Horse Tracks 4/15/09

JC: More chins than a chinese phone book! (Just joking everyone!)
Do we have to include Kreiger and Armstrong here???? I know we do…but man…..almost makes me miss Bernie Lincicome!

Did he actually talk to any players, get any quotes? I find the whole premise ridiculous that all of the players would high five Cutler because of some secret vendetta against the FO.

I’ll say this again, I have yet to hear a player say more than the situation was disappointing. Apparently they’re not sad that Cutler is gone, they aren’t going to miss him; I think that speaks volumes by itself. Caveat: If there have been quotes from current Broncos who say that they loved Jay and will miss him, I’m sorry. I just haven’t read any.

Last night Jamie Dukes and Solomon Wilcots on NFLN pounded the Broncos and cheered the Bears every chance they could. The guys like Armstrong and Krieger (10 straight losses!) are going to fire away relentlessly. We just need to get used to it. Until the games start, we will not know whether the moves the Broncos made will work out. I am very optimistic about 2010 and think the Broncos can be in the mix for a playoff spot in 2009.

Where is Mr. Doom and Gloom, Kizla, by the way?

the headline makes it sound like he is implying that the locker room is divisive and against McDaniels at this stage, but the message armstrong tries to get across (He is sourcing Jim Rome here, to some extent, and Rome makes his name and living by being in contact with sports personalities. He might not have interviewed a number of players, but it wouldn’t surprise to me if he has talked to some people off the record. ) is that the locker room has perennially been about “me first players” more interested in cashing their check than playing for the Broncos. In saying that they are “envious” of Cutler, he is surmising that the locker room still has some issues to get over, some bad ideas to flush.

He might be right. Losing does that to players, and to some degree they might implicitly prioritize their chance to make their paycheck and support their families and lifestyles (and both are worthwhile endeavors) rather than sacrifice themselves to some mantra that gains them nothing. Its hard to be about “team” when the team can’t win.

IF (and remember, this is just speculation, and of the worst sort, too: psychological speculation) the players truly do feel a pang of jealousy that Cutler is moving on, or got what he wanted from an unwilling front office (and who got what they wanted is debatable at this point) then I certainly think they are entitled to it, in some degree. Not at the cost of moving forward, but when the struggles have been so dire (especially for many of our young, maligned defensive players) hope gets confused with change. Call it the “Grass is Greeener” syndrome.

Back to Armstrong. He is saying that McDaniel’s highest priority right now is creating something that gets all the players on the same page. He isn’t bashing McDaniels (though his tone is typically Armstrongian), he is bashing the players, and by proxy, the former regime that alienated team at the expense of a win at all costs (and the cost was indeed high) mantra. Our holdover players are all products of a dysfunctional program that consisted of a lot of bluster and fury, but was ultimately ineffective; ineffective at adjusting, ineffective at converting in the redzone, ineffective at winning. It was a system that had broken down and survived on words, not actions; yards, not points.

The following choice of words by Armstong is key, but I hesitate to call them intentional. I have no doubt he kows where they came from, but his use of them isn’t completely conducive to his point:

In a perfect world, players would run through the proverbial wall for their coach. That’s the kind of attitude McDaniels has to instill in his players.

Armstrong has para-phrased the immortal (if progeny is any indication) words of none other than Travis Henry, referring to Shanny’s “player-personnel” system for gaining undying loyalty. Shanny backed Henry 100 percent in drug related charges, and got Henry’s undying loyalty for his efforts. And there is the rub.

I think McDaniels is already way ahead of Shanahan in the category of player loyalty, if for no other reason than that he hasn’t put the cart before the horse. FIRST you get players who have the character to reciprocate, implicitly and explicitly, the concept of loyalty. THEN you can worry about inspiring that loyalty. Shanahan got the order reversed, and his personnel history is a black ledger filled with red marks, where he got guys that no one else would take in an effort to start with undying loyalty. Unfortunately, there was a reason no one would take most of those players.

I agree with Armstrong to the extent that creating a new program of “Broncos football” that players buy into wholeheartedly will be his toughest challenge.

I disagree with Armstorng in that I think McDaniels is already halfway there.

can’t come fast enough for me. Get here already!

Why? It gives us something new to focus on, and hopefully something that gives us… well, hope. A good draft may also get people off the Broncos backs a bit.

But I also have to say I don’t mind “experts” predicting a tough season for the Broncos, I would rather them sneak up on people than be a disappointment, which they were for most of the past 5 seasons.

If his stock is indeed falling a little bit, not based on him personally as much as on the position he plays, as this article seems to imply…
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/story/11630138
…I wonder if there’s any way the Broncos could trade up just a bit to nab him. Despite what it says about the 3-4 and Curry in that article, I still think he’d be a terrific addition to the D.

But that article was literally worthless.

If you think the Broncos will go 5-11, that’s fine, but give actual REASONS why you think it will happen for each game, instead of writing little blurbs wherin you try and fail miserably to be funny.

For crying out loud, he’s a paid sportswriter. I could have written a higher quality article than that about the schedule.

What I find more annoying than the article itself is the comments you read below it. I guess if you ever want to know why someone who writes something without much real thought has lots of fans its because they are not thinking either.