Top Flops? Writers predicting Patriots & Cowboys losses

scooterp7 · Joined: 10 Jan 2008 Posts: 21

Yeah, but c'mon, prolific offense when 9 out of the 16 games were
against .500 or less (2 games against .16 record) teams. Meh.

> Right. At least until people ask about the most prolific offense of all
> time.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Archived from group: alt>sports>football>pro>dallas-cowboys

Chris · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 36

> >Jaguars Will Win
> >
>
> It depends upon how much video Belicheat has in his office closet on the Jags.
> It's hard not to win when you know the plays and signals of your opponent.

Earl, is that you?
You need a checkup
from your neckup.
Still, Love ya blue.

What will you say?
When the Jags burn out
and then fade away.
Boo, damn those louts!

Go Colts go!
Beat those cheats!
They'll lose too,
Despite great feats.

Pats fans are calm.
Cry Earl, If you must
For we have Tom.
and "In Bill we trust"

MZ · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 199

"who'sthat" wrote in message @4ax.com...
> On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 17:47:26 -0500, "MZ" wrote:
>
>>"who'sthat" wrote in message
>>@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 13:57:53 -0600, "observer"
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>---
>>>>Top Flops?
>>>> http://assets.espn.go.com/photo/2008/0109/nfl_brady_romo_war_top.jpg
>>>>---
>>>>
>>>>---
>>>>Jaguars Will Win
>>>>
>>>>ESPN, Jeremy Green
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/ywfhv3
>>>>---
>>>>
>>>>---
>>>>Giants Will Win
>>>>
>>>>ESPN, Seth Wickersham
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/2bkohp
>>>>---
>>>>
>>> If the Pats lost what would the 2007 Pats be remembered for? The 4th
>>> team in history to go undefeated in the regular season. And they
>>> cheated.
>>> When you look at it they really haven't accomplished much yet.
>>
>>That's true. Aside from most reg season wins; only one of four teams to
>>go
>>undefeated in the reg season; points scored record; point differential
>>record; most passing TDs; most receiving TDs by a single player; and a
>>variety of other individual records. But none of those will be
>>remembered.
>>
> Agreed. All that will be said is 16-0 and out. And cheated.

Right. At least until people ask about the most prolific offense of all
time.

observer · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 196

wrote ...

> Yeah, but c'mon, prolific offense when 9 out of the 16 games were
> against .500 or less (2 games against .16 record) teams. Meh.

>> Right. At least until people ask about the most prolific offense of all
>> time.

Generally speaking, playoff teams and
easier schedules go hand-in-hand, but
there were -4- exceptions to that rule
in 2007:

Playoff Teams Schedule Difficulty

Washington 9 7 .563 .555 142-114 (2)
Indianapolis 13 3 .813 .516 132-124 ( Cool

Jacksonville 11 5 .688 .516 132-124 ( Cool

NY Giants 10 6 .625 .516 132-124 ( Cool

San Diego 11 5 .688 .500 128-128 (20)
Tennessee 10 6 .625 .500 128-128 (20)
Dallas 13 3 .813 .496 127-129 (22)
New England 16 0 1.000 .469 120-136 (24)
Green Bay 13 3 .813 .469 120-136 (24)
Tampa Bay 9 7 .563 .469 120-136 (24)
Pittsburgh 10 6 .625 .453 116-140 (29)
Seattle 10 6 .625 .414 106-150 (32)

For the record, 3 teams with easier schedules
were knocked out of the playoffs in the wild
card round, only 2 surviving. 2 of the 3 wild
card teams with tougher schedules survived
the wild card round, only 1 knocked out.

---

Reference:

NFL Tentative Draft Order
http://tinyurl.com/2sxp6x

---

Cobb · Joined: 28 Sep 2007 Posts: 56

"observer" wrote in message $0$3410$a82e2bb9@reader.athenanews.com...
>
> ---
> Top Flops?
> http://assets.espn.go.com/photo/2008/0109/nfl_brady_romo_war_top.jpg
> ---
>
> ---
> Jaguars Will Win
>
> ESPN, Jeremy Green
> http://tinyurl.com/ywfhv3
> ---
>
> ---
> Giants Will Win
>
> ESPN, Seth Wickersham
> http://tinyurl.com/2bkohp
> ---
>
>
Wrong twice. But that's ESPN.

who'sthat · Joined: 17 Nov 2007 Posts: 208

On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 23:33:01 -0500, "MZ" wrote:

>"who'sthat" wrote in message
>@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 17:47:26 -0500, "MZ" wrote:
>>
>>>"who'sthat" wrote in message
>>>@4ax.com...
>>>> On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 13:57:53 -0600, "observer"
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>---
>>>>>Top Flops?
>>>>> http://assets.espn.go.com/photo/2008/0109/nfl_brady_romo_war_top.jpg
>>>>>---
>>>>>
>>>>>---
>>>>>Jaguars Will Win
>>>>>
>>>>>ESPN, Jeremy Green
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/ywfhv3
>>>>>---
>>>>>
>>>>>---
>>>>>Giants Will Win
>>>>>
>>>>>ESPN, Seth Wickersham
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/2bkohp
>>>>>---
>>>>>
>>>> If the Pats lost what would the 2007 Pats be remembered for? The 4th
>>>> team in history to go undefeated in the regular season. And they
>>>> cheated.
>>>> When you look at it they really haven't accomplished much yet.
>>>
>>>That's true. Aside from most reg season wins; only one of four teams to
>>>go
>>>undefeated in the reg season; points scored record; point differential
>>>record; most passing TDs; most receiving TDs by a single player; and a
>>>variety of other individual records. But none of those will be
>>>remembered.
>>>
>> Agreed. All that will be said is 16-0 and out. And cheated.
>
>Right. At least until people ask about the most prolific offense of all
>time.
>
It will mean nothing if they don't win the Superbowl.

scooterp7 · Joined: 10 Jan 2008 Posts: 21

> If the Pats had to play against the Steel Curtain defenses of the 70s with the older rules, they mightn't score
> nearly so many points.

Without question. Brady wouldn't have near the time in the pocket
against the likes of Mean Joe Greene, L.C. Greenwood, Jack Lambert,
Dwight White , Jack Ham, Mel Blount, etc.....

Wipe the floor? Fanboy comments cannot be taken seriously.

And again, "total points''? Against Girl Scouts like the Dolphins does
not impress me one wit. Another years schedule would have almost
certainly yeilded less "total points" (unless they drew the Dolphins
for 16 games in a row).

scooterp7 · Joined: 10 Jan 2008 Posts: 21

On Jan 10, 9:34 am, "MZ" Woke up his single brain
cell that had already been put on waivers and belched,>
>
"The Pats feat is more impressive, wouldn't you say?"- Hide quoted
text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Total points against an AMALGAM OF DEFENSIVE WEENIES. Yeah, something
to feel all gushy about. Like stealing candy from a baby.

MZ · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 199

wrote in message @z17g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>Yeah, but c'mon, prolific offense when 9 out of the 16 games were
>against .500 or less (2 games against .16 record) teams. Meh.

No different than any other era.

scooterp7 · Joined: 10 Jan 2008 Posts: 21

On Jan 10, 9:46 am, "MZ" wrote:

>
> There were 31 other teams that apparently didn't feel that stealing candy
> from a baby was very easy.

Not sure I'm getting yer point. My point is the freakin easy,
fortuidous 2007 schedule of the pats which without doubt attributed to
those "total points". I'm pretty sure ( and I may be wrong ) that the
Colts had a tougher schedule.

scooterp7 · Joined: 10 Jan 2008 Posts: 21

On Jan 10, 10:08 am, "MZ" wrote:

> And I'm not sure what the Colts have to do with any of it. But, no, the
> Colts did not have a better strength of schedule in the games they won.

My perspective was aroused by the suggetion that because of "total
points", the Pats were therefore, somehow, the best team in NFL
history. That doesn't even pass the giggle test. They may be among the
best, but that is all. For this year (operative words being, "this
year") they have proved to be the most formidable, possibly (the other
AFC East teams have struggled for years) and the team to beat. But on
the NFC there is no counter to the AFC stallwarts especially the Pats.
Still, in my book, they are not the all time best and they had better
win the Super Bowl to keep any crediblity they have generated thus
far, or it truly, regardless of what some may hope, will all be in
vain.

scooterp7 · Joined: 10 Jan 2008 Posts: 21

On Jan 10, 10:47 am, "MZ" wrote:
> wrote in message
>
> @m34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > My perspective was aroused by the suggetion that because of "total
> > points", the Pats were therefore, somehow, the best team in NFL
> > history.
>
> That suggestion was made only in your mind, then. I said they were the most
> prolific offense.

I'm not sure who suggested it, but it was posited. Maybe by the same
fanboy who farted the remark that the patriots would wipe the floor
with any and/or all of the past teams of renown.

scooterp7 · Joined: 10 Jan 2008 Posts: 21

On Jan 10, 10:52 am, je.s.t...@hehxduhmp.org wrote:

>
> BTW, why are your Newsgroups and Followup-to headers always borked?

Selective editing? Maybe, not sure.

scooterp7 · Joined: 10 Jan 2008 Posts: 21

On Jan 10, 11:15 am, je.s.t...@hehxduhmp.org wrote:
> In alt.sports.football.pro.ne-patriots scoote...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> BTW, why are your Newsgroups and Followup-to headers always borked?
> > Selective editing? Maybe, not sure.
>
> FYI, you're not supposed to have spaces (or tabs, which you're also
> seemingly using) after the commas.

It's just a writing style originating in the '70's by Chicago Bear
Dick Butkus.

riggodeezil · Joined: 06 Aug 2007 Posts: 20

On Jan 9, 2:57 pm, "observer" wrote:
> ---
> Top Flops?
> http://assets.espn.go.com/photo/2008/0109/nfl_brady_romo_war_top.jpg
> ---
>
> ---
> Jaguars Will Win
>
> ESPN, Jeremy Green
> http://tinyurl.com/ywfhv3
> ---
>
> ---
> Giants Will Win
>
> ESPN, Seth Wickersham
> http://tinyurl.com/2bkohp
> ---

An excellent, spot-on analysis by Seth Wickersham. Dallas will be
lucky to get an offensive touchdown. Too many injuries + no running
game + weak pass defense. It's over...