Hollywood Donahoe Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 continued (What the hell? We're only allowed to post a certain number of quotes per post now?) And I don't "believe" that stat from ESPN because I actually SAW it happen. Oh really? I SAW the refs keep the flags in their pockets because that's what they do come playoff time. I SAW the Colts receivers throw their arms up after every incompletion like they always do, and I SAW the Patriots win the game under the oversight of competent NFL officials. I knew there were a bunch of penalties not called... "Knew," "imagined," whatever... ...but I was floored to learn there were 14. That's because there weren't. And ESPN did NOT make them all up. ESPN opted for sensationalism, as always. Next you're going to tell me he really deserved that 2001 SB MVP, after throwing for a net 134 yards, with over 1/3 on the final drive where he checked-down on every play against a prevent defense and where his WR's got 2/3 of the yards in RAC. I'd have given it to Law or Seymour. I'm sure you had a hand in that, seeing as how he was 4th in voting until the fan vote came into play. I've never participated in online voting for Super Bowl MVP. Like I said, he's a very good QB...I just don't think he's the god people make him out to be. So sue me. You're certainly free to hold whatever opinions you want. Just don't be surprised if people call you on them if they're asinine and you state them in a public forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 And I've ALWAYS maintained that football is a team game. No team in NFL history embodied that more than the Pats from 2001-2004. I just didn't like what looked like favoritism given to them. I don't disagree with you that the Pats corners got away with bloody murder in that game. I fault the Colts for not doing EXACTLY the same thing. Was it poor officiating? Absolutely. Have I come to expect that in the NFL and sports in general? Sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 We'll agree to disagree, HD. I am no more interested in trying to change your opinion than I am trying to change someone's religion, which is a fitting comparison. I don't disagree with you that the Pats corners got away with bloody murder in that game. I fault the Colts for not doing EXACTLY the same thing. Was it poor officiating? Absolutely. Have I come to expect that in the NFL and sports in general? Sure. And that's the reason why every year I find myself enjoying the NFL, and sports in general, less and less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 And that's the reason why every year I find myself enjoying the NFL, and sports in general, less and less. Maybe this would help... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RLflutie7 Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 He had the same thing that Steve Deberg and Dave Kraig had the season's prior - and ended up with virtually the same set stats/record. Oh, and Marcus Allen MADE THE PROBOWL in Montana's first (and most accomplished) season in KC. Yeah, Dwight Clark and Freddie Solomon sucked. I'll give you that they didn't have much of a running game, but their defense was terrific. They finished rated second in scoring defense in the NFL that season. To clerify, Montana didn't have Roger Craig and Jerry Rice until his second and third Superbowl. 1984 and 1988. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Bump... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Bump... Oh yeah, i would definitely take tom brady and his 57 rating and 3 picks over Joe Montana . If the dumbass charger knocks down the 4th down pass, brady is suffering his 2nd playoff loss in 3 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Oh yeah, i would definitely take tom brady and his 57 rating and 3 picks over Joe Montana . If the dumbass charger knocks down the 4th down pass, brady is suffering his 2nd playoff loss in 3 games. I knew that bump would be too much for you to ignore.... Reminds me a bit of these: 1981 NFC Championship: defeated Dallas 28-27 | 25 33 286 3 TD 3 int 1984 NFC Round 1 playoff : defeated NYG 21-10 | 25 39 309 3 TD 3 int Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollywood Donahoe Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 I knew that bump would be too much for you to ignore.... Reminds me a bit of this: 1984 nyg W, 21-10 | 25 39 309 3 3 Stop that. Montana never had any bad games. Ever. Brady played like utter crap most of the game. But on a handful of plays, he came up huge, and that's why he's got three rings on his fingers and two SB MVP trophies on his mantle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Oh yeah, i would definitely take tom brady and his 57 rating and 3 picks over Joe Montana . If the dumbass charger knocks down the 4th down pass, brady is suffering his 2nd playoff loss in 3 games. right on - now instead of Brady getting credit for losing the game he's gonna get credit for winning. There is no way in hell Brady is better than Montana. This game proves that clearly. 3 picks? 3 picks in a playoff game = better than Joe Montana? Would the late 80's Dallas or Giants have fumbled away an interception? No fuggin way. The positive for us? This simply means that the Patriots will fall farther next year. From what I've seen they are done. In fact - I think the Colts are gonna smoke them because they finally have a defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Stop that. Montana never had any bad games. Ever. Brady played like utter crap most of the game. But on a handful of plays, he came up huge, and that's why he's got three rings on his fingers and two SB MVP trophies on his mantle. The thing that makes Brady great, to me, is that I would have been MORE surprised if the Patriots DID NOT score a TD AND the two point conversion than I was that they did. I thought there was about a 90% chance of it. I didnt even feel the same way with Montana, even though he was great in the clutch, obviously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozymandius Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Brady is so amazingly accurate when he has time. Dropping that sideline route into Caldwell in stride. Great, clutch throw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 right on - now instead of Brady getting credit for losing the game he's gonna get credit for winning. (and one coming up) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 (and one coming up) So geting lucky and the other team being basically retarded means that Brady is good, and better than Montana? Now that logic is staggering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SACTOBILLSFAN Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Excellent point. Give the Pats credit for their titles, but have they beaten a single great team in the past 5 years? The NFC of Montana's era had some dominating teams going up against each other every year in the playoffs. They're the great team. To me their dynasty is the most impressive ever because they have done it in the free agent era. If you look at the past dynasties their core players rarely changed throughout their time at the top, whereas the Patsies have had a revolving door of players, save for Brady (which says alot about Marcia's skills). It sickens me every time i watch these guys play, because they are that good and yes I am jealous of their success as a Bills fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 12-1 in the playoffs with lots more gas in the tank. Brady is probably a better choice than Montana in the long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SACTOBILLSFAN Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 ALASKA----the best teams back then would crush the best teams now.Its the salary cap. There is no team now in the same universe as those niner,giant,cowboy teams. Which is why the Patsies run is even more impressive, because they keep winning despite constant change. 3 SB wins are not lucky guys, and when you keep saying they are then you sound like an ignorant football fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Which is why the Patsies run is even more impressive, because they keep winning despite constant change. 3 SB wins are not lucky guys, and when you keep saying they are then you sound like an ignorant football fan. Umm, tuck rule, missed field goals, ridiculous ref calls(ones that we never see again), comes to mind -- that wasn't luck? Did u just watch that game? Are u telling me that the Patriots beat the Chargers - or did the Chargers beat themselves and the Patriots just happen to be on the other sideline? How ignorant are we again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SACTOBILLSFAN Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 right on - now instead of Brady getting credit for losing the game he's gonna get credit for winning. There is no way in hell Brady is better than Montana. This game proves that clearly. 3 picks? 3 picks in a playoff game = better than Joe Montana? Would the late 80's Dallas or Giants have fumbled away an interception? No fuggin way. The positive for us? This simply means that the Patriots will fall farther next year. From what I've seen they are done. In fact - I think the Colts are gonna smoke them because they finally have a defense. Yes. They must be done with all those playoff wins they keep getting. The fact that Brady played terribly all game only to come up big when it mattered the most is why he's so good, and why I hate him so much. The Bills had kept him off balance all day in week one and Marcia came up with a big throw to beat the bills late its sickening. So geting lucky and the other team being basically retarded means that Brady is good, and better than Montana? Now that logic is staggering. Case in point. The retard roller coaster is in full motion. Just give a team credit for being a great team, and stop saying assinine things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Case in point. The retard roller coaster is in full motion. Just give a team credit for being a great team, and stop saying assinine things. Assinine? How about addressing my points rather than calling names? With the speed of the defenses now I don't see pure pocket passers like Brady being able to hang on - hence IMO they are done. Maybe you can explain the three picks and 57 passer rating to me - don't forget I am a retard so you will have to speak slowly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts