Official Super Bowl XLII Thread: Giants/Patriots

[sep]

4, so what they are 5th?

Certainly better than the 43rd you give them.

[dkgojackets]

sepsportsfanatic said:

4, so what they are 5th?

Certainly better than the 43rd you give them.

I was just showing that you were wrong in saying they were first. I could go on if you want.

[detroitbasketball]

david said:

sepsportsfanatic said:

4, so what they are 5th?

Certainly better than the 43rd you give them.

I was just showing that you were wrong in saying they were first. I could go on if you want.

No need. You've done it about 20 times already.

I find it ironic that you call people obsessed yet you've posted over 50 times in this thread and feel the need to respond to every single comment made about New England.

[sep]

david said:

sepsportsfanatic said:

4, so what they are 5th?

Certainly better than the 43rd you give them.

I was just showing that you were wrong in saying they were first. I could go on if you want.

Oh my mistake, countless must now stand for every.

[dkgojackets]

sepsportsfanatic said:

david said:

I was just showing that you were wrong in saying they were first. I could go on if you want.

Oh my mistake, countless must now stand for every.

wtf are you talking about?

I posted regarding an ad I saw on the top of the page about the Patriots being the greatest team ever, and you replied "truthful ads, thats refreshing"

By that reply I gathered you thought they were the best team ever, seeing as how that's what you said.

[sep]

I thought it read one of the best, then thats my mistake.

But they are one of the best whether win or loss, imo

[dkgojackets]

I agree, they are "one of" the best

[Loki]

You children are still arguing. .

[JackTheRipper]

For god's sake...LET IT GO!

[JacktheRipper]

I want to say this, even though it'll probably start arguments up again. The Pats this year was the best football team I have ever watched. It's that simple. No bones about it, they would probably beat any team from the past at least 6 times out of ten.

Pull out the 85 Bears please, because the spread would shit all over the 46.

[Loki]

bamarulz2020 said:

I want to say this, even though it'll probably start arguments up again. The Pats this year was the best football team I have ever watched. It's that simple. No bones about it, they would probably beat any team from the past at least 6 times out of ten.

Pull out the 85 Bears please, because the spread would shit all over the 46.

This Pats team was as good as the 2001 Rams team. One of the best offenses ever but a defense that couldn't carry the team for anything. When the offense fell apart so did the rest of the team.

[JacktheRipper]

loki1230 said:

bamarulz2020 said:

I want to say this, even though it'll probably start arguments up again. The Pats this year was the best football team I have ever watched. It's that simple. No bones about it, they would probably beat any team from the past at least 6 times out of ten.

Pull out the 85 Bears please, because the spread would shit all over the 46.

This Pats team was as good as the 2001 Rams team. One of the best offenses ever but a defense that couldn't carry the team for anything. When the offense fell apart so did the rest of the team.

I disagree, the Pats had a very good defense this year. Not great, not saying that, but better than the 01 Rams IMO. They had some early defensive woes, but that is due to that offense mowing the other team down. Leave a defense on the field that much, they are going to get scored on. The Pats excelled at every single aspect of the game of football like no other I have seen. That doesn't make them unbeatable as the Giants proved, but they just were extremely good.

[sep]

loki1230 said:

This Pats team was as good as the 2001 Rams team. One of the best offenses ever but a defense that couldn't carry the team for anything. When the offense fell apart so did the rest of the team.

Thats why they were 4th in total yards, 6th in passing, 10th in rushing, 2nd in sacks, tied for 6th in interceptions, and 4th in scoring.

Right?

[dkgojackets]

A lot of those stats have to do with the offense getting huge leads and opponents having to get in desperation mode early or pull starters.

[sep]

Yes, teams pulled their starters when they were down big against the Pats. Cause they'd have a much better shot at winning then.

[Chief Bstn]

Teams don't pull starters to try and get back in the game. They pull them to get players experience.

[dkgojackets]

notrelame said:

Teams don't pull starters to try and get back in the game. They pull them to get players experience.

I don't see why that was difficult to understand.

If you are out of the game, why risk getting a starter hurt? Give your other players some reps.

[cooljayhu]

man you really do hate the pats dont you. Anyway, I was listening to the radio on monday morning and the DJ was having a How Much Money Did The Patriots Cost You? segment and some guy phoned in and said his friend when they were in Vegas before the season started decided to bet 1000 on the G-Men to win the SB. He was drunk and completely forgot about it. Sunday night the place where the bet was made found them and asked him how he wanted to pick up his money. Apparantly the G-Men were coming off at 45-1 so he won like 45K on a stupid drunk bet in Vegas.

[JackTheRipper]

cooljayhu said:

man you really do hate the pats dont you. Anyway, I was listening to the radio on monday morning and the DJ was having a How Much Money Did The Patriots Cost You? segment and some guy phoned in and said his friend when they were in Vegas before the season started decided to bet 1000 on the G-Men to win the SB. He was drunk and completely forgot about it. Sunday night the place where the bet was made found them and asked him how he wanted to pick up his money. Apparantly the G-Men were coming off at 45-1 so he won like 45K on a stupid drunk bet in Vegas.

This is a dream of mine someday. The 45k would just be a nice addition.

[Freak93]

He may be a Super Bowl champion, but he will always remind me of Scooby Doo.