In the wake of the last two games there have been a lot of comments from fans on this site to the effect that Denver no longer should be considered an "elite" team.   These come in two varieties:

1)  The negative variety ("This team is not good, Orton is terrible, our offense is inept, etc.)

2)  The sort-of positive variety ("Well, even though clearly we're not going to the SB this year, it's still a solid squad.")

There seems to be a general agreement that these two losses have somehow disqualified the Broncos from serious contention.  Sure, the logic goes, They might make the playoffs, but they won't go far.

This seems to come from the fact that the losses were not simple losses, but BIG losses.  By "big," I mean that the score was lopsided.  If Denver had lost 13-7 and 17-10, I think the comments would be much more positive.

Putting aside for the moment the issue of whether the games themselves were as lopsided as the scoreboard (I don't think they were), I wandered whether past Super Bowl Champions had endured similar defeats, and if so, how often?  My hypothesis was that even great teams experience lopsided losses, and that, therefore, Denver fans should still look at their team as a legitimate contender.

I looked at Super Bowl winners since 2002, and also at the 1997 Denver squad.  The results after the jump:

Losses:  4

Biggest Loss:  31-14 at Tennessee in Week 16.  Big Ben turns the ball over four times and the Steelers get crushed.

New York Giants (2007):

Losses:  6

Big Losses:  Where to start?  With the 35-13 pounding by the Packers in Week Two?  How about the 41-17 beatdown at the hands of the Vikings in Week 12?  Or the 22-10 loss against the Redskins in week 15, during which Eli Manning averaged 3.5 YPA?  

Indianapolis Colts (2006):

Losses:  4

Biggest Loss:  In week 14 they were blow out 44-17 by the Jaguars, giving up 375 yards rushing (second most in the NFL since the merger at the time).  Manning completed only 50% of his passes and was picked once.

In Brief:

2005 - Steelers - blown out @ Indy, 26-7 in week 12

2004 - New England - beaten soundly by the Steelers, 34-20, in week 8

2003 - New England - routed by Buffalo 31-0 in week 1

2002 - Tampa Bay - dominated by Pitt in week 16,  going down 17-0 early, and scoring their only touchdown in garbage time, with 3:00 to play.

Denver Broncos (1997): 

Losses:  4

Biggest Loss:  In week 14 they jumped out to a 10 point lead against the 49ers and then were destroyed the rest of the way, losing 34-17.  Elway threw two picks and completed 16/41 passes.

Conclusions:

Every Super Bowl champion I looked at suffered at least one lopsided loss, with the possible exception of the 2004 Patriots and the 2002 Bucs.  Even in those cases, the teams in question lost convincingly.  In fact, if you look inside the box scores you will see that, though the results were "better," neither Tampa nor New England were ever really in those respective games.

I also found some truly horrific QB play among those losses, including an ugly game from none other than #7 himself:  16/41, 150 yards, 0 TDs, 2 INTs, and one horrific game apiece form the Manning brothers.  Or how about Tom Brady's performance in the inaugural game of 2003?  14/23 for 128 yards, 0TDs, 4 INTs, Qb Rating:  22.5.  There seems to be a correlation between terrible QB play and blowout losses.  This is not a surprise.  What may be surprising to some is that EVERY QB - yes, EVERY QB - on every team seems to have at least one awful game per season, leading to their team being dominated.  (Kyle Orton supporters, know hope!)

The point is simple:  just because your team suffers a blowout loss, that doesn't mean they are somehow eliminated from Super Bowl contention.  That's why they play the games, and  whether or not you lost games "big" does not matter come playoff time.  If the Steelers and Broncos meet again this year, the Steelers will not get extra points for having defeated us so thoroughly.  The game will start 0-0, and what happened on Nov. 9th will not matter.

In general, we as a fan base seem to have developed this expectation that if a team is good, they must always win, or, on the rare occasions they lose, they should lose by tiny margins.  The historical record does not seem to support this view.  The only team I can think of that reached a Super Bowl without suffering a lopsided loss was the 2007 Patriots, and we all remember how that ended.

Will the Broncos reach or win the Super Bowl?  Probably not.  Regardless of whether they finish 10-6 or 14-2, the number of things that have to "go right" for playoff teams to win it all is immense (look at the Titans or Patriots of last year, or the 2005 Colts).

But they are certainly not out of it, and the "blowout" losses to Pittsburgh and Baltimore prove nothing other than the fact that Denver too is capable of being outplayed and outcoached (no surprise there).

Now, if we lose to the Redskins, that's another story . . .