What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Is a Denver vs Seattle Super Bowl inevitable? (1 Viewer)

Crrently the Saints are 15th in PPG. So I would say no. That could change.
I am going by what they do year in and year out, 3 games is too small of a sample size. Talk to me after 8 games and if they are still middle of the pack then I will concede.
Fair enough, but you can't say they are elite this season 3 games in. Maybe things will change. :shrug:
Did the Miami game help any? Now the Saints rank 3rd in total offense; Brees is about 35 yards passing behind Peyton Manning. The defense is 6th in yards allowed, 5th in PPG, 2nd in TO ratio (after Sea). Is it a stats thing or can we agree they belong in the conversation.

 
Denver only by five, I am honestly surprised.

ETA: Saints scares me...but not in Seattle.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Crrently the Saints are 15th in PPG. So I would say no. That could change.
I am going by what they do year in and year out, 3 games is too small of a sample size. Talk to me after 8 games and if they are still middle of the pack then I will concede.
Fair enough, but you can't say they are elite this season 3 games in. Maybe things will change. :shrug:
Why not? Theyve looked every bit as dominant as Seattle thus far. Your bait is stinky.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just FYI:

"Jacksonville is the worst NFL team I have ever seen,” says Golden Nugget bookmaker Aaron Kessler. Not many people in Vegas disagree. Nine-point underdogs at home last week against the Colts, the Jags were supported by an extremely positive trend: Home-team underdogs of more than eight points had covered 23 of 25 against the spread. The public didn’t care about that, fading Jacksonville with both fists, and Jacksonville didn’t come close to covering, resulting in the biggest win of the day for players, as reported by BetOnline.ag.As much as bettors hate Jacksonville, they love Denver. These two play next week, and with early spreads in the 27-point range, the Broncos have a chance to be the biggest favorite in NFL history. Against Philadelphia, Denver garnered 71 percent of the bets (according to our ticket count tracking tool at Pregame.com), and their cover was another win for the bettors. "We got destroyed on this game. Lost not only on the side and total for the game, but also lost big on the first half and second half side and total," said Mike Perry from Sportsbook.ag.

Seattle is another favorite of the average bettor. Their comeback win and cover was another loser for the books, with 79 percent of the money bet on this game at Mike Perry’s shop backing the Seahawks. With Denver and Seattle on a Super Bowl collision course, many have asked which team would be favored. The consensus Vegas opinion is that Denver on a neutral field would be favored by five points, which equates to over a touchdown at home. Surprisingly, the Broncos would be a small favorite, even in Seattle.
Wow, interesting info RN!

First, I find it fascinating for a Vegas bookmaker to flat out state that Jacksonville is the worst NFL team he has ever seen. That confirms that what we are seeing is historic. They could eclipse the '76 Bucs as the pinnacle of ineptitude (I don't think the 0-16 Lions can hold a candle to the '76 Bucs in this regard). This is also making me feel pretty good about my St. Louis DEF play this weekend.

Second, the hypothetical Denver/Seattle spread is very interesting. All I know is given Seattle and 5 points, I would mortgage the house, the cars, the farm...everything I can and lay it on Seattle. Manning and Denver may be tearing it up against league doormats right now, but there's no way they should be giving 5 points against a team that can actually cover receivers and put pressure on Old Man Cletus. Not to mention the pressure of the postseason itself...Manning hasn't exactly shown that he's Joe Cool when history is on the line.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just FYI:

"Jacksonville is the worst NFL team I have ever seen,” says Golden Nugget bookmaker Aaron Kessler. Not many people in Vegas disagree. Nine-point underdogs at home last week against the Colts, the Jags were supported by an extremely positive trend: Home-team underdogs of more than eight points had covered 23 of 25 against the spread. The public didn’t care about that, fading Jacksonville with both fists, and Jacksonville didn’t come close to covering, resulting in the biggest win of the day for players, as reported by BetOnline.ag.As much as bettors hate Jacksonville, they love Denver. These two play next week, and with early spreads in the 27-point range, the Broncos have a chance to be the biggest favorite in NFL history. Against Philadelphia, Denver garnered 71 percent of the bets (according to our ticket count tracking tool at Pregame.com), and their cover was another win for the bettors. "We got destroyed on this game. Lost not only on the side and total for the game, but also lost big on the first half and second half side and total," said Mike Perry from Sportsbook.ag.

Seattle is another favorite of the average bettor. Their comeback win and cover was another loser for the books, with 79 percent of the money bet on this game at Mike Perry’s shop backing the Seahawks. With Denver and Seattle on a Super Bowl collision course, many have asked which team would be favored. The consensus Vegas opinion is that Denver on a neutral field would be favored by five points, which equates to over a touchdown at home. Surprisingly, the Broncos would be a small favorite, even in Seattle.
Wow, interesting info RN!

First, I find it fascinating for a Vegas bookmaker to flat out state that Jacksonville is the worst NFL team he has ever seen. That confirms that what we are seeing is historic. They could eclipse the '76 Bucs as the pinnacle of ineptitude (I don't think the 0-16 Lions can hold a candle to the '76 Bucs in this regard). This is also making me feel pretty good about my St. Louis DEF play this weekend.

Second, the hypothetical Denver/Seattle spread is very interesting. All I know is given Seattle and 5 points, I would mortgage the house, the cars, the farm...everything I can and lay it on Seattle. Manning and Denver may be tearing it up against league doormats right now, but there's no way they should be giving 5 points against a team that can actually cover receivers and put pressure on Old Man Cletus. Not to mention the pressure of the postseason itself...Manning hasn't exactly shown that he's Joe Cool when history is on the line.
Yeah, those Baltimore Ravens haven't done anything for years. . . . Oh wait.

 
Wow, interesting info RN!

Manning and Denver may be tearing it up against league doormats right now, but there's no way they should be giving 5 points against a team that can actually cover receivers and put pressure on Old Man Cletus.
Wait... the combined record of Seattle opponents is 5-10 so far this year. Denver's are 4-12. Except Denver has been treating their "doormats" like...well, doormats. They've scored 49, 41, 37 & 52. That 49 was on the Ravens' Defense. The Ravens D is ranked middle of the pack so far this year, but that's not fair, because they played Denver. Denver put 510 yards on them. Take away that game and the Ravens are averaging 291 yards a game, good for top 5 in the league.

I'm not saying Seattle wouldn't give them a good game - and even have a chance to win - but if you want to put everything you have on Seattle and 5 points, good luck with that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Also, I really like the Saints.
This, The only reason the Saints are at 3 instead of 2 is because of how bad a season they had last year but the fact is they handled that situation about as good as any NFL team would have. Previous to that year they were in the playoffs every year and won the Super Bowl in 2009. They have a ton of post season experience. They are really not that bad a road team either under Sean Payton. 38-18 record on the road. The playoff loss to the Seahawks 2 years ago was more to do with injuries than being on the road . They had just played a Brutal division game and had no RB's and guys out on defense and if you remember the Saints were still in command of that game but let it get away from them on that Lynch beast mode run. This is a very different Saints squad than that one because of what they are doing on defense right now. If they stay healthy they will be a force at home or on the road in the playoffs. I do think this Saints team will need to do better on the offensive line opening up the running game and protecting Drew Brees. He makes them look far better than they really are.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It was inevitable for the Colts to go to the Superbowl during Manning's (then) record-setting 49 TD season. He led the Colts to three points in New England. Of course, that was a road game outdoors. But Manning plays his home games outdoors now, so the cold could be an issue.

It was inevitable for the Colts to go to the Superbowl in 2005 when they started 13-0. The Colts lost their first playoff game despite incredible luck - most notably, when the refs overturned an interception on instant replay, but after the game admitted that that was a mistake, and when Jerome Bettis was putting the game away late in the fourth and fumbled on the goal line. This was a home game for the Colts, too.

It was inevitable for the Colts to go to the Superbowl in 2009, when the Colts started out 14-0. And they did go to the Superbowl, where Manning threw a game ending interception that was returned for a touchdown.

It was inevitable for the Broncos to go to the Superbowl in 2012, when the Broncos reeled off 11 straight wins to end the season and had home field advantage throughout the playoffs. But in a home game outdoors, Manning threw a game ending interception in overtime and left the Ravens a short field to hit their game winning field goal.

I don't know how you guys continue to be fooled by this. Every year, it's inevitable that Manning's going to lead his team to the playoffs. In truth, Manning's only ring was won when the Colts defense dragged him kicking and screaming through the playoffs, as he threw 3 TDs and 7 INTs during the run.

 
LMAO at Den being potential 5 point favorite over Sea in the SB. In New York, harsh elements in Feb. I'll take Sea +5, easily.

Again, the goal of Vegas is to get even money on both sides. That is baked into that number. They know Den has a much larger fan base and national recognition. That doesn't mean they actually see Den as a 5 point better team.

 
Here's the thing. It's only week 5 of the season. So much will change between now and just the playoffs that nobody has a clue who is going to the Super Bowl. Den and Sea are hot right now. Lots of teams start the season hot and fade. Lots of teams start the season slow and just improve week after week. Some teams, like Pitt a few years ago and Giants, just get hot at the right time and go on sick playoff runs.

A team like Cinci could peak at the right time. Everyone is throwing dirt on their grave right now but they are still a team flush with talent that, if hot, could make a big run. Really, that just comes down to one guy getting hot, Dalton.

 
Both teams looking very human today.

Might not be inevitable
Oh noes! What are all the non-Seahawks fans that are predicting this going to do?!

I'm much happier losing to Luck in his house than Romo. Good thing this isn't college and a loss or two doesn't exclude you from the championship.

 
The Saints look like the team to beat in the NFC, not the Hawks. Their offense is amazing as usual, but they actually have a somewhat formidable defense. If they met in the playoffs, I like the home team.

 
mad sweeney said:
Raider Nation said:
Both teams looking very human today.

Might not be inevitable
Oh noes! What are all the non-Seahawks fans that are predicting this going to do?!

I'm much happier losing to Luck in his house than Romo. Good thing this isn't college and a loss or two doesn't exclude you from the championship.
who lost to Romo?

 
Seahawks need a QB and they could give the Saints a run. They have a game manager. Once they fall behind the only way they win is if the defense bails them out.

 
Crrently the Saints are 15th in PPG. So I would say no. That could change.
I am going by what they do year in and year out, 3 games is too small of a sample size. Talk to me after 8 games and if they are still middle of the pack then I will concede.
Fair enough, but you can't say they are elite this season 3 games in. Maybe things will change. :shrug:
Did the Miami game help any? Now the Saints rank 3rd in total offense; Brees is about 35 yards passing behind Peyton Manning. The defense is 6th in yards allowed, 5th in PPG, 2nd in TO ratio (after Sea). Is it a stats thing or can we agree they belong in the conversation.
Still too early. Any team can be beaten. Brees and company look good but what happens when they lose a game, then all the Seahawk homers will be going nuts, then Denver goes down and all the Colts, Patriots, and Chiefs homers go nuts. After 8 games lets see where we are, after 4 or 5 games we can knock out some teams, but we need a few more games to determine the favorites.

 
Seahawks need a QB and they could give the Saints a run. They have a game manager. Once they fall behind the only way they win is if the defense bails them out.
:lmao:
He is a really inaccurate passer.
Yeah, he was inaccurate a record 26 times last season.

He's been on the run a lot this season and hasn't had his WRs give him much help. I expect him to improve on that. However, his use of his legs were as instrumental as the D in last week's comeback. Calling him a game manager is what people who read the box score might say, but not people that watch the game.

 
This is the biggest thing that happened in Chicago today. The Saints did not turn the ball over. Not once. They also managed to create a couple nice turnovers in their favor. The Saints went into a hostile road environment against a tough NFC opponent who they have not beaten in Soldier field since 2000 . 13 years ago. Chicago Defense had been averaging 3 take aways per game until today. I think the Saints could do fine on the road in Seattle and steal a victory as hard and impossible as Seahawk fans think that may be. If you are counting on Defense and turnovers to win it it could go down just like today did.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Seahawks need a QB and they could give the Saints a run. They have a game manager. Once they fall behind the only way they win is if the defense bails them out.
:lmao:
He is a really inaccurate passer.
Yeah, he was inaccurate a record 26 times last season.

He's been on the run a lot this season and hasn't had his WRs give him much help. I expect him to improve on that. However, his use of his legs were as instrumental as the D in last week's comeback. Calling him a game manager is what people who read the box score might say, but not people that watch the game.
He's got an intangible "winner" quality...something you can't teach. I love watching him play...one of my favorites in the NFL.

 
This is the biggest thing that happened in Chicago today. The Saints did not turn the ball over. Not once. They also managed to create a couple nice turnovers in their favor. The Saints went into a hostile road environment against a tough NFC opponent who they have not beaten in Soldier field since 2000 . 13 years ago. Chicago Defense had been averaging 3 take aways per game until today. I think the Saints could do fine on the road in Seattle and steal a victory as hard and impossible as Seahawk fans think that may be. If you are counting on Defense and turnovers to win it it could go down just like today did.
Soldier Field might be hostile but there's still a pretty big gap between it and CenturyLink.

 
The Saints look like the team to beat in the NFC, not the Hawks. Their offense is amazing as usual, but they actually have a somewhat formidable defense. If they met in the playoffs, I like the home team.
Which is why the week 13 Monday night game in Seattle could be huge. Saints will have to conquer the Seahawks there just to get homefield. I think if any offense can find a way to attack that defense it's the Saints, but I'm nervous as heck.

 
This is the biggest thing that happened in Chicago today. The Saints did not turn the ball over. Not once. They also managed to create a couple nice turnovers in their favor. The Saints went into a hostile road environment against a tough NFC opponent who they have not beaten in Soldier field since 2000 . 13 years ago. Chicago Defense had been averaging 3 take aways per game until today. I think the Saints could do fine on the road in Seattle and steal a victory as hard and impossible as Seahawk fans think that may be. If you are counting on Defense and turnovers to win it it could go down just like today did.
Soldier Field might be hostile but there's still a pretty big gap between it and CenturyLink.
The Saints are familiar with that environment as well aren't they? They held the lead for most of that playoff game didn't they? They were too beat up at RB, too beat up in the secondary, and even if they had beaten the Seahawks they would have been destroyed the next week against the Bears. Those were the days when a banged up Reggie Bush and newly acquired Joique Bell were worthless in the backfield. I expect that if both teams stay healthy it will be a good game but not one that would be won with certainty by the Seahawks.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thank god the Saints v. Seahawks game is in Seattle this year. That should have huge homefield implications.

Seattle's next 4 games:

Home vs Tennessee

Away @ Arizona(TNF)

Away @ St. Louis (MNF)

Home vs TB

Seattle should be 8-1 going into the Atlanta game.

 
This is the biggest thing that happened in Chicago today. The Saints did not turn the ball over. Not once. They also managed to create a couple nice turnovers in their favor. The Saints went into a hostile road environment against a tough NFC opponent who they have not beaten in Soldier field since 2000 . 13 years ago. Chicago Defense had been averaging 3 take aways per game until today. I think the Saints could do fine on the road in Seattle and steal a victory as hard and impossible as Seahawk fans think that may be. If you are counting on Defense and turnovers to win it it could go down just like today did.
Soldier Field might be hostile but there's still a pretty big gap between it and CenturyLink.
The Saints are familiar with that environment as well aren't they? They held the lead for most of that playoff game didn't they? They were too beat up at RB, too beat up in the secondary, and even if they had beaten the Seahawks they would have been destroyed the next week against the Bears. Those were the days when a banged up Reggie Bush and newly acquired Joique Bell were worthless in the backfield. I expect that if both teams stay healthy it will be a good game but not one that would be won with certainty by the Seahawks.
How many players on that Saints team are on this year's Saints team? I can tell you that the two Seahawks teams are NIGHT and DAY different.

 
We are talking about the Seahawks or the home field advantage of CenturyLink?

I think the fact that you are better works against you actually. The Saints will not overlook you for sure.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
We are talking about the Seahawks or the home field advantage of CenturyLink?

I think the fact that you are better works against you actually. The Saints will not overlook you for sure.
That's rich. For a little perspective, Russell Wilson was still at NC State(before he went to Wisconsin), Sherman was still at Stanford, Browner was in the CFL, Chancellor hadn't been a starter yet, Thomas was a rookie, etc, etc. Oh yeah, the shell of Matt Hasselbeck was also the starter. Comparing the two teams is completely useless.

 
We are talking about the Seahawks or the home field advantage of CenturyLink?

I think the fact that you are better works against you actually. The Saints will not overlook you for sure.
Seattle doesn't really seem that elite at this point. If the Saints can get a run game going, there'll be no team that can hang with them in the NFC.

 
We are talking about the Seahawks or the home field advantage of CenturyLink?

I think the fact that you are better works against you actually. The Saints will not overlook you for sure.
That's rich. For a little perspective, Russell Wilson was still at NC State(before he went to Wisconsin), Sherman was still at Stanford, Browner was in the CFL, Chancellor hadn't been a starter yet, Thomas was a rookie, etc, etc. Oh yeah, the shell of Matt Hasselbeck was also the starter. Comparing the two teams is completely useless.
Look read my post. There is no argument about that. My point is the Centurylink is not going to give that "Better" team that big of an advantage. The Saints are actually pretty damn good on the road. If You score more than 20 points you stand a chance at winning if you don't you will lose. No one has scored 20 on the Saints this season. Not yet.

 
I think the Colts showed again today, just like the Falcons did last January, that, as good as Seattle's D is, if you have two really good WRs and a top 10 QB, they can be had. Just not in Seattle. On the road or a neutral field is a different story.

In the NFC, the Seahawks and Saints look like the class of it thus far, and that NO at Seattle game could well decide home field (since I don't see more than 2 or 3 losses for each, assuming NO's defense is as for real as they have looked).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I realize that half of you are probably running shtick, but that still leaves a lot of people who don't seem to realize that we're less than a third of the way through the season.

 
I think the Colts showed again today, just like the Falcons did last January, that, as good as Seattle's D is, if you have two really good WRs and a top 10 QB, they can be had. Just not in Seattle. On the road or a neutral field is a different story.
Well, unfortunately, there are no neutral field games (aka Super Bowls) to speak of, but they're 5-2 in their past 7 road games. Not bad.

The parameters are tough to define, but my guess is that most teams playing on the road vs. a top 10 QB with 2 "really good" WR's will have a losing record.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top