.:.:.:.:
RTTP
.
Mobile
:.:.:.:.
[
<--back
] [
Home
][
Pics
][
News
][
Ads
][
Events
][
Forum
][
Band
][
Search
]
full forum
|
bottom
Reply
[
login
]
SPAM Filter:
re-type this
(values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)
you are quoting a heck of a lot there.
[QUOTE]blah blah blah[/QUOTE] to reply to dreadkill.
Please remove excess text as not to re-post tons
message
[QUOTE="dreadkill:708257"]tbone_r nli said:[QUOTE]how can you possibly make reference to the patriots schedule as anything but strong? They beat 2/3 teams left in the playoffs (chargers, giants), and beat 3/4 teams to lose in the divisional round (cowboys, colts, jaguars). They beat the best team to lose in the first round (steelers), as well as the best team to not make the playoffs (Browns) and the better of the 2 teams to lose in the first round of the NFC wildcard (redskins). The only good teams they didn't beat were because (obviously) they didnt play them (Packers, Seahawks). However, the patriots beat one of only 2 teams that beat the Pack (cowboys). And if you even want to call the seahawks good (i'd prefer "NFC good" or "ok"), you can still say that out of the 6 teams the hawks lost to, the patriots beat 2 of them (steelers, browns). And even though the rest of their division was weak, the Bills are still a top 15 team in any power ranking. So the Patriots had 4 really easy games out of 17. They played the best division in the NFC as well as the 3 other best teams in the AFC and did so convincingly. The '72 dolphins beat teams with a combined winning percentage of what i believe was under 500. Find one other team in the league this year that had a schedule difficulty even close to the patriots and fared even remotely as successful (10 wins). You can't. I SAID GOOD DAY[/QUOTE] well said, i agree [/QUOTE]
top
[
Vers. 0.12
][ 0.005 secs/8 queries][
refresh
][