PDA

View Full Version : Alright, what went wrong?


Killericon
01-20-2010, 09:09 AM
Okay, Let me first say that I'm on the pro-Josh bandwagon, but I have a question for everyone on the "screw Josh" bandwagon.

Most of the criticism I've heard about Josh is about his personality; that his abrasive, brash and arrogant ways led to the Cutler fiasco, which was followed by any number of fiascos, Marshall, Nolan, etc.

Another big hit on him was how he cared too much about the Patriot game, how he let it become his Super Bowl, and then eased off the pedal.

If I'm missing anything, please tell me what.

I don't want this to be a thread where people talk about if McDaniels is a good or bad coach, or if the season was satisfactory or not(A man can dream, right?). What I want to hear is theories about why we went 2-8 down the stretch, because I haven't heard any from the Anti-Josh camp. My personal theory is that Nolan and McDaniels were scheming their way to victory in the first 6 games, and then ran out of tricks in the bag, and couldn't hack coaching normally, but that's a wildly simplistic view. The team stopped playing as well, both on offence and on defence.

Why did we go 2-8? Try to avoid letting your bias show, and give me a good answer. What went wrong?

jhns
01-20-2010, 09:19 AM
Josh McDaniels is what went wrong!

I would say it was a combination of injury, scheme getting figured out on defense, unproductive offense, and lack of talent. I do not think there are many coaches that would have done a lot better this year.

I am anti-McD but I don't want him fired for going 8-8 and I have never been in these 2-8 arguments. Me wanting him fired has to do with how he deals with players and other issues. That and the fact that I would love a normal NFL power structure. This crap with the coach being in full control has not been successful in this league for a while now. Our coach not only is in full control, he also game plans and calls the offensive plays. That is a lot to take on. I do not think this team will be successful with the current way we run things. I know this probably isn't what you want as a response but I figured I would show where I am coming from with the anti-McD stuff.

DrFate
01-20-2010, 09:22 AM
We went 2-8 cause McDaniels is dumb. :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Denver_Broncos_season

Seriously though - You come off the bye, you get handled by two teams that simply pile drive people (BAL and PIT) and after that the gig was up.

Teams started trying to overpower the defense. They couldn't weather the storm.

On the other side of the ball - you can only run so many screen passes before it catches up to you. No deep threat hinders the run game, and Harris getting hurt doesn't help you close.

Basically you lose a bit of steam on the bye, you have two teams in back-back weeks that expose your weaknesses - and it snowballs.

Gob
01-20-2010, 09:27 AM
Okay, Let me first say that I'm on the pro-Josh bandwagon, but I have a question for everyone on the "screw Josh" bandwagon.

Most of the criticism I've heard about Josh is about his personality; that his abrasive, brash and arrogant ways led to the Cutler fiasco, which was followed by any number of fiascos, Marshall, Nolan, etc.

Another big hit on him was how he cared too much about the Patriot game, how he let it become his Super Bowl, and then eased off the pedal.

If I'm missing anything, please tell me what.

I don't want this to be a thread where people talk about if McDaniels is a good or bad coach, or if the season was satisfactory or not(A man can dream, right?). What I want to hear is theories about why we went 2-8 down the stretch, because I haven't heard any from the Anti-Josh camp. My personal theory is that Nolan and McDaniels were scheming their way to victory in the first 6 games, and then ran out of tricks in the bag, and couldn't hack coaching normally, but that's a wildly simplistic view. The team stopped playing as well, both on offence and on defence.

Why did we go 2-8? Try to avoid letting your bias show, and give me a good answer. What went wrong?

I agree with this. Also, I think we had some pretty lucky breaks in the first 6 games, which is part of football but it partially explains the two seperate halves of the season. I think it ultimately comes down to not having the type of talent that is ideal fits for the schemes we were running, but on defense the D-line overachieved for as long as it could.
I think the ultra conservative O we ran worked well for when the D-line was overachieving and the defense dominating, but when it started to faid our offense could not compensate and we were done.

Killericon
01-20-2010, 09:27 AM
We went 2-8 cause McDaniels is dumb. :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Denver_Broncos_season

Seriously though - You come off the bye, you get handled by two teams that simply pile drive people (BAL and PIT) and after that the gig was up.

Teams started trying to overpower the defense. They couldn't weather the storm.

On the other side of the ball - you can only run so many screen passes before it catches up to you. No deep threat hinders the run game, and Harris getting hurt doesn't help you close.

Basically you lose a bit of steam on the bye, you have two teams in back-back weeks that expose your weaknesses - and it snowballs.

So, on offence, we just ran out of innovation and people got our screen pass brilliance figured out...And on defence people just started ramming it down our throat?

What I'm trying to get at here is that people are blaming McDaniels for everything, without pointing to anything ON the field. Sure, McDaniels ****ed up off the field a fair amount...Tell me how he ****ed up on it.

Rohirrim
01-20-2010, 09:34 AM
So, on offence, we just ran out of innovation and people got our screen pass brilliance figured out...And on defence people just started ramming it down our throat?

What I'm trying to get at here is that people are blaming McDaniels for everything, without pointing to anything ON the field. Sure, McDaniels ****ed up off the field a fair amount...Tell me how he ****ed up on it.

He wasn't able to pull a pro-bowl LG, C, RT and NT out of his ass.

bowtown
01-20-2010, 09:34 AM
He stepped on Chris Harris's toe, took a tire iron to Russ Hochstein, and made Weigmann old. Also, he didn't let Hillis get enough 2 yard runs.

jhns
01-20-2010, 09:35 AM
Tell me how he ****ed up on it.

Well, it was him getting rid of Cutler, his playcalling, and his unwillingness to fix the lines that created an offensive regression and allowed for the d-line to break apart easily. We had 5 picks in the first two rounds. We spent loads in FA. We didn't spend many of those resources on either line.

Killericon
01-20-2010, 09:36 AM
Well, it was him getting rid of Cutler, his playcalling, and his unwillingness to fix the lines that created an offensive regression and allowed for the d-line to break apart easily. We had 5 picks in the first two rounds. We spent loads in FA. We didn't spend many of those resources on either line.

So, you're of the opinion that the problems that caused us to go 2-8 were there the whole time? Nothing changed after 6 games to lead to the terrible end?

Paladin
01-20-2010, 09:37 AM
Seems to me that the Ravens discovered that Wigman and Hamilton could not hold up against big NTs or DTs who opened lanes for the LBs to fire in. With a rookie RB learning to block in the NFL, he was susceptible to the delayed rush by the MLBs, which further shortened the time for Orton to find the primary target let alone do his progressions. Secondly, the game plans did not call for long passes beyond the quick (compensating) passes which were used to cover for the weak Oline's middle. Moreover, since the bubbles and quicks were compensating for the Oline, the Ds understood that they did not have to cover deep balls. Thirdly, Harris' replacement - Polumbus - could not actually contain the speed rushers from his side of the line. Fourth, Clady was being asked to help in the compensation which left him against the speed rushers on his side alone. He did well, but there were more breakdowns than usual this year, but he was still good. Fifth, Buck was hurt enough that it broke the one-two punch significantly. Sixth, Moreno got nearly 1000 yards this year, but the Oline couldnt move a pile of empty boxes by the 13th game or so. Moreno was tackled behind the LOS so much that one thought the other team had a pipeline into the huddle and knew just what play was being called. (I often wondered whether someone on that Oline was giving a "tell".) Simms proved ineffective, probably due to his lack of playing time over the previous two years, and the lack of prep time since Orton was learning the O himself and got most of the prep time.

Seventh, the D started to get hurt. Dawkins hurt his ankle, People were getting banged up, but htey never quit until the last game.

Heroic moments were seen throughout the season. We should remember those as well as the failures......

Popps
01-20-2010, 09:37 AM
When did this whole "our season went south because Josh was too happy to beat the Patriots" routine start? Who squatted over the forum and dropped this latest turd?

Does this mean we're done with the Hillis conspiracy?

DrFate
01-20-2010, 09:37 AM
So, on offence, we just ran out of innovation and people got our screen pass brilliance figured out...And on defence people just started ramming it down our throat?

What I'm trying to get at here is that people are blaming McDaniels for everything, without pointing to anything ON the field. Sure, McDaniels ****ed up off the field a fair amount...Tell me how he ****ed up on it.

He can be blamed for turmoil with personnel and having a lousy draft. He can be blamed for emasculating the offense by replacing Cutler with Orton and turning a blind eye to Royal, Scheffler, and Hillis.

I don't blame him for the defense being over matched (although I wonder how much credit Nolan should get).

Gob
01-20-2010, 09:38 AM
So, on offence, we just ran out of innovation and people got our screen pass brilliance figured out...And on defence people just started ramming it down our throat?

What I'm trying to get at here is that people are blaming McDaniels for everything, without pointing to anything ON the field. Sure, McDaniels ****ed up off the field a fair amount...Tell me how he ****ed up on it.

As people like to remind me during other arguments, I am not an insider and don't know what happens behind the scenes. The only thing I can judge head coaches on is the product they put on the field and the changes they make in the offseason. I was ok with Shanny going because of his recent mediocre records, and because he would either dump a good DC because his defense faided after compensating for the offense all season (Coyer) or would keep the same horrible DC who never made any improvement (you know), but throughout all of it he didn't really ever commit to throwing more resources to the D-line. Since I don't see why I should judge McDaniels by different standards, I am not happy with this season.

BigPlayShay
01-20-2010, 09:39 AM
In the games we won we handled the battles at the line of scrimmage on offense and defense. In the games we lost, we didn't.

gyldenlove
01-20-2010, 09:40 AM
On offense what happened was that we stopped being innovative. Before the bye week we had showed up to each game with a tailor made game plan and new formations and styles to match our opponent and it worked. For some reason we came into the Baltimore game with a plan that was incredibly poorly concieved, and when Baltimore completely broke the screen we had nothing. From there on in the only game we really came with something innovative was the Redskins game where we challenged what was supposed to be their strength and it worked.
In many of the games we came in with stuff that looked entirely vanilla, we would run exclusively out of heavy multi TE sets, we would line up without a runningback on many passing plays, we ended up with a gameplan that lead to 50% of our passes going to Marshall.

On defense we stopped doing things that worked. The one play that really got to the Chargers more than anything else when we beat them early was the delayed blitz in the middle, Rivers tends to drop deep and then step up when he feels the pressure, but blitzing in the middle takes away that option and makes him nervous. For some reason we didn't blitz in the middle at all in the 2nd game.
Against the Raiders we didn't blitz nearly as much as you would think against a team that gave up 8 sacks to the Redskins the previous week. Instead we sat back and dared them to pass the ball and they did.
The rotation on the defensive front that worked so well early on always having people who could rush on passing downs and people who could stop the run on early downs failed, we ended up with a lot of mismatches and people would take advantage of knowing what we were vulnerable to.

One big thing that affected both sides of the ball late were penalties. In the first 6 games we took very few penalties, but we took double digit penalties in several games during the slide. Many of them stupid penalties, holdings that weren't necesary, offsides, false starts, things that shouldn't happen.

Rohirrim
01-20-2010, 09:40 AM
Seems to me that the Ravens discovered that Wigman and Hamilton could not hold up against big NTs or DTs who opened lanes for the LBs to fire in. With a rookie RB learning to block in the NFL, he was susceptible to the delayed rush by the MLBs, which further shortened the time for Orton to find the primary target let alone do his progressions. Secondly, the game plans did not call for long passes beyond the quick (compensating) passes which were used to cover for the weak Oline's middle. Moreover, since the bubbles and quicks were compensating for the Oline, the Ds understood that they did not have to cover deep balls. Thirdly, Harris' replacement - Polumbus - could not actually contain the speed rushers from his side of the line. Fourth, Clady was being asked to help in the compensation which left him against the speed rushers on his side alone. He did well, but there were more breakdowns than usual this year, but he was still good. Fifth, Buck was hurt enough that it broke the one-two punch significantly. Sixth, Moreno got nearly 1000 yards this year, but the Oline couldnt move a pile of empty boxes by the 13th game or so. Moreno was tackled behind the LOS so much that one thought the other team had a pipeline into the huddle and knew just what play was being called. (I often wondered whether someone on that Oline was giving a "tell".) Simms proved ineffective, probably due to his lack of playing time over the previous two years, and the lack of prep time since Orton was learning the O himself and got most of the prep time.

Seventh, the D started to get hurt. Dawkins hurt his ankle, People were getting banged up, but htey never quit until the last game.

Heroic moments were seen throughout the season. We should remember those as well as the failures......

That's it in a nutshell. :thumbs:

Killericon
01-20-2010, 09:41 AM
He can be blamed for turmoil with personnel and having a lousy draft. He can be blamed for emasculating the offense by replacing Cutler with Orton and turning a blind eye to Royal, Scheffler, and Hillis.

I don't blame him for the defense being over matched (although I wonder how much credit Nolan should get).

So, the consensus seems to be forming that the things that lead to the 2-8 ending happened in the offseason, right? Nothing changed after 6 games, we just got lucky for the first 6 games. Bad team from the start. McDaniels sucks as a GM and a manager of people, is this the general idea?

jhns
01-20-2010, 09:46 AM
So, you're of the opinion that the problems that caused us to go 2-8 were there the whole time? Nothing changed after 6 games to lead to the terrible end?

Yup. I think the pass blocking was bad because of injury and QB but the run problems and d-line problems have been here for years.

PRBronco
01-20-2010, 09:48 AM
Seems to me that the Ravens discovered that Wigman and Hamilton could not hold up against big NTs or DTs who opened lanes for the LBs to fire in. With a rookie RB learning to block in the NFL, he was susceptible to the delayed rush by the MLBs, which further shortened the time for Orton to find the primary target let alone do his progressions. Secondly, the game plans did not call for long passes beyond the quick (compensating) passes which were used to cover for the weak Oline's middle. Moreover, since the bubbles and quicks were compensating for the Oline, the Ds understood that they did not have to cover deep balls. Thirdly, Harris' replacement - Polumbus - could not actually contain the speed rushers from his side of the line. Fourth, Clady was being asked to help in the compensation which left him against the speed rushers on his side alone. He did well, but there were more breakdowns than usual this year, but he was still good. Fifth, Buck was hurt enough that it broke the one-two punch significantly. Sixth, Moreno got nearly 1000 yards this year, but the Oline couldnt move a pile of empty boxes by the 13th game or so. Moreno was tackled behind the LOS so much that one thought the other team had a pipeline into the huddle and knew just what play was being called. (I often wondered whether someone on that Oline was giving a "tell".) Simms proved ineffective, probably due to his lack of playing time over the previous two years, and the lack of prep time since Orton was learning the O himself and got most of the prep time.

Seventh, the D started to get hurt. Dawkins hurt his ankle, People were getting banged up, but htey never quit until the last game.

Heroic moments were seen throughout the season. We should remember those as well as the failures......

Can we put this on the front page? Maybe make it like one of those disclaimers you have to scroll through and read before you can sign in?

Rohirrim
01-20-2010, 09:49 AM
So, the consensus seems to be forming that the things that lead to the 2-8 ending happened in the offseason, right? Nothing changed after 6 games, we just got lucky for the first 6 games. Bad team from the start. McDaniels sucks as a GM and a manager of people, is this the general idea?

Nolan was the only reason the Broncos won a single game. It seemed to me that the few times they showed Nolan on TV sitting up in the booth after the sixth game, he looked kind of groggy. I am convinced the McDaniels started drugging Nolan after that sixth game. I am further convinced that Belichick supplied the drugs. Plus I have no doubt, NO DOUBT, that they might have tampered with his headset so that everything he said WAS ACTUALLY FUNNELED STRAIGHT TO JOSH! and then Josh was able to change the play before it got to the field. I'm pretty sure all the evidence points to that. So, Parcells going after Nolan wasn't tampering...

IT WAS AN INTERVENTION INTENDED TO SAVE HIS LIFE!!!

Josh is truly evil.

Gob
01-20-2010, 09:50 AM
When did this whole "our season went south because Josh was too happy to beat the Patriots" routine start? Who squatted over the forum and dropped this latest turd?

Does this mean we're done with the Hillis conspiracy?

Sure. Lets talk about the regression of each of the 2008 Broncos offensive players as well as the 2009 draft choices, and how none of it has anything to do with McDaniels.

DrFate
01-20-2010, 09:53 AM
So, the consensus seems to be forming that the things that lead to the 2-8 ending happened in the offseason, right? Nothing changed after 6 games, we just got lucky for the first 6 games. Bad team from the start. McDaniels sucks as a GM and a manager of people, is this the general idea?

The entire thing is his responsibility. And of course offseason moves have an impact on in-season play. I was giving the guy props during the fast start. I simply thinks he is taking a 'scorched earth' strategy, which I don't think is helpful. By the beginning of the '10 season, he will have run Cutler, Marshall, and Scheffler out of town. I don't think that is moving in the right direction (regardless of the awful season Cutler had).

Killericon
01-20-2010, 09:55 AM
Sure. Lets talk about the progression of each of the 2009 Broncos defensive players, and how none of it has anything to do with McDaniels.

I edited your quote. Just for kicks.

But seriously, this isn't what I want, guys. No pointing fingers or defending McDaniels. Don't talk about how poorly Hillis did this year. What went wrong this year? Did anything change after 6 games? If so, what? If not, how did we win 6 straight?

The entire thing is his responsibility. And of course offseason moves have an impact on in-season play. I was giving the guy props during the fast start. I simply thinks he is taking a 'scorched earth' strategy, which I don't think is helpful. By the beginning of the '10 season, he will have run Cutler, Marshall, and Scheffler out of town. I don't think that is moving in the right direction (regardless of the awful season Cutler had).

I'm not trying to defend McDaniels! I'm trying to get people to form coherent, well thought through arguments, rather than just partisan bickering.

WolfpackGuy
01-20-2010, 10:03 AM
If not, how did we win 6 straight?


Bengals - Miracle halfcourt shot at the buzzer
Browns - They're the Browns
Faiders - JaMucus played the entire game
Cowgirls - Defense pitches shutout last 3 quarters
Pats - Defense pitches shutout in second half
Chuggers - Royal sparks team with 2 return TD's

PRBronco
01-20-2010, 10:03 AM
The entire thing is his responsibility. And of course offseason moves have an impact on in-season play. I was giving the guy props during the fast start. I simply thinks he is taking a 'scorched earth' strategy, which I don't think is helpful. By the beginning of the '10 season, he will have run Cutler, Marshall, and Scheffler out of town. I don't think that is moving in the right direction (regardless of the awful season Cutler had).

Holy ****, people still think he ran Cutler out of town? I dont' understand how everyone just ignores the fact that he wanted to be traded before "Cassell-gate" even happened. Marshall wanted out of Denver before then too...he actually seems to get along well with McDaniels.

Scheffler has a vajayjay, I would welcome running him out of town.

Sorry to derail your thread KI, back on track!

Rohirrim
01-20-2010, 10:05 AM
I edited your quote. Just for kicks.

But seriously, this isn't what I want, guys. No pointing fingers or defending McDaniels. Don't talk about how poorly Hillis did this year. What went wrong this year? Did anything change after 6 games? If so, what? If not, how did we win 6 straight?



I'm not trying to defend McDaniels! I'm trying to get people to form coherent, well thought through arguments, rather than just partisan bickering.

Read post #10. End thread.

PRBronco
01-20-2010, 10:05 AM
Bengals - Miracle halfcourt shot at the buzzer
Browns - They're the Browns
Faiders - JaMucus played the entire game
Cowgirls - Defense pitches shutout last 3 quarters
Pats - Defense pitches shutout in second half
Chuggers - Royal sparks team with 2 return TD's

I would attribute the Pats win to the Wildhorses formation. It was a one time gimmick that worked beautifully in a contest that most people thought we were horribly outmatched in.

Killericon
01-20-2010, 10:06 AM
Bengals - Miracle halfcourt shot at the buzzer
Browns - They're the Browns
Faiders - JaMucus played the entire game
Cowgirls - Defense pitches shutout last 3 quarters
Pats - Defense pitches shutout in second half
Chuggers - Royal sparks team with 2 return TD's

So, our defence, which pitched 5 shutout quarters against the Cowboys and the Patriots, was always as bad as it was towards the end of the season?

Killericon
01-20-2010, 10:08 AM
Read post #10. End thread.

I wholeheartedly agree, but what I'm looking for is a McDaniels basher to grant the premise that we were a good team for the first 6 games(We were), and then tell me what McDaniels did or changed after 6 games to **** things up like he so badly did.

ZONA
01-20-2010, 10:08 AM
I can't believe there are pepople still whining about Jay being gone. Mutha ***a led the league in INT's again this year and looked like total crap. And we still get dudes begging to hold his cock around here. Get over it. Get over Jay already. Damn it's funny.

Gob
01-20-2010, 10:09 AM
I edited your quote. Just for kicks.

But seriously, this isn't what I want, guys. No pointing fingers or defending McDaniels. Don't talk about how poorly Hillis did this year. What went wrong this year? Did anything change after 6 games? If so, what? If not, how did we win 6 straight?



I'm not trying to defend McDaniels! I'm trying to get people to form coherent, well thought through arguments, rather than just partisan bickering.

I don't have a problem with that. I do think he did a great job last offseason on defense, he assembled a good defensive coaching staff from top to bottom (even it some of it was supposedly only because they had the same agent, it still turned out well so I will give him credit) and wanted a scheme installed that fit our best players better then the 4-3. He did an outstanding job (along with whoever else contributed) getting free agents who could contribute without overpaying. He did the same (with some notable exceptions) on special teams also, and drafted well for special teams. I would have loved higher quality attention to the D-line, but if nothing was really available or it was a multi-year rebuild, fine (but you better cut your D-coordinator some slack then, and have the offense playing well enough to compensate).

WolfpackGuy
01-20-2010, 10:11 AM
I would attribute the Pats win to the Wildhorses formation. It was a one time gimmick that worked beautifully in a contest that most people thought we were horribly outmatched in.


They really only ran it early and a few scattered times in the second half.

It was effective in getting the Pats to use up their timeouts in the first half though.

I don't remember it leading to more than maybe a FG or TD.

vancejohnson82
01-20-2010, 10:11 AM
basically teams found out that they could just run over us. The Ravens game REALLY exposed what the defense was. Teams were fooled for the first few weeks into thinking that we were a bruising defense, when in reality those offenses were being too cute with their playcalling. The Ravens really weren't known for throwing the ball deep or running any gadgets and they just took us behind the woodshed with the running game and then running routes over the middle towards the gaps we vacated with blitzes...teams started to follow suit

the O-line got banged up and that was the nail in the coffin...once we couldnt stay on the field because we couldnt run the ball it was over for us....at that point even teams like the Raiders were thinking they could just bowl over our defense and tire them out. It worked

Killericon
01-20-2010, 10:13 AM
I don't have a problem with that. I do think he did a great job last offseason on defense, he assembled a good defensive coaching staff from top to bottom (even it some of it was supposedly only because they had the same agent, it still turned out well so I will give him credit) and wanted a scheme installed that fit our best players better then the 4-3. He did an outstanding job (along with whoever else contributed) getting free agents who could contribute without overpaying. He did the same (with some notable exceptions) on special teams also, and drafted well for special teams. I would have loved higher quality attention to the D-line, but if nothing was really available or it was a multi-year rebuild, fine (but you better cut your D-coordinator some slack then, and have the offense playing well enough to compensate).

I hear you on that one, man. I'm still upset we didn't nab Alan Branch(Not that he worked out, but he was a projected top 10 pick, then we took Jarvis Moss?? Come on). We'd be better off today with Kerney over Graham. Yeah, we need a defensive line stud. Badly.

Gob
01-20-2010, 10:16 AM
Seems to me that the Ravens discovered that Wigman and Hamilton could not hold up against big NTs or DTs who opened lanes for the LBs to fire in. With a rookie RB learning to block in the NFL, he was susceptible to the delayed rush by the MLBs, which further shortened the time for Orton to find the primary target let alone do his progressions. Secondly, the game plans did not call for long passes beyond the quick (compensating) passes which were used to cover for the weak Oline's middle. Moreover, since the bubbles and quicks were compensating for the Oline, the Ds understood that they did not have to cover deep balls. Thirdly, Harris' replacement - Polumbus - could not actually contain the speed rushers from his side of the line. Fourth, Clady was being asked to help in the compensation which left him against the speed rushers on his side alone. He did well, but there were more breakdowns than usual this year, but he was still good. Fifth, Buck was hurt enough that it broke the one-two punch significantly. Sixth, Moreno got nearly 1000 yards this year, but the Oline couldnt move a pile of empty boxes by the 13th game or so. Moreno was tackled behind the LOS so much that one thought the other team had a pipeline into the huddle and knew just what play was being called. (I often wondered whether someone on that Oline was giving a "tell".) Simms proved ineffective, probably due to his lack of playing time over the previous two years, and the lack of prep time since Orton was learning the O himself and got most of the prep time.

Seventh, the D started to get hurt. Dawkins hurt his ankle, People were getting banged up, but htey never quit until the last game.

Heroic moments were seen throughout the season. We should remember those as well as the failures......

What is the theory on the dropoff from Wiegmann? 2008 went to the pro-bowl, mostly based (I think) on how well he did against NT's like Jenkins.

BigPlayShay
01-20-2010, 10:20 AM
What is the theory on the dropoff from Wiegmann? 2008 went to the pro-bowl, mostly based (I think) on how well he did against NT's like Jenkins.

He got paid...

BroncoBuff
01-20-2010, 10:23 AM
Seems to me that the Ravens discovered that Wigman and Hamilton could not hold up against big NTs or DTs who opened lanes for the LBs to fire in. With a rookie RB learning to block in the NFL, he was susceptible to the delayed rush by the MLBs, which further shortened the time for Orton to find the primary target let alone do his progressions. Secondly, the game plans did not call for long passes beyond the quick (compensating) passes which were used to cover for the weak Oline's middle. Moreover, since the bubbles and quicks were compensating for the Oline, the Ds understood that they did not have to cover deep balls. Thirdly, Harris' replacement - Polumbus - could not actually contain the speed rushers from his side of the line. Fourth, Clady was being asked to help in the compensation which left him against the speed rushers on his side alone. He did well, but there were more breakdowns than usual this year, but he was still good. Fifth, Buck was hurt enough that it broke the one-two punch significantly. Sixth, Moreno got nearly 1000 yards this year, but the Oline couldnt move a pile of empty boxes by the 13th game or so. Moreno was tackled behind the LOS so much that one thought the other team had a pipeline into the huddle and knew just what play was being called. (I often wondered whether someone on that Oline was giving a "tell".) Simms proved ineffective, probably due to his lack of playing time over the previous two years, and the lack of prep time since Orton was learning the O himself and got most of the prep time.

Seventh, the D started to get hurt. Dawkins hurt his ankle, People were getting banged up, but htey never quit until the last game.

Heroic moments were seen throughout the season. We should remember those as well as the failures......

Bad excuses I think ... EVERY team has injuries and weak links (and Weigmann was not one of the weak links btw). And in fact, we had fewer injuries that most teams, so using stuff like Dawkin's ankle as an explanation why we fell apart just doesn't fit as a reasonable causative factor. And as far as Moreno getting stopped behind the line ... there are strategies aplenty available to counter such run-focused D-lines.

Ever hear the phrase "your theory explains too much"? Instead of all this, how about the simple thought that the team suffered internal unrest and personality conflicts, players and coaches apparently, and midway through the season, just quit? Anybody who watched those last two home games knows what an atrocious team we had become by season's end ... at the end there we were probably the worst team in the NFL. Tough to argue with that.

And Roh, no team can pull 3 or 4 Pro Bowlers "outta their ass." You gotta make do with what you have, that's what football is. Life too, for that matter.

Taco John
01-20-2010, 10:24 AM
He wasn't able to pull a pro-bowl LG, C, RT and NT out of his ass.

Sure he could have. He had the option to switch back to zone blocking didn't he?

BroncoBuff
01-20-2010, 10:25 AM
What is the theory on the dropoff from Wiegmann? 2008 went to the pro-bowl, mostly based (I think) on how well he did against NT's like Jenkins.

Was there a dropoff? Those rankings last week listed him as out top blocker ... don't remember if it was run or pass blocker, but he was #1 for one of those.

Paladin
01-20-2010, 10:31 AM
What is the theory on the dropoff from Wiegmann? 2008 went to the pro-bowl, mostly based (I think) on how well he did against NT's like Jenkins.

I have heard some say that Weigman just hit a wall with age and such, but I don't know if that covers all the issues. He was probably trying to help out Hamilton/Hochstein to the detriment of his own work. (You want to block the Williams, Ngatas, Wilforks and others all alone all the time without ever having a breakdown?) Also, remember, the Broncos' schedule was rated the second most difficult in the league. One hallmark of those teams is the large NTs and DTs, and I would not be surprised to hear that Weigman was having some problems with his shoulders, legs, etc. One of the things about the Broncos this year is that not much was leaked about the players as when Shanahan was here, and that means there is not as much true info out there from the "reporters" and other hangers on. That also leads to a lot of speculation and misundrstanding among "fans" who like to think they know everthing there is to know about the game and the players.

I just think Weigman had a tough year and could not meet the expectatiosn game in and game out. He had a h3ll of an assignment. I also think he is done unless a very big LG can be found and groomed quickly.....

WolfpackGuy
01-20-2010, 10:32 AM
So, our defence, which pitched 5 shutout quarters against the Cowboys and the Patriots, was always as bad as it was towards the end of the season?

Well, I think the early teams on the schedule didn't know what to expect.

That combined with the defense playing at a high level couldn't be counted on to continue all season. You can only hide lack of overall talent for so long.

Starting with the Ravens, teams directly attacked the DL and whoever JMFW and/or Smith were on.

Even during the first 4 game losing streak, the defense held its own FOR AWHILE until being dominated from being on the field for so long.

Rohirrim
01-20-2010, 10:37 AM
Bad excuses I think ... EVERY team has injuries and weak links (and Weigmann was not one of the weak links btw). And in fact, we had fewer injuries that most teams, so using stuff like Dawkin's ankle as an explanation why we fell apart just doesn't fit as a reasonable causative factor. And as far as Moreno getting stopped behind the line ... there are strategies aplenty available to counter such run-focused D-lines.

Ever hear the phrase "your theory explains too much"? Instead of all this, how about the simple thought that the team suffered internal unrest and personality conflicts, players and coaches apparently, and midway through the season, just quit? Anybody who watched those last two home games knows what an atrocious team we had become by season's end ... at the end there we were probably the worst team in the NFL. Tough to argue with that.

And Roh, no team can pull 3 or 4 Pro Bowlers "outta their ass." You gotta make do with what you have, that's what football is. Life too, for that matter.

I'm not surprised at all that you would put forth the theory that some mythical, behind-the-scenes soap opera is more of a determinant of the outcome on the field than the talent of the players. You Jay-gopis have been flogging that dead horse for months.

Paladin
01-20-2010, 10:40 AM
Bad excuses I think ... EVERY team has injuries and weak links (and Weigmann was not one of the weak links btw). And in fact, we had fewer injuries that most teams, so using stuff like Dawkin's ankle as an explanation why we fell apart just doesn't fit as a reasonable causative factor. And as far as Moreno getting stopped behind the line ... there are strategies aplenty available to counter such run-focused D-lines.

Ever hear the phrase "your theory explains too much"? Instead of all this, how about the simple thought that the team suffered internal unrest and personality conflicts, players and coaches apparently, and midway through the season, just quit? Anybody who watched those last two home games knows what an atrocious team we had become by season's end ... at the end there we were probably the worst team in the NFL. Tough to argue with that.

And Roh, no team can pull 3 or 4 Pro Bowlers "outta their ass." You gotta make do with what you have, that's what football is. Life too, for that matter.

Because there is no objective evidence supporting your biased hatred. In fact, I thought the team did well against tthe Colts and the Eagles. Those two games refute your biased opinions right there.

I used Dawkins as just an exampole. I did not wish to imply that his ankle injury was the cause of the D breakdown. But I should have known that your biases would show up like a grossly overpaid Defense Attorney.

I actually tried to address the OP from my perspective. You just want to whine and moan. Why don't you find a thread where you can do that.....

Rohirrim
01-20-2010, 10:40 AM
Sure he could have. He had the option to switch back to zone blocking didn't he?

So, now you're saying we didn't play any ZB last season? I don't Tivo games but I'm sure somebody does. Let's have a review.

MaloCS
01-20-2010, 10:40 AM
What I want to hear is theories about why we went 2-8 down the stretch, because I haven't heard any from the Anti-Josh camp.


Quote: Darrel Reed on 104.3 The Fan, interviewed by D-Mac, Mon, 1/18/10.
"McD and Nolan often collaborated on game plans."

--------------------------------------

Quote: Mike Klis, Denver Post article, "Nolan out, Pees likely in with Broncos", Tues, 1/19/10
"Nolan believed he would have more autonomous control of the defense."

--------------------------------------

Quote: Mike Klis, Denver Post article, "Nolan out, Pees likely in with Broncos", Tues, 1/19/10
"In large part because of differences in coaching styles, philosophies and game-day play calling, McDaniels, the Broncos' head coach, and Nolan, the team's defensive coordinator, decided at the conclusion of their meeting Monday to end their business relationship after just one season."

--------------------------------------

Fact: 2009 Bye week, Broncos cut Brett Kern

--------------------------------------

Fact: 2009 Bye week, Broncos cut Jack Williams, bring in Ty Law

--------------------------------------

Fact: Pre 2009 Bye week, 6 wins, 0 losses

--------------------------------------

Fact: Post 2009 Bye week, 2 wins, 8 losses

--------------------------------------


Fact: Pre 2009 Bye week, allowed just 11.0 points per game

--------------------------------------


Fact: Post 2009 Bye week, allowed 25.8 points per game

--------------------------------------

It looks to me that McD was meddling in the defense which may have been a key factor in the play of the defensive unit after the bye week. It sounds like McD was exerting his control and Nolan didn't like it.

WolfpackGuy
01-20-2010, 10:43 AM
We'd be better off today with Kerney over Graham.


AGREED

I brought this up before.

The only reason I can think of for having Graham was because of extra blocking for Henry and Cutler.

I remember when they both were possibly coming in 2007.

BroncoBuff
01-20-2010, 10:50 AM
Every team has personnel weaknesses Roh ... we had about an average or slightly above average amount of talent on this roster.

Besides, no "lack of talent" problems can explain going from a 6-0 elite team to a 2-8 doormat.

Taco John
01-20-2010, 10:50 AM
So, now you're saying we didn't play any ZB last season? I don't Tivo games but I'm sure somebody does. Let's have a review.

I never said we didn't play "any" ZBS. But I am saying the consistency wasn't there.

BroncoBuff
01-20-2010, 10:59 AM
Because there is no objective evidence supporting your biased hatred. In fact, I thought the team did well against tthe Colts and the Eagles. Those two games refute your biased opinions right there.


"Biased hatred"?! What is the matter with you, you cannot be serious!

My comments there are MAINSTREAM THOUGHT ... the idea we had lockerroom and coaching staff disagreement and dissention goes well beyond a theory. It was even widely reported that a contingent of players actually went to the coach to request he bench some of their teammates!

You and Rohirrim honestly think that's "mythical," as he said?

BroncoBuff
01-20-2010, 11:01 AM
Get real :nono:

TheDave
01-20-2010, 11:02 AM
As with everything it was a combination of events...

Some key injuries, especially Harris.

We lost our scheme advantage we had during the first 5-6 weeks and never regained it.

Lack of talent along the lines for the 3-4 D and the man to man run blocking we wanted to run. This was exposed butally as time went on.

Linebackers and dlineman that dance around blocks instead of taking them on.

An anemic passing offsense (specifically the lack of big plays) than never forced teams to take the 8th man out of the box... allowing teams to line up and POUND on our Oline (especially the interior).

Add to that a sprinkle of controversey by deactivating our only offensive weapon...

Unfortunately it was a lot of stuff and we have our work cut out this off season.

Rohirrim
01-20-2010, 11:05 AM
Every team has personnel weaknesses Roh ... we had about an average or slightly above average amount of talent on this roster.

Besides, no "lack of talent" problems can explain going from a 6-0 elite team to a 2-8 doormat.

"Personnel weaknesses" on your lines are fatal, especially at such key areas as LG, RT and NT in a 3/4. Not to mention, no rush end. I think Paladin's post #10 perfectly describes what I saw taking place on the field. By the time we got to the Ravens, McD and Nolan had run out of "coach-arounds" and the game was up. You can coach around some deficiencies easier than others.

Rohirrim
01-20-2010, 11:07 AM
"Biased hatred"?! What is the matter with you, you cannot be serious!

My comments there are MAINSTREAM THOUGHT ... the idea we had lockerroom and coaching staff disagreement and dissention goes well beyond a theory. It was even widely reported that a contingent of players actually went to the coach to request he bench some of their teammates!

You and Rohirrim honestly think that's "mythical," as he said?

I thought that took place before the last two games of the season? So what would that have to do with week 8?

Killericon
01-20-2010, 11:31 AM
Is there an actual belief that we know what was going on in regards to how much control Nolan had, and if any changes to that level were made over the bye?

vancejohnson82
01-20-2010, 11:33 AM
who the hell listed the two cuts we had...and then posted our record afterwards as if it were integral...what a joke

like Kern and JMFW were big reasons we lost

BroncoBuff
01-20-2010, 11:51 AM
I thought that took place before the last two games of the season? So what would that have to do with week 8?

?

Paladin
01-20-2010, 11:57 AM
"Biased hatred"?! What is the matter with you, you cannot be serious!

My comments there are MAINSTREAM THOUGHT ... the idea we had lockerroom and coaching staff disagreement and dissention goes well beyond a theory. It was even widely reported that a contingent of players actually went to the coach to request he bench some of their teammates!

You and Rohirrim honestly think that's "mythical," as he said?

:rofl:

Just more of the same of revisionists' history/theory. You need to take your "Boy Scout Event Interpretor" to the shop and get it repaired.....

My God. Even the Dave made sense.

Taco John
01-20-2010, 11:57 AM
Is there an actual belief that we know what was going on in regards to how much control Nolan had, and if any changes to that level were made over the bye?

The only thing we really know for sure is the difference between how our defense was playing before the bye, and how it was playing after the bye.

BroncoBuff
01-20-2010, 12:02 PM
"Personnel weaknesses" on your lines are fatal, especially at such key areas as LG, RT
Sorry, the "key area" is LT. Some teams pay their LT more than the other four O-line starters combined.

Again, EVERY team has personnel weak links ... overall I think we were above average this year across the 22-man starting contingent.



Not to mention, no rush end.
In a 3-4 defense, the "pass-rushing end" is the WOLB. For us, Elvis - the best in the business. Other 3-4s: Ware in Dallas, Banta-Cain NE, Woodley in Pittsburgh, Phillips/Merriman SD, Clay Matthews GB. You're thinking of a Jared Allen/Kerney/Freeney/Peppers 4-3 defense.

BroncoBuff
01-20-2010, 12:06 PM
:rofl:

Just more of the same of revisionists' history/theory. You need to take your "Boy Scout Event Interpretor" to the shop and get it repaired.....

My God. Even the Dave made sense.

So then you believe there was NOT any "lockerroom and coaching staff disagreement and dissention."

Interesting position to take, and against the weight of evidence, but you're free to believe that.

mr007
01-20-2010, 12:09 PM
Why did we go 2-8? Try to avoid letting your bias show, and give me a good answer. What went wrong?

I honestly think it was an overall lack of talent, I really don't think we were that good to begin with.

In our first 6 games, we really had a lot of lucky bounces, I know you can say this about a lot of games between teams. But when we were 6-0 and there were so many people going off about "the idiots that bashed McD's decisions" I didn't think we were a very good team, just happened to have luck roll our way.

Bengals, Chargers, Patriots, and Cowboys were all games we had some things bounce our way. Royal's 2 returns for TDs against the Chargers, Brady missing wide open receivers all over the place against the Patriots, Romo having an off day against the Cowboys are a few that come to mind.

Also, along with the injuries to our O-line, other teams really started challenging the short passing game by crowding the line and being ready to put a lot of pressure on Orton. I don't know what the statistic was for us on 3rd and ridiculously short, but overall our offense seemed pretty predictable. We weren't taking enough chances.

Paladin
01-20-2010, 12:12 PM
Nah, It sounded to me like the team was pretty united in saying that Marshall and Sheffler were asses. They are/will be gone. Where's the dissension? You have PROOF, dear Counselor, that htere was more than that? Coaches disension? Proof?

Links, boy, links And you don't need to repeat the meeting between MCD and the Team Leaders. I want new info and proof. Otherwise, the Jury says, you lose......

PRBronco
01-20-2010, 12:16 PM
So then you believe there was NOT any "lockerroom and coaching staff disagreement and dissention."

Interesting position to take, and against the weight of evidence, but you're free to believe that.

The only rumblings I heard out of the lockerroom all year was that group of vets going to McDaniels to say they weren't happy with the way some players were preparing (or not preparing) for games, and Coach handled it as best he could. I thought it was promising that such an exchange took place.

What evidence is there to contrary? Just the ****ty showing against the Chiefs?

BroncoBuff
01-20-2010, 12:37 PM
The only rumblings I heard out of the lockerroom all year was that a group of vets going to McDaniels to say they weren't happy with the way some players were preparing (or not preparing) for games, and Coach handled it as best he could. I thought it was promising that such an exchange took place.

Well, that's exactly what I'm talking about.

Rohirrim
01-20-2010, 01:04 PM
Sorry, the "key area" is LT. Some teams pay their LT more than the other four O-line starters combined.

Again, EVERY team has personnel weak links ... overall I think we were above average this year across the 22-man starting contingent.

LT when you're talking about pass protection. Most QBs are right handed so franchises pay more for the blind side protection. Remember all those 3rd and ones we couldn't pick up on the ground? LG, C, RT. Remember how many blitzes came right through Polumbus? Also, as Paladin pointed out, Clady was engaged in covering over to make up for the bad LG play, so the weakness at the position did affect our LT as well.


In a 3-4 defense, the "pass-rushing end" is the WOLB. For us, Elvis - the best in the business. Other 3-4s: Ware in Dallas, Banta-Cain NE, Woodley in Pittsburgh, Phillips/Merriman SD, Clay Matthews GB. You're thinking of a Jared Allen/Kerney/Freeney/Peppers 4-3 defense.

Thanks, Mr. Belichick, but I was thinking more of guys like Seymour who can stuff the run and rush the passer. A luxury, maybe, but a guy like Gerald McCoy could do it.

gyldenlove
01-20-2010, 01:20 PM
I honestly think it was an overall lack of talent, I really don't think we were that good to begin with.

In our first 6 games, we really had a lot of lucky bounces, I know you can say this about a lot of games between teams. But when we were 6-0 and there were so many people going off about "the idiots that bashed McD's decisions" I didn't think we were a very good team, just happened to have luck roll our way.

Bengals, Chargers, Patriots, and Cowboys were all games we had some things bounce our way. Royal's 2 returns for TDs against the Chargers, Brady missing wide open receivers all over the place against the Patriots, Romo having an off day against the Cowboys are a few that come to mind.

Also, along with the injuries to our O-line, other teams really started challenging the short passing game by crowding the line and being ready to put a lot of pressure on Orton. I don't know what the statistic was for us on 3rd and ridiculously short, but overall our offense seemed pretty predictable. We weren't taking enough chances.

You don't beat 4 playoff teams in 6 games by luck, there is more to it than that. To be lucky you need to be good, and we put ourselves in a situation to be lucky in those first 6 games. We didn't do that in several of the later games.

Against the Colts we fell behind to fast that any luck we might have had was effectively negated - same story for the Eagles game. Against the Raiders, Chiefs, Chargers we never played well enough to be lucky.

Heck, the only game we really got lucky in was the Redskins game, and the only reason we did that is that we came out with a good plan. Then Simms happened which obviously ****ed everything up.

TheDave
01-20-2010, 01:27 PM
You don't beat 4 playoff teams in 6 games by luck, there is more to it than that. To be lucky you need to be good, and we put ourselves in a situation to be lucky in those first 6 games. We didn't do that in several of the later games.

Against the Colts we fell behind to fast that any luck we might have had was effectively negated - same story for the Eagles game. Against the Raiders, Chiefs, Chargers we never played well enough to be lucky.

Heck, the only game we really got lucky in was the Redskins game, and the only reason we did that is that we came out with a good plan. Then Simms happened which obviously ****ed everything up.

Bengals game wasn't lucky? Pats game where both welker and Moss dropped passes that would have easily resulted in TD's wasn't lucky?... C'mon we had lots of breaks the first couple of games.

...and then we got none the rest of the season.

Killericon
01-20-2010, 01:49 PM
I'm really not trying to bicker here, I'm just trying to hone the "Anti-McDaniels" crowd's argument to a point.

So, we didn't have a good enough team to begin with. No additions in the trenches combined with the gutting of our offence left us in ruins, but we got the right breaks at the right times along the way to the 6-0 record, which McDaniels mistook for his own brilliance, which lead to his inability to change anything when the breaks didn't go our way.

Is that somewhat accurate?

TheDave
01-20-2010, 01:56 PM
I'm really not trying to bicker here, I'm just trying to hone the "Anti-McDaniels" crowd's argument to a point.

So, we didn't have a good enough team to begin with. No additions in the trenches combined with the gutting of our offence left us in ruins, but we got the right breaks at the right times along the way to the 6-0 record, which McDaniels mistook for his own brilliance, which lead to his inability to change anything when the breaks didn't go our way.

Is that somewhat accurate?

What?... no I don't necessarily agree with that.

I already gave you my opinion and it is a mix of talent, coaching and GM duties. We took missteps in several areas and it led to one hell of a collapse.



...and why are you so interested in "Honing the anti-McDaniels crowd's argument to a point"?

gyldenlove
01-20-2010, 01:58 PM
Bengals game wasn't lucky? Pats game where both welker and Moss dropped passes that would have easily resulted in TD's wasn't lucky?... C'mon we had lots of breaks the first couple of games.

...and then we got none the rest of the season.

I was talking about the games after the bye week.

TheDave
01-20-2010, 02:00 PM
I was talking about the games after the bye week.

Then that I agree with... hell we used up all of our lucky bounces before the bye-week. after that little if anything went our way.

Killericon
01-20-2010, 02:08 PM
What?... no I don't necessarily agree with that.

I already gave you my opinion and it is a mix of talent, coaching and GM duties. We took missteps in several areas and it led to one hell of a collapse.



...and why are you so interested in "Honing the anti-McDaniels crowd's argument to a point"?

Oh, I know where you stand. I'm trying to get someone like bpc in here.

Well, primarily because there seems to be a lot of hatred for Josh McDaniels around here, and I'm trying to determine if there's actual evidence from how the team performed the season or if it's all based in personnel management issues. If Josh McDaniels is to blame for how the season went, then I want to hear why(beyond Cutler) because I don't see it. I'm not against McDaniels, and it seems as if most people are right now, and I'm curious about why that is. Is it because I don't have all the facts(as people are constantly telling me) or is it simply a different opinion? I'm aiming for genuine debate about this sort of thing. Unfortunately, this place is far more like a House of Legislature than it is a place for debate these days. There are two sides that keep saying the same things over and over at each other. Neither side is trying to convince the other side of anything, it's just bickering for its own sake. I'd like something different for a while.

I'm of the opinion that this team is heading in the right direction, under the right leadership. I'll admit that we've made huge mistakes, but we're on the right track. I'm being told THAT I'm wrong, just not HOW I'm wrong.

jhns
01-20-2010, 02:25 PM
Is that somewhat accurate?

No. You are not going to get an accurate picture. Where you are failing is in the fact that everyone thinks different. That is even true of each individual in the assigned Bronco forums groups of haters and blind people.

Popps
01-20-2010, 02:27 PM
Then that I agree with... hell we used up all of our lucky bounces before the bye-week. after that little if anything went our way.

Truth.

Injuries, bad bounces, bad calls... we got them all in the 2nd half.

But, that tends to be how it goes. If you play poker, you're all too familiar with running good... and running bad.

TheDave
01-20-2010, 02:35 PM
Oh, I know where you stand. I'm trying to get someone like bpc in here.

Well, primarily because there seems to be a lot of hatred for Josh McDaniels around here, and I'm trying to determine if there's actual evidence from how the team performed the season or if it's all based in personnel management issues. If Josh McDaniels is to blame for how the season went, then I want to hear why(beyond Cutler) because I don't see it. I'm not against McDaniels, and it seems as if most people are right now, and I'm curious about why that is. Is it because I don't have all the facts(as people are constantly telling me) or is it simply a different opinion? I'm aiming for genuine debate about this sort of thing. Unfortunately, this place is far more like a House of Legislature than it is a place for debate these days. There are two sides that keep saying the same things over and over at each other. Neither side is trying to convince the other side of anything, it's just bickering for its own sake. I'd like something different for a while.

I'm of the opinion that this team is heading in the right direction, under the right leadership. I'll admit that we've made huge mistakes, but we're on the right track. I'm being told THAT I'm wrong, just not HOW I'm wrong.

Fair enough I think we are on the right track in some ways and off base in others....

3-4 Defense was absolutely the right track

McKidd is a good offensive coordinator but he needs significant improvement on the interior offensive line. for his scheme to be effective

He did a great job in FA last year, so I am confident that he can effectively communicate his message.

I felt he put together a good coaching staff, especially the hiring of Nolan.

He did a great job of dealing with Marshall in the preseason.

For the most part I liked his game plans and some of the passion he showed during the games.


On the other hand...

He is young and rash... often making emotional decisions like airing his dirty laundry in public.

The production from his draft is VERY concerning

The fact that he traded for additional players with very little preparation for the draft is a major concern.

He keeps finding himself in Cutler/Marshall/Nolan type of situations.

He saddled us with Kyle Orton instead of finding a way of either getting Matt Cassel or working with a much more talented Jay Cutler.

He allowed 2 four game losing streaks

He spent way too much time for my liking trying to fit a round peg into a square hole. Blocking scheme, 3rd &1 run up the middle, etc.


So I don't think he is the devil, but I do think he is too young and inexperienced to succeed at this point. Could he mature and surprise me... of course he could.

Will he?

Guess we are going to have to wait and find out.

Popps
01-20-2010, 02:35 PM
Oh, I know where you stand. I'm trying to get someone like bpc in here.

Well, primarily because there seems to be a lot of hatred for Josh McDaniels around here, and I'm trying to determine if there's actual evidence from how the team performed the season or if it's all based in personnel management issues. If Josh McDaniels is to blame for how the season went, then I want to hear why(beyond Cutler) because I don't see it. I'm not against McDaniels, and it seems as if most people are right now, and I'm curious about why that is. Is it because I don't have all the facts(as people are constantly telling me) or is it simply a different opinion? I'm aiming for genuine debate about this sort of thing.


Great post.

Look, I'm excited about this team, but I have no idea if McDaniels is a dickhead or a brilliant coach who does things his way. NONE OF US KNOW.

My stance is simply that it was time for a change, and we need to at least let this guy get his players and system in place before we deem him a failure.

You accurately pointed out that we weren't a success, or a failure this year. We were .500. Some good, some bad... but about what you'd expect in a rebuilding year, if not a little better.

McDaniels will get bashed for Nolan leaving, but got no credit for the hire.

McDaniels will get no credit for the personnel upgrades on D, yet people claim he's a controlling freak who does everything himself.


The bottom line is, people don't know. They (a few) are just angry because Cutler and Shanahan are gone.

As a Rohirrim and other bright posters have noted... if Shanahan had this EXACT season, the same folks would be putting a positive spin on it. (As they did for last year's disaster.)


This season has been turbulent. No question. If things don't start heading in the right direction, McDaniels will start to feel the heat... and I'll be the first to hold him accountable. But, you've got to let the guy get his team in place.

Bitching about it on a message board isn't going to stop it. He's GOING to be our coach next season, and he's GOING to install the kind of systems he wants. I personally am excited to see that play out.

I like McDaniels because he has a vision. He reminds me VERY much of Shanahan. (Which is ironic, considering the bashers here are basically bashing him because he replaced Shanahan.)

Maybe he'll wash out. Fine. I'll root for our next coach. But, for now... I think he's a brilliant young guy who's absolutely going to be a winner in this league. I just hope it's with us.

If I'm wrong... so be it. Maybe he'll fizzle. But, my contention is with people who are claiming defeat without adequate logic/proof to show it. I think that's basically what you were saying, as well.

jhns
01-20-2010, 02:43 PM
If I'm wrong... so be it. Maybe he'll fizzle. But, my contention is with people who are claiming defeat without adequate logic/proof to show it. I think that's basically what you were saying, as well.

Aww, poe whittle popps can't get everyone to think just like him.

You don't want everyone to agree with you anyways. What would you cry about all day, every day?

We have tons of logic and proof. You just don't agree with it. I get that you guys are drama queens that love a dramatic franchise but I bet you can't name a single good franchise that has had half the drama as we have had in a single year. I bet you can't name a single successful organization that let's the coach control everything as well as call plays on one side of the ball. I bet you think McD is just the rookie to be better than all of those veteran coaches though, right?

The proof is there. You just close your eyes, cover your ears, and scream as loud as you can.

BroncoBuff
01-20-2010, 04:12 PM
Aww, poe whittle popps can't get everyone to think just like him.

You don't want everyone to agree with you anyways. What would you cry about all day, every day?
Rep that. And when you say all day, you mean ALL day.

24-7 he's on here :oyvey:

Requiem
01-20-2010, 04:18 PM
Popps is my friend, leave him alone you jerks!

Rohirrim
01-20-2010, 05:17 PM
Aww, poe whittle popps can't get everyone to think just like him.

You don't want everyone to agree with you anyways. What would you cry about all day, every day?

We have tons of logic and proof. You just don't agree with it. I get that you guys are drama queens that love a dramatic franchise but I bet you can't name a single good franchise that has had half the drama as we have had in a single year. I bet you can't name a single successful organization that let's the coach control everything as well as call plays on one side of the ball. I bet you think McD is just the rookie to be better than all of those veteran coaches though, right?

The proof is there. You just close your eyes, cover your ears, and scream as loud as you can.

Popps, I like. You? A big job for dung beetles.

jhns
01-20-2010, 07:16 PM
Popps, I like. You? A big job for dung beetles.

That was a little rude.

SoCalBronco
01-20-2010, 07:21 PM
What?... no I don't necessarily agree with that.

I already gave you my opinion and it is a mix of talent, coaching and GM duties. We took missteps in several areas and it led to one hell of a collapse.



...and why are you so interested in "Honing the anti-McDaniels crowd's argument to a point"?

It's clear that something went massively wrong.

The proof: TheDave switched allegiances from the OM to a gay teen message board. This is a disturbing development. Thanks alot, Josh. We could have used TheDave. Rather than breaking off 2k (posts a year) in our system, TheDave will be breaking off something else somewhere else.

Man...no wonder Nolan left.

;D

Bronco Yoda
01-20-2010, 07:34 PM
Many things could be said. But I guess if you boil it down, deep to the bone.... down to one sentence.

Both lines were too small and thin to hold up.