07/08 NFL Playoff Thread

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by troutman

Good breakdown Transplant. How do you think the Pack stacks up vs. the AFC? I don't know what to make of GB - they seem really good, but they enjoyed a relatively soft schedule this year. They beat NYG and SD when those teams were still finding themselves. GB posted impressive victories vs. WAS and SEA. Lost at DAL. The rest of the schedule was easy.

I think they beat the Giants too (could be close though), but can they challenge NE (or SD)?

Thanks.

As for how they stack up against the AFC....who knows really?

They did beat all 4 AFC West opponents they faced (weak group beyond SD no doubt), but that was the only games they played OOC.

I have watched every Pack game this season and I still dont know how good they are. At times they look unstoppable on Offense as witnessed in Saturday nights blizzard. Then they throw up a game like they did against Dallas and the 1st Bears game of the year in which they showed their youth and IMO beat themselves both times. Though both times the D was as guilty as the O in the decision.

Can they beat NE? Sure they could. Will they? Doubtful. I dont think anyone is stopping that locomotive this year. Though again I will reiterate....I think the GB secondary (with the sudden maturation of Bigby) may be the best in the entire league right now. That may be enough to allow them to stay close to anyone they play.

Of course there is still a game to win this Sunday and anything can happen there as well.

[flamesdyehard]

Originally Posted by habernac

yeah, I'm stunned. Has the guy finally figured out how to not be an idiot?

It does seem genuine. Maybe T.O. feels differently about Romo, because he feels Romo can be a winner as opposed to the other QB's he's played with. Maybe Romo has forged a friendship with T.O., there could be many reasons.

[Clever_Iggy]

Congrats Transplant... Im cheering for Farve. Should New England be knocked out in the AFC championship (I want perfection just to throw in the face of the 72 Dolphins) Im a Packer fan in the Superbowl.

The road got a lot easier for the Pack after Tony Simpson, er, Romo gagged up another playoff game. I give a strong edge to Green Bay because against Seattle they did something that should make the Giants nervous... they ran the ball very effectively. The greatest strength the Giants have against the Pack was their great pass rush against an average mobile QB. With the rush being a factor, that "pin the ears back" approach is going to be much less effective.

Also, forgive me if I dont believe in Manning... the other one. He's due for a melt down anytime now.

Pack 35 - Giants 24. The tundra in Green Bay is an easier path to Arizona than Texas Stadium.

[Cheese]

Wellity wellity wellity.
My Pats seem to have gained an easier road to the SB. Not that San Diego wont give them a show, but with a banged up QB and RB it wont take the Pats long to wear them down even if they do manage to play. I think the Chargers will stay close firsthalf and get blown out in the 2nd...Pats x 19.

The NFC will be a helluva game. The Cheeseheads never played my Pats this year so nothing to compare in that regard...but the Giants played the Pats VERY well in the last game of the year...they almost pulled out the V. I think the Giants are simply too strong for the young blocks of cheddar. Manning and his running game will be victorius in GB and face the Pats in what could be an excellent SB.

Pats vs Giants Superbowl...sorry tranny.

[Sainters7]

Apparently the New York Post flew a Jessica Simpson look-alike to sit behind the Cowboys bench yesterday, in a pink and white Romo jersey.

http://www.sportsbybrooks.com/lynsey...nts-game-15415

[Bobblehead]

Teams that played hard in week 17 are all going to their respective championships.

Teams that "rested" week 17:
Seattle - Hasselbeck played a half, they lost to Atlanta
Dallas - mailed it in - lost to Wash 27-6
Jacksonville - lost to the Texans - 42-28
Indy - Sorgi took over midway through the 2nd quarter

See ya in training camp.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

Teams that played hard in week 17 are all going to their respective championships.

Teams that "rested" week 17:
Seattle - Hasselbeck played a half, they lost to Atlanta
Dallas - mailed it in - lost to Wash 27-6
Jacksonville - lost to the Texans - 42-28
Indy - Sorgi took over midway through the 2nd quarter

See ya in training camp.

Maybe conventional wisdom will switch to playing your starters right to the end:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...nal/index.html

Still think it's a good idea to rest your players for the playoffs in Weeks 16 and 17? The Bucs and Colts went to a spa the last half of December and lost to underdogs at home in their first playoff games. That's the second time in three years it's happened to Indy. The Packers barely rested their guys and looked like the '58 Colts in whipping the Seahawks. New England, Green Bay and New York rested no one; they're 4-0 combined. The Giants, in fact, were badly slumping entering Week 17 with nothing to play for. Since then, they nearly knocked off the best team in the league and have won two road playoff games.

[Bobblehead]

I knew I liked that Peter King (even if I still think he was wrong about the foul ball in spring training a few years ago).

And, while I am usually an avid MMQB reader, it has been hectic and I haven't made it that far quite yet.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

I knew I liked that Peter King (even if I still think he was wrong about the foul ball in spring training a few years ago).

Peter King is an asshat. Ever read his fan fiction where he basically felates Tom Brady in every story?

[troutman]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Peter King is an asshat. Ever read his fan fiction where he basically felates Tom Brady in every story?

Tom Brady deserves it.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Peter King is an asshat. Ever read his fan fiction where he basically felates Tom Brady in every story?

No. I don't purposely look for that type of stuff.
Not that there's anything wrong with that.

[burn_baby_burn]

Originally Posted by troutman

Maybe conventional wisdom will switch to playing your starters right to the end:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...nal/index.html

Still think it's a good idea to rest your players for the playoffs in Weeks 16 and 17? The Bucs and Colts went to a spa the last half of December and lost to underdogs at home in their first playoff games. That's the second time in three years it's happened to Indy. The Packers barely rested their guys and looked like the '58 Colts in whipping the Seahawks. New England, Green Bay and New York rested no one; they're 4-0 combined. The Giants, in fact, were badly slumping entering Week 17 with nothing to play for. Since then, they nearly knocked off the best team in the league and have won two road playoff games.

Good on Indy. That rest really helped. The Chargers won that game with one arm tied behind their back. Not to mention the obvious bias in officiating. Pass interferance for running beside a reciever looking over your shoulder for the ball and not touching the wide reciever? Could it have been more obvious?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

No. I don't purposely look for that type of stuff.
Not that there's anything wrong with that.

LOL!

I actually found it on the Sports Argument Wiki so I won't take credit for it.

http://sportsargumentwiki.com/index....tle=Peter_King

Fatty from Montclair that writes for Sports Illustrated.

Notorious for his love of daughter Mary Beth's high school softball team and of gurgling Tom Brady's semen, expressed through horrific slash fanfiction - warning, NOT SAFE FOR WORK OH GOD.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Go Packers!

I might actually watch the games this weekend and if the Pack makes it to the Super Bowl I will watch my first Super Bowl since the Broncos cleaned the dirty birds!

[Sainters7]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Go Packers!

I might actually watch the games this weekend and if the Pack makes it to the Super Bowl I will watch my first Super Bowl since the Broncos cleaned the dirty birds!

??? Serious?? You dont watch the Super Bowl? You missed some beauts since then, namely Super Bowl XXXVIII, best SB I ever saw(though Im only in my mid-20's). The days of the one-sided spankfests that the 90's offered up annually are over(at least for the most part)

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Sainters7

??? Serious?? You dont watch the Super Bowl? You missed some beauts since then, namely Super Bowl XXXVIII, best SB I ever saw(though Im only in my mid-20's). The days of the one-sided spankfests that the 90's offered up annually are over(at least for the most part)

I can't do it. It sickens me so much. Not kidding.

[Sainters7]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

I can't do it. It sickens me so much. Not kidding.

What about it? Like all the hype & over-commercialization & crap?

[4X4]

MAybe it was JJ's nipple?

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally Posted by Sainters7

What about it? Like all the hype & over-commercialization & crap?

Oh no, it's more psychotic than that. The fact that my team isn't there. Pathetic, I know. I'm not even sure how it got to that point.

[Sainters7]

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

Oh no, it's more psychotic than that. The fact that my team isn't there. Pathetic, I know. I'm not even sure how it got to that point.

haha I year ya. Ohhh the joys of cheering for an actual historic franchise. They've been to it what, six times now? In that case I can see what you mean. They're usually contenders, so when they dont make it, it p***** you off and you cant handle watching the Super Bowl without them. When you're a Saints fan like me, you just get accustomed to watching the playoffs, let alone the Super Bowl, without them. Hence I'm fine with it.

Haha Y'know, when I jumped on board in '93, I had no idea what I was getting into. I'm jealous of you even cheering for a team successful enough that you're able to harbour such bitter feelings towards a Broncos-less Super Bowl.