NFL Week XIV

[nl5xsk1 0]

 

 

Yes, I'm talking about the vaunted '72 Dolphins, who beat a bunch of shitty teams in the regular season and then barely won in the playoffs, but is still considered the greatest season of all time. I don't see why revisionist history would be so kind to them if the Pats are going to be downgraded because they won 'boring' games.

 

Sure, and then come back to this argument when Pats actually go undefeated...

No, no need. I'm not comparing the Pats - of any year - to the undefeated Dolphins. I'm just pointing out that people like to say how the Pats barely won games, or that they got good records by beating on shitty teams ... yet still continue to blow smoke up the Dolphins ass for the '72 season, even though the same facts are applicable.

 

The honest answer to why the Pats won't be remembered as an all-time great team is the simple fact that they weren't; the dynasties in Pittsburgh, SF, and Dallas were all much more impressive than New England's. The fact that they barely won games is irrelevant to their place in history.

[packwingfn 0]

The Main question for all Packer Fans is:

 

Is this the year that Mike Sherman finally gets fired?

 

or will they use injuries as an excuse....

[Black Lushus 0]

niskie, I don't agree, i think the Pats dynasty is very impressive and I hate the guys. If they somehow manage to pull off another win this season, that'd be even more impressive. Everyone keeps overlooking them, but I would not want to be the one playing them in the playoffs...granted they'll never beat Indy IN Indy, but still...

[Cartman 0]

They beat indy IN indy before...

 

I just want it to happen more this year than ever before so I can see how Manning commit's suicide after the game.

 

Also consider that the Pats "Dynasty" comes in a time with parity and salary caps.

[Black Lushus 0]

well, I more or less meant THIS season as far as beting Indy in Indy...

 

and to add to your take about salary cap and such, it's incredible that they were able to keep that team together through all the championships compared to St. Louis, Tampa Bay and Baltimore as well as all the losers of those Superbowls...it's a shame that you get to the big dance once and then suddenly Free Agency takes over and everyone jumps ship.

[Spaceman Spiff 0]

For everyone that likes to bring out the "hey, they had an easy schedule" argument, that '72 Dolphins team played the majority of the season w/ a 38-year old (I think) backup QB after Griese got hurt in game 5, and didn't return until the AFC title game.

Edited December 12, 2005 by Spaceman Spiff

[nl5xsk1 0]

niskie, I don't agree, i think the Pats dynasty is very impressive and I hate the guys. If they somehow manage to pull off another win this season, that'd be even more impressive. Everyone keeps overlooking them, but I would not want to be the one playing them in the playoffs...granted they'll never beat Indy IN Indy, but still...

Can you imagine the verbal fellatio that the ESPN crew would give Belichick & Brady if the Pats found a way to beat Indy in Indy in the post-season? A tranny porn video would have less balls-in-man-mouth than that scenario would.

 

And the good news is it looks like - if everything plays out - that it'll be NE vs. Indy in Indy in the 2nd round of the playoffs.

 

And Spiff ... I'm the only one that's really harped on their easy schedule, and it's really not to take anything away from going undefeated. It just gets my Irish up to hear people downplay the Pats' success because of their easy schedule or the fact that they don't win games by USC-like scores ... yet continue to hype the Dolphins as the most amazing season ever, even if the same flaws exist.

[Black Lushus 0]

I give the Pats a lot of credit for their first SB victory considering they were in a somewhat competitive division at the time with guys that were not household names yet...the fact that they kept practically the same team even up to today is amazing.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

As much as it pains me to say it, the best team of the Super Bowl era was the 85 Bears, even though they lost once. They just demolished everybody, doubly so in the playoffs.

[Cartman 0]

^ What he said. Even though they stomped my beloved Pats in the SB...I was 5 so it cant bother me THAT much hehe.

[Guest Vitamin X]

The `98 Vikings were probably the best team ever to not make a Super Bowl. That offense could've gone toe to toe with the Monsters of the Midway.

 

I think it's also a little ridiculous not to consider the `00s Patriots among the all-time great dynasties. 3 Super Bowls in 4 years, a record winning streak that might not be broken for quite some time (that'll include Indy as well), and all in a very tough division in a very competitive conference, in a time of great parity. The Patriots deserve all the massive attention and media love they get; they've EARNED it, and no matter what Indy might do this season or not, everyone will probably still look at the `00s as the Patriots decade, just like the `90s belonged to the Cowboys, the 80s to the Niners, the 70s to the Steelers, and the 60s to the Packers. You always had one team that was also great, but not the one that defined that decade as well, like the Dolphins in the 70s, the Redskins and Giants in the 80s, or the Niners and Packers in the 90s, I think Indy will be that type of team for the 00s, unless they happen to go on an amazing run that takes them past this year and can somehow get out of the Pats' shadow.

 

Speaking of the Patriots, it bears mentioning from yesterday's huge win over the Bills, that they've got a much healthier team. Richard Seymour, Corey Dillon, guys on the offensive line, all these guys that have been injured and are just starting to come back.. New England is a dangerous, dangerous team that oddly enough (especially at this time of year) is getting overlooked.

[Spaceman Spiff 0]

I would have liked to have seen how a Bears/Dolphins SB would've turned out. They coudn't have done worse than the Pats, and may have actually made it close. The way to beat the '85 Bears was to be able to throw it deep, which was the Dolphins strong suit. The Bears killed their playoff opponents because they all had to go to Soldier Field in the snow & cold (they obviously were a great team already, but the weather gave them more of an edge), but the SB was in the dome, so weather wouldn't be a factor. Turf definitely would have helped w/ the Marino/Duper/Clayton attack. On the Bears side, they'd have McMahon at QB, whereas their loss to Miami came w/ Jimmy Mac on the sidelines.

 

A very interesting "what if?".

[Black Lushus 0]

exactly (the overlooked part), even the CBS guys were treating their Bills trouncing like an afterthought...it was like "oh hey, the Patriots played today."

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

You always had one team that was also great, but not the one that defined that decade as well, like the Dolphins in the 70s, the Redskins and Giants in the 80s, or the Niners and Packers in the 90s

 

Don't forget the Chiefs of the 60s.

[Just John 0]

For once, I can actually understand why the Pats are being overlooked (though I'm not doing it). They've looked pretty inconsistent all year, kinda like 02 team between SB's. However, the 02 team wasn't getting better like the Pats are now. If things stay the way they are, I don't see any way the Jags go to Foxboro and win, thus setting up another interesting Colts/Pats match.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Not having a scary, physical safety like Rodney Harrison isn't a good thing against Indianapolis. Keep in mind all those times the Patriots were able to beat the Colts, they had the secondary to go toe to toe against the Harrison/Stokley/Wayne trio. Even if the Patriots do a great job of playing the Colts in a physical manner against James as well as the Colts defense, Manning can rip New England's secondary to shreds, especially at home.

[Black Lushus 0]

again, unless Indy pulls a Pittsburgh and falters somewhere along the line, I don't see the Pats taking them out this season...oh and I think this season's Cincy team will be like the Bears from a couple seasons ago in the playoffs, first round bye, second round loss...

[cabbageboy 0]

In theory it should end up as Jacksonville/NE in the playoffs, but I'm torn as to who I want the Colts to play in that 2nd round. On one hand there's the Jags, who have played the Colts tough this year and might be a dangerous opponent the 3rd time around. On the other we get the dreaded game (NE/Indy).

 

That said, if the Pats actually do go into Indy and win this year, that's it for me. I'm not watching the NFL ever again if it happens. That said, who's to say JAX won't beat NE in that 1st round?

[Guest Leelee]

Probable playoff picture:

 

1. Indy

2. Denver (They'll have the tiebreak over Cincy. Both play Buffalo, so that's automatic W's for both.)

3. Cincinnati

4. New England

5. Jacksonville

6. Kansas City, San Diego, Pittsburgh. KC and SD have the better conference records, with 2 NFC losses. Pittsburgh has H2H over SD. SD has H2H for the moment, over KC.

 

I just don't want Cincy-Shittsburgh again.

 

I want Indy to win 45-3 over NE so the Belichick ass-kissing can die. Even though I tolerate the Patriots, despite them being a division foe.

[Red Baron 0]

I really do think if you can stop Edgerrin James on the run the Colts would be a much easier team to defeat.

 

Odds of actually happening this year...rare.

[Slayer 0]

The `98 Vikings were probably the best team ever to not make a Super Bowl.

Heavy sigh

[KingPK 0]

For some reason, I watched the end of the Sunday Night game. I want that half hour of my life back.

 

As far as this discussion, no Harrison definitely might be the difference in a possible NE/Indy playoff game. The Indy defense, honestly, is getting TOO much credit this year. Their stats are padded a lot by starting the year against crap offenses like Baltimore. In the first game, with having very little ToP and no Dillon to boot, Brady tore apart that secondary for nearly 300 yards and 3 TDs. If there's a rematch in Indy (and guys stay healthy), that game has all the makings of a shootout.

[Red Baron 0]

It would be funny to see Manning get hurt.

[Conspiracy_Victim 0]

Well, news just broke that the Texans have hired Dan Reeves as a "consultant". Looks like Casserly and Capers can start updating their resumes, thank God. Reeves as GM and Kubiak as head coach sounds like a good start to me.

[Gert T 0]

For some reason, I watched the end of the Sunday Night game. I want that half hour of my life back.

 

 

King, did you make any sense of that call made after the Packers stopped the Lions on fourth down? I still have no idea why a safety was not called on the Packers. Fine the holding was not in the end zone, but how can (a.) how can a running back be called for intentional grounding and (b.) if it was so obvious that he fumbled intentionally, why was what it not a safety?

[Robert 0]

I was at the game, and I was just as baffled. I haven't been that baffled at a call like that since the Tuck game.

 

If the Bears would've palyed the Dolphins in the SB, Bears would've had to do one thing: run Walter Payton. The Dolphins were last in the NFL against the run, and it killed them. I wished Miami would've went, so that Walter Payton can get a fucking SB TD instead of that fat-ass William Perry. I alway's hated Ditka for doing that, why take scores away from Walter? It would've been alot closer probably, and I wish that they would've got somebody else to narrate the game then that one guy who used to narrate trailers.

[LooseCannon25 0]

I don't care what anyone says, Bret Favre is a selfish, selfserving prick. God forbid Aaron Rodgers get some playing time, on a 2--10 team going absolutely nowhere. I'm not even saying for the dick not to start, because that would end his beloved streak, but at least let the kid get some reps out there and some playing time.

 

God forbid Aaron Rodgers isn't as good as what was reported to be, being the reason why the Packers have been scouting Matt Leinart and might not be picking up the option on Rodgers' contract next season. In other words, a first round pick completely wasted, just like I though it would.

 

And you're saying that as if it was Favre's decision who plays or not. How many other starting veterans on other teams with similar records (or hell, any team that's not going anywhere at this point) are still playing? What's the point of Steve "Human Injury Report" McNair slinging around deep balls for the Titans? Or anyone on the Texans' o-line, for that matter (their backups can't possibly be any worse, can they?).

 

Call "Bret" Favre a selfish prick or whatever you want, I don't care. Just don't use any idiotic reasoning like that. Plenty of other players on teams not going anywhere, including the Packers, are still starting without giving way to rookies for reps and playing time.

 

 

How about giving the kid a fuckin chance at least in a meaningless game to see what he can do in a game situation. He deserves at least that. I'll give you a perfect example of what i'm talking about. For the first years after drafting him the Jets were not high on Chad Pennington at all and had big time doubts about him. When he finally got his chance due to injury he shined and was a very good quarterback until his injury.

 

 

Even if he's not that impressive you have to give him a chance to show what he can do in a game time scenario. If you want to defend your precious little Favre then feel free, I feel h'e s fuckin selfish and has proven he is. Like when Rodgers was drafted Favre said "it's not my job or problem to see he gets ready". That's a dickhead thing to say to the media. You think it would be any different if you guys had Leinart or Young....nope, Favre would still be out there. He wouldn't even come out for a WHILE when he injured himself a few weeks ago and threw a TD for INT against the Bears. The proof is there, like it or not. Stop being a little bitch

[Rendclaw 0]

Well, news just broke that the Texans have hired Dan Reeves as a "consultant". Looks like Casserly and Capers can start updating their resumes, thank God. Reeves as GM and Kubiak as head coach sounds like a good start to me.

 

Add to that the fact that they greatly improved their chances of getting Reggie Bush by that shank job, and things are definitely looking up for the Texans.

[LooseCannon25 0]

Well, news just broke that the Texans have hired Dan Reeves as a "consultant". Looks like Casserly and Capers can start updating their resumes, thank God. Reeves as GM and Kubiak as head coach sounds like a good start to me.

 

Add to that the fact that they greatly improved their chances of getting Reggie Bush by that shank job, and things are definitely looking up for the Texans.

 

 

But, then what happens to Dominick Davis. He's a good back running and catching out of the backfield. I would think the Texans would trade their pick to someone for a Ol and early draft (2nd round ) pick. That's what they need the most.

[Rendclaw 0]

Well, news just broke that the Texans have hired Dan Reeves as a "consultant". Looks like Casserly and Capers can start updating their resumes, thank God. Reeves as GM and Kubiak as head coach sounds like a good start to me.

 

Add to that the fact that they greatly improved their chances of getting Reggie Bush by that shank job, and things are definitely looking up for the Texans.

 

 

But, then what happens to Dominick Davis. He's a good back running and catching out of the backfield. I would think the Texans would trade their pick to someone for a Ol and early draft (2nd round ) pick. That's what they need the most.

 

They need two OLs, thats for sure... and Domanick Davis will serve that purpose. Bush is good enough that he can start immediately.