Super Bowl 50

Carolina Panthers
O 45.5
(-110)
-4.5
(-120)
-200

Denver Broncos
U 45.5
(-110)
+4.5
(even)
+170

Given those two defenses, I'd take the under.

http://www.nfl.com/superbowl/50

Battle in the Bay
Super Bowl 50 matches each conference's top seed for the third consecutive year as the Broncos represent the AFC in going up against the NFC champion Panthers on February 7 at Levi’s Stadium in Santa Clara, California. This will be Denver’s eighth Super Bowl appearance (2-5) while Carolina is playing in its second title game (0-1).

Carolina all the way.

I said to my wife after the Carolina game that the difference between Denver and Carolina is that when they interview Peyton, he'll talk about how to play the game of football but when they interview Cam, he'll talk about how much fun it is to play football and I think that is going to be the difference. Listening to Cam talk makes me think about possibilities while listening to Peyton talk usually puts me to sleep.

Peyton comes from the old-school thinking that "Football is Armageddon" or "Football is a Chess Match" and to him it's all about execution and the "X's and O's", while Cam and the rest of his team seem more like a bunch of kids playing a pickup game in which no play is too weird and no chance isn't worth taking and I really like that.

It's so refreshing to see a team that doesn't treat a football game as if the future of human civilization depended upon its outcome.  Both teams obviously have confidence but only one possesses a child-like exuberance and that combined with ability and confidence will be very hard to beat.

Carolina's just the better team overall, I think they will win and win big. Denver is tough to beat at mile high, but they won't have the homefield advantage this time.

I'll take Carolina as well but I think it could turn into a good game. Cam versus that Denver defense will be fun. Like FS72, I like Cam and the Panthers a lot too. I really hope Thomas Davis can somehow play too. The guy's come back through a lot. I don't think either fanbase is large enough to make it into a "home game" like we did in SBXL. I think slightly Broncos but I don't think i twil lbe overwhelming. I'll say 34-21 Carolina at this point but I could easily change my mind.

True if there's any defense out there that can shut down Cam it's Denver. Might be one of those hard-hitting, low scoring games, but I totally wouldn't mind that. It's almost a lost art in today's NFL.

I think this will be a 17-14 type game. Give me Carolina in a low scoring slugfest.

I wouldn't mind seeing another Peyton meltdown like the Denver-Seattle Super Bowl a few years ago.

JonM229 wrote:

I wouldn't mind seeing another Peyton meltdown like the Denver-Seattle Super Bowl a few years ago.

Nah i want a good game though i wouldn't be too unhappy with a costly Peyton TO.

I don't see a good game coming. I think Carolina is the perfect team to make Manning turn the ball over, often.

Cam will continue to capitalize.

Carolina doesn't strike me as a team to let the foot off the pedal.

KeepHarrisonTilHes92 wrote:

I don't see a good game coming. I think Carolina is the perfect team to make Manning turn the ball over, often.

Cam will continue to capitalize.

Carolina doesn't strike me as a team to let the foot off the pedal.

I dunno, they did against Seattle and almost paid for it. Then again Seattle is a lot more dangerous on offense than Denver is, by far.

I'd like to see the Sheriff win it and ride off into the sunset. However, I just don't see how Denver can stop Carolina. Carolina is complete in all 3 phases and Denver, not so much.

If you ask me, Denver is screwed.

Peyton skated on by with a great defense and had a healthy Steelers team been playing, they may have been dead in their tracks. I know that's looking with the homer glasses on, but Denver just doesn't seem to be a team that inspires the thought of success in my eyes. I mean, look how they skidded by the Browns, while we annihilated them basically.

So I'm going Carolina, but I feel Denver winning would be considered an upset.

This is the same Peyton that choked hard the last time he faced a SB team. And the Panther's now are better than the Seahawks were then. Have to go with Carolina.

Compelling points by angry Pats* fan Mike from Woburn  

Imagine the NFL Media Superbowl coverage if the Patriots** won with a HGH scandal hanging over Brady & a tablet outage at Gillette? #GateCity

— Mike From Woburn (@MikeFromWoburn) January 25, 2016

https://twitter.com/mikefromwoburn

Patriots***** fans complaining about someone else possibly cheating? oh the irony

Denver has a championship defense but Carolina is just all around too good. I can see Denver slowing them down but not stopping then Carolina 27 Denver 20

Bradshaw on Peyton: If you like losing Super Bowls, he’s your guy

Posted by Michael David Smith on June 19, 2014



Former Steelers quarterback Terry Bradshaw says current Broncos quarterback Peyton Manning is great — as long as you stop watching after the regular season ends.

Bradshaw said during his one-man show, America’s Favorite Dumb Blonde, that he views Manning as a regular-season star and a playoff choker.

“Peyton Manning, considered the best quarterback to play the game today. Nobody would argue with that — if you like winning good during the season and losing Super Bowls, that’s your guy,” Bradshaw said, via PFT Commenter.

Bradshaw rarely misses an opportunity to say that quarterbacks are judged based on winning Super Bowls, a viewpoint that may be slightly self-serving considering that Bradshaw, with four Super Bowl rings, is tied with Joe Montana for the most for any quarterback.

Of course, Bradshaw won those Super Bowl rings because he was on the best teams, not because he himself was the best quarterback. Although Bradshaw does have two Super Bowl MVPs to his credit, the 1970s Steelers won Super Bowls first and foremost with their defense. People forget that in 1974, the year the Steelers won their first Super Bowl, Bradshaw was only the starter for half the regular season, and the Steelers actually had a better record in the games he missed than the games he started. People forget that if Bradshaw hadn’t played so badly in so many playoff games, the Steelers could have won more than four Super Bowls: Among Bradshaw’s postseason stat lines were a 5-for-10, 80-yard, one-touchdown, two-interception game in a loss to the Dolphins, a 12-for-25, 167-yard, two-touchdown, three-interception game in a loss to the Raiders, a 14-for-35, 176-yard, zero-touchdown, one-interception game in another loss to the Raiders, and a 19-for-37, 177-yard, one-touchdown, three-interception game in a loss to the Broncos.

For a guy who has a reputation as a clutch performer in big games, Bradshaw sure did turn in a lot of multiple-interception games in playoff losses.

But while Manning’s passing stats dwarf Bradshaw’s, and Manning’s regular-season accomplishments (including five MVPs and seven first-team All-Pros) far surpass those of Bradshaw (one MVP and one All-Pro), Bradshaw does have those four shiny rings on his fingers, while Manning only has one. That’s something Bradshaw will continue to remind audiences of, every chance he gets.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/06/19/bradshaw-on-peyton-if-you-like-losing-super-bowls-hes-your-guy/

I've always been a Bradshaw fan, but you cant forget that he played with a lot of guys that contributed to those 4 rings. Franco, Rocky, Swann, Stallworth, Webster, Kolb, Greene, Greenwood, Lambert, Ham, Shell, Blount, etc.

T.B. was clutch in the big games, but Manning never had that kind of talent around him. If you ask me who was the better QB in history, I will say Manning.

I wanna see a competitive game. I don't care much for, nor hate, either team. So I just wanna see some good football

either way it'll be pretty cool, history in the making. carolina wins their first ever championship, or manning becomes the first qb to win a sb with 2 teams

Atlanta Dan wrote:

Compelling points by angry Pats** fan Mike from Woburn  

Imagine the NFL Media Superbowl coverage if the Patriots*** won with a HGH scandal hanging over Brady & a tablet outage at Gillette? #GateCity

— Mike From Woburn (@MikeFromWoburn) January 25, 2016

https://twitter.com/mikefromwoburn

He's right.
If Brady won, we'd all know more about HGH in 24hrs. than even some doctors would know in a lifetime.
Can you imagine the public reaction if Brady said it was for his wife?

But in Peyton's case, good ol' Archie is on the job and I'm sure all of the appropriate parties have been sufficiently paid off or otherwise dealt with.

Just like they tried to do back in '97 when Peyton shoved his junk into a female trainer's face and then denied it and basically called her a slut.
But I guess Archie's clout or Peyton's money couldn't go that far back then and "settlements" were made on several occasions to make it all go away.

I am no Peyton fan or for his apologists like Jim Nantz.

But consider the possibility having the story reported by Al Jezeera with no corroboration from any other media source might be a factor why it has not resonated - even Al Jezeera said it was not claiming Peyton received HGH when there was pushback and the probable threat of a libel suit - and nobody has claimed Peyton trashed his phone to eliminate acces to text messages to the clinic

Archie Manning's "clout" with the NYT and other news organizations that have dug down on CTE and whether or not footballs were deflated is non-existent -,I highly doubt there is a massive media conspiracy to coddle Peyton and cover up his HGH use

As far as Peyton's $$$, the harassment of the female trainer was widely reported - unlike ofher QBs like Ben who had a pattern of alleged sexual harassment, Peyton skated on that with the public because it looked like a one off. Not certain whether you are claiming Peyton's $$$, which are a rounding error to the truly wealthy, has shut down the HGH story.

The Patriots* fans being butt hurt about this after the crap their organization clearly has done over the years is highly entertaining to me

Atlanta Dan wrote:

I am no Peyton fan or for his apologists like Jim Nantz.

But consider the possibility having the story reported by Al Jezeera with no corroboration from any other media source might be a factor why it has not resonated - even Al Jezeera said it was not claiming Peyton received HGH when there was pushback and the probable threat of a libel suit - and nobody has claimed Peyton trashed his phone to eliminate acces to text messages to the clinic

Archie Manning's "clout" with the NYT and other news organizations that have dug down on CTE and whether or not footballs were deflated is non-existent -,I highly doubt there is a massive media conspiracy to coddle Peyton and cover up his HGH use

As far as Peyton's $$$, the harassment of the female trainer was widely reported - unlike ofher QBs like Ben who had a pattern of alleged sexual harassment, Peyton skated on that with the public because it looked like a one off.  Not certain whether you are claiming Peyton's $$$, which are a rounding error to the truly wealthy, has shut down the HGH story.

The Patriots**** fans being butt hurt about this after the crap their organization clearly has done over the years is highly entertaining to me

Then there's this:

Quote :

"...Deborah Davies, while a guest on CNN's "Reliable Sources" Sunday morning, said Charles David Sly was not al-Jazeera's only source who alleged Peyton's wife, Ashley, received multiple shipments of HGH from The Guyer Institute in Indianapolis, where Peyton was a patient in 2011.

"What you didn't know until now is we had a second source," Davies told CNN's Brian Stelter. "Absolutely impeccably placed, knowledgeable and credible who confirmed exactly what Charlie Sly said. Shipments of HGH were repeatedly, repeatedly sent to Ashley Manning in Florida and other places in the U.S."..."

Here's the full article: http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_29338568/al-jazeera-reporter-says-second-source-confirmed-hgh

I just think Peyton is a phony and a hypocrite.
His public persona is this "All-American [white] Kid" who claims to have committed his life to Christ at age 13 and has said, "... "I hope (and pray) I don't do too many things that displease Him before I get to Heaven myself. I believe, too, that life is much better and freer when you're committed to God in that way..."

So this "Christian" then publicly threw his teammate under the bus at the 2003 Pro Bowl saying:

Quote :

“Here we are, I’m out at my third Pro Bowl, and we’re talking about our idiot kicker, who got liquored up and ran his mouth off. What is the sports world coming to when we’re talking about idiot kickers? He has ruined kickers for life. (David) Akers and (Adam) Vinatieri, these guys are great guys, and they’ve been getting killed all week because our idiot ran his mouth.

“When I get home, I’ll deal with it. Tony and I will talk about it. It’s kind of funny, really, when you think about it. If he’s still a teammate, we’ll deal with it. That remains to be seen. The sad thing is, he’s a good kicker. He’s a good kicker. But he’s an idiot.”

Manning can be occasionally endearing - even funny, but most of the time he's all about arrogance, ego and self-importance; he plays the media to suit his needs and at the end of the day he really doesn't care who gets steamrolled in the process as long as Manning gets what he wants.

Is there really anything to this HGH thing?
Who knows?

But let's just say that if it turns out that the reports and allegations are true, I'd be the last person on earth to be surprised by the news.

FanSince72 wrote:

Manning can be occasionally endearing - even funny, but most of the time he's all about arrogance, ego and self-importance; he plays the media to suit his needs and at the end of the day he really doesn't care who gets steamrolled in the process as long as Manning gets what he wants.

It is odd that in commercials, he has no problem making fun of himself, but in reality he seems like the complete opposite.  I guess he'll do just about anything for the fame and fortune.

As I posted in the thread about Kemo threatening to sue the Steelers, players need to be careful about filing suit, which exposes you to a deposition under oath and civil subpoenas being served on both the player and third parties for records. That is why threats of filing suit for libel (such as James Harison saying it would not be "worth it") usually are not carried out.

I personally think the use of HGH as well as other PEDs in the NFL is rampant and would not be surprised if Peyton has been a user.

But the reason a story of HGH use by Brady would have greater resonance is because of the history of the organization of which he is a member. it is like the claim the other owners want to come down on the Pats* because they are jealous of their success - if that is the case amazing how the other owners have somehow managed to tolerate the Rooneys.

Atlanta Dan wrote:

As I posted in the thread about Kemo threatening to sue the Steelers, players need to be careful about filing suit, which exposes you to a deposition under oath and civil subpoenas being served on both the player and third parties for records.  That is why threats of filing suit for libel (such as James Harison saying it would not be "worth it") usually are not carried out.

I personally think the use of HGH as well as other PEDs in the NFL is rampant and would not be surprised if Peyton has been a user.

But the reason a story of HGH use by Brady would have greater resonance is because of the history of the organization of which he is a member.  it is like the claim the other owners want to come down on the Pats** because they are jealous of their success - if that is the case amazing how the other owners have somehow managed to tolerate the Rooneys.

Exactly, that's what I've tried telling the Pats* fans I know who say "Well if Brady and HGH had happened, what would you say?", and you're right about that. They just think it's pure jealously but it really isn't. I said it when the story broke about Deflategate, I got no reason to be jealous of the Pats*. At that time, they only had one more SB than my team did in my lifetime. Anyhow, I wouldn't be surprised either way. I just as you said that a hypothetical Brady HGH use story would be brought up more is because of the Pats* past and present. Anyhow, I think a lot of Golden Boys of sports have carefully constructed images. Think Derek Jeter in baseball or Michael Jordan in basketball. As for Peyton's Christianity and throwing Vanderjagt under the bus, I agree with that accessment but he's hardly the first over the top Christian to end up being a bit of a jerk when it comes to things like that. I remember being really disappoitned in how Tony Dungy responded to Michael Sam when eh had strongly (and I agreed with him on this btw) a second chance for Michael Vick. Honestly on that note, the weird combination of Christianity with football has always weirdsme out some but I confess that's the Agnostic in me.