Posted:
#26
no way you go 0-6
Green Bay +3 for me
Green Bay +3 for me
0
NFL WEEK 1 *****350-1 UNDERDOG ML PARLAY*****
Posted:
#29
Quote Originally Posted by matty441204:
I don't get this position at all. I said this in a different thread, but name one player on the colts that is better at his position than his counterpart on the Broncos. Now, since you say they are an all around better team, you should be able to easily name 5....right? I don't get the urge to fade the Broncos at home, in prime time, opening night, with Manning wanting revenge.
Manning was the consensus top player in football last year, hands down.
DT > Wayne
Welker > Hilton
Sanders > Nicks
Ball > Richardson
Orange Julius >>> Fleener
Broncos O-line >>> Colts O-Line
D-Ware/Miller >>>>>>>>> Werner/Walden....aka who?
Talib > Davis
Harris > Toler
Ward > Landry
Shall I go on?
PLUS they're at home.
PLEASE explain to me why you'd be so shocked if the Broncos won.
The offenses don't play each other, so why compare them to determine who will win the game? How will each offense match up against the opposing defense is a much more tangible way to handicap a game.
I personally don't have an opinion on this one, just think that is a flawed way of thinking and can get you in trouble.
0
Posted:
#30
Quote Originally Posted by matty441204:
They had the better offensive players across the board (except rb) in the SB. That didnt turn out so well. I don't get this position at all. I said this in a different thread, but name one player on the colts that is better at his position than his counterpart on the Broncos. Now, since you say they are an all around better team, you should be able to easily name 5....right? I don't get the urge to fade the Broncos at home, in prime time, opening night, with Manning wanting revenge.
Manning was the consensus top player in football last year, hands down.
DT > Wayne
Welker > Hilton
Sanders > Nicks
Ball > Richardson
Orange Julius >>> Fleener
Broncos O-line >>> Colts O-Line
D-Ware/Miller >>>>>>>>> Werner/Walden....aka who?
Talib > Davis
Harris > Toler
Ward > Landry
Shall I go on?
PLUS they're at home.
PLEASE explain to me why you'd be so shocked if the Broncos won.
0
Posted:
#31
Quote Originally Posted by TRAIN69:
They had the better offensive players across the board (except rb) in the SB. That didnt turn out so well.
They had the better offensive players across the board (except rb) in the SB. That didnt turn out so well.
Yeah, that's a nice comparison. I wanna think you're smarter than that, and just being tongue in cheek, but in case you're not...
That's a HORRIBLE comparison, because:
1) Seahawk's D was WAY better than Denver's D last year, while the Colts D is no where near as good as the Broncos this year.
2) Broncos O-line was not healthy for the super bowl (and much of the reg. season too), but they are now with Clady back.
So, in summary, a great D beat a great O in the Superbowl.
A great O and a good/potentially great D will beat a good O and a bad D on 9/7 in Denver.
0
Posted:
#33
Quote Originally Posted by matty441204:
Cool. Best of luck to you sir. Yeah, that's a nice comparison. I wanna think you're smarter than that, and just being tongue in cheek, but in case you're not...
That's a HORRIBLE comparison, because:
1) Seahawk's D was WAY better than Denver's D last year, while the Colts D is no where near as good as the Broncos this year.
2) Broncos O-line was not healthy for the super bowl (and much of the reg. season too), but they are now with Clady back.
So, in summary, a great D beat a great O in the Superbowl.
A great O and a good/potentially great D will beat a good O and a bad D on 9/7 in Denver.
0
Posted:
#34
Quote Originally Posted by Hawky:
Denver didn't have a good offense in the superbowl, it wasn't just the seahawks defense. that was domination in every aspect, especially seahawks special teams and offense
So the Seahawk's defense deserves less credit then, if they just stopped a poor offense from scoring, right?
0
Posted:
#35
Quote Originally Posted by matty441204:
did u see Sherman wearing his champions hat before the game was over? they didn't need any stars to win that game, but they had TONS. I said EVERY ASPECT, not 'less credit'. Seahawks mindset is 'you aren't a champion until you defend it'. It's going to be a bloodbath
So the Seahawk's defense deserves less credit then, if they just stopped a poor offense from scoring, right?
0
Posted:
#37
Quote Originally Posted by Hawky:
I said EVERY ASPECT, not 'less credit'. Seahawks mindset is 'you aren't a champion until you defend it'. It's going to be a bloodbath
I said EVERY ASPECT, not 'less credit'. Seahawks mindset is 'you aren't a champion until you defend it'. It's going to be a bloodbath
You said "the Broncos didn't have a good offense in the superbowl." That's at best a confused statement, and at worst an idiotic one.
Are you saying the Broncos weren't a good offense last year? Or are you saying their offense didn't look good against a good D? Your statement didn't seem to be the same as either of those. But it sure sounded like you were saying Denver's offense was not very good, hence they did bad not because of a good Seattle D, but because they just weren't very good. Hence, they would deserve less credit than they have received.
Either way, your subsequent comments have showed me a bit more of your level of understanding. Seahawks are definitely gonna have a little bit of a fall off from last year.
0
Posted:
#39
Quote Originally Posted by matty441204:
1. I said in the superbowl seattle dominated every aspect of the game.
You said "the Broncos didn't have a good offense in the superbowl." That's at best a confused statement, and at worst an idiotic one.
Are you saying the Broncos weren't a good offense last year? Or are you saying their offense didn't look good against a good D? Your statement didn't seem to be the same as either of those. But it sure sounded like you were saying Denver's offense was not very good, hence they did bad not because of a good Seattle D, but because they just weren't very good. Hence, they would deserve less credit than they have received.
Either way, your subsequent comments have showed me a bit more of your level of understanding. Seahawks are definitely gonna have a little bit of a fall off from last year.
2. Your second sentence was that of a 6 year old and I still don't quite understand.
3. What don't you understand? He came across and illegaly blind-sided that guy and got away with it because he's wes welker
I added you so I could argue a bit but now I have realized you are brainless
0
Posted:
#42
Quote Originally Posted by Hawky:
So how do you think the denver offense was in the superbowl?
"Denver didn't have a good offense in the superbowl, it wasn't just the seahawks defense"
They had a very good offense in the superbowl, as they did all season. In fact, they had probably one of the best offenses of all time. They didn't play well, partly due to their own lack of execution, but in a large part due to SEA playing very good D. You seem to be saying they weren't a good offense, and the reason they didn't score much had nothing to do with the SEA defense, yes? You also don't seem to have the best grasp of the English language either though, so I dunno....
0
Posted:
#44
hey retard I don't think YOU have a good grip on the English language. what part of "IT WASN'T JUST THE SEATTLE DEFENSE" means 'and the reason they didn't score much had nothing to do with the SEA defense, yes?' frick you're dumb. I was reading your run on sentences and idiot grammar so don't worry about my English.
0
Posted:
#45
"you seem to be saying' what is that? can't you read what I wrote and comprehend it? I write what I mean, not open for your moronic interpretation. Seattle goes 3-0 to start the season, Denver being the toughest, but it will still be a 14 pt spread. peyton will be lucky if he walks away from that one
0
Hot Forum Topics
