So who wins the SB

[cdumler7]

Not the point.

A Lombardi means more to a city that has none than it does to a city that has 2 already.

How can you know that? There are certain cities across the country known as football cities. To those cities where football is everything I would think a Super Bowl means more to them than a city that football has been one of many sports. Like I said I lived in Seattle for a while and people wanted to talk more about the pro soccer team than they ever did the Seahawks. It has now switched obviously with how well the team is doing but there are cities like Pittsburgh, San Fran, Denver, Dallas, Green Bay, and others that Super Bowls mean a ton to them.

 

[SonnyCID]

How can you know that? There are certain cities across the country known as football cities. To those cities where football is everything I would think a Super Bowl means more to them than a city that football has been one of many sports. Like I said I lived in Seattle for a while and people wanted to talk more about the pro soccer team than they ever did the Seahawks. It has now switched obviously with how well the team is doing but there are cities like Pittsburgh, San Fran, Denver, Dallas, Green Bay, and others that Super Bowls mean a ton to them.

What do those teams have in common?

Do you think they would be such die-hard cities without the trophies they already have? The answer is no. SF was not some major football town "that would appreciate a SB more than anyone else" before Walsh showed up.

 

[Podunkparte]

Not sure you can compare the two units. Jimmy Graham would be the only starter from that group on the Broncos team. Colston would be a toss up with Decker but otherwise don't think you can compare the two groups.

Sproles is as dynamic a pass catcher out of the backfield or lined up outside as Welker is. They're both small, fast, elusive guys.

Like I said, they're not exactly the same but the Saints have just as dangerous a receiving core as Denver does and we beat them twice this year. It isn't as though Seattle has faced nothing but teams with no receivers all year long.

 

[cdumler7]

Kind of like comparing KC's secondary to Seattles?

I didn't compare them. I said Seattle is better. Only player I even said could start for Seattle is Eric berry.

 

[cdumler7]

Sproles is as dynamic a pass catcher out of the backfield or lined up outside as Welker is. They're both small, fast, elusive guys.

Like I said, they're not exactly the same but the Saints have just as dangerous a receiving core as Denver does and we beat them twice this year. It isn't as though Seattle has faced nothing but teams with no receivers all year long.

Sproles and welker are two very different players. I didn't say you hadn't played good receivers I said you have played a unit from top to bottom as good as the broncos.

 

[Midnightangel]

How can you know that? There are certain cities across the country known as football cities. To those cities where football is everything I would think a Super Bowl means more to them than a city that football has been one of many sports. Like I said I lived in Seattle for a while and people wanted to talk more about the pro soccer team than they ever did the Seahawks. It has now switched obviously with how well the team is doing but there are cities like Pittsburgh, San Fran, Denver, Dallas, Green Bay, and others that Super Bowls mean a ton to them.

Um, yeah....we're one of them.

So I get it.

I also get how much that first SB meant not only to the Steelers but to the city of Pittsburgh. We came into the NFL in 1933 and didn't win a championship until 1974. That's over 40 years. That first one erases a lot of heartache.

 

[iknowftbll]

Denvers receivers are average(made better than avg by Manning), and until Taliq got hurt they weren't doing much against a uncomparable secondary with good field/weather. This hawks secondary is a whole new level and weather and field conditions are almost guaranteed to favor the run game.

Average, above average, the Manning factor, whatever you want to call them I'm fine with it. Not a one of them are the single best at their position, and I think a lot of Broncos fans will readily admit this. But from top to bottom, Thomas, Decker, Welker, Thomas, Moreno/Ball are as good a group of targets as ever existed together on one roster. Now the Seahawks have a group of players in the secondary that are big, strong, aggressive, smart, and as fundamentally sound as you could ask. The Broncos have their work for them. But that is a two-way street. The Seahawks secondary has not dealt with as complete a core of receiving threats as this Broncos unit. Not even close.

We beat Marques Colston, Robert Meachem, Jimmy Graham, Lance Moore, and Darren Sproles twice. Of course they're different, but to say Seattle hasn't faced a group full of receiving threats is wrong.

There is a reason the Broncos outscored the Saints by roughly 13 PPG through the season. If it were something like 1-3 PPG, I may be inclined to say the Saints playing a schedule with tougher defenses were the difference. But a difference of 13 PPG can only partially be explained by opponents. A difference that pronounced is the result of one team being significantly better than the other.

I don't think this has sunk in for a lot of Seahawks fans. The Broncos had the top scoring offense at 37.9 PPG. The second highest scoring offense was the Chicago Bears at 27.8 PPG. I realize the Broncos have not played a defense as good as the Seahawks. But it is a fair statement to say the Seahawks have not played an offense as good as the Broncos. Not even close.

 

[Wolvie]

no love for Kenny Stills?

 

[Berkeley_Blues]

Manning > Sherman

In other words,

HOF QB > Shit talking punk

 

[broncosmitty]

Not the point.

A Lombardi means more to a city that has none than it does to a city that has 2 already.

We got our first Lombardi ever this week here in Detroit. Everything has changed since.

 

[Podunkparte]

Manning > Sherman

In other words,

HOF QB > Shit talking punk

Not true. Richard Sherman is a much better CB than Peyton Manning.

U mad bro?

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

Not true. Richard Sherman is a much better CB than Peyton Manning.

U mad bro?

Except in Madden. The AI cheats so bad. I once saw a video where they had Peyton Manning guarding Boldin and Manning made an interception. LOL.

 

[Podunkparte]

Except in Madden. The AI cheats so bad. I once saw a video where they had Peyton Manning guarding Boldin and Manning made an interception. LOL.

Probably because Boldin is too slow to even get separation against PM in coverage ; )

 

[BoBlake]

I don't think this has sunk in for a lot of Seahawks fans. The Broncos had the top scoring offense at 37.9 PPG. The second highest scoring offense was the Chicago Bears at 27.8 PPG. I realize the Broncos have not played a defense as good as the Seahawks. But it is a fair statement to say the Seahawks have not played an offense as good as the Broncos. Not even close.

What are you talking about. I've literally read and said that exact same thing at least 15 times from Seattle fans.


All this X > Y bullshit is just hypothetical. No one knows what to expect between these two teams. It's all going to depend on who shows up to play. Who's able to make the plays when they need to. Whoever executes the best will win the game (how's that for a "no-duh" statement, but really that's all that can be said about these teams).

It's going to be a GREAT Superbowl and the one that I think everyone wanted to see (objectively). I don't think either team holds a great advantage over the other.

 

[iknowftbll]

What are you talking about. I've literally read and said that exact same thing at least 15 times from Seattle fans.


All this X > Y bullshit is just hypothetical. No one knows what to expect between these two teams. It's all going to depend on who shows up to play. Who's able to make the plays when they need to. Whoever executes the best will win the game (how's that for a "no-duh" statement, but really that's all that can be said about these teams).

It's going to be a GREAT Superbowl and the one that I think everyone wanted to see (objectively). I don't think either team holds a great advantage over the other.

Perhaps so. I've read a lot comments here, other sports forums and on the heels of sports articles ranging from ESPN/NFL.com to local papers. The prevailing mindset amongst Seahawks fans is "No way Denver wins this game because they haven't seen a defense like this one all season." It's fine with me that people feel this way, it just makes it hard to have a football conversation when people can't or won't trade point for point.

I definitely agree that it is all speculation and none of us really know what is going to happen. Both sides have a lot of valid reasons to be confident in their team. Considering how long it has been since two #1 seeds have faced off and brought the #1 offense and defense and pitted them against each other, the potential for this one to be one of the greatest Super Bowl games in a long time is real.

 

[Morpheus]

Y! SPORTS

Legal.

 

[LogicMan]

If Hawks can get Peyton to have to move his legs in the pocket with pressure, and do the 5 yard chucks on the receivers, they have a chance. Peyton will pass regardless. If you mess his timing you can get some picks, he will throw on the play. Pressure is paramount.

 

[Broncos6482]

What do those teams have in common?

Do you think they would be such die-hard cities without the trophies they already have? The answer is no. SF was not some major football town "that would appreciate a SB more than anyone else" before Walsh showed up.

Denver was selling out Broncos games long before the team ever got any good. I believe the sellout streak started in 1970, and the Broncos didn't even have a winning season until 1973, and didn't make the playoffs until 1977.

Don't tell me Denver wouldn't be a die-hard Broncos town without the trophies; it's just not true.

 

[Broncos6482]

We beat Marques Colston, Robert Meachem, Jimmy Graham, Lance Moore, and Darren Sproles twice. Of course they're different, but to say Seattle hasn't faced a group full of receiving threats is wrong.

Those guys aren't even on the same level as Denver. The only one who would be starting in Denver is Graham.

It's fine to say that Denver hasn't faced a defense as good as Seattle's: that's true. But it's also true that Seattle hasn't faced an offense as good as Denver's.

 

[SonnyCID]

Denver was selling out Broncos games long before the team ever got any good. I believe the sellout streak started in 1970, and the Broncos didn't even have a winning season until 1973, and didn't make the playoffs until 1977.

Don't tell me Denver wouldn't be a die-hard Broncos town without the trophies; it's just not true.

I actually agree about Denver. They were flirting with titles for 20 years before they won one and were the only show in town for years.

But some of those other places "die hard" image coincided with their success.