OT: Pats-Colts | Page 2 | The Boneyard

OT: Pats-Colts

Status
Not open for further replies.
BigErnMcCracken said:
If your team is so soft that a first quarter fumble ends the game you probably don't deserve to win. Colts are just outclassed.
Expand ...

I don't know how many here are old enough to remember the first Giants Super Bowl, but in the first quarter of the first round, Jerry Rice got behind the Giants D on a long pass and was on his way to an easy touchdown and a 7-0 lead, when he inexplicably fumbled the ball with nobody within five yards of him. Giants recovered the fumble and went on to win 49-3.

Folks thought that play was the game back then, and I said the same thing. If you get smooshed that bad, it was going to happen one way or another.
 
Gurleyman said:
I don't know how many here are old enough to remember the first Giants Super Bowl, but in the first quarter of the first round, Jerry Rice got behind the Giants D on a long pass and was on his way to an easy touchdown and a 7-0 lead, when he inexplicably fumbled the ball with nobody within five yards of him. Giants recovered the fumble and went on to win 49-3.

Folks thought that play was the game back then, and I said the same thing. If you get smooshed that bad, it was going to happen one way or another.
Expand ...

Thats what it feels like watching Uconn this year.
 
Gurleyman said:
I don't know how many here are old enough to remember the first Giants Super Bowl, but in the first quarter of the first round, Jerry Rice got behind the Giants D on a long pass and was on his way to an easy touchdown and a 7-0 lead, when he inexplicably fumbled the ball with nobody within five yards of him. Giants recovered the fumble and went on to win 49-3.

Folks thought that play was the game back then, and I said the same thing. If you get smooshed that bad, it was going to happen one way or another.
Expand ...

Yep I remember that, I have that game in my Giants DVD set.
 
Scoe said:
Who would you say is elite then.


Its a team sport, Brady isn't lighting the world on fire this game, when your behind you gotta take chances.
Expand ...

Brady lit the world on fire last week. He didn't need to do it today.
 
Scoe said:
Yes, you bench, him or put him on the practice squad do something to embarass him, you don't cut him during the season knowing one of your main competitors like the Pats will sign him. When Randy Moss acted up the Pats made sure he wasn't able to sign with a good team, when they cut him, he was placed on waivers. Kudos to the Pats for taking advantage off the Steelers stupidity.
Expand ...

Blount was cut and had to go through waivers. 31 other teams had a chance to pick up his contract, which didn't have a signing bonus. In other words, he would cost 31 other teams very little money. No one picked him up.
 
It's really a huge feat that the Brady and Belichick combo is going to the Super Bowl for the 6th time.

For Brady, that's 9 AFC championship games in 14 years. He has been victorious in 6 of them.

If he gets his 4th victory, it puts to rest the Joe Montana arguments about being undefeated in the SB. After all, getting there so many times is more a credit to Brady than losing in the first round.
 
.-.
Getting there so many times is very impressive but less so when you realize how awful the AFC East has been for a long time, AFC overall is just weak recently.
 
superjohn said:
Getting there so many times is very impressive but less so when you realize how awful the AFC East has been for a long time, AFC overall is just weak recently.
Expand ...

You're doing it again.

The Patriots record is worse against the AFCE than it is against the rest of the league. Up above, you mentioned how much tougher the NFC is than the AFC. But, of course, the AFC dominated the NFC head to head this year. For instance, Buffalo swept the NFC North, as they beat Green Bay, Detroit, Minnesota and Chicago.

And, I'll say it again: Brady has been victorious in 6 Super Bowls. That pretty much makes any AFCE argument (which doesn't fly anyway, given the fact that the Patriots have a better winning % outside AFCE games) null and void.
 
upstater said:
Blount was cut and had to go through waivers. 31 other teams had a chance to pick up his contract, which didn't have a signing bonus. In other words, he would cost 31 other teams very little money. No one picked him up.
Expand ...

The plan was more diabolical than that. First, the Patriots convinced the Steelers to sign Blount as a free agent. Then, they convinced the Steelers coaches not to play Blount during a game and for him to walk out early. After ordering the Steelers to cut him, they Jedi mind tricked the rest of the league to not claim Blount off waivers.

New England could have just re-signed Blount during but apparently thought this approach would be more entertaining.
 
.-.
upstater said:
You're doing it again.

The Patriots record is worse against the AFCE than it is against the rest of the league. Up above, you mentioned how much tougher the NFC is than the AFC. But, of course, the AFC dominated the NFC head to head this year. For instance, Buffalo swept the NFC North, as they beat Green Bay, Detroit, Minnesota and Chicago.

And, I'll say it again: Brady has been victorious in 6 Super Bowls. That pretty much makes any AFCE argument (which doesn't fly anyway, given the fact that the Patriots have a better winning % outside AFCE games) null and void.
Expand ...
I'm doing what again? The AFC East has been terrible since forever, are you trying to dispute that or not? No clue why you are bringing Buffalo up, they played very well at the end of the season and looked good for pretty much the first time since Jim Kelly and Thurman Thomas left. Brady has been victorious in 6 Superbowls? Now you're just making my head hurt.
 
superjohn said:
Getting there so many times is very impressive but less so when you realize how awful the AFC East has been for a long time, AFC overall is just weak recently.
Expand ...

Not defending the Colts but the AFC was arguably stronger this year than the NFC as there were 11 teams out of 16 were .500 or better and only 7 in the NFC less than half the teams. Yes 6 of the NFC squads well at least 5( excluding az w/injuries) were very good the AFC had a better year.
 
Lotta posters "telling it like it is" in this thread were the same ones proclaiming the end of the Brady era back in late September. Just about as correct now.
 
.-.
The Colts have a lot to build on and will be really good if they get the right pieces in the next couple of years, but they got their butts kicked big time tonight. Would have rather seen Denver/New England go at it.
 
BigErnMcCracken said:
Lotta posters "telling it like it is" in this thread were the same ones proclaiming the end of the Brady era back in late September. Just about as correct now.
Expand ...

From what I heard the past 18 months and living in this swamp of Pats fans, many of them were the one's proclaiming the potential end. Now they are like the Cowboy fans are with Romo again, on a honeymoon. Although the Pats fans have a "cruise" and the Boys fans have a long weekend in Maine.
 
Pats are really good. Their defense is a bit underrated and it won't be all that tested vs the Seahawks offense. This game is all on the Seattle defense and how well it plays vs a 2 week prep from Bill B and staff. The Seahawks cannot start like the did vs the Pack because it will be 21-0 and not 13-0.

Someone is going to need to catch on against the helmet to beat the Pats I think LOL. Seriously I really don't like the Pats, their fans or Bill B but give credit where credit is due. If their running it, lots of trouble with multiple weapons. Of course we have also seen Brady and how he reacts to consistent pressure, so therein lies the Seattle hope. Start solid and get to Tom's head.
 
superjohn said:
I'm doing what again? The AFC East has been terrible since forever, are you trying to dispute that or not? No clue why you are bringing Buffalo up, they played very well at the end of the season and looked good for pretty much the first time since Jim Kelly and Thurman Thomas left. Brady has been victorious in 6 Superbowls? Now you're just making my head hurt.
Expand ...

It's been explained to you already. Their record is better against teams outside the AFCE than it is against the AFCE. It's likelier a team like the Bills for instance makes the playoffs if they don't have to deal with the Patriots twice a year.

Don't know why I wrote Super Bowls, but I clearly meant AFC championships.
 
mauconnfan said:
Pats are really good. Their defense is a bit underrated and it won't be all that tested vs the Seahawks offense. This game is all on the Seattle defense and how well it plays vs a 2 week prep from Bill B and staff. The Seahawks cannot start like the did vs the Pack because it will be 21-0 and not 13-0.

Someone is going to need to catch on against the helmet to beat the Pats I think LOL. Seriously I really don't like the Pats, their fans or Bill B but give credit where credit is due. If their running it, lots of trouble with multiple weapons. Of course we have also seen Brady and how he reacts to consistent pressure, so therein lies the Seattle hope. Start solid and get to Tom's head.
Expand ...

Brady responded to tons of pressure against Ravens last week. Responded great. He played well in the Second SB against the Giants too.
 
mauconnfan said:
From what I heard the past 18 months and living in this swamp of Pats fans, many of them were the one's proclaiming the potential end. Now they are like the Cowboy fans are with Romo again, on a honeymoon. Although the Pats fans have a "cruise" and the Boys fans have a long weekend in Maine.
Expand ...

The one thing that annoys me with Pats fans is a lot of them seem to be more concerned with Brady's "legacy" then they are with winning a Super Bowl. This legacy talk is now the most overused word amongst sports media members, just like the word "elite" was.
 
.-.
upstater said:
Brady responded to tons of pressure against Ravens last week. Responded great. He played well in the Second SB against the Giants too.
Expand ...

He played ok in the 2nd half against the Giants only because the OLine responded a little better for him. When he was hit and chased not so much, but that's not all that different than most QB's unless you're Rogers or even Wilson. But Wilson's ability to get out of trouble doesn't allow him to be discussed with Rogers or Brady at any time.

He did hang in on "pressure" from the Ravens but they didn't get to him like the GMen did, constantly. Seattle didn't get to Rogers either this week so I am not sure they will do much to Brady in 2 weeks either. If they don't they will get beat no matter how good their dbacks are.
 
upstater said:
You're doing it again.

The Patriots record is worse against the AFCE than it is against the rest of the league. Up above, you mentioned how much tougher the NFC is than the AFC. But, of course, the AFC dominated the NFC head to head this year. For instance, Buffalo swept the NFC North, as they beat Green Bay, Detroit, Minnesota and Chicago.

And, I'll say it again: Brady has been victorious in 6 Super Bowls. That pretty much makes any AFCE argument (which doesn't fly anyway, given the fact that the Patriots have a better winning % outside AFCE games) null and void.
Expand ...

I don't really understand. What does win % matter? They've won the AFC East 12 times. They get a bye and 1-2 home games to get to the Super Bowl. How does haven't that "automatic" advantage not help them accomplish 6 Super Bowl invites?
 
Scoe said:
The one thing that annoys me with Pats fans is a lot of them seem to be more concerned with Brady's "legacy" then they are with winning a Super Bowl. This legacy talk is now the most overused word amongst sports media members, just like the word "elite" was.
Expand ...

Patriots fans are the most insecure group of fans I've ever seen. All that they've accomplished, if you say ONE thing to discredit any of it, they fly off the handle. Spygate? David Tyree? Sends them into a hissy fit.

I'm a Jets fan. I was 3 when they won Super Bowl 3. I'd be happy just watching them in a Super Bowl. I'm a Mets fan. I have never complained about their mediocrity because I have 1986. But Pats fans? So insecure.
 
mauconnfan said:
From what I heard the past 18 months and living in this swamp of Pats fans, many of them were the one's proclaiming the potential end. Now they are like the Cowboy fans are with Romo again, on a honeymoon. Although the Pats fans have a "cruise" and the Boys fans have a long weekend in Maine.
Expand ...
You just don't fit in in Mass. Hate Pats, Sox, probably Celts and Bruins too. And UMass. Did I miss anyone?
 
uconnfan68 said:
You just don't fit in in Mass. Hate Pats, Sox, probably Celts and Bruins too. And UMass. Did I miss anyone?
Expand ...

Like the Celts (hate he Knicks) and rooted for the Bruins last Stanley Cup actually but I am a Rangers fan. Sox fans are unbearable and since I moved up here 24 years ago and there has been some success for both Pats and Sox, unbearable doesn't come close. :eek:
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,194
Messages
4,556,313
Members
10,442
Latest member
Virginiafan


Top Bottom