Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Both were teams of destiny. Who wins here in a neutral stadium? Is it the road warriors or the bus's team?

Who ****ing cares.

Your getting two teams that will never be considered great championship teams facing off against each other.

So yeah, who ****ing cares.

First off, that phrase "Team of Destiny" is pure crap. Both teams got hot at the right time to win their respective Superbowls. If you look back at both seasons, no one had either team picked to even make the playoffs, let alone win the Superbowl.

Like Smasandian said, who cares?

More elegantly than I, but yes.

Yeah, football's about getting hot at the end of the season. Want to make a SB prediction? Look at the last 3 weeks of the season and pretend that's the entire season. The past 3-4 years, you'd have at least 1 and usually both SB teams based on such criteria.

Steelers imo, btw.

If it were the 07 Giants vs. the 04 Steelers, Plaxico Burress could have suited up for both teams!

Crazy.........

Would the world implode or something if that happened?

Originally posted by Smasandian
Crazy.........

Would the world implode or something if that happened?

No. There would just be twice as many dropped balls.

313

the dallas cowboys would win.

wait wait you mean the steelers won in 05?

(had to do it)

Originally posted by forumcrew
wait wait you mean the steelers won in 05?

(had to do it)

Originally posted by DigiMark007
No. There would just be twice as many dropped balls.

313

Well obviously, yesh....

Both of he cant catch the ball if the world imploded....

Though you would know that....

Originally posted by forumcrew
wait wait you mean the steelers won in 05?

(had to do it)

We all know the Seahawks would of won if Julius Jones was running.

No arguement there.

Originally posted by Smasandian
Who ****ing cares.

Your getting two teams that will never be considered great championship teams facing off against each other.

So yeah, who ****ing cares. Its just a thread man.

Why would you even post here just to tell us how badly you dont care about this thread anyways.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Yeah, football's about getting hot at the end of the season. Want to make a SB prediction? Look at the last 3 weeks of the season and pretend that's the entire season. The past 3-4 years, you'd have at least 1 and usually both SB teams based on such criteria.

Steelers imo, btw. Giants would win.

The Steelers played hot up until the superbowl and then went completely flat against the Seahawks.


Two things stand out to me first.

Ben Roethisbergers abysmal play in the superbowl and the giants smothering defense against arguably the greatest offense of all time.

The giants beat the 18-0 pats while the Steelers beat the Seahawks mainly due to poor officiating and playing lowsy with a few good key plays. Pats of that year>>Seahawks of that year.

Giants beat their faces in.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Its just a thread man.

Why would you even post here just to tell us how badly you dont care about this thread anyways.

Because its annoying and your giving the football fans in this forum (all 4 of us) a bad name.

I know you like to discuss different teams against each other, even though its impossible to say, but have you ever thought of just combing all those threads into one and having a NFL VS thread, instead of making new ones for each team thats only from last year.

Originally posted by Smasandian
Crazy.........

Would the world implode or something if that happened?


Oh, wait. He'd be not practicing on the sideline and renegotiating his contract.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Giants would win.......Ben Roethisbergers abysmal play in the superbowl and the giants smothering defense against arguably the greatest offense of all time.

I actually agree with this statement. Ben '05 played terrible in the Super Bowl while Eli '07 made all the right plays. That being said (and I know it's not the topic), I would take Ben '07 over Eli '07 in a heartbeat. (not like I have a choice, do I?)

Originally posted by quanchi112
Giants would win.

The Steelers played hot up until the superbowl and then went completely flat against the Seahawks.


Two things stand out to me first.

Ben Roethisbergers abysmal play in the superbowl and the giants smothering defense against arguably the greatest offense of all time.

The giants beat the 18-0 pats while the Steelers beat the Seahawks mainly due to poor officiating and playing lowsy with a few good key plays. Pats of that year>>Seahawks of that year.

Giants beat their faces in.

You're you're only counting the SB? It's 05 Steelers, not SB 05 Steelers. The fact that they tore up the playoffs (and end of the season) suggests to me that the good-but-not-great SB performance was more an aberration than the playoff wins, so my estimation of them is closer to their peak.

Same with the Giants, who I simply don't think bring as much to the table. People can point to beating the Pats all they want, but I think that Pats team was wildly overrated.

Giants can rush the passer, but the Steelers were a running team. Whereas the Steelers stopped the run effectively, and despite some good play from Eli I can't see the passing offense carrying the Giants, who were also built on the run.

Originally posted by Smasandian
We all know the Seahawks would of won if Julius Jones was running.

No arguement there.

eh didnt even need that. A TE with the ability to hold a football would have been enough.

I'll trade you Witten for.....

ah shit, cant think of anybody....hahahaha.

Originally posted by Smasandian
We all know the Seahawks would of won if Julius Jones was running.

No arguement there.

no we dont

Sarcasm.....

Originally posted by Smasandian
Because its annoying and your giving the football fans in this forum (all 4 of us) a bad name.

I know you like to discuss different teams against each other, even though its impossible to say, but have you ever thought of just combing all those threads into one and having a NFL VS thread, instead of making new ones for each team thats only from last year. No I am not. And for one thing your on the internet meaning your anonymous. You have a name on here and no one judges you based on what someone else says.


Whats the big deal? If you dont like this dont post in this thread and avoid it.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
You're you're only counting the SB? It's 05 Steelers, not SB 05 Steelers. The fact that they tore up the playoffs (and end of the season) suggests to me that the good-but-not-great SB performance was more an aberration than the playoff wins, so my estimation of them is closer to their peak.

Same with the Giants, who I simply don't think bring as much to the table. People can point to beating the Pats all they want, but I think that Pats team was wildly overrated.

Giants can rush the passer, but the Steelers were a running team. Whereas the Steelers stopped the run effectively, and despite some good play from Eli I can't see the passing offense carrying the Giants, who were also built on the run. We have to take into account their abysmal sbowl and their playoff play as well. They werent dominating teams pretty much either. The beat the colts right at the end and it was due to a missed field goal.

Pats team was overrated but their offense still broke all kinds of regular season records and this Giants team pwned them.

I think this game would come down to the wire. Eli played great all postseason long while ben didnt. In the end eli wins this.


The defense which imo was better than the seahawks can shut down this running game. Willie parker wont have that 75 yard run which was a fluke anyways.

The refs also wont be calling a crappy game and taking points away from the giants as they did against the seahawks.

Originally posted by quanchi112
We have to take into account their abysmal sbowl and their playoff play as well. They werent dominating teams pretty much either. :

Excuse me?
They beat the shit out of the Colts! Starting with the pass to Heath Miller on the second play, they rolled them right out of the gate. Hell, it was 14-0 after 2 drives! I don't deny it came down to a missed FG, but abysmal? Come on, bro!

And for those who love that infamous "what if" game, if it weren't for Troy's *INT overturned by a made-up-on-the-spot rule and Bettis' fumble at the goal line, the Colts wouldn't have even had a chance to go down TWICE to scramble to get close in the 4th . Hell, it could've been 28-10 (or worse) were it not for those plays. Yeah, I know they happened but since you don't remember 2005 very well, I'll assume you base performance off of stats and scores, so here are the numbers:

Time of possession against a Peyton Manning offense: 34 minutes and 52 seconds
Sacks against Manning: 5
Score at the start of the 4th: Pittsburgh 21, Indy 3
3rd down efficiency: Pittsburgh 6-14, Indy 3-13
Career ruined: Mike Vanderjagt
Offensive Line blamed by QB at press conference: Indy
Crowd noise-pumping sub-woofers: Silenced.

And in the AFC Conference game, Denver was dominated after the first quarter, and Cincy was embarrassed on their home field in the first round. And no, Cincy would not have gone to the Super Bowl if Carson Palmer had not gone down, as evidenced by the 900 other times he's faced the Steelers and gotten his ass handed to him. The Bengals simply could not stop the Steelers from scoring that day, even on trick plays.

co-sign botankus. The SB was underwhelming for the Steelers. But they stomped through the playoffs that year, with teams like the Colts who were expected to win it all that year.

Originally posted by botankus
Excuse me?
They beat the shit out of the Colts! Starting with the pass to Heath Miller on the second play, they rolled them right out of the gate. Hell, it was 14-0 after 2 drives! I don't deny it came down to a missed FG, but abysmal? Come on, bro!

And for those who love that infamous "what if" game, if it weren't for Troy's *INT overturned by a made-up-on-the-spot rule and Bettis' fumble at the goal line, the Colts wouldn't have even had a chance to go down TWICE to scramble to get close in the 4th . Hell, it could've been 28-10 (or worse) were it not for those plays. Yeah, I know they happened but since you don't remember 2005 very well, I'll assume you base performance off of stats and scores, so here are the numbers:

Time of possession against a Peyton Manning offense: 34 minutes and 52 seconds
Sacks against Manning: 5
Score at the start of the 4th: Pittsburgh 21, Indy 3
3rd down efficiency: Pittsburgh 6-14, Indy 3-13
Career ruined: Mike Vanderjagt
Offensive Line blamed by QB at press conference: Indy
Crowd noise-pumping sub-woofers: Silenced.

And in the AFC Conference game, Denver was dominated after the first quarter, and Cincy was embarrassed on their home field in the first round. And no, Cincy would not have gone to the Super Bowl if Carson Palmer had not gone down, as evidenced by the 900 other times he's faced the Steelers and gotten his ass handed to him. The Bengals simply could not stop the Steelers from scoring that day, even on trick plays. Ok first off the took carson palmer after he completed a td pass at the beginning of the game. Their qb was taken out. I mean come on.

Secondly I know the Steelers beat the colts but colts had a chance at the end of the game to win it. I dont care if you give me stats and what not. Peyton still had a chance at the end of the game. The kicker missed it. If you have a chance at the end of the game you didnt stomp a team you gave them daylight and a chance to stun you at the end. Period he missed the kick so the steelers won. Thats all.

Again dont coulda woulda shoulda me with bettis' fumble etc. the call was about as bad as the pass interference call in the super bowl that year that they took away from the seahawks. I cant believe you bring up a fumble and try to turn that against me.

The steelers then went on to play flat and pathetic in the superbowl against the very unimpressive seahawks and won imo because of the calls not their play.

This is wrong on so many levels. It was pretty obvious after the first statement that this guy doesn't know what he's talking about.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Ok first off the took carson palmer after he completed a td pass at the beginning of the game. Their qb was taken out. I mean come on.

I believe it was a pass down the sidelines that was a good 20 yards short of the end zone. And BTW, Kitna did just fine getting them 10 points before he got absolutely rattled by the 3rd quarter. At one point, he was being chased and the ball just flew out of his hands. I hate repeating myself, but watch the games next time!! And I can't tell you how much I can't stand would-coulda-shoulda debaters. (ah, hold that thought...it WILL be referenced later on in this post).

Originally posted by quanchi112
Secondly I know the Steelers beat the colts but colts had a chance at the end of the game to win it. I dont care if you give me stats and what not. Peyton still had a chance at the end of the game. The kicker missed it. If you have a chance at the end of the game you didnt stomp a team you gave them daylight and a chance to stun you at the end. Period he missed the kick so the steelers won. Thats all.


It was to tie the game!!!! And I gave you stats because you do not pay attention to the games, and typically people who do that tend to bog their arguments down with stats. Trust me, I'm not a stat guy.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Again dont coulda woulda shoulda me with bettis' fumble etc. the call was about as bad as the pass interference call in the super bowl that year that they took away from the seahawks. I cant believe you bring up a fumble and try to turn that against me.

This is freakin' hilarious! Everyone knows that anyone who argues against that offensive PI call (which, BTW, had it been a non-call it would have been just as offensive to the other squad) is the ultimate woulda-coulda-shoulda debater!!!! THAT IS EXACTLY MY POINT with the Bettis fumble, if you'd read the context of the post, that woulda-coulda-shoulda people have no place in professional sport debates and that is supposed to be a slap in the face to Super Bowl XL whiners. Things happen, get over it, just like I had to get over the Troy call in the Indy game. Even if they would have lost, I would have stopped bitching after a day or two. Fact: A ref had to make a call on whether to call or not call an offensive PI call in Super Bowl XL that WOULD HAVE BEEN A DISERVICE TO ONE OF THE TEAMS NO MATTER IF IT WERE A CALL OR NON-CALL. I think everyone here knows what a push-off is, but the issue is whether or not to call a penalty, just like it happens made in 99% of all NFL games. Deal with it, and do yourself a favor and don't use this argument again. I'm trying to help you b/c it severely weakens your credibility.

Originally posted by quanchi112
The steelers then went on to play flat and pathetic in the superbowl against the very unimpressive seahawks and won imo because of the calls not their play.
yeah, well, it's already obvious that you're not in front of a TV during the playoffs, so by saying "IMO" you just saved me a lot of trouble.

Alright, I've cooled down a bit. Sorry for being a drama queen there, but it just rattles me how people can downplay the woulda-coulda-shoulda argument (as well they should), and then come back with 3 woulda-coulda-shoulda arguments in favor of the Bengals, Colts, and Seahawks. It just blows me away.

Darrell Jackson (think that's who it was) should have just fallen down instead of pushing off. That would have saved about 1,000,000 hours of arguing nationwide over the next few years.

Originally posted by botankus
This is wrong on so many levels. It was pretty obvious after the first statement that this guy doesn't know what he's talking about.



I believe it was a pass down the sidelines that was a good 20 yards short of the end zone. And BTW, Kitna did just fine getting them 10 points before he got absolutely rattled by the 3rd quarter. At one point, he was being chased and the ball just flew out of his hands. I hate repeating myself, but watch the games next time!! And I can't tell you how much I can't stand would-coulda-shoulda debaters. (ah, hold that thought...it WILL be referenced later on in this post).



It was to tie the game!!!! And I gave you stats because you do not pay attention to the games, and typically people who do that tend to bog their arguments down with stats. Trust me, I'm not a stat guy.



This is freakin' hilarious! Everyone knows that anyone who argues against that offensive PI call (which, BTW, had it been a non-call it would have been just as offensive to the other squad) is the ultimate woulda-coulda-shoulda debater!!!! THAT IS EXACTLY MY POINT with the Bettis fumble, if you'd read the context of the post, that woulda-coulda-shoulda people have no place in professional sport debates and that is supposed to be a slap in the face to Super Bowl XL whiners. Things happen, get over it, just like I had to get over the Troy call in the Indy game. Even if they would have lost, I would have stopped bitching after a day or two. Fact: A ref had to make a call on whether to call or not call an offensive PI call in Super Bowl XL that WOULD HAVE BEEN A DISERVICE TO ONE OF THE TEAMS NO MATTER IF IT WERE A CALL OR NON-CALL. I think everyone here knows what a push-off is, but the issue is whether or not to call a penalty, just like it happens made in 99% of all NFL games. Deal with it, and do yourself a favor and don't use this argument again. I'm trying to help you b/c it severely weakens your credibility.


yeah, well, it's already obvious that you're not in front of a TV during the playoffs, so by saying "IMO" you just saved me a lot of trouble. Check your facts. Palmer tossed a td pass and was injured on the very same play. I believe it was 60plus yards but could be wrong on the yardage.

Calls that affect the game are much different than fumbles. I am not arguing about the dropped passes that the seahawks made that game in the super bowl. I am talking about the calls that reversed tds. I think there is a huge difference, if you fumble or drop a pass its your fault but if you score and its taken away by nitpicky or incorrect calls then thats a different matter altogether imo.

The Try call in the pittsburgh game was also horrible. I really feel they called a bad game against the steelers in the indy game. They made it up to them in the superbowl.

You say I didnt watcht these games but I am correct when i said that palmer threw a td on the same play he was injured. You cant seem to remember that play but I do. I dont expect either of us to remember play by play years ago but I think we both have the memory to recall key points in the games.

Erm. It wasn't a TD pass. It was down the sidelines, and more impressive on the part of the receiver than the QB. That O-line was swiss cheese. Wouldn't have mattered who was playing QB.

From wiki:
On the Bengals' second offensive play, Palmer launched a 66-yard completion - the longest in Bengals' playoff history - to former Bengal wide out Chris Henry while Steelers defensive tackle Kimo von Oelhoffen dove at Palmer's left leg, striking it at the knee and bending it at an awkward angle.

I also checked his season stats from '05 from the NFL's website. No TD passes in the playoffs.

Neither team blew out opponents, but both were the better team in each game they played in their respective playoffs. It's a subjective call, as most things are with sports opinions, but for quan to unequivocally say that the Giants were better is just silly.

It's pretty clear at this point that you made this thread with some sort of vendetta. Maybe you're right. But you're flat-out lying now, as well as being clearly baised.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Erm. It wasn't a TD pass. It was down the sidelines, and more impressive on the part of the receiver than the QB. That O-line was swiss cheese. Wouldn't have mattered who was playing QB.

From wiki:
On the Bengals' second offensive play, Palmer launched a 66-yard completion - the longest in Bengals' playoff history - to former Bengal wide out Chris Henry while Steelers defensive tackle Kimo von Oelhoffen dove at Palmer's left leg, striking it at the knee and bending it at an awkward angle.

I also checked his season stats from '05 from the NFL's website. No TD passes in the playoffs.

Neither team blew out opponents, but both were the better team in each game they played in their respective playoffs. It's a subjective call, as most things are with sports opinions, but for quan to unequivocally say that the Giants were better is just silly.

It's pretty clear at this point that you made this thread with some sort of vendetta. Maybe you're right. But you're flat-out lying now, as well as being clearly baised. Ok I thought it was a td pass but knew it was a bomb. You still have to hand it to Carson and must admit they stood a better chance to win that game with Palmer as opposed to winning without him.

I made the thread but when most of us make threads I think we usually have already made up a winner in our own minds wouldnt you say? I strongly believe the Giants were better imo. I am sure others would disagree, I wanted to hear opinion on this matter as both made impressive postseason runs when they werent supposed to be able to do this.

You can disagree all you want but Eli played lights out all throughout the entrie postseason run while ben played awful in the superbowl. I admit he played awesome before but eli didnt have one awful game.



Anyways you can disagree with me as its only my opinion and this game will never be played anyways.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I made the thread but when most of us make threads I think we usually have already made up a winner in our own minds wouldnt you say?

Not really. If I, and many others, make a vs. thread it's out of genuine curiosity. It's not because I already have an opinion and want to argue it. This reasoning for making a thread honestly perplexes me. It's making threads in order to debate/argue, not to discuss and learn.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Ok I thought it was a td pass but knew it was a bomb. You still have to hand it to Carson and must admit they stood a better chance to win that game with Palmer as opposed to winning without him.

I made the thread but when most of us make threads I think we usually have already made up a winner in our own minds wouldnt you say? I strongly believe the Giants were better imo. I am sure others would disagree, I wanted to hear opinion on this matter as both made impressive postseason runs when they werent supposed to be able to do this.

You can disagree all you want but Eli played lights out all throughout the entrie postseason run while ben played awful in the superbowl. I admit he played awesome before but eli didnt have one awful game.

Anyways you can disagree with me as its only my opinion and this game will never be played anyways.

Don't say things like "Check your facts" if you're guessing. It's both shoddy debating and rude.

And I think Ben's the better QB overall. I also think the Steelers are the better team overall, which is what this thread is about. Weighting the QB position too much is something most people do. But again, you're looking at one game and turning that anecdotal evidence into your entire argument. We can't know how they'd play in our hypothetical game, so we have to look at their body of work, not one game.

...

The Giants rush the passer well, it's a big reason why they beat the Pats. The Steelers were a bruising run team who could make the Giants one-dimensional on offense. Eli played well, but he never had his run game completely cut off. Certainly, any team can beat any other team (it's the NFL, after all), but the matchup favors the Steelers in terms of strengths and weaknesses.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Not really. If I, and many others, make a vs. thread it's out of genuine curiosity. It's not because I already have an opinion and want to argue it. This reasoning for making a thread honestly perplexes me. It's making threads in order to debate/argue, not to discuss and learn.



Don't say things like "Check your facts" if you're guessing. It's both shoddy debating and rude.

And I think Ben's the better QB overall. I also think the Steelers are the better team overall, which is what this thread is about. Weighting the QB position too much is something most people do. But again, you're looking at one game and turning that anecdotal evidence into your entire argument. We can't know how they'd play in our hypothetical game, so we have to look at their body of work, not one game.

...

The Giants rush the passer well, it's a big reason why they beat the Pats. The Steelers were a bruising run team who could make the Giants one-dimensional on offense. Eli played well, but he never had his run game completely cut off. Certainly, any team can beat any other team (it's the NFL, after all), but the matchup favors the Steelers in terms of strengths and weaknesses. Ok but when I make a thread I usually have already come to a conclusion. Thats not to say that my decision wont change. I have changed my stance many times. But if I hear nothing that changes my mind I wont change it. Thats it no big deal really. I learn even if I dont change my mind.

You are right I was rude. My style is very cutthroat. I am making a conscious effort to cut that arrogance out of my debating.

I think Eli is the better qb. I think ben is very good when the running game is working and when teams are afraid of it and commit to much to stop it. But I think you can definitely rattle ben when you shut down the running game.

The giants beat not only the pats but the packers etc. These were complete teams as well. I think this game wouldnt be dominated by either team. I see a low scoring affair like 17-14 or something. But I think the giants definitely can shut down the run and rattle ben enough to get the w.

I think eli made enough plays here and there to keep his team in the game. He was clutch in every playoff game and did just enough to get the w no matter what the situation. He didnt have one off playoff game.


The steelers run game was shut down in the superbowl other than that 75 yard skirt from willie parker so I dont think its crazy for me to say they could also shut down this rushing attack.

Any QB becomes exponentially less effective when the run game isn't working. So that's not a knock on Ben, just a truism of any football team. And if you can assume that the Giants have a chance at shutting down the Steelers run game, then I should get the same concession and be able to assume that teh Giants would have little if any run game, especially since the Steelers run D that year was far more statistically dominant than the Giants.

I really don't see how you can have it one way but not the other, especially when the stronger case exists on the other side.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Ok I thought it was a td pass but knew it was a bomb. You still have to hand it to Carson and must admit they stood a better chance to win that game with Palmer as opposed to winning without him.



I think everyone would agree the Bengals had a better chance with Carson. However that does not mean that they would have won, or that the Steelers were not dominate on their run to the SB. The Bengals D played like shit either way and the Steelers played great either way. Then came the SB where everyone played like shit.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Any QB becomes exponentially less effective when the run game isn't working. So that's not a knock on Ben, just a truism of any football team. And if you can assume that the Giants have a chance at shutting down the Steelers run game, then I should get the same concession and be able to assume that teh Giants would have little if any run game, especially since the Steelers run D that year was far more statistically dominant than the Giants.

I really don't see how you can have it one way but not the other, especially when the stronger case exists on the other side. My point is that the Giants didnt rely on their running game as much as the steelers had.

You can take away both but in the end this game is coming down to the fourth quarter and I think eli's play was better than ben's during the entire postseason stretch.


Originally posted by forumcrew
I think everyone would agree the Bengals had a better chance with Carson. However that does not mean that they would have won, or that the Steelers were not dominate on their run to the SB. The Bengals D played like shit either way and the Steelers played great either way. Then came the SB where everyone played like shit. My point is only that the Steelers took out their best player. Sure Kitna didnt suck but he was no Palmer. Palmer had a great year all year as well and had a 60 yard completion in the very game he went down in. This is in the short amount of time he was in the game he completed one of the longest pass plays in playoff bengal history.