National Football League

Page 182 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Great win for Baltimore. Though the Steelers made too many mistakes, and one can only wonder what contribution Bell may have had, if the Ravens can play like this next week they can compete with the Patriots.

I'll say the same as before about Carolina. But I have to feel bad for Arizona, who just couldn't overcome too many injuries, but gritted it out to the end.

This also means Denver gets the winner of Indy-Cincy, which could benefit their chances.

If we end up with a Seattle-Denver rematch...ugh.

:cool:
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
What a superb night of football for him, and the Ducks overall. Watching the game I was thinking they could definitely beat Alabama. Then, with the way Alabama lost to OSU, I started thinking the way OSU was playing should make a great match-up against Oregon.

As to Mariota and the NFL, I can't see Tampa Bay not taking him first. If they don't, I can't see Tennessee not taking him. And his quiet demeanor would do fine in both of those organizations.

As to the NFL:

Ari@Car - Despite the poor record, the Panthers won 4 in a row at season's end, and are at home. Expect a low scoring game. The Panthers then get to fly to the abyss of Seattle, where their season ends. (As an aside, if the NFL did things right, this game would be Philadelphia traveling to Arizona. A much more interesting match-up).

Det@Dal - For no specific reason (though I've been wrong picking them all season), I'll go with the upset here.

Cin@Indy - Despite sketchy running and defense, the Colts have Luck, and can put up a lot of yards and points. This will be Marvin Lewis last game as a Bengals coach, and the team will struggle all off-season with the Andy Dalton issue (eg. his big contract).

Bal@Pit - Both teams have looked very good, and terrible at times this season. Both have veterans with playoff experience, and solid coaches. I'll go with the Steelers, who will then take on Denver, in a match-up I like.
Wrong. If you're going to slag off on a team, get your facts straight. 1. We go to Seattle if Dallas wins. If your later prediction is correct, we go to Green Bay. Secondly, Philly and Arizona would have been more entertaining how? Either way, Arizona gets crushed. I guess your definition of "entertainment" and mine are different...

As for whether we deserved to be there, suck it up buttercup.

Anyway, whether it's Seattle or Green Bay, I don't think either wants to face our defense. We have the best linebacker tandem in the NFL, and the rest of the defense is hitting on all cylinders...sure the QB was bad, but 97 yards (I don't count off for the last play of the game)? We crushed their running game. CRUSHED IT. We can do that to anyone.
 
Alpe d'Huez said:
Great win for Baltimore. Though the Steelers made too many mistakes, and one can only wonder what contribution Bell may have had, if the Ravens can play like this next week they can compete with the Patriots.

I'll say the same as before about Carolina. But I have to feel bad for Arizona, who just couldn't overcome too many injuries, but gritted it out to the end.

This also means Denver gets the winner of Indy-Cincy, which could benefit their chances.

If we end up with a Seattle-Denver rematch...ugh.

:cool:
Arizona were really screwed so bad by the football gods. Everything that could possibly go wrong did. Insanely hard schedule, all their important players injured apart from Fitz and Peterson. Washington got a year's suspension (like the entire NFC west isn't doped to the gills). Had to use 3rd and 4th string qbs for much of the season. The number 1 seed was in their division so even a top record could only get them a wc.
They had to play both games against Seattle after Palmer's injury (the 2nd one after Stanton's:cool:)
 
Yes, I recall last season how certain you were about Carolina's unstoppable defense. How'd that work out?

So, I got my games wrong, so what?

As to "fairness" it's been discussed quite a few times here in recent posts how it's absurd a team that doesn't even have a winning record gets to host a playoff game. How would you have felt if "your" team won 11 games, but had to go on the road to play a team who only finished with a .469 winning percentage and made the playoffs because their division was the weakest in the sport? This is why I think overall conference wins mean more.

Any way you slice it though, Arizona wasn't going to get very far behind Lindley, and a decimated roster.
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
Yes, I recall last season how certain you were about Carolina's unstoppable defense. How'd that work out?

So, I got my games wrong, so what?

As to "fairness" it's been discussed quite a few times here in recent posts how it's absurd a team that doesn't even have a winning record gets to host a playoff game. How would you have felt if "your" team won 11 games, but had to go on the road to play a team who only finished with a .469 winning percentage and made the playoffs because their division was the weakest in the sport? This is why I think overall conference wins mean more.

Any way you slice it though, Arizona wasn't going to get very far behind Lindley, and a decimated roster.
We'll see which tune you have to play next week.

Anyway, sorry about you not knowing the specifics of your argument, especially considering the fact that your prognostication would lead to the event you didn't know about...

And I would feel humiliated if my 11 win team went on the road to a .469 team and gained 97 yards...:rolleyes:
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
Alpe d'Huez said:
Yes, I recall last season how certain you were about Carolina's unstoppable defense. How'd that work out?

So, I got my games wrong, so what?

As to "fairness" it's been discussed quite a few times here in recent posts how it's absurd a team that doesn't even have a winning record gets to host a playoff game. How would you have felt if "your" team won 11 games, but had to go on the road to play a team who only finished with a .469 winning percentage and made the playoffs because their division was the weakest in the sport? This is why I think overall conference wins mean more.

Any way you slice it though, Arizona wasn't going to get very far behind Lindley, and a decimated roster.
And Alpe, just remember that I'm being a fan, blinded by optimism...

That being the case, let me predict that the Panthers will become the most unlikely Super Bowl winners in history this year. We're going all the way to the Lombardi Trophy. Considering that all I risk is being wrong on the intertubes, I feel perfectly comfortable with my prediction.
 
ChewbaccaD said:
Anyway, whether it's Seattle or Green Bay, I don't think either wants to face our defense.
True, but I think most teams would be happy to face Carolina’s offense. Anyway, I’m glad Dallas beat Detroit, because I want to see what the Panthers can do vs. Seattle. I think they have a better chance of winning that game than beating GB, though of course if they do get past Seattle, they might well have to face the Packers. I wouldn’t bet on them, but I wouldn’t be stunned if they won, either. And to think they don’t have Hardy, who had been one of their best defensive players.

The 78 yards AZ gained was the worst in playoff history, and even if you don’t count that 19 yard loss at the end, it was really pathetic. A lot of people are trying to argue that it wasn’t the Panther defense, it was just that AZ had high school level players on the field. I don’t buy that, this is the NFL, even the worst team in the NFL, which AZ was not, even with all the injuries, is not that bad. A defense has to be really good to hold any team to less than 100 yards. Less than 200 yards is fairly rare in the NFL.

And the second half was almost beyond belief, 13 yards in just 18 plays. Even if you don’t count that 19 yard loss, what really stands out to me is the 18 plays. How can you play an entire half and not have more than 18 plays? To put that in a little perspective, going to the opposite end of the spectrum, Oregon had a TD drive vs. FSU that was 19 plays, and they did it in just 4:45.

Alpe d'Huez said:
An even temperament. No sense of entitlement. All the issues that made RG3 seem a head case, no one has seen from Mariota.
Now RGIII seems like a head case. But I never heard anyone suggest that when he was drafted. Correct me if I missed something, but did anyone ever suggest RGIII had any kind of attitude problem? There were some rumblings about Newton, in his first year in the pros, but RGIII? He did expect to start as a rookie, but so did Luck, and in fact if you sell the farm to draft someone, it’s understood he won’t stay on the bench very long. And if RGIII didn’t raise any flags at the time, how can we say we know Mariota well enough to be sure he’s so different? He seems exemplary to me, but you know the old saying, we don't really know anything about these star athletes.

Also, if RGIII does have an attitude problem, it might affect how hard he works, but I don’t think that goes very far in explaining his failures. He didn’t develop in a college system that prepared him for the pros, and the same is true for Mariota. Scouts who compare him to, say, Winston, point out he’s not as good at reading progressions and throwing into tight windows, exactly the kind of criticism RGIII (and Kaepernick, for that matter) is getting. Also like RGIII, Mariota is accustomed to running when he can’t immediately find an open receiver. When NFL teams prepare for that and make it much more difficult, any deficiencies as a pocket passer become magnified.

Not saying he can't succeed, but a Winston-type QB seems to have a much better chance. I say Winston-type, of course, meaning a hypothetical QB like him but without the attitude problems we know he does have. I think Mariota's chances depend a lot on where he goes and how he's handled. An interesting comp might be Vince Young, who was also an outstanding QB who could run. Young's career did seem to be derailed by attitude problems. I could see Mariota as maybe like Young with the right attitude, in which case he might have a very good career.

But Luck is already there. He's carrying the Colts on his arm. He still makes mistakes and too many bad throws, but he's a top 10 QB right now. Arguably a top 5.
When I say elite, I mean Rodgers, Brady, Manning, probably Brees. Luck is not in that company yet, but he may be next year. In fact, if Manning has started declining, Luck might even be better than Manning next year. I could see him possibly being top 3 next year, with Rodgers and Brady, and that’s assuming Tom “as good at 45 as 25” doesn’t start his own decline.
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
Merckx index said:
The 78 yards AZ gained was the worst in playoff history, and even if you don’t count that 19 yard loss at the end, it was really pathetic. A lot of people are trying to argue that it wasn’t the Panther defense, it was just that AZ had high school level players on the field. I don’t buy that, this is the NFL, even the worst team in the NFL, which AZ was not, even with all the injuries, is not that bad. A defense has to be really good to hold any team to less than 100 yards. Less than 200 yards is fairly rare in the NFL.

And the second half was almost beyond belief, 13 yards in just 18 plays. Even if you don’t count that 19 yard loss, what really stands out to me is the 18 plays. How can you play an entire half and not have more than 18 plays? To put that in a little perspective, going to the opposite end of the spectrum, Oregon had a TD drive vs. FSU that was 19 plays, and they did it in just 4:45.
Please note that all of my posts are written in "Fanboyese"

But I have read the criticisms that it was AZ being bad, rather than our Defense being good. My retort is: This is the same offense that gained more yards on Seattle...so, I guess Seattle's D wasn't the reason for that either...

Thanks for the line of support!:)
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
ChewbaccaD said:
Wrong. If you're going to slag off on a team, get your facts straight. 1. We go to Seattle if Dallas wins. If your later prediction is correct, we go to Green Bay. Secondly, Philly and Arizona would have been more entertaining how? Either way, Arizona gets crushed. I guess your definition of "entertainment" and mine are different...

As for whether we deserved to be there, suck it up buttercup.

Anyway, whether it's Seattle or Green Bay, I don't think either wants to face our defense. We have the best linebacker tandem in the NFL, and the rest of the defense is hitting on all cylinders...sure the QB was bad, but 97 yards (I don't count off for the last play of the game)? We crushed their running game. CRUSHED IT. We can do that to anyone.
We'll see how well Carolina keeps it together. Can't speak for folks in GB but Seattle is as good now as they have ever been. They have an offense as well; not an egomaniac playing a cartoon superhero.

I wouldn't take too much solace for what was arguably one of the worst games in playoff memory.

To next Saturday...
 
First, that Dallas-Detroit game was something. One of the most peculiar games I have seen because of the mistakes mixed in with great plays. I think we're going to wonder for some time if the "no call" on interference would have made a difference, and I'm sure Lions fans are going to argue yes forever. But I think in the end the better team won. Still, hate to see calls like that.

Merckx index said:
Now RGIII seems like a head case. But I never heard anyone suggest that when he was drafted. Correct me if I missed something, but did anyone ever suggest RGIII had any kind of attitude problem?
I'm happy to correct you for missing it. Bleacher Report, 2012. Why Robert Griffin's Selfish Attitude Will Doom His Career.

Everybody is just assuming because of the Heisman and all that b.s....they are ignoring a lot of bad tape that he's had. I don't think he has vision or pocket feel, which to me are the two most important components of quarterbacking. He's just running around winging it.
The only way he gets big plays with his feet is if he's got a wide-open field and the sea opens for him. He's got a little bit of a selfish streak, too. Everybody was laying on Cam, but for some reason this guy has become gloves off. (But) he doesn't treat anybody good.
SB Nation also wrote about it. Trying to cover both sides of scouts points. The good and potential bad, and why people were saying it about Griffin.

I don't know that I'd compare Mariota to Young though, as Vince had some serious accuracy issues in the Pros, and was a head case. And in college he definitely took off and ran quicker than Mariota does.

But one thing is for sure, we really don't know how well these guys, Mariota and Winston will develop. Both have issues now they need to overcome before starting in the NFL. Can they in 8 months? Maybe. Maybe not.


Oldman said:
We'll see how well Carolina keeps it together. Can't speak for folks in GB but Seattle is as good now as they have ever been.
This season? Maybe. Or maybe they did a month ago with some of those gritty road wins, dominating the 49ers and Eagles? I would also argue I'm not quite sure this team is as good as last year's. They miss a few defensive players, and despite being a problem, Harvin gave them a great effort in the SB with his talent. But Lynch seems about the same, and Wilson better than last season.

They have an offense as well; not an egomaniac playing a cartoon superhero.
LOL! Took me a second. :)

I wouldn't take too much solace for what was arguably one of the worst games in playoff memory.
Well, if the Seahawks win the same way next week, you'll take it.

My early picks are Seattle & Green Bay in the NFC. Though both games will be tough, and close.

The AFC is more peculiar. I really can see Baltimore going into New England and taking out a Patriot team that peaked a month ago. I can also see Brady slicing them apart.

I felt for some time Denver would falter early in the playoffs, but I don't have much faith in Indianapolis going there and doing that.

So, outside of New England, who seems questionably good or great, I can see almost every NFC team beating any AFC team right now in the Super Bowl. I'll have to revisit this later. As long as we don't get a Seattle-Denver rematch, I'll be happy.
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
Oldman said:
We'll see how well Carolina keeps it together. Can't speak for folks in GB but Seattle is as good now as they have ever been. They have an offense as well; not an egomaniac playing a cartoon superhero.

I wouldn't take too much solace for what was arguably one of the worst games in playoff memory.

To next Saturday...
If that's the only thing you know about our offense, I think you're going to be a little surprised next weekend.
 
Alpe d'Huez said:
First, that Dallas-Detroit game was something. One of the most peculiar games I have seen because of the mistakes mixed in with great plays. I think we're going to wonder for some time if the "no call" on interference would have made a difference, and I'm sure Lions fans are going to argue yes forever. But I think in the end the better team won. Still, hate to see calls like that.
Cowboys have been most entertaining team this season imo. This and the Cowboys Redskins game were the 2 best of the season. The ones vs Texans and @ Philly were also up there.

I don't get all this outrage over that call. Ive seen 100 worse calls this season and no one made a peep. The fact that the ref picked the flag up is irrelevant to me. The call is what it is. Doesn't matter if it took them 10 minutes or 10 seconds to decide. Ive seen way worse in pretty much every game this season.
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
The Hitch said:
Cowboys have been most entertaining team this season imo. This and the Cowboys Redskins game were the 2 best of the season. The ones vs Texans and @ Philly were also up there.

I don't get all this outrage over that call. Ive seen 100 worse calls this season and no one made a peep. The fact that the ref picked the flag up is irrelevant to me. The call is what it is. Doesn't matter if it took them 10 minutes or 10 seconds to decide. Ive seen way worse in pretty much every game this season.
As many people who played in the NFL observed, nobody has ever seen them PICK-UP the flag...especially considering that it was clearly pass interference. Now, how the game plays out after that, we will never know, but picking up the flag was inexcusable. That just doesn't happen with pass interference...especially when it was clearly pass interference. Not to mention that Dez Bryant should have been flagged for running on the field and arguing without his helmet on. 15 yard penalty there that was also ignored.

Plus, I hate Dallas.
 
ChewbaccaD said:
As many people who played in the NFL observed, nobody has ever seen them PICK-UP the flag...especially considering that it was clearly pass interference. Now, how the game plays out after that, we will never know, but picking up the flag was inexcusable. That just doesn't happen with pass interference...especially when it was clearly pass interference. Not to mention that Dez Bryant should have been flagged for running on the field and arguing without his helmet on. 15 yard penalty there that was also ignored.

Plus, I hate Dallas.
I think that was the most overlooked aspect of the whole play. It was such a ridiculous breach of the rules, that I chuckled when I saw him on the TV doing it. PI is such a subjective decision, so I can see how the call in question was in the gray area, but when a player from the sideline goes on to the field to protest the call without a helmet, that is an obvious breach. I haven't heard anybody say why that wasn't flagged.

As much as I dislike Dallas, my dislike for the Packers is much higher, so that will free up three hours of my weekend. Dallas/ GB was once a yearly staple of the playoffs in the Favre/ Aikman era, usually with GB getting spanked in Dallas, so I think the cheeseheads will be out for revenge on Sunday.

The Ravens look perfectly suited to playoff football, similar to the Superbowl winning Giants' teams with a dominant pass rush, great coaching, and a qb that can throw a deep ball. I think they will maul the suspect Patriot offensive line and eventually make it out of the AFC into the super bowl.
 
Jul 16, 2011
1,551
0
0
I'm a Cowboys fan and if I say that picking up that flag was a crock of ****, then it was a crock of ****.

Obviously, there were other mistakes, like Williams being penalised for being pushed into a defensive back, but that pick up was huge.

Having said that, I'm obviously happy with the result and Detroit had their chances to put the game away.

One of the best games I've seen (with regard to emotional involvement, not skill level). I was screaming at Lawrence (who fumbled after recovering Stafford's fumble with 2 minutes to go). Why the hell did he not just fall on the ground?

As for the other games, Cincinnati had it really tough without their top two receivers and after the first quarter, it seemed that Indianopolis pulled away at a fairly gentle canter, which builds up nicely for a Manning-Luck duel, although Manning has not been in best form over the past few weeks (maybe the week off will help).

Pittsburgh really missed Bell, who takes a lot of pressure of Big Ben and the Ravens definitely capitalised on that with their strong defense.

Some really intruiging match ups this weekend (even after taking into account this is the last 8). I'm glad that the Cowboys-Packers game is an evening kick-off rather than a night game :D
 
The Hitch said:
I don't get all this outrage over that call. Ive seen 100 worse calls this season and no one made a peep.
It's because they picked up the flag after it was announced. That's what has people upset.

But let's look at what happened after that. The Lions had a 4th and 1 on the Dallas 46 and decided to not go for it. Had they gotten the 1st down, and at least a FG, it would have put them up by 6. Had they gotten a TD, it would have virtually sealed the game. Instead, they punted, and Sam Martin kicked a 10 yard punt. Regardless, their defense couldn't hold the Cowboys, who marched down the field and got a TD for the win.

It was one play. A bad call. But one play. The bad punt was likely a bigger mishap, and one within the Lions control. There were numerous other penalties in the game, plenty against Dallas. But otherwise, fairly judged by the refs, who got this one single play wrong. This wasn't the Pittsburgh-Seattle Superbowl where numerous calls were wrong against one team.

As I see it there are three solutions to keeping this from happening in the future. The first is to make every play subject to a coach's challenge. All of them. There's no reason not to as I see it. It's a judgment call whether the refs on the field make it, or the refs back in a booth in NYC. Same with a fumble, or TD. Only if it's the guys in NYC doing the review, they can view it multiple times in slow motion, and have a better chance of getting it right.

Second. The referees should get amongst themselves and agree that once the head referee announces the call over the loudspeaker, they're not changing the play, period. If one of them doesn't agree with the initial flag, he better start talking to the others quickly before they announce it.

Third, let's get rid of the referee "all star team" group in the playoffs. The NFL has considered this in the past and just taking the referee teams that have worked the best through the season. Now is the time to do that.

Finally, I think the referees in the NFL are doing a better job now than they ever have. It's an amazingly difficult, high pressure job they get right 99.99% of the time.
 
ChewbaccaD said:
As many people who played in the NFL observed, nobody has ever seen them PICK-UP the flag...especially considering that it was clearly pass interference. Now, how the game plays out after that, we will never know, but picking up the flag was inexcusable. That just doesn't happen with pass interference...especially when it was clearly pass interference. Not to mention that Dez Bryant should have been flagged for running on the field and arguing without his helmet on. 15 yard penalty there that was also ignored.

Plus, I hate Dallas.
And in the St Louis SF game there was a PI called when cameras showed the defender actually didn't touch the player, which swung the game 10-14 points.
And in the Chargers Seahawks game even the booth review judges didn't catch harvin stepping out of bounds.
And in Seahawks Rams game Seahawks clearly recovered the ball on the fumble but refs didn't even booth review it.
And in the Giants Cowboys game the rb clearly fumbled the ball way before his knee hit the ground.

There's hundreds of examples from the season.

None of these were ever a big deal after the game, even when they cost teams the wins. Most weren't even shown on the highlight reels of the matches.

But then this one relatively light PI no call brings about more outrage than the Fail Mary which was a real screwjob that really did cost a game.

I don't get it.
 
Btw Chiewie, as I recall last year I pointed after the Seattle victory in the Championship game, that SF should have been allowed to continue the drive in the 3rd quarter, when Seattle floored the SF punter but the refs did not call the roughing the kicker penalty. Harbaugh went ape **** on the sideline, refs said he can go **** himself, Seattle got the ball in the centre, scored the touchdown and took the lead.

Your response was this
ChewbaccaD said:
The mistake probably cost 49ers the game
I'd go with the three turnovers in the 4th quarter
Well its the same here isn't it? Almost an identical situation. Lions should have been allowed to continue their drive. Instead they punted, Cowboys took the lead, Detroit couldn't get it back.

Basically the same thing.

So doesn't the same thing apply here? It wasn't the bad call that cost the Lions. Its the 3 turnovers in the 2nd half and the inability to stop Romo on 4th and 6 to win the game, or 3rd and 11 to keep it tied, or 3rd and 12 at their 20 yard line with under 2 minutes left in the half, etc.

Or for that matter, not having the balls to go for it on 4th and 1 against a college level cowboys defense.
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,991
0
0
ChewbaccaD said:
As many people who played in the NFL observed, nobody has ever seen them PICK-UP the flag...especially considering that it was clearly pass interference. Now, how the game plays out after that, we will never know, but picking up the flag was inexcusable. That just doesn't happen with pass interference...especially when it was clearly pass interference. Not to mention that Dez Bryant should have been flagged for running on the field and arguing without his helmet on. 15 yard penalty there that was also ignored.

Plus, I hate Dallas.
This! And Chris Christie also appears to be a Cowgirls fan, which figures.
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,773
1
0
ChewbaccaD said:
And Alpe, just remember that I'm being a fan, blinded by optimism...

That being the case, let me predict that the Panthers will become the most unlikely Super Bowl winners in history this year. We're going all the way to the Lombardi Trophy. Considering that all I risk is being wrong on the intertubes, I feel perfectly comfortable with my prediction.
While I'm damm sure not a Panthers fan and I'm fairly certain youre not a Saints fan......I agree with your previous posts in regards to the offense of the Panthers. If the defense would have played better, I'm 100% sure you guys would have been above .500 ....

Some of these guys crying about the Panthers being in the playoffs have it all wrong in my opinion. Not to mention most of the Seahawk fans forget 2010 seahawks 7-9 that year won the division and HOSTED the Saints 11-5 that is a serious home field advantage and none of these guys in here honking for the seahawks even recognize / remember. :rolleyes:


I'm rooting for the Panthers for sure against the Seahawks. That would be an awesome upset.
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,773
1
0
dallas sux

Just in case anyone does not know....I want to let everyone know......Dallas Sux....

I can't stand watching ginger call a game with botox and "govnah Jonah Hill errrrrrr Chaps Crasty" in da booofff circle jerking all day long.

Please Green Bay stop the madness and level these shale clowns.
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
The Hitch said:
Btw Chiewie, as I recall last year I pointed after the Seattle victory in the Championship game, that SF should have been allowed to continue the drive in the 3rd quarter, when Seattle floored the SF punter but the refs did not call the roughing the kicker penalty. Harbaugh went ape **** on the sideline, refs said he can go **** himself, Seattle got the ball in the centre, scored the touchdown and took the lead.

Your response was this

Well its the same here isn't it? Almost an identical situation. Lions should have been allowed to continue their drive. Instead they punted, Cowboys took the lead, Detroit couldn't get it back.

Basically the same thing.

So doesn't the same thing apply here? It wasn't the bad call that cost the Lions. Its the 3 turnovers in the 2nd half and the inability to stop Romo on 4th and 6 to win the game, or 3rd and 11 to keep it tied, or 3rd and 12 at their 20 yard line with under 2 minutes left in the half, etc.

Or for that matter, not having the balls to go for it on 4th and 1 against a college level cowboys defense.
Like I said, I hate Dallas.
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
Glenn_Wilson said:
While I'm damm sure not a Panthers fan and I'm fairly certain youre not a Saints fan......I agree with your previous posts in regards to the offense of the Panthers. If the defense would have played better, I'm 100% sure you guys would have been above .500 ....

Some of these guys crying about the Panthers being in the playoffs have it all wrong in my opinion. Not to mention most of the Seahawk fans forget 2010 seahawks 7-9 that year won the division and HOSTED the Saints 11-5 that is a serious home field advantage and none of these guys in here honking for the seahawks even recognize / remember. :rolleyes:


I'm rooting for the Panthers for sure against the Seahawks. That would be an awesome upset.
...but that was the Seahawks...

Good post Glenn!
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts