Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Myth of Bronco's Youth

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Myth of Bronco's Youth

    Youth can be NO excuse . . .

    http://www.rockymountainnews.com/new...-with-broncos/

    Forgiveness is in the waiting room. Understanding is buying the next round. Blame has no ticket on the big Bronco bus.

    However this all turns out, and it should be fine if mediocrity is fine, the Broncos' grasp will have exceeded their reach. They are a young team.

    They are an injured team. They are a work in progress.

    They are all there, backs waiting for the pat. Good job. Considering.

    This would be if they beat Buffalo on Sunday or San Diego loses in Tampa or, probably the most valuable experience of all, they must meet the Chargers for final validation, or if they blow the finish, still it will seem enough.

    The beauty of low expectations is that when expectations are reached they appear so much higher, so when Mike Shanahan assured the faithful that the Broncos would reach the playoffs, it seemed bold and brave, when it should have been taken for granted.

    This is the same coach who, when dumping Jake Plummer, concluded that only the Super Bowl should be the goal and any player not equipped to help the Broncos reach that goal might as well be in Idaho.

    And yet sniffing around the lowest nonwild-card spot is reason for a marching band and balloons.

    As a season unfurled, made of parts luck, deeds and misdeeds, there was more the notion that it matters less now than tomorrow. This is what a young team does, plays well, plays poorly, takes the blows, gets the scars, and one day soon it will turn into the New England Patriots.

    The Broncos have the quarterback, they have the coach, they have the ambition. It has to happen.

    And if it does not, they are young, aren't they? So young that they cannot be trusted to know the score of the San Diego game before they play their own against the Bills.

    Shhhh. Let's wait until they are nestled all snug in their beds before we put the presents under the tree.

    Ah, the young have time. They are young.

    Well, the important ones are. Jay Cutler. Brandon Marshall. Eddie Royal. Ryan Clady. Those are the young good ones. Enough to build on.

    These are the ones who represent the Broncos as young when in truth the Broncos are more or less the same age as any other NFL team, older than Oakland, Kansas City and San Diego in fact. The Broncos are typical, a bunch of up-and-comers and a lot of soon-to-be-goners, wannabes and used-to-bes.

    For some reason, unlike sitcoms and gymnastics, youth is not considered an advantage in professional football.

    NFL teams average around 27 years old with four years' experience. The Broncos are just a little under that at 26.9 with 3.8 experience, according to ProFootball-Reference.com. They are tied for 13th with Houston and Cincinnati among the youngest teams and about the same in experience.

    Research reveals that the Broncos have been the older and more experienced team in nine of their games so far and will be again against Buffalo.

    A possible first opponent in the playoffs, Indianapolis, is the youngest team of all in the NFL at 25.7 average age and 2.6 years of experience.

    This suggests that youth as an excuse is a bit misleading, although all those Broncos injuries are very much not misleading at all.

    Younger teams than the Broncos, Dallas for one, will not be allowed to use age as an excuse (read that as Wade Phillips' job is on the line) and Atlanta basks in its youth, while Miami considers itself not surprising but ready.

    The first time the Broncos won the Super Bowl, they were 28.3 with five years experience, implying possibly that this team is now two years away from that, except John Elway was 37 and Cutler would be only 27, if a year older than Elway's initial Super Bowl.

    At the Broncos' first Super Bowl appearance under Elway, when he was 26, the squad averaged 26.5 years with 3.8 years of experience, a team that was even younger than this one.

    The assumption that youth needs only experience assumes that the youth is good youth. Whereas with the Broncos, as the box emptied, the organization was forced to fill it with bubble wrap. And some of that is gone, too, leaving only the bubble without the wrap.

    Not to pick on either of the Joshes, Barrett or Bell, even if everyone else is.
    uhhh,this ain't Lou from Aurora

  • #2
    I haven't even looked at who wrote the article, but can I take a stab and say it's Lincicome?
    sigpic

    Comment


    • #3
      This a great example of why Newspapers are going bankrupt across America. LOL

      Comment


      • #4
        Lincicome did write it. Facts are facts. I know, I know, people HATE the facts . . . The reason newspapers are going under is because the general population is only semi-literate.
        uhhh,this ain't Lou from Aurora

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by xxxlibertine View Post
          Lincicome did write it. Facts are facts. I know, I know, people HATE the facts . . . The reason newspapers are going under is because the general population is only semi-literate.
          You mean the "facts" that he wanted to pull up to support his view while conveniently leaving out ones that don't? Like every writer?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by jhns View Post
            You mean the "facts" that he wanted to pull up to support his view while conveniently leaving out ones that don't? Like every writer?
            aint that the truth.

            i'd like to know the average age of the starters on our team compared to the average age of the starters on everyone other team. i bet we're in the top 5. especially when champ, dj, webster, and mccree were not playing for the better part of the season.

            on the other hand, he does have a good point. you shouldn't use age as an excuse. you really shouldn't use anything as an excuse. but from a fan's point of view i guess we like to justify things.
            Pro McD

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by scotto291 View Post
              aint that the truth.

              i'd like to know the average age of the starters on our team compared to the average age of the starters on everyone other team. i bet we're in the top 5.
              Didn't you READ the article?

              "They are tied for 13th with Houston and Cincinnati among the youngest teams and about the same in experience."
              uhhh,this ain't Lou from Aurora

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by xxxlibertine View Post
                Lincicome did write it. Facts are facts. I know, I know, people HATE the facts . . . The reason newspapers are going under is because the general population is only semi-literate.
                I am not renewing my newspaper subscription for the simple fact that it is just as easy to read the news "today" on the internet, as it is to read it tomorrow in the paper, and not have to get ink on my fingers in the process. I have been literate for 30 years now......

                Skill position is crucial for experience, which makes the argument of the Colts youth a little bogus IMO because they have a lot of experience there with Manning, Wayne, Harrison, and Clark.

                I agree to a point though. Most of the older players on the team are on the defensive side of the ball (Ekuban, Bailey, Bly, Manuel, McCree). Thomas, Dumerville, Bell (by default) and now Barrett are the only starters on defense who have less than 4 years of experience, but on the offensive side of the ball only Hamilton and Graham have more than 3 years of experience.

                This leads me to a question. Is the writer slanting the statistics to make a biased statement? What I mean by that is the average age of the team reflective of the entire roster, or is it reflective of the age of the guys actually on the field?
                sigpic
                Thank you to my grandfather jetrazor for being a veteran of the armed forces!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Al Wilson 4 Mayor View Post
                  I am not renewing my newspaper subscription for the simple fact that it is just as easy to read the news "today" on the internet, as it is to read it tomorrow in the paper, and not have to get ink on my fingers in the process. I have been literate for 30 years now......

                  Skill position is crucial for experience, which makes the argument of the Colts youth a little bogus IMO because they have a lot of experience there with Manning, Wayne, Harrison, and Clark.

                  I agree to a point though. Most of the older players on the team are on the defensive side of the ball (Ekuban, Bailey, Bly, Manuel, McCree). Thomas, Dumerville, Bell (by default) and now Barrett are the only starters on defense who have less than 4 years of experience, but on the offensive side of the ball only Hamilton and Graham have more than 3 years of experience.

                  This leads me to a question. Is the writer slanting the statistics to make a biased statement? What I mean by that is the average age of the team reflective of the entire roster, or is it reflective of the age of the guys actually on the field?
                  Yes, your last point is a good one. What is fairly interesting is that the unit which is performing near expectations (the offense) is the younger of the two squads.
                  uhhh,this ain't Lou from Aurora

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by xxxlibertine View Post
                    Yes, your last point is a good one. What is fairly interesting is that the unit which is performing near expectations (the offense) is the younger of the two squads.
                    I know, I thought of that as well. I added the numbers, (assuming I am correct about their ages), and the average age I come up with on the offensive side of the ball is 25.6.

                    I kind of think saying they are so successful is not quite accurate because of turnovers. We are the only team in the league with a winning record that has a negative turnover ratio on the season. When you look back at all of their losses, only the recent game against Carolina was there not a gross imbalance of turnovers, which is largely due to inexperience on the offensive side of the ball.
                    sigpic
                    Thank you to my grandfather jetrazor for being a veteran of the armed forces!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by xxxlibertine View Post
                      Didn't you READ the article?

                      "They are tied for 13th with Houston and Cincinnati among the youngest teams and about the same in experience."
                      haha...yes i READ the article. i said starters, not team. to clarify, i am curious as to the age of just our starters and not our entire team.


                      "Research reveals that the Broncos have been the older and more experienced team in nine of their games so far and will be again against Buffalo."

                      i aint buyin it. champ, websters, mccree, and dj arent playing for most of the season. of course i am sure they are counted into his statistics. a perfect example of how its easy to skew the facts.
                      Pro McD

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by mojo0730 View Post
                        I haven't even looked at who wrote the article, but can I take a stab and say it's Lincicome?


                        I thought the same thing just looking at the title.

                        Overall age vs age of starters/key positions are 2 completely different things.

                        Sure there are some vets, but look at the skill positions and starters. Plus, many vets have been injured.

                        Lincicome is about the worst writer ever. He can't say one nice thing about anyone!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by xxxlibertine View Post
                          Didn't you READ the article?

                          "They are tied for 13th with Houston and Cincinnati among the youngest teams and about the same in experience."
                          Counting a bunch of irrelevant and special teams players doesn't give you the entire picture.

                          Here are some other facts:

                          -Denver has the youngest starting lineup in the NFL on the offensive side of the ball with an age of 25. And that's inflated by Daniel Graham, Ben Hamilton, and Casey Wiegman, who are the only ones above 30.

                          -You will not find another team in the NFL that has as much of a base core in youth as the Broncos at key starting positions.

                          -Denver has played without key veterans older players Champ Bailey, DJ Williams, and Boss Bailey the majority of the season.

                          -Inserted into the lineup are young pups Josh Barrett, Wesley Woodyard, Josh Bell, and even Spencer Larson at times. That's over a quarter of the starting defensive at 23 and younger that doesn't show the true measure of just how young and inexperienced this team is.

                          -You probably could, but I bet you would be hard pressed to find a younger defensive unit in the NFL than Denver when we are having to force in our younger players.

                          -There are no exceptions and our defense is bad, but it's in no way an established unit, and far from it.

                          -I would even take a step further and dare someone to find a younger team filled with starters on both sides of the ball, not to mention there probably isn't a younger starting K/P combo in the NFL, along with a special teams unit that's filled with a plethora of rookies.
                          Last edited by silkamilkamonic; 12-19-2008, 11:33 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by silkamilkamonic View Post

                            -I would even take a step further and dare someone to find a younger team filled with starters on both sides of the ball, not to mention there probably isn't a younger starting K/P combo in the NFL, along with a special teams unit that's filled with a plethora of rookies.
                            I have done this before and the only one that compares is the Falcons.

                            You have to word it and look at it differently though. There are younger teams than us and the Falcons right now. Us and the Falcons are the only two filled with youth in key areas that are actually winning any games though.

                            I actually don't think I ever broke down Indy. Just from looking at their starting skill positions and such, I thought they where much older than the article gives them credit for. Although they don't compare because they have good veteran pass rushers and a safety on defense as well as most every skill position on offense is a veteran player.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              what a horrible article. like others have said, why does it matter the age of all the backups. look at the age of all the starters you dimwit
                              sig pic removed by mod staff.
                              we do not allow site advertising.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X