Superbowl winner? - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to Football Talk

Superbowl winner?

Moderator: Football Moderators

Postby South Park Cows » Wed Feb 02, 2005 6:05 pm

Cowboys.
Image
South Park Cows
General Manager
General Manager

Mock(ing) DrafterWeb Supporter
Posts: 2257
Joined: 2 Sep 2004
Home Cafe: Football

Postby stomperrob » Wed Feb 02, 2005 7:58 pm

As they say "on any given Sunday...". The Pats do appear to have the edge but then the Colts had the edge in Super Bowl III and weren't supposed to lose to the lowly Jets; and no way Oakland was supposed to beat Philly in Super Bowl XV; and no one thought the Raiders would beat Washington in Super Bowl XVIII (just a few examples).
As former Browns coach Sam Rutigliano would say - on paper, the Pats have the better team - unfortunately for the Pats Sunday's game will not be played on paper!
GO EAGLES
Image
Fantasy Football: "Luck is where preparation meets opportunity"
stomperrob
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyePick 3 ChampionMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 13579
(Past Year: 138)
Joined: 19 Mar 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Steeler Nation!!!

Postby portisfan24 » Wed Feb 02, 2005 10:16 pm

Dr. Duran Duran wrote:
portisfan24 wrote:
Dr. Duran Duran wrote:
chaindog35 wrote:i'm rooting for the eagles, but the pats are simply the better team


A lot of people said that about the Rams when the Patriots won their first Super Bowl.


That's an unfair comparison. Why not just say Trent Dilfer is better than McNabb because he's played in more Super Bowls.



two quotes from you. In the second you are discrediting my evidence by using a past superbowl which has nothing to do with this one. Yet, in the first quote you use a past superbowl to support your own argument?


Your quote is totally subjective. Anyone can see that simply comparing a quarterbacks total number of Super Bowl appearances isn't an end all way to justify how much better he is.

My quote is based on fact supported by a legitmate outcome. When the Rams lost to the Patriots four years ago, hardly anyone gave New England a chance to win. The outcome of that game didn't support the Rams being heavily favored to win. I'm not saying that the Eagles will win, I'm simply saying that it's too early to say the Patriots are a better team when the game hasn't even been played yet.


alright I see what youre saying. Just to clarify, I wasnt saying that Brady is a better qb because he has been in the superbowl, Im saying he is more experienced in the Super Bowl compared to DOnovan McNabb who hasnt been in any.
Image
portisfan24
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterInnovative MemberCafe MusketeerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 6196
Joined: 4 May 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Canada

Postby maddog60 » Wed Feb 02, 2005 11:19 pm

DisgruntledJetsFan wrote:1. Tom Brady is a whole different player in the playoffs, as is evident by his perfect record. Donovan McNabb doesn't have any superbowls to his name, and it took him 4 tries to get past the NFC championship game.


First off, for the Superbowls comment. Brady didn't have any Superbowls when he won his first SB MVP, so that statistic is rather irrelevant. Its like me posting that in college Brady lost the big game to McNabb therefore, Brady hasn't won any big games against McNabb. It is meaningless.

Secondly, look at the passer ratings. McNabb was better over the course of the entire season than Brady. In the playoffs, McNabb is the number one QB coming out of the playoffs, and the only one better than Brady. Oh, McNabb kinda did that without his only credible WR, whereas Brady benefitted from Branch finally being healthy and in the offense again. I won't deny Brady plays incredible in the playoffs, but by comparison, there is no reason why McNabb should be outplayed by Brady this superbowl.

2. To say that Brian Westbrook is better than Corey Dillon is absurd. Maybe he can catch the ball out of the backfield well, but Dillon had a tremendous year, around 1630 yards.


Dillon played in 15 games, and had 1738 total yards. Westbrook played in 13 games, and had 1515 yards.
Dillon had 115.86 ypg, and 4.7 ypc on an avg 24 touches a game.
Westbrook had 116.54 ypg, and 4.6 ypc on an avg 19.23 touches per game.

So with roughly 5 less touches each game, Westbrook accounted for more yards in each game on average, and had nearly the same ypc. Factor in Westbrook's youth, and his versatility with catching the football, and yeah, anybody would want him over Dillon. But somehow its absurd?

3. Steelers secondary is not that great with the exception of Troy Polamalu. The Eagles do have an incredible secondary, but just look at the steelers linebackers. Farrior, Porter, Bell, etc.


Last time I checked, Farrior and Porter don't drop back and cover Branch, Givens, or Patten. The Eagles can match Brown and Sheppard on any two WRs the Pats put out there, and play 8 in the box for the run without having to worry. They're one of the few teams that can do this, and it'll make throwing hell for Brady (though I expect him to make the smart throw, it's not going to be nearly as easy as his last couple games).

Look: In defense, you have the two defenses that let the least points up (Philly, then NE) in the playoffs They haven't played defenses that have performed well overall in the playoffs(Colts/Pitt = 5/9, Minn/Atl = 6/7). They're also the 1st and 3rd offenses in the playoffs (NE, then Philly). And they have faced other potent playoff offenses, which by their defensive rankings they had clearly shut down (Atl/Minn = 2/7, Ind/Pitt = 4/6). So you have two teams that ranked near the top if not the top in both categories, the two statistically best team in the entire playoffs, facing each other. They're going against the toughest defenses they've seen since the playoffs began, and the toughest offenses each other has seen since the playoffs began. This should by these indicators alone, be the closest, hardest fought, best game of the year. Ignoring the how good the Eagles are just because the Pats rightfully deserve to be the favorites does not bode well.
maddog60
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 9758
Joined: 18 Sep 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Postby disgruntledjetsfan » Thu Feb 03, 2005 12:18 am

maddog60 wrote:First off, for the Superbowls comment. Brady didn't have any Superbowls when he won his first SB MVP, so that statistic is rather irrelevant. Its like me posting that in college Brady lost the big game to McNabb therefore, Brady hasn't won any big games against McNabb. It is meaningless.


What?? I never said anything about their head to head matchups. This is not Donovan McNabbs first time in the playoffs, he has proven that he can't win the big game (see last year...year before that....year before that.......). He finally won this year against a team that I didnt think was that good anyways. Brady has never, NEVER lost in the playoffs. Frankly, I don't like Brady much because I am a Jets fan, but there is no denying that this guy is something special. I would rather have him than McNabb in this game.

Dillon played in 15 games, and had 1738 total yards. Westbrook played in 13 games, and had 1515 yards.
Dillon had 115.86 ypg, and 4.7 ypc on an avg 24 touches a game.
Westbrook had 116.54 ypg, and 4.6 ypc on an avg 19.23 touches per game.

So with roughly 5 less touches each game, Westbrook accounted for more yards in each game on average, and had nearly the same ypc. Factor in Westbrook's youth, and his versatility with catching the football, and yeah, anybody would want him over Dillon. But somehow its absurd?


When you are talking about ypg, you are not factoring in the fact that Westbrook is just a WR who happens to run the ball. The Patriots offense is not built around stats, either. I have been amazed at how they can destroy such good defenses with a seemingly unimpressive offense. They have no real stars. Brady's stats are good, not great. Dillon is a great back, and westbrook just hasnt proven it yet.


Look: In defense, you have the two defenses that let the least points up (Philly, then NE) in the playoffs They haven't played defenses that have performed well overall in the playoffs(Colts/Pitt = 5/9, Minn/Atl = 6/7). They're also the 1st and 3rd offenses in the playoffs (NE, then Philly). And they have faced other potent playoff offenses, which by their defensive rankings they had clearly shut down (Atl/Minn = 2/7, Ind/Pitt = 4/6). So you have two teams that ranked near the top if not the top in both categories, the two statistically best team in the entire playoffs, facing each other. They're going against the toughest defenses they've seen since the playoffs began, and the toughest offenses each other has seen since the playoffs began. This should by these indicators alone, be the closest, hardest fought, best game of the year. Ignoring the how good the Eagles are just because the Pats rightfully deserve to be the favorites does not bode well.


You cannot compare the NFC teams to the AFC teams. And don't go by this years playoff rankings. Its based on 1 or 2 games. How can you say that the steelers D isnt that good? They held the jets offense to 3 points (which isnt saying much, but still). And the Minnesota offense isnt comparable to the colts. And i seem to remember minnesota scoring a decent number of points.
disgruntledjetsfan
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterCafe MusketeerSweet 16 Survivor
Posts: 6358
(Past Year: 8)
Joined: 25 Jan 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Fighting in the shade...

Postby chcbb » Thu Feb 03, 2005 8:56 am

mtryanks12 wrote:
portisfan24 wrote:
mtryanks12 wrote:I really want the eagles to win on sunday for two reasons:

1) I want the Pats fans to shut up for once.



I may be biased, but I think Eagles fans are a little more, shall we say exuberant, about their team than us Patriot fans.

oh and deluxe, if the Eagles win the SB dont you think bag will be even more vocal?


In connecticut, you have no idea how wxuberant the pats fans are. I wasn't necessairly talking about guys at the cafe.


conneticut is the red headed stepchild of new england sports; you got red sox fans, yankees fans, pats fans, giants fans.... it's all just a big mess. plus a lot of conneticans i know hold a grudge that the patriots backed out of moving to hartford (thank god).

anyway on the topic of this post i think it's obvious that i want the pats to win, because well, they've always been who i've rooted for. i know a lot of people are patriot haters now, but i've come to accept that because it comes with being succesful. i'm just going to enjoy the winning while it lasts. now i guess i know what it feels like to be a *shudder* yankees fan circa 1996-2000. i feel dirty.
chcbb
Defensive Assistant
Defensive Assistant

User avatar

Posts: 501
Joined: 12 May 2004
Home Cafe: Football

Postby SeaWolf » Thu Feb 03, 2005 9:19 am

I usually pull for the team that has either never won a Super Bowl or hasn't won one for a while. I can't stand TO. I never want to see him get a ring. Therefor I am cheering for the Patriots.
Image
Sporting events are family events. If you can't watch your language for 3 hours then stay home.
SeaWolf
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
CafeholicEagle EyeTrivia Time Trial ChampionPick 3 Weekly WinnerCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 4620
(Past Year: 1)
Joined: 17 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Time to FEED THE BEAST!

Postby eaglesrule » Thu Feb 03, 2005 9:43 am

"When you are talking about ypg, you are not factoring in the fact that Westbrook is just a WR who happens to run the ball. "

that is simply ignorant. you don't think westbrook would have gotten 1000 yards if he had played in three more games? gimmie a break.

it is most certianly valid to compare the total yardages of the two. somehow when marshall fualk was doing the same type of things, it was the best thing ever. the facts are that when the eagles need to run the ball, he is more than capable, and dillon only had a marginal more amount of yards in more games.

Yea, the WHOLE of the AFC was better. But that isn't a slight on the Eagles -- they beat every NFC team they played, and they destroyed almost all of them. You can only play the games in front of you. And yes the nfc was "weak" but they did destroy the three best teams of the nfc, the vikings, packers, and the panthers (when the panthers were good and healthy). The vikings would not have been 8-8 had moss been healthy. They beat the falcons who had a winning record versus the afc. The eagles beat the ravens, whom beat the steelers. They beat the two best offenses in the conference who were top five in the league. I think the D is more than legit AFC superiority or not.
How anyone can think the Eagles are a product of a weak conference, given that they have done it year in year out and destroyed the people they have played. To say the AFC is better is almost trite at this point.

But, logically it does not follow that since the AFC on the WHOLE is better, that the Pats are better than the Eagles because they hail from the AFC. The West in general was better than the EAst, but the Pistons (from the East) were the Best. Its like saying the nations best scholar can't come from a poor school district because we all know the "rich schools" are better.
The opening scene of the movie "Saving Private Ryan" is loosely based on games of dodgeball Brian Dawkins played in second grade.
eaglesrule
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 2843
Joined: 3 Dec 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Postby portisfan24 » Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:10 pm

chcbb wrote:
mtryanks12 wrote:
portisfan24 wrote:
mtryanks12 wrote:I really want the eagles to win on sunday for two reasons:

1) I want the Pats fans to shut up for once.



I may be biased, but I think Eagles fans are a little more, shall we say exuberant, about their team than us Patriot fans.

oh and deluxe, if the Eagles win the SB dont you think bag will be even more vocal?


In connecticut, you have no idea how wxuberant the pats fans are. I wasn't necessairly talking about guys at the cafe.


conneticut is the red headed stepchild of new england sports; you got red sox fans, yankees fans, pats fans, giants fans.... it's all just a big mess. plus a lot of conneticans i know hold a grudge that the patriots backed out of moving to hartford (thank god).

anyway on the topic of this post i think it's obvious that i want the pats to win, because well, they've always been who i've rooted for. i know a lot of people are patriot haters now, but i've come to accept that because it comes with being succesful. i'm just going to enjoy the winning while it lasts. now i guess i know what it feels like to be a *shudder* yankees fan circa 1996-2000. i feel dirty.


same here man. I hate all big market teams (Yankees, Red Wings, Lakers). Im used to cheering for my canucks who before recently were terrible. Then there were the Vancouver Grizzlies, dont even get me started. Now its the Blue Jays and Raptors. I feel dirty, but I feel like I deserve some wins.
Image
portisfan24
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterInnovative MemberCafe MusketeerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 6196
Joined: 4 May 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Canada

Postby OwenTheBlonde » Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:21 pm

DisgruntledJetsFan wrote:I think that everyone, even cowboy, giant, and redskin fans want to see the eagles take down the pats (unless you're a pats fan of course). Everyone likes an underdog.

But, the reality is that the Pats are going to win big.


Couldn't agree more.
OwenTheBlonde
Offensive Coordinator
Offensive Coordinator

User avatar

Posts: 668
Joined: 10 Jan 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Right behind you with a bucket of Gatorade

Previous

Return to Football Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

cron
Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 17:50 hours
(and 36 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


  • Fantasy Football
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact