Fangio is SI's favorite with 5-1 odds!

[Butler By'Note]

....to be fired this season:

https://www.si.com/nfl/broncos/news/...-fired-in-2021

If he does botch this year, I hope they shuffle Shurmur out with him.

He's the favourite because every other non-playoff team has made a change recently, or is locked in with Belichick, or is cheap (Bengals) and won't pay two HCs.

Jacksonville-hired this year
Jets-hired this year
Texans-hired this year
Atlanta-hired this year
Bengals-Won't fire a coach until his contract runs out
Eagles-hired this year
Detroit-hired this year
Carolina-Gave Rhule a 7 year $62 million contract last year
Broncos
Dallas-hired McCarthy last year
Giants-Hired Judge last year
San Fran-Shanahan and staff had them in the Super Bowl last season
Chargers-hired this year...the most unqualified HC in the NFL
Minnesota-Zimmer has been around for a long time and they've had moderate success
Patriots-Belichick...enough said
Cardinals-They have an irrational belief that Kingsbury will be a great NFL HC
Raiders-They gave Gruden a 10 year contract
Dolphins-They've shown some real promise under Flores

So the betting odds are pretty much based on which non-playoff team has had their coach the longest with the worst results, other than the Bengals. Minnesota also seems like an interesting case for a coach that could be fired in-season. And I wouldn't bet against McCarthy or Judge being in-season firings.

[Butler By'Note]

Do you think that was really Fox or more a product of Manning? I kinda always thought it was Manning who changed everything here, and everyone else, at least until 2015, rode his coattails. Fox seemed too easy-going. But, on the other hand, Fangio seems "tough" at the wrong times. I don't agree with the way he publicly talks about players and their performance. I mentioned this before on here, but I'm more of the Gen. Patton style of management...publicly fall on the sword for your people, but behind closed doors, make them fully accountable.

Fox is the most underrated HC in Broncos history. He started turning it around before Manning was signed, which is a reason that Manning even considered Denver (no way he chooses Denver is they go 5-11). He's also taken two different teams to the Super Bowl, and 1 of those teams had Jake Delhomme as their starting QB.

[DiveInstructor]

Fox turned the culture around the year prior with Tebow. He doesn't get enough credit for that and the W against Pitt in the playoffs.

Shoot, I forgot that he started before Manning. I barely remember the Tebow and McDaniels days, since they're ones I'd rather forget. LOL

[HDbroncos02]

If Lock is the QB for 2021, the reality is that his performance will be directly tied to the team’s success... which is tied to Fangio’s job. If Lock flops and the team has another losing record, Fangio is gone— no matter how well the defense plays. And yes, that goes for Shurmur, Donatell, and a lot of the staff too. I think 2022 will be when we truly first see how Paton molds the organization.

[Butler By'Note]

If Lock is the QB for 2021, the reality is that his performance will be directly tied to the team’s success... which is tied to Fangio’s job. If Lock flops and the team has another losing record, Fangio is gone— no matter how well the defense plays. And yes, that goes for Shurmur, Donatell, and a lot of the staff too. I think 2022 will be when we truly first see how Paton molds the organization.

And that's why it makes sense for Paton to just keep it as is this season. If it fails, everyone thought it would and no one blames him because he didn't bring in either. If it works, he's a genius. Let it play out for a season, and then go forward on his path in 2022.

And if Fangio and Lock are as bad as so many on here believe, they'll be in good position to get Howell, Rattler or Slovis next year.

[GMTD]

GMTD, I appreciate and respect your positivity. But can I ask....do you "expect" or did you mean you "hope"? Not my business to question loyalty, but 16 and 0 is one of the rarest things in football, and this team was ok at best last season.

Let me put it this way: I expect the coaches to properly prepare the players so that they can and do believe that they can win every game. Whether they do or not is another matter.

What I am not going to do is go through the whole of free agency, the draft, and preseason worried that we will finish again with another losing record, and that we will be so bad that Fangio will be the first HC to be fired.

[DiveInstructor]

And that's why it makes sense for Paton to just keep it as is this season. If it fails, everyone thought it would and no one blames him because he didn't bring in either. If it works, he's a genius. Let it play out for a season, and then go forward on his path in 2022.

And if Fangio and Lock are as bad as so many on here believe, they'll be in good position to get Howell, Rattler or Slovis next year.

I'd like to offer a few reasons why keeping things as is is a bad idea:


First, the Broncos have a top 10 1st round draft pick this year. That's a position that is reasonable to work from to trade up and grab a QB. Use that if they can't get Watson.

Second, Watson is possibly on the market. Young guys with big potential like that rarely appear available. Time to try to grab him.

Third, should the Broncos go something like 7-9 but Lock still doesn't look good, the Broncos might be drafting back around 15 which is not a good position for a draft pick trade or trade up.

Fourth, next year's QB draft class is supposedly not as good as this year.

Fifth, next year's free agent QBs doesn't have a Watson in it, and even Stafford is better than pretty much anything that frees up next year.


Doing nothing when you have a bad team is a for sure kiss of death in the fast moving NFL.

[Butler By'Note]

I'd like to offer a few reasons why keeping things as is is a bad idea:


First, the Broncos have a top 10 1st round draft pick this year. That's a position that is reasonable to work from to trade up and grab a QB. Use that if they can't get Watson.

Second, Watson is possibly on the market. Young guys with big potential like that rarely appear available. Time to try to grab him.

Third, should the Broncos go something like 7-9 but Lock still doesn't look good, the Broncos might be drafting back around 15 which is not a good position for a draft pick trade or trade up.

Fourth, next year's QB draft class is supposedly not as good as this year.

Fifth, next year's free agent QBs doesn't have a Watson in it, and even Stafford is better than pretty much anything that frees up next year.


Doing nothing when you have a bad team is a for sure kiss of death in the fast moving NFL.

But drafting a QB just to get one doesn't make sense. If the Broncos were to take a QB in this draft I'd rather the draft Mac Jones at 9, or trade down slightly, rather than trading up, cause I'm not sure I think any of them are any better, and in year 1 Mac Jones will be the best QB in this draft. Lawrence will have the better career, but year 1 it'll be Mac Jones.

But I also think it's bad for a team that's not sold on this coaching staff to draft a QB this year. Because next year when you're searching for a new coach you limit who you'll hire based on how they feel about your current QB, or you end drafting another high QB next year.

Watson isn't currently available, and if he does become available I think Denver should call about him, but I don't see them being able to offer the same package that the Dolphins, or Jets could. Miami could offer them 3 picks in the top 35 in this draft (including number 3) a top 10 drafted QB last year who has 4 years of cheap contracts left, and a pretty good corner who has term left on his contract. Then you add in what the Texans could get by trading 3 to a QB needy team, and they could have a huge haul of early picks in 2021 and 2022. Denver can't come close to matching that, unless they start giving up young players with multiple contract years left, like Chubb, Jeudy Hamler etc.

This coaching staff has their current QB, they'll get a veteran to come in and compete in camp, but it makes no sense to pick a QB and then limit yourself next year, if you're looking for a new coach, based on someone who promises to come in and make it work with that QB.

[DiveInstructor]

But drafting a QB just to get one doesn't make sense. If the Broncos were to take a QB in this draft I'd rather the draft Mac Jones at 9, or trade down slightly, rather than trading up, cause I'm not sure I think any of them are any better, and in year 1 Mac Jones will be the best QB in this draft. Lawrence will have the better career, but year 1 it'll be Mac Jones.

But I also think it's bad for a team that's not sold on this coaching staff to draft a QB this year. Because next year when you're searching for a new coach you limit who you'll hire based on how they feel about your current QB, or you end drafting another high QB next year.

Watson isn't currently available, and if he does become available I think Denver should call about him, but I don't see them being able to offer the same package that the Dolphins, or Jets could. Miami could offer them 3 picks in the top 35 in this draft (including number 3) a top 10 drafted QB last year who has 4 years of cheap contracts left, and a pretty good corner who has term left on his contract. Then you add in what the Texans could get by trading 3 to a QB needy team, and they could have a huge haul of early picks in 2021 and 2022. Denver can't come close to matching that, unless they start giving up young players with multiple contract years left, like Chubb, Jeudy Hamler etc.

This coaching staff has their current QB, they'll get a veteran to come in and compete in camp, but it makes no sense to pick a QB and then limit yourself next year, if you're looking for a new coach, based on someone who promises to come in and make it work with that QB.

The higher near the top of that first round you draft, the more your chances increase on getting a starter. There have been articles written about this. The Broncos have been bad about selecting QBs in the draft. Paton was assistant GM when Cousins was signed, so his eye for good QB's isn't much better. So, I'd rather they rely on statistics to help them get a QB that's good. When QBs are ranked high in the draft, it's usually coming from different sources, which appears to often be better than when a team decides on its own that they know better. Lynch was a great example. Lock's performance shows why he fell. The masses might know more than any "expert".

If the Broncos can't get Watson, the next smartest thing to do in my opinion is trade up and go after one of the top 3 guys in the draft....which really means QB #3, since 1 and 2 will be gone before the Broncos can get to either. The other FA QBs all have issues, and a couple it appears teams are willing to overpay for (e.g., Wentz). I think they should use their draft position while they have it, and maybe bring in Dalton. He won't cost much.

Lock shows no reason to stick solely with him....none whatsoever. Let him play for it this next season, but make sure they have the best replacement option possible, before they turn into that 7-9 team and end up stuck in that hole.

[Butler By'Note]

The higher near the top of that first round you draft, the more your chances increase on getting a starter. There have been articles written about this. The Broncos have been bad about selecting QBs in the draft. Paton was assistant GM when Cousins was signed, so his eye for good QB's isn't much better. So, I'd rather they rely on statistics to help them get a QB that's good. When QBs are ranked high in the draft, it's usually coming from different sources, which appears to often be better than when a team decides on its own that they know better. Lynch was a great example. Lock's performance shows why he fell. The masses might know more than any "expert".

If the Broncos can't get Watson, the next smartest thing to do in my opinion is trade up and go after one of the top 3 guys in the draft....which really means QB #3, since 1 and 2 will be gone before the Broncos can get to either. The other FA QBs all have issues, and a couple it appears teams are willing to overpay for (e.g., Wentz). I think they should use their draft position while they have it, and maybe bring in Dalton. He won't cost much.

Lock shows no reason to stick solely with him....none whatsoever. Let him play for it this next season, but make sure they have the best replacement option possible, before they turn into that 7-9 team and end up stuck in that hole.

Too much credit and fault is given with anything the Vikings did while Paton was there. He never had roster control, so we don't know if he agreed or disagreed with the moves that were actually made. It's an exercise in futility to try and assume that it's how the Broncos will be built.

I disagree with trading up for one of those 3 QBs, unless the Broncos truly believe he will be a star QB for years to come. Getting a QB just to get a QB is how you end up looking to draft or sign another QB in a couple of years. I'm not high on Fields or Lance, I do love Lance's skillset, but I think he's a 2 to 3 year project and Broncos fans have shown they don't have the patience for a 2 or 3 year project at QB.

I'd try to get Alex Smith or Fitzpatrick as a backup QB to Lock. If they can't get either of those I'd draft Mac Jones (if they're hellbent on drafting a QB) or I would sign Jameis Winston. That wouldn't be a popular move, but it takes a lot of talent to throw for over 5000 yards and 33 touchdowns in the NFL. He's got a massive upside...if you can limit his turnovers. I believe a year in New Orleans, plus having had laser eye surgery (so he can see who he's throwing to) will make him a potential franchise QB.

[CanDB]

Let me put it this way: I expect the coaches to properly prepare the players so that they can and do believe that they can win every game. Whether they do or not is another matter.

What I am not going to do is go through the whole of free agency, the draft, and preseason worried that we will finish again with another losing record, and that we will be so bad that Fangio will be the first HC to be fired.

Ok....I did not think you fully expected 16 and 0. Just that expecting vs hoping can lead to disappointment.

[HDbroncos02]

I'd try to get Alex Smith or Fitzpatrick as a backup QB to Lock. If they can't get either of those I'd draft Mac Jones (if they're hellbent on drafting a QB) or I would sign Jameis Winston. That wouldn't be a popular move, but it takes a lot of talent to throw for over 5000 yards and 33 touchdowns in the NFL. He's got a massive upside...if you can limit his turnovers. I believe a year in New Orleans, plus having had laser eye surgery (so he can see who he's throwing to) will make him a potential franchise QB.

Jameis Winston in a fully-unleashed Pat Shurmur offense would be very interesting to watch. I would not be opposed to that. If Lock is truly the guy for 2021, then bringing in an ego-less veteran at the end of their career to be the backup (like Smith/Fitz) would be wise. Tim Jenkins brought up a great point in one of his video breakdowns that a veteran backup provides a valuable set of eyes that helps the starter see what's going on and is pretty much like a second OC/QB coach (cited the likes of Mark Brunell and other old vets he was around in his career). At the same time, I'm not necessarily against having Rypien as the backup-- especially if a free agent backup QB is going to take up significant cap space.

[Butler By'Note]

Jameis Winston in a fully-unleashed Pat Shurmur offense would be very interesting to watch. I would not be opposed to that. If Lock is truly the guy for 2021, then bringing in an ego-less veteran at the end of their career to be the backup (like Smith/Fitz) would be wise. Tim Jenkins brought up a great point in one of his video breakdowns that a veteran backup provides a valuable set of eyes that helps the starter see what's going on and is pretty much like a second OC/QB coach (cited the likes of Mark Brunell and other old vets he was around in his career). At the same time, I'm not necessarily against having Rypien as the backup-- especially if a free agent backup QB is going to take up significant cap space.

If they could get Winston on a 2 year $10 million dollar deal (4 million signing bonus, $2 million in year 1) I'd be all over that. It's a fairly low risk investment and it has a massive upside if it pays off. He's got a big arm, mobility and a good pedigree. Obviously the turnovers are the massive red flag, but at this point I'm not sure Denver will be upset with that risk if the good means having a functional offense.

[Kyousukeneko]

Too much credit and fault is given with anything the Vikings did while Paton was there. He never had roster control, so we don't know if he agreed or disagreed with the moves that were actually made. It's an exercise in futility to try and assume that it's how the Broncos will be built.

I disagree with trading up for one of those 3 QBs, unless the Broncos truly believe he will be a star QB for years to come. Getting a QB just to get a QB is how you end up looking to draft or sign another QB in a couple of years. I'm not high on Fields or Lance, I do love Lance's skillset, but I think he's a 2 to 3 year project and Broncos fans have shown they don't have the patience for a 2 or 3 year project at QB.

I'd try to get Alex Smith or Fitzpatrick as a backup QB to Lock. If they can't get either of those I'd draft Mac Jones (if they're hellbent on drafting a QB) or I would sign Jameis Winston. That wouldn't be a popular move, but it takes a lot of talent to throw for over 5000 yards and 33 touchdowns in the NFL. He's got a massive upside...if you can limit his turnovers. I believe a year in New Orleans, plus having had laser eye surgery (so he can see who he's throwing to) will make him a potential franchise QB.

Luckly for the players it is not up to the fans to decide if they have Patience it is up to the front office.

[DiveInstructor]

Too much credit and fault is given with anything the Vikings did while Paton was there. He never had roster control, so we don't know if he agreed or disagreed with the moves that were actually made. It's an exercise in futility to try and assume that it's how the Broncos will be built.

I disagree with trading up for one of those 3 QBs, unless the Broncos truly believe he will be a star QB for years to come. Getting a QB just to get a QB is how you end up looking to draft or sign another QB in a couple of years. I'm not high on Fields or Lance, I do love Lance's skillset, but I think he's a 2 to 3 year project and Broncos fans have shown they don't have the patience for a 2 or 3 year project at QB.

I'd try to get Alex Smith or Fitzpatrick as a backup QB to Lock. If they can't get either of those I'd draft Mac Jones (if they're hellbent on drafting a QB) or I would sign Jameis Winston. That wouldn't be a popular move, but it takes a lot of talent to throw for over 5000 yards and 33 touchdowns in the NFL. He's got a massive upside...if you can limit his turnovers. I believe a year in New Orleans, plus having had laser eye surgery (so he can see who he's throwing to) will make him a potential franchise QB.

Unless you have something stating that Paton was against the Cousins signing, you're going on wishful thinking alone. Everything I can dig up state he was a part of the team that signed Cousins, and there's even talk he might try to bring Cousins here. Also, which HOF QB was identified in the Vikings organization during Paton's employ? None. Not one.

https://broncoswire.usatoday.com/202...neral-manager/

https://thevikingage.com/2021/01/13/...enver-broncos/


Which HOF QB has Elway identified in the draft and drafted? None. Which HOF QB has the Broncos organization identified in the draft and drafted since Elway was QB there? None. Not one. And, they continually use your model of "pick the guy you want". It's failed them every single time.
Who you and I and the Broncos think are the best QB draft candidates is irrelevant. We're wrong more than we're right, by much more than simply going with the odds. Statistics show picking the top best QB candidates as identified by the masses is the least risk decision. That's where my argument comes from...play the odds.

You ignore facts and history. That's were humans are dangerous....it's when a person thinks they're smarter than reality.