Bronco 'Guarantees' They'll Beat Pats...

[OffensivelyPC]

"But why do they put a guarantee on the box?"

 

 

"Because they know all they sold ya was a guaranteed piece of ****. That's all it is, isn't it? Hey, if you want me to take a dump in a box and mark it guaranteed, I will. I got spare time. But for now, for your customer's sake, for your daughter's sake..."

[sportsworld33]

but it crushed your analysts

 

Manning is like Sammy Sosa and Mark McGwire.  A lot of stats, not much to show for it.  :-)

[Gramz]

Manning is like Sammy Sosa and Mark McGwire.  A lot of stats, not much to show for it.  :-)

We get it. You don't care for him. No need to keep

[sportsworld33]

We get it. You don't care for him. No need to keep

 

I like him personally.  I just think he's the greatest regular season QB of all time.

[southwest1]

And Manning will throw for more TD's in 1 season than Russell Wilson will throw in 2 or 3.  Big deal.  And Wilson won a super bowl in his 2nd season.

I know all about RW. I saw every home game of his at Camp Randall at UW-Madison. Is he elite? No. Is he darn good? Yes. Is Seattle's defense elite? You bet your caboose it is. 

 

In a head to head against either Brady or Manning again for a Lombardi trophy in 2015, Wilson is going down. 

 

Right now, I'd say that both Brady & Manning are capable of outscoring RW & both Denver's & NE's defense & secondaries can present the Hawks QB with huge problems like pressure up the middle & scramble containment. If you keep RW in the pocket with no roll outs, you're halfway home to victory. 

 

Plus, given his short stature, if your defensive front can push linemen into his lap & block his vision & ability to slide up into the pocket it's over. Mr. Skittles/RB Lynch is the X factor that makes Wilson look much better than he really is. 

 

Yes, RW typically makes good football decisions. I will give you that, but Lynch saves him so often it isn't even funny. 

[sportsworld33]

I know all about RW. I saw every home game of his at Camp Randall at UW-Madison. Is he elite? No. Is he darn good? Yes. Is Seattle's defense elite? You bet your caboose it is. 

 

In a head to head against either Brady or Manning again for a Lombardi trophy in 2015, Wilson is going down. 

 

Right now, I'd say that both Brady & Manning are capable of outscoring RW & both Denver's & NE's defense & secondaries can present the Hawks QB with huge problems like pressure up the middle & scramble containment. If you keep RW in the pocket with no roll outs, you're halfway home to victory. 

 

I thought about a lot...

 

What do you think is the best defensive scheme to beat the Seahawks?  I been wondering how a 4-6D would do against the Seahawks.  A 46D would definitely stop the run and contain Wilson, but it's very susceptible to the pass.  And Wilson can beat you with his arm.

 

I'm surprised more teams don't use a 46D in the red zone where you don't have to cover down field.

 

So I guess to play it safe against the Seahawks a 4-3 or a 3-4 D would probably be the best of both worlds.  Have enough LB's on field to stop the run and put a spy on Wilson and enough guys in the secondary.

[chad72]

I thought about a lot...

 

What do you think is the best defensive scheme to beat the Seahawks?  I been wondering how a 4-6D would do against the Seahawks.  A 46D would definitely stop the run and contain Wilson, but it's very susceptible to the pass.  And Wilson can beat you with his arm.

 

I'm surprised more teams don't use a 46D in the red zone where you don't have to cover down field.

 

So I guess to play it safe against the Seahawks a 4-3 or a 3-4 D would probably be the best of both worlds.  Have enough LB's on field to stop the run and put a spy on Wilson and enough guys in the secondary.

 

The fact that the Broncos and Patriots can now run the ball and play patient ball makes them more on even terms with the Seahawks version minus Tate, Harvin and Walter Thurmond III as nickel CB from last year. Both the Broncos and Patriots can put up 20 points and restrict the Seahawks to around the 15-20 range, IMO if they stay patient. Yes, the odds are greater that Brady stays more patient and the Patriots pull it off more likely but lately, Peyton has embraced the 55-45 run approach and stayed patient too, IMO.

[sportsworld33]

The fact that the Broncos and Patriots can now run the ball and play patient ball makes them more on even terms with the Seahawks version minus Tate, Harvin and Walter Thurmond III as nickel CB from last year. Both the Broncos and Patriots can put up 20 points and restrict the Seahawks to around the 15-20 range, IMO if they stay patient. Yes, the odds are greater that Brady stays more patient but lately, Peyton has embraced the 55-45 run approach and stayed patient too, IMO.

 

What do you think about the idea of teams using the 46D against the Seahawks in the red zone?

[chad72]

What do you think about the idea of teams using the 46D against the Seahawks in the red zone?

 

I don't know what you think about lesser known wideouts like Lockette and Paul Richardson that the Seahawks have but when you have wideouts that can run close to 4.3s, using multiple LBs does not negate that speed still. It might work for a few series but then, the reverses will come from the WR position and the little guys among WRs will start winning big sooner than later. Nickel packages to squeeze the zones and DB speed to be able to recover from a bad step still becomes valuable.

 

It would be different if you had lighter LBs that were college safeties used in that 4-6 D look but to defend the run against a running team like the Seahawks and have a spy on Wilson, you use more 3-3-5 looks with maybe 3 safeties to not lose the strength against the run but have enough speed on the field if stretched in the red zone with reverses and boot legs. Just my two cents.

[sportsworld33]

I don't know what you think about lesser known wideouts like Lockette and Paul Richardson that the Seahawks have but when you have wideouts that can run close to 4.3s, using multiple LBs does not negate that speed still. It might work for a few series but then, the reverses will come from the WR position and the little guys among WRs will start winning big sooner than later. Nickel packages to squeeze the zones and DB speed to be able to recover from a bad step still becomes valuable.

 

It would be different if you had lighter LBs that were college safeties used in that 4-6 D look but to defend the run against a running team like the Seahawks and have a spy on Wilson, you use more 3-3-5 looks with maybe 3 safeties to not lose the strength against the run but have enough speed on the field if stretched in the red zone with reverses and boot legs. Just my two cents.

 

 

What I meant was to only use the 46D in the red zone were it's 1st and goal and the defense has only 10 yards to defend.  In that situation you don't have to worry about WR's burning LB's.

[-JJ-]

Because the Pats and Phins are divisional rivals and know each other better.  But the Pats just experimented with some things in the 1st half and were dic%ing around.  After half time they came out and said enough playing around and turned up the heat and smoked the Phins.  The Phins scored ZERO points in the second half.

 

The score was 41-13.

 

The game between the Broncos and Dolphins was much closer and came down to the last remaining minutes of the game.  Dolphins almost won.

 

So basically Manning puts up a lot of junk stats and needs to put up 350+ yards to win games.  And then comes into Foxborough and puts up 400 yards and still loses.

LOL. Wow.  Yeah BB said -eh lets just fool around in the first half. Oh and what did they experiment with? To see if Brady can throw it to ground?

 

ok.

[southwest1]

Actually, Tom Brady is on a mission to show the NFL world that he can win another SB ring since 2004 & Manning is on a mission to erase the humiliation that the Broncos underwent last February. I'm just very impressed with the tenacious resolve of both field generals. 

 

RW...I like the kid, but he doesn't scare the crap out of me like Brady does, Manning does, or even Aaron Rogers does...

 

Like Chad72 said so well, both the Broncos & the Patriots have lethal ground games now & neither clubs are gonna be pushovers. If you boxed me into a corner & forced me to pick the SB match up right now, I'd go with NE vs Seattle with NE winning 38-30. I wanna see Brady vs Rogers, but that isn't happening this year. 

 

My sentimental side would love to see Manning win his 2nd SB, retire, & be the 1st QB to win Championships with 2 different teams, but that's a steep hill to climb. Not impossible, but extremely rare.

 

My SB MVP: Julian Edelman. I love that kid. Gronk gets all the love in the press, but Edelman keeps 3rd & long drives alive. Julian never gets enough praise to me.

 

Mr "death by a thousand paper cuts" gives me anxiety attacks when my beloved Colts face him, but I do have immense respect for that relentless WR.  He's darn good. I gotta give him props. 

[southwest1]

I said this to Flying Elvis once, another NE fan friend of mine. If the Colts or the Broncos can't represent the SB this year AFC wise, I'd like to see Brady get his 4th ring because the dude works his caboose off & I do like the guy even though I'm not supposed to like him as a competitor. 

 

An early Christmas stocking stuffer would be is if somehow the Cowboys got to the SB from the NFC & NE whipped them say 55-3. LOL! I hate the Cowboys & if Tommy & Bill demolished Dallas; I would sing Foxboro's praises forever. 

 

Let me put it this way: If Andrew Luck & company loses this weekend to the silver & blue, you might not see me on the forum for a few days just to avoid any possible warning point citations against me. I wish I was kidding, but I'm really not. 

 

Yeah I know it's petty & stupid, but my disdain for Dallas runs very deep across many generations like a family heirloom or tradition. It is what it is...

[amfootball]

right now calling for a high of 40  low of 26.

 

Will probably be around 30 for game time.  I plan to be there  

Good for you Gramz. That is awesome. Do you live in Cincy?

[amfootball]

LOL. Wow.  Yeah BB said -eh lets just fool around in the first half. Oh and what did they experiment with? To see if Brady can throw it to ground?

 

ok.

lol. That last line me laugh out loud.

 

Felger said on Monday that the Pats did not respect Miami or Philibin and basically knew they only had to play one good quarter of football to win the game. I thought that premise was absurd given Miami beat them pretty badly in South Florida in week 1. I really don't get where these conspiracy theories come from. While the Pats did look flat in the first half, I am pretty sure that had everything to do with the Miami defense who held them to zero points in the second half in week 1. I do think Bill lit a fire at halftime and then they came out smoking but this idea that they took half or three quarters of the game off on purpose is ridiculous.

[amfootball]

The fact that the Broncos and Patriots can now run the ball and play patient ball makes them more on even terms with the Seahawks version minus Tate, Harvin and Walter Thurmond III as nickel CB from last year. Both the Broncos and Patriots can put up 20 points and restrict the Seahawks to around the 15-20 range, IMO if they stay patient. Yes, the odds are greater that Brady stays more patient and the Patriots pull it off more likely but lately, Peyton has embraced the 55-45 run approach and stayed patient too, IMO.

The other team that matches up well and can do what you are saying is Dallas. I really hope they don't falter down the stretch here even though I know that means beating your Colts this week. I want to see them get the 1 seed and face off vs Seattle in the NFCCG. Dallas can be patient with the run, be physical with Seattle and put up enough points to win. That is how they did it in Seattle earlier this season.

[Gramz]

Good for you Gramz. That is awesome. Do you live in Cincy?

No, we don't live in Cincy, it's a 45 min. Drive for us. Close enough.

[chad72]

The other team that matches up well and can do what you are saying is Dallas. I really hope they don't falter down the stretch here even though I know that means beating your Colts this week. I want to see them get the 1 seed and face off vs Seattle in the NFCCG. Dallas can be patient with the run, be physical with Seattle and put up enough points to win. That is how they did it in Seattle earlier this season.

 

The issue with Dallas is that if they cannot control tempo, they cannot protect their D. Of all the Cowboys, Packers, Seahawks, Broncos, Patriots, the D that needs most protection from the O is that of the Cowboys.

[chad72]

Actually, Tom Brady is on a mission to show the NFL world that he can win another SB ring since 2004 & Manning is on a mission to erase the humiliation that the Broncos underwent last February. I'm just very impressed with the tenacious resolve of both field generals. 

 

RW...I like the kid, but he doesn't scare the crap out of me like Brady does, Manning does, or even Aaron Rogers does...

 

Like Chad72 said so well, both the Broncos & the Patriots have lethal ground games now & neither clubs are gonna be pushovers. If you boxed me into a corner & forced me to pick the SB match up right now, I'd go with NE vs Seattle with NE winning 38-30. I wanna see Brady vs Rogers, but that isn't happening this year. 

 

My sentimental side would love to see Manning win his 2nd SB, retire, & be the 1st QB to win Championships with 2 different teams, but that's a steep hill to climb. Not impossible, but extremely rare.

 

My SB MVP: Julian Edelman. I love that kid. Gronk gets all the love in the press, but Edelman keeps 3rd & long drives alive. Julian never gets enough praise to me.

 

Mr "death by a thousand paper cuts" gives me anxiety attacks when my beloved Colts face him, but I do have immense respect for that relentless WR.  He's darn good. I gotta give him props. 

 

38-30??? What world do you live in, SW ? 28-20 is more like it in a SB between those two.

 

The last time both teams scored in the 30s in a SB, you have to go back to Bradshaw-Staubach where Bradshaw won 35-31 and a close second would be the 32-29 that the Patriots won over the Panthers.

[GoPats]

The Broncos' unveiled their new philosophy on offense after the St. Louis game. Manning was hit early and often in that one. I do find myself wondering just a little bit if he suffered some kind of minor (but nagging) injury in that one. I don't think we'll know for sure at any point but that would all kind of make sense.

 

Or...it's much simpler than that, and we're all reading into it too much. 

 

John Elway was a great player, but didn't win a title until he had a running game. It's cliche but so true, especially in today's NFL, how much a running game can open up the passing game for you. Teams defend the pass first, playing the majority of the time in sub-packages, practically begging teams to run the ball at their lighter, faster personnel. The Patriots have done this with a lot of success this year, and having an effective play-action game is critical to opening up the middle of the field (drawing the LBs in, giving yourself space between them and the secondary to get guys open). It's all about match-ups. Sometimes the goal is to throw on another team's base D, so you go with more conventional sets. Sometimes you want to run it on their sub packages, so you spread it out a little and call some draws. 

 

I've wondered before in other threads if the Broncos' offense is capable of flipping the proverbial switch if needed - that is, if they have to throw because they've falled behind, but have been running the ball 60/40 or 65/35, can they jump right back into the passing game? What they do is so heavily predicated on rhythm and timing. If you're only throwing one time for every three or four runs, sometimes you don't get the opportunity to get into a groove. 

 

Anyway, this thread is severely derailed at this point (LOL) but I have no problem with Pork Chop's comments. I think you have to take that kind of mindset if you have to go on the road in the playoffs. And there's no guarantee that will happen, not yet anyway. There are still two games left and I don't expect either of them to be "easy wins" for New England. 

[-JJ-]

lol. That last line me laugh out loud.

 

Felger said on Monday that the Pats did not respect Miami or Philibin and basically knew they only had to play one good quarter of football to win the game. I thought that premise was absurd given Miami beat them pretty badly in South Florida in week 1. I really don't get where these conspiracy theories come from. While the Pats did look flat in the first half, I am pretty sure that had everything to do with the Miami defense who held them to zero points in the second half in week 1. I do think Bill lit a fire at halftime and then they came out smoking but this idea that they took half or three quarters of the game off on purpose is ridiculous.

Absurd for sure. Unlike Felger to say that. No way BB toils with an opponent. They were flat because there was no timing with Brady or the receivers with a couple passed hitting the ground. Josh's game plan may have been a bit conservative. Gronk got no passes 1st half because he was double teamed and blocking a lot on plays.

 

Josh simply opened up the playbook more 2nd half getting passes to Gronk. That and the fire that was lit.

[JerodMayo51]

months ago or yesterday doesn't change the fact that it can be done.

Actually it matters a lot. You're using an example of a game that happened in September.. Teams haven't even established their identity in September and defenses take longer than offenses to develop the cohesiveness to play well.

September is ancient history at this point.

Obviously anything is possible, but the Patriots have done nothing in November and December (facing division leaders and the best Qbs in the nfl) to suggest that they'll be had for 40+ points and be blown out.

Personally I think it's foolish to assume anything, whether a team is at home or away or whatever, none of that matters once the ball is kicked off.

Assuming the Broncos and Pats win their first playoff game and face each other, either team is capable of winning... but you can certainly use recent history to assess and compare the 2 teams, and the Broncos are worse than they were in September, the Patriots have improved.

The Broncos have some flaws and certainly aren't picture perfect, but it will come down to whether they can execute better when it matters most.

[-JJ-]

Actually it matters a lot. You're using an example of a game that happened in September.. Teams haven't even established their identity in September and defenses take longer than offenses to develop the cohesiveness to play well.

September is ancient history at this point.

Obviously anything is possible, but the Patriots have done nothing in November and December (facing division leaders and the best Qbs in the nfl) to suggest that they'll be had for 40+ points and be blown out.

Personally I think it's foolish to assume anything, whether a team is at home or away or whatever, none of that matters once the ball is kicked off.

Assuming the Broncos and Pats win their first playoff game and face each other, either team is capable of winning... but you can certainly use recent history to assess and compare the 2 teams, and the Broncos are worse than they were in September, the Patriots have improved.

The Broncos have some flaws and certainly aren't picture perfect, but it will come down to whether they can execute better when it matters most.

Bolded part goes against the grain. Offenses take longer early to get in sync while defenses can just react. However you are correct defenses can gel towards the end.

 

So I would say in this order of getting it together- defense, offense, defense.

[Shane Bond]

Like they always do .... ;)

I liked their talking during last year's AFCCG.

[southwest1]

38-30??? What world do you live in, SW ? 28-20 is more like it in a SB between those two.

 

The last time both teams scored in the 30s in a SB, you have to go back to Bradshaw-Staubach where Bradshaw won 35-31 and a close second would be the 32-29 that the Patriots won over the Panthers.

Both RW & Tom Brady are capable of lighting  it up Chad. I saw RW do this a lot at Big Ten games in college & Brady is well Brady. NFL history means absolutely nothing with 2 clutch SB winning QBs in my book. 

 

Besides, both Lynch & Blount are capable of carrying defenders to the endzone so 30 points each won't surprise me at all especially if you throw in a TD pick for both Sherman & Revis too. 

[amfootball]

I liked their talking during last year's AFCCG.

The Pats don't talk. You win some, you lose some. How you handle yourself in either situation is the test of true character.

[chad72]

Both RW & Tom Brady are capable of lighting  it up Chad. I saw RW do this a lot at Big Ten games in college & Brady is well Brady. NFL history means absolutely nothing with 2 clutch SB winning QBs in my book. 

 

Besides, both Lynch & Blount are capable of carrying defenders to the endzone so 30 points each won't surprise me at all especially if you throw in a TD pick for both Sherman & Revis too. 

 

Odds are very very low of the scores in the 30s for both teams, given SB history that has produced plenty of clutch QBs like Montana, Bradshaw, Staubach at the big stage etc. Clutch has nothing to do with high scoring, IMO.

 

Seattle, under RW, has never won a game where their D gave up 30 pts and I don't think the NE club has given up 30 pts since week 4 either. Given the playoff intensity and how Ds rule to a considerable extent, I would go as far as to make a bet that both teams do not score 30 pts whatsoever in this SB if the SB is Pats-Seahawks. Both teams pride themselves in not turning it over, so pick sixes against either of those teams is mostly a pipe dream.

[chad72]

Actually it matters a lot. You're using an example of a game that happened in September.. Teams haven't even established their identity in September and defenses take longer than offenses to develop the cohesiveness to play well.

September is ancient history at this point.

Obviously anything is possible, but the Patriots have done nothing in November and December (facing division leaders and the best Qbs in the nfl) to suggest that they'll be had for 40+ points and be blown out.

Personally I think it's foolish to assume anything, whether a team is at home or away or whatever, none of that matters once the ball is kicked off.

Assuming the Broncos and Pats win their first playoff game and face each other, either team is capable of winning... but you can certainly use recent history to assess and compare the 2 teams, and the Broncos are worse than they were in September, the Patriots have improved.

The Broncos have some flaws and certainly aren't picture perfect, but it will come down to whether they can execute better when it matters most.

 

It is hard to make that statement because the Broncos are not putting up Star Wars numbers. When you can pass for a 67% completion rate while running the ball well, I don't think it is a case of the Broncos regressing. It is more a case of them not letting themselves getting dragged into shootouts because they are playing better clock control. If the 49ers were doing the same, we would say "look at them, they are running the ball well and defending well enough and will be a hard out in the playoffs". The same brush has to be applied to the Broncos as well, objectively. 

 

I wish the Colts would incorporate the run more into their O as the playoffs are nearing, to play clock control instead of letting Luck wing it even if we get close to 4 YPC, and stay committed to the run. I don't think any team can convince anyone that they are good enough until they take down the Pats in the playoffs. That's not just for the Pats fans sake, but mainly because the Pats are the gold standard in the AFC, hard to argue that.

[southwest1]

Odds are very very low of the scores in the 30s for both teams, given SB history that has produced plenty of clutch QBs like Montana, Bradshaw, Staubach at the big stage etc. Clutch has nothing to do with high scoring, IMO.

 

Seattle, under RW, has never won a game where their D gave up 30 pts and I don't think the NE club has given up 30 pts since week 4 either. Given the playoff intensity and how Ds rule to a considerable extent, I would go as far as to make a bet that both teams do not score 30 pts whatsoever in this SB if the SB is Pats-Seahawks. Both teams pride themselves in not turning it over, so pick sixes against either of those teams is mostly a pipe dream.

Do you remember the 1994 season & SB XXIV with Steve Young & the 49ers vs QB Stan Humphries & LB Jr. Seau? The final score was 49-26 in favor of San Fran so that's almost 30 on both squads offensively right there. The precent has already been set. It's not like it's impossible or never been done before Chad. 

 

Clutch to me has everything to do with scoring points & matching your rival toe to toe. True, clutch can mean a critical stop on defense, but given how NFL zebras cater to the offense now penalty wise, I'd say higher scoring SBs will proliferate now not diminish. 

 

Any established QB can throw an ill timed pick at any moment especially under the intense heat of SB bulbs with all the world watching. Pipe dream or not. It happens & performance butterflies can get to any established veteran. Was Peyton supposed to get his butt whipped last February & turn the ball over to Kam Chancellor? No, but he did. Facts are facts. 

[chad72]

Do you remember the 1994 season & SB XXIV with Steve Young & the 49ers vs QB Stan Humphries & LB Jr. Seau? The final score was 49-26 in favor of San Fran so that's almost 30 on both squads offensively right there. The precent has already been set. It's not like it's impossible or never been done before Chad. 

 

Clutch to me has everything to do with scoring points & matching your rival toe to toe. True, clutch can mean a critical stop on defense, but given how NFL zebras cater to the offense now penalty wise, I'd say higher scoring SBs will proliferate now not diminish. 

 

That is not proven in the playoffs yet, SW. Regular season, they call more penalties favoring the offense but come playoff time, they ease up on it. I have always felt that has been a big source of discrepancy in Peyton's playoff vs regular season records, percentage wise, because while playing against elite Ds, he does not get those calls that he gets in the regular season. Only time will tell because that will hurt good Ds like the Seahawks and Patriots, IMO. 

 

Given how they have favored the offense, with rules around the 2004 time frame, the closest we have had is 31-25 from the Steelers-Packer SB and a 34-31 from the Ravens-49ers.

 

Otherwise, it has been 24-21 in 2004, 21-10 in 2005, 29-17 in 2006, 17-14 in 2007, 27-23 in 2008, 31-17 in 2009, 31-25 in 2010, 21-17 in 2011, 34-31 in 2012, 43-8 in 2013. Once in the last 10 years have both teams scored in the 30s (mainly happened because the Ravens played field position by conceding a safety at 34-29 but it happened). Again, sounds cliche and repetitive because you are not willing to accept it, odds are very very low that both teams score in the 30s, not just 1 team. I will change my tune saying playoff rules favor the offense if it happens thrice in any span of 5 years (greater than 50% occurrence qualifies for me like a simple majority). Until it happens, you don't have numbers in your favor. Numbers speak louder than opinions to me.

[-JJ-]

Both RW & Tom Brady are capable of lighting  it up Chad. I saw RW do this a lot at Big Ten games in college & Brady is well Brady. NFL history means absolutely nothing with 2 clutch SB winning QBs in my book. 

 

Besides, both Lynch & Blount are capable of carrying defenders to the endzone so 30 points each won't surprise me at all especially if you throw in a TD pick for both Sherman & Revis too. 

problem is by the time of the SB you usually get two good defenses. It's also played a tad more conservative so not to make any mistakes in a crucial game. So it's more common two high powered offenses will have a low score if both teams have a great defense.

 

Remember- defense wins championships

[chad72]

problem is by the time of the SB you usually get two good defenses. It's also played a tad more conservative so not to make any mistakes in a crucial game. So it's more common two high powered offenses will have a low score if both teams have a great defense.

 

Remember- defense wins championships

 

To me, SBs prior to the salary cap era, you had talent discrepancies. The NFC was so powerful for a decade that they got off to hot starts and were crushing their opponents (like say 49-14), and towards garbage time, the NFC team did not care if they gave up 2 garbage time TDs or not making the scores seem closer.

 

In the salary cap era, teams are more evenly matched and tend to play clock control and like you said, there is a conservative nature to not make mistakes, so they are not winging it for high scoring. Saints gave 8 possessions to Peyton with one being a kneel down before the half, Eli and the Giants restricted Patriots' possessions in both those SBs that they won. Teams game plan to cut down the possessions for the opponent, especially if the opponent has a high flying QB. Just what I have been observing lately in SBs. Big plays are rare, so teams force the other team to spend 6 or 7 minutes to get even a FG, that is also a big part of it.

[-JJ-]

38-30??? What world do you live in, SW ? 28-20 is more like it in a SB between those two.

 

The last time both teams scored in the 30s in a SB, you have to go back to Bradshaw-Staubach where Bradshaw won 35-31 and a close second would be the 32-29 that the Patriots won over the Panthers.

And that Panther game was a misconception. Only the 2nd half had high scoring. To those who love defense that was an awesome 1st half that most people forget because to them that's boring.

 

1st qtr Panthers had MINUS 7 yards and NE not much better at 21 yards.

 

2nd qtr not much better. So as a defensive fan you're on the edge of your seat- who is going to make the first mistake.

Jake D  did (forget what).

 

So 2nd half Panthers had no choice but to open it up because they were slowly losing the defensive battle. He came out and threw a bomb (low odds play but made it nonetheless). They got the TD. That in turned forced NE to open it up- hence the 2nd half became a shootout.

 

But the real beauty of that game was the 1st half- if you enjoy to great defenses

[chad72]

And that Panther game was a misconception. Only the 2nd half had high scoring. To those who love defense that was an awesome 1st half that most people forget because to them that's boring.

 

1st qtr Panthers had MINUS 7 yards and NE not much better at 21 yards.

 

2nd qtr not much better. So as a defensive fan you're on the edge of your seat- who is going to make the first mistake.

Jake D  did (forget what).

 

So 2nd half Panthers had no choice but to open it up because they were slowly losing the defensive battle. He came out and threw a bomb (low odds play but made it nonetheless). They got the TD. That in turned forced NE to open it up- hence the 2nd half became a shootout.

 

But the real beauty of that game was the 1st half- if you enjoy to great defenses

 

True dat. With the Flacco SB run, to me, it almost had a "is this guy Flacco for real with his offensive production" feel to me. Teams did not really respect Flacco and continually kept getting burnt with Anquan Boldin inside, and Jacoby Jones and Torrey Smith outside against 1-on-1s during that SB run. I still believe that if they did not have that blackout, the Ravens probably would have won 41-20 or something like that. It was another case of "Panthers like run vs the Patriots" that the 49ers pulled in the second half vs the Ravens, I felt, aided by that stoppage which resulted in the same 29 pts for the 49ers O like the Panthers augmented by the 2 pts from the intentional safety.

[-JJ-]

True dat. With the Flacco SB run, to me, it almost had a "is this guy Flacco for real with his offensive production" feel to me. Teams did not really respect Flacco and continually kept getting burnt with Anquan Boldin inside, and Jacoby Jones and Torrey Smith outside against 1-on-1s during that SB run. I still believe that if they did not have that blackout, the Ravens probably would have won 41-20 or something like that. It was another case of "Panthers like run vs the Patriots" that the 49ers pulled in the second half vs the Ravens, I felt, aided by that stoppage which resulted in the same 29 pts for the 49ers O like the Panthers augmented by the 2 pts from the intentional safety.

Ya know maybe the trend will be higher scores with the advanced passing rules although they tend to relax them in the playoffs.

 

There is one other defensive game I wanted to share with you. It was reg season NE vs Dallas in NE with Bill Parcells coaching Dallas.

 

Was funny as the cameras kept going back and forth between the two Bills.

 

Anyway an amazing defensive game. 0-0 score well into the game and you're on the edge of your seat- who is going to make the 1st mistake. Dallas finally did with an INT from that rookie QB who played well. Wish I could remember who but he faded shortly after but I thought he had promise.

 

Score ended up 12-6. Awesome defensive game. Alas that doesn't motivate the masses

[Yehoodi]

That is not proven in the playoffs yet, SW. Regular season, they call more penalties favoring the offense but come playoff time, they ease up on it. I have always felt that has been a big source of discrepancy in Peyton's playoff vs regular season records, percentage wise, because while playing against elite Ds, he does not get those calls that he gets in the regular season. Only time will tell because that will hurt good Ds like the Seahawks and Patriots, IMO. 

 

Given how they have favored the offense, with rules around the 2004 time frame, the closest we have had is 31-25 from the Steelers-Packer SB and a 34-31 from the Ravens-49ers.

 

Otherwise, it has been 24-21 in 2004, 21-10 in 2005, 29-17 in 2006, 17-14 in 2007, 27-23 in 2008, 31-17 in 2009, 31-25 in 2010, 21-17 in 2011, 34-31 in 2012, 43-8 in 2013. Once in the last 10 years have both teams scored in the 30s (mainly happened because the Ravens played field position by conceding a safety at 34-29 but it happened). Again, sounds cliche and repetitive because you are not willing to accept it, odds are very very low that both teams score in the 30s, not just 1 team. I will change my tune saying playoff rules favor the offense if it happens thrice in any span of 5 years (greater than 50% occurrence qualifies for me like a simple majority). Until it happens, you don't have numbers in your favor. Numbers speak louder than opinions to me.

 

 

Chad, with all stats one needs to looks at them and see what they mean, what their make up is and/or if they compare to other things/slats, it helps to put things in perspective . . . you are looking at the SB and finding only one game in 10 that had both teams scoring over 30 points . . . well lets see how that standard holds up in the regular season . . . by just doing a round check it appears that only 11 games all season this season have both teams scored over 30 points each . . . with 224 games played to date in week 15, that means this regular season year only about 1 game in 11 has both teams scoring over 30 

 

So SBs last 10 years 1 in 10

2014 regular season 1 in 11

 

so about the same . . .

[chad72]

Chad, with all stats one needs to looks at them and see what they mean, what their make up is and/or if they compare to other things/slats, it helps to put things in perspective . . . you are looking at the SB and finding only one game in 10 that had both teams scoring over 30 points . . . well lets see how that standard holds up in the regular season . . . by just doing a round check it appears that only 11 games all season this season have both teams scored over 30 points each . . . with 224 games played to date in week 15, that means this regular season year only about 1 game in 11 has both teams scoring over 30 

 

So SBs last 10 years 1 in 10

2014 regular season 1 in 11

 

so about the same . . .

 

Good numbers comparison, I like that.

 

So, what it means is that the odds of both teams scoring in the 30s are no different in the SB than it is in the regular season and the odds are still very very low. However, here is the catch for your 1 year snapshot regular season numbers.

 

If you took last year (2013 regular season) though, the Broncos, by virtue of being in shootouts, I can already tell you there were 3 games they played (lost to Colts 33-39, lost to Patriots 31-34 and beat the Cowboys 51-48) where both teams scored in the 30s. That is just off the top of my head without even diving deeper. If you took the 10 year sampling of regular season games, the odds of both teams scoring in the 30s are probably higher than in the SB over 10 years. But that was not my original point though. My point was the odds of a 38-30 SB between the Seahawks and Patriots is extremely low.

 

The logical way is still "better Ds in the playoffs lead to lower odds of both teams in the 30s in a SB, at the biggest stage". I am sure the numbers, if we dig deeper, will fall in line and the odds of both teams scoring in the 30s will probably be higher in the regular season than the SB as well. Heck, from a Colts fan perspective, I remember the 38-34 AFCCG win and last year's wild card win of 45-44 vs the Chiefs. So, yes, it can happen in the playoffs but given the SB history, it is way more unlikely at a SB than any earlier playoff stage given the stakes. That has been my point all along, exclusively to SBs.

[-JJ-]

Good numbers comparison, I like that.

 

So, what it means is that the odds of both teams scoring in the 30s are no different in the SB than it is in the regular season and the odds are still very very low. However, here is the catch for your 1 year snapshot regular season numbers.

 

If you took last year (2013 regular season) though, the Broncos, by virtue of being in shootouts, I can already tell you there were 3 games they played (lost to Colts 33-39, lost to Patriots 31-34 and beat the Cowboys 51-48) where both teams scored in the 30s. That is just off the top of my head without even diving deeper. If you took the 10 year sampling of regular season games, the odds of both teams scoring in the 30s are probably higher than in the SB over 10 years. But that was not my original point though. My point was the odds of a 38-30 SB between the Seahawks and Patriots is extremely low.

 

The logical way is still "better Ds in the playoffs lead to lower odds of both teams in the 30s in a SB, at the biggest stage". I am sure the numbers, if we dig deeper, will fall in line and the odds of both teams scoring in the 30s will probably be higher in the regular season than the SB as well. Heck, from a Colts fan perspective, I remember the 38-34 AFCCG win and last year's wild card win of 45-44 vs the Chiefs. So, yes, it can happen in the playoffs but given the SB history, it is way more unlikely at a SB than any earlier playoff stage given the stakes. That has been my point all along, exclusively to SBs.

Without looking at history I agree you'll be hard pressed to finding scores in the 30's for BOTH teams.

 

Heck look at 07 Pats Giants. Last game of the season Pats 38 Giants 34.

SB 2 games later--Giants 17-Pats 14.

 

Something just happens in SB to make it lower. Giants D line played good in SB- NE Oline good all year did not- well they did have the flu ;)

[amfootball]

Good numbers comparison, I like that.

 

So, what it means is that the odds of both teams scoring in the 30s are no different in the SB than it is in the regular season and the odds are still very very low. However, here is the catch for your 1 year snapshot regular season numbers.

 

If you took last year (2013 regular season) though, the Broncos, by virtue of being in shootouts, I can already tell you there were 3 games they played (lost to Colts 33-39, lost to Patriots 31-34 and beat the Cowboys 51-48) where both teams scored in the 30s. That is just off the top of my head without even diving deeper. If you took the 10 year sampling of regular season games, the odds of both teams scoring in the 30s are probably higher than in the SB over 10 years. But that was not my original point though. My point was the odds of a 38-30 SB between the Seahawks and Patriots is extremely low.

 

The logical way is still "better Ds in the playoffs lead to lower odds of both teams in the 30s in a SB, at the biggest stage". I am sure the numbers, if we dig deeper, will fall in line and the odds of both teams scoring in the 30s will probably be higher in the regular season than the SB as well. Heck, from a Colts fan perspective, I remember the 38-34 AFCCG win and last year's wild card win of 45-44 vs the Chiefs. So, yes, it can happen in the playoffs but given the SB history, it is way more unlikely at a SB than any earlier playoff stage given the stakes. That has been my point all along, exclusively to SBs.

Pats/Carolina was 32-29 so basically both scoring 30 pretty much. And Ravens/Niners was 34-31. And GB/Steelers was 31-25. Those are the closest in recent SB history.

[Shane Bond]

The Pats don't talk. You win some, you lose some. How you handle yourself in either situation is the test of true character.

So they dont always win, good