The Broncos look like 85 year old men on offensive.

I'm not sure the Texans could have looked any worse.

Other than that they have a first down in the second half.

Very Thor like catch (vs UH in 2008) for Seattle's Kearse.

Odds on Peyton getting the hat trick have to be pretty high. Not doing much for selling Pappa John's Pizza.

Seattle defense manhandling Denver like we got manhandled.

Bad tackling, bad defense, bad play calling. Team was unprepared.

Denver needs to fire their coach.

Sounds like our coaches in Liberty Bowl

And the half-time was immediately forgettable.

Friends and I kept talking about how similar this game was to our bowl game. This is what happens when one team plays their best game and the other plays one of their worst.

Final stats are Denver 306 yards of offense, Seattle 341.

This was a ridiculous game for a lot of reasons, but Denver gave away about 19 points differential on ridiculous plays and/or coaching decisions... safety-cute kickoff-stupid pick 6-and not kicking the field goal at the end of the first half.

Denver made just about every mistake imaginable, including interceptions, fumbles, you name it. This is far more embarrassing because they are supposed to be at the highest level of play in all of the sport and failed so miserably, but it's not the same level of physical domination as the Rice-MSU game was.

Ultimately, I feel this game is a validation of econometrics on the football field.

(02-02-2014 10:21 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Friends and I kept talking about how similar this game was to our bowl game. This is what happens when one team plays their best game and the other plays one of their worst.

With the obvious exception that this was two pretty evenly matched and coached teams, and the Liberty Bowl wasn't.

(02-02-2014 11:32 PM)At Ease Wrote:  

(02-02-2014 10:21 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Friends and I kept talking about how similar this game was to our bowl game. This is what happens when one team plays their best game and the other plays one of their worst.

With the obvious exception that this was two pretty evenly matched and coached teams, and the Liberty Bowl wasn't.

Of course. But obviously that difference in physicality is moot since the point differential in the two games was 35 or 37 points.

The comparison is fairly superficial.

Denver beat Denver in ways that Rice didn't even have an opportunity to do. And, they did it well enough for the game to be a blowout on that merit alone.

Seattle was physically dominant over Denver, especially defensively versus Denver's offensive line. Enough so for the game to be a blowout on that merit alone.

Seattle out-coached, out-managed (econometrics), and physically dominated Denver... all of which contributed to scoring more in the first 24 seconds or so combined at the beginning of each half than Denver did the entire game.

All of this is in a game that most people expected to be very evenly matched.

Well, Rice had a lead, which Denver never had, and first downs much earlier than Denver. So, on that evidence, maybe we were better prepared. (note, better does not mean good)

Mistakes like bad snaps and interceptions and a general futility in both offense and defense indicate a lack of prep.

To address the thread title, yes it was, but Denver's performance vs. Seattle was worse, at least from a what was expected perspective.

Denver actually looked a lot like us... with lots of horizontal and short passes (we ran much more but they completed more 3-5 yard passes). At one point in the 3rd or 4th quarter, Manning was something like 20/30 for 230 yards.

Manning finished with 18 first downs to 17 for Seattle... 6-13 on 3rd down and a record 34-49 for the game. 306 to 341 total yards. Other than the miscues, the game was pretty close. Throw in the miscues and they got absolutely manhandled.

So why were they manhandled? IMO, the short and horizontal passing game only serves to keep guys IN the box. Sure, you'll move the ball, but you aren't making them change what they want to do... stack the box. With so many people in the box, fumbles... tipped passes and interceptions are going to happen more often. With no vertical stretch to keep them from stacking the box, you end up with great stats (because of a great QB) and a huge loss. Anyone other than Manning with that horizontal game would have lost just as badly, but been 20/49 for 180 yards.

FTR... a vertical stretch doesn't require blazing speed. It merely requires catching them stepping forward. The horizontal game only works if you occasionally fake it and run by them when they step up. Seattle consistently crashed the blocks in the horizontal game and kept a man deep. This is where Seattle's speed killed Denver... and frankly, where MSU killed us. They competed hard at the point of attack and had interior pursuit. We couldn't get anyone open in the seams or make them pay (slant) for crashing the point of attack.

(02-03-2014 03:48 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Manning finished with 18 first downs to 17 for Seattle... 6-13 on 3rd down and a record 34-49 for the game. 306 to 341 total yards. Other than the miscues, the game was pretty close. Throw in the miscues and they got absolutely manhandled.

I have to disagree. There was nothing close about that game. The Seahawks whipped the Broncos on offense, defense, and special teams. If anything, by keeping the ball away from the Seahawks offense (which the Broncos could not stop - only one punt in the entire game), the "miscues" are responsible for the total yards being as close as they were. And I'm pretty sure most of those first downs and third down conversions came well after the game was far out of reach.

(02-04-2014 01:37 PM)jh Wrote:  

(02-03-2014 03:48 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Manning finished with 18 first downs to 17 for Seattle... 6-13 on 3rd down and a record 34-49 for the game. 306 to 341 total yards. Other than the miscues, the game was pretty close. Throw in the miscues and they got absolutely manhandled.

I have to disagree. There was nothing close about that game. The Seahawks whipped the Broncos on offense, defense, and special teams. If anything, by keeping the ball away from the Seahawks offense (which the Broncos could not stop - only one punt in the entire game), the "miscues" are responsible for the total yards being as close as they were. And I'm pretty sure most of those first downs and third down conversions came well after the game was far out of reach.

Forgive my poor wording. Statistically, the game was close. If all you saw was 18 and 17 first downs and 341-306 in yards, you would have expected a close game. Even throwing in the safety, pick 6 and KOR, it's a +/- 2 or 3 score game... based solely on the stats here. Instead, the reality is that it was a manhandling as you note...

My intent was to imply that stats are often misleading. What you witnessed was a team that couldn't score despite 300+ yards of offense, 18 first downs and a decent 3rd down percentage.... primarily because Seattle kept everything (and everyone) within 10 yards of the LOS...

Denver's biggest problem was that they couldn't get any vertical stretch... They couldn't create any vertical gaps in the defense. They could move the ball, but ONLY where Seattle LET them move. This is where 'taking what the defense gives' is a bad plan... if the defense doesn't miss tackles or make mistakes. Denver's gameplan was predicated on the defense making mistakes.. which ours often was as well (imo).

The latest on/from Seattle's defense is that they figured out Manning's hand signals, and were able to get a jump on the play from that.