Super Bowl - in-depth analysis

[4815162342]

Originally Posted by Tom Hufford

Glad all that foolishness is over - 11 more days until pitchers and catchers report!!

+1

[itjclarke]

Originally Posted by familytoad

...although he wasn't sacked he was hurried on a bunch of important downs...notice that the Defense allowed those weak 4 yd passes all day long and for some reason that seemed to make the Broncos happy

Think Seattle does it almost in reverse.. usually you see pressure from the defensive front forcing errant throws, interceptions, etc.. and when a QB has time, a secondary may be exposed. Seattle's secondary is so good that they force a QB to hold the ball (consistently knocking guys off their underneath routes and completely taking away over the top throws), and thus QB pressure comes from having nowhere to go to with the ball.

This may be best all around secondary I've ever seen (cover, bump/fight, tackle, strip, and ball skills)... though I was too young to really remember watching the young (1981 version) of the great Niner secondary of Wright/Williamson/Hicks/Lott.. or those 70's Raiders groups.

[familytoad]

Ian, I agree with you about the pressure being aided by the strong secondary play...no where to throw!
Now he was able to set a SB record for completions, but the defense obviously could care less about 4 yd completions and the chance to pop the receiver a second after the catch.
Seattle totally dominated in every aspect. I loved it all!

[Runscott]

well, that's that. Hopefully when I get back from dinner, someone will have bumped the John Rogers/Peter Nash thread back up to it's rightful place.

[Harliduck]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Ian, I'm really hoping San Francisco is good enough to get back to Seattle for next year's NFC Championship game (assuming Dallas chokes again). I know I said earlier I hoped it would be in S.F., but that' probably not going to happen.

I will buy the first round next year if it happens.

Dallas? No offense, but even mentioning that underperforming no talents is rather humorous to me. They won't choke, they simply have zero talent to get anywhere near this game. The first year Carroll got here, he made more changes than any other coach in NFL history, and Dallas is in need of those changes...and as a Seattle resident, I was worried to say the least. I went from being admittedly a huge Flynn fan to thinking "what the hell is Carroll doing??" like most Seattle fans (if you say you weren't thinking that you are friggen lying...lol). Schneider and Carroll are fricken geniouses...I bow to their direction and THANK GOD they came here. A truly blessed fan and humbled Seattlite tonight!

I remember being 9 years old watching the city being mesmerized by the Championship Sonics...we haven't had success on that level since...I am now taking my 9 year old to the parade on Wednesday...hopefully we don't have to wait until HIS son is 9!!! GO HAWKS!!

[MyGuyTy]

Originally Posted by itjclarke

Think Seattle does it almost in reverse.. usually you see pressure from the defensive front forcing errant throws, interceptions, etc.. and when a QB has time, a secondary may be exposed. Seattle's secondary is so good that they force a QB to hold the ball (consistently knocking guys off their underneath routes and completely taking away over the top throws), and thus QB pressure comes from having nowhere to go to with the ball.

This may be best all around secondary I've ever seen (cover, bump/fight, tackle, strip, and ball skills)... though I was too young to really remember watching the young (1981 version) of the great Niner secondary of Wright/Williamson/Hicks/Lott.. or those 70's Raiders groups.

Completely agree Ian, I would honestly rank this secondary at the very top with the 70's Raiders group as the two best ever. The Assassin, Atkinson, old man Willie and later Lester Hayes have company.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Harliduck

Dallas? No offense, but even mentioning that underperforming no talents is rather humorous to me. They won't choke, they simply have zero talent to get anywhere near this game.

So they have finished 8-8 each year and you call them "underperforming", yet you say they have zero talent? Not bad for underperforming no talent players.

The reason Cowboys fans like me are so frustrated with the team is that they have gone into each of the last three seasons with high expectations, BECAUSE of the talent, and have then underperformed - the players along with the management. I mention them for one reason - I have been a fan since 1966 - that's 47 years. How old are you?

Sorry for the rant, but if you are going to talk football, talk about the part you have been watching, or do some googling first. No offense.

[freakhappy]

Manning's velocity is not what it used to be, but let's give credit fully where it is due and that is to the Seahawks....they totally dominated this game and it had nothing to do with Peyton Manning's lack of this or that. Peyton Manning attempted to do what he did all year long, but the Seahawk's defense was way too stingy to let that happen. They have the #1 pass defense for a reason and it showed up ready to go tonight.

I know it doesn't matter that Manning set a record in the game, but he still completed a boatload of passes...so what was the difference again? The Seahawks defense made several plays resulting in a lot of turnovers and points. So to throw Manning on the ground and kick dirt on him is clearly the wrong way to view how this game panned out.

The Seahawks were the better team tonight and the Broncos were not prepared for them. It's weird...it's still hard to fathom the final score. I've never seen such a prolific team so dominated like the Broncos were tonight...just crazy!

[Harliduck]

Originally Posted by Runscott

So they have finished 8-8 each year and you call them "underperforming", yet you say they have zero talent? Not bad for underperforming no talent players.

The reason Cowboys fans like me are so frustrated with the team is that they have gone into each of the last three seasons with high expectations, BECAUSE of the talent, and have then underperformed - the players along with the management. I mention them for one reason - I have been a fan since 1966 - that's 47 years. How old are you?

Sorry for the rant, but if you are going to talk football, talk about the part you have been watching, or do some googling first. No offense.

Scott...I appreciate your comments, and if you are referring to me as too young to have an opinion I thank you for the compliment...haha. I have been a fan of the Seahawks since 1976, their inception, and have been a season ticket holder since 1980 (my parents) and took over their tickets...and personally am old enough to remember Tony Dorsett as my favorite player in my youth. So by math you got maybe 10 years on me as a fan...again...

I just see Romo as a QB who will never lead that team to the promise land (all I can think when saying Romo was the botched hold and fumble against my beloved Seahawks). I also feel your team needs major overhauls...just like the Seahawks had to go thru. Sure...we could have held on to the players who were aging and "so-so" that brought us our 2005 NFC Championship...but now...MASSIVE overhauls and good drafts and signings changed our fortunes. To me, the Cowboys are poster childs for the need to rebuild. Yes, they have a stellar history...but it's just that...history. They lack the coaching and the talent for the next level...and as a die hard Seahawk fan who was AGAINST all the changes we went thru (I am truly humbled by the genius of Carroll and Schneider), I certainly don't have the Cowboys answer...I just know with their current line up top to bottom...I am just glad I am NOT a fan...

To answer the age question...I was born in 1970...I am hoping you rip on me for being young...HAHAHA....

[itjclarke]

Originally Posted by freakhappy

Manning's velocity is not what it used to be, but let's give credit fully where it is due and that is to the Seahawks....they totally dominated this game and it had nothing to do with Peyton Manning's lack of this or that. Peyton Manning attempted to do what he did all year long, but the Seahawk's defense was way too stingy to let that happen. They have the #1 pass defense for a reason and it showed up ready to go tonight.

I know it doesn't matter that Manning set a record in the game, but he still completed a boatload of passes...so what was the difference again? The Seahawks defense made several plays resulting in a lot of turnovers and points. So to throw Manning on the ground and kick dirt on him is clearly the wrong way to view how this game panned out.

The Seahawks were the better team tonight and the Broncos were not prepared for them. It's weird...it's still hard to fathom the final score. I've never seen such a prolific team so dominated like the Broncos were tonight...just crazy!

Hey Mike, I'm definitely with you in giving Seahawks full credit (no matter how much it hurts me).. and I also have huge respect for what Manning's been able to accomplish with diminished physical skills (though I do think people put too much emphasis on the pure stats). That said, this matchup was probably the single worst he could have faced in the Super Bowl.

Manning's lack of arm strength is not why the Seahawks DBs are good or looked great tonight.. but his limitations really played into their strengths. Those guys are always on the receivers' hips contesting the every completion.. far more so than any other team's secondary. If there were ever a time to place a premium on pure arm strength, it's when facing the Hawks. That is often the only way someone's able to be able to squeeze the ball into very tight windows on the intermediate to deeper routes with any consistency (and "consitency" v Seahawks does not equal "consistency" v others) against these guys.

Underneath stuff (pick plays, option routes, slip screens, short drags, etc) worked great for the Broncos all year, and they have some great play makers.. but the Seahawks secondary hits/tackles like no other as well. I think there were like three 3rd and 1s the Broncos converted by gaining 1 yard... Seahawks make teams work for yards like no other. Best D in league and maybe best secondary ever.

(That said--- I still gotta give a shot out to my Niners as having a great D and the best linebackers in the game... this rivalry picks up from the Steelers/Ravens as the most physical/bruising old school style football)

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Harliduck

Scott...I appreciate your comments, and if you are referring to me as too young to have an opinion I thank you for the compliment...haha.

Absolutely not - I would never discount someone's opinion merely because of their age. I do realize that it sounded that way, but my point was that I have followed this team longer than most board members have been alive - I know the team very well, and that comes from following them from good years to bad years to good years, etc. We are in a bad spot at the moment, but I'm acutely aware of the reasons, and isn't for lack of Jerry Jones throwing money at the team. It's simply bad decisions compounded over years, resulting in a lack of motivation for very talented players. Unless you are a long-time Cowboys fan, or a sportswriter, there is no reason for you to have a good feel for these things.

Originally Posted by Harliduck

I have been a fan of the Seahawks since 1976, their inception, and have been a season ticket holder since 1980 (my parents) and took over their tickets...and personally am old enough to remember Tony Dorsett as my favorite player in my youth. So by math you got maybe 10 years on me as a fan...again...

I just see Romo as a QB who will never lead that team to the promise land (all I can think when saying Romo was the botched hold and fumble against my beloved Seahawks). I also feel your team needs major overhauls...just like the Seahawks had to go thru. Sure...we could have held on to the players who were aging and "so-so" that brought us our 2005 NFC Championship...but now...MASSIVE overhauls and good drafts and signings changed our fortunes. To me, the Cowboys are poster childs for the need to rebuild. Yes, they have a stellar history...but it's just that...history. They lack the coaching and the talent for the next level...and as a die hard Seahawk fan who was AGAINST all the changes we went thru (I am truly humbled by the genius of Carroll and Schneider), I certainly don't have the Cowboys answer...I just know with their current line up top to bottom...I am just glad I am NOT a fan...

To answer the age question...I was born in 1970...I am hoping you rip on me for being young...HAHAHA....

Tony Romo is NOT the reason for Dallas' problems. It was tough watching him grow up, throwing a lot of very ill-advised passes, being distracted by off-field stuff, etc., but I'll finally admit that without him we are worse. So he fumbled that snap against Seattle - one play, even if it cost them a shot at moving on. It wasn't stupid - it was a physical mistake. I don't know about the rest of you, but I never really had a choice about which teams I was a fan of. I grew up in the 1960's in Texas, so my teams were the Astros and the Cowboys (the AFL wasn't considered a real league by most of us). They still are - for better or worse. I pulled for the Broncos when I lived in Denver in the '70s and '80s, but they were my second team behind Dallas. Now I pull for the Seahawks and the Mariners, still behind Dallas and the Astros. It was actually easier to become a Mariners fan because they sucked - no arrogant fans. It's hard to like a team of arrogant winners, when you are new to a city. I lived in Atlanta from '94 - '05 and I never liked the Braves. I pulled for the Saints in the playoffs this year against Seattle, but I went to the NFC championship game, and hating the 49'ers, I bonded a bit with the team and the fans. One thing Seattle and Dallas have in common: we both dislike San Francisco.

No, I won't rip anyone for being young. My comments were related to your experience with Dallas in particular, not with your age. I figured you were probably born after I began following Dallas, and I was correct by about six years. Anyone can blast me for being a Cowboys fan, but I've been one for 47 years, and the post-Landry years have not been easy.

[itjclarke]

btw- genius move by Leon to move this thing over to the main board! It was a pretty thread lonely over there in the watercooler.

[Harliduck]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Absolutely not - I would never discount someone's opinion merely because of their age. I do realize that it sounded that way, but my point was that I have followed this team longer than most board members have been alive - I know the team very well, and that comes from following them from good years to bad years to good years, etc. We are in a bad spot at the moment, but I'm acutely aware of the reasons, and isn't for lack of Jerry Jones throwing money at the team. It's simply bad decisions compounded over years, resulting in a lack of motivation for very talented players. Unless you are a long-time Cowboys fan, or a sportswriter, there is no reason for you to have a good feel for these things.



Tony Romo is NOT the reason for Dallas' problems. It was tough watching him grow up, throwing a lot of very ill-advised passes, being distracted by off-field stuff, etc., but I'll finally admit that without him we are worse. So he fumbled that snap against Seattle - one play, even if it cost them a shot at moving on. It wasn't stupid - it was a physical mistake. I don't know about the rest of you, but I never really had a choice about which teams I was a fan of. I grew up in the 1960's in Texas, so my teams were the Astros and the Cowboys (the AFL wasn't considered a real league by most of us). They still are - for better or worse. I pulled for the Broncos when I lived in Denver in the '70s and '80s, but they were my second team behind Dallas. Now I pull for the Seahawks and the Mariners, still behind Dallas and the Astros. It was actually easier to become a Mariners fan because they sucked - no arrogant fans. It's hard to like a team of arrogant winners, when you are new to a city. I lived in Atlanta from '94 - '05 and I never liked the Braves. I pulled for the Saints in the playoffs this year against Seattle, but I went to the NFC championship game, and hating the 49'ers, I bonded a bit with the team and the fans. One thing Seattle and Dallas have in common: we both dislike San Francisco.

No, I won't rip anyone for being young. My comments were related to your experience with Dallas in particular, not with your age. I figured you were probably born after I began following Dallas, and I was correct by about six years. Anyone can blast me for being a Cowboys fan, but I've been one for 47 years, and the post-Landry years have not been easy.

Great comments and completely understood...I think you hit it best by saying you mentioned you can't pick who you are a fan of...now we here in Seattle are feeling good at the moment...but please remember, it is absolute HELL being a fan in Seattle...we haven't had this level of success since 1979!!! (And even though I have a daughter who plays for Team USA in Softball, I STILL don't consider a womens championship by our Seattle Storm anything of merit...)

I choose to ignore all the failures I live thru each and every year...and just hope my 8 year old son doesn't have to wait until HIS SON has to wait until he is in the 3rd grade for our towns next Championship!! GO HAWKS!!



I also agree with the poster who mentioned Spring Training...my daughter the baller simply said this..."Good, the NFL is OVER...now lets bring on Pitchers and Catchers for the REAL season!" That is when I knew I raised her RIGHT...lol...

[freakhappy]

Originally Posted by itjclarke

Hey Mike, I'm definitely with you in giving Seahawks full credit (no matter how much it hurts me).. and I also have huge respect for what Manning's been able to accomplish with diminished physical skills (though I do think people put too much emphasis on the pure stats). That said, this matchup was probably the single worst he could have faced in the Super Bowl.

Manning's lack of arm strength is not why the Seahawks DBs are good or looked great tonight.. but his limitations really played into their strengths. Those guys are always on the receivers' hips contesting the every completion.. far more so than any other team's secondary. If there were ever a time to place a premium on pure arm strength, it's when facing the Hawks. That is often the only way someone's able to be able to squeeze the ball into very tight windows on the intermediate to deeper routes with any consistency (and "consitency" v Seahawks does not equal "consistency" v others) against these guys.

Underneath stuff (pick plays, option routes, slip screens, short drags, etc) worked great for the Broncos all year, and they have some great play makers.. but the Seahawks secondary hits/tackles like no other as well. I think there were like three 3rd and 1s the Broncos converted by gaining 1 yard... Seahawks make teams work for yards like no other. Best D in league and maybe best secondary ever.

(That said--- I still gotta give a shot out to my Niners as having a great D and the best linebackers in the game... this rivalry picks up from the Steelers/Ravens as the most physical/bruising old school style football)

No doubt, Ian...I hear what you're saying. I just had to put my two cents in and let everyone know that this game was clearly won by the Seahawks and not lost by Manning.

I thought the Niners were in the driver's seat a few weeks ago when they jumped out to that lead, but that's why they play the whole game!
The NFC West is going to be crazy for a few more years down the road. Defense is key to winning IMO and it showed tonight. My team is the Buccaneers and I've liked them ever since I was little back in the eighties, so I know how to take 'em on the chin if you know what I mean. The Bucs were known for their defense when they started getting better and that's what I loved about them...their defense. I always wanted to see more offense from them and it was often frustrating to watch them mostly shutdown a team, but lose 13-10. But lately their defense has been horrible and I see how important it is to have that great defense...it's a must! Unless of course you have a decent defense and a great offense

[Runscott]

The 49'ers and Seahawks will both be great as long as Harbaugh and Carroll stay put. I see a chess match between these two each time they meet, with either team winning on any given Sunday. Using Kaepernick more as a runner in the NFC Championship was a great plan, even though it put him at a lot of physical risk that most coaches wouldn't be okay with. I think he knew he couldn't win any other way - Carroll had seen Harbaugh's team twice and was ready for Gore and Boldin. I don't think it would be far-fetched to predict that one of these two will represent the NFC for the next three years.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Harliduck

I choose to ignore all the failures I live thru each and every year...and just hope my 8 year old son doesn't have to wait until HIS SON has to wait until he is in the 3rd grade for our towns next Championship!! GO HAWKS!!

It's all relative. From the late '60s through the early '80s, we were disappointed any time Dallas didn't win the Super Bowl. Now they don't even make the playoffs. The biggest sports moment of my life was seeing the Asros win their first playoff series. They have now won three total, and the last was nine years ago. So it could be worse than being a Seattle sports fan.

[freakhappy]

Originally Posted by Runscott

The 49'ers and Seahawks will both be great as long as Harbaugh and Carroll stay put. I see a chess match between these two each time they meet, with either team winning on any given Sunday. Using Kaepernick more as a runner in the NFC Championship was a great plan, even though it put him at a lot of physical risk that most coaches wouldn't be okay with. I think he knew he couldn't win any other way - Carroll had seen Harbaugh's team twice and was ready for Gore and Boldin. I don't think it would be far-fetched to predict that one of these two will represent the NFC for the next three years.

I can see that as well, but we all know how much teams change during the course of one off-season. Teams that look great this year, may lose a few players or just might not be as good as what other teams have assembled. I heard that there was a chance that Lynch doesn't sign back with the Seahawks...I'm not sure about this, but I know it's a possibility and now that they are SB champs, it's that much more possible to happen. Only time will tell I guess. I can see teams like the Panthers and possibly the Rams becoming playoff contenders sooner rather than later. I always root for teams that aren't always in the mix to get in and do some damage. Parity rules!

[Harliduck]

Originally Posted by Runscott

The 49'ers and Seahawks will both be great as long as Harbaugh and Carroll stay put. I see a chess match between these two each time they meet, with either team winning on any given Sunday. Using Kaepernick more as a runner in the NFC Championship was a great plan, even though it put him at a lot of physical risk that most coaches wouldn't be okay with. I think he knew he couldn't win any other way - Carroll had seen Harbaugh's team twice and was ready for Gore and Boldin. I don't think it would be far-fetched to predict that one of these two will represent the NFC for the next three years.

Couldn't agree more. One of my best friends is a huge life long 49ers fan and we both talked before the game the Superbowl was definitely decided two weeks ago...looks like we were right. I think two weeks ago had that last pass somehow passed thru Sherman's outstretched hands...that today would have had the same NFC outcome...Defense never slumps.

[Rickyy]

Peyton didn't have much of a chance today...Me being a 9er fan and regular game attendee I know the Seahawks MO all too well LOL....the Seahawks D pretty much did what they have been doing all year. Its hard to score against a D that puts pressure from the front four without having to blitz a lot.....and the back 7 is SO Fast and breaks to the ball quickly. They basically man cover to the outside and roll everything into a zone defense when the plays turn in towards the middle...the LB's are fast enough to stay with most RB's, TE's and even some wide outs...and the two safeties are always at the back patrolling what come in front of them and they do a great job of reading the plays and all at the same time staying disciplined in their assignments.... they can play aggressively at the line and get the receivers off balance because they know they are fast enough to recover and they always have Chancellor and Thomas at the back end...

I agree the 9ers are still a force and am happy where they're at with a good D of their own, but I hope they get even more younger, bigger and faster on the Defense to keep up with the Hawks... we got a #1, 2 #2's and 3 #3's picks in the coming draft so hope we can continue to load up on young talent.

Ricky Y

[itjclarke]

Originally Posted by Rickyy

Peyton didn't have much of a chance today...Me being a 9er fan and regular game attendee I know the Seahawks MO all too well LOL....the Seahawks D pretty much did what they have been doing all year. Its hard to score against a D that puts pressure from the front four without having to blitz a lot.....and the back 7 is SO Fast and breaks to the ball quickly. They basically man cover to the outside and roll everything into a zone defense when the plays turn in towards the middle...the LB's are fast enough to stay with most RB's, TE's and even some wide outs...and the two safeties are always at the back patrolling what come in front of them and they do a great job of reading the plays and all at the same time staying disciplined in their assignments.... they can play aggressively at the line and get the receivers off balance because they know they are fast enough to recover and they always have Chancellor and Thomas at the back end...

I agree the 9ers are still a force and am happy where they're at with a good D of their own, but I hope they get even more younger, bigger and faster on the Defense to keep up with the Hawks... we got a #1, 2 #2's and 3 #3's picks in the coming draft so hope we can continue to load up on young talent.

Ricky Y

From where I sit (longtime Niner fan, former season ticket holder, and present at all 3 of those damn Seahawk games this year) I think that's dead on the money. There's so much more flexibility for a defense when you don't have to blitz regularly to get pressure. People like Peyton/Brady/Brees make a living spotting and exploiting blitzes, but Seattle has 7 guys in coverage consistantly.. and as seen the past 2 years, all those guys had a lot of trouble with this team (Brees looked completely lost against them twice this year). The Niners are able to do the same, but think the Niners' front four gets pressure more consistently, and in essence helps cover our secondary by doing so.. whereas I feel the Hawks secondary (and linebackers) does a great job of forcing QB's to hold the ball, in essence helping their front four get pressure. If you could combine the Niners' and Seahawks' defenses you would have THE PERFECT D... can you imagine our linebackers flying all over, with their DB behind them??? (and that's not to take away from Seattle LBs or Niners' DBs, both very good units).

I've been telling my buddy (who works for the Hawks) and a few others that I have a man crush on Kam Chancellor. That dude is an absolute ballplayer... supports the run like a Tim McDonald, hits like a bigger Ronnie Lott, and is still fast enough to catch Kaep from behind on his long run in the champ game. I'm worried we may lose our guy "Hitner" this year, and don't to have to hope we score another Eric Reid caliber safety.. but agree, we do need to keep bringing in some grade A young talent.. in the secondary, on the D Line, and we need a WR that can stretch a D (still want to strangle for Scott McCloughan for passing on DeSean Jackson not once, but TWICE!) The Niners are still pretty young though, but the Seahawks are younger. It'll be an arms race for new/young talent in the NFC west for a while.

Scott F- re Kaep running, I'm fine with his continuing to run (it's an amazing and often undefensable weapon) and he's been very good about avoiding big hits. He's rarely been completely "blown up" on a run (J Rice had that ability too), and most often seems to get what he can then duck out of bounds or slide.. or just cut back inside, run through some arm tackles and house it. Wilson seems similar in avoiding the big hits (and is the most functionally elusive QB in the league).. as opposed to RGIII who seemingly would get blasted with regularity his rookie year. My only problem is if Kaep's running remains a hinderance to his development as a complete QB.. a crutch he relies on when a play devolves or his primary isn't open. So far, I think it has, as he's been prone to give up on plays early, to force balls and to make a lot of pre-snap decisions. That said however, he's been very effective up to now and we have no reason to doubt he'll keep getting better. After watching Seattle dominate Denver, I'm sure Kaep's always big shoulder chip is growing larger and larger. I promise this- there will be no more playful video game bet/shaving eyebrow commercials this offseason.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Runscott

It's all relative. From the late '60s through the early '80s, we were disappointed any time Dallas didn't win the Super Bowl. Now they don't even make the playoffs. The biggest sports moment of my life was seeing the Asros win their first playoff series. They have now won three total, and the last was nine years ago. So it could be worse than being a Seattle sports fan.

You damn Cowboy fans, I hate you all. Try growing up a Giants fan in the 70s. 2-12 seemingly every year after 6-0 preseason starts. Despite winning four Superbowls I still feel the pain from 73-80, the ten years which made up the bulk of my youth. After one fluke year in 81, the Giants were awful again until 84. That's 13 out of 14 horrendous years with the one winning year a 9-7 record. Live through that.

[h2oya311]

Wow!! Shellacking!

[wolf441]

I haven't seen a Bronco in that much trouble since 1994!

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by calvindog

You damn Cowboy fans, I hate you all. Try growing up a Giants fan in the 70s. 2-12 seemingly every year after 6-0 preseason starts. Despite winning four Superbowls I still feel the pain from 73-80, the ten years which made up the bulk of my youth. After one fluke year in 81, the Giants were awful again until 84. That's 13 out of 14 horrendous years with the one winning year a 9-7 record. Live through that.

Everyone hates the Cowboys and their fans, except Cowboy fans. While we had Landry coaching we were still 'clean' and somewhat likable, but Jerry Jones, Michael Irvin, etc., changed all that. I actually quit being a fan for a couple of games back in the '90s, and still renounce my fan-ship after each miraculous come-from-ahead loss of the last three years. I can't tell you how many times in that period I've sworn I'll never watch another Cowboys game.

When I was a kid the Super Bowl didn't matter - the big game each of my first two years of football awareness was losing to the Packers in the NFL Championship. The Chiefs and Raiders were non-entities, along with the rest of the AFL - the Packers might as well have been playing our high school team as far as we were concerned. The Jets changed all of that.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Everyone hates the Cowboys and their fans, except Cowboy fans. While we had Landry coaching we were still 'clean' and somewhat likable, but Jerry Jones, Michael Irvin, etc., changed all that.

Some of my most painful memories as a kid were the few times we had a lead on the Cowboys late in the 4th quarter only to go into a 'prevent' defense -- which of course prevented us from keeping the lead. I hated the Cowboys back then but had great respect for Landry (who as you know was a Giant) and Staubach. Even the rest of the damn team just oozed class. Jones, Johnson, Irvin, et al. did change that. All that being said, they aren't nearly as hateable now because they simply don't dominate in any manner. But I have respect for Jerry Jones who, while misguided at times, wants to win and is willing to spend.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Some of my most painful memories as a kid were the few times we had a lead on the Cowboys late in the 4th quarter only to go into a 'prevent' defense -- which of course prevented us from keeping the lead. I hated the Cowboys back then but had great respect for Landry (who as you know was a Giant) and Staubach. Even the rest of the damn team just oozed class. Jones, Johnson, Irvin, et al. did change that. All that being said, they aren't nearly as hateable now because they simply don't dominate in any manner. But I have respect for Jerry Jones who, while misguided at times, wants to win and is willing to spend.

I was hoping to procure original photos for all three of Landry's Bowman football cards while he was with the Giants - have '52 and '55 so far. Still need '51

[calvindog]

Beautiful photos!

[MyGuyTy]

While this thread is still up, let's get some early predictions for next year's Super Bowl, my pick:

Seattle vs. Kansas City

Winner - Seattle becomes the first back to back champs since the Patriots 10 years ago.

[pawpawdiv9]

I had more fun watching Puppy Bowl X for 2 hours before the game.
Damn.. Joe (Namath) is wearing a jacket made of warm fuzzy puppies.

[Rickyy]

Originally Posted by itjclarke

From where I sit (longtime Niner fan, former season ticket holder, and present at all 3 of those damn Seahawk games this year) I think that's dead on the money. There's so much more flexibility for a defense when you don't have to blitz regularly to get pressure. People like Peyton/Brady/Brees make a living spotting and exploiting blitzes, but Seattle has 7 guys in coverage consistantly.. and as seen the past 2 years, all those guys had a lot of trouble with this team (Brees looked completely lost against them twice this year). The Niners are able to do the same, but think the Niners' front four gets pressure more consistently, and in essence helps cover our secondary by doing so.. whereas I feel the Hawks secondary (and linebackers) does a great job of forcing QB's to hold the ball, in essence helping their front four get pressure. If you could combine the Niners' and Seahawks' defenses you would have THE PERFECT D... can you imagine our linebackers flying all over, with their DB behind them??? (and that's not to take away from Seattle LBs or Niners' DBs, both very good units).

I've been telling my buddy (who works for the Hawks) and a few others that I have a man crush on Kam Chancellor. That dude is an absolute ballplayer... supports the run like a Tim McDonald, hits like a bigger Ronnie Lott, and is still fast enough to catch Kaep from behind on his long run in the champ game. I'm worried we may lose our guy "Hitner" this year, and don't to have to hope we score another Eric Reid caliber safety.. but agree, we do need to keep bringing in some grade A young talent.. in the secondary, on the D Line, and we need a WR that can stretch a D (still want to strangle for Scott McCloughan for passing on DeSean Jackson not once, but TWICE!) The Niners are still pretty young though, but the Seahawks are younger. It'll be an arms race for new/young talent in the NFC west for a while.

Scott F- re Kaep running, I'm fine with his continuing to run (it's an amazing and often undefensable weapon) and he's been very good about avoiding big hits. He's rarely been completely "blown up" on a run (J Rice had that ability too), and most often seems to get what he can then duck out of bounds or slide.. or just cut back inside, run through some arm tackles and house it. Wilson seems similar in avoiding the big hits (and is the most functionally elusive QB in the league).. as opposed to RGIII who seemingly would get blasted with regularity his rookie year. My only problem is if Kaep's running remains a hinderance to his development as a complete QB.. a crutch he relies on when a play devolves or his primary isn't open. So far, I think it has, as he's been prone to give up on plays early, to force balls and to make a lot of pre-snap decisions. That said however, he's been very effective up to now and we have no reason to doubt he'll keep getting better. After watching Seattle dominate Denver, I'm sure Kaep's always big shoulder chip is growing larger and larger. I promise this- there will be no more playful video game bet/shaving eyebrow commercials this offseason.

About Kap...I don't mind his running so much since its an element of his aresnal that works... but I agree with you...he needs to still refine his QB skills.... esp his footwork and being more patient and going through progressions particularly in the red zone where the field is more condensed and congested...I think that's why they've had to settle for FG's so often inside the 20 yd line...

NFC West is now how NFC Central and East used to be ... rough, tough and physical... I think the Bronco's weren't prepared for that time of play...

Ricky Y

[fkm_bky]

Hey, did y'all see that endorsement deal that Peyton Manning turned down?




......me either.

Russell Wilson for MVP!

Bill

[drmondobueno]

Originally Posted by MyGuyTy

Completely agree Ian, I would honestly rank this secondary at the very top with the 70's Raiders group as the two best ever. The Assassin, Atkinson, old man Willie and later Lester Hayes have company.

I was a fan of this Raider defense, a super solid group of dominant hard hitting ballhawking backs. But this Seattle group is a deeper group and, in my opinion, better defenders in the air and just as aggressive with the hits.