SB’s 21/22/24- more competitive if no DEN?

[CSKreager]

How much were those lopsided SB’s a result of the Broncos? Or would it not have mattered the AFC representative?

Like if the AFC playoffs play out differently…..

I don’t think Cleveland and Marty give up 3 incompletions to Simms or a 35 point 1st quarter

While the 1989 AFC-CG was not a what if game, DEN DID have a what if game in the divisionals vs PIT

If it’s a PIT/CLE AFC-CG, they could have played with blindfolds vs SF and it would’ve been closer than 45 (Montana in real life didn’t exactly light up the Browns/Steelers in October 1990)

And remember DEN’s Super duds were sandwiched around the AFC’s closest calls during the 13 year dry spell (23 and 25)

[Mark]

It would seem very unlikely that anyone could do worse than the Broncos did but it is certainly possible they would have done bad enough we would be wondering if the Broncos would have done better or even won. It should be mentioned that the Broncos had only lost to NYG 19-16 in the regular season. They had beaten Washington and San Francisco the year before their SB losses to them. Washington hadn't done anything all year to indicate they would rout Denver the way they did. I think everyone saw SF winning easily but I doubt may people predicted 55-10 which was their biggest rout of the year. It seemed that back then once a team fell behind in the SB they would panic and wilt. I remembered someone saying then that if teams would treat it more like a regular season game and not get into the hype they would be better off. I wonder if teams have made a point to take that approach in the past 25 years and is one reason the SBs have been more competitive.

[Crazy Packers Fan]

It seemed that back then once a team fell behind in the SB they would panic and wilt. I remembered someone saying then that if teams would treat it more like a regular season game and not get into the hype they would be better off. I wonder if teams have made a point to take that approach in the past 25 years and is one reason the SBs have been more competitive.

Good observation. If there was a moment it changed, it was probably Super Bowl XXX. Pittsburgh came back from a big deficit and made a game of it. After that, Super Bowls got gradually better and better.

As for the Broncos, I don't think any other AFC team would have done better. Cleveland would have had a puncher's chance, but that's about it. The NFC was just too good.

[7DnBrnc53]

In 1989 (SB 24), I could see the Bills playing the 49ers a lot tougher that the Broncos did if Ronnie Harmon doesn't drop that pass in Cleveland.

They played the 49ers earlier that year (with Young at QB). While they lost 21-10, the Bills were their own worst enemy:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/ ... cf101a221/

However, they had some missed chances in the first half. Flip Johnson was breaking open for a long TD, but Kelly underthrew it a bit. Also, in the second quarter, they sacked Young and forced a fumble, and Bruce Smith was taking it the other way for a TD (that would have put the Bills up 10-0). However, the play was incorrectly ruled down (probably the 49er ref huddle in action). Also, I liked how they played SF's receivers (up close and inside rather than cover high).

[Brian wolf]

In all three of the NFC SB blowouts over Denver, the NFC teams were on rolls going into the SB, although the Redskins could have lost to the Vikings and went down 10-0 before exploding in that second quarter.

The Broncos were opportunistic forcing turnovers during the seasons and playoffs but the NFC teams were good at holding onto the ball. The Browns were bigger and might have matched-up better against the Giants and Redskins but didnt have the pass rush to get to the different QBs. I do feel with their cornerbacks they would have held up better than the Broncos and kept more respectable scores despite losses. I actually believe Kosar and the Browns could have upset the Redskins ...

[Bryan]

SB XXI was competitive in the 1st half at least. The Broncos didn't really have great personnel on defense (or great personnel in general), but they had a complicated defense under Joe Collier that was very effective in the regular season. If you look at Denver's postseason runs in 86 and 87, they never really stopped anyone on defense. Teams regularly got 350+ years. Even the Oilers, whom Denver beat 34-10, outgained Denver 337-316 but couldn't overcome boneheaded coaching by Glanville. I think when teams had more time/more film to study Collier's defenses, they could figure it out and move the ball.

I remember Phil Simms being asked why he played so well in SB XXI, he said "it helps when you play against an average defense". In 87, Mike Harden broke his arm in the postseason and Tony Lilly injured his hip and couldn't really run. The lack of Harden and the leadfooted Lilly allowed the Redskins to score several long TDs. In 89, apparently John Elway was sick and could barely move, resulting in a terrible game against the Niners.

I think Denver did a good job of consistently winning and overachieving in the regular season, and they probably were not the AFC's best Super Bowl representative in those years....but they faced Marty Schottenheimer in the AFC Championship game three times, which is probably the biggest reason why Denver kept getting back to the Super Bowl. Schottenheimer is possibly the worst postseason coach in NFL history.

One tidbit is that the AFC was terrible in 1989. The Broncos were the only team with double digit wins, and they were only 11-5.

[Brian wolf]

In those years against Denver, if you could block or occupy Mecklenberg, Fletcher and Dennis Smith, you could beat them and the NFC did a good job of exposing the other players on defense.
I still feel those players had great careers with cases for the Hall but in the SB, their whole team, especially the offensive line, had to play well to win and they couldnt.

What hurt the Browns was not having a speedy LB to contain Elway. The coverage couldnt stay with the quick receivers forever, while in the SB, the NFC linebackers and pass rush in general could contain him better, while keeping the receivers in front of them.

[racepug]

SB XXI was competitive in the 1st half at least. The Broncos didn't really have great personnel on defense (or great personnel in general), but they had a complicated defense under Joe Collier that was very effective in the regular season. If you look at Denver's postseason runs in 86 and 87, they never really stopped anyone on defense. Teams regularly got 350+ years. Even the Oilers, whom Denver beat 34-10, outgained Denver 337-316 but couldn't overcome boneheaded coaching by Glanville. I think when teams had more time/more film to study Collier's defenses, they could figure it out and move the ball.

I remember Phil Simms being asked why he played so well in SB XXI, he said "it helps when you play against an average defense". In 87, Mike Harden broke his arm in the postseason and Tony Lilly injured his hip and couldn't really run. The lack of Harden and the leadfooted Lilly allowed the Redskins to score several long TDs. In 89, apparently John Elway was sick and could barely move, resulting in a terrible game against the Niners.

I think Denver did a good job of consistently winning and overachieving in the regular season, and they probably were not the AFC's best Super Bowl representative in those years....but they faced Marty Schottenheimer in the AFC Championship game three times, which is probably the biggest reason why Denver kept getting back to the Super Bowl. Schottenheimer is possibly the worst postseason coach in NFL history.

One tidbit is that the AFC was terrible in 1989. The Broncos were the only team with double digit wins, and they were only 11-5.

This explains that while Joe Collier's defenses did a good job against Joe Montana, the scheme (and personnel) that Wade Phillips preferred was destined to be eaten alive by the 49ers in S.B. XXIV: https://goldenrankings.com/SuperBowl24-A.htm

[7DnBrnc53]

This explains that while Joe Collier's defenses did a good job against Joe Montana, the scheme (and personnel) that Wade Phillips preferred was destined to be eaten alive by the 49ers in S.B. XXIV: https://goldenrankings.com/SuperBowl24-A.htm

Exactly. I was just getting ready to share that.

Also, this guy that I talk football with from the Bay Area (I met him on You Tube) told me that the Broncos had success early in the 86 season when Collier would stunt his D-linemen. When he stopped that later in the year, that D-line was exposed.