PDA

View Full Version : T.D. VS. Elway ?


Quoydogs
11-03-2010, 11:52 PM
It's a slow week, why not ?

So I just got done watching the Denver Super bowl tapes I have. I am having a hard time with this question.

Who was more important to the team in the two super bowls

T.D. Or Elway.

broncocalijohn
11-03-2010, 11:53 PM
testing testing
TD in 32
Elway in 33

Quoydogs
11-03-2010, 11:54 PM
testing testing
td in 32
elway in 33

lol

Sassy
11-03-2010, 11:54 PM
testing testing
TD in 32
Elway in 33

You read my mind!
I was just going to post that~! 8')

TheReverend
11-03-2010, 11:55 PM
The answer to ANY Denver Broncos related question is always "John Elway"

Quoydogs
11-03-2010, 11:56 PM
As much as John wanted it, It never would have happened w/o TD. I was thinking he the most important piece in both.

Sassy
11-04-2010, 12:08 AM
Nope...in 33 Elway had over 300 yards and was SB MVP!

Killericon
11-04-2010, 12:26 AM
Chicken or the egg?

16slayer24
11-04-2010, 03:14 AM
ide say steve atwater

Taco John
11-04-2010, 03:38 AM
The moral support of Bubby Brister was irreplacable.

Jesterhole
11-04-2010, 05:07 AM
TD was the first in a long line of backs to find success in the system. Elway was irreplaceable, as we have since discovered.

kcbroncofan
11-04-2010, 05:30 AM
The line. They were simply amazing. Best ever if you ask me. Zimmerman, Stink, Nails, Habib, Jones. Wow...only one guy drafted by us. We dominated free agency back then.

Jack1118son
11-04-2010, 07:48 AM
I'd say TD, yes the system did churn out other backs but the dominance TD displayed on the field was only shown in flashes by Portis and that was simply due to his speed. The Duke was monumental of course & his work ethic energized and motivated our team back then. However, without TD I personally don't think we would have won both games. John did have a huge game in XXXIII however the Falcons defense was committed to stopping TD and challenging The Duke to beat them. Pretty Dumb, however if they weren't so keyed on stopping TD that day. I don't think the Duke would of had as great of a game. Oh yea, TD being the main focus for the Falcon Defense, which ranked # 2 against the rush that year still managed to put up 102 yards on the ground & 50 yards receiving. TD was simply a beast & if his career wasn't cut short against the Jets (freaking Teague & Griese) I think he would have been considered one of the greatest running backs in NFL history. He certainly was on pace. Again, no disrespect to the Duke. He was the reason this Philly Boy became a Bronco fan back in the 80’s, I love that dude!!! However TD was simply incredible to watch, talk about a downhill runner…..God I loved watching him break free and take it to the house……Followed by the Salute….Ah the good ole days…. GO BRONCOS!!!!!

Rabb
11-04-2010, 08:00 AM
Nope...in 33 Elway had over 300 yards and was SB MVP!

it's a chicken and egg deal there though...John was awesome, but that running threat with TD opened up an unbelievable passing threat

we really were just about a perfect team those few years

fml

Gcver2ver3
11-04-2010, 09:17 AM
the correct answer is:

1. ZBS
2. Salary cap abuse


thats right, i said it...

listopencil
11-04-2010, 09:53 AM
Elway.

Chris
11-04-2010, 10:05 AM
Glenn Cadrez.

Pony Boy
11-04-2010, 12:06 PM
What would you give to find this guy in the 2011 draft?

Quoydogs
11-04-2010, 12:14 PM
He would break 2k in our system.

BroncoMan4ever
11-04-2010, 03:07 PM
TD was the first in a long line of backs to find success in the system. Elway was irreplaceable, as we have since discovered.

sure there was a long line of success with replacements at the RB position, but TD was special. he was that type of once in a decade type of player. sure the ZBS was a help to him, but even without it, he was still a 1500 yard back

he was the type of RB that at the goal line you knew he was getting the ball and a defense wouldn't stop him. you knew on 3rd and 2 he was going to get 3 yards.

as much as i loved Elway, without TD we don't win either super bowl, because we wouldn't have gotten to either of them.

briane
11-04-2010, 03:23 PM
The moral support of Bubby Brister was irreplacable.

In 33, it also helped to have the motivation of whooping dan reeves butt..

How sweet was that!

TheReverend
11-04-2010, 03:27 PM
Diaz Infante.

Los Broncos
11-04-2010, 03:45 PM
Rod Smith

Mile High Shack
11-04-2010, 03:49 PM
the offensive line

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
11-04-2010, 04:06 PM
What was our record in 99' without Elway?

Beantown Bronco
11-04-2010, 04:07 PM
What was our record in 99' without Elway?

Ummmm, Davis only played in 4 games that year.....so that might not be the year you want to reference to make a point.

Al Wilson 4 Mayor
11-04-2010, 04:09 PM
Ummmm, Davis only played in 4 games that year.....so that might not be the year you want to reference to make a point.

That's right, is that the year Griese "Ninja-jumped" his knee? I thought it was in 2000.

Beantown Bronco
11-04-2010, 04:12 PM
It was week four of the 99 season

Mile High Shack
11-04-2010, 04:15 PM
It was week four of the 99 season

http://i.cdn.turner.com/sivault/si_online/covers/images/1999/1011_mid.jpg

broncolife
11-04-2010, 05:01 PM
That's right, is that the year Griese "Ninja-jumped" his knee? I thought it was in 2000.
The Griese curse also hit Sharpe and Mobley early in 1999

Jason in LA
11-04-2010, 05:08 PM
TD was the first in a long line of backs to find success in the system. Elway was irreplaceable, as we have since discovered.

That point was always off base to me. Other backs had success in the Broncos system, but none of them dominated the game. TD did.

I'd say TD was more important in both. He took all the focus, which allowed Elway to still play great late in his career. Even when Elway didn't play well, or didn't play at all, TD was still great. In games where TD was out Elway struggled. '97 against the 49ers comes to mind. TD goes down early in the game and it was a wrap.

bowtown
11-04-2010, 05:12 PM
the correct answer is:

1. ZBS
2. Salary cap abuse


thats right, i said it...

Salary cap abuse had absolutely no bearing on the talent level on the field. But by all means, let's rehash this myth one more time.

Requiem
11-04-2010, 05:13 PM
Neil Smith!

gunns
11-04-2010, 05:17 PM
The line. They were simply amazing. Best ever if you ask me. Zimmerman, Stink, Nails, Habib, Jones. Wow...only one guy drafted by us. We dominated free agency back then.

Bingo. But Elway did quite a lot without such a line. Elway couldn't do it without a team, no single player can. If we hadn't had Elway I doubt TD would have had the success he did because teams had to deal with two evils with both of them.

WolfpackGuy
11-04-2010, 05:31 PM
Having Elway meant teams couldn't consistently bring up that extra defender against the run.

Having TD meant teams couldn't lay back in zone all day against the pass.

Pick your poison.

Rock Chalk
11-04-2010, 05:42 PM
Bingo. But Elway did quite a lot without such a line. Elway couldn't do it without a team, no single player can. If we hadn't had Elway I doubt TD would have had the success he did because teams had to deal with two evils with both of them.

Except TD had success with Brister in 98 when Elway was out with injury for what, 4 games? Thing is, that TEAM was great. No one player made it happen, they all did. Offense, defense, special teams.

gunns
11-04-2010, 05:44 PM
Except TD had success with Brister in 98 when Elway was out with injury for what, 4 games? Thing is, that TEAM was great. No one player made it happen, they all did. Offense, defense, special teams.

That's true and that was my point. One hell of a team.

Elway had success with Winder too. ;D

Gcver2ver3
11-05-2010, 06:29 PM
Salary cap abuse had absolutely no bearing on the talent level on the field. But by all means, let's rehash this myth one more time.

stay in denial...i could care less...

but personally it doesnt bother me a bit...we did what we had to do to win...

no regrets from my end...

Archer81
11-05-2010, 06:34 PM
Except TD had success with Brister in 98 when Elway was out with injury for what, 4 games? Thing is, that TEAM was great. No one player made it happen, they all did. Offense, defense, special teams.


TD had possibly the greatest 39 game stretch between 1997 and 1998. Without him we do not beat Jacksonville, or KC or Pittsburgh or GB in 1997. We do not beat Miami or the NYJ in 1998. Elway is the greatest QB to ever play the game, but he needed TD to get balance in the offense and make the playaction passing game work.

No running back was better or did as much for the Broncos.

:Broncos:

Quoydogs
11-05-2010, 06:37 PM
TD had possibly the greatest 39 game stretch between 1997 and 1998. Without him we do not beat Jacksonville, or KC or Pittsburgh or GB in 1997. We do not beat Miami or the NYJ in 1998. Elway is the greatest QB to ever play the game, but he needed TD to get balance in the offense and make the playaction passing game work.

No running back was better or did as much for the Broncos.

:Broncos:

This.

Archer81
11-05-2010, 06:41 PM
TD was a joy to watch. The kid was blessed for those four years. Everything worked. The injury to his knees is just a sadness because of what TD could have done. But those four years were pure magic. Other backs might have put up numbers in Denver's system too, but none of them did it like TD. The Broncos would be extremely fortunate to ever land a player of TD's caliber again.

:Broncos:

Quoydogs
11-05-2010, 06:57 PM
TD was a joy to watch. The kid was blessed for those four years. Everything worked. The injury to his knees is just a sadness because of what TD could have done. But those four years were pure magic. Other backs might have put up numbers in Denver's system too, but none of them did it like TD. The Broncos would be extremely fortunate to ever land a player of TD's caliber again.

:Broncos:

You know one HUGE thing everyone on here missed is. He had all the talent and was still a stand up guy on and off the field. That is something that you just don't see much today.

Boogerboots
11-05-2010, 08:49 PM
Not sure if any of you had the chance to see the panel discussion on the NFL Channel on how they tried to explain the selection process for the NFL's top 100 players. Peter King tried to float the argument that TD was a product of a system.. "a RB factory" I believe were his words. Meanwhile Gale Sayers was a unique play making RB that captivated the fans.

Hearing no counter argument from any of the panel only solidifies the thought that TD will not get his rightful place in the Hall. How both he and Sharpe missed the top 100 is beyond me. But they obviously missed the point that TD was head and shoulders above the other backs that ever played in our system and that Shannon was the best pass catching TE in the game with 3 SB's to his credit. How Gonzo or Winslow go ahead of him is a glaring oversight.

As for the TD v Elway argument... It was obvious that Elway needed a bonafide running game to win the big one and the team needed a QB like Elway (not Griese) to win. The SB opponent determined who got the spotlight. We needed sustained drives to keep Favre on the bench in the first one and Elway's pass attack was needed in the 2nd one as ATL's D locked in on TD. You can not separate the two.

TailgateNut
11-05-2010, 09:18 PM
My adopt a bronco.

Jason in LA
11-06-2010, 12:17 PM
Meanwhile Gale Sayers was a unique play making RB that captivated the fans.



I don't think that very many people realize that Gale Sayers never won a playoff game. Check that, never played in a playoff game. Another "unique play making RB that captivated the fans" was Barry Sanders, who only won one playoff game.

Both of them were great players and were extremely exciting, but great high light runs don't win games, especially in the playoffs. There's a difference between exciting runs and effective runs. If a guy like TD or Emitt Smith had 150+ yards, chances are the team put up 30 points and controlled the clock. those guys consistently moved the chains, making it easy to pick up first downs and put points on the board. There were games where I saw Sanders run for 150+ yards and the Lions didn't light up the scoreboard. When the bulk of the yards come from a few carries, the offense isn't going to control the game or put up a lot of points.

***After making the above points I decided to look at Sayers career and what the Bears did during his time. I'm almost shocked at what little impact Sayers had. I wasn't around to watch those Bears teams, so I don't know what the issues were, but I'm thinking if they had a HOF running back, who judging by the high light films and how he was remembered was unstoppable, they would have a much better offense.

Sayers rookie season, 1965, was the Bears only good season with him. They finished 9-5 and averaged 29 points per game with him, second in the league out of 14 teams.

In 1966 they were 5-7-2 with the league's leading rusher (he also set the record for most all purpose yards), but the Bears were 13th out of 15 teams in the league in scoring, averaging only 16.7 points per game.

In '67 the Bears were 13th out of 16 teams in scoring, averaging 17.1 points per game and they finished 7-6-1.

Sayers led the league in rushing through 9 games in 1968 when he blew his knee out. The Bears were 5-4 with Sayers leading the league in rushing that year at that point, and 10th out of 16 teams in scoring, averaging 17.9 points per game.

Sayers was back in time for the '69 season and he lead the league in rushing. And that got the Bears a 1-13 record. They averaged 15 points per game, last in the league. The offense with the great Gale Sayers, who led the league in rushing, was last in scoring. Yeah, really effective running there.

Based on that, put TD in the HOF!

Now my point wasn't to say that Sayers wasn't a great player. I didn't watch him like I watched Barry Sanders, but the two seem similar. I think Sanders is one of the greatest RBs ever. His abilities were insane, but his abilities didn't really lead to winning. It looks like the same can be said for Sayers. But TD, his abilities led to a lot of winning.

B-Love
11-06-2010, 12:52 PM
I lagh at suckers who say Gale Sayers or Barry Sanders, when asked which all time RB they would start their franchise with.

If you had Sayers or Sanders as your starting RB, at least 30 times per season they'll singlehandedly put your Offense in 2nd and 14 situations, due to their perpetual desire to dance around, looking for the highlight run. Both Sanders and Sayers led the league, by a WIDE MARGIN, in rushes for losses when they played.

I don't want that on my team. Terrell Davis was the complete opposite of that!! Always forward.

Quoydogs
11-06-2010, 12:55 PM
I don't think that very many people realize that Gale Sayers never won a playoff game. Check that, never played in a playoff game. Another "unique play making RB that captivated the fans" was Barry Sanders, who only won one playoff game.

Both of them were great players and were extremely exciting, but great high light runs don't win games, especially in the playoffs. There's a difference between exciting runs and effective runs. If a guy like TD or Emitt Smith had 150+ yards, chances are the team put up 30 points and controlled the clock. those guys consistently moved the chains, making it easy to pick up first downs and put points on the board. There were games where I saw Sanders run for 150+ yards and the Lions didn't light up the scoreboard. When the bulk of the yards come from a few carries, the offense isn't going to control the game or put up a lot of points.

***After making the above points I decided to look at Sayers career and what the Bears did during his time. I'm almost shocked at what little impact Sayers had. I wasn't around to watch those Bears teams, so I don't know what the issues were, but I'm thinking if they had a HOF running back, who judging by the high light films and how he was remembered was unstoppable, they would have a much better offense.

Sayers rookie season, 1965, was the Bears only good season with him. They finished 9-5 and averaged 29 points per game with him, second in the league out of 14 teams.

In 1966 they were 5-7-2 with the league's leading rusher (he also set the record for most all purpose yards), but the Bears were 13th out of 15 teams in the league in scoring, averaging only 16.7 points per game.

In '67 the Bears were 13th out of 16 teams in scoring, averaging 17.1 points per game and they finished 7-6-1.

Sayers led the league in rushing through 9 games in 1968 when he blew his knee out. The Bears were 5-4 with Sayers leading the league in rushing that year at that point, and 10th out of 16 teams in scoring, averaging 17.9 points per game.

Sayers was back in time for the '69 season and he lead the league in rushing. And that got the Bears a 1-13 record. They averaged 15 points per game, last in the league. The offense with the great Gale Sayers, who led the league in rushing, was last in scoring. Yeah, really effective running there.

Based on that, put TD in the HOF!

Now my point wasn't to say that Sayers wasn't a great player. I didn't watch him like I watched Barry Sanders, but the two seem similar. I think Sanders is one of the greatest RBs ever. His abilities were insane, but his abilities didn't really lead to winning. It looks like the same can be said for Sayers. But TD, his abilities led to a lot of winning.

TD I don't understand other then he did not have a very long career but Shannon ficken sharp ? Really 3 SB's and broke or held every tightened record ever. That show was a complete Joke.

Jason in LA
11-06-2010, 01:08 PM
I lagh at suckers who say Gale Sayers or Barry Sanders, when asked which all time RB they would start their franchise with.

If you had Sayers or Sanders as your starting RB, at least 30 times per season they'll singlehandedly put your Offense in 2nd and 14 situations, due to their perpetual desire to dance around, looking for the highlight run. Both Sanders and Sayers led the league, by a WIDE MARGIN, in rushes for losses when they played.

I don't want that on my team. Terrell Davis was the complete opposite of that!! Always forward.

People don't get that. They love the high light run, but they miss the beauty of consistently getting 3-5 yards on every carry. There were plays where TD was hit for what looked like a two yard gain, but he'd fall forward and get 4 yards. That's huge. It's not pretty, but when the team is always picking up first downs and putting points on the board, that's more exciting than the high light run, which doesn't happen often.

Two stats stood out to me about TD and Sanders. The year Sanders went for 2000 they showed a stat that stated something to the effect of when he gained yards on a play, he averaged like seven yards per gain. But on carries when he lost yards, he lost an average of two yards per carry. That same year, towards the end of the year, it was said that TD only had five carries for loss for the entire season. That's insane. That's always going forward, and sometimes, if there is only two yards to get, well then go get those two yards, because that's better than dancing around trying to break a big one and losing two yards.

2nd and 3rd and longs with Scott Mitchel as your QB is a formula for disaster. 2nd and 3rd and shorts with Elway as your QB, Yikes!

Rabb
11-06-2010, 01:14 PM
I miss TD

Los Broncos
11-06-2010, 01:28 PM
I miss TD

Seeing those highlight vids of him are awesome, I remember that game vs the fins where he made a sick cut back on his way to a TD.