molson_golden2002 Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 They were the difference. Manning was barely touched, the running backs had huge holes to run through and they did it against a pretty good defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 They were the difference. Manning was barely touched, the running backs had huge holes to run through and they did it against a pretty good defense. should have gone to their center. most of the runs were up the middle, manning barely had any pressure, he never made a bad snap in the rain and he had to deal w/ all of peytons audibles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molson_golden2002 Posted February 5, 2007 Author Share Posted February 5, 2007 should have gone to their center. most of the runs were up the middle, manning barely had any pressure, he never made a bad snap in the rain and he had to deal w/ all of peytons audibles. If you had to pick one, yes, but they all played well. Played like a great offensive line should Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 You could say the same for every SB-winning team's O-line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 If you had to pick one, yes, but they all played well. Played like a great offensive line should would have been awesome if the voters had a clue for a change and appreciated the work of the oline instead of reflexisely awarding to the QB. 25 of 38, 247 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT, 0 rush yards in a victory not bad but probably not MVP either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokinandjokin Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 No safeties in run support helps an OLine look pretty good, too. They were so scared of fast-strike Manning, they let Dominick Rhodes kill them slowly. Did you see how far off the LOS the Bears' safeties were playing? A good 15+ yards, and backpedaling on the snap! There's no denying that Urlacher is a great player, and the heartbeat of the team, but the Chicago defense lost a LOT of luster when Mike Brown went down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 No safeties in run support helps an OLine look pretty good, too. They were so scared of fast-strike Manning, they let Dominick Rhodes kill them slowly. Did you see how far off the LOS the Bears' safeties were playing? A good 15+ yards, and backpedaling on the snap! There's no denying that Urlacher is a great player, and the heartbeat of the team, but the Chicago defense lost a LOT of luster when Mike Brown went down. no doubt, but bears played the same defense against saints and the front 4 were in brees face all day. and that saints line was supposed to be good too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 would have been awesome if the voters had a clue for a change and appreciated the work of the oline instead of reflexisely awarding to the QB. 25 of 38, 247 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT, 0 rush yards in a victory not bad but probably not MVP either. It's far more deserving of an MVP than Brady's performance in the Pats' first SB. And add in the fact that it was raining like anything... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted February 5, 2007 Share Posted February 5, 2007 There's no denying that Urlacher is a great player, and the heartbeat of the team, but the Chicago defense lost a LOT of luster when Mike Brown went down. And Harris. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts