Brian wolf wrote: ↑Mon Sep 01, 2025 10:32 am
To be honest, many people--including the media--were hoping the Broncos wouldnt make it to the SB. Some thought the Chiefs and Steelers were better teams and the Broncos had been upset by the Jags as heavy favorites in the playoffs the year before. The Packers took care of SF easily in the championship game and had beaten the Broncos 41-6 just the season before. Denver was underestimated, but built a solid team and whipped them. Then went back to back, though I feel the Vikings would have possibly beaten them in early 1999, had they got by Atlanta. With those championships, everyone looked at Shanahan and Elway differently.
Denver backing into the playoffs is a key ingredient to the they being underestimated. And losing to Steelers and San Fran, each by double-digits with the latter being the Romanowski spitting incident, not a good look for a team getting ready for the playoffs and having to beat teams like those two.
Of course we found out otherwise, that they and GB were really on the same caliber (with Denver really better in the very end as the win indicates). But as you point out, Wolf, with the Jags upset still fresh and GB convincingly beating San Fran on the road though, lets face it, they really weren't all that special (I felt that 11-1 start was a mirage even at the time,
confirmed with that 44-9 loss at KC). And Green Bay
were the 13-3 defending-Champs!
Though this was now a completely different John Elway Denver team, unfairly the 'ghosts' of the '80s were circling all around San Diego the two weeks leading up. And I was, yes, a bit guilty of it at the time. I wasn't picturing Denver at all beating Green Bay. I, admittedly, stuck a knife in them after the San Fran loss. But yet I was still, as I should have been, leery going into that AFC Championship Game (rematch) at Three Rivers.
Yes, end of day, GB wasn't on a higher level than Denver. Their road record was 3-5,
low-lighted by that serious 'black-eye' of a loss to the winless Colts which dropped the Pack to a modest 8-3 mark. Yes, the '79 Steelers get blown out at 0-6 Cincy; but to an 0-10 team is worse though it wasn't a blowout. I once seen the '97 Packers as the 'younger twin-brother' of 1996. But upon further inspection, '97 was quite a steeper step down. Yes, they woke up after that loss at Indy. They won the rest of their games until SBXXXII itself, each and every one in double-digits, but they really weren't dominant in that 8-3 start as the '96 version was. Yes, '96 had those back-to-back November defeats at KC & Big D, but bounced right on back to convincing wins.
The '97 Packers are like the '14 Seahawks. Both defending-Champs that didn't start off too great but streaked/dominated into the playoffs until each barely losing the SB.
