-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
The Everything NFL Thread - 2013-2014 Edition
- Thread starter Killah
- Start date
- Status
But hey, at least you can blaze it to mask your sorrows.
WE'RE THE SUPER BOWL CHAMPIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I really never thought this day would come, that any of our teams would win anything, but we did. :')
should have waited a day, you could have picked up some denver broncos super bowl champion gear
Actually meant to type Seahawks in that post. But you know, autocorrect.
But on a more serious note, around week 14 I said this has been my favorite season ever. And I wouldn't really care had the Broncos gotten blown out at home by the Colts in the playoffs. The greatest regular season ever is still the greatest regular season ever. My opinion hasn't changed one bit.
You can take you're meaningless 1 game, i'll take the greatest passing season in the history of the game.
Quaterback puts the greatest 18 games ever statistically. Underperforms in one game and his team loses. First random quarterback that comes to mind is suddenly better.
You can take you're meaningless 1 game, i'll take the greatest passing season in the history of the game.
Last edited:
It was not the greatest anything ever, it was just abuse of new passing rules by one of the two QBs basically capable of abusing them in a statistical context (Manning & Brees). Favre in the playoffs had 9/24 games he played in with LESS than 2 TD, Manning has more than 1 TD in only 9/23. You can call shit meaningless, but the sample size bears the fuck out. The best quarterback years of all time are Marino in '84, Montana in '89, Young in '94, and Warner in '99, Manning in '04, and Culpepper in '04, not the season with the happenstance highest totals just because the NFL butchered its passing rules. I do think Manning in '04 was gunning at the sake of his teammates, I obviously have not watched the Marino or Montana seasons, so I cannot really comment on those past what statistics tell me. I will edit myself to say to pick the best season of all time, you would have to absolutely adjust for strength of schedule or especially defensive strength of schedule/points allowed by opponents against their other opponents, and I am far too lazy for that.
The only thing you can compare the 2012 & 2013 passing seasons to are 2012 & 2013 results...nothing else makes sense compared to these. You can compare postseason results across all eras, because good defense when the stakes are the highest almost always wins out. Hyperefficient offenses that rely on short passing fall apart in imperfect conditions or against amazing pass rushes and amazing secondaries. [Rodgers in '11 could be argued best season ever, etc etc recent passing seasons are all ridiculously hard to contextualize]
Consistency in the postseason matters, and Peyton Manning is a ridiculously worse postseason QB than a whole bunch of guys. Whatever reasons you want to blame, the proof is in the statistics.
Last edited:
yes it was, furious masturbation to every seahawks defensive player tonight asdfthat was the best game i have ever watched.
No Brees in '09 to continue the Every Five Years pattern?
Yawn. I knew this would happen a while ago. And in typical fashion Capt. Kirby likes to think he's right 100% of the time with his response:
But yeah, I'll go ahead and leave this here. I'm not even trying to take credit for this analysis because it was painfully obvious to anyone with a brain that the Seahawks had an all-time great defense and were going to steamroll basically everybody (49ers gave em a good game at least!!), I just find it funny that other people refused to believe.
Or their supply of Adderall will run out!
Yeah, they won't be able to afford all of those players in a couple years, especially if they continue to play at this high of a level. Unless Wilson blossoms into a truly elite QB capable of carrying the team on his own, the Seahawks will have a small window in which to earn as many trophies as possible. They could maintain playoff success over a longer period of time if Schneider continues to draft this well, but I doubt they will become a true dynasty.
Yeah, they won't be able to afford all of those players in a couple years, especially if they continue to play at this high of a level. Unless Wilson blossoms into a truly elite QB capable of carrying the team on his own, the Seahawks will have a small window in which to earn as many trophies as possible. They could maintain playoff success over a longer period of time if Schneider continues to draft this well, but I doubt they will become a true dynasty.
A 70% chance to win the Super Bowl has not been a thing since the Cowboys/Niners teams were a thing. You were not correct about that number before and still are not. The Seahawks were an underdog in this game, the Ravens against the Giants were only -3 favorites. It is not about "liking" to be almost always correct, it just is being almost always correct.
The only sport 70% can still exist in out of the US "big 4" is NBA, which is because only 5 people can be on a court at once.
WaterBomb, Brees "only" had 34/11. It was a great season, and he tossed 70.6% and won it all...but it just does not count :( his 2011 might need to be on the list, but again all the seasons recently are more about completely broken passing rules I think, or at the very least impossible to contextualize properly.
The only sport 70% can still exist in out of the US "big 4" is NBA, which is because only 5 people can be on a court at once.
WaterBomb, Brees "only" had 34/11. It was a great season, and he tossed 70.6% and won it all...but it just does not count :( his 2011 might need to be on the list, but again all the seasons recently are more about completely broken passing rules I think, or at the very least impossible to contextualize properly.
Clearly Vegas's finest hour lol.
I'm actually surprised you don't at least slightly agree with me. You can pick at my arbitrarily chosen percentage that I picked out of thin air all you want I guess, but honestly: how often does a defense like this come around? Don't you have a tendency to look at these trends? Are they not as good as I think? Whenever a defense dominates the NFL like this, they win the Super Bowl almost always, correct? The 2002 Bucs, 2000 Ravens, 1990 Giants, 1985 Bears? The Seahawks don't necessarily compare to those defenses, but in the context of the current day NFL this Seattle D was just rolling over everyone. I don't know how anyone could consider them an underdog against anyone in today's NFL, Denver being favored was media driven imo. I'd be surprised if they don't repeat assuming their roster stays mostly intact.
Last edited:
this super bowl sucked
the difference between enjoying elite defenses of the past blow out their opponents in the super bowl and this was that they weren't facing one of the 5 greatest offenses in nfl history. those opponents played to the best of their ability but weren't a match and you got to see a well executed defense do work. watching seattle's defense was a joy here, but watching the entire denver offense underperform was just disappointing. ill just cite barnwell "While Manning eventually racked up empty completions by throwing in a desperate attempt to catch up during the second half, his first-half line is probably more indicative of the kind of day he had: 17-of-23 for 104 yards and two interceptions tells the whole story"
manning throwing 5 ypa and 2 ints is not a "good day" as some people trying to say denver was playing their best will have you believe. seattle's gameplan was executed well but manning made some really poor decisions and was too jumpy, forgoing an open man several times to check it down. this is not the denver of the regular season, despite how rule changes have affected our view of prolific offenses, he was better than this
meanwhile, seattle was a top 10 offense this season along with their top 1 defense led by an almost elite qb in russell wilson, it wasn't fun watching them just pick apart denver's pitiful defense. "The final score will judge them harshly — 16 of Seattle’s 43 points came from defensive and special teams scores — but they repeatedly couldn’t get off the field. The Broncos allowed Seattle to score on six of its first seven meaningful drives, and by the time they had forced their second stop of the game, there was less than 10 minutes to go in the fourth quarter."
6 / 7 drives seattle scored, that's absolutely insane, idk what's fun about watching a good offense obliterate a bad defense. denver was horrible vs the pass this season and good vs the run - that's exactly what happened here.
add that to the fact that denver wasn't at their best with some really shitty injuries while seattle was basically 100% healthy. seeing safetys and bad kick coverage are "good football" ok, 3/4 absurd turnovers are good football "ok", a kick returner making several horrible decisions is good football "ok"
i don't need a game to be close to be thrilling but denver's offense didn't perform, even if seattle's defense >>> denver's offense, this was not telling of it. but it's my opinion, you don't need to bother correcting me about how im not a real football fan because i didnt enjoy watching a team get blown out because they didn't play their best and made a lot of mental mistakes
the difference between enjoying elite defenses of the past blow out their opponents in the super bowl and this was that they weren't facing one of the 5 greatest offenses in nfl history. those opponents played to the best of their ability but weren't a match and you got to see a well executed defense do work. watching seattle's defense was a joy here, but watching the entire denver offense underperform was just disappointing. ill just cite barnwell "While Manning eventually racked up empty completions by throwing in a desperate attempt to catch up during the second half, his first-half line is probably more indicative of the kind of day he had: 17-of-23 for 104 yards and two interceptions tells the whole story"
manning throwing 5 ypa and 2 ints is not a "good day" as some people trying to say denver was playing their best will have you believe. seattle's gameplan was executed well but manning made some really poor decisions and was too jumpy, forgoing an open man several times to check it down. this is not the denver of the regular season, despite how rule changes have affected our view of prolific offenses, he was better than this
meanwhile, seattle was a top 10 offense this season along with their top 1 defense led by an almost elite qb in russell wilson, it wasn't fun watching them just pick apart denver's pitiful defense. "The final score will judge them harshly — 16 of Seattle’s 43 points came from defensive and special teams scores — but they repeatedly couldn’t get off the field. The Broncos allowed Seattle to score on six of its first seven meaningful drives, and by the time they had forced their second stop of the game, there was less than 10 minutes to go in the fourth quarter."
6 / 7 drives seattle scored, that's absolutely insane, idk what's fun about watching a good offense obliterate a bad defense. denver was horrible vs the pass this season and good vs the run - that's exactly what happened here.
add that to the fact that denver wasn't at their best with some really shitty injuries while seattle was basically 100% healthy. seeing safetys and bad kick coverage are "good football" ok, 3/4 absurd turnovers are good football "ok", a kick returner making several horrible decisions is good football "ok"
i don't need a game to be close to be thrilling but denver's offense didn't perform, even if seattle's defense >>> denver's offense, this was not telling of it. but it's my opinion, you don't need to bother correcting me about how im not a real football fan because i didnt enjoy watching a team get blown out because they didn't play their best and made a lot of mental mistakes
I stopped watching aftrr Harvin returned the kickoff for a TD to start the second half (though I should have stopped after the pick 6, teams that return an interception for a touchdown in the super bowl are now 12-0!), so I can't say I enjoyed the game too much. I agree that Seattle played pretty close to perfectly and completely outclassed Denver throughout the game, and much respect to them for doing so, but I don't enjoy watching a game that I know the outcome of halfway through the game.
I could never agree with 70%. Last season I had extremely strong reasons to back up around a 73% chance that either the Patriots would win the Super Bowl, or whoever beat them would win it. That itself only accorded the Patriots around a 40% chance to win, and 40% was already phenomenally high. Teams rarely have a 70% chance to win a single game against another elite opponent, 70% to win it against an entire field of teams is just highly improbable. Percentages are not about pulling something out of thin air, and the winner result does not make some 70% number or any particular number validated (it is not like the win result means every team who won a Super Bowl retroactively becomes obviously over 50% to have won it all)...I mean come on, what were the Ravens' chances to win last year, 3-5%?
As far as historically comparable etc, the Seahawks gave up so many points (compared to other elite defenses) that it was incredibly hard to contextualize them coming into this postseason. They allowed about 10 more points than Steelers & Niners did 2 seasons ago, and neither of those teams qualified for the Super Bowl, and one of them lost round 1 to fucking Tim Tebow with the fucking #1 pass rank defense giving up ridiculously long passes, while the Niners had that game where the Saints carved them up & then should have beaten Giants but whatever. You can look at the Seahawks secondary and say "well it's obviously invincible, Sherman & Thomas & etc", but that is just not objective. Tim Tebow destroyed the #1 pass defense 2 years ago, and if a good long passer faced Seahawks, then a similar sort of thing could have happened. Theoretically Eagles, Packers, and Saints basically were the biggest threats to Seahawks in that category. On top of three teams that could theoretically beat them in the air if things broke any of those teams ways, the other teams they might face in the NFC were the most similar styled defensive teams. After coming out of all that, the Super Bowl was practically easy, but my guess is that even before you account for the threat Broncos or Pats theoretically "should have" posed, just accounting for the NFC definitely kept Seahawks at 30% maximum to win it all.
For instance, to compare them with the 2000 Ravens...Ravens started 5-4 before figuring their strategy out and never lost again. Meanwhile, the Seahawks went 3-2 coming into the playoffs, despite having shifted to their least points allowed in any stretch of the season. The Cardinals loss in "despite the picks lol!11" is no reason not to believe in them, it was just a very confusing outcome for anyone to try to work with any highly fact based predictions going forward.
Last edited:
- Status