Anyone have a feeling this will be a lop-sided Superbowl?

[BleedBlu8792]

1 hour ago, jvan1973 said:

Just because Mike Carey said so doesn't make it so.    Had it been ruled a complete catch that would have stood as well.    

You misunderstood what I was saying. I'm not a fan of Mike Carey at all, I just found it surprising that he even saw it as a catch. There was enough there to over-turn the call.

[Dustin]

17 hours ago, oldunclemark said:

wow

 

I guess you got me. Not the first time I've picked a game wrong. Certainly won't be the last.

[bababooey]

On 1/29/2016 at 10:53 AM, bababooey said:

While I am impressed with Carolina's record, I don't think it's as impressive as the 2007 Pats or the 2009 Colts (14-2 but threw the season away vs the Jets and Bills in the last two weeks). Both teams failed to win the SB.

 

Carolina games against playoff teams - won all

Seahawks

Redskins

Packers

Colts (OT) - thrown in for the sake of argument bc when healthy they are a playoff team

 

Denver games against playoff teams

Chiefs x2 - split W/L when Manning was injured

Vikings

Packers

Patriots

Colts - L

Steelers - L

Bengals

 

Denver still has the number 1 D and so much more so than Carolina that CAR is closer to sixth. 15-1 and playing in their weak division with a couple of almost losses to the Colts and Giants isn't huge. The number 1 D is 11-2 in the last 13 SB's and one of the losses is last year Seattle. White jerseys are also undefeated in the last 6 or so SBs I read.

Well, good thing I put money on the Broncos right before kickoff.

 

You're welcome, everyone!

[jvan1973]

8 minutes ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

You misunderstood what I was saying. I'm not a fan of Mike Carey at all, I just found it surprising that he even saw it as a catch. There was enough there to over-turn the call.

I disagree.    You couldn't see if the nose of the ball touched the ground.   But that play was hardly the difference in the outcome either way.   The better team won

[throwing BBZ]

6 minutes ago, bababooey said:

Well, good thing I put money on the Broncos right before kickoff.

 

You're welcome, everyone!

 

 Spend that $1 wisely. ;-)

[bababooey]

10 minutes ago, throwing BBZ said:

 

 Spend that $1 wisely. ;-)

I was actually down 90 and won 93 haha. I emotionally hedged myself for the Pats to win the SB and to beat Denver and was thinking of doing the same thing for Carolina but had a gut feeling not to.

[BleedBlu8792]

24 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

I disagree.    You couldn't see if the nose of the ball touched the ground.   But that play was hardly the difference in the outcome either way.   The better team won

The tip can touch the ground as long as the receiver has possession, which Brown had. He lost possession when he rolled over and regained it again without the ball touching the ground.

 

Disagree all you want, but that play along with the sack fumble gave Denver full momentum. 

[jvan1973]

5 minutes ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

The tip can touch the ground as long as the receiver has possession, which Brown had. He lost possession when rolled over and regained it again without the ball touching the ground.

 

Disagree all you want, but that play along with the sack fumble gave Denver full momentum. 

An incomplete pass doesn't give a team momentum.  Obviously the sack fumble did.

 

The broncos pass rush was the difference in the game

[BleedBlu8792]

5 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

An incomplete pads doesn't give a team momentum.  Obviously the sack fumble did.

 

The broncos pass rush was the difference in the game

 

I never said that it specifically did..  There is an "AND" in my previous statement between both events correlating the two. Had that pass play been called the other way, the chances of a sack/fumble/TD go down due to the Carolina offense being on the ~35 yard line instead of inside the 10.

 

There is no disagreement in that Denver took advantage of the situation and slammed the door on Carolina.

 

[krunk]

On ‎1‎/‎25‎/‎2016 at 0:29 PM, BleedBlu8792 said:

Carolina is too strong defensively and offensively for Denver. Ware and Miller are going to leave horrible rushing lanes for Carolina and if they sit back Cam is going to find the open guy. It's going to be like 2 years ago all over again... Carolina is going to curb stomp Denver just like Seattle did. 

 

Carolina's defensive front will have Peyton running for his life. That OL couldn't even contain NE's front 7, so they sure as hell aren't going to contain Carolina's. 

 

Carolina by 10+

Feeling kind of crunchy about this prediction now aren't ya!

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, krunk said:

Feeling kind of crunchy about this prediction now aren't ya!

It was lopsided all right  

[ColtsLegacy]

1 hour ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

The tip can touch the ground as long as the receiver has possession, which Brown had. He lost possession when he rolled over and regained it again without the ball touching the ground.

 

Disagree all you want, but that play along with the sack fumble gave Denver full momentum. 

 

If the ball touches the ground, in any capacity, and the ball subsequently comes loose then it's incomplete. Period. In this case, right after the moment where the ball may or may not have touched the ground the ball came loose in the receivers grip, clear as day, before he regained control. The reason the play stood is because there was no conclusive evidence to say that the ball did not touch the ground before it came loose.

 

But, no one is using that challenge as an excuse if Cam didn't get curb stomped by Von Miller a play or two later, are they?

[Traines]

7 minutes ago, krunk said:

Feeling kind of crunchy about this prediction now aren't ya!

Thought the same exact thing, especially after I read all of the other similar posts throughout this thread about how Carolina was going to beat Denver so badly (Denver's O-line can't handle Carolina, Peyton will be running for his life all game, Cam is not Brady and will not sit in the pocket and get hit, Miller and Ware will leave running lanes by blitzing against Carolina's great O-line, Ware and Miller will not be able to get to Cam like they did Brady, a reference to Carolina curb stomping Denver, and the list goes on)...and I believe this same person made a reference involving a donkey getting beat with a paddle.  All of this is totally fine obviously (and to each their own), but whenever the opposite happens, and you're still defending the team and picking out individual plays as excuses, it gets to be a large grasp and borders on ridiculous.  In the end, Denver made the plays, were the better team, and won fair and square.

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

The tip can touch the ground as long as the receiver has possession, which Brown had. He lost possession when he rolled over and regained it again without the ball touching the ground.

 

Disagree all you want, but that play along with the sack fumble gave Denver full momentum. 

Denver had momentum when Miller stripped sacked Newton and Denver got a TD. The defense gave up a few plays but there was never really a momentum swing IMO.

[ColtsLegacy]

2 hours ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

You misunderstood what I was saying. I'm not a fan of Mike Carey at all, I just found it surprising that he even saw it as a catch. There was enough there to over-turn the call.

 

Mike Carey calling it a catch should have been all the evidence you needed to know it was not a catch. Carey couldn't hit the broadside of a barn if he fell out of a boat.

[18Manning]

1 hour ago, jvan1973 said:

An incomplete pass doesn't give a team momentum.  Obviously the sack fumble did.

 

The broncos pass rush was the difference in the game

 

I think Denver would have won regardless. The defense was unstoppable! They pressured Fig, I mean Superman all night long.

[jvan1973]

1 hour ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

 

I never said that it specifically did..  There is an "AND" in my previous statement between both events correlating the two. Had that pass play been called the other way, the chances of a sack/fumble/TD go down due to the Carolina offense being on the ~35 yard line instead of inside the 10.

 

There is no disagreement in that Denver took advantage of the situation and slammed the door on Carolina.

 

http://www.milehighreport.com/2016/2/8/10945910/super-bowl-50-no-that-was-not-a-catch

[southwest1]

2 hours ago, Dustin said:

 

I guess you got me. Not the first time I've picked a game wrong. Certainly won't be the last.

I respect it when fans own up to their prediction miscues & loses Dustin. Hades, I'm wrong a lot too. It's all good man. 

13 minutes ago, ColtsLegacy said:

 

If the ball touches the ground, in any capacity, and the ball subsequently comes loose then it's incomplete. Period. In this case, right after the moment where the ball may or may not have touched the ground the ball came loose in the receivers grip, clear as day, before he regained control. The reason the play stood is because there was no conclusive evidence to say that the ball did not touch the ground before it came loose.

 

But, no one is using that challenge as an excuse if Cam didn't get curb stomped by Von Miller a play or two later, are they?

Beautiful explanation CL. You should be the head of NFL officiating. Oh wait, that means NFL zebras would be required to be competent. Darn, it was a nice dream while it lasted. 

[BleedBlu8792]

54 minutes ago, krunk said:

Feeling kind of crunchy about this prediction now aren't ya!

 

Nah not at all.. I was wrong it happens to the best of us..

[southwest1]

The best part of Denver's decisive victory is watching all these sports "experts" not recall that they all went with Carolina to win the SB, with maybe the exception of Tony Dungy, & now they wanna pretend like they had Manning's back all along. Whatever. 

 

Now, in the interest of full disclosure & transparency, SW1 will admit that I was tough on Peyton after his 2013 loss to Seattle. But, I also said that I wanted his swan song to be a high note & end with a ring. 

 

Kudos "Sheriff" kudos! 

 

Just for laughs, how's that Al Jazeera fabricated HGH investigation going Sly? Oh, dead in the water eh? Yep, that's what I thought.  

 

Ray Lewis was rumored to use illegal antler spray & he wins his 2nd ring & now Peyton is rumored to use illegal steroids & he also wins his second ring. 

 

Translation: A bull crap scandal on an iconic athlete equals shiny new hardware. Works for me man. LOL! 

[2006Coltsbestever]

17 minutes ago, southwest1 said:

The best part of Denver's decisive victory is watching all these sports "experts" not recall that they all went with Carolina to win the SB, with maybe the exception of Tony Dungy, & now they wanna pretend like they had Manning's back all along. Whatever. 

 

Now, in the interest of full disclosure & transparency, SW1 will admit that I was tough on Peyton after his 2013 loss to Seattle. But, I also said that I wanted his swan song to be a high note & end with a ring. 

 

Kudos "Sheriff" kudos! 

 

Just for laughs, how's that Al Jazeera fabricated HGH investigation going Sly? Oh, dead in the water eh? Yep, that's what I thought.  

 

Ray Lewis was rumored to use illegal antler spray & he wins his 2nd ring & now Peyton is rumored to use illegal steroids & he also wins his second ring. 

 

Translation: A bull crap scandal on an iconic athlete equals shiny new hardware. Works for me man. LOL! 

I know, nobody in the media picked Denver but they are kissing Manning's behind  I have yet to see Deion's reaction to the game.

[krunk]

14 minutes ago, southwest1 said:

The best part of Denver's decisive victory is watching all these sports "experts" not recall that they all went with Carolina to win the SB, with maybe the exception of Tony Dungy, & now they wanna pretend like they had Manning's back all along. Whatever. 

 

Now, in the interest of full disclosure & transparency, SW1 will admit that I was tough on Peyton after his 2013 loss to Seattle. But, I also said that I wanted his swan song to be a high note & end with a ring. 

 

Kudos "Sheriff" kudos! 

I like when Talib came on set and talked for a little bit and then turned and asked Marshall Faulk and the other guy who they picked. They both said Denver. I think he already knew who said what because he saved Michael Irvin for last. He turned and took a long stare at Irvin and said "Who you pick Mike?" As if he did not know! Mike starts stuttering and says I picked Carolina. Thought it was funny.

[2006Coltsbestever]

8 minutes ago, krunk said:

I like when Talib came on set and talked for a little bit and then turned and asked Marshall Faulk and the other guy who they picked. They both said Denver. I think he already knew who said what because he saved Michael Irvin for last. He turned and took a long stare at Irvin and said "Who you pick Mike?" As if he did not know! Mike starts stuttering and says I picked Carolina. Thought it was funny.

What about Deion?  I guess Deion can eat crow too regarding bashing Peyton for years.

[southwest1]

2 minutes ago, krunk said:

I like when Talib came on set and talked for a little bit and then turned and asked Marshall Faulk and the other guy who they picked. They both said Denver. I think he already knew who said what because he saved Michael Irvin for last. He turned and took a long stare at Irvin and said "Who you pick Mike?" As if he did not know! Mike starts stuttering and says I picked Carolina. Thought it was funny.

Yeah, I saw that too krunk. Don't get me started on Michael Irvin or Prime Time for that matter or I'll get myself suspended for a year on the forum. I respect both mens athletic talent, but their verbal, in your face swag, supreme self confidence just rubs me the wrong way. That & the fact that getting them to admit they made a mistake is like pulling teeth with no novacane . 

 

Don't try to pretend your BFF #88. Never gonna happen in my lifetime. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, southwest1 said:

Yeah, I saw that too krunk. Don't get me started on Michael Irvin or Prime Time for that matter or I'll get myself suspended for a year on the forum. I respect both mens athletic talent, but their verbal, in your face swag, supreme self confidence just rubs me the wrong way. That & the fact that getting them to admit they made a mistake is like pulling teeth with no novacane . 

 

Don't try to pretend your BFF #88. Never gonna happen in my lifetime. 

I didn't even realize Faulk took Denver. I thought they all took Cam.

[krunk]

59 minutes ago, Traines said:

Thought the same exact thing, especially after I read all of the other similar posts throughout this thread about how Carolina was going to beat Denver so badly (Denver's O-line can't handle Carolina, Peyton will be running for his life all game, Cam is not Brady and will not sit in the pocket and get hit, Miller and Ware will leave running lanes by blitzing against Carolina's great O-line, Ware and Miller will not be able to get to Cam like they did Brady, a reference to Carolina curb stomping Denver, and the list goes on)...and I believe this same person made a reference involving a donkey getting beat with a paddle.  All of this is totally fine obviously (and to each their own), but whenever the opposite happens, and you're still defending the team and picking out individual plays as excuses, it gets to be a large grasp and borders on ridiculous.  In the end, Denver made the plays, were the better team, and won fair and square.

Two things I knew about Carolina. I knew their real running game was mediocre with Stewart so that would probably get shutdown. I knew Cam would only take so many attempts at running so it was likely they would end up one dimensional. Number two was if they ended up one dimensional their Wrs were too mediocre to beat all those quality DBs Denver has to go along with that pass rush. To beat Denver to me you need some quality Wrs, good ground game. Play action passing game. Especially with Talib back there as he tends to get undisciplined at times. We had all these things when we beat them.

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 minutes ago, krunk said:

Two things I knew about Carolina. I knew their real running game was mediocre with Stewart so that would probably get shutdown. I knew Cam would only take so many attempts at running so it was likely they would end up one dimensional. Number two was if they ended up one dimensional their Wrs were too mediocre to beat all those quality DBs Denver has to go along with that pass rush. To beat Denver to me you need some quality Wrs, good ground game. Play action passing game. Especially with Talib back there as he tends to get undisciplined at times. We had all these things when we beat them.

I agree. Luck is a better passer than Cam too. The only thing that scared me going into the game was Cam's running ability. I was really shocked he didn't just take off and run at times when things broke down like Luck did against them.

[krunk]

7 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I didn't even realize Faulk took Denver. I thought they all took Cam.

Remember Faulk was Peytons running back in Indy. He went for his buddy.

[southwest1]

5 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I didn't even realize Faulk took Denver. I thought they all took Cam.

Marshall is always fair in his analysis. I never have any qualms with him. Ever. 

 

I wonder who Solomon Wilcotts picked? He's reasonable too. 1 of my favorite pundits around. 

[krunk]

3 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I agree. Luck is a better passer than Cam too. The only thing that scared me going into the game was Cam's running ability. I was really shocked he didn't just take off and run at times when things broke down like Luck did against them.

Broncos had the running lanes squeezed down and the edges contained. Lots of well constructed blitzes too.

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 minutes ago, southwest1 said:

Marshall is always fair in his analysis. I never have any qualms with him. Ever. 

 

I wonder who Solomon Wilcotts picked? He's reasonable too. 1 of my favorite pundits around. 

Yeah not sure on that one either. Most of what I seen they all went Carolina being Stephen A, Skip, Both Mike's on Mike and Mike, Deion, Irvin

[bababooey]

Just now, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Yeah not sure on that one either. Most of what I seen they all went Carolina being Stephen A, Skip, Both Mike's on Mike and Mike, Deion, Irvin

Trey Wingo is the only ESPN analyst to pick Denver by more than a TD of 70 people.

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, bababooey said:

Trey Wingo is the only ESPN analyst to pick Denver by more than a TD of 70 people.

Wow! Nice call Trey! I had it 24-20 Denver on here. I didn't even think it would be by more than TD. Trey gets MVP  

[2006Coltsbestever]

I am out of likes but like a lot of these posts.

[oldunclemark]

8 hours ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

 

It is what it is...

 

Carolina shot themselves in the foot and Denver capitalized on it and it was game over.

 

However, after they ruled Browns catch incomplete even after seeing it a second time, and even Mike Carey got it right, I knew how the game was going to go from there.

 

It's open game for a good handful of teams next year and hopefully it's the Colts that come out on top.

That was a pivotal play......but I saw the ball touch the ground and then move..

I thought the call was correct...but I was soooooo biased

[ColtsBlueFL]

11 hours ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

However, after they ruled Browns catch incomplete even after seeing it a second time, and even Mike Carey got it right, I knew how the game was going to go from there.

 

I heard Bill Polian on "Late Hits" radio show (Sirius XM radio NFL channel 88) tonight.

 

He said that call would not be overturned.  He also said any call on the field will be up held unless there is 'incontrovertible" evidence to overrule the officials call.

 

He said he's on the Catch Rule committee (with coaches Ken Whisenhunt, Jim Schwartz and Joe Philbin, former NFL receiver James Thrash and Tom Finken, and a former NFL side judge who currently trains game officials) and there will not be any major changes.  He also called out all of the "What's a catch?' crowd.  He said he knows what a catch is, the coaches know what a catch is, and in that case Rivera challenged based that he felt the ball never touched the ground, when there was a section where it clearly did.  And some would say maybe it could have, or could not have. To which he says that's not enough to overturn.

 

Then he mentioned to those who don't know what a catch is, to go read the rule book.  And followed it up with they are either disingenuous or under-informed.

 

Strong words, and position.

[JCPatriot]

On Tuesday, January 26, 2016 at 8:28 PM, \m/COLTS\m/ said:

So the Colts took the Panthers into OT and only lost by 3, yet it was a "blowout?" Ummm ok.

 

That's not what I said.  I said....

 

On Tuesday, January 26, 2016 at 7:38 PM, JCPatriot said:

 

The Colts were getting their rear ends handed to them against the Panthers, and then they stormed back at the end and made the final score close.  For all practical purposes, the Panthers blew the Colts out.  If Carolina has a significant weakness, it is their tendency to not finish teams off once they get a comfortable lead.

 

I didn't say that the game actually WAS a blowout.  I said that, FOR PRACTICAL PURPOSES, the game was a blowout.  Obviously, a game that goes into OT is not a blowout.  I said this in the context of discussing one of Carolina's glaring weaknesses, that they have a tendency to not finish teams off once they get a comfortable lead.  Nobody looks at the Colts game and says, "Hmm....the Colts kept the game close.  Lets analyze this to figure out how to take down the Panthers," because, from a practical standpoint, it was a blowout.  The Colts game doesn't provide any kind of blueprint for how to beat the Panthers unless your blueprint is....

 

Step 1 - Let them walk all over you and build a big lead.

Step 2 - Wait until they get bored and stop playing hard.

Step 3 - Storm back at the end and try to take the lead before they realize that they actually might lose.

 

On Wednesday, January 27, 2016 at 9:16 PM, Jules said:

 

I think that game also showed how sometimes Carolina has a weakness all year with holding onto a good lead.

 

Exactly.  That was my whole point.

 

On Friday, January 29, 2016 at 10:35 AM, bababooey said:

...but saying someone is "more hungry" is a little ridiculous intangible/Skip Bayless thing to say as it's the SB, everyone is hungry for it.

 

You would think so, but apparently not.

 

On Friday, January 29, 2016 at 11:26 AM, BleedBlu8792 said:

 

Denver's offense is going to be their defenses own demise. 3 and outs and turnovers is going to keep putting that Denver D back on the field and eventually that D is going to break, that's when the game is probably going to get out of hand.

 

That's what I thought too but nope, the D never broke.  That was the most incredibly dominating defensive performance that I have ever watched unfold in real time.  The entire game I was thinking, "Denver needs some offense.  The defense isn't going to be able to sustain this for the entire game," but they did.  I was thinking, "Come on, Peyton, if you can come up with one last TD drive you can walk away a champion."  I thought they would need one offensive TD to win.  They eventually got it after the defense set them up in the red zone but to be honest, I think they would have won without it.  That defense was just incredible.

 

On Friday, January 29, 2016 at 0:51 PM, Valpo2004 said:

 

I think if it looks like it's gonna be a shoot out or they are gonna have to put up a bunch of points they might want to go to Oswielder.

 

 

One question that I was pondering in the days leading up to the game was if the Broncos found themselves in a hole and they needed a comeback to win, would they stick with Peyton and go to Osweiler?  If there was, say, two minutes to go and they needed a TD to stay alive or if they were in the fourth quarter and down by two scores, what would they do?  Osweiler would probably stand a better chance of moving the ball and getting the needed scores, and at that point you are more willing to risk turnovers.  At the same time, though, could you really sub in a backup in the fourth quarter of the Super Bowl that hasn't played a snap since Week 17 of the regular season?  It is an interesting question and fun to ponder, but I am glad that we never got the opportunity to learn the answer.

 

On Saturday, January 30, 2016 at 11:00 PM, SilentHill said:

I think the game will be lop-sided too, but just not the way the OP does, I think Denver runs away with this one, winning by at least 8.

 

We heard it here first!!!

 

On Tuesday, February 9, 2016 at 7:47 PM, ColtsLegacy said:

This thread is classic. Much crow to be served.

 

That game was well worth having to stomach some crow.  Do I have to eat mine with the feathers, or can I pluck it first?

 

10 hours ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

You misunderstood what I was saying. I'm not a fan of Mike Carey at all, I just found it surprising that he even saw it as a catch. There was enough there to over-turn the call.

 

There wasn't.  The nose of the ball clearly touched the ground as he was going down.  That's okay because he had possession at that point, but once it touches the ground the receiver has to maintain possession all the way through to the end.  As he was rolling over on ground, the ball shifted and he wedged it in his armpit.  It was unclear from the replay whether he maintained possession during that shift or if he lost possession and regained it.  Since you couldn't tell from the replay whether or not he maintained possession during that time, then you stick with the call on the field.  If they had called it complete on the field, they would have stuck with that as well.  I'm not sure if they actually got the call right or not, but I agree that there was not sufficient evidence in the replay to overturn it.

 

9 hours ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

The tip can touch the ground as long as the receiver has possession, which Brown had. He lost possession when he rolled over and regained it again without the ball touching the ground.

 

 

Yes, the ball can touch the ground as long as the receiver has possession, but if he loses possession after it touches the ground then that's it.  It's incomplete.  I'm not sure that he actually did lose possession, but if he did then there is no question that is an incomplete pass.

 

7 hours ago, krunk said:

Number two was if they ended up one dimensional their Wrs were too mediocre to beat all those quality DBs Denver has to go along with that pass rush. To beat Denver to me you need some quality Wrs, good ground game.

 

I actually thought the Carolina receivers did a decent job of getting open.  Cam was just missing them.  There were several passes that went sailing over the heads of open receivers.  There was also one play where the receiver went up and made a really impressive catch in traffic on a ball that otherwise would have gone sailing over his head.  The Carolina receivers didn't burn the Denver defense, but they did get open semi-regularly.

 

31 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

He also called out all of the "What's a catch?' crowd.  He said he knows what a catch is, the coaches know what a catch is, and in that case Rivera challenged based that he felt the ball never touched the ground, when there was a section where it clearly did.

 

I don't understand the "What's a catch?" crowd either.  I get them wrong in real time frequently, but once I see a good replay I can call those correctly 90-95% of the time.  In this case, when I saw the first replay I initially thought it was a catch.  I've already stated my opinion after seeing all of the replays, so I won't repeat it.  I am much worse at playing the "What's a defenseless receiver?" game, though.  That one is a crap shoot.