PDA

View Full Version : Super Bowl XLII



TEEMONT
01-20-2008, 11:18 PM
Can the Giants do it?

Stlrs4Life
01-20-2008, 11:19 PM
No way!

Captcoolhand
01-20-2008, 11:26 PM
Eli is a F*ck'n Queer

steelcityrockers
01-20-2008, 11:27 PM
Real mature Captain, real mature. I mean so was Kordell...

Anyway, there is always a chance. I think they could do it, but I doubt that they actually will.

Black@Gold Forever32
01-20-2008, 11:34 PM
Eli is a F*ck'n Queer

That so called Queer has played very well these play-offs and is big reason the G-Men are in the Super Bowl.......I know I'm rooting for Eli against the Pats.....

LatrobePA
01-20-2008, 11:48 PM
The only queer is the posting about Eli being one...Stupid ***!!

Go Eli and the Giants, I hope they wipe the turf with Brady's pretty ***!!

Koopa
01-20-2008, 11:53 PM
i hate eli so much i'm going for the pats

BlitzburghRockCity
01-21-2008, 12:00 AM
Im rooting for the Giants all the way but I don't have much confidence in them being able to pull off the major upset.

buccaneers#1fan
01-21-2008, 12:23 AM
the giants are playing remarkable football right now and the defense is playing great.highest points given up in the post season was 20 and that was today. and they got all there confidence playing n.e so i think there very capable of winning this game. i mean they have won 10 in a row on the road and there the hottest team in the nfl besides the pats. so i say go giants keep up the good defense dont turn the ball over and you know u can do it cause your not playing at home.

------------------------------------------------------------
[AutoMerged Post Below]
------------------------------------------------------------
the giants are playing remarkable football right now and the defense is playing great.highest points given up in the post season was 20 and that was today. and they got all there confidence playing n.e so i think there very capable of winning this game. i mean they have won 10 in a row on the road and there the hottest team in the nfl besides the pats. so i say go giants keep up the good defense dont turn the ball over and you know u can do it cause your not playing at home.

Troyisabeast_43
01-21-2008, 01:22 AM
These Giants are very much like the Steelers in 2005 typical road warriors and are playing I think just as good if not better then the Pats are right now. If Jacobs and Bradshaw can run the ball against this Pats team and this Giants defense can stop Maroney and blitz Brady and get some pressure they have a great shot to win. Keep in mind Giants were very close to having the Pats on the ropes that game on that Saturday night up 12 at 28-16 in New York almost a month ago. They can play with this Pats team and right now I think might be playing better. The Giants now get another shot to end the Pats perfection. They had a shot to end the Pats perfect regular season at 16-0 and couldnt do it, and now they have a shot to end the Pats perfect season overall at 19-0 who would have thought that the Giants would get 2 chances within almost a month to end the Pats perfection twice. They definitely will get that chance and for one think they are gonna find a way to do it. Giants win 31-27.

Koopa
01-21-2008, 01:27 AM
they may be playing like the steelers of 05.......... however you forget.......... pats >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then any team in the history of this sport, so comparing them to the 05 steelers is dumb, because then you would be suggesting they would be playing a team taht sucked *** like the seahawks........ also the giants didn't sneak in the playoffs like we did in 05, the giants are the 5th seed, so they played to worse home team in the bucs......they didn't go in with teh momentum we did, and they are in the nfc, much easier to advance then it is in the afc

black an gold 4 life
01-21-2008, 01:32 AM
this was all set up 4 the cheaters 2 go undefeated.:wtf::cursin:.............i hate the cheaters an the nfl sucks 4 letting them get away with the b.s they pulled this season, an they get an top 10 1st day pick:willybs::willybs:the cheaters suck...................:rulez:commish roger sucks also, u were suppose 2 follow the rules :rulez:so here's 2 u roger an u the cheaters:bigfinger::bigfinger::thumbdown1:u all suck...............

Dan
01-21-2008, 01:57 AM
I"m just so relieved it's not the Pats and Packers, cause I'd have had to root for the Pack. I don't think the Giants will win, but you never know and we can hope.

Koopa
01-21-2008, 03:14 AM
this was all set up 4 the cheaters 2 go undefeated.:wtf::cursin:.............i hate the cheaters an the nfl sucks 4 letting them get away with the b.s they pulled this season, an they get an top 10 1st day pick:willybs::willybs:the cheaters suck...................:rulez:commish roger sucks also, u were suppose 2 follow the rules :rulez:so here's 2 u roger an u the cheaters:bigfinger::bigfinger::thumbdown1:u all suck...............

they got caught the first game of the season, i doubt they cheated the other 17 wins they've gotten since they got caught......

RW318
01-21-2008, 03:37 AM
they may be playing like the steelers of 05.......... however you forget.......... pats >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then any team in the history of this sport

Bullshit

Koopa
01-21-2008, 03:42 AM
Bullshiat

i haven't seen any other team go 18-0..........and the 72 dolphins don't count as an undefeated team cause they played in an inferior era, adn only played like 4 teams over .500 during that stretch........... so the faggot pats have to be considered the best of all time cause they are doing it in a superior era

steelersgal86
01-21-2008, 06:12 AM
That sucks!!! I wanted the packers to win...I dont know if I can cheer on the Giants...even though I dont want the pats to win :scratch:

Ambridge
01-21-2008, 08:08 AM
The Giants might be the 5th seed but if they go in and beat a heavily favored 18-0 Patriots team in the Superbowl then I'd have to say that surpasses the Steelers playoff run in '05.

Will the Giants win??? No!!

TEEMONT
01-21-2008, 11:32 AM
i haven't seen any other team go 18-0..........and the 72 dolphins don't count as an undefeated team cause they played in an inferior era, adn only played like 4 teams over .500 during that stretch........... so the faggot pats have to be considered the best of all time cause they are doing it in a superior era

It wasn't an inferior era. The competition then was probably stiffer then, if anything. Expansion waters down the competition, I really don't feel like doing the research, but I think there were something like 26 teams then, I'm not sure what year the Bucs and Falcons came into existence. So, in essence going undefeated then was a lot harder then it is now. Would todays Pats murder yesterdays Dolphins? Absolutely, but thats just evolution. The Dolphins were playing against teams who had more overall talent than the Pats had. Lets not forget either, the Pats are in the AFC East, which was an automatic 6 wins. I highly doubt they would have gone undefeated if they had played in the NFC East. This is one case where the NFC>(you only need to use one) the AFC.

AZ_Steeler
01-21-2008, 12:14 PM
This is a tough call... The Giants did hang with the Patriots during the last game but you gotta wonder if the Patriots were more concerned with records or winning? :dunno: I think the Giants have a chance, but I'm not a big Eli fan... but I'm also not a Patriots fan in general.

This could probably be the lowest rated Super Bowl in its entire history, primarily because we all just saw this game a month ago... I at least hope the commercials are good! :D

Koopa
01-21-2008, 02:53 PM
It wasn't an inferior era. The competition then was probably stiffer then, if anything. Expansion waters down the competition, I really don't feel like doing the research, but I think there were something like 26 teams then, I'm not sure what year the Bucs and Falcons came into existence. So, in essence going undefeated then was a lot harder then it is now. Would todays Pats murder yesterdays Dolphins? Absolutely, but thats just evolution. The Dolphins were playing against teams who had more overall talent than the Pats had. Lets not forget either, the Pats are in the AFC East, which was an automatic 6 wins. I highly doubt they would have gone undefeated if they had played in the NFC East. This is one case where the NFC>(you only need to use one) the AFC.

i just think athletes today are superior to those of the past, so i respect no one of the past

RW318
01-21-2008, 03:23 PM
i haven't seen any other team go 18-0..........and the 72 dolphins don't count as an undefeated team cause they played in an inferior era, adn only played like 4 teams over .500 during that stretch........... so the faggot pats have to be considered the best of all time cause they are doing it in a superior era

That means what? The record doesn't mean they're better than any other team in league history. It may mean they have had a better record than anyone but it doesn't equate to them being the best ever. They are doing it in a weak time too...running through that division they had would be a cake walk for any damn team (that isn't in that division lol). It's an offense friendly game now too....this **** wouldn't fly in the 90s...when you were allowed to beat the **** out of a WR before he got off the line....Or knock the hell out of anyone anywhere.

You're saying the 70's is weak compared to 07....well 07 is weak compared to the late 90s and early 80s

Koopa
01-21-2008, 03:26 PM
That means what? The record doesn't mean they're better than any other team in league history. It may mean they have had a better record than anyone but it doesn't equate to them being the best ever. They are doing it in a weak time too...running through that division they had would be a cake walk for any damn team (that isn't in that division lol). It's an offense friendly game now too....this shiat wouldn't fly in the 90s...when you were allowed to beat the shiat out of a WR before he got off the line....Or knock the hell out of anyone anywhere.

You're saying the 70's is weak compared to 07....well 07 is weak compared to the late 90s and early 80s

you are just saying that cause that's when the cowboys dominated

RW318
01-21-2008, 03:30 PM
No it's because it's obvious as hell...that was football and the athletes were every bit as talented as they were now....and with NO CAP? You'd be a fool to honestly think this is the best team ever....or any team is because you can't compare anything but the record...and it's not an accurate gauge unless you look at EVERYTHING involved in getting it.

Koopa
01-21-2008, 03:44 PM
No it's because it's obvious as hell...that was football and the athletes were every bit as talented as they were now....and with NO CAP? You'd be a fool to honestly think this is the best team ever....or any team is because you can't compare anything but the record...and it's not an accurate gauge unless you look at EVERYTHING involved in getting it.

that's another reason i think this is the best, becasue they are doing it when it's hardest, with the cap, it makes it hard for teams to dominate like they did in the 90s and before then

RW318
01-21-2008, 03:50 PM
Hardest? It's easy when it's practically like you have no cap.

I still don't see how the fact that they did it with a cap makes them any better than a team who did it without it. Talent is the only thing that could do that. Only a fool would argue that they're more talented then some of those late 80s early 90s teams. The game was tougher back then as well....as were the players.

Koopa
01-21-2008, 04:02 PM
Hardest? It's easy when it's practically like you have no cap.

I still don't see how the fact that they did it with a cap makes them any better than a team who did it without it. Talent is the only thing that could do that. Only a fool would argue that they're more talented then some of those late 80s early 90s teams. The game was tougher back then as well....as were the players.

because jones had the money and was willing to pay more then any other team, that's why the cowboys got all the best players, he was willing to pay......... now a days you can't get all those superstars unless they are willing to take a pay cut which most aren't, that's why the cap was put in place, so one team wouldn't dominate, it was put in to give other teams a chance to compete, and the pats are dominating even with the cap, they are about to win 4 titles in 7 years, they are second to the steelers in the shortest span to win 4, followed by the 49ers which one 4 in 9 years, and that was mostly in the 80s, that's why i say it's tougher to dominate now then it was back in the day, and again, athletes now are superior, maybe not more psychical, but these guys would run circles around the players of back in the day

RW318
01-21-2008, 04:22 PM
That somehow changes the fact that they were more talented? They're dominating because players are taking pay cuts....it shouldn't be that impressive when you're getting all the talent because players are taking pay cuts to work with your cheater of a coach. It's pretty much like they're working without a cap too.

They would not run circles around players back in the 90s....if that's what you're saying get real. They don't have more talent as a team as a lot of the Superbowl winners in the late 80s early 90s. So they can not be the best team....just the team with the best record.

Koopa
01-21-2008, 04:33 PM
That somehow changes the fact that they were more talented? They're dominating because players are taking pay cuts....it shouldn't be that impressive when you're getting all the talent because players are taking pay cuts to work with your cheater of a coach. It's pretty much like they're working without a cap too.

They would not run circles around players back in the 90s....if that's what you're saying get real. They don't have more talent as a team as a lot of the Superbowl winners in the late 80s early 90s. So they can not be the best team....just the team with the best record.

i didn't say this team would run circles, i said athletes today, my argument is going two ways, one saying that the pats are dominating in a harder era, and the other is that athletes in general today are superior to those of the past........ i know kind of confusing, but i'm mixing what i always say about the past into this because it kind of goes together when talking about athletes........... but they didn't cheat to get to 18-0 so bringing up a cheating coach doesn't mean anything, going undefeated in this era is harder then it has been in other eras, sure they had a ****** division, but they still beat every team in your division, so i guess y'all have a ****** division too?? and they also beat every other team that was put in front of them, does that mean they are all ****** too?? the pats have had an amazing season and an amazing run, i wish the steelers could be doing this and i bet you wish the cowboys could have a run like this......and i bet if your cowboys had a run like this, you'd be saying exactly what i'm saying, even if they were in the same circumstances with cheating and **** like that............ i will always give more credit to teams that dominate in this era then in the past just because it was easier to dominate with a rich owner

RW318
01-21-2008, 05:08 PM
2000 is not as tough as 1990.....they were not "dominating" in the 90's...so? Today is not tougher than it was in the 90s.....thinking so just isn't smart. The athletes are far from "superior" to the ones in the 90s as well. So I honestly do not have a clue in hell as to why you keep saying that.

No because the 90's teams would still be better so I wouldn't be saying that. Defense and offense.....****ing crystal ball over here.

It's bullshit to call players now far superior to the ones in the late 90s. The end...you can stop using that because I'm not talking about the 70s 60s or 50s lol.

Koopa
01-21-2008, 05:20 PM
i have no idea what you are saying in that first paragraph........ what i'm saying is........ it's was easier in the 70s, 80s, and early 90s to dominate cause there was no cap, and one team could just buy all the best players and leave the poor teams with nothing

i'm also saying, that most the athletes of the past couldn't come into this era and be as good, cause the game is much more faster then it used to be

i also think the athletes today are superior for that reason, the athletes today could go dominate in the past, lets say if tony romo played in the 70s or 80s he'd be unstoppable, cause he's elusive and would be to fast for most of the athletes of the past...... i wanna use another example here, but being on this forum, ppl will throw a hissy fit so i guess i'll end it here

also, can you point to where i ever said late 90s

RW318
01-21-2008, 05:25 PM
It's almost the same now....cheap teams don't spend and the good teams do. That doesn't make the Patriots a more talented team because they're winning under the cap. Doesn't even make sense to suggest it lol.

Athletes from the 90s could.

Well why are you bringing up **** that I'm not talking about lol. I've been talking late 80s and early 90s this whole damn time and you're bringing up the 70s and crap.

Koopa
01-21-2008, 05:33 PM
but the post you originally quoted was about the 70s and 80s and every other era before now so i was backing up what i was talking about in that post you originally quoted

RW318
01-21-2008, 05:38 PM
I don't know why.....I quoted the post that said the Pats are the best team in the history of football. They have the best record but saying they're the best team is a stretch....then you started on about athletes of the 70s like I was talking about that lol.

Koopa
01-21-2008, 05:57 PM
I don't know why.....I quoted the post that said the Pats are the best team in the history of football. They have the best record but saying they're the best team is a stretch....then you started on about athletes of the 70s like I was talking about that lol.

to me the 70s and on are the only legit times of football, so i brought them up and the 80s and early 90s cause back then it was easier to dominate IMO, remember this is all opinions........ i know you are gonna always love the 90s cause that was your glory years for the cowboys, but without blinders, i think this era is superior to any other decade

RW318
01-21-2008, 06:02 PM
LMAO...it's bullshit to call this era superior. You can go down the line and the best players of the 90s would trump the best players of 2000-2007. There is no blinders here....I'm stating the obvious. It's foolish to think the players now are better than those of the 90s.

Whatever though "blinders" "homer" yadda yadda. It's nice when people fall back on that crap lol.

Koopa
01-21-2008, 06:10 PM
tomlison, better then any rb in the 90s

peyton manning, better then any qb in the 90s

t.o., randy moss, chad johnson, steve smith, and all the other badass wrs of this decade is better then any wr in the 90s

gates, witten, gonzales, better then any te of the 90s

ed reed is better then any saftey of the league

champ baily would dominate in the 90s


put all the best players of this era together, and they'll beat the best players of the 90s, 80s, 70s, 60s, 50s, 40s, 30s, and any other time

RW318
01-21-2008, 06:58 PM
tomlison, better then any rb in the 90s

peyton manning, better then any qb in the 90s

t.o., randy moss, chad johnson, steve smith, and all the other badass wrs of this decade is better then any wr in the 90s

gates, witten, gonzales, better then any te of the 90s

ed reed is better then any saftey of the league

champ baily would dominate in the 90s


put all the best players of this era together, and they'll beat the best players of the 90s, 80s, 70s, 60s, 50s, 40s, 30s, and any other time

LMAO...you don't even know what the hell you're talking about.

Barry Sanders & Emmitt Smith>>Tomlinson

Aikman, Montana, Favre, Young, Moon, Elway, Kelly, Marino & Cunningham>>>>>>>>>>>Any list of QBs you can **** out of 2000-2007.

Jerry Rice>>>All of them (not even gonna bother listing the rest lol).

Probably have TEs.

Bullshit on Ed Reed...Rod was probably better than him lol.

Deion Sanders>>Bailey.

You'd have to be a damn fool to truly believe that.

Koopa
01-21-2008, 06:59 PM
hester>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any return man from the past lol

Black@Gold Forever32
01-21-2008, 07:56 PM
LMAO...you don't even know what the hell you're talking about.

Barry Sanders & Emmitt Smith>>Tomlinson

Aikman, Montana, Favre, Young, Moon, Elway, Kelly, Marino & Cunningham>>>>>>>>>>>Any list of QBs you can shiat out of 2000-2007.

Jerry Rice>>>All of them (not even gonna bother listing the rest lol).

Probably have TEs.

Bullshiat on Ed Reed...Rod was probably better than him lol.

Deion Sanders>>Bailey.

You'd have to be a damn fool to truly believe that.

Ok Dan Marino and Joe Montana had their best years in the 1980s.....Both still were very good QBs in the 90s but their prime years were the 1980s.....Elway peaked late in his career and his has best years his last few years in the NFL so I'll give you that....

Aikman,Favre,Moon,Young, and Kelly were great QBs......But Randall Cunningham?:lol: I was a huge Cunningham fan and he was good but come on do not put them on that list with those great QBs...lol

Tom Brady and Peyton Manning are in the company with the great QBs you mentioned....

LT is the conversation with Smith and Sanders...I'm not going into who is the best since that argument will never end.....I just think he belongs in the conversation with the greatest RBs of all time....

Jerry Rice best of all time.....I agree.....

As for Rod.....Are you talking about Rod Woodson? If so he played corner most of his career....not safety.....:lol: One of the greatest corners ever also......He could do it all...tackle and cover.....Plus was one hell of a kick returner in his prime....So please know what you're talking about...lol

I'm not going to touch what era is better....Since I really don't care...But really the game is not that different today then it was in the 90s...You make it sound like comparing todays NFL with the 1940s NFL....:lol:

RW318
01-21-2008, 08:00 PM
I thought he played Safety towards the end of his career...so I just threw him in there with an lol since it is a Steelers site lol.

The 90s was a much more physical game though....it's a HUGE difference in that aspect. As far as talent it's pretty much the same.

Except you could stack some MAJOR talent on teams in the earl 90s lol.

Black@Gold Forever32
01-21-2008, 08:09 PM
I thought he played Safety towards the end of his career...so I just threw him in there with an lol since it is a Steelers site lol.

The 90s was a much more physical game though....it's a HUGE difference in that aspect. As far as talent it's pretty much the same.

Rod played safety at the end of his career.....When he signed with the Ravens he was moved to safety......When they won the Super Bowl in 2000 he was a safety for sure....Of course with the Raiders he played safety also.....But through 87-97 he played corner which all of those years he was Steelers except 97 when he played that season with the 49ers....

I don't think the players are less physical...The reason the game is less physical is do to the rules put into place...The over protecting of the QB and such rules like that which really doesn't allow the defensive player to play defense anymore...lol But thats not these current players fault.....

This whole who is the greatest team ever is stupid anyway....You really can't say which team is the greatest....But the Pats are the greatest team of the 2000s...

1950s-Browns
1960s-Packers
1970s-Steelers
1980s-49ers
1990s-Cowboys
2000s-Pats

Those are the dynasties of those decades...Any of those teams can stake a claim as the greatest team in NFL history....

As for single seasons.....

Of course the 72 Phins will always be up there...But so will the 85 Bears be int he conversation with this current Pats squad....

buccaneers#1fan
01-21-2008, 09:24 PM
hell yeah im wit troy all the way. giants upset pats in the superbowl.

Prosdo
01-22-2008, 09:48 AM
I really wanted to see the Packers vs Patriots, but didn't happen. Let's Go Giants!

BlitzburghNation
01-22-2008, 08:31 PM
Go G-men,,,,,,,,:bigfinger: Those patzeez !
Not a big Eli fan,but I really hate those patzeez,,,,,,,,,,

SteelersfaninPhilly
01-22-2008, 09:49 PM
Who gives a ****? It is not the steelers so who cares?