SI's Michael Silver: Belichick Disciples Alienating Players & Others

[footstepsfrom#27]

Eight players and several management people...all with similar experiences and opinions resulting from the same issues with disciples of Bill Belichick. This is an interesting story, by a respected sports writer whose covered the NFL for some of the best publications out there for a long time...the conclusions are not encouraging.

Michael Silver, a senior writer for Sports Illustrated, joined the magazine in November 1994. He is one of SI's lead pro football writers, having authored the magazine's past 12 Super Bowl game stories. He also regularly pens in-depth profiles of some of the most intriguing characters in sports...He also covered the 49ers for the Sacramento Union and served as a correspondent for Pro Football Weekly and The Sporting News.

Mangini, Belichick disciples alienate players

By Michael Silver, Yahoo! Sports
May 22, 12:27 pm EDT

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slu...yhoo&type=lgns

Joshua Cribbs is a popular man in the Cleveland Browns’ locker room, an undrafted free agent from nearby Kent State who developed into a Pro Bowl kick returner. He is also the team’s unofficial social coordinator, which is of no small importance in a city where success has been scarce in recent years.

“We all love Cribbs,” one Browns veteran said Thursday of the speedy fifth-year receiver, who might also have a future as a defensive back. “He’s the guy who always throws the Halloween parties and the Christmas bashes, so yeah, he’s very popular.”

In light of recent developments, that would make Browns coach Eric Mangini the Grinch – and the man who hired him, owner Randy Lerner, Ebeneezer Scrooge.

Cribbs and his bosses are currently locked in what seems on the surface to be a typical NFL contract dispute between a player who has outperformed his long-term deal and a team that is in no hurry to provide an upgrade. In reality, this is a credibility dispute between a dependable, accountable athlete and an abrasive coach consumed with flexing his newly acquired power.

It’s the latest testament to Mangini’s apparent lack of tact and people skills, personality traits he honed under his estranged mentor, New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick. Like two other Belichick disciples, new Kansas City Chiefs general manager Scott Pioli and neophyte Denver Broncos coach Josh McDaniels, Mangini has marked his arrival at a new organization this offseason by alienating established leaders while projecting a self-assuredness that borders on arrogance.

With three Super Bowl titles as a head coach and a prior record of success as a brainy defensive coordinator, Belichick, a future Hall of Famer, can get away with his power trip. Whether Mangini, Pioli and McDaniels are able to pull it off will depend upon how many football games their respective teams win, something that often depends upon the men in uniform buying into the program.

In the meantime, in Cleveland, Kansas City and Denver, the new guys in charge seem to be consumed with winning mind games, a strategy I’m not so sure will serve them well over the long haul.

In Denver, McDaniels’ sloppy handling of his interactions with Jay Cutler after an unsuccessful attempt to trade him at the start of free agency led to the loss of a franchise quarterback, largely because the 33-year-old coach was obsessed with demonstrating his unquestioned authority.

In K.C., Pioli’s arrival as the all-powerful general manager after years as Belichick’s right-hand personnel man was soon followed by a less-publicized incident involving a star player. According to Kansas City Star columnist Jason Whitlock, perennial Pro Bowl guard and locker-room leader Brian Waters asked to be traded or released after becoming offended by the arrogant attitudes of Pioli and his newly hired coach, Todd Haley.

Waters, a source told Whitlock, flew to Kansas City in February specifically to meet with the new GM and coach in an effort to become familiar with their leadership plans. The source said Pioli told Waters he had no interest in meeting and that Haley began a hallway conversation with the player by proclaiming that 22 guys off the street could win two games, as the Chiefs had in ’08.

Mangini, fresh off a 1-4 finish with the Jets that got him fired after three seasons – he had a 23-26 overall record (including a playoff loss) in New York – arrived in Cleveland with a similar swagger. One of his first moves was to orchestrate the firing of director of pro personnel T.J. McCreight, the highest-ranking personnel man remaining after Lerner’s dismissal of general manager Phil Savage, and one of the people who’d interviewed to replace Savage. (Mangini, hired while the GM job was still open, successfully lobbied Lerner to choose Ravens personnel executive George Kokinis.)

McCreight, a source said, was called into the office of team president Mike Keenan, who pulled out cell-phone records showing that McCreight had engaged in conversations with reporters – an act frowned upon by the paranoid Mangini. McCreight explained that speaking with the media was among the duties with which he’d been entrusted by Savage, but he was nonetheless terminated; he has since been hired as the Cardinals’ director of pro personnel.

A team source said Mangini, upon his arrival in Cleveland, was brusque when dealing with other Browns employees and spent most of his time in his office with the door closed. Early on Mangini, according to multiple reports, alienated the team’s top performer from 2008, Pro Bowl defensive tackle Shaun Rogers, by failing to acknowledge him on a pair of occasions: once in the team’s training room and once at a local awards show.

Rogers reportedly asked the team not to pay him a $6 million bonus and to trade or release him. Mangini, who claimed he didn’t notice Rogers at the awards show, apparently patched up the relationship; Rogers recently said the two had put aside their differences “just like grown men do.”

It’s unclear how another Browns defensive lineman, Shaun Smith, feels about Mangini, who a source said told the player during their first interaction at the team’s facility, “Lose some weight and lose the attitude.”

The latest coach-player dustup involves Cribbs, who signed a six-year, $6.7 million contract extension in 2006 and, after a Pro Bowl ’07 season, began earning comparisons to the Chicago Bears’ ultra-explosive breakaway threat Devin Hester. Last July Hester signed a four-year contract extension worth a reported $40 million, which did not go unnoticed by Cribbs.

When Cribbs’ representatives at All-Pro Sports and Entertainment approached Savage last summer about their client’s desire for a new deal, they were told the team was amenable to adjusting his salary following the ’08 season because Cribbs was deserving and was a positive locker-room influence.

Two sources say Lerner, too, was on board with the decision and that the owner, after firing Savage and coach Romeo Crennel immediately after a season-ending defeat at Pittsburgh last December, called Cribbs on the team bus to assure him that regardless of the moves he would honor his word and address the player’s contract situation.

Yet after Mangini’s arrival, no one in the organization expressed interest in negotiating a new deal. Frustrated by the team’s unresponsiveness, Cribbs decided to skip this week’s voluntary minicamp. The Browns then issued a statement that disputed Cribbs’ reported perspective, saying, “no one from the current Browns organization, including Owner Randy Lerner, has ever made any promises to Josh Cribbs with regard to his contract status.”

That, said a source close to Cribbs, “took his anger from Defcon 3 to Defcon 1.” Cribbs, through his representatives, has since asked for a trade, a request the Browns said they were not amenable to honoring.

On Thursday, Cribbs was asked to come to the facility for a meeting with Mangini. The player complied, explaining to the coach that he wouldn’t participate in voluntary offseason activities until the team honors its promise to adjust his contract. Mangini, according to a source familiar with the conversation, said little in return. Cribbs then attended a team meeting before departing the facility, leaving teammates wondering if a resolution is in sight.

“They need to figure out a way to get that fixed,” the aforementioned unnamed Browns player said Thursday, “because the guy is a special player.”

Could the situation be handled any more clumsily? Whatever Mangini’s perception of Cribbs’ value, he should be especially sensitive to the player’s contention that the team broke its promise to upgrade his deal. During Mangini’s tenure with the Jets, three players no longer with the team – guard Pete Kendall, tight end Chris Baker and wideout Laveranues Coles – went public with similar accusations.

Why would a team do business this way? Why did Lerner, with no other NFL franchises in pursuit of Mangini as a head coach, rush to make the hire before naming a GM and then grant him so much control over the team’s football operations? Why is a franchise, whose powerbrokers are paranoid enough to check an employee’s cell-phone records, be so rattled by a player’s absence from a voluntary minicamp that it put out a public statement essentially calling one of its model citizens a greedy liar?

“The whole thing is so screwy,” said one former Browns employee. “I think it’s about control. If the fans knew what was really going on over there, they wouldn’t even buy a ticket.”

Football, of course, is a bottom-line business. Fan support will persist if Mangini, despite his warped methodology, turns the Browns into a winner, as he did with the Jets in his first season. The same goes for Pioli and Haley in K.C. and for McDaniels and his handpicked GM, Brian Xanders, in Denver.

I wonder whether Mangini, Pioli or McDaniels can attain the type of immediate success enjoyed last year in Atlanta under first-year general manager Thomas Dimitroff, another former Pats employee who approached his new job with a far less contentious management style.

If not, it won’t be a very merry Christmas for them or their affronted employees. It’s safe to say that in Mangini’s case, there’s one popular party to which he likely won’t be receiving an invitation.

[sirhcyennek81]

So let me understands this. McDaniels is the same as mangini because he got rid of a player who thought he was more important then the other 52 guys on the roster? Who won nothing, and was acting like a b****. Sucks for the Browns, but the comparison is a bit weak.

[telluride]

Jesus, let it go #27. Either find another team to root for, or just admit that you're rooting against the Broncos. But this gleeful posting of every anti Denver article is getting tiresome.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Originally Posted by sirhcyennek81

So let me understands this. McDaniels is the same as mangini because he got rid of a player who thought he was more important then the other 52 guys on the roster? Who won nothing, and was acting like a b****. Sucks for the Browns, but the comparison is a bit weak.

Eight players...all with the same basic story, plus assorted managerial people. The story in case you missed it...is not about Denver, nor is it about McDaniels.

It's about a pattern.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Originally Posted by telluride

Jesus, let it go #27. Either find another team to root for, or just admit that you're rooting against the Broncos. But this gleeful posting of every anti Denver article is getting tiresome.

Your beef is with Michael Silver. Not surprisingly...you attack me for posting what he wrote.

The story is not about Denver.

[sirhcyennek81]

Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27

Eight players...all with the same basic story, plus assorted managerial people. The story in case you missed it...is not about Denver, nor is it about McDaniels.

It's about a pattern.

Then why post the ****ing article if it has nothing to do with Denver or McDaniels? Its a pattern with Bellichek and Mangini, not Pioli or McDaniels. Get the sand out of your vag dude.

[AZBroncomaniac]

Originally Posted by sirhcyennek81

Then why post the ****ing article if it has nothing to do with Denver or McDaniels? Its a pattern with Bellichek and Mangini, not Pioli or McDaniels. Get the sand out of your vag dude.

Talk about sand in a vag....

b**** about the article, not the one posting it. Maybe you should ask for an end to birthday posts since they have nothing to do with the Broncos. Argue the discussion at hand, or move to the next thread.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Originally Posted by sirhcyennek81

Then why post the ****ing article if it has nothing to do with Denver or McDaniels? Its a pattern with Bellichek and Mangini, not Pioli or McDaniels. Get the sand out of your vag dude.

I didn't say it had nothing to do with McDaniels...obviously it does. Did you actually read it? Apparently not or you wouldn't suggest it's got nothing to do with Pioli or McDaniels. The core of the story is about a group of people all connected with Belichick...that includes McDaniels.

As I said...your beef is with Michael Silver. I suppose I should have pretended I didn't see this right?

[footstepsfrom#27]

Originally Posted by AZBroncomaniac

Talk about sand in a vag....

b**** about the article, not the one posting it. Maybe you should ask for an end to birthday posts since they have nothing to do with the Broncos. Argue the discussion at hand, or move to the next thread.

Rep.

Better yet...dispute what he said with some facts to back it up rather than just b****ing about it or calling the writer an idiot.

Pretty sure that's wishful thinking...

[sirhcyennek81]

Originally Posted by AZBroncomaniac

Talk about sand in a vag....

b**** about the article, not the one posting it. Maybe you should ask for an end to birthday posts since they have nothing to do with the Broncos. Argue the discussion at hand, or move to the next thread.

I only oppose birthday threads created by the birthday boy/girl. Its just common sense.

As for the article, if the poster of the friggin article says it has nothing to do with Denver, then why post it unless its a criticism of the current coaching staff?

[footstepsfrom#27]

Originally Posted by sirhcyennek81

I only oppose birthday threads created by the birthday boy/girl. Its just common sense.

As for the article, if the poster of the friggin article says it has nothing to do with Denver, then why post it unless its a criticism of the current coaching staff?

Come back when you've read the article. I didn't say it had nothing to do with Denver.

[sirhcyennek81]

Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27

I didn't say it had nothing to do with McDaniels...obviously it does. Did you actually read it? Apparently not or you wouldn't suggest it's got nothing to do with Pioli or McDaniels. The core of the story is about a group of people all connected with Belichick...that includes McDaniels.

As I said...your beef is with Michael Silver. I suppose I should have pretended I didn't see this right?

One sentence about McDaniels and you post it. Why? McDaniels has never been a head coach. He has no history or established way of doing things. So obviously the only remaining reason you posted this was to attack, yet again, the new Broncos HC. Passive aggressive behavior at its finest.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Originally Posted by sirhcyennek81

One sentence about McDaniels and you post it. Why? McDaniels has never been a head coach. He has no history or established way of doing things. So obviously the only remaining reason you posted this was to attack, yet again, the new Broncos HC. Passive aggressive behavior at its finest.

McDaniels is just as much part of this as the rest of them, and easily the most visible and publicized example.

There's nothing passive aggressive about me...I'll tell you exactly what I think every time.

[AZBroncomaniac]

Originally Posted by sirhcyennek81

I only oppose birthday threads created by the birthday boy/girl. Its just common sense.

As for the article, if the poster of the friggin article says it has nothing to do with Denver, then why post it unless its a criticism of the current coaching staff?

I hear ya' on the birthday posts.

I think Footsteps' point was that the article was not entirely based on the Broncos. Most of us know his stance on the current state of affairs, and where most of his posts are going to be directed. I think it's fruitless to b**** about a post, when anyone on this forum can see who started the post, whether they agree with the poster or not.

[epicSocialism4tw]

This was McD's MO from day one, and to ignore that is to ignore the truth.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Originally Posted by AZBroncomaniac

I hear ya' on the birthday posts.

I think Footsteps' point was that the article was not entirely based on the Broncos. Most of us know his stance on the current state of affairs, and where most of his posts are going to be directed. I think it's fruitless to b**** about a post, when anyone on this forum can see who started the post, whether they agree with the poster or not.

The thing is...it doesn't matter who started the post, because I didn't write the article. This is probably the single most relevant piece I've seen this offseason on the state of affairs we're looking at, and it's written by a real NFL writer, not some blogger with an orange hard on.

People can scream at me all they want...now let's see some responses directed to the issues Silver raises.

[sirhcyennek81]

Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27

McDaniels is just as much part of this as the rest of them, and easily the most visible and publicized example.

There's nothing passive aggressive about me...I'll tell you exactly what I think every time.

You are grasping at straws man. Mangini and McDaniels are completely different men, in completely different situations. The only similarity is they both worked in NE and worked for an a-hole. Mangini has continued to be a dick, while we have no clue about how McDaniels will be. So you dug for an article that has little to do with the Broncos to bring up some convoluted halfassed theory that McDaniels will be just as pricklike as Mangini and Bellicheat, without any evidence to support the claim.

Which makes you passive aggressive.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Originally Posted by sirhcyennek81

You are grasping at straws man. Mangini and McDaniels are completely different men, in completely different situations. The only similarity is they both worked in NE and worked for an a-hole.

That's hardly irrelevant. You didn't read the article did you?

Mangini has continued to be a dick, while we have no clue about how McDaniels will be. So you dug for an article that has little to do with the Broncos to bring up some convoluted halfassed theory that McDaniels will be just as pricklike as Mangini and Bellicheat, without any evidence to support the claim.

Which makes you passive aggressive.

I didn't dig for anything. I found it surfing for material, like I find everything.

Go look up what "passive aggressive" means.

[GreatBronco16]

Ok, first you need to look at this thread. http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=79471

Second.

"In Denver, McDaniels’ sloppy handling of his interactions with Jay Cutler after an unsuccessful attempt to trade him at the start of free agency led to the loss of a franchise quarterback, largely because the 33-year-old coach was obsessed with demonstrating his unquestioned authority."

McDaniels sloppy handling of his interactions? Oh please, McDaniels tried nearly everything to talk to Jay. Jay was the one not returning the calls. Sorry, but he is clearly clueless on this matter. And he was obsessed with demonstrating his 'unquestioned' authority ROFL. I guess McDaniels should have just walked in and said hey guys, you just do what you want to do, I'm just a coach here.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Originally Posted by GreatBronco16

Ok, first you need to look at this thread. http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=79471

Second.

"In Denver, McDaniels’ sloppy handling of his interactions with Jay Cutler after an unsuccessful attempt to trade him at the start of free agency led to the loss of a franchise quarterback, largely because the 33-year-old coach was obsessed with demonstrating his unquestioned authority."

