Patriots improve to 12-0 [Archive]

hideaway70

12-08-2007, 10:00 AM

LuciusBeebe

12-08-2007, 04:20 PM

They've got a very good shot.

happygolucky

12-08-2007, 06:54 PM

So, what are my Steelers' chances of raining on New England's parade tomorrow? It's going to take a flawless game from Pittsburgh and a subpar game from the Pats, but this may be the best shot anyone has had to end the perfect season since NE seems to be showing some vulnerability the last couple of games.

Pats are done, just like the colts in 05, 13-0 then 14-2, not gonna happen, steelers are to good to let that happen. Brady will throw three int's and Big Ben will toss for three. Every defense is figuring out the pats offense just like they did to indy two years ago.

Sit Down Brady and Moss, time to get a Butt Kicking. I am not a steelers fan but I will be tomorrow.

If the Ravens would not have had idiot attacks they would have beaten the pats any way. In my book they did.

SUNDAY PATS #1 Offense vs. STEELERS #1 Defense!!!

troublesome one

12-10-2007, 10:18 AM

Pats improve to 13-0.

Looks like the double-lateral TD pass flummoxed the #1 defense. :)

hideaway70

12-10-2007, 11:52 AM

I can't imagine these guys are going to lose a game, unless of course they rest their starters at the end of the season...

What impressed me the most was that the Steelers didn't play a particularly bad game- they moved the ball well and they had some solid run defense. But those big pass plays are just killers. Brady is an amazing QB. It pains me to give the Pats a compliment after they beat the Steelers but they are impressive.

I wish my Steelers well in the playoffs, but they aren't going to get past New England. The Colts may be the only team with any shot- albeit a looong one of beating them in the playoffs- by virtue of their offense being capable of matching them score for score on a good day. No one else has that kind of scoring ability, except maybe Dallas in the Super Bowl.

This season is going to contiune to be one for the record books for New England.

LuciusBeebe

12-10-2007, 12:00 PM

The Colts may be the only team with any shot- albeit a looong one of beating them in the playoffs- by virtue of their offense being capable of matching them score for score on a good day. No one else has that kind of scoring ability, except maybe Dallas in the Super Bowl.

Have you not been paying attention? The Colts were up 30 with 6 minutes left in the 3rd quarter against a Ravens team that came thiiiiiiiis close to beating the Pats.

And when they played head-to-head, a Colts team that was riddled with injuries were up 10pts on the Pats in the 4th.

Its no long shot, the Colts are a better team.

hideaway70

12-10-2007, 04:02 PM

Its no long shot, the Colts are a better team.

Until a team actually beats them as opposed to saying they will beat them or should have beaten them, the Pats are the best team in football.

Have you not been paying attention? The Colts were up 30 with 6 minutes left in the 3rd quarter against a Ravens team that came thiiiiiiiis close to beating the Pats.

By that logicthen, (a)the Steelers beat the Ravens soundly and (b) the Ravens almost beat the Pats SO the Steelers should have beaten the Patriots as well. That didn't happen. "That's why they play the games" as the saying goes.

And when they played head-to-head, a Colts team that was riddled with injuries were up 10pts on the Pats in the 4th.

I agree the Colts will be a much stronger opponent when everyone is healthy, however, injuries are a part of football and shouldn't diminish how good NE is. I'd love to say that the Steelers would have won if only Polamalu were healthy, but the truth is it may have been 31-13 instead of 34-13.

If and when the Colts get another shot at them in the playoffs I will be rooting for them as hard as anyone, but reality is that they better be firing on all cylinders if they are going to get it done.

LuciusBeebe

12-10-2007, 04:29 PM

I agree the Colts will be a much stronger opponent when everyone is healthy, however, injuries are a part of football and shouldn't diminish how good NE is.

Tell me that if Matt Cassell is under center for the Pats.

Of course injuries diminish a football team.

matt_s

12-10-2007, 05:51 PM

If it were simply a case of numbers, there would be no need to play the games. You'd have the BCS and we all know what a glowing success that is.

While the Pats have undoubtably not had their A Game every week, so far, their B game has been good enough. There have been some circumstances where their opponant showed up with ther D Game.

Yesterday, the Raven's showed up with their D Game. The Colts, showed up with their A Game. The game was over before the first quarter ended.

Even facing serious injuries, if a team shows up prepared and play to the fullest potential of the players that can be fielded, in the NFL, that's a lot of talent and their opponant had better take the game seriously.

The Colts have as many injuries to key players as most other NFL teams, even more than some. School was in session yesterday, a lot of seats were empty and the Raven's didn't make the grade.

If both the Colts and the Pats bring their A game, they will beat all commers, including Dallas and Green Bay. If they show up with a B Game, an A Game from a team like Dallas or Green Bay (or each other) could beat them. If they face each other again and both bring their A game, just smile and sit back because as a FAN of Football you will be in for a treat. As a fan of one of the teams, you might be a bit sad at the end.

hideaway70

12-10-2007, 06:16 PM

Tell me that if Matt Cassell is under center for the Pats.

Of course injuries diminish a football team.

Granted. The point is that this isn't a theoretical league and consequently, in most of the games played, there are going to be players who will either not be playing or playing at less that 100% due to injuries. That's simply a fact of life in sports. Because of that, resorting to "if only player A was healthy we would have won" is an exercise in futility. Only in a perfect world will everyone on both sides of the ball be completely healthy, especially this late in the season.

I am hoping that Indy's(and New England's) key personnel are healthy for the playoffs. Not only will it minimize the excuses from whoever loses, but it will make for a great game. Barring the Steelers pulling off another year like 2005, I will be supporting the Colts, injuries or not.

happygolucky

12-10-2007, 06:47 PM

You also have to remember the Colts' schedule has been much tougher than New Englands. I agree NE is a good team, but they proved they can and will be beaten.

Colts have played very well despite injuries, do you think the pats would be this good with out moss and Teddy???? Probably not. Injuries or no injuries the Pats will be beaten in the AFC divisional playoffs. Colts Steelers in AFC CHAMPIONSHIP. COLTS WIN.

Colts put a spanking on the Ravens who should have beaten the Pats. When you score 23 points in the first 10 minutes of the game, that say's alot about their offense.

GO COLTS

hideaway70

12-10-2007, 07:30 PM

Colts have played very well despite injuries, do you think the pats would be this good with out moss and Teddy????

Absolutely yes, the Colts have played very well. Heck, 11-2 is good for most teams with everyone healthy.

But your comment brings up a good point, which is that not all injuries are created equal. If you have everyone healthy but lose the right guy it can be devestating. If Moss went down it would hurt the Pats in a big way certainly, but it wouldn't kill them. Losing Brady would.

By the same token, where would the Colts be if Manning went down? Having Harrison out was big, but they have other weapons, but manning isn't replacable. There is no playing through losing one of the two best QB's in football.

So it matters more WHO is hurt than how many are hurt.

You also have to remember the Colts' schedule has been much tougher than New England's

That's kind of a judgement call in my opinion. The Pats did have Dallas, Indy, Jacksonville and Pittsburgh on the schedule, but I will say that some of the teams on the Pats' schedule didn't end up being the teams they were last year (Bengals,Eagles,Chargers).

To see the teams strength of schedule and their rankings see the following link....

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/nfl07.htm

It indicates that they are pretty close in that area....

LuciusBeebe

12-10-2007, 07:55 PM

The Pats have feasted on their division for years.

hideaway70

12-10-2007, 08:09 PM

Yeah it can't hurt the record when you play in a division with the Jets year in and year out...

troublesome one

12-10-2007, 09:13 PM

And of course they play the Jets this weekend.

Oh "Spygate"! :)

tandjflo

12-11-2007, 12:45 AM

Give the 26 points. Belichick is going to want to embarass the "rat" who dropped the dime on him, former assistant Eric Mangini.....I believe this is the largest point spread ever, surpassing 1976 Pittsburgh v. expansion team Tampa Bay Buccaneers Although I thought I heard someone say that in 1968 Baltimore Colts v. Atlanta Falcons had a larger spread. Can't find anything to confirm that however.

matt_s

12-11-2007, 05:11 PM

What do you think the point spread will be for the week 16 matchup with Miami. Will they need to add third column of numbers to the score board?

troublesome one

01-02-2008, 11:26 AM

Now they're 16-0. Brady, Moss & the team set records.

All will be for naught, though, if they don't win the Super Bowl.

LuciusBeebe

01-02-2008, 11:47 AM

Why do people say that? I don't get it, people act like records mean nothing and the Superbowl is the end-all be-all. People talked about the 72 Phins for 35 years, but who won the 76 Superbowl? The 80 Superbowl?

People remember records, they forget superbowls.

james_t

01-02-2008, 11:52 AM

If the Pats don't win the Super Bowl, I think they will be remembered, but it will be as one of the greatest chokes of all time.

LuciusBeebe

01-02-2008, 11:57 AM

My problem with everyone kissing up to the Patriots is that their period of awesome play was during the first 2/3 of the season. Since the weather has turned cold they have struggled against mediocre teams. I am expecting them to lose in the playoffs. Colts/Pack.

jabberjaw

01-02-2008, 01:38 PM

Yeah they are struggling along at 16-0 aren't they. Lotta Colts fans here i take it?

LuciusBeebe

01-02-2008, 01:46 PM

Oh goody, a Pats fan.

December 3rd... Pats eak one out against the ferocious Ravens, 27-24

December 9th... Pats beat up on Pittsburgh

December 16th... Pats beat the Jets by 10

December 22nd... Pats beat the Dolphins

December 29th... Pats just edge out the Giants, 38-35

Woo. What a tremendous run. Sorry bruther, but they're going down in the playoffs.

Hawaii was undefeated, right? Undefeated means you can't be beaten, doesn't it?

jabberjaw

01-02-2008, 02:41 PM

December 3rd... Pats eak one out against the ferocious Ravens, 27-24

Did you intend to write "eke" or was that a clever intentional grammatical error?

Woo. What a tremendous run. Sorry bruther, but they're going down in the playoffs.

Actually no. I'm a Colts fan. Just one who doesn't have blinders on.

Woo. What a tremendous run. Sorry bruther, but they're going down in the playoffs.

And you are basing this revelatory exclamation on...?

Hawaii was undefeated, right? Undefeated means you can't be beaten, doesn't it?

Good comparison. College teams never go undefeated do they? I can't believe Howie and Terry haven't called you for a color commentary slot...

So, in my short hour on this site, I have already met "that" guy. LOL

superdad1

01-02-2008, 02:57 PM

Well, if they ranked the pro's like they do the college teams, New England would be ranked about 7th or 8th since the other 3 teams in their division are all way under .500 for the year (Buf is 7-9, Jets are 4-12, and Miami is 1-15). If the Colts can't get their starters back from injury, they will struggle against the Pat's again. But everyone is going to be gunning to break that streak. Hawaii had a great season, but the Bulldogs were unstoppable last night. Lucky they weren't taking on the Buckeyes. Unfortunately they won't get the chance.

jabberjaw

01-02-2008, 03:06 PM

Well, if they ranked the pro's like they do the college teams, New England would be ranked about 7th or 8th since the other 3 teams in their division are all way under .500 for the year (Buf is 7-9, Jets are 4-12, and Miami is 1-15).

Did you read that before you posted it? Regardless of everyone's excuse that they had a such a weak schedule (one with the Colts and Cowboys on it I might add), they didn't lose a game (including those two). Even the morons in college football aren't going to rank an undefeated team "7th or 8th" when they are the only team in the game with no losses.

This is the same ridiculous nonsense everyone spouted when the Bulls, Cowboys, Yankees, Lakers, etc. were on top. "It's a conspiracy!" "They cheated!" "They bought a championship!" :hahaha:

matt_s

01-02-2008, 03:22 PM

... Even the morons in college football aren't going to rank an undefeated team "7th or 8th" when they are the only team in the game with no losses.

You are right. They will be ranked 10th.

jabberjaw

01-02-2008, 03:37 PM

Of course. So, based on strength of schedule, the Pats are just a mediocre team who got lucky. Am I feeling ya?

matt_s

01-02-2008, 03:40 PM

No, I think they are a very good team that has the capability of running the table in the playoffs if they play to the fullest of their potential. If other teams decide not to challenge them, then I'm pretty sure they will. But, thats why they play the game.

matt_s

01-02-2008, 03:52 PM

While I didn't agree with Hawaii's #10 ranking in the BCS (they should have been much higher IMHO) their play against Georgia didn't warrant being ranked as high as they were.

Strength of schedule is a nearly moot point in the NFL because from top to bottom if the top ranked teams don't play their best and the team they are playing brings their A game, there can be an upset. It probably would have taken the Patriots playing their C game for Miami to beat them.

I think a perfect record in the NFL isn't a reflection of strength of schedule but of professionalism. They brought enough of a game each week to get the job done.

hideaway70

01-02-2008, 04:52 PM

Strength of schedule is a nearly moot point in the NFL because from top to bottom if the top ranked teams don't play their best and the team they are playing brings their A game, there can be an upset. It probably would have taken the Patriots playing their C game for Miami to beat them.

I think a perfect record in the NFL isn't a reflection of strength of schedule but of professionalism. They brought enough of a game each week to get the job done.

I think it's a reflection of professionalism and strength of schedule and coaching and talent and luck. All of those things helped them go 16-0.

Certainly, if NE shows up flat and someone else shows up firing on all cylinders, they are capable of going down, but until that happens they are the best team in the NFL. At this point, the strength of schedule issue goes out the window, assuming every team deserves to be in the playoffs. Those other attributes make the difference now. I can't give BB a thumbs-up, but they have more talent than anyone else involved, including Indy, Dallas and GB.

It sure would be nice if my Steelers sneak into another one while all these guys are getting the attention...(I'm not buying my SB shirt yet though)

superdad1

01-02-2008, 06:18 PM

[QUOTE=jabberjaw;5937]Even the morons in college football aren't going to rank an undefeated team "7th or 8th" when they are the only team in the game with no losses.QUOTE]

Well then why was Hawaii only ranked 10th then? I believe they were the only undefeated team this year? Or did you not read what you posted first?

LuciusBeebe

01-02-2008, 06:41 PM

So, in my short hour on this site, I have already met "that" guy. LOL

Ignoring the substance of the argument, while supplying snarky comments instead of rebuttles... YOU are "that guy".

The simple fact is that the Pats feasted on an abysmal division and were average at best when the weather turned cold. Look at Brady's touchdown numbers before December versus after. Then look at their rushing stats. You say you don't have blinders on, but you're the one ignoring the fact that their playoff games will be out in the elements in a New England winter. If you think they can win the playoffs without a running game, well, why bother. You claim to be a Colts fan, but that's not what I'm hearing. A Colts fan would know that a Colts team that was riddled with injuries had the Pats down 10 points in the 4th quarter. A Colts fan would know that a shaky team from New York stuck it to the Pats last Saturday. A Colts fan would know that an offensive juggernaut in the regular season means jack squat in the playoffs. I'm a Colts fan.

"LOL"

jabberjaw

01-03-2008, 06:40 AM

Ignoring the substance of the argument, while supplying snarky comments instead of rebuttles... YOU are "that guy".

The simple fact is that the Pats feasted on an abysmal division and were average at best when the weather turned cold. Look at Brady's touchdown numbers before December versus after. Then look at their rushing stats. You say you don't have blinders on, but you're the one ignoring the fact that their playoff games will be out in the elements in a New England winter. If you think they can win the playoffs without a running game, well, why bother. You claim to be a Colts fan, but that's not what I'm hearing. A Colts fan would know that a Colts team that was riddled with injuries had the Pats down 10 points in the 4th quarter. A Colts fan would know that a shaky team from New York stuck it to the Pats last Saturday. A Colts fan would know that an offensive juggernaut in the regular season means jack squat in the playoffs. I'm a Colts fan.

"LOL"

Uh-oh, I've upset "that" guy.

Now, in order for me to be a Colts fan, do I need to do so on your terms? Nah. The Colts are a great team, but the Pats are better. I'd love for the Colts to upset them yes, but it would be an upset my hero.

As for the snareky comments, go back and read your last 900 comments. Every message board has it's equivalent of the drunk in the bar who has to prove he knows it all by shouting eeryone else down to get his point accross. That, my friend, is you.

LOL

james_t

01-03-2008, 07:16 AM

Can we please keep the debate on football and drop the topic of whoever is a troll, "that" guy, Cliff Clavin or whatever you want to call it? Otherwise we're going to have to bring out the moderator stick, and nobody wants that...

I grew up near Detroit, so watching professional football was pretty much a miserable experience during my formative years. My sons, born near Chicago, are all Bears fans, so I usually cheer along with them (though not as much this season).

I watched the Pats' win over the Giants and can't say I was terribly impressed. They've pulled out a few close ones - and yes, I realize that's what good teams do - but to me, at least, they are definitely beatable.

Of course, my record of sports predictions on The Fence Post is 0-for-infinity, so I've probably just sealed the Super Bowl for them.

LuciusBeebe

01-03-2008, 07:52 AM

"LOL"

"LOL"

A Colts fan would also remember that the Patriots are not the defending Superbowl champs.

A Colts fan would remember that Adam Vinatieri has won more games for the Pats than Tom Brady.

But go right ahead and continue failing to bring any meat to the discussion, its not like i'm unaccustomed to people throwing ad hominem attacks at me in lieu of a cogent counterpoint.

I watched the Pats' win over the Giants and can't say I was terribly impressed. They've pulled out a few close ones - and yes, I realize that's what good teams do - but to me, at least, they are definitely beatable.

Exactly. If the season ended in November, I'd give up all hope of anyone but the Patriots winning, but I watched the Baltimore Ravens take them to the final bell, and I watched the Colts handily dispatch that same team the next week. I watched the Pats make Eli Manning look good last week. If Jabber wants to ignore the last month, then he's in for some disappointment. Heck, I'd take the Chargers over the Pats at this point.

edit:

Last 5 games for Tom Brady:

1367 yards, 11 TDs, 4 INTs

Previous 11 games, 3500+ yards, 39 TDs, 4 INTs

jabberjaw

01-03-2008, 08:47 AM

"LOL"

"LOL"

A Colts fan would also remember that the Patriots are not the defending Superbowl champs.

<clears throat> What have you done for me lately? Ooooohhhhh yeahhhh.:thrasher: LOL LOL

A Colts fan would remember that Adam Vinatieri has won more games for the Pats than Tom Brady.

Correct me if I am in error, but don't those wins still count as wins? They aren't a one-man show- which would explain the 16-0 that they lucked into because neither the Colts nor the Cowboys were up to the task. Must have been all that cheatin'. LOL LOL LOL

edit:

Last 5 games for Tom Brady:

1367 yards, 11 TDs, 4 INTs

And those are bad numbers? We are grasping at straws now aren't we? Lest we forget, our man threw a few interceptions in the second half- in fact more in one game than that horrible Brady did in 5. LOL LOL LOL (3 of 'em for ya. I have an unlimited supply) :ridinghorse:

jabberjaw

01-03-2008, 08:51 AM

Can we please keep the debate on football and drop the topic of whoever is a troll, "that" guy, Cliff Clavin or whatever you want to call it? Otherwise we're going to have to bring out the moderator stick, and nobody wants that...

I would never refer to someone as Cliff Clavin. I love Cliff.

Anyway, I'll be a sweetie. You won't reprimand a cat with 900+ posts. He's a golden boy. LOL LOL :ridinghorse:

LuciusBeebe

01-03-2008, 08:52 AM

jabberjaw

01-03-2008, 09:04 AM

I'm not grasping at straws, I'm proving my argument with simple statistics. The Patriots offense has flagged in the 5 months heading into the playoffs. 3 of their last 5 opponents were the among the worst in the league, and despite going against such weak competition, Brady's numbers were worse than in all the games preceding that period. The point is that in colder weather the Patriots are not the Harlem Globetrotters that they were. The point is that they should have been doing what Green Bay started during the same 5 game period: establishing a run game. The point is that they're not the juggernaut that they were through the first 11 games of the season. The point is that they're completely beatable in the playoffs. Feel free to refute any one of these points, instead of pointing to 16-0 like it matters. There's 2 seasons in the NFL every year, one of them is done, now we begin the next.

Weren't you the guy a few posts back arguing that 16-0 was a big deal?

Why do people say that? I don't get it, people act like records mean nothing and the Superbowl is the end-all be-all. People talked about the 72 Phins for 35 years, but who won the 76 Superbowl? The 80 Superbowl?

People remember records, they forget superbowls.

Are injuries our excuses for these games as well?....

Sun. Nov 4 Patriots L 20-24
Sun. Nov 11 @ Chargers L 21-23
Sun. Nov 18 Chiefs W 13-10
Sun. Dec 30 Titans L 10-16

That KC juggernaut has dominated all season long. LOL ROFLMAO (Thought you'd like some variety):rofl::love:

hideaway70

01-03-2008, 09:17 AM

It pains me to say this, but I have to take Lucius' side here. The playoffs are a whole new endeavor and the teams that were hot early on aren't necessarily the hot ones now.

That being said, I still have to give NE the nod until someone knocks 'em off. The Colts are the most likely to do so IMHO.

LuciusBeebe

01-03-2008, 10:31 AM

Weren't you the guy a few posts back arguing that 16-0 was a big deal?

The argument was about history. People remember perfect seasons, they don't remember Superbowls as much. The argument had nothing to do with a team's regular season record being an indicator of playoff success.

Are injuries our excuses for these games as well?....

Sun. Nov 4 Patriots L 20-24
Sun. Nov 11 @ Chargers L 21-23
Sun. Nov 18 Chiefs W 13-10
Sun. Dec 30 Titans L 10-16

That KC juggernaut has dominated all season long. LOL ROFLMAO (Thought you'd like some variety):rofl::love:

Injuries were key in the Patriots loss, Vinatieri missed a chipshot to lose to the Chargers, and if you didn't notice, Sorgi was under center against the Titans.

The Chiefs game was just like the games you're ignoring that the Pats had against the Ravens, Jets, and Giants. They should've won handily, but didn't.

I see you haven't addressed any of the points about the Patriots.

Perhaps this is why. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBGIQ7ZuuiU)

jabberjaw

01-03-2008, 12:22 PM

The Chiefs game was just like the games you're ignoring that the Pats had against the Ravens, Jets, and Giants. They should've won handily, but didn't.

They are very similar. Expect that you don't see fit to bring those games up as they pertain to the Colts. Again with the blinders and excsues. Ohhh yyyeaaahhhh! (in a Randy Savage voice) LOL LOL LOL AND ROFLMAO:ridinghorse::adore:

LuciusBeebe

01-03-2008, 12:31 PM

jabberjaw

01-03-2008, 12:40 PM

I don't bring them up as they pertain to the Colts because that is not the point of the discussion; I bring them up as proof that the Patriots are not a juggernaut going into the playoffs.

Your remark, "they're very similar", is proof enough that you agree... yet despite your claim of being a Colts fan, and despite your admission that the Pats have looked "very similar" in the past 5 weeks, you are unwilling to acknowledge that the Colts could beat the Patriots.

There is no way you are a Colts fan.

I sure am Bubba! I love me some Colts!

I do admit that the Colts are capable of beating the Patriots, or anyone else for that matter. What I don't agree with is that it's just a foregone conclusion. You seem to be under the impression that everyone ought to know the Colts are a superior team, because they are your team and you have given them your blessing based on your superior knowledge and fastidious research. LOL LOL LOL Whoooooooooooo!

Maybe you can let me know who will win the NBA championship as well so I can make a couple bucks with a bookie? And maybe you can let me know who your chosen candidate is in the presidential race so I can vote with confidence? Yeeeaaaahhhhh babbbyy! He's a PTP'er!!!
:party:
:party:
:party:

LuciusBeebe

01-03-2008, 12:45 PM

I do admit that the Colts are capable of beating the Patriots, or anyone else for that matter.

That's a far cry from what you've been posting.

What I don't agree with is that it's just a foregone conclusion. You seem to be under the impression that everyone ought to know the Colts are a superior team, because they are your team and you have given them your blessing based on your superior knowledge and fastidious research.

That has never been my contention. The only thing I've said is that the Patriots have been on a downswing heading into the playoffs, making them what they were not in the earlier portion of the season: beatable.

jabberjaw

01-03-2008, 12:49 PM

That has never been my contention. The only thing I've said is that the Patriots have been on a downswing heading into the playoffs, making them what they were not in the earlier portion of the season: beatable.

Well shoot! It's looks like you and me, we got ourselves a consensus! That there is a reasonable position cowboy! :ridinghorse:

They have always been beatable, any team is in the right scenario, but they are maybe easier to beat right now. Did the possibility that they might have been playing "down" to the level of competition in some of those wins? I don't know that to be the case, but it's not unheard of. :eviltongue:

jabberjaw

01-03-2008, 12:54 PM

That's a far cry from what you've been posting.

What defines fandom for you anywho? I'm a Cubbie fan too, but I don't kid myself into thinking they're the Yankees man. I root for the team I like when they play and I might even get up and go "Yay!" on occasion, but it's just a freakin' game. There are more important things in the real, non-sports, non-D&D, non-scifi world. :stupido:

LuciusBeebe

01-03-2008, 12:57 PM

Did the possibility that they might have been playing "down" to the level of competition in some of those wins? I don't know that to be the case, but it's not unheard of. :eviltongue:

In my opinion, no. Its all weather related.

What baffles me the most is that Beli-what'sit is some supposed Supercoach, but he seems to have forgotten that his team plays in the elements in New England. That was always their advantage against the Colts. Passing games suffer in the cold outdoor venues. As a guy with Maroney on the bench of his fantasy league all darn year, I have no idea what he's thinking. A team can't flip a switch and suddenly be able to pound the ball. Green Bay was completely unimpressive to me until they got Ryan Grant into a groove, now they look completely plausible to take the NFC. New England? They gave the Colts the template to beat them years ago: jam the receivers at the line, disrupt their routes, beat the snot out of 'em. If you ask me, the Colts and Pats have switched roles from a few years ago. Heck, we even got their kicker.

What defines fandom for you anywho? I'm a Cubbie fan too, but I don't kid myself into thinking they're the Yankees man. I root for the team I like when they play and I might even get up and go "Yay!" on occasion, but it's just a freakin' game. There are more important things in the real, non-sports, non-D&D, non-scifi world. :stupido:

So you admit you're not a fan.

jabberjaw

01-03-2008, 01:00 PM

In my opinion, no. Its all weather related.

What baffles me the most is that Beli-what'sit is some supposed Supercoach, but he seems to have forgotten that his team plays in the elements in New England. That was always their advantage against the Colts. Passing games suffer in the cold outdoor venues. As a guy with Maroney on the bench of his fantasy league all darn year, I have no idea what he's thinking. A team can't flip a switch and suddenly be able to pound the ball. Green Bay was completely unimpressive to me until they got Ryan Grant into a groove, now they look completely plausible to take the NFC. New England? They gave the Colts the template to beat them years ago: jam the receivers at the line, disrupt their routes, beat the snot out of 'em. If you ask me, the Colts and Pats have switched roles from a few years ago. Heck, we even got their kicker.

Yo yo yo, check this out. It looks like we have more common ground yo. I think Beli-what'sit is their weak link. They win despite him.

:embarassed:

jabberjaw

01-03-2008, 01:06 PM

In my opinion, no. Its all weather related.

Ok now, I get that you think New England is incapable of playing in cold weather. But one must be very careful of speaking in absolute terms, mustn't one? I'll give you an example..."Peyton Manning can never win the big one" Turned out not to be true. If those folks had said "Peyton Manning hasn't one the big one yet" instead, they might not be feeling so contrite today. LOL LOL LOL See? I'm a Colts fan! Whoooooo! Go Horsheshoes! :ridinghorse::ridinghorse::ridinghorse::ridinghors e:

james_t

01-03-2008, 01:10 PM

I'm a Cubbie fan too, but I don't kid myself into thinking they're the Yankees man.

My oldest son - having spent the first 10 years of his life in the Chicago suburbs - is a die-hard, bleeding-Cubbie-blue Cubs fan. We've tried to get him counseling, but from what we're told, it's a chronic disorder...

jabberjaw

01-03-2008, 01:14 PM

My oldest son - having spent the first 10 years of his life in the Chicago suburbs - is a die-hard, bleeding-Cubbie-blue Cubs fan. We've tried to get him counseling, but from what we're told, it's a chronic disorder...

Yes, that is true. It is listed in the DSM IV as a treatable condition, similar to paranoid schizophrenia in some respects. Be comforted in knowing that I have lived with this for many years and am able to live a mostly normal life with the right medication and regular counseling.

LuciusBeebe

01-03-2008, 01:15 PM

Ok now, I get that you think New England is incapable of playing in cold weather.

Again, that is now what I said at all. What I'm saying is the style of ball they were playing in the comfortable fall weather is not available in winters in New England. Which is why they have not looked like the same team in the last 5 weeks of the season.

That is my entire point in a nutshell. The team that was tearing teams apart disappeared in Week 13.

But one must be very careful of speaking in absolute terms, mustn't one? I'll give you an example..."Peyton Manning can never win the big one"

Those people were morons.

My oldest son - having spent the first 10 years of his life in the Chicago suburbs - is a die-hard, bleeding-Cubbie-blue Cubs fan. We've tried to get him counseling, but from what we're told, it's a chronic disorder...

reminds me of:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-Elr5K2Vuo

james_t

01-03-2008, 01:17 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-Elr5K2Vuo

Don't blame me; I'm a Tigers fan. They actually HAVE won a World Series in my lifetime.

LuciusBeebe

01-03-2008, 01:19 PM

Don't blame me; I'm a Tigers fan. They actually HAVE won a World Series in my lifetime.

And lost a pitcher to Guitar Hero.

jabberjaw

01-03-2008, 01:20 PM

Again, that is not what I said at all. What I'm saying is the style of ball they were playing in the comfortable fall weather is not available in winters in New England. Which is why they have not looked like the same team in the last 5 weeks of the season.

That is my entire point in a nutshell. The team that was tearing teams apart disappeared in Week 13.

That is a fair statement. Aww ya big lug. You and I are going to be fast friends yet, just you wait and see. :shakehands:

Those people were morons.

Goodness, you have a vicious side hombre. :eek::ahhhhh:

LuciusBeebe

01-03-2008, 01:25 PM

Goodness, you have a vicious side hombre. :eek::ahhhhh:

That "Peyton Manning can't win the big one" always stuck in my craw, because it usually came after some long-winded diatribe about how awesome the Patriots are. The ESPN guys couldn't seem to make the logical connection that either the Patriots are amazing, and thus Peyton Manning is not a choker; or the Patriots are not amazing, they simply won because Peyton Manning was incapable of winning the big game.

jabberjaw

01-03-2008, 01:30 PM

That "Peyton Manning can't win the big one" always stuck in my craw, because it usually came after some long-winded diatribe about how awesome the Patriots are. The ESPN guys couldn't seem to make the logical connection that either the Patriots are amazing, and thus Peyton Manning is not a choker; or the Patriots are not amazing, they simply won because Peyton Manning was incapable of winning the big game.

I think it's a common thing with sports fans in general that they place waaaay to much emphasis on the high-profil players, thus giving them too much credit and blame. The Colts wouldn't be the Colts without Peyton, but they also wouldn't be who they are without their receivers, running game, O-line, secondary etc.

Dan Marino always got a bum rap for never winning a bowl, but the guy nevr had a great team. It takes more than a QB to win a SB. :beerglass:

LuciusBeebe

01-03-2008, 01:37 PM

Exactly. They said the same stuff about Elway until he won a superbowl. So what?! They saying Dilfer is a better QB than Marino? Brad Johnson? How many Patriots Superbowl wins came off the foot of Vinatieri? The Colts didn't get past the Steelers because Vanderjagt missed a field goal. Last year the Chargers lost to the Pats because their cornerback tried to run an interception back instead of simply laying on the ground and letting his team take 4 knees to ice the game. There's so much of this and that involved in winning a superbowl that it was insane to say Peyton Manning couldn't win the big one. That's why I say those people were morons.

Peyton Manning is on pace to destroy the newly gained records of Brett Favre.

hideaway70

01-03-2008, 01:41 PM

Dan Marino always got a bum rap for never winning a bowl, but the guy nevr had a great team. It takes more than a QB to win a SB. :beerglass:

I agree with most of that statement, except for the part about Marino not having great teams. He did have great teams that didn't get it done in the playoffs. Not his fault alone, but the fact remains that they were good during the regular season. In fact, I found an interesting list that surprised me a bit:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_Standings_since_AFL-NFL_merger

I hesitate to use Wikipedia as a source but, based on a quick spot check, the records appear to be right. I don't know what percentage of those wins for Miami were during the Marino era, but I would wager many were.

As an aside, I see my Steelers (when I say "my" I don't mean to imply ownership) are number two on that list. Makes me chest swell with pride, although it may not help much this weekend...

hideaway70

01-03-2008, 01:46 PM

Peyton Manning is on pace to destroy the newly gained records of Brett Favre.

Oh I think with the years Manning has left he will blow by most of those records. Indy has an offensive juggernaut there that will play right into that plan. Even with the year Brady had, I have to think Peyton will be better over a longer period of time. Brady is good, but this year was an aberration when you look at his history. He is in a very good position this year with the talent they have. Manning has consistently been able to succeed with whomever he happens to have available.

LuciusBeebe

01-03-2008, 01:47 PM

Yeah, your boys in Pittsburgh are in trouble. In a meatfest game that's likely to occur, Jacksonville's run game is a monster going up against Najeh Davenport.

Brady is good, but this year was an aberration when you look at his history.

Look at what Moss did for Culpepper.

hideaway70

01-03-2008, 01:49 PM

Yeah, your boys in Pittsburgh are in trouble. In a meatfest game that's likely to occur, Jacksonville's run game is a monster going up against Najeh Davenport.

Jacksonville is playing well right now. There's a reason Willie Parker refers to them as the "Steelers of the South". They play that same rough and tough style of football, only better right now.

Yeah Davenport is a great 3rd down guy, but he is not a feature back by any stretch. Oh well, this is why we play the games. Lots can happen in the playoffs. I'm just not getting my hopes up. You'll be glad to hear that, if indeed the Steelers go down, I shall jump onto the Colts train. Gotta stick with the AFC.

hideaway70

01-03-2008, 01:54 PM

Look at what Moss did for Culpepper.

He's amazing, but it's hard to get behind a guy who only plays hard when he's in the mood. How does someone that talented disappear during his entire stay in Oakland? Not to minimize anything Brady or Culpepper have done, but any college QB could look reasonably good throwing to that guy when he feels like playing.

LuciusBeebe

01-03-2008, 01:59 PM

hideaway70

01-03-2008, 02:03 PM

Yeah, that's why I don't think Moss has cleaned up his act any more then Terrell Owens. They're winning, winning cures everything. The dude's just another self-absorbed wide receiver. Makes me appreciate Marvin and Reggie that much more.

Yeah, when the TO's and Moss's and Keyshawns of the world start getting to you it's nice to have a Marvin or Reggie or Hines Ward to remind you that not every NFL wideout is Allen Iverson with a helmet.

matt_s

01-03-2008, 02:38 PM

hideaway70

01-03-2008, 02:48 PM

... and here I had thought that Iverson had come a long way over the past few years.

I'm not buying if somebody is selling that Moss has reformed from his old ways. But, it is nice to see him performing without the attitude. Of course he is finally on a team where he wasn't the biggest fish in the pond and the bigger fish is what feeds him. So maybe he has finally realized that there is more to the world than just him.

Here's to finding out :beerglass:

Go Colts

If anybody believes Moss is reformed they are kidding themselves. He is a great football player and a despicable human being. That's not likely to change in my lifetime. He is just in a good situation in NE and he knows it. This will be his shot at a title and he would be a total fool to mess that up.

So, in summary, your post is essentially correct except for the last word. It should read as follows: Go Steelers

matt_s

01-03-2008, 02:54 PM

What are horseshoes made out of again...

troublesome one

01-03-2008, 08:42 PM

Awwwwww..

Midway through this post I thought a lovefest was going to break out between Lucius & jabberjaw. :)

happygolucky

01-03-2008, 10:12 PM

Did you read that before you posted it? Regardless of everyone's excuse that they had a such a weak schedule (one with the Colts and Cowboys on it I might add), they didn't lose a game (including those two). Even the morons in college football aren't going to rank an undefeated team "7th or 8th" when they are the only team in the game with no losses.

This is the same ridiculous nonsense everyone spouted when the Bulls, Cowboys, Yankees, Lakers, etc. were on top. "It's a conspiracy!" "They cheated!" "They bought a championship!" :hahaha:

Also remember the Colts divison has more teams in the playoffs that any other afc divison. Colts, titans and Jags. The other 3, from the other 3 divisions. Colts have had the toughest schedule of all the teams in the NFL and yes they lost to San Diego, NE and Titans(pity game). The Pats have played nobody, almost lost to Ravens, Eagles, Colts etc. I know they still won but c'mon, not near as tough at INDY's schedule. If they meet in the Championship game I think the Colts will pull it off, Unless pittsburg, jags or titans can pull it off.....which is a probability. Don't get me wrong, they are a good team with great players, but nothing compared to the INDY COLTS.

tandjflo

01-03-2008, 11:33 PM

If the NFL adopted the BCS...http://sports.aol.com/fanhouse/2008/01/03/what-life-would-be-like-if-the-bcs-ran-the-nfl/

hideaway70

01-04-2008, 07:13 AM

What are horseshoes made out of again...

See? I'm right. You should thank the Steelers for making your logo possible...

LuciusBeebe

01-04-2008, 07:29 AM

You should thank our logo for giving your logo a job.

I wonder if Parcell's is making the PETA people angry... dolphin-free tuna... i'm so sorry.

hideaway70

01-04-2008, 07:31 AM

You should thank our logo for giving your logo a job.

It just occurred to me... Aren't horseshoes iron rather than steel? Not sure as I am not a blacksmith. Regardless, thank you Mr. Irsay for your business.

hideaway70

01-04-2008, 07:34 AM

I wonder if Parcell's is making the PETA people angry... dolphin-free tuna... i'm so sorry.

Everything makes the PETA people angry...I'm sure they are upset that animals are being exploited by having their images co-opted for use as logos and mascots. They will be asking for a public apology and reparations.

james_t

01-04-2008, 07:35 AM

I'm sure they are upset that animals are being exploited by having their images co-opted for use as logos and mascots. They will be asking for a public apology and reparations.

The Colts are probably safe as long as the Redskins are still around (in Washington, no less.)

james_t

01-04-2008, 07:36 AM

It just occurred to me... Aren't horseshoes iron rather than steel? Not sure as I am not a blacksmith. Regardless, thank you Mr. Irsay for your business.

It is unknown who invented the first horseshoe. Early Asian horsemen used horse booties made from leather and plants. During the first century, the Romans made leather and metal shoes called "hipposandals". By the 6th and 7th centuries, European horsemen had begun nailing metal shoes to horses' hooves. Around 1000 AD, cast bronze horseshoes with nail holes had became common in Europe. The 13th and 14th centuries brought the widespread manufacturing of iron horseshoes. Hot-shoeing, the process of heating the horseshoe before shoeing the horse, became common in the 16th century.

http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blhorseshoe.htm

hideaway70

01-04-2008, 07:38 AM

It is unknown who invented the first horseshoe. Early Asian horsemen used horse booties made from leather and plants. During the first century, the Romans made leather and metal shoes called "hipposandals". By the 6th and 7th centuries, European horsemen had begun nailing metal shoes to horses' hooves. Around 1000 AD, cast bronze horseshoes with nail holes had became common in Europe. The 13th and 14th centuries brought the widespread manufacturing of iron horseshoes. Hot-shoeing, the process of heating the horseshoe before shoeing the horse, became common in the 16th century.

http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blhorseshoe.htm

You like Google don't you James? :)

hideaway70

01-04-2008, 07:40 AM

The Colts are probably safe as long as the Redskins are still around (in Washington, no less.)

How is it, with all the political correctness running rampant, that they have been able to keep that name? It's nice to see someone bucking the trend in my opinion.

james_t

01-04-2008, 07:43 AM

You like Google don't you James? :)

What, you think I didn't have that one off the top of my head? My kids don't believe me when I tell them dads know everything, either...

I actually got that one off ask.com, since I was asking a question that would have been a little harder (for me, at least) to format as a Google query (What are horseshoes made of?).

hideaway70

01-04-2008, 07:48 AM

What, you think I didn't have that one off the top of my head? My kids don't believe me when I tell them dads know everything, either...

I actually got that one off ask.com, since I was asking a question that would have been a little harder (for me, at least) to format as a Google query (What are horseshoes made of?).

Yeah it can be tough to narrow your results in Google sometimes. The way you research, maybe you should consider a career with a newspaper...

james_t

01-04-2008, 07:56 AM

The way you research, maybe you should consider a career with a newspaper...

I dunno. I hear those media jackals are just a bunch of godless liberals.

hideaway70

01-04-2008, 07:58 AM

I dunno. I hear those media jackals are just a bunch of godless liberals.

That's what Bill O'Reilly says, and since he yells a lot, I have to assume that it's true.

LuciusBeebe

01-04-2008, 08:05 AM

I dunno. I hear those media jackals are just a bunch of godless liberals.

That's just a myth perpetuated by the...

LuciusBeebe

01-05-2008, 11:07 PM

ouch
sorry steelers

troublesome one

01-13-2008, 04:49 PM

With the Colts going down today and San Diego so beat up (Tomlinson & Rivers injured in this game and Gates not 100%), who is going to keep the Pats from going 19-0?

hideaway70

01-13-2008, 07:54 PM

With the Colts going down today and San Diego so beat up (Tomlinson & Rivers injured in this game and Gates not 100%), who is going to keep the Pats from going 19-0?

Only the Pats can do that now.

LuciusBeebe

01-13-2008, 08:41 PM

With the Colts going down today and San Diego so beat up (Tomlinson & Rivers injured in this game and Gates not 100%), who is going to keep the Pats from going 19-0?

The Chargers will be fine. Turner's a darn good RB, and Volek is a pretty good QB. No worries.

troublesome one

01-13-2008, 08:50 PM

Is this a daring Lucius prediction?

LuciusBeebe

01-14-2008, 06:24 AM

Me? Bold predictions?!

matt_s

01-14-2008, 06:36 AM

I'm not sure I'm holding out much hope for the Chargers. But my hope for the Colts didn't help either.

Ok, lets see....

Lets go Packers... a snow filled, blustry day in Glendale (hey, it just snowed in Baghdad, anything is possible) and a retractable roof stuck in the open position.

Not that the Patriots will be complaining about weather condistions considering where they play.

jabberjaw

01-14-2008, 08:07 AM

Its no long shot, the Colts are a better team.

Ladies and gentlemen, Jimmy the Greek! LOL :adore::elefant:

james_t

01-24-2008, 08:45 AM

A general question:

We all say we love to see sports played at their best level. So why is it we hate the teams that achieve that and dominate their sport?

About everyone I know is rooting against the Patriots for the Super Bowl, despite conceding that they are heavily favored to win. People hate the Yankees, Hendrick Motorsports, etc.

So if we want the sport played at its best, why do we hate teams that do it consistently?