Off The Grid
Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2010
- Messages
- 9,153
- Reaction score
- 4,341
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.This thread is actually getting FUNNIER as it goes ALONG!!
Page 32 is HILARIOUS!! :singing:
Dude, that is flat out SCARY!!
The OP must be a soccer fan. Otherwise one of the dumbest posts of the year.
The Giants win over GB wasn't fluky. They DOMINATED the Packers. What was fluky was how a team as talented as the Gmen lost seven games during the regular season. They struggled with injuries most of the year and got healthy at the right time. Not only do they deserve to be here, I think they should be favored. This is a team that's proven they match up well against us. I'm not just talking about SB42, I'm talking about coming to Gillette and beating us on our home field despite missing key guys like Bradshaw and Nicks. We're going to have our hands full on Sunday. Don't get me wrong, I believe we'll find a way but to talk like the Giants don't deserve to be here is moronic. Threads like this one makes one reconsider the benefits of freedom of speech.
LOL. Yeah they fluked out on 7 losses and dominated one of the worst games I have seen GB play... If my OP is dumb I don't know what to say about some of the responses like this one. What are we kindergarten kids?
They got freaking swept and beat down by Washington in December. Kept to 10 points. They got blown out by a bunch of teams, including the Saints. Although not even that is as bad as getting blown out by Washington twice. That's not a fluke. That's just a weak team. Good teams don't get destroyed in 25 % of their games. They didn't go through any transformation 2 weeks before the playoffs despite what a bunch of people think. They barely got by a sloppy 49ers team and the only reason they did is cause those guys were balling their eyes out over a playoff win the week before and forgot there were games left to play. This is going to be one of the weakest teams in a Super Bowl in some time and I'll be highly surprised, if Gronk plays, if this isn't a major blowout. I think the 2008 Cardinals were a tougher team.
I am a fan of soccer, and a lot of different sports, but that has nothing to do with a playoff format, other than they use a combination of round robin and head to head for the finals which would work wonders in the NFL as well, considering there are so few teams left. You must be a Tennis fan, cause that's the only major PRO level sport I know that uses single elimination and works effectively. And it works great for tennis if anyone was watching what just happened in Australia. But even then its mostly an individual sport, those guys play 7 sets most of the times which last 5 hours, and if its close they still have to win by 2.
There are many types of different playoff formats, and single elimination simply fails to produce the best teams at the end. Honestly, the only teams afraid of it would be teams afraid of being able to repeat a win against the best teams. No fan of football should be against seeing the best teams in the Super Bowl. They deserve it. All players fight too hard and work too hard to get knocked out in an early round by a bad team, because of a bad day.
Not to mention they all get at least 3 playoff games. I don't care what anybody says a Super Bowl loss is never going to take away the accomplishment of the Patriots going 18-0 nor will it convince me that the Giants beating the 15-1 team in Green Bay is actually a better team than the 15-1 Green Bay that played all season long because they won one game. When they get blown out in a week, that much will be clear.
Maybe they might be scared of it, cause they wouldn't want to have the chance to face any of those teams more than once, but I don't think any of the other teams would be. But if you are afraid to face top competition and test yourself against all of them, do you really deserve the Super Bowl?
LOL. Yeah they fluked out on 7 losses and dominated one of the worst games I have seen GB play... If my OP is dumb I don't know what to say about some of the responses like this one. What are we kindergarten kids?
They got freaking swept and beat down by Washington in December. Kept to 10 points. They got blown out by a bunch of teams, including the Saints. Although not even that is as bad as getting blown out by Washington twice. That's not a fluke. That's just a weak team. Good teams don't get destroyed in 25 % of their games. They didn't go through any transformation 2 weeks before the playoffs despite what a bunch of people think. They barely got by a sloppy 49ers team and the only reason they did is cause those guys were balling their eyes out over a playoff win the week before and forgot there were games left to play. This is going to be one of the weakest teams in a Super Bowl in some time and I'll be highly surprised, if Gronk plays, if this isn't a major blowout. I think the 2008 Cardinals were a tougher team.
I am a fan of soccer, and a lot of different sports, but that has nothing to do with a playoff format, other than they use a combination of round robin and head to head for the finals which would work wonders in the NFL as well, considering there are so few teams left. You must be a Tennis fan, cause that's the only major PRO level sport I know that uses single elimination and works effectively. And it works great for tennis if anyone was watching what just happened in Australia. But even then its mostly an individual sport, those guys play 7 sets most of the times which last 5 hours, and if its close they still have to win by 2.
There are many types of different playoff formats, and single elimination simply fails to produce the best teams at the end. Honestly, the only teams afraid of it would be teams afraid of being able to repeat a win against the best teams. No fan of football should be against seeing the best teams in the Super Bowl. They deserve it. All players fight too hard and work too hard to get knocked out in an early round by a bad team, because of a bad day.
Not to mention they all get at least 3 playoff games. I don't care what anybody says a Super Bowl loss is never going to take away the accomplishment of the Patriots going 18-0 nor will it convince me that the Giants beating the 15-1 team in Green Bay is actually a better team than the 15-1 Green Bay that played all season long because they won one game. When they get blown out in a week, that much will be clear.
Maybe they might be scared of it, cause they wouldn't want to have the chance to face any of those teams more than once, but I don't think any of the other teams would be. But if you are afraid to face top competition and test yourself against all of them, do you really deserve the Super Bowl?
Mr. PatriotSeven, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Giants fan here. Not trolling, but I came to engage in conversation with fans of the other team. I am glad that the majority of the Pats fans on here dismissed the OP's premise as absurd.
But the one thing I have not seen mentioned (at least in the first 20+ pages) by Patriot Seven is why he separates the AFC teams and the NFC teams in terms of his grouping and round robin tournaments. If he really thinks that the SB should be about pitting the two best teams against each other, then mix up the conferences in the playoffs. I think that most would agree that the NFC was the stronger conference at the top, partly due to the cyclical nature of the NFL, and because preseason AFC contenders lost their QBs and other players for the season (IND, HOU, KC). (For the record, I like the playoffs just as they are, except I think that division winners shouldn't automatically get the Top 4 seeds, only guaranteed playoff berths).
And according to the OP's logic, what makes the Patriots so much worthier than the Giants under the current format? The only team they beat with a winning record was the Ravens last week. The Giants beat them in Foxboro and the Giants went 4-0 in the AFC East this season. The regular seasons results are due to matchups and timing because of injuries and it's all about getting to the playoffs. The better the regular season record, the more advantages that come along with it: first round bye, home field advantage, playing lower seeded teams, etc.
As to the Giants losing to the Packers. They lost in large part to a controversial Greg Jennings touchdown which was eerily similar to the ruled incomplete pass to Lee Evans that would have given the Ravens the win last Sunday (for the record, I think that Evans did NOT have a TD). Yes, the Giants lost @ San Francisco, but it came down to one play.
Yes, the Giants lost at New Orleans. Everyone lost at New Orleans. They were +186 at home (23.25 points was the average margin of victory) while only being +22 on the road. That's insane. The Patriots likely would have lost at home because they seemed unbeatable in that dome.
The Giants got healthy in Week 15, and have since won five games in a row against playoff teams or would-be playoff teams if they beat the Giants. The Patriots had an easier schedule, but they still beat all of the teams in front of them in order to make it to the SB (and many in convincing fashion).
Both teams deserve to be playing for the championship on Sunday. Good luck next Sunday. May the game be decided by the players and not by the refs.
I asked him about 6,000 pages ago to use 100 words to summarize his position; otherwise, I asked him to use this season's standings to show how his "round robin" would play out.
He did neither because I suspect what he proposes, if indeed he proposes it, is impossible to do in five weeks after a 17 week season.
Of the many flaws in what I think he proposes, the most fundamental is modeling his "alternative" on a sport that determines its champion quadrennially after extended regional eliminations and is so rife with corruption that the outcomes are suspect anyway.
(I’ve wasted enough time here.)
This thread ceased to be about football back around page five . No, its about the authors Deep seated need to be correct garner attention,which is almost pathalogical in nature. When the op posts that other people agree with him that is delusional, i haven't seen One other poster say they think hes right. He will respond using the same rationalizations and denials as long as others respond to his rantings. No one, no argument can convince P7 that he is wrong, this is almost troll like, wants people to respond, thats his goal. As long as people reply to this Steaming Turd of a thread will continue
Just for the record I wanted you to know I enjoyed your thread about possibly changing the playoff format. I know you got pummeled for suggesting it - people are very resistant to any type of change - and even though I didn't necessarily agree with it, I did like the idea of considering it and discussing it.