That was a miracle.

[zyron]

Credit to Tebow and the Broncos, though, they have put a lot of life into the NFL season this year.

Yeah, there is nothing like watching an inept offense to get you going.

 

[Fishy]

Yeah, there is nothing like watching an inept offense to get you going.

Blah, blah, blah.

If you aren't capable of enjoying what the Broncos did on, what, about a half-dozen occasions this year, you're a garden variety white, beige or black who should be hollow-pointed or dinged with an ashtray.

I just hope Tebow and Jesus are more forgiving than I am or you'll spend an eternity in Hell. (i.e. the Boneyard chat room.)

 

[Kitaman]

I suspect many churches in America are praying for Tebow on Sunday morning. That's at least worth a favorable coin toss.

 

[Prezidint]

If you aren't capable of enjoying what the Broncos did on, what, about a half-dozen occasions this year, you're a garden variety white, beige or black . . . .

Now THAT'S what I'm talkin' 'bout Willis.​

​

​

 

[huskyhal]

I didn't have a strong rooting interest in either of yesterday's games, but one thing I feel strongly about: the playoff teams should be seeded based on record. Those games should have been in Atlanta and Pittsburgh, not New York and Denver. I've got no problem with division winners getting into the playoffs ahead of teams with better records, but you shouldn't get rewarded with a home game by being the least crappy team in a crappy division, nor should you get penalized for being the 2nd-best team in a strong division. Last year a 13-3 New Orleans team had to go to Seattle to play the 7-9 Seahawks, and yesterday, a 10-6 Atlanta team had to go to NY to play a 9-7 Giants team, and 12-4 Pittsburgh had to go to 8-8 Denver. Give a division winner the tie-breaker against a team with the same record, but otherwise, the seedings should be based on who has the better record.

Not saying either the Giants or Broncos didn't deserve their wins yesterday, but I do think the games might have been different if they were in Atl/Pitt.

Again, no axe to grind ... unfortunately I'm a Buc fan. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Silk City]

I didn't have a strong rooting interest in either of yesterday's games, but one thing I feel strongly about: the playoff teams should be seeded based on record. Those games should have been in Atlanta and Pittsburgh, not New York and Denver. I've got no problem with division winners getting into the playoffs ahead of teams with better records, but you shouldn't get rewarded with a home game by being the least crappy team in a crappy division, nor should you get penalized for being the 2nd-best team in a strong division. Last year a 13-3 New Orleans team had to go to Seattle to play the 7-9 Seahawks, and yesterday, a 10-6 Atlanta team had to go to NY to play a 9-7 Giants team, and 12-4 Pittsburgh had to go to 8-8 Denver. Give a division winner the tie-breaker against a team with the same record, but otherwise, the seedings should be based on who has the better record.

Not saying either the Giants or Broncos didn't deserve their wins yesterday, but I do think the games might have been different if they were in Atl/Pitt.

Again, no axe to grind ... unfortunately I'm a Buc fan. Just my 2 cents.

I see what you're saying, but the way I see it-- those wild card teams had two cracks at beating the division champ head to head. Tough luck, should have done more with those opportunities. They should be happy they can get into the playoffs after not winning their division. I have no problem with the NFL rewarding its division winners a little extra, and if nothing else it makes for more entertaining matchups in the first round (those Seahwaks and Broncos games could have been blowouts as road games)

 

[Dove]

Damn, my avatar is supposed to be animated.