PDA

View Full Version : For those who wish to bitch about Mcdaniels.


pokenation
02-03-2010, 06:35 PM
for all of those who wish to highjack everythread and turn it into a "how mcdaniels ****ed our team", could you just start your own thread and talk about it with each other?

there are a lot of people that come to this site to read about the team, players and/or organization. you really have made this site no fun. i know that im not the only person that has gotten interested in a thread just to see it go south, like all the other threads you highjack because you just can't let it go. yes, WE ALL KNOW that he has made mistakes. if you cant get passed them and discuss the issue or thread at hand, then please for the rest of us that were enjoying the thread, go start your own.

I do appreciate your opinions, but it just gets old. you know who you are, im not going to call you names or even name names. everbody has the right to give their opinions, but for the good of the board and the pure enjoyment of this sight, could you please start your own thread if you're just going to bring up what we already know and have already heard why you hate mcdaniels?

:peace:

ColoradoDarin
02-03-2010, 06:40 PM
We wasted the 14th pick in the draft on a short slow CB!!!!oneone!!!eleven!


:)

Flex Gunmetal
02-03-2010, 06:46 PM
No 41 post rule yet?
JK, I agree 100%. Condemning a coach after his 1st year, when he matched his team's record from the previous year (which happened to be coached by a hall of famer) is something faid and redskins fans do.
You know who you are.

broncosteven
02-03-2010, 06:47 PM
for all of those who wish to highjack everythread and turn it into a "how mcdaniels ****ed our team", could you just start your own thread and talk about it with each other?

there are a lot of people that come to this site to read about the team, players and/or organization. you really have made this site no fun. i know that im not the only person that has gotten interested in a thread just to see it go south, like all the other threads you highjack because you just can't let it go. yes, WE ALL KNOW that he has made mistakes. if you cant get passed them and discuss the issue or thread at hand, then please for the rest of us that were enjoying the thread, go start your own.

I do appreciate your opinions, but it just gets old. you know who you are, im not going to call you names or even name names. everbody has the right to give their opinions, but for the good of the board and the pure enjoyment of this sight, could you please start your own thread if you're just going to bring up what we already know and have already heard why you hate mcdaniels?

:peace:

This sheet gets old and drags the site down as well. Best you can do is talk football and hope the 4 posters from the Hate side don't provoke the 4 Blind Homers into a fight which destroys the thread.

DBroncos4life
02-03-2010, 06:47 PM
this thread is useless without food....

oubronco
02-03-2010, 06:48 PM
You do know you could just ignore them right

tsiguy96
02-03-2010, 06:50 PM
No 41 post rule yet?
JK, I agree 100%. Condemning a coach after his 1st year, when he matched his team's record from the previous year (which happened to be coached by a hall of famer) is something faid and redskins fans do.
You know who you are.

it doesnt matter, im getting pretty sick of it and like i siad in another post, i just end up flying past teh same 5-6 members posts. but considering every single thread is hijacked it doesnt matter because the rest of the posts are responding to them, and you know those idiots love it.

scttgrd
02-03-2010, 06:51 PM
You do know you could just ignore them right

You need to stop making sense. I guess if they wanted a lovefest one could go over to Broncos Country.

DBroncos4life
02-03-2010, 06:53 PM
it doesnt matter, im getting pretty sick of it and like i siad in another post, i just end up flying past teh same 5-6 members posts. but considering every single thread is hijacked it doesnt matter because the rest of the posts are responding to them, and you know those idiots love it.

Considering you are one of 5-6 members that continually fights with those 5-6 members in pretty much every thread you must be one of those idiots that love it.

broncosteven
02-03-2010, 06:54 PM
it doesnt matter, im getting pretty sick of it and like i siad in another post, i just end up flying past teh same 5-6 members posts. but considering every single thread is hijacked it doesnt matter because the rest of the posts are responding to them, and you know those idiots love it.

Your right it is the same guys on BOTH sides of the argument that have dragged this place down.

TheDave
02-03-2010, 06:56 PM
for all of those who wish to highjack everythread and turn it into a "how mcdaniels ****ed our team", could you just start your own thread and talk about it with each other?

there are a lot of people that come to this site to read about the team, players and/or organization. you really have made this site no fun. i know that im not the only person that has gotten interested in a thread just to see it go south, like all the other threads you highjack because you just can't let it go. yes, WE ALL KNOW that he has made mistakes. if you cant get passed them and discuss the issue or thread at hand, then please for the rest of us that were enjoying the thread, go start your own.

I do appreciate your opinions, but it just gets old. you know who you are, im not going to call you names or even name names. everbody has the right to give their opinions, but for the good of the board and the pure enjoyment of this sight, could you please start your own thread if you're just going to bring up what we already know and have already heard why you hate mcdaniels?

:peace:

Just out of curiosity... Did you really think this was going to do anything?

DBroncos4life
02-03-2010, 06:57 PM
Just out of curiosity... Did you really think this was going to do anything?

It gave us another thread to fight in. :spit:

tsiguy96
02-03-2010, 06:58 PM
Considering you are one of 5-6 members that continually fights with those 5-6 members in pretty much every thread you must be one of those idiots that love it.

i was one of those who felt the need to constantly argue over it. im over it though, its old and at this point those people are absolutely doing it for attention as much if not more than to state their arguments.

TheDave
02-03-2010, 06:59 PM
It gave us another thread to fight in. :spit:

Hilarious!

I'm hopping he was in on that joke before he posted this... but I doubt it.

Flex Gunmetal
02-03-2010, 06:59 PM
I'm just tired of people ****ting on the broncos despite the fact they weren't the losers everyone thought they would be. It's poor form as a fan and shows how spoiled we really are.

pokenation
02-03-2010, 07:01 PM
Just out of curiosity... Did you really think this was going to do anything?

no not really, i know i could put them on ignore or roll past them.....and i dont need a love fest. im just sayin that WE ALL know what they are sayin, they dont have to keep bringing it up.

if ur going to just highjack a thread to state ur anger, then just start ur own thread thats all im sayin.

Jason in LA
02-03-2010, 07:01 PM
I agree. Can we also toss in the guys who want to bash Cutler and Shanahan too? That group is just as annoying as the group that hates McD.

Taco John
02-03-2010, 07:03 PM
I'm just tired of people ****ting on the broncos despite the fact they weren't the losers everyone thought they would be. It's poor form as a fan and shows how spoiled we really are.


What if they were worse than some of us thought they would be. I had us as a 9-7 or 10-6 team based on our division and the talent we had on the team despite the departures. We'd have been right there too if we'd have beaten the Raiders and Chiefs at home.

DBroncos4life
02-03-2010, 07:04 PM
Hilarious!

I'm hopping he was in on that joke before he posted this... but I doubt it.

I was dying for another thread to discuss McD and all of his success and failures in but oddly this thread just doesn't feel right. Hopefully a OManer will have a child be born so I can toss my opinions in that thread and trash it instead. I think something like you know while in labor it would have been less painful for the mother if McD hadn't traded the 14th pick for Smith.

tsiguy96
02-03-2010, 07:05 PM
I agree. Can we also toss in the guys who want to bash Cutler and Shanahan too? That group is just as annoying as the group that hates McD.

no one here bashes shanahan, everyone is very grateful for what he did for the franchise but thought it was time for him to move on given the state of the entire TEAM.

cutler on the otherhand, well we are a 6 to him so he is free territory to bash all we want. we got the 2 first rounders from him so thats cool though.

DenverBrit
02-03-2010, 07:06 PM
What if they were worse than some of us thought they would be. I had us as a 9-7 or 10-6 team based on our division and the talent we had on the team despite the departures. We'd have been right there too if we'd have beaten the Raiders and Chiefs at home.

Yes, but you don't feel compelled to remind us of that fifty times a day in every new thread.

That's the issue here, not dissent, but beating the same point to death.

24champ
02-03-2010, 07:06 PM
I'm just tired of people ****ting on the broncos despite the fact they weren't the losers everyone thought they would be. It's poor form as a fan and shows how spoiled we really are.

I'm just tired of the "Who is a real Bronco fan" and the "McDaniels doesn't know what it means to be a Bronco" crap. It's BS and unfortunately this type of crap is encouraged around here.

tsiguy96
02-03-2010, 07:06 PM
What if they were worse than some of us thought they would be. I had us as a 9-7 or 10-6 team based on our division and the talent we had on the team despite the departures. We'd have been right there too if we'd have beaten the Raiders and Chiefs at home.

then look forward to next year wehn the offense is more comfortable in the system and the defense has more/better players in it :afro:

DBroncos4life
02-03-2010, 07:08 PM
no one here bashes shanahan, everyone is very grateful for what he did for the franchise but thought it was time for him to move on given the state of the entire TEAM.

cutler on the otherhand, well we are a 6 to him so he is free territory to bash all we want. we got the 2 first rounders from him so thats cool though.

Your mom rated TheDave a 6 and me a 10.....oh burn...do you need some ice? FOR THAT BURN....8')

Flex Gunmetal
02-03-2010, 07:09 PM
I'm just tired of the "Who is a real Bronco fan" and the "McDaniels doesn't know what it means to be a Bronco" crap. It's BS and unfortunately this type of crap is encouraged around here.

Look, I want my team to do well. I have seen from more than one poster hoping for broncos failure over the next couple years till mcd is forced out. That's where my beef lies.

tsiguy96
02-03-2010, 07:11 PM
Your mom rated TheDave a 6 and me a 10.....oh burn...do you need some ice? FOR THAT BURN....8')

damn, well atleast she gave me a 9.

DBroncos4life
02-03-2010, 07:14 PM
damn, well atleast she gave me a 9.

Dude you ****ed your mom?

strafen
02-03-2010, 07:15 PM
no one here bashes shanahan, everyone is very grateful for what he did for the franchise but thought it was time for him to move on given the state of the entire TEAM.

cutler on the otherhand, well we are a 6 to him so he is free territory to bash all we want. we got the 2 first rounders from him so thats cool though.No one here bashes Shanahan?
How many threads do you have to read comparisons about if Shanahan failed, why are we criticizing McDaniels for you to see it?
Did you miss those, or are you just convenintly ignoring those threads?

Dr. Broncenstein
02-03-2010, 07:19 PM
for all of those who wish to highjack everythread and turn it into a "how mcdaniels ****ed our team", could you just start your own thread and talk about it with each other?

there are a lot of people that come to this site to read about the team, players and/or organization. you really have made this site no fun. i know that im not the only person that has gotten interested in a thread just to see it go south, like all the other threads you highjack because you just can't let it go. yes, WE ALL KNOW that he has made mistakes. if you cant get passed them and discuss the issue or thread at hand, then please for the rest of us that were enjoying the thread, go start your own.

I do appreciate your opinions, but it just gets old. you know who you are, im not going to call you names or even name names. everbody has the right to give their opinions, but for the good of the board and the pure enjoyment of this sight, could you please start your own thread if you're just going to bring up what we already know and have already heard why you hate mcdaniels?

:peace:

http://item.slide.com/r/1/7/i/NLBq4maN3j_bkdN_v5_JASLQtG9DuOGq/

24champ
02-03-2010, 07:19 PM
damn, well atleast she gave me a 9.

http://threadbombing.com/data/media/2/14sntcy.gif

Taco John
02-03-2010, 07:23 PM
then look forward to next year wehn the offense is more comfortable in the system and the defense has more/better players in it :afro:

That's actually what I'm doing. It takes three years for a coach to install his program.

tsiguy96
02-03-2010, 07:35 PM
Dude you ****ed your mom?

if youre gonna say weird ****, ill say weirder ****.


Hilarious!Hilarious!Hilarious!

edit: guess the sarcasm doesnt pass over hte internet. this is an ongoing joke between me and my friend because if someone says something about your mom in real life and you say something like this, EVERYONE gets a dumbfounded look on their face and has no idea what to say.

DBroncos4life
02-03-2010, 07:39 PM
if youre gonna say weird ****, ill say weirder ****.


Hilarious!Hilarious!Hilarious!

I would stop before telling people you do your mom....;D There has to be a line.Hilarious!

Meck77
02-03-2010, 07:40 PM
That's actually what I'm doing. It takes three years for a coach to install his program.

Hey mods. Someone get Taco asap. I think someone hijacked his account!

jhns
02-03-2010, 07:41 PM
What if I like complaining about McDaniels and Orton and feel you guys are ruining the threads because you cry about my complaining? I even usually keep it to the threads that start about these subjects.

tsiguy96
02-03-2010, 07:43 PM
I would stop before telling people you do your mom....;D There has to be a line.Hilarious!

read edit, its actually really funny to see the response you get because its usually one exactly like the gif above :rofl:

DBroncos4life
02-03-2010, 07:46 PM
read edit, its actually really funny to see the response you get because its usually one exactly like the gif above :rofl:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/z-HFRxJtHa8&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/z-HFRxJtHa8&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

tsiguy96
02-03-2010, 07:48 PM
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/z-HFRxJtHa8&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/z-HFRxJtHa8&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

LOL

thats ****ed up

BroncoMan4ever
02-03-2010, 08:01 PM
this thread is useless without food....

http://distinctpixel.org/images/userImages/puerco_pibil.jpg

BroncoMan4ever
02-03-2010, 08:05 PM
No one here bashes Shanahan?
How many threads do you have to read comparisons about if Shanahan failed, why are we criticizing McDaniels for you to see it?
Did you miss those, or are you just convenintly ignoring those threads?

not to start a bunch of ****, but the majority of people why bring up Shanahan aren't bashing the guy. we are all grateful to the guy for the 90s dominance, however, as with every coach, after a few years of nothing and questionable moves, fans will become critical of him.

Taco John
02-03-2010, 08:06 PM
Hey mods. Someone get Taco asap. I think someone hijacked his account!

This is the same opinion I've had since Josh was first installed. I don't blame Josh for Bowlen's mistake. Or for being hired young for that matter. I have my doubts, but I will give him the benefit of at least two full seasons - and probably three before I'd call for his head. And even then, I'd have reservations if it looked like we were on the precipice.

Popps
02-03-2010, 08:10 PM
Hey mods. Someone get Taco asap. I think someone hijacked his account!

Seriously.

I looked at the post... then the name.... then the post... then the name again.... then the post again... and triple checked that just to be sure.

To be fair, though... most of Taco's idiocy came during the offseason and was Shanahan-related. He's been less of an annoyance during the regular season.

Taco John
02-03-2010, 08:25 PM
For all the "idiocy" it's funny how all the concerns that I had turned out to be completely valid.

Dagmar
02-03-2010, 08:56 PM
http://i.pbase.com/o5/42/267742/1/68416031.aQBkbWkL.fight.gif

yerner
02-03-2010, 09:29 PM
For all the "idiocy" it's funny how all the concerns that I had turned out to be completely valid.

Come on dude, Josh is doing a fantastic job. He completly turned our 8-8 team into a different fatter older slower less talented 8-8 team. All those worries were for nothing.

Jason in LA
02-04-2010, 06:20 AM
no one here bashes shanahan, everyone is very grateful for what he did for the franchise but thought it was time for him to move on given the state of the entire TEAM.

cutler on the otherhand, well we are a 6 to him so he is free territory to bash all we want. we got the 2 first rounders from him so thats cool though.

What message board have you been reading? Shanahan gets roasted around here by some of the McD lovers. And your negative posts about Cutler are so annoying. He's gone. Get over it.

You and Broncofan7 should have your own section on this board where you two could just fight it out. It would save the rest of us from reading a lot of BS around here.

Broncomutt
02-04-2010, 08:28 AM
Baby Josh would like you to know he made fish sticks. He cooked them at 1000 degrees for 3 minutes.

They're burnt badly on the outside but still frozen on the inside. Baby Josh says this means it all balances out.

He calls them "Eight & Eights" as a tribute to all the ass kicking he did this year. :strong:

Enjoy Bronco Fans!!

bronco militia
02-04-2010, 08:55 AM
come on dude, josh is doing a fantastic job. He completly turned our 8-8 team into a different fatter older slower less talented 8-8 team. All those worries were for nothing.

lol

broncos-rock
02-04-2010, 09:00 AM
Not to hijack this thread but can't we turn this into a boob mojo thread about keeping bm, doom, & Kuper????

strafen
02-04-2010, 09:01 AM
I think everyone here -including myself- wanted McDaniels to succedd the minute he was appointed as our new head coach.
I was clearly with him all the way.
The trading of Cutler I can tell you was a bit disturbing, whether it was his or Cutler's fault, I was able to recover and move on from that still believing that McDaniels had something special for us.

Then it came all the off-season moves and the handling of our offense that made me jump off his bandwagon real quick.
I give McDaniels credit for the way he focused on preparing our team and covering all the little details on the 3 phases of the game.
I think he did a commendable job there.
His age an immaturity were really a problem. While there's nothing wrong with being that young to be a head coach, that proved to be his achilles heel.

A lot were said about Hillis. That Hillis wasn't practicing hard, that Hillis worked his way out of playing time, and the more we saw McDaniels handling players like Scheffler, Marshall and the whole offense, the more those theories about Hillis became weak and unfounded.

Then there were rumors about locker room mistrust in McDaniels. Rumors that true or false still raised a flag and doubts why those rumors started in the first place.

We've had some staff personnel looking for a way out. I believe those coaches initiated their way out of the Broncos behing the scenes.
The way that worked out whether it was perceived as a way for then to seek greener pasture, or to be a philosophical differences between them and McDaniels also raised a flag and placed a huge question mark on McDaniels reputation in dealing with people and maintaining a happy football club.
Too many things that point out to McDaniels' inability to sussessfully deal with adversity. His ego stood up as one of the most glaring reasons of the mutiny taking place

We can all say that's water under the bridge. He's now ready to go into his second season as a head coach with a clean slate.
For most part he will have his parts in place that would give him a chance to prove he can handle this job
Nothing but a substantial improvement is expected this year.
As I said, he's got his people in place, his offense system has one year in the works, along with ample time to have evaluated the needs of this team that should be properly addressed in the draft and during FA.

Until I see how that pans out, I will remain sckeptical...

oubronco
02-04-2010, 09:12 AM
What message board have you been reading? Shanahan gets roasted around here by some of the McD lovers. And your negative posts about Cutler are so annoying. He's gone. Get over it.
You and Broncofan7 should have your own section on this board where you two could just fight it out. It would save the rest of us from reading a lot of BS around here.

you should put Popps on that list as well

oubronco
02-04-2010, 09:13 AM
Come on dude, Josh is doing a fantastic job. He completly turned our 8-8 team into a different fatter older slower less talented 8-8 team. All those worries were for nothing.

Hilarious!

OABB
02-04-2010, 09:16 AM
This thread is actually a great idea.

the wpr forum works perfectly to keep insanity off the mane page.

I think we need a forum just for fighting it out. it would actually be kind of fun to peek in there once and a while and ramp people up. like beating rattlesnakes....

and than, when they are bloodied and tired and want to have a more enriching experience talking about football in an objective and intelligent manner, they can come here.

baja
02-04-2010, 09:28 AM
Your right it is the same guys on BOTH sides of the argument that have dragged this place down.

This post is no good without names. Name those names.

Taco John
02-04-2010, 09:35 AM
This thread is actually a great idea.

the wpr forum works perfectly to keep insanity off the mane page.

I think we need a forum just for fighting it out. it would actually be kind of fun to peek in there once and a while and ramp people up. like beating rattlesnakes....

and than, when they are bloodied and tired and want to have a more enriching experience talking about football in an objective and intelligent manner, they can come here.

Actually, that's the way the draft forum is working right now. That's where rational, cool-headed discussion is happening. Then I come over here for some entertainment and watch people argue about the same stuff over and over again without anything new to say. Not that I blame them. I expect that sort of thing after an 8-8 season. I think people expect too much by way of fresh ideas and analysis during a mediocre season where it's just as easy to point out the bad as it is the good. Especially considering it's only February 4th. There's nothing new under the sun here.

tsiguy96
02-04-2010, 10:46 AM
What message board have you been reading? Shanahan gets roasted around here by some of the McD lovers. And your negative posts about Cutler are so annoying. He's gone. Get over it.

You and Broncofan7 should have your own section on this board where you two could just fight it out. It would save the rest of us from reading a lot of BS around here.

im over cutler and very, very glad hes gone. it doesnt change the fact that most haters here are NOT over cutler and he is the reason they are still mad at mcdaniels, because cutler is not a bronco anymore.

broncosteven
02-04-2010, 10:55 AM
This post is no good without names. Name those names.

How about a poll?

LOL

Get it?

Poll!

LOL

Jason in LA
02-04-2010, 11:04 AM
im over cutler and very, very glad hes gone. it doesnt change the fact that most haters here are NOT over cutler and he is the reason they are still mad at mcdaniels, because cutler is not a bronco anymore.

We all know that you are glad that he's gone, but you certainly are not over him. If you were over him you wouldn't have anything to say about the guy. But obviously you have a lot to say about the guy and it's pretty annoying at this point.

Taco John
02-04-2010, 11:05 AM
im over cutler and very, very glad hes gone. it doesnt change the fact that most haters here are NOT over cutler and he is the reason they are still mad at mcdaniels, because cutler is not a bronco anymore.

You think that it's solely that, and not the accumulation of things, including a 2-8 fade that included losses at home to the pathetic Raiders and the pathetic Chiefs?

Dagmar
02-04-2010, 11:10 AM
You think that it's solely that, and not the accumulation of things, including a 2-8 fade that included losses at home to the pathetic Raiders and the pathetic Chiefs?

I thought you weren't a hater?

strafen
02-04-2010, 11:10 AM
im over cutler and very, very glad hes gone. it doesnt change the fact that most haters here are NOT over cutler and he is the reason they are still mad at mcdaniels, because cutler is not a bronco anymore.

That's pretty weak.
Try again...

tsiguy96
02-04-2010, 11:14 AM
You think that it's solely that, and not the accumulation of things, including a 2-8 fade that included losses at home to the pathetic Raiders and the pathetic Chiefs?

these are the same haters that hated before the 6-0 run, silenced when we were 6-0, then came back celebrating as soon as the team started losing because, gosh darnit, they knew that dumb mcdaniels would screw things up!

Broncomutt
02-04-2010, 11:43 AM
these are the same haters that hated before the 6-0 run, silenced when we were 6-0, then came back celebrating as soon as the team started losing because, gosh darnit, they knew that dumb mcdaniels would screw things up!

And they were right. Perhaps for the wrong reasons, but they were right.

2-8. I can see why people feel vindicated. Notice I didn't say they were happy we were losing, I said they felt vindicated.

And FWIW, those 2 wins also came after a Players Only meeting. Ironic that the team briefly got back on track once McDaniels was removed from the equation.

Taco John
02-04-2010, 11:45 AM
I thought you weren't a hater?


I wouldn't call myself a hater. But I think that it's legitimate to have questions about Josh. This idea that you either love or hate Josh is moronic. I think the guy has great potential in this league. I'm not convinced that he'll necessarily realize it in Denver.

Taco John
02-04-2010, 11:56 AM
I can relate a little to Josh from my own perspective. I want to be a publisher with the organization that I work for. But I'm young for the position. There is a lot I still have to learn. There's still experience that I need to gain. If I were promoted to the position tomorrow, I personally think that I could handle it, but I would probably make some mistakes along the way. It would probably be nothing that would destroy the organization, but it would be probably be stuff that would give people reason to question whether or not I should have been promoted to the position so young. My colleagues would still look at me very favorably - I've earned it within our organization. I've got a very good history here, and a bright future. But that bright future doesn't make me above criticism. People wouldn't hesitate to talk about where they think I effed up.

I wouldn't call myself a Josh hater. But I'm not afraid to talk about where I think the guy has effed up. It's all basically the stuff I was concerned about before we hired him and related to inexperience. It's my hunch that he is going to work out for us like Belichick worked out for Cleveland. I hope my hunch is wrong. But I refuse to accept that I'm a "hater" for having that hunch, especially as the concerns that I've had since day one have proven to be valid.

I'm most definitely rooting for the guy. But I'm not necessarily a "Josh McDaniels" fan yet. I'm a Broncos fan, and am interested in seeing the Broncos win. It remains to be seen if Josh McDaniels is the best thing towards that interest.

watermock
02-04-2010, 11:57 AM
Well, I'm not changing my avatar anytime soon.

Other than maybe "kick me" instead of "hug me".

montrose
02-04-2010, 12:07 PM
It's my hunch that he is going to work out for us like Belichick worked out for Cleveland. I hope my hunch is wrong.

I've been thinking that a lot myself recently. I've already come to the conclusion Josh isn't going to work out here - and it isn't because of the 2-8 finish. It's because of the 6-0 start, and the negativity in this town that surrounded that man in spite of the winning. The things I heard were along the lines of "We're winning in spite of him," or "I wish we were losing so we can get rid of him."

Recently The Fan had a segment of your sports nightmare and a die-hard called in and said his nightmare was the Broncos winning the Super Bowl next year because it would mean Josh sticking around. These sentiments were echoed by several callers and texters. When you have your fanbase wanting the team to lose because they hate the Head Coach so much, that's a problem.

Whether he was right or wrong, Josh sealed his fate in Denver when he traded Jay Cutler. The fanbase was already lukewarm because of his ties to New England and his age. When he traded THEIR Quarterback who played THEIR sytle of football - it was over. While I disagree with this, I've realized most Broncos fans have a style of football they want to see played. While I believe a style of football being played by a specific franchise is dead (see the Chicago Bears hiring Mike Martz to coach Cutler. The Chicago Bears!), most Broncos fans want to see what they believe is "Bronco Football". Without question having lived here and gone to every game the last two seasons, I believe most fans enjoyed the losses in 2008 more than the wins in 2009. They could deal with losing to Miami or Oakland as Cutler was winging TDs and INTs, they could not deal with a conservative game managing approach - no matter how effective or ineffective it is.

So eventually Josh will be out, I don't believe Bowlen's pockets can absorb losing any more fans. And I think you'll see a guy brought in with Denver-ties, a coach who will be open with the media who will coach "Broncos Football". Maybe Kyle Shanahan or Rick Dennison - somebody Bowlen can tout as a "Broncos Coach" instead of an "NFL Coach". I personally disagree with it but consumers set the marketplace, if Broncos fans hate their coach so much they don't want him to win - you've got to make a change.

24champ
02-04-2010, 12:41 PM
So eventually Josh will be out, I don't believe Bowlen's pockets can absorb losing any more fans. And I think you'll see a guy brought in with Denver-ties, a coach who will be open with the media who will coach "Broncos Football". Maybe Kyle Shanahan or Rick Dennison - somebody Bowlen can tout as a "Broncos Coach" instead of an "NFL Coach". I personally disagree with it but consumers set the marketplace, if Broncos fans hate their coach so much they don't want him to win - you've got to make a change.

McDaniels isn't going anywhere for a while and I think you're greatly exaggerating the feelings of the fan base overall.

I went to every game for the last 4 seasons, and generally speaking this year was more fun to attend. Cowboys game was crazy, Patriots game was one of the best games I ever attended. Sure the 2-8 slide sucked, but honestly most people didn't think this team was made for the playoffs anyway, including myself.

First of all, I don't think Bowlen wants to pay for 3 head coaches. Bowlen is sticking by McDaniels for awhile and he has a long leash, he'll get what he wants/needs this offseason. This team is in transition, and the Shanny era is over, those players are going to be gone. Bowlen is going to stick by his man McDaniels, simply because he really believes in McDaniels is going to bring the winning tradition back to Denver. Also Bowlen's legacy rides on McDaniels tenure.

Of course there's skeptics out there, but there always will be until we start going to the playoffs. Also Bowlen is making money, so financially he is doing ok.

montrose
02-04-2010, 12:52 PM
McDaniels isn't going anywhere for a while and I think you're greatly exaggerating the feelings of the fan base overall.

I went to every game for the last 4 seasons, and generally speaking this year was more fun to attend. Cowboys game was crazy, Patriots game was one of the best games I ever attended. Sure the 2-8 slide sucked, but honestly most people didn't think this team was made for the playoffs anyway, including myself.

First of all, I don't think Bowlen wants to pay for 3 head coaches. Bowlen is sticking by McDaniels for awhile and he has a long leash, he'll get what he wants/needs this offseason. This team is in transition, and the Shanny era is over, those players are going to be gone. Bowlen is going to stick by his man McDaniels, simply because he really believes in McDaniels is going to bring the winning tradition back to Denver. Also Bowlen's legacy rides on McDaniels tenure.

Of course there's skeptics out there, but there always will be until we start going to the playoffs. Also Bowlen is making money, so financially he is doing ok.

I had a great time at the NE game, but the more you talk to fans - and I get that chance at the Colorado Blvd. store I work at - you realize how hated that guy is. I do think Bowlen will stick with him for the duration of his contract, but I don't think he's here long term. Assuming Marshall is traded, there's another "Broncos Football" kind of player who the fans will see that Josh got rid of. Obviously most fans want to win, but I don't think they want to do it with Josh. I do, but I don't think they do.

scttgrd
02-04-2010, 12:59 PM
If they let Mashall leave or trade him things will only get worse for him here. It won't be enough to just win anymore, the team will have to contend and win a superbowl. And even then a lot of fans would still celebrate his leaving.

oubronco
02-04-2010, 01:01 PM
If they let Mashall leave or trade him things will only get worse for him here. It won't be enough to just win anymore, the team will have to contend and win a superbowl. And even then a lot of fans would still celebrate his leaving.

as unfortunately sad as that seems I could see it happening

watermock
02-04-2010, 01:10 PM
It's alot more that trading Cutler, we got great value. I don't think we drafed well at all with what we go tho.

It's alot of things, like not having a real GM, the poor draft, coaches bailing, the scheme change on offense.

I can only imagine this team with Nolan and the 09 defense, Orakpo, Cushing and Greene and now 2 picks in the top 14.

There's alot to critique.

WolfpackGuy
02-04-2010, 01:11 PM
"We're winning in spite of him"


Overlooked in a big way.

The 6-0 start had little to do with "The Coach's" "record setting" offense.

DBroncos4life
02-04-2010, 06:22 PM
2-8 during the last ten games is a big deal. The Titans went 8-2 during that same time frame to finish with the same record as we do. Which coaching staff do you feel did a better job during the season of giving there players something to build on during the next season?

tsiguy96
02-04-2010, 06:27 PM
2-8 during the last ten games is a big deal. The Titans went 8-2 during that same time frame to finish with the same record as we do. Which coaching staff do you feel did a better job during the season of giving there players something to build on during the next season?

the titans started out 0-6, we started 6-0. at the end of the day, its the same. we are pissed we couldnt finish to get in, the titans are pissed they couldnt win a damn game to save their lives including losing to the pats like 59-0. id say its equal.

watermock
02-04-2010, 06:32 PM
Bulllshiat.

The Titans changed QB's, we got Simms.

watermock
02-04-2010, 06:35 PM
the titans started out 0-6, we started 6-0. at the end of the day, its the same. we are pissed we couldnt finish to get in, the titans are pissed they couldnt win a damn game to save their lives including losing to the pats like 59-0. id say its equal.

I don't think they lost that bad. Your a liar.

DBroncos4life
02-04-2010, 06:38 PM
the titans started out 0-6, we started 6-0. at the end of the day, its the same. we are pissed we couldnt finish to get in, the titans are pissed they couldnt win a damn game to save their lives including losing to the pats like 59-0. id say its equal.

No it's not. Titans coaches kept there jobs because they were able to prevent that team from just quitting. They fought and have something to build on. They overcame adversity. Look at the pressure Jeff Fischer was under? They had the best record in the NFL the year before and they started off 0-6 the media was even talking about him losing his job and by week 12 they had a outside chance of making the playoffs. You think just because we both finished 8-8 we were equal, but it's far from it. Only a handful of teams have ever started out 6-0 and finished 8-8. That is failure. I doubt many teams have overcame 0-6 to finish 8-8. What do you think that would be called?

DBroncos4life
02-04-2010, 06:41 PM
I don't think they lost that bad. Your a liar.

They did mock it was 59-0. They got crushed and fell to 0-6. After that game though they won 5 straight games. That is some damn good coaching there to keep a team together that was beat up with injuries and just lost by 59 points.

The MVPlaya
02-04-2010, 06:44 PM
Recently The Fan had a segment of your sports nightmare and a die-hard called in and said his nightmare was the Broncos winning the Super Bowl next year because it would mean Josh sticking around. These sentiments were echoed by several callers and texters. When you have your fanbase wanting the team to lose because they hate the Head Coach so much, that's a problem.

LOL

And people get mad when I call out the Broncos fans... when I called out the fans on here, people were acting as if I was making duck tales.

Think about this for a second and how dumb some of the fans in Denver are.

How could you even sensibly say this...

It is a NIGHTMARE for the BRONCOS to win the SUPERBOWL.

How can those 3 words be in the same sentence for a Broncos fan (without another team/person involved)?

Seriously... there are a bunch of Broncos fans that are straight LOSERS with loser mentality.

I'm still baffled by that quote up there... a nightmare if the Broncos win the Super Bowl..

Damn and you guys think you have the right to talk sh1t about Raiders, Chargers, and Chiefs fans? Hilarious!

theAPAOps5
02-04-2010, 06:44 PM
I am not going to bitch about McDaniels. I no longer can stand up for him but I am not ready to bury him. Not I am focusing my ire on the real cause. I can't believe people are ignoring the role Kenny Chavez played in this season. I mean come on he is the assistant equipment manger. Hello people!

watermock
02-04-2010, 08:20 PM
They did mock it was 59-0. They got crushed and fell to 0-6. After that game though they won 5 straight games. That is some damn good coaching there to keep a team together that was beat up with injuries and just lost by 59 points.


http://www.titansonline.com/schedule/game/2009/regular6/

Oh yeah, that the week after we beat N.E.


