NFL 2010

It felt pretty good to watch the Patriots lose like that. Is it time we start calling Belichick and Brady chokers for losing two home playoff games in a row? Because, you know, Peyton Manning is the biggest choker in NFL history because he loses sometimes too.
 
well 2 of my sided teams won (Packers, Jets). Overall it was a shit weekend with shit games. Hopefully next weekend we'll get better games and not just ass-kickings.

I thought both the Ravens-Steelers and Jets-Patriots games were very enjoyable from a viewer's standpoint. For starters, the Steelers were down by two douchdowns and ended up winning by a touchdown. The game was tied with the Steelers at 3rd and 19 late in the game and deep in their own territory only to launch a 58 yard pass and ultimately score the winning touchdown. In the Patriots game, watching the game you had a constant feeling that the Patriots would ultimately come up with the big plays as they usually do, and the battle between the Patriots rising up and the Jets trying to keep them down was an engaging storyline throughout the game. Top that off with Holmes' excellent touchdown catch, Cromartie scooping up the onside kick and returning it quite a way, and the Shonn Greene out on the edge and in for the go-ahead touchdown, and you have a game very worthy of viewership. Neither game was hardly an asskicking.

It felt pretty good to watch the Patriots lose like that. Is it time we start calling Belichick and Brady chokers for losing two home playoff games in a row? Because, you know, Peyton Manning is the biggest choker in NFL history because he loses sometimes too.

I understand what you're saying (and in fact the Patriots have lost their last 3 playoff games overall going back to Super Bowl XLII), but let's be honest hear. Peyton Manning has brought his team to 11 playoffs. He reached the Super Bowl twice, and won once. He's 9-10 overall. Tom Brady has led his team to the playoffs 8 times. 4 times he's led them to the Super Bowl, and 3 times he's won. His overall record is 14-5 (the same as Terry Bradshaw's). Overall, Manning has been eliminated from the playoffs twice as often, reached half a many super bowls, and only won a third as many.

Unfortunately, I think the Patriots are going to be one of the favorites to win the super bowl until Brady retires, because the team has reloaded and has way too much young talent to not be a regular playoff threat for at least another half-decade plus until Brady retires.
 
Playoff win-loss records have nothing to do with side by side comparison of the two players. In fact, I could argue (and win) that Brady is the lesser QB overall INCLUDING the playoffs.

The fact is neither of those guys could win on their own. And had it not been for the Colts defense choking away fourth quarter leads in their last four playoff games, you'd probably be singing a different tune right now.

The playoffs are a crap shoot whether anyone wants to realize it or not. It's mostly luck, that's just the way it is. Manning is just unlucky enough to have to deal with a special teams that plays worse as the season goes on and its worst in the playoffs and a defense that likes to choke leads away. Not only that, but Manning is constantly faced with tougher odds considering the lack of possessions and horrible field position. I personally think with the team he has around him (offense aside of course) he's fortunate to be 9-10 with two Super Bowl appearances and one win.
 
I'm talking about only the postseason, I thought that was obvious. The term "choke" hardly applies to the regular season. Seven out of eleven times that Manning led his team to the playoffs, they didn't win a game. In only one of those games did he throw more than one touchdown pass (2007, where he threw 3, but also 2 interceptions; they lost to the Chargers with Billy Volek leading the go-ahead touchdown drive, with Manning turning the ball over on downs twice after that). Manning is simply not at his best in the playoffs more often than not. Does that mean that he's not easily one of the greatest quarterbacks in history of the game? No. At least he has a Super Bowl ring, unlike Marino. How many quarterbacks have more than one ring? Bart Starr, Bob Griese, Terry Bradshaw, Roger Staubach, Jim Plunkett, Joe Montana, Troy Aikman, John Elway, Tom Brady, Ben Roethlisberger. Actually, that's more than I thought...
 
Every quarterback's play declines in the postseason, Peyton included. Here's an example of the regular and postseason QB rating for the top QB's in the AFC:

Name Reg Post Drop
Brady 95.2 85.5 -9.7
Manning 94.9 88.4 -6.5
Rivers 97.2 79.2 -18
Roethlisberger 92.5 88.7 -3.8

Like I mentioned before, Brady is worse in the playoffs than Manning.

Here are the stats for Manning's first 16 playoff games:
403/613, 65.7%, 28 tds, 17 int, 93.3 rating

That's a full season. That would be a Pro Bowl season against nothing but playoff teams. Those don't look like the numbers of a bad playoff quarterback.

Again, you are using an argument against a player than an entire team needs to be held accountable for. As I showed, there's nothing wrong with Peyton in the playoffs, he performs up to snuff, it's the rest of his team that is lagging behind. It's the same old tired argument that Colts fans have had with this team ever since Peyton arrived. He's never had a great defense at his disposal like Brady did in his early years or like Ben has had his entire career, he's dealt with a mediocre to bad defense with recurring problems. He's also dealt with a special teams unit that constantly regresses in the playoffs leaving him with the worst field position ever. No quarterback let alone a team is going to win on a consistent basis when 2/3 of the team is bad.

That's why I have a problem when people use playoff records for or against anyone.
 
The Steelers game was probably the most entertaining for Steelers fans but I hate the Steelers. Only fags wave yellow flags. I loved watching the Pats get their asses kicked around, did you see the look on Brady's face ...he was about to cry LOL! Seahawks game was a joke I turned it off, and i didn't expect the Packers to beat the Falcons asses like they did.
 
Number of one and dones with a bye week: 3. Scores: 19-16, 28-24, 21-18.

You can't use "the team" as Manning's crutch when it's been the Colts' policy since they drafted him to completely focus on him. They put a lot of financial resources in him, which takes away from the rest of the team. That means his value to the team must be greater, and therefore his responsibility. He played behind an excellent offensive line with some excellent wide receivers for the majority of this decade, with Edgerrin James and Joseph Addai. Manning calls the plays, so it's his decision when to run. No team's success is more tied to a single individual more than the Colts' success is tied to Peyton Manning, and a lot of this has to do with Manning himself, not the organization's ability to surround him with talent.

You quote stats. I never said he never shows up in the postseason. I said that overall, he's not at his best in the postseason. And you know what? The year that the Colts actually won the Super Bowl, Manning averaged 6.8 YPA with 3 touchdowns and 7 picks for a QB rating of 70.5 In that season, the defense came up big against the Chiefs when Manning threw 3 interceptions while forcing 3 turnovers on their own. In the divisional round against the Ravens, Vinatieri kicked 5 field goals, the team's only points. This game included a Manning pick near midfield, the subsequent Ravens drive ending with a Colts interception of Steve McNair. Another Manning pick set the Ravens up near midfield, the subsequent drive once again ending the the Colts intercepting the ball. The Ravens scored 6 points. Robert Mathis sealed the game with a strip sack. Manning had a lovely pick six in the next game against the Patriots by Asante Samuel. Manning ran one in on his own for a touchdown and threw a 1 yard touchdown pass to a defensive lineman that was set up by a pass interference call. An Addai touchdown run gave them the go-ahead score here. The game was sealed with a Colts interception of Brady. In the Super Bowl, the Colts racked up nearly 200 rushing yards. Manning had a touchdown and an interception. The Colts had a pick six to help seal the game.
 
Every quarterback's play declines in the postseason, Peyton included. Here's an example of the regular and postseason QB rating for the top QB's in the AFC:

Having a lower overall level of play due to playing typically better teams, and choking are two different things though.
 
Playoff win-loss records have nothing to do with side by side comparison of the two players. In fact, I could argue (and win) that Brady is the lesser QB overall INCLUDING the playoffs.

The fact is neither of those guys could win on their own. And had it not been for the Colts defense choking away fourth quarter leads in their last four playoff games, you'd probably be singing a different tune right now.

The playoffs are a crap shoot whether anyone wants to realize it or not. It's mostly luck, that's just the way it is. Manning is just unlucky enough to have to deal with a special teams that plays worse as the season goes on and its worst in the playoffs and a defense that likes to choke leads away. Not only that, but Manning is constantly faced with tougher odds considering the lack of possessions and horrible field position. I personally think with the team he has around him (offense aside of course) he's fortunate to be 9-10 with two Super Bowl appearances and one win.

Brady is better than Manning, but not by much. Manning throws too many interceptions, to be honest. I remember two seasons ago he had 6 in one game or something (more than TB all season!). On Brady's worst day you'd never see him do that. I think Manning's problem is he probably studies too much. lol
 
Number of one and dones with a bye week: 3. Scores: 19-16, 28-24, 21-18.

You can't use "the team" as Manning's crutch when it's been the Colts' policy since they drafted him to completely focus on him. They put a lot of financial resources in him, which takes away from the rest of the team. That means his value to the team must be greater, and therefore his responsibility. He played behind an excellent offensive line with some excellent wide receivers for the majority of this decade, with Edgerrin James and Joseph Addai. Manning calls the plays, so it's his decision when to run. No team's success is more tied to a single individual more than the Colts' success is tied to Peyton Manning, and a lot of this has to do with Manning himself, not the organization's ability to surround him with talent.

I understand this and agree, but Manning doesn't play defense or special teams. Besides, Peyton isn't even the highest paid player in the league right now, he isn't being paid that much more than other top-tier QB's.

You quote stats. I never said he never shows up in the postseason. I said that overall, he's not at his best in the postseason.

And I just showed you that no one is at their best, not even the Golden Boy Tom Brady or Big Ben. However, his stat line isn't too far off his regular season averages. Peyton has had some insanely great games in the postseason, just like he has had in the regular season, but yes his overall performance has dipped slightly, but this is only natural because of the situation and the competition.

And you know what? The year that the Colts actually won the Super Bowl, Manning averaged 6.8 YPA with 3 touchdowns and 7 picks for a QB rating of 70.5 In that season, the defense came up big against the Chiefs when Manning threw 3 interceptions while forcing 3 turnovers on their own. In the divisional round against the Ravens, Vinatieri kicked 5 field goals, the team's only points. This game included a Manning pick near midfield, the subsequent Ravens drive ending with a Colts interception of Steve McNair. Another Manning pick set the Ravens up near midfield, the subsequent drive once again ending the the Colts intercepting the ball. The Ravens scored 6 points. Robert Mathis sealed the game with a strip sack. Manning had a lovely pick six in the next game against the Patriots by Asante Samuel. Manning ran one in on his own for a touchdown and threw a 1 yard touchdown pass to a defensive lineman that was set up by a pass interference call. An Addai touchdown run gave them the go-ahead score here. The game was sealed with a Colts interception of Brady. In the Super Bowl, the Colts racked up nearly 200 rushing yards. Manning had a touchdown and an interception. The Colts had a pick six to help seal the game.

And? I think you forgot to mention that the Colts offense faced the three best defenses in the entire league in those playoffs and played a turnover creating machine Chicago Bears defense in monsoon type weather. No one has every done that before. Either way, he obviously didn't play bad enough to lose those games, so why are you using that against him? They won all of those games right?

Having a lower overall level of play due to playing typically better teams, and choking are two different things though.

That's my point! I was being sarcastic about the choke comment because no matter what Peyton does he's a choker, but whatever Tom Brady does is never his fault. My point is, Brady's postseason play is extremely overrated when in fact he plays worse in the playoffs than Peyton, he's just had several great teams surrounding him to pick up the slack, this is a fact.

Brady is better than Manning, but not by much. Manning throws too many interceptions, to be honest. I remember two seasons ago he had 6 in one game or something (more than TB all season!). On Brady's worst day you'd never see him do that. I think Manning's problem is he probably studies too much. lol

How is he better than Manning, aside from you perceiving he throws less interceptions?

