Thread: Broncos trying to sack Dumervil at negotiating table

Originally Posted by BigBroncLove

What a load of conjecture filled tripe by Kiszla. One could expect the nearly 99% speculation spouted out by Kiszla in this article from a casual fan or irritated forum poster but for a journalist to put to print an article filled with this... garbage is unprincipled and questionable IMO.

Simply put, I firmly believe writers working at this level of media are not supposed to make their living off of stories built on a house of supposition and hyperbole. To do so shows his quality as a journalist.

As for the story itself, few things in there I agree with at all, with the exception that some fans and likely players on the Broncos are starting to question if the Broncos have commitment issues. Personally, I find it rather reaffirming that I disagree with Kiszla on so many issues. Seeing my personal opinion of his intelligence and skill as writer for the Post I would find it much more disheartening to agree with an unskilled hack then the alternative...

I agree with you in large part, it is conjecture filled tripe, but I wouldn't go so far as to say unprincipled. My thoughts on Kiszla are that he's lazy, both in style and substance. I think most sportswriters are and it's easy to understand why. Year after year of writing variations on a theme can dull a man's talents. It is Kiszla's laziness, however, that betrays any sincerity in his subject and leaves the reader disaffected. He doesn't seem to believe half of what he says.

As far as the level of competence demanded by his employer and the larger media as a whole, never forget how they really make their living and that's by selling trucks and beer. Kiszla's job is to keep us coming back to read what he says, no matter how silly. If we're exposed to his sponsors, he's done his job. Not everyone need be after a Pulitzer.

Originally Posted by Slick

Dumb it down for me if I interpreted wrong. When I read your post I interpret, Pat won't pay Elvis because of past mistakes with Rice and Henry.

You're right, my original statement wasn't very clear.

Aside from the extremely high asking price, I don't think Pat has any problem at all paying Dumervil.

That said, I think it's pretty clear that Pat wanted someone who wouldn't blow through lots of money on character risks, which is kinda what Hildebrand was alluding to.

Separate issues though, as we're all aware that Dumervil is all class and about as diametrically opposed to Carter/IHOP/Henry/Rice as one could be.

Sorry, I stopped reading the article at this Point:

Kiszla

Originally Posted by BigBroncLove

What a load of conjecture filled tripe by Kiszla. One could expect the nearly 99% speculation spouted out by Kiszla in this article from a casual fan or irritated forum poster but for a journalist to put to print an article filled with this... garbage is unprincipled and questionable IMO.

Simply put, I firmly believe writers working at this level of media are not supposed to make their living off of stories built on a house of supposition and hyperbole. To do so shows his quality as a journalist.

As for the story itself, few things in there I agree with at all, with the exception that some fans and likely players on the Broncos are starting to question if the Broncos have commitment issues. Personally, I find it rather reaffirming that I disagree with Kiszla on so many issues. Seeing my personal opinion of his intelligence and skill as writer for the Post I would find it much more disheartening to agree with an unskilled hack then the alternative.

Give Doom his due, pay him his money, and put Kiszla's foot where it belongs... in his mouth.

uh, he is a columnist and is paid to compose opinion pieces full of conjecture. it's in the job requirements. but, keep in mind that these "lazy" journalists do spend time at team facilities talking to people off the record. they do make calls to people in the know. they take the temperature of situations and relay their findings/opinions. it's easy to blame the messenger, especially when you have no understanding of what they do.

having said that, kizla does rub people the wrong way.

Originally Posted by Jrwiz

Kiz is the second biggest hack the DP next to woody.

Nowhere is it been quoted by anyone reliable that DEN is not negioating in good faith.

If Doom does not show up at Training camp then he can be fined. Zhould bd fined because he signed the tender increasing his salary 6 fold.

Is that enough, or is 50 milion+ yo much.


Pat does not a cash flow issue anymore than any other team.

But neither does he have money to flush down the toilet on FA like in the past.

Was Josh hired to keep costs down like the NE team he came from.

I doubt that if that would have been the objective they would have hired Piaoli oe Billy whom ever was resposible for that type of stuff.

They have guaranteed TV money next year even IF they have NO or a short schedule.

Pat is responsible for putting a good product on the field but it does not mean he has to break the bank to do so.

Doom nice to have IF he is affordable

Kiz did say that at his size no on knows how much he can take and for how long.

That much I have been saying for along time along with him being a one trick pony.
Mobile Post via Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

Did you read the article? Kizla basically said everything you've been arguing about Doom for months.

Originally Posted by NightTrainLayne

Did you read the article? Kizla basically said everything you've been arguing about Doom for months.

would you want to admit it if you agreed with kiszla?

clearest imaginable proof that you're dead wrong. . . .

Originally Posted by NightTrainLayne

Did you read the article? Kizla basically said everything you've been arguing about Doom for months.

Dont worry, i laughed at that as well.

Originally Posted by GGMoogly

I agree with you in large part, it is conjecture filled tripe, but I wouldn't go so far as to say unprincipled. My thoughts on Kiszla are that he's lazy, both in style and substance. I think most sportswriters are and it's easy to understand why. Year after year of writing variations on a theme can dull a man's talents. It is Kiszla's laziness, however, that betrays any sincerity in his subject and leaves the reader disaffected. He doesn't seem to believe half of what he says.

As far as the level of competence demanded by his employer and the larger media as a whole, never forget how they really make their living and that's by selling trucks and beer. Kiszla's job is to keep us coming back to read what he says, no matter how silly. If we're exposed to his sponsors, he's done his job. Not everyone need be after a Pulitzer.

Well I don't keep coming back to his stories, just find them here, so can't say he's doing his job. At least for me.

I would disagree regarding unprincipled journalism. Journalist, generally taught in nearly every university, are expected to write, at the very least, upon a degree of truth. What I find in this story is complete and utter assumption. Nowhere near simple opinion built upon either widely held beliefs or concrete fact, as would be expected of a columnist, Kiszla in this case chooses to promote ideas that have no other foundation then abstract thought. This, as far as journalism is concerned, is exactly what their taught not to do. I know there is a very tangible difference between real world application and ideology of journalism, but some things are expected to hold true regardless. Much like a hippocratic oath. It is, as a result, unprincipled IMO. Against the larger unspoken code of promoting the truth. Not half-truths and innuendo, no matter how much you might think them to be truths.

As for the bleeds it leads, I agree. Controversy sells. I didn't implicitly attack the overall tactic, just his quality as a journalist. I also disagree that reporting year after year of sports can lead to poor journalism. There do remain journalists/columnists who continue to provide intriguing, thought provoking, and sensible stories year in and year out. Stories that sell just as well as they make the reader think. I don't get lazy in my job and I find no reason to not call a spade a spade, regardless of how identifiable his circumstances may seem.

Originally Posted by rationalfan

uh, he is a columnist and is paid to compose opinion pieces full of conjecture. it's in the job requirements. but, keep in mind that these "lazy" journalists do spend time at team facilities talking to people off the record. they do make calls to people in the know. they take the temperature of situations and relay their findings/opinions. it's easy to blame the messenger, especially when you have no understanding of what they do.

having said that, kizla does rub people the wrong way.

Columnists are expected to give their opinion based upon the facts of the situation. Not build opinions off of assumption of what the situation is. There is a distinct difference and given your omission of this, I would wager you have little understanding of what a columnist is supposed to do.

Originally Posted by BigBroncLove

...I would disagree regarding unprincipled journalism. Journalist, generally taught in nearly every university, are expected to write, at the very least, upon a degree of truth. What I find in this story is complete and utter assumption. Nowhere near simple opinion built upon either widely held beliefs or concrete fact, as would be expected of a columnist, Kiszla in this case chooses to promote ideas that have no other foundation then abstract thought. This, as far as journalism is concerned, is exactly what their taught not to do. I know there is a very tangible difference between real world application and ideology of journalism, but some things are expected to hold true regardless. Much like a hippocratic oath. It is, as a result, unprincipled IMO. Against the larger unspoken code of promoting the truth. Not half-truths and innuendo, no matter how much you might think them to be truths.

I think the definition of "principled" is broad enough that should one feel compelled to defend Kiszla (I certainly don't) as a columnist, one could do an adequate job. When he uses phrases like, "If you're asking me" and "it also seems fair to ask" it's obvious he's stating opinion. He also throws in a few facts so to say it's "complete and utter assumption" is to surrender to hyperbole.

Originally Posted by BigBroncLove

As for the bleeds it leads, I agree. Controversy sells. I didn't implicitly attack the overall tactic, just his quality as a journalist. I also disagree that reporting year after year of sports can lead to poor journalism. There do remain journalists/columnists who continue to provide intriguing, thought provoking, and sensible stories year in and year out. Stories that sell just as well as they make the reader think. I don't get lazy in my job and I find no reason to not call a spade a spade, regardless of how identifiable his circumstances may seem.

I agree with you on the quality of his work, but I stand by my statement; Rehashing the same story CAN lead to poor journalism, though it doesn't necessarily have to. You're right, there are journalists/columnists who don't succumb and do exemplary work. They are a joy to read. I salute you for not getting lazy in your job. I wish I could say the same thing, but I'm deeply flawed...

Originally Posted by GGMoogly

I think the definition of "principled" is broad enough that should one feel compelled to defend Kiszla (I certainly don't) as a columnist, one could do an adequate job. When he uses phrases like, "If you're asking me" and "it also seems fair to ask" it's obvious he's stating opinion. He also throws in a few facts so to say it's "complete and utter assumption" is to surrender to hyperbole.

The entire basis of the story though, which is what I speak to as his supposition, is that the Broncos are trying to nickle and dime Dumervil. I don't think anyone outside of the few parties that are part of the negotiation process between the Dumervil and Bronco camps, can choose to make claim to such knowledge without calling it assumption. Such as , "to the negotiating table where his employer is squeezing Dr. Doom for every last red cent". The foundation of his story is built upon the assumption that the Broncos are not negotiating in good faith. Beyond that it builds one assumption upon another, though I will agree that he at least frames some of his conjecture into well formed declarations that they are nothing but that.

Again, I said 99% was assumption. I apologize for the misconstruing in saying the story is "complete and utter" assumption. I meant that the foundation of his story was complete and utter guess work. In a climate the Broncos currently inhabit to be misleading in this sense is, again only IMO, unprincipled let alone the mere journalistic requirements I felt Kiszla obviously did not meet.

Originally Posted by Jrwiz

Kiz is the second biggest hack the DP next to woody.

Speaking of writers, my opinion of Woody is a little different. Though I don't always agree with what he's saying, I think he's very good at his craft. To do this type of writing takes a certain "diarrhea of the pen" - as Woody has called it - and it seems to flow smoother from him than most others. Sure, from time to time he phones it in, but when he's on a roll, I find his folksy approach charming.

Originally Posted by GGMoogly

Speaking of writers, my opinion of Woody is a little different. Though I don't always agree with what he's saying, I think he's very good at his craft. To do this type of writing takes a certain "diarrhea of the pen" - as Woody has called it - and it seems to flow smoother from him than most others. Sure, from time to time he phones it in, but when he's on a roll, I find his folksy approach charming.

Woody's isn't right many times maybe even most but sometimes he is.

Originally Posted by GGMoogly

Speaking of writers, my opinion of Woody is a little different. Though I don't always agree with what he's saying, I think he's very good at his craft. To do this type of writing takes a certain "diarrhea of the pen" - as Woody has called it - and it seems to flow smoother from him than most others. Sure, from time to time he phones it in, but when he's on a roll, I find his folksy approach charming.

well for the most part I find his lack of facts loose as a goose with diarrhea .

it is OK to have an opinion, but lets not confuse reality with what he writes for the most part.

Originally Posted by Jrwiz

well for the most part I find his lack of facts loose as a goose with diarrhea .

it is OK to have an opinion, but lets not confuse reality with what he writes for the most part.

Sure, what he says is always questionable, I just like how he says it.