PDA

View Full Version : Mike Shanahan


Norg
01-07-2009, 02:28 AM
Now that Mike Shanahan has been fired that got me worried

What if Kubes & Kyle that use a similar playcalling and football stlye that denver uses cant make a winning team


Denver was 8-8 again this year same has us

maybe this Denver system cant make winning teams on a constent basis

but what do wee need to make this system work

what did the John elway system have they we dont ?????


also should we get rid of Kubes and try and get Mr Shanahan LOL !!!!!!!!!

TexanSam
01-07-2009, 02:31 AM
Denver has the same problem the Texans have. A poor defense

Norg
01-07-2009, 02:33 AM
Denver has the same problem the Texans have. A poor defense


yes its kinda clear now

we need a ravens/Greenbay like defensive


with and High power offensive

kiwitexansfan
01-07-2009, 02:48 AM
Poor personnel decisions are a huge factor in the Denver situation too.

We don't have that problem with Smith in Charge.

I think your being WAY too reactionary to say that the Denver system can't win. Shanahan was the winningest active coach in the NFL the day he got fired. He was very successful, he just got too big for his boots and the owner canned him.

Thorn
01-07-2009, 07:46 AM
High powered offenses rarely win the Super Bowl without a good defense, and a lot of times don't even get to the Super Bowl. However, mediocre offensive teams with a great defense have. When Denver got it's two Super Bowls, they had a very good defense.

Kubiac knows this, hence the offseason moves. I think we heading in the right direction with Kubiac. A little to slow for the taste of most of the posters on this board for sure, but we are getting there.

gtexan02
01-07-2009, 08:42 AM
Defense is a lot harder to perfect that offense, in my opinion. Its not glamorous, so you're getting less and less talented athletes going on the defensive side of the ball. I don't know if theres any reason to this, but it sure seems like college scores have risen dramatacially over the top 10 years. I think its because
1) Offenses are given a lot of advantages
2) Offenses are getting more advanced
3) More of the skill position players want to go on the offensive side of the ball

b0ng
01-07-2009, 09:03 AM
also should we get rid of Kubes and try and get Mr Shanahan LOL !!!!!!!!!

So we'll get rid of our head coach in favor of a guy who does the exact same thing?

drewmar74
01-07-2009, 09:19 AM
So we'll get rid of our head coach in favor of a guy who does the exact same thing?

And who also wants complete control of personnel but sucks at it?

I'll stick with Kubes, Rick Smith, and Shanny 2.0

Carr Bombed
01-07-2009, 09:21 AM
And who also wants complete control of personnel but sucks at it?

I'll stick with Kubes, Rick Smith, and Shanny 2.0

Actually his drafts haven't been that bad...(he finds talent and steals every year)...what failed him was a aging defense and leading the league with like 7 RBs placed on IR this season. I think Denver pulled the plug a little too early in the rebuilding process......Shanahan was building a very good young offense.

drewmar74
01-07-2009, 09:25 AM
Actually his drafts haven't been that bad...(he finds talent and steals every year)...what failed him was a aging defense and leading the league with like 7 RBs placed on IR this season.

Not being able to keep replenishing that aging defense, in my opinion, constitues poor personnel management.

I felt his pain on the RB injury situation, though. That was just really, really bad.

Carr Bombed
01-07-2009, 09:42 AM
Not being able to keep replenishing that aging defense, in my opinion, constitues poor personnel management.

I felt his pain on the RB injury situation, though. That was just really, really bad.

They should've just got somebody to help out with the defensive selections (although he did find Elvis Dumervil also), but he did find hits in the draft. Just look at this season.....Eddie Royal and Ryan Clady. His problem is kinda like our problem.......missed in FA.

drewmar74
01-07-2009, 09:44 AM
They should've just got somebody to help out with the defensive selections (although he did find Elvis Dumervil also), but he did find hits in the draft. Just look at this season.....Eddie Royal and Ryan Clady. His problem is kinda like our problem.......missed in FA.

Like the whole Cleveland defensive line transplant? Yeah, he should have lost personnel control then.

infantrycak
01-07-2009, 10:10 AM
Actually his drafts haven't been that bad...(he finds talent and steals every year)...

Not on the D side of the ball. They have 2 players, 2, on D drafted by the Broncos--D.J. Williams and Dumervil. That's bad.

ChampionTexan
01-07-2009, 10:52 AM
Not on the D side of the ball. They have 2 players, 2, on D drafted by the Broncos--D.J. Williams and Dumervil. That's bad.

If you look at their entire roster at the end of the season, there are three players out of 67 (53 active, 14 injured) that were drafted by the Broncos from 2002 to 2005 (And that includes Tatum Bell). These are the guys who should be at the peaks of their careers. The two besides Bell, are Karl Paymah (Backup CB), and D.J. Williams. Heck, we have 6 guys left from the '02-'05 drafts, and we all know who was running those things.

Porky
01-07-2009, 11:02 AM
what did the John elway system have they we dont ?????


Ummm, John Elway? :tiptoe:

El Tejano
01-07-2009, 11:34 AM
what did the John elway system have they we dont ?????




The answer is in the question.

Vinny
01-07-2009, 11:47 AM
Defense is a lot harder to perfect that offense, in my opinion. Its not glamorous, so you're getting less and less talented athletes going on the defensive side of the ball. I don't know if theres any reason to this, but it sure seems like college scores have risen dramatacially over the top 10 years. I think its because
1) Offenses are given a lot of advantages
2) Offenses are getting more advanced
3) More of the skill position players want to go on the offensive side of the ball I'd argue the opposite. Its harder to create than it is to destroy and offense is about creating and defense is about destruction....It's much harder to put together a top offense imo. we just have to remember that this is the FIRST time we have ever had a decent offense in the NFL the last year or so and next year is year 8.

ChampionTexan
01-07-2009, 11:55 AM
I'd argue the opposite. Its harder to create than it is to destroy and offense is about creating and defense is about destruction....It's much harder to put together a top offense imo. we just have to remember that this is the FIRST time we have ever had a decent offense in the NFL the last year or so and next year is year 8.

Agreed!

I once heard somebody say that on offense, one guy out of eleven failing can cause the entire play to fail, while on defense, one guy out of eleven succeeding can cause the entire play to succeed.

gtexan02
01-07-2009, 12:04 PM
I checked to see if my "offense is getting better" theory is right, and it doesn't seem to hold much credibility. This last year featured some super high scorers, so thats probably why I thought it was increasing

2002 - 42.8
2003 - can't find
2004 - 46
2005 - 45.4
2006 - 40.2
2007 - 44
2008 - 47

beerlover
01-07-2009, 12:07 PM
Rules of the game favor the offense. Joe Plumber likes to see scoring & big plays. hand checking/contact in secondary, holding, laying out QB's, running into the kicker, returner or runner heading out of bounds all limit the intimidation a defense can exploit. the NFL is all about selling its product & offense is considered more sexy - offense out sells defense, marketing 101 :)

bigbrewster2000
01-07-2009, 12:46 PM
I checked to see if my "offense is getting better" theory is right, and it doesn't seem to hold much credibility. This last year featured some super high scorers, so thats probably why I thought it was increasing

2002 - 42.8
2003 - can't find
2004 - 46
2005 - 45.4
2006 - 40.2
2007 - 44
2008 - 47

What exactly do these numbers mean?