OK Boys and Girls! The 2005-06 NFL season playoffs
- 01-09-2006, 10:53 AM
- 01-09-2006, 10:56 AM
Originally Posted by LCSULLA
- 01-09-2006, 10:58 AM
the way brunell is playing right now skins are going nowhere. only if the seahawks hurt themselves they will lose. could happen though, it happened before...
01-09-2006, 10:58 AM
Originally Posted by Bean
You seem to have an odd and rather biased slant on the games......
The Pats "barely won"? What game were you watching, Bean? 28-3 is close in your mind? While the first half was slow, the Jags were never in a position of controlling that game at all.
The Patriots have now routed 2 lower calibur playoff teams, the Jags and the Bucs. It remains to be seen if they have rebounded and developed far enough to beat the better AFC teams like the Broncos or the Colts, but given their injury recoveries and recent level of play, most objective guys think those games will be interesting and unlike the lopsided regular season games.
As to how many yards Cory Dillon had against the Jags...... did he start the game? Nope. Hopefully he'll get healthy soon, but he hasn't been healthy since early in the season. The Patriots are going to need him from here on out, and hopefully his health and performance will improve. No question though it hasn't happened yet this year.
Insofar as Palmer's injury goes, anyone paying attention to the replays saw the Steelers tackle was pushed to the ground while being blocked, and fell on Palmer's leg entirely beyond his own control or direction. His reaction was clearly one of regret, not a Romo type of ha-ha, gotcha anyway I could. I'm sure he'd relish getting a good clean lick on Palmer or any quarterback any day of the week, but being pushed to the ground by your opponent and accidently falling on someone's knee to end their season is nothing any self respecting player would be proud of.
01-09-2006, 11:07 AM
Eli threw the interceptions true enough, but Carolina simply dominated the Giants at the line of scrimmage, both sides of the ball. Had those interceptions gone as incompletions, Carolina still would have won the game handily, they simply were the stronger team. They took the Giant's game away from them on defense and were able to execute their own offense against them.Originally Posted by hannainnc
If they play their remaining NFC games the way they did yesterday, they will go to the Superbowl and may even win it. They looked that good.
01-09-2006, 12:30 PM
I guess its just luck that we're 6-0 right now and going into the second round of the playoffs. And the Seahawks will choke, as they always do. Every year since Holmgren became the coach they have predicted a Superbowl birth, but has happened? NOOOOOOOOOO! Why the Seahawks always look better, because of weak opponents, then they really are.Originally Posted by revodrew
Is the 'Skins offense sucking right now? Yes, but this is JOE GIBBS. He will turn it around!
01-09-2006, 12:47 PM
Yup, I am picking all home teams this time as well except for Carolina and the Bears.Originally Posted by natedogg
Though, I am now thinking the Seahawks won't be able to beat Carolina. Seattle had the easiest schedule of ANY team in the NFL this year.... Carolina IS inconsistent; so it depends on if they actually show up. But I don't think the Seahawks can beat Carolina; not after how the NYG would have beaten the Seahawks but for 3 missed field goals for the win.
01-09-2006, 12:53 PM
Go Bears. Get busy. Bust ass. Get your groove on. Win that bitch
01-09-2006, 02:55 PM
Yeah. Carolina all the way.Originally Posted by sandinsciuz
I'm going to get an ulcer watching this week.
01-09-2006, 03:59 PM
Hanna...... Uh-uh. No-no-no-no-NO!Originally Posted by hannainnc
First of all, you may need upwards of several beers or glasses of wine to calm your nerves on game days (choice optional). And you don't want to deplete yourself, so keep calories high by eating frequently throughout BOTH game days.
Also, you don't want to overtax yourself, so ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY NO projects "around the house" whatsoever on Saturday and Sunday. Even minor cleaning, laundry or ironing are just too much for the CNS at this critical time on the calendar. A spouse or significant other is just going to have to be patient and provide you with an extension to complete your various and sundry "honey-do" task list.
And if your team should lose at any time during the playoffs, you will still require the same PST (post season therapy) right through the super bowl, as it can take WEEKS for even the most highly conditioned fan to get their life back in order. The devastation and deep despair that come after a team loss during the playoffs are more than any human being can or should have to bear in this life.
01-09-2006, 05:34 PM
Two of those fumble recoveries that the Pats made were VERY close to being touchdown runbacks; that would have taken away 1 scoring drive at least. Thats a BIG difference. Like I said, they got lucky. They played horribly against a rusty and wounded Jags and won... but not nearly by the margin they should have if they were as great as you say they are. You think they are going to beat the Colts in the RCA Dome when they only mustered 300ish total yards against the Jags?!?!? ROFLOriginally Posted by sandinsciuz
The Jags and the Bucs are BARELY playoff teams. Because of their play earlier in the year or by luck in their inconsistency...
I think the Chargers and Chiefs are both better than the Jags and the Bucs; but they didnt make it; which I'm starting to believe was coaching related. Hopefully San Diego fires Schottenheimer; he's botched it so many times I've lost count.
01-09-2006, 06:27 PM
I am printing these words of wisdom and posting them on the refrigerator. I shall follow your Post Season Therapy recommendation and offer up my review thereafter. Thank you!Originally Posted by sandinsciuz
01-10-2006, 12:57 AM
the Colts are going to roll the Steelers the way cheech & chong roll joints. Colts 38 Steelers 16.Originally Posted by natedogg
01-10-2006, 12:59 AM
They'll win this week but fall next weekOriginally Posted by hannainnc
01-10-2006, 01:00 AM
I'll be the first to collect if that happens. Test E & Tren E pleaseOriginally Posted by sage
01-10-2006, 06:48 AM
Evidently you aren't capable of being objective when it comes to the Patriots. They're not your team, and that's fine, but it's impossible to have a rational conversation with someone as biased as you demonstrate through your posts.Originally Posted by Bean
The Bucs and Jags made the playoffs, even if they aren't top teams, period. The Patriots routed both, by 3+ touchdowns. You call that playing "horribly"?
And regardless of how a fumble bounces, which is in fact part of the luck of the game, neither the Jags or the Bucs were EVER able to control the flow of their games against the Patriots. It was men against boys both games, and the score reflects that.
All this "proves" is that the Patriots have improved over their status earlier in the season when they went W-L-W-L. They're healthy again, fielding consistent personnel, and that's showing up in their results.
Whether they will beat the Broncos this week remains to be seen. But most guys who are objective about it agree it should be a much closer competition as many of the Patriots starters are healthy again, whereas earlier they weren't. And the Patriots have the record to demonstrate they play well in the post season. The Patriots have also demonstrated a knack for developing and executing a game plan against teams with equal or even superior personnel (SB XXXVI) that neuturalize their opponents advantages and create opportunities for them to make enough plays to have more points on the board as the final seconds tick off the clock. And that's just how it's gone Bean.
NOBODY would have imagined the Colts in last year's AFC championship game, could not score one touchdown, after watching them utterly torch the Broncos the week before. The Patriots could have beaten the Colts with 150 total yards on offense that game and only 1 touchdown. Oh, I'm sorry, I'm forgetting it was the WEATHER, that kept Peyton Manning from being able to throw a touchdown pass, or Edgerrin James from being able to run the ball........... that's right. ALL because of the weather.
2 consecutive Super Bowls, and 3 out of the last 4 years, all just sheer luck, eh Bean?
01-10-2006, 03:00 PM
The last game the broncos won by 8 points and the pats were pretty beat up at that point. Starks will not be playing this time either.Two of those fumble recoveries that the Pats made were VERY close to being touchdown runbacks; that would have taken away 1 scoring drive at least. Thats a BIG difference. Like I said, they got lucky. They played horribly against a rusty and wounded Jags and won... but not nearly by the margin they should have if they were as great as you say they are. You think they are going to beat the Colts in the RCA Dome when they only mustered 300ish total yards against the Jags?!?!? ROFL
01-10-2006, 03:04 PM
Denver is a tough place to play but the patriots have improved allot. The running game and secondary still worries me.It's probably going to be a close game that is decided by a touch down or a field goal.Whether they will beat the Broncos this week remains to be seen. But most guys who are objective about it agree it should be a much closer competition as many of the Patriots starters are healthy again, whereas earlier they weren't. And the Patriots have the record to demonstrate they play well in the post season. The Patriots have also demonstrated a knack for developing and executing a game plan against teams with equal or even superior personnel (SB XXXVI) that neuturalize their opponents advantages and create opportunities for them to make enough plays to have more points on the board as the final seconds tick off the clock.
01-10-2006, 07:03 PM
Denver isn't just a tough place to play, they have the best home record of any team over the last 35 years.
The only hope the Pats have is to shut down our running game, and that isn't going to happen. The Pats will be lucky to be within 3 touchdowns by the end of this game. The Pats have no running game so that means they are going to have to pass and guess what, that means going up against All-Pro Champ Bailey. They lose that matchup. Plus we've got Darrent Williams coming back, so our defensive backfield is going to shut down anything the Pats try to do. On defense, the Pats have nothing to stop either Tatum Bell or Mike Anderson and god help them try to contain Rod Smith. This is a blowout in the making.
01-10-2006, 07:14 PM
Sure, but Denver does not have the intangibles the Pats do or at least not to the extent the Pats do. Heart, desire, teamwork, determination, a winning attitude; those are things they have built up over the past several years where they have won 3 out of the past 4 super bowl's. I'm giving Denver the edge, but do not EVER count the Pats out. I'm expecting a good game and an all out effort on the part of the Patriots.
01-10-2006, 08:46 PM
Well obviously, I mean the Broncos are the best damn team to ever walk the planet.Originally Posted by Sir Foxx
01-11-2006, 12:47 AM
The pats didnt have Dillon, Faulk, bruschi, or seymore last time they played. And the pats still only lost by 8 points. Denvers hardly facing the same team. The pats are healthier now than they have been all season. Other than the Colts the pats are the scariest team in the playoffs. The pats will win saturday night 31 to 17.
01-11-2006, 12:05 PM
3 touchdown? blowout? you are dreaming my good man. chump bailey is all pro on reputation alone. pats they didn't have a runniong game when tehy played the broncos and still was a very close game with all their defence ailing back then too.
not syaing who is going to win, but dissmissing the pats like that is a joke.
01-11-2006, 12:54 PM
I am hoping Dillon will take it up a few notches for this game. He isn't the same as he was last year. I think it's going to be a close game. The pats D has been great at stopping the run but this will be a true test if they are that good at stopping it or they were just playing mediocre teams.
01-11-2006, 01:35 PM
I agree. When a team is forced to play in one dimension, it really hurts their chances when playing GOOD teams. Take a look at the Eagles this year as an example. The Pats passing attack is pretty good. Brady is relatively accurate, doesnt throw interceptions often, etc. But when a team knows whats coming because you have NO rushing attack... its nothing but a college game at that point.... especially if your defense can't seem to hang well.Originally Posted by Sir Foxx
As for the Pats having the best run defense since mid-season or whatever... thats because their secondary has been so poor that everyone has been passing against them.
Almost all good teams have those qualities you stated. Those arent intangibles. These players are where they are because they are the best of the best. Yeah they will be more relaxed, because they're used to being there as a team. But heart, desire, teamwork, determination, blah blah are things required of a great NFL team. And you've got quite a few in the playoffs this season... they wouldnt be where they are if they DIDNT have those qualities.Originally Posted by natedogg
01-11-2006, 03:59 PM
I said more so. Not saying other teams do not have them. Look what the Pats have done despite a smorgasboard (I like that word) of injuries.
01-11-2006, 04:36 PM
Put all the unobjective and even ridiculous drivel posted by Bean aside, the Patriots are a MUCH better team than when they played earlier, and this promises to be a very good game played by 2 of the top the top teams in the league.Originally Posted by natedogg
If these teams had to play each other in a best of 5 series, the winner would end up winning 3 games to 2.
01-11-2006, 04:51 PM
I couldn't agree with you more. While Dillon is at the twilight of his career, I find it hard to believe that being one year older accounts for a drop from ~1,600+ yards in 2004 over 15 games, to ~800 yards in 2005 over 12/13 games. I don't know the exact stats, but those are close.Originally Posted by VanillaGorilla
Age alone might account for 200-300 yards of it. There's got to be something more, either in the scope of injuries he's had or changes in the O Line. And while Andruzzi left with Crennel, Gorin, Hochstein, Light and Ashworth all had significant playing time last year and this year. Mankins is (was) a rookie coming in, but earned his spot over the others. And most people give Nick Kaczur decent grades even though he is (was) a rookie coming in.
That magnitude of drop in production has to be injury related. It would be interesting to see how Kevin Faulk's production statistically was this year compared with last.
01-11-2006, 04:53 PM
Saying the Pats Broncos game is going to be a blowout is asinine at best.
01-11-2006, 05:11 PM
We shall see. I want my props when the blowout occurs though(in Denver's favor of course)Originally Posted by NPursuit
01-11-2006, 05:14 PM
Originally Posted by judge-mental
All-Pro on rep alone, huh? Well, if an 8 interception season, 2 of them returned for touchdowns, 1 of them winning a game outright(against the Chargers), 5 of them in 5 consective games, 3rd most tackles at his position in the league, consitutes a man getting accolades on his rep alone, well then, his rep is growing into legend.
01-11-2006, 08:32 PM
Tom Brady referred to Champ Bailey this week as a true shut down corner, among the best in the league. Nuff said.
01-11-2006, 08:35 PM
..... this is the stuff that's just really silly. YOU want props if they win? Your contribution to the game, is what exactly......?Originally Posted by Sir Foxx
01-11-2006, 10:27 PM
Just because you don't agree with it; doesnt mean its unobjective or ridiculous drivel.Originally Posted by sandinsciuz
I personally think the Pats game is the biggest chance of an upset of all 4 games this weekend. (as in the Pats winning). I give them that because of Belichik and Brady. But my "ridiculous drivel" is more 'reactive' arguments to all the "the Pats are back OMG!" that I keep hearing from wishy-washy Patriot bandwagoneers. (not just here mind you, and not saying you ARE one either).
When the FACTS are:
Of all the teams that New England BEAT in the regular season; their combined record is: 64 - 96
-A 23-20 win BARELY beating an 11-5 Pittsburgh team with a wounded Big Ben.
-A great 28-0 win against a very inconsistent 11-5 Tampa Bay team (they showed us that again and again all year; and their grand finale' being their loss to the Redskins)
-And finally in the postseason a 28-3 win with 2 near fumble recoveries for touchdowns by the opposing team, their tremendous homefield advantage in the freezing cold against a team used to warm weather (florida), and against a QB playing with a BROKEN limb (ankle I'm pretty sure) who hadnt played in 7 weeks.
How much objective material do you want?
I grant you, that they are BETTER than they were; they are doing much better. But they still lack a running game; their secondary, while settled in, has yet to test itself against a GOOD offense.
A good team must have one of two things to win BIG games:
A) An offense that can play however they need to play to win(look at the Patriots of years past and ESPECIALLY of the Colts offense this year). If you can pass and run well; then you're QUITE deadly-especially if your QB can read defenses. (reading a run protection defense, calling a fake handoff, and then 20 yard passes to the slot or the TE will KILL ANY team)
B) If missing (A) then you must have a terrific defense against both the passing and running attack. Special teams are quite important if missing (A) too.
This assumes GOOD teams already have at least one dimension of offense (running or passing attack). You can't win games on defense alone in BIG games. At the very least you need to put some offensive points on the board.
I am done with my ridiculous drivel and I will end this with a friendly: "Let's see how the Broncos game turns out".
01-12-2006, 12:04 PM
True enough!Originally Posted by Bean
True enough! But I thought that was you a number of posts ago, who was predicting a 3 touchdown victory by the Bronco’s? I by the way, have done no such thing. I’m pulling for the Patriots, I can think they can win, although from this weekend on, they’re going to have to play their best football each game or they will be done.Originally Posted by Bean
While I don’t argue that point, it’s not telling the whole story, and is misleading here because of two factors: 1, the Pats were not healthy and fielding consistent personnel for 2/3’s of their regular season, and 2, the Pats are a team, who’s core players have a demonstrated history of playing better and winning post season games.Originally Posted by Bean
Game 3 of the regular season, wherein the Patriots ALREADY had 5 of their 10 defensive secondary personnel out for the season on IR or were regular members on the weekly injury report, and during which both Matt Light and Rodney Harrison left the game fairly early on, and subsequently went out for season on IR, let’s also add.Originally Posted by Bean
True enough. However, Tampa won their way into the playoffs, and as such is a playoff caliber team. And the win was not just a win, it was a shut out, wherein the Pats controlled all phases of the game.Originally Posted by Bean
Again, true enough, but to tell the full story, you have to give the Jags D some credit for being an especially strong and physical football team for creating those near fumbles. I don’t think for example, that anyone would say that Peyton Manning is a so-so QB because he has been intercepted several times in recent years during post season play against the Patriots. You have to give the Patriots D some credit for having created both the pressure and deception on those plays.Originally Posted by Bean
This has been your most objective post on this subject, although you still have presented the factual information from a biased position of not quite telling the WHOLE truth, giving what I feel is a more balanced account of games and events.. That’s fine, you’re not a Patriots fan. But as you’ve posted your assertions about the Patriots this season, I’ve also felt compelled, as a Patriots fan, to present what I feel is a more complete picture.Originally Posted by Bean
I wouldn’t say they lack a running game. But clearly Corey Dillon, as I’ve discussed earlier, has for one reason or another, not had anywhere near the production this year compared with last year. And that undeniably, is a deficiency compared to last year’s results. Kevin Faulk has, I believe, brought enough to the table to be able to make up for some of that, but no question I’d rather have Dillon in there as well gaining 100+ yards a game. I don’t think anyone can argue with the problems the Pats had earlier with their secondary, or your assessment of them being more “settled in”. But, as you know, even having a “patchwork” secondary last season, they were able to stuff the Colts in the post season AFC game. Originally Posted by Bean
And I would argue that Tom Brady does that as well as anyone this year, in fact his total production of yards passing, in spite of inconsistent personnel this year, has exceeded Peyton Mannings. And in spite of their overall POOR production against the Broncos in the first game this year, Brady & the Patriots damn near mounted a comeback in the 2nd half! 3 incomplete passes in a row to end a drive that could have tied that game.Originally Posted by Bean
Originally Posted by Bean
And the Patriots have demonstrated at least recently, that they can do this against at least some playoff caliber teams. I agree it remains to be seen what they can now do against the very best teams, which is why the teams have to actually play the games And why it’s so much fun to follow the games this time of year!
Which is why I believe the Bears will lose this weekend to the Panthers, who right now might be the most balanced team in the league, although they struggle with consistency.Originally Posted by Bean
Let the games begin!Originally Posted by Bean
01-12-2006, 12:22 PM
That's a bold prediction, Sir Foxx. I respect your opinion, but I think the game will be a lot closer than you are predicting.Originally Posted by Sir Foxx
My prediction: with two evenly matched teams and two great coaches, the game will come down to turnovers.
Oh, and Champ Bailey is really really good (to those who seem to think otherwise).
01-12-2006, 12:23 PM
True enough! But I thought that was you a number of posts ago, who was predicting a 3 touchdown victory by the Bronco’s? I by the way, have done no such thing. I’m pulling for the Patriots, I can think they can win, although from this weekend on, they’re going to have to play their best football each game or they will be done.
That was me predicting a 3 touchdown win by the Broncos, but for you let's make it four
01-12-2006, 01:00 PM
His yardage exceeded Manning's because he has no running game to fall back on. Manning still has more TDs, fewer interceptions, a higher QB rating, and his RB and FB have FAR more rushing yards than the Pats. If this was one of Brady's greatest offensive years, then thats pretty sad. He's a great QB; but I don't think he's much better than Big Ben. Definitely below Manning and Palmer.Originally Posted by sandinsciuz
Plus Manning has been taken out of the 4th quarter quite a few times this season because they were SO FAR AHEAD. Not to mention playing only 2 series in the Seahawks game and 1 in the Cardinals game. His lead would be even furthur extended if he was required to fight for the playoff entry.
And by your comeback argument; the same could be said against the Chargers. If the Colts had just stopped that long passing play that put the Chargers close to the endzone... or if they had just not thrown that interception in their last drive (which was run back for a TD).... they might have really played hard against the Seahawks instead of pulling 9 starters at the beginning of the game.
01-12-2006, 01:05 PM
It can happen! Remember the Colts beat them 40-21 and just ran the clock out in the 4th quarterOriginally Posted by Sir Foxx
01-12-2006, 04:47 PM
What?! Not much better than Big Ben?!?! If that's what you really think, you don't know anything about football. You seem to be confusing fantasy football with the NFL.Originally Posted by Bean
What every coach wants from their QB is a leader who, more than anything else, will lead their team to victory, period.
And as of today, among current QB's, Brady stands without equal. All QB's and coaches in the week leading up to any contest against the Patriots, in their weekly press conferences have said that exact thing. Brady's record in both playoff victories and super bowl wins stands without equal among current QB's, and he's the envy of the league. I suppose you just think they're being polite?
Not much better than Big Ben?! Nothing against Big Ben, he's a fine QB and has potential to blossom into something special. But he's accomplished nothing yet to be considered in the same light as Brady and I'm sure he'd say the same thing. Most analysts after last year's conference game, pointed to his staring down his receivers as being the reason the Pats were able to intercept him. When is the last time Brady did that? Carson Palmer? yup, ..... another talented guy with the potential, but hasn't done it yet either.
Peyton Manning has in recent years generated enviable personal stats and an NFL record, but until he wins a super bowl, he will not ascend beyond the plateau of being "just" another great QB who couldn't win the big one. And he has stated publicly, he'll trade the personal accolades for a super bowl ring.
Personally I AGREE he's a GREAT QB, but counter to your assertion, that's how current/former players, analysts and coaches all rate QB's against other's in history.
And who knows, maybe this is Manning's year to win it all. Could happen. But not as of today, Bean.