no my point is it's a little disingenuous to paint the picture he did while ignoring QB runs. I've said seattle's D is great and pretty good against the run but not nearly as good as their pass D. i just find it interesting you wouldn't include QB or even WR runs.

kaep is a freak of nature

not sure if his yardage on busted pass plays should be considered a break down in run d, or pass d.

the hawk run d was not as strong as their pass d. fine. "weak" by comparison? no, that is just silly.

I don't think you understand the word "relative"

really?

It is weak by comparison. That's the definition of weak by comparison. They had an all time great pass D and a slightly above average/good for this season run D. So yes, most things are weak by comparison to their pass D.

weaker by comparison, not "weak". you are still under-selling a very strong run d.

holding running backs to ~3 yds/carry over eight games, including three playoffs, isn't "slightly above average".

that's not what you said buddy. re-read what you wrote, you said they weren't weak by comparison. in a few games, Seattle got ran on pretty hard (basically NFCW teams) and a few they held the other team to effectively nothing on the ground. Saints also ran pretty well on Seattle but obviously got too far behind. again, I said the run D wasn't weak multiple times, i said it was weak in comparison to their pass D.

there isn't any facet of the hawks d where the term "weak" is even remotely applicable.

that is what i wrote. standing by it. there is a difference between saying weak by comparison, and weaker by comparison.

btw, i quoted from this post by grizy;

I mean we can agree Seattle's run defense is weak, but that's only relative to their overall defense. They got so many bodies at the LoS, leaning heavily on the Cover 3, that it's hard for their run defense to be all that awful. I believe it's ranked as above average by most systems.

i found the first five words to be most humorous. thanks for helping confirm that.

Yes, this is also true. And the next group of undervalued players will create the next en vogue system. Rinse and repeat forever ...

I imagine NFL is just going full douchebag now. It's Tuesday and All-22 is still not up. They must have realized just how brutally awful the decision to not give KAM the MVP and is doing their best to deny us the pleasure of watching his game from a view that will prove it.

That's my reasoning at least.

I haven't heard it, but I can't imagine how that isn't an impossibly stupid/insulting question.

Considering the supposed greatest offense of all-time scored 8 (meaningless) points in the big game, this is a perfectly legitimate question. Peyton shouldn't be so thin-skinned.

what the **** is the difference? there is no difference. weak or weaker by comparison is the exact same thing. you are being a true life nit. again, the #1 overall pass D maybe ever versus an above average run D. fine you don't like weak by comparison. does that make you freak out. WEAKER BY comparison. I've never used that term before but if it makes you happy then so be it. jfc.

it's relative.

Kam was just a monster in that game. Looking forward to your breakdown of the film.

One of the enduring images of the game for me was when Manning threw that deepish seam route incomplete down the right hash. Watching Earl Thomas streak back to get in position to make a play was insane. The dude was a ****ing missile. He's an absolute joy to watch in person.

I think the suggestion that a historically elite/arguably GOAT player should be embarrassed or ashamed of a loss is idiotic unless you can demonstrate that person gave less than a full effort. I don't see any argument that that's the case here.

A great QB can't dwell on failure or focus on bad results. Peyton's had years of shrugging off picks, bad games and losses. He got beat, that happens. He got beat bad, that happens too.

Random pissants telling people playing at a level they can't comprehend how they should feel is just ****ing stupid.

None of the guys asking these questions can comprehend that. It's a bunch of media guys asking questions of elite athletes.

Manning has been around long enough to know questions like that get asked. It wasn't that out of line.

fwiw Welkeh disagrees with Peyton

Excited fan shirtcocking on local television (NSFW)

Welker should be embarrassed:

Brady/Manning SB record w/o Welker: 4-1
Brady/Manning SB record with Welker: 0-3

He is the biggest kiss of death in football.

Patriot fans are the worst.

Too soon after that beatdown to take a joke??

Meh- "being around long enough" shouldn't mean you have to tolerate idiotic questions.

One of the things I like about Peyton is that he doesn't Welker it up and just say the "right" thing. So much better with guys put the media in check when they act out.

I think he handled the question very well and he didn't really seem "thin-skinned". He answered a stupid question with a serious response, which is a lot more than how I would have fielded the question if I was asked it right after the SB if I was manning. FYI, my response would have probably been a slight (but genuine) chuckle then a "No... next question?"

He should have to tolerate dumb questions, but he has every right to throw it back imo. It's quite obvious that a lot of fans/reporters get joy in kicking someone like him when they are down, and I don't think this was any different.

OT a bit, but what do you do if you're Peyton/Elway in this spot? Sure you had some pretty big injuries, but do they really think it's a close game with a healthy Von/Clady/HarrisMoore/etc? They should have a decent amount of cap space for upgrades, but I can't see any moves that make them equal to Seattle without a fundamental difference in their style of play... and we all know that's not happening.

If I were Denver, I'd be pretty terrified of going against these guys again in another SB. It's probably fortunate that they'll get experience in the regular season with that style of play, and if they can't handle it next year it'll probably put them out of home field contention which may not be a bad thing.

Fire Fox should be #1 and we know the Broncos aren't doing that, bring in a better coach--going to be tough at this point though...maybe Cowher... :/.

Denver got to the Superbowl, they shouldn't change much. I'm probably not going to shut up about how great the Hawks are for months, but the field is still a fav over them for next year, and no team is more than a few bad turns of luck from losing. Denver should do what they're doing, address issues where depth is problematic, and be happy being good and then hope. It's what anybody should do, including the Hawks.