Miyagi-Do Karate Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Nope! Seattle is too fast, too physical, too relentless, and too good, and too complete. That's what they said about the cowboys against us, yet we beat them during the regular season just about every year during the 90s. I agree that Seattle is tough and played well, but this game was a product of mistakes that just got out of hand. The D Thomas fumble, for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 That's what they said about the cowboys against us, yet we beat them during the regular season just about every year during the 90s. I agree that Seattle is tough and played well, but this game was a product of mistakes that just got out of hand. The D Thomas fumble, for example. Come on Man! Really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed83HOF Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 That's what they said about the cowboys against us, yet we beat them during the regular season just about every year during the 90s. I agree that Seattle is tough and played well, but this game was a product of mistakes that just got out of hand. The D Thomas fumble, for example. Not to turn this into the Bills Superbowl Thread; but that made our loses worse. If we got manhandled by them in the regular season I wouldn't have been as pissed as I am...errr was Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 I am taking nothing from this game. The broncos just had a series of blunders, which caused this game to spiral out of control. The safety, tipped ball for a pick 6, KO return for a TD. This was just like the bills' Super Bowls. If the broncos played this same team tomorrow, they could just as easily win the game. Today was just a snowball situation, which Seattle effectively seized upon. Agreed. As I said up thread I think 9 out of 10 times this matchup has meaningful play in the 4th quarter, and Denver would take more than 1 of them. Seattle is a very good, very complete team. Denver is too though. Tonight was like getting stuck in quicksand - the more they struggled the deeper they got. That's what Seattle is designed to do but if instead of a safety out of the gate Denver could've had a nice drive, who knows where the game goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Im so glad we gave up 2 picks to draft TJ Graham, instead of Russell Wilson. This one got a snort laugh from me.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Come on Man! Really? Well not every year. But in 90 and 93 we beat the same team we lost to in the Super Bowl that year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobobonators Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 (edited) I just don't think it is fair to single out one guy when every single GM made the same mistake -- at least twice. I am not going to continue arguing with you (especially given that I have been a huge RW fan since he was in college). You can get the last word in if that is important to you. Youre missing his point however, and thats the key: not every other team in the NFL NEEDED a QB. We did and that is the difference. In actuality maybe like 6 to 10 teams actually passed on him and we were one of those teams. Edited February 3, 2014 by bobobonators Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Well not every year. But in 90 and 93 we beat the same team we lost to in the Super Bowl that year. Sorry man, but comparing regular season wins to how they matched up in the ultimate game just isn't a compelling argument for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 http://profootballta...ngs-legacy-now/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Youre missing his point however, and thats the key: not every other team in the NFL NEEDED a QB. We did and that is the difference. In actuality maybe like 6 to 10 teams actually passed on him and we were one of those teams. I can only imagine the broncos boards tonight. They took brock osweiler ahead of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LB3 Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 I can only imagine the broncos boards tonight. They took brock osweiler ahead of him. Stir it up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sodbuster Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 (edited) I can only imagine the broncos boards tonight. They took brock osweiler ahead of him. yeah but they HAVE Peyton Manning. Even the biggest fans of Wilson would never have predicted that he would win a super bowl in year two, especially playing across from Manning. Edited February 3, 2014 by sodbuster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Yes Russell was amazing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Here's your real Super Bowl MVP! @ProFootballTalk John Schneider's work pays off in Super Bowl win http://wp.me/p14QSB-9p8V Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Well not every year. But in 90 and 93 we beat the same team we lost to in the Super Bowl that year. In the Bills SB years, they were 14-2 against the NFC. The two losses came in the final weeks of 1990 and 1991 (against the Skins and Lions, respectively) and in each of those two losses Kelly didn't play. In the second of those two losses, the Bills took the Lions to OT with a bunch of scrubs playing. So in my book, the Bills were 14-0 in those seasons. Of course, they were 14-4 against the NFC in meaningful games if you include super bowls ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 In the Bills SB years, they were 14-2 against the NFC. The two losses came in the final weeks of 1990 and 1991 (against the Skins and Lions, respectively) and in each of those two losses Kelly didn't play. In the second of those two losses, the Bills took the Lions to OT with a bunch of scrubs playing. So in my book, the Bills were 14-0 in those seasons. Of course, they were 14-4 against the NFC in meaningful games if you include super bowls ... Great stats. To me, this just proves my point. Just because the bills laid an egg in basically 3 Super Bowls, doesn't mean they were a worse team, or that the "model" team was the Super Bowl winner. It means that sometimes you can hit a game where just everything seems to go against you, and the snowball gets out of control. That's what happened to buffalo, and in my view, that's what happened to Denver tonight. Big plays, mistakes build on each other, and then you're screwed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExWNYer Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Great stats. To me, this just proves my point. Just because the bills laid an egg in basically 3 Super Bowls, doesn't mean they were a worse team, or that the "model" team was the Super Bowl winner. It means that sometimes you can hit a game where just everything seems to go against you, and the snowball gets out of control. That's what happened to buffalo, and in my view, that's what happened to Denver tonight. Big plays, mistakes build on each other, and then you're screwed. Unfortunately, that's the double-edged sword that is a one game, winner-take-all championship. That's often why the Super Bowl is a dud. The NHL, MLB, & NBA all have a minimum of four games to determine the best team. Unlike the NFL, a one game clunker is not fatal to your chances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Great stats. To me, this just proves my point. Just because the bills laid an egg in basically 3 Super Bowls, doesn't mean they were a worse team, or that the "model" team was the Super Bowl winner. It means that sometimes you can hit a game where just everything seems to go against you, and the snowball gets out of control. That's what happened to buffalo, and in my view, that's what happened to Denver tonight. Big plays, mistakes build on each other, and then you're screwed. I think the biggest difference in those SB losses were the coaching. Parcells and Johnson can some excellent game plan to stop us and they were successful/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 Great stats. To me, this just proves my point. Just because the bills laid an egg in basically 3 Super Bowls, doesn't mean they were a worse team, or that the "model" team was the Super Bowl winner. It means that sometimes you can hit a game where just everything seems to go against you, and the snowball gets out of control. That's what happened to buffalo, and in my view, that's what happened to Denver tonight. Big plays, mistakes build on each other, and then you're screwed. I agree. The gap between these two teams is not as big as it looked last night, but we have seen this before. Seattle was an inch away from losing to SF 2 weeks ago at home. Seattle played an amazing game. Funny that I looked at the stats and Denver had more 1st downs and passing yards, and half as many penalties. Jaws was on ESPN this morning saying RW and Lynch were non-factors. Denver's offense was outscored by Seattle's defense. I don't think they were non-factors, because they didn't turn the ball over and used good judgment (which doesn't show up in the stats). But they weren't the keys to the game. Denver's pass rush was pretty good all year but no sacks on RW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sodbuster Posted February 3, 2014 Share Posted February 3, 2014 I agree. The gap between these two teams is not as big as it looked last night, but we have seen this before. Seattle was an inch away from losing to SF 2 weeks ago at home. Seattle played an amazing game. Funny that I looked at the stats and Denver had more 1st downs and passing yards, and half as many penalties. Jaws was on ESPN this morning saying RW and Lynch were non-factors. Denver's offense was outscored by Seattle's defense. I don't think they were non-factors, because they didn't turn the ball over and used good judgment (which doesn't show up in the stats). But they weren't the keys to the game. Denver's pass rush was pretty good all year but no sacks on RW. a lot of those stats showed up when seattle started dropping into coverage. RW was not a non factor. He made the throws that he needed to make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts