• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

So after watching AFCC game.....

  • Thread starter Thread starter POP
  • Start date Start date
P

POP

Guest
.....have you formed any other opinions or just had previous ones strengthened?

So we gave Denver all they could handle; we should have won the game, but didn't.

Then Denver handles Pats, not easily, but they flat out beat them.

So, in your mind, do you think that means we would have beat the Pats had we advanced?

I don't.

Had a shot, but I still don't think we win that game in Foxboro.

1.) Pats played _IN_ Denver. Noise was seriously loud. Line couldn't hear snap count all game, allowed Bronc's D-line to tee off. If we played in NE, they wouldn't have this problem, obviously.

2.) Our D is not Bronc's D. We don't have the pressure at the line, nor do we have a secondary anywhere near as good. We would not give Brady the fits Denver did.

All in all, the stars just didn't align for us. But all things considered, I really like our chance to win the AFC next season.
 
brady wouldve torched us like always. we cant get to the QB with 3 or 4 like denver can. #10, 11, and 87 wouldve killed us by 1,000 papercuts. and we couldnt have outscored them, because for some reason, we still cant score in the redzone. we can score from distance, but down close = the Ghost of FG Bill
 
I didn't learn a thing. Denver's D is a good matchup against the highly depleted Patriots offense (pathetic offensive line, no running game, no vertical threat at WR, no RB that scares you as a receiver). Our defensive matchup would not have been as favorable and the Pats would certainly be tougher at home. Just like nearly every other game this year: we would have won if our defense generated turnovers and our offense avoided them.
 
Denver won that game simply by getting Home Field. They beat Cinci and San Diego, while New England lost to the NYJ and Miami. On paper those were 2 games they should have won.

I have no doubts that the script would have been flipped had they played in New England. There are some places and games where the home field is crucial for the win. When the Steelers beat the Broncos in the regular season, at the time I felt that the game would have been the complete opposite in Denver.
 
It looks like AB probably would not have been back from concussion protocol so it would have been tough to beat them without him. With him, yes, we would have beaten them in their house. No doubt in my mind.
 
After watching the AFCC Game I no longer disgusted by the officiating during the Steelers/ Broncs game.
There apparently are more "non-calls" in playoff type games.
 
I don't think we could have beaten NE in Foxboro simply because of the injuries again...AB was not likely going to play and Williams would probably have been held out again.

Had we both players, I know we would win but it would be a shootout 41-38 OT
 
BAS said:
Denver won that game simply by getting Home Field. They beat Cinci and San Diego, while New England lost to the NYJ and Miami. On paper those were 2 games they should have won.

I have no doubts that the script would have been flipped had they played in New England. There are some places and games where the home field is crucial for the win. When the Steelers beat the Broncos in the regular season, at the time I felt that the game would have been the complete opposite in Denver.
Click to expand...

But but the Pats lost on purpose to the Jets..just to try and keep us out of the playoffs
 
bigtwnvin said:
After watching the AFCC Game I no longer disgusted by the officiating during the Steelers/ Broncs game.
There apparently are more "non-calls" in playoff type games.
Click to expand...

I have noticed that they keep flags in their pockets much more in playoffs; they should adapt the same demeanor in regular season games.
 
We hung with the Pats first game of the year in foxboro with 2 of our best players missing. We lost that game is more accurate than saying they won. I was one the few picking the Donkeys to win apparently. I have not doubt we could have beaten cry-brady and the billicheats. Much would have depended on how we covered (or didn't cover) Gronk. Seems like the donks had 3 guys around him most the game.
 
I saw that the Broncos kept hitting Brady and threw him way off his game (blueprint to beat N.E.). We are almost there, once we get a no **** pass rush from our OLBs that can create that kind of pressure. We should improve real soon.
 
Any time you lose in the playoffs it is a missed opportunity. You never know. Sooner or later the worm has to turn as it pertains to the Pats and the Steelers, right?
 
The constant pass rush without the need for blitzing KO'd tommy boy. We can't generate that kind of pressure.
 
POP said:
I have noticed that they keep flags in their pockets much more in playoffs; they should adapt the same demeanor in regular season games.
Click to expand...

I'm not a fan of the "emphasis" on helping offenses.

You know the Pats held on almost every passing snap. Go back and look a the video. And I think they got one call for it.

I would like to see less ticky tack calls for PI, and ALOT more calls for pass blockers holding.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...-do-refs-have-a-responsibility-to-throw-flags
 
Last edited:
Denvers D beat up Brady all day. That's how you beat him. Our D rarely touches him. We don't have the aggressive pass rushers. Jarvis will nevr be aggressive. He plays patty cake on every snap. We need upgrades there. Harrison is old. He can still hit, but he is old. Needs replaced too.
 
Denver's defense spanked Brady pretty badly - but I think Cam can outscore them

Peyton is a game manager at this point. Owen ******* Daniels won't win them two games in a row.


that's what I say
 
There isnt a smidge of doubt in my mind, that Carolina will beat the piss out of the Broncos
 
If we had beaten the donkos, OUR momentum / team / everything would have been tops. INJURIES definately a factor, but I think we beat them and recieve a Man/hole spewing of record proportion. The cheatriots are beatable and everyone seems to have a fear of them. Our team is young enough to NOT believe they have our number (i think that is kept alive by some fans here). Again **** the cheaters.




Salute the nation
 
Would have to be able to overcome the *'s home field cheating, that is a really tall order right there.
 
I think Steelers would have beaten the Pats. The Steelers were much better at the end of the year than week 1 when the Pats only won by 7. The Pats scored 28 points vs the steelers week 1 and that was with several blown coverages. Gronk had 3 TDs and on 2 of them, the STeelers did not even have anybody covering him. Total blown coverages.

The Steeler defense was not great but by the end of the year, it wasn't bad either. Shazier would have been a factor against the short throws. The pass rush was better too. I think they would be able to hold the Pats to 28 or fewer

Offensively the steelers got better as well. Week 1, Martavis was suspended and Bell was out too. DeAngelo had 127 yards rushing and Ben threw for 350. Wheaton stepped up late in the year. There is no way the pats could have defended the steelers with AB, Martavis, and Wheaton. The steelers torched the much better Bronco defense in the regular season. And they moved the ball pretty well on Denver minus Deangelo and AB.

This is not the dynasty Pats. They were a good team that benefited once again from a weak schedule that afforded them a bye in the playoffs as usual. I think the Pats would have lost to KC if Maclin wasn't injured. Without Maclin, KC had zero deep threats.
 
tapeANaspirin2it said:
This is not the dynasty Pats. They were a good team that benefited once again from a weak schedule that afforded them a bye in the playoffs as usual. I think the Pats would have lost to KC if Maclin wasn't injured. Without Maclin, KC had zero deep threats.
Click to expand...

I was surprised the Chiefs didn't give the Pats more of a game. The Chiefs defense played as well as the Broncos defense in the 2nd half of the season. I think the Chiefs were just intimidated by playing the Pats in NE --- they weren't mentally up for it. They got zero pressure on Brady.

But, yes, the Pats at the end of the season were decimated by injuries and not a good team. Remember, they lost 4 of their last 6 games. Getting Edelman back could not compensate for the complete lack of a running game and vertical passing game. They didn't even have a running back that was a threat to catch the ball out of the backfield (which is huge for Brady).
 
Chiefs = Andy Reid coaching a team in the playoffs...does anything else really need to be said?
 
BAS said:
Denver won that game simply by getting Home Field. They beat Cinci and San Diego, while New England lost to the NYJ and Miami. On paper those were 2 games they should have won.

I have no doubts that the script would have been flipped had they played in New England. There are some places and games where the home field is crucial for the win. When the Steelers beat the Broncos in the regular season, at the time I felt that the game would have been the complete opposite in Denver.
Click to expand...

Which is why having a decent backup QB that can get you a win is crucial. Brock Osweiler was the starting QB for the game they won over New England in the regular season. If they lose that game, the AFCCG is in Foxboro... Totally different outcome for sure.

The thing is...home field matters. Tomlin needs to throw down a 13-3 or 14-2 record sometime real soon. We need playoff games in Pittsburgh...and that first-round bye.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top