andrew8798
FANatic
on 24/7 this month
Posts: 106,084
|
Post by andrew8798 on Jan 21, 2014 22:20:57 GMT -5
Clemson QB Tajh Boyd says the Raiders have shown more interest in him than any team at this week's Senior Bowl.
|
|
Mac
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 16,502
|
Post by Mac on Jan 21, 2014 22:24:10 GMT -5
Reading through some Seahawks forums and, my God, are their fans cocky as all hell. I've seen cocky fans before, and EVERY fanbase holds a bias, but holy shit. I mean, the way they're talking you wouldn't know they're going up against the #1 Offense in the league; as a matter of fact, it reminds me a lot of how Bronco fans talked, myself included, going into the playoff game last year against Baltimore. "Oh, man, we got this! It's going to be a piece of cake! They're not that good!" Peyton's a man on a mission, and if Hawks fans think this game is going to be a walk in the park for them they've got another thing coming. And I guarantee I could find the same going on in a Denver message board. I think you take the Broncos way too personally.
|
|
|
Post by Orange on Jan 21, 2014 22:40:11 GMT -5
Reading through some Seahawks forums and, my God, are their fans cocky as all hell. I've seen cocky fans before, and EVERY fanbase holds a bias, but holy shit. I mean, the way they're talking you wouldn't know they're going up against the #1 Offense in the league; as a matter of fact, it reminds me a lot of how Bronco fans talked, myself included, going into the playoff game last year against Baltimore. "Oh, man, we got this! It's going to be a piece of cake! They're not that good!" Peyton's a man on a mission, and if Hawks fans think this game is going to be a walk in the park for them they've got another thing coming. And I guarantee I could find the same going on in a Denver message board. I think you take the Broncos way too personally. Oh, you absolutely can; it's why I made the mention to Broncos fans from last playoff season. I was just stating my opinion was all.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jan 21, 2014 22:43:30 GMT -5
No, our run game is very good. When you have a guy in Moreno that can run for 224 yards in one game, and consistently help keep the offense on field, your run game is good. The run game looks good because the passing game is incomparable. No team I can remember had a passing offense like Denver does right now. No one plays the run against Denver because...why should you? If you bother, you're always going to get burned with a short pass to the myriad #1 WRs. Denver could have a guy with no legs running the ball and their offense wouldn't be any different. That's part of it though, isn't it? I mean, they don't have a Barry Sanders or an Adrian Peterson, sure, but if the run game is effective in the offense, for whatever reason, then I don't think you can call it bad. With as many 2nd and shorts and 3rd and shorts as Denver gets, they use it very effectively to get the yard or set up options down the line. It can't pick up teh slack if Manning plays bad, but it sure as hell works in conjunction with him.
|
|
|
Post by Jedi-El of Tomorrow on Jan 21, 2014 23:06:08 GMT -5
I know that the old saying is defense wins championships, but this isn't just the #1 offense. The Broncos have the best offense in NFL history. The best in points, yards and TDs. They have way too many weapons on offense. Demaryius, Decker, Welker, Juilius, Knowshon and an emerging Montee Ball. No way no how does Seattles D contain all of them. Plus Seattle's O is very average. They have a good run game, but Denver's D has been great against the run. Final score Denver - 31 Seattle- 17 You can say that about the 1990 and 2007 Giants teams when comparing them to this year's Seahawks. Screw the 1990 Giants! That was the Niners three-peat right there. That Leonard Marshall hit on Montana, is still one of the most vicious hits I've ever seen.
|
|
|
Post by Hugh Mungus on Jan 21, 2014 23:07:33 GMT -5
The Steelers have the Immaculate Reception.
The Patriots have the Tuck Rule Game.
The Seahawks have the Fail Mary.
Just saying...
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Jan 21, 2014 23:23:54 GMT -5
The best offense in history thing is a bit relative considering how hamstrung defenses are nowdays with rule changes and such. That offense wouldn't be AS prolific even six-seven years ago.
|
|
PrinceD
Unicron
WI MADE
Posts: 2,511
|
Post by PrinceD on Jan 21, 2014 23:24:40 GMT -5
No, our run game is very good. When you have a guy in Moreno that can run for 224 yards in one game, and consistently help keep the offense on field, your run game is good. The run game looks good because the passing game is incomparable. No team I can remember had a passing offense like Denver does right now. No one plays the run against Denver because...why should you? If you bother, you're always going to get burned with a short pass to the myriad #1 WRs. Denver could have a guy with no legs running the ball and their offense wouldn't be any different. Yeah a RB with over 1500 total yards 13 TDs and oh yeah 60 receptions must be an average player, riiiight. Knowshon is a beast and is playing out of his mind. Anybody who's followed his career knows that he's matured as a player and realizes he can't take anything for granted because he was a beast at Georgia. He's making the most out of his second chance in the NFL. And throw in an emerging Montee Ball, I think Denver has one of the best 1,2 punches at RB in the league.
|
|
PrinceD
Unicron
WI MADE
Posts: 2,511
|
Post by PrinceD on Jan 21, 2014 23:27:18 GMT -5
I know that the old saying is defense wins championships, but this isn't just the #1 offense. The Broncos have the best offense in NFL history. The best in points, yards and TDs. They have way too many weapons on offense. Demaryius, Decker, Welker, Juilius, Knowshon and an emerging Montee Ball. No way no how does Seattles D contain all of them. Best offense in NFL history? Sorry can't agree with that. They may have the stats, but I'd go with the 1989 49ers, yeah they didn't have the huge number of points, but that offense was f***ing loaded. Joe Montana having arguably the best season of his career, Steve Young as a backup throwing for over 1,000 yards, Jerry Rice having an amazing year (not as good as his 2007 season), Roger Craig out of the backfield, John Taylor, Tom Rathman, and Brent Jones. That was a team with way too many weapons on offense. And that's not even counting what they did in the playoffs where they ran over everyone. The NFL was also a different game then, it wasn't as slanted to the offense as now. Yeah that could be argued, but still...statistically the best offense ever in the NFL is the 2013-14 Denver Broncos.
|
|
Sektor
Unicron
The OTHER Big Red Machine.
Posts: 2,808
|
Post by Sektor on Jan 21, 2014 23:32:32 GMT -5
The run game looks good because the passing game is incomparable. No team I can remember had a passing offense like Denver does right now. No one plays the run against Denver because...why should you? If you bother, you're always going to get burned with a short pass to the myriad #1 WRs. Denver could have a guy with no legs running the ball and their offense wouldn't be any different. Yeah a RB with over 1500 total yards 13 TDs and oh yeah 60 receptions must be an average player, riiiight. Knowshon is a beast and is playing out of his mind. Anybody who's followed his career knows that he's matured as a player and realizes he can't take anything for granted because he was a beast at Georgia. He's making the most out of his second chance in the NFL. And throw in an emerging Montee Ball, I think Denver has one of the best 1,2 punches at RB in the league. Peyton made Joseph Addai look good. It's not exactly a ridiculous claim to make, especially considering the amount of nothing that he was doing before Peyton came in. At the same time, it's foolish to say that he's 100% dependent on the guys around him. He had his best day in NE when the passing game sputtered to a halt, and they weren't showing him 3-man fronts all day. Yes, running backs benefit from being in a high-powered offense. That doesn't mean you can put just anyone in and expect positive results (Trent Richardson).
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jan 21, 2014 23:35:18 GMT -5
I know that the old saying is defense wins championships, but this isn't just the #1 offense. The Broncos have the best offense in NFL history. The best in points, yards and TDs. They have way too many weapons on offense. Demaryius, Decker, Welker, Juilius, Knowshon and an emerging Montee Ball. No way no how does Seattles D contain all of them. Plus Seattle's O is very average. They have a good run game, but Denver's D has been great against the run. Final score Denver - 31 Seattle- 17 The best offense in NFL history prior to this was the 2007 Patriots, who had an output almost identical to these Broncos and went 16-0 in the regular season. They lost in the Super Bowl to a defensive squad that, while solid, wasn't nearly as good as this Seahawks team. Denver's great Run D needs to be tempered by the fact that they jumped to early leads so often that opposing offenses pretty much had to abandon the run to try to stay in it.
|
|
|
Post by Orange on Jan 21, 2014 23:52:09 GMT -5
Denver's great Run D needs to be tempered by the fact that they jumped to early leads so often that opposing offenses pretty much had to abandon the run to try to stay in it. That's not entirely fair, is it? This run D didn't have Miller for the first 6 games, and then lost him later in the season and has still been pretty damn stout. Blount coming into Sunday's game had 4 touchdowns, but the Broncos Run D held him to 5 carries for 6 yards. And they were trying to run early, too. Ryan Matthews ran all over the D in the regular season, but he was held to a handful of yards, as well. Knighton has really stepped up as a defensive leader and this rushing D has been damn good for a while now. The Pass D? Well, that's another story. There doesn't always have to be a "yeah, but..." when it comes to this team.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jan 22, 2014 0:12:18 GMT -5
Denver's great Run D needs to be tempered by the fact that they jumped to early leads so often that opposing offenses pretty much had to abandon the run to try to stay in it. That's not entirely fair, is it? This run D didn't have Miller for the first 6 games, and then lost him later in the season and has still been pretty damn stout. Blount coming into Sunday's game had 4 touchdowns, but the Broncos Run D held him to 5 carries for 6 yards. And they were trying to run early, too. Ryan Matthews ran all over the D in the regular season, but he was held to a handful of yards, as well. Knighton has really stepped up as a defensive leader and this rushing D has been damn good for a while now. The Pass D? Well, that's another story. There doesn't always have to be a "yeah, but..." when it comes to this team. I didn't say there was always a "yeah, but," but when talking about their 'great Run D' it's deserved and most certainly a fair point. The offense was so efficient at scoring that teams really didn't have the option to run as often as they might. Their run defenses stats are padded pretty heavily by that, Belichick deciding he didn't need a run game for some reason doesn't negate the fact. Every discussion of the Broncos doesn't need an overly defensive response
|
|
|
Post by Orange on Jan 22, 2014 0:36:44 GMT -5
That's not entirely fair, is it? This run D didn't have Miller for the first 6 games, and then lost him later in the season and has still been pretty damn stout. Blount coming into Sunday's game had 4 touchdowns, but the Broncos Run D held him to 5 carries for 6 yards. And they were trying to run early, too. Ryan Matthews ran all over the D in the regular season, but he was held to a handful of yards, as well. Knighton has really stepped up as a defensive leader and this rushing D has been damn good for a while now. The Pass D? Well, that's another story. There doesn't always have to be a "yeah, but..." when it comes to this team. I didn't say there was always a "yeah, but," but when talking about their 'great Run D' it's deserved and most certainly a fair point. The offense was so efficient at scoring that teams really didn't have the option to run as often as they might. Their run defenses stats are padded pretty heavily by that, Belichick deciding he didn't need a run game for some reason doesn't negate the fact. Every discussion of the Broncos doesn't need an overly defensive response Fair point, but the Run D has been better throughout the playoffs then they probably should've been, especially what with losing Miller. Not being overly defensive, it's not as if I'm saying they're perfect or immune to criticism something, but I'm going to voice my opinion on my team, as well. Me disagreeing with negative sentiments and giving reasons why I believe they're a good team shouldn't be taken as overly defensive, that's me taking another stance to further the discussion. Unless I'm starting my posts with "f*** you, guys, you f***ers are so wrong and don't f***ing criticize my goddamn team" or something, I'm not being defensive.
|
|
|
Post by Ganon83 on Jan 22, 2014 0:39:04 GMT -5
Honestly I think it comes down to three factors, all of which depend on the Seahawks: 1. Can the Seattle defense step it up without the 12th man? 2. Can the Seahawks offense show up? 3. Can Sherman in particular back up his trash talk and catch a couple Peyton picks? If the Seahawks can answer yes to at least two of these, they win the game, no questions asked.
|
|
|
Post by 01010010 01101001 01100011 on Jan 22, 2014 0:48:39 GMT -5
Honestly I think it comes down to three factors, all of which depend on the Seahawks: 1. Can the Seattle defense step it up without the 12th man? 2. Can the Seahawks offense show up? 3. Can Sherman in particular back up his trash talk and catch a couple Peyton picks? If the Seahawks can answer yes to at least two of these, they win the game, no questions asked. I agree with the first two being huge but I don't see 3 being one as I don't think Peyton throws his way. Sherman will most likely be on OpThomas Prime and Peyton will be looking at Decker and Julius Thomas so the burden will be on the CB and LB that are covering those two.
|
|
|
Post by Red Impact on Jan 22, 2014 0:52:37 GMT -5
Not being overly defensive, it's not as if I'm saying they're perfect or immune to criticism something, but I'm going to voice my opinion on my team, as well. Me disagreeing with negative sentiments and giving reasons why I believe they're a good team shouldn't be taken as overly defensive, that's me taking another stance to further the discussion. Unless I'm starting my posts with "f*** you, guys, you f***ers are so wrong and don't f***ing criticize my goddamn team" or something, I'm not being defensive. You've been cordial, sure, but being rude isn't a prerequisite to being overly defensive. It's been happening throughout the playoffs anytime someone even talks about the strengths of a team they're playing or a weakness of them, trying to paint it like people have it out for the team or are overlooking them (re. the Chargers). Saying it's not fair to talk about why that great run D may not be as great as everyone has been saying is just another example.
|
|
|
Post by Orange on Jan 22, 2014 1:00:39 GMT -5
Not being overly defensive, it's not as if I'm saying they're perfect or immune to criticism something, but I'm going to voice my opinion on my team, as well. Me disagreeing with negative sentiments and giving reasons why I believe they're a good team shouldn't be taken as overly defensive, that's me taking another stance to further the discussion. Unless I'm starting my posts with "f*** you, guys, you f***ers are so wrong and don't f***ing criticize my goddamn team" or something, I'm not being defensive. You've been cordial, sure, but being rude isn't a prerequisite to being overly defensive. It's been happening throughout the playoffs anytime someone even talks about the strengths of a team they're playing or a weakness of them, trying to paint it like people have it out for the team or are overlooking them (re. the Chargers). Saying it's not fair to talk about why that great run D may not be as great as everyone has been saying is just another example. Defensiveness isn't my intention, but if I don't agree with someone I don't agree with them. To pretend I do stifles conversation and makes the thread boring. If the viewpoint is that the Run D isn't very good and I disagree, I'll state that just to continue discussion. It's no fun when everybody agrees with each other. Do you get what I mean?
|
|
Ben Wyatt
Crow T. Robot
Are You Gonna Go My Way?
I don't get it. At all. It's kind of a small horse, I mean what am I missing? Am I crazy?
Posts: 41,544
Member is Online
|
Post by Ben Wyatt on Jan 22, 2014 7:44:03 GMT -5
The best offense in history thing is a bit relative considering how hamstrung defenses are nowdays with rule changes and such. That offense wouldn't be AS prolific even six-seven years ago. Yes sir. It's why all of the offensive records will mean far less when they're broken every 3 or 4 years. The rules are horribly slanted now where the defense can barely sneeze around a reciever anymore. They need to make a few rule changes to til things back a bit more towards even
|
|
suave
Dennis Stamp
"I only got on my knees for God and maybe to lick a girl's pussy" -Teddy Hart
Posts: 4,207
|
Post by suave on Jan 22, 2014 8:01:40 GMT -5
The Steelers have the Immaculate Reception. The Patriots have the Tuck Rule Game. The Seahawks have the Fail Mary. Just saying... Except that the Tuck Rule and the Immaculate Reception happened in playoff games, and the fail mary was on a random MNF.
|
|