PDA

View Full Version : Super Bowl XLV



Sea Ray
01-24-2011, 12:32 PM
This should be a heck of a game. The point spread is the smallest in 27 years:


The Green Bay Packers are 2 1/2- point favorites over the Pittsburgh Steelers in the Super Bowl, according to Las Vegas oddsmakers, the narrowest spread for the championship game in 27 years.

Think this spread will get bigger or smaller in the next two weeks? I'm guessing there's a few more Steeler fans out there than Packers so I'd say if it moves at all it'll get slightly smaller.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-24/packers-favored-over-steelers-in-closest-super-bowl-spread-for-27-years.html

Two rabid fanbases.

Ironically it's also two of the smaller media markets but in the NFL that doesn't matter. Only in the NFL can you have a championship game of such two small markets. This is also the 10th NFC team to play in the Super Bowl in the last ten years.

Being a Bengal fan, I can't stand the Steelers so I'll be a big GB fan in two weeks. Should be a good Super Bowl.

Thoughts?

Slyder
01-24-2011, 01:49 PM
I would be shocked if the spread is any bigger both teams have outstanding defenses. It should be a very well played game where it might come down to a big play by one of the defenses is deciding factor.

15fan
01-24-2011, 02:15 PM
It's a shame that they have to play this game on a carpet in a domed stadium in Dallas.

These two teams should be playing on a glacier in a driving snow storm.

CTA513
01-24-2011, 02:44 PM
I'm hoping the Packers can beat the Steelers and I like the Packers chances even more if Pouncey isn't able to play.

bucksfan2
01-24-2011, 03:29 PM
It's a shame that they have to play this game on a carpet in a domed stadium in Dallas.

These two teams should be playing on a glacier in a driving snow storm.

I agree completely. I think it would be fun to see this game played in Lambeau field or any northern outdoor stadium for that matter. I think indoor title games take away from teams that are built to play in adverse conditions. That said I think the perfect playing conditions (dome) helps the more offensive football team in the Packers.

Caveat Emperor
01-24-2011, 04:45 PM
Rooting for the Steelers to win -- mostly to annoy the people I'm friends with on Facebook (who treat every Steelers win as further proof of the nonexistence of any divine influence).

New York Red
01-24-2011, 05:36 PM
Go Packers!! :beerme:

Signed,


Soon-to-be Cheesehead for a day

blumj
01-24-2011, 05:57 PM
Go Packers!! :beerme:

Signed,


Soon-to-be Cheesehead for a day

I'm not a big fan of the original, I think I'd go with the fez.

http://www.cheesehead.com/imageresize.asp?path=fezamy.jpg

Newport Red
01-24-2011, 05:58 PM
It's a shame that they have to play this game on a carpet in a domed stadium in Dallas.

These two teams should be playing on a glacier in a driving snow storm.

And the Jersey Super Bowl will be two finesse dome teams.

Mutaman
01-24-2011, 06:39 PM
Based on his post-game comments, it appears that Ben has now discovered the Lord. I wonder if that will make any difference.

CTA513
01-24-2011, 07:02 PM
Based on his post-game comments, it appears that Ben has now discovered the Lord. I wonder if that will make any difference.

This was after he was violated by Mendenhall after one of the kneel downs.

fugowitribe
01-24-2011, 11:20 PM
I'm actually of the weird Southeastern Ohio breed that is very passionate about both the Cincinnati Reds and the Pittsburgh Steelers. I am estatic. Hands down the best sports year of my life. I hate the NBA, so that doesn't matter, I am an Ohio State Student and besides the Pryor stuff, it is the best time of all time to be a Buckeye. I don't know what to do with myself.

RedsBaron
01-25-2011, 08:11 AM
I hate the Steelers and the Packers are one of my favorite teams, so I will have a real rooting interest in this Super Bowl. I am surprised that the Packers are favored. The Steelers have a lot of veterans from their 2005 and 2008 teams that won Super Bowls whereas the Packers are virtually free of Super Bowl experience. I think the Steelers should be favored.

redsfandan
01-25-2011, 08:22 AM
Based on his post-game comments, it appears that Ben has now discovered the Lord. I wonder if that will make any difference.

Yeah sure, maybe the Packers defense will genuflect after they knock him out of the game.

bucksfan2
01-25-2011, 09:21 AM
I hate the Steelers and the Packers are one of my favorite teams, so I will have a real rooting interest in this Super Bowl. I am surprised that the Packers are favored. The Steelers have a lot of veterans from their 2005 and 2008 teams that won Super Bowls whereas the Packers are virtually free of Super Bowl experience. I think the Steelers should be favored.

I think the Steelers are a pretty flawed team. Their OLine is porous and is only bailed out because Big Ben is an animal. I do think they benefited from two favorable match ups in the Playoffs. They played two very similar teams to them but they had a huge advantage at QB. IMO Sanchez isn't ready to be a top tier QB, one that is capable of winning a football game. The Steelers used that to their advantage. There will be a difference against the Packers because not only are the Pack a very good defensive team but they also have a great O. I think that is what makes the difference.

Caveat Emperor
01-25-2011, 09:26 AM
I do think they benefited from two favorable match ups in the Playoffs. They played two very similar teams to them but they had a huge advantage at QB.

Joe Flacco is a damn good QB, and I'd probably take the Ravens OVER the Packers on a neutral field this year.

Both teams have rather large flaws -- the Steelers O-Line is duct tape and prayers and the Packers really have no running game to speak of.

bucksfan2
01-25-2011, 10:11 AM
Joe Flacco is a damn good QB, and I'd probably take the Ravens OVER the Packers on a neutral field this year.

Both teams have rather large flaws -- the Steelers O-Line is duct tape and prayers and the Packers really have no running game to speak of.

Not a Flacco fan at all. I don't really think he is a good QB. He wows people with his arm and stature but there seems to be something lacking. IMO he is a guy who plays just good enough, either just good enough to win or just good enough to lose. But this isn't about Flacco its about the Steelers.

Sea Ray
01-25-2011, 10:15 AM
...the Packers really have no running game to speak of.

Which is why they matchup very well against the Steelers. You can pass on the Steelers if you can get the ball out. They don't cover well but they do put pressure on the QB. They also stuff the run.

Sea Ray
01-25-2011, 10:17 AM
Not a Flacco fan at all. I don't really think he is a good QB. He wows people with his arm and stature but there seems to be something lacking. IMO he is a guy who plays just good enough, either just good enough to win or just good enough to lose. But this isn't about Flacco its about the Steelers.

I can't believe some people think Flacco is a stud QB. Tell me when you're facing the Ravens who are you more worried about? Ray Lewis, Ray Rice, Joe Flacco? I know who's a distant third on my list

Razor Shines
01-25-2011, 01:04 PM
Rooting for the Steelers to win -- mostly to annoy the people I'm friends with on Facebook (who treat every Steelers win as further proof of the nonexistence of any divine influence).

Awesome, that seems about right.

CTA513
01-25-2011, 03:29 PM
Any team that wants to stop Flacco should watch tape of the Bengals playing the Ravens.

In 3 seasons (6 games total) against the Bengals:
2008: 34 of 58, 409 yards, 2 TDs, 0 INTs, 2 Sacks
2009: 40 of 63, 381 yards, 1 TD, 4 INTs, 6 Sacks
2010: 31 of 58, 279 yards, 1 TD, 5 INTs, 5 Sacks
Total: 105 of 179, 1069 yards, 4 TDs, 9 INTs, 13 Sacks

Captain Hook
01-25-2011, 06:31 PM
Joe Flacco is a damn good QB, and I'd probably take the Ravens OVER the Packers on a neutral field this year.

Both teams have rather large flaws -- the Steelers O-Line is duct tape and prayers and the Packers really have no running game to speak of.


Not that I completely disagree but Starks is the leading rusher in this years playoffs so far with 263 yards.He has had the benefit of playing one more game but no other rusher has over 200 yards.While I'm not going to try to convince anyone that the Pack is a great rushing team, it does seem that they have found just enough of a running attach to make a difference.

Mutaman
01-26-2011, 02:16 AM
Joe Flacco is a damn good QB, and I'd probably take the Ravens OVER the Packers on a neutral field this year.

Both teams have rather large flaws -- the Steelers O-Line is duct tape and prayers and the Packers really have no running game to speak of.


1. Any complaints about the Packers running game are totally pre James Starks being activated. The man is the real deal. Green Bay has outrushed all of their 3 postseason opponents, even though all three games have been on the road.

2. The Packers and Ravens last met in December 2009. Green Bay won 27-14 in a game that was more one sided than the score. Flacco was intercepted 3 times. Green Bay had 350 total yards, Baltimore 185.

CTA513
01-28-2011, 12:39 AM
It looks like Pouncey probably won't be playing:


Gerry Dulac and Ed Bouchette of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette report that Pouncey has a broken bone in his left ankle in addition to the high ankle sprain that had previously been reported.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/01/27/pouncey-has-broken-bone-in-ankle/

Roy Tucker
01-28-2011, 09:11 AM
I am surprised that the Packers are favored. The Steelers have a lot of veterans from their 2005 and 2008 teams that won Super Bowls whereas the Packers are virtually free of Super Bowl experience. I think the Steelers should be favored.

I'm with you on this, RB. I think the game will be close, but the Steelers have the proverbial ability to impose their will on you.

As much as I don't like the Steelers, I admire them having a team philosophy and sticking with it. If the Steelers defense (and Polomalu) are healthy, I see them blitzing Rodgers silly and making him make quick reads and accurate throws under pressure. Now Rodgers also has a gun and the fastest release in the game, so this ought to be an interesting matchup. And the Steelers will run the ball and Roethlisberger will play his game where he moves around, sheds tacklers like Lilliputians off Gulliver, and makes some key throws. I see the game 27-14 Steelers with the Steelers scoring late to cement a win.

mlh1981
01-30-2011, 03:25 PM
please.....please....PLEASE win Pack!!!!!

Caveat Emperor
01-30-2011, 04:08 PM
1. Any complaints about the Packers running game are totally pre James Starks being activated. The man is the real deal. Green Bay has outrushed all of their 3 postseason opponents, even though all three games have been on the road.

A hot streak does not a running game make -- especially when one of the games is against the Falcons. I watched a lot of their games this season, they're an incredibly poor fundamental defensive team.


2. The Packers and Ravens last met in December 2009. Green Bay won 27-14 in a game that was more one sided than the score. Flacco was intercepted 3 times. Green Bay had 350 total yards, Baltimore 185.

I said this year.

RedsBaron
02-01-2011, 10:40 AM
I'm with you on this, RB. I think the game will be close, but the Steelers have the proverbial ability to impose their will on you.

As much as I don't like the Steelers, I admire them having a team philosophy and sticking with it. If the Steelers defense (and Polomalu) are healthy, I see them blitzing Rodgers silly and making him make quick reads and accurate throws under pressure. Now Rodgers also has a gun and the fastest release in the game, so this ought to be an interesting matchup. And the Steelers will run the ball and Roethlisberger will play his game where he moves around, sheds tacklers like Lilliputians off Gulliver, and makes some key throws. I see the game 27-14 Steelers with the Steelers scoring late to cement a win.

Your prediction sems to be about spot-on (unfortunately). The Packers could win, but I would bet on the Steelers.
Now if I could have my wish, Green Bay would win 74-0. After the game the Steelers would blame the loss upon Ben Roethlisberger being distracted by the presence of teenage girls in the stands and the injury sustained by Troy Polomalu when James Harrison missed an intended helmet-to-helmet hit on Aaron Rodgers and hit Pomomalu instead, causing Polomalu to suffer a hair concussion. Old time Steelers fans blamed the loss upon the injuries suffered by Franco Harris and Rocky Bleier against Baltimore.

texasdave
02-02-2011, 01:19 PM
A Little SB XLV humor on a cold, cold day:


A woman had 50 yard line tickets for the Super Bowl. As she sits down, a man
comes down and asks if anyone is sitting in the seat next to her.

"No," she says, "The seat is empty."

"This is incredible," said the man. "Who in their right mind would
have a seat like this for the Super Bowl, the biggest sporting event in the
world, and not use it?"

She says, "Well, actually, the seat belongs to me. I was supposed to
come with my husband, but he passed away. This is the first Super bowl we
haven't been to together since we got married in 1967."

"Oh, I'm sorry to hear that. That's terrible. But couldn't you find
someone else-a friend or relative, or even a neighbor to take the seat?".

The woman shakes her head.

"No, they're all at his funeral."

Razor Shines
02-02-2011, 02:29 PM
So I've been listening to quite a bit of Sports Radio this week. Jim Rome has been going on and on about how Big Ben doesn't get a fair shake in terms of being one of the greatest QBs of all time. He thinks that Ben is top 5 all time if he gets another ring.

I think he's a good QB but there are at least 5 current QBs that I would take over him. The Steeler teams he's been on have been great defensive and rushing teams.

He was talking about it at the beginning of his show today just before he brought Lynn Swan on. And as he's bringing Swan on the air Rome says "here is a guy that will back me up......uhh or maybe he won't"

And Swan goes on to say how Ben is his biggest concern for the Steelers winning this game. I laughed and I laughed.

RedsBaron
02-02-2011, 06:12 PM
Roethlisberger one of the top 5 QBs of all time? Nuts.
I realize it is tough to compare eras, but Sammie Baugh, Ottie Graham, Johnny Unitas, Bart Starr, Roger Staubach, Joe Montana, John Elway, Brett Favre, Dan Marino, Steve Young, Peyton Manning, Tom Brady and Drew Brees and probably a half dozen or more QBs I have forgotten all say "hi."

Mutaman
02-02-2011, 11:54 PM
I'm with you on this, RB. I think the game will be close, but the Steelers have the proverbial ability to impose their will on you.

As much as I don't like the Steelers, I admire them having a team philosophy and sticking with it. If the Steelers defense (and Polomalu) are healthy, I see them blitzing Rodgers silly and making him make quick reads and accurate throws under pressure. Now Rodgers also has a gun and the fastest release in the game, so this ought to be an interesting matchup. And the Steelers will run the ball and Roethlisberger will play his game where he moves around, sheds tacklers like Lilliputians off Gulliver, and makes some key throws. I see the game 27-14 Steelers with the Steelers scoring late to cement a win.

I wish I was your bookie.

1. In 19 games this year ( 11 of which were on the road) the Packers have never lost by more than 4 points. There is no reason to think that all of a sudden they will lose by 13.

2. Rodgers/ Jennings/Driver et al indoors with perfect conditions being held to 14 points? No way!

3. That being said, I think its pick em. The Steelers have done it before and McCarthy's record in close games is putrid. But if the Steelers win, it will be close. (A field goal). I think the starting point for analysis has to be last years 37-36 Steeler win in Pittsburgh where both quarterbacks were unstoppable. Green Bays defense is far superior to what it was then but they are missing Finlay so the offense is not as good . I don't think either team will do much on the ground and the key will be what the Packers can do with Roethlisberger.

Gun to my head: I think Rodgers has a big game as he usually does indoors. I don't think Capers will be embarrassed by Ben R two years in a row. Green Bay 31 Steelers 24. And despite two defensive coordinators who have invented modern NFL defense, take the over.

CTA513
02-04-2011, 06:27 PM
The Steelers have officially ruled Pouncey out for this Sunday.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/2010/news/story?id=6090999

Matt700wlw
02-05-2011, 12:47 AM
I like the Packers. I can thank Bret Favre for that.

Sadly, my pick is the Steelers.

They've been there, they've done it, and it seems like when they get there, they win it.

I would rather vomit than see that horrible human being in Ben, win a 3rd.

Sea Ray
02-05-2011, 12:37 PM
The Steelers have officially ruled Pouncey out for this Sunday.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/2010/news/story?id=6090999

So much for his 75% chance of playing pronouncement earlier in the week

Matt700wlw
02-05-2011, 05:48 PM
http://blogs.phoenixnewtimes.com/valleyfever/2011/02/stupid_things_steelers_fans.php

:)

SandyD
02-05-2011, 06:25 PM
My nephew has enlisted in the Navy. He's going to be sworn in on the field at the Super Bowl. And he gets to sit on the sidelines for the entire game. Pretty cool. He leaves for boot camp next week.

Razor Shines
02-05-2011, 09:49 PM
Super Computer Predicts SB 45 Outcome

YouTube - Tosh.0 - Super Bowl: 45 - Prediction (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjyBDk0SwVU)

Redsfan320
02-05-2011, 10:13 PM
My nephew has enlisted in the Navy. He's going to be sworn in on the field at the Super Bowl. And he gets to sit on the sidelines for the entire game. Pretty cool. He leaves for boot camp next week.

He has my thanks. And congratulations! The greatest honor one can have is to serve his country. :usa:

320

Matt700wlw
02-06-2011, 01:54 PM
http://www.whodeyfans.com/post/10-Reasons-for-Bengals-fans-to-hate-the-Pittsburgh-Steelers.aspx

Redsfan320
02-06-2011, 02:19 PM
http://www.whodeyfans.com/post/10-Re...-Steelers.aspx

Ye be warned, NSFW strong language. Although it was pretty funny.

320

paintmered
02-06-2011, 02:56 PM
Ye be warned, NSFW strong language. Although it was pretty funny.

320

True that. Also, plenty of head-nodding haterade moments in there for this Bengals fan.

HotCorner
02-06-2011, 03:07 PM
GB 33 PIT 24

CTA513
02-06-2011, 11:11 PM
Packers win 31-25
3 Steeler turnovers (2 Roethlisberger INTs and 1 Mendenhall fumble) led to 21 of the Packer 31 points

Vottomatic
02-06-2011, 11:16 PM
The better team, The Packers, survived despite losing their best defensive backs late in the first half allowing the Steelers to start passing again, because they were getting shut down until those two went out.

Congrats to the new dynasty in football and Aaron Rodgers.

Steelers are done. Put a fork in them. Their dynasty is over.

Redsfan320
02-06-2011, 11:16 PM
The 2010 Champions of the National Football League are the Green Bay Packers

Football season's over! That means baseball is close!!

320

blumj
02-06-2011, 11:25 PM
The 2010 Champions of the National Football League are the Green Bay Packers

Football season's over! That means baseball is close!!

320

The Steelers lost, Rodgers has as many SB wins as the drama queen, and P's & C's just over a week away. I'll take it.

Sea Ray
02-06-2011, 11:46 PM
The Steelers lost, Rodgers has as many SB wins as the drama queen, and P's & C's just over a week away. I'll take it.

So far as I know, Super Bowl wins:

Rodgers: 1
Drama Queen: 2

Razor Shines
02-06-2011, 11:55 PM
The better team, The Packers, survived despite losing their best defensive backs late in the first half allowing the Steelers to start passing again, because they were getting shut down until those two went out.

Congrats to the new dynasty in football and Aaron Rodgers.

Steelers are done. Put a fork in them. Their dynasty is over.

Guess you're pretty loose in handing out on that dynasty label.

blumj
02-07-2011, 12:12 AM
So far as I know, Super Bowl wins:

Rodgers: 1
Drama Queen: 2
Sorry, I was referring to the previous Packers QB.

Matt700wlw
02-07-2011, 12:17 AM
Packers = class

Steelers = trash

Mutaman
02-07-2011, 01:19 AM
Gun to my head: I think Rodgers has a big game as he usually does indoors. I don't think Capers will be embarrassed by Ben R two years in a row. Green Bay 31 Steelers 24. And despite two defensive coordinators who have invented modern NFL defense, take the over.

I'll try to do better the next time. I didn't factor in that Nolan would go for the two point conversion.

paintmered
02-07-2011, 01:31 AM
I'll try to do better the next time. I didn't factor in that Nolan would go for the two point conversion.

I hope you made some money off of that prediction. Well played. :clap:

Slyder
02-07-2011, 01:45 AM
I would be shocked if the spread is any bigger both teams have outstanding defenses. It should be a very well played game where it might come down to a big play by one of the defenses is deciding factor.

I know, I know I said 1 play but 3 big plays from the GB defense won this game.

Caveat Emperor
02-07-2011, 03:14 AM
Packers = class

Steelers = trash

This Super Bowl certainly has brought out the best in Bengals fans.

The Pittsburgh Steelers are the class of the NFL. Literally, the best organization the NFL has to offer. Off the charts in classiness. Well run from top to bottom with a world-class owner.

Oh, wait, they employ a dude to play quarterback with no criminal record who was crucified in the court of public opinion. Right. Morally reprehensible, that is.

GAC
02-07-2011, 05:50 AM
Being a lifelong Browns fan I am really happy for Clay Matthew III (Thor), who is the spitting image of his Dad who, in 19 yrs, never got to experience a SB.

Good article.... Matthews Family Is Football Royalty

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=6068060

Can't wait to get to work this morning and hear what one of the most obnoxious, big-mouthed, Steeler fans I have ever met has to say. LOL

Mutaman
02-07-2011, 06:42 AM
Being a lifelong Browns fan I am really happy for Clay Matthew III (Thor), who is the spitting image of his Dad who, in 19 yrs, never got to experience a SB.

Good article.... Matthews Family Is Football Royalty



Clay is a gift from heaven to all Packer fans. What's amazing is that he was a walk-on in college who never started until partway into his senior season. Whats more amazing is that despite his weak college resume, Ted Thompson had the wherewithall to trade up and grab him in the first round of the draft. Kudos to Kevin Greene who spotted Matthews' talent from the getgo and who has been his coach with the Packers.

traderumor
02-07-2011, 07:10 AM
This Super Bowl certainly has brought out the best in Bengals fans.

The Pittsburgh Steelers are the class of the NFL. Literally, the best organization the NFL has to offer. Off the charts in classiness. Well run from top to bottom with a world-class owner.

Oh, wait, they employ a dude to play quarterback with no criminal record who was crucified in the court of public opinion. Right. Morally reprehensible, that is.I think many would point to on-field issues when making charges against the Steelers, such as going for knees, trash talking, head hunting, all of which is excessive and would not be considered "classy." All of that has nothing to do with the QB.

I would agree with you that they do have a good football program that produces consistent winning football.

Reds
02-07-2011, 07:13 AM
I dislike most franchises, although I'm thankful it was a close game and that the Steelers didn't win. Pack were the best team throughout the playoffs, no doubt.

Vottomatic
02-07-2011, 09:15 AM
Guess you're pretty loose in handing out on that dynasty label.

Young team.

Great young QB.

They'll be in the playoffs for years to come.

Caveat Emperor
02-07-2011, 09:30 AM
Young team.

Great young QB.

They'll be in the playoffs for years to come.

Most people would consider multiple championships over a short amount of time a pre-req for being called a "Dynasty."

Eric_the_Red
02-07-2011, 11:39 AM
Let's hope this year's game puts to rest the ridiculous notion of Ben Roethlisberger as some sort of elite post-season QB. He is slightly above a game manager, with good leadership skills, who benefits from a great defense and plus run game.

Compare these three QB's post-season stats:

19 games - 88.4 QB rating - 29 TD/19 INT

19 games - 85.7 QB rating - 30 TD/16 INT

13 games - 84.5 QB rating - 3 TD/3 INT

The first two are QBs with different post-season legacies, Peyton Manning and Tom Brady. Looking at their stats, their isn't much difference.

The last is Roethlisberger, a far cry from the other two.

Sea Ray
02-07-2011, 11:53 AM
Yes, Ben played a horrible Super Bowl vs Seattle in Detroit about 5 yrs ago too

bucksfan2
02-07-2011, 12:01 PM
Let's hope this year's game puts to rest the ridiculous notion of Ben Roethlisberger as some sort of elite post-season QB. He is slightly above a game manager, with good leadership skills, who benefits from a great defense and plus run game.

Compare these three QB's post-season stats:

19 games - 88.4 QB rating - 29 TD/19 INT

19 games - 85.7 QB rating - 30 TD/16 INT

13 games - 84.5 QB rating - 3 TD/3 INT

The first two are QBs with different post-season legacies, Peyton Manning and Tom Brady. Looking at their stats, their isn't much difference.

The last is Roethlisberger, a far cry from the other two.

I pretty much agree with this conclusion. Big Ben is a good post season QB who plays very well within his system and is able to make plays that the aforementioned Brady and Manning can't. His ability to take a hit in the pocket and stay upright and also his ability to scramble when a play breaks down are skills that make him unique.

But I think last night followed the script that most of Big Ben's Super Bowl wins followed. The defense allows them to stay close, they pull within striking distance and have a drive at the end to win the game. He is a good QB who has the uncanny ability to make plays when all hope is lost. However I don't think he is anywhere near an elite QB in the playoffs. I don't think he is an elite or HOF level QB but man he makes plays in the playoffs.

IslandRed
02-07-2011, 01:52 PM
Really, the offenses owned that game last night. The Steelers shot themselves in the foot with turnovers, the Packers did it with critical drops, but otherwise the defenses didn't do much stopping out there.

Caveat Emperor
02-07-2011, 02:04 PM
Really, the offenses owned that game last night. The Steelers shot themselves in the foot with turnovers, the Packers did it with critical drops, but otherwise the defenses didn't do much stopping out there.

Pittsburgh generated ZERO pass rush. Their secondary simply isn't good enough to run with guys if their front 7 is getting the QB to the ground.

Rodgers is fantastic when he has time. Kinda sucks though -- I was really enjoying Jeff Tedford's unbroken string of mediocre/awful first-ronud pro-QBs: Trent Dilfer, David Carr, Akili Smith, Joey Harrington, and Kyle Boller.

Hoosier Red
02-07-2011, 03:11 PM
Let's hope this year's game puts to rest the ridiculous notion of Ben Roethlisberger as some sort of elite post-season QB. He is slightly above a game manager, with good leadership skills, who benefits from a great defense and plus run game.

Compare these three QB's post-season stats:

19 games - 88.4 QB rating - 29 TD/19 INT

19 games - 85.7 QB rating - 30 TD/16 INT

13 games - 84.5 QB rating - 3 TD/3 INT

The first two are QBs with different post-season legacies, Peyton Manning and Tom Brady. Looking at their stats, their isn't much difference.

The last is Roethlisberger, a far cry from the other two.

I agree with your general thought, but I looked and Roethlisberger has 19 TD's and 16 INT's.(4 TD's and 4 INT's this post season.)

Hoosier Red
02-07-2011, 03:13 PM
I actually think the whole "wins in post season" is overrated anyway. Tom Brady got the reputation as a guy who won in the post season even if his numbers were not off the charts, he's lost his last three playoff games(Last two at home.)

kaldaniels
02-07-2011, 03:30 PM
I despise Big Ben, but to just look at his "stats" for playoff games is misleading. During the performance in the Jets game they put the numbers side by side with Sanchez. I believe Sanchez was over 100 QB rating, and Big Ben was under 50. But there was no debate over the better QB that game. QB rating is good, but not the whole story.

Hoosier Red
02-07-2011, 03:38 PM
Well I'd argue that a guy who was 10 of 19 with 2 picks played well. He may have been a better quarterback, but it's a stretch to say he played better than Sanchez that day.

His team won, so I suppose you could say he made throws "when he needed to," but the rest of the team got the Steelers a lead so the throws he got around to making still meant something.

kaldaniels
02-07-2011, 03:44 PM
Well I'd argue that a guy who was 10 of 19 with 2 picks played well. He may have been a better quarterback, but it's a stretch to say he played better than Sanchez that day.

His team won, so I suppose you could say he made throws "when he needed to," but the rest of the team got the Steelers a lead so the throws he got around to making still meant something.

And we could debate and go round and round about the better QB that day, but do you think in terms of the QB position, Sanchez was 3 times as good as Ben?, cause that is what the QB rating shows.

And just to ask, as the Colts fans have jumped in to knock Ben down a peg or 2...who is the better postseason QB, Big Ben or Peyton?

Roy Tucker
02-07-2011, 04:14 PM
I thought the game was going to be Rodgers quick release vs. the Steelers blitzing. I thought the blitzing was going to get to Rodgers and make him hurry his passes and make mistakes. But he didn't. The Green Bay OL and running backs did a decent job of keeping the blitzers away from Rodgers and then Rodgers did a great job of finding open receivers fast. I can only remember hi throwing the ball away 2-3 times. The rest of the time he was finding open guys.

I also think the GB defense made the Steelers offense play "faster" than what they were used to. Steelers made the turnovers and that was the ballgame.

Razor Shines
02-07-2011, 05:24 PM
And we could debate and go round and round about the better QB that day, but do you think in terms of the QB position, Sanchez was 3 times as good as Ben?, cause that is what the QB rating shows.

And just to ask, as the Colts fans have jumped in to knock Ben down a peg or 2...who is the better postseason QB, Big Ben or Peyton?

First off 1 Colts fan.

Secondly Id take Peyton over Ben in heartbeat. I don't really think its difficult to decide who is the better qb between those two.

kaldaniels
02-07-2011, 05:29 PM
First off 1 Colts fan.

1) Eric
2) Hooiser

Razor Shines
02-07-2011, 05:31 PM
1) Eric
2) Hooiser - Bengals fan, I thought.

kaldaniels
02-07-2011, 05:37 PM
My bad.

Razor Shines
02-07-2011, 05:37 PM
Young team.

Great young QB.

They'll be in the playoffs for years to come.

By that definition the Colts would still have been/are a dynasty. Which they're not. CE is right, you gotta win multiple Super Bowls to get the dynasty tag.

The Packers could be that, but we'll have to see. They almost didn't even make the playoffs this year.

Razor Shines
02-07-2011, 05:39 PM
My bad.

I guess it doesn't really matter maybe he is a Colts fan but it seems like he posts way more in the Bengals thread.

Either way, I gave an answer to your question. Was I right or wrong?

BRM
02-07-2011, 05:42 PM
Either way, I gave an answer to your question. Was I right or wrong?

It's an opinion. Not sure if there is a right or wrong there.

That said, I agree with your answer.

Slyder
02-07-2011, 05:55 PM
First off 1 Colts fan.

Secondly Id take Peyton over Ben in heartbeat. I don't really think its difficult to decide who is the better qb between those two.

Raider fan here and it's a no brainer for me. Give me Peyton Manning to be my QB, in a game you must win. What he does reading defenses and checking into the right protection/play is out of this world.

Ben is a really really good facilitator, who can improvise on the fly within the system but to compare Ben to Peyton is not fair.

Eric_the_Red
02-07-2011, 08:16 PM
Raider fan here and it's a no brainer for me. Give me Peyton Manning to be my QB, in a game you must win. What he does reading defenses and checking into the right protection/play is out of this world.

Ben is a really really good facilitator, who can improvise on the fly within the system but to compare Ben to Peyton is not fair.

This x1000.

But think about how scary good Aaron Rodgers could be as his career progresses. He seems to have the accuracy of Brees, but the mobility of a Roethlisberger or McNabb. If he can keep away from concussions, he could be the next elite level QB in the Manning/Brady line.

kaldaniels
02-07-2011, 08:24 PM
I guess it doesn't really matter maybe he is a Colts fan but it seems like he posts way more in the Bengals thread.

Either way, I gave an answer to your question. Was I right or wrong?

I'll be honest here. I've been down the Peyton road with you all, and we know how I stand, so yes I would prefer Ben in a playoff game and I know I'm thought of as an idiot for that. I just truly felt the numbers Eric threw up there were not giving doing Ben justice. (Remember, personally, I like Peyton, I loathe Ben).

kaldaniels
02-07-2011, 08:27 PM
I guess it doesn't really matter maybe he is a Colts fan but it seems like he posts way more in the Bengals thread.

Either way, I gave an answer to your question. Was I right or wrong?

Poor phrasing on my part, but I asked who is the better postseason QB. I was intending to ask, who throughout his career, has (which I should have said) been the better QB in the playoffs.

I already knew the answer to who you would take. :D

kaldaniels
02-07-2011, 08:30 PM
And I mean no harm to Eric, but had the numbers been correct, I would not have made an appearance in here. :dunno:

Razor Shines
02-07-2011, 08:44 PM
Poor phrasing on my part, but I asked who is the better postseason QB. I was intending to ask, who throughout his career, has (which I should have said) been the better QB in the playoffs.

I already knew the answer to who you would take. :D

What do you want to base that on? Most of the Steeler teams that Ben has been on were Run first/Defensive teams.

Seems that Peyton has been asked to do way more than Ben has.

Also, these numbers (http://www.stampedeblue.com/2011/2/1/1967981/pro-football-reference-measures-the-support-qbs-receive-in-playoff) brought up by ETR in the Colts thread mean more to me than the ones he posted in this thread.

MilotheMayor
02-07-2011, 09:22 PM
Really the only significant happening I took from last night:

http://gif.mocksession.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/AROD-EATS-IT.gif

kaldaniels
02-07-2011, 10:19 PM
What do you want to base that on? Most of the Steeler teams that Ben has been on were Run first/Defensive teams.

Seems that Peyton has been asked to do way more than Ben has.

Also, these numbers (http://www.stampedeblue.com/2011/2/1/1967981/pro-football-reference-measures-the-support-qbs-receive-in-playoff) brought up by ETR in the Colts thread mean more to me than the ones he posted in this thread.

Its simply a difference of opinion.

If I counter you with W-L stats, individual stats,anything etc...you are going to come back with the fact that Peyton has been playing with the proverbial one arm tied behind his back due to being on the Colts. Without looking though, I'd wager the Colts have a high regular season W-L % than Pitt during each of these QB's respective reigns. I can't win.

Ben is 10-3 in the playoffs. Peyton is well...I don't know, but nowhere close to that. I'm not saying the QB is totally responsible for a teams W-L, but he's pretty darn important. And having watched about all of Ben's playoff games, there is no doubt in my mind he is a difference maker.

But it is all a matter of opinion as I said, and I hold nothing against your feeling that Peyton has been the better playoff QB.

Eric_the_Red
02-07-2011, 10:27 PM
And I mean no harm to Eric, but had the numbers been correct, I would not have made an appearance in here. :dunno:

No, I should've recognized those TD/INT numbers had to be wrong.

But let me ask you this....if you switch their teams, do you still think Ben would be your pick?

I think Ben would be exposed on a team that does not feature a strong defense and running game. But Peyton would still be an elite QB on the Steelers (as horrible as that thought is).

kaldaniels
02-07-2011, 10:34 PM
No, I should've recognized those TD/INT numbers had to be wrong.

But let me ask you this....if you switch their teams, do you still think Ben would be your pick?

I think Ben would be exposed on a team that does not feature a strong defense and running game. But Peyton would still be an elite QB on the Steelers (as horrible as that thought is).

Very good question. I don't know. I think both QB's are in their ideal enviroments as it is. Moving Peyton to cold weather and playing the Ravens twice a year, and moving Ben to a dome would decrease the effectiveness of each.

GAC
02-08-2011, 06:09 AM
I despise Big Ben, but to just look at his "stats" for playoff games is misleading. During the performance in the Jets game they put the numbers side by side with Sanchez. I believe Sanchez was over 100 QB rating, and Big Ben was under 50.

35.5 to be exact.


Let's hope this year's game puts to rest the ridiculous notion of Ben Roethlisberger as some sort of elite post-season QB

His post-season performance has been pretty erratic and sub-par.

I gleaned a lot of this from here, and it's pretty spot in...

2011 Super Bowl: Ben Roethlisberger With Another Super Bowl Clunker

http://dallas.sbnation.com/2011/2/7/1979980/2011-superbowl-ben-roethlisberger-with-another-super-bowl-clunker

Roethlisberger has a history of performing poorly in Super Bowls. The Steelers won Super Bowl XL vs the Seattle largely in spite of Roethlisberger who was anemic, completing nine of 21 passes for 123 yards, 2 INTs, and a 22.6 QB rating. Now Ben did improve vs the Cardinals in Super Bowl XLIII, who were 9-7 in the regular season and got hot in the post-season, completing 21 of 30 passes for 256 yards, a TD, an INT, and a QB Rating of 93.2.

And in this year's SB, Ben was 25-40 for 263 yds, 2 TS, 2 INTs, and a QB Rating of 77.4.

In three Super Bowls, Roethlisberger has thrown three touchdowns and five interceptions. If the Steelers won, people would compare him to Brady, having three rings and all, but know this: in four Super Bowls, Brady has completed 100 of 155 passes for 1,001 yards and seven touchdowns against just one interception.

Roethlisberger is not a big-game quarterback, his defense and running games have bailed him out in the playoffs time and time again - which is a testament to how good the Steelers running game and defense has been in a league that is now dominated by passing.

Hoosier Red
02-08-2011, 12:27 PM
Sorry, I'm a Bengals fan, but I live in Indianapolis. I'd take Peyton in the playoffs over Big Ben easily. One knock on Peyton is his W-L record in the playoffs, but that's forgetting he took an awful lot of crappy teams to the playoffs.
When Roethlisberger's team wasn't as good(2009, 2006) they couldn't ride his back to the playoffs. When Peyton's team hasn't been as good, (2010, 2000) they made the playoffs. Peyton's record would also be a bit better if Mike Vanderjagt didn't choke on two end of game kicks.(2000 to beat the Dolphins, 2005 to tie the Steelers.)

But reverse the situations, say Roethlisberger made two more playoffs with a mediocre team and lost in the first round, while Peyton wasn't good enough to elevate a mediocre team to the playoffs. Than the W-L record looks a little more even, and Peyton's numbers show who the better quarterback was.

Razor Shines
02-08-2011, 12:34 PM
Sorry, I'm a Bengals fan, but I live in Indianapolis. )
We need to talk about this. :)


I'd take Peyton in the playoffs over Big Ben easily. One knock on Peyton is his W-L record in the playoffs, but that's forgetting he took an awful lot of crappy teams to the playoffs.
When Roethlisberger's team wasn't as good(2009, 2006) they couldn't ride his back to the playoffs. When Peyton's team hasn't been as good, (2010, 2000) they made the playoffs. Peyton's record would also be a bit better if Mike Vanderjagt didn't choke on two end of game kicks.(2000 to beat the Dolphins, 2005 to tie the Steelers.

But reverse the situations, say Roethlisberger made two more playoffs with a mediocre team and lost in the first round, while Peyton wasn't good enough to elevate a mediocre team to the playoffs. Than the W-L record looks a little more even, and Peyton's numbers show who the better quarterback was.
Nice post.

Like Kal said the Colts have had some really good records in the reg. season, but IMO that's largely due to Manning. The Steelers were 3-1 without Ben this year...I'd venture to say the Colts would be lucky to be 1-3 without Manning. Ben is a really good QB who doesn't have to carry his team. Manning is a great QB who can and does carry his team much of the time.

NJReds
02-08-2011, 12:36 PM
Sorry, I'm a Bengals fan, but I live in Indianapolis. I'd take Peyton in the playoffs over Big Ben easily. One knock on Peyton is his W-L record in the playoffs, but that's forgetting he took an awful lot of crappy teams to the playoffs.
When Roethlisberger's team wasn't as good(2009, 2006) they couldn't ride his back to the playoffs. When Peyton's team hasn't been as good, (2010, 2000) they made the playoffs. Peyton's record would also be a bit better if Mike Vanderjagt didn't choke on two end of game kicks.(2000 to beat the Dolphins, 2005 to tie the Steelers.)

But reverse the situations, say Roethlisberger made two more playoffs with a mediocre team and lost in the first round, while Peyton wasn't good enough to elevate a mediocre team to the playoffs. Than the W-L record looks a little more even, and Peyton's numbers show who the better quarterback was.


I'm not a fan of either team, but you have to take Peyton in a heartbeat. He's an all-time great, future Hall of Fame QB. Ben reminds me more of a Phil Simms-type QB ... which isn't a knock, he's just not in Manning's league.

bucksfan2
02-08-2011, 12:47 PM
I'm not a fan of either team, but you have to take Peyton in a heartbeat. He's an all-time great, future Hall of Fame QB. Ben reminds me more of a Phil Simms-type QB ... which isn't a knock, he's just not in Manning's league.

I take Ben and it really isn't even close. Payton is going to put up better numbers. Payton is going to look prettier in doing so. Payton can make all the throws and has the accuracy that Ben doesn't have. But that said when the *bleep* hits the fan Ben is able to make plays out of nothing. He is able to take a 10 yard sack and turn it into a 20 yard gain.

In the playoffs you aren't playing against average defenses anymore. It appears as if in the past few years teams have been able to scheme and defend Payton. You can scheme all you want against Ben but there are just times when he defies logic and turns a negative into a positive.

Payton is the better QB and it really isn't a question, but Ben is the better winner. When you get to the playoffs winning is the only thing that matters.

Razor Shines
02-08-2011, 12:55 PM
You think the Colts would have won more than 1 Super Bowl with only switching Ben and Manning? Some of those years I don't even see the Colts making the playoffs switching the two.

Hoosier Red
02-08-2011, 01:02 PM
I take Ben and it really isn't even close. Payton is going to put up better numbers. Payton is going to look prettier in doing so. Payton can make all the throws and has the accuracy that Ben doesn't have. But that said when the *bleep* hits the fan Ben is able to make plays out of nothing. He is able to take a 10 yard sack and turn it into a 20 yard gain.

In the playoffs you aren't playing against average defenses anymore. It appears as if in the past few years teams have been able to scheme and defend Payton. You can scheme all you want against Ben but there are just times when he defies logic and turns a negative into a positive.

Payton is the better QB and it really isn't a question, but Ben is the better winner. When you get to the playoffs winning is the only thing that matters.

Well there's some logic there that excellent defenses can scheme and turn Peyton into a mere mortal, whereas Ben's numbers are about the same regardless of the defense(he already is a mortal.)
When this happens Peyton's team which was built around him being a quarterbacking deity of some order is in more trouble than Roethlisberger's team which is built around him being able to make a play or two.

But I think that really misses the forest for the trees, one or two spectacular plays do not a winner make. One or two bad plays in isolation don't lose a game for the team. We saw that on Sunday night. Roethlisberger threw a terrible pick six, but his team still had a chance to win the game at the end.
Was Roethlisberger unclutch in Super Bowl XLV because his team lost by 6, but clutch in Super Bowl XL because his team won? In Super Bowl XL, he was the third best quarterback on the field behind Hasselback and Antwaan Randle-El.(1-1-43 yards and 1 TD)

It's not about having prettier stats, it's about improving the chances that your team is going to win, Peyton Manning has done that more than Ben Roethlisberger every game be it in September, October, November, December, January, or February.

bucksfan2
02-08-2011, 01:18 PM
Well there's some logic there that excellent defenses can scheme and turn Peyton into a mere mortal, whereas Ben's numbers are about the same regardless of the defense(he already is a mortal.)
When this happens Peyton's team which was built around him being a quarterbacking deity of some order is in more trouble than Roethlisberger's team which is built around him being able to make a play or two.

The Pitt offense is built around Big Ben as well. Just because they are two completely different styles of QB's doesn't mean each team is equally dependent on their respective QB's. What I see is that the Colts run a finesse style of offense that can be shut down (see the Chargers) while the Steelers don't run a finesse offense. They don't rely on timing and I have seen Ben make plays from nothing. The bigger the game gets the more those intangibles add up.


But I think that really misses the forest for the trees, one or two spectacular plays do not a winner make. One or two bad plays in isolation don't lose a game for the team. We saw that on Sunday night. Roethlisberger threw a terrible pick six, but his team still had a chance to win the game at the end.
Was Roethlisberger unclutch in Super Bowl XLV because his team lost by 6, but clutch in Super Bowl XL because his team won? In Super Bowl XL, he was the third best quarterback on the field behind Hasselback and Antwaan Randle-El.(1-1-43 yards and 1 TD)

Big Ben did not throw a terrible pick six. His arm was hit on the throw and caused the ball to fly off mark. If you want to see a terrible pick see Carson Palmer or in a big game see Payton Manning in last years super bowl.

Big Ben is never going to put up pretty stats. It just isn't the way he plays the game. But he will make plays with both his arm and feet that no other QB can make. I have seen in countless times during his games against the Bengals. He can shrug off 2-3 defenders hanging on him and complete a pass. He can elude defenders and run for a first down. He does things that stats can't calculate.

When a play breaks down Ben is able to more around in the pocket and make something out of nothing with his legs. When a play breaks down with Manning he either throws the ball away or slides down to avoid a big hit. There isn't anything wrong with that, its just the differences between the two.


It's not about having prettier stats, it's about improving the chances that your team is going to win, Peyton Manning has done that more than Ben Roethlisberger every game be it in September, October, November, December, January, or February.

I just can't agree with this. Peyton is the better QB but give me Roethlisberger in the playoffs.

Hoosier Red
02-08-2011, 03:30 PM
I just can't agree with this. Peyton is the better QB but give me Roethlisberger in the playoffs.

Everything you wrote seems to contradict what you wrote here.

1) How is Peyton a better quarterback if Ben can do all those things you mentioned better than Peyton? I mean it's not like those things don't come up in every game before the playoffs. Further, what I've never understood is why if Peyton has better stats in playoff games than Ben, why that's a bad thing. He throws fewer interceptions/game, especially considering how many passes each is asked to throw.
Again, if playoff games are all about making one or two plays "when it matters" why do they play the rest of the game?
The answer is because all plays matter, and Peyton elevates his team to be in position when those "plays that matter" happen whereas Ben's team keeps him in the game long enough for the "plays to matter."

2) If what you're saying is true, how does being a lesser quarterback help a team win in the playoffs? Or does Ben only bring those qualities which make him a better quarterback to the playoffs?

Dom Heffner
02-08-2011, 03:34 PM
Are you guys seriously debating Manning vs Roethslisberger?

Uh.....

Hoosier Red
02-08-2011, 03:35 PM
Big Ben is never going to put up pretty stats. It just isn't the way he plays the game. But he will make plays with both his arm and feet that no other QB can make. I have seen in countless times during his games against the Bengals. He can shrug off 2-3 defenders hanging on him and complete a pass. He can elude defenders and run for a first down. He does things that stats can't calculate.


I apologize if I'm being obtuse, but in those examples, what exactly do the stats not calculate? The rushing yards, the passing yards, the number of first downs gained?

I suppose the stats don't measure the degree of difficulty, but Peyton dropping back throwing a ball in 2.5 seconds for a first down counts for the same as Roethlisberger, dropping back, avoiding three tackles, pump faking, circling back around, and throwing a completion to Hines Ward.

Oxblood
02-08-2011, 03:53 PM
Wow, that was a sloppy game. Steelers pretty much gave it away with stupid penalties & turnovers.

I think if the Jets would have slipped passed pitt in the AFC champ they would have dominated GB. They would have wreaked havoc on Rodgers and prob rolled to an easy victory. Pitt's D didn't come to play.

RedsBaron
02-08-2011, 04:21 PM
I think if the Jets would have slipped passed pitt in the AFC champ they would have dominated GB. They would have wreaked havoc on Rodgers and prob rolled to an easy victory. Pitt's D didn't come to play.

On October 31, 2010 the Packers defeated the Jets 9-0 on the road. While on "any given Sunday" one NFL team may be able to defeat another there is no reason to expect that the Jets would have "dominated" Green Bay and "rolled to an easy victory" had New York somehow made it to the Super Bowl.

Oxblood
02-08-2011, 05:38 PM
On October 31, 2010 the Packers defeated the Jets 9-0 on the road. While on "any given Sunday" one NFL team may be able to defeat another there is no reason to expect that the Jets would have "dominated" Green Bay and "rolled to an easy victory" had New York somehow made it to the Super Bowl.

IMO the jets offense had vastly improved, final score would have been around 24-9. Packers D got rolled vs the Steelers, just had a few key turnovers to turn the tide.

Mutaman
02-10-2011, 01:00 AM
IMO the jets offense had vastly improved, final score would have been around 24-9. Packers D got rolled vs the Steelers, just had a few key turnovers to turn the tide.


When Green Bay shut out the Jets in their own ballpark back in October, they also created "a few key turnovers". Did the same thing against the Bears and Philly. Funny how they constantly have the luck to get "a few key turnovers".

I'm assuming you're just trolling buddy, but on the slight chance you're serious, you're just embarrassing yourself.

Dom Heffner
02-10-2011, 07:58 AM
Wow, that was a sloppy game. Steelers pretty much gave it away with stupid penalties & turnovers.

I think if the Jets would have slipped passed pitt in the AFC champ they would have dominated GB. They would have wreaked havoc on Rodgers and prob rolled to an easy victory. Pitt's D didn't come to play.

Or they would have not showed up against the Packers.

They were up and down all year. They got killed by the Pats, they beat the Pats.

In my opinion, they couldn't have beat the Pack on their best day- Green Bay has been consistently awesome the last two months of the season.

Oxblood
02-10-2011, 01:27 PM
Best team definitely didn't win the super bowl this season, luckiest.... maybe. All the breaks seemed to go gb's way, turnovers..penalties..etc. Probably shouldn't have even made the playoffs.

They're looking at a .500 record next season, no way their luck stays like it did this past season.

Oxblood
02-10-2011, 01:52 PM
I'll even go as far as to say my Bengals will have a better record than the Packers next season. Take it to the bank.

Slyder
02-10-2011, 02:35 PM
Wow I would take them odds and RUN. Seriously 500 for the pack next year?

I would counter that their luck couldnt have been worse this season. How many people did they end up having on the IR? How many KEY players missed at least 1 game this year? They have one of the young up and coming QBs and it this league RIGHT NOW that might be the most important thing. They have one of the best wide receiving units in football.

The defense consistantly made the plays they needed. I would be shocked if this was a repeat next year short of 3/4 of the team being FAs. You say their luck couldnt have been better? I say their luck couldnt have been worse and made the best of it "scrapping" into the playoffs.

RichRed
02-10-2011, 03:15 PM
Wow I would take them odds and RUN. Seriously 500 for the pack next year?

I would counter that their luck couldnt have been worse this season. How many people did they end up having on the IR? How many KEY players missed at least 1 game this year? They have one of the young up and coming QBs and it this league RIGHT NOW that might be the most important thing. They have one of the best wide receiving units in football.

The defense consistantly made the plays they needed. I would be shocked if this was a repeat next year short of 3/4 of the team being FAs. You say their luck couldnt have been better? I say their luck couldnt have been worse and made the best of it "scrapping" into the playoffs.

Exactly. That's the first time I've seen the Packers described as "lucky." They were decimated by injuries all year, yet still won their final 6 games, including the Super Bowl. And they beat the Eagles, Falcons and Bears all on the road in the playoffs. They're a very good team that's well-coached and they'll be a force next year.

RedsBaron
02-10-2011, 03:35 PM
Exactly. That's the first time I've seen the Packers described as "lucky." They were decimated by injuries all year, yet still won their final 6 games, including the Super Bowl. And they beat the Eagles, Falcons and Bears all on the road in the playoffs. They're a very good team that's well-coached and they'll be a force next year.

RichRed, all that you and Slyder have are mere facts. ;)
The Packers were just lucky to defeat the Eagles, Falcons, Bears and Steelers, all on the road, to win the Super Bowl. :rolleyes: :)

Oxblood
02-10-2011, 03:57 PM
Luck definitely played a role;

To get in the playoffs
Vick throwing the terrible pass to end that game, eagles had 'em on the ropes
Ryan throwing the ill conceived pass before halftime that ended that game
Cutler playing like a bum (prob not luck, just Cutler being cutler)
Chi towns 3rd stringer rallying them to victory if there was only more time.
Stupid turnovers by Pitt that lead to easy points
Stupid penalties on pitt negating key plays
Some nice phantom penalties against pitt
The first punt that was muffed, if Pitt recovers it's lights out
Pitt not being able to stop GB on 3rd down
Pitt not being able to convert on 3rd down
could go on....

Lions will have a better record than GB next season. Plus Rodgers is a concussion away from pumping gas.

Oxblood
02-10-2011, 04:00 PM
Disclaimer: I HATE THE PACKERS

Hate them even more than the Patriots, that's a lot of hate.

Another luck factor; Matthews not getting busted for roids.

BRM
02-10-2011, 04:34 PM
Disclaimer: I HATE THE PACKERS


I don't think you needed to put the disclaimer out there. It was pretty obvious.

Mutaman
02-10-2011, 04:41 PM
Back on 1/9/11, this genius Oxblood posted:


"On to next week, Falcons should beat the Pack by 3 TD's".

Final: Green Bay 48 Atlanta 21 - in Atlanta's own building.

He wisely didn't make anymore picks after that. We are not exactly dealing with Jimmy the Greek here. What I wouldn't give to book his bets.

Oxblood
02-10-2011, 04:53 PM
Back on 1/9/11, this genius Oxblood posted:


"On to next week, Falcons should beat the Pack by 3 TD's".

Final: Green Bay 48 Atlanta 21 - in Atlanta's own building.

He wisely didn't make anymore picks after that. We are not exactly dealing with Jimmy the Greek here. What I wouldn't give to book his bets.

Good one muttman.

Questionable pass int call on 3rd down early in the game...
Ryan's terrible pass before halftime...

RedsBaron
02-10-2011, 04:57 PM
All the teams kept playing terribly against the Packers.....could Green Bay's play have had something to do with that? ;)

BuckeyeRed27
02-10-2011, 04:59 PM
Luck definitely played a role;

To get in the playoffs
Vick throwing the terrible pass to end that game, eagles had 'em on the ropes
Ryan throwing the ill conceived pass before halftime that ended that game
Cutler playing like a bum (prob not luck, just Cutler being cutler)
Chi towns 3rd stringer rallying them to victory if there was only more time.
Stupid turnovers by Pitt that lead to easy points
Stupid penalties on pitt negating key plays
Some nice phantom penalties against pitt
The first punt that was muffed, if Pitt recovers it's lights out
Pitt not being able to stop GB on 3rd down
Pitt not being able to convert on 3rd down
could go on....

Lions will have a better record than GB next season. Plus Rodgers is a concussion away from pumping gas.

Everything you listed here could also be attributed to Green Bay playing well and forcing those things to happen or Green Bay simply executing well. In fact I would say there isn't a single thing on the list that is lucky.

Oxblood
02-10-2011, 05:05 PM
Everything you listed here could also be attributed to Green Bay playing well and forcing those things to happen or Green Bay simply executing well. In fact I would say there isn't a single thing on the list that is lucky.

I disagree, pretty sure you'll see GB come back down to Earth next season.

RichRed
02-10-2011, 05:06 PM
Good one muttman.

Questionable pass int call on 3rd down early in the game...
Ryan's terrible pass before halftime...

Yes, if those things didn't happen, Atlanta definitely would've won instead of losing by 27, despite being outgained 442-194.

Also, GB was penalized 65 yards in the game, compared to 32 for Atlanta.

Oxblood
02-10-2011, 05:13 PM
Yes, if those things didn't happen, Atlanta definitely would've won instead of losing by 27, despite being outgained 442-194.

Also, GB was penalized 65 yards in the game, compared to 32 for Atlanta.

It's like time travel, you go back in time...kill a fly...alters everything from that point on...Hitler becomes a gay rights activist.

RichRed
02-10-2011, 05:18 PM
It's like time travel, you go back in time...kill a fly...alters everything from that point on...Hitler becomes a gay rights activist.

Understood, but if you get 48 points scored on you and you lose by 4 touchdowns, there's probably more than one bounce of the ball and one ref's whistle's difference between you and the team on the other sideline.

Oxblood
02-10-2011, 05:22 PM
Understood, but if you get 48 points scored on you and you lose by 4 touchdowns, there's probably more than one bounce of the ball and one ref's whistle's difference between you and the team on the other sideline.

Possibly, maybe I'm blinded by hate... :beerme:

paintmered
02-10-2011, 07:20 PM
I'll even go as far as to say my Bengals will have a better record than the Packers next season. Take it to the bank.

Just for clarification, you want to bet that the Bengals overachieve? You'll have no shortage of participants willing to take you up on that one.

Mutaman
02-10-2011, 08:19 PM
Oxblood: I'm curious as to what's to hate. No high priced free agents, everything built through the draft, Woodson who donates a zillion dollars a year to charity, Rodgers who handled the Favre circus with total class, Donald Driver because he's Donald Driver. Owned by the community. What's not to like?

bucksfan2
02-11-2011, 09:26 AM
Best team definitely didn't win the super bowl this season, luckiest.... maybe. All the breaks seemed to go gb's way, turnovers..penalties..etc. Probably shouldn't have even made the playoffs.

They're looking at a .500 record next season, no way their luck stays like it did this past season.

How many games did Aaron Rodgers miss with a concussions? He missed most of the Detroit game and then the next game.

Don't get me wrong Green Bay went 10-6 but if Rodgers plays fully in those games the Pack probably go 12-4. Pretty good team huh?

Did anyone think that the Falcons were really the best team in the NFC?

Did anyone think that Michael Vick wouldn't make the same mistakes that he historically made in the playoffs?

Did anyone think the Seahawks belonged in the playoffs? But did anyone really think the Saints would roll the Hawks?

Hoosier Red
02-11-2011, 10:57 AM
The Packers weathered a brutal year injury wise.

Rogers missed a game and a half, JerMichael Finley and Ryan Grant were both done for the season before the Reds had clinched the NL Central.
Along with the Colts and the Bengals, I'd think the 16 players the Packers put on IR had to be toward the top of the list.

Then in the Super Bowl Woodson and Shields being out for the 2nd half(Surprisingly then the Steelers found Mike Wallace was indeed alive and well.)

They were lucky that even with all the injuries, they caught enough breaks to make the playoffs, but on the whole the team was far superior to the rest of the conference in talent before the season. Next year they will have a different sort of challenge, but it's hard to see them having a losing season next year.

Razor Shines
02-11-2011, 11:26 AM
The Packers weathered a brutal year injury wise.

Rogers missed a game and a half, JerMichael Finley and Ryan Grant were both done for the season before the Reds had clinched the NL Central.
Along with the Colts and the Bengals, I'd think the 16 players the Packers put on IR had to be toward the top of the list.

Then in the Super Bowl Woodson and Shields being out for the 2nd half(Surprisingly then the Steelers found Mike Wallace was indeed alive and well.)

They were lucky that even with all the injuries, they caught enough breaks to make the playoffs, but on the whole the team was far superior to the rest of the conference in talent before the season. Next year they will have a different sort of challenge, but it's hard to see them having a losing season next year.

I agree. As long as Rogers is healthy I don't see any way they are worse than 10-6 next year.

Oxblood
02-11-2011, 11:29 AM
Oxblood: I'm curious as to what's to hate. No high priced free agents, everything built through the draft, Woodson who donates a zillion dollars a year to charity, Rodgers who handled the Favre circus with total class, Donald Driver because he's Donald Driver. Owned by the community. What's not to like?

Rodgers is about as arrogant as you can be, that will catch up to him fast in the NFL @ the QB position.

Also, kudos to him on blatantly ignoring a cancer survivor who waited for hours at the airport for his autograph. At least Matthews signed something for her.

RedsBaron
02-11-2011, 12:08 PM
Rodgers is about as arrogant as you can be, that will catch up to him fast in the NFL @ the QB position.

Also, kudos to him on blatantly ignoring a cancer survivor who waited for hours at the airport for his autograph. At least Matthews signed something for her.

It took me about five minutes on the internet to determine that your post is baloney. Mike Florio of NBC made the original post of Rodgers allegedly ignoring the cancer survivor but even he has finally apologized for his report.
The cancer survivor is Jan Cavanaugh. There is a video at WISN.com where she defends Rodgers. Rodgers had previously signed items for her, including signing a jersey only one week prior to the incident at issue.
You can also find on the 'net Rodgers helping make a 13 year old (Anna Schmidt) heart transplant survivor's wish come true last September.
I don't know Rodgers, but I see no reason to expect an athlete or other celebrity to sign every last thing shoved their way every single time. If anyone was an arrogant jerk in this matter it was Florio in showing professional incompetence in rushing out with his story without checking on the facts first.
In fairness to Florio I finally found and read his apology, which seemed to be straight forward and honest, so I applaud him for that.

Oxblood
02-11-2011, 12:46 PM
I saw the video, he storms right past her. If he met her previous than it's even worse in the way he blatantly ignores her.

bucksfan2
02-11-2011, 12:50 PM
Rodgers is about as arrogant as you can be, that will catch up to him fast in the NFL @ the QB position.

Also, kudos to him on blatantly ignoring a cancer survivor who waited for hours at the airport for his autograph. At least Matthews signed something for her.

Comments like this add nothing to enhance the discussion.

RedsBaron
02-11-2011, 12:58 PM
I saw the video, he storms right past her. If he met her previous than it's even worse in the way he blatantly ignores her.

I saw it too. He didn't "storm right past her."
Did you bother to watch Jan Cavanaugh's videotape interview? Did you bother to read Mike Florio's apology to Rodgers?
Don't let facts get in the way of your hate for Rodgers. You didn't let facts get in the way of your opinions about how the Packers were just lucky to win the Super Bowl.

RichRed
02-11-2011, 02:33 PM
I think somebody's a Bears fan.

Revering4Blue
02-11-2011, 03:44 PM
I think somebody's a Bears fan.

Or a disgruntled Brett Farve apologist who wanted thePackers to lose to validate the position that GM Ted Thompson was wrong when he let Brett go and handed the keys to Rodgers.

Yes, a small faction of Packer fans actually feel/felt this way, just as some 49er fans wanted Steve Young to fail just to prove Montana should have been QB in 1993.

Just a guess.

Mutaman
02-11-2011, 04:28 PM
Rodgers is about as arrogant as you can be, that will catch up to him fast in the NFL @ the QB position.

Also, kudos to him on blatantly ignoring a cancer survivor who waited for hours at the airport for his autograph. At least Matthews signed something for her.


I'm sorry I asked- how inane. This guy was bragging up the Jets so he has no problem with a team which is rude and crude- Cromarte has 9 kids by 8 women, Ryan is a loudmouth who has his wife do foot fetish ads, Sanchez is bedding 17 year old girls, Edwards- DUI, etc, etc. But let some bs urban myth develop over Rodgers walking through an airport and he goes nuts.

I say hes obviously a disgruntled Viking fan and not worth wasting any more time on. The problem with Viking fans is they can't handle the fact that cheeseheads view the Bears as their #1 rival. The Vikings are a distant second.

Hey Buddy, hows that Favre thing working out?

dabvu2498
02-11-2011, 04:32 PM
I think we've flown way past the intended topics of this thread. You guys please keep it civil or we'll shut it down.

Thanks.

Oxblood
02-11-2011, 04:56 PM
Lol, not a Viking fan at all. Bengals are my squadron but lately I've had more fun rooting against certain teams.

Too bad you got so riled up muttman, take it down a notch.

Mutaman
02-11-2011, 05:42 PM
I think we've flown way past the intended topics of this thread. You guys please keep it civil or we'll shut it down.

Thanks.

OK. Curious though- What are the intended topics of this thread?

RedsBaron
02-11-2011, 06:00 PM
OK. Curious though- What are the intended topics of this thread?

I guess it was who we think will win. I'm picking the Packers, say by about 6 points! ;)

dabvu2498
02-11-2011, 11:31 PM
I guess it was who we think will win. I'm picking the Packers, say by about 6 points! ;)

Man! You are good!



OK. Curious though- What are the intended topics of this thread?

As to this question, I wouldn't want to speak for the person who started this thread, but I'm just fairly certain this thread was about to take a turn for the worse. That's all. :D

Chip R
02-14-2011, 12:20 AM
http://www.onionsportsnetwork.com/articles/super-bowl-security-breached-as-regular-football-f,19062/

Razor Shines
03-02-2011, 01:39 PM
Ben Roethlisberger's 29th birthday is today! Don't worry about getting him anything though, he'd rather take it against your will.

Best line I've heard today. ^