PDA

View Full Version : Peyton Hillis


Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Dedhed
12-16-2009, 10:22 PM
Your argument fails.

His reference to SHANAHAN taking a RB high in the draft was probably accurate.

McD changed the game plan.

As did the addition of a second 1st round selection.

Popps
12-16-2009, 10:23 PM
Hey this one is some fun:

Look, bro... no one has been as "fun" as you around here.

You called your entire user-base idiots for discussing Shanahan's departure the day before he was fired.

Then, you called the best owner in sports a Gutless Drunk... a thread so pathetic you had to close it yourself... but only after getting your site kicked out of Broncos camp.

So, maybe you can take a break from the "look how funny your old post is" stuff.

You, of all people have no business.

Taco John
12-16-2009, 10:23 PM
Still feel the same way:


I personally am sold on the 2 back system where Hillis is the Fullback with a feature back behind him. I don't understand why anyone would be against having a home run hitter behind Hillis, regardless of where they are drafted.

watermock
12-16-2009, 10:23 PM
Thank god ha had a vasectomy.

Taco John
12-16-2009, 10:24 PM
You, of all people have no business.

Bwah! Whatever. Take your medicine.

Popps
12-16-2009, 10:26 PM
Bwah! Whatever. Take your medicine.

My medicine is laughter, and you provide it regularly. Must be a lot of work being the forum owner, and jester.

Popps
12-16-2009, 10:27 PM
Thank god ha had a vasectomy.

Go to bed, Mock.

Taco John
12-16-2009, 10:27 PM
Blowing with the breeze:

Again, the need to get cute with Hillis is just a product of a message board's active imagination.
We lined Hillis right up against a top run D today and smashed him right down their throat. Shanahan gave him ALL of the carries today. We don't need to line him up as a tight end or have him throw passes. We can hand him the ball... block, and he runs over people.
Obviously, Shanahan didn't think we needed to get cute with him. The dude can play. The dude can move the chains... and that will keep him in good graces with Mike Shanahan.

GreatBronco16
12-16-2009, 10:28 PM
Still feel the same way:


Really? Even though he can't beat out a gimpy Larsen? Even though he misses blocks on nearly every snap he as been out there as a FB this year?


You would think that Hillis had busted out 1500 yards in a season and McD is just doesn't work well with white RBs with the way this thread has gone.

Taco John
12-16-2009, 10:28 PM
Hillis is a latter day John Riggins:

Hillis reminds me of a latter-day John Riggins ... and yes, we could use a 3rd down change of pace back down the stretch - Bell and/or Young.
Exactly. I'd like to see us bring in another back, but I still think we might be more effective with a bruiser bashing out 4-6 yards on first down. Remember when Anderson was running like that for us?
I love it. I hope Hillis keeps delivering like this every week. I've got no problem with him taking the bulk of the carries for us. Yes, I'd like a homerun threat, but I love what Hillis brings.

Popps
12-16-2009, 10:29 PM
Blowing with the breeze:

Yep, and I was correct. He was the best option we had at the time.

Good call, huh?

Too bad he can't earn reps this year.

Doesn't that bother you?

strafen
12-16-2009, 10:37 PM
Blowing with the breeze:Yup, back and forth, back and forth, and every which way like the flag :strong:

tsiguy96
12-16-2009, 10:40 PM
this is kinda dumb argument, as we will never know (atleast for a long time) why hillis is not seeing the field. i dont think i buy that it has to do with having the best players on the field, as it simply isnt true, but maybe in mcd's mind it is?

Popps
12-16-2009, 10:42 PM
Yup, back and forth, back and forth, and every which way like the flag :strong:

Really?

Thought he was talented then... and I even TOLD you in this thread I thought he was (and is) talented.

I wonder why you have so much trouble accepting that?

You need me to dislike him, don't you.

If I dislike him, at least you have a position to argue against. (Since you have no real logic to base your conspiracy theory upon.)

But, I don't dislike him.

Sorry.

I was singing his praises here long before you.

Guess that leaves us back with you proving your conspiracy theory....








or not.

SJ Bronco
12-16-2009, 10:46 PM
this is kinda dumb argument, as we will never know (atleast for a long time) why hillis is not seeing the field. i dont think i buy that it has to do with having the best players on the field, as it simply isnt true, but maybe in mcd's mind it is?

Like I said, you can question the mans Judgment (although I think he's ok on personnel) but you just can't honestly tell me that ANY coach in the NFL wouldn't put his best players on the field. I mean, if he really hated the guy, it's the NFL, why wouldn't he cut him? It wouldn't cost him anything. I'm just going to remain with the fact that he's a professional football coach that spends 12 -20 hours a day on football and he may know a bit more about what is going on in his offense than I do, and he believes this gives him the best shot to win. I'll give you all the room in the world to question his tactics ( I did it a lot this week) but I simply won't hear the "he doesn't like him" argument. That's just insane.

bowtown
12-16-2009, 10:51 PM
What it comes down to for me is that I just don't know what the motivation would be for McDaniels to cut off one palyer and one player only. He has no problems playing other blue collar players. Woodyard gets plenty of snaps, Larsen is our starting fullback (just like he was with Shanahan), Barett probably sees more snaps with McDaniels. I just can't see why he would choose to exclude one player and one player only. Add that to the fact that Shanahan didn't use him unitl he had to, and the fact that the reports from Nutt coming out of college played a huge roll in him dropping to the 7th round in a draft where San Diego moved up into 3rd round to take Hester.

I just can't help but feel like where there's so much smoke there has to be fire. You are looking at Nutt, Shanahan, Turner and McDaniels all keeping this kid from touching the ball. That just seems like more than a coincidence to me, and certainly is more than enough for me to rule out a conspiracy theory.

Popps
12-16-2009, 10:54 PM
What it comes down to for me is that I just don't know what the motivation would be for McDaniels to cut off one palyer and one player only. He has no problems playing other blue collar players. Woodyard gets plenty of snaps, Larsen is our starting fullback (just like he was with Shanahan), Barett probably sees more snaps with McDaniels. I just can't see why he would choose to exclude one player and one player only. Add that to the fact that Shanahan didn't use him unitl he had to, and the fact that the reports from Nutt coming out of college played a huge roll in him dropping to the 7th round in a draft where San Diego moved up into 3rd round to take Hester.

Look, Taco and Dragster don't want to deal with the reality of those questions.

They'd rather bump threads to pretend that someone doesn't like Peyton.
(Even though we're all saying we do.)


This thread can go on for another 1500 posts, and you won't get Taco, Dragster or Rasta to address those questions head-on.

You'll get diversionary tactics, and avoidance tactics.

They'll tell you you hate Peyton. Anything to avoid addressing the reality of this situation. (Which is really simple and Peyton told you in his own words what it was.)

Taco John
12-16-2009, 10:55 PM
I don't know what the motivation is either. I just know what the guy looks like with a football in his hands.

Jason in LA
12-16-2009, 11:04 PM
This thread is getting good.

Dagmar
12-16-2009, 11:05 PM
Just when it couldn't get more epic, TJ swoops!


http://www.scribbleoneverything.com/images/uploads/thumbs/thumb_kaboom.gif

bowtown
12-16-2009, 11:05 PM
I don't know what the motivation is either. I just know what the guy looks like with a football in his hands.

Well to be fair you know what he looks like with a football in his hands with a pure ZBS against Cleveland, an injured Atlanta, Oakland, an exposed Jets team in the rain, and KC, and in a mixed ZBS against KC in garbage time. Doesn't that come with at least a tiny grain of salt?

theAPAOps5
12-16-2009, 11:08 PM
Man Hillis, The Great White Hope has reached epic levels on this board. Yeah he looks good with the ball in his hand. Problem is its when he doesn't have the ball in his hand where he sucks. See his missed blocks, his lack of knowledge of the play, his penalties.

Yeah great like Forrest Gump when you give him the ball and say run and stop. But when it comes time to think and be cerebral its not so pretty.

I like the guy just think its hilarious how overblown he has become. Reading here you would think he is on the level of TD! :)

Taco John
12-16-2009, 11:12 PM
Well to be fair you know what he looks like with a football in his hands with a pure ZBS against Cleveland, an injured Atlanta, Oakland, an exposed Jets team in the rain, and KC, and in a mixed ZBS against KC in garbage time. Doesn't that come with at least a tiny grain of salt?

It just makes me wonder how he'd look in a more straight forward style system. My caveat with Hillis last year was THAT we had a ZBS system, and I didn't think that he had the lateral speed to get to the cutback lane quick enough. It turned out that didn't matter, because he'd PLOW THROUGH guys to get to that lane.

strafen
12-16-2009, 11:18 PM
Really?

Thought he was talented then... and I even TOLD you in this thread I thought he was (and is) talented.

I wonder why you have so much trouble accepting that?

You need me to dislike him, don't you.

If I dislike him, at least you have a position to argue against. (Since you have no real logic to base your conspiracy theory upon.)

But, I don't dislike him.

Sorry.

I was singing his praises here long before you.

Guess that leaves us back with you proving your conspiracy theory....








or not.Oh, conspiracy, I just love that word, conspiracy!!!

Look, McDaniels was heavily criticized for not taking a defensive player with his first pick, right?
Are you following me?
Ok, let's keep moving forward...
Because he chose Moreno, McDaniels was under the heat to justify his pick.
McDaniels was confident that the Moreno he saw in college was going to pay dividends this year.
That, as you very well know has not been the case.
Yet, McDaniels insists on making it work. He's not going to concede to the fact Moreno has not turned out to be the RB he and everybody else expected to se.
That's why after Moreno's performance last Sunday couple with the fact that we're 26 or 28th in the NFL in scoring in the RZ, sh*t hit the fan about why Hillis was not put in there to run the ball in situations that were tailored made for him.
So, your conspiracy theory can be summed up by saying that McDaniels has vested interest in making sure he's got that pick in Moreno right.
He is his boy. McDaniels will continue to move forward with Moreno. He wants to make a point that he was right in picking Moreno

That's all there is to it. It's in plain view and his actions point to that direction, and not that Hillis is not prepared to play in his system when he was sold on him coming into the season.

Defense is what the problem was with this team. I understand he addressed that by basically improving by substraction and implementing a different system instead of adding thru the draft for the future of this team.

Either way, Moreno is still not where he should be as far as production and making an impact in our offense when he needs to step up goes

HAT
12-16-2009, 11:18 PM
I wonder if Hillis could break off 2K in this system? :thumbs:

Popps
12-16-2009, 11:18 PM
M
Yeah great like Forrest Gump when you give him the ball and say run and stop. But when it comes time to think and be cerebral its not so pretty.


I'm not saying that's the case, because I don't know for sure.

But, let's just say for the sake of conversation that some of the speculation is true, and not only does Peyton not pick up things quickly, but he has trouble with accepting coaching on top of it.

How likely would a new coach be to reward that player and set that kind of example for his team?

You're preaching that your team needs to be disciplined and intelligent, but if someone is not... do you reward them with reps because they looked good for another coach in another system last year?

I'm not saying I KNOW that's the case, but if you look at things circumstantially, it's a potential explanation.

The one thing I'm 100% sure is... this is not some sort of petty nonsense by McDaniels. He's ruthlessly dedicate to fielding the best players. He's not afraid to look "foolish" if he believes in something, or did everyone forget about this entire offseason?

Whatever is going on with Hillis goes deeper than what he looks like "with a ball in his hand."

Again, hopefully it'll work out. It's in everyone's best interest that it does. Broncos fans would all like to see him earn his reps, I'm sure.

Popps
12-16-2009, 11:26 PM
By the way, I wonder if Neck-Pony Nation is getting nervous?

This thread has reached 10% of the post-count of NPN in less than one month.

Taco John
12-16-2009, 11:30 PM
I love this place.

theAPAOps5
12-16-2009, 11:31 PM
I love this place.

Its awesome really. Its like going to a dysfunctional family reunion!

Dagmar
12-16-2009, 11:34 PM
I love this place.

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=87653&page=4

Popps
12-16-2009, 11:37 PM
I love this place.

http://www.calbar.ca.gov/calbar/images/CBJ/2005/Metrolink-Train-Wreck.jpg

:thumbs:

strafen
12-16-2009, 11:38 PM
What it comes down to for me is that I just don't know what the motivation would be for McDaniels to cut off one palyer and one player only. He has no problems playing other blue collar players. Woodyard gets plenty of snaps, Larsen is our starting fullback (just like he was with Shanahan), Barett probably sees more snaps with McDaniels. I just can't see why he would choose to exclude one player and one player only. Add that to the fact that Shanahan didn't use him unitl he had to, and the fact that the reports from Nutt coming out of college played a huge roll in him dropping to the 7th round in a draft where San Diego moved up into 3rd round to take Hester.

I just can't help but feel like where there's so much smoke there has to be fire. You are looking at Nutt, Shanahan, Turner and McDaniels all keeping this kid from touching the ball. That just seems like more than a coincidence to me, and certainly is more than enough for me to rule out a conspiracy theory.Andre Hall, Selvin Young, and Michael Pittman were the featured backs in Shanahan's offense.

You can make the same argument why he didn't play joe blow or whatever. That's irrelevant, what you need to understand is that those 3 backs I've mentioned were the ones to be played going into the 2008 season.
Hillis was a rookie and a project to be looked at later, however, Hillis still saw some action along the way, and became the primary back by default when all the injuries took place.

You just can't look at it from any other angle than how things actually happened. Theory and conspiracy and coincidence aside that's how things were. Hillis WAS NOT at any time last year to be the featured back in Shanahan's offense. Re-read my first paragraph if you still have trouble understanding what I'm saying..

Popps
12-16-2009, 11:41 PM
Hillis WAS NOT at any time last year to be the featured back in Shanahan's offense. Re-read my first paragraph if you still have trouble understanding what I'm saying..

Sure, but Shanahan knew he could run the ball. He drafted him. You don't think Shanahan/Turner watched every run that kid had in college?

82 yards rushing through 11 weeks, until injury forced him into the lineup.

100th time... I'm a fan. But we have a pattern.

Accept it or don't.

Dagmar
12-16-2009, 11:42 PM
Andre Hall, Selvin Young, and Michael Pittman were the featured backs in Shanahan's offense.

You can make the same argument why he didn't play joe blow or whatever. That's irrelevant, what you need to understand is that those 3 backs I've mentioned were the ones to be played going into the 2008 season.
Hillis was a rookie and a project to be looked at later, however, Hillis still saw some action along the way, and became the primary back by default when all the injuries took place.

You just can't look at it from any other angle than how things actually happened. Theory and conspiracy and coincidence aside that's how things were. Hillis WAS NOT at any time last year to be the featured back in Shanahan's offense. Re-read my first paragraph if you still have trouble understanding what I'm saying..

I don't want to overstate this, but with Joe Blow back there...

http://www.bostonherald.com/blogs/sports/rap_sheet/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/superbowl-trophy.jpg

He was a DYNAMO at Imagination University. IU, or the Unicorns as they are known.

strafen
12-16-2009, 11:43 PM
I'm not saying that's the case, because I don't know for sure.

But, let's just say for the sake of conversation that some of the speculation is true, and not only does Peyton not pick up things quickly, but he has trouble with accepting coaching on top of it.

How likely would a new coach be to reward that player and set that kind of example for his team?

You're preaching that your team needs to be disciplined and intelligent, but if someone is not... do you reward them with reps because they looked good for another coach in another system last year?

I'm not saying I KNOW that's the case, but if you look at things circumstantially, it's a potential explanation.

The one thing I'm 100% sure is... this is not some sort of petty nonsense by McDaniels. He's ruthlessly dedicate to fielding the best players. He's not afraid to look "foolish" if he believes in something, or did everyone forget about this entire offseason?

Whatever is going on with Hillis goes deeper than what he looks like "with a ball in his hand."

Again, hopefully it'll work out. It's in everyone's best interest that it does. Broncos fans would all like to see him earn his reps, I'm sure.Didn't you read the recent article by the Denver Post where Mcdaniels was referring to Hillis as a smart player?
He wouldn't had said that if he didn't see Hillis perform in his oofense or Shanahan's offense, or unless he too blows with the wind...

strafen
12-16-2009, 11:47 PM
Sure, but Shanahan knew he could run the ball. He drafted him. You don't think Shanahan/Turner watched every run that kid had in college?

82 yards rushing through 11 weeks, until injury forced him into the lineup.

100th time... I'm a fan. But we have a pattern.

Accept it or don't.

Why you skip the most relevant parts of my statement to make a lame one?
What are you saying?
Are you saying that because of Hillis accomplishments in college that he should've then been the starter right off the bat?

While Selvin Young, Andre Hall, and Michael Pittman were the featured backs, Hillis saw limited action as you point out his 82 yards thru 11 weeks.
He had 3 freaking backs in front of him in the depth chart and one freakin ball to play in a game.
How with 3 backs in front of him would you in the right mind expect Hillis to see more action than what he's got?
Please!

bowtown
12-16-2009, 11:50 PM
Andre Hall, Selvin Young, and Michael Pittman were the featured backs in Shanahan's offense.

You can make the same argument why he didn't play joe blow or whatever. That's irrelevant, what you need to understand is that those 3 backs I've mentioned were the ones to be played going into the 2008 season.
Hillis was a rookie and a project to be looked at later, however, Hillis still saw some action along the way, and became the primary back by default when all the injuries took place.

You just can't look at it from any other angle than how things actually happened. Theory and conspiracy and coincidence aside that's how things were. Hillis WAS NOT at any time last year to be the featured back in Shanahan's offense. Re-read my first paragraph if you still have trouble understanding what I'm saying..

Knowshon Moreno, Correll Buckhalter, and Lamont Jordan were the featured backs in McDaniels's offense.

You can make the same argument why he didn't play joe blow or whatever. That's irrelevant, what you need to understand is that those 3 backs I've mentioned were the ones to be played going into the 2009 season.
Hillis was second year player coming off an injury and a terrible preseason, however, Hillis still saw some action along the way, and drew several penalties on special teams before showing decently in KC garbage time.

You just can't look at it from any other angle than how things actually happened. Theory and conspiracy and coincidence aside that's how things were. Hillis WAS NOT at any time this year to be the featured back in McDaniel's offense--which is understandable seeing as how they both have the same running backs coach (whos is one of the best in the league) advising them. Re-read my first paragraph if you still have trouble understanding what I'm saying..

strafen
12-16-2009, 11:57 PM
Knowshon Moreno, Correll Buckhalter, and Lamont Jordan were the featured backs in McDaniels's offense.

You can make the same argument why he didn't play joe blow or whatever. That's irrelevant, what you need to understand is that those 3 backs I've mentioned were the ones to be played going into the 2009 season.
Hillis was second year player coming off an injury and a terrible preseason, however, Hillis still saw some action along the way, and drew several penalties on special teams before showing decently in KC garbage time.

You just can't look at it from any other angle than how things actually happened. Theory and conspiracy and coincidence aside that's how things were. Hillis WAS NOT at any time this year to be the featured back in McDaniel's offense--which is understandable seeing as how they both have the same running backs coach (whos is one of the best in the league) advising them. Re-read my first paragraph if you still have trouble understanding what I'm saying..Running backs coaches don't make desicions on who plays and who doesn't play.
Again, the fact remains, Moreno was a pick Mcdaniels didn't need.
He was criticized for it.
He's the reason why Hillis is not playing. McDaniels wants to make a point that he was right by drafting Moreno.
That's what you need to see but keep looking the other way for ghost theories and made up crap to hurt Hillis reputation in favor of a 1st round draft bust.

BTW, you can't compare Moreno, Jordan and Buckhalter with Hall, Young and Pittman.

bowtown
12-17-2009, 12:07 AM
Running backs coaches don't make desicions on who plays and who doesn't play.
Again, the fact remains, Moreno was a pick Mcdaniels didn't need.
He was criticized for it.
He's the reason why Hillis is not playing. McDaniels wants to make a point that he was right by drafting Moreno.
That's what you need to see but keep looking the other way for ghost theories and made up crap to hurt Hillis reputation in favor of a 1st round draft bust.

Okay, I see, so when McDaniels came here and interviewed and decided to keep Turner on staff andd Turner decided to stay they had a conversation in which Bobby Turner told him he had all the running backs he needed with Hillis, yet McDaniels went out anyway and picked up 3 veteran RBs immediatly in FA and then spent his first pick on one too because he has such a big ego!

Oh, and by the way the guy that he spent that first pick on, this is what Turner had to say about him:

"a person that was a complete package, and that's what we're always looking for,"

"He could do everything," Turner said. "He can do pass protection, he can block, he can catch, and obviously to be a running back you've got to be able to run the ball."

Read more: http://www.denverpost.com/premium/broncos/ci_13362724#ixzz0ZvYcqlvP

But you are right, McDaniels is clearly out to prove a point...

strafen
12-17-2009, 12:09 AM
Sorry, but...This message is hidden because bowtown is on your ignore list.

bowtown
12-17-2009, 12:10 AM
Sorry, but...This message is hidden because bowtown is on your ignore list.

Hmmm... that's a nice cop out. I have some people on ignore. I don't remember there being any elipses in that notification.

strafen
12-17-2009, 12:15 AM
Again...This message is hidden because bowtown is on your ignore list.

Popps
12-17-2009, 12:16 AM
Didn't you read the recent article by the Denver Post where Mcdaniels was referring to Hillis as a smart player?
.

I did, so what are you saying?

I'm not sure he is a smart player.

I AM sure that you're never going to get McDaniels to rip a player in a media interview. He's going to give you the stock answer every time.

But, sure... I heard him say it.

For the billionth time... what's your point? If there's a conspiracy, prove it.

bowtown
12-17-2009, 12:20 AM
Again...This message is hidden because bowtown is on your ignore list.

At this point I'm totally convinced you are Broncofan7.

strafen
12-17-2009, 12:21 AM
I did, so what are you saying?

I'm not sure he is a smart player.

I AM sure that you're never going to get McDaniels to rip a player in a media interview. He's going to give you the stock answer every time.

But, sure... I heard him say it.

For the billionth time... what's your point? If there's a conspiracy, prove it.Holy sh*t you're more stubborn than a mule, aren't you?
Why don't you prove to me Hillis is not smart, and that what McDaniels said was a political correct statement.
Yet, when Hillis said he was going to work harder, you didn't look at that as Hillis not going to rip his coach in a media interview, did you?
Instead you looked at it as the smoking gun you've been trying to find.
Totally different tune you're singing about Hillis than you were last year, huh?

I already told you for the billionth time, that McDaniels is trying to prove a point by playing Moreno.
Hillis will outperform Moreno if given a chance, and McDaniels would look like a fool.
Is that enough for you?
Or is it still not a good conspiracy theory?

Br0nc0Buster
12-17-2009, 12:22 AM
At this point I'm totally convinced you are Broncofan7.

or equally retarded
I guess you have more patience than me, I would of given up a long time ago

strafen
12-17-2009, 12:23 AM
or equally retarded
I guess you have more patience than me, I would of given up a long time ago

Are you from KC?
ROFL!

Br0nc0Buster
12-17-2009, 12:24 AM
Are you from KC?
ROFL!

nope

strafen
12-17-2009, 12:25 AM
nopeOk, just Kansas. LOL!

Popps
12-17-2009, 12:27 AM
Holy sh*t you're more stubborn than a mule, aren't you?
Why don't you prove to me Hillis is not smart, and that what McDaniels said was a political correct statement.

You've got it backwards.

If you believe we didn't land on the moon, it's not to the world to prove you wrong. It's up to YOU to prove the WORLD wrong. That's how conspiracy theories work.

So, the rest of the world is fairly certain that there are behind the scenes issues that are keeping him from playing more. He's clearly talented, and McDaniels has shown an absolute willingness to play the best player.

So, it looks like simple football reasons to the rest of us. Peyton said it himself. He needs to "rethink his priorities." (Or was it motives? Either way.)

So, if you're saying Peyton is lying, and all of the circumstantial evidence that points to the obvious answer is incorrect... then it's up to YOU to prove it all wrong.

See?

It's not the rest of the world, it's you.

So, here's your forum. Prove that he's being benched for unjust, non-football reasons.

Br0nc0Buster
12-17-2009, 12:32 AM
Ok, just Kansas. LOL!

yeah......thats hilarious

strafen
12-17-2009, 12:36 AM
You've got it backwards.

If you believe we didn't land on the moon, it's not to the world to prove you wrong. It's up to YOU to prove the WORLD wrong. That's how conspiracy theories work.

So, the rest of the world is fairly certain that there are behind the scenes issues that are keeping him from playing more. He's clearly talented, and McDaniels has shown an absolute willingness to play the best player.

So, it looks like simple football reasons to the rest of us. Peyton said it himself. He needs to "rethink his priorities." (Or was it motives? Either way.)

So, if you're saying Peyton is lying, and all of the circumstantial evidence that points to the obvious answer is incorrect... then it's up to YOU to prove it all wrong.

See?

It's not the rest of the world, it's you.

So, here's your forum. Prove that he's being benched for unjust, non-football reasons.You're the reason why this thread has gone so far.
Your ridiculous statements I'm not sure are really worth my time replying to.
One more time...
You're saying that Mcdaniles was not being forthright about what he said about Hillis, yet, you don't have to prove that. Hilarious!

Now, after I turned the table on you to illustrate how two same situations can be looked differently depending on what side you're on, you're now calling me out to prove that Hiils was lying.
That's not what my point was. Jesus!
How many times do I need to tell you the reasons why Hillis is not playing?
You can't be this retard, can you?

strafen
12-17-2009, 12:38 AM
I'll give you one thing Popps. You sure have a lot of guys here sniffing your ass on this board.
Gotta give it to those guys who have stood up here in your defense.
Start sending Xmas gifts to all the Popps sniff-ass connection board members

Popps
12-17-2009, 01:01 AM
I'll give you one thing Popps. You sure have a lot of guys here sniffing your ass on this board.
Gotta give it to those guys who have stood up here in your defense.
Start sending Xmas gifts to all the Popps sniff-ass connection board members

Sorry bro, that's not the case.

You're not out on an island because I'm a popular guy.

You're out on an island because you can't support your argument with substance, and yet you're willing to post incessantly, accusing the staff of purposely sabotaging the team.

See, you can't "turn the tables" on me... because you're arguing from a point rooted in no basis.

"Hey Popps, the earth is flat."

"No, it's round."

"Oh yea, PROVE IT! SEE, I TURNED THE TABLES ON YOU!!"



See, you're arguing against commonly held believe that there are simple, logical football reasons that we're seeing what we're seeing with Hillis. (Or not seeing.)

People aren't taking exception with you for any other reason than you're vigorously presenting a flawed and slanderous argument.

You've been asked to support it, and you've yet to do so. So, until you do... you'll remain out there on an island, clinging to your conspiracy theory.

watermock
12-17-2009, 01:13 AM
You're not out on an island because I'm a popular guy.

http://www.youtube.com/user/GeneveAireen

watermock
12-17-2009, 01:28 AM
you're vigorously presenting a flawed and slanderous argument.

Now It's SLANDER!

watermock
12-17-2009, 01:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dragster69
Didn't you read the recent article by the Denver Post where Mcdaniels was referring to Hillis as a smart player?
.

I did, so what are you saying?

I'm not sure he is a smart player.

I AM sure that you're never going to get McDaniels to rip a player in a media interview. He's going to give you the stock answer every time.

But, sure... I heard him say it.

For the billionth time... what's your point? If there's a conspiracy, prove it.

watermock
12-17-2009, 01:49 AM
For the billionth time... what's your point? If there's a conspiracy, prove it.

TYou prove it,or better prove it with 9/10th's of it other backs.

Taco John
12-17-2009, 02:14 AM
I don't know whether it's to prove a point or not. Frankly, I don't care. I just think that a coach has got to figure out a way to use a talent like Hillis to their advantage. Get creative if you have to. I think Popps says it best though:

...if you've watched the team as long as some of us have, you quickly understand the value of this type of back.

Popps
12-17-2009, 02:17 AM
I don't know whether it's to prove a point or not. Frankly, I don't care. I just think that a coach has got to figure out a way to use a talent like Hillis to their advantage. Get creative if you have to. I think Popps says it best though:

You just continue to reinforce a point.

Hillis has talent.

Either that, or we're all incorrect and he doesn't.


Or... there are reasons that go beyond his talent that he's not seeing the field. Some issues are up to the player to correct.

Peyton stated in no uncertain terms that he needed to rethink his motives.
Pretty telling, and let's all hope he does so he can contribute like the 52 other guys who seem to be having little problem doing so.

watermock
12-17-2009, 02:28 AM
Didn't you read the recent article by the Denver Post where Mcdaniels was referring to Hillis as a smart player?


Hey Poops, are you retarded?

watermock
12-17-2009, 02:53 AM
Peyton stated in no uncertain terms that he needed to rethink his motives.


Actually no. He was told he was 3rd string RB, 2nd string FB.

Gort
12-17-2009, 08:47 AM
recapping this thread for everyone:

Popps: Hillis is stoopid.
Dragster: It's a conspiracy I tell you.
Rasta: I love Jay Cutler. He's so dreamy.
Popps: Stop talking about Jay Cutler, Rasta.
Rasta: Don't tell me what I can and can't do. I'm not a robot fan.
Dragster: It's a conspiracy I tell you.
Taco: Popps is stoopid.
Popps: No, Taco is stoopid.
Taco: Ha Ha.
Rasta: If Cutler and Hillis had a baby, would that baby end up in the HOF?
Dragster: It's a conspiracy I tell you.
Popps: I'm just saying, Hillis is too stoopid to play.
Rasta: It's a conspiracy I tell you.
Dragster: Rasta is right.
Watermock: It's all McPoopyPants' fault.
Popps: ...but, Hillis is stoopid.

and yes, this could easily go another 1500 posts before the end of the month.

Popps
12-17-2009, 10:12 AM
Rasta: If Cutler and Hillis had a baby, would that baby end up in the HOF?

LOL

Popps
12-17-2009, 10:12 AM
=
and yes, this could easily go another 1500 posts before the end of the month.

Isn't it wonderful?

SJ Bronco
12-17-2009, 10:19 AM
recapping this thread for everyone:

Popps: Hillis is stoopid.
Dragster: It's a conspiracy I tell you.
Rasta: I love Jay Cutler. He's so dreamy.
Popps: Stop talking about Jay Cutler, Rasta.
Rasta: Don't tell me what I can and can't do. I'm not a robot fan.
Dragster: It's a conspiracy I tell you.
Taco: Popps is stoopid.
Popps: No, Taco is stoopid.
Taco: Ha Ha.
Rasta: If Cutler and Hillis had a baby, would that baby end up in the HOF?
Dragster: It's a conspiracy I tell you.
Popps: I'm just saying, Hillis is too stoopid to play.
Rasta: It's a conspiracy I tell you.
Dragster: Rasta is right.
Watermock: It's all McPoopyPants' fault.
Popps: ...but, Hillis is stoopid.

and yes, this could easily go another 1500 posts before the end of the month.

Much better and more well rounded wrap up then mine......Rep!

~Crash~
12-17-2009, 10:21 AM
My problem with how we are using hills is there a million ways to use him give all our player 3 or 4 plays a game

SJ Bronco
12-17-2009, 10:27 AM
My problem with how we are using hills is there a million ways to use him give all our player 3 or 4 plays a game

Get out of here with that makin' sense talk! We're "kamunikatin' heer!"

Seriously, dude, I think there is a consensus that the kid should get a handful of carries. Specially with the injuries. There are just some that are arguing for a bit more than that.

Popps
12-17-2009, 10:31 AM
I expect that Buck's injury will allow Hillis to carry a few more times this weekend.

jhns
12-17-2009, 10:34 AM
Reading part of this thread made me not want to read the rest. Is anyone discussing why he really isn't playing? I know he runs and catches well. I have seen that. The only thing I can think of is that he sucks at pass blocking and they think he is a liability. If it isn't that, maybe he made a bunch of mistakes and has been benched to teach him that isn't exceptable. Maybe he has a nagging injury so he can't play much? There are many possibilities.

As long as it isn't an injury, this can be a good thing. He will be fresh for the playoff run and into the playoffs. With our RBs getting banged up now, we can use his power running style late in the year.

Arkie
12-17-2009, 11:04 AM
Hillis solved the rezone problem last year and ended the mid season slump, then when he went down, the Broncos had a historic collapse. Deja-vu. I remember when Arkansas was an undefeated top 15 team when Hillis got hurt his junior season. I think they lost every game after that, and fans were saying that it was because we missed Hillis on offense and special teams. Remember, Arkansas had two backs "better" than Hillis at that time too.

rastaman
12-17-2009, 11:35 AM
Sorry bro, that's not the case.

You're not out on an island because I'm a popular guy.

You're out on an island because you can't support your argument with substance, and yet you're willing to post incessantly, accusing the staff of purposely sabotaging the team.

See, you can't "turn the tables" on me... because you're arguing from a point rooted in no basis.

"Hey Popps, the earth is flat."

"No, it's round."

"Oh yea, PROVE IT! SEE, I TURNED THE TABLES ON YOU!!"



See, you're arguing against commonly held believe that there are simple, logical football reasons that we're seeing what we're seeing with Hillis. (Or not seeing.)

People aren't taking exception with you for any other reason than you're vigorously presenting a flawed and slanderous argument.

You've been asked to support it, and you've yet to do so. So, until you do... you'll remain out there on an island, clinging to your conspiracy theory.

Popps you have no equal. I can't understand why he CIA hasn't already offered you job in their Psyops Department! to help overthrow more 3rd world country's and to propagandize its citzenry as you have your Orangemane followers. GREAT JOB DUDE!:thumbsup:

rastaman
12-17-2009, 11:43 AM
I expect that Buck's injury will allow Hillis to carry a few more times this weekend.

Gee Whiz Popps so does everyone else! Thats no great leap of logic. Prior to Moreno's epic failure last week, you would have aurgued had the question been asked who should get C-Bucks carries due to his injuries Moreno or Hillis, you would have said give the carries to Moreno b/c he's 1st on the depth chart and practices real hard, and earned it...yakity-yak-yak etc!!

Oh well Moreno told/taught you he can't handle his carries and C-Bucks w/o break down.You always see to come up with a way to avoid being wrong!

rastaman
12-17-2009, 11:49 AM
recapping this thread for everyone:

Popps: Hillis is stoopid.
Dragster: It's a conspiracy I tell you.
Rasta: I love Jay Cutler. He's so dreamy.
Popps: Stop talking about Jay Cutler, Rasta.
Rasta: Don't tell me what I can and can't do. I'm not a robot fan.
Dragster: It's a conspiracy I tell you.
Taco: Popps is stoopid.
Popps: No, Taco is stoopid.
Taco: Ha Ha.
Rasta: If Cutler and Hillis had a baby, would that baby end up in the HOF?
Dragster: It's a conspiracy I tell you.
Popps: I'm just saying, Hillis is too stoopid to play.
Rasta: It's a conspiracy I tell you.
Dragster: Rasta is right.
Watermock: It's all McPoopyPants' fault.
Popps: ...but, Hillis is stoopid.

and yes, this could easily go another 1500 posts before the end of the month.

WhoIsJohnGalt = King of the one line Sound Bytes.

WhoIsJohnGalt = I can take peoples opinions out of context like no one on the OM.

Archer81
12-17-2009, 11:53 AM
WhoIsJohnGalt = King of the one line Sound Bytes.

WhoIsJohnGalt = I can take peoples opinions out of context like no one on the OM.


Its a summation of the ridiculousness of this thread...he did not directly quote you. Unless you really asked what would happen if Hillis and Cutler had a baby, would that kid be a hall of famer.


:Broncos:

rastaman
12-17-2009, 11:57 AM
Really? Even though he can't beat out a gimpy Larsen? Even though he misses blocks on nearly every snap he as been out there as a FB this year?

Gee an outsider would have thought you were talking about Moreno! You know the rookie first round draft pick?

You would think that Hillis had busted out 1500 yards in a season and McD is just doesn't work well with white RBs with the way this thread has gone.

You would have thought that Moreno busted off over 2400 yds last year at Georgia.....and every team in the NFL was salivating to draft him with their first picks. McD has proven he works well with his favorites and certainly with his RB of whom he picked in the first round. There's nothing wrong with playing favorites! Coaches do it all the time.

Archer81
12-17-2009, 12:01 PM
You would have thought that Moreno busted off over 2400 yds last year at Georgia.....and every team in the NFL was salivating to draft him with their first picks. McD has proven he works well with his favorites and certainly with his RB of whom he picked in the first round. There's nothing wrong with playing favorites! Coaches do it all the time.


You are so right, I mean Sheffler and Marshall are definately McDaniels favorite people. I suppose you feel there is a conspiracy against Ben Hamilton because he got benched. That MUST be because Hochstein was sitting on the bench and is a former Pat, and has nothing to do with Hamilton regressing badly and getting blown up consistently.

:Broncos:

bowtown
12-17-2009, 12:11 PM
You would have thought that Moreno busted off over 2400 yds last year at Georgia.....and every team in the NFL was salivating to draft him with their first picks. McD has proven he works well with his favorites and certainly with his RB of whom he picked in the first round. There's nothing wrong with playing favorites! Coaches do it all the time.

If he has proven he works well with him, and there is nothing wrong with it, then what the hell are you still here whining about?

Popps
12-17-2009, 12:33 PM
There's nothing wrong with playing favorites! Coaches do it all the time.

There's only something wrong with it if it's proven that a coach is picking "favorites" based on issues not related to football performance.

McDaniels picks "favorites" (also knows as starters) based on performance and work ethic. This is evidenced by his clear willingness to bench his own high-profile draft picks while favoring Shanahan-regime players like Woodyard and Larsen.


Hopefully Peyton can work himself into a situation where he's considered a "favorite," as well... as McDaniels has demonstrated no bias against any past regime players, and has demonstrated that he is fearless in the court of public opinion.

Popps
12-17-2009, 01:24 PM
It's been like 30 minutes since anyone has posted on this thread.

'the **** is going on here?

vancejohnson82
12-17-2009, 01:29 PM
It's been like 30 minutes since anyone has posted on this thread.

'the **** is going on here?

I think we've made our point Popps

rastaman
12-17-2009, 01:31 PM
I'm not saying that's the case, because I don't know for sure.

But, let's just say for the sake of conversation that some of the speculation is true, and not only does Peyton not pick up things quickly, but he has trouble with accepting coaching on top of it.

Why even bring this type of speculation into the conversation if it isn't found to be true? How much does a player need to pick up if all thats required is to listen to the count, take the hand-off from the QB and read the blocks to pick up a first down. Look how much Orton struggled with picking up McD's Offense in training camp and the pre-season. Was Kyle benched? or were unfounded rumors started that Kyle isn't picking up the offense b/c of his limited brain function? Of course not. Kyle was allowed to work thru is errors/interceptions..etc. Question I have is why wasn't Hillis afforded the same treatment?

How likely would a new coach be to reward that player and set that kind of example for his team?

Its done in certain situations. I suspect there may have been rumblings of discontent amongst Bronco players b/c Moreno was literally handed the starting job merely b/c he was McD's guy and was drafted no. 1. The blow up btwn BMarsh and Moreno after his goal lne fumble a few weeks back may have shedded some light on player discontent of Moreno starting. Its speculation but its someting to consider. Just b/c you're drafted No. 1 and handed the starting job doesn't say you're the best player per say. Its says b/c of your position you were taken in the draft and the amount money you're being paid....the coach had better start you.

You're preaching that your team needs to be disciplined and intelligent, but if someone is not... do you reward them with reps because they looked good for another coach in another system last year? I'm not saying I KNOW that's the case, but if you look at things circumstantially, it's a potential explanation.

This is speculation. I'd say McD may have handed Moreno the starting job b/c his reputation and judgement is on the line as the HC to bench or not start your No. 1 picked RB. Where's the disciplined and intelligence with this type of decision of force starting Moreno merely b/c he's a No.1 pick and is paid the huge signing bonus.

The one thing I'm 100% sure is... this is not some sort of petty nonsense by McDaniels. He's ruthlessly dedicate to fielding the best players. He's not afraid to look "foolish" if he believes in something, or did everyone forget about this entire offseason? Whatever is going on with Hillis goes deeper than what he looks like "with a ball in his hand."

Again this is pure speculation. No one here at the OM has been a "Fly on Wall" during McD's coaching staff meetings or his one-on-one player meetings to discuss player pers. decisons or scripting the game plan. So we really don't know how McD arrives at his decisions. Hillis already knows the HC gets the benefit of the doubt with the owner, the media, the fans and the players. He knows he can't fight city hall. So if the speculation appears that its automatically Hillis's fault....then it must be so, b/c the HC is beyond reproach/questioning.

Again, hopefully it'll work out. It's in everyone's best interest that it does. Broncos fans would all like to see him earn his reps, I'm sure.

Agreed, lets hope all this works out for the betterment of the team b/c Broncos fans would like to see McD put the best players out there to give the team the best opportunity to win and not play favoritism and mind games with his players.

rastaman
12-17-2009, 01:34 PM
It's been like 30 minutes since anyone has posted on this thread.

'the **** is going on here?

Oh get over yourself Popps. This is the best thread you've ever posted and you're loving the attention. Enjoy it you "Egomanic" you never know when all your henchmen will come out in such mass to support your Ego & Homerism again. Enjoy it dude.ROFL!

Popps
12-17-2009, 01:34 PM
Agreed, lets hope all this works out for the betterment of the team b/c Broncos fans would like to see McD put the best players out there to give the team the best opportunity to win and not play favoritism and mind games with his players.

Luckily, there isn't a shred of evidence that this has ever occurred, and in fact... a mountain of evidence to the contrary.

So, Hillis remaining on the bench... OR NOT, will have nothing to do with "mind games" or "favoritism."

So, you can rest easy... as this hasn't happened yet and there is no sign that it will.

rastaman
12-17-2009, 01:42 PM
If he has proven he works well with him, and there is nothing wrong with it, then what the hell are you still here whining about?

Okay Bow...stop with all the drama you're one of the biggest whinners on the OM. But I digress. Point is, Playing favorites with your RB's will at times blow up in your face.

As what happened to McD against INDY last week. Need we replay the disaster that fell on the running attack due to McD forcing feeding the ball to Moreno, although it was obivous Moreno just didn't have it that day and was ill prepared to take on his carries and C-Buck's as well.

And don't give me the excuse of not having a FB! B/c McD could have scripted the running attack out of a single Tailback backfield and gave Hillis C-Bucks carries and not over working Moreno. Now that was pretty dam obvious....wasn't it!

Los Broncos
12-17-2009, 01:52 PM
It's been like 30 minutes since anyone has posted on this thread.

'the **** is going on here?

No!

rastaman
12-17-2009, 01:52 PM
Luckily, there isn't a shred of evidence that this has ever occurred, and in fact... a mountain of evidence to the contrary.

So, Hillis remaining on the bench... OR NOT, will have nothing to do with "mind games" or "favoritism."

So, you can rest easy... as this hasn't happened yet and there is no sign that it will.

Well Popps....hopefully this matter will be solved on the Field. At this stage your argument of earning the coaches trust and earning carries like we are still in training camp is foolhardy at best. The reality is, Moreno has hit the rookie wall, C-Buck is still injured....and ALL you got is HILLIS! Perhaps Hillis can teach his YOU, the HC and the coaching staff something that in December with WC implications on the line and AFC west title on the line, ya gotta go with what ya got.

McD and his coaching staff can't play mind games now. Either Hillis is given the opportunity to jump start the rushing attack b/c your no. 1, no. 2 and no.3 RB's are either injured or inconsistent, or Hillis should not be in uniform at this stage. Hopefully Hillis makes the best of his opportunity and allows McD and the coaching staff to SAVE FACE in the process.

rastaman
12-17-2009, 02:09 PM
That's what everyone is bummed about... Hillis has all of this talent and can't get himself on the field.

You act as though all Hillis needs to do is pencil himself in as the starter?? I can see the scenario....Hillis during the game approaches McD and Turner.....and says "Hey you two Knuckle Heads.....I'm going in on the next series and you better not say a word and just roll with it!

Yeah that would have went over real well. Hillis can't get himself on the field b/c McD is playing Middle Linebacker and prevents Hillis from getting out on the field.

rastaman
12-17-2009, 02:16 PM
True, but I'm thinking that if/when we lose in the playoffs, it's clearly going to be because of the conspiracy.

Think about it... this could go on for the entire off-season.

If our 4th string RB has a few good carries this Sunday against a crap team because Buckhalter is out, you'll see this thread explode.

:thumbs:

:rofl:

How about if we get you off your ego trip and start a brand new thread? Perhaps the swelling in your head will go down and you can enter back into your house instead of living in your garage b/c the double doors can accomodate your immense Big Headedness!:rofl:

If its any consolation you should get "Thread Of The Year"!:wiggle:

vancejohnson82
12-17-2009, 02:31 PM
How about if we get you off your ego trip and start a brand new thread? Perhaps the swelling in your head will go down and you can enter back into your house instead of living in your garage b/c the double doors can accomodate your immense Big Headedness!:rofl:

If its any consolation you should get "Thread Of The Year"!:wiggle:

4 straight posts...

Popps
12-17-2009, 02:35 PM
Well Popps....hopefully this matter will be solved on the Field. At this stage your argument of earning the coaches trust and earning carries like we are still in training camp is foolhardy at best.

Really? You mean, players don't have to earn reps as the season goes on?

Wow.

Well, that's the first any of us have heard of that.

Go ahead and provide the details of the conspiracy. Because if you're saying that McDaniels is not playing players based on performance and preparedness, please provide the proof. It's very simple... all you have to do is back your words with proof.

Of course, you're also going to have to disprove the many examples of other Shanahan players having success with McDaniels, and McDaniels benching his own high draft picks.

We're all waiting for the proof that Hillis' lack of carries is based on a non-football conspiracy...

Popps
12-17-2009, 02:38 PM
How about if we get you off your ego trip

Wow, no sense of humor, huh?

You're probably a lot of fun at parties.

You and Dragster sit in the corner and talk UFOs or something?

errand
12-17-2009, 03:06 PM
Look, bro... no one has been as "fun" as you around here.

You called your entire user-base idiots for discussing Shanahan's departure the day before he was fired.

Then, you called the best owner in sports a Gutless Drunk... a thread so pathetic you had to close it yourself... but only after getting your site kicked out of Broncos camp.

So, maybe you can take a break from the "look how funny your old post is" stuff.

You, of all people have no business.

Exactly....

Of all people TJ should just shut the **** up. No matter what anyone has said about any othe rplayer , TJ's still got the all-time biggest blunder quote.

"I believe, no wait....I know, when given protection, Brian Griese is the NFL's most efficient QB - bar none!"

People who live in glass houses thrwoing stones....very amusing.

broncolife
12-17-2009, 03:09 PM
I AM sure that you're never going to get McDaniels to rip a player in a media interview. He's going to give you the stock answer every time.

.







Peyton said it himself. He needs to "rethink his priorities." (Or was it motives? Either way.)

So, if you're saying Peyton is lying, and all of the circumstantial evidence that points to the obvious answer is incorrect... then it's up to YOU to prove it all wrong.

.


So you think Mcd can give a politcal correct answers but Hillis cant? I think its more likley an employee is going to give a political correct answer than the employer in fear of getting in trouble. Shiat, I wouldnt tell the media what I think of my boss.If the media told me my boss said I wasnt doing something right, then I would tell them I would work harder to get it right the next time. Eventhough I maybe thinking something different in my head.

I just dont see how Mcd can say Hillis is doing everything asked of him unless he is either lying or not asking him to do much. If he not asking him to do to much then why isnt he asking him to do more.Is it because Hillis messed up at something? If thats the case then he didnt do everything Mcd asked :)

Popps
12-17-2009, 03:13 PM
So you think Mcd can give a politcal correct answers but Hillis cant? :)

No, I think they both can give politically correct answers.

The problem is, Peyton isn't able to get on the field. Plenty of other players have. So, when McDaniels says he's not in the doghouse, that sure sounds more to me like... "I don't air my team's dirty laundry in public."

When Peyton says "I need to rethink my motives," given his history and some of the previous rumors and scouting reports we've seen on him... I have to wonder if there's some truth to what he's saying.

I KNOW McDaniels isn't giving up anything. Hillis? I have no idea. He's not going to throw the coach under the bus, but if he truly believed he was up to par... why say that you need to "rethink your motives?" That's pretty specific language, given the situation.

The point is, something is going on... and it doesn't take a genius to figure out that Hillis isn't in the best graces with this staff. If people want to believe that McDaneils has enacted some sort of bizarre vendetta against Hillis, that's their right. It's silly, but it's their right.

Some people will go to any lenghts to avoid accepting reality when it doesn't fit the way they want reality to be.

rastaman
12-17-2009, 03:59 PM
Luckily, there isn't a shred of evidence that this has ever occurred, and in fact... a mountain of evidence to the contrary.

So, Hillis remaining on the bench... OR NOT, will have nothing to do with "mind games" or "favoritism."

So, you can rest easy... as this hasn't happened yet and there is no sign that it will.

Meh! Moreno has hit the rookie wall and his psychic and legs are showing signs of getting worn down and C-Buck doesn't know whether he can stay healthy. We have 3 games left to play, so in your rampant speculative opinions, don't you think McD should try and rest his pride and joy 1st round RB as much as possible in preparation for the post season? If McD is smart thats what he should do.....but a brass young coach like McD you just never know.

So you see Popps at this stage its not about Hillis remaining on the bench or not, it comes down to McD taking care of his prized No. 1 draft pick RB by giving him some rest! McD has no other choice but to give Hillis some carries just to allow Moreno to get some REST! Moreno will play Sunday but he should not be the featured back all 4 qtrs! But you never know what decisions McD will make. He's a young gambler and stuborn and determined to be RIGHT!

We all saw Moreno stumbling around in pure exhaustion during the Indy game and sure you are well aware of how worn down tired players are more susceptible to injuries. McD was lucky that his ignoring of Moreno's tired-semi- injured state didn't end with a season ending injury. McD dodged a bullet. Whew! that was close!

I'm sure you and McD would like at least two healthy RB's going into the last 3 remaining games and into the playoffs.....RIGHT!

rastaman
12-17-2009, 04:02 PM
Wow, no sense of humor, huh?

You're probably a lot of fun at parties.

You and Dragster sit in the corner and talk UFOs or something?

Popps you come off as a person who has never played well with others. I bet during recess the teachers made you play by yourself!:thumbs:

Popps
12-17-2009, 04:08 PM
I'm sure you and McD would like at least two healthy RB's going into the last 3 remaining games and into the playoffs.....RIGHT!

I'd love to get into the playoffs. Then, I'll worry about who is healthy.

McDaniels is going to use the players that are most talented and most prepared to get us into that position.

Buckhalter is hurt, so I'm sure McDaniels will resort to giving Hillis more carries this weekend. I hope he kicks serious ass and runs the **** over people.

That said, it won't change the circumstances of why he hasn't seen more action to date.

rastaman
12-17-2009, 04:09 PM
Really? You mean, players don't have to earn reps as the season goes on? ...

Really Popps! are you still riding your "earned reps" BS! Its too late for that b/c with Moreno warned down and C-Buck injured......McD has no one else to turn to except Hillis. Maybe McD will suit up and play in place of C-Buck, McD is only 33 years old he can do it. This way he can continue the mind games and ask the question is Hillis ready----has Hillis earned his reps! Sheeeesh dude give it up why don'tcha!!Hilarious!

rastaman
12-17-2009, 04:11 PM
I'd love to get into the playoffs. Then, I'll worry about who is healthy.

McDaniels is going to use the players that are most talented and most prepared to get us into that position.

Buckhalter is hurt, so I'm sure McDaniels will resort to giving Hillis more carries this weekend. I hope he kicks serious ass and runs the **** over people.

That said, it won't change the circumstances of why he hasn't seen more action to date.

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.....calm down we hear ya Ole Popps, we all want Hillis to do well. When your're trying to be right all the time.....CIRCUMSTANCES NEVER MATTER ANYWAY.:~ohyah!:

broncolife
12-17-2009, 04:23 PM
HILLISMANE
THE HILLIS THREAD THAT NEVER ENDS.

Tried editing the organemane sign but didnt have the stuff do it.

Popps
12-17-2009, 04:28 PM
God help us if he had a semi-decent day Sunday. We'll blow by Neck Pony by Monday afternoon! :)

broncolife
12-17-2009, 04:28 PM
lol

Popps, rastaman, dragster, and errand all past the 100 post rule just on this thread.

Bronco Yoda
12-17-2009, 05:11 PM
This should help push this baby over 2k :P

November 30, 2009
Out Of The Running
PHIL TAYLOR
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1163298/index.htm

They will usually accept the backhanded compliments without complaint: "Hey, you're pretty fast for a white dude." They will smile when they get tagged with a nickname like Eminem or K-Fed. (Get it? They're Caucasian guys trying to do what African-Americans tend to do better.) White running backs will take all the good-natured teasing you've got, and they'll ask for only one thing in return—the football.

Doesn't seem like much, does it? Just give them the ball and with it the chance to prove that productive rushers come in more than one shade. But coaches don't seem to have that handoff in their playbook. You're more likely to see Bill Belichick dance the hokeypokey on the sideline than find a white tailback in the NFL. There isn't a single white feature back on any of the 32 teams; through Sunday the Bengals' Brian Leonard led all white rushers in carries, with 24 (for 66 yards). White running backs break through slightly more often on the college level, where Stanford's Toby Gerhart is third in the nation in rushing—but there is only one other white back, Nevada's Luke Lipincott, among the top 50 ground-gainers. Of the BCS teams Stanford is the only one whose primary running back is white.

Maybe you're thinking that the racial imbalance is because Caucasian backs just can't keep up. You watch Adrian Peterson and Maurice Jones-Drew and say, "Find me a white runner who can do that." But there's plenty of anecdotal evidence to suggest that white backs haven't been competing just against other players; they've also been battling the perception that they're not cut out for the job. Four years ago Gerhart was a hotshot at Norco (Calif.) High, visiting USC on a recruiting trip with fellow runners C.J. Gable and Stafon Johnson, who are black. The Trojans told Gerhart they would love to have him—as an outside linebacker or a fullback to block for guys like Johnson and Gable.

That's a little like being told the leading role is going to another actor, but how'd you like to be his bodyguard? Says Norco High coach Todd Gerhart of his son, "Even today with all he's done I had a linebacker coach say to me, 'You give me one year with him, and I'll turn him into Junior Seau.'"

Gerhart eventually got his college chance, but others, like Dillon Romain, are still waiting. Last spring Romain seemed to have the necessary credentials to attract droves of college recruiters. He's big enough (5'11", 210 pounds) and fast enough (4.46 in the 40 according to Scout.com, a recruiting website), and as a senior at powerhouse Don Bosco Prep in Ramsey, N.J., he rushed for 1,435 yards and 25 touchdowns, earning the state's Gatorade Player of the Year award. Each of the previous 10 winners of that honor earned Division I scholarships, including three current NFL players, Broncos quarterback Chris Simms, Bears tight end Greg Olsen and Jaguars offensive tackle Eugene Monroe—but not Romain. When he received no D-I offers by national signing day, he decided to take a postgraduate year at Blair Academy in Blairstown, N.J.

For those who do reach the NFL, the path doesn't get any easier. In 2003 Brock Forsey was a Bears backup who started one game in place of injured starter Anthony Thomas and was spectacular, rushing for 134 yards and a touchdown on 27 carries. The next week Thomas returned to the lineup and Forsey went back to the bench, getting only three carries. He never started another NFL game. "It's hard to tell exactly what happened," says Forsey, who starred at Boise State and is now an executive at a title and escrow company in Nampa, Idaho. "No one ever said anything about race. But there may be some preconceived notions out there. A white guy from Idaho isn't what you have in mind when you envision an NFL running back."

Evaluating players shouldn't be about what we envision but what we see. That lesson should have been learned from the decades of discrimination against black quarterbacks at colleges and in the pros. Despite the obvious parallels, no one seems to be as concerned that white tailbacks are getting the same treatment. "I did dozens of interviews about the lack of opportunity for an African-American to be a QB back in the 1980s and early '90s," says Richard Lapchick, director of the Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport at Central Florida, "but this is only the second time I have been asked about the lack of opportunity for whites to be running backs." Maybe that's because racism isn't the culprit here; it's mostly white coaches and talent evaluators who are choosing black running backs over white ones. But it doesn't make the color line any less real.

It's not that football needs to aim for some acceptable distribution of races throughout the field, and it's not that every white would-be tailback who is passed over or directed to a different position is the victim of stereotyping. It's about equality of opportunity, just as it has always been. The sports world may be enlightened enough not to immediately dismiss the idea of African-Americans as quarterbacks or coaches anymore, but maybe we haven't come as far as we thought. Maybe we've just found a new demographic to discourage. The dashing of dreams is always an ugly thing, no matter what shade the dreamers come in.

Popps
12-17-2009, 05:15 PM
Yes!!!!!!

THE RACE CARD!!!


10K posts, here we come!!!

Popps
12-17-2009, 05:17 PM
The dashing of dreams is always an ugly thing, no matter what shade the dreamers come in.

By the way, the word "ever" is thrown around way too much around here.... but that absolutely has to be ONE OF the silliest goddamned pieces I've ever read. Just hysterical. I kept waiting for the punch-line, then realized, there wasn't one. (Which IS actually the punch-line.)

Mr.Meanie
12-17-2009, 05:17 PM
This should help push this baby over 2k :P

November 30, 2009
Out Of The Running
PHIL TAYLOR
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1163298/index.htm

They will usually accept the backhanded compliments without complaint: "Hey, you're pretty fast for a white dude." They will smile when they get tagged with a nickname like Eminem or K-Fed. (Get it? They're Caucasian guys trying to do what African-Americans tend to do better.) White running backs will take all the good-natured teasing you've got, and they'll ask for only one thing in return—the football.

Doesn't seem like much, does it? Just give them the ball and with it the chance to prove that productive rushers come in more than one shade. But coaches don't seem to have that handoff in their playbook. You're more likely to see Bill Belichick dance the hokeypokey on the sideline than find a white tailback in the NFL. There isn't a single white feature back on any of the 32 teams; through Sunday the Bengals' Brian Leonard led all white rushers in carries, with 24 (for 66 yards). White running backs break through slightly more often on the college level, where Stanford's Toby Gerhart is third in the nation in rushing—but there is only one other white back, Nevada's Luke Lipincott, among the top 50 ground-gainers. Of the BCS teams Stanford is the only one whose primary running back is white.

Maybe you're thinking that the racial imbalance is because Caucasian backs just can't keep up. You watch Adrian Peterson and Maurice Jones-Drew and say, "Find me a white runner who can do that." But there's plenty of anecdotal evidence to suggest that white backs haven't been competing just against other players; they've also been battling the perception that they're not cut out for the job. Four years ago Gerhart was a hotshot at Norco (Calif.) High, visiting USC on a recruiting trip with fellow runners C.J. Gable and Stafon Johnson, who are black. The Trojans told Gerhart they would love to have him—as an outside linebacker or a fullback to block for guys like Johnson and Gable.

That's a little like being told the leading role is going to another actor, but how'd you like to be his bodyguard? Says Norco High coach Todd Gerhart of his son, "Even today with all he's done I had a linebacker coach say to me, 'You give me one year with him, and I'll turn him into Junior Seau.'"

Gerhart eventually got his college chance, but others, like Dillon Romain, are still waiting. Last spring Romain seemed to have the necessary credentials to attract droves of college recruiters. He's big enough (5'11", 210 pounds) and fast enough (4.46 in the 40 according to Scout.com, a recruiting website), and as a senior at powerhouse Don Bosco Prep in Ramsey, N.J., he rushed for 1,435 yards and 25 touchdowns, earning the state's Gatorade Player of the Year award. Each of the previous 10 winners of that honor earned Division I scholarships, including three current NFL players, Broncos quarterback Chris Simms, Bears tight end Greg Olsen and Jaguars offensive tackle Eugene Monroe—but not Romain. When he received no D-I offers by national signing day, he decided to take a postgraduate year at Blair Academy in Blairstown, N.J.

For those who do reach the NFL, the path doesn't get any easier. In 2003 Brock Forsey was a Bears backup who started one game in place of injured starter Anthony Thomas and was spectacular, rushing for 134 yards and a touchdown on 27 carries. The next week Thomas returned to the lineup and Forsey went back to the bench, getting only three carries. He never started another NFL game. "It's hard to tell exactly what happened," says Forsey, who starred at Boise State and is now an executive at a title and escrow company in Nampa, Idaho. "No one ever said anything about race. But there may be some preconceived notions out there. A white guy from Idaho isn't what you have in mind when you envision an NFL running back."

Evaluating players shouldn't be about what we envision but what we see. That lesson should have been learned from the decades of discrimination against black quarterbacks at colleges and in the pros. Despite the obvious parallels, no one seems to be as concerned that white tailbacks are getting the same treatment. "I did dozens of interviews about the lack of opportunity for an African-American to be a QB back in the 1980s and early '90s," says Richard Lapchick, director of the Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport at Central Florida, "but this is only the second time I have been asked about the lack of opportunity for whites to be running backs." Maybe that's because racism isn't the culprit here; it's mostly white coaches and talent evaluators who are choosing black running backs over white ones. But it doesn't make the color line any less real.

It's not that football needs to aim for some acceptable distribution of races throughout the field, and it's not that every white would-be tailback who is passed over or directed to a different position is the victim of stereotyping. It's about equality of opportunity, just as it has always been. The sports world may be enlightened enough not to immediately dismiss the idea of African-Americans as quarterbacks or coaches anymore, but maybe we haven't come as far as we thought. Maybe we've just found a new demographic to discourage. The dashing of dreams is always an ugly thing, no matter what shade the dreamers come in.

My only regret in life is that bf7 isn't here to respond to this post.

bowtown
12-17-2009, 05:18 PM
This thread just went nuclear.

Bronco Yoda
12-17-2009, 05:19 PM
Yes!!!!!!

THE RACE CARD!!!


10K posts, here we come!!!


You owe me one Pops :rofl:

listopencil
12-17-2009, 05:20 PM
http://www.denverpost.com/premium/broncos/ci_13998702





3. The short-yardage struggles had nothing to do with the runners and everything to do with the offensive line.




I'm still going with McD feels that Mo/Buck can be more effective with our current level of run blocking, based on what Hillis did earlier in the year when given a chance to perform.

bowtown
12-17-2009, 05:25 PM
.

Popps
12-17-2009, 05:33 PM
You owe me one Pops :rofl:

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2007/04/invishighfive.jpg

strafen
12-17-2009, 06:06 PM
There's only something wrong with it if it's proven that a coach is picking "favorites" based on issues not related to football performance.



Really?
Then that explains why he's got a long snapper from New England to replace Mike Leach who was or is considered top 3 amongst long snappers in the NFL.
Not to mentioned Mike Leach was also a back-up tight end.

So, if I read what you're saying, Mcdaniels was wrong in picking Paxton and forcing Mike Leach out, correct?

Bronco Yoda
12-17-2009, 06:11 PM
http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2007/04/invishighfive.jpg
http://www.prowebsurfer.com/public/toolbar/content/images/0/0/0/3/2/0003231/1784/HIGH%20FIVE!.jpg

strafen
12-17-2009, 06:12 PM
Luckily, there isn't a shred of evidence that this has ever occurred, and in fact... a mountain of evidence to the contrary.

So, Hillis remaining on the bench... OR NOT, will have nothing to do with "mind games" or "favoritism."

So, you can rest easy... as this hasn't happened yet and there is no sign that it will.

No Popps. It's got nothing to do with favoritism, just has something to do with McDaniels justifying picking a RB with our first pick, and going out of his way with questionable roster or line-up moves to make sure his guy gets as many carries as he can, even if it means getting stuffed repeatedly on 3rd and 4th and short in critical plays with the game on the line...

Arkie
12-17-2009, 06:20 PM
I'm still going with McD feels that Mo/Buck can be more effective with our current level of run blocking, based on what Hillis did earlier in the year when given a chance to perform.

He wasn't given much of a chance to measure effectiveness, but 4.5 yards is usually more effective than 4.1 yards.

Popps
12-17-2009, 06:29 PM
Really?
Then that explains why he's got a long snapper from New England to replace Mike Leach who was or is considered top 3 amongst long snappers in the NFL.
Not to mentioned Mike Leach was also a back-up tight end.

So, if I read what you're saying, Mcdaniels was wrong in picking Paxton and forcing Mike Leach out, correct?

Horrible analogy.

You're comparing a guy who never saw the field for McDaniels to Hillis, who's been a deep reserve for 2 years? Clearly, McDaniels wanted Paxton's presense and famiarity with the STs, etc. McDaniels made a decision based on a prior experiene of a quality player. There are technical reasons a coach brings in a player with experience in his system.

See the difference?

McDaniels brought in Paxton because of prior experience and for quality reasons. That's coaching 101.

Your claim is that McDaniels is unjustly singling out one player and benching him for non-football reasons.

So, if you want to make analogies, you're going to have to do it correctly.
You'll need to use a player on the current roster who McDaniels has had enough time to analyze as a player... and has benched that player for non-football reasons.

Keep trying, though. We've got a long way to go for 10K.

strafen
12-17-2009, 06:46 PM
Horrible analogy.

You're comparing a guy who never saw the field for McDaniels to Hillis, who's been a deep reserve for 2 years? Clearly, McDaniels wanted Paxton's presense and famiarity with the STs, etc. McDaniels made a decision based on a prior experiene of a quality player. There are technical reasons a coach brings in a player with experience in his system.

See the difference?

McDaniels brought in Paxton because of prior experience and for quality reasons. That's coaching 101.

Your claim is that McDaniels is unjustly singling out one player and benching him for non-football reasons.

So, if you want to make analogies, you're going to have to do it correctly.
You'll need to use a player on the current roster who McDaniels has had enough time to analyze as a player... and has benched that player for non-football reasons.

Keep trying, though. We've got a long way to go for 10K.Of course is a horrible analogy.
Coaching 101 my ass, man.
We're talking about Mike Leach one of the best at his position in the NFL. What that means to you is quality and experience. Nuff said!

I wasn't expecting you to admit I've got a point there to refute what you've said.
A long snapper brings a lot to a team, ya' know :thumbsup:

houghtam
12-17-2009, 06:54 PM
Clearly, McDaniels wanted Paxton's presense and famiarity with the STs, etc. McDaniels made a decision based on a prior experiene of a quality player.

Cue rasta and dragster saying "ST's? What's there to be familiar with? You just line up and snap the ball! Only farther."

houghtam
12-17-2009, 06:55 PM
A long snapper brings a lot to a team, ya' know :thumbsup:

Wow, I couldn't even get my reply in on time.

Popps
12-17-2009, 08:18 PM
A long snapper brings a lot to a team, ya' know :thumbsup:

Wait, so you're refuting your own horrible analogy?

If the position is so insignificant, why use it for the basis of your conspiracy theory?

Again, if you want to prove that McDaniels is purposely sabotaging the team... you'll need to provide real-world examples. A guy who never played for us this year being shown the door in favor of a guy the coach brought from another system is not remotely comparable.

You need to show us someone ON THE CURRENT ROSTER who is the victim of McDaniels' "punish innocent players to the detriment of the team" campaign.

You've given no examples. Sorry, guys who never played for our coach don't qualify.

Hillis has had a chance to earn a starting job, and not only did not... but seemed to cement himself further down the depth chart as the season went on while PLENTY of other Shanahan guys flourished.


You'll need to refute the logic and evidence at hand, not the other way around.

Keep trying!

:thumbsup:

strafen
12-17-2009, 08:34 PM
Wait, so you're refuting your own horrible analogy?

If the position is so insignificant, why use it for the basis of your conspiracy theory?

Again, if you want to prove that McDaniels is purposely sabotaging the team... you'll need to provide real-world examples. A guy who never played for us this year being shown the door in favor of a guy the coach brought from another system is not remotely comparable.

You need to show us someone ON THE CURRENT ROSTER who is the victim of McDaniels' "punish innocent players to the detriment of the team" campaign.

You've given no examples. Sorry, guys who never played for our coach don't qualify.

Hillis has had a chance to earn a starting job, and not only did not... but seemed to cement himself further down the depth chart as the season went on while PLENTY of other Shanahan guys flourished.


You'll need to refute the logic and evidence at hand, not the other way around.

Keep trying!

:thumbsup:

A long snapper was never a position of concern where Mcdaniels had to go out of his way to replace one of the best in the NFL with one of his guys....

strafen
12-17-2009, 08:40 PM
Wait, so you're refuting your own horrible analogy?

If the position is so insignificant, why use it for the basis of your conspiracy theory?

Again, if you want to prove that McDaniels is purposely sabotaging the team... you'll need to provide real-world examples. A guy who never played for us this year being shown the door in favor of a guy the coach brought from another system is not remotely comparable.

You need to show us someone ON THE CURRENT ROSTER who is the victim of McDaniels' "punish innocent players to the detriment of the team" campaign.

You've given no examples. Sorry, guys who never played for our coach don't qualify.

Hillis has had a chance to earn a starting job, and not only did not... but seemed to cement himself further down the depth chart as the season went on while PLENTY of other Shanahan guys flourished.


You'll need to refute the logic and evidence at hand, not the other way around.

Keep trying!

:thumbsup:What conspiracy, moron?

Popps
12-17-2009, 08:42 PM
A long snapper was never a position of concern where Mcdaniels had to go out of his way to replace one of the best in the NFL with one of his guys....

When did the topic of conversation change to our ex-long snapper?

Seems like we're getting off track.


We're all waiting for you to show us the example of the CURRENT ROSTER player who has worked with McD all season, and been purposely benched to the detriment of the team.

That's all you have to do is provide some proof. Is that so much to ask?

You're making a lot of claims. You simply need to back them up.

Shouldn't be a problem, right?

strafen
12-17-2009, 08:46 PM
When did the topic of conversation change to our ex-long snapper?

Seems like we're getting off track.


We're all waiting for you to show us the example of the CURRENT ROSTER player who has worked with McD all season, and been purposely benched to the detriment of the team.

That's all you have to do is provide some proof. Is that so much to ask?

You're making a lot of claims. You simply need to back them up.

Shouldn't be a problem, right?

Hillis and Stokley come to mind. There you go. Shoot that down as well...

BTW, I provided the Mike Leach example, but you conveniently changed the rules to CURRENT ROSTEr since that would play to your advantage since I've once again proven you wrong. But you keep going with the wind...

Popps
12-17-2009, 09:03 PM
Hillis and Stokley come to mind. There you go. Shoot that down as well.

Stokely was a slot receiver and a part-time contributor last year.

Stokely is a slot receiver and a part-time contributor this season.

Have you heard of him being in the doghouse? I haven't heard that. But, if you have proof that he's having his reps withheld purposely to damage the team, please share that information.

We'd all like to learn more about the conspiracy.

Again, the proof is on you, though... not us. Prove that Stokely is being restricted due to a non-football reason, and we'll all be happy to jump on board the conspiracy train.

Popps
12-17-2009, 09:06 PM
BTW, I provided the Mike Leach example, but you conveniently changed the rules .

No, you simply provided an example that didn't relate to the discussion.

You could say that Randy Moss is having a worse season this year than last, but see... he doesn't play on our team this year.

Hate to confuse you, but you should probably stick with Broncos players if you're trying to make a point that the Broncos coach is purposely sabotaging the team by benching the better players.

Then, I suppose you'll need to go into detail and explain to us why McDaniels furthers his cause by purposely making his team perform poorly


You've got your work cut out, but I know you can do it. You're certainly willing to make a lot of claims, so I'm sure you'll be rolling out the evidence any time now.

strafen
12-17-2009, 09:15 PM
Whatever the fuc* you say man. I'm done arguing you stupid bull****...

Archer81
12-17-2009, 09:17 PM
Match point, Popps.


:Broncos:

strafen
12-17-2009, 09:22 PM
Match point, Popps.


:Broncos:You got your nose up the crack of his ass, don't you?
The guy is ridiculous.
You can't argue with somebody who keeps changing the rules and situations to his advantage.
If you get your head out of his ass, you too could see that...

Archer81
12-17-2009, 09:24 PM
You got your nose up the crack of his ass, don't you?
The guy is ridiculous.
You can't argue with somebody who keeps changing the rules and situations to his advantage.
If you get your head out of his ass, you too could see that...


Insightful and oh so classy.

So, where is your proof about the Hillis conspiracy?

:Broncos:

SoDak Bronco
12-17-2009, 09:28 PM
why are we still talking about this guy? wow 66 pages, that is foneco like.

Popps
12-17-2009, 09:44 PM
You can't argue with somebody who keeps changing the rules and situations to his advantage...

What, you thought you could give examples from guys who don't play with us, and we'd all buy into your conspiracy?

:P

C'mon, dude. The rules never changed. It's very simple. You've got a public forum to prove the conspiracy.

Just name the players McDaniels has purposely benched for non-football reasons to sabotage the team. It CAN'T just be Hillis. There must be more.

Then, explain all of the successful Shanahan guys and him benching his own high-profile draft picks when he saw it fit.

Again, a lot of work for you to do... but you're awfully mouthy. I'm sure you're up to it.... right?

uplink
12-18-2009, 12:52 AM
Seems McD is not using other talented players enough: Stockly, Scheftler, Royal
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

Dagmar
12-18-2009, 06:22 AM
Seems McD is not using other talented players enough: Stockly, Scheftler, Royal
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

:spit: Who?

rastaman
12-18-2009, 06:47 AM
Whatever the **** you say man. I'm done arguing you stupid bull****...

Popps will try and wear you down with flip-flops, propaganda, psyops, creating red herrings and endless company-corporate rants. I don't know why Bowlen and McD haven't hired this homer-hack yet. Perhaps there's something in his past that has caused Bowlen to back off hiring him.

rastaman
12-18-2009, 07:18 AM
:spit: Who?

You know all those gifted talented receivers drafted by Shanny and left to offensive wonder boy genius rookie HC to make the most of their talents. You know all those Shanny drafted-signed receivers who secretly talk about how they hate having to endure catching Ortons wobbly-inaccurate passes.

Its those guys.^5

rastaman
12-18-2009, 07:36 AM
Seems McD is not using other talented players enough: Stockly, Scheftler, Royal
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">

When McD was hired as our new coach he hit the jackpot and had the best Christmas of his young life. He has so many offensively skilled toys left to him by Shanahan he's like a kid deciding which toy(s) he wants to play with on Sunday.

Gort
12-18-2009, 07:41 AM
You know all those gifted talented receivers drafted by Shanny and left to offensive wonder boy genius rookie HC to make the most of their talents. You know all those Shanny drafted-signed receivers who secretly talk about how they hate having to endure catching Ortons wobbly-inaccurate passes.

Its those guys.^5

i've got a couple of questions for you rasta,

1) who do you think killed JFK? was it Oswald alone, or was there a bigger conspiracy?
2) did we send men to the moon, or was that faked in a studio somewhere?
3) did Bush blow up the WTC or did Al Qaeda?
4) do we (or did we) have captured UFO's at area 51?
5) loch ness monster? real? not real?

i'm interested in your real answers here. no need to be overly wordy. just tell me what you think so i can figure out what number to assign for you on my official OM bat**** crazy scale (1=not bat**** crazy, 10=seriously bat**** crazy).

:P

rastaman
12-18-2009, 07:54 AM
i've got a couple of questions for you rasta,

1) who do you think killed JFK? was it Oswald alone, or was there a bigger conspiracy?

No not at all....it was either you or someone in your family!

2) did we send men to the moon, or was that faked in a studio somewhere?

Again the U.S. sent YOU to the Moon....but you were not supposed to return to earth.

3) did Bush blow up the WTC or did Al Qaeda?

Bush new Al Qaeda was planning to blow up the WTC.....he just sat on ass and on stayed on vacation and just didn't give a Rats Ass.

4) do we (or did we) have captured UFO's at area 51?

You'll have to ask Bowlen and Joshua McDaniel's about that one.

5) loch ness monster? real? not real?

Again, I'll need to refer you to Bowlen and McDaniel's for that answer on the grounds of "Need-to-know"! Only Bowlen and McD has top secret clearances to answer that. Sorry....wish I could be of more help to you.

i'm interested in your real answers here. no need to be overly wordy. just tell me what you think so i can figure out what number to assign for you on my official OM bat**** crazy scale (1=not bat**** crazy, 10=seriously bat**** crazy).

:P

I hope this answers all your "Battle-of-the-Banjos" Hill Billy questions.

By the way! Are you up-to-date with all your dental work? Last time I saw you, you were missing three teeth on top and three teeth on the bottom! You gotta get your "Front-Grill" fixed L'il Abner.

MERRY CHRISTMAS!

errand
12-18-2009, 07:58 AM
Rasta: If Cutler and Hillis had a baby, would that baby end up in the HOF?

LOL

I'm thinking it'd end up on the bench, only to be traded later

Gort
12-18-2009, 07:59 AM
I'm thinking it'd end up on the bench, only to be traded later

and it wouldn't return Bowlen's phone calls, but only because it was too stoopid to know how to use a cellphone. :wiggle:

rastaman
12-18-2009, 08:00 AM
I'm thinking it'd end up on the bench, only to be traded later

Errand if you and Popps had a baby together how much would it ressemble Pat Bowlen? :wiggle:

errand
12-18-2009, 08:00 AM
Hillis solved the rezone problem last year and ended the mid season slump, then when he went down, the Broncos had a historic collapse. Deja-vu. I remember when Arkansas was an undefeated top 15 team when Hillis got hurt his junior season. I think they lost every game after that, and fans were saying that it was because we missed Hillis on offense and special teams. Remember, Arkansas had two backs "better" than Hillis at that time too.

...you would think such a playmaker and team icon wouldn't have lasted until the 7th round, huh?

rastaman
12-18-2009, 08:02 AM
and it wouldn't return Bowlen's phone calls, but only because it was too stoopid to know how to use a cellphone. :wiggle:

Bowlen didn't recall calling Cutler nor did Bowlen recall if Cutler ever returned his calls! Go Figure! ROFL!

Bowlen probably doesn't even remember firing Mike Shanahan....he probably thought McDaniel's fired Shanny!:sunshine:

rastaman
12-18-2009, 08:03 AM
...you would think such a playmaker and team icon wouldn't have lasted until the 7th round, huh?

Hey Dumb Billy.....why did Terrell Davis last until the 6th round?

Gort
12-18-2009, 08:05 AM
for the record. i like Hillis. i think McD SHOULD do what he can to get the guy a few touches every game. i don't know why he hasn't had as much playing time as we'd all like, except for what McD has said about the situation. i don't think McD is lying. I do think he might have more reasons than he stated. I don't think Hillis is dumb and i think that's a horrible argument for explaining why somebody is on the team but not able to get playing time.

however, this thread moved beyond rational discussion long ago, so i now consider this thread to exist solely for entertainment purposes. off my soapbox now.

bowtown
12-18-2009, 08:11 AM
i've got a couple of questions for you rasta,

1) who do you think killed JFK? was it Oswald alone, or was there a bigger conspiracy?
2) did we send men to the moon, or was that faked in a studio somewhere?
3) did Bush blow up the WTC or did Al Qaeda?
4) do we (or did we) have captured UFO's at area 51?
5) loch ness monster? real? not real?

i'm interested in your real answers here. no need to be overly wordy. just tell me what you think so i can figure out what number to assign for you on my official OM bat**** crazy scale (1=not bat**** crazy, 10=seriously bat**** crazy).

:P

Oh now you've done it. Once Gaffney finds out about this thread, it's all over.

rastaman
12-18-2009, 08:20 AM
Hey at least Hillis tried to bring back the MILE HIGH SLAUTE! :D

vancejohnson82
12-18-2009, 09:55 AM
Hey at least Hillis tried to bring back the MILE HIGH SLAUTE! :D

I Mile High Saluted your mom last night...

bowtown
12-18-2009, 10:02 AM
I Mile High Saluted your mom last night...

http://hiscrivener.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/holy-pow-batman.jpg

Arkie
12-18-2009, 11:48 AM
...you would think such a playmaker and team icon wouldn't have lasted until the 7th round, huh?

That's why the immediate buzz in the media was that Denver got a 7th round steal. We all knew he would make the team, but nobody knew he would be a top rookie that would have gone in the first 2 rounds if we had a draft do-over. But lasting to the 7th was strange anyway since he was predicted to go as high as the 3rd and was rated over Jacob Hester, the FB drafted in the 3rd.

bowtown
12-18-2009, 11:56 AM
That's why the immediate buzz in the media was that Denver got a 7th round steal. We all knew he would make the team, but nobody knew he would be a top rookie that would have gone in the first 2 rounds if we had a draft do-over. But lasting to the 7th was strange anyway since he was predicted to go as high as the 3rd and was rated over Jacob Hester, the FB drafted in the 3rd.

Yeah it's almost like the front offices of all 32 teams had information and knew more about the drafts and players than the media... weird. Also, he had 5 nice games last year. I wouldn't exactly say that would have vaulted him into the first two rounds of last year's draft... even if hind sight is 20/20.

rastaman
12-18-2009, 12:01 PM
I Mile High Saluted your mom last night...

That can't be possible b/c your mom and I pro-created YOU! I was in the birthing room when you came into this world! Sorry I haven't been around in your life MUCH! Oh well life goes on ORPHAN. Ha!

bowtown
12-18-2009, 12:03 PM
That can't be possible b/c your mom and I pro-created YOU! I was in the birthing room when you came into this world! Sorry I haven't been around in your life MUCH! Oh well life goes on ORPHAN. Ha!

Stick to the whining... you are better at that than the comedy.

Arkie
12-18-2009, 12:21 PM
There was speculation why he fell to the 7th from the day he was drafted. There were rumors back then that Houston Nutt made disparaging remarks to NFL scouts about Hillis. The joke was "He rubbed Nutt the wrong way." The SIGMA "preparation in college" Test that started off this whole thread is the reason he fell.


just days after the draft, they were trying to explain his fall.

LIKE IT IS : Plenty to love about Hillis despite strange fall
by WALLY HALL
Posted on Sunday, May 11, 2008

On The South Stands, a Denver Broncos Internet forum, the 2008 NFL Draft has been a favorite subject.

South Stands Junkie wrote of Peyton Hillis: "I love this pick.... He looks like he should be playing tight end."

The next Broncos booster was Bronco Militia, who posed a very legitimate question: "How does a guy that blocks for two 1, 000-yard rushers in the SEC fall to the seventh round ?"

That question has been asked around Arkansas for several days about the former Razorback.

Consider that in the days leading up to the draft, experts thought Peyton Hillis was a third- or fourth-round pick, which would have brought him to camp with a much better chance of being an automatic to make the squad.

In his career at Arkansas, he rushed for 960 yards (4. 7 average per carry ) and scored 12 touchdowns, six as a freshman before Darren McFadden and Felix Jones arrived on campus.

He caught 118 passes for 1, 197 yards and 11 touchdowns, returned 12 kickoffs for 213 yards (17. 8 average ) and 25 punts for 257 yards (10. 3 ).

In his final regular-season game, he lit up eventual national champion LSU for 151 all-purpose yards and four touchdowns.

Some thought that might jump him up to the third round because he showed his versatility.

Hillis is a guy who in the NFL can play fullback, H-back, tailback and return kicks or punts (as a Razorback he also saw action at tight end and wide receiver ).

For his 6-1, 240-pound muscled frame, he has good speed and great hands.

A Parade All-American out of Conway High School, Hillis found himself primarily as a blocker his final three seasons for McFadden and Jones, both first-round picks.

Mostly he did it without complaint, but when you have been scoring touchdowns your entire life, there is going to be a period of adjustment.

Yet, while he could be outspoken at times and almost critical of some coaching decisions after tough, emotional losses, he's a young man who now always talks about God and how important he is in his life.

Still, why did Peyton Hillis fall to the seventh round, the 227 th player taken overall ?

Many Houston Nutt critics want to believe the former UA coach did not give him a good review to NFL scouts, that Hillis' honesty had rubbed Nutt the wrong way.

Josh Melton, a four-year letterman on the Razorbacks' offensive line, called Sports Animals on Arkansas Radio Network last week, unsolicited, to say he believed Nutt had told scouts there were character and injury issues and that Hillis is tough to have in the locker room.

That last one has a familiar ring because Hillis was not afraid to speak his mind going all the way back to his sophomore season, when he told the media he might move himself to linebacker, which caused a stir with fans and the coaching staff.

However, it would be ridiculous for anyone, especially Nutt, to say Hillis would not play with pain.

His playing hurt is well-documented.

He suffered a severe thigh bruise his junior season that developed into a career-threatening calcium deposit because he refused to sit out. When he finally was forced to sit, the Razorbacks did not win another game that season.

As a freshman, he played with a broken bone in his back.

Hillis is tougher than a claw hammer on a pecan.

As for character, Hillis might have made some missteps when he first arrived, but he certainly was not a featured name on the police blotter.

There might have been other issues that concerned NFL scouts. After Hillis was drafted, the Denver Post reported he was not a strong blocker.

Whatever it was that caused Hillis to slide to the seventh round in the draft will continue to be debated, but most likely, it will remain a mystery.

Yet, it is reminiscent of another former Razorback by the name of Jason Peters, who was not drafted and is now a Pro Bowler.

rastaman
12-18-2009, 12:29 PM
Stick to the whining... you are better at that than the comedy.

Bow out why dont'cha....Vancy doesn't need you stick up for him! I rasised him better than that.

bowtown
12-18-2009, 12:35 PM
There was speculation why he fell to the 7th from the day he was drafted. There were rumors back then that Houston Nutt made disparaging remarks to NFL scouts about Hillis. The joke was "He rubbed Nutt the wrong way." The SIGMA "preparation in college" Test that started off this whole thread is the reason he fell.


just days after the draft, they were trying to explain his fall.

What's your argument? Yes, this combined with his lack of touches under two NFL head coaches, only helps to support all of the negatives on his SIGMA test and scouting reports. It is most likely what caused him to fall in the draft and unfortunately appears to still be an issue with him.

Looks like it wasn't just a conspiracy in Arakansas either... go figure.

rastaman
12-18-2009, 01:37 PM
What's your argument? Yes, this combined with his lack of touches under two NFL head coaches, only helps to support all of the negatives on his SIGMA test and scouting reports. It is most likely what caused him to fall in the draft and unfortunately appears to still be an issue with him.

Looks like it wasn't just a conspiracy in Arakansas either... go figure.

Are you a Touchy-Feely type of guy! Screw the SIGMA test and scouting reports.....Hillis says to all his doubters! Put ON A UNIFORM! ;D

driver
12-18-2009, 01:42 PM
phyco-babel b.s....

bowtown
12-18-2009, 01:45 PM
Are you a Touchy-Feely type of guy! Screw the SIGMA test and scouting reports.....Hillis says to all his doubters! Put ON A UNIFORM! ;D

And then promptly gets flagged on the kickoff.

rastaman
12-18-2009, 01:53 PM
And then promptly gets flagged on the kickoff.

Gotta have a uniform on to get flagged.....Correct! Fans who act as CHEER-LEADERS can't get FLAGGED! You wouldn't be one of those fans would-ya?:giggle:

Gort
12-18-2009, 02:06 PM
Gotta have a uniform on to get flagged.....Correct! Fans who act as CHEER-LEADERS can't get FLAGGED! You wouldn't be one of those fans would-ya?:giggle:

seriously rasta, enquiring minds want to know...

sasquatch? real? or fiction?

watermock
12-18-2009, 02:10 PM
You should be asking me.

Popps
12-18-2009, 02:17 PM
You should be asking me.

Oh boy.

This should be good.

Arkie
12-18-2009, 04:44 PM
What's your argument? Yes, this combined with his lack of touches under two NFL head coaches, only helps to support all of the negatives on his SIGMA test and scouting reports. It is most likely what caused him to fall in the draft and unfortunately appears to still be an issue with him.

Looks like it wasn't just a conspiracy in Arakansas either... go figure.

There wasn't a conspiracy in Arkansas where he was used the right way sharing the backfield with McFadden and Felix. The controversy started after the draft. There's no argument between me and you on why he fell. It was these rumors from Arkansas. It wasn't because of his production on the field. Even his lack of touches in the pros is not a result of poor production. The controversy is that he's kept off the field by something the fans can't see. It obviously makes for good discussion on a message board.

Dagmar
12-18-2009, 04:50 PM
You should be asking me.

No one asked for a racist comment from a retard though?

OABB
12-18-2009, 04:58 PM
Hillis was behind 9/11.

Arkie
12-18-2009, 05:14 PM
You and Taco forget that Hillis was benched earlier in the year last year for a few games and If I recall correctly it was directly related to game-readiness or the lack thereof.

He was benched for whatever reason, but when he came back, the Broncos started winning. When he got hurt, the Broncos never won again. When he's on the field, he produces at a higher level. I don't know what is happening in practice, but it creates the illusion that it will be different this time, and he won't be able to produce for us.

Popps
12-18-2009, 06:05 PM
He was benched for whatever reason, but when he came back, the Broncos started winning. When he got hurt, the Broncos never won again. When he's on the field, he produces at a higher level. I don't know what is happening in practice, but it creates the illusion that it will be different this time, and he won't be able to produce for us.

I forgot that he had been benched last year.

Add that to the rep, this scouting report and apparent troubles cracking the line-up again this season, and it baffles me that people refuse to recognize that something might be going on with this dude.

rastaman
12-18-2009, 07:52 PM
seriously rasta, enquiring minds want to know...

sasquatch? real? or fiction?

Seriously dude....ask yo daddy or yo momma!:thumbsup:

Arkie
12-18-2009, 09:44 PM
I forgot that he had been benched last year.

Add that to the rep, this scouting report and apparent troubles cracking the line-up again this season, and it baffles me that people refuse to recognize that something might be going on with this dude.

well, Popps, you were the first to notice his production. I don't know why they won't put him on the field, but we both expect it's something in practice.

Bronco Yoda
12-18-2009, 10:09 PM
sure he was....

Popps
12-18-2009, 10:24 PM
well, Popps, you were the first to notice his production. I don't know why they won't put him on the field, but we both expect it's something in practice.

I hope he works it out. He should get some carries this weeknd. Hopefully he makes the best of them.

watermock
12-19-2009, 12:06 AM
[Quote:
Originally Posted by watermock
You should be asking me.

Oh boy.

This should be good./QUOTE]

Funny thing happened on the wait to the "office".

[QUOTE]Originally Posted by Arkie
He was benched for whatever reason, but when he came back, the Broncos started winning. When he got hurt, the Broncos never won again. When he's on the field, he produces at a higher level. I don't know what is happening in practice, but it creates the illusion that it will be different this time, and he won't be able to produce for us.

Maybe he just has the bad habit of making coaches look like idiots.

Ever consider that?

Or the fact our coach will look like a retard starting a 7th round FB instead of his sorry ass, out of shape 12 pick?

watermock
12-19-2009, 12:11 AM
The fact is, Moreno has looked fat and lazy, not Hillis.

Moreno has had false starts, despite getting the reps.

Moreno has slow feet, not Hillis, Moreno stumbles, Hillis carries tacklers.

Popps
12-19-2009, 01:54 AM
The fact is, Moreno has looked fat and lazy, not Hillis.


Yea, that's why the league has recognized his achievements multiple times this year, and Hillis can't beat out Larsen for fullback work.

Keep up the vendetta, Mock.

Looks like you've found your purpose in life.

Beantown Bronco
12-19-2009, 02:09 AM
Can't sleep so I just rewatched the first Raiders game. Hillis was actually on the field more than I originally remembered.

First drive, his first appearance is on the goal line....he false starts.

2 plays later, they're at the two, 2nd and goal. Hillis gets it. Gets stuffed.
3rd and goal. Hillis gets it. Gets stuffed.

No broken tackles. No carrying of guys. All he did was go down on first contact. Nothing but fail on his part in 3 plays.

Couple of drives later, they again put him in during the goal line package. Pass play to him, he literally can't get any separation from the defender in a clear mismatch. Pass incomplete. Those are the type of plays Dallas Clark makes all day long.

Let's quit pretending that McD hasn't given him ANY chance to show what he can do. Hillis was given a bunch of chances this game to show his stuff and he showed he wasn't prepared, focused, whatever. It wasn't the same Hillis as we saw last year and it has cost him.

Hopefully, he's ready this weekend, because I have a feeling we're going to be calling on him.

watermock
12-19-2009, 02:25 AM
this should be the week Moreno breaks 100 then right?

watermock
12-19-2009, 02:26 AM
Hillis averages are on NFL.com.

Moreno should have a huge day.

Popps
12-19-2009, 10:05 AM
this should be the week Moreno breaks 100 then right?

As long as we win, I don't care if he or Hillis break 10 yards.


(Not that you'd be interested in winning, Mock.)

Arkie
12-19-2009, 11:56 AM
Featured Columnist
Oh, Peyton Hillis, Where Have You Gone? by kevin roberts

Doug Pensinger/Getty Images Results - Author Poll
Should Hills be starting at RB in the NFL?
Definitely 40.0%
Sure, but as part of a committee 30.0%
No, but he should have a big role 26.7%
No, he should stick to blocking 1.1%
No, he should switch to tight end 2.2%
He shouldn't even be in the league 0.0%
Total votes: 90
Share with your friends

Josh McDaniels lied.

He said in the off-season that he would utilize any of Mike Shanahan's holdover offensive talent, and that anyone that had the ability to help the team would be used in his offense.

True, after the Denver Broncos started the season 6-0, there wasn't much one could argue with McDaniels over. The defense was playing at a phenomenal level, the offense was doing what it had to do, and the Broncos were taking the league by storm.

But a 2-5 record since has changed the tune a bit in Denver. And after experiencing a tale of two seasons after 15 weeks, this writer is finally ready to unleash on McDaniels and any Denver fans that have been unwilling to come forward and say what needs to be said:

Where the hell is Peyton Hillis , and why hasn't he been involved in this offense?

Granted, the Broncos realized a flaw in their roster after last year's on-going list of injuries to the running back position left them depleted and scratching at free agency for talent, but with solid players returning for the 2009 season still on the roster, McDaniels did a complete overhaul, originally bringing in J.J. Arrington, Lamont Jordan, Correll Buckhalter, and drafting Georgia running back, Knowshon Moreno.

It begs the question; where's the room for that white guy who kicked some serious ass at tailback last year?

Hillis took the league by storm in 2008, rushing for 329 yards and five touchdowns in a five-game span towards the end of last season, and even ran for 129 yards against the New York Jets, one of last season's top run defenses.

He averaged five yards per carry, topped 4.4 yards per carry in four straight games, and was even an asset as a receiver. A bit more than just an asset if you watch the tape and look at the numbers, as Hillis was able to haul in seven catches for 116 yards and a touchdown in a game against the Miami Dolphins before he was called to duty as an emergency tailback.

However, we know where the story goes from here. Hillis tore his hamstring in the first half against the Kansas City Chiefs, and his season was over.

Still, even with all the running back additions, fans and writers alike questioned the rookie coach all off-season on what Hillis's role would be, and how often he'd be used. McDaniels claimed that Hillis would have a decent role, as he is a versatile and talented player, yet McDaniels seemed unwilling to switch his position, and opted to keep him at fullback.

When McDaniels was questioned on why he wasn't using Hillis more, he simply referenced the current rushing attack, and said he wasn't needed .

He even made the weak excuse that he wasn't being used in short yardage situations because fullback Spencer Larsen was injured, even though it was only for one week, and doesn't explain Hillis's lack of offensive duties for the other 12 games.

While Hillis is still technically listed at running back on some depth charts across the web, he's still primarily playing the role of a fullback, and for the most part in 2009, hasn't really played a role at all.

When finally given a chance as a ball carrier for the first time in nine weeks, Hillis took seven attempts for 47 yards (6.7 yards per carry) against the Chiefs two weeks ago.

This isn't an open announcement that Hillis should be starting over Knowshon Moreno and/or Correll Buckhalter. It's not a promotion for him to switch positions. It's not even a deliberate attack on Josh McDaniels or the Denver Broncos.

What it is, though, is a friendly reminder that the Broncos have a very versatile and talented player wasting away on their team. And if they don't want to use him, they should send him somewhere where someone will.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/310217-oh-peyton-hillis-where-have-you-gone

Bronco Yoda
12-19-2009, 05:04 PM
For those who want me to rock.....
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v30/netizen/Bronco%20Avs/Peyton-Hillis.jpg

Bronco Yoda
12-19-2009, 05:42 PM
Broncos 35
Fade 9

Popps
12-19-2009, 10:57 PM
What the hell was this doing off of the front page?

Killericon
12-19-2009, 11:35 PM
What the hell was this doing off of the front page?

Is unthinkable.

Lev Vyvanse
12-19-2009, 11:39 PM
It is?

