the red zone had on ****ler/

skpac1001
10-09-2009, 07:22 PM
Even if we're outscoring our opponents more often than not? Because the larger goal is to outscore your opponent, not just to score.

I would say that if we are outscoring our opponents when it counts, then it won't be an issue and he is doing his job as a head coach. But as far as his job as offensive coordinator, I do expect more from this offense then just an average level of scoring. Maybe I am misjudging the talent, but it seems like we have a top 5 O line, a top 5-10 WR corps, a top 5 TE corps, a top 5-10 rb/fb crew. Orton is controversial, I have faith in him, but either way when you look at our good d, special teams, and stocked offense I think scoring out of the top 12 is underachieving. I imagine McDaniels would agree completely, judging by his offseason comments. I think he wants domination in all three phases.

Drek
10-09-2009, 08:49 PM
This is where we disagree. I see McDaniels on the sidelines talking to Orton and chewing him out when he took the sack that put us out of FG range against the Bengals. I see him talking to the OL, the offense etc.

It's Nolan that makes the defensive calls, when to blitz when not to, what to change up and so on. It's because the defense that we're on top and yes, Nolan should get most of the credit here.

Would you give Nolan any credit for Orton not throwing any ints or the rushing game doing so well? Why not? It's pretty much the same thing when you give McDaniels the lion's share of the credit for what has been a defensive 4-0.

Or to put it simply, Nolan has far lesser talent on Defense and has produced far greater results compared to the kind of talent and ability present in the offense under McDaniels and how they are producing.
Nolan didn't hire McDaniels, McDaniels hired Nolan, for starters.

Next up McDaniels requested that Nolan basically scrap the read and react 3-4 he ran in Baltimore and San Fran to instead go towards a more aggressive Patriots and Steelers modeled attacking defense.

Then McDaniels went out and got Brian Dawkins, Andra Davis, Andre Goodman, Renaldo Hill, etc. to staff Nolan's defense.

To top it all off, Elvis Dumervil (that guy with 8 sacks through four games) has even said that McDaniels worked with him on how to transition from 4-3 DE to 3-4 OLB.

That is ignoring the obvious importance of his head coach philosophy of having the team practice in pads so they where used to hitting and sound on the fundamentals of tackling (which a surprising number of teams in this league suck at).

But hey, if you think of football as such a shallow, one dimensional game that the guy who actually makes the play call, regardless of how it all got put together, is the guy most responsible then I can see where you're coming from. Its obtuse, bordering on naive, but its a viewpoint I guess.

As for the comment that the D has far less talent than the O, Champ is proving again this season that he's still the biggest game changer on our team. Dumervil is looking like he's giving Clady a run for #2, with Dawkins and DJ both looking like potential all-pros. The D has plenty of talent now that we cast out all of the Shanahan/Slowik pets and retreads and brought guys who're hungry and know how to win to take their jobs. In fact, its probably a deeper unit than the offense at this point as a whole.

Dagmar
10-09-2009, 08:54 PM
Creeping up on the fourteen pages I predicted. Sigh.

Circle Orange
10-10-2009, 03:25 AM
Wait.. you preferred cutler's stylish losing to Plummer's ugly wins?

What was it.. 42-18 compared to 17-20? I'd had enough of Cutler after the loss to red hot (7 consecutive losses) Buffalo at home. Couldn't believe I froze my ass off to watch nothing but three and outs after the first quarter in a game that meant going to the playoffs or not. Bad Jay wasn't interested.

I'm amazed at the determination that Cutler = Super Bowls, despite there being no evidence whatsoever.

Orton is erratic because his feet are too dang big...when he pushes off to throw, them flapjacks knock him off stride. Thus, the ball sails. ROFL!

JJJ
10-10-2009, 03:45 AM
I'm amazed at the determination that Cutler = Super Bowls, despite there being no evidence whatsoever.

Orton is erratic because his feet are too dang big...when he pushes off to throw, them flapjacks knock him off stride. Thus, the ball sails. ROFL!

Do you really need much proof for the blatantly obvious. Put a 4500 yard 25 TD guy on the field with this defense you have managed to pull out of thin air (I am actually very impressed so far) and you got a pretty scary team.

Like Elway Cutler's pick totals will go down over his career as he learns to keep the six shooter holstered more often.

fontaine
10-10-2009, 04:08 AM
I agree that Nolan should get a ton of credit for how the Defensive schemes are being run. The entire defensive coaching staff should get a ton of credit for how coached up the players are.

But McD is specifically responsible for bringing in most of the FA's that we hit on. Dawkins said McD is the one who convinced him to come over here. McD talked about how Goodman and Hill gave him problems in Miami, and he set out to get them in FA. Holliday came over because of Dawkins, LeKevin Smith came over via trade... the only one I can remember reading about that came directly because of Nolan is Fields.

McD also gets a ton of credit for practicing the team in pads, coaching up the secondary on the type of offensive looks they'll be seeing, and the absolutely insane amount of attention to detail in practice and preparation. Champ said they knew exactly what Romo was going to run the last 2 plays, he didn't even have to get the call in the huddle because they practiced it so much the week before.

I believe McD put together a tremendous coaching staff, and they all work as a team together... but he is a huge reason why the defense is doing so well right now. What's sad is if the Defense were playing terrible at this point... all the haters who want to give Nolan 100% of the credit would place the blame entirely on McDaniels.

This is exactly right. The credit should be shared across the coaching staff rather than attributed all or mostly to McDaniels.

Great point on Nolan bringing in Fields who's argueably the most important player we brought in the offseason.

fontaine
10-10-2009, 04:19 AM
Nolan didn't hire McDaniels, McDaniels hired Nolan, for starters.

Next up McDaniels requested that Nolan basically scrap the read and react 3-4 he ran in Baltimore and San Fran to instead go towards a more aggressive Patriots and Steelers modeled attacking defense.

Then McDaniels went out and got Brian Dawkins, Andra Davis, Andre Goodman, Renaldo Hill, etc. to staff Nolan's defense.

To top it all off, Elvis Dumervil (that guy with 8 sacks through four games) has even said that McDaniels worked with him on how to transition from 4-3 DE to 3-4 OLB.

That is ignoring the obvious importance of his head coach philosophy of having the team practice in pads so they where used to hitting and sound on the fundamentals of tackling (which a surprising number of teams in this league suck at).

But hey, if you think of football as such a shallow, one dimensional game that the guy who actually makes the play call, regardless of how it all got put together, is the guy most responsible then I can see where you're coming from. Its obtuse, bordering on naive, but its a viewpoint I guess.


So because I disagree with your point of view it makes mine shallow and naive?

And for the record neither you or anyone else here knows exactly who comes up with the weekly gameplan on defense, who scouts the other teams QBs etc. Instead of guessing, suspecting or just talking out loud I choose to just say the credit should be shared across the board because no one here, no matter how much posturing they do, know the day to day in Dove Valley.

But I guess that makes me shallow and naive.

Drek
10-10-2009, 05:52 AM
So because I disagree with your point of view it makes mine shallow and naive?

And for the record neither you or anyone else here knows exactly who comes up with the weekly gameplan on defense, who scouts the other teams QBs etc. Instead of guessing, suspecting or just talking out loud I choose to just say the credit should be shared across the board because no one here, no matter how much posturing they do, know the day to day in Dove Valley.

But I guess that makes me shallow and naive.

See, that is why your take is shallow and naive.

Rather than give credit to the head coach who picks all the players, staff, and chose the entire direction this organization was going to move in you think it should be shared across the board.

We DO know what has gone on in Dove Valley for quite a while now, that is what the press covers, what these guys talk about in interviews, etc.. There has been more than enough coverage of this new regime to know how the power structure is set up.

McDaniels hired Nolan, thats an outright fact because I heard Nolan say as much literally the day he was hired on Sirius, where he was hosting a radio show at the time. He said that McDaniels called him, even though the two of them had never even met before, and started talking defensive strategy. At the end of the call he asked Nolan if he'd be his DC, should he get the Broncos job.

We have comments by players themselves saying that McDaniels is hands on, even with the defense.

We have the smack you in the face obvious difference between what Nolan is currently running here, and what he had installed in both Baltimore and San Francisco prior to coming here. Just so happens this system is shockingly more like the attacking Belichick/Parcells defense than the read and react defense Nolan had ran previously.

McDaniels designed the car, bought all the parts for it, and has been as involved as anyone in its assembly. But the guy who ran the exhaust pipes deserves just as much credit, right? Spread it around equally and all that.

If we where 0-4 I'm sure a lot of people on here wouldn't think we should spread it around. I know I wouldn't. If we where 0-4 it falls directly at McDaniels feet, he got to build the organizational structure and bring in the players he wanted, so long as Bowlen approved (which he has almost 100%). So it should cut both ways.

This mindset of "spread it around" and labeling coordinators and players responsible and not accepting that an organization starts from the head coach down is what lead to Shanahan's teams underperforming for the last three seasons. Guys like Winborn, Webster, McCree, Manuel, etc. sucking it up last year and celebrating tackles after a 1st down? That is 100% on Shanahan for building a complacent, candy assed organization. Bob "short bus" Slowik's defense? 100% on Shanahan for not handling his staff. Cutler's inability to play like the franchise player he claims to be down the stretch, year in and year out? 100% Shanahan again.

If you're a head coach in the NFL and you have power over player personnel decisions then you are 100% accountable for everything that happens on the field because you can always make a change, or did make a change that had a positive (or negative) effect.

The Moops
10-10-2009, 06:05 AM
I'm Jason Whitlock. I only write shock articles. The stupider the better . . .

Dagmar
10-10-2009, 07:19 AM
these are all brand new arguments that have never been on the mane before!

rastaman
10-10-2009, 07:24 AM
these are all brand new arguments that have never been on the mane before!

chill out Rusty!!!:wiggle:

baja
10-10-2009, 07:25 AM
So because I disagree with your point of view it makes mine shallow and naive?

And for the record neither you or anyone else here knows exactly who comes up with the weekly gameplan on defense, who scouts the other teams QBs etc. Instead of guessing, suspecting or just talking out loud I choose to just say the credit should be shared across the board because no one here, no matter how much posturing they do, know the day to day in Dove Valley.

But I guess that makes me shallow and naive.

You never answered my question, who gets credit for last year's defense

Shanahan or Slowick?

chex
10-10-2009, 07:32 AM
The factors you presented are all true. However, we can't dismiss the facts that a another aspect-major reason the Broncos are 4-0 is the fact that Shanny has left McDaniels an outstanding infrustructure to build upon and to win "Right Now With.

Shanny and the Goodmans drafted key impact players between 2005-2008, and those players are paying dividends right now. So far Doom has rachet up this Defense to another level not seen since the 2000 Ravens Defense.

Then there's Bmarsh who is a world beater and can change the fortune of any game on a single throw. You have Schefter at TE position who will be mis-match nightmare if utilized properly.

Now of course, there is Royal who is going thru a sophomre slump or an adjustment to a new Qb and offensive scheme.....but this guy is another Shanny drafted player who has a world of potential if utilized in the correct way. If you were to ask Royal who would he rather having passes thrown to him btwn Orton or Cutler......hands down Royal would privately say Cutler. B/c of Cutlers ability to get him the ball at the precise right moment in time.

Then you Hillis if utilized properly would add another dimension of mis-matches and offensive production if "Utilized" as FB-HB (running btwn and off tackle) or a receiving threat coming out of the backfield.....instead wasting time on ST's. Hillis is "RED ZONE" weapon.

And we haven't even mentioned the Shanny drafted and developed Offensive Line that is now coming into its own! You have Clady who is a top 5 left tackle in the league. All these guys were drafted by Shanhan and now the crops are finally bearing fruit!

You can't give all the credit to McDaniels and ignore what his predessor has already built upon. In two years from now lets see how 1st round picks Moreno and Ayers pan out for McDaniels b/c those were his guys.

Point is folks the positive or negative outcome of the 2009 season will not be squarely on McDaniel's shoulders.......Shanny will shoulder the success or failure of the 09 season as well even though he's no longer here.

Shanny & Goodman drafted "key impact players" from 2005-2008? :giggle: Why don't you tell the rest of us who from the 2005 draft class is having a "key impact" for us this year.

And great job in trying to make us believe we're winning because of Royal and Scheffler even though they've been quiet ths year.

Noticed you didn't mention any of our RB's as a reason, since they were all brought in by McDaniels, but you threw in Hillis as a factor. Well, not really, since all he's done is **** up so far, but we'll give him and Shanahan credit for 4-0 since he has the potential to contribute.

I am so enjoying watchng people like you, Whitlock, ESPN, etc. spend all your time in major spin mode because your best laid plans of piling on McDaniels have gone astray. Up until the Cincy game, we were the worst team in the league, with the worst offseason ever, so now that we've already surpassed the "experts" win total, the sore-asses have to rationalize why we're winning, as if that wasn't the plan all along.

Point is folks the positive or negative outcome of the 2009 season will not be squarely on McDaniel's shoulders.......Shanny will shoulder the success or failure of the 09 season as well even though he's no longer here

Bull****. You and the others were so busy telling us how the loss of Shanahan/Cutler would bring about rapture, you never once said that Shanny would shoulder any failure for this year, as much as you and others were hoping for it. Everyone was frothing at the mouth in such a frenzy over McDaniels, and how he set the franchse back for decades, I never once heard Shanahan's name in those rants, and by all means, prove me wrong by showing me any posts that backs up what you said.

baja
10-10-2009, 07:33 AM
See, that is why your take is shallow and naive.

Rather than give credit to the head coach who picks all the players, staff, and chose the entire direction this organization was going to move in you think it should be shared across the board.

We DO know what has gone on in Dove Valley for quite a while now, that is what the press covers, what these guys talk about in interviews, etc.. There has been more than enough coverage of this new regime to know how the power structure is set up.

McDaniels hired Nolan, thats an outright fact because I heard Nolan say as much literally the day he was hired on Sirius, where he was hosting a radio show at the time. He said that McDaniels called him, even though the two of them had never even met before, and started talking defensive strategy. At the end of the call he asked Nolan if he'd be his DC, should he get the Broncos job.

We have comments by players themselves saying that McDaniels is hands on, even with the defense.

We have the smack you in the face obvious difference between what Nolan is currently running here, and what he had installed in both Baltimore and San Francisco prior to coming here. Just so happens this system is shockingly more like the attacking Belichick/Parcells defense than the read and react defense Nolan had ran previously.

McDaniels designed the car, bought all the parts for it, and has been as involved as anyone in its assembly. But the guy who ran the exhaust pipes deserves just as much credit, right? Spread it around equally and all that.

<B>If we where 0-4 I'm sure a lot of people on here wouldn't think we should spread it around. I know I wouldn't. If we where 0-4 it falls directly at McDaniels feet, he got to build the organizational structure and bring in the players he wanted, so long as Bowlen approved (which he has almost 100%). So it should cut both ways. </b>

This mindset of "spread it around" and labeling coordinators and players responsible and not accepting that an organization starts from the head coach down is what lead to Shanahan's teams underperforming for the last three seasons. Guys like Winborn, Webster, McCree, Manuel, etc. sucking it up last year and celebrating tackles after a 1st down? That is 100% on Shanahan for building a complacent, candy assed organization. Bob "short bus" Slowik's defense? 100% on Shanahan for not handling his staff. Cutler's inability to play like the franchise player he claims to be down the stretch, year in and year out? 100% Shanahan again.

If you're a head coach in the NFL and you have power over player personnel decisions then you are 100% accountable for everything that happens on the field because you can always make a change, or did make a change that had a positive (or negative) effect.

Something I would like to know is did McD agree with trading Cutler or was that primarily Bowlen's decision.

orangemonkey
10-10-2009, 07:55 AM
I would say that if we are outscoring our opponents when it counts, then it won't be an issue and he is doing his job as a head coach. But as far as his job as offensive coordinator, I do expect more from this offense then just an average level of scoring. Maybe I am misjudging the talent, but it seems like we have a top 5 O line, a top 5-10 WR corps, a top 5 TE corps, a top 5-10 rb/fb crew. Orton is controversial, I have faith in him, but either way when you look at our good d, special teams, and stocked offense I think scoring out of the top 12 is underachieving. I imagine McDaniels would agree completely, judging by his offseason comments. I think he wants domination in all three phases.

This is spot-on but, where we may be top 5 across the board, Orton is mediocre at best. He is the weakest link on this "TEAM". Also, the four opponents we face from here on out are far better than the 4 we have just faced. Don't get too caught up in "we've scored when it counts" because the foes ahead will do a much better job defending our run/pass than what we've seen. We need a much more proficient offense to beat New England and San Diego. Way too early for me to call the Broncos a top tier team.

Drek
10-10-2009, 08:16 AM
Something I would like to know is did McD agree with trading Cutler or was that primarily Bowlen's decision.

I'm pretty strongly of the belief that McDaniels was going to make Cutler report and if necessary suspend him, like he did with Marshall.

From day one of the ordeal Cutler effectively called McDaniels a liar publicly multiple times. He made a demand for special treatment which he openly acknowledges, and McDaniels refused. He kept on with that attitude for several weeks and the organization's stance was "Jay Cutler is our quarterback, he's not going anywhere".

Then when the tune changes from "I can't trust McDaniels" to "I can't trust the organization" Bowlen gets involved. Less than a week after that Cutler is traded.

You could see it as Cook and Cutler playing Bowlen, or Bowlen putting his own pride before the team. But you can also see it as Bowlen not wanting that kind of attitude on his football team.

broncofan7
10-10-2009, 08:17 AM
This is spot-on but, where we're we may be top 5 across the board, Orton is mediocre at best. He is the weakest link on this "TEAM". Also, the four opponents we face from here on out are far better than the 4 we have just faced. Don't get too caught up in "we've scored when it counts" because the foes ahead will do a much better job defending our run/pass than what we've seen. We need a much more proficient offense to beat New England and San Diego. Way too early for me to call the Broncos a top tier team.

It's the Quarterback. Kyle 'MY BAD' Orton

Irish Stout
10-10-2009, 08:26 AM
Something I would like to know is did McD agree with trading Cutler or was that primarily Bowlen's decision.

No one will ever know. But a big thing when people try and say its McD's fault Cutler is gone, thats simply not true. Bowlen ultimately got fed up with Cutler and was the one who demanded he get traded.

As much as I think we have a better team without a moody Cutler (and I may be wrong) I always think its a problem for the owners to get too involved with their teams.... look at crazy Al and Jerry Jones' success while fiddling with their teams.

baja
10-10-2009, 08:43 AM
I'm pretty strongly of the belief that McDaniels was going to make Cutler report and if necessary suspend him, like he did with Marshall.

From day one of the ordeal Cutler effectively called McDaniels a liar publicly multiple times. He made a demand for special treatment which he openly acknowledges, and McDaniels refused. He kept on with that attitude for several weeks and the organization's stance was "Jay Cutler is our quarterback, he's not going anywhere".

Then when the tune changes from "I can't trust McDaniels" to "I can't trust the organization" Bowlen gets involved. Less than a week after that Cutler is traded.

You could see it as Cook and Cutler playing Bowlen, or Bowlen putting his own pride before the team. But you can also see it as Bowlen not wanting that kind of attitude on his football team.

Good deductions, I think you have the most likely scenario.

I wonder if we will ever really know the whole story.

lex
10-10-2009, 08:52 AM
Shanny & Goodman drafted "key impact players" from 2005-2008? :giggle: Why don't you tell the rest of us who from the 2005 draft class is having a "key impact" for us this year.

And great job in trying to make us believe we're winning because of Royal and Scheffler even though they've been quiet ths year.

Noticed you didn't mention any of our RB's as a reason, since they were all brought in by McDaniels, but you threw in Hillis as a factor. Well, not really, since all he's done is **** up so far, but we'll give him and Shanahan credit for 4-0 since he has the potential to contribute.

I am so enjoying watchng people like you, Whitlock, ESPN, etc. spend all your time in major spin mode because your best laid plans of piling on McDaniels have gone astray. Up until the Cincy game, we were the worst team in the league, with the worst offseason ever, so now that we've already surpassed the "experts" win total, the sore-asses have to rationalize why we're winning, as if that wasn't the plan all along.



Bull****. You and the others were so busy telling us how the loss of Shanahan/Cutler would bring about rapture, you never once said that Shanny would shoulder any failure for this year, as much as you and others were hoping for it. Everyone was frothing at the mouth in such a frenzy over McDaniels, and how he set the franchse back for decades, I never once heard Shanahan's name in those rants, and by all means, prove me wrong by showing me any posts that backs up what you said.

3/5 of our OLine came from those draft classes. And while youre trashing Hillis, perhaps you should remember that he's the only full back on the roster because Larsen was injured in year 1. How he's been used doesnt mean he cant play. Good luck trying to sell the idea that Hillis is a scrub. BTW, Hillis was taken in the 7th round. Marshall was taken in the 4th round. Marcus Thomas has played a lot. So even the 07 draft class was big. Plus Doom was taken in the 4th round that year. He is the tip of the spear on defense. Right now, some teams are playing almost 10 million a year to get the kind of production he is providing. We have him at the price of taking someone in the 4th round.

Kaylore
10-10-2009, 10:38 AM
I think the fact that we're having so much success is just a further indictment of Shanahan as a GM. Why was it so easy to fix the defense? Why couldn't Shanahan evaluate personnel on that side of the ball? Why didn't he want to get rid of Slowick? Why did he fire Coyer? Why couldn't he get the special teams to improve in a decade?

How was McDaniels able to rebuild all this in a few months, and Shanahan wasn't able to put it together in a decade of trying?

And Chex has it right. The Shanahan group is trying to have it both ways. If we win, then it was because Shanahan "has left McDaniels an outstanding infrustructure to build upon" which by the way is completely bogus because every aspect of how the team is run, the practices, food they eat, conditioning, how they study, entire coaching staff except for two and several of the starters on game day, has all changed completely. Even day to day policies have been changed.

My favorite is how Taco has taken to saying anything good that we do "Shanahan would have done that too" and anything that is perceived to be a problem "Shanahan wouldn't have done that."

So you have a group that wants to dismiss everything that is going right as a product of holdover from Shanahan to try and re-imagine all this as McDaniels riding on Shanny's coat tails. And everytime a good decision is made Shanahan would have obviously done that because it's good, and all bad decisions, Shanahan wouldn't have made.

Essentially, just like last year and the quality of the team we fielded, many people are still in complete denial.

rbackfactory80
10-10-2009, 10:56 AM
People around here have often made the claim if Shanahan brought in Nolan we would have kept Cutler and we would have had a very solid team. The entire problem with Shanahan was he had his hands all over the defense as with every other part of this organization and wouldn't allow coordinators like Bates and Coyer do their job.

baja
10-10-2009, 11:04 AM
I think the fact that we're having so much success is just a further indictment of Shanahan as a GM. Why was it so easy to fix the defense? Why couldn't Shanahan evaluate personnel on that side of the ball? Why didn't he want to get rid of Slowick? Why did he fire Coyer? Why couldn't he get the special teams to improve in a decade?

How was McDaniels able to rebuild all this in a few months, and Shanahan wasn't able to put it together in a decade of trying?

And Chex has it right. The Shanahan group is trying to have it both ways. If we win, then it was because Shanahan "has left McDaniels an outstanding infrustructure to build upon" which by the way is completely bogus because every aspect of how the team is run, the practices, food they eat, conditioning, how they study, entire coaching staff except for two and several of the starters on game day, has all changed completely. Even day to day policies have been changed.

<b>My favorite is how Taco has taken to saying anything good that we do "Shanahan would have done that too" and anything that is perceived to be a problem "Shanahan wouldn't have done that." </b>

So you have a group that wants to dismiss everything that is going right as a product of holdover from Shanahan to try and re-imagine all this as McDaniels riding on Shanny's coat tails. And everytime a good decision is made Shanahan would have obviously done that because it's good, and all bad decisions, Shanahan wouldn't have made.

Essentially, just like last year and the quality of the team we fielded, many people are still in complete denial.

LOL I like how he states his opinion as if it is universal fact.

misturanderson
10-10-2009, 11:20 AM
This is spot-on but, where we may be top 5 across the board, Orton is mediocre at best. He is the weakest link on this "TEAM". Also, the four opponents we face from here on out are far better than the 4 we have just faced. Don't get too caught up in "we've scored when it counts" because the foes ahead will do a much better job defending our run/pass than what we've seen. We need a much more proficient offense to beat New England and San Diego. Way too early for me to call the Broncos a top tier team.

Have you watched the chargers play this year? You think they are a "top tier team"? That game may end up being easier than the Cincy or Dallas games with how that team has played so far. If we can keep Gates and Jackson under control while keeping Sproles from getting huge gains, it won't even be close. Their defense is mediocre at best, their run defense and run offense are nearly non-existent this year. Dumervil has more sacks so far than their whole team.

How can anyone still be rationalizing the chargers as a top half of the league team? They've only beaten the raiders (barely) and the 1-3 dolphins for ****'s sake. Oh but they lost to pitt and bmore in close games so they must be good still. "Lost" is the key word in that statement and the games were only close on the scoreboard.

They start slow and end fast, that killed us the last few years when we started fast and ended really slow on a good day. This year is different, we aren't that team any more.

Kaylore
10-10-2009, 11:24 AM
LOL I like how he states his opinion as if it is universal fact.

"Shanahan totally would have drafted Moreno. It just makes sense. Never mind he's never used a first overall pick on a running back, or he values timed speed above football playing skills and Knowshon was comparatively slow in his combine times. And forget that with the heat on his buddy Slowick, he would have been pressured to take a player like Orakpo at that spot instead. And please forget the fact that Shanahan also felt the 'offense was there' and so needed no upgrade. Despite all evidence to the contrary, I think Shanahan would have taken Moreno because that was a good decision and any good decision made this season Shanahan would have also made, because it was good."
/Taco

:flush:

misturanderson
10-10-2009, 11:31 AM
To those hating on Orton (TheReverand) for the Bengals game. Here are all of Orton's throws from that game:

- Incomplete to Marshall, WR screen (hit him in the gut).

- Incomplete to Stokely. Pass interefence should have been called, still got his hands on it.

- Incomplete, deflected by Odom at line of scrimmage.

- Complete to Marshall over the middle. 8 yards.

- Complete to Gaffney. 1 yard.

- Incomplete deep to Marshall, through his hands.

- Complete to Jabar Gaffney off the deflection. 2 yards.

- Complete short to Eddie Royal. 7 yards.

- Incomplete to Royal. Batted away, double coverage.

- Complete to Buckhalter, screen play. 6 yards.

- Incomplete to Gaffney, deep out. Broken up.

- Complete to Royal, WR screen. 8 yards.

- Complete to Gaffney. 20 yards.

- Incomplete to Scheffler. Dropped (was on target and "caught" but ripped out by DB).

-- Begin 2nd Half --

- Complete to Marshall over the middle. 8-ish yards.

- Complete to Graham over the middle. 10 yards.

- Complete to Marshall over the middle. 4 yards.

- Incomplete to Hillis. Slightly behind him, hit both hands, should have caught it...

- Complete to Scheffler. 29 yards.

- Incomplete to Stokely. Dropped wtf.

- Complete to Hillis out of the backfield. 6 yards.

- Incomplete to Royal. Keith Rivers about kills him to knock the ball out.

- Complete to Marshall. 9 yards.

- Complete to Graham. 10 yards.

- Complete to Graham. 20 yards.

- Incomplete to Marshall down the sideline.

- Complete off the deflection to Stokely. 87 yards touchdown.


I can't find the numerous bad throws. Not exactly a great game from Orton. Overall poor performance from the WRs and Oline in this game.

The fact that we don't give him any props for playing hurt kinda bothers me...

TheRev was admittedly wasted during that game and right after it was over he came on here and told us why we were no better than last year on defense with his "we gave up 13 points because they get 3 for the fumbled snap and 3 extra points for not being coached by McD and because I was too drunk" thread. He was then shot down by everyone, deservedly, and decided to take a break from the mane to pout it out. I wouldn't take his opinion of that game too seriously.

baja
10-10-2009, 11:31 AM
"Shanahan totally would have drafted Moreno. It just makes sense. Never mind he's never used a first overall pick on a running back, or he values timed speed above football playing skills and Knowshon was comparatively slow in his combine times. And forget that with the heat on his buddy Slowick, he would have been pressured to take a player like Orakpo at that spot instead. And please forget the fact that Shanahan also felt the 'offense was there' and so needed no upgrade. Despite all evidence to the contrary, I think Shanahan would have taken Moreno because that was a good decision and any good decision made this season Shanahan would have also made, because it was good."
/Taco

:flush:

LOL I challenged his take too but he never got back to me.

Soon TJ is going to be a huge Josh McD fan you can see he is maneuvering that way now but it's all good and this is going to be one hell of a fun season no matter how we do in the win / loss column.

RhymesayersDU
10-10-2009, 11:37 AM
"Shanahan totally would have drafted Moreno. It just makes sense. Never mind he's never used a first overall pick on a running back, or he values timed speed above football playing skills and Knowshon was comparatively slow in his combine times. And forget that with the heat on his buddy Slowick, he would have been pressured to take a player like Orakpo at that spot instead. And please forget the fact that Shanahan also felt the 'offense was there' and so needed no upgrade. Despite all evidence to the contrary, I think Shanahan would have taken Moreno because that was a good decision and any good decision made this season Shanahan would have also made, because it was good."
/Taco

:flush:

ROFL

/thread

Classic.

TonyR
10-10-2009, 11:49 AM
So you have a group that wants to dismiss everything that is going right as a product of holdover from Shanahan to try and re-imagine all this as McDaniels riding on Shanny's coat tails. And everytime a good decision is made Shanahan would have obviously done that because it's good, and all bad decisions, Shanahan wouldn't have made.


If we lose to the Pats the "Shanahan always beat NE" drum will be beat to death. lex is already laying the groundwork. Never mind what NE did to us last year without Brady.

Spider
10-10-2009, 11:49 AM
preposterous ...............

HAT
10-10-2009, 11:55 AM
0-0: Denver is going to suck
1-0: Denver got lucky
2-0: Denver hasn't played anyone
3-0: see 2-0
4-0: They'd be better with Cutler


Is that about the gist of it?

baja
10-10-2009, 12:05 PM
6. 5-0 Brady was horrible today 6 sacks. Unbelievable. Todd Light is really slow. .....but you got to give credit to Denver for playing hard especially in the 4 quarter.

rastaman
10-10-2009, 12:08 PM
Shanny & Goodman drafted "key impact players" from 2005-2008? :giggle: Why don't you tell the rest of us who from the 2005 draft class is having a "key impact" for us this year.

DWill had he not been murdered would have been an impact player today....he was after all drafted in 2005!

And great job in trying to make us believe we're winning because of Royal and Scheffler even though they've been quiet ths year.

Sure both have been quite thus far......but the minute they start producing and helping out, what you will hear is how McD and Orton has made them better etc.....Point is, should either Royal or Schefter break out their slumps all we will hear is how we must re-sign Shanahan drafted players! By the way, Royal was doing much better in Shanny's system by this time last year.

Noticed you didn't mention any of our RB's as a reason, since they were all brought in by McDaniels, but you threw in Hillis as a factor. Well, not really, since all he's done is **** up so far, but we'll give him and Shanahan credit for 4-0 since he has the potential to contribute.

Hillis is a Red Zone impact player. He's not an impact on Special Teams. However, lets hope McD doesn't have to endure losing all his RB's to season ending injuries this year! Then we will hear the excuse makers come out the wood work! With Buckhalters injury, this should allow Hillis to be utilized in his rightful position a little more.

I am so enjoying watchng people like you, Whitlock, ESPN, etc. spend all your time in major spin mode because your best laid plans of piling on McDaniels have gone astray. Up until the Cincy game, we were the worst team in the league, with the worst offseason ever, so now that we've already surpassed the "experts" win total, the sore-asses have to rationalize why we're winning, as if that wasn't the plan all along.

I'm enjoying watching bias CHUMPS like you spend all your time ignoring that it is Mike Nolan's DEFENSE as to why the Broncos are 4-0 and the fact that Doom who was drafted by Shanny has elevated the pass rush.



Bull****. You and the others were so busy telling us how the loss of Shanahan/Cutler would bring about rapture, you never once said that Shanny would shoulder any failure for this year, as much as you and others were hoping for it. Everyone was frothing at the mouth in such a frenzy over McDaniels, and how he set the franchse back for decades, I never once heard Shanahan's name in those rants, and by all means, prove me wrong by showing me any posts that backs up what you said.

Be that as it may.....the facts are its Shanny's Offensive Line that is responsible for opening up the running attack and allowing Orton to be a high maintenance incubator lead foot QB and still realize success. This AIN'T McD's Offensive line that he has DRAFTED and Developed.

fontaine
10-10-2009, 12:16 PM
You never answered my question, who gets credit for last year's defense

Shanahan or Slowick?

Credit? How would you assign credit for that awful defense. I think both Shanahan and Slowick share the responsibility. Slowick because his players were so awful at tackling and gap discipline and that's on coaching. Shanahan because he brought in the players and I'm not 100% sure but didn't Shanahan take a more active role when it was clear our defense sucked?

TonyR
10-10-2009, 12:31 PM
A little bit OT, but did anyone see this quote from Champ?

"I tell you what, just being under Josh McDaniels for a few months now, I mean he's a guy that is going to have you as prepared as you can be for a game, and that's something that throughout my 11 years I haven't had a lot of," Broncos cornerback Champ Bailey said. "I've had some great coaches, including [Mike] Shanahan, but [McDaniels] is definitely one-of-a-kind in the way that he approaches the game."

baja
10-10-2009, 12:33 PM
A little bit OT, but did anyone see this quote from Champ?

"I tell you what, just being under Josh McDaniels for a few months now, I mean he's a guy that is going to have you as prepared as you can be for a game, and that's something that throughout my 11 years I haven't had a lot of," Broncos cornerback Champ Bailey said. "I've had some great coaches, including [Mike] Shanahan, but [McDaniels] is definitely one-of-a-kind in the way that he approaches the game."

How could that be "off topic" ;D

Kaylore
10-10-2009, 12:36 PM
A little bit OT, but did anyone see this quote from Champ?

"I tell you what, just being under Josh McDaniels for a few months now, I mean he's a guy that is going to have you as prepared as you can be for a game, and that's something that throughout my 11 years I haven't had a lot of," Broncos cornerback Champ Bailey said. "I've had some great coaches, including [Mike] Shanahan, but [McDaniels] is definitely one-of-a-kind in the way that he approaches the game."

This deserves it's own thread.

TonyR
10-10-2009, 12:38 PM
How could that be "off topic" ;D

Remember, baja, McD set this franchise back 10 years. At least. He's in over his head and doesn't know what he's doing. We're a laughingstock.

baja
10-10-2009, 12:38 PM
This deserves it's own thread.

I thought so too.

rastaman
10-10-2009, 12:49 PM
I'm pretty strongly of the belief that McDaniels was going to make Cutler report and if necessary suspend him, like he did with Marshall.

From day one of the ordeal Cutler effectively called McDaniels a liar publicly multiple times. He made a demand for special treatment which he openly acknowledges, and McDaniels refused. He kept on with that attitude for several weeks and the organization's stance was "Jay Cutler is our quarterback, he's not going anywhere".

From day one all McD had to do was be honest! with the trade talks to bring in Cassel....yet Josh chose to lie! Then when he found out Cutler was aware of his lie he finally came clean about it! Lets not forget when McD finally admitted to Cutler that he was seeking trades to bring Cassel to Denver, Josh did so in a condecending and antagonizing manner.

Now it was McD's perogative on how he handled the situation, but lets not pretend Josh's method on handlng the situation was like he was showing Jay he wanted him to be his QB. Sounds like to me Josh was pissed off that Jay caught him in a lie, and to save face--McD came off like a DICK!

And by the way show some proof that Cutler was DEMANDING SPECIAL TREATMENT. McD was speaking out of both sides of his mouth. One moment McD was saying Jay is our QB and the next moment Josh was telling Cutler that he could entertain trading him anytime he wanted to! So go figure thru McD's egotistical nonsense.

Then when the tune changes from "I can't trust McDaniels" to "I can't trust the organization" Bowlen gets involved. Less than a week after that Cutler is traded.

Can you or would you trust someone who blatantly LIED to your face! And Bowlen should have gotten involved immediately and intervened the moment it was public that McD considered trade talks for Cassel to replace Cutler. That is IF Bowlen wanted to KEEP! Cutler as his franchise QB. It looks more and more from Bowlens' behavior that McD got Bowlen's blessing to possible Trade Cutler for Cassel in the first place. Hence, Bowlen taking two weeks to intervene in the first place. By then the damage was already done and there was no going back.

You could see it as Cook and Cutler playing Bowlen, or Bowlen putting his own pride before the team. But you can also see it as Bowlen not wanting that kind of attitude on his football team.

Again, Bowlen more than likely approved McD to entertain trade talks for Cassel in the first place in a behind the scenes mode. So who was playing who? No way does McD entertain calls and make calls of a two way deal for Cassel and sending Cutler on his merry way! Face it, Bowlen stayed quite way to fuccing long, to where he appeared to be an accomplice with McDaniel's grandiose idea to bring in Cassel.

rastaman
10-10-2009, 12:51 PM
A little bit OT, but did anyone see this quote from Champ?

"I tell you what, just being under Josh McDaniels for a few months now, I mean he's a guy that is going to have you as prepared as you can be for a game, and that's something that throughout my 11 years I haven't had a lot of," Broncos cornerback Champ Bailey said. "I've had some great coaches, including [Mike] Shanahan, but [McDaniels] is definitely one-of-a-kind in the way that he approaches the game."

Champ ain't stupid! He's trying to position to ensure he makes $15 million dollars next year!:wiggle:

ScottXray
10-10-2009, 12:57 PM
Both sides....

Shanny did lay the foundation of the Offense. The O line and Marshall
were his picks. (note ...Marshall may still implode....and Shannys treatment of him (contract wise etc) laid some of the groundwork...he still may be a problem child...but Shanny did see his potential). Royal...shanny pick...currently in a slump. Graham was brought in by him. Sheffler too.

And Cutler, who May be a great QB someday...but as of now is NOT.

Yes...Shanny knew how to draft for the O. So he has to get some credit for having laid a good foundation for the O. Just like Reeves/Phillips got credit for having some pretty good defenses in place for shanny to tweak when he came in.

CURRENT Defense ..... about the only thing he did right on D was bring in
Champ, and keep DJ around. Virtually everything that was wrong with the D was also Shannys responsibility.

The current defense is almost entirely due to McD ( and Nolan who was chosen by McD).

The offense is sluggish as of yet.

But our QB has been playing with an injury that some said would prevent him from being able to even play. So if his completion percentage is not that great, you have to give him some credit for not LOSING games for us. I think that aspect is going to get better as he truly heals.

Anyway my point is that Shanny DID do some things right....and McD is Building on that. He is tweaking what was good , and he completely tore down what was wrong. What was wrong was the Attitude, practice habits, scheme, preparation and most coaching on the D, and a lot of the same on the O. So far so good. We will lose some games this year.

But If we make the playoffs this year McD will have done what Shanny didn't do in his first year. And he will have done it without a "franchise" QB.

So McD will get and deserve most of the credit. The fact that Shanny drafted most of the offense will be recognised. McD will get credit for having them achieve their potential.

If we don't make the playoffs the media will give him no credit, syaing ...well Shanahan did THAT. And he made that terrible trade of Cutler.

Most of us are much more up on the team than the media. Lets not be as stupid as they are!

Kaylore
10-10-2009, 12:59 PM
McD was honest. He took a call on a trade but nothing happened. If I took a call on a trade and didn't trade a player and they asked me if I "tried" to trade them, I would say no, but that's not your business because you're under contract. If any player is traded, they will be notified. Your job is to prepare to play for the team who holds your contract, and worry about things you can control. If they threw a tantrum I would fine them.

baja
10-10-2009, 01:00 PM
Champ ain't stupid! He's trying to position to ensure he makes $15 million dollars next year!:wiggle:


Not everybody negotiates like you do you know. ;D

baja
10-10-2009, 01:02 PM
McD was honest. He took a call on a trade but nothing happened. If I took a call on a trade and didn't trade a player and they asked me if I "tried" to trade them, I would say no, but that's not your business because you're under contract. If any player is traded, they will be notified. Your job is to prepare to play for the team who holds your contract, and worry about things you can control. If they threw a tantrum I would fine them.

Now isn't this the way you would rather see your Broncos run???

rastaman
10-10-2009, 01:10 PM
Not everybody negotiates like you do you know. ;D

I'm just saying Champ is sly like a fox!:sunshine:

baja
10-10-2009, 01:11 PM
Both sides....

Shanny did lay the foundation of the Offense. The O line and Marshall
were his picks. (note ...Marshall may still implode....and Shannys treatment of him (contract wise etc) laid some of the groundwork...he still may be a problem child...but Shanny did see his potential). Royal...shanny pick...currently in a slump. Graham was brought in by him. Sheffler too.

And Cutler, who May be a great QB someday...but as of now is NOT.

Yes...Shanny knew how to draft for the O. So he has to get some credit for having laid a good foundation for the O. Just like Reeves/Phillips got credit for having some pretty good defenses in place for shanny to tweak when he came in.

CURRENT Defense ..... about the only thing he did right on D was bring in
Champ, and keep DJ around. Virtually everything that was wrong with the D was also Shannys responsibility.

The current defense is almost entirely due to McD ( and Nolan who was chosen by McD).

The offense is sluggish as of yet.

But our QB has been playing with an injury that some said would prevent him from being able to even play. So if his completion percentage is not that great, you have to give him some credit for not LOSING games for us. I think that aspect is going to get better as he truly heals.

Anyway my point is that Shanny DID do some things right....and McD is Building on that. He is tweaking what was good , and he completely tore down what was wrong. What was wrong was the Attitude, practice habits, scheme, preparation and most coaching on the D, and a lot of the same on the O. So far so good. We will lose some games this year.

But If we make the playoffs this year McD will have done what Shanny didn't do in his first year. And he will have done it without a "franchise" QB.

So McD will get and deserve most of the credit. The fact that Shanny drafted most of the offense will be recognised. McD will get credit for having them achieve their potential.

If we don't make the playoffs the media will give him no credit, syaing ...well Shanahan did THAT. And he made that terrible trade of Cutler.

Most of us are much more up on the team than the media. Lets not be as stupid as they are!

Nice way to put it into perspective.

baja
10-10-2009, 01:12 PM
I'm just saying Champ is sly like a fox!:sunshine:

He truly is. :notworthy

bronco0608
10-19-2009, 10:08 PM
Really Fatlock?

LONG LIVE KYLE ORTON!!!