I actually rooted for the Seahawks yesterday. As some of you may know, I hate seeing upstart teams succeed (even though only I'm about 60/40 against parity) and like to see teams that have been there before advance. I should be a MLB fan, for crying out loud, and I would if only I liked baseball. Therefore, I rooted against Baltimore, New Orleans, Chicago, and San Diego. Went 2-for-4.
They are an upstart team because they haven't done jack in decades. It was kind of like George Mason in the NCAA tournament last year. Maybe you are defining the word "upstart" differently than me, but to me the upstarts are the Davids trying to take down the traditional Goliaths. I cheer for the traditional Goliaths. Key word here is "traditional," which has nothing to do with the 2006 season.
I don't see how the Colts are gonna beat the Patriots when they can't even score a bloody TD. Heck! Manning wasn't even under pressure. My pick is still the Patriots. Captain Comeback will take it to the colts.
I'm still amaze how terrible the Ravens were on saturday. They're suppose to be the best defense in the league and they totally flop. What bunch of posers.
Saints and Bears...hmm....is gonna be interesting.
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
I don't see how the Colts are gonna beat the Patriots when they can't even score a bloody TD. Heck! Manning wasn't even under pressure. My pick is still the Patriots. Captain Comeback will take it to the colts.
Kinda like how the Colts beat them the last two times they played each other.
Kinda like how neither of those games were in the playoffs.
I'm not saying it's a lock; it could go 50/50, but someone had better have a STRONG argument (simply saying 'they're better' doesn't cut it) to decisively pick against Bellichick and Brady in the postseason.
One item of interest: Remember that big deal everyone made about the lousy Colt's run defense and how it would be easy for LJ and JL to run wild? I'd be shocked if Bellichick didn't find a way to exploit that run D with the 3 backs that he has. You can't just say, "We're going to run off tackle with stud running back 'X' and get 180 yards," I don't care who you play. But I'd be surprised if they don't crack some big 10-yard clips and control the clock.
Well,
a. It's in Indy, so thats an advantage.
b. Indy has won because of it's team, and not Manning, so if Manning get's on board and the team still plays the same, that's a pretty tough team to beat.
c. Who cares how many times the Pat's won against the Colts, the fact remains that its 2007, and not 2005, or 2004, and this year, the Colts are a better team.
d. I dont know, I just think that its the time for the Pats to lose. They didnt play extremely well against the Chargers, especially Brady while the Colts have played extremely well against teams that were "suppose to destroy" the Colts. Heck, off the top of my head, the Colts still havnt let Lewis, and Johnson run for over 100 hundred yards combined.
e. Botankus is right, its 50/50. Could go either way, but this is definitly not an automatic win for the Pats....they're secondary isnt great, while the running attack is good, but if the Colts can stop Johnson and Lewis, why couldnt they stop Dillon and the rookie?
WD, I dont get you. First you say the Colts arnt not going to win because they couldnt score an TD, but then you say the Raven defense sucks because they couldnt stop the Colts. What? If the defense sucked, the Colt's would of scored TD's. Also, the Colts are finally showing that maybe, they can win those "close playoff/defense type" games which they havnt shown in the past few years.
I'm rooting for Indy in the Pats game, I'd like to see Manning shutup his critics, and for Dungy to finally get to the Superbowl.
Originally posted by botankus
They are an upstart team because they haven't done jack in decades. It was kind of like George Mason in the NCAA tournament last year. Maybe you are defining the word "upstart" differently than me, but to me the upstarts are the Davids trying to take down the traditional Goliaths. I cheer for the traditional Goliaths. Key word here is "traditional," which has nothing to do with the 2006 season.
yea, ok, gotcha, but I think Philly was favored in that game(I could be wrong tho, not sure), which would make Philly Golliath. I'm the opposite I root for the Underdog more times than not
Originally posted by wuTa
yea, ok, gotcha, but I think Philly was favored in that game(I could be wrong tho, not sure), which would make Philly Golliath. I'm the opposite I root for the Underdog more times than not
The Goliaths:
Indianapolis
New England
Philadelphia
Seattle
The Davids:
Baltimore
San Diego
New Orleans
Chicago
This judgment of mine is based solely on their playoff performance history in recent years, not their 2006 regular season. I guess it would be similar to if Utah State was 11-0 and playing USC who was 7-4, even if USC lost to Cal Tech that year. USC would still be the Goliath.
Originally posted by Smasandian
WD, I dont get you. First you say the Colts arnt not going to win because they couldnt score an TD, but then you say the Raven defense sucks because they couldnt stop the Colts. What? If the defense sucked, the Colt's would of scored TD's.
I think it was a subtle way of saying, "The Colts' offense sucks."
Originally posted by botankus
The Goliaths:
Indianapolis
New England
Philadelphia
SeattleThe Davids:
Baltimore
San Diego
New Orleans
ChicagoThis judgment of mine is based solely on their playoff performance history in recent years, not their 2006 regular season. I guess it would be similar to if Utah State was 11-0 and playing USC who was 7-4, even if USC lost to Cal Tech that year. USC would still be the Goliath.
That depends if Utah State beat some top notch progams in those 11 wins, look at Boise State, and whats Baltimore doing in the "David" category, they are more proven to win crucial games in the playoffs than the Colts.
I'll give you that one (the Baltimore David thing, not the Utah State thing b/c it deals with the present year)...because I had a hard time picking who to root for in the Colts / Ratbirds game, and I couldn't figure it out until about halftime. In the end, I decided on Indianapolis because I hate Baltimore.
Originally posted by SmasandianWD, I dont get you. First you say the Colts arnt not going to win because they couldnt score an TD, but then you say the Raven defense sucks because they couldnt stop the Colts. What? If the defense sucked, the Colt's would of scored TD's. Also, the Colts are finally showing that maybe, they can win those "close playoff/defense type" games which they havnt shown in the past few years.
The Ravens defense allow the Colts to gain too much yards. Allowing them to score field goals. For a defense that was second on the league in not allowing their opponents to gain yards...their performance does suck. I said that about the Colts because it's the truth...they didn't score any TD. The victory of the game is thanks to Vinny not Manning. Manning wasn't under pressure...yet he couldn't score a TD? I mean the game was terrible. The Colts gain to many rush yards and not a single TD.
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
The Ravens defense allow the Colts to gain too much yards. Allowing them to score field goals. For a defense that was second on the league in not allowing their opponents to gain yards...their performance does suck. I said that about the Colts because it's the truth...they didn't score any TD. The victory of the game is thanks to Vinny not Manning. Manning wasn't under pressure...yet he couldn't score a TD? I mean the game was terrible. The Colts gain to many rush yards and not a single TD.
I believe the Colts did exactly what they needed to, to be able to win the game. Who cares about the stats.
Originally posted by LORDSIDIOUS01
Peyton Manning is a poser.
Possibly the dumbest thing ive ever heard.