Broncos Hire John Fox (1 Viewer)

'TobiasFunke said:

I think I understand the analogy. If you have the best cards but you keep coming up short, maybe the problem is in your game. But what does Tom Brady failing to get the job done for six seasons in a row despite having the best team in the AFC many of those seasons have to do with this? We're talking about John Fox, Peyton Manning and the Broncos here.

Click to expand...

Funny time to make this comment, the day after brady passed montana for most playoff wins of all time. Both brady and montana have played 23 playoff games, and brady is 17-6, while montana was just 16-7. Nobody has been as successful as brady, but this isn't about him. This thread is about john fox and his decision not to have manning throw the ball at the end of regulation. the only reason to bring up brady is if you were going to say something like "look, if you have tom brady back there, obviously you go for it, but with manning, you should kneel down and head to overtime". Which, by the way, is exactly what real nfl coaches do in each scenario. And they are correct to do so.

'bostonfred said:

'TobiasFunke said:

I think I understand the analogy. If you have the best cards but you keep coming up short, maybe the problem is in your game. But what does Tom Brady failing to get the job done for six seasons in a row despite having the best team in the AFC many of those seasons have to do with this? We're talking about John Fox, Peyton Manning and the Broncos here.

Click to expand...

Funny time to make this comment, the day after brady passed montana for most playoff wins of all time. Both brady and montana have played 23 playoff games, and brady is 17-6, while montana was just 16-7. Nobody has been as successful as brady, but this isn't about him. This thread is about john fox and his decision not to have manning throw the ball at the end of regulation. the only reason to bring up brady is if you were going to say something like "look, if you have tom brady back there, obviously you go for it, but with manning, you should kneel down and head to overtime". Which, by the way, is exactly what real nfl coaches do in each scenario. And they are correct to do so.

Click to expand...

It was your analogy, not mine. The analogy was about seeming to have the best cards but coming up short repeatedly, and wondering if whether you eventually need to concede that maybe the problem is in how you play those cards. I think we all know which franchise has had the best cards for the last eight years. And sure enough, they keep coming up short.

'pizzatyme said:

When statboy tossed out his advanced stats of 85 versus 87%, was that considering all QBs or Hall of Fame QBs named Peyton Manning?

I wonder the career playoff win percentages of more aggressive head coaches. Lets pick 3 I can think of of the top of my head- Sean Payton, Jeff Fisher, and Bill Belichick. Lets put those up against Lovie, Dungy, and Fox. And I don't even have to know the results to know which set of coaches I want leading my playoff team.

And, Dungy taking over the Colts coincided with a Peyton Manning in his prime. I contest 9/10 coaches could have done as well or likely better than Dungy did during that span, especially during the playoffs.

Click to expand...

The HoF QB named Peyton Manning claims he audibled into the run, so he must have assessed his own chances of converting with the called play against that specific defense to be low enough to make the run the right probabilistic call. As for the sample of coaches you list... Give me a break. Sure, I'd trade Fox for Payton or Belichick. Are either of them available? No? Okay then. As for Fisher, his 5-6 playoff record is worse than any of the three conservative guys you named. I'd trade Fox for Fisher anyway, though- because Fisher is another coach who is amazing at the 95% of coaching that is not in-game management.

To throw out names of coaches who actually are available, I'd gladly trade Fox for Chip Kelly, who is as aggressive as they come. Of course, I'd do the same for Bill Cowher, who is old-school conservative to the bone. Outside of those two, there's no one available who would be better than Fox. I'm not claiming Fox is one of the best coaches in the league, I'm claiming he's a solid B/B+ guy, which is plenty good enough to win with, and not worth replacing unless a you can get a solid A or an A+. Plenty of B/B+ guys win titles. Gruden did. Billick did. Vermeil did. Mike Tomlin. Martz almost did. Reid had 4 straight NFCCG appearances (5 total). Lovie took Grossman/Orton to the Super Bowl.

You don't fire a B/B+ guy unless you're getting a sure upgrade, because you're far more likely to wind up swapping Shanahan for McDaniels, or Schotty for Norv.

'The Comedian said:

'SSOG said:

Just saw this: Brian Burke from Advanced NFL Stats ran the numbers on Fox's conservative calls to see just how terrible they were. His conclusion? Surprisingly enough, not very terrible. The run on 3rd down was flat out the correct call (running there gives Denver an 87% chance to win, passing gives them an 85% chance). The kneels at the end of both halves were both the wrong call, but it wasn't as bad as it first seems when you account for the weather (the wind was in Denver's face both times) and temperature (field goal kickers are less accurate in the cold). Both choices left very few points on the field (maybe a 10% chance for a FG in the first half, or just 0.3 expected points, and maybe a 5% increase in win probability in the second half). And Burke points out that, as the heavy favorite, pursuing a low-variance strategy made more sense for Denver.

And lest you think Burke is some sort of old-school football fan who doesn't believe in aggressive play, he says one of Fox's worst calls was actually choosing not to go for it on 4th-and-1 from his own 39 in sudden death overtime. He's a big advocate for aggressive play when the numbers support it. It just happened that this time, the numbers didn't support it. Not that this will change anyone's opinion of Fox that gutless spineless coward who cost his team a win through sheer indefensible idiocy and who deserves to be fired immediately.

Click to expand...

For teams that need a touchdown to survive, time makes a big difference. With 1:09 to play, a team typically has a 13 percent chance of scoring a touchdown. With 1:49 to go, they have around a 26 percent chance. The choice, then, is between conceding Baltimore the 13 percent shot or gambling that you'll either win the game outright or give Baltimore a 26 percent chance to win. League-wide, third-and-7 situations are converted 42 percent of the time. That means if Denver drops back to pass, Baltimore's chance of winning is (1 - 0.42) * 0.26 = 0.15 = 15 percent. According to the math, then, Fox made the right call: Punting was, just barely, the right probabilistic call.

Click to expand...

Really? So you take the %'s based on a league-wide average ignoring, you know, everything specific about this game?

Click to expand...

People were criticizing Fox for not playing the numbers. The numbers say he made the right call. You say he ignored the game situation, but what if he didn't? Peyton was throwing into the wind, and his arm strength had been fading all game. And Peyton claims to have audibled into the run, anyway, so the argument over how bad Fox was for making a conservative call that was supported by the numbers is all moot anyway. And, ironically enough, Rahim Moore's blunder came on a play Fox wasn't conservative enough- the safeties should have been more than 15 yards deep. Denver should have gone prevent. The decisions to kneel at each end of half had a negative impact on Denver's chances of winning... but not nearly as much as the decision to single Champ on Torrey in the game-plan. In game management is just far less impactful than the rest of a coach's job. Installing a game plan is far more important than deciding when to challenge and when to kneel and when to burn timeouts. Developing players is far more important still. Identifying quality assistants and delegating them the right amount of authority. Setting a practice schedule that gets your team prepared enough without burning them out. Setting depth charts, motivating players, fostering competition. These are the true measures of a head coach- not in-game management. These are areas where Fox excels, and where the hotshot prospect with great in-game credentials remains wholly untested. It's why a guy like McDaniels- who is a brilliant aggressive mind who knows all the percentages in-game- was such a colossal failure. Given my choice, yeah, I want a guy who can do all that AND manage the game well. Absent that choice, I'm happy to have someone who can't manage a game well, but has the rest of it down cold.

'SSOG said:

The HoF QB named Peyton Manning claims he audibled into the run, so he must have assessed his own chances of converting with the called play against that specific defense to be low enough to make the run the right probabilistic call.

Click to expand...

I think that is where Manning outsmarts himself at times. Audibling to a run on that 3rd and 5 was poor, and it makes me wonder if defenses know he will switch to a run if they throw certain coverages at him. The run went nowhere, so it makes me wonder. Again, I think he outsmarts himself with play calls like that. Just because they are throwing a defense at you that is designed to stop the pass doesn't mean that throwing a pass is somehow the wrong thing to do.

'Ghost Rider said:

'SSOG said:

The HoF QB named Peyton Manning claims he audibled into the run, so he must have assessed his own chances of converting with the called play against that specific defense to be low enough to make the run the right probabilistic call.

Click to expand...

I think that is where Manning outsmarts himself at times. Audibling to a run on that 3rd and 5 was poor, and it makes me wonder if defenses know he will switch to a run if they throw certain coverages at him. The run went nowhere, so it makes me wonder. Again, I think he outsmarts himself with play calls like that. Just because they are throwing a defense at you that is designed to stop the pass doesn't mean that throwing a pass is somehow the wrong thing to do.

Click to expand...

Let's hope he is eventually able to overcome this problem and become an above-average quarterback.

'TobiasFunke said:

'Ghost Rider said:

'SSOG said:

The HoF QB named Peyton Manning claims he audibled into the run, so he must have assessed his own chances of converting with the called play against that specific defense to be low enough to make the run the right probabilistic call.

Click to expand...

I think that is where Manning outsmarts himself at times. Audibling to a run on that 3rd and 5 was poor, and it makes me wonder if defenses know he will switch to a run if they throw certain coverages at him. The run went nowhere, so it makes me wonder. Again, I think he outsmarts himself with play calls like that. Just because they are throwing a defense at you that is designed to stop the pass doesn't mean that throwing a pass is somehow the wrong thing to do.

Click to expand...

Let's hope he is eventually able to overcome this problem and become an above-average quarterback.

Click to expand...

I think you are missing my point.

'Ghost Rider said:

'SSOG said:

The HoF QB named Peyton Manning claims he audibled into the run, so he must have assessed his own chances of converting with the called play against that specific defense to be low enough to make the run the right probabilistic call.

Click to expand...

I think that is where Manning outsmarts himself at times. Audibling to a run on that 3rd and 5 was poor, and it makes me wonder if defenses know he will switch to a run if they throw certain coverages at him. The run went nowhere, so it makes me wonder. Again, I think he outsmarts himself with play calls like that. Just because they are throwing a defense at you that is designed to stop the pass doesn't mean that throwing a pass is somehow the wrong thing to do.

Click to expand...

Sure. That 3rd and 5 run was idiotic- it's not like you're keeping the defense honest. It's not like the next time you're facing 3rd and 5, the defense will say "well, they ran last time...". I have no idea what was up with that. Shanny used to call the occasional 3rd and 5 run, but that was with Clinton Portis and one of the top running games in the league. Slightly different context. I don't think it's really comparable to the 3rd and 7 run, though. The first call was early enough that the only objective was converting. For the second, there were dueling objectives- convert, and kill clock. It changes the calculus.

'SSOG said:

'Ghost Rider said:

'SSOG said:

The HoF QB named Peyton Manning claims he audibled into the run, so he must have assessed his own chances of converting with the called play against that specific defense to be low enough to make the run the right probabilistic call.

Click to expand...

I think that is where Manning outsmarts himself at times. Audibling to a run on that 3rd and 5 was poor, and it makes me wonder if defenses know he will switch to a run if they throw certain coverages at him. The run went nowhere, so it makes me wonder. Again, I think he outsmarts himself with play calls like that. Just because they are throwing a defense at you that is designed to stop the pass doesn't mean that throwing a pass is somehow the wrong thing to do.

Click to expand...

Sure. That 3rd and 5 run was idiotic- it's not like you're keeping the defense honest. It's not like the next time you're facing 3rd and 5, the defense will say "well, they ran last time...". I have no idea what was up with that. Shanny used to call the occasional 3rd and 5 run, but that was with Clinton Portis and one of the top running games in the league. Slightly different context. I don't think it's really comparable to the 3rd and 7 run, though. The first call was early enough that the only objective was converting. For the second, there were dueling objectives- convert, and kill clock. It changes the calculus.

Click to expand...

The 3rd and 7 call was also frustrating because you could have put the game away right there. Let Manning drop back to throw, and if no one gets open, you let him turtle and take the sack and the clock keeps running.

'bostonfred said:

'Popinski said:

'bostonfred said:

'Warrior said:

'bostonfred said:

Can you think of any reason why fox would have had manning kneel down there besides "he was afraid manning would throw an interception"?

Click to expand...

He wasn't more likely to turn the ball over than score. But I bet Fox believed he WAS more likely to turn the ball over than score.This is due to Fox being an idiot.

Click to expand...

What happened in overtime?

Click to expand...

Huh? Warrior's point is absolutely correct. The Broncos were more likely to score than turn the ball over and lose, although the most likely event was neither team scoring.

Click to expand...

I agree that the most likely event was neither team scoring. But that's irrelevant in the decision to kneel down, since no score doesn't change the game either way. The only reason - literally the only reason - that you don't go for it with time left in regulation and timeouts in hand is that you're more afraid of a game ending turnover than you are confident in a game winning score. Warrior and I seem to agree that fox felt the turnover was more likely than the score.

Click to expand...

This may be true, but I'm not sure. I would guess that Fox just played not to lose; I don't think he tried in his mind to compare percentages. Sometimes we give coaches too much credit for their thought process and ability to reason in critical moments; there are so many gaffes across the league that will attest to this, and is part of the reason I respect Belichick so much. Hypothetically, and I understand this is speculative, I think Fox makes the same call in that position if Eli Manning is his QB.

Where we disagree, and you seem to disagree as well, is whether fox was correct to feel that way. And so we look at overtime. Denver had the ball more than once, and each time it was sudden death, field goal wins, just like at the end of regulation. And what happened? Manning turned it over, and didn't score. That doesnt mean that they shouldnt have tried to score, or that it was a certainty that manning would throw a game ending interception. But your contention that the broncos were more likely to score than turn the ball over and lose is a tough one when they did exactly the opposite.

Click to expand...

We are dealing with such a small sample size that this is essentially irrelevant.

There is probably a good reason for it, too. Manning relies heavily on the check with mes, and the presnap reads, which are much more difficult in a hurryup offense. the defense can be one dimensional against the pass with short time left on the clock, which takes his audible out of the equation. the entire offensive system is predicated on mismatches - if they show eight in the box, we pass, if they go cover 2, we run, if they play off coverage, the receivers go short, if they blitz, we go to the hot read, eyou motion guys to get them to show their defense, and you take what they give. Manning lost badly in new england when they disguised their coverages and baited him into making the obvious adjustments, and the pats picked him off four times. The following season, just the threat of it kept him from playing aggressively, and they held him to just three points. He has adjusted over time, obviously, but the fact remains that his style is more about accuracy and intelligent decision making than gunslinging and improvisation, and that is probably what keeps him from excelling in some of these late game situations. Couple that with his deteriorated arm strength, and it seems like asking him to go bombs away with short time left was a recipe for disaster.

Click to expand...

Some of these are fair points. But with 2 timeouts and the option to spike the football, the options for audibles and adjustments are clearly available. Also, Manning doesn't have to throw bombs, as YAC factor in as well. That said, these points still don't come anywhere close to making it more likely that the Broncos lose than that they win in this situation. At the absolute minimum, the team would have to have a below average QB for this to be true. OT is essentially a 50/50 deal - but Fox had an extra possession before that, and he just walked away from it. No one is saying that the Broncos had to come out and play high risk there, because they obviously had the safety net of OT. Playing on the conservative side in that scenario is fine, but what Fox did is drop the ball.Was anyone on the Ravens sideline upset that the Broncos kneeled to close out regulation?

'Ghost Rider said:

'TobiasFunke said:

'Ghost Rider said:

'SSOG said:

The HoF QB named Peyton Manning claims he audibled into the run, so he must have assessed his own chances of converting with the called play against that specific defense to be low enough to make the run the right probabilistic call.

Click to expand...

I think that is where Manning outsmarts himself at times. Audibling to a run on that 3rd and 5 was poor, and it makes me wonder if defenses know he will switch to a run if they throw certain coverages at him. The run went nowhere, so it makes me wonder. Again, I think he outsmarts himself with play calls like that. Just because they are throwing a defense at you that is designed to stop the pass doesn't mean that throwing a pass is somehow the wrong thing to do.

Click to expand...

Let's hope he is eventually able to overcome this problem and become an above-average quarterback.

Click to expand...

I think you are missing my point.

Click to expand...

I don't think I am. You're using an impossibly small sample size to argue about effectiveness when the larger sample size shows that he does just fine making play calls in every situation. Third down conversions- Third in the league2010- Fifth in the league2009- First in the leagueI'm sure I could go on, but the point is made. There's no way his offenses would have third down conversion rates that good if he regularly made the wrong call when the defense was "designed to stop the pass."

I didn't say that he regularly makes the wrong call in such situations. I just think he outsmarts himself at times going with the "percentage play" instead of taking chances. Yes, most of the time, what he does works, but there are occasions where he runs a play that is mystifying when you consider the game situation. That 3rd and 5 was a prime example of this. That's all I am saying.

'Ghost Rider said:

I didn't say that he regularly makes the wrong call in such situations. I just think he outsmarts himself at times going with the "percentage play" instead of taking chances. Yes, most of the time, what he does works, but there are occasions where he runs a play that is mystifying when you consider the game situation. That 3rd and 5 was a prime example of this. That's all I am saying.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I see the point you're trying to make. I'm just not sure how we can say, since we don't know what he based the audible on. Maybe he saw a gap created by the perceived pass rush that he though the RB could attack for a first down with the added benefit of running 40 seconds off the clock if he failed; something that would change the cost/benefit significantly. Maybe he saw something in the perceived pass coverage that would have stymied the passing attack and risked a turnover through INT or sack/fumble. Who knows.Since his teams are historically effective in these types of situations than any other QB- an effectiveness that has maintained even with personnel that would go 1-15 the next year with a different QB, and with a completely different team- I think he probably has earned the benefit of the doubt.

'Ghost Rider said:

I didn't say that he regularly makes the wrong call in such situations. I just think he outsmarts himself at times going with the "percentage play" instead of taking chances. Yes, most of the time, what he does works, but there are occasions where he runs a play that is mystifying when you consider the game situation. That 3rd and 5 was a prime example of this. That's all I am saying.

Click to expand...

I would agree with this.

I know I'm late to the party, but the run at the end of the game on 3rd down was ######ed. Not to mention everything, but that one especially. Throw it, get a 1st down, end the game essentially. Worst case scenario, throw it away/take a sack/go down/etc. Anything but running it up the gut.

So in the press conference after the game, Fox gave his reasoning for taking a knee with 2 timeouts and 0:31 left in regulation.

"You watch a (70)-yard bomb go over your head, there's a certain amount of shock value," Fox said. "A little bit like a prize fighter who gets a right cross on the chin at the end of a round, you're looking to get out of the round."

Click to expand...

Okay, whatever. Stupid quote, but he was probably devastated. Fast forward to tonight. He was just on in his regular spot with Tim Ryan and Pat Kirwan on Moving the Chains on Sirius. After having a few days to get his thoughts together... same answer. "After giving up a big play like that, the team is in shock. It's like a boxer who just took a huge shot in round 11. He's just looking to make it through round 12."

Were I a Broncos fan, I would be livid that this guy is permitted to coach my team for another second.

Our team was very, very sad... so I figured we should just try our luck in overtime.

I wouldn't want this clown coaching my nephew's Pop Warner team.

Just fired DBs coach. Nice fall guy. Lol

'Raider Nation said:

So in the press conference after the game, Fox gave his reasoning for taking a knee with 2 timeouts and 0:31 left in regulation.

"You watch a (70)-yard bomb go over your head, there's a certain amount of shock value," Fox said. "A little bit like a prize fighter who gets a right cross on the chin at the end of a round, you're looking to get out of the round."

Click to expand...

Okay, whatever. Stupid quote, but he was probably devastated. Fast forward to tonight. He was just on in his regular spot with Tim Ryan and Pat Kirwan on Moving the Chains on Sirius. After having a few days to get his thoughts together... same answer. "After giving up a big play like that, the team is in shock. It's like a boxer who just took a huge shot in round 11. He's just looking to make it through round 12."

Were I a Broncos fan, I would be livid that this guy is permitted to coach my team for another second.

Our team was very, very sad... so I figured we should just try our luck in overtime.

I wouldn't want this clown coaching my nephew's Pop Warner team.

Click to expand...

I hope his comments put to rest any notions by the mathletes in this thread that Fox made any calls based on supported statistics. The boxing analogy makes him look even more stupid since you can't win on decision in an NFL game. He made the calls based on pure emotion and stupidity and nothing more. Arguing for the kneel downs is like arguing that you should punt on first down. You are effectively arguing to turn the ball over to the other team and give up a chance to win.

'TwinTurbo said:

'Raider Nation said:

So in the press conference after the game, Fox gave his reasoning for taking a knee with 2 timeouts and 0:31 left in regulation.

"You watch a (70)-yard bomb go over your head, there's a certain amount of shock value," Fox said. "A little bit like a prize fighter who gets a right cross on the chin at the end of a round, you're looking to get out of the round."

Click to expand...

Okay, whatever. Stupid quote, but he was probably devastated. Fast forward to tonight. He was just on in his regular spot with Tim Ryan and Pat Kirwan on Moving the Chains on Sirius. After having a few days to get his thoughts together... same answer. "After giving up a big play like that, the team is in shock. It's like a boxer who just took a huge shot in round 11. He's just looking to make it through round 12."

Were I a Broncos fan, I would be livid that this guy is permitted to coach my team for another second.

Our team was very, very sad... so I figured we should just try our luck in overtime.

I wouldn't want this clown coaching my nephew's Pop Warner team.

Click to expand...

I hope his comments put to rest any notions by the mathletes in this thread that Fox made any calls based on supported statistics. The boxing analogy makes him look even more stupid since you can't win on decision in an NFL game. He made the calls based on pure emotion and stupidity and nothing more. Arguing for the kneel downs is like arguing that you should punt on first down. You are effectively arguing to turn the ball over to the other team and give up a chance to win.

Click to expand...

IN before my buddy SSOG tells us why football, in fact, IS very much like boxing!

'Raider Nation said:

'TwinTurbo said:

'Raider Nation said:

So in the press conference after the game, Fox gave his reasoning for taking a knee with 2 timeouts and 0:31 left in regulation.

"You watch a (70)-yard bomb go over your head, there's a certain amount of shock value," Fox said. "A little bit like a prize fighter who gets a right cross on the chin at the end of a round, you're looking to get out of the round."

Click to expand...

Okay, whatever. Stupid quote, but he was probably devastated. Fast forward to tonight. He was just on in his regular spot with Tim Ryan and Pat Kirwan on Moving the Chains on Sirius. After having a few days to get his thoughts together... same answer. "After giving up a big play like that, the team is in shock. It's like a boxer who just took a huge shot in round 11. He's just looking to make it through round 12."

Were I a Broncos fan, I would be livid that this guy is permitted to coach my team for another second.

Our team was very, very sad... so I figured we should just try our luck in overtime.

I wouldn't want this clown coaching my nephew's Pop Warner team.

Click to expand...

I hope his comments put to rest any notions by the mathletes in this thread that Fox made any calls based on supported statistics. The boxing analogy makes him look even more stupid since you can't win on decision in an NFL game. He made the calls based on pure emotion and stupidity and nothing more. Arguing for the kneel downs is like arguing that you should punt on first down. You are effectively arguing to turn the ball over to the other team and give up a chance to win.

Click to expand...

IN before my buddy SSOG tells us why football, in fact, IS very much like boxing!

Click to expand...

Football is nothing like boxing. I'm sure John Fox DOES make decisions based on what the percentage play is. I'm equally sure his idea of the percentage play is frequently wrong, and when it's not, that's through sheer dumb luck. As I said, John Fox thinks football wisdom was handed down from the Heavens directly into the hands of Vince Lombardi, carved on stone tablets, and that it never changes. Guy's old. He's set in his ways. He's not changing. My goal was never to argue that Fox somehow made the right calls, or that he was a great game-day manager. My goal was to argue that game-day management is such a minuscule portion of his job description, and he's so good at everything else, that he's still a great coach and I'm still thrilled to have him.

Look, if I'm getting my appendix out, I'd prefer to have a surgeon who is brilliant and graduated at the top of his class with perfect marks. If such a surgeon isn't available, I'm okay settling for a guy who got a D+ in technical writing and a C in business ethics, but aced anatomy and physiology and all of his other core courses. That's Fox- he's not a 4.0 student or a Rhodes Scholar, but the stuff he gets right far outweighs the stuff he gets wrong.

'SSOG said:

'Raider Nation said:

'TwinTurbo said:

'Raider Nation said:

So in the press conference after the game, Fox gave his reasoning for taking a knee with 2 timeouts and 0:31 left in regulation.

"You watch a (70)-yard bomb go over your head, there's a certain amount of shock value," Fox said. "A little bit like a prize fighter who gets a right cross on the chin at the end of a round, you're looking to get out of the round."

Click to expand...

Okay, whatever. Stupid quote, but he was probably devastated. Fast forward to tonight. He was just on in his regular spot with Tim Ryan and Pat Kirwan on Moving the Chains on Sirius. After having a few days to get his thoughts together... same answer. "After giving up a big play like that, the team is in shock. It's like a boxer who just took a huge shot in round 11. He's just looking to make it through round 12."

Were I a Broncos fan, I would be livid that this guy is permitted to coach my team for another second.

Our team was very, very sad... so I figured we should just try our luck in overtime.

I wouldn't want this clown coaching my nephew's Pop Warner team.

Click to expand...

I hope his comments put to rest any notions by the mathletes in this thread that Fox made any calls based on supported statistics. The boxing analogy makes him look even more stupid since you can't win on decision in an NFL game. He made the calls based on pure emotion and stupidity and nothing more. Arguing for the kneel downs is like arguing that you should punt on first down. You are effectively arguing to turn the ball over to the other team and give up a chance to win.

Click to expand...

IN before my buddy SSOG tells us why football, in fact, IS very much like boxing!

Click to expand...

Football is nothing like boxing. I'm sure John Fox DOES make decisions based on what the percentage play is. I'm equally sure his idea of the percentage play is frequently wrong, and when it's not, that's through sheer dumb luck. As I said, John Fox thinks football wisdom was handed down from the Heavens directly into the hands of Vince Lombardi, carved on stone tablets, and that it never changes. Guy's old. He's set in his ways. He's not changing. My goal was never to argue that Fox somehow made the right calls, or that he was a great game-day manager. My goal was to argue that game-day management is such a minuscule portion of his job description, and he's so good at everything else, that he's still a great coach and I'm still thrilled to have him.

Look, if I'm getting my appendix out, I'd prefer to have a surgeon who is brilliant and graduated at the top of his class with perfect marks. If such a surgeon isn't available, I'm okay settling for a guy who got a D+ in technical writing and a C in business ethics, but aced anatomy and physiology and all of his other core courses. That's Fox- he's not a 4.0 student or a Rhodes Scholar, but the stuff he gets right far outweighs the stuff he gets wrong.

Click to expand...

I'd be interested to hear your opinion of how a coach's job breaks down that you use to determine that game day management is miniscule.

'RUSF18 said:

'SSOG said:

'Raider Nation said:

'TwinTurbo said:

'Raider Nation said:

So in the press conference after the game, Fox gave his reasoning for taking a knee with 2 timeouts and 0:31 left in regulation.

"You watch a (70)-yard bomb go over your head, there's a certain amount of shock value," Fox said. "A little bit like a prize fighter who gets a right cross on the chin at the end of a round, you're looking to get out of the round."

Click to expand...

Okay, whatever. Stupid quote, but he was probably devastated. Fast forward to tonight. He was just on in his regular spot with Tim Ryan and Pat Kirwan on Moving the Chains on Sirius. After having a few days to get his thoughts together... same answer. "After giving up a big play like that, the team is in shock. It's like a boxer who just took a huge shot in round 11. He's just looking to make it through round 12."

Were I a Broncos fan, I would be livid that this guy is permitted to coach my team for another second.

Our team was very, very sad... so I figured we should just try our luck in overtime.

I wouldn't want this clown coaching my nephew's Pop Warner team.

Click to expand...

I hope his comments put to rest any notions by the mathletes in this thread that Fox made any calls based on supported statistics. The boxing analogy makes him look even more stupid since you can't win on decision in an NFL game. He made the calls based on pure emotion and stupidity and nothing more. Arguing for the kneel downs is like arguing that you should punt on first down. You are effectively arguing to turn the ball over to the other team and give up a chance to win.

Click to expand...

IN before my buddy SSOG tells us why football, in fact, IS very much like boxing!

Click to expand...

Football is nothing like boxing. I'm sure John Fox DOES make decisions based on what the percentage play is. I'm equally sure his idea of the percentage play is frequently wrong, and when it's not, that's through sheer dumb luck. As I said, John Fox thinks football wisdom was handed down from the Heavens directly into the hands of Vince Lombardi, carved on stone tablets, and that it never changes. Guy's old. He's set in his ways. He's not changing. My goal was never to argue that Fox somehow made the right calls, or that he was a great game-day manager. My goal was to argue that game-day management is such a minuscule portion of his job description, and he's so good at everything else, that he's still a great coach and I'm still thrilled to have him.

Look, if I'm getting my appendix out, I'd prefer to have a surgeon who is brilliant and graduated at the top of his class with perfect marks. If such a surgeon isn't available, I'm okay settling for a guy who got a D+ in technical writing and a C in business ethics, but aced anatomy and physiology and all of his other core courses. That's Fox- he's not a 4.0 student or a Rhodes Scholar, but the stuff he gets right far outweighs the stuff he gets wrong.

Click to expand...

I'd be interested to hear your opinion of how a coach's job breaks down that you use to determine that game day management is miniscule.

Click to expand...

As I see it, here are a head coach's jobs. If anyone can think of any I overlooked, please feel free to chime in:Hiring a qualified staff and delegating authority (any of the subsequent duties can be kept, delegated, or some combination, but the HC is ultimately responsible)

Player development (improving the players on the roster)

Setting and maintaining a depth chart / getting your best players on the field

Establishing a consistent identity on offense and defense (season-long)

Varying that identity from week to week (game-planning)

Maintaining the health of the players (setting a practice schedule and monitoring workloads)

Motivating the players and eliciting a consistently high effort level

Play calling

Game management (timeouts, challenges, setting offensive and defensive goals in real time)

In my mind, play calling is very distinct from game management. Game management says "we want to go for the first on 3rd and 7" or "we want to run clock on 3rd and 7", while play calling is the actual play called to achieve that goal. Someone can have great game management (going for it on 4th and 1 in the red zone) and terrible play calling (a slow-developing running play). Likewise, someone can have terrible game management (going for 2 when up 6) and brilliant play calling.

In my mind, game-planning is by far the least important of those skills. By a huge margin. I'd say 80+% of the coach's job is simply hiring staff and developing players, with most of the rest being game-planning, maintaining the roster, and keeping the players motivated, focused, and ready to play. If you do all that stuff consistently well, you'll rarely be in a position for your game management to decide outcomes. For an example of what a team with poor game management looks like, look no further than this year's 13-3, #1 seed Denver Broncos. For an example of what a team with poor player development looks like... well, look at San Fran before Harbaugh got there. Tons of talent, brutal on-field results.

'SSOG said:

'RUSF18 said:

'SSOG said:

'Raider Nation said:

'TwinTurbo said:

'Raider Nation said:

So in the press conference after the game, Fox gave his reasoning for taking a knee with 2 timeouts and 0:31 left in regulation.

"You watch a (70)-yard bomb go over your head, there's a certain amount of shock value," Fox said. "A little bit like a prize fighter who gets a right cross on the chin at the end of a round, you're looking to get out of the round."

Click to expand...

Okay, whatever. Stupid quote, but he was probably devastated. Fast forward to tonight. He was just on in his regular spot with Tim Ryan and Pat Kirwan on Moving the Chains on Sirius. After having a few days to get his thoughts together... same answer. "After giving up a big play like that, the team is in shock. It's like a boxer who just took a huge shot in round 11. He's just looking to make it through round 12."

Were I a Broncos fan, I would be livid that this guy is permitted to coach my team for another second.

Our team was very, very sad... so I figured we should just try our luck in overtime.

I wouldn't want this clown coaching my nephew's Pop Warner team.

Click to expand...

I hope his comments put to rest any notions by the mathletes in this thread that Fox made any calls based on supported statistics. The boxing analogy makes him look even more stupid since you can't win on decision in an NFL game. He made the calls based on pure emotion and stupidity and nothing more. Arguing for the kneel downs is like arguing that you should punt on first down. You are effectively arguing to turn the ball over to the other team and give up a chance to win.

Click to expand...

IN before my buddy SSOG tells us why football, in fact, IS very much like boxing!

Click to expand...

Football is nothing like boxing. I'm sure John Fox DOES make decisions based on what the percentage play is. I'm equally sure his idea of the percentage play is frequently wrong, and when it's not, that's through sheer dumb luck. As I said, John Fox thinks football wisdom was handed down from the Heavens directly into the hands of Vince Lombardi, carved on stone tablets, and that it never changes. Guy's old. He's set in his ways. He's not changing. My goal was never to argue that Fox somehow made the right calls, or that he was a great game-day manager. My goal was to argue that game-day management is such a minuscule portion of his job description, and he's so good at everything else, that he's still a great coach and I'm still thrilled to have him.

Look, if I'm getting my appendix out, I'd prefer to have a surgeon who is brilliant and graduated at the top of his class with perfect marks. If such a surgeon isn't available, I'm okay settling for a guy who got a D+ in technical writing and a C in business ethics, but aced anatomy and physiology and all of his other core courses. That's Fox- he's not a 4.0 student or a Rhodes Scholar, but the stuff he gets right far outweighs the stuff he gets wrong.

Click to expand...

I'd be interested to hear your opinion of how a coach's job breaks down that you use to determine that game day management is miniscule.

Click to expand...

As I see it, here are a head coach's jobs. If anyone can think of any I overlooked, please feel free to chime in:Hiring a qualified staff and delegating authority (any of the subsequent duties can be kept, delegated, or some combination, but the HC is ultimately responsible)

Player development (improving the players on the roster)

Setting and maintaining a depth chart / getting your best players on the field

Establishing a consistent identity on offense and defense (season-long)

Varying that identity from week to week (game-planning)

Maintaining the health of the players (setting a practice schedule and monitoring workloads)

Motivating the players and eliciting a consistently high effort level

Play calling

Game management (timeouts, challenges, setting offensive and defensive goals in real time)

In my mind, play calling is very distinct from game management. Game management says "we want to go for the first on 3rd and 7" or "we want to run clock on 3rd and 7", while play calling is the actual play called to achieve that goal. Someone can have great game management (going for it on 4th and 1 in the red zone) and terrible play calling (a slow-developing running play). Likewise, someone can have terrible game management (going for 2 when up 6) and brilliant play calling.

In my mind, game-planning is by far the least important of those skills. By a huge margin. I'd say 80+% of the coach's job is simply hiring staff and developing players, with most of the rest being game-planning, maintaining the roster, and keeping the players motivated, focused, and ready to play. If you do all that stuff consistently well, you'll rarely be in a position for your game management to decide outcomes. For an example of what a team with poor game management looks like, look no further than this year's 13-3, #1 seed Denver Broncos. For an example of what a team with poor player development looks like... well, look at San Fran before Harbaugh got there. Tons of talent, brutal on-field results.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the response. I think what you are saying is largely true, although I'll say that once you remove a lot of those delegated duties, the "pie" if you will of what the HC job entails definitely expands in some areas and reduces in others. Like player development...of course the HC is ultimately responsible but most times you seem to hear that players spend the vast majority of their time with their position coaches. On game-planning, he may determine the ultimate strategy, but his assistants also have a large role in the input (breaking down film, scouting reports, etc) as well as the output (getting their position players to perfect the game plan in practice that week). We can argue the percentages, but to me, the important point to consider is that whatever % you want to put on game management, the actual impact of those decisions on the game itself is enormously larger. A coach can develop the right players and put them in the right situations, but then it's on them to execute. These decisions that coaches make though, when the pressure is on, is all about them.

we were in shock so we took a knee....you are paying Manning 18 mil plus a year for situations exactly like this.....you may not even get the ball back in OT....and LMAO that he spits out all these percentages etc the next day at the press conference like he knew them while the game was going on and that what he was basing his decisions on......the fact that Elway supported the decision even when asked if he would have wanted to have done the same thing had he still been playing is just comical and complete BS....after the Ravens scored that game tieing TD...I'm sure their first reaction after being very excited was "oh crap Manning has 31 seconds and two timeouts"......Broncos bailed them out here...love it...Chiefs fan

I remember one game a while a go where the offense had the ball at their own 39 yard line, 3rd and 4, just inside the two minute warning. They had a 3 point lead, by the way. That coach had the chutzpa to actually throw the ball, trying to close out the game. Unfortunately, the pass was incomplete, and the team had to punt. Their opponents got the ball on their own 21 yard line with 1:44 to go. Well, 6 plays later, they had the ball at the opponents 23 yard line and 0:51 on the clock. Enough time to take three shots at the end-zone and still have enough left to attempt the game tying FG.Had the original 3rd down play been a run, they would have taken off about an additional :40 from the clock. This would have prevented at least three shots into the end-zone. The fact that they threw the ball in this situation kept their opponents in the game.Fortunately, Billy Cundiff missed the easy FG, sending the coach who made the overly aggressive call (Belichick) and the HoF QB who threw the incomplete pass (Brady) into the Superbowl.was this a case of "fortune favors the bold," propelling New England into the superbowl, or was Cundiff missing a gimmie FG simply poor luck?

'SSOG said:

'RUSF18 said:

'SSOG said:

'Raider Nation said:

'TwinTurbo said:

'Raider Nation said:

So in the press conference after the game, Fox gave his reasoning for taking a knee with 2 timeouts and 0:31 left in regulation.

"You watch a (70)-yard bomb go over your head, there's a certain amount of shock value," Fox said. "A little bit like a prize fighter who gets a right cross on the chin at the end of a round, you're looking to get out of the round."

Click to expand...

Okay, whatever. Stupid quote, but he was probably devastated. Fast forward to tonight. He was just on in his regular spot with Tim Ryan and Pat Kirwan on Moving the Chains on Sirius. After having a few days to get his thoughts together... same answer. "After giving up a big play like that, the team is in shock. It's like a boxer who just took a huge shot in round 11. He's just looking to make it through round 12."

Were I a Broncos fan, I would be livid that this guy is permitted to coach my team for another second.

Our team was very, very sad... so I figured we should just try our luck in overtime.

I wouldn't want this clown coaching my nephew's Pop Warner team.

Click to expand...

I hope his comments put to rest any notions by the mathletes in this thread that Fox made any calls based on supported statistics. The boxing analogy makes him look even more stupid since you can't win on decision in an NFL game. He made the calls based on pure emotion and stupidity and nothing more. Arguing for the kneel downs is like arguing that you should punt on first down. You are effectively arguing to turn the ball over to the other team and give up a chance to win.

Click to expand...

IN before my buddy SSOG tells us why football, in fact, IS very much like boxing!

Click to expand...

Football is nothing like boxing. I'm sure John Fox DOES make decisions based on what the percentage play is. I'm equally sure his idea of the percentage play is frequently wrong, and when it's not, that's through sheer dumb luck. As I said, John Fox thinks football wisdom was handed down from the Heavens directly into the hands of Vince Lombardi, carved on stone tablets, and that it never changes. Guy's old. He's set in his ways. He's not changing. My goal was never to argue that Fox somehow made the right calls, or that he was a great game-day manager. My goal was to argue that game-day management is such a minuscule portion of his job description, and he's so good at everything else, that he's still a great coach and I'm still thrilled to have him.

Look, if I'm getting my appendix out, I'd prefer to have a surgeon who is brilliant and graduated at the top of his class with perfect marks. If such a surgeon isn't available, I'm okay settling for a guy who got a D+ in technical writing and a C in business ethics, but aced anatomy and physiology and all of his other core courses. That's Fox- he's not a 4.0 student or a Rhodes Scholar, but the stuff he gets right far outweighs the stuff he gets wrong.

Click to expand...

I'd be interested to hear your opinion of how a coach's job breaks down that you use to determine that game day management is miniscule.

Click to expand...

As I see it, here are a head coach's jobs. If anyone can think of any I overlooked, please feel free to chime in:Hiring a qualified staff and delegating authority (any of the subsequent duties can be kept, delegated, or some combination, but the HC is ultimately responsible)

Player development (improving the players on the roster)

Setting and maintaining a depth chart / getting your best players on the field

Establishing a consistent identity on offense and defense (season-long)

Varying that identity from week to week (game-planning)

Maintaining the health of the players (setting a practice schedule and monitoring workloads)

Motivating the players and eliciting a consistently high effort level

Play calling

Game management (timeouts, challenges, setting offensive and defensive goals in real time)

In my mind, play calling is very distinct from game management. Game management says "we want to go for the first on 3rd and 7" or "we want to run clock on 3rd and 7", while play calling is the actual play called to achieve that goal. Someone can have great game management (going for it on 4th and 1 in the red zone) and terrible play calling (a slow-developing running play). Likewise, someone can have terrible game management (going for 2 when up 6) and brilliant play calling.

In my mind, game-planning is by far the least important of those skills. By a huge margin. I'd say 80+% of the coach's job is simply hiring staff and developing players, with most of the rest being game-planning, maintaining the roster, and keeping the players motivated, focused, and ready to play. If you do all that stuff consistently well, you'll rarely be in a position for your game management to decide outcomes. For an example of what a team with poor game management looks like, look no further than this year's 13-3, #1 seed Denver Broncos. For an example of what a team with poor player development looks like... well, look at San Fran before Harbaugh got there. Tons of talent, brutal on-field results.

Click to expand...

Excellent posting. Because the group of NFL coaches is such a closed fraternity, you're going to have coaches who blindly follow conventional wisdom. As a result, it seems like the vase majority of NFL coaches make genuinely bad decisions in regards to clock management, 4th down decisions and the like. I can only count about 5 coaches who seem to make decisions that are thought out and well-reasoned.Once you accept that almost every coach is going to make objectively bad decisions, then you need to hope that you either 1) get one of the few coaches who makes good in-game decisions, or 2) does everything else well. If you have a coach who generally has his players ready to play every week and has a coherent game plan, which the Broncos seem to have in Fox, then that's really all you can ask for. It would be great if the NFL did a better job of producing head coaches who make better decisions, but that certainly isn't the case now.

at you guys second-guessing Peyton's play calling.Calling audibles at the LOS isn't a sure-thing. Maybe his choice had a 95% success rate but the chips just fell on the 5% side.You guys are like people watching the World Series of Poker on TV and bashing someone for folding when he would have hit the gut-shot straight on the river.

'Warrior said:

at you guys second-guessing Peyton's play calling.Calling audibles at the LOS isn't a sure-thing. Maybe his choice had a 95% success rate but the chips just fell on the 5% side.You guys are like people watching the World Series of Poker on TV and bashing someone for folding when he would have hit the gut-shot straight on the river.

Click to expand...

I'm positive that a run on 3rd and 7 when the opposing defense is expecting a run doesn't have anywhere near a 95% success rate.

I would like to punch John Fox in his face, and keep stealing money from his wallet until I can make a dent in the money his dopey decisions cost me last week

I couldn't tell if MOP was suggesting that the Broncos might can John Fox, so I thought I'd talk or ask about it here.

In my opinion, Peyton Manning deserves a lot of the blame for the playcalling in that game, heck maybe all of it.

Everyone knows Fox would rather run it however whenever he can as much as possible, Manning has been calling the plays in almost every game since he came to Denver, no?

SaintsInDome2006 said:

I couldn't tell if MOP was suggesting that the Broncos might can John Fox, so I thought I'd talk or ask about it here.

In my opinion, Peyton Manning deserves a lot of the blame for the playcalling in that game, heck maybe all of it.

Everyone knows Fox would rather run it however whenever he can as much as possible, Manning has been calling the plays in almost every game since he came to Denver, no?

Click to expand...

Hey Saints, I am definitely sending John Fox on his way if I am the Denver Broncos and ever want to actually win the Super Bowl with Peyton Manning. I think next year they likely will NOT make the Super Bowl as Manning can lay an egg in the 1st round as easy as when he does in the Super Bowl.

I would be telling him we are going to use the heart condition so he can simply step away for a year to be with his family. He gets all of his money, he gets a glowing recommendation next year when he is interviewing for jobs, he gets to walk away with his head held high.

I'm not naive, I don't truly believe they will do this but if I were John Elway I would be finding a new head coach. Send a message, these type of Super Bowl performances with gobs of talent on the roster will not be acceptable. It's not good enough in 2014 just to get to the big game, you have to win it

If the score had been 24-21 I would say carry on, the blowout though showed Fox to be totally outclassed in the coaching department. No one was leading that team on the sidelines, Manning is too busy staring at faxed pictures to rally the troops and Fox just walked around aimlessly. Terrible challenge as well on the forward pass by Wilson in the 1st Q. There's a lot to be critical of rather than celebrating him getting them their. Getting this Denver team to the Super Bowl is not anything to hang your hat on as a coach, they were expected to get there.

Ministry of Pain said:

SaintsInDome2006 said:

I couldn't tell if MOP was suggesting that the Broncos might can John Fox, so I thought I'd talk or ask about it here.

In my opinion, Peyton Manning deserves a lot of the blame for the playcalling in that game, heck maybe all of it.

Everyone knows Fox would rather run it however whenever he can as much as possible, Manning has been calling the plays in almost every game since he came to Denver, no?

Click to expand...

Hey Saints, I am definitely sending John Fox on his way if I am the Denver Broncos and ever want to actually win the Super Bowl with Peyton Manning. I think next year they likely will NOT make the Super Bowl as Manning can lay an egg in the 1st round as easy as when he does in the Super Bowl.

I would be telling him we are going to use the heart condition so he can simply step away for a year to be with his family. He gets all of his money, he gets a glowing recommendation next year when he is interviewing for jobs, he gets to walk away with his head held high.

I'm not naive, I don't truly believe they will do this but if I were John Elway I would be finding a new head coach. Send a message, these type of Super Bowl performances with gobs of talent on the roster will not be acceptable. It's not good enough in 2014 just to get to the big game, you have to win it

If the score had been 24-21 I would say carry on, the blowout though showed Fox to be totally outclassed in the coaching department. No one was leading that team on the sidelines, Manning is too busy staring at faxed pictures to rally the troops and Fox just walked around aimlessly. Terrible challenge as well on the forward pass by Wilson in the 1st Q. There's a lot to be critical of rather than celebrating him getting them their. Getting this Denver team to the Super Bowl is not anything to hang your hat on as a coach, they were expected to get there.

Click to expand...

You make good points, and it did occur to me during the game that Fox had a lot of horrible coaching decisions:

• The red flag review on the forward incompletion to Harvin. If Denver had one break in that early part it was that Carroll wasted a timeout on Wilson's 3rd down run (which actually looked go to me but anyway...). That decision by Fox just seemed crazy to me.
• The 4th down attempt at the end of the 1st half. The safety really screwed up the scoring - get a FG there and it wipes the safety off the board and it's under a 3 TD game, which at halftime as we all know is very doable for Manning. Momentum was lost instead.
• The weird pooch kick at the beginning of the 2nd half. Either onsides kick it or try to hold the Seahawks to start the 2nd half, 3 and out, get the ball back, and hope for a long drive or a big play on offense/defense. What they did, short kicking it to Harvin of all people, was absolutely insane.
• The punt in the 2nd half (was that the 4th quarter?)? Really, I'm mystified.
• No halftime adjustments from what I could see, zero.

I will say again I think the biggest failure though was the playcalling. Personally I put that on Manning. - They had run with success earlier this year: It was cold weather and it was the Pats but Moreno had a spectacular game vs them earlier in the year, the man can be a workhorse, there is no tomorrow after the SB, and Ball was finally coming into his own.

There was one way to beat the Hawks this year - run it 30+ times, don't commit TO's and don't give them the defensive or ST score. The Broncos violated every principle of that.

I don't know what to say about Fox. Manning is not getting any younger. Do you really bring in a new HC at this stage? How many more years do you have with Manning, two tops? Do you just promote Gase? Maybe promote Gase, but if Manning is as hard headed as was yesterday with old man Fox, how is he going to treat Gase? He's going to run right over him.

I kind of think Elway has made his bed with this situation. If he really wants to hope for a championship next year, keep Fox, maybe cede some HC duties to Gase, and then somehow impart to Manning that he has got to let someone else make the gameplan from time to time.

Frankly I think they're stuck.

Foxy ball.

Actually it's kind of painful to see a jackass like Carroll run circles around Fox.

Its kind of hard to say you have to do "this" to beat the Seahawks in the SB. When Peyton is the alpha and omega of why your team is playing in this game, it is really hard to say "ok. scrap that. Let's run it 30+ times". Had they done that last night and lost like they did, I'm not sure fox would get back to Denver before being fired. That would have incited riots because people would have said "WTF! You have Peyton Freaking Manning. Let him throw the ball!."

That game yesterday was just one of those games we call a buzzsaw game in fantasy. Sometimes you can have the best this and that and everything make sense and you just play that guy where it ALL falls the right way for them. That is what happened yesterday. Seattle never faced a crucial decision in the game. It just fell to them that easy.

Shutout said:

Its kind of hard to say you have to do "this" to beat the Seahawks in the SB. When Peyton is the alpha and omega of why your team is playing in this game, it is really hard to say "ok. scrap that. Let's run it 30+ times". Had they done that last night and lost like they did, I'm not sure fox would get back to Denver before being fired. That would have incited riots because people would have said "WTF! You have Peyton Freaking Manning. Let him throw the ball!."

That game yesterday was just one of those games we call a buzzsaw game in fantasy. Sometimes you can have the best this and that and everything make sense and you just play that guy where it ALL falls the right way for them. That is what happened yesterday. Seattle never faced a crucial decision in the game. It just fell to them that easy.

Click to expand...

I think people are not quite used to seeing a historically good pass defense.

It's more like if a running team was playing a historically great rushing defense like 85 Bears, do you really run the ball right at them over and over again? No, it's suicidal. Seattle did lose three games this year, came close to losing three more (HOU, STL & TB) and they got stiff challenges from NO & SF in the playoffs, all of whom ran the ball a lot and minimized TOs and defensive scores.

I hate coaches like Fox. A few have been hired this offseason. Complete waste of time

JetMaxx said:

I hate coaches like Fox. A few have been hired this offseason. Complete waste of time

Click to expand...

I can't remember if Elway hired Fox, but I'm not sure if it matters.

The whole situation with taking over from McDaniel seemed like a weird time, the Broncos were doing poorly (2-6?) and then Tebow magic happened, bingo, bango, playoff win. Fox with Orton then Tebow and building around a run/defense team concept made sense.

Fox with Manning never made sense.

SaintsInDome2006 said:

JetMaxx said:

I hate coaches like Fox. A few have been hired this offseason. Complete waste of time

Click to expand...

I can't remember if Elway hired Fox, but I'm not sure if it matters.

The whole situation with taking over from McDaniel seemed like a weird time, the Broncos were doing poorly (2-6?) and then Tebow magic happened, bingo, bango, playoff win. Fox with Orton then Tebow and building around a run/defense team concept made sense.

Fox with Manning never made sense.

Click to expand...

Just like Dungy never made sense.

BassNBrew said:

Foxy ball.

Actually it's kind of painful to see a jackass like Carroll run circles around Fox.

Click to expand...

Carrol can coach like a mofo

John Fox is a choker

Bojang0301 said:

SaintsInDome2006 said:

JetMaxx said:

I hate coaches like Fox. A few have been hired this offseason. Complete waste of time

Click to expand...

I can't remember if Elway hired Fox, but I'm not sure if it matters.

The whole situation with taking over from McDaniel seemed like a weird time, the Broncos were doing poorly (2-6?) and then Tebow magic happened, bingo, bango, playoff win. Fox with Orton then Tebow and building around a run/defense team concept made sense.

Fox with Manning never made sense.

Click to expand...

Just like Dungy never made sense.

Click to expand...

Actually, I agree.

It's a whole other topic but Manning is kind of like Archie - when has he ever had a great offensive mind coaching him?

Jim Mora and Tony Dungy were great coaches, but no one ever accused them of being great offensive minds. If anything they probably left fans throwing glasses and plates at the tv for all the times they punted and ran the ball.

Peyton has had a hell of a career and then some, but has he ever in all these years gotten to play and create with a great offensive mind as coach? Someone he could work and collaborate with? It's crazy if you think about it, he's been piling these numbers up with Mora, Dungy, Caldwell and Fox.

Bojang0301 said:

SaintsInDome2006 said:

JetMaxx said:

I hate coaches like Fox. A few have been hired this offseason. Complete waste of time

Click to expand...

I can't remember if Elway hired Fox, but I'm not sure if it matters.

The whole situation with taking over from McDaniel seemed like a weird time, the Broncos were doing poorly (2-6?) and then Tebow magic happened, bingo, bango, playoff win. Fox with Orton then Tebow and building around a run/defense team concept made sense.

Fox with Manning never made sense.

Click to expand...

Just like Dungy never made sense.

Click to expand...

OK but Dungy was smart enough to surround himself with good offensive minds. Wasn't Tom Moore pretty much the guy coaching the offense with Peyton? It's about leadership and even though Dungy might not be a great offensive mind he can still win with a guy like Manning by making the defense a lot more like Seattle.

I'm glad posters are putting at least part of the blame on Fox, that would bother me if no one else thought the same thing.

I know it's not conventional and I know it wouldn't be wildly popular but I think you have seen enough of the Fox/Manning experiment, you gotta go get someone who can make this work with the limited time you have Manning.

Could you dangle the job to Gruden? I'm not sure he is even the right guy but there has to be a better option than Fox, this is not the right mix to win the Super Bowl. And sometimes you gotta reel Manning in and implement a game plan that may not be to his immediate liking. I understand you want him to throw the ball a lot but he has to have a ground game established again the better teams or else it is a 1 dimensional attack and that won't work agians the elite teams in the NFL.

"I know there is disappointment," Fox said. "It will take a while to go away for all of us, but at the end of the day, it was a successful season: 15-4 is not real shabby."

Seriously? Good grief.

Fox is part of the same idiotic decision making team that decided to throw millions of $$$ at Stewart and Williams. In today's NFL, the RB is the easiest position to fill - see Stacy, Mike James etc. You do not go around throwing major $$ for Rbs

Is this experiment over?

BassNBrew said:

Is this experiment over?

Click to expand...

For the sake of Broncos fans, I hope so

Report: Broncos could dump John Fox if they lose to Colts

Rotoworld:

Bleacher Report's Jason Cole reports there's a "pretty good chance" coach John Fox gets fired if the Broncos lose to the Colts on Sunday.

FOX Sports' Jay Glazer had a similar "report" earlier in the morning, but it was extremely flimsy. Per Glazer, "there's a thought if (the Broncos) lose today, could Fox become available? If he is, he shoots to the top of lists." Despite winning the AFC West in each of his four seasons as Denver's coach, Fox has been unable to deliver a championship. The Broncos lost in the Divisional Round in each of 2011 and 2012 before getting destroyed by the Seahawks in the Super Bowl last year. Fox would still be in high demand if he hit the open market.

Source: Jason Cole on Twitter
Jan 11 - 12:56 PM

Click to expand...

Manning has certainly played for some ####ty coaches over his career. He has to own that somewhat, because he could have used his clout to get some of morons booted....

When Manning is scoring at will it's cause he's awesome. When he loses it must be the coach...

The coach had nothing to do with how awful Manning was tonight.

BassNBrew said:

Is this experiment over?

Click to expand...

You ain't seen nothing yet. Manning ran the show and that is over with. Fox will be fired either during or after the 2016 season.

Faust said:

Report: Broncos could dump John Fox if they lose to Colts

Rotoworld:

Bleacher Report's Jason Cole reports there's a "pretty good chance" coach John Fox gets fired if the Broncos lose to the Colts on Sunday.

FOX Sports' Jay Glazer had a similar "report" earlier in the morning, but it was extremely flimsy. Per Glazer, "there's a thought if (the Broncos) lose today, could Fox become available? If he is, he shoots to the top of lists." Despite winning the AFC West in each of his four seasons as Denver's coach, Fox has been unable to deliver a championship. The Broncos lost in the Divisional Round in each of 2011 and 2012 before getting destroyed by the Seahawks in the Super Bowl last year. Fox would still be in high demand if he hit the open market.

Source: Jason Cole on Twitter
Jan 11 - 12:56 PM

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Top of the lists of avoid at all costs.

Bigboy10182000 said:

The coach had nothing to do with how awful Manning was tonight.

Click to expand...

I agree, but Fox's flaws as a head coach have been on display for years. From his gutlessness at the end of regulation in the Baltimore playoff game two years ago, to not having the team ready to play in last year's Super Bowl, Fox's coaching is maddening. I always liked him when he was in Carolina, but as a Broncos fan, I want him gone. Immediately.