PDA

View Full Version : Broncos GM Xanders confident a smart game plan is in place to revitalize roster


baja
09-15-2010, 12:15 AM
t's been awhile since the men upstairs at Dove Valley seemed to be smart.
The men upstairs at Broncos headquarters, coach Josh McDaniels and general manager Brian Xanders, understand how it works. They know smarts are directly related to winning, and the Broncos have lost nine of their last 11 games — including their season opener Sunday at Jacksonville, 24-17.
When a team slumps, every transaction made by the football operations department — including acquiring running back Laurence Maroney from the New England Patriots in a trade Tuesday — is scrutinized.
It looked bad three weeks ago when the bosses essentially dumped cornerback Alphonso Smith, upon whom the team placed a first-round draft pick value as recently as 2009, and released defensive end Jarvis Green, who as recently as March was considered worth a $3.255 million guarantee.
Not considered: Even with the wasted investment in Smith and Green, and the $600,000 in bonuses paid to Brandon Stokley before his release, the Broncos' "dead money" against the salary cap this year, if there were a salary cap, is only $8.2 million. Their wasted cash is $6 million. Both figures are in the bottom five of the NFL, according to two league sources. A far cry from a Broncos franchise that from 1998-2009 was No. 1 in dead money, according to the sources.
"It depends on perspective," Xan-ders said. "Those were two decisions in one day, but the goal was to get better in terms of trying to make the roster better. It's not a decision of 'We drafted him here,' or 'We paid this guy in free agency.' We work the roster process purely on football decisions.
"(Broncos owner) Pat Bowlen and the fans want the best team out there on Sunday, not a team that's preserving decisions in the offseason."
Xanders agreed to address the team's plan and some of the surprise decisions made while setting the Broncos' 53-man roster. Team executives know that until the Broncos start winning, convincing their fan base that an intelligent plan has been formulated is difficult.
<b>On the plus side, they point to a roster turnover from when McDaniels inherited the head coaching job in January 2009.
"We let go of 32 players from 2008 (roster and practice squad) who were here who never played in the NFL again," </b>Xanders said. "There's a plan in place. We're laying the foundation for success. And most of the decisions have been productive."
Green was the only major flop from a free-agent list that since March 2009 includes Brian Dawkins, Jabar Gaff-ney, Brandon Lloyd, Andre Goodman, Renaldo Hill, Correll Buckhalter, Justin Bannan and Jamal Williams.
These Broncos are considerably larger, and more physical at the line of scrimmage, than most recent Denver teams. It's too early to say the Broncos are better up front, but they appear better equipped to handle such rugged teams as those typically fielded in the NFC East and AFC East.
But can the Broncos miss on such players as Smith and Green and eventually win?
"There's always inherent risk in every transaction — whether it's a trade or a signing or a draft selection," Xanders said. "But as a whole, we feel good about the summation of the decisions we've made the last two years."
The Miami Dolphins cut a second- round pick from the 2009 draft (Pat White) and just released center Jake Grove, who received a $14.5 million guarantee before last season and played in only 10 games.
This season, more than any other, teams seemed willing to cut their losses. Arizona cut its 2009 second-round pick (Cody Brown) and gave up on quarterback Matt Leinart after paying him roughly $14.5 million.
Seattle still owes nearly $7 million to T.J. Houshmandzadeh. Four teams — the Broncos (Smith), Arizona (Brown), Miami (White) and Cleveland (David Viekune) — gave up on their 2009 second-round draft picks.
It took guts for Xanders and McDaniels to admit mistakes on their initial evaluation of Smith and Green.
The moves might have even been called smart had the Broncos defeated Jacksonville.


Read more: Broncos GM Xanders confident a smart game plan is in place to revitalize roster - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_16077150#ixzz0za1jz7AP

baja
09-15-2010, 12:23 AM
"On the plus side, they point to a roster turnover from when McDaniels inherited the head coaching job in January 2009.
"We let go of 32 players from 2008 (roster and practice squad) who were here who never played in the NFL again,""



That my fellow fans is fuqking amazing

Dr. Broncenstein
09-15-2010, 12:23 AM
Translation: "We created problems where there weren't problems. Plus we haven't fixed the original problems. Most of anyone leftover worth a shiat is injured or on IR. So excuse us for looking a little desperate because we are a little desperate."

DivineLegion
09-15-2010, 12:31 AM
Wasn't the 09 Draft supposed to be one of the worst draft classes in the last 20 years talent wise?

R8R H8R
09-15-2010, 12:38 AM
"On the plus side, they point to a roster turnover from when McDaniels inherited the head coaching job in January 2009.
"We let go of 32 players from 2008 (roster and practice squad) who were here who never played in the NFL again,""



That my fellow fans is fuqking amazing

Yes it is, and so is this:

"Even with the wasted investment in Smith and Green, and the $600,000 in bonuses paid to Brandon Stokley before his release, the Broncos' "dead money" against the salary cap this year, if there were a salary cap, is only $8.2 million. Their wasted cash is $6 million. Both figures are in the bottom five of the NFL, according to two league sources. A far cry from a Broncos franchise that from 1998-2009 was No. 1 in dead money, according to the sources."

baja
09-15-2010, 12:47 AM
Yes it is, and so is this:

"Even with the wasted investment in Smith and Green, and the $600,000 in bonuses paid to Brandon Stokley before his release, the Broncos' "dead money" against the salary cap this year, if there were a salary cap, is only $8.2 million. Their wasted cash is $6 million. Both figures are in the bottom five of the NFL, according to two league sources. A far cry from a Broncos franchise that from 1998-2009 was No. 1 in dead money, according to the sources."

Yes, I didn't bold that for fear So Cal would pass Gall stones when he read it.

baja
09-15-2010, 12:50 AM
Yes it is, and so is this:

"Even with the wasted investment in Smith and Green, and the $600,000 in bonuses paid to Brandon Stokley before his release, the Broncos' "dead money" against the salary cap this year, if there were a salary cap, is only $8.2 million. Their wasted cash is $6 million. Both figures are in the bottom five of the NFL, according to two league sources. A far cry from a Broncos franchise that from 1998-2009 was No. 1 in dead money, according to the sources."

If only the broke ass gutless drunk had not tied Shanny's hands on spending why I bet we would have won two or three more Super Bowls

fontaine
09-15-2010, 01:37 AM
"On the plus side, they point to a roster turnover from when McDaniels inherited the head coaching job in January 2009.
"We let go of 32 players from 2008 (roster and practice squad) who were here who never played in the NFL again,""



That my fellow fans is fuqking amazing

Do we know how many of the 32 retired, or were too injured to play, or were Practice squad players who fall off the radar anway?

baja
09-15-2010, 01:41 AM
Do we know how many of the 32 retired, or were too injured to play, or were Practice squad players who fall off the radar anway?

Not sure but there is this;

Both figures are in the bottom five of the NFL, according to two league sources. A far cry from a Broncos franchise that from 1998-2009 was No. 1 in dead money, according to the sources."

BMarsh615
09-15-2010, 01:47 AM
Do we know how many of the 32 retired, or were too injured to play, or were Practice squad players who fall off the radar anway?

Marlon McCree, Marquand Manuel, Nate Webster, Jamie Winborn, Tatum Bell, Michael Pittman, Andre Hall, PJ Pope, Cory Boyd, Selvin Young, Chad Mustard, Darrell Jackson, Cliff Russell, Glenn Martinez, Nate Jackson, Engleberger, Jeb Putzier, Dewayne Robertson, Ekuban, Boss Bailey, Josh Bell, Kenny Peterson, Calvin Lowery.

Did I miss anyone ???

TheReverend
09-15-2010, 01:48 AM
Xanders is probably the worst decision Bowlen has ever made. Including Annabelle, fur coats, and ostrich boots.

baja
09-15-2010, 01:50 AM
Xanders is probably the worst decision Bowlen has ever made. Including Annabelle, fur coats, and ostrich boots.

...and you base that on?

tsiguy96
09-15-2010, 03:21 AM
Marlon McCree, Marquand Manuel, Nate Webster, Jamie Winborn, Tatum Bell, Michael Pittman, Andre Hall, PJ Pope, Cory Boyd, Selvin Young, Chad Mustard, Darrell Jackson, Cliff Russell, Glenn Martinez, Nate Jackson, Engleberger, Jeb Putzier, Dewayne Robertson, Ekuban, Boss Bailey, Josh Bell, Kenny Peterson, Calvin Lowery.

Did I miss anyone ???

Roderick Rogers

signed as FA mid season, started not long after.

jhns
09-15-2010, 06:07 AM
That is great and all but we aren't more talented now that we have their roster in place... I fail to see why we should be proud of them.

55CrushEm
09-15-2010, 06:14 AM
...and you base that on?

His superior football knowledge, and love of all things Shanny related.

rbackfactory80
09-15-2010, 06:17 AM
More proof to how great a coach Shanahan was. That guy could field a winner in the NFL with college kids.

55CrushEm
09-15-2010, 06:31 AM
More proof to how great a coach Shanahan was. That guy could field a winner in the NFL with college kids.

How? By overpaying so many lazy, worthless free agents, that we led the league in dead money?? Resulting in 1 playoff win in 10 years?? Yes, I agree.....tremendous.

::)

McD has purged Shanny's garbage......and yet, because he hasn't built his own winning team yet in (gasp) only 17 regular season games.....you think we should give up on him. Smart.

rbackfactory80
09-15-2010, 06:38 AM
How? By overpaying so many lazy, worthless free agents, that we led the league in dead money?? Resulting in 1 playoff win in 10 years?? Yes, I agree.....tremendous.

::)

McD has purged Shanny's garbage......and yet, because he hasn't built his own winning team yet in (gasp) only 17 regular season games.....you think we should give up on him. Smart.

Look at his win percentage. I said win. Winning and winning championships are two different things. Separate him from the GM duties and you won't find a better coach.

I never said give up on McDaniels, where you got that I don't know. I was simply stating how amazing to have had a winning season under Shanahan with a severe lack of talent on the field. I support McDaniels and no question he deserves 3 full years. If things don't start to change after the next full season maybe other options need to be explored.

55CrushEm
09-15-2010, 06:45 AM
Look at his win percentage. I said win. Winning and winning championships are two different things. Separate him from the GM duties and you won't find a better coach.

I never said give up on McDaniels, where you got that I don't know. I was simply stating how amazing to have had a winning season under Shanahan with a severe lack of talent on the field. I support McDaniels and no question he deserves 3 full years. If things don't start to change after the next full season maybe other options need to be explored.

Fair enough. I wrongly lumped you into the "fire McD now" crowd. And I agree....if by the end of season 3 we are not in the playoffs....then we can start questioning.....until then, give the guy time to build the team he wants to build.

:deadhorse

bloodsunday
09-15-2010, 06:53 AM
Translation: "We created problems where there weren't problems. Plus we haven't fixed the original problems. Most of anyone leftover worth a shiat is injured or on IR. So excuse us for looking a little desperate because we are a little desperate."

Uh, I read that exactly the opposite. They got rid of 32 guys that no one else wanted.

jhns
09-15-2010, 06:56 AM
How? By overpaying so many lazy, worthless free agents, that we led the league in dead money?? Resulting in 1 playoff win in 10 years?? Yes, I agree.....tremendous.

::)

McD has purged Shanny's garbage......and yet, because he hasn't built his own winning team yet in (gasp) only 17 regular season games.....you think we should give up on him. Smart.

LOL

What a douche.

bloodsunday
09-15-2010, 06:56 AM
Marlon McCree, Marquand Manuel, Nate Webster, Jamie Winborn, Tatum Bell, Michael Pittman, Andre Hall, PJ Pope, Cory Boyd, Selvin Young, Chad Mustard, Darrell Jackson, Cliff Russell, Glenn Martinez, Nate Jackson, Engleberger, Jeb Putzier, Dewayne Robertson, Ekuban, Boss Bailey, Josh Bell, Kenny Peterson, Calvin Lowery.

Did I miss anyone ???

I have no idea how Knoshown will work out (I'm afraid the early returns aren't looking spectacular), but that said, look at the players I bolded. We got so used to Shanny bringing in spare parts at RB that we came to EXPECT it as a pattern of success. Those three guys above were all going to be the next Mike Anderson/Olandis Gary.

Mediator12
09-15-2010, 07:00 AM
LOL

What a douche.

Wow! That is the pot calling the kettle Black If I have ever seen it ;D

cmhargrove
09-15-2010, 07:00 AM
The jury is still out on whether thhe Xanders/McDaniels connection will eventually strike gold, but i do appreciate the fact that they have been given the reins to overhaul anything they see necessary. If they don't make it, we can find a new GM and Coach, but at least they aren't being handcuffed from doing what they think is in the best interests of the team.

I like the fact that we cut guys and replace them based on performance, not perception. It's a winning recipe if you can find the right players who will excel in your system. The question is - have we found those "right" guys to work in our system?

steeledude
09-15-2010, 07:01 AM
And we got rid of a first round cornerback after one season. As bad as Alphonso was, he was a guy who probably should have fit in that BS "two year evaluation" period on all draftees that McD loves to go around spewing.

I don't have much faith that our roster, if 32 guys were cut, would have much to fill other teams with.

And when you take an 8-8 team with an explosive offensive who needs to work on red zone issues, and say it's okay if we're potentially worse for a couple of years, then that is the logic that loses me.

The Broncos that played this week looked as bad on both sides of the ball as our defense did in 2008. I was waiting for someone to get the football stuck in his mask as he accidentally tripped in for a touchdown.

bloodsunday
09-15-2010, 07:01 AM
That is great and all but we aren't more talented now that we have their roster in place... I fail to see why we should be proud of them.

No one is suggesting we be proud, yet any way. The real point is two-fold (as I read it):
1) There is a plan in place and they need time to execute it
2) A significant part of what they have done to date has been unraveling mistakes made by the last administration

There is also one hidden point not mentioned here... they are doing it all while cash strapped (at least that is the assumption). Between a struggling economy, an unknown labor landscape, past roster mistakes (e.g. dead money), and having to pay Shanny's deal out, there is a strong assumption out there that Bowlen is having cash flow problems. Even if he IS NOT cash strapped, most of those issues are still relevant problems to this new administration.

cmhargrove
09-15-2010, 07:03 AM
No one is suggesting we be proud, yet any way. The real point is two-fold (as I read it):
1) There is a plan in place and they need time to execute it
2) A significant part of what they have done to date has been unraveling mistakes made by the last administration

There is also one hidden point not mentioned here... they are doing it all while cash strapped (at least that is the assumption). Between a struggling economy, an unknown labor landscape, past roster mistakes (e.g. dead money), and having to pay Shanny's deal out, there is a strong assumption out there that Bowlen is having cash flow problems. Even if he IS NOT cash strapped, most of those issues are still relevant problems to this new administration.

Good point about the cash flow also. From a purely financial standpoint, if you can field 8-8 teams for millions less, why not? Shanny had been overspending for a while with mediocre results. It's just fiscally responsible.

Steve Sewell
09-15-2010, 07:10 AM
Marlon McCree, Marquand Manuel, Nate Webster, Jamie Winborn, Tatum Bell, Michael Pittman, Andre Hall, PJ Pope, Cory Boyd, Selvin Young, Chad Mustard, Darrell Jackson, Cliff Russell, Glenn Martinez, Nate Jackson, Engleberger, Jeb Putzier, Dewayne Robertson, Ekuban, Boss Bailey, Josh Bell, Kenny Peterson, Calvin Lowery.

Did I miss anyone ???

Wow that list is full of fail.

SoDak Bronco
09-15-2010, 07:11 AM
Look at his win percentage. I said win. Winning and winning championships are two different things. Separate him from the GM duties and you won't find a better coach.

I never said give up on McDaniels, where you got that I don't know. I was simply stating how amazing to have had a winning season under Shanahan with a severe lack of talent on the field. I support McDaniels and no question he deserves 3 full years. If things don't start to change after the next full season maybe other options need to be explored.

I agree 100%. If Shanny were to have his ego in check, and just coached and didn't worry about the GM duties. He is top 2 or 3 coaches bar none.

I am starting to get annoyed by X and McD with some of these trades, I am willing to be on board for 3 years, but I better see some progress and a playoff trip.

Steve Sewell
09-15-2010, 07:12 AM
That is great and all but we aren't more talented now that we have their roster in place... I fail to see why we should be proud of them.

Its a testament to Shanahan's coaching ability more than anything. No one is disputing that. However, you can only get by on smoke and mirrors so long, which is why we saw so many fast starts only the get destroyed in the playoffs against teams with vastly superior top to bottom talent.

Rabb
09-15-2010, 07:15 AM
I love the mane now, where else can I get that "opposing fan in the other team's stadium" feeling when I am really in our own backyard

love all of you, go Broncos

jhns
09-15-2010, 07:18 AM
Its a testament to Shanahan's coaching ability more than anything. No one is disputing that. However, you can only get by on smoke and mirrors so long, which is why we saw so many fast starts only the get destroyed in the playoffs against teams with vastly superior top to bottom talent.

I agree. I wasn't defending Shanahan the GM. He was a horrible GM. I just feel that our current coach and GM have no room to talk until they actually improve the talent level of this team. We are 8-9 with their roster. Let's call their plan a smarter one after they start winning. No, I am not saying they should have won the SB already. I'm only saying it is way to early to call their plan a better one.

jhns
09-15-2010, 07:22 AM
Wow! That is the pot calling the kettle Black If I have ever seen it ;D

Haven't you heard? It takes one to know one. I figured I would do you all a favor and point out the other ones.

bloodsunday
09-15-2010, 07:23 AM
I don't have much faith that our roster, if 32 guys were cut, would have much to fill other teams with.
Honestly I think you make a fair point here. I don't know what the number is, but there are quite a few guys on this roster that are throw away as well.

And when you take an 8-8 team with an explosive offensive who needs to work on red zone issues, and say it's okay if we're potentially worse for a couple of years, then that is the logic that loses me.
This is where I really disagree with most 2008 defenders. The first thing you have to do is decide on what metrics you are going to use to determine success or failure. If it's record, then last year was a lateral move. When evaluating an offense points make the most sense to me. The last 13 games of 2008 (the explosive offense) scored 19 pts per game (24th in the league). They took a small step forward from that to 20.4 pts per game (20th in the league) last season. In terms of defense, they allowed 28 pts per game (for the whole season and for the last 13 games -- since I did that for the offense) in 2008 and they allowed 20.3 pts per game in 2009.

So, what does it all mean? It means that thus far they have maintained a competitive team while making this transition. There is simply no reason to believe that the trajectory of this team is different now then when Shanahan left. He was a .500 football coach his last three years and we were a .500 football team last year. But it's really not fair to say they took a great thing and turned it into crap. There is no evidence of that, particularly in light of the cap and roster they inherited.

Obviously this thing is reaching a critical point (over the next 12 to 18 months) where McDaniels and Xanders plan had better start to show fruit or there will be a problem. But right now patience is warranted to see if their plan is actually working.

The Broncos that played this week looked as bad on both sides of the ball as our defense did in 2008. I was waiting for someone to get the football stuck in his mask as he accidentally tripped in for a touchdown.

I disagree with this. The team looked competitive, but lacking play makers to me. In particular the offensive line looked in flux, which you would expect with 2 rookies starting and 3 guys out or dealing with injuries (Clady, Kuper, and Harris)

TailgateNut
09-15-2010, 07:24 AM
Wow! That is the pot calling the kettle Black If I have ever seen it ;D


I see jhns hasn't changed a bit. He remains at the head of the "douche" race.

colonelbeef
09-15-2010, 07:27 AM
Translation: "We created problems where there weren't problems. Plus we haven't fixed the original problems. Most of anyone leftover worth a shiat is injured or on IR. So excuse us for looking a little desperate because we are a little desperate."

Haha +1

The 2008 Broncos were young and exciting.

the 2010 Broncos are old and predictable.

bloodsunday
09-15-2010, 07:29 AM
If Shanny were to have his ego in check, and just coached and didn't worry about the GM duties. He is top 2 or 3 coaches bar none.

I used to think this way, but I am slowly coming to grips with the reality that even then it was time. He'd simply been here too long. His "philosophies", whether it be zone blocking schemes, late round draft picks on OL, left over parts at RB, bootlegs for QBs, etc... had just worn tired. He had a good run here, but it was just time. I suspect if you asked him at this point that even he would agree with that.

colonelbeef
09-15-2010, 07:32 AM
The jury is still out on whether thhe Xanders/McDaniels connection will eventually strike gold, but i do appreciate the fact that they have been given the reins to overhaul anything they see necessary. If they don't make it, we can find a new GM and Coach, but at least they aren't being handcuffed from doing what they think is in the best interests of the team.

I like the fact that we cut guys and replace them based on performance, not perception. It's a winning recipe if you can find the right players who will excel in your system. The question is - have we found those "right" guys to work in our system?

Agreed. The only problem is that potentially we have a FO in place now that cannot properly value talent. At the very least, it is clear that 'character' or at least the perception thereof trumps actual football talent in the eyes of this regime.

They have been given all of the rope, hopefully it doesn't result in a self-induced hanging.

colonelbeef
09-15-2010, 07:34 AM
Its a testament to Shanahan's coaching ability more than anything. No one is disputing that. However, you can only get by on smoke and mirrors so long, which is why we saw so many fast starts only the get destroyed in the playoffs against teams with vastly superior top to bottom talent.

Peyton ****ing Manning.

there is no shame in losing to Peyton Manning, fools

Rabb
09-15-2010, 07:35 AM
Haha +1

The 2008 Broncos were young and exciting.

the 2010 Broncos are old and predictable.

yeah, we don't have any youth at all Uhh

and for the record, the 2008 Broncos...how many playoff wins did we get that year?

Brian Xanders
09-15-2010, 07:36 AM
Xanders is probably the worst decision Bowlen has ever made. Including Annabelle, fur coats, and ostrich boots.

Hey, come on now, worse then ostrich boots? At least you said probably.

jhns
09-15-2010, 07:38 AM
I see jhns hasn't changed a bit. He remains at the head of the "douche" race.

LOL

Come on now, I could never beat you in the douche race.

"I'm going to beat you up and talk like a tough guy as I sit behind my monitor!"

I just can't compete.

55CrushEm
09-15-2010, 07:40 AM
LOL

What a douche.

Why? When you lead the league in dead money.....that's a BAD thing.

I'm a douche because I pointed out something negative about the Shanny regime??

Sorry, I forgot your unconditional love for all things Shanny related.

I'm actually amazed you can even type on your keyboard. It must be hard to do with your nose, cause you've apparently got Shanny's penis in one of your hands and his balls in another.

Steve Sewell
09-15-2010, 07:40 AM
Peyton ****ing Manning.

there is no shame in losing to Peyton Manning, fools

Especially when you have Roc Alexander out there covering Reggie Wayne or Marvin Harrison, right?

2004: 31-3 at halftime
2005: 35-3 at halftime

That's pitiful. That's a severe lack of talent.

jhns
09-15-2010, 07:43 AM
Why? When you lead the league in dead money.....that's a BAD thing.

I'm a douche because I pointed out something negative about the Shanny regime??

Sorry, I forgot your unconditional love for all things Shanny related.

I'm actually amazed you can even type on your keyboard. It must be hard to do with your nose, cause you've apparently got Shanny's penis in one of your hands and his balls in another.

No, you're a douche because you freaked out and cried about nothing. The other poster didn't say anything close to what you went off on. That makes you a douche.

chex
09-15-2010, 07:52 AM
and for the record, the 2008 Broncos...how many playoff wins did we get that year?

Who cares? Our offense was second in yards. 8')

LRtagger
09-15-2010, 07:56 AM
Especially when you have Roc Alexander out there covering Reggie Wayne or Marvin Harrison, right?

2004: 31-3 at halftime
2005: 35-3 at halftime

That's pitiful. That's a severe lack of talent.

Yea but it was Peyton Manning!!! He destroys all teams that he faces. Just look at all those Super Bowl rings we won those years he destroyed us.

Mediator12
09-15-2010, 07:57 AM
Haven't you heard? It takes one to know one. I figured I would do you all a favor and point out the other ones.

I certainly do not need the effort, but I guess you have no problem with telling us all after feeling free to do the same to others :welcome:

Rohirrim
09-15-2010, 07:57 AM
With presidents and coaches it's the same: Give them three years.

Mediator12
09-15-2010, 08:00 AM
Who cares? Our offense was second in yards. 8')

And it was exciting, just like the Run and shoot was when they lost to BUF in the playoffs with a 28 point lead ;D

Taco John
09-15-2010, 08:02 AM
If there's one thing our front office has excelled at during the new era, it's been pointing fingers.

Mediator12
09-15-2010, 08:02 AM
With presidents and coaches it's the same: Give them three years.

Presidents actually affect things about three years AFTER they do something. That is why the current political landscape is such a joke. People vote on the here and now and never see the real results.

HAT
09-15-2010, 08:03 AM
the 2010 Broncos are old and predictable.

So predict them. What will their record be this year?

55CrushEm
09-15-2010, 08:03 AM
No, you're a douche because you freaked out and cried about nothing. The other poster didn't say anything close to what you went off on. That makes you a douche.

I didn't cry at all. Just simply pointed out (the obvious) that McD has purged much of Shanny's roster to make room for "his players". Every coach does it.

And what you seem to want to ignore is that the article pointed out that most of those players AREN'T EVEN PLAYING IN THE NFL NOW.

Whatever......douche nozzle (thanks for letting me borrow that term, Alec).

Dedhed
09-15-2010, 08:04 AM
More proof to how great a coach Shanahan was. That guy could field a winner in the NFL with college kids.

Well, by that rationale isn't McDaniels equally good?

If you're arguing that Xanders and McDaniels haven't upgraded the roster, and McD in his first year posted the same record as Shanahan with a roster of equal talent, it seems like you have to concede that Josh is equal to Shanahan.

For those arguing that McD has downgraded the roster, they're saying that McD is a superior coach.

Mediator12
09-15-2010, 08:06 AM
If there's one thing our front office has excelled at during the new era, it's been pointing fingers.

Yes, they are world class at that ;D

I think they need to shut up and walk the walk personally. I really like McDaniels as an OC. However, so far, he has handled being a head coach about as well as Wade Phillips. Just good enough, instead of being happy to be a superior OC.

Too many GREAT coordinators, make Poor HC's. That is why I think hiring guys like John Harbaugh works out much better. He spent his time dealing with the forgotten realm of ST's and was able to see what a real HC neeed to do behind the scenes. Coordinators are too focused on their side of the ball and really struggle with being a big picture kind of guy way too often....

jhns
09-15-2010, 08:08 AM
I didn't cry at all. Just simply pointed out (the obvious) that McD has purged much of Shanny's roster to make room for "his players". Every coach does it.

And what you seem to want to ignore is that the article pointed out that most of those players AREN'T EVEN PLAYING IN THE NFL NOW.

Whatever......douche nozzle (thanks for letting me borrow that term, Alec).

That is a pretty old term. Why would you need to borrow it from Alec?

Anyways, go back and read the post I quoted. Read the post you quoted. The guy said that Shanahan could win games even though he had crap rosters. You went off about a lot of stuff that had nothing to do with what he said, while calling him a hater. That is what a douche does.

Rohirrim
09-15-2010, 08:09 AM
Yes, they are world class at that ;D

I think they need to shut up and walk the walk personally. I really like McDaniels as an OC. However, so far, he has handled being a head coach about as well as Wade Phillips. Just good enough, instead of being happy to be a superior OC.

Too many GREAT coordinators, make Poor HC's. That is why I think hiring guys like John Harbaugh works out much better. He spent his time dealing with the forgotten realm of ST's and was able to see what a real HC neeed to do behind the scenes. Coordinators are too focused on their side of the ball and really struggle with being a big picture kind of guy way too often....

I guess Rex Ryan's offense supports that point. ;D

bendog
09-15-2010, 08:09 AM
As usual, McDaniels has to "prove" he's smarter than Shanahan. Anyone want to actually say this squad is better than 2008?

http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/depth/_/name/den/denver-broncos

http://www.examiner.com/broncos-in-denver/broncos-release-initial-depth-chart-of-2008

It's not, both are mediocre or at best 9 wins. Instead of patting themselves on the back about not spending as much money as Shanahan spent, just say they have a plan in place. Maybe they do, but wtf cares how much of the owners money a coach spends. I'd sure as hell rather have a coach who spends the owner's money, backloads the hell out of the cap - which isn't capped btw - and brings in D. McNabb than one who sits pat with the guy in Oak (who shanny raped Washington over, btw). That whole argument is seriously warped when the speculation was that Bowlen fired shanny because he wanted to cut payroll and bank profits. It's not supposed to be about 'I'm better than the mastermind." Hey, win two superbowls then crow.

I don't see how you justify giving up the value they did for Moreno and A.Smith, but nobody's draft is perfect. We'll see in two more years. I'm not sure about the D.Thomas pick rather than Dez Bryant, cause of the injury issue, but I liked the back half of the 2010draft. This team might be playoff capable by then.

That list is a little curious too, btw. Shanny traded Tatum Bell and Foster for Dre Bly. Andre Pittman was a desperation move that didn't involve a draft pick, as I recall. But it's all sort of meaningless since the average career in the nfl is 3.5 years. And that makes me question the entire effort of the xander b.s. Whow, I'm smarter than shanahan cause I got rid of players who were old and would have been gotten rid of anyway. Inferiorty complex much. lol

chex
09-15-2010, 08:09 AM
If there's one thing our front office has excelled at during the new era, it's been pointing fingers.

Not pointing fingers, just stating the facts. Unless you can prove otherwise, 32 guys from our roster two years ago who are no longer in the NFL doesn't exactly tell me we were on the right track, as you and others would lead us to believe. It's not like we broke up the Steel Curtain Steelers for crissakes.

bowtown
09-15-2010, 08:11 AM
Yes, they are world class at that ;D

I think they need to shut up and walk the walk personally. I really like McDaniels as an OC. However, so far, he has handled being a head coach about as well as Wade Phillips. Just good enough, instead of being happy to be a superior OC.

Too many GREAT coordinators, make Poor HC's. That is why I think hiring guys like John Harbaugh works out much better. He spent his time dealing with the forgotten realm of ST's and was able to see what a real HC neeed to do behind the scenes. Coordinators are too focused on their side of the ball and really struggle with being a big picture kind of guy way too often....

True but Josh did also assist in defense for a few years, and don't forget that BB took him under his wing the last year in NE and groomed him to be a HC. Not making a judgement one way or the other on how his tenure has turned out thus far, just making an observation.

Kaylore
09-15-2010, 08:11 AM
The jury is still out on whether thhe Xanders/McDaniels connection will eventually strike gold, but i do appreciate the fact that they have been given the reins to overhaul anything they see necessary. If they don't make it, we can find a new GM and Coach, but at least they aren't being handcuffed from doing what they think is in the best interests of the team.

I like the fact that we cut guys and replace them based on performance, not perception. It's a winning recipe if you can find the right players who will excel in your system. The question is - have we found those "right" guys to work in our system?

Good post. I agree. If it doesn't look good by next year, or this year is a disaster, we can look somewhere else knowing we gave it a fair shake. And I like cutting guys based on performance. The guys in the locker room will take to that.

bendog
09-15-2010, 08:13 AM
I guess Rex Ryan's offense supports that point. ;D

Hey, just cause they thought the were drafting Joe Flacko ..... and got Matt leinart's backup. They're the Jets. These things will happen.

Steve Sewell
09-15-2010, 08:14 AM
"We let go of 32 players from 2008 (roster and practice squad) who were here who never played in the NFL again," Xanders said. "There's a plan in place. We're laying the foundation for success. And most of the decisions have been productive."

This is pretty telling.

I don't know if Xanders and Co. are making excuses or not, but wouldn't it be fair for Broncos fans to give this group more than a season and 1 game to turn this situation around?

Mediator12
09-15-2010, 08:16 AM
Hey, just cause they thought the were drafting Joe Flacko ..... and got Matt leinart's backup. They're the Jets. These things will happen.

Well, there is that whole Shonn Green fumbling thing that put him on the bench too ;D

Rohirrim
09-15-2010, 08:19 AM
Hey, just cause they thought the were drafting Joe Flacko ..... and got Matt leinart's backup. They're the Jets. These things will happen.

I don't think The Mighty Sanchez is the root of their problems. He's more the victim than the cause.

bendog
09-15-2010, 08:23 AM
I think the root of the Jets problem is just that there's some supreme order in the universe that decided they should be doomed.

orangemonkey
09-15-2010, 08:26 AM
This is pretty telling.

I don't know if Xanders and Co. are making excuses or not, but wouldn't it be fair for Broncos fans to give this group more than a season and 1 game to turn this situation around?

It is fair but if we're looking at a 3 year plan for McD/Xanders, 1 year and 1 game in is plenty of time to start evaluating progress (or retrogress). So far results are not good on both sides of the ball.

As someone else said earlier, winning cures all.

PRBronco
09-15-2010, 08:33 AM
I love the mane now, where else can I get that "opposing fan in the other team's stadium" feeling when I am really in our own backyard

love all of you, go Broncos

Hey careful, that kind of talk gets you labelled "fan police" now.

Rohirrim
09-15-2010, 08:34 AM
It all starts with the lines. We won't know whether Josh's schemes lead to victory until we get some continuity on the lines. We've been shuffling more people in and out of those lines than a friggin NY subway station.

Mediator12
09-15-2010, 08:44 AM
It all starts with the lines. We won't know whether Josh's schemes lead to victory until we get some continuity on the lines. We've been shuffling more people in and out of those lines than a friggin NY subway station.

Stability in the lines, continuity of schemes, and solid QB play are the keys to longterm success. Ask the COLTS how losing players on the OL and having weak DT's helped them at HOU last week despite Manning throwing for a quarter mile and three TD's.

Taco John
09-15-2010, 08:45 AM
Not pointing fingers, just stating the facts.

Whatever. Anyone can clearly see they're pointing fingers right now.

Inkana7
09-15-2010, 08:54 AM
Whatever. Anyone can clearly see they're pointing fingers right now.

I'm not sure about that, TJ. To me it just sounds like Xanders was stating the truth.

bendog
09-15-2010, 08:57 AM
Whatever. Anyone can clearly see they're pointing fingers right now.

Big time pointing fingers. And unecessarily so from a fans' perspective.

Everyone who had any clue already knew that Shanahan would spend every dime he could find on anyone who had any potential to help win a single game. That's his track record. If there's anyway to possibly upgrade any postion, even if it's a third string, he'll jump. Risk, cost, possbile failure, character issues ... doesn't matter. For whatever reason, Bowlen abruptly changed his mind about doing this approach. Personally, I think Shanny was just done in Denver, and it was time for a change.

Looks to me that the Denver front office realizes that the broncos are at best mediocre this year, and fans are going to see Shanahan with a top 5 defense and a pro-bowl qb.

If I'm a Wash fan, I pony up for direct ticket this year, and I'll probably go to a sports bar a couple of times this year. If I'm having to shell out to keep my Denver season tickets maybe I'm more annoyed. But, Denver's rebuilding, and that's an undeniable fact, and really shouldn't make anyone angry or defensive. BUT, the fact that the front office is defensive makes me more concerned that their plan is really a bunch of amateurs with little clue. I keep hoping that isn't the case, but we'll see.

chex
09-15-2010, 08:57 AM
Whatever. Anyone can clearly see they're pointing fingers right now.

Well, are they making it up? 32 guys from the fabled 2008 team aren't on an NFL roster right now, but people are pointing fingers.

I get it though, no one is allowed to point out facts that besmirch anything Shanahan.

55CrushEm
09-15-2010, 08:58 AM
If there's one thing our front office has excelled at during the new era, it's been pointing fingers.

Seriously, Taco. I know you've been a proud supporter of Shanny over the years.....but really? This is more hypocrisy, if you ask me. Shanny did nothing but point the finger over his last few years, as evidenced by the annual firing of a d-coordinator, the firing of Sundquist, etc.

bendog
09-15-2010, 08:58 AM
Well, are they making it up? 32 guys from the fabled 2008 team aren't on an NFL roster right now, but people are pointing fingers.

I get it though, no one is allowed to point out facts that besmirch anything Shanahan.

The FACT is that the average career in the nfl is 3.5 years, so a team SHOULD have that turnover. The front office is spinning a fact that is meaningless. the QUESTION is why they try this bogus SPIN.

Popps
09-15-2010, 08:58 AM
<b>On the plus side, they point to a roster turnover from when McDaniels inherited the head coaching job in January 2009.
"We let go of 32 players from 2008 (roster and practice squad) who were here who never played in the NFL again," </b>

Wow.

Just wow.

Mediator12
09-15-2010, 08:58 AM
The truth is that teams lose 30+% of their rosters each season and that 2/3 of those players never make another roster for more than an offseason. In reality, they got rid of a lot of players just like other teams have! Very few teams stay together outside their core players for more than 4-5 years.

So, while this seems like it might have legs, it is just an ignorance of the sheer amount of players teams cut never make another NFL team for long. Yeah, we cut our dead weight, oh wait so does everyone else!

fontaine
09-15-2010, 08:59 AM
I'm not sure about that, TJ. To me it just sounds like Xanders was stating the truth.

Yeah, and where in that truth did he mention Clady, Harris, Kuper, Graham, Royal, Doom, Champ, Marshall, Cutler etc?

Seems like he was complaining about a roster and discounting the talent that was inherited.

bendog
09-15-2010, 09:01 AM
Seriously, Taco. I know you've been a proud supporter of Shanny over the years.....but really? This is more hypocrisy, if you ask me. Shanny did nothing but point the finger over his last few years, as evidenced by the annual firing of a d-coordinator, the firing of Sundquist, etc.

Did shanahan ever defend himself by poiting out he was better than R66vs or Wade? You miss the pt. Yeah shanny would throw anyone under the bus, andmaybe his own kid. But he didn't deflect from what he was doing with some bogus bull**** about average tenure in the nfl.

Drek
09-15-2010, 09:06 AM
If there's one thing our front office has excelled at during the new era, it's been pointing fingers.

How is it pointing fingers when Xanders was involved in the '08 roster construction?

Sounds to me like they're being honest. This team has been running low on real NFL talent for several years. A key byproduct and continued handicap you get from that is poor cap resources, preventing you from acquiring further talent.

They're now trying to change that and bring some real talent in. But we were pretty depleted to start things out.

chex
09-15-2010, 09:08 AM
The FACT is that the average career in the nfl is 3.5 years, so a team SHOULD have that turnover. The front office is spinning a fact that is meaningless. the QUESTION is why they try this bogus SPIN.

It's not SPIN. Spin is taking a negative fact and trying to make it positive, which is kinda what you are trying to do here.

Half the board talks about the 2008 Broncos with twinkles in their eyes. We've heard the stories. They were on the verge of something great. Lots of talent to boast about. Yet, 32 players from that team are out on the street. That is just 2 years removed. To me, that is fact. Not spin, unless you can prove otherwise.

Yes, there is plenty of turnover inherent with NFL rosters year to year, but 32 guys from a team that was supposedly on the verge of great things is an awful lot. I don't see how the two dovetail.

Drek
09-15-2010, 09:08 AM
The truth is that teams lose 30+% of their rosters each season and that 2/3 of those players never make another roster for more than an offseason. In reality, they got rid of a lot of players just like other teams have! Very few teams stay together outside their core players for more than 4-5 years.

So, while this seems like it might have legs, it is just an ignorance of the sheer amount of players teams cut never make another NFL team for long. Yeah, we cut our dead weight, oh wait so does everyone else!

The problem is that a lot of that dead weight we cut had comparatively big contracts and had been starting on this team. Most teams don't do that.

Inkana7
09-15-2010, 09:10 AM
Only 3 of our 11 defensive starters in 2008 are still starting in the NFL. The only other player to start in that game against Oakland that's still in the NFL is Marcus Thomas.

That's pathetic.

jhns
09-15-2010, 09:11 AM
The problem is that a lot of that dead weight we cut had comparatively big contracts and had been starting on this team. Most teams don't do that.

The teams that switch front offices, go from a 4-3 to a 3-4, and change from a west coast to a spread offense do.

jhns
09-15-2010, 09:16 AM
The teams that switch front offices, go from a 4-3 to a 3-4, and change from a west coast to a spread offense do.

