Denver Broncos News: Horse Tracks - 11/7/10

I don’t think either column is a truly fair assessment and Paige rarely steps out of the yellow journalism mode and doesn’t in this one.

Re: age. Klis makes a point we’ve raised here previously so he’s not telling us anything we don’t already know. There weren’t many cost-effective affordable UFAs available so it’s wasn’t a route we could have chosen. Moreover, Klis is offering advice that probably would have hurt us if we could have taken it. The high-priced FA strategy is often less effective than the lower priced FA strategy. We’ve filled more holes this way and haven’t had any busts. The crucial desideratum is the scope of needs. We needed to address multiple needs in the last two years rather than fill a single hole or two.

An added consideration that’s been given short shrift is the amount of change we’ve had. High roster turnover invariably leads to a lack of cohesion unless mitigated. We really didn’t have a choice, though. We had to replace the dismal 2008 defense. However, the scale of change put us in a vulnerable position and unable to withstand many problems, such as injuries.

Age hasn’t been our problem. Some of the most notable injuries have been to (usually more) experienced younger players — Dumervil, Ayers, Clady, Harris, Moreno, McBath. Injuries have been a big part of the problem for a team that’s still in the rebuilding mode and lacks the depth to weather all the injuries. Klis cites an obvious problem (call it the bi-modal age distribution) but he misleads somewhat in his analysis. It wasn’t because the strategy didn’t work but because we weren’t good enough to weather the storm of injuries.

I didn’t see much available UFA talent that would have solved our problems in the off-season and we don’t know that the few who were available wanted to sign with us, so we can bemoan the dearth of prime age talent on the roster but it gets old after a while and doesn’t really offer a solution to our problems.

Pardon me but I get pissed when I hear ‘insufficiency’ equated with ‘wrong.’ This rhetorical technique is used frequently in politics and it’s repulsive — IMO. In the political case (without citing particulars), one side can sabotage the solution to a problem and then claim that it’s doesn’t work, or even worse, that it’s part of the problem.

Re: Paige. Paige is merely employing the logical fallacy of equating team success with Orton’s success. Paige is bright enough to know the difference so his honesty/sincerity appears to be the problem.

Finally, Klis offers some true insight — although only accidentally — when he discusses K.C.

While Pioli was able to rebuild while enduring a 4-12 first season, McDaniels was asked to overhaul without losing grip of the Broncos’ perennial position as playoff contenders.

The Chiefs brought in a boatload of talent in the past few years, partly through the Jared Allen trade and partly through ‘merit,’ and they suffered because of it. The ‘instant gratification’ fans need to take a long look at the situations in K.C., Oakland and S.D. (at an earlier point) in order to understand how long it often takes before draft talent delivers on-the-field success.

What many fans are fearful of, presumably because of ego-driven needs, is that we’ll fall into true mediocrity. On the contrary, it wouldn’t hurt to have a top ten draft pick for once, for the obvious reason that a player of the caliber of Marcell Dareus is never going to fall out of the top ten picks. Many positions on our team have yet to be addressed in the short time span (2 draft cycles) that McX have had. It’s pretty hard to rebuild without the picks to do it with.