Brady/Manning XVII

Tony C

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 13, 2000
13,772
I've been thinking a lot about a prediction on this game and as the week has worn on, I find myself becoming more and more confident in a Denver win.

I think it will be a close game and just like last week, the biggest key will be Manning's Offense avoiding turnovers and letting the Defense take care of business. It's kind of an obvious statement, but if Peyton throws several picks or Denver loses some fumbles, NE will probably win. If they protect the ball, I like Denver with a final score around 26-24.

Here's my reasoning:

General Home Field Advantage:

NE under Brady is only 2-6 in Denver. The altitude plays a part, but so does the loud crowd when NE is trying to run a hurry up attack and communicate. Natural grass as opposed to turf is another factor which I'll detail below.

...

A few days ago I saw an interesting couple of stats about NE playing on natural grass over the last few years. In the last 3 seasons and playoffs, NE's record playing on grass is 7-8. In addition, 4 of the 5 stadiums where Brady has a losing record in his career have natural grass (the fifth is SEA and that was only one game played). Those stadiums are Miami, KC, Carolina, and Denver and Brady's career numbers in those games is 10-17. Now, I'm sure a part of this is just the simple fact that it is harder to win on the road, but I also wonder if the precision passing attack that relies of timing and exact route running might be harder to execute on a surface that is not perfectly even like Modern turf surfaces are. Tomorrow might be a little muddy and there might be a little rain late in the game and I think NE will have some drives killed by failure to make the timing plays work. It won't keep NE out of the end zone, but it should lower the amount of drives where they score.
It is an obvious statement in re turnovers, but the point in terms of prognosticating is not just stating the obvious, it's that statistically Manning is far more likely to turn the ball over. So, yes, if that happens...but statstically INTs should be more a Denver problem.
 

cutman1000

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 26, 2003
3,587
South Carolina/New Zealand
Denver has won a boat load of games this year that they had no business winning, and I feel like people here hold that against them. The fact of the matter is the Broncos are the number 1 seed for a reason, and I bet they don't care if they got there with ugly or pretty wins. I think it's foolish to discount what they accomplished this year.

My head says the Pats win but my heart is nervous as hell.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,847
Somewhere
Denver has won a boat load of games this year that they had no business winning, and I feel like people here hold that against them. The fact of the matter is the Broncos are the number 1 seed for a reason, and I bet they don't care if they got there with ugly or pretty wins. I think it's foolish to discount what they accomplished this year.

My head says the Pats win but my heart is nervous as hell.
Yep. I think this is about a 50/50 outcome, any way you slice it.
 

86spike

Currently enjoying "Arli$$"
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2002
25,082
Procrasti Nation
Denver has won a boat load of games this year that they had no business winning, and I feel like people here hold that against them. The fact of the matter is the Broncos are the number 1 seed for a reason, and I bet they don't care if they got there with ugly or pretty wins. I think it's foolish to discount what they accomplished this year.

My head says the Pats win but my heart is nervous as hell.
Teams with great defenses tend to pile up close wins.

I am expecting nail biting by both fan bases today. This might be a classic.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Denver is a modestly above average team.

Pats were head and shoulders above the AFC when healthy and are now healthy.

Feel pretty good about this one. Not a gimme but about as favorable a road game as the Pats could have.
 

wilked

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
4,185
Feel like most topics have been beat into the ground, so here's a random one:
What do you suppose the league would have done if it was Pats @ NYJ instead of Denver?

Postpone to a Monday night game?
 

jsinger121

@jsinger121
SoSH Member
Jul 25, 2005
17,737
Feel like most topics have been beat into the ground, so here's a random one:
What do you suppose the league would have done if it was Pats @ NYJ instead of Denver?

Postpone to a Monday night game?
Would never have happened since the Pats don't lose divisions to the Jets.
 

wiffleballhero

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 28, 2009
4,744
In the simulacrum
Feel like most topics have been beat into the ground, so here's a random one:
What do you suppose the league would have done if it was Pats @ NYJ instead of Denver?

Postpone to a Monday night game?
Or Baltimore, or just imagine an NFC match-up of NYG at PHI or WASH. Those would be good times for the people who deal with the team travel arrangements.
 

Soxy

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2008
6,095
Teams with great defenses tend to pile up close wins.
This sentence got me thinking, so I did some quick research using PFR's game finder tool. You can try to brush this off as simply a team with a great defense winning a lot of close games, but the number of close games Denver has played, as well as their record in those games, is anything but typical.

Thirteen of their seventeen games have been decided by 7 points or less, with Denver winning ten of them. Only two other teams since 1970 have had 10 or more wins in games decided by 7 or less in a single season (including playoffs): the 2003 Panthers and the 1978 Oilers, each of whom also had ten. A Denver win by 7 or less today and/or in the Super Bowl would set a new record.

Their total of thirteen games played that were decided by 7 or less has only been surpassed by three teams since 1970: the 2003 Panthers, the 1996 Jaguars, and the 1995 Colts, all of whom played fourteen such games. There have been twelve other teams who played thirteen such games in a season, most recently the 2011 Cardinals.

Denver's winning percentage in these games (.769) is currently tied for 4th best since 1970. The only teams that have done better are the 1999 Titans, the 1986 Giants, and and 1981 49ers, all of whom went 9-2 (.818) in those games. All three of those teams played in the Super Bowl, with the Giants and Niners winning. The 1978 Oilers were the other team to go 10-3 in these games. They made the AFC Championship, losing 34-5 at Pittsburgh.

Since this is something of an arbitrary endpoint, I wanted to see how the numbers would change using different values. Changing the numbers to 8 didn't make much of a difference. It puts Denver tied for second-most such games in a season and puts them second in winning percentage.

Now, changing it to 6 or less does make a difference. All of the sudden Denver plunges down to 9 such games, though their winning percentage in those games (7-2, .778) still puts them in the top ten of all-time.

If you change it to 3 or less, Denver falls off of the list entirely. (Though I couldn't help but notice that the 2013 Patriots were on it, going 6-1 with the only loss being @NYJ in the bogus field goal penalty game.)

Denver has played a historically high number of games decided by 7-8 points or less, and they have won most of them. But I don't think one can simply say that teams with great defenses tend to win a lot of close games. Looking at the list of teams that pop up throughout these lists is hardly a who's who of great D's throughout the years. It's the combination of Denver's great defense along with their poor offense that causes them to play so many close games.

The original search on PFR can be found here.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
Right. It's why those 2009-2011 Jets teams were so frustrating. They had a great defense and a pop-gun offense, and so would win games 16-13 seemingly every week.

With a good QB, those teams (like this year's Broncos) would have been juggernauts.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
43,789
AZ
Denver has won a boat load of games this year that they had no business winning, and I feel like people here hold that against them. The fact of the matter is the Broncos are the number 1 seed for a reason, and I bet they don't care if they got there with ugly or pretty wins. I think it's foolish to discount what they accomplished this year.

My head says the Pats win but my heart is nervous as hell.
And certainly, they don't panic when behind, especially at home. I kind of think one advantage the Patriots have in recent years is that Belichick really understands how these games go -- from the multiple time outs and longer waits to the controlled mahem that is the fourth quarter, when the time outs stop and they don't go to commercials with change of possession. When the communications maybe are breaking down, the play clock is running, and the opposing coach can't quite get the right personnel on the field, etc. Broncos won't be so affected. If anything, the grind of playing at altitude will hurt the visitor.

Really feels to me as though the Patriots need to figure out a way to build a lead in this one. Close in the fourth quarter and the balance really shifts to Denver.
 

Red Averages

owes you $50
SoSH Member
Apr 20, 2003
9,305
Denver is a modestly above average team.

Pats were head and shoulders above the AFC when healthy and are now healthy.

Feel pretty good about this one. Not a gimme but about as favorable a road game as the Pats could have.
Agree 100%.
 

Carlos Cowart

Land of Enchantment
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2001
5,323
undacheese
Peyton's 9 TDs and 17 picks is all I need to know. Don't think of him as Peyton Manning, think of him as the worst QB in the league.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,661
Peyton's 9 TDs and 17 picks is all I need to know. Don't think of him as Peyton Manning, think of him as the worst QB in the league.
Well, we did lose a playoff game once to Mark Sanchez. I think Manning is going to play fine - something like 270 yards 2 TD / 1 INT. Brady will need to be on his game for us to win.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
There are always "if"s. But if the Patriots play an average game (for them, with the available personnel), they should win. The Broncos need to hope they can fuck up the Patriots rhythm on offense to have a shot.

That could happen, but it probably won't. Ergo, the patriots should win.

But you never know. Maybe Brady comes out tight like in the 2012 Super Bowl and gets called for a safety. Shit happens.

Still, I think Pats pull away in the third.

27-20, NE.
 

staz

Intangible
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2004
21,121
The cradle of the game.
All right. Here's one thing I really don't get:

Osweiler: Can throw downfield, is healthy, beat the Patriots
Manning: Can't, isn't, didn't

Either Denver thinks Manning's game management/decision-making abilities outweigh his physical limitations, or this is about respect? I can't believe either position. Does this become a tag-team situation? Does Manning start, give way to Osweiler, and the come back in the 4th, Willis Reed-style?

Given everything we know about Manning, I can't believe Osweiler isn't part of Denver's game plan. It make's no sense.
 

DaughtersofDougMirabelli

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 17, 2006
3,016
Well, we did lose a playoff game once to Mark Sanchez. I think Manning is going to play fine - something like 270 yards 2 TD / 1 INT. Brady will need to be on his game for us to win.
Peyton has only had 2 games that fit this stat line, and both were 4 months ago. @DET and @KC
 

Tony C

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 13, 2000
13,772
Denver is a modestly above average team.

Pats were head and shoulders above the AFC when healthy and are now healthy.

Feel pretty good about this one. Not a gimme but about as favorable a road game as the Pats could have.
It's as simple as this to me, and as simple as Manning's TD/INT ratio. totally respect the Broncos and their defense is better than the Pats. But the Pats offense is so much better than the Broncos that it's only home field advantage and some lucky breaks that will keep Denver in this. Totally possible -- I'll be nervous as there's a reason they play the games. But the Pats win this 7 out of 10 times.

In re weather, I see the forecast is now for 8 mph winds and no precipitation. About 45 degrees. Would love a windier day as Brady can throw through that and Manning can not. But will also take the no precipitation as want the field to be as clean as possible.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,782
Hingham, MA
All right. Here's one thing I really don't get:

Osweiler: Can throw downfield, is healthy, beat the Patriots
Manning: Can't, isn't, didn't

Either Denver thinks Manning's game management/decision-making abilities outweigh his physical limitations, or this is about respect? I can't believe either position. Does this become a tag-team situation? Does Manning start, give way to Osweiler, and the come back in the 4th, Willis Reed-style?

Given everything we know about Manning, I can't believe Osweiler isn't part of Denver's game plan. It make's no sense.
I have said this multiple times. Kubiak screwed up IMO bringing Peyton in vs. the Chargers. Brock was playing fine, they were gonna win that game regardless. And they would have beaten Pitt last week with Brock as well. Then if Brock struggled vs. the Pats he could still bring in Peyton for the supposed "spark". Now he is stuck with Manning for better or for worse. We'll see if he was right.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Were I a Denver fan, I'd hope for a one score game at the end of the 3rd quarter and be happy with that.

Were I a football fan with no rooting interest in either team, I'd hope for a NE win. If Denver wins, we are likely looking at a 1980s style NFC beatdown in Super Bowl 50, especially if the opponent is Carolina. Its biggest weakness is something Denver cannot take advantage of.
 

Gorton Fisherman

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
May 26, 2002
2,485
Port Orange, FL
One thing that is bugging the shit out of me in all the pre-game coverage is the inability of any of these stooges to make a proper distinction between "tackling a guy low" (OK) and "leading with your helmet at a guy's knees" (not OK). Believe it or not, it is in fact possible to tackle a player low without launching yourself headfirst directly at his knee joint.
 

Red Averages

owes you $50
SoSH Member
Apr 20, 2003
9,305
Well, we did lose a playoff game once to Mark Sanchez. I think Manning is going to play fine - something like 270 yards 2 TD / 1 INT. Brady will need to be on his game for us to win.
Peyton's game logs this year: Yards/TD/INT

Bal: 175 / 0 /1
@ KC: 256 / 3 / 1
@ DET: 324 / 2 / 1
MIN: 213 / 1 / 2
@ OAK: 266 / 0 / 2
@ CLE: 290 / 1 / 3
GB: 340 / 0 / 1
@ IND: 281 / 2 / 2
KC: 35 / 0 / 4
SD (1/2 game): 69 / 0 / 4
Pit: 222 / 0 / 0

So why do you think he will throw for 270 w/ 2 TD and 1 INT?

Good to hear a well thought out post from Spike on why he thinks Denver can win, but ultimately that left me even more confident when many of his points revolved around huge IFs (Chris Harris is fine, Pats can't play on grass, Brady's record in Denver with different teams, it'll be kept close late in the game). Should be a good one, but I look at this similar to last year's Super Bowl run when the first week was a bigger test and if the Patriots can establish a lead in the first half they should be able to breakaway in the 2nd half.
 
Dec 21, 2015
1,410
A few days ago I saw an interesting couple of stats about NE playing on natural grass over the last few years. In the last 3 seasons and playoffs, NE's record playing on grass is 7-8. In addition, 4 of the 5 stadiums where Brady has a losing record in his career have natural grass (the fifth is SEA and that was only one game played). Those stadiums are Miami, KC, Carolina, and Denver and Brady's career numbers in those games is 10-17. Now, I'm sure a part of this is just the simple fact that it is harder to win on the road, but I also wonder if the precision passing attack that relies of timing and exact route running might be harder to execute on a surface that is not perfectly even like Modern turf surfaces are. Tomorrow might be a little muddy and there might be a little rain late in the game and I think NE will have some drives killed by failure to make the timing plays work. It won't keep NE out of the end zone, but it should lower the amount of drives where they score.
This is interesting, but lacks some context. Pulling from the list of field surfaces as well as Brady's splits, let's see if there's anything to this trend...

Surface distribution:

Turf (15): (NE), NYG, NYJ, DAL, BUF, NO, HOU*, ATL, BAL, IND, SEA, CIN, DET, MIN, STL (astroturf before 2005, fieldturf since)
Hybrid (3): GB, PHI, SF
Bermuda Grass (10): WAS, KC, CAR, SD, TEN, JAX, TB, ARI, OAK, MIA
Kentucky Bluegrass (4): DEN, PIT, CLE, CHI

* only stadium still using AstroTurf, which is much harder on knees and has cleat-gripping issues

...I was going to get some aggregate ANY/A numbers for Brady on those groups of surfaces, but it looks like PFR only has splits by opponent, not by location. NFL.com kinda has it but only for individual years not career-long, and only has passer rating not ANY/A.

I guess the only conclusion I can draw right now is that he plays at a great number of stadiums that use grass, and there haven't been serious mishaps at others. I'm not sure that absent a little more digging we can know that Denver's kentucky bluegrass is a problem for NE receivers.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
Were I a Denver fan, I'd hope for a one score game at the end of the 3rd quarter and be happy with that.

Were I a football fan with no rooting interest in either team, I'd hope for a NE win. If Denver wins, we are likely looking at a 1980s style NFC beatdown in Super Bowl 50, especially if the opponent is Carolina. Its biggest weakness is something Denver cannot take advantage of.
Almost every "ideal SB matchup" column I've read has had the Patriots as the favored winner from the AFC.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Almost every "ideal SB matchup" column I've read has had the Patriots as the favored winner from the AFC.
If today's game were in Fox, there would be a lot of talk of an AFC Championship game resembling last year's -- close for a half, but Pats pulling away. And that talk would be reasonable IMO.

Locale matters a fuckton. (No I not going to launch into another rant about a certain home game against NFC East opponent. That's in the books).
 

JohnnyK

Member
SoSH Member
May 8, 2007
1,941
Wolfern, Austria
One player the Pats will miss from the last game in Denver is Easley. They got a ton of pressure with just a three-man rush of Sheard, Easley and Chandler Jones.

One thing they certainly won't miss is having to throw jump balls to Scott Chandler.

I am a little nervous, but mostly calm. I'm hoping for a beatdown of epic proportions.
 

Soxy

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2008
6,095
Almost every "ideal SB matchup" column I've read has had the Patriots as the favored winner from the AFC.
It was pretty funny listening to the MMQB podcast this week, where Robert Klemko basically said that this will be an exciting Super Bowl to watch no matter what..... as long as Denver isn't in it. I think Pats-Cards would have the highest entertainment potential, but Pats-Panthers would be great to watch as well.

Except for Nantz-level Peyton fans, nobody outside Denver would give them a prayer against either of the NFC teams. I think that's underestimating Arizona's (more specifically, Carson Palmer's) ability to self-destruct, but they still probably beat Denver 7 times out of ten. They would be more likely to lose than Carolina, but they would also be more likely to win by something like 45-10. I don't see anyway Carolina would lose to Denver barring a disaster of epic proportions. Factoring in health, their defense is arguably better than Denver's right now, and their offense is miles ahead of the Peyton express.

But that's getting ahead of ourselves.

Win today.
 

lambeau

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 7, 2010
1,175
Connecticut
FWIW, Rapoport's reporting makes the news of Chris Harris' miraculous recovery sound like BS:
"A lot of pain and weakness--he is struggling to brush his teeth."
 

staz

Intangible
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2004
21,121
The cradle of the game.
I have said this multiple times. Kubiak screwed up IMO bringing Peyton in vs. the Chargers. Brock was playing fine, they were gonna win that game regardless. And they would have beaten Pitt last week with Brock as well. Then if Brock struggled vs. the Pats he could still bring in Peyton for the supposed "spark". Now he is stuck with Manning for better or for worse. We'll see if he was right.
When you say "stuck," this means you think the situation is political (not disagreeing). As someone who has been drinking the BB kool-aid for more then a decade, a political decision is unfathomable.

I fully expect some sort of QB rotation today, along with every other shenanigan in the book: constant OPI baiting/bitching, intentionally late hits, helmet-to-knee tackles, well-disguised illegal picks, DPI Flacco specials, copious trick plays, onside kicks here and there, etc... Denver is going to stop at nothing. Kitchen sink game.
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
10,455
Maybe oversimplification, but I think it comes down to if the Pats can stop the Broncos running game. If Denver can get the ground game going, they can extend their own drives and tire the Pat's D out, especially by the fourth quarter, and shorten the game/limit New England's number of possession so even if Brady is having a good day moving the ball, they're less likely to be down a lot late in the game. If New England can stop the run and put them into passing situations on third downs, I think their defense will be able to get off the field and stay fresh for later in the game and give the ball back to the offense to try and build a lead.

Obviously a lot more going on than that (turnovers, injuries, Manning playing better than expected, etc.) but I think the Denver running game will be key.
 
Last edited:

DukeSox

absence hasn't made the heart grow fonder
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2005
11,770
Were I a Denver fan, I'd hope for a one score game at the end of the 3rd quarter and be happy with that.

Were I a football fan with no rooting interest in either team, I'd hope for a NE win. If Denver wins, we are likely looking at a 1980s style NFC beatdown in Super Bowl 50, especially if the opponent is Carolina. Its biggest weakness is something Denver cannot take advantage of.
Or, like, the super bowl 2 years ago.
 

Section15Box113

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2005
8,953
Inside Lou Gorman's Head
This is interesting, but lacks some context. Pulling from the list of field surfaces as well as Brady's splits, let's see if there's anything to this trend...

Surface distribution:

Turf (15): (NE)
Going further back - and focusing on Brady since he's the only player left from a decade ago, recall that the Patriots didn't install the Field Turf until November 2006. They ripped it up after a mid-November loss to the Jets and had it ready for the next home game against the Bears at the end of the month.

So that means Brady played all his home games on grass for the first 4 1/2 years in the new stadium.

During those years, here's how the team fared at home:

2002: 5-3, missed playoffs
2003: 8-0, 2-0 at home in playoffs
2004: 8-0, 1-0 at home in playoffs
2005: 5-3, 1-0 at home in playoffs
2006: 2-3 on grass, 3-0 on the new Field Turf, 1-0 at home in playoffs on FieldTurf

So that's 32-9 at home on grass between 2002-2006.

Of course, obvious caveat. Different players, different team - and the QB isn't the one maintaining footing on grass.

Plus, it's only been a decade. Which means I am old.
 

Dahabenzapple2

Mr. McGuire / Axl's Counter
SoSH Member
Jun 20, 2011
8,943
Wayne, NJ
My heart is always nervous about all these games

That being said, I believe intellectually slightly less confident than against the Colts last year. Patriots are a much better team when healthy and this version of Peyton Manning without the horseshoe up his ass throws 2 picks and the game is plus 10 to 17 by the end of the 3rd quarter. To me the only thing that disrupts this are turnovers, bad drops or a horrible call or 2 at the wrong time.

But as always, I'm nervous as ever.
 

grsharky7

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
1,256
Berlin, PA
My heart is always nervous about all these games

That being said, I believe intellectually slightly less confident than against the Colts last year. Patriots are a much better team when healthy and this version of Peyton Manning without the horseshoe up his ass throws 2 picks and the game is plus 10 to 17 by the end of the 3rd quarter. To me the only thing that disrupts this are turnovers, bad drops or a horrible call or 2 at the wrong time.

But as always, I'm nervous as ever.
It's the playoffs in the NFL, there is always reason to be nervous when its one and done. How nervous do you think the Rams fans were back in SB36? Everyone said beat down and looked how that turned out. It's not going to be a Colts like romp from last year. If the Pats win I believe it will be by 10-14 points, if they lose I believe it will come down to the last possession. Enjoy the ride, you never know when this could be the last one.
 

Carlos Cowart

Land of Enchantment
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2001
5,323
undacheese
You should all be nervous because I bet the Pats. I don't like the fact that the money in Vegas is coming in 5-1 on the Pats. They stand to either win or lose about a billion on this game. Always scares me.
 

Zososoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 30, 2009
9,357
South of North
Maybe oversimplification, but I think it comes down to if the Pats can stop the Broncos running game. If Denver can get the ground game going, they can extend their own drives and tire the Pat's D out, especially by the fourth quarter, and shorten the game/limit New England's number of possession so even if Brady is having a good day moving the ball, they're less likely to be down a lot late in the game. If New England can stop the run and put them into passing situations on third downs, I think their defense will be able to get off the field and stay fresh for later in the game and give the ball back to the offense to try and build a lead.

Obviously a lot more going on than that (turnovers, injuries, Manning playing better than expected, etc.) but I think the Denver running game will be key.
This is where I'm at too HBDS. We can talk about contingencies (e.g. turnovers, injuries, etc.) changing the game, but this is the key matchup. If CJ Anderson is kept in check, I have no doubt the Pats take this. If Denver is putting 15-20 play scoring drives together and chewing clock, that points to a big advantage in their favor. Taken in conjunction with the fact that the Pats will presumably struggle to run the ball, that's the aspect of the game making me most apprehensive.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
62,552
Im going to be pretty emotional if we lose. Im gonna put money on Denver to make me feel better.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,671
Maybe oversimplification, but I think it comes down to if the Pats can stop the Broncos running game. If Denver can get the ground game going, they can extend their own drives and tire the Pat's D out, especially by the fourth quarter, and shorten the game/limit New England's number of possession so even if Brady is having a good day moving the ball, they're less likely to be down a lot late in the game. If New England can stop the run and put them into passing situations on third downs, I think their defense will be able to get off the field and stay fresh for later in the game and give the ball back to the offense to try and build a lead.

Obviously a lot more going on than that (turnovers, injuries, Manning playing better than expected, etc.) but I think the Denver running game will be key.

Yes, and the concern is how many effective minutes will the Pats get out of Hightower and Collins today. If the answer is not a lot, then the Broncos will gash the Pats with the running game.
 

yecul

appreciates irony very much
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 8, 2001
18,513
DEN is not getting enough credit by anyone. Manning is a shadow of his former self and is fun to pile on but they are good in all aspects. He is unlikely to be a force but he won't necessarily lose it for them nor be a drag. The D and rush game can keep this low scoring and manageable where some calls, big play or turnovers can make all the difference.

The Pats should win. I see this as 55/45 at best. No blowout. No dominance. A tight game that could be won by either team in the last part of the game.
 

Dahabenzapple2

Mr. McGuire / Axl's Counter
SoSH Member
Jun 20, 2011
8,943
Wayne, NJ
Im going to be pretty emotional if we lose. Im gonna put money on Denver to make me feel better.
If I was a betting man, this is the kind of thing I would do.

I told everyone at work that I'm not coming in if the Patriots lose and this has them cheering and hating harder against the Patriots. In fact here in NJ where I have lived for 33+ years, I have NO friends who are Patriots fans. My only close association to Pats supporters is here. In fact, I have many sane friends and associates who are *only* insane when it comes to perspective about the New England Patriots. I wish them extreme pain today and I can't wait to be talking shit tomorrow morning if all goes as I am praying.
 

Captaincoop

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
13,805
Santa Monica, CA
Im going to be pretty emotional if we lose. Im gonna put money on Denver to make me feel better.
Instead of doing that you should take the NFC to win the Super Bowl. That's the gambling play on Denver. Because if Denver wins you'll have an amazing, virtually unloseable bet on the Super Bowl, if the Pats win you still have your consolation play alive.
 

dbn

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 10, 2007
7,785
La Mancha.
Instead of doing that you should take the NFC to win the Super Bowl. That's the gambling play on Denver. Because if Denver wins you'll have an amazing, virtually unloseable bet on the Super Bowl, if the Pats win you still have your consolation play alive.
I'm not a gambler, but that's actually not a bad idea.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
62,552
Instead of doing that you should take the NFC to win the Super Bowl. That's the gambling play on Denver. Because if Denver wins you'll have an amazing, virtually unloseable bet on the Super Bowl, if the Pats win you still have your consolation play alive.
That's smart. I'll take that money and get a real gimpy shelter dog and put a Manning jersey on it. That'll cheer me up.
 

mwonow

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 4, 2005
7,259
It's on! And for those still wondering, "How often is there an ode to Peter King and Peyton Manning in a SoSH game thread?" - well, wonder no more.

The Adieu Haiku

My chores completed
I open a beer and toast
The last of Peyton
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,424
Don't even bother running the ball...not working. Brady always had trouble in Denver