The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Orange Mane Discussion > Orange Mane Central Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-13-2012, 04:34 AM   #1
troya900
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,133
Default Looking back at the 1998 season

Tonight for some reason I was reminiscing about the 1998 season the Broncos had and the thought that popped into my mind was that I wish we all could've seen the Broncos take on the Vikings in the Super Bowl that year.

Bored as I was I googled vikings should have faced broncos in Super Bowl 33 and to my amazement I found this thread (and poll) at a forum discussing this.

http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB...php?p=12200207

I'm honestly amazed at how many people truly believe the Broncos would not have been a match for the Vikings that year. Obviously I'm biased and my thoughts are that that Vikings team couldn't even take care of the Falcons in their own damn stadium and we demolished the pathetic Falcons in the SB. IMO the Broncos were on a mission that 98 season and not even a high flying offense like the Vikings were gonna stop them that year, but I still do wish to this day that it would have been proven by the Broncos smashing the Vikings in Superbowl 33. Just wanted to post this and get the opinions of other biased Broncos fans.
troya900 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 01-13-2012, 06:00 AM   #2
OrangeSe7en
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

It wouldn't have been a contest. Denver would have won easily. That might have been the best running game of all time.

And it's also ab absurd hypothetical for the exact reason you said. Denver steamrolled Atlanta on a neutral field when Minnesota couldnt even deal with them at home. Atlanta was similar to Denver except Denver was a much more superior version.

Last edited by OrangeSe7en; 01-13-2012 at 06:04 AM..
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 06:12 AM   #3
fwf
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

The first post of that thread cracks me up. He forgot to mention that the Falcons beat the Vikings and we easily handled the Falcons. Fact is that 98 team was as complete as any time in the last 2 decades. Qb to FB to Safety they didnt have a weakness. We might have cheated the salary cap in order to assemble that team but even so.. you cant deny the facts.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 06:37 AM   #4
OrangeSe7en
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fwf View Post
The first post of that thread cracks me up. He forgot to mention that the Falcons beat the Vikings and we easily handled the Falcons. Fact is that 98 team was as complete as any time in the last 2 decades. Qb to FB to Safety they didnt have a weakness. We might have cheated the salary cap in order to assemble that team but even so.. you cant deny the facts.
It wasn't really cheating as much as it was a miscalculation...it was an error.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 07:13 AM   #5
gunns
I WANT DEFENSE!
 
gunns's Avatar
 
Defense, defense, defense

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Always Hoping
Posts: 12,441

Adopt-a-Bronco:
TJ Ward
Default

The few posts I read that sided with the Vikings failed to bring up the fact that the Vikings had to go into OT with the Falcons, in their own house, and lost. You can blame that game on Gary Anderson all you want, but who put Anderson in the position to have to win that game....the Vikings team.

As far as the two teams the stats for both were almost identical. 1 and 2 in offense, 6 and 8 in defense. 1 and 2 in outscoring opponents. The one area that was different was rushing. We would have dominated them in rushing. Their defense was ranked 14th in stopping rushing TD's, we were #1 in scoring rushing TD's.
gunns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 07:17 AM   #6
Garcia Bronco
Hokie since 1993
 

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 46,781

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Tom Jackson
Default

It's all over but the crying
Garcia Bronco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 07:19 AM   #7
bronco militia
OMG...this is horrible!
 
bronco militia's Avatar
 
THE GREATEST

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: colorado springs, co
Posts: 24,428
Default

Broncos fans fears that year was the secondary. Late in the seasn they had trouble stopping the "mighty" passing games of the chiefs, giants, and Dolphins.
bronco militia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 07:33 AM   #8
Jason in LA
Gimmie that rep fool!
 
Jason in LA's Avatar
 
Speaking of Butts & Boob Mojo

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: LA
Posts: 11,833
Default

People seem to remember that Vikings team as the greatest ever. I don't get it. The Even though the Broncos finished 14-2, they nearly pulled off a perfect season. It's like when the Vikings finished 15-1, people thought they were clearly the best team in the league. And people thought that the Falcons beating them was a huge upset. The Falcons were 14-2 that year. That's no upset.

That Broncos team was stacked, and I remember that Vikings team being all offense and not much defense. I'm kind of pissed that they blew their game against the Falcons because in a way it has taken away from the Broncos victory. The Broncos defense would have slowed the Vikings offense, and there is no way that the Vikings defense would have stopped the Broncos offense.
Jason in LA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 07:40 AM   #9
bronco militia
OMG...this is horrible!
 
bronco militia's Avatar
 
THE GREATEST

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: colorado springs, co
Posts: 24,428
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason in LA View Post
People seem to remember that Vikings team as the greatest ever. I don't get it. The Even though the Broncos finished 14-2, they nearly pulled off a perfect season. It's like when the Vikings finished 15-1, people thought they were clearly the best team in the league. And people thought that the Falcons beating them was a huge upset. The Falcons were 14-2 that year. That's no upset.

That Broncos team was stacked, and I remember that Vikings team being all offense and not much defense. I'm kind of pissed that they blew their game against the Falcons because in a way it has taken away from the Broncos victory. The Broncos defense would have slowed the Vikings offense, and there is no way that the Vikings defense would have stopped the Broncos offense.
yeah, it might have been a high scoring game. Going into the playoffs, the broncos D was not playing well, but they turned it on against the Dolphins Jets and Falcons
bronco militia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 07:43 AM   #10
Chris
Millenium Scrooge McDuck
 
Chris's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,557

Adopt-a-Bronco:
OrlandoFranklin
Default

I agree with you guys but our pass defense was somewhat suspect... I think we were ranked 22nd or at the very least middle tier. Of course I think we would still have whupped them.

This is a case of Vikings fans having sour grapes.
Chris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 07:44 AM   #11
TheChamp24
Future HOF...CHAMP BAILEY
 
TheChamp24's Avatar
 
The Legend

Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Broncos Country
Posts: 5,478
Default

The Vikings did provide a potential matchup nightmare for our defense, they were with almost every team actually.
I don't think people realize though that our rushing offense was unstoppable. We would've slowly went down the field and scored our points, forcing the Vikings to be predictable and us pinning our ears back to get to Cunningham.
TheChamp24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 08:22 AM   #12
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
 
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
 
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 21,946

Adopt-a-Bronco:
WorrellWilliams
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troya900 View Post
Tonight for some reason I was reminiscing about the 1998 season the Broncos had and the thought that popped into my mind was that I wish we all could've seen the Broncos take on the Vikings in the Super Bowl that year.

Bored as I was I googled vikings should have faced broncos in Super Bowl 33 and to my amazement I found this thread (and poll) at a forum discussing this.

http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB...php?p=12200207

I'm honestly amazed at how many people truly believe the Broncos would not have been a match for the Vikings that year. Obviously I'm biased and my thoughts are that that Vikings team couldn't even take care of the Falcons in their own damn stadium and we demolished the pathetic Falcons in the SB. IMO the Broncos were on a mission that 98 season and not even a high flying offense like the Vikings were gonna stop them that year, but I still do wish to this day that it would have been proven by the Broncos smashing the Vikings in Superbowl 33. Just wanted to post this and get the opinions of other biased Broncos fans.
What a bunch of asshats. They all think that the Viking would have beaten the Broncos based on seasonal stats. One asshat throws out the stat that the Broncos pass defense was ranked 26th but conviniently forgets that the Broncos always played with a lead and the opposing teams had to pass the ball. Ignorance.

Also, it comes down to big games. Which team (the Vikings or the Broncos) had the ability to play mistake free football in the big games when it mattered the most--easy answer--the Denver Broncos and it's not even close.

fuggem.
Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 08:29 AM   #13
barryr
Ring of Famer
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 9,619

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

The Vikings would have been the tougher matchup since as others have pointed out, their passing game would have caused the Bronco defense many problems as it did most teams. I think the Broncos would still win, but the game would not nearly been as comfortable as taking on Atlanta and their conservative offense, which the Bronco defense handled rather easily it seemed.
barryr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 08:32 AM   #14
SonOfLe-loLang
Young Buck
 
SonOfLe-loLang's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 19,174

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Thunder (RIP)
Default

It would have a been a great game, but im glad we didn't have to face them. That offense was potent and, if we had made an early mistake or two, that's the type of team that would have took it and ran.

Gimme a blow out agains the falcons anyday.
SonOfLe-loLang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 08:36 AM   #15
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
 
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
 
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 21,946

Adopt-a-Bronco:
WorrellWilliams
Default

I still say the pressure of playing in the SB is a huge Broncos advantage. If the Vikings could have squeeked by the Falcons and made it to the SB, the Broncos would have had a huge advantage in the preparation, experience, coaching and overall mental aspect of the football game. In other words, all the intangible aspects of the game would favor the Broncos.
Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 08:50 AM   #16
bronco militia
OMG...this is horrible!
 
bronco militia's Avatar
 
THE GREATEST

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: colorado springs, co
Posts: 24,428
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ View Post
I still say the pressure of playing in the SB is a huge Broncos advantage. If the Vikings could have squeeked by the Falcons and made it to the SB, the Broncos would have had a huge advantage in the preparation, experience, coaching and overall mental aspect of the football game. In other words, all the intangible aspects of the game would favor the Broncos.
mehhh....it didn't help the Packers against the Broncos
bronco militia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 09:23 AM   #17
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
 
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
 
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 21,946

Adopt-a-Bronco:
WorrellWilliams
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bronco militia View Post
mehhh....it didn't help the Packers against the Broncos
meh, that doesn't change the fact that the Broncos still have Elway and Davis on offense and that Davis plays his best in the big games where as the Vikings obviously didn't play their best when it mattered the most.
Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 10:23 AM   #18
SimonFletcher73
Pro Bowler
 
SimonFletcher73's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Denver
Posts: 640

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Goose Gonsoulin
Default

I would have loved to see the Broncos play the Packers in XXXI. Although we got whooped by them 41-6 on the road that season we were 12-1 going into that game with little to play for. Bill Musgrave actually started that game.
SimonFletcher73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 01:02 PM   #19
OrangeSe7en
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason in LA View Post
People seem to remember that Vikings team as the greatest ever. I don't get it. The Even though the Broncos finished 14-2, they nearly pulled off a perfect season. It's like when the Vikings finished 15-1, people thought they were clearly the best team in the league. And people thought that the Falcons beating them was a huge upset. The Falcons were 14-2 that year. That's no upset.

That Broncos team was stacked, and I remember that Vikings team being all offense and not much defense. I'm kind of pissed that they blew their game against the Falcons because in a way it has taken away from the Broncos victory. The Broncos defense would have slowed the Vikings offense, and there is no way that the Vikings defense would have stopped the Broncos offense.
I'm not. Because, like you said, the Falcons were 14-2. Those teams were very even. This was proven on the field. The Falcons team was like a poor man's Broncos. Jamal Anderson had a huge season running then ball and Chris Chandler had a big season to complement the running game. But the Falcons, though balanced, were run first. The Vikings, though balanced, were pass first.

During that period in the NFL, you almost had to be more balanced to contend for SBs. It wasn't the same league that it is now where there's been 10 years worth of rule changes to make the league more passing focused.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 01:05 PM   #20
OrangeSe7en
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SonOfLe-loLang View Post
It would have a been a great game, but im glad we didn't have to face them. That offense was potent and, if we had made an early mistake or two, that's the type of team that would have took it and ran.

Gimme a blow out agains the falcons anyday.
I would have rather faced Minnesota. We would have exposed them worse than Atlanta did. We faced better defense en route to the SB than what Minnesota had. We averaged around 30 ppg against strong defenses but it would have been a lot more had they not let their foot of the gas. Minnesota might have gotten a few big plays but not enough because they would have eventually been sacked or intercepted. Meanwhile, good luck trying to stop Denver's running game.

Last edited by OrangeSe7en; 01-13-2012 at 01:09 PM..
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 01:05 PM   #21
bronco militia
OMG...this is horrible!
 
bronco militia's Avatar
 
THE GREATEST

Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: colorado springs, co
Posts: 24,428
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ View Post
meh, that doesn't change the fact that the Broncos still have Elway and Davis on offense and that Davis plays his best in the big games where as the Vikings obviously didn't play their best when it mattered the most.
of course, but that doesn't have anything to do with that point you were making
bronco militia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 01:14 PM   #22
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
 
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
 
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 21,946

Adopt-a-Bronco:
WorrellWilliams
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bronco militia View Post
of course, but that doesn't have anything to do with that point you were making
My point is that the coaching staff and players of the Vikings choked during their biggest game of the year while the Broncos were playing their best football during the post season. The Vikings were a great team but choked at home to the Falcons. If they had won that game then I think the pressure of the SB would have been greater on them than on the Broncos and they could have easily made a lot of big mistakes (turnovers, penalties, etc.) that could have affected the outcome of the game. You can reasonably argue that they were the superior team talent wise, but the intangibles go to the Broncos.

Fact is, the Packers did not think the Broncos could beat them and they were not as mentally prepared to play the game as the Broncos were. Theres video of a Packers player on the Packers sideline (a defensive player) saying something along the lines of how the Broncos were not even a good team. That gives you some idea of what they thought of the Broncos.

The Broncos on the other hand were not going to take the Vikings lightly (or the Falcons for that matter). They would have been prepared to play the game at a high level and they had the vets to lead the team.
Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 01:21 PM   #23
OrangeSe7en
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ View Post
My point is that the coaching staff and players of the Vikings choked during their biggest game of the year while the Broncos were playing their best football during the post season. The Vikings were a great team but choked at home to the Falcons. If they had won that game then I think the pressure of the SB would have been greater on them than on the Broncos and they could have easily made a lot of big mistakes (turnovers, penalties, etc.) that could have affected the outcome of the game. You can reasonably argue that they were the superior team talent wise, but the intangibles go to the Broncos.

Fact is, the Packers did not think the Broncos could beat them and they were not as mentally prepared to play the game as the Broncos were. Theres video of a Packers player on the Packers sideline (a defensive player) saying something along the lines of how the Broncos were not even a good team. That gives you some idea of what they thought of the Broncos.

The Broncos on the other hand were not going to take the Vikings lightly (or the Falcons for that matter). They would have been prepared to play the game at a high level and they had the vets to lead the team.
Not really. Most of the perception of being more talented has to do with who had the more prolific passing games. The Falcons were like a poor man's Broncos and they were 14-2. There was no guarantee that Minnesota could or should steamroll the Falcons. Sure, Anderson missed a FG but it was a home game and it was coming down to a FG.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 01:31 PM   #24
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
 
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
 
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 21,946

Adopt-a-Bronco:
WorrellWilliams
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrangeSe7en View Post
Not really. Most of the perception of being more talented has to do with who had the more prolific passing games. The Falcons were like a poor man's Broncos and they were 14-2. There was no guarantee that Minnesota could or should steamroll the Falcons. Sure, Anderson missed a FG but it was a home game and it was coming down to a FG.
go tell that to these guys:

http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB...php?p=12200207
Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2012, 01:34 PM   #25
OrangeSe7en
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ View Post
If thats the thread from the OP, I already saw it. Most of them are speaking out of ignorance.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:49 AM.


Denver Broncos