Buffalo03

I think it was the most boring. The next I would have to say was the Ravens and Giants in SB XXXV

That play where Goff got drilled out of bounds, if that was Brady, that's a flag for sure

The bottom line is, Gilmore held Cook's arm which allowed him not to get his other hand up to catch it. It was even brought up by Romo. Gilmore also never looked back for the ball. If it's called PI like it should have been, it would have been first and goal at the 1. Plain and simple

Sure they were. I would love for the same people that praise Belichick for this to give McDermott credit for the same thing if he was to do it. Beat all the teams you should beat and then get destroyed by the good ones and say "But they were 11-5". I bet most of those people would find a way to say that his wins were non impressive because most were against non playoff teams. But this is Belichick were talking about so everything he does is impressive

I get that. But you can't say "oh, look what he did without Brady" when 9 out of 11 wins came against non playoff teams 4 of which were 5-11 or worse and then 4 out of 5 losses against teams that did go to the playoffs and 3 of those teams they got destroyed by. With that kind of schedule any good coach could have done the same thing.

They went 11-5 in 2008 but only beat two teams with a winning record and those teams were only 9-7 Cardinals and then the 11-5 Dolphins (who actually destroyed the Patriots in New England). The Cardinals game was a late season blizzard in New England. The Dolphins who made the playoffs but weren't a very good team themselves coming off a 1-15 season the year before. They won 8 of 11 games against teams with losing records and another against the Jets who went 9-7 but missed the playoffs as well. 4 of those games against teams with losing records went 5-11 or worse. The teams they beat were a combined 71-105. Ironically, out of Their 5 losses, 4 of them came against teams with winning records and 3 of those losses were a 38-13 loss in New England to the Dolphins, a 30-10 loss to the Chargers and a 33-10 loss to the Steelers. Their record against teams they lost to were 52-28 I hate how people talk about how Belichick went 11-5 without Brady. They had an extremely easy schedule and lost to really good teams. Three of those teams they got destroyed by. So how good were they really?

I'd rather try to make a run at DeMarcus Lawrence. Will probably be more expensive though

I want no part of him anywhere near this team unless he is playing a game against us on the opposing team. Our team is way to classy to have this douchebag on it. No way

Favorite classic Geico commercial? I have to go with Maxwell the pig saying "weeeeeeeee". Or the Moose hump day commercial. Those are my two faves. Both were on today. I also love the "Bob Weadababyeetsaboy" one as well lol

How about the Giants D daring us to run at them since the first play of the game by playing with only 2 Dlineman and the Bills just doing nothing but passing the ball constantly? Belichick said himself he prayed that we didn't run on them from the start because it would have been bad. Thurman Thomas had only 15 carries and ran for like 140 yards. If the Bills weren't stubborn and ran the ball more like they should have then we may have a Super Bowl trophy in Buffalo

Since the start of the 2003 season, West Coast teams have gone just 61-111 (35.5%) against East Coast teams. That seemingly reveals a significant advantage, but straight up wins and losses don’t provide a realistic measure of performance. Instead, we have focused on against the spread (ATS) records which indicate how well teams have performed against expectations this is from an article written in 2016 so I'm not sure what the record is now but 50 games below .500 in 16 years is a proven fact

I agree. It has nothing to do with how bad they are getting beat but just the fact that in the playoffs they would make a west coast team play back to back weeks at 1pm eastern time

Dude, it's a proven fact, west coast teams don't play well when they have to travel out east because of the time difference. Last week they had the Colts vs Texans as the Saturday 4pm game when they could have made that Chargers vs Ravens. The Chargers had to Travel east to play the Ravens and then travel back west only to turn around and travel back east again. That's a lot to ask

The Chargers did kind of get shafted having to travel east for a 1pm game twice. Not saying that it would have made a huge difference but it's kind of messed up that the league did that to them in back to back weeks

Vegas won't know what the hell to do

Sadly, I don't think Rivers is ever going to get to a Super Bowl

I know. It was a joke

The best way for everyone to beat the Patriots is to make them have to go 30 yards for a first down and the rest of the league still only has to go 10. Sounds fair

I would never want to punch an old man in the face but Robert Kraft is making me change my mind. I freaking hate him so much

I think next season everyone needs to start saying Brady isn't declining or he'll never decline. Maybe then the opposite will happen

I brought this up last year and people thought I was lying

If only the Texans didn't crap the bed to lose the 2 seed. The Pats probably would have been playing in Houston today. Even though Houston obviously wasn't very good themselves. NE on the road makes them somewhat vulnerable

Looks like Rivers has to matvh score for score

You do you. If that's what you like to do that's fine. I put in for the day after the SB every year. I don't do it because of drinking and partying (I'm in my 30's so I don't even really care about getting plastered or drinking much anymore) and I don't do it because I feel like I "deserve" it. I do it because it just allows me to relax more and enjoy myself more knowing I can watch the game and that I don't have to rush out the door at any point during the game so I can get to bed in time to get up early enough the next day. It's just nicer. A lot of people seem to think by saying all this that I feel like everyone deserves the day off. I'm not saying that at all. I'm just saying in my opinion due to the fact of how big the game is and the effect of lost revenue on employers we might as well get the day off. That's all I've been trying to say. I feel like a bunch of people just blew this out of proportion by calling me entitled. Which is ridiculous. They implied that I thought I was so much better than everyone else or that I hold football to some incredible high standard by thinking the day should be a holiday which is ridiculous. I get where they are coming from and I understand their reasoning and as much of a cool idea as I think it is, I don't ever expect it to happen.

As I stated before, this would not apply to the World Series or Stanley Cup or NBA Finals or any of those other sports big games in this country because those games are not as big as the Super Bowl. Those games don't get 100 million viewers in our country alone and those games don't have the effect that the day after the Super Bowl has on employers and all the billions of dollars in lost revenue from employees calling off or showing up late or being unproductive when they get to work. Those games don't compare to the effect of the Super Bowl