Official 2011-12 NFL Regular Season Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
For all the talk you hear about how you have to have ice running through your veins to be a kicker, I think it's kind of comical that this little break in routine is somehow actually being brought up as an excuse.
 
[quote name='TKtheknight']Is it me or does this year's Super Bowl feel like it's a rerun episode on TV? I dunno maybe it's because I'm bummed my Niners lost, but I think Brady and the Pats will get their revenge and beat the Giants. If Giants win, then Eli is better than big brother Peyton.[/QUOTE]

I am the biggest Eli fan around - but Peyton has 4 league MVPs. You can't top that. Now, if Eli wins I'd of course rather have his career because titles is what it is all about as a fan but comparing them as individual players? There is no comparison.

[quote name='Thekrakrabbit']Right up my alley. This is going to be another tight game obviously but I didn't really like the way the Giants played against the 49ers. Pats have worse defense but much better offense and their passing game is almost unbeatable...and obviously it is boring (slant, curl, slant, slant, curl, slant, TD).

I like the Pats here actually. -3 looks like a perfectly decent line to me, I have trouble thinking the Giants are going to be able to pressure Brady enough to force him to make mistakes.[/QUOTE]

Really? You didn't like the way the Giants played (on the road, in terrible weather on the sloppiest field in the league against arguably the best defense in the league) but you liked the way the Pats played against the Ravens (at home, barely winning on a fluke missed FG with Tom Brady getting outplayed by Joe Flacco)?

I don't know who is going to win but I feel better than I did 4 years ago about our chances. This game is a pick 'em and that line is a joke - especially if Gronk isn't 100%.
 
[quote name='Soodmeg']Did you guys see this explaining why Billy missed his kick?

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-s...-rushed-fateful-field-goal-try-013101618.html

Its a yahoo article so meh but its good for cooler talk. It also raises the questions, why the fuck do you have 100 people "working" on the sidelines yet no one can make sure the down is right on the scoreboard? There is not a sport out there that gets more things wrong with 10x the amount of people and cameras view than the NFL. fuck they are horrid.


For those who dont want to click, basically on the last set of positions the scoreboard read the wrong down because of the Boldin fumble out of bounds. It fumbled past a first down so the scoreboard listed it that way but really it was 2nd down. That threw off the kickers routine of practice on the sideline and why everyone seemed so rushed when they were taking it. Billy wasnt even near the sidelines when they were calling for him to go into the game because he thought it was still 3rd down after looking at the board.[/QUOTE]

I saw that. And the first thought that came to mind?

"Well, the home team controls the scoreboard"...

Just putting it out there, because I wouldn't put it past them at all to have done it "accidentally" on purpose.
 
[quote name='Javery']Really? You didn't like the way the Giants played (on the road, in terrible weather on the sloppiest field in the league against arguably the best defense in the league) but you liked the way the Pats played against the Ravens (at home, barely winning on a fluke missed FG with Tom Brady getting outplayed by Joe Flacco)?

I don't know who is going to win but I feel better than I did 4 years ago about our chances. This game is a pick 'em and that line is a joke - especially if Gronk isn't 100%.[/QUOTE]

While I agree with you that the line should probably be -1 or pick 'em, your first paragraph is a bit disingenuous in only mentioning the factors the Giants overcame and then only mentioning the things that broke the Patriots way.

Again, I'm not saying I disagree with you that it's a fair matchup, but if you're listing these factors you should also mention the Bradshaw fumble which was whistled dead, the punt which bounced off Kyle Williams' leg, and the two different tailor-made interceptions where multiple 49ers collided trying to pick a pass.

My point is there's rarely a Super Bowl team who didn't have some luck break their way. The Patriots are fortunate to be in the Super Bowl based on how they played last week, but the Giants caught some breaks too. Hell, if Tony Romo completes that easy pass to Miles Austin last month, the Giants are golfing right now. ;)
 
[quote name='keithp']I saw that. And the first thought that came to mind?

"Well, the home team controls the scoreboard"...

Just putting it out there, because I wouldn't put it past them at all to have done it "accidentally" on purpose.[/QUOTE]

:roll: I can't believe I'm even going to address this nonsense.

