Socnorb11 wrote:Denver punted twice the entire game.
Peyton made one horrible throw to an open receiver, which got intercepted. His arm was hit on another throw to an open receiver, and it got intercepted. Outside of that, he completed 34 or 47 passes for 280 yards. That's not bad. Two other times, Denver fumbled to end long drives.
The secondary didn't do anything special. The front 7 for Seattle got good pressure on Manning. If anything, give them the credit (but that would be SO unlike Sherman).
I assume you guys believe that Boston beating New York in 2004 was the "real World Series"?
Again, Indianapolis (AFC) handled Seattle, and Indy was probably the 3rd or 4th best team in the AFC. Houston (AFC) took Seattle to overtime, and they were probably the worst team in football. Seattle had to rally late to beat the Titans (AFC), who weren't close to making the playoffs in the AFC. Meanwhile, Denver averaged almost 50 points per game while steamrolling their 4 NFC opponents. Saying that the 49ers were their "Super Bowl" after the Super Bowl is over is just more of Sherman acting like a dumbass.
The score tells the tale, not # of punts. If any lesser stat is telling - Manning threw 47 times and only had 280 yds to show
for it (and this includes some garbage time).
Agreed - the Seattle defensive line came up big, and factored more than Sherman.
The pick 6 on which manning was hit was a still a poor decision by Manning. the pocket was clearly gone and the guy was in Manning's face. That play is not all on Manning, but clearly, no attempt should have been made there - even if he weren't hit, it was a blind and altered toss. That play practically sealed the game.
Sherman is not exhibiting any class in saying SF was their SB. But it was a bigger hurdle to winning it all.
That who beat who stuff -doesn't really work in NFL. Rams beat Indy handily too ( and a game Indy needed at the time).
