jurb26
Footballguy
Umm, in NE he is.... Look it up.P.S. Bellichick isn't undefeated in the playoffs. Look it up.

Umm, in NE he is.... Look it up.P.S. Bellichick isn't undefeated in the playoffs. Look it up.
Well, missing the playoffs the year after you win the Super Bowl goes a long way in keeping that "undefeated in the playoffs" streak intact.Umm, in NE he is.... Look it up.P.S. Bellichick isn't undefeated in the playoffs. Look it up.Anyway, I'm glad you spew of overconfidence in your team. I hope Den gets to play NE and not my Steelers. Best of luck to you.
I don't know why people like you continuously try to argue with SSOG. IMO he is extremely knowledgeable and insightful, and I've never seen him formulate a poor argument. I'm sorry but he has already won this argument and I'm sure most people reading this thread realize that. And while he is a Denver homer, he has always been extremely reallistic in his expectations for the Broncos.Umm, in NE he is.... Look it up.P.S. Bellichick isn't undefeated in the playoffs. Look it up.Anyway, I'm glad you spew of overconfidence in your team. I hope Den gets to play NE and not my Steelers. Best of luck to you.
If it was just resting the players I agree with you, but it is a lot more than that. With Dungy MIA (for well deserved reasons) I just have a feeling that it will impact them more than anyone is thinking. It is a shame cause I think it would of been the Colts year, but I just don't see how a team can forget about what happen to its coach.People worried about the Colts resting players and being able to "turn it on" when they have to need to look no further than their preseason games.
In the preseason, Indy is as vanilla as you can get. They rest players like E. James and look mediocre and they came out of the gates flying.
The Colts will dominate, absolutely dominate whoever their first opponent is at home in the playoffs.
The Colts have gone in two weeks to looking unbeatable, sitting on top of the world to a team that's now being allowed to find "angles" or reasons to win.
This hype of them not being the best team or these "other" teams are now better is only going to fuel their fire more.
I for one will Hammer the Colts that first week they play. No way any team in the playoffs, NE, CINCi, or Pitt will stop them from scoring 30 points that first week.
I don't know why people like you continuously try to argue with SSOG. IMO he is extremely knowledgeable and insightful, and I've never seen him formulate a poor argument. I'm sorry but he has already won this argument and I'm sure most people reading this thread realize that. And while he is a Denver homer, he has always been extremely reallistic in his expectations for the Broncos.Umm, in NE he is.... Look it up.P.S. Bellichick isn't undefeated in the playoffs. Look it up.Anyway, I'm glad you spew of overconfidence in your team. I hope Den gets to play NE and not my Steelers. Best of luck to you.
So, let' see... you have differing opinions and you are both defending those opinions. Sounds like an argument to me.I don't know why people like you continuously try to argue with SSOG. IMO he is extremely knowledgeable and insightful, and I've never seen him formulate a poor argument. I'm sorry but he has already won this argument and I'm sure most people reading this thread realize that. And while he is a Denver homer, he has always been extremely reallistic in his expectations for the Broncos.Umm, in NE he is.... Look it up.P.S. Bellichick isn't undefeated in the playoffs. Look it up.Anyway, I'm glad you spew of overconfidence in your team. I hope Den gets to play NE and not my Steelers. Best of luck to you.
I didn't know we were even in an arguement. I happen to have the opinion that NE is a scary team that shouldn't be overlooked. He happens to think they are all washed up and finished. Nobody is right or wrong untill the playoffs actually start. Den homers...
![]()
I don't see how there is an arguement. I never said that NE should be the favorite or that they would win. Only that they are a dangerous team and one people will likely not forget. He seems intent on proving that they are not as good as years past. I never claimed they were, only that they should not be overlooked THIS PLAYOFF SEASON, which both of you seem content to do as Den fans. It's OK, they aren't as good as last year so worry about Indy.So, let' see... you have differing opinions and you are both defending those opinions. Sounds like an argument to me.
Why shouldn't I spew overconfidence in my team? Denver was 6-2 against teams in the playoff races. That, my friend, is a statistic that inspires confidence.For comparison purposes, Indy is 5-2, although that includes the meaningless loss to Seattle. KC is 4-4, Pitt is 2-4, and New England was 2-5. You call it OVERconfidence. I call it CONFIDENCE, knowing that there's no way we will face another team with a comparable record against the playoff contenders until at least the AFC Championship game.Umm, in NE he is.... Look it up.P.S. Bellichick isn't undefeated in the playoffs. Look it up.Anyway, I'm glad you spew of overconfidence in your team. I hope Den gets to play NE and not my Steelers. Best of luck to you.
I know why people continuously argue with me. It because... and brace yourself here, because this may come as a shock... sometimes even *I* am wrong. Seriously, it's happened at least twice in my life, that I know of. Shocking, I know.I don't know why people like you continuously try to argue with SSOG. IMO he is extremely knowledgeable and insightful, and I've never seen him formulate a poor argument. I'm sorry but he has already won this argument and I'm sure most people reading this thread realize that. And while he is a Denver homer, he has always been extremely reallistic in his expectations for the Broncos.
Yes sir, I am. Very observant.By the way, SSOG, I've always wondered this: are you Kibbles from FO? I assume you are because I've seen you pimp FO a few times on these boards and Kibbles over there has been pimping MA as long as you have.
Just curious. I don't post there but I lingered there for a while (and still check it out occasionally).
Yeah, like when you took exception to my post saying that Brian Griese's never played in a playoff game.I know why people continuously argue with me. It because... and brace yourself here, because this may come as a shock... sometimes even *I* am wrong. Seriously, it's happened at least twice in my life, that I know of. Shocking, I know.![]()
Yeah, that was one of them. The other was when I once thought that Curt Warner and Kurt Warner were the same guy.Yeah, like when you took exception to my post saying that Brian Griese's never played in a playoff game.I know why people continuously argue with me. It because... and brace yourself here, because this may come as a shock... sometimes even *I* am wrong. Seriously, it's happened at least twice in my life, that I know of. Shocking, I know.![]()
(Just knockin' ya down a notch!
In general I really like your stuff!
)
And then you look at 2005, they see the Browns blow up their DL and so they raid it and buy a bunch of guys low.Comeback player of the year: Neil Smith, defensive end, Broncos.Smith had an off year for Kansas City in 1996, which allowed Denver to get him as a free agent for a relatively paltry $1.5 million for one year. "All I know," says Broncos coach Mike Shanahan, "is that every time we played the Chiefs, even last year, he was the first guy we accounted for. If you don't block him, you've got no chance."
The reason Denver doesn't get the credit it deserves this year is because they have changed the way they win games. There is no flash, its just grindout football.
Denver is a very balanced team on defense and offense, it's not like before where they needed Jake to win games and score 30+ points. They only scored 30 plus points 3 times this year. They are a complete ball control offense. Look at the time of possession in all their wins and they've dominated it. Their defense has the bend, not break mentality. They've had a good rush defense for a couple of years now, and those numbers with their passing defense are misleading. They do have a pretty decent secondary as well.
If you look at what they have done this year, it's pretty simple to see is that they've went to an offense/defense that they believe can beat Indy. Ball control which leads to the clock being chewed up, pressure from the front 4, while dropping everybody else back. Drafting 3 corners, 2 of which have played decent, and the jury still out on 1. The key for Denver is if they can get Darrent Williams back and when.
All this talk about NE, well I think its pointless right now since NE is losing and so is Cinncy, so Cinncy will be slotted at #3. But, NE has not had the best record against Denver the past 3 years. They are 1-2 since 2002. They lost this year to Denver in Mile High, Denver beat them in New England in 2002, and New England beat them on a last second touchdown in 2003 in Mile High. For those of you that remember, that 2003 game was the infamous intentional safety by Belichek which put the score at 26-23 Denver w/ 2:49 left in the game. New England drove in the last minute to get the game winning touchdown, 30-26. Personally, as good as New England's track record is, going into the thin air of Mile High with a fully rested Broncos squad, I don't think Broncos fan should worry too much. Not that it's a gimmie game, but I wouldn't worry much more than playing any other playoff team.
I disagree. I don't think Denver has changed its PHILOSOPHY one little bit during Shanahan's entire tenure. Their philosophy has always been to run the ball, to stop the run, to jump out to an early lead, and then hold on to it. No team has lead more after one quarter than Shanahan's Broncos. No team has run for more yards, attempts, or yards per attempt than Shanahan's Broncos. Denver's always had a good rushing defense, and Denver's always been up with Pitt and Balt battling for the best Time of Possession margin. This year they finished top 10 in offensive yards and points, like they have for 4 straight seasons. They were top 10 in scoring defense for the third straight year, although their yardage defense has fallen a lot (which has a lot to do with the fact that they've faced more passing attempts than any other team in the league by a HUGE margin- 33 attempts more than the second place NYG).I think there is one big difference between this year's Denver team and the Denver teams of years past. Turnovers. This is the first time in something like 4 years that Denver has a positive TO Differential. Denver has 26 INTs this year after getting 30 in the last 3 years combined. I think that huge glut in turnovers accounts almost entirely for the difference between 10-6 and 13-3. That's just my take on it.The reason Denver doesn't get the credit it deserves this year is because they have changed the way they win games. There is no flash, its just grindout football.
Denver is a very balanced team on defense and offense, it's not like before where they needed Jake to win games and score 30+ points. They only scored 30 plus points 3 times this year. They are a complete ball control offense. Look at the time of possession in all their wins and they've dominated it. Their defense has the bend, not break mentality. They've had a good rush defense for a couple of years now, and those numbers with their passing defense are misleading. They do have a pretty decent secondary as well.
Although I do agree that the turnover ratio is a huge difference. You have to look at why that is. The offense is forcing teams to throw more since they jump to the lead early. The defense has been a lot more aggressive since the Browncos joined. As much as people look at stats and see they don't have many sacks, you have to watch the games and see that the do get pressure on the QB, which leads to bad throws. Also, look at the offense as well, Plummer is not forced to win the games, which in years past he has been. I'm not saying its a major change in philosophy, but there has been a slight difference. As a Broncos fan who hasn't missed a game since the early 90's, I can see it watching them as I'm sure other Bronco fans would vouch for that. This team is definitely different from Griese/Plummer led teams in the past.I disagree. I don't think Denver has changed its PHILOSOPHY one little bit during Shanahan's entire tenure. Their philosophy has always been to run the ball, to stop the run, to jump out to an early lead, and then hold on to it. No team has lead more after one quarter than Shanahan's Broncos. No team has run for more yards, attempts, or yards per attempt than Shanahan's Broncos. Denver's always had a good rushing defense, and Denver's always been up with Pitt and Balt battling for the best Time of Possession margin. This year they finished top 10 in offensive yards and points, like they have for 4 straight seasons. They were top 10 in scoring defense for the third straight year, although their yardage defense has fallen a lot (which has a lot to do with the fact that they've faced more passing attempts than any other team in the league by a HUGE margin- 33 attempts more than the second place NYG).I think there is one big difference between this year's Denver team and the Denver teams of years past. Turnovers. This is the first time in something like 4 years that Denver has a positive TO Differential. Denver has 26 INTs this year after getting 30 in the last 3 years combined. I think that huge glut in turnovers accounts almost entirely for the difference between 10-6 and 13-3. That's just my take on it.The reason Denver doesn't get the credit it deserves this year is because they have changed the way they win games. There is no flash, its just grindout football.
Denver is a very balanced team on defense and offense, it's not like before where they needed Jake to win games and score 30+ points. They only scored 30 plus points 3 times this year. They are a complete ball control offense. Look at the time of possession in all their wins and they've dominated it. Their defense has the bend, not break mentality. They've had a good rush defense for a couple of years now, and those numbers with their passing defense are misleading. They do have a pretty decent secondary as well.
Also, I agree with Ghost Rider that it's a shame Shanny doesn't get more love. Not just for coach of the year honors. When listing the best coaches in the NFL, he rarely makes the top 10 and frequently misses out on the top 16 entirely. That's a joke.
Also, it's time people started easing up on Mike Shanahan the general manager. I don't think you can give Shanny Coach of the Year over Lovie, but I *DEFINITELY* think he deserves Executive of the Year. Courtney Brown, Gerard Warren, Ebenezer Ekuban, Michael Myers, Ian Gold, Curome Cox, Darrent Williams, Dominique Foxworth, Ron Dayne, resigning Hamilton, restructuring Pryce, trading Middlebrooks (who was worthless- he even got cut by the 49ers!) for Engleberger, a very solid player, the trade of draft picks with Washington (which, if it didn't turn out to be quite as big of a steal, was still a great trade that left Denver as the only team in the NFL with *2* first round picks this year)... Shanahan the GM had an UNBELIEVABLE season this year.
I'm afraid I just have a difference of opinion with you. It's okay, it's not the end of the world, I'm just going to continue to disagree. The only difference between this team and last year's is turnovers, which really isn't a philosophical difference in my mind as much as it is a difference of execution.I'm not saying that your opinion has no merit, I'm just saying that I subscribe to a different school of thought.Although I do agree that the turnover ratio is a huge difference. You have to look at why that is. The offense is forcing teams to throw more since they jump to the lead early. The defense has been a lot more aggressive since the Browncos joined. As much as people look at stats and see they don't have many sacks, you have to watch the games and see that the do get pressure on the QB, which leads to bad throws. Also, look at the offense as well, Plummer is not forced to win the games, which in years past he has been. I'm not saying its a major change in philosophy, but there has been a slight difference. As a Broncos fan who hasn't missed a game since the early 90's, I can see it watching them as I'm sure other Bronco fans would vouch for that. This team is definitely different from Griese/Plummer led teams in the past.
Which is exaclty why the spread in that game will be set near 2. Perception is reality when it comes to setting the line.Denver is being overlooked by a large degree right now. Reading through posts here and seeing predictions made on television, it seems like many are picking Pittsburgh to win this weekend, giving us Indy vs Pit and Den vs. NE in the divisional round and it almost seems like a foregone conclusion to most that Indy and NE will then play in the conference championship. I guess everyone is forgetting about the 13-3 Broncos already, eh? What is funny is everyone will rip Shanahan and the Broncos if they lose in the second round, but if they win, no one will give them a chance in the AFC championship game. Shanahan needs to use the disrespect card like he did in Super Bowl XXXII (when few gave them a chance to beat the Packers).
When Arizona was 6-7 and needed to win out to make the Playoffs, they won out under Jake the Snake. They also got their only playoff victory since 1964. I'd call that a pretty big win.The fact that Denver vs. New England is even considered a tossup shows some serious disrespect. Denver is 7-3 against teams with winning records. New England is 3-6. Denver was 13-3 in the toughest division in football (and they played the NFC East, the second toughest division in football, too). New England was 10-6 in the weakest division in football. Denver WHUPPED UP on New England, going up 28-3 before slipping into prevent defense and killing clock. Denver is 8-0 at home. Denver will be coming off of a bye-week, playing at home in a round of the playoffs were the home team wins 80% of the time. The fact that, despite all of that, many people consider the game a virtual "pick 'em" is a joke.Denver looks really good to me, especially the D.
If it were to be Denver/NE I'd have to call it a toss up. I think it would come down to Jake vs. the NE defense. To me those are the most questionable parts of the respective teams now that we're in the playoffs. Don't get me wrong, I think Jake's a good qb, he just hasn't really won a big one here in the pros yet - ergo questionable in a situation where I think he will need to win one.
Both those spreads would be much higher.....you're underestimating home field advantage in the playoffs and the extra week of rest. I predict that if NE and Cincy win, Vegas opens up the lines atNot sure why everyone is saying NE in the second round. As they stand I think it will be NE and Indy then Cincy vs Denver.
Which I would put Indy a +3 over NE... although I have concerns that Indy will not make it out of the second round no matter who they face. Due to the Dungy issue I just don't see how he and the the team can put that behind them. IMO
And I would put Denver a +2 1/2 over Cincy
This would be a classic I think. But I think Denver being home and have prevous playoffs games under the belt will be to much for the Bengals.
I think it's better to be overlooked at this point. Let the Patriots fans take the "no respect" press for the 5th year in a row, while the Broncos lay low.An interesting, but ultimately meaningless stat -- Denver's 0-2 in the playoffs after a 13-3 season.When Arizona was 6-7 and needed to win out to make the Playoffs, they won out under Jake the Snake. They also got their only playoff victory since 1964. I'd call that a pretty big win.The fact that Denver vs. New England is even considered a tossup shows some serious disrespect. Denver is 7-3 against teams with winning records. New England is 3-6. Denver was 13-3 in the toughest division in football (and they played the NFC East, the second toughest division in football, too). New England was 10-6 in the weakest division in football. Denver WHUPPED UP on New England, going up 28-3 before slipping into prevent defense and killing clock. Denver is 8-0 at home. Denver will be coming off of a bye-week, playing at home in a round of the playoffs were the home team wins 80% of the time. The fact that, despite all of that, many people consider the game a virtual "pick 'em" is a joke.Denver looks really good to me, especially the D.
If it were to be Denver/NE I'd have to call it a toss up. I think it would come down to Jake vs. the NE defense. To me those are the most questionable parts of the respective teams now that we're in the playoffs. Don't get me wrong, I think Jake's a good qb, he just hasn't really won a big one here in the pros yet - ergo questionable in a situation where I think he will need to win one.
I don't see those AZ games as being on the same level as playing NE in the conference semis - so we're in disagreement there.I think you're somewhat guilty of discounting NE in the same way others are discounting Denver. The raw numbers definitely don't tell the whole NE story this year, particularly because they're playing at a very high level right now when it matters the most. Then you throw in the intangibles which I think favor NE and it's not hard to see a toss up. More importantly the toss up is not an indictment of Denver as not being that good, it's a credit to NE for being better than how they've been perceived for much of the season.When Arizona was 6-7 and needed to win out to make the Playoffs, they won out under Jake the Snake. They also got their only playoff victory since 1964. I'd call that a pretty big win.The fact that Denver vs. New England is even considered a tossup shows some serious disrespect. Denver is 7-3 against teams with winning records. New England is 3-6. Denver was 13-3 in the toughest division in football (and they played the NFC East, the second toughest division in football, too). New England was 10-6 in the weakest division in football. Denver WHUPPED UP on New England, going up 28-3 before slipping into prevent defense and killing clock. Denver is 8-0 at home. Denver will be coming off of a bye-week, playing at home in a round of the playoffs were the home team wins 80% of the time. The fact that, despite all of that, many people consider the game a virtual "pick 'em" is a joke.Denver looks really good to me, especially the D.
If it were to be Denver/NE I'd have to call it a toss up. I think it would come down to Jake vs. the NE defense. To me those are the most questionable parts of the respective teams now that we're in the playoffs. Don't get me wrong, I think Jake's a good qb, he just hasn't really won a big one here in the pros yet - ergo questionable in a situation where I think he will need to win one.
If you really had to go back 10 years to find a good example, then I'm not so sure about that.The Broncos have always been smart at buying players low.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/events/19...S/envelope.html
And then you look at 2005, they see the Browns blow up their DL and so they raid it and buy a bunch of guys low.Comeback player of the year: Neil Smith, defensive end, Broncos.
Smith had an off year for Kansas City in 1996, which allowed Denver to get him as a free agent for a relatively paltry $1.5 million for one year. "All I know," says Broncos coach Mike Shanahan, "is that every time we played the Chiefs, even last year, he was the first guy we accounted for. If you don't block him, you've got no chance."
Even if you say that New England is DRASTICALLY better than their season numbers suggest... no team in the entire NFL was better at home this season than Denver, AND 80% of home teams win in the second round. Saying that NE and Denver would be a tossup is essentially saying that New England is a DRASTICALLY better team than Denver.I get it, New England is better than they looked over the whole season. Great. Home teams win 80% of the time in the divisional round, and Denver is undefeated at home. Advantage: Denver, in a big way.I don't see those AZ games as being on the same level as playing NE in the conference semis - so we're in disagreement there.
I think you're somewhat guilty of discounting NE in the same way others are discounting Denver. The raw numbers definitely don't tell the whole NE story this year, particularly because they're playing at a very high level right now when it matters the most. Then you throw in the intangibles which I think favor NE and it's not hard to see a toss up. More importantly the toss up is not an indictment of Denver as not being that good, it's a credit to NE for being better than how they've been perceived for much of the season.
Don't discount Denver's chances of getting it done in Indy so easily. Remember the end of 2003, when Denver dominated Indy *IN INDY* in a game that was incredibly meaningful for both teams (Indy was fighting for a first round bye, at the time)?Denver played so well that people were comparing QUENTIN GRIFFIN to Barry Sanders.Denver Broncos' path to the super bowl =
Cincy beats pitt, goes to Denver and loses
NE beats JAX, goes to Indy and wins.
NE in Den for AFC Champ - Den to the Bowl.
OR
Pitt beats Cin, upsets Indy
NE/Jax to Den in round 2, lose to Den
Den hosts Pitt and goes to Bowl
Denver going into Indy = Indy to the Bowl.
I respect your points, but I see it a bit differently. I think the home team winning 80% of the time may have something to do with the fact that the team with home field advantage is moderately to "drastically" better than the other team - they usually have home field because they have a better record, which implies a better team. Right now, I don't think Denver is drastically or even moderately better than NE. Also if there's one team in the NFL, maybe the history of the NFL, that doesn't care where it's playing it would be this 2 time defending NE squad. Playing on the road gives no disadvantage to them - you can throw that stat right out the window. So to me it looks like a toss up between two evenly matched teams.If anything I'll be rooting for the Broncos, 1st because they're from the AFC west, and second because I'm tired of the Patriots' reign. It should be a great game, very evenly matched, if it happens - there's no disrespect in saying that for either team.Even if you say that New England is DRASTICALLY better than their season numbers suggest... no team in the entire NFL was better at home this season than Denver, AND 80% of home teams win in the second round. Saying that NE and Denver would be a tossup is essentially saying that New England is a DRASTICALLY better team than Denver.I get it, New England is better than they looked over the whole season. Great. Home teams win 80% of the time in the divisional round, and Denver is undefeated at home. Advantage: Denver, in a big way.
Call me a homer, but I do not see how anyone can say that New England is as good as Denver right now. Beating up on the Jets twice, the Bills and the Bucs in Foxboro (beating a Florida team in the cold in New England in December is a given) was nice, but not enough to impress me to the point where they are scaring me like they are scaring everyone else. You know what happened the last time they played a team with a good offense? They got smacked around! The Chiefs moved the ball on them all day and beat them pretty good before a few late NE scores made the final score a bit more respectable. That game was only six weeks ago. Again, look at who they have beaten since and instead of freaking out over the fact that the all-mighty Patriots are the big and bad bully again, think about the fact that they still have not faired well this season against good teams, especially on the road. When thinking of it that way, they don't look quite so scary, do they?I respect your points, but I see it a bit differently. I think the home team winning 80% of the time may have something to do with the fact that the team with home field advantage is moderately to "drastically" better than the other team - they usually have home field because they have a better record, which implies a better team. Right now, I don't think Denver is drastically or even moderately better than NE.
Playing on the road gives a disadvantage to EVERYONE. The crowd isn't so loud that the HOME team can't hear the calls in the huddle. The HOME team doesn't have to play with one fewer practice because they have to travel thousands of miles. the HOME team isn't dealing with an unfamiliar environment- ESPECIALLY in Denver, where the air is so much thinner. The HOME head coach doesn't have to worry if the jumbotron is going to show replays of controversial plays (to help him decide whether to challenge).Every road team plays at a disadvantage. Some might win DESPITE that disadvantage, but the fact exists that the disadvantage IS THERE, so if all other things are considered equal, if two completely evenly matched teams play, the advantage lies with the home team. END OF STORY. Even Vegas knows this, awarding 3 points for HFA, no matter what- even in games involving New England.Also if there's one team in the NFL, maybe the history of the NFL, that doesn't care where it's playing it would be this 2 time defending NE squad. Playing on the road gives no disadvantage to them - you can throw that stat right out the window.
OK, your a homer. What did that same KC O do to your precious Den D only FIVE weeks ago? What about the Balt game they should have lost at home? Fact is, Den has not beaten a playoff caliber team since week 7 and have struggled in every game vs teams with winning records since then as well. Their schedule has been just as easy as NEs down the stretch and maybe easier. At least NE has beaten TB, a playoff team in the final half of the year. Yet Den homers countinually try to dicredit anything NE has done due to poor competition late in the year. Heck, look at your teams schedule before casting those stones. Over the last 8 weeks of the year NEs opponents have a combined record of 55-73. NE went 6-2 (cashed in early vs Mia too) during that stretch beating TB the only playoff team either team beat during that time. Den over the last 8 weeks faced opponents with a 51-77 combined record. They too went 7-1 during that time but beat no playoff teams. Is it starting to set in now why some people may be under the impression that NE is playing as well as Den AT THIS POINT IN TIME?Call me a homer, but I do not see how anyone can say that New England is as good as Denver right now. Beating up on the Jets twice, the Bills and the Bucs in Foxboro (beating a Florida team in the cold in New England in December is a given) was nice, but not enough to impress me to the point where they are scaring me like they are scaring everyone else. You know what happened the last time they played a team with a good offense? They got smacked around! The Chiefs moved the ball on them all day and beat them pretty good before a few late NE scores made the final score a bit more respectable. That game was only six weeks ago. Again, look at who they have beaten since and instead of freaking out over the fact that the all-mighty Patriots are the big and bad bully again, think about the fact that they still have not faired well this season against good teams, especially on the road. When thinking of it that way, they don't look quite so scary, do they?
Denver had a bad 4th quarter against the Chiefs and Larry Johnson. Then again, no one has stopped Johnson since the beginning of November. I would call Dallas (despite tanking Sunday) and San Diego playoff-caliber teams (they are probably two of the three or four best teams not in the playoffs) and Denver won on the road against both in the last six weeks.OK, your a homer. What did that same KC O do to your precious Den D only FIVE weeks ago? What about the Balt game they should have lost at home? Fact is, Den has not beaten a playoff caliber team since week 7 and have struggled in every game vs teams with winning records since then as well. Their schedule has been just as easy as NEs down the stretch and maybe easier. At least NE has beaten TB, a playoff team in the final half of the year. Yet Den homers countinually try to dicredit anything NE has done due to poor competition late in the year. Heck, look at your teams schedule before casting those stones. Over the last 8 weeks of the year NEs opponents have a combined record of 55-73. NE went 6-2 (cashed in early vs Mia too) during that stretch beating TB the only playoff team either team beat during that time. Den over the last 8 weeks faced opponents with a 51-77 combined record. They too went 7-1 during that time but beat no playoff teams. Is it starting to set in now why some people may be under the impression that NE is playing as well as Den AT THIS POINT IN TIME?
No, not really. Try harder. Maybe next time.OK, your a homer. What did that same KC O do to your precious Den D only FIVE weeks ago? What about the Balt game they should have lost at home? Fact is, Den has not beaten a playoff caliber team since week 7 and have struggled in every game vs teams with winning records since then as well. Their schedule has been just as easy as NEs down the stretch and maybe easier. At least NE has beaten TB, a playoff team in the final half of the year. Yet Den homers countinually try to dicredit anything NE has done due to poor competition late in the year. Heck, look at your teams schedule before casting those stones. Over the last 8 weeks of the year NEs opponents have a combined record of 55-73. NE went 6-2 (cashed in early vs Mia too) during that stretch beating TB the only playoff team either team beat during that time. Den over the last 8 weeks faced opponents with a 51-77 combined record. They too went 7-1 during that time but beat no playoff teams. Is it starting to set in now why some people may be under the impression that NE is playing as well as Den AT THIS POINT IN TIME?Call me a homer, but I do not see how anyone can say that New England is as good as Denver right now. Beating up on the Jets twice, the Bills and the Bucs in Foxboro (beating a Florida team in the cold in New England in December is a given) was nice, but not enough to impress me to the point where they are scaring me like they are scaring everyone else. You know what happened the last time they played a team with a good offense? They got smacked around! The Chiefs moved the ball on them all day and beat them pretty good before a few late NE scores made the final score a bit more respectable. That game was only six weeks ago. Again, look at who they have beaten since and instead of freaking out over the fact that the all-mighty Patriots are the big and bad bully again, think about the fact that they still have not faired well this season against good teams, especially on the road. When thinking of it that way, they don't look quite so scary, do they?
I didn't expect it would.....No, not really. Try harder. Maybe next time.
Be careful what you wish for (NOT A BRONCOS FAN!!!!!!). Denver rolls NE at Denver. Book it.Do you hear the footsteps Den fans. When Pitt beats Cini tomarrow you will have a hot Pats team coming to town.![]()
Umm, I'm a Steeler fan that is what I WISH for.Be careful what you wish for (NOT A BRONCOS FAN!!!!!!). Denver rolls NE at Denver. Book it.Do you hear the footsteps Den fans. When Pitt beats Cini tomarrow you will have a hot Pats team coming to town.![]()
Gotcha.Umm, I'm a Steeler fan that is what I WISH for.Be careful what you wish for (NOT A BRONCOS FAN!!!!!!). Denver rolls NE at Denver. Book it.Do you hear the footsteps Den fans. When Pitt beats Cini tomarrow you will have a hot Pats team coming to town.![]()
![]()
I thought the Pats D looked very good. Created a 4 man rush and blitz very effectivly. Stopped the run and created big plays.If the Steelers win tomorrow, Denver should be able to roll over the Patriots if they play the way they played tonight.
Leftwich didn't look ready to lead a team in a playoff game tonight.
Bring 'em on.Do you hear the footsteps Den fans. When Pitt beats Cini tomarrow you will have a hot Pats team coming to town.![]()
Stopping the mediocre Jacksonville defense is one thing. Stopping the Broncos and their lethal rushing attack is another. And Steelers4Life is right. If NE plays like that next week, they don't have a prayer against Denver or Indy.I thought the Pats D looked very good. Created a 4 man rush and blitz very effectivly. Stopped the run and created big plays.If the Steelers win tomorrow, Denver should be able to roll over the Patriots if they play the way they played tonight.
Leftwich didn't look ready to lead a team in a playoff game tonight.
Well, I'll tell you what, if the 2004 New England Patriots show up to play the Denver Broncos, they'll probably be favored.
You want to know what ELSE the Patriots haven't done in the past 4 years? For one, they haven't sent a team to the playoffs that was worse than 6th in the NFL in points allowed. This season, they're 18th. They were also a combined 5-0 against Indy and Denver in 2003-2004, and a combined 0-2 against Indy and Denver in 2005.
Inconsistent.the fact ALSO remains that no team has a better record in weeks following the bye, since the bye was introduced, than the Denver Broncos.
Not at all inconsistant. I said if the 2004 Patriots showed up, they'd be favored. Unfortunately, the 2004 Patriots don't exist anymore. Now there's just the 2005 Patriots, which aren't anywhere NEAR as good as the 2004 version. As a result, the 2005 Patriots will be underdogs to Denver- as they should be, since Denver is a much better team than the 2005 Patriots, even if they're potentially worse than the 2004 Patriots.Well, I'll tell you what, if the 2004 New England Patriots show up to play the Denver Broncos, they'll probably be favored.You want to know what ELSE the Patriots haven't done in the past 4 years? For one, they haven't sent a team to the playoffs that was worse than 6th in the NFL in points allowed. This season, they're 18th. They were also a combined 5-0 against Indy and Denver in 2003-2004, and a combined 0-2 against Indy and Denver in 2005.Inconsistent.the fact ALSO remains that no team has a better record in weeks following the bye, since the bye was introduced, than the Denver Broncos.
Not at all inconsistant. I said if the 2004 Patriots showed up, they'd be favored. Unfortunately, the 2004 Patriots don't exist anymore. Now there's just the 2005 Patriots, which aren't anywhere NEAR as good as the 2004 version. As a result, the 2005 Patriots will be underdogs to Denver- as they should be, since Denver is a much better team than the 2005 Patriots, even if they're potentially worse than the 2004 Patriots.
I'm not saying that anyone suggested Denver wouldn't be favored, I'm only suggesting that general consensus is that New England will beat Denver if they play. Look at the playoff predictions thread, and you'll see that less than 50% of people predicted Denver would win their first playoff game.Not at all inconsistant. I said if the 2004 Patriots showed up, they'd be favored. Unfortunately, the 2004 Patriots don't exist anymore. Now there's just the 2005 Patriots, which aren't anywhere NEAR as good as the 2004 version. As a result, the 2005 Patriots will be underdogs to Denver- as they should be, since Denver is a much better team than the 2005 Patriots, even if they're potentially worse than the 2004 Patriots.BTW, who ever said Den wouldn't be favored? Why do you keep bringing that up? The only question is by HOW MUCH?
WHAT? Denver should ABSOLUTELY be favored. Denver is the 2nd best team in the entire NFL, Denver has the biggest HFA in the NFL, Denver is healthy (and NE is not), and home teams win 80% of the time in the second round. Lots of people would put money on Denver- at least the people who gamble because they like making money. Denver's got the third best odds of winning the SB, behind Indy and Seattle, so obviously Vegas likes them. And I think Vegas has demonstrated that they are far more knowledgeable than the average fan.I've made the offer SEVERAL times, but no one has taken me up on it yet... but I will make a sig-bet that New England loses next week, regardless of who they play.I don't know that Denver even *should* be favored. The Broncos play the Brady Patriots tougher than anyone, but who in Vegas is going to be putting money on Denver?