PDA

View Full Version : Krieger: Broncos coach McDaniels can do it all, or at least he's trying


Bronco Rob
01-21-2010, 04:29 AM
Krieger: Broncos coach McDaniels can do it all, or at least he's trying


By Dave Krieger
Denver Post Columnist

Posted: 01/21/2010 01:00:00 AM MST




In retrospect, as soon as Josh McDaniels explained in his season-ending news conference that run blitzing is "never a good formula," we should have known Mike Nolan was gone.

Nolan's aggressive mind-set is no secret in the NFL. When it was working for the Broncos early in the season, nobody seemed to mind. When it started working against them as the season wore on, people including, apparently, Nolan's boss started to mind.

Considering the defensive talent he inherited, especially up front, some of us thought it was amazing Nolan's smoke and mirrors worked as long as they did. Evidently, McDaniels was not among us.

In any case, an odd pattern seems to be emerging. When McDaniels arrived a year ago, the Broncos' strength was their offense. Almost immediately, he began to dismantle it by trading the quarterback. By almost every statistical measure, the offense McDaniels found was better than the one he created.

A year later, the team's strength is the defense, which improved from 29th in the NFL a year ago to seventh this season. So, as soon as the season is over, McDaniels and the defensive coordinator mutually agree to put 2,000 miles between them.

Trying to understand why this doesn't look as odd from the inside as it does from out here, I put in a call to Broncos chief operating officer Joe Ellis, owner Pat Bowlen's right-hand man. I asked if they are dismantling their most effective unit each year on purpose. I wondered if this is what Bowlen had in mind when he hired McDaniels a year ago.

"I would just tell you this that Pat supports what Josh has done 100 percent," Ellis said.

"And while some of it may appear to have been difficult and a change in philosophy and a change in how this team is trying to operate, what Josh's philosophy is which is to bring in tough, smart players that are accountable to their teammates, their coaches, their head coach, their organization, the owner and their fans all of that Pat believes in to the fullest extent."

As do a lot of the players, Ellis said.

In light of the Nolan departure, I asked how this is any different from the Mike Shanahan days. Like Shanahan, McDaniels has final say over personnel, runs the offense, calls the plays and now apparently intends to run the defense too. General manager Brian Xanders might as well be in the witness protection program. Wasn't Bowlen trying to get away from this concentration of power when he fired Shanahan?

"Pat has put Josh and Brian collectively in the position of running the football program for us," Ellis said. "And the decisions that have been made are not decisions that are made in isolation. Pat is informed. If Pat's not here, I am informed on his behalf.

"I mean, there's direct communication ongoing on a daily basis between Josh, myself and Pat, between Brian, myself and Pat, on all issues related to the team. But the voice you hear, and this is the way Pat wanted it, is the guy that's running the football program for him, and that's Josh."

I may have pointed out that in the space of 30 seconds he had gone from Josh and Brian running the football program to just Josh.

"Josh and Brian are speaking to Pat, and I'm involved in a lot of that as well, on all of the issues that come up, and they speak to him together," Ellis said. "But then Josh is the voice that relays what they collectively or we collectively feel is the best way to let the information out to the public. You can agree or disagree as to whether multiple voices should be heard."

Actually, the issue I was getting at isn't so much who's talking. It's who's deciding. A year ago, there was a lot of sentiment that Shanahan simply had too much on his plate, that there weren't enough hours in the day for one man to be head coach, de facto offensive coordinator and de facto GM and do all three jobs well.

Like McDaniels, Shanahan had personnel people working with him, sometimes even one with the GM title, but the Broncos' erratic drafts suggested that was not necessarily the best model. Evidently, Bowlen didn't feel that way because he has essentially replicated that structure for McDaniels.

McDaniels runs the offense. He is taking charge of the defense. He will run the draft. He will make the trades. It is Shanny Redux with one major revision: McDaniels keeps the boss in the loop. Give him this: It's a pretty smart revision.

Like Shanahan, he will ultimately be judged on the results. If he wins enough games, his tactics will be all good. That's the Bill Belichick credo. McDaniels is counting on it.





http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_14234589

bpc
01-21-2010, 04:34 AM
Brian... who's Brian? I've never heard or seen anybody by that name before in our front office.

DivineLegion
01-21-2010, 04:39 AM
Xanders our GM, did you read the article?

Dr. Broncenstein
01-21-2010, 06:33 AM
"Mutually agreed to put 2000 miles between each other."

My roflcopter. Let me show you it.

Rohirrim
01-21-2010, 06:41 AM
Almost immediately, he began to dismantle it by trading the quarterback.

Stopped reading right there.

jhns
01-21-2010, 06:56 AM
I have said this for a while now. No one is successful in the NFL with the type of power structure we have. There is not a single good team that has a head coach do everything, including call plays on one side of the ball. I don't get how they expect to win by doing everything opposite of what winning organizations do. Even the Pats don't give this much power to their HOF coach.

Anyways, it isn't like I am expecting much at this point. We just let Nolan walk. The guy that was in charge of the one part of the team which actually improved last season. Brilliant move. Not that it matters since it was mutual and he already had decided he doesn't want to work with McD.

jhat01
01-21-2010, 06:57 AM
Almost immediately, he began to dismantle it by trading the quarterback.

Stopped reading right there.

Me too..it's laughable.

Merlin
01-21-2010, 06:58 AM
Almost immediately, he began to dismantle it by trading the quarterback.

Stopped reading right there.
Yeah, McD wanting to offer a first to NE for Cassel was not a precursor to trading the QB you are right. Furthermore, creating a toxic environment is not an attempt to encourage an immature QB to give the wrong reaction and create tension leading to a trade, you are right. Cutler was immature, but it is the HC's job to manage ego's, not to impose his own, especially when he has proven absolutely nothing as a HC. If the HC wanted Cutler, he would have recognized that he is a young man that still needs to grow, like virtually every frigging star athlete his age (and yes, he was a star athlete, thus why many NFL GMs thought he was worth to 1st round draft choices). But our HC is still too immature, and his mangina must not be questioned, regardless of its actions.

WolfpackGuy
01-21-2010, 06:59 AM
Hey, Pat Bowlen is informed...

Good to know...

No word yet on whether he's accountable...

jhns
01-21-2010, 07:08 AM
Yeah, McD wanting to offer a first to NE for Cassel was not a precursor to trading the QB you are right. Furthermore, creating a toxic environment is not an attempt to encourage an immature QB to give the wrong reaction and create tension leading to a trade, you are right. Cutler was immature, but it is the HC's job to manage ego's, not to impose his own, especially when he has proven absolutely nothing as a HC. If the HC wanted Cutler, he would have recognized that he is a young man that still needs to grow, like virtually every frigging star athlete his age (and yes, he was a star athlete, thus why many NFL GMs thought he was worth to 1st round draft choices). But our HC is still too immature, and his mangina must not be questioned, regardless of its actions.

Let's not be rational now. That makes you a bad fan. The fan police will be here any second to tell you as much.

You need to realize McDaniels is better than the Broncos. Question him and you aren't a Broncos fan. He is so smart that he hires a d coordinator without knowing his scheme. He hired a d coordinator that ran a system he doesn't like. It doesn't matter that he has been in the league forever and always done the same thing. It shows how detail oriented and smart Josh is. Then, when he finally figured out what his defense, that he is in charge of, was doing, he fired the coordinator. The coordinator that turned us from 30th to 7th. What a horrible job that d coordinator was doing!

jhat01
01-21-2010, 07:13 AM
He offered a first for Cassel? I never heard that.

jhns
01-21-2010, 07:18 AM
He offered a first for Cassel? I never heard that.

I don't think that ever came out. Just replace that with "got in trade talks" and his post is spot on.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
01-21-2010, 07:44 AM
Yeah, McD wanting to offer a first to NE for Cassel was not a precursor to trading the QB you are right. Furthermore, creating a toxic environment is not an attempt to encourage an immature QB to give the wrong reaction and create tension leading to a trade, you are right. Cutler was immature, but it is the HC's job to manage ego's, not to impose his own, especially when he has proven absolutely nothing as a HC. If the HC wanted Cutler, he would have recognized that he is a young man that still needs to grow, like virtually every frigging star athlete his age (and yes, he was a star athlete, thus why many NFL GMs thought he was worth to 1st round draft choices). But our HC is still too immature, and his mangina must not be questioned, regardless of its actions.

It is adorable when people think they know what went on behind closed doors. Hilarious!

Merlin
01-21-2010, 07:46 AM
He offered a first for Cassel? I never heard that.
According to a discussion between Peter King and McD

"McDaniels did pursue a deal with New England on the first day of free agency..."I think we were too late to the dance,'' he said, meaning the Chiefs had already made the deal with New England...Denver would have given more, likely a first-round pick, but Patriots coach Bill Belichick had his deal done with the Chiefs."

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/03/15/union/index.html

TheElusiveKyleOrton
01-21-2010, 07:48 AM
According to a discussion between Peter King and McD

"McDaniels did pursue a deal with New England on the first day of free agency..."I think we were too late to the dance,'' he said, meaning the Chiefs had already made the deal with New England...Denver would have given more, likely a first-round pick, but Patriots coach Bill Belichick had his deal done with the Chiefs."

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/03/15/union/index.html

And yet Belichick denied that there was ever another deal offered on the table.

Weird.

But what I really love is Peter King explaining for us what Josh McDaniels meant with that. LOVE it.

jhns
01-21-2010, 07:49 AM
It is adorable when people think they know what went on behind closed doors. Hilarious!

Umm, McDaniels made sure that all played out in the media. It is one of the many things he does wrong. What closed doors are you talking about?

Merlin
01-21-2010, 07:49 AM
It is adorable when people think they know what went on behind closed doors. Hilarious!
Is adorable when all blind followers can do is parrot without an inkling of independent thought because apparently they are not aware of actual substantive reading outside the Mane.

TheDave
01-21-2010, 07:49 AM
Krieger: Broncos coach McDaniels can do it all, or at least he's trying


By Dave Krieger
Denver Post Columnist

Posted: 01/21/2010 01:00:00 AM MST




In retrospect, as soon as Josh McDaniels explained in his season-ending news conference that run blitzing is "never a good formula," we should have known Mike Nolan was gone.

Nolan's aggressive mind-set is no secret in the NFL. When it was working for the Broncos early in the season, nobody seemed to mind. When it started working against them as the season wore on, people including, apparently, Nolan's boss started to mind.



Wait... I thought Nolan was the passive one and McDaniels was the agressive Blitz happy one.

jhns
01-21-2010, 07:51 AM
And yet Belichick denied that there was ever another deal offered on the table.

Weird.

But what I really love is Peter King explaining for us what Josh McDaniels meant with that. LOVE it.

Hmmmm, imagine that. A coach that doesn't talk about what goes on behind closed doors. I wonder if that coach is more successful than ours...

Merlin
01-21-2010, 07:53 AM
And yet Belichick denied that there was ever another deal offered on the table.

Weird.
But McD did not...weird. Is about time you take some reading comprehension, you seem to miss the core argument far too often.

Learn to differentiate between deal on the table, and "McDaniels did pursue a deal with New England on the first day of free agency..."I think we were too late to the dance,''

Nice try though.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
01-21-2010, 07:55 AM
Is adorable when all blind followers can do is parrot without an inkling of independent thought because apparently they are not aware of actual substantive reading outside the Mane.

A guy quotes Peter King and then complains about the downfall of substantive reading outside the Mane?

Now THAT is funny.

By the way, see my second comment above. I read that Belichick said there was never a second offer -- early, late, or otherwise -- from any other team for Cassel. Perhaps you should do some outside reading.

Merlin
01-21-2010, 07:55 AM
Wait... I thought Nolan was the passive one and McDaniels was the agressive Blitz happy one.
Please delete this post, it is counter the dogma McD lovers are attempting to proselytize.

Rohirrim
01-21-2010, 07:56 AM
Yeah, McD wanting to offer a first to NE for Cassel was not a precursor to trading the QB you are right. Furthermore, creating a toxic environment is not an attempt to encourage an immature QB to give the wrong reaction and create tension leading to a trade, you are right. Cutler was immature, but it is the HC's job to manage ego's, not to impose his own, especially when he has proven absolutely nothing as a HC. If the HC wanted Cutler, he would have recognized that he is a young man that still needs to grow, like virtually every frigging star athlete his age (and yes, he was a star athlete, thus why many NFL GMs thought he was worth to 1st round draft choices). But our HC is still too immature, and his mangina must not be questioned, regardless of its actions.

blah, blah, blah

TheElusiveKyleOrton
01-21-2010, 07:56 AM
But McD did not...weird. Is about time you take some reading comprehension, you seem to miss the core argument far too often.

Learn to differentiate between deal on the table, and "McDaniels did pursue a deal with New England on the first day of free agency..."I think we were too late to the dance,''

Nice try though.

First day of free agency...

Yet he was too late...

And Belichick says there was NEVER. ANOTHER. DEAL. EVER.

Reading comprehension, indeed.

worm
01-21-2010, 07:56 AM
Wait... I thought Nolan was the passive one and McDaniels was the agressive Blitz happy one.

Some people here said that enough....I was almost convinced it must be true.

I am pretty sure if you post the same thing often enough on the Mane....it becomes fact.

Rohirrim
01-21-2010, 07:57 AM
We just let Nolan walk.

Yeah. McD should have duct taped him to a locker.

Rohirrim
01-21-2010, 07:58 AM
I don't think that ever came out. Just replace that with "got in trade talks" and his post is spot on.

It never came out because it never existed. All you drama queens just make up soap operas when you are bored with the facts.

RaiderH8r
01-21-2010, 07:59 AM
Yeah. McD should have duct taped him to a locker.

Well crapping in his sneaker didn't do any good.

jhns
01-21-2010, 08:03 AM
It never came out because it never existed. All you drama queens just make up soap operas when you are bored with the facts.

He just posted direct quoted from McDaniels. Those quotes say he attempted a trade but was to late. Are you calling McDaniels a liar? Like I said, they never came out with compensation. The point is the same. Nice try on twisting the argument though. The "McDaniels is above the Broncos" group just doesn't even try to be rational or make sense anymore. I can see why.

Merlin
01-21-2010, 08:03 AM
I read that Belichick said there was never a second offer -- early, late, or otherwise -- from any other team for Cassel. Perhaps you should do some outside reading.
Lets try and read it a little slower for you then. McD did pursue Cassel, but he was "late to the dance". McD's own words. Yeah, I know, he meant the Salsa class he was taking with Belicheat. The funny thing is the guy you are hanging your hat on is the HC who is renown in the league for keeping everything behind close doors. Now there is a good source.

PS if you bother reading the link, you would find out that McD did pursue a deal on the first day of free agency, but because they were also in the middle of 6 free agents negotiations, they did not give it their focus. By the time McD gets back to it he states "I think we were too late to the dance".

You are right. McD had no intention of negotiating for Cassel with NE. And Belicheat is the best source for all internal events.

TheDave
01-21-2010, 08:04 AM
Please delete this post, it is counter the dogma McD lovers are attempting to proselytize.

I learned everything I needed to learn in the "Who should replace Bobby Turner" Thread...

When the rumor in the Denver Post came out that Ben McDaniels would get consideration... Some actually started the mental gynastics required to defend that move.

Some here will defend anything... no matter what. Trust me, I wish there was more good news and great moves to back. Unfortunately, there are just too many head scratchers and too much drama going on at dove valley.

On the bright side he did a very good job with FA last year. Lets hope he can replicate that.

Merlin
01-21-2010, 08:05 AM
blah, blah, blah
Yeah, I know, we should not engage in inserting facts into any discussion pertaining McD. Blind allegiance is so much better. I'll try and do better next time.

jhns
01-21-2010, 08:06 AM
Yeah. McD should have duct taped him to a locker.

Telling him that they are going in a different direction didn't really work. Figuring out what scheme his defense was running half way through the season and then complaining about it didn't seem to do it either. I would have been willing to try your idea. Theirs don't seem very good.

misturanderson
01-21-2010, 08:26 AM
Lets try and read it a little slower for you then. McD did pursue Cassel, but he was "late to the dance". McD's own words. Yeah, I know, he meant the Salsa class he was taking with Belicheat. The funny thing is the guy you are hanging your hat on is the HC who is renown in the league for keeping everything behind close doors. Now there is a good source.

PS if you bother reading the link, you would find out that McD did pursue a deal on the first day of free agency, but because they were also in the middle of 6 free agents negotiations, they did not give it their focus. By the time McD gets back to it he states "I think we were too late to the dance".

You are right. McD had no intention of negotiating for Cassel with NE. And Belicheat is the best source for all internal events.

Even if that's true, it doesn't prove your original argument that we were giving up a 1st for Cassel. That was purely speculation on King's part just like all of the BS trade scenarios Mort offered up that had us trading Cutler and trading down in the 1st for Cassel.

Rohirrim
01-21-2010, 08:29 AM
He just posted direct quoted from McDaniels. Those quotes say he attempted a trade but was to late. Are you calling McDaniels a liar? Like I said, they never came out with compensation. The point is the same. Nice try on twisting the argument though. The "McDaniels is above the Broncos" group just doesn't even try to be rational or make sense anymore. I can see why.

Really? What's the direct quote?

Rohirrim
01-21-2010, 08:30 AM
Yeah, I know, we should not engage in inserting facts into any discussion pertaining McD. Blind allegiance is so much better. I'll try and do better next time.

When you find a fact, you be sure to let us know.

Rohirrim
01-21-2010, 08:32 AM
Telling him that they are going in a different direction didn't really work. Figuring out what scheme his defense was running half way through the season and then complaining about it didn't seem to do it either. I would have been willing to try your idea. Theirs don't seem very good.

Is this your idea of more "facts?"

TheElusiveKyleOrton
01-21-2010, 08:32 AM
Lets try and read it a little slower for you then. McD did pursue Cassel, but he was "late to the dance". McD's own words. Yeah, I know, he meant the Salsa class he was taking with Belicheat. The funny thing is the guy you are hanging your hat on is the HC who is renown in the league for keeping everything behind close doors. Now there is a good source.

PS if you bother reading the link, you would find out that McD did pursue a deal on the first day of free agency, but because they were also in the middle of 6 free agents negotiations, they did not give it their focus. By the time McD gets back to it he states "I think we were too late to the dance".

You are right. McD had no intention of negotiating for Cassel with NE. And Belicheat is the best source for all internal events.

Not to worry, I read it just fine.

Just so I'm crystal clear on this, McDaniels is NEVER to be trusted by anyone, unless he's saying he was late for the dance, which according to Peter King MUST mean that they were sending a first round pick to New England, even though Cassel actually went for a SECOND round pick, WITH a linebacker, to the Chiefs, so Belichick, who is the guy that keeps everything behind closed doors, has a secret plan to actually trade assets for lower picks rather than higher picks.

Did I get your mental gymnastics right?

Astounding.

Rohirrim
01-21-2010, 08:35 AM
Even if that's true, it doesn't prove your original argument that we were giving up a 1st for Cassel. That was purely speculation on King's part just like all of the BS trade scenarios Mort offered up that had us trading Cutler and trading down in the 1st for Cassel.

McD seems to like to work fast. Judging by the OP, this is a thread for unsubstantiated speculation. Here's one: I wonder what other players the Broncos FO inquired after on that first day of FA? How many of our players at those same positions on the team, shortly after, demanded a trade? Uhh. That would be zip.

Rabb
01-21-2010, 08:36 AM
serious question because I don't troll other team boards but are their fan bases on the intarwebs as ****ing douchey as this place is becoming?

it's amazing

Rohirrim
01-21-2010, 08:37 AM
Not to worry, I read it just fine.

Just so I'm crystal clear on this, McDaniels is NEVER to be trusted by anyone, unless he's saying he was late for the dance, which according to Peter King MUST mean that they were sending a first round pick to New England, even though Cassel actually went for a SECOND round pick, WITH a linebacker, to the Chiefs, so Belichick, who is the guy that keeps everything behind closed doors, has a secret plan to actually trade assets for lower picks rather than higher picks.

Did I get your mental gymnastics right?

Astounding.

I'm sure Peter King knows everything that goes on at Dove Valley. After all, from his office in Philadelphia (or wherever - he's such a raving Iggles fan I just assume) he must have the insider knowledge.

jhns
01-21-2010, 08:38 AM
Is this your idea of more "facts?"

Nope just responding in kind.

So, when did direct quotes become fiction?

TheDave
01-21-2010, 08:38 AM
Who cares about the Cutler trade anymore...???

It's done and lucky for us he had a ****ty year... Next.

jhns
01-21-2010, 08:41 AM
Who cares about the Cutler trade anymore...???

It's done and lucky for us he had a ****ty year... Next.

I care. Can't you tell?

TheElusiveKyleOrton
01-21-2010, 08:41 AM
I'm sure Peter King knows everything that goes on at Dove Valley. After all, from his office in Philadelphia (or wherever - he's such a raving Iggles fan I just assume) he must have the insider knowledge.

He sure does! Did you know that Tony Romo leads the league in smiles!?! I had understood that the NFL stopped keeping track of smiles as an official stat.

I think he lives in Boston, fwiw.

Rohirrim
01-21-2010, 08:42 AM
Nope just responding in kind.

So, when did direct quotes become fiction?

And I'm sure you wouldn't mind posting the direct quote.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
01-21-2010, 08:42 AM
I care. Can't you tell?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo...

Why didn't you SAY anything?

/sarcasm

jhns
01-21-2010, 08:47 AM
And I'm sure you wouldn't mind posting the direct quote.

It has been posted a few times. Look for these, "", to be surrounding a group of words. It will be followed with something like "McDaniels said".

jhns
01-21-2010, 08:48 AM
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo...

Why didn't you SAY anything?

/sarcasm

Maybe I should try harder to get my thoughts out there.

Rohirrim
01-21-2010, 08:49 AM
It has been posted a few times. Look for these, "", to be surrounding a group of words. It will be followed with something like "McDaniels said".

Can't do it, eh? Okay. :wiggle:

TheElusiveKyleOrton
01-21-2010, 08:49 AM
It has been posted a few times. Look for these, "", to be surrounding a group of words. It will be followed with something like "McDaniels said".

"We were late to that dance." Then the rest is filled in by Peter King.

You're direct-quoting Peter King. Congratulations.

Taco John
01-21-2010, 08:58 AM
Wait... I thought Nolan was the passive one and McDaniels was the agressive Blitz happy one.

I noticed that one too, and the hilarious shift that went with it.

jhns
01-21-2010, 08:58 AM
"We were late to that dance." Then the rest is filled in by Peter King.

You're direct-quoting Peter King. Congratulations.

Filled in from their conversation. The direct quote is enough though. They were late to the dance. That means they didn't look into trades? Really?

Rohirrim
01-21-2010, 09:00 AM
Filled in from their conversation. The direct quote is enough though. They were late to the dance. That means they didn't look into trades? Really?

:bs:

TheElusiveKyleOrton
01-21-2010, 09:02 AM
Filled in from their conversation. The direct quote is enough though. They were late to the dance. That means they didn't look into trades? Really?

Why would a writer -- even one as clueless as Peter King -- fill in facts from a conversation and not just use a quote? A quote is a far more powerful, meaningful thing than a writer's conjecture (in all places other than the Mane).

TheDave
01-21-2010, 09:02 AM
I noticed that one too, and the hilarious shift that went with it.

It's common knowledge that Belechek plays a passive bend but don't break 3-4... Yet for some reason people here are trying like hell to convince themselves that we parted ways with Nolan so we can blitz like we did back in 2005.

jhns
01-21-2010, 09:05 AM
Why would a writer -- even one as clueless as Peter King -- fill in facts from a conversation and not just use a quote? A quote is a far more powerful, meaningful thing than a writer's conjecture (in all places other than the Mane).

Maybe it was about 5 pages woth of conversation and he didn't think people would stay with the article? I have no clue. Like I said. Look at what is a direct quote. What about that says they never looked into a trade for Cassel? How can they be late if it didn't happen?

TheElusiveKyleOrton
01-21-2010, 09:11 AM
Maybe it was about 5 pages woth of conversation and he didn't think people would stay with the article? I have no clue. Like I said. Look at what is a direct quote. What about that says they never looked into a trade for Cassel? How can they be late if it didn't happen?

King regularly writes paragraphs upon paragraphs of direct quotes from players and coaches, yet he went with ONE sentence from McDaniels in a matter that captured the entire league's attention for a good month? Seriously? Are you serious?

It doesn't say they looked into a trade. It doesn't say they DIDN'T look into a trade. It doesn't say that they called someone about a trade, or that they were called about a trade. It doesn't say anything. It's a throwaway line that King wanted to use because it's all he got and then HE ASSUMED that McDaniels "looked into a trade." Someone could have called McD and asked him about Cutler... if he ponders, if he discusses with other coaches, is that considered "looking into it"?

It's absurd. I'm not saying what he said means absolutely nothing, but I REALLY don't think it means EVERYTHING, as you do.

Gob
01-21-2010, 09:13 AM
Why would a writer -- even one as clueless as Peter King -- fill in facts from a conversation and not just use a quote? A quote is a far more powerful, meaningful thing than a writer's conjecture (in all places other than the Mane).

Obviously a conspiracy. He asked McDaniels about his daughters ballet recital and when McDaniels said he was "late to the dance" he made it sound like they were talking about Cassel.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
01-21-2010, 09:13 AM
Obviously a conspiracy. He asked McDaniels about his daughters ballet recital and when McDaniels said he was "late to the dance" he made it sound like they were talking about Cassel.

Being a retard for the sake of being a retard doesn't make you funny. It makes you a retard.

Happy I could help.

jhns
01-21-2010, 09:16 AM
King regularly writes paragraphs upon paragraphs of direct quotes from players and coaches, yet he went with ONE sentence from McDaniels in a matter that captured the entire league's attention for a good month? Seriously? Are you serious?

It doesn't say they looked into a trade. It doesn't say they DIDN'T look into a trade. It doesn't say that they called someone about a trade, or that they were called about a trade. It doesn't say anything. It's a throwaway line that King wanted to use because it's all he got and then HE ASSUMED that McDaniels "looked into a trade." Someone could have called McD and asked him about Cutler... if he ponders, if he discusses with other coaches, is that considered "looking into it"?

It's absurd. I'm not saying what he said means absolutely nothing, but I REALLY don't think it means EVERYTHING, as you do.

Yes, Peter King is just out to get McDaniels. The quote says what it says. You can't be late to something that didn't happen. You keep covering your ears, closing your eyes, and screaming though. You will never have to face reality and your little world can stay perfect.

TheDave
01-21-2010, 09:18 AM
Being a retard for the sake of being a retard doesn't make you funny. It makes you a retard.

Happy I could help.

You take yourself way too seriously... relax.

http://cantinhodaeris.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/internet_serious_business_framed.jpg

jhns
01-21-2010, 09:19 AM
Obviously a conspiracy. He asked McDaniels about his daughters ballet recital and when McDaniels said he was "late to the dance" he made it sound like they were talking about Cassel.

LOL

People can be rediculous around here. I agree.

strafen
01-21-2010, 09:24 AM
Almost immediately, he began to dismantle it by trading the quarterback.

Stopped reading right there.

What?
You can't handle the truth?

jhns
01-21-2010, 09:28 AM
rediculous

I can't get my edit button to work and I can't spell. I just wanted to say people are ridiculous. It would be hard to be rediculous since I don't know what that means.

strafen
01-21-2010, 09:33 AM
Why would a writer -- even one as clueless as Peter King -- fill in facts from a conversation and not just use a quote? A quote is a far more powerful, meaningful thing than a writer's conjecture (in all places other than the Mane).

So a national renown writer like Peter King is now clueless?

Let's see. Let me take a guess why uou think he's cluless.
Tell me which of this options apply. You may choose more than one:

A- He revealed something negative about McDaniels and you didn't like it
B- He talked about how McDaniels is dismantling this team, and you didn't like it
C- He said something about McDaniels you didn't like
D- He's exposed McDaniels and you didn't like it
E- All of the above because you hate people "hating" on McDaniels

kamakazi_kal
01-21-2010, 09:36 AM
So a national renown writer like Peter King is now clueless?

Let's see. Let me take a guess why uou think he's cluless.
Tell me which of this options apply. You may choose more than one:

A- He revealed something negative about McDaniels and you didn't like it
B- He talked about how McDaniels is dismantling this team, and you didn't like it
C- He said something about McDaniels you didn't like
D- He's exposed McDaniels and you didn't like it
E- All of the above because you hate people "hating" on McDaniels

pure awesomeness

Rohirrim
01-21-2010, 09:40 AM
So a national renown writer like Peter King is now clueless?

Let's see. Let me take a guess why uou think he's cluless.
Tell me which of this options apply. You may choose more than one:

A- He revealed something negative about McDaniels and you didn't like it
B- He talked about how McDaniels is dismantling this team, and you didn't like it
C- He said something about McDaniels you didn't like
D- He's exposed McDaniels and you didn't like it
E- All of the above because you hate people "hating" on McDaniels

Or F - He didn't substantiate his speculation?

Gee. Ya think?

BTW, this is the first time I've seen Peter King get such credence on this board. Weird. All his previous comments regarding the Broncos are usually greeted with some form of, what an ass, King doesn't know ****. But not this time.

Rohirrim
01-21-2010, 09:41 AM
Maybe it was about 5 pages woth of conversation and he didn't think people would stay with the article? I have no clue. Like I said. Look at what is a direct quote. What about that says they never looked into a trade for Cassel? How can they be late if it didn't happen?

That's the problem with speculation - you have to come up with all sorts of bs excuses to cover for it.

jhns
01-21-2010, 09:43 AM
Or F - He didn't substantiate his speculation?

Gee. Ya think?

BTW, this is the first time I've seen Peter King get such credence on this board. Weird. All his previous comments regarding the Broncos are usually greeted with some form of, what an ass, King doesn't know ****. But not this time.

Maybe you have said that about him. I sure haven't.

Anyways, it isn't about King. It is about a direct quote from McDaniels and a conversation with King. We aren't using his opinions as proof of anything. You are way out in left field right now.

jhns
01-21-2010, 09:45 AM
That's the problem with speculation - you have to come up with all sorts of bs excuses to cover for it.

LOL

So you think you guys are bringing an intelligent argument? McDaniels was late but never even thought about it? Really?

RaiderH8r
01-21-2010, 09:49 AM
You take yourself way too seriously... relax.

http://cantinhodaeris.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/internet_serious_business_framed.jpg

http://www.hollow-hill.com/sabina/images/serious-cat.jpg

Rohirrim
01-21-2010, 09:51 AM
LOL

So you think you guys are bringing an intelligent argument? McDaniels was late but never even thought about it? Really?

Well, since you guys have decided that King is the expert, here's ya go:


McDaniels said he was not considering trading Cutler until he was contacted "by two teams'' at the Scouting Combine -- presumably Detroit and Tampa. They were pie-in-the-sky inquiries, though, and he didn't consider anything seriously, he said, until the day before the Feb. 27 beginning of free-agency, when he got a serious proposal for Cutler.

"This was a non-issue until Thursday [Feb. 26],'' McDaniels said. "There was obviously a scenario where teams figured we'd be interested in Matt Cassel, because I'd coached him in New England. When someone calls, I'm going to consider it, because that's my job.''

Cutler believes the Broncos were much more interested in trading him and signing Cassel than they've said. I asked McDaniels if he'd been interested in Cassel before the contact by the two teams at the combine, going back to when he knew Cassel might be on the market and available in trade from the Patriots. "No, that's totally untrue,'' he said.

McDaniels did pursue a deal with New England on the first day of free agency, but not intensely, he said, because he and Broncos general manager Brian Xanders were in the middle of doing six free-agent negotiations in the opening two days of free-agency. "I think we were too late to the dance,'' he said, meaning the Chiefs had already made the deal with New England -- a second-round pick for Cassel and linebacker Mike Vrabel. Denver would have given more, likely a first-round pick, but Patriots coach Bill Belichick had his deal done with the Chiefs.
Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/03/15/union/index.html#ixzz0dGa3QTIl

It even has some "direct quotes from McDaniels" that you seem to like.

BTW, when somebody uses the word "likely," as in "likely a first-round pick," they are speculating.

jhns
01-21-2010, 09:55 AM
Well, since you guys have decided that King is the expert, here's ya go:

McDaniels did pursue a deal with New England on the first day of free agency, but not intensely, he said, because he and Broncos general manager Brian Xanders were in the middle of doing six free-agent negotiations in the opening two days of free-agency. "I think we were too late to the dance,'' he said,

It even has some "direct quotes from McDaniels" that you seem to like.

Yup, it is exactly what we have been saying. Thanks for the confirmation.

PRBronco
01-21-2010, 09:56 AM
Well, since you guys have decided that King is the expert, here's ya go:


McDaniels said he was not considering trading Cutler until he was contacted "by two teams'' at the Scouting Combine -- presumably Detroit and Tampa. They were pie-in-the-sky inquiries, though, and he didn't consider anything seriously, he said, until the day before the Feb. 27 beginning of free-agency, when he got a serious proposal for Cutler.

"This was a non-issue until Thursday [Feb. 26],'' McDaniels said. "There was obviously a scenario where teams figured we'd be interested in Matt Cassel, because I'd coached him in New England. When someone calls, I'm going to consider it, because that's my job.''

Cutler believes the Broncos were much more interested in trading him and signing Cassel than they've said. I asked McDaniels if he'd been interested in Cassel before the contact by the two teams at the combine, going back to when he knew Cassel might be on the market and available in trade from the Patriots. "No, that's totally untrue,'' he said.

McDaniels did pursue a deal with New England on the first day of free agency, but not intensely, he said, because he and Broncos general manager Brian Xanders were in the middle of doing six free-agent negotiations in the opening two days of free-agency. "I think we were too late to the dance,'' he said, meaning the Chiefs had already made the deal with New England -- a second-round pick for Cassel and linebacker Mike Vrabel. Denver would have given more, likely a first-round pick, but Patriots coach Bill Belichick had his deal done with the Chiefs.
Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/03/15/union/index.html#ixzz0dGa3QTIl

It even has some "direct quotes from McDaniels" that you seem to like.

BTW, when somebody uses the word "likely," as in "likely a first-round pick," they are speculating.

Sigh, I don't understand how people aren't getting this eh? Even every ****ing announcer this season.

strafen
01-21-2010, 10:00 AM
Or F - He didn't substantiate his speculation?

Gee. Ya think?

BTW, this is the first time I've seen Peter King get such credence on this board. Weird. All his previous comments regarding the Broncos are usually greeted with some form of, what an ass, King doesn't know ****. But not this time.I'm not saying he's a great writer, but a guy with Peter King's credentials doesn't usually get to be where he's at by being clueless as judged by an internet individual

The fact that Peter King gets greeted here the way he has, I'll bet anything I own it has more to do with not giving the Broncos the love we're looking for from every national reporter than anything to do with his profession.

If a national reporter or writer doesn't talk about the Broncos as SB contenders in preseason, if a national publication doesn't place the Broncos in the top 3 NFL weekly power rankings during the season, then that reporter and publication are clueless. They suck!

jhns
01-21-2010, 10:04 AM
BTW, when somebody uses the word "likely," as in "likely a first-round pick," they are speculating.

Is this supposed to be directed at me? I said from the beginning that I don't know if the first round pick thing is true. I have not tried to say it is true since that time. Is this really what you are arguing? Like it makes a difference what we wanted to give or get in the deal? How does this take away from any point that is being made, even buy the guy that said something about the first round pick?

TheElusiveKyleOrton
01-21-2010, 10:09 AM
So a national renown writer like Peter King is now clueless?

Let's see. Let me take a guess why uou think he's cluless.
Tell me which of this options apply. You may choose more than one:

A- He revealed something negative about McDaniels and you didn't like it
B- He talked about how McDaniels is dismantling this team, and you didn't like it
C- He said something about McDaniels you didn't like
D- He's exposed McDaniels and you didn't like it
E- All of the above because you hate people "hating" on McDaniels

How about

F- His article is all conjecture and little fact. He took one line -- "we were late to that dance." -- and drew his own conclusions.

If you actually read Peter King, you know he NEVER shies away from sharing complete quotes, text messages, notes from friends, etc. If there was more to it, he would have quoted it. He didn't. He quoted one sentence, then decided what McD "must have" meant. That's not reporting. It's Josina-ing.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
01-21-2010, 10:10 AM
I'm not saying he's a great writer, but a guy with Peter King's credentials doesn't usually get to be where he's at by being clueless as judged by an internet individual

The fact that Peter King gets greeted here the way he has, I'll bet anything I own it has more to do with not giving the Broncos the love we're looking for from every national reporter than anything to do with his profession.

If a national reporter or writer doesn't talk about the Broncos as SB contenders in preseason, if a national publication doesn't place the Broncos in the top 3 NFL weekly power rankings during the season, then that reporter and publication are clueless. They suck!

That has nothing to do with it. In fact, King was among the few giving Denver props during the 6-0 start.

So... you're wrong. Again. heckuva try though.

jhns
01-21-2010, 10:12 AM
How about

F- His article is all conjecture and little fact. He took one line -- "we were late to that dance." -- and drew his own conclusions.

If you actually read Peter King, you know he NEVER shies away from sharing complete quotes, text messages, notes from friends, etc. If there was more to it, he would have quoted it. He didn't. He quoted one sentence, then decided what McD "must have" meant. That's not reporting. It's Josina-ing.

You have a problem reading. Since when was King known to be out to get the Broncos? When has King been known to lie about what people say? What is it that you think McDaniels was talking about? How can McDaniels be late to something that didn't happen? All great questions.

Rohirrim
01-21-2010, 10:14 AM
Is this supposed to be directed at me? I said from the beginning that I don't know if the first round pick thing is true. I have not tried to say it is true since that time. Is this really what you are arguing? Like it makes a difference what we wanted to give or get in the deal? How does this take away from any point that is being made, even buy the guy that said something about the first round pick?

My argument goes back to the post where I said I stopped reading right there, because Krieger wrote, "When McDaniels arrived a year ago, the Broncos' strength was their offense. Almost immediately, he began to dismantle it by trading the quarterback."

This is the same out-and-out bull**** I keep hearing from every announcer, every writer and half the people on this board. If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.

The only reason Cutler is gone is Cutler. And Bus Cook. Fortunately for us.

jhns
01-21-2010, 10:15 AM
. He quoted one sentence, then decided what McD "must have" meant.

Also, when did he say McDaniels must have meant something? Are we using straw man arguments again, even after all of that crying?

jhns
01-21-2010, 10:19 AM
My argument goes back to the post where I said I stopped reading right there, because Krieger wrote, "When McDaniels arrived a year ago, the Broncos' strength was their offense. Almost immediately, he began to dismantle it by trading the quarterback."

This is the same out-and-out bull**** I keep hearing from every announcer, every writer and half the people on this board. If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.

The only reason Cutler is gone is Cutler. And Bus Cook. Fortunately for us.

You just used an article as proof that shows everything I have said, and that everyone is claiming.....

Why do you get so offended by the truth?

Cutler was under contract. There is no way he can be gone on his own, or with his agents help.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
01-21-2010, 10:20 AM
Also, when did he say McDaniels must have meant something? Are we using straw man arguments again, even after all of that crying?

Awww, look who doesn't know what a straw man argument is. Cute.

He quoted McDaniels, then finished the thought for him. He took one line and turned it into "was looking into trades for Cutler."

Rohirrim
01-21-2010, 10:23 AM
You just used an article as proof that shows everything I have said, and that everyone is claiming.....

Why do you get so offended by the truth?

Cutler was under contract. There is no way he can be gone on his own, or with his agents help.

A player under contract can't force a trade? Whew. That's a relief.

jhns
01-21-2010, 10:23 AM
Awww, look who doesn't know what a straw man argument is. Cute.

He quoted McDaniels, then finished the thought for him. He took one line and turned it into "was looking into trades for Cutler."

So if I put something in quotes that wasn't actually said, I am using a straw man argument? Then, you do the same thing and you aren't? Do you not remember the whole "McDaniels is above the team" crowd thing?

jhns
01-21-2010, 10:25 AM
A player under contract can't force a trade? Whew. That's a relief.

Wait, is that sarcasm? My internet sarcasm meter says it is but it just doesn't make sense.

Rohirrim
01-21-2010, 10:28 AM
Wait, is that sarcasm? My internet sarcasm meter says it is but it just doesn't make sense.

Well, King's piece states that McD didn't initiate anything. Krieger's says that the first thing McD did is dismantle the offense by trading Cutler. One of them is wrong.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
01-21-2010, 10:28 AM
So if I put something in quotes that wasn't actually said, I am using a straw man argument? Then, you do the same thing and you aren't? Do you not remember the whole "McDaniels is above the team" crowd thing?

Ugh. Just do yourself a favor and google strawman argument. Please.


ROFL!LOLHilarious!

jhns
01-21-2010, 10:31 AM
Ugh. Just do yourself a favor and google strawman argument. Please.


ROFL!LOLHilarious!

Nah, I am fine without it. You are the one that used it in that way. You were going on about finding people that said that because I used quotes and it is a strawman argument. I will just use your implied definition and laugh that you then turn around and do it.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
01-21-2010, 10:31 AM
Nah, I am fine without it. You are the one that used it in that way. You were going on about finding people that said that because I used quotes and it is a strawman argument. I will just use your implied definition and laugh that you then turn around and do it.

It has nothing to do with quotes, stupid. If you'd look it up, you'd know that.

Remain ignorant. It's what you're best at.

jhns
01-21-2010, 10:33 AM
It has nothing to do with quotes, stupid. If you'd look it up, you'd know that.

Remain ignorant. It's what you're best at.

OK poopee head. I will do that.

RaiderH8r
01-21-2010, 10:38 AM
It has nothing to do with quotes, stupid. If you'd look it up, you'd know that.

Remain ignorant. It's what you're best at.

At least he doesn't end his sentences with prepositions. HA!

jhns
01-21-2010, 10:39 AM
Well, King's piece states that McD didn't initiate anything. Krieger's says that the first thing McD did is dismantle the offense by trading Cutler. One of them is wrong.

I was talking about the agents and QBs getting to decide when to leave a contract, thing.

Popps
01-21-2010, 10:51 AM
Krieger: Broncos coach McDaniels can do it all, or at least he's trying


[size=1][i]
Like Shanahan, he will ultimately be judged on the results. If he wins enough games, his tactics will be all good. That's the Bill Belichick credo. McDaniels is counting on it.

That's basically it. No one minded Shanahan's control when things were working.

Beyond that, the article is pretty funny. He asks several times if Josh makes all decisions by himself... he's told no, he does not. He then concludes the article by saying that Josh makes all of the decisions himself, disregarding the answer he was just given and reported in a prior paragraph.

Bronco Rob
01-22-2010, 04:39 AM
:thumbsup:

Meck77
01-22-2010, 06:06 AM
Krieger: Broncos coach McDaniels can do it all, or at least he's trying
\
"I would just tell you this that Pat supports what Josh has done 100 percent," Ellis said.

"And while some of it may appear to have been difficult and a change in philosophy and a change in how this team is trying to operate, what Josh's philosophy is which is to bring in tough, smart players that are accountable to their teammates, their coaches, their head coach, their organization, the owner and their fans all of that Pat believes in to the fullest extent."\

It takes time to reconstruct "The shanny resort aka Dove Valley" into a football camp.

Rohirrim you nailed it with your post earlier. This site thrives off of drama and controversy. Even when we were a playoff team this same group found a way to create drama. The omane is a soap opera and needs that element of controversy to keep it ticking just like the tv shows.

I'm just glad Pat was able to see past his friendship with Shanny and make the call for change. That's what leaders do. Then real leaders stick with their decision.

The MVPlaya
01-22-2010, 09:41 PM
Lets try and read it a little slower for you then. McD did pursue Cassel, but he was "late to the dance". McD's own words. Yeah, I know, he meant the Salsa class he was taking with Belicheat. The funny thing is the guy you are hanging your hat on is the HC who is renown in the league for keeping everything behind close doors. Now there is a good source.

PS if you bother reading the link, you would find out that McD did pursue a deal on the first day of free agency, but because they were also in the middle of 6 free agents negotiations, they did not give it their focus. By the time McD gets back to it he states "I think we were too late to the dance".

You are right. McD had no intention of negotiating for Cassel with NE. And Belicheat is the best source for all internal events.

McD's own words? Or was that Xanders? That was poor as **** writing.

It's funny that Peter King was the ONLY one to have all these quotes from Josh. It's even funnier that you actually believe Peter King.

McDaniels did pursue a deal with New England on the first day of free agency, but not intensely, he said, because he and Broncos general manager Brian Xanders were in the middle of doing six free-agent negotiations in the opening two days of free-agency.


If he really did pursue the deal, you really think it fell behind all those negotiations when THAT deal would have been the most important transaction? Yeah, somehow dealing for the most important position in football fell behind all those deals. If he really wanted Cassell he would have got him.

That's hilarious though, that you Peter King brought you under such deception - I guess that's where he makes his money/gets his views from...from all the "fans" like you.

The MVPlaya
01-22-2010, 09:46 PM
My argument goes back to the post where I said I stopped reading right there, because Krieger wrote, "When McDaniels arrived a year ago, the Broncos' strength was their offense. Almost immediately, he began to dismantle it by trading the quarterback."

This is the same out-and-out bull**** I keep hearing from every announcer, every writer and half the people on this board. If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.

The only reason Cutler is gone is Cutler. And Bus Cook. Fortunately for us.

Exactly.

Cutler was not driven out of Denver. Did McDaniels not wear his jersey to that coach meeting? That probably doesn't mean much though.

Cutler and his agent decided they wanted out of Denver. McDaniels and staff were trying to BRING HIM BACK but he wanted out - wtf part of this is so hard to comprehend?

The only excuse I hear from Cutler apologists are that his feelings were hurt? How would you FEEL?

Cutler was NEVER driven out of Denver. He WROTE his path.

DenverBrit
01-22-2010, 09:59 PM
Unreal. The 'Cutler trade' is still being debated?

Denver was contacted by two other teams with a 3 way proposal.

By the time McDaniels got involved, a deal had been done with KC.
They were "too late to the dance." End of story.

As for trying to trade Cutler for Cassel, is there a person here who thinks that deal wouldn't have been made in a heartbeat?? It never happened.

King's suggestion that Denver tried to trade a first for Cassel would have meant Cassel was being brought onboard as a backup.

Great idea, unless you're a Simms fan.

DBroncos4life
01-23-2010, 01:09 AM
Exactly.

Cutler was not driven out of Denver. Did McDaniels not wear his jersey to that coach meeting? That probably doesn't mean much though.

Cutler and his agent decided they wanted out of Denver. McDaniels and staff were trying to BRING HIM BACK but he wanted out - wtf part of this is so hard to comprehend?

The only excuse I hear from Cutler apologists are that his feelings were hurt? How would you FEEL?

Cutler was NEVER driven out of Denver. He WROTE his path.

This would mean so much more if it was wrote by someone that didn't claim that Nolan was let go because he didn't run blitz enough.

rastaman
01-23-2010, 09:53 PM
Who cares about the Cutler trade anymore...???

It's done and lucky for us he had a ****ty year... Next.

Meh! The Cutler trade to me wasn't really about drafting the Bears 2 number #1's; b/c number 1 picks are such a crap shoot and either under achieve over a 4 or 5 year period or they can become outright bust.

The Cutler trade will be judged whether the Broncos can replace Jay with another pro bowl-franchise QB over the next 3 or 4 years and whether Cutler can muture and stop forcing throws i.e, interceptions. Everyone can see all Cutler needs to do is stop throwing interception and he's going to be on of the top QB's in the league.

rastaman
01-23-2010, 09:58 PM
Unreal. The 'Cutler trade' is still being debated?

Denver was contacted by two other teams with a 3 way proposal.

By the time McDaniels got involved, a deal had been done with KC.
They were "too late to the dance." End of story.

As for trying to trade Cutler for Cassel, is there a person here who thinks that deal wouldn't have been made in a heartbeat?? It never happened.

King's suggestion that Denver tried to trade a first for Cassel would have meant Cassel was being brought onboard as a backup.

Great idea, unless you're a Simms fan.

Meh! McD and Bowlen wanted Cutler out of Denver b/c of Diabetic and had a drinking problem.

The MVPlaya
01-24-2010, 05:11 AM
This would mean so much more if it was wrote by someone that didn't claim that Nolan was let go because he didn't run blitz enough.

Did I say this? LOL... I would like a direct quote before you stuff sh1t in my mouth. Not only is this the opposite of my point in my thread, I never said that THIS IS THE REASON.

I wonder if everyone here finished high school and took some english classes that forced you to critically read or analyze and be accountable for what you read.

:rofl:

DenverBrit
01-24-2010, 10:04 AM
Meh! McD and Bowlen wanted Cutler out of Denver b/c of Diabetic and had a drinking problem.

Bowlen's too drunk to leave the house and McPoopyPants isn't old enough to drink, so how would they know about Cutler's drinking??

RaiderH8r
01-25-2010, 06:51 AM
Bowlen's too drunk to leave the house and McPoopyPants isn't old enough to drink, so how would they know about Cutler's drinking??

http://drunkathlete.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/kyle_orton_chicago_bears_3_drunk_pictures1.jpg

jhns
01-25-2010, 07:24 AM
I wonder if everyone here finished high school and took some english classes that forced you to critically read or analyze and be accountable for what you read.


The better question is what English class did you take? How can you question others about their education while posting something like this?