Also, the 6 interception game was against the Chargers in 2007. Oddly enough they were leading that game most of the time and Peyton put them in position to actually win it in regulation, and then Vinatieri missed the field goal and the Colts lost. He played like shit that day I'll admit, but he did what he had to when it counted to put the Colts in position to win so it's hard for me to bitch about it too much.

And, yes I agree earlier this season when he went through his rough stretch he just played like shit, but he came out of it and ended the season with a career high in attempts and completions (partly the problem with the interceptions) and passing yards. Basically what I'm saying is, anytime he plays like crap he more than makes up for it in other ways.
 
Since we're in the discussion of comparing stuff and debunking myths, I went ahead and decided to debunk a few more that bother me. Warning: some of these myths are only about the Colts. (bold sentences are the myth)

Peyton Manning had a bad game against the Jets (and plays poorly in the playoffs).
The big winner this weekend didn't step on the field. Suddenly, Peyton Manning's 108 rating and four scoring drives look pretty good against that Jets defense, doesn't it? As much as Bill Simmons, Peter King, Jason Whitlock, Kerry Byrne, Bob Kravitz and a host of others want to nitpick Manning's performance against the Jets, the truth is that he had an incredible game. The Colts only had 8 possessions in that game and put up 16 points and four scoring drives. Ignoring the final drive, the Pats had 11 possessions and put 14 points on three drives. Tom Brady, coming off one of the greatest seasons in history, playing at the top of his game, didn't have nearly the game against the Jets that Manning did a week earlier. Suddenly, all the ripping of Manning for throwing a low ball to Blair White on a drive where his team took the lead with under a minute to play seems patently ridiculous. Ok, so it wasn't sudden. It was always ridiculous. But still.

The Colts should have thrown to Reggie Wayne more.
For those of you who don't know, Reggie Wayne had a little hissy fit about not being thrown the ball against the Jets. I personally had no problem with Peyton ignoring Reggie Wayne, but for some reason people have started to criticize Manning for it. Yesterday showed that that Revis guy...he's pretty amazing. Every pass thrown his way is a potential interception. Revis had the Pats locked down all day. Avoiding him is never a bad choice.

Momentum means something.
I would have have thought the Colts killed that one last year. The Jets lost 3 of 5 to close the year, but beat the Pats and Colts both on big winning streaks. The Seahawks had won two in a row, and the Bears lost their last game. The Falcons had won 9 of 10 games. The Ravens had won five in a row. 'Getting hot' isn't a thing. It's all about who you play this week and how you match up.

Tom Brady is a playoff god.
Tom Brady is a wonderful quarterback, one of the 10 best to ever play. He does not 'elevate' his game to some other level in the playoffs. When he's good, it's only because he's usually good. After an impossible 10-0 start to his playoff career, the Pats are now 4-5 in his last 9 games. What changed? Something that has NOTHING to do with Brady. He's gotten dramatically better as a quarterback. The Pats defense has imploded, and the Pats have stopped winning Super Bowls. The worst decision Belichick ever made was to alter the identity of the Pats from defensive warhorse to offensive juggernaut. Brady hasn't had any more playoff success with that model than Peyton Manning did. Defense wins championships, not floppy haired demi-gods.

Direct snaps to running backs are a good idea.
I get why the Jets try it (their QB sucks), but if Belichick wanted to go for a fourth down, he should have left his 'best offense in history' on the field to do it. I hate snaps to the runningback. HATE THEM. It's a lame gimmick that I love to watch fail.

Points scored are a good way to measure an offense game by game.
This is a favorite of Cold Hard Football Facts. Team X averaged 24 points in the regular season, but only scored 17 in the playoffs. Their quarterback is a choker. So goes the argument, only take out team X and insert "The Indianapolis Colts". The Ravens Steelers game showed the folly of that reasoning. The Ravens scored 24 points. That's a hefty total against a good defense. The problem is that they had scoring drives of 0 (defensive score), 16, and 23 yards long. The Steelers put up 31 on one of the best Ds in the league. They did it with the aid of 23, 22, and 6 yard drives. The Jets put up 28 points, a hefty sum. The truth is that had Green just gone down in bounds at the 1, the Jets would have never had to cover a final onsides kick. 21 would have been better than 28 for the purposes of winning the game.

Aaron Rodgers is a choker.
Rodgers has a bad reputation in the clutch for his awful mark in one score games. As I pointed out earlier this year, that's probably just luck. Rodgers has had three insane games to start his playoff career, and might be the best quarterback left in the playoffs.

Jay Cutler is a loser (and Kyle Orton is a winner).
Last year, the media ripped the Bears for acquiring Jay Cutler and dumping 'underrated' Kyle Orton. Orton, who piled up big stats in Denver has since lost his starting job and the Broncos imploded. The Bears are playing at home for the right to go to the Super Bowl. Can we please stop with these stupid categories? Teams win and lose. Quarterbacks don't. A loser is a quarterback on a bad team. A winner is a quarterback on a good team.

The Patriots secondary is improving.
Frankly, I never saw it. The Pats defense played better as the offense caught fire and forced teams to be one dimensional. Yesterday proved, however, that the Pats defense was utterly fraudulent. Mark Sanchez is NOT a good quarterback. He's not accurate. He sprays passes. He also LIT UP the Pats seconary. After New England cut the Jets lead to 14-11, the old Patriots would have gotten stops and probably won the game. The new "Brady-centric" Pats folded like a cheap tent. Sanchez passed four times for 75 yards as the Jets ripped through the Pats in 5 plays to take a 10 point lead early in the fourth quarter.

After the Pats lost to the Colts in '06, Belichick rebuilt the Pats around Tom Brady and the offense. The results have been some of the most incredible seasons in history...followed by massive playoff failures. The Patriots defense is eroding and so is Brady's reputation.

It's a bad idea to rile up Tom Brady.
Don't trash talk him or he'll go out and suck royally and act confused all day.

Tom Brady has great pocket presence.
Brady was sacked 5 times, frequently going down after time to throw. His line gave him all day to throw, but Brady hung on to the ball too long. The ability to not take a sack is vastly underrated. Brady looked lost yesterday, seemingly so confused by the coverage that he failed to see that his pocket was collapsing. His sacks came with 3, 5, 6, 3 and 4 seconds to throw. That's plenty of time to get rid of the ball. He was terrible.

Belichick controls every aspect of the Pats
Watching him on the sidelines openly wondering why the Pats weren't passing was surreal. I half expected him to march onto the field and start throwing it himself.

Field position is meaningless.
Belichick mentioned it as one of the key reasons the Pats lost the game. He's right. Against a bad defense, field position doesn't matter. That's why I never want the Colts to punt...the defense is rarely good. Against an elite defense, however, it matters where you start. The Steelers Ravens game showed that as well.

The NFL playoffs show us which team is the best in the NFL.
The playoffs are a giant crapshoot. They aren't designed to pit the best teams in the Super Bowl (like last year). They are designed to give everyone a shot a the title. The Super Bowl winner isn't the best team in the NFL. They are the team that wins the tournment. There is a huge difference. The Pats were the best team in the NFL this year. They are not winning it all.

It's a massive upset when the 6 beats the 1 seed.
Back when the Steelers dumped the Colts in '05 it was a shocking upset, but the 1-6 matchup is more hazardous than ever. Both top seeds were beaten at home by six seeds, and the Packers game wasn't even a huge upset.

Quarterbacks win games.
Anyone still believe this? Brady, Manning, and Brees are 1, 2 and 3 on every single QB list on earth. All three are out. Cutler and Sanchez are still playing. What does that tell you?
 
A lot of those incredible "myths" you're debunking sound an awful lot like straw men, and others I disagree with. For example, I'm pretty sure it was YOU a few years ago that was arguing that the team that wins is the best team. But I don't feel like going back and forth any more, so here's a peace offering:

Patricia Sheridan's Breakfast With ... Tony Dungy
Monday, January 17, 2011
By Patricia Sheridan, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

You have a lot of history with the Steelers.

[laughing] Yes, I do! I do. Came there in 1977 as a rookie player, and it was probably the greatest thing that happened to me in terms of career because I really basically got to spend 10 years around coach Noll. Just getting so much insight from him, and you know, being around Art Rooney Sr. and Dan and coach Noll and just some tremendous Hall of Fame players. I was there two years as a player, went away for two years and played for some other teams, San Francisco and the Giants. I came back as a coach and spent my first seven years as a coach there.

Tell me about Chuck Noll's influence on you?

Oh, it was tremendous. He believed in fundamentals, not fooling people but really being sound and doing things the right way. That's the way you build championships. He also believed everybody on the team was important. Yes, you had star players, but the way you won was by getting contributions from every person on the team. You know I was a backup player -- a guy who didn't play a lot, certainly wasn't in the limelight -- but he made you feel like your job was important to winning. As I got into coaching later on, that really shaped my philosophy.

The other thing I learned from him that helped me down the road was to be a complete person. He didn't spend 24 hours a day in the office. Coaching and winning was very important, but his family was important and the community of Pittsburgh was important and what he did to enjoy himself when he was away from the game. There's no doubt in my mind that's why he lasted so long. He wasn't just totally consumed with football.

Do you find that you approach fatherhood the same way you did coaching?

Absolutely, yes that every member of your family is important [and] they are all different. You have to use different ways to reach each child. I learned from my dad but also from coach Noll. He didn't just coach one way. It wasn't my way or the highway. Coach Noll always said: "Your job is to help every player be the best that they can be, and if you do that as an assistant coach, we're going to have a great team." As a parent you want to do the same thing.

Can bad chemistry among teammates derail even a great coach?

Bad chemistry can derail great talent. I think if you are a great coach, you are going to get great chemistry on the team because you know that's important. You are going to find ways to do that, and you are going to get rid of guys who take away from the chemistry.

Some athletes seem to lose themselves in the hype.

You can and especially now in this period of free agency. When I came to the Steelers you had the same core of guys. So as a young player, I could look to guys who had been in the organization eight or nine years [and they would say], "Here's how we do things here." Now it's a little harder in locker rooms. Everybody is moving around. Guys are there two or three years, and [they say], "I'll go here because I got a bigger contract." It's harder from a coaching standpoint now, but you can still get it done.

A lot of players seem to be playing for the fame and fortune and those big salaries.

And that's OK. There's nothing wrong with that. You can do that and be a good teammate as well. You want guys who are motivated. You want guys who want to be the best. You want guys who want that big contract because they have performed. But they are able to put that below the team goals.

You are known for your soft-spoken manner, but you must get angry and frustrated at times. What do you do with those emotions as a coach and a family man?

You try to control them, and it is a learned experience. I'm better at it now than I was 20 years ago, for sure, with my team and my children. The greatest advice I got from my dad was, "What are you going to do to make the situation better?" If you find yourself in a place where something is not working, or you haven't had the success you wanted, how do you make it better? Usually reacting emotionally, flying off the handle, yelling at someone isn't going to make it better. Rational thought is usually better than emotional thought. It's very tough, but the more you practice something, the better you get at it.

You've been an advocate of giving people a second chance, such as Michael Vick. A lot of young athletes make poor choices like Ben Roethlisberger, but they turn things around.

Second chances are great if a person can grow from it and if they really are willing to change. That's what you have to surmise. ... There's nothing wrong with giving a guy a second chance if they're really sincere. You usually get a pretty good gut feel. I remember we had a situation in Indianapolis my first year there. We had a kicker, Mike Vanderjagt, who made some comments after we lost a playoff game. They were incendiary, and everybody is telling me to get rid of this guy. He'd criticized Peyton Manning and he criticized me. Fortunately, I had a talk with him.

In the final analysis I said, "Do you want to be here and do you still feel like you can be part of the team?" He said, "Yes, I definitely want to be here, and I want to see us win a championship." We moved forward and we grew from that. He kicked very well for us for the next couple of years.

Being able to come back after life knocks you down is not easy. I know you are a man of faith and have had to deal with the loss of your son. How do you remain positive?

I think the Christian faith is the most important thing for me, but the other part of it is the lessons you learn in sports. Very seldom do you have an undefeated team that wins a championship. It teaches you that even though something negative happens, it doesn't mean it's the end of the world. If we lose a game we can bounce back and get on a 10-game winning streak. If a player gets injured, you can have another player step in and have a great year.

Those lessons you learn in sports, I think, carry over into life. Then you have to have faith that there are some things you can't control. So you can't worry about those things. You have to let the Lord handle them and let go and control the things you can control, which is your effort, your attitude and how you approach things.

What motivated you and your wife to write children's books?

She really thinks reading is important. She found there was a shortage of books that had the type of message we are talking about. Good family values and books that are fun to read.

Does the fact that there could be long-term damage from concussions concern you?

There are physical dangers playing football. Now that we have this link to concussions, I'm sure there will be a lot more studies done. The helmets today are 100 times better than the helmets I played in. They are doing things to address it, but I think that's where your faith has to come in. It's definitely a more dangerous job than an accountant, but there are things you can't control and you can't worry about. You control the things you can by learning to hit the right way, using the right equipment and wearing a mouthpiece. When I played probably 75 percent of the guys didn't wear a mouthpiece. Now we know that the proper mouthpiece can really decrease your chance of a concussion. So there are things you can do to protect yourself. Do what you can do, and let the Lord handle the rest.
 
Straw men eh? I wouldn't go that far.

Also I think I remember that conversation you're talking about, but I don't think I was completely on the side of "Super Bowl champs are the greatest ever," moreso that Super Bowl champs deserve the respect they earned by winning that title. I'm also pretty sure that I made that argument because people were claiming how Indy somehow "lucked" into winning the title that year for some pretty stupid reasons. Either way, it's not worth the time.
 
hHoly fookin Patriot hangover!


I said it earlier in the week that I was worried more in facing the Jets again. The revenge factor and bein better prepared to face the re-invented Pats offense...Jets of course were. This game was still there for the taking for the Pats but the problem imo is Belichick (yes Mr. in Bill we trust) has a pension for not making adjustments on both sides of the ball when he really needs to...almost in a stubborn manner. Its like screw everyone...we will do what the Patriots do because it works most of the time. But that attitude will come up and bite ya in the ass once in a while like it did yesterday. Credit the Jets, they were the more desperate and hungrier team yesterday.

And Brady is to take blame as well for this loss. But please don't waste time comparing Brady and Manning. It ends up turning into a joke. Its always anything good that the Pats accomplish...Brady has little to do with it. And anything good the Colts accomplish its all Peytons doing. When Manning fails, its excuses and everyone else but Peytons fault. Only Peyton can have a pick 6 game and its spun as meh no big deal.

When you win 3 rings (Brady) and you're the MVP in two of them...sure you're in a good system but you're the key part of the system. YOU ARE A BIG REASON FOR GETTING THRU THE PLAYOFFS- OBVIOUSLY YOU'RE ALSO HAVING A POSITIVE IMPACT IN THE CHAMPIONSHIP GAMES! Brady still has it over Manning with playoff record, rings and well earned SB mvp's. Until Peyton (wich he probably won't do) surpasses Brady in certain things just mentioned...its a no-brainer. Does not take away from anyones greatness...its just how the great ones are remembered. And I know the whole Doug Williams has a ring and an MVP arguement thing- whats that make him? But once you build up credentials, become established and are considered in elite status like Brady and Manning...then and only then you can of course start comparing, judging, talking how many rings, SB mvp's etc. What the hell else are we suppose to go by...who can throw it the farthest? To touch on the Montana - Young Niners reference earlier. Both became great elite QB's in thier own right and we can fairly look back now and consider thier titles, mvp's respectively when taking about thier levels of greatness. It does play a big part in how they're remembered, thats all.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here's my NFC Championship game preview:

The talk in Chicago is that this is the biggest, most-anticipated single sporting event in the history of the city. It's the first playoff meeting in the Super Bowl era between ancient rivals and NFL founding franchises, and will probably smash viewership marks for non-SB NFL games. Neither team seems to do a lot of talking or have a lot of egos, so I don't think there will be the off-field drama that happened in the AFC.

Green Bay is carrying a lot of hype into this game, which is in many ways justified. But Rodgers had a historic game, and it's probably not reasonable to expect that again, especially considering the conditions. For one, it is going to be cold, and secondly, the Chicago crowd will not be as pathetic as Atlanta's. Tickets are selling for absurd prices on the secondary markets already. Soldier Field is probably the worst playing surface in the NFL, and the Packers play like a dome team. Having seen plenty of opposing WRs (and Bears) slip and fall while making quick cuts, the passing game should be slowed. But rushing attacks like the Bears that rely more on hitting holes and less on quick cuts can succeed. Green Bay's rushing attack is so bad that it more or less neutralizes the advantage the Bears' superior rush defense has on other teams. Marshawn Lynch certainly did not go into "beast mode" this week, and Seattle only picked up 34 yards on the ground while punting their first eight possessions. Anything that happened after the Bears went up 28-0 is elementary. They started dicking around then to try to confuse the Packers, sort of like week 17, when the play calling on offense was pre-season level.

The week 17 game is something to look at. The Bears had nothing to play for, and the Pack needed to win to get in, so they threw out all their best blitzes and defenses against a pre-season level offensive scheme. No wonder Chicago barely moved the ball; they didn't really try, and their best possession receiver sat that one out and is now back. On the other side, the Chicago D kept the Pack scoreless 42 minutes, in a game that GB had to win and was a meaningless game for the Bears.

In any game, QBs are going to play the biggest role. Much has been said about Rodgers being great lately. He's helped by a deep WR core. I just don't think the pace he's been on is sustainable. On the other side, Cutler quieted doubts in his first playoff game. Both guys are pretty mobile. Cutler seems faster and more able to run for significant gains, while Rodgers is better at feeling pressure and avoiding sacks. Rodgers is better at being concussed, with a two to one lead.

I think people wrongly look at Cutler like a more talented Rex Grossman. Look at his WRs, and think about how many teams those guys would be above 3 on the depth chart. Olsen and Forte are good receivers for their positions. The line is not particularly good either. But after about week six this year, he has not had disaster games. Only maybe the New England game looks bad, and in that case he was faced with such a deficit that chances had to be taken.

The defenses seem pretty equal to me. The Bears have had the statistical measures burned by bad finishes to a few games where they had the final result in hand. They are vulnerable to a hurry-up though, if no one makes a play. Green Bay's defense is not going to be helped by Chicago's superior special teams. Chicago is going to start at at least the 35 after kickoffs. And if they get past midfield and stall, Maynard is a skilled punter, twice pinning Seattle inside the 5. Gould is a better kicker than Crosby. Chicago has a huge edge on special teams, which should mitigate the difference between the offenses. I think the homefield advantage will matter too. The Bears already beat the Packers once at Soldier field, and I think they can again if they win the turnover battle.

Bears 31
Packers 28
 
My overly simplistic analysis of Chicago is that they are quite overrated and the mere fact that Cutler is their qb creates an advantage for opposing teams. Also, in that first game the Packers had 18 penalties and still almost won.

I'd say it'll be a close game because of the conditions, but the Packers are a better team, and I'll think they'll win by a score of 27-20ish.