Self Editor

Forum: foot
Page 4828
Subject: Playoff Action

Posted by: Electroman - [44651412] Sat, Jan 06, 2007, 17:47

Peyton is doing his annual playoff choke job, but KC is doing worse. How did they get in the playoffs? This is a terrible game.

barilko6
ID: 411154308
Sat, Jan 06, 2007, 18:43

Up until that last KC drive, I couldn't understand why Herm didn't put Huard in....was pretty much screaming at him through the TV, but he wasn't listening.

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Sat, Jan 06, 2007, 19:00

Incredible how Ty Law owns Manning.

Donkey Hunter
ID: 61182620
Sat, Jan 06, 2007, 19:26

Looked like a Bears game. Defense playing great. QB trying to give away the game. But I bet the media doesnt rip Peyton or Dungy all week the same way they would if it had been the Bears winning like this.

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Sat, Jan 06, 2007, 21:58

P. Manning:
C/ATT YDS AVG TD INT
30/38 268 7.1 1 3

Kansas City Rushing
CAR YDS AVG TD LG
L. Johnson 13 32 2.5 0 6
D. Hall 2 14 7.0 0 8
M. Bennett 1 1 1.0 0 1
T. Green 1 -3 -3.0 0 0
Team 17 44 2.6 0 8

Indianapolis Rushing
CAR YDS AVG TD LG
J. Addai 25 122 4.9 1 14
D. Rhodes 13 68 5.2 0 25

So Peyton goes 30 of 38, yet he's choking. Sure he had 3 picks, but I think that's pretty darn good considering the score and the rushing.

So the Indy D plays their best game of the year and holds one of the best rushers to 32 yds. Green was held to 107 yds and also had two picks. Instead of wow, the Colts played really well, it's man how did the Chiefs even make the playoffs and Manning is doing his annual choke job. Wish I could choke that bad!

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Sat, Jan 06, 2007, 22:04

Btw, I'm not saying Peyton threw the game of his life, I'm sure he'd consider it mediocre, but considering the entire game and he went 30 of 38, that's what I'm saying is pretty darn good--even if there weren't any long passes, etc.

Perm Dude
ID: 51043615
Sat, Jan 06, 2007, 22:19

IMO this game wasn't about Manning. It was about the Colts D. If their D played their "normal" game Indy loses.

Punk42AE
Donor
ID: 036635522
Sat, Jan 06, 2007, 22:23

Look at it this way only 5 passes that Manning threw fell to the ground.

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Sat, Jan 06, 2007, 22:58

The first half, Manning was not playing well, that is when I wrote that he is choking, because he wasn't getting the job done. Second half, he was conservative, didn't lose the game. He managed the offense.

KC was abismal on offense, if they could have at least converted a first down after the turnovers, maybe they could have got some momentem.

Indy played very well and inspired on D, so did the Chiefs D, but they were on the field the whole game and got tired.

A 12-4 team beat a 9-7 team, that is supposed to happen. I will be interested how Indy play next week on the road against a tougher opponent.

Trip
Leader
ID: 13961611
Sat, Jan 06, 2007, 23:10

W

O

W

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Sat, Jan 06, 2007, 23:13

From first and goal to a botched FG and turnover on downs, incredible.

tastethewaste
ID: 42017617
Sat, Jan 06, 2007, 23:20

When Romo ran after the botched FG, didnt he get the first down? It looked like the refs gave seattle the ball inside the 1. Didnt the cowboys just need to get the ball to the 1?

Trip
Leader
ID: 13961611
Sat, Jan 06, 2007, 23:26

He was down before the fumble but he didn't make the 1st

tastethewaste
ID: 42017617
Sat, Jan 06, 2007, 23:26

ok looking at the replay it didnt look like he got it. Also on the the 3rd and whatever play for Dallas when they got it to the 1 and a half and the refs initially called it a first down there was like 1:45 left. Seattle for some reason didnt call a timeout, then the play was reviewed and they didnt get the first. Can't Holmgren say something like if i knew it would be 4th down i wouldve called a timeout right away and to reset the game clock to around 1:45 instead of 1:19? If they had done that Dallas would have had around 30 seconds instead of 3.

Bond, James Bond
ID: 14046420
Sat, Jan 06, 2007, 23:30

He didn't make it to the 1 IMHO. Yes, that would have been a first down but he didn't make it. My question is the overruling from upstairs of the original ref's call of first down on the play proceeding the miffed FG attempt. Seems to me it he "probably" didn't make it but it was inconsequential at best. The first down call should have remained.

But since the refs were overruled, why doesn't Parcells have Romo do a QB sneak on 4th and 1/4 of a yard???

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Sat, Jan 06, 2007, 23:31

So, how will Dallas fans view Romo now? Will Parcells be back? What a finish to the season for Dallas. Go Eagles:)

Seattle Zen
ID: 46315247
Sat, Jan 06, 2007, 23:37

IMO this game wasn't about Manning. It was about the Colts D. If their D played their "normal" game Indy loses.

But more importantly, if the Colts D plays like that for the rest of the playoffs, they win the Super Bowl.

If I was a Dallas fan, keep me away from sharp objects. I don't really know how the booth officials ruled that Whitten didn't make the first down. Without the benefit of a line marker and from watching the replay at an angle, how do you determine where his forward progress stops? To me it was like a guy in the bleachers above first base calling a baseball foul down the third baseline without any chalk to demarcate the line. Think you might want to take the word of the official who was in perfect position and about 12 feet away?

Do you think the NFC coach of the Pro Bowl squad will ask Romo to hold in Honolulu?

tastethewaste
ID: 42017617
Sat, Jan 06, 2007, 23:38

I dont have a problem with the refs overturning that call. It was a bad call, i think it had to be overturned. And you cant go for it on 4th and 1/4 for your season when you have the opportunity to win the game with a 19 yd FG.

tastethewaste
ID: 42017617
Sat, Jan 06, 2007, 23:39

That ref gave them a spot inside the 1, there is no way he made it even to the 1. Refs make mistakes, thats why they have replay.

mjd
Sustainer
ID: 501381415
Sun, Jan 07, 2007, 00:15

I'm just glad to have a good game to watch after the first snoozer.

J
Leader
ID: 049346417
Sun, Jan 07, 2007, 00:46

Romo always came off (to me) as a cocky little punk. It'll be interesting to see how acts now that he's gone through this mess. Can't say I feel bad for him :)

barilko6
ID: 550477
Sun, Jan 07, 2007, 08:06

Wherever Mike Vanderjagt was when that FG missed, I bet he was laughing, laughing, laughing...

barilko6
ID: 550477
Sun, Jan 07, 2007, 08:12

Its official...

Tony Romo is dating Carrie Underwood. I am sure there is a joke somewhere to be made there...

Mike D
Leader
ID: 041831612
Sun, Jan 07, 2007, 09:03

Zen, yes, I bet Romo does hold in the pro bowl due to the lack of choices.......maybe he can exercise his demons.

Pancho Villa
ID: 1311532913
Sun, Jan 07, 2007, 11:18

Shaun Aleaxander is a shadow of his former self.

He looks slow, apprehensive and weak, unable to fight through tackles, make good cuts or put on a burst of speed when there is a hole.

The Seattle passing attack is not good enough to overcome a non-existent running game, so I fear their chances of getting beyond next week, especially on the road, are very slim, regardless the opponent.

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Sun, Jan 07, 2007, 15:24

The Jets are down 7, yet the whole game I'm still expecting them to win. Weird. It's like they are going through the motions right now as it's obvious that they are going to go nuts. I have no idea why I'm thinking like that!

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Sun, Jan 07, 2007, 15:29

Now after the backward pass fumble, the Pats are ready to score again. Maybe the Jets are lulled into the same attitude I've had all day.

smallwhirled
ID: 27051213
Sun, Jan 07, 2007, 16:07

Until that backward foward pass this game has been very exciting. Certainly much better from a fan's point of view than yesterday IMO.

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Sun, Jan 07, 2007, 16:17

Well tha Pats took advantage of the desperate Jets to blow them out in the 4th.

Tree
ID: 36043712
Sun, Jan 07, 2007, 16:34

So, how will Dallas fans view Romo now? Will Parcells be back? What a finish to the season for Dallas.

as a Cowboy fan who cannot believe the stunning last few minutes of last night's game, i still think Romo is the QB of the present and future for this team.

remember, he has less than a full season of experience under his belt. he played just well enough to lead a team going nowhere into the play offs. he is a strong QB, and i think this is one of those "things" that just happens, and a good player becomes and even better player because of it.

Romo always came off (to me) as a cocky little punk. It'll be interesting to see how acts now that he's gone through this mess. Can't say I feel bad for him :)

i don't know if this is serious or sarcasm, because i haven't heard one thing that he has said that even has a remote amount of cockiness.

Wherever Mike Vanderjagt was when that FG missed, I bet he was laughing, laughing, laughing...

well, no, not really, since it wasn't a missed FG. the kicker had nothing to do with it.

RecycledSpinalFluid
Dude
ID: 204401122
Sun, Jan 07, 2007, 17:30

Sweet sweet run by Westbrook for 49 yard TD. Gints going for shoe string tackles.

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Sun, Jan 07, 2007, 17:31

Woo, hoo! 49 yd run by Westbrook.

I think I know why he isn't in the Pro Bowl. 2003, he was injured in the championship game. 2004, overshadowed by T.O. and McNabb. Last year, injured. As fantasy players, we know the value of players maybe more than a casual fan. This year, he is making a name for himself, now people will get to know him.

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Sun, Jan 07, 2007, 17:34

Pick by Sheldon Brown.

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Sun, Jan 07, 2007, 17:49

Shockey and Tiki sure proving their toughness.

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Sun, Jan 07, 2007, 19:57

Next stop on the way to Miami, New Orleans. Go Eagles!!!

barilko6
ID: 411154308
Sun, Jan 07, 2007, 21:35

re 29: You don't think the dumb idiot kicker is laughing because the team that unceremoniously (in his mind) released him is eliminated from the playoffs?

I think he is happy as anything that the Tuna is out of the playoffs.

steve houpt
ID: 451161019
Mon, Jan 08, 2007, 00:29

Curious, do any of you think the New England at San Diego game will match the best two teams in NFL. They are at least two of the top three teams.

Other than the Bears, the NFC is a joke. This coming from someone rooting for either the Eagles or Saints to make it to the Super Bowl. Was born and raised in Philadelphia. My parents picked the name Steve from Eagles Hall of Famer Steve Van Buren. I also lived in New Orleans for too many years [and will be in New Orleans next weekend without tickets to the game].

J
Leader
ID: 049346417
Mon, Jan 08, 2007, 09:39

Re 29 - Tree, there's no sarcasm there. To me he comes off as an arrogant prick and I've never liked him from day 1.

steve houpt
ID: 451161019
Mon, Jan 08, 2007, 12:34

The four NFC teams left and their record against the AFC.

Since they are each from a different division, they combined to play each team in the AFC once. They are 6-10, and outscored 357-312. They six wins were against CLE, HST, BUF, OAK, NYJ & DEN

NOR ___ WON ___ 19 - 14 ___ at _ Cleveland __ September 10
PHL ___ WON ___ 24 - 20 ___ at _ Houston __ September 10
CHI ___ WON ___ 40 - 7 ___ H _ Buffalo __ October 08
NOR ___ LOST ___ 22 - 35 ___ H _ Baltimore __ October 29
PHL ___ LOST ___ 6 - 13 ___ H _ Jacksonville __ October 29
SEA ___ LOST ___ 28 - 35 ___ at _ Kansas City __ October 29
CHI ___ LOST ___ 13 - 31 ___ H _ Miami __ November 05
SEA ___ WON ___ 16 - 0 ___ H _ Oakland __ November 06
NOR ___ LOST ___ 31 - 38 ___ at _ Pittsburgh __ November 12
NOR ___ LOST ___ 16 - 31 ___ H _ Cincinnati __ November 19
PHL ___ LOST ___ 13 - 31 ___ H _ Tennessee __ November 19
CHI ___ WON ___ 10 - 0 ___ at _ NY Jets __ November 19
CHI ___ LOST ___ 13 - 17 ___ at _ New England __ November 26
PHL ___ LOST ___ 21 - 45 ___ at _ Indianapolis __ November 26
SEA ___ WON ___ 23 - 20 ___ at _ Denver __ December 03
SEA ___ LOST ___ 17 - 20 ___ H _ San Diego __ December 24

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Mon, Jan 08, 2007, 12:50

I don't think anyone really thinks that the NFC champ has much of a chance, but that is why they play the games.

TB
ID: 72253110
Mon, Jan 08, 2007, 13:29

Good info, Steve.

We all know that any team can get lucky on any given day, but I mostly agree with Electroman. The only team I disagree with is Chicago. If they bring their "A-Game" I think they can beat any remaining AFC team. I also believe that any of the remaining AFC teams could also beat Chicago. If Chicago doesn't make it to the Superbowl for the NFC, I would be surprised if it wasn't an AFC blowout win.

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Mon, Jan 08, 2007, 13:40

What's funny to me is that Indy is currently being picked as the 4th best team in the AFC. The run defense was the 7th worst this year in NFL History! They were truly horrific at times, yet what most people might not know is that the Indy D was beseiged with injuries--most notably thier run stopper, Corey Simon, (who was supposedly in his best shape of his career this year) was IRed due to a non-football injury and the guy they designed their whole defense around--Bob Sanders--didn't play most of the season.

Well, they filled the run stop with Booger MacFarland from the Bucs, sure he might eb a downgrade, but he has helped and is getting better. And even though there are several guys still out, the Colts are a different team with Sanders playing. Also, the Colts Special Teams has been horrid as well. Last week they added three top guys to the punt and kick coverages and played well.

Now I don't expect them to put up the kind of performace they did last time every week, if they play decently and the Indy O plays like it normally does, Indy should win. Again, they were the 7th worst in NFL History. Horrible ST and still finished 12-4 after starting off 9-0. Counting the playoff win, that's 13 wins.

I'm not saying they WILL win it all, but for so many people to be basically counting them out is humorous to me. Maybe they go out and get blown out next week--but I'd be very surprised. Should be a great game with a top D vs. a top O. Still Indy will score some points. All comes back to the Indy D.

TB
ID: 72253110
Mon, Jan 08, 2007, 14:38

I am with you, Ref. I picked them to win this week vs Baltimore. In one set of picks I have them losing the following week to SD and in another set of picks I have them beating Chicago in the Superbowl. We all know how tough Indy is to beat at home, but they are not the best road team. I think it will be tough for them to win on the road in back to back weeks, but they have the talent to pull it off.

Now, when Baltimore and NE both win this week, both sets of picks will be shot along with all of my play-off survivor teams.

Texas Flood
ID: 4905267
Mon, Jan 08, 2007, 14:42

Even a casual football fan understands that the AFC is superior to the NFC. So what?

I'm not inclined to put the Saints and Eagles in the joke category just yet.

The Eagles loose thier Pro-Bowl QB, plug in a guy who's on the backsdie of a decent career and find themselves two wins from the Super Bowl. Would McNabb have done the same thing?

The Saints were the best story in the NFL this season. A guy who wasn't wanted on the AFC's best team puts the team on his back and carries a bunch of unknowns to a division title, and a possible Super Bowl. Not a joke from my point of view.

The Cowboys are a joke, I'll give ya that. They looked terrible down the strech and there's so much blame to go around you could'nt even begin to spread it all.

The Seahawks have been hammered by injuries, which makes thier win over the Cowboys even more amazing. The Great T.O. was shut down by a elk hunting guide, mortgage broker, and a guy who was working out in a gym. Tony Romo could'nt beat those guys or hang onto a snap from center. The Cowboys are'nt a joke they're an entire stand-up routine!

The Bears....Interesting but over rated. The division they won was the biggest joke in the NFL. Thier defense was less than exciting down the strech against teams like STL,TB,DET & GB. Rex Grossman is about as focused as a seven year old with A.D.D

SD may very well be the best team in the NFL. They sure have the best running back and a solid defense. Rivers has yet to be tested in the playoff's so we'll see before we crown em. They have to get by a battle tested NE team that features a chamionship QB and very good defense.

IF the IND defense can duplicate thier KC effort they will handle BAL. Peyton and that offense can score enough to beat any team anytime.

While the AFC is superior to the NFC each game in the playoffs has to be taken on its own merritt and anything can happen.

My take on this weeks games

PHI @ NO. This is a tough game to predict. I like NO but thier defense better come to play. I like Brees, the home field avantage more than I like Garcia and Westbrook. NO wins.

SEA @ CHI. I like the CHI D better than Hasselbeck and Alexander. I like the cold, rain and wind and hopefully Grossman will get his head in the game. CHI wins.

NE @ SD. I like Brady's playoff expericene but I like LT and the SD defense better. SD compeltely shuts down the NE running game and forces Brady to put the ball up more than usual. Taking away the balance of the NE attack is the key. SD wins.

IND & BAL. Keep Peyton off the field, run the ball and play great defense. That was what KC tried to do but in the end it failed. IF the IND D can play at the same pace it did last week BAL has no chance. IND wins.

TB
ID: 72253110
Mon, Jan 08, 2007, 14:54

Nice post, TF. I have the same picks so I am hoping you are correct.

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Mon, Jan 08, 2007, 15:59

Peyton and that offense can score enough to beat any team anytime.

I would ask you to look at the Dallas, Tennessee, Jax, Houston games.

One thing that this week and those games have in common, they are road games. Whoop de doo, they beat 9-7 Chiefs, at home. I expect a Ravens win.

TB
ID: 19425813
Mon, Jan 08, 2007, 16:16

@ Giants, @ Jets, @ Denver, and @ New England were all wins for Indy, though. This game could go either way.

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Mon, Jan 08, 2007, 16:47

This is why I love football so much. You can talk all you want, show stats and trends, but come kickoff, throw everything out, and enjoy. Soak it in people, it is almost over for this year.

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Mon, Jan 08, 2007, 17:16

I think the Colts will beat Balt. Afterall, Jamal Lewis isn't one of the top RBs in the league and the passing game doesn't scare me--though they can be solid and score that way too. The Colts can be one of the worst tackling teams but Lewis et al aren't the kind of guys that can break tackles. I think the team they should bew orried about is SD with that D and LT who is not only a great back but can cause even the best tacklers to miss. Obviously am rooting for Indy and NE this week. Would love a Colts/Bears superbowl. The Colts blew out the Eagles earlier this year.

Perm Dude
ID: 15014811
Mon, Jan 08, 2007, 17:20

I'm printing out your post, Ref.

Anyone who is banking on the Indy defense stopping the run more than one game in a row is in need of some help...the first step is to admit you have a problem, ref.

:)

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Mon, Jan 08, 2007, 17:26

Damn 9-0 doesn't do it for you? ;)

Texas Flood
ID: 4905267
Mon, Jan 08, 2007, 17:26

45, I like the Colts much better @home than on the road too, but they had some nice road wins this year vs 3 playoff teams and one almost (Denver). I just don't see McNair, Jamal Lewis, Mark Clayton and Derrick Mason keeping pace with the IND offense.

The best senerio for BAL would be terrible weather and a slow track. I think a lot of people are under estimating the Colts at the wrong time of the year.

Perm Dude
ID: 15014811
Mon, Jan 08, 2007, 17:35

I actually like the Colts. Their win at New England was one of the best games I saw the whole year. But their start (Ten? Was? Hous?) was against weak competition. And their average of giving up 5.3 yards/rush during the season should give you at least a pause.

Some interesting regular season stats on the Colts:

Fourth Downs conversions: Colts 0/4. Opponents 11/14 (!)

Sacks: Gave up only 15 all season

FG's: Colts 26/29. Opponents: 24/35.

Pancho Villa
ID: 1311532913
Mon, Jan 08, 2007, 19:55

I'm a little bias as a Seahawks fan, but you folks do remember the beating Detroit served on the Bears New Year's Eve? Now it's true that the Bears embarrassed the Seahawks on Monday(or was it Sunday?)Night Football earlier this year, but I'm going out on a limb and picking the Hawks.

Seattle was sans Alexander in that game, and although he doesn't look to be full speed to me, just being in the lineup should help set up the play action pass better for Hasselbeck. And doesn't Holmgren have some incredibly gaudy overall record vs Chicago?

Texas Flood
ID: 4905267
Tue, Jan 09, 2007, 09:10

The Packers beat the Bears on New Years Eve. The Lions beat the Cowboys.

The Bears are a mediocre team with the luxury of playing in a semi-pro division. Thier vaunted defense was less than sensational in December and the QB has an advanced case of A.D.D. Lovie is going to regret not giving Griese significant PT.

All that said, I still think the Bears can beat the Hawks unless Grossman sinks the ship. A lot will depened on the weather and if the bears can shut down Hasselbeck and Alexander.

Hasselbeck still looks out of sync, the wr's are banged up, and quite frankly Alexander looks much older and slower than in years past.

I'm not a Bears fan but I think they have more than the Seahawks, espically at home. I would love to see the Hawks win though!

Motley Crue
Dude
ID: 439372011
Sat, Jan 13, 2007, 18:36

12-3 Indy with 7:30 left in the 3rd.

The Ravens are going to lose this game to the Colts if they can't get some offense going like real soon.

Great game on defense by the Colts. Very disruptive, forcing turnovers, and playing excellent coverage in the secondary.

If Manning doesn't throw a pick for a TD the other way, the Colts have a good chance.

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Sat, Jan 13, 2007, 19:38

Wow, winning despite Manning again. The D has stepped up. The play of the game, the INT McNair throws in the red zone. Instead of the lead or a tie, they go down by 6. Gotta give props to the Colts, as hard as it is to do.

Perm Dude
ID: 6027137
Sat, Jan 13, 2007, 19:39

Just watched the end. Very, very nice game by the Indy D. Gotta give them props--they are hitting on all cylinders exactly when they needed to.

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Sat, Jan 13, 2007, 23:20

Scott Young, what a prick. Very good game, but I feel that it slipped away. 2nd and 1 at the 2, and you can't convert. Brian Westbrook taking his eyes off the ball and dripping it. Garcia could have run for a first down, but throws it when he was across the line. I don't believe that the Bears of Seahawks will be able to stop the Saints.

Sludge
ID: 45541422
Sat, Jan 13, 2007, 23:41

WOOOOOOOOHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

GO SAINTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Motley Crue
Dude
ID: 439372011
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 10:23

The Colts defense played a very solid game, but it wasn't spectacular. Time and again the Ravens' unimaginative playcalling hindered their offense. They didn't run the ball nearly as much as they should have, especially in the 4th quarter. I specifically remember a drive the Ravens started with near 8 minutes to go in the game where they threw 3 straight passes. That hurt, because they didn't move the ball at all.

I think the Manning-led Colts are witnessing their best chance so far to make and win the Super Bowl. And it's certainly because of the defense. Can they get over the Patriots hump? We may find out next weekend. What a way to get to the big dance that would be for Manning--beating New England in the AFC Title game.

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 11:16

I doubt that New England will beat the Chargers, but I doubted that the Colts would beat the Ravens. And I think that if the Colts meat the Chargers, their run will be up. Right now, I would say a Chargers - Saints SB.

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 11:34

LOL Electro, you really have it bad for the Colts!

I wasn't able to watch the games yesterday as I was out of town, but I did catch the Colts game on the radio at least. I've been telling you that the Colts D has been HURT all year--esp the player they designed the entire D around in Bob Sanders. Now Sanders and a couple others are back. They are still without a few of them though. The Colts are a different team with a healthy Bob Sanders.

The Ravens seemed to be so intent on not letting Manning beat them that they sold out in the passing D. They doubled Harrison all day and apparently doubled Wayne as well more than once. That allowed the running game to work as well as other receivers like Clark to be open.

One thing I like about Manning is that he goes with what is working. If the Ravens had gotten a couple of TDs early, you see a different Manning. Of course with perhaps the best D in the league, you never know. But his mentality is you take away the pass, then here's the run. He doesn't have the ego where he has to get his numbers. As long as they do enough to win. I'm sure he will trade numbers for a W every week.

I am so tired of these so called experts who get truckloads of cash because they are a former player, etc. to simply predict based on what the popular opinion is at that moment. Anyone worth their salt that did adequate research or even talked to someone that follows the Colts could at least brought to the table some of the things I have brought up in the past couple weeks before making their decision.

What's funny is that the Colts are apparently going to continue getting the naysayers finding something else negative about their huge win on the road in the playoffs until they win it all. Ever team is very good at this point in the playoffs and every one of them should be taken seriously as a potential Super Bowl Winner.

I really like the SD D. Their front 7 is studly. Their DBs don't get much props and perhaps for good reason--allowing what 22 TDs or so, but I still think they are underated. Still I really think the Pats have an excellent chance to win. Coach B is great at designing plays and coverages to fool young QBs. It will be interesting to see what happens. If NE can get some turnovers, that will be the story. We all know what will happen if LT runs wild.

The Bears better not turn the ball over or they could be in trouble to. If they take care of the ball though I think they are strong enough to win. Still don't be surprised if the favorites go home today. I'll be rooting for the Bears and Pats. We shall see.

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 11:38

Btw the two best acquitions this year are Brees and Vinatieri. How appropriate would it be for those two to meet in the Super Bowl? Esp. after everything NO has been through on and off the field? Their team has been the league's laughing stock for so long and with Katrina killing the city's morale, what a feel-ggod story. Manning being from NO and finally getting over the hump and having a small market team representing...how perfect is that? (Don't answer that Electro! ;))

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 12:00

The Colts got very lucky yesterday. There were three Colts turnovers that were negated by the Ravens D, two Lewis tips that were headed for INT's, and a fumble recovery that was batted out of the defenders hand, by his own teammate. McNair made two bad INT's. I just get frustrated watching the last two Colts games. They are really bad games, and the opposing offense gets away from the game plan, namely, the run. LJ had 13 carries the week before. The game wasn't that out of hand, and they got away from the run. Yesterday, Lewis ran well, but they throw, and McNair gets picked. I give that to the rep of the Colts offense. The opponents think that they have to score fast, or they are going to get blown out. I am not a believer in the Colts D, YET. Show me that you can stop the best, namely, LT, and then I will show some respect.
BTW, I am sure that the NFL wants a Saints vs Colts SB.

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 12:03

Fine the Colts have lucked their way to 14 wins this year and after this weekend are one of just four teams left. Hopefully they can luck their way into two more wins. As long as they win, I don't care how it is classified.

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 12:20

You don't have to look that far for a team that had everything bounce their way all the way to the SB, last years Steelers.

Motley Crue
Dude
ID: 439372011
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 13:38

I kept thinking the same thing--that the Colts were lucky a few times. But the Ravens never took advantage of anything the Indy defense gave them. Indy absolutely deserved to win.

Their kicking game is ridiculously good right now. That might be the edge they need to win it all. Imagine if Peyton stops throwing picks! They could be unstoppable.

I think Indy-New Orleans in the SB sounds about right. Sorry, Chargers fans. As much as I love them, I don't think they can survive with a green QB. We'll see.

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 14:01

The Bears look pretty good today so far.

Motley Crue
Dude
ID: 439372011
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 14:35

Not good enough to win the whole thing, though. They're letting Seattle hang around.

If the Saints set up a game plan that involves lots of pressure on Grossman next week, they'll win. Rex seems to be pathetic with guys hanging in his face and on his back (not that many QB's could handle that well). I think New Orleans will have a real good chance next week.

And yes, that means that I believe Seattle will lose today. They've hung in to halftime, but they haven't impressed me. Chicago will run the ball a lot in the second half and keep the ball out of Rex's (and thus the other team's) hands.

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 15:57

tied up late and seattle has their fate in their own hands. Will they score or allow Chicago the opportunity? OT anyone?

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 16:00

Well seattle has answered my question. The squandered it. Now Chicago has the ball with 1:59 to go and needs about 20-25 yds for a Gould TD. I think Seattle needed to play it safe and punt that ball and then pressure Grossman and hope for a TO or a punt and take it to OT if need be.

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 16:01

Bears 3 and out. So Seattle again has the opporunity to do something with 1:38 left and all their time outs.

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 16:09

Why would chicago call time out and give seattle another chance to score?

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 16:22

Saints VS Bears.

Pancho Villa
ID: 1311532913
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 16:32

So, who will be the Charger's sacrificial lamb in the Super Bowl...Bears or Saints?

Boxman
ID: 211139621
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 16:33

Rex seems to be pathetic with guys hanging in his face and on his back (not that many QB's could handle that well).

That's a criticism about Grossman that I hear a lot and just shrug my shoulders. If he's got one guy humping his leg and another pulling on his throwing arm, just how in the hell do you expect him to perform well at all?

Go Bears.

It was putrid to hear Joe Buck and Troy Aikman call the game, but what choice do I have? There's the radio, but it's on a delay relative to the TV broadcast. It could be worse. It could've been McCarver and Buck.

Motley Crue
Dude
ID: 439372011
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 16:44

You have to get rid of the ball quickly, Box. That's the only way to defend the blitz. Watch Tom Brady this afternoon and you'll see what I mean.

Buck seemed unusually stupid today. The part about not knowing which was longer between 5/8 and 1/2 inch; what was that nonsense?

Anyway, the Bears have a week to improve their execution, and they'll need it: New Orleans is a much better team, IMO, than Seattle.

I am glad to see the 5 remaining teams are all very good. I hope San Diego beats New England, because I don't think I can stand another Patriots Championship. But either way, the Final 4 will be an entertaining group next weekend. I'm looking forward to it.

Boxman
ID: 571114225
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 17:25

You have to get rid of the ball quickly, Box. That's the only way to defend the blitz. Watch Tom Brady this afternoon and you'll see what I mean.

That is true, but you have to take the playcalling into consideration. The Bears don't run a lot of quick slants or quick routes. That's Ron Turner, our dunderhead from Illinois, for you.

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 18:28

SD better not let NE keep hanging around! The halftime guys said that and I totally agree with them!

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 19:11

How can you act so stupid. You stop the Pats, and then give them 15 yds and a 1st down. Stupid, stupid, stupid!!!

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 20:20

Wow, poor Marty. Incredible. Pats vs Colts. This will be interesting.

Tree
ID: 350231414
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 20:36

Wow, poor Marty. Incredible. Pats vs Colts. This will be ~~interesting~~ boring.

there. fixed that for you.

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 20:45

Why will it be boring? I know the week ahead won't be, with all the story lines.

Frick
ID: 21041187
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 20:58

I'm a Colt's fan and I agree with Tree. I'll put the over under on Monkey on the back, Brady just wins, Manning chokes and all of the other recycled articles at about 2,000,000.

ivan
ID: 534552418
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 22:48

Wow, poor Marty. Incredible. Pats vs Colts. This will be interesting.

poor marty? at what point does it become ok to blame the coach for his teams failures?

9 pro bowlers, bye week, home crowd (out of towners couldn't even buy tickets through ticketmaster) and he still can't get the job done? too bad nobody makes performance enhancing drugs for coaches.

secondary thoughts: i don't recall ever seeing a facemask penalty get called, then have the penalty dropped entirely.

nor do i understand what marty hoped the review would find on the fumble following the int on 4th down - that had to be the clearest play i've seen reviewed in quite some time, it seemed like an easy way to waste a timeout.

--

next week does look interesting, neither the pats nor the colts played up to their potential on offense this week rather they both did just enough to survive.

mjd
Sustainer
ID: 501381415
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 23:08

All I know is that both playoff games this year with Indy involved were pretty boring. The only way they win next week will be if their D repeats those same performances.

My team has been eliminated, so I'm just looking for a well played, interesting game. I don't think that the same old, rehashed story lines are going to be that interesting.

I'd much rather be watching a Chargers-Ravens game next week.

Motley Crue
Dude
ID: 439372011
Sun, Jan 14, 2007, 23:19

I think the Colts' defense is going to be better.

They have to beat New England one of these years.

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Mon, Jan 15, 2007, 00:17

Well it wasn't the playoffs but the Colts did go into NE this season and win. But perhaps that was just luck. ;)

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Mon, Jan 15, 2007, 15:45

How much pressure is on Manning? As a Colts fan, when does him not performing in the playoffs reach its limit? He has a chance to redeem himself for all of those other years, to some extent. Dungy has to have some pressure too. This is a QB and a coach who have a list of playoff failures, against a coach and a QB who just win.

Perm Dude
ID: 41051159
Mon, Jan 15, 2007, 16:14

I don't think they care as long as they win.

TB
Sherpa
ID: 031811922
Mon, Jan 15, 2007, 16:20

How much pressure is on Manning? As a Colts fan, when does him not performing in the playoffs reach its limit?

I think this is it. Win the superbowl or he gets cut. Dungy too. We all know the regular season is all about luck and in the playoffs the best team always wins. Win it all or get the bum outta here.

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Mon, Jan 15, 2007, 16:39

Electro, you crack me up. When Peyton has all the stats but they don't win, then he is a choker or can't win in the postseason. When the Colts win but Peyton doesn't have those big numbers then he takes heat for not having the big numbers.

Manning takes thousands of reps. When you're that familliar with what is going on, that takes a lot of the nervousness out of the picture. If everyone perfoms up to their expectations, the Colts win easily. I think i will be a tough game, but again, the Colts win this one. Finally.

The Bears/Saints is a tough one to figure out. It may come down to Grossman to Berrian and the big play if Chicago is to win it. All four teams are very capable of winning the Super Bowl.

WiddleAvi
ID: 241137114
Mon, Jan 15, 2007, 16:45

Whats interesting is Had Baltimore or SD made it to the super bowl no one would have given the NFC a chance. All of a sudden with NE or Indy in the super bowl the NFC suddenly has a chance to win !!!

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Mon, Jan 15, 2007, 17:00

So, if they rely on the defense to win, why pay the QB so much money, and make him the focal point of the team?

I want Peyton to show up, and play the game of his life. Win, the game, you know, how the True Greats do it. Then I will quit ragging on him.

Perm Dude
ID: 41051159
Mon, Jan 15, 2007, 17:27

That's a setup. Is Peyton calling himself a "True Great?" Essentially, you are calling out Peyton for his team winning despite him not being the messiah that his hardcore fans say he is.

Peyton got them where they are to win. On a team sport that's the best you can do. Expecting him to win the whole thing himself is the Colts of 5-6 years ago.

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Mon, Jan 15, 2007, 18:08

Peyton idn't have to throw much. He took what the D gve them and that was running the ball. Had the Colts been forced to throw, you can be assured his stats would have been higher. Perhaps he'd have even thrown another pick, who knows. I think he's hte best QB in the league, but he's still human. To be honest, I wouldn't care if he has 5 picks as long as his team wins.

This was a team that had the least props of the final 8 teams and now suddenly the tide is starting to turn. If they knock off the Pats, I bet you they will suddenly be the favorites. Nah, they won't. Too many people will be so embarassed for picking against them that they will be rooting against them from here on out. Good. The underdog role isn't so bad.

TB
Sherpa
ID: 031811922
Mon, Jan 15, 2007, 18:33

I want Peyton to show up, and play the game of his life. Win, the game, you know, how the True Greats do it. Then I will quit ragging on him.

I agree. Until he has as many rings as Marino or Fouts or Kelly or Tarkenton or Moon I just don't think anyone should quit ragging him.

It's kinda like how Rivers lost that game for his team yesterday. Even though he wasn't on the field when Parker muffed the punt. Nor was he on the field when McCree intercepted the ball (on 4th down, knock it down dammit) and then fumbled it back to NE. He wasn't on the field when Brady was sacked on a 3rd and 13 and the defender felt the need to get up into the Patriot players face. Any one of those three plays alters the outcome of this game. It's amazing how the QB will get all the blame when a team loses, but when they win it was a team effort. Yeah, I'd like to see Manning have a great play-off game, win a ring, and get the monkey off his back but even then he is going to need the whole team to step up.

Da Bomb
Donor
ID: 487112814
Mon, Jan 15, 2007, 18:42

But Indy is winning in the playoffs now despite Manning, not because of him. The defense was putrid during the season, and it was thought that if Manning didn't throw for 300 yds and 3 TDs during the playoffs, they would have no chance. And that's very very tough to do every game, let alone 4 in a row in the playoffs to win the Superbowl. This is why Indy was looked at as having a small chance of going anywhere. But, the defense is now suddenly playing out of its mind. No one could have predicted the D would be playing this well. Maybe you could have expected them to play a little better with the return of Sanders, but giving up just 14 points in 2 games? - wow. If the defense plays this way from here on out, Manning doesn't have to worry about putting up gaudy numbers to win games. The question is if the defense can keep up what it has been doing. If all of a sudden it goes back to the way they were during the season, Manning will have to have a huge game, or else they will be out.

ivan
ID: 534552418
Tue, Jan 16, 2007, 00:15

It's amazing how the QB will get all the blame when a team loses, but when they win it was a team effort.

rivers might not be the best example of this. while there were some plays he could of made, i'm not sure there is anyone that blames him exclusively for this loss. there are much more obvious targets, like his recievers for droping easy completions, failure to get feet inbound, the defense getting stupid. marty. ect.

peyton manning is a totally different case. the problem w/ peyton is that peyton can have a regular season better than most qb's could ever dream of, then struggle in the playoffs. when the colts lose it's usually b/c peyton didn't play as well as he usually does. last year being the exception where vanderjack got scapegoated.

if the pats had lost yesterday, brady's poor performance would justifiably be listed as the primary reason the pats lost.

100

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Tue, Jan 16, 2007, 11:51

ivan, as someone who follows the Colts VERY closely, I can assure you that you don't know what you're talking about.

I'm not going to get into great detail, but the playoff losses had a lot of factors to be considered such as, the other team's superior play, uncharacteristic drops, uncalled illegal contact, failure to block for Peyton, an idiot kciker who gets all liquored up before running his mouth amd missing critical kicks inthe playoffs (ok maybe that one is half true ;)). Sure Manning deserves some blame but not all of it.

This year the defense started out decently. But again, the whole scheme was built around Bob Sanders. Add is like 7 other starters going down at some point and you have inferior athletes trying to learn the scheme on the fly or at least without enough reps. Sanders is one of the best defensive players in the league. I am amazed by his ability. You'll be hearing a lot more about him in the years to come--hopefully in the weeks to come. He is also quick enough to come in and limit the run to short gains. Earlier in the year, when a RB got through the line, their scheme broke down w/o Sanders. Now the defense is more than a one man team and there have been a couple others heal up. Still, it would be great to have all of the guys on D back. Of course the Pats would love to have Harrison back this week as well (and there may still be a chance of that).

The last few weeks of the regular season wasn't only a breakdown in the defense but receivers were uncharacteristically dropping the ball. The Colts should have won some of those games despite the defense.

So what is wrong with Manning taking what the defense gives him in the playoffs? You have a great D, doubling two receivers. So what does he do? Throws it to the TE and runs the ball. Balt was so content on stopping Manning--and they did a great job on that for the most part--that he methodically took what he was given. If he had to do more, he would have. Not saying he was on the top of his game, but great players understand what is happening and deal with it. If a grea pitcher isn't getting his curve over that day, maybe he throws his slider more.

Now I am no expert, but these generalizations that some people are making are based on some of the crap they read and hear. I am all for people's opinions based on what they observe, but making inaccurate statements based on perception cracks me up.

As many know, I am the biggest Dodgers and Colts fan around, but I still try to be objective and realistic at the same time.

Earlier this year the Colts marched into NE and came away with a 27-20 victory. Now I'm not expecting Brady to have four picks this game like he did then, but it is possible. At home, in a controlled environment of the Dome, it may come down to Win-atieri, now that should be the story. Still, if the Colts play up to their potential, they could win by 13-14 points. Don't ever count out NE though--even if it looks bleak late. Same can be said for Manning.

I think it will come down to the TEs. Clark seems to be doing much better even with the partially torn ACL. Watson is a huge threat against the Colts and his YAC. Look for the QBs to target those guys frequently. Wayne and Harrison are the big play receivers. My gut says that NE will double Harrison until Wayne starts to burn them. But just ask Balt. what happens when you try and take them both away by doubling. Of course that may lead to bad Manningnumbers again, but the W is all that matters.

101

Tree
ID: 32014168
Tue, Jan 16, 2007, 13:29

Whats interesting is Had Baltimore or SD made it to the super bowl no one would have given the NFC a chance. All of a sudden with NE or Indy in the super bowl the NFC suddenly has a chance to win !!!

nah, i've been saying all along that New Orleans was going to win the Super Bowl. previously, i thought they'd beat SD, now it's going to be NE.

this is what the power brokers that won the NFL decided shortly after Katrina trashed NO and the SuperDome.

the team would play away from home, deal with an owner who threatened to move the team away from its home city and home dome, then they'd return home, to their dome, after being forced to roam, and they'd win, and win big, with a new quarterback who was a risky play because of an injury, and ultimately, they'd win the Super Bowl with that QB.

very clearly, this is how it was scripted, and i have little doubt that next year we'll be talking about a QB heading into the Super Bowl with a chance of redemption after bobbling a chip shot field goal place in the season before, helping to cost his team the game.

things in the NFL don't happen by accident. much like boxing or wrestling, the NFL is scripted, and the results are pre-determined.

102

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Tue, Jan 16, 2007, 13:31

OK Tree, take a step back into reality now.

103

Perm Dude
ID: 130151611
Tue, Jan 16, 2007, 13:38

Don't forget to make your Football Pickoff selections. Put your money where you mouth is.

:)

104

Sludge
ID: 16109168
Tue, Jan 16, 2007, 13:49

105

Seattle Zen
ID: 49112418
Tue, Jan 16, 2007, 14:11

Yeah, I don't know what is crazier: The NFL is scripted or the Cowboys going to Super Bowl XLII?

106

Tree
ID: 32014168
Tue, Jan 16, 2007, 16:00

Don't forget to make your Football Pickoff selections. Put your money where you mouth is.

i've been picking NO all along.

107

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Tue, Jan 16, 2007, 18:32

I don't agree with the NFL being scipted, but I did notice that the refs were giving very generous spots to the Saints on Saturday. I should mention that I am an Eagles fan, but it seemed that the refs were giving spots where the players would end up after being tackled, meaning that they would get tackled, touch the ground, and go forward a couple of yards, and that was the spot.

108

Slackjawed Yokel
ID: 811371220
Tue, Jan 16, 2007, 18:59

Another Colts' fan chiming in... a troubling trend this season has been the way they lost all their rematches this year. They beat their division rivals the first time, but lost to each the second time they played them (of course, these were on the road).

It'll be interesting to see what Belichick has in store for the Colts offense. As I recall, their first game was a start of a trend where Colts opponents would give them the underneath stuff - dropping back in coverage and not blitzing.

You can't help but think that Peyton is due for a turnaround; he's made a lot of ill-advised passes over the past two games that he hasn't been doing this year. He'll need it this game, as the SD game showed, Brady and the Pats are notorious for getting breaks(Troy Brown forced-fumble, anyone?), so if the Colts want to win they need to put them away early.

(By the way, anyone who has an extra nosebleed seat for less than $350, let me know). The 1000 tickets that went on sale yesterday sold out in a matter of minutes.

109

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Tue, Jan 16, 2007, 20:32

So, if Vinatieri wins the game with a kick, is his god-like status affected in New England?(How many places do people actually wear the kickers jersey?) Or does Belichick get some flack for one of his cost cutting moves coming back to bite him in the butt?

110

ivan
ID: 534552418
Tue, Jan 16, 2007, 21:03

ivan, as someone who follows the Colts VERY closely, I can assure you that you don't know what you're talking about.

I'm not going to get into great detail, but the playoff losses had a lot of factors to be considered such as...

it is what it is, some folks find a way to win, others find someone else to blame. ;~)

when peyton sets passing records for touchdowns the storyline isn't the blocking of the colts o-line.

111

Frick
Donor
ID: 3410101718
Wed, Jan 17, 2007, 09:02

If the only story lines that you read are from the main stream media, then we can't help you. There are some good writers that write about those "non-flashy" play of teams. Dr. Z at CNN.com does a decent job, for a site that attempts to break down football in a Sabremetrics type of way check out footballoutsiders.com. The Colts have had one of the top O-lines in their adjusted sack rates metric the last several years. While some of the credit should go to Manning, I would give even more credit to Jeff Saturday the C and Tom Mudd the O-line coach. While the Colts O-line isn't a power running line (except the last drive of the Raven's game) it is extremely good at pass blocking.

112

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Wed, Jan 17, 2007, 10:38

Exactly Frick. That's what surprised everyone so much about the game against Pittsburgh last year. The O-Line was uncharacterstically bad. Peyton took some heat for bad-mouthing them, but they deserved it. At least he has the stones to be honest. You always hear him praising thta line too. Saturday is finally getting his props. He wasn't always the C either has he moved over like 3 or 4 years ago.

113

Kyle
ID: 52753312
Wed, Jan 17, 2007, 13:03

I believe Saturday has been the starter ever since Manning has been there. Frick you said pretty much everything I was going to say. The O-line is one of the best lines in the league. No believed me when I said that a few year ago when it was all about the Broncos and Chiefs lines. I contended that the Colts were one of the best and used their pass blocking as an example. Manning was sacked 14 times this year with 557 passing attempts (almost 40 attempts per sack). Finally the O-line is getting respect. Saturday and Tarik Glenn are Pro Bowlers. Also interesting is how the Colts keep their chemistry together. Saturday's been there since 1999, Glenn 1997, Ryan Diem 2001, Jake Scott and Ryan Lilja 2004. Get used to these names they will be household names!!

114

Frick
Donor
ID: 3410101718
Wed, Jan 17, 2007, 13:48

Ref, during the same press conference where he said "We had some protection problems" he also took responsability for some it when he stated he was the one who called the intial protection scheme. Saturday then takes over for the linemen, but how often do you see Manning move a WR, TE or RB to help with the protection. But, since that didn't make a huge headline, it wasn't reported.

Don't you know that Manning is a loser and throws his teammates under the bus. I mean Vanderjagt didn't do anything beside call his QB and Head Coach loser, you have to stick up for kickers who aren't afraid to speak their minds. /sarcasm.

115

JeffG
ID: 146591911
Thu, Jan 18, 2007, 09:11

not playoff related, but...

Yesterday, Michael Vick reluctantly surrendered a water bottle to security at Miami International Airport that contained a residue "closely associated with marijuana," police said Wednesday.

SI.com story
A look at a similar water bottle

116

ivan
ID: 534552418
Fri, Jan 19, 2007, 08:40

If the only story lines that you read are from the main stream media, then we can't help you. There are some good writers that write about those "non-flashy" play of teams.

yeah, but when they start getting commercials let me know.

by contrast when the pats won in the past a lot fo the credit and accolades went to the kicker, the coach, the cordinators who turned their superbowl rings into long term deals and head coaching jobs - and of course brady - but he's never had that spotlight all to himself. despite the fact that brady has never had the onfield superstars like manning has.

obviously peyton has enjoyed having a good o-line and one of the best wr tandems in the nfl. if you want to call the o-line great or even best in the nfl as far as pass blocking, fine by me, and other then the edge injury peyton has had very good (at least) running back(s) to split the load and sell the play action.

the contrast to the pats offense is pretty stark, there aren't too many pats that i'd rate as better than the colts, position by position. esp at wr it's not even close.

this is the 2nd year now where the colts are the team that "should" win, last year despite protection problems, the colts still had some huge breaks late that made the fg attempt possible. the colts schedule is partly to blame, their schedule has been pretty soft the past few years esp when you compare it to the raiders. (note the pats didn't have that hard a road either this year) as a result they build expectations playing the weaker teams then fold when faced with other good teams - and usually on the road.

just as the jimmy johnson cowboys were built to be an emmit smith stat machine, the colts are geared the same way towards peyton, if that team wins or loses most of the credit or blame should be on peyton.

that's the interesting part about the colts run so far, peyton is almost an afterthought so far, yet these next two games could be the final justification peyton needs to surpass "great" and move on to "legend".

117

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Fri, Jan 19, 2007, 13:46

The Colts play one of the toughest schedules in the NFL based on the Strength of Schedule formula the NFL uses based on the previous season. Only their 3 dvision opponents are set despite of their record. I'm not sure how you get a "soft" schedule out of this:

WK DATE OPPONENT
1 9/10 @ New York Giants 26 - 21 W
2 9/17 HOUSTON TEXANS 43 - 24 W
3 9/24 JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS 21 - 14 W
4 10/1 @ New York Jets 31 - 28 W
5 10/8 TENNESSEE TITANS 14 - 13 W
6 10/15 BYE -
7 10/22 WASHINGTON REDSKINS 36 - 22 W
8 10/29 @ Denver Broncos 34 - 31 W
9 11/5 @ New England Patriots 27 - 20 W
10 11/12 BUFFALO BILLS 17 - 16 W
11 11/19 @ Dallas Cowboys 14 - 21 L
12 11/26 PHILADELPHIA EAGLES 45 - 21 W
13 12/3 @ Tennessee Titans 17 - 20 L
14 12/10 @ Jacksonville Jaguars 17 - 44 L
15 12/18 CINCINNATI BENGALS 34 - 16 W
16 12/24 @ Houston Texans 24 - 27 L
17 12/31 MIAMI DOLPHINS 27 - 22 W
18 1/6 KANSAS CITY CHIEFS 23 - 8 W
19 1/13 @ Baltimore Ravens 15 - 6 W
20 1/21 NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS 6:30 PM

118

ivan
ID: 534552418
Sat, Jan 20, 2007, 06:31

Ref,

that's not a tough schedule, even considering the two playoff wins. you said it yourself based on last season. last year seattle and pitt were hell on wheels, this year - barely a factor.

weeks 1-5, only one team (jets) finishes with a winning record this year.

6 bye

7-12 this is the toughest it gets, 4 winning teams in 6 weeks, 3 on the road, this is what a tough schedule looks like. to their credit colts are 5-1 in this part of the schedule.

12-> more creampuffs and wannabes.

20 - pats. peyton is gonna have to earn this one.

---

what i find interesting / odd is the colts d, the fewest points allowed in the regular season was 13, and they only had 4 games where their opponent scored less than 20.

yet they get to the playoffs and give up a total of 14 pts in two games.

119

Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 311151718
Sat, Jan 20, 2007, 09:22

I'm not particluarly interested in this discussion but I have to point out that measuring strength of sched by looking at opponents' final records will not tell you the whole story. For example, the Jets finished 10-6 compared to the Jags 8-8 but in weeks 3 & 4 (when Indy played and beat both), the Jags were a much better team than the Jets.

And the Jags were much better than a team projected to go 8-8. Two weeks after losing to the Colts by 1 score, they romped the Jets 44-0. Before their late season collapse, they were 8-5. Including losses to KC and NE in that collapse, they were 5-3 against playoff opponents. The Jaguars, until week 15, anyway, were certainly not creampuffs and were definitely favored over the Jets to make the playoffs all season long.

I'd hardly call the week 13 Titans creampuffs, either. Perhaps you noticed that they beat the Colts in the middle of a 6-game winning streak in the second half. They played (and beat) Indy coming off wins against the Eagles and Giants. They were doing something right that made them very tough down the stretch.

The week 15 Bengals also went into Indy on the heels of their best streak of the season, coming off a 4 game winning streak that included victories at NO and against Balt.

I'm not interested in a thorough disection of Indy's 2006 regular season schedule and how tough it was. My only point is that if you're going to attempt finer arguments about a team by breaking down strength of schedule, you won't get anywhere if you simply rely on the final records of its opponents. With only 16 games and all the parity in this league, some very tough teams will finish with a .500 record. That (or even 7-9) is not a reason to dismiss them outright as a creampuff or wannabe opponent in a particular week.

120

Seattle Zen
ID: 46315247
Sun, Jan 21, 2007, 22:51

Congrats Ref, it took a storybook comeback to get that 800 lbs. gorilla off their back.

As for the Bears, has there every been a worse quarterback to win a conference championship? Seriously, Rex makes Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer look like Zeus and Odin. Vince Ferragamo is Aku

to Rex's retched cockroach act.

121

Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 311151718
Sun, Jan 21, 2007, 23:12

What happened to Tree's script?

122

Sludge
ID: 45541422
Sun, Jan 21, 2007, 23:27

It's alive and well, MITH. It's the year of the black coach. Tree just had the scripts confused.

123

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Mon, Jan 22, 2007, 00:21

My favorite and 2nd favorite team are playing each other in the Super Bowl. WOW!

The Bears have shown some vulnarability as of late, but not today--that was impressive.

The Colts...what can you say. Never gave up and kept chipping away. Probably the two of the best QBs in the game today facing off and coming down to the last two minute.

There will still be naysayers against Manning. This week it will be that he's never won the big one. If he wins that, well he only won once until they won't be able to hide the stupidity anymore. I also hate the cracks about Peyton being another ARod if he lost today. Get a life, dude. This is a team sport and it takes a lot more than one person to lead you to victory. Go cover some singles Tennis or something.

124

ivan
ID: 534552418
Mon, Jan 22, 2007, 07:47

The Colts...what can you say. Never gave up and kept chipping away. Probably the two of the best QBs in the game today facing off and coming down to the last two minute.

colts looked very impressive yesterday, congrats.

the bears - which bear team is gonna show up?

i don't have a dog in this fight so all i can hope for is a good game and some funny commercials.

125

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Mon, Jan 22, 2007, 14:14

Edge leaves and the Colts go the Super Bowl. But he got paid mad cash and I think that's really what he's about moreso than the Super Bowl.

126

Kyle
ID: 52753312
Mon, Jan 22, 2007, 15:40

Ref as a Colts fan who was in Arizona (watching the White Sox spring training) when Edge was signed I was upset to see him go. Then the draft came and Addai was picked and I felt good again. I have never been a fan of Rhodes but he's been serviceable as Edge's backup. I honestly thing we couldn't have done this with Edge though. Every year come playoff time Edge has had 360 or some odd carries and was a tired horse. Joe comes in with 100 less and looks like Edge did toward the end of the regular season.
There is something to be said about the 2 back system if all 4 championship teams are using it. The grizzled vet and the young gun running side by side carrying the load.

127

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 11:17

RE: 101

Tree, if the NFL had scripted NO to win the Super Bowl, how do you explain that they didn't even make the Super Bowl? I think I'm gonna nickname you Mel Gibson for your conspiracy theories. I don't venture to the Politics Forum, but I bet you post a lot over there! ;)

Interestingly enough, Rex Grossman grew up south of Indy and was a lifelong Colts fan.

128

Tree
ID: 29082512
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 13:17

Tree, if the NFL had scripted NO to win the Super Bowl, how do you explain that they didn't even make the Super Bowl?

in 1986, Lex Luger and Bruiser Brody had a steel cage match in Florida. Luger got too big for his britches, Brody stopped cooperating, and threatened to legitimately pummel the young upstart Luger.

this is called a shoot. they happen sometimes in wrestling, and they happen sometimes in football.

that's what happen in the NO-Chicago game. The Saints were poised to win, then Chicago got a safety on a play that was clearly supposed to be part of the go-ahead drive for New Orleans.

the Bears continued their refusal to cooperate and adhere to the script, and as a result, they won, despite the fact the Saints were on the book to take the contest 1-2-3.

129

Boxman
ID: 47922511
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 13:31

Tree, I am finding myself hard pressed to disagree with you on this one.

How can anyone who watched this game and listened to the Aikman/Buck commentary not see a bias towards NO? How many times did we see the Reggie Bush TD reception?

Aikman and Buck just glowed over the Saints "#1" offense for the entire game. A little factoid however shows that the Bears as a team scored more points. Since football is actually a team sport, they could have brought it up in a fair way.

The broadcasters clearly wanted NO to win. NO was an easy sympathetic favorite.

I understand that just because the broadcasters themselves were biased does not imply a league mandate for NO to win. However, the broadcasters prepare for these games some time in advance. Even the s#itty ones like Buck probably. Maybe Aikman and Buck were winked at and told to gloat about NO. After all, they'd look like even bigger asses if they touted Chicago and NO wound up winning.

I add a log to Tree's fire. It's my understanding that Prince is doing the halftime show correct?

What's been a relatively popular Prince song lately?

This one.

"S.S.T." is a song by Prince which was recorded and released directly after the impact of Hurricane Katrina. It was officially released as a digital download by the NPG Music Club on September 3, 2005 and reached #1 on the iTunes R&B chart. It was later made available as a CD single through commercial outlets. All proceeds from the recording went to hurricane relief.

The song's title alludes to Sade's "Sweetest Taboo", which is namechecked more than once in the lyrics. "S.S.T." also refers to Sea Surface Temperature, which is used to monitor the threat of hurricanes.

The B-side of the single is the instrumental "Brand New Orleans".

I would be interested in knowing when Prince was booked as the half time performer versus when NO clinched a playoff spot or was headed that way.

130

Perm Dude
ID: 39012259
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 13:37

Guys, you can't argue with a wrestling fan that all sports isn't scripted. They already believe wrestling is "sport" and just can't help themselves...

131

boikin
ID: 59831214
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 13:49

Am i reading this correctly are we comparing the NFL to the WWE, i could buy the argument maybe if it was the series is scripted to got to go game 6 or 7 but this is ludicris. And using the announcers as your bases is non-sense in what games are the anouncers not biased.

132

leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 13:58

"The playoffs are scripted," and because someone (the Bears) doesn't adhere to the script, this is justification??? What the heck kind of backwards logic is this??? The Bears winning means it wasn't scripted, especially with them winning so convincingly at 39-14. The Bears didn't adhere to the script and it would of been different with no intentional grounding call??? Couldn't the ref not called the intentional grounding, assuming the "NFL is in on it?" I have seen worse non-calls, so, if that drive is truly "meant to be," the ref simply wouldn't of called it.

this is called a shoot. they happen sometimes in wrestling, and they happen sometimes in football.

What the heck??? You proved it happens in wrestling, and that makes it "happen sometimes in football"??? Show me a "shoot" happening in football. Comparing a sport that is scripted to one that isn't, doesn't make it comparable. This is insanity!

As for your points Box, the Bush TD was as good a TD you will see; and I expect to watch the replay more than a 5 yd plunge by Thomas Jones. It was an 87 yd wheel route for a TD against a top defense. How many times did they show the Berrian TD...I remember seeing it quite a few times, as it was an impressive TD as well.

And for the announcers, they can't affect the game, so, how is this a conspiracy theory? Everyone that wasn't a Bears fan was rooting for the Saints anyhow, so, I am not surprised the amount of coverage they got.

Again, how anyone can say it was scripted, even though it didn't work out, is beyond me. That is the opposite definition of scripted.

133

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 13:58

This is so laughable. The Bears' "refusal to cooperate" shows you right there it isn't scripted. Baloney. And I guarantee you the NFL makes a lot more money with the Chicago market than the depleted NO Market--no matter how much of a feel-ggod story it may be. It all comes down to the all-mighty dollar.

The WWE doesn't even have a Sports License, it has a Theater License.

134

Boxman
ID: 47922511
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 14:35

leg: You ignored my point about Prince.

Everyone that wasn't a Bears fan was rooting for the Saints anyhow

So that gives the broadcasters license to go out and be biased?

135

KrazyKoalaBears
ID: 15023167
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 14:52

LOL!

The Saints were poised to win, then Chicago got a safety on a play that was clearly supposed to be part of the go-ahead drive for New Orleans.

Good thing that happened right as the 4th quarter ended, or else NOR would have had a chance!

Oh, wait...

LOL!

Boxman, put down the Kool-aid. Please.

The broadcasters clearly wanted NO to win. NO was an easy sympathetic favorite.

And that right there is the reason for 99% of what you pointed out. Is this the first time you've ever seen an easy sympathetic favorite get all the attention? If so, watch the Olympics some time. :)

I would be interested in knowing when Prince was booked as the half time performer versus when NO clinched a playoff spot or was headed that way.

Saints Clinch: December 17, 2006
Prince Rumored: July 28, 2006
Prince Officially Announced: December 10, 2006

You can bet negotiations were taking place a LONG time before that December 10th announcement, so any relation to the New Orleans clinch a week later is purely coincidental.

And a non-factor now that the Saints lost.

136

Perm Dude
ID: 39012259
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 14:56

So they are now free to help Prince out in his halftime show, which was the way it was scripted all along!

137

Seward Norse
ID: 317472810
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 15:12

Just wait until Manning wins the game and rips off his jersey to reveal the NO jersey underneath.

138

leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 15:24

leg: You ignored my point about Prince.

I ignored it because I didn't want to dig up the info and I didn't think my belief would be as helpful as facts...KKB did show facts, though, and I will just say: "See post 135." But, on a more general basis, I bet a ton of singers did something for New Orleans after Katrina, and that we could draw some kind of connection for nearly anyone who was going to perform at halftime.

So that gives the broadcasters license to go out and be biased?

Broadcasters have license to talk about whatever they want, unless it's racist, sexist, or some other kind of -ist. Look at what Madden talks about half the time, or even Dennis Miller when he was on: it doesn't even pertain to football sometimes. Whether you choose to believe it or not, announcers have bias when they announce a game, this isn't breaking news for the Saints. Sometimes it's for a team, and sometimes announcers won't get off being sooo enamored with a specific player. Heck, I think you were one of many who said that Musberger was all about USC when they played Notre Dame this year and that he was showing serious bias to that team; that right there should tell you what Simms and Buck did was not out of the ordinary.

139

boikin
ID: 59831214
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 16:40

RE: 137, don't you mean wait till the whole saints team is sitting in stands and right before kick off rush out onto the field taking their rightful place in the game.

140

Perm Dude
ID: 39012259
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 16:43

Yes, at the halftime show, just like I said...

:)

141

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 18:02

Just wait until Manning wins the game and rips off his jersey to reveal the NO jersey underneath.

ROFLMAO

142

Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 49848118
Thu, Jan 25, 2007, 18:29

Tree
What's absurd is not the possibility or even liklihood that the NFL playoffs and regular season were fixed but the certainty with which you insist on this claim.

You say you've known this "all along". How long is that? Since the flood?

143

¤ Mario LeMoose ¤
ID: 280122619
Fri, Jan 26, 2007, 20:28

So much for the "elite officiating crews" in the NFL playoffs ...

Posted at jaguars.com (and linked there from other sites):

Join jaguars.com senior editor Vic Ketchman as he tackles the fans' tough questions.

Jacob from Weymouth, MA: "He was face-guarding. You’re not permitted to do that. It’s been that way forever. You can’t shadow a receiver for the purpose of blocking his vision of the ball. That’s what Hobbs was doing. It was an easy call." Vic, you should check your NFL rules book. Face-guarding was made legal in the NFL six or seven years ago. Learn the rules before you make blatantly wrong claims.

Vic: I bow to your superior intellect. I checked out what you are saying and you are absolutely correct. Face-guarding was discontinued several years ago and I completely missed it. I talked to Dean Blandino in the league office and he confirmed what you’re saying. Blandino, by the way, was in the replay booth at the Patriots-Colts game. Ellis Hobbs should not have been flagged for pass-interference. He didn’t make contact with the receiver and in no way did Hobbs impede Reggie Wayne’s ability to catch the pass. Blandino confirmed that the incorrect call was made. It advanced the ball from the Patriots’ 19-yard line to the one-yard line and was the big play in a touchdown drive that led to a two-point conversion and a tie game at 21-21. Referee Bill Carollo made no reference to face-guarding in his explanation, but CBS analyst Phil Simms did. Apparently, he, too, doesn’t know the rule no longer exists. The next time you hear a TV analyst say, "he wasn’t playing the ball," think of the Hobbs play, then turn down the sound.

144

Trip
Leader
ID: 13961611
Sat, Jan 27, 2007, 00:00

I realize your attack wasn't on the outcome of the game, but did think that this was an interesting counterpoint to any accusations that the Patriots got hosed in the game:

From ESPN.com's TMQ

Resisting the urge to panic helped the Colts' comeback. Taking the second half kickoff and trailing 21-6, Indianapolis coaches called eight rushing plays on the 76-yard touchdown drive that turned the game into a tense, close contest. Then on the next possession came the play that Colts players, coaches and front office people, especially Bill Polian, have been waiting for since the 2004 AFC Championship. In that game, New England was never called for defensive pass interference, despite numerous obvious muggings of Colts' receivers. Bill Belichick, knowing officials tend to call defensive pass interference and offensive holding (the two most damaging penalties) less as the postseason progresses, had instructed his defensive backs to interfere with Colts receivers mercilessly until such time as a flag was thrown -- and a flag was never thrown. Polian complained bitterly after that game, and should have; the league changed its officiating procedures, instructing zebras to end the traditional practice of switching to "let the boys play" in the postseason. Then in 2005, New England beat Indianapolis again in the playoffs, and again was never flagged for defensive pass interference. Now it's the third quarter of the 2007 AFC Championship, and once again New England has not been flagged for defensive interference. Eleven consecutive postseason quarters between the Pats and Colts and we're supposed to believe New England has never once interfered with an Indianapolis receiver? Finally the yellow flies -- Ellis Hobbs called for pass interception in the end zone. Polian must have yelled, "Finally, FINALLY!" Ball spotted on the 1, and on the next play, Peyton Manning threw a touchdown pass to defensive tackle Dan Klecko, lined up as a blocking back. Putting a big defender in as a blocking back at the goal line, then throwing to him, is one of Bill Belichick's favorite tricks. How the football gods must have chortled to see Belichick's own trick used against him.

145

Motley Crue
Dude
ID: 439372011
Sat, Jan 27, 2007, 00:10

Well, the Patriots might not have gotten hosed for the game, but if that play went down the way it was described above (I don't remember it at all), they clearly got screwed on the play.

And I don't think it's relevant to the accuracy of the call in the least to point out that the Patriots' secondary hadn't been called for DPI in 11 quarters of playoff action against Indy prior to that. Not really a 'counterpoint' to me at all. An observation, sure. But completely irrelevant.

Bad calls happen every game. Occasionally they affect the outcome of the game. The law of averages caught up with New England.

Even if the Colts didn't get a TD there, and had settled for a FG, the game likely would have gone into OT. It's not as if the Patriots were robbed. They certainly had a chance to put the thing away when it was 21-3.

146

TB
Sherpa
ID: 031811922
Sat, Jan 27, 2007, 00:14

"The law of averages caught up with New England."

I still think the *tuck-rule champions are due another 40-50 holding calls from their offensive linemen to get their law of averages correct.

147

Trip
Leader
ID: 13961611
Sat, Jan 27, 2007, 00:17

I was definitely rooting for Peyton and only felt disappointed that they chose that point to call a DPI, I didn't want NE to have any excuses for losing that game, especially at a point when I thought that IND was already on their way to turn things around. NE had plenty of other opportunities to stop them. I really do see it as a moot point, but wanted to offer that up to argue moot points :)

148

Motley Crue
Dude
ID: 439372011
Sat, Jan 27, 2007, 14:05

TB, that "law of averages" comment was strategically placed to draw you into the conversation.

I often awe at my own brilliance.

149

TB
Sherpa
ID: 031811922
Sun, Jan 28, 2007, 04:33

I only commented because I knew you wanted to let me know that you knew I would comment. I too know the pressure of being brilliant.

150

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Fri, Feb 02, 2007, 15:40

Funny how the Colts went from little chance to win any of their playoff games to suddenly the favorite to win it all.

151

Perm Dude
ID: 2914028
Fri, Feb 02, 2007, 15:45

That happens when you stop playing AFC teams, Ref.

152

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Fri, Feb 02, 2007, 16:07

I don't even know why they are playing the game. It is so clear that the Colts are going to win. Why waste everyones time. CBS should pull out and have a "Everybody Loves Raymond" marathon.

153

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Fri, Feb 02, 2007, 17:36

The only Super Bowl that I remember that I was 100% sure that a team was going to win was the '85 Bears. The Bears have a lot of ways hey can win this game. I think (and hope) the Colts will win though.

154

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Fri, Feb 02, 2007, 17:56

Just heard on PTI that it is supposed to rain. That should make it interesting.

155

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Fri, Feb 02, 2007, 17:59

That definitely helps the Bears if that occurs. Colts are based on speed.

156

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Fri, Feb 02, 2007, 18:10

The Super Bowl I remember being a 100% sure of was the Broncos vs Falcons.
Situations like this, the chance of rain, make me wonder why teams build domes. Your team is built generally on where you play. Inside, there are no elements, so if they face them, they clearly have a disadvantage. It might help you to get to the SB, but then you just have to hope that the weather is good, or that it is played in a dome. This is a personal opinion, if I were an owner, I would make sure my team played outside.

157

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Fri, Feb 02, 2007, 18:25

It might help you to get to the SB...

You said it. And for that reason, I'd have a dome team. (ie...you gotta get there, to win it.)

158

sarge33rd
ID: 99331714
Fri, Feb 02, 2007, 18:27

one other comment along that line.....being an outdoor team, didnt help Buff to win it a few years back. (lost 4 straight it seems to me.)

159

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Fri, Feb 02, 2007, 20:09

This is only the 4th appearance by a Dome team, if I scanned correctly, and they are 1-2. The Rams did it twice and the Falcons. So it doesn't really give an advantage in making the SB.

160

Perm Dude
ID: 2914028
Fri, Feb 02, 2007, 20:13

There weren't any domed teams early on, of course, and many of those that came along were expansion teams.

Plenty of sucky non-dome teams (Cleveland?) out there that aren't playing...

161

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Fri, Feb 02, 2007, 20:23

The point got side-tracked. If it does rain on Sunday, the Colts are at a disadvantage because of playing in a dome, and the subsequent style of play. That is why if I had a team, I would have them outside.

162

Perm Dude
ID: 2914028
Fri, Feb 02, 2007, 20:29

Ah, that makes sense.

163

Motley Crue
Dude
ID: 439372011
Fri, Feb 02, 2007, 21:11

The only Super Bowl that I remember that I was 100% sure that a team was going to win was the 2001 game (Ravens v. Giants).

Baltimore dismantled every team in their path to get to the game, and I knew the Giants had no prayer. I actually bet money on that game. I never do that.

164

Perm Dude
ID: 2914028
Sat, Feb 03, 2007, 01:37

Breaking news from The Onion...

165

Boxman
ID: 211139621
Sat, Feb 03, 2007, 09:38

The only Super Bowl that I remember that I was 100% sure that a team was going to win was the 2001 game (Ravens v. Giants).

I'd have to say the Bears in '85, the 49ers the year they played the Chargers, and the 2001 Ravens.

166

Electroman
ID: 44651412
Sat, Feb 03, 2007, 10:16

"prissy indoor-team members"

That's no way to talk about Peyton:)

167

TB
Sherpa
ID: 031811922
Sat, Feb 03, 2007, 16:34

The only Super Bowl that I remember that I was 100% sure that a team was going to win was the 2001 game (Ravens v. Giants).

I knew Oakland was going to beat Tampa Bay in 2003. Somehow, I am still trapped in this alternate future.

168

Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Sun, Feb 04, 2007, 00:37

Including playoffs contests, the two Super Bowl XLI franchises had five common opponents (Patriots, Jets, Giants, Bills and Dolphins) in 2006.

The Indianapolis Colts, who played New England both during the regular season and in the AFC Championship Game, posted a 6-0 record against common opponents. The Chicago Bears fashioned a 3-2 mark.

Forum: footPage 4828Subject: Playoff Action

Forum: foot
Page 4828
Subject: Playoff Action