Broncos are good but...

Discuss any and all NFL-related topics and matters of interest here. RATING: PG-13
Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 9:27 am
  • Several sites, including ESPN now, have the Broncos as #1 over the Seahawks. I'm not going to sit here and say they aren't good but are they really better than than the Hawks? Looking at who've they've played compared to Seattle and I don't finite at they've done as impressive. The Seahawks have beaten two very good teams in SF and Houston. Who have the Broncos really played? The Ravens are a shell if their former selves. The Giants are imploding the Raiders haven't been relevant for a while. Who have they played that justifies all the love they're getting over our Seahawks?
    User avatar
    SeaWolv
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 360
    Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 8:31 am


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 9:30 am
  • I know we're better, therefore I don't care who else thinks they are or aren't on an opinion poll.
    Image
    User avatar
    KARAVARUS
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2932
    Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 7:09 am
    Location: Omaha, NE


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 9:36 am
  • Who cares who's better in September. The best of the NFL rise to the top in the cold of November and December. Right now we're just two thoroughbreds sizing each other up at the quarter pole. Peyton has an established history of fading in the cold and particularly in the playoffs. If we're lucky, they end up seeded against smash mouth physical teams in the postseason. Those kinds of teams traditionally give Peyton fits.

    Offensive fireworks garner the headlines. But this game is at it's core, a hitting league. And nobody hits harder than we do. If we do navigate the postseason and end up matched up in the SB, then the venue couldn't be more tailor made for our success this year.
    Attyla the Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 723
    Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 2:38 pm


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 9:38 am
  • The Donkos have blown out every single one of their opponents. So what? It's early. How they're playing doesn't affect how our team plays; it only affects national perception. We're still listed at #2, above a very good Saints team who is a more immediate threat.

    One bad game from Manning hoses that team, and it's most likely to happen as the weather gets colder and the playoffs arrive.
    Super Bowl Champions XVLIII

    RIP Radish: Check your PMs. Upper right corner.
    User avatar
    Sarlacc83
    * NET Philistine *
     
    Posts: 15443
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Portland, OR


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 9:39 am
  • SeaWolv wrote:Several sites, including ESPN now, have the Broncos as #1 over the Seahawks. I'm not going to sit here and say they aren't good but are they really better than than the Hawks? Looking at who've they've played compared to Seattle and I don't finite at they've done as impressive. The Seahawks have beaten two very good teams in SF and Houston. Who have the Broncos really played? The Ravens are a shell if their former selves. The Giants are imploding the Raiders haven't been relevant for a while. Who have they played that justifies all the love they're getting over our Seahawks?


    The Ravens curbstomped the team we played on Sunday. If they're a shell, then the Baltimore HFA is as good as ours.

    Denver has played teams with a combined 4-12 record.

    Seattle has played teams with a combined 5-10 record.

    Is that really so much of a difference that the beatdowns Denver is laying on teams should be considered inferior to the results we've been seeing with the Seahawks?

    Yes, Denver has gotten to play 3 at home so far, and they haven't been playing brutally tough teams. That said, they've been absolutely destroying their opponents. There's legitimate discussion of Denver setting ALL-TIME offensive records this season. That has a tendency to reflect favorably on a team.

    And hey, were the 2005 Seahawks a lesser team just because they played some pretty weak competition? If you got irritated when people would downplay our '05 squad because of the strength of schedule, then you should want to avoid using that same faulty criticism of this year's Broncos.

    In any case, why does it even matter? Denver getting props from the media doesn't lessen what the Seahawks have done this season. It doesn't hurt their chances of a #1 seed. It doesn't make that breathtaking comeback against the Texans any less thrilling. It's just pixels on a screen.
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8170
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 9:39 am
  • They are playing better at the moment. I have no problem admitting that. Their offense has been unstoppable. Lets see how they do when the bad weather rolls in.
    User avatar
    Missing_Clink
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2489
    Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 9:53 am


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 9:42 am
  • I tried to give people a heads up about this on Sunday...guess it doesn't matter. People still get offended by the Seahawks getting dropped in the rankings.

    The Broncos have looked better to the eye test so far. It's not even worth debating. They are going to be ranked #1. The Seahawks offense has not looked great, and so when people are looking at rankings they see the Broncos as better. And right now maybe they are. No big deal.
    Image
    Radish and Cheinhill — Gone, but not forgotten
    User avatar
    HawkFan72
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 11723
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:50 am
    Location: Antioch, CA


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 9:48 am
  • Ohhh the Broncos....

    I don't give a damn about them, haha.

    The other thread pretty much nailed it in terms of why they are a good 1B and an even better 2 (in terms of best in the league right now).
    Image

    Go Hawks.
    User avatar
    SouthSoundHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2197
    Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 5:06 am


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 9:58 am
  • volsunghawk wrote:
    SeaWolv wrote:Several sites, including ESPN now, have the Broncos as #1 over the Seahawks. I'm not going to sit here and say they aren't good but are they really better than than the Hawks? Looking at who've they've played compared to Seattle and I don't finite at they've done as impressive. The Seahawks have beaten two very good teams in SF and Houston. Who have the Broncos really played? The Ravens are a shell if their former selves. The Giants are imploding the Raiders haven't been relevant for a while. Who have they played that justifies all the love they're getting over our Seahawks?


    The Ravens curbstomped the team we played on Sunday. If they're a shell, then the Baltimore HFA is as good as ours.

    Denver has played teams with a combined 4-12 record.

    Seattle has played teams with a combined 5-10 record.

    Is that really so much of a difference that the beatdowns Denver is laying on teams should be considered inferior to the results we've been seeing with the Seahawks?

    Yes, Denver has gotten to play 3 at home so far, and they haven't been playing brutally tough teams. That said, they've been absolutely destroying their opponents. There's legitimate discussion of Denver setting ALL-TIME offensive records this season. That has a tendency to reflect favorably on a team.

    And hey, were the 2005 Seahawks a lesser team just because they played some pretty weak competition? If you got irritated when people would downplay our '05 squad because of the strength of schedule, then you should want to avoid using that same faulty criticism of this year's Broncos.

    In any case, why does it even matter? Denver getting props from the media doesn't lessen what the Seahawks have done this season. It doesn't hurt their chances of a #1 seed. It doesn't make that breathtaking comeback against the Texans any less thrilling. It's just pixels on a screen.


    Good Post, and I Agree with you.

    The Fans here in Denver, (My wife included) are pretty in tune with the fact that they havent played anybody yet, and that their defense needs some work.

    Hey we should meet up and watch some time soon! Cheers!
    Image
    User avatar
    5280Hawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 922
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:01 pm


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 10:02 am
  • Sarlacc83 wrote:The Donkos have blown out every single one of their opponents. So what? It's early. How they're playing doesn't affect how our team plays; it only affects national perception. We're still listed at #2, above a very good Saints team who is a more immediate threat.

    One bad game from Manning hoses that team, and it's most likely to happen as the weather gets colder and the playoffs arrive.


    Seattle would have beaten those by similar margins maybe even bigger ones. They haven't played anyone yet.
    User avatar
    SeaWolv
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 360
    Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 8:31 am


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 10:09 am
  • I'll only be pissed if their cupcake schedule gets them 16-0 in the regular season. The Patriots had the 3rd-hardest schedule in the league when they did it, Broncos started this year with the 32nd-hardest. As long as they lose at least one game, I don't care, because the playoffs are what matter.
    Image
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 26409
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Kirkland, WA


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 10:10 am
  • The Broncos have the best offense in the league, slightly above NO IMO, that's sexy to the networks, bottom line.

    Defense win you championships, offense wins you national admiration. Let's see how the Broncos do against a defense like Texans or SF or Seattle for that matter, then we can talk best team in the league. until then, IMO they are the best offense in the league, not best team...
    Last edited by hawker84 on Tue Oct 01, 2013 10:12 am, edited 2 times in total.
    World Champs - Sounds good don't it
    User avatar
    hawker84
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4053
    Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
    Location: Tri Cities, WA


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 10:10 am
  • SeaWolv wrote:
    Sarlacc83 wrote:The Donkos have blown out every single one of their opponents. So what? It's early. How they're playing doesn't affect how our team plays; it only affects national perception. We're still listed at #2, above a very good Saints team who is a more immediate threat.

    One bad game from Manning hoses that team, and it's most likely to happen as the weather gets colder and the playoffs arrive.


    Seattle would have beaten those by similar margins maybe even bigger ones. They haven't played anyone yet.


    I think you're assuming our offense is working on a level that it's not. I'm in the "Panthers, Texans, 49ers have amazing defenses" camp, but our offense is far from peaking at this point, yet.
    Super Bowl Champions XVLIII

    RIP Radish: Check your PMs. Upper right corner.
    User avatar
    Sarlacc83
    * NET Philistine *
     
    Posts: 15443
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Portland, OR


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 10:12 am
  • Sarlacc83 wrote:The Donkos have blown out every single one of their opponents. So what? It's early. How they're playing doesn't affect how our team plays; it only affects national perception. We're still listed at #2, above a very good Saints team who is a more immediate threat.

    Exactly.

    Week 4 ranking don't mean much. It's too small of a sample. With the way the Donkeys and Saints are dominating, I'm surprised we're not 3. I think we should be 3 right now, but I'm sure we'll be 1 by the end of the year and end of the playoffs.

    I think looking at the rankings in tiers makes more sense this early, especially since you see huge fluctuations each week.

    Tier 1: Broncos, Saints, Seahawks
    Tier 2: Pats, Colts, 49ers, Chiefs
    Tier 3: Packers, Bengals, Bears, Lions
    Tier 4: Falcons, Ravens, Texans, Titans, Chargers, Cowboys
    ...

    Sarlacc83 wrote:One bad game from Manning hoses that team, and it's most likely to happen as the weather gets colder and the playoffs arrive.

    Good point. If Manning ever goes down, that's a team that can go from 13-3 to 9-7 or worse very easily. The Seahawks are very even across the board (aside from O-line).
    Colin Kaepernick wrote:I think our efficiency in the huddle was more of a factor than the crowd.
    User avatar
    C-Dub
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1129
    Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 9:06 am
    Location: Spokane, WA


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 10:16 am
  • Let's worry about traversing the NFC and making it to the superbowl. Whoever awaits us is who awaits us.
    "Know thy self, know thy enemy. A thousand battles, a thousand victories." - Sun Tzu
    User avatar
    BigMeach
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 359
    Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 12:11 am


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 10:17 am
  • RolandDeschain wrote:I'll only be pissed if their cupcake schedule gets them 16-0 in the regular season. The Patriots had the 3rd-hardest schedule in the league when they did it, Broncos started this year with the 32nd-hardest. As long as they lose at least one game, I don't care, because the playoffs are what matter.


    Eh, Football Outsiders ranked the Pats' schedule in 2007 as 10th. Pro Football Reference had them about middle of the pack.

    As for this year and Denver, FO doesn't have any data on schedule rank yet, but PFR has 7 teams listed with a schedule as easy or easier than the Broncos (including the Chiefs and most of the NFC North).
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8170
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 10:22 am
  • RolandDeschain wrote:I'll only be pissed if their cupcake schedule gets them 16-0 in the regular season. The Patriots had the 3rd-hardest schedule in the league when they did it, Broncos started this year with the 32nd-hardest. As long as they lose at least one game, I don't care, because the playoffs are what matter.

    It's only week 4, so a lot can change in a few games.

    The Donkeys still play @Indy, @NE, @KC, KC, and @Hou. Tenn, Dal, and Wash have a slight chance to beat Denver.

    The Saints play @Chi, @NE, SF, @Atl, and @Sea. @Car, Dal, and Car seem like ok teams left on the schedule.

    The Hawks only have @Indy, @Atlanta, NO, and @SF left with Tenn as the only ok team left.

    Honestly, I feel that Seattle has the best chance to end the season with the best record, but it really depends which teams fix their problems and can avoid the injury bug the most.
    Colin Kaepernick wrote:I think our efficiency in the huddle was more of a factor than the crowd.
    User avatar
    C-Dub
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1129
    Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 9:06 am
    Location: Spokane, WA


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 10:24 am
  • I'd take a number 1 defense over a number 1 offense any day of the week...
    Go SeaHawks
    User avatar
    SeaChase
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 328
    Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2010 3:12 pm


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 10:25 am
  • Caveat- I am a Broncos fan, maybe a little biased:

    The rankings are not relevant. A lot can also change between now and playoff time. We may not play this year at all.

    Nobody is going to pretend that Denver's schedule has been impressive (I won't) but the rankings reflect the fact that Denver has simply toyed with each one of their opponents. It has truly looked like a varsity high school team vs. the pop warner squad throughout most of their games. Even when the score was close, it was always clear who was going to win. And let's be honest, Seattle was outplayed by Houston...but I still think Seattle is the second best team in the NFL... those games happen, and I'm sure they will happen to us this year. We probably have the top two home field advantages in the NFL and if we play it will be on neutral grounds. Denver can't control their schedule, but they can (and have) dictated the games. Peyton Manning is doing ridiculous things...he was 28/34 and 32/37 in the last two games, and probably half those incompletions were on the receiver. Denver's D is playing good when it matters...a lot of passing yards/points in garbage time, but we are still #1 against the run including playing Ray Rice, Darren McFadden, and LeSean McCoy...part of this is that teams can't run a lot on us after build a lead, but the yards per carry from most of the games wasn't impressive either. Only McCoy topped 4 ypc, McFadden had 0.75 yard per carry. The defense was a top 5 unit last year with Von Miller and Champ Bailey in the mix, and no reason they can't be just as good as a Seattle or KC unit. They are stacked with talent all over the board.

    That said, I think only two teams in the NFL can threaten Denver: Seattle and NE. Depends on who makes less mistakes, game-planning etc.
    cmc0605
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 4
    Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 5:45 pm


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 10:29 am
  • volsunghawk wrote:Eh, Football Outsiders ranked the Pats' schedule in 2007 as 10th. Pro Football Reference had them about middle of the pack.

    As for this year and Denver, FO doesn't have any data on schedule rank yet, but PFR has 7 teams listed with a schedule as easy or easier than the Broncos (including the Chiefs and most of the NFC North).


    I was comparing how hard they were based on the prior year, i.e. rankings before the seasons finished. They are never 100% accurate, and sometimes turn out to be very inaccurate, but since this year isn't done yet we can't compare how hard they really were against each other for another 13 weeks.
    Image
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 26409
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Kirkland, WA


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 10:32 am
  • Broncos are #1 in an opinion poll. The NFL plays out well with high scoring, dynamic offenses. The Broncos also have not been affected by the loss of Miller and the injury of Bailey (who I figured was getting too long in the teeth to be counted on anyway).

    The Seahawks offense is just not performing at a consistent enough level for the pollsters to rate them as the #1 overall best team in the NFL. No need to rag on the Broncos because they have been judged the best team by writers. I think it is only a matter of time before the Patriots or Saints are judged better as well. It is just the way things are.
    Image
    Leon Washington 2010-2012 Red Bryant 2008-2013 Chris Clemons 2010-2013 Golden Tate 2010-2013
    Brandon Browner 2011-2013 Breno Giacomini 2011-2013 - Gone but not forgotten.
    R.I.P Les "PithyRadish" Norton 9/13/2014
    User avatar
    drdiags
    * The Doc *
    * The Doc *
     
    Posts: 9319
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 7:33 am
    Location: Covington, Washington


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 10:33 am
  • Another thing to think about is the quality of defense Peyton has faced each week thus far. Namely...They are "lol" status. Broncos are missing two O-linemen and it doesn't even matter, what a joke.

    Pro Football Focus ‏@PFF wrote:Of all QBs w/at least 100 dropbacks Mike Vick has faced the most pressure (46.5%). 2nd is Russell Wilson (44.6%) & 3rd Matt Schaub (44.4%).


    Pro Football Focus ‏@PFF wrote:Lowest amount of pressure faced by quarterbacks. 1st Peyton Manning (19.3%), 2nd Andy Dalton (22.8%) & 3rd Stafford (25.8%)


    I'm sure the vast majority of Denver fans think things like this are irrelevant, though. :roll:
    Image
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 26409
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Kirkland, WA


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 10:41 am
  • I'd take Denver over us right now, maybe even at our place. Brady very nearly beat us last year, I think Peyton could. That said, if we get our O performing like they were the back end of last year (plus Harvin) then nobody's beating us.
    User avatar
    SomersetHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 619
    Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 6:33 am
    Location: United Kingdom


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 10:45 am
  • drdiags wrote:Broncos are #1 in an opinion poll. The NFL plays out well with high scoring, dynamic offenses. The Broncos also have not been affected by the loss of Miller and the injury of Bailey (who I figured was getting too long in the teeth to be counted on anyway).

    The Seahawks offense is just not performing at a consistent enough level for the pollsters to rate them as the #1 overall best team in the NFL. No need to rag on the Broncos because they have been judged the best team by writers. I think it is only a matter of time before the Patriots or Saints are judged better as well. It is just the way things are.


    You think that this statistic is independent of what Denver is doing offensively?
    cmc0605
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 4
    Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 5:45 pm


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 10:46 am
  • Forum noobie ^^

    The above response was intended to Roland regarding pressure by opposing defenses
    cmc0605
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 4
    Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 5:45 pm


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 11:10 am
  • The Donko's have one glaring problem, no back up QB worth a crap.
    Not advocating it, but if Manning goes down...
    They go down with him.
    He ain't a kid anymore, and it's a long season.
    User avatar
    Wartooth
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 999
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:29 pm


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 11:14 am
  • cmc0605 wrote:You think that this statistic is independent of what Denver is doing offensively?


    Not independent, no. One can't ignore the quality of the competition, though.
    Image
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 26409
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Kirkland, WA


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 11:15 am
  • Wartooth wrote:The Donko's have one glaring problem, no back up QB worth a crap.
    Not advocating it, but if Manning goes down...
    They go down with him.
    He ain't a kid anymore, and it's a long season.


    True, but Manning has also proven pretty damn resilient over his career. He gets the ball out so quick that he avoids a lot of the beatings slower QBs suffer. There's a reason he's playing like this at 37 years old.

    He missed the 2011 season, yes. But prior to that, he'd only ever missed one PLAY due to injury (when the Dolphins broke his jaw in 2001).

    I'll definitely agree that if Manning goes down, that team is doomed. But I think anyone banking on Manning missing time is probably going to end up disappointed.
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8170
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 11:34 am
  • volsunghawk wrote:
    Wartooth wrote:The Donko's have one glaring problem, no back up QB worth a crap.
    Not advocating it, but if Manning goes down...
    They go down with him.
    He ain't a kid anymore, and it's a long season.


    True, but Manning has also proven pretty damn resilient over his career. He gets the ball out so quick that he avoids a lot of the beatings slower QBs suffer. There's a reason he's playing like this at 37 years old.

    He missed the 2011 season, yes. But prior to that, he'd only ever missed one PLAY due to injury (when the Dolphins broke his jaw in 2001).

    I'll definitely agree that if Manning goes down, that team is doomed. But I think anyone banking on Manning missing time is probably going to end up disappointed.


    I agree completely, and hope nothing does happen to him.
    He's an all time great, and to be playing at this level, at his age...Amazing!
    Makes me hope that the Hawks get Russell an Oline at some point, so he can have a long, highly productive career!
    User avatar
    Wartooth
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 999
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 12:29 pm


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 11:43 am
  • Denver's O-line is doing remarkably well, Peyton's not getting injured.
    Image
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 26409
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Kirkland, WA


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 1:06 pm
  • Who cares about a team peaking in September? We're 4 and 0 and we haven't played our best by far. Things are heating up in Seattle, nowhere to go but down for the donkeys.
    President of the Perfect Parents Society - est. 2013
    User avatar
    JesterHawk
    * Smackmeister *
     
    Posts: 7099
    Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 5:56 pm


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 1:13 pm
  • they hav'nt played a tough defense yet so i wanna see them against the Chiefs that will tell alot if they can handle the pressure when things don't go their way. I know Peyton Manning is the biggest cry baby QB in the league so i wanna see some LB's/DE's put some hits on him.
    Lynch Mob
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 536
    Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 1:30 am


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 1:19 pm
  • Wartooth wrote:The Donko's have one glaring problem, no back up QB worth a crap.
    Not advocating it, but if Manning goes down...
    They go down with him.
    He ain't a kid anymore, and it's a long season.


    this could be said about 30 other teams in this league, not including seahawks ;)
    World Champs - Sounds good don't it
    User avatar
    hawker84
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 4053
    Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
    Location: Tri Cities, WA


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 1:21 pm
  • Missing_Clink wrote:They are playing better at the moment. I have no problem admitting that. Their offense has been unstoppable. Lets see how they do when the bad weather rolls in.

    The weather and I want to see how they react when someone hits them in the mouth.
    UGotHawked
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 282
    Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 8:24 pm


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 1:46 pm
  • Bronco D allowing 22 ppg or thereabouts (some of that probably because hey why not, they're hanging 40 on everyone).
    Bronco O has played maybe 1 solid defense? The Ravens?

    Hawk passing O has been anemic against Carolina, SF, Houston. I'm interested in seeing what the Broncos do against a good defense.

    I'm not ready to say the crazy numbers they're putting up are all about playing creampuff defenses. Manning is just unbelievable right now. They may well be the best team in the league. But I don't think that's really known yet, and if they are better than Seattle it's by a much smaller distance than is suggested simply by comparing the scoring of the 2 offenses.
    hawk45
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
    *GOLD SUPPORTER*
     
    Posts: 5251
    Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 1:08 pm


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 2:10 pm
  • I'm sorry but Peyton Manning is putting on a clinic right now.. I'd love to see how we measured up at full strength but right now if we played them we wouldn't beat them with the injuries we have..

    And again power rankings are useless.. Until the nfl adopts the BCS system for the postseason who cares
    February 2, 2014... the day the dream was finally realized
    User avatar
    Hasselbeck
    * NET Sage *
     
    Posts: 5111
    Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 4:55 pm


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 2:53 pm
  • I'd prefer to not be listed at number one, honestly
    User avatar
    CaptainSkybeard
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 904
    Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2011 4:08 pm


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 2:57 pm
  • We know what the score was when the first starter left the field in week three of the preseason...Peyton was pissed too.
    rideaducati
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1881
    Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 3:18 pm


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 3:38 pm
  • The Seahawks are the better team, but the Broncos are playing better football right now. I also think it's very likely that the Broncos finish with more wins than the Seahawks do, they will be favored in every game the rest of the way and don't have any nagging issues hanging around them like we do.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 11202
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 3:40 pm
  • This is Colts week not Broncos.

    :les:
    Image
    On to week two. Week one was not a fluke!
    User avatar
    The Radish
    * NET Radish *
     
    Posts: 18655
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:18 pm
    Location: Spokane, Wa.


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 3:48 pm
  • But really it is also Seahawks, Saints, and Pats week being undefeated along with the Broncos!
    Breast Cancer Awareness Month!
    Passepartout
    NET Practice Squad
     
    Posts: 63
    Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 5:18 pm
    Location: La La Land!


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 3:57 pm
  • SomersetHawk wrote:I'd take Denver over us right now, maybe even at our place. Brady very nearly beat us last year, I think Peyton could. That said, if we get our O performing like they were the back end of last year (plus Harvin) then nobody's beating us.


    Not with a pass rush that now includes Avril, Bennett, Clemons and Irvin.
    User avatar
    SeaWolv
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 360
    Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 8:31 am


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 4:16 pm
  • volsunghawk wrote:
    The Ravens curbstomped the team we played on Sunday. If they're a shell, then the Baltimore HFA is as good as ours.

    Denver has played teams with a combined 4-12 record.

    Seattle has played teams with a combined 5-10 record.

    Is that really so much of a difference that the beatdowns Denver is laying on teams should be considered inferior to the results we've been seeing with the Seahawks?

    Yes, Denver has gotten to play 3 at home so far, and they haven't been playing brutally tough teams. That said, they've been absolutely destroying their opponents. There's legitimate discussion of Denver setting ALL-TIME offensive records this season. That has a tendency to reflect favorably on a team.


    See this what I don't get. You, like many in the media, are focusing on raw production numbers without looking even 1 layer beyond. They have an extremely weak schedule and they're capitalizing on it. I would expect the talking heads at ESPN to know the difference. Denver has not played a single team in the top 10 defensively. Seattle, on the other hand, has played played 3 teams in the top 10 and they're doing it without key players and only half of their games have been at home as opposed to 75% for Denver. That says a lot about both teams in my opinion.
    User avatar
    SeaWolv
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 360
    Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 8:31 am


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 4:22 pm
  • SeaWolv wrote:
    volsunghawk wrote:
    The Ravens curbstomped the team we played on Sunday. If they're a shell, then the Baltimore HFA is as good as ours.

    Denver has played teams with a combined 4-12 record.

    Seattle has played teams with a combined 5-10 record.

    Is that really so much of a difference that the beatdowns Denver is laying on teams should be considered inferior to the results we've been seeing with the Seahawks?

    Yes, Denver has gotten to play 3 at home so far, and they haven't been playing brutally tough teams. That said, they've been absolutely destroying their opponents. There's legitimate discussion of Denver setting ALL-TIME offensive records this season. That has a tendency to reflect favorably on a team.


    See this what I don't get. You, like many in the media, are focusing on raw production numbers without looking even 1 layer beyond. They have an extremely weak schedule and they're capitalizing on it. I would expect the talking heads at ESPN to know the difference. Denver has not played a single team in the top 10 defensively. Seattle, on the other hand, has played played 3 teams in the top 10 and they're doing it without key players and only half of their games have been at home as opposed to 75% for Denver. That says a lot about both teams in my opinion.


    And what I don't get is that you seem to think that we've played some monster schedule while Denver has only played creampuffs. That, my friend, is simply untrue. It is INCORRECT. The difference in the teams we've played is MINOR. The records say so.

    Denver is missing key players, as well. They haven't had Von Miller at all, they've lost their LT for the season, and they lost their starting center before the season even began.

    Now, if you want to hang your hat on the fact that Denver hasn't played tough defenses and they've had 1 more home game than us, awesome. That's legit. And if we were beating teams the same way that Denver was - with those considerations - then I could see getting all butthurt over the Broncos being viewed as a better team. But the difference is that Denver has been destroying all comers thus far in a way we simply haven't.

    And again, it doesn't hurt Seattle to give credit to Denver for doing what they've been doing. By trying to discredit them, you make yourself look incapable of objectivity.
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8170
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 5:11 pm
  • great posts, volsunghawk.
    Popeyejones
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1443
    Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2013 7:58 am


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 6:00 pm
  • volsunghawk wrote:
    SeaWolv wrote:
    volsunghawk wrote:
    The Ravens curbstomped the team we played on Sunday. If they're a shell, then the Baltimore HFA is as good as ours.

    Denver has played teams with a combined 4-12 record.

    Seattle has played teams with a combined 5-10 record.

    Is that really so much of a difference that the beatdowns Denver is laying on teams should be considered inferior to the results we've been seeing with the Seahawks?

    Yes, Denver has gotten to play 3 at home so far, and they haven't been playing brutally tough teams. That said, they've been absolutely destroying their opponents. There's legitimate discussion of Denver setting ALL-TIME offensive records this season. That has a tendency to reflect favorably on a team.


    And what I don't get is that you seem to think that we've played some monster schedule while Denver has only played creampuffs. That, my friend, is simply untrue. It is INCORRECT. The difference in the teams we've played is MINOR. The records say so.

    Denver is missing key players, as well. They haven't had Von Miller at all, they've lost their LT for the season, and they lost their starting center before the season even began.

    Now, if you want to hang your hat on the fact that Denver hasn't played tough defenses and they've had 1 more home game than us, awesome. That's legit. And if we were beating teams the same way that Denver was - with those considerations - then I could see getting all butthurt over the Broncos being viewed as a better team. But the difference is that Denver has been destroying all comers thus far in a way we simply haven't.

    And again, it doesn't hurt Seattle to give credit to Denver for doing what they've been doing. By trying to discredit them, you make yourself look incapable of objectivity.


    Perhaps shell was a bit too strong a word but they're clearly not as good when you consider the talent and leadership they've lost. You can chalk Houston's loss in Baltimore up as nothing more than it's tough to win on the road in the NFL especially coming off an emotional OT win against the Titans.

    In the debate over which team is better you have to compare individual units and how they fared against their respective competition. I don't weigh record as highly as I do offensive and defensive statistics. Records can be skewed based on the level of competition. That being said, Philadelphia is ranked dead last in team defense. I think that alone would qualify them as a creampuff.

    Denver may have lost their starting center, LT and LB but Seattle has lost their LT, LG, played without Unger in Houston as well and were without Clemons and Irvin for most of the season so far not to mention being without Percy Harvin. Big difference.

    Please don't confuse my post as saying the Broncos suck because that would be foolish. All I'm saying is that it's a bit early to start planning Denver's coronation.

    As far as the characterization that Denver is destroying everyone is a bit hyperbolic. A 16 point win over lowly Oakland is not what I would call destroying someone. Now they did destroy Philly but considering that D I would expect that.
    User avatar
    SeaWolv
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 360
    Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 8:31 am


Re: Broncos are good but...
Tue Oct 01, 2013 6:20 pm
  • SeaWolv wrote:
    Please don't confuse my post as saying the Broncos suck because that would be foolish. All I'm saying is that it's a bit early to start planning Denver's coronation.

    As far as the characterization that Denver is destroying everyone is a bit hyperbolic. A 16 point win over lowly Oakland is not what I would call destroying someone. Now they did destroy Philly but considering that D I would expect that.


    I don't think Denver should have any kind of early coronation, either. There's still 75% of the season left, and Denver will face tougher competition. And as several folks have pointed out, Manning and the Broncos don't have some great track record in December and the postseason. But what they're doing right now... it's incredible, regardless of competition.

    As for Oakland, come on now. That 16 point win was a 23 point lead with a minute and a half to go. Denver spent all but about 3 minutes of the entire second half up by 20+. The Broncos are winning games by 3 scores. That's huge and deserving of the praise they're receiving.

    Now, that doesn't mean I think Denver is a better team than Seattle is. I think both squads, fully healthy, are among the league's very best. I think the Seahawks are better built for postseason success, and I hope to see that play out in January and February. But you've got to give credit where it's due, and right now, no team is playing better football than the Broncos... us included.
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 8170
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


Re: Broncos are good but...
Wed Oct 02, 2013 12:33 am
  • Yup I'm going to say it and use it because well in a way it does matter:
    2012 (preseason - OMG I said it..) Sea VS Den - 30 -10 Before they lose maybe a few key players due to either agent's fax machine issues and whatever else i.e. trades Oh and thatw as at Mile High!
    2013 (Preason -Oh sh!t I said it again) Sea Vs Den 40 - 10 After they get their "golden boy" Welker After losing: McGahee and Dumervil

    And Yes being preseason games there wasn't much BUT as I recall both team let their 1st strings Play up until what? The middle of the 3rd Qtr?

    So I guess what I'm saying is ..

    We've beat them before .. we'll beat them again, and if it takes an "Easy schedule" for them to get to where they need to be to meet us so be it, They'll be in for a shock when they realize the opponent they're facing is some monster from hell ready to just devour everyone on that field that isn't wearing blue and green to Hoist that lombardi. After all I'll admit our schedule when we went to the SB in 06 wasn't necessarily the hardest.. so when we faced the Steelers (regardless of the sh!t calls) I think they were a bit taken by surprised of the level they'd have to play at
    Conference Championships: NFC: 2005, 2013
    Division Campionships: AFC West: 1988, 1999 NFC West: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2010, 2013
    Superbowl Championships: 2013 XLVIII Final Score: Sea 43 Den 8.. SUCK IT

    The Radish
    Thu Sep 11, 2014 1:10 pm: Please don't offend The Fonz like that. :roll:
    :les:
    User avatar
    Exittium
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1122
    Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 9:53 am
    Location: Spokane, WA


Re: Broncos are good but...
Wed Oct 02, 2013 3:30 am
  • First off, let me state I have bo issue with Denver being considered the best in the league, they have rolled every team they play, and made it look easy.

    More power to them, imo.

    I do think it is amusing, though, that Denver beating marginal teams in 2013 earns them the praise and admiration of the masses, while Seattle, who trounced questionable competition in 2005, was routinely met with statements of "Who have they played?" and "I'LL buy into Seattle when they beat someone good"

    So, again, I think Denver deserves the "best" title until someone takes it from them, but the dichotomy of perceptions, based on popular assumptions, amuses me.
    Dismas
    NET Starter
     
    Posts: 308
    Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 11:35 pm
    Location: Reno,NV


Re: Broncos are good but...
Wed Oct 02, 2013 3:32 am
  • Having a truly elite QB that everyone admires, even if they're jealous of the team that has him, makes a big difference, Dismas. What can we say? At least DangeRuss appears to be on that path.
    Image
    "VICTORYYYYYYY!" -Johnny Drama
    User avatar
    RolandDeschain
    *NET FCC Liaison*
     
    Posts: 26409
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
    Location: Kirkland, WA


Next


It is currently Mon Oct 20, 2014 6:37 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ NFL NATION ]




Information
  • Who is online