Since no one predicted a Seattle blowout, I think you win for this prediction. There was both an long-yard touchdown and a score within 12 seconds of the start of the game. (Why would you continue the snap if you couldn’t hear the QB? Stupid!)
I actually missed two touchdowns because I was bored and checking out the commercials on the NFL website. (I watched online, so we didn’t get all of them live.)
I don’t think Manning will ever be as great as he was before this game. Now that Seattle has shown how to do it everyone that wants to beat Denver will do it.
That includes the entire western AFC division of Oakland, Kansas City and of course San Diego Chargers who just happen to be the only team to beat Denver Broncos in Denver last year.
Manning should wait till August and announce at practice that he is stepping down to save his neck (no pun intended)
I wonder if New England or San Diego could’ve played Seattle a better game. Heck, the San Francisco 49ers could’ve played Seattle a better game.
That new Pro Bowl played last week in Hawaii sucks to me, but maybe, just maybe it would make a better Super Bowl of all super stars from every team.
Just a thought 
Again, what does that have to do with his “legacy”? So the NFL courts the “casual” fan. That has nothing to do with the HOF or player legacies, because those fans are precisely the ones who don’t about those things.
If they are that casual, will they remember 10 years after he’s retired? Not if they’re actually that casual.
As for the not-casual gamblers, you’re saying playoff wins are the only measure that’s important to them for purposes of legacy? I beg to differ.
Once again, to the truly casual, they won’t remember his name long enough to “tarnish” his legacy. To the non-casual, this season only entrenches his supporters and detractors further.
I hate it that I’m having to defend Peyton Manning in this thread. I’ve been rooting against that guy since he was at Tennessee. But it’s only because I know how good he is that I hate seeing him on the other side of the field.
It’s a ridiculous and circular chain of reasoning to question his legacy based on this single game:
You mean have the best secondary in the NFL, the best defense in the NFL, and a young enough roster (including ridiculously cheap quality QB) to afford the occasional deep grab in free agency? And partially rely on massive injury depletion of the Denver defense?
Yeah, that’s going to be tough for more than 1 or 2 teams to replicate, much less the rest of a division.
I can’t speak for San Diego, but the Patriots dodged a bullet. Seattle’s defensive line would have swarmed all over Tom Brady. Although I do believe Brady wouldn’t have tried to force it like Manning. Maybe a ‘more respectable’ 34-10 rout.
Unlike your line of argument, which is “Manning’s legacy is not tarnished, because I say that Manning’s legacy is not tarnished, so how can you say Manning’s legacy was tarnished?”
Manning will take a beating in the sports media for the next two weeks… at least until Baseball’s Spring Training begins. How can you make the claim that his legacy was not tarnished by his woeful performance in last night’s game? (along with a lot of help from his team)
It’s tarnished among those who only watch the Super Bowl and no other games, but so what? It’s like making fun of the Bills for winning four straight AFC championships, because all they saw was the losses in the SB.
Since the 2-pt conversion didn’t exist in the NFL until a few years ago, the fact that 43-8 has never occurred isn’t all that amazing.
Now, if it had never occurred in college (which has had the 2-pt conversion for 50 years), that would be something.
And “everybody” makes fun of the Bills. Not fair, perhaps, but aren’t the Bills the epitome of losers… even if they had to win two playoff games, 4 years in a row to earn that “honor?”
Boeing saluted its hometown team and their “12th Man” with the flight test of a new 747. You can see the flight track here. 
1994 wasn’t a few years ago - but 20 years of games is still a pretty short period of time to come across such an odd scoring line.
Let’s just put it this way:
If you actually think that leading a team with an average defense and solid but not elite offensive options to a tie for the best record in the NFL, then playing well in and winning playoff games against a good Chargers team and a Patriots team that had the third best record in the league (all in the context of setting all-time records in multiple passing categories), thus making it to the third Super Bowl of your career, then losing to the best defensive team in football this year and frankly one of the better ones to come along in a while…
…actually hurts you in terms of your eventual historical evaluation, such that you should have retired rather than play the year because your reputation would have been better without that year?
Then your opinion was probably reached, without reliance on facts, long before kickoff last night.
And I really love the idea that the Seahawks established some sort of blueprint that the Chiefs and Chargers and everyone else is going to exploit to turn the 13-3 Broncos into an also-ran. “Have better players than the Broncos, pressure Manning without letting his receivers get open, and make absolutely no mistakes yourself on either offense or defense” is not exactly a radical new gameplan.
Not quite.
My line of argument is (and has been) that among people who will actually measure his legacy, this single game doesn’t change much.
His supporters will fall back on his stats, his multiple MVPs, his multiple Super Bowl appearances.
His detractors will point to his playoff losses.
It’s like a religious debate. Neither side is going to budge.
And if neither side budges, and the casual fans stop caring next week, how does that affect his legacy at all, much less tarnish it?
Precisely.
If we’re talking solely losses in the Super Bowl, the Bills had 4 straight. But in terms of legacy, the HOF members from those teams include Andre Reed (last night, no less), Jim Kelly, Thurman Thomas, Marv Levy (coach), James Lofton, and Bruce Smith. The majority of Buffalo’s HOF members were from that era of 4 straight SB losses, some of them pretty bad losses at that. And while we might think of the teams as losers, the fans who still remember the individual players have little doubt they’re worthy of induction.
Plus the AFL games from 1960 - 1969 are included in the link provided earlier, and they had the 2 point conversion.
No. The Bills are not the epitome of losers. That’s such a weird question I can’t believe you’re even asking it. The Bills were awesome. For every even sort of rational sports fan, the SB losses are a footnote, not nearly the definiing quality of those teams. They were winners - huge winners - and I’d much rather have been a Bills fan in the 90’s then a Lions fan pretty much ever.
The flight occurred on the Thursday before the game. You didn’t mention the paint scheme of the 747-8 freighter that took the flight.
Then there’s Paul Allen’s connections to NASA and the ISS. The 12th Man flag took a spacewalk as well (wink, wink!).
And Mt Rainier was name changed to Mount Seattle Seahawks within the 12th Man National Park.
Well the Lions were pretty darn good in the 50s (NFL champs in 1952, 1953 and 1957). Though that does me little good as a Lion’s fan born in the 60s.
Actually last night’s game had something to do with it…
Peyton Manning’s regular season QB rating 97.2 In his 3 SB’s his rating ins 81.0
In his 3 SB’s, he now has 3 TD passes and 4 INTs, even though in the regular season his TD/INT ratio is 2.3/1. (Brady has 9 TDs and 2 INTs; Joe Montana 11/0!;
Isn’t it a valid question to ask, “What happens to Manning’s composure in the biggest game?”
I’m going to judge him more fairly than most fans, but the media is going to clobber him for the next 100 years. He’s the greatest regular season QB in the history of the game, but put him in a Super Bowl and he’s the second coming of Jeff George.
:eek:
I was going to guess sometime around 2004-6. Only off by 10 years.
Based on the television, he looks the same as he always does. His performance was substandard, but, as noted, it wasn’t all on him.
If you say so. That’s just like your opinion, man. 
The media doesn’t clobber Jim Kelly, despite 4 straight Super Bowl losses. Maybe you do, but the media doesn’t. You’re offering some caricatures of fans and the media that just don’t add up.
If you’re going to epitomize anybody as great in the regular season and awful in the post-season, Jim Kelly’s your guy. But the media doesn’t judge him poorly on it. He’s even got a nice HOF jacket, and the sports media still talk about the K-Gun and lightning fast offense they ran.
And he’s not the only one. There’s a good sized list of Super Bowl and playoff losers we consider some of the best QBs of all time.
At least Manning has a ring. I’m guessing we’ll remember that more than the losses.
And for a topic that’s not Manning, it’s now 3 straight Super Bowls with a safety. And in each, a safety was either the first or last points scored in the game. I’d love to know the odds the bookies were offering on a safety to start off the game this year.
A player’s legacy is determined by everything he does. Peyton’s performance yesterday goes on the negative side of the ledger. Getting to the Super Bowl is on the positive side of the ledger. Winning the MVP and setting numerous records…positive. The problem is folks want there to be a single thing defining a player like Manning’s legacy…it just isn’t like that.