BelizeIt Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 Go Patriots! I hope its a nice close game, blow outs are boring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willthegolfer Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tarheel1231 Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 DAMN IT SEATTLE! WHY the HELL would you THROW IT? AGH! Â My week has been ruined. Stupid Pats. Well really, stupid Seattle for that stupid ass play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jew Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Even though I think they should have given Lynch one more shot, when you look at an aerial view of the play...it's actually a brilliant call that developed 1/2 second too late. The middle of the field was wide open and only the guy who made the INT was breaking towards the ball. Throw that 1/2 second sooner and it's an easy TD. Â Also, someone crunched the numbers...the Seahawks were actually only 1/15 when rushing Lynch from the 1 yard line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mechanic Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 I'm not a Patriots or Seahawks fan, so who ultimately won was of little concern to me. I'm just glad it was a very entertaining game right to the end. I wish all super bowls could be as good as this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
9Armgeddon4 Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 My offseason SB 50 pick is the Packers over Indy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philrad71 Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 Even though I thought it crazy that Seattle didn't run the ball, that last second pick earned me $250 for final score on one of my office pools. Â Unbelievable the things that players will now do to get attention on the camera (and in the media) with the brawl at the end, Baldwin's "poopdown" and Sherman's taunting of Revis...I knew that the players would keep it klassy! Â All I kept thinking about were parents watching it with their young kids...and then thinking about Paul McCartney being there and what he must have thought of how "cool" us Americans are...it's no wonder other countries can't stand us. Ugghh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfc Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 All I kept thinking about were parents watching it with their young kids...and then thinking about Paul McCartney being there and what he must have thought of how "cool" us Americans are...it's no wonder other countries can't stand us. Ugghh. Â Well, there are such things as "soccer riots" during big matches in Europe. Liverpool fans (McCartney's hometown) are particularly notorious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philrad71 Posted February 3, 2015 Share Posted February 3, 2015 All I kept thinking about were parents watching it with their young kids...and then thinking about Paul McCartney being there and what he must have thought of how "cool" us Americans are...it's no wonder other countries can't stand us. Ugghh. Â Well, there are such things as "soccer riots" during big matches in Europe. Liverpool fans (McCartney's hometown) are particularly notorious. Â Â Point well taken...I forgot about that "other" football and some of their rabid fans! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Intamin_coyote Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 I love how Sherman made it out to be like Revis got burnt on that that TD pass, despite the fact that the ref got in the way of Revis...  And I also find it quite funny that not only did the Seahawks lose the game at the end, but also their dignity  Brady > Montana Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jew Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Joe Montana never lost a Super Bowl, so the edge goes to him IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genx24 Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 I give the edge to Brady due to the unparalleled success he's had since becoming the starting QB. In 13 years the Pats have 11 division titles, 9 AFC Championship game appearances, 6 Super Bowl appearances, and 4 Super Bowl wins. That's quite the résumé. Also, Montana had Jerry Rice at his disposal. Outside of the couple of years with Randy Moss, Brady hasn't had a true weapon at WR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbomser Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Here's the fallacy of this argument. Â As it stands, Malcolm Butler makes a miraculous play and: "Tom Brady is the best QB of all time because he won 4 Super Bowls" Â If Butler doesn't make the play, and the Hawks score: "Tom Brady is a great regular season QB, but he's lost 3 Super Bowls..." Â So thanks to Butler, apparently Brady is the best QB of all time? I'm not saying he isn't good, (and I'm a Jets Fan ), but both of those (and those related to them) are ignorant statements. Â On another note, what did you all think of the halftime show? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tarheel1231 Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 I actually really liked the half time show. Especially with the fireworks at the end. I'm a bit embarrassed to tell people at my school that I liked Katy Perry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mechanic Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 Left shark was stoned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philrad71 Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 Here's the fallacy of this argument. As it stands, Malcolm Butler makes a miraculous play and: "Tom Brady is the best QB of all time because he won 4 Super Bowls"  If Butler doesn't make the play, and the Hawks score: "Tom Brady is a great regular season QB, but he's lost 3 Super Bowls..."  So thanks to Butler, apparently Brady is the best QB of all time? I'm not saying he isn't good, (and I'm a Jets Fan ), but both of those (and those related to them) are ignorant statements.  On another note, what did you all think of the halftime show?  I agree 100% although I fast forwarded through the halftime show to get caught up on the DVR. I am not into that type of music. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meteornotes Posted February 6, 2015 Share Posted February 6, 2015 I was really hoping one of the sharks would bite her. Â dt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Intamin_coyote Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 (edited) Here's the fallacy of this argument. As it stands, Malcolm Butler makes a miraculous play and: "Tom Brady is the best QB of all time because he won 4 Super Bowls"  If Butler doesn't make the play, and the Hawks score: "Tom Brady is a great regular season QB, but he's lost 3 Super Bowls..."  So thanks to Butler, apparently Brady is the best QB of all time? I'm not saying he isn't good, (and I'm a Jets Fan ), but both of those (and those related to them) are ignorant statements.  I see what you're saying. It's just that Brady was already comparable to Montana before the game even started and arguably better, based on how much more overall winning Brady had done in his career compared to Montana, both regular season and post-season (160-47 to 117-47 regular season records and 20-8 to 16-7 playoff records). So matter how Brady's fourth Super Bowl and 3rd SB MVP was won, it just makes it a helluva lot easier to put Brady above Montana. It's just how sports are. Beside, the Seahawks were lucky to even be on the 1-yd line with the assistance of the 2nd most improbable catch in Super Bowl history and they were lucky to even be in the Super Bowl. No one would be taking anything away from Russel Wilson if they had won...  As unfair as it is sometimes, quarterbacks' Super Bowl legacys are usually decided by a few plays here and there, or whether their defense can make a stop with ~2 minutes left. Brady never got credit for his go-ahead touchdown to put the Pats up 14-10 with 2:42 left to play in Super Bowl XLII. That drive had Joe Montana written all over it, just if it only would have been 2 mins later in the game, or if his defense could have intercepted Eli Manning on the play right before the helmet catch like they should have. This time Brady does get credit for his epic go-ahead drive. No one would be calling Eli Manning a great Super Bowl quarterback or Tom Coughlin a great coach if a few miraculous/fortunate plays didn't go their way not only in those 2 Super Bowls they won, but in the NFC title games as well leading up to the Super Bowls.  I'm not saying that situations like these are right. It's just that years from now memory will fade and people will see both Montana and Brady as 4-time champions and 3 time Super Bowl MVPs, and not Brady as "barely" a 4-time champion. Not many talk about Eli Manning as "barely" having 2 Super Bowls, so think it's only fair NOT to refer to Brady as "barely" a 4-time Super Bowl champion.  All I'm trying to say is that the what if? game could be played indefinitely. After those comeback and go-ahead drives, it's only fair that Brady got credit for them with his team winning at the end.  What if the 49ers defense gives up a touchdown in the remaining 34 seconds of Super Bowl XXIII and they end up losing 23-20? There goes "the Joe Montana was never defeated on the biggest stage" argument. They'd blame him for "only" putting up 20 points, even though it was an amount that should have won them the game (if it was this year Pats' defense out there, evidently by witnessing the end of the first half of this Super Bowl, they very well could have given up a touchdown in that short amount of time!)  Joe Montana never lost a Super Bowl, so the edge goes to him IMO. But by that logic you're penalizing Brady for winning more playoff games and thus winning 2 more extra conference championships. If making it to the Super Bowl and not winning is so bad, then that means it would have been better for Brady's legacy if he were just knocked out in the first round of the playoffs in 2007 and 2011, instead of winning the playoff games that got him to the Super Bowl... Edited February 8, 2015 by Intamin_coyote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jew Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 ^You never hear the Super Bowl losers saying "well, at least we were conference champions!" so I would say it is sound logic. Â One other thing I will add is the eras they played in. QB's and receivers are babied now compared to when Joe Montana played. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philrad71 Posted February 7, 2015 Share Posted February 7, 2015 I was really hoping one of the sharks would bite her. dt   I agree...I would have watched if all of the sharks would have eaten her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Intamin_coyote Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 ^You never hear the Super Bowl losers saying "well, at least we were conference champions!" so I would say it is sound logic. One other thing I will add is the eras they played in. QB's and receivers are babied now compared to when Joe Montana played.  I know, but it's still an accomplishment nonetheless(you get a shiny trophy for it after all). How is winning your conference not an accomplishment? Or at least, more successful than losing in the first round of the playoffs, or not even making the playoffs for this matter. It basically means you were the 2nd most accomplished team that year.  The different eras is a fair point, which is why Joe Montana's raw stats wouldn't be as good as Brady's, but I would say winning games and Super Bowls is something that mostly swings both ways no matter what era were talking about. Especially considering that while Brady played with some great defenses early in his career Joe Montana not only had comparable defenses for the years he won his Super Bowls, but on average had better defenses over his entire career, in terms of points allowed.  Average defensive ranking of 49ers (1981-1990) ~ 3.111rd (excluding 1982 as an outlier and only 9 games that season) Average defensive ranking of Pats (2001-2014) ~ 7.929th  Defensive rankings of Patriots when Brady won 4 SBs : 1st, 2nd, 6th, 8th Defensive rankings of 49ers when Montana won 4 SBs : 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 8th  http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/sfo/ http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/nwe/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jew Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 (edited) ^It's an accomplishment sure, but at the end of the day all that matters is the Super Bowl. For example, Jim Kelly is going to be remembered as losing 4 straight Super Bowls, not dominating his conference for 4 straight years. On the flip side, Joe Montana is 4-0 and had a 11/0 TD to interception ratio in his Super Bowl appearances. He played lights out on the biggest stage. That to me is why I will consider him the greatest. Â As far as statistics are concerned...my point was more about the rules themselves. They heavily favor the offense. Back then QB's and receivers genuinely had to fear being obliterated when they got sacked or caught a pass over the middle. Not so much anymore. Â Ultimately, I think it's most fair to say Joe Montana is the greatest of his era and Tom Brady is the greatest of his. We could go back and forth forever, but that's the one thing no one can really dispute. Edited February 8, 2015 by Jew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Intamin_coyote Posted February 8, 2015 Share Posted February 8, 2015 If all that matters is the Super Bowl, then that makes the Seahawks' 2014 season as successful as the Buccaneers' 2014 season... oh nevermind... Â But yes I would agree that it's indisputable that they're both the best of their eras, but the argument of better overall could go back and forth forever. Another thing to note is that it's a lot harder to sustain success in the salary cap era than it was back then. Â But about those interceptions, I would just like to point out Brady's first 3 Super Bowl interceptions happened way down field and were practically punts, with the third one sacrificing at least a field goal, and the 4th resulting in an ensuing touchdown by the Seahawks. Only one of them was really that costly, but he ended up making for it and that's all that matters... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jew Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 ^At the end of the day, that statement is true. NFL teams set out to win the Super Bowl. Anything less might produce some extra bragging rights, revenue for the team, and an extra paycheck for the players...but the end result was still the same as the Bucs: not holding the Lombardi trophy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Intamin_coyote Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 "Jerry Rice admits using stickum after criticizing deflate-gate" Â http://blog.sfgate.com/49ers/2015/02/09/jerry-rice-admits-using-stickum-after-criticizing-deflate-gate/ Â Oh Jerry, you're such a hypocrite... Does this mean YOUR 3 Super Bowls and 2 of Montana's Super Bowls should have asterisks on them? Â Especially considering there's really no evidence so far to prove the Patriots did anything with those footballs, and it's turning out to be about nothing now that new reports are saying only one of the 12 balls were seriously underinflated. Ten others were just a "tick" under: http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/2/1/7959649/deflategate-psi-legal-limit-new-england-patriots-bill-belicheck-tom-brady-ball-boy 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