PDA

View Full Version : NFL Playoffs = crapfest



Chip R
01-07-2007, 01:13 AM
This is the highest caliber football we have in this country? That KC Indy game was about the worst excuse for a NFL playoff football game I have ever seen. You would think when a QB in the playoffs throws 3 picks, his team is going to lose, right? Not when the other team is even worse. KC doesn't even get a 1st down till the 2nd half. 3 times in the 1st half this supposedly potent Indy offense has to settle for FGs. KC intercepts Manning and instead of running Manning over, Ty Law gets cute ant tries to go around him and gets nailed at the 15. Easy FG for the Chiefs, right? Oh, but it hits the upright.

The Dallas Seattle game was only a little better. Ut was a field goal contest in the 1st half because neither eam was potent enough to score. And it's not like either defense was anything special. And the game is lost on a fumbled long snap. At least the Bengals had snow as an excuse, what was Romo's excuse?

It's pathetic that 4 playoff teams played this poorly. They could have picked 4 other teams that didn't make the playoffs, match them up and they wouldn't have played so poorly.

Razor Shines
01-07-2007, 02:20 AM
Way to make sure and not give any credit to the Colts defense. It had nothing to do with them actually wrapping people up today. Holding the second best rusher in the NFL to 32yds, looked pretty good to me. That's easily the most fire I've seen the Colts D play with all season. The Cheifs have one of the best O lines in football and the Colts shoved them around. Only one of Manning's picks was a really bad throw, other than that 30 of 38 isn't too bad. The replay shows Marvin clearly broke the wrong way both times, he broke toward the other defensve back and left Ty Law wide open for easy picks. They say Ty Law is in Manning's head, honestly I think it's Marvin's head that he's in, but that's my opinion.

You say nobody showed for these games, I say the Colts defense finally showed up. But I know I'm biased because I'm a Colts fan.

guttle11
01-07-2007, 02:21 AM
what was Romo's excuse?

Sabotage.

Montgomery Inn.

It all adds up. It makes too much sense.

MWM
01-07-2007, 02:49 AM
Yeah, there's a lot of very average teams in the playoffs this year. But this is the parity everyone says they want. This is what happens when parity gets taken to the extreme. This is one of the reasons why I've never supported copying the NFL model for baseball.

Dom Heffner
01-07-2007, 03:23 AM
Yeah, there's a lot of very average teams in the playoffs this year. But this is the parity everyone says they want. This is what happens when parity gets taken to the extreme. This is one of the reasons why I've never supported copying the NFL model for baseball.

I agree with Chip, it was pathetic, but I'd still rather have what happened today than have the old formality games where they played them and it was clear who was going to win back in Novenber. Every year it was either Dallas, Frisco, or the Giants playing whatever AFC chump (Normally Denver or Buffalo) came along.

I love parity. Each year everybody has a shot, and just becuase your team has New York in front of it doesn't mean you are a contender.

Speaking of New York, it's good to know we are less than 2 hours a way from seeing them both eliminated.

Cedric
01-07-2007, 03:24 AM
Way to make sure and not give any credit to the Colts defense. It had nothing to do with them actually wrapping people up today. Holding the second best rusher in the NFL to 32yds, looked pretty good to me. That's easily the most fire I've seen the Colts D play with all season. The Cheifs have one of the best O lines in football and the Colts shoved them around. Only one of Manning's picks was a really bad throw, other than that 30 of 38 isn't too bad. The replay shows Marvin clearly broke the wrong way both times, he broke toward the other defensve back and left Ty Law wide open for easy picks. They say Ty Law is in Manning's head, honestly I think it's Marvin's head that he's in, but that's my opinion.

You say nobody showed for these games, I say the Colts defense finally showed up. But I know I'm biased because I'm a Colts fan.

Yep, we heard the same things after the Bengals game also. What happened after that one?

The Colts defense isn't good, not even close. The Chiefs offense isn't that great and the crowd noise is everything to Indy. Doubt they even come close to playing that well on the road.

Dom Heffner
01-07-2007, 03:28 AM
Doubt they even come close to playing that well on the road.

I wouldn't be surprised to see the Colts beat Baltimore and then falter big time in San Diego.

It'll be a shame when the Colts lose and Manning takes the blame again because people don't understand he doesn't play both sides of the ball.

MWM
01-07-2007, 03:54 AM
Kansas City fell prey to the same trap the Bengals did. They thought they'd be able to show up with Larry Johnson and just walk all over the Colts defense. It was easy to tell they had no other plan in mind. And the Colts knew this as well and just stacked the line. That was one poor coaching job by the KC staff today.


It'll be a shame when the Colts lose and Manning takes the blame again because people don't understand he doesn't play both sides of the ball.


Yep. One of my biggest pet peeves in all of sports is the idea that QBs win and lose game. And I'm not sure when they started doing it but I'm alwasy hearing about QB win % in the same way I do a pitchers. If Trent Dilfer, Mark Rypien, and Brad Johnson can win Super Bowls while Dan Marino can't, there's something more to winning than a QB.

Dom Heffner
01-07-2007, 04:20 AM
Yep. One of my biggest pet peeves in all of sports is the idea that QBs win and lose game. And I'm not sure when they started doing it but I'm alwasy hearing about QB win % in the same way I do a pitchers. If Trent Dilfer, Mark Rypien, and Brad Johnson can win Super Bowls while Dan Marino can't, there's something more to winning than a QB.


I got into it with a guy at a bar the other day over this. I wholeheartedly agree with you, MWM.

Great quarterbacks like Elway, Manning, and Marino can only take you so far. If the rest of the team isn't there, you'll get beat in the NFL eventually.

Yachtzee
01-07-2007, 04:27 AM
I think a great QB can lift a team up on his shoulders in the 4th Qtr. and pull out the victory. However, even with the great QB, you still need a defense at least good enough to make that stop to prevent the other team from scoring. Otherwise it's just a battle of who has the ball last, as us Bengals fans are painfully aware. If the Bengals D could have just made one stop against the Steelers when they needed it, the Bengals would have been playing today instead of the Chiefs.

With a great QB, you need a defense that's good enough to hold the other team out of the endzone enough to win the game. With a great D, you just need a QB good enough to get some points on the board and hand the ball off without making costly mistakes.

GAC
01-07-2007, 05:40 AM
Yeah, there's a lot of very average teams in the playoffs this year. But this is the parity everyone says they want. This is what happens when parity gets taken to the extreme. This is one of the reasons why I've never supported copying the NFL model for baseball.

The same word (parity) came to my mind too, even before I read your post Mike.

GAC
01-07-2007, 05:42 AM
I got into it with a guy at a bar the other day over this. I wholeheartedly agree with you, MWM.

Great quarterbacks like Elway, Manning, and Marino can only take you so far. If the rest of the team isn't there, you'll get beat in the NFL eventually.

I agree. And how long did it take Elway to finally win a Super Bowl?

RedsBaron
01-07-2007, 07:53 AM
I agree. And how long did it take Elway to finally win a Super Bowl?

He won two Super Bowls as soon as he had a team around him that was good enough to win. Elway had previously carried three Bronco teams to Super Bowls that wouldn't have come close to the game without him, and then took the blame when Denver was beaten.

Heath
01-07-2007, 08:47 AM
I wouldn't be surprised to see the Colts beat Baltimore and then have the Chargers falter big time in San Diego due to Martyball.

Hi Dom, sorry to fix your quote above. It was missing a few words.


:D

blumj
01-07-2007, 09:31 AM
Speaking of New York, it's good to know we are less than 2 hours a way from seeing them both eliminated.
:eek: Damn you! Take that back!
Signed, superstitious NE fan.

Razor Shines
01-07-2007, 10:49 AM
Yep, we heard the same things after the Bengals game also. What happened after that one?

The Colts defense isn't good, not even close. The Chiefs offense isn't that great and the crowd noise is everything to Indy. Doubt they even come close to playing that well on the road.

Not from me. I still contend that the Colts defense didn't play that well against the Bengals, they gave up 4.4 yards a carry. And the Bengals should have won that game, and I think they would have if they would have committed to the run.

The Chiefs had the second best running game in football. They have a great offensive line, the Colts finished their tackles yesterday, something they did not do against the Bengals.

That wasn't my point anyway, Chip said that game was a pethetic excuse for a playoff game or something. And all season everybody has said "when is the Colts defense going to step up and stop the run?" and they do, in the most important game so far this year, and it's "well KC just played bad".

Betterread
01-07-2007, 11:10 AM
I love parity. Each year everybody has a shot, and just becuase your team has New York in front of it doesn't mean you are a contender.

Speaking of New York, it's good to know we are less than 2 hours a way from seeing them both eliminated.

I don't know if you intended to sound that way, but you appear to be insinuating that New York State pro football teams "always" contend (which isn't correct) - and this is in some way due to some type of bias in their favor, as opposed to the parity with which all other teams are treated. If this is what you were trying to say, do you have some type of fact-based information supporting this view?
And, for the record, there are 3 pro football teams in NY state and 3 pro football teams in Florida. They have the same number of chances to contend year-to-year, from what I can determine.

Chip R
01-07-2007, 11:25 AM
That wasn't my point anyway, Chip said that game was a pethetic excuse for a playoff game or something.


It was a pathetic game. The only reason you say it wasn't was cause Indy won. I don't have a dog in this hunt so I think I'm a little more objective than you are. I'm not necessarily talking about individuals but the actual quality of play - in both games. Can you truthfully say that all 4 teams played good quality football? Can you say that about the majority of these playoff teams?

I don't know if it's parity or not. Parity's been around for quite some time and I've seen some fine football during those years. I'm not seeing it now. Perhaps these games were aberrations and today's games will be crisply played and well coached. I hope so because there are few things that are worse than seeing football played poorly.

Razor Shines
01-07-2007, 11:42 AM
It was a pathetic game. The only reason you say it wasn't was cause Indy won. I don't have a dog in this hunt so I think I'm a little more objective than you are. I'm not necessarily talking about individuals but the actual quality of play - in both games. Can you truthfully say that all 4 teams played good quality football? Can you say that about the majority of these playoff teams?

I don't know if it's parity or not. Parity's been around for quite some time and I've seen some fine football during those years. I'm not seeing it now. Perhaps these games were aberrations and today's games will be crisply played and well coached. I hope so because there are few things that are worse than seeing football played poorly.
How often is it that all four teams play well? You could say that just about every year. There have been many playoff games in past years when the Colts haven't played well at all. KC was dominated by a Colts team that did play very well. They rushed for almost 200 yds, Manning was 30 of 38 passing and the defense held them to just 7 first downs. That's not saying anything about what will happen in future games, I'm just saying that as someone who has watched every quarter of all their games, yesterday the defense played differently than it had all season. They held their tackles, all season they have hit people in the backfield or for short gains but have not wrapped up, yesterday they did. You say KC looked pathetic, I say the Colts made them look pathetic.

I know you don't have a "dog in the hunt" and I don't mean to be an ass but you sound like you're just mad that the Bengals are out. And I could be way off, as far as I know you may not even be a Bengals fan, and if you tell me I'm wrong well then I apologize in advance.

Chip R
01-07-2007, 12:53 PM
I know you don't have a "dog in the hunt" and I don't mean to be an ass but you sound like you're just mad that the Bengals are out. And I could be way off, as far as I know you may not even be a Bengals fan, and if you tell me I'm wrong well then I apologize in advance.


I couldn't care less that the Bengals are out. I'm no Bengals fan. They playe like crap and the Broncos were just a lttle better and the Chiefs were just a little better than that. But what did you think when the Colts go down in KC territory 3 times and go away with just field goals every time? Did you think that was a good offense and the Chiefs were playing excellent defense or did you think the Colts didn't do a good job of sticking it in the end zone? FGs are nice and it's even nicer to have someone who can kick them on a regular basis. But the point of the game is to stick it in the end zone. If the Colts settle for FGs next week, they are going to be in trouble. You should be happy the Colts won but that's not the point. They just played better than the Chiefs, which wasn't difficult. And it isn't just the Colts and Chiefs either. Look around the league and tell me with a straight face there aren't more than 1 or 2 teams who play good football.

redsfanmia
01-07-2007, 02:45 PM
If the Colts settle for FGs next week, they are going to be in trouble.

Really? When did Baltimore become a great offensive team? I honestly dont fear the Ravens as a Colts fan. I dont think they can score enough to beat the Colts and look at the last few games they have played. The Ravens O-line cant handle the speed of Freeney and Mathis and the Colts are going to get their points.

Chip R
01-07-2007, 03:57 PM
Really? When did Baltimore become a great offensive team? I honestly dont fear the Ravens as a Colts fan. I dont think they can score enough to beat the Colts and look at the last few games they have played. The Ravens O-line cant handle the speed of Freeney and Mathis and the Colts are going to get their points.


Well, I don't know why Baltimore is even going to show up then.

As an Indy fan, you should know that you don't win championships with offense. You win them with defense. The Ravens have a defense. As for their offense, they averaged over 22 points per game this season. Not quite in the same league with the Colts but better than the Chiefs and only a little worse than the Bengals. The Colts just can't send all 11 guys after Jamal Lewis next week like they did against Larry Johnson yesterday. They were smart and were determined not to let Larry Johnson beat them. If Baltimore can throw the ball against the Colts, that will open up the run. That's what the Bengals failed to realize. They thought that since the Colts defense was so bad, they could just run it down their throats. But they got behind and couldn't adjust. You also have to realize that the game is in Baltimore, not Indy.

I must say that the 1st half of this NE-NY game has been a lot more enjoyable. At least these teams can put it in the end zone.

redsfanmia
01-07-2007, 04:22 PM
Well, I don't know why Baltimore is even going to show up then.

As an Indy fan, you should know that you don't win championships with offense. You win them with defense. The Ravens have a defense. As for their offense, they averaged over 22 points per game this season. Not quite in the same league with the Colts but better than the Chiefs and only a little worse than the Bengals. The Colts just can't send all 11 guys after Jamal Lewis next week like they did against Larry Johnson yesterday. They were smart and were determined not to let Larry Johnson beat them. If Baltimore can throw the ball against the Colts, that will open up the run. That's what the Bengals failed to realize. They thought that since the Colts defense was so bad, they could just run it down their throats. But they got behind and couldn't adjust. You also have to realize that the game is in Baltimore, not Indy.

I must say that the 1st half of this NE-NY game has been a lot more enjoyable. At least these teams can put it in the end zone.

I agree that the game was ugly yesterday and I am not denying that. You said that if the Colts kick field goals against the Ravens that they would be in trouble and my point was that they can kick field goals and win because the Ravens are not a great offensive team. The Colts will score a few touchdowns as well. I am a Colts fan but I am a realist I just think that the Colts match up will against the Ravens and have a great chance to win. I think the Colts will win but would not be shocked if they got manhandled. The Colts burned me last year so I am tenative to make the superbowl prediction just yet.

traderumor
01-07-2007, 08:17 PM
I would not want to face the Ravens D on their home field in the playoffs. I cannot stand the personalities on that D, but that really doesn't mean squat as to whether they are any good. Their offense is ordinary and the Bengals formula is how you beat them--don't make turnovers and leave the offense with long fields. The points racked up by the O are often due to the D giving great field position either through a stop or a turnover.

The AFC semis are very interesting matchups. I would almost put down a bet on the Pats upsetting the Bolts and I think Baltimore will send Peyton home to rehearse a new batch of commercials. In the AFC Championship, I think Baltimore will win a low scoring game over the Patsies.

redsfanmia
01-07-2007, 08:40 PM
I would not want to face the Ravens D on their home field in the playoffs. I cannot stand the personalities on that D, but that really doesn't mean squat as to whether they are any good. Their offense is ordinary and the Bengals formula is how you beat them--don't make turnovers and leave the offense with long fields. The points racked up by the O are often due to the D giving great field position either through a stop or a turnover.

The AFC semis are very interesting matchups. I would almost put down a bet on the Pats upsetting the Bolts and I think Baltimore will send Peyton home to rehearse a new batch of commercials. In the AFC Championship, I think Baltimore will win a low scoring game over the Patsies.

Peyton has never really had problems with the Ravens vauted D in the past but you could be right, I think Martyball will come into play and the Pats upset the Bolts. I think the Colts win and the Pats win, then the Pats send Peyton home to rehearse.

Reds Freak
01-07-2007, 09:18 PM
Was there a team that played this weekend that has more talent than the Bengals? You may be able to make a case for the Colts. But it just drives you nuts that they can't figure out how to turn their talent into a team.

paintmered
01-07-2007, 10:46 PM
I got into it with a guy at a bar the other day over this. I wholeheartedly agree with you, MWM.

Great quarterbacks like Elway, Manning, and Marino can only take you so far. If the rest of the team isn't there, you'll get beat in the NFL eventually.

Tom Brady has also been canonized due to this logic. He's a fine quarterback to be sure, but he benefited from a wonderful supporting cast around him when he won his rings.

MWM
01-07-2007, 10:51 PM
Tom Brady has also been canonized due to this logic. He's a fine quarterback to be sure, but he benefited from a wonderful supporting cast around him when he won his rings.

While Brady is obviously the most significant individual contributor on the field for the Pats, and a great QB, Bill Bellicheck is reason #1,2, and 3 why that team wins. Going into the playoffs I picked the Patriots to win it all. I still don't see any of this year's teams beating a Bellicheck coached team in the playoffs. He's in a world all his own when it comes to devising schemes in the playoffs. Next week we'll see it when the best offense in the NFL is shut down and lucky to score 13 points.

Mutaman
01-08-2007, 02:02 AM
Great quarterbacks like Elway, Manning, and Marino can only take you so far. If the rest of the team isn't there, you'll get beat in the NFL eventually.

3 interceptions at home in a dome against an average team? Not exactly what I'd call a "great" quarterback. A typical mediocre Peyton postseason performance.

On the other hand, that guy playing against the Jets on Sunday, now thats a great quarterback. A typical incredible Brady postseason performance.

redsfanmia
01-08-2007, 08:33 AM
Was there a team that played this weekend that has more talent than the Bengals? You may be able to make a case for the Colts. But it just drives you nuts that they can't figure out how to turn their talent into a team.

A good start would be to get guys who dont get arrested every other week. Character matters and Marvin needs to learn that. Bad character guys ruin teams, see T.O., Artest, and Isiah Rider.

RedFanAlways1966
01-08-2007, 08:57 AM
A good start would be to get guys who dont get arrested every other week. Character matters and Marvin needs to learn that. Bad character guys ruin teams, see T.O., Artest, and Isiah Rider.

I don't like trouble-makers. However, relative to the Bengals, I am not sure this cost the Bengals the playoffs. Things that were more detrimental to not making the playoffs (only took one more win to get there):

(1) A horrific roughing the passer call in Tampa Bay.
(2) A bad defense (something Bengals fans are all too used to). 42 points to San Diego in the 2nd half... no NFL defense should be that bad (L.T. or not).
(3) A bad snap on an extra point.
(4) A missed 39-yd. FG on their last offensive play of the season.

Trouble-makers are not good things. But a trouble-maker off the field (getting arrested) is different than a trouble-maker in the lockerroom (T.O. or Carl Pickens) relative to the team's psyche. Execution killed the Bengals playoff chances, not trouble-makers. Oh, and one terrible call by a referee named Mike Carey.

redsfanmia
01-08-2007, 09:15 AM
I don't like trouble-makers. However, relative to the Bengals, I am not sure this cost the Bengals the playoffs. Things that were more detrimental to not making the playoffs (only took one more win to get there):

(1) A horrific roughing the passer call in Tampa Bay.
(2) A bad defense (something Bengals fans are all too used to). 42 points to San Diego in the 2nd half... no NFL defense should be that bad (L.T. or not).
(3) A bad snap on an extra point.
(4) A missed 39-yd. FG on their last offensive play of the season.

Trouble-makers are not good things. But a trouble-maker off the field (getting arrested) is different than a trouble-maker in the lockerroom (T.O. or Carl Pickens) relative to the team's psyche. Execution killed the Bengals playoff chances, not trouble-makers. Oh, and one terrible call by a referee named Mike Carey.

Sounds like a discipline problem to me, lack of discipline off the field creeps onto the field. Marvin needs to get control asap. If say the Colts or Browns had the legal problems the Bengals have had Bengal fans would be all up in arms or if the team was 3-13 Bengal fans would be all up in arms. You can have 2 or 3 bad guys on your team not 10 or 12.

Razor Shines
01-08-2007, 06:53 PM
3 interceptions at home in a dome against an average team? Not exactly what I'd call a "great" quarterback. A typical mediocre Peyton postseason performance.

On the other hand, that guy playing against the Jets on Sunday, now thats a great quarterback. A typical incredible Brady postseason performance.

I'm sorry but two of those INT's were just plain not his fault. Ty Law is in Marvin Harrison's head not Manning's. Marvin broke into the D both times, when 9 times out of 10 (or 8 I guess) Marvin breaks to the outside on those plays. Marvin does weird things against Ty Law, and I am just as big of a Marvin Harrison fan as a Peyton Manning fan. And again 30 of 38 and throwing the TD when they really needed it after the Chiefs cut the lead to 8, and having long drives to keep the D on the bench and rested. Manning has had his struggles in the playoffs but Saturday was not one of those days.

Dom Heffner
01-08-2007, 07:49 PM
Next week we'll see it when the best offense in the NFL is shut down and lucky to score 13 points.

I'll believe that when I see it. New England is out after this week, I think.


3 interceptions at home in a dome against an average team? Not exactly what I'd call a "great" quarterback. A typical mediocre Peyton postseason performance.

Manning is a great quarterback. His performance wasn't that great on Sunday, but only a fool thinks Manning is anything less than superb at his position.


Character matters

There have been some real jerks and disruptions who win and there have been some terrific people who lose.

The Bengals awful season had nothing to do with character issues. There were 4 games they could have won with or without the arrests off the field.

Mutaman
01-08-2007, 08:39 PM
[QUOTE=Dom Heffner;1223596]

Manning is a great quarterback. His performance wasn't that great on Sunday, but only a fool thinks Manning is anything less than superb at his position.
QUOTE]


Manning in postseason: 10 games 4 wins 6 losses 16 td passes 11 interceptions

Brady in postseason: 12 games 11 wins 1 loss 17 td passes 5 interceptions

If Manning is a "great" quarterback, what do call Brady?

Although i know its all subjective , just watch these guys in the postseason, Manning always looks tenative, uncomfortable, and uptight. Brady absolutely relishes postseason play. No ifs, ands, or buts. No excuses. No talk about coaching or defense. Tom Brady is the best quarteback in the NFL, and its not even close. Manning has not proven that he can get it done when the money is on the line.

Matt700wlw
01-08-2007, 08:47 PM
what was Romo's excuse?



Thinking about going home to Carrie Underwood?

I could buy that. :D

Dom Heffner
01-08-2007, 09:02 PM
Manning in postseason: 10 games 4 wins 6 losses 16 td passes 11 interceptions

Brady in postseason: 12 games 11 wins 1 loss 17 td passes 5 interceptions

If Manning is a "great" quarterback, what do call Brady?


A quarterback is not a major league pitcher.

What is the starting right tackle's for the Colts record as a starter? What is the punter's record?

Stop treating the quarterback like he is the only player on the field.

John Elway was better than Joe Montana. Montana played for the better team.

Last time I checked football is a team sport. Trent Dilfer won a Superbowl. Doug Williams did, too. Are they better than Peyton Manning?

Stop it with this QB stuff. Anthony Munoz is considered the greatest tackle of all time: how many Super Bowls did he win?

The QB can be a more prominent position, yes, but there are 21 other guys on the field. Do they count? Or do we just look at the QB?

Brady is a terrific quarterback, but he has had the better supporting cast over the years: his coach, the defense.

Is he better than Manning? I think its close. I'd rather have Manning, but I think you can make an argument either way.

But to lay the post season as the only litmus test on a player is naive.
Using your logic, John Elway lost four SuperBowls all by himself and then suddenly turned into a great quarterback 10 years later when he "found a way to win and relished the post season..."

Ya ever think the Broncos won a Super Bowl with Elway as their quarterback when they finally had a real running back and a defense?

Or did John just go from someone who hated the postseason to somebody who relished it?


Although i know its all subjective , just watch these guys in the postseason, Manning always looks tenative, uncomfortable, and uptight. Brady absolutely relishes postseason play.

Wow, you are amazing. You can see that with your own eyes? Is there a "relish" meter I can buy somewhere?

What does "uncomfortable" look like for a quarterback? Can you also tell me what "scrappy" looks like? Is Brady a "go-getter" too? Does he "hustle"?

Mutaman
01-08-2007, 11:28 PM
Trent Dilfer, coaching, Defense, blah, blah, blah. I hate to break it to you buddy, but in the NFL the quarterback has a much bigger bearing on the outcome of a game than the left tackle or the punter. And at least Elway got his team to the Supper Bowl, despite having the hugh homefield advantage produced by a dome and artificial turf, Manning can't even do that.

Anyhow talk is cheap. Over the last few years the best bet in sports is to go with Brady and against Manning in a big game. Thats why on Sunday I will take Baltimore and give the 4, and take the 5 with New England. With both hands! I'd advise you to do the same.

Dom Heffner
01-09-2007, 12:40 AM
And at least Elway got his team to the Supper Bowl, despite having the hugh homefield advantage produced by a dome and artificial turf, Manning can't even do that.


John Elway did not get his team to the Super Bowl by himself the years they won it. Terrell Davis helped tremendously along with a great coaching staff and a pretty good defense.

The years they lost they did so to much better teams. Everybody used to say Elway choked, but it's hard to choke when you are the underdog (and you aren't even the reason). Denver wasn't favored in a single Super Bowl they lost, were they?

And if I remember correctly, weren't the Broncos the underdog versus the Packers in a dome? I dunno, I'd have to Google it.


Anyhow talk is cheap. Over the last few years the best bet in sports is to go with Brady and against Manning in a big game. Thats why on Sunday I will take Baltimore and give the 4, and take the 5 with New England. With both hands! I'd advise you to do the same.

Sigh. You may be right but for the wrong reasons. You go with the Patriots, not Tom Brady. Yu go against the Colts, not because of Maning but becuase the entire team simply isn't that good as a whole. Manning isn't the problem with that team.

If the Pats lose, you'll be blaming everybody but Brady, I guess, but if the Colts lose, it will be Manning.

You've been listening to too much Jim Rome or watching ESPN, one or the other.

MWM
01-09-2007, 12:41 AM
Was that "relishing the playoffs" last year when he threw a interception in the endzone that cost his team the game? Brady's a great QB, but the Pats are all about Bellicheck.

Mutaman
01-09-2007, 12:57 AM
Was that "relishing the playoffs" last year when he threw a interception in the endzone that cost his team the game? Brady's a great QB, but the Pats are all about Bellicheck.

Gee MWM, I guess you've given up on the OSU game too. Talk about leaving a very sinking ship.

Bellicheck before Brady post season: 1 win 1 loss, 5 no appearances.
Bellicheck after Brady postseason : 11 wins 1 loss 3 rings. 1 no appearance.

Bellicheck's overall record before Brady: 41 wins 55 losses
Bellicheck's overall record after Brady: 71 wins 26 losses


Hmmmmm!

Lets see, Brady plays 13 postseason games during which he makes a total of one bad mistake, and you take that mistake to support your argument. Now thats real logic.

Mutaman
01-09-2007, 01:09 AM
John Elway did not get his team to the Super Bowl by himself the years they won it. Terrell Davis helped tremendously along with a great coaching staff and a pretty good defense.

The years they lost they did so to much better teams. Everybody used to say Elway choked, but it's hard to choke when you are the underdog (and you aren't even the reason). Denver wasn't favored in a single Super Bowl they lost, were they?

And if I remember correctly, weren't the Broncos the underdog versus the Packers in a dome? I dunno, I'd have to Google it.



Sigh. You may be right but for the wrong reasons. You go with the Patriots, not Tom Brady. Yu go against the Colts, not because of Maning but becuase the entire team simply isn't that good as a whole. Manning isn't the problem with that team.

If the Pats lose, you'll be blaming everybody but Brady, I guess, but if the Colts lose, it will be Manning.

You've been listening to too much Jim Rome or watching ESPN, one or the other.

I can't figure out your point but the Packers lost to Denver in San Diego on natural surface. One of the main reasons they lost was because Holmgrin geared his defense to stop Denver's passing attack and conceeded the ground game. Considering that Elway was on the decline and Davis was at his peak, that was a really dumb mistake as Holgrin has since admitted on many occassions. Denver won the following year against a very medicore Atlanta team.

No if the Patriots lose on Sunday, I won't blame Brady because he has done very nicely for me over the years and nothing is a sure thing. But the odds are really in my favor. If the Colts lose and Manning has his typical mediocre game, it will confirm once again an opinion that I formed about him in college-- that he is "cheap speed" and he spits the bit when he moves up in class.

MWM
01-09-2007, 01:12 AM
LAMO. You're supposedly an attorney and that's the best you can do?

No mention at all that he was with the Browns then, huh. And a sample size of 2 games. He was a different coach then and he will even tell you that.

Hey, I'm a big fan of Brady. I used to be a skeptic of his, but he's made me a full believer the last couple of years. I have a lot of respect for him and I love the way he carries himself off the field. I also happen to know that it's more than show with him. He's a genuinely good person with integrity. I've become a fan of his. Really, I have. He's a great player. He's a big reason they've been able to sustain the success they've had.

And it would be different if they were winning primarily because of the offense. But they're winning in the playoffs first because their defense dominates. They completely baffle other team's offenses consistently. Let's be honest, for a QB, the situation they find themself in very important. Tom Brady's a great player, but let's face it, he's been in a damn good situation in his career. Put the NE offense with the Indianapolis defense over the past 5 years, and how many Super Bowls would that team have won? NONE.

Or do you think that combination would have been able to win?

Dom Heffner
01-09-2007, 01:30 AM
Bellicheck before Brady post season: 1 win 1 loss, 5 no appearances.
Bellicheck after Brady postseason : 11 wins 1 loss 3 rings. 1 no appearance.

Bellicheck's overall record before Brady: 41 wins 55 losses
Bellicheck's overall record after Brady: 71 wins 26 losses


This analysis is stunning. I guess the other players on the roster have nothing to do with anything. Brady plays both sides of the ball, I guess.

Put Brady on any team in the NFL and that team will win every Super Bowl ever played. He's the best football player ever.

I tell ya, Tom Brady isn't even in the top 5 quarterbacks of all time.

The point I was making with Elway is moot, since they played on grass. I couldn't remember.

So when Green Bay loses, it's the coach's fault, when the Pats lose it's everybody but Brady's fault, but when the Colts lose, Peyton Manning sucks.

That is something that Chris Berman would have us believe.

Brady is great, but not the sole reason the Pats win. Manning is great and not the sole reason the Colts often lose.

We can all learn from the example of Elway. For years he was considered a choker until his team got better. That was a very unfair assessment.

You are only as good as your surrounding cast in many cases. Sometimes good players can get you so far, but ultimately it's a team effort.

Mutaman
01-09-2007, 02:31 AM
He was a different coach then and he will even tell you that.


Yeah, he was a loser.

Betterread
01-09-2007, 06:59 PM
This analysis is stunning. I guess the other players on the roster have nothing to do with anything. Brady plays both sides of the ball, I guess.

Put Brady on any team in the NFL and that team will win every Super Bowl ever played. He's the best football player ever.

I tell ya, Tom Brady isn't even in the top 5 quarterbacks of all time.

The point I was making with Elway is moot, since they played on grass. I couldn't remember.

So when Green Bay loses, it's the coach's fault, when the Pats lose it's everybody but Brady's fault, but when the Colts lose, Peyton Manning sucks.

That is something that Chris Berman would have us believe.

Brady is great, but not the sole reason the Pats win. Manning is great and not the sole reason the Colts often lose.

We can all learn from the example of Elway. For years he was considered a choker until his team got better. That was a very unfair assessment.

You are only as good as your surrounding cast in many cases. Sometimes good players can get you so far, but ultimately it's a team effort.

"A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player."
John Wooden

Chip R
01-13-2007, 08:39 PM
I couldn't care less that the Bengals are out. I'm no Bengals fan. They playe like crap and the Broncos were just a lttle better and the Chiefs were just a little better than that. But what did you think when the Colts go down in KC territory 3 times and go away with just field goals every time? Did you think that was a good offense and the Chiefs were playing excellent defense or did you think the Colts didn't do a good job of sticking it in the end zone? FGs are nice and it's even nicer to have someone who can kick them on a regular basis. But the point of the game is to stick it in the end zone. If the Colts settle for FGs next week, they are going to be in trouble.


Mmmmmmm, crow. Or was that raven?

GAC
01-13-2007, 09:01 PM
Brady's a great QB, but the Pats are all about Bellicheck.

I disagree with the "all about" part. You still have to have the "playas" who execute.

MWM
01-13-2007, 09:09 PM
More crappy football today. How bad if Baltimore's offense to only score 3 points against that defense? I've always thought Steve McNair, although a good QB, was vastly over-rated.

traderumor
01-13-2007, 10:44 PM
Indy did exactly what the Bengals did to beat the Ravens, give them long fields all day. The D didn't provide the field position, the Ravens are ordinary on offense and cannot score on their own, even against bad defenses.

RedFanAlways1966
01-13-2007, 11:21 PM
Indy did exactly what the Bengals did to beat the Ravens, give them long fields all day. The D didn't provide the field position, the Ravens are ordinary on offense and cannot score on their own, even against bad defenses.

Although Matt Stover did miss a chip-shot (28 yds?) FG when they played at Cincy on that Thursday night right before halftime!

I did notice, and to your point, that Indy tried the same gadget play in which the Bengals used to score their only TD in that win over Baltimore... handoff to Rudi, who pitches back to Palmer, who hits a wide-open T.J. for a touchdown. Indy did not have the same result (they did complete about a 15-yarder for a first down on it), but I'd like to think that they learned that one from the Thursday night game in Cincinnati.

redsfanmia
01-14-2007, 02:16 AM
Mmmmmmm, crow. Or was that raven?

Damn and I was going to point it out, you beat me to it.

redsfanmia
01-14-2007, 02:18 AM
More crappy football today. How bad if Baltimore's offense to only score 3 points against that defense? I've always thought Steve McNair, although a good QB, was vastly over-rated.

The Colts Defense deserves some credit, I know they were terrible in the regular season, but they have stepped it up and had a little something to do with holding the Ravens to 6 points.

Tony Cloninger
01-14-2007, 02:59 AM
Elway had no running game until Davis showed up.

I mean really....he had nothing back there to help......Sammy Winder?

During most of the 80's.......the AFC offenses were about throwing the ball and mostly undersized defenses tailored to stop them.

They go against the plodding teams of the NFC and they get pushed around on the DL.....while the NFC defenses beat up on those 1 dimensional offenses (Marino in 1984.....what did the Pats have in 1985?....Elway in 1986)

The SB between WASH and DEN.....Den was favored...by a little ...mainly beacuse the writers did not believe Doug Williams ( "How long have you been a black QB" was 1 of the many excellent questions asked of him during SB week ) could actually lead the team to victory.

I bet 5 people $20 that WAS would win.....beacuse WAS had a big OL and DEN had a small DL and LB's....... even when DEN went up 10-0 .....i thought nothing of it...beacuse WAS ran the ball down DEN throat and made their RB a SB one-hit wonder.

It is not totally Manning's fault when the Colts lose..... but he does seem to play his worst games during a lot of these playoffs..... but today they won in spite of it. I am glad for him......beacuse he at least needs to go to 1 SB before his career is over.

Brady will get a pass for a while considering he has been part of 3 SB winning teams. What is he expected to do.....win them all?

Mutaman
01-14-2007, 01:16 PM
Indy did exactly what the Bengals did to beat the Ravens, give them long fields all day. The D didn't provide the field position, the Ravens are ordinary on offense and cannot score on their own, even against bad defenses.

Now you tell me. The Ravens hit new levels in suckitude. Anyhow congradulations Colt fans, the defense was good, and Vinatieri is amazing.

GAC
01-14-2007, 09:18 PM
Poor Marty Schottenmeimer. He comes up short again in the post-season. Another Patriot-Colts showdown in the AFC Championship game.

MWM
01-14-2007, 09:29 PM
Wow, the Chargers really blew that one. Once again, the New England defense holds the Chargers offense to 7 points in the second half. NE tried to hand them the game, but their DBs would rather talk trash and get a personal foul call on them (what an idiot), and then fumble an interception that would have darn near put an end to the game.

Indianapolis has no chance next week. They'll do what they always do to Ind in the playoffs. I picked New England before the playoffs started to win it all and I'm sticking with them.

GAC
01-14-2007, 09:40 PM
Wow, the Chargers really blew that one. Once again, the New England defense holds the Chargers offense to 7 points in the second half. NE tried to hand them the game, but their DBs would rather talk trash and get a personal foul call on them (what an idiot), and then fumble an interception that would have darn near put an end to the game.

Indianapolis has no chance next week. They'll do what they always do to Ind in the playoffs. I picked New England before the playoffs started to win it all and I'm sticking with them.

They've been my darkhorse pick for some time.

Poor clock management at the end by Marty IMO to leave them with no TOs, basically taking LT out of the game and having to rely on Rivers alone.

Brady did not have a good game; but when it was needed, came through.

MWM
01-14-2007, 09:44 PM
NE is no dark horse. And I like Tom Brady, but they won in spite of him today. When it counted when they were driving down with a chance to tie the game, he threw the ball right to their DB who then fumbled the ball giving them ball on the 30 yard line. Brady's a fantastic QB and has had plenty of great playoff games. Today wasn't one of them. In baseball, luck comes into play all the time. In football, it's rare. Today was one of those rare games and NE got damn lucky. Without that stupid personal foul and that fumbled interception, NE has no chance. Heck, until that game winning FG, the two scores they got out of those plays were the only points they had in the second half.

Although, to be fair, that drive right before halftime by the Patriots was HUGE. And Brady was brilliant in orchestrating that drive. It was a thing of beauty.

RedFanAlways1966
01-14-2007, 10:06 PM
When it counted when they were driving down with a chance to tie the game, he threw the ball right to their DB who then fumbled the ball giving them ball on the 30 yard line.

That play reminded me of the 2002 NCAA National Championship game at the Fiesta Bowl. Sean Taylor of Miami picked off OSU's Craig Krenzel pass only to have the ball taken away by Maurice Clarett. Got to hand it to Troy Brown for the intentional strip that he did on that SD defensive back after the pick. It was a key play... if not the most important play for NE. Just like that play by Clarett in 2002 for OSU.

Schottenheimer really blew it IMO. The use of that timeout on the afore-mentioned play with a review was idiotic. I am not sure if someone upstairs told him to do it or not, but it was an obvious fumble. You could see it was a fumble as it happened (no instant replay needed). As luck would have it that timeout was really needed. Not only that, but when SD completed their first pass on the last drive for a 1st down, they should have spiked the ball. Instead they took about 20 seconds getting setup and then completed a 4-yard pass to keep the clock running. Terrible clock management and the reason for a 54-yd field goal attempt.

Degenerate39
01-14-2007, 10:10 PM
It's a crapfest because the Bengals aren't in it.

MWM
01-14-2007, 10:23 PM
That play reminded me of the 2002 NCAA National Championship game at the Fiesta Bowl. Sean Taylor of Miami picked off OSU's Craig Krenzel pass only to have the ball taken away by Maurice Clarett. Got to hand it to Troy Brown for the intentional strip that he did on that SD defensive back after the pick. It was a key play... if not the most important play for NE. Just like that play by Clarett in 2002 for OSU.

Schottenheimer really blew it IMO. The use of that timeout on the afore-mentioned play with a review was idiotic. I am not sure if someone upstairs told him to do it or not, but it was an obvious fumble. You could see it was a fumble as it happened (no instant replay needed). As luck would have it that timeout was really needed. Not only that, but when SD completed their first pass on the last drive for a 1st down, they should have spiked the ball. Instead they took about 20 seconds getting setup and then completed a 4-yard pass to keep the clock running. Terrible clock management and the reason for a 54-yd field goal attempt.

Yep, that was the most important play of the game. The next most important play of the game was that dumbass personal foul by the San Diego DB. I was glad they called it, though. I get so tired of seeing the morons in the NFL act like that guy, I'm glad they penalized him for it.

And Schottenhiemer managed the game down the stretch like an amateur. Rivers' inexperience didn't help either. After their first first down, he threw a 4 yard pass almost in the middle of the field to Gates that cost them another 10 seconds. That's one where Brady would have thrown it away to keep the clock from moving. That 4 yards meant nothing.

GAC
01-15-2007, 09:46 AM
NE is no dark horse.

To me they were simply by watching some of their erratic play this year. At times they looked really good and then the following week like crap. No great consistency at times. You didn't know which team was going to show up.

MWM
01-15-2007, 10:22 AM
That describes just about every team in the playoffs this year. This weekend you had Seattle, Chicago, Indy, San Diego, Baltimore, and NE. With the exception of San Diego every one of those teams were erratic and inconsistent. That's the NFL these days. PLayoff football is different and usually the team prepared the best who makes the fewest mistakes wins. New England is tough to beat in the playoffs. They got lucky yesterday, but mostly they've just been better at playoff football.

NJReds
01-15-2007, 11:18 AM
That describes just about every team in the playoffs this year. This weekend you had Seattle, Chicago, Indy, San Diego, Baltimore, and NE. With the exception of San Diego every one of those teams were erratic and inconsistent. That's the NFL these days. PLayoff football is different and usually the team prepared the best who makes the fewest mistakes wins. New England is tough to beat in the playoffs. They got lucky yesterday, but mostly they've just been better at playoff football.

I think a lot of the mediocre play has to do with the salary cap. It's difficult to put together cohesive units with the amount of turnover in personnel that you see these days. Even the best teams are filling in positions with rookies and inexperienced free agents.

The days of dyansties and flawlessly played playoff games are probably gone. That said, there was a lot of exciting football action this weekend.

And I'll say this for Brady...He puts up some great results with below average receivers. He's not throwing to Jerry Rice and John Taylor.
Jabar Gaffney was cut by the Texans, now all of the sudden he's playing like an all pro?

I think the big difference in the Pats-SD game was that the Chargers were self destructed with really dumb penalties and an inexcusable waste of a time-out by Schottenheimer.

Tony Cloninger
01-15-2007, 11:31 AM
I agree....SD lost/blew/choked that game way more than NE winning it themselves.

Besides the long TD drive before the half (another inexcusable use of a prevent defense....they looked like a Bengals regular defense) ....the Pats really did nothing but play less worse than the Chargers.

CrackerJack
01-15-2007, 11:56 AM
This is the way pro sports is now-a-days across the board. The one thing Bengals' fans have every year going into December now, at least, is real hope.

Is anyone going to tell me that watching what the Reds have been throwing out there the last several years, is a reason not to do a salary cap in baseball?

It's not as if we're watching picture perfect baseball on a daily basis either. Just look at the Reds' #'s of errors for how long now, and Adam Dunn or Wily Mo a couple of years go try to flag down routine fly balls for example. Or Felipe Lopez try to throw to first base. One of the things I truly admired as a kid watching pro baseball players, was that they could do those things flawslessly hundreds of times over and be perfect - it was graceful and a skill that came as a result of skill and experience/repetition. Not any more around here at least - these guys can't even make the most routine of plays.

Not saying a salary cap would eliminate sloppy pro sports - but the fact is turnover and free agency has caused a lot of this across the board (NBA, MLB, NFL in particular).

M2
01-15-2007, 12:48 PM
This is the way pro sports is now-a-days across the board. The one thing Bengals' fans have every year going into December now, at least, is real hope.

Is anyone going to tell me that watching what the Reds have been throwing out there the last several years, is a reason not to do a salary cap in baseball?

It's not as if we're watching picture perfect baseball on a daily basis either. Just look at the Reds' #'s of errors for how long now, and Adam Dunn or Wily Mo a couple of years go try to flag down routine fly balls for example. Or Felipe Lopez try to throw to first base. One of the things I truly admired as a kid watching pro baseball players, was that they could do those things flawslessly hundreds of times over and be perfect - it was graceful and a skill that came as a result of skill and experience/repetition. Not any more around here at least - these guys can't even make the most routine of plays.

Not saying a salary cap would eliminate sloppy pro sports - but the fact is turnover and free agency has caused a lot of this across the board (NBA, MLB, NFL in particular).

We're not even halfway through the NBA season and roughly 1/3 of the league is out of the playoff picture. The short schedule creates the illusion competition in the NFL. Nine NFL teams lost the equivalent of 100+ games in the NFL. Another three lost the equivalent of 90 games.

And the overall quality of play in the NBA (especially) and the NFL is WAY below where it is in baseball. The Reds may not play it, but there's plenty of teams, including many small market clubs, who do play an entertaining brand of baseball.

GAC
01-16-2007, 09:12 AM
New England is tough to beat in the playoffs.

I definitely agree with that. It was just getting to that stage. When they lost to Miami 21-0 in week #14 I was starting to wonder somewhat.

Razor Shines
01-16-2007, 12:42 PM
I'm worried about what tricks Ol' Bill has up his stupid cut-off sweatshirt sleeves.

TeamSelig
01-16-2007, 12:50 PM
About the stupid DB penalty... did he actually head butt the guy? Looked to me like he got nailed after the play was dead and then was gettin in the other guys face (looking dumb too might I add) and got shoved. Not really sure though, but shouldn't that have been a double penalty, on both guys. ?? I didn't get a real good look at it though...

I think the playoffs have been really fun to watch this year. I hate it when its obvious who is going to win like the past (Patriots). This year its hard to tell who is going to win it. Colts are surprisingly playing very well. Bears were the #1 team in the season, but doesn't look like they have it (but they are the last big defensive team left). Patriots are always tough, and the Saints are also pretty good this year. I'm pulling for the Colts & Saints, but seeing as how the Patriots are my least favorite team, they will probably win it. Seems to work that way.

BRM
01-16-2007, 02:22 PM
Nine NFL teams lost the equivalent of 100+ games in the NFL. Another three lost the equivalent of 90 games.


That's staggering. Just for comparison's sake, only two teams in all of MLB lost 100 games in 2006. Another four lost 90. Is there really more parity in the NFL or is it a myth?

M2
01-16-2007, 03:13 PM
That's staggering. Just for comparison's sake, only two teams in all of MLB lost 100 games in 2006. Another four lost 90. Is there really more parity in the NFL or is it a myth?

It's one of those things that gets said so often that it's taken as fact. Yes, "on any given Sunday" any NFL team can beat another, but it's even truer in other sports. Even if you follow a wretched baseball team, you'll get to watch 60 wins a year.

And if you're only two to three games out of a playoff spot, it doesn't feel as bad as if you're twenty to thirty games out of a playoff spot even if, relatively speaking, it's the same thing. The Reds have been in the exact same number of playoff games as the Bengals over the past decade. That despite the fact that 37.5% of the NFL makes the playoffs every season and only 26.67% of MLB does. Parity indeed.