Letters to the Editor
-
Giants in SB
As a Pack fan, I take my hat off to the Giants. They proved yesterday they wanted the game more than the Packers - and also demonstrated it. The Giants I saw yesterday were vastly improved over the team the Pack beat 35-13 some months ago. And significantly better than the team that lost to the Pats in the last week of the regular season.
The G-men now have a terrific running game, and a standout receiver (Plaxico Burress) on a par with Randy Moss. Their defense is lights out, and plays with an intensity I've not seen since the 2000 Ravens.
It is therefore more than feasible they could beat the Patriots - especially seeing how the Pats sputtered yesterday against a battered San Diego team.
I predict:
Giants 24 Patriots 21
-
"take my hat off to them"
Anyone notice this idiom gaining an extraordinary amount of traction in the cliche-ridden post game interviews this NFL season?
-
Is LT out?
What do you think King, Tomlinson said it wasn't his decision. This seems eerily reminiscent of the way they handled the Drew Brees situation, clouded by a rumored shoulder injury. He had a breakout year with the Saints the following season, no arm problems whatsoever. There is no mistaking the way LT has been made the oddman out in the Norv Turner offense. AJ Smith is not adverse to trading high profile players, or coaches. I say LT never carries the ball again, in a Chargers uniform. The team is probably looking for some draft picks, most likely linebackers. No idea who is interested, but the Giants come to mind.
-
Winningest winners ever?
That would be the the Cleveland Browns who went 29-0-2 from week 8 of the 1947 season through week six of 1949. That span included two championships and 15-0 mark in 1948.
And, yes, I've heard that supposedly those stats do not officially count. But if a Browns fan can't dial it back sixty years every now and then, well, life would be bleak indeed.
-
That's why we make them play the games
The amusing thing about the Pats this ENTIRE season, well, almost the entire season (really just starting with the Patriots-Eagles match-up) is how longingly all the anti-Pats football fans speak of how good the chances are of all the Pats opponents. I suspect that King, who often took the Pats as his "what the heck" pick of the week to LOSE, is in this camp, even though he is always careful to add the disclaimer about their amazing abilities. These anti Pats folks so badly want the Pats to lose, that they look for the possibilities, and cling to them. We had the surprising Jags last week, who were going to beat the Pats up (but then were quite befuddled) -- then the poor Chargers, who despite all their injuries, were going to get the job done (but then, um, didn't). There's no question the Giants *can* get beat the Pats. But will they? Someone on the always wonderful coldhardfootballfacts.com site suggested this hilarious catch phrase for the upcoming Super Bowl: The team that could against the team that will. That probably sums it up. But as the cliche title of this posting says, that's why they make them play the games!! I'm a Pats fan, so I say, go Pats! But I know that a huge portion of America, probably most, will be pulling for the Giants, as they see the Pats as the evil empire. We shall see!
-
This is what I hate
I would be happy to see a Giants-Patriots Super Bowl if they hadn't played this season -- and the last game of the year for heaven's sake.
As I keep saying -- I hate inter-conference season play. A lot of the good old days wasn't good -- but keeping the conferences (or leagues) apart until the big game -- that's a good idea.
-
I do not think it means what you think it means
What does it mean to prove something and also demonstrate it? I think you might want to look those words up.
-
hell done froze over
"Might that most pain-inducing of duties have been handled with more aplomb with the thermometer resting comfortably at 72?"
Duties would have been handled better at 32.
I just survived a blistering cold weekend of 4 on Saturday and 10 on Sunday. Not sure of windchill but surely minus double digits. Quite frankly, I couldn't bring myself to learn the awful truth. Ignorance is bliss, I guess. You chill to the bone and exposed body parts start to hurt after 30 seconds. The AIR hurts your body.
How bad did it suck for those guys to have come back out after half time? Or go into ovetime? Talk about earning that paycheck!
-
maybe a super Super Bowl this time?
I admit I've always thought as Ohmygoodness does; I just don't like the inter-conf games during the season. But this year, I have to say I'm glad it happens--that Pats v Giants game was maybe the best game I've watched in a long long time. wow.
I wouldn't be surprised if this Super Bowl turns out to be a really great game, going down to the last few minutes in tension. we'll see.
-
Dude!
But it must have had an effect. Who knows which throws would have been more accurate, which snaps would have been better, which tackles would have been more sure. As the game wore on, neither team was able to cover kickoffs with anything like NFL efficiency. Might that most pain-inducing of duties have been handled with more aplomb with the thermometer resting comfortably at 72?
It was frikkin' cold enough that the commentators on the sidelines (including & especially Howie Long) couldn't even frikkin' talk! That's how cold it was.
Yeah.
It had an effect.
-
Where's the asterisk?
So if Barry Bonds gets an asterisk for cheating, why doesn't the Pats "perfect" season get one for cheating? Sure, they decided not to make them forfeit that game - but they did cheat, and kinda-sorta admitted it.
Personally I can't wait for the Super Bowl to be over, so maybe possibly we can get back to some sports coverage...
-
Been there, done that
"Super" Bowl? This game is a rerun. We saw it three weeks ago.
Just one more reason why interconference or interleague play is a bad idea.
-
Browns
The Browns were in the AAFC when they went on that streak, so those wins came against the likes of the Chicago Rockets, Miami Seahawks, and Los Angeles Dons. Perhaps that's why those stats don't count.
And the Pats, for that matter, haven't yet matched their own record of 21 straight wins in 2003-04.