'84 Broncos discussion

[74_75_78_79_]

Elway's second season. 13-3 finish. The first division-winner in the Dan Reeves era. Had Dallas, who had to win to get in at all, beat Miami at the Orange Bowl in the finale on MNF, the Broncos instead would have been top-seed in the AFC; but still would have had to play Pittsburgh in the divisional anyway.

Members here have opined previously that they weren't really that great a team despite their record. Though points-wise they were both 11th and 2nd in offense and defense respectively, they were just a respective 22nd and 25th yardage-wise! Not just that, but they allowed more yardage than they gained by more than 700 (gaining 4.8 Y/P while allowing 5.1)!

And its also been discussed here previously if that loss to the 9-7 Steelers was really even an upset? Upon further inspection, the 'Burgh was actually a pretty good team in what would be Noll's last playoff berth until five years later. Points-wise they were 8th and 11th in offense and defense. They were also 8th in offense yardage-wise but even better in defense at 5th! Positive point and positive yardage differential; gaining 500+ more yards (at 5.2 Y/P) than they allowed (4.8).

In addition to seriously lacking now at the QB position, the Steelers' issue in '84, obviously, was consistency! They beat the Rams, San Fran on the road, and at LA in the finale against the defending-World Champs who they had to beat in order to get in; and who they didn't beat in their last 6 tries going in! However, they lost to some bad teams which made that division race vs Cincy much more suspenseful than it needed to be at all. Yes, if only just one more year of (a healthy, of course; healthy all season long) Terry Bradshaw in '84...

Just the same, they beating Denver perhaps shouldn't be seen as an upset. In addition to what's already been written, Reeves/Elway were still new to the playoffs while Chuck Noll entered his 11th post-season in the last 13. Also, look at the stats and you'll see the 'Burgh beat Denver there as well. More first downs, more rushing yards, more passing yards, more time of possession....Vegas must have known something going in. They installed 13-3 Denver, at Mile High, at 'just' a 4.5 favorite against that very 9-7 team.

That said, its pretty pointless to ever entertain a 'what-if' Steelers play San Fran in a rematch, SBXIX. They simply couldn't match-up with Miami who beat them in even-more lopsided fashion during the regular season, 31-7, at Three Rivers.

But had Denver turned that close loss to Pittsburgh into a win, nice-enough chance they at least give Miami a good game in the Orange Bowl if not win which others, including myself, have opined over the years. Reeves winning on the road against a flashier, seemingly noticeably better (despite the just one-win difference) aerial powerhouse would have, basically, been the same kind of feat he'd actually achieve 15 years later at Minny in the NFCCG. Lets include winning at Cleveland in '86 as well. Say what you may about his HOF case, but Reeves did have his overachieving moments in big conference playoff games. Maybe winning at Miami in '84 would have been another.

What are your takes on this installment? Could they have beaten Miami? How do you compare them to the actual SB-teams of the Reeves era? My guess is that most of you, 7Dn included, will say they weren't ready just yet and not up to snuff with them. I recall '91 getting some gruff as well. I don't disagree. Maybe place both in the same boat. Despite me not thinking of the '84 Broncos as anything too special thus not up there with the SB-qualifiers, I think balance most-likely prevails in a hypo-Den@Mia AFCCG, but I never imagined Denver giving San Fran a game either in what would, of course, have been seen as a sort-of (Stanford) homecoming for John (Broncos get trounced as well, IMO, had they played Washington in '91).

13-3 still is 13-3 at the end of the day and they did sweep the Raiders albeit both games being real close, one of them going into OT.

[Halas Hall]

I kind of feel re the 1980's Denver Broncos that Dan Reeves went 85-50-1 during the 1980's in his first head coaching job and should be in the Hall of Fame, but as Bill Parcells said in his book with Jerry Izenberg "The Broncos (of that era) just cannot handle power".

But as you say 13-3 is 13-3.

[JWL]

My first ever recorded prediction was for that Steelers-Broncos playoff game. When my father asked me who I thought would win I replied, "Broncos." I did pick Chicago to win the earlier game that day but that didn't make the recording my father made. He rented a camcorder from a video store for a family party we hosted.

It was just after or immediately before my father's question about the AFC game when I lightly pushed my sister and she replied, "Hey! I have a cookie in my mouth, farto."

[7DnBrnc53]

I have wondered at times what would have happened if Gradishar came back for one more year, and they were able to get to the SB.

If he would have said that 84 would have been his last year going into the playoffs, I think they beat the Steelers because they would have been more focused. As for Miami, I like their chances because their defense matches up better (I don't see Collier calling as many blitzes as the Steelers did).

If they somehow get by Miami, I think they play the 49ers way tougher than the Dolphins did because Collier knew the right schemes to play against the WCO. Five years later, the 49ers were on a roll, and Wade didn't know the right scheme to play. He played the worst possible defensive scheme against the WCO (a static 3-4 with the safeties wide and deep. Walsh designed his offense specifically to attack that style of defense).

[CSKreager]

I kind of feel re the 1980's Denver Broncos that Dan Reeves went 85-50-1 during the 1980's in his first head coaching job and should be in the Hall of Fame, but as Bill Parcells said in his book with Jerry Izenberg "The Broncos (of that era) just cannot handle power".

But as you say 13-3 is 13-3.

The Giants were all power without any speed. In short, 3 yards and a cloud of dust. They were power and physicality but nothing else. Slowest teams to ever win SB’s, 0 emphasis on team speed, a one trick pony

[7DnBrnc53]

I kind of feel re the 1980's Denver Broncos that Dan Reeves went 85-50-1 during the 1980's in his first head coaching job and should be in the Hall of Fame, but as Bill Parcells said in his book with Jerry Izenberg "The Broncos (of that era) just cannot handle power".

But as you say 13-3 is 13-3.

The Giants were all power without any speed. In short, 3 yards and a cloud of dust. They were power and physicality but nothing else. Slowest teams to ever win SB’s, 0 emphasis on team speed, a one trick pony

The 01, 03-04 Pats were similar. Those teams didn't have a lot of speed, either (especially on defense). No surprise that they cheated.

[Brian wolf]

Fortunately for those two slow teams, Belichick could coach and had determined pass rushers in Taylor, Marshall and McGinest who helped make life easier for their offenses

[Citizen]

I saw them at the time as a paper tiger. Not a 13-win team. They benefited from at least one fluky win (in the snow against Green Bay), and not one but three come-from-behind 16-13 wins over division rivals. Still, I had to give them credit for prevailing in what was an insanely competitive AFC West.

[Bryan]

I saw them at the time as a paper tiger. Not a 13-win team. They benefited from at least one fluky win (in the snow against Green Bay), and not one but three come-from-behind 16-13 wins over division rivals. Still, I had to give them credit for prevailing in what was an insanely competitive AFC West.

I remember seemingly every game was determined by a Rich Karlis make or miss that year. One game against the Raiders had Frank Hawkins fumbling as the Raiders were positioning for the game-winning FG, and then Denver won in OT. One thing that's weird is that both Denver and Seattle had a lot of fluky luck that year. Denver had a +21 TO differential and scored 8 defensive TDs. The Seahawks had a +24 TO differential and scored 8 defensive TDs as well.

I don't remember this at all, but in 1984 the Broncos played the Lions and the Lions turned the ball over 10 times. Some guy named Mike Machurek replaced Gary Danielson as Lions QB after Danielson threw 4 INTs. Machurek threw 3 himself. That was the only season Machurek played in the NFL....his statline for the 84 Lions is 14-43 for 193 yards 0 TDs 6 INTs. Ick.

[Brian wolf]

I was very surprised the Steelers beat the Broncos in that playoff game. It should have been the battle of second-year QBs in Miami and maybe Denver overlooked them but the Steelers gave Elway problems his rookie season as well. A late interception from Elway hurt them but the Steelers also ran the ball down their throats, a sign of future NFC game plans for the Super Bowl ...