Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Denver and Indy the last 2 Juggernauts?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    There is no reason arguing good from great.

    We can lose to any team in the NFL, all it takes is mistakes which everyone makes.

    We have a great team, but there's not a single game we play that can be an assured win.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Coldbrew View Post
      There is no reason arguing good from great.

      We can lose to any team in the NFL, all it takes is mistakes which everyone makes.

      We have a great team, but there's not a single game we play that can be an assured win.


      Very true. Look at what the faiders just did to Philly, and Philly is not a pushover. Any given Sunday...:go:
      Raider Hater #1

      Team TEBOW #32, Broncos Supporter for Life!

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by BroncsSB#3 View Post
        That's funny. A lot of people were playing the disrespect card every time an analyst said that we hadn't played any worthy opponents, but now people on here are doing the same thing to the Colts.

        The Colts already have built in credibility. They've proved it year after year. If anything, they should get the benefit of the doubt.

        The Broncos haven't proved anything the last few years and after the huge changes implemented during this off season, it's easy to see why the Broncos weren't given the benefit of the doubt.

        It's just funny to me that some people couldn't see that.

        The Broncos have to take the respect and that's exactly what we're doing every week that we keep winning.
        Really what the problem was that people were counting us out because of our schedule looking so difficult. Then when we started beating teams it was because they were weak teams.

        My point about the Colts this year is that after the games have been played and they sit at 6-0 just like us, I can look at how they got there.

        Here are the facts:

        Only 2 of the Colts opponents barely have a winning record (Jac. 3-3, Az, 3-2?). 2 of the Colts opponents have 0 wins. Collectively the Colts opponents are 10-26.

        Denver has beaten 4 teams with a winning record (NE 5-2, CIN 5-2, DAL 4-2, SD 3-3). Collectively the Bronco's opponent's are 20-20.

        Yes, this year the Colts undefeated record is over-rated based on the opponents they've played.
        Rhyme Time: Loose, Caboose. Lose, Boo's. Grieve, Peeve? Cat, Hat and all of that...

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by on2 View Post
          Really what the problem was that people were counting us out because of our schedule looking so difficult. Then when we started beating teams it was because they were weak teams.

          My point about the Colts this year is that after the games have been played and they sit at 6-0 just like us, I can look at how they got there.

          Here are the facts:

          Only 2 of the Colts opponents barely have a winning record (Jac. 3-3, Az, 3-2?). 2 of the Colts opponents have 0 wins. Collectively the Colts opponents are 10-26.

          Denver has beaten 4 teams with a winning record (NE 5-2, CIN 5-2, DAL 4-2, SD 3-3). Collectively the Bronco's opponent's are 20-20.

          Yes, this year the Colts undefeated record is over-rated based on the opponents they've played.
          The undefeated record is overrated? I don't quite understand this concept. Should the Colts be better than 6-0?

          If your argument is that the Colts have played a weak schedule so far, then fine. If you're saying the Colts are over-rated because of that, well that's just wishful thinking I believe.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by MVPManning View Post
            The undefeated record is overrated? I don't quite understand this concept. Should the Colts be better than 6-0?

            If your argument is that the Colts have played a weak schedule so far, then fine. If you're saying the Colts are over-rated because of that, well that's just wishful thinking I believe.

            Not to derail this thread any, as i agree that the colts are not overrated and are an excellent team.

            But-- Is peyton Mannings forehead really that big in real life? I see it on tv and such and it looks so big, but i always wondered if the TV makes is seem so much larger?
            So far:
            FA- Melvin Gordon. Brandon Scherff
            1. Kenneth Murray LB; 2. Shenault WR; 2B. Biadazz Center, 3. OT

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by MVPManning View Post
              The undefeated record is overrated? I don't quite understand this concept. Should the Colts be better than 6-0?

              If your argument is that the Colts have played a weak schedule so far, then fine. If you're saying the Colts are over-rated because of that, well that's just wishful thinking I believe.
              It might help to read the entire post:

              My point about the Colts this year is that after the games have been played and they sit at 6-0 just like us, I can look at how they got there.

              Is that unclear?

              I don't care about what the Colts have done in years past. I don't think that success from the year before automatically carries over to the next year (someone mentioned it, but who won the superbowl last year?). The Colts are one of the top 5 teams this year for sure. But NOW (!!) We can look back. We can examine the opponents they beat and compare that to the opponents the Bronco's have beaten.

              People were saying that the Bengal's were a bad team and it was just luck that we won (and it was) but the Bengal's are at 5-2. They were wrong to call the Bengal's a bad team. I am not wrong to call 2 of the Colt's opponents horrible teams. They have the record to support that. And the other's aren't doing much better.

              Do you see the difference? I am critical of the Colt's based on reality. Others were critical of the Bronco's based on wishful thinking.

              Never said the Colt's were a bad team. Just said they are over-rated.

              And by the way Payton Manning's Forehead actually starts at the bottom of his neck.
              Last edited by on2; 10-27-2009, 12:51 PM.
              Rhyme Time: Loose, Caboose. Lose, Boo's. Grieve, Peeve? Cat, Hat and all of that...

              Comment


              • #52
                'Borrowed' from Broncolee on page 2

                Getting back to beating the Colts, I've copied part of Broncolee's post from page 2 that I think sums up this year's game:
                "Don't go handing the game against the Broncos to the Colts either. You beat the Colts the same way you beat the Patsies, you get hits on the quarterback and make him uncomfortable. The Broncos are among the best defenses to get pressure and hits on the quarterback and they do it without a lot of blitzing. Past history doesn't apply. The Broncos are a completely different team than they've been in the past. You can't just assume that because Manning has had big games against the Broncos in the past it means that the Colts are going to win the game this year. Maybe they will win, but maybe they won't. Maybe the Broncos will win that game."
                Thanks Broncolee.
                ______________________________________________
                This year is different than the past. Each year the schedule comes out based on the previous year and some teams look hard or impossible that fall apart and some teams (like the Broncos this year) surprise everyone from all the experts to half it's own fans. If Peyton is sacked, harassed and knocked down the game could be very different then past games. It should be great to watch.
                SmilingJack

                Comment


                • #53
                  Well I don't think Arizona is a horrible team (biased homer I am!). Just look at what they did to the giants. Now that I've seen one Manning on his back all day, I'm ready to see us do the same to his brother...

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by on2 View Post
                    It might help to read the entire post:

                    My point about the Colts this year is that after the games have been played and they sit at 6-0 just like us, I can look at how they got there.

                    Is that unclear?

                    I don't care about what the Colts have done in years past. I don't think that success from the year before automatically carries over to the next year (someone mentioned it, but who won the superbowl last year?). The Colts are one of the top 5 teams this year for sure. But NOW (!!) We can look back. We can examine the opponents they beat and compare that to the opponents the Bronco's have beaten.

                    People were saying that the Bengal's were a bad team and it was just luck that we won (and it was) but the Bengal's are at 5-2. They were wrong to call the Bengal's a bad team. I am not wrong to call 2 of the Colt's opponents horrible teams. They have the record to support that. And the other's aren't doing much better.

                    Do you see the difference? I am critical of the Colt's based on reality. Others were critical of the Bronco's based on wishful thinking.

                    Never said the Colt's were a bad team. Just said they are over-rated.

                    And by the way Payton Manning's Forehead actually starts at the bottom of his neck.
                    Got it. The Colts are one of the top 5 teams in the NFL but are overrated. Makes alot of sense to me.

                    You discredit the Colts based on wishful thinking as well. "Reality" is not just what has happened in the past 7 weeks. When your entire franchise turns over, like the Broncos, you can throw alot of history out the window. The truth is the Broncos were criticized because Cutler was overrated, Orton was underrated, and few people saw the defense turning around like it has.

                    I have to give myself a pat on the back here because I recognized at least 2/3 of that. I'm a Purdue grad and have followed Orton closely his entire college and pro career. There are many truths that people didn't want to recognize about both Cutler and Orton that led me to the belief that Denver's offense would be just fine under a coach like McDaniels with Orton at the helm and it has been.

                    The Colts, on the other hand, are basically the same team that they have been for the past half decade. They haven't beaten a bunch of great teams this year (although I think winning convincingly in Arizona is pretty significant) but they've beaten enough in the past with pretty much the same team that most people can safely project they deserve a top spot even if they are undefeated against a weaker schedule thus far.

                    I understand what you're saying, but I don't think you're communicating it well by stating it the way you do. This isn't college football and everything will be decided on the field sooner or later. The Broncos have a more impressive body of work so far but that doesn't mean much when trying to determine who any one person thinks is the best team going forward.
                    Last edited by MVPManning; 10-27-2009, 01:39 PM.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X