|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
-First Round Bye -We will beat GB @ GB IF we lose the game vs the Colts (who have nothing to play for in that game + will probably rest starters. This gives the Seahawks homefield advantage throughout the playoffs.
Say what you want about the Seahawks, at home they are fucking good. No team in the NFC can beat the Seahawks at home. Bears are not great on the road and have a horrid offense. The Panthers arent on the level of the Seahawks atm. The Giants bode the biggest threat but we already beat em so chances are (in a clean game) wed do it again.
Than we get to the superbowl, where we face the Patriots fresh off of defeating the Colts in champ. Patriots limp into Superbowl and in an epic game the Seahawks win.
Seahawks return to glory and become a dynasty.
|
YES. I love the Seahawks, living in Seattle, we don't have much to hope for...Sonics suck...Mariners are -_-
SOMETHING TO BE EXCITED ABOUT!!!!
|
control.. ur .... 100% right :D <3
|
Korea (South)11558 Posts
skins are in a winning streak, watch out
35-7 over dallas. that game was insane!
|
The Giants should have beaten you. The Colts will beat you next week, and they'll beat whichever team makes it out of the NFC.
|
Seahawks did not beat the Giants. The Giants fucking field goal kicker beat the Giants. The Seahawks got out played that game and were lucky to win. Seahawks are a bunch of soft candy ass football players, and if they play again the Giants will beat them soundly. Osi going to put a second wooping on walter jones.
|
And what the hell do you mean the seahawks return to glory? The god damn Seahawks never had a glory!!
|
And another thing while we are talking football. There only one god damn player called LT and hes not a 5 foot 10 running back. He a big mean coked up linebacker who snaped legs like us mortal men break toothpicks!!! GO GIANTS!!!!!!
|
............................................go seahawks!
|
MyLostTemple
United States2921 Posts
chiefs are gonna win out and make the playoffs and eventually win the superbowl
mark my words
|
Braavos36362 Posts
giants would've fucked them up if jay feely wasn't a girly man
|
um no, chargers will win the super bowl after denver loses to cleveland browns
|
If colts !@#$ up in the playoffs, you're probably right. But the bears play like men, using the defence to win games
|
Seattle is good. Look at our record.
|
PANTHERS WIN SUPERBOWL!!!
|
um...the colts are playign extremely good. After them id have to say Maybe the seahawks or chargers. O and no the patriots won't make it that far.
|
The Seahawks have been pretty good the past three years... it's just that inconsistency gets to them late in the seasons (some three years ago Hassleback was having 25/32 completion ratios for 300+ yards, and nobody was paying any attention to him). Finally they start to break out
|
"We want the ball...and we're going to score"
|
Seahawks are good but I really don't think they have a chance. My Broncos on the other hand...
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
heeh lejester that was so gay i cringed when i watched that, so childish. Seahawks have a different aura about them, seahawks of old woulda lost that Cowboy game, woulda lost the Giant game,, but this year luck is on our side!
|
As a Bears fan who was at one of the top ten coldest games in Soldier Field history last night, the Bears with a healthy Rex Grossman, and Mike Brown are going to be the best team in the NFC. Period.
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
no offense / not good on the road
|
Geoff, Geoff, Geoff, you're so misinformed. The Patriots suck, Your Seahawks will meet and destroy my Jaguars in the Super Bowl.
Edit - Just looked, if the standings stayed how they are now, the Jags would play the Patriots in the 1st round. That'll be fun.
|
Korea (South)11558 Posts
once again, look at the redskins record lately, if they win 1 more game, on christmas eve vs the giants, they're in the playoffs. :D
|
unless the colts choke there is no fucking way in hell they won't make it to the superbowl unless the steelers bring out their A game agains them. the steelers are the ONLY team in the league tough enough to effectively defend the colts offense. and the steeler offense can be good.
i'm not a huge steeler fan but they do have what it takes.
i would still bet on colts winning the superbowl.
|
On December 20 2005 02:32 {88}iNcontroL wrote: no offense / not good on the road How can a seahawks fan accuse another team of not being good on the road?
|
Ermmm Manning will eat them for lunch in the Super-Bowl
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
lol, seahawks doesn't have the prestige to win the superbowl. The favorite is the colts, then the chargers, and then the giants. then the seahawks.
|
Braavos36362 Posts
On December 20 2005 04:30 DTDominion wrote: the steelers are the ONLY team in the league tough enough to effectively defend the colts offense. and the steeler offense can be good. have you watched this season? the steelers defense got manhandled by the colts O-line. the steelers defense is nowhere near as good as it was the year they made it to the championship game.
plus how can they be the only team when San Diego just "effectively defended" the Colts two days ago? the jags did as well in week two, and i'm sure the bears can as well...
it's just that those teams can't score on the colts, but SD can, so indy better pray that SD doesn't make the playoffs because they're the only AFC team with a realistic chance of beating them. denver i guess has a shot, but the colts have owned them the last few years.
|
On December 20 2005 00:53 IronMentality wrote: As a Bears fan who was at one of the top ten coldest games in Soldier Field history last night, the Bears with a healthy Rex Grossman, and Mike Brown are going to be the best team in the NFC. Period.
bears defense has a ridiculous amount of playmakers. vasher tillman brown brown ogunleye urlacher. they have a physical and fast enough defense to give peyton manning problems. whether or not they can get to the superbowl is another problem. i highly doubt rex grossman is the solution to the quarterback woes. he's proven absolutely nothing at the professional level (except that he gets FAR too much). i'm not saying that switching was a good idea, grossman will prolly be at least as good as orton was. either way though, if they can't ride their defense all the way, they're in trouble
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
On December 20 2005 11:27 NuclearAntelope wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2005 02:32 {88}iNcontroL wrote: no offense / not good on the road How can a seahawks fan accuse another team of not being good on the road?
You are an idiot. Do i have to be a fan of the best road team to look at a team and see they are bad on the road? Im a fan of Brian Urlacher but can i also be a fan of a running back? That "ok" with you? I prefer pasta, but i like seafood from time to time, is it ok? Im a fan of the Seahawks but their performance in any way shape or form has nothing to do with my opinion on other teams and how they do in different situations.
|
I know you're trained to be right at the mighty OSU debate team, but you really should calm down a bit.
First of all, the bears aren't THAT bad on the road. Yeah, they had that loss at cleveland, and I'd be lying if I said it looks impressive for chicago. They lost by two points at washington (not an easy place to play in, and washington's defense hadn't collapsed yet at that point in the season), and then lost a tough one at pittsburgh because bettis played amazing, and fast willy parker chipped in some more yards. When those two guys are running well, it is next to impossible to beat pitt in a ball control game, which is how the bears play.
The bears went on the road and beat tampa bay (should have went to OT but a win is a win). Their real test will come in week 17, so let's not dismiss them as a truly bad road team until the regular season ends. It is a pity that they started out so shaky, because I don't think seattle could win a playoff game in chicago (even though seattle is looking really nice this year and I'd probably call them the favorites in the NFC).
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
Point well taken. Im jus saying i can speculate regardless of who i root for!
Seahawks in Chi town late december or early january is death for seahawks no doubt. But Bears comming to Seattle favors Seattle hugely, as i think is true for all the teams in NFC. And Seahawks my friend, have home field locked up this week or at the very least the next vs a team that the fucking Ravens offense tore up. Than we go to the Super bowl etc etc..
|
Anyone going to the Seahawks versus Indy game on Christmas Eve?? I am going!! Any advice? How cold will it be, what should I look out for, etc?
Alexander is too good.
|
Yeah, seattle pretty much has the home field locked up, and I am looking forward to see how it plays itself out. The NFC is really tough to predict this year.
-The seahawks have played overall very consistant and alexander is simply unstoppable. He's playing for a new contract I believe so I don't see him slowing down at all. -The bears' defense is incredible, and thomas jones is running the ball pretty well. I'm interested to see how the team responds to the new change at QB (orton did his job I guess but they really do need a bit more of a two-dimensional offense) -The giants are the toughest team to predict. They keep winning despite eli doing his best to throw every game away. Tiki is having a career year and their D is stepping up big time. If eli keeps throwing the ball to the other team, they will lose at seattle or at chicago.
Panthers/bucs/redskins/vikings probably deserve to be mentioned too, but those are the main three right now.
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
vikings wont make the playoffs, i think skins / bucs are interesting although bucs got curb stomped like nobodies business by the Pats.
Sharkey: i may be going, shouldnt be to cold but dress warmly. Also a safe bet to wear a rain resistant coat. Bring the noise! Seattle is getting back the reputation for being a hostile ass environment and the 12th man is getting big again!.=
|
On December 20 2005 12:13 Hot_Bid wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2005 04:30 DTDominion wrote: the steelers are the ONLY team in the league tough enough to effectively defend the colts offense. and the steeler offense can be good. have you watched this season? the steelers defense got manhandled by the colts O-line. the steelers defense is nowhere near as good as it was the year they made it to the championship game. plus how can they be the only team when San Diego just "effectively defended" the Colts two days ago? the jags did as well in week two, and i'm sure the bears can as well... it's just that those teams can't score on the colts, but SD can, so indy better pray that SD doesn't make the playoffs because they're the only AFC team with a realistic chance of beating them. denver i guess has a shot, but the colts have owned them the last few years.
You realize that game meant absolutely nothing to the colts. They were already completely set for the playoffs.
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
nah, it did mean something. Manning is a NFL history buff and he wanted that record more than anything. They didnt rest any starters and they played hard. The only exscuse is they didnt use any of their secret plays im sure they are saving for the playoffs. Still, a 8-5 west coast team traveling to their house and sacking Manning 4 times knocking him down 8 and rushing him 13 times is fucking good news for the rest of us. SD doesnt exactly have the most amazing defense and they found a chink in the Colts armor. This bodes well for Seattle imo (if we do meet them) cause we have 45 sacks in the front 4 and lead the NFL in rushing the passer.
HOHO!
|
is it Seattle Seahawks?
american rugby is art! I was a 49ers fan!
|
Cincinnati Bengals! Who dey? 85 in 05? I think so. This is the year, I can feel it.
|
|
Lies. Seahawks vs Bengals. That would be kind of cool ;P
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
i agree... Bengals are fooking good. But i really think (unless some unforseen amazing event occurs) its either Colts / Pats. Pats just have the knack to win. Colts seem to be most powerful team in NFL (undeniable). But i think AFC is gonna be a fucking brawl, some god damn powerful teams over there. Broncos / Chargers (can be good) / Bengals / Patriots / Colts / Steelers (inconsistant) are all huge threats in playoffs gonna be amazing to watch. I think AFC wildcard scene is most intriguing, but it all remains to be seen! All i know is im fooking excited as a Seattle fan >_< our time is here i think! omg omg omg
|
the first time i go on a starcraft site in about 8 months and were talking about my favorite team in all the world! Go Seahawks!!! ill be in detroit got my super bowl package booked yesterday
|
On December 20 2005 17:40 Clemens21 wrote: the first time i go on a starcraft site in about 8 months and were talking about my favorite team in all the world! Go Seahawks!!! ill be in detroit got my super bowl package booked yesterday
Seahawks are gay. Panthers rule. Too bad we won't be able to rape you in the super bowl :/
|
WHO DEY WHO DEY WHO DEY THINK GUNNA BEAT DEM BENGALS?!?!!
|
If the Giants get healthy they are going to crush everyone in the NFC. Tiki too good to be stoped, and no one can score on us lately. We are going to go into Seattle and Osi and Strahan are going to put Hasselback right on his butt again. Eli is his best when the pressuer is on and he going to pick his game up for the playoffs. Giants are going to the superbowl!!!!!
|
On December 20 2005 19:04 ChoboCop wrote: WHO DEY WHO DEY WHO DEY THINK GUNNA BEAT DEM BENGALS?!?!! DEM COLTS!!
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
On December 20 2005 21:36 InToTheWannaB wrote: If the Giants get healthy they are going to crush everyone in the NFC. Tiki too good to be stoped, and no one can score on us lately. We are going to go into Seattle and Osi and Strahan are going to put Hasselback right on his butt again. Eli is his best when the pressuer is on and he going to pick his game up for the playoffs. Giants are going to the superbowl!!!!!
Just like they crushed the Ravens in the superbowl a few years ago.
|
|
Don't assume any game vs. the Pats is gonna be a cakewalk =p. There is a reason why Tom Brady doesn't lose playoff games...
|
Bears are going to win there next two games vs. weak opponents, and will have home field advantage, guaranteed.
|
Pats are going to win it again.
|
On December 20 2005 12:13 Hot_Bid wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2005 04:30 DTDominion wrote: the steelers are the ONLY team in the league tough enough to effectively defend the colts offense. and the steeler offense can be good. have you watched this season? the steelers defense got manhandled by the colts O-line. the steelers defense is nowhere near as good as it was the year they made it to the championship game. plus how can they be the only team when San Diego just "effectively defended" the Colts two days ago? the jags did as well in week two, and i'm sure the bears can as well... it's just that those teams can't score on the colts, but SD can, so indy better pray that SD doesn't make the playoffs because they're the only AFC team with a realistic chance of beating them. denver i guess has a shot, but the colts have owned them the last few years.
which is why manning didn't seem to have his shit together at all that game right?
and please don't tell me you really think the colts were trying against san diego or just got unlucky...
|
On December 20 2005 12:13 Hot_Bid wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2005 04:30 DTDominion wrote: the steelers are the ONLY team in the league tough enough to effectively defend the colts offense. and the steeler offense can be good. have you watched this season? the steelers defense got manhandled by the colts O-line. the steelers defense is nowhere near as good as it was the year they made it to the championship game. plus how can they be the only team when San Diego just "effectively defended" the Colts two days ago? the jags did as well in week two, and i'm sure the bears can as well... it's just that those teams can't score on the colts, but SD can, so indy better pray that SD doesn't make the playoffs because they're the only AFC team with a realistic chance of beating them. denver i guess has a shot, but the colts have owned them the last few years.
"SD is the only team that can score on Indy"
Here's my outlook on Indy's gameplan: Score BIG in the first half. Their whole team has issues with wearing down in the 2nd half, if you look at the 4th quarter of most of Indy's games, their defense completely shuts down in the 4th quarter. Against SD, they were keeping it close (realistically) until the 4th quarter came and SD had that 80~ yard run and held their offense. Granted, they were moving, but Peyton made a bad throw (maybe result of fatigue) to seal the game.
Also, against the Jaguars, the Colts were up 26-3 going into the 4th quarter, and the Jaguars were able to move the ball in the 4th, bringing it to 26-18.
The keys to beating Indianapolis are: -Not wearing down. -No turnovers. -Take Edgerrin out of the picture. [If you stop their run and force them to pass, you can take people off of the line to put an extra linebacker or d-back in.]
|
|
On December 20 2005 21:39 {88}iNcontroL wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2005 21:36 InToTheWannaB wrote: If the Giants get healthy they are going to crush everyone in the NFC. Tiki too good to be stoped, and no one can score on us lately. We are going to go into Seattle and Osi and Strahan are going to put Hasselback right on his butt again. Eli is his best when the pressuer is on and he going to pick his game up for the playoffs. Giants are going to the superbowl!!!!! Just like they crushed the Ravens in the superbowl a few years ago. Geting to the superbowl and winning the superbowl are not the same thing. At least the Giants have been there b4 and won. Wtf have the Seahawks ever done other then be a punch line for jokes. Plz go resign Ricky Watters now. Get on them Ricky !!! They aint blocking for you!!!
|
On December 20 2005 21:39 {88}iNcontroL wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2005 21:36 InToTheWannaB wrote: If the Giants get healthy they are going to crush everyone in the NFC. Tiki too good to be stoped, and no one can score on us lately. We are going to go into Seattle and Osi and Strahan are going to put Hasselback right on his butt again. Eli is his best when the pressuer is on and he going to pick his game up for the playoffs. Giants are going to the superbowl!!!!! Just like they crushed the Ravens in the superbowl a few years ago.
God I hate Kerry Collins.
|
god damnit gryffindor i wanted to be the first european to post here ..aaarg!!
gotta learn the rules in american football
|
i hope it will be colts vs seahawks final, i like seahawks and love colts
|
watch out for patriots, finally playing good again =)
|
On December 21 2005 12:28 omgbnetsux wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2005 21:39 {88}iNcontroL wrote:On December 20 2005 21:36 InToTheWannaB wrote: If the Giants get healthy they are going to crush everyone in the NFC. Tiki too good to be stoped, and no one can score on us lately. We are going to go into Seattle and Osi and Strahan are going to put Hasselback right on his butt again. Eli is his best when the pressuer is on and he going to pick his game up for the playoffs. Giants are going to the superbowl!!!!! Just like they crushed the Ravens in the superbowl a few years ago. God I hate Kerry Collins.
I wish the panthers had kept Collins. We had to suffer through Chris Weinke and Rodney Pete before getting a half-decent one with Delhomme, and even so Collins may be the better passer.
|
On December 19 2005 16:22 {88}iNcontroL wrote: -First Round Bye -We will beat GB @ GB IF we lose the game vs the Colts (who have nothing to play for in that game + will probably rest starters. This gives the Seahawks homefield advantage throughout the playoffs.
Say what you want about the Seahawks, at home they are fucking good. No team in the NFC can beat the Seahawks at home. Bears are not great on the road and have a horrid offense. The Panthers arent on the level of the Seahawks atm. The Giants bode the biggest threat but we already beat em so chances are (in a clean game) wed do it again.
Than we get to the superbowl, where we face the Patriots fresh off of defeating the Colts in champ. Patriots limp into Superbowl and in an epic game the Seahawks win.
Seahawks return to glory and become a dynasty.
Shows how much you follow the NFL. Based off current rankings, the Patriots will be going to Indy in the Divisional round. Even if they don't, Denver will beat them again. Pats aren't doing shit this year.
Your statement about the Bears held a lot more truth until Sunday's game. Why's that? Because Grossman is a much better QB than Orton is right now. He presents a threat of a pass game, and with that defense, that's all they need.
The Bears are a legitimate Superbowl contender this year, like it or not. Seattle is going to be hard for anyone, but don't count the Bears out of this one just yet. (Even though you are a giant Seattle nuthugger)
On December 20 2005 04:30 DTDominion wrote: unless the colts choke there is no fucking way in hell they won't make it to the superbowl unless the steelers bring out their A game agains them. the steelers are the ONLY team in the league tough enough to effectively defend the colts offense. and the steeler offense can be good.
i'm not a huge steeler fan but they do have what it takes.
i would still bet on colts winning the superbowl.
Wrong. The Broncos have a better D than SD does, and better than Pitt this year. If anyone is going to give them hell (aside from the old nemesis in NE), it's going to be Denver. Cinci wins the first round game after losing out on the first round bye, as Denver will easily despose of the Raiders this week, then end strong with a victory over SD, thus keeping them at the #2 spot. The Patriots also win their game. Then it's Indy/Pats and Broncos/Cinci, which are won by Indy and Denver respectively, and they meet in the championship. I'd love to see Denver in another Super Bowl, but I like Peyton too much to actually want him to lose to any team.
On December 20 2005 15:42 {88}iNcontroL wrote: nah, it did mean something. Manning is a NFL history buff and he wanted that record more than anything. They didnt rest any starters and they played hard. The only exscuse is they didnt use any of their secret plays im sure they are saving for the playoffs. Still, a 8-5 west coast team traveling to their house and sacking Manning 4 times knocking him down 8 and rushing him 13 times is fucking good news for the rest of us. SD doesnt exactly have the most amazing defense and they found a chink in the Colts armor. This bodes well for Seattle imo (if we do meet them) cause we have 45 sacks in the front 4 and lead the NFL in rushing the passer.
HOHO!
Not ONLY that, but he fucking HATES to lose. I was just reading an interview with Eli in ESPN today, and Eli talked about a 1 on 1 basketball game they played, which he won by 2 points (going to ten). Peyton was so pissed about that he wouldn't talk to anyone for a couple of days. There was no handshaking, no good job, he just walked away. Now imagine that for a game that really, really meant something to him. He was devastated, which means one thing in my mind: he's going to be electric in the next several games.
-_-: I'd take Jake over Kerry any day of the week, and twice on Sundays. Collins has not been the same since his jaw got shattered.
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
On December 21 2005 20:42 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2005 16:22 {88}iNcontroL wrote: -First Round Bye -We will beat GB @ GB IF we lose the game vs the Colts (who have nothing to play for in that game + will probably rest starters. This gives the Seahawks homefield advantage throughout the playoffs.
Say what you want about the Seahawks, at home they are fucking good. No team in the NFC can beat the Seahawks at home. Bears are not great on the road and have a horrid offense. The Panthers arent on the level of the Seahawks atm. The Giants bode the biggest threat but we already beat em so chances are (in a clean game) wed do it again.
Than we get to the superbowl, where we face the Patriots fresh off of defeating the Colts in champ. Patriots limp into Superbowl and in an epic game the Seahawks win.
Seahawks return to glory and become a dynasty.
Shows how much you follow the NFL. Based off current rankings, the Patriots will be going to Indy in the Divisional round. Even if they don't, Denver will beat them again. Pats aren't doing shit this year. Your statement about the Bears held a lot more truth until Sunday's game. Why's that? Because Grossman is a much better QB than Orton is right now. He presents a threat of a pass game, and with that defense, that's all they need. The Bears are a legitimate Superbowl contender this year, like it or not. Seattle is going to be hard for anyone, but don't count the Bears out of this one just yet. (Even though you are a giant Seattle nuthugger) Show nested quote +On December 20 2005 04:30 DTDominion wrote: unless the colts choke there is no fucking way in hell they won't make it to the superbowl unless the steelers bring out their A game agains them. the steelers are the ONLY team in the league tough enough to effectively defend the colts offense. and the steeler offense can be good.
i'm not a huge steeler fan but they do have what it takes.
i would still bet on colts winning the superbowl. Wrong. The Broncos have a better D than SD does, and better than Pitt this year. If anyone is going to give them hell (aside from the old nemesis in NE), it's going to be Denver. Cinci wins the first round game after losing out on the first round bye, as Denver will easily despose of the Raiders this week, then end strong with a victory over SD, thus keeping them at the #2 spot. The Patriots also win their game. Then it's Indy/Pats and Broncos/Cinci, which are won by Indy and Denver respectively, and they meet in the championship. I'd love to see Denver in another Super Bowl, but I like Peyton too much to actually want him to lose to any team. Show nested quote +On December 20 2005 15:42 {88}iNcontroL wrote: nah, it did mean something. Manning is a NFL history buff and he wanted that record more than anything. They didnt rest any starters and they played hard. The only exscuse is they didnt use any of their secret plays im sure they are saving for the playoffs. Still, a 8-5 west coast team traveling to their house and sacking Manning 4 times knocking him down 8 and rushing him 13 times is fucking good news for the rest of us. SD doesnt exactly have the most amazing defense and they found a chink in the Colts armor. This bodes well for Seattle imo (if we do meet them) cause we have 45 sacks in the front 4 and lead the NFL in rushing the passer.
HOHO! Not ONLY that, but he fucking HATES to lose. I was just reading an interview with Eli in ESPN today, and Eli talked about a 1 on 1 basketball game they played, which he won by 2 points (going to ten). Peyton was so pissed about that he wouldn't talk to anyone for a couple of days. There was no handshaking, no good job, he just walked away. Now imagine that for a game that really, really meant something to him. He was devastated, which means one thing in my mind: he's going to be electric in the next several games. -_-: I'd take Jake over Kerry any day of the week, and twice on Sundays. Collins has not been the same since his jaw got shattered.
Manner up nucca. Shows how much i follow the NFL? I dont. I just watch games and ESPN from time to time. If i make a mistake its cause I GOT A LIFE. Everything else i agree with basically bdskfldnfbsd
|
i can't imagine peyton manning being good at basketball he's so slow........of course eli isn't much faster, but even so
i love watching kerry collins and vinny get flushed out of the pocket, watching them try to run is prolly the funniest thing in football
i think the real question is, how the hell did deltha o'neal get so good so fast? he didn't look so great when he was in denver
either way, i still say colts win it. can't see anyone slowing them down enough. they have the power back, the deep threats, the posession tight end, the unflappable competitive quarterback, and a quick defense. let's go peyton. DE CAF. DE CAF.
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
id be willing to bet huge sums of money colts dont win it.
|
|
On December 21 2005 20:42 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2005 16:22 {88}iNcontroL wrote: -First Round Bye -We will beat GB @ GB IF we lose the game vs the Colts (who have nothing to play for in that game + will probably rest starters. This gives the Seahawks homefield advantage throughout the playoffs.
Say what you want about the Seahawks, at home they are fucking good. No team in the NFC can beat the Seahawks at home. Bears are not great on the road and have a horrid offense. The Panthers arent on the level of the Seahawks atm. The Giants bode the biggest threat but we already beat em so chances are (in a clean game) wed do it again.
Than we get to the superbowl, where we face the Patriots fresh off of defeating the Colts in champ. Patriots limp into Superbowl and in an epic game the Seahawks win.
Seahawks return to glory and become a dynasty.
Shows how much you follow the NFL. Based off current rankings, the Patriots will be going to Indy in the Divisional round. Even if they don't, Denver will beat them again. Pats aren't doing shit this year. Your statement about the Bears held a lot more truth until Sunday's game. Why's that? Because Grossman is a much better QB than Orton is right now. He presents a threat of a pass game, and with that defense, that's all they need. The Bears are a legitimate Superbowl contender this year, like it or not. Seattle is going to be hard for anyone, but don't count the Bears out of this one just yet. (Even though you are a giant Seattle nuthugger) Show nested quote +On December 20 2005 04:30 DTDominion wrote: unless the colts choke there is no fucking way in hell they won't make it to the superbowl unless the steelers bring out their A game agains them. the steelers are the ONLY team in the league tough enough to effectively defend the colts offense. and the steeler offense can be good.
i'm not a huge steeler fan but they do have what it takes.
i would still bet on colts winning the superbowl. Wrong. The Broncos have a better D than SD does, and better than Pitt this year. If anyone is going to give them hell (aside from the old nemesis in NE), it's going to be Denver. Cinci wins the first round game after losing out on the first round bye, as Denver will easily despose of the Raiders this week, then end strong with a victory over SD, thus keeping them at the #2 spot. The Patriots also win their game. Then it's Indy/Pats and Broncos/Cinci, which are won by Indy and Denver respectively, and they meet in the championship. I'd love to see Denver in another Super Bowl, but I like Peyton too much to actually want him to lose to any team. Show nested quote +On December 20 2005 15:42 {88}iNcontroL wrote: nah, it did mean something. Manning is a NFL history buff and he wanted that record more than anything. They didnt rest any starters and they played hard. The only exscuse is they didnt use any of their secret plays im sure they are saving for the playoffs. Still, a 8-5 west coast team traveling to their house and sacking Manning 4 times knocking him down 8 and rushing him 13 times is fucking good news for the rest of us. SD doesnt exactly have the most amazing defense and they found a chink in the Colts armor. This bodes well for Seattle imo (if we do meet them) cause we have 45 sacks in the front 4 and lead the NFL in rushing the passer.
HOHO! Not ONLY that, but he fucking HATES to lose. I was just reading an interview with Eli in ESPN today, and Eli talked about a 1 on 1 basketball game they played, which he won by 2 points (going to ten). Peyton was so pissed about that he wouldn't talk to anyone for a couple of days. There was no handshaking, no good job, he just walked away. Now imagine that for a game that really, really meant something to him. He was devastated, which means one thing in my mind: he's going to be electric in the next several games. -_-: I'd take Jake over Kerry any day of the week, and twice on Sundays. Collins has not been the same since his jaw got shattered.
Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm about 95% sure I'm right, but don't the top two teams in the league get 1st round byes? So "with current standings", the Pats will play the Jaguars. Correct? The worst division leader against the best wildcard. Or, seeds 4 and 5. Either way you look at it, I'm generally sure that I'm right.
|
he said the pats will play the colts in the division round, not the wildcard round. he assumed the pats would win their first game and move on, where they face the colts, or the broncos in the next round
|
Seahawks win the superbowl
|
Woody never lies. The Falcons are going to the Superbowl.
|
Braavos36362 Posts
i know it probably won't happen, but i want to see the pats beat the colts and win the super bowl again
not that i'm a pats fan, but i just want something to believe in and root for a TRUE underdog
its hard to hate that organization
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
Pats won 3 of last 4 super bowls. Im getting tired of rooting for that underdog. Seahawks havent won a playoff game in 20 years. THATS an underdog. So revise your rooting Hot_Bid.
|
hah stupidest thing i've heard today its all about the skins sonson
|
On December 23 2005 11:45 LeJester wrote: Woody never lies. The Falcons are going to the Superbowl.
Hahah. As much as I like woody, he just is a sucker for the falcons and broncos :/
|
atlanta won't even make the playoffs, let alone the superbowl
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
On December 23 2005 18:21 Tossim1 wrote: hah stupidest thing i've heard today its all about the skins sonson
Did you just say stupidest?
The irony...
|
hey, at least the redskins are in the weaker conference. of course they could easily miss the playoffs too...they should smoke the eagles (damnit, my team) but the giants game will be tough. sean taylor is a scary man tho, he's def in the top 3 of people in the nfl i wouldn't want to piss off along with ray ray and lavar arrington
|
in the interest of fairness, I haven't seen denver play this year, maybe they have the physical defense you need to beat the colts
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
hey bitches Seahawks #1 record in NFL #1 seed. 21-3 at home in last 3 seasons Super Bowl here we come!!!
Peyton was pulled when it was 14-3 Seahawks MUAHAHAHA things looking amazing for us!
|
Seahawks are a strong team, but cant beat the colts in the superbowl
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
your right, they will beat the Pats in the superbowl.
|
Austin10831 Posts
|
Well, the AFC half of the playoffs will be a huge bloodbath, in which the team advancing to the superbowl will be the team with the least broken bones.
Then they will meet up with some pantywaste NFC team, and crush them, because, like chuck norris, the chief export of the AFC is pain.
The NFC has the Seahawks, Bears, and Giants as the only real contenders in my eyes. Redskins, Falcons, Panthers, etc are all tier 2 teams. I feel as though I have forgotten a team or two, but since its the NFC, I fail to find myself giving 2 shits.
The AFC has this years superbowl champions, the Colts, running over the Pats, Steelers, Chargers, Bengals, Broncos, and whoever else might be in contention. The AFC is such a far better conference than the NFC that it makes me laugh, cry, and puke at the same time.
With that being said, the Bears, Seahawks, and Giants have really impressed me this year. With the failing of the eagles, and the falcons fall from grace, I was thinking the superbowl this year would be an absolute joke. As it is, the NFC team might stay within a couple touchdowns this year. Especially if the Giants or the Bears make it because of their insane defenses (with the bears having the best defense in the league atm).
On the AFC side, you have the Bengals who have really stepped it up this year, the Pats who you can never count out becuase they are goddamn lucksac faggots, the steelers who are physical as fuck, and while slightly inconsistent, can, on any given sunday, give any team in the league a run for their money, the Chargers who have a solid defense, and a very strong offense, the Broncos with a stout defense, and of course, the fucking colts.
This years playoff scene will be pretty fun to watch, but I expect the colts to emerge from the bloodbath to stomp all over some Seahawk or Bear. MAYBE the giants, but I doubt it.
OH, and expect Indy to be picking up a complete and total read on Seattle and how they play this weekend, while Indy plays their second string. =)
<3 geoffykins
|
YES <3 SEAHAWKS CAN I GET A SOUL CLAP?!!!
28-13 W
Seahawks > Colts
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On December 24 2005 17:40 {88}iNcontroL wrote: your right, they will beat the Pats in the superbowl. The blessings of a weak division. Just sit on your ass for half a year and wake up come playoff time.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On December 24 2005 18:30 GoGoGo[cF] wrote: YES <3 SEAHAWKS CAN I GET A SOUL CLAP?!!!
28-13 W
Seahawks > Colts
calm down, Colts rested their starters.
|
skins just raped giants? sup?
CANT STOP SANTANA
|
See the steelers rape browns? rofl!
|
On December 24 2005 19:21 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2005 18:30 GoGoGo[cF] wrote: YES <3 SEAHAWKS CAN I GET A SOUL CLAP?!!!
28-13 W
Seahawks > Colts
calm down, Colts rested their starters.
And their head coach wasnt there, not to mention the kind of emotional stress that could've been going on because of dungy's fam.
|
And the game really didn't mean anything to them
But ya, think whatever you want. /rolls eyes
|
On December 24 2005 20:05 Tossim1 wrote: skins just raped giants? sup?
CANT STOP SANTANA
u can stop him, it's just not easy. he actually hasn't really had a big game since week 7 against the niners, this is his first game over 100 since then i believe. even so, he should light up the eagles...because hopefully they won't try this game to move up even a place or two in the draft. god, everytime i see mcmahon throw the ball i expect a pick.
|
Duude, the Seahawks are going to effin fantastic this year, but will they beat the Colts when they use there starters? The Seahawks defence has VASTLY improved this year, and there offence is probably the best in the league. The Super Bowl game is going to be an awsome one if it between Colts and Seahawks.
|
PANTEHRSHELFD GOT FUCKING GAYED SSTUPID STUPID REFS :SIIIIIIIIIIII I WAN TOT KILL THEM ARRRRRRRRRFHGHHHHGHHHH
You know what, they RUINED xmas. DAMN it. Christ. Damn. Fucking, fuck, fuck. Damn
|
LOL, Head coach wasn't there...rested starters...sounds like still many people don't believe in Seahawks...Oo
Another thing, we in Seattle, really don't have much to look forward to what with our baseball and basketball so poor.....so anything, any win is GOOD!! Please understand.
CAN I GET A SOUL CLAP??
Anyways, Merry Christmas guys!
|
DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA BEARS
|
|
DAAAAAAAAA BEARS FOR THE WIN they took the nfc championship thx
|
On December 19 2005 16:22 {88}iNcontroL wrote: -First Round Bye -We will beat GB @ GB IF we lose the game vs the Colts (who have nothing to play for in that game + will probably rest starters. This gives the Seahawks homefield advantage throughout the playoffs.
Say what you want about the Seahawks, at home they are fucking good. No team in the NFC can beat the Seahawks at home. Bears are not great on the road and have a horrid offense. The Panthers arent on the level of the Seahawks atm. The Giants bode the biggest threat but we already beat em so chances are (in a clean game) wed do it again.
Than we get to the superbowl, where we face the Patriots fresh off of defeating the Colts in champ. Patriots limp into Superbowl and in an epic game the Seahawks win.
Seahawks return to glory and become a dynasty.
"return to glory" ?
.... Yeah, the Dave Krieg and Brian Blades days were truly glorious. Sorry, but the NFC is a race to lose to whichever team makes it from the AFC. Congratulations, you beat the Colts backups :p
And the Giants really should've beaten the Squawks. I mean, 3 missed field goals? Feely handed you the game on a silver platter.
|
To be fair, they were from a pretty hefty range away. The giants only converted 1 first down on each drive, and then they had to send him out there for like 48, 51, and 52 yarders, or some such.
|
i forgot to mention this but didnt skins rape seahawks? hm
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
skins beat not raped the Seahawks at skins home. GL doing that @ Seattle fag
|
Canada5062 Posts
As the saying goes, "on any given Sunday...". And anything can happen in the playoffs.
But, I gotta say, I would not want to be playing against the Patriots. The odds are stacked against them going all the way (no team in NFL history has won three Super Bowls in a row before), but they sure do seem to have their mojo back - the D is starting to hit again and Brady's as clinical as ever. Their dismantling of the Bucs a couple of weeks ago confirmed to me that they're going to be tough sobs to beat, their mediocre record notwithstanding. Don't know about the Super Bowl, but I can see a Colts vs Patriots conference final. Should be highly entertaining to watch given the recent history between the two teams and their respective QBs.
I'd love to see Seattle go all the way. But I can't see that happening. They don't have that aura of invincibility most Super Bowl champs have. The Ravens, Rams and Patriots all had "it" when they won, just to name the recent winners. The Colts are pretty close - but they have to make it past the Patriots (or have someone else bump the reigning champs off). It will not be easy. In fact, on a head-to-head basis, I give the Patriots the edge. But, if Manning & Co. somehow survive the Patriots, then they go all the way. About fucking time, too.
|
On December 27 2005 12:20 {88}iNcontroL wrote: skins beat not raped the Seahawks at skins home. GL doing that @ Seattle fag
k when they do i expect a typed apology on behalf of you calling me a fag
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
On December 27 2005 16:47 mensrea wrote: As the saying goes, "on any given Sunday...". And anything can happen in the playoffs.
But, I gotta say, I would not want to be playing against the Patriots. The odds are stacked against them going all the way (no team in NFL history has won three Super Bowls in a row before), but they sure do seem to have their mojo back - the D is starting to hit again and Brady's as clinical as ever. Their dismantling of the Bucs a couple of weeks ago confirmed to me that they're going to be tough sobs to beat, their mediocre record notwithstanding. Don't know about the Super Bowl, but I can see a Colts vs Patriots conference final. Should be highly entertaining to watch given the recent history between the two teams and their respective QBs.
I'd love to see Seattle go all the way. But I can't see that happening. They don't have that aura of invincibility most Super Bowl champs have. The Ravens, Rams and Patriots all had "it" when they won, just to name the recent winners. The Colts are pretty close - but they have to make it past the Patriots (or have someone else bump the reigning champs off). It will not be easy. In fact, on a head-to-head basis, I give the Patriots the edge. But, if Manning & Co. somehow survive the Patriots, then they go all the way. About fucking time, too.
Not a huge surprise but i agree on almost all accounts and find myself a lil bit happier after reading such a damn well written post. Now im on your fan wagon.
Tossim1: if the Seahawks lose to the skins at home i will appologize and denounce myself as JLIG prophet. If they win however, or the skins dont even make it to the Emerald City i expect a new JLIG follower. Complete with announciation and "quote" clarification.
|
Harsh. Seahawks are doing well. Let's all at least agree to that. Better than any of the teams mentioned here....Except for maybe the Colts..
|
On December 27 2005 18:14 GoGoGo[cF] wrote: Harsh. Seahawks are doing well. Let's all at least agree to that. Better than any of the teams mentioned here....Except for maybe the Colts..and the Broncos, Bengals, Patriots, Jaguars, and Steelers.......
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
On December 27 2005 18:41 ApollyoN wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2005 18:14 GoGoGo[cF] wrote: Harsh. Seahawks are doing well. Let's all at least agree to that. Better than any of the teams mentioned here....Except for maybe the Colts..and the Broncos, Bengals, Patriots, Jaguars, and Steelers.......
|
yeah, the jags have a chance vs the seahawks. go on day dreaming
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
jags wont make it to the superbowl if thats what he was implying hehe. Its Colts / Pats / Broncos as primary contenders.
|
I would'nt rule the bengals out of the running for the AFC either. Their a good offensive team with a good offense that has been sporatic at times yes but they still have to be watched for depending on if they get the 3 or 4 seed it could make things interesting on the AFC side of the bracket. I wouldnt rule out the Jaguars either sure they havent done great the last two weeks because they play to the lvl of their opponents(proven by how close they have played the Colts over the last 3-4 years) I dont think they will make it to the Super Bowl but they could shock some people with a upset win in the second round. The Patriots should also have a pretty good playoff run this year depending on what seed they get they are always a dangerous team to play against because Billick always has his defense ready for the opponent that their playing that week. And we all know what Brady and the offense can do when they are healthy.
As for the NFC side i would agree the Seahawks are front runners with Alexander playing so damn well right now and their defense meshing as of late. I wouldnt sleep on the Bears, Panthers, or Skins either because all(except the panthers maybe) have been having a great second half of the season. If the Panthers play up to their potential i would say they could be playing for the NFC Championship at the least. The Bears playing their first round game(second round they get the other bye baring anything unseen i believe) and playing @ Soldier Field in January will not be welcome for any team in the NFC especially with the way that their defense plays this year. I dont really see anything happening from the G-men or the Bucs but you never know with the NFC...
Nyways that being said i think we should expect a Seattle New England/Colts Super Bowl and this should be another close super bowl with the seahawks pounding the ball down the AFC's throats and if the colts make it the lighting up the score board with the Manning/Harrison combo with the right amount's of Edge. It is shaping up for a good Super Bowl this year(with exception of the Rolling Stones performing @ Half Time.
|
On December 27 2005 19:36 KOFgokuon wrote: yeah, the jags have a chance vs the seahawks. go on day dreaming
They already beat them this year
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
they beat the seahawks in 90+ degree weather @ Florida which is the farthest distance for a team to travel in the NFL. Niiiiice. Seahawks have won 11 since than and wont be traveling anywhere except detroit. So yea, continue the day dreaming.
|
On December 27 2005 20:25 ApollyoN wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2005 19:36 KOFgokuon wrote: yeah, the jags have a chance vs the seahawks. go on day dreaming They already beat them this year
any team that only beats san francisco 10-9 gets absolutely no respect in my opinion
of course, i did forget that the seahawks had a really close game vs the 49'ers as well.
|
On December 27 2005 22:14 KOFgokuon wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2005 20:25 ApollyoN wrote:On December 27 2005 19:36 KOFgokuon wrote: yeah, the jags have a chance vs the seahawks. go on day dreaming They already beat them this year any team that only beats san francisco 10-9 gets absolutely no respect in my opinion of course, i did forget that the seahawks had a really close game vs the 49'ers as well.
oh the stupidity....
|
Canada5062 Posts
On any given Sunday, yes. But. The Jags won't upset anybody. These Jags are not underrated. They are simply not contenders. Same goes for the Skins (are they even in the playoffs? I haven't been following them because I know they will not do anything.)
Aside from the favorites based on record (Colts, Seahawks and Broncos), the Bears, Bengals and (if they play things right) Panthers are much more of a threat to go deep into the playoffs.
And of course the Pats. Fuck I hate them. But, as already mentioned, they're close to hitting on all cylinders again.
|
I'm so sick of hearing how the Giants "Shoulda-Coulda-Woulda" beat the Seahawks!
You crack smoken New York D**k heads need to watch the replay of that game. Both those TD's were NOT TD's! What's his face drug his foot out of bounds before his other touched. And that big jerk from Miami, Shockly?, never had both feet touch before he got his bell rung.
I pray the Giants come back to Seattle so we can lay a real whoopin on them as we will have all our starters back in the secondary, which we did not have for the first game with the G-men.
Just my $0.02
|
On December 28 2005 00:58 mensrea wrote: On any given Sunday, yes. But. The Jags won't upset anybody. These Jags are not underrated. They are simply not contenders. Same goes for the Skins (are they even in the playoffs? I haven't been following them because I know they will not do anything.)
Aside from the favorites based on record (Colts, Seahawks and Broncos), the Bears, Bengals and (if they play things right) Panthers are much more of a threat to go deep into the playoffs.
And of course the Pats. Fuck I hate them. But, as already mentioned, they're close to hitting on all cylinders again.
redskins have to beat dallas to make the playoffs if ramsey is starting, who knows........but the eagles are trash this year so they'll prolly win regardless
i dunno if they have NO shot. i think they can beat the bucs, and they can give the giants a run for their money. seahawks and bears...who knows. they have the hard hitting athletic stingy defense to do well in the playoffs tho
|
in reply to the 49ers only getting beat by one point, do not forget, last season the New England Patriots, lost to the Miami Dolphins....and the pats did win the Super Bowl...So yea...
Anyway Seahawks aren't going to make it to the Super Bowl -.-...They are another, "OGM PLAYOFF TIME, LETS CHOKE" team, just like the colts.
|
On December 28 2005 08:52 KOFgokuon wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2005 00:58 mensrea wrote: On any given Sunday, yes. But. The Jags won't upset anybody. These Jags are not underrated. They are simply not contenders. Same goes for the Skins (are they even in the playoffs? I haven't been following them because I know they will not do anything.)
Aside from the favorites based on record (Colts, Seahawks and Broncos), the Bears, Bengals and (if they play things right) Panthers are much more of a threat to go deep into the playoffs.
And of course the Pats. Fuck I hate them. But, as already mentioned, they're close to hitting on all cylinders again. redskins have to beat dallas to make the playoffs if ramsey is starting, who knows........but the eagles are trash this year so they'll prolly win regardless i dunno if they have NO shot. i think they can beat the bucs, and they can give the giants a run for their money. seahawks and bears...who knows. they have the hard hitting athletic stingy defense to do well in the playoffs tho
The Redskins have to beat the Eagles to get into the playoffs. The Cowboys can get in if either the Redskins or the Panthers lose (to the Falcons) and the Cowboys win (at home against the Rams). Redskins win the division if the Giants lose.
|
On December 28 2005 10:52 ~OpZ~ wrote: in reply to the 49ers only getting beat by one point, do not forget, last season the New England Patriots, lost to the Miami Dolphins....and the pats did win the Super Bowl...So yea...
Anyway Seahawks aren't going to make it to the Super Bowl -.-...They are another, "OGM PLAYOFF TIME, LETS CHOKE" team, just like the colts.
Here's my problem with the jags. they've had 10 "we should definitely win this game by 30 point" type of games against the jets, 2xhouston, baltimore, 2xtennessee, arizona, cleveland, san fran, and borderline st louis. in the last 7 weeks, they're only tough opponent was indy. admitedly they did well early in the season against cinci pittsburgh and seattle, but that was with a healthy fred taylor and byron leftwich. taylor gets hurt a lot, who konws if leftwich will be in playing shape when he returns. he was never all that quick footed, and after a month or not working out, who knows if he can push off well on that ankle. their defense is solid but i dont trust in their offense enough to put up points against the rest of the AFC defenses.
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
I honestly dont see the Colts in the Super bowl. Broncos / Pats are my best bet. And nobody has done a real good job at giving me a reason to doubt the seahawks beyond the smattering of "omgnmmgn XXX team is better!"
Let me remind you guys. 21-3 @ home in last 3 years. More false starts by opponents than ANY other stadium in the NFL this year. #1 Offense. #4 Defense in Pts allowed. #1 Sack team. NFL MVP, NFL Defensive ROokie of the Year (Tatupu) and oh yeah, the quarterback with the best rating in the month of December completing over 60 passes of 80 with 0 interceptions.
|
On December 23 2005 02:29 TreY wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm about 95% sure I'm right, but don't the top two teams in the league get 1st round byes? So "with current standings", the Pats will play the Jaguars. Correct? The worst division leader against the best wildcard. Or, seeds 4 and 5. Either way you look at it, I'm generally sure that I'm right.
That's right. I'm not sure if you were replying to something I said or not, though. If you were replying to what I said about the Pats losing in the divisional round what I meant was this: They're going to stomp the Jaguars. Jags suck without Leftwhich. (unless he's QBing, which he might be, but I was unaware of that)
On December 28 2005 11:56 {88}iNcontroL wrote: I honestly dont see the Colts in the Super bowl. Broncos / Pats are my best bet. And nobody has done a real good job at giving me a reason to doubt the seahawks beyond the smattering of "omgnmmgn XXX team is better!"
Let me remind you guys. 21-3 @ home in last 3 years. More false starts by opponents than ANY other stadium in the NFL this year. #1 Offense. #4 Defense in Pts allowed. #1 Sack team. NFL MVP, NFL Defensive ROokie of the Year (Tatupu) and oh yeah, the quarterback with the best rating in the month of December completing over 60 passes of 80 with 0 interceptions.
I thought the Falcons had that honor for some reason.
The Seahawks have beaten bad opponents convincingly, nothing more.
t Jacksonville L 26-14 FOX Sunday, September 18 1:00 pm PT Atlanta W 21-18 FOX Sunday, September 25 1:00 pm PT Arizona W 37-12 FOX Sunday, October 2 10:00 am PT at Washington L 20-17 FOX Sunday, October 9 10:00 am PT at St Louis W 37-31 FOX Sunday, October 16 5:30 pm PT Houston W 42-10 ESPN Sunday, October 23 1:00 pm PT Dallas W 13-10 FOX Sunday, November 6 1:05 pm PT at Arizona W 33-19 FOX Sunday, November 13 1:00 pm PT St Louis W 31-16 FOX Sunday, November 20 1:05 pm PT at San Francisco W 27-25 FOX Sunday, November 27 1:00 pm PT New York Giants W 24-21 FOX Monday, December 5 6:00 pm PT at Philadelphia W 42-0 ABC Sunday, December 11 1:00 pm PT San Francisco W 41-3 FOX Sunday, December 18 10:00 am PT at Tennessee W 28-24 FOX Saturday, December 24 1:00 pm PT Indianapolis W 28-13
They played mediocre teams in Dallas and New York (good for the NFC, but both needing at least one more year before they become serious threats), and hardly beat them. They also have the luxury of having the absolute worst division in the NFC, and second in the NFL being topped only by the the AFC East (Patriots division whichever it is).
The Colts played and beat the Steelers, the Patriots, the Bengals and the Jaguars (twice). They began the season 13-0 and have since lost two meaningless games, one of which the starters only played one quarter, the coach didn't show up to, and the #1 reciever, and Cato June (their linebacker). The Colts also deactivated four other starters before the game – offensive tackle Ryan Diem (knee), safety Bob Sanders (back), defensive tackle Corey Simon (foot) and defensive tackle Montae Reagor (knee). And Manning passed for over 100 yards in the first quarter, without Harrison. Add Harrison into the mix, and put the defensive starters back in, and you're in for an asskicking via the Colts.
The Broncos have, bar none, the hardest division in the league this year. They've beaten the Chargers, the Cheifs, The Patriots (granted they were missing some key players), and The Eagles when they still had TO and McNabb. They also beat some decent teams in the Cowboys, the Ravens (who's defense is still very good), and Buffalo who just beat the crap out of the Bengals.
Everyone knows about the Patriots, and you'd have to be an idiot to say they're going to be an easy game for anyone, but their time is over. The Bengals had a huge turn around this season, and they'll be tough for anyone, and the Jags beat the Seahawks, so I guess we can tell how the two conferences stack up against each other, considering Jacksonville is pretty much the weakest team going into the playoffs on the AFC side.
|
you could say the same argument for the giants beating hte broncos. one of the weakest NFC playoffs teams beats one of the top AFC playoff teams. any team can win any of the games. at this point there's little use arguing. u won't change anyone's minds about the teams that they like, just root for your team, and when your team eventually loses (as 11 of the 12 will) we can discuss what happened. trying to predict more is pointless
|
seahawks are hands down best in the nfc but i still dont see them making it to the super bowl. Seahawks will probably choke. (Im from seattle too) I think giants will revenge their loss and beat the seahawks in the conference championships. I also think redskins can beat them with their stifling defense. Other than alexander, I think seahawks are just an ordinary team, so if a team can shut him down, i think they have a real good chance of winning.
AFC on the other hand is very difficult to predict with all the high caliber teams, but I think Colts will pull through since they are playing in their dome. Games that Colts lost in previous playoffs was due to the cold conditions that they are not used to, though now with their revamped D and edge, they prob would do pretty well if they had to play on the road. But indoors, its gonna be very hard to stop that offense.
|
o and u forgot the loss in the playoffs at home =]
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
Its true seahawks have played bad vs bad teams and only skimmed by the better teams. Not going to deny it. Seahawks are a tough traveling team cause we travel further than any other team in the NFL, we also come from a moderate climate and travel to Florida where its 90+ with 90% humidity, that isnt easy. Playing in Washington is also known as one of the hardest stadiums to be played in. BUt guess what stadium is THE hardest? Seattle. Know why? 1. The fans and their proximity to the field, but 2. Teams have to travel the furthest to get there as well. So when i talk about the playoffs, im not talking about the regular season where we traveled hundreds of miles to play in the opposite climate, or an extremely hostile environment, im talking about weaker NFC teams traveling very far to go to THE hardest place for opponents to play football in the NFL. Im talking about a team who has allowed 22 points in 3 games and scored 107. Im talking about a team that has confidence (finnally), a mature quarterback (bout time) and the best running back with the best offensive line in the NFL. I can see the arguement for us getting smacked in the Superbowl, because we are going to be the underdogs. BUt saying we dont have all the cards lined up to make it to the superbowl is a bit off key.
|
hehe actually even with my remarks from above, i want the colts and seahawks play in the super bowl =]
|
Gotta go with my home team Chicago to take down Seattle in the NFC Championship game. Will be a close game, but I think the bears have a good chance if Grossman's return continues to elevate our passing game. Bald Hasselback getting picked off a couple times wouldn't hurt either.
|
SweetLemons - He's questionable to play this week, but I think we're starting Garrard because we're already locked in the 5th spot and it would give Leftwich an extra week to rest.
|
i think leftwich should play this week. i dont think first game back should be a playoff game, it may be too much for leftwich to handle due to pressure. He should get some playing time in this week.
|
On December 30 2005 08:40 HyunG wrote: i think leftwich should play this week. i dont think first game back should be a playoff game, it may be too much for leftwich to handle due to pressure. He should get some playing time in this week.
Maybe like, for a series or something, just to see how he is. If he runs well and stuff, let him play until he feels uncomfortable.
|
Gahh I also hate the Patriots, and the Steelers have to play them AGAIN.... For god sakes, they kill us in the playoffs every year.
|
skins in playoffs boy?
going from 5-6 to 10-6.. mm
|
Good to see Favre go out on a win.
Packers are double fucked without him now
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
im still laughing chiefs didnt make it in after POUNDING their opponent.
|
Hahaha. PANTHERS RULE!!! Not division winners but we're in the fucking playoffs for the third time in history. Death to the enemies of allah! Death to the infidels! death! Death! DEATH!
YAYAYAYYAYAYAY
Booyah-_-
|
Bears will make it to the superbowl and smoke you like a cheap cuban cigar.
|
On December 30 2005 09:21 pooper-scooper wrote: Gahh I also hate the Patriots, and the Steelers have to play them AGAIN.... For god sakes, they kill us in the playoffs every year.
No, they're playing the Bengals. That's game of the week, easy. Should be really great.
To say the Seahawks don't have a chance to make it is stupid, but I don't think they can win the Superbowl, and they have not played a top defense like the Bears' D this year. It'll be a hard game for them.
My predictions as of now:
Tampa - Washington NYG - Carolina Pittsburgh - Bengals NE - Jacksonville
That means that the Bucs go on to Chicago, NY to Seattle, Pittsburgh to Indy, and NE to Denver, should it all happen like that.
So, divisional rounds:
Bears - Bucs Seattle - NYG Denver - Patriots (becoming the first team to ever give Billicheck two losses to the same team in one year) Indy - Pittsburgh
Championship Bears - Seattle
Indy - Denver (even though Denver winning would be great, they have a shot, but Indy is going to play some inspired ball this year in the playoffs.)
On January 02 2006 19:23 decafchicken wrote: Bears will make it to the superbowl and smoke you like a cheap cuban cigar.
It's not really that likely the two will meet again, but we beat them without Grossman before, it'll be easier this time around.
|
instead of quoting here is lemons
My predictions as of now:
Tampa - Washington Should be a given NYG - Carolina Im going to call panthers... they are still a better team this year I believe maybe next year giants will take it but... nonetheless close game Pittsburgh - Bengals I'm calling bengals but this game means nothing NE - Jacksonville I'm calling new england just because it will favor the broncos more and I'm a denver fan boy
That means that the Bucs go on to Chicago, Carolina to Seattle, Pittsburgh to Indy, and NE to Denver, should it all happen like that.
So, divisional rounds:
Bears - Bucs Bear should win Seattle - Car Close game carolina does have the ability to beat seattle at home Denver - Patriots (becoming the first team to ever give Billicheck two losses to the same team in one year) Also denver has the best score against the patriots and I believe the pats have only beaten us once? under brady at home in a worthless game? but yeah I believe we have the best record against brady and co. but I REALLY wish the pats would play colts instead of the steelers or bengals because the pats would walk all over the colts.... heres where the nay sayers come in AMAGOSH the colts are so great... see the patriots have their team back.. all their key players... they can tear the colts up... the colts are good but I say overrated. Indy - Pittsburgh Indy just because the steelers don't deserve this over the bengals
Championship Bears - Seattle I'm going to say bears but who the hell cares.. I mean seattle has a shot but they blow these types of games
Indy - Denver - Heres where im calling denver not just because of my fanboyism
Denver has one hell of an offensive line that is capable of stopping mathis and freeney ... indianas line has less endurance over the course of the game... so they tend to die off at the end... while on defense denver has one of the fresh and best rotations currently in the league... they will swarm manning and keep him on his toes while champ and williams cover the recievers not to mention our small but fast line backer corp will be able to drop back and help coverage.
Denver has a knack all season for throwing up points early and riding it out for a win... while indiana has trouble stopping scores later on in the game so it should be a shoot out really... manning will Most likely keep his offense out on the field longer.. which i know gives them an advantage but if denver uses all their depth they can wear that offense out and keep manning moving...
manning lost to the chargers because they never let him get his foot hold... sorry everyone but manning can not play this game on the run which is why to me hes not as great as everyone says
anyways I'm calling denver over indy
Den vs Sea - Tough game to pick becuase I witnessed larry johnson tear through the broncos and in my mind hes the same caliber as alexander... I'll say if this match up happens we might actually have the first superbowl to watch since Carolina vs Pats... and don't tell me that wasn't a good game... everyone was worried that carolina couldn't score but delhomme went score for score against brady
|
lol ok we'll see. i agree that broncos and colts will meet in the afc championship. but broncos are gonna get blown out.
as for redskins vs bucs, i duno why you would say its a given that bucs will win. i really think redskins will be the team to watch out for upsets and i think bucs are gonna go down first game oo
|
3rd times a charm man... The colts are overrated and I can guarantee the broncos will have a little bit more fight in them after losing the last 2 playoff games against them
Bucs are may have lost a few players like gold and shit but they still were just in the last decade they have experience and some players from that team... plus CADILLAC !
I dunno I say skins can upset them but I'm not really one to root for the skins
|
|
chargers had the talent, but didn't have the drive to win games that they should've, so it's only their own fault they arn't in the playoffs. But it doesn't matter, It's all about the Bears now
|
Canada5062 Posts
Speaking of talent, but no drive, two words: "Michael Vick".
|
it's tough to say who had a bigger melt down, the falcons or the cowboys
|
Canada5062 Posts
|
Braavos36362 Posts
chargers shouldn't have made it
they lost at home to miami and got spanked by KC in two MUST WIN games. who cares if they beat the colts, they didn't win when they needed to, hence no playoffs. they got what they deserved.
the afc side of the bracket is soooo stacked.
|
Falcons went 2-6 in there last 8 games...weak.
First of all the AFC >>>>>>>>>> NFC. The cheifs would be one of the top teams in the NFC and yet didn't even make the playoffs.
The redskins and steelers are on fire right now, they both had a bad streak in the middle of the season, but really turned things around.
Wildcard Predictions
Steelers > Cinnci N.E. > Jacksonville
Wash. > Tampa Bay Giants > Carolina
|
stop with all the theory crafting I'm going to post something from one of the greatest recieving tight ends to play the game
from shannon sharpe
(Jan. 1, 2006) -- This postseason is going to be an interesting one, because I really feel that the top six teams in the league are all in the AFC. Whichever one of those six wins the AFC championship will win the Super Bowl.
One thing that is really bugging me, though, is that I keep hearing people say that San Diego is the 'best team not to make the playoffs.' Or maybe they say it about Dallas or Minnesota or Kansas City. Whatever the team, it doesn't matter to me. It's really quite simple: If you are in the playoffs, you deserve to be, and if you aren't in them, you don't. It's as simple as that.
Every team has a game or two that they won that they shouldn't have, and conversely, there are a few games each team has lost that maybe they shouldn't have. Well, too bad. Your record says you're 10-6, you're 10-6. If that's good enough to make the playoffs, great. If not, too bad. It's a 16-game season. There was plenty of time to win games and get yourself in without people having to make excuses for you. You get the point.
now if you want to be picky one of the teams that played very well and will do well next season is the dolphins they are currently 6-0 in their last 6 games. they also tipped off the broncos after they were the only undefeated team in the preseason so this is a good team to watch for next year...
|
Braavos36362 Posts
speaking of shannon sharpe,
"Ray Lewis is the type of guy, if he were in a fight with a bear I wouldn't help him, I'd pour honey on him because he likes to fight. That's the type of guy Ray Lewis is." -- Shannon Sharpe
|
yo redskins take it all nuff said
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
if seahawks go to superbowl it will NOT be a blow out. I think thats the best chance for a better super bowl. Bears would keep it low, but their offense blows huge donkey nuts. Panthers arent what they used to be, Bucs would be nice but their offense is only a bit better than the Bears, and their defense is actually fairly inconsistant.
Id love a Seahawks / Colts/Broncos/Pats superbowl inspite my huge and blind bias to the seahawks i think them vs the amazing offense of Colts or the most balanced team in football with the Broncos or the legendary Pats would be epic!
|
Braavos36362 Posts
i agree, seahawks would make the most entertaining super bowl
though colts/giants would be unreal too, hahahaha imagine if eli wins? peyton would absolutely shit himself.
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
that would rock, but i think by the time the media is done pounding our faces with peyton drama we'd be sick n tired of the game before it was even played. Giants CAN be a very entertaining and good team to watch, but they too are very inconsistant (mostly due to eli).
|
On January 03 2006 04:24 mensrea wrote: Speaking of talent, but no drive, two words: "Michael Vick".
He has great running talent, but he's a terrible quarterback. It's not too late to make him a halfback, really.
The guy just can't throw. He doesn't understand the physics of throwing a football. How to put touch on it, etc, etc. He's just BAD. He's an amazing athlete, though, very fun to watch, but a bad QB..
To the guy who posted right below my predictions, I could see things going that way, but uhh... you picked the Bears to beat Seattle, and have Seattle in the Super Bowl... which is it?
On January 03 2006 14:26 {88}iNcontroL wrote: if seahawks go to superbowl it will NOT be a blow out. I think thats the best chance for a better super bowl. Bears would keep it low, but their offense blows huge donkey nuts. Panthers arent what they used to be, Bucs would be nice but their offense is only a bit better than the Bears, and their defense is actually fairly inconsistant.
Id love a Seahawks / Colts/Broncos/Pats superbowl inspite my huge and blind bias to the seahawks i think them vs the amazing offense of Colts or the most balanced team in football with the Broncos or the legendary Pats would be epic!
The Bears offense now, in the last three weeks (minus week 17, that was a preseason game to them) cannot be compared to their offense before the Atlanta game. They can now score against good teams, and put up 20-24 points in a game, maybe more with that defense.
I like defensive struggles a lot more than I like shootouts (I found the Cinci v Colts game to be very boring), and the Bears will give that to whoever they play.
It should absolutely come down to the Bears and Seahawks in the NFC Championships, there's no reason for it not to.
On January 03 2006 14:47 {88}iNcontroL wrote: that would rock, but i think by the time the media is done pounding our faces with peyton drama we'd be sick n tired of the game before it was even played. Giants CAN be a very entertaining and good team to watch, but they too are very inconsistant (mostly due to eli).
Eli's inconsistancy is for two reasons in my mind: 1) He's inexperienced, give him a few more years and he could be a great QB. 2) He doesn't have the same sort of drive and attitude his brother has. Sure, Peyton may overreact to losses, but Eli doesn't take them seriously enough. They're like polar opposites. Eli could be a great QB down the line, but he needs another year or two of development.
|
I was using both as an example because to me its a tossup game seahawks blow big games and to me hasselback can't throw.. while the bears defense can stop the run
|
|
|
Jags down 7-3 at halftime. Leftwich looking good.
|
You've got the superbowl teams right, but the Seahawks aren't gona win it
|
On January 07 2006 18:48 TreY wrote:Jags down 7-3 at halftime. Leftwich looking good.
Ick... nevermind.
|
Haha, the jags got fucked up.
|
that redskins games was one of the worst offensive performances i've ever seen in my life
|
On January 08 2006 08:17 KOFgokuon wrote: that redskins games was one of the worst offensive performances i've ever seen in my life
125 yards ftw.
|
Eesh another horrendous offensive performance by the giants The giants may have the so-called best defensive end tandem in the league, but carolina had the far superior defense it'll be interesting to see the panthers play the bears. both have their strong defenses, and a one-dimensional offense...even though deshaun foster ran the ball really well today. will be interesting if he can run against the bear's defensive line. same issue with steve smith, whether or not he'll be able to get open vs the secondary of the bears. thi'sll be a great matchup
if the redskins' offense doesn't play better, needless to say they're gonna get smoked...badly. better hope they have sean taylor back...i don't think he's getting suspended for the spitting incident but who knows.
let's go bengals
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
panthers will beat the bears. If you have _any_ kind of defense what so ever you should beat the bears. Their offense is worse than Tampa Bay's and apparently Tampa has a better defense (rated) so i dont see the Panthers losing in Chi town.
Panths 17 Bears 13
Skins looked horrible. Yes their defense looked amazing, but they lost a starting defensive tackle (omg did anyone see that play? His arm got zig-zagged) and they only scored 17 points (14 off turnovers). I dont see the Skins comming to Seattle and beating the Hawks. The hawks (when they werent playing great) lost by a missed field goal IN washington. We are playing a lot better and we get our 2 starting cb's back as well as our starting ROLB in DD Lewis.
Seahawks 30 Skins 20
Colts vs patriots is easily going to be the best game that weekend. FFS the Pats looked amazing and the Colts have such a intense team. But i think the pats go to Indi and upset the bandwaggoners with a W
Pats 34 Colts 33
Pit vs cinci is a Pit victory sorry folks. We are looking at a Pit vs Broncos game in which the broncos run all over the Pit.
Pit 28 Cinci 21
Pit 13 Broncos 38
|
just so you know
IF bengals beat steelers... then pats goto indy and bengals goto denver
IF steelers beat bengals... pats goto denver and steelers goto indy
Denver > pats easy look threw history this is the only team capable of owning brady hands down
Pats > indy ... so u indy fans better hope that the steelers win.....
Denver - Bengals.... this ones tough they like never play each other
but yeah the only way the steelers can play the broncos is if they make it to the afc championship after beating indy and denver beating the pats I'm calling for a Denver vs indy afc championship with denver finally getting vengence for the 2 and out playoffs in the past while seahawks or panthers play denver in the superbowl which seahawks have a chance at beating denver... ... larry johnson and the chiefs vs denver remember? I think johnson and alexander are on the same level as far as that goes.
Denver would walk all over carolina... but I'm looking forward to a den vs sea superbowl it'd be an impressive game
|
He's right. Lowest Seed that moves on from the wild card round plays the top seed, and the middle 2 play each other, so if Pittsburgh wins then they play vs the colts, Patriots vs the Broncos
|
but yes I think that seattle and cinncinatti are the only two teams that can hold the rotation of the broncos defensive line... and even then the offensive lines of those two teams will break after halftime........
|
PALMER HURT SECOND SNAP INTO GAME HHHH
YES!~>!>!>! if he goes out steelers win :D muhahahahah therefore pats going to denver and pats losing
but man kitna is okay and all veteran he might be able to do it but lasdkfjlsk;dfjaskl;dfjla;skdfjklasd;f poor palmer Im so confused on who I want to win.....
|
man wtf steelers defense and the bengals offense are going at it ... this game just started two bengals are hurt .. the refs are having trouble keeping the peace..... a steeler saftey tried to walk over a bengal wide reciever that was down to taunt him and the refs had to seperate that.... this isn't even football... sad...
|
my prediction: skins > hawks 21-3
|
a lot of people will say no because the skins offense... they had a bad game but that is actually plauseable they are extremely capable of beating the hawks
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
On January 08 2006 14:41 Tossim1 wrote: my prediction: skins > hawks 21-3
Your fucking retarded
|
lolololololol well according to you the hawks are unbeatable at home... hrrmm well thats okay I'll go along with that because denver was undefeated at home too
|
On January 08 2006 15:36 {88}iNcontroL wrote:Your fucking retarded
The Skins can very well beat the Seahawks, in that he's right, but the spread is ridiculous.
Who the fuck saw the Giants game coming, though? Yikes, 23 (24?)- 0. Ouch, sucks for Eli.
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
i agree fully the skins can damn well beat the hawks. In fact i think this game will be harder / bigger game for the hawks than the championship game. We have the mental hill of our first playoff win to get over (in 20 years) and also the skins are hottest team in football with 6 wins in a row and a very well balanced team (most of the time). But to say 21-3 is "fucking retarded" imo.
|
i think it'll be a real close game due to the fact that alexander will actually be somewhat contained I think. We'll see. Im thinking redskins by a field goal or so. oo
and its over for Pitt. If Colts score first, then u can expect a blow out. As for New England, it'll be a great game i think. But I think Denver is a bit too much for NE this year. Good run though.
Last playoff game: Panthers looked good, but I think the cold weather will help out the bears. Both teams will be forced to run, and Bears have better D and better run attack with Jones than Panthers with Foster. But it will be close game since Bears D does allow alot of yards.
|
steve smith all dayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy redskins have the ridiculus linebacking core to at least slow down alexander, seahawks will have to beat them in the air. their secondary is still beat up though, so it's definitely plausible. I'm still not convinced that the seahawks defense is that great. They may have good numbers, but come on, nfc west? Either way, we'll see this week if they're overrated, or if they're legitimately good. I just don't think the seahawks have the top-level playmakers on defense that most of the other teams have. Let's see if I get proven wrong on saturday
|
Braavos36362 Posts
the pats HAVE to win at denver, because they simply MUST play each other in the playoffs. don't let denver do the dirty work for you, bitches.
|
On January 08 2006 23:34 HyunG wrote: i think it'll be a real close game due to the fact that alexander will actually be somewhat contained I think. We'll see. Im thinking redskins by a field goal or so. oo
and its over for Pitt. If Colts score first, then u can expect a blow out. As for New England, it'll be a great game i think. But I think Denver is a bit too much for NE this year. Good run though.
Last playoff game: Panthers looked good, but I think the cold weather will help out the bears. Both teams will be forced to run, and Bears have better D and better run attack with Jones than Panthers with Foster. But it will be close game since Bears D does allow alot of yards.
Are you dumb? They were #2 in yards allowed this year, #1 in points against. Easily the most dominant defense over the last five years (note, after the Ravens D).
On January 09 2006 06:30 KOFgokuon wrote: steve smith shut down all dayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy redskins have the ridiculus linebacking core to at least slow down alexander, seahawks will have to beat them in the air. their secondary is still beat up though, so it's definitely plausible. I'm still not convinced that the seahawks defense is that great. They may have good numbers, but come on, nfc west? Either way, we'll see this week if they're overrated, or if they're legitimately good. I just don't think the seahawks have the top-level playmakers on defense that most of the other teams have. Let's see if I get proven wrong on saturday
I agree. Steve Smith will probably be shut down all dayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy. He didn't really do a whole lot last time around, but DelHomme has made improvements in his game since week 11. Should be a good game, but it's a Bear victory.
|
Patriots all the way. The other matchups are irrelevant.
|
1. i never said anything about points. 2. wow my bad. i didn't look up the stats before i said it. I had the bears d on my fantasy team and it looked like they allowed a lot of yards. I thought they just got a lot of turnovers to give me points. 3. You got something against me? 4. stop trying to be so smart rofl. I know football, maybe not as well as you (i dunno how much u know). Ps I went 3-1 last week =p Giants game was not expected.
|
On January 10 2006 18:48 HyunG wrote: 1. i never said anything about points. 2. wow my bad. i didn't look up the stats before i said it. I had the bears d on my fantasy team and it looked like they allowed a lot of yards. I thought they just got a lot of turnovers to give me points. 3. You got something against me? 4. stop trying to be so smart rofl. I know football, maybe not as well as you (i dunno how much u know). Ps I went 3-1 last week =p Giants game was not expected.
The "are you dumb" is just something that gets said a lot where I live, and I've started to use it.
The only team with less yardage allowed was the Bucs, and the Bears would have had that, should they have kept the starters in week 17.
I'm not "trying to be smart" I'm merely stating my opinion. If I disagree with someone, I'm not going to act as if I don't.
I was really hoping for the Bucs to win, and I figured that Washington would defuse soon, thus leaving the Bucs a good opportunity at home, and Chris Simms had been playing great. The Giants game was very unexpected. Even if they lost, they shouldn't have been shut out. (Quick note: The last time they were shut out was against the '85 Bears in the playoffs.)
|
Panthers will win big against chicago. The panthers have a an average offense; jake delhomme is good if not a little interception prone, and foster has been looking better every game. Chicago has NO OFFENSE. They have rex grossman--he sucks. Very badly. And he's had alot of time to mature and start not sucking, but he hasn't, and I don't think he ever will. Their other QB suck worse, as they have shown in past games. Their running game is average on a good day.
They have no chance at a super bowl. What is the playoff average of points? A good bit over 20. And better D's than the bears have given up more points in than that. It WAS just a matter of time, and now that time has run up.
PS GO PANTHERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
thomas jones is definitely an unsung hero for the bears this year. he put up really good numbers for an anemic offense (scored half of the bear's offensive touchdowns) while being banged up most of the year. I don't see how you can possibly say that their run game is average at best, not when they have a top 10 rusher in yards AND touchdowns. And how can you say that Rex Grossman sucks? We've barely seen him play. at all. it's one thing to say he's inexperienced, and we have no idea what we'll get out of him. Saying that he's trash just because he's injury prone and hasn't had a chance to prove himself is something else entirely.
Orton isn't very good though, that is true. But to say they have no shot at the superbowl is dumb. The ravens had a terrible offense too, yet they won the superbowl. Everything about these teams is very similar, it wouldn't surprise me at all to see them make a run at the superbowl at all.
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
omg sign of appocalypse !!!
Seahawk advertisement on this very site AS i clicked on this thread. It means the Seahawks have the backing of the Christian God, we win.
|
On January 10 2006 21:11 KOFgokuon wrote: thomas jones is definitely an unsung hero for the bears this year. he put up really good numbers for an anemic offense (scored half of the bear's offensive touchdowns) while being banged up most of the year. I don't see how you can possibly say that their run game is average at best, not when they have a top 10 rusher in yards AND touchdowns. And how can you say that Rex Grossman sucks? We've barely seen him play. at all. it's one thing to say he's inexperienced, and we have no idea what we'll get out of him. Saying that he's trash just because he's injury prone and hasn't had a chance to prove himself is something else entirely.
Orton isn't very good though, that is true. But to say they have no shot at the superbowl is dumb. The ravens had a terrible offense too, yet they won the superbowl. Everything about these teams is very similar, it wouldn't surprise me at all to see them make a run at the superbowl at all.
Grossman is awful. And you'll see sunday just how awful. He is inexperienced, but that doesn't mean he doesn't suck.
|
On January 11 2006 06:01 -_- wrote:Show nested quote +On January 10 2006 21:11 KOFgokuon wrote: thomas jones is definitely an unsung hero for the bears this year. he put up really good numbers for an anemic offense (scored half of the bear's offensive touchdowns) while being banged up most of the year. I don't see how you can possibly say that their run game is average at best, not when they have a top 10 rusher in yards AND touchdowns. And how can you say that Rex Grossman sucks? We've barely seen him play. at all. it's one thing to say he's inexperienced, and we have no idea what we'll get out of him. Saying that he's trash just because he's injury prone and hasn't had a chance to prove himself is something else entirely.
Orton isn't very good though, that is true. But to say they have no shot at the superbowl is dumb. The ravens had a terrible offense too, yet they won the superbowl. Everything about these teams is very similar, it wouldn't surprise me at all to see them make a run at the superbowl at all. Grossman is awful. And you'll see sunday just how awful. He is inexperienced, but that doesn't mean he doesn't suck.
You are an idiot, and clearly know nothing about football.
Anyone who watches Grossman sees that he has certain things going for him already, especially considering his inexperience. He has a quick release, and pretty decent field vision, especially for a guy who hasn't played much. He makes better reads on the defense than some quarterbacks, definitely so against most rookies, and he has good pocket presence, too.
On the contrary, you're going to see exactly how overrated the Panthers are because the Giants happened to play bad last week. They're going to go up against a great defense, and Foster will NOT run for 100+ yards. If Foster can't run, that forces the game into DelHomme's hands, which is bad news for the Panthers, because he's not exactly the guy you want to rely on in a pressure situation; he's a decent QB, but nothing special by any stretch of the imagination.
Remember the last time they played? Yeah, of course you do. 8 sacks, two picks, 3 points allowed. You really think that team has the ability to beat this year's #1 defense, and one of the best defenses over the last 20 years?
|
Rookie Quarterback... Almost no season experience... = doom.... atleast for the ravens dilfer was a little better than a rookie with one game under his belt....
remember what happened to big ben.... yeah unless the defense scores some points the bears offense won't make over 10.
|
On January 11 2006 16:43 Chris.K wrote: Rookie Quarterback... Almost no season experience... = doom.... atleast for the ravens dilfer was a little better than a rookie with one game under his belt....
remember what happened to big ben.... yeah unless the defense scores some points the bears offense won't make over 10.
He has more than one game under his belt. He installed the offense on the team, it's not like it's something new to him. It's a lot different than a rookie who got injured in pre-season then came back in week 15 or something.
|
yeah, he just has 3 (maybe 2, forget how early he got hurt) pre seasons, and 6 actual games of playing experience. He has the real game experience of a 3rd year backup quarterback. At some point, watching film and practicing just isn't enough, you need to have real game experience, which he fundamentally lacks. I'm not saying he isn't good. I have no idea. He certainly has more upside than Orton (read: Any upside at all) so having him in won't hurt. He really is the x-factor in the game, if he plays well bears win. If he plays badly, complete toss up. Even so, having one of his first games back against the panthers is not something I'd want, not with all the ball hawks in their secondary
|
On January 11 2006 16:04 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2006 06:01 -_- wrote:On January 10 2006 21:11 KOFgokuon wrote: thomas jones is definitely an unsung hero for the bears this year. he put up really good numbers for an anemic offense (scored half of the bear's offensive touchdowns) while being banged up most of the year. I don't see how you can possibly say that their run game is average at best, not when they have a top 10 rusher in yards AND touchdowns. And how can you say that Rex Grossman sucks? We've barely seen him play. at all. it's one thing to say he's inexperienced, and we have no idea what we'll get out of him. Saying that he's trash just because he's injury prone and hasn't had a chance to prove himself is something else entirely.
Orton isn't very good though, that is true. But to say they have no shot at the superbowl is dumb. The ravens had a terrible offense too, yet they won the superbowl. Everything about these teams is very similar, it wouldn't surprise me at all to see them make a run at the superbowl at all. Grossman is awful. And you'll see sunday just how awful. He is inexperienced, but that doesn't mean he doesn't suck. You are an idiot, and clearly know nothing about football. Anyone who watches Grossman sees that he has certain things going for him already, especially considering his inexperience. He has a quick release, and pretty decent field vision, especially for a guy who hasn't played much. He makes better reads on the defense than some quarterbacks, definitely so against most rookies, and he has good pocket presence, too. On the contrary, you're going to see exactly how overrated the Panthers are because the Giants happened to play bad last week. They're going to go up against a great defense, and Foster will NOT run for 100+ yards. If Foster can't run, that forces the game into DelHomme's hands, which is bad news for the Panthers, because he's not exactly the guy you want to rely on in a pressure situation; he's a decent QB, but nothing special by any stretch of the imagination. Remember the last time they played? Yeah, of course you do. 8 sacks, two picks, 3 points allowed. You really think that team has the ability to beat this year's #1 defense, and one of the best defenses over the last 20 years?
I don't know much about football, but frankly, I think I know ten times as much as you.
"Anyone who watches grossman..." Huh? He's thrown the ball 39 times ALL SEASON.
How the fuck do you know that he has "a quick release... pretty decent field vision... makes better reads on the defense than some quarterbacks, definitely so against most rookies and has good pocket presence." Unless you're a profesional football analyst SHUT THE FUCK UP.
|
seahawks are going to lose for sure, redskins defense has been unstoppable and will keep alexander from running the ball...also the skins offense will be back in gear this week and santana moss and clinton portis will have big games...the spead on the game is +10 last i saw for the skins, anyone who bets should put money on them
|
The Panthers are still a superbowl caliber team... if you ignore last year.... and everyone thinks they are chumps
exactly what people thought with the pats... although the pats are back and fully capable of taking any other team out shanahan has a plan for them he always does
but people need to stop looking so much into stats and records and slumps.... and look at the effing teams they played.....
Redskins by far are riding a nice streak they have a lot of upside... while the hawks on the other hand don't
then you look at the other NFC matchup once again carolina.... super bowl team..... bears... great defense ... and a quarterback who has shown the world nothing..... hrrmm who would I place my bets on in this game.
|
On January 11 2006 19:22 shuturface wrote: seahawks are going to lose for sure, redskins defense has been unstoppable and will keep alexander from running the ball...also the skins offense will be back in gear this week and santana moss and clinton portis will have big games...the spead on the game is +10 last i saw for the skins, anyone who bets should put money on them
saying that the redskins will cover a 10 point spread (which i think will definitely happen) and saying that the seahawks are gonna lose are completely different things. their defense is definitely not unstoppable, their secondary is still beat up. rogers springs and walt harris still aren't 100% (and walt harris suck anyways). Personally I think it'll be a close game (and I hope the redskins win), mainly because I think the seahawk's defense is overrated because they played so many shitty teams. Again, at this point, pretty much every point of these games has been argued. Time for everyone to put their foots in their mouths and wait for saturday/sunday to come on by -_- (not mocking you -_-, that's actually a face i use all the time).
|
Den vs pats Skins vs Hawks Panthers vs bears Indy vs Steelers
theorycrafting this is... these are the teams with the best statistical chances of winning based on teams played... current streaks... and overall comparisons of defense and offense.. done by me of course
as of right now i'm 3-1 mainly because I thought simms was a better player and my lack of watching him proved to be a very vital thing.
plus I lucked out on the bengals... I mean I believe i picked the steelers b/c I wanted the pats to goto denver
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
They must have been done by you, cause if you went by the numbers the Seahawks have the highest probability of not only going to the superbowl, but winning it as well. Numbers compiled by Las Vegas of course.
|
Some fanboy forgot to factor in that the hawks are overrated and played worthless teams... and miscalculation the previous loss to the skins...which will fully put the hawks foot up their ass...
plus if they make it past the skins.... the definately can not take a superbowl caliber team in the panthers..... and lord knows hasselback can't score on the bears defense if it comes to that.... well correction he may actually score on them.... but I'd say the bears defense would outscore his offense....
Vegas numbers take the highest seeded team and automatically give them the favorite.... seriously find a team that had a by... that doesn't have the odds to win... and hell it doesn't even mean they are better teams... in the seahawks case... the cards... err teams... fell in the right order and they had an easy schedule... besides the probowler in the line... which I'd say didn't deserve it ... it absolutely sucks.... the secondary sucks... the offense.... alexander can be shut down... the recievers errr.. RECIEVER isn't someone who I'd list in my top 10 or 15. plus hasselback ... yeah sorry... I'm not even going to begin on him... someone needs to get this guy a walker
|
Further note.... sorry for the double post I should just edit but this is an entirely different point
MOST POLLS AND ODDS HAVE THE COLTS WINNING THE SUPERBOWL... definately not the seahawks.... Well any decent poll that doesn't take into account the half back.. alexander can't take you to the championship and win it for ya he needs help.
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
No you can flame all you like. They actually take into account numbers like home rtecord, defense, offense rating, MVP mayhaps? Health and likelihood of them beating a team at home that barely won the Hawks in Washington by us missing a field goal.
You can go a head and try and say Vegas doesnt know jack shit about numbers and odds but you will be, well horribly wrong.
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
and ur latest post was just factually wrong. Maybe "most polls" i guess you have some kind of poll counter compiled before you. Im going off what vegas said, considered the mecca for gambling and is really nothing to argue against.. the safest bet as of now in Vegas is seattle. And no they didnt just pull it out of their ass, they might have considered all the numbers kid.
|
On January 11 2006 18:35 -_- wrote:Show nested quote +On January 11 2006 16:04 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote:On January 11 2006 06:01 -_- wrote:On January 10 2006 21:11 KOFgokuon wrote: thomas jones is definitely an unsung hero for the bears this year. he put up really good numbers for an anemic offense (scored half of the bear's offensive touchdowns) while being banged up most of the year. I don't see how you can possibly say that their run game is average at best, not when they have a top 10 rusher in yards AND touchdowns. And how can you say that Rex Grossman sucks? We've barely seen him play. at all. it's one thing to say he's inexperienced, and we have no idea what we'll get out of him. Saying that he's trash just because he's injury prone and hasn't had a chance to prove himself is something else entirely.
Orton isn't very good though, that is true. But to say they have no shot at the superbowl is dumb. The ravens had a terrible offense too, yet they won the superbowl. Everything about these teams is very similar, it wouldn't surprise me at all to see them make a run at the superbowl at all. Grossman is awful. And you'll see sunday just how awful. He is inexperienced, but that doesn't mean he doesn't suck. You are an idiot, and clearly know nothing about football. Anyone who watches Grossman sees that he has certain things going for him already, especially considering his inexperience. He has a quick release, and pretty decent field vision, especially for a guy who hasn't played much. He makes better reads on the defense than some quarterbacks, definitely so against most rookies, and he has good pocket presence, too. On the contrary, you're going to see exactly how overrated the Panthers are because the Giants happened to play bad last week. They're going to go up against a great defense, and Foster will NOT run for 100+ yards. If Foster can't run, that forces the game into DelHomme's hands, which is bad news for the Panthers, because he's not exactly the guy you want to rely on in a pressure situation; he's a decent QB, but nothing special by any stretch of the imagination. Remember the last time they played? Yeah, of course you do. 8 sacks, two picks, 3 points allowed. You really think that team has the ability to beat this year's #1 defense, and one of the best defenses over the last 20 years? I don't know much about football, but frankly, I think I know ten times as much as you. "Anyone who watches grossman..." Huh? He's thrown the ball 39 times ALL SEASON. How the fuck do you know that he has "a quick release... pretty decent field vision... makes better reads on the defense than some quarterbacks, definitely so against most rookies and has good pocket presence." Unless you're a profesional football analyst SHUT THE FUCK UP.
He played more than that one game this season. He's been on the team for three years, you just haven't seen him. Being from Illinois (upper), I get to see him every time he plays. I can tell you that he can see what's going on on the field from the Falcons game. Why is that? The 12 yard pass to Justin Gage when the Falcons brought the house shows this. The fact that he was over 50% completion tells me this. It makes sense. It's pretty easy to see that a guy has a quick release. He either holds on to it for too long and throws a lot of balls badly, or he gets rid of it on time and completes them/does not get sacked all the time. Not really that hard to figure out. He makes better reads than the guy who was before him, it's a fact. He has good pocket presence because he knows when to move away from the oncoming traffic, and when to get rid of it. It's an innate thing. You either have it, or you don't. Again, it's not that hard to see.
You don't have to be a professional analyst to not be retarded.
(EDIT: Keep in mind that I am from Illinois, so when I talk, I talk like most Bear fans and talk in unsaid comparison to Orton)
On January 11 2006 20:53 {88}iNcontroL wrote: and ur latest post was just factually wrong. Maybe "most polls" i guess you have some kind of poll counter compiled before you. Im going off what vegas said, considered the mecca for gambling and is really nothing to argue against.. the safest bet as of now in Vegas is seattle. And no they didnt just pull it out of their ass, they might have considered all the numbers kid.
But do they take into account strength of schedule? I have no idea, it's an honest question. The Seahawks had an easy schedule.
NEW EDIT:
Let's take a look at -_-'s original argument, shall we?
Grossman has had a "long time to mature and not suck." He's actually only played six games, not really that much time, now is it? However, you can see signs of promise in him if you actually watch him play, and many EXPERTS will agree with that.
Average rushing offense? Last I checked, a top ten rushing attack was not "average," to say the least. In fact, it's pretty damn good. Thomas Jones had 1300 yards this season, which isn't too bad for a back. Not the best in the league, but above average for sure. Then they have Adrian Peterson, and now Cedric Benson to bang it a bit for rest for Jones amongst other things.
Their D is the best there's been since the Ravens' D of 2000. There's no question about that. Before the Ravens there was the '85 Bears who were so great. There haven't been a whole lot of "better defenses" than the Bears defense this year. Their D allowed 12.6 points per game. Do you realize how highly that ranks on the all time list? Pretty damn high. To say "better defenses" is assinine.
The key to the game is stopping Foster. If they can stop him, which I believe they will, and they can get an early lead, however it may be done, then they can drop an extra guy back to double Smith. Because if you're down in a game, running just is not going to help, unless it's only a few points.
|
The polls DO NOT take into account the strength of the schedules which I fully did the seahawks had a much easier time than lets say... denver or san diego or oakland or kansas... i'm naming these 4 teams because this is the hardest division in the league and those teams sparred against each other quite a few times.
|
On January 11 2006 22:00 Chris.K wrote: The polls DO NOT take into account the strength of the schedules which I fully did the seahawks had a much easier time than lets say... denver or san diego or oakland or kansas... i'm naming these 4 teams because this is the hardest division in the league and those teams sparred against each other quite a few times.
At the same time, most of the league didn't have to deal with that kind of schedule (of the Broncos, Chargers [especially them], or Chiefs).
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
Strength of schedule doesnt mean shit in the playoffs. Hardest or easiest its a 1 game live or die baby. So when i say the seahawks have the best odds they are taking into account MANY aspects, while you are taking into account strength of schedule? That doesnt matter. Thats the past.
Ive continually said, this is the seahawks hardest game until superbowl. IF we win this game we are a guranteed superbowl team i promise it. Not winning a playoff game in 20 years = a mental hill we have to climb no matter how good we are. That and the Skins are the hottest teamin the NFL winning 6 must win games in a row. I am absolutely ecstatic about this game, its gonna fucking rock.
But you seriously can count on me verbally reaming you when the seahawks win. And they will.
|
seahawks are over rated sorry=p they had one if not the weakest schedule in the NFL and they were in the weakest division. their rec is a production of the weakest Nfl schedule.
|
On January 11 2006 23:04 {88}iNcontroL wrote: Strength of schedule doesnt mean shit in the playoffs. Hardest or easiest its a 1 game live or die baby. So when i say the seahawks have the best odds they are taking into account MANY aspects, while you are taking into account strength of schedule? That doesnt matter. Thats the past.
Ive continually said, this is the seahawks hardest game until superbowl. IF we win this game we are a guranteed superbowl team i promise it. Not winning a playoff game in 20 years = a mental hill we have to climb no matter how good we are. That and the Skins are the hottest teamin the NFL winning 6 must win games in a row. I am absolutely ecstatic about this game, its gonna fucking rock.
But you seriously can count on me verbally reaming you when the seahawks win. And they will.
They may be the hottest team in football, but the skins are gonna run out of gas. They've been on full drive mode for the past 6 weeks, you can't maintain that kind of pace. It wouldn't shock me at all if the red skins are just tired, and just don't put up a good performance against the sea hawks. However if the redskins do win, prepare to have your team shit talked on for the next, oh, year or so. again.
let the team with less excuses win!
|
On January 11 2006 23:04 {88}iNcontroL wrote: Strength of schedule doesnt mean shit in the playoffs. Hardest or easiest its a 1 game live or die baby. So when i say the seahawks have the best odds they are taking into account MANY aspects, while you are taking into account strength of schedule? That doesnt matter. Thats the past.
Ive continually said, this is the seahawks hardest game until superbowl. IF we win this game we are a guranteed superbowl team i promise it. Not winning a playoff game in 20 years = a mental hill we have to climb no matter how good we are. That and the Skins are the hottest teamin the NFL winning 6 must win games in a row. I am absolutely ecstatic about this game, its gonna fucking rock.
But you seriously can count on me verbally reaming you when the seahawks win. And they will.
I don't see why anyone would say the Seahawks don't have a legitimate shot at making the Superbowl. Winning and making are two different things, as I think the NFC is just a race to lose this year.
|
I will... they don't have a legitimate shot at making the superbowl... whether is be the skins or panthers they are getting dismantled....
but yes race to lose is a very good and true fact
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
Hey Chris, FUCK YOU
We GAVE you the ball 3 times and you couldnt score more than 10 pts. We lost the MVP after 5 rushes and STILL scored 20 on your defense.
Eat cock i told you the hawks would win.
|
On January 14 2006 16:53 {88}iNcontroL wrote: Hey Chris, FUCK YOU
We GAVE you the ball 3 times and you couldnt score more than 10 pts. We lost the MVP after 5 rushes and STILL scored 20 on your defense.
Eat cock i told you the hawks would win.
I hope by eight tommorow I will be saying the same thing to lemon-_-
|
Canada5062 Posts
|
On January 14 2006 17:17 -_- wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2006 16:53 {88}iNcontroL wrote: Hey Chris, FUCK YOU
We GAVE you the ball 3 times and you couldnt score more than 10 pts. We lost the MVP after 5 rushes and STILL scored 20 on your defense.
Eat cock i told you the hawks would win. I hope by eight tommorow I will be saying the same thing to lemon-_-
good job your team won.... but hey my team just beat the defending world champs... so yeah its not like the NFC has a shot at winning the superbowl... so you can just go celebrate your pathetic 10 points over a pathetic NFC team I don't like the skins either I just like them better than the hawks...... any news on how bad alexander was hurt??
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
Any news on how wrong you were? The AFC isnt so fart ahead of the NFC im pretty sure your in for yet another piss poor prediction. Alexander is a pussy he had his bell rung and had to sit it out, he will be back for the championship and hopefully he will decide to tough it up for an entire playoff game.
Btw your doing the classical "thats fine im happier this way anyways! nahahaha"
I told you if you take that stance, once ur wrong im going to gloat like an obese pregnant woman and here i am being a bigger man. I will settle with my previous completely immature post and simply wait until the superbowl to yet again gloat at how the two conferences arent so fart apart like you seem to believe.
|
Hey sweetlemon...
Thomas Jones and Adrian Peterson officially sucked cock. What did they have 70-80 combined yards?
Rex Grossman ruled, though, right? OH WAIT. Did he even break the 200 yard mark? Down the stretch how did this games played rookie fare? He fucked up with a crucial interception.
Hmmm, weren't you talking about how jake delhomme couldn't throw, and that if they took deshaun out of the game they were screwed, we'd be 'playing right into their hand'... well foster was out in the third quarter with a high ankle sprain AND DELHOMME FUCKED YOU UP. You should really be a analyst!!!
You say the bears had one of 'greatest D's of all time' AHAHHAHAHA. Great to the tune of twenty fucking nine points given up.
OOOOOOHHHHH. Looks like the gosu football guru didn't know that Delhomme had a 100+ QB rating in the playoffs... playing into their hands my ass.
GO PANTHERS!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
seahawks won't win the superbowl
denver is a better team
and if the steelers beat denver that means teh steelers have what it takes to beat them
|
On January 15 2006 17:30 -_- wrote: Hey sweetlemon...
Thomas Jones and Adrian Peterson officially sucked cock. What did they have 70-80 combined yards?
Rex Grossman ruled, though, right? OH WAIT. Did he even break the 200 yard mark? Down the stretch how did this games played rookie fare? He fucked up with a crucial interception.
Hmmm, weren't you talking about how jake delhomme couldn't throw, and that if they took deshaun out of the game they were screwed, we'd be 'playing right into their hand'... well foster was out in the third quarter with a high ankle sprain AND DELHOMME FUCKED YOU UP. You should really be a analyst!!!
You say the bears had one of 'greatest D's of all time' AHAHHAHAHA. Great to the tune of twenty fucking nine points given up.
OOOOOOHHHHH. Looks like the gosu football guru didn't know that Delhomme had a 100+ QB rating in the playoffs... playing into their hands my ass.
GO PANTHERS!!!!!!!!!!!!
Now imagine if Orton had been playing instead i can see line of...say...10-33, 0 td's, 3 picks haha I will admit, Rex Grossman had flashes that he'll be a good quarterback in the future. He drove down the field pretty well hooking up with berrian for a few good passes, plus he definitely has the arm strength. He got flustered and confused, but let's be honest here, in your second start of the year, playing against the panther's defense isn't exactly cake. Berrian is fast as hell, and he has pretty good hands all things considered. The bears are young still. With more time on his hands, I can see grossman becoming at least a mid level, maybe a high level starter. more time with his receivers, the bears should be perennial playoff contenders for the next few years.
|
|
Braavos36362 Posts
denver should really just take random RBs, feed them the ball like 8000 times a season and then trade his 2000yard ass to the highes bidder EVERY YEAR
also i think the panthers will beat the seahawks, and the steelers riding their crazy momentum over denver
thats right i picked two road teams, the #5 and #6 teams haha
|
SweetLemon if you don't come into this thread and admit that I'm smarter, sexier, cooler, and overall better than you I'm going to be pissed-_-
|
Canada5062 Posts
Actually, I'm also waiting for SweetLemon to respond to how his Bears (whom Lemon rated as one of the greatest defensive teams of all time) got torched for 434 total yards by the Carolina offense.
I know, I'm being juvenile and petty. Can't help it.
|
He'll prolly just avoid the topic for a few days hoping everyone forgets don't worry rea, it happens to the best of us
|
On January 15 2006 17:30 -_- wrote: Hey sweetlemon...
Thomas Jones and Adrian Peterson officially sucked cock. What did they have 70-80 combined yards?
Rex Grossman ruled, though, right? OH WAIT. Did he even break the 200 yard mark? Down the stretch how did this games played rookie fare? He fucked up with a crucial interception.
Hmmm, weren't you talking about how jake delhomme couldn't throw, and that if they took deshaun out of the game they were screwed, we'd be 'playing right into their hand'... well foster was out in the third quarter with a high ankle sprain AND DELHOMME FUCKED YOU UP. You should really be a analyst!!!
You say the bears had one of 'greatest D's of all time' AHAHHAHAHA. Great to the tune of twenty fucking nine points given up.
OOOOOOHHHHH. Looks like the gosu football guru didn't know that Delhomme had a 100+ QB rating in the playoffs... playing into their hands my ass.
GO PANTHERS!!!!!!!!!!!!
Did you watch the game? Probably not...
Thomas Jones was tearing up that D when he actually ran. He was averaging four yards a carry. The problem is that they never ran him. Again, going back to how you obviously didn't watch the game, Rex MAY have thrown a pick, but that's a rookie mistake, and he also threw a TD, and led the team right down the field for three scores. Of all the first time playoff QB's he did the best. And by the way, he missed the 200 yard mark by 8 yards, good argument, moron.
Going to DelHomme. He's not that great of a QB, he just has one of the top WR's in the league. Also, I'd like to see where I said he couldn't throw. What I said was that you don't want him in a pressure situation, which is the truth, because he's not a top notch QB. By the way, they ran on the Bears, it just wasn't Foster running. They had 123 yards rushing against the Bears, which opened them right up for the pass.
The Bears defense was statistically one of the greatest defenses there has been, and there's simply no denying that. You can say all you want, they had a bad game, but look at the stats, they were amazing throughout the regular season. It WAS one of the best defenses over the last 20 years, just as I had said, they came out flat, and got ripped apart by Steve Smith, which isn't a surprise, because that was one of the biggest concerns of any Bears fan-- Steve Smith. They have NO ONE to cover him, and they never decided to double him, either. Not to mention that they play a Cover 2 defense, which puts them into zones most of the time, and with a guy like Smith playing, he's going to find creases in the zone. Jake DelHomme didn't have such an amazing game, he just put it where it needed to be put. Also, you may as well take that first TD away from them, because Smith shoved Tillman to the ground, after HE initiated the contact. Then Tillman got called for the penalty.
Finally, if you're basing a team's greatness off of one game, it's better for you to shut the fuck up, because you're definitely retarded. The problem was a lack of preparation. They were rested for too long (and go ahead an ask Mike Shanahan about resting starters in the final game), and they were underprepared. The schemes they used to try and defend Smith were horrible, and they never double covered him, leaving guys like Tillman and Vasher (who are good CB's, no doubt, but not the type to keep up with a guy like Smith) to single cover him. That spells doom. Just look at the stats, and name 15 teams that were better than the Bears' defense was this year. 12.6 PPG allowed, that's enough said.
|
4 yards a carry isn't tearing it up... OH MAYBE IT IS.. haha I'm actually used to a running game being a denver fan and all..
|
On January 16 2006 20:53 Chris.K wrote: 4 yards a carry isn't tearing it up... OH MAYBE IT IS.. haha I'm actually used to a running game being a denver fan and all..
Denver is just insane. They're taking it all this year. I was rooting for an orange and blue SB (I've been a Bronco fan since '96 or so), now that the Bears are out.
Also, considering that Walter Payton (the best HB to ever play, maybe the best all around player ever) averaged 4.4 yards per carry, that makes 4 a good average.
Mensrea, I understand what you're saying, but at the time, what else could you base the defense on? You can still only think of five better D's than this years Bears D. Maybe six if you include the '02 Bucs.
|
Yeah, since when was averaging 4 yards a carry considered "Tearing up that D?" They ran him 20 times, ample opportunity for him to break a big one and really impact the game. If you take out his one big run of 24 yards, he averaged less than 3 yards a carry, really impacted the game a lot! they had more success throwing screen passes to him than running the ball.
Let's be honest here, you can claim all the stats that you want to during the regular season, but in the game that actually mattered, the bears played terribly. You can't be considered an all time great no matter what your numbers are if you play that terribly. If you can't win a playoff game, no matter what, all claims to greatness are negated. Since the schemes and defenses that the bears had to defend smith weren't working, why not adjust at all? He was clearly destroying them in every way -- deep, in the middle, on end arounds. You can't just stick with the original game plan when he was creating that much havoc.
|
On January 16 2006 21:08 KOFgokuon wrote: Yeah, since when was averaging 4 yards a carry considered "Tearing up that D?" They ran him 20 times, ample opportunity for him to break a big one and really impact the game. If you take out his one big run of 24 yards, he averaged less than 3 yards a carry, really impacted the game a lot! they had more success throwing screen passes to him than running the ball.
Let's be honest here, you can claim all the stats that you want to during the regular season, but in the game that actually mattered, the bears played terribly. You can't be considered an all time great no matter what your numbers are if you play that terribly. If you can't win a playoff game, no matter what, all claims to greatness are negated. Since the schemes and defenses that the bears had to defend smith weren't working, why not adjust at all? He was clearly destroying them in every way -- deep, in the middle, on end arounds. You can't just stick with the original game plan when he was creating that much havoc.
Okay, maybe tearing up is a bit of an overstatement, he was running very well on them, though. 4 ypc is a good average. Also, saying "take away his 24 yard run" is stupid. There's no need to explain why it's stupid, it just is.
I don't know why they didn't adjust schemes, and that's the coaching, not the players.
|
On January 16 2006 20:44 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote:Show nested quote +On January 15 2006 17:30 -_- wrote: Hey sweetlemon...
Thomas Jones and Adrian Peterson officially sucked cock. What did they have 70-80 combined yards?
Rex Grossman ruled, though, right? OH WAIT. Did he even break the 200 yard mark? Down the stretch how did this games played rookie fare? He fucked up with a crucial interception.
Hmmm, weren't you talking about how jake delhomme couldn't throw, and that if they took deshaun out of the game they were screwed, we'd be 'playing right into their hand'... well foster was out in the third quarter with a high ankle sprain AND DELHOMME FUCKED YOU UP. You should really be a analyst!!!
You say the bears had one of 'greatest D's of all time' AHAHHAHAHA. Great to the tune of twenty fucking nine points given up.
OOOOOOHHHHH. Looks like the gosu football guru didn't know that Delhomme had a 100+ QB rating in the playoffs... playing into their hands my ass.
GO PANTHERS!!!!!!!!!!!! Did you watch the game? Probably not...
Yes I did. Arrgh, of course I did. And you're going to regret saying that.
Thomas Jones was tearing up that D when he actually ran. He was averaging four yards a carry. The problem is that they never ran him. Again, going back to how you obviously didn't watch the game, Rex MAY have thrown a pick, but that's a rookie mistake, and he also threw a TD, and led the team right down the field for three scores. Of all the first time playoff QB's he did the best. And by the way, he missed the 200 yard mark by 8 yards, good argument, moron.
Thomas Jone did not step up his game. Saying he was averaging four yards a carry is misleading. He was getting stuffed and had one solid run. That's why you can't say "WHY DON'T YOU GIVE THE BALL TO JONES EVERY DOWN AND HE'D MAKE ITT!!!!" If a QB scrambles and runs 5 times for 8 yards then bust a huge one for a TD isn't michael vick because he averages 15 yards a run.
And what do you mean rex may have thrown a pick? He DID thorw a pick. And what's this about rex being a rookie, dude? "He played more than that one game this season. He's been on the team for three years, you just haven't seen him. Being from Illinois (upper), I get to see him every time he plays." I mean you already gave him an in-depth skill analysis. He shouldn't play like a rookie!!!
Going to DelHomme. He's not that great of a QB, he just has one of the top WR's in the league. Also, I'd like to see where I said he couldn't throw. What I said was that you don't want him in a pressure situation, which is the truth, because he's not a top notch QB. By the way, they ran on the Bears, it just wasn't Foster running. They had 123 yards rushing against the Bears, which opened them right up for the pass.
"If Foster can't run, that forces the game into DelHomme's hands, which is bad news for the Panthers, because he's not exactly the guy you want to rely on in a pressure situation; he's a decent QB, but nothing special by any stretch of the imagination"
That's what YOU said. And it really showed your ignorance, as delhomme is an AMAZING fourth quarter and playoff QB. The only thing you can say is that he's not the best day to day QB because in pressure he nearly always delievers (remember the 2003 cardiac cats slogo?). So
And there's more!:
"The key to the game is stopping Foster. If they can stop him, which I believe they will, and they can get an early lead."
Yeah... great prediction. But no, it was delhomme that fucked you early and often with foster being all but worthless.
Oh but they really did rush well, right? Nope. Deshaun had 54 and Goings had 34. They combine for 88. The rest came from steve smith and delhomme. And FYI they passed before they ran. AND I'M THE ONE WHO DIDN'T WATCH THE GAME? Even if the RB's did run for 123 (which they didn't) the game still follows the rules of space and time, so if they pass first the pass opened up the run. You can't say just because the RB's had a good game (which they didn't) that you weren't stupid in saying that carolina throwing wasn't a good idea.
The Bears defense was statistically one of the greatest defenses there has been, and there's simply no denying that. You can say all you want, they had a bad game, but look at the stats, they were amazing throughout the regular season. It WAS one of the best defenses over the last 20 years, just as I had said, they came out flat, and got ripped apart by Steve Smith, which isn't a surprise, because that was one of the biggest concerns of any Bears fan-- Steve Smith.
No surprise to any bears fan that smith would tear you up? Hmmmm. I was under the impression I was talking to a bears fan, or am I misinterpreting this:
"Steve Smith will probably be shut down all dayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy. He didn't really do a whole lot last time around" (By the way, he had 10+ catches for 168 yards last time with no touchdowns)
Oh boy that was really clever when you changed his quote.
They have NO ONE to cover him, and they never decided to double him, either. Not to mention that they play a Cover 2 defense, which puts them into zones most of the time, and with a guy like Smith playing, he's going to find creases in the zone. Jake DelHomme didn't have such an amazing game, he just put it where it needed to be put. Also, you may as well take that first TD away from them, because Smith shoved Tillman to the ground, after HE initiated the contact. Then Tillman got called for the penalty.
Wahahahaha. I'm not going to deal with a whiny baby crying about penalites. All I can do is point you at the sport shows, game announcers, radio announcers, and so on. And ask why they don't agree with you. Oh yeah, please don't talk about cover 2 and creases in the zone and so on. You're only embarassing yourself.
Finally, if you're basing a team's greatness off of one game, it's better for you to shut the fuck up, because you're definitely retarded. The problem was a lack of preparation. They were rested for too long (and go ahead an ask Mike Shanahan about resting starters in the final game), and they were underprepared. The schemes they used to try and defend Smith were horrible, and they never double covered him, leaving guys like Tillman and Vasher (who are good CB's, no doubt, but not the type to keep up with a guy like Smith) to single cover him. That spells doom. Just look at the stats, and name 15 teams that were better than the Bears' defense was this year. 12.6 PPG allowed, that's enough said.
Oh they had a good defense. About as good as the 2003 panthers, I'd say. They would've been remembered as a great defensive team, but in the superbowl they lost. And now they're nothing. As for greatness? Fuck yeah I can base it on one game. It's not like you can get unlucky to the tune of 319 passing yards and 29 points. You can't get all that on one play. Now if it had been 9 to 3 and delhomme had thrown a 90 yarder at the end of the game then you could still say they had a good D. But no. They were torched ALL GAME. Oh, I'm sorry. I guess you win! I can't name 15 teams better so they MUST be great.
"you're going to see exactly how overrated the Panthers are"
See, those comments really came back to bite you in the ass. Notice how I'm not saying that about the hawks.
The fact is the playoff point average is higher than the normal game point average. People give it their all and play with something more than the did before. The bears obviously weren't good enough to do that.
|
How the fuck did the Steelers win.
So much for the Colts almost perfect season =\
|
On January 17 2006 07:16 RowdierBob wrote: How the fuck did the Steelers win.
So much for the Colts almost perfect season =\ I'm starting to wonder if the colts are going to have to do what the bucs did to win the superbowl...Have dungy build team, get rid of him and bring someone else in to get them all the way.
|
They just dominated the whole year and then choked so bad =[
That missed field goal at the end pretty much summed up their effort.
|
Braavos36362 Posts
chilllllll
-_- is pretty much spot on with his analysis, but sweetlemons is just a bears fan, no need to constantly flame him, usually your views on your own team are distorted
you wouldn't be a fan otherwise
|
sweetlemons,
How dare you say that Delhomme only had a good day because of him having one of the best recievers in the NFL. Apparently YOU didn't watch the game, because that 45 yard pass to smith was delivered perfectly into double coverage, and the game winning TD was thrown to a reciever who, last time I checked, does not wear #89 on his jersey.
When you have once seen Delhomme disappoint in a pressure situation? He gave the Patriots their hardest challenge ever in the super bowl (people are quick to forget that it took another last second FG for the pats to take down the panthers in that game, because whenever they pulled ahead, Delhomme somehow engineered another comeback drive).
I had two paragraphs written on why you have no clue what you're talking about with Thomas Jones too, but I accidently refreshed the page so I have to rewrite that.
edit: here we are
There are times when people should just keep their mouth closed. I think you, sweetlemons, have missed one of those times. Thomas Jones had 20 carries for 80 yards, and if you take away his 24 yard sprint, it accounts to a wonderful 2.94 ypc on his other 19 runs. Way to change the complexion of the game, TJ. You seem to think that discounting long runs is "stupid" when analyzing a runner's overall impact on a game. That is silly. I would MUCH rather have my RB average 5 yards per carry by gaining 5 yards every time he touches the ball than have him get 2.5 ypc plus one 60 yard sprint for the same average.
Here's what you don't seem to understand: The panthers were not afraid of Rex Grossman. They were prepared to dedicate 7 guys to stopping the run on nearly every play. When the defense knows you can only beat them with the run, and they play an obvious run defense, there is only so much you can do running the football. Jones got 20 carries, and the overall run/pass ratio for the bears was kept at almost exactly 2:3. They had to put the ball in the air so much because they were fighting uphill the entire game. If they took 10 throws away from Grossman and gave TJ 30 carries instead, I GUARANTEE you that they would not even be down by 8 looking to equalize with 4 minutes left...it would be over long before then.
Carolina knew Grossman couldn't beat them, and what do you know, he didn't. TJ couldn't have, either. The only way for the bears to win that game would be for their defense which you acclaim so much to force some big turnovers and give the offense a short field where the worst they can do is get 3 on the board. With just 1 INT from Delhomme (yeah, doesn't he really suck?) and no lost fumbles, the bears had no way to win that game.
|
"By the way, he had 10+ catches for 168 yards last time with no touchdowns"
No touchdowns is the key. It doesn't matter if a team puts up a thousand yards in a game if they can't score on you.
I never said DelHomme sucked, I said he wasn't the best QB there is, which is a fact.
I cannot account for the mismanagement in the game, I'm not a Bear coach or player. After Foster went down there was one threat left, really, that being Steve Smith. Why did they have a third stringer single covering him? Don't know. Why were they single covering him at all? Don't know. I can only name one CB who could almost certainly single cover Smith and handle him, that being Champ Bailey (who is definitely one of the top CB's in the league, but I really don't know a lot of CB's, so there might be more, or even better guys out there). Smith won them that game, and this is a fact. When one player covers over half a teams entire offense, something was wrong with scheming. Smith had 218 yards, and they totaled 434. That's OVER half from one player. He also had 2 TD's that game, which is about half their points. Had they gameplanned for him just a bit more, maybe they could have won, but they didn't, and I cannot explain why because, as stated, I'm not a part of the organization.
The problem the Bears have had all year has been their offense, and not being able to pass the ball. Muhammed didn't do shit all year long, and we lost our #2 reciever pretty early on (Bradley). So, basically, they were relying on the defense to come out and win that game for them. The defense came out and played like shit, and the coaching staff NEVER made ANY adjustments. They never got pressure on DelHomme, and they single covered Smith. If you're not going to double cover a guy, then get the fucking QB. They didn't do that.
Yes, I did say he was going to be shut down, but the whole time I was talking shit about the Panthers, I was doing just that: Talking shit. I thought the Bears D would come out prepared, but they didn't. I thought they'd double cover Smith once they had shut down the running game, and hopefully would have taken the early lead, but they didn't. It wasn't a typical Bears game at all, and the team played nothing to what they were capable of.
Also, last I checked, I was the one living in IL, and the one who listens to the Chicago sports radio.. Yes, Bears fans were definitely worried about what Steve Smith was going to do to that defense. The thing is, most people also figured that Lovie Smith and co wouldn't be stupid enough to attempt to single cover one of the league's best WR's when they have no shut down CB's.
EDIT: Also, apparently you skipped the post where I noted that all my comparisons were towards our second stringer, who sucked shit, Kyle Orton. Grossman was undoubtedly the better QB. The reason I brought up the fact that he HAD played more than one game is because you said he had only played once, but he hadn't. At any rate, his total time on the field still equated to that of a rookie QB, or a 3rd stringer. Having played 7 games over 3 years does not make him a seasoned player, however, saying that he had only played one game makes you misinformed, because he put the offense in place with Turner.
|
this is funny.... Carolina is still a championship team and I still rest my case... this is the 2nd nfc championship game in 3 years I believe.... yeah the bears shore own them... Oh man here come those ruff ridah hawks
I've been in love with carolina since I saw delhomme go TD for TD against brady in that superbowl.. the panthers are an amazing team with almost 0 credit towards em.....
shore would be ncie to see Holmgren against shanahan again though.... so torn so torn.. regardless broncos take all :D
|
On January 17 2006 16:21 Chris.K wrote:this is funny.... Carolina is still a championship team and I still rest my case... this is the 2nd nfc championship game in 3 years I believe.... yeah the bears shore own them... Oh man here come those ruff ridah hawks I've been in love with carolina since I saw delhomme go TD for TD against brady in that superbowl.. the panthers are an amazing team with almost 0 credit towards em..... shore would be ncie to see Holmgren against shanahan again though.... so torn so torn.. regardless broncos take all :D
I agree, and I completely forgot about how that'd be a rematch if Holmgren went up against Shanahan. Shanahan would win it again, though. The Seahawks aren't as good as those Packers were.
Also, someone said the Steelers were the most underrated team going into the AFC side of the playoffs this year. That's wrong, the Broncos were. No one picked them to beat the Pats (except Shannon Sharpe, but he pretty much has to, being an ex-Bronco), and hardly anyone is picking them to beat the Steelers.
|
On January 17 2006 16:15 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote: "By the way, he had 10+ catches for 168 yards last time with no touchdowns"
No touchdowns is the key. It doesn't matter if a team puts up a thousand yards in a game if they can't score on you.
I never said DelHomme sucked, I said he wasn't the best QB there is, which is a fact.
I cannot account for the mismanagement in the game, I'm not a Bear coach or player. After Foster went down there was one threat left, really, that being Steve Smith. Why did they have a third stringer single covering him? Don't know. Why were they single covering him at all? Don't know. I can only name one CB who could almost certainly single cover Smith and handle him, that being Champ Bailey (who is definitely one of the top CB's in the league, but I really don't know a lot of CB's, so there might be more, or even better guys out there). Smith won them that game, and this is a fact. When one player covers over half a teams entire offense, something was wrong with scheming. Smith had 218 yards, and they totaled 434. That's OVER half from one player. He also had 2 TD's that game, which is about half their points. Had they gameplanned for him just a bit more, maybe they could have won, but they didn't, and I cannot explain why because, as stated, I'm not a part of the organization.
The problem the Bears have had all year has been their offense, and not being able to pass the ball. Muhammed didn't do shit all year long, and we lost our #2 reciever pretty early on (Bradley). So, basically, they were relying on the defense to come out and win that game for them. The defense came out and played like shit, and the coaching staff NEVER made ANY adjustments. They never got pressure on DelHomme, and they single covered Smith. If you're not going to double cover a guy, then get the fucking QB. They didn't do that.
Yes, I did say he was going to be shut down, but the whole time I was talking shit about the Panthers, I was doing just that: Talking shit. I thought the Bears D would come out prepared, but they didn't. I thought they'd double cover Smith once they had shut down the running game, and hopefully would have taken the early lead, but they didn't. It wasn't a typical Bears game at all, and the team played nothing to what they were capable of.
Also, last I checked, I was the one living in IL, and the one who listens to the Chicago sports radio.. Yes, Bears fans were definitely worried about what Steve Smith was going to do to that defense. The thing is, most people also figured that Lovie Smith and co wouldn't be stupid enough to attempt to single cover one of the league's best WR's when they have no shut down CB's.
EDIT: Also, apparently you skipped the post where I noted that all my comparisons were towards our second stringer, who sucked shit, Kyle Orton. Grossman was undoubtedly the better QB. The reason I brought up the fact that he HAD played more than one game is because you said he had only played once, but he hadn't. At any rate, his total time on the field still equated to that of a rookie QB, or a 3rd stringer. Having played 7 games over 3 years does not make him a seasoned player, however, saying that he had only played one game makes you misinformed, because he put the offense in place with Turner.
You didn't respond to me, so I'm not going to bother responding to you. Refer to my above post.
Regardless of everything though, you cannot dodge this single immutable, irrefutable, irreformable, undeniable, inexorable FACT: The team you said would win--indeed the team you supported by shit-talking your team's opponent, got beat--and in just about everyone's opinions but chicago fans, they got beat badly. I said the panthers would win. You said the bears would win. I was right. You were wrong. Simple as that, and you're not getting out of it.
GO PANTHERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
On January 17 2006 16:15 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote: I never said DelHomme sucked, I said he wasn't the best QB there is, which is a fact.
And I quote: "Going to DelHomme. He's not that great of a QB, he just has one of the top WR's in the league."
Slight difference between those two statements. Saying he's "not that great" of a QB is pretty much just a nice way to say that you do not think highly of him at all. I guess you must not think highly of Tom Brady, either, since both of them play their best when the pressure is on.
You neglected the other few hundred words I wrote, so that's that I guess.
|
On January 17 2006 17:05 NuclearAntelope wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2006 16:15 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote: I never said DelHomme sucked, I said he wasn't the best QB there is, which is a fact.
And I quote: "Going to DelHomme. He's not that great of a QB, he just has one of the top WR's in the league." Slight difference between those two statements. Saying he's "not that great" of a QB is pretty much just a nice way to say that you do not think highly of him at all. I guess you must not think highly of Tom Brady, either, since both of them play their best when the pressure is on. You neglected the other few hundred words I wrote, so that's that I guess.
No, saying that says he's a good QB, but nothing super-special.
Tom Brady is a great QB, I'll never deny that, but I think some people overrate him a bit. They act like he's the second coming of Christ, or something.
Also, to -_-, my post was in response to you, I just didn't quote you. You're asking me to explain things, in fact, everyone is asking these things of me, that I simply cannot explain. I don't know why they didn't do certain things, but they didn't.
Also, I'm not the only person in the world who doesn't think they ran enough. I was just listening to the radio, and the guys there said they never established the run, and that they handled Smith all wrong. The Bears did not play the game they know how to play.
Finally, the run is not all about "Give it to Thomas Jones and he'll make it!" it's about clock control. Incomplete passes stop the clock, but every run guarantees another 30 seconds ticking off the clock, barring an injury or timeout. The three ways to beat Smith are these: Don't give their offense the ball (aka controlling the clock), double cover him, or pressure the QB. The Bears did NONE of these things, and that's why they got beat. The ones to blame are the coaching staff.
|
On January 17 2006 17:28 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote:Show nested quote +On January 17 2006 17:05 NuclearAntelope wrote:On January 17 2006 16:15 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote: I never said DelHomme sucked, I said he wasn't the best QB there is, which is a fact.
And I quote: "Going to DelHomme. He's not that great of a QB, he just has one of the top WR's in the league." Slight difference between those two statements. Saying he's "not that great" of a QB is pretty much just a nice way to say that you do not think highly of him at all. I guess you must not think highly of Tom Brady, either, since both of them play their best when the pressure is on. You neglected the other few hundred words I wrote, so that's that I guess. No, saying that says he's a good QB, but nothing super-special. Tom Brady is a great QB, I'll never deny that, but I think some people overrate him a bit. They act like he's the second coming of Christ, or something. Also, to -_-, my post was in response to you, I just didn't quote you. You're asking me to explain things, in fact, everyone is asking these things of me, that I simply cannot explain. I don't know why they didn't do certain things, but they didn't. Also, I'm not the only person in the world who doesn't think they ran enough. I was just listening to the radio, and the guys there said they never established the run, and that they handled Smith all wrong. The Bears did not play the game they know how to play. Finally, the run is not all about "Give it to Thomas Jones and he'll make it!" it's about clock control. Incomplete passes stop the clock, but every run guarantees another 30 seconds ticking off the clock, barring an injury or timeout. The three ways to beat Smith are these: Don't give their offense the ball (aka controlling the clock), double cover him, or pressure the QB. The Bears did NONE of these things, and that's why they got beat. The ones to blame are the coaching staff.
You didn't respond to me. If you want to, explain all the contradicting statements you made, all the shit-talking you did, and everything just plain retarded you said (I would suggest a quote by quote response, but you don't have to if you don't want)
|
Osaka26947 Posts
And the bell rings with both fighters headed back to their corners. As this one has pretty much spent its potential all over my screen, it is tie to start again in a new thread. GOGO conference final thread!
|
|
|
|