Jan 08, 2006, 01:58 AM // 01:58
|
#221
|
Ascalonian Squire
Join Date: Oct 2005
Guild: N/A
Profession: R/W
|
New England-30
Seattle-34
yes.....im dead serious.
|
|
|
Jan 08, 2006, 03:37 AM // 03:37
|
#222
|
Academy Page
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In my bed
Guild: Onslaught of Xen
Profession: W/E
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by I pwnd U
u were correct bucs lost!! redskins just ran all over em and there def took over! great game by the skins. redemption from there 1 point loss to the bucs earlier this year.
|
Ummm, the redskins offense did like nothing. I think the announcers said they had the lowest offensive output of any team winning a playoff game... ever. They didn't run all over anything really. They won, but their offense decided to take a nap it seemed.
|
|
|
Jan 08, 2006, 03:48 AM // 03:48
|
#223
|
Wilds Pathfinder
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEPIC
Ummm, the redskins offense did like nothing. I think the announcers said they had the lowest offensive output of any team winning a playoff game... ever. They didn't run all over anything really. They won, but their offense decided to take a nap it seemed.
|
Redskins D won the game for them turnovers where key
im happy tho
|
|
|
Jan 08, 2006, 04:25 AM // 04:25
|
#224
|
Wilds Pathfinder
Join Date: May 2005
Profession: W/
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by blink4ever_tbarker
New England-30
Seattle-34
yes.....im dead serious.
|
Pats ran over Jags, this should be a good game though, looks like an accurate score if everyone plays at their optimum level.
|
|
|
Jan 08, 2006, 04:32 AM // 04:32
|
#225
|
Wilds Pathfinder
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogmar
Pats ran over Jags, this should be a good game though, looks like an accurate score if everyone plays at their optimum level.
|
pats beat leftwich who had not played in the last five games and was hurt
if garrard played i think they would have won
now pats think there all that I guess i'll just have to watch denver or the colts kill them off
im happy bucs are out just wish pats are too
stupid jags head coach is ugh stupid!
|
|
|
Jan 08, 2006, 05:05 AM // 05:05
|
#226
|
Krytan Explorer
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: nowhere
Guild: none
|
First, now i know u dont know what ur talking about- because u dont know the coach for jaguars, Jack Del Rio, and NO that wasnt a mistake starting byron leftwich, and john madden+al michaels both even said he had a good game, and people are going to say, "we should of started david garrard" and they laughed. Byron did have a incredible game until his turnover, david didnt do much better, stop trying to make excuses ty3c, patriots are starting to look like the old champs
|
|
|
Jan 08, 2006, 06:13 AM // 06:13
|
#227
|
Wilds Pathfinder
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by conker
First, now i know u dont know what ur talking about- because u dont know the coach for jaguars, Jack Del Rio, and NO that wasnt a mistake starting byron leftwich, and john madden+al michaels both even said he had a good game, and people are going to say, "we should of started david garrard" and they laughed. Byron did have a incredible game until his turnover, david didnt do much better, stop trying to make excuses ty3c, patriots are starting to look like the old champs
|
leftwitch had missed the last five games
leftwich did not practice all those weeks for this game
garrard could run also and he won the last four games to put them into the playoffs
garrard would have made that game close or won it
leftwich also said at the end of the game his leg gave way again
garrard was 4-1 winning and could run= jags win
leftwich not fully healthy had not played in a month!= jags loss
pats will be killed off by denver or colts those teams are too good to lose to the sucky pats.
|
|
|
Jan 08, 2006, 06:19 AM // 06:19
|
#228
|
Academy Page
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In my bed
Guild: Onslaught of Xen
Profession: W/E
|
Umm, actually, Jack Del Rio had no option but to play Leftwich as the starter. Leftwich took ALL of the practice reps ALL week. Leaving Garrard unpracticed for this game. So, he had to start Leftwich. And besides, Leftwich put up pretty well the first half. It wouldn't have mattered. As much as I wanted the pats to lose, I didn't see it happening today.
|
|
|
Jan 08, 2006, 06:34 AM // 06:34
|
#229
|
Wilds Pathfinder
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheEPIC
Umm, actually, Jack Del Rio had no option but to play Leftwich as the starter. Leftwich took ALL of the practice reps ALL week. Leaving Garrard unpracticed for this game. So, he had to start Leftwich. And besides, Leftwich put up pretty well the first half. It wouldn't have mattered. As much as I wanted the pats to lose, I didn't see it happening today.
|
Garrard was fresh, he would have made it harder or beat them
leftwich was not fully healthy and there coach is stupid i bet he hates the fact that leftwich lost him the game
pats will get killed off
if not whats the point of watching football? i dont wanna keep seeing the same team win the super bowl every year how boring is that jeez i need a fresh start a new champion
so SOMEONE PLZ KNOCK OUT THE PATS so i can enjoy a new champion
Im not wasting 200 bucks every year for NFL sunday ticket to see a team i hate win the super bowl every freaking year!
someone will kill them off dunno who but im guessing colts or denver.
|
|
|
Jan 08, 2006, 06:42 AM // 06:42
|
#230
|
Krytan Explorer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The Great Southwest
Guild: Shadowstorm Mercenaries
Profession: E/
|
Hey ty... keep predicting bad things for the Pats please. Nothing you've "predicted" has happened yet. See you in Detroit.
|
|
|
Jan 08, 2006, 06:52 AM // 06:52
|
#231
|
Wilds Pathfinder
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aracos79
Hey ty... keep predicting bad things for the Pats please. Nothing you've "predicted" has happened yet. See you in Detroit.
|
YOUR WRONG
redskins won thats one i did get right
pats will be next just watch.
brady i wish i could legaly kill you.
|
|
|
Jan 08, 2006, 02:06 PM // 14:06
|
#232
|
God of Spammers
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: in the middle of a burning cornfield...
Guild: Scars Meadows [SMS] (Officer)
|
lol he was talking a/b any prediction on the pats there ty3c. he wasnjt talking a/b the skins as that was kinda an ovbious one. if the skins had lost to a south team there would of been problems. the NFC south was the weakest confrence. they lost to the NFC North. lost to the 49ers and got swept by the bears. packers beat 2 of them and gave the other 2 a run for there money. no suprise that the bucs lost.
|
|
|
Jan 09, 2006, 12:03 AM // 00:03
|
#233
|
Academy Page
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In my bed
Guild: Onslaught of Xen
Profession: W/E
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by I pwnd U
lol he was talking a/b any prediction on the pats there ty3c. he wasnjt talking a/b the skins as that was kinda an ovbious one. if the skins had lost to a south team there would of been problems. the NFC south was the weakest confrence. they lost to the NFC North. lost to the 49ers and got swept by the bears. packers beat 2 of them and gave the other 2 a run for there money. no suprise that the bucs lost.
|
To say that the NFC South was the weakest conference is blatant ignorance. Seriously, how could the NFC west be better than the NFC south? Sure the west may have the Seahawks but there is no one else worthy of note in the NFC west. And if the Seahawks had to play the teams of the NFC south instead of the 49ers, the Rams, and the Cardinals, they wouldn't be the #1 seed. Also, to go to prove that the teams from the south have some clout, the Panthers smashed on the lauded Giants. And you say they lost to the Bears as if losing to the Bears makes you automatically suck or something. The Bears are a good team, otherwise they wouldn't be the #2 seed.
|
|
|
Jan 09, 2006, 12:49 AM // 00:49
|
#234
|
Desert Nomad
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Titusville, PA <nowhere>
Guild: KOD <Knights of the Dragonrose><Guild Officer>
Profession: W/Mo
|
Steelers win! Steelers win! Woooooot!
Thats my team, anyways. 31-17 Over bengals. Next sunday vs INDY at INDY, which sorta scares me!
--The Shim
|
|
|
Jan 09, 2006, 02:49 AM // 02:49
|
#235
|
God of Spammers
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: in the middle of a burning cornfield...
Guild: Scars Meadows [SMS] (Officer)
|
what? last time i checked they were down by 2 tds. wow awesoem way to go Steelers! they are my madden team ya the 49ers gave some of the teams a run for there money. i mean come on they are said to be weakest confrecene by the AP.
|
|
|
Jan 09, 2006, 02:58 AM // 02:58
|
#236
|
Academy Page
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In my bed
Guild: Onslaught of Xen
Profession: W/E
|
I think we all should take a look at the power rankings here.
Doesn't look like the South is all that bad now does it. I guess the Associated Press doesn't know crap about football now do they?
|
|
|
Jan 09, 2006, 03:22 AM // 03:22
|
#237
|
God of Spammers
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: in the middle of a burning cornfield...
Guild: Scars Meadows [SMS] (Officer)
|
that doesnt take into account the almost loses that they should of been a blow out. but i dont always trust the AP either but if u take into account different stuff u come up w/ different rankings. really u could come up w/ different ranks for different things.
|
|
|
Jan 09, 2006, 04:41 AM // 04:41
|
#238
|
Wilds Pathfinder
|
Lets see here my record in the playoffs so far
redskins at bucs:Redskins
Jags at Pats: Jags
Panthers at Giants: Panthers
Steelers at Bengals: Steelers
so far im 3-1
redskins won
steelers won
panthers won
as for the 2nd round
Pats at Denver: Denver
Steelers at Colts: Steelers in an upset but if the colts win it will ok with me.
Panthers at Bears: Panthers
Redskins at Seahawks: Redskins
Last edited by ty3c; Jan 09, 2006 at 04:50 AM // 04:50..
|
|
|
Jan 09, 2006, 03:18 PM // 15:18
|
#239
|
God of Spammers
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: in the middle of a burning cornfield...
Guild: Scars Meadows [SMS] (Officer)
|
hahah im 4-0 (check page 8)
skins @ bucs: skins
Jags @ Pats: Pats
Panthers @ Giants: Panthers
Steelers @ Bengals: Steelers
ok 2nd round
Pats @ Denver: Pats (i do believe its going to be cold and pats are looking like champs agian)
Steelers @ Colts: Steelers (Colts are 1-2 in the past 3 games only beating Arizona but barely yes i know second string was in)
Pahthers @ Bears: Bears (gonna be COLD, though all first time playoff QBs lost, this will be grossmans first playoff game)
Redskins @ Seahawks: Seahawks (if redskins offense doesnt get going they are in trouble)
|
|
|
Jan 11, 2006, 12:13 AM // 00:13
|
#240
|
Wilds Pathfinder
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by I pwnd U
hahah im 4-0 (check page 8)
skins @ bucs: skins
Jags @ Pats: Pats
Panthers @ Giants: Panthers
Steelers @ Bengals: Steelers
ok 2nd round
Pats @ Denver: Pats (i do believe its going to be cold and pats are looking like champs agian)
Steelers @ Colts: Steelers (Colts are 1-2 in the past 3 games only beating Arizona but barely yes i know second string was in)
Pahthers @ Bears: Bears (gonna be COLD, though all first time playoff QBs lost, this will be grossmans first playoff game)
Redskins @ Seahawks: Seahawks (if redskins offense doesnt get going they are in trouble)
|
The redskins will wake up and put up some high yards and td's in the game at seahawks
Pats will not win in denver is a great team and can run there backs to a win bell will get to 1,000 yards in this game he has about 800 something atm
Panthers have a very good D if they bliz the bears then the bears D will have to win the game for them I dont see that so panthers win
The steelers will be more ready then before at the RCA dome ben is more healthy in this one and he's been doing well they got there running game back and the bus will push his way for a few rushing td's the colts are on fire with manning but unless manning can handle a healthy steelers D blizing him and all manning will be under pressure all day I dont think the colts will have nuff time for manning to throw in this game he will be under pressure alot steelers will win this one.
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 08:45 PM // 20:45.
|