Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3111213
Results 181 to 190 of 190
  1. #181
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    14,647
    Quote Originally Posted by metswon69 View Post
    Sure but that's a solid team on the other side even with their injuries. If anyone can QB their team to beat the Rams without his full roster, its Brady. He'll find open receivers and mismatches as long as he isn't on his backside most of time. I wouldn't be super confident in Stafford either.

    I definitely like the Ram's chances but I wouldn't say its a give me game.
    I wasn't completely discounting the Bucs. They're the Super Bowl champion for a reason. But they are running into a superior opponent and the Rams don't fear Brady at all. The game isn't over, but it's 27-3 now. I don't see the Bucs coming back from that.

  2. #182
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    14,647
    Quote Originally Posted by Midnightbottle View Post
    Surprise people there a ****ing mega team. More like living up to the talent on the team. But I disagree Tampa will win.

    Sent from my LM-K500 using Tapatalk
    I'm sticking by my prediction. It's almost time to start the Brady retirement party.

  3. #183
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    15,269
    Quote Originally Posted by Andrei00 View Post
    I mean they absolutely destroyed KC. They destroyed the Rams, on the road, and that was without their best player, and they beat Allen and Buffalo. They did it all with mediocre to bad QB play all year.

    I could honestly care less about who people would have preferred to play, but how in the world can a team that beat three legit contenders, two of them in a very convincing fashion, be called an unworthy 1 seed (let alone the worst 1 seed in history, as some have claimed)?
    And most of that was months ago and in the regular season. The Titans barely avoided being swept by the Texans and in a 16 game season would've locked in the #1 seed at 11-5 which I'm not sure has been done before. I'm really not sure why you're so upset at the idea that teams would rather play the Titans than go to BUF or KC against two of the best QBs in the league. I mean, if we needed an indication that they weren't as good as they seemed, losing a 19-16 game to the Bengals would probably be it.

  4. #184
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    Posts
    45,912
    Quote Originally Posted by RaiderLakersA's View Post
    I wasn't completely discounting the Bucs. They're the Super Bowl champion for a reason. But they are running into a superior opponent and the Rams don't fear Brady at all. The game isn't over, but it's 27-3 now. I don't see the Bucs coming back from that.
    They almost made the comeback lol. All I'm saying is you were way too certain that the Rams were going to win handedly and they just barely squeaked it out.

  5. #185
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    5,733
    Quote Originally Posted by manbearchef View Post
    And most of that was months ago and in the regular season. The Titans barely avoided being swept by the Texans and in a 16 game season would've locked in the #1 seed at 11-5 which I'm not sure has been done before. I'm really not sure why you're so upset at the idea that teams would rather play the Titans than go to BUF or KC against two of the best QBs in the league. I mean, if we needed an indication that they weren't as good as they seemed, losing a 19-16 game to the Bengals would probably be it.
    I could care less about who people would have rather played, that's not how seeding is done, thankfully. It's the people that use "weakest number 1 seed" and "ever" or "since..." to describe a team that beat three legit Super Bowl contenders and embarrassed two. In the regular season, obviously, again, that's how the seeding process works.

    If yesterday's game, which has no relevance whatsoever in this argument, but if that game is any indicator of anything, why is it not Green Bay that is the weakest number one seed ever? Because Rodgers and because they're sexier, but that's also stupid. A team that beats three legit contenders and embarrasses two of them has earned its seeding and should not have it questioned or disrespected like that.

  6. #186
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Posts
    2,118
    Quote Originally Posted by manbearchef View Post
    You pretty much answered your own question. I think they're a very talented team with a great coach, but given all the injuries you never knew what you'd get from them. In a playoff game, almost anyone would rather play them than have to go into the BUF/KC atmosphere and play against Allen/Mahomes.

    Tannehill has been criminally underrated the last couple years, but he **** the bed big time yesterday and isn't scaring teams the way the other QBs are.
    I think you are over emphasizing the importance of the team base on who the QB is while everything else seem secondary to it. Titans were clearly the team other teams would avoid in the AFC if possible once Henry was back in the lineup. If fearing the QB is really that important, most teams would avoid facing the back to back MVP winner Aaron Rodgers over any other team from the NFC yet they just lost to a team with a better QB?

    The better team has the better defense and can dominate the time of possession when it comes to the playoffs regardless of who is the most feared QB!

  7. #187
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    121,895
    Quote Originally Posted by cattusmaru View Post
    I think you are over emphasizing the importance of the team base on who the QB is while everything else seem secondary to it. Titans were clearly the team other teams would avoid in the AFC if possible once Henry was back in the lineup. If fearing the QB is really that important, most teams would avoid facing the back to back MVP winner Aaron Rodgers over any other team from the NFC yet they just lost to a team with a better QB?

    The better team has the better defense and can dominate the time of possession when it comes to the playoffs regardless of who is the most feared QB!
    yup. I have said from day 1 A qbs best weapon is defense.. Always has been and always will be

  8. #188
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    15,269
    Quote Originally Posted by Andrei00 View Post
    I could care less about who people would have rather played, that's not how seeding is done, thankfully. It's the people that use "weakest number 1 seed" and "ever" or "since..." to describe a team that beat three legit Super Bowl contenders and embarrassed two. In the regular season, obviously, again, that's how the seeding process works.

    If yesterday's game, which has no relevance whatsoever in this argument, but if that game is any indicator of anything, why is it not Green Bay that is the weakest number one seed ever? Because Rodgers and because they're sexier, but that's also stupid. A team that beats three legit contenders and embarrasses two of them has earned its seeding and should not have it questioned or disrespected like that.
    It seems you have some permanent fixation on some ESPN "worst #1 seed ever" take that I've never said. They were a suspect #1 seed and that's literally all I've said. I also had zero faith in the Packers to go very far because they're annual choke artists, though I will say I thought they'd at least win a game.

    Quote Originally Posted by More-Than-Most View Post
    yup. I have said from day 1 A qbs best weapon is defense.. Always has been and always will be
    Except when Rodgers defense allows just 6 points (+7 by ST) and he can't put up more than 10 despite a good OL and arguably the best WR in the game.

  9. #189
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    5,733
    Quote Originally Posted by manbearchef View Post
    It seems you have some permanent fixation on some ESPN "worst #1 seed ever" take that I've never said. They were a suspect #1 seed and that's literally all I've said. I also had zero faith in the Packers to go very far because they're annual choke artists, though I will say I thought they'd at least win a game.
    I do have a fixation with it, I've admitted as such. You called it the weakest pair of number one seeds you've seen in a while. Granted, it's not as bad as calling it the weakest all time, but it still doesn't make any sense. They beat three legit Super Bowl contenders, embarrassed two. Pretty sure that's more than any other contender could claim. They did it while playing a historical number of players due to injuries. If that's not a team worthy of their seeding, I don't know what/who is.

    Also, if postseason success or lack of it you think is any indicator as to how weak, or strong, or worthy a team is of their number 1 seeding, they're not the first one-and-done number 1 seed. As a matter of fact, since the 1990 season, a number one seed is more likely to lose in the Divisional round (25.8%), than win the Super Bowl (22.6%). Judging by that, they are well within the rule, and are not in fact the exception.

  10. #190
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Coventry RI
    Posts
    5,542
    Boy if they could of only gotten a few first downs or a FG and bam no blocked punt and they win. They stopped SF on 4th down they had momentum. All they had to do was drive a little

    Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
    One More Time

Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3111213

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •