The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Orange Mane Discussion > Orange Mane Central Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-21-2010, 11:42 AM   #1
bloodsunday
Ring of Famer
 
Nothing lasts forever.

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Dove Valley
Posts: 5,838

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Spencer Larsen
Default Random Thoughs about Shanahan, McDaniels and moving on

After reflecting on our season and the upheaval in our organization, I've come to a couple of conclusions:

1) It was without a doubt time to move on from Mike Shanahan (put aside who we hired for the moment). His wasteful spending and constant draft failings were compounding and killing us. (See dead money last year). Shanahan made his reputation in Denver by being ahead of the curve in FA (it started in 93 and he became our HC in 95) by finding quality "role" players like McCaffrey, Romanowski, etc.... But now the rest of the league sees that strategy as status quo in FA and the draft has once again become the best way to build your team. What's more, Shanahan refused to build this team at the most important point of football -- the line of scrimmage. Drafting late round, under-sized offensive lineman to run a zone-blocking scheme became a stale idea and he didn't adapt. I think he failed to recognize that the players he had when he first implemented the zone-blocking scheme were much better than "system" players.

2) I think Mike will be a better coach for this transition and having a chance to step back.

3) Shanahan never proved he could win without Elway.

4) Why are people so afraid of change? This organization has one exactly 1 playoff game and 1 division in more than a decade? Yes change comes with risk, but is a mediocre status quo really any better? McDaniels may not be the answer, but we won't have to continue watching 280 offensive lineman get flogged in the redzone, RB that look like Gale Sayers between the 20's and disappear and cannot finish, or a rotating door on defensive schemes.

5) Why do people see that the answer is 4 and assume the question was "what's 2 + 2?". When McDaniels was asked if he was surprised that Denver didn't hire a "defensive-minded head coach", he responded by saying that he was hired to coach the entire football team. To me, that was one of the most impressive things that McDaniels said when he was introduced as head coach. Everyone around here belly-ached about the defense and assumed we would hire "Spagnolo" and just leave the offense alone. What's more, everyone assumed that hiring McDaniels was about the offense because of the 2007 Patriots. But, people forget two things: 1) McDaniels started in NE as a defensive coach and 2) NE is not a perennial super power on offense (2007 aside). In fact, I would say that it's my opinion they buttered their bread on defense and had timely/clutch offense. So isn't it possible that maybe we got a head coach because he knows defense? I also think that over time we'll find he will put much more emphasis on special teams than Shanahan ever did, particularly late in his tenure.

6) This is really a summary of all these things, but in general I like the "plan" that this organization has, at least as I perceive it. It's difficult to know if McDaniels will succeed or fail, but in general I agree with his approach: 1) build the team at the line of scrimmage 2) build the core of the team through the draft 3) improve the run defense (and really the defense overall) 4) build a team first approach.
bloodsunday is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 04-21-2010, 12:49 PM   #2
doonwise
Seasoned Veteran
 
doonwise's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 459
Default

Your post is way to rational and will not be appreciated. That being said, I completely agree with every single point you made.
doonwise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2010, 12:56 PM   #3
crush17
"Born A Broncos Fan"
 
crush17's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 5,572

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Rick Upchurch
Default

Agreed on all points.
crush17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2010, 12:57 PM   #4
Ray Finkle
DOOONNNTTTTT CAAARRREEE!
 
Ray Finkle's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 7,538
Default

I agree with your post.....

It is funny how perception works. In DC, Shanny has taken a top 5 D and alienated it's "star" player, and tried to trade one of it's top DE's. He then goes and brings in a slew of RB's (including Torain) to battle for spots.

He is lauded for righting the ship.....Josh does something similar and is an idiot....
Ray Finkle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2010, 01:18 PM   #5
mkporter
Ring of Famer
 
mkporter's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,675

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

I agree with most of your points except #3. Shanny was 39-15 (regular season) with Jake. Yeah, he didn't win any super bowls, but that counts as winning with another QB.
mkporter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2010, 01:20 PM   #6
rastaman
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 7,180

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Bill Walsh said it best. A HC should only stay with the same team for 10 years max. After that its time to move on.

Last edited by rastaman; 04-21-2010 at 01:26 PM..
rastaman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2010, 01:22 PM   #7
Ray Finkle
DOOONNNTTTTT CAAARRREEE!
 
Ray Finkle's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 7,538
Default

This message is hidden because rastaman is on your ignore list.

Ray Finkle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2010, 01:46 PM   #8
bpc
"Nemo Me Impune Lacessit"
 
bpc's Avatar
 
1 sword keeps another in the sheath

Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Northern California
Posts: 14,048

Adopt-a-Bronco:
TJ Ward
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bloodsunday View Post
After reflecting on our season and the upheaval in our organization, I've come to a couple of conclusions:

1) It was without a doubt time to move on from Mike Shanahan (put aside who we hired for the moment). His wasteful spending and constant draft failings were compounding and killing us. (See dead money last year). Shanahan made his reputation in Denver by being ahead of the curve in FA (it started in 93 and he became our HC in 95) by finding quality "role" players like McCaffrey, Romanowski, etc.... But now the rest of the league sees that strategy as status quo in FA and the draft has once again become the best way to build your team. What's more, Shanahan refused to build this team at the most important point of football -- the line of scrimmage. Drafting late round, under-sized offensive lineman to run a zone-blocking scheme became a stale idea and he didn't adapt. I think he failed to recognize that the players he had when he first implemented the zone-blocking scheme were much better than "system" players.

2) I think Mike will be a better coach for this transition and having a chance to step back.

3) Shanahan never proved he could win without Elway.

4) Why are people so afraid of change? This organization has one exactly 1 playoff game and 1 division in more than a decade? Yes change comes with risk, but is a mediocre status quo really any better? McDaniels may not be the answer, but we won't have to continue watching 280 offensive lineman get flogged in the redzone, RB that look like Gale Sayers between the 20's and disappear and cannot finish, or a rotating door on defensive schemes.

5) Why do people see that the answer is 4 and assume the question was "what's 2 + 2?". When McDaniels was asked if he was surprised that Denver didn't hire a "defensive-minded head coach", he responded by saying that he was hired to coach the entire football team. To me, that was one of the most impressive things that McDaniels said when he was introduced as head coach. Everyone around here belly-ached about the defense and assumed we would hire "Spagnolo" and just leave the offense alone. What's more, everyone assumed that hiring McDaniels was about the offense because of the 2007 Patriots. But, people forget two things: 1) McDaniels started in NE as a defensive coach and 2) NE is not a perennial super power on offense (2007 aside). In fact, I would say that it's my opinion they buttered their bread on defense and had timely/clutch offense. So isn't it possible that maybe we got a head coach because he knows defense? I also think that over time we'll find he will put much more emphasis on special teams than Shanahan ever did, particularly late in his tenure.

6) This is really a summary of all these things, but in general I like the "plan" that this organization has, at least as I perceive it. It's difficult to know if McDaniels will succeed or fail, but in general I agree with his approach: 1) build the team at the line of scrimmage 2) build the core of the team through the draft 3) improve the run defense (and really the defense overall) 4) build a team first approach.
1. Partially Agree - Shanahan could have definitely tightened up the ship on spending. Draft picks are what they are though... you can revamp the FO and get better scouting, which allow for better drafting. It could be argued this is what was taking place during Mike's last three years IMO. Unfortunately, his veteran squad in 2005 turned over really quick through age, death, and injury. You can't say he didn't invest in the OL, because we took George Foster in what, 2004 with our 1st round pick and Ryan Clady just a few years ago. You can criticize the scouting but he was moving more towards what you are stating within the OL. Clady/Harris/Kuper were paying off huge dividends as recent as Mike's last year here. While not having a face on the running game, it was still producing.

2. Agree.

3. Disagree. You are right in the sense that he could never win a SUPER BOWL without Elway. He won A LOT with Jake Plummer and put Plummer in a position to succeed despite VAST failure in Arizona. Great coaching job in my opinion, probably his best coaching job of his career. Plummer couldn't carry us past the finish line which is why we went after Jay Cutler, a guy that could run AND pass. Blast that move however you want but Cutler was producing. It's unfortunate he didn't have a ton of help on either side of the ball. For the record, Shanahan also won and went to the playoffs with Griese and Beaurlein. Bubby Brister was HUGE in going undefeated when Elway was hurt in 1998, our 2nd super bowl season.

4. Wrong. People are not afraid of change. THey may be disappointed by it, not afraid. Most fans don't like 32 yr old 1st time HC's rolling through a stop and making risky decisions before a down of football has been played. We also scored a lot of TD's during the late 90's and early 2000's. Nobody was complaining about 280 lb linemen when we were breaking off 2000 yd combined rushing seasons per year. Hard to say we aren't changing schemes. We changed 4-3 schemes under Shanny. Year two has started with McD and he's already changed out Nolan, for what? Another scheme within the 3-4?

5. TBD.

6. Meh. I agree with his thoughts on approaching football, don't agree with his poor relationship skills which continue to pop up over his year in Denver. I think that's completely fair to say.
bpc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2010, 02:01 PM   #9
Shoemaker
A Lurker No More
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: People's Republic of Boulder
Posts: 371

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Brian Dawkins
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bpc View Post
6. Meh. I agree with his thoughts on approaching football, don't agree with his poor relationship skills which continue to pop up over his year in Denver. I think that's completely fair to say.
Okay, this one I don't get. What "poor relationship skills" are we talking about?

I understand that he's had conflict with some players, namely Cutler, Marshall, and Scheffler. But I don't think that establishes a trend of poor communication.

Clearly, the Cutler situation was a bit of a debacle. But reports have indicated that Cutler was dissatisfied as soon as Shanahan was fired; before the whole "trading" incident even occurred. And McDaniels was fully prepared to move into the season with Cutler as his starter until Bowlen forced the trade, so its not like McDaniels kept trying to move Cutler after he failed to get Cassel because he just couldn't work with Jay or hated him so much.

Scheffler, well, he expressed his displeasure as soon as Cutler was traded. I doubt he and McDaniels ever got along well, but given the spinelessness that Scheffler showed near the end of last season, I'm not to worried about McDaniels not being a big fan of his.

And in every interview since the trade, Marshall has been nothing but complimentary of McDaniels and their relationship. Obviously, the Broncos FO, Josh included, felt that they couldn't make a long term investment in Brandon and decided to trade him, but it seemed like Marshall just wanted to get away from Denver, not from Josh in particular. I just don't see any indication that the trade was due to Marshall's "inability to get along with McDaniels."

Plus, aside from those three players, our locker room raves about the guy. Free agents want to come here; do you really think Dawkins would have left Philly to come here if he had had a poor relationship with McDaniels? People who interview Josh (Mike Lombardi, Peter King, etc.) come away very impressed with him. And now potential draft picks, like Weatherspoon and Benn, are raving about McDaniels and the team.

I understand that prominent players on this team have been traded during McDaniels' tenure, but I still don't understand where the perception that Josh has "poor relationship skills" comes from.
Shoemaker is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2010, 02:11 PM   #10
bloodsunday
Ring of Famer
 
Nothing lasts forever.

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Dove Valley
Posts: 5,838

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Spencer Larsen
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bpc View Post
1. Partially Agree - Shanahan could have definitely tightened up the ship on spending. Draft picks are what they are though... you can revamp the FO and get better scouting, which allow for better drafting. It could be argued this is what was taking place during Mike's last three years IMO. Unfortunately, his veteran squad in 2005 turned over really quick through age, death, and injury. You can't say he didn't invest in the OL, because we took George Foster in what, 2004 with our 1st round pick and Ryan Clady just a few years ago. You can criticize the scouting but he was moving more towards what you are stating within the OL. Clady/Harris/Kuper were paying off huge dividends as recent as Mike's last year here. While not having a face on the running game, it was still producing.

2. Agree.

3. Disagree. You are right in the sense that he could never win a SUPER BOWL without Elway. He won A LOT with Jake Plummer and put Plummer in a position to succeed despite VAST failure in Arizona. Great coaching job in my opinion, probably his best coaching job of his career. Plummer couldn't carry us past the finish line which is why we went after Jay Cutler, a guy that could run AND pass. Blast that move however you want but Cutler was producing. It's unfortunate he didn't have a ton of help on either side of the ball. For the record, Shanahan also won and went to the playoffs with Griese and Beaurlein. Bubby Brister was HUGE in going undefeated when Elway was hurt in 1998, our 2nd super bowl season.

4. Wrong. People are not afraid of change. THey may be disappointed by it, not afraid. Most fans don't like 32 yr old 1st time HC's rolling through a stop and making risky decisions before a down of football has been played. We also scored a lot of TD's during the late 90's and early 2000's. Nobody was complaining about 280 lb linemen when we were breaking off 2000 yd combined rushing seasons per year. Hard to say we aren't changing schemes. We changed 4-3 schemes under Shanny. Year two has started with McD and he's already changed out Nolan, for what? Another scheme within the 3-4?

5. TBD.

6. Meh. I agree with his thoughts on approaching football, don't agree with his poor relationship skills which continue to pop up over his year in Denver. I think that's completely fair to say.
1. He didn't draft Clady until he was almost out of Denver. Foster was an "oops" pick (and it showed by the way). He thought he had a deal to draft down. In general he didn't draft well enough build a core of a team. He had hits and misses every year, but the teams that have succeeded the past 10 years have killed the draft. Denver was not among them. You cannot blame scouts or personnel because Shanahan oversaw all of that.

3. You can define success however you want. For me, 1 division title in 10 years is not enough. Yes there were several playoff opportunities in there, but in reality its tough to win a Super Bowl if you cannot win your division. He also only 1 one playoff game after Elway. Bottom line, his W/L record, his playoff record, and his division dominance all went downhill when Elway hung em' up. I'll get to the Jake Plummer thing later....

4. Again, define it how you want. People are already on McDaniels because of everything he is not. People had a defined perspective of how this transition should go and it include everything Shanahan, minus Shanahan. Keep the roster together, more specifically keep the offense together. Keep Turner, etc... But in reality, making organizational change after a guy that had so much power leaves after such a long time should be hard, by definition. To me, that is fear of change. "It's ok to change as long as the change is within my grasp of acceptable." And for the record, I am not complaining about the size of the lineman more than the flawed idea that you can build a "system" out of average players on the line of scrimmage.

6. I find if fascinating that all of a sudden McDaniels has "poor relationship skills" as if Shanahan was Ghandi. Am I the only one that remembers how he treated Jake Plummer at the end? Am I the only one that remembers his deteriorating relationship with Sundquist and about 5 different defensive coordinators (we lost Ray Rhodes and Bates in one season each!)? How about the way he got along with Gibb's son? Did you blank out on the fact that Shanahan was game planning behind Dan Reeves back when he was an assistant coach here? Brandon Marshall himself said that the reports of his relationship with McDaniels were blown out of proportion. Of course high profile guys like this are going to be perceived as being difficult to get along with. It's their job to make tough decisions. In the NFL those decisions cost people millions of dollars. It's part of the deal.

I for one saw McDaniels mature in the way he dealt with the media and with running an organization as the season moved along last year. Yes he's young and yes he's learning on the job (to a certain degree). But that's how it goes. Again, I am not even saying I am certain McDaniels will be a blinding success. I don't know. But I think he's worth giving a chance.
bloodsunday is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2010, 02:19 PM   #11
Steve Sewell
Oh Tyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!
 
Steve Sewell's Avatar
 
Patrick and Ty's pimp

Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,624

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Reggie Rivers
Default

This is an excellent post, I agree with everything you said.
Steve Sewell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2010, 02:25 PM   #12
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
 
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
 
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 22,235

Adopt-a-Bronco:
WorrellWilliams
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bloodsunday View Post
1. He didn't draft Clady until he was almost out of Denver. Foster was an "oops" pick (and it showed by the way). He thought he had a deal to draft down. In general he didn't draft well enough build a core of a team. He had hits and misses every year, but the teams that have succeeded the past 10 years have killed the draft. Denver was not among them. You cannot blame scouts or personnel because Shanahan oversaw all of that.

3. You can define success however you want. For me, 1 division title in 10 years is not enough. Yes there were several playoff opportunities in there, but in reality its tough to win a Super Bowl if you cannot win your division. He also only 1 one playoff game after Elway. Bottom line, his W/L record, his playoff record, and his division dominance all went downhill when Elway hung em' up. I'll get to the Jake Plummer thing later....

4. Again, define it how you want. People are already on McDaniels because of everything he is not. People had a defined perspective of how this transition should go and it include everything Shanahan, minus Shanahan. Keep the roster together, more specifically keep the offense together. Keep Turner, etc... But in reality, making organizational change after a guy that had so much power leaves after such a long time should be hard, by definition. To me, that is fear of change. "It's ok to change as long as the change is within my grasp of acceptable." And for the record, I am not complaining about the size of the lineman more than the flawed idea that you can build a "system" out of average players on the line of scrimmage.

6. I find if fascinating that all of a sudden McDaniels has "poor relationship skills" as if Shanahan was Ghandi. Am I the only one that remembers how he treated Jake Plummer at the end? Am I the only one that remembers his deteriorating relationship with Sundquist and about 5 different defensive coordinators (we lost Ray Rhodes and Bates in one season each!)? How about the way he got along with Gibb's son? Did you blank out on the fact that Shanahan was game planning behind Dan Reeves back when he was an assistant coach here? Brandon Marshall himself said that the reports of his relationship with McDaniels were blown out of proportion. Of course high profile guys like this are going to be perceived as being difficult to get along with. It's their job to make tough decisions. In the NFL those decisions cost people millions of dollars. It's part of the deal.

I for one saw McDaniels mature in the way he dealt with the media and with running an organization as the season moved along last year. Yes he's young and yes he's learning on the job (to a certain degree). But that's how it goes. Again, I am not even saying I am certain McDaniels will be a blinding success. I don't know. But I think he's worth giving a chance.
This is what I've been saying since McD was hired. A lot of posters are just flat out scared of all the change because it's not what they expected.

It's perfectly understandable why so many supposed long time Broncos fans are so critical of McD. They are scared, plain and simple.
Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2010, 02:26 PM   #13
Steve Sewell
Oh Tyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!
 
Steve Sewell's Avatar
 
Patrick and Ty's pimp

Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,624

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Reggie Rivers
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoemaker View Post

I understand that prominent players on this team have been traded during McDaniels' tenure, but I still don't understand where the perception that Josh has "poor relationship skills" comes from.
I believe it's because people are uncomfortable with the notion of a really young guy being in a position of immense power who has the ability to assert his authority.
Steve Sewell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2010, 02:30 PM   #14
Dagmar
...there ain't no devil
 
Dagmar's Avatar
 
..there's just God when he's drunk.

Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Morrison
Posts: 16,755

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Tim Tebow
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoemaker View Post
Okay, this one I don't get. What "poor relationship skills" are we talking about?

I understand that he's had conflict with some players, namely Cutler, Marshall, and Scheffler. But I don't think that establishes a trend of poor communication.

Clearly, the Cutler situation was a bit of a debacle. But reports have indicated that Cutler was dissatisfied as soon as Shanahan was fired; before the whole "trading" incident even occurred. And McDaniels was fully prepared to move into the season with Cutler as his starter until Bowlen forced the trade, so its not like McDaniels kept trying to move Cutler after he failed to get Cassel because he just couldn't work with Jay or hated him so much.

Scheffler, well, he expressed his displeasure as soon as Cutler was traded. I doubt he and McDaniels ever got along well, but given the spinelessness that Scheffler showed near the end of last season, I'm not to worried about McDaniels not being a big fan of his.

And in every interview since the trade, Marshall has been nothing but complimentary of McDaniels and their relationship. Obviously, the Broncos FO, Josh included, felt that they couldn't make a long term investment in Brandon and decided to trade him, but it seemed like Marshall just wanted to get away from Denver, not from Josh in particular. I just don't see any indication that the trade was due to Marshall's "inability to get along with McDaniels."

Plus, aside from those three players, our locker room raves about the guy. Free agents want to come here; do you really think Dawkins would have left Philly to come here if he had had a poor relationship with McDaniels? People who interview Josh (Mike Lombardi, Peter King, etc.) come away very impressed with him. And now potential draft picks, like Weatherspoon and Benn, are raving about McDaniels and the team.

I understand that prominent players on this team have been traded during McDaniels' tenure, but I still don't understand where the perception that Josh has "poor relationship skills" comes from.
Look, this road has been traveled many a time, to save you and bpc some time, you will NEVER change bpc's mind.
Dagmar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2010, 02:42 PM   #15
Bronco Yoda
.
 
Bronco Yoda's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 9,025
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoemaker View Post
Okay, this one I don't get. What "poor relationship skills" are we talking about?

I understand that he's had conflict with some players, namely Cutler, Marshall, and Scheffler. But I don't think that establishes a trend of poor communication.

Clearly, the Cutler situation was a bit of a debacle. But reports have indicated that Cutler was dissatisfied as soon as Shanahan was fired; before the whole "trading" incident even occurred. And McDaniels was fully prepared to move into the season with Cutler as his starter until Bowlen forced the trade, so its not like McDaniels kept trying to move Cutler after he failed to get Cassel because he just couldn't work with Jay or hated him so much.

Scheffler, well, he expressed his displeasure as soon as Cutler was traded. I doubt he and McDaniels ever got along well, but given the spinelessness that Scheffler showed near the end of last season, I'm not to worried about McDaniels not being a big fan of his.

And in every interview since the trade, Marshall has been nothing but complimentary of McDaniels and their relationship. Obviously, the Broncos FO, Josh included, felt that they couldn't make a long term investment in Brandon and decided to trade him, but it seemed like Marshall just wanted to get away from Denver, not from Josh in particular. I just don't see any indication that the trade was due to Marshall's "inability to get along with McDaniels."

Plus, aside from those three players, our locker room raves about the guy. Free agents want to come here; do you really think Dawkins would have left Philly to come here if he had had a poor relationship with McDaniels? People who interview Josh (Mike Lombardi, Peter King, etc.) come away very impressed with him. And now potential draft picks, like Weatherspoon and Benn, are raving about McDaniels and the team.

I understand that prominent players on this team have been traded during McDaniels' tenure, but I still don't understand where the perception that Josh has "poor relationship skills" comes from.
You forgot Hillis in your post. For this egregious omission... you are hence forth sent back to lurking.
Bronco Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2010, 02:54 PM   #16
Cito Pelon
Been there, didn't get it
 
Cito Pelon's Avatar
 
Not2Shabby County Seat

Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: AFC Championshipville, NotTooShabby County
Posts: 16,550

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Slim Shabby
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ View Post
This is what I've been saying since McD was hired. A lot of posters are just flat out scared of all the change because it's not what they expected.

It's perfectly understandable why so many supposed long time Broncos fans are so critical of McD. They are scared, plain and simple.
True.
Cito Pelon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2010, 02:56 PM   #17
DawnBTVS
Laugh This Off... Puddin'
 
Rookie Poster

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Sudbury, MA
Posts: 88

Adopt-a-Bronco:
David Bruton
Default

One thing I think gets overlooked in regards to McDaniels and his "communication issues"/"people skills"...

Yes, he traded Jay Cutler (who reportedly was upset when both the QB Coach AND Shanahan were let go pre-new coach), Brandon Marshall (who's said he's wanted out of Denver for a while and finally got his wish and as others have said he's been high on McDaniels as a person), and Scheffler (who's reportedly been upset since Cutler was traded since they were close).

But you all forget about the other 49-50 players on the roster. Champ Bailey, a respected veteran, hasn't complained about McDaniels. Brian Dawkins, signed as a free agent, hasn't complained. Ryan Clady hasn't been complaining despite being part of an offensive line asked to play a completely different scheme he learned under Shanahan. Jarvis Green signed in part because of McDaniels and McD didn't exactly scare Jamal Williams away from signing.

I think some of the posters are extracting Josh's trading of the first three players (and the loss of Mike Nolan despite replacing him IN HOUSE with a guy the players admittedly liked and WANTED) with a team wide expectation that the guy as head coach has people problems and struggles to communicate with players (or wants to communicate with them). They ignore the free agents who've signed AFTER Josh was named head coach and ignored the lack of complaints from highly respected veterans.
DawnBTVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2010, 03:06 PM   #18
RonDaChamp24
Twitter.com/RonGreco
 
RonDaChamp24's Avatar
 
The Champ is here

Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Broken Arrow, Oklahoma
Posts: 328

Adopt-a-Bronco:
D. Thomas
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by doonwise View Post
Your post is way to rational and will not be appreciated. That being said, I completely agree with every single point you made.
This ^
RonDaChamp24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2010, 03:31 PM   #19
Popps
It's so easy
 
Popps's Avatar
 

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 29,804
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ View Post
This is what I've been saying since McD was hired. A lot of posters are just flat out scared of all the change because it's not what they expected.

It's perfectly understandable why so many supposed long time Broncos fans are so critical of McD. They are scared, plain and simple.
Popps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2010, 03:35 PM   #20
TheReverend
Permanent Facepalm
 
TheReverend's Avatar
 
Not. Too. Shabby.

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 37,463

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Mike Shanahan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cito Pelon View Post
True.
Not at all true.

Plain and simple fact is the future is completely uncertain.

You may agree or disagree with what he's done, but McD is easily the most polarizing Broncos figure in the past decade AT LEAST.

The other plain and simple fact is that this argument can only be ended by one man's actions whether they result in success or failure: Josh McDaniels.
TheReverend is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2010, 04:09 PM   #21
elsid13
Lost In Space
 
elsid13's Avatar
 
Bóg, Honor, Ojczyzna

Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: DC
Posts: 19,851
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bloodsunday View Post
1. He didn't draft Clady until he was almost out of Denver. Foster was an "oops" pick (and it showed by the way). He thought he had a deal to draft down. In general he didn't draft well enough build a core of a team. He had hits and misses every year, but the teams that have succeeded the past 10 years have killed the draft. Denver was not among them. You cannot blame scouts or personnel because Shanahan oversaw all of that.
No one knew that Shanahan was going anywhere when he decided to take Clady and he had had very good LT in Lepsis which meant he didn't need to invest in that position. And as much this board likes to kill Shanahan's drafts they are on par or slightly better then most of the teams in NFL.
elsid13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2010, 04:14 PM   #22
rastaman
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 7,180

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Popps View Post
WHY DON'T YOU TAKE YOUR OWN ADVICE!
rastaman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2010, 04:36 PM   #23
OCBronco
Seasoned Veteran
 

Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 256

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Von Miller
Default

The conventional wisdom had it that all McDaniels, or any coach, had to do was just leave the offense alone, come in and fix the D. Then you'd be set for a championship run.

Further, most assumed that Bowlen thought this way, and McDaniels more or less hoodwinked Bowlen so that he could get the job.

Here I'm more or less repeating what I've heard by some of the talking heads on NFL Network, as well as Profootballtalk.com, and so on.

The problem with this is that if you thought that the team was just a good D away from a championship, then why fire Shanahan? I suspect that Bowlen thought that things need to be radically reorganized, and that he probably wasn't against the idea of blowing up the team and remodeling it. Think about that for a second. You haven't seen Bowlen on TV, railing about how McDaniels shouldn't have gotten rid of Cutler or Marshall. In fact, it's the opposite, and he seems fine with the fact that things are proceeding as they are.

I guess this is just a long way of saying that it's not all McDaniels here. The organization as a whole is behind the new coach, and seems perfectly fine with completely remodeling the team.
OCBronco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2010, 04:41 PM   #24
Steve Sewell
Oh Tyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!
 
Steve Sewell's Avatar
 
Patrick and Ty's pimp

Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,624

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Reggie Rivers
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OCBronco View Post
The conventional wisdom had it that all McDaniels, or any coach, had to do was just leave the offense alone, come in and fix the D. Then you'd be set for a championship run.

Further, most assumed that Bowlen thought this way, and McDaniels more or less hoodwinked Bowlen so that he could get the job.

Here I'm more or less repeating what I've heard by some of the talking heads on NFL Network, as well as Profootballtalk.com, and so on.

The problem with this is that if you thought that the team was just a good D away from a championship, then why fire Shanahan? I suspect that Bowlen thought that things need to be radically reorganized, and that he probably wasn't against the idea of blowing up the team and remodeling it. Think about that for a second. You haven't seen Bowlen on TV, railing about how McDaniels shouldn't have gotten rid of Cutler or Marshall. In fact, it's the opposite, and he seems fine with the fact that things are proceeding as they are.

I guess this is just a long way of saying that it's not all McDaniels here. The organization as a whole is behind the new coach, and seems perfectly fine with completely remodeling the team.
Which is precisely why Bowlen is one of the most well respected owners in all of professional sports. He hires the right people and gets the hell out of the way so that they can do their job.
Steve Sewell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2010, 04:43 PM   #25
tsiguy96
Ring of Famer
 
tsiguy96's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 12,748

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elsid13 View Post
No one knew that Shanahan was going anywhere when he decided to take Clady and he had had very good LT in Lepsis which meant he didn't need to invest in that position. And as much this board likes to kill Shanahan's drafts they are on par or slightly better then most of the teams in NFL.
do you not remember 2000-2005? he was the worst drafter in the NFL during that time, remember all those stats about us havinglike 1 guy on the team in 07 from those drafts.
tsiguy96 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:20 AM.


Denver Broncos