Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Detroit loses, Bills lose.
4 views
Skip to first unread message
Ray O'Hara
Oct 16, 2011, 11:35:23 PM10/16/11
to
It was a toughand the coach melts down.
I wouldn't be surprised to see it all unravel for the Lions now.
The Bills also lost but they disn't melt down. they are a good team.
and now the Pats are 1st but with scary D, it scares me silly, especially on
3rd and long.
the Bills s surprising 2nd. and they look solid
the Jets are a surpring 2-3 with a bye. I expected better than that.
The Fish, they just suck , love it. they could conceivably go o-fer
and should they give Peyton the MVP trophy now?
I wouldn't be surprised to see it all unravel for the Lions now.
The Bills also lost but they disn't melt down. they are a good team.
and now the Pats are 1st but with scary D, it scares me silly, especially on
3rd and long.
the Bills s surprising 2nd. and they look solid
the Jets are a surpring 2-3 with a bye. I expected better than that.
The Fish, they just suck , love it. they could conceivably go o-fer
and should they give Peyton the MVP trophy now?
Señor Patriots
Oct 16, 2011, 11:51:50 PM10/16/11
to
The Lions and Bills and Niners are going to have to learn how to act
as a winning organization. So far the Lions seem to have no idea.
The world isn't weeping because the Lions lost a game. A surprising
number of people picked the Niners in that game too. It's a pretty
good team. Harbaugh is still the same competitor. You have to love a
RB like Gore. They are on the rise. I like all three teams but the
Niners seem to have it together enough to beat Detroit on the road and
that says it all.
The Bills certainly don't have a lock on a wildcard or anything but I
have to like their chances better than the Jets. The Jets have too
much internal dissension. The Bills are all on the same page. I
wouldn't write off anybody at this early stage but boy are the Jets in
a hole if they lose to the Fish. The Fish somehow have their number
recently (which makes no logical sense) and it won't shock me to see
the upset. At 2-4 the Jets would be in a deep hole and without the
solid OL and running game. Has a team ever started off 2-4 and won
the SB? That's a long shot. I've heard of 0-2 teams winning it but
not 2-4. At 2-4 the best you can do is .500 at the half way pole.
Somebody would have to collapse pretty bad for them to slip in.
Ray O'Hara
Oct 17, 2011, 12:30:14 AM10/17/11
to
"Señor Patriots" <roam...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c00cc986-cd25-46a1...@v11g2000vbm.googlegroups.com...
Pyeton MVP.
the Dolts went from an elite team to the worst team strictly because Peyton
isn't there
oldn...@mindspring.com
Oct 17, 2011, 4:34:06 AM10/17/11
to
On Sunday, October 16, 2011 11:51:50 PM UTC-4, Señor Patriots wrote:
Nope. Green Bay last year was 3-3 after losing in week six to Miami.
That's the worst start of any SB team, though several others have equalled it including a couple Pats teams.
So 3-3 after six is still alive and kicking, 2-4 not so much.
That's the worst start of any SB team, though several others have equalled it including a couple Pats teams.
So 3-3 after six is still alive and kicking, 2-4 not so much.
Señor Patriots
Oct 17, 2011, 5:32:47 PM10/17/11
to
On Oct 16, 11:30 pm, "Ray O'Hara" <raymond-oh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> ===============================================================================
>
> Pyeton MVP.
> the Dolts went from an elite team to the worst team strictly because Peyton
> isn't there
I understand the argument but not the sentiment. Inactive players are
>
>
> ===============================================================================
>
> Pyeton MVP.
> the Dolts went from an elite team to the worst team strictly because Peyton
> isn't there
what their records say they are. MVP candidates help their teams
win, not lose.
I understand the argument though, and it's a point well taken except
that he never played a down this year and we really don't now how good
the team would have been with him. We don't know how good the team
would be with a decent QB like Matt Cassell chucking it (and having
lived in the system for two years.) We really won't ever know these
things because the Colts shot themselves in the foot with backup QB.
So remember all the arguments about the Colts spending too much on
Vinetieri? They could have spent it on a backup QB too but they chose
to go for the game changing kicker. The only problem with that is
that he never got a chance to change a game, and they needed a solid
backup QB.
Imagine if they had had a Matt Cassell in that system who could step
in and win you a few games. Then they are still in the hunt when
Manning gets cleared to play and this conversation never happens.
But I understand the argument and it is compelling. I just don't
think a team with NOBODY at QB can compare their record to what a
Manning team MIGHT have done, but might not have done. One thing is
for sure: Their front office is no longer an MVP front office.
Papa Carl
Oct 17, 2011, 8:02:59 PM10/17/11
to
news:9e26b720-d26e-4561...@a25g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
The entire Colts offense was built around Peyton Mannings unique
skills...especially calling plays at the LOS. He is not like any other
QB....including Brady and the other elites. Now....they took a step
backward in some other areas and may not have been as great this year...but
that whole offensive scheme was built around him and no other QB is going to
come in and make it work...simple.
skills...especially calling plays at the LOS. He is not like any other
QB....including Brady and the other elites. Now....they took a step
backward in some other areas and may not have been as great this year...but
that whole offensive scheme was built around him and no other QB is going to
come in and make it work...simple.
Ray O'Hara
Oct 17, 2011, 8:35:11 PM10/17/11
to
news:9e26b720-d26e-4561...@a25g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
======================================================================
Their back-up was incapable of turning in even a shadow of the job because
the entire scheme was built to Manning.
a backup can't do what he does, its not about a good arm and knowing the
plays.
Manning called the plays at the line. even Brady has plays sent in and he
then can adjust them,
Their back-up was incapable of turning in even a shadow of the job because
the entire scheme was built to Manning.
a backup can't do what he does, its not about a good arm and knowing the
plays.
Manning called the plays at the line. even Brady has plays sent in and he
then can adjust them,
Señor Patriots
Oct 18, 2011, 2:01:38 AM10/18/11
to
On Oct 17, 7:35 pm, "Ray O'Hara" <raymond-oh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Their back-up was incapable of turning in even a shadow of the job because
> the entire scheme was built to Manning.
>
Keeerist, even in Mexico they know that the Colts are obliged to
>
>
> Their back-up was incapable of turning in even a shadow of the job because
> the entire scheme was built to Manning.
>
change the schemes to suit the QB. Either that or the backup is good
enough to run the Manning offense. Either way they didn't have the
personnel. That's why they called Kerry Collins. Collins is proof
that they swapped out the system for something more conventional. It
still sucks though - and that's my point about the front office
fail. They failed. There is no excuse for it. If they had had a
decent backup they would have salvaged their season.
Fine with me if they blew it because now the Patriots clearly have the
best W/L record over the past decade. They were neck and neck with
the Neck before he went down.
Papa Carl
Oct 18, 2011, 7:14:36 AM10/18/11
to
news:89f0a06c-ab53-4a08...@s14g2000vbj.googlegroups.com...
Tell the Jets to change the scheme to fit the QB :-) What I'm saying about
Manning is he was THE COACH on the field....he knew more about the scheme
than any of the coaches...it was his system.
Manning is he was THE COACH on the field....he knew more about the scheme
than any of the coaches...it was his system.
Señor Patriots
Oct 18, 2011, 6:44:31 PM10/18/11
to
On Oct 18, 6:14 am, "Papa Carl" <papa.c...@verizon.net> wrote:
> "Señor Patriots" <roamin...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Acknowledged ...
> "Señor Patriots" <roamin...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Papa Carl
Oct 18, 2011, 7:40:42 PM10/18/11
to
news:f4b29ff7-4644-41c3...@h5g2000vbf.googlegroups.com...
I honestly do not think we will ever see this again...he was the architect
of that system...it was HIM....and he got those results with sometimes less
than equal talent. Still....they have fallen so far who knows what this
season would have been.
of that system...it was HIM....and he got those results with sometimes less
than equal talent. Still....they have fallen so far who knows what this
season would have been.
Harlan Lachman
Oct 19, 2011, 12:19:00 AM10/19/11
to
In article <j7g7pt$4f3$1...@dont-email.me>,
of the year (preferably not against us) and lose out on Luck.
harlan
> The Fish, they just suck , love it. they could conceivably go o-fer
Actually, as a Fish hater, I hope they eek out a game or two at the end
of the year (preferably not against us) and lose out on Luck.
harlan
norman fletcher
Oct 22, 2011, 12:56:30 PM10/22/11
to
On 10/16/2011 11:35 PM, Ray O'Hara wrote:
> It was a toughand the coach melts down.
> I wouldn't be surprised to see it all unravel for the Lions now.
> The Bills also lost but they disn't melt down. they are a good team.
> and now the Pats are 1st but with scary D, it scares me silly, especially on
> 3rd and long.
fags like you are scared of barking puppys
> It was a toughand the coach melts down.
> I wouldn't be surprised to see it all unravel for the Lions now.
> The Bills also lost but they disn't melt down. they are a good team.
> and now the Pats are 1st but with scary D, it scares me silly, especially on
> 3rd and long.
0 new messages