# NFL 2003-04 Playoffs discussion thread



## Krug (Dec 29, 2003)

Games for next week:

AFC:
Tenessee at Baltimore
Denver at Indy

NFC:
Seattle at Green Bay
Dallas at Carolina

My picks:
Tenessee 
Denver (in another running romp)

Green Bay
Dallas


----------



## pogre (Dec 29, 2003)

Like your picks. I have to go with Carolina over Dallas though. I know Dallas won the first meeting, but I think Carolina has improved - Dallas does not look sharp heading into next week. Denver and Greenbay have to love their draws!


----------



## Crothian (Dec 29, 2003)

The Ravens are going to suprise Tenesee.  These teams know each other very well and I expect a very tough, hard heating game.


----------



## Welverin (Dec 29, 2003)

Don't like the home teams much this weekend do you?

Funny note: This is the second year in a row the Eagles have gone into the last weekend of the season needing a win and a loss by someone else to get home field advantage after blowing it a week or two earlier and it's worked out for them.


----------



## d20Dwarf (Dec 30, 2003)

My picks are:

Baltimore, Denver, Green Bay, and Dallas.

Baltimore doesn't need to surprise Tennessee, they've beaten them 5 straight.


----------



## drothgery (Dec 30, 2003)

Krug said:
			
		

> AFC:
> Tenessee at Baltimore



Tennessee. Yes, in the NFL, you must have both an offense and a defense. The Super Bowl-winning Ravens were a fluke.



			
				Krug said:
			
		

> Denver at Indy



Indy. The Colts didn't show up for the first game. That won't happen twice.



			
				Krug said:
			
		

> NFC:
> Seattle at Green Bay



Green Bay. If I weren't a hopeless Packers fan, I'd note that this looks a lot like last year (Packers are a big favorite at home vs. a team they're not all that much better than), but Cheesehead status allows me to ignore this.



			
				Krug said:
			
		

> Dallas at Carolina



Carolina. The Cowboys really aren't good enough to be in the playoffs, previous victory over the Panthers notwithstanding.


----------



## Greyhawk_DM (Jan 2, 2004)

Krug said:
			
		

> _Hi Mods,
> Please close the other thread._
> 
> Games for next week:
> ...




My Picks:
Tennesse
Indy
Green Bay
Dallas


----------



## Crothian (Jan 2, 2004)

drothgery said:
			
		

> Tennessee. Yes, in the NFL, you must have both an offense and a defense. The Super Bowl-winning Ravens were a fluke.




How is having a 2000 yard rusher not having an offense?  Sure their passing game is not that great, but they can run the ball with the best of them.


----------



## drothgery (Jan 2, 2004)

Crothian said:
			
		

> How is having a 2000 yard rusher not having an offense? Sure their passing game is not that great, but they can run the ball with the best of them.



If they had an average passing game, they'd be okay offensively. But they have the #32 pass offense in the NFL, which gives them the worst offense of any playoff team. I don't think you can consistently beat good teams without passing well.


----------



## der_kluge (Jan 2, 2004)

I admit that I don't know much about football, but can someone tell me who the Chief's will be playing next week?  I assume it has to do with who wins this Sunday, but what are the scenarios?


----------



## Crothian (Jan 2, 2004)

Chiefs are the number two seeded team in the AFC playoffs.  they will play the highest seeded team that wins this weekend.  If the Colts win against Denver they will play them.  If Baltimore wins against the Titans and the Colts loose, they will play Baltimore.  If the Titans and Denver both win, the Chiefs play the Titans.


----------



## Seonaid (Jan 2, 2004)

Tennessee (3)
Indy (7)
Green Bay (3)
Carolina (7)


----------



## Dungannon (Jan 3, 2004)

Lessee here.

Tennessee will beat Baltimore.  Two words: Steve McNair.  This guy is uncanny in big games.

Indy beats Denver.  I just don't see Dungy letting his team get embarrassed at home by the same team twice in three weeks.

Carolina over Dallas.  Carolina's defense will stuff Dallas' running game and force Quincy Carter to beat them.  That ain't gonna happen.

Seattle surprises Green Bay.  There are too many subplots in this game to mention, but suffice it to say that Holmgren is too good a coach not to have his team prepared for this rematch.


----------



## d20Dwarf (Jan 3, 2004)

Dungannon said:
			
		

> Lessee here.
> 
> Tennessee will beat Baltimore. Two words: Steve McNair. This guy is uncanny in big games.



Yes, it *is* uncanny how Steve McNair has lost 5 straight games to the Ravens. 



			
				Dungannon said:
			
		

> Carolina over Dallas. Carolina's defense will stuff Dallas' running game and force Quincy Carter to beat them. That ain't gonna happen.



Dallas over Carolina . Dallas's #1 defense will stuff Carolina's running game and force Jake Delwho? to beat them. That ain't gonna happen. 

Something's gotta give, so give it to the 'Boys!


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 3, 2004)

d20Dwarf said:
			
		

> Dallas over Carolina . Dallas's #1 defense will stuff Carolina's running game and force Jake Delwho? to beat them. That ain't gonna happen.




Pretty much the same could be said about Carolina D and the Cowboys offense...  This might be the first game that's won in over time on a safety.  Final score: 0-2


----------



## d20Dwarf (Jan 3, 2004)

Brother Shatterstone said:
			
		

> Pretty much the same could be said about Carolina D and the Cowboys offense... This might be the first game that's won in over time on a safety. Final score: 0-2



See, that was my point, with the word copying and the symmetry..... 

The difference is in red, though.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 3, 2004)

I must be missing it....  Oh wait the yahoo chat button is red is that what you mean?


----------



## Krug (Jan 4, 2004)

Nice work Tennessee, though credit to Baltimore's D (except for Orlando Brown who's a total frigging idiot). 3 Ints including a TD but still can't win it.


----------



## Crothian (Jan 4, 2004)

Carolina kicked some butt.  Hope they beat the Rams next week as well.


----------



## drothgery (Jan 4, 2004)

Krug said:
			
		

> Nice work Tennessee, though credit to Baltimore's D (except for Orlando Brown who's a total frigging idiot). 3 Ints including a TD but still can't win it.



If the Titans had run the ball on third and short a few more times when they were doing a pretty good job running the ball (all three of McNair's INT's were on 3rd and less than 2), then the game would have been a blowout instead of a squeeker. The final score in no way reflects how much Tennessee dominated the game.


----------



## pogre (Jan 4, 2004)

OK, I'm 2 for 2. I will admit I am a bit nervous about my Greenbay pick, but I will stick with them. Denver will win at Indy - I wish I was wrong about that one...


----------



## Krug (Jan 4, 2004)

1 for 2.. lets see how we do tom...


----------



## Silver Moon (Jan 4, 2004)

I'm 2 for 2 so far, and had picked Indy and Green Bay for Today.     I'm glad Carolina won and actually see them continuing all the way to the superbowl, where they will lose to the Patriots in a very close game.


----------



## Krug (Jan 4, 2004)

Boy what a great game... nice job Packers! 2-1 for me now...


----------



## Darrin Drader (Jan 4, 2004)

Damn Seahwaks. Leave it to them to screw it up.


----------



## Jaws (Jan 4, 2004)

*Packers!*

I guess I won't be seeing my Packers - Cowboys matchup for the NFC Championship. Go Pack!


Peace and smiles 

j.


----------



## Krug (Jan 4, 2004)

Boy Colts destroying Denver. Manning 16-18 for 326 yds and 4 TDs in the *FIRST HALF*.


----------



## pogre (Jan 4, 2004)

Krug said:
			
		

> Boy Colts destroying Denver. Manning 16-18 for 326 yds and 4 TDs in the *FIRST HALF*.




How'boutit!?

Never been so glad to be wrong!

Love that Pack game finish too!

Silvermoon 4 for 4 - nice going.


----------



## Silver Moon (Jan 5, 2004)

pogre said:
			
		

> Silvermoon 4 for 4 - nice going.



Hey, the Indy/Denver isn't over yet - Denver still has another 10 minutes to come back from 41 to 3.       I doubt I'll do as well going forward.


----------



## Seonaid (Jan 5, 2004)

Ha ha! Unless Denver does something really spectacular, I'm 4 for 4 (not counting my points, which were really off). Can't wait for the Green Bay - Eagles game!


----------



## drothgery (Jan 5, 2004)

So am I (4 for 4 this weekend, that is). But I didn't expect two blowouts, and another game that would've been a blowout if not for stupid mistakes. I did expect my Packers to have trouble with the 'Hawks; if Seattle had managed to get home field advantage somehow, and I weren't a shameless Packers fan, they'd've been my Super Bowl pick. They're the most complete team in the NFC playoffs.

Next week's picks (home team in *bold*)...

Indy over *KC*

While a blowout win in the wild card round usually is a prelude to doom in the next round, I just can't see how KC stops Peyton Manning.

*New England* over Tennessee

If the Pats didn't have home field and a bye week on their side, this would be a toss-up. As is, I like the Pats here.

Green Bay over *Philly*

Losing Westbrook is probably enough to kill the Eagles against Green Bay. I can't see their defense stopping both Favre and Green, and without Westbrook, McNabb doesn't have enough playmakers to keep up with the Packers offense.

*St. Louis* over Carolina

Easiest pick of the weekend. The Panthers can out field goal the Cowboys, but that's just not going to be enough against the Rams.


----------



## Seonaid (Jan 5, 2004)

My picks (no silly scores this time):

Kansas City
New England
Philly (gotta root for my boys, even if they are hurting--they can still beat Green Bay and Fa-what'shisname?)
St. Louis


----------



## Krug (Jan 5, 2004)

Sames picks as just about everyone it seems:
Kansas City
New England
Philadelphia
St Louis

Maybe we should predict scores or margins..


----------



## d20Dwarf (Jan 5, 2004)

Krug said:
			
		

> Maybe we should predict scores or margins..



Kansas City over Indianapolis, 30-27
New England over Tennessee, 16-13
Green Bay over Philadelphia 24-10
St. Louis over Carolina, 24-20


----------



## Silver Moon (Jan 5, 2004)

Krug said:
			
		

> Sames picks as just about everyone it seems:
> Kansas City
> New England
> Philadelphia
> St Louis



Not everyone.  I agree on your top three, but think that Carolina will beat St. Louis.


----------



## Crothian (Jan 5, 2004)

Colts over KC.  The Chiefs defense will be outmatched.  The Colts defense did a fine job against Dencver, so they can handle KC's offense.

Patriots over Titans.  Titans are playing well and tough, but the Pats defense is always just so tough.  I'll be routing for the Titans though.

Phili over Green Bay.  We all know Phili only looses in the NFC Championship game!!  

Carolina over St Louis.  Rams offense might be explosive, but it's also fragile.  Bulger has not been looking good and will be in trouble against this defense.


----------



## d20Dwarf (Jan 10, 2004)

I'm the only one with the balls to post score predictions?!?!

I've got my buffalo wings and I'm ready for a great weekend of football.


----------



## Silver Moon (Jan 10, 2004)

d20Dwarf said:
			
		

> I'm the only one with the balls to post score predictions?!?!



Not a question of balls (although I do have my football handy, playing catch with my son regularly).  It's just that I don't gamble, so there's no point in my overthinking each game beyond who will win.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 10, 2004)

Okay...  I've been meaning to post this for quite sometime...  I think the chiefs will destroy the colts.  They have been dismissed for about 9 weeks now and I think they are tried of it.  Priest got no love on the voting, not saying he shouldn't have won but finishing 4th when you break the single season rushing touchdown mark and total touchdown mark is just sad and insane.

Anyhow the Chiefs will win by at least 10, and if the don’t you can quote me on it….  (Not that I didn’t think this crowd wouldn’t in the first place.  )


----------



## Krug (Jan 11, 2004)

Carolina kicking some butt!


----------



## Crothian (Jan 11, 2004)

Darn good game though, darn good game.  It does seem that the Rams might be imploding a bit with those two back to back interceptions.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 11, 2004)

How many kicks have the panthers blocked this year????  (Hopeful look)


----------



## Crothian (Jan 11, 2004)

OT....wow....


----------



## Silver Moon (Jan 11, 2004)

Crothian said:
			
		

> OT....wow..



I can't remember when I've ever seen a game like this before!


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 11, 2004)

Silver Moon said:
			
		

> I can't remember when I've ever seen a game like this before!



It Short!!!


----------



## Crothian (Jan 11, 2004)

Win or loose...the Panthers are going to get yelled out for these penalties.


----------



## Silver Moon (Jan 11, 2004)

Crothian said:
			
		

> Win or loose...the Panthers are going to get yelled out for these penalties.



[Overconfidence Mode]It will just make them make fewer in next week's game.[/Overconfidence Mode]


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 11, 2004)

Silver Moon said:
			
		

> [Overconfidence Mode]It will just make them make fewer in next week's game.[/Overconfidence Mode]



hopefully...  Touchdown!


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 11, 2004)

So is there a quarterback controversy in St. Louis next year?


----------



## Silver Moon (Jan 11, 2004)

Brother Shatterstone said:
			
		

> Touchdown!



Methinks the Ram's may be looking for a new coach in the near future.  I would imagine that all of Saint Louis will be blaming this loss on him for letting the clock run down in regulation. 

During the past week several people laughed at me for picking the Panthers to make it to the SuperBowl.   I imagine they may think otherwise on Monday.


----------



## Crothian (Jan 11, 2004)

Okay, if this Titans Patriots game is not as good or better then the Panthers Rams game, I'm going to mad!!


----------



## Silver Moon (Jan 11, 2004)

Crothian said:
			
		

> Okay, if this Titans Patriots game is not as good or better then the Panthers Rams game, I'm going to mad!!



I think you're setting the bar way too high there - we just saw one of the best games in NFL history.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 11, 2004)

Not just this week he's horrible with his time outs and is over all to cocky when it comes to his offense.

Oh and the Panthers could win it all.  There are few if any teams that I don't think have a chance to when it all.


----------



## Crothian (Jan 11, 2004)

Brother Shatterstone said:
			
		

> Oh and the Panthers could win it all.  There are few if any teams that I don't think have a chance to when it all.




And the Bengals have moved out of that category!!


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 11, 2004)

Crothian said:
			
		

> And the Bengals have moved out of that category!!



Except for the Bangles...  In till they do it I will always bet against them.


----------



## Crothian (Jan 11, 2004)

The Panthers have never won it all, either have the Titans/oilers.  Don't pick on the Bengals just cause they haven't won it all yet.


----------



## Krug (Jan 11, 2004)

Boy that CAR-RAMS game was insane and I had to follow it on GAMECAST here! Sheesh.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 11, 2004)

Crothian said:
			
		

> The Panthers have never won it all, either have the Titans/oilers.  Don't pick on the Bengals just cause they haven't won it all yet.



Oh I haven't, I "bet" against them due to their excessive amount of "charm".


----------



## d20Dwarf (Jan 11, 2004)

Crothian said:
			
		

> Okay, if this Titans Patriots game is not as good or better then the Panthers Rams game, I'm going to mad!!



Well, I have to say it was just as good. Although I'm a little depressed that the Titans lost, this was a great frickin' day of football.


----------



## AGGEMAM (Jan 11, 2004)

Anyone wanna discuss the current game (Colts @ Chiefs)?


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 11, 2004)

AGGEMAM said:
			
		

> Anyone wanna discuss the current game (Colts @ Chiefs)?



Sure, let me find that bottle of arsenic I have laying around here first...


----------



## AGGEMAM (Jan 11, 2004)

Brother Shatterstone said:
			
		

> Sure, let me find that bottle of arsenic I have laying around here first...




Not sure what you mean by that .. don't think it's a good game? .. or don't you think that Chiefs can make the come-back?


----------



## d20Dwarf (Jan 11, 2004)

Brother Shatterstone said:
			
		

> Sure, let me find that bottle of arsenic I have laying around here first...



Sorry, I grabbed it for use if Morton drops another pass.


----------



## d20Dwarf (Jan 11, 2004)

YEAH BABY!!!! Hall does it again!!!!


----------



## AGGEMAM (Jan 11, 2004)

Did you even doubt it? Now Chiefs defense only needs to stop Manning once then I think it their game.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 11, 2004)

AGGEMAM said:
			
		

> Did you even doubt it? Now Chiefs defense only needs to stop Manning once then I think it their game.



If theirs any team in the game that can come back and win this it's the Chiefs...  Right now I'm hoping the chiefs’ defense is lulling Manning into a false sense of security.


----------



## AGGEMAM (Jan 11, 2004)

Brother Shatterstone said:
			
		

> Right now I'm hoping the chiefs’ defense is lulling Manning into a false sense of security.




Yeah right    

Really, I think they should send the defensive coordinator home NOW .. and let Remill do the work himself.


----------



## d20Dwarf (Jan 11, 2004)

AGGEMAM said:
			
		

> Did you even doubt it? Now Chiefs defense only needs to stop Manning once then I think it their game.



This may be too much to ask. The middle of the field is wide open on every single play. How many slants and seam routes is it going to take?

Answer: As many as the Colts have drives.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 11, 2004)

I hoped the chiefs would win, obviously, but I don't see anyone beating the patriots.

Defensive Coordinator?  I don't think we have one...  We just have a 1000 slack jaw monkeys trying to write Shakespeare.... err, a defensive plan.


----------



## Krug (Jan 11, 2004)

Man.. what an offensive display.. and a truly offending one from the Kansas D. Ah well Pats-Colts.. should be interesting.


----------



## AGGEMAM (Jan 11, 2004)

Nooo .. we lost ..

Off coursse there's one place to place the blame .. the 'defense' ..


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 11, 2004)

I'm so glad we drafted Larry Johnson in the first round...  We so needed another running back. *sigh*


----------



## d20Dwarf (Jan 11, 2004)

Krug said:
			
		

> Man.. what an offensive display.. and a truly offending one from the Kansas D. Ah well Pats-Colts.. should be interesting.



Actually the Colts defense was no better. That's why I think the Pats are going to the Super Bowl again.


----------



## drothgery (Jan 11, 2004)

Brother Shatterstone said:
			
		

> I hoped the chiefs would win, obviously, but I don't see anyone beating the patriots.



I expect the Pats will win (I'm picking the Colts for pure emotional reasons, named Harrison and Freeney[1]), but it's not a sure thing by any means. The Pats defense is a lot better than the Chiefs, so the Colts probably won't drop 38 points on them. But the Pats offense is nowhere near as good as the Chiefs, so they're not going to score any 31 points on the Colts, either.

[1] My irrational biases are first in favor in the Packers, and secondly in favor of ex-Syracuse guys.


----------



## AGGEMAM (Jan 11, 2004)

In retrospect Chief probably should have gone for onside kicks on _every_ kick-off. With their special teams strength they might have scored one or two TD's more, and with their defensive weakness it wouldn't matter if Colts started on their or Chiefs 30 yard line.

Anyways, it time to swallow the defeat (and the loss of money) and move on to the next game. Go Philly.


----------



## d20Dwarf (Jan 11, 2004)

drothgery said:
			
		

> The Pats defense is a lot better than the Chiefs, so the Colts probably won't drop 38 points on them. But the Pats offense is nowhere near as good as the Chiefs, so they're not going to score any 31 points on the Colts, either.



Actually 38 is exactly what the Pats scored on the Colts a few weeks ago.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 11, 2004)

d20Dwarf said:
			
		

> Actually the Colts defense was no better. That's why I think the Pats are going to the Super Bowl again.



Yup, last time they where the underdog...  Now I think will be favored by almost as much as St. Louis was.

I'm official a packers fan for the rest of the season. Go Brett, win one for your dad.


----------



## d20Dwarf (Jan 11, 2004)

Brother Shatterstone said:
			
		

> Yup, last time they where the underdog... Now I think will be favored by almost as much as St. Louis was.
> 
> I'm official a packers fan for the rest of the season. Go Brett, win one for your dad.



Yep, go Packers. Shut off all the talk about Donovan McCrapp. My friend just called to say that Westwood One just picked Mcnabb as its player that exemplifies how to be great off the field as much as on the field. 

McNabb's going to have to pack some pounds onto his ass to accomodate all the lips and tongues on it all year. God I hope people get their senses back sometime soon, and he's relegated to where he deserves to be...in the Randall Cunningham pit of never-beens.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 11, 2004)

d20Dwarf said:
			
		

> God I hope people get their senses back sometime soon, and he's relegated to where he deserves to be...in the Randall Cunningham pit of never-beens.



Well I don't agree with all that, I think he's a decent quarterback and he does change the way the game is played.

As for Randall Cunningham, if I was given a choice to start any quarterback and they are in their prime from the last 20 years...  Randall Cunningham would be in my top 5.

Marino
Elway
Young
Cunningham
Montana


----------



## d20Dwarf (Jan 11, 2004)

Brother Shatterstone said:
			
		

> Well I don't agree with all that, I think he's a decent quarterback and he does change the way the game is played.
> 
> As for Randall Cunningham, if I was given a choice to start any quarterback and they are in their prime from the last 20 years... Randall Cunningham would be in my top 5.
> 
> ...



See, you're just clearly a rabid Cunningham fan.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 11, 2004)

d20Dwarf said:
			
		

> See, you're just clearly a rabid Cunningham fan.



Actually I would take Dan Marino of the set of "NFL Today" and would have started him versus the colts today...  Now that’s rabid!


----------



## d20Dwarf (Jan 12, 2004)

Even wonder what it's like to have Chris Collinsworth's lips on your ass?

Just ask McNabb.

One of Collinsworth's gems from today:

"You could watch years of football and never see a greater play from a quarterback!"

My reply: Ummm, yeah, he avoided a sack...that never happens! Good job!


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 12, 2004)

d20Dwarf said:
			
		

> My reply: Ummm, yeah, he avoided a sack...that never happens! Good job!



It was a very nice play.    but to be honest I've seen better from Cunningham.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 12, 2004)

d20Dwarf said:
			
		

> One of Collinsworth's gems from today:



His best one BY far just happened with his clock management speak.


----------



## d20Dwarf (Jan 12, 2004)

Brother Shatterstone said:
			
		

> His best one BY far just happened with his clock management speak.



It reminds me of the "Leon" commercials. If McNabb throws a pick to lose the game, Collinsworth will say "Damn, one of the other guys really should have made a tackle or caught the ball."



P.S. I'd love to see the Eagles actually handle a team, then I might have 0.1% respect for them.


----------



## Krug (Jan 12, 2004)

Go Packers! Put on the Pain!


----------



## d20Dwarf (Jan 12, 2004)

Just like Week 17, the Eagles have it handed to them.

Shmerte.



My teams went 0-4 this weekend, but it was still some great football (except this game).


----------



## d20Dwarf (Jan 12, 2004)

Let the ass-kissing begin.

I believe Collinsworth's next statement will be:

"McNabb's such a great player, I truly believe he's like an angel that came down and forced Favre to throw that interception. Even from the sideline, his incorporeal hands and feet won this game. Without Mcnabb, Akers would never have made that field goal."


----------



## Krug (Jan 12, 2004)

Ah the irony. Win by an int one weekend.. lose by one the next.


----------



## Krug (Jan 12, 2004)

Anyway, I'm 4-4. 

Ok next week:
New England 20 Indy 13
Carolina 24 Philly 14 (Yes, my upset pick!)

With the SB:
New England 17 Carolina 14


----------



## d20Dwarf (Jan 12, 2004)

Krug said:
			
		

> Anyway, I'm 4-4.
> 
> Ok next week:
> New England 20 Indy 13
> ...



New England 31, Indianapolis 27
Carolina 17, Philadelphia 13

Although, as bad as I am I should probably pick Philly to insure they lose. Please God let them lose.


----------



## drothgery (Jan 12, 2004)

d20Dwarf said:
			
		

> Even wonder what it's like to have Chris Collinsworth's lips on your ass?
> 
> Just ask McNabb.
> 
> ...



It's kind of counter-intuitive, but good running quarterbacks often take a lot of sacks, mostly because they won't throw the ball away as quickly as a guy who doesn't think they can run with it.


----------



## d20Dwarf (Jan 12, 2004)

drothgery said:
			
		

> It's kind of counter-intuitive, but good running quarterbacks often take a lot of sacks, mostly because they won't throw the ball away as quickly as a guy who doesn't think they can run with it.



Yeah, I know, which sorta makes you question the effectiveness of having a running quarterback, doesn't it? Sure he can get you a first down now and then, but he's going to kill a lot of drives too.

Ah well, the Eagles certainly aren't the first team to be successful with a sub-par quarterback.


----------



## Silver Moon (Jan 12, 2004)

Well, I'm 3 for 4 for the weekend, 7 for 8 for the playoffs (Indy messed me up).  Still on track with my original SuperBowl prediction, as long as both New England and Carolina win next weekend.


----------



## Krug (Jan 15, 2004)

El bumperello.

KC really should have let their defensive coordinator go last season...


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 15, 2004)

Krug said:
			
		

> El bumperello.
> 
> KC really should have let their defensive coordinator go last season...



Vermeil is loyal to a fault that’s one of the reason why he is so loved…  He still didn’t want to can him this time, but he resigned on his own accord.

Are biggest mistake was drafting a bench warmer in the first round.


----------



## Crothian (Jan 15, 2004)

Well, The Steelers have yet another Offense Cordinator go.  Hopefully, they'll replace him with someone who can get the offense moving.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 15, 2004)

How many is that now and in how many years?


----------



## Crothian (Jan 15, 2004)

Not counting whoever the new one is that's like 5 in 6 years.  Steelers have the indivdual talent but they just aren't playing as a team.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 15, 2004)

Ouch I would hardly consider 20 games (16 regular 4 preseason games) as defining rather or not an offense works...  I suggest keeping the next one for 2 years and then deciding rather or not it works.


----------



## Crothian (Jan 15, 2004)

Well, the Next time I talk to Mr Rooney (the owner) I'll be sure to mention that. It's odd, we've have two head coaches in 24 years, yet the asisstants we go through fast.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 16, 2004)

I new cower had been the head coach for like a decade but I really had no idea that your offensive coordinator was based upon musically chairs.


----------



## Welverin (Jan 17, 2004)

Crothian said:
			
		

> Well, the Next time I talk to Mr Rooney (the owner) I'll be sure to mention that. It's odd, we've have two head coaches in 24 years, yet the asisstants we go through fast.




Well they've been pretty succesful over Cowher's tenure, so that will cause interest in other teams to hire them and when there's a proble with the team the Rooneys won't just fire Cowher, but someone has to go so good bye coordinator.


----------



## LiVeWiRe (Jan 18, 2004)

d20Dwarf said:
			
		

> Even wonder what it's like to have Chris Collinsworth's lips on your ass?
> 
> Just ask McNabb.
> 
> ...




Has Collinsworth *ever* seen Vick play?!  Seems like Vick does things like that every game...

LW


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 18, 2004)

LiVeWiRe said:
			
		

> Has Collingsworth *ever* seen Vick play?!  Seems like Vick does things like that every game...



I saw Vick break his leg trying to avoid a sack this year...  Of course I saw Thiesman try and do the same thing too.


----------



## LiVeWiRe (Jan 18, 2004)

Brother Shatterstone said:
			
		

> I saw Vick break his leg trying to avoid a sack this year...  Of course I saw Thiesman try and do the same thing too.




That sucked!  I would say that Vick is the best running/scrambling QB in the league...regardless of what Collingsworth says!


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 18, 2004)

LiVeWiRe said:
			
		

> That sucked!  I would say that Vick is the best running/scrambling QB in the league...regardless of what Collingsworth says!



Oh and he has the most potential also, but I just don’t see him playing that long as all it’s going to take is one missed block, one miss cut, or one guy down field he failed to account for and it’s “game over.”  

Believe it or not the safest place on the field for the quarterback is in the pocket.  Marino was never a speed demon but by using the pocket and shuffling around with in it he was able to light up defenses for far longer than any scramble first quarterback has ever done before. 

Anyhow I'll support the Eagles and Seonaid today.   Oh and the Patriots.


----------



## LiVeWiRe (Jan 18, 2004)

Brother Shatterstone said:
			
		

> Oh and he has the most potential also, but I just don’t see him playing that long as all it’s going to take is one missed block, one miss cut, or one guy down field he failed to account for and it’s “game over.”
> 
> Believe it or not the safest place on the field for the quarterback is in the pocket.  Marino was never a speed demon but by using the pocket and shuffling around with in it he was able to light up defenses for far longer than any scramble first quarterback has ever done before.
> 
> Anyhow I'll support the Eagles and Seonaid today.   Oh and the Patriots.




Well, I'm a Fins fan who just moved to Tampa but lived in Charlotte, NC for my entire life before recently moving...

So, I've got to pull for the Panthers and I'll go with the 'lesser of 2 evils' and back the Colts.   Regardless of the outcomes though, both should be good games!  Can't wait!!  

LW


----------



## AGGEMAM (Jan 18, 2004)

LiVeWiRe said:
			
		

> So, I've got to pull for the Panthers and I'll go with the 'lesser of 2 evils' and back the Colts.   Regardless of the outcomes though, both should be good games!  Can't wait!!




And that would also make a killer superbowl.

Colts and Panthers are my picks too. (I should note that last weekend I was 1 of 4, but .. ah well)


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 18, 2004)

Well Manning is looking more like Clark Kent this week instead of superman...    

I’m not seeing in Kryptonite green in the patriots uniform but it’s there.


----------



## Crothian (Jan 18, 2004)

The Pats defense has been kryptonite to many a NFL teram this year


----------



## AGGEMAM (Jan 18, 2004)

Let's see if 3's a charm for Manning.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 18, 2004)

Well see what happens when you don't practice your punting...?   The Chief’s/Broncos' defense were good for something after all.


----------



## Crothian (Jan 18, 2004)

eh...they just don't want to punt.


----------



## AGGEMAM (Jan 18, 2004)

Nothing is going Colts way this half .. phew .. I hope for comeback next half but I'm loosing hope fast here.


----------



## Mark (Jan 18, 2004)

It appears that as I have often heard, when the best of the best meet head to head, either injuries or turnovers (or a combination of both) decides who comes out on top.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 18, 2004)

Crothian said:
			
		

> eh...they just don't want to punt.



*LMAO* true enough.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 18, 2004)

Take a picture boys and girls!  They just punted!


----------



## Silver Moon (Jan 18, 2004)

This is what being a Patriots fan has been like this year.   Despite the fact that they've won a record number of consecutive games, most have been nail biters like this, where the opponent could have won in the final two minutes.


----------



## AGGEMAM (Jan 18, 2004)

Referee mistakes decided this game, not the players.


----------



## Silver Moon (Jan 18, 2004)

AGGEMAM said:
			
		

> Referee mistakes decided this game, not the players.



Really?  So it was the referees who made those three interceptions?    They've showed Brady's fall from four different angles, his knee was clearly down before he lost the ball


----------



## AGGEMAM (Jan 18, 2004)

Silver Moon said:
			
		

> Really?  So it was the referees who made those three interceptions?    They've showed Brady's fall from four different angles, his knee was clearly down before he lost the ball




I meant the obvious two holdings on Colts second last drive, both on Pollard.

Brady was clearly down on that run. But that run should never have been if the either of the holdings was called. I've seen them a few times now (I have TiVo) and it's still a mystery how they missed them.


----------



## Krug (Jan 18, 2004)

Pats defense owned this one. Good job! Pats O really need to execute better in the red zone.


----------



## Silver Moon (Jan 18, 2004)

AGGEMAM said:
			
		

> I meant the obvious two holdings on Colts second last drive, both on Pollard....I've seen them a few times now (I have TiVo) and it's still a mystery how they missed them.



I don't have TiVo, so I'll conceed your point, but that still doesn't mean they would have gotten the TD.  Clearly those plays should have been reviewed.  Why is it that a coach can't call for a review in the final two minutes as long as they still have a timeout to forfeit if they lose? 

Regardless, the Pats really were dominant throughout this game, especially the first half.  The best team won, despite any calls or not from the ref's.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 18, 2004)

Silver Moon said:
			
		

> Despite the fact that they've won a record number of consecutive games, most have been nail biters like this, where the opponent could have won in the final two minutes.



You going to have to explain this record number of wins...  Team record?



			
				AGGEMAM said:
			
		

> I meant the obvious two holdings on Colts second last drive, both on Pollard.



I didn't see anything other than a good non-call; you have to make plays not beg the officials to give you one more chance.  I thought the officiating was very good in the game some of the best I’ve seen all year.


----------



## AGGEMAM (Jan 18, 2004)

In a few hours I'll agree with you that Patriots was the better team, especially in the first half.

And yes, it's by no means certain they would gotten a TD on the drive regardless of whether they would have been called or not.

I think I'm just disappointed by Colts, and especially Mannings, play today, much like when Atlanta Falcons surprisingly went to the Superbowl, and then played their worst game of the season. That was Colts today, their worst performance of the season.

But in real football (soccer) we have a saying that goes something like this: "You're only as good as the opponent allows you to be". So in that light it was a deserved win for the Patriots.


----------



## AGGEMAM (Jan 18, 2004)

Brother Shatterstone said:
			
		

> You going to have to explain this record number of wins...  Team record?




Team record and tied for NFL record, if Patriots win the Superbowl it will be NFL record in number of straight wins, IIRC.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 18, 2004)

AGGEMAM said:
			
		

> Team record and tied for NFL record, if Patriots win the Superbowl it will be NFL record in number of straight wins, IIRC.



Not possible, the 1972 dolphins where 17-0 and even won a few the next year but I've been able to find their record for the next year (week by week)


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 18, 2004)

Brother Shatterstone said:
			
		

> Not possible, the 1972 dolphins where 17-0 and even won a few the next year but I've been able to find their record for the next year (week by week)



Appears to have been 18 straight and that they lost in week two of the 1973 season.


----------



## AGGEMAM (Jan 18, 2004)

Brother Shatterstone said:
			
		

> Appears to have been 18 straight and that they lost in week two of the 1973 season.




Yuo're right. And the last game of the 1971 season was the superbowl in which they lost.

Must be team record then.

Interestingly, the play-off game that year 1971 against Kansas City Chief was another one of those much talked about double overtime games.


----------



## Silver Moon (Jan 19, 2004)

AGGEMAM said:
			
		

> And yes, it's by no means certain they would gotten a TD on the drive regardless of whether they would have been called or not.



Sorry, I'm a bit oversensitive to hearing "The ref's decided the game"   I've been hearing my in-laws use that mantra for the past 18 years about the 1986 Superbowl, where the Bears beat the Pats 46 to 10.   To this day they still insist that the Pats won that game and it was only bad ref calls that resulted in the artificial score.  What bunk!  The Bears destroyed them.


----------



## AGGEMAM (Jan 19, 2004)

46 to 10?! That's a pretty decisive win in my book. I mean it's 5 TD and a 2-point conversion to a tie.

I can't really say that I've ever heard nor seen the game, but it sounds like a thumbing with or without bad ref decisions.


----------



## Brother Shatterstone (Jan 19, 2004)

AGGEMAM said:
			
		

> 46 to 10?! That's a pretty decisive win in my book. I mean it's 5 TD and a 2-point conversion to a tie.




Yeah that about sums that game up...  At once point in the third quarter the whole bears team left the field to record the infamous "Superbowl Shuffle"


----------



## d20Dwarf (Jan 19, 2004)

Awesome! So I'm 2-2 this week, possibly my best pick record ever.


----------



## BigFreekinGoblinoid (Jan 19, 2004)

dAMN eAGLES!


----------



## Crothian (Jan 19, 2004)

Well, not that great of game, I got one of the games right (Ya Panthers).  I'm picking the Panthers to win it all.  But I imagine the game might be as exciting as the Ravens Giants Super Bowl.


----------



## LiVeWiRe (Jan 19, 2004)

I can't believe the Panthers are going to the big dance!   

The team that was 1-15 two seasons ago is now playing for the Lombardi trophy? WOW!!

Having lived in Charlotte until December 2003, I'm glad to see the success for this team and the players.  Although I do like McNabb and would have liked to see him playing for a ring as well....too bad someone has to lose.  

The Eagles *have* to get some receivers...that's all I have to say about it.

Panthers-Patriots should be a great game! 

LW


----------



## Silver Moon (Jan 19, 2004)

Silver Moon said:
			
		

> I'm glad Carolina won and actually see them continuing all the way to the superbowl, where they will lose to the Patriots in a very close game.



The above quote is from my post way back on page 1 of this thread.  So far I'm 9 for 10 on this playoff series!   I wish I could predict as well with the NCAA Basketball Championship!


----------



## Krug (Jan 19, 2004)

Well I'm 6-4. Philly didn't look impressive last week and they didn't this week either.

Should be a good Super Bowl. Pats really should learn to put it away though.


----------