My edit isn't working but I should also add, "and had a ton of injuries", to that.

Drek
09-15-2010, 09:19 AM
The teams that switch front offices, go from a 4-3 to a 3-4, and change from a west coast to a spread offense do.

And what guys did we release because of the 4-3>3-4 change who now have jobs in the NFL?

What year did Brian Xanders start working for the Denver Broncos?

The offensive side of the ball is where most of the players were retained. Defense is where we cleaned house. If it was something as simple as a system change you'd think 4-3 teams would've been snapping our cast offs up post-haste.

jhns
09-15-2010, 09:22 AM
And what guys did we release because of the 4-3>3-4 change who now have jobs in the NFL?

What year did Brian Xanders start working for the Denver Broncos?

The offensive side of the ball is where most of the players were retained. Defense is where we cleaned house. If it was something as simple as a system change you'd think 4-3 teams would've been snapping our cast offs up post-haste.

Sure, whatever you say. It is normal for this kind of turnover to happen in the NFL. The reason ours is a little more is because of the reasons I stated. McDaniels and Xanders have no room to talk until they put together a more talented squad than the one they inherited. Period.

mwill07
09-15-2010, 09:24 AM
...

The Broncos that played this week looked as bad on both sides of the ball as our defense did in 2008. I was waiting for someone to get the football stuck in his mask as he accidentally tripped in for a touchdown.

you need to go back and watch that 2008 defense again.Did you already forget about the great Calvin Lowry, starting safety?

The only way Lowry could make a tackle is if he got run over and managed to hang on. If the back did something expecially tricky, like change direction, Lowry was SOL.

That 2008 defense, my friends, was one of the worst defenses the NFL had seen in the past decade.

SouthStndJunkie
09-15-2010, 09:25 AM
"On the plus side, they point to a roster turnover from when McDaniels inherited the head coaching job in January 2009.
"We let go of 32 players from 2008 (roster and practice squad) who were here who never played in the NFL again,""



That my fellow fans is fuqking amazing

I'd be interested to see the numbers from the other 31 teams so we have something to compare it to.

jhns
09-15-2010, 09:30 AM
you need to go back and watch that 2008 defense again.Did you already forget about the great Calvin Lowry, starting safety?

The only way Lowry could make a tackle is if he got run over and managed to hang on. If the back did something expecially tricky, like change direction, Lowry was SOL.

That 2008 defense, my friends, was one of the worst defenses the NFL had seen in the past decade.

Wasn't he starting because of injuries? Just like how a bunch of the people they cut were only here because half that roster was injured and we needed bodies?

Anyways, that defense was bad but it wasn't one of the worst of the decade. It wasn't even the worst that season. Maybe I am wrong and that season just had the worst defenses of the decade.

Mediator12
09-15-2010, 09:32 AM
Only 3 of our 11 defensive starters in 2008 are still starting in the NFL. The only other player to start in that game against Oakland that's still in the NFL is Marcus Thomas.

That's pathetic.

You do realize that DENVER went through 3 scheme changes from 2006, 2007, and 2008 right?

A lot of the DL has changed over the years, because DEN has never had solid starters there since 2004 ;D There were over 26 different players that STARTED from 2000-2006 under Shanahan. There were over 36 differnt DL on the active gameday rosters duringthat time. Heck, I play golf with one of them, Ellis Johnson.

Roster turnover on defense has been the Broncos way for over a decade! That and starting UDFA's for a year and cutting bait. You know, Mario Fatefahi, Darius Holland, Lenny Walls, Kelly Herndon, Roc Alexander, Donnie Spragan, Nick Ferguson, and Jashon Sykes.

Roster turnover is not an excuse in today's NFL. It is a smokescreen PR stunt. It is an excuse, not a reason.

Drek
09-15-2010, 09:34 AM
Sure, whatever you say. It is normal for this kind of turnover to happen in the NFL. The reason ours is a little more is because of the reasons I stated. McDaniels and Xanders have no room to talk until they put together a more talented squad than the one they inherited. Period.

So since you have no leg to stand on it goes back to the ambiguous statements. Great.

Why don't you try to actually have some sort of intelligent debate for once, instead of throwing out half-assed opinions and then crying like a little girl when people call you out on them?

Mediator12
09-15-2010, 09:38 AM
I'd be interested to see the numbers from the other 31 teams so we have something to compare it to.

I have a list around here of the DL DEN had during the Shanahan era that never played anywhere else again. Pretty sure it was about 20 deep ;D

jhns
09-15-2010, 09:41 AM
So since you have no leg to stand on it goes back to the ambiguous statements. Great.

Why don't you try to actually have some sort of intelligent debate for once, instead of throwing out half-assed opinions and then crying like a little girl when people call you out on them?

You will always ignore facts to back McDaniels. How am I supposed to have an intelligent debate with that?

It is not an opinion that we switched schemes on both sides of the ball. It is not an opinion that we had a TON of injuries that year. It is not an opinion that a lot of the people they are talking about were only signed as roster fillers (in place of injured players) that even Shanahan wouldn't have kept. It is a fact that a lot of NFL teams have roster turnover and that a team making this many changes is going to have more changes to the roster than normal. It is a fact that McDaniels and Xanders have not proven that their roster is more talented now that they got rid of these players.

Rohirrim
09-15-2010, 09:43 AM
Sure, whatever you say. It is normal for this kind of turnover to happen in the NFL. The reason ours is a little more is because of the reasons I stated. McDaniels and Xanders have no room to talk until they put together a more talented squad than the one they inherited. Period.

They've already put together a better defense in a one season than Shanahan did in ten.

jhns
09-15-2010, 09:46 AM
They've already put together a better defense in a one season than Shanahan did in ten.

Ummm, we had some top 10 defenses in the last 10 years. Also, a defense is not a team. Where is the offense at? What about depth. If we are more talented and not winning, I would say we need a new coach.

Mediator12
09-15-2010, 09:52 AM
They've already put together a better defense in a one season than Shanahan did in ten.

When? I seriously hope you are not saying that last years atrocity was better than some of those shanahan years. You watch the last three games of last year or the JAX game last weekend?

In fact, that 2005 defense won the Only playoff game in the Shanahan era with 5 TO's. That offense certainly did nothing to score points against NE ;D

Rohirrim
09-15-2010, 09:55 AM
Ummm, we had some top 10 defenses in the last 10 years. Also, a defense is not a team. Where is the offense at? What about depth. If we are more talented and not winning, I would say we need a new coach.

Shanahan was 7-9 in 2007, 8-8 in 2008, and McDaniels was 8-8 in 2009. Of course, you want to throw in the towel already. Hell, you were ready last year.

mwill07
09-15-2010, 09:56 AM
Wasn't he starting because of injuries? Just like how a bunch of the people they cut were only here because half that roster was injured and we needed bodies?

Anyways, that defense was bad but it wasn't one of the worst of the decade. It wasn't even the worst that season. Maybe I am wrong and that season just had the worst defenses of the decade.
he was starting because of injuries, not that the great Marlon McCree was a world beater though.

Yes, 2008 had two of the worst D's of the decade. The Lions were worse. Denver was slightly better.

In 2008, Denver allowed 448 points and 5993 yards. Below is a complete list of all teams since 1980 to allow more than 448 and 5993.

2009 Lions
2008 Lions
2003 Lions
1986 Buccaneers
1985 Buccaneers
1984 Vikings
1981 Colts
1980 Saints

This is how the 2008 defense compares, historically.

Rohirrim
09-15-2010, 10:01 AM
When? I seriously hope you are not saying that last years atrocity was better than some of those shanahan years. You watch the last three games of last year or the JAX game last weekend?

In fact, that 2005 defense won the Only playoff game in the Shanahan era with 5 TO's. That offense certainly did nothing to score points against NE ;D

Were they any worse than Shanahan's last D? Or their performance against the Bills, Raiders and Sandy Eggo? The change of coordinators hurt, but I think the new D plays harder and with more intensity than anything I saw out of Shanahan's last few squads who pretty much phoned it in after game 8 every year. Maybe I'm just so glad to see the 3/4 come back to Denver that I'm biased. How could Wink (or anybody) do worse than Slowitz? At least, now I have hope that we can put the "D" back in Denver. Under Shanahan, I had given up.

rbackfactory80
09-15-2010, 10:01 AM
Well, by that rationale isn't McDaniels equally good?

If you're arguing that Xanders and McDaniels haven't upgraded the roster, and McD in his first year posted the same record as Shanahan with a roster of equal talent, it seems like you have to concede that Josh is equal to Shanahan.

For those arguing that McD has downgraded the roster, they're saying that McD is a superior coach.

I don't think the roster has been downgraded. I do think it has been filled with stop gap lunch pal NFL talent that has no future upside. A lot of positions are going to need to be filled soon and I hope we can continue to gain positive momentum while doing it. Lets face it, I don't think he will get 5 years to fix our woes and talent is needed almost across the board on this team. I have to say we really need Tebow to pan out.

I don't see Middlebrooks, the Browncos, or Roc Alexander out there anymore, that's a good thing. Pretty unimaginable that Shanahan raided the Browns scrap heap an continuously fielded a 10-6 team.

The question I ask myself is what is the strength of this team, I have no idea.

Mediator12
09-15-2010, 10:06 AM
Were they any worse than Shanahan's last D? Or their performance against the Bills, Raiders and Sandy Eggo? The change of coordinators hurt, but I think the new D plays harder and with more intensity than anything I saw out of Shanahan's last few squads who pretty much phoned it in after game 8 every year. Maybe I'm just so glad to see the 3/4 come back to Denver that I'm biased. How could Wink (or anybody) do worse than Slowitz? At least, now I have hope that we can put the "D" back in Denver. Under Shanahan, I had given up.

Yeah, he was too close to slowick. You really can screw up a good staff right quick by being close to your hires.

2007 and 2008 were abominations, but that 2005 defense was the best by far of the last decade. They just crapped their pants in the AFCCG as soon as Bailey dropped that PIck on Ben's third throw.....

tsiguy96
09-15-2010, 10:09 AM
i cant believe people are still arguing about all this ****. incredible.

jhns
09-15-2010, 10:10 AM
Shanahan was 7-9 in 2007, 8-8 in 2008, and McDaniels was 8-8 in 2009. Of course, you want to throw in the towel already. Hell, you were ready last year.

Throw in the towel? I stated facts.

Steve Sewell
09-15-2010, 10:10 AM
You will always ignore facts to back McDaniels. How am I supposed to have an intelligent debate with that?

It is not an opinion that we switched schemes on both sides of the ball. It is not an opinion that we had a TON of injuries that year. It is not an opinion that a lot of the people they are talking about were only signed as roster fillers (in place of injured players) that even Shanahan wouldn't have kept. It is a fact that a lot of NFL teams have roster turnover and that a team making this many changes is going to have more changes to the roster than normal. It is a fact that McDaniels and Xanders have not proven that their roster is more talented now that they got rid of these players.

This is hilarious.

You criticize someone for ignoring facts in order to back McDaniels and question their ability to have an intelligent debate.

Then you state that it is a FACT that McD and Xanders have not proven their roster is more talented after 17 games.

How can you ask for intelligent discourse when you yourself won't give a coaching staff more than a season to prove their worth?

Just sayin'

NFLBRONCO
09-15-2010, 10:11 AM
That is great and all but we aren't more talented now that we have their roster in place... I fail to see why we should be proud of them.

I agree 100% its money time for this FO to get us alot better then we are today. They must hit jackpot with top 10 draft choice in 2011.

orangemonkey
09-15-2010, 10:12 AM
The question I ask myself is what is the strength of this team, I have no idea.[/B]

Kicking....so far, we seem to be a very good kicking team. :Elway:

PRBronco
09-15-2010, 10:13 AM
Kicking....so far, we seem to be a very good kicking team. :Elway:

Does Colquitt have the punting job locked up?

jhns
09-15-2010, 10:14 AM
This is hilarious.

You criticize someone for ignoring facts in order to back McDaniels and question their ability to have an intelligent debate.

Then you state that it is a FACT that McD and Xanders have not proven their roster is more talented after 17 games.

How can you ask for intelligent discourse when you yourself won't give a coaching staff more than a season to prove their worth?

Just sayin'

Did I say they should be fired for not proving this? No. I said they shouldn't compare rosters, or methods of building rosters, until they prove they know something...

NFLBRONCO
09-15-2010, 10:16 AM
I am starting to get annoyed by X and McD with some of these trades, I am willing to be on board for 3 years, but I better see some progress and a playoff trip.

I'm like you with time table of FO and McD to show me progress and a playoff trip. I think its a huge task not sure how we will get 3 young solid DL 1 ISLB for front 7 in that time frame.

tsiguy96
09-15-2010, 10:21 AM
I'm like you with time table of FO and McD to show me progress and a playoff trip. I think its a huge task not sure how we will get 3 young solid DL 1 ISLB for front 7 in that time frame.

one stud DL in round 1, LB in round 2, big FA to help fill void.

orangemonkey
09-15-2010, 10:22 AM
Does Colquitt have the punting job locked up?
yes, punting and holding he has all locked up!

NFLBRONCO
09-15-2010, 10:29 AM
one stud DL in round 1, LB in round 2, big FA to help fill void.

Too easy solution for a team that rarely drafts DL. Big quality FA's are tough and real expensive to land.

yerner
09-15-2010, 10:29 AM
I like the idea that there is significantly less dead money. Probably the best news I've read out of Xandersland.

But the 32 players thing sounds odd to me. Although true, I wonder what it is for other teams that have coaching changes? It seems to me that when a coach leaves a team 'his' players often don't find other jobs.

All in all this left me optimistic. At least there will be money for Mcd to throw and NE garbage in the future.

ChSuperStar
09-15-2010, 10:29 AM
Yea but it was Peyton Manning!!! He destroys all teams that he faces. Just look at all those Super Bowl rings we won those years he destroyed us.

If he destroys every team he faces, and if he has been in nfl for 13 yrs.. if my guess is right. leaving the first few years.. he must have atleast 10 superbowl rings right ? :spit:

~Crash~
09-15-2010, 10:32 AM
Wasn't the 09 Draft supposed to be one of the worst draft classes in the last 20 years talent wise?

so you don't want one of all those kick ass RB's from that class . or better yet the 13th pick of this last years draft ?

Drek
09-15-2010, 10:33 AM
Yeah, he was too close to slowick. You really can screw up a good staff right quick by being close to your hires.

2007 and 2008 were abominations, but that 2005 defense was the best by far of the last decade. They just crapped their pants in the AFCCG as soon as Bailey dropped that PIck on Ben's third throw.....

The '05 defense played with fire on a weekly basis and got incredibly lucky up until the AFCCG. They were a solid D that hit on an amazingly lucky season of turnovers that made them look better than they where.

Solid though, and at least as good as last year's team. Shanahan put out some good defenses in the early 2000's. People forget that. But we did it thanks to an amazing LB corps shutting down the run, so it was often a defense that got dismantled by good passing teams (read: playoff level competition).

The story of Shanahan's last few years here was him getting too close to hires though. Boss Bailey, McCree and Manual, Slowick, Ian Gold, etc.. Mike had his guys and he sacrificed young, capable players for them on a regular basis.

We gave up Foxworth, a 3rd round CB who actually looked like he could play in this league (turns out he can), for a 7th because Shanahan didn't want real pressure on his boy Dre Bly.

Any time a coach or FO is making their decisions based on who their "guys" are you will see a lot of mistakes. One of the hallmarks of McDaniels' time here is a willingness to admit failure and try to salvage some value out of it.

Steve Sewell
09-15-2010, 10:35 AM
Did I say they should be fired for not proving this? No. I said they shouldn't compare rosters, or methods of building rosters, until they prove they know something...

I was using this as an example.

My point is that you routinely criticize other posters for their inability to partake in intelligent discussion, while maintaining an irrational position as it relates your expectations of the current regime.

ChSuperStar
09-15-2010, 10:37 AM
I am ok with the trade even, If we can get some play out of maroney this year and it gives k'shon time to heel. We dont want to make him injury prone by over using him now.. and i also dont mind everyone giving McD and the FO 3 years. But my only complain is while making trade or picking players this group seems to only concentrate on NE talent. There are 30 other NFL teams and other UDFA's that are available. So they need people who can evaluate talent like the goodman's did.

But McD makes me feel.. he makes like this organization makes 3 great moves, 2 good moves and 1 ok move and all of sudden fall back 10 steps with what seems like a stupid move. If that is avoided , i am sure there will be more support from the fan base. But whatever it be, I love my broncos and who ever the player is or who ever coaches this team.. This is MY TEAM and i will give my unconditional support. Just would like to see them win more games and eventually the big one in the next 5 years.

jhns
09-15-2010, 10:40 AM
I was using this as an example.

My point is that you routinely criticize other posters for their inability to partake in intelligent discussion, while maintaining an irrational position as it relates your expectations of the current regime.

I have no clue what you are talking about. The only reason I said anything about intelligent discussion was because I was responding to a post about intelligent discussion. I'm not sure where else you see me saying that.

Rohirrim
09-15-2010, 10:40 AM
The '05 defense played with fire on a weekly basis and got incredibly lucky up until the AFCCG. They were a solid D that hit on an amazingly lucky season of turnovers that made them look better than they where.

Solid though, and at least as good as last year's team. Shanahan put out some good defenses in the early 2000's. People forget that. But we did it thanks to an amazing LB corps shutting down the run, so it was often a defense that got dismantled by good passing teams (read: playoff level competition).

The story of Shanahan's last few years here was him getting too close to hires though. Boss Bailey, McCree and Manual, Slowick, Ian Gold, etc.. Mike had his guys and he sacrificed young, capable players for them on a regular basis.

We gave up Foxworth, a 3rd round CB who actually looked like he could play in this league (turns out he can), for a 7th because Shanahan didn't want real pressure on his boy Dre Bly.

Any time a coach or FO is making their decisions based on who their "guys" are you will see a lot of mistakes. One of the hallmarks of McDaniels' time here is a willingness to admit failure and try to salvage some value out of it.

Also, Al Wilson was the glue that held it all together. Once he was out of that lockerroom, they nosedived.

bendog
09-15-2010, 10:48 AM
I have no clue what you are talking about. The only reason I said anything about intelligent discussion was because I was responding to a post about intelligent discussion. I'm not sure where else you see me saying that.

stop trying to have an intelligent discussion about an unintelligent comment by Xanders about roster turnover and comments saying Xanders is right. (-:

And yeah, the foxworth trade hurt me. Shanny actually ran a good draft that year ... except for Claret. He actually drafted two decent corners that year.

Dagmar
09-15-2010, 11:00 AM
What happens if there is no 2011 season? Does McDaniels get 2012 from the fans?

PRBronco
09-15-2010, 11:10 AM
What happens if there is no 2011 season? Does McDaniels get 2012 from the fans?

I'm fairly certain he'll be blamed for the lack of the 2011 season.

Rohirrim
09-15-2010, 11:12 AM
I was using this as an example.

My point is that you routinely criticize other posters for their inability to partake in intelligent discussion, while maintaining an irrational position as it relates your expectations of the current regime.

Don't mess with jhns. He's a ninja:

http://i.huffpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/10591/slide_10591_139933_large.jpg?1284573285808

Eldorado
09-15-2010, 11:20 AM
Thanks Ro!

Rohirrim
09-15-2010, 11:41 AM
Thanks Ro!

He looks pretty fierce. :spit:

Hulamau
09-15-2010, 11:52 AM
i used to think this way, but i am slowly coming to grips with the reality that even then it was time. He'd simply been here too long. His "philosophies", whether it be zone blocking schemes, late round draft picks on ol, left over parts at rb, bootlegs for qbs, etc... Had just worn tired. He had a good run here, but it was just time. I suspect if you asked him at this point that even he would agree with that.

amen!

Steve Sewell
09-15-2010, 12:40 PM
What happens if there is no 2011 season? Does McDaniels get 2012 from the fans?

herp derp no fire mcdumy herp derp

Steve Sewell
09-15-2010, 12:42 PM
He looks pretty fierce. :spit:

ugh my avatar is pretty outdated. It was made originally to taunt Bobo about Ty Law and Patrick Surtain rofl

jhns
09-15-2010, 12:48 PM
Come on now. We all know my ninja outfit is way cooler than that thing.

bendog
09-15-2010, 12:49 PM
IF there's a lockout in 2011, I'll give McDaniels a pass, but only if he needs to shave by 2012.

zdoor
09-15-2010, 01:31 PM
if there's a lockout in 2011, i'll give mcdaniels a pass, but only if he needs to shave by 2012.

lmao

baja
09-15-2010, 01:46 PM
More proof to how great a coach Shanahan was. That guy could field a winner in the NFL with college kids.

You would be hard pressed to find one poster that does not think Shanny is a great coach and game planner. Talent evaluator not so much. I will never understand why people say some of us are Shanahan haters, it was just time for him to go. Now that he is focused on coaching he is going to be awesome in Washington and I will not be surprised if he has great success there with the help of a full time good GM and Snyder's money. He could very well have more SB wins in his future and there will be many here saying, "see we should have kept Shanny' but they will be wrong. Everyone involved will profit from his firing, Shanny, the redskins, pat Bowlen, the broncos and the Fans of both teams. You all will come to see we got a great coach too. here's to hoping we get the chance to go head to head in a Super Bowl.

baja
09-15-2010, 01:52 PM
The jury is still out on whether thhe Xanders/McDaniels connection will eventually strike gold, but i do appreciate the fact that they have been given the reins to overhaul anything they see necessary. If they don't make it, we can find a new GM and Coach, but at least they aren't being handcuffed from doing what they think is in the best interests of the team.

I like the fact that we cut guys and replace them based on performance, not perception. It's a winning recipe if you can find the right players who will excel in your system. The question is - have we found those "right" guys to work in our system?

This is a great way to look at the situation. I wish more of our fans could be this level headed.

baja
09-15-2010, 01:57 PM
Haven't you heard? It takes one to know one. I figured I would do you all a favor and point out the other ones.

Could you write shorter posts.

baja
09-15-2010, 02:03 PM
If there's one thing our front office has excelled at during the new era, it's been pointing fingers.

Never mind the facts

baja
09-15-2010, 02:04 PM
Well, by that rationale isn't McDaniels equally good?

If you're arguing that Xanders and McDaniels haven't upgraded the roster, and McD in his first year posted the same record as Shanahan with a roster of equal talent, it seems like you have to concede that Josh is equal to Shanahan.

For those arguing that McD has downgraded the roster, they're saying that McD is a superior coach.

LOL Love it!!!!

jhns
09-15-2010, 02:08 PM
Could you write shorter posts.

Nope. I could consider typing shorter posts though.

baja
09-15-2010, 02:09 PM
I'm not sure about that, TJ. To me it just sounds like Xanders was stating the truth.

When the truth doesn't support your beliefs it's labeled finger pointing.

baja
09-15-2010, 02:17 PM
The teams that switch front offices, go from a 4-3 to a 3-4, and change from a west coast to a spread offense do.

Does not change the fact that 32 ex player, some starters, are out of the league

baja
09-15-2010, 02:21 PM
I'd be interested to see the numbers from the other 31 teams so we have something to compare it to.

Fair enough

baja
09-15-2010, 02:23 PM
You do realize that DENVER went through 3 scheme changes from 2006, 2007, and 2008 right?

A lot of the DL has changed over the years, because DEN has never had solid starters there since 2004 ;D There were over 26 different players that STARTED from 2000-2006 under Shanahan. There were over 36 differnt DL on the active gameday rosters duringthat time. Heck, I play golf with one of them, Ellis Johnson.

Roster turnover on defense has been the Broncos way for over a decade! That and starting UDFA's for a year and cutting bait. You know, Mario Fatefahi, Darius Holland, Lenny Walls, Kelly Herndon, Roc Alexander, Donnie Spragan, Nick Ferguson, and Jashon Sykes.

Roster turnover is not an excuse in today's NFL. It is a smokescreen PR stunt. It is an excuse, not a reason.

I think you have proved a long running trend - Shanny didn't judge talent well which is the point you opposition is making.

jhns
09-15-2010, 02:23 PM
Does not change the fact that 32 ex player, some starters, are out of the league

It also doesn't change the fact that they haven't shown we are better off without those guys. What is McDaniels record? They were 8-8 with about five times the number of injuries as we have had since Josh took over. Josh is 8-9. Good job Josh. Your plan is incredible. Way to show us what the meaning of talent is!

baja
09-15-2010, 02:27 PM
Were they any worse than Shanahan's last D? Or their performance against the Bills, Raiders and Sandy Eggo? The change of coordinators hurt, but I think the new D plays harder and with more intensity than anything I saw out of Shanahan's last few squads who pretty much phoned it in after game 8 every year. Maybe I'm just so glad to see the 3/4 come back to Denver that I'm biased. How could Wink (or anybody) do worse than <b>Slowitz?</b> At least, now I have hope that we can put the "D" back in Denver. Under Shanahan, I had given up.

Slowitz - Ha Ha Ha! ;D

baja
09-15-2010, 02:32 PM
The '05 defense played with fire on a weekly basis and got incredibly lucky up until the AFCCG. They were a solid D that hit on an amazingly lucky season of turnovers that made them look better than they where.

Solid though, and at least as good as last year's team. Shanahan put out some good defenses in the early 2000's. People forget that. But we did it thanks to an amazing LB corps shutting down the run, so it was often a defense that got dismantled by good passing teams (read: playoff level competition).

The story of Shanahan's last few years here was him getting too close to hires though. Boss Bailey, McCree and Manual, Slowick, Ian Gold, etc.. Mike had his guys and he sacrificed young, capable players for them on a regular basis.

We gave up Foxworth, a 3rd round CB who actually looked like he could play in this league (turns out he can), for a 7th because Shanahan didn't want real pressure on his boy Dre Bly.

Any time a coach or FO is making their decisions based on who their "guys" are you will see a lot of mistakes. One of the hallmarks of McDaniels' time here is a willingness to admit failure and try to salvage some value out of it.

Agree. Favoritism was a huge problem along with not wanting to admit errors.

bendog
09-15-2010, 02:33 PM
It also doesn't change the fact that they haven't shown we are better off without those guys. What is McDaniels record? They were 8-8 with about five times the number of injuries as we have had since Josh took over. Josh is 8-9. Good job Josh. Your plan is incredible. Way to show us what the meaning of talent is!

But 8-8 (9?) while turning over a roster isn't that bad. And honestly, honestly Shanahan had pretty much turned his glass eye to "character." There were issues that even a shanny homer like me has to admit needed addressing.

Not the least of which is that Bowlen isn't the only owner/official noticing that fans are being asked to shell out THOUSANDS for seats, and off the field stuff is not getting less infrequent. It's bad enough that owners are making Billions off of stadium deals, but when fans see guys who are making millions behaving like criminals and getting away with it, it's not good for biz.

My only concern is that we haven't really seen McDaniels draft guys on the field. So his personnel ability is still a ?. He definitely looks like he knows what he wants on offense. And now he's got a Dcoord who apparantly speaks the same language he knows.

baja
09-15-2010, 02:34 PM
Also, Al Wilson was the glue that held it all together. Once he was out of that lockerroom, they nosedived.

Pretty embarrassing the way he treated when he was done.

Al in the Ring of Fame please....

jhns
09-15-2010, 02:42 PM
My only concern is that we haven't really seen McDaniels draft guys on the field. So his personnel ability is still a ?.

This is the only point I am trying to make. Neither McDaniels or Xanders have proven a thing when it comes to evaluating talent. Period.

OABB
09-15-2010, 02:42 PM
If hochuli didn't gift us a win we would have been 7-9... So a true 8-8 was an improvement fwiw. Also we weren't out physicalled by jax for once. We lost that game by miscues, not by rape.

I see improvement so far. I'm also a wait and see guy so I've made no proclamation that mcd is doing great so far. All I see is a more physical team with quality players and a team that can contend in any game. He'll last year we came back on Indy and even caused a few turnovers by manning. That is an actual improvement from the shanny era IMO.

I didn't like the loss on Sunday and have my doubts about this team, but I definitley see improvement.

TheReverend
09-15-2010, 02:53 PM
If hochuli didn't gift us a win we would have been 7-9... So a true 8-8 was an improvement fwiw. Also we weren't out physicalled by jax for once. We lost that game by miscues, not by rape.

I see improvement so far. I'm also a wait and see guy so I've made no proclamation that mcd is doing great so far. All I see is a more physical team with quality players and a team that can contend in any game. He'll last year we came back on Indy and even caused a few turnovers by manning. That is an actual improvement from the shanny era IMO.

I didn't like the loss on Sunday and have my doubts about this team, but I definitley see improvement.

And if the refs in the Fins game didn't call back Marshalls TD on a phantom PI we would've been 9-7 so what's your point?

OABB
09-15-2010, 02:56 PM
And if the refs in the Fins game didn't call back Marshalls TD on a phantom PI we would've been 9-7 so what's your point?

We could have overcome that pi I think. The fumble was on the final play of the game. I do agree with you overall on this point as it is useless to argue calls for a win, but we should have been 7-9 based in the timing if the calls.

I like where this team is heading and that is my real point.

CEH
09-15-2010, 03:02 PM
If hochuli didn't gift us a win we would have been 7-9... So a true 8-8 was an improvement fwiw. Also we weren't out physicalled by jax for once. We lost that game by miscues, not by rape.

I see improvement so far. I'm also a wait and see guy so I've made no proclamation that mcd is doing great so far. All I see is a more physical team with quality players and a team that can contend in any game. He'll last year we came back on Indy and even caused a few turnovers by manning. That is an actual improvement from the shanny era IMO.

I didn't like the loss on Sunday and have my doubts about this team, but I definitley see improvement.

Not sure if you were talking about last y ear but an 87 yard last second tipped pass TD is a miracle and a gifted win

TheReverend
09-15-2010, 03:46 PM
We could have overcome that pi I think. The fumble was on the final play of the game. I do agree with you overall on this point as it is useless to argue calls for a win, but we should have been 7-9 based in the timing if the calls.

I like where this team is heading and that is my real point.

Then why don't you just say that instead of trying to change reality?

Mediator12
09-15-2010, 03:50 PM
The '05 defense played with fire on a weekly basis and got incredibly lucky up until the AFCCG. They were a solid D that hit on an amazingly lucky season of turnovers that made them look better than they where.

Solid though, and at least as good as last year's team. Shanahan put out some good defenses in the early 2000's. People forget that. But we did it thanks to an amazing LB corps shutting down the run, so it was often a defense that got dismantled by good passing teams (read: playoff level competition).

The story of Shanahan's last few years here was him getting too close to hires though. Boss Bailey, McCree and Manual, Slowick, Ian Gold, etc.. Mike had his guys and he sacrificed young, capable players for them on a regular basis.

We gave up Foxworth, a 3rd round CB who actually looked like he could play in this league (turns out he can), for a 7th because Shanahan didn't want real pressure on his boy Dre Bly.

Any time a coach or FO is making their decisions based on who their "guys" are you will see a lot of mistakes. One of the hallmarks of McDaniels' time here is a willingness to admit failure and try to salvage some value out of it.

I do not think Luck had anything to do with those TO's. They did not have the talent to rush the passer and play coverage in the first half of the season. So, they came out with a pressure scheme the second half of the year and played an amazing amount of snaps going Cover Zero or faking going cover Zero. They played an ultra aggressive scheme to get those TO's, but Failed miserably in the AFCCG after they dropped 3 ints and had a Fumble recovery oveturned.....

bendog
09-15-2010, 03:51 PM
Then why don't you just say that instead of trying to change reality?

probably because posts above it were commenting on w-l and whether McDaniels was improving the team.

OABB
09-15-2010, 03:52 PM
Then why don't you just say that instead of trying to change reality?

I thought it was an interesting thought was all. It wasn't a proclamation of any sorts, just a benign statement.

Maybe if I cried like a little girl having her first period and started my own thread called "Hochuli is absolute embarrassing" it would have sat better with you?

HAT
09-15-2010, 03:57 PM
Maybe if I cried like a little girl having her first period and started my own thread called "Hochuli is absolute embarrassing" it would have sat better with you?

:spit:

baja
09-15-2010, 04:00 PM
Then why don't you just say that instead of trying to change reality?

Is reality objective?

WolfpackGuy
09-15-2010, 04:01 PM
Good to hear the X-Man is confident.

It's a plan filled with reaches and other teams drooling to rape the Broncos in trades.

Awesome!

baja
09-15-2010, 04:03 PM
A plan filled with reaches and other teams drooling to rape the Broncos in trades.

Awesome!

So far it doesn't look like Chicago will be charged with rape

Drek
09-15-2010, 04:14 PM
I do not think Luck had anything to do with those TO's. They did not have the talent to rush the passer and play coverage in the first half of the season. So, they came out with a pressure scheme the second half of the year and played an amazing amount of snaps going Cover Zero or faking going cover Zero. They played an ultra aggressive scheme to get those TO's, but Failed miserably in the AFCCG after they dropped 3 ints and had a Fumble recovery oveturned.....

Maybe, but statistically high turnover seasons are more of an anomaly/luck trait than a defensive trait.

Great defenses generate turnovers more consistently, sure, they have more play makers and generate more pressure. But the rate at which we were taking the ball away was something no defense has really sustained year to year. It was a smoke and mirrors defense, Coyer deserves a ton of credit for his scheming, but the actual talent on the defense was in a lot of ways pretty suspect.

TheReverend
09-15-2010, 04:21 PM
I thought it was an interesting thought was all. It wasn't a proclamation of any sorts, just a benign statement.

Maybe if I cried like a little girl having her first period and started my own thread called "Hochuli is absolute embarrassing" it would have sat better with you?

It's an interesting thought in what way? We were given a game and we were robbed a game. Bad calls happen all the time. Remember Chicago in 2007? We got royally screwed in that one. Oh well. Really interesting thought though... you know, if dog**** were interesting.

OABB
09-15-2010, 04:50 PM
It's an interesting thought in what way? We were given a game and we were robbed a game. Bad calls happen all the time. Remember Chicago in 2007? We got royally screwed in that one. Oh well. Really interesting thought though... you know, if dog**** were interesting.

If you were the person who decided what was interesting in the world, every post, discussion and picture on the internet would be about you, your work out regimen, or pictures of you masturbating to pictures of you.

Luckily, there is a world outside of your head for the rest of us to enjoy.

I understand you didn't find my point interesting, really I do. It's noted.

Can we move on now?

TheReverend
09-15-2010, 04:59 PM
If you were the person who decided what was interesting in the world, every post, discussion and picture on the internet would be about you, your work out regimen, or pictures of you masturbating to pictures of you.

Luckily, there is a world outside of your head for the rest of us to enjoy.

I understand you didn't find my point interesting, really I do. It's noted.

Can we move on now?

Would you like to keep deflecting away from you having no point or actually get back to the discussion?

Better yet, why don't you make a detailed post on specifically how you think the team is improving and in what areas and use different on field examples to support your evidence. I know it'll be hard since actual football posts aren't your thing, but it should adorable watching you. Now run along and hurry up to PM somebody who knows wtf they're talking about for help.

gyldenlove
09-15-2010, 05:14 PM
I really thought the team was improving last season, we had a genuine shot at 10-6 when we had 8 wins and still had the Raiders and Chiefs at home. Unfortunately it is difficult really to tell which team last year was the true Broncos, the team that beat up on the Giants, Chargers and Cowboys or the team that got abused at home by the Raiders and Chiefs.

It seems to me that the fundamental problem with the team is talent level, in the early season you can coach wins and gameplan success to some degree, but at the end of the year when too much video footage is available and all your tricks are used, it comes down to talent level, and that is when we have failed. I hope that the strategy the team is using now to build the roster is working and that we are adding more talent than we are subtracting, but there is not a lot of evidence yet to suggest it.

TheReverend
09-15-2010, 05:17 PM
I really thought the team was improving last season, we had a genuine shot at 10-6 when we had 8 wins and still had the Raiders and Chiefs at home. Unfortunately it is difficult really to tell which team last year was the true Broncos, the team that beat up on the Giants, Chargers and Cowboys or the team that got abused at home by the Raiders and Chiefs.

It seems to me that the fundamental problem with the team is talent level, in the early season you can coach wins and gameplan success to some degree, but at the end of the year when too much video footage is available and all your tricks are used, it comes down to talent level, and that is when we have failed. I hope that the strategy the team is using now to build the roster is working and that we are adding more talent than we are subtracting, but there is not a lot of evidence yet to suggest it.

The New England game was our best. That was such a beacon of hope and a brilliant performance in my opinion.

baja
09-15-2010, 05:24 PM
The New England game was our best. That was such a beacon of hope and a brilliant performance in my opinion.

I loved the fist pump. That said a lot IMO

OABB
09-15-2010, 05:34 PM
Would you like to keep deflecting away from you having no point or actually get back to the discussion?

Better yet, why don't you make a detailed post on specifically how you think the team is improving and in what areas and use different on field examples to support your evidence. I know it'll be hard since actual football posts aren't your thing, but it should adorable watching you. Now run along and hurry up to PM somebody who knows wtf they're talking about for help.

The improvement I see is simple.:

We have added solid and bigger vets to the Dline
Example: Bannan, Williams

We have added young and physically bigger players to the oline
Example: Beadles, Walton, Daniels

We have a Quarter back coming off a career year that is visibly more comfortable in what is a qb friendly system.
Example: Kyle Orton

in fa we have added players that make a solid and consistent secondary
Example: hill, Goodman,dawkins

We have added solid depth at Rb
Example: white, maroney and buckhalter

We have drafted young promising players that I am exited about.
Example:
Thomas, Moreno,ayers,decker,squid, cox, tebow, etc.

We have a young coach who has a legitimate resume by NFl hiring standards.
Example: Josh Mcdaniels

We are a team that is not afraid to cut bait on players if they donít fit in to the overall vision
Example: smith, green,olsen

We have a defensive scheme(3-4) which utilizes our players strengths.
Example: Nfl sack leader last year in Dumerville.

We have a coach who has been quoted as saying that you draft and acquire players to fit your scheme, and not change scheme to fit players that may have been mistakes.

We have a coach that runs more physical training camps(I believe this makes a more physical team)
Example: reality.

Also, it should be noted that if you had read my full posts in this thread, that I do agree with you and am not trying to deflect. If you could take your eyes off of the picture of yourself shirtless in the gold plated picture frame on your desk long enough, you would have seen that.


Also, it should be noted that I have NUMEROUSLY stated that I am a wait and see guy. Mcd may be terrible, I am not sure yet. I am more known for being a joker than a reasonable football expert, sure, but I do understand the game of football and am not devoid of thoughts or analysis like you are suggesting.

My persona here is a joker, and I am fine with that. This place can be so dreary and negative sometimes, that I think the mood needs to be lightened up a bit.

I am not one to stroke myself and blabber on and on in the hopes that someone will find me intelligent. Just because I choose to shut my mouth until I feel there is something of interest, does not make me dank, idiotic, or naive.

gyldenlove
09-15-2010, 05:41 PM
The New England game was our best. That was such a beacon of hope and a brilliant performance in my opinion.

I thought the Giants game was the best, I was super psyched about the Patriots game, that was the game that really made people take notice, that Mcdaniels beat Belichick, but to me coming back from the disaster that was Chris Simms finding a way to lose to the Redskins and then get humiliated by the Chuggers in prime time on thanksgiving made it special to beat the Giants, and beat them so comprehensively.

That game really stood out to me because it proved (at the time) that we were better than the losses to Washington and San Diego (Orton being injured) and that we could bounce back after bad games.

SoCalBronco
09-15-2010, 06:33 PM
Yes, I didn't bold that for fear So Cal would pass Gall stones when he read it.

When there is actual proof that we were No. 1 in dead money for this period, then I will pass gall stones...not just "two sources said so", I want the numerical data. I've posted the numerical data from the USA Today Database as to actual dollars spent and it suggests dead money is not out of whack (relative to the league)...when this article can cite something specific, I will give it credence.

Missouribronc
09-15-2010, 06:54 PM
Did I say they should be fired for not proving this? No. I said they shouldn't compare rosters, or methods of building rosters, until they prove they know something...

You should start by proving you know something.

Just stating facts.

Tell us again how the defensive talent Shanahan compiiled was great, but then they got injured. That was damn entertaining.

OABB
09-15-2010, 09:59 PM
What happened to you reverend? I was waiting for a witty retort.

TheReverend
09-15-2010, 10:41 PM
What happened to you reverend? I was waiting for a witty retort.

Had a girl over.

Anyways, I asked for on field examples. I got only one. Would appreciate more.

"We have a defensive scheme(3-4) which utilizes our players strengths.
Example: Nfl sack leader last year in Dumerville."

Dumervil, by the way.

baja
09-15-2010, 10:44 PM
When there is actual proof that we were No. 1 in dead money for this period, then I will pass gall stones...not just "two sources said so", I want the numerical data. I've posted the numerical data from the USA Today Database as to actual dollars spent and it suggests dead money is not out of whack (relative to the league)...when this article can cite something specific, I will give it credence.

Somebody help out here. I want to see So Cal's stones. ;D

OABB
09-15-2010, 11:04 PM
Had a girl over.

Anyways, I asked for on field examples. I got only one. Would appreciate more.

"We have a defensive scheme(3-4) which utilizes our players strengths.
Example: Nfl sack leader last year in Dumerville."

Dumervil, by the way.

what's that saying about those who lose an argument resorting to grammer corrections? Oh well, glad you had a girl over. Did she get creeped out when you asked her to wear your clothes and act like a condescending a-hole while you masturbated?

TheReverend
09-15-2010, 11:12 PM
what's that saying about those who lose an argument resorting to grammer corrections? Oh well, glad you had a girl over. Did she get creeped out when you asked her to wear your clothes and act like a condescending a-hole while you masturbated?

Cute. Would you like to continue deflecting or actually answer the question with more than one actual example?

Archer81
09-15-2010, 11:14 PM
Had a girl over.

Anyways, I asked for on field examples. I got only one. Would appreciate more.

"We have a defensive scheme(3-4) which utilizes our players strengths.
Example: Nfl sack leader last year in Dumerville."

Dumervil, by the way.


Just one?

You getting old or what?

:Broncos:

BroncoBuff
09-15-2010, 11:16 PM
I'm not buying any of the "smart" stuff, not by a longshot. Not yet anyway.

The Alphonso Smith and Richard Quinn picks, especially trading up for both, is pretty bad. The Lions have been playing Xanders like a real patsy, and we traded Hillis (whether you like him or not) for a backup QB who became redundant when we drafted Tebow. Plus, who's bright idea was is to build the defense "from the back to the front?" Definitely Nolan's fault, fine, but I hope nobody was surprised when every team gashed and gouged our run defense down the stretch last year.

They did fix the defensive front this year, very well done (though the Green thing was costly), and their maneuvering on draft day was very impressive. Still, they're just beginners, and it shows. I'm surprised Klis would take this angle.

OABB
09-15-2010, 11:18 PM
Cute. Would you like to continue deflecting or actually answer the question with more than one actual example?

Douche,

You do not dictate the terms of our conversation. This is mutual. I spent the time to explain myself at your request when there really was no need. Now you are asking for more. Quit trying to outsmart yourself by tapdancing your way out. I know you fancy yourself an alpha, but I'm not buying it.

You have been a real twat lately and you should just have kept your itchy, sandy vag away from me inthis thread.

Your performance is absolute embarrassing.

SoCalBronco
09-15-2010, 11:19 PM
I'm not buying any of the "smart" stuff, not by a longshot. Not yet anyway.

The Alphonso Smith and Richard Quinn picks, especially trading up for both, is pretty bad. The Lions have been playing Xanders like a real patsy, and we traded Hillis (whether you like him or not) for a backup QB who became redundant when we drafted Tebow. Plus, who's bright idea was is to build the defense "from the back to the front?" Definitely Nolan's fault, fine, but I hope nobody was surprised when every team gashed and gouged our run defense down the stretch last year.

They did fix the defensive front this year, very well done (though the Green thing was costly), and their maneuvering on draft day was very impressive. Still, they're just beginners, and it shows. I'm surprised Klis would take this angle.

Why would you be surprised that Klis is taking this angle?

It's always a good idea tactically to give the organization at least an occasional puff piece to keep the flow of information coming.

baja
09-15-2010, 11:22 PM
Why would you be surprised that Klis is taking this angle?

It's always a good idea tactically to give the organization at least an occasional puff piece to keep the flow of information coming.

Ya like the most dead money of any team for the entire Shanahan era.

TheReverend
09-15-2010, 11:25 PM
Douche,

You do not dictate the terms of our conversation. This is mutual. I spent the time to explain myself at your request when there really was no need. Now you are asking for more. Quit trying to outsmart yourself by tapdancing your way out. I know you fancy yourself an alpha, but I'm not buying it.

You have been a real twat lately and you should just have kept your itchy, sandy vag away from me inthis thread. This conversation is absolute embarrassing.

It absolutely should be embarrassing for you. I ORIGINALLY asked for some on field examples. You were able to provide only one: Dumervil being the sack leader. That's absolutely legit but is that your only sign of improvement in 17 games that you can actually reference?

You've apparently learned a lot in 3.5 years on this message board. The only tap dancing going on is you trying to shift the subject by making baseless insults at me that you apparently think I give a **** about. Here's a secret, the day I care about what some anonymous know nothing ****** that thinks he's funny and never references anything football related on a football ****ing message board thinks, then you're probably even more narcissistic than I am.

In summation: Answer the mother ****ing question or get bent you hack queer.

OABB
09-15-2010, 11:40 PM
It absolutely should be embarrassing for you. I ORIGINALLY asked for some on field examples. You were able to provide only one: Dumervil being the sack leader. That's absolutely legit but is that your only sign of improvement in 17 games that you can actually reference?

You've apparently learned a lot in 3.5 years on this message board. The only tap dancing going on is you trying to shift the subject by making baseless insults at me that you apparently think I give a **** about. Here's a secret, the day I care about what some anonymous know nothing ****** that thinks he's funny and never references anything football related on a football ****ing message board thinks, then you're probably even more narcissistic than I am.

In summation: Answer the mother ****ing question or get bent you hack queer.

i explained myself. If it doesn't satisfy your holiness than I have nothing else to say. You are doing a classic douche manuever of setting the terms and hiding behind them.

I said I saw improvement and explained why.

I'm not on trial here and you aren't my judge. These tactics may work for you with others, but I see through it.

I explained myself in football terms an not in lame jokes. It's all there.

Twat.

HAT
09-15-2010, 11:41 PM
Had a girl over.



Which one?

http://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj73/thereverend316/andrea1.jpg



http://www.orangemane.com/BB/attachment.php?attachmentid=25269&d=1256075654

OABB
09-15-2010, 11:46 PM
Which one?

http://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj73/thereverend316/andrea1.jpg



http://www.orangemane.com/BB/attachment.php?attachmentid=25269&d=1256075654


Holy ****. How prophetic I am..... When I made that I had no idea how right on it was.

Anyways, for the record I actually love the rev, he just vag'd out on for some reason early on in this thread and I had to get into it with him.

TheReverend
09-15-2010, 11:47 PM
i explained myself. If it doesn't satisfy your holiness than I have nothing else to say. You are doing a classic douche manuever of setting the terms and hiding behind them.

I said I saw improvement and explained why.

I'm not on trial here and you aren't my judge. These tactics may work for you with others, but I see through it.

I explained myself in football terms an not in lame jokes. It's all there.

Twat.

Well, since you're clearly an idiot, let me explain it to you. If you SAW IMPROVEMENT, you'd have on field examples to cite, wouldn't you?

And that's the best you got by the way? You've been winding up for like half a dozen posts and that's your big finish? You're probably the only unfunny Jewish person I've ever even heard of.

Oh. And you're a ****ing idiot who has no opinion. You've let others formulate it for you and that's why you can't support it with examples. Bravo.

baja
09-15-2010, 11:47 PM
Which one?

http://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj73/thereverend316/andrea1.jpg



http://www.orangemane.com/BB/attachment.php?attachmentid=25269&d=1256075654

end thread/

TheReverend
09-15-2010, 11:48 PM
Which one?

[IMG][IMG]http://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj73/thereverend316/andrea1.jpg[IMG][IMG]



[IMG]http://www.orangemane.com/BB/attachment.php?attachmentid=25269&d=1256075654[IMG]

That's not stalkerish at all... You've been saving those photos for a year and a half there bro?

HAT
09-15-2010, 11:52 PM
Anyways, for the record I actually love the rev, he just vag'd out on for some reason early on in this thread and I had to get into it with him.

Hahaha...Just trying to bring some lolz back to this thread. Rev is good peeps and you can tell he'd be a fun guy to have a beer or ten with.

OABB
09-15-2010, 11:54 PM
Well, since you're clearly an idiot, let me explain it to you. If you SAW IMPROVEMENT, you'd have on field examples to cite, wouldn't you?

And that's the best you got by the way? You've been winding up for like half a dozen posts and that's your big finish? You're probably the only unfunny Jewish person I've ever even heard of.

Oh. And you're a ****ing idiot who has no opinion. You've let others formulate it for you and that's why you can't support it with examples. Bravo.

I stated an opinion that I thought we were improving and explained.

I never took a stand demanding it. If I did than I would agree with you and need to back it up with on field examples. You demanded that because you wanted to play tummy sticks.

I never took a stand. I'm a wait and see guy for the thousandth time. It's too early to tell if we even have improved. I explained that my opinion was premature numerous times.

Again, I'm not on trial here so you can lay off the semantics.

It was an innocent opinion and I didn't eve have to explain it at all.

But I did in the spirit of good conversation and you became a douchenozzle.

Also, what's with the Jew thing? That was lame.

HAT
09-15-2010, 11:55 PM
That's not stalkerish at all... You've been saving those photos for a year and a half there bro?

Nope....Just wanted to throw the lobster pic in as 'the girl' for some internet funnies and found better ones when I searched for the chop thread! :thumbsup:

TheReverend
09-15-2010, 11:56 PM
I stated an opinion that I thought we were improving and explained.

I never took a stand demanding it. If I did than I would agree with you and need to back it up with on field examples. You demanded that because you wanted to play tummy sticks.

I never took a stand. I'm a wait and see guy for the thousandth time. It's too early to tell if we even have improved. I explained that my opinion was premature numerous times.

Again, I'm not on trial here so you can lay off the semantics.

It was an innocent opinion and I didn't eve have to explain it at all.

But I did in the spirit of good conversation and you became a douchenozzle.

Also, how do you know I'm Jewish?

And I AM funny.

Definitely not funny.

This bores me. Begone.

OABB
09-15-2010, 11:56 PM
Hahaha...Just trying to bring some lolz back to this thread. Rev is good peeps and you can tell he'd be a fun guy to have a beer or ten with.

I would like to think so.

HAT
09-15-2010, 11:58 PM
PS....

Rev,
Start the 'Gambling, week 2' thread already. I've got some nice teasers in the works after killing it last weekend.

TheReverend
09-15-2010, 11:58 PM
Nope....Just wanted to throw the lobster pic in as 'the girl' for some internet funnies and found better ones when I searched for the chop thread! :thumbsup:

It's cool. I finally figured out why you love Orton so much even though he can't net a first down.

http://campussqueeze.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/orton8-3.jpg

How did you meet him and Olsen anyways?

OABB
09-15-2010, 11:59 PM
Definitely not funny.

This bores me. Begone.

My wife typed that funny part. She gets defensive.

Anyhoo, it was fun while it lasted.

TheReverend
09-15-2010, 11:59 PM
My wife typed that funny part. She gets defensive.

Anyhoo, it was fun while it lasted.

A mediocre time was had by all.

footstepsfrom#27
09-16-2010, 12:54 AM
It would go a ways toward restoring some confidence if they were to offer some insight (but not giving away anything of inside information) into WHAT that plan actually is. I get that they want to get bigger/more physical but beyond that, what's the basic direction we're going in here and how are we getting there? That's a conversation I'd like Xanders or McD to address in at least some detail, or at least more than merely stating that a plan exists, which I assumed anyway.

Cito Pelon
09-16-2010, 07:51 AM
It would go a ways toward restoring some confidence if they were to offer some insight (but not giving away anything of inside information) into WHAT that plan actually is. I get that they want to get bigger/more physical but beyond that, what's the basic direction we're going in here and how are we getting there? That's a conversation I'd like Xanders or McD to address in at least some detail, or at least more than merely stating that a plan exists, which I assumed anyway.

Well, they got rid of the last Goodman, the one that scouted Phonz and Quinn.

colonelbeef
09-16-2010, 09:59 AM
Well, they got rid of the last Goodman, the one that scouted Phonz and Quinn.

bwahahahahah

you have no shame

colonelbeef
09-16-2010, 09:59 AM
It would go a ways toward restoring some confidence if they were to offer some insight (but not giving away anything of inside information) into WHAT that plan actually is. I get that they want to get bigger/more physical but beyond that, what's the basic direction we're going in here and how are we getting there? That's a conversation I'd like Xanders or McD to address in at least some detail, or at least more than merely stating that a plan exists, which I assumed anyway.

It seems that getting old and having no run game are the cornerstones of this new regime

bendog
09-16-2010, 10:11 AM
I think the "plan" is to acquire personnel to follow pretty much the NE offensive philosophy of a grind offensive run game, but really utilize about 60% passing plays, and in a scheme that isn't really WC, because the QB has a bigger arm, but be able to spread the entire field 40 yds past the los, and use a lot of clearing routes with underneath sutff and even go up top.

I'm not sure about defense. Hiring Nolan initially made me think that McDaniels was not tied to a scheme, but would utilize anything that his personnel fit. Shanahan was locked into the 4-3, and imo that was a weakness. But since McDaniels brought in a NE guy for defense, I'm not really sure what they're up to. Signing Jamal Williams, resigneing Doom, and gettying Ayers on the field looks to me like they're trying to emulate NE. Not a bad idea, imo, for a lot of reasons. Mostly, you don't need pass rush DE who are expensive and getting rarer by the day.

TheReverend
09-16-2010, 10:13 AM
Well, they got rid of the last Goodman, the one that scouted Phonz and Quinn.

Thats not true at all..,

Tombstone RJ
09-16-2010, 10:15 AM
It would go a ways toward restoring some confidence if they were to offer some insight (but not giving away anything of inside information) into WHAT that plan actually is. I get that they want to get bigger/more physical but beyond that, what's the basic direction we're going in here and how are we getting there? That's a conversation I'd like Xanders or McD to address in at least some detail, or at least more than merely stating that a plan exists, which I assumed anyway.

It's moving to a spread offense on the offensive side of the ball and going 3-4 on the defensive side of the ball. How much more do you need to know? The Broncos are trying to get bigger on the oline and that makes sense for a spread offense that relys on throwing the ball more. As for the 3-4 it's a matter of finding the right guys to successfully run the defense.

bendog
09-16-2010, 10:34 AM
It's moving to a spread offense on the offensive side of the ball and going 3-4 on the defensive side of the ball. How much more do you need to know? The Broncos are trying to get bigger on the oline and that makes sense for a spread offense that relys on throwing the ball more. As for the 3-4 it's a matter of finding the right guys to successfully run the defense.

I know what you're trying to say, but it isn't the kind of spread offense of Urban Meyer. It's play action based and uses the run to set up the pass. The oline may be using bigger splits, but I don't think that's really a big deal one way or another.

"Ron Erhardt - Ray Perkins"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_England_Patriots_strategy

bowtown
09-16-2010, 10:40 AM
I know what you're trying to say, but it isn't the kind of spread offense of Urban Meyer. It's play action based and uses the run to set up the pass. The oline may be using bigger splits, but I don't think that's really a big deal one way or another.

"Ron Erhardt - Ray Perkins"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_England_Patriots_strategy

You didn't read that whole thing, did you?

Despite its reputation, this system is not always a run first offense. Erhardt commonly ran the system in his later years spread wide open with multiple receivers (earning the moniker "Air Erhardt"), as NFL rules evolved to benefit the passing game. As a result of this influence, the Patriots will frequently run this offense with five potential receivers and an empty backfield should a favorable matchup present itself or as a function of available personnel. With the addition of Randy Moss and Wes Welker to the Patriots offense in 2007, the Patriots placed an emphasis on a wide open passing attack (with record setting results).[5]

bendog
09-16-2010, 10:41 AM
yeah, I read it, and probably understanding it and shanny's use of the WC in Den are beyond your ability to comprehend.

bowtown
09-16-2010, 10:44 AM
yeah, I read it, and probably understanding it and shanny's use of the WC in Den are beyond your ability to comprehend.

Good comeback.

Lev Vyvanse
09-16-2010, 10:51 AM
I know what you're trying to say, but it isn't the kind of spread offense of Urban Meyer. It's play action based and uses the run to set up the pass. The oline may be using bigger splits, but I don't think that's really a big deal one way or another.

"Ron Erhardt - Ray Perkins"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_England_Patriots_strategy

McDaniels has been quoted as saying he adopted some of Meyer's playbook during his first season here.

Drek
09-16-2010, 11:18 AM
I'm not sure about defense. Hiring Nolan initially made me think that McDaniels was not tied to a scheme, but would utilize anything that his personnel fit. Shanahan was locked into the 4-3, and imo that was a weakness. But since McDaniels brought in a NE guy for defense, I'm not really sure what they're up to. Signing Jamal Williams, resigneing Doom, and gettying Ayers on the field looks to me like they're trying to emulate NE. Not a bad idea, imo, for a lot of reasons. Mostly, you don't need pass rush DE who are expensive and getting rarer by the day.

When did he bring in a New England guy for the defense?

bendog
09-16-2010, 11:33 AM
Bowtow, the sarcstic little snark, apparantly didn't grasp what i was trying to say to Rev. I was commenting on his reference to offensive line splits. It's not really about offensive line splits. Shanny's offense is run first, and that's the tweak he put on the west coast.

Look at the splits. As Billick explains it.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-network-playbook/09000d5d80aec9cf/Billick-on-Denver-s-zone-blocking-scheme

shanny's offense IS A SPREAD RUN OFFENSE.

As to the meyer/mcdaniels connenction, I really don't know. I don't think NE ever switched offensive line splits. Maybe, but to me they seem to be consistent. If you watch Fla's base scheme it isn't what NE runs. They pass more now, and they put the qb in the shotgun more, and maybe I'm wrong that they didn't really stick with the play action thing. But they don't use meyer's focus on eliminating the defense's advantage of one extra defender because of the qb, and forcing teams to man up. They use clearout routes with Moss clearing it out for the little white guy that the suzy kolber site likes to parody. They use a bigger field. Brady can stretch a field, but they didn't try that with Orton last year, and the gripes aout him on Monday was that he wasnt accurate.

Is McDaniels gonna put Tebow in the shotgun like he was in Fla? That's really the Urban Meyer question.

When we were really successful with the spread at Utah, nobody ever saw it before,” Mullen said. “Josh did that in New England. If you can stay a little ahead of the curve and do something they’re not prepared for, you’re at an advantage.”

That may be what McDaniels has in mind — not to turn Tebow into a Peyton Manning-esque drop-back passer, if that is even possible, but to exploit his physicality and ability to improvise. It may not work, and it certainly may take awhile, but it will be a fascinating experiment.

“One of two things will happen,” said the former Ravens coach Brian Billick, who analyzed the draft for the NFL Network. “Either he’ll change his mechanics to fit the demands of playing in the N.F.L. Or is he the singularly spectacular athlete that changes the paradigm of the N.F.L. to bring the spread to the game?”

Billick suspects it will be the former. McDaniels’s future may hinge on its being the latter.
When we were really successful with the spread at Utah, nobody ever saw it before,” Mullen said. “Josh did that in New England. If you can stay a little ahead of the curve and do something they’re not prepared for, you’re at an advantage.”

That may be what McDaniels has in mind — not to turn Tebow into a Peyton Manning-esque drop-back passer, if that is even possible, but to exploit his physicality and ability to improvise. It may not work, and it certainly may take awhile, but it will be a fascinating experiment.

“One of two things will happen,” said the former Ravens coach Brian Billick, who analyzed the draft for the NFL Network. “Either he’ll change his mechanics to fit the demands of playing in the N.F.L. Or is he the singularly spectacular athlete that changes the paradigm of the N.F.L. to bring the spread to the game?”

Billick suspects it will be the former. McDaniels’s future may hinge on its being the latter.
When we were really successful with the spread at Utah, nobody ever saw it before,” Mullen said. “Josh did that in New England. If you can stay a little ahead of the curve and do something they’re not prepared for, you’re at an advantage.”

That may be what McDaniels has in mind — not to turn Tebow into a Peyton Manning-esque drop-back passer, if that is even possible, but to exploit his physicality and ability to improvise. It may not work, and it certainly may take awhile, but it will be a fascinating experiment.

“One of two things will happen,” said the former Ravens coach Brian Billick, who analyzed the draft for the NFL Network. “Either he’ll change his mechanics to fit the demands of playing in the N.F.L. Or is he the singularly spectacular athlete that changes the paradigm of the N.F.L. to bring the spread to the game?”

Billick suspects it will be the former. McDaniels’s future may hinge on its being the latter.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/27/sports/football/27fast.html

bendog
09-16-2010, 11:41 AM
When did he bring in a New England guy for the defense?

That's right. Whatever happened with that? Did Pees not want it? I'm not sure Den offered it, but it died out

gyldenlove
09-16-2010, 11:49 AM
Thats not true at all..,

Just let him have it, if it makes him feel better to think a guy who got fired so long before the draft did the scouting and a coordinator traded a 1st round pick and drafted the player then let him, some people have real problems acknowledging imperfections in their idols.

NFLBRONCO
09-16-2010, 11:54 AM
I don't care what the plan is as a fan. I just know this part is the hardest finding studs to improve this team to another level.

Taco John
09-16-2010, 12:16 PM
reading Rev put people on the spot for their takes is good entertainment while we wait for the doctor to come and cut open my wife's belly and pull out a baby girl.

Rohirrim
09-16-2010, 12:18 PM
reading Rev put people on the spot for their takes is good entertainment while we wait for the doctor to come and cut open my wife's belly and pull out a baby girl.

Wow! No kidding? Congrats...


Where's my ceegar?

bowtown
09-16-2010, 12:21 PM
reading Rev put people on the spot for their takes is good entertainment while we wait for the doctor to come and cut open my wife's belly and pull out a baby girl.

Congrats! You should name her TheRevereena.

On second thought, don't do that.

Drek
09-16-2010, 12:31 PM
That's right. Whatever happened with that? Did Pees not want it? I'm not sure Den offered it, but it died out

No word of them ever offering it and he's now a positional coach for the Ravens, so I'd imagine if a DC job was on the table he'd have jumped at it.

McDaniels isn't looking for the New England style of defense though. He didn't pursue Crennel who he was an assistant under in New England either this off-season. The only NE guy we have here is Roman Phifer as an assistant LB coach, who played for NE at the tail end of his career.

Instead he has Martindale who worked under Rob Ryan in Oakland. Rob Ryan, like his brother Rex, both come from their father's school of philosophy on defense.

That philosophy, an aggressive defense that seeks to confuse a QB's pre-snap reads to make blitzes more effective, is exactly what McDaniels has espoused from day one here. It is also likely why he and Nolan butted heads since Mike Nolan comes from the less chaotic read and react defenses espoused by both his father and his previous coaching mentors.

This is why Robert Ayers' growth is a key part of our team's success. While we don't technically run a 46 defense we are moving towards incorporating some parts of it in our scheme and to make that work we need a strong side guy who can handle being isolated so we can load up on the weak side and generate pressure.

Having to carry the team at OLB this year might be just the catalyst we need to get Ayers to take the next step in development. If he does we'll have something real special when we pair him and Doom together in 2011.

Missouribronc
09-16-2010, 12:38 PM
This is why Robert Ayers' growth is a key part of our team's success. While we don't technically run a 46 defense we are moving towards incorporating some parts of it in our scheme and to make that work we need a strong side guy who can handle being isolated so we can load up on the weak side and generate pressure.

I think Ayers might not excel at being a read and react player, which maybe is why he struggled last year, and has looked better this year. He might be better in a more aggressive defense where he has a set role on each play. Who knows? I could be completely wrong and he could suck the rest of the year, but a sack a game and he'd look pretty good.

:afro:

Steve Sewell
09-16-2010, 12:39 PM
blah blah blah I fail at posting

It's a "stretch zone blocking scheme".

AlienBronco
09-16-2010, 12:48 PM
reading Rev put people on the spot for their takes is good entertainment while we wait for the doctor to come and cut open my wife's belly and pull out a baby girl.

Congratulation, to you and your wife, that make's it a pair???:strong:

NFLBRONCO
09-16-2010, 01:05 PM
Congrats to TJ and his wife on new baby girl teboweena :)

Taco John
09-16-2010, 01:33 PM
TheRevereena Tebowna John

TheReverend
09-16-2010, 02:09 PM
TheRevereena Tebowna John

I think it sounds beautiful

SouthStndJunkie
09-16-2010, 02:29 PM
Good luck Taco....hope everything goes smoothly.

bowtown
09-16-2010, 02:30 PM
TheRevereena Tebowna John

Absolute Embarrasseena

gyldenlove
09-16-2010, 02:46 PM
reading Rev put people on the spot for their takes is good entertainment while we wait for the doctor to come and cut open my wife's belly and pull out a baby girl.

That doesn't sound safe at all, doctors should not be running around cutting people open left and right.

Congratulations on the baby.

Chris
09-16-2010, 02:51 PM
Congrats Taco. Might I suggest "Burrita John".

TheReverend
09-16-2010, 02:55 PM
Stop with the absurd name suggestions guys. He's clearly going to name her Patricia.

baja
09-16-2010, 03:11 PM
Taquta

Ray Finkle
09-16-2010, 04:12 PM
Which one?

http://i269.photobucket.com/albums/jj73/thereverend316/andrea1.jpg



http://www.orangemane.com/BB/attachment.php?attachmentid=25269&d=1256075654

Best Post EVER!

TailgateNut
09-16-2010, 04:37 PM
TheRevereena Tebowna John


jhns for short.


I would bet that she will know as much about football in a week as he does, and we can get her to hush up with a pacifier.

On a serious note: Congrats, daughters are a blast, but they do get EXPENSIVE!:wiggle:

Cito Pelon
09-18-2010, 06:56 AM
Just let him have it, if it makes him feel better to think a guy who got fired so long before the draft did the scouting and a coordinator traded a 1st round pick and drafted the player then let him, some people have real problems acknowledging imperfections in their idols.

I figured a few of you nerds would get a kick out of that.

I was referencing the LAST Goodman, Ryan Goodman, the one that was retained last year and was, ya know, the SE Regional scout.

Taco John
11-28-2010, 03:07 PM
This thread is awesome. I can understand why Baja is making himself scarce after that first post...

colonelbeef
11-28-2010, 03:53 PM
Absolute Embarrasseena

got a lol out of me