McDaniels sloppy handling of his interactions? Oh please, McDaniels tried nearly everything to talk to Jay. Jay was the one not returning the calls. Sorry, but he is clearly clueless on this matter. And he was obsessed with demonstrating his 'unquestioned' authority ROFL. I guess McDaniels should have just walked in and said hey guys, you just do what you want to do, I'm just a coach here.

I think perhaps you're missing the elephant in the room here.

You...and every other individual on this board has formed an opinion about who was right, who was wrong, and what actually happened...not on the basis of what you (or I) KNOW to be true...but on the basis of what you (and I) BELEIVE based on WHO we choose to trust.

That is a stone cold, undeniable fact...one of the few we actually have.

The issue in this article, is that Silver...who is not some blogging idiot but an accomplished writer...is presenting you with a pattern...one that if you actually read carefully what he's saying...shows evidence of repeating itself in every one of Belichicks disciples. The fact that strong threads of similarity dominate the actions and attitudes of these coaches and executives as reported by the players themselves who associate with them, is a powerful commentary on where probability lies when trying to deciper who said what to who and who is believable.

When you have almost identical issues accross the board reported by these players, including those related to respect, ownership instantly offering power to these individuals out of the blue, making statements in the press to the fan base about the players, behind the scenes firing of former execs in the midst of power struggles, and the general milieu of what Silver depicts as unbridled arrogance...that is worth noting, and that is worth examining in light of the fact we have reports of the same identical problems here. You can choose to do whatever you wish with this story, but saying that Silver doesn't know what he's talking about represents that you do...and like all of us...you don't know more than what you've read, and your opinion like mine...comes down to who you've chosen to believe.

You can't ignore the ramifications of the story. The common denominators are to numerous, to closely mirroring one another, and to significant to merely assign this to either coincidence, stupidity, bias or ineptness on the part of the writer.

If you say he's wrong...prove why he's wrong, and it has to be something other than simple heresay, which is what we're working with right now. I don't think all these players are making up the same story.

Do you?

[GreatBronco16]

I don't have to prove if he is wrong on McDaniels. He needs to prove that he is right. He is the one making 'assumptions' about how he is some power hungry punk that had an agenda from day one. Everything he wrote is just his opinion thrown in with some sources from players who use to work under Mangini who don't anymore because they didn't get what they wanted. Gee go figure they wouldn't have anything nice to say.

[meangene]

I read the article and it would have been interesting if it were just about Mangini because he has a history of these types of actions as a head coach and a number of issues already in Cleveland that leave you scratching your head. But, the author needed a more entertaining hook than that so he made a huge stretch to link McDaniels and Pioli. Pioli was on the job for many years in New England and I don't recall a single incident of this type. McDaniels has been involved in one issue - Cutler, in which it is vogue for the head-line seeking national media to blame him. Any fault he may have is, at best, questionable but the media just glosses over the details and the unknowns in the whole Cutler situation. It is vogue to just say McDaniel's ran Cutler out of town, the Broncos will suck and Cutler is a great quarterback. Let's just ignore the fact that there is absolutely no indication that McDaniels is alienating the players in Denver and that everything you read or hear from the players indicates a real enthusiasm for the system and optimism for the upcoming season. Another shoddy piece of SI "journalism" just like the recent Marshall witch hunt on ESPN and some of those ridiculous rankings of head coaches who have yet to coach an NFL game by TSN. I guess it's the offseason and there is nothing else to talk about than another Brett Favre comeback.

[BroncoInSkinland]

Let me take a shot at it as Devils advocate. I am not fond of McDaniels moves so far this off season, but this deserves some kind of response. Let's assume the article is spot on and that the assertations it makes are completely true.

Originally Posted by footstepsfrom#27

With three Super Bowl titles as a head coach and a prior record of success as a brainy defensive coordinator, Belichick, a future Hall of Famer, can get away with his power trip. Whether Mangini, Pioli and McDaniels are able to pull it off will depend upon how many football games their respective teams win, something that often depends upon the men in uniform buying into the program. Given the talent levels on the three teams in question, I would say the Broncos have the best shot at winning enough games to "pull it off".

Why would a team do business this way? Why did Lerner, with no other NFL franchises in pursuit of Mangini as a head coach, rush to make the hire before naming a GM and then grant him so much control over the team’s football operations? A team would do business this way because it is financially advantageous to them, and because a similar approach has been used in NE resulting in the most recent football dynasty. Say what you want about Belichick, he puts a winning team on the field with consistancy.

So, it is a gamble. I will not try to refute the article, though I would say its basis in fact is reliant upon hearsay from disgruntled players and an argument could be made from that standpoint. Instead I will accept the article at face value and point out that it could work out well for the Broncos. If McDaniels is able to string together a few wins, and get the players to truely believe in the system and his leadership, we could have the start of a future dynasty on our hands. If the Broncos post anything near New Englands 2000's numbers in the 2010's the management style will be vindicated. Further, if any of the three teams have a good level of success the same could be said. In that case it might suck for the Broncos, but the rationale behind taking the gamble will be evident.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Originally Posted by GreatBronco16

I don't have to prove if he is wrong on McDaniels. He needs to prove that he is right. He is the one making 'assumptions' about how he is some power hungry punk that had an agenda from day one. Everything he wrote is just his opinion thrown in with some sources from players who use to work under Mangini who don't anymore because they didn't get what they wanted. Gee go figure they wouldn't have anything nice to say.

It would be nice if we could explain it away like that, but it's not tht easy. First of all, it's not just Mangini, it's also Pioli and McDaniels, as well as the ownership in both Denver and Cleveland, as well as the testimony of players in New York plus the other three teams. It's 8 players singing the same tune and on top of that he didin't just pull this opinion out of his butt, he researched it. He spoke to sources on the teams, and he tells you this in the article. Second, it's not just that "they don't have anything nice to say" as you put it...it's the fact that they all have the SAME thing to say. It's not like their story's differ from one another...they match. A few months ago it's Cutler...now we have Weigman talking about what was promised him...a theme that sounds like the one echoed by Cribbs. Then you have the remarkably similar examples of upper mangement being fired in Denver and Cleveland where TJ McCreight, fresh off an interview for the vacant GM job, was summarily fired after Mangini got to town and lobbied for Ravens exec George Kokinis as his personal choice for GM...a pattern followed with Denver when they hired promoted Xanders.

Does all this prove McDaniels is a carbon copy? No...it doesn't. But what it does do...is offer one of the few actual pieces of evidence we have that is supported by coraborating testimonials from other places on the nature of how the "New England way" is planted outside the Pats organization. It's a strong indicator that for the first time, casts real doubt on the offical version of things that doesn't just come from Jay Cutler, and can't just be dismissed as one immature player having a tantrum.

Silver's a credible writer, not a hack like Woody Paige or the drama queens we see on ESPN. He spoke to players and people in these organizations, and had access we don't. Whether you choose to believe it or not is up to you, but the door's been opened to questions on a wider level with the existence of multiple other Belichick coaching tree issues rising to the surface that mirror the ones we've seen here.

[footstepsfrom#27]

Originally Posted by meangene

I read the article and it would have been interesting if it were just about Mangini because he has a history of these types of actions as a head coach and a number of issues already in Cleveland that leave you scratching your head. But, the author needed a more entertaining hook than that so he made a huge stretch to link McDaniels and Pioli. Pioli was on the job for many years in New England and I don't recall a single incident of this type. McDaniels has been involved in one issue - Cutler, in which it is vogue for the head-line seeking national media to blame him. Any fault he may have is, at best, questionable but the media just glosses over the details and the unknowns in the whole Cutler situation. It is vogue to just say McDaniel's ran Cutler out of town, the Broncos will suck and Cutler is a great quarterback. Let's just ignore the fact that there is absolutely no indication that McDaniels is alienating the players in Denver and that everything you read or hear from the players indicates a real enthusiasm for the system and optimism for the upcoming season. Another shoddy piece of SI "journalism" just like the recent Marshall witch hunt on ESPN and some of those ridiculous rankings of head coaches who have yet to coach an NFL game by TSN. I guess it's the offseason and there is nothing else to talk about than another Brett Favre comeback.

This is the writer whose done the last 12 Super Bowl game stories for the #1 sports magazine in the country. Accusing him of shoddy journalism because you don't like his conclusions is unreasonable, unsupportable and smacks of denial. As for there being "absolutely no indication that McDaniels is alienating the players in Denver"...does Cutler count? He was after all...the best player on the team at the most important position on the team. Now we're hearing Weigman starting to make some rumblings about his contract and what he thinks was promised him...we are still early here...Mangini had more time to show what he was going to do. If nothing else it forces an aknowledgement that this is something to keep an eye on.