Broncos: Easiest path to the #1 seed ever?

[Danger Zone]

EDIT 2: Actually not kidding, that really did hit the ground. Oh well, not like it woulda changed anything anyway.

This was a legal catch.

The ball can hit the ground and even shift/move in the receiver's hands as it does so. The receiver needs to maintain control throughout (as we see here).

 

[Claremonster]

One of the few things Broncos fans can thank McDaniels for lol.

The brokebacks were stupid for giving up on McD. He got rid of their cancer, yet he was criticized for having the balls to do it. Cutler sucks ass. He is a whiny *****. Marshall is a suicide or a very bad accident waiting to happen. Giving up after 2 years (1 year in the playoffs) is idiotic.

 

[PatsWSB47]

Hit the ground.

Just kidding. Luckily for us Number 21 is no longer on our team haha.

EDIT 2: Actually not kidding, that really did hit the ground. Oh well, not like it woulda changed anything anyway.

So? He never lost control. It's a catch. The ruling on the field is confirmed.

 

[Claremonster]

We'll see.

You can definitely not count on running all over us again, the run D has been shored up entirely since the first part of the season. The weaknesses vs. TE's I'll give you that. And now that Peyton can count on the D not putting him in 10 or 17 point holes in the first half (first 6 games of the season) he's a lot more comfortable.

Hope you're not expecting another blowout cause it's not gonna happen. I'll be back here after that game if and when it happens, no matter what the outcome.

First of all, no one knows who will be even playing by then. I mean, the Pats could take over the number one seed when the brokebacks lose.

 

[CYA_PATS_DEN>NE_2012AFCCG]

First of all, no one knows who will be even playing by then. I mean, the Pats could take over the number one seed when the brokebacks lose.

Uh, nobody "takes over" the number one seed when the real one loses. Takes over the highest seed, sure.

And real clever with the "brokebacks" label. I bet you came up with that since you were so inspired by watching Brokeback Mountain and how it resonated with your own life.

 

[Claremonster]

Uh, nobody "takes over" the number one seed when the real one loses. Takes over the highest seed, sure.

And real clever with the "brokebacks" label. I bet you came up with that since you were so inspired by watching Brokeback Mountain and how it resonated with your own life.

Nope, just a regional reference.

Never seen the movie personally. Is it true that Elway was in it?

Truthfully, I like Denver (the surrounding area) and the mountains.

 

[BlueThunder]

We can call a horseface toss a Wolf Creek Pass.

Up in the NE area they're called Wobblin Goblins.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Uh, nobody "takes over" the number one seed when the real one loses. Takes over the highest seed, sure.

And real clever with the "brokebacks" label. I bet you came up with that since you were so inspired by watching Brokeback Mountain and how it resonated with your own life.

Seriously. You like the wrong team and are deluded about who's better, but it's a little late in history for snide "huh huh yer gay" jokes. I don't know how it's a regional reference... rural Montana or Wyoming or somewhere vs. Denver... but it sure looks like homophobia to me.

On behalf of Pats fans who are not homophobic, you're not gay, it's okay if you are, and your team still sucks

 

[PatsWSB47]

Seriously. You like the wrong team and are deluded about who's better, but it's a little late in history for snide "huh huh yer gay" jokes. I don't know how it's a regional reference... rural Montana or Wyoming or somewhere vs. Denver... but it sure looks like homophobia to me.

On behalf of Pats fans who are not homophobic, you're not gay, it's okay if you are, and your team still sucks

one way or the other, right?

 

[BananaRepublican]

I'm not sure why you choose to ignore the reality of Manning's playoff career, but he's a sub .500 player who's gaspiped on many occasions.

You mean like how Tom disappeared against the Jets two years ago, disappeared against the Giants until the last five minutes in '07, missed Welker with the game on the line last year, threw it to Champ Bailey in '05, didn't show up in the Ravens drubbing at Foxboro, got out played by Flacco last year but managed to win the game on a fluke defensive play? How about the fourth and two choke in Indy?

Now I don't hold any of that against Tom. You must though because you've played your "gas pipe" card on a future HOF QB.

 

[Deus Irae]

You mean like how Tom disappeared against the Jets two years ago, disappeared against the Giants until the last five minutes in '07, missed Welker with the game on the line last year, threw it to Champ Bailey in '05, didn't show up in the Ravens drubbing at Foxboro, got out played by Flacco last year but managed to win the game on a fluke defensive play? How about the fourth and two choke in Indy?

Now I don't hold any of that against Tom. You must though because you've played your "gas pipe" card on a future HOF QB.

No, I mean like Manning has done it over and over and over, to the tune of a 9-10 record in the playoffs. Your passionate defense of Manning, while a fine thing to attempt if you so choose, is hysterical and misplaced. Your attempt to equate Brady and Manning, on the other hand, is pathetic:

Brady's never had a game with a QB rating in the 30's, while Manning's had 3.
Brady's never been shut out, while Manning has.
Brady's never put up fewer than 10 points, while Manning has done it twice.
Brady's never had a 4 INT game, while Manning has.
Brady's never completed fewer than 50% of his passes, while Manning's done it thrice.
Brady's got a winning record, while Manning is sub .500.
Brady's won 3 Super Bowls, while Manning has just the one.
Brady's been one-and-done just twice, while Manning's done it 7 times.

 

[Claremonster]

Seriously. You like the wrong team and are deluded about who's better, but it's a little late in history for snide "huh huh yer gay" jokes. I don't know how it's a regional reference... rural Montana or Wyoming or somewhere vs. Denver... but it sure looks like homophobia to me.

On behalf of Pats fans who are not homophobic, you're not gay, it's okay if you are, and your team still sucks

 

[josh24]

Don't get me wrong,its hard to win 2 games in a row in the NFL,let alone 11 games in a row but when you sit and look at the schedule Manning has had,its easy to see that the #1 seed was very obtainable once he settled in as their QB.

The 11 game winning streak consisted of opposing teams that had a combined 68-108 in wins vs. losses which includes division opponents twice and in a division is which the other 3 teams had a record of 13-35.

How lucky has Manning been who almost always throughout his career got chump teams in the division he plays in?

The 2012 Denver Broncos team has not had a visitor in Mile High who has had a winning record and their only loss at home was to a team that is in the playoffs and has a good record and all their losses includes teams in the playoffs.

The only 2 wins against playoff teams (Cincy & Balt) were on the road


Folks....The bottom line is Denver has beaten the Sisters Of The Poor all season and lost to most of the teams in the playoff picture.

Denver to me is the weakest #1 seed in the NFL in over a decade and is a pretender at 13-3

The first team to enter Mile High might very well walk out the winner
of that game.

At 13-3,I still think Denver is B.S. and like that kicker Vanderjagt once said,that team is "ripe for the picking"...he was wrong then but I think the 2012 Broncos are the lightest challenged 13-3 team ever.

Actually, they are the 5th lightest challenged in the regular season in the history of 1st seeds since the bye week novelty.

If you take every 1st seed of the AFC & NFC since the bye week was introduced (and therefore, the WC round: 1978), and analyze the records of the teams they beat in the regular season, the 2012 Denver Broncos' opponents have the 5th worst combined W-L %. Here are the top 10 worst and their subsequent result in the postseason:

SBC - SB Champion
SBR - SB Runner-up
CC - Lost in the Conference Championship
DIV - Lost in the Divisional Round

[B]Team/Record                   W-L%       PS result[/B]
1999 Rams (13-3)            0.32212         SBC
1999 Jaguars (14-2)         0.33036         CC
1991 Bills (13-3)           0.37019         SBR
1988 Bears (12-4)           0.38021         CC
2012 Broncos (13-3)         0.38462         ?
2000 Giants (12-4)          0.38542         SBR
1986 Browns (12-4)          0.39063         CC
2005 Seahawks (13-3)        0.40385         SBR
2006 Bears (13-3)           0.40385         SBR
1984 49ers (15-1)           0.40833         SBC

Wins by the 1999 St. Louis Rams:
vs Ravens (8-8)
vs Falcons (5-11)
@ Bengals (4-12)
vs 49ers (4-12)
@ Falcons (5-11)
vs Browns (2-14)
vs Panthers (8-8)
@ 49ers (4-12)
vs Saints (3-13)
@ Panthers (8-8)
@ Saints (3-13)
vs Giants (7-9)
vs Bears (6-10)

Here's a look to the opposite:

[B]Team/Record                   W-L%       PS result[/B]
2002 Raiders (11-5)         0.53125         SBR
1985 Rams (11-5)            0.52604         CC
2003 Patriots (14-2)        0.50893         SBC
2010 Patriots (14-2)        0.50446         DIV
2008 Giants (12-4)          0.50000         DIV
1993 Cowboys (12-4)         0.50000         SBC
1995 Cowboys (12-4)         0.48958         SBC
1989 Broncos (11-5)         0.48864         SBR
1996 Packers (13-3)         0.48558         SBC
1979 Chargers (12-4)        0.48438         DIV

Wins by the 2002 Oakland Raiders:
vs Seahawks (7-9)
@ Steelers (10-5-1)
vs Titans (11-5)
@ Bills (8-8)
@ Broncos (9-7)
vs Patriots (9-7)
@ Cardinals (5-11)
vs Jets (9-7)
@ Chargers (8-8)
vs Broncos (9-7)
vs Chiefs (8-8)

In case you wonder, 2012 Falcons are 14th in the list of lightest challenged 1st seeds. The opponents' record of both teams combined (DEN & ATL) is 0.39904, the 2nd worst in history for 1st seeds (1999, .32639).

Other NE 1st seeds:
2007 NE - 0.46875, 16th toughest
2011 NE - 0.42308, 19th easiest

NOTES
- As noted before, the W-L% shown is from the teams they beat, not from the entire schedule. If DEN would have beaten ATL/HOU/NE, we wouldn't have this discussion.
- This is a list based on strength of victory. Just like most of the websites (PFF, PFR, etc), when a team beats a certain opponent 2+ times, you MUST count their record the same amount of times. 1999 STL beat the 5-11 ATL twice, so it would be 10-22, rather than just 5-11.

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

You mean like how Tom disappeared against the Jets two years ago, disappeared against the Giants until the last five minutes in '07, missed Welker with the game on the line last year, threw it to Champ Bailey in '05, didn't show up in the Ravens drubbing at Foxboro, got out played by Flacco last year but managed to win the game on a fluke defensive play? How about the fourth and two choke in Indy?

Now I don't hold any of that against Tom. You must though because you've played your "gas pipe" card on a future HOF QB.

I don't see your point. PM's failings in the playoffs were discussed(failings that were well known and the proverbial monkey on his back prior to his SB victory). Further, in comparison, TFB has a better playoff performance track record. It is suggested that PM's lesser track record in the playoffs is that he sucks in the playoffs ("gas pipe").

So if a Patriots poster says PM sucks in the playoffs (or is it the specific words 'gas pipe' that you disliked?), they then also must hold it against TFB/feel he sucks for any poor playoff performances regardless of the fact there were significantly fewer? Don't get that one.......

 

[RhodyPatriot]

No, I mean like Manning has done it over and over and over, to the tune of a 9-10 record in the playoffs. Your passionate defense of Manning, while a fine thing to attempt if you so choose, is hysterical and misplaced. Your attempt to equate Brady and Manning, on the other hand, is pathetic:

Brady's never had a game with a QB rating in the 30's, while Manning's had 3.
Brady's never been shut out, while Manning has.
Brady's never put up fewer than 10 points, while Manning has done it twice.
Brady's never had a 4 INT game, while Manning has.
Brady's never completed fewer than 50% of his passes, while Manning's done it thrice.
Brady's got a winning record, while Manning is sub .500.
Brady's won 3 Super Bowls, while Manning has just the one.
Brady's been one-and-done just twice, while Manning's done it 7 times.

What so amazing about Manning's 9 -10 W/L record in the playoffs is that 4 of those 9 wins came in 1 year - the SB winning year.
Forehead is nowhere close to even sniffing a pathetic .500 playoff record without that one year of Joseph Addai and Bob Sanders leading the Colts to a ring.

I've been as critical of Tom Brady and his recent weak playoff performances as anyone on this board but Tom IS and will always be light years ahead of Peyton Manning in the clutch play department. In fact Peyton Manning is not even in the Clutch QB conversation.

 

[RhodyPatriot]

You mean like how Tom disappeared against the Jets two years ago, disappeared against the Giants until the last five minutes in '07, missed Welker with the game on the line last year, threw it to Champ Bailey in '05, didn't show up in the Ravens drubbing at Foxboro, got out played by Flacco last year but managed to win the game on a fluke defensive play? How about the fourth and two choke in Indy?

Now I don't hold any of that against Tom. You must though because you've played your "gas pipe" card on a future HOF QB.

It is amazing how even with all of Tom's recent playoff struggles Peyton Manning still doesn't come close to being included in the clutch playoff performer conversation with Tom Brady.
Not a good reflection on Manning at all.

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

What so amazing about Manning's 9 -10 W/L record in the playoffs is that 4 of those 9 wins came in 1 year - the SB winning year.
.

You mean the year his defense bailed him out, when he had 3 TD and 7 ints and no QB rating above an 81 in any of the 4 playoff games????

 

[Uncle Rico]

No, I mean like Manning has done it over and over and over, to the tune of a 9-10 record in the playoffs. Your passionate defense of Manning, while a fine thing to attempt if you so choose, is hysterical and misplaced. Your attempt to equate Brady and Manning, on the other hand, is pathetic:

Brady's never had a game with a QB rating in the 30's, while Manning's had 3.
Brady's never been shut out, while Manning has.
Brady's never put up fewer than 10 points, while Manning has done it twice.
Brady's never had a 4 INT game, while Manning has.
Brady's never completed fewer than 50% of his passes, while Manning's done it thrice.
Brady's got a winning record, while Manning is sub .500.
Brady's won 3 Super Bowls, while Manning has just the one.
Brady's been one-and-done just twice, while Manning's done it 7 times.

Great stuff, but one correction: Bills shut out Brady/Pats 31-0 in the "they hate their coach" game to open '03. i can still see Gash and Milloy being obnoxiously ****y afterward; made the season-ending reversal all that much sweeter.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Great stuff, but one correction: Bills shut out Brady/Pats 31-0 in the "they hate their coach" game to open '03. i can still see Gash and Milloy being obnoxiously ****y afterward; made the season-ending reversal all that much sweeter.

He was only using play-off numbers, and he completely demolished BR. Well done.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

one way or the other, right?

Or in the JEST case, both. Not that there's anything wrong with that in one of the two senses.