Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

SB Champs from the 00's you would take over the 1998 Broncos
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL Comparisons
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
NextBigThing


Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 22013
Location: Beat Of My Own Drum
PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 4:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The 1998 Vikings would have crushed the Broncos, as would the 2007 Patriots, 2004 Patriots, 2004 Eagles, 1999 St. Louis Rams, etc.
_________________
NBT's Prime Pimpage:
1. Justin Hunter
2. Aaron Dobson
3. Cordarelle Patterson
Past Successes: Dez Bryant, Alshon Jeffrey, Torrey Smith
Future Successes: Sammy Watkins, Rueban Randle
Past Failures:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Steelerspower


Joined: 13 Jun 2011
Posts: 7742
PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 4:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the broncos would have destroyed the Vikings in 1998, as the Broncos have destroyed the falcons

The broncos were a more complete team with a better QB, RB, better defense,and better coach
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Russell2Bailey


Joined: 20 Mar 2008
Posts: 12905
Location: Where I will, I'll roam.
PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 5:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the 1997 team was better than the 98' team but that's just me.
_________________
[quote="Reggie Nelson#1"] Radio-"Peyton give the ball to Ball. Ball drops the ball & Ball scoops it up! He's going downfield, TOUCHDOWN! Ball pats him on the back for when he lost the ball."[/quote]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
CP3MVP


Joined: 07 Feb 2012
Posts: 303
PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 7:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NextBigThing wrote:
The 1998 Vikings would have crushed the Broncos, as would the 2007 Patriots, 2004 Patriots, 2004 Eagles, 1999 St. Louis Rams, etc.


They didn't crush the Falcons who the Broncos crushed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GaTechRavens


Moderator
Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 17540
Location: Madison, WI
PostPosted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 7:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CP3MVP wrote:
NextBigThing wrote:
The 1998 Vikings would have crushed the Broncos, as would the 2007 Patriots, 2004 Patriots, 2004 Eagles, 1999 St. Louis Rams, etc.


They didn't crush the Falcons who the Broncos crushed


Transitive property doesn't work, though I think the Broncos would have won as well.

And 7DnBrnc53, don't the same principles of your "Super Bowl Myth Era" apply just as much to the Broncos. Their Super Bowl opponent, by your own standards, was a one year fluke that lacked particularly great talent. Their AFC championship foe was the same. So why are the '98 Broncos exempt from this?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ChazStandard


Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Posts: 3695
Location: The bandwagon, hop on up!
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 12:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry that this isn't entirely on topic, but this "Superbowl Myth Era" when referencing the 80s, am I interpreting it right: that 80s SBs deserve an asterisk because of the relative weakness of the AFC?

If that's the case, surely they still deserve credit for beating the rest of the NFC.
_________________
Quote:
Well, I'm the President of the Howdy Doody Circus Army!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
tom cody


Joined: 01 Sep 2007
Posts: 8433
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 3:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Neither team. The 1998 Broncos were that good.
_________________
That's Latin dad-- the language of Plutarche.
Mickey Mouse's dog?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
7DnBrnc53


Joined: 09 Mar 2010
Posts: 2110
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 9:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

GaTechRavens wrote:
CP3MVP wrote:
NextBigThing wrote:
The 1998 Vikings would have crushed the Broncos, as would the 2007 Patriots, 2004 Patriots, 2004 Eagles, 1999 St. Louis Rams, etc.


They didn't crush the Falcons who the Broncos crushed


Transitive property doesn't work, though I think the Broncos would have won as well.

And 7DnBrnc53, don't the same principles of your "Super Bowl Myth Era" apply just as much to the Broncos. Their Super Bowl opponent, by your own standards, was a one year fluke that lacked particularly great talent. Their AFC championship foe was the same. So why are the '98 Broncos exempt from this?


1. The year before, the Broncos did beat a good team in the 97 Packers, even though they were overrated compared to the Broncos because they had no business being more than three point favorites.

2. The 98 Broncos aren't mythologized, reverenced, and overrated like the 85 Bears, 84 Niners, 91 Skins, and 92-93 Cowboys are. And, it isn't warranted because those teams beat less than worthy opponents. The 98 Falcons were more balanced than some of those teams the SB myth teams beat.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GaTechRavens


Moderator
Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 17540
Location: Madison, WI
PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 1:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

7DnBrnc53 wrote:
1. The year before, the Broncos did beat a good team in the 97 Packers, even though they were overrated compared to the Broncos because they had no business being more than three point favorites.
That's fine for the '97 team. '98 doesn't get away with it, though.

Quote:
2. The 98 Broncos aren't mythologized, reverenced, and overrated like the 85 Bears, 84 Niners, 91 Skins, and 92-93 Cowboys are.
Except that's exactly what you're doing with them. You're saying they were better than those teams when the same principle applies to them.

Quote:
And, it isn't warranted because those teams beat less than worthy opponents. The 98 Falcons were more balanced than some of those teams the SB myth teams beat.


More balanced =/= better. They were not a better team than the '84 Dolphins or '91 Bills, and using the standards you used to knock down the '91 Redskins, they're worse than pretty much all of those Super Bowl opponents. And even if they were better, it wasn't by much. Then you look at the NFC competition some of those teams faced in the playoffs and it's clearly better than what Denver faced in the AFC.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
x0x


Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Posts: 15418
Location: Ontario, Canada
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 3:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

2002 Bucs or 2007 Pats


Every other team would probably lose to the Broncos.



For the record, with regards to the 02 Bucs, their offense was underrated and their defense was in the realm of 85 Bears and 00 Ravens.
_________________
Legends Never Die. They Breathe Through The New Generation.
100 Greatest Quarterbacks of All Time
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
reckless123


Joined: 02 Jun 2011
Posts: 11569
PostPosted: Sat Sep 29, 2012 6:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

2007 Pats...Oh wait.
_________________


"I'm not in the danger, I AM the DANGER" - Heisenberg
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
7DnBrnc53


Joined: 09 Mar 2010
Posts: 2110
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 4:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GaTechRavens wrote:
7DnBrnc53 wrote:
1. The year before, the Broncos did beat a good team in the 97 Packers, even though they were overrated compared to the Broncos because they had no business being more than three point favorites.
That's fine for the '97 team. '98 doesn't get away with it, though.

Quote:
2. The 98 Broncos aren't mythologized, reverenced, and overrated like the 85 Bears, 84 Niners, 91 Skins, and 92-93 Cowboys are.
Except that's exactly what you're doing with them. You're saying they were better than those teams when the same principle applies to them.

Quote:
And, it isn't warranted because those teams beat less than worthy opponents. The 98 Falcons were more balanced than some of those teams the SB myth teams beat.


More balanced =/= better. They were not a better team than the '84 Dolphins or '91 Bills, and using the standards you used to knock down the '91 Redskins, they're worse than pretty much all of those Super Bowl opponents. And even if they were better, it wasn't by much. Then you look at the NFC competition some of those teams faced in the playoffs and it's clearly better than what Denver faced in the AFC.


1. I didn't start this thread. I am not mythologizing the 98 Broncos. I never have.

2. The 91 Bills are better than the 98 Falcons, but I don't know if the 84 Dolphins were. If Dan Marino got hurt, that would be an 8-win team at best.

3. Some of the teams that Denver played in the playoffs those two years were better than teams that those NFC playoffs teams played during the streak. For example, I would take the 97 Chiefs and Steelers over the teams that the 91 Redskins beat in the playoffs.

I would also take the 97 Chiefs over the 92 and 93 49ers and the 93 and 94 Packers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JaguarCrazy2832


Joined: 28 Jun 2008
Posts: 83150
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 5:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bohlmann20 wrote:
GaTechRavens wrote:
7DnBrnc53 wrote:
Uh, none.

I wouldn't even take the 07 Pats over the 97-98 Broncos. TD would hang 150 on that weak defense.


4th in both points and yards = weak defense


Not to mention you never know in the playoffs. Remember how Larry Johnson was supposed to absolutely murder the Colts' horrible run D back in the '06(?) wild card game at Indy?

Plus, Bill is known for being able to take away the opposing team's best player every week. Not saying the Broncos didn't have the passing attack to compete with the Patriots, but they sure would need it along with Davis.


Wasnt their run D horrible without Bob Sanders and then he came back for the playoffs and he dominated?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GaTechRavens


Moderator
Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 17540
Location: Madison, WI
PostPosted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

7DnBrnc53 wrote:
1. I didn't start this thread. I am not mythologizing the 98 Broncos. I never have.


Well, you're propping them up for the same reasons people prop up a lot of the "myth" teams.

Quote:
2. The 91 Bills are better than the 98 Falcons, but I don't know if the 84 Dolphins were. If Dan Marino got hurt, that would be an 8-win team at best.


Except Dan Marino didn't get hurt. You can't just take away possibly the greatest single season quarterback of all time. The 49ers played the Dolphins with a healthy Marino, so there's no reason to consider how good that team would be without him.

Quote:
3. Some of the teams that Denver played in the playoffs those two years were better than teams that those NFC playoffs teams played during the streak. For example, I would take the 97 Chiefs and Steelers over the teams that the 91 Redskins beat in the playoffs.

I would also take the 97 Chiefs over the 92 and 93 49ers and the 93 and 94 Packers.


We're not even talking about '97. We're talking about the '98 Dolphins and the '98 Jets.

I would take the 97 Chiefs and Steelers over the teams the 91 Redskins beat as well. I would not, however, take 4 point wins against those teams over 17 and 31 point wins over the teams the Redskins beat. You can't just ignore margin of victory here.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
7DnBrnc53


Joined: 09 Mar 2010
Posts: 2110
PostPosted: Mon Oct 15, 2012 1:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GaTechRavens wrote:
7DnBrnc53 wrote:
1. I didn't start this thread. I am not mythologizing the 98 Broncos. I never have.


Well, you're propping them up for the same reasons people prop up a lot of the "myth" teams.

Quote:
2. The 91 Bills are better than the 98 Falcons, but I don't know if the 84 Dolphins were. If Dan Marino got hurt, that would be an 8-win team at best.


Except Dan Marino didn't get hurt. You can't just take away possibly the greatest single season quarterback of all time. The 49ers played the Dolphins with a healthy Marino, so there's no reason to consider how good that team would be without him.

Quote:
3. Some of the teams that Denver played in the playoffs those two years were better than teams that those NFC playoffs teams played during the streak. For example, I would take the 97 Chiefs and Steelers over the teams that the 91 Redskins beat in the playoffs.

I would also take the 97 Chiefs over the 92 and 93 49ers and the 93 and 94 Packers.


We're not even talking about '97. We're talking about the '98 Dolphins and the '98 Jets.

I would take the 97 Chiefs and Steelers over the teams the 91 Redskins beat as well. I would not, however, take 4 point wins against those teams over 17 and 31 point wins over the teams the Redskins beat. You can't just ignore margin of victory here.


If Marino gets lost for the year early in the 84 season, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the Fins would have been in a heap of hurt.

And, I know that we are dealing with the 98 Broncos, but the 97 team also has a lot of relevance to this discussion since they were back to back champions, something that the "big, bad" 85 Bears, 84 Niners, and 91 Skins weren't able to accomplish.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL Comparisons All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group