C'mon, there's not a single person on this board that still believes your front story. I know that it must be shameful to admit, but come out of the closet and admit that you're a Broncos fan. We have them here and you won't get banned. You'll get made fun of, but you won't get banned.

Why are a lot of people praising Von for destroying New England? Their OL was horrific all year long. It's like everyone forgot that Miami almost killed the guy week 17. They even hurt him.

I don't think ivd ever seen the NFL be so bad at OL. It's truly terrible and these pass rushers are going to have higher numbers BC of it.

Because leading up to that game, the story was that the only reason Denver won in the regular season was that Edelman was out. With Edelman, NE was basically unbeatable and Von/Ware didn't even matter because Brady would get the ball out too quickly.

I'd take Miller over Houston. Turnovers change games and seasons and he has a clear advantage in that area. Those are Derrick Thomas-like forced fumble stats.

Miller has also been healthy and dominant when his team needed him most...the postseason. Houston has now twice entered the postseason banged up...Elbow in 2013.....knee in 2015. Somehow he finished his contract year in good health.

Both are beasts and are quite complete vs pass and run. But I give Miller the edge due to his ability to create turnover opportunities and his dominance on the big stage.

Miller also brings a throwback type of tone-setting nastiness and bad guy presence that any historically dominant defense needs....especially from arguably the unit's best player. For me that's a huge bonus and another reason I give Miller the nod over Houston.

Well, save for the postseason he missed due to injury, yes, you're correct

Even turds look down their noses at you

I don't like sacks per game (or per start) because it can be affected in a huge way by a few games. Aldon Smith, for example, had an otherwordly sack/game rate for a while because he had one game where he had 5.5 sacks against a terrible OL. Having huge games against bad teams is a great way to make a name for yourself, but I think being a consistent performer benefits the team more.

Yeah, but this kinda makes the Chiefs D look like ass. :)

Good take.

Yep. It's the same issue when you say "Team X hasn't played any good teams" or "Team Y has lost every game against a good team this year." ALL TEAMS play shitty teams. You're SUPPOSED to win those games, and very few manage to beat all the GOOD teams on their schedule.

Same deal here. You can discount Von's performance against the Pats, sure, but Houston's been invisible for a handful of games against shitty OL as well (and I'm sure Von has too).

Dominant games are dominant games, regardless of who they're up against.

What kind of freaky sentient anthropomorphic turds are you trafficking in?

I was with you up to freaky.

Dinny

Which sack/fumble was a big play in the game? There were two of them.

Miller had one of the most dominant postseason games by a defender ever. And he did it twice, once in the AFC Championship, again in the Superbowl.

The kind Bambi sees when he looks up into a mirror

:LOL: