Patriots vs. Steelers - In Game

Hapday · Post by **Hapday** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 7:27 pm

BSmack wrote:
Over a 16 game season, against a broad cross section of NFL opponents, the Steelers allowed 15.7 points per game and the Pats allowed 16.2. If that doesn't shut you up, maybe I could interest you in a Clue By 4?

The Steelers getting the ever-living shit kicked out of them by a clearly better Patriots team in an extremely important playoff game sure didn't shut your piehole. I think it's pretty obvious who doesn't have a clue about what here. I don't know how many others have to join this pile-on before you realize it.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 7:34 pm

Neely8 wrote:Brady gift wrapped a couple for you on Oct. 31st. You Squeeler fans sure put alot of stock in that game. Seems to me like the Pats D was just as good that day.....ya know......without the turnovers and all. Turnovers don't count..... :roll:

Now you're just bein a fucking idiot. Why don't you read the part of my post (same post mind you) where I specificly said the Steelers and the Pats defenses were equals over the course of the WHOLE season?

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 7:34 pm

Hapday wrote:
BSmack wrote:
Over a 16 game season, against a broad cross section of NFL opponents, the Steelers allowed 15.7 points per game and the Pats allowed 16.2. If that doesn't shut you up, maybe I could interest you in a Clue By 4?
The Steelers getting the ever-living shit kicked out of them by a clearly better Patriots team in an extremely important playoff game sure didn't shut your piehole. I think it's pretty obvious who doesn't have a clue about what here. I don't know how many others have to join this pile-on before you realize it.

Whatever you say Hap Knox. :roll:

JHawkBCD · Post by **JHawkBCD** » Wed Jan 26, 2005 12:05 am

mvscal wrote:Peyton Manning had a 67.6% completion rate with 9.2 yards per attempt this year.

Only because he threw the fucking ball a bazillion times, even when they could have run the ball efficiently.

All smack aside

The next time you run smack will be the first, Meat Curtain Chewer.

JHawkBCD · Post by **JHawkBCD** » Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:02 am

mvscal wrote:Nor have you shown anything that would support your moronic assertion. The fact remains that those are all-pro numbers.

That's why no one gives a fuck about your opinion... by your own fucking argument, you just kicked your own ass.

Sincerely,
Trent Green
5.8% better completion percentage than Tom Brady in 2004
Nearly 1/2 a yard per pass attempt more than Tom Brady in 2004
899 more yards passing than Tom Brady in 2004
4 times more rushing yards on nearly half the attempts than Tom Brady in 2004
95.2 QB rating vs Tom Brady's 92.6 in 2004
Better "Pro Bowl" numbers than Tom Brady in 2004, but not voted to the Pro Bowl in 2004

Time to eject, tardling. There is no arguing the fact that the only thing separating Brady's performance and Roethlisberger's performance in that playoff game is two stupid passes, and that is pretty much reflected in the two TD difference in the final score. Which reinforces the point that I made from the beginning... New England's defense still gave up just as many points to what you and your retarded cohort HerpDay want to coin as a "shitty QB" in Roethlisberger, as Pittsburgh's defense gave up to your "all pro" idol... therefore, New England's defense isn't nearly as much of a "juggernaut" as PatFan would like to believe.

I will be laughing my ass off when PatFan bets the farm on New England, giving seven points with a defense that has to depend on Troy Brown in the secondary.

Take the over, too. No way that game stays below 48 points.

Neely8 · Post by **Neely8** » Wed Jan 26, 2005 5:48 am

JHawkBCD wrote:
mvscal wrote:Nor have you shown anything that would support your moronic assertion. The fact remains that those are all-pro numbers.
That's why no one gives a fuck about your opinion... by your own fucking argument, you just kicked your own ass.

Sincerely,
Trent Green
5.8% better completion percentage than Tom Brady in 2004
Nearly 1/2 a yard per pass attempt more than Tom Brady in 2004
899 more yards passing than Tom Brady in 2004
4 times more rushing yards on nearly half the attempts than Tom Brady in 2004
95.2 QB rating vs Tom Brady's 92.6 in 2004
Better "Pro Bowl" numbers than Tom Brady in 2004, but not voted to the Pro Bowl in 2004

Time to eject, tardling. There is no arguing the fact that the only thing separating Brady's performance and Roethlisberger's performance in that playoff game is two stupid passes, and that is pretty much reflected in the two TD difference in the final score. Which reinforces the point that I made from the beginning... New England's defense still gave up just as many points to what you and your retarded cohort HerpDay want to coin as a "shitty QB" in Roethlisberger, as Pittsburgh's defense gave up to your "all pro" idol... therefore, New England's defense isn't nearly as much of a "juggernaut" as PatFan would like to believe.

I will be laughing my ass off when PatFan bets the farm on New England, giving seven points with a defense that has to depend on Troy Brown in the secondary.

Take the over, too. No way that game stays below 48 points.

They only held Manning and one of the greatest offenses in history to 3 points 2 weeks ago. With said Troy Brown in the backfield.

He also played alot against the Rams and Queefs offenses this year. Both wins......

JHawkBCD · Post by **JHawkBCD** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 2:29 am

Neely8 wrote:They only held Manning and one of the greatest offenses in history to 3 points 2 weeks ago. With said Troy Brown in the backfield.

Yeah, I'm sure that the fact that Indy is a dome team, losing a game played in frigid conditions, and the groundskeepers yanking the tarp three days earlier to let the rain/snow/ice fuck up the field had NOTHING to do with things.

If your defense is that good, you don't have to resort to shit like that.

DMike316 · Post by **DMike316** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 2:09 pm

JHawkBCD wrote:Yeah, I'm sure that the fact that Indy is a dome team, losing a game played in frigid conditions, and the groundskeepers yanking the tarp three days earlier to let the rain/snow/ice fuck up the field had NOTHING to do with things.

If your defense is that good, you don't have to resort to shit like that.

Hold on now.

In all honesty, I'd do the same thing (yanking the tarp).

That's why it's called HOME FIELD ADVANTAGE. They won that advantage by being the better team over the course of the entire season.

If you can't play ball when the temperature is below 70 degrees on your carpet, then win enough games in the regular season that you don't have to go outside in the playoffs.

Dome teams suck horsecocks.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 4:25 pm

This thread is rather pink.

Facts:

The Pat defense gave up almost 40 more rushing yards than Pitt.......and also allowed .5 more yards per rush than Pitt.

The Pat defense gave up 30 more yards through the air than Pitt......and also allowed .5 more yards per pass than Pitt.

The Pat defense gave up 1 more first down than Pitt.

3rd down conversions were virtually even......as were total 1st downs allowed.

The Pat defense came up large.........when......uhh.......the rookie tossed the ball right to them.

Face it, the defenses WERE about equal in this game.

Trade QBs and the opposite result would likely have happened.

Step back and look objectively, Hapless.

JHawkBCD · Post by **JHawkBCD** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 4:26 pm

^^^^ gets it.

DMike316 wrote:Hold on now.

In all honesty, I'd do the same thing (yanking the tarp).

That's why it's called HOME FIELD ADVANTAGE. They won that advantage by being the better team over the course of the entire season.

If you can't play ball when the temperature is below 70 degrees on your carpet, then win enough games in the regular season that you don't have to go outside in the playoffs.

Dome teams suck horsecocks.

Agreed, but my point remains that New England's defense ain't quite "all dat". With all those turnovers, a defense that's "all dat" should have pinned the Steelers down by the throat far earlier than they did in that game.

Hapday · Post by **Hapday** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 4:31 pm

poptart wrote:
Step back and look objectively, Hapless.

You either didn't watch the game, never saw the final score, or you aren't being objective. Which one?

Joe in PB · Post by **Joe in PB** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 4:38 pm

I will be laughing my ass off when PatFan bets the farm on New England, giving seven points with a defense that has to depend on Troy Brown in the secondary.

Sincerely,

Todd Stinkston

I have a hard time figuring out how Philly is going to score. The Eagles don’t run the ball enough to keep NE honest on defense and certainly the Patriots will be keying on Westbrook. That leaves McNabb to have to win the game with the likes of Freddie Mitchell, LJ Smith and Todd alligator armed Stinkston. I wouldn’t count on much from Owens even if he were healthy. Terrell much like Randy Moss has yet to play his best in big games…playoff games.....much less trying to play on an atrophied broken leg.

The "real" Super Bowl was last week against the Steelers.

I think NE right now is head and shoulders above the rest of the league, and will win the "offical" Super Bowl handedly 31-17.

Then I can enjoy the ever-increasing media hype about how NE is a dynasty and Brady is better than Montanna all off season......

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 5:05 pm

Face it, the defenses WERE about equal in this game.

Trade QBs and the opposite result would likely have happened.

All these bitches are running around and crying about Cowher's play-calling - fact is, you're right. The Rookie QB made some dumb mistakes...that's what happened in the game.

Neely8 · Post by **Neely8** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 5:43 pm

poptart wrote:This thread is rather pink.

Facts:

The Pat defense gave up almost 40 more rushing yards than Pitt.......and also allowed .5 more yards per rush than Pitt.

The Pat defense gave up 30 more yards through the air than Pitt......and also allowed .5 more yards per pass than Pitt.

The Pat defense gave up 1 more first down than Pitt.

3rd down conversions were virtually even......as were total 1st downs allowed.

The Pat defense came up large.........when......uhh.......the rookie tossed the ball right to them.

Face it, the defenses WERE about equal in this game.

Trade QBs and the opposite result would likely have happened.

Step back and look objectively, Hapless.

Can you show me how many plays each offense ran? Harrison's return was an immediate turnaround back to the Steelers O. Brady ran one play for the 60 yard bomb. The Steelers O was on the field more.

Edit---Counted 60-53 plays on offense for Pittsburgh. Makes sense. Two extra drives what with the defensive score and all.

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 5:55 pm

If Plexiglass doesn't gutlessly drop that pass in the EZ, the game would have been different. My point being, the Steelers were actually close at several points...not that the Pats wouldn't have answered with more points.

Fair, square, old school beating.