Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Let's just get this out of the way right now
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Denver Broncos
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
broncos67


Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Posts: 22345
Location: Conshohocken
PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 10:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Okay I checked. So we've averaged 3 points less per game this year than last, and we were 8 PPG better this year.
_________________


Thanks, Tzimisce
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
germ-x


Joined: 05 Apr 2009
Posts: 7874
PostPosted: Sun Jan 03, 2010 10:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AntiSuperstar wrote:
Hey, if that's the fairytale you have to tell yourself to go to bed at night, be my guest. The reality of the situation is, Josh McDaniels came into this season with a lot of cap space and tons of draft picks, we didn't have close to half of the injury problems as last year's teams, and the younger players had another year to develop, yet here we are sitting with the same record at 8-8 when we had every reason to improve. Even the 'tough schedule' excuse became a myth as we can now say in hindsight that the Giants, Steelers, and Patriots weren't that good after all. Even worse, McDaniels is slowly but surely getting rid of the team's young talent. Cutler, Williams, Marshall and Scheffler will be next, and don't be surprised when Hillis bolts as well when he gets the chance with a team who will actually use him. Even Brett freaking Kern has played well for Tennessee, while we're stuck with an utter buffoon masquerading as an NFL player to replace him. And while that goes on not one of our rookies was a standout this year. Oh, but there's positive? The defense improved? Well even if you want to give McDaniels credit for that, fine, too bad the defense is old and will need replacements as well. Yeah, things are great.

But let's act like this season is somehow a pleasent surprise when many fans predicted a worse season. Well guess what? Most of those fans didn't predict the Patriots, Giants, and Steelers to all be mediocre teams. Most of those fans didn't see a fluke play against the Bengals. The only pleasant surprise is the defense. That's all, we failed to predict such a vast improvement from the defense. All I can say is we have better be able to re-sign Dumervil so you guys have something you can pin your hopes on.


The fact that there was almost a completely new coaching staff, scheme changes both offensively and defensively and well over a 50% roster turnover plays no part?

No most of us didn't expect the fluke play...but it is part of the game...most of us didn't expect Kyle Orton to go down vs the Redskins and have the back up come in and have a below 15 QB rating either, but guess what that is part of the game too...

The fact is McDaniels seems to be a hot head, it could ruin his career here...who knows. He needs to get in check with the media first and foremost..the comments he made about Marshall prior to this game most likely ended Marshalls career in Denver.

I happen to like McDaniels and think he could be a great coach here in Denver for many years...but i am not going to jump down his throat yet...the team needs to build on this year..the FO had one season to bring in the players they felt were fits for what they are trying to do here...i expect them to build and improve from this seasons 8-8 mark...if they don't then i will be all over McDaniels with what seems to be the majority of this forum...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AKRNA


Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 5205
PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 10:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

We need to be straight about a few things and take off the rosy glasses.

1st, it's not true that Shanny only had one playoff appearance since Elway. He had 4. losing to the Ravens in 2000 (SB winners) and appearances in 2003, 04 and 2005, playing for the AFC championship and losing to the Steelers (SB winners)

He completely rebuilt the team with emphasis on offense and yes, it was far better than this years. PPG don't tell the story. Here's something that does. Last year we were 6-8 when giving up 17+ points, this year we're 2-8.

Also, he completely revamped the roster with only one losing season to show for it.

So, we're supposed to be happy when our entire 2006 draft class is about to be blown up?

I'm not, and I have no confidence in Mac's ability to right the ship.

Personally I think we'll all be missing him alot by next year.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
broncos67


Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Posts: 22345
Location: Conshohocken
PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 11:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

AKRNA wrote:
We need to be straight about a few things and take off the rosy glasses.

1st, it's not true that Shanny only had one playoff appearance since Elway. He had 4. losing to the Ravens in 2000 (SB winners) and appearances in 2003, 04 and 2005, playing for the AFC championship and losing to the Steelers (SB winners)

He completely rebuilt the team with emphasis on offense and yes, it was far better than this years. PPG don't tell the story. Here's something that does. Last year we were 6-8 when giving up 17+ points, this year we're 2-8.

Also, he completely revamped the roster with only one losing season to show for it.

So, we're supposed to be happy when our entire 2006 draft class is about to be blown up?

I'm not, and I have no confidence in Mac's ability to right the ship.

Personally I think we'll all be missing him alot by next year.


Sorry but no. I'm a diehard Broncos fan, but people cling a little too much to back-to-back SB wins 12 YEARS AGO, as the basis for why Shanahan should be here.

Let me ask you this, if your coach had 1 playoff win in 12 years, followed by a .500 record over three years and three straight collapses why should he not be fired?

PPG DO tell the story. If they don't what does? Yards? Please. Everyone needs to get off Shanahan's jock for a second and realize that he's not our coach, McDaniels is. He had an 8-8 season, with a defense that allowed 8 PPG better, and an offense, that for how much everyone griped about it, only allowed 3 PPG worse.

Mike Shanahan's message got old. He did not deserve to be HC of this team anymore. I can't believe people are willing to give free passes to a guy who wanted to keep Slowik around, who had the most porous defense we've ever seen.
_________________


Thanks, Tzimisce
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PGeorge2


Joined: 20 Feb 2008
Posts: 1722
Location: Columbia, MO
PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 11:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

broncos67 wrote:
AKRNA wrote:
We need to be straight about a few things and take off the rosy glasses.

1st, it's not true that Shanny only had one playoff appearance since Elway. He had 4. losing to the Ravens in 2000 (SB winners) and appearances in 2003, 04 and 2005, playing for the AFC championship and losing to the Steelers (SB winners)

He completely rebuilt the team with emphasis on offense and yes, it was far better than this years. PPG don't tell the story. Here's something that does. Last year we were 6-8 when giving up 17+ points, this year we're 2-8.

Also, he completely revamped the roster with only one losing season to show for it.

So, we're supposed to be happy when our entire 2006 draft class is about to be blown up?

I'm not, and I have no confidence in Mac's ability to right the ship.

Personally I think we'll all be missing him alot by next year.


Sorry but no. I'm a diehard Broncos fan, but people cling a little too much to back-to-back SB wins 12 YEARS AGO, as the basis for why Shanahan should be here.

Let me ask you this, if your coach had 1 playoff win in 12 years, followed by a .500 record over three years and three straight collapses why should he not be fired?

PPG DO tell the story. If they don't what does? Yards? Please. Everyone needs to get off Shanahan's jock for a second and realize that he's not our coach, McDaniels is. He had an 8-8 season, with a defense that allowed 8 PPG better, and an offense, that for how much everyone griped about it, only allowed 3 PPG worse.

Mike Shanahan's message got old. He did not deserve to be HC of this team anymore. I can't believe people are willing to give free passes to a guy who wanted to keep Slowik around, who had the most porous defense we've ever seen.


The 8 PPG on defense is huge. Thats 8 points less that we had to score on offense on a weekly basis to win. Yes, its an average, but you shouldn't have to score as many points as we did last year when your defense isn't giving up 30 a game. Giving up 8 less points take a ton of pressure off our our offense.

And if Shanahan was still here, we'd have a good offense, Cutler and Marshall would be @ the Pro Bowl, we'd have the worst defense in the league, and we'd still be at home watchinng the playoffs. It was time for a change, period. Whether you agree Mac is the answer or not is a justified argument, but that Shanahan was getting it done is not.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AKRNA


Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 5205
PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 12:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

broncos67 wrote:
AKRNA wrote:
We need to be straight about a few things and take off the rosy glasses.

1st, it's not true that Shanny only had one playoff appearance since Elway. He had 4. losing to the Ravens in 2000 (SB winners) and appearances in 2003, 04 and 2005, playing for the AFC championship and losing to the Steelers (SB winners)

He completely rebuilt the team with emphasis on offense and yes, it was far better than this years. PPG don't tell the story. Here's something that does. Last year we were 6-8 when giving up 17+ points, this year we're 2-8.

Also, he completely revamped the roster with only one losing season to show for it.

So, we're supposed to be happy when our entire 2006 draft class is about to be blown up?

I'm not, and I have no confidence in Mac's ability to right the ship.

Personally I think we'll all be missing him alot by next year.


Sorry but no. I'm a diehard Broncos fan, but people cling a little too much to back-to-back SB wins 12 YEARS AGO, as the basis for why Shanahan should be here.

Let me ask you this, if your coach had 1 playoff win in 12 years, followed by a .500 record over three years and three straight collapses why should he not be fired?

PPG DO tell the story. If they don't what does? Yards? Please. Everyone needs to get off Shanahan's jock for a second and realize that he's not our coach, McDaniels is. He had an 8-8 season, with a defense that allowed 8 PPG better, and an offense, that for how much everyone griped about it, only allowed 3 PPG worse.

Mike Shanahan's message got old. He did not deserve to be HC of this team anymore. I can't believe people are willing to give free passes to a guy who wanted to keep Slowik around, who had the most porous defense we've ever seen.


Let me be clear. I had no problem with Mike getting fired, still don't.

The problems I had were choice of HC and firing of the Goodmans right before the draft.

I would have much prefered to see Dennison promoted. Our offense would still be intact and Rick has the knowledge on both sides of the ball to correct the problems on defense.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
broncos67


Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Posts: 22345
Location: Conshohocken
PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 12:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AKRNA wrote:
broncos67 wrote:
AKRNA wrote:
We need to be straight about a few things and take off the rosy glasses.

1st, it's not true that Shanny only had one playoff appearance since Elway. He had 4. losing to the Ravens in 2000 (SB winners) and appearances in 2003, 04 and 2005, playing for the AFC championship and losing to the Steelers (SB winners)

He completely rebuilt the team with emphasis on offense and yes, it was far better than this years. PPG don't tell the story. Here's something that does. Last year we were 6-8 when giving up 17+ points, this year we're 2-8.

Also, he completely revamped the roster with only one losing season to show for it.

So, we're supposed to be happy when our entire 2006 draft class is about to be blown up?

I'm not, and I have no confidence in Mac's ability to right the ship.

Personally I think we'll all be missing him alot by next year.


Sorry but no. I'm a diehard Broncos fan, but people cling a little too much to back-to-back SB wins 12 YEARS AGO, as the basis for why Shanahan should be here.

Let me ask you this, if your coach had 1 playoff win in 12 years, followed by a .500 record over three years and three straight collapses why should he not be fired?

PPG DO tell the story. If they don't what does? Yards? Please. Everyone needs to get off Shanahan's jock for a second and realize that he's not our coach, McDaniels is. He had an 8-8 season, with a defense that allowed 8 PPG better, and an offense, that for how much everyone griped about it, only allowed 3 PPG worse.

Mike Shanahan's message got old. He did not deserve to be HC of this team anymore. I can't believe people are willing to give free passes to a guy who wanted to keep Slowik around, who had the most porous defense we've ever seen.


Let me be clear. I had no problem with Mike getting fired, still don't.

The problems I had were choice of HC and firing of the Goodmans right before the draft.

I would have much prefered to see Dennison promoted. Our offense would still be intact and Rick has the knowledge on both sides of the ball to correct the problems on defense.


Understandable, but then it comes back to, as it does so often, people being upset because the person they preferred wasn't the one who was hired. Rick Dennison wasn't hired for a reason. He was a lot like Mike Shanahan. He knew everything that Mike Shanahan knew, so you can't blame Bowlen for trying, or wanting to change up a stale message.
_________________


Thanks, Tzimisce
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Winder23


Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 4263
PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 12:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The premise of this thread is a good one. It is almost certain that we will move forward for the next 2 years of the McDaniels contract. There are reports Bowlen has cash issues and firing McDaniels would simply cost too much money. So it is really a non issue.

The issue to me is whether or not Pat Bowlen is going to give McDaniels the financial resources to put together a winning team here. I'm not convinced McDaniels can do that, but I'm also not convinced he will be given a good chance to do so.

Unfortunately the new look of the NFL is going to have less competitive balance and the richer teams will most likely be the better teams on a consistent basis. Everything Tagliabue (sp?) and Rozelle worked for will be brought down into a heap. There is alot more money at stake and the gap between have and have nots will surely widen.

The McDaniels debate will continue as long as he is here. Just like replacing Elway, it will take a long time for people to get over the loss of Shanahan. He was the face of the franchise for a decade and a half. We won ALOT of games and ALOT is expected. Can Josh meet these expectations? I think he can get it done. With improved line play on both sides and an added playmaker on defense we could be pretty good. If we do lose Marshall we need another WR, but his loss wouldn't cripple the franchise. This offseason should be interesting to say the least.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
champ+jay+al=SB


Joined: 10 Mar 2007
Posts: 15459
Location: Boulder
PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 2:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Are we really 8-8? Or are we 6-0 and then 2-8?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AKRNA


Joined: 28 May 2008
Posts: 5205
PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 2:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

broncos67 wrote:
AKRNA wrote:
broncos67 wrote:
AKRNA wrote:
We need to be straight about a few things and take off the rosy glasses.

1st, it's not true that Shanny only had one playoff appearance since Elway. He had 4. losing to the Ravens in 2000 (SB winners) and appearances in 2003, 04 and 2005, playing for the AFC championship and losing to the Steelers (SB winners)

He completely rebuilt the team with emphasis on offense and yes, it was far better than this years. PPG don't tell the story. Here's something that does. Last year we were 6-8 when giving up 17+ points, this year we're 2-8.

Also, he completely revamped the roster with only one losing season to show for it.

So, we're supposed to be happy when our entire 2006 draft class is about to be blown up?

I'm not, and I have no confidence in Mac's ability to right the ship.

Personally I think we'll all be missing him alot by next year.


Sorry but no. I'm a diehard Broncos fan, but people cling a little too much to back-to-back SB wins 12 YEARS AGO, as the basis for why Shanahan should be here.

Let me ask you this, if your coach had 1 playoff win in 12 years, followed by a .500 record over three years and three straight collapses why should he not be fired?

PPG DO tell the story. If they don't what does? Yards? Please. Everyone needs to get off Shanahan's jock for a second and realize that he's not our coach, McDaniels is. He had an 8-8 season, with a defense that allowed 8 PPG better, and an offense, that for how much everyone griped about it, only allowed 3 PPG worse.

Mike Shanahan's message got old. He did not deserve to be HC of this team anymore. I can't believe people are willing to give free passes to a guy who wanted to keep Slowik around, who had the most porous defense we've ever seen.


Let me be clear. I had no problem with Mike getting fired, still don't.

The problems I had were choice of HC and firing of the Goodmans right before the draft.

I would have much prefered to see Dennison promoted. Our offense would still be intact and Rick has the knowledge on both sides of the ball to correct the problems on defense.


Understandable, but then it comes back to, as it does so often, people being upset because the person they preferred wasn't the one who was hired. Rick Dennison wasn't hired for a reason. He was a lot like Mike Shanahan. He knew everything that Mike Shanahan knew, so you can't blame Bowlen for trying, or wanting to change up a stale message.


Possibly true. I would have much preferred a defensive minded HC such [inappropriate/removed] Ryan or Spags rather than ANY offensive minded coach.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big_palooka


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 22761
Location: ATL
PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 3:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

champ+jay+al=SB wrote:
Are we really 8-8? Or are we 6-0 and then 2-8?


Smart post there. That's the question to be answered.

Breaking down a 6-0 start:

Bengals - fluke win on a last second play.

Browns - Horrible until a late season rally

Raiders - No identity on offense under Russell.

Cowboys - Hadn't found their identity on offense w/o TO. Miles Austin would emerge the next week.

Patriots - Brady not his usual rhythm as a passer. Missed throws he normally makes.

Chargers - No identity. Typical Early season lull as they find their offense after Tomlinson.

Bye week, 6-0, everything is great. The defense looks elite but the teams they played simply hadn't found their footing. The Chargers, Cowboys and Pats all had documents concerns early in the season and later gelled.

Ravens - First opponent who was clicking. Blown out!

Steelers - A team that would prove they are not as good as advertised. Blown out!

Redskins - Kyle Orton injury is the excuse, but Betts shreds the defense.

Chargers - Found their stride. Blown out!

Giants - Were frauds. Gave up 45,45,41 and 44 points in last 4 losses.

Chiefs - A beatable team that dropped numerous balls and buried their chances. Jamal Charles not fully integrated.

Indy - Manning shreds defense w/ 4 TDs. Broncos rally, but are not in their league.

Raiders - Defense shredded by running game. Let worst QB in league put a game winning drive on them.

Eagles - Came out hot, buried and let Broncos in only to have McNabb shred defense late.

Chiefs - Embarrassing beat down at the hands of Charles who is now integrated as the starter.

What we learned:

Defense was not the impressive unit displayed early in the season. They had advantage of playing offense who hadn't hit their stride. Defense won some games offense couldn't.

As the season moved on, blowouts and letdowns in winnable games.

The future:

The McDaniels led Broncos are the team many thought they would be coming in. They are in jeopardy of losing their best talent. (Marshal). The locker room seems divided. The had a surprising start and proved to be frauds as the competition increased. The defense started to look it's age and was beaten up as the season went on.

Offensive genius? Hardly. This is the Broncos now.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
broncos67


Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Posts: 22345
Location: Conshohocken
PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Palooka, you are hilarious. Look, you can't discount every win and make every loss seem worse than it was. You just can't.

Cincy- Fluky play, sure. But we held them defensively very well that game and we deserved a win.

CLE- We beat up on a bad team, like we should have.

OAK- See above.

DAL- We beat a team that everyone thought would expose us. Don't make it seem like Miles Austin was hiding and then decided to be great. Is it possible we neutralized him well?

NE- We beat them fair and square. Brady was off all season, so discount all those games for every team. Orton led a GW drive.

SD- Played them tough and got good ST play, AT THEIR PLACE, and took them out of the game.

BAL- Two weeks they had to gameplan for us and they whooped us good.

PIT- We were outcoached and outmanned. Of course you leave out though, how different they are when Polamalu is in there.

WSH- The Orton injury is a perfectly legitimate excuse. I was at the game, I can attest to how bad we were beating them, despite the halftime score. Simms couldn't keep the offense on the field, that's why we lost.

SD- They came out hot, and we were with them for awhile, some untimely fumbles and we got pushed back. Orton didn't start BTW.

NYG- Frauds or not, we dominated on a short week.

KC- We beat them up bad after they didn't capitalize.

IND- After the first three drives we shut Peyton down completely. He looked lost. We couldn't capitalize and score, and finally D wears down.

OAK- No run stopping from us whatsoever, and bad D on the last drive loses it for us.

PHI- Philly made mistakes, we capitalize they pull it out in the end. LOL at McNabb shredding the defense. He was 5/18 INT in the second half. He didn't shred anything until the Maclin pass.

KC- Embarassment.
_________________


Thanks, Tzimisce
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Winder23


Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 4263
PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 4:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

broncos67 wrote:
Palooka, you are hilarious. Look, you can't discount every win and make every loss seem worse than it was. You just can't.

Cincy- Fluky play, sure. But we held them defensively very well that game and we deserved a win.

CLE- We beat up on a bad team, like we should have.

OAK- See above.

DAL- We beat a team that everyone thought would expose us. Don't make it seem like Miles Austin was hiding and then decided to be great. Is it possible we neutralized him well?

NE- We beat them fair and square. Brady was off all season, so discount all those games for every team. Orton led a GW drive.

SD- Played them tough and got good ST play, AT THEIR PLACE, and took them out of the game.

BAL- Two weeks they had to gameplan for us and they whooped us good.

PIT- We were outcoached and outmanned. Of course you leave out though, how different they are when Polamalu is in there.

WSH- The Orton injury is a perfectly legitimate excuse. I was at the game, I can attest to how bad we were beating them, despite the halftime score. Simms couldn't keep the offense on the field, that's why we lost.

SD- They came out hot, and we were with them for awhile, some untimely fumbles and we got pushed back. Orton didn't start BTW.

NYG- Frauds or not, we dominated on a short week.

KC- We beat them up bad after they didn't capitalize.

IND- After the first three drives we shut Peyton down completely. He looked lost. We couldn't capitalize and score, and finally D wears down.

OAK- No run stopping from us whatsoever, and bad D on the last drive loses it for us.

PHI- Philly made mistakes, we capitalize they pull it out in the end. LOL at McNabb shredding the defense. He was 5/18 INT in the second half. He didn't shred anything until the Maclin pass.

KC- Embarassment.
This looks more accurate to me. I would agree with your asessment of every game.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
big_palooka


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 22761
Location: ATL
PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

broncos67 wrote:
Palooka, you are hilarious. Look, you can't discount every win and make every loss seem worse than it was. You just can't.

Cincy- Fluky play, sure. But we held them defensively very well that game and we deserved a win.

CLE- We beat up on a bad team, like we should have.

OAK- See above.

DAL- We beat a team that everyone thought would expose us. Don't make it seem like Miles Austin was hiding and then decided to be great. Is it possible we neutralized him well?

NE- We beat them fair and square. Brady was off all season, so discount all those games for every team. Orton led a GW drive.

SD- Played them tough and got good ST play, AT THEIR PLACE, and took them out of the game.

BAL- Two weeks they had to gameplan for us and they whooped us good.

PIT- We were outcoached and outmanned. Of course you leave out though, how different they are when Polamalu is in there.

WSH- The Orton injury is a perfectly legitimate excuse. I was at the game, I can attest to how bad we were beating them, despite the halftime score. Simms couldn't keep the offense on the field, that's why we lost.

SD- They came out hot, and we were with them for awhile, some untimely fumbles and we got pushed back. Orton didn't start BTW.

NYG- Frauds or not, we dominated on a short week.

KC- We beat them up bad after they didn't capitalize.

IND- After the first three drives we shut Peyton down completely. He looked lost. We couldn't capitalize and score, and finally D wears down.

OAK- No run stopping from us whatsoever, and bad D on the last drive loses it for us.

PHI- Philly made mistakes, we capitalize they pull it out in the end. LOL at McNabb shredding the defense. He was 5/18 INT in the second half. He didn't shred anything until the Maclin pass.

KC- Embarassment.


I see what you are saying. But you can look at this 2 ways. Through blue and orange colored glasses (as you did) of silver and black (as did I).

The point is still the same. The Broncos were frauds and resemble a poor team going out with a lot work to do and not a solid team that needs a tweak.

Then their is the McDaniels factor and how that all plays with the players in Denver and the ones wanting out.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
broncos67


Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Posts: 22345
Location: Conshohocken
PostPosted: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You have to look at the whole season. You thought we'd win 3 games, we won 8. Frauds or not, we still won more than projected, so that alone makes me believe we weren't frauds.

And I'd hardly say I looked at that through homer glasses. That's how the games went. I watched every game palooka, I don't lack the ability to be objective.
_________________


Thanks, Tzimisce
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Denver Broncos All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group