How amusing.

tsiguy96
02-04-2010, 08:29 PM
No it's not. Titans coaches kept there jobs because they were able to prevent that team from just quitting. They fought and have something to build on. They overcame adversity. Look at the pressure Jeff Fischer was under? They had the best record in the NFL the year before and they started off 0-6 the media was even talking about him losing his job and by week 12 they had a outside chance of making the playoffs. You think just because we both finished 8-8 we were equal, but it's far from it. Only a handful of teams have ever started out 6-0 and finished 8-8. That is failure. I doubt many teams have overcame 0-6 to finish 8-8. What do you think that would be called?

its the exact same thing, teams that overachieved in different times of the year. after 8 months of everyone telling the broncos how bad they would be, they came out swinging and went 6-0, and for whatever reason they stopped winning. titans came back after an offseason of being sucked off at every opportunity and went 0-6. both teams switched fortunes at the half, and obviously everyone would rather finish strong then start strong only, but mcdaniels still deserves credit for his 6-0 start especially after the media and "fans" put him through the fire about how bad he hurt this franchise blah blah blah

DBroncos4life
02-04-2010, 08:54 PM
its the exact same thing, teams that overachieved in different times of the year. after 8 months of everyone telling the broncos how bad they would be, they came out swinging and went 6-0, and for whatever reason they stopped winning. titans came back after an offseason of being sucked off at every opportunity and went 0-6. both teams switched fortunes at the half, and obviously everyone would rather finish strong then start strong only, but mcdaniels still deserves credit for his 6-0 start especially after the media and "fans" put him through the fire about how bad he hurt this franchise blah blah blah

You are clueless and it is pointless even to try and discuss anything with you. Keep on holding on the the amazing 6-0 start. Hell three teams started out 6-0 I wonder what happened to the other two? The Titans had major injuries to the secondary and lost arguably the best DT in the offseason. They over came a 0-6 start. Do you understand just how impressive that really is? Of course you don't. During our losing streak it took a PLAYERS only meeting to get things fixed for two games. Jeff Fischer on the other hand changed QB's basically brought in the option offense on the fly and kept his players fighting when they by all rights could have just quit on him after that 59-0 beat down.

All you want to do is focus on the first 6 games of the season when we were successful instead of looking at the full season where the wheels fell off and we regressed yet again. To me it's just another year of plugging in new staff members and new players trying to find away not to fail after we reach the mid season mark.

Dagmar
02-04-2010, 08:56 PM
I don't think they lost that bad. Your a liar.

Did you apologise yet?

24champ
02-04-2010, 09:01 PM
I had a great time at the NE game, but the more you talk to fans - and I get that chance at the Colorado Blvd. store I work at - you realize how hated that guy is. I do think Bowlen will stick with him for the duration of his contract, but I don't think he's here long term. Assuming Marshall is traded, there's another "Broncos Football" kind of player who the fans will see that Josh got rid of. Obviously most fans want to win, but I don't think they want to do it with Josh. I do, but I don't think they do.

Hated is a strong word, there is skepticism about McDaniels methods...but I don't see a lot "hate" around these parts (in Denver). The "haters" voices get amplified because that's what sells papers and gets listeners. People aren't going to listen in to a radio show where fans heap a ton of praise on McDaniels. The same thing here, there are a lot of idiots running around the OM, and they have dumb takes about who is a real bronco and who is not. etc. That generates traffic and it's encouraged around here.

Dagmar
02-04-2010, 09:07 PM
Seriously though, look at Baja's poll.

http://i49.tinypic.com/xgk35u.png

That is here on the Mane, where sometimes it seems like 60% of the people want him to go. I don't think he is as hated as montrose says.

Taco John
02-04-2010, 09:40 PM
I've been thinking that a lot myself recently. I've already come to the conclusion Josh isn't going to work out here - and it isn't because of the 2-8 finish. It's because of the 6-0 start, and the negativity in this town that surrounded that man in spite of the winning. The things I heard were along the lines of "We're winning in spite of him," or "I wish we were losing so we can get rid of him."

Recently The Fan had a segment of your sports nightmare and a die-hard called in and said his nightmare was the Broncos winning the Super Bowl next year because it would mean Josh sticking around. These sentiments were echoed by several callers and texters. When you have your fanbase wanting the team to lose because they hate the Head Coach so much, that's a problem.

Whether he was right or wrong, Josh sealed his fate in Denver when he traded Jay Cutler. The fanbase was already lukewarm because of his ties to New England and his age. When he traded THEIR Quarterback who played THEIR sytle of football - it was over. While I disagree with this, I've realized most Broncos fans have a style of football they want to see played. While I believe a style of football being played by a specific franchise is dead (see the Chicago Bears hiring Mike Martz to coach Cutler. The Chicago Bears!), most Broncos fans want to see what they believe is "Bronco Football". Without question having lived here and gone to every game the last two seasons, I believe most fans enjoyed the losses in 2008 more than the wins in 2009. They could deal with losing to Miami or Oakland as Cutler was winging TDs and INTs, they could not deal with a conservative game managing approach - no matter how effective or ineffective it is.

So eventually Josh will be out, I don't believe Bowlen's pockets can absorb losing any more fans. And I think you'll see a guy brought in with Denver-ties, a coach who will be open with the media who will coach "Broncos Football". Maybe Kyle Shanahan or Rick Dennison - somebody Bowlen can tout as a "Broncos Coach" instead of an "NFL Coach". I personally disagree with it but consumers set the marketplace, if Broncos fans hate their coach so much they don't want him to win - you've got to make a change.


I think that the part that gets overlooked (including by Bowlen) is that there was an "Us vs. New England" dynamic that developed over the years as New England rose to prominence and Shanahan and Belichick battled for the winningest coaches in the NFL (if I'm not mistaken Shanahan is #2 right now to ole Bill). There is a certain feeling that we sold out to New England when Bowlen brought Josh in. I don't think any other coach would have experienced as much of a backlash because of this.

Florida_Bronco
02-04-2010, 10:01 PM
I think that the part that gets overlooked (including by Bowlen) is that there was an "Us vs. New England" dynamic that developed over the years as New England rose to prominence and Shanahan and Belichick battled for the winningest coaches in the NFL (if I'm not mistaken Shanahan is #2 right now to ole Bill). There is a certain feeling that we sold out to New England when Bowlen brought Josh in. I don't think any other coach would have experienced as much of a backlash because of this.

There is some validity in this (just ask Blue, who will never accept McDaniels, no matter what, because he came from the Patriots) however a smart fan would look at it as bringing in someone who was groomed by the greatest franchise of the decade.

watermock
02-04-2010, 10:14 PM
a smart fan would look at it as bringing in someone who was groomed by the greatest franchise of the decade.

What makes you think he was "groomed?".

scttgrd
02-04-2010, 10:14 PM
There is some validity in this (just ask Blue, who will never accept McDaniels, no matter what, because he came from the Patriots) however a smart fan would look at it as bringing in someone who was groomed by the greatest franchise of the decade.

*Camera assisted* wins.

Durango
02-04-2010, 11:08 PM
I don't think McDaniels exit is imminent. I do think he's under the gun to produce in 2010, even if it only a winning record without a play-off berth. Some notable progress and consistency may earn him a pass over any lock-out that may occur, but a digression will, in my opinion, bring a change at the end of the 2010 season.

Blueflame
02-05-2010, 01:23 AM
Would it be rude to note that maybe Tsiguy wants to b*tch about McDaniels... I mean, seeing as how he's tied for the top poster on this thread and all..... :P

Blueflame
02-05-2010, 01:47 AM
There is some validity in this (just ask Blue, who will never accept McDaniels, no matter what, because he came from the Patriots) however a smart fan would look at it as bringing in someone who was groomed by the only franchise that was sanctioned for cheating this decade.

Fixed it for you. Oh... and how many Super Bowls have the Patriots won since the league took away their tapes? (None)

Florida_Bronco
02-05-2010, 02:17 AM
Fixed it for you. Cute. I figured it wouldn't take long for you to respond in a way that would cut down the only dynasty of this decade. You can hate the Pats all you want (I'm not exactly a fan of theirs) but you can't deny their greatness.

Oh... and how many Super Bowls have the Patriots won since the league took away their tapes? (None) True, but they went there the same year as Spygate, which didn't put a damper on them stomping the collective **** out of the league until they finally lost a close game in the Super Bowl. It also didn't effect them going 11-5 the next year with a QB who hadn't started a game since high school.

All of this while Josh single-handedly ran that elite offense.

Blueflame
02-05-2010, 02:31 AM
Cute. I figured it wouldn't take long for you to respond in a way that would cut down the only dynasty of this decade. You can hate the Pats all you want (I'm not exactly a fan of theirs) but you can't deny their greatness.

True, but they went there the same year as Spygate, which didn't put a damper on them stomping the collective **** out of the league until they finally lost a close game in the Super Bowl. It also didn't effect them going 11-5 the next year with a QB who hadn't started a game since high school.

All of this while Josh single-handedly ran that elite offense.

Yes, I can deny their so-called "greatness". It's not so hard for a team to win when they're blatantly cheating. Oh...and.... even during the years when the Pats were cheating, there was one team that had a winning record vs. them. I don't apologize for being a Broncos fan.

Florida_Bronco
02-05-2010, 02:41 AM
Yes, I can deny their so-called "greatness". Then you're clearly showing that you lack any logical and reasonable thinking and instead going on your pure hatred of another franchise.

It's not so hard for a team to win when they're blatantly cheating. You mean that same "cheating" that basically every team has been doing for years as admitted by Jimmy Johnson and other coaches? Or that same cheating that, when discovered, did absolutely nothing to derail the previous success of the same franchise that was busted?

All this after our own team had been previously busted for their shady salary cap dealings during the Super Bowl years? Ultimately both instances have the commonality of having little to nothing to do with the outcomes of the games while providing cannon fodder to those who like to hate on the winners.

Oh...and.... even during the years when the Pats were cheating, there was one team that had a winning record vs. them.
Yeah, I'm well aware of the success we enjoyed against them. I'm also aware that despite our head to head success against them they were still the absolute elite franchise of the decade.

I don't apologize for being a Broncos fan. Who is asking you to?

24champ
02-05-2010, 02:41 AM
I don't apologize for being a Broncos fan.

Nor should you apologize, but I won't question the Head Coaches work ethic or think he isn't a "true" bronco or that McDaniels doesn't know what it means to be a Bronco. He is the Head Coach of the Broncos and I support him in what he does now. The Shanny era is over, I got over it not long ago. Time to look into the future and focusing on accomplishing on bringing this franchise another SB.

watermock
02-05-2010, 02:41 AM
Cute. I figured it wouldn't take long for you to respond in a way that would cut down the only dynasty of this decade. You can hate the Pats all you want (I'm not exactly a fan of theirs) but you can't deny their greatness.

True, but they went there the same year as Spygate, which didn't put a damper on them stomping the collective **** out of the league until they finally lost a close game in the Super Bowl. It also didn't effect them going 11-5 the next year with a QB who hadn't started a game since high school.

All of this while Josh single-handedly ran that elite offense.

Ha!

This is the NFL. They haven't made the playoffs for 2 years and are unlikely to do so in '10.

Blueflame
02-05-2010, 02:43 AM
Cat got your tongue (typing fingers), FB? ???

24champ
02-05-2010, 02:44 AM
Ha!

This is the NFL. They haven't made the playoffs for 2 years and are unlikely to do so in '10.

We haven't made the playoffs since 05'. What's your point Mock?

Florida_Bronco
02-05-2010, 02:45 AM
Cat got your tongue (typing fingers), FB? ???

Forget how to use the refresh future, Blue? ???

Florida_Bronco
02-05-2010, 02:46 AM
We haven't made the playoffs since 05'. What's your point Mock?

Mock is also incorrect. The Pats were in the playoffs this year.

tsiguy96
02-05-2010, 02:47 AM
You are clueless and it is pointless even to try and discuss anything with you. Keep on holding on the the amazing 6-0 start. Hell three teams started out 6-0 I wonder what happened to the other two? The Titans had major injuries to the secondary and lost arguably the best DT in the offseason. They over came a 0-6 start. Do you understand just how impressive that really is? Of course you don't. During our losing streak it took a PLAYERS only meeting to get things fixed for two games. Jeff Fischer on the other hand changed QB's basically brought in the option offense on the fly and kept his players fighting when they by all rights could have just quit on him after that 59-0 beat down.

All you want to do is focus on the first 6 games of the season when we were successful instead of looking at the full season where the wheels fell off and we regressed yet again. To me it's just another year of plugging in new staff members and new players trying to find away not to fail after we reach the mid season mark.


i believe ive talked about the final games of hte season multiple times in my posts, citing its clearly better to finish strong than start strong, did you see that? try reading comprehension, its good stuff.

the difference is, i give mcd credit for going 6-0 after the entire media thought like you and the rest of the haters did, that he destroyed the team and without cutler we are lost in the dark. we clearly arent. the season ending sucked for a lot of reasons (see, i mentioned it again, omg!) i think we are all aware of that, but the season started off ridiculously good. that shows hes atleast capable of being a great game planner and winning coach if he can stretch it to an entire season.

24champ
02-05-2010, 02:49 AM
Mock is also incorrect. The Pats were in the playoffs this year.

Yeah...Beezer must have missed that Ravens vs Patriots game.

Blueflame
02-05-2010, 02:50 AM
Then you're clearly showing that you lack any logical and reasonable thinking and instead going on your pure hatred of another franchise.
whatever.
You mean that same "cheating" that basically every team has been doing for years as admitted by Jimmy Johnson and other coaches? Or that same cheating that, when discovered, did absolutely nothing to derail the previous success of the same franchise that was busted?
how many have been sanctioned in the past decade for cheating? One... the Patriots.

All this after our own team had been previously busted for their shady salary cap dealings during the Super Bowl years? Ultimately both instances have the commonality of having little to nothing to do with the outcomes of the games while providing cannon fodder to those who like to hate on the winners.
Was it equal to Spygate? I don't think so.

Yeah, I'm well aware of the success we enjoyed against them. I'm also aware that despite our head to head success against them they were still the absolute elite franchise of the decade.
Uh...no. While you're busy kissing Patriot butt, the Steelers quietly earned their sixth Lombardi.
Who is asking you to?[/QUOTE]

Blueflame
02-05-2010, 02:52 AM
Forget how to use the refresh future, Blue? ???

No... it took a while between your replies.

Blueflame
02-05-2010, 02:53 AM
Mock is also incorrect. The Pats were in the playoffs this year.

Yep... one and done. Might not have happened if the league hadn't made Bill stop cheating.

Florida_Bronco
02-05-2010, 02:59 AM
whatever. Excellent response.

how many have been sanctioned in the past decade for cheating? One... the Patriots. Excellent qualifier. What did we miss that cut off date by? A year?

I guess the fact that our little indiscretion came during our short lived dynasty is more relevant than the fact that they occurred in different decades.

Was it equal to Spygate? I don't think so. Equal in the fact that they did not effect the outcome of the games.

Uh...no. While you're busy kissing Patriot butt, the Steelers quietly earned their sixth Lombardi. The second of the decade, obviously surpassed by the Patriots three Lombardis.

No... it took a while between your replies. My reply was posted at 5:41 AM, a full two minutes before you asked if "the cat had my tongue".

Yep... one and done. Might not have happened if the league hadn't made Bill stop cheating. And yet you have no response for the undefeated record in 2007, 11-5 with a backup quarterback in 2008 and playoffs again this year.

watermock
02-05-2010, 03:01 AM
The power of the east is in Miami and NY now.

Blueflame
02-05-2010, 03:05 AM
Excellent response.
Whatever.
Excellent qualifier. What did we miss that cut off date by? A year?
Sounds like something a Patriots fan would post in order to deflect criticism off their cheating team.

I guess the fact that our little indiscretion came during our short lived dynasty is more relevant than the fact that they occurred in different decades.
"our short-lived dynasty"? ??? Do you know how long it's been since the Broncos had a top-10 draft pick? ???

Equal in the fact that they did not effect the outcome of the games.

BS

The second of the decade, obviously surpassed by the Patriots three Lombardis.
Uh. No. No other team besides the Steelers has six.

My reply was posted at 5:41 AM, a full two minutes before you asked if "the cat had my tongue".

And a full ten minutes past when I'd responded to your previous post...

DBroncos4life
02-05-2010, 03:08 AM
i believe ive talked about the final games of hte season multiple times in my posts, citing its clearly better to finish strong than start strong, did you see that? try reading comprehension, its good stuff.

the difference is, i give mcd credit for going 6-0 after the entire media thought like you and the rest of the haters did, that he destroyed the team and without cutler we are lost in the dark. we clearly arent. the season ending sucked for a lot of reasons (see, i mentioned it again, omg!) i think we are all aware of that, but the season started off ridiculously good. that shows hes atleast capable of being a great game planner and winning coach if he can stretch it to an entire season.

In this thread? That's rich you have used the "6-0" number four times in your last four posts and made the same damn I give McD credit for going 6-0 blah blah blah talk in two of the last four. You keep going back to that claiming that it proves that he is capable of being a great game planner. As others have pointed out the first few games you can get away with things that you can't later on in the season. All he proved is that he can win till teams get enough film on him to game plan around him. McD will have a harder time getting people to buy into the 6-0 start of the season because of the 2-8 finish at the end of the season. Teams try and build on the positive things from the previous season and for us all we really have is the first six damn games.

24champ
02-05-2010, 03:12 AM
Uh. No. No other team besides the Steelers has six.



You do know what Dynasty means right?

Florida_Bronco
02-05-2010, 03:13 AM
Whatever. Sour grapes eh?

Sounds like something a Patriots fan would post in order to deflect criticism off their cheating team. That's a stretch considering that if anything, my comment would open the door to increased criticism of our team.

"our short-lived dynasty"? ??? Do you know how long it's been since the Broncos had a top-10 draft pick? ??? Do you know what a "dynasty" is? Hint: It's not one playoff win in a decade.

BS So where is your counterpoint? Let's see some proof that the taping impacted the outcome of the games.

(This should be good)

Uh. No. No other team besides the Steelers has six. What part of "decade" escapes you?

And a full ten minutes past when I'd responded to your previous post... Which has absolutely zero to do with the fact that you asked where my reply was two minutes after it had been posted.

Try again, Blue.

Blueflame
02-05-2010, 03:14 AM
You do know what Dynasty means right?

Why do you ask? Of course I do.

DBroncos4life
02-05-2010, 03:14 AM
the titans started out 0-6, we started 6-0. at the end of the day, its the same. we are pissed we couldnt finish to get in, the titans are pissed they couldnt win a damn game to save their lives including losing to the pats like 59-0. id say its equal.
its the exact same thing, teams that overachieved in different times of the year. after 8 months of everyone telling the broncos how bad they would be, they came out swinging and went 6-0, and for whatever reason they stopped winning. titans came back after an offseason of being sucked off at every opportunity and went 0-6. both teams switched fortunes at the half, and obviously everyone would rather finish strong then start strong only, but mcdaniels still deserves credit for his 6-0 start especially after the media and "fans" put him through the fire about how bad he hurt this franchise blah blah blah
i believe ive talked about the final games of hte season multiple times in my posts, citing its clearly better to finish strong than start strong, did you see that? try reading comprehension, its good stuff.

the difference is, i give mcd credit for going 6-0 after the entire media thought like you and the rest of the haters did, that he destroyed the team and without cutler we are lost in the dark. we clearly arent. the season ending sucked for a lot of reasons (see, i mentioned it again, omg!) i think we are all aware of that, but the season started off ridiculously good. that shows hes atleast capable of being a great game planner and winning coach if he can stretch it to an entire season.

Try and take it easy on the ending of the season tsi.....Ha!

Blueflame
02-05-2010, 03:25 AM
Sour grapes eh?
No. I don't like the Patriots or their cheating.

That's a stretch considering that if anything, my comment would open the door to increased criticism of our team.
So if they cheat it's ok?

Do you know what a "dynasty" is? Hint: It's not one playoff win in a decade.
I never claimed that the Broncos were a "dynasty" in the 2000 decade... but minimizing what they accomplished in the late '90s is not exactly what one would expect from a Broncos fan.... "short-lived", indeed... :clown:

So where is your counterpoint? Let's see some proof that the taping impacted the outcome of the games.

(This should be good)
Where are the Pats' SB wins since the league took their tapes away? I'm waiting....

What part of "decade" escapes you?
Pats will be a long time in earning six... now that the league has stopped their cheating.

Which has absolutely zero to do with the fact that you asked where my reply was two minutes after it had been posted.

Try again, Blue.

So? I hadn't seen your reply. And could easily have deleted my own post but didn't. :pfbbt:

24champ
02-05-2010, 03:25 AM
Why do you ask? Of course I do.

Because first of all, 6 Steeler Lombardis is irrelevant to the current conversation. Seems that you are grasping straws here. Dynasties are measured by titles won in a decade, and the Patriots won the most in the last decade. Whether you like it or not.

Blueflame
02-05-2010, 03:31 AM
Because first of all, 6 Steeler Lombardis is irrelevant to the current conversation. Seems that you are grasping straws here. Dynasties are measured by titles won in a decade, and the Patriots won the most in the last decade. Whether you like it or not.

They've won only one more than the Steelers have in the past decade.... and the two recent Steelers wins have both happened since the league stopped the Patriot cheating.

Blueflame
02-05-2010, 03:35 AM
Oh, my bad. The first recent Steelers SB win (Feb. 5, 2005) did happen while the Pats were still cheating...

Florida_Bronco
02-05-2010, 03:36 AM
No. I don't like the Patriots or their cheating. That's fine. That's entirely subjective. What isn't subjective is that the Patriots were the absolute pinnacle of the NFL over the decade.

So if they cheat it's ok? Was it ok when we did it? No, but ultimately it had no effect on the game so the discussion is limited to the haters who use it to seek some validation for their baseless claims.

I never claimed that the Broncos were a "dynasty" in the 2000 decade... Then why did you reply using the Broncos drafting status as a defense? Not only is drafting status the most absurd way of identifying a dynasty but the Broncos are not even in the discussion as they did not win a title during that decade.

but minimizing what they accomplished in the late '90s is not exactly what one would expect from a Broncos fan.... "short-lived", indeed... :clown: It's simple facts. A three year run with two Super Bowl titles is short lived, despite the immense success of those three years.

Where are the Pats' SB wins since the league took their tapes away? I'm waiting.... That's a pretty piss poor counterpoint considering that it's only been 3 years since Spygate and in those 3 years they went undefeated up to the Super Bowl, missed the playoffs with an 11-5 record (a freak of circumstance) and were back in the playoffs this year despite losing their world class offensive coordinator.

As I said, Spygate has done nothing to derail the success that the Patriots have enjoyed.

Pats will be a long time in earning six... now that the league has stopped their cheating. Again, what part of "decade" escapes you...or are you just being intentionally obtuse to avoid any acknowledgment of their dynasty status?

Me thinks it's the later.

So? I hadn't seen your reply. So when I asked if you had forgot how to use the refresh future, the answer should have been a resounding "yes".

24champ
02-05-2010, 03:38 AM
They've won only one more than the Steelers have in the past decade.... and the two recent Steelers wins have both happened since the league stopped the Patriot cheating.

Steelers only won one since spygate came out.

24champ
02-05-2010, 03:41 AM
Oh, my bad. The first recent Steelers SB win (Feb. 5, 2005) did happen while the Pats were still cheating...

Correction, February 2006.

Blueflame
02-05-2010, 03:46 AM
That's fine. That's entirely subjective. What isn't subjective is that the Patriots were the absolute pinnacle of the NFL over the decade.
No, it's not "subjective"... the Pats cheated, end of story.

Was it ok when we did it? No, but ultimately it had no effect on the game so the discussion is limited to the haters who use it to seek some validation for their baseless claims.
No, it isn't ok for any team to cheat.

Then why did you reply using the Broncos drafting status as a defense? Not only is drafting status the most absurd way of identifying a dynasty but the Broncos are not even in the discussion as they did not win a title during that decade.
A successful football team seldom drafts in the top ten...

It's simple facts. A three year run with two Super Bowl titles is short lived, despite the immense success of those three years.
So? The Steelers have two titles in 4 years... and their history includes four within a five-year span.

That's a pretty piss poor counterpoint considering that it's only been 3 years since Spygate and in those 3 years they went undefeated up to the Super Bowl, missed the playoffs with an 11-5 record (a freak of circumstance) and were back in the playoffs this year despite losing their world class offensive coordinator.

As I said, Spygate has done nothing to derail the success that the Patriots have enjoyed.
Sure... zero Lombardis = "nothing to derail their success"... LOL

Again, what part of "decade" escapes you...or are you just being intentionally obtuse to avoid any acknowledgment of their dynasty status?

Me thinks it's the later.

So when I asked if you had forgot how to use the refresh future, the answer should have been a resounding "yes".
Keep worshipping at the Belicheat altar... while all of his neophytes fail... like he himself did in Cleveland... in their first HC jobs.

Blueflame
02-05-2010, 03:47 AM
Correction, February 2006.

Yep... my bad. It was Feb. 06

24champ
02-05-2010, 03:53 AM
and their history includes four within a five-year span.


Objection your honor, this is irrelevant to the conversation.


http://wearemoviegeeks.com/wp-content/my-cousin-vinny.jpg

Blueflame
02-05-2010, 03:56 AM
Objection your honor, this is irrelevant to the conversation.


http://wearemoviegeeks.com/wp-content/my-cousin-vinny.jpg

LOL Love that movie. :thumbsup:

Florida_Bronco
02-05-2010, 04:04 AM
No, it's not "subjective"... the Pats cheated, end of story.

No, it isn't ok for any team to cheat. And yet you use the "cheating" against the Patriots while dismissing it when it comes to the Broncos.

Not much for consistency are you, Blue?

A successful football team seldom drafts in the top ten...
The difference between "successful" and "dynasty" is very large.

So? The Steelers have two titles in 4 years... and their history includes four within a five-year span. Three > Two. Steelers dynasty of the 70's has zero to do with the 2000's Patriots.

Sure... zero Lombardis = "nothing to derail their success"... LOL So just what is your definition of success? When it comes to the Broncos it's apparently not picking in the top 10, but when we're talking about the Patriots anything less than a Super Bowl victory is unsuccessful.

Please clarify.

Keep worshipping at the Belicheat altar... while all of his neophytes fail... like he himself did in Cleveland... in their first HC jobs. The only two of his previous understudies who went on to the NFL were defensive coaches, were Belichick runs the show in New England. Despite being little more than glorified wingmen, both Crennel and Mangini had relative success with their new teams, and this despite the fact that Belichick made it known he did not feel Mangini was ready to be a head coach.

McDaniels, on the other hand, had more control over his area than any other assistants (including Weis) and used coordinated the greatest offense in NFL history will receiving Belichick's full endorsement and support for a head coaching gig, something that none of the other assistants EVER received.

With that said, this discussion is basically over unless you can start bringing some legitimate facts and counterpoints to the table rather than your typical hyperbole, conjecture and emotional lunacy.

I won't be holding my breath though.

Blueflame
02-05-2010, 04:17 AM
And yet you use the "cheating" against the Patriots while dismissing it when it comes to the Broncos.

Not much for consistency are you, Blue?
Uh... I'm the one here who's saying cheating isn't right regardless. Your stance is... because our team was accused of cheating... it's OK for any other team to cheat. Which one of us is inconsistent? ???

The difference between "successful" and "dynasty" is very large.
Sorry... I don't consider the cheating Patriots to be a "dynasty"... your mileage may vary.

Three > Two. Steelers dynasty of the 70's has zero to do with the 2000's Patriots.
And the Steelers could easily win another... or maybe two or three more... in the immediate future (since the league put an end to the Patriot cheating)....

So just what is your definition of success? When it comes to the Broncos it's apparently not picking in the top 10, but when we're talking about the Patriots anything less than a Super Bowl victory is unsuccessful.

Please clarify.

Excuse me for being a tad biased in favor of the Broncos (it's seeming clear that you'd rather minimize their achievements in order to elevate the "success" of the cheating Patriots) To me, "success" is winning more football games than you lose.

The only two of his previous understudies who went on to the NFL were defensive coaches, were Belichick runs the show in New England. Despite being little more than glorified wingmen, both Crennel and Mangini had relative success with their new teams, and this despite the fact that Belichick made it known he did not feel Mangini was ready to be a head coach.

McDaniels, on the other hand, had more control over his area than any other assistants (including Weis) and used coordinated the greatest offense in NFL history will receiving Belichick's full endorsement and support for a head coaching gig, something that none of the other assistants EVER received.

With that said, this discussion is basically over unless you can start bringing some legitimate facts and counterpoints to the table rather than your typical hyperbole, conjecture and emotional lunacy.

I won't be holding my breath though.

Right. Weis, Crennel, Mangini, and Belicheat himself enjoyed unrivaled success in their first HC jobs. :clown: Too funny.

Florida_Bronco
02-05-2010, 04:58 AM
Uh... I'm the one here who's saying cheating isn't right regardless. Your stance is... because our team was accused of cheating... it's OK for any other team to cheat. Which one of us is inconsistent? ??? I agree that cheating isn't right regardless, however neither the Broncos nor the Patriots actions effected the outcome of the games, so using those instances to disregard their success is wrong.

Using one instance to disregard a team's success while not applying the same standard to another team is, to put it bluntly, flat out dumb.

Sorry... I don't consider the cheating Patriots to be a "dynasty"... your mileage may vary. You could also consider the sky purple. Doesn't make you correct.

And the Steelers could easily win another... or maybe two or three more... in the immediate future (since the league put an end to the Patriot cheating).... Sure, they could win more, but the decade is over now.

Excuse me for being a tad biased in favor of the Broncos (it's seeming clear that you'd rather minimize their achievements in order to elevate the "success" of the cheating Patriots) See, your biases shouldn't play into factual analysis of the game. I'm a Broncos fan through and through, but there is no debating the fact that the Patriots were a superior team over the decade.

Does it make me happy? No. Is it fact? Absolutely.

To me, "success" is winning more football games than you lose. Then the Patriots have been overwhelmingly successful since Spygate. Glad we can put an end to that debate.

Right. Weis, Crennel, Mangini, and Belicheat himself enjoyed unrivaled success in their first HC jobs. :clown: Too funny. First off, I said "relative success" but no surprise that you side stepped that little part as you are so apt to do.

Weis went to a college program that hasn't place much emphasis on athletic performance while concurrently have some of the toughest admission standards in the country. Simply put, Notre Dame can't attract the elite talent other schools can.

Crennel went to a perennial bottom feeder and produced a winning record by year 3. He might have produced another in 2008 had it not been for injury issues and some critical players (read: Braylon Edwards) forgetting how to play football.

Mangini took over a team left in basic ruin by Herm Edwards and still went to the playoffs his first year with 2 winning records in 3 years. He arguably gets another playoff berth in had Brett Favre not pulled his usual antics.

Belichick also took over a team that had gone 3-13 the year before and lead him to a playoff win in 1994 (their last one) before the entire team quit when Modell announced he was moving them to Baltimore and Belichick resigned shortly there after.

Those pitfalls that the other proteges experienced (poor ownership, talent depleted teams) are not something McDaniels has to deal with and he also earned the support and personal tutoring that they did not. In short, you can't point to their failures and make any logical connection to Josh's situation.

Blueflame
02-05-2010, 05:22 AM
I agree that cheating isn't right regardless, however neither the Broncos nor the Patriots actions effected the outcome of the games, so using those instances to disregard their success is wrong.
If you don't see the Patriot cheating as "affecting the outcome" of at least "some" games... then I can't help you.

Using one instance to disregard a team's success while not applying the same standard to another team is, to put it bluntly, flat out dumb.
Thanks for the personal insult.

You could also consider the sky purple. Doesn't make you correct.
Doesn't make me wrong either...I've seen a purple sky before.

Sure, they could win more, but the decade is over now.
T'is debatable... some claim that the decade ends on Dec. 31, 2010....

See, your biases shouldn't play into factual analysis of the game. I'm a Broncos fan through and through, but there is no debating the fact that the Patriots were a superior team over the decade.

Does it make me happy? No. Is it fact? Absolutely.
Um...fact is that head-to-head, the Broncos have owned the Patriots.... over the decade.

Then the Patriots have been overwhelmingly successful since Spygate. Glad we can put an end to that debate.
Lombardis since Spygate? ??? Thought not.

First off, I said "relative success" but no surprise that you side stepped that little part as you are so apt to do.

Weis went to a college program that hasn't place much emphasis on athletic performance while concurrently have some of the toughest admission standards in the country. Simply put, Notre Dame can't attract the elite talent other schools can.

Crennel went to a perennial bottom feeder and produced a winning record by year 3. He might have produced another in 2008 had it not been for injury issues and some critical players (read: Braylon Edwards) forgetting how to play football.

Mangini took over a team left in basic ruin by Herm Edwards and still went to the playoffs his first year with 2 winning records in 3 years. He arguably gets another playoff berth in had Brett Favre not pulled his usual antics.

Belichick also took over a team that had gone 3-13 the year before and lead him to a playoff win in 1994 (their last one) before the entire team quit when Modell announced he was moving them to Baltimore and Belichick resigned shortly there after.

Those pitfalls that the other proteges experienced (poor ownership, talent depleted teams) are not something McDaniels has to deal with and he also earned the support and personal tutoring that they did not. In short, you can't point to their failures and make any logical connection to Josh's situation.
I don't care what they all "went on" to do in college ranks or otherwise... Belicheat and all of his minions sucked azz in their first NFL HC gigs. NO excuses.

Florida_Bronco
02-05-2010, 05:57 AM
I'm going to make one last attempt of this before I leave. Let's try doing this debate right.

If you don't see the Patriot cheating as "affecting the outcome" of at least "some" games... then I can't help you. My counterpoint: No factual evidence exists to suggest game outcomes affected. Patriots success so far has been unaffected by spygate.

What's your counterpoint? I want legitimate facts too.

Thanks for the personal insult. Sorry Blue, I've tried playing nice during this whole debate but there simply isn't much sugar coating I can do for that stance.

Doesn't make me wrong either...I've seen a purple sky before. Semantics.

T'is debatable... some claim that the decade ends on Dec. 31, 2010.... Actually it's not. The next Super Bowl will be after that date and the Steelers aren't playing in this year's. No matter how you define the decade, the Patriots have the most titles.

Um...fact is that head-to-head, the Broncos have owned the Patriots.... over the decade. Agreed, but success in the NFL isn't measure in head to head records. It's measured in playoffs and Super Bowl titles.

Using the head to head record is very Chief or Raider fan-esque.

Lombardis since Spygate? ??? Thought not. You defined success as "winning more than you lose." By your own definition, the Pats have been overwhelmingly successful.

End debate of that subject.

Belicheat and all of his minions sucked azz in their first NFL HC gigs. NO excuses. I feel like I'm debating with a teenager here.

Weis - Two BCS berths his first two years, only one losing record.
Mangini - A playoff berth and two winning seasons out of three.

Did they "suck ass"? Absolutely not. Not by any definition.

Could you make the argument that Crennel sucked ass? Maybe, if you only looked at the win loss record and completely ignored the utter ****hole he stepped into. Same goes for Belichick in Cleveland, even though he is responsible for their most recent playoff win.

And ultimately their successes and failures have very little, if anything to do with Josh McDaniels. I've provided pretty factual counterpoints to your assertion that Josh will fail because they did. Do you have any factual counterpoints to the contrary?

Flex Gunmetal
02-05-2010, 08:40 AM
Blueflame=Facepalm

montrose
02-05-2010, 09:46 AM
Can we stop bringing up the Pats cheating please? If only because it naturally leads to how we cheated to win our two championships :)

broncocalijohn
02-05-2010, 10:19 AM
I'm just tired of the "Who is a real Bronco fan" and the "McDaniels doesn't know what it means to be a Bronco" crap. It's BS and unfortunately this type of crap is encouraged around here.
Encouraged? Of course. The one who states it is the owner of the site. You arent going to get that erased here.

Blueflame
02-05-2010, 12:57 PM
I'm going to make one last attempt of this before I leave. Let's try doing this debate right.

My counterpoint: No factual evidence exists to suggest game outcomes affected. Patriots success so far has been unaffected by spygate.

What's your counterpoint? I want legitimate facts too.

Sorry Blue, I've tried playing nice during this whole debate but there simply isn't much sugar coating I can do for that stance.

Semantics.

Actually it's not. The next Super Bowl will be after that date and the Steelers aren't playing in this year's. No matter how you define the decade, the Patriots have the most titles.

Agreed, but success in the NFL isn't measure in head to head records. It's measured in playoffs and Super Bowl titles.

Using the head to head record is very Chief or Raider fan-esque.

You defined success as "winning more than you lose." By your own definition, the Pats have been overwhelmingly successful.

End debate of that subject.

I feel like I'm debating with a teenager here.

Weis - Two BCS berths his first two years, only one losing record.
Mangini - A playoff berth and two winning seasons out of three.

Did they "suck ass"? Absolutely not. Not by any definition.

Could you make the argument that Crennel sucked ass? Maybe, if you only looked at the win loss record and completely ignored the utter ****hole he stepped into. Same goes for Belichick in Cleveland, even though he is responsible for their most recent playoff win.

And ultimately their successes and failures have very little, if anything to do with Josh McDaniels. I've provided pretty factual counterpoints to your assertion that Josh will fail because they did. Do you have any factual counterpoints to the contrary?

I believe it's a fact that the Patriots haven't won a Super Bowl since the league made them quit cheating.

Another fact... Belicheat himself and every single assistant of his... had short tenures before being fired from their first HC jobs. Success rarely = "being fired"....

You're right... this debate is an exercise in futility. You're not gonna change my mind and I'm not even trying to change yours. You're free to worship the Patriots; I never will.

strafen
02-05-2010, 01:04 PM
I believe it's a fact that the Patriots haven't won a Super Bowl since the league made them quit cheating.

Another fact... Belicheat himself and every single assistant of his... had short tenures before being fired from their first HC jobs. Success rarely = "being fired"....

You're right... this debate is an exercise in futility. You're not gonna change my mind and I'm not even trying to change yours. You're free to worship the Patriots; I never will.It's amazing how the love for McDaniels has driven people to worship anything that has to do with McDaniels.

Blueflame
02-05-2010, 01:12 PM
It's amazing how the love for McDaniels has driven people to worship anything that has to do with McDaniels.

I don't quite understand the new "rule" that in order to be "a good Broncos fan", one has to admire the Patriots. I don't think it was engraved in granite that everyone had to suddenly become a 49'ers fan when Shanahan became our HC....

If being a diehard Patriots fan is a prerequisite to being a Broncos fan... count me out. I will never like the Patriots. In fact, I'm not sure I don't hate them more than the Raiders. Pretty much a tossup...

bronco militia
02-05-2010, 01:15 PM
I don't quite understand the new "rule" that in order to be "a good Broncos fan", one has to admire the Patriots. I don't think it was engraved in granite that everyone had to suddenly become a 49'ers fan when Shanahan became our HC....

If being a diehard Patriots fan is a prerequisite to being a Broncos fan... count me out. I will never like the Patriots. In fact, I'm not sure I don't hate them more than the Raiders. Pretty much a tossup...

after the last 12 months I hate them even more.

WolfpackGuy
02-05-2010, 01:17 PM
3 Super Bowls by 3 points each.

Noone can tell me their little videotaping scheme didn't make a difference in one if not all those games.

24champ
02-05-2010, 01:50 PM
I don't quite understand the new "rule" that in order to be "a good Broncos fan", one has to admire the Patriots.

Who said that?

Blueflame
02-05-2010, 01:55 PM
Who said that?

Everyone who takes issue with the well-known fact that I hate the Patriots. I've been called some pretty vile names for expressing dislike for that AFC East team.... :)

24champ
02-05-2010, 03:04 PM
Everyone who takes issue with the well-known fact that I hate the Patriots.

Who is everyone? Popps? FB? I don't see anyone forcing you to like the Patriots.

Blueflame
02-05-2010, 03:11 PM
Who is everyone? Popps? FB? I don't see anyone forcing you to like the Patriots.

I just know that I've taken a lot of flak from various members of the OM community for openly disliking the Pats... it's gotten quite heated and devolved into personal insults at times. The defense of the Pats (and denial that they cheated or that the cheating even might have played any role whatsoever in their SB wins) here has rivaled anything one would expect to see on Patriots Planet.

DenverBrit
02-05-2010, 03:33 PM
Everyone who takes issue with the well-known fact that I hate the Patriots. I've been called some pretty vile names for expressing dislike for that AFC East team.... :)

Isn't it traditional to hate teams that you have a rivalry with??

Denver owns the Pats, even McPoopyPants knows how to get it done. :P

Blueflame
02-05-2010, 04:16 PM
Isn't it traditional to hate teams that you have a rivalry with??

Denver owns the Pats, even McPoopyPants knows how to get it done. :P

One would certainly not expect "hatred of the Patriots" to be such a controversial viewpoint on a Broncos message board... but since McDaniels arrived in Denver it has been taken as almost a personal affront to some Broncos fans if you do hate the Pats.

broncos-rock
02-05-2010, 04:35 PM
Are we sure we cant make this a thread with boob mojo in it? I loved those threads during the regular season!:~ohyah!:

DenverBrit
02-05-2010, 06:25 PM
One would certainly not expect "hatred of the Patriots" to be such a controversial viewpoint on a Broncos message board... but since McDaniels arrived in Denver it has been taken as almost a personal affront to some Broncos fans if you do hate the Pats.

I've noticed that. ;D

oubronco
02-05-2010, 07:13 PM
after the last 12 months I hate them even more.

Amen Brotha

oubronco
02-05-2010, 07:17 PM
One would certainly not expect "hatred of the Patriots" to be such a controversial viewpoint on a Broncos message board... but since McDaniels arrived in Denver it has been taken as almost a personal affront to some Broncos fans if you do hate the Pats.

I hate the Pats too and I don't think Mcd is no fuggin genius either all this talk of him orchastrating the best offense of all time shyt is BS Bellichick had the offense and scheme already in place for little McDyck

DBroncos4life
02-05-2010, 07:44 PM
I hate the Pats too and I don't think Mcd is no fuggin genius either all this talk of him orchastrating the best offense of all time shyt is BS Bellichick had the offense and scheme already in place for little McDyck

That is what I don't get either. BB is a huge control freak, yet Broncos fans want to give credit to McD for the O in New England. At the same time when it comes to the D turn around they down play Nolan's role in it because McD is a control freak. I didn't see anything McD did this year that would lead me to believe that he is this amazing offensive guru. That doesn't mean that I don't think his system can be productive I just don't think it will create nightmares for other teams like the Pats O did.

WolfpackGuy
02-05-2010, 07:48 PM
I hate the Pats too and I don't think Mcd is no fuggin genius either all this talk of him orchastrating the best offense of all time shyt is BS Bellichick had the offense and scheme already in place for little McDyck

They also left the starters in and ran up the scores on more than one occasion.

Passing out of the shotgun in the 4th quarter of a blowout? Come on!

It makes you wonder how many points the 1998 Broncos could've put up.

Florida_Bronco
02-06-2010, 01:53 AM
I just know that I've taken a lot of flak from various members of the OM community for openly disliking the Pats... it's gotten quite heated and devolved into personal insults at times. The defense of the Pats (and denial that they cheated or that the cheating even might have played any role whatsoever in their SB wins) here has rivaled anything one would expect to see on Patriots Planet.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I've never given you flak because you don't like the Patriots. That's an entirely subjective thing and personally I couldn't care less.

What you are getting flak for is the absolutely irrational takes that you post here thanks to your Patriot hate. It's pretty obvious (you've basically admitted as such) that you will never accept Josh and some of the players brought her because of their Patriot connection despite the fact that their methods have been overwhelmingly successful.

That, and the fact that you seem to have different standards of ethics and success depending on which team we're talking about.

Bottom line is that you (and multiple others) need to start being a little more objective and quit letting your hate of all things New England cloud your opinion of our new team. Otherwise it's really going to suck to be you when McDaniels has us in competition for the Super Bowl year in and year out.

Blueflame
02-06-2010, 03:35 AM
I can't speak for anyone else, but I've never given you flak because you don't like the Patriots. That's an entirely subjective thing and personally I couldn't care less.

What you are getting flak for is the absolutely irrational takes that you post here thanks to your Patriot hate. It's pretty obvious (you've basically admitted as such) that you will never accept Josh and some of the players brought her because of their Patriot connection despite the fact that their methods have been overwhelmingly successful.

That, and the fact that you seem to have different standards of ethics and success depending on which team we're talking about.

Bottom line is that you (and multiple others) need to start being a little more objective and quit letting your hate of all things New England cloud your opinion of our new team. Otherwise it's really going to suck to be you when McDaniels has us in competition for the Super Bowl year in and year out.

I'll accept McDaniels when his team wins. Perhaps you can provide a valid explanation for why veteran Bronco Mike Leach was let go... so that the Broncos could pay more for Lonie Paxton... and maybe you could explain why LaMont Jordan... inactive week after week... still gets a paycheck from the Broncos (total waste of money and a roster slot)

Yeah, right. I already had numerous attempts to force-feed the "crow" when the team went 6-0.... nevermind the 2-8 that ensued. Until McDaniels proves he's not "in over his head"... I'm gonna continue to presume that he just might be.

Florida_Bronco
02-06-2010, 04:18 AM
I'll accept McDaniels when his team wins. Begrudgingly, I'm sure.

Perhaps you can provide a valid explanation for why veteran Bronco Mike Leach was let go... so that the Broncos could pay more for Lonie Paxton... This has been discussed repeatedly. Paxton is a guy who has long been regarded as one of, if not the best, long snappers in the game. He is also a guy who had spent years in the Patriots atmosphere and for a very reasonable price McDaniels was able to bring that here.

Did we downgrade the position? No. We upgraded to an even more elite LS. At the very worst, it was a lateral move.

and maybe you could explain why LaMont Jordan... inactive week after week... still gets a paycheck from the Broncos (total waste of money and a roster slot) Same situation as Lonie Paxton minus the elite factor, but then again Jordan is a 3rd string running back so he's obviously not going to be elite. Every single team in the NFL has 3rd string running backs and very rarely do they play. He was also active for a majority of the games (9 of them) and was injured for a few of his inactive games.

What I find absolutely laughable is that you wouldn't have the slightest complaints about these guys if they weren't former Patriots.

Until McDaniels proves he's not "in over his head"... I'm gonna continue to presume that he just might be. And you don't think he's done that yet, at least partially, when he had this team playing greater than the sum of it's parts for the first 6 weeks of the season and the defense made enormous strides?

Blueflame
02-06-2010, 06:22 AM
Begrudgingly, I'm sure.
Your point is? ???

This has been discussed repeatedly. Paxton is a guy who has long been regarded as one of, if not the best, long snappers in the game. He is also a guy who had spent years in the Patriots atmosphere and for a very reasonable price McDaniels was able to bring that here.

Did we downgrade the position? No. We upgraded to an even more elite LS. At the very worst, it was a lateral move.
It's not a "lateral move" if you're paying more $$ and the performance isn't clearly better.
[
Same situation as Lonie Paxton minus the elite factor, but then again Jordan is a 3rd string running back so he's obviously not going to be elite. Every single team in the NFL has 3rd string running backs and very rarely do they play. He was also active for a majority of the games (9 of them) and was injured for a few of his inactive games.
Jordan is slow and lazy. No other team wanted him.

What I find absolutely laughable is that you wouldn't have the slightest complaints about these guys if they weren't former Patriots.
Yeah, we should all just love former Raiders. :clown:

And you don't think he's done that yet, at least partially, when he had this team playing greater than the sum of it's parts for the first 6 weeks of the season and the defense made enormous strides?

No, he hasn't. "The sum of its parts" is .... special teams is still "special ed".... the defense was better, but without Nolan, who knows? The offense... one could ask... what offense? Boring one-dimensional dink-and-dunk may work for a while, but then other teams just load the LOS to stop the run. And your "offense" goes 3-and-out.

Florida_Bronco
02-06-2010, 02:54 PM
It's not a "lateral move" if you're paying more $$ and the performance isn't clearly better. What do you care? It's not your money and the price increase wasn't large enough to even remotely effect the salary cap especially considering we have a rather large amount of cap room to spend.

Simply put, there was absolutely no detriment to the move as far as the Broncos concerned. This is just another case of you and your sour grapes because we replaced a player with a former Patriot.

Jordan is slow He's a power back. Always has been.

and lazy. Bull****. Post some facts to support this. I bet anything you don't have jack ****.

No other team wanted him. Again, let's see some facts. Jordan signed on 3/4/09 which was barely a week into the free agency signing period. For reference, Renaldo Hill and Andre Goodman, who were both starters and excellent signings, were signed on 3/2/09 and 3/3/09.

Yeah, we should all just love former Raiders. :clown: You sure didn't have much trouble accepting Shanahan did you?

No, he hasn't. "The sum of its parts" is .... special teams is still "special ed".... Our special teams coverage was some of the best in the game last year and Prater made big improvements over 2008. Our return game still needs improvement, but that will be addressed in the offseason I'm sure.

the defense was better, but without Nolan, who knows? Again, this has been discussed repeatedly, but our scheme is not changing. McDaniels dictated the defensive scheme and was very hands on with the defense. Nolan just handled the game planning and play calling on gameday which all went through McDaniels anyways.

I know this might be hard for you to wrap your head around since Shanahan never did this, but smart teams have safety nets in place for when talented coordinators inevitably leave to pursue head coaching jobs. McDaniels had that in place with Martindale, Donatell (a former Bronco, like Nolan) and possibly even Nunnely.

Blueflame
02-06-2010, 09:06 PM
What do you care? It's not your money and the price increase wasn't large enough to even remotely effect the salary cap especially considering we have a rather large amount of cap room to spend.

Simply put, there was absolutely no detriment to the move as far as the Broncos concerned. This is just another case of you and your sour grapes because we replaced a player with a former Patriot.

I have a right to form and express an opinion that replacing a serviceable player with a more-expensive one for no other reason than: because "Player B" used to play for the Patriots (or any other "fill-in-the-blank" team) might not yield best value per dollar spent.
He's a power back. Always has been.

Bull****. Post some facts to support this. I bet anything you don't have jack ****.

Google search keywords: "LaMont Jordan + lazy" yields 7,280 results.
http://www.google.com/search?q=LaMont+Jordan+%2B+lazy&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

Dude, his own teammates called him lazy.

Again, let's see some facts. Jordan signed on 3/4/09 which was barely a week into the free agency signing period. For reference, Renaldo Hill and Andre Goodman, who were both starters and excellent signings, were signed on 3/2/09 and 3/3/09.
So? Your point is that other teams had a full week to sign him and didn't?

You sure didn't have much trouble accepting Shanahan did you?
At first, I was relatively ambivalent about Shanahan... until he proved himself to be a capable HC. The fact that Elway was glad to have him as HC helped.

Our special teams coverage was some of the best in the game last year and Prater made big improvements over 2008. Our return game still needs improvement, but that will be addressed in the offseason I'm sure.
Sure... Berger was a really smart move. If you like hearing the words "short punt"....

Again, this has been discussed repeatedly, but our scheme is not changing. McDaniels dictated the defensive scheme and was very hands on with the defense. Nolan just handled the game planning and play calling on gameday which all went through McDaniels anyways.

I know this might be hard for you to wrap your head around since Shanahan never did this, but smart teams have safety nets in place for when talented coordinators inevitably leave to pursue head coaching jobs. McDaniels had that in place with Martindale, Donatell (a former Bronco, like Nolan) and possibly even Nunnely.

Guess we'll have to wait and see how the defense plays without Nolan.

Florida_Bronco
02-06-2010, 09:59 PM
I have a right to form and express an opinion that replacing a serviceable player with a more-expensive one for no other reason than: because "Player B" used to play for the Patriots (or any other "fill-in-the-blank" team) might not yield best value per dollar spent. You can form whatever opinions you like. As we've seen here lately, yours are usually wrong.

Google search keywords: "LaMont Jordan + lazy" yields 7,280 results.
http://www.google.com/search?q=LaMont+Jordan+%2B+lazy&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a Excellent work. You must not have read through many of the links because several of them on the first page weren't even related to LaMont (a facebook link for someone named Lamonte Jordan?) and many others were simply blogs or forums where posters called Jordan lazy.

Have any other massive blunders you'd like to share with us?

Dude, his own teammates called him lazy. The only record of that I could find was a statement made by Warren Sapp (long known to have a big mouth) referencing the 2007 season when Jordan was leading the NFL in rushing early in the year. It must have escaped Sapp that lazy players don't A) lead the NFL in rushing almost a quarter of the way through the season and B) Jordan injured his back and lost significant playing time.

Then he joins a team long known to never tolerate lazy players and stuck around a whole season as a backup when he then proceeded to follow his offensive coordinator to Denver.

If he was lazy, do you think the Pats sign him, much less keep him for the whole year? Do you think Josh McDaniels would sign a lazy player when he knew full well that the locker room here needed a massive overhaul?

So? Your point is that other teams had a full week to sign him and didn't? My point is that you don't know jack ****. You claim no one else wanted Jordan when he was signed less than a week after free agency opened within 48 hours of guys like Goodman and Hill being signed.

If he had lasted weeks or months on the market than you would have a valid point. He didn't, and you don't.

The fact that Elway was glad to have him as HC helped. And players like Bailey, Dawkins, Williams, Graham and others all signing his praises doesn't inspire similar confidence in you?

Sure... Berger was a really smart move. If you like hearing the words "short punt".... He was a substantial improvement over Kern, which is no small feat considering we didn't make the change until week 7.

Guess we'll have to wait and see how the defense plays without Nolan. I doubt we see little, if any dropoff.

Blueflame
02-06-2010, 10:47 PM
You can form whatever opinions you like. As we've seen here lately, yours are usually wrong.
"Different from yours" does not automatically = "wrong".

Excellent work. You must not have read through many of the links because several of them on the first page weren't even related to LaMont (a facebook link for someone named Lamonte Jordan?) and many others were simply blogs or forums where posters called Jordan lazy.

Have any other massive blunders you'd like to share with us?

The only record of that I could find was a statement made by Warren Sapp (long known to have a big mouth) referencing the 2007 season when Jordan was leading the NFL in rushing early in the year. It must have escaped Sapp that lazy players don't A) lead the NFL in rushing almost a quarter of the way through the season and B) Jordan injured his back and lost significant playing time.

Then he joins a team long known to never tolerate lazy players and stuck around a whole season as a backup when he then proceeded to follow his offensive coordinator to Denver.

If he was lazy, do you think the Pats sign him, much less keep him for the whole year? Do you think Josh McDaniels would sign a lazy player when he knew full well that the locker room here needed a massive overhaul?
And my point is that his work ethic has been called into question by his own teammates. That's all you asked for evidence of... and I provided it. As for the Patriots, they only gave him a one-year contract and if he were all that good/valuable, then wouldn't they have kept him?

My point is that you don't know jack ****. You claim no one else wanted Jordan when he was signed less than a week after free agency opened within 48 hours of guys like Goodman and Hill being signed.

If he had lasted weeks or months on the market than you would have a valid point. He didn't, and you don't.

Sure.. I seem to recall all the teams in the league ringing his agent's phone off the hook trying to sign him. Oops. Nevermind. Too funny...

And players like Bailey, Dawkins, Williams, Graham and others all signing his praises doesn't inspire similar confidence in you?
No. What do you expect them to say? If they weren't glowing with praise of him in the press, they'd be gone.

He was a substantial improvement over Kern, which is no small feat considering we didn't make the change until week 7.
That's definitely a matter of opinion.
I doubt we see little, if any dropoff.

Maybe. At any rate I'm weary of discussing this with you. As noted earlier, I'm not even trying to change your mind and you're damn sure not making any points that are worthy of changing mine. Hence this whole exchange is nothing more than a waste of both of our time. You keep worshipping the Patriots and I'm quite content to view things differently than from your perspective.

strafen
02-06-2010, 11:20 PM
He was a substantial improvement over Kern, which is no small feat considering we didn't make the change until week 7.

I doubt we see little, if any dropoff.You're the biggest d-bag ever.
What a delusional fan you are.
How can somebody take your crap seriously.
You're a freakin' joke.
How can you in the right mind say Berger was a substantial improvement over Kern, moron?!
Unbelievable!

And we have a rookie DC and you think we won't drop at all in defense?
Even with Nolan everybody expected us to be middle of the pack defense. To get to be 7th in the NFL in total defense from 26th in 2008 was a huge leap.

Get off under McDaniels' sack. You've started to stink.
Really. I feel offended by your stupid statements and blind love for McDaniels is flat out disturbing!

TomServo
02-07-2010, 12:49 AM
not many coaches could take an offense on the edge of greatness -just a few more Red Zone Points and sit his big TD maker Fullback(Hillis) and keep running his Failure RB (knowsho)time and time again into the middle... yay McD! we couldnt score in the red before and we could even score Less. yay

Florida_Bronco
02-07-2010, 05:08 PM
You're the biggest d-bag ever.
What a delusional fan you are.
How can somebody take your crap seriously.
You're a freakin' joke.
How can you in the right mind say Berger was a substantial improvement over Kern, moron?!
Unbelievable!

Oh yeah? Brett Kern had a net average of 33.5. Mitch Berger's was 37.9.

Care to try again?