It can work in certain scenarios but this is not one of them. 

This is a very very common rookie mistake.I wrote a blog about that here in BP here.

I posted the article not because I agree with it, but more so because it's not particularly common to find an article exclusively about Denver in the NYT.  

Any possible pitfalls that aren't common sense or not figured out until in the thick of it.

What is the worst case scenario I'm looking at if property goes to 100% vacant?

I will give you the caveat that I have enough cash and Heloc money leveraged against my other properties to buy more than one place at a time so I'm not dependent on selling a reno in order to buy another but being more particular about the deals you do and making money by leveraging all of the advantages including lower taxes has always been a successful strategy.Both scenarios can be winners but you have to decide where on the experience/risk scale you are and I'm a believer in pounding out all the take home money you can get.  

Example Temple scenarios: 1990 yr built, 90k price home, 1100sqft, 3/2/1, $1000-1200 rent. 1955 yr built, 50k, 800 sqft, 2/1, $650 rent. 

It is on the southeast side near Xavier and Surrey Commons.

This is the scenario you market for when wanting to buy with a lease/option or subject to.I live in Clarkston and some 3 yrs ago moved marketing to less contested counties 1 hrs drive outside Atlanta but in towns with growing jobs.  

i would say above 1000 is very common.