# Super Bowl Champs?



## SUS (Mar 10, 2007)

BRONCOS!!!!!!


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

If by Broncos you mean Colts, then yes - Broncos !


----------



## ChilDawg (Apr 30, 2006)

Thanks for including the Vikings, though, as a Minnesota fan, I can't even justify voting for them.

I had to go with the Patriots, though I wouldn't mind being able to change my vote if Randy Moss goes supernova.


----------



## Guest (Aug 21, 2007)

I wanted to vote Buffalo but I just couldnt.

Go Chargers!


----------



## face2006 (Feb 17, 2006)

DA BEARS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## ChilDawg (Apr 30, 2006)

They're not a horrible pick.


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

I'm a jets fan but I think the Chargers are doing it this year.

Still...its too early to tell.

I think that Chargers, Colts, Ravens and Patriots will be the TEAMS this year. NFC seems a little iffy for me to tell so far


----------



## hitler (Jun 4, 2006)

Cardinals!!!!!!


----------



## latinoheat (Jan 26, 2006)

49ers for sure wait that was 10 years ago. By far DA BEARS!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## djcyborg (Aug 11, 2003)

i also went with the pats but am a vikes fan went to the training camp and had a blast but dont think they have what it takes to go all the way.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)




----------



## face2006 (Feb 17, 2006)

thats horrible....lol...i'm getting nasty flash backs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO PICK THE BALL UP GROSSMAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>>>>> U WUSSSSS BENSON>>> IT DIDN"T HURT THAT BAD!!!>>>> .....u suck...well at least we beat the Seahawks....lol and got there!


----------



## rchan11 (May 6, 2004)

DA BOYZ!!!!!!


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

face2006 said:


> thats horrible....lol...i'm getting nasty flash backs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO PICK THE BALL UP GROSSMAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>>>>> U WUSSSSS BENSON>>> IT DIDN"T HURT THAT BAD!!!>>>> .....u suck


UH OH !!


































BTW, he fumbled 3 times and threw one pick in the 1st half against Colts last night in preseason


----------



## latinoheat (Jan 26, 2006)

Jewelz said:


> thats horrible....lol...i'm getting nasty flash backs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO PICK THE BALL UP GROSSMAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >>>>>> U WUSSSSS BENSON>>> IT DIDN"T HURT THAT BAD!!!>>>> .....u suck


UH OH !!


































BTW, he fumbled 3 times and threw one pick in the 1st half against Colts last night in preseason
[/quote]
That pick with Manning and the coach looks like there making out what a **** lol. Yeah he fumble 3 times hopefully he keeps doing that and they start Griese but i aon't holding my breath.


----------



## skubasteve! (Feb 14, 2007)

Jewelz said:


> *BTW, he fumbled 3 times and threw one pick in the 1st half against Colts last night in preseason*


Yes, but they still won! (i know i know its just preseason)

Bears are my choice!


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

skubasteve! said:


> *BTW, he fumbled 3 times and threw one pick in the 1st half against Colts last night in preseason*


Yes, but they still won! (i know i know its just preseason)

Bears are my choice!
[/quote]

Yeah I'll bet Grossman feels vindicated after last night.. "Yeah I fucked up the Super Bowl completely, but at least last night we won a preseason game against them despite me fumbling 3 times and throwing an INT in the span of about 10 minutes"


----------



## Liquid (Aug 24, 2004)

Geee I wonder who voted for the Steelers


----------



## Guru (Apr 20, 2004)

Patriots I think. They seem like the most balanced team.


----------



## maknwar (Jul 16, 2007)

WHO DEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## 8o8P (Jan 13, 2007)

Id say its either the Pats or Colts. SD has a new coach and I doubt he will win the SB on his debut. The Bears have Grossman and they lost TJ which was a big part of their offense. If Benson can pick up where TJ left and Grossman can handle a snap they have a chance.

After looking at the poll results... A better title would be pick your favorite team. 2 people picked the Raiders and one picked Chiefs. Come on, to win the SB? Both teams have no Oline, both of their #1 offensive threats is holding out.


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

Is anyone paying attention to this off season?

Does the name Culpepper ring any bells?

Steal of the century...and with that....The Raiders and Daunte Culpepper will add yet another championship to the mantle of Mr. Football....Al Davis!


----------



## ripped2shreds (Apr 20, 2006)

Gotta go with the Patriots as of right now although I do think that the Chargers and Colts will also compete from the AFC. Superbowl will b between the Patriots and the Eagles or the Bears.


----------



## JCraig (Nov 9, 2006)

Grosse Gurke said:


> Is anyone paying attention to this off season?
> 
> Does the name Culpepper ring any bells?
> 
> ...


WRONG!!!

go chargers!! second pick if i could would be the bears!


----------



## Guru (Apr 20, 2004)

Grosse Gurke said:


> Is anyone paying attention to this off season?
> 
> Does the name Culpepper ring any bells?
> 
> ...


Not a steal at all, let alone a steal of the century. Culpepper wont last the season with such a bad o-line in front of him.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

Culpepper's stealing his salary, that's about all


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

Grosse Gurke said:


> View attachment 152612


"OH GAWD! CULPEPPER HERE?"


----------



## 8o8P (Jan 13, 2007)

Grosse Gurke said:


> Is anyone paying attention to this off season?
> 
> Does the name Culpepper ring any bells?
> 
> ...


LMAO

First off, i dont care whos at QB for the Raiders. It could be Brady, Manning, even Montana and the Raiders will still not be a contender. They have done NOTHING to revamp the Oline which is the problem with the Raiders O. This is a Oline that avg.d just as much sacks allowed as pts scored. 6 sacks/game 10pts/game avg. They have a #1 pick who hasnt signed and a RB that would be 2nd team on most teams.

Their D is the only thing that keeps them in games, but with the O constantly turning it over or giving up sacks it puts a lot of pressure on the D and they arent talented enough like the Bears or Ravens D to carry the team.


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

jesus jewelz...with posts like that you'd think the colts won 3 superbowls in 4 years...


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

r1dermon said:


> jesus jewelz...with posts like that you'd think the colts won 3 superbowls in 4 years...


With posts like what ? You don't think Culpepper is stealing his salary ?


----------



## hitler (Jun 4, 2006)

Culpepper will have the same thing happen to him that happened to him in Miami.


----------



## 8o8P (Jan 13, 2007)

Jewelz said:


> Culpepper will have the same thing happen to him that happened to him in Miami.


Culpepper will have the same thing happened as it did to Brooks. Unhappy with his old team, wants to get released, did, ended up in Oakland, got pounded, and now is a nobody.


----------



## b_ack51 (Feb 11, 2003)

Sweet, 2 other bengals fans here!

But I'll say its gonna be Colts or Pats this year.


----------



## KINGofKINGS (Jul 24, 2006)

Chicago--- They brought everyone back(basically) and added some pieces to the puzzle--- IF rex can cut down on turnovers it will be a cake walk... if he struggles with the turnovers it will just make everything the more interesting---- all of this is hinged on health being a major factor as well--- I can actually see Chicago WINNING the bowl if they can keep a healthy D-


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

Chicago? Really? Seriously?

Not even in the same league as the patriots or colts. They might make it to the big game...but they cant win it.


----------



## KINGofKINGS (Jul 24, 2006)

ok assman.... Im pretty sure chi is in the same league as the colts and patriots, its called the NFL and the season hasnt even began.... so I would say everyone has a chance......... get real man, indy is not even close to the same team and NE has a lot of football to play---- "paper champs" never gets the job done-


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

KINGofKINGS said:


> ok assman.... Im pretty sure chi is in the same league as the colts and patriots, its called the NFL and the season hasnt even began.... so I would say everyone has a chance......... get real man, indy is not even close to the same team and NE has a lot of football to play---- "paper champs" never gets the job done-


Come on now, remember the mid-90s when 49ers and Cowboys duked it out against each in the NFC and whoever emerged victorious slaughtered the sacrificial AFC lamb ? Everyone knew that 49ers v. Cowboys was the de facto Super Bowl. Can you not see history repeating itself now with Colts v. Pats in the AFC ?


----------



## 8o8P (Jan 13, 2007)

KINGofKINGS said:


> ok assman.... Im pretty sure chi is in the same league as the colts and patriots, its called the NFL and the season hasnt even began.... so I would say everyone has a chance......... get real man, indy is not even close to the same team and NE has a lot of football to play---- "paper champs" never gets the job done-


Your love for Chicago got you twisted.

Chicago may have brought everyone back and added some depth, but what have they done with the team they have now? They didnt win a SB. Dont say, well at least they got there as many teams have gotten there and didnt return the following season. Philly, Carolina, Seattle, they have made it to the SB only to not even make the playoffs the following year.

Indy may have lost a few key players, but majority of their team is still there. The Pats have almost everyone back and they added HUGE amounts of talent on BOTH sides of the ball. Also, lets not forget that coaching is a HUGE part in football and Bellichick is the best by far.

Paper champs? What do you think Chicago is? At least the colts and Pats can say they won a SB in the last five years.


----------



## KINGofKINGS (Jul 24, 2006)

thats a good comparison- i can see your argument BUT Chi is def no "sacrificial lamb"---


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

KINGofKINGS said:


> thats a good comparison- i can see your argument BUT Chi is def no "sacrificial lamb"---


You say that cause you're a Bears fan









Should Seattle, New Orleans or Dallas make it this year, will you call them the Lamb ??


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

KINGofKINGS said:


> ok assman.... Im pretty sure chi is in the same league as the colts and patriots, its called the NFL and the season hasnt even began.... so I would say everyone has a chance......... get real man, indy is not even close to the same team and NE has a lot of football to play---- "paper champs" never gets the job done-


Come on now, remember the mid-90s when 49ers and Cowboys duked it out against each in the NFC and whoever emerged victorious slaughtered the sacrificial AFC lamb ? Everyone knew that 49ers v. Cowboys was the de facto Super Bowl. Can you not see history repeating itself now with Colts v. Pats in the AFC ?
[/quote]
Exactly.


----------



## KINGofKINGS (Jul 24, 2006)

I can see chi beating whoever they play- When your D is no1 and then your sp teams is no1.... the sky is the limit


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

chi is a good team, and would probably be a top 4 team in the AFC, but they can't contend with potent D's AND high powered offenses...chargers, colts, pats, all would beat (and one has) the bears in a SB matchup...but that's not to say the bears aren't a good team overall...its just to say that the AFC teams are better...the pats beat them regular season last year as well....

if D and special teams were all there were to the game than baltimore should be a dynasty...and buffalo would be a damn good team for the past 5 years...


----------



## hitler (Jun 4, 2006)

I can see Chicago beating Indy and NE... Its not that unbelieveable... Although the big question mark is of course the QB position in Chi. even decent stats from greise could catapult chi over NE.. Chi defense is the real deal... I remember when Baltimore won the super bowl with their d, their Offense wasnt that great, just good enough.


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

KINGofKINGS said:


> I can see Chicago beating Indy and NE... Its not that unbelieveable... Although the big question mark is of course the QB position in Chi. even decent stats from greise could catapult chi over NE.. Chi defense is the real deal... I remember when Baltimore won the super bowl with their d, their Offense wasnt that great, just good enough.


Yeah...but Dilfer didnt continually make mistakes. They werent a powerhouse offense...but they didnt loose games for their defense.


----------



## 8o8P (Jan 13, 2007)

^^ I agree. If Chicago wouldve tried to get another QB then I would make them more likely to win the SB. But they didnt and on top of all that they let go TJ. Yeah they have Benson, but he isnt proven yet IMO. So actually, this team has gone back a notch in the running game.

Hester was a huge weapon last year, but you cant count he will have the same year this time around. A good example was Dante Hall. As a rookie he exploded on the season returning kicks, the following season he didnt do much and now hes not even on the Chiefs anymore. One big season does not make you a star, especially your rookie season as other teams and coaches will pick up on what you can do and adjust aka the sophmore jinx.


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

OWIES!!! better buckle up when you come to foxboro...MUHAHAHAHAHA...


----------



## Fargo (Jun 8, 2004)

The Chargers are loaded and don't have Marty. Seeing how hard it is to repeat, I'll go with them. Now, who the hell picked the Lions?


----------



## ICEE (Feb 3, 2007)

Lions


----------



## Fargo (Jun 8, 2004)

coutl said:


> Lions


----------



## 8o8P (Jan 13, 2007)

Fargo said:


> The Chargers are loaded and don't have Marty. Seeing how hard it is to repeat, I'll go with them. Now, who the hell picked the Lions?


Thats the reason why SD will NOT win the SB.. A new head coach means new schemes. I highly doubt a new coach will win the SB in his debut season.


----------



## hitler (Jun 4, 2006)

8o8P said:


> The Chargers are loaded and don't have Marty. Seeing how hard it is to repeat, I'll go with them. Now, who the hell picked the Lions?


Thats the reason why SD will NOT win the SB.. A new head coach means new schemes. I highly doubt a new coach will win the SB in his debut season.
[/quote]

I dont think any coach has won the SB in the first year... Jimmy Johnson did it in 2 years with the cowboys..


----------



## swack (May 29, 2007)

Here we go steelers, here we go.....Mike Tomlin has a fire in his eye


----------



## mori0174 (Mar 31, 2004)

ChilDawg said:


> i also went with the pats but am a vikes fan went to the training camp and had a blast but dont think they have what it takes to go all the way.


Thats funny you both said that because its the same with me. I would love to see the vikes do it someday, but voted for the Pats as well.


----------



## HighOctane (Jan 2, 2003)

Patriots are stacked like crazy with talent. I don't like the team but IMO they are probably gonna win it.


----------



## Boobah (Jan 25, 2005)

i'd love to see the panthers do it...but yeah...

i'm going with SD


----------



## face2006 (Feb 17, 2006)

once again DA BEARS!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## KINGofKINGS (Jul 24, 2006)

just thought id let everyone know that rex and olin got the snap under control now---

http://www.chicagobears.com/news/NewsStory.asp?story_id=3731


----------



## face2006 (Feb 17, 2006)

I hope so....


----------



## KINGofKINGS (Jul 24, 2006)

Now THIS is what Im talking about, this guy knows his sh*t!....

http://www.sportsline.com/nfl/story/10304480


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

KINGofKINGS said:


> Now THIS is what Im talking about, this guy knows his sh*t!....
> 
> http://www.sportsline.com/nfl/story/10304480


Hahahahahah... this guy's talking DYNASTY before even winning ONE Super Bowl (yeah, whatever, 1985 was 22 years ago). People are still debating whether or not to consider Patriots a dynasty but this guy's ready to crown a team who hasn't even won ONE yet !!!


----------



## ChilDawg (Apr 30, 2006)

If you wanna crown them, then crown their asses! But the Bears are who we thought they were!


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

ChilDawg said:


> If you wanna crown them, then crown their asses! But the Bears are who we thought they were! *(NOT a dynasty)*


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

lmao...he's banking on the idea that the NFC sucks, so the bears basically will have no competition, that's how they're going to become a "dynasty"...how can you even utter the D word without at least a SINGLE superbowl? and its not like you lost by 3 either...i'd say to KoK, that that guy has his head stuck extremely far up his ass...


----------



## KINGofKINGS (Jul 24, 2006)

he sees what I see.... young talent all over the place, key players signed for the next handful of years(very rare in the NFL), coaching, and by far the best draft class coming in year after year.... but wait I should listen to your guys biased beliefs because your.......wait.... who are you again?


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

yeah...and he is? he is who again? i could say the same about a lot of other teams, the cards (damn, they're looking like a dynasty with all that young talent), the bears are uni-dimentional, they have one good side of the ball, its defense, their QB sucks, and their offense even with a good QB isnt an elite offense.

holy sh*t!!! have you seen the new dynasty? the colts?!? but hey, at least they've won a superbowl in the last 2 decades...


----------



## KINGofKINGS (Jul 24, 2006)

hes a sporswriter for quite a few large newspapers.... who has been to most all of the training camps this summer--- and your..... oh thats right, ridermon from p-fury--- and again hes not basing his observations on what has been done in the past- OBVIOUSLY, but hes trying to predict the future.... and the future looks good for bears fans----

and there are PLENTY of weapons on chi's offense--- we just have to get them the ball--


----------



## 8o8P (Jan 13, 2007)

I agree with most of the article. The Bears will have a cake walk into the Playoffs. i also agree with most of his top 10 reasons except for #4 and #1.

#4 Devin Hester. This kid is talented, he has the speed, athleticism and the vision. However, the guy is talking like Hester has been playing for years. He had one breakout season and that was his rookie season, if he can do it again then when can start talking. Let him get past the sophmore year jinx then we can talk about him being a threat.

#1Rex Grossman. Grossman sucks we all saw it Monday night live. Who gives a flying crap about how you do in camp. Most QB's do good in camp anyway. Theres no pressure, dont have to worry about getting hit, you know the defense your up against and most times your going against the practice squad. So yeah you better look good in camp.

Other than that he is saying they are a dynasty because getting to the SB will be easy. Well, IMO, getting to the playoffs may be easy but from there it may be a dogfight.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

Flashback to 1994.

Did you hear about the great San Diego Chargers DYNASTY ? They made it to the Super Bowl, sure they got their ass handed to them by the 49ers, but they got a great promising QB in Stan Humphreys, a future Hall of Fame linebacker in Junior Seau, all-pro safety in Rodney Harrison, an awesome running back in Natrone Means, and a clutch kicker in John Carney. Sounds like a great young nucleus. With this collection of talent, the Chargers are destined to be the next great DYNASTY ! Expect no more than 5 championships from them in the next decade


----------



## b_ack51 (Feb 11, 2003)

I remember one awesome dynasty back in the 90s. I think they were called the Buffalo Bills. They made it to the superbowl quite a few times and always lost. But hey thats a dynasty cause they made it?


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

b_ack51 said:


> I remember one awesome dynasty back in the 90s. I think they were called the Buffalo Bills. They made it to the superbowl quite a few times and always lost. But hey thats a dynasty cause they made it?


Well, at least Buffalo made it to the Super Bowl more than once ..


----------



## KINGofKINGS (Jul 24, 2006)

All this Dynasty talk has gotten me excited... I cant control myself,


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

KINGofKINGS said:


> All this Dynasty talk has gotten me excited... I cant control myself,
> 
> View attachment 152685


Now, see, they ARE a in fact a DYNASTY, because, y' know, they actually have CHAMPIONSHIP RINGS


----------



## KINGofKINGS (Jul 24, 2006)

it takes time to get rings--- CHI's time is NOW--- fast forward 3 nfl seasons---- i am gonna predict 2 sb's out of the bears(atleast)


----------



## thePACK (Jan 3, 2003)

Grosse Gurke said:


> Is anyone paying attention to this off season?
> 
> Does the name Culpepper ring any bells?
> 
> ...


 did you see that saturday game...butterfingers drops it in the enzone...nice..

you know whose going to do it...well probably win a draft pick in the top ten..thats right..the niners...come on kids...


----------



## Fargo (Jun 8, 2004)

Very entertaining to hear Bears fans acting like they'll just walk thru the playoffs. New Orleans should be even better this year - with a better QB - and Philly should be better as well - barring injury with a better QB. Another interesting stat is that no team with a mediocre QB ever went to the super bowl two years in a row. Not Philly with Jaworski, not Baltimore with Dilfert, not NY with Hosteddler. They should have made a move.

The Spurs own coach said there were only two dynasties in Basketball: The Celtics and UCLA. I mean, if the Spurs are a dynasty, we better call the Lakers one if they win a title next year, since that would also be 4 in 9 years.


----------



## Guest (Aug 24, 2007)

b_ack51 said:


> I remember one awesome dynasty back in the 90s. I think they were called the Buffalo Bills. They made it to the superbowl quite a few times and always lost. But hey thats a dynasty cause they made it?


f*ck off. *tear*

Oh back I saw Transformers last night at the theatre...incredible!


----------



## Fargo (Jun 8, 2004)

Bills will improve this year.


----------



## 8o8P (Jan 13, 2007)

KINGofKINGS said:


> it takes time to get rings--- CHI's time is NOW--- fast forward 3 nfl seasons---- i am gonna predict 2 sb's out of the bears(atleast)


Ill take that bet. I dont see them winning 2 out of the next 3 years with the squad they have now. Grossman sucks, bottom line. He cant handle pressure just like when he was in Florida. Chicago fans need to realize he is holding this team back. He gives fans hope when he throws up big numbers against soft defenses in the NFC, but when he faces a solid D he will lose the game through turnovers and just bad play overall. Look at the playoffs and SB last year, their D and TJ carried this team. TJ scoring 5 TD's in the 3 games. So what do they do, they release him and put their faith back in Grossman. Lose Grossman and youll have a better shot IMO.


----------



## ICEE (Feb 3, 2007)

Fargo said:


> Lions



























































[/quote]


----------



## SERRAPYGO (Feb 4, 2003)

KINGofKINGS said:


> it takes time to get rings--- CHI's time is NOW--- fast forward 3 nfl seasons---- i am gonna predict 2 sb's out of the bears(atleast)


Two losing SB's?







Yeah...I might go along with that. I'm getting blue in the face saying this.....It's up to Grossman. Bears coaching and management seems to have it all together and are primed for a Superbowl win, EXCEPT...when it comes to their faith in Grossman. The window is small, man. And the Bears may miss that window pinning their hopes on this guy. 
If Rexy can string together six solid games consecutively without a brain fart, I might change my mind about him.


----------



## Guest (Aug 24, 2007)

JaMarcus Russell has a fricken CANNON. Very impressed. Its sad that he isnt signing.


----------



## b_ack51 (Feb 11, 2003)

DannyBoy17 said:


> I remember one awesome dynasty back in the 90s. I think they were called the Buffalo Bills. They made it to the superbowl quite a few times and always lost. But hey thats a dynasty cause they made it?


f*ck off. *tear*

Oh back I saw Transformers last night at the theatre...incredible!
[/quote]

Haha sorry about bringing up the Bills but it was from the 90s and they were always in the superbowl, just could never get the job done in the superbowl.

And yeah TF was actually pretty good. I believe October 16 is the release date for the DVD.


----------



## Fargo (Jun 8, 2004)

DannyBoy17 said:


> JaMarcus Russell has a fricken CANNON. Very impressed. Its sad that he isnt signing.


He's a head case already. Put Quinn on the right team and he'll pan out as a better pro QB.


----------



## ChilDawg (Apr 30, 2006)

As a Vikings' fan, I'd take either above Tavaris Jackson, Brooks Bollinger and Drew Henson. (And WTF is Tyler Thigpen?) Anyone want to try to get their team to trade Quinn or Russell for those three or four?


----------



## Fargo (Jun 8, 2004)

Cleveland may ruin Quinn with their OL. Unless he's got Manning-like ability to endure a 1-15 season.


----------



## KINGofKINGS (Jul 24, 2006)

quinn was ruined the second cle drafted him-


----------



## Fargo (Jun 8, 2004)

KINGofKINGS said:


> quinn was ruined the second cle drafted him-


Baptism by Fire would be an understatement.


----------



## 8o8P (Jan 13, 2007)

KINGofKINGS said:


> quinn was ruined the second cle drafted him-


And to think, he wanted to go there. IMO, Quinn will not make it in the NFL. From watching him in college he struggled facing solid D's. He does have the benefit of coming off a pro-style offense. To me, that Samardzja (sp?) guy bailed him out big time on a few occassions and had he not broken some bigYAC; ND wouldve lost at least 2 games.


----------



## Nomorewifenagginboutfish (May 7, 2003)

SERRAPYGO said:


> it takes time to get rings--- CHI's time is NOW--- fast forward 3 nfl seasons---- i am gonna predict 2 sb's out of the bears(atleast)


Two losing SB's?







Yeah...I might go along with that. I'm getting blue in the face saying this.....It's up to Grossman. Bears coaching and management seems to have it all together and are primed for a Superbowl win, EXCEPT...when it comes to their faith in Grossman. The window is small, man. And the Bears may miss that window pinning their hopes on this guy. 
If Rexy can string together six solid games consecutively without a brain fart, I might change my mind about him.
[/quote]

Agreed 100%---IMO Bears are a QB away from being a very dominant team. Defense, special teams, coaching, it's all there except for the QB. Unless Grossman steps up this year, being a Bears fan myself, we may have a repeat of last year.


----------



## b_ack51 (Feb 11, 2003)

Nomorewifenagginboutfish said:


> it takes time to get rings--- CHI's time is NOW--- fast forward 3 nfl seasons---- i am gonna predict 2 sb's out of the bears(atleast)


Two losing SB's?







Yeah...I might go along with that. I'm getting blue in the face saying this.....It's up to Grossman. Bears coaching and management seems to have it all together and are primed for a Superbowl win, EXCEPT...when it comes to their faith in Grossman. The window is small, man. And the Bears may miss that window pinning their hopes on this guy. 
If Rexy can string together six solid games consecutively without a brain fart, I might change my mind about him.
[/quote]

Agreed 100%---IMO Bears are a QB away from being a very dominant team. Defense, special teams, coaching, it's all there except for the QB. Unless Grossman steps up this year, being a Bears fan myself, we may have a repeat of last year.
[/quote]

Maybe you guy cans be the new Buffalo Bills!


----------



## KINGofKINGS (Jul 24, 2006)

cans we really? or a franchise like cincy that is known for nothing more than being losers-


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

to the bengals defense, the 70's and 80's they had winning records overall 70-79 and 80-89... and made it to the superbowl in 1981 and 1988 losing both times to san fran...both times they lost by less than 7pts iirc...they're on the up and up...bears have a long ass ladder to fall down, if the bengals make the playoffs they'll be praised...the expectations are lower...


----------



## b_ack51 (Feb 11, 2003)

KINGofKINGS said:


> cans we really? or a franchise like cincy that is known for nothing more than being losers-


Well at least we have a QB that can actually hold a football and throw it to someone on his own team.


----------



## Fargo (Jun 8, 2004)

New Orleans or Philly before Chicago.


----------



## KINGofKINGS (Jul 24, 2006)

nope^... kicked new orleans ass last year and we got better as they really did nothing(lost horn)... and philly? PALEASE! chi's biggest challenge will be sea... imo-


----------



## 8o8P (Jan 13, 2007)

^^ NO kicked NO ass. NO killed themselves IMO. Too much emotion. NO actually outgained Chicago but they couldnt overcome 4 TO. NO also had tons of dropped passes, passes right into their hands. I remember watching the game saying if Chicago makes it to SB Im gonna pound Indy.

Laugh if you will, but Tampa Bay might also cause some problems in the NFC. They made some good moves during the offseason. Theyre O looks good (on paper) and they got decent weapons. Garcia showed he can still play, then theres Caddy and Galloway. Their left side O line got anchored with Sears to go with Petitgout. The right side got Trueblood and this is a team know for its D

On D they got alot of players back and add a HUGE addition in Gaines Adams. Watch this Tampa Bay team. Theyll be making moves this year.


----------



## joefish219 (Feb 8, 2005)

Jewelz said:


>


 one hit wonder


----------



## ICEE (Feb 3, 2007)

Fargo said:


> New Orleans or Philly before Chicago.


Ill agree with that


----------



## 8o8P (Jan 13, 2007)

joefish219 said:


>


 one hit wonder
[/quote]

I disagree. Im not a Indy fan, but they have a good team and has a decent shot at taking it again. Their offense is potent as always and they have a good D which you saw through the playoffs last year. However, they better do it quick though as this team is getting old.


----------



## ChilDawg (Apr 30, 2006)

I think their D was overrated in the playoffs and it hasn't improved this year...look at who's gone from it!


----------



## KINGofKINGS (Jul 24, 2006)

the colts lost players on Offense and Defense--- They will make a great run because they still have payton, but will come up short this year like all the previous years(except for last) when they just werent quite good enough-


----------



## Fargo (Jun 8, 2004)

8o8P said:


> nope^... kicked new orleans ass last year and we got better as they really did nothing(lost horn)... and philly? PALEASE! chi's biggest challenge will be sea... imo-


Oh yeah, I forgot about Seattle. They almost beat you guys last year. Chicago's greatest challenge is QB.


----------



## KINGofKINGS (Jul 24, 2006)

"Almost"---


----------



## 8o8P (Jan 13, 2007)

ChilDawg said:


> I think their D was overrated in the playoffs and it hasn't improved this year...look at who's gone from it!


How were they overrated? They have the players and the system. They looked like crap throughout the season, but there were injuries including a big one in Sanders. Go back to the '05 season, they were TOP 3 in the NFL defensively. So the skill and talent is there. Yeah they lost guys, but all teams do after a season including a SB season. But they still have key weapons,


----------



## ChilDawg (Apr 30, 2006)

Key weapons are there, but they seemed to overachieve in the playoffs. I know, I know, Bob Sanders came back, but I don't think the defense is even as good as they were last year.

http://mirror.colts.com/sub.cfm?page=depth


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

8o8P said:


> I think their D was overrated in the playoffs and it hasn't improved this year...look at who's gone from it!


How were they overrated? They have the players and the system. They looked like crap throughout the season, but there were injuries including a big one in Sanders. Go back to the '05 season, they were TOP 3 in the NFL defensively. So the skill and talent is there. Yeah they lost guys, but all teams do after a season including a SB season. But they still have key weapons,
[/quote]

Yes.. it's hard to believe that one player makes such a huge difference in the overall performance of a defense, much less a free safety but he does make a world of difference. It's hard to understand how.. his leadership skills on defense are unquestionable and he leads by example more than anyone. When he was gone last year, the D was absolutely atrocious. I say as long as he's healthy, we should be ok


----------



## hitler (Jun 4, 2006)

I can see dallas giving Chicago a run for thier money... but only if Jones has another good year and if TO shows up...


----------



## KINGofKINGS (Jul 24, 2006)

Jewelz said:


> I think their D was overrated in the playoffs and it hasn't improved this year...look at who's gone from it!


How were they overrated? They have the players and the system. They looked like crap throughout the season, but there were injuries including a big one in Sanders. Go back to the '05 season, they were TOP 3 in the NFL defensively. So the skill and talent is there. Yeah they lost guys, but all teams do after a season including a SB season. But they still have key weapons,
[/quote]

Yes.. it's hard to believe that one player makes such a huge difference in the overall performance of a defense, much less a free safety but he does make a world of difference. It's hard to understand how.. his leadership skills on defense are unquestionable and he leads by example more than anyone. When he was gone last year, the D was absolutely atrocious. I say as long as he's healthy, we should be ok
[/quote]

I can relate..... we have a similar player on our D named Mike Brown---- one player can make a world of difference


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

wait till a healthy (finally) rodney harrison suits up for the pats...he's had bad luck the last two years with severe injuries, but if he can stay healthy, watch out for the pats D being a top 3 D...


----------



## john2798 (Aug 25, 2004)

Pats will win this years Super Bowl, but .........
The best franchise, best fans, and best following is...

*THE STEELERS*


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

john2798 said:


> Pats will win this years Super Bowl, but .........
> The best franchise, best fans, and best following is...
> 
> *THE STEELERS*
> ...


based on what? i'd rate eagles or raiders fans higher than steelers fans...and pats fans are the best...


----------



## KINGofKINGS (Jul 24, 2006)

oh boy... now an argument over whos fans are the best? not only do the does foxburo have the highest priced beer, but they have the best fans.... ontop of the best team(on paper)--- is someone a bit biased?


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

ok umm...i never said we had the highest priced beer...but if you want to put words in my mouth...that's fine, not that it matters really...the best team on paper...are they not? well, i mean, they're DEFINATELY a lot better than the bears....on paper







...oh, and in last seasons regular season game...so what team is better on paper?

BTW the beer in foxboro is 7.00 as of last season (i havent had the $$ to hit up the all-important pre-season games and find out how much the beer costs this year), so i'll base my quote on that...and that's for bud light/miller light/coors light...etc...find one higher than that and honestly, i really dont give a f*ck, i'd rather have the lowest beer price...heh.

and the fans are the best up here...95% of the fans in foxboro (pats fans) could tell you the past 3 coaches names, the previous owners name, the name of the previous stadium, all of our superbowl appearances...etc...


----------



## KINGofKINGS (Jul 24, 2006)

r1dermon said:


> ok umm...i never said we had the highest priced beer...*but if you want to put a c*ck in my mouth...that's fine,* not that it matters really...the best team on paper...are they not? well, i mean, they're DEFINATELY a lot better than the bears....on paper
> 
> 
> 
> ...


um no thanks---

and if you really "didnt give a f*ck" you wouldnt take the time to mention something so meaningless(like beer prices)--- it means something to you... sadly-


----------



## Guest (Aug 29, 2007)

Bills have one of the worst teams on paper and a decent fan base...beat that!


----------



## ChilDawg (Apr 30, 2006)

Um...the Vikings have a 70-something page code of conduct...FTW? Oh, wait...no...the Bills could have a better team and better fan support. sh*t.


----------



## Guest (Aug 29, 2007)

Bills lost 4 superbowls in a row.

/thread. We win.


----------



## ChilDawg (Apr 30, 2006)

Don't use that f'ing prefix, man!









J/K...and, yes, I know it was used in a different manner.

The Vikings had a longer string out for their four Super Bowl losses...and multiple QBs IIRC...and a perfect kicker for a regular season...wait, why are we comparing the Vikings and Bills again? This is about the SB Championship for this year...should we go to a thread for non-champions for SB XLII?


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

junior...why did you change what i said into one of your gay fantasies? you prodded for info, so i gave it to you to make you happy, but you're never happy...i can't imagine how sad you're going to be when the bears get to the playoffs on the back of THE worst division in the entire NFL and SOMEHOW lose to either the saints or any afc team. they're the worst dynasty in history!!! lol...


----------



## Guest (Aug 29, 2007)

ChilDawg said:


> Don't use that f'ing prefix, man!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Just name it "Cleveland Browns".


----------



## KINGofKINGS (Jul 24, 2006)

r1dermon said:


> junior...why did you change what i said into one of your gay fantasies? you prodded for info, so i gave it to you to make you happy, but you're never happy...i can't imagine how sad you're going to be when the bears get to the playoffs on the back of THE worst division in the entire NFL and SOMEHOW lose to either the saints or any afc team. they're the worst dynasty in history!!! lol...


junior?... your a ****** dude--- you gave me info??? if i was looking for info of any kind, you would be the last person id check with---the North is not the worst division in football -- and your saying the only teams that are gonna beat chi are the saints or an afc team? ill take that! those are good odds at getting back to the sb--- and I never said chi was a dynasty, just that sportswriter and now you--- see why would i look to you for info when all your blabber is always so far off? but whatever... im sick of correcting you all the time-


----------



## rhom40 (May 3, 2007)

Fo show the bears......


----------



## Liquid (Aug 24, 2004)

Jewelz said:


> get real man, indy is not even close to the same team and NE has a lot of football to play---- "paper champs" never gets the job done-


Come on now, remember the mid-90s when 49ers and Cowboys duked it out against each in the NFC and whoever emerged victorious slaughtered the sacrificial AFC lamb ? Everyone knew that 49ers v. Cowboys was the de facto Super Bowl. Can you not see history repeating itself now with Colts v. Pats in the AFC ?
[/quote]

your delusional, kok had it right the first time, if you wanna talk history, one trip to the bowl or superbowl ring doesn't warrant a colt reign over the afc and if we're talking recent history Steelers didn't make the playoffs last year so suure the colts had an open road to the bowl, but like the year before, if the Steelers make the playoffs this year(which they will) Colts won't be making a trip to the bowl







we both know mannings not the same when faced with Steeler D and harrison was, is and will forever be polamalu's bitch..


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

Liquid said:


> get real man, indy is not even close to the same team and NE has a lot of football to play---- "paper champs" never gets the job done-


Come on now, remember the mid-90s when 49ers and Cowboys duked it out against each in the NFC and whoever emerged victorious slaughtered the sacrificial AFC lamb ? Everyone knew that 49ers v. Cowboys was the de facto Super Bowl. Can you not see history repeating itself now with Colts v. Pats in the AFC ?
[/quote]

your delusional, kok had it right the first time, if you wanna talk history, one trip to the bowl or superbowl ring doesn't warrant a colt reign over the afc and if we're talking recent history Steelers didn't make the playoffs last year so suure the colts had an open road to the bowl, but like the year before, if the Steelers make the playoffs this year(which they will) Colts won't be making a trip to the bowl







we both know mannings not the same when faced with Steeler D and harrison was, is and will forever be polamalu's bitch..
[/quote]

Awwww, isn't that cute ? A little poodle's trying to hump a big rottweiler's leg.. Sorry dude, your team is about seventh in the conference on my list of worries, somewhere between the Jets and the Chiefs









Until the Steelers jump out to a 6-2 record or something, then maybe I'll start paying attention to you again







Until then, you can show yourself the way out of this conversation which you're not involved in in the 1st place


----------



## Liquid (Aug 24, 2004)

Jewelz said:


> get real man, indy is not even close to the same team and NE has a lot of football to play---- "paper champs" never gets the job done-


Come on now, remember the mid-90s when 49ers and Cowboys duked it out against each in the NFC and whoever emerged victorious slaughtered the sacrificial AFC lamb ? Everyone knew that 49ers v. Cowboys was the de facto Super Bowl. Can you not see history repeating itself now with Colts v. Pats in the AFC ?
[/quote]

your delusional, kok had it right the first time, if you wanna talk history, one trip to the bowl or superbowl ring doesn't warrant a colt reign over the afc and if we're talking recent history Steelers didn't make the playoffs last year so suure the colts had an open road to the bowl, but like the year before, if the Steelers make the playoffs this year(which they will) Colts won't be making a trip to the bowl







we both know mannings not the same when faced with Steeler D and harrison was, is and will forever be polