f13.net

The format is as before.  You list the winners only.  1pt for Wild Card games then the points double each round.

To help you, here is the initial bracket with the seeds so no one screws up the next round:

AFC
Kansas City (5) at Indianapolis (4)
San Diego (6) at Cincinnati (3)

NFC
New Orleans (6) at Philadelphia (3)
San Francisco(5) at Green Bay (4)

My picks:

AFC
Kansas City
San Diego

NFC
New Orleans
San Francisco

Yep, I picked all road teams to win. I am just really not that confident in any of the division winners, including my beloved Packers.

Kansas City
Cincinnati
Philadelphia
San Francisco

AFC
KC
Cincinatti

NFC
Philladelphia
Green Bay

Indianapolis
Cincinnati

New Orleans
San Francisco

Indy
Cincy

Philly
San Fran

My initial picks were the same as Haemish's so I made one (sentimental) change.

AFC
Kansas City
San Diego

NFC
Philadelphia
San Francisco

My picks:

AFC
Indianapolis
Cincinnati

NFC
Philadelphia
San Francisco

Indy
San Diego
New Orleans
Green Bay

KC
Cinci

Philly
San Francisco

AFC
Indianapolis
San Diego

NFC
Philadelphia
San Francisco

Kansas City
Cincinnati
New Orleans
San Francisco

AFC
Indianapolis
Cincinnati

NFC
Philadelphia
San Francisco

Kansas City
Cincinnati

Philadelphia
Green Bay

Indy
Cincy

New Orleans
San Francisco

Are we not predicting the entire bracket before it starts? I thought we did it that way previous years.

In any case:

AFC:
Cincinatti
Indianapolis

NFC:
Green Bay
Philadelphia

You guys have more faith in Cincinnati than the fans. I find that amusing.  We still haven't sold out and most people polled on news and radio cite 1) Cost, 2) No need to waste money on a one-and-done team.

I understand their frustration. I feel that with a good QB, they would be the team to beat. There's no reason they shouldn't be an AFC favorite, except for Andy Dalton.

Top 5 Defense
Top 5 Receiver

15th QB Rated Quarterback.

The weather in Green Bay has to make the home team a big favorite, but it could also force a running game which would mean who the hell knows.

AFC
Indianapolis
Cincinnati

NFC
Philadelphia
San Francisco

Indy
San Diego
Green Bay
New Orleans

Cincinnati has been really really good at home this season. That's why I picked them.

Also, the Chargers only beat the Chiefs' b-team on bad refereeing.

Indianapolis
San Diego

New Orleans
Green Bay

I am betting some fan is going to die of exposure at one of the games this weekend.

And it will probably be some dumbass who dies of exposure tailgating shirtless in Indy  :why_so_serious:

As for my picks:
Green Bay
New Orleans

Kansas City
Cincinnati

I'm surprised at the number of people picking the Packers. It could be argued that the cold weather actually benefits the Niners due to the better defense and a running QB. I'd love to pick them but have to with my head on this one.

Indianapolis
Cincinnati

New Orleans
San Francisco

AFC:  Indy and Cincy go through. 

NFC:  Philly and GB go through.

These games seem harder to pick than usual, probably because it is really hard to trust the home teams this year.  I am picking GB, simply because I find it hard to believe that Aaron Rodgers is going to let SF kill them yet again.  Time for a bit of payback.

Cincy will win because Dalton seems to play well every other week...and this is the other week.  Would really rather see Rivers go through, but thems the breaks.

Indy will win just to annoy me.  Seriously, go away Indy.

NO will continue it's road woes.  And unruly fan might throw a pack of D batteries at Brees as he comes out the tunnel, concussing him.  I think McCoy is going to run for a mile, which will be enough for Nick Foles to continue to fool America into thinking he is a top-shelf QB.

I think San Francisco is better than the Pack, Rogers or not.  That being said, I feel like the other three games this weekend are a tossup and could go either way.  When I feel that way, I like to pick home teams, which is what I did.  We'll see if it pays off later.

I agree with you, but the better team doesn't always win.  I am thinking that GB will finally find a way to keep Humperdink from running all over them, and then it will be a case of Rodgers out throwing him in the cold weather.  Mostly, it's just football karma - the Pack owes the 49ers some payback.

Or maybe this all all me wanting San Fran to drop out early, because I don't want to see them playing my Seahawks.

KC
SD
PHI
SF

My picks are madness.

Indy
SD
Philly
GB

Nah.  This might be the only wildcard round I can ever remember where nothing at all would surprise me.  Seems like a crapshoot.

Indy is getting run out of their own building

Well, that was a half of football.

Best comeback ever

 :why_so_serious:

Once that DB for the Chiefs went out it was like the floodgates were open.

What a game

What the ever-living fuck happened? I was driving back from Chicago and it was KC up by 28 at half. I get home, set up the new TV and grab a stream of the game and caught the last 5 minutes. /boggle  :why_so_serious:

Amazing game. We left the house to run to the store to pickup stuff for tomorrows games and it was 38-10.

Luck picking up that fumble and diving in was crazy. KC defense was just standing around.

And down go the Bengals, as expected. That's how these normally go, so I hope none of you put money on these playoff picks.

0-2 yesterday on the Yahoo!

1-1 so far today. Watching Dalton implode was pure joy.

I'm 3/3 and bet them all, so I'm cool with this so far.

I like that they're letting them play in this game.

Welp.   :awesome_for_real:

Three of them could have gone either way, so at least there's that.

It's all been utterly watchable so far.

The Green Bay game was the very definition of why a defense is important in the playoffs down the stretch.

After Round 1

HaemishM           3
Ghost           3
Paelos           3
Stewie           3
Shannow           3
Wayabvpar           3
Veredus           3
Mithas           3
Malakili           2
shiznitz           2
naum                   2
K9                   2
Trippy           2
Bungee           2
Mr. Hat           2
Hoax                   2
Phildo           1
Bunk                   1
Azuredream   1
Chimpy           1
Cyrrex           1
Sickrubik           0
Nevermore           0

Round 2 - Each games is 2 points.

NFC
New Orleans at Seattle
San Francisco at Carolina

AFC
Indianapolis at New England
San Diego at Denver

My picks:
Seattle
San Francisco
New England
Denver

Seattle
Carolina
Denver
Indianapolis

Seattle
Carolina

Indianopolis
Denver

Seattle
Carolina
New England
Denver

Seattle
Carolina
Indianapolis
Denver

NFC with the head.
49ers
Seahawks

AFC with the heart.
Pats
Chargers (Manning face!!!)

Seattle
San Francisco
Indianapolis
Denver

Seattle
San Francisco

Indianapolis
San Diego

New Orleans
Carolina
Indy
San Diego

EDIT: I changed to New Orleans. We're just too damn confident on Seattle. I'm going the other way.

Seattle
Carolina
Indy
San Diego

Seattle
Carolina
Indianapolis
Denver

I will continue to pick in the hope of jinxing more teams.  :why_so_serious:

Seattle
San Francisco
New England, New England, New England <-- triple jinx
Denver

Seattle
San Francisco
Indy
San Diego

My picks:

Seattle
San Francisco

San Diego
New England

NFC
Seattle
Carolina

AFC
New England
Denver

Y'all are matching my feelings that there's one lopsided game here, and three tossups.

If New Orleans beats Seattle in Seattle it will be the upset of the year.

Thought that was the Rams.  :awesome_for_real:

Not really. NO is not bad. And I'd take Brees over Wilson any day of the week. I still think Seattle wins, but it's not THAT crazy.

Seattle
San Francisco
Indianapolis
Denver

Maybe I'm overstating it, but I don't think Seattle lost a game at home yet since Wilson showed up? And I think their last playoff loss was those Rams in like 2004.

They lost to the Cardinals at home two weeks ago.

Shit, that is who I meant. bah. Not the Rams. Got the signals crossed since the Rams beat NO.  :uhrr:

That's the one I forgot. Oh well, probably not biggest upset ever now.

They also beat the Saints 34-7 on MNF about 5 weeks ago.

Seattle
Carolina

New England
Denver

Seattle
Carolina

Indy
Denver

Seattle
San Francisco

New England
Denver.


I was really tempted to pick the Colts

Seattle
Carolina

Denver
Indy

Need to go out on a limb since I only scored one point in round one.

Wow... I never posted in the first round here. Ooops. Though my yahoo pick em thing is still rolling (fuck you and your kilt waving  :awesome_for_real:)

So my first round went like this:
KC over Indy
SD over Cinci

Philly over NO
SF over GB

 :uhrr:

Next round goes like this:
Seattle over NO
Carolina over SF

Denver over SD
NE over Indy

I changed one of my picks.

Seattle
Carolina
New England
Denver

Seattle
Carolina

Indy
Denver

NFC
Seattle
San Francisco

AFC
Indianapolis
Denver

NFC

Seattle (can't see NO winning 2 road playoff games in a row plus Seattle is getting some back some players from injury)
Carolina (Carolina's D stops SF again, this time at home)

AFC

San Diego (Manning is one and done again, SD head coach was Broncos OC last season so he knows what can work to stop Peyton)
New England (Indy beating Brady and NE at home isn't going to happen)

if McCoy knows what it takes to stop Manning, he really should have done it in the first matchup of the season. Plus, he really didn't even stop Manning too much on the second matchup, even if they did go on to win that one.

Did HaemishM die?

He's been picking so well this year that he no longer has time for us mortals. 

Jury duty, then returning to work and now I'm setting up a new computer at work. So... I'll try to get it done by Saturday morning.

Broncos.

Seahawks.

.fact   :why_so_serious:

Broncos
49ers

NE
SF

 :heartbreak:

Whoa.

Broncos
Niners

NE
Seattle

Animal mascots over Human mascots, both games.

New England and SF.

EDIT: Changed mine I can't catch up with Denver and Seattle.

Seattle
New England

The San Francisco 49ers will win it all.

Then the Santa Clara 49ers will proceed to go on a centuries long championship drought that will put the cubs and all others to SHAME.

Denver
Seattle

Pats
49ers

New Totals

HaemishM   11
Ghost   9
Paelos   3
Stewie   5
Shannow   9
Wayabvpar   9
Veredus   9
Mithas   7
Malakili   10
shiznitz   6
naum           8
K9           6
Trippy   8
Bungee   6
Mr. Hat   8
Hoax           2
Phildo   7
Bunk           5
Azuredream   5
Chimpy   5
Cyrrex   5
Sickrubik   6
Nevermore   8
Surlyboi   4
1101010   6
Ginaz           4

Round 3 - Each Game worth 3 points

New England v Denver
San Francisco v Seattle

My picks
Denver
Seattle

You should have put them in rank order.   :grin:

Totally going with my heart on these but I don't care:

Denver
Seattle

If SF and NE get in, I may not watch the Super Bowl.

This.

Denver
Seattle

Denver
Seattle

I think both of these games are coinflips, so taking the home teams.

Denver
Seattle

NE
Seattle.

New England
San Francisco


It's the only way I can catch up here!

Yup.

Denver
Seattle

Denver and Seattle

Well, since I cannot beat Haemish by picking the same teams...

NE
SF

New England
Seattle

Denver
San Francisco

Denver
SF

I think.

I hope its Denver at least.  Suppose to be a nice day.

Denver
Seattle

Way to reach on that AFC game. ;)

Picking after a team had already won is a wee bit shifty  :why_so_serious:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHoNWwhzh3M

Go the fuck back to Boston, Brady.

He will drive there in his gold plated rocket car and give no fucks.

I'd like to change my Wild Card picks to:
Indianapolis
San Diego
New Orleans
San Francisco
 :grin:

It was the first time I have gone to the sport forum EVER!

Actually no, he'll come back to New York and live here in Madison Square Park during the winter because no one really wants to live in Boston if they don't have to.

Woohoo I picked rightly!


As much as I prefer Seattle to Denver, Broncos are going to win because the last time I went skiing in Colorado between the championship game and the Super Bowl the broncos won (beating my beloved Packers)

So the two teams that go to the Super Bowl also happen to be from the only two states that legalized marijuana.  Coincidence!?  I think not.

It's the Bowl Bowl.

Toke up and post up.

Glad to be wrong. Was ready to flee my house during that last 49er drive. SO STRESSFUL.

Sherman provided one of the best sideline interview moments ever by scaring the shit out of Erin Andrews.

I do love exposing how useless of a "job" that is.

She really didn't know what to say. I was waiting for the cut away due to swearing.

Richard Sherman really is a shit-talking douchenozzle.

I am also very awesome at picking winners this year.  :why_so_serious:

I think you meant to say that Richard Sherman is an AWESOME shit-talking douchenozzle. 

That game damn near killed me.  So fucking exciting.

:mob:

Peyton walked off at the end of the game all business.

He knows that all these bullshit records mean nothing if they lose in February.

He may be the greatest corner that ever lived, it's still not excuse for being a classless fuckstick who rubs his balls in the face of the losers. Fuck him in his earhole.

For all the dancing in the endzone and ridiculous wideout first down posturing, I'm glad to see a defensive back stick it to them. It's an offensive league and he made the play.

I'm from the Jimmy Johnson school of smack. You don't want me dancing in the end zone? Keep me out of the end zone. Sherman did that so he got his say.

He made 1 fucking play. Crabtree made more catches than Sherman had tackles. Whether it was because Sherman was intentionally avoided or not, numbers say Sherman needs to shut his festering gob.

Also, you just made it to the Super Bowl. Have some FUCKING CLASS. Apparently coaches aren't teaching tackling skills or how to be a gracious winner. But then I've always thought Pete Carroll was an asshole who recruited other assholes.

I loved Lynch's TD early, where he stopped them all from celebrating, and just shook all his team mate's hands. He did go do a little dance after, but it was very subdued, as if to acknowledge that there was a lot of game left to play.

Actually, The numbers (http://deadspin.com/sherman-says-and-does-smart-things-he-is-smart-1505019724/@samer) say the exact opposite.

The utter discomfort Andrews had from the second he started speaking was worth it, alone.

Yeah, he might be acting like an asshat, but the attention is now on him while the rest of the team is just off stage. Might be a great strategy if it works. I am torn, on the one hand, I can see it as completely classless; on the other, it seemed way more genuine than the canned response of thanking God for somehow looking down on the team. It will also make for a nice flashpoint in the now-rivalry between the teams. I am sure Boldin will make up for things next season on the other side of the field.


I am in agreement here. I have hated touchdown celebrating save for the Leap or handing the ball to a fan and running back to the bench... and now that. I was waiting for something else to happen when he started the hand shaking, but it never came and I was impressed.

Dude...what?  I know they don't get a lot of coverage, but you are talking like you don't even know who he is.  He got thrown at twice, which is about normal for him.  Throwing at him is a terrible idea.  He obviously talks an insane amount of smack, but the dude backs it up like nobody's business.  He was not covering any one receiver yesterday, which is the only reason Crabtree got any action at all.  

Hate him for his mouth, that's cool, but the guy is down right amazing in coverage.

When a CB is playing at a top level, you never hear his name during the telecast.

Except for those one or two plays that some foolish QB tries to throw at him.  Dude almost never gets thrown at, and still leads the league in interceptions.

We get on players for constantly speaking in boring cliches. A player finally gives a great, I owned you, WWE heat of the moment speech, and he gets nailed as a classless thug.

Because we're fair like that.

Also, Erin Andrews job is as fucking useless as poker commentary, but we are forced to pretend that sideline reporting is somehow a legitimate pursuit because it's one of the few ways women can get a job on an NFL broadcast. Moments like the Sherman thing are the only reason it should exist at all, and I for one am glad it happened.

I KNOW how good a corner he is. I KNOW how good his entire team's defense is. I can easily believe that he IS the best corner in the game.

But in last night's game, which is what I was talking about, Crabtree made more catches than Sherman had tackles or passes defensed. He made one play the entire fucking game and he talks shit LIKE AN ASSHOLE. He is a great cornerback, great footballer WHO IS AN ASSHOLE.

To be fair, part of the reason that Sherman had so few plays was because teams tend to go away from him.  He's a very good cover corner, but he's also one of the biggest shit talkers in the league.  Maybe he's channeling Michael Jordan.

Two weeks of Peyton Manning fellatio and hand-wringing over Richard Sherman.

Oh joy.

Thug is the new subtle N-word. It's annoying how it gets tossed around.

It's not all that new, but yeah. I remember the exact moment I realized when it was A Thing; my old DAOC server forum had one of those 'post pictures of yourself' threads, and two black guys (iirc they were brothers) posted a picture of themselves with a baby, I believe it was the baby daughter that one of them had just had. This conservative southern white dude posts "what a couple of thugs" in response (their hair was done in cornrows.) This was mid-2002. It's been a dogwhistle for a long time, but it's nice that realizing it is catching on with the larger public now.

Yeah in the last decade I think it's a great racism spotter.

There are legitimate thuggish things, but they usually involve guns and violence.

People love using it, because they can back out of it... even if they can't actually back out of it because they've judged someone based on color, like with Ing's example.

However, when it comes to "legitimate thuggish things", the problem is still based on race, because you don't see that word ascribed to someone not black.

He was a little over the top in his interview but if you listen to his explanation later he did it because Crabtree was talking shit to him and other Seattle DBs.  Same thing happened with the whole "U MAD BRO!" thing with Tom Brady.  Brady was talking shit because he was up by 2 scores and basically said to them some variation of "Do you know who I am?" or "I'm Tom Brady and you're not, see me after the game".  Well, Sherman saw him after the game.  It just didn't go down like Brady thought it would.  Sherman is a pretty smart and articulate guy and I don't have a problem with what he's said.  The NFL can be boring as fuck at times and we all bitch about it yet when someone does something colourful what do some people do?  Bitch about that.

Yeah, it just comes off as too much butt-hurt when you say things like "he only made one play all day!!".  That is dumb, and you know it.

I will put this out there, however:  I do not understand nor agree with the way we try to protect the precious little feelings of millionaire professional athletes.  If you and I are playing a pickup game of (insert sport here), then sure, we need to behave like civilized human beings.  These guys, on the other hand, are extremely well paid, idolized, modern day gladiators and I give less than two shits about them getting sad when some guy celebrates a touchdown with a teammate, or pulls out a pen and autographs the ball, or whatever it is that has been ruled illegal these days.  That some of you then get butt-hurt on their behalves at the same time just blows my mind.  Direct taunting, sure that should probably be a penalty offense, as should be anything that causes significant delay to the game. 

These guys are at each other ALL the time on the field.  Non-stop talking, taunting, intimidating, posturing.  But as soon as it actually becomes visible and we can watch endless video replays of it?  Suddenly it is an outrage.  Give me a break.

The reason those things are penalties is not to coddle the feelings of the opposition, it is to attempt to keep tempers down so a riot doesn't happen every game. The NFL is a game about controlled violence and they are trying to keep the violence in check. If they allowed the players to say/do whatever they wanted a typical NFL game wouldn't make it to halftime before the riot police would have to separate the players with teargas and tazer cannons.

I don't give a rat's ass about the feelings of the players.

Uh, no, I don't buy that.  You don't have to look much farther than to a thread like this to see that the fans get all bent out of shape over it.  The NFL doesn't want to upset the fans.  I can't recall a time where the NFL ever had an issue with actual fighting (other than isolated stuff here and there), even back when the celebrations were at their high point.

Because again, they are already doing all this shit talking.  Endlessly.  When Sherman gives the choke sign to Kaep, it is no different than the kind of shit they have probably being saying to him the entire game, and I am sure he has heard it a billion times before.  The difference is that little Billy at home sees it, and we sure can't have that.

You are not listening to a word I've said. I could give two rat fucks about Crabtree's feelings. This is not about Crabtree's feelings. This is about being a gracious winner, not a sniveling, chest-pounding neanderthalic ASSHOLE. It's about winning with honor and class. It's about getting to the end of a well-fought contest and shaking hands not to coddle the other team's feelings but to congratulate them on a game well-played.

It's the difference between fun PVP and not-fun - because it's a GAME. It's a fucking game. There's not one reason to piss on the losing team in some kind of macho bullshit "I IS DA BETTA MAN!" bullshit. It's why people complain about GRIEFING and it's the attitude that leads to bullshit like Trammel. Most people who like to compete love doing so only until the other guy starts teabagging their corpse and then it's not fun anymore because suddenly it became personal for no good goddamn reason. With Sherman, it apparently WAS personal and it was based on something that happened MONTHS ago off the field - which shows that he's a petty little shit as well as being a poor winner.

Be a gracious winner. Keep your petty off-field beefs off the fucking field because it's got nothing to do with the game and it makes the entire game look bad.

That's a perfectly valid opinion.  God knows there are many, many people who share that exact opinion (despite my words, I myself would try to act with respect to other players in a similar situation).  My point of contention was that you kept harping on the fact that Sherman only made one play, and he had somehow been outplayed over the course of the game.  That's pants on head territory, and you can't possibly believe it.  I am forced to assume you only said it out of anger at the situation in general.

Actually no. I only root against the Seahawks because I hate them (especially Golden Tate, another asshole) but I'm happy to admit they deserved to win that game. I couldn't really care whether the 49ers beat them or not because I don't have any skin in the Niners either. But Sherman comes out and says he is the better player and that Crabtree is a "sorry" or "mediocre" player and the statistics DO NOT BEAR THAT OUT. Sherman DID only make ONE PLAY in the game - whether that be from Kap not targeting him or from his awesome coverage (and I would assume it's a lot of both) doesn't matter. Crabtree had 4 receptions for 52 yards on 8 targets. At least 2 of those receptions were much needed receptions on 3rd down to keep the chains moving against a tough defense. Sherman had 2 tackles and 1 pass defensed. His PD just happened to be at clutch time. Again, not sure if that was because the ball wasn't coming to his side of the field or not - that's not in the stats. The stats say he only made 3 total plays to Crabtree's 4. On the basis of stats, Crabtree made more plays - Sherman's just had a bigger impact at a more visible time in the game.

What I'm saying was that his stats, the visible impact both had on the game does not justify saying that "Crabtree is a sorry receiver" or a "mediocre receiver." Boldin, SF's leading receiver in that game had only 5 catches for 53 yards and 1 TD on 9 targets. Is Boldin a "mediocre" receiver? No. So don't go acting like your 1 play makes you the Muhameed Ali Jesus Christ Superstar on national TV.

Yeah, his saying that Crabtree is mediocre is pretty far-fetched, I'll give you that.  "Sorry" is a more qualitative judgement, and I actually agree with that one  :why_so_serious:  And yes, saying either of those things after the game on national TV was rather unwise in any event.

As for your breakdown, we'll just have to agree to disagree.  There is no question at all in my mind that Kaepernick, just like every other QB in the league, tried to keep the ball away from him.  He was definitely going to Maxwell's side of the field.  I think it is patently wrong to imply that just because Crabtree was involved in more plays that he somehow had as much or more impact.  Sherman's best games are the ones where his name is rarely called, and this was no exception.  And as for Crabtree, do you not remember the short arm thing he did on a critical play in the the 4th quarter?  Weak sauce.

Crabtree is rather mediocre though. He's had one outstanding year in 2012 where he achieved 14th in receiving yards and 9 TDs.

Otherwise? 34th in 2011, 44th in 2010, and 60th in 2009?

Taken into account his total production, I can't say he's even in the top 30 of receivers I want on the field right now.

Richard Sherman is awesome.  I'm glad to see someone with cajones like in the old days.  The only reason we see this shit now is because they're all stupid enough to use twitter. 

2012 was also the only year he had a full preseason and never got hurt at any point IIRC.

Injuries play into your ranking as a great receiver. Especially over 5 years.

Tom Brady weighs in on Richard Sherman. (http://deadspin.com/tom-brady-on-richard-sherman-we-win-with-graciousness-1505211287)


Except you haven't won since they made you stop filming the other teams, Tom.

(http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/19d5qbgy93aqyjpg/ku-medium.jpg)

I actually liked the rest of that interview blurb:

He's still got his rings. Richard Sherman doesn't have anything yet.

Also, I'd trade Russell for Tom any day of the week.

nononoo SPYGATE!!!!

SPYGATE SPYGATE SPYGATE!!!!

SPYGATE!

btw did I hear correctly that the John Elway Bronco's teams of the late 90's got dinged pretty hard for some big time cap violations?

nevermind....SPYGATE!!!

 :facepalm:

edit: Actually the whole story is indicative of the whole manufactured hand-wringing media crap about this story. Brady was directly asked a question about Sherman on his regular Monday morning appearance on sports radio. His comments, I think, weren't all that over the top but christ some of the headlines on Yahoo, etc were.

Gotta love riling up pats fans.

Scream spygate all you want and point to other teams that may or may not have done it, Bellichick the homeless actually got busted doing it and the taint will always be there.

He likely won't win again. As I've said before though, I just think hating Brady is a waste of time. Dude's basically living the dream.

'murricans cannot into sportsmanship

hue

I don't hate Brady as much as I hate the way the media slobbers all over him like he can do no wrong and he overcame some great hardship.

I've wrapped around to liking him now, the way he embraced the whole high five thing won him a lot of points with me.

fify.

:awesome_for_real:

The difference is Peyton is probably one of the most likable human beings in football. Brady doesn't fit that mold except for Pats fans.

Wasn't Brady the one who left his pregnant wife for a supermodel?

Girlfriend, not wife.

So he knocked her up out of wedlock?  Tom Brady sure is Mr. American Values.

That was sort of my point, he's not winning ethical guy of the year awards. Boston fans saying BUT PEYTON GETS TONS OF LOOOOOOOOOVE, don't get the point. If you hate Peyton as a man I question your ethic. If you hate Tom, you have ammo.

So I don't really care who wins the Super Bowl this year. I like both teams equally. I'd like to see Peyton win another to pull even with his brother so that talking point goes away, but I'd also like to see Wilson and the Seahawks finally get a trophy for Seattle. Win-win either way...

that said, I am picking the Broncos. I think Peyton Manning is playing too well this year and has more tools than the Seattle defense can keep up with. Not that Peyton can't shit the bed, but I don't see it happening this year. The only X factor might be Lynch and the run game in Seattle, but the way Denver shut down Blount and Ridley after the Pats ran all over their last two opponents... and I don't think Wilson can win the game for them - he won't lose it for them, but I don't think he is there yet.

I'm a die-hard Seattle fan, but I would have to bet on the Broncos.  I do think the matchup is super intriguing, one of the best in recent memory - because would it surprise me to see that Defense beat up Peyton?  No, not really.  Given two weeks to prepare, however, I think Manning will have just enough time and planning for him to overcome it all.  It could well be a game where Seattle's defense makes him miserable all day, and yet he still puts up 30 points.

I think the x-factors are these:

Will Seattle be able to take away the quick short routes that Denver so loves?  That might be the key to the game.  If they don't have those short options where they get all the Yards After Catch, then Peyton will have to stick to medium and long range stuff, and that plays to Seattle's strengths.  If he can still complete the short stuff?  They will score on them as easily as any other defense.

Will Russel be able to step it up a bit?  The last time he was out of a game was....uh, can't remember a time, maybe early in 2012 or something.  If he has a little extra mojo on game day, that might be enough.  And this is a defense that is ranked lower on average than what he is used to facing.

Still, my head says Broncos.  It seemed destined kinda from the very beginning.

I don't dislike Seattle but I'm rooting for Denver so Peyton can get another ring and Welker can give a giant middle finger to Belicheat.

Champ needs a ring for that first time ballot to the HoF.

Seattle. Their O-line and run game are on an entirely different level than what the pats had and they'll run all over Denver's smallish front 7. That and I trust the Seattle D to make some crucial stops and force Peyton into bad throws in bad weather.

Hoping to see this for 4 quarters-
(http://hookingfoul.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/manningface.jpeg)

Hoping for a catastrophic ring finger injury to Sherman on the first play, then his severed finger flies through the air and impales Pete Carroll in the eye, causing them both to immediately announce their retirement, and then John Elway trips while running over to help and breaks his hip. After that Marshawn just runs all over everyone and gets a ring.

lol Ingmar.

A good D with a decent QB and weapons on offense? I'll take Seattle.

Seattle has weapons? I get to the 4th Denver receiver before I get to the second Seattle guy.

Denver's D has really stepped up in the last few games of the season as well as the preseason.

I'll take that good defense with all of the offensive weapons that Denver has.

(http://i.imgur.com/g6yN1yp.png)

 :thumbs_up:

Percy Harvin is a weapon for the 4 plays he'll get before he's knocked out of the game again.

Also: My pick is Denver.

Denver

This works for me. But in general I don't know how closely I'll be watching unless the game is good.

I still think if Welker were to win a Super Bowl this year, Belichick would frown so hard his entire face would collapse into a sourpuss singularity.

My pick: Denver. DENVER. DEEEEEENNNVEEEERRRRRRRRRR.

Seattle.
Wilson makes plays when it matters, Harvin is back and Lynch is fucking Lynch. That along with our D and we got this.

Seattle.

Manning is due for an off game. Seattle's defense really matches up well against the offense. Seattle's offense only needs to make a few plays to stay in the game. Seattle pulls off a miracle in the last 2 minutes to win.

Seattle.

Going with Denver.

I actually think Seattle chokes in that last 2 min drive.  Simply can't recover ALL those fumbles.

I'm picking Seattle.

Totals through the Championship Games

HaemishM           17
Malakili           16
Nevermore           14
Mithas           13
Shannow           12
Veredus           12
Bungee           12
1101010           12
naum                   11
Trippy           11
Mr. Hat           11
Bunk                   11
Azuredream   11
Cyrrex           11
Ghost            9
Wayabvpar            9
K9                    9
Sickrubik            9
Stewie            8
Chimpy            8
Phildo            7
Paelos            6
shiznitz            6
Surlyboi            4
Ginaz                    4
Hoax                    2

Super Bowl is worth 8 points to avoid the messiness that could be a tie. Ties will be decided by a goddamn coin flip.

My Super Bowl Pick

DUN DUN DUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

Denver. Obviously.

This is Seattle's game to lose.  They're holding all the meaningful advantages in this game:

1)  weather likely
2)  superior/physical run game both from RB and QB position
3)  Peyton is immobile against the best and gnastiest defense in the NFL (this alone to me seals the deal)
4)  Short-pass offenses dont work against great cover-physical defenses like Seattle's  (recall: rams vs. pats and pats superbowl losses).  Chancellor and Thomas are gonna have a field day (nom nom Welker).  They will feast on Denver receivers who will short-arm just like Crabtree by the 3rd Quarter.
5)  Seattle has the best offensive playmakers; that's Wilson, Lynch and Harvin.  Also more overall speed at the WR position.
6)  Marchand Lynch - nuff said.

Seriously, I dont see how people can think Denver has the edge in this game.  This defense will feast on Peyton's style of game and offensively (though anxious to watch) Seattle has the physical run-game and big play capability to beat anyone.

welp, I cant win but in the interest of completness I'm gonna go ahead and pick Seattle.

Do not even begin to think Harvin will be a factor in this game. He will sprain a labia during warmups if he's even allowed near the field. As for playmakers, I don't buy Wilson's ability as a playmaker in a big game yet. SF may be a better defense than Denver's but Denver's isn't bad. They will be able to cut out the passing game and contain Lynch. The big question will be can Peyton beat that Seattle defense. I think he can, weather or no. He has 4 really damn good targets at wide receiver and a decent running game. Will they take the short pass away? Sure. Get ready for Peyton to bomb your ass long. It ain't like Peyton lacks for arm strength on the deep ball or like these receivers can't go and get it long.

It will be a great game nonetheless.

If this game comes down to the last 2 minutes there is a non-zero chance I won't survive it. The NFC Championship game nearly killed me.

Seattle. I'm counting on bad weather.

Seattle really only needs to do two things to win:

Run the ball for 3+yards, play action Wilson run around and then bomb it down to the super super super weak Corners of Denver (Champ is old).

Biggest weakness of Denver this year has been that deep bombo.

1 - We have no idea in 10 days what it will look like. This will be more of a factor by Wednesday.
2 - Denver is 8th against the run in the NFL, not far behind SF. They are much worse against the pass, but Seattle doesn't excel there. Denver will sell out on the run.
3 - Best pass defense against the best offensive line in the NFL in pass protection. It's not the advantage you think.
4 - Oh really? Arizona does nothing but throw short passes, and they beat the Seahawks in their building, even after throwing 4 picks. The Seattle offense couldn't keep up.
5 - You're high on this. Denver has 4 receivers that eclipse Seattle's two basic guys. Moreno's Y/A is the same as Lynch, and Wilson v. Peyton is a mismatch of epic proportions. Offensively, Seattle holds no advantages.
6 - Reference point about Moreno.

Wut?  Tate and Harvin are the two fastest receivers in the Superbowl, period (if you leave out Holliday)...  regardless of bloated "Welkerish" numbers Denver has.  Wilson also counts as an extra runningback in the formation, and can outgun Peyton in the longball.  Note:  I said 'playmakers' not statmakers.

Most importantly, those 4 Denver receivers are moot against that defense.

Well, even though I want Denver to win I'm going to pick Seattle mostly due to the weather. (plus it's the only way to overtake Haemish)

What the hell does "playmakers" mean?
What does "bloated 'Welkerish' numbers" mean?

Demaryius Thomas: 92 - 1430 - 14
Eric Decker: 87 - 1288 - 11
Julius Thomas: 65 - 788 - 12
Wes Welker: 73 - 778 - 10

Wilson is 6-18 for 4 TDs and 3 picks on passes greater than 31 yards. Peyton's 8-13 for 3 TDs no picks. Wilson can't "outgun" Peyton in any category. At all.

We know Seattle's defense is good, you'll find no arguments there. But please, don't try to sell us that Russell Wilson has been anything special in these playoffs. Seattle's been winning games on defense, kicking, and Lynch.

Did you watch Wilson at all last year??

Man, I think Ghambit is drinking the Seattle Kool Aid more than I'm drinking the Denver Kool Aid.

Explain to me how that matters at all? Here's what I know. In the playoffs this season he's had 1 TD, period. He's not running the ball in the playoffs at all. He's managed to pass for about 300 yards across two games.

Let me be clear, HE HASN'T BEEN A FACTOR IN THIS PLAYOFFS. I mean shit, he literally fumbled the game away on the first play against SF and his defense said, don't worry we got this. If they don't hold SF to a 3, that game goes 14-3 at the half, and has a totally different outlook.

His team is barely cresting 21 points each game. Meanwhile you have a Denver team that on their absolute dog-cussing worst day puts up 20 easy. I don't know what you're watching, tbh. This is no easy game for Seattle, and they are underdogs in Vegas on a neutral field because of that.

I don't see bad weather being a tremendous advantage for Seattle, personally.

They are underdogs in Vegas because the overwhelming majority of the early money is on the Broncos. They opened at 2 or 2.5 point favorites.

This is a hard contest to handicap.

Best defense v. best offense. But Denver defense not too shabby and Seattle offense is not clicking up points.

OTOH, hard to get a gauge on competition caliber as NFC, this season, has better teams (I think even the Cardinals who didn't qualify were better than half the AFC playoff teams).

All indication is that Wilson will struggle, even young QB who excel in playoffs falter in SB.

I guess the question is will Seattle defense be able to stymie Manning? Enough to keep him under 20 points which looks like the mark Seattle offense will be hard pressed to exceed.

Fixed.

<erased>
Bah!  You'll see.

Denver by a hair.

Denver

Denver, by two scores.

Oooh, that's bold.  I think you have to go back a ways to find the last time Seattle lost by two scores or more.

Two scores can be as little as 9, to be fair.

FIFY

Still....November 6, 2011.  Dallas beat them by 10.  That's even farther back than I expected, unless I missed something. 

(I assume Nebu is being sarcastic)

I have my reasons, but most of it will get tossed out with the "bias", which I can't necessarily disagree with totally. I just don't see it being close.

No.  Two scores could be two safeties.  That's 4 points.

Can you tell I was a defensive guy?  :grin:

I can tell that you took too many blows to the head, that's what I can tell  :awesome_for_real:

We'll stick to the traditional definition of "more than 8 points" for the duration of this conversation.

Here are some good reasons why Seattle will likely win:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1937931-super-bowl-odds-five-reasons-why-seattle-seahawks-will-win-super-bowl-xlviii

This is b4 considering the dynamics of Wilson; who people seem to forget went to the pro bowl twice and has been the most prolific 'rookie' QB in NFL history; on a team w/o Harvin and that mostly runs the ball for that matter.   :oh_i_see:

He doesn't lose this game unless he decides to show up like mini-me.

As for Peyton and the Broncos offense, I leave you with this:

Russel Wilson has a QBR of 34.3 in the playoffs. That's why he is the x-factor for me. The path of  victory for the Seahawks rests squarely on his shoulders.

Yeah, he is in a slump to be certain.  He is way better than he has shown the last few games.  To me, it is not a question of whether or not he is good enough, it's a question of whether or not he'll break out of this skid.  That said, he seems to excel in big games and/or big moments.

I am also sort of wondering why we haven't seen hardly any designed running or read/option from him in a long while, other than once or twice a game.  Part of me thinks they have been deliberately putting a lid on it until they need it.  We'll see.

That was 100% my point. I like the kid. Hell, I kinda like the team. They deserve to be here. They are a great, young team.

I'll go with Denver -- close game but Manning v. a struggling Wilson puts the Broncos on top.

Points matter.  The Seahawks do not score as reliably as the Broncos.  As long as Denver is within 10 points in the 4Q, they can come back as stomp out any lead Lynch has managed to scrape out.

Hmm.  That defense tends to get super nasty in close games in the 4th quarter.  The offense seems to be able to find magic in big moments, too.  I think Denver's path to winning is by dominating the first three quarters.  The last thing Denver wants is anything resembling a close game, they need to create some distance early.

If Denver is down less than a TD in the 4th quarter, my money is on Peyton Motherfucking Manning to win the game.

Cyrrex, I think that is always optimal.  I am not trying to belittle your comment, but falling behind by 2 TDs or more in the NFL is usually the kiss of death - unless you have Brady or Manning, P as your QB.

or Luck, actually.

It is relevant to this discussion specifically because that is how Denver wins.  


I would probably make that same bet, but I wouldn't feel good about it.  Cold weather, a ridiculously good secondary on the other side of the field, and a QB that has shown he can crumble in huge situations despite how we might otherwise feel about him.  Denver doesn't want to be in that situation.  

For the record, I think Peyton is the best ever.  I also think he chokes more than his fair share.

If the shoes on the other foot, I'm not putting money on Russell Wilson, no matter what I think of his abilities.

With the slanting towards passing that the league rules give, all it takes is one ref with an itchy flag hand to utterly ruin Seattle's defensive stops in the end zone.

It tends to be the defense itself, or Lynch that pulls off the actual heroics.  Russell has shown he can do it, but again...the slump.

Good point about the refs, though.  That'll be the game within the game.

If Denver goes up by more than 14 at any point, I don't think Seattle can come back.

So, got a Conference Champs hat. Hopefully this isn't an omen.

(http://i.imgur.com/LRMcCxe.jpg)

Are you satisfied?  :why_so_serious:

Yeah, that just makes the entire thing extra hilarious. Thankfully NFLShop.com customer service was really easy to deal with.

I've been to three superbowls in the last decade, I've always flown in and out either the day before and out on Sunday or in and out the same day. The week-long tourist shit here is fucking ridiculous. Between New Yorkers giving precisely zero fucks about an event that usually takes over a city and the NFL being butthurt by its inability to shut the whole town down, we probably won't be seeing a Superbowl here ever again.

Under 15 hours to go. Hope I can sleep at least some of that, but I am about to start pacing around my house already. Any posts you see from me between now and Monday morning will almost assuredly be extremely alcohol-fueled, so I apologize in advance  :grin:

Just be glad that you are in a decent time zone.  I am facing the prospect of watching it with a nominal start time of 30 minutes past midnight.  And then regardless of outcome, I would not be able to sleep afterwards.  So I face the prospect of a virtual all-nighter, or recording the thing and watching tomorrow afternoon (with high risk of spoilerage).  I don't know what to do.

Holy Shit. It's here. Yeah, I kept waking up through the night. But the food's been prepped, and the beer has been picked out. Now all is left is waiting.

It will be an amazing and awesome game. I'm working and we are bringing food, so that means every dip-shit with a month to years old complaint will come in...even if we try and keep the tv on the game, the patients will be like "i hate football, we are watching crazy shit on tv."

I thinking Seattle with the awesome defense can pull it off. I'll probably get to watch hi-lights from the game around 0300 if lucky.

I'm just hoping no one does a self inflicted tracheostomy to themselves again or they decide to have a brick fight again.

The jingoism of FOX annoys the hell out of me.

Also, as I said before I pick Denver to win though I like the seachickens better.

Let's go! Favorite day of the year. Good luck to any fans that have a rooting interest.

The parkway in Secacus is a shitshow. Maybe the NFL pissed off Christie. I'm glad I gave my tickets to my nephew.

RIP anyone who bet on this game. Seahawks walking away with it.

Is it too early to call this game over?

Someone better check on Sickrubik...

Wow... just wow. Denver just doesn't seem to be working on offense. They look frozen for a second before they do anything. Astounding.

Oh yeah, the Super Bowl's on. I wonder who's doing the half-time gig?

Oh. It's Bruno Mars.

Bruno.
Fucking.
Mars.


How many barrels had to be scraped before they settled on him?

Didn't they have Prince on a few years ago? Wtf happened?

[EDIT] Christ, now someone's defrosted the fucking Chili Peppers. Not sure could be more awful.

Janet Jackson's nipple popped out and scarred a nation for a generation.  They haven't gone anywhere near anyone risky or contemporary since.  Prince was a safe bet because he's born again. Madonna was a safe bet because she hasn't been edgy in 20 years.

That said, it wasn't a bad show.

Harvin made it all the way down the field without getting a hangnail!

It was fine as far as halftime shows go. This game, however...

They made a statement though. Where the fuck was Denver's special teams?

My god, the beatings continue!

Oh and who the fuck is Bruno Mars.  His third song was decent, but I switched to the Puppy Bowl when those old hacks Red Hot Chili Peppers came on.

Go to bed and save yourselves from watching this really depressing game.

Yeah, so the game is not going at ALL how I thought. However, several people have texted me that I don't talk to often to rub it in. Good job people.

Seattle: Amazing win. We did all we could to help you win too. As always, stupid mistakes plague the Broncos, on top of that, Seattle was CLICKING on defense. Props.

Are the Broncos aware that this is the Super Bowl, not some pre - season game?

I have no idea. Such terrible play. From the gun, it's been horrid. I can't decide if I'm angry or depressed or both.

Defense matters a ton in the NFL, and Denver just couldn't deal with Seattle's D or play any functional version themselves.

I picked Seattle because I'm a defense first guy, but I'm shocked Denver didn't even show up from the go.

EDIT: Also, the hat was an omen for sickrubik.

I really dislike the "defense wins championships" cliche but it was true this year.

Huh.  The #1 defense in the league will win the Super Bowl.  Go figure.

Broncos sucked hard in this game, played terribly.  But give credit to the Seahawks, that defense is smothering and their offense seemed really sharp as well. 

Who wins MVP in this game? Seattle's offense was good, but not great. They didn't need to be.

Could be worse.  We could have Up With People again or...even worse...The Black Eyed Peas. :ye_gods:

Can I change my pick?

This is the worst ass-kicking in the salary cap era, replacing the Tampa buttkicking of Oakland in 03.

I think it is clear that next year's half-time show needs to be Hooray for Everything.

I'm not a fan of Bruno Mars, but it really was a decent show. It beats The Who any day.

Next year's halftime show needs to be Lorde getting mooned by Bieber.

The game being a rout is good in one way: I get to change the channel to PBS to watch Sherlock without needing to worry about missing the end of the game.  :awesome_for_real:

Does Fox really need to be bringing back 24?  Really?

suck it denver. Funny what happens when you play a team that can actually play defense.

What a shit show.

This has been a shit year for NFL football, culminating in a shit Super Bowl.  So tired of this NFL product.  

About all that game did was make me want a Ghibli.

So was the beer good at least?

I haven't seen a Super Bowl team shit the bed like that since the Buffalo Bills in 1992 against Dallas. :facepalm:

Commercials Sucked, Superbowl Sucked, and the half time show sucked.  Triple crown of suck for the NFL this year .  I guess it can't all be good... but hey at least the puppies were cute on Animal Planet (Especially if you love Brittany Spaniels).

Defense wins championships. What an utterly fucking dire piece of shit game totally undeserving of being called a Super Bowl and being played to this large an audience. This was a goddamn freak show.

ANNNNNNDDDD Fox gives us 24 again. Is it possible to transmit 4 hours of pure excrement through the screen? Yep. Fox has perfected the art of the shit show.

Fuck you, Fox, fuck you, NFL.

If that games sets ratings records it will be because they only counted people watching before the first half.

I took a nap after the 1st quarter, came back to see it was 29-0 in the 3rd, made some stir fry for supper, watched the Walking Dead marathon, came back in time to see the Seattle coach get his cliched Gatorade bath.  The end.  Thank fuck.

Ron Musselman (https://twitter.com/ronmusselman8/status/430180410153500673)

(http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/19ei3inmvgzm1gif/ku-xlarge.gif)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BfhIQRFCUAASZK-.jpg)

(http://i.imgur.com/XHN0gte.jpg)

This is for Denver-pickers:
(http://i.imgur.com/UoyN9Rr.jpg)

Vegas made a killing, good for them... the spread was just small enough to get people all giddy about Denver.  My father almost fell for it too, but my constant bitching that he should pick Seattle paid off.  He cleared $1500 from this game.

Lastly, I'm a bit saddened they didn't pull at least a small part of the race-card (1st starting QB 'of color' to ever win a SB; and no, D. Williams wasn't a perennial starter) - but it's Faux so I'm not surprised.  Actually, that was the only negative for the SB for me.  The constant hyper-patriotism, intro. Obama-bashing, Peyton-bromance, and general propaganda from Fox was maddening.  It felt like I was watching a Starship Troopers Jumpball game; only thing we needed was "Would you like to know more?"

That wasn't even a good game. I don't even want to call it a game. I don't even like or watch football but when I first noticed it was 5-0, I was like, wow, a safety. A safety in the superbowl. This shit is over.

Let the rioting commence! Does Vegas take bets on number of overturned flaming cars?

What the fuck did the NFL expect? The stadium isn't even in the same fucking state as NYC!

PS: That was a crap Superbowl, but at least it produced some amusing Manning gifs.

On basically the first play.  This game was great comedy!

We also got a bonus sad eli face.


The Bronco's beat up on shit teams all year. They had to beat other teams who beat up on shit teams all year in order to get into the Superbowl. The Chargers were 9-7, the Patriots were 12-4 in the weakest division in the league.

The Seahawks were 13-3 in the toughest division in the league, which was so strong that the third place team nearly made it to the Wildcard slot. Any of those three would have beaten the Bronco's. Seattle, Arizona, and SF lost a total of 6 games outside of their division (10 counting St Louis) better than any other division and did so while also playing the majority of their games against the strongest divisions. The top 3 in the Bronco's division lost 7, but these were to the rest of the AFC or the NFC-East which was also terrible

It shouldn't have even been a question that this would happen. We beat em 40-10 in the preseason too.

Yah, but Peyton!   :why_so_serious:

Honestly, I enjoyed the game and didn't think it was shit at all.  But, I'm sadistic like that and relish good D laying the wood on sissy offenses; especially where turnovers are involved.

I don't find safeties in the Superbowl particularly surprising, but that is because I am a Giants fan and they have had one happen in their Superbowls three out of five times.  :why_so_serious:

First I was like
(http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive/20317317/images/1344986194067.jpg)

and then I was like (http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z261/TheAceRock/RandyMarshJizz.jpg?t=1246916211)

and then I was like (https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ04qK8eZaA9pxycKFDVSo563RVUpyF_oBV0cIqrj2U9WsnEAK1RneYio4_)

and then I was like (http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a150/NMUN/kryten.jpg)

I didn't talk a lot about this beforehand, or watch a lot of the 'experts'. I knew if Seattle played their game that it would be a two score game at least. I did not expect the total asskicking. But let's just say I wasn't surprised.

Not sure I agree with that. He was a first rounder that started from the start of his career (getting paid peanuts) and then when he wanted to get paid what he was worth was basically tossed out of the league. He was a starter in the USFL and was only a backup when he came back to the NFL when the USFL folded.  When it mattered in the playoffs Gibbs knew what he had and he played him as a started all the way from then on. His career was flukey and significantly impacted by racial prejudice in my opinion.  Hell, he took the fucking Buccaneers to the NFC championship in his second year. I don't think it is all that fair to minimize what he did.

I grew up a vikings fan.  We saw it a lot too.

I'm not trying to minimize him but, you're right.  But I'd always thought he was inserted due to injury (when he won the SB).  Gotta check my facts. 
Regardless, I think this win by Wilson will represent a bit of a changing of the guard so-to-speak, and holds more inherent importance then Peyton's legacy.

The super bowl in one gif!

(http://i.imgur.com/yvqLRea.gif)

So neither manning can win in the Meadowlands...  :drill:

The surprising part is how unprepared the Broncos looked for the game.  I picked them in part because I thought Peyton Manning with two weeks preparation was going to be able move the ball, and there were a couple series there where I saw what I thought I was going to see all game.  But the Seahawks were just far better prepared, seemed to deal with "the moment" much better than the Broncos and flat out came to play.

I am not going to do a bunch of "I told you so", because I think I officially did pick Denver to win earlier in this thread.  That said...

As I wrote before, if Seattle could take away the short yardage stuff and get some pressure on Peyton, that was going to be how they would win.  And boy was that ever the case.  Denver lived all year against soft defenses that would let them catch the ball underneath and then run like the blazes.  Yesterday, the caught the ball underneath and then got absolutely creamed, over and over and over.  Once you can do that, Peyton can no longer count on the quick pass where he holds it for two seconds or less, and then he is in trouble.  And when he gets in trouble, he often caves. 

And there is where Peyton is a bit of a double-edged sword.  Once he gets all mopey, his team has no chance.  He is part time coach and full time offensive coordinator, and as he goes so goes the whole team.  I won't say that the very first play of the game cracked him, but the three and out on the very next drive, where Seattle creamed the living fuck out a few of those short yardage passes...I think he knew right then and there that he was in serious trouble.  And then he moped on the sidelines for the rest of the game, even when he was still theoretically in it.  John Fox is powerless to adjust, because the only adjusting possible is whatever happens between Peyton's ears. 

Russel Wilson didn't have to do much in this game, but the things that he needed to do, he executed with ice water in his veins.  I can only imagine that some of you are still sitting there thinking "he only threw for 200 yards!" and "yeah, but that defense!".  Bullcrap.  If you don't see it by now, it is because you never will.

I thought that underneath stuff is exactly what was going to let Denver move the ball, quick pass that didn't let the secondary work their magic.  But the tackling by Seattle was superb and they just didn't let Denver get any momentum at all.  I picked Denver, but I had no particular rooting interest and it was an impressive show of defense.

It was all about the tackling. Manning threw a record number of completions in the game but there was pretty much never any post-catch yardage. The pursuit and tackling by the Seahawks was phenomenal.

Any commercial with serious whispery kid voices fucking sucks. That shit went on for so long and the kid was so annoying I hope he/she gets throat cancer.

Payton Manning does not like being touched, tackled, or interrupted. Almost no quarterback does, but I noticed when Payton was playing for the Colts that any defense who could pressure him or rough him up a bit would completely fuck his ability to call plays or pass under pressure. Doesn't hurt that the Seahawks covered the receivers extremely well either. Payton just could not get enough time to find a target.

Yup.  They tackled the fuck out of everyone.

And Denver just looked confused.  I thought after the safety - ok, no problem.  Then they held them to a pair of field goals and I thought, ok, no problem.

Then they just shit the bed on EVERY play.  Then Peyton did Peyton face and threw his duck.  He's been ENORMOUSLY lucky all season that those haven't been intercepted.

Seahawks looked like they just played "500!" with each ball.

Sigh.  On a brighter note - Bad Grandpa was funny.

(http://i.imgur.com/ZxpZqJf.jpg)

I noticed through three quarters that Peyton never looked in the vicinity of Sherman.  That was the other issue that I thought was a mistake, because he telegraphed everything to the weak side of the defense or underneath inside the right-hash.  It was almost like Seattle only had to play "half-D" the entire game.  The drive(s) where you guys saw some promise was when Sherman was hurt... but, by then it didnt matter.

Honestly, I think Seattle (and Sherman) got into Peyton's head bigtime, and for good reason.  As has been said by many, the matchup favored Seattle by far - not even close in my book.  Even with Peyton (who is actually the perfect QB for Seattle to play against, especially since he calls his own plays).  And watching Carroll's Dbackfield feast on Broncos receivers was glorious.  Seattle even schemed their tackles (if you paid attention)... e.g. they dont just "tackle" per se; it's more like an orchestrated beatdown wherein they sandwich-crush receivers purposely.  I saw a few plays where they LET them catch the ball.

Everything I harped on came to pass in this game; everything.  Only thing I missed was Golden Tate having an impact, but with Harvin back in the lineup Tate's job was mostly doing clearouts for speed sweeps.
As for Wilson, people who keep calling him a Dilfer can go fuck themselves - they dont know football, and I'm tired of explaining it.  In a nutshell you dont spend millions on Flynn only to insert a 5'11" rookie QB onto your SB-quality team if that rookie is a Dilfer.  Seriously?

Seattle is a pending dynasty imo.  Totally new type of team organization built around Pacific Northwest hardcore liberalish values.  They'll be the prototype for a while I think, but you'd need the right ownership and coaching to do it.  San Fran is the only team that comes close.

You harped on the fact that Russell Wilson is some kind of difference maker, and I will continue to tell you that you're nuts. Russell doesn't do anything that 20 QBs in the league can't do with that team.

The Seattle team is all about special teams, defense, and running the ball. They had 29 points on the board doing just that, and Wilson makes a bunch of short throws and middle throws. He had one pass to Baldwin that was great, and the rest of the game just unfolded into a rout.

He doesn't have to be great. That's not a knock on him because he's smart about not fucking up, but Seattle fans pretending he's a difference maker is fucking silly. You need to get over that, and just celebrate the shit you have that matters.

Now you are just sounding like an idiot.  75% completion rate, 8 or so yards per attempt.  2 touchdowns.  123 rating.  No picks.  Outplayed the GOAT in the Super Bowl by a enormous margin in only his second year.  He doesn't put up the huge yardage numbers, because he doesn't fucking need to.  Do you think for a second that he couldn't have put up 300 to 350 in that game?

Seriously, just stop.

No, I won't. I picked Seattle for the exact reasons they won. Their defense controlled the field, they controlled the line of scrimmage, and they controlled the turnover game. They also have the best kicking game, and they played all the special teams facets well.

Russell has a high rating because he throws the vast majority of his passes 0-6 yards down the field, and many of them on screens. Do you honestly believe Russell Wilson is the reason Seattle won any of their games in the playoffs more than the defense?

I mean hell, the winning QB didn't win Super Bowl MVP. It went to a defensive player, and the only other guy to do that is Ray Lewis on (guess who!) TRENT DILFER'S TEAM.

Defensive players not winning the MVP in the SuperBowl has a lot less to do with the low quality of QB play and more to do with the bias towards flashy play in single game MVP voting.

That being said, Wilson has not been a flashy big-numbers QB. Because Seattle is not a team designed around needing a Hall of Fame caliber QB performance to win week in and week out, it is hard to know if he is capable of being such a level of player.

But honestly, it doesn't matter. Wilson has a SuperBowl ring. Seattle have won a title and they won it by doing the fundamental things right on defense not allowing the other team to get big plays. They never let contain be broken, their pursuit to the ball was stellar, and they made good tackles.

They made awesome tackles.

I figure that Peyton ate some Papa John's before the game.  He obviously had a stomachache starting in the second.

I will almost agree with you on this. He wasn't a HUGE difference maker but he did 2 things last night that did make a lot of difference.

1) He made throws on 3rd down - they weren't GREATZOMG throws, they were just the normal, keep the engine running and the chains moving kind of throws that kept that offense on the field and Peyton on the bench.
2) He didn't turn the ball over at all, and to be fair, he didn't really even get close to throwing a bad pass.

He did exactly what he had to do, and he did it well. It was the best game he's had in these playoffs which is why the game was a complete rout as opposed to a close game like that against San Fran. Seattle won because of their defense and special teams, this is true, but they won by such a huge margin because Wilson had a pretty damn good game within the role he was expected to play. His QB rating was over 100 after all - Manning's was 24 something.

And talk about Manning all you want, but it wasn't just him that lost that game. His entire team played like shit except for the D line.

I seem to remember Wilson running a few yards when he couldn't throw, and he did it in perfectly acceptable conditions; meaning, not from desperation so much as there was a lane and they needed the down.

I had considered going for Wilson in next season's draft, depending on where I fall, but at this point I'm going to have to be at least third in line to get him.  This is fine, more Brees for me.

Bruno Mars is a good showman, not sure why people don't like him.  But whatever, not the place.

I agree, Wilson does what needs to be done. Wilson piled on the extra scores at the end, but those were garbage time stat-padding numbers. When Seattle went up 29-0? Game was over.

Before that 29-0 score, Wilson went 9-15 with 94 yards, no TDs. I mean, I can't spell it out much more than that. The game was done, and he was basically a non-issue. Defense and kicking scored 22 of those points.

What I want is for people to stop pretending you have to have the ZOMG BEST QB EVER QB DRIVEN LEAGUE RAWR. The last three champs are Eli, Flacco, and Wilson. Are we really going to say those guys are in the top echelon of QBs? Or are we going to say they had some of the best defensive players in the game?

I'm not sure he'll be a great fantasy option.  There are games where he'll need to do nothing and that's exactly what he'll do.  Plus, the defenses in the NFC West just seem to be getting better all the time.

Wilson is fine for what they need now. I'm not sure how good he'll do without such a fantastic team supporting him, but that might not be an issue for a while.

I don't think he is going to be an awesome fantasy pick, just that he is or was on the radar if I couldn't get someone who is actually good in FF.  I mean, Mike Ditka said Wilson is the best QB out there but that's a haul from being a good FF QB.  Also Ditka can't dress himself.

You said it: Flacco. Eli.

Oh please. There is one rule about declaring someone the GOAT. They need to play their biggest and baddest on their biggest stage(s). Manning does not qualify in the slightest for that criteria.

And football, being the ultimate team game, doesn't led itself much to the GOAT concept. Not like basketball certainly or hockey or soccer to lesser extents.

The team counting on 22+ guys to win the game beat the piss out of the team counting on one guy to win the game. All was how it should be. Peyton choked on a big fat dick under the pressure of an amazing defensive display. I love super bowls like this. I loved 2000 and I loved 2002. Those were my favorite super bowls of my adult life. This one may have been even better.

I give Denver defense credit though, at least on one dimension. They contained Lynch...Harvin, not so much.

I was impressed that they contained Lynch, at least until I realized that they were doing so at the expense of containing everyone else.

Eh, Harvin had 50 yards of total offense not counting special teams.  The kickoff return is not on the D, that's on the special teams.

My wife thought he was awfully fast.  "Yes, dear, he's awesome when he's not having a migraine."

That game just shows me how fucking meaningless passing stats in the regular season are nowadays.

Ditka wasnt the only coach saying Wilson was the best.  A lot of scouts thought if it weren't for his size, he would be; even coming fresh out of the draft (this was repeated over and over during that draft).  That's literally the only knock scouts have against him.  He's a very non-cocky, smart, swiss army knife type of QB.  They'll get him to do what they need him to and he'll do it.  As was said in the postgame, they've only scratched the surface with him and Carroll will never put him in a position to lose.

Personally, I'd rather have him on my team then Kaepernick, RG3, or T-Hill.  Kaep still shows the most potential though, if he can get over being a cocky dumbass; which is unlikely.  In a complex offense Luck is still the best of them all for the time being regardless, but statistically last year Wilson was the better QB (if people actually ever bothered to pay attn. to the numbers)  Efficiency-wise, Wilson is hard to beat.  Per pass attempt you'd be hardpressed to find a more reliable player, let alone on 3rd-down.  Also for the SB, recall he had 3 passes that should've been caught.  His QBR would be even higher.

I dont have a bromance with the guy, I just call it like it is.  The Seahawks got lucky picking him up, along with the what?  20+ undrafted players that go beastmode for them.  Scary.


He touched the ball what? 4 times??  Four.  These are the stats for those 4 times.
Two carries, 45 yards (one of which should've went the distance); one catch, five yards; one kickoff return, 87 yards, one TD.   :oh_i_see:

Recall, if they wanted to they'd put him in the backfield to compliment Lynch.  He's a natural tailback.  They just didnt have to and since he was hurt most of the year they couldn't.

All goes back to what I was saying before, that Seattle has way more weapons then people think.  Way more team speed.  Speed kills.  I'd forgotten to bring up Kearse as well, who a lot of guys were saying is a phreak and a lock for the Pro Bowl at some point.  Anyways, they cant hide from the attention now and teams will come more prepared for them, but good luck with that.   A team that talented, that young, with that comfortable a place to play (due to awesome ownership) will be tough to bring down.

Kaep is going to be a Dbag until he dies.  I'm not going to hang my backwards cap on that hook.

You keep comparing a guy with a career rating over a hundred, a career Y/A above or around 8, the the with the most wins and most TDs in his first two seasons (let me hedge that one...maybe it was just in his first?), the third youngest QB and the third QB in his second year to win a Super Bowl ring (and two Pro Bowl nods, I think), a game in which he thoroughly outplayed his counterpart who is considered one of the best ever, to Trent Dilfer.  If you actually believe that, then your football IQ is so low that I might as well be arguing with my keyboard.

He is not the best QB in the NFL, but he is definitely in the top 10.  He manages a football game extraordinarily well, but it is beyond foolish to think that he is no more than that.


I was sorta using the term ironically, given what just happened.  But still, Manning is still considered one of the best, by any measure.

Oh, and Kaepernick is not only a dbag, but he is also one good knee injury away from not being good enough to play in the NFL.

Just the first.  Marino had 68 TDs in his first two years (20 and 48), Wilson only had 52 (26 and 26).

You many now all return to your Wilson fellatio.  :why_so_serious:

Edit: By the way, Marino only played in 11 games his first year so that works out to 1.8 TDs per game that he played.  For Wilson it comes out to 1.6 TDs per game his first year.

I thought these stats made an interesting point. This is for the regular season of course:

Wilson:    4.4 yards in the air per catch. 46.3% of his passing yards were after the catch.
Manning: 4.2 yards in the air per catch. 49% of his passing yards were after the catch.

Wilson isn't Payton Manning, but he sure as hell isn't Trent Dilfer.

Also:

(http://i.imgur.com/Fb20BM8.jpg)

He's AJ McCarron of the NFL. He's on a great defensive team with one of the best running games in the league. You don't have to have the QB be great to win in the NFL, and that's the issue. People try to claim QBs are good because they win a Super Bowl, when in fact they are just solid players who don't make errors.

On Green Bay, New England, Philly, Denver, Indy, NO, SD, or Cincy, he's just a guy.

I think 99% of us reading this thread can agree that the reality on Wilson is somewhere in the middle of Paelos's total dismissal and Ghambit's mancrush.

 :why_so_serious:

Game manager on a superbowl winning team with a great defense? Hrrm wonder where I've seen that before. Is he going to be Tom Brady? Maybe not but I have a feeling the kid is only going to get better.

They have until 2016 to win as much as they can and structure deals. Then almost all the contracts are up, and shit will hit the fan due to the cap. That's why dynasties are so difficult in the cap era.

Jim McMahon. 

There have been 9 defensive players to win the Super Bowl MVP Edit: Howley for 70 Cowboys, Scott for the 72 Dolphins, Martin and White, of the 77 Cowboys, Dent of the 85 Bears, Brown of the 93 Cowboys, Lewis of the 2000 Ravens, Jackson of the 2002 Buccaneers, Smith of the 2013 Seahawks.

Wilson didn't throw the ball a lot, sure. But that isn't because he is some bad QB. Its because good QB's don't throw the ball when they're ahead and have a good defense. They run time off the clock. Which Wilson did.


Wilson got the ball in range to be kicked. Would probably have had a TD on one of those if it wasn't for the weak offensive holding call, and the other had the challenge gone their way (he probably didn't quite make it but probably worth the challenge)


Eh. Kaepernick had the unfortunate luck of having to play against the Seahawks this year. In a division with the number 1,2,7, and 11 defenses with SF being the weakest defense (weighted DVOA) in the division. While he will be a lot weaker as soon as he can't run. But he is still a very good Quarterback, an amazing thrower, and a douche.

Then again Wilson had the unfortunate luck of having the number 2, number 7 and 11 defense in the league in his division.

The NFC Wests primary Rivals are the NFC South(3,12,30,9) and the AFC South(19,21,23,22). Seattle got the Giants(4) and Vikings(26) as their free. SF got Washington(17) and Green Bay(29)

Compare to Manning. Whose divisions defenses looked like this 10, 14, 25, 28. Denver was number 10. With primary rivals being the NFC East(4,15,32,17) and the AFC South(19,21,23,22). Denver's off teams were the Ravens(8) and Patriots(24).

The best defense that Denver played all year, besides Seattle was the Giants. Seattle played 4 games against defenses as good as the Giants. San Fran played 5. Seattle played 6 games against defenses as strong as the second best that the Bronco's played. San Fran played 7, over 40% of its schedule. Seattle still had the number 9 rated offense and SF had the number 7 rated. And yea, neither of them put up really amazing numbers. But neither of them were playing in the AFC West with a pure pass offense either.

So uh, what was Kaepernick's big crime this year that's got everyone calling him a douche? I mean other than things like 'having tattoos' and 'wearing his hat at an angle I don't like'.

High pitched voice.  Thuggery.

Eyes too close together + thin-lipped/small-mouth is always an indicator.

He also throws the ball like a 90 year old man slamming a screen door shut. It is an awful throwing motion which likely impacts his accuracy. Once he can't run he is a pedestrian QB at best.

He plays for Jim Harbaugh. The douche rolls downhill.

I usually can't stand Frank Caliendo but his bit  from the pre-game  (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwMONEPz4yA) had some gems. The Belichick bit killed.

That accurately sums up my feelings for 30 for 30.

The Harbaugh and Belichick bits are great.

His Jaworski, Ditka and Gruden are great impressions, but yeah, the Harbaugh bit just killed.

So? Who got it?

Edit: Looked it up, Nevermore won. Gratz!

Heh, thanks.  After an 0-4 start no less.  :awesome_for_real:

Russel Wilson is a very good QB -- he might not be elite level (yet), but he's most definitely an asset to his team and I place him in the top 8. He'll improve but I'm not sure if he'll ever be the level of Tom Brady. But smarts and speed, coupled with a solid supporting cast (I think Seattle receiver group not an outstanding outfit), he'll have much more post-season success and more SB appearances.

Peyton Manning is way overrated -- people dork out over the glittering stats (and I concede that 2013 was an epic year for him, setting records despite age and the handicap of the neck which did subtract from his arm strength and release -- but he more than compensated with wisdom and preparation and tactical wherewithal) but all his career, he's played all his games in a dome or warm climate (AFC South). Then he goes to Denver and the thin air masks the ill effects of his neck surgical work. I know I got some flak for this in another thread here (proclaiming Roethlisberger the better QB), but put Manning in Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, and New England and he might post decent QB numbers, but not the epic stats he amassed in Indianapolis and Cleveland. Where the majority of games are played in swirling, windy, sub-temperature conditions. It makes a difference -- just listen to any pro QB talk about the experience of throwing in a dome v. cold & windy conditions.

That said, Manning not the reason the Broncos got shellacked -- I think the coaching and preparation was pitiful -- I don't believe I've ever seen a team so unprepared for a big game. Unless the NFC is just that much more superior to the AFC.

(http://theawkwardyears.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/kapdouche.jpg)

Let me guess... Dan Marino is also overrated because he played in Miami.   How about Roger Staubach in Dallas? :oh_i_see:

I wouldn't put Wilson in the top 8, and saying Peyton is overrated boggles my mind. Denver doesn't even sniff the playoffs without him. Reference the disaster that was the Tebow years.

My top ten current QBs in no order are:

Peyton
Brees
Rodgers
Brady
Stafford
Ryan
Rivers
Luck
Foles
Big Ben

No Kaepernick, Newton, RG III or Wilson?  Why do you hate the mobile guys?

With the exception of Wilson, I haven't seen reason to believe that helps the team more than it hurts. And in Wilson's specific case, he won a Super Bowl practically without running at all.

I believe they can win, but they need a dynamic defense and supporting cast. I also believe I could plug any of those guys on my list into Seattle and they would make that team better.

Haha, no way with that list.  Of course, your lists are notoriously wanting.  Top four is fine (order could be discussed), but Ryan and Stafford over Rivers?  Foles is still too much of an unknown to put on any list.  I think he can still go either way.

I would take the current version of Russel Wilson over the current versions of Luck, Big Ben, Foles, Ryan and Stafford.  Of those five, the only one that I think I might take as more of a longer term solution would be Luck.

Also, while I think you are high on this, just wanted to say that I don't actually think you are an idiot, despite whatever rage might be boiling off my posts.  Just a Russel Wilson idiot.  

I hope Manning's poor performance in the SuperBowl means he slips a few picks in fantasy next year so I can get him again.  He is the best QB playing right now.  Hands down.

I could be wrong about the kid, but I don't see it with the new generation of QBs. They look like injury risks who are at best managing the game, and at worst can't make plays to come back if they are put in a bad situation.

They are GREAT with a lead, but so are most good QBs (except Romo). Also, my list wasn't in order.

Oh, and back on Kaepernick.  Douche might be the wrong word.  Annoying, posturing waste of talent who purportedly puts very little effort into his craft.  I don't actually think he is actually a very good quarterback.  I mean, he'll have a day here and there, but what he really brings to the table is that he is a freaking gazelle.  He is the best running QB right now, for sure.  But if he blows a knee, just what is he going to fall back on?  He is a worse pocket-passer and has a lower football IQ than RG3, and RG3 was nearly a disaster without his legs at 100%.  If that happens to Kaep, I think he has a big problem.  Which he might avoid if he would work harder.

Being a Seattle fan, I am kinda glad he isn't better, so there's also that.

IMO, the difference with Wilson is that running is not what he does first.  He is almost certainly the best out-of-pocket QB in the league, there is certainly nobody that can throw as well on the run.  Maybe you haven't seen it enough yet.  When he gets chased out of the pocket, it's a big play waiting to happen.  It's not just me who says this stuff.

The great QB's remain great when they no longer rely on pure athletic ability.  The question is whether the new crop will be able to play at a high level when they reach 30.  I give Wilson the best chance of this among he, RGIII, and Kaep. 

He's not better throwing than Rodgers on the move. Sorry, he's just not. I've seen the man flick his wrist moving away from that offensive line and make plays 40 yards down the field that are just ridiculous.

I'm not talking as a fan of any of these guys. I'm a Cowboys fan and my QB is mostly garbage when shit hits the fan. What I'm looking at is fans of a team wanting their QB to get more credibility than he deserves just yet, and the rest of the national media buying into the HE WON A SUPER BOWL SO HE'S GREAT NOW!

Well, that wears off fast. It wore off of Eli and he has two rings now. Time will tell, but when contracts come due, and that Seattle defense starts to have to shed pieces, I think they are toast. That's where all the Super Bowl level talent lies, with them and Lynch.

I expected you would come back with Rodgers.  I think Wilson is better (not by a huge margin).  At least, right now he is.  Lots of experts say it as well. 

He does deserve more credibility.  This has always been true of good Seattle players, it's part of the price of being where they are.  I will stop far short of calling him GREAT.  Far too early to say that sort of thing, any quarterback needs to be judged over a longer period of time.  But that said, you are still wantonly ignoring what he has accomplished, and I am not talking about Super Bowl rings.  Having a good defense means you may not have to throw as much.  It doesn't automatically make you more accurate, make you run better, or somehow give you a higher Yards per Attempt (which is possibly the best single measurement) or throw a smaller percentage of interceptions.  Go ahead, look up Dilfer's numbers.  McMahon's.  They are abymsal in comparison.

Wilson is not better than Rodgers. 

When you have the lead, and you can pick and choose when to pass? Of course your percentages and Y/A are going to be high. In 2012, Robert Griffin led the league in that category. Is he somehow a top 10 QB, or has the shine come off? Cam Newton was top 5 in 2012. When you throw less than 400 times while the rest of the league is cresting 500+? Something is off.

Could Russell continue to hold up those numbers without his running game safety valve? Could he do that when defenses know he's going to throw? We don't know because he's not asked to do that since he's not the guy that has to win them games.

No. The best out of pocket QB is Aaron Rodgers. He won't put up running numbers like Wilson, but he will be a better PASSER when flushed out of the pocket.

It's very hard to say that Wilson would thrive in another system because the Seattle system is SO GODDAMN GOOD. Their defense is so stifling, their special teams is so stifling that the offense all too often DOESN'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING to win. How many short fields did Seattle start possession with in the Super Bowl? Their punt and kickoff special teams close people down, which means their defense is often defending in the opponent's territory. A 3 and out that started with a kick at the 15? That means Seattle's offense is starting on the 35-40 yard line. Their average starting field position was the 31 yard line - which was 3rd in the league.  Their average lead at the beginning of an offensive drive was 5 points (so they often started from a position of strength where they didn't have to pass). They were second in the league behind KC in drives that started in opponent's territory. They had the second lowest percentage of drives starting in their own territory.

It's hard to tell how good a QB Wilson is because he's not often being asked to do a whole lot and his stats bear that out. They were 24th in third downs made per game. He was 12th in completion percentage of guys that had more than 75 pass attempts, but he was 5th in yards per attempt. His receivers made him 18th in yards after the catch (Manning was 1st). He was 9th in TD to INT ratio.

All the stats point to him being a GOOD QB - but I don't think anything points to him being a GREAT QB. He seems more like a Byron Leftwich with much better running skills (when Leftwich was good). He won't turn the ball over, he'll win you some games but most of the time, he won't have to.

Cyrrex is really showing the bias by even considering that Wilson is a better QB than Rodgers. There isn't a single national analyst that would have been willing to tolerate that conversation before this Sunday, and they shouldn't have.

To be fair, most of the "analysts" are complete and utter tool bags.

Better than Rodgers, fuck no, I never said that.  I was talking primarily about throwing on the run.  Saying he is the best out-of-pocket is probably going too far...what I am trying to say is that he has a singular ability to run out of the pocket so convincingly that the defense are sure that he is off and running.  And then he throws, with stupid good accuracy.  Or he might run it for a first down.  I guess it is the combination of this threat that I am talking about.  

And you all continue to harp on the fact that "he doesn't have to do as much", and it is so much bullshit.  The same can be said for the QBs on all the great defensive teams then.  If you have any point at all, then we will see comparable stats from those QBs.  Dilfer and McMahon, right?  San Fran has that nearly epic defense, let's look at their QB stats then.  How about the more recent Ravens teams?  What other great defensive teams can we come up with?  Phil Simms with the Giants?  My quick look at all those guys' numbers shows a rather large gulf.  

This year, the only "Great" defensive teams played in the NFC Championship Game and Seattle won by a tight margin.

Which means he's better than Kaep, but doesn't really say a lot about his ability against other great defensive teams. And to follow that, Andrew Luck beat Seattle's defense as did a few other teams.

EDIT: Actually, Carolina had a "Great" defense but after that, you had New Orleans at #4 overall and KC at #5 overall - and both those teams had issues late in the season. Also, Seattle beat the #4 defense and played the #2 defense (Carolina) in the first game of the season and only scored 12 points - their only TD was a Wilson pass though.

Denver, with Tebow, beat the reigning AFC champions in the playoffs 2011-2012.

Again, Manning is a *good* QB, but not great, and vastly overrated. Rodgers, Brady, Roethlisberger, even Wilson and brother Eli (despite his horrid 2013 season, but he still brandishes 2 SB rings!) ahead of Peyton.  

You pay too much attention to stats, which can be deceptive and more indicative of supporting cast, offensive philosophy, etc.

Drew Brees is overrated too…

2013 INDOORS: 9 YPA, 1% INT
2013 OUTDOORS: 7 YPA, 3% INT

Let's look at some QB playoff records:

Roethlisberger: 10-4 (2-1 SB)
Russell Wilson: 4-1 (1-0 SB)
Peyton Manning: 11-12 (1-2 SB)
Tom Brady: 18-8 (3-2 SB)
Colin Kaepernick: 4-2 (0-1 SB)
Drew Brees: 6-5 (1-0 SB)
Philip Rivers: 4-5
Andrew Luck: 1-2
Aaron Rodgers: 5-4 (1-0 SB)
Andy Dalton: 0-3
Cam Newton: 0-1
Joe Flacco: 9-4 (1-0 SB)
Matt Ryan: 1-4
Eli Manning: 8-3 (2-0 SB)
Mark Sanchez: 4-2
Jay Cutler: 1-1
Alex Smith: 1-2
Tony Romo: 1-3

Matt Hasselback: 5-6 (0-1 SB)
Donovan McNab: 9-7 (0-1 SB)
Kurt Warner 9-4 (1-2 SB)
Brett Favre 13-11 (1-1 SB)
Terry Bradshaw 14-5 (4-0 SB)
Joe Montana 16-7 (4-0 SB)
Steve Young 8-6 (1-0 SB)
Troy Aikman 11-4 (3-0 SB)
John Elway 14-7 (2-3 SB)
Dan Marino 8-10 (0-1 SB)
Bart Starr 9-1 (2-0 SB)
Fran Tarkenton 6-5 (0-3 SB)
Jim McMahon 3-3 (1-0 SB)
Joe Theismann 6-2 (1-1 SB)
Steve McNair 5-5 (0-1 SB)
Trent Dilfer 5-1 (1-0 SB)
Jim Kelly 9-8 (0-4 SB)

Haemish - Not really what I meant - I am saying to look at the QB stats of the so-called greatest defenses in NFL history, or any really good defense.  What you keep telling me is that I should see all their QB stats up there around Russell's, on account of how that is how it magically works.  I am telling you right now that it is not the case, but go ahead and look.

But look more closely at the point you are making yourself.  They played San Fran three times this year.  Played New Orleans twice, Carolina once.  Arizona twice.  The Rams twice.  That is a pretty heavy list of strong defensive teams they went against.  I would imagine only other NFC west teams had to deal with so many difficult defenses.

Anyway, let's just stop here, this isn't going anywhere.  We can regroup again a year from now, after another year of a nearly 3 to 1 TD/Int ratio, another rating of around 100, another Y/A of around 8, and maybe we'll throw in another 500 yards or so of rushing.  I have a feeling we'll still have the same discussion about the magical forces causing it  :grin:

FWIW this doesn't fit what we read about him here at all. Local accounts all pretty much say he has the best work ethic on the team (along with Gore).

Wait, so stats are deceptive and more indicative of supporting cast but playoff wins are not?  :headscratch:

Not sure WTF you are talking about with magical forces.

Remove Marshawn Lynch, Richard Sherman and Cliff Avril from that team, and his stats would drop. He's a good QB and he may be great one day - but he hasn't shown me enough yet to make me think he will be great. A Super Bowl ring does not prove his greatness - after all, Flacco, Dilfer and McMahon all have rings and I wouldn't build a franchise around them anymore than Seattle is building a franchise around Wilson. Their franchise is built around that defense and running game.

Nearly every living NFL QB (retired and active) would place Peyton in the top 10 QB's to ever play the game.  How on Earth can you think that he's overrated?  Have you not watched the way that he runs an offense in real time on the field?  How many QB's even have the football IQ to do that in the modern era?

Manning to me has always just been a modern Jim Kelly with a slightly weaker arm.  Nothing more, nothing less.  A tier 2 prospect among the epic QBs like Elway, Marino, Montana, etc.
Teams have always placed too much burden on his shoulders since he was at TN (costing him the NCAA championship no-less), and he's not ever quite had the physical talent to make up the difference.

Danny Wuerfel was smarter and better throwing to-the-spot then Manning ever was btw.  He just was too short and too weak in the arm.

 :facepalm:

Ever heard of Fran Tarkenton or Joe Montana?  Both have weaker arms than Manning. 

Out of curiosity, did you grow up watching these guys?  I remember them in particular because they were the big names when I was in middle school.  I mean, the records are there, but I find it interesting that the names you went with were all guys from the late 80s and 90s.

Joe Montana arm > Peyton Manning arm. Montana didn't have an arm like Bradshaw or Elway but he could throw decent enough, and a better spiral than Manning.

The comparison to Tarkenton is apt though, even if Tarkenton was a scrambling QB and Manning a pocket passer -- both used their wit moreso than most QB to gain advantage, and just like Tarkenton, in big games, this attribute not as much a difference maker. Even heard Kurt Warner on the radio saying the same thing -- that all the pre-snap audible calls and overriding based on defensive read can be overkill in a SB/championship game scenario.

One word. SCOREBOARD.

Outside of his friendly home field confines, he's consistently come up short in big games. He's been owned by Roethlisberger, Brady, etc. in the playoffs. If it weren't for the Bears, he'd be 0-3 in SB. The comparison to Jim Kelly or Dan Marion is an apt -- a very good QB, not in the league of Brady, Roethlisberger, Elway, Bradshaw, Montana, etc..

...

You have to be from Pittsburgh.  That's the only explanation. 

You can spot the biases when we get into this stuff pretty easily.

I'll fully admit I'm biased against the mobile QB. I haven't seen that they can carry a team to success for anything more than brief periods. I wouldn't want to build around them, and I sure as hell wouldn't pay them huge contracts.

Anyone who says Dan Marino was not a top QB is insane.

No one has ever had the ability to throw the touch pass as well as Marino.

But he never won a Super Bowl so clearly he was terrible. If he really cared he'd have been out there on defense.

Wait... Danny Wuerffel?  :uhrr:

Look who made that comment. Then do like most of us do and send it to the "this dude is crazy" bin.  :why_so_serious:

Stating that a player is overrated and the concept that they are still pretty damned good are not mutually exclusive.  Manning is obviously a very, very good quarterback.  I don't think I would put him as "best of all time" or even in the top 5, but then he has 5 MVPs.  Favre is also a very, very good quarterback, but he's overrated too.  He has 3 MVPs.  I'd still take either of them on my team when they were in their prime.

(http://i.imgur.com/9tVKh7p.jpg)

Dan Marino was a great passer, but he can't hold a kick for shit.

Dan Marino was to passing what Barry Sanders was to running.

That Sanders guy was fucking terrible. Didn't win shit.

Manning has been hurt by time.  The neck injuries have taken a toll on his arm strength, which was never Favre-like to begin with.   I think teams built somewhat wrongheadedly around Manning.  They keep foisting offensive weapons upon him that he really doesn't need.  Like Brady, he could turn just about anyone into a 1,000 yard receiver.  Get him on a team with a stout defense and I think he has a better playoff record.

:awesome_for_real:

That made me laugh out loud.  Thanks for that.

I totally agree, and this is the problem with many GMs in the NFL right now. They believe too much in "weapons" and not enough in defense. The Falcons biggest problem right now is just that, they can't try to win the 4th quarter every game while the defense shits the bed.

Now you just climbed into the silly clown car.

Even the greatest of running backs (i.e., Simpson in his prime, Payton, Sanders) can sparkle at unprecedented level, but at best, can only lift a team to slightly above mediocre by their efforts alone. Not like QB who consistently win games and elevate their team into champions.

No, Marino, didn't play defense. But his playoff record is mediocre (go look it up). And I was a big fan of Dan Marino -- he grew up not far from me (2-3 miles) and I believe I played street hockey against him as a kid in Oakland (he went to Central Catholic before heading to Pitt) PA. Yet every big game he fell short.

It is subjective, but QB can indeed be measured by W-L, especially playoff time, when all the teams are more closely matched.

Sorry, but Roethlisberger > Manning. More SB. Done more with a lesser supporting cast. The Steeler teams helmed by O'Donnel and Stewart featured better D, offensive line and running backs (Bettis was at tail end of career and hobbled by time Roethlisberger cycled into his prime) yet they fell short in AFC championships (though the officials gave it to Denver with phantom PI calls back in 97) and SB. Manning's stats look better because he played most of his games in the pristine conditions of a dome whereas Roethlisberger plays 11-12 games a season in AFC North outdoor stadiums.

That's honestly almost as crazy as measuring pitchers by W-L. Football is even more of a team sport and you want to hang the game on the QB? Have you been watching Skip Bayless or something?

 :heart:

But the "greatness" of a pitcher is indeed measured by wins -- at least over the course of a career and 300 wins still holds luster for HoF voters.

But again, you're comparing apples to hammers as the best teams in baseball win slightly over 60% of games whereas football and it's limited schedule a great team easily wins 75%-90%+ and a QB is the most essential (even more so today than yesteryear given the emphasis on passing game and consistent repeated clampdown on defensive measures through recent decades).

Look at past SB winners -- since Dilfer & TB QB in 2002, SB victor has been led by elite QB. Wilson might not be level of Brady, Roethlisberger, Flacco, etc. (yet) but he's very good and along with Manning in the upper QB echelon. I just think Manning is in the same class with Wilson, below Brady, Roethlisberger, etc.. Yeah, if you go by stats alone, you can certainly make a case for Manning being the greatest, but football isn't like baseball -- it's a team sport, and winning is what matters. Even more pronounced for QB position -- while amassing a lot of yards and high YPA is indicative of a great runner, completing a lot of passes for a lot of yardage isn't necessarily emblematic of a great passer. Throw for 400 yards but fail to move the chains on a critical down or make the big play and the more efficient QB might be the one who maybe threw for 200 but made the big plays when the game was at a critical juncture.

Manning has mostly done that but I think there's a small class above that's done it on a more consistent basis in the big games.  Yeah I'm countervailing against announcer worship and stat fetishdom.

You just put Flacco in the elite camp too?

:facepalm:

Roethlisberger doesn't belong in the same conversation as Manning. You are high.

Naum, you're buying into the bullshit ESPN version of football. It's not all about QB. It's an important position, but it's absolutely pointless without a decent offensive line, a semblance of a running game, a decent receiving core, and a defense.

Even by your own insane standards Flacco could at best only be the equal (lol) of Manning because they've both won one championship.

Without a great or very good/on the cusp QB, you're not winning a Superbowl. Maybe in 1974, but not 2014. Again, SCOREBOARD -- peruse the last decade of Superbowl winners and the importance of QB position is apparent.

Yes, offensive line, defense, running game are important but I point again to Steelers & Roethlisberger -- pre-Roethlisberger, Steelers were superior in every one of these facets, yet they fell short, in championship games and the first SB Cowher/O'Donnel (1995 v. Cowboys). Roethlisberger, with a shabby O-line, a decent D but nowhere near previous years, and a diminished running game and Steelers win 2 of 3 Super Bowls. This season, Steelers on cusp of  playoffs, despite having almost NO running game, an atrocious defense especially against the pass, and a decrepit offensive line -- all due to Roethlisberger mostly -- plug Matt Cassel as starting QB and they're 4-12 or worse.

How many super bowl winners in the last decade had a top 10 defense? 

What defenses nowhere near previous years and a diminished running game might look like:

Manning is an elite QB with two glaring weaknesses.  One, he is prone to crack in big games when things are not going his way.  In general, big games just seem to have a way of getting to him.

Two, and this isn't entirely his own fault, he is given too much power on the field because of his admittedly super high football IQ.  As a result, when he begins to crack, his whole team is utterly doomed because the only adjustments you can make have to go through him.  For all intents and purposes, he calls all the offensive plays.

I still think he is one of the best all time, it's just that the flaws that he does have are killer ones, if you can find a way to expose them.

Eli is my QB and I am weirdly fond of him these days because he is just so gosh durn Eli, but I am pretty sure he was not what won that first Superbowl against the Patriots, even though he got the MVP.

Going by scoring defense all the way back to 2000:

2013: Seahawks - 231pts (1st)
2012: Ravens - 344pts (12th)
2011: Giants - 400pts (25th)
2010: Packers - 240pts (2nd)
2009: Saints - 341pts (20th)
2008: Roethlisbergers - 223pts (1st)
2007: Giants - 351pts (17th)
2006: Colts - 360pts (23rd)
2005: Roethlisbergers - 258pts (3rd)
2004: Patriots - 260pts (2nd)
2003: Patriots - 238pts (1st)
2002: Buccaneers - 196pts (1st)
2001: Patriots - 272pts (6th)
2000: Ravens - 165pts (1st)

So the overrated Manning and Brees had to win their rings without a lot of help from their defense, while elite Roethlisberger was carried by his defense.  As an aside, also note that Brady hasn't been able to win a championship without a dominating defense backing him up.

Edit: Here, I'll color code the defenses in the top 10.

I want to say the 2011 Giants, a lot of their good defenders were hurt at various points in that season, and only all got healthy right at the end, too. But I could be high.

I actually think that, for at least a handful of plays, he played out of his mind and WAS the reason they won.  He was the anti-Peyton.  I'm not really a Giants fan by any stretch, but I remember watching that game and getting a strange feeling of pride for what he did.  You should be fond of Eli.  He'll never be considered good as Peyton, but I'd almost rather have him as my SB QB.

Edit for spelling.

Just to add to the "Naum is high" details nevermore posted, Pittsburgh was the #1 scoring defense the year they lost to Green Bay.
 :why_so_serious:

EDIT:
Whoops, didn't see the previous spoiler tagged info.

That win over the Seahawks was all him.  Elite level shit.  

(http://o.onionstatic.com/images/8/8355/original/700.jpg?3949)

At least he hasn't raped anyone or crashed a motorcycle lately.   

To be fair, there is no way for you to know that he hasn't raped someone lately.

The entire team played out of their mind that night, though. It was crazy awesome.  :why_so_serious:

The second one I'm more willing to give Eli, simply because he had an awesome year and they wouldn't have made the playoffs without him, imo.

The problem is this is kind of circular, isn't it?  Why are they great, because they've won Super Bowls?  Why did they win Super Bowls?  Because they're great!

That was precisely my point.  Though I do like the colors better. 

Leave Roethlisberger alone.  He never actually successfully raped anybody!

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRfTmcY4YbLce_AOgfJ20Rri4utSqkk-1DD_DMLdchD-sGy32gdoA)

Besides the fact that "points allowed" is a not always indicative of defense effectiveness, the point was that Roethlisberger era Steeler D were not at the level of previous Steeler defenses -- a fact that is uncontroversial to most analysts and objective viewers.

This. The Rapist has been good (though he's obviously breaking down physically these days and his team is shit), but he has NEVER, EVER in a MILLION FUCKING YEARS been as good a QB as Manning or Brady is RIGHT FUCKING NOW in their sunset years. He just isn't. The two Super Bowls the Rapist won were not won by him - the first in particular was a terrible game for the Berger.

EDIT: And it doesn't matter the Steelers' D that won those 2 Super Bowls was as good as previous Steelers' D - it's that THOSE defenses were better than most other defenses in the league they were playing against, including the teams they beat.

Also, Eli would NOT have won that first Super Bowl without the Giants defense. If I remember right, that year the Giants D started out fuckstupid awful but got insanely hot by the end of the season. Their first 8 games were forgettable but their pass rush just KILLED people down the stretch and in the postseason. Their numbers were somewhat skewed by early injuries and coaching incompetence. Also, Eli didn't throw one INT in the entire postseason that year.

I feel like people are really underestimating Rothlisberger. At least three plays a game he just refuses to be sacked and often beats you for a big gain because a secondary can't cover forever. Besides that he's pretty much a slightly above average QB but as someone who has watched at least two of his games every year I can tell you that those plays are just so back breaking that they often decide games. Furthermore unlike Manning's on-field coaching shit which I think we can safely say at this point loses value in playoff situations and especially super bowls with that extra week of prep time. Rothlisberger's beingfuckingimpossibletobringdown skill probably gains value in tighter playoff-type contests.

Flacco and Eli are pretty similar unless Flacco proves otherwise by doing it again, with less help. They are under Peyton but not by that much.

Peyton is nowhere near Montana or Brady. Hell nobody in my lifetime is. But I'd hear the argument that both those guys were working for the most genius coaches of their times. So maybe they get too much credit? Who knows.

Now where to rank Peyton versus Elway, Young and Favre type amazingly gifted athletically QB's is really tough. Doesn't quite feel like an apples to apples comparison.

***

For the record here is the conversation for elite QB's from my lifetime (obviously data suggests Staubach, Stabler, Bradshaw etc. were pretty damn good but what do I know?).
-Montana
-Brady
-Young
-Elway
-Kelly
-Rodgers
-Favre
-Manning (Peyton)
-Rothlisberger

*edit* forgot Aaron Rodgers

 :facepalm:

One of us is certainly missing the point and spoiler alert, it's not me. The entire point of the defense is to not allow points. I can only assume you're just trolling because the alternative is just  :uhrr:.

Haemish already covered the point that it doesn't matter how the Super Bowl defenses compared to defenses in the past when the former were all at least top 3 relative to the rest of the league.

Basically throw out everything you know about stats and comparing teams before 1994, when the cap came in. That's the beginning of the modern era of football.

It should probably be noted that special teams is a much bigger piece of the 'points allowed' puzzle than it is normally given credit for. That said, naum is still living in crazy town.

You should also consider the addition of another wild card team and first-round byes in the "he won a Super Bowl" picture as well. Teams like the 2010 Green Bay Packers or even the Rapist's first Super Bowl would not have even been in the playoffs in the 90's.

I dunno about insanely hot but their defense was like a completely different defense once they hit the postseason, and then in the actual Superbowl, they were really, really good. I remember at the time people being shocked at how well the defense played against the Patriots, and the general feeling being the defense won that game. :P

They got hot after week 15. The Giants gave up an average of 14 points starting in Week 16 and running through the Super Bowl.

Before that? They averaged almost 25 points a game against.

The Giants defense matched up really well against the Patriots.  Overall rankings are important, but it depends who you play too.  Match-ups matter.  I remember actually hoping the Patriots won during the 2011 playoffs.  I think they would have had a much tougher time against the other potential opponents.

Haha, I remember for the 2011 one, Ingmar seething because it was pretty obvious the 49ers would've wrecked the Patriots.

I remember one Giants SB year, their defense basically murdered half a dozen QBs.

They were asking for it.

As much as I ended up disliking LT after he was done with football, he sure was fun to watch. Dude could lay a hit down hard.

Joe Theismann agrees.

I think he was talking about crack.

That's really interesting, actually, and it hadn't occurred to me.  Possibly I've just missed people bringing that up, but typically I've just seen "can't win the big game" where "big game" is defined as "a playoff game Peyton Manning loses."  I can definitely buy that his game management would become less of a factor as the season goes on.

Eh, i think its more that the Seattle secondary had his number. According to Sherman they figured out his audibles (or rather hand signals since Manning couldn't be heard) in the game and then jumped the routes.

One thing I've always said about Manning - he does not thrive well in the playoffs when he's had a week off. That's one of the reasons the Colts never won the Super Bowl as a division champ. When he has the week off, his timing which is so precise week in and week out during the season, is off. The weekly rhythm of the regular season really favors him, whereas 2 weeks off and he loses that touch.

The Broncos just didn't execute any of their plays from the first snap. The Seattle D threw off everything, and that was the difference.

Denver executed some of their early stuff just like they normally do - the quick underneath pass, jailbreak screens, quick slants, etc.  That has always, always, ALWAYS been their bread and butter.  We talked about this before the game.  The difference was that Seattle defenders were there immediately, and absolutely demolished them as soon as they got the ball.  This point, along with whether or not Seattle would pressure Manning, was always going to be the deciding factor on that side of the ball for both teams.  Manning completed a lot of those passes, but it didn't matter much.

An interesting thing to watch if you can find it somewhere is a highlight video for D. Thomas during the Super Bowl.  It kind of puts his record setting SB performance in perspective, because he got absolutely rocked in that game.  Eve some of his catches that turned into first downs, you can't help but think he was just getting clobbered.  Except for his TD pass and a few other plays, the video looks more like a Seattle D highlight real.  Not to take anything away from Thomas, because I think he was the only Bronco on the field that actually showed any gumption that day, so good on him for that.  The rest of the trio were invisible, except for some garbage time stuff from Welker.

Yeah, on the second or third series for Denver it was 3rd and maybe 4 or 5, and they ran a crossing route to someone.  He got absolutely blown up as soon as he caught the ball.  Despite the fumble and sloppy play before that, it was definitely the moment where I went.. "Oh. It's going to be like THAT." And I knew at that moment Denver was almost certainly done for.

Yeah, it was the first real series they ran after the safety.  1 run and two short passes.  3 clobberings.

I said it earlier in the season, but the Super Bowl completely reaffirmed it- the Seattle D tackles better than any defense I can remember. They are big and fast and all that, but when they get to the ball carrier, he goes down 99% of the time. The fact that they get there in bunches makes it easier to do it, but even one on one they make almost all the tackles.

When I use Haemish's picks next year for gambilng and lose I will have no one to blame but Haemish.

I don't expect my picking prowess to continue for another season but who the fuck knows?