NFL Week 15

[Exile on Waveland]

btw if the cowboys are struggling at home against a lousy team like the eagles, that doesn't bode well for them beating the pats in the super bowl.

 

grossman-esque first half for romo. maybe jessica can give him a halftime beej and get him going.

 

Yeah, because the Pats just decimated the Jets today.

 

it was rainy and windy the whole game. the cowboys barely beat the lions, who are getting trashed by the chargers today, and are struggling with the crappy eagles. the cowboys really aren't playing well.

 

So it's not going to be rainy and windy in Foxboro in January?

 

*My issue is you constantly advancing the Pats for no reason.

 

The Cowboys won't have to play the Patriots in Foxboro in January so that's really a moot point.

 

Really? They won't? As I said, my issue was with whether the Cowboys will even have to play the Pats in the Super Bowl. If the Cowboys even make the Super Bowl. Being the favorite means nothing.

[Exile on Waveland]

Last year San Diego (14-2) was a heavy favorite, two years ago it was Indianapolis (14-2), three years ago it was Pittsburgh (15-1). A one-game playoff is a crap shoot. Especially when you're clearly not playing as well as early in the season or built for cold weather.

 

those teams were not heavy favorites. san diego was favored by what, about 5 points against the pats last year? denver was also very good in 2005. and three years ago the pats were 14-2, and had won 2 of the past three super bowls, and were facing a rookie qb... i think they were actually favored over the steelers in the afc championship game.

 

hey maybe i'm wrong and the pats will lose, but i don't think so.

 

I doubt the Pats are big favorites over the Colts, if those teams meet in the AFCCG. If the line is big, bet on the Colts with the points. The Pats barely won the first meeting despite the Colts missing half their team.

[Guest]

btw if the cowboys are struggling at home against a lousy team like the eagles, that doesn't bode well for them beating the pats in the super bowl.

 

grossman-esque first half for romo. maybe jessica can give him a halftime beej and get him going.

 

Yeah, because the Pats just decimated the Jets today.

 

it was rainy and windy the whole game. the cowboys barely beat the lions, who are getting trashed by the chargers today, and are struggling with the crappy eagles. the cowboys really aren't playing well.

 

So it's not going to be rainy and windy in Foxboro in January?

 

*My issue is you constantly advancing the Pats for no reason.

 

The Cowboys won't have to play the Patriots in Foxboro in January so that's really a moot point.

 

Really? They won't? As I said, my issue was with whether the Cowboys will even have to play the Pats in the Super Bowl. If the Cowboys even make the Super Bowl. Being the favorite means nothing.

 

Then what's the point of the bolded statement? You were debating with Truffle the chances the Cowboys had of beating the Patriots in the Super Bowl. Then, for some reason, you wrote the bolded statement which, when talking about the Cowboys and Patriots, doesn't matter at all.

[Exile on Waveland]

btw if the cowboys are struggling at home against a lousy team like the eagles, that doesn't bode well for them beating the pats in the super bowl.

 

grossman-esque first half for romo. maybe jessica can give him a halftime beej and get him going.

 

Yeah, because the Pats just decimated the Jets today.

 

it was rainy and windy the whole game. the cowboys barely beat the lions, who are getting trashed by the chargers today, and are struggling with the crappy eagles. the cowboys really aren't playing well.

 

So it's not going to be rainy and windy in Foxboro in January?

 

*My issue is you constantly advancing the Pats for no reason.

 

The Cowboys won't have to play the Patriots in Foxboro in January so that's really a moot point.

 

Really? They won't? As I said, my issue was with whether the Cowboys will even have to play the Pats in the Super Bowl. If the Cowboys even make the Super Bowl. Being the favorite means nothing.

 

Then what's the point of the bolded statement? You were debating with Truffle the chances the Cowboys had of beating the Patriots in the Super Bowl. Then, for some reason, you wrote the bolded statement which, when talking about the Cowboys and Patriots, doesn't matter at all.

 

No, I'm not debating the Cowboys chances against the Pats. See what I bolded, I thought it was pretty clear I was questioning the Pats automatically advancing. Especially the ensuing discussion between Truffle and I. Maybe it wasn't clear.

[TruffleShuffle]

Being the favorite means nothing.

 

well, generally it means that you have a better chance of winning than the other team.

[Exile on Waveland]

Being the favorite means nothing.

 

well, generally it means that you have a better chance of winning than the other team.

 

Sure, it means that. The better team is almost always the favorite. But the favorite doesn't always win. Especially recently in the AFC playoffs. That's my whole point. The Pats are the favorite, but acting like it's a lock they make the Super Bowl is myopic. Especially considering they've struggled of late, aren't exactly built for the cold, and there isn't much reason to think they're much better than a healthy Colts (today's crap-fest notwithstanding).

[Flames24Rulz]

Pretty funny to see Buck's boy Romo have such a bad game. He really seems to be at a loss for words right now.

[Exile on Waveland]

Also, I think it's extremely ironic that the reason the Cowboys can't beat the Patriots is because they're struggling to beat the Eagles at home.

 

I mean, the greatest team in the history of sport wouldn't struggle to beat the Eagles at home. Especially when the Eagles were missing their starting QB. Just wouldn't happen.

[CubColtPacer]

"An unnecessary gamble?" There's 4 minutes left, if Dallas punts they might not get it back! Also, they're a good offense, they should be able to pick up a 4th and 2. Finally, even if they don't get it, they still can get the ball back down only 1 possession!

 

It would have been criminally bad to not go for it there. And what do you know, they pick it up with complete ease.

[TruffleShuffle]

Also, I think it's extremely ironic that the reason the Cowboys can't beat the Patriots is because they're struggling to beat the Eagles at home.

 

I mean, the greatest team in the history of sport wouldn't struggle to beat the Eagles at home. Especially when the Eagles were missing their starting QB. Just wouldn't happen.

 

no, they can't beat the patriots because they're not as good as the patriots.

 

Last year San Diego (14-2) was a heavy favorite, two years ago it was Indianapolis (14-2), three years ago it was Pittsburgh (15-1). A one-game playoff is a crap shoot. Especially when you're clearly not playing as well as early in the season or built for cold weather.

 

those teams were not heavy favorites. san diego was favored by what, about 5 points against the pats last year? denver was also very good in 2005. and three years ago the pats were 14-2, and had won 2 of the past three super bowls, and were facing a rookie qb... i think they were actually favored over the steelers in the afc championship game.

 

hey maybe i'm wrong and the pats will lose, but i don't think so.

 

I doubt the Pats are big favorites over the Colts, if those teams meet in the AFCCG. If the line is big, bet on the Colts with the points. The Pats barely won the first meeting despite the Colts missing half their team.

 

half their team? the only important players missing from that game were harrison and ugoh. if the officials hadn't been wearing colts jerseys during the game, the margin of victory would probably have been larger.

[Flames24Rulz]

Come on Eagles, just get a 1st down.

[Soul]

That's game. Even the famous Cowboys luck can't get them out of this one.

[Flames24Rulz]

Come on Eagles, just get a 1st down.

 

Thanks guys.

[CubColtPacer]

Also, I think it's extremely ironic that the reason the Cowboys can't beat the Patriots is because they're struggling to beat the Eagles at home.

 

I mean, the greatest team in the history of sport wouldn't struggle to beat the Eagles at home. Especially when the Eagles were missing their starting QB. Just wouldn't happen.

 

no, they can't beat the patriots because they're not as good as the patriots.

 

Last year San Diego (14-2) was a heavy favorite, two years ago it was Indianapolis (14-2), three years ago it was Pittsburgh (15-1). A one-game playoff is a crap shoot. Especially when you're clearly not playing as well as early in the season or built for cold weather.

 

those teams were not heavy favorites. san diego was favored by what, about 5 points against the pats last year? denver was also very good in 2005. and three years ago the pats were 14-2, and had won 2 of the past three super bowls, and were facing a rookie qb... i think they were actually favored over the steelers in the afc championship game.

 

hey maybe i'm wrong and the pats will lose, but i don't think so.

 

I doubt the Pats are big favorites over the Colts, if those teams meet in the AFCCG. If the line is big, bet on the Colts with the points. The Pats barely won the first meeting despite the Colts missing half their team.

 

half their team? the only important players missing from that game were harrison and ugoh. if the officials hadn't been wearing colts jerseys during the game, the margin of victory would probably have been larger.

 

2 of the 3 starting linebackers on a team would usually be considered important. The Colts didn't even have 3 linebackers healthy for the Patriots game, let alone their best linebackers. Also Anthony Gonzalez missing the whole 2nd half and the Colts having to rely on the horrible Aaron Moorehead as an outside receiver (and if you don't believe that's a factor, take a look at how the Colts offense has changed since Gonzalez came back). It wasn't a shock that the Pats defense had a lot easier time against the Colts the second half after he left.

 

Then you add in the fact that Brady hasn't been the same player as he was earlier in the season in the last several weeks, and things have changed significantly since the Patriots were destroying everybody in the first 8 weeks of the year.

[E.J.]

That was an interesting decision.

[TruffleShuffle]

very smart play by westbrook, but i'm sure that he just enraged plenty of fantasy owners

[Exile on Waveland]

Also, I think it's extremely ironic that the reason the Cowboys can't beat the Patriots is because they're struggling to beat the Eagles at home.

 

I mean, the greatest team in the history of sport wouldn't struggle to beat the Eagles at home. Especially when the Eagles were missing their starting QB. Just wouldn't happen.

 

no, they can't beat the patriots because they're not as good as the patriots.

 

Last year San Diego (14-2) was a heavy favorite, two years ago it was Indianapolis (14-2), three years ago it was Pittsburgh (15-1). A one-game playoff is a crap shoot. Especially when you're clearly not playing as well as early in the season or built for cold weather.

 

those teams were not heavy favorites. san diego was favored by what, about 5 points against the pats last year? denver was also very good in 2005. and three years ago the pats were 14-2, and had won 2 of the past three super bowls, and were facing a rookie qb... i think they were actually favored over the steelers in the afc championship game.

 

hey maybe i'm wrong and the pats will lose, but i don't think so.

 

I doubt the Pats are big favorites over the Colts, if those teams meet in the AFCCG. If the line is big, bet on the Colts with the points. The Pats barely won the first meeting despite the Colts missing half their team.

 

half their team? the only important players missing from that game were harrison and ugoh. if the officials hadn't been wearing colts jerseys during the game, the margin of victory would probably have been larger.

 

You're certainly right. The Pats are better than the Cowboys. Surely no one will argue such. But just because they're not as good doesn't mean they can't. It simply means they aren't likely to. Also, again, you used today's game as a reason they can't. The Pats struggled against the same team -- without McNabb.

 

Half their team was a ridiculous exaggeration, admittedly, but they were missing more than two key players. Anthony Gonzalez dislocated his thumb on the first drive and basically didn't play after that. He's certainly a key player -- three touchdowns the past two games proves that. The Colts also played with only two linebackers -- total -- and only one was a starter. Since then, they've lost Freeney for the year, so that must be subtracted. I won't even comment on the officials garbage.

[Soul]

That was an interesting decision.

 

Yes, if the Beagles were to turn it over it would become a stupid one.

[Flames24Rulz]

That was an interesting decision.

 

Yes, if the Beagles were to turn it over it would become a stupid one.

 

Just kneel it. Dallas is out of timeouts and you're at the 2 minute warning. I thought it was a good decision by Westbrook.

[Yanksfan1523]

Nice play!! Westbrook is smart!

[TruffleShuffle]

That was an interesting decision.

 

Yes, if the Beagles were to turn it over it would become a stupid one.

 

we'd have to lose the ball while taking a knee. the other way, dallas gets the ball back and if they score, they can try an onside kick.

[Exile on Waveland]

Great play by Westbrook.

[Soul]

That was an interesting decision.

 

Yes, if the Beagles were to turn it over it would become a stupid one.

 

Just kneel it. Dallas is out of timeouts and you're at the 2 minute warning. I thought it was a good decision by Westbrook.

 

Yes, 95% of the time it's a good decision. There's just always that chance...

[Yanksfan1523]

Jessica shed a tear for her man?

[Flames24Rulz]

Thank you Eagles :)

 

Sure wish Dallas would've lost one of those two games against Buffalo or Detroit. We'd really be looking pretty good for that #1 seed if that were the case.