Qwiz Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 They will have gone through Manning (though that's not saying much in the postseason) and Brady in consecutive years. They are going to be paying Wilson, but Carroll did a superb job finding defensive players for cheap before, so who says he can't strike again? I don't think I would say dynasty yet, unless they manage to make it to the Super Bowl in 2016 as well. Then we can talk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OffensivelyPC Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 Nobody refers to the 98-99 Broncos as a dynasty. I agree with the 3 in 5 year standard and it is a pretty good rule IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OffensivelyPC Posted January 23, 2015 Share Posted January 23, 2015 Wilson being praised for a 4 int game because of 1 throw in OT is a bit amusing thoughI never understood that one myself, either. I've heard/seen a few talking heads talk about how he makes the great throws under pressure. As a general statement, fine. But you have to be on PCP if you're going to make that statement in reference to the Green Bay game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodyChamp Posted January 24, 2015 Share Posted January 24, 2015 Give me Wilson, Favre, Eli, Bradshaw and those guys who throw 4 ints a game then 1 TD at the end to win over Rodgers, Pennington, Garcia and their unscathed QBR in games they never win every time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomFan Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 Seahawks won the SB already. No need to even play the game. NFL won't let pats win because of thier cheating ways!! You make the NFL sound fixed. If I truly thought it was fixed I couldn't watch it anymore.....Also, the patriots haven't been caught cheating. Somehow people take "investigation" as "guilty". There's a very good chance the patriots come out of this innocent. I base this off belichicks press conference and science. Science backs up the theory that this could all very well have been a gigantic waste of time.......Well, I think it already is regardless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amfootball Posted January 25, 2015 Author Share Posted January 25, 2015 Give me Wilson, Favre, Eli, Bradshaw and those guys who throw 4 ints a game then 1 TD at the end to win over Rodgers, Pennington, Garcia and their unscathed QBR in games they never win every time.Nah, just give me Brady who just throws 4 TDs for the win ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodyChamp Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Brady is in the same boat, recently atleast. He's in the Superbowl in spite of the fact that it's been everything but pretty. His last Seahawks game is a perfect example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlacknGold77 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Brady is in the same boat, recently atleast. He's in the Superbowl in spite of the fact that it's been everything but pretty. His last Seahawks game is a perfect example. you mean his 395 yds and 2 td in Seattle where the defense gave up a last minute TD to lose by 1? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodyChamp Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 you mean his 395 yds and 2 td in Seattle where the defense gave up a last minute TD to lose by 1?I thought the Pats won that one my bad...still a good example though. Brady put up 23 and led in the 4th even though he threw 2 ints.And if that example doesn't cut it, then I just go back to my first comment about Wilson, Favre, etc. I looked the game up. Wilson had fewer completions, fewer yards, and more sacks. He still won the game. It can't be both. He can't win the game and suck because of stats while Brady loses but is perfect because of stats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southwest1 Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 Yes they did. They made more plays and scored more points than green bay. Style points are for losers.Did Seattle win? Yes. Did GB collapse in the last 5 minutes? Yes. Are most QBs who throw 4 picks gonna win the NFC Championship Game. Absolutely not. What in the world does style points have to do with anything? Lynch saved Wilson's caboose in that game. Don't kid yourself man. Please don't infer that the Hawks played better than the Packers. They didn't. Seattle just got lucky. Plain & simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southwest1 Posted January 27, 2015 Share Posted January 27, 2015 Nah, just give me Brady who just throws 4 TDs for the win ...Yep, Brady is driven to hoist the Lombardi trophy this year AMF. He's due & it's time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomFan Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Did Seattle win? Yes. Did GB collapse in the last 5 minutes? Yes. Are most QBs who throw 4 picks gonna win the NFC Championship Game. Absolutely not. What in the world does style points have to do with anything? Lynch saved Wilson's caboose in that game. Don't kid yourself man. Please don't infer that the Hawks played better than the Packers. They didn't. Seattle just got lucky. Plain & simple. Sometimes its better to be lucky than good. The only thing that matters is seattle made more plays when it mattered than the packers and they won. Yeah, the packers played better for most of the game, so what? They didn't play well when it came time to close it out.. And they lost. Plain and simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luck_Is_Skilled Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Nobody refers to the 98-99 Broncos as a dynasty. I agree with the 3 in 5 year standard and it is a pretty good rule IMO.Back to Back Championships may not be a dynasty but Back to Back is still Back to Back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OffensivelyPC Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Back to Back Championships may not be a dynasty but Back to Back is still Back to Back.well of course. It's an amazing achievement not many teams can say they've done. So if, in describing the difference between a dynasty and "only" back to back chamionships, I don't in any way try to diminish either achievement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerodMayo51 Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Did Seattle win? Yes. Did GB collapse in the last 5 minutes? Yes. Are most QBs who throw 4 picks gonna win the NFC Championship Game. Absolutely not. What in the world does style points have to do with anything? Lynch saved Wilson's caboose in that game. Don't kid yourself man. Please don't infer that the Hawks played better than the Packers. They didn't. Seattle just got lucky. Plain & simple. I'm pretty indifferent when it comes to Wilson, but it's been pretty annoying seeing how much praise people have been lavishing him with after having what would be considered a horrendous game in most circles. Some of the plays that they made in that game, they were like 1 in 500 type plays and they managed to string a bunch of them together for a win. Pretty unreal, and hey hats off to them for getting lucky enough to do that, but they definitely liked out and I think the fact that they won had more to do with GB giving the game away than the Seahawks taking it from them. A win is a win though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southwest1 Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Sometimes its better to be lucky than good. The only thing that matters is seattle made more plays when it mattered than the packers and they won. Yeah, the packers played better for most of the game, so what? They didn't play well when it came time to close it out.. And they lost. Plain and simple.I'm not disputing that the Seahawks won the NFC Championship Game & yes they deserve to be playing in the SB. No argument there, but the odds of recovering that onside kick & winning that game are like a billion to 1. Yes, I am aware that INDY lost a SB to New Orleans in 2009 due to the same circumstance, but it's pretty rare. Like you said, "It's better to be lucky than good" once in awhile RF. I just can't give QB RW universal praise for an astronomical comeback because without that onside kick recovery RW has no shot at winning that Championship Game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southwest1 Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 I'm pretty indifferent when it comes to Wilson, but it's been pretty annoying seeing how much praise people have been lavishing him with after having what would be considered a horrendous game in most circles. Some of the plays that they made in that game, they were like 1 in 500 type plays and they managed to string a bunch of them together for a win. Pretty unreal, and hey hats off to them for getting lucky enough to do that, but they definitely liked out and I think the fact that they won had more to do with GB giving the game away than the Seahawks taking it from them. A win is a win thoughIt won't matter anyway because your Patriots are still winning the SB tomorrow. There will be no lopsided Pacific NW victory this time by the middle of the 3rd QTR JM51 my friend. Brady's got this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomFan Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 It won't matter anyway because your Patriots are still winning the SB tomorrow. There will be no lopsided Pacific NW victory this time by the middle of the 3rd QTR JM51 my friend. Brady's got this one. God I hope you're wrong.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now