The Conservative Cave
The Bar => Sports => Topic started by: john c calhoun on April 15, 2008, 02:58:24 PM
-
http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d807c555e&template=without-video&confirm=true
2008 NFL schedules are out baby !!...
and the Pats get HOSED once again by the kings team...tEh indianpolis colts, who for some reason get to play the Pats at home AGAIN ....the Pats /Colts used to alternate home field advantage year after year , but no more...
and of course, the Colts get to play the BEARS in Indy as well....
again, why even have a superbowl every year?? .....why doesn't the NFL just give their team, the COLTS, the lombardi trophy at the end of every season ... :whatever: .... :-)
but, this year does look to be different, cause I see that the Titans & Jags actually get the same amount of rest as do the colts before each of their games this year.... ......this is THE YEAR the colts don't take the AFC South...
I also see that the pats have to fly out to make 2 west coast trips in a row ....the 2nd one is against the chargers ...that could be a charger win this time around !! :banghead:
the season begins in august baby !:cheersmate:
-
You know the reason why the Colts are playing the Pats at home and it has nothing at all to do with any bias on the NFL's part.
-
It's amazing that the Patriots continue to win SUper Bowls or go undefeated in the regular season despite the fact that the league is soooo against them. It must just be the genius of Bill Beeeelichik.
-
It's amazing that the Patriots continue to win SUper Bowls or go undefeated in the regular season despite the fact that the league is soooo against them. It must just be the genius of Bill Beeeelichik.
Yeah, how does that happen? ::)
Debating football with JCC kind of makes you feel like this guy: :banghead:
-
It's amazing that the Patriots continue to win SUper Bowls or go undefeated in the regular season despite the fact that the league is soooo against them. It must just be the genius of Bill Beeeelichik.
Yeah, how does that happen? ::)
Debating football with JCC kind of makes you feel like this guy: :banghead:
specially when JCC's team whoops the shiite out of dallas IN THEIR HOUSE :lmao:
so tell us why the Colts get to play the Pats at home AGAIN ...if its not the NFLs BIAS ??
-
It's amazing that the Patriots continue to win SUper Bowls or go undefeated in the regular season despite the fact that the league is soooo against them. It must just be the genius of Bill Beeeelichik.
Yeah, how does that happen? ::)
Debating football with JCC kind of makes you feel like this guy: :banghead:
specially when JCC's team whoops the shiite out of dallas IN THEIR HOUSE :lmao:
so tell us why the Colts get to play the Pats at home AGAIN ...if its not the NFLs BIAS ??
Hell, the Falcoons QB is in prison. Framed by the man AKA Roger Goodell. The league was paranoid that Vick would outshine teh Colts and win Super Bowls on his back.
-
The Cowboys' Schedule:
Sun, Sep 7 @ Cleveland (FOX) 3:15 PM
Mon, Sep 15 PHILADELPHIA (ESPN) 7:30 PM
Sun, Sep 21 @ Green Bay (NBC) 7:15 PM
Sun, Sep 28 WASHINGTON (FOX) 3:15 PM
Sun, Oct 5 CINCINNATI (CBS) 3:15 PM
Sun, Oct 12 @ Arizona (FOX) 3:15 PM
Sun, Oct 19 @ St. Louis (FOX) NOON
Sun, Oct 26 TAMPA BAY (FOX) NOON
Sun, Nov 2 @ New York Giants (FOX) 3:15 PM
Sun, Nov 9 BYE
Sun, Nov 16 @ Washington (NBC) 7:15 PM
Sun, Nov 23 SAN FRANCISCO (FOX) NOON
Thurs, Nov 27 SEATTLE (FOX) 3:15 PM
Sun, Dec 7 @ Pittsburgh (FOX) 3:15 PM
Sun, Dec 14 NEW YORK GIANTS (NBC) 7:15 PM
Sat, Dec 20 BALTIMORE (NFLN) 7:15 PM
Sun, Dec 28 @ Philadelphia (FOX)
It looks okay. I think we've got definite wins against Cleveland, Arizona, St. Louis, San Francisco, and Baltimore. That's five right there. I think we'll sweep Washington and split with the Giants and the Evils. That's nine. Give me probable wins against Cincy, Seattle, and Pittsburgh. To me, it looks to be at least a 12-4 campaign. Too bad we can't play the AFC East again.
-
It's amazing that the Patriots continue to win SUper Bowls or go undefeated in the regular season despite the fact that the league is soooo against them. It must just be the genius of Bill Beeeelichik.
Yeah, how does that happen? ::)
Debating football with JCC kind of makes you feel like this guy: :banghead:
specially when JCC's team whoops the shiite out of dallas IN THEIR HOUSE :lmao:
so tell us why the Colts get to play the Pats at home AGAIN ...if its not the NFLs BIAS ??
Hell, the Falcoons QB is in prison. Framed by the man AKA Roger Goodell. The league was paranoid that Vick would outshine teh Colts and win Super Bowls on his back.
I believe it...
pacman jones too... the damn league made a clone of him , with one mission & one mission only......infiltrate TITTY BARS & conquer !!! :lmao:
-
The Cowboys' Schedule:
Sun, Sep 7 @ Cleveland (FOX) 3:15 PM
Mon, Sep 15 PHILADELPHIA (ESPN) 7:30 PM
Sun, Sep 21 @ Green Bay (NBC) 7:15 PM
Sun, Sep 28 WASHINGTON (FOX) 3:15 PM
Sun, Oct 5 CINCINNATI (CBS) 3:15 PM
Sun, Oct 12 @ Arizona (FOX) 3:15 PM
Sun, Oct 19 @ St. Louis (FOX) NOON
Sun, Oct 26 TAMPA BAY (FOX) NOON
Sun, Nov 2 @ New York Giants (FOX) 3:15 PM
Sun, Nov 9 BYE
Sun, Nov 16 @ Washington (NBC) 7:15 PM
Sun, Nov 23 SAN FRANCISCO (FOX) NOON
Thurs, Nov 27 SEATTLE (FOX) 3:15 PM
Sun, Dec 7 @ Pittsburgh (FOX) 3:15 PM
Sun, Dec 14 NEW YORK GIANTS (NBC) 7:15 PM
Sat, Dec 20 BALTIMORE (NFLN) 7:15 PM
Sun, Dec 28 @ Philadelphia (FOX)
It looks okay. I think we've got definite wins against Cleveland, Arizona, St. Louis, San Francisco, and Baltimore. That's five right there. I think we'll sweep Washington and split with the Giants and the Evils. That's nine. Give me probable wins against Cincy, Seattle, and Pittsburgh. To me, it looks to be at least a 12-4 campaign. Too bad we can't play the AFC East again.
you'll lose to seattle & the Brownies I will prolly be betting on too ... and I think the Cards will light you up in AZ...
dallas has a pretty hard schedule this year...
whoops, you're playing seattle at home...sorry, I forgot this is americans team & only the PATS have to go out & play seattle in their house :p
-
http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d807c555e&template=without-video&confirm=true
2008 NFL schedules are out baby !!...
and the Pats get HOSED once again by the kings team...tEh indianpolis colts, who for some reason get to play the Pats at home AGAIN ....the Pats /Colts used to alternate home field advantage year after year , but no more... and of course, the Colts get to play the BEARS in Indy as well....
Well the Pats game is scheduled for November 2. I don't think most fans wanna' see a game in the snow, just my opinion. And you know the NFL brass likes a clean field and the look of turf in HD. And if you don't have it, get the NFL Network, it's worth it.
No conspiracy JCC. BTW, welcome to the CC!
-
http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d807c555e&template=without-video&confirm=true
2008 NFL schedules are out baby !!...
and the Pats get HOSED once again by the kings team...tEh indianpolis colts, who for some reason get to play the Pats at home AGAIN ....the Pats /Colts used to alternate home field advantage year after year , but no more... and of course, the Colts get to play the BEARS in Indy as well....
Well the Pats game is scheduled for November 2. I don't think most fans wanna' see a game in the snow, just my opinion. And you know the NFL brass likes a clean field and the look of turf in HD. And if you don't have it, get the NFL Network, it's worth it.
No conspiracy JCC. BTW, welcome to the CC!
er, what you just described IS A CONSPIRACY :thatsright: ....thank you for telling us why the NFL is playing favorites to the colts, instead of doing what is RIGHT...
and yeah, football fans LOVE TO WATCH GAMES IN THE SNOW !!!!
and can you tell us the last time tEh colts played in the SNOW ?? (funny how they play all northern opponents w/out domes early in the season)
thanks for the welcome man !! :cheersmate:
-
It's amazing that the Patriots continue to win SUper Bowls or go undefeated in the regular season despite the fact that the league is soooo against them. It must just be the genius of Bill Beeeelichik.
Yeah, how does that happen? ::)
Debating football with JCC kind of makes you feel like this guy: :banghead:
specially when JCC's team whoops the shiite out of dallas IN THEIR HOUSE :lmao:
so tell us why the Colts get to play the Pats at home AGAIN ...if its not the NFLs BIAS ??
Hell, the Falcoons QB is in prison. Framed by the man AKA Roger Goodell. The league was paranoid that Vick would outshine teh Colts and win Super Bowls on his back.
I believe it...
pacman jones too... the damn league made a clone of him , with one mission & one mission only......infiltrate TITTY BARS & conquer !!! :lmao:
And Eli is not really Peytons little brother. The league secretly cloned Peyton and altered the DNA just enough to keep them from being identical. The more Peytons the better. Plus it distracts the casual fan from noticing how they cheat to keep Peyton in the Super Bowl. Now they can put the other Peyton in there and people won't know it was Peyton. But the more enlightened fans like us :tinfoil2: see through it.
-
It's amazing that the Patriots continue to win SUper Bowls or go undefeated in the regular season despite the fact that the league is soooo against them. It must just be the genius of Bill Beeeelichik.
Yeah, how does that happen? ::)
Debating football with JCC kind of makes you feel like this guy: :banghead:
specially when JCC's team whoops the shiite out of dallas IN THEIR HOUSE :lmao:
so tell us why the Colts get to play the Pats at home AGAIN ...if its not the NFLs BIAS ??
Hell, the Falcoons QB is in prison. Framed by the man AKA Roger Goodell. The league was paranoid that Vick would outshine teh Colts and win Super Bowls on his back.
I believe it...
pacman jones too... the damn league made a clone of him , with one mission & one mission only......infiltrate TITTY BARS & conquer !!! :lmao:
And Eli is not really Peytons little brother. The league secretly cloned Peyton and altered the DNA just enough to keep them from being identical. The more Peytons the better. Plus it distracts the casual fan from noticing how they cheat to keep Peyton in the Super Bowl. Now they can put the other Peyton in there and people won't know it was Peyton. But the more fans like us :tinfoil2: see through it.enlightened
you're illuminati too ?? :cheersmate:
-
It's amazing that the Patriots continue to win SUper Bowls or go undefeated in the regular season despite the fact that the league is soooo against them. It must just be the genius of Bill Beeeelichik.
Yeah, how does that happen? ::)
Debating football with JCC kind of makes you feel like this guy: :banghead:
specially when JCC's team whoops the shiite out of dallas IN THEIR HOUSE :lmao:
so tell us why the Colts get to play the Pats at home AGAIN ...if its not the NFLs BIAS ??
Hell, the Falcoons QB is in prison. Framed by the man AKA Roger Goodell. The league was paranoid that Vick would outshine teh Colts and win Super Bowls on his back.
:rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf:
-
and yeah, football fans LOVE TO WATCH GAMES IN THE SNOW !!!!
We are a dying breed. Snow, defense, 17-10 final score, these things are considered relics nowadays. People want to see high scoring offense and no defense. Like the Pats and Cowboys last year, that was considered a good game. I don't consider high scoring games "good". I consider them lack of defense, which ultimately will bite you in the ass in the playoffs.
-
People want to see high scoring offense and no defense.
Huh? I want to see a skirt get his teeth knocked down his throat for having the balls to come across the middle zone of the second level.
-
It's amazing that the Patriots continue to win SUper Bowls or go undefeated in the regular season despite the fact that the league is soooo against them. It must just be the genius of Bill Beeeelichik.
Yeah, how does that happen? ::)
Debating football with JCC kind of makes you feel like this guy: :banghead:
specially when JCC's team whoops the shiite out of dallas IN THEIR HOUSE :lmao:
so tell us why the Colts get to play the Pats at home AGAIN ...if its not the NFLs BIAS ??
Okay, that was weird. I had put up a post that basically refuted your contention that the Colts and Pats always play in Indy (I don't know what happened to it). Actually, since the 2002 realignment (when the current scheduling formula went into force), the teams have played five times during the regular season, three in Foxboro, two in Indy. And they haven't even played enough consecutive times in Indy to make it "seem like they never play in Foxboro". Before last season, the Pats hosted three consecutive years.
ETA: Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colts-Patriots_rivalry
-
People want to see high scoring offense and no defense.
Huh? I want to see a skirt get his teeth knocked down his throat for having the balls to come across the middle zone of the second level.
Who gets all the hype on the sports shows, which have become nothing more than Entertainment Tonight featuring athletes, the grind it out old school knock the shit out of you NFL game or the high octane 900 yards of total offense Arena League type game. We are a dying breed, nobody appreciates defense anymore. No one talks about the Ravens Super Bowl run as a great team. Why, because they had no offense. That team would have beaten at least 3/4 of the other Super Bowl teams. Especially this years. All they had to score was 14.
-
People want to see high scoring offense and no defense.
Huh? I want to see a skirt get his teeth knocked down his throat for having the balls to come across the middle zone of the second level.
Who gets all the hype on the sports shows, which have become nothing more than Entertainment Tonight featuring athletes, the grind it out old school knock the shit out of you NFL game or the high octane 900 yards of total offense Arena League type game. We are a dying breed, nobody appreciates defense anymore. No one talks about the Ravens Super Bowl run as a great team. Why, because they had no offense. That team would have beaten at least 3/4 of the other Super Bowl teams. Especially this years. All they had to score was 14.
That's because most of the sportscasters are pussies. They love the "finesse" of the game because they have never felt that feeling when you lower an "ambulance" on somebody.
-
Well my second favorite team looks like they will be blasted off the map. Hope Marvin Lewis don't let the door hit him on the a$$ on his way out of town, lol.
Cincinnati Bengals
Sept. 7 at Baltimore, 1 p.m.
Sept. 14 Tennessee, 1 p.m.
Sept. 21 at N.Y. Giants, 1 p.m.
Sept. 28 Cleveland, 1 p.m.
Oct. 5 at Dallas, 4:15 p.m.
Oct. 12 at N.Y. Jets, 1 p.m.
Oct. 19 Pittsburgh, 1 p.m.
Oct. 26 BYE
Nov. 2 Jacksonville, 1 p.m.
Nov. 9 at Houston, 1 p.m.
Nov. 16 Philadelphia, 1 p.m.
Nov. 20 at Pittsburgh, 8:15 p.m.
Nov. 30 Baltimore, 1 p.m.
Dec. 7 at Indianapolis, 1 p.m.
Dec. 14 Washington, 1 p.m.
Dec. 21 at Cleveland, 1 p.m.
Dec. 28 Kansas City, 1 p.m.
That looks like 4 or 5 wins tops IMHO. :bawl:
But my Seahawks should be OK. Playoff bound anywho...
Seattle Seahawks
1 Sept. 7 at Buffalo Bills (That's a win. To bad it's not in Toronto where many Hawk fans reside)
2 Sept. 14 San Francisco 49ers (9ers still suck)
3 Sept. 21 St. Louis Rams (Rams still suck)
4 Sept. 28 Bye (too early) :thatsright:
5 Oct. 5 at New York Giants (Tough one in NY. Glad the bye at least came right before the Champs)
6 Oct. 12 Green Bay Packers (About time we got those bastards at Quest, lol)
7 Oct. 19 at Tampa Bay Buccaneers (We suck going East but at least it's not a 10AM kickoff)
8 Oct. 26 at San Francisco 49ers (9ers still suck)
9 Nov. 2 Philadelphia Eagles (We owned the Iggles twice in Philly, we'll own em in Seattle for sure)
10 Nov. 9 at Miami Dolphins (teh suck)
11 Nov. 16 Arizona Cardinals (Might be putting something together. Might not.)
12 Nov. 23 Washington Redskins (How tired are the Skins of Quest field, LOL. This game makes it 4 of the last 5 meetings.) :lmao:
13 Nov. 27 (Thurs.) at Dallas Cowboys (Sweet! Great matchup and on Turkey day to boot!!!)
14 Dec. 7 New England Patriots* (Our record at Quest speaks for itself. Brady meets the 12th man)
15 Dec. 14 at St. Louis Rams (Rams suck)
16 Dec. 21 New York Jets (Jets suck)
17 Dec. 28 at Arizona Cardinals (dunno. Hope this game does not matter, lol)
Hmmm. I'll give us a good shot at 11-5.
Go Seahawks!!!
-
FWIW- all my predictions are pre-draft, pre-pre-season here. My "official" predictions come out near the end of August following game three of the pre-season. (just sayin')
btw, draft countdown...
10 DAYS 22 HRS 39 MIN 11 SEC :cheersmate:
-
It's amazing that the Patriots continue to win SUper Bowls or go undefeated in the regular season despite the fact that the league is soooo against them. It must just be the genius of Bill Beeeelichik.
Yeah, how does that happen? ::)
Debating football with JCC kind of makes you feel like this guy: :banghead:
specially when JCC's team whoops the shiite out of dallas IN THEIR HOUSE :lmao:
so tell us why the Colts get to play the Pats at home AGAIN ...if its not the NFLs BIAS ??
Okay, that was weird. I had put up a post that basically refuted your contention that the Colts and Pats always play in Indy (I don't know what happened to it). Actually, since the 2002 realignment (when the current scheduling formula went into force), the teams have played five times during the regular season, three in Foxboro, two in Indy. And they haven't even played enough consecutive times in Indy to make it "seem like they never play in Foxboro". Before last season, the Pats hosted three consecutive years.
ETA: Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colts-Patriots_rivalry
hey wikipedia boy... your post prolly got deleted cause it was WRONG !! :loser:
I've watched EVERY SINGLE GAME you're talking about & you forget to mention the PLAYOFFS .... the reg/. season game has been the deciding factor in who gets homefield in their playoff matchup....
the ONLY reason there was consecutive homefield games for either team, was because the winner of the regular season game had clinched homefield in the PLAYOFFS....
thats one reason why their rivalry has been so fierce..... so yeah, their regular season games have alternated homefield advantages EVERY year up until this year...
historically, whoever wins the regular season game, has moved on to homefield in the playoffs & ALWAYS advanced to the SB after beating the other ....
-
and yeah, football fans LOVE TO WATCH GAMES IN THE SNOW !!!!
We are a dying breed. Snow, defense, 17-10 final score, these things are considered relics nowadays. People want to see high scoring offense and no defense. Like the Pats and Cowboys last year, that was considered a good game. I don't consider high scoring games "good". I consider them lack of defense, which ultimately will bite you in the ass in the playoffs.
well the highest rated superbowl in NFL history was at least one of the lowest scoring in decades .... (Pats vs Giants) ...so I think fans are looking for good football more than just gratuitous scoring (which it has become)
the NFL tries to tell us what we're gonna like, its not the other way around... the NFL has bent every rule they could to CREATE more scoring up until this year, because the new defensive rules are gonna slow down teams like the Colts for sure....
but tEh colts have gotten ALOT privi cause they give the NFL a bunch of money & make them a bunch of money ... & of course, their choice of peyton manning gave them instant celebrity power, which the NFL & investors have gone with...
peyton manning sells commericals & gear, so peyton manning gets the red carpet from the NFL ....& yet they've still only managed 1 superbowl all these years .... :hyper:
-
People want to see high scoring offense and no defense.
Huh? I want to see a skirt get his teeth knocked down his throat for having the balls to come across the middle zone of the second level.
Who gets all the hype on the sports shows, which have become nothing more than Entertainment Tonight featuring athletes, the grind it out old school knock the shit out of you NFL game or the high octane 900 yards of total offense Arena League type game. We are a dying breed, nobody appreciates defense anymore. No one talks about the Ravens Super Bowl run as a great team. Why, because they had no offense. That team would have beaten at least 3/4 of the other Super Bowl teams. Especially this years. All they had to score was 14.
That's because most of the sportscasters are pussies. They love the "finesse" of the game because they have never felt that feeling when you lower an "ambulance" on somebody.
yep....
and they also don't like to sit out in the SNOW .... :whatever:
did you see that the Bears don't have the luxury of playing teH colts at soldier field in december either.... ...
they gotta play Indy in the dome & I'm only guessing it will be a mild to stunning Indy blowout alright :( ...
but, I'm willing to bet if the Bears got to play them at soldier field in late nov or december, there would be a different outcome...
but the only way the colts will be playing in the snow is if they are a wild card team & the NFL has NO CHOICE but to force them to play in the cold/snow at winter time ...
-
It's amazing that the Patriots continue to win SUper Bowls or go undefeated in the regular season despite the fact that the league is soooo against them. It must just be the genius of Bill Beeeelichik.
Yeah, how does that happen? ::)
Debating football with JCC kind of makes you feel like this guy: :banghead:
specially when JCC's team whoops the shiite out of dallas IN THEIR HOUSE :lmao:
so tell us why the Colts get to play the Pats at home AGAIN ...if its not the NFLs BIAS ??
Okay, that was weird. I had put up a post that basically refuted your contention that the Colts and Pats always play in Indy (I don't know what happened to it). Actually, since the 2002 realignment (when the current scheduling formula went into force), the teams have played five times during the regular season, three in Foxboro, two in Indy. And they haven't even played enough consecutive times in Indy to make it "seem like they never play in Foxboro". Before last season, the Pats hosted three consecutive years.
ETA: Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colts-Patriots_rivalry
hey wikipedia boy... your post prolly got deleted cause it was WRONG !! :loser:
I've watched EVERY SINGLE GAME you're talking about & you forget to mention the PLAYOFFS .... the reg/. season game has been the deciding factor in who gets homefield in their playoff matchup....
the ONLY reason there was consecutive homefield games for either team, was because the winner of the regular season game had clinched homefield in the PLAYOFFS....
thats one reason why their rivalry has been so fierce..... so yeah, their regular season games have alternated homefield advantages EVERY year up until this year...
historically, whoever wins the regular season game, has moved on to homefield in the playoffs & ALWAYS advanced to the SB after beating the other ....
I have no idea what you're trying to say and I doubt that you do either. From 1970-2001, they were division rivals. That means that they each played one home game and one away game every year, and because they've each been so good, they've played each other each of the last five seasons. You don't seem to be contesting my point that the Patriots have hosted more than the Colts since 2003, and I fail to see how the playoffs are relevant. In these last several years, of the three times that they've met in the playoffs, the host team for the regular season game lost in the playoffs.
Your main point, however, has been that there is a bias in which team hosts there regular season game. That's just not true. The scheduling "formula" has been out there since 2002. Since NE and IND are in the same conference but not in the same division, they are guaranteed to face each other at least once every three years. Three years after that meeting, they switch stadiums. However, in the interim, they may face each other again if they finish in the same spots in their respective divisions. This is why they've faced each other every year since '03. The only question, then, is how the NFL decides exactly who plays at home in those games. My guess is that they switch off somehow, but Im not sure.
-
People want to see high scoring offense and no defense.
Huh? I want to see a skirt get his teeth knocked down his throat for having the balls to come across the middle zone of the second level.
Who gets all the hype on the sports shows, which have become nothing more than Entertainment Tonight featuring athletes, the grind it out old school knock the shit out of you NFL game or the high octane 900 yards of total offense Arena League type game. We are a dying breed, nobody appreciates defense anymore. No one talks about the Ravens Super Bowl run as a great team. Why, because they had no offense. That team would have beaten at least 3/4 of the other Super Bowl teams. Especially this years. All they had to score was 14.
That's because most of the sportscasters are pussies. They love the "finesse" of the game because they have never felt that feeling when you lower an "ambulance" on somebody.
yep....
and they also don't like to sit out in the SNOW .... :whatever:
did you see that the Bears don't have the luxury of playing teH colts at soldier field in december either.... ...
they gotta play Indy in the dome & I'm only guessing it will be a mild to stunning Indy blowout alright :( ...
but, I'm willing to bet if the Bears got to play them at soldier field in late nov or december, there would be a different outcome...
but the only way the colts will be playing in the snow is if they are a wild card team & the NFL has NO CHOICE but to force them to play in the cold/snow at winter time ...
Umm, you do know that the Colts are one of the "poorest" teams in the NFL, don't you?
http://www.forbes.com/2007/09/13/nfl-team-valuations-biz-07nfl_cz_kb_mo_cs_0913nfl_land.html
It's so easy to "own" you on football related stuff, and yet you continue posting smugly. :banghead:
-
People want to see high scoring offense and no defense.
Huh? I want to see a skirt get his teeth knocked down his throat for having the balls to come across the middle zone of the second level.
