Super Bowl 50: Denver Broncos v.s Carolina Panthers

[ATL Boy]

[Slava]

Lost in all this is that Demariyus Thomas pulled another disappearing act in a big game. I was a big fan of the guy a couple years ago but as far as premier receivers go, you can't pull a one reception and 8 yard performance in the biggest game of your career.

[truth18]

Lost in all this is that Demariyus Thomas pulled another disappearing act in a big game. I was a big fan of the guy a couple years ago but as far as premier receivers go, you can't pull a one reception and 8 yard performance in the biggest game of your career.

I despise that dude. Enjoyed watching him dissappear.

[Mr. E]

Stop trying to sell us **** Payton.

Yeah! That's JJ's job now!

[Celtsfan1980]

What I saw was much different than the norm here:bad offense by the Panthers as much as good defense by the Broncos. The Broncos' defense couldn't shut down the Browns among other teams. A very good defense but far from one of the greatest. A dud of a game all around, as I had expected.

[Cactus Jack]

Thoroughly enjoyed Cam's performance. Happy for Peyton.

[Stoked]

Dominant defensive performance by an elite defense.

Best part is that the majority of that D will be back next year, Clady will be back improving the Denver O line and a new QB. Denver will be pushing for another Lombardi next year.

[NaturalBuns]

Carolina is 15-1 in regular season and destroyed two NFC west teams.

Carolina all the way

I watched the game and saw the second half where Seattle mostly had their way with Carolina. The game was close by the end.

I watched that game too and Seattle sucked, man. No moral victories.

I was wrong anyway but the panthers didn't look like they did all year. I was disappointed in that effort. happy for Peyton though

[Left*My*Heart]

Lost in all this is that Demariyus Thomas pulled another disappearing act in a big game. I was a big fan of the guy a couple years ago but as far as premier receivers go, you can't pull a one reception and 8 yard performance in the biggest game of your career.

He disappeared long before this game. I haven't checked to see what coverage he was playing against, as a friend uses the double coverage argument anytime I bring up his suck. Manning lost faith in him against San Diego for dropping several passes. He will always be ranked in the top 10 in the league in dropped passes.

[Chicago76]

What I saw was much different than the norm here:bad offense by the Panthers as much as good defense by the Broncos. The Broncos' defense couldn't shut down the Browns among other teams. A very good defense but far from one of the greatest. A dud of a game all around, as I had expected.

I'm sorry but this is ridiculous. Football outsiders had PBP data going back 27 years to rate aspects of the game based upon down, distance, clock, and score. This removes a lot of noise around raw yardage and point comparisons. This year's Broncos defense is rated #8 over that span, regular season only. Even a great D can have a bad game or two over 16 games, but overall, they were great. A once every 3-4 year defense (on average) is a great D, unless your greatness bar is set ridiculously high.

The 91 Eagles (didn't even make the postseason on account of a horrendous offense) came in at #1 42.4% better than league average. SB winner Tampa Bay came in #2 (31.8% better than lg avg). #3 though #16 were all pretty tightly bunched +/- 3.2% of DEN. Pittsburgh 2008 was #3 at 29% better. If you're looking at regular season only, if Denver wasn't great, then there were only 2 great Ds in the last 27 years and 1 of them didn't even appear in the postseason.

Add playoffs to the mix. 7 of those top 16 defenses since 89 played at least two postseason games. There are only three teams from that elite group of 16 regular season defenses that could reasonably claim to have been better than the Broncos over their postseason run: 2000 Baltimore, 2002 Tampa Bay, and 2013 Seattle. TB in 2002 gave up 12.3 vs. similar quality. 2013 Seattle gave up 13.3 vs. similar quality. 2000 Baltimore gave up 5.7 pts against similar to slightly lower quality (#s 3,6,8,13). The Broncos gave up 14.7 pts per game facing the #s 3,5, and 8 offenses on their run. 17 of their 44 pts allowed also came off drives that started at midfield or closer.

So, um, yeah. They were better than just very good.

[Celtsfan1980]

What I saw was much different than the norm here:bad offense by the Panthers as much as good defense by the Broncos. The Broncos' defense couldn't shut down the Browns among other teams. A very good defense but far from one of the greatest. A dud of a game all around, as I had expected.

I'm sorry but this is ridiculous. Football outsiders had PBP data going back 27 years to rate aspects of the game based upon down, distance, clock, and score. This removes a lot of noise around raw yardage and point comparisons. This year's Broncos defense is rated #8 over that span, regular season only. Even a great D can have a bad game or two over 16 games, but overall, they were great. A once every 3-4 year defense (on average) is a great D, unless your greatness bar is set ridiculously high.

The 91 Eagles (didn't even make the postseason on account of a horrendous offense) came in at #1 42.4% better than league average. SB winner Tampa Bay came in #2 (31.8% better than lg avg). #3 though #16 were all pretty tightly bunched +/- 3.2% of DEN. Pittsburgh 2008 was #3 at 29% better. If you're looking at regular season only, if Denver wasn't great, then there were only 2 great Ds in the last 27 years and 1 of them didn't even appear in the postseason.

Add playoffs to the mix. 7 of those top 16 defenses since 89 played at least two postseason games. There are only three teams from that elite group of 16 regular season defenses that could reasonably claim to have been better than the Broncos over their postseason run: 2000 Baltimore, 2002 Tampa Bay, and 2013 Seattle. TB in 2002 gave up 12.3 vs. similar quality. 2013 Seattle gave up 13.3 vs. similar quality. 2000 Baltimore gave up 5.7 pts against similar to slightly lower quality (#s 3,6,8,13). The Broncos gave up 14.7 pts per game facing the #s 3,5, and 8 offenses on their run. 17 of their 44 pts allowed also came off drives that started at midfield or closer.

So, um, yeah. They were better than just very good.

I didn't watch much of the Steelers game, but for the other two I saw offenses that were far from perfect. My eyes tell me more than stats ever will.

[Chicago76]

What I saw was much different than the norm here:bad offense by the Panthers as much as good defense by the Broncos. The Broncos' defense couldn't shut down the Browns among other teams. A very good defense but far from one of the greatest. A dud of a game all around, as I had expected.

I'm sorry but this is ridiculous. Football outsiders had PBP data going back 27 years to rate aspects of the game based upon down, distance, clock, and score. This removes a lot of noise around raw yardage and point comparisons. This year's Broncos defense is rated #8 over that span, regular season only. Even a great D can have a bad game or two over 16 games, but overall, they were great. A once every 3-4 year defense (on average) is a great D, unless your greatness bar is set ridiculously high.

The 91 Eagles (didn't even make the postseason on account of a horrendous offense) came in at #1 42.4% better than league average. SB winner Tampa Bay came in #2 (31.8% better than lg avg). #3 though #16 were all pretty tightly bunched +/- 3.2% of DEN. Pittsburgh 2008 was #3 at 29% better. If you're looking at regular season only, if Denver wasn't great, then there were only 2 great Ds in the last 27 years and 1 of them didn't even appear in the postseason.

Add playoffs to the mix. 7 of those top 16 defenses since 89 played at least two postseason games. There are only three teams from that elite group of 16 regular season defenses that could reasonably claim to have been better than the Broncos over their postseason run: 2000 Baltimore, 2002 Tampa Bay, and 2013 Seattle. TB in 2002 gave up 12.3 vs. similar quality. 2013 Seattle gave up 13.3 vs. similar quality. 2000 Baltimore gave up 5.7 pts against similar to slightly lower quality (#s 3,6,8,13). The Broncos gave up 14.7 pts per game facing the #s 3,5, and 8 offenses on their run. 17 of their 44 pts allowed also came off drives that started at midfield or closer.

So, um, yeah. They were better than just very good.

I didn't watch much of the Steelers game, but for the other two I saw offenses that were far from perfect. My eyes tell me more than stats ever will.

Meh. All I hear in this is a sport fan with who follows New England teams who is unable to give credit where it is due. First game v. DEN I heard a lot of NWE was missing so and so. It will be different next time. It wasn't. Brady is one of the best ever with quick reads. NWE had won something like 15 straight when he had his two favorite targets available. He ended up getting hit 20 times v. DEN. Imperfections or not, the D had a lot to do with that. Ditto Carolina, except it the story there was supposed to be Newton's elusiveness. He didn't look elusive until the end when he was so sick of getting hit that he managed to elude a ball resting on the ground at his feet.

Sure, the both offenses didn't look great, but great defenses have a way of making very good offenses look quite ordinary.

[truth18]

I'm sorry but this is ridiculous. Football outsiders had PBP data going back 27 years to rate aspects of the game based upon down, distance, clock, and score. This removes a lot of noise around raw yardage and point comparisons. This year's Broncos defense is rated #8 over that span, regular season only. Even a great D can have a bad game or two over 16 games, but overall, they were great. A once every 3-4 year defense (on average) is a great D, unless your greatness bar is set ridiculously high.

The 91 Eagles (didn't even make the postseason on account of a horrendous offense) came in at #1 42.4% better than league average. SB winner Tampa Bay came in #2 (31.8% better than lg avg). #3 though #16 were all pretty tightly bunched +/- 3.2% of DEN. Pittsburgh 2008 was #3 at 29% better. If you're looking at regular season only, if Denver wasn't great, then there were only 2 great Ds in the last 27 years and 1 of them didn't even appear in the postseason.

Add playoffs to the mix. 7 of those top 16 defenses since 89 played at least two postseason games. There are only three teams from that elite group of 16 regular season defenses that could reasonably claim to have been better than the Broncos over their postseason run: 2000 Baltimore, 2002 Tampa Bay, and 2013 Seattle. TB in 2002 gave up 12.3 vs. similar quality. 2013 Seattle gave up 13.3 vs. similar quality. 2000 Baltimore gave up 5.7 pts against similar to slightly lower quality (#s 3,6,8,13). The Broncos gave up 14.7 pts per game facing the #s 3,5, and 8 offenses on their run. 17 of their 44 pts allowed also came off drives that started at midfield or closer.

So, um, yeah. They were better than just very good.

I didn't watch much of the Steelers game, but for the other two I saw offenses that were far from perfect. My eyes tell me more than stats ever will.

Meh. All I hear in this is a sport fan with who follows New England teams who is unable to give credit where it is due. First game v. DEN I heard a lot of NWE was missing so and so. It will be different next time. It wasn't. Brady is one of the best ever with quick reads. NWE had won something like 15 straight when he had his two favorite targets available. He ended up getting hit 20 times v. DEN. Imperfections or not, the D had a lot to do with that. Ditto Carolina, except it the story there was supposed to be Newton's elusiveness. He didn't look elusive until the end when he was so sick of getting hit that he managed to elude a ball resting on the ground at his feet.

Sure, the both offenses didn't look great, but great defenses have a way of making very good offenses look quite ordinary.

He is a Cowboys fan. Leave your agenda at the door.

[Chicago76]

I didn't watch much of the Steelers game, but for the other two I saw offenses that were far from perfect. My eyes tell me more than stats ever will.

Meh. All I hear in this is a sport fan with who follows New England teams who is unable to give credit where it is due. First game v. DEN I heard a lot of NWE was missing so and so. It will be different next time. It wasn't. Brady is one of the best ever with quick reads. NWE had won something like 15 straight when he had his two favorite targets available. He ended up getting hit 20 times v. DEN. Imperfections or not, the D had a lot to do with that. Ditto Carolina, except it the story there was supposed to be Newton's elusiveness. He didn't look elusive until the end when he was so sick of getting hit that he managed to elude a ball resting on the ground at his feet.

Sure, the both offenses didn't look great, but great defenses have a way of making very good offenses look quite ordinary.

He is a Cowboys fan. Leave your agenda at the door.

And what agenda would that be?

I was pointing out that by any metric/observation imaginable, DEN's defense is quite good. Brady is good. One of the best ever. NWE is good. Newton is good although he lacks experience. Carolina is good. If a D makes two teams with good Os look ordinary and that D posts stats all year indicating they are historically good, and if there is near universal consensus that they are indeed that good, you'll need to excuse me when I see somebody claim that they aren't. Especially they have Celts in their name and one of the most recent and 1s on their page was for a Manning choked/sucks comment. I think it's reasonable to read between the lines and question someone's objectivity in that situation.

BTW, what's your agenda here?

[El Turco]

yeah i dont see how there could be an agenda by saying denver defense is historically good, just about every stat backs it up. that's like saying somebody has an agenda by saying sky is blue.

[truth18]

yeah i dont see how there could be an agenda by saying denver defense is historically good, just about every stat backs it up. that's like saying somebody has an agenda by saying sky is blue.

I fully agree, just think it's silly to assume he's an NE fan.

[Celtsfan1980]

I'm clearly a Browns fan first, Giants second. I have nothing to gain one way or the other regarding Denver's defense.

[mjkpitt]

The halftime show was boring...big yawn