18 and mother freakin ONE

monkeyhead · Post by **monkeyhead** » Sun Feb 03, 2008 10:07 pm

indescribeable

Go GIANTS!

Roody · Post by **Roody** » Sun Feb 03, 2008 10:12 pm

Pats blew their shot to be considered the best ever. You can't lose your last game though to be considered the best.

Easto · Post by **Easto** » Sun Feb 03, 2008 10:14 pm

Cheaters never prosper. lol.

Sava700 · Post by **Sava700** » Sun Feb 03, 2008 10:16 pm

Giants Dominated a lucky NE team.. great game!

Indy · Post by **Indy** » Sun Feb 03, 2008 10:17 pm

Roody wrote:Pats blew their shot to be considered the best ever. You can't lose your last game though to be considered the best.

Pats will go down as the biggest chokers in NFL history.

monkeyhead · Post by **monkeyhead** » Sun Feb 03, 2008 10:20 pm

Indy wrote:Pats will go down as the biggest chokers in NFL history.

2007-08 Pats choke > 2007 Mets choke

???

Excellent Game though

Eli has shown hes got some game now and took the monkey off his back

A_old · Post by **A_old** » Sun Feb 03, 2008 10:27 pm

That was a hell of a last drive -- good stuff. All hail the New York Giants!

Indy · Post by **Indy** » Sun Feb 03, 2008 10:55 pm

monkeyhead wrote:2007-08 Pats choke > 2007 Mets choke ???

Yes. A team that had gone 18-0 and were almost a two touchdown favorite could not beat a team that was 13-6 on the season. The expectations for the Patriots were miles higher than what was expected of the Mets. Though I'm sure the Patriot apologists will be out tomorrow making excuses for why the team couldn't win...

David · Post by **David** » Sun Feb 03, 2008 11:29 pm

Roody wrote:Pats blew their shot to be considered the best ever. You can't lose your last game though to be considered the best.

It is arguable. They ran into a Giants team that was on a roll.

downhill · Post by **downhill** » Sun Feb 03, 2008 11:31 pm

monkeyhead wrote:2007-08 Pats choke > 2007 Mets choke ???

Excellent Game though

Eli has shown hes got some game now and took the monkey off his back

Given the amout of time he had to throw.....really he should have done better. Still he hit his mark on some very important plays. He was also lucky he wasn't intercepted more. There were some dumb throws.

My personal opinion is that the Giants defense won that game. Keeping Brady in the turf all night long and it was a very rare moment when he did have enough time to scout the field.

Hell of a great game.

Shagster · Post by **Shagster** » Sun Feb 03, 2008 11:33 pm

I was rooting for the upset, glad it happened. Great game by the Giants!

LOLZ, Vikes creamed the superbowl team 41-17.

Izzo · Post by **Izzo** » Sun Feb 03, 2008 11:35 pm

Shagster wrote:LOLZ, Vikes creamed the superbowl team 41-17.

If it only mattered.

SeedOfChaos · Post by **SeedOfChaos** » Sun Feb 03, 2008 11:58 pm

BTW: with the giants being the only team having the 21 on their helmets... they truly played their defense in memory of Sean Taylor. He would be proud.

Lefty · Post by **Lefty** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 7:27 am

David wrote:It is arguable. They ran into a Giants team that was on a roll.

I think they ran into a team that never lost hope. It was a great game.

Gixxer · Post by **Gixxer** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 7:41 am

Sava700 wrote:Giants Dominated a lucky NE team.. great game!

"lucky" .. i dont think so

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 8:24 am

Sava700 wrote:Giants Dominated a lucky NE team.. great game!

Really, looking at the score I see a close game, not domination.

Indy · Post by **Indy** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 8:42 am

http://www.rbk.com/us/perfectville/

Sava700 · Post by **Sava700** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:00 am

Gixxer wrote:"lucky" .. i dont think so

yeah lucky for sure.. lucky to get as far as they did.

YARDofSTUF wrote:Really, looking at the score I see a close game, not domination.

Yeah it was clearly domination regardless of the Giants won by a single point..the Giants were spanking NE up and down that field last night.

You must have been paying a bit more attention to the commericals than the game if you don't think so.

Izzo · Post by **Izzo** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:06 am

Sava700 wrote:yeah lucky for sure.. lucky to get as far as they did.

Yeah it was clearly domination regardless of the Giants won by a single point..the Giants were spanking NE up and down that field last night.

You must have been paying a bit more attention to the commericals than the game if you don't think so.

I think you dominated a little too much moonshine last night.

Sava700 · Post by **Sava700** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:06 am

Izzo wrote:I think you dominated a little too much moonshine last night.

Didn't have any.. had a 6pack of Bud Light instead

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:36 am

Sava700 wrote:Yeah it was clearly domination regardless of the Giants won by a single point..the Giants were spanking NE up and down that field last night.

You must have been paying a bit more attention to the commericals than the game if you don't think so.

I didnt watch the game but looking at the score chart it was a close game, but as always when theres a team you like or dislike playing you exagerate the results.

Sava700 · Post by **Sava700** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:53 am

YARDofSTUF wrote:I didnt watch the game but looking at the score chart it was a close game, but as always when theres a team you like or dislike playing you exagerate the results.

I don't care about either team.. I watched the game to have fun with some friends but I had to pull for one of them so I pulled for the Giants to win as the underdog...the results were a score difference of a few points.. but play by play the Giants Dominated the game.

Indy · Post by **Indy** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:56 am

YARDofSTUF wrote:I didnt watch the game but looking at the score chart it was a close game, but as always when theres a team you like or dislike playing you exagerate the results.

The Giants defense manhandled Tom Brady. As an article I read stated, he was the human grass stain, with the amount of time he was on the ground

The score doesn't always relate whether a team was dominated or not. Given the talent on the Patriots team, for them to only score 14 points means the Giants absolutely dominated them.

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:59 am

Sava700 wrote: I don't care about either team.. I watched the game to have fun with some friends but I had to pull for one of them so I pulled for the Giants to win as the underdog...the results were a score difference of a few points.. but play by play the Giants Dominated the game.

3-0, 3-7, 3-7, 17-14. Thats not domination.

YARDofSTUF · Post by **YARDofSTUF** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 10:01 am

Indy wrote:The Giants defense manhandled Tom Brady. As an article I read stated, he was the human grass stain, with the amount of time he was on the ground The score doesn't always relate whether a team was dominated or not. Given the talent on the Patriots team, for them to only score 14 points means the Giants absolutely dominated them.

For me to see a domination the stats need to refelct that and the final score should so signs of it. Obviously the Giants had a great game regardless.

Izzo · Post by **Izzo** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 10:05 am

YARDofSTUF wrote:For me to see a domination the stats need to refelct that and the final score should so signs of it. Obviously the Giants had a great game regardless.

The Giant's D dominated the Pat's O
The Giant's O didn't dominate the Pat's D

that's how I'm callin' it.

Sava700 · Post by **Sava700** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 10:09 am

Indy wrote:The Giants defense manhandled Tom Brady. As an article I read stated, he was the human grass stain, with the amount of time he was on the ground The score doesn't always relate whether a team was dominated or not. Given the talent on the Patriots team, for them to only score 14 points means the Giants absolutely dominated them.

DOMINATION!

Lefty · Post by **Lefty** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 10:30 am

Izzo wrote:The Giant's D dominated the Pat's O
The Giant's O didn't dominate the Pat's D

that's how I'm callin' it.

I will agree with that, and add if I may, the Giants never lost faith on both sides of the ball.

SeedOfChaos · Post by **SeedOfChaos** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 10:50 am

Izzo wrote:The Giant's D dominated the Pat's O
The Giant's O didn't dominate the Pat's D

that's how I'm callin' it.

Good call IMO, only that the Giants O stepped up big time when it was required of them.

Izzo · Post by **Izzo** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 11:05 am

SeedOfChaos wrote:Good call IMO, only that the Giants O stepped up big time when it was required of them.

seems similar to the Ravens/Bucs approach when they won their titles.....tough D and just enough O to win.

David · Post by **David** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 12:41 pm

Izzo wrote:seems similar to the Ravens/Bucs approach when they won their titles.....tough D and just enough O to win.

Toss in the Pittsburgh Steelers during their 70's dynasty and the '85 Bears.

Shagster · Post by **Shagster** » Mon Feb 04, 2008 5:38 pm

I'd say the game loser for the pats was their o-lines inability to stop the rush.

It also occured to me that Welker is OH MY ****ING GOD good at football.