Who gets all the hype on the sports shows, which have become nothing more than Entertainment Tonight featuring athletes, the grind it out old school knock the shit out of you NFL game or the high octane 900 yards of total offense Arena League type game. We are a dying breed, nobody appreciates defense anymore. No one talks about the Ravens Super Bowl run as a great team. Why, because they had no offense. That team would have beaten at least 3/4 of the other Super Bowl teams. Especially this years. All they had to score was 14.
That's because most of the sportscasters are pussies. They love the "finesse" of the game because they have never felt that feeling when you lower an "ambulance" on somebody.
yep....
and they also don't like to sit out in the SNOW .... :whatever:
did you see that the Bears don't have the luxury of playing teH colts at soldier field in december either.... ...
they gotta play Indy in the dome & I'm only guessing it will be a mild to stunning Indy blowout alright :( ...
but, I'm willing to bet if the Bears got to play them at soldier field in late nov or december, there would be a different outcome...
but the only way the colts will be playing in the snow is if they are a wild card team & the NFL has NO CHOICE but to force them to play in the cold/snow at winter time ...
Umm, you do know that the Colts are one of the "poorest" teams in the NFL, don't you?
http://www.forbes.com/2007/09/13/nfl-team-valuations-biz-07nfl_cz_kb_mo_cs_0913nfl_land.html
It's so easy to "own" you on football related stuff, and yet you continue posting smugly. :banghead:
so who said the Colts USE THEIR OWN MONEY to buy off the NFL ??
did you happen to catch the superbowl bidding war that Jerry Jones, AZ Cards & the poor, poor colts have been over SUPERBOWL rights ??
have you noticed the BRAND NEW stadium the oooooil boys & Indiana taxpayers are building the poor, poor colts team ?? ....
using other peoples money while showing little of your own is the oldest trick in the book....
you own nothing but a bag of coal...
-
It's amazing that the Patriots continue to win SUper Bowls or go undefeated in the regular season despite the fact that the league is soooo against them. It must just be the genius of Bill Beeeelichik.
Yeah, how does that happen? ::)
Debating football with JCC kind of makes you feel like this guy: :banghead:
specially when JCC's team whoops the shiite out of dallas IN THEIR HOUSE :lmao:
so tell us why the Colts get to play the Pats at home AGAIN ...if its not the NFLs BIAS ??
Okay, that was weird. I had put up a post that basically refuted your contention that the Colts and Pats always play in Indy (I don't know what happened to it). Actually, since the 2002 realignment (when the current scheduling formula went into force), the teams have played five times during the regular season, three in Foxboro, two in Indy. And they haven't even played enough consecutive times in Indy to make it "seem like they never play in Foxboro". Before last season, the Pats hosted three consecutive years.
ETA: Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colts-Patriots_rivalry
hey wikipedia boy... your post prolly got deleted cause it was WRONG !! :loser:
I've watched EVERY SINGLE GAME you're talking about & you forget to mention the PLAYOFFS .... the reg/. season game has been the deciding factor in who gets homefield in their playoff matchup....
the ONLY reason there was consecutive homefield games for either team, was because the winner of the regular season game had clinched homefield in the PLAYOFFS....
thats one reason why their rivalry has been so fierce..... so yeah, their regular season games have alternated homefield advantages EVERY year up until this year...
historically, whoever wins the regular season game, has moved on to homefield in the playoffs & ALWAYS advanced to the SB after beating the other ....
I have no idea what you're trying to say and I doubt that you do either. From 1970-2001, they were division rivals. That means that they each played one home game and one away game every year, and because they've each been so good, they've played each other each of the last five seasons. You don't seem to be contesting my point that the Patriots have hosted more than the Colts since 2003, and I fail to see how the playoffs are relevant. In these last several years, of the three times that they've met in the playoffs, the host team for the regular season game lost in the playoffs.
Your main point, however, has been that there is a bias in which team hosts there regular season game. That's just not true. The scheduling "formula" has been out there since 2002. Since NE and IND are in the same conference but not in the same division, they are guaranteed to face each other at least once every three years. Three years after that meeting, they switch stadiums. However, in the interim, they may face each other again if they finish in the same spots in their respective divisions. This is why they've faced each other every year since '03. The only question, then, is how the NFL decides exactly who plays at home in those games. My guess is that they switch off somehow, but Im not sure.
WHO CARES ABOUT 1970 -2001 ??
from 2001 on up is THE COLTS/PATS rivalry ....
and as I just told you, they used to alternate thier reg season game homefield advantage from 2001 up until THIS YEAR...
and the WINNER of that regular season matchup ALWAYS went further in the playoffs & ALWAYS beat the other in the post season....and they ALWAYS had homefield advantage in the playoffs as a result of their reg season metting, because that 1 game made the difference as far as 'best record'..
you don't seem to realize that the colts/pats have had the best records these past 7 years & which ever team loses their reg. season matchup against each other, ALWAYS loses homefield advantage & ALWAYS loses in the playoffs when/if they meet again...
basically, their reg. season matchup game has been THE deciding factor in the outcome of their entire season...
this year, the NFL is loading it for the Colts, AGAIN, because they have broken the mold & granted the colts another homefield against the PATS this season ....the colts had homefield last year , so this should've been the Pats turn at homefield...
are you still confused ?? ....
-
and yeah, football fans LOVE TO WATCH GAMES IN THE SNOW !!!!
We are a dying breed. Snow, defense, 17-10 final score, these things are considered relics nowadays. People want to see high scoring offense and no defense. Like the Pats and Cowboys last year, that was considered a good game. I don't consider high scoring games "good". I consider them lack of defense, which ultimately will bite you in the ass in the playoffs.
well the highest rated superbowl in NFL history was at least one of the lowest scoring in decades .... (Pats vs Giants) ...so I think fans are looking for good football more than just gratuitous scoring (which it has become)
the NFL tries to tell us what we're gonna like, its not the other way around... the NFL has bent every rule they could to CREATE more scoring up until this year, because the new defensive rules are gonna slow down teams like the Colts for sure....
but tEh colts have gotten ALOT privi cause they give the NFL a bunch of money & make them a bunch of money ... & of course, their choice of peyton manning gave them instant celebrity power, which the NFL & investors have gone with...
peyton manning sells commericals & gear, so peyton manning gets the red carpet from the NFL ....& yet they've still only managed 1 superbowl all these years .... :hyper:
Do you think the fans were watchiing because it was going to be a defensive battle? Or do you think it might have had something to do with the Pats going in undefeated? Maybe it was to watch the highest scoring team in the history of the league. Maybe it was to watch the QB who who broke the single season touchdown record. Or could it have been to watch the reciever who broke the single season touchdown record? Maybe it was to watch the rematch of two teams who combined to score 73 points? The average, casual fan likes to see high scores, big plays, and no defese. That is the society we live in now. Nobody gets hurt, physically or emotionally. One day, they may even stop keeping score so everyone is a winner. :banghead:
-
and yeah, football fans LOVE TO WATCH GAMES IN THE SNOW !!!!
We are a dying breed. Snow, defense, 17-10 final score, these things are considered relics nowadays. People want to see high scoring offense and no defense. Like the Pats and Cowboys last year, that was considered a good game. I don't consider high scoring games "good". I consider them lack of defense, which ultimately will bite you in the ass in the playoffs.
well the highest rated superbowl in NFL history was at least one of the lowest scoring in decades .... (Pats vs Giants) ...so I think fans are looking for good football more than just gratuitous scoring (which it has become)
the NFL tries to tell us what we're gonna like, its not the other way around... the NFL has bent every rule they could to CREATE more scoring up until this year, because the new defensive rules are gonna slow down teams like the Colts for sure....
but tEh colts have gotten ALOT privi cause they give the NFL a bunch of money & make them a bunch of money ... & of course, their choice of peyton manning gave them instant celebrity power, which the NFL & investors have gone with...
peyton manning sells commericals & gear, so peyton manning gets the red carpet from the NFL ....& yet they've still only managed 1 superbowl all these years .... :hyper:
Do you think the fans were watchiing because it was going to be a defensive battle? Or do you think it might have had something to do with the Pats going in undefeated? Maybe it was to watch the highest scoring team in the history of the league. Maybe it was to watch the QB who who broke the single season touchdown record. Or could it have been to watch the reciever who broke the single season touchdown record? Maybe it was to watch the rematch of two teams who combined to score 73 points? The average, casual fan likes to see high scores, big plays, and no defese. That is the society we live in now. Nobody gets hurt, physically or emotionally. One day, they may even stop keeping score so everyone is a winner. :banghead:
superbowls are traditionally low scoring games.....so, the average fan is STOOPID & therefore should demand their money back if they were looking for a shootout in last years SB... I predicted one team would score more than 30 points, but not the other ...
I predicted the Pats 34, giants 17 , but it didn't happen (cept for the giants 17 :banghead:) ....
guarantee you if the pats could play them again, it would be Pats 34-17 or worse.....
but the only way the Pats were gonna score 30plus points, was if brady was 100% & he had TIME TO THROW.....neither happened & therefore the luckiest team EVER won the superbowl....
frankly, other than the 4th quarter, that game SUCKED ...yet the 'fan polls' all show its now THE greatest superbowl ever :mental:
the new defensive rules this season are gonna tame offensive scoring, because all the teams that lost out last year all voted to pump up defenses to counter the offensive shenannigans.... ...
-
and yeah, football fans LOVE TO WATCH GAMES IN THE SNOW !!!!
We are a dying breed. Snow, defense, 17-10 final score, these things are considered relics nowadays. People want to see high scoring offense and no defense. Like the Pats and Cowboys last year, that was considered a good game. I don't consider high scoring games "good". I consider them lack of defense, which ultimately will bite you in the ass in the playoffs.
well the highest rated superbowl in NFL history was at least one of the lowest scoring in decades .... (Pats vs Giants) ...so I think fans are looking for good football more than just gratuitous scoring (which it has become)
the NFL tries to tell us what we're gonna like, its not the other way around... the NFL has bent every rule they could to CREATE more scoring up until this year, because the new defensive rules are gonna slow down teams like the Colts for sure....
but tEh colts have gotten ALOT privi cause they give the NFL a bunch of money & make them a bunch of money ... & of course, their choice of peyton manning gave them instant celebrity power, which the NFL & investors have gone with...
peyton manning sells commericals & gear, so peyton manning gets the red carpet from the NFL ....& yet they've still only managed 1 superbowl all these years .... :hyper:
Do you think the fans were watchiing because it was going to be a defensive battle? Or do you think it might have had something to do with the Pats going in undefeated? Maybe it was to watch the highest scoring team in the history of the league. Maybe it was to watch the QB who who broke the single season touchdown record. Or could it have been to watch the reciever who broke the single season touchdown record? Maybe it was to watch the rematch of two teams who combined to score 73 points? The average, casual fan likes to see high scores, big plays, and no defese. That is the society we live in now. Nobody gets hurt, physically or emotionally. One day, they may even stop keeping score so everyone is a winner. :banghead:
superbowls are traditionally low scoring games.....so, the average fan is STOOPID & therefore should demand their money back if they were looking for a shootout in last years SB... I predicted one team would score more than 30 points, but not the other ...
I predicted the Pats 34, giants 17 , but it didn't happen (cept for the giants 17 :banghead:) ....
guarantee you if the pats could play them again, it would be Pats 34-17 or worse.....
but the only way the Pats were gonna score 30plus points, was if brady was 100% & he had TIME TO THROW.....neither happened & therefore the luckiest team EVER won the superbowl....
frankly, other than the 4th quarter, that game SUCKED ...yet the 'fan polls' all show its now THE greatest superbowl ever :mental:
the new defensive rules this season are gonna tame offensive scoring, because all the teams that lost out last year all voted to pump up defenses to counter the offensive shenannigans.... ...
From a historical standpoint, it was the greatest. To the average idiot, it was like a movie script. Underdog defeats the great team. Miracle on turf.
To the educated fan, it was a horrible game, until the 4th quarter like you said. To me the greatest game was the Giants - Bills.
-
and yeah, football fans LOVE TO WATCH GAMES IN THE SNOW !!!!
We are a dying breed. Snow, defense, 17-10 final score, these things are considered relics nowadays. People want to see high scoring offense and no defense. Like the Pats and Cowboys last year, that was considered a good game. I don't consider high scoring games "good". I consider them lack of defense, which ultimately will bite you in the ass in the playoffs.
well the highest rated superbowl in NFL history was at least one of the lowest scoring in decades .... (Pats vs Giants) ...so I think fans are looking for good football more than just gratuitous scoring (which it has become)
the NFL tries to tell us what we're gonna like, its not the other way around... the NFL has bent every rule they could to CREATE more scoring up until this year, because the new defensive rules are gonna slow down teams like the Colts for sure....
but tEh colts have gotten ALOT privi cause they give the NFL a bunch of money & make them a bunch of money ... & of course, their choice of peyton manning gave them instant celebrity power, which the NFL & investors have gone with...
peyton manning sells commericals & gear, so peyton manning gets the red carpet from the NFL ....& yet they've still only managed 1 superbowl all these years .... :hyper:
Do you think the fans were watchiing because it was going to be a defensive battle? Or do you think it might have had something to do with the Pats going in undefeated? Maybe it was to watch the highest scoring team in the history of the league. Maybe it was to watch the QB who who broke the single season touchdown record. Or could it have been to watch the reciever who broke the single season touchdown record? Maybe it was to watch the rematch of two teams who combined to score 73 points? The average, casual fan likes to see high scores, big plays, and no defese. That is the society we live in now. Nobody gets hurt, physically or emotionally. One day, they may even stop keeping score so everyone is a winner. :banghead:
superbowls are traditionally low scoring games.....so, the average fan is STOOPID & therefore should demand their money back if they were looking for a shootout in last years SB... I predicted one team would score more than 30 points, but not the other ...
I predicted the Pats 34, giants 17 , but it didn't happen (cept for the giants 17 :banghead:) ....
guarantee you if the pats could play them again, it would be Pats 34-17 or worse.....
but the only way the Pats were gonna score 30plus points, was if brady was 100% & he had TIME TO THROW.....neither happened & therefore the luckiest team EVER won the superbowl....
frankly, other than the 4th quarter, that game SUCKED ...yet the 'fan polls' all show its now THE greatest superbowl ever :mental:
the new defensive rules this season are gonna tame offensive scoring, because all the teams that lost out last year all voted to pump up defenses to counter the offensive shenannigans.... ...
From a historical standpoint, it was the greatest. To the average idiot, it was like a movie script. Underdog defeats the great team. Miracle on turf.
To the educated fan, it was a horrible game, until the 4th quarter like you said. To me the greatest game was the Giants - Bills.
yep, great points & agree 100%...
same with the giants/ bills SB.....I always thought the redksins/raiders was a good one too as well as cowboys/bills in their first meeting... Steelers /cowboys in 1979 was GREAT...
titans /rams was damn good too, as well as Pats/Eagles.... ...
-
and yeah, football fans LOVE TO WATCH GAMES IN THE SNOW !!!!
We are a dying breed. Snow, defense, 17-10 final score, these things are considered relics nowadays. People want to see high scoring offense and no defense. Like the Pats and Cowboys last year, that was considered a good game. I don't consider high scoring games "good". I consider them lack of defense, which ultimately will bite you in the ass in the playoffs.
well the highest rated superbowl in NFL history was at least one of the lowest scoring in decades .... (Pats vs Giants) ...so I think fans are looking for good football more than just gratuitous scoring (which it has become)
the NFL tries to tell us what we're gonna like, its not the other way around... the NFL has bent every rule they could to CREATE more scoring up until this year, because the new defensive rules are gonna slow down teams like the Colts for sure....
but tEh colts have gotten ALOT privi cause they give the NFL a bunch of money & make them a bunch of money ... & of course, their choice of peyton manning gave them instant celebrity power, which the NFL & investors have gone with...
peyton manning sells commericals & gear, so peyton manning gets the red carpet from the NFL ....& yet they've still only managed 1 superbowl all these years .... :hyper:
Do you think the fans were watchiing because it was going to be a defensive battle? Or do you think it might have had something to do with the Pats going in undefeated? Maybe it was to watch the highest scoring team in the history of the league. Maybe it was to watch the QB who who broke the single season touchdown record. Or could it have been to watch the reciever who broke the single season touchdown record? Maybe it was to watch the rematch of two teams who combined to score 73 points? The average, casual fan likes to see high scores, big plays, and no defese. That is the society we live in now. Nobody gets hurt, physically or emotionally. One day, they may even stop keeping score so everyone is a winner. :banghead:
superbowls are traditionally low scoring games.....so, the average fan is STOOPID & therefore should demand their money back if they were looking for a shootout in last years SB... I predicted one team would score more than 30 points, but not the other ...
I predicted the Pats 34, giants 17 , but it didn't happen (cept for the giants 17 :banghead:) ....
guarantee you if the pats could play them again, it would be Pats 34-17 or worse.....
but the only way the Pats were gonna score 30plus points, was if brady was 100% & he had TIME TO THROW.....neither happened & therefore the luckiest team EVER won the superbowl....
frankly, other than the 4th quarter, that game SUCKED ...yet the 'fan polls' all show its now THE greatest superbowl ever :mental:
the new defensive rules this season are gonna tame offensive scoring, because all the teams that lost out last year all voted to pump up defenses to counter the offensive shenannigans.... ...
From a historical standpoint, it was the greatest. To the average idiot, it was like a movie script. Underdog defeats the great team. Miracle on turf.
To the educated fan, it was a horrible game, until the 4th quarter like you said. To me the greatest game was the Giants - Bills.
yep, great points & agree 100%...
same with the giants/ bills SB.....I always thought the redksins/raiders was a good one too as well as cowboys/bills in their first meeting... Steelers /cowboys in 1980 was GREAT...
titans /rams was damn good too, as well as Pats/Eagles.... ...
Pats/Eagles was a good one, just for the fact that was the first one that I actually rooted for the Patriots. I hate McNabb, not for anything he's done but because of the way he's handled by ESPN. Rush was dead on.
I forgot about Titans/Rams. That was a good one, too.
-
and yeah, football fans LOVE TO WATCH GAMES IN THE SNOW !!!!
We are a dying breed. Snow, defense, 17-10 final score, these things are considered relics nowadays. People want to see high scoring offense and no defense. Like the Pats and Cowboys last year, that was considered a good game. I don't consider high scoring games "good". I consider them lack of defense, which ultimately will bite you in the ass in the playoffs.
well the highest rated superbowl in NFL history was at least one of the lowest scoring in decades .... (Pats vs Giants) ...so I think fans are looking for good football more than just gratuitous scoring (which it has become)
the NFL tries to tell us what we're gonna like, its not the other way around... the NFL has bent every rule they could to CREATE more scoring up until this year, because the new defensive rules are gonna slow down teams like the Colts for sure....
but tEh colts have gotten ALOT privi cause they give the NFL a bunch of money & make them a bunch of money ... & of course, their choice of peyton manning gave them instant celebrity power, which the NFL & investors have gone with...
peyton manning sells commericals & gear, so peyton manning gets the red carpet from the NFL ....& yet they've still only managed 1 superbowl all these years .... :hyper:
Do you think the fans were watchiing because it was going to be a defensive battle? Or do you think it might have had something to do with the Pats going in undefeated? Maybe it was to watch the highest scoring team in the history of the league. Maybe it was to watch the QB who who broke the single season touchdown record. Or could it have been to watch the reciever who broke the single season touchdown record? Maybe it was to watch the rematch of two teams who combined to score 73 points? The average, casual fan likes to see high scores, big plays, and no defese. That is the society we live in now. Nobody gets hurt, physically or emotionally. One day, they may even stop keeping score so everyone is a winner. :banghead:
superbowls are traditionally low scoring games.....so, the average fan is STOOPID & therefore should demand their money back if they were looking for a shootout in last years SB... I predicted one team would score more than 30 points, but not the other ...
I predicted the Pats 34, giants 17 , but it didn't happen (cept for the giants 17 :banghead:) ....
guarantee you if the pats could play them again, it would be Pats 34-17 or worse.....
but the only way the Pats were gonna score 30plus points, was if brady was 100% & he had TIME TO THROW.....neither happened & therefore the luckiest team EVER won the superbowl....
frankly, other than the 4th quarter, that game SUCKED ...yet the 'fan polls' all show its now THE greatest superbowl ever :mental:
the new defensive rules this season are gonna tame offensive scoring, because all the teams that lost out last year all voted to pump up defenses to counter the offensive shenannigans.... ...
From a historical standpoint, it was the greatest. To the average idiot, it was like a movie script. Underdog defeats the great team. Miracle on turf.
To the educated fan, it was a horrible game, until the 4th quarter like you said. To me the greatest game was the Giants - Bills.
yep, great points & agree 100%...
same with the giants/ bills SB.....I always thought the redksins/raiders was a good one too as well as cowboys/bills in their first meeting... Steelers /cowboys in 1980 was GREAT...
titans /rams was damn good too, as well as Pats/Eagles.... ...
Pats/Eagles was a good one, just for the fact that was the first one that I actually rooted for the Patriots. I hate McNabb, not for anything he's done but because of the way he's handled by ESPN. Rush was dead on.
I forgot about Titans/Rams. That was a good one, too.
funny how the two small market midwest teams get forgotten about by the big boys... ie: rams/titans:-) ....they always talk about the big market teams (pats are now a big market team, because of their international appeal/record, not because of the boston area) ...
just look at the obvious bias the NFL has this year...
my pathetic BARES team has 5 primetime appearances :lmao: .....one against the colts I understand, but the rest ?? ..spare me.... the only reason they are getting primetime is because of the chicago area's market..
the NFL hasn't learned their lesson from last year....they had to bump teH Bares out of a primetime game last year, cause THEY SUCKED SO BAD.. :thatsright: ...against seattle I think it was ...
-
People want to see high scoring offense and no defense.
Huh? I want to see a skirt get his teeth knocked down his throat for having the balls to come across the middle zone of the second level.
Who gets all the hype on the sports shows, which have become nothing more than Entertainment Tonight featuring athletes, the grind it out old school knock the shit out of you NFL game or the high octane 900 yards of total offense Arena League type game. We are a dying breed, nobody appreciates defense anymore. No one talks about the Ravens Super Bowl run as a great team. Why, because they had no offense. That team would have beaten at least 3/4 of the other Super Bowl teams. Especially this years. All they had to score was 14.
That's because most of the sportscasters are pussies. They love the "finesse" of the game because they have never felt that feeling when you lower an "ambulance" on somebody.
yep....
and they also don't like to sit out in the SNOW .... :whatever:
did you see that the Bears don't have the luxury of playing teH colts at soldier field in december either.... ...
they gotta play Indy in the dome & I'm only guessing it will be a mild to stunning Indy blowout alright :( ...
but, I'm willing to bet if the Bears got to play them at soldier field in late nov or december, there would be a different outcome...
but the only way the colts will be playing in the snow is if they are a wild card team & the NFL has NO CHOICE but to force them to play in the cold/snow at winter time ...
Umm, you do know that the Colts are one of the "poorest" teams in the NFL, don't you?
http://www.forbes.com/2007/09/13/nfl-team-valuations-biz-07nfl_cz_kb_mo_cs_0913nfl_land.html
It's so easy to "own" you on football related stuff, and yet you continue posting smugly. :banghead:
so who said the Colts USE THEIR OWN MONEY to buy off the NFL ??
did you happen to catch the superbowl bidding war that Jerry Jones, AZ Cards & the poor, poor colts have been over SUPERBOWL rights ??
have you noticed the BRAND NEW stadium the oooooil boys & Indiana taxpayers are building the poor, poor colts team ?? ....
using other peoples money while showing little of your own is the oldest trick in the book....
you own nothing but a bag of coal...
Notice that I put poorest in quotation marks. They're not poor in any sense of the word, save that 20+ other teams bring in more money than they do. The idea that the Colts are such a profitable franchise that the NFL would fix its season for them is ludicrous.
-
It's amazing that the Patriots continue to win SUper Bowls or go undefeated in the regular season despite the fact that the league is soooo against them. It must just be the genius of Bill Beeeelichik.
Yeah, how does that happen? ::)
Debating football with JCC kind of makes you feel like this guy: :banghead:
specially when JCC's team whoops the shiite out of dallas IN THEIR HOUSE :lmao:
so tell us why the Colts get to play the Pats at home AGAIN ...if its not the NFLs BIAS ??
Okay, that was weird. I had put up a post that basically refuted your contention that the Colts and Pats always play in Indy (I don't know what happened to it). Actually, since the 2002 realignment (when the current scheduling formula went into force), the teams have played five times during the regular season, three in Foxboro, two in Indy. And they haven't even played enough consecutive times in Indy to make it "seem like they never play in Foxboro". Before last season, the Pats hosted three consecutive years.
ETA: Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colts-Patriots_rivalry
hey wikipedia boy... your post prolly got deleted cause it was WRONG !! :loser:
I've watched EVERY SINGLE GAME you're talking about & you forget to mention the PLAYOFFS .... the reg/. season game has been the deciding factor in who gets homefield in their playoff matchup....
the ONLY reason there was consecutive homefield games for either team, was because the winner of the regular season game had clinched homefield in the PLAYOFFS....
thats one reason why their rivalry has been so fierce..... so yeah, their regular season games have alternated homefield advantages EVERY year up until this year...
historically, whoever wins the regular season game, has moved on to homefield in the playoffs & ALWAYS advanced to the SB after beating the other ....
I have no idea what you're trying to say and I doubt that you do either. From 1970-2001, they were division rivals. That means that they each played one home game and one away game every year, and because they've each been so good, they've played each other each of the last five seasons. You don't seem to be contesting my point that the Patriots have hosted more than the Colts since 2003, and I fail to see how the playoffs are relevant. In these last several years, of the three times that they've met in the playoffs, the host team for the regular season game lost in the playoffs.
Your main point, however, has been that there is a bias in which team hosts there regular season game. That's just not true. The scheduling "formula" has been out there since 2002. Since NE and IND are in the same conference but not in the same division, they are guaranteed to face each other at least once every three years. Three years after that meeting, they switch stadiums. However, in the interim, they may face each other again if they finish in the same spots in their respective divisions. This is why they've faced each other every year since '03. The only question, then, is how the NFL decides exactly who plays at home in those games. My guess is that they switch off somehow, but Im not sure.
WHO CARES ABOUT 1970 -2001 ??
from 2001 on up is THE COLTS/PATS rivalry ....
and as I just told you, they used to alternate thier reg season game homefield advantage from 2001 up until THIS YEAR...
and the WINNER of that regular season matchup ALWAYS went further in the playoffs & ALWAYS beat the other in the post season....and they ALWAYS had homefield advantage in the playoffs as a result of their reg season metting, because that 1 game made the difference as far as 'best record'..
you don't seem to realize that the colts/pats have had the best records these past 7 years & which ever team loses their reg. season matchup against each other, ALWAYS loses homefield advantage & ALWAYS loses in the playoffs when/if they meet again...
basically, their reg. season matchup game has been THE deciding factor in the outcome of their entire season...
this year, the NFL is loading it for the Colts, AGAIN, because they have broken the mold & granted the colts another homefield against the PATS this season ....the colts had homefield last year , so this should've been the Pats turn at homefield...
are you still confused ?? ....
Are you still confused? I provided proof that there has been no alternating of regular season homefield advantage from year to year. The teams have played each other since 2003. The Colts hosted the first meeting, then THE PATS HOSTED THREE STRAIGHT REGULAR SEASON MEETINGS, now the Colts are hosting back to back. Got that? Absolutely no alteration of homefield from season to season. Get your facts straight if you want to talk football.
-
It's amazing that the Patriots continue to win SUper Bowls or go undefeated in the regular season despite the fact that the league is soooo against them. It must just be the genius of Bill Beeeelichik.
Yeah, how does that happen? ::)
Debating football with JCC kind of makes you feel like this guy: :banghead:
specially when JCC's team whoops the shiite out of dallas IN THEIR HOUSE :lmao:
so tell us why the Colts get to play the Pats at home AGAIN ...if its not the NFLs BIAS ??
Okay, that was weird. I had put up a post that basically refuted your contention that the Colts and Pats always play in Indy (I don't know what happened to it). Actually, since the 2002 realignment (when the current scheduling formula went into force), the teams have played five times during the regular season, three in Foxboro, two in Indy. And they haven't even played enough consecutive times in Indy to make it "seem like they never play in Foxboro". Before last season, the Pats hosted three consecutive years.
ETA: Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colts-Patriots_rivalry
hey wikipedia boy... your post prolly got deleted cause it was WRONG !! :loser:
I've watched EVERY SINGLE GAME you're talking about & you forget to mention the PLAYOFFS .... the reg/. season game has been the deciding factor in who gets homefield in their playoff matchup....
the ONLY reason there was consecutive homefield games for either team, was because the winner of the regular season game had clinched homefield in the PLAYOFFS....
thats one reason why their rivalry has been so fierce..... so yeah, their regular season games have alternated homefield advantages EVERY year up until this year...
historically, whoever wins the regular season game, has moved on to homefield in the playoffs & ALWAYS advanced to the SB after beating the other ....
I have no idea what you're trying to say and I doubt that you do either. From 1970-2001, they were division rivals. That means that they each played one home game and one away game every year, and because they've each been so good, they've played each other each of the last five seasons. You don't seem to be contesting my point that the Patriots have hosted more than the Colts since 2003, and I fail to see how the playoffs are relevant. In these last several years, of the three times that they've met in the playoffs, the host team for the regular season game lost in the playoffs.
Your main point, however, has been that there is a bias in which team hosts there regular season game. That's just not true. The scheduling "formula" has been out there since 2002. Since NE and IND are in the same conference but not in the same division, they are guaranteed to face each other at least once every three years. Three years after that meeting, they switch stadiums. However, in the interim, they may face each other again if they finish in the same spots in their respective divisions. This is why they've faced each other every year since '03. The only question, then, is how the NFL decides exactly who plays at home in those games. My guess is that they switch off somehow, but Im not sure.
WHO CARES ABOUT 1970 -2001 ??
from 2001 on up is THE COLTS/PATS rivalry ....
and as I just told you, they used to alternate thier reg season game homefield advantage from 2001 up until THIS YEAR...
and the WINNER of that regular season matchup ALWAYS went further in the playoffs & ALWAYS beat the other in the post season....and they ALWAYS had homefield advantage in the playoffs as a result of their reg season metting, because that 1 game made the difference as far as 'best record'..
you don't seem to realize that the colts/pats have had the best records these past 7 years & which ever team loses their reg. season matchup against each other, ALWAYS loses homefield advantage & ALWAYS loses in the playoffs when/if they meet again...
basically, their reg. season matchup game has been THE deciding factor in the outcome of their entire season...
this year, the NFL is loading it for the Colts, AGAIN, because they have broken the mold & granted the colts another homefield against the PATS this season ....the colts had homefield last year , so this should've been the Pats turn at homefield...
are you still confused ?? ....
Are you still confused? I provided proof that there has been no alternating of regular season homefield advantage from year to year. The teams have played each other since 2003. The Colts hosted the first meeting, then THE PATS HOSTED THREE STRAIGHT REGULAR SEASON MEETINGS, now the Colts are hosting back to back. Got that? Absolutely no alteration of homefield from season to season. Get your facts straight if you want to talk football.
no the Pats did not get 3 straight since 2004...
wiki, as usual, has got it wrong...
last year the colts had it (07), the year before the Pats had it (06) & the year before that the Colts had it (05) ...
does that sound like 3 years in a row for the Pats after the 2004 season ??....
-
no the Pats did not get 3 straight since 2004...
wiki, as usual, has got it wrong...
last year the colts had it (07), the year before the Pats had it (06) & the year before that the Colts had it (05) ...
does that sound like 3 years in a row for the Pats after the 2004 season ??....
Do you have a source for this?
-
no the Pats did not get 3 straight since 2004...
wiki, as usual, has got it wrong...
last year the colts had it (07), the year before the Pats had it (06) & the year before that the Colts had it (05) ...
does that sound like 3 years in a row for the Pats after the 2004 season ??....
Do you have a source for this?
budweiser :rotf: ....
nah....I don't actually remember if the Pats/colts alternated 04-05-06 ....I was just being a dickhead :hyper:
I'm just pissed the Pats have to play those homo's in Indy 2 years in a row... :p
-
no the Pats did not get 3 straight since 2004...
wiki, as usual, has got it wrong...
last year the colts had it (07), the year before the Pats had it (06) & the year before that the Colts had it (05) ...
does that sound like 3 years in a row for the Pats after the 2004 season ??....
Do you have a source for this?
budweiser :rotf: ....
nah....I don't actually remember if the Pats/colts alternated 04-05-06 ....I was just being a dickhead :hyper:
I'm just pissed the Pats have to play those homo's in Indy 2 years in a row... :p
Well, they could throw next season. If they finished dead last in their division, then they probably wouldn't have to worry about it. :lmao:
Yeah right, next thing you know, the Colts lose Manning in the preseason and have to use Jim Sorgi all year long.. :hammer:
-
no the Pats did not get 3 straight since 2004...
wiki, as usual, has got it wrong...
last year the colts had it (07), the year before the Pats had it (06) & the year before that the Colts had it (05) ...
does that sound like 3 years in a row for the Pats after the 2004 season ??....
Do you have a source for this?
budweiser :rotf: ....
nah....I don't actually remember if the Pats/colts alternated 04-05-06 ....I was just being a ****head :hyper:
I'm just pissed the Pats have to play those homo's in Indy 2 years in a row... :p
Well, they could throw next season. If they finished dead last in their division, then they probably wouldn't have to worry about it. :lmao:
Yeah right, next thing you know, the Colts lose Manning in the preseason and have to use Jim Sorgi all year long.. :hammer:
jim sorgi vs matt cassell would be EPIC !! :rotf: ...
sad thing is, both of those guys could still be a step up on the Bears :thatsright:
-
no the Pats did not get 3 straight since 2004...
wiki, as usual, has got it wrong...
last year the colts had it (07), the year before the Pats had it (06) & the year before that the Colts had it (05) ...
does that sound like 3 years in a row for the Pats after the 2004 season ??....
Do you have a source for this?
budweiser :rotf: ....
nah....I don't actually remember if the Pats/colts alternated 04-05-06 ....I was just being a ****head :hyper:
I'm just pissed the Pats have to play those homo's in Indy 2 years in a row... :p
Well, they could throw next season. If they finished dead last in their division, then they probably wouldn't have to worry about it. :lmao:
Yeah right, next thing you know, the Colts lose Manning in the preseason and have to use Jim Sorgi all year long.. :hammer:
jim sorgi vs matt cassell would be EPIC !! :rotf: ...
sad thing is, both of those guys could still be a step up on the Bears :thatsright:
What are you talking about? Rex Grossman? That guy is Hall of Fame material! :rotf: :lmao:
-
no the Pats did not get 3 straight since 2004...
wiki, as usual, has got it wrong...
last year the colts had it (07), the year before the Pats had it (06) & the year before that the Colts had it (05) ...
does that sound like 3 years in a row for the Pats after the 2004 season ??....
Do you have a source for this?
budweiser :rotf: ....
nah....I don't actually remember if the Pats/colts alternated 04-05-06 ....I was just being a ****head :hyper:
I'm just pissed the Pats have to play those homo's in Indy 2 years in a row... :p
Well, they could throw next season. If they finished dead last in their division, then they probably wouldn't have to worry about it. :lmao:
Yeah right, next thing you know, the Colts lose Manning in the preseason and have to use Jim Sorgi all year long.. :hammer:
jim sorgi vs matt cassell would be EPIC !! :rotf: ...
sad thing is, both of those guys could still be a step up on the Bears :thatsright:
What are you talking about? Rex Grossman? That guy is Hall of Fame material! :rotf: :lmao:
yeah.... the football bloopers HOF .... :loser:
I lost all respect for the BARES when they resigned that dufus.... (&/or picked him in the first place) .. ...
wrex will lead da Bares to another embarrassment this year when they play the colts in indy :whatever:
-
no the Pats did not get 3 straight since 2004...
wiki, as usual, has got it wrong...
last year the colts had it (07), the year before the Pats had it (06) & the year before that the Colts had it (05) ...
does that sound like 3 years in a row for the Pats after the 2004 season ??....
Do you have a source for this?
budweiser :rotf: ....
nah....I don't actually remember if the Pats/colts alternated 04-05-06 ....I was just being a ****head :hyper:
I'm just pissed the Pats have to play those homo's in Indy 2 years in a row... :p
Well, they could throw next season. If they finished dead last in their division, then they probably wouldn't have to worry about it. :lmao:
Yeah right, next thing you know, the Colts lose Manning in the preseason and have to use Jim Sorgi all year long.. :hammer:
jim sorgi vs matt cassell would be EPIC !! :rotf: ...
sad thing is, both of those guys could still be a step up on the Bears :thatsright:
What are you talking about? Rex Grossman? That guy is Hall of Fame material! :rotf: :lmao:
yeah.... the football bloopers HOF .... :loser:
I lost all respect for the BARES when they resigned that dufus.... (&/or picked him in the first place) .. ...
wrex will lead da Bares to another embarrassment this year when they play the colts in indy :whatever:
What's wrong with Turnoversaurus Rex?
-
no the Pats did not get 3 straight since 2004...
wiki, as usual, has got it wrong...
last year the colts had it (07), the year before the Pats had it (06) & the year before that the Colts had it (05) ...
does that sound like 3 years in a row for the Pats after the 2004 season ??....
Do you have a source for this?
budweiser :rotf: ....
nah....I don't actually remember if the Pats/colts alternated 04-05-06 ....I was just being a ****head :hyper:
I'm just pissed the Pats have to play those homo's in Indy 2 years in a row... :p
Well, they could throw next season. If they finished dead last in their division, then they probably wouldn't have to worry about it. :lmao:
Yeah right, next thing you know, the Colts lose Manning in the preseason and have to use Jim Sorgi all year long.. :hammer:
jim sorgi vs matt cassell would be EPIC !! :rotf: ...
sad thing is, both of those guys could still be a step up on the Bears :thatsright:
What are you talking about? Rex Grossman? That guy is Hall of Fame material! :rotf: :lmao:
yeah.... the football bloopers HOF .... :loser:
I lost all respect for the BARES when they resigned that dufus.... (&/or picked him in the first place) .. ...
wrex will lead da Bares to another embarrassment this year when they play the colts in indy :whatever:
What's wrong with Turnoversaurus Rex?
is his nickname Bendoversaurus ? ...if so, you know the answer :lmao:
-
no the Pats did not get 3 straight since 2004...
wiki, as usual, has got it wrong...
last year the colts had it (07), the year before the Pats had it (06) & the year before that the Colts had it (05) ...
does that sound like 3 years in a row for the Pats after the 2004 season ??....
Do you have a source for this?
budweiser :rotf: ....
nah....I don't actually remember if the Pats/colts alternated 04-05-06 ....I was just being a ****head :hyper:
I'm just pissed the Pats have to play those homo's in Indy 2 years in a row... :p
Well, they could throw next season. If they finished dead last in their division, then they probably wouldn't have to worry about it. :lmao:
Yeah right, next thing you know, the Colts lose Manning in the preseason and have to use Jim Sorgi all year long.. :hammer:
jim sorgi vs matt cassell would be EPIC !! :rotf: ...
sad thing is, both of those guys could still be a step up on the Bears :thatsright:
What are you talking about? Rex Grossman? That guy is Hall of Fame material! :rotf: :lmao:
yeah.... the football bloopers HOF .... :loser:
I lost all respect for the BARES when they resigned that dufus.... (&/or picked him in the first place) .. ...
wrex will lead da Bares to another embarrassment this year when they play the colts in indy :whatever:
What's wrong with Turnoversaurus Rex?
is his nickname Bendoversaurus ? ...if so, you know the answer :lmao:
What was it? Three years ago he was the second coming.
-
no the Pats did not get 3 straight since 2004...
wiki, as usual, has got it wrong...
last year the colts had it (07), the year before the Pats had it (06) & the year before that the Colts had it (05) ...
does that sound like 3 years in a row for the Pats after the 2004 season ??....
Do you have a source for this?
budweiser :rotf: ....
nah....I don't actually remember if the Pats/colts alternated 04-05-06 ....I was just being a ****head :hyper:
I'm just pissed the Pats have to play those homo's in Indy 2 years in a row... :p
Well, they could throw next season. If they finished dead last in their division, then they probably wouldn't have to worry about it. :lmao:
Yeah right, next thing you know, the Colts lose Manning in the preseason and have to use Jim Sorgi all year long.. :hammer:
jim sorgi vs matt cassell would be EPIC !! :rotf: ...
sad thing is, both of those guys could still be a step up on the Bears :thatsright:
What are you talking about? Rex Grossman? That guy is Hall of Fame material! :rotf: :lmao:
yeah.... the football bloopers HOF .... :loser:
I lost all respect for the BARES when they resigned that dufus.... (&/or picked him in the first place) .. ...
wrex will lead da Bares to another embarrassment this year when they play the colts in indy :whatever:
What's wrong with Turnoversaurus Rex?
is his nickname Bendoversaurus ? ...if so, you know the answer :lmao:
What was it? Three years ago he was the second coming.
yep...
until he finally got 1/2 a season under his belt ....
he started off strong the 06 season, but fizzled & popped in the stuperbowl....then the beginning of last season , when we were all guaranteed his jitters were healed, he was MISERABLE ...I mean GOD AWFUL ...
and its a slap in the face to every player on that superbowl team to bring back wrex after his god awful performances these past 2 years.... and obviously they know it & MANY want out of there....
same w/ not only choosing that LOSER cedric benson over T Jones, but bringing his sorry ass back after his performance last year....
-
no the Pats did not get 3 straight since 2004...
wiki, as usual, has got it wrong...
last year the colts had it (07), the year before the Pats had it (06) & the year before that the Colts had it (05) ...
does that sound like 3 years in a row for the Pats after the 2004 season ??....
Do you have a source for this?
budweiser :rotf: ....
nah....I don't actually remember if the Pats/colts alternated 04-05-06 ....I was just being a ****head :hyper:
I'm just pissed the Pats have to play those homo's in Indy 2 years in a row... :p
Well, they could throw next season. If they finished dead last in their division, then they probably wouldn't have to worry about it. :lmao:
Yeah right, next thing you know, the Colts lose Manning in the preseason and have to use Jim Sorgi all year long.. :hammer:
jim sorgi vs matt cassell would be EPIC !! :rotf: ...
sad thing is, both of those guys could still be a step up on the Bears :thatsright:
What are you talking about? Rex Grossman? That guy is Hall of Fame material! :rotf: :lmao:
yeah.... the football bloopers HOF .... :loser:
I lost all respect for the BARES when they resigned that dufus.... (&/or picked him in the first place) .. ...
wrex will lead da Bares to another embarrassment this year when they play the colts in indy :whatever:
What's wrong with Turnoversaurus Rex?
is his nickname Bendoversaurus ? ...if so, you know the answer :lmao:
What was it? Three years ago he was the second coming.
yep...
until he finally got 1/2 a season under his belt ....
he started off strong the 06 season, but fizzled & popped in the stuperbowl....then the beginning of last season , when we were all guaranteed his jitters were healed, he was MISERABLE ...I mean GOD AWFUL ...
and its a slap in the face to every player on that superbowl team to bring back wrex after his god awful performances these past 2 years.... and obviously they know it & MANY want out of there....
same w/ not only choosing that LOSER cedric benson over T Jones, but bringing his sorry ass back after his performance last year....
But, hey, Lovie's loyal. :fuelfire:
-
no the Pats did not get 3 straight since 2004...
wiki, as usual, has got it wrong...
last year the colts had it (07), the year before the Pats had it (06) & the year before that the Colts had it (05) ...
does that sound like 3 years in a row for the Pats after the 2004 season ??....
Do you have a source for this?
budweiser :rotf: ....
nah....I don't actually remember if the Pats/colts alternated 04-05-06 ....I was just being a ****head :hyper:
I'm just pissed the Pats have to play those homo's in Indy 2 years in a row... :p
Well, they could throw next season. If they finished dead last in their division, then they probably wouldn't have to worry about it. :lmao:
Yeah right, next thing you know, the Colts lose Manning in the preseason and have to use Jim Sorgi all year long.. :hammer:
jim sorgi vs matt cassell would be EPIC !! :rotf: ...
sad thing is, both of those guys could still be a step up on the Bears :thatsright:
What are you talking about? Rex Grossman? That guy is Hall of Fame material! :rotf: :lmao:
yeah.... the football bloopers HOF .... :loser:
I lost all respect for the BARES when they resigned that dufus.... (&/or picked him in the first place) .. ...
wrex will lead da Bares to another embarrassment this year when they play the colts in indy :whatever:
What's wrong with Turnoversaurus Rex?
is his nickname Bendoversaurus ? ...if so, you know the answer :lmao:
What was it? Three years ago he was the second coming.
yep...
until he finally got 1/2 a season under his belt ....
he started off strong the 06 season, but fizzled & popped in the stuperbowl....then the beginning of last season , when we were all guaranteed his jitters were healed, he was MISERABLE ...I mean GOD AWFUL ...
and its a slap in the face to every player on that superbowl team to bring back wrex after his god awful performances these past 2 years.... and obviously they know it & MANY want out of there....
same w/ not only choosing that LOSER cedric benson over T Jones, but bringing his sorry ass back after his performance last year....
But, hey, Lovie's loyal. :fuelfire:
lovie is a friggen idiot ...
he's got ALOT to learn in regards to being a HEAD COACH ...
the more I learn about his history as defensive cooridinator, the more I question is coaching skills PERIOD ... (ie: also brought in miserable players & kept them when DC for the RAMS)
-
marion barber wants 40-60million like LT & LJ, arguably the best running backs in the league (who have also logged more yards in 2 seasons, than barber has in 4 )
consider that LT has rushed for 4787 yards since 2005, whereas barber has rushed for around 2500 yards (if that) & LT has scored around 70 TD's & Barber around 25 , I'd have to LAUGH barbers agent out of the office if I were Jerry Jones....
jerry jones only wants to pay him 30 million or so....
hmmmmm ??
trouble in Big D ?? :uhsure:
-
marion barber wants 40-60million like LT & LJ, arguably the best running backs in the league (who have also logged more yards in 2 seasons, than barber has in 4 )
jerry jones only wants to pay him 30 million or so....
hmmmmm ??
trouble in Big D ?? :uhsure:
There's always trouble in Big D. Just wait til Pacman gets there.
-
marion barber wants 40-60million like LT & LJ, arguably the best running backs in the league (who have also logged more yards in 2 seasons, than barber has in 4 )
jerry jones only wants to pay him 30 million or so....
hmmmmm ??
trouble in Big D ?? :uhsure:
There's always trouble in Big D. Just wait til Pacman gets there.
yup....jerry jones would be smart to hire security guards at EVERY titty bar in dallas, whose only orders are to KEEP PACMAN OUT :whatever:...
I'm sure JJ is simply gonna lay out LT's accomplishments & stats, compared to Barbers & tell him that he's lucky to be making 1/2 of LT's salary, since he's accomplished 10 times more than you have these past 4 years...
LT rushing yards since 05 - around 4787
Barbers rushing yds since 04 -around 2500
LT Tds - around 70
Barber- 29 or so
-
marion barber wants 40-60million like LT & LJ, arguably the best running backs in the league (who have also logged more yards in 2 seasons, than barber has in 4 )
jerry jones only wants to pay him 30 million or so....
hmmmmm ??
trouble in Big D ?? :uhsure:
There's always trouble in Big D. Just wait til Pacman gets there.
yup....jerry jones would be smart to hire security guards at EVERY titty bar in dallas, whose only orders are to KEEP PACMAN OUT :whatever:...
I'm sure JJ is simply gonna lay out LT's accomplishments & stats, compared to Barbers & tell him that he's lucky to be making 1/2 of LT's salary, since he's accomplished 10 times more than you have these past 4 years...
LT rushing yards since 05 - around 4787
Barbers rushing yds since 04 -around 2500
LT Tds - around 70
Barber- 29 or so
Yeah, and MBIII's going to come back with the fact that for some reason they decided to keep him behind that bum Julius Jones the whole time. They'll work something out, and it'll be reasonable.
-
marion barber wants 40-60million like LT & LJ, arguably the best running backs in the league (who have also logged more yards in 2 seasons, than barber has in 4 )
jerry jones only wants to pay him 30 million or so....
hmmmmm ??
trouble in Big D ?? :uhsure:
There's always trouble in Big D. Just wait til Pacman gets there.
yup....jerry jones would be smart to hire security guards at EVERY titty bar in dallas, whose only orders are to KEEP PACMAN OUT :whatever:...
I'm sure JJ is simply gonna lay out LT's accomplishments & stats, compared to Barbers & tell him that he's lucky to be making 1/2 of LT's salary, since he's accomplished 10 times more than you have these past 4 years...
LT rushing yards since 05 - around 4787
Barbers rushing yds since 04 -around 2500
LT Tds - around 70
Barber- 29 or so
Yeah, and MBIII's going to come back with the fact that for some reason they decided to keep him behind that bum Julius Jones the whole time. They'll work something out, and it'll be reasonable.
bottom line is, Barber doesn't have the raw numbers to warrant LT or LJ numbers....
and we really don't know what barber is capable of since he's only started 1 game in the NFL as the official starter... (that the cowboys lost mind you :lmao:)...
personally, I don't find barber worth 40 million....30 million over 6-7 years , YES, but not 60 million over 4 years like LT has got coming his way....
barber is a great short yardage back, but, he can't go the distance & won't be an every down back ...
-
marion barber wants 40-60million like LT & LJ, arguably the best running backs in the league (who have also logged more yards in 2 seasons, than barber has in 4 )
jerry jones only wants to pay him 30 million or so....
hmmmmm ??
trouble in Big D ?? :uhsure:
There's always trouble in Big D. Just wait til Pacman gets there.
yup....jerry jones would be smart to hire security guards at EVERY titty bar in dallas, whose only orders are to KEEP PACMAN OUT :whatever:...
I'm sure JJ is simply gonna lay out LT's accomplishments & stats, compared to Barbers & tell him that he's lucky to be making 1/2 of LT's salary, since he's accomplished 10 times more than you have these past 4 years...
LT rushing yards since 05 - around 4787
Barbers rushing yds since 04 -around 2500
LT Tds - around 70
Barber- 29 or so
Yeah, and MBIII's going to come back with the fact that for some reason they decided to keep him behind that bum Julius Jones the whole time. They'll work something out, and it'll be reasonable.
bottom line is, Barber doesn't have the raw numbers to warrant LT or LJ numbers....
and we really don't know what barber is capable of since he's only started 1 game in the NFL as the official starter... (that the cowboys lost mind you :lmao:)...
personally, I don't find barber worth 40 million....30 million over 6-7 years , YES, but not 60 million over 4 years like LT has got coming his way....
I don't think he's worth that much yet either, but that's what negotiations are about.
And I'll thank you not to mention any Cowboys losses. Jerk. :banghead: :-)
-
Hey, JCC. How about this scenario?
Chad Johnson is demanding out of Cinci, the Pats love to make trades on draft day. How would you like to see Chad Johnson as a number 2 reciever for Tom Brady. I really think it's gonna happen. What do you htink? :rotf:
-
marion barber wants 40-60million like LT & LJ, arguably the best running backs in the league (who have also logged more yards in 2 seasons, than barber has in 4 )
jerry jones only wants to pay him 30 million or so....
hmmmmm ??
trouble in Big D ?? :uhsure:
There's always trouble in Big D. Just wait til Pacman gets there.
yup....jerry jones would be smart to hire security guards at EVERY titty bar in dallas, whose only orders are to KEEP PACMAN OUT :whatever:...
I'm sure JJ is simply gonna lay out LT's accomplishments & stats, compared to Barbers & tell him that he's lucky to be making 1/2 of LT's salary, since he's accomplished 10 times more than you have these past 4 years...
LT rushing yards since 05 - around 4787
Barbers rushing yds since 04 -around 2500
LT Tds - around 70
Barber- 29 or so
Yeah, and MBIII's going to come back with the fact that for some reason they decided to keep him behind that bum Julius Jones the whole time. They'll work something out, and it'll be reasonable.
bottom line is, Barber doesn't have the raw numbers to warrant LT or LJ numbers....
and we really don't know what barber is capable of since he's only started 1 game in the NFL as the official starter... (that the cowboys lost mind you :lmao:)...
personally, I don't find barber worth 40 million....30 million over 6-7 years , YES, but not 60 million over 4 years like LT has got coming his way....
I don't think he's worth that much yet either, but that's what negotiations are about.
And I'll thank you not to mention any Cowboys losses. Jerk. :banghead: :-)
thats awright, my Pats & Bears got royally cornholed by the LUCKIEST TEAM IN HISTORY too...
-
Hey, JCC. How about this scenario?
Chad Johnson is demanding out of Cinci, the Pats love to make trades on draft day. How would you like to see Chad Johnson as a number 2 reciever for Tom Brady. I really think it's gonna happen. What do you htink? :rotf:
I think tom brady needs to HAVE TIME TO THROW against Elite pass rushing teams...
unless the pats have a stealth 350lber waiting for them in the late rounds, I think that would be a big mistake trading their 7 for johnson...
the Pats need brandon albert w/ that #7 pick &/or a defensive FREAK to make their D alot more potent (gholston, dorsey long, ellis)
either way, I think the Pats need a big man, not a showboat.... they are getting away from their roots, that won them 3 SB's (domination up front first & foremost)
I'd love to have C Johnson, but, not if it means giving up better protection for Brady, who did get gang raped by the colts, giants, ravens & eagles...so there is a systemic problem on that Oline that must be fixed first
but then again, 1/2 of todays star players are 3rd rounders & up, so, I'm sure if the Pats do it, they'll have that Oline shored up too...
-
Hey, JCC. How about this scenario?
Chad Johnson is demanding out of Cinci, the Pats love to make trades on draft day. How would you like to see Chad Johnson as a number 2 reciever for Tom Brady. I really think it's gonna happen. What do you htink? :rotf:
I think tom brady needs to HAVE TIME TO THROW against Elite pass rushing teams...
unless the pats have a stealth 350lber waiting for them in the late rounds, I think that would be a big mistake trading their 7 for johnson...
the Pats need brandon albert w/ that #7 pick &/or a defensive FREAK to make their D alot more potent (gholston, dorsey long, ellis)
either way, I think the Pats need a big man, not a showboat.... they are getting away from their roots, that won them 3 SB's (domination up front first & foremost)
I'd love to have C Johnson, but, not if it means giving up better protection for Brady, who did get gang raped by the colts, giants, ravens & eagles...so there is a systemic problem on that Oline that must be fixed first
but then again, 1/2 of todays star players are 3rd rounders & up, so, I'm sure if the Pats do it, they'll have that Oline shored up too...
They could swing something to get the Bungles #9. You never know. Gotta go, see y'all tomorrow.
-
Hey, JCC. How about this scenario?
Chad Johnson is demanding out of Cinci, the Pats love to make trades on draft day. How would you like to see Chad Johnson as a number 2 reciever for Tom Brady. I really think it's gonna happen. What do you htink? :rotf:
I think tom brady needs to HAVE TIME TO THROW against Elite pass rushing teams...
unless the pats have a stealth 350lber waiting for them in the late rounds, I think that would be a big mistake trading their 7 for johnson...
the Pats need brandon albert w/ that #7 pick &/or a defensive FREAK to make their D alot more potent (gholston, dorsey long, ellis)
either way, I think the Pats need a big man, not a showboat.... they are getting away from their roots, that won them 3 SB's (domination up front first & foremost)
I'd love to have C Johnson, but, not if it means giving up better protection for Brady, who did get gang raped by the colts, giants, ravens & eagles...so there is a systemic problem on that Oline that must be fixed first
but then again, 1/2 of todays star players are 3rd rounders & up, so, I'm sure if the Pats do it, they'll have that Oline shored up too...
They could swing something to get the Bungles #9. You never know. Gotta go, see y'all tomorrow.
good point...
and the bungles would be desperate enough to do that...
brandon albert would still prolly be around at #9 .... so might sedric ellis...
wonder who the bengals would need so desperatly to move up 2 spots ?? ... the cornerback cromartie ?? a running back like mcfadden or mendenhall ??
:thatsright: ...dope!!.... well if they get rid of chad & they just lost henry, obviously they'd need a RECEIVER !!! :-) ....
wonder who ??
-
ah ha !!!
now I know whats gonna happen !!
the cowboys will trade Barber to the Patriots, to reunite him w/ Maroney & provide a power runner/blocker for the Pats...
in return, the cowboys get the Pats #7 pick, which they take Darren Mcfadden ...
then the Bengals trade Johnson to the Pats & give them their number 9 pick in return for a late rounder & tons of cleared salary cap.... then the Pats will use the #9 to pick up brandon albert/or clady to provide more protection for brady, so he can actually connect w/ johnson !!! ...
boooyah!!!
you thought last years pats team was great ....LOOK OUT !!
who else can afford C Johnson but the Pats ?? ...highly unlikely chad would play for anyone else for 1 million dollars his first year (just like they did w/ moss & stallworth) ...
chads incentive is playing w/ one of THE greatest ever receivers, on one of the greatest teams ever, w/ one of the greatest QB's ever....he can't get any closer to a SB than he could in NE these next 4 years...
-
Hey, JCC. How about this scenario?
Chad Johnson is demanding out of Cinci, the Pats love to make trades on draft day. How would you like to see Chad Johnson as a number 2 reciever for Tom Brady. I really think it's gonna happen. What do you htink? :rotf:
I think tom brady needs to HAVE TIME TO THROW against Elite pass rushing teams...
unless the pats have a stealth 350lber waiting for them in the late rounds, I think that would be a big mistake trading their 7 for johnson...
the Pats need brandon albert w/ that #7 pick &/or a defensive FREAK to make their D alot more potent (gholston, dorsey long, ellis)
either way, I think the Pats need a big man, not a showboat.... they are getting away from their roots, that won them 3 SB's (domination up front first & foremost)
I'd love to have C Johnson, but, not if it means giving up better protection for Brady, who did get gang raped by the colts, giants, ravens & eagles...so there is a systemic problem on that Oline that must be fixed first
but then again, 1/2 of todays star players are 3rd rounders & up, so, I'm sure if the Pats do it, they'll have that Oline shored up too...
They could swing something to get the Bungles #9. You never know. Gotta go, see y'all tomorrow.
good point...
and the bungles would be desperate enough to do that...
brandon albert would still prolly be around at #9 .... so might sedric ellis...
wonder who the bengals would need so desperatly to move up 2 spots ?? ... the cornerback cromartie ?? a running back like mcfadden or mendenhall ??
:thatsright: ...dope!!.... well if they get rid of chad & they just lost henry, obviously they'd need a RECEIVER !!! :-) ....
wonder who ??
According to Sports Illustrated's mock draft. They'll trade up to get Ellis. It didn't say anything about Johnson, but I figured the Pats could get Johnson and the #9 for their #7 and a second rounder. SI says that is the reason the Pats are showing such interest in Ellis, to bait the Bengals.
-
Hey, JCC. How about this scenario?
Chad Johnson is demanding out of Cinci, the Pats love to make trades on draft day. How would you like to see Chad Johnson as a number 2 reciever for Tom Brady. I really think it's gonna happen. What do you htink? :rotf:
I think tom brady needs to HAVE TIME TO THROW against Elite pass rushing teams...
unless the pats have a stealth 350lber waiting for them in the late rounds, I think that would be a big mistake trading their 7 for johnson...
the Pats need brandon albert w/ that #7 pick &/or a defensive FREAK to make their D alot more potent (gholston, dorsey long, ellis)
either way, I think the Pats need a big man, not a showboat.... they are getting away from their roots, that won them 3 SB's (domination up front first & foremost)
I'd love to have C Johnson, but, not if it means giving up better protection for Brady, who did get gang raped by the colts, giants, ravens & eagles...so there is a systemic problem on that Oline that must be fixed first
but then again, 1/2 of todays star players are 3rd rounders & up, so, I'm sure if the Pats do it, they'll have that Oline shored up too...
They could swing something to get the Bungles #9. You never know. Gotta go, see y'all tomorrow.
good point...
and the bungles would be desperate enough to do that...
brandon albert would still prolly be around at #9 .... so might sedric ellis...
wonder who the bengals would need so desperatly to move up 2 spots ?? ... the cornerback cromartie ?? a running back like mcfadden or mendenhall ??
:thatsright: ...dope!!.... well if they get rid of chad & they just lost henry, obviously they'd need a RECEIVER !!! :-) ....
wonder who ??
According to Sports Illustrated's mock draft. They'll trade up to get Ellis. It didn't say anything about Johnson, but I figured the Pats could get Johnson and the #9 for their #7 and a second rounder. SI says that is the reason the Pats are showing such interest in Ellis, to bait the Bengals.
sounds pretty do'able...
and I think that would still leave brandon albert available at #9, since the ravens would prolly take a QB or Cromartie ...
me likes :naughty:
if this happens, you do know all the scoring the Pats did last year, will be eclipsed this year !!...
#1 WR randy moss
#2 WR wes welker
#3 WR Chad Johnson
#4 TE ben watson/david thomas (hurt all last year)
#5 RB's Maroney, Sammy Morris healthy again & Kevin Faulk ....
#6- Oline- Brandon Albert added to the mix for bulldozing run blocking & brick wall pass protection
thats flatout scary ....
-
Hey, JCC. How about this scenario?
Chad Johnson is demanding out of Cinci, the Pats love to make trades on draft day. How would you like to see Chad Johnson as a number 2 reciever for Tom Brady. I really think it's gonna happen. What do you htink? :rotf:
I think tom brady needs to HAVE TIME TO THROW against Elite pass rushing teams...
unless the pats have a stealth 350lber waiting for them in the late rounds, I think that would be a big mistake trading their 7 for johnson...
the Pats need brandon albert w/ that #7 pick &/or a defensive FREAK to make their D alot more potent (gholston, dorsey long, ellis)
either way, I think the Pats need a big man, not a showboat.... they are getting away from their roots, that won them 3 SB's (domination up front first & foremost)
I'd love to have C Johnson, but, not if it means giving up better protection for Brady, who did get gang raped by the colts, giants, ravens & eagles...so there is a systemic problem on that Oline that must be fixed first
but then again, 1/2 of todays star players are 3rd rounders & up, so, I'm sure if the Pats do it, they'll have that Oline shored up too...
They could swing something to get the Bungles #9. You never know. Gotta go, see y'all tomorrow.
good point...
and the bungles would be desperate enough to do that...
brandon albert would still prolly be around at #9 .... so might sedric ellis...
wonder who the bengals would need so desperatly to move up 2 spots ?? ... the cornerback cromartie ?? a running back like mcfadden or mendenhall ??