This stupid story has the potential to be the stupidest of the NFL season. Anyone who's ever attended an NFL game knows the scoreboard being off is not an exceedingly rare occurrence - which is precisely why it's not an official measure of anything. The down and distance markers are there on the sidelines for a reason. If the Ravens (and specifically Cundiff) don't know what down it is, they're idiots. With less than 30 seconds left in a game in which you're trailing by 3, the kicker should probably be ready to get on the field. If he's not, call the fricking time out that you have. Harbaugh is still sitting on it.

If this is any team but the Patriots, this isn't even a whisper of a story. Such ridiculousness.
 
[quote name='bvharris']While I agree with you that the line should probably be -1 or pick 'em, your first paragraph is a bit disingenuous in only mentioning the factors the Giants overcame and then only mentioning the things that broke the Patriots way.

Again, I'm not saying I disagree with you that it's a fair matchup, but if you're listing these factors you should also mention the Bradshaw fumble which was whistled dead, the punt which bounced off Kyle Williams' leg, and the two different tailor-made interceptions where multiple 49ers collided trying to pick a pass.

My point is there's rarely a Super Bowl team who didn't have some luck break their way. The Patriots are fortunate to be in the Super Bowl based on how they played last week, but the Giants caught some breaks too. Hell, if Tony Romo completes that easy pass to Miles Austin last month, the Giants are golfing right now. ;)[/QUOTE]

Of course!!! I'm an irrational Giants fan!!! That's what I do.

The Giants definitely got some key breaks in the game - we were owed a whole bunch from the Packers game though. I didn't feel anything about the Bradshaw fumble when it happened because I thought the play was dead but we've all seen that happen 1000 times and go the other way. I guess that was a lucky whistle? The first punt muff was definitely a lucky bounce but I think the second one was a good play by our special teams (just like that Lee Evans non-TD was a great play by the Pats defense).

Side note: regarding the first fumble by Kyle Williams, why can't the recovering team advance the football? This is the only rule I don't think I had heard of before and I've been watching football for 30+ years (I've probably missed less than 10 Giants games since I was in like 3rd grade). At the time I thought the refs robbed us of 7 points because it was recovered by the Giants and easily ran into the end zone. What is the deal there? A fumble is a fumble but not on a punt?
 
[quote name='Javery']Of course!!! I'm an irrational Giants fan!!! That's what I do.

The Giants definitely got some key breaks in the game - we were owed a whole bunch from the Packers game though. I didn't feel anything about the Bradshaw fumble when it happened because I thought the play was dead but we've all seen that happen 1000 times and go the other way. I guess that was a lucky whistle? The first punt muff was definitely a lucky bounce but I think the second one was a good play by our special teams (just like that Lee Evans non-TD was a great play by the Pats defense).[/QUOTE]

That's why I didn't mention the second fumble. ;)

[quote name='Javery']Side note: regarding the first fumble by Kyle Williams, why can't the recovering team advance the football? This is the only rule I don't think I had heard of before. At the time I thought the refs robbed us of 7 points because it was recovered by the Giants and easily ran into the end zone. What is the deal there? A fumble is a fumble but not on a punt?[/QUOTE]

A muffed punt recovered by the kicking team can't be advanced by rule. I don't know why that's the rule, but it's been that way for a while.

I mentioned this during the game, but it's amazing to me how many NFL special team players seem to be completely unaware of this rule and scoop it up anyway instead of just falling on it. It's the same thing with botched or blocked extra points, which similarly can't be scored upon by the defense, and yet you often see guys trying to run them back.

So even if they'd ruled on the field that the ball had hit his leg, they only would have got it at the spot anyway. They eventually got it right, so all it cost the Giants is a challenge. Would've been pretty tough to tell it bounced off his leg at game speed unless you were at the exact right angle.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='bvharris']A muffed punt recovered by the kicking team can't be advanced by rule. I don't know why that's the rule, but it's been that way for a while.

I mentioned this during the game, but it's amazing to me how many NFL special team players seem to be completely unaware of this rule and scoop it up anyway instead of just falling on it. It's the same thing with bothced or blocked extra points, which similarly can't be scored upon by the defense, and yet you often see guys trying to run them back.

So even if they'd ruled on the field that the ball had hit his leg, they only would have got it at the spot anyway. They eventually got it right, so all it cost the Giants is a challenge. Would've been pretty tough to tell it bounced off his leg at game speed unless you were at the exact right angle.[/QUOTE]

My favorite part was how Kyle Williams was like "I didn't touch it" when there are 250 HD cameras on him from every angle.

The extra point thing always makes me nuts too - same thing with 2pt. conversions that are picked off.

I am really curious why the rule is set up like that. Is there some way for the kicking team to take advantage of this? It doesn't make sense - after the receiving team touches the ball it becomes live - they could advance the ball on a kickoff, right?
 
[quote name='Javery']My favorite part was how Kyle Williams was like "I didn't touch it" when there are 250 HD cameras on him from every angle.
[/QUOTE]

It was a stupid play on his part, there's absolutely no upside in running alongside a bouncing punt. If you're not going to field it, get the hell out of the way.
[quote name='Javery']
I am really curious why the rule is set up like that. Is there some way for the kicking team to take advantage of this? It doesn't make sense - after the receiving team touches the ball it becomes live - they could advance the ball on a kickoff, right?[/QUOTE]

I'm not sure, but here's my guess: Most fumbles in the NFL are somewhere around a 50/50 proposition in terms of recovery because there's plenty of players from both teams around the ball (more so on rushing plays that passing, but the same principle applies). On a muffed punt, it's only the returner back there with the gunners flying down the field towards him and really the only ones likely to have a play on the ball in most instances (unless the returner recovers himself). Everyone else on the receiving team either has their back to the play or is not in a position to recover. Given that, I'd think not being able to advance a muffed punt is a concession to how much of an advantage the kicking team has in recovering it, and also the high likelihood that a lot of them would result in TDs given that there's no one on the receiving team back to make a play besides the returner himself.

Again, that's just my guess as to the rationale, but I think it makes sense. I'm sure there's an official explanation for it out there somewhere.
 
I found the actual reason: A muffed punt is never "possessed" by the receiving team and is considered an "uncontrolled touch", which is why it can't be advanced by the kicking team. That explains why if a returner fumbles during his return, it can be advanced by the kicking team. I'd assume the old "football move" rule applies here as it does in most cases of possession.

The same would presumably be true on kickoffs, although obviously the instances of a muffed kickoff being recovered by the kicking team are much less common. But that's also the reason that the kicking team can't advance the ball if they recover an onside kick.
 
[quote name='bvharris']:roll: I can't believe I'm even going to address this nonsense.

This stupid story has the potential to be the stupidest of the NFL season. Anyone who's ever attended an NFL game knows the scoreboard being off is not an exceedingly rare occurrence - which is precisely why it's not an official measure of anything. The down and distance markers are there on the sidelines for a reason. If the Ravens (and specifically Cundiff) don't know what down it is, they're idiots. With less than 30 seconds left in a game in which you're trailing by 3, the kicker should probably be ready to get on the field. If he's not, call the fricking time out that you have. Harbaugh is still sitting on it.

If this is any team but the Patriots, this isn't even a whisper of a story. Such ridiculousness.[/QUOTE]

Yes, if it's any other team except one that's been KNOWN to cheat, you're probably right.

Seems I'm not the only one that had that thought
 
[quote name='keithp']Yes, if it's any other team except one that's been KNOWN to cheat, you're probably right.

Seems I'm not the only one that had that thought[/QUOTE]

I'm not taking that bait and running with it, but if you still believe that the Patriots weren't punished for something plenty of other teams did, I have some land in the Everglades you might be interested in.

In any case, here's what the scoreboard showed on 4th down:

cundiffb.png


My eyes aren't what they used to be, but I'm pretty sure that says "Down: 4th"

So the scoreboard operator thought the Boldin play resulted in a 1st down and marked it that way, but by the time the series was over had corrected the mistake. This happens more often than you seem to think, the networks make the mistake all the time too, which is why neither the scoreboard nor what's on the television are official. Only the down markers on the sidelines are.

I'm not saying that you think the Patriots cheated here, or if you are just trying to stir the pot on a slow morning. But if you do actually believe there was some funny business at work here, you're an idiot, or at the very least need to stop blindly buying into what the media spins.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='dafoomie']The real error was Harbaugh not using his timeout.[/QUOTE]

This.

Made no sense. That timeout goes wasted if you make or miss the kick.
 
Late to the party but that non fumble call was brutal. If Bradshaw would have gotten free from that tackle and got a few more yards no way the ref would have blown the play dead. Also why is the ref even blowing the whistle? Let the play end then make the ruling. Competition committee needs to make the refs take the damn whistle out of their mouths, it's not a pacifier.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12ZF2LeSMm0
Look at the ref. Just chillin until he see's the ball out. He could have let the play end and ruled forward progress after the ball was recovered. A ref did that in the Saints game but the other refs overruled him since he was wrong.

