Bronco Meltdown Post Mortem

Sports Journalists Forum – Media, Newsroom & Reporting Talk

Help Support Sports Journalists Forum:

Boom_70

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2002
Messages
43,823
No doubt with most embarrising performance ever in Super Bowl , the stories
of why will start to roll in. Here one of first out of game:

Broncos' Wes Welker: We didn't prepare well for noise


http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000323440/article/broncos-wes-welker-we-didnt-prepare-well-for-noise

It's interesting to note that in Wednesday's pool report from the Broncos' practice, USA Today's Jarrett Bell told us that John Fox -- who previously had been to Super Bowls with the Carolina Panthers as a coach and the New York Giants as a defensive coordinator -- turned down the simulated crowd noise during practice.

"Normally, it's about five times louder than that," Fox said at the time. "It's not an away game. The ones I've been to haven't been too loud. So we just kind of practice with what we think we're going to get."
 
Don't exaggerate, Boom. One of the most is true, most is not. I say that after having covered Super Bowls XX, XXII, XXIV and XXIX.
 
I think he's probably right. I thought they would lose, but were any of those other teams favored?
 
I think it was the most embarrassing loss in Super Bowl history.

There have been worse beat downs, but not by favored teams with the league MVP at QB.
 
Mizzougrad96 said:
I think it was the most embarrassing loss in Super Bowl history.

There have been worse beat downs, but not by favored teams with the league MVP at QB.

There has never been a bigger differential between the point spread and the actual game differential in the 48 games.

The more I look at this game, the worse it is.
 
poindexter said:
Mizzougrad96 said:
I think it was the most embarrassing loss in Super Bowl history.

There have been worse beat downs, but not by favored teams with the league MVP at QB.



There has never been a bigger differential between the point spread and the actual game differential in the 48 games.

The more I look at this game, the worse it is.

Worst Super Bowl game I've seen in my lifetime. I wasn't stunned Seattle won, but I was stunned the way they dominated and how inept every aspect of the best offense in the league was.
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change.
Maybe the media will learn not to tongue a player's rectum for destroying Oakland, Jacksonville, Tennessee and a host of other bad teams during the course of a season.
 
I agree. This was much worse than the other four Super Bowl beatdowns. Yes, worse than 55-10 because there was zero expectation they were going to win that game. They at least led in XXI and XXII and were quasi-competitive for a little bit.

Not this thing. It was over at the botched coin toss. Holliday ran the opening kick out from virtually the back of the end zone. Safety on the first play. The only real glimmer of hope was holding the Seahawks to two early field goals. For as terrible as the start was, it was *only* 8-0.

Then the roof caved in and PFM was completely out of his element. He looked tight. He played tight. They all did. Players. Coaches. Water boys. Miscalculations by the coaches. ****, two weeks of preparation and the very damn first play of the game is that safety?

And John Fox and the rest of the coaches didn't put in silent snap counts -- and turned down the speakers at practice on Wednesday -- because they didn't think it would be loud? All week, people were saying and writing Seahawks fans were all over New York. They didn't go all that way to watch it on a TV.

There was not one instance to be excited about the Broncos. Not one.

It was humiliating. Embarrassing. And a joke on many levels. But they have to own it and it's on the coaching staff and Elway to make it right, to make it so they can take that next step. But, yeah, this one is going to sting for a long time.
 
The Broncos didn't get a first down or cross midfield until it was 15-0, and as soon as they did, the pick-six made it 22-0.
 
3_Octave_Fart said:
Maybe the media will learn not to tongue a player's rectum for destroying Oakland, Jacksonville, Tennessee and a host of other bad teams during the course of a season.

That's a part of it, but you play who you play. They do have the NFC West next year, which is a good thing. Including a trip to Seattle.
 
The AFC this year was as bad as it's been since the '90s.
Not an environment that tests the mettle of champions.
I agree with what was said on the other thread, that Bailey is the answer to salary relief.
 
poindexter said:
Mizzougrad96 said:
I think it was the most embarrassing loss in Super Bowl history.

There have been worse beat downs, but not by favored teams with the league MVP at QB.

There has never been a bigger differential between the point spread and the actual game differential in the 48 games.

The more I look at this game, the worse it is.
All of you are too smart and experienced to believe a point spread is anything more than a gambling tool to get equal money on both teams and not the actual handicapping of the game.

Although no one would have bet that the point differential was 35 points, Seattle did open as the betting favorites until money started rolling in on Denver. Seattle was the handicapping favorite not the Vegas line favorite. The only upset was the uncompetitive nature of the game, not the winner. The score was surprising but not shocking.
 
heyabbott said:
poindexter said:
Mizzougrad96 said:
I think it was the most embarrassing loss in Super Bowl history.

There have been worse beat downs, but not by favored teams with the league MVP at QB.

There has never been a bigger differential between the point spread and the actual game differential in the 48 games.

The more I look at this game, the worse it is.
All of you are too smart and experienced to believe a point spread is anything more than a gambling tool to get equal money on both teams and not the actual handicapping of the game.

Although no one would have bet that the point differential was 35 points, Seattle did open as the betting favorites until money started rolling in on Denver. Seattle was the handicapping favorite not the Vegas line favorite. The only upset was the uncompetitive nature of the game, not the winner. The score was surprising but not shocking.

good points, and I'll only quibble with one item: I listen to a lot of Las Vegas sports books directors, and the Wynn and LVH didn't even want 'even' money. Books are not afraid to take a side, and at least some books had no problem taking more Denver money. If they wanted to 'even' it, they would have moved the spread to Denver -3 - but they didn't.
 
MileHigh said:
No, the score was shocking. No one saw that coming.

There was one guy at NFL.com who predicted Seahawks 38-12. I will accept his gloating.

Everyone else can get bent if they even pretend they envisioned that.
 
LongTimeListener said:
The Broncos didn't get a first down or cross midfield until it was 15-0, and as soon as they did, the pick-six made it 22-0.

Broncos D did not help. Even though both drives ended up in field goals they let Seattle
run of drives of 11 and 13 plays. 26 of Seattle's 55 offensive plays were in 1 qtr.

Game also highlighted importance of field position starting with poor decision of Holliday
on opening kickoff, leaving Bronco O starting on14. Also bad punt by Colquit in 2nd series
letting Seattle start on 35 instead of inside 20.
 
I don't think that Seattle necessarily had to play an absolutely perfect game to beat Denver. The fact that the Seahawks DID play a perfect game is what made the score so out of hand. I felt the same way when the Broncos scored as I do when a no-hitter gets broken up after the seventh inning.
 
FileNotFound said:
I don't think that Seattle necessarily had to play an absolutely perfect game to beat Denver. The fact that the Seahawks DID play a perfect game is what made the score so out of hand. I felt the same way when the Broncos scored as I do when a no-hitter gets broken up after the seventh inning.

Before they scored, I was wondering if the Broncos would go for it on a long fourth down or just take the FG to end the shutout. Would have been a very interesting call.

As it was, they did provide square-pool drama by scoring (and getting the two) on the last play of the third quarter.
 
I don't see where this game taints Manning's legacy, in that the breakdown by every Bronco was so complete, I'm not sure Manning at his best could make much of a difference. Of course, he wasn't at his best. With his receivers not able to get separation, it became that much more apparent that his arm doesn't have the zip it used to. Being 37 and coming off of neck surgery (when he couldn't throw a ball 10 yards at any speed) will do that to you.
 
3_Octave_Fart said:
Maybe the media will learn not to tongue a player's rectum for destroying Oakland, Jacksonville, Tennessee and a host of other bad teams during the course of a season.

You do realize Seattle played two of those three, right? Plus teams like Tampa Bay, Atlanta and the Giants?
 
Back
Top