What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

*** GAME THREAD *** New England v. Philadelphia (1 Viewer)

Who wins?

  • Patriots

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Eagles

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
,Feb 3 2005, 02:14 PM] Poll Update >>Congrats to the Eagles... now a full 70% of their fans think they will win the game. :thumbup: 100% of Pats fans believe the Pats wiill win....89% of Impartial Fans believe the pats will win.... 35-8 so far....
Man you sound like a Yankees fan. Thanks for being so much mightyer than thou.For those with short term memory loss, remember when the Pats were the underdog and nobody thought they could win? Remember how everyone said the Eastern Conference was horrible and Detroit won? It has nothing to do with who you played, but how you play. I see this being close and anything can happen come the 4th quarter. The Eagles don't turn the ball over and the Pats live off the big play. Plus the Pats have a habbit of keeping it close. Hell the Steelers gave them 4 TOs and they were still hanging around in the second half, only down by 14. It should be a good game.
 
,Feb 3 2005, 11:57 AM]

,Feb 3 2005, 09:50 AM]Remember... this is old hat for this Patriots squad. We've been here 3 of the last 4 years. It's routine. We'll see how composed the Eagles stay when on the BIG stage..... Lord knows they don't have the best track record on it thus far  Eagles will once again find a way to choke.....as they would have in the NFC Championship game (again) had they faced any real competition. Make no bones about it... this Patriots team is the best team the Eagles will have faced this year.... and by a significant Margin. The Patriots have already beaten two teams superior to the Eagles on their way to this game....
Hey icon, I think you need to get in on this.You're right, your team is the heavy favorite, put your sig where your mouth is, you can't possibly lose.
I'll gladly join any sig bet but I'm not pasting War & Peace at the base of every one of my posts for the next 6-months. :thumbdown: I've gladly put my sig on the line in support of my Pats and Red Sox every single time there has been a bet there.... but I abhor 2000 character signatures. Start a bet where I have to put something shorter and I'd be on board in a heartbeat.
906 Characters w/ Spaces, 739 w/o.Shut Up or Put Up you whiney tool!!
I agree 100%.Got your back, JAA. :thumbup:
 
You ladies can get a room if you'd like.

The fact of the matter is that I object to the sig based on length. I will gladly submit to a sig that says that "Tom Brady couldn't hold McNabb's Jock, and Bill wants to make sweet love to The Walrus because the Patriots are a shadow of the Powerhouse that is the Eagles." for all I care. It's not about the support of the team. It's about annoying the living #### out of the board for the next few months.

I, among many others, HATE long sigs.... but I leave them on because some are entertaining. I don't want to become part of the problem. I'll take the shorter (and worse signature) if you guys want... but I'm not going to make everyone scroll a full screen to get through my sig for every one of my posts.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Where is the T.O. playing / not playing post? I've got to decide on him vs Branch vs. Givens in a playoff fantasy challenge. I think Branch is the best bet but I'm trailing by 1 point and WR and TE are my only chance to make up points.Not that anyone really knows how he'll be used, but it's worth reading everyone's opinions.

 
Are you hoping to the Eagles can keep the game close, like within 14 points? Isnt that the amount you said the Steelers were behind but they were close the Pats couldnt put them away. The Pats have only won 2 of their 16 wins this year by less than 7 points. By 6 against the Jets and 3 against Indy. Every other victory was by more than a TD. This myth that the Pats play them all close is just that, a myth. :rotflmao: At the Pats having to DOUBLE COVER Westbrook. The Pats play mostly zone. Bruschi and Phifer will most likely get the task of checking Westbrook in the flat AFTER McGinnest and Vrabel have drilled him every time he tries to leave the backfield ala what they did to Faulk in 2001. I dont see Westbrook being much of a factor.

 
,Feb 3 2005, 09:38 PM] I, among many others, HATE long sigs.... but I leave them on because some are entertaining. I don't want to become part of the problem. I'll take the shorter (and worse signature) if you guys want... but I'm not going to make everyone scroll a full screen to get through my sig for every one of my posts.
Your point is incredibly weak. Obviously you are worried about losing, otherwise you wouldn't hesitate. Your remarks seem to indicate this game doesn't even need to be played, but you are unwilling to back it up. Who cares what the length is, you won't be the one having to use it, will you (oh I forgot, you are afraid of your team failing). Hey, I really don't care for sigs either, I never use one, and never even bother reading others, but will readily offer it up to support the team that I root for. JAA's right, all talk.
 
,Feb 3 2005, 09:38 PM] I, among many others, HATE long sigs.... but I leave them on because some are entertaining. I don't want to become part of the problem. I'll take the shorter (and worse signature) if you guys want... but I'm not going to make everyone scroll a full screen to get through my sig for every one of my posts.
Your point is incredibly weak. Obviously you are worried about losing, otherwise you wouldn't hesitate. Your remarks seem to indicate this game doesn't even need to be played, but you are unwilling to back it up. Who cares what the length is, you won't be the one having to use it, will you (oh I forgot, you are afraid of your team failing). Hey, I really don't care for sigs either, I never use one, and never even bother reading others, but will readily offer it up to support the team that I root for. JAA's right, all talk.
:sleep: As I said before.... I'll take a far more abrasive, shorter sig (in bold) in exchange for a mildly abrasive sig that will annoy the piss out of everyone on the board for 6 months. Sorry... something I stand firm on. Take it or leave it....Lucky for me there's not a whole lot of Eagles fans in on this bet... otherwise I might have to turn sigs off for a while while you ladies enjoy your new closing arguements for a few months....
 
Last edited by a moderator:
,Feb 4 2005, 09:48 AM]

,Feb 3 2005, 09:38 PM] I, among many others, HATE long sigs.... but I leave them on because some are entertaining. I don't want to become part of the problem. I'll take the shorter (and worse signature) if you guys want... but I'm not going to make everyone scroll a full screen to get through my sig for every one of my posts.
Your point is incredibly weak. Obviously you are worried about losing, otherwise you wouldn't hesitate. Your remarks seem to indicate this game doesn't even need to be played, but you are unwilling to back it up. Who cares what the length is, you won't be the one having to use it, will you (oh I forgot, you are afraid of your team failing). Hey, I really don't care for sigs either, I never use one, and never even bother reading others, but will readily offer it up to support the team that I root for. JAA's right, all talk.
:sleep: As I said before.... I'll take a far more abrasive, shorter sig (in bold) in exchange for a mildly abrasive sig that will annoy the piss out of everyone on the board for 6 months. Sorry... something I stand firm on. Take it or leave it....
Scared
 
,Feb 3 2005, 09:38 PM] You ladies can get a room if you'd like.

The fact of the matter is that I object to the sig based on length. I will gladly submit to a sig that says that "Tom Brady couldn't hold McNabb's Jock, and Bill wants to make sweet love to The Walrus because the Patriots are a shadow of the Powerhouse that is the Eagles." for all I care. It's not about the support of the team. It's about annoying the living #### out of the board for the next few months.

I, among many others, HATE long sigs.... but I leave them on because some are entertaining. I don't want to become part of the problem. I'll take the shorter (and worse signature) if you guys want... but I'm not going to make everyone scroll a full screen to get through my sig for every one of my posts.
You personify "Whiney Tool". I feel bad for other Pats fans who have you on their side. :yawn:
 
,Feb 4 2005, 09:48 AM] :sleep:

As I said before.... I'll take a far more abrasive, shorter sig (in bold) in exchange for a mildly abrasive sig that will annoy the piss out of everyone on the board for 6 months. Sorry... something I stand firm on. Take it or leave it....

Lucky for me there's not a whole lot of Eagles fans in on this bet... otherwise I might have to turn sigs off for a while while you ladies enjoy your new closing arguements for a few months....
I singled (called) you out because YOU are the one making lengthy tirades about how the Eagles have no chance to win, the Pats are a dynasty, so on and so on. And in doing so, I have found some of your comments obnoxious and arrogant, offensive and degrading to Eagles fans, and in general poor taste. I respect most Patriots fans, but you are representitive of the ones who put a bad taste in peoples mouths regarding the Pats (whiney tools, non stop "we are great" talk, etc.)Normally I don't care and/or even enjoy this type of trash talk, but yours rubs people the wrong way. I feel that when people offer up their sig to the opposing team, that then DOES give them license to trash talk in any way they want. There are many other Pat's fans saying some of the same things, but they didn't hesitate to put their sigs on the line either, they have some balls, and I accept and actually expect some trash talk from them, they have earned the right IMO.

Regarding the length of which you are hiding behind:

I find it ironic that you are concerned about length considering the length of some of your posts and doubly ironic that you don't want to "piss people off". Too late.

Length shouldn't concern you since you should be confident you will win (obviously you are not)
If you lose, you shouldn't be the one who decides what to put in the sig. We Eagles fans will take great pleasure at seeing you use a sig that you despise, that's the whole idea.Look down at your shirt, I am sure it is yellow.

 
,Feb 4 2005, 09:48 AM] :sleep:

As I said before.... I'll take a far more abrasive, shorter sig (in bold) in exchange for a mildly abrasive sig that will annoy the piss out of everyone on the board for 6 months. Sorry... something I stand firm on. Take it or leave it....

Lucky for me there's not a whole lot of Eagles fans in on this bet... otherwise I might have to turn sigs off for a while while you ladies enjoy your new closing arguements for a few months....
I singled (called) you out because YOU are the one making lengthy tirades about how the Eagles have no chance to win, the Pats are a dynasty, so on and so on. And in doing so, I have found some of your comments obnoxious and arrogant, offensive and degrading to Eagles fans, and in general poor taste. I respect most Patriots fans, but you are representitive of the ones who put a bad taste in peoples mouths regarding the Pats (whiney tools, non stop "we are great" talk, etc.)Normally I don't care and/or even enjoy this type of trash talk, but yours rubs people the wrong way. I feel that when people offer up their sig to the opposing team, that then DOES give them license to trash talk in any way they want. There are many other Pat's fans saying some of the same things, but they didn't hesitate to put their sigs on the line either, they have some balls, and I accept and actually expect some trash talk from them, they have earned the right IMO.

Regarding the length of which you are hiding behind:

I find it ironic that you are concerned about length considering the length of some of your posts and doubly ironic that you don't want to "piss people off". Too late.

Length shouldn't concern you since you should be confident you will win (obviously you are not)
If you lose, you shouldn't be the one who decides what to put in the sig. We Eagles fans will take great pleasure at seeing you use a sig that you despise, that's the whole idea.Look down at your shirt, I am sure it is yellow.
LOLGlad to see I've got a few :fishy: :fishy: on the line here....

Okay...I'm done harassing you guys. If you go back to the AFC Championship thread you guys will find that I was the LEAST trash talking fan in there.... however the conversation was getting boring as hell in here so I figured I'd stir things up a bit. Spit a little fire and get you guys riled up. :D

Do I think the Eagles really "have no chance"? No.... they're a pretty solid team who've done well for themselves lately.

Do I think the Eagles will win the SuperBowl? Again... No. New England is just TOO diverse.They can beat you too many ways. Had Rothlesburger had a good game, I believe Pitt was the only team in the NFL that was built to play with the Pats on a level basis. You need to have a good, balanced attack. If you rely on a certain weapon too much then Bill WILL take it away from you.

Rationalize all you want about how the Eagles will be different, but the fact of the matter is that New England made Peyton look silly (with the best receiving corps in the nation. and a capable RB in Edge). They also stopped Pitt's "unstoppable" brusing double RBs despite having to account for Hines Ward and Plaxico Burress. I just don't think the Eagles have a deep enough offense. New England will smother Westbrook and keep an eye on the gimpy Owens. Remove those two from the game plan and the Eagles are relying on the likes of Pinkston and Mitchell. I just don't see them able to put many points on the board... 24.....27 maybe? They haven't faced a Defense that is even CLOSE to the level of what they will face on Sunday..... and New England has put up substantial scoring on better overall Defenses.

I personally feel like if TO is at 80% (which is where I feel he'll be), AND with NE getting Seymour Back (who some consider to be the 2nd best Defensive player in all of football)......I believe NE wins 7 of 10 against this Eagles squad.....maybe 8.

If I were forced to pick a final score I'm seeing something along the lines of:

Patriots: 34 - Eagles 24

 
Patriots fans today: :soap: Patriots fans at start of Super Bowl: :hifive: Patriots fans at halftime: :X Patriots fans at end of Super Bowl: :toilet: Brady and Belichick at Press Conference: :shrug:

 
for icon:A first grade teacher explains to her class that she is a Patriot fan. She asks her students to raise their hands if they are Patriot fans too. Not knowing what a Patriot fan is, but wanting to be liked by their teacher, their hands fly into the air. There is, however, one exception. A little boy named Johnny has not gone along with the crowd. The teacher asks him why he has decided to be different. "Because I'm not a Patriot fan" he retorts. "Then," asks the teacher, "What are you?" I'm a proud Eagles fan!" boasts the little boy. The teacher is a little perturbed now, her face slightly red. She asks Johnny why he is a Eagles fan. Well, my Dad and Mom are Eagles fans, so I'm an Eagles fan too, he responds. The teacher is now angry. "That's no reason," she says loudly . "What if your Mom was a moron, and your dad was an idiot What would you be then? " Johnny smiles and says, "Then I'd be a Patriots fan." God I can't wait for this game - two weeks break sucks.

 
for icon:A first grade teacher explains to her class that she is a Patriot fan. She asks her students to raise their hands if they are Patriot fans too. Not knowing what a Patriot fan is, but wanting to be liked by their teacher, their hands fly into the air. There is, however, one exception. A little boy named Johnny has not gone along with the crowd. The teacher asks him why he has decided to be different. "Because I'm not a Patriot fan" he retorts. "Then," asks the teacher, "What are you?" I'm a proud Eagles fan!" boasts the little boy. The teacher is a little perturbed now, her face slightly red. She asks Johnny why he is a Eagles fan. Well, my Dad and Mom are Eagles fans, so I'm an Eagles fan too, he responds. The teacher is now angry. "That's no reason," she says loudly . "What if your Mom was a moron, and your dad was an idiot What would you be then? " Johnny smiles and says, "Then I'd be a Patriots fan." God I can't wait for this game - two weeks break sucks.
:rotflmao:
 
Pure Genius... ya write that one all by yourself?!?!

Good to see you classy Iggles fans taking a break from booing everything that moves to fit a generic sports-team joke with some nice personal insuts :thumbup:

Then again, I'd get tired of booing after this sort of record too :rotflmao:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
,Feb 4 2005, 10:37 AM] Rationalize all you want about how the Eagles will be different, but the fact of the matter is that New England made Peyton look silly (with the best receiving corps in the nation. and a capable RB in Edge). They also stopped Pitt's "unstoppable" brusing double RBs despite having to account for Hines Ward and Plaxico Burress. I just don't think the Eagles have a deep enough offense. New England will smother Westbrook and keep an eye on the gimpy Owens. Remove those two from the game plan and the Eagles are relying on the likes of Pinkston and Mitchell. I just don't see them able to put many points on the board... 24.....27 maybe? They haven't faced a Defense that is even CLOSE to the level of what they will face on Sunday..... and New England has put up substantial scoring on better overall Defenses. I personally feel like if TO is at 80% (which is where I feel he'll be), AND with NE getting Seymour Back (who some consider to be the 2nd best Defensive player in all of football)......I believe NE wins 7 of 10 against this Eagles squad.....maybe 8. If I were forced to pick a final score I'm seeing something along the lines of:Patriots: 34 - Eagles 24
I'm sure all this has been said before, but the SuperBowl is just around the corner and I just felt compelled to attack this...1) Dungy had a horrible game plan against the Pats and the snow didn't help what is basically a turf offense. While the Eagles O may not be as diverse and as potent as the Colts, I can GUARANTEE, they will have a better plan in place to exploit weaknesses in the Pats D than the friggin' Colts.2) The Steelers game got out of hand early because Big Ben played like a rookie. Turnovers killed Pitt and they're not a come from behind team. They win by establishing a lead, and then grinding it out with the run. The Pats took them out of their game plan and Cowher isn't a good enoguh coach to make the adjustments.3) If the Eagles score 24 to 27 points on Sunday, I believe they'll win. The Pats haven't faced a QB like McNabb. And exactly which defenses are better overall than Philly, that, as you claim, New England has put up substantial scoring against?4) You feel like TO will play at 80%? How did you come to that number? Just curious about the science that went into that assumption. What percentage will Seymour be at by the way?
 
,Feb 4 2005, 10:37 AM] Rationalize all you want about how the Eagles will be different, but the fact of the matter is that New England made Peyton look silly (with the best receiving corps in the nation. and a capable RB in Edge). They also stopped Pitt's "unstoppable" brusing double RBs despite having to account for Hines Ward and Plaxico Burress. I just don't think the Eagles have a deep enough offense. New England will smother Westbrook and keep an eye on the gimpy Owens. Remove those two from the game plan and the Eagles are relying on the likes of Pinkston and Mitchell. I just don't see them able to put many points on the board... 24.....27 maybe? They haven't faced a Defense that is even CLOSE to the level of what they will face on Sunday..... and New England has put up substantial scoring on better overall Defenses.

I personally feel like if TO is at 80% (which is where I feel he'll be), AND with NE getting Seymour Back (who some consider to be the 2nd best Defensive player in all of football)......I believe NE wins 7 of 10 against this Eagles squad.....maybe 8.

If I were forced to pick a final score I'm seeing something along the lines of:

Patriots: 34 - Eagles 24
I'm sure all this has been said before, but the SuperBowl is just around the corner and I just felt compelled to attack this...1) Dungy had a horrible game plan against the Pats and the snow didn't help what is basically a turf offense. While the Eagles O may not be as diverse and as potent as the Colts, I can GUARANTEE, they will have a better plan in place to exploit weaknesses in the Pats D than the friggin' Colts.

2) The Steelers game got out of hand early because Big Ben played like a rookie. Turnovers killed Pitt and they're not a come from behind team. They win by establishing a lead, and then grinding it out with the run. The Pats took them out of their game plan and Cowher isn't a good enoguh coach to make the adjustments.

3) If the Eagles score 24 to 27 points on Sunday, I believe they'll win. The Pats haven't faced a QB like McNabb. And exactly which defenses are better overall than Philly, that, as you claim, New England has put up substantial scoring against?

4) You feel like TO will play at 80%? How did you come to that number? Just curious about the science that went into that assumption. What percentage will Seymour be at by the way?
Re TO:The 80% is a generous figure based on what I've been reading. The team's trainer has allready stated that he'd pull the plug on TO if things don't look like he's going to be ready.... the other doc shot him down..... the team hasn't even commited to his playing,... and he's gone from "I'm playing" to "We'll see how things go and If I can get out there I hope I can make an impact (quote from Jim Rome Radio Show..no link" There is a FAR higher chance that TO DOESN'T play than that he'll be 100%

Re McNabb,

You Eagles guys keep saying Pats haven't faced anyone like McNabb. The guy rushes for 20 yards a game. Give me a break. Okay... so he can break the pocket? Big deal.... The Pats aren't a hard blitzing offense. Lane assignments. he can break the pocket all he wants but if he tries to advance upfield he will be decleated. McNabb MIGHT contribute 30-40 yards at MOST on Sunday... and that's only if they get lucky on a busted play or two. McNabb is a strong armed QB who's shown much improvement, but as others have pointed out, he's showing the pressure already with forced jokes in interviews. He's got a record for choking under pressure and with a key link in his passing game weakened if not eliminated completely (Owens), he'll likely feel pressure to force plays at time.

Re. Seymour

Completely different types of injuries. Seymour is not rushing back... he's ready. It's been stated that he can move with no adverse affects and is completely ready to go. TO still has a plate with two screws in his ankle and just started running 3-4 days ago after over a month of latency AND 2+ more weeks to go for a proper healing. Don't be silly and compare the two.

What defenses have New England put up big points on that are better than the Eagles? THE STEELERS

The Pats put up 41 points on that Defense with only 7 coming off a TD INT Return:

Total Yards/Game:

Pittsburgh: 1st in NFL

Philly: 10th

Points Scored Against:

Pittsburgh: 1st

Philly: 3rd

Rushing Defensse (think Corey Dillon):

Pittsburgh: 1st

Philly: 16th

Passing Defense:

Pittsburgh: 4th

Philly: 12th

3rd Down Percentage:

Pittsburgh: 6th

Philly: 12th

Number of Penalties:

Pittsburgh: 7th

Philly: 24th

Who did Philly Face on the way in?

Atlanta: 14th Overall in Defense

Minny: 28th Overall

And yet they were only able to put up 27 points per game....

ALSO: keep in mind most NFC teams defensive numbers are inflated due to playing weak-### NFC Competition.

Now... you can GUARANTEE they'll have a better plan in place than the Colts huh? Just like everyone GUARANTEED that Peyton could throw on the NE offense? Just like the Steelers Fans GUARANTEED that Bettis and Staley could run on NE's Defense? If you have some special insight into The Walrus's meetings and strategy for the game, or some other form of "scientific proof" as you call it, then I suggest to you that you can't guarantee ANYTHING.

 
For those NE fans who think their dominance against Indy and Pittsburgh proves their team is the best here is some more useless analysis:Pittsburgh gained 393 yds and 3 tds against NE DPittsburgh gained 384 yds and 2 tds against NYJ DYou guys had great games. Obviously you deserve to be in the Super Bowl, but stop overemphasizing the victories. Pittsburgh was lucky to survive against the Jets. It's not your fault Pittsburgh didn't show up. But, anybody that watched the game knows that they didn't show up so stop acting like they did.

 
1) Dungy had a horrible game plan against the Pats and the snow didn't help what is basically a turf offense. While the Eagles O may not be as diverse and as potent as the Colts, I can GUARANTEE, they will have a better plan in place to exploit weaknesses in the Pats D than the friggin' Colts.

2) The Steelers game got out of hand early because Big Ben played like a rookie. Turnovers killed Pitt and they're not a come from behind team. They win by establishing a lead, and then grinding it out with the run. The Pats took them out of their game plan and Cowher isn't a good enoguh coach to make the adjustments.

3) If the Eagles score 24 to 27 points on Sunday, I believe they'll win. The Pats haven't faced a QB like McNabb. And exactly which defenses are better overall than Philly, that, as you claim, New England has put up substantial scoring against?

4) You feel like TO will play at 80%? How did you come to that number? Just curious about the science that went into that assumption. What percentage will Seymour be at by the way?
Answers to all these points:1. and 2. You may call it luck or whatever, but when the game was played the Patriots found ways to put the other teams off their game plan. This was not just fluke luck - it has been happening for 2 years.

3a. You say "if my team puts up X points, they'll win". In this arguement, it is more key to establish why they are a lock to put up that many points, than whatever number X is. How is McNabb significantly different than any other good QB? Sure, he may be a bit better at running for that crucial one first down or punch in a few TDs each year, but he's not gonna change the face of the game with his legs as Vick does (1outof4 games). Other than that hes no different than any other upper tier QB. I'm not knocking him - he's high quality thru and thru, but not unique as you argue. Tha Pats have faced plenty of quality QBs over the last couple years.

3b. The eagles MAY be the best D in the league (personally I dispute this) but even if they are, their edge in that department is not significant. 41 points agains Steelers is pretty significant number against pretty damn good D.

4. The same way anyone other than TO would come up w/ any number! W.A.G. or gut feeling. The likelhood of Seymour playing when he's less than 900% is probably lower w/ Belichick than Owens' chance of playing hobbled in his current situation. Owens has actually "painted himself into a corner" (and his coach even more so!) with his words. Think about it whether a player CAN play is the player's decision. Whether a player SHOULD play is the coaches decision. If Owens is actually in a state where he should not play for the ood of the team, he's made it that much harder for the coach to say so.

The game plan is really simple:

Double TO all night if needed, knock the rest of the WRs at the line, contain on the dumps to the flat and let Westbrook get 4 yards and a major beating each reception. McNabb will run a few times due to coverage, but wont "make a meal of it".

If Jeff Thomason happens to come up w/ more than 1 big play, you have a chance to still hang in to the 3rd.

Personally, I hope TO plays - maybe McNabb will try to force some balls to him leading to pics.

I look at it this way:

If its a reasonably close game, there are ways the Eagles can win.

But there's only one team here that could blow out the other - the Pats.

 
1) Dungy had a horrible game plan against the Pats and the snow didn't help what is basically a turf offense. While the Eagles O may not be as diverse and as potent as the Colts, I can GUARANTEE, they will have a better plan in place to exploit weaknesses in the Pats D than the friggin' Colts.

2) The Steelers game got out of hand early because Big Ben played like a rookie. Turnovers killed Pitt and they're not a come from behind team. They win by establishing a lead, and then grinding it out with the run. The Pats took them out of their game plan and Cowher isn't a good enoguh coach to make the adjustments.

3) If the Eagles score 24 to 27 points on Sunday, I believe they'll win. The Pats haven't faced a QB like McNabb. And exactly which defenses are better overall than Philly, that, as you claim, New England has put up substantial scoring against?

4) You feel like TO will play at 80%? How did you come to that number? Just curious about the science that went into that assumption. What percentage will Seymour be at by the way?
Answers to all these points:1. and 2. You may call it luck or whatever, but when the game was played the Patriots found ways to put the other teams off their game plan. This was not just fluke luck - it has been happening for 2 years.

3a. You say "if my team puts up X points, they'll win". In this arguement, it is more key to establish why they are a lock to put up that many points, than whatever number X is. How is McNabb significantly different than any other good QB? Sure, he may be a bit better at running for that crucial one first down or punch in a few TDs each year, but he's not gonna change the face of the game with his legs as Vick does (1outof4 games). Other than that hes no different than any other upper tier QB. I'm not knocking him - he's high quality thru and thru, but not unique as you argue. Tha Pats have faced plenty of quality QBs over the last couple years.

3b. The eagles MAY be the best D in the league (personally I dispute this) but even if they are, their edge in that department is not significant. 41 points agains Steelers is pretty significant number against pretty damn good D.

4. The same way anyone other than TO would come up w/ any number! W.A.G. or gut feeling. The likelhood of Seymour playing when he's less than 900% is probably lower w/ Belichick than Owens' chance of playing hobbled in his current situation. Owens has actually "painted himself into a corner" (and his coach even more so!) with his words. Think about it whether a player CAN play is the player's decision. Whether a player SHOULD play is the coaches decision. If Owens is actually in a state where he should not play for the ood of the team, he's made it that much harder for the coach to say so.

The game plan is really simple:

Double TO all night if needed, knock the rest of the WRs at the line, contain on the dumps to the flat and let Westbrook get 4 yards and a major beating each reception. McNabb will run a few times due to coverage, but wont "make a meal of it".

If Jeff Thomason happens to come up w/ more than 1 big play, you have a chance to still hang in to the 3rd.

Personally, I hope TO plays - maybe McNabb will try to force some balls to him leading to pics.

I look at it this way:

If its a reasonably close game, there are ways the Eagles can win.

But there's only one team here that could blow out the other - the Pats.
Did you actually READ the points I made?1- Did I ever say the Pats were lucky in ANY of their wins? Or that is was some kind of fluke? I just said Dungy had a crappy game plan. The Eagles won't.

3a- My 24-27 point reference was based on a comment from another post that the Eagles "might" score that many. I didn't just pull those numbers out of the air. In my opinion... they will WIN with that many points on the board. In other words, I believe their D is their strongest asset.

3b- I never said the Eagles had the BEST D IN THE LEAGUE.

4- I was just questioning the 80% number. I just think it's comical when people who have no idea how Owens ankel actually feels come up with these perecentages.

 
Patriots fans today: :soap: Patriots fans at start of Super Bowl: :hifive: Patriots fans at halftime: :X Patriots fans at end of Super Bowl: :toilet: Brady and Belichick at Press Conference: :shrug:
Great use of smileys. Laugh out loud funny.
 
1) Dungy had a horrible game plan against the Pats and the snow didn't help what is basically a turf offense.  While the Eagles O may not be as diverse and as potent as the Colts, I can GUARANTEE, they will have a better plan in place to exploit weaknesses in the Pats D than the friggin' Colts.

2) The Steelers game got out of hand early because Big Ben played like a rookie.  Turnovers killed Pitt and they're not a come from behind team.  They win by establishing a lead, and then grinding it out with the run.  The Pats took them out of their game plan and Cowher isn't a good enoguh coach to make the adjustments.

3) If the Eagles score 24 to 27 points on Sunday, I believe they'll win.  The Pats haven't faced a QB like McNabb.  And exactly which defenses are better overall than Philly, that, as you claim, New England has put up substantial scoring against?

4) You feel like TO will play at 80%?  How did you come to that number?  Just curious about the science that went into that assumption.  What percentage will Seymour be at by the way?
Answers to all these points:1. and 2. You may call it luck or whatever, but when the game was played the Patriots found ways to put the other teams off their game plan. This was not just fluke luck - it has been happening for 2 years.

3a. You say "if my team puts up X points, they'll win". In this arguement, it is more key to establish why they are a lock to put up that many points, than whatever number X is. How is McNabb significantly different than any other good QB? Sure, he may be a bit better at running for that crucial one first down or punch in a few TDs each year, but he's not gonna change the face of the game with his legs as Vick does (1outof4 games). Other than that hes no different than any other upper tier QB. I'm not knocking him - he's high quality thru and thru, but not unique as you argue. Tha Pats have faced plenty of quality QBs over the last couple years.

3b. The eagles MAY be the best D in the league (personally I dispute this) but even if they are, their edge in that department is not significant. 41 points agains Steelers is pretty significant number against pretty damn good D.

4. The same way anyone other than TO would come up w/ any number! W.A.G. or gut feeling. The likelhood of Seymour playing when he's less than 900% is probably lower w/ Belichick than Owens' chance of playing hobbled in his current situation. Owens has actually "painted himself into a corner" (and his coach even more so!) with his words. Think about it whether a player CAN play is the player's decision. Whether a player SHOULD play is the coaches decision. If Owens is actually in a state where he should not play for the ood of the team, he's made it that much harder for the coach to say so.

The game plan is really simple:

Double TO all night if needed, knock the rest of the WRs at the line, contain on the dumps to the flat and let Westbrook get 4 yards and a major beating each reception. McNabb will run a few times due to coverage, but wont "make a meal of it".

If Jeff Thomason happens to come up w/ more than 1 big play, you have a chance to still hang in to the 3rd.

Personally, I hope TO plays - maybe McNabb will try to force some balls to him leading to pics.

I look at it this way:

If its a reasonably close game, there are ways the Eagles can win.

But there's only one team here that could blow out the other - the Pats.
Did you actually READ the points I made?1- Did I ever say the Pats were lucky in ANY of their wins? Or that is was some kind of fluke? I just said Dungy had a crappy game plan. The Eagles won't.

3a- My 24-27 point reference was based on a comment from another post that the Eagles "might" score that many. I didn't just pull those numbers out of the air. In my opinion... they will WIN with that many points on the board. In other words, I believe their D is their strongest asset.

3b- I never said the Eagles had the BEST D IN THE LEAGUE.

4- I was just questioning the 80% number. I just think it's comical when people who have no idea how Owens ankel actually feels come up with these perecentages.
Your real point w/ 1 and 2 is "the patriots didn't beat anyone - the other teams beat themselves". My point is this is false.The eagles wont score 27 points. Maybe 24...

You give no argument as to how they will accomplish that!

By asking who the Pats have played with a better D, you imply Eagles are better than Pitts, which would make them best in league. NOT!

I guess I actually agree w/ you about the 80% bit. It's pure speculation, not scientific, etc. But you seem (by the use of him in your aguement) to think he will be a factor.

 
1) Dungy had a horrible game plan against the Pats and the snow didn't help what is basically a turf offense. While the Eagles O may not be as diverse and as potent as the Colts, I can GUARANTEE, they will have a better plan in place to exploit weaknesses in the Pats D than the friggin' Colts.

2) The Steelers game got out of hand early because Big Ben played like a rookie. Turnovers killed Pitt and they're not a come from behind team. They win by establishing a lead, and then grinding it out with the run. The Pats took them out of their game plan and Cowher isn't a good enoguh coach to make the adjustments.

3) If the Eagles score 24 to 27 points on Sunday, I believe they'll win. The Pats haven't faced a QB like McNabb. And exactly which defenses are better overall than Philly, that, as you claim, New England has put up substantial scoring against?

4) You feel like TO will play at 80%? How did you come to that number? Just curious about the science that went into that assumption. What percentage will Seymour be at by the way?
Answers to all these points:1. and 2. You may call it luck or whatever, but when the game was played the Patriots found ways to put the other teams off their game plan. This was not just fluke luck - it has been happening for 2 years.

3a. You say "if my team puts up X points, they'll win". In this arguement, it is more key to establish why they are a lock to put up that many points, than whatever number X is. How is McNabb significantly different than any other good QB? Sure, he may be a bit better at running for that crucial one first down or punch in a few TDs each year, but he's not gonna change the face of the game with his legs as Vick does (1outof4 games). Other than that hes no different than any other upper tier QB. I'm not knocking him - he's high quality thru and thru, but not unique as you argue. Tha Pats have faced plenty of quality QBs over the last couple years.

3b. The eagles MAY be the best D in the league (personally I dispute this) but even if they are, their edge in that department is not significant. 41 points agains Steelers is pretty significant number against pretty damn good D.

4. The same way anyone other than TO would come up w/ any number! W.A.G. or gut feeling. The likelhood of Seymour playing when he's less than 900% is probably lower w/ Belichick than Owens' chance of playing hobbled in his current situation. Owens has actually "painted himself into a corner" (and his coach even more so!) with his words. Think about it whether a player CAN play is the player's decision. Whether a player SHOULD play is the coaches decision. If Owens is actually in a state where he should not play for the ood of the team, he's made it that much harder for the coach to say so.

The game plan is really simple:

Double TO all night if needed, knock the rest of the WRs at the line, contain on the dumps to the flat and let Westbrook get 4 yards and a major beating each reception. McNabb will run a few times due to coverage, but wont "make a meal of it".

If Jeff Thomason happens to come up w/ more than 1 big play, you have a chance to still hang in to the 3rd.

Personally, I hope TO plays - maybe McNabb will try to force some balls to him leading to pics.

I look at it this way:

If its a reasonably close game, there are ways the Eagles can win.

But there's only one team here that could blow out the other - the Pats.
Did you actually READ the points I made?1- Did I ever say the Pats were lucky in ANY of their wins? Or that is was some kind of fluke? I just said Dungy had a crappy game plan. The Eagles won't.

3a- My 24-27 point reference was based on a comment from another post that the Eagles "might" score that many. I didn't just pull those numbers out of the air. In my opinion... they will WIN with that many points on the board. In other words, I believe their D is their strongest asset.

3b- I never said the Eagles had the BEST D IN THE LEAGUE.

4- I was just questioning the 80% number. I just think it's comical when people who have no idea how Owens ankel actually feels come up with these perecentages.
Your real point w/ 1 and 2 is "the patriots didn't beat anyone - the other teams beat themselves". My point is this is false.The eagles wont score 27 points. Maybe 24...

You give no argument as to how they will accomplish that!

By asking who the Pats have played with a better D, you imply Eagles are better than Pitts, which would make them best in league. NOT!

I guess I actually agree w/ you about the 80% bit. It's pure speculation, not scientific, etc. But you seem (by the use of him in your aguement) to think he will be a factor.
Well basically I'm saying that the Colts and Pitt played poorly. I'm not saying the Pats didn't earn the wins. But the Colts (mainly their entire game plan) and Pitt (mainly Rothlesberger) put together subpar efforts.Are you actually arguing that the Eagles MIGHT score 24... but they WON'T score 27? :confused:

If you really want, I'll be glad to show how they can score 27. Brian Westbrook returns a punt 67 yards for a TD, McNabb scrambles 3 yards for a score on 3rd and goal, McNabb hits the construction worker on an 8 yard slant for TD number 3, Akers kicks 2 field goals. How's that? :P

 
Well basically I'm saying that the Colts and Pitt played poorly.  I'm not saying the Pats didn't earn the wins.  But the Colts (mainly their entire game plan) and Pitt (mainly Rothlesberger) put together subpar efforts.
What scenario is more likely:1) Teams continually just seem to miraculously/coincidentally put up sub-par efforts against the Pats ( :tinfoilhat: )OR2) The Patriots CAUSE these subpar efforts through solid, methodical play. ( :yes: )Team's game plans don't work because Bill and Romeo scheme to stop them. Hindsight is 20/20.... do you really think that if the Colts or Stieelers had changed their gameplans that NE wouldn't have adapted and shut down that plan as well? They've shown the ability to morph into whatever team it takes to beat the team they play that Sunday. Have a High-powered passing attack? They'll stop you. Have a smashmouth Running Game? They'll stop you. The fact of the matter is that the Patriots aren't a good defense because they're the best the league at any one thing.... it's because they can adapt and do ANYTHING very well.I'm expecting the Pats to hit Westbrook HARD every time he heads downfield to get open for a pass. This is a similar strategy the Pats used on Colts receivers... they simply couldn't run their routes. Their lane-assignment style defense allowed the LBs to focus on the rushing game white the corners and safeties could pick Ben off all day long. I'll say it again, Philly has not faced a single defense that even comes CLOSE to the one they'll be seeing on Sunday. Hell...well over half of their games this year are against the bottom 3rd caliber defenses in the NFL.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
,Feb 4 2005, 04:29 PM] What scenario is more likely:1) Teams continually just seem to miraculously/coincidentally put up sub-par efforts against the Pats ( :tinfoilhat: )OR2) The Patriots CAUSE these subpar efforts through solid, methodical play. ( :yes: )
What scenario is more likely:1) McNabb throws 3 INTs... one goes the opposite way for an 87 yard touchdown... ala the rookie Ben Rothlesberger. :no: OR2) McNabb takes care of the ball, puts together solid drives and finishes them with TDs... much like he has ALL season (31-8 TD/INT ratio) :thumbup:
 
,Feb 4 2005, 04:29 PM] What scenario is more likely:1) Teams continually just seem to miraculously/coincidentally put up sub-par efforts against the Pats ( :tinfoilhat: )OR2) The Patriots CAUSE these subpar efforts through solid, methodical play. ( :yes: )
What scenario is more likely:1) McNabb throws 3 INTs... one goes the opposite way for an 87 yard touchdown... ala the rookie Ben Rothlesberger. :no: OR2) McNabb takes care of the ball, puts together solid drives and finishes them with TDs... much like he has ALL season (31-8 TD/INT ratio) :thumbup:
3. The Eagles put together a chain of solid drives but lack the ability to punch it in the end zone against a disciplined quality defense and have to settle for field goals. Meanwhile, Brady throws TDs to Branch, Givens, Patten, Graham and Vrabel, and Dillon punches in two. Late in the game, McNabb gets desperate and throws two picks, one for a TD.Pats 56Eagles 19Not that it's going to happen, but I like the sound of it. :P
 
,Feb 4 2005, 04:29 PM] What scenario is more likely:1) Teams continually just seem to miraculously/coincidentally put up sub-par efforts against the Pats ( :tinfoilhat: )OR2) The Patriots CAUSE these subpar efforts through solid, methodical play. ( :yes: )
What scenario is more likely:1) McNabb throws 3 INTs... one goes the opposite way for an 87 yard touchdown... ala the rookie Ben Rothlesberger. :no: OR2) McNabb takes care of the ball, puts together solid drives and finishes them with TDs... much like he has ALL season (31-8 TD/INT ratio) :thumbup:
You're completely missing my point, but that's to be expected at this point.The Eagles, like all teams before them, have strengths. The Patriots will seriously inhibit thier ability to exercise those strengths.... hence the end result, a "choke". From Sports Illustrated:"Under Belichick and Crennel the Patriots have opposed passers with ratings of at least 95.5 seven times in nine playoff games. In every case, those quarterbacks failed to match their regular-season rating in the playoffs against New England. So Donovan McNabb's 104.7 regular-season rating shouldn't be a concern.The Rams' Kurt Warner finished with a 78.3 rating in the Super Bowl three years ago, after putting up an NFL-best 101.4 regular-season mark. The Colts' Peyton Manning went from 99.0 to 35.5 in last year's AFC title game, and from a league-record 121.1 to 69.3 in this year's divisional playoff loss at Gillette Stadium. Ben Roethlisberger joined the trend two weeks ago, dropping from 98.1 in the regular season to 78.1 in the AFC title game.The Belichick/Crennel factor is real, and it's going to bring McNabb to earth. Just wait and see."Teams don't choke against the Pats..... the pats strangle them.
 
3b. The eagles MAY be the best D in the league (personally I dispute this) but even if they are, their edge in that department is not significant. 41 points agains Steelers is pretty significant number against pretty damn good D.
dont blame the Pit D for 4 turnovers
 
Hey icon, since you arent interested in a sig bet, how about a $$ bet. How many points with your Dynasty are you going to give me?

 
Hey icon, since you arent interested in a sig bet, how about a $$ bet. How many points with your Dynasty are you going to give me?
Frankly I think the new 7.5 line is a bit high. If I was putting $ down I'd tease it up to 10.5 and take the Eagles. I'm confident the Pats will win, however I'm hardly ready to put money on the fact that they will do it by 8 or more points. When it comes to gambling I bet with my head... not my heart. The pats could just as easily win by 3 as 10. And I'll do a sig bet.... just not with a novel. I've stated repeatedly that I'll take a much harsher and shorter sig bet and place it in bold type. Not about toting a sig..... it's about having a 10 line sig...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
,Feb 4 2005, 08:18 PM]

Hey icon, since you arent interested in a sig bet, how about a $$ bet. How many points with your Dynasty are you going to give me?
Frankly I think the new 7.5 line is a bit high. If I was putting $ down I'd tease it up to 10.5 and take the Eagles. I'm confident the Pats will win, however I'm hardly ready to put money on the fact that they will do it by 8 or more points. And I'll do a sig bet.... just not with a novel. I've stated repeatedly that I'll take a much harsher and shorter sig bet and place it in bold type. Not about toting a sig..... it's about having a 10 line sig...
whole'ly ####, what are you my wife??!?! You so act like a woman for pete's sake! How many rules to do you have .... seriously
 
,Feb 4 2005, 08:18 PM]

Hey icon, since you arent interested in a sig bet, how about a $$ bet. How many points with your Dynasty are you going to give me?
Frankly I think the new 7.5 line is a bit high. If I was putting $ down I'd tease it up to 10.5 and take the Eagles. I'm confident the Pats will win, however I'm hardly ready to put money on the fact that they will do it by 8 or more points. And I'll do a sig bet.... just not with a novel. I've stated repeatedly that I'll take a much harsher and shorter sig bet and place it in bold type. Not about toting a sig..... it's about having a 10 line sig...
whole'ly ####, what are you my wife??!?! You so act like a woman for pete's sake! How many rules to do you have .... seriously
:rolleyes: So I'm supposed to give you more points than I can get from a book? Yeah... that's smart. Offer me a deal I can't get from the book, otherwise... just enjoy your new long-### signature on Monday. :yes:

 
,Feb 4 2005, 08:28 PM]

,Feb 4 2005, 08:18 PM]

Hey icon, since you arent interested in a sig bet, how about a $$ bet.  How many points with your Dynasty are you going to give me?
Frankly I think the new 7.5 line is a bit high. If I was putting $ down I'd tease it up to 10.5 and take the Eagles. I'm confident the Pats will win, however I'm hardly ready to put money on the fact that they will do it by 8 or more points. And I'll do a sig bet.... just not with a novel. I've stated repeatedly that I'll take a much harsher and shorter sig bet and place it in bold type. Not about toting a sig..... it's about having a 10 line sig...
whole'ly ####, what are you my wife??!?! You so act like a woman for pete's sake! How many rules to do you have .... seriously
:rolleyes: So I'm supposed to give you more points than I can get from a book? Yeah... that's smart. Offer me a deal I can't get from the book, otherwise... just enjoy your new long-### signature on Monday. :yes:
Well im not even sure what the #### you said?!? Do I need a calculator to figure out your point? I guess I could go look for my protractor if it will help.I dont think your book can beat 6.5, push on a tie

 
,Feb 4 2005, 11:37 AM]I'm done harassing you guys.
LOL at icon. He is a real man of his word, yuh. I saw him backing down from a $$ bet a mile away. I'm sure all the patriots fans are glad he is on their side representing them. He is yellow.
 
Well im not even sure what the #### you said?!? Do I need a calculator to figure out your point? I guess I could go look for my protractor if it will help.I dont think your book can beat 6.5, push on a tie
Not much of a sports better, are you?If my post confused you, then you might not want to open a Sports Betting Account.:rotflmao: "Push on a tie at 6.5?" Love it... :rotflmao: Pinnacle is currently offering -120 on NE-6.5 so I'd be willing to go even money on that... Hows about $50? $100? We both need to transfer the cash via paypal to a neutral party. I've got PSD's paypal address since I've got squares in his grid... acceptable holding party?Another Option is I'll give you 2-1 on the Eagles Money Line (win outright). I'll go up to 25 to win 50 on that bet. You pick it... PHI +6.5 for even money or ML for 2-1 odds.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
,Feb 4 2005, 11:37 AM]I'm done harassing you guys.
LOL at icon. He is a real man of his word, yuh. I saw him backing down from a $$ bet a mile away. I'm sure all the patriots fans are glad he is on their side representing them. He is yellow.
Not backing down genius... not my fault you two are too stupid to understand sportsbetting terms. :wall: For mental midgets like yourself: what I was saying is personally think the line is high, but I'll make any bet that offers as good or better odds than I can get with my book.

 
,Feb 4 2005, 08:40 PM]

Well im not even sure what the #### you said?!?  Do I need a calculator to figure out your point?  I guess I could go look for my protractor if it will help.I dont think your book can beat 6.5, push on a tie
Not much of a sports better, are you?If my post confused you, then you might not want to open a Sports Betting Account.:rotflmao: "Push on a tie at 6.5?" Love it... :rotflmao: Pinnacle is currently offering -120 on NE-6.5 so I'd be willing to go even money on that... Hows about $50? $100? We both need to transfer the cash via paypal to a neutral party. I've got PSD's paypal address since I've got squares in his grid... acceptable holding party?Another Option is I'll give you 2-1 on the Eagles Money Line (win outright). I'll go up to 25 to win 50 on that bet. You pick it... PHI +6.5 for even money or ML for 2-1 odds.
Ill take 25 to win 50 and consider this bet made. No need to transfer money upfront, ill consider you trustworthy. I know I am as I have paid out all of my wagers here. To be honest, I would be more interested in 50 tw 100, but frankly I find it hard to trust a "sports gambler" who is caught up on sig character length.JAA
 
Last edited by a moderator:
but frankly I find it hard to trust a "sports gambler" who is caught up on sig character length.JAA
Still :cry: ? :PI'll gladly go 50 to win 100. I've got about two grand in a neteller account from poker playing that is ready to be transferred.... It's not a problem.
 
,Feb 5 2005, 12:37 PM]

but frankly I find it hard to trust a "sports gambler" who is caught up on sig character length.JAA
Still :cry: ? :PI'll gladly go 50 to win 100. I've got about two grand in a neteller account from poker playing that is ready to be transferred.... It's not a problem.
How many characters is that? Like I said, I know I pay up. I know nothing of you.25 tw 50. Good luck Sunday Hoss.
 
,Feb 5 2005, 12:37 PM]

but frankly I find it hard to trust a "sports gambler" who is caught up on sig character length.JAA
Still :cry: ? :PI'll gladly go 50 to win 100. I've got about two grand in a neteller account from poker playing that is ready to be transferred.... It's not a problem.
How many characters is that? Like I said, I know I pay up. I know nothing of you.25 tw 50. Good luck Sunday Hoss.
Ahhh so now $50's too much? ;)Ask PSD how quickly I paid for my square in the SB Grid he's got going. You're good to go kiddo... no worries. PM Me your paypal Address if your Iggles pull it off and the cash will be in your account as soon as I'm home. If the Pats manage to squeak by I'll PM ya mine... GL To you and your Iggles as well.... just hoping for a good game.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
,Feb 5 2005, 04:47 PM]

,Feb 5 2005, 12:37 PM]

but frankly I find it hard to trust a "sports gambler" who is caught up on sig character length.JAA
Still :cry: ? :PI'll gladly go 50 to win 100. I've got about two grand in a neteller account from poker playing that is ready to be transferred.... It's not a problem.
How many characters is that? Like I said, I know I pay up. I know nothing of you.25 tw 50. Good luck Sunday Hoss.
Ahhh so now $50's too much? ;)Ask PSD how quickly I paid for my square in the SB Grid he's got going. You're good to go kiddo... no worries. PM Me your paypal Address if your Iggles pull it off and the cash will be in your account as soon as I'm home. If the Pats manage to squeak by I'll PM ya mine... GL To you and your Iggles as well.... just hoping for a good game.
You will be paying the extra, though no happy ending for you
 
Sorry to see I missed so much banter.

It was interesting being in Puerto Rico for the week before the big game. I was completely closed off from this board, but caught a ton of ESPN hype on the game. Obviously the majority of the talking heads are picking NE to cover the 7, which you might think disappoints me, but in fact it makes me giddy because nine times out of ten the "consensus" is proven wrong when it comes to these SB "experts." :thumbup:

Highlights of the media coverage for me this week:

1) The Merril Hoge Montage -- NFL Live on Friday showed all the clips of Hoge bashing the Eagles this season and absolutely made him look the fool he has shown himself to be. Kudos to the ESPN crew for not letting him off the hook for one of THE most stubborn and biased slants I've seen in a long, long time.

2) T.O. running and catching in practice -- :pickle:

3) Jay Mariotti made to look the fool on Around the Horn -- Mariotti is the self styled "king" of Around the Horn. Well on Friday as he was pontificating on how the Patriots were going to walk all over the Eagles, his rationale was that Belichick had two weeks to prepare, 'nuff said. I was screaming at the TV over the softball he tossed and luckily, Michael Smith smacked it out of the park by pointing out that Andy Reid is 9-0 with two weeks to prepare, while Belichick is quite mortal in the same situation. :thumbup:

Best of luck to all the Patriots fans, I sincerely hope (and expect) a competitive, balanced game.

Patriots 27-Eagles 34 :thumbup:

 
Highlights of the media coverage for me this week:1) The Merril Hoge Montage -- NFL Live on Friday showed all the clips of Hoge bashing the Eagles this season and absolutely made him look the fool he has shown himself to be. Kudos to the ESPN crew for not letting him off the hook for one of THE most stubborn and biased slants I've seen in a long, long time.
Wish I could've seen it, does anyone have it available??
 
I haven't woken up more excited for a football game since 2001. This is going to be fun. Hey Jason, welcome back from your vacation. I was a little surprised you went away during Super Bowl week, but you probably expected to have some free time after the NFC Championship game. :P

 
Sorry to see I missed so much banter.

It was interesting being in Puerto Rico for the week before the big game. I was completely closed off from this board, but caught a ton of ESPN hype on the game. Obviously the majority of the talking heads are picking NE to cover the 7, which you might think disappoints me, but in fact it makes me giddy because nine times out of ten the "consensus" is proven wrong when it comes to these SB "experts." :thumbup:

Highlights of the media coverage for me this week:

1) The Merril Hoge Montage -- NFL Live on Friday showed all the clips of Hoge bashing the Eagles this season and absolutely made him look the fool he has shown himself to be. Kudos to the ESPN crew for not letting him off the hook for one of THE most stubborn and biased slants I've seen in a long, long time.

2) T.O. running and catching in practice -- :pickle:

3) Jay Mariotti made to look the fool on Around the Horn -- Mariotti is the self styled "king" of Around the Horn. Well on Friday as he was pontificating on how the Patriots were going to walk all over the Eagles, his rationale was that Belichick had two weeks to prepare, 'nuff said. I was screaming at the TV over the softball he tossed and luckily, Michael Smith smacked it out of the park by pointing out that Andy Reid is 9-0 with two weeks to prepare, while Belichick is quite mortal in the same situation. :thumbup:

Best of luck to all the Patriots fans, I sincerely hope (and expect) a competitive, balanced game.

Patriots 27-Eagles 34 :thumbup:
Nothing against Jason, but I think his blinders are on on this one. If you took the same exact team and coaches from Philadelphia and put them in Washington, Dallas, SF (or any other NFC city), he'd be all over the Patriots this week.The Pats have allowed more than 30 points only 5 times in their last 70 games. The Iggles only scored 10 points against N.E. last year.

34 points is asking A LOT for the Eagles to score. I see them getting pretty much half that many . . . They only mustered up 27 points against both the Vikings and Falcons, yet they will do BETTER than that against the Pats?

(To be clear, I am NOT saying that the Eagles have a bad team, nor am I saying that they have no chance to win.)

IMO, this is the best Pats team of their 3 recent Super Bowl teams, and I don't think that the Eagles are better than a number of the teams the Patriots have beaten in their 4-year run.

I think some people are confusing the "barely win" Patriot teams from 01 and 03 with the 04 version. The 2004 Pats won 14 games this year by 7 or more points, including 12 games by 10 or more points.

Like always, N.E. lets their opponents beat themselves and the Pats win 27-17.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top