PDA

View Full Version : There are few people who did more with less last season than Mike Nolan


Bronco Rob
02-22-2010, 05:17 AM
There are few people who did more with less last season than Mike Nolan


Feb. 19, 2010
By Clark Judge
CBSSports.com Senior Writer


Mike Nolan, defensive coordinator, Miami


There are few people who did more with less last season than Mike Nolan. The Broncos not only ranked seventh in overall defense; they were third against the pass and tied for 12th in points allowed, and that's downright remarkable considering what Nolan had -- Elvis Dumervil, Brian Dawkins, D.J. Williams, Champ Bailey and not much more.

The Broncos didn't jump to a 6-0 start because of Kyle Orton or Brandon Marshall; they won because of Nolan's defenses, with the Broncos allowing an average of 9.3 points per game. Then the roof collapsed, with eight of their remaining 10 opponents scoring 20 or more each and the Broncos losing to all eight.

People in Denver tell me Nolan tired of coach Josh McDaniels and needed a change. Well, he has it, and say goodbye to Philip Rivers as your arch enemy and hello to Tom Brady. For the Dolphins to return to the top of the division they must get through Brady and New England, and lots of luck. When Brady has been healthy, he and the Patriots have won the division all but one season.

Nolan's Denver defense was aggressive, with Dumervil leading all pass rushers in sacks. That was good, but this is not: Joey Porter, the team's leading pass rusher the past two seasons is gone, and Jason Taylor is at or near the end of a storied career. Furthermore, the Dolphins were dead-flat ordinary last season, and that's kind. They ranked 22nd in overall defense, 25th in points allowed and surrendered a franchise-record 140 points in the fourth quarter.

But that is why Nolan is the right man for this job. He just went through a reconstruction project with a porous Denver defense that ranked 29th in 2008, and he made it work. Furthermore, he made it work by going to a 3-4, a defense that coach Tony Sparano favors. Make it work here, and you might make Brady and the Patriots sweat for a change.




http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/12950449/five-assistant-coaches-who-will-impact-their-new-teams

Drek
02-22-2010, 05:29 AM
I'm as happy with what Nolan did here last year as anyone, but why do so many act like he did it all on his own?

McDaniels brought in a very good caste of assistants for him, got the players for him, and was active in deciding the game plan. I don't think Nolan was out there coaching the LBs and DBs himself.

He'll be missed, but ultimately McDaniels made the changes that improved the D, including hiring Nolan. He saw something there last season, who's to say he doesn't with the current configuration heading into 2010?

jhns
02-22-2010, 07:02 AM
I'm as happy with what Nolan did here last year as anyone, but why do so many act like he did it all on his own?

McDaniels brought in a very good caste of assistants for him, got the players for him, and was active in deciding the game plan. I don't think Nolan was out there coaching the LBs and DBs himself.

He'll be missed, but ultimately McDaniels made the changes that improved the D, including hiring Nolan. He saw something there last season, who's to say he doesn't with the current configuration heading into 2010?

Why do you act like play calling means nothing? It was Nolans scheme and Nolans play calling. This defense is not going to be the same without him. It could have been great, fast, if we would have given him more talent.

McDaniels did good bringing Nolan in. Then he had the same problem we have seen many times now. People don't want to work with McDaniels. Oh well, at least he has his yes man in place now. We all saw how well that worked for greats like Shanahan.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
02-22-2010, 07:25 AM
Why do you act like play calling means nothing? It was Nolans scheme and Nolans play calling. This defense is not going to be the same without him. It could have been great, fast, if we would have given him more talent.

McDaniels did good bringing Nolan in. Then he had the same problem we have seen many times now. People don't want to work with McDaniels. Oh well, at least he has his yes man in place now. We all saw how well that worked for greats like Shanahan.

Here we go. It's fiction story hour with jhns, everybody!

OH NOOOOOOEZ! Nolan, who has left other jobs before, has left his job with Denver. WE could have been great, but now we can't be because nobody wants to work with Josh McDaniels! /pout

Did I cover everything for you?

jhns
02-22-2010, 07:28 AM
Here we go. It's fiction story hour with jhns, everybody!

OH NOOOOOOEZ! Nolan, who has left other jobs before, has left his job with Denver. WE could have been great, but now we can't be because nobody wants to work with Josh McDaniels! /pout

Did I cover everything for you?

Don't know, couldn't hear over your crying. Settle down and try again.

Inkana7
02-22-2010, 07:31 AM
Why do you act like play calling means nothing? It was Nolans scheme and Nolans play calling. This defense is not going to be the same without him. It could have been great, fast, if we would have given him more talent.

McDaniels did good bringing Nolan in. Then he had the same problem we have seen many times now. People don't want to work with McDaniels. Oh well, at least he has his yes man in place now. We all saw how well that worked for greats like Shanahan.

Because, all of this is true, and stuff.

Inkana7
02-22-2010, 07:32 AM
Don't know, couldn't hear over your crying. Settle down and try again.

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~wagnerr/DeflectionCard.jpg

jhns
02-22-2010, 07:35 AM
Because, all of this is true, and stuff.

Right, after one year he leaves and he wants to work with McDaniels? That sounds well thought out.

Broncomutt
02-22-2010, 07:37 AM
It certainly appeared that Nolan had the defense playing hard nose football to start the season. Would have been nice to see what he could do with a couple seasons. But it appears that things get done Josh's Way or else you aren't a team player.

I wonder why Nolan never commented on Josh's antics over the season? My guess is maturity, poise and tact. Boy, sure am glad we don't have to witness that kind of behavior from the coaching staff this year. :moody:

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 07:44 AM
and that's downright remarkable considering what Nolan had -- Elvis Dumervil, Brian Dawkins, D.J. Williams, Champ Bailey and not much more.


Please. I can name a dozen defenses last year that would've loved to have that "lack of talent" to work with.

My Redskins friend called it from day one and even stuck to his guns when the Broncos were 6-0 and the defense looked all-world. He told me even then that by the end of the season, I'd come to not like him very much because opponents have a way of figuring him out and he can't seem to adjust for whatever reason. He falls back into his "read and react" comfort zone and it becomes maddening.

jhns
02-22-2010, 07:48 AM
Please. I can name a dozen defenses last year that would've loved to have that "lack of talent" to work with.


Yes but can you name one with less talent that did better? If so, care to try?

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 07:59 AM
Yes but can you name one with less talent that did better? If so, care to try?

Bengals
Panthers
Cowboys
Pats
Texans
49ers

All finished similarly in team defense stats (scoring and/or yardage given up).

jhns
02-22-2010, 08:03 AM
Bengals
Panthers
Cowboys
Pats
Texans
49ers

All finished similarly in team defense stats (scoring and/or yardage given up).

LOL

You try to hard to throw everyone and everything under the bus just to defend McDaniels. You are completely rediculous.

SportinOne
02-22-2010, 08:04 AM
Bengals
Panthers
Cowboys
Pats
Texans
49ers

All finished similarly in team defense stats (scoring and/or yardage given up).

Cowboys, Pats, Texans, and 49ers all have better players on defense.

WTF is your point?

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 08:04 AM
LOL

You try to hard to throw everyone and everything under the bus just to defend McDaniels. You are completely rediculous.

Solid rebuttal as always.

You issued a challenge and I responded completely on point. Sadly, as usual, you're not up to the challenge of furthering the debate with any real takes.

jhns
02-22-2010, 08:05 AM
That is "ridiculous". Edit isn't working.

jhns
02-22-2010, 08:07 AM
Solid rebuttal as always.

You issued a challenge and I responded completely on point. Sadly, as usual, you're not up to the challenge of furthering the debate with any real takes.

Maybe because we don't have half the defensive talent as any team you just named. We don't have a tenth of the defensive talent as teams like Dallas. That post was far to ridiculous to give a real response to. That post showed there is 0 chance you are going to be reasonable. I just gave up before getting into it.

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 08:08 AM
Cowboys, Pats, Texans, and 49ers all have better players on defense.

WTF is your point?

You really can't follow the train of thought?

Of course they have SOME better players on defense. I'm not saying all 11 starters on our unit are better than theirs. What I'm saying is that it is at least debatable whether or not the individual talent on our starting unit is better. In other words, would a DC have taken more of our starters or more of the "other team" starters if they were building up a completely new unit.

SportinOne
02-22-2010, 08:11 AM
You really can't follow the train of thought?

Of course they have SOME better players on defense. I'm not saying all 11 starters on our unit are better than theirs. What I'm saying is that it is at least debatable whether or not the individual talent on our starting unit is better. In other words, would a DC have taken more of our starters or more of the "other team" starters if they were building up a completely new unit.

Nope. You missed it. It's really not that complex. As a whole, I would take more of their teams players, especially in your scenario since Champ and Dawkins are so old... thanks for helping my case.

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 08:11 AM
Maybe because we don't have half the defensive talent as any team you just named. We don't have a tenth of the defensive talent as teams like Dallas. That post was far to ridiculous to give a real response to. That post showed there is 0 chance you are going to be reasonable. I just gave up before getting into it.

I'd like to see some real analysis here.

Line up the Pats starters against the Broncos starters from this past year. The Broncos EASILY take all 4 DB and safety spots and, depending on how you line up the LB spots, at least 2 of those. The Pats get the edge in all 3 DL spots and maybe 1 LB spot. That's 6 spots to 5 in favor of the Broncos.

I could do this for all the teams listed above IMO.

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 08:13 AM
Nope. You missed it. It's really not that complex. As a whole, I would take more of their teams players, especially in your scenario since Champ and Dawkins are so old... thanks for helping my case.

I don't care that Champ and Dawkins are old. In 2009, they outplayed their opposite numbers on any of those teams listed above. The premise of the article above is the talent Nolan had access to LAST YEAR.....it says nothing of future potential.

colonelbeef
02-22-2010, 08:17 AM
Don't know, couldn't hear over your crying. Settle down and try again.

Seriously, ThatOneDenverMooseGuy goes around writing post after post in all caps and using lots of punctuation accusing other people of 'crying' and 'freaking out' while barely able to hold back his trembling fingers or tear-splashed keyboard

Fanboy is good at embarrassing himself tho

WolfpackGuy
02-22-2010, 08:17 AM
Reserve players playing starter roles and minutes on the defensive line = disaster.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
02-22-2010, 08:19 AM
Seriously, ThatOneDenverMooseGuy goes around writing post after post in all caps and using lots of punctuation accusing other people of 'crying' and 'freaking out' while barely able to hold back his trembling fingers or tear-splashed keyboard

Fanboy is good at embarrassing himself tho

/yawn.

Hey little fella. Am I really that far into your head? It'll be okay. Cry yourself to sleep again tonight, little one.

Just once, I'd like to see you back up something you claim. Just once. Come on PrivateBeef. Show me where I do what you're claiming in "post after post in all caps." Let's see it.

SportinOne
02-22-2010, 08:31 AM
I don't care that Champ and Dawkins are old. In 2009, they outplayed their opposite numbers on any of those teams listed above. The premise of the article above is the talent Nolan had access to LAST YEAR.....it says nothing of future potential.

I understand that, and if you can't read it's not my problem. You said:

would a DC have taken more of our starters or more of the "other team" starters if they were building up a completely new unit.

And then I said:


It's really not that complex. As a whole, I would take more of their teams players, especially in your scenario since Champ and Dawkins are so old... thanks for helping my case.

So let's recap. I would have taken their players over ours to start last season. Period. And, as indicated by the 'especially', i certainly would have taken them if I were starting a new DC unit, which is the facet of the argument that YOU brought to the table.

colonelbeef
02-22-2010, 08:34 AM
/yawn.

Hey little fella. Am I really that far into your head? It'll be okay. Cry yourself to sleep again tonight, little one.

Just once, I'd like to see you back up something you claim. Just once. Come on PrivateBeef. Show me where I do what you're claiming in "post after post in all caps." Let's see it.

You are easily the most worthless poster on here. Let me sum up every post you've ever had on here.

1.Next year, I think the Broncos will go 10-6 or 11-5 and go deep into the playoffs. We will see much improvement on both sides of the ball. McDaniels and his staff are professionals who therefore know more than you or I ever will and we shouldn't even be discussing anything regarding the Broncos, ever

2.We need to let everything play out and can only discuss things that have happened in the past as McDaniels and his staff are professionals who therefore know more than you or I ever will and we shouldn't even be discussing anything regarding the Broncos, ever

3.Everything the Broncos have done since McDaniels got here has worked out perfectly, you can't judge anything that has gone on, and have I mentioned that McDaniels and his staff are professionals who therefore know more than you or I ever will and we shouldn't even be discussing anything regarding the Broncos, ever

4. Hey anyone criticizing the Broncos, Bowlen, or McDaniels- Stop CRYING. The offseason ISNT FINISHED yet. We NEED to let MCDANIELS trade away ALL OF THE STARS ON OFFENSE because he doesn't personally GET ALONG with them before we realize how his EGO is getting in the way of operating the FOOTBALL team.


According to morons like you, the Detroit Lions of the past 10 years never could have occurred- after all, Matt Millen is a superbowl winning player with more experience, expertise, and understanding of the NFL game than you, I, and everyone on this board combined. He therefore should have been able to run that team at least better than a retarded chimpanzee.

Guess what, dbag? The pros make mistakes all the time, even the very people running your beloved Denver Broncos. simply putting a bag over your head and pretending that it isn't so will never change that. Your ignorance is amusing, but seriously, get off of you high horse and stop telling people what to post, it's embarrassing to watch a grown man act like such a child.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
02-22-2010, 08:35 AM
You are easily the most worthless poster on here. Let me sum up every post you've ever had on here.

1.Next year, I think the Broncos will go 10-6 or 11-5 and go deep into the playoffs. We will see much improvement on both sides of the ball. McDaniels and his staff are professionals who therefore know more than you or I ever will and we shouldn't even be discussing anything regarding the Broncos, ever

2.We need to let everything play out and can only discuss things that have happened in the past as McDaniels and his staff are professionals who therefore know more than you or I ever will and we shouldn't even be discussing anything regarding the Broncos, ever

3.Everything the Broncos have done since McDaniels got here has worked out perfectly, you can't judge anything that has gone on, and have I mentioned that McDaniels and his staff are professionals who therefore know more than you or I ever will and we shouldn't even be discussing anything regarding the Broncos, ever

4. Hey anyone criticizing the Broncos, Bowlen, or McDaniels- Stop CRYING. The offseason ISNT FINISHED yet. We NEED to let MCDANIELS trade away ALL OF THE STARS ON OFFENSE because he doesn't personally GET ALONG with them before we realize how his EGO is getting in the way of operating the FOOTBALL team.


According to morons like you, the Detroit Lions of the past 10 years never could have occurred- after all, Matt Millen is a superbowl winning player with more experience, expertise, and understanding of the NFL game than you, I, and everyone on this board combined. He therefore should have been able to run that team at least better than a retarded chimpanzee.

Guess what, dbag? The pros make mistakes all the time, even the very people running your beloved Denver Broncos. simply putting a bag over your head and pretending that it isn't so will never change that. Your ignorance is amusing, but seriously, get off of you high horse and stop telling people what to post, it's embarrassing to watch a grown man act like such a child.

Still waiting for a bit of proof. Even a shred of proof, evidence. Something. Something more than you trying to one-up me claiming things I've never said.

I'll just have to keep waiting.

colonelbeef
02-22-2010, 08:37 AM
Still waiting for a bit of proof. Even a shred of proof, evidence. Something. Something more than you trying to one-up me claiming things I've never said.

I'll just have to keep waiting.

Check the other thread, genius. 3 words in ALL CAPS.

Stop being childish.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
02-22-2010, 08:38 AM
Check the other thread, genius. 3 words in ALL CAPS.

Stop being childish.

So three paragraphs of your post in this thread are represented by three capitalized words in another thread? Wow.

You have derailed, Private.

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 08:44 AM
I understand that, and if you can't read it's not my problem. You said:

And then I said:

So let's recap. I would have taken their players over ours to start last season. Period. And, as indicated by the 'especially', i certainly would have taken them if I were starting a new DC unit, which is the facet of the argument that YOU brought to the table.

It may have been a poor choice of words on my part. I was trying to get across the point of putting together a unit from scratch to play one season.....2009. Nothing more, nothing less. Why? Because that is the one season Nolan is being graded on here in the article. The idea that Nolan made lemonade out of lemons has caught on like wildfire.....and to SOME extent it is true and I'll agree with it. However, my sole point is that several other DCs in this league also did comparable jobs in 2009 with even LESS talent. Nolan was not unique as the article would like to have us believe. That is all.

Rabb
02-22-2010, 08:48 AM
jesus christ

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 08:49 AM
jesus christ

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/fwYVqMj5i6k&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/fwYVqMj5i6k&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

baja
02-22-2010, 09:20 AM
/yawn.

Hey little fella. Am I really that far into your head? It'll be okay. Cry yourself to sleep again tonight, little one.

Just once, I'd like to see you back up something you claim. Just once. Come on PrivateBeef. Show me where I do what you're claiming in "post after post in all caps." Let's see it.


Mock sucks whaaaa!!!

TheElusiveKyleOrton
02-22-2010, 09:24 AM
Mock sucks whaaaa!!!

When you actually learn to read, you'll really be somethin'.

TonyR
02-22-2010, 09:25 AM
People don't want to work with McDaniels.

"No, Josh isn't a monster," Marshall said. "Josh is actually easy to talk to, easy to work with."

Rabb
02-22-2010, 09:29 AM
"No, Josh isn't a monster," Marshall said. "Josh is actually easy to talk to, easy to work with."

how dare you use facts!!!

jhns
02-22-2010, 09:31 AM
"No, Josh isn't a monster," Marshall said. "Josh is actually easy to talk to, easy to work with."

What does this have to do with my post? What part of that post says no one wants to work with McDaniels?

gyldenlove
02-22-2010, 09:35 AM
Bengals
Panthers
Cowboys
Pats
Texans
49ers

All finished similarly in team defense stats (scoring and/or yardage given up).

Bengals: Odom, Hall, Joseph, Gaethers, Maualuga, Rivers: no talent at all.
Cowboys: Ratliff, Spears, Ware, Brooking, Spencer, Newman: no talent at all.
Texans, are you serious? did you ever hear of guys like Demeco Ryans and Mario Williams?
49ers, who build that defense including such players as Smith, Willis and Franklin? That is right, Nolan did.

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 09:38 AM
Bengals: Odom, Hall, Joseph, Gaethers, Maualuga, Rivers: no talent at all.
Cowboys: Ratliff, Spears, Ware, Brooking, Spencer, Newman: no talent at all.
Texans, are you serious? did you ever hear of guys like Demeco Ryans and Mario Williams?
49ers, who build that defense including such players as Smith, Willis and Franklin? That is right, Nolan did.

gyldenlove

Now go back and read again. Where did I say that these teams had zero talent and no players that would start over their counterparts in Denver? I'll save you the time.......nowhere. In fact, you've helped prove my point in only being able to name two and three players on certain teams.

Mediator12
02-22-2010, 09:54 AM
I could agree with this to a point, but DEN also had some of the fewest injured playmakers in the league on Defense. Then, they also were as horrid down the stretch defensively as they were all the last half of the previous four seasons. And, you can go and check this as they gave up 3/4s of their total points allowed in those final eight losses.

Nolan started Hot, then finished terrible. If anyone wants to say he was the reason they won those first 6 games OK, but what about contributing to the playcalling that lost the last eight as well. Stop being one sided, its tired and old. The guy did his best with a poor personnel package, just like a lot of DC's have to do over the course of a season, especially with Injuries. However, they were as POOR defensively in their last eight games as any Defense in the league. In fact, they might just have been the worst in the final eight losses.

The problem is, people have points to prove here. It is more about YOU being right, rather than actually BEING right. DEN was the tale of three different teams last year. The good, the bad, and the ugly. And, the defense played as much a part of that split personality as the offense.

oubronco
02-22-2010, 10:01 AM
jesus christ

No Shyt this got outta hand pretty quickly

jhns
02-22-2010, 10:07 AM
I could agree with this to a point, but DEN also had some of the fewest injured playmakers in the league on Defense. Then, they also were as horrid down the stretch defensively as they were all the last half of the previous four seasons. And, you can go and check this as they gave up 3/4s of their total points allowed in those final eight losses.

Nolan started Hot, then finished terrible. If anyone wants to say he was the reason they won those first 6 games OK, but what about contributing to the playcalling that lost the last eight as well. Stop being one sided, its tired and old. The guy did his best with a poor personnel package, just like a lot of DC's have to do over the course of a season, especially with Injuries. However, they were as POOR defensively in their last eight games as any Defense in the league. In fact, they might just have been the worst in the final eight losses.

The problem is, people have points to prove here. It is more about YOU being right, rather than actually BEING right. DEN was the tale of three different teams last year. The good, the bad, and the ugly. And, the defense played as much a part of that split personality as the offense.

Except they weren't nearly as bad as you are trying to make them out to be. They had a few really bad games. Even some of those had some great play. Take the Colts for example. We gave up 3 quick scores in horrible fashion. We then got many turnovers and didn't allow them to do anything until the last couple minutes.
As far as points, you also have to look at stuff like the two INT returns in the KC game. People that try saying how bad we were, always include these points and act as though it was the defense. Then there are games like Baltimore and Pitt. These were not the defenses fault. Any defense will fall apart when they have to be the entire team all the time. Here are the number of plays for each drive in the first half against Baltimore: 3,3,4,4,4,10. None of those went for points and all but one were around 2 minutes or less. Against the Steelers, in the second half, our drives were: 4,4,3,2,3,4. That included turnovers and 21 points scored in that time. This was not all the defenses fault. No one is claiming Nolan ran the greatest ever defense. He would have needed the greatest ever defense in order to keep making up for the crap offense we put out.

Nolan worked wonders. This defense is not very talented and has horrible depth. Any front 7 this lacking in talent will end up doing bad. It is not a good thing that we don't have Nolan and now have a rookie coordinator.

Broncomutt
02-22-2010, 10:07 AM
"No, Josh isn't a monster," Marshall said. "Josh is actually easy to talk to, easy to work with."

Now there's a credible source.

DenverBrit
02-22-2010, 10:10 AM
As much as Nolan deserves kudos for the D's performance during the 6-0 start, he also deserves credit for the total collapse during the last 10 games.

If Shanny were still HC and the D turned in a similar performance, Nolan wouldn't have left, he would have been fired right after the last game of the season. Larry Coyer got a similar result from the D......a fast start, followed by a collapse.


They finished seventh in yards allowed last season under Nolan, a vast improvement over their 29th-place finish in 2008. But things unraveled in the team's 2-8 collapse down the stretch, particularly in run defense, when five of their last nine opponents rushed for at least 173 yards and three topped the 200-yard mark.

The Broncos surrendered at least 27 points in seven of their eight losses and allowed an average of 25.8 points per game over the last 10 games.

Read more: http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_14386016#ixzz0gHdX9IKX
(//www.denverpost.com/search/ci_14386016#ixzz0gHdX9IKX)

HAT
02-22-2010, 10:18 AM
people don't want to work with mcdaniels.


http://www.denverpost.com/broncosheadlines/ci_14441207?source=rss



"i come from the george o'leary methods in college," marshall said. "and it doesn't get any tougher than that."

used to getting yelled at, then?

"not just yelled at degraded," marshall said. "you do something wrong, 'hey, bear crawl 200 yards. Wake up at 5 in the morning and do this.' "

does that mean mcdaniels isn't a monster?

"no, josh isn't a monster," marshall said. "josh is actually easy to talk to, easy to work with."


^5

Rabb
02-22-2010, 10:20 AM
No Shyt this got outta hand pretty quickly

yes

I mean, I fully expect every thread to turn into a sweet session of "nuh uh!" and "yeah huh!" but seriously

jhns
02-22-2010, 10:20 AM
As much as Nolan deserves kudos for the D's performance during the 6-0 start, he also deserves credit for the total collapse during the last 10 games.

If Shanny were still HC and the D turned in a similar performance, Nolan wouldn't have left, he would have been fired right after the last game of the season. Larry Coyer got a similar result from the D......a fast start, followed by a collapse.



Read more: http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_14386016#ixzz0gHdX9IKX
(//www.denverpost.com/search/ci_14386016#ixzz0gHdX9IKX)

Except the points KC scored were against our offense. the points the Steelers scored were from our offense turning it over on our side of the field and trying to force our defense to be the entire team. When you don't have a drive over 4 plays in an entire half, that usually happens.

You guys want to take away from what Nolan did but there is no way you can. He took a defense with very little front 7 talent and no depth and made it top 10. He took this teams worst ever defense and made it top 10. If course they got worn out. The offense did nothing all season.

jhns
02-22-2010, 10:22 AM
^5

Well at least you guys show what it takes to love McDaniels. It seems to take being completely irrationale with little education.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
02-22-2010, 10:25 AM
Except the points KC scored were against our offense. the points the Steelers scored were from our offense turning it over on our side of the field and trying to force our defense to be the entire team. When you don't have a drive over 4 plays in an entire half, that usually happens.

You guys want to take away from what Nolan did but there is no way you can. He took a defense with very little front 7 talent and no depth and made it top 10. He took this teams worst ever defense and made it top 10. If course they got worn out. The offense did nothing all season.

Don't you ever get tired of making extreme statements like "always" and "never"? It just makes you incorrect most of the time.

Just fyi.

strafen
02-22-2010, 10:28 AM
I'm as happy with what Nolan did here last year as anyone, but why do so many act like he did it all on his own?

McDaniels brought in a very good caste of assistants for him, got the players for him, and was active in deciding the game plan. I don't think Nolan was out there coaching the LBs and DBs himself.

He'll be missed, but ultimately McDaniels made the changes that improved the D, including hiring Nolan. He saw something there last season, who's to say he doesn't with the current configuration heading into 2010?I totally disagree. Nolan is not getting the credit he deserves.
He was the one making the calls from the booth at game time, not McDaniels.
The game is won on the field. Nolan had the experience to call his game on Sunday based on the flow of things. Stopping what the other team's offense was trying to do was what made Nolan's defense stand out.

Don't get me wrong, McDaniels sure had his input based on the make up of the team he's trying to build, but to give a rookie headcoach that much credit over a guy with the NFL experience of Mike Nolan is preposterous.

He definitely made the best of what he had to work with...

jhns
02-22-2010, 10:30 AM
Don't you ever get tired of making extreme statements like "always" and "never"? It just makes you incorrect most of the time.

Just fyi.

Neither of the quoted words are anywhere in what you quoted from me.

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 10:32 AM
Except the points KC scored were against our offense.

It's a talent to be so wrong, so often. The KC offense scored 30 pts against the Broncos defense and rushed for over 300 yards against the Broncos defense. They racked up over 500 yards of offense against the Broncos defense. None of that was the result of offensive turnovers.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
02-22-2010, 10:32 AM
You're right. Saying "The offense did nothing all season." isn't an overstatement at all.

DrFate
02-22-2010, 10:35 AM
After reading the OP, I was wondering how long before we were 'corrected' that the defensive improvements were due to Sparky (a first time, offensive-minded guy), and had little/nothing to do with Nolan (a guy who has been doing this for a while).

Apparently - not long.

jhns
02-22-2010, 10:36 AM
You're right. Saying "The offense did nothing all season." isn't an overstatement at all.

Well we were below average in yards, points, third downs, red zone, etc...... I would say that statement sums it up pretty well.

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 10:42 AM
Well we were below average in yards, points, third downs, red zone, etc...... I would say that statement sums it up pretty well.

Ladies and Gentlemen.....jhns is wrong again. Shocker, I know.

Since when is 15th in yards "below average"?

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=false&conference=null&role=TM&offensiveStatisticCategory=TOTAL_YARDS&defensiveStatisticCategory=null&season=2009&seasonType=REG&tabSeq=2&qualified=true&Submit=Go

Are you EVER right about anything?

Br0nc0Buster
02-22-2010, 10:45 AM
Nolan did a great job, but he wasnt the only reason for defensive improvement

I think we will be fine, Josh picked the players, and the scheme will stay the same so the familiarity will help

TheElusiveKyleOrton
02-22-2010, 10:47 AM
After reading the OP, I was wondering how long before we were 'corrected' that the defensive improvements were due to Sparky (a first time, offensive-minded guy), and had little/nothing to do with Nolan (a guy who has been doing this for a while).

Apparently - not long.

Don't think anyone's claiming they were "due" to "Sparky," which I'm assuming is your cute little nickname for Josh McDaniels. I think that people are stating that if you're going to give Nolan credit for the hot start, he should share some of the blame for the cold finish, AND that McDaniels, as the head coach, may have had some input on the operations of one part of the defense. Not all the credit or all the blame goes to either man.

I'm not sure why everything must be so black and white on this board. Seems to me that arguing in absolutes when you're short on factual evidence is the bastion of the lazy and ill-informed.

Florida_Bronco
02-22-2010, 11:16 AM
Why do you act like play calling means nothing? It was Nolans scheme and Nolans play calling. This defense is not going to be the same without him. It could have been great, fast, if we would have given him more talent. It was not Nolan's scheme. The scheme was dictated by McDaniels and Nolan's own words back this up. Ask any of the few remaining people here who actually know the X's and O's and they'll tell you that our 2009 defense was nothing like anything Nolan had ever run before and it more closely resembled the (wait for it...) Patriots defense that McDaniels worked with in New England.

Also, when has Nolan ever run a "great" defense. Lots of very good ones, but never any great ones.

People don't want to work with McDaniels. Not quite. Go back and read any of the reports from Schefter on the issue. There was never any personal issues between Josh and Mike, just differences in how they felt the defense should be run. Is it any surprise that the head coach is going to win that disagreement, or that Nolan bolted for a team that will basically give him complete control of the defense?

Oh well, at least he has his yes man in place now. We all saw how well that worked for greats like Shanahan. What "yes men"? Look our coaching staff and tell me how many of them worked with McDaniels prior to coming to Denver. Our current defensive coordinator sure didn't, and neither did Nunnely, Nolan, McCoy, Studesville, Wylie, Barone...etc.


Please. I can name a dozen defenses last year that would've loved to have that "lack of talent" to work with.

My Redskins friend called it from day one and even stuck to his guns when the Broncos were 6-0 and the defense looked all-world. He told me even then that by the end of the season, I'd come to not like him very much because opponents have a way of figuring him out and he can't seem to adjust for whatever reason. He falls back into his "read and react" comfort zone and it becomes maddening.

Your friend is like a football prophet or something. Of course no one paid any attention at the beginning of the season when people like you, Drek, Mediator, Kaylore and Montrose were all telling us that this aggressive blitzing defense was not Nolan's work. ;)

jhns
02-22-2010, 11:23 AM
It was not Nolan's scheme. The scheme was dictated by McDaniels and Nolan's own words back this up. Ask any of the few remaining people here who actually know the X's and O's and they'll tell you that our 2009 defense was nothing like anything Nolan had ever run before and it more closely resembled the (wait for it...) Patriots defense that McDaniels worked with in New England.


So your argument is McDaniels hired a long established coordinator and then forced him to run some other scheme that he has never run before? Well then it is McDaniels fault we fell apart. That is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Well, close behind the "we are a more talented defense than Dallas" than Bean is spouting.

jhns
02-22-2010, 11:27 AM
Ladies and Gentlemen.....jhns is wrong again. Shocker, I know.

Since when is 15th in yards "below average"?

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=false&conference=null&role=TM&offensiveStatisticCategory=TOTAL_YARDS&defensiveStatisticCategory=null&season=2009&seasonType=REG&tabSeq=2&qualified=true&Submit=Go

Are you EVER right about anything?

Will it make you happy if I switch it to "we were average in yards(like that somehow makes it good) and were below average everywhere else."?

I'm sorry I can't be as knowledgable as the guy saying we are more talented on defense than teams like Dallas. That is some of the funniest and most retarded homer talk I have seen this year. The year is young though.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
02-22-2010, 11:28 AM
Again with the black and white arguments, jhns?

He didn't "force" Nolan to do anything. However, he had certain things in mind and probably pushed Nolan to do those certain things. That's what a head coach (or a boss) does.

Eldorado
02-22-2010, 11:29 AM
I could agree with this to a point, but DEN also had some of the fewest injured playmakers in the league on Defense. Then, they also were as horrid down the stretch defensively as they were all the last half of the previous four seasons. And, you can go and check this as they gave up 3/4s of their total points allowed in those final eight losses.

Nolan started Hot, then finished terrible. If anyone wants to say he was the reason they won those first 6 games OK, but what about contributing to the playcalling that lost the last eight as well. Stop being one sided, its tired and old. The guy did his best with a poor personnel package, just like a lot of DC's have to do over the course of a season, especially with Injuries. However, they were as POOR defensively in their last eight games as any Defense in the league. In fact, they might just have been the worst in the final eight losses.

The problem is, people have points to prove here. It is more about YOU being right, rather than actually BEING right. DEN was the tale of three different teams last year. The good, the bad, and the ugly. And, the defense played as much a part of that split personality as the offense.

Our nickel killed us against the run.

Bigdawg26
02-22-2010, 11:30 AM
To be honest with you and you guys can rip me the pieces on this, but Denver really doesn't have to many TALENTED players especially on the defensive side of the ball. We have Champ (past his prime but still top 5), Dawkins (past his prime but still one of the best), Doom, and DJ Williams (who is VERY talented but doesnt always play up to it). Outside of them there is no real talent on that defense, and to stay what he did on the defensive side of the play is especially from the year before (which was the worst defense I ever saw in my life) was OUTSTANDING! He was responsible for the 6-0 start and that we were ever in the play off to begin with not because of Orton and the boring offense. I wish him luck I just wish he woulda stayed!

TonyR
02-22-2010, 11:30 AM
Now there's a credible source.

Agree, but any less credible than the narrative that he isn't easy to work with for which we have no known source? If BM hates him so much, which is part of that narrative, why say this?

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 11:31 AM
I'm sorry I can't be as knowledgable as the guy saying we are more talented on defense than teams like Dallas. That is some of the funniest and most retarded homer talk I have seen this year. The year is young though.

I was asked to present ONE team to support my side of that debate. I provided several and have yet to see any rebuttal of substance for each of them. Telling.

jhns
02-22-2010, 11:32 AM
Again with the black and white arguments, jhns?

He didn't "force" Nolan to do anything. However, he had certain things in mind and probably pushed Nolan to do those certain things. That's what a head coach (or a boss) does.

Riiiight. Nolan came in and decided he wants to run someone else scheme. That is why he is still here.

jhns
02-22-2010, 11:35 AM
I was asked to present ONE team to support my side of that debate. I provided several and have yet to see any rebuttal of substance for each of them. Telling.

Don't worry. I laughed at each of them. You are ridiculous. You either don't follow the rest of the NFL or your homerism has made you stupid. I don't normally care to point out how dumb you are but your constant "jhns is always wrong" is making it fun to start. I would watch getting into that when you post such dumb stuff right before it.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
02-22-2010, 11:38 AM
Riiiight. Nolan came in and decided he wants to run someone else scheme. That is why he is still here.

Christ, you are retarded. Doesn't your manager at Burger King tell you how to cook the fries?

Same idea. Nolan worked FOR Josh McDaniels and the Denver Broncos. Josh McDaniels was the boss in this scenario, and Nolan was the fry cook.

They were delicious fries. I'll wait to see if the next fry cook can make them as well before crowning Nolan "BEST FRY COOK EVAR!" if you don't mind.

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 11:38 AM
Don't worry. I laughed at each of them. You are ridiculous. You either don't follow the rest of the NFL or your homerism has made you stupid. I don't normally care to point out how dumb you are but your constant "jhns is always wrong" is making it fun to start. I would watch getting into that when you post such dumb stuff right before it.

I accept your concession.

DenverBrit
02-22-2010, 11:39 AM
Again with the black and white arguments, jhns?

He didn't "force" Nolan to do anything. However, he had certain things in mind and probably pushed Nolan to do those certain things. That's what a head coach (or a boss) does.


You're correct. I looked for the article with the Nolan quote, but couldn't locate it.

But basically, Nolan said that McD told him what he wanted from the 3-4 D and Nolan designed the schemes.

The new scheme, new personnel and consequent lack of film gave the D an advantage early on. Once teams figured it out, they tore it apart.

One interesting McD comment prior to Nolan's departure referenced run blitzing.

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

Read more: http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_14234589#ixzz0gI83LOvf

DenverBrit
02-22-2010, 11:41 AM
Agree, but any less credible than the narrative that he isn't easy to work with for which we have no known source? If BM hates him so much, which is part of that narrative, why say this?

Had the quote been a negative about McD, the source would have been credible. ;D

jhns
02-22-2010, 11:41 AM
Christ, you are retarded. Doesn't your manager at Burger King tell you how to cook the fries?

Same idea. Nolan worked FOR Josh McDaniels and the Denver Broncos. Josh McDaniels was the boss in this scenario, and Nolan was the fry cook.

They were delicious fries. I'll wait to see if the next fry cook can make them as well before crowning Nolan "BEST FRY COOK EVAR!" if you don't mind.

What does this have to do with what I said?

TheElusiveKyleOrton
02-22-2010, 11:46 AM
What does this have to do with what I said?

Seriously? You can't figure it out? Really?

God. I was joking before, but you really are mentally slow.

Okay. Once more with feeling:

You sarcastically stated that McDaniels "forced" Nolan to run the defense that was run.

McDaniels is the boss.

He hired Nolan to do a job. From that job he had certain expectations. It was discussed before the season, probably before he was hired, what McDaniels expected from his defense.

That's not "forcing" Nolan to do anything. It's called a job description. McDaniels gave it, Nolan followed it, giving McDaniels what he was looking for from the defense.

However, because Nolan wanted more autonomy, and was offered just that in Miami, he is now gone.

Could you follow that? It really isn't terribly complicated. You're adding 1 + 2 and getting "Purple."

jhns
02-22-2010, 11:55 AM
Seriously? You can't figure it out? Really?

God. I was joking before, but you really are mentally slow.

Okay. Once more with feeling:

You sarcastically stated that McDaniels "forced" Nolan to run the defense that was run.

McDaniels is the boss.

He hired Nolan to do a job. From that job he had certain expectations. It was discussed before the season, probably before he was hired, what McDaniels expected from his defense.

That's not "forcing" Nolan to do anything. It's called a job description. McDaniels gave it, Nolan followed it, giving McDaniels what he was looking for from the defense.

However, because Nolan wanted more autonomy, and was offered just that in Miami, he is now gone.

Could you follow that? It really isn't terribly complicated. You're adding 1 + 2 and getting "Purple."

You sure seem to know a lot about their interviews. Funny stuff.

What is the best part of all of this is you don't even know what you are talking about. None of you do. I bet not one of you can break down what Nolans defense is and the changes he made while here. It is why I am just laughing at how dumb you all sound.

There is no spin that makes it a smart move to bring in a coordinator to run anything other than what they run. I don't care if there are small changes or big ones. The post you quoted was in response to someone saying we ran New Englands scheme and not Nolans. If we hired him to run a scheme he has never run before, it was a really dumb move. There is no way you can convince me otherwise. I don't really care how smart you think it was.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
02-22-2010, 12:00 PM
sigh.

Not sure why someone who knows so very much about football would stoop to the level of posting on a board where nobody else knows anything.

I'm also curious why, if you know so much, you never actually drop any legitimate football knowledge on us.

Eldorado
02-22-2010, 12:00 PM
Chick fight!!11 Woohooo!!111

worm
02-22-2010, 12:04 PM
However, because Nolan wanted more autonomy, and was offered just that in Miami, he is now gone.

What makes you think that Nolan will get more autonomy in Miami?

baja
02-22-2010, 12:06 PM
What makes you think that Nolan will get more autonomy in Miami?

It's near the ocean???

TheElusiveKyleOrton
02-22-2010, 12:06 PM
What makes you think that Nolan will get more autonomy in Miami?

Pretty much everything I've read about his hiring there. Sounds like a nearly-full autonomy gig. /shrug

Could be wrong, of course, I just don't think I am (which should honestly be in every signature on the site).

jhns
02-22-2010, 12:10 PM
sigh.

Not sure why someone who knows so very much about football would stoop to the level of posting on a board where nobody else knows anything.

I'm also curious why, if you know so much, you never actually drop any legitimate football knowledge on us.

It is fun to let you know that you don't know anything. It is a good time waster while here at work.

There is no place to drop legitimate knowledge here. Look at the conversations. "We have more defensive talent than Dallas!". "It is a great idea to hire a coordinator to run a scheme he has never run before!". Then, when I respond to this, you freak out and act like I am the one claiming it. Where is the place to have legitimate football breakdowns between your crying and the obvious stupidity?

Florida_Bronco
02-22-2010, 12:11 PM
So your argument is McDaniels hired a long established coordinator and then forced him to run some other scheme that he has never run before?

It happens all the time in the NFL. Do you really believe that in the interviews it wasn't made clear to Nolan what type of scheme he would have to run. Also I think you're over estimating the changes Nolan had to make. Nolan formations, alignments and coverages mainly stayed the same. What changed was the aggressiveness and amount of blitzing.

Well then it is McDaniels fault we fell apart. So when the defense was looking like the best in the league it was all because of Nolan despite running McDaniels scheme, and then at the end of the season when we were looking pretty horrible on defense it's all McDaniels fault despite the fact Nolan had reverted back to his own scheme?

Gotcha.

jhns
02-22-2010, 12:18 PM
because of Nolan despite running McDaniels scheme, and then at the end of the season when we were looking pretty horrible on defense it's all McDaniels fault despite the fact Nolan had reverted back to his own scheme?

Gotcha.

LOL

See, this is exactly what I am talking about. You are the one doing exactly what you are crying about right here. Now it was McDaniels scheme but was Nolans when we played bad? I have never said anything close to it being one scheme at one time and a different when we did bad. The only thing I claimed is that we lacked talent, lacked depth, and got worn down.

Like I said earlier, you guys have made it clear what it takes to like what McDaniels does. You just have illogical and irrational.

Florida_Bronco
02-22-2010, 12:34 PM
You're correct. I looked for the article with the Nolan quote, but couldn't locate it. I'm pretty sure it was a radio interview.

I bet not one of you can break down what Nolans defense is and the changes he made while here. It is why I am just laughing at how dumb you all sound.

Mediator can break down X's and O's better than anyone on this forum. Drek isn't too far behind and so is Beantown. Montrose spent a good amount of his personal time breaking down Nolan's previous defenses during the last offseason and as soon as he saw it at camp and in preseason he told us it wasn't the norm for Nolan. Same with Kaylore, SoCal and a few others. Hell I said it, and any of those people on that list are just as good or even better than me at the X's and O's of football.

Florida_Bronco
02-22-2010, 12:38 PM
LOL

See, this is exactly what I am talking about. You are the one doing exactly what you are crying about right here. Now it was McDaniels scheme but was Nolans when we played bad? I have never said anything close to it being one scheme at one time and a different when we did bad. The only thing I claimed is that we lacked talent, lacked depth, and got worn down. Because we did revert back to Nolan's scheme. You don't have to be a football scholar to see that. Hell, just go dig through some of the threads on here during that time and you'll see complaints along the lines of "what happened to the creative blitzes" and the passive nature of the defense.

I think it's probably safe to say that when things were going good McDaniels probably backed off some and let Nolan have more control and as a result Nolan slowly went back to his comfort zone.

jhns
02-22-2010, 12:40 PM
Mediator can break down X's and O's better than anyone on this forum. Drek isn't too far behind and so is Beantown. Montrose spent a good amount of his personal time breaking down Nolan's previous defenses during the last offseason and as soon as he saw it at camp and in preseason he told us it wasn't the norm for Nolan. Same with Kaylore, SoCal and a few others. Hell I said it, and any of those people are the list are just as good or even better than me at the X's and O's of football.

I don't know many of them but you included Bean and lost all credibility in this post.

At any rate, if we hired Nolan to run a scheme that wasn't exactly the one he is an expert at, we are a dumb ass team. Of course it was going to fail.

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 12:47 PM
I don't know many of them but you included Bean and lost all credibility in this post.


It's sad how rattled I've gotten you. Why don't you go back to watching all those Cowboys games....pining over all that talent we're missing out on.

Florida_Bronco
02-22-2010, 12:48 PM
I don't know many of them but you included Bean and lost all credibility in this post. How can you NOT know them? We're talking some of the most cerebral posters on this forum and to a T they have all talked about the differences in the style of pre-Denver Mike Nolan.

At any rate, if we hired Nolan to run a scheme that wasn't exactly the one he is an expert at, we are a dumb ass team. Of course it was going to fail. That's the thing. Nolan almost certainly knew what was expected of him when he took the job, and he did just fine with it at the beginning of the season.

And as I previously mentioned. It's not like he had to make wholesale changes in his scheme. Josh McDaniels arguably made more changes to his offense in any given year than what Nolan was forced to adapt to.

jhns
02-22-2010, 12:49 PM
It's sad how rattled I've gotten you. Why don't you go back to watching all those Cowboys games....pining over all that talent we're missing out on.

Poor guy really thinks we are one of the most talented defenses.... Good stuff.

~Crash~
02-22-2010, 12:52 PM
I'm as happy with what Nolan did here last year as anyone, but why do so many act like he did it all on his own?

McDaniels brought in a very good caste of assistants for him, got the players for him, and was active in deciding the game plan. I don't think Nolan was out there coaching the LBs and DBs himself.

He'll be missed, but ultimately McDaniels made the changes that improved the D, including hiring Nolan. He saw something there last season, who's to say he doesn't with the current configuration heading into 2010?

this . and I will add McD seems to a damn good GM. I like all of his FA moves for the most part . and I even think his draft is not as bad as people point out .

jhns
02-22-2010, 12:54 PM
How can you NOT know them? We're talking some of the most cerebral posters on this forum and to a T they have all talked about the differences in the style of pre-Denver Mike Nolan.

That's the thing. Nolan almost certainly knew what was expected of him when he took the job, and he did just fine with it at the beginning of the season.

And as I previously mentioned. It's not like he had to make wholesale changes in his scheme. Josh McDaniels arguably made more changes to his offense in any given year than what Nolan was forced to adapt to.

I meant I don't know enough to say if they are some of the smartest posters. I hardly see them and I never see detailed breakdowns of anything here anymore. I didn't see a single one of their breakdowns of Nolans defense. From what you are telling me, they aren't very accurate.

If you are right about this scheme difference, then everything I am claiming has already proven to be true. The defense collapsed and he isn't here anymore. I would say it can't work out any worse than that.

DenverBrit
02-22-2010, 12:59 PM
I'm pretty sure it was a radio interview.



It may have been, but I saw it in print too.....might have been a transcript or just a quote from the radio show.

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 01:01 PM
Poor guy really thinks we are one of the most talented defenses.... Good stuff.

Keep twisting my words. It's all you can do.

All I've done since post number one is show that the belief that Nolan had zero talent to work with is largely a myth.

Starter-wise, we had a very competitive group. Two probowl level LBs and a starting back 4 that I wouldn't have traded for any other back four in the entire league last year. Sorry if you disagree, but that is a solid group of 6 players. Sure, the lack of DLine talent became all too apparent over the course of the season.....and I too believe that "everything starts up front".....but very few teams had top talent at all 3 levels, especially in the first year of a complete system and personnel overhaul.

jhns
02-22-2010, 01:10 PM
Keep twisting my words. It's all you can do.

All I've done since post number one is show that the belief that Nolan had zero talent to work with is largely a myth.

Starter-wise, we had a very competitive group. Two probowl level LBs and a starting back 4 that I wouldn't have traded for any other back four in the entire league last year. Sorry if you disagree, but that is a solid group of 6 players. Sure, the lack of DLine talent became all too apparent over the course of the season.....and I too believe that "everything starts up front".....but very few teams had top talent at all 3 levels, especially in the first year of a complete system and personnel overhaul.

You said Dallas did more than this team on defense, with less talent. I would laugh about the other teams but I didn't feel like memorizing your list. It is to funny to just let go. You are one of the posters that likes to tell people they are dumb and you play around with symantics to claim I am never right. Well, if that is how you are going to post, you may want to avoid saying some of the dumbest things I have read on this board.

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 01:17 PM
You said Dallas did more than this team on defense, with less talent.

I stand by that. There are 11 starters on defense. I can name at least 6 2009 Broncos defenders that I would start over their 2009 Cowboys counterparts. That was my argument.

I would laugh about the other teams but I didn't feel like memorizing your list. It is to funny to just let go.

In other words: I've had 4 pages now to rebut your argument, but I can't so I'll pretend I'm laughing at you instead.

Here is the list. Even though you only challenged me to name one, I named 6. Have at it.

Bengals
Panthers
Cowboys
Pats
Texans
49ers

You are one of the posters that likes to tell people they are dumb and you play around with symantics to claim I am never right. Well, if that is how you are going to post, you may want to avoid saying some of the dumbest things I have read on this board.

Play with semantics? When you explicitly say something that isn't right, and someone here calls you on it, it's semantics? That's rich.

jhns
02-22-2010, 01:50 PM
I stand by that. There are 11 starters on defense. I can name at least 6 2009 Broncos defenders that I would start over their 2009 Cowboys counterparts. That was my argument.



In other words: I've had 4 pages now to rebut your argument, but I can't so I'll pretend I'm laughing at you instead.

Here is the list. Even though you only challenged me to name one, I named 6. Have at it.

Bengals
Panthers
Cowboys
Pats
Texans
49ers



Play with semantics? When you explicitly say something that isn't right, and someone here calls you on it, it's semantics? That's rich.

"They aren't below average, they are right on average for one of the things you named! You are always wrong!" Yeah, not playing with symantics at all.

As for your list. LOL

That is the only argument that can come from that. I start typing why that is stupid and it just makes me laugh to much that I even have to type how dumb it is. You are showing you aren't interested in real debate when you say this stuff. You aren't going to be rationale when your debate begins with us being more talented on defense than some of the most talented defenses in the league. What exact debate do you expect to come from that?

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 01:58 PM
If you said that the 2009 offense was in the bottom half of the league in yards gained, when they were in fact in the top half of the league in yards gained, I'm not arguing semantics at all. It's called arguing facts. You were wrong. Period.

When you say that KC scored all those points in week 17 because of two pick sixes, and I point out that 30 pts and over 500 yards of offense were the result of our crappy defensive performance that game, I'm not arguing semantics at all. I'm again arguing facts. You were wrong. Again.

jhns
02-22-2010, 02:07 PM
If you said that the 2009 offense was in the bottom half of the league in yards gained, when they were in fact in the top half of the league in yards gained, I'm not arguing semantics at all. It's called arguing facts. You were wrong. Period.

When you say that KC scored all those points in week 17 because of two pick sixes, and I point out that 30 pts and over 500 yards of offense were the result of our crappy defensive performance that game, I'm not arguing semantics at all. I'm again arguing facts. You were wrong. Again.

I said the team was below average. I didn't say the bottom half. Did you add up all yards gained by every offense and divide it by 32 to get the average? No? Well then it looks to me like you are to dumb to even call me out correctly.

As for the points, you all do add those points into the averages you give. Are you saying you haven't? I can show how much of a liar you are if you want to go that route. I didn't say every point scored against KC was the offense. I said you guys attribute more to the defense than what the defense actually gave up. I named specifics like those int returns and games where the offense continually put the defense in horrible positions.
I guess it isn't symantics. You just aren't smart enough to read. Sorry for the confusion.

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 02:14 PM
I said the team was below average. I didn't say the bottom half. Did you add up all yards gained by every offense and divide it by 32 to get the average? No? Well then it looks to me like you are to dumb to even call me out correctly.


Wrong again. Shocker.

Total offensive yards per game for all teams = 10,724.6 yds
Average of all = 335.14 per game
Broncos = 341.4 per game

That = above average.....so sorry j "always wrong" hns.

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 02:19 PM
As for the points, you all do add those points into the averages you give. Are you saying you haven't? I can show how much of a liar you are if you want to go that route. I didn't say every point scored against KC was the offense. I said you guys attribute more to the defense than what the defense actually gave up. I named specifics like those int returns and games where the offense continually put the defense in horrible positions.
.

Wrong again. I, and others, weren't giving averages. We were simply pointing out, like the article we cited, that the defense gave up 27 or more in all but one of the losses. That remains true even when you discount the 14 "pick 6" points in the KC game. Sorry again, Mr. Always Wrong.

jhns
02-22-2010, 02:25 PM
Wrong again. Shocker.

Total offensive yards per game for all teams = 10,724.6 yds
Average of all = 335.14 per game
Broncos = 341.4 per game

That = above average.....so sorry j "always wrong" hns.

So this changes the fact that you called me out for the wrong thing because you aren't smart? That is all I claimed in that post.... Again, to dumb to read.

Whatever though mr. "The Broncos are a more talented defense than Dallas." Keep clinging to symantics. "They are average in one of the multiple things you listed, that must mean the point isn't there when everything else is well below average! The offense obviously carried its weight! How dare you say they are below average in everything when they are clearly exactly on par for being complete **** all around!"

LOL

jhns
02-22-2010, 02:29 PM
Wrong again. I, and others, weren't giving averages. We were simply pointing out, like the article we cited, that the defense gave up 27 or more in all but one of the losses. That remains true even when you discount the 14 "pick 6" points in the KC game. Sorry again, Mr. Always Wrong.

Well it is hard to copy and paste right now so I will show you this later. I will paste in you and many others showing the wrong average points the defense gave up in losses. Of course you don't remember reading it or saying it. You aren't smart enough. I will refresh your small brain in a bit.

"We have a more talented defense than Dallas!"

Good stuff man. It has had me laughing all day.

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 02:30 PM
So this changes the fact that you called me out for the wrong thing because you aren't smart? That is all I claimed in that post.... Again, to dumb to read.

I called you out for being wrong as usual. Again, too dumb to admit it.

Whatever though mr. "The Broncos are a more talented defense than Dallas." Keep clinging to symantics. "They are average in one of the multiple things you listed, that must mean the point isn't there when everything else is well below average! The offense obviously carried its weight! How dare you say they are below average in everything when they are clearly exactly on par for being complete **** all around!"

LOL

Why would I keep clinging to a computer anti-virus software program? This is at least the second time you've referred to them in one of your posts for no reason. You should probably stop surfing the midget Asian porn sites before your computer explodes.

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 02:32 PM
Well it is hard to copy and paste right now so I will show you this later.

I've heard that before.

Every thread with you, it's the same story. You get proven wrong left and right. You deflect and try to make counter claims and either say you can prove them but never do.....or you turn it around and make us go through the leg work of dis-proving your claims. Either way, the result is the same. You are always found to be wrong.

jhns
02-22-2010, 02:37 PM
I called you out for being wrong as usual. Again, too dumb to admit it.



Why would I keep clinging to a computer anti-virus software program? This is at least the second time you've referred to them in one of your posts for no reason. You should probably stop surfing the midget Asian porn sites before your computer explodes.


You called me out over nothing. The offense was well below average. Nothing you have said shows any different. I didn't show one thing when I said that. You are the one that fixated on one thing and cried because I pointed out McDaniels offense sucked. You get to emotional about this stuff and it makes you sound dumb. The offense sucked, deal with it.

As for the midget asian porn, my computer can handle it. If not, I can get another.

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 02:40 PM
You called me out over nothing. The offense was well below average. Nothing you have said shows any different.

Wrong again. Shocker.

Total offensive yards per game for all teams = 10,724.6 yds
Average of all = 335.14 per game
Broncos = 341.4 per game

That = above average.....so sorry j "always wrong" hns.

Simple math. It's not for everyone.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
02-22-2010, 02:42 PM
Oy.

Seriously Bean, don't waste your time. He makes a point, you disprove it, he says "yeah, but you didn't disprove THIS!" It's absurd.

He re-frames arguments constantly and never stays on the topic he's trying to prove. Just a completely worthless poster.

jhns
02-22-2010, 02:44 PM
I've heard that before.

Every thread with you, it's the same story. You get proven wrong left and right. You deflect and try to make counter claims and either say you can prove them but never do.....or you turn it around and make us go through the leg work of dis-proving your claims. Either way, the result is the same. You are always found to be wrong.

No, it is more like you go on about random stuff never said and then try your hardest to spin it so you sound less stupid. It doesn't work. Never once did I claim the stat he used was wrong. You thought I did for some reason. Nothing I claimed with the 2 interceptions was wrong. Again, you just saw some random thing that wasn't there and are trying to save face, as always.

Stop being such an dumbass all the time and you wouldn't have this problem.

Kind of like the offense thing. My entire point is the offense is below average. You haven't countered this point once. You have only cried that I listed a bunch of things that show they are below average and cried that ONE of those things is exactly average. I don't even know where you are going with that. It has nothing to do with any point made. Are you saying the offense was above average? If not, what is your point? Oh right, you don't have one, yet again.

"We are more talented on defense than Dallas." - enough siad. I may exagerate some but you are just dumb.

oubronco
02-22-2010, 02:46 PM
Simple math. It's not for everyone.

:~ohyah!:

Rabb
02-22-2010, 02:47 PM
I picture you guys feverishly hitting F5 and telling your co-workers (assuming) "not now Bob, I have to set this ass straight...again" all day

please tell me that's not it (I am kinda' hoping it is)

jhns
02-22-2010, 02:48 PM
Simple math. It's not for everyone.

If this is really your argument, we were the 2nd best offense in the league with Cutler and really screwed the team giving him away. Try arguing against that in the future and I am linking to this post that says offensive yards are everything.

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 02:50 PM
No, it is more like you go on about random stuff never said and then try your hardest to spin it so you sound less stupid. It doesn't work. Never once did I claim the stat he used was wrong. You thought I did for some reason. .

Which stat? And who is the "he" now?

Stop being such an dumbass all the time and you wouldn't have this problem.

Kind of like the offense thing. My entire point is the offense is below average. You haven't countered this point once.

You're right. I've countered it twice with the official NFL statistics which showed, by definition, that they were above the NFL average. You must think that 341 is somehow LESS than 335?

If you didn't want yardage to be argued than you shouldn't have included it in your original rant. It's not my fault you couldn't control yourself and couldn't simply stop at scoring, which nobody would've denied.

jhns
02-22-2010, 02:51 PM
Oy.

Seriously Bean, don't waste your time. He makes a point, you disprove it, he says "yeah, but you didn't disprove THIS!" It's absurd.

He re-frames arguments constantly and never stays on the topic he's trying to prove. Just a completely worthless poster.

Bean takes one thing I said, completely changes the argument into something else, and this is what you respond with? Funny stuff.

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 02:52 PM
If this is really your argument, we were the 2nd best offense in the league with Cutler and really screwed the team giving him away. Try arguing against that in the future and I am linking to this post that says offensive yards are everything.

YOU are the one who presented yardage first. Not me. I, from the beginning, said nothing about points scored and went after you on yardage and yardage alone because you went out of your way to say that they were below average there as well, when they clearly weren't.

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 02:53 PM
Bean takes one thing I said, completely changes the argument into something else, and this is what you respond with? Funny stuff.

I changed nothing.

You made an argument (bottom half in yardage). I proved it wrong with hard numbers. Period. Any other change in the argument was not led by me.

jhns
02-22-2010, 02:55 PM
Which stat? And who is the "he" now?

Stop being such an dumbass all the time and you wouldn't have this problem.



You're right. I've countered it twice with the official NFL statistics which showed, by definition, that they were above the NFL average. You must think that 341 is somehow LESS than 335?

If you didn't want yardage to be argued than you shouldn't have included it in your original rant. It's not my fault you couldn't control yourself and couldn't simply stop at scoring, which nobody would've denied.

You don't even know what you called out any more. I would try to forget it as well.

I named more than yards. In fact, I put 3 more important things out there. You are the one claiming yards mean everything. Fine, it is all based on yards. We just settled a hundred other arguments on here. This offense was a thousand times better with Cutler and McDaniels is a dumbass that screwed this team. Glad you finally see it my way.

jhns
02-22-2010, 02:59 PM
YOU are the one who presented yardage first. Not me. I, from the beginning, said nothing about points scored and went after you on yardage and yardage alone because you went out of your way to say that they were below average there as well, when they clearly weren't.

I presented multiple variables that show we are below average. You focused on a single point and have continued to cry about it. What you are crying about has nothing to do with the original point other than to show you have nothing. The point was the offense is below average. Showing we were average in one thing while admitting we were well below average in everything else isn't exactly a good argument against my point.

"We have a more talented defense than Dallas!". YOU are the one being a dumbass.

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 03:03 PM
Well we were below average in yards, points, third downs, red zone, etc...... I would say that statement sums it up pretty well.

If it's the least important, why oh why would you list it first?

jhns
02-22-2010, 03:06 PM
I picture you guys feverishly hitting F5 and telling your co-workers (assuming) "not now Bob, I have to set this ass straight...again" all day

please tell me that's not it (I am kinda' hoping it is)

Close. I don't have an F5 so it is R instead.

Also, I don't care to set anyone staright. It is just fun to get others worked up when they are being dumbasses. I haven't tried to argue a real point since about page 3.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
02-22-2010, 03:06 PM
I picture you guys feverishly hitting F5 and telling your co-workers (assuming) "not now Bob, I have to set this ass straight...again" all day

please tell me that's not it (I am kinda' hoping it is)

You know, I think they've ignored everyone except each other.

This is an exclusive grudge match. DON'T INTERRUPT US!

Beantown Bronco
02-22-2010, 03:06 PM
I haven't tried to argue a real point since about page 3.

Sadly, it was page three of a thread that was closed over a year ago.

jhns
02-22-2010, 03:08 PM
If it's the least important, why oh why would you list it first?

I shouldn't have said it wasd least important. I would say they are equally important. I listed the 4 most imporant factors to me and left a bunch of others in the etc bin.

Either way, I agree with you. It is all yards. We f'd up big time giving away Cutler. Glad you agree with me.

jhns
02-22-2010, 03:11 PM
Sadly, it was page three of a thread that was closed over a year ago.

OK Mr. "We have a more talented defense than Dallas!"

At least you provide a lot of entetainment with the stupidity.

Bigdawg26
02-22-2010, 03:26 PM
I picture you guys feverishly hitting F5 and telling your co-workers (assuming) "not now Bob, I have to set this ass straight...again" all day

please tell me that's not it (I am kinda' hoping it is)
Hilarious!

Just to kick the ant pile lets compare! In my opinion
D-line
Igor Olshansky> Ryan McBean
Jay Ratliff > Ronald Fields
Marcus Spears > Kenny Peterson
Linebackers
Keith Brooking < DJ Williams
Bradie James > Andra Davis
Anthony Spencer > Mario Haggan
DeMarcus Ware = Elvis Dumervil
Defensive Backs
Mike Jenkins < Champ Bailey
Terence Newman > Andre Goodman
Ken Hamlin < Brain Dawkins
Gerald Sensabaugh < Renaldo Hill

TheElusiveKyleOrton
02-22-2010, 03:36 PM
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/teMlv3ripSM&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/teMlv3ripSM&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Florida_Bronco
02-22-2010, 03:50 PM
Hilarious!

Just to kick the ant pile lets compare! In my opinion
D-line
Igor Olshansky> Ryan McBean
Jay Ratliff > Ronald Fields
Marcus Spears > Kenny Peterson
Linebackers
Keith Brooking < DJ Williams
Bradie James > Andra Davis
Anthony Spencer > Mario Haggan
DeMarcus Ware = Elvis Dumervil
Defensive Backs
Mike Jenkins < Champ Bailey
Terence Newman > Andre Goodman
Ken Hamlin < Brain Dawkins
Gerald Sensabaugh < Renaldo Hill

I'm not sure I'd put Bradie James over Davis, and you need to compare apples to apples in the secondary.

#1 corner vs #1 corner. Bailey beats Newman. #2 corner vs #2 corner and Goodman beats Jenkins.

Broncomutt
02-22-2010, 04:13 PM
Agree, but any less credible than the narrative that he isn't easy to work with for which we have no known source? If BM hates him so much, which is part of that narrative, why say this?

I don't know what source you need. Do you need 52 players signing a sworn affadavit or something?

Press has been on McDaniels case about the collapse, his emotional outbursts, friction with other coaches, taunting opposing players and a divided locker room.

While I agree the press tends to inflate stories at times, they aren't really able to conjure them out of thin air. That's called libel. If McDaniels is so inncent of all these things, why isn't he suing the reporters who seem to have simply fabricated all this.

Seriously, convict 1 reporter of libel and the rest of the feeding frenzy will stop right? But he can't stop it can he? He's already made his bed.

And now the players, coaches and owner all have to constantly answer questions about his maturity. Nothing personal TonyR, I'm just flabbegasted by the amount of selective amnesia by many here.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
02-22-2010, 04:19 PM
I don't know what source you need. Do you need 52 players signing a sworn affadavit or something?

Press has been on McDaniels case about the collapse, his emotional outbursts, friction with other coaches, taunting opposing players and a divided locker room.

While I agree the press tends to inflate stories at times, they aren't really able to conjure them out of thin air. That's called libel. If McDaniels is so inncent of all these things, why isn't he suing the reporters who seem to have simply fabricated all this.

Seriously, convict 1 reporter of libel and the rest of the feeding frenzy will stop right? But he can't stop it can he? He's already made his bed.

And now the players, coaches and owner all have to constantly answer questions about his maturity. Nothing personal TonyR, I'm just flabbegasted by the amount of selective amnesia by many here.

You honestly think that a pro football coach cares what the media is saying about him?

Baffling. Just baffling.

How are you going to convict someone of libel without proof that something happened, either affirmative or negative? You can't just sue and suddenly everything is right, and honestly, I would hope that he doesn't have the time in his day to think about "suing" a reporter. Gimme a break.

Florida_Bronco
02-22-2010, 06:09 PM
How are you going to convict someone of libel without proof that something happened, either affirmative or negative? You can't just sue and suddenly everything is right, and honestly, I would hope that he doesn't have the time in his day to think about "suing" a reporter. Gimme a break.

He doesn't really seem to understand what libel is, does he?

SoCalBronco
02-22-2010, 11:37 PM
It was a big loss, no doubt at all.

It's highly unfortunate that they could not work together. Wink Martindale will be held to the Nolan standard. Nothing less is acceptable. He has to be just as good as what we had. There's no excuses at this point. It's simply not acceptable to settle for a lesser defense simply because Josh has underdeveloped people skills. Wink seems like a good guy. He better be a good DC. Period.

HAT
02-22-2010, 11:43 PM
It was a big loss, no doubt at all.

It's highly unfortunate that they could not work together. Wink Martindale will be held to the Nolan standard. Nothing less is acceptable. He has to be just as good as what we had. There's no excuses at this point. It's simply not acceptable to settle for a lesser defense simply because Josh has underdeveloped people skills. Wink seems like a good guy. He better be a good DC. Period.

I've got $100 that says The 2010 Broncos give up less PPG than the 2009 version did.

First 5 takers welcome. (Except for BF7 of course)

SoCalBronco
02-22-2010, 11:46 PM
I've got $100 that says The 2010 Broncos give up less PPG than the 2009 version did.

First 5 takers welcome. (Except for BF7 of course)

That would be great if we could improve on that. Denver was tied for 12th in the league giving up 20.3 points per game. That was a pretty solid showing all things considered. Why do you believe we would do better than that this year?

Taco John
02-22-2010, 11:47 PM
His argument would have been better made if he used the "where there is smoke, there's usually fire" metaphor.

Taco John
02-22-2010, 11:49 PM
I've got $100 that says The 2010 Broncos give up less PPG than the 2009 version did.

First 5 takers welcome. (Except for BF7 of course)

I would never bet against the Broncos out of principle - but the thought of giving up less than 20.3 points per game seems pretty far fetched to me at this moment.

Of course, I should be granted this given we've lost our defensive coordinator, and haven't signed any free agents or drafted any rookies yet. I don't see how Martindale's sheer presence has made this defense better.

HAT
02-22-2010, 11:57 PM
I don't have an argument Taco....Just an offer to wager the first five takers...And upon further review, no McChamp or Boob either.

To answer your question SoCal. The 12th ranking is completely meaningless since we have no idea what other teams are going to do year over year. And BTW...4 teams finished at 20.3 so 12th may as well be 15th....In other words, middle of the pack.

I have no doubt that the 20.3 will be improved upon though. The 2009 D was patchwork at best and as I've pointed out many, many times here....They gave up 30 PPG in the 8 losses. (No need to mention that 14 of KC's week 16 points were Orton P6's...Well aware)

Am I expecting a top 5 scoring D that gives up 16 PPG? Hell no. But they should have no problem going sub 20.

Drek
02-23-2010, 05:02 AM
I would never bet against the Broncos out of principle - but the thought of giving up less than 20.3 points per game seems pretty far fetched to me at this moment.

Of course, I should be granted this given we've lost our defensive coordinator, and haven't signed any free agents or drafted any rookies yet. I don't see how Martindale's sheer presence has made this defense better.

Well I'd say the biggest source of definitive improvement will come from system familiarity.

DJ and Elvis both played really well, but it was their first year in a 3-4. DJ will get more comfortable making quick reactions and Doom will at least improve in his run support capabilities.

Haggan, Reid, and Ayers where a solid trio opposite Doom but none had played in a 3-4 before. Haggan was previously an MLB, Reid and Ayers where both DT/DEs. Moving to 3-4 OLB was a big change for all of them.

Ryan McBean and Kenny Peterson where surprisingly solid rotational guys. Peterson was in his first year of playing in a 3-4 and McBean got his first chance to play real NFL minutes. Both have a lot of upside going into 2010.

To take it a step further when talking about upside, Alphonso Smith will hopefully have a healthy season and will have an extra year of adjusting to the CB role. He was an unquestionably elite playmaker at the collegiate level, those skills didn't just disappear. And while age related decline is a realithy for the starters in the secondary they'll also show improvement as they gel together as a unit, not to mention the three impressive young safeties we have chomping at the bit for playing time in McBath, Bruton, and Barrett. McBath would probably win a 2010 starting job on half the teams in the league if you ask me. In a few years that pick is going to look like a home run 2nd round selection.

This is all assuming we don't get anything out of the back end of our draft/UDFA pickups last year where we brought in two good 3-4 DL prospects in Baker and Pedescleaux. Baker spent the season on the regular roster, though often inactive come Sunday, and Pedescleaux was a practice squader with some good buzz before getting injured in November. Both where raw coming in but thats what you get with UDFAs and you coach them up. We also brought back Carlton Powell and put him on the PS, he should be much more prepared to make a serious bid to contribute as a third year, now having been healthy for a full season of NFL conditioning and practice. Lot of potential here considering SD's success over the past several half decade or so was largely built on Nunnely turning similar no names into legit starters, and now he's (hopefully) doing that for us.

That is before we even go into the draft. This is the nature of organizational turnarounds. Last season we dumped a lot of dead weight but also had to put a good number of inexperienced players, both in terms of 3-4 familiarity and starting experience, into heavy use. Now the transformation to a real 3-4 talent base begins, and the backbone installed last year looks pretty solid already.

If this team can land a guy like Ryan Pickett in FA then we're very likely to be a better defense in '10 than '09. Just one guy could do that. I'm not sure Rolando McClain couldn't do that as well.

In reality if we improve the interior OL blocking and Moreno shows the agility and elusiveness he had pre-MCL we'll also be taking points off the board for the D, since an improved running game will help us control the clock.

Lot of room for improvement. Nolan will be missed but this is McDaniels' transformation, Nolan was just the #2 helping him execute it, and Nolan left a lot of good behind in his wake. The same positional coaches who helped with this rapid turnaround are all still here, and one of them got pushed up to DC, sending a clear message to the players that this regime has no problems promoting from within.

WolfpackGuy
02-23-2010, 05:45 AM
It's going to be the same old story if they don't improve the defensive line.

The offense could also stand to pull its weight to help the defense as well.

Mediator12
02-23-2010, 06:45 AM
It's going to be the same old story if they don't improve the defensive line.

The offense could also stand to pull its weight to help the defense as well.

DING, Ding, Ding. We have a winner.

It's kind of funny how people's perception of the defense is so damn high. They were vastly improved early in the season, but by the end resembled the junk Slowik rolled out the last 2 years. Talk about first impression bias!

I have discussed ad hominem the reason this team has vastly declined in the second half of seasons over the last 5-6 years. Nolan's defense was no better in the end than Larry Coyer's, Bates, or Slowiks down the stretch. I might also remind people that despite the 6-0 record, Coyer's 2006 defense started out much hotter than Nolan's not surrendering a TD in the first 11 Quarters of the season and then not surrendering another one for 9 more Quarters after that at one point. They had a 5-1 record after 6 games and the only Loss was to STL after they turned the ball over 4 times in STL scoring position. What happened to that defense was Injuries to the Starting Secondary and The front Seven collapsing down the stretch and not being able to play their gaps and get pressure on the QB anymore.

Just like Nolan relying on Run blitzes to stop the run came back to haunt 2009's run defense, injuries to Ferguson, Darrent Williams, and Finally Al Wilson took DEN out of what they liked to do on Defense. The Common theme between those two teams was having to scheme the run defense to stop the run and by the end of the season not having the ability to hide the terrible DL performances.

It's not like Nolan is the ONLY DC who can scheme the defense to early wins in the season. Find me a DC who can win in DEC playing solid Run defense and getting solid production from a competent DL and we will talk.

Gutless Drunk
12-29-2010, 06:54 PM
Nolan's done good job at Miami this year.
Took the 22nd ranked defense in yards (349.3) to 3rd ranked 296.5 YPG
and the 25th ranked in points (24.4) to 9th at 19.7 PPG

Denver went from 7th in yards (315) to 31st at 387 YPG
and from 12th in points (20.3) to 32nd at 29.2 PPG

baja
12-29-2010, 07:04 PM
Nolan's done good job at Miami this year.
Took the 22nd ranked defense in yards (349.3) to 3rd ranked 296.5 YPG
and the 25th ranked in points (24.4) to 9th at 19.7 PPG

Denver went from 7th in yards (315) to 31st at 387 YPG
and from 12th in points (20.3) to 32nd at 29.2 PPG

That's a pretty damaging stat.

oubronco
12-29-2010, 07:10 PM
No shyt

extralife
12-29-2010, 07:17 PM
That's a pretty damaging stat.

it's why Mike Nolan should be our next head coach

Jason in LA
12-29-2010, 07:27 PM
So... did anybody actually take Hat up on his bet? I'd be surprised if a Broncos fan did, because like TJ mentioned, that would be betting against the Broncos. Well, seeing how some folks seem to root against the Broncos just to be right, I wouldn't be shocked if somebody did take that bet.

broncocalijohn
12-29-2010, 08:15 PM
Hat's bet? Surprised Drek didnt as he seemed to be the McD butt kisser in the beg of the thread. To me, Nolan is the reason the defense played so well. I would love the real story (if there is one) on how we tanked half way through the season. If McD got his hands on the steering wheel and screwed it up, another notch why he had to go. Nolan is not leaving Miami unless he gets a HC job. Seems nobody is doing much in SF these days so was it the personnel on the field or the coaches? All I know is someone better be coming in with a defensive mind.

strafen
12-29-2010, 08:22 PM
It was a big loss, no doubt at all.

It's highly unfortunate that they could not work together. Wink Martindale will be held to the Nolan standard. Nothing less is acceptable. He has to be just as good as what we had. There's no excuses at this point. It's simply not acceptable to settle for a lesser defense simply because Josh has underdeveloped people skills. Wink seems like a good guy. He better be a good DC. Period.After the facts are all in, you were spot on!:thumbs:

NUB
12-29-2010, 08:28 PM
Man... I'd take Nolan as HC and Kubiak as OC in a heartbeat.

TonyR
12-29-2010, 09:01 PM
Nolan is not leaving Miami unless he gets a HC job.

I don't know, if they fire Sparano it's possible they may can the whole staff. But I agree it's probably not terribly likely he's going to make a lateral move and he may have zero interest in coming back to Denver.

TheReverend
12-30-2010, 06:21 AM
I've got $100 that says The 2010 Broncos give up less PPG than the 2009 version did.

First 5 takers welcome. (Except for BF7 of course)

You literally HAVE to try to be wrong as often as you are. It's a remarkable talent and I'm actually starting to think that you're just trolling to screw with everyone...

jhns
12-30-2010, 07:13 AM
If Nolan was still here, Josh would still be here. This is really McDaniels biggest mistake. He should have been on his knees making sure Nolan enjoyed his time here.

TheReverend
12-30-2010, 07:22 AM
If Nolan was still here, Josh would still be here. This is really McDaniels biggest mistake. He should have been on his knees making sure Nolan enjoyed his time here.

Can you imagine the team McDaniels could've had if he could get along with talented human beings?

jhns
12-30-2010, 07:30 AM
Can you imagine the team McDaniels could've had if he could get along with talented human beings?

Yup, it could have been good pretty fast. Even with the Cutler thing, I was starting to like what I was seeing by the end of his first season. Then came his second offseason... It was pretty obvious that this team was f'ed by the time it was over.

CEH
12-30-2010, 07:43 AM
Can you imagine the team McDaniels could've had if he could get along with talented human beings?

The more time passes the more Josh's ppl skills are coming into focus.
Can anyone be this callous?

When the COO leads of the post firing new conference with we must get back the "Integrity of the Denver Broncos " that is rooted more deeply than just wasting a 1st round pick on Zo or trading players.

Say what you will about Cutler he went to a team that built a defense and running game around him. Andy Reid is a QB guru who does it differently . He has a system but allows his QBs to have their own personalities. It's not my way or the highway.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see where Josh could have gone if he had any type of leadership ability

TheReverend
12-30-2010, 07:48 AM
The more time passes the more Josh's ppl skills are coming into focus.
Can anyone be this callous?

When the COO leads of the post firing new conference with we must get back the "Integrity of the Denver Broncos " that is rooted more deeply than just wasting a 1st round pick on Zo or trading players.

Say what you will about Cutler he went to a team that built a defense and running game around him. Andy Reid is a QB guru who does it differently . He has a system but allows his QBs to have their own personalities. It's not my way or the highway.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see where Josh could have gone if he had any type of leadership ability

Mike Martz or is that completely random?

CEH
12-30-2010, 07:56 AM
Mike Martz or is that completely random?

Yes new thought . Should have started a new paragraph. Just wanted to point out a guy known to coach up QBs in this league and they don't always have to fit a certain mode or be a yes man