Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

SB XLVIII: SEAHAWKS VS BRONCOS


CelibatePimp

Recommended Posts

He is not really wrong.  They had a couple of decent drives.  Turnovers killed them. 

 

That is not how to answer that question.  Something like "we played a disappointing first half, we will make adjustments.  We are a better team than what you saw in the first half."  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49ers, Hawks, or our Panthers would have won this game.....it was going to be NFC all the way....one more reason I'm super sad we didn't make it.

 

The top 3 teams in the NFL were in the NFC and we have abetter pass rush than Seattle...Kraken would have killed Manning.

 

Can't wait to get Cam some weapons.

 

The way the Broncos are playing, the Bucs, Skins, and Rams would have won also

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way the Broncos are playing, the Bucs, Skins, and Rams would have won also

 

Uh no. You realize it's seattle number 1 defense that denver's offense has been horrible right? The only comparable defense to seattle's is the panthers and 49ers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It's not impossible to go from worst to first.  We kept Evero because anyone in there right mind knew our defense was destroyed by injuries, not the scheme.  Evero has been given a plethora of talent between free agency and the draft, not to mention getting DB back. I fully expect our defense to be very good.  I have no reason to think Jones would say something like that unless he truly felt like that.   
    • We would’ve played Florida and lost in the 1st instead of the 3rd round.  Montreal would have been the 8 seed.
    • I can't get behind a purely subjective re-draft as a method of defining "top-10 QB" status. That invites bias based on vibes/hypotheticals and can ignore actual on-field performance. You and others have said that Bryce has to be a top-10 QB to justify the pick. That's a high bar, which I'm not against, but we need a clear, consistent way to measure it. When I bring up metrics that Bryce has registered in the top-10 in like BTT%, P2S ratio, catchable deep ball rate, etc... they're waved off as either irrelevant or the expected baseline performance. Meanwhile, volume stats like passing yards or win-loss records, both of which depend heavily on roster talent, health, and coaching, are treated as definitive. That's where the inconsistency kicks in. If no performance metric ever counts in his favor and the answer is always going to be "he should be doing that," then we're not evaluating him... we're just holding him to a curve he can't win against. If this is really about performance standards, then let's define them. But if it's just about confirming prior takes based on height and weight, then let's call it what is it and stop pretending that this is a football analysis discussion.
×
×
  • Create New...