The NFL Thread Part IV: Super Bowl Edition.

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hewson said:
But halfway through the commercial, a Troy Polamalu commercial for Head and Shoulders will interrupt, but the ref will review the Polamalu commercial, overturn it and put the Peyton ad back on.

I was actually enjoying my coffee thank you but now it is all over my computer as I just spit it out b/c of my erupting laughter.....


well worth it:wink:
 
Hewson said:
But halfway through the commercial, a Troy Polamalu commercial for Head and Shoulders will interrupt, but the ref will review the Polamalu commercial, overturn it and put the Peyton ad back on.

:lmao:
 
Hey Peyton I have a question? Why in God's name did you win the Walter Peyton NFL player of the year award? I just can't figure it out.
 
How's the golf course? I heard you were gonna play with Tom but he had to leave to go toss the coin. Oh well-see you both next year!
 
So, I'm still not leaning toward either team. At least I have Tom Brady and the coin toss to look forward to. Bring on the commericals, beer and random betting.
Even the trash talk this week was boring.

What is it, 13 days until pitchers and catchers report? oops, wrong thread.
 
The Hall of Fame class was interesting.

I think Aikman is the modern day Bradshaw, a better than average, capable QB who won titles.

He's not better than Esiason or Simms, IMO.

Yet Warren Moon gets elected. WHat a bogus election.
Anyone who is my age and has watched at least 20 years of NFL football would list 10 QB's before they got to Moon.

He was good, if not really good, hall of fame??? Give me a break.

Art Monk was the all-time leader in receptions and TD's, I think when he retired, he's not in. C'mon, where is PHil Simms??? Where is Joe Theisman?? Boomer Esiason??

Stallworth is not in.
Swann took umpteen years to get in.
But Moon gets in, rather easily as compared to Harry Carson, who was an absolute stud???

Moon is not a Hall of Famer, if tossing for 10 million yards makes you a hall of famer, then make room for Testaverde and Dave Krieg. What a joke. In fact Krieg and Testaverde played for HORRIBLE teams, maybe they should geta free pass as well.

That said, Aikman, okay.....Reggie White of course, Harry Carson, hell yes, Madden gets in because of personality, he won 100 games as a NFL head coach and one Super Bowl, ho-hum, I guess that makes Shanahan and Holmgren a lock. At least he had to wait 25 fuckign years. Warren Moon, give me a break.

Sorry, that's just absurd. The Oilers lost a 35-7 lead in the playoffs, he may have won 5 playoff games his whole career. But he played in the CFL!!! C'mon.!!!!!!!!

Rayfiled Wright, I'll defer to the older vet committee on this one.

Derrick thomas? Michael Irvin? Thurman Thomas.

Several great candidates passed over for Moon.

Also LC Greenwood. And others who didn't become finalists.
 
Warren Moon getting elected to the Football Hall of Fame is like Michael Jordan getting into Cooperstown.

Good in another league, but in this one... :yuck:
 
Before gametime, I'm going to offer my honest opinion.

Pittsburgh is a sixth seed who barely made it in. They were very lucky, they PEAKED at the right time. I will NEVER believe they are better than the Colts, or the Bengals or the Broncos, or even the Chiefs (or even the Patriots). And they are certainly not better than the Seahawks man for man. Pittsburgh WAS on a roll, but that roll is now over. You know what time off can do to cool down a team's hot streak (see Colts) and I don't think you're going to see the same team today that you saw in the playoffs.

Seahawks 27, Steelers 14
 
Well, I don't agree with your point of them cooling down because of time off, because Seattle has the same amount of time to wait as well, and I'd say they are peaking at the right time also. It's not luck - you want to peak now. That's the whole point. The Colts peaked too early, and it cost them. The Steelers peaked at the right time, and deserve to be there.

That being said, I'm still going with Seattle in an upset. So I agree with you there.
 
But the difference is, Seattle was solidly good anyway, while Pittsburgh's success was due to a hot streak that kicked in at the right time. They played above their heads. That was what was responsible for their run more than their actual talent. Take that away and Seattle is the better team. They will win, unless they commit a lot of stupid mistakes.
 
Actually, Pittsburgh was solid for most of the year. They had a bad stretch in the middle when Big Ben was hurt, and the only reason they were a #6 seed was because the AFC was much tougher than the NFC. I don't think they've played above their heads at all - they were in the AFC championship game last year. They certainly are talented.
 
Alright I just went for Seattle and the under after finding out Dad went to Vegas. So I am hoping for a couple of filed goals and a lot of choking by both QBs:wink:

Just for the record I hate it when the PAts are not in the Superbowl...God am I bored this year!!
 
I have to go with the known quantity here -- Pittsburgh has beaten great teams this season, while Seattle hasn't.

I see Hasslebeck having one of those 22-for-40, 230 yards, 0 or 1 TD-type games because his receivers can't get open for good yards against Pittsburgh.

Pittsburgh 20, Seattle 17.
 
Last edited:
DaveC said:


Have you watched football at all this year...? :eyebrow:

Don't mock me---lol. I've watched every Seahawks game. Grew up with them and am a huge fan. Maybe, I'm biased, but I doubt it.

If Seattle avoids special teams blunders, they win handily. They match-up too well with the Steelers. I think they'll handle Pitts. defensive tricks because they've had 2 weeks to prepare for them and have an experienced offense that's been together awhile now.

Also, Seattle's defense will surprise again. Like they did vs. Carolina. Pitt. thinks they'll be able to run on an undersized defense. They'll be wrong. I predict that Pitt. will revert to form in this game and try to out-tough Seattle. Big Mistake!!

Pitt. is a fastball-curveball team. They've gotten hot on offense by starting off games with curveballs (play-action, counter-action and trick plays). To their credit, they've become a little more unpredictable in that sense. This game will be different because they can't take a 'nothing-to-lose' approach that they've been riding for awhile. There's alot to lose here and that will make Pitt. revert back to their more predictable and safe form.
 
U2DMfan said:

I think Aikman is the modern day Bradshaw, a better than average, capable QB who won titles.

He's not better than Esiason or Simms, IMO.


Aikman is superior to those guys. Being the leader of one of the top 3 teams of the last 20 years is nothing to scoff at. Sure, he had better guys around him, but having better guys demands that you step up big and Aikman did that hands down.

Simms did, too. It's just that because of injuries he didn't show it enough to be part of a dynasty like Aikman did. So Simms comes up short in this comparison. I also think Aikman was superior to Simms and Esiason just on raw ablilty. Aikman was more able to tailor his game to fit an elite team than those two were.
 
U2DMfan said:
The Hall of Fame class was interesting.

I think Aikman is the modern day Bradshaw, a better than average, capable QB who won titles.

He's not better than Esiason or Simms, IMO.

The QB position is the most important in football. If you win three Super Bowl titles, you deserve to be there, and you sure as hell are a better than average quarterback.

Esiasion and Simms? Yeah, they were good QBs, but the same as Aikman? I don't think so. Simms won one, yes (and was part of another although Hostetler was the QB), and perhaps he'll be in one day, but Esiason? Sorry, I don't agree. And this is coming from someone who never cared for Aikman.

It's the same argument being made about Brady today. The guy has won three Super Bowls, but doesn't always have the flashy stats that someone like Manning has.

I'll take Brady and Aikman with their three SB wins over guys with good stats but choke when it counts the most.
 
I'm suffering from an overdose of Polamalu. He's a great player, but cut his hair and he's no better than Ed Reed, Roy Williams, or Darren Sharper.
 
U2Kitten said:
But the difference is, Seattle was solidly good anyway, while Pittsburgh's success was due to a hot streak that kicked in at the right time. They played above their heads. That was what was responsible for their run more than their actual talent. Take that away and Seattle is the better team. They will win, unless they commit a lot of stupid mistakes.

the differnce is that the colts are a bunch of pussies. they by far have the most talent in the NFL, but they're a bunch of whiney little bitches.

pittsburgh doesn't have the talent that indy has, but they have the one thing that indianapolis is missing... toughness. if peyton manning didn't shit his pants every time a blitz came his way and actually stood in the pocket, took the hit and just made the pass, maybe the colts would be playing right now.

and none of what i wrote above is be "picking on you."

that you're selling pittsburgh short is making me want to switch my pick and go with the steelers again.

now that was me picking on you. neener neener neener.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom