daquixers Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 #1 - NE is not that good (better than us) , but not that good #2 - Eagles are good in the NFC - but in the AFC they would be 7-4 at BEST right now #3 - Pitt is not that good I am sick of hearing how good Pitt is. Roethlisberger is already starting to look bad and if anyone disagrees just look at his last 3 games. His first 5 games he was new and the defenses were tryin to adjust. Now the defenses have adjusted and in his last 3 games he has 15 sacks, 2 interceptions and 2-3 fumbles. Now lets look at their schedule: Oakland: 4-7 Baltimore: 7-4 Miami: 2-9 Cincinatti: 5-6 Cleveland: 3-8 Dallas: 4-7 NE: 10-1 Philly: 10-1 Cleveland: 3-8 Cinci: 5-6 Washington: 3-8 So their opponents overall record is 56-65 ... are you joking me ... They have played THREE teams with a winning record ... and Cinci, Cleveland, and Washington all gave them fits. What is everyone so hyped about this team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 #1 - NE is not that good (better than us) , but not that good#2 - Eagles are good in the NFC - but in the AFC they would be 7-4 at BEST right now #3 - Pitt is not that good I am sick of hearing how good Pitt is. Roethlisberger is already starting to look bad and if anyone disagrees just look at his last 3 games. His first 5 games he was new and the defenses were tryin to adjust. Now the defenses have adjusted and in his last 3 games he has 15 sacks, 2 interceptions and 2-3 fumbles. Now lets look at their schedule: Oakland: 4-7 Baltimore: 7-4 Miami: 2-9 Cincinatti: 5-6 Cleveland: 3-8 Dallas: 4-7 NE: 10-1 Philly: 10-1 Cleveland: 3-8 Cinci: 5-6 Washington: 3-8 So their opponents overall record is 56-65 ... are you joking me ... They have played THREE teams with a winning record ... and Cinci, Cleveland, and Washington all gave them fits. What is everyone so hyped about this team? 143208[/snapback] Well, they killed the Pats and Eagles, and Burress was out for most of the last 2 games. Once Burress and Staley come back, they'll be even better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daquixers Posted December 2, 2004 Author Share Posted December 2, 2004 Well, they killed the Pats and Eagles, and Burress was out for most of the last 2 games. Once Burress and Staley come back, they'll be even better. 143222[/snapback] Read what I said about the Pats and Eagles above. And dont give me the bullcrap about Staley. Jerome Bettis has given them 120-130 yards and 1-2 TD's a game in the past 4 weeks ... they have NOT missed the running game AT ALL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Leon Seals Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 and you're still a moron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Read what I said about the Pats and Eagles above. And dont give me the bullcrap about Staley. Jerome Bettis has given them 120-130 yards and 1-2 TD's a game in the past 4 weeks ... they have NOT missed the running game AT ALL. 143229[/snapback] Read what I wrote about them missing Burress, as well as Staley, who gives them another dimension from Bettis, who is at best a backup at this point in his career. To put it in Bills terms, Staley is more like Willis and Bettis is more like Travis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Well, the Bengals would have a winning record if the Steelers had lost to them once. I watched both of their games vs. Cleveland and they were both over by halftime, so I'm not sure what qualifies as "giving fits". The Redskins haven't scored 19 points all year, so once you get 2 scores up on them the game is over... They've played really well, though I still think NE is better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daquixers Posted December 2, 2004 Author Share Posted December 2, 2004 Read what I wrote about them missing Burress, as well as Staley, who gives them another dimension from Bettis, who is at best a backup at this point in his career. To put it in Bills terms, Staley is more like Willis and Bettis is more like Travis. 143243[/snapback] Well that last 4 weeks, Bettis has rushed for more yards than Willis so your analagy is pretty far off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daquixers Posted December 2, 2004 Author Share Posted December 2, 2004 Well, the Bengals would have a winning record if the Steelers had lost to them once. I watched both of their games vs. Cleveland and they were both over by halftime, so I'm not sure what qualifies as "giving fits". The Redskins haven't scored 19 points all year, so once you get 2 scores up on them the game is over...They've played really well, though I still think NE is better. 143250[/snapback] Huh? Are you blind - Pitt was only up by 2 points to Cleveland with 3 minutes left in the game ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Huh? Are you blind - Pitt was only up by 2 points to Cleveland with 3 minutes left in the game ... 143255[/snapback] The game in Cleveland was 24-10 and it was 24-3 in the 4th Qtr. The other one was 34-16 in the 4th Qtr, 34-23 final. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gantrules Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 why is it that the teams with the best records are always "not that good". If you are 10-1, 9-2, 8-3, 7-3, 7-4 then you are darn good at this point no matter how you "break it down". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 The game in Cleveland was 24-10 and it was 24-3 in the 4th Qtr.The other one was 34-16 in the 4th Qtr, 34-23 final. 143261[/snapback] Yeah, where'd he get THAT from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Then WHO is good? You seem to trash every team. The fact you say New England is not good makes me wonder about you. The Pats are not just good...they are a freakin' football machine! How many games in a row do they need to win before you admit that? If a team that wins 29 of 30 games and 2 Super Bowl in 3 years "isn't that good," then what, pray tell, IS a good team? I can see your point about the Steelers. The Eagles have to win when it counts to earn respect. But you have to be blind to say the Patriots aren't the NFL gold standard right now. PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daquixers Posted December 2, 2004 Author Share Posted December 2, 2004 why is it that the teams with the best records are always "not that good". If you are 10-1, 9-2, 8-3, 7-3, 7-4 then you are darn good at this point no matter how you "break it down". 143263[/snapback] Possibly because they play on of the easiest schedules in the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daquixers Posted December 2, 2004 Author Share Posted December 2, 2004 Then WHO is good? You seem to trash every team. The fact you say New England is not good makes me wonder about you. The Pats are not just good...they are a freakin' football machine! How many games in a row do they need to win before you admit that? If a team that wins 29 of 30 games and 2 Super Bowl in 3 years "isn't that good," then what, pray tell, IS a good team? I can see your point about the Steelers. The Eagles have to win when it counts to earn respect. But you have to be blind to say the Patriots aren't the NFL gold standard right now. PTR 143267[/snapback] New England is a very good team - just not great. The Colts are a very good team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gantrules Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 Possibly because they play on of the easiest schedules in the NFL. 143269[/snapback] They handed out 10 of those losses on their schedule last time I checked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gantrules Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 New England is a very good team - just not great. The Colts are a very good team. 143272[/snapback] This is getting to close to ignore material. If NE wins the SB this year I will offically call them a dynasty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 If NE wins the SB this year I will offically call them a dynasty. 143322[/snapback] Not if, when. I will agree with daquixers, though, about the Steelers. In the end, Cowher's team will fold yet again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICE Posted December 2, 2004 Share Posted December 2, 2004 I agree with Lombardi and the Tuna 'You are what your record says you are' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Poojer Posted December 3, 2004 Share Posted December 3, 2004 not many times i agree with you ice , but this one time that i whole heartedly agree. I agree with Lombardi and the Tuna 'You are what your record says you are' 143391[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartshan-83 Posted December 3, 2004 Share Posted December 3, 2004 #1 - NE is not that good (better than us) , but not that good#2 - Eagles are good in the NFC - but in the AFC they would be 7-4 at BEST right now #3 - Pitt is not that good I am sick of hearing how good Pitt is. Roethlisberger is already starting to look bad and if anyone disagrees just look at his last 3 games. His first 5 games he was new and the defenses were tryin to adjust. Now the defenses have adjusted and in his last 3 games he has 15 sacks, 2 interceptions and 2-3 fumbles. Now lets look at their schedule: Oakland: 4-7 Baltimore: 7-4 Miami: 2-9 Cincinatti: 5-6 Cleveland: 3-8 Dallas: 4-7 NE: 10-1 Philly: 10-1 Cleveland: 3-8 Cinci: 5-6 Washington: 3-8 So their opponents overall record is 56-65 ... are you joking me ... They have played THREE teams with a winning record ... and Cinci, Cleveland, and Washington all gave them fits. What is everyone so hyped about this team? 143208[/snapback] You're crazy. The Eagles aren't that good? 4 losses in the AFC?? Give me a break. The Patriots are not that good?? 10-1...spank everyone except PITT!! Who the hell IS good then? And I mean besides your hard-on for Peyton and the Colts. Are they the only really good team in the NFL?? If the Steelers, Eagles and Pats aren't that good (3 best records in the league) then the rest of the teams in the NFL blow a huge dick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts