OT: Todays NFL games

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Sun Jan 16, 2005 8:32 pm

Excellent game by the Patriots and I imagine they will be favorites next week. I wouldn't want it any other way. You have to beat the champs to be the champs. If the Steelers can't knock off the Patriots, then they don't deserve to go to the Super Bowl. The Patriots have a chance to avenge their only loss and the Steelers can make everyone forget about 2001. It should be a great game.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Sun Jan 16, 2005 8:34 pm

credit to Coach B..
The Patriots have shut down a high powered offense before....Anyone remember SB XXXVI??? as a 14 pt underdog......vs a team that had scored 500 pts 3 straight seasons...This guy is amazing...I hate him...jagoff

Kazuya · Post by **Kazuya** » Sun Jan 16, 2005 8:41 pm

Without being on the field or hearing from the players/coaches after the game, I don't really know how much the conditions have affected their offense. It doesn't look *that* bad out there. Both quarterbacks are making strong throws that don't appear to be affected by the wind.

If it *is* the case, they Colts are going to have to try to gameplan to win 14+ games every year so they can play at home. N.E., and Pittsburgh don't appear to be going anywhere and those places are almost guaranteed bad weather at this time. Whatever their plan is, this s*** here ain't working. You can't be one of the best offenses ever and then dial up 3 points, even if you're playing on Pluto.

Dave · Post by **Dave** » Sun Jan 16, 2005 8:45 pm

f*** the weather, it isn't like it suddenly got 70 and sunny when the Pats had the ball.

Got to 'sack up' in the playoffs, especially in the defending champs' house, regardless of the conditions.

If anything, the WR's should have had a bigger advantage against what is, on paper, a low-talent CB crew.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Sun Jan 16, 2005 8:52 pm

Well I'm sure the Colts won't blame the weather. But for some reason, they didn't throw it down field.

So their passing attempts were mostly under 20 yards (again, I don't recall a single pass attempt over 20 yards). It's like playing in the red zone all game.

Much easier to defend.

In the earlier game, the Eagles flooded the LBs' zones with crossing patterns instead of challenging the DBs down field and got an early def. holding call against one of the Vikes LBs. After that, Westbrook and others were free to roam and run after catch.

Looks like the Colts also played the short game but didn't try to take any of the defenders deeper to create more room for the RB and TEs.

The Colts defense played well enough in the first half but they were out in the field too long. But the overall team needs more help on defense. With the money given to Manning and Harrison (and maybe to Edge), the Colts will have a hard time keeping Freeney, let alone getting more defensive help.

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Sun Jan 16, 2005 9:10 pm

Leebo33 wrote:The Patriots have a chance to avenge their only loss and the Steelers can make everyone forget about 2001.

Umm...wrong.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Sun Jan 16, 2005 9:25 pm

Eric Allen is breaking down the game on ESPN2.

Allen like some other NFL players, past and present, had predicted a Colts win.

He says the Pats forced the Colts passing game into the middle where those LBs are. How did they exactly do that? With guys like Gay on the outside covering Harrison and Wayne, how did the Pats force Manning not to take shots in the middle?

Even if they doubled those outside guys, Colts have good players to attack the middle, like Pollard, Stokeley, Clark and James.

I still think the Colts played right into the Pats' hands. If those outside guys were singled up, Manning should have taken some shots, like he did last week when Wayne abused that poor young Broncos CB.

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Sun Jan 16, 2005 11:38 pm

dbdynsty25 wrote:
Leebo33 wrote:The Patriots have a chance to avenge their only loss and the Steelers can make everyone forget about 2001.
Umm...wrong.

That's cool. No need for anymore senseless banter. I can see why you are picking the Patriots. I wouldn't pick against the 2 time champs either if I was a non-partisan fan.

I'm just going to sit back and enjoy this week. I feel so lucky to be a Steelers fan. There aren't many NFL fans my age that have seen better football. They've had 5 losing seasons since I've been 3 years old and 2 of those losing seasons they finished 7-9. Sometimes I take it for granted and I shouldn't, but when your favorite team goes to the playoffs almost 60% of the time during your lifetime it is easy to forget how hard it is to get this far. For instance, this is the Steelers 12th trip to a Conference Championship game. That's as many as ATL, NE, and Philadelphia combined.

Post by **ScoopBrady** » Sun Jan 16, 2005 11:42 pm

Is it just me or does anyone else think that the fan they kept showing with the "This is not Payton's Place" sign was Parker. At least the guy could have spelled Peyton right.

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Sun Jan 16, 2005 11:56 pm

Leebo33 wrote:
dbdynsty25 wrote:
Leebo33 wrote:The Patriots have a chance to avenge their only loss and the Steelers can make everyone forget about 2001.
Umm...wrong.
That's cool. No need for anymore senseless banter. I can see why you are picking the Patriots. I wouldn't pick against the 2 time champs either if I was a non-partisan fan.

I was stating the fact that the Pats lost twice, not once, like you mentioned. I could give two sh*ts who wins next week. I'm rooting for my boy Donovan in Philly. Should be a nice defensive contest in the AFC though.

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:46 am

dbdynsty25 wrote:I was stating the fact that the Pats lost twice, not once, like you mentioned.

Well, if the Steelers close *wins* don't count for very much then why should I hold that fluke of a 1 point loss to Miami against them? In my mind the Patriots only loss was to Pittsburgh.

jLp vAkEr0 · Post by **jLp vAkEr0** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 10:19 am

Ugh... I feel bad for the Jets kicker.... The beating he's taking in the NY media is prety bad.

Badgun · Post by **Badgun** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 10:27 am

Boy was I wrong about the Colts. It's so hard for me to imagine a team having another team's number like this, but it just doesn't seem that the Colts will ever beat the Patriots when they have to.

Two quick observations about the game. Games have turning points where momentum changes, and I really believe the Colts should have gotten a TD just before halftime. They had moved the ball right down the field with little resistance and Manning was getting in a groove. The last 20 seconds were as poorly mismanaged as anything I've ever seen. Had the Colts taken their final timeout instead of trying to hurry up and run another play, they could have gotten two more shots at the end zone. As it turned out, 2nd down would be their last shot before kicking the field goal.

That was definitely a mental victory for the Pat who went in up 6-3 instead of down 7-6 and I bet it was in Manning's head too. I thought that sequence was huge.

The other big series I think was the Colts first drive in the 2nd half. They moved the ball well getting down to the Pats 35, but choosing to punt on 4th and 1 instead of going for it. I was screaming at the tv "You gotta go for it here!!" I have never understood the logic when a team punts from another team's 35. The net gain is usually only 15 yards because a majority of the punts go into the end zone. Anyway, I think the game ended the moment the Colts chose to punt because they lost all their momentum and really never put a decent drive together after that. The Pats wound up running off like a 95 yard drive after the Colts punted and the game was over.

As for the weather conditions, I do think they played a big role in the game. Winds were blowing 15-25 MPH the entire game and that just wreaks havoc on a qb that lives on the deep ball like Manning. The Pats running game and all of the dinks and dunks are perfect for this kind of weather. Like someone else said, until the Colts can go 14-2 or 15-1 and get this game at home, they're not going to ever get past this game. I feel bad for Manning who has done so much during the regular season only to fall flat in these games. As we say every year, maybe next year.

I'm still picking against the Steelers next week and I think it will be an entirely different game than the last time they met. If Manning couldn't do anything against New England's defense, why would anyone believe that an unproven rookie could? I don't think that the Steelers are going to be able to run the ball either and that will put all the pressue on the rookie to win the game and I don't think he can.

In the NFC, I'm going with the upset. I think the Falcons go into Philly and pick up the win. I think Vick's ability to run with the ball is going to allow the Falcons to do so much. Either way it's going to be a fun game to watch. Neither the Eagles or the Falcons can beat the Pats, but the best matchup would be the Falcons and the Pats. If Vick can work his magic, the Falcons might have a chance, but I think the Pats will shut him down and win their 3rd Super Bowl in 4 years.

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 10:46 am

Badgun wrote: The other big series I think was the Colts first drive in the 2nd half. They moved the ball well getting down to the Pats 35, but choosing to punt on 4th and 1 instead of going for it. I was screaming at the tv "You gotta go for it here!!" I have never understood the logic when a team punts from another team's 35. The net gain is usually only 15 yards because a majority of the punts go into the end zone. Anyway, I think the game ended the moment the Colts chose to punt because they lost all their momentum and really never put a decent drive together after that. The Pats wound up running off like a 95 yard drive after the Colts punted and the game was over.

I was doing and saying the exact same thing. The game wasn't as close as the score at that point, as it was already clear that the Colts couldn't stop the Pats. Dungy and Co. should have realized this and gone for it. In a legitimately close game, punting would've made sense, but the Colts should've realized that they were going to have a hard time getting the Pats offense off the field.

It was clear that Bellicheck was using the philosophy that got the Giants past the powerful Bills in 1991. It sickened me that the otherwise revolting Phil Simms made the point later on in the broadcast, but even an idiot like him couldn't miss it. (FWIW, to combine this with the announcer-bashing thread, what was up with Simms defending Harrison's helmet-fist hit?) Dungy should've identified that the weekness of his defense and the ball-control philosophy implemented by the Pats made every possession more valuable.

At the end of the day, it may not have mattered, but in the ebb and flow of the game, I think it was an important moment.

Post by **ScoopBrady** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 10:50 am

There's no doubt that the Pats smothered the Colts but they got away with murder again this year but on the opposite side of the ball. I don't know how many offensive holding penalties I saw that were not called on the Pats. Grandma Moses could have run for at least 3.5 yards per carry with holding like that. And that helmet to helmet hit on Stokley went uncalled as well.

TheFormerBrett44 · Post by **TheFormerBrett44** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 11:47 am

ScoopBrady wrote:There's no doubt that the Pats smothered the Colts but they got away with murder again this year but on the opposite side of the ball. I don't know how many offensive holding penalties I saw that were not called on the Pats. Grandma Moses could have run for at least 3.5 yards per carry with holding like that. And that helmet to helmet hit on Stokley went uncalled as well.

Perhaps the NFL will change the rules again next year for Peyton and the Colts. Although the rule they changed for them this year didn't do much good yesterday. Maybe the Pats should only be allowed to use 9 players on defense against the Colts, then maybe Peyton and crew would be able to sniff the end zone.

I was rooting for the Colts, I know the Steelers can beat them at home. I think the Pats/Steelers game is a toss up. I know this is a cliche, but the team that makes the least amount of mistakes will win.

Brett

Dave · Post by **Dave** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 11:50 am

The rule wasn't f***in changed. It was re-emphasized, much like the NHL and NBA frequently do with some of there rules.

Offensive holding happens every play, it is a matter of when they call it and consistency.

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 12:28 pm

Leebo33 wrote:
dbdynsty25 wrote:I was stating the fact that the Pats lost twice, not once, like you mentioned.
Well, if the Steelers close *wins* don't count for very much then why should I hold that fluke of a 1 point loss to Miami against them? In my mind the Patriots only loss was to Pittsburgh.

Umm...who said the wins don't count for much? I simply stated that they (the Steelers) weren't very impressive seeing as though they had only lost one time. The Pats losing to the Dolphins is definitely NOT impressive...but then again it could have been the best thing to happen to the them. They seem to be more focused than ever since that loss. Sometimes it takes a loss to the 2nd worst team in the NFL to get you to focus on the ultimate goal.

Post by **ScoopBrady** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 12:41 pm

Dave wrote:The rule wasn't f***ing changed. It was re-emphasized, much like the NHL and NBA frequently do with some of there rules.

Offensive holding happens every play, it is a matter of when they call it and consistency.

That's all I was getting at Brett. The Patriots defense just flat out whooped the Colts offense yesterday but I saw Colt linemen being taken down regularly throughout the game with no penalties. You don't need to call them all but at least call the ones where the o-lineman tackles the d-lineman.

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 1:05 pm

dbdynsty25 wrote:I simply stated that they (the Steelers) weren't very impressive seeing as though they had only lost one time.

Fair enough. I guess we just have different criteria for being impressed. Just that fact that they've done something that only less than one half of one percent of teams have ever done is impressive to me. On November 7th, you wrote regarding the Steelers: "They've sure been impressive." All they have done since that statement is win every single game they've played. All they've done since your November statement is have the lead for the vast majority of minutes in every game. All the defense has done is allow 11TDs in the 9 games since the decisive victory vs. Philly. How is that not impressive is beyond me. You're not going to get 27-3 blowouts every week in the age of parity. The past 4 Super Bowl champions: Baltimore, NE, TB, NE did not blow teams every week, but they usually won the games. That's impressive to me.

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 1:16 pm

They were impressive in the first Patriots game...just so happens, that statement came the week after.

BTW, you're a psycho for actually going back that far to find that statement, if in fact I did make it.

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 2:30 pm

dbdynsty25 wrote:BTW, you're a psycho for actually going back that far to find that statement, if in fact I did make it.

Psycho? I clearly remembered an "Are the Steelers the Best Team in Football Thread." There is a search engine here that works. Type in Steelers and find out how fast you can find it.

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 2:34 pm

Why? To prove that I like to waste my time like you, trying to find something to pin on me? You're already doing a good job of that.

I already said, in this very thread (you don't need to search) that the win against the Pats was impressive...hence the "Steelers were impressive" statement on November 7th.

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 2:41 pm

dbdynsty25 wrote:Why? To prove that I like to waste my time

4,610

Post by **ScoopBrady** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 2:43 pm

Leebo33 wrote:
dbdynsty25 wrote:Why? To prove that I like to waste my time
4,610

LMAO