bigblueinsanity Posted October 11, 2009 Posted October 11, 2009 (edited) Denver is now 5-0. Winning vs New England, Denver may be the top team in the AFC, but the Colts are #1 then Denver maybe just only because they are 5-0. :lol: Edited October 11, 2009 by bigblueinsanity fixed game place
TrueBlueWildcat Posted October 11, 2009 Posted October 11, 2009 Crazy, who would have thought that: Denver would be 5-0, Bengals would be 4-1, and Titans 0-4?
Original Rookie Posted October 11, 2009 Posted October 11, 2009 How about Josh McDaniels... who saw this coming?
ColonelCrazy Posted October 11, 2009 Posted October 11, 2009 Denver is now 5-0. Winning at New England, Denver may be the top team in the AFC, but the Colts are #1 then Denver maybe just only because they are 5-0. :lol: The game was at Denver...
bigblueinsanity Posted October 11, 2009 Author Posted October 11, 2009 The game was at Denver... Your right my bad. :isurrender:
Habib Posted October 11, 2009 Posted October 11, 2009 Maybe this McDaniel character knows what he is doing. This summer I thought the Broncos were a trainwreck waiting to happen.
bigblueinsanity Posted October 11, 2009 Author Posted October 11, 2009 I still think Denver isn't very good. Yes, Orton is solid and "manages" the game. Their O line is solid and their D is solid. But New England isn't the old New England, Dallas is way overrated. Denver will lose it's next three games. SD, Balt, Pitt I think they have.
TrueBlueWildcat Posted October 11, 2009 Posted October 11, 2009 No way Denver loses their next 3 games. They are for real, and all that work that McDaniels put into the team during the summer is slowly starting to payoff. Everyone that he was crazy and that the team would bust but they are for real my friend. They will more than likely beat San Diego, Baltimore will be a close game but I think if the Bengals can win then so can Denver, and Pitt could go either way. But I do find it funny how some people say that Denver is such a bad team when the Bengals are playing above themselves as well, but no one is saying anything about them.
HammerTime Posted October 12, 2009 Posted October 12, 2009 ^ Have you watched the Bengals game at all? They haven't even come close to putting a whole game together let alone "playing above themselves". Not sure what the Bengals have to do with this thread but I thought I would respond.
bigblueinsanity Posted October 12, 2009 Author Posted October 12, 2009 No way Denver loses their next 3 games. They are for real, and all that work that McDaniels put into the team during the summer is slowly starting to payoff. Everyone that he was crazy and that the team would bust but they are for real my friend. They will more than likely beat San Diego, Baltimore will be a close game but I think if the Bengals can win then so can Denver, and Pitt could go either way. But I do find it funny how some people say that Denver is such a bad team when the Bengals are playing above themselves as well, but no one is saying anything about them. You can't be serious.:lol:
TrueBlueWildcat Posted October 12, 2009 Posted October 12, 2009 You can't be serious.:lol: Dead serious. No way the Bronco's go 0-3. At worst they go 2-1.
TrueBlueWildcat Posted October 12, 2009 Posted October 12, 2009 ^ Have you watched the Bengals game at all? They haven't even come close to putting a whole game together let alone "playing above themselves". Not sure what the Bengals have to do with this thread but I thought I would respond. What I'm saying is some people are going based off records. I've heard people talking about whether or not the Bengals are "contenders" solely based on them being 4-1. Not based on how they've actually played during the game and everything else. Denver, on the other hand, has played quite well and who cares who they've played, it's an NFL team that has NFL players on it and they took care of business. I may be wrong but I thought good teams were supposed to beat the bad teams? Bronco's are 5-0 and well deserving based on how they've played thus far into the season.
gametime Posted October 12, 2009 Posted October 12, 2009 What I'm saying is some people are going based off records. I've heard people talking about whether or not the Bengals are "contenders" solely based on them being 4-1. Not based on how they've actually played during the game and everything else. Denver, on the other hand, has played quite well and who cares who they've played, it's an NFL team that has NFL players on it and they took care of business. I may be wrong but I thought good teams were supposed to beat the bad teams? Bronco's are 5-0 and well deserving based on how they've played thus far into the season. Outside of maybe the P&R forum, has there ever been a more contradictory two paragraphs in BGP history???
corndog23 Posted October 12, 2009 Posted October 12, 2009 I dont care what anybody says, Denver has a pretty darn good football team.
Recommended Posts