Meet the new boss
by Bob in Boulder on Aug 24, 2009 9:45 AM MDT
Email
Print
And as The Who said, so far anyway, same as the old boss. Except The Who didn't throw in that "so far anyway" bit. Would have probably weakened their classic.
Now, before the koolaiders get all hot and bothered here, I'll come clean. I'm not a fan of McJosh so far. Having said that, I've been looking for hope during the first few preseason games, and have seen glimpses of good. 7 sacks. Good. First team offense moving the ball. Good. First team D doing better against the run, OK, but let's be honest here, they haven't been tested. Even Orton, especially Saturday night, has been a little better than I had anticipated (but he sure as hell isn't going to stretch a D with that arm).
Now for the "same as the old boss" stuff. I thought I was reliving a nightmare when the Broncos had the ball 2nd and goal at the one and went to, get this, 3 straight passing plays. Isn't that part of the reason Shanny is gone? Sure, Gaffney could have had the first one. But why try two more? If our offense can't punch the ball in from one yard out in 3 tries, we're in a world of hurt. Add that horrible sequence to the ineptitude in week one, the Broncos aren't any better at putting points on the board so far than they were in 2008. In fact, without the potential for big strikes. they may be worse.
And the other thing? Turnovers. Bloody awful production in turnovers on both sides of the ball. 6-0 against two dregs from the NFC Worst. Keep putting lipstick on this pig, but frankly, isn't that part of the rationale for us giving away our first rounder next year? And picking up and drafting a zillion dbs and pretty much filling our front 7 with rejects and projects? Until we actually see fruits of this "master plan," I'm not biting. All of the great defenses of year's past have one thing in common. Relentless pressure from their front 7. Think Bears circa 1986. Ravens early 2000's. Steelers. What I've seen so far is a D capable of putting a little more pressure on the QB here and there, but still, nothing that is going to strike fear into anyone. Even the lowly 49ers and Seahawks.
I've also seen a team that, for all of the hype, doesn't appear to be "well coached." Routinely blowing timeouts because they don't know what is going on out there? Is that a metric of good coaching?
Have fun with this koolaiders. Again, I'm a fan, but not an optimistic one. I hope I'm wrong on McJosh. I hope this team comes around. So far, I'm not impressed. Not one bit.
This is a Fan-Created Comment on MileHighReport.com. The opinion here is not necessarily shared by the editorial staff of MHR
81 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
This has been said
before and I don’t mean to infringe on anyone’s copyright, but…..3 passes from the 3 yard line was most likely pre-season training. The fact that it is SO ABSURD to everyone, the fact that Josh comes from the belichek (sp?) breeding, and the fact that we have Hillis Buck lamont and moreno, should prove this case.
It is my firm (while completely opinionated) belief that we would have punched it in w/ Hillis or C-Buks if this had been a reg. season game. But Mcdaniels wants neckbeard to get familiar with the redzone. We already KNOW that we can run the ball. We already KNOW we could pounch the ball in with the H-Train at the very least. Hell, we could have QB Sneaked and gotten better results. But how often do you get the chance to force a QB to see 3 or 4 straight plays that deep in the red Zone?
I say bring on the kool-aid. Of course that tells you plenty based on your own views, but I hope and urge you to see the silver-lining in these dark grey clouds over your head.
We may not be a SB team this year…..but we are MUCH improved over all.
My comparison is such…..last year our offense was a 9-9.5 Our Defense? Maybe a 3?
This year our O is looking closer to a 7-8, leaning closer to 7 probably, but our D is looking more like a 7 as well.
so…last year a 12-12.5 overall
This year? a 14-15. And given that our O lost little, and D gained much I’d say we are in a very good position to be SB caliber in 1-3 years. Not a huge amount of time when you figure our last visit was 10 yeras ago.
"I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work."
- Thomas Alva Edison
"Success is not a place at which one arrives, but rather... the spirit with which one undertakes and continues the journey."
- Alex Noble
by DenBronx on Aug 24, 2009 9:56 AM MDT reply actions 2 recs
I'm glad you see the improvement
and it might be more than you realize. Our offense was 16th — average! — in scoring last year. From the fourth week on we were 27th. That’s not 9.0 or 9.5. It’s just plain bad. Meanwhile, our defense is looking much better than last year, but a 7 implies better than average. Frankly, if we’re average or not too far below average I’ll be thrilled. I agree that we’ll be about 7-8 on offense this year, which would be an improvement over the 5 (370 points) we were last year. If that’s the way it works out we’ll have improved from about an 8 to about 12-13, which would give us a good shot at the playoffs. If 8 sounds like we were below average as a team last year, 370 points scored and 448 given up seconds that motion. We were lucky to be 8-8 last year. We could easily be much better and still be only 8-8 or 9-7.
"Surprised to see you, Captain, though pleased." — from Star Trek episode Space Seed.
Sobering opinion.
Our defense is a work in progress. No one is arguing that. The next draft and FA period will more than likely resemble what many thought they would see this off season. Supposedly, the 2010 draft is very deep, particularly along the d-line. More help is on the way. Who really knows what to expect this season. To expect anything, really, is just ill advised. Prepare for the worst and hope for the best. Our secondary is now filled with playmakers and our LB’s don’t really have anywhere to go but up. That is where we really got killed last season, the second and third levels. Our d-line wasn’t as bad as it was made out to be. We have 7 sacks in two games. We are better on defense. Period. Cutler is gone. He accounted for the vast majority of our turnovers. Had we been just even in turnovers we probably make the playoffs and would have been a 10 or 11 win team last year. Orton is getting looks in the red zone, nothing more. We all know that left handed duck wouldn’t have set sail in a real situation. As the other poster mentioned, we could have easily punched it in or at worst came away with a field goal. I appreciate your being grounded and all, but don’t overlook these simple facts that really tell a lot more between the lines. I’m not a starry eyed optimist, and I haven’t been proclaiming that we will win anything close to 13 games. It could very well happen though. Or we could win 3 games. I’m not passing judgement anytime soon, that much I can tell you.
Take my advice, I'm not using it !!!
Like McDaniels or not...
but what’s up with McJosh, McIdiot, McInsertinsulthere…
For me, it instantly discredits anything you’re about to say, because if you’re going to try and attack the man by saying ‘McDork" it tells me you’re not creative or intelligent enough to come up with a reasonably funny or relevant insult about the guy and whatever you’re going to say afterwards is probably just as idiotic and not worth my time to read.
For instance, I read up to “McJosh” and then I stopped reading, because I’m sure whatever you posted afterward is just as idiotic as saying “mcjosh”
by Bustafluff on Aug 24, 2009 10:59 AM MDT reply actions 2 recs
Please lighten up Busta
If this site lacks credibility (and I know that’s not really the right word or the word I’m really looking for), it’s the the thin skin or hypersensitivity demonstrated by the kool-aid crowd. The use of McJosh is no more derogatory than McD or McJedi or other nicknames that get thrown around here – and I do realize there’s a line that should not be crossed. There’s plenty of other points within BB’s post to dispute, discuss, argue with etc. without resorting to “false outrage”. Go Broncs!
It's "just" football
I think Bustaluuf's outrage is quite sincere
The whole Mcwhatever thing has become a sore spot for many and you have to concede the point that 95% of the posts that start with Mc### go on to slam the coach. I agree that Mcjosh isn’t as bad as some but it is more derogatory than McD which woul be the next letter in the name or Mcjedi which would probably be a positive association since Jedi’s rock.
"as in football so in life"
I Think
He has a point. There is an abundance of McName and the fact that he prefaces it with his admission to not being a fan of his.
It doesn’t hurt to call people out on their negative semantics.
Tis better not to throw it to the deep receiver but the open receiver.
right
I see enough “mcdummy” posts over at DP
Depends on the context
The use of McJosh is no more derogatory than McD or McJedi or other nicknames
I use McD as an abbreviation, like many people used Shanny as an abbreviation.
...because sometimes your inner cowboy needs to yodel.
Wow.
This isn’t a serious response, right?
…Right?
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Aug 24, 2009 11:43 AM MDT up reply actions
I think it was
and feel the same way myself. I’m sick and tired of McThis and McThat designations which amount to sneers. McJosh is relatively mild as insults go, or perhaps just unimaginative, but it’s in the same vein. Along with I’m sure a lot of other MHR posters I just want to say ENOUGH ALREADY.
"Surprised to see you, Captain, though pleased." — from Star Trek episode Space Seed.
Wow again.
I really didn’t think it was that big of a deal. I can’t believe “McJosh” could stir ANYBODY’S pot. Life’s too short, dude.
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Aug 26, 2009 5:28 PM MDT up reply actions
How about "McJoshMcDanielsIsTheGreatestCoachTheWorldHasEverSeen"?
That’s not insulting, right?
But who will guard the guards themselves?
by Agent Jerry Fletcher on Aug 26, 2009 5:56 PM MDT up reply actions
I'm not asking anyone to fall in love with him
Just to knock off the obnoxious name-calling. Is that too much to ask without getting a smartass reply? Apparently so.
"Surprised to see you, Captain, though pleased." — from Star Trek episode Space Seed.
Easy there, Spock.
It’s not like we’re negotiating “The Treaty of Alliance” here. We’re supposed to be having fun, right? Or am I missing something?
But who will guard the guards themselves?
by Agent Jerry Fletcher on Aug 26, 2009 6:40 PM MDT up reply actions
Guess I overreacted
Sorry.
"Surprised to see you, Captain, though pleased." — from Star Trek episode Space Seed.
No sweat - happens to the best of us.
We all know you’re a good guy.
But who will guard the guards themselves?
by Agent Jerry Fletcher on Aug 27, 2009 4:07 PM MDT up reply actions
This post is incredibly frustrating
As has been mentioned many times on this site, McD is using the preseason for what it was intended to be used. He is testing his team and is not concerned with the outcome. The points scored in the preseason mean NOTHING. This is a time to see who will be on the roster and KISS (keep it simple s…). Don’t give away how you will be playing when the snaps mean something.
The Broncos will be more than fine once the regular season starts.
There is no I in team.
I keep hearing that...
3 straight passes from the goal line was some sort of a situational test….
What kind of a situation? The only thing you could be practicing for is that exact situation in a real game. Since it is on the goal line, the D is not in a formation you will see anywhere else on the field. It is logical to conclude that in the same situation in a real live game, the coach will at least consider acting in the same way.
KISS from the goal line means buckle your chinstrap and smack them in the mouth, not trot out some cutesy little passes 3 times in a row.
Get ready for it Bronco fans, you will see this offense try to get cute on the goal line. Bank on it.
by miner00 on Aug 24, 2009 1:24 PM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
The situational test
Would most likely involve being in that field position and 1st or second down. He wanted to see if Orton could get the ball in. Whats the point of making your RB’s make an extremely physical play and possibly risking injury anyways? I don’t see this occasion as real cause for alarm.
"I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work."
- Thomas Alva Edison
"Success is not a place at which one arrives, but rather... the spirit with which one undertakes and continues the journey."
- Alex Noble
Maybe that's the point miner
of course you want the D to “conclude that the coach will consider” passing on the goal line. It makes it that much easier to run or pass for that matter when the D is uncertain.
"as in football so in life"
My point wasn't that he would consider it once...
It is that he would try 2 or 3 passes on the goal line in a real game under real circumstances.
That is what I meant my “getting cutesy”. My impression of McD so far is that he is EXTREMELY confident and thinks that he can coach that ball over the goal line. We will see if I am right or wrong over the next few weeks.
Of course you need them to fear the Play Action, like the FB sprint out that Shanny used so effectively for all those years.
3 passes from the goal line says…I don’t trust my O-Line. Could that be because a run on the goal line has nothing to do with the coach?
Running on the Goal line is a test of our guys against their guys. Everyone knows whats coming and you have to trust your hosses to beat up their hosses. Could it be that McDaniels doesn’t like to give up that power and would rather do a little trickery?
That is what I see from McDaniels, and that is what scares me most.
I believe in McDaniels and his system
Improv looked at some situations and what he found is discussed here. It sounds like it hasn’t been uncommon for the Patriots to pass inside the opponents’ five-yard line. I’ll let you read it, but others said this could be a function of checking out of the called play. Maybe that’s what happened to Orton in the Seattle game.
But who will guard the guards themselves?
by Agent Jerry Fletcher on Aug 26, 2009 9:09 AM MDT up reply actions
I guess that is my problem.
10 years ago I was sure that the Broncos would continue to dominate and win football games without No7 because…Shanny and his wonderful System!
Of course we will continue to win…we still have TD, EddieMac, Rod, the O-Line and a good Defense. SB’s for years to come. Bring on Bubby! Bring on Brian! Bring On Gus! Bring on Jake!
I no longer believe in any “system”. I believe that a football team has to go out and win the battles between the tackles. McDaniels does not seem to agree with me.
After 10 years of wandering in the wilderness of mediocrity, I believe that you need more than a system. You need more than great players.
You need a good system, good players and most of all a team that wants to win.
McD seems to me to be a X’s and O’s guy, without any regard for the fact that these Pros still have to be motivated. You do NOT motivate your O-Line by throwing the ball on the goal line.
Getting 22 guys into the right spots on the field is a good start, but at some point, it comes down to desire and ability.
I can see where you're coming from.
The league caught up to and passed Shanahan.
I heard an interesting quote that was attributed Jimmy Johnson: “It’s not about the X’s and O’s; it’s about the Jimmy’s and Joe’s.”
I think scheme or system or whatever you want to call it comes in second to talent. The exception is if the scheme revolutionizes. Look at what the Wildcat offense did last season. I don’t think the Dolphins had special talent, yet the Wildcat probably gave them two extra wins. Maybe more.
I think McDaniels’ offense is revolutionary. And I believe it will be a couple more seasons before the rest of the league catches up. As for the defense, I don’t believe Nolan is doing anything revolutionary.
The bottomline is I think we’re on the same page in terms of what the preseason is telling us about how the regular season will look. That said, I think Lolcopter made a great point below about the difference of installation pace between the running and passing games. Maybe that’s why they passed three times in a row in the blood red zone.
But who will guard the guards themselves?
by Agent Jerry Fletcher on Aug 26, 2009 10:52 AM MDT up reply actions
I hope you're right...
but I will remain skeptical until I see this offense do something other than dink and dunk its way down the field early in games. I am waiting to see the “revolutionary” part. I actually like the work ethic and the pace of practice under McD, but I am unimpressed with what i see as his priorities and his handling of talent.
I saw the pace argument below and unfortunately disagree with that as well. The running game, especially with a zone blocking scheme, is not a gimme and requires very good timing and communication between the RB’s and the linemen. It also requires some fear of the passing game. If we continue to limit Orton to 3-5 yard passes, it will not be a good year for the running game because the defense will be able to cover both using the same scheme.
I would agree that the league caught up to Shanny in the past few years, but in 99 and 00, it was still pretty shiny and we didn’t do squat other than beat the Raiders.
I was holding my tongue
or keyboard, or whatever. But I almost had the same thoughts about this “revolutionary offense” that has been on display so far. It reminds me of when Shanny asked Griese to manage games for him. About as exciting as watching paint dry. Dink, dunk, and stall. Great.
Our 2009-2010 Avs: The towel has been thrown into the rink.
by Bob in Boulder on Aug 26, 2009 4:38 PM MDT up reply actions
It might not be readily apparent.
The wildcat was obvious. But McDaniels’ new ideas might be subtle, but effective.
Remember that quote, “We’re going to do things that have never been done before.” I paraphrased, but you’ve probably seen the quote before.
Maybe what he was talking about was backs running sideways and QBs throwing with their off hand.
But who will guard the guards themselves?
by Agent Jerry Fletcher on Aug 26, 2009 4:38 PM MDT up reply actions
good question
I think miner00 asks a fair question. I’ve read all the responses about situational football. My question is, what if that response is wrong? What if what we’re seeing is what we’ll be getting?
I’ve seen several comments suggesting that Josh McDaniels is playing it very close to the vest in the interest of maintaining some degree of surprise when the regular season starts. Well, what if he’s not?
After all, we’ve heard repeatedly that the starters are getting 80% of the reps in camp, whereas a more “normal” percentage might be 50%. And the starters are playing longer in the preseason games then what we grew accustomed to under Shanahan. Why is he doing that? We’ve been told the reason is because he’s installing new systems on both sides of the ball and he wants his starters to get the reps so the pace of installation will accelerate. Then we hear that McDaniels has been installing full game plans before the preseason games so that the players won’t be surprised when the regular season starts.
In other words, he’s treating the preseason like the regular season. Prior to the San Francisco game, McDaniels made it clear he really wanted to win that game.
It seems to me that some rationalization and excuse-making is finding root at MHR. I even saw one comment that suggested Brandon Marshall wasn’t disgruntled and, instead, all the drama was a carefully conceived plan by McDaniels to catch the rest of the league offguard and Brandon would surprise everyone against the Bengals. Sorry, but McDaniels isn’t Darth Sidious.
The truth is we really don’t know what McDaniels is thinking because he’s not telling anyone. And although I believe McDaniels will prove himself an excellent coach, I wish he’d be more forthcoming.
I thought about posting it myself, but I think it’d be interesting to take the temperature of MHR after two preseason games. It’s hard to say whether people would answer honestly. Personally, my expectations haven’t changed. I’m still thinking about 8 wins. Maybe 9. I’ve been pleasantly surprised by the defensive front seven and have been disappointed in the turnovers, the defensive backfield and the running game. I also think Josh McDaniels needs to work some of the administrative kinks out. But, overall, I think we’re on pace to be ready by Week 1.
But who will guard the guards themselves?
by Agent Jerry Fletcher on Aug 24, 2009 5:42 PM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
i agree that we don't know what he is thinking
but i think it’s safe to assume that more reps are being given to the QB and WRs at this point. that connection is usually the one that takes the longest to develop, whereas running plays usually come relatively quickly. (#1 reason i wish brandon marshall would get on board)
the running game will be important this season. after all, we did draft moreno. i’m not surprised by the play-calling so far in the pre-season. to be honest, i expected to see a lot more WR screens and HB receptions in that first game.
they are trying to master the spread before they fine tune the running game (IMO). remember, we still have dennison and turner coaching. i don’t think we’ll be that far behind. i’m hoping to see plenty of running in the red zone during the regular season. (three TE set perhaps? bring it)
(i’m realistically shooting for a 9-7 record, but as long as we’re competitive and show improvement throughout the season, i’ll be happy anywhere around .500)
I get your emphasis.
I understand that it’s the preseason.
My point is that, from what we’ve heard, McDaniels isn’t treating it as such. Consider this: What’s the point of giving the starters reps in plays and formations that they’ll never use during the regular season? There’s no point in it. Or I should say, that’s a luxury the 2009 Broncos can’t afford. Especially given what I suspect about the way McDaniels is approaching the preseason.
Likewise, I think we’re probably seeing plays and formations that McDaniels plans to run in the regular season. I keep seeing references to the three tight end set (I believe HoosierTeacher wrote an article about it or something – but I missed it). I think that if that set were in McDaniels’ plans, we would have seen it at least once in the past two games. In fact, I can’t remember seeing any reference to that formation in any of the camp accounts from MHR reporters (Kaptain, you were there more than anyone – did you see it?).
I can’t speak for miner00, but it seems Occam’s Razor is being ignored as the Broncos’ onfield performance is clashing against hopes and expectations. Someone complains about the playcalling near the goal line and instead of saying, “Yeah, that was frustrating,” some choose to explain it away, saying things like, “Well, it’s the preseason and they’d NEVER do that in the regular season.”
Really? How do we know he’d never do that in the regular season? We’ve never seen Josh McDaniels coach a regular season game. All we have to go on is what we’ve seen this preseason. And if the Seattle game is any indication, McDaniels might choose to throw it three consecutive times from the opponent’s three.
But who will guard the guards themselves?
by Agent Jerry Fletcher on Aug 24, 2009 6:34 PM MDT up reply actions
yes, but he has also stated himself that pre-season is the time where you play situational football.
“For the veterans and for the younger players, I think the point has been made,” Hillis said. “For a new coaching staff to come in, to establish their system, their scheme, they have to enforce it early instead of late to get ready for the season.”
“These are not just scrimmages,” McDaniels insisted. “They are a chance for you to actually go through and substitute, run the game the way you would run it and execute. I hope there are six or eight of these (situations) that come up in the game on Friday night, because then we will get to actually go out there and see what we learned from all of these practices.”
orton learned to not throw with his left hand. i hope that he wouldn’t run or execute the tail end of that drive like he did, but he could have just been doing that for orton and the receivers
That's not the way I read that quote.
It looks like the word “situations” was added by the editor.
I read that quote as supporting what I’m saying: That he’s not treating the preseason as scrimmages. He says that explicitly. “Run the game they way you would run it and execute…” Sounds like he’s doing what he’s going to do.
But who will guard the guards themselves?
by Agent Jerry Fletcher on Aug 24, 2009 7:08 PM MDT up reply actions
sounds to me like he’s getting a new QB in a new system acquainted to his new receivers. i bet we’ll see more of the running game against chicago, but i wouldn’t be surprised to see orton throw the pigskin all over the place either. i honestly believe that getting the QB and WRs on the same page re: timing and routes is the highest priority right now
by lolcopter on Aug 24, 2009 7:57 PM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
AJF, the 3 TE set was used last game when
Hillis ran from the 41 to the 10, but was called back cuz Clady fell into the back of their DLs legs! Scheff on one side, Graham & Quinn on the other.WORKED GREAT!!!
I saw that play, but I must've missed the formation
My bad.
But who will guard the guards themselves?
by Agent Jerry Fletcher on Aug 26, 2009 8:59 AM MDT up reply actions
Exactly my point...Thank you for being much more eloquent than I am.
Too many ifs. Too many assumptions.
IMO, we are seeing the Broncos O as it will be during the season. I don’t buy for a second the “its only preseason” argument. The players aren’t and can’t be thinking during the plays that “this is only preseason”, that is the quickest way to get yourself hurt.
In the same situation during the regular season, KO will at least be tempted to underhand lefty flip it and McD will want to show how good his plays are and toss 3 balls up for grabs.
Any coach worth his salt has a situational playlist and any goal line offense should be 95% running plays, even in a pass-first offense. The reason is that it is incredibly difficult to throw the ball on a 15yard field. It is too easy to defend.
The simplest answer is usually right.
by miner00 on Aug 25, 2009 1:29 PM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
Occam's Razor is often helpful
I don’t have quite the same perspective, but I sure do agree with how you got there, miner. Rec’d
Hillis/Moreno in '09
this is a good point
that connection is usually the one that takes the longest to develop, whereas running plays usually come relatively quickly.
I totally ignored this and shouldn’t have. This is a really good point, especially since they retained Dennison and Turner.
But who will guard the guards themselves?
by Agent Jerry Fletcher on Aug 24, 2009 6:39 PM MDT up reply actions
You make some good points
but please note that many of those sacks have been coverage sacks. That the pass rushers can get there quickly enough to take advantage of good coverage is an improvement, but it means the coverage was good. I think we’re giving up lots of completions right now because the coaches are concentrating on establishing the run defense and because our OLB’s aren’t up to speed in their zone coverage responsibilities yet. That puts extra pressure on the defensive backs. Yes, the Marshall conspiracy theory was silly, but much of the rationalization and excuse-making is just fans looking for something positive and hopeful. Show me a city where that doesn’t happen. Bad teams are average and average teams are great in fans’ eyes until the cold, hard reality of regular season sets in. I’m sure McDaniels will get better at clock management. Not only is he inexperienced, he has 80 instead of 45 players to keep track of (wrt substitutions), and Orton is taking too long to get plays off because he’s still mastering the offense (and making progress). I think 8 or 9 wins is realistic and would be real happy with 10 or 11.
"Surprised to see you, Captain, though pleased." — from Star Trek episode Space Seed.
yep
Fair points…all.
Just to clarify, my disappointment in the defensive backfield has less to do with the coverage and more to do with the lack of interceptions. It’s not like we’ve played against Joe Montana, John Elway and Peyton Manning. We’ve played against the immortal Shaun Hill, the peerless Seneca Wallace and the legendary Alex Smith.
I watched the Jets-Ravens game recently and there were interceptions galore. Troy Smith can’t play a lick, but neither can Alex Smith. Had you asked me before the preseason began how the defense would have fared at the end of the second week, I would have said the Broncos would have turned the ball over at least once and we would have had at least one interception. Instead? Nada.
During the Ravens-Jets game, Gruden talked about the role of turnovers in winning. They showed a chart that depicted the Ravens’ seasonal win totals against their seasonal turnover plus/minus. As expected, there was a perfect correlation. So far, the Broncos haven’t turned the ball over once and they haven’t won yet.
I know it’s only the preseason. But if we can’t turn over the second- and third-string quarterbacks, what are we going to do with Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Donovan McNabb and Philip Rivers?
We need to get some interceptions. Fortunately, we have an obliging quarterback coming in this week.
But who will guard the guards themselves?
by Agent Jerry Fletcher on Aug 26, 2009 9:26 AM MDT up reply actions
You...
wascally wabbit….. I will always bank on Elmer Fudd catching his wabbit, more than I will bank on seeing that type of play calling in the regular season ……..ehehehehehehehehe………ITS PRE-SEASON
BTW- dont you think its odd that a guy who has been preaching physicallity, and toughness…to run 3 straight pass plays on the 2 yd line???? Dont you worry none, in 3 weeks we will see the chin straps buckled up, and plenty of mouths smacked!!!!
"The question that sometimes drives me hazy, Am I or the others crazy?" -Albert Einstein
Another logical assumption could be...
Re-evaluating our 2-point conversions….since we missed one last game…hmmmmmm
"The question that sometimes drives me hazy, Am I or the others crazy?" -Albert Einstein
Easy there Bob....
Save the “same as” stuff for the regular season. As many here have noted already it’s hard to tell much from 2 preseason games and what the coaches are looking for vs. what the avg. fan thinks can be quite different. I’m not a koolaider,I’m more of a pragmatist who really loves the game of football and happens to have been blessed to be a bronco fan. What I’ve seen so far is in complete contrast to your post, but it would be pointless to dissect either of our observations in preseason since it’s preseason. To base the majority of your assessment on the goal line series and clock management in 2 series may be an indication that you fall on the pessimistic side of the equation but they are valid observations none the less. My question for you to consider however is, How much enjoyment can you possible get from the game if your perceptions are so preconceived?
"as in football so in life"
Group think
Have fun with this koolaiders
Fair enough, Bob. So, is everyone who sees this differently a ‘koolaider?’ that kind of us/them is starting to permeate a lot of posters, and it’s kind of a shame. How about, I like business theory as well as football theory and so far it’s been interesting to see how he’s going about trying to change a team that looks like it has just given up over the past few year?
Hillis/Moreno in '09
The us/them thing
has been prevalent here for a long time. It’s naturally going to happen when you find people you share a common opinion with and because it’s the internet you feel free to blast someone who you think is totally off base (see mind-boggling response by Bustafluff above). People with a dissenting opinion around here are frequently dismissed as just being wrong. The whole thing is ridiculous. This is supposed to be fine, right? If you strongly disagree with someone or just want to say something rude, what’s the point in posting? Do not understand the mindset.
/endrant
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Aug 24, 2009 12:03 PM MDT up reply actions
In Life, Love, and Career...
It is not always what you say, but HOW you say it!
by BroncoSense72 on Aug 24, 2009 2:32 PM MDT up reply actions
Excellent point BB
If nothing else this will be an excellent field study of applied organizational theory. It’ll be interesting to see which principles transfer and which ones don’t.
I like business theory as well as football theory and so far it’s been interesting to see how he’s going about trying to change a team that looks like it has just given up over the past few year?
"as in football so in life"
ummm...mhr is sorta like harliquins for broncos
maybe its just kinda cool to be able to go to a place where lots and lots of people totally want the broncos to be good…and are totally smart…umm except for for me…and they teach us…and we all have a totally party time of happiness about the team
soooo…some people who are totally sold on the ego thing…that they can write anything they want…and be totally rude and stupid and have no future…soooo…they wanna crash our little party
its not even one of those can we just get along…cuz…they dont wanna.
MHR...and proud of it!
by MHRsGirl on Aug 24, 2009 9:25 PM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
Bob
I respect your thoughts, agree with some and disagree with others. The D is a work in progress, but, I like that there is improvement there. The offense will be fine. IMHO stretching the field is a bunch of MSM precipitated hogwash. You do not open up the short game by throwing the ball long. You throw the ball long because the receiver is open, period. Orton can make those throws, he just isn’t being asked to do that. And last but not least, the bosses are not the same. The previous man would not have questioned the integrity of the players and their commitment to the game. The new one does.
Ok
Now for the “same as the old boss” stuff. I thought I was reliving a nightmare when the Broncos had the ball 2nd and goal at the one and went to, get this, 3 straight passing plays. Isn’t that part of the reason Shanny is gone?
You realize that preseason games are all about situational football. That’s why we threw the ball every down. Of course we’d run the ball in the second quarter at the 1 yard line…no we would never go for it on fourth down. BUT, games could be won in the final seconds when running from the 1 yard line IS NOT AN OPTION. Situational football baby!
Turnovers
Uhg! This problem has to be fixed…AND FAST. We have 6 turnovers in 2 games and we have not even faced an elite defense yet! We’re screwed if we don’t fix this problem by September…..
I rec’ the post man. I respect the reasonable tone of your post and I can’t find myself disagreeing with your main points, though I balk at being critical of the coach. I just love how he is playing these games…evalute, critique, coach, and reevalute. Love it.
Verbose in style, dispersion of thought, procrastination in life.
by Tim Lynch on Aug 24, 2009 2:34 PM MDT reply actions 1 recs
I still don't understand...
“running from the 1 yard line IS NOT AN OPTION. Situational football baby!”
When is running the ball from the 1 not an option? Throwing the football on the goal line is dangerous and incredibly difficult. Against any decent defense, you are MUCH more likely to score from the 1 with a run.
Because, running from the 1 yard line is the only option in the regular season...on first or second down anyways...
especially in the second quarter.
BUT,
The situation McD decided to pretend to be in was late in the game, down by 4-8 points, no timeouts….passing situation every single down.
That is Situational Football baby…in the preseason. In the regular season you play what situation you are in, in preseason you play whatever situation you tell your players you are in. ;-)
Verbose in style, dispersion of thought, procrastination in life.
Nope, still BS.
Come on…You are totally guessing about the situation he is “pretending” to be in.
On the 1 yard line, it is NEVER a passing situation on every down. That makes absolutely no sense unless you have an atrocious O-Line. If we can’t trust our O-Line and our RB’s to punch it in from the 1, we might as well go home and wait for next year’s draft.
Winning teams Win the line of scrimmage. Passing on the 1 yard line is throwing up the white flag and admitting you are a bunch of wimps. I can guarantee that the Broncos O-Line was PISSED at 3 consecutive passes on the goal line. There is no bigger insult to an O-Lineman than passing on the goal line. He might as well have started that play call with “Yo Mamma’s so Fat…”
That is the one area that scares me the most about McDaniels, he seems to lack both respect for and understanding of the Offensive and Defensive Lines.
I tend to agree with Zappa on this one miner
I was lucky enough to see some of the situational drills at practice camp this summer and saw a lot of McDaniels setting the offense up by saying “You’re at (down) on the (yard line)” then running a play.
The Seattle series appeared to be another case like that. I tend to believe McDaniels knew his running game could punch it in (shoot, Hillis could do that without an offensive line at all :) ). The series came across as a “what if” sort of situation. What if running were not an option (due to the defense dominating our running game, or injuries to running backs/o-line or whatever) and we have to pass? Good chance to practice.
"The best defense is a good offense. Or is it the other way around." Wolverine
Pray for the best, prepare for the worst, and know you will come down somewhere between the two.
Livin' in La La Land and Lovin' It
by Brian Shrout on Aug 27, 2009 1:35 PM MDT up reply actions
As I have said...we will see.
I understand the “situational” thing, but the particular “what if” scenario that would lead to 3 passes from the goal line is so rare as to be non-existent. On the other hand, the scenario where you are on the 1 yard line and have to punch it in, God willing, will be fairly frequent and I for one would like to see us be a consistent and powerful red-zone team.
Running the ball in Goal Line O, even for Hillis, is NOT a gimmee and it takes work.
My impression of McD is that he has more faith in his system than in his players, so he will default to passes or fancy disguised runs rather than depending on his Line to punch it in. Time will tell and we should know pretty quickly if this was an aberration or the norm.
Maybe McD is a genius and all teams will be throwing on the Goal line in the next few years. In my experience though, passes on the goal line lead to Interceptions and Field Goals.
I think we're saying the same thing in different ways
this is all “what if” speculation at this point as to why McDaniels called what he was calling.
I agree with you that we’ll see in the season what’s the pattern’s going to be.
My hope is that we won’t see many 4th & 1’s, that we will have scored before it gets to that point.
"The best defense is a good offense. Or is it the other way around." Wolverine
Pray for the best, prepare for the worst, and know you will come down somewhere between the two.
Livin' in La La Land and Lovin' It
by Brian Shrout on Aug 27, 2009 2:36 PM MDT up reply actions
It doesn't have to be a what-if scenario in which we pass three straight times
It could have been, each time, “It’s fourth down and the game is on the line.” Not likely, of course, the point being we just don’t know and shouldn’t get all excited when we can see Orton is making progress. McDaniels is no Bates. I’m going to trust that he knows what he’s doing until a season or two of dire results proves otherwise.
"Surprised to see you, Captain, though pleased." — from Star Trek episode Space Seed.
Some Koolaiders have spoken
And so far, for the most part, have been pretty gentle with me. One was so infuriated by the ever so derogatory name “McJosh” (who would have thunk it?) that he ban hammered the rest of my post, but others have posted some interesting thoughts. I hope folks are right about the “situational test for Orton” on the 2nd and goal from the one failure. Could be, but another school of thought is that don’t you want these guys to get a taste of winning sometime? Also, not sure if anyone has addressed all of the wasted timeouts in the first two games?
Finally, I do not at all dislike the “koolaiders.” I’m just having fun here with an opposing view. I wish I could be more like some of you …. my life would be easier. I honestly mean no offense with that term.
Our 2009-2010 Avs: The towel has been thrown into the rink.
Heres the problem.
I too was starting to get very worked up during the game. And I am a koolaid drinker. Well, maybe not all the time, as I’ve said we can go 4-12, and as long as we don’t get blown out 41-3 by the lions and charger, and bears.. “Oh My” lol… I would view that as a tep in the right direction.
The problem being, we are Bronco fans, and for most, not new ones. So we don’t understand what the Coach is doing, as we are used to the old ways. If you look historically, thke Patriots are usually lucky to win 1 preseason game, yet they win in the regular season. (In the 2007 16-0 season, the pats went 2-2)
As I was saying, during the Seattle game, I actually found myself getting worked up. I had to take a “Time-Out” and tell myself, this is preseason. This is Preseason…
Now, come Sep 28, if we are 0-3, I will be on here pissed as hell. I understand we might lose a few of the first games as we are “Learning” and “Gelling”, but if we lose to Oakland. I will me ANGRY!!!
Just my thoughts and opinions.
Quit drinking the Kool-Aid and start drinking the good stuff, and everything is always alright.
by Chuck "DeadDrunk" Breedlove on Aug 24, 2009 3:26 PM MDT up reply actions
...
I don’t really appreciate the negative connotation you have when using the term “koolaiders”. You are implying just about anyone and everyone here is a delusional fan.
I’m not going to do anything about it, but I want you to understand that I find that term insulting and the more you use it the more I lose any kind of respect I might have for you.
How would you feel if I just referred to you in some negative way? Perhaps “fairweather fan”? Or “hater”? Or whatever. You’ll find people like me far more receptive to your opinions when you leave the arrogant remarks and insults out of the discussion.
I just don’t get the constant rude attitudes from certain “clicks” that show up every once in a while.
Verbose in style, dispersion of thought, procrastination in life.
by Tim Lynch on Aug 24, 2009 4:26 PM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
Can i just be the "beerdrinker"?
Quit drinking the Kool-Aid and start drinking the good stuff, and everything is always alright.
by Chuck "DeadDrunk" Breedlove on Aug 24, 2009 5:23 PM MDT up reply actions 1 recs
that's funny, dude
But who will guard the guards themselves?
by Agent Jerry Fletcher on Aug 24, 2009 5:45 PM MDT up reply actions
LOL DD...I'll have a pint of IPA...Easy on the head!
by BroncoSense72 on Aug 24, 2009 6:08 PM MDT up reply actions
I suspect he'd have some competition for that "role."
But who will guard the guards themselves?
by Agent Jerry Fletcher on Aug 24, 2009 6:39 PM MDT up reply actions
Oh come on.
We get Zappa playing the tough guy because Bob calls people "koolaiders", something everyone here is proud of until the moment they’re called on it, and somebody down below is telling him to go play in traffic?
Your “Parent Mode” is pretty one-sided. Giving Bob the stern, finger-pointing talking to while letting others go unscathed is just silly.
Your comment about rude attitudes from certain clicks is ironic as hell, too.
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
by A.J. Haefele on Aug 24, 2009 8:09 PM MDT up reply actions
I’m tired of people being negative for the sake of being negative. Bob wasn’t doing that, but whenever someone disagrees with Bob or “thedoctor” it has an air of being personal that I don’t appreciate.
I just won’t read or respond…that way there can be no conflict.
Verbose in style, dispersion of thought, procrastination in life.
simma down now there zappa!
First, I explicitly said im my post above that I mean no offense with that term and I mean it. And some folks in here proudly call themselves koolaiders, correct? Doesn’t the orange and blue koolaid man pop up here and there? Second, how on early am I implying that anyone and everyone is a delusional fan? Huge leap by you …. may want to rethink that career in mind reading. So why, exactly, do you find the term insulting? Especially when some folks are embracing it?
Our 2009-2010 Avs: The towel has been thrown into the rink.
by Bob in Boulder on Aug 24, 2009 9:20 PM MDT up reply actions
oh Bob
I share your opinion of the last few games, but it really won’t mean anything until the regular season starts, especially around here.
It is startling to see the some of exact same offensive issues. That sequence on the goal line was almost heartbreaking.
Some Concern
Mostly on the TOs. I’m quite happy the the D is looking a bit better, but yes, the TO differential is getting a bit annoying. I’m hoping that will change as D start to settle into their roles…but we’ll see.
As for the goal line play-calling, as others have mentioned, I don’t think there’s any cause for alarm yet. I’m thinking of it this way: Denver took Moreno with the 12th pick, signed a bunch of RBs, and traded around to pick up Quinn (an excellent blocker) with Graham already on the roster. Those moves suggest a focus on running, but at the same time, the running game is (for lack of a better term right now) “simpler.” The passing game, on the other hand, is facing the most overhaul: a combination of a new QB unfamiliar with the WRs, the line, and the system. From that angle, it would make sense to go heavy on the pass, just to get in as much “game” practice as possible, finguring that the run game most likely further along.
But if they continually go spread at the goal line, I’ll be the first one smacking my head against a wall!
"Don't feed the trolls. Remember to be polite. And please show self-restraint in comment length!" -Me, to myself, because I need constant reminding.
Your absolutely right Bob! We are going to be the worst team in the NFL,
so get used to it!!! What do you want people say that you are correct in your loop sided vision of where this team is going? Or headed? Preseason is preason, either bang it in your head with a empty Jack Daniels bottle or lay out in traffic with your head pn the centerline. Dumb…dumb…dumb…
Time Out!
Hey at least Orton is reading the defense. He will get quicker. That is why we have pre-season. If you think about all the changes our team has gone through this year, system/player/coaches I think we are doing pretty good. Mr. McDaniels is growing on me.
I ride the short bus!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Getting Social With MHR
Web Stuff
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
