I, of course, will root for the Broncos, just as I did right down to the the bitter end (sometime in the first quarter) two years ago.
If they win, it will be due to defense, and it will be a low-scoring game. There is no chance that Manning will break loose downfield. None.
Denver 9, Carolina 5.
Meh. I live in the Bay Area where the Super Bowl is being played. The hype and outright greed associated with this event on a local level is truly staggering.
I plan to be dining here at kickoff time, enjoying a course of French Onion Soup Baked with Puffed Pastry, followed by a Classic Beef Wellington served over a Sauce of Roasted Seasonal Forest Mushrooms, concluding with a Crème Caramel with Seasonal Fresh Berries and a Cappuccino.
Enjoy your nachos.
With TVs scattered about the room. 
Maybe far far away, in a little room labeled “The Bar”.
I should stop fixating on numbers and stuff.
This will be the third consecutive SB in which the two #1 seeds face each other. A tad different from the previous 2 in that both starting QBs are first-round #1 draft picks. In fact, from what I can tell, that makes this SB different from the previous 49 SBs in this respect.
Denver has been in three other SBs where the two #1 seeds met. The first time was 38 years ago, a comparatively close game that they only lost by 17 points. Their total point differential for those 3 games was 97. Their per-game average point differential for 7 SBs has so far been 18. Not, obviously, in their favor.
Not looking so good for them, at least historically.
I don’t know why people focus on those sorts of numbers. It might be fun for novelty, but what does the 1985 Broncos getting their ass kicked have to do with anything?
Your argument is that it’s easier to win by only paying real QB money to the select few uber-elite QBs, like your Packers.
Your argument laughably falls apart by the fact that the over-paid Eli has more rings than your boy Rodgers. Clearly, your hypothesis needs some work.
Bummer. But hey, you can stream the game to your phone!
Or, as I’ve said countless times and multiple ways, Super Bowl rings is an idiotic way to measure QB value.
But then what is it you’re saying is superior about the “don’t overpay above average QBs” strategy? More consistent regular season wins?
I don’t view that as a worthy goal. The goal is to win Superbowls. If your argument discounts Superbowls as statistical anomalies, we will never see eye to eye. More specifically, we will always view the other’s position as idiotic.
Wins may not tell you much about QB performance. That’s kinda my point. I’d much more prefer to look at the QB’s actual performance when judging their value.
I don’t completely throw out Super Bowl wins, but it certainly isn’t a “this QB is elite, his team won a Super Bowl” thought that you’re trying to peddle it as. It can be one part, but to ignore how someone plays for 50 games in favor of looking at how their team played in one is, to my mind, just silly.
Do you use this Super Bowl wins as a metric for other positions? Is Larry Brown an elite CB because he won the Super Bowl MVP? Or, to be more Giants centric for your Eli loving heart, should Pepper Johnson, with 2 Super Bowl rings, be paid like Lawrence Taylor, also with two?
Or can we actually look at how they play to determine their value?
And one of us would be right.
I’m the right one. 
Yeah, about the only thing linking the two teams is that Elway lives nearby.
::raised eyebrows:: 4.5 points?
Right after the conference championship games ended I checked the point spreads. Carolina was an early 3 point favorite. I checked again just now and Carolina is favored by 5.5.
If Denver’s pass rush can harass Newton, they have a chance. If they can’t, then forget it, and Denver’s only chance to win would be from turnovers or from special teams play.
I predict a blowout reminscent of Da 1985 Bears. Panthers 45 - Broncos 10. Carolina’s defense is awesome. Da 1985 Bears won their only Super Bowl to date, 46-10 over New England in Super Bowl XX.
There’s an almost apophenic* sense of connection between the '85 Bears and the '15 Cats, down to (A) The latter’s head coach played in the former; (B) comparable season record, even down to the same kind of late-season upset; and (C) dominating defenses and a cocky and charismatic but widely disliked quarterback.
*Meaning I don’t think there’s any actual connection, but the human mind sees connections and patterns and similarities, so it sure looks like the '85 Bears are a prototype for the '15 Panthers.
The announcers Joe “the Pompous, I’m too sexy in my own mind” Buck and Troy “I hated you as a player, you were a Cowboy after all, but I like your analysis okay enough” Aikman mentioned the connection to that Buddy Ryan defense. After they said that, the rest of the game they did remind me of Da 85 Bears.
Unfortunately for the Super Bowl we’ll have Phil Dumbshit Simms. (sigh)
Not only will this be the final score, but at every point in the game, both teams will have a score which is prime (or 0.) Specifically, Denver will be down 5-3 late, score a touchdown, go for two, and not get it.
You know 9 isn’t a prime number right?
Yes, Da '85 Bears were only in one SB, but the Chicago Bears did return to the show a couple decades later, rolling over for Manning’s Colts in XLI.
Wow, going to get some coffee now. Carry on.
Well, Devin Hester started it well.