Monday, January 16, 2006

One down, two to go

My response to this melvin, and all the Bronco haters in general who are whining about the Broncos victory over the New England Patriots this past weekend.....

Dear Mr. Wojciechowski,

In the time that I have been a Bronco fan (since 1985 when I was seven years old), I have had my share of arguments with the Chief fan boys and Raider ex-convicts. I will tell you that John Elway was the greatest QB of all time, if for no other reason than he single-handedly took the Broncos to those three Super Bowls in the 80's - they had no one else on any of those teams. Montana had the running game, the receivers, the defense. Elway? Just his right arm - enough to get there, but not enough to beat the best team in the NFC. I will argue that Terrell Davis most certainly does belong in the Hall of Fame. If you're going to let Gale Sayers in you better let T.D. in as well. I will even tell you that despite winning two Super Bowls with the new ones, I much prefer the old orange jerseys.

However, I can't recall a time that I ever responded to a journalist (well, I may have called Woody Paige every name in the book after he needlessly mocked the Jaguars before the '96 playoff loss) who wrote something about the Broncos I didn't like. Until now. Your article on the Broncos being fortunate to beat the Pats last Saturday night was, in my opinion, incorrect. The gist of your argument was that had the Pats not turned the ball over 5 times, they would have won the game. The basis of this argument is flawed - Shannahan called plays based on the conditions of the game. If Denver is ahead or behind, that will dictate the type of offense that is being executed. Beyond that however, is the simple fact that the Pats DID turn the ball over 5 times. They weren't a great football team. They weren't all year. They made enough mistakes to go 10-6 on the year, and they made enough mistakes to lose on Saturday night. The Broncos, on the other hand, went 13-3. They only had one turnover in the game. They were the better team because the better team DOESN'T MAKE MISTAKES!!! If we were to take your argument as fact, then we invalidate every winning team who has won the turnover battle in that game. Was New England "fortunate" to win their Super Bowls when they got more turnovers than the other team?

I also take umbrage with your accretion that the Colts would have won by two touchdowns had they played. You, along with seemingly every other "expert" would think this for the same reason you all picked New England to win Saturday night - history. Oh the Colts beat the crap out of Denver the last two years. Oh the Patriots are a great dynasty so they will win easily in Denver. What these same experts don't seem to realize is that history plays little part in an NFL game. Only when the teams have previously played each other that year is it at all relevant, and even then not all that much. Had you been paying any attention at all to Denver this year, you would have known that we Bronco fans WANTED to play the Colts, because our pressure defense would have done exactly what Pittsburg did to Indy yesterday.

This upcoming AFC championship game proves that things in the NFL have a way of working themselves out. Take out the injury to Roethlisberger during the middle of the season, and you are left with the two most consistent teams in the conference all year. It will be a knock-down-drag-out fight, and yes Mr. Wojciechowski, the team that makes the fewest mistakes will win - and they will be the better team.

Morgan Bonner


Anonymous said...

I would say Gene is a Patriot fan who lost a bunch of money on the game. I know he is a sports writer, but they too have teams they like.

Anonymous said...

Or he's just a jacka$$ journalist from hell.


Allison Bonner said...

good job buddy, that will certainly put him in his'll win him over with kindness.

Morgan Bonner said...

30 hours later, I have not recived a response, and he has since written another article - and implies that Jake Plummer is Jesus. Or something like that.