MFer

I've always regarded the Patriots as the least dominant dominant team ever in any sport. I mean they only seem to beat every one by a few points. Shit, they only beat the Lions by 8 this year in New England. Other than Brady and a couple random defensive players and O-linemen, this team doesn't have a ton of Pro Bowl caliber players. I mean teams like say, the 90's Cowboys would beat the shit outta teams with their 4-5 Hall of Famers and 10+ All Pros. But the Patriots always find a way to win. I think it just pisses ppl of cause it always seems like they survive and advance by the skin of their teeth.

I guess I'll be rooting for the Pats to win it all by default since Brady's a Michigan man. He can continue his quest to becoming the greatest QB of all-time. Not sure who to go for between the Saints and the Bears.

I guess the Bears are back to the "chuck it 50 yards to Berrian and hope for the best" plan from the beginning of the season.

Yeah it was Neil Everett

This day sucks for me. I can't stand the Colts. The Saints are just eh to me. There's a fair chance that both the Bears and Pats will win tomorrow, leaving me me with no teams to really root for. I mean the Saints story is nice and all, but I'm just not really that into them, especially with Reggie "Gale Sayers" Bush getting his nut sack licked by the media. Maybe I'll go with the Pats because of Brady. Hopefully LT and Co. can win the Super Bowl and make everything I just said a moot point (Seattle too but I'm not holding my breath).

I guess we forgot to mention Weatherford as the other Saints' playmaker.

I'll admit that I'm a USC hater, but that was a nice run.

per ABC World News Tonight.

This was the first time I've watched most of Smackdown in awhile. Maybe I should make an effort to see it more often. I wasn't really watching SD a lot last year, so I didn't see too much of Kennedy. I'm pretty impressed by this guy. One thing that I like is that he's a heel with credibility. You saw how he beat six former World Champions and how the announcers acknowledge it. One thing that irks me about WWE is when heels, especially ones that are mid-card or higher, have no credibility. A couple years ago, guys like Jericho and Christian(and to a lesser degree, the Spirit Squad last year) were in a position to establish themselves. But instead they end up getting buried by guys like Triple H and then no one can take them seriously. They rarely, if ever, beat anyone of consequence and have to settle for their spot in the mid-card. Anyways, Smackdown appears to be of higher quality than RAW right now.

What's Domanick Davis' status? EDIT: Apparently he's Domanick Williams now.

"(X team) will win because they've been there before." "(X team)'s veteran leadership will prove to be too much in the end" Might be true to a point, but it really comes down to either who has the best talent or who just simply plays the best.

I was thinking about how the media keeps using the saying "throwing someone under the bus" so much in the last couple years. When the fuck did that phrase come out? I first starting hearing it when T.O. was doing his antics. Now I hear it every damn week! And another thing I keep hearing is a team that "wins going away." What the hell is that supposed to mean? Post any cliches that you love, hate, or have no clue about here.

Lately, Lions fans have been high on Jamaal Anderson, DE outta Arkansas.

"It just wasn't meant to be" "Things happen for a reason" Shut the fuck up, you guys played like shit. Quit trying to imply that it was out of your control. "Not to take anything away from the other team, but we didn't play the way we're capable of playing." Way to give the other team credit. Whenever you preface a statement toward someone with a "not to" (not to offend anyone...etc...) you meant to say it.

That's funny, I didn't know you were from San Francisco. What's the story? Nah, I just know that he's gonna get crucified by everyone and their momma. Sure he probably deserves it, but only he and a few others are the only ones taking the fall for the whole steroid issue. And is anyone really surprised that he threw Sweeney under the bus?(I'll get into the whole throwing ppl under the bus thing in my own thread.)

BURN HIM AT THE STAKE!!! BURN HIM AT THE STAKE!!!

Not so sure about the receiver part. Maybe in the later rounds, yes, but I wouldn't go first round. When I look at Branch, Jackson, Hackett, Engram, and Burleson, the Seahawks have the best core of WR's from 1-5 with the possible exception of the Patriots, whose receivers are made better by Brady anyways. I would put a run-stuffing DT as their other main priority.

Tony Gwynn's one of my favorite all time players, it's good to see him get his due. Not a huge Ripken fan but obviously a worthy inductee as well. Would like to see Trammell get in someday but he probably won't.

That was a pretty good game between Wisconsin and Ohio State. The Badgers had control most of the game but they nearly blew it in the end. I was impressed with Wisconsin's D and they seem to be more athletic than past teams. They play extremely well at home. Taylor looked really good. The Buckeyes on the other hand, were not really in rhythm most of the game offensively as Oden was in foul trouble. Ohio State's gonna be real scary though cause they look like one of those teams that's gonna hit their stride at the end of the year.

Leak's on Leno right now.

On that note, how come no one has been voted into the HOF unanimously? I believe Tom Seaver has the highest percentage, receiving 98.8% of the votes. I mean, there's a laundry list of guys who should've got 100% of the votes(Ruth, DiMaggio, Mays, Aaron, Williams, Walter Johnson etc...)

This has gotta be so sweet for Leak. Chastised a lot during his career, a coaching change, giving away some snaps to Tebow, and he ends up being Offensive MVP in the BCS Title Game. I had heard absolutely no talk about his pro prospects this year. I'm not sure he would have even been a 1st day pick let alone a 1st round pick. Maybe he'll move up the food chain more in the next couple months.

Watched bits and pieces of RAW while seeing the Fuckeyes get their shit kicked in. Nothing special that I saw. That's all I gotta say about that.

Yes, thank you.

Let's see: Indy/Bal-Unlike the Chiefs, the Ravens don't need Jamal Lewis to gain 120+ yards. Give him 25-30 carries for 80-90 yards and that'll be good enough. McNair's battle-tested and should be able to do fine. I can't imagine that Addai will have as much success as he did against K.C. Manning will be OK but the Ravens' D will keep the Indy offense down as a whole. Bal. 24 Indy 20 N.E./S.D.-I don't think LT will necessarily go off but he'll make the big plays when he has to. I suspect we'll be hearing Gates' name a lot. I think Rivers will be good enough. N.E. won't have too much success running the ball and Brady's gonna get harassed all day by Merriman and Co. S.D. 24 N.E. 16 Philly/N.O.-The Eagles are hot but they've got a tough task against the Saints high-powered offense. Philly is more than capable of getting the job done but I just don't see it happening in the Superdome. I'm not entirely sold on the Saints' D, but they'll make the plays when it counts the most. N.O. 31 Philly 21 Sea/Chi-I really believe that the Seahawks can win this game. I think Bears should be concerned about Rex Grossman's comments and the way he played in that last game. Plus the Bears D hasn't been dominant lately. That said, it's hard for me to go against Chicago. I think Seattle's prone to give one up to Hester. Seattle's receiving core is a little banged up and I'm not sure that Alexander can have much success on the ground. I hope I'm wrong but I'll say Chi 17 Sea 10