bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
Really,Does Denver have a chance?Good luck Broncos.
"IN BRADY WE TRUST"RAPTUREBroncos will win.
Did you watch the same game I did? The Jags never really mounted any substantial scoring chances and the Pats won by 25 points.How does that play into N.E. having no chance?Actually, after watching NE beat the Jags yesterday, if I have to pick a team that has little shot to win in that game, it's not the Broncos.
Im really not.#1 - I hate the Broncos being a bolts fan and all.Big time.Really,
Does Denver have a chance?
Good luck Broncos.
Of course. To quote King Yao:Of course they have a chance.
Not only that, but Denver should be favored.Many people are picking games these days who aren't in the business of handicapping or betting on games. These include: Journalists, TV analysts, radio talk show hosts, even other players.
One error or weakness that I see often is that too many people speak of sports in terms of absolutes. Stuff like: Texas has no chance against USC; New England will dominate and kill the Jaguars; the defenses are too good, no way this game goes over 70; etc. These people are clearly not gamblers. Texas was only a 7 point dog to USC, which usually translates to about a 25% chance of winning the game. 25% is not close to 0%. When a TV analyst says Texas has absolutely no chance, that should mean 0%. I understand that these guys are partially in the entertainment business, and need to be emphatic when choosing a winner. But the problem is that they speak in absolutes.
Sharp gamblers won't typically speak or write in absolutes. They know that even if they have an edge, it is small. Poker players know that 25% is still 10 outs of of 40 cards on the River. Poker players have gone through so many bad beats in their playing lifetimes that they almost expect the River card to spike them in the butt even if they are the 3-1 favorite. What's my point? I guess my point is that sharp gamblers (sports bettors and poker players) are head and shoulders above the media. Sharp gamblers doesn't mean all gamblers...there are a lot of idiot gamblers out there. The media sounds more like idiot gamblers than they do like sharp gamblers.
Hmmmm....
Better running game than Jax....check
Better passing game than Jax....check
Better defense?....actually I think this is pretty close
Home field advantage instead of in Foxborough....check
A week's rest....check
Yeah, I don't see anyway the Broncs keep it within 30, it should be over by the end of the first quarter
Wow they really shut down some powerhouse running teams there!Granted, Denver has a strong running game, but NE's defense has been stout against the run in the latter half of the season:
JAC - 87 yards
NYJ - 40 yards
TB - 30 yards
BUF - 14 yards
NYJ - 41 yards
NO - 87 yards
MIA - 77 yards
KC - 112 yards
That's only 488 rushing yards allowed in 8 games (61 yards per game). (I left off the last game against the Dolphins where the Pats were playing their 3rd string defense for much of the game.)
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. The team that lost to Denver early this year is not the same team that's playing next weekend.
There's Taylor, McGahee, Brown/RWilliams, CWilliams, and Larry Johnson. That's not all that bad in my book.Wow they really shut down some powerhouse running teams there!Granted, Denver has a strong running game, but NE's defense has been stout against the run in the latter half of the season:
JAC - 87 yards
NYJ - 40 yards
TB - 30 yards
BUF - 14 yards
NYJ - 41 yards
NO - 87 yards
MIA - 77 yards
KC - 112 yards
That's only 488 rushing yards allowed in 8 games (61 yards per game). (I left off the last game against the Dolphins where the Pats were playing their 3rd string defense for much of the game.)
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. The team that lost to Denver early this year is not the same team that's playing next weekend.
Larry Johnson's lowest rushing output of the second half of the season and held him to 3.8 YPC.Wow they really shut down some powerhouse running teams there!Granted, Denver has a strong running game, but NE's defense has been stout against the run in the latter half of the season:
JAC - 87 yards
NYJ - 40 yards
TB - 30 yards
BUF - 14 yards
NYJ - 41 yards
NO - 87 yards
MIA - 77 yards
KC - 112 yards
That's only 488 rushing yards allowed in 8 games (61 yards per game). (I left off the last game against the Dolphins where the Pats were playing their 3rd string defense for much of the game.)
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. The team that lost to Denver early this year is not the same team that's playing next weekend.
And they lost that game 26-16. New England has folded against any good offensive team they played this year. Everyone keeps saying how they are getting healthy now and going on a winning streak, but they didn't play anyone in that time either. They played their division. Wow they beat the Jets a couple times and the Bills.Jacksonville doesn't scare anyone on offense. Tampa had some good offensive fantasy players, but their offense when you compare it to a real offense was mediocre with a patchwork offensive line. Going into the playoffs, everyone was looking at Jacksonville being the weak playoff link and some were even saying that teams were trying to lose on purpose so they could play Jacksonville. Denver is a real test. They are well rounded and a team I consider a legit contender. If they beat Denver, I'll believe they are a better team than they were early in the season.Larry Johnson's lowest rushing output of the second half of the season and held him to 3.8 YPC.Wow they really shut down some powerhouse running teams there!Granted, Denver has a strong running game, but NE's defense has been stout against the run in the latter half of the season:
JAC - 87 yards
NYJ - 40 yards
TB - 30 yards
BUF - 14 yards
NYJ - 41 yards
NO - 87 yards
MIA - 77 yards
KC - 112 yards
That's only 488 rushing yards allowed in 8 games (61 yards per game). (I left off the last game against the Dolphins where the Pats were playing their 3rd string defense for much of the game.)
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. The team that lost to Denver early this year is not the same team that's playing next weekend.
I am not a fan of either team.My unbiased opinion...the Bronco's have not shot.Really,
Does Denver have a chance?
Good luck Broncos.
They are a better team than they were early in the season. You can see that in the way they're gelling on defense. Their secondary is still their weakness though and good passing teams can exploit that. Jacksonville obviously couldn't. Plummer's going to have to beat the Pats cause I really can't see Denver running well on them. The secondary is also Denver's weakness, so barring bad weather I see this being a Brady vs. Plummer show. I'll take Brady but Denver's homefield evens the odds IMO.And they lost that game 26-16. New England has folded against any good offensive team they played this year. Everyone keeps saying how they are getting healthy now and going on a winning streak, but they didn't play anyone in that time either. They played their division. Wow they beat the Jets a couple times and the Bills.Jacksonville doesn't scare anyone on offense. Tampa had some good offensive fantasy players, but their offense when you compare it to a real offense was mediocre with a patchwork offensive line. Going into the playoffs, everyone was looking at Jacksonville being the weak playoff link and some were even saying that teams were trying to lose on purpose so they could play Jacksonville. Denver is a real test. They are well rounded and a team I consider a legit contender. If they beat Denver, I'll believe they are a better team than they were early in the season.Larry Johnson's lowest rushing output of the second half of the season and held him to 3.8 YPC.Wow they really shut down some powerhouse running teams there!Granted, Denver has a strong running game, but NE's defense has been stout against the run in the latter half of the season:
JAC - 87 yards
NYJ - 40 yards
TB - 30 yards
BUF - 14 yards
NYJ - 41 yards
NO - 87 yards
MIA - 77 yards
KC - 112 yards
That's only 488 rushing yards allowed in 8 games (61 yards per game). (I left off the last game against the Dolphins where the Pats were playing their 3rd string defense for much of the game.)
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. The team that lost to Denver early this year is not the same team that's playing next weekend.
They only finished 2nd in the NFL in rushing this year.This might sound absurd - but Denver's RBBC running game does very little to excite me.
#1 Bolts colored glasses. #2 I'm sick of the Pats, too.#1 - I hate the Broncos being a bolts fan and all.
#2 - Im sick of the Pats run and I wanna see Peyton win it this year.
#3 - I think Denver has no shot. NE just has that look about them. Denver's had a great season, dominated the first game with NE, it wasnt as close as 28-20. I just think NE smokes 'em. Badly
Only one problem with your sig.AJ Smith will not wait around, if Marty does not produce next year, he's gone.#1 Bolts colored glasses. #2 I'm sick of the Pats, too.#1 - I hate the Broncos being a bolts fan and all.
#2 - Im sick of the Pats run and I wanna see Peyton win it this year.
#3 - I think Denver has no shot. NE just has that look about them. Denver's had a great season, dominated the first game with NE, it wasnt as close as 28-20. I just think NE smokes 'em. Badly
#3 See #1
#4 You will always cheer for other teams in the Super Bowl (a la #2 above) if your Bolts don't fire Schottenheimer.
#5 I hear the altitude makes the air so thin in the Mile High City that it is hard for Brady-Dangerfield to get much respect up there.
Did you watch the same game I did? The Jags never really mounted any substantial scoring chances and the Pats won by 25 points.How does that play into N.E. having no chance?Actually, after watching NE beat the Jags yesterday, if I have to pick a team that has little shot to win in that game, it's not the Broncos.
You might be a very smart person. I don't know. Regardless, I would suggest that, no matter HOW MUCH you know about football, the collective whole that is Vegas knows more. You might not think Denver has a chance, but Vegas thinks Denver has a better than 50% chance. Personally, I'm going to side with Vegas on this one.Really,
Does Denver have a chance?
Good luck Broncos.
I agree that "Brady" "Darrent Williams" and "Pick" all belong in the same sentence, but not in the order that you have them.Peyton Manning picked on Roc Alexander last season. Roc Alexander was Denver's #5 CB, behind Lenny Walls and the (since released) Willie Middlebrooks. He was also covering Reggie Wayne.This might sound absurd - but Denver's RBBC running game does very little to excite me. I also think that while their LBers are top tier in Denver - I think Brady might pick on Darrent Williams a bit and expose an overrated defense.
Close game - but I think we see Colts vs. New England in two weeks.
My only concern about D.Williams is if he's not strong enough on his leg, Givens is a physical receiver and has both a height and weight advantage over him.This season, Darrent Williams is the #2 CB in Denver, AHEAD of the (since released) Lenny Walls. He's much better than Roc Alexander, and David Givens is no Reggie Wayne.
EVERYONE has a height and weight advantage on Darrent Williams. That's why he fell so far. I think, as long as he's even 80-90%, it should be a great matchup.My only concern about D.Williams is if he's not strong enough on his leg, Givens is a physical receiver and has both a height and weight advantage over him.This season, Darrent Williams is the #2 CB in Denver, AHEAD of the (since released) Lenny Walls. He's much better than Roc Alexander, and David Givens is no Reggie Wayne.
I agree with Maurile, NE has no chance.Of course. To quote King Yao:Of course they have a chance.Not only that, but Denver should be favored.Many people are picking games these days who aren't in the business of handicapping or betting on games. These include: Journalists, TV analysts, radio talk show hosts, even other players.
One error or weakness that I see often is that too many people speak of sports in terms of absolutes. Stuff like: Texas has no chance against USC; New England will dominate and kill the Jaguars; the defenses are too good, no way this game goes over 70; etc. These people are clearly not gamblers. Texas was only a 7 point dog to USC, which usually translates to about a 25% chance of winning the game. 25% is not close to 0%. When a TV analyst says Texas has absolutely no chance, that should mean 0%. I understand that these guys are partially in the entertainment business, and need to be emphatic when choosing a winner. But the problem is that they speak in absolutes.
Sharp gamblers won't typically speak or write in absolutes. They know that even if they have an edge, it is small. Poker players know that 25% is still 10 outs of of 40 cards on the River. Poker players have gone through so many bad beats in their playing lifetimes that they almost expect the River card to spike them in the butt even if they are the 3-1 favorite. What's my point? I guess my point is that sharp gamblers (sports bettors and poker players) are head and shoulders above the media. Sharp gamblers doesn't mean all gamblers...there are a lot of idiot gamblers out there. The media sounds more like idiot gamblers than they do like sharp gamblers.
Alright, so the winner is up for debate....what about teasing the over to 36.5?I agree with Maurile, NE has no chance.Of course. To quote King Yao:Of course they have a chance.Not only that, but Denver should be favored.Many people are picking games these days who aren't in the business of handicapping or betting on games. These include: Journalists, TV analysts, radio talk show hosts, even other players.
One error or weakness that I see often is that too many people speak of sports in terms of absolutes. Stuff like: Texas has no chance against USC; New England will dominate and kill the Jaguars; the defenses are too good, no way this game goes over 70; etc. These people are clearly not gamblers. Texas was only a 7 point dog to USC, which usually translates to about a 25% chance of winning the game. 25% is not close to 0%. When a TV analyst says Texas has absolutely no chance, that should mean 0%. I understand that these guys are partially in the entertainment business, and need to be emphatic when choosing a winner. But the problem is that they speak in absolutes.
Sharp gamblers won't typically speak or write in absolutes. They know that even if they have an edge, it is small. Poker players know that 25% is still 10 outs of of 40 cards on the River. Poker players have gone through so many bad beats in their playing lifetimes that they almost expect the River card to spike them in the butt even if they are the 3-1 favorite. What's my point? I guess my point is that sharp gamblers (sports bettors and poker players) are head and shoulders above the media. Sharp gamblers doesn't mean all gamblers...there are a lot of idiot gamblers out there. The media sounds more like idiot gamblers than they do like sharp gamblers.
Like to see a Chargers fan that is ready for Schotty to hit the road, too! I'll change my sig to include "or tomorrow". I'm tellin' ya, the sooner the better.The whole Elway thing has been beat to death in many posts here - and I truly think it takes a complete team overall (ask Marino). It is true for now, but 13-3 is nice to see again. Let's see what happens next weekend.Only one problem with your sig.AJ Smith will not wait around, if Marty does not produce next year, he's gone.#1 Bolts colored glasses. #2 I'm sick of the Pats, too.#1 - I hate the Broncos being a bolts fan and all.
#2 - Im sick of the Pats run and I wanna see Peyton win it this year.
#3 - I think Denver has no shot. NE just has that look about them. Denver's had a great season, dominated the first game with NE, it wasnt as close as 28-20. I just think NE smokes 'em. Badly
#3 See #1
#4 You will always cheer for other teams in the Super Bowl (a la #2 above) if your Bolts don't fire Schottenheimer.
#5 I hear the altitude makes the air so thin in the Mile High City that it is hard for Brady-Dangerfield to get much respect up there.
Shanahan without Elway = ZERO playoffs wins. The streak continues.
Those numbers might be a bit misleading. Dunn only had 29 yards against Carolina in the season finally, that's a terrible game. Does it matter that he only carried the ball 7 times because of the score? If a team is behind, they sometimes abandon their running game. A more reliable stat, in my opinion, is yards per carry. In some of these games, the team never got into their running game. Jac - 5.11 ypcGranted, Denver has a strong running game, but NE's defense has been stout against the run in the latter half of the season:
JAC - 87 yards
NYJ - 40 yards
TB - 30 yards
BUF - 14 yards
NYJ - 41 yards
NO - 87 yards
MIA - 77 yards
KC - 112 yards
That's only 488 rushing yards allowed in 8 games (61 yards per game). (I left off the last game against the Dolphins where the Pats were playing their 3rd string defense for much of the game.)
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. The team that lost to Denver early this year is not the same team that's playing next weekend.
This is false. Vegas does not set the line based on how much they think a team is going to win by. They set a line based on trying to get equal action on both sides of the line. The line then moves depending upon which team is getting the most money placed on it.Ex. If a ton of people put the majority of the money on NE, the line will go down, despite nothing happening to shange their opinion of the outcome of the game. Conversely, if all the money went on Denver, they would become 4 or more point favorites.[
You might be a very smart person. I don't know. Regardless, I would suggest that, no matter HOW MUCH you know about football, the collective whole that is Vegas knows more. You might not think Denver has a chance, but Vegas thinks Denver has a better than 50% chance. Personally, I'm going to side with Vegas on this one.
Isn't this just a market reflection of the "collective whole" of Vegas? People "vote" with their dollars, and the line should be the equilibrium between the action on either side.At least that's how I've always viewed it.This is false. Vegas does not set the line based on how much they think a team is going to win by. They set a line based on trying to get equal action on both sides of the line. The line then moves depending upon which team is getting the most money placed on it.Ex. If a ton of people put the majority of the money on NE, the line will go down, despite nothing happening to shange their opinion of the outcome of the game. Conversely, if all the money went on Denver, they would become 4 or more point favorites.[
You might be a very smart person. I don't know. Regardless, I would suggest that, no matter HOW MUCH you know about football, the collective whole that is Vegas knows more. You might not think Denver has a chance, but Vegas thinks Denver has a better than 50% chance. Personally, I'm going to side with Vegas on this one.
Shanny's blocking angles +disciplined linemen are a definite challenge for BBs attack and have been in the past. Gibbs, Parcells and plenty others would run the same offensive play 100 times and not care. BB wasn't coaching the Pats then. He's too smart. I think you must expect him to figure out a way to beat what you've done over and over. Ya gotta go into a game with him with something new in your playbook and mix it up a bit. I hope Shanny does, he's certainly creative enough and the offensive mind to match BB's defensive mind but will he? or will he just be confident in what he's got?We need Bruschi. I'll be nervous about Denver's backs without himReally,Does Denver have a chance?
While I think the Pats will win, I think you're sniffing glue if you think it will be a double-digit victory.I am not a fan of either team.My unbiased opinion...the Bronco's have not shot.Really,
Does Denver have a chance?
Good luck Broncos.
The Pat's will win by double digits
Well, it's awfully hard to assail that kind of logic. Based upon your irrefutable facts, I've just put the deed for the house on NE.Im really not.
#1 - I hate the Broncos being a bolts fan and all.
#2 - Im sick of the Pats run and I wanna see Peyton win it this year.
#3 - I think Denver has no shot. NE just has that look about them. Denver's had a great season, dominated the first game with NE, it wasnt as close as 28-20. I just think NE smokes 'em. Badly