Originally Posted by BroncoBuff:
"Almost a decade," ... I swear to you I just lol'd at that.
You guys are SO damaged, although that takes nothing away from this Chiefs' mega-dynasty!
Let's hope we can scale those heights soon, and both teams hang around, regularly logging classic games .... Mahomes thinks we will. After the blocked field goal couple weeks back, Mahomes said "you got one" to Sean Payton and Bo Nix, so ...... we got that going for us too. Which is nice.
Are you downplaying a decade of pure domination? This isn’t college. Pro franchises don’t usually just spot a team 16 straight.
But there’s no need to focus on the last decade. KC leads the all-time series by 17. That’s a biiiig number. It ain’t like they’ve been playing since the dawn of time.
Of course, you’re so damaged and insecure you’ll come back with “But…but…not all of those count!! Not in MY book!”
Donks have averaged 11 points a game against the 4 AFC teams with a winning record...and lost all of them. Even that number is inflated due to the Chargers giving them garbage stats trying to run out the clock.
The media is trying to sell the narrative that if the Donks get the 7th seed...no team would want to face them. Yeah right..
If they do get the sympathy invite...it's because their competition, the 9 remaining teams, all currently have 5 wins or less. I cant remember this many bad teams in the same year.
Tua getting hurt and the Bengals falling off a cliff created a vacuum that normally wouldn't exist...and likely wont again. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BlackOp:
Interesting game tonight...Donks have the Colts next week.
NFL loves it's late season drama...and part of that is the "best of the worst" 7th seed sweepstakes.
If the Browns win...next week is a battle for that illustrious final spot.
Hard to envision NFL passing on a riveting 3:25 match up of future "one-and-dones"
Cleveland has beaten the Ravens and Steelers...way more impressive pelts than the 6-6 Falcons/6-6 Bucs.
Broncos gave a bye next week, Colts are in two weeks.
CLE beating the Ravens and Steelers is impressive. They also lost to the Saints… and a slew of teams like the Giants, Cowboys, Raiders and Bengals.
They have been better with Winston, Payton is familiar with his pros and cons. I think the game will be close for a bit. In the end, Broncos win 30-20. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RaidersOftheCellar:
Are you downplaying a decade of pure domination? This isn’t college. Pro franchises don’t usually just spot a team 16 straight.
Oh okay, by "almost a decade" you meant Chiefs over Broncos, my mistake. I thought you meant Chiefs vs. the League. Such domination does exist, but it's maybe just 5-6 years.
Originally Posted by RaidersCellar:
But there’s no need to focus on the last decade. KC leads the all-time series by 17. That’s a biiiig number. It ain’t like they’ve been playing since the dawn of time.
Of course, you’re so damaged and insecure you’ll come back with “But…but…not all of those count!! Not in MY book!”
No no, I definitely DO acknowledge the total numbers, franchise head-ho-head. I just devalue the AFL numbers such that I believe they're not comparable, it wasn't an even playing field.
FIRST OFF: Playing a schedule with 25 other teams stocked with top notch rosters is very different than 7 other teams with good and not-so-good players, plus ....
Here's a good comparison:
For decades the Denver Bears (in their last years "Zephyrs") played baseball in the AAA American Association, as did the Oklahoma City 89ers. In 1991 Denver was awarded a National League franchise the "Colorado Rockies" (not the NHL Hockey team, they moved from Denver to become the New Jersey Devils eight years earlier in 1983), and for the sake of conformity, let's say it was the same owners, Zephyrs and Rockies.
Then, in say, 1992 or 2002, Oklahoma City was awarded a major league baseball franchise. Would anyone seriously acknowledge their H2H from a different league? Acknowledge, yes.Consider an appropriate evaluation of their historical strength? No.
Forget the difference between AFL and NFL, your own Lamar Hunt was adamant that AFL owners pace themselves, not get into bidding wars with NFL teams unless they knew they could afford to - that the short-term rewards of wins and losses paled in comparison with the long-term reward of MERGER.
Far from hiding Otis Taylor in a series of Dallas hotel rooms until you could sign him, the Phipps Brothers offered only rookie minimum contracts to draftees, and consequently signed a none of them, until a framework for the merger was announced and the leagues drafted in one common draft. Broncos drafted pretty damn well then, too .....
1962-66 Broncos Drafts
* Merlin Olsen
* Kermit Alexander
* Bob Hayes
..Jerry Richardson
* Paul Krause
. Wally Hilgenberg
* Bob Brown
* Willie Brown (CFA)
..Ray Mansfield
* Dick Butkus
..Tom Coughlin
- - - - - - - - - -
1967-68
* Floyd Little (1st common draft,1st signed)
* Curley Culp
* = Hall of Fame Hmmm... Curly Culp? If we were trading you Hall of Fame talent because we couldn't afford to sign them, does that strike you as an even playing field? NO, I didn't think it would!
Originally Posted by BroncoBuff: Hmmm... Curly Culp? If we were trading you Hall of Fame talent because we couldn't afford to sign them, does that strike you as an even playing field? NO, I didn't think it would!
..
Rubbish !! Curley Culp was drafted in the 2nd round and you have ZERO evidence whatsoever that the Donks couldn't afford to sign him. Another one of your false narratives.
Dollars had nothing to do with anything -- the Donks decided they didn't want Culp and traded him away -- same as they did with another guy from that same 1968 draft -- Marlin Briscoe, but Briscoe was let go a year later in 1969 (to Buffalo). [Reply]
As a rookie in 1968, Marlin Briscoe became the first black starting QB ever in American football. He led the AFL with 17.1 yds per completion, and set several Broncos rookie passing records, including 14 TD passes - a record broken by Bo Nix just eight days ago.
In 1969, hearing that HC Lou Saban planned to return him to the backup QB role, he asked to be released to pursue a starting QB job elsewhere (he was released, not traded).
It has been hotly debated whether Briscoe was the victim of backwards-thinking - that African Americans didn't have the "capacity" to play the position (it was 56 years ago after all) - OR whether, as Saban claimed, his (generous) 5'10" listed height had more to do with it.
Either way, Briscoe made five more stops in his career - Three years in Buffalo, led the Bills in TD receptions three times and total receptions twice, won two Super Bowls in Miami, leading the Dolphins in TD catches in their undefeated 1972 season, and edging Paul Warfield for most catches 1973.*
Below, Briscoe heads to the locker room with eventual Hall of Fame RB Floyd Little. Little was always listed at 5'10" ... and it appears they're on very nearly equal footing in this photo.
*- Nobody has ANYTHING to say about my thoroughly research claim that without a doubt the 1972 Dolphins are the greatest team ever?!
Proves yet again, you guys don't want to talk football, you just want to hammer on your obsession ... Denver Broncos. BDS - Broncos derangement syndrome.
. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BroncoBuff:
Nothing but long-winded blather that doesn't answer the refutation to my false claim that the Donks couldn't afford to sign Curley Culp
Fixed. And nice try with the deflection, but you FAIL.
And the only ones deranged about the Donkeys are Donktards themselves. [Reply]