|
|
Post by anthonyrocks on Sept 24, 2019 6:29:29 GMT
For all of the People Here that watched "SUPERBOWL 42" when it happened, What was your First Reaction to it when it was over ?
|
|
|
|
Post by NJtoTX on Sept 24, 2019 10:39:01 GMT
Exhilaration.
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Sept 24, 2019 14:34:22 GMT
Greatest Super Bowl game ever!
|
|
|
|
Post by Xcalatë on Sept 24, 2019 15:16:42 GMT
As a Giants fan that game was Orgasmic.
|
|
|
|
Post by hoskotafe3 on Sept 24, 2019 18:00:14 GMT
I didn't watch the game (it was on Monday at about 11am in Oz so I was working) so my first reaction was "what...sorry...what?" Followed quickly by "lol." It was put into perspective later that year when Geelong had a record equalling 21-1 regular season in the AFL and then lost the Grand Final to Hawthorn. These things happen from time to time.
|
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Sept 24, 2019 18:03:35 GMT
I didn't watch the game (it was on Monday at about 11am in Oz so I was working) so my first reaction was "what...sorry...what?" Followed quickly by "lol." It was put into perspective later that year when Geelong had a record equalling 21-1 regular season in the AFL and then lost the Grand Final to Hawthorn. These things happen from time to time. They happen from time to time, but for both of those to happen in the same year has to be unusual. |
|
GiantFan1980
Junior Member
@scifi1980
Posts: 3,451
Likes: 4,513
|
Post by GiantFan1980 on Sept 24, 2019 19:02:22 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Sept 24, 2019 20:01:28 GMT
I didn't watch the game (it was on Monday at about 11am in Oz so I was working) so my first reaction was "what...sorry...what?" Followed quickly by "lol." It was put into perspective later that year when Geelong had a record equalling 21-1 regular season in the AFL and then lost the Grand Final to Hawthorn. These things happen from time to time. Going 21-1 in the regular season and then losing the Grand Final isn't as bad as going 16*-0 in the regular season and losing the Super Bowl. If you went 21-1, that means someone beat you so you weren't invincible. If you went 16*-0 (and won those 16 games by 19.7 ppg), which has never been done in the NFL before, then no one beat you and you're supposed to be invincible. And when you're supposed to be invincible and you're a double-digit favorite over a team that you already beat on that team's home field and you lose, that's an epic choke job and epic underachievement.
|
|
|
|
Post by hoskotafe3 on Sept 24, 2019 20:31:32 GMT
Only two teams have ever gone 21-1 in an AFL season, which is exactly as many as have gone undefeated in an NFL regular season. Both are the best records ever in their sports. The two are directly comparable.
To the one who said it was bizarre that both happened in the same year: 2016 was a lot weirder. Western Bulldogs (62 years) Cronulla (54), Cleveland (50), Leicester City (125+) and Chi Cubs (108) all ending massive title droughts.
|
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Sept 24, 2019 23:08:54 GMT
From what I can recall (it was a long time ago), I was disappointed but not surprised.
After all, in the divisional round the Giants bitch-slapped what was arguably the most talented team in NFL history, the 2007 Dallas Cowboys. In the Cowboys own house. Squashing their one and only real hope, over the last 20+ years, to at least make to the big show.
After humiliating the Cowboys and their overconfident fans with a one and done, they then beat the #1 Green Bay Packers.
The writing was clearly on the wall, for anyone smart enough to see it.
It's a true testimony to the Patriots long term greatness. Most teams fold after losing a Super Bowl. They become a shell of their formed selves, languishing in a funk of remorse and self-pity. It can take some of these teams a decade to recover. The Patriots, on the other hand, pick themselves up and soldier on ... their loses give them strength ... which has ultimately lead us to the current Golden Age of the New England Patriots. Five years ... four Conference Championships ... three World Championships ... and a pretty good shot at another one. Without the loss of 42 to fuel the fire, we may never have had 49, the unforgettable 51 and 53.
|
|
GiantFan1980
Junior Member
@scifi1980
Posts: 3,451
Likes: 4,513
|
Post by GiantFan1980 on Sept 24, 2019 23:46:24 GMT
I think the Giants also benefited from playing New England in week 17 of the regular season. Giants were winning until the Patriots came from behind to win, but it must of been a great advantage to Ny because they just played this team not even 2 months earlier so the Giants coaches and player could sit down and say "Okay, we almost beat the undefeated Patriots, now what do we have to tweak to win???" I still remember the shit show that game created because the NFL was trying to make it an exclusive on the NFL Network to get people to sign up for it and people universally bitched them out until they put it on regular cable TV.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Sept 25, 2019 12:39:27 GMT
From what I can recall (it was a long time ago), I was disappointed but not surprised. After all, in the divisional round the Giants bitch-slapped what was arguably the most talented team in NFL history, the 2007 Dallas Cowboys. In the Cowboys own house. Squashing their one and only real hope, over the last 20+ years, to at least make to the big show. After humiliating the Cowboys and their overconfident fans with a one and done, they then beat the #1 Green Bay Packers. The writing was clearly on the wall, for anyone smart enough to see it. It's a true testimony to the Patriots long term greatness. Most teams fold after losing a Super Bowl. They become a shell of their formed selves, languishing in a funk of remorse and self-pity. It can take some of these teams a decade to recover. The Patriots, on the other hand, pick themselves up and soldier on ... their loses give them strength ... which has ultimately lead us to the current Golden Age of the New England Patriots. Five years ... four Conference Championships ... three World Championships ... and a pretty good shot at another one. Without the loss of 42 to fuel the fire, we may never have had 49, the unforgettable 51 and 53. Yeah I was worried about this one. The Giants had played them tough in week 17 and were on a hell of a hot streak while the Pats had really lost momentum down the stretch and didn't look great against the Chargers. Then there was this. I still expected the Pats to win, but I knew it was going to be a tough game. It was a choke job for sure, but you still have to give the Giants credit for outplaying them. They were really on a roll, it's not like this happened out of nowhere, in context. I don't have words to describe my feeling immediately after the game, but I agree that in retrospect maybe losing that game is what made their second dynasty run here possible. As a fan you have to look ta that season as a failure, yet you also have to count it as yet another incredible feat by this team. A 16-0 regular season, four 14-2 seasons (including 2 back to back and a 21 game winning streak, which resulted in championships), a couple of 13-3 seasons and five 12-4 seasons. Hell they've even won the Super Bowl twice when they went 11-5 during the regular season. They haven't won less than 10 games since 2002-- and they went an entire season with a backup QB in 2008. Thirteen AFC championship appearances (including 8 consecutive) in the Brady/BB era, nine Super Bowl appearances, six championships, yadda yadda yadda. Hey, I'm always going to see Super Bowl 42 as an embarrassment, but it's the kind of blemish I can accept when it comes with the rest of the story.
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Sept 25, 2019 14:55:14 GMT
Only two teams have ever gone 21-1 in an AFL season, which is exactly as many as have gone undefeated in an NFL regular season. Both are the best records ever in their sports. Nevertheless, a 21-1 regular season does mean that someone beat you and you weren't invincible. A 16*-0 regular season means that no one beat you so you're supposed to be invincible. It's like the difference between pitching a 1-hitter vs pitching a no-hitter or perfect game. Pitching a 1-hitter is a great game, but still someone got a hit off you so it doesn't have the same luster as pitching no-hitter or a perfect game.
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Sept 25, 2019 14:58:42 GMT
From what I can recall (it was a long time ago), I was disappointed but not surprised. After all, in the divisional round the Giants bitch-slapped what was arguably the most talented team in NFL history, the 2007 Dallas Cowboys. The 2007 Cowboys weren't even the most talented Cowboys team. The 1995 Super Bowl champion Cowboys had 5 Hall-of-Famers: Emmitt Smith, Troy Aikman, Michael Irvin, Charles Haley, Deion Sanders.
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Sept 25, 2019 15:07:48 GMT
I think the Giants also benefited from playing New England in week 17 of the regular season. Giants were winning until the Patriots came from behind to win, but it must of been a great advantage to Ny because they just played this team not even 2 months earlier so the Giants coaches and player could sit down and say "Okay, we almost beat the undefeated Patriots, now what do we have to tweak to win???" It could've also worked against the Giants. The Giants could've said "We just played our best game of the season, gave it our best shot, and they still beat us on our home field. Can they even be beaten? If we can't beat them on our own home field when we played our best game of the season, then how can we expect a different result next time?"
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Sept 25, 2019 15:14:15 GMT
You're using injury as an excuse for Brady and the Pats epic choke job and epic underachievement in SB 42, while conveniently ignoring the fact that Kurt Warner played SB36 with an injured thumb on his throwing hand and conveniently ignoring the fact that Todd Gurley wasn't 100% healthy near the end of last season? Such hypocrisy! After 16 games and 2 or 3 postseason games, no team goes into the Super Bowl 100% healthy. Emmitt Smith went into Super Bowl XXVIII with an injured shoulder and still rushed for 132 yards and 2 TDs and won the Super Bowl MVP. So you're saying that Shady Brady was too much of a wimp to be able to win the biggest game of his life with a bad foot?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Sept 25, 2019 15:20:42 GMT
You're using injury as an excuse for Brady and the Pats epic coke job and epic underachievement in SB 42, while conveniently ignoring the fact that Kurt Warner played SB36 with an injured thumb on his throwing hand and conveniently ignoring the fact that Todd Gurley wasn't 100% healthy near the end of last season? Such hypocrisy! After 16 games and 2 or 3 postseason games, no team goes into the Super Bowl 100% healthy. Emmitt Smith went into Super Bowl XXVIII with an injured shoulder and still rushed for 132 yards and 2 TDs and won the Super Bowl MVP. So you're saying that Shady Brady was too much of a wimp to be able to win the biggest game of his life with a bad foot? I'm not using injury as an excuse, dipshit. I said it was a reason I was concerned going into the game. I already said the Patriots choked and the Giants outplayed them you dumb fuck.
|
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Sept 26, 2019 0:17:06 GMT
From what I can recall (it was a long time ago), I was disappointed but not surprised. After all, in the divisional round the Giants bitch-slapped what was arguably the most talented team in NFL history, the 2007 Dallas Cowboys. The 2007 Cowboys weren't even the most talented Cowboys team. The 1995 Super Bowl champion Cowboys had 5 Hall-of-Famers: Emmitt Smith, Troy Aikman, Michael Irvin, Charles Haley, Deion Sanders. 1995 Cowboys, 10 pro-bowl players. The one and done 2007 Cowboys, 13 pro-bowl players. An NFL record. What a player did over an entire career in order to qualify for the hall of fame is immaterial to the season in question, so your argument has little merit. When it comes to choking, it's hard to beat the 2007 Cowboy! ... who accomplished absolutely nothing that season ... losing to a team they beat twice during the regular season.
|
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Sept 26, 2019 0:38:04 GMT
The 2007 Cowboys weren't even the most talented Cowboys team. The 1995 Super Bowl champion Cowboys had 5 Hall-of-Famers: Emmitt Smith, Troy Aikman, Michael Irvin, Charles Haley, Deion Sanders. 1995 Cowboys, 10 pro-bowl players. The one and done 2007 Cowboys, 13 pro-bowl players. An NFL record. What a player did over an entire career in order to qualify for the hall of fame is immaterial to the season in question, so your argument has little merit. The debate is about talent and being a Pro Bowler is immaterial so your argument has NO merit. Rich Gannon, who threw 5 picks in a Super Bowl and who isn't on anyone's list of top QBs of all time, was a 4-time Pro Bowler but only a stupid idiot like you would argue that Rich Gannon was as good as a Hall of Fame QB. Any player can have a good season and make the Pro Bowl. But making the Hall of Fame requires a career of great seasons, and that requires talent. And the 1995 Cowboys, with 5 Hall of Famers, was definitely the most talented Cowboys team ever. And that's why they won their 3rd Super Bowl in 4 years, all by double-digit margins.
|
|
|
|
Post by millar70 on Sept 26, 2019 1:30:21 GMT
Who was in Super Bowl 42? I forget.....
|
|
