PDA

View Full Version : So who is/was the better team? 08 Broncos or 09 Broncos?


PaintballCLE
12-24-2009, 07:15 PM
Poll coming

Paladin
12-24-2009, 07:17 PM
'09

broncofan7
12-24-2009, 07:23 PM
2009 defense paired with the 2008 offense (IE JAY CUTLER)= 11 wins this year.

Our best unit in 2008 was our YOUNG offense

Our best unit in 2009 is our OLDEST in the league secondary

by the VERY definition of OLD Vs YOUNG--no one of sound mind can come to the conclusion that the 2009 Broncos have a 'brighter future'

PaintballCLE
12-24-2009, 07:25 PM
2009 defense paired with the 2008 offense (IE JAY CUTLER)= 11 wins this year.

Our best unit in 2008 was our YOUNG offense

Our best unit in 2009 is our OLDEST in the league secondary

by the VERY definition of OLD Vs YOUNG--no one of sound mind can come to the conclusion that the 2009 Broncos have a 'brighter future'

the offense is just as young though.....if not younger (Moreno)

The defense was young last year, but it was the worst defense ever.......... these older players are just stop gaps. So i disagree and my mom tells me I have a sound mind so I am going with that :wiggle:

Popps
12-24-2009, 08:15 PM
It's not even close.

Florida_Bronco
12-24-2009, 08:33 PM
It's not even close.

Yep. The 2009 Broncos would have walked all over the 2008 Broncos.

houghtam
12-24-2009, 08:35 PM
This message is hidden because broncofan7 is on your ignore list.

Whatever he said, except the opposite.

eddie mac
12-24-2009, 08:36 PM
Look at the schedules ffs. Look at who we've beaten in 09, Dallas, San Diego and New England. Look at who we should've beaten (Indy).

Look at how we've performed considering the majority of the players had to learn new schemes and most are still adjusting.

09 wins hands down.

snowspot66
12-24-2009, 08:43 PM
Look at the schedules ffs. Look at who we've beaten in 09, Dallas, San Diego and New England. Look at who we should've beaten (Indy).

Look at how we've performed considering the majority of the players had to learn new schemes and most are still adjusting.

09 wins hands down.

The scores don't show it but we were in every single game we lost. Against some strong teams.

Last years team can't claim that.

SonOfLe-loLang
12-24-2009, 08:51 PM
our 08 defense was historically bad. 09 and its not close.

Lolad
12-24-2009, 09:09 PM
So if the 2008 Offense put 35 points on the 2009 team. The 2009 team would come out on top?

Boobs McGee
12-24-2009, 09:17 PM
So if the 2008 Offense put 35 points on the 2009 team. The 2009 team would come out on top?

THey wouldn't have been able to drop 35 on this defense imo

Jason in LA
12-24-2009, 10:01 PM
I'd say the 09 Broncos are better, but not by a whole lot. Much better defense. The offense certainly isn't as good. A better defense with an offense that protects the ball leads to more wins than a passing O that lights it up without much help from the running game and no help from the defense.

Both teams were blown out multiple times and lost games that to teams that weren't as good as them. But the 09 team at least has had some quality wins.

SonOfLe-loLang
12-24-2009, 10:28 PM
I'd say the 09 Broncos are better, but not by a whole lot. Much better defense. The offense certainly isn't as good. A better defense with an offense that protects the ball leads to more wins than a passing O that lights it up without much help from the running game and no help from the defense.

Both teams were blown out multiple times and lost games that to teams that weren't as good as them. But the 09 team at least has had some quality wins.

I'd argue we were only "blown out" once. (to SD).

snowspot66
12-24-2009, 10:36 PM
THey wouldn't have been able to drop 35 on this defense imo

Would have folded like the Pats game last year.

Popps
12-25-2009, 12:02 AM
Both teams were blown out multiple times and lost games that to teams that weren't as good as them. But the 09 team at least has had some quality wins.

We were blown out once all season... a game we played without our starting QB.

If we played San Diego next week, we'd play a tight game.

We played San Diego at the end of last year with a healthy starting QB and mostly healthy team and were embarrassed.


It's not even close. In one year, we've greatly improved the quality of our team.

bpc
12-25-2009, 12:40 AM
Tough to say. I'd probably go with 2008.

I would say the pass rush on this year's team would give us a legup on the offense from last year but I don't think that would be the case. Our OLine could pass block like crazy last season and would give Cutler time to throw the ball... and throw he would.

Last year's defense was horrendous but this year's offense is the same.

SonOfLe-loLang
12-25-2009, 12:42 AM
Tough to say. I'd probably go with 2008.

I would say the pass rush on this year's team would give us a legup on the offense from last year but I don't think that would be the case. Our OLine could pass block like crazy last season and would give Cutler time to throw the ball... and throw he would.

Last year's defense was horrendous but this year's offense is the same.

What a shock

snowspot66
12-25-2009, 02:27 AM
Tough to say. I'd probably go with 2008.

I would say the pass rush on this year's team would give us a legup on the offense from last year but I don't think that would be the case. Our OLine could pass block like crazy last season and would give Cutler time to throw the ball... and throw he would.

Last year's defense was horrendous but this year's offense is the same.

Not really going to get into it with the offense comment. It's not horrible. It's practically the same.

Anyway. Nolan would have easily stopped Cutler. He managed to get Manning to have his worst game of the year. You really think Cutler could have thrown (successfully) against our secondary dropping into coverage when Manning and few other QBs this year have?

Bronco Yoda
12-25-2009, 03:47 AM
As a 'TEAM'.... '09

Ratboy
12-25-2009, 06:10 AM
I wish we still had Plummer.

Lolad
12-25-2009, 06:37 AM
The 2009 offense is atrocious compared to the 2008 offense. ppg right now we are sitting in the bottom half of the league.

loborugger
12-25-2009, 07:20 AM
Hows this...

The 2008 Broncos met the 2009 Broncos in the last game of the season with a play off berth on the line. Who wins that?

I predict its like 2 old ladies at the grocery eyeballing the last dozen eggs. "You take it." "Oh, I wouldnt dream of it, you take it." "Oh, I just remembered I have a stash of eggs at home, go ahead." "Oh, contrary, I insist you take it."

broncofan7
12-25-2009, 07:20 AM
The 2009 offense is atrocious compared to the 2008 offense. ppg right now we are sitting in the bottom half of the league.

off by almost 4 points per game...our 3rd down conversion % is what is REALLY troubling.........

DrFate
12-25-2009, 07:20 AM
I'll say what everyone already knows

09 defense is better
08 offense was better

I still think the 08 team was up-and-coming while the 09 time has go nowhere players like Orton at key spots as well as an aging secondary.

Broncos_OTM
12-25-2009, 07:49 AM
Well if the broncos can get one more win we would have had the better record in 09. We had the tougher schedule this year. I liked the 08 offense. and i liked the 09 defense.

We really need to work on our running game this off season. IE Line, RB. If we can get our running game back Orton will look alot better.

over all ill take the 2010 team.

Paladin
12-25-2009, 10:26 AM
Trust me. The haters will be in the minority again.........

BlaK-Argentina
12-25-2009, 10:41 AM
Not even close. The 08 offense wasn't that much better. After the first 3 weeks I can't remember a single time when they scored when they absolutely had to. (except the Browns game and Cutler got extremely lucky on some awful throws there)

09.

27atwater
12-25-2009, 12:05 PM
09

Aside from the Oakland game which I still don't understand, we have beat the teams we should and have even upset some teams. Looking at the pre-season schedule, many thought we'd be luckuy to win 5 games. The 08 team was fun to watch, but losing to Oakland and Buffalo late was unexcusable. Please don't forget that technically Jay fumbled away the first SD game.

I think we have aging CBs, but the rookie safeties, Ayers, Doom and some of the other younger guys have showed promise/potential. DJ isn't old either. The 3-4 actually uses the strenghts of some who were busts under Shanny.

As far as the offense goes, we have the same players except at QB and 2 Oline spots. So what is the difference? Our "less Talented" QB who DOESN'T have 28 INTs? Or is it the aging Hamilton and injured Harris who have seriously set back the offense after our bye week. Our WRs are young. Moreno is a rookie. Our OTs are very young. Orton isn't old...and I believe Brandstater will be the heir apparent. We have a future here. We just need to infuse more strength on the interior oline and get some youth at CB and ILB.

Spider
12-25-2009, 12:09 PM
0 ****ing 9 team ...........jeez not even close

Spider
12-25-2009, 12:10 PM
1 very simple reason , the 0 8 defense couldnt have stopped this offense , that woulod force Cutler to throw more ............nuff said

go_broncos
12-25-2009, 12:11 PM
Right now, I will take 09 broncos. But, if we don't reach playoff's this year after starting 6-0, then it becomes difficult for me to choose(as both teams are chokers).
I will be able to vote the poll after regular season..

Pick Six
12-25-2009, 12:45 PM
The 09 has more heart than the 08 team. Led by Captain Mopey, the 08 team easily lost their way when they were losing. This team fights back...

ColoradoDarin
12-25-2009, 12:50 PM
Jay Cutler throws 5 picks against the 09 defense. Mopes. gets a couple of garbage time TDs.

The 08 defense make 09 offense look like a well oiled machine (kinda like the Browns game).

09 wins - 38-16

KevinJames
12-25-2009, 01:17 PM
Summary breakdown if these 2 teams played.

08 Offense explosive with Royal and Marshall and Scheffler but lack the consistent running game Andre Hall coughs it up a few times but we have some power on short yardage with Hillis. However the 09 secondary can contain Royal and double Marshall and our Safeties could handle Scheffler. Pass rush would get to Cutler a few times maybe force him into some bad decisions especially in the red zone.

09 offense more conservative but still has some big play potential with Marshall coming into his own he would be matched up with an 08 gimpy champ wasn't fully healthy also matched up against a 60% Dre Bly and Josh Bell if Marshall gets by any of these corners the safeties would miss some tackles or two and def get beat once or twice. Moreno would look like Adrian Peterson against the 08 d-line and linebacker core runs for over 100 and 2 tds. Scheffler would destroy Maquand Manuel and Marlon McCree oh wait did I mention Calvin Lowry? Orton has all day to throw against the 08 defense that generates little pass rush.

It be the like playing the 09 chiefs

gunns
12-25-2009, 01:25 PM
2009 defense paired with the 2008 offense (IE JAY CUTLER)= 11 wins this year.

Our best unit in 2008 was our YOUNG offense

Our best unit in 2009 is our OLDEST in the league secondary

by the VERY definition of OLD Vs YOUNG--no one of sound mind can come to the conclusion that the 2009 Broncos have a 'brighter future'

Seems to me the 98 Broncos were the oldest in the league. I prefer a mixture of old and young but enough cannot be said for experience.

BroncoBuff
12-25-2009, 02:31 PM
No contest, the '09 team is much better. But I voted '08 more promising because we were younger and would've had more Jim Goodman drafts coming. As great as McD has been coaching this team, the reality is the '09 draft is not looking too good thus far.

Requiem
12-25-2009, 02:34 PM
Jim Goodman. LOL.

UberBroncoMan
12-25-2009, 02:40 PM
No future with Bob Slowik was going to be a promising one.

NFLBRONCO
12-25-2009, 02:41 PM
I think its unfair because 08 team had exp in Shanny's system 09 only have 14 games in Baskins system. As far as question 09 team is better just not ready for primetime yet needs QB upgrade .

BroncoBuff
12-25-2009, 03:03 PM
Jim Goodman. LOL.

Laugh if you must, but of Goodman's three drafts - 06, 07 and 08 - only Ryan Torain and Greg Eslinger are out of the league. Every other guy is on an NFL roster right now. That is truly remarkable, maybe unprecedented. They don't keep records for that kinda stuff, but if they did that stretch would surely be near the top.


Hey Req, what happened to that cool new avatar homeboy?

Requiem
12-25-2009, 03:06 PM
Cool new avatar!? Am I supposed to get a new one?

I don't know if all the successes of those drafts should be attributed to the Goodman's. Why not the regional scouts and the others involved? I just always had grin pop up when people said the Goodman's were mostly responsible for our draft successes over that span.

BroncoBuff
12-25-2009, 03:20 PM
Shanhan credited Goodman, that should be enough for anybody.


Earlier today you had a flashing avatar of your face ???

Requiem
12-25-2009, 03:22 PM
Ah, I never saw him do such. Yeah. I had that like last year when I stopped posting. That was from Christmas 2008. Time to rock something different since avatars are back. I'm looking for more asian boobs like Bronx has.

ColoradoDarin
12-25-2009, 04:48 PM
Do we really need to look farther than BOB SLOWIK?

bpc
12-25-2009, 06:01 PM
Personally, I think Hillis hits 150, maybe 200 yds off this defense. :)

HEAV
12-25-2009, 06:14 PM
In 2008 the Raiders coached by Tom Cable came into Denver and beat Denver 31-10

In 2009 the Raiders coached by Tom Cable came into Denver and stole a win 20-19

Hercules Rockefeller
12-25-2009, 10:08 PM
Laugh if you must, but of Goodman's three drafts - 06, 07 and 08 - only Ryan Torain and Greg Eslinger are out of the league. Every other guy is on an NFL roster right now. That is truly remarkable, maybe unprecedented. They don't keep records for that kinda stuff, but if they did that stretch would surely be near the top.


I like how we're now moving the goalposts in an attempt to make the Goodman's last few drafts better. So now we're basing it on who is out of the league? Who gives a crap if a 1st round pick in Moss can't consistently stay active or that Tim Crowder is in Tampa? The best defensive player the Goodman's drafted is Marcus Thomas, a rotational player. All of them are still NFL players, so obviously they were good draft picks.

Yeah, yeah the '07 picks were by Bates, I already know what the excuse is going to be to deflect the blame from them.

So either the defensive picks were made by Bates, giving no one any basis to actually think the Goodmans would be any good at making defensive picks, or the picks were not made by Bates, showing that the Goodmans cannot pick defensive talent. It's one or the other, neither is really a great option for anyone who thinks they were in the process of building a defense here. But I do love that people, TJ especially, who think that Shanahan was onto something and just needed more time. His defensive picks for the past decade sucked outside of Al and DJ, and his FA signings were even worse. Yeah, he just needed more time, even though nothing in the last decade should give anyone the belief that he could actually build a defense.

Oh, and all these posts about last year's team being so much younger and on the verge of greatness, let's list all the young superstars in the making that aren't here anymore.

Cutler- the guy currently proving that he's not yet a franchise QB that everyone though he was
Jack Williams- the guy who did nothing over a season and a half, but was an Internetz superstar based on one preseason pick
Andre Hall
Karl Paymah
Kory Lichtensteiger

So it's Cutler that everyone is hanging on to. You guys should just be honest, and come out and say it because everyone knows that's what you're thinking. When Cutler was here, the future was so bright we should be wearing shades because the QB savior was on the roster. He's the only young player from last year's team who would be making any impact in the slightest on this year's team.

McPoopy****Face really got rid of a **** ton of young talent. Whatever will they do?

People also need to actually go back and look at last year's roster. The defensive talent was atrocious (something I don't think anyone disagrees with), the defense wasn't that young either, and there was very little depth thoughout the team. The only change to the offense this year has been QB and LG, that's it. Orton has 1 more year of experience than Cutler, and Hamilton and Hochstein actually have the same.

NFLBRONCO
12-25-2009, 10:55 PM
I like how we're now moving the goalposts in an attempt to make the Goodman's last few drafts better. So now we're basing it on who is out of the league? Who gives a crap if a 1st round pick in Moss can't consistently stay active or that Tim Crowder is in Tampa? The best defensive player the Goodman's drafted is Marcus Thomas, a rotational player. All of them are still NFL players, so obviously they were good draft picks.

Yeah, yeah the '07 picks were by Bates, I already know what the excuse is going to be to deflect the blame from them.

So either the defensive picks were made by Bates, giving no one any basis to actually think the Goodmans would be any good at making defensive picks, or the picks were not made by Bates, showing that the Goodmans cannot pick defensive talent. It's one or the other, neither is really a great option for anyone who thinks they were in the process of building a defense here. But I do love that people, TJ especially, who think that Shanahan was onto something and just needed more time. His defensive picks for the past decade sucked outside of Al and DJ, and his FA signings were even worse. Yeah, he just needed more time, even though nothing in the last decade should give anyone the belief that he could actually build a defense.

Oh, and all these posts about last year's team being so much younger and on the verge of greatness, let's list all the young superstars in the making that aren't here anymore.

Cutler- the guy currently proving that he's not yet a franchise QB that everyone though he was
Jack Williams- the guy who did nothing over a season and a half, but was an Internetz superstar based on one preseason pick
Andre Hall
Karl Paymah
Kory Lichtensteiger

So it's Cutler that everyone is hanging on to. You guys should just be honest, and come out and say it because everyone knows that's what you're thinking. When Cutler was here, the future was so bright we should be wearing shades because the QB savior was on the roster. He's the only young player from last year's team who would be making any impact in the slightest on this year's team.

McPoopy****Face really got rid of a **** ton of young talent. Whatever will they do?

People also need to actually go back and look at last year's roster. The defensive talent was atrocious (something I don't think anyone disagrees with), the defense wasn't that young either, and there was very little depth thoughout the team. The only change to the offense this year has been QB and LG, that's it. Orton has 1 more year of experience than Cutler, and Hamilton and Hochstein actually have the same.

Great Post


Do you think McD will upgrade the O alot in 10?

snowspot66
12-25-2009, 11:27 PM
Great Post


Do you think McD will upgrade the O alot in 10?

Be a fool not too. He seems well aware of our short comings on offense. Especially on the line.

BroncoBuff
12-25-2009, 11:35 PM
Oh, and all these posts about last year's team being so much younger and on the verge of greatness, let's list all the young superstars in the making that aren't here anymore.
"Verge of greatness?" I never said that ... shouldn't make up quotes to try to win an argument.


Cutler - the guy currently proving that he's not yet a franchise QB that everyone though he was
Jack Williams- the guy who did nothing over a season and a half, but was an Internetz superstar based on one preseason pick
Andre Hall
Karl Paymah
Kory Lichtensteiger

Man you need to get your facts straight. Hall was a free agent and Paymah was not drafted by Goodman (although he is the nickel back on an 11-3 team). Cutler netted us two 1st round picks and a starting quarterback, and JMFW had six teams put waiver claims on him two seconds after his name hit the wire.

Sheesh dude ... that was a nasty fall, hope you didn't hurt yourself.

Play2win
12-26-2009, 12:37 AM
Orton would be throwing down the field more often if we (currently) had the OLine to hold up for some of those routes to develop.

Popps
12-26-2009, 12:59 AM
So, looks like the results are in...

2008 team better and brighter future: BPC

2009 team better and brighter future: Everyone else.

Hercules Rockefeller
12-26-2009, 09:01 AM
"Man you need to get your facts straight. Hall was a free agent and Paymah was not drafted by Goodman (although he is the nickel back on an 11-3 team). Cutler netted us two 1st round picks and a starting quarterback, and JMFW had six teams put waiver claims on him two seconds after his name hit the wire.

Sheesh dude ... that was a nasty fall, hope you didn't hurt yourself.

No, I'm fine thanks.

Really? 6 teams put in waiver claims for Williams? That doesn't make him anything. Paymah is the Vikings nickelback? FYI, he only signed a one-year deal with them, so it's not like they thought he was great either.

Besides Cutler, you've set the bar so low for these guys that anything they do is some sort of success story. None of them are anything special. Every single one of them except for Cutler is a backup, and if the Bears hadn't given up 2 1sts+ for Jay, his 25 picks probably would have landed on the bench by now.

TonyR
12-26-2009, 09:29 AM
Tough to say. I'd probably go with 2008.


You're wrong and it's not tough to say. Typical disingenuousness and lack of perspective.

The '08 team was outscored, on average, by ~5 points a game against the 3rd easiest Sagarin ranked schedule in the league.

The '09 team has outscored, on average, the opponent by ~2 points a game against the 8th most difficult Sagarin ranked schedule.

ColoradoDarin
12-26-2009, 04:55 PM
How did this thread get past BOB SLOWIK?

BroncoBuff
12-27-2009, 12:18 AM
No, I'm fine thanks.

Really? 6 teams put in waiver claims for Williams? That doesn't make him anything. Paymah is the Vikings nickelback? FYI, he only signed a one-year deal with them, so it's not like they thought he was great either.

Besides Cutler, you've set the bar so low for these guys that anything they do is some sort of success story. None of them are anything special. Every single one of them except for Cutler is a backup, and if the Bears hadn't given up 2 1sts+ for Jay, his 25 picks probably would have landed on the bench by now.

I think it was 5 actually. And while I really do appreciate your staunch defense of the status quo, I think the JMFW move was a mistake. Ty Law might've been a good idea later in the season, but now what if we don't make the playoffs? A waste of a guy who by all indications was a real playmaker. Maybe not starting CB, but the kind of nickel back who can make a play.

Cutler has proven himself everything his detractors here thought he would, and proved me as wrong as a guy can be. But when evaluating Goodman's performance, you should really count what Cutler netted us in the trade, which was a ransom. Besides, I think Cutler was Mike's pick.

Hercules Rockefeller
12-27-2009, 09:04 AM
I think it was 5 actually. And while I really do appreciate your staunch defense of the status quo, I think the JMFW move was a mistake. Ty Law might've been a good idea later in the season, but now what if we don't make the playoffs? A waste of a guy who by all indications was a real playmaker. Maybe not starting CB, but the kind of nickel back who can make a play.

Cutler has proven himself everything his detractors here thought he would, and proved me as wrong as a guy can be. But when evaluating Goodman's performance, you should really count what Cutler netted us in the trade, which was a ransom. Besides, I think Cutler was Mike's pick.

A defense of the status quo? I've never thought Williams was any good. The guy never did anything in a real game, yet this board saw fit to add the MF to his initials because of one preseason play. A real playmaker? He had 13 tackles last year and 14 this year. He hasn't even been good enough to be credited with a single tackle since he was cut, and he plays for Detroit, the team ranked 32nd in total and scoring defense. How bad do you have to be if you can't even be active in Detroit? The blind love this board had for JW is almost as bad as the Hillis crap permeating this board now. He did nothing on this team. He's never made a play, yet he had all the indiciations of a real playmaker?

Cutler is now Mike's pick? Fine. We've now eliminated Cutler, Moss, Crowder, and Thomas from the list of Goodman's picks because they were made by someone else. Who actually is a Goodman pick?

Jason in LA
12-27-2009, 09:39 AM
I'd argue we were only "blown out" once. (to SD).

I'd say that the Steelers and Ravens games were blowouts. I guess it's what a person defines a blowout as.

Jason in LA
12-27-2009, 09:44 AM
Last year's defense was horrendous but this year's offense is the same.

This year's offense is better than last year's defense. Well, that's not saying much ;D. This year's offense has been average to bad, but they'd score 30 on last year's defense.

Jason in LA
12-27-2009, 09:46 AM
Hows this...

The 2008 Broncos met the 2009 Broncos in the last game of the season with a play off berth on the line. Who wins that?

I predict its like 2 old ladies at the grocery eyeballing the last dozen eggs. "You take it." "Oh, I wouldnt dream of it, you take it." "Oh, I just remembered I have a stash of eggs at home, go ahead." "Oh, contrary, I insist you take it."

Pretty much. I think the '09 Broncos would end up with the eggs though.

Jason in LA
12-27-2009, 09:50 AM
The 09 has more heart than the 08 team. Led by Captain Mopey, the 08 team easily lost their way when they were losing. This team fights back...

Losing to the Raiders this past week kind of hurts that point of view. If this team was legit, then there is no way they lose that game, at home, against a horrible team, with the playoffs on the line.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
12-27-2009, 09:52 AM
Losing to the Raiders this past week kind of hurts that point of view. If this team was legit, then there is no way they lose that game, at home, against a horrible team, with the playoffs on the line.

Like we did in '97? To the Raiders who finished 4-12? And then rolled on to the Super Bowl?

YOu mean like that?

Or like '98, when we went on the road and lost to the Giants after starting 13-0?

Were either of those teams legit?

Spider
12-27-2009, 10:14 AM
Like we did in '97? To the Raiders who finished 4-12? And then rolled on to the Super Bowl?

YOu mean like that?

Or like '98, when we went on the road and lost to the Giants after starting 13-0?

Were either of those teams legit?

LOL ....... shhhhhhhhh those losses never happened .........

Dagmar
12-27-2009, 10:27 AM
I notice Buff only crawls out of his pathetic HOLE after a devastating loss. Funny that.

bombay
12-27-2009, 10:28 AM
The '09 team will almost certainly win more games than the '08 team, and against a much tougher schedule.

Spider
12-27-2009, 10:30 AM
So, looks like the results are in...

2008 team better and brighter future: BPC

2009 team better and brighter future: Everyone else.

:~ohyah!: Marching to the beat of his own drummer

Inkana7
12-27-2009, 10:40 AM
This year's team would kick the **** out of last year's.

Dagmar
12-27-2009, 10:45 AM
This year's team would kick the **** out of last year's.

Dawk and Goodman would combine for 7 picks!

Jason in LA
12-27-2009, 12:32 PM
Like we did in '97? To the Raiders who finished 4-12? And then rolled on to the Super Bowl?

YOu mean like that?

Or like '98, when we went on the road and lost to the Giants after starting 13-0?

Were either of those teams legit?

That is total nonsense. I can't believe anybody would make a comparison using those teams and this one.

Teams lose games, even great teams. Great teams have lost to bad teams during the regular season. It happens. But great teams, like those Super Bowl Broncos, consistently won games, and consistently beat the crap out of horrible teams. Every now and then a bad team would give them a challenge, and a couple times would even beat those Broncos (Raiders and Giants, like you stated). But this Bronco team, and the Broncos teams over the past few years, have lost to a number of bad teams. They've lost a number of games to teams they should have beaten. That's why the miss the playoffs. That's why the comparison to those Super Bowl Broncos teams is just silly. It looks like this year's Broncos team would have lost to 3 to 4 non playoff teams, and two of those teams look like they'll finish with 10+ losses. That's not the sign of a good team.

TheElusiveKyleOrton
12-27-2009, 12:47 PM
That is total nonsense. I can't believe anybody would make a comparison using those teams and this one.

Teams lose games, even great teams. Great teams have lost to bad teams during the regular season. It happens. But great teams, like those Super Bowl Broncos, consistently won games, and consistently beat the crap out of horrible teams. Every now and then a bad team would give them a challenge, and a couple times would even beat those Broncos (Raiders and Giants, like you stated). But this Bronco team, and the Broncos teams over the past few years, have lost to a number of bad teams. They've lost a number of games to teams they should have beaten. That's why the miss the playoffs. That's why the comparison to those Super Bowl Broncos teams is just silly. It looks like this year's Broncos team would have lost to 3 to 4 non playoff teams, and two of those teams look like they'll finish with 10+ losses. That's not the sign of a good team.

This is what you said:

"If this team was legit, then there is no way they lose that game, at home, against a horrible team, with the playoffs on the line."

Horrible teams beat good teams -- even with the playoffs on the line, even when they shouldn't -- all the time. It's the NFL.

And I wasn't comparing this team to those teams. Not remotely. You said "if this team was legit." Well, those teams were legit, and they lost to some bad teams. Losses happen.

It's absurd to think a team isn't legit because of one bad loss to a bad team.

Going to be especially hard to think that way after we beat up on Philly today.

Jason in LA
12-27-2009, 01:28 PM
This is what you said:

"If this team was legit, then there is no way they lose that game, at home, against a horrible team, with the playoffs on the line."

Horrible teams beat good teams -- even with the playoffs on the line, even when they shouldn't -- all the time. It's the NFL.

And I wasn't comparing this team to those teams. Not remotely. You said "if this team was legit." Well, those teams were legit, and they lost to some bad teams. Losses happen.

It's absurd to think a team isn't legit because of one bad loss to a bad team.

Going to be especially hard to think that way after we beat up on Philly today.

It's not absurd to think that at all. a 9-0 team has the luxury of losing to a bad team. A 13-0 team has the luxury of losing to a bad team. It's just a bump in the road and isn't really a sign of anything.

A team battling for a playoff spot does not have the luxury of losing to not only one, but two horrible teams. The Broncos needed those games and were not able to come up with a win.

If they had only lost to one bad team, then I could see your point. But they lost to two bad teams, and lost to other teams who are struggling just to make it to the playoffs.

broncofan7
12-27-2009, 02:31 PM
young= has a promising future

Old= does not...but keep voting as you are sheep.........it only confirms to me the fact that most on here are dullards....incapable of objective thought......

bloodsunday
12-27-2009, 03:13 PM
We'll have to wait and see what the final record turns out to be. That said, I would most likely say the '09 team because of the schedule we played. NFC North (may get three teams in), NFC East, Indy, San Diego twice, and New England. This team is also not making as many mistakes as last year's team.