PDA

View Full Version : Hillis fever spreading...


Pages : [1] 2

Taco John
01-12-2010, 05:55 PM
I was doing a Google search on "Josh McDaniels" to see if there was anything new out there, and ran across this.

Thought it was plenty amusing and worth sharing...

http://extremeskins.com/showthread.php?t=315384

Popps
01-12-2010, 05:59 PM
Too bad Peyton couldn't earn work like the rest of the Shanahan-regime players.

Oh well.

Maybe next year.

Taco John
01-12-2010, 06:01 PM
Too bad Peyton couldn't earn work like the rest of the Shanahan-regime players.

Oh well.

Maybe next year.


You're like a broken propaganda record from the 40's.

Popps
01-12-2010, 06:01 PM
You're like a broken propaganda record from the 40's.

Yea, but posting another conspiracy theory thread is super-fresh!

Popps
01-12-2010, 06:02 PM
Looks like this guy caught the fever...

Addicted's top 10 reasons why Peyton Hillis sucks:

01. He's a Fullback, not a running back. Your thread said our next running back was Hillis. If you said our next FB was Hillis I'd be cool with that.
02. Hillis is no where near as good as Portis is today and would be a big down grade from Portis.
03. Hillis has started only 8 games in the last 32 games his teams played.
04. Hillis has a whooping 347 yards rushing in the last 32 games his teams played
05. Hillis has a whooping 6 TD's in the last 32 games, with most of those coming from the 1 yard line
06. Hillis has only 18 catches in the last 32 games
07. Hillis in four years in college rushed for an astounding 960 yards
08. Hillis ended his rookie year on IR
09. The last thing wikipedia says about this guy for 2009 is the following "In week three of the 2009 preseason Hillis rushed for a touchdown." Championship
10. The guy looks like this


Weren't the sorry ass Broncos the team that was so decimated at Running Back last year they had something like 5 RB's on IR and this dude couldn't get the starting job? And Denver decided to go out to a shopping mall and bring in some guy selling cell phones to run the ball who out performed Hillis? HAHAAH


I predict it now...there will be some poster put up a Ryan Torain post next...hahahahah

Taco John
01-12-2010, 06:05 PM
Yea, but posting another conspiracy theory thread is super-fresh!

Conspiracy theory thread?

Take off the clown shoes man. It's after 5pm.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41VzzlbHkQL._SS500_.jpg


It's not suprising that you've ruined the spirit of yet another thread. It was supposed to be kind of an inside joke. You jump in with your stupid agenda and turn it contentious right off the bat.

Thanks for that.

Popps
01-12-2010, 06:06 PM
Hey, here's a guy who does like the idea to acquire Hillis....

Portis is terrible. He falls down after two yards and then blames the quarterback, the fullback, the offensive line, the coaches, anyone but himself. Put a fork in him.

Maybe we can send him over for Portis, straight up!

LOL

Popps
01-12-2010, 06:07 PM
It was supposed to be kind of an inside joke.


Dude, it's hysterical.

Mission accomplished!

Taco John
01-12-2010, 06:08 PM
Dude, it's hysterical.

Mission accomplished!


Mission accomplished? What is it? Week 5 all over again?

Lev Vyvanse
01-12-2010, 06:08 PM
You're like a broken propaganda record from the 40's.

We need another Hillis thread? What was that you said about sounding like a broken record?

Popps
01-12-2010, 06:11 PM
From the Skins board...

there is about 27 peyton hillis threads...no need for more

Wow, there really must be a lot of people from here moonlighting over there. That's funny ****.

errand
01-12-2010, 06:21 PM
amazing how a guy who cannot see the field on consecutive 8-8 teams is considered the "franchise' by a few ignorant clowns.

watermock
01-12-2010, 06:26 PM
Portis is done, and I'm a big fan, he had a concussion too. He's lost his burst. He's got no tread left. IMO.The transition to zbs might bring out some new life tho.

OBF1
01-12-2010, 06:27 PM
Hillis would break off 2K in our system :thumbs:

Dagmar
01-12-2010, 06:28 PM
There's a lot of clown bashing in this thread...

Popps
01-12-2010, 06:31 PM
Hillis would break off 2K in our system :thumbs:

But would you give up a 1st and a 3rd for him?

:~ohyah!:

Blueflame
01-12-2010, 06:37 PM
Looks like this guy caught the fever...

Addicted's top 10 reasons why Peyton Hillis sucks:

01. He's a Fullback, not a running back. Your thread said our next running back was Hillis. If you said our next FB was Hillis I'd be cool with that.
02. Hillis is no where near as good as Portis is today and would be a big down grade from Portis.
03. Hillis has started only 8 games in the last 32 games his teams played.
04. Hillis has a whooping 347 yards rushing in the last 32 games his teams played
05. Hillis has a whooping 6 TD's in the last 32 games, with most of those coming from the 1 yard line
06. Hillis has only 18 catches in the last 32 games
07. Hillis in four years in college rushed for an astounding 960 yards
08. Hillis ended his rookie year on IR
09. The last thing wikipedia says about this guy for 2009 is the following "In week three of the 2009 preseason Hillis rushed for a touchdown." Championship
10. The guy looks like this


Weren't the sorry ass Broncos the team that was so decimated at Running Back last year they had something like 5 RB's on IR and this dude couldn't get the starting job? And Denver decided to go out to a shopping mall and bring in some guy selling cell phones to run the ball who out performed Hillis? HAHAAH


I predict it now...there will be some poster put up a Ryan Torain post next...hahahahah

The guy would have more credibility if he knew wtf he was talking about. Here in the real world, the Broncos had 7 RBs on IR in '08 and Hillis was one of them. Furthermore, Hillis... and not Tatum Bell... had the most yards of any RB on the roster that year. But don't just take my word for it... here's the linkage from profootballreference.com...

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/den/2008.htm

This clown's saying that 249 yards + 2 touchdowns > 343 yards and 5 TD's? Tells me all I need to know about whether or not he looks stuff up or makes stuff up....

Rohirrim
01-12-2010, 06:54 PM
Hillis could kick Bruschi's ass.

strafen
01-12-2010, 07:23 PM
Too bad Peyton couldn't earn work like the rest of the Shanahan-regime players.

Oh well.

Maybe next year.

That's pretty disturbed...
No Scheffler, no Royal, no Marshall and no Hillis= No play-offs!

Popps
01-12-2010, 07:29 PM
That's pretty disturbed...
No Scheffler, no Royal, no Marshall and no Hillis= No play-offs!

Yep.

Better take a year off of the Orange Mane.

See you in 2011, champ.

broncocalijohn
01-12-2010, 07:30 PM
Looks like this guy caught the fever...

Addicted's top 10 reasons why Peyton Hillis sucks:

01. He's a Fullback, not a running back. Your thread said our next running back was Hillis. If you said our next FB was Hillis I'd be cool with that.
02. Hillis is no where near as good as Portis is today and would be a big down grade from Portis.
03. Hillis has started only 8 games in the last 32 games his teams played.
04. Hillis has a whooping 347 yards rushing in the last 32 games his teams played
05. Hillis has a whooping 6 TD's in the last 32 games, with most of those coming from the 1 yard line
06. Hillis has only 18 catches in the last 32 games
07. Hillis in four years in college rushed for an astounding 960 yards
08. Hillis ended his rookie year on IR
09. The last thing wikipedia says about this guy for 2009 is the following "In week three of the 2009 preseason Hillis rushed for a touchdown." Championship
10. The guy looks like this


Weren't the sorry ass Broncos the team that was so decimated at Running Back last year they had something like 5 RB's on IR and this dude couldn't get the starting job? And Denver decided to go out to a shopping mall and bring in some guy selling cell phones to run the ball who out performed Hillis? HAHAAH


I predict it now...there will be some poster put up a Ryan Torain post next...hahahahah

Popps, are you that dumb to repeat a Redskin fan that doesnt know garbage about Hillis. Yes, they picked up a cell phone manager...after Hillis already played and got hurt. Guy brings up 32 games, 32 games. How about tell the stats of last year that he started and put those stats. Amazing the hate you put on Hillis after you glowed about him from last year.

Popps
01-12-2010, 07:36 PM
Popps, are you that dumb to repeat a Redskin fan that doesnt know garbage about Hillis. .

I can't tell if you're joking or not. I'd assume you are.

In the event that you're not... I didn't "repeat" him... I just posted it as a comical rebuttal to the notion of a "fever" being caught. It wasn't what he said, but how he said it that was funny.

In any case, we all like Hillis' talents. I'd still speak glowingly about him if he could manage to get himself on the field. Very disappointing, but in the big picture... he's sort of irrelevant, at this point.

strafen
01-12-2010, 07:45 PM
amazing how a guy who cannot see the field on consecutive 8-8 teams is considered the "franchise' by a few ignorant clowns.I don't think anybody here has ever considered Hillis the franchise.
I can tell you however, that a few of you clowns have considered a 1st round bust as the franchise in Moreno.
That my friend, is the biggest joke.
A 12th overall pick who couldn't run for a mere 100 yards in any game, and couldn't even break 1000-yard last season when all he had to do was to average a lousy 62.5 yards per-game.
That blows!

strafen
01-12-2010, 07:46 PM
Yep.

Better take a year off of the Orange Mane.

See you in 2011, champ.Who needs Hillis when we have Moreno, huh?! ROFL!

RhymesayersDU
01-12-2010, 08:06 PM
amazing how a guy who cannot see the field on consecutive 8-8 teams is considered the "franchise' by a few ignorant clowns.

There's a Kyle Orton joke in there somewhere, right?

Stormontheplains
01-12-2010, 08:09 PM
My biggest problem with hillis not playing was in the passing game, he proved the year before to have great hands. Big waste not using him on 3rd downs as a recieving option. I saw him in the arron craver mode. Lot of different looks available with him in the backfield on passing downs.

Taco John
01-12-2010, 08:13 PM
My biggest problem with hillis not playing was in the passing game, he proved the year before to have great hands. Big waste not using him on 3rd downs as a recieving option. I saw him in the arron craver mode. Lot of different looks available with him in the backfield on passing downs.



I hear the loud thud of clown shoes running in to call you a conspiracy theorist.

RhymesayersDU
01-12-2010, 08:18 PM
Wait a minute here... I thought Moreno did pretty well for himself when he caught balls.

I'm not trying to turn this into Moreno vs. Hillis, just saying that it's not like our current RB's have stone hands or anything.

slyinky
01-12-2010, 08:19 PM
As soon as I saw the thread title I wondered how long before Popps chimed in (first one) and how often (5 out of the first 7 replies). Not bad, not bad at all. Especially when you consider that "in the big picture... he's sort of irrelevant, at this point."

Stormontheplains
01-12-2010, 08:29 PM
I hear the loud thud of clown shoes running in to call you a conspiracy theorist.

Hilarious!:thumbs:

broncosteven
01-12-2010, 08:32 PM
Wait a minute here... I thought Moreno did pretty well for himself when he caught balls.

I'm not trying to turn this into Moreno vs. Hillis, just saying that it's not like our current RB's have stone hands or anything.

I agree with that, it is about playing to your personell strengths and not trying to fit round pegs into square holes.

If we ran some play action to Moreno in the flat on some of those 3rd and 1's rather than trying to create an identity we might still be in the playoffs.

Hillis could not get on the field and made mental errors when he was out there. I don't think Moreno is a 30 carry 1200 yard back though. Play up what he can do well rather than try to force him to become one.

Popps
01-12-2010, 08:35 PM
I hear the loud thud of clown shoes running in to call you a conspiracy theorist.

Dude... see... McDaniels HATED Hillis. Him playing all of those other Shanahan guys was a cover-up. He was afraid of Hillis unleashing the whip-ass on Moreno! Then his career would be ruined as a coach! Don't you get it!?

What conspiracy?

Los Broncos
01-12-2010, 08:38 PM
I thought we went over this already? another Hillis bitch fest, this will keep me up for hours.

skpac1001
01-12-2010, 09:51 PM
Considering what happens to Shanny players when they get McDaniels guru treatment, Hillis is lucky to be on the bench.

Florida_Bronco
01-12-2010, 09:57 PM
Dude... see... McDaniels HATED Hillis. Him playing all of those other Shanahan guys was a cover-up. He was afraid of Hillis unleashing the whip-ass on Moreno! Then his career would be ruined as a coach! Don't you get it!?

What conspiracy?

You know what's exceedingly funny? The same people who are going emo-mode over Bobby Turner leaving are the same ones crying conspiracy over a guy that he coached and was almost certainly the deciding factor in keeping him on the bench under two different head coaches.

Their hypocrisy is nothing if not comical.

Popps
01-12-2010, 10:07 PM
You know what's exceedingly funny? The same people who are going emo-mode over Bobby Turner leaving are the same ones crying conspiracy over a guy that he coached and was almost certainly the deciding factor in keeping him on the bench under two different head coaches.

Their hypocrisy is nothing if not comical.

Yea, they can't quite figure out what it is they're mad about... but they're mad!!

Taco John
01-12-2010, 10:09 PM
The losing to Oakland and KC at home while a 5 tool player who proved himself a game changer was left in the dog house is the part that I find upsetting.

Not to mention losing eight of ten games.

MaloCS
01-12-2010, 10:15 PM
I just watched the videos that "Twizlers" posted over on the Skins forums. Now I'm depressed.

Hillis is a bull and most importantly, he's a gamer. I hope he reunites with Shanny and gets his career going in the right direction.

bronco militia
01-12-2010, 10:21 PM
if CP skips off-season workouts , the redskins will in the market for another RB

strafen
01-12-2010, 10:27 PM
You know what's exceedingly funny? The same people who are going emo-mode over Bobby Turner leaving are the same ones crying conspiracy over a guy that he coached and was almost certainly the deciding factor in keeping him on the bench under two different head coaches.

Their hypocrisy is nothing if not comical.We all know why McDaniels didn't want to play Hillis.
He wanted Moreno to succeed at all cost.
That was just one of the reasons, but not his primary reason.
Anybody here with a speck brain left in their heads would acknowledge Hillis is much better runner than Moreno. A game changer, an impact and a difference maker.
Moreno was none of that at all.

Also, McDaniels to me, wanted to win with his own guys, not with Shanahan's guys.
You can make an argument that McDaniels played some of Shanahan's guys to prove that theory wrong, but the fact of the matter is that McDaniels wanted to win with his own guys on offense.
He could care less about who was left on defense from the Shanahan's regime, all he cared about was the offense. All the guys left on defense after the initial house cleaning by McDaniels from shanahan's era were all left alone.
McDaniels didn't bring any defensive player of his own, all he did was bring RB's, WR's, and OL's to replace Shanny's offensive plaers. And that's what he did, did he not?!!!
He didn't play Stokley, Hillis, Royal, Scheffler and Hillis the way he should have. He antagonized Marshal to the point he didn't want to practice -let alone play- earlier during training camp and beginning of the season.

And there you have it, all Shanahan's guys on offense were relegated to ride the bench, with the exception of Marshall who McDaniels couldn't figure out how to justify not playing him

Florida_Bronco
01-12-2010, 10:29 PM
The losing to Oakland and KC at home while a 5 tool player who proved himself a game changer was left in the dog house is the part that I find upsetting.

Hillis was healthy for that game against Oakland at home in 2008. You know, the one where we got beat 31-10?

Quite the game changer he was.

Popps
01-12-2010, 10:30 PM
I just watched the videos that "Twizlers" posted over on the Skins forums. Now I'm depressed.

Hillis is a bull and most importantly, he's a gamer. I hope he reunites with Shanny and gets his career going in the right direction.

See, that's where I'm different.

I hope he "gets his career going" in Denver.

But, that's up to him.

Florida_Bronco
01-12-2010, 10:34 PM
He didn't play Stokley Injured alot of the year, yet still performed well.

Hillis A giant ****up waiting to happen every time he stepped on the field.

Royal Started every game he was healthy for.

Scheffler Had what, a whopping 9 catches less than 2008? ::)

and Hillis Look at that, Lord Hillis gets two mentions!

the way he should have. He antagonized Marshal to the point he didn't want to practice -let alone play- earlier during training camp and beginning of the season. Yeah, how dare that McDaniels demand that Marshall act like a professional while under contract with the team. ::)

strafen
01-12-2010, 10:35 PM
Hillis was healthy for that game against Oakland at home in 2008. You know, the one where we got beat 31-10?

Quite the game changer he was.

Almost. We could've been beaten 31-3
What you failed to mention is in that game, Hillis scored the only TD.
He ran the ball 17 times for 74 yards and 1 TD. That's 4.35 ypa if you're keeping track.
Also, he had two catches for 22 yards.

DivineLegion
01-12-2010, 10:37 PM
Florida stop being rational you might upset the natives.

Florida_Bronco
01-12-2010, 10:38 PM
Almost. We could've been beaten 31-3
What you failed to mention is in that game, Hillis scored the only TD.
He ran the ball 17 times for 74 yards and 1 TD. That's 4.35 ypa if you're keeping track.
Also, he had two catches for 22 yards.

Yeah, I saw the game, I'm well aware of what he did and didn't do in that game.

strafen
01-12-2010, 10:38 PM
Injured alot of the year, yet still performed well.

A giant ****up waiting to happen every time he stepped on the field.

Started every game he was healthy for.

Had what, a whopping 9 catches less than 2008? ::)

Look at that, Lord Hillis gets two mentions!

Yeah, how dare that McDaniels demand that Marshall act like a professional while under contract with the team. ::)

Excuses my friend. That doesn't make what you said right.
Stokley, Scheffler, Hillis and Royal never were used the way they should've.
Come on?!
Who you're trying to fool?
You saw the same freaking games Isaw and everybody saw. You can't try to convince people otherwise.
It is what it is...

strafen
01-12-2010, 10:40 PM
Yeah, I saw the game, I'm well aware of what he did and didn't do in that game.Then why are you down playing his contributions and efforts in that game?

DivineLegion
01-12-2010, 10:40 PM
Excuses my friend. That doesn't make what you said right.
Stokley, Scheffler, Hillis and Royal never were used the way they should've.
Come on?!
Who you're trying to fool?
You saw the same freaking games Isaw and everybody saw. You can't try to convince people otherwise.
It is what it is...

I would like some stats/hard evidence to back this theory...

DBroncos4life
01-12-2010, 10:43 PM
I wish we would cut this guy so he can go be over hyped by some other fan base.

Florida_Bronco
01-12-2010, 10:43 PM
Excuses my friend. That doesn't make what you said right. Sure it does.

Stokley, Scheffler, Hillis and Royal never were used the way they should've. I've already explained this. Stokely was battling injuries, Scheffler saw no significant drop in production and Royal was starting every game he was healthy for.

Then why are you down playing his contributions and efforts in that game? I'm not. Taco said that Hillis was a game changer and a bull. I reminded him that Hillis was healthy and active for that game where we take a 21 point loss.

Popps
01-12-2010, 10:48 PM
We all know why McDaniels didn't want to play Hillis.
He wanted Moreno to succeed at all cost.
That was just one of the reasons, but not his primary reason.
Anybody here with a speck brain left in their heads would acknowledge Hillis is much better runner than Moreno.

http://maggiesclocks.com/library/KasselQuartzCuckooBirdCuckooClock400.JPG

~Crash~
01-12-2010, 10:49 PM
Hey, here's a guy who does like the idea to acquire Hillis....

Portis is terrible. He falls down after two yards and then blames the quarterback, the fullback, the offensive line, the coaches, anyone but himself. Put a fork in him.

Maybe we can send him over for Portis, straight up!

LOL

sure thing by the way I bet our skin flint owner would not go for that by the way.

DivineLegion
01-12-2010, 10:50 PM
I wish we would cut this guy so he can go be over hyped by some other fan base.

I learned 5 years ago that you can't jump on Bronco running back bandwagons because they have a few games. My lesson came at the unwielding potential of Mr.Quintin Griffin...I won't make that mistake again.

Paladin
01-12-2010, 10:55 PM
Conspiracy theory thread?

Take off the clown shoes man. It's after 5pm.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41VzzlbHkQL._SS500_.jpg


It's not suprising that you've ruined the spirit of yet another thread. It was supposed to be kind of an inside joke. You jump in with your stupid agenda and turn it contentious right off the bat.

Thanks for that.

....says the guy who, just sitting around with nothing else to do, googles McD......


ROFL!

Popps
01-12-2010, 10:56 PM
....says the guy who, just sitting around with nothing else to do, googles McD......


ROFL!

... and then starts another Hillis thread, no less.

strafen
01-12-2010, 10:57 PM
I would like some stats/hard evidence to back this theory...It's not a theory, it's a fact...

Stokley played 15 games. So much for being injured, huh?
19 catches 327 yards 4 td
Royal:
14 games 37 catches 0 td
Scheffler:
14 games 31 catches 416 yards 2 td
Hillis:
10 games 4 catches and 13 carries for 54 yards 1 td

Compared to 2008:
Stokley:
14 games 49 catches 528 yards 3 td

Royal:
15 games 91 catches 980 yards 5 td. 11 carries for 109 yards

Scheffler:
13 games 40 catches 645 yards 3TD's

Hillis:
12 games 14 catches 179 yards 1 td 68 carries for 343 yards and 5 td's

Killericon
01-12-2010, 10:57 PM
http://i47.tinypic.com/ic45f6.jpg

Because the mood in here is too serious.

Paladin
01-12-2010, 11:04 PM
We all know why McDaniels didn't want to play Hillis.

You blew it right there.....

Way to go Professor. You have a real sense of what's going on in McD/s moind? I th ink Bobby Turner had something to say about Hillis' playing time.

Jeezus. You need to change the oil in your brain and tighten the screws; not all your screws seem to be at the proper torque because your thoughts are getting messed up.....

Paladin
01-12-2010, 11:08 PM
I wish we would cut this guy so he can go be over hyped by some other fan base.

And take his local "fan base" with him.....

DivineLegion
01-12-2010, 11:09 PM
It's not a theory, it's a fact...

Stokley played 15 games. So much for being injured, huh?
19 catches 327 yards 4 td
Royal:
14 games 37 catches 0 td
Scheffler:
14 games 31 catches 416 yards 2 td
Hillis:
10 games 4 catches and 13 carries for 54 yards 1 td

Compared to 2008:
Stokley:
14 games 49 catches 528 yards 3 td

Royal:
15 games 91 catches 980 yards 5 td. 11 carries for 109 yards

Scheffler:
13 games 40 catches 645 yards 3TD's

Hillis:
12 games 14 catches 179 yards 1 td 68 carries for 343 yards and 5 td's

Your missing Gaffney and Marshall, this is a team effort here partner.

Considering that Gaffney was used as our number 3 (ie. Stokley last year) you should compare his stats to Stokley last year, and then you should look up Darrell Jackson/Chad Jackson.

strafen
01-12-2010, 11:16 PM
Your missing Gaffney and Marshall, this is a team effort here partner.

I just knew somebody would bring that up, while skipping the important facts...

I'm trying to stay within the argument here.
I was asked to prove with numbers and stats the lack of involvement on the 2009 offense by Hillis, Royal, Scheffler and Stokley.
Didn't you read the previous posts?!!!!

Boobs McGee
01-12-2010, 11:18 PM
Really?

3 pages, and no one has even commented on the fact that "Twizlers" = Rastaman?

Lets break it down here...

Grammatical errors?
check

Manbearpig love for Hillis?
check check check

Stoner (his name is TWIZLERS, an extremely popular food amongst the baked)
CHECK


totally him

strafen
01-12-2010, 11:21 PM
You blew it right there.....

Way to go Professor. You have a real sense of what's going on in McD/s moind? I th ink Bobby Turner had something to say about Hillis' playing time.

Jeezus. You need to change the oil in your brain and tighten the screws; not all your screws seem to be at the proper torque because your thoughts are getting messed up.....

It wasn't just Hillis, was it?
It was Royal, Scheffler, Stokley, and Hillis

Let me ask you, then...
Do you have a real sense of what's going on in Turners brain?
WTF is that supposed to mean?
You can defend McDaniels all you want, that doesn't make you right.
You just can't igonre facts and numbers.
I didn't make any of this up. Look it up for yourself. I know it wouldn't still make any difference to you, if that proves Mcdaniels dropped the ball this season, would it?

DivineLegion
01-12-2010, 11:21 PM
I looked it up for you and I think this is why you avoided Gaffney our number 2 all season...

2008 top 4 WRs

Marshall: 1265 6 TD
Stokley: 528 3 TD
Royal: 980 5 TD
Jackson: 190 1 TD

2009 top 4 WRs

Marshall: 1120 10 TD
Royal: 345 0 TD
Gaffney: 732 2 TD
Stokley: 327 4 TD

15 TDs from our top 4 recievers in 08' and 16 in 09'...

Seems like we used our Wideouts really well, and TEs are not going to put up prolific numbers in this system.

Paladin
01-12-2010, 11:24 PM
It wasn't just Hillis, was it?
It was Royal, Scheffler, Stokley, and Hillis

Let me ask you, then...
Do you have a real sense of what's going on in Turners brain?
WTF is that supposed to mean?
You can defend McDaniels all you want, that doesn't make you right.
You just can't igonre facts and numbers.
I didn't make any of this up. Look it up for yourself. I know it wouldn't still make any difference to you, if that proves Mcdaniels dropped the ball this season, would it?

And, you dumb ***, it doesn't make you right, either........

DivineLegion
01-12-2010, 11:26 PM
Does the bold mean your super angry?

strafen
01-12-2010, 11:27 PM
I looked it up for you and I think this is why you avoided Gaffney our number 2 all season...

2008 top 4 WRs

Marshall: 1265 6 TD
Stokley: 528 3 TD
Royal: 980 5 TD
Jackson: 190 1 TD

2009 top 4 WRs

Marshall: 1120 10 TD
Royal: 345 0 TD
Gaffney: 732 2 TD
Stokley: 327 4 TD

15 TDs from our top 4 recievers in 08' and 16 in 09'...You can't quite comprehend what you read, can you Scherlock?
It's understood to any fan here of what Marshall's numbers this year and last years were.
That's not a secret to anyone, is it?
As for Gaffney, he wasn't part of what we were discussing. You're diverting the topic away from what we're discussing.
Gaffney still had about half the catches that Marshall had.
I didn't bring Marshall or Gaffney into the mix because it was irrelevant to what I was challenged to prove. Got it?

Yet, you're not proving any of what I was saying wrong. If anything, you're just backing up what I've already said... :thumbsup:

strafen
01-12-2010, 11:30 PM
Does the bold mean your super angry?Haha!!! LOL

He's just showing his true colors! :wiggle:

That's typical when you bring a knife to a gunfight :rofl:

Popps
01-12-2010, 11:33 PM
You can't quite comprehend what you read, can you Scherlock?
It's understood to any fan here of what Marshall's numbers this year and last years were.
That's not a secret to anyone, is it?
As for Gaffney, he wasn't part of what we were discussing. You're diverting the topic away from what we're discussing.
Gaffney still had about half the catches that Marshall had.
I didn't bring Marshall or Gaffney into the mix because it was irrelevant to what I was challenged to prove. Got it?

Yet, you're not proving any of what I was saying wrong. If anything, you're just backing up what I've already said... :thumbsup:

Not really.

Actually, he made an excellent case for his point, and you're the one that's tiptoeing around things. (Purposely omitting receivers, etc.)

Paladin
01-12-2010, 11:35 PM
Does the bold mean your super angry?

Not at all. It means the dumb *** can't understand what he reads and so I tried to help him with his comprehension of the stupidity of his "arguments". Sorry if you misunderstood.....

strafen
01-12-2010, 11:35 PM
Not really.

Actually, he made an excellent case for his point, and you're the one that's tiptoeing around things. (Purposely omitting receivers, etc.)Ok.
Tell me what difference would it have made if I had included Gaffney and Marshall into what I was debating?
Hint: go back a few post to get a clue first before you reply...
We were talking about Shanahan's guys. Was Gaffney a Shanny guy?
No, he wasn't. That's why he wasn't part of the discussion.
Marshall, yes, he was a shanny's guy, but I've already made the point earlier that McDaniles couldn't figure a way to keep Marshall from playing, while relegating the rest of Shanny's players to the bench.
You can't be this dumb, can you?

strafen
01-12-2010, 11:36 PM
Not at all. It means the dumb *** can't understand what he reads and so I tried to help him with his comprehension of the stupidity of his "arguments". Sorry if you misunderstood.....You've got as much class as brain...

DivineLegion
01-12-2010, 11:37 PM
You can't quite comprehend what you read, can you Scherlock?
It's understood to any fan here of what Marshall's numbers this year and last years were.
That's not a secret to anyone, is it?
As for Gaffney, he wasn't part of what we were discussing. You're diverting the topic away from what we're discussing.
Gaffney still had about half the catches that Marshall had.
I didn't bring Marshall or Gaffney into the mix because it was irrelevant to what I was challenged to prove. Got it?

Yet, you're not proving any of what I was saying wrong. If anything, you're just backing up what I've already said... :thumbsup:

Well saying Josh under utilized players only really works if you look at the bigger picture and that is production across the board, so yea you can call me Sherlock. You see this is a team game its not about an individuals production compared to the previous season its the group as a whole. The only fair way to judge this is look at the WR core because TEs are utilized more for blocking in Josh's scheme...hints Tony being in the dog house. Its amazing how when we dont have cannon arm our WR's acctually have a better year with *Dramatic Pause* Kyle Orton!!!!!!

Eddie was hurt most of the season, while he started a majority of the games I think I can only count about 6 games where he was at full health. It sucks he had a sophmore slump but, thats not the coachs fault.

DivineLegion
01-12-2010, 11:38 PM
Not at all. It means the dumb *** can't understand what he reads and so I tried to help him with his comprehension of the stupidity of his "arguments". Sorry if you misunderstood.....

No I agree he's not all there, I mean hell he thinks im a fictional detective. :peace:

strafen
01-12-2010, 11:44 PM
Well saying Josh under utilized players only really works if you look at the bigger picture and that is production across the board, so yea you can call me Sherlock. You see this is a team game its not about an individuals production compared to the previous season its the group as a whole. The only fair way to judge this is look at the WR core because TEs are utilized more for blocking in Josh's scheme...hints Tony being in the dog house. Its amazing how when we dont have cannon arm our WR's acctually have a better year with *Dramatic Pause* Kyle Orton!!!!!!

Eddie was hurt most of the season he started a majority of the season but that dosent mean he was fully healthy. It sucks he had a sophmore slump but, thats not the coachs fault.You still don't get it do you?
We were not talking about the 2008 offense vs. the 2009 offense per-se.
No, that is NOT what we were discussing.
What we were discussing is the players from Shanahan offense from 2008 being under utilized this season.
That's why I posted the numbers about those specific players. Gaffney got nothing to do with what the discussion was about.
How hard is it to understand?

DivineLegion
01-12-2010, 11:46 PM
No man your the one not getting the point. When you have other players brought in to produce along with the players you already have their production has to be compared along with. Gaffney was our number two WR he has everything to do with this discussion.

strafen
01-12-2010, 11:48 PM
No man your the one not getting the point. When you have other players brought in to produce along with the players you already have their production has to be compared along with. Gaffney was our number two WR he has everything to do with this discussion.

What part of the specific Shanahan's guys mentioned from 2008 not being used properly in McDaniels 2009 offense do you not understand?

If you want to bring Gaffney, then you're just proving my point further, as Gaffney was our second leading receiver ahead of any Shanny player with the exception of Marshall. And that's part of what I was trying to say. Shanny guys being under utilized. Gaffney's production proves my point...

Popps
01-12-2010, 11:55 PM
What part of the specific Shanahan's guys mentioned from 2008 not being used properly in McDaniels 2009 offense do you not understand?

Well, Marshall had more TDs in less games. Let's start there.

Beyond that, who gives a **** if they're "Shanahan guys" or not?

You might be a fan of a coach or a player. Some of us are fans of the team, so Gaff's 700+ receiving yards are worth a mention.

How come you haven't mentioned that our #1 WR had more TDs? How come you didn't mention that Gaffney was a great pick-up?

You're cherry-picking to make a useless point about particular players.

Hillis had several chances to contribute and ****ed up every one of them. Beyond that, there's likely a reason that two pro coaches kept him buried deep on the RB chart.

You're just bitching to bitch.

You hate the new team. Just say so. Don't try to justify it with nit-picky stats.

Bronco Yoda
01-13-2010, 12:02 AM
See, that's where I'm different.

I hope he "gets his career going" in Denver.

But, that's up to him.

Really?

It's ALL up to HIM?

Seriously?

Wow, someone should inform him that he has such powers.

All he needed to say was the magic word. Damn him!

And all along I thought it was up to McD and his thoughts on the player.

strafen
01-13-2010, 12:05 AM
Well, Marshall had more TDs in less games. Let's start there.

Beyond that, who gives a **** if they're "Shanahan guys" or not?

You might be a fan of a coach or a player. Some of us are fans of the team, so Gaff's 700+ receiving yards are worth a mention.

How come you haven't mentioned that our #1 WR had more TDs? How come you didn't mention that Gaffney was a great pick-up?

You're cherry-picking to make a useless point about particular players.

Hillis had several chances to contribute and ****ed up every one of them. Beyond that, there's likely a reason that two pro coaches kept him buried deep on the RB chart.

You're just b****ing to b****.

You hate the new team. Just say so. Don't try to justify it with nit-picky stats.You didn't read the previous posts as I told you to do, did you?
You just love making an ass out of yourself, don't you?
Read the previous posts again, so you can have a clue what's being disussed, bud!
Really, that would help you with what you should be saying

Gaffney was NOT a Shanny guy. The argument was about Shanny's guys being under utilized this year by comparing the stats from this year and last year.
By including Gaffney, that strengthens my point, don't you think?
It validates my point, it doesn't refute my argument at all does it?

Gaffney caught more passes than any other Shanny player from 2008 outside Marshall, did he not?
And by doing so, isn't that what my whole point about -one more time- shanny's guys not being put in a position to contribute this year in the way they were used last year...

DivineLegion
01-13-2010, 12:06 AM
What part of the specific Shanahan's guys mentioned from 2008 not being used properly in McDaniels 2009 offense do you not understand?

If you want to bring Gaffney, then you're just proving my point further, as Gaffney was our second leading receiver ahead of any Shanny player with the exception of Marshall. And that's part of what I was trying to say. Shanny guys being under utilized. Gaffney's production proves my point...

LOL Ok I think this is helpless but I'm going to try and get this across to you.

Gaffney was our number 2 WR, Eddie was our number 2 last year.

Eddie and Stokley were utilized as our slot recievers this year.

Brandon Marshall was our number one WR.


I have a feeling I will get this through to you eventually. The point of this whole matter is, this conversation should have never been about "Shannys guys" in the first place. Our WR core scored more TDs this season than all of last season, thats all there is to it. It sucks when your favorite players have bad years but if the team as a whole performs better there is no reason to go out and complain.

Coach McDaniels came in with a very complicated system and brought the players along slowly, we wont see the true potential of this system until middle of the season next year. You can cry and moan all you want thats your right as a Broncos fan, just be ready for somebody to challenge your position because thats what this place was built for. You learn from other people, you challenge thier opinions to gain more knowledge, and when you can counter that persons point with something more valid you b**** slap them as hard as you can. Thats the nature of discussion.

Popps
01-13-2010, 12:27 AM
Really?

It's ALL up to HIM?

Seriously?

Wow, someone should inform him that he has such powers.

All he needed to say was the magic word..

Yea, it's weird that every other Shanahan player had "magic powers" to earn the playing time and not him, huh?

Or... hear me out... maybe it's not magic powers.

Maybe these guys earn their reps and the other 90 percent of the Shanahan players have... and Peyton hasn't?

Just a wild, crazy thought.


I realize the global conspiracy theory makes more sense.

Popps
01-13-2010, 12:29 AM
You didn't read the previous posts as I told you to do, did you?.

Yes, I read the slop.

It was useless, and as I pointed out.. NFL teams aren't in the business of playing guys from prior coaches just to be friendly. You're making a completely useless point.

If you want to talk about "Shanahan guys," let's talk about the 8 or so defensive starters that can't even find work in the friggin' NFL.

What about those "Shanahan guys."

You don't mention them so much, do you.

strafen
01-13-2010, 12:35 AM
LOL Ok I think this is helpless but I'm going to try and get this across to you.

Gaffney was our number 2 WR, Eddie was our number 2 last year.

Eddie and Stokley were utilized as our slot recievers this year.

Brandon Marshall was our number one WR.


I have a feeling I will get this through to you eventually. The point of this whole matter is, this conversation should have never been about "Shannys guys" in the first place. Our WR core scored more TDs this season than all of last season, thats all there is to it. It sucks when your favorite players have bad years but if the team as a whole performs better there is no reason to go out and complain.

Coach McDaniels came in with a very complicated system and brought the players along slowly, we wont see the true potential of this system until middle of the season next year. You can cry and moan all you want thats your right as a Broncos fan, just be ready for somebody to challenge your position because thats what this place was built for. You learn from other people, you challenge thier opinions to gain more knowledge, and when you can counter that persons point with something more valid you b**** slap them as hard as you can. Thats the nature of discussion.Whatever point you wanted to make, you should've started a thread about what you're talking about.
You just can't come into an ongoing discussion about a specific subject and change it totally to your own interpretation. That's not how it works.
you're forcing what i was saying to turn it into something it was not. Sorry!

Again, Scheffler, Stokley, Hillis and Royal were not utilized as they should have.
As a fan, you should be outraged by that. You should be pissed off that the players that gave us the best chance to win, weren't allowed to do so.
Why are you defending the coach?
He clearly ****ed up, didn't he?
He admitted his mistakes.

Now, Marshall was not under utilized. That's why he had another stellar season. What do you think the results would have been if Royal, Scheffler, Hillis and Stokley had seen the field/action as much as they did last year?
Do you really think we would've finished 8-8?
Why is that people don't find this to be a critical part of our season failure?
I'm pissed. I'm not going to give our headcoach a pass, and try to justify his decisions as anything but arrogance, stubborness, and being an egomaniac.
He'll grow up and hopefully mature to realize what's best for the team, and not what's best for McDaniels ego

Oh one more thing, let me set you straight about what you mentioned above (see your statement in bold)

Our receiving core scored 21 TD this season. 10 of which were by Marshall, 4 of those by Stokley, and the rest or next receivers had 2 td's.
Last season we've had 25 td's. You do the math, and correct me if I'm wrong 8')

strafen
01-13-2010, 12:38 AM
Yes, I read the slop.

It was useless, and as I pointed out.. NFL teams aren't in the business of playing guys from prior coaches just to be friendly. You're making a completely useless point.

If you want to talk about "Shanahan guys," let's talk about the 8 or so defensive starters that can't even find work in the friggin' NFL.

What about those "Shanahan guys."

You don't mention them so much, do you.No, you didn't read like I told you to do.
Go back and read the last two pages carefully.
I did mention McDaniels cleaning house on defense, did I not?
I don't care if they were Shanahan's players or not. They sucked!

DivineLegion
01-13-2010, 12:49 AM
Whatever point you wanted to make, you should've started a thread about what you're talking about.
You just can't come into an ongoing discussion about a specific subject and change it totally to your own interpretation. That's not how it works.
you're forcing what i was saying to turn it into something it was not. Sorry!

Again, Scheffler, Stokley, Hillis and Royal were not utilized as they should have.
As a fan, you should be outraged by that. You should be pissed off that the players that gave us the best chance to win, weren't allowed to do so.
Why are you defending the coach?
He clearly ****ed up, didn't he?
He admitted his mistakes.

Now, Marshall was not under utilized. That's why he had another stellar season. What do you think the results would have been if Royal, Scheffler, Hillis and Stokley would have seen the field as much as they did last year?
Do you really think we would've finished 8-8?
Why is that people find this not to be a critical part of our season failure?
I'm pissed. I'm not going to give our headcoach a pass, and try to justify his decisions as anything but arrogance, stubborness, and being an egomaniac.
He'll grow up and hopefully mature to realize what's best for the team, and not what's best for McDaniels ego

Oh one more thing, let me set you straight about what you mentioned above (see your statement in bold)

Our receiving core scored 21 TD this season. 10 of which were by Marshall, 4 of those by Stokley, and the rest or next receivers had 2 td's.
Last season we've had 25 td's. You do the math, and correct me if I'm wrong 8')

Call what I'm doing regulating, you see I come onto threads like this (which was originaly posted as a joke by the way) and I see dumb posts like yours. It is my duty as a responsible Broncos fan to stop and make sure that you have a clear understanding that your way off point man. Anytime some starts saying Shannys guys its clear that said poster is stuck in the past. When I look at the Denver Broncos I see a collection of players that are here at the mercy of the coaching staff competing with each other to win a superbowl. This not about bitching and griping over an old regime its about moving forward and accepting that theres nothign you or I can do to stop it.

What is wrong with this whole notion of Shannys guys is not a single one of the players on this current roster would be here if Josh did not think they could contribute this season. Some did some did not, some were injured and some decided not to give it their all. What happened this season was not a result of one mans actions. It was a collective effort by our orginization (Players, Coaches, and executives) to earn this franchise a superbowl. Do you really honestly think that the players in the locker room are divided on the very plague that has swept accross the Mane? I dont think so. Its fun to talk football and go back in forth comparing the new and the old I get a thrill out of, I really do. But I swear to God it is by far most rediculous thing in the world to have people honestly divided in this forum because you think that Shannys guys are not getting enough reps. Dude if they really wanted the reps and they deserved them they would have got those reps. Josh is not sitting in his office looking at Mikes security cameras laughing as he derails "Shannys Players". He is doing what he can to make this team a championship contender...so Enjoy the ride or STFU!

Popps
01-13-2010, 01:00 AM
Call what I'm doing regulating, you see I come onto threads like this (which was originaly posted as a joke by the way) and I see dumb posts like yours. It is my duty as a responsible Broncos fan to stop and make sure that you have a clear understanding that your way off point man. Anytime some starts saying Shannys guys its clear that said poster is stuck in the past. When I look at the Denver Broncos I see a collection of players that are here at the mercy of the coaching staff competing with each other to win a superbowl. This not about b****ing and griping over an old regime its about moving forward and accepting that theres nothign you or I can do to stop it.

:notworthy



Bingo.

Florida_Bronco
01-13-2010, 01:13 AM
Call what I'm doing regulating, you see I come onto threads like this (which was originaly posted as a joke by the way) and I see dumb posts like yours. It is my duty as a responsible Broncos fan to stop and make sure that you have a clear understanding that your way off point man. Anytime some starts saying Shannys guys its clear that said poster is stuck in the past. When I look at the Denver Broncos I see a collection of players that are here at the mercy of the coaching staff competing with each other to win a superbowl. This not about b****ing and griping over an old regime its about moving forward and accepting that theres nothign you or I can do to stop it.

What is wrong with this whole notion of Shannys guys is not a single one of the players on this current roster would be here if Josh did not think they could contribute this season. Some did some did not, some were injured and some decided not to give it their all. What happened this season was not a result of one mans actions. It was a collective effort by our orginization (Players, Coaches, and executives) to earn this franchise a superbowl. Do you really honestly think that the players in the locker room are divided on the very plague that has swept accross the Mane? I dont think so. Its fun to talk football and go back in forth comparing the new and the old I get a thrill out of, I really do. But I swear to God it is by far most rediculous thing in the world to have people honestly divided in this forum because you think that Shannys guys are not getting enough reps. Dude if they really wanted the reps and they deserved them they would have got those reps. Josh is not sitting in his office looking at Mikes security cameras laughing as he derails "Shannys Players". He is doing what he can to make this team a championship contender...so Enjoy the ride or STFU!

Wow...EXCELLENT post.

You sir..."get it" when it comes to being a Broncos fan.

Rep to you.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 02:02 AM
Do you really honestly think that the players in the locker room are divided on the very plague that has swept accross the Mane?

I do. And I think that the 2-8 finish is pretty good evidence of that, not to mention the whispers that have come out of the place, complete with team leaders coming to Josh and asking him to make players accountable - followed up with Josh taking his beef with a current player star to the media and damaging his trade value to the team in the process. There's a lot of smoke coming out of the Broncos locker room, signalling that there's a fire.

The Mane, and the fan base in general - whether you look on other forums, or worse listen to the radio - is a reflection of what is happening with the organization. The bottom line being wins. Wins set the tone. This is why winning at home against Oakland, and especially to finish the season against KC were so important. A win against KC would have been substantial, given the way they played against Philly. The loss only brought out the Oakland loss and the 2-10 finish in sharper contrast (not to mention the problems that McDaniels was having in the locker room).

I really like what you had to say, but this specific question, I would think you'd have to be purposefully trying to ignore the smoke to miss the answer. It's up to Josh this offseason to put out the fire and get everybody on the same page with him. He's got a challenge ahead of him, because precedent is a b****. How he handles Marshall is going to be closely watched by every business savvy football player on the roster, and also in the free agent pool. I think his best move would be to first throw a ton of cash at Elvis and praise him for his attitude and commitment to the team. I think that would set the tone for what he's going to have to end up doing with Marshall.

Florida_Bronco
01-13-2010, 02:27 AM
I do. And I think that the 2-8 finish is pretty good evidence of that The 2-8 finish is evident of a team that lacked talent, especially in the trenches, much more so than a split locker room.

not to mention the whispers that have come out of the place Courtesy of the same prima-donna douchebags that McDaniels has been trying to purge from this team.

No worries though. They will be gone, and true professionals will replace them. I have no worries about that seeing how happily so many former Patroits followed Josh into Denver.

Blueflame
01-13-2010, 02:31 AM
I don't think anybody here has ever considered Hillis the franchise.
I can tell you however, that a few of you clowns have considered a 1st round bust as the franchise in Moreno.
That my friend, is the biggest joke.
A 12th overall pick who couldn't run for a mere 100 yards in any game, and couldn't even break 1000-yard last season when all he had to do was to average a lousy 62.5 yards per-game.
That blows!

Noteworthy is the fact that one has to go all the way back to 1994 and Leonard Russell (190 attempts for 620 yards, 9 TDs; a 3.3 YPC average) to find the last time (before Knowshon's 247 carries for 947 yards;7 TDs; 3.8 YPC ) a Bronco RB failed to average over 4 yards per carry. Oh.. and Wade Phillips was the coach back in '94...

Taco John
01-13-2010, 02:36 AM
The 2-8 finish is evident of a team that lacked talent, especially in the trenches, much more so than a split locker room.

If that were true, then we wouldn't have players going to Josh demanding accountability before the last game of the season, only to go out and lay an egg themselves in the following game.

Losing to Oakland and KC wasn't about needing more talent - especially when you look at how convincingly we beat them earlier in the season. Are you saying those wins were flukes? Are you saying the 6-0 start was a fluke?

uplink
01-13-2010, 03:00 AM
From the Skins board...

there is about 27 peyton hillis threads...no need for more


wow, would be funny if a lot of people registered for the site with Hillis derived nicknames.

Blueflame
01-13-2010, 04:28 AM
The 2-8 finish is evident of a team that lacked talent, especially in the trenches, much more so than a split locker room.

Courtesy of the same prima-donna douchebags that McDaniels has been trying to purge from this team.

No worries though. They will be gone, and true professionals will replace them. I have no worries about that seeing how happily so many former Patroits followed Josh into Denver.

I'm totally underwhelmed by the performance of "true professional" "former Patriot" player LaMont Jordan, who "happily followed Josh into Denver" (most likely because no other franchise wanted him). Oh... same goes for "Ten-Tackle-Ty"...

rastaman
01-13-2010, 04:59 AM
I'm totally underwhelmed by the performance of "true professional" "former Patriot" player LaMont Jordan, who "happily followed Josh into Denver" (most likely because no other franchise wanted him). Oh... same goes for "Ten-Tackle-Ty"...

Also remember teams weren't exactly banging down Gaffney's door for his services either.

BroncoBuff
01-13-2010, 05:11 AM
That's pretty disturbed...
No Scheffler, no Royal, no Marshall and no Hillis= No play-offs!

Exactly ... how is it possible to alienate all that brilliant young talent in just one season?

Requiem
01-13-2010, 09:18 AM
My grandson is a better fullback than Hillis.

BroncoBuff
01-13-2010, 09:27 AM
Hillis had several chances to contribute and ****ed up every one of them. Beyond that, there's likely a reason that two pro coaches kept him buried deep on the RB chart.

You're just b****ing to b****.

You hate the new team. Just say so. Don't try to justify it with nit-picky stats.

http://www.nonstick.com/sounds/Yosemite.gif

skpac1001
01-13-2010, 09:34 AM
Call what I'm doing regulating, you see I come onto threads like this (which was originaly posted as a joke by the way) and I see dumb posts like yours. It is my duty as a responsible Broncos fan to stop and make sure that you have a clear understanding that your way off point man. Anytime some starts saying Shannys guys its clear that said poster is stuck in the past. When I look at the Denver Broncos I see a collection of players that are here at the mercy of the coaching staff competing with each other to win a superbowl. This not about b****ing and griping over an old regime its about moving forward and accepting that theres nothign you or I can do to stop it.

What is wrong with this whole notion of Shannys guys is not a single one of the players on this current roster would be here if Josh did not think they could contribute this season. Some did some did not, some were injured and some decided not to give it their all. What happened this season was not a result of one mans actions. It was a collective effort by our orginization (Players, Coaches, and executives) to earn this franchise a superbowl. Do you really honestly think that the players in the locker room are divided on the very plague that has swept accross the Mane? I dont think so. Its fun to talk football and go back in forth comparing the new and the old I get a thrill out of, I really do. But I swear to God it is by far most rediculous thing in the world to have people honestly divided in this forum because you think that Shannys guys are not getting enough reps. Dude if they really wanted the reps and they deserved them they would have got those reps. Josh is not sitting in his office looking at Mikes security cameras laughing as he derails "Shannys Players". He is doing what he can to make this team a championship contender...so Enjoy the ride or STFU!

Talking about the carryover players and coaches is very relevant for two reasons. First, McDaniels chose to mess with the offense, he certainly didn't have to, he could have taken the Tomlin route. Since he did, he can be judged by the immediate results of changing the offense and how well that choice was suited to the talent compared to the one in place. Second, he almost certainly got the job he did by selling himself as somebody who could take the young talent we had and take it to the next level. I doubt he said anything about most of the pieces not fitting and needing to be replaced. You can waive your hands and try to distract everyone from discussing this all you want by pointing to the future, but it is a legitimate topic. I think its a little amusing that you think it is more reasonable to lay the blame at every carryover underachieving or becoming a head case rather then saying it is related to McDaniels and/or the changes he made. As far as Royal's season being because of injury, McDaniels fessed up that he was disappointed in how he used him, I think you can admit to it also.
I am glad McDaniels can make the most of the players he brought in. I am disappointed in what he did with the base that was already here.

2KBack
01-13-2010, 09:34 AM
Noteworthy is the fact that one has to go all the way back to 1994 and Leonard Russell (190 attempts for 620 yards, 9 TDs; a 3.3 YPC average) to find the last time (before Knowshon's 247 carries for 947 yards;7 TDs; 3.8 YPC ) a Bronco RB failed to average over 4 yards per carry. Oh.. and Wade Phillips was the coach back in '94...

When you say Bronco RB, are you talking about the guy with the most carries or simply a guy who played RB during the season? I say this because Mike Anderson, Terrell Davis, and Quentin Griffin all had seasons averaging under 4 yards per carry.

Requiem
01-13-2010, 09:41 AM
I'm totally underwhelmed by the performance of "true professional" "former Patriot" player LaMont Jordan, who "happily followed Josh into Denver" (most likely because no other franchise wanted him). Oh... same goes for "Ten-Tackle-Ty"...

Familiar players who understood the scheme. They are role players. Nothing significant. You weren't supposed to be overwhelmed by their performances. They aren't long-term options here.

strafen
01-13-2010, 09:49 AM
Call what I'm doing regulating, you see I come onto threads like this (which was originaly posted as a joke by the way) and I see dumb posts like yours. It is my duty as a responsible Broncos fan to stop and make sure that you have a clear understanding that your way off point man. Anytime some starts saying Shannys guys its clear that said poster is stuck in the past. When I look at the Denver Broncos I see a collection of players that are here at the mercy of the coaching staff competing with each other to win a superbowl. This not about b****ing and griping over an old regime its about moving forward and accepting that theres nothign you or I can do to stop it.

What is wrong with this whole notion of Shannys guys is not a single one of the players on this current roster would be here if Josh did not think they could contribute this season. Some did some did not, some were injured and some decided not to give it their all. What happened this season was not a result of one mans actions. It was a collective effort by our orginization (Players, Coaches, and executives) to earn this franchise a superbowl. Do you really honestly think that the players in the locker room are divided on the very plague that has swept accross the Mane? I dont think so. Its fun to talk football and go back in forth comparing the new and the old I get a thrill out of, I really do. But I swear to God it is by far most rediculous thing in the world to have people honestly divided in this forum because you think that Shannys guys are not getting enough reps. Dude if they really wanted the reps and they deserved them they would have got those reps. Josh is not sitting in his office looking at Mikes security cameras laughing as he derails "Shannys Players". He is doing what he can to make this team a championship contender...so Enjoy the ride or STFU!First of all, you need to STFU don't tell me to STFU mother ****er.
If you don't want to be proven wrong, just admit you're wrong.
Don't try to come over here telling everybody is your duty to police this forum because you don't like to hear people pointing out some of the key factors that got us out of the play-offs. Don't come over here hijacking a thread by making points totally irrelevant to what was being discussed

Old regime vs new regime, the truth is what it is. For you to understand what we're talking about, you need to look at the players we had last year who contributed, and the very same players now who this year were not given a fair shot to compete. There was not competition as you put it. You know it, and everybody else knows it. The minute Moreno was drafted he was going to be the starter competition or not.
Now, you're saying we had a better chance of making the play-offs with Gaffney, McKinley, Moreno, Brandon Lloyd and Graham than with Royal, Scheffler, Hillis and Stokley?
That's why we finished 2-8 in the last 10 games moron!
And if we're going into next season with these same scrubs, expect the same results.
McDaniels wanted to get rid of Shanny players. At least he didn't want to attribute any success to having an already talented offensive unit. Guess what?
He didn't have to worry about that anymore. He can't give Shanny's players any credit for his success or lack thereof, but he sure can blame himself for the team's colossal collapse
Didn't the signing of all those FA during the off-season make that clear to you?
The signing of new offensive players under the umbrella of "knowing" the system was a clear indication that our key players from 2008 were not going to be part in the McDaniels' super complicated offense. ZBS required more knowledge to run than the power straght ahead blocking being taught by McDaniels. He had the coaching and players to do it, but he wanted to fit a square peg into a round hole
An offense so complicated it took teams around the NFL 6 weeks of game film watching to figure out the dink and dunk, the straight ahead running, and the bubble screens.
Yup, that was complicated alright. We got shut down. we only won 2 games after the bye week.
All the while players who have talent, who are very good offensive weapons, all sat and watched from the sidelines.
Joke or not by TJ in starting this thread, those are still facts.
You're somehow praising McDaniels for everything he did as if he was right.
No, he wasn't right all the time. The guy is a 33-year old rookie NFL head coach with ZERO experience in building teams.
He dismantled this team, not only from the players standpoint, but now from coaching staff standpoint. They are now taking no chances and moving onto other teams.
Two of the most important assistant coaches of the Broncos have basically jumped ship!
Division on the locker room. Players ratting out on other players. Total chaos and turmoil. It's a team mutiny not to be confused with team unity what McDaniels has created...

I as a fan, am pissed to see what unfolded in front of me by a head coach who's got nobody to blame but himself. How can you condone that?
Because you're a true fan?

Total debacle is what my team has become. We're heading into another off-season with the same issues we've started with last season.

Am I willing to give McDaniels the benefit of the doubt?
I would, but I will still remain cautious...
The fact he still wants to go with scrub players while trying to get rid of proven offensive weapons, is not any different than Shanahan wanted to make changes and promise play-offs while keeping Slowik as his defensive coordinator...

Requiem
01-13-2010, 09:52 AM
How high is your blood pressure?

skpac1001
01-13-2010, 09:52 AM
Hillis did screw up a lot this year, almost as much as Moreno. However, as a rookie he seemed to do just fine. I wonder who gets credit for that? I remember Josh making a great speech at the beginning of the year about how coaching is teaching, and some players require different ways of learning and how its the responsibility of the coach to find a way to get across to the player.
If Hillis is a talentless nothing or a bad fit, Josh wasted a roster spot and alot of hot air talking up what he was going to do with him in the offseason. If Hillis just can't perform in a McDaniels led team, well, welcome to the club.
1 player having problems is an incident.
2 players, a coincidence.
3 players, 4 players,... seems like a pattern.

Rohirrim
01-13-2010, 09:54 AM
First of all, you need to STFU don't tell me to STFU mother ****er.
...

This tactic didn't work for me in debate class.

Requiem
01-13-2010, 10:01 AM
This tactic didn't work for me in debate class.

Back in the old Lincoln-Douglas days, haha. ^5

Dagmar
01-13-2010, 10:07 AM
Familiar players who understood the scheme. They are role players. Nothing significant. You weren't supposed to be overwhelmed by their performances. They aren't long-term options here.

:thumbsup:

Meck77
01-13-2010, 10:11 AM
Would we really be having this debate if Hillis was a badass? Come on people.
He had every chance like any other guy to earn a starting spot. It didn't happen.

Hercules Rockefeller
01-13-2010, 10:13 AM
Familiar players who understood the scheme. They are role players. Nothing significant. You weren't supposed to be overwhelmed by their performances. They aren't long-term options here.

But, but, but, you're just supposed to let Blue bitch about the Patriot-way that she hates so much. Who cares if it's minor role players, she's on a roll.

TonyR
01-13-2010, 10:15 AM
But, but, but, you're just supposed to let Blue b**** about the Patriot-way that she hates so much. Who cares if it's minor role players, she's on a roll.

It will be interesting to see how people with such agendas react if/when the Broncos somehow manage to land a Vince Wilfork or a Logan Mankins. Something tells me the anti-Patriots mindset will be tucked away in such cases.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 10:20 AM
Would we really be having this debate if Hillis was a badass?


As far as I'm concerned, that's the only reason this whole discussion exists. If he wasn't a badass, why would anyone care about him?

skpac1001
01-13-2010, 10:20 AM
Would we really be having this debate if Hillis was a badass? Come on people.
He had every chance like any other guy to earn a starting spot. It didn't happen.

I don't think anybody ever thought he deserved to be the starting RB (well maybe a couple guys did last offseason, but most didn't). If your not going to use him situationally though, what is the point in having him on the roster? There are better blockers and special teams players, if your not going to use his size, power running ability, and hands in situations that fit them better then smaller, more jittery runners, why have him?

Taco John
01-13-2010, 10:21 AM
It will be interesting to see how people with such agendas react if/when the Broncos somehow manage to land a Vince Wilfork or a Logan Mankins. Something tells me the anti-Patriots mindset will be tucked away in such cases.

We're going to have to compete with the Chiefs for guys like that, and as far as I'm concerned, better us than them.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 10:23 AM
I don't think anybody ever thought he deserved to be the starting RB (well maybe a couple guys did last offseason, but most didn't). If your not going to use him situationally though, what is the point in having him on the roster? There are better blockers and special teams players, if your not going to use his size, power running ability, and hands in situations that fit them better then smaller, more jittery runners, why have him?

Popps was telling us that Hillis was THE starting runningback for 2009. He's actually the father of the Hillis phenomenon. He went as far as to say we'd be stupid to waste a first round draft pick on a runningback, and that it should be spend on Defensive line.

Of course, the wind started blowing in the other direction since, and that take dried up quick, virtually overnight.

Requiem
01-13-2010, 10:24 AM
As far as I'm concerned, that's the only reason this whole discussion exists. If he wasn't a badass, why would anyone care about him?

I don't know, why do you care about him?

Taco John
01-13-2010, 10:27 AM
I don't know, why do you care about him?


Because I believe the guy showed that he has the potential to be a game breaker if you get his motor running, and that he could have helped turn an 8 of 10 losing skid into something a lot more palatable - which might have included the playoffs.

Meck77
01-13-2010, 10:27 AM
As far as I'm concerned, that's the only reason this whole discussion exists. If he wasn't a badass, why would anyone care about him?

And you thought griese was the man. I rest my case.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 10:28 AM
And you thought griese was the man. I rest my case.

No I didn't. I thought of Griese the same thing that I think of Orton: a servicable guy who needs better protection. Read anything Popps writes about Orton. That's the same stuff I was saying about Griese, nearly word for word.

Orton and Griese are practically the same quarterback. Orton had a much better line this year than Griese probably ever had though.

DenverBrit
01-13-2010, 10:28 AM
That's pretty disturbed...
No Scheffler, no Royal, no Marshall and no Hillis= No play-offs!


As opposed to all those great years when they led the Broncos to the playoffs??

Rohirrim
01-13-2010, 10:29 AM
And you thought griese was the man. I rest my case.

Where's George Foster these days?


I keed. ;D

DenverBrit
01-13-2010, 10:32 AM
I hear the loud thud of clown shoes running in to call you a conspiracy theorist.

You start ANOTHER thread about Hillis??

Why? Is there a conspiracy to keep him off the field?? Hilarious!

Taco John
01-13-2010, 10:33 AM
You start ANOTHER thread about Hillis??

Why? Is there a conspiracy to keep him off the field?? Hilarious!


I've never heard of a conspiracy in football. I do think that there's been some bad decision-making going on though. There would have to be a lot of that to go on a 8 of 10 game skid.

DenverBrit
01-13-2010, 10:34 AM
Anybody here with a speck brain left in their heads would acknowledge Hillis is much better runner than Moreno. A game changer, an impact and a difference maker.


LOL

Ha!Ha!Ha!

DenverBrit
01-13-2010, 10:36 AM
I've never heard of a conspiracy in football. I do think that there's been some bad decision-making going on though. There would have to be a lot of that to go on a 8 of 10 game skid.

It's a tradition in Denver......melting down the stretch and missing the playoffs.

Nothing to do with Hillis, has more to do with a team lacking in talent.

McD didn't start that tradition, he merely perfected it. ;D

strafen
01-13-2010, 10:38 AM
As opposed to all those great years when they led the Broncos to the playoffs??Of course not.
You guys keep missing the point. you guys keep deflecting the ball.
If McDaniels does not play a player, then the logic around here is to throw that player under the bus, because McGenius got to be right...
There's no secret our defense in the last few years has been a key factor in us not getting into the play-offs. Do we agree there?

Good. Now, this year we had a decent defense that could have been even better had it had a good offense to support it, right?
So, they way things unfolded this year and for what I assume you as a fan had a chance to watch some Broncos games- that you would have seen the same thing. Our offense was pathetic. Our running game sucked.
The wrong RB was starting. CBuck should at least been the starter and Moreno getting limited reps as he developed, yet we had playmakers on the bench that could've made an impact not only on our pathetic offense, but a positive impact on our whole season.
If that didn't bother you, you don't have a pulse. You have too much love for McDaniels to see reality...

Requiem
01-13-2010, 10:39 AM
I've never heard of a conspiracy in football. I do think that there's been some bad decision-making going on though. There would have to be a lot of that to go on a 8 of 10 game skid.

Right. I'm sure had Hillis earned his playing time, he would have played an intricate role in winning the games we lost. :rofl:

Popps
01-13-2010, 10:49 AM
I've never heard of a conspiracy in football. I do think that there's been some bad decision-making going on though. There would have to be a lot of that to go on a 8 of 10 game skid.

Really? You must not be listening to your parter Drag, then.

rastaman
01-13-2010, 11:18 AM
Regardless how the next 3 years pan out for McD he's getting paid and gaining enough experience to land his next coaching job and leaving his mess to cleanup for the next poor sole Bowlen hires.

Just think folks, many of you OM members were either not born yet or to young to remember when Broncos endured losing seasons like back in the 60's and from 60-77. In the middle 70's you had the Orange Crush Defense carrying a lousy Offense. In the 80's we had Elway for the next 16 years of winning football. Then you had Shanny keeping the Broncos competive enough while winning over 62% of his games as HC.

However, now the Broncos and the fans are entering into unchartered waters and the McD era has begun. Point is, this franchise could very well become the Detroit Lions of the west if we aren't careful. McD could leave this franchise worst off than it was before Shanny was fired!

Not saying this could happen. But I'm preparing myself for the worst....so should the worst happen it won't come as a complete shock. McD has alot work ahead of him thats for sure.

I asked the question back in late October when we were 6-2 about the possibility of finishing 8-8 and I was called every name in the book for thinking about such a possibility. Turns out I was correct b/c I took my "Homer Glasses" off and saw the reality.

Last years team was closer to 5-11 team than they were as an 8-8 team. Point is in 2010 and 2011 McD's Broncos will either stay at .500 or probably regress further should McD continue on the course he's on. McD is making changes not b/c the changes are necessary, but b/c he can make changes. Sending or trading away players b/c you can or they don't firt your system, McD runs the risk of not replacing those talanted players with the players he brings in thru FA or thru the draft. In the end it's McD's decisions...he either sinks or wins with his decisions.

DenverBrit
01-13-2010, 11:23 AM
Of course not.
You guys keep missing the point. you guys keep deflecting the ball.
If McDaniels does not play a player, then the logic around here is to throw that player under the bus, because McGenius got to be right...
There's no secret our defense in the last few years has been a key factor in us not getting into the play-offs. Do we agree there?

Good. Now, this year we had a decent defense that could have been even better had it had a good offense to support it, right?
So, they way things unfolded this year and for what I assume you as a fan had a chance to watch some Broncos games- that you would have seen the same thing. Our offense was pathetic. Our running game sucked.
The wrong RB was starting. CBuck should at least been the starter and Moreno getting limited reps as he developed, yet we had playmakers on the bench that could've made an impact not only on our pathetic offense, but a positive impact on our whole season.
If that didn't bother you, you don't have a pulse. You have too much love for McDaniels to see reality...

Hardly! Everyone here knows that McPoopyPants is doing whatever he can to run off any player that Shanny signed.

That includes Hillis, the stud game changer who McPoopPants won't start despite your advice. He's ignoring your extensive NFL experience and film room expertise.

You being an 'unbiased' fan know exactly why Hillis isn't playing and apparently it's not because he's a doofus who's ability to grasp the new scheme is apparently in question.

Why else would he be riding the pine??

Got any theories?? (rhetorical)

Arkie
01-13-2010, 11:26 AM
Right. I'm sure had Hillis earned his playing time, he would have played an intricate role in winning the games we lost. :rofl:

He stopped the slide of 2008 until he got hurt, then the slide resumed.

Popps
01-13-2010, 11:28 AM
That includes Hillis, the stud game changer who McPoopPants won't start despite your advice. He's ignoring your extensive NFL experience and film room expertise. (rhetorical)

:rofl:

skpac1001
01-13-2010, 11:33 AM
Hardly! Everyone here knows that McPoopyPants is doing whatever he can to run off any player that Shanny signed.

That includes Hillis, the stud game changer who McPoopPants won't start despite your advice. He's ignoring your extensive NFL experience and film room expertise.

You being an 'unbiased' fan know exactly why Hillis isn't playing and apparently it's not because he's a doofus who's ability to grasp the new scheme is apparently in question.

Why else would he be riding the pine??

Got any theories?? (rhetorical)

I wonder if Shanny's scheme was so much simpler then screens slants and runs up the middle, or was he just a better communicator?

Killericon
01-13-2010, 11:34 AM
Very seriously, apart from the "He's an idiot" defence, why would Josh McDaniels NOT be playing Hillis if Hillis were as good as you people say he is?

Dagmar
01-13-2010, 11:36 AM
Very seriously, apart from the "He's an idiot" defence, why would Josh McDaniels NOT be playing Hillis if Hillis were as good as you people say he is?

The theories range from McDaniels having a personal issue with the guy, to McDaniels not being able to see what the Hillis lovers can see and making a bad decision. That is pretty much it.

McDaniels is so petty to risk his shot at being a head coach over a personal vendetta or he makes terrible decisions.

Arkie
01-13-2010, 11:37 AM
It's on film. It's not just a bunch of fans saying he's good.

skpac1001
01-13-2010, 11:37 AM
Very seriously, apart from the "He's an idiot" defence, why would Josh McDaniels NOT be playing Hillis if Hillis were as good as you people say he is?

Why would he be on the roster if he is as bad as his reputation suddenly is here? He is not a standout blocker or special teams player.

No team in the NFL, much less a McDaniels offense, needs a backup FB.

rastaman
01-13-2010, 11:37 AM
:rofl:

Well McD has yet to sign or draft any "Game Changers".ROFL!

But before its all said and done history may prove that McD got rid of 3 game changers in Cutler, Marshall and Hillis. Or McD will have proved everyone wrong b/c the 3 aforementioned players will be NFL FLOPPS!:D

We will see what Your Boy does over the next two years....hopefully McD can find, evaluate draft/sign some GAME CHANGERS all on his own b/c "Him-So-Smart".:sunshine:

rastaman
01-13-2010, 11:42 AM
Very seriously, apart from the "He's an idiot" defence, why would Josh McDaniels NOT be playing Hillis if Hillis were as good as you people say he is?

Either Hillis is an idiot and thats the reason McD did not play him or McD is an idiot for not playing him. Time will tell however. Hillis was only asking for an opportunity to make some plays with the inconsistent sputtering 1st team offense led by HOF QB Kyle Orton and McD told Hillis to go F himself. Perhaps Shanny and Turner can turn McD's garbage player in Hillis into their own pot of Gold.

rastaman
01-13-2010, 11:43 AM
The theories range from McDaniels having a personal issue with the guy, to McDaniels not being able to see what the Hillis lovers can see and making a bad decision. That is pretty much it.

McDaniels is so petty to risk his shot at being a head coach over a personal vendetta or he makes terrible decisions.

Spoken like a true McD Lover.

Dagmar
01-13-2010, 11:43 AM
It's on film. It's not just a bunch of fans saying he's good.

Shanahan had a bunch of 1000 yard rushers, but rarely the same one, what happened to them the next year? I am seriously asking, not baiting or fishing for an argument.

Dagmar
01-13-2010, 11:45 AM
Spoken like a true McD Lover.

Ok, give me the theories please.

As far as I can see, the only two are McD is an idiot or has a personal vendetta, what are the other theories rastaracist?

Requiem
01-13-2010, 11:55 AM
Heartbreak bound for the Hillis crowd when their tales fairy.

skpac1001
01-13-2010, 11:55 AM
Shanahan had a bunch of 1000 yard rushers, but rarely the same one, what happened to them the next year? I am seriously asking, not baiting or fishing for an argument.

Anderson and Mike Bell are/were solid rotational backs, don't know about the rest.
By the way, I am going to miss that system. It was always satisfying getting more out of a late round pick then some team like the Patriots would get out of their first round RB.

Arkie
01-13-2010, 11:59 AM
Shanahan had a bunch of 1000 yard rushers, but rarely the same one, what happened to them the next year? I am seriously asking, not baiting or fishing for an argument.

Good point. There's just something that makes Hillis exciting. His highlight reel looks like he's played as long as John Riggins, but it's all from a little five game window. Imagine the possibilities.

Dagmar
01-13-2010, 12:02 PM
Good point. There's just something that makes Hillis exciting. His highlight reel looks like he's played as long as John Riggins, but it's all from a little five game window. Imagine the possibilities.

I've never said he didn't look good, but most of Shanahans big performers seemed to fade the next year and disappear the next, except Mike A. Who knows, again, I am not fishing for an argument, just wondering what other people thought.

skpac1001
01-13-2010, 12:13 PM
Wow, here I thought our running game had a bad year....but instead congratulations are in order.
Moreno's 947 yards are the most any RB has ever gotten under McDaniels as OC going back to the 2005 season.

rastaman
01-13-2010, 12:16 PM
Ok, give me the theories please.

As far as I can see, the only two are McD is an idiot or has a personal vendetta, what are the other theories rastaracist?

Hi Li'l Abner......you forgot that "Hillis is an Idiot"!:P

Popps
01-13-2010, 12:19 PM
Wow, here I thought our running game had a bad year....but instead congratulations are in order.
Moreno's 947 yards are the most any RB has ever gotten under McDaniels as OC going back to the 2005 season.

Fairly sure his teams were in the top 10 rushing for most of his seasons. They used multiple backs and still maintained solid rushing numbers, which is a testament to the system and the line.

rastaman
01-13-2010, 12:19 PM
I've never said he didn't look good, but most of Shanahans big performers seemed to fade the next year and disappear the next, except Mike A. Who knows, again, I am not fishing for an argument, just wondering what other people thought.

Well it looks like McD's big performer is going to be "SLIDING" / FADING right out of Denver and his name is Brandon Marshall! But hey don't worry b/c McGaffney will SLIDE right in and take over for Marshall and McD's predictable dink and dunk offense won't skip a beat! :thumbs:

Dagmar
01-13-2010, 12:20 PM
Wow, here I thought our running game had a bad year....but instead congratulations are in order.
Moreno's 947 yards are the most any RB has ever gotten under McDaniels as OC going back to the 2005 season.

It was the most since 2006 by a Bronco. He got 40 yards less than Mike A in 05, 49 yards less than TB in 06.

http://img.fannation.com/upload/truth_rumor/photo_upload/112/512/full/Knowshon-Moreno.jpg

Taco John
01-13-2010, 12:22 PM
I've never said he didn't look good, but most of Shanahans big performers seemed to fade the next year and disappear the next, except Mike A. Who knows, again, I am not fishing for an argument, just wondering what other people thought.

I think Shanahan's system was able to get more out of marginal talent than other systems were. I believe that it was part of his strategy. Outside of Portis, he didn't spend high picks on runningbacks. He would look for guys in late rounds who had specific qualities that fit the offense. And then he'd build value in them and try to get more in trade for them than he used to acquire them. It really only worked effectively with Portis, as far as the trades go. But unless the runningback was absolutely dominant (ie. TD), they were expendable because he could replace their production easily in the next draft or through FA.

Requiem
01-13-2010, 12:23 PM
Moreno is 22 years old and adjusting to a new system. Our blocking was terrible and he is running different plays than he is used to. I think he'll improve greatly next season. At any case, 1,200 APY and 9 touchdowns is nothing to slouch at. He had two years of college football under his belt, he was going to struggle in transition a bit anyways.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 12:23 PM
It was the most since 2006 by a Bronco. He got 40 yards less than Mike A in 05, 49 yards less than TB in 06.

http://img.fannation.com/upload/truth_rumor/photo_upload/112/512/full/Knowshon-Moreno.jpg

Based on what we saw last season and provided he stayed healthy, do you think Peyton Hillis would have managed to get 1000 yards rushing in the Shanahan system?

Dagmar
01-13-2010, 12:24 PM
Well it looks like McD's big performer is going to be "SLIDING" / FADING right out of Denver and his name is Brandon Marshall! But hey don't worry b/c McGaffney will SLIDE right in and take over for Marshall and McD's predictable dink and dunk offense won't skip a beat! :thumbs:

Right. There was me wanting reasonable discussion. Sorry.

Dagmar
01-13-2010, 12:25 PM
Based on what we saw last season and provided he stayed healthy, do you think Peyton Hillis would have managed to get 1000 yards rushing in the Shanahan system?

As featured back based on 2008's 5 games, I say highly likely. Although Shanahan's backs did have trouble staying injury free in 07 and 08.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 12:25 PM
Moreno is 22 years old and adjusting to a new system. Our blocking was terrible and he is running different plays than he is used to. I think he'll improve greatly next season. At any case, 1,200 APY and 9 touchdowns is nothing to slouch at. He had two years of college football under his belt, he was going to struggle in transition a bit anyways.

I personally think Moreno will be just fine. I just would prefer to compliment him with a battering ram who has a 5 tool skill set.

Archer81
01-13-2010, 12:25 PM
Based on what we saw last season and provided he stayed healthy, do you think Peyton Hillis would have managed to get 1000 yards rushing in the Shanahan system?


In the fantasy world where Hillis starts? Probably.

:Broncos:

Requiem
01-13-2010, 12:26 PM
But unless the runningback was absolutely dominant (ie. TD), they were expendable because he could replace their production easily in the next draft or through FA.

I think it is safe to say with a change in system and coaching, that Hillis would naturally fall by the wayside. When we invest the pick we did into Knowshon, he is obviously going to be the back of the future. Hillis never was and I doubt would have been had Mike remained with the team.

skpac1001
01-13-2010, 12:26 PM
Fairly sure his teams were in the top 10 rushing for most of his seasons. They used multiple backs and still maintained solid rushing numbers, which is a testament to the system and the line.

I have them as 12-13 every year but one, but that is close enough. So he used multiple backs and spreads the load around alot huh? That does sound like a smart plan, instead of forcing one RB to carry too much of the load. Throw in using different backs with different strengths for different situations and you have me sold.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 12:27 PM
In the fantasy world where Hillis starts? Probably.

:Broncos:

Fantasy world or not, we agree that if Hillis had an opportunity, he's a 1000 yard back. That's something.

Requiem
01-13-2010, 12:28 PM
I personally think Moreno will be just fine. I just would prefer to compliment him with a battering ram who has a 5 tool skill set.

So you want us to accompany Moreno with a baseball player? :~ohyah!:

Dagmar
01-13-2010, 12:29 PM
Reasonable discussion without namecalling breaks out on the Mane! This is nice.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 12:29 PM
I think it is safe to say with a change in system and coaching, that Hillis would naturally fall by the wayside. When we invest the pick we did into Knowshon, he is obviously going to be the back of the future. Hillis never was and I doubt would have been had Mike remained with the team.


I don't see anything natural about a 5 tool talent falling by the wayside. But I think that you're right. I absolutely agree with you that the investment in Knowshon is what caused it to happen.

Wait. What's that sound? I hear clown shoes thundering in the distance to tell us both that we're conspiracy theorists.

rastaman
01-13-2010, 12:29 PM
Right. There was me wanting reasonable discussion. Sorry.

How can you expect anyone to take you seriously let alone give you a reasonable discussion due to your choice of Avatar! :P

Popps
01-13-2010, 12:29 PM
I have them as 12-13 every year but one, but that is close enough. So he used multiple backs and spreads the load around alot huh? That does sound like a smart plan, instead of forcing one RB to carry too much of the load. Throw in using different backs with different strengths for different situations and you have me sold.

Sure, and that's essentially what he did with us this year.

Minnesota ran for about the same amount of yardage with AP and their #2 back as we did with Moreno and Buck.

Agree, it's a smart way to do things and that's exactly what he did.

Archer81
01-13-2010, 12:29 PM
Fantasy world or not, we agree that if Hillis had an opportunity, he's a 1000 yard back. That's something.


Bothers me a bit that Hillis didnt play in either of the two seasons when healthy backs were in front of him. No one denies he has the physical talent. Something is missing and is stopping him from being a competent starter and I seriously doubt its because he is a player drafted by Shanahan.


:Broncos:

Taco John
01-13-2010, 12:33 PM
So you want us to accompany Moreno with a baseball player? :~ohyah!:

5 Tools:

1. Pass blocking
2. Lead rushing
3. Back field pass catching
4. Short yardage battering ram (3rd down back)
5. Open field rushing (1st and 2nd down back)

and six if you want to include:

6. special teams ball handler


If we're not going to use this guy, he's a player that we should be building value in for a great trade. This is a 7th rounder that should command no less than a third round pick for his skill set.

Dagmar
01-13-2010, 12:33 PM
How can you expect anyone to take you seriously let alone give you a reasonable discussion due to your choice of Avatar! :P

My avatar is amazing.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 12:33 PM
Bothers me a bit that Hillis didnt play in either of the two seasons when healthy backs were in front of him. No one denies he has the physical talent. Something is missing and is stopping him from being a competent starter and I seriously doubt its because he is a player drafted by Shanahan.

:Broncos:

I think that's a straw man.

Archer81
01-13-2010, 12:34 PM
I think that's a straw man.


Yup.


:Broncos:

Requiem
01-13-2010, 12:36 PM
I don't see anything natural about a 5 tool talent falling by the wayside. But I think that you're right. I absolutely agree with you that the investment in Knowshon is what caused it to happen.

Wait. What's that sound? I hear clown shoes thundering in the distance to tell us both that we're conspiracy theorists.

I don't think I hold Hillis in the same regard as you. I too, wondered why he didn't see the field, but *shrug* -- I can't be one to necessarily question the coaches decision. He sees how he performs on a weekly basis. I'm surprised that Larsen started at FB over him. I think his experience at LB in college and understanding their instincts and recognition on run defense helped in Spencer's transition to FB. He is a gritty guy and knows what to do and does what is asked of him.

Hillis has been a tough player, but I don't think he is anything special. Yes, I do feel we could have utilized him and his talents better, but he isn't a high caliber player. He had his flashes, as did all backs in Mike's old system. We can upgrade and do better. I am hopeful we can lure Faulk away from the Patriots, but he seems to be the kind of guy who would want to remain loyal and be one for life.

I was excited when Hillis was drafted by Shanahan in the seventh round. I thought he'd have a great opportunity to excel with him as his coach. Unfortunately, it seems like the coaches who liked Peyton and had faith in his abilities are moving on. Who knows though. I just have a strong belief that you earn your time on the playing field, and despite using a #1 on Moreno, if Hillis was looking strong in practice, he'd of been utilized on Sundays.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 12:39 PM
I think losing makes it easy to question Josh's decisions.

Winning makes it very difficult. I hope we start winning.

Requiem
01-13-2010, 12:39 PM
5 Tools:

1. Pass blocking
2. Lead rushing
3. Back field pass catching
4. Short yardage battering ram (3rd down back)
5. Open field rushing (1st and 2nd down back)

and six if you want to include:

6. special teams ball handler


If we're not going to use this guy, he's a player that we should be building value in for a great trade. This is a 7th rounder that should command no less than a third round pick for his skill set.

I know what you meant, I was teasing. Just used to hearing the phrase uttered more in baseball. And no, Hillis isn't worth that much. He fell for a reason in the draft. No way in Hell we spin Hillis for such value. I'd be thankful to get back what we put into him in a trade, which I feel is unlikely.

Popps
01-13-2010, 12:41 PM
This is a 7th rounder that should command no less than a third round pick for his skill set.

Hilarious!

Requiem
01-13-2010, 12:41 PM
I think losing makes it easy to question Josh's decisions.

Winning makes it very difficult. I hope we start winning.

There is more to our losses than McDaniels not utilizing certain players. You're an honest guy TJ, and I think you'd agree in the whole scheme of things -- there are a lot more reasons for our poor finish than the way McDaniels sought to use his player arsenal at hand. So many other factors contributed. Misuse of personnel is probably just the tip of the iceberg. :thumbsup:

DenverBrit
01-13-2010, 12:47 PM
I wonder if Shanny's scheme was so much simpler then screens slants and runs up the middle, or was he just a better communicator?

Difficult to say. But Hillis didn't get an opportunity to play last year until the 7th (or 6th) RB went down.

It's not as though Shanny and Bobby Turner thought a lot of Hillis, if they had, we would have seen him much earlier.

As it was, Hillis was put in the lineup when there was no other choice.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 12:54 PM
There is more to our losses than McDaniels not utilizing certain players. You're an honest guy TJ, and I think you'd agree in the whole scheme of things -- there are a lot more reasons for our poor finish than the way McDaniels sought to use his player arsenal at hand. So many other factors contributed. Misuse of personnel is probably just the tip of the iceberg. :thumbsup:

Absolutely. You and I have some disagreements on certain ways to view things, but on this we're in sync. There were a myriad of factors that contributed to our skid.

Requiem
01-13-2010, 12:57 PM
I'm still in disbelief really. I just am excited for FA, the draft and the camps. I think Josh could have done more with what we had, but it is all in the past. We have to do better next year. There is no reason to be worse. I really think that another year under the system will benefit these players. It sounds kind of cliche, but I think not this coming season, but next -- will be our best chance to field a competitive team. I just wonder how many of our aging leaders like Dawkins, Bailey, etc. will be around by then. Only time will tell.

Now I know how my Vikings friends have felt for the past. . . well since Tarkenton left. I'm just shocked. 6-0 to 8-8. . . just doesn't seem possible.

skpac1001
01-13-2010, 01:00 PM
Sure, and that's essentially what he did with us this year.

Minnesota ran for about the same amount of yardage with AP and their #2 back as we did with Moreno and Buck.

Agree, it's a smart way to do things and that's exactly what he did.

Knowshon Moreno is 10th in the league in carries. Buck is 41st with half as many carries. Then Lamont Jordan at 109 with 25 carries. New England has Moroney at 23rd, Morris at 60, Taylor at 67, Faulk at 69, even Tom Brady has more runs then our 3rd RB. Explain how we are running a system that spreads the ball around to its rb's more then most teams please.

Popps
01-13-2010, 01:12 PM
Knowshon Moreno is 10th in the league in carries. Buck is 41st with half as many carries. Then Lamont Jordan at 109 with 25 carries. New England has Moroney at 23rd, Morris at 60, Taylor at 67, Faulk at 69, even Tom Brady has more runs then our 3rd RB. Explain how we are running a system that spreads the ball around to its rb's more then most teams please.

Production-wise, we got nice numbers out of our #2 back.

I think you'd agree that if Buck hadn't been injured, we certainly would have been feeding him the ball much more... no?

That's the comedy of this whole thing. McDaniels had NO problem feeding a banged up vet like Buck the ball, but didn't trust Hillis.

If the whole theory is that McDaniels was afraid of Hillis' greatness... why was he so willing to give Buck carries?

I agree, we could certainly spread the ball around more... but you have to have capable, healthy backs to do so.

People forget that we signed Arrington, who would have obviously been in that mix, as well. Hillis started out the season in good graces... and slowly fell out of favor.

Jordan is a back McDaniels likes to use when he's got a lead and he wants to protect it. (Which he did if you go back to earlier in the season.)

So, situationally... things don't always work out that you can spread the touches out exactly how you want. Injuries (etc.) play a role in that. But, looking at McD's history and his offseason moves... it should be apparent that this is his eventual intention.

Popps
01-13-2010, 01:20 PM
I'm just shocked. 6-0 to 8-8. . . just doesn't seem possible.

You know, I remember looking at the schedule when we were 6-0 and thinking something like that was possible. I wouldn't have thought 8-8, but if you asked me to find 4 wins in that stretch... I would have said KC/Oakland/Washington.. and beyond that, I wouldn't have been sure. I was suspicious of our 6-0 record, despite being obviously elated.

8-8 is really a nice accomplishment for a total rebuild in the first season. I think we all just wish it could have been a different kind of 8-8.

I still hold that if Kyle didn't hurt his ankle in that Washington game... we would have been playing last weekend.

Oh well. Exciting times for Broncos fans, nonetheless.

Requiem
01-13-2010, 01:22 PM
It's always an exciting time to be Broncos fan. Our off-seasons over the past half-decade cannot be paralleled. For good and bad. Broncos for life.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 01:27 PM
I don't see 8-8 as an accomplishment at all given the division we play in, the fact that we lost at home to Oakland and KC, and the fact that we got off to a 6-0 start.


Despite that, I agree that this is going to be an exciting offseason. I can't wait to see what Josh has in store for us.

Requiem
01-13-2010, 01:30 PM
I don't see 8-8 as an accomplishment at all given the division we play in, the fact that we lost at home to Oakland and KC, and the fact that we got off to a 6-0 start.

I'm kind of in the same boat. I think eight wins is decent, but not good enough after starting out 6-0. We lost to three of the worst teams in the NFL. Simply inexcusable.

skpac1001
01-13-2010, 01:32 PM
Production-wise, we got nice numbers out of our #2 back.

I think you'd agree that if Buck hadn't been injured, we certainly would have been feeding him the ball much more... no?

That's the comedy of this whole thing. McDaniels had NO problem feeding a banged up vet like Buck the ball, but didn't trust Hillis.

If the whole theory is that McDaniels was afraid of Hillis' greatness... why was he so willing to give Buck carries?

I agree, we could certainly spread the ball around more... but you have to have capable, healthy backs to do so.

People forget that we signed Arrington, who would have obviously been in that mix, as well. Hillis started out the season in good graces... and slowly fell out of favor.

Jordan is a back McDaniels likes to use when he's got a lead and he wants to protect it. (Which he did if you go back to earlier in the season.)

So, situationally... things don't always work out that you can spread the touches out exactly how you want. Injuries (etc.) play a role in that. But, looking at McD's history and his offseason moves... it should be apparent that this is his eventual intention.

I don't know, that's kind of a strange role for Jordan. I can see if he only wants to use him in power running situations, or whatever, but tying him to the scoreboard is odd. Anyways, as the season went on and Moreno started to hit the rookie wall or just needed to have some of the load off, it seems to me if you know that Hillis isn't the solution, or Jordan or whoever you have but are not using, you bite the bullet, cut them, and try somebody else. If McDaniels totally doesn't see a role for Hillis, then he should cut him and pick up somebody to help share the load a little. If he does see Hillis as someone who can contribute, what role is it? It's not blocking FB, apparently its not rotational or situational RB. If its simply backup FB in a spread offense then I would have rather kept another D-lineman. I don't think Hillis is looked at as backup RB to take over a big role in case of injury. I think the only role he could have is as situational power rb or pass catching FB, and I didn't see either being committed to, so I can't figure out what McDaniels is doing.

Blueflame
01-13-2010, 01:41 PM
When you say Bronco RB, are you talking about the guy with the most carries or simply a guy who played RB during the season? I say this because Mike Anderson, Terrell Davis, and Quentin Griffin all had seasons averaging under 4 yards per carry.

I'm talking about the Broncos' primary "go-to" RB for each season... not the backups.

Blueflame
01-13-2010, 01:44 PM
Familiar players who understood the scheme. They are role players. Nothing significant. You weren't supposed to be overwhelmed by their performances. They aren't long-term options here.

Point is, Req... most weeks LaMont Jordan was on the inactives list. He had near-zero value to the team. No inactive player can be a "role player"... you have to be on the field to do much of anything and let's face it, Jordan sucked and was a waste of a roster slot (only on the team because of the fact that he once played for the Patriots).

ant1999e
01-13-2010, 01:44 PM
Is the "Hillis Fever" spead the same way as AIDS?

Taco John
01-13-2010, 01:45 PM
Is the "Hillis Fever" spead the same way as AIDS?

Yes. Cobras are used.

TonyR
01-13-2010, 01:52 PM
I think losing makes it easy to question Josh's decisions.

Winning makes it very difficult.

Too true.

Popps
01-13-2010, 01:56 PM
If McDaniels totally doesn't see a role for Hillis, then he should cut him .

I think he did see a role for him... as a reserve fullback, a reserve RB and a special teams contributor.

Plenty of guys on the roster serve similar purposes.

He just didn't see him as a starting RB, and Hillis had some major lapses that didn't help his case, apparently.

He may well cut him this off-season, if he feels like he's not capable of staying with the mental side of the game and coming in as prepared as everyone else.

McDaniels absolutely loves Spencer Larsen. Yet, Hillis found himself in the doghouse. Two guys of almost identical standing and background... one found good graces, one didn't. I can't tell you how or why, but I can only tell you that if Hillis was demonstrating that he was the best RB option for the team, McDaniels would have used him. Anyone who believes otherwise is kidding themselves.

And, like others have pointed out... we have assistant coaches and RB coaches who play a part in these decisions, too. A guy like Turner likely reported the readiness of these guys to McD as the season went along.

Two years in a row... two separate staffs choose to keep Hillis in mostly a reserve role. I can't tell you exactly why, but they did. When there were other options... both coaches used them first.

Florida_Bronco
01-13-2010, 02:02 PM
Point is, Req... most weeks LaMont Jordan was on the inactives list. So?

He had near-zero value to the team. He was a backup player. That's where his value lies.

No inactive player can be a "role player"... Not true.

let's face it, Jordan sucked Really? How did he suck? He never made any mistakes on the field and did exactly what we asked him to do.

and was a waste of a roster slot So are all backup players according to you.

(only on the team because of the fact that he once played for the Patriots). How is that a bad thing?

Taco John
01-13-2010, 02:04 PM
Two years in a row... two separate staffs choose to keep Hillis in mostly a reserve role. I can't tell you exactly why, but they did. When there were other options... both coaches used them first.

...and then Hillis got his opportunity, and took so much advantage of it that you told us all that he was the Running Back of the future and that we'd be stupid to draft a runningback with the first pick.

And then the wind blew in the other direction and you changed your take.

gyldenlove
01-13-2010, 02:05 PM
I don't see 8-8 as an accomplishment at all given the division we play in, the fact that we lost at home to Oakland and KC, and the fact that we got off to a 6-0 start.


Despite that, I agree that this is going to be an exciting offseason. I can't wait to see what Josh has in store for us.

8-8 was what we had to achieve with 4 games against the Raiders and Chiefs as well as games against the Browns and Redskins. There was no way we could have gone less than that without it being seriously disappointing.

I think the way we ended the season was disasterous, we were in a very good position but things fell apart, the reasons are surely many and the blame likewise can not be pinpointed on any single person or part of the organization. However ultimately we need to ensure that we improve as an organization and win more games than we lose, to that end we need to improve the overall team talent as well as making changes to the systems we use to emphasize strengths and remove concepts that do not fare well. Now we have a seasons worth of evaluations and hopefully we will be able to utilize that knowledge and have more success next year.

skpac1001
01-13-2010, 02:06 PM
I'm kind of in the same boat. I think eight wins is decent, but not good enough after starting out 6-0. We lost to three of the worst teams in the NFL. Simply inexcusable.

I was pretty happy with everything until those last two games. I can handle getting beat by teams that should beat us or teams that are fairly close, but not those games back to back. For all my complaining since though, I am still pretty much optimistic about McDaniels in the long run, and still mostly happy with the direction he is taking us overall. I think he has and will continue to make inexperienced HC mistakes though, and don't feel like polishing the turds he occasionally drops.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 02:08 PM
....if you've watched the team as long as some of us have, you quickly understand the value of this type of back.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 02:10 PM
The wind has changed directions since Popps held this take:


To me, (Hillis) is the new Mike Anderson. Get a back to compliment him and move on to more pressing needs... like a DE or S deserving of a starting job in the NFL.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 02:12 PM
We'll see. If Hillis keeps running over people and racking up yards the rest of the year, (the coach) is going to have a hard time justifying sticking a rookie in his place and moving him back to FB. But, it's possible.

A likely scenario is that he remains HB, but they work in someone else next season and simply see who gives the most bang for buck at HB. I also DO expect Hillis to get some carries and catches as a FB, simply because... why not.

It boggles me that someone could be so convinced that Hillis was the answer, and then in a snap, change his opinion of his value to the team.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 02:13 PM
And my take then, and still today:

Let the game plan and the match-ups dictate who gets what carries. I'm not concerned about distribution. I'm just personally a big fan of the type of offense that uses an athlete at Fullback in the mold of Howard Griffith and Lorenzo Neal - and now Hillis. When you have a fullback who can provide your offense with a full compliment of tools (rushing, blocking, catching), you can approach invincibility. We'd have had a hell of a time winning a single Superbowl without the extraordinary amount of help we got from Howard Griffith. I think Hillis is a key piece to the Superbowl puzzle - but I think we need to put him in the spot where he best fits, and IMO feature back is not that spot.

This is while you, Popps, were making the argument that Hillis is THE feature back, not a compliment back, and certainly not a game day inactive.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 02:15 PM
Cito weighs in:

Most of you guys are right on the beam. The guy totally reminds me of Mark van Eeghen.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/V/VanEMa00.htm
Hillis is the same kind of back. A chain mover. He doesn't have to be the feature back, but seems to me you want to get Hillis 20 touches a game. He adds diversity galore to the O and has a nose for the endzone. You can't teach a nose for the end zone, either you have it or you don't. Hillis has it. This guy is a dynamo. His ego is big, so he'll be holding out soon for a payday to meet his production. Worry about that when it happens.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 02:17 PM
Here is what Meck77 had to say about Hillis and the notion that he didn't earn it...

He's too slow, he can't jump high enough, he won't be a starter, he can't be a starter, he's not the typical player for the position, etc etc etc
Oh but he was tough and retired with Two Superbowl rings..........
With as many flavor clowns who have been thru the door lately I'm thrilled we have a guy like Hillis pounding people and playing hard.
What we have now is a guy who has EARNED the position until somebody PROVES they deserve the job.
http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/9658/edmcsa5uy7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img70.imageshack.us/img70/edmcsa5uy7.jpg/1/w594.png (http://g.imageshack.us/img70/edmcsa5uy7.jpg/1/)

Blueflame
01-13-2010, 02:17 PM
So?

He was a backup player. That's where his value lies.

Not true.

Really? How did he suck? He never made any mistakes on the field and did exactly what we asked him to do.

So are all backup players according to you.

How is that a bad thing?

An inactive player cannot be used as a backup that week, now can they? And he was on the inactives list more than just a few times.

A couple of years back, most Broncos fans saw Cutler, Marshall, and Hillis as young players with a lot of potential to be the core of a pretty solid offense. Now two years later, they're all "garbage" that we'll be "well rid of"? ??? I think exchanging young players with a lot of potential... for draft picks (that may or may not pay off over the long haul) then signing old over-the-hill players that no other team even wants and that aren't good enough to see much actual playing time... as free agents... is perhaps not the smartest move.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 02:18 PM
Runningback? We have the solution. Why do we need to draft a runningback?


Again, I'm a bit confused as to why the emergence of a very solid runner in our system seems to have convinced people (that our coach) will now take a RB high in the draft.

Merlin
01-13-2010, 02:19 PM
Difficult to say. But Hillis didn't get an opportunity to play last year until the 7th (or 6th) RB went down.
Not that it makes it much better, but he was the 5th starting RB. My guess is that there were many factors at play. I don't think Hillis is a great RB, but he is better than he was allowed to perform under McD. I would not want him as my starting RB, but he is a great backup (or committee), short yardage, and receiving RB.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 02:21 PM
Hillis is virtually the answer to all of our problems at RB:


Correct, it's a position of need as long is it's put in proper order...
1. DE
2. DE
3. S
4. S
5. OLB (Strong)
6. RB


That means, DE remains #1 priority in this coming draft.... though I would accept that S is just as dire. I think we need a true strong side LB. Hopefully we dump Boss Bailey after this season. You bring up a good point with CB, though some may argue that Williams/Carl P. provide enough insurance there for the short term.

Hey, I'm all for an elite back in the draft as long as it doesn't interfere with our more pressing needs.... OR, if we grab one in free agency, that's fine, too.

Bronco Yoda
01-13-2010, 02:25 PM
Knowshon Moreno is 10th in the league in carries. Buck is 41st with half as many carries. Then Lamont Jordan at 109 with 25 carries. New England has Moroney at 23rd, Morris at 60, Taylor at 67, Faulk at 69, even Tom Brady has more runs then our 3rd RB. Explain how we are running a system that spreads the ball around to its rb's more then most teams please.

I noticed this also. The Pats always used rbbc. This year Josh was really hell bent on rushing Moreno regardless the circumstances. Moreno could be limping, bending over gasping for air, and yet we still kept fresh leggs sitting on the bench. It was a puzzling year in so many ways.

Florida_Bronco
01-13-2010, 02:28 PM
An inactive player cannot be used as a backup that week, now can they? And he was on the inactives list more than just a few times. He was inactive for 7 games, and active for the 9 others.

Also, you can't dress all 53 players for every game, so sometimes you have to pick and choose who to deactivate. Seeing as how we were generally pretty healthy at running back, we could afford to deactivate Jordan to have someone else active at WR, OL or DL.

A couple of years back, most Broncos fans saw Cutler, Marshall, and Hillis as young players with a lot of potential to be the core of a pretty solid offense. Now two years later, they're all "garbage" that we'll be "well rid of"? ??? Yeah, until Cutler became a traitor to this franchise, Marshall continued with his off the field troubles and Hillis couldn't pick up the offense, presumably the same thing that kept him on the bench with Shanahan.

I think exchanging young players with a lot of potential... for draft picks (that may or may not pay off over the long haul) then signing old over-the-hill players that no other team even wants and that aren't good enough to see much actual playing time... as free agents... is perhaps not the smartest move. What players with alot of potential did we trade? Cutler? He forced our hand when he wouldn't act like a professional and talk to the owner.

Marshall? Again, off the field problems and now, on the field problems. He's not a popular guy with his teammates and he's simply not worth the trouble.

Hillis? He's still on the roster, so at the present time it's only logical that McDaniels believes he might be able to put it all together.

HEAV
01-13-2010, 02:32 PM
I was doing a Google search on "Josh McDaniels" to see if there was anything new out there, and ran across this.

Thought it was plenty amusing and worth sharing...

http://extremeskins.com/showthread.php?t=315384

Google search? More like troll'n like you always have done...

skpac1001
01-13-2010, 02:33 PM
I think he did see a role for him... as a reserve fullback, a reserve RB and a special teams contributor.

He may well cut him this off-season, if he feels like he's not capable of staying with the mental side of the game and coming in as prepared as everyone else.

McDaniels absolutely loves Spencer Larsen. Yet, Hillis found himself in the doghouse. Two guys of almost identical standing and background... one found good graces, one didn't. I can't tell you how or why, but I can only tell you that if Hillis was demonstrating that he was the best RB option for the team, McDaniels would have used him. Anyone who believes otherwise is kidding themselves.


Two years in a row... two separate staffs choose to keep Hillis in mostly a reserve role. I can't tell you exactly why, but they did. When there were other options... both coaches used them first.

Maybe he has value as far as covering all three positions, but as far as I can tell he is nothing special at special teams and well below average as a McDaniels style blocking FB, and you guys are arguing that he is nothing special in any way at RB, so its a pretty worthless backup system IMHO. Your typical street free agent FB could probably do a better job at both special teams and FB, like the one we had in training camp.
As far as backup RB, I think there is two styles;
1) The replacement type that is similar to the starter and will take over the main role if the starter goes down. You have given good reasons why Hillis probably isn't looked at this way, he isn't trusted.
2) The situational player, ie 3rd down back, short yardage, pass catching FB, ...
If Jordan was taking all the situational roles away from Hillis, I could understand somewhat. It seems to be they are just jamming Moreno into all the roles with Buck as a breather though. I don't think thats good for anyone, including Moreno.
Anyways, like you said, I guess we will find out a lot this offseason.

Blueflame
01-13-2010, 02:36 PM
He was inactive for 7 games, and active for the 9 others.

Also, you can't dress all 53 players for every game, so sometimes you have to pick and choose who to deactivate. Seeing as how we were generally pretty healthy at running back, we could afford to deactivate Jordan to have someone else active at WR, OL or DL.

Yeah, until Cutler became a traitor to this franchise, Marshall continued with his off the field troubles and Hillis couldn't pick up the offense, presumably the same thing that kept him on the bench with Shanahan.

What players with alot of potential did we trade? Cutler? He forced our hand when he wouldn't act like a professional and talk to the owner.

Marshall? Again, off the field problems and now, on the field problems. He's not a popular guy with his teammates and he's simply not worth the trouble.

Hillis? He's still on the roster, so at the present time it's only logical that McDaniels believes he might be able to put it all together.

So for nearly half of the season he wasn't even useful as a backup. And you deactivate the guys who are least likely to get any playing time anyway (too buried on the depth chart or dinged up... Jordan wasn't dinged up so you do the math).

Marshall and Scheffler are on their way out of Denver this offseason. And whoever replaces Marshall will be a downgrade at WR. Furthermore, we have absolutely no guarantees that McDaniels will use whatever draft picks we get as compensation wisely (judging by last year's draft).

Taco John
01-13-2010, 02:45 PM
Google search? More like troll'n like you always have done...


Uh, no... A Google search (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&tbo=1&output=search&q=Josh%20McDaniels&tbs=rltm:1)

Florida_Bronco
01-13-2010, 03:00 PM
So for nearly half of the season he wasn't even useful as a backup. And you deactivate the guys who are least likely to get any playing time anyway Sorry, but I explained this already. You pick your active players based on where you need them. If you're deep at running back (we were) then you can afford to deactivate one and use his spot at another position.

(too buried on the depth chart or dinged up... Jordan wasn't dinged up so you do the math). Actually for at least a couple of those games, Jordan was dinged up.

Marshall and Scheffler are on their way out of Denver this offseason. Maybe.

And whoever replaces Marshall will be a downgrade at WR. Says who?

Furthermore, we have absolutely no guarantees that McDaniels will use whatever draft picks we get as compensation wisely (judging by last year's draft). The same can be said for every single team in the league. ???

Blueflame
01-13-2010, 03:11 PM
Sorry, but I explained this already. You pick your active players based on where you need them. If you're deep at running back (we were) then you can afford to deactivate one and use his spot at another position.

Actually for at least a couple of those games, Jordan was dinged up.

Maybe.

Says who?

The same can be said for every single team in the league. ???

Does it change the fact that LaMont Jordan was of little to no value to the '09 Broncos? No. Again, he was a waste of a roster slot.

I'd be totally amazed if either Marshall or Scheffler were on the roster on opening day 2010.

Know what? WRs of Marshall's caliber (on-field performance) don't come along every single day. As for his presumptive replacement... the likelihood is Gaffney. No football fan in his/her right mind would consider Gaffney anywhere near Marshall's level athletically. You'd be laughed at if you even suggested it.

While the draft is a crapshoot, a lot of eyebrows were raised by McDaniels' draft day choices last April. Every team in the league didn't trade a future first round pick to move up in the second round of the draft.

Popps
01-13-2010, 03:12 PM
Maybe he has value as far as covering all three positions, but as far as I can tell he is nothing special at special teams and well below average as a McDaniels style blocking FB, and you guys are arguing that he is nothing special in any way at RB, so its a pretty worthless backup system IMHO. Your typical street free agent FB could probably do a better job at both special teams and FB, like the one we had in training camp.
.

Could be, which is why it's just not that big of an issue, at this point.

I'm as disappointed as anyone that he couldn't earn more playing time this year. But, I also think Moreno has much more upside and expect us to bring a third back for the rotation who can handle his assignments, etc.

Dagmar
01-13-2010, 03:15 PM
I see this one has gone "that way" again. Oh well.

watermock
01-13-2010, 03:19 PM
I've never said he didn't look good, but most of Shanahans big performers seemed to fade the next year and disappear the next, except Mike A. Who knows, again, I am not fishing for an argument, just wondering what other people thought.

What bushiat.

Portis iis the second leading rusher in Washington history. He's got over 11,000 yads from scimmage.

Droughns was much like Hillis, produced, and was traded away for I think a 3rd. H was also a converted RB who produced when called on.

Anderson flamed out, he was a big benfiary of the ZBS, he was taught good. In fact rusty, MA never did crap once traded.

Torain was alot like Fargas, who has a pretty good career, better than McFadden and certainly more value. His deal got cut short.

Bell is playing for a SB for NO.

Also gone are our offensive coaches now.

Remember when mock told you that McStalin would purge the great draft of 06 and destroy the coaching staff on offense?

They did a good job bringing in nolan and installing the 3/4, but the draft, heavy with high picks, was terrible.

We got a couple lucky wins against Cincy and Dallas, or we could be 6-10.

If we had Shanahan and the 09 D, 11-5.

Popps
01-13-2010, 03:20 PM
Runningback? We have the solution. Why do we need to draft a runningback?

Taco, when you quote things that I've already expressly said many times... and reiterated, and even put in the ORIGINAL POST of a Hillis thread I created, I'm not sure if you think you're being clever, or exactly what you think you're accomplishing. Or, maybe like others pointed out, maybe you're just trolling to see who's biting.

In any case, I was a big fan of Hillis' play last season. I'm not sure how much more clear I can make that. I'm also just as disappointed that he couldn't impress the staff this season. I did indeed think he'd be part of our RB rotation. I think we all did. There wouldn't be 1000 threads on the subject if this wasn't a surprising fall-off for him.

So, it's anyone's guess what your real point is, here... other than you and Dragboy's conspiracy theory that McDaniels purposely keeps Hillis from success so he can protect Moreno. (Despite giving plenty of carries to Buckhalter and PLENTY of opportunity to Shanahan players.)

It looks like you and about 3 or 4 other people who buy that hair-brained theory. Posting more threads about it doesn't seem to be convincing anyone.

It's good for a laugh, though. I have a neighbor who thinks the government is putting stuff in the water to calcify his brain, or some ****. You guy should get together and trade stories.

watermock
01-13-2010, 03:23 PM
It isn't just Hillis.

Popps
01-13-2010, 03:28 PM
What bushiat.

Portis iis the second leading rusher in Washington history. He's got over 11,000 yads from scimmage.

Droughns was much like Hillis, produced, and was traded away for I think a 3rd. H was also a converted RB who produced when called on.

Anderson flamed out, he was a big benfiary of the ZBS, he was taught good. In fact rusty, MA never did crap once traded.

Torain was alot like Fargas, who has a pretty good career, better than McFadden and certainly more value. His deal got cut short.

Bell is playing for a SB for NO.

Also gone are our offensive coaches now.

Remember when mock told you that McStalin would purge the great draft of 06 and destroy the coaching staff on offense?

They did a good job bringing in nolan and installing the 3/4, but the draft, heavy with high picks, was terrible.

We got a couple lucky wins against Cincy and Dallas, or we could be 6-10.

If we had Shanahan and the 09 D, 11-5.



Actually, he's soft of right.

Olandis Gary, Mike Anderson, Mike Bell, Tatum Bell, Rouben Droughns, Torrain, Selvin Young...

How many of those guys went on to take on starting RB positions after leaving our system?

Portis and TD were gifted backs. The rest of those guys were quality backs, but probably not starting caliber in other systems. (Obviously.)

If you want to go with historical trends... the trend would be that Hillis does not go onto be a starter in another city.

skpac1001
01-13-2010, 03:36 PM
Could be, which is why it's just not that big of an issue, at this point.

I'm as disappointed as anyone that he couldn't earn more playing time this year. But, I also think Moreno has much more upside and expect us to bring a third back for the rotation who can handle his assignments, etc.

I am going to hold out hope that Hillis makes some strides in the offseason, McDaniels learns from his 1st year, and between the two of them they find a real contributing role for him on the team. I agree that Moreno and Buck both are and should be the workhorses, and I also hope we do bring in another back (Jordan must be done because not knowing the system couldn't be the excuse), but I still think Hillis could have a pretty unique situational role on the team, he could be a matchup problem if used creatively.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 03:39 PM
Taco, when you quote things that I've already expressly said many times... and reiterated, and even put in the ORIGINAL POST of a Hillis thread I created, I'm not sure if you think you're being clever, or exactly what you think you're accomplishing. Or, maybe like others pointed out, maybe you're just trolling to see who's biting.

In any case, I was a big fan of Hillis' play last season. I'm not sure how much more clear I can make that. I'm also just as disappointed that he couldn't impress the staff this season. I did indeed think he'd be part of our RB rotation. I think we all did. There wouldn't be 1000 threads on the subject if this wasn't a surprising fall-off for him.

So, it's anyone's guess what your real point is, here... other than you and Dragboy's conspiracy theory that McDaniels purposely keeps Hillis from success so he can protect Moreno. (Despite giving plenty of carries to Buckhalter and PLENTY of opportunity to Shanahan players.)

It looks like you and about 3 or 4 other people who buy that hair-brained theory. Posting more threads about it doesn't seem to be convincing anyone.

It's good for a laugh, though. I have a neighbor who thinks the government is putting stuff in the water to calcify his brain, or some ****. You guy should get together and trade stories.


I like how you pretend that everyone is puzzled over why I'd post the stuff that you said last year which contradicts the arguments that you're making this year.

Not that I'm suprised that the forum fun house mirror has such a poor grip on reality, but really... You think only 3 or 4 people are puzzled by the disappearance of a back you claimed was the answer to all of our runningback problems? I mean, this is your claim - not mine. I'm the one who was telling you that we would probably draft Moreno or someone on Day 1.

And now when people are asking "what the hell happened here," you want to call them names? YOU'RE THE GRANDFATHER OF THE HILLIS HYPE HERE.

Where'd you go!?

Taco John
01-13-2010, 03:49 PM
In this current thread, you laugh at me for suggesting that Hillis is worth a third. In May, half the forum said that he was worth a second or third round pick (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=2716), while you corrected them saying he was worth "9 first rounders." And people cheerily agreed.

Seems to me that you shouldn't be calling anyone a troll here. I don't know how I'm a troll for maintaining a consistent position on Hillis over two seasons, while you flip-flop on the subject at the snap of a finger.

watermock
01-13-2010, 03:52 PM
Noone said he was a starter, we we hoping he might be someone like Riggins lite, that's all.

I can't fathom your hipocracy about him. You were that flag bearer, not anyone else.

When I said Moreno might be bothered by his knee, but man, he sucks, I was greeted by disdain.

Now it's the lines fault.

or the OC's fault.

Or Cutler's fault, or Schefler's fault or weigmans fault or Marshalls fault.

Or the line's fault, which produced last year, despie the bullshiat.

Royal had 2 plays, he won the NE or SD game don't remember.

Of 6 of 9 draft picks, we had NO IMPACT PLAYERS. WE HAD 3 FIRST ROUNDERS.

AND 6 OF 9 WERE OFFENSE!

Popps
01-13-2010, 03:58 PM
I like how you pretend that everyone is puzzled

Well, people would be puzzled because it's puzzling. You don't have a concise argument, other than your tinfoil hat business.

Last year, Hillis was basically our only option outside of pulling guys up from the practice squad. My opinion was that he was far and away our best option at that time.

(Helpful hint: This was before we spent a top 12 pick on a RB.)

Beyond that, I thought Hillis could contribute this season in a rotation.

He couldn't impress the staff, but how was I to know that? Now, with retrospect... one could assume he didn't impress Shanahan either, as he was never used until absolutely necessary.

Couple that one one public and one private account I've heard that he's got real problems with assignments and coaching, and perhaps there's a story there... perhaps not.

But, your puzzlement seems to be over stories you're creating in your own head. No one else but you and dragqueen seem to have these grand conspiracy notions in their heads.



As we saw in the Hillis poll, about 85% of the people who responded thought the decisions being made were the result of normal and proper coaching thought processes, not conspiracies.
http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showth
read.php?t=87376

So, as I said... it's basically you and a few folks out on an island claiming to be smarter than Shanahan and McDaniels on the subject of a back-up RB.


I think we all liked Hillis' play last season. But, you're among the extreme minority that doesn't seem to understand normal football roster movement.
So, yes... you're puzzled, and I'm not sure how any of us can help you.

Let me guess, is this where you remind me that I liked Hillis' play last season? Try it again, that's been effective thus far.

Repeating what someone just said back to them as if it's a new idea is compelling football forum material.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 04:03 PM
You've made this way too easy...

Thread Title:
llis proved he should be the starting RB

Your response to this:

I've been saying this since the start of camp. I'm not sure Hillis has to be "the starter," but McDaniels is going to realize that he has no choice but to give Hillis more carries. If you look at how we started the game, Hillis was blocking, running routes, etc. In other words, we were being cute with him. Shanahan tried the same thing for a while until he realized that you just hand this guy the ball and let him run.
McDaniels will realize this, and Hillis will be splitting carries with someone, I'd suspect. I don't know that he'll be named a starter, but he very well may be the most effective back on our roster, until Moreno knows the system and is healthy. Even then, those two may be a nice compliment.

I understand that the inclination is to move Hillis all over the place because he's athletic. But, he's an extremely effective 1st down running back. There's no need to outsmart ourselves with this guy. Give him the ****ing rock 15 times a game, minimum.

The fact is, you were Hillis's biggest cheerleader here until the situation worked out to where Hillis was being used to question McDaniel's decisions. In the snap of a finger, you went from "don't get cute with him, give him the ****ing rock 15 times a game, minimum" to "He hasn't earned anything."

So yes. I'm puzzled. That's puzzling.

Popps
01-13-2010, 04:08 PM
I am going to hold out hope that Hillis makes some strides in the offseason, McDaniels learns from his 1st year, and between the two of them they find a real contributing role for him on the team. I agree that Moreno and Buck both are and should be the workhorses, and I also hope we do bring in another back (Jordan must be done because not knowing the system couldn't be the excuse), but I still think Hillis could have a pretty unique situational role on the team, he could be a matchup problem if used creatively.

Agree... I hope Hillis can get in good graces with the staff and get out there. He's certainly shown that he can be effective in some capacity.

I'd also expect us to draft a back in the Arrington, speed-back mold this April.
Clearly, McD wanted a 3-headed RB monster, but injuries and game situations never really let that play out.

Popps
01-13-2010, 04:10 PM
You've made this way too easy...

Thread Title:
llis proved he should be the starting RB

Your response to this:



The fact is, you were Hillis's biggest cheerleader here until the situation worked out to where Hillis was being used to question McDaniel's decisions. In the snap of a finger, you went from "don't get cute with him, give him the ****ing rock 15 times a game, minimum" to "He hasn't earned anything."

So yes. I'm puzzled. That's puzzling.



Taco, your silly capsulation of the scenario omits giant chunks of data, like...

-Having no other RBs on the active roster last season

-Having two very talented RBs on the roster this season

-A new system

(etc.)


So, when you omit giant chunks of data in your story, of course you're going to confuse yourself. Try including ALL of the data next time, and you won't have such a hard time, bro!

Taco John
01-13-2010, 04:16 PM
That last one was what you posted in August during training camp.

Popps
01-13-2010, 04:23 PM
That last one was what you posted in August during training camp.

Right, at which time I (like most people) would have expected he'd be able to earn a spot in the rotation.

He couldn't. It's unfortunate.

Once again, fairly simple situation. Unfortunate, but not "puzzling."

2KBack
01-13-2010, 04:25 PM
I am going to hold out hope that Hillis makes some strides in the offseason, McDaniels learns from his 1st year, and between the two of them they find a real contributing role for him on the team. I agree that Moreno and Buck both are and should be the workhorses, and I also hope we do bring in another back (Jordan must be done because not knowing the system couldn't be the excuse), but I still think Hillis could have a pretty unique situational role on the team, he could be a matchup problem if used creatively.

I think this is the best approach.

Hillis likely struggled with the system and he isn't alone. Some players have adjusted to the new system better than others, it doesn't mean more won't come around. This especially goes for the guys who were rookies last year. Sophomore seasons can be tough, it's even tougher when you are forced to essentially start over from scratch with a new system and coaches.

I once again am an advocate of patience.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 04:38 PM
Right, at which time I (like most people) would have expected he'd be able to earn a spot in the rotation.




No no no no no.

The thread title was "Hillis proved he should be the starting RB," not "we expect that he will be able to earn a spot."

He proved. You went from, "he proved" to "you're a conspiracy theorist if you think Hillis is anything but irrelevant, and by the way, I laugh openly at the idea that he's worth a third round pick, preposterous!"

You should be the last person criticizing posters who take an active interest in what's going to happen with this guy. I agree that the guy's hype is off the charts, but I'm not confused about why that hype exists. Your own posts on the matter tell the tale.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 04:39 PM
All I know is that I'm VERY interested in what happens to this guy this offseason, and I think it's ridiculous to call him "irrelevant." He's hardly "irrelevant."

Popps
01-13-2010, 04:47 PM
Again, Taco... you're just not willing to accept what's happened.

We all think he looks great carrying the ball.

Unfortunately, he did not make the proper strides with the staff and in the offense to be a productive member of our team this year. I ABSOLUTELY AGREE that he proved he deserved carries going into this season.

However, something we're not seeing behind the scenes is keeping that from happening, and there's a matter of a new offense for him to learn... which he's reportedly had problems doing.

If you believe that McDaniels would purposely throw football games, you're free to believe it. But, most of us just feel that he got beat out by other guys, at this point.

It happens.

You can deal with it or continue ranting. Your call.

Taco John
01-13-2010, 04:53 PM
Again, Taco... you're just not willing to accept what's happened.

I have no disagreement there. We lost 8 of 10 games, and not once did we see McDaniels try to get Hillis up to full speed despite the fact that we all know that he's got game breaking ability. I'm having a difficult time accepting that.

DivineLegion
01-13-2010, 05:28 PM
We were 18th in the league rushing and 25th in the league against the run on defense. Going into week 8 we were top 10 in both categories. Its obvious that injuries across the offensive line killed our running game (Ben, and Ryan going down). On the defense it was simply a matter of wear and tear. There are two major needs for this team this offseason...

Guard
DE
and a rotational DT

Oh and Nate Webster, Vernon Fox, Marlon McCree, John Engleberger, Ebenezer Ekuban, Louis Green, Niko Kutavidies, Calvin Lowery, Jack Williams, Dre Bly, Jamie Winborn, Tim Crowder because these were all Mikes guys and they were definitely a better defensive unit. I guess you can throw Michael Pittman, Tatum Bell, Selvin Young, Andre Hall, and Ryan Torain on there too cause you know...Shannys guys are better running backs to.

DivineLegion
01-13-2010, 05:32 PM
No no no no no.

The thread title was "Hillis proved he should be the starting RB," not "we expect that he will be able to earn a spot."

He proved. You went from, "he proved" to "you're a conspiracy theorist if you think Hillis is anything but irrelevant, and by the way, I laugh openly at the idea that he's worth a third round pick, preposterous!"

You should be the last person criticizing posters who take an active interest in what's going to happen with this guy. I agree that the guy's hype is off the charts, but I'm not confused about why that hype exists. Your own posts on the matter tell the tale.

To try and put this whole thing to rest, he did prove he deserved a shot. He got his shot and he failed. He made major mistakes in critical situations and he found himself in the dog house just like Mike Bell. Same exact story different player and different coach. Put this to rest already if Josh wants Peyton around he will keep him around, and Peyton will get his shot again. If Peyton Hillis wants to be a starting running back for the Denver Broncos he will come out and prove his worth this offseason and if he dosent he will be gone.

That was easy.

Florida_Bronco
01-13-2010, 06:20 PM
Does it change the fact that LaMont Jordan was of little to no value to the '09 Broncos? No. Again, he was a waste of a roster slot. Really, I don't get this take at all. Are all the backups a waste of a roster spot then? Let's trim the rosters down to 30 since you only need the starters and a few role players ::)

On top of that, Jordan came cheap, did what we asked of him and was a needed veteran presence, so what exactly are you complaining about?

Oh, wait, he was a Patriot for a brief time. ::)

I'd be totally amazed if either Marshall or Scheffler were on the roster on opening day 2010. Me too, but that remains to be seen.

Know what? WRs of Marshall's caliber (on-field performance) don't come along every single day. As for his presumptive replacement... the likelihood is Gaffney. No football fan in his/her right mind would consider Gaffney anywhere near Marshall's level athletically. You'd be laughed at if you even suggested it. There are plenty of other talented receivers out there who could take Marshall's spot. Honestly I'd prefer he just grow the **** up and act like a professional but that seems unlikely at this point.

While the draft is a crapshoot, a lot of eyebrows were raised by McDaniels' draft day choices last April. Every team in the league didn't trade a future first round pick to move up in the second round of the draft. A move that may very well be praised down the road.

Popps
01-13-2010, 06:31 PM
To try and put this whole thing to rest, he did prove he deserved a shot. He got his shot and he failed. He made major mistakes in critical situations and he found himself in the dog house just like Mike Bell. Same exact story different player and different coach. Put this to rest already.

That's actually the simplest and most accurate synopsis I've seen.

TonyR
01-13-2010, 06:31 PM
Really, I don't get this take at all. Are all the backups a waste of a roster spot then? Let's trim the rosters down to 30 since you only need the starters and a few role players ::)

On top of that, Jordan came cheap, did what we asked of him and was a needed veteran presence, so what exactly are you complaining about?


Apparently she doesn't understand that teams need depth. She must remember all the RB injuries the team had last year, right? If Moreno and Buckhalter were both hurt clearly Jordan would have been asked to contribute more. Not that difficult.

Jordan didn't play a lot because there were better options in front of him. That's how it works. Simple. At least for some people.

strafen
01-13-2010, 07:01 PM
Difficult to say. But Hillis didn't get an opportunity to play last year until the 7th (or 6th) RB went down.

It's not as though Shanny and Bobby Turner thought a lot of Hillis, if they had, we would have seen him much earlier.

As it was, Hillis was put in the lineup when there was no other choice.

And wouldn't you agree that was a nice pleasant surprise?
Do you point the finger at the coaching staff for having failed to use him earlier?
Come on, the guy went in there and took the bull by the horns, and he had done the same thing this year if given the same opportunity...

skpac1001
01-13-2010, 07:01 PM
Apparently she doesn't understand that teams need depth. She must remember all the RB injuries the team had last year, right? If Moreno and Buckhalter were both hurt clearly Jordan would have been asked to contribute more. Not that difficult.

Jordan didn't play a lot because there were better options in front of him. That's how it works. Simple. At least for some people.

Wait a second....
Which of these options are right...
Moreno has the 10th most carries in the league with Buck having half as much and nobody else having any significant amount because...
A) Moreno's dominating performances. When a player is putting up the kind of numbers Moreno did, you don't even think of sharing the load. Nobody could match that production.
B) Buck was hurt and couldn't take more of the load, and nobody else could be trusted.
C) That is how McDaniels runs his offense.

If the option is B, how do we have depth at RB? Because we have somebody to go through the motions if Moreno gets hurt?

strafen
01-13-2010, 07:03 PM
To try and put this whole thing to rest, he did prove he deserved a shot. He got his shot and he failed. He made major mistakes in critical situations and he found himself in the dog house just like Mike Bell. Same exact story different player and different coach. Put this to rest already if Josh wants Peyton around he will keep him around, and Peyton will get his shot again. If Peyton Hillis wants to be a starting running back for the Denver Broncos he will come out and prove his worth this offseason and if he dosent he will be gone.

That was easy.

He got a shot?
What do you call getting a shot?
13 carries?
Critical mistakes?
How many times did Moreno screw up on critical downs where he failed to convert?
About his fumbles?
What is good for the goose is good for the gander...

watermock
01-13-2010, 07:09 PM
Apparently she doesn't understand that teams need depth. She must remember all the RB injuries the team had last year, right? If Moreno and Buckhalter were both hurt clearly Jordan would have been asked to contribute more. Not that difficult.

Jordan didn't play a lot because there were better options in front of him. That's how it works. Simple. At least for some people.

Easy, for the simple minded.

We had the injuries in 08 not 09 moron.

Jordan? Your not serious.

TonyR
01-13-2010, 07:10 PM
...how do we have depth at RB? Because we have somebody to go through the motions if Moreno gets hurt?

I'm not sure what your argument is. Backups aren't necessarily "wastes of roster spots" as someone falsely suggested above. Every team needs them, and every team has them. If there's someone you would rather have as a backup than Jordan that's another argument I suppose.

strafen
01-13-2010, 07:11 PM
I think he did see a role for him... as a reserve fullback, a reserve RB and a special teams contributor.

Plenty of guys on the roster serve similar purposes.

He just didn't see him as a starting RB, and Hillis had some major lapses that didn't help his case, apparently.

He may well cut him this off-season, if he feels like he's not capable of staying with the mental side of the game and coming in as prepared as everyone else.

McDaniels absolutely loves Spencer Larsen. Yet, Hillis found himself in the doghouse. Two guys of almost identical standing and background... one found good graces, one didn't. I can't tell you how or why, but I can only tell you that if Hillis was demonstrating that he was the best RB option for the team, McDaniels would have used him. Anyone who believes otherwise is kidding themselves.

And, like others have pointed out... we have assistant coaches and RB coaches who play a part in these decisions, too. A guy like Turner likely reported the readiness of these guys to McD as the season went along.

Two years in a row... two separate staffs choose to keep Hillis in mostly a reserve role. I can't tell you exactly why, but they did. When there were other options... both coaches used them first. Wow, what side are you on?
This is what you said of Hillis before.
I have to ask, why are you now acting like the guy can't produce anymore...
Watch the highlight reel above at 1:00 and check those few runs. It's runs like those that separate him from bruiser-types people want to compare him to. This isn't Mike Alstott, folks. Hillis has legitimate starting RB vision and moves. He's big, so he's not going to look like Barry Sanders when he runs, but this isn't a plodding back. He's got excellent body-control and awareness. He uses his blockers (even if he has to knock them over) and doesn't force things when they're not there.

Again, I think it's all just great that he can catch, block, kick, cook, paint and any other skills he may have. But, I want to see this guy lining up for at least 1/3rd of our carries. After watching him last year, there is absolutely no acceptable excuse for not giving this guy 10-15 carries a game, or more. If Moreno is what I think he is... he and Hillis could be a brutally effective combo, much like Johnson/White in Tenn. Pepper in Buckhalter on third downs and for change of pace, and we'll run the ball down team's throats.
What is it man?
Make up your mind!
I've been saying this since the start of camp. I'm not sure Hillis has to be "the starter," but McDaniels is going to realize that he has no choice but to give Hillis more carries. If you look at how we started the game, Hillis was blocking, running routes, etc. In other words, we were being cute with him. Shanahan tried the same thing for a while until he realized that you just hand this guy the ball and let him run.

McDaniels will realize this, and Hillis will be splitting carries with someone, I'd suspect. I don't know that he'll be named a starter, but he very well may be the most effective back on our roster, until Moreno knows the system and is healthy. Even then, those two may be a nice compliment.


I understand that the inclination is to move Hillis all over the place because he's athletic. But, he's an extremely effective 1st down running back. There's no need to outsmart ourselves with this guy. Give him the ****ing rock 15 times a game, minimum.

TonyR
01-13-2010, 07:12 PM
Easy, for the simple minded.


So it should be easy for you then, right? Assuming you're sober?

strafen
01-13-2010, 07:13 PM
It boggles me that someone could be so convinced that Hillis was the answer, and then in a snap, change his opinion of his value to the team.

That's Popps right there.
He's got zero credibility. After being all over Hillis last year, he's now acting like a scorned girlfriend and now has a new boyfrind to console her and now is bashing his old boyfriend...

Popps
01-13-2010, 07:16 PM
That's Popps right there.
He's got zero credibility. After being all over Hillis last year, he's now acting like a scorned girlfriend and now has a new boyfrind to console her and now is bashing his old boyfriend...

Again, you're just so over the top psycho over this guy, you'll never listen to reason.

DevlineLegion's post summed it up perfectly. That's the long and the short of it.

But, you keep up the freak-out if you want. It's like watching a train-wreck. Not pleasant, but somehow entertaining.

strafen
01-13-2010, 07:20 PM
Very seriously, apart from the "He's an idiot" defence, why would Josh McDaniels NOT be playing Hillis if Hillis were as good as you people say he is?What do you mean being as good as people say he is?
Have you been living under a rock?
How can you say something so stupid to imply Hillis never demonstrated legitimate skills to be a difference maker?
He's not playing Hillis because he had his guys to play in front of him, just like the guys he's brough to play in front of Royal, Stokley, and Scheffler.
Moreno was his guy. He had to play Moreno because the criticism he recieved for that pick.
It was a controversial pick.
McDaniels wanted to prove he was right in spending the 12th overall pick on a college back that only had 2 years under his belt of college football.
That was a dumb move, and McDaniels wanted to prove otherwise...