:thatsright: ...dope!!.... well if they get rid of chad & they just lost henry, obviously they'd need a RECEIVER !!! :-) ....
wonder who ??
According to Sports Illustrated's mock draft. They'll trade up to get Ellis. It didn't say anything about Johnson, but I figured the Pats could get Johnson and the #9 for their #7 and a second rounder. SI says that is the reason the Pats are showing such interest in Ellis, to bait the Bengals.
sounds pretty do'able...
and I think that would still leave brandon albert available at #9, since the ravens would prolly take a QB or Cromartie ...
me likes :naughty:
if this happens, you do know all the scoring the Pats did last year, will be eclipsed this year !!...
#1 WR randy moss
#2 WR wes welker
#3 WR Chad Johnson
#4 TE ben watson/david thomas (hurt all last year)
#5 RB's Maroney, Sammy Morris healthy again & Kevin Faulk ....
#6- Oline- Brandon Albert added to the mix for bulldozing run blocking & brick wall pass protection
thats flatout scary ....
Plus, Beeeelichik not blowing the Super Bowl.
-
Hey, JCC. How about this scenario?
Chad Johnson is demanding out of Cinci, the Pats love to make trades on draft day. How would you like to see Chad Johnson as a number 2 reciever for Tom Brady. I really think it's gonna happen. What do you htink? :rotf:
I think tom brady needs to HAVE TIME TO THROW against Elite pass rushing teams...
unless the pats have a stealth 350lber waiting for them in the late rounds, I think that would be a big mistake trading their 7 for johnson...
the Pats need brandon albert w/ that #7 pick &/or a defensive FREAK to make their D alot more potent (gholston, dorsey long, ellis)
either way, I think the Pats need a big man, not a showboat.... they are getting away from their roots, that won them 3 SB's (domination up front first & foremost)
I'd love to have C Johnson, but, not if it means giving up better protection for Brady, who did get gang raped by the colts, giants, ravens & eagles...so there is a systemic problem on that Oline that must be fixed first
but then again, 1/2 of todays star players are 3rd rounders & up, so, I'm sure if the Pats do it, they'll have that Oline shored up too...
They could swing something to get the Bungles #9. You never know. Gotta go, see y'all tomorrow.
good point...
and the bungles would be desperate enough to do that...
brandon albert would still prolly be around at #9 .... so might sedric ellis...
wonder who the bengals would need so desperatly to move up 2 spots ?? ... the cornerback cromartie ?? a running back like mcfadden or mendenhall ??
:thatsright: ...dope!!.... well if they get rid of chad & they just lost henry, obviously they'd need a RECEIVER !!! :-) ....
wonder who ??
According to Sports Illustrated's mock draft. They'll trade up to get Ellis. It didn't say anything about Johnson, but I figured the Pats could get Johnson and the #9 for their #7 and a second rounder. SI says that is the reason the Pats are showing such interest in Ellis, to bait the Bengals.
sounds pretty do'able...
and I think that would still leave brandon albert available at #9, since the ravens would prolly take a QB or Cromartie ...
me likes :naughty:
if this happens, you do know all the scoring the Pats did last year, will be eclipsed this year !!...
#1 WR randy moss
#2 WR wes welker
#3 WR Chad Johnson
#4 TE ben watson/david thomas (hurt all last year)
#5 RB's Maroney, Sammy Morris healthy again & Kevin Faulk ....
#6- Oline- Brandon Albert added to the mix for bulldozing run blocking & brick wall pass protection
thats flatout scary ....
Plus, Beeeelichik not blowing the Super Bowl.
man, it looked as though the giants were an unstoppable force last year... they were a fluke, but, the football Gods were behind them & I don't know if anything would've got the Pats by them in that SB....
if anything, Tom Bradys cockiness, combined w/ his injury did more to sink the Pats than belichicks seemingly lack of preparation &/or answers for what was happening to thier offense..... remember, belichik is a defensive guy & he basically puts all his trust in his OC (who is a youngin) ...hopefully that youngin learned something about smashmouth football in that SB....
I mean, when your QB is consistently being raped by a 4 man rush, you gotta stick your nastiest fullback in the back field, just to lay some lumber on a Dlineman or blitzer to RING THEIR BELL a few times.... the pats never did & just let the giants confidence & ego's blossom all game long...
-
Hey, nobody's perfect twice: Pats to go 12-4
On Pro Football
Hector Longo
The National Football League succeeded again in keeping Bill Belichick up late at night.
Blessed with the easiest schedule in the NFL (record-wise 99-157) thanks to six AFC East gimmes and rotating through the dregs of both the NFC and AFC West, the Patriots got hammered by the league with one of the most physically taxing slates a team could endure.
Five night games on national TV with three on the road, plus two back-to-backers on the West Coast will force Belichick to split his time between coach, travel agent and chief motivator.
Will this team make the unorthodox move and stay in California the early October week between the San Francisco game and the San Diego game or will the club fly coast-to-coast-to-coast-to-coast-to-coast, all in an eight-day span?
How about in December when they play at Seattle on the 7th and Oakland on the 14th?
Belichick has a lot more on his mind than the upcoming draft (April 26-27) and the impending June free-agent signing frenzy.
Taking all the factors into account, the Patriots will take a giant (oops, sorry folks) step back toward the pack, coming off the perfect 16-0 regular season. It says here New England will be human and will be beaten four times, a solid 12-4 campaign.
Week 1 vs. Kansas City: Belichick introduces the nine-man front and dares the Chiefs to pass. They can't. Damon Huard can't. Brodie Croyle can't. And Len Dawson and Joe Montana aren't walking through that door, fans. Pats breeze, much to the glee of the Foxboro faithful.
Week 2 at New York Jets: Belichick makes pregame announcement that jobs will be lost if Eric Mangini's hated crew ends the Pats' regular-season win streak (by this game it's 20). Fear and rekindled "Spygate" talk are exceptional motivators. Pats dominate green team and move to 2-0.
Week 3 vs. Miami: Vegas puts out an NFL record 35-point line and the Pats cover easily, causing another uneasy confrontation between on-again, off-again pals Belichick and Bill Parcells.
Week 4: Bye, bye, bye. Too early and at just the wrong time.
Week 5 at San Francisco: All the momentum gone, with the Pats looking ahead to a week in wine country and next Sunday's meeting with Shawne Merriman and the boys, New England finally loses a regular-season game, its first since December 2006. Haverhill's Duane Carlisle has the 49ers in the shape of their lives. Alex Smith returns with a vengeance. The Niners stun the slumbering Pats, who fall to 3-1. The murmurs about an underachieving Randy Moss begin to simmer.
Week 6 at San Diego: The NFL should be ashamed of this kind of scheduling. Toppling LaDainian Tomlinson and the Chargers under these circumstances is a humongous task, one an aging linebacking crew can't handle.
Week 7 vs. Denver: Gone are the days when the Broncos were a team to fear. Mike Shanahan rotates through the downward coaching spiral. And the Pats get back on the right track with a stumbling win.
Week 8 vs. St. Louis: Sandwiched between the Monday nighter with Denver and the game of the year coming next week at Indy, this would, in the past, scream out "trap game." The Rams, 3-13 a year ago, would fit in nicely with AFC East bottom-feeders: Miami, Buffalo and the Jets. Pats sleepwalk, but prevail rather easily.
Week 9 at Indianapolis: Belichick's defense simply can't stop the Mannings when it matters. Still, it's the game of the year, a Sunday night shootout and a wonderful preview of the AFC title game.
Week 10 vs. Buffalo: Talk about the right time for a run through the AFC East. Buffalo is the perfect elixir for a drained team needing a waltz or two.
Week 11 vs. New York Jets: When is a rivalry not a rivalry? When the Jets stand no chance of beating the Pats on any given Sunday. Another miserable performance by a divisional foe turns into a laugher.
Week 12 at Miami Dolphins: By now, Bill Parcells has plotted the course back to respectability for Miami, but there is much work to be done. Expect Miami to close fast, like Parcells' 1993 Patriots, but savvy New England snatches the win away late from the hungry, young fish.
Week 13 vs. Pittsburgh Steelers: It's not quite December (Nov. 30), but the Pats hit their prime at just the right time. Tom Brady outshines Ben Roethlisberger in a game which has to be changed to a nationally televised night game by the NFL. Stick a fork in the Steelers. Any Bill Cowher-era momentum is wiped away for good here.
Week 14 at Seattle: If the Patriots do one thing well, they unmask cowards and frauds. The Seahawks are both. Belichick has his team thinking this could be a possible Super Bowl matchup, and the New Englanders play like it.
Week 15 at Oakland: Laurence Maroney obliterates the 1,000-yard rushing barrier for the first time in his career. The ridiculous Raiders offer little resistance in a December yawner.
Week 16 vs. Arizona: The Pats pay here, at home, for all the traveling. All I can say, is let's hope this one doesn't cost the Pats home-field advantage in the AFC title game or, even worse, a playoff bye. Matt Leinart puts the beer bong down long enough to lead the Cards to the cusp of the NFC West crown with a win. They clinch it here in Foxboro, by waxing a weary group of frequent flyers, who are coming off their fourth West Coast game of the campaign.
Week 17 at Buffalo: A post-Christmas yawner. But why not find a way to get the momentum flowing toward the playoffs by assaulting an overmatched J.P. Losman? The Bills are weak and meek, falling to the Pats, who lick their wounds with a playoff bye.
So what does 12-4 get you? It gets the Patriots right where they want to be, owning a playoff bye and remaining home possibly right through the AFC title game.
Accept the four losses, folks As we all found out in February, nobody's perfect.
http://www.eagletribune.com/pusports/local_story_107002906.html?keyword=secondarystory
I don't know which is funnier, the loss to the 49ers or the Falcons clinching their division in Foxboro.
:rotf:
-
Week 14 at Seattle: If the Patriots do one thing well, they unmask cowards and frauds. The Seahawks are both. Belichick has his team thinking this could be a possible Super Bowl matchup, and the New Englanders play like it.
:bird: Hector! LOL
I can see the Pats going 12-4. Nothing wrong with that and they shure as heck are good enough. (or better) However, I agree a loss to the 9ers is laughable. Never happen. A Pats win in Seattle on the other hand? Never happen! You heard it here (I don't know when you heard it first) and you will hear it here again. Seattle beats the Pats at Qwest.
As to "other". Ocho Stupido stays in Cincy. It's an $8M hit to release or trade him. He is likely to stay a Bungle IMHO.
-
thats a NICE piece there formerlurker....
and it accuratly depicts how HARD the patriots schedule really is...
emmit smith & troy aikman used to say "its not who you play so much, its WHEN YOU PLAY THEM" ...
& if the Pats had as EASY of a schedule as the colts did last year & this year, not only would they have won the SB last year by 40 points, but this year would be the same...
IMO, the Pats are better when they lose a couple a games ...will they lose 4 this year?? ....its possible, but I think 3 games may be more likely....
Colts will get their 2-3 bogus interference calls & put themselves into scoring position, but I still say the Pats will beat them if maroney/morris are healthy & their #7 draft pick if a winner... the colts are actually the team thats getting long in the tooth (from manning/harrison on down) .... look for bob sanders to get hurt & their D to fall apart .... rumors are even saying Dwight Freeny is a shell of himself from that foot injury too ..
bottom line is, I don't see the colts being a better team this year, whereas their divisional foes in JAX & TN will be better & one of them will take the colts down since the colts have no monkey biz w/ scheduling giving them the edge this year...
as for the chargers ?? ....obviously they're a tough team & facing them the way that they are will prolly end up for a big LOSS for the Pats..... but, the chargers are going on year 2 w/ Norv & that can't be a good thing for them....
the chargers just dumped the guy they should actually kept for the next 4 years (michael turner) & I' betting their injury bug will be back to haunt them a bit....
-
Week 14 at Seattle: If the Patriots do one thing well, they unmask cowards and frauds. The Seahawks are both. Belichick has his team thinking this could be a possible Super Bowl matchup, and the New Englanders play like it.
:bird: Hector! LOL
I can see the Pats going 12-4. Nothing wrong with that and they shure as heck are good enough. (or better) However, I agree a loss to the 9ers is laughable. Never happen. A Pats win in Seattle on the other hand? Never happen! You heard it here (I don't know when you heard it first) and you will hear it here again. Seattle beats the Pats at Qwest.
As to "other". Ocho Stupido stays in Cincy. It's an $8M hit to release or trade him. He is likely to stay a Bungle IMHO.
ocho stupido can negate that contract by signing away that money ?? ....
and I agree w/ you about the seattle game...it will be tough because seattle is always GREAT at home & always good at the end of the season ...it will be close