quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brad H

Pretty much what I've been saying all year. McCarthy was Kwesi's guy and O'Connell wanted Darnold back. It ain't easy to win 14 games with a shitty o-line.

O'Connell will get a one-year reprieve before the heat turns back to him. He showed no ability to adapt the game plan the final two games of the 2024 season when everyone in the league knew the offensive line was a disaster. He has done some nice things since arriving, but hasn't shown much growth as a head coach. He rode the quarterback whisperer thing as far as it is going to go. Now he has to go and be a real coach.

I don't think it was that B and W.

I think Rodgers was also in play until the end......KOC's guy was Daniel Jones but that wouldn't fit your narrative.

WE can agree on something it seems. Darnold wasn't really KOCs guy. They offered him a cursory contract to say they tried. the one they REALLY tried to get back was Jones. They wanted the mobility of Jones. But he took less money to go elsewhere. Rodgers was really never an option IMHO. But maybe he will be this year....who knows.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brad H

Pretty much what I've been saying all year. McCarthy was Kwesi's guy and O'Connell wanted Darnold back. It ain't easy to win 14 games with a shitty o-line.

O'Connell will get a one-year reprieve before the heat turns back to him. He showed no ability to adapt the game plan the final two games of the 2024 season when everyone in the league knew the offensive line was a disaster. He has done some nice things since arriving, but hasn't shown much growth as a head coach. He rode the quarterback whisperer thing as far as it is going to go. Now he has to go and be a real coach.

I don't think it was that B and W.

I think Rodgers was also in play until the end......KOC's guy was Daniel Jones but that wouldn't fit your narrative.

WE can agree on something it seems. Darnold wasn't really KOCs guy. They offered him a cursory contract to say they tried. the one they REALLY tried to get back was Jones. They wanted the mobility of Jones. But he took less money to go elsewhere. Rodgers was really never an option IMHO. But maybe he will be this year....who knows.

I think that neither Darnold or Jones wanted to be clear #1s which the Colts and Seahawks did. The problem in the end that they signed the backup Wentz very late/as an afterthought. Odds are they will have a backup right away this offseason.

Don't know if this was a Kwesi or KOC thing as they never had a true backup for Kirk either.

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

A little while after I posted about the possibility of NE winning with walk off TD, I ran into someone that believes NE will win the Super Bowl.

His angle was along conspiratorial lines, he gave some examples from the past, and then stated NE will win the SB: red, white and blue, in support of MAGA, MAGA might be in need of more support at this time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

A little while after I posted about the possibility of NE winning with walk off TD, I ran into someone that believes NE will win the Super Bowl.

His angle was along conspiratorial lines, he gave some examples from the past, and then stated NE will win the SB: red, white and blue, in support of MAGA, MAGA might be in need of more support at this time.

So you ran into someone who also believes in conspiracies (the same day you mentioned a walk-off TD). This person thinks the NFL will ensure NE wins because the flag's colors are the team's colors, and in turn are somehow related to a subset of a political party that might need more support at this time?

Can't imagine what the past examples were [:-] Did you tell this person to self-check into an institution?

I've never run into anyone like that and in my wildest imagination cannot fathom how a person could concoct such a belief.

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

A little while after I posted about the possibility of NE winning with walk off TD, I ran into someone that believes NE will win the Super Bowl.

His angle was along conspiratorial lines, he gave some examples from the past, and then stated NE will win the SB: red, white and blue, in support of MAGA, MAGA might be in need of more support at this time.

So you ran into someone who also believes in conspiracies (the same day you mentioned a walk-off TD). This person thinks the NFL will ensure NE wins because the flag's colors are the team's colors, and in turn are somehow related to a subset of a political party that might need more support at this time?

Can't imagine what the past examples were [:-] Did you tell this person to self-check into an institution?

I've never run into anyone like that and in my wildest imagination cannot fathom how a person could concoct such a belief.

You don't attend the meetings...

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty

Bill

I am just as surprised as you at what some people believe.

From thinking the Patriots won because of 9/11, to thinking all the games are rigged, to New Orleans winning because of hurricane Katrina, to KC winning because of Taylor Swift, etc ....

I have encountered many people like that on the Internet, but very few in person, but am now starting to run into an occasional person like that in person.

Some of these people seem to really believe these conspiracies, I find those people fascinating. I entertain these conspiracies, just like entertaining 9/11 conspiracies, or Vegas shooting conspiracies, to refs swaying games, to players allowing themselves to get hurt, but I don't really believe any of them, but still entertain them, even if it's less than a 1% chance any of them are true.

IF I really believed there might be something to "the powers that be" wanting New England to win the Super Bowl, I would put some money on them. I am not convinced, but there are a few days until the game 😂

quote:

ORIGINAL: marty


If I didn't believe in conspiracies (or ahem less than 1%) I certainly wouldn't repeatedly post variations of them on a sports thread, let alone over the years argue about how they could be true. But that's just me.

Just one more reason for me to be thankful everyday that I am not Bill. I am a unique person in many ways, and am thankful for that, most days.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

Steve Young was asked who might win the SB. He said Seattle and listed the reasons:

1. Seattle's defense
2. JSN
3. Seattle's RB and OL

What did he miss? Guessing nobody, including the most important position in team sports.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rob Viking

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

Steve Young was asked who might win the SB. He said Seattle and listed the reasons:

1. Seattle's defense
2. JSN
3. Seattle's RB and OL

What did he miss? Guessing nobody, including the most important position in team sports.

Steve Young is one of the greatest QB's ever. Perhaps top 5 even IMO. But he is a horrendous analyst, offers basic input and he has no charisma.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rob Viking

Looking forward to the game. It does go to show how a couple of moves along with health can change the fortunes of any team.

Seattle was able to move on from declining veterans like Geno Smith, Tyler Lockett and DK Metcalf. Adding Darnold of course and Demarcus Lawrence were massive. Of course their drafting has been very strong:

2022 - OT Charles Cross, RB Ken Walker, OG Lucas, CB Cobe Bryant, Woolen
2023 - CB Witherspoon, JSN, LB Hall, Charbonnet, OG Bradford
2024 - DT Byron Murphy, LB Tyrice Knight, TE Barner
2025 - OT Zabel, S Emmanwori, TE Arroyo, possible QBOTF in Milroe.

Those are all starters, with Cross, Witherspoon, Zabel and JSN playing at all pro levels. The others have been quite solid like Emmanwori who has been everywhere as a safety.

As for the argument of the Pats having an easy schedule, the same argument can be made for Seattle. The 49ers team they played twice was a skeleton crew. They did beat the Rams twice but the Rams too hadn't been at the top of their game. I feel like the Seahawks have been fortunate when they've played some of the stiffer opposition. Credit to them they've been the best in the NFC and are deserving representatives but this might be their toughest test yet.

The Pats have had the easy schedule and have benefitted from terrible QB play with inexplicable turnovers that swung both the Texans and Broncos games. Their D has looked sharp and they haven't allowed much in the past 2 months. Gonzalez is arguably the best corner in the league, their D has been way better with Milton Williams inside. Can the OLine block? They struggled vs the Texans but that's an incredible DLine and they did run the ball well in the 2nd half. The Broncos game is tough to evaluate though they really struggled early. I think that Broncos game has put people off of the Pats. They played porrly in the first half and then the blizzard made everything difficult. It was a gutty win that most SB teams have to endure.

To me this is a FG game either way. I'll take the +4.5 with the Pats, their coaching is better than Seattle's. They have way more experience in these situations, though Vrabel has yet to coach in one he's played in 4. MacDonald is from Boston maybe he'll shake coaching against his childhood team.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

Steve Young was asked who might win the SB. He said Seattle and listed the reasons:

1. Seattle's defense
2. JSN
3. Seattle's RB and OL

What did he miss? Guessing nobody, including the most important position in team sports.