|
|
Post by hehatesshe on Feb 10, 2019 3:37:00 GMT
Which means he was throwing 52 other players under the bus.  Oh I see, you were being facetious. I'm sorry, sarcasm doesn't come across easily online. |
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Feb 10, 2019 3:39:54 GMT
Which means he was throwing 52 other players under the bus. Oh I see, you were being facetious. I'm sorry, sarcasm doesn't come across easily online. It's all good mang. It's fun to debate sports. Doesn't really matter what side you are one. |
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Feb 10, 2019 3:52:41 GMT
1. Seattle 2. Atlanta 3. St. Louis 4. LA 5. Carolina The real question is where does the 2015 AFC championship 4th quarter drive rank? The drive where Brady threw an INT on the 2-point conversion attempt to send the Broncos to the Super Bowl? What's more amazing, the fact that Brady has gone to 9 Super Bowls or the fact that he's like three plays away from going to 12? The fact that Shady Brady was 2 plays away from being the only QB to lose 5 Super Bowls. So you're agreeing with me? |
|
|
|
Post by poutinep on Feb 10, 2019 4:22:43 GMT
The fact that Shady Brady was 2 plays away from being the only QB to lose 5 Super Bowls. and 3 plays away from being the only QB to win 9 Super Bowls |
|
|
|
Post by bluerisk on Feb 10, 2019 10:45:47 GMT
Super Bowl 52. Oh wait... ...they won the two Super Bowls around this one: 2/1/0 (two golds and one silver in three event) Note: No team has ever won the Super Bowl three times in a row. |
|
|
|
Post by NJtoTX on Feb 10, 2019 13:06:29 GMT
The Seahawks one was the only one where they were losing, but Marshawn Lynch should have made it moot.
|
|
|
|
Post by poutinep on Feb 10, 2019 15:15:36 GMT
The Seahawks one was the only one where they were losing, but Marshawn Lynch should have made it moot. Lynch was only one for five from the 1-yard line that season. League wide, passing from the one was more successful than rushing was. Of 108 passes from the 1 that season, only that one was intercepted.
Statistically, the slant was not a bad call, it just didn't work out because Wilson led Lockette too much, and Kearse was supposed to pick Butler, but got jammed by Browner. Butler read the play perfectly and reacted fast because he got burned on that play in practice earlier that day.
Facts rarely change minds though...this myth that it was a bad call will never die.
|
|
|
|
Post by NJtoTX on Feb 10, 2019 15:31:42 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Feb 10, 2019 15:52:50 GMT
What is it you're arguing here? "Good thing the Patriots have a better coaching staff and their players rose to the occasion while the Seahawks made bad decisions and didn't execute." Yes, that's the difference between winning and losing. But I agree with you, it's a good thing the Seahawks couldn't capitalize on the Pats defense virtually handing them the game after Brady led two 4th qtr TD drives against the league's #1 defense. |
|
|
|
Post by NJtoTX on Feb 10, 2019 16:05:38 GMT
What is it you're arguing here? "Good thing the Patriots have a better coaching staff and their players rose to the occasion while the Seahawks made bad decisions and didn't execute." Yes, that's the difference between winning and losing. But I agree with you, it's a good thing the Seahawks couldn't capitalize on the Pats defense virtually handing them the game after Brady led two 4th qtr TD drives against the league's #1 defense. That they had to give it to Lynch. You can't say Brady was watching them line up at that point without the sickening feeling that the Seahawks would win it then and there. |
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Feb 10, 2019 16:21:37 GMT
What is it you're arguing here? "Good thing the Patriots have a better coaching staff and their players rose to the occasion while the Seahawks made bad decisions and didn't execute." Yes, that's the difference between winning and losing. But I agree with you, it's a good thing the Seahawks couldn't capitalize on the Pats defense virtually handing them the game after Brady led two 4th qtr TD drives against the league's #1 defense. That they had to give it to Lynch. You can't say Brady was watching them line up at that point without the sickening feeling that the Seahawks would win it then and there. No question Brady had to be thinking, "Here we go again." I still don't think it was the dumbest call in the world when you crunch the numbers. Pats got lucky on that play not because it was a bad call, but because they had scouted that specific play. |
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Feb 10, 2019 16:26:55 GMT
What is it you're arguing here? "Good thing the Patriots have a better coaching staff and their players rose to the occasion while the Seahawks made bad decisions and didn't execute." Yes, that's the difference between winning and losing. But I agree with you, it's a good thing the Seahawks couldn't capitalize on the Pats defense virtually handing them the game after Brady led two 4th qtr TD drives against the league's #1 defense. That they had to give it to Lynch. You can't say Brady was watching them line up at that point without the sickening feeling that the Seahawks would win it then and there. The narrative as to whether it was a stupid play or a brilliant play is completely dependent on the outcome. If the Seahawks had scored, not one person would be saying that it was a stupid play. They'd all be lamenting on how the clever Pete Carrol fooled Bill Belichick. If it truely was a stupid play, it would still be stupid, regardless of the outcome. That is clearly not the case here. |
|
|
|
Post by lordarvidthexiii on Feb 10, 2019 17:43:56 GMT
What is it you're arguing here? "Good thing the Patriots have a better coaching staff and their players rose to the occasion while the Seahawks made bad decisions and didn't execute." Yes, that's the difference between winning and losing. But I agree with you, it's a good thing the Seahawks couldn't capitalize on the Pats defense virtually handing them the game after Brady led two 4th qtr TD drives against the league's #1 defense. That they had to give it to Lynch. You can't say Brady was watching them line up at that point without the sickening feeling that the Seahawks would win it then and there. Its the end of a long season and a long game, Lynch is not going to be 100%. Running it 1st was a 1 shot chance. Passing it gave a chance for a second play and also less than 1 in 100 being intercepted. |
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Feb 10, 2019 17:47:11 GMT
This thread is further proof that Pats fans are idiots who know nothing about football. Because that was clearly the dumbest play call in Super Bowl history and only idiot Pats fans would defend that dumb play call. |
|
|
|
Post by lordarvidthexiii on Feb 10, 2019 17:56:14 GMT
This thread is further proof that Pats fans are idiots who know nothing about football. Because that was clearly the dumbest play call in Super Bowl history and only idiot Pats fans would defend that dumb play call. Poor little AH, you were so certain the defending defensive champions were going to win back to back SBs. |
|
|
|
Post by poutinep on Feb 10, 2019 18:01:22 GMT
I think you're trying to disagree with me but you actually supported what I said.
Lockette failing to brace for the hit is part of the poor execution of the play, and does not make the play a bad call.
I don't see stats for Lynch from the 1 outside that season and I don't feel like going through all his games' play-by-plays but the bottom line is giving him the ball at the 1 wasn't working that season.
If running Lynch up the middle on the 1 hasn't been working, and the other team also expects it, then what would make it a good call? Nothing. The slant pass didn't work, but it was statistically the better call.
|
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Feb 10, 2019 18:05:29 GMT
Super Bowl 52. Oh wait... ...they won the two Super Bowls around this one: 2/1/0 (two golds and one silver in three event) Note: No team has ever won the Super Bowl three times in a row. The Packers won three titles in a row ( twice ) And the Cleveland Browns won five straight. |
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Feb 10, 2019 18:09:07 GMT
...they won the two Super Bowls around this one: 2/1/0 (two golds and one silver in three event) Note: No team has ever won the Super Bowl three times in a row. The Packers won three titles in a row ( twice ) And the Cleveland Browns won five straight. That's correct. But Pats fans are always trying to pretend that other teams never achieved anything. That's why KKB tries to pretend that the Dolphins 17-0 season isn't the greatest and most revered season in NFL history. |
|
|
|
Post by lordarvidthexiii on Feb 10, 2019 18:17:31 GMT
The Packers won three titles in a row ( twice ) And the Cleveland Browns won five straight. That's correct. But Pats fans are always trying to pretend that other teams never achieved anything. That's why KKB tries to pretend tha the Dolphins 17-0 season isn't the greatest and most revered season in NFL history. So, they won 5 Super Bowls in a row? |
|
|
|
Post by poutinep on Feb 10, 2019 18:25:44 GMT
The Packers won three titles in a row ( twice ) And the Cleveland Browns won five straight. That's correct. But Pats fans are always trying to pretend that other teams never achieved anything. That's why KKB tries to pretend that the Dolphins 17-0 season isn't the greatest and most revered season in NFL history. Bluerisk said
No team has ever won the Super Bowl three times in a row.
And that is fucking true.
|
|
