Discussion in 'NFL Football Forum' started by SVN, Dec 26, 2012.
Why the Denver Broncos are Super Bowl favorites - NFL.com
Why the Broncos are Super Bowl favorites:
1. The Texans were favorites, and the Patriots spanked them.
2. The Patriots were favorites, and the 49ers spanked them.
3. The 49ers were favorites and the Seahawks spanked them.
So the Broncos are the Super Bowl favorite of the week. And Kansas City isn't likely to spank anyone, so NFL.com thinks they're safe for at least a week after the team that was publicly declared to be the "best team in the NFL" was soundly thrashed each of the past 2 weeks.
The San Diego freaking Chargers..... Philip Rivers gave the game away with 23 interceptions....
Right there is the reason why the Broncos ain't going to the Superbowl. Let alone win it.....
Their cakewalk for a schedule is about to get them off the high tree they're sitting on, blow out in their faces come playoffs time.
See that is the problem with the Broncos' hype. They haven't beaten anyone. It is currently unknown if they can beat an elite team or are they just an above average team that can beat on the bad teams they have faced including a mediocre Chargers that at best will finish 7-9. In their ten game winning streak, they have faced two teams that currently have more than 7 wins (and only the Saints have more than 6) and that is the free falling Ravens (who just beat the free falling Giants) and the streaky Bengals.
I also love how people are saying that the Pats can't win in Denver as if the Broncos will magically figure out the Pats' defense in Denver and not be able to figure it out in Foxboro. Gronk should be back and probably 100% (this extended rest probably has done wonders for his ankle and hip injuries) and the Broncos can't stop TEs up the seam. Del Rio has never figured out to ever stop Brady and the offense.
These articles are just filler crap. Last year, all the articles at this time were how the Packers were the favorites to win the Super Bowl because no one could stop their offense. Well, the "one and done" Giants (nearly everyone in the world expected them to lose to the Falcons in round one) did on a way to a Super Bowl win.
I wish people would stop obsessing on the Broncos. Many years, being the media favorites around this time is more of a curse than a blessing. Since 2005, five of the seven Super Bowl winners played Wild Card Weekend (Giants twice, Steelers in 2005 season, Packers, and Colts).
I am as big a Pats fan as anyone else, but I am no homer by any means. I speak as I see it.
I think this argument of soft schedule is a weak one. I am saying this because if everyone remembers correctly, last year people were saying the same things about our schedule at the end when we won like 9-10 straight heading into the playoffs at 13-3 and in that span didn't beat any winning team. However we deflected that question by saying "We can only beat teams we have on our schedule" and at the end we ended up in the Superbowl.
I would hate to see the Manning family anywhere near any Superbowl, but with playoffs you never know. You just need to be hot and get the right breaks (and with Peyton, you know he is gonna get some free PI calls every game) and voila, you are in the Superbowl. Green Bay did it couple of years back and this year I won't be surprised if someone else does it.
A picture is worth a thousand words....
Green - wins vs weak opponents
Red - losses (no further explanation needed)
Orange - wins vs. middle of the pack
Not the deepest of columns. Looks to me like Rosethal snuck into the bathroom at the family party and tapped out a few token lines on his iPad before, um, flushing.
The soft schedule argument isn't weak. The Pats' last year are one team and not a trend. Plus, a few things broke their way on the way to the Super Bowl They faced an 8-8 division winner in the first round and needs a blown chipshot field goal and a near TD that was stripped to beat the Ravens. Now the Broncos could just like the Pats last year and are good enough to hang with one good team on the way to the Super Bowl and have a few breaks go their way. But they could be paper tigers.
People act like the Pats last year faced the all the best teams in the playoffs to the Super Bowl and rolled on them. They faced only one great challenge in the Ravens and barely beat them. Now we need to using this team as proof that we should be afraid of the Broncos.
Guess what, I wouldn't be afraid of the 2011 Pats if that is who the the 2012 Pats had to go through. I think the 2012 Patriots are significantly better than the 2011 Pats and I would be far more afraid of the Broncos if this team was last year's team.
Regardless of headlines I don't like underselling myself on an opponent. It's easier for me to watch a game expecting an opponents best conceivable effort with anything less being a pleasant surprise.
I will be expecting Manning's best performance and hoping for his all time worst one as well.
Just my 2 cents...
Rob Ninkovich sack-fumble of Peyton - YouTube
At one point that was the score of the game, with Sterling Moore getting lit up like a Christmas tree by Demaryius Thomas all game.
As the Pats have proven both for "better" and for "worse" over the last 11 seasons, come the second Sunday in January all of this is just a pile of horse ****. It just plain doesn't matter whom you've beaten or who has beaten you. You win and play on or you lose and go home.
After getting extended to the final seconds of the game and almost into OT by a 2--13 team last week, let's just beat the next team we're playing, which, this week, will be another team playing its Super Bowl, in this case a Division rival trying to put up an 8--8 vs. a 7--9 season.
I think this is fair. The Broncos losses against tougher teams were at the beginning of the season, which don't really refect where they are now. The spanked the Ravens pretty soundly a couple weeks back--and right, the Ravens are not what they were, but they're still a division winner. There just aren't that many top teams out there to play in the first place.
I'd be confident with the Pats playing Denver in the playoffs (wherever the game's played) but the Broncos "not beating anybody" isn't really one of the reasons.
This Broncos won vs a weak schedule is so bogus. They Dominated the Ravens in their house. Now all of sudden because a little losing streak the Ravens are a weak team. I didn't see any other team do that.
I could be wrong, but it seems like many fans here look for any reason to discredit a team that is not named the Pats.
If you watch the games, you will see the Broncos are the real deal.
Please take off the homer glasses it's embarrasing.
i don't know if denver can cover the TE, in which we have two very good ones. Last time I don't think Hernandez even played. They had trouble with Gronk, Welker and Lloyd. Not much has changed with the Denver D. Patriots on the other hand have gotten Talib and Dennard as starters, and moved McCourty back to safety.
I wonder how well the Broncos will play in Denver if the weather is cold, with wind or snow. I just don't see Peyton Manning doing too well outdoors in bad weather. I think That could be a problem for the Broncos.
The Pats team that played last week would not beat the Broncos in any shape or form.
A Pats team that has Gronk,Spikes,Dennard and Talib healthy could match up with most of the top NFL teams. Put McCourty back at Safety where he belongs. Lets get Cunningham back in the lineup and see if he can put pressure on the QB.
A bye would be perfect, but not everything ends up being perfect in the NFL.
This about sums it up.
The reality is if Gronk and AHern are healthy going into the playoffs, the Patriots are the heavy favorites. Since nobody knows their actual status, one can give pundits a path.
What you need to consider:
The "top 5" Denver defense is the same defense that has displayed absolutely zero ability to stop the Patriots offense WITHOUT both TE's....confidence that this "TOP 5" defense can keep the two TE's under 40 is misplaced because they haven't displayed any ability to do this.
The Jax game was planned with an eye for the playoffs. Anyone reading anything into the game (much of patsfans.com) doesn't pay attention to what's going on.
Playoff football is a game of specific matchups. Outside of what is happening, what can happen? The Patriots are the only team with real "X factor" upside going into the playoffs.
So at Ravens is a win against a weak opponent. Please.
If the Broncos have a cupcake schedule, so do we with only the Texans win being a middle of the pack victory. Since you're obviously calling the Broncos a weak opponent.
First thing I'd like to say is that as a Patriots fan, I respect Peyton Manning as a player and I enjoy watching him play. Him returning is a great thing for football. When Brady isn't playing, I sit down, relax, and watch Peyton do his work. It's a blessing that we get to watch these two quarterback at a high level both in the same season.
I have a feeling that the Broncos are going to be overconfident heading into the playoffs on an 11 win streak, thinking they have their work cut out for themselves and that they can just show up and win. Peyton Manning is going to be due for a bad game sometime soon.
The Broncos have been rolling for so long, you just wonder when the pressure will get to them. Let the critics ride the Broncos. But then again, there is no one else in the AFC that can beat Brady or Manning on the road.
If the Patriots and Broncos face off in the AFC championship (assuming the emotional Colts can beat the Texans on Sunday), I have no doubt that the Patriots can stun the Broncos on the road. Tom Brady will shred that defense to pieces, Jack Del Rio will have no answer for the offense. Not to mention, Lloyd is better accustomed to Brady now and Hernandez will be playing unlike the first matchup, and he is another matchup problem for the Broncos to worry about. When Gronk returns, the run/play action/red-zone game will be better and Jack Del Rio will have to play "pick-your-poison" with this offense.
My only concern is the defense getting no pressure on Manning and letting him pick them apart. Unlike the first matchup, the Patriots now have a CB in Talib that can physically matchup with Demaryius Thomas, who abused them last time. McCourty at safety has been a good move and he will be a key player to watch in the postseason.
Denver will probably have to play Baltimore at home and New England hosting Houston in the divisional round (if Colts win on Sunday) as I do think the Colts and Bengals will both lose in the Wild Card round. So a Patriots/Broncos rematch in Mile High is very possible. I'll admit that Denver is a great team, but let's not crown them.
You have to underestand newb, posters here will say anything negative about the other 31 teams to make them feel more comfy about our chances for success.
Hey now, are you really trying to interject some common sense here?
Edit, stupid IPad.
Ravens up to this past weekend's win over the Giants were playing like a monkey fcking a football. They are missing half of their defense, so yes, AT THE TIME the Broncos played them, they were weak. Weak enough to have almost lost to the crappy Chargers - saved by a miracle on a 4th & 29 run by Rice.
Broncos should be more worried about us then us of them.
I'm not sure what the "please" is about. The Ravens had lost 3 straight before last week. The week prior to the losing streak starting, they'd gone to OT to beat the Chargers. The week before that, they'd eeked out a 13-10 win against the Leftwich-led Steelers. They've been a very questionable team all season long.
This simply doesn't follow logic, on multiple levels.
By this logic there isn't any good teams in the NFL. So basically the Pats are really the only good team. The Ravens, are lucky, the Broncos are just a product of their schedule, The Giants suck because they won't the playoffs. The Packers suck because they got blown out by the Giants who suck.
We also lost to the Niners who may not be that good, because they got blown out by the Giants who you say are not that good.
We blew out Houston, but how good are they, if they lost to the Vikings at home who got blown out by the Bucs who suck.
I noticed nobody mentioned that we barely beat the Jags, Bills and Jets, and lost to the God-awful Cards.
You can disect every team and find a fault to suit your argument, but you need to realize no matter who you play its hard to win in this league week in and out.
At Denver is a very difficult game against any QB. It is an extremely difficult game against a hot Peyton Manning and a quality group of BIG receivers. Yes, we should be able to move the ball against them, but they showed in the second half of the first game this year that they can shut us down for an extended period of time. Assuming the Giants don't make the playoffs, At Denver is definitely the toughest possible matchup we could face.
His logic was fine. Your attempt to railroad it, however, was not. The Ravens had suffered additional injuries and were not playing well at the time. Your argument is essentially trying to claim that the Arizona cardinals beating the Patriots in the first month is no different than if they'd beaten them last week. The reality is that teams change over the course of the season, that teams sometimes have hard/easy schedules, that teams do get lucky either in play or with officiating (Ask Seattle or GB about that), and that such things do matter.
OK, so you are willing to give the Broncos a pass for their losses earlier in the year, because Manning was a little rusty and didn't have the timing with his receivers like he has now. Like you said teams change over the season.
And what do you say about the Pats game last week. Maybe the Pats aren't that good, because the Jags are one of the worst teams in football.
I just hate when people discount a teams record because of who they beat. Yet they over look their own teams flaws, and make excuses like we didn't have Gronk, or Spikes. I don't buy it, The Packers had a bunch of injuries and they waxed the Titans.
As for the Broncos, if you watch the games you can't help but be impressed with them. Are they perfect no? A good offense can move the ball on them, but they are playing real well, and for anyone to discount them is just a homer just trying to make the Pats look good.
Being favorites the last 2 super bowls didn't help us either so I'm not sure why people care about this sort of stuff.
Is this something you've seen?
Separate names with a comma.