Grant

If Miami were Super Bowl, I'd make sure to wake up. Miami in a Super Bowl... those words just don't go together.

You could also say that he wasn't mentally "ready" for a good portion of the games this season (or last, or the year before), too. So, as jarthur pointed out, a QB needs to be mentally ready. This is something I've always argued that is the most important aspect of the quarterback position. People think that because this will be Losman's first year he will be less mentally ready. I contend that he'll be at least as mentally ready as our incumbent, who has proved that he is incapable of being a consistent mental star. Futhermore, I think Losman actually increases our playoff chances right away. But we won't know until we know, will we?

I like to think of OJ as two different people. There's OJ Simpson the star of the Buffalo Bills, and OJ Simpson the filthy murderer. Because there's no way I'd ever praise the latter for the former's accomplishments.

It does strike me as a bit odd, yeah. It'll be interesting to see what happens as a result of this.

Uh, what?

I think the recent Super Bowls of the late 90s and on have been much better games than in the past, but my personal favorite was the Niners-Bengals, with Montana and Rice winning it on that last back-breaking drive, as Boomer was even doing his Disney World speech.

Just a little bump for everyone's buddy, Fezmid, who has taken the liberty to challenge my intelligence in other threads regarding this argument. I'm still waiting to see how I horribly misinterpreted you. Please, sir. Enlighten me. Show me how you are a genius and I am "simply not intelligent enough" to understand. Please.

AHAHAHAHAHAHA. You are the Comedy King of the Trailer Park, my friend. Rock on, indeed. But just to refresh your memory of your "intended" comedy, I'll post what you said again: Please don't ever stop posting.

Good one. Maybe if we were still in grade school and this were recess, something that weak might work. You couldn't come up with any real argument, so you hide behind petty internet insults. How old are you? Could your dad beat up my dad? You fail.

Wow. I don't even know what to say. That might be one of the most unintentionally hilarious things I've ever read in my lifetime.

Ah, but you still haven't shown how I misinterpreted you. Seems to me you have nothing. As always. Yeah, but can your dad beat up my dad?

Because we know who they voted for already, don't we. Incidentally, haven't we seen similar threads like this about three times already? Weren't people saying the same thing after Iraq was defeated so quickly? And after Saddam was captured? And after Fallujah was taken so quickly? I know I'm talking to a brick wall here, but to the more sane right-wingers on the board, I would suggest not getting too excited just yet.

Fixed.

So, if we're truly "liberating" Iraq, what happens when they choose to do things against our interest? oh, that's right. Nobody's being liberated at all. We're merely colonizing them with the illusion of freedom. No different than before, in that regard.

As I despise both teams, I've decided to root for Paul McCartney and the half time show.

Very nice.

This is a good point. It's often difficult for people to criticize the 90s Bills because, thus far, they are the best this franchise has produced. Unfortunately for us, the best they had simply wasn't enough. I think that when the Bills do eventually win a Super Bowl it will be easier to look at the 90s Bills properly. They were a very, very good team that dominated in the regular season and the playoffs, but could never bring their "A" game to the big one.

Please tell me how I misinterpreted you. Are you not, in fact, saying that you're happier with four Super Bowl losses than you would be if we had won one and not repeated? I mean, I could have somehow missed it the first five times you said it. So, please set me straight.

It's charming that you're trying to force yourself to make lemonaide out of lemons with our situation here, but I'm sure even you see the problem with your argument. Essentially, you're saying, if we had won Super Bowl XXV and not repeated, you'd have been like, "Well, I'm happy, I guess. But I would have rather went and lost four than to have one just this measly one." Which is just ridiculous. The Chicago Bears have only won one Super Bowl, and have pretty much sucked since 1985. But they can still at least hang their hats on that. I wouldn't mind having that.

I disagree, but we won't know until we know.

I agree that Weis is more important than Crennel, but I'm still not convinced it's going to do any serious damage. The Patriots are successful because the players play smart and stick to the plan, not because of any gadgetry employed by the coordinators.

I don't think it's going to hurt them very badly, personally, but we can hope!

And this is a pretty uninteresting Super Bowl, if you ask me. Everyone knows the Patriots are going to win - the question is, by how much?

I love how losses are never Bledsoe's fault, but saving entire franchises he can do single-handedly.

Ah, I see. That makes a bit more sense now!