And Kyle Williams better not be on the roster next year.
 
Barely going backwards. Forwards progress should be when he is being driven back and deliberately being held up. Not when you start to fall back and in the process of being tackled but not yet tackled.
 
[quote name='Javery']He was going backwards though... it was a quick whistle but not a horrible call.[/QUOTE]

This is pretty much right. Typically you wouldn't see a whistle on that since it was so quick, but the definition of forward progress is when "the runner's forward progress toward the opponents' goal line is stopped by contact with an opponent, with little chance to be resumed. The exact moment at which the player's forward progress stops is subject to the judgment of the officials." I can definitely see how that meets the "little chance to be resumed" criteria.

It was definitely still fortunate for the Giants since I think it could have been easily ruled a fumble, but I don't think 49er fans should be starting any conspiracy theories about it. It certainly wasn't anywhere in the vicinity of egregiousness of the Jennings non-fumble.
 
[quote name='dafoomie']The real error was Harbaugh not using his timeout.[/QUOTE]

Harbaugh on scoreboard-gate:

“We knew what the down and distance were on our last series. The scoreboard was not a factor for us. Any suggestion that the wrong down information was a deliberate effort to affect the outcome of the game is nonsense.”

Hopefully that puts this nonsense to bed, though of course it won't. :bomb:
 
[quote name='bvharris']This is pretty much right. Typically you wouldn't see a whistle on that since it was so quick, but the definition of forward progress is when "the runner's forward progress toward the opponents' goal line is stopped by contact with an opponent, with little chance to be resumed. The exact moment at which the player's forward progress stops is subject to the judgment of the officials." I can definitely see how that meets the "little chance to be resumed" criteria.

It was definitely still fortunate for the Giants since I think it could have been easily ruled a fumble, but I don't think 49er fans should be starting any conspiracy theories about it. It certainly wasn't anywhere in the vicinity of egregiousness of the Jennings non-fumble.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. It was just a call that didn't go our way. 5 times out of 10 the whistle won't blow that fast, the other 5 it will.
 
[quote name='DestroVega']Exactly. It was just a call that didn't go our way. 5 times out of 10 the whistle won't blow that fast, the other 5 it will.[/QUOTE]

Agreed - this is why "luck" is a definite component of winning a championship.
 
[quote name='DestroVega']This.

Made no sense. That timeout goes wasted if you make or miss the kick.[/QUOTE]

If he called a timeout then everyone would have been like 'he iced the kicker!!! lololol'. If cundiff wasn't confident he could have called a timeout himself. Don't blame Harbaugh.
 
[quote name='Reo 15x']If he called a timeout then everyone would have been like 'he iced the kicker!!! lololol'. If cundiff wasn't confident he could have called a timeout himself. Don't blame Harbaugh.[/QUOTE]

This post is full of stupid.

One, there has never been a kicker who called a timeout in a late game situation. They are not even on the list of in terms of hierarchy. Are you serious?

Two, its not icing the kicker to call a timeout a full 20 to 30 seconds before he tries to kick it. That only applies to the tactic of intentional waiting to the very last second to call it as to make the kicker try 2 times. It doesnt apply when your entire sideline is confused as to what is going on and people are rushing all over the place with only 20 second left in the game.

Blaming Harbaugh is the right thing as he is the head coach and that was a stupid thing on his part. You dont get to keep timeouts going into OT, it should have been in your gameplan to call on anyway as soon as the previous down was called.

Should he have made that kick? Yes, but could things have been made easier for him if the head coach was smarter...hell yes.
 
[quote name='bvharris']This is pretty much right. Typically you wouldn't see a whistle on that since it was so quick, but the definition of forward progress is when "the runner's forward progress toward the opponents' goal line is stopped by contact with an opponent, with little chance to be resumed. The exact moment at which the player's forward progress stops is subject to the judgment of the officials." I can definitely see how that meets the "little chance to be resumed" criteria.

It was definitely still fortunate for the Giants since I think it could have been easily ruled a fumble, but I don't think 49er fans should be starting any conspiracy theories about it. It certainly wasn't anywhere in the vicinity of egregiousness of the Jennings non-fumble.[/QUOTE]It's not a conspiracy theory, it was a quick whistle. Like I said, if Bradshaw would have spun out the play would have continued but as soon as the ball was loose the official blew it dead.
 
[quote name='DT778']It's not a conspiracy theory, it was a quick whistle. Like I said, if Bradshaw would have spun out the play would have continued but as soon as the ball was loose the official blew it dead.[/QUOTE]

This.

That was a bullshit call that probably saved the gmen season. I love people just always forget that you can "give up" on any play at any time by simply falling to the ground. If you dont want to take the risk of fumbling then you should go down before you even he contacted.

Forward Progress is one of the worst called rules in the NFL. You could call it on EVERY single play the very second anyone gets touched...but you dont because there is a chance they could break the tackle and gain more yards. If its forward progress than it should have been whistled ASAP not after he loses the ball. Also how is it that its NEVER ruled forward progress when QBs are grabbed, they seem to be allowed tons of time to spin away from defenders and make plays. Pfft Giants dont win the superbowl couple years back if forward progress is ruled when Eli threw that pass.

Its one of the reason I dislike this new age modern football where everything so CRAZY subjective which has taken form in the dumbass guy in New York trying to explain all the rules.

We need to go back to...."is he down? No? Then the play is still live" I am really sick of every other play in the game having to be reviewed for 30 seconds. I can see why the MLB doesnt want to go with replay because then you get every rule having 20 sub rules and 10 different people who have to voice their opinions on it. Every single game now has 5 or 6 moments where calls are just blown.

I remember in the lions game where Young clearly caught a TD, it was ruled a incomplete yet no one could rule it a TD.

There are so many loopholes and subrules added on top of just some very mediocre refs that the game becomes more about who didnt get screwed than who actually won. (cough cough...if you are such a stickler for rules where did offensive holding go cough cough)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_5CZm8C29A


Look at the 12 second mark....Bradshaw is clearing trying to get more yards...so the defense should be able to continue to play defense until he either stops/gives up or touches the ground. Either of those happened so the play should continue.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bradshaw is clearly falling backwards due to the weight of the guy behind him pulling him down. The second guy then comes in and rips out the ball. It's a quick whistle but the rule was put in place because defenders used to gang tackle someone and keep them upright and rip the ball out once the runner lost his momentum. There would be way too many ridiculous fumbles if that was allowed.
 
[quote name='Javery']Bradshaw is clearly falling backwards due to the weight of the guy behind him pulling him down. The second guy then comes in and rips out the ball. It's a quick whistle but the rule was put in place because defenders used to gang tackle someone and keep them upright and rip the ball out once the runner lost his momentum. There would be way too many ridiculous fumbles if that was allowed.[/QUOTE]

That's pretty much how I see the play as well the more I look at it.. At the time the ball comes out and the whistle blows, he's already falling backwards and I don't think even Tecmo Bowl Bo Jackson could have broken the tackle at that point. :D

It's subjective, but if that's not forward progress being halted, I'm not sure what would be.

That said, Eli was in the grasp. ;)
 
Going backwards is sometimes part of the process of getting tackled but not the complete process of getting tackled. Two dudes go out it, one is going to go backwards. Bradshaw was on the way to be tackled but was stripped before he was tackled. He wasn't being held up intentionally which is where the forward progress rule is supposed to come in. He was fighting for more yards and lost the ball. That's how I see it.

Damn, need to stop watching that replay. fucking ref. Standing back, giving Bradshaw all the time necessary to break the tackle and continue the play. But as soon as he fumbles... fffifffififif (or however you type someone whistling). :bomb:
 
Gronk has a high ankle sprain. Those usually take way more than 2 weeks to heal so I expect if he does play he won't be 100%. He is a beast though so anything is possible - no one thought TO would be ready for the Super Bowl and he was...
 
[quote name='Javery']Gronk has a high ankle sprain. Those usually take way more than 2 weeks to heal so I expect if he does play he won't be 100%. He is a beast though so anything is possible - no one thought TO would be ready for the Super Bowl and he was...[/QUOTE]

I pray that the Giants are preparing for less than 100% of Gronk. I doubt they're that foolish.
 
Skip has predicted that Peyton Manning will win the superbowl next year no matter whos jersey he is in. Because apparently the owner has "created a monsters and you will see the most focused and driven Peyton next year."

I cant wait to see him back pedal like always.
 
I doubt Payton can be any more focused or driven than when previously playing. What is he going to do? Also run the defense?
 
[quote name='bvharris']I pray that the Giants are preparing for less than 100% of Gronk. I doubt they're that foolish.[/QUOTE]

The have to be preparing for a 100% Gronk otherwise they wouldn't even need to practice. ;)
 
[quote name='Javery']The have to be preparing for a 100% Gronk otherwise they wouldn't even need to practice. ;)[/QUOTE]

I know you're joking, but in general I have been enjoying how much the hubris factor has been reversed from 2007. Obviously the mood of the fans doesn't really affect the play on the field, but as far as expectations goes it's been much less stressful.
 
Well, I'd be lying if I told you I don't feel much better about our chances this year than in 2007. I thought we had about a 5% chance to win in 2007 and had to play an absolutely perfect game to win. This year, the Giants have way more offensive weapons and the Patriots aren't as good as they were in 2007 so I think if the Giants play a good game they can win and it won't be a miracle.

I'm not confident at all though - I've watched this team for way too long and I know they always play up or down to their opponent and they can blow a 3 TD lead in about 5 minutes at any point in time - there are no "easy" wins, unfortunately. I wish I knew what it was like to expect your team to win like most Pats fans do (with good reason - they win all the freaking time).
 
Super Bowl Predictions

Welker MVP

Eli will have more passing yards than Brady.

Patiots will have 1 defensive TD.

Ochocinco will have the game winning TD (final line: 1 reception, 8 yards, 1 TD).

Patriots 34 - Giants 20
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']Super Bowl Predictions

Welker MVP

Eli will have more passing yards than Brady.

Patiots will have 1 defensive TD.

Ochocinco will have the game winning TD (final line: 1 reception, 8 yards, 1 TD).

Patriots 34 - Giants 20[/QUOTE]

Well at least these are all Bold.
 
Brad Childress has been hired as the offensive coordinator of the Cleveland Browns. Not a surprise since he's a part of the same Mike Holmgren system.
 
[quote name='dafoomie']They're giving 25/1 odds on Welker being named MVP, I'd take that all day.[/QUOTE]

wow really? i have a buddy that lives in vegas...
 
[quote name='dafoomie']They're giving 25/1 odds on Welker being named MVP, I'd take that all day.[/QUOTE]

It will be next to impossible for Welker to win MVP. Assuming he has an awesome game (minimum 2TDs and 150+ yards) don't you think the Golden Boy will get the MVP for his awesome passing and super good looks?

6 WRs have won MVP (although 3 in the last 7 years) out of 45 games played. Not impossible I guess but highly unlikely.
 
[quote name='Javery']It will be next to impossible for Welker to win MVP. Assuming he has an awesome game (minimum 2TDs and 150+ yards) don't you think the Golden Boy will get the MVP for his awesome passing and super good looks?

6 WRs have won MVP (although 3 in the last 7 years) out of 45 games played. Not impossible I guess but highly unlikely.[/QUOTE]

Deion Branch was the MVP of Super Bowl XXXVIII with 143 yards and 1 TD. His QB was the same Golden Boy, who had 354 yards and 3 TDs.

I'm curious to hear what the other MVP odds are. I'd be especially interested in hearing Gronk's current odds given his injury.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']wow really? i have a buddy that lives in vegas...[/QUOTE]
Internet sportsbooks need to be legal, can't even use overseas sites anymore.

100/1 odds for Chad Johnson, you never know... If he plays he'll be in single coverage all day.
 
[quote name='Javery']I've watched this team for way too long and I know they always play up or down to their opponent and they can blow a 3 TD lead in about 5 minutes at any point in time - there are no "easy" wins, unfortunately. I wish I knew what it was like to expect your team to win like most Pats fans do (with good reason - they win all the freaking time).[/QUOTE]

Exactly... My wife and kids think I'm a disloyal Giants fan (I have season tickets and watch every game) because I don't expect them to win every game. I tell them I've been a fan for too long to be a wide-eyed optimist with respect to the Giants. I left the Eagle game when the Giants were up 21 points in the 4th quarter last year only to be rushing into a bar in Hoboken to see the winning Eagles touchdown on a punt return.
 
What's the starter breakdown on that stat? Either way it's crazy to think half of a championship caliber team can be composed of guys that were not expected to amount to much, if anything, judging by their draft positions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
bread's done
Back
Top