Jets In Playoffs

[gales0678]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

Why is there always an excuse with you? Favre has a good year? Its because of Adrian Peterson. Tennessee's line blocks well enough that a guy gets 2000 yards but yet you attribute it to the QB. Get real.

Originally Posted by dalakhani

You live in this weird world of "ifs". It is a world I try to stay out of. IF Ronnie Brown doesnt get injured, how many more yards do the fish run for? How many more yards do the cowboys run for IF they had an offensive coordinator with a brain and IF their backs could stay healthy?
I can play that game as well.

The facts are the facts. You have these opinions of the jets but I think they are fraudulent and I am willing to back that with a wager...a straight up wager.

Do you want to make that bet...just fifty dollars...or are you going to be a chicken?

chris johnson is the best back in the league hands down , not knocking him at all , but , when you bring in total yds you do relaize VY played half they year and had over 280 yds rushing , sanchez had 104 yrds in all 16 games

i'm not knocking cj at all , i'm poiniting out your yardage total for the titans includes an extra 280 yds of scrambles from VY

are you going to give up the points in the wager?

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by gales0678

[b]


chris johnson is the best back in the league hands down , not knocking him at all , but , when you bring in total yds you do relaize VY played half they year and had over 280 yds rushing , sanchez had 104 yrds in all 16 games

i'm not knocking cj at all , i'm poiniting out your yardage total for the titans includes an extra 280 yds of scrambles from VY

are you going to give up the points in the wager?

What about Peterson? Is he chopped liver now? A couple of weeks ago, he was the root of Favre's success. LOL

The dolphins were the leading rushing team in the league when ronnie brown went down.

And why do you need points? You say the jets are going to win. How about 70 to 50? That would be a +140 money line for you which is probably about where it will be.

Deal?

[gales0678]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

What about Peterson? Is he chopped liver now? A couple of weeks ago, he was the root of Favre's success. LOL

The dolphins were the leading rushing team in the league when ronnie brown went down.

And why do you need points? You say the jets are going to win. How about 70 to 50? That would be a +140 money line for you which is probably about where it will be.

Deal?

a little higher (ex oregeon was -4 in rose bowl and was -200 and osu was +170) , you not only insult me , now you going to try and rob me too

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by gales0678

a little higher (ex oregeon was -4 in rose bowl and was -200 and osu was +170) , you not only insult me , now you going to try and rob me too

LOL. Who said the line was 4? That was a guess on my part but Im probably wrong. I would have never guessed the pats laying but 4 points to the ravens. I would have figured that game about a touchdown.

The money line isnt directly related to the spread.

[gales0678]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

LOL. Who said the line was 4? That was a guess on my part but Im probably wrong. I would have never guessed the pats laying but 4 points to the ravens. I would have figured that game about a touchdown.

The money line isnt directly related to the spread.

welker is out who is going to make all the catches for brady now ???

the ravens should beat the pats

i'll put a * on the raven game though because the zebras can always save the game for the pats (see the game in oct with all the phony calls to get ne home)

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by gales0678

welker is out who is going to make all the catches for brady now ???

the ravens should beat the pats

i'll put a * on the raven game though because the zebras can always save the game for the pats (see the game in oct with all the phony calls to get ne home)

I like the pats in that game hands down. I think it will be by a comfortable amount.

And we can wait for the spread on the bengals. It will be a fun wager.

[gales0678]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

I like the pats in that game hands down. I think it will be by a comfortable amount.

And we can wait for the spread on the bengals. It will be a fun wager.

there both at 4

you do realzie welker is not playing?

[Patrick333]

I'm not a Jet fan (Eagles) but I certainly wish you guys luck. I hope Buddy's boy can do something that he couldn't, win a playoff game.

[otisotisotis]

Bengals fan here - in case you missed it, they had nothing to play for last night and the game plan was very vanilla. 3 or 4 def. starters didn't play and they basically played base the whole game. I;m sure they'd rather play the Jets again than face a hot Texans team that already beat them at home.
The Jets had fire in their bellies and laid everyting on the line and on the table last night.
Rookie QB on the road in a first playoff game - I would take that as a Bengal fan. And considering the Jets were given the last 2 wins to even make the playoffs makes them a sketchy playoff team at best.
But, either way we will know come Saturday night.

[herkhorse]

Originally Posted by otisotisotis

Bengals fan here - in case you missed it, they had nothing to play for last night and the game plan was very vanilla. 3 or 4 def. starters didn't play and they basically played base the whole game. I;m sure they'd rather play the Jets again than face a hot Texans team that already beat them at home.
The Jets had fire in their bellies and laid everyting on the line and on the table last night.
Rookie QB on the road in a first playoff game - I would take that as a Bengal fan. And considering the Jets were given the last 2 wins to even make the playoffs makes them a sketchy playoff team at best.
But, either way we will know come Saturday night.

LOL, they're toast.

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by otisotisotis

Bengals fan here - in case you missed it, they had nothing to play for last night and the game plan was very vanilla. 3 or 4 def. starters didn't play and they basically played base the whole game. I;m sure they'd rather play the Jets again than face a hot Texans team that already beat them at home.
The Jets had fire in their bellies and laid everyting on the line and on the table last night.
Rookie QB on the road in a first playoff game - I would take that as a Bengal fan. And considering the Jets were given the last 2 wins to even make the playoffs makes them a sketchy playoff team at best.
But, either way we will know come Saturday night.

I understand what you are saying about them really having nothing to play for, but with that being said they were absolutely dominated last night in every aspect. If they had no intentions of trying to move the ball/score then there was no reason for Palmer/Ochocinco even being out there. Maybe they kept it vanillia, but the fact that they couldn't move the ball at all isn't good.

I could see the game going either way next week, it's actually a good matchup for the Jets and I'm leaning that way (as painful as it for me to say that). You would think as long as the game stays close (I don't believe the Cincy is an offensive powerhouse) it means that Sanchez doesn't have to do that much throwing the ball (I guess you can say Edwards doesn't have to worry about catching it either) and thats good for the Jets. The only negative thing I think for the Jets is, that they played so so well last night and dominated the game so handily, that they might start looking past the Bengals on to possible 2nd round match ups. They really are a brash/cocky bunch (which isn't totally bad), but it's possible that they are thinking that they are going to waltz right past what looked to be an inept Bengals squad last night.

Joey, How cold was it there last night? I remember watching and thinking to myself that, maybe they should have put a dome on the new place. I'm sure the way they played took some of the edge out of the cold, it always does.

[GBBob]

I think it's pretty amazing that three of the four games are Week 17 re-matches..what are the odds of that?

[gales0678]

Originally Posted by GBBob

I think it's pretty amazing that three of the four games are Week 17 re-matches..what are the odds of that?

nfl can't be happy bob

this stat for the playoffs looks good for the vikings:

"Since the NFL playoffs expanded to 12 teams in 1990 with the #1 and #2 seeds in each conference owning a first round bye there have been 23 times where a #1 or #2 seed has LOST their final regular season game (more often than not resting starters and tanking) and then had their bye. But unbelievably only 3 of those 23 #1 or #2 seeds that lost their final regular season game went on to win the Super Bowl!!!! 3 out of 23 in 19 years! I think that speaks volumes as to how big of a factor momentum is in this game and just how utterly STUPID it is to rest starters and tank your final regular season game if you have a bye after that, effectively killing any momentum."




The 3 winners?




1999 Rams

1994 49ers

1991 Redskins

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by gales0678

nfl can't be happy bob

this stat for the playoffs looks good for the vikings:

"Since the NFL playoffs expanded to 12 teams in 1990 with the #1 and #2 seeds in each conference owning a first round bye there have been 23 times where a #1 or #2 seed has LOST their final regular season game (more often than not resting starters and tanking) and then had their bye. But unbelievably only 3 of those 23 #1 or #2 seeds that lost their final regular season game went on to win the Super Bowl!!!! 3 out of 23 in 19 years! I think that speaks volumes as to how big of a factor momentum is in this game and just how utterly STUPID it is to rest starters and tank your final regular season game if you have a bye after that, effectively killing any momentum."




The 3 winners?




1999 Rams

1994 49ers

1991 Redskins

Why not? Isn't that what the NFL wants.....Parity.
Which is the quicker way for a NFL head coach to end up on the unemployment line?
Have your #1 seed team that played well the whole season lose in the playoffs?

Or to have your #1 seed team suffer a devestating injury in a meaningless week 17 game with nothing to play for?

I'm guessing that #2 will get you fired quicker. So until that reverses, I really don't see any big changes coming any time soon.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by gales0678

nfl can't be happy bob

this stat for the playoffs looks good for the vikings:

"Since the NFL playoffs expanded to 12 teams in 1990 with the #1 and #2 seeds in each conference owning a first round bye there have been 23 times where a #1 or #2 seed has LOST their final regular season game (more often than not resting starters and tanking) and then had their bye. But unbelievably only 3 of those 23 #1 or #2 seeds that lost their final regular season game went on to win the Super Bowl!!!! 3 out of 23 in 19 years! I think that speaks volumes as to how big of a factor momentum is in this game and just how utterly STUPID it is to rest starters and tank your final regular season game if you have a bye after that, effectively killing any momentum."




The 3 winners?




1999 Rams

1994 49ers

1991 Redskins

Well the Packers and Cardinals certainly went opposite directions yesterday...we'll see how it pans out next week. Ironically, Card mailed it in and rested starters, but had three starters leave due to injury versus Packers who played all out for three quarters, but only had one injury.