Too bad they moved the Pro Bowl to the week before the Super Bowl. That could have been our playoff. On 2nd thought, that's a bad idea, because then I may feel compelled to watch part of that awful event.Ockeghem said:Scott, I got the game wrong, and was also 7-4 in my playoff predictions. This means, of course, that you and I need to have a playoff.
Yes, that Welker dropped pass ultimately doomed the Pats. New England needed another 1-2 first downs to bleed the clock with the Giants only having one timeout. Giving Manning 3:45 left made the timeout situation irrelevant. It was interesting watching Bradshaw have his "oh sh*t" moment when he realized he shouldn't be scoring, but couldn't stop himself. Had New England come back, he would have been one of the biggest goats in Super Bowl history.
Scott, I read this morning that doing away with the Pro Bowl is something Goodell may consider. I can't live without my Pro Bowl.Scott Merryfield said:Too bad they moved the Pro Bowl to the week before the Super Bowl. That could have been our playoff. On 2nd thought, that's a bad idea, because then I may feel compelled to watch part of that awful event.
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7542806/nfl-commissioner-roger-goodell-says-ceasing-pro-bowl-consideration
Not that this matters much, but I wonder how many people would look at the Giants - Patriots final score (21-17) and think that the Giants scored three touchdowns, and New England two (and a field goal)? LOL. In years to come, I doubt too many will think that the twenty-one points that were scored by New York were the result of a safety, touchdown and P.A.T., two field goals, and a touchdown with a missed two-point conversion.
Yeah, he's gotta be thinking that. Both wins were greatly aided by unlikely catches, amongst other things. And being just human, we tend to want what we don't have, regardless of how much we do have. Jeez, if he had 5 SB wins, could anyone say he isn't the best QB ever? And yet the difference between the 5 and 3 is so small. I was listening to Rodney Harrison commenting on either espn or nfl channel saying that he would rather have Eli in the clutch instead of Brady...Ouch!Ockeghem said:
Wasn't Rodney the guy draped over Tyree during that helmet-catch? Had Rodney knocked the ball out, he'd also have another Super Bowl ring (assuming he won one or more early in the 2000s).Johnny Angell said:
I do not think so, but if it was, what would they have to whine about? The Giants beat them fair and square. There was no controversial call that went against the Pats. They did not have a healthy Gronkowski, who really shouldn't have even been out there, but every team has to deal with injuries. The Giants got the lucky bounces on their two fumbles, but that is just part of the game. In the end, New York made the plays they needed to at critical moments, while New England did not.RobertR said:
What about Branch?Ockeghem said:
Scott, Yes, Branch was there as well, and as you know, eventually traded. Then he was re-signed by New England. He has two Super Bowl rings with the Patriots.Scott Merryfield said:
A certain percentage of every NFL team turns over every year, so it depends on how you want to define it. It's the same ownership, head coach, QB, and a few other players that have been part of five Super Bowl trips, a 16-0 regular season, and three SB wins. Personally, I think the Pats era changes over when either Bellichick or Brady leave, but that's just one person's interpretation. I fully recognize that this season's SB loser looks vastly different than the first SB winner from the Bellichick/Brady era.Patrick_S said:
