Denver did better then I thought they would this year

[Jules]

And I do mean this, seriously. I don't follow them as closely as some here do but when I do watch them lately I am pretty darn impressed.

 

I thought they might squeeze out the division title this year but thats about it. I never expected the first seed from them. Although we helped them get it!

 

The D looks great and so does Manning.

 

Best of luck to them in the playoffs and to Peyton.

 

 

[Malakai432]

Yeah they did, I never would've imagined it would be up to the Colts beating the Texans to allow Denver to get first. I doubt any analyst thought that. I can't see them sitting there thinking at the beginning of the season:

"Well, I'm going to have to go with Denver winning the AFC crown only because the Colts will dethrone the Texans in week 17."

[Jules]

Yeah they did, I never would've imagined it would be up to the Colts beating the Texans to allow Denver to get first. I doubt any analyst thought that. I can't see them sitting there thinking at the beginning of the season:

"Well, I'm going to have to go with Denver winning the AFC crown only because the Colts will dethrone the Texans in week 17."

 

I honestly can't believe it happened like this lol. I really did think Houston was going to beat the Vikes last weekend. Wow.......

 

But, no way am I unclemark. "We will all get high........in mile high........for the old cowboy and country boy........"

[The Peytonator]

I doubted them as well....not because of Manning, but because I thought they had a very flawed team.

[Jules]

I doubted them as well....not because of Manning, but because I thought they had a very flawed team.

 

Yeah I was thinking KC or SD would challenge them. lolz.......

 

I guess Peyton is smarter then we are. ;)

[Malakai432]

Dez is just an absolute freak.

[DILLIGAFER]

Fox, JDR, Manning, McCoy all played a huge roll in settling down and bringing out the best in the Broncos IMO. JDR has been great for the defense.

[Jules]

I did think once Peyton got settled and shook rust off the offense would be fine. But, the D suprises me. I expected it to be worse.

 

So they do look like the best going into the playoffs but chad has me thinking 2001 again. lmao

[shakedownstreet]

today i switched off the broncos game for the more interesting vikings game. now i know how non manning team fans have felt all these years

[Jules]

today i switched off the broncos game for the more interesting vikings game. now i know how non manning team fans have felt all these years

 

LOL I was all over that Pack/Vikes game. Once NE and Denver got big leads it was like oh okay........same old same old.

[chad72]

I do think that people will appreciate the era of Peyton and Brady even more after they retire, I am a firm believer in that.

 

When you can have such consistency over a decade with your team always having a chance to make some noise in the playoffs, despite ample roster turnover in this era of free agency, you have to stand back and take notice of how they both elevate their teams' play. It is almost like you expect it from them and the teams they take over, SB or bust is an expectation every season. I am sure Rodgers or Brees will get there some day, maybe.

[jahsoul]

I must be the only person in the country who believed that the Broncos would dominate. No knock against them (you play who is on the schedule), but their opponents have been damp Charmin soft. *shrugs* I want to see how they do in the playoff before I have any final feelings about this team.

 

Understated fact- The Broncos are 2-3 against teams over .500.

[JerodMayo51]

I must be the only person in the country who believed that the Broncos would dominate. No knock against them (you play who is on the schedule), but their opponents have been damp Charmin soft. *shrugs* I want to see how they do in the playoff before I have any final feelings about this team.

 

Understated fact- The Broncos are 2-3 against teams over .500.

Yea, Broncos have had an easy road to the playoffs. They do have an all around complete team though, so they're a scary team regardless of who they played in the regular season. That cupcake schedule though is surely the reason they're the #1 seed, in front of the Pats who beat them already this year, but now will have to travel to Denver for a potential rematch.

[subvet]

I wanted them to do this well, I wanted Peyton Manning to have his shot at another ring, he chose where he wanted to play wisely and is as good as ever.  I am overjoyed with the success the Colts are having with Andrew Luck, I don't miss seeing number 18 run out onto the field anymore, I just wonder...

[subvet]

Yea, Broncos have had an easy road to the playoffs. They do have an all around complete team though, so they're a scary team regardless of who they played in the regular season. That cupcake schedule though is surely the reason they're the #1 seed, in front of the Pats who beat them already this year, but now will have to travel to Denver for a potential rematch.

"Cupcake schedule?"  The only "cupcakes" I see are divisional and that is unchangable, the rest of the list is as tough as any.

[Jules]

SD might be better next year without Norv.

[chad72]

"Cupcake schedule?"  The only "cupcakes" I see are divisional and that is unchangable, the rest of the list is as tough as any.

 

It is always a mixed bag for most teams in most years.

 

Heck, we all gave Kurt Warner and the Cardinals flak for their 9-7 record that year in the NFC, look where they ended up. Same with Giants last year.

 

HFA is a huge one come playoff time and good teams take advantage of them.

 

2 of the teams above .500, the Broncos played on the road before their O and D got as good as they are. Again, it is the age old saying "it is not who you play, it is when you play them". Ask the Broncos to play the Texans now, they will crush them. They probably beat the Falcons too. The Patriots are the only ones I would give a chance on the road in Denver.

[jahsoul]

"Cupcake schedule?"  The only "cupcakes" I see are divisional and that is unchangable, the rest of the list is as tough as any.

I wouldn't go as far as saying cupcake because I don't believe any NFL team is a cupcake. Numbers don't lie though and they probably have played more sub .500 teams than anyone in the NFL this season.

[chad72]

I wouldn't go as far as saying cupcake because I don't believe any NFL team is a cupcake. Numbers don't lie though and they probably have played more sub .500 teams than anyone in the NFL this season.

 

Hey, Pats played these teams over .500:

 

Broncos - win

Texans - win

Colts - win

Seahawks - loss

49ers - loss

Ravens - loss

 

Record 3-3

 

 

 

Broncos played these teams over .500:

 

Pats - loss

Texans - loss

Falcons - loss

Bengals - win

Ravens - win

 

Record 2-3

 

Raiders and Chiefs can be used all you want to discredit the Broncos but neither the AFC East nor the AFC West have a 2nd placed team with more than 7 wins.

 

 

Most compelling stat to me:

 

Number of Patriots wins over teams over .500 on the road: 0

 

Number of Broncos wins over teams over .500 on the road: 2 (Bengals, Ravens)

 

Similar AFC division leading opponents: 1-1 (Texans and Ravens)

 

 

Patriots - No. of teams played below .500 (7 of them - Titans, Jags, Rams, Cardinals, Dolphins, Jets, Bills, 10 if you count division rivals twice)

 

Broncos - No. of teams played below .500 (7 of them - Saints, Panthers, Bucs, Browns, Raiders, Chiefs, Chargers, 10 if you count division rivals twice)

 

Looks even to me when you consider the sum of all parts.

 

 

 

 

Colts have played Titans, Jags, Dolphins, Bills, Jets, Lions, Browns, Chiefs - 8 teams below .500 making them the team to play the most sub .500 teams in the NFL.

 

Some Peyton or Bronco haters need to take their blinders off and look at some numbers as well.

[JerodMayo51]

I wouldn't go as far as saying cupcake because I don't believe any NFL team is a cupcake. Numbers don't lie though and they probably have played more sub .500 teams than anyone in the NFL this season.

Its just a figure of speech, the Broncos schedule was very easy this year and they lost games to the teams that were above .500. They're still a good team, but that schedule is a big reason they're the #1 seed and will have home field advantage throughout the playoffs. They don't have to apologize for it, thats the way it works sometimes, but don't sit there and pretend that the Broncos schedule was anything but easy.. Or should I say, easier than most teams.

[chad72]

Its just a figure of speech, the Broncos schedule was very easy this year and they lost games to the teams that were above .500. They're still a good team, but that schedule is a big reason they're the #1 seed and will have home field advantage throughout the playoffs. They don't have to apologize for it, thats the way it works sometimes, but don't sit there and pretend that the Broncos schedule was anything but easy.. Or should I say, easier than most teams.

 

Patriots have not done that much better vs teams over .500, they are 3-3, Broncos are 2-3.

[JerodMayo51]

Patriots have not done that much better vs teams over .500, they are 3-3, Broncos are 2-3.

yea but that 1 game difference is literally the difference between 1st and 2nd seed. Not that it matters, thats the way the cards were dealt. Looks like Patriots will get the Texans if they win, otherwise they play the winner of the Colts vs Ravens

[jahsoul]

Hey, Pats played these teams over .500:

 

Broncos - win

Texans - win

Colts - win

Seahawks - loss

49ers - loss

Ravens - loss

 

Record 3-3

 

 

 

Broncos played these teams over .500:

 

Pats - loss

Texans - loss

Falcons - loss

Bengals - win

Ravens - win

 

Record 2-3

 

Raiders and Chiefs can be used all you want to discredit the Broncos but neither the AFC East nor the AFC West have a 2nd placed team with more than 7 wins.

 

 

Most compelling stat to me:

 

Number of Patriots wins over teams over .500 on the road: 0

 

Number of Broncos wins over teams over .500 on the road: 2 (Bengals, Ravens)

 

Similar AFC division leading opponents: 1-1 (Texans and Ravens)

 

 

Patriots - No. of teams played below .500 (7 of them - Titans, Jags, Rams, Cardinals, Dolphins, Jets, Bills, 10 if you count division rivals twice)

 

Broncos - No. of teams played below .500 (7 of them - Saints, Panthers, Bucs, Browns, Raiders, Chiefs, Chargers, 10 if you count division rivals twice)

 

Looks even to me when you consider the sum of all parts.

 

 

 

 

Colts have played Titans, Jags, Dolphins, Bills, Jets, Lions, Browns, Chiefs - 8 teams below .500 making them the team to play the most sub .500 teams in the NFL.

 

Some Peyton or Bronco haters need to take their blinders off and look at some numbers as well.

I don't know if you read anything that I've written on this website but I'm neither a Bronco or Manning hater but facts are facts. I'm not pro anybody in the discussion but I just see things for how they are. The numbers that I stated are just that; the numbers. The Broncos are under .500 against teams with winning records. No bias, just speaking facts. *shrugs*

[chad72]

I don't know if you read anything that I've written on this website but I'm neither a Bronco or Manning hater but facts are facts. I'm not pro anybody in the discussion but I just see things for how they are. The numbers that I stated are just that; the numbers. The Broncos are under .500 against teams with winning records. No bias, just speaking facts. *shrugs*

 

Yeah, you got one fact right, and I gave numbers to corroborate it as well.

 

But then, you were also the same guy that said Broncos were the team to probably play the most sub .500 teams, wrong on that fact. Do you want me to re-quote it to you before you deny it?

 

Just pointing that error in detail and shrugging myself, cya

[18Manning]

Yea, Broncos have had an easy road to the playoffs. They do have an all around complete team though, so they're a scary team regardless of who they played in the regular season. That cupcake schedule though is surely the reason they're the #1 seed, in front of the Pats who beat them already this year, but now will have to travel to Denver for a potential rematch.

Keep in mind they have lost ONLY the 3 games and to Super Bowl contenders and at the beginning of the season. I think they can beat any team in the NFL right now. Although I don't put much stock in odds, but they are favored to win the Super Bowl as far as Vegas is concerned.

[chad72]

yea but that 1 game difference is literally the difference between 1st and 2nd seed. Not that it matters, thats the way the cards were dealt. Looks like Patriots will get the Texans if they win, otherwise they play the winner of the Colts vs Ravens

 

Should have taken care of the 49ers at home when you could have, right??? 

 

It is how the Pats dealt with those cards too that gave them the #2 seeding, only the Pats are to blame. 

[18Manning]

Yea, Broncos have had an easy road to the playoffs. They do have an all around complete team though, so they're a scary team regardless of who they played in the regular season. That cupcake schedule though is surely the reason they're the #1 seed, in front of the Pats who beat them already this year, but now will have to travel to Denver for a potential rematch.

According the ESPN, their schedule was more difficult than Houston, Atlanta and New England...

 

2012 NFL Strength of Schedule By Team

A look at the most difficult schedules in 2012 (based on opponents' 2011 record).

 

Rank Team Combined W-L Record Winning Pct. Games vs. Quality Opp.** * 2011 playoff team.

** Quality opponents are teams that had at least nine wins in 2011.

1 N.Y. Giants* 140-116 .547 7 2 Denver* 139-117 .543 7 3 Cleveland 135-121 .527 7 4 St. Louis 134-122 .523 5 4 Baltimore* 134-122 .523 7 6 San Diego 133-123 .520 6 7 Philadelphia 132-124 .516 8 8 Minnesota 131-125 .512 7 8 Arizona 131-125 .512 6 10 Carolina 130-126 .508 5 11 Seattle 129-127 .504 5 11 Dallas 129-127 .504 7 11 New Orleans* 129-127 .504 5 14 Jacksonville 128-128 .500 8 14 Cincinnati* 128-128 .500 5 14 Pittsburgh* 128-128 .500 6 14 Indianapolis 128-128 .500 7 18 Oakland 127-129 .496 5 18 Miami 127-129 .496 6 20 N.Y. Jets 126-130 .492 6 20 Kansas City 126-130 .492 5 20 Chicago 126-130 .492 7 20 Detroit* 126-130 .492 6 24 Washington 125-131 .488 7 24 Atlanta* 125-131 .488 4 24 San Francisco* 125-131 .488 5 27 Tampa Bay 124-132 .484 5 28 Tennessee 123-133 .480 6 29 Houston* 121-135 .473 6 29 Buffalo 121-135 .473 5 31 Green Bay* 120-136 .469 7 32 New England* 116-140 .453 4

[chad72]

According the ESPN, their schedule was more difficult than Houston, Atlanta and New England...

 

 

* 2011 playoff team.

** Quality opponents are teams that had at least nine wins in 2011. 1 N.Y. Giants* 140-116 .547 7 2 Denver* 139-117 .543 7 3 Cleveland 135-121 .527 7 4 St. Louis 134-122 .523 5 4 Baltimore* 134-122 .523 7 6 San Diego 133-123 .520 6 7 Philadelphia 132-124 .516 8 8 Minnesota 131-125 .512 7 8 Arizona 131-125 .512 6 10 Carolina 130-126 .508 5 11 Seattle 129-127 .504 5 11 Dallas 129-127 .504 7 11 New Orleans* 129-127 .504 5 14 Jacksonville 128-128 .500 8 14 Cincinnati* 128-128 .500 5 14 Pittsburgh* 128-128 .500 6 14 Indianapolis 128-128 .500 7 18 Oakland 127-129 .496 5 18 Miami 127-129 .496 6 20 N.Y. Jets 126-130 .492 6 20 Kansas City 126-130 .492 5 20 Chicago 126-130 .492 7 20 Detroit* 126-130 .492 6 24 Washington 125-131 .488 7 24 Atlanta* 125-131 .488 4 24 San Francisco* 125-131 .488 5 27 Tampa Bay 124-132 .484 5 28 Tennessee 123-133 .480 6 29 Houston* 121-135 .473 6 29 Buffalo 121-135 .473 5 31 Green Bay* 120-136 .469 7 32 New England* 116-140 .453 4

 

Strength of schedule at the beginning of the season is always different than how it turns out at the end of the season.

 

Pats' strength of schedule is barely above that of the Broncos though based on 2011 playoffs and season, Broncos' was much higher when the season started.

[18Manning]

Strength of schedule at the beginning of the season is always different than how it turns out at the end of the season.

 

Pats' strength of schedule is barely above that of the Broncos though based on 2011 playoffs and season, Broncos' was much higher when the season started.

I don't know what happened to the format of my post. It wasn't supposed to look like that.

[jahsoul]

Yeah, you got one fact right, and I gave numbers to corroborate it as well.

 

But then, you were also the same guy that said Broncos were the team to probably play the most sub .500 teams, wrong on that fact. Do you want me to re-quote it to you before you deny it?

 

Just pointing that error in detail and shrugging myself, cya

Yes, i was the same guy who said that they probably played the most sub .500 and I won't back off that comment. I didn't check to see specifically but I was looking at who played more teams with winning records, which the Broncos has only faced 5.

 

Now to get to the nitty gritty, lets look at the record of opponents.

 

Broncos: 104-104

Patriots: 105-85-2

 

But I digress.

[jahsoul]

According the ESPN, their schedule was more difficult than Houston, Atlanta and New England...

 

2012 NFL Strength of Schedule By Team

A look at the most difficult schedules in 2012 (based on opponents' 2011 record).

 

Rank Team Combined W-L Record Winning Pct. Games vs. Quality Opp.** * 2011 playoff team.

** Quality opponents are teams that had at least nine wins in 2011.

1 N.Y. Giants* 140-116 .547 7 2 Denver* 139-117 .543 7 3 Cleveland 135-121 .527 7 4 St. Louis 134-122 .523 5 4 Baltimore* 134-122 .523 7 6 San Diego 133-123 .520 6 7 Philadelphia 132-124 .516 8 8 Minnesota 131-125 .512 7 8 Arizona 131-125 .512 6 10 Carolina 130-126 .508 5 11 Seattle 129-127 .504 5 11 Dallas 129-127 .504 7 11 New Orleans* 129-127 .504 5 14 Jacksonville 128-128 .500 8 14 Cincinnati* 128-128 .500 5 14 Pittsburgh* 128-128 .500 6 14 Indianapolis 128-128 .500 7 18 Oakland 127-129 .496 5 18 Miami 127-129 .496 6 20 N.Y. Jets 126-130 .492 6 20 Kansas City 126-130 .492 5 20 Chicago 126-130 .492 7 20 Detroit* 126-130 .492 6 24 Washington 125-131 .488 7 24 Atlanta* 125-131 .488 4 24 San Francisco* 125-131 .488 5 27 Tampa Bay 124-132 .484 5 28 Tennessee 123-133 .480 6 29 Houston* 121-135 .473 6 29 Buffalo 121-135 .473 5 31 Green Bay* 120-136 .469 7 32 New England* 116-140 .453 4

One thing that I will say and always catch flack for is the Broncos last year had a tougher road to the playoffs than this year, no matter who was under center. Last year, the Broncos only played 3 teams that didn't win 8 games. I have no idea what happened in the AFC West this year.

[Nobody]

I may have way underestimated our team, but I can at least say I was right about Peyton and Denver. I had Denver making the AFC Champ game and Peyton returning to MVP form.

[oldunclemark]

And I do mean this, seriously. I don't follow them as closely as some here do but when I do watch them lately I am pretty darn impressed.

 

I thought they might squeeze out the division title this year but thats about it. I never expected the first seed from them. Although we helped them get it!

 

The D looks great and so does Manning.

 

Best of luck to them in the playoffs and to Peyton.

I agree, Jules...

I wasn't sure...because he wasnt sure...You could tell he wasn't sure.

the 2012 Mannng is better than the 2010 Manning...and I didnt think that was possible with the new team

I hoped for 10-6 with the 1st place schedule

..and the defense..especialy the secondary...I didnt know they were quite that fast and could shut down teams.

People on this board get upset when you say it but Indy at 11-5 and Denver at 13-3 is the best case scenario for longtime Colts fans...

...far beyond anything I expected on either side..

[oldunclemark]

 

But, no way am I unclemark. "We will all get high........in mile high........for the old cowboy and country boy........"

Come on

I honestly can't believe it happened like this lol. I really did think Houston was going to beat the Vikes last weekend. Wow.......

Come on, Jules.....You know you want to get high !!!

[chad72]

Broncos: 104-104

Patriots: 105-85-2

 

But I digress.

 

But that "probably" statement is on the lower side of the probability, that is all I am saying.

 

I think you should check your math, the Pats' opponents record is 107-99-2 with 1 tie and the Broncos 104-104. Again, you continue to be partially correct, and you will always be "probably" correct.

[jjcolts]

So. You can only control what you can control and play the teams in front of you.

 

Talking about cupcake schedule, look at the Pats last year...and they went on to the SB.

[chad72]

Talking about cupcake schedule, look at the Pats last year...and they went on to the SB.

 

Yep, for the record; Patriots opponents had a record of 95-113 last season when they got the #1 seed and were 13-3 and went to the SB.

And now this year Broncos have #1 seed......13-3... but with an opponents record of 104-104.

[jahsoul]

But that "probably" statement is on the lower side of the probability, that is all I am saying.

 

I think you should check your math, the Pats' opponents record is 107-99-2 with 1 tie and the Broncos 104-104. Again, you continue to be partially correct, and you will always be "probably" correct.

It was late so I will go back and check..still comes out better than the Broncos.

 

But seriously, I'm not a proponent of either team. All I know is the Broncos last year had a tougher road to the playoffs than this years teams. Shoot, even the Chiefs were 7-9...lol. Most people think that I'm saying that to discredit the team or their QB (smh) but no, I keep things in perspective. I knew the Broncos were going to win the AFC West. It's not like LT is still running back for the Chargers or anything. I had the Broncos winning 12 games at the beginning of the season, and they lost every game that I believed they would (but I had them losing to Pittsburgh).

[chad72]

and they lost every game that I believed they would (but I had them losing to Pittsburgh).

 

I agree on that part though I expected them to beat the Steelers since Ryan Clark and James Harrison were not playing. Based on the schedule when it came out, the expectations were in line. But then, if the Steelers become a 9-7 team and still miss the playoffs, the Broncos' record vs above .500 teams becomes 3-3, same as Patriots' 3-3. Stats can sometimes be so subtle that one win here and there can skew it.

 

I always remember coach Dungy's words "it is not who you play, it is when you play them".

 

If I look at the good offensive teams, before their rhythm is formed with their O-line and offense, you need to play them early. Broncos, Packers and Pats all had 2 losses before 5 games and in the case of Broncos and Packers, it was 3, I think in the first 5.

 

Similarly, good defensive teams like the Bears and Texans and 49ers (even Ravens), you play them late because the D is bound to wear out as the season goes on, and it happened with them like expected.