You’ll have to correct me if I’m wrong. I wasn’t entirely certain what your point was, so I’m doing a bit of projection here.

The mainstream media has specifically and maliciously attacked the Denver Broncos organization for the strict purpose of selling ad space. Is the “Anti-Denver Broncos” market large enough for this to be a logical goal? I suppose perhaps I’m underestimating the overall hatred of the Denver Broncos organization worldwide.

Perhaps one of the reasons I am doing that is because, since its inception, Monday Night Football has featured the Denver Broncos a total of 59 times, 5th-most among all NFL teams, behind only the Dolphins, Cowboys, 49ers and Raiders (should be noted: The Steelers have also appeared on MNF 59 times). When you consider that a great deal of that time frame — we’ll call it ‘the 70s’ was a pretty low era for the Denver Broncos (sans the 1977 SB run), while the other teams (specifically the Raiders, Dolphins and Cowboys) all had very successful runs during that time, it can pretty safely be assumed that, since the early 1980s, the Denver Broncos have been considered one of America’s most-popular teams.

Here’s a list of a few stories that I could drudge up. I tried to find some anti-Broncos stuff to mix it in there:

Here’s a nice career-retrospective piece about John Elway, written shortly after Shanahan was hired.

Telling quote:

The bad news for unforgiving Colt fans is that he hasn’t gotten to that point yet. He has a new coach, a solid new cast of veteran teammates and an intricate new offense that makes him feel like a kid again. “For a quarterback it’s like dying and going to heaven,” he says of the offense that Shanahan brought with him from the San Francisco 49ers, where he was the offensive coordinator for the past two seasons. “I feel like I’m starting over again.”

That sure doesn’t sound like, to me, someone who is being overly critical of the decision-making process in Denver.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1006910/index.htm

Here’s another one, written in 1996, just as the team was starting to come together.

Perhaps the only thing that this writer needs to be remorseful for was his puzzling use of hyperbole in an otherwise subtle piece:

After missing the playoffs three of the last four seasons, Denver is enjoying a revival under second-year coach Mike Shanahan, who has quietly produced the AFC’s best team. This season’s Broncos, who are 7-1 and own a two-game lead over the Chiefs in the AFC West, are not of the same breed as their Elway-era predecessors, including the three teams in the 1980s that advanced to the Super Bowl only to be pushed around like unwelcome drunks crashing a party. This year Denver is physical, purposeful and well-rounded.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1008978/index.htm

In 1999, Adam Schefter — perhaps the foremost NFL writer at this point in his career — wrote a book, with Shanahan, about leadership titled “Think Like a Champion.”

New York Times review of said-book:

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/207

Not sure even the most pessimistic person could find that to be any type of attack on the organization.

This piece was published in the WSJ, but originally written in Stefan Fatsis’ wonderful book “A Few Seconds of Panic.”

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121477975676614277.html.html?mod=sports

There were certainly some moments in the book that didn’t show the Broncos’ organization in a perfect light — the Sauerbrun issue is examined in this excerpt, and Fatsis certainly didn’t seem to like certain players (though, retrospectively thinking about it, a few of the players he seemed to not get along with probably were warranted: Cutler and Marshall, both of whom are, shall we say, ‘eccentric’?). On the whole, the book was solid and I know I’ve seen Fatsis write about the Broncos’ organization elsewhere since the book came out, and his fawning for the team and its executives was pretty transparent.

Worth noting: Bill Williamson’s response to Shanahan’s shocking dismissal last year. “Pork Chop,” as he’s so affectionately known around these parts as, has taken an awful lot of ribbing from some folks.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/tag/_/name/shanahan-fired

He seemed to look at both Shanahan and the Broncos as a whole in a positive light, suggesting that Shanahan will be able to get any job he wants and also suggesting the Broncos are a very attractive destination for a head coach (though, part of that attraction was attached to the QB we had).

Wojo on the Cutler saga:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&id=3946294&sportCat=nfl

Seemed to me that he was, in fact, supporting the organization, not bashing it.

Digging a bit deeper, the biggest complaint I hear — and I’ll be the first to admit that I might have been suckered into this opinion had I not done a little research — is that John Elway was unfairly ripped for failing to win a Super Bowl early in his career. That’s certainly partially true; the lack of a title was one of the first things people thought about when they heard the name Elway. However, this is a tremendous piece by Rick Reilly (you won’t hear me say that very frequently) in 1989 about some of the problems that faced Elway. I think reading this will do two things:
1: Make you bash your head against the wall 150 times when you remember how conservative the Broncos’ offense was in the 80s; and, 2: Help squash some of those beliefs that he was unfairly maligned by the MSM.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1069023/1/index.htm

(Good read, retrospectively, particularly the portion about Reeves/Elway/Shanahan, a triumvirate that I never thought got enough coverage. Et tu, Reeves? Also, if anyone actually reads this, notice how Reilly mentions that Elway is ranked 18th among QBs. 18th in what? Football stats have improved so much in 20 years.)

Small piece: King ranks the offensive lines last year. Note the inclusion of the Broncos:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1149378/index.htm

King again, ostensibly siding with the Broncos during “Cutlergate”

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1153631/index.htm

The point I’m trying to get at is this:

The MSM by-and-large predicted that this Broncos team would struggle. I outlined above why they might have thought that, and I maintain that such a train of thought isn’t entirely without its merit. The team seemed to be in turmoil and, following last year’s historically bad defense, it seemed unlikely that it could improve to such a degree that a playoff appearance was in its future.

Part of the problem, as I stated above, is McDaniels’ limitation on information leaving Dove Valley. Right or wrong, anyone can safely assume that it is difficult to get a true gauge on a team when you’re limited in your access. Logically, most first-time coaches struggle. Most people struggle the first time they do anything; that’s just how life works.

The “MSM” didn’t predict failure in Denver out of malice; they did it because that seemed to be the likeliest outcome (and, frankly, is still a possible outcome).

Lastly, I want to point out that all I’m asking for is that we focus less on the MSM and more on the team. I don’t think that’s an unreasonable request and, frankly, the above post was slightly surprising as I didn’t think my initial proposal was very vitriolic.

Go Broncos and I apologize for the verbosity.

What language? I thought I edited it…

Just did a search and found ‘bs’. Apologize about that. Really didn’t mean to.

I’m not sure what you’re arguing for here, Endzone. All I’m asking is that the sweeping attacks on the MSM stop and that we focus exclusively on the team. Is that really an irrational request?

And I would love to see some semblance of evidence — just a little, itty bitty shred of evidence, really — that the media is ‘clearly’ biased, as you have said. I’m in the process of gathering a few articles from national media about the Broncos during the past 10 years.

That’s not true. I don’t know a single journalist who gets paid by the number of clicks. There are some blogs that work that way, I’m sure, but I would hardly consider them MSM.

The fact is, there isn’t a single journalist I’ve ever met who has anything to do with the finance side of the operation. In fact, in most newsrooms, the finance side of things (accounts, sales, ads and what not) are in an entirely different area of the building and, in some cases, in another building altogether.

The idea that someone like Peter King would write something exclusively to ‘sell more ads’ is incorrect. It does not work that way. I’m sure SI (as well as ESPN, TSN, Yahoo, etc) have a Code of Ethics published on their Web site that will outline what I just explained.

I did? I didn’t mean to post it over there, I promise. I started writing it out over there and decided to post it here instead because it was so darned long.

Apologies.

I wasn’t intending to speak down to anyone… You have to admit, though, that the level of vitriol and personal attacks can get a tad out of hand toward the media, particularly when some of them are so baseless and unfounded.

I’m not really sure why it’s necessary. If we were truly analyzing the MSM (I know I use it too. The problem I have with it, though, is that it’s so broad. What qualifies? The Gazette in the Springs? Daily Camera? Yahoo!?), I would have no problem with it.

But that’s not what is going on. What’s going on is that, on a daily basis, the comments and posts from staff members are filled with unnecessary snark. I can be as scathing as anyone, but what started out as a harmless level of criticism has turned into a pall over the site.

All I’m asking is that we talk about the team for one day without putting in a comment about how badly the media treats the team.

It was one of many reasons why the Broncos were picked to finish poorly. I find it a little bit interesting that you chose to focus on such a minor detail.

And, like I said above: People picking a 3-13 finish (or whatever they predicted) wasn’t done out of malice. It’s not like any journalists sat at home trying to concoct reasons to write something negative about the team. Frankly, I’m guessing the bulk of the media would prefer to write positive things all of the time as that would make their job s’much easier.

Unsubstantiated, baseless, broad, generalized attack on an entire group of professionals? What news do they ‘redact’?

Journalists DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH REVENUE. THEY MERELY REPORT THE NEWS.

I’ve spent more time in newsrooms than you have. I promise you that I have never encountered a journalist with a vendetta.

They hate predictions, too, by-and-large. But people want them. The readership demands them.

As far as the opinion, I suppose that’s an interesting query. Should newspapers have columnists? You’re essentially arguing that they should not. I happen to think columnists are an important part of a newsroom, but perhaps folks should examine that. I wonder, however, if that would be the opinion if Kiszla had the same “support the team no matter what” philosophy that is expressed here. I happen to think that attitude is more dangerous than criticism.