Superbowl matchup?
Posted: Fri Dec 02, 2005 7:39 am
My vote:
Chicago
vs.
Indy
DISCUSS!
Chicago
vs.
Indy
DISCUSS!
Bears SUCK!Th wrote:My vote:
Chicago
vs.
Indy
DISCUSS!
Joe in PB wrote:Right now I'd say Chicago Vs Indy.
Nobody in the NFC is going to beat the Bears in Chicago. Seattle better hope they can hold home field advantage, even then I wouldn't be surprised if the Bears toughness puts them over the top.
I want in on that!frodo_biguns wrote:Kyle Orton!!!!! Does he look south side or what?
Not too mention , they are homosexuals
I'm not sold on the Panthers yet either. The way the NFC is going the Vikings have a chance. They have the second best rated defense in the past four weeks. Things are starting to gel. :DCicero wrote:Indy v. Carolina
I'm not that sold on anybody in the NFC period. There is no clear cut favorite like Indy in the AFC.frodo_biguns wrote:I'm not sold on the Panthers yet either. The way the NFC is going the Vikings have a chance. They have the second best rated defense in the past four weeks. Things are starting to gel. :DCicero wrote:Indy v. Carolina
Funkywhiteboy wrote:I want in on that!frodo_biguns wrote:Kyle Orton!!!!! Does he look south side or what?
Not too mention , they are homosexuals
Sin,
Yea, the only problem is that they only allow an average of 10.9 points a game. Um, hate to be the one to tell you this but that wins championships. With a defense like that all they need to do is not turn it over. A team with that record and that defense FAR from sucks. How should they have lost to Carolina? They allowed 3 points and were ALL OVER them. I saw it and The Panthers did not deserve to win that game at all.frodo_biguns wrote: The Bears SUCK! They should have lost their last two games. If you sore 13 points you will beat them!
Don't be alarmed, fraudo. Despite what you may be used too, it's not unusual for a defender too be that close too an opposing player. It's all part of that thing called tackling.frodo_biguns wrote:
Not too mention , they are homosexuals
Uhhhh....the Bucs outplayed them. Simms fumble at the 1 resulted in the difference as well as the mised FG. TB had chi beat. Not sour grapes but the bucs defense was better than the bears that day while completely confusing orton. No way a rook makes it to the super bowl.Dumbass wrote:Yea, the only problem is that they only allow an average of 10.9 points a game. Um, hate to be the one to tell you this but that wins championships. With a defense like that all they need to do is not turn it over. A team with that record and that defense FAR from sucks. How should they have lost to Carolina? They allowed 3 points and were ALL OVER them. I saw it and The Panthers did not deserve to win that game at all.frodo_biguns wrote: The Bears SUCK! They should have lost their last two games. If you sore 13 points you will beat them!
You say that in the same breath you state The Vikings have a chance? Um, which NFC south team did they beat? Oh the one that won't be in the playoffs. They won't avoid all of them, IF they get in. You're dreaming if you think that pile of shit can do anything against the true contenders of the NFC. Things usually start to gel for an average team when they start playing teams that can not defend. The Giants have a fair share of wins but they don't exactly put the clamps on anyone. Every other team that has a defense has had their way with Minnesota and there are 3 teams at the end of December that find ways to shut down offenses. Sorry, but the only North team worthy of going to the playoffs are those Bears that "suck". The Vikings present "success" is merely dictated by the timing of the schedule. You'll wake up soon.
As far as The Panthers go, yea I have my question marks with them myself now and they still have to prove they can take out Vick. What is more concerning however is that they are not going to be able to rely on that piss poor North to bring CHI down and below them so they can only win out and count on Pittsburgh and Atlanta to do that. If they get that even still they will have to sweep Atlanta to get homefield. With a first round bye and homefield Chicago and Seattle can be some real shitty places to play come January.
Yup... except Tampa Bay's defense wasn't tough enough when it counted.T REX wrote:Not sour grapes but the bucs defense was better than the bears that day while completely confusing orton. No way a rook makes it to the super bowl.
Huh...tard......TB....number TWO defense in the NFL.JHawkBCD wrote:Yup... except Tampa Bay's defense wasn't tough enough when it counted.T REX wrote:Not sour grapes but the bucs defense was better than the bears that day while completely confusing orton. No way a rook makes it to the super bowl.
Phil Simms wrote:
"To say that I'm disappointed in my boy would be an understatement."
Once again, you miss the sarcasm... a play off of your own words... and that's what makes you the uber-tard.T REX wrote:Huh...tard......TB....number TWO defense in the NFL.JHawkBCD wrote:Yup... except Tampa Bay's defense wasn't tough enough when it counted.T REX wrote:Not sour grapes but the bucs defense was better than the bears that day while completely confusing orton. No way a rook makes it to the super bowl.
KC? That opportunistic 27th rated defense. Yep, another stand out year for the KC swiss.
PS No rookie QB has EVER made it to teh Super Bowl. I looked it up.
Chicago ain't going no where.
mvscal wrote:This is just wrong.chowd103 wrote: