BuffOrange

The Stevie play made us go from 100% --> ~55-60% chance of winning? This play made the Eagles go from ~5% --> 0%... So not really the same thing. BTW this was mentioned on one of the postgame shows and I've always wondered the same thing - how hard can it be to to pick up 6 inches when the #1 thing on most DLmens mind is "I can't move, must not jump in case they don't snap it"?

The part I have a hard time with is I've seen about a dozen plays this year (namely the Oakland hail marry) where holding on Merriman was much more blatant than the one they finally called today. It just seems so random and arbitrary that you have to wonder what they are looking at. And the spot on 1st drive - OMG - did anyone in the world even need replay for that? It was so obvious watching it live that he was a yard short. The second running off at the end of the half is really very standard. That's never reviewed on replay unless you're Texas. Shame on Vick for being so casual.

You clearly didn't play in the NFL, where the talent disparity is a little different than it is in Pop Warner.

I know somebody whose office janitor picked Philly too.

Death, Taxes, and blaming playcalling after a loss. You act like running the ball is some kind of lifeline that guarantees 5 yards on every carry when the passing game isn't putting up big #'s. Well guess what just like the passing game wasn't as successful against Cincy, neither was the running game, which is why Jackson was <4ypc. It's not that easy to "kill the clock and kick a FG" with 10 minutes left. First you have to get in FG range, which they may have done if not for the blown call. You must've missed that the running game helped get us back in the game vs. Oakland too.

From what I remember growing up in Syracuse, the network the teams are normally on determines whether they show the Giants or Bills. IE when the Giants are hosting an AFC team on CBS, they will show the Bills game instead... But apparently the #1 FOX team is somehow doing Hawks-Giants so maybe that's a more marquee matchup than I think it is.

I've gotten into it more the last few years but can't really argue that it's kinda dumb. Look at this Cardinals game today. They hit soft bloop after weak flair single after wimpy dribbler to load the bases and put themselves in a position to win. They finally get a guy to crush a ball and it's a double play.

Maybe teams spied him in Atl, but nobody does anymore. Their weapons at the skill positions will kill you if you waste a defender on that. The Giants are not a big blitz team but the Vikings and Packers blitzed the crap out of him at the end of last year w/ pretty good success. Of course 4man pressure is always preferable (not the Bills strength clearly).

I'm just saying if you're in a large pool, it's worth taking risks because who cares whether you're eliminated in week 1 or week 9 - you need to last the whole season. By creative I don't mean picking road teams or 3pt favorites. That's stupid. I mean when Pittsburgh was the easiest pick in week 2, I think it was reasonable to notice that their schedule is a complete joke and pick a less popular team like the Jets (who don't have many easy games) vs. Jacksonville. Of course some weeks such as this one you don't have that luxury so the Giants are the only choice. Lets not kid ourselves there's luck involved too. I dunno if my Tampa pick was any necessarily any smarter than someone's Philly pick last week. Maybe Ronnie Brown & Jeremy Maclin wanted to get rid of some people in their pool - a little ridiculous that they lost that game.

They're more like the '91 Bills who went 13-3 than the '08 Bills who went 7-9, but they'll probably finish 8-8? You're just really hedging and setting yourself up to not be disappointing don't ya think?

In general, the larger the pool the more creative you want to get. But yah there is really no reason to get fancy this week. Take the Giants and move on.

Why? Reeks of guilty to me; though I wouldn't have an easy time convicting in court. Her and her boyfriend shut off their cell phones (which they never did) and bought cleaning supplies at 7am?

Can we please delete these threads that are complete aids? Honestly.

Obviously they have some holes. The worst of the worst though, for the most part don't have an elite players at key positions - they have a few in Long, Wake, and Marshall. It is possible the whole owner/coach dynamic causes them to implode, but if they don't quit they're going to win some games.

I have a bad feeling about this game. Not because they're due as much as their record is just a fluke. Teams that find the redzone as much as they do and fail to score TD's, there's typically some bad luck involved. Reminds me a lot of the last time we played them here in '03. They were coming off two bad home losses and we came down to earth the previous week in Miami.

Yah I don't think Miami is even one of the worst 5 teams in the league.

Hey look at that, a voice of reason. We just snapped 15 and 10 game winning/losing streaks vs. the Pats & Bengals. But yah we always play to the level of competition, haha. Don't get the "we weren't going undefeated" comments. There are 7-8 games minimum on the schedule that are more difficult than Cincy. It wouldn't have been difficult to not go undefeated and win that game.

You're not kidding. Andy Reid must be the worst coach in the league. For such a tough city, the players get an unbelievable free pass (as long as their name isn't McNabb).

I'm sorry but I'm just tired of that loser mentality. Honestly if I had known the Chiefs would be so terrible I'd have been surprised if we were any worse than 2-2. We've played an easier schedule than NE and played them at home, so being tied with them at this point isn't worth much.

This. He is an overrated punk. People can say what they want about his OL not helping him tonight, but he's had the benefit of the best OL in the league the last two years, a good defense, and a ridiculous # of missed FG's by opponents; yet he gets credit for "winning road playoff games". He's not good when the circumstances aren't perfect.

Stop starting threads.

How McNabb wasn't familiar with common knowledge I'm not sure, but it's not that improbable that he had never been in an almost-tie game before. Simms on the other hand, I would think have experienced a play applicable to the rule once in his long career if it was "called more than I think". And the game isn't that fast in slow-motion.

Maybe Aaron Rodgers and his cast is just better than what we have. Nah, that can't be.

I know everyone here loves to hate on Mike Schopp but I love him for stuff like this - he's not afraid to call out the shield. The league is so full of obscure/convoluted technicalities that it's real easy to leave itself 'outs' and claim that any bad call was correct. They can just selectively enforce this tuck rule once every couple years and every announcer and analyst just goes along with it. But not once has anyone ever complained the other 17 times it wasn't enforced. Seriously, have you ever heard anyone say "ya know I don't think that fumble shoulda counted - tuck rule"? Of course not. Phil Simms was in the booth for the original tuck game and he had never heard of it after playing 19 years in the league; but now he just pretends like it was the right call because that's what announcers do. Same thing with this Giants-Cardinals game that just happened. It's such crap, but everyone always has to pretend these weak calls are ok because the shield is bullet-proof.

You don't win a tiebreaker vs a divisional opponent by winning one game at home.