What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

McMuffin now loves Tony Scheffler (1 Viewer)

doubletrouble

Footballguy
Stop playing head games with me man.....!!!

Broncos coach Josh McDaniels promised to "take advantage of every skill" TE Tony Scheffler possesses.

"He’s capable of doing a lot of things, we’re moving him around the field quite a bit," McDaniels said. "Tony is a very, very highly skilled player. He can run, he can catch, he can block ... He's made a good impression on our team here." Conventional wisdom notwithstanding, that doesn't sound like a coach who has every intention of weeding Scheffler out of his offense.

 
Translation: You'd better trade for him unless you want to get beat by him.

I'm still not convinced he'll be a Bronco come August.

 
doubletrouble said:
Stop playing head games with me man.....!!!

Broncos coach Josh McDaniels promised to "take advantage of every skill" TE Tony Scheffler possesses.

"He’s capable of doing a lot of things, we’re moving him around the field quite a bit," McDaniels said. "Tony is a very, very highly skilled player. He can run, he can catch, he can block ... He's made a good impression on our team here." Conventional wisdom notwithstanding, that doesn't sound like a coach who has every intention of weeding Scheffler out of his offense.
Is that why you wasted a pick on Richard Quinn in the 2nd round? Wasted an early pick and reached on the guy as well? McDaniels is gonna tear this team apart.....

 
Broncos TE Scheffler on board with role in offense

www.9news.com

ENGLEWOOD (AP) - Tony Scheffler has no beef with Broncos coach Josh McDaniels and insists he's on board even after the team traded his good buddy, Jay Cutler.

Any friction that might have existed dissipated after a recent chat the tight end had with his head coach.

Scheffler and McDaniels sat down to clear the air, discussing his role with the team.

The conversation was cathartic.

"Everything's fine," Scheffler said Thursday after the third day of passing camp. "It's not about me. It's not about any individual on this team right now. We're really focused on the team and moving forward. I think we're doing a lot of good things."

There were rumors swirling in the offseason that Denver was shopping Scheffler, not sure how he would fit into the new intricate offense that McDaniels was implementing.

The meeting with McDaniels staunched those.

As for frayed feelings, there are none.

"Water off a duck's back - move forward and move to the next day," said Scheffler, who caught 40 passes for 645 yards and three touchdowns last season. "You can't really have hurt feelings in this league or else you'll get left behind in a hurry."

These days, McDaniels is envisioning a big role for his reliable receiving tight end, who's looks slimmer and sleeker.

"Tony's a very, very highly skilled player," McDaniels said. "He can do a lot of things -- he can run, he can catch, he can block. We're going to take advantage of every skill that he has. He's made a good impression on our team here."

McDaniels admits he's never coached a tight end quite like Scheffler, one with the ability to stretch the field with a combination of speed and athleticism.

"Tony is probably the most skilled pass-receiving tight end that I've had an opportunity to be around," McDaniels said. "That's a weapon for us that we can move around on the field. We're going to try to feature him in that role."

Now if he can just stay healthy. That's been the knock on Scheffler, who missed three games with a groin injury last season and was bothered by a broken foot before the 2007 season.

"The whole hurt label is kind of overrated with me," he said. "I've only missed four games in three years, if you really look at it. It's frustrating, don't get my wrong, but at the same time it's something you've got to battle through and learn from. I think I've done that. It makes you really appreciate being on the field and being out there with the guys."

Scheffler and Cutler formed quite the connection after the two were taken in the same draft class. Scheffler was a frequent target for the strong-armed quarterback when Cutler found himself in a jam.

However, that came to a halt when Cutler was traded to the Chicago Bears in the offseason after deciding he didn't want to play for McDaniels.

The two remain close, texting and talking all the time.

"I'm sure Jay is going to have a lot of success, a ton of success, in Chicago," Scheffler said.

McDaniels understands the loyalty.

"I'm sure there were quite a few players that had relationships with Jay," McDaniels said. "But they've done a great job of saying, 'You know what? This is our team now, these are our quarterbacks."'

Those quarterbacks would be Chris Simms and Kyle Orton, who are in a hotly contested tussle to land Cutler's spot.

McDaniels has yet to settle on a starting quarterback, preferring to wait and see who gains the upper hand through minicamps.

"I think the (players) have embraced both Chris and I," said Orton, who was acquired as part of the Cutler deal. "We've come in here, worked hard and pretty much kept our mouths shut and tried to improve every day."

So far, Scheffler likes what he sees from both of them.

"We've got two pretty darn good quarterbacks," he said.

Scheffler's unsure what his precise role will be, only that he's hoping to find himself locked up in coverage by a linebacker.

"Those are the matchups I've got to win," Scheffler said. "There's a lot of weapons on the field, so when your number is called you've got to step up and make a play or else you don't know when the next one's going to come."

Notes: McDaniels said that once Brandon Marshall's surgically repaired hip feels up to it, the receiver will return to the field. "It'll depend on his rehab," McDaniels said. "We're not going to rush anything. When Brandon's healthy, Brandon will be out here." ... The team released RB J.J. Arrington after he failed a physical due to a balky right knee.

(Copyright Associated Press, All Rights Reserved)

 
doubletrouble said:
Stop playing head games with me man.....!!!Broncos coach Josh McDaniels promised to "take advantage of every skill" TE Tony Scheffler possesses."He’s capable of doing a lot of things, we’re moving him around the field quite a bit," McDaniels said. "Tony is a very, very highly skilled player. He can run, he can catch, he can block ... He's made a good impression on our team here." Conventional wisdom notwithstanding, that doesn't sound like a coach who has every intention of weeding Scheffler out of his offense.
:)
Is that why you wasted a pick on Richard Quinn in the 2nd round? Wasted an early pick and reached on the guy as well? McDaniels is gonna tear this team apart.....
Quinn has very little impact on Scheffler.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I see Quinn being more utilized on double TE sets than actually getting in and taking over for Scheffler. Considering Denver's moving to a potential power run scheme, I'm not seeing how Quinn is "eating" into Scheffler's time if he'll likely be employed in double TE sets for the majority of his plays. I could also see Scheffler being split wide in a few 3 WR packages with Quinn serving as the TE, which should only improve Scheffler's stock.

As for the "promises" or what not... everything I've read largely seemed to be conjecture and opinion that because Cutler was traded, Scheffler wanted out and McDaniels was going to shove Scheffler out too. I don't ever remember seeing a firm quote from Scheffler, McDaniels, or his agent saying Scheffler would be traded (despite the rumors prior to the NFL Draft).

 
I'm now offically rooting for McDaniels - everyone is on his case, every media talking head.
:wall: I thought he should have waited at least another year or two before taking a head coaching job, and I've never liked the Broncos, but I hope they win the division this year.
 
McBuffoon is liable to contend with Al Davis for the biggest clown in the game. And he made it 80 years younger than Davis did.

 
McBuffoon is liable to contend with Al Davis for the biggest clown in the game. And he made it 80 years younger than Davis did.
If McBuffoon can manage to be even half the clown Al Davis is that means he should be good for at least one Superbowl victory.
 
...

"Everything's fine," Scheffler said Thursday after the third day of passing camp. "It's not about me. It's not about any individual on this team right now. We're really focused on the team and moving forward. I think we're doing a lot of good things."

...
:thumbup:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes. There's a lot more to know about players than watching them on film.

McDaniels said he noticed from last year's film which players made smart plays, and which ones didn't. He also tried to gauge physical toughness. If the players showed him those attributes, they stayed.
LinkTrying to bring in Cassel to replace Cutler was done not because Cassel is better (he's not), but because McDaniels was more familiar with him, having been through practices and games with him. He didn't that level of knowledge about Cutler and figured he was expendable. That will likely work out to be a bad move, made hastily.

 
Yes. There's a lot more to know about players than watching them on film.

McDaniels said he noticed from last year's film which players made smart plays, and which ones didn't. He also tried to gauge physical toughness. If the players showed him those attributes, they stayed.
LinkTrying to bring in Cassel to replace Cutler was done not because Cassel is better (he's not), but because McDaniels was more familiar with him, having been through practices and games with him. He didn't that level of knowledge about Cutler and figured he was expendable. That will likely work out to be a bad move, made hastily.
The only reason it may prove to be a mistake is they didn't get Cassel.
I'm now offically rooting for McDaniels - everyone is on his case, every media talking head.
:goodposting: I usually enjoy rooting for the underdog. IMO, McD will prove his critics wrong. He won't reach the elite level of success, but he'll be a lot better than people are saying now.
 
So McDaniels has decided to learn a bit about the players on his new team before trying to trade them?
Was this not the case before?
He tried to bring in Cassell before knowing much about Cutler.
Is it really your opinion that he didn't know much about Cutler? We'll give you a mulligan here if you'd like to rethink that one.
Seeing how that relationship got burned to the ground in a month, I'm gonna go with yes. Now answer me a question please. Do you possibly think you could ever be MORE of a Pats homer or do you think you have already peaked?
 
So McDaniels has decided to learn a bit about the players on his new team before trying to trade them?
Was this not the case before?
He tried to bring in Cassell before knowing much about Cutler.
Is it really your opinion that he didn't know much about Cutler? We'll give you a mulligan here if you'd like to rethink that one.
Seeing how that relationship got burned to the ground in a month, I'm gonna go with yes. Now answer me a question please. Do you possibly think you could ever be MORE of a Pats homer or do you think you have already peaked?
maybe he wanted Cutler gone BECAUSE he knew lots about Cutler?
 
Maybe he wanted Cutler gone BECAUSE he was an inexperienced and/or insecure new head coach who wanted "his guy" rather than the best guy for the team.

 
Maybe he wanted Cutler gone BECAUSE he was an inexperienced and/or insecure new head coach who wanted "his guy" rather than the best guy for the team.
yes, that's a possibility. Let's not assume that this is the only possibility though. To do so would lead to the conclusion that McD is one of the worst NFL coaching prospects in a really, really long time. Before Cutlergate, there was nothing to indicate as such, so I'm more apt to assume that might not be the case. Of course, as a Bronco fan, I really have no choice but to hope for the best.
 
I think it was just something done hastily (and wrongly) by a guy new in a job. He may well turn out to be a good coach, or a bad one, and it'll take a lot more than the Cutler thing to define why he's one or the other.

 
I think it was just something done hastily (and wrongly) by a guy new in a job. He may well turn out to be a good coach, or a bad one, and it'll take a lot more than the Cutler thing to define why he's one or the other.
Depends on how this season goes. If it turns south and the Bears are successful, McD will be blamed, and will be dealing with the stigma of this mess until he can prove he is above it. If the Broncos outperform expectations (i.e. win 7 or more games), and especially if the Bears stumble, McD will be vindicated.Rightly or wrongly, McD's legacy will be tied to Cutlergate until he does something more meaningful, I have no doubts about that.
 
link

...

"Tony is probably the most skilled pass-receiving tight end I've had an opportunity to be around," McDaniels said. "That's a weapon for us. We can move him around on the field, do different things with him. He can stretch the field at the third level, the second level, and he can take the short underneath level and turn it into a long gain."

Scheffler caught 40 balls for three touchdowns in 2008. Now for the stat that jumps off the page: 16.1 yards per catch. How many other NFL tight ends who played an appreciable amount of time matched that figure? That would be none.

In the ultimate copycat league, Scheffler has emerged as a genuinely unique player. Unlike rank-and-file tight ends throughout the league, he isn't a go-to guy on third down. He didn't even make the fine print on the list of the NFL's leading receivers on third down. It's first and second down when he does his damage, often well down the field.



He's a weapon, all right, and, ironic as it may seem given Cutler's departure, he may be used more extensively in McDan-iels' offense than he was in Mike Shanahan's. The prospect of a fresh start in a new offense, combined with a healthy left foot, has Scheffler excited about the 2009 season.

...
interesting.
 
If McDaniels plans on running an offense similar to New England's then he doesn't need a gunslinger. I think Orton is a good match assuming we see a NE style offense. Personally I don't think McD will look all that bad by the end of the year.

 
So McDaniels has decided to learn a bit about the players on his new team before trying to trade them?
Was this not the case before?
He tried to bring in Cassell before knowing much about Cutler.
Is it really your opinion that he didn't know much about Cutler? We'll give you a mulligan here if you'd like to rethink that one.
Seeing how that relationship got burned to the ground in a month, I'm gonna go with yes. Now answer me a question please. Do you possibly think you could ever be MORE of a Pats homer or do you think you have already peaked?
Your basis for saying that McDaniels didn't know much about Cutler is that the relationship didn't work out in a month? That's an interesting opinion.Yes, I could be more of a Pats homer.
 
Maybe he wanted Cutler gone BECAUSE he was an inexperienced and/or insecure new head coach who wanted "his guy" rather than the best guy for the team.
So head coaches who bring in "their guys" are inexperienced and/or insecure?
 
I think it was just something done hastily (and wrongly) by a guy new in a job. He may well turn out to be a good coach, or a bad one, and it'll take a lot more than the Cutler thing to define why he's one or the other.
...but it won't take more than the Cutler thing for fans to make up their minds about him, evidently.
 
If McDaniels plans on running an offense similar to New England's then he doesn't need a gunslinger. I think Orton is a good match assuming we see a NE style offense. Personally I don't think McD will look all that bad by the end of the year.
It will all come down to their defense. Their defense was horrid last year and Cutler help make it look better than it was by making long drives, holding onto the ball and keeping games close despite no turnovers, awful field position and playing from behind. If its near as bad as it was last year you can throw all this power running game stuff out the window. What good is a power running game when you're down 14 heading into the 2nd half each week? What coach doesn't want a power running game? A decent defense is a key ingredient if you hope to have a successful game. As far as McD I think he saw a team with a lot of holes and saw Cutler as the biggest chip that could get him some ammo to fill those holes. It just happened that he worked with a guy who he knew would be available that he had confidence in and could run his offense. That all makes sense and although I personally think its nuts to trade a guy like Cutler I can understand McD looking to make that move. Where he dropped the ball IMO was his after the fact tough guy routine after the Cassell trade blew up and it spiralled quickly from there. I think it was a huge mistake trading a franchise QB but time will tell and McD's future is riding on it. As far as Scheffler goes McD isn't saying anything he already shouldn't have known if he watched any game film or read any newspapers. He's trying to make nice now and build his team.
 
If McDaniels plans on running an offense similar to New England's then he doesn't need a gunslinger. I think Orton is a good match assuming we see a NE style offense. Personally I don't think McD will look all that bad by the end of the year.
It will all come down to their defense. Their defense was horrid last year and Cutler help make it look better than it was by making long drives, holding onto the ball and keeping games close despite no turnovers, awful field position and playing from behind. If its near as bad as it was last year you can throw all this power running game stuff out the window. What good is a power running game when you're down 14 heading into the 2nd half each week? What coach doesn't want a power running game? A decent defense is a key ingredient if you hope to have a successful game. ...
this really didn't happen all that much last year. Despite ranking 2nd in the NFL in total offensive yards, the Broncos ranked 25th in time of possession - not really indications of long drives. To me, this sound more like quick strike drives and throwing the ball way too much (presumably due to lack of healthy backs). As far as turnovers, the Broncos ranked 25 in turnovers lost, including Cutlers 18 ints and 5 fumbles.
 
Your basis for saying that McDaniels didn't know much about Cutler is that the relationship didn't work out in a month? That's an interesting opinion.
Your contention is that a month is a long time when talking about establishing relationships between head coaches and quarterbacks?
 
If McDaniels plans on running an offense similar to New England's then he doesn't need a gunslinger. I think Orton is a good match assuming we see a NE style offense. Personally I don't think McD will look all that bad by the end of the year.
It will all come down to their defense. Their defense was horrid last year and Cutler help make it look better than it was by making long drives, holding onto the ball and keeping games close despite no turnovers, awful field position and playing from behind. If its near as bad as it was last year you can throw all this power running game stuff out the window. What good is a power running game when you're down 14 heading into the 2nd half each week? What coach doesn't want a power running game? A decent defense is a key ingredient if you hope to have a successful game. ...
this really didn't happen all that much last year. Despite ranking 2nd in the NFL in total offensive yards, the Broncos ranked 25th in time of possession - not really indications of long drives. To me, this sound more like quick strike drives and throwing the ball way too much (presumably due to lack of healthy backs). As far as turnovers, the Broncos ranked 25 in turnovers lost, including Cutlers 18 ints and 5 fumbles.
The TOP was due to their defense not the offense...they ran the 8th most plays in the NFL and as you stated had the 2nd most yards in the NFL (due to the worst field position in the NFL due to their defense/ST) and not quick strikes as you stated. They ran a ton of plays and were ranked 2nd on 3rd down % at 48% which keeps drives alive. Despite those figures being 25th in TOP is an indication of how truly awful their defense was. Teams could run or pass on them at will.My point about the turnovers was not that the offense didn't turn it over but the defense ranked 31st in INT's with 6 and 31st in FF's with 9. Their was no worse team in the turnover dept on defense than the Broncos. They were 26th in sacks so at least there were a few that were worse...

 
Your basis for saying that McDaniels didn't know much about Cutler is that the relationship didn't work out in a month? That's an interesting opinion.
Your contention is that a month is a long time when talking about establishing relationships between head coaches and quarterbacks?
Are you just screwing around here, or are you legitimately asking me a question that you don't know the answer to?My contention is that just because their relationship didn't work out over the course of one month, that doesn't mean that McDaniels "didn't know much" about Cutler.
 
Your basis for saying that McDaniels didn't know much about Cutler is that the relationship didn't work out in a month? That's an interesting opinion.
Your contention is that a month is a long time when talking about establishing relationships between head coaches and quarterbacks?
Are you just screwing around here, or are you legitimately asking me a question that you don't know the answer to?My contention is that just because their relationship didn't work out over the course of one month, that doesn't mean that McDaniels "didn't know much" about Cutler.
:lmao: So merely questioning your line of thinking means I'm "screwing around here." Think much of yourself? You're a bull among sacred cows.

Yeah, a month during the offseason is no time at all to establish a relatinship with a QB. Keep defending your boy though, :popcorn: It's the only thing you're doing well in this thread.

 
If McDaniels plans on running an offense similar to New England's then he doesn't need a gunslinger. I think Orton is a good match assuming we see a NE style offense. Personally I don't think McD will look all that bad by the end of the year.
It will all come down to their defense. Their defense was horrid last year and Cutler help make it look better than it was by making long drives, holding onto the ball and keeping games close despite no turnovers, awful field position and playing from behind. If its near as bad as it was last year you can throw all this power running game stuff out the window. What good is a power running game when you're down 14 heading into the 2nd half each week? What coach doesn't want a power running game? A decent defense is a key ingredient if you hope to have a successful game. ...
this really didn't happen all that much last year. Despite ranking 2nd in the NFL in total offensive yards, the Broncos ranked 25th in time of possession - not really indications of long drives. To me, this sound more like quick strike drives and throwing the ball way too much (presumably due to lack of healthy backs). As far as turnovers, the Broncos ranked 25 in turnovers lost, including Cutlers 18 ints and 5 fumbles.
The TOP was due to their defense not the offense...they ran the 8th most plays in the NFL and as you stated had the 2nd most yards in the NFL (due to the worst field position in the NFL due to their defense/ST) and not quick strikes as you stated. They ran a ton of plays and were ranked 2nd on 3rd down % at 48% which keeps drives alive. Despite those figures being 25th in TOP is an indication of how truly awful their defense was. Teams could run or pass on them at will.My point about the turnovers was not that the offense didn't turn it over but the defense ranked 31st in INT's with 6 and 31st in FF's with 9. Their was no worse team in the turnover dept on defense than the Broncos. They were 26th in sacks so at least there were a few that were worse...
don't get me wrong - I'm well aware of how terrible that D was. I've been calling it the worst Bronco D of my lifetime since at least week 8 of last year. However, I do want to remind people that the O wasn't as good as some remember - in terms of scoring, the O was average. Denver had an uncharacteristic extremely unbalanced attack which was due to lack of healthy backs. This O bogged down in the red zone, and committed lots of turnovers. This O failed to score at least 20 points in 7 games last year, and came up short down the stretch when it was needed the most.I think that McD is taking a systemic approach to fixing this team. Fixing the DL isn't enough - IMO what he is trying to do is put together an O that can chew up more clock (allowing the D to rest), and improving special teams - return and coverage - for improved field position, so the D can have a better chance for success. That, coupled with a competent DC in Nolan (which I don't think Denver has had since Wade Phillips was DC in the early 90's) and starting secondary players that weren't signed off of the street should be enough to improve. If the O can remain mediocre and the D can upgrade from terrible to slightly worse than average, this team win 7 games, which IMO would be fantastic.

 
If McDaniels plans on running an offense similar to New England's then he doesn't need a gunslinger. I think Orton is a good match assuming we see a NE style offense. Personally I don't think McD will look all that bad by the end of the year.
It will all come down to their defense. Their defense was horrid last year and Cutler help make it look better than it was by making long drives, holding onto the ball and keeping games close despite no turnovers, awful field position and playing from behind. If its near as bad as it was last year you can throw all this power running game stuff out the window. What good is a power running game when you're down 14 heading into the 2nd half each week? What coach doesn't want a power running game? A decent defense is a key ingredient if you hope to have a successful game. ...
this really didn't happen all that much last year. Despite ranking 2nd in the NFL in total offensive yards, the Broncos ranked 25th in time of possession - not really indications of long drives. To me, this sound more like quick strike drives and throwing the ball way too much (presumably due to lack of healthy backs). As far as turnovers, the Broncos ranked 25 in turnovers lost, including Cutlers 18 ints and 5 fumbles.
The TOP was due to their defense not the offense...they ran the 8th most plays in the NFL and as you stated had the 2nd most yards in the NFL (due to the worst field position in the NFL due to their defense/ST) and not quick strikes as you stated. They ran a ton of plays and were ranked 2nd on 3rd down % at 48% which keeps drives alive. Despite those figures being 25th in TOP is an indication of how truly awful their defense was. Teams could run or pass on them at will.My point about the turnovers was not that the offense didn't turn it over but the defense ranked 31st in INT's with 6 and 31st in FF's with 9. Their was no worse team in the turnover dept on defense than the Broncos. They were 26th in sacks so at least there were a few that were worse...
don't get me wrong - I'm well aware of how terrible that D was. I've been calling it the worst Bronco D of my lifetime since at least week 8 of last year. However, I do want to remind people that the O wasn't as good as some remember - in terms of scoring, the O was average. Denver had an uncharacteristic extremely unbalanced attack which was due to lack of healthy backs. This O bogged down in the red zone, and committed lots of turnovers. This O failed to score at least 20 points in 7 games last year, and came up short down the stretch when it was needed the most.I think that McD is taking a systemic approach to fixing this team. Fixing the DL isn't enough - IMO what he is trying to do is put together an O that can chew up more clock (allowing the D to rest), and improving special teams - return and coverage - for improved field position, so the D can have a better chance for success. That, coupled with a competent DC in Nolan (which I don't think Denver has had since Wade Phillips was DC in the early 90's) and starting secondary players that weren't signed off of the street should be enough to improve. If the O can remain mediocre and the D can upgrade from terrible to slightly worse than average, this team win 7 games, which IMO would be fantastic.
I agree that they weren't good in the redzone and I think that was due to the imbalanced attack you mentioned which led to turnovers. It's funny because if you look at the numbers their redzone rushing numbers weren't bad but Shanny didn't seem to want to run in the redzone. Good post and I agree with most everything you wrote...

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top