Bronco Yoda
12-20-2009, 01:12 AM
Lev spams my PM's till it's full and repeatedly neg's me with nothing but d i. c k s... LMFAO

Guess we have a winner in the Hillis Hater club.

Popps
12-20-2009, 03:17 AM
The fact is, Moreno has looked fat.

http://www.theonion.com/content/files/images/Knowshon-Moreno.article_large.jpg

Good point, Mock. He looks like a real porker.


Way to keep on top of your game, buddy. Not sure what we'd do without your insight around here.

vindico
02-11-2010, 11:54 AM
When Hillis lines up as HB in 2009, every team knew he was getting the ball. So? Can you say 6.7 yard average?

Beantown Bronco
02-11-2010, 12:02 PM
When Hillis lines up as HB in 2009, every team knew he was getting the ball. So? Can you say 6.7 yard average?

Try 4.2

watermock
02-11-2010, 12:30 PM
I never said Moreno was fat. Never. That's just a lie.

I said he was slow for where he was picked. For #11, he looked DAMN SLOW.
Your a liar and an idiot.

Beantown Bronco
02-11-2010, 12:46 PM
I never said Moreno was fat. Never. That's just a lie.


Do you have yourself on ignore? Guess I couldn't blame you if you did. Look up at the very first post on this page.


The fact is, Moreno has looked fat

Dagmar
02-11-2010, 02:03 PM
I never said Moreno was fat. Never. That's just a lie.

I said he was slow for where he was picked. For #11, he looked DAMN SLOW.
Your a liar and an idiot.

http://i49.tinypic.com/ycob5.png

Rabb
02-11-2010, 02:11 PM
wow Mock, just when I thought you couldn't be any dumber

Beantown Bronco
02-11-2010, 02:14 PM
wow Mock, just when I thought you couldn't be any dumber

you asked for it:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/UnkefjCES-4&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/UnkefjCES-4&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Dagmar
02-11-2010, 02:16 PM
you asked for it:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/UnkefjCES-4&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/UnkefjCES-4&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

:notworthy:notworthy:notworthy:notworthy:notworthy

Dagmar
02-11-2010, 02:51 PM
Hmmmm, mock's online yet has disappeared...

watermock
02-11-2010, 03:16 PM
Fine.

Moreno did look fat and lazy, did I mention stumbling around and false starts?

If Moreno looked that slow as a rookie, what will he look like after 500 carries?

Dagmar
02-11-2010, 03:18 PM
Fine.

Moreno did look fat and lazy, did I mention stumbling around and false starts?

If Moreno looked that slow as a rookie, what will he look like after 500 carries?

I never said Moreno was fat. Never. That's just a lie.

I said he was slow for where he was picked. For #11, he looked DAMN SLOW.
Your a liar and an idiot.

watermock
02-11-2010, 03:23 PM
Thanks for reminding me.

He DID look fat and slow, especially for a rookie/junior.

I'll stand behind that.

Dagmar
02-11-2010, 03:27 PM
http://cdn.bleacherreport.com/images_root/image_pictures/0360/5477/110129_feature.jpg

http://www.nj.com/hssports/football/content/175/1219mm_moreno.jpg

http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/2009/fantasy/06/05/knowshon.moreno/knowshon-st.jpg

I wish I was that fat.

vindico
02-11-2010, 03:28 PM
Try 4.2

His average was 6.7 from the HB position.

DenverBrit
02-11-2010, 04:49 PM
Thanks for reminding me.

He DID look fat and slow, especially for a rookie/junior.

I'll stand behind that.

Try a different pair of glasses.

http://blogs.eveningsun.com/troublebrewing/glasses.jpg

Beantown Bronco
02-12-2010, 07:38 AM
His average was 6.7 from the HB position.

Sorry, you are wrong.

Punisher
02-12-2010, 07:40 AM
I want to make love to Hillis's Jersey

vindico
02-12-2010, 11:29 AM
Sorry, you are wrong.

No I'm not.

Beantown Bronco
02-12-2010, 11:42 AM
No I'm not.

Yes, you are. All you are doing is counting the carries he had at the end of the KC game. He was lined up as the lone back in several other games this year and had carries in those positions....most notably the first few games of the season, where he had a handful of carries and none more than 2 yards.

Nice try, though.

Inkana7
02-12-2010, 11:45 AM
Mock, when did Moreno have any false starts?

vindico
02-12-2010, 11:51 AM
Yes, you are. All you are doing is counting the carries he had at the end of the KC game. He was lined up as the lone back in several other games this year and had carries in those positions....most notably the first few games of the season, where he had a handful of carries and none more than 2 yards.

Nice try, though.

I know his fullback stats brought his average down to 4.2. One example was his TD from the goalline. He ran in standing up. It counted as 1, but he could have easily gotten 10 more.

Beantown Bronco
02-12-2010, 11:54 AM
I know his fullback stats brought his average down to 4.2.

Clearly you don't know the difference between lining up as a fullback and as a tailback.

Inkana7
02-12-2010, 11:56 AM
I know his fullback stats brought his average down to 4.2. One example was his TD from the goalline. He ran in standing up. It counted as 1, but he could have easily gotten 10 more.

Because defenses play the same on the 1 as they do on the 10.

Beantown Bronco
02-12-2010, 12:00 PM
I know his fullback stats brought his average down to 4.2. One example was his TD from the goalline. He ran in standing up. It counted as 1, but he could have easily gotten 10 more.

Just to further prove that you are clearly talking out of your @ss, I found the TD run he had this year. Watch it (38 sec mark) and tell me again how he "ran in standing up and could've gotten 10 more yards." You are an idiot.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/tEAUWreNFtE&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/tEAUWreNFtE&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Taco John
02-12-2010, 12:22 PM
Boy we could have used more goal line runs like that this season...

Popps
02-12-2010, 12:35 PM
This thread is nothing short of fascinating.

bpc
02-12-2010, 12:38 PM
Just to further prove that you are clearly talking out of your @ss, I found the TD run he had this year. Watch it (38 sec mark) and tell me again how he "ran in standing up and could've gotten 10 more yards." You are an idiot.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/tEAUWreNFtE&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/tEAUWreNFtE&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Boy, OL blocking looked pretty good there.

Popps
02-12-2010, 12:39 PM
boy, ol blocking looked pretty good there.

ding ding ding ding ding ding ding!!!!!!!!!

bowtown
02-12-2010, 12:40 PM
Boy we could have used more goal line runs like that this season...

That TD was due to Harris and Graham, and a great lead from Hochstein. Any back would have scored that.

Popps
02-12-2010, 12:50 PM
That TD was due to Harris and Graham, and a great lead from Hochstein. Any back would have scored that.

We saw the results when Hillis was asked to run through a couple of guys in the backfield on 3rd and short against Indy. Stuffed for a loss. (Moreno came in and picked up the 1st on the next play, though.)

Any back can run through giant holes.

This team needs to fix its line. It's really not even a debatable topic, at this point. We WILL be fixing our lines. Everyone involved with the organization has said as much, and common sense dictates it.

BroncoInferno
02-12-2010, 05:02 PM
Boy we could have used more goal line runs like that this season...

Yep. And if the blocking had been as good all season as it was on that play, we would have regardless of who was running the ball.

vindico
02-12-2010, 05:20 PM
Just to further prove that you are clearly talking out of your @ss, I found the TD run he had this year. Watch it (38 sec mark) and tell me again how he "ran in standing up and could've gotten 10 more yards." You are an idiot.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/tEAUWreNFtE&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/tEAUWreNFtE&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

I could have sworn he ran in standing up on the left side. It must have been preseason. I stand corrected, but this site is wrong too.

His FB average was 1.2
http://www.profootballfocus.com/by_position.php?tab=by_position&season=2009&pos=FB&stype=r&runpass=run&teamid=10&numsnaps=0&numgames=1
and his HB average was 6.7 http://www.profootballfocus.com/by_position.php?tab=by_position&season=2009&pos=HB&stype=r&runpass=run&teamid=10&numsnaps=0&numgames=1

strafen
02-12-2010, 07:15 PM
We saw the results when Hillis was asked to run through a couple of guys in the backfield on 3rd and short against Indy. Stuffed for a loss. (Moreno came in and picked up the 1st on the next play, though.)

Any back can run through giant holes.

This team needs to fix its line. It's really not even a debatable topic, at this point. We WILL be fixing our lines. Everyone involved with the organization has said as much, and common sense dictates it.C-Buck didn't seem to have any problems running behing our OL...

Popps
02-12-2010, 07:22 PM
C-Buck didn't seem to have any problems running behing our OL...

Either did Moreno when they were blocking well.

If we're running a power scheme, we need to be able to utilize a power back. That means a darter like Buckhalter is going to be a change of pace back, not an every down back.

Our line needs to be able to allow our power runners to get some momentum, not allowing several defenders to penetrate into the backfield to meet the back as they take the handoff.

It's all just football 101 ****. We shouldn't need to discuss this on a board where people are supposed to understand the game.

You either block correctly or you don't. We didn't in the 2nd half of the season, and the results reflected that. Hence, you'll see those positions addressed this off-season, without question.

watermock
02-12-2010, 08:14 PM
The line is fine, sans LG. And Hamilton was a true center, not a LG.

But Beavis want big line, so be it. Maybe he could of draftedone instead of Qunn or with #14 this year.

Florida_Bronco
02-12-2010, 10:58 PM
But Beavis want big line, so be it. Maybe he could of draftedone instead of Qunn or with #14 this year.

We drafted Olsen in the 4th round and signed Hochstein for specifically that purpose.

watermock
02-12-2010, 11:15 PM
PROJECTION: Sixth/Seventh Round

And I'm an Iowa homer. And I'm from Holstien Germany, however, I can't even find this player on google.

Next.

baja
02-12-2010, 11:21 PM
PROJECTION: Sixth/Seventh Round

And I'm an Iowa homer. And I'm from Holstien Germany, however, I can't even find this player on google.

Next.

Is that where the cows come from?

bowtown
02-12-2010, 11:23 PM
PROJECTION: Sixth/Seventh Round

And I'm an Iowa homer. And I'm from Holstien Germany, however, I can't even find this player on google.

Next.

3rd entry under Seth Olsen:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seth_Olsen

Do you know how to use the internets?

watermock
02-13-2010, 12:15 AM
Sounds good.

Plug him in at LG.

Maybe 1 pick will pan out.

Steve Sewell
08-26-2010, 11:19 AM
wuts goin on in dis thread?

Cito Pelon
08-26-2010, 12:36 PM
Wow. Yeah, we need an update.

Tombstone RJ
08-26-2010, 12:45 PM
This thread just symbolizes the drive of one "Peyton Hillis." He never stops, he just keeps his legs pumping. He's a man among boys, he's unstoppable! The only player who can possibly stop Hillis is Hillis himself! There's no other RB that comes close to this guy, he's got that "it" factor, he's a football player on a mission from God! He has single handedly dragged this stooopid thread on 70 pages! Just think what he will do to those poor bastards on the other team!

Tombstone RJ
08-26-2010, 12:46 PM
I get gassed talking about Hillis, he's that goood!

SoCalBronco
08-26-2010, 10:29 PM
I get gassed talking about Hillis, he's that goood!

http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb56/cyclone2426/Peyton-Hillis-Arkansas-PS3-Cover.jpg

Stud.

s0phr0syne
11-02-2010, 02:46 PM
Why have you abandoned us?

bowtown
11-02-2010, 02:51 PM
http://i50.tinypic.com/xfyfzc.jpg

Archer81
11-02-2010, 03:07 PM
I heard one time that Hillis was leading his people out of slavery in Egypt and came upon the shores of the red sea. God told him to hold up his staff and God would do the rest. But Hillis had a hard time remembering what a staff was.

So the slaves were captured and returned to Egypt, and God had to try again with some dude named Moses.

True story.

:Broncos:

baja
11-02-2010, 04:12 PM
I heard one time that Hillis was leading his people out of slavery in Egypt and came upon the shores of the red sea. God told him to hold up his staff and God would do the rest. But Hillis had a hard time remembering what a staff was.

So the slaves were captured and returned to Egypt, and God had to try again with some dude named Moses.

True story.

:Broncos:

Actually the story goes Hillis thought God said stiff instead of staff so he went into the reeds to spank his monkey and his people were captured because he came late.

colonelbeef
11-02-2010, 05:07 PM
Another poops classic! Hahahah

go_broncos
11-07-2010, 11:17 AM
Classic thread..Hillis is dumb....LOL

Popps
11-07-2010, 11:27 AM
Nice mojo-****, guys. Hillis fumbles right as you bump this thread.

go_broncos
11-07-2010, 11:29 AM
haaaaaaa..still..he is better than ****ing moreno...

go_broncos
11-07-2010, 11:36 AM
Nice mojo-****, guys. Hillis fumbles right as you bump this thread.

7 Att..58 yards.. Mcd is dumb for trading him.

Popps
11-07-2010, 11:44 AM
Yep, too bad he couldn't do his job in our offense. I like watching him run.

cabronco
11-07-2010, 12:24 PM
Is anyone doing an effective job in the broncos offense, besides Orton ? I think if we still had Hillis, he would bring much needed positive energy and yards to the lack luster offense. Another McD blunder, imo.

JJJ
11-07-2010, 12:32 PM
He is chewing up the Patriots. McD was the ultimate ultramoroon for getting rid of that football player. My favorite non-bolt in the league that guy.

fontaine
11-07-2010, 12:35 PM
It's funny how Hillis is supposedly too dumb to play in this offense because every week he's making McD look like the dumba$$.

After chewing up Baltimore's vaunted 3-4 front, Hillis is doing the same to NE's front 7.

Dr. Broncenstein
11-07-2010, 12:37 PM
It's funny how Hillis is supposedly too dumb to play in this offense because every week he's making McD look like the dumba$$.

McTougherSmarter hardly needs the play of Hillis to accomplish that.

yerner
11-07-2010, 12:48 PM
Damn, he is hammering the Pats today.

frerottenextelway
11-07-2010, 12:51 PM
Over 100 today already.