EPTNFL Playoffs 2008-2009 - Page 5
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
SK.Testie
Canada11084 Posts
| ||
OneOther
United States10774 Posts
On September 08 2008 17:11 lilsusie wrote: Brady is definitely the face of the NFL, as much as I don't wanna admit. Call me cruel, but it seriously makes me giggle to know that they will have a shitty season. And their franchise won't be hurt, they'll just come back again next year. It really sucks that Tom Brady set all kinds of records last year, just to drop one game at the worst time possible. I imagine the entire Patriots squad, especially Brady and Moss (who are both into their 30s), have been grinding their teeth for that title this year. Then what happens? The face of New England Patriots franchise Tom Brady suffers a potentially season ending injury on the first week. Wtf. Edit: Yeah, Brady definitely is. SweetLemons, is the Favre trade deal the only football you have watched in the past 7 years? | ||
|
eshlow
United States5210 Posts
Holy crap though there was a bunch of injuries today and some pretty "big" upsets. Looks like this season is going to be fairly interesting. If only my Redskins could get it together. COME ON CAMPBELL WTF!  | ||
|
sundance
Slovakia3201 Posts
btw , FUCK YOU COWBOYS !!! | ||
|
3 Lions
United States3705 Posts
| ||
|
QuanticHawk
United States32161 Posts
| ||
|
Dknight
United States5225 Posts
On September 08 2008 13:58 lilsusie wrote: in all seriousness (i'm so sorry, Scott) but brady getting hurt honestly made my day. here i am at work, monday morning and the first piece of espn news i read is brady getting injured. i'm a terrible person. but a terrible person with a big smile on her face. </3. Whatever. Cassel is the new Brady. Patriots win the Super Bowl. Hurray. | ||
|
3 Lions
United States3705 Posts
| ||
|
ShloobeR
Korea (South)3851 Posts
as a die hard NFL Fan from Ireland. GO EAGLES!!! : ) It's our year! | ||
|
Gryffindor_us
United States5606 Posts
I don't wish anything terrible upon them even though I can't stand them or their teams. I suppose people have to be happy that Brady is out because now their teams have a prayer of making it into the playoffs. Being glad that Brady is out for the season is akin to being glad that Joe Montana was taken down. Wow, that's great for you but terrible for football. llllolllll I suppose we'll see. | ||
|
sundance
Slovakia3201 Posts
| ||
|
SweeTLemonS[TPR]
11739 Posts
On September 08 2008 17:38 OneOther wrote: It really sucks that Tom Brady set all kinds of records last year, just to drop one game at the worst time possible. I imagine the entire Patriots squad, especially Brady and Moss (who are both into their 30s), have been grinding their teeth for that title this year. Then what happens? The face of New England Patriots franchise Tom Brady suffers a potentially season ending injury on the first week. Wtf. Edit: Yeah, Brady definitely is. SweetLemons, is the Favre trade deal the only football you have watched in the past 7 years? Yeah, it sure is. Nevermind the in depth, pre-game, analysis I did of the Giants and Redskins (which I was 2 TDs total off of, but I had the spread 100% correct on). Nevermind that I know more than 90% of the people who post in these threads, not just about current NFL happenings, but probably about actual strategy and so forth. Aside from that, everyone that has ever seen me post about the Patriots/Tom Brady knows I hate them with all imaginable feeling. Of course I'm going to say he isn't the face of the NFL, I can't stand him. On September 09 2008 10:24 Gryffindor_us wrote: I still have no idea why people dislike Tom Brady. Instead, America is fascinated by the chair-in-the-face retard brothers Peyton and Eli. Really? I don't wish anything terrible upon them even though I can't stand them or their teams. I suppose people have to be happy that Brady is out because now their teams have a prayer of making it into the playoffs. Being glad that Brady is out for the season is akin to being glad that Joe Montana was taken down. Wow, that's great for you but terrible for football. llllolllll I suppose we'll see. It's not bad for football at all, except for the loss of star-power, which there is still plenty of. It adds a lot more intrigue to that division now. What was once an auto-seed for the Patriots is now up for grabs between three teams (The Dolphins still don't have a prayer, but the Jets with Favre, and the Bills looking great on Sunday [and solid last season, they were on game out of the playoffs]). How is THAT bad for football? That's like saying the Yankees not dominating the AL anymore is bad for baseball. On the contrary, it's brought in NEW fans. So will this. The top teams in the AFC all losing in week one is the best thing that could have happened for any fan of football, unless you like those teams. How about my Broncos tonight, eh? 41-14, and both of the Raiders TD's were pretty much garbage TD's. The defense obviously couldn't care less on that last drive. They were out there, but played with about half the intensity they had been, probably because they didn't want to hurt themselves. I wish Shannahan would have taken Cutler out though. Especially after what happened to Brady, it really shows that injuries can strike any player, at any time. There was no need to risk their star QB for a pointless finish. They've definitely made improvements to the offensive schemes this year. What would have been three field goals last year turned into three TD's this year. Even against a team that played as horrible as the Raiders did today, they wouldn't have gotten into the end zone. Speaking of how awful the Raiders played.. WOW, talk about bad. Russel had NO time to throw the ball at all. Fargas and McFadden looked good, but it's hard to judge because of it being a blowout, and the defense clearly not playing at their top level for much of the game. They started out very nicely on offense, but that fumble really destroyed everything they had going. Russel looked a lot better than I imagined he would, though. When he wasn't getting smacked around he made some nice throws, and a nice run too. If they can manage to give him some time, their offense could be somewhat productive this year. I don't think he'll get that time, though, because their coaching is just awful there. I was also really surprised at the first game tonight, too. I thought for sure the Vikings D was going to get after Rodgers much more successfully than they did. Jared Allen got shut down by that O-line guy again (I don't know his name, but I guess he shut him down last year too, when the Packers played the Chiefs), and the rest of the defense looked anemic, especially their pass defense, which is one of the worst in the league. The Packers rush D could use some help. I think the loss of Corey Williams is going to haunt them throughout the season. 19 carries, 103 yds and a TD is not what you want to give up to one guy--even if that guy is Adrian Peterson. It was certainly an interesting week one for the NFL this year. | ||
motbob
United States12546 Posts
| ||
|
nemY
United States3119 Posts
| ||
|
ShloobeR
Korea (South)3851 Posts
In fact I will go ahead and say 22-0 That's how good it will be. | ||
|
OneOther
United States10774 Posts
| ||
|
Gryffindor_us
United States5606 Posts
On September 09 2008 14:54 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote: It's not bad for football at all, except for the loss of star-power, which there is still plenty of. It adds a lot more intrigue to that division now. What was once an auto-seed for the Patriots is now up for grabs between three teams (The Dolphins still don't have a prayer, but the Jets with Favre, and the Bills looking great on Sunday [and solid last season, they were on game out of the playoffs]). How is THAT bad for football? That's like saying the Yankees not dominating the AL anymore is bad for baseball. On the contrary, it's brought in NEW fans. So will this. The top teams in the AFC all losing in week one is the best thing that could have happened for any fan of football, unless you like those teams. From a business perspective your point is merely OKAY, but I'd even debate that because people pay a bit of money to see Brady come to town even if it doesn't look good for their team(or lots of viewers). The potential amount of money/exposure made from the HYPE surrounding an undefeated team far surpasses any paltry amount from some more fans especially if they're fairweather(usually they are). Now, moving that despicable point aside, how is this good for the sanctity of the game? Sure, injuries occur but how can you seriously say that an arbitrary factor affecting the outcome of the division rankings is good for football? If teams were beating the Patriots(WITH Tom Brady) and "shaking things up" in week 1 that would be fine, but not because the star quarterback isn't playing. It's similar to a NE fan being happy that we won against the Ravens in 07' when we weren't the best team on the field that day or for beating the injured Chargers in the AFC Championship. Sure, you could say a win is a win is a win but that's a pathetic way to justify renewed faith in your team. Contrived competition is not good for football. Oh, and I'm still a New England Patriots fan. I'll watch their games this season, whether or not they have a shitty record. Even if Cassel buries them, I will watch. WE WILL SEE. | ||
|
OneOther
United States10774 Posts
Please stop. It's really fucking annoying. | ||
|
SweeTLemonS[TPR]
11739 Posts
On September 09 2008 16:11 Gryffindor_us wrote: From a business perspective your point is merely OKAY, but I'd even debate that because people pay a bit of money to see Brady come to town even if it doesn't look good for their team(or lots of viewers). The potential amount of money/exposure made from the HYPE surrounding an undefeated team far surpasses any paltry amount from some more fans especially if they're fairweather(usually they are). Now, moving that despicable point aside, how is this good for the sanctity of the game? Sure, injuries occur but how can you seriously say that an arbitrary factor affecting the outcome of the division rankings is good for football? If teams were beating the Patriots(WITH Tom Brady) and "shaking things up" in week 1 that would be fine, but not because the star quarterback isn't playing. It's similar to a NE fan being happy that we won against the Ravens in 07' when we weren't the best team on the field that day or for beating the injured Chargers in the AFC Championship. Sure, you could say a win is a win is a win but that's a pathetic way to justify renewed faith in your team. Contrived competition is not good for football. Oh, and I'm still a New England Patriots fan. I'll watch their games this season, whether or not they have a shitty record. Even if Cassel buries them, I will watch. WE WILL SEE. No, I think I'm coming across wrong here. It's not BECAUSE Brady went down that it's good. I am not only looking at this from the league's perspective. I think people are getting tired of seeing the Colts/Patriots walk through the regular season and then win the Super Bowl. I know I am (even though I need the Colts to play well this year, offensively, at least). The Patriots weren't going to go undefeated this year. The teams they beat last year are better than they were last year, their weak schedule is really distorted, as I said before. Honestly, how many people that aren't Patriots fans want to see them win a Super Bowl again? How many people want the Yankees to pull off a magical run and win the World Series? I doubt the number is very high, though I have no statistics to back me up. The excited responses from several others would seem to put that in my favor, though. (That is, excited responses about Brady going down. Someone called me all giddy about him getting hurt, and said it made their day. That is, yes, excessive.) It's bad for football that Brady went down, but it's good for football that the Patriots probably won't win much this year. Imagine that the Jets win the division, and roll through the playoffs. That would be unbelievable for the NFL. Bret Favre gets let go by the Packers, to go on to the Super Bowl. And it would be even BIGGER if the Packers were the other team. It's still unlikely to happen as it stands now, but it was a near impossibility before Brady went down, due to their stronghold on the weakest division in the league. That's how I see this being better for football.The potential that is opened up for other teams, regardless of how they're doing it, makes it better for the NFL, especially if what I suggested there comes true. On September 09 2008 16:09 nemY wrote: The raiders played well tonight What? On September 09 2008 16:19 OneOther wrote: Sweetlemons, I do appreciate your thorough NFL knowledge. But hey, fucking lay off that ridiculous Patriots hating. I am not even a Patriots fan, but all of your posts in every single NFL thread contain unnecessary hatred, sometimes over the line. I remember you saying in last year's thread that you wished all of New England players would break their knees and go out. Nasty. Do you consider yourself a true fan of football? Of this league? Half of your claims regarding Pats aren't even valid. Please stop. It's really fucking annoying. Yeah, I do get a little over the top sometimes, but I'm normally not serious when I start getting all crazy. I wasn't, for instance, serious when I said I hoped someone went Tanya Harding on Tom Brady before the game. I actually felt bad for Tom when I saw the replay of what happened. I hate him as a football player, not as a person. That goes for their whole team. That said, every single post of mine does not contain hatred for them. Consider the first two posts I made in this thread. "The Patriots will not go undefeated this year. If they get past the Chargers in week six, I have faith that the Broncos will continue their winning streak against them. The weakness of their schedule is also distorted by the fact that they play in the league's worst division. The Patriots actually play some very good teams this year, including San Diego, Indianapolis, Pittsburgh, and Seattle. That's not even considering that the Jets and Dolphins should be much better teams than they were last year." The only hateful message I've posted in this thread about the Patriots was the "Fuck the Patriots. Fuck Tom Brady too" message. The rest of them I was just speaking my thoughts on. I don't always have the nicest tone, but I wouldn't say that any of my posts here were hateful, so far. Unless my bashing of Jason Campbell, or the Saints was taken that way.. I don't see how it could be, though. I would like to know what I've claimed about the Patriots that isn't valid, though. (Except some of the things concerning Spygate last year, because some of that was just me misreading things, or jumping the gun a little bit on alleged evidence of cheating.) Also, while Favre is no longer the face of the NFL (except now after all the trade talk), there is an argument to be made for Peyton Manning. I would also put Manning as the best of the era, mostly because rings are an overrated qualifier for greatness. On September 09 2008 16:11 Gryffindor_us wrote: Sure, you could say a win is a win is a win but that's a pathetic way to justify renewed faith in your team. Contrived competition is not good for football. I don't know of many people who say that with excitement. Most of the time I hear that when their team should have lost, but pulled it off somehow. | ||
|
QuanticHawk
United States32161 Posts
It's bad for business because a) Obviously not all of those Pats fans are true Patriots fans or even true football fans. Passive fans aren't going to watch a 6-10 team and aren't exactly too inclined to watchh whoever else. That's why they're passive. b) They're easily one of the top 5 markets in the league. So that probably means they've got a real lot of passive fans to match those who worship all things BAHSTAN sports (Hello Dknight) It's pretty simple: Which would draw more ratings? Bills and Cards or Giants and Pats? | ||
| ||
