Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

LucasOilStadium

Super Bowl LII (52) Game Thread

Recommended Posts

Just now, Bluefire4 said:

If anybody can do this it is Brady. Eagles have to finish here.

Nobody can do this...not even Brady

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, oldunclemark said:

8-point lead.....Pats cant do it this time

probably not but theyve done it before.  That said, GAME

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Pats blocker who got mixed up is who broke the ball carriers stride on that pitch. If that didn't happen, that would have been a big return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, oldunclemark said:

Cant score..not enough time

only need 1 second to score....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Each 10-12 yard pass that only takes a couple seconds gives Brady more of a chance to reach the end zone on the hail mary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, oldunclemark said:

Not enough time..he cant reach the end zone from here

all it takes a broken tackle or two...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, oldunclemark said:

Has any QB ever lost 3 Super Bowls???? John Elway?

Jim Kelly lost 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, buffalo34 said:

Brady has two chances to get this Hail Mary, so he'll do it.

Cant do it....its over guys..They'r e throwing to Dorsett

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, buffalo34 said:

Brady has two chances to get this Hail Mary, so he'll do it.

 

Will you stop if your reverse psychology posting finally works and the Pats voodoo is broken? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And how about that boys and girls....   It's a wrap.   Way to go Eagles...!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

woooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo THANK YOU EAGLES !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Remember,  we are not debating whether Spring is doable.   I've stated from the beginning that I agree.    It's not as bad as some here think it is.    It's doable,   No question.   We are debating whether Spring is preferable, or desireable.    So, when you write,  that you don't think you have to say more about an issue,  any issue,  I'm sorry,   but NO!     You DO have to say more.  A heckuva lot more.    Because YOU have the burden of proof.    My position is the Industry Standard.   Your's has, by comparison,  a handful of examples.   Some are recent.   That's great.   But I view that as a nod to the position that it's doable.    You view it as a possibility that it might soon become the norm.   I'm happy to wait until that actually happens.   As to your primary argument.....    that all the prep work has been done,  and if you make the changes in winter,  that the GM is not up to speed on what the current scouts and player personnel people have done.    Except there is this......   Your argument that you yourself use to others here who complain that changing in the spring is bad.   To quote you....   it's just one draft.    One free agency period.    And there will soon be another,  and then another....   and another.   One season is nothing in the grand scheme of things.   That is what you wrote (roughly) to posters who think making the GM change in the spring is outright terrible and stupid.    Which I strongly disagree with their positin.   Your argument makes my argument for me.    I want the new GM in the building ASAP.    So he can sooner evaluate his players.    His front office.    His scouts.    The entire program.   Waiting until May or June just delays that.    I want it to begin ASAP.   I'd expect that he can and would be able to make some level of difference in his first free agency and draft.    Plus,  I think you way, way over-dramatize the handicap the new GM has arriving in January.   He's the GM.    He's already got a ton of information in his head,  and in his notebooks, his binders.    He's not in as much of a bind as you like to portray.     So, with your desired scenario, this draft could be used for a system that the new GM doesn't even want to run.    Like Chuck running a 3-4,  when Ballard wants to run a 4-3.    Like Chuck wanted to run a power running game and a deep pattern passing game.    While Ballard favors a zone running game and a get rid of the ball quick, move the chains offense.     In your preferred scenario,  you're the one who is burning the first year the GM has,  not me.     I see little of the benefits and mostly an approach that screams....   "Gee,  I hope this works out."   I know you believe what you're writing.   But honestly, this feels like one big thought experiment. Like you're trying to make a case for something you really don't believe,  but you're trying to see if you can make a good argument anyway.   And yet I know that's NOT the case.    That you really, honestly do believe this.    That's what I find so astonishig.    There's lots of opinion,  and not a lot of evidence to back this up.    As I've said from the get-go....   I think this is doable.    I just don't think it's desireable or preferable.    
    • To your last paragraph....   yes,  I agree that if a GM,  any GM, inherits a bad roster,  then no matter how OK his draft picks may be,   they will likely stick on the roster.   But if you're a GM inheriting a poor team,  and you draft players that are only somewhat better than what you originally had,  then the improvement in the team will only be so good.   Again,  from 4 wis,  to perhaps 6-7.    That wouldn't be bad.    That would be reasonable.   But when you suddenly pop to 10 wins,  including 9 of the last 10 in the regular season,  and you win on the road in the playoffs,   then there's got to be something more there than just the GM's new guys.    Those guys have got to be good.    You can't do that well simply because they're better than the previous guys.    They're much better.    Yes, the coaching staff is better and the systems the team is running are better,  but so are the players.    They have to execute.    And we did.   Better than we thought possible.    Certainly better than when we were 1-5 and looked like a candidate for a top-10 or even a top-5 draft pick.    The players are good.   They may not be great yet,  but they're really good and much better than what we had.    The results are all the proof you need.   Again,  thanks for the exchange....  
    • I missed the first couple innings, was keeping track on phone, didn’t realize things got chippy with the benches clearing after the Contreras HR! Seems the Cubs were playing with a little extra edge tonight, I love it!!! 
    • and then NE goes into KC and throws for 350 and Sony runs for 100+ on them. our O, and O game plan just sucked.   i get KC was good, but our O just sucked.
  • Members

    • Shadow_Creek

      Shadow_Creek 415

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Kirie89

      Kirie89 22

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • luckyBatistuta

      luckyBatistuta 109

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • el duderino

      el duderino 61

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • jmac_48

      jmac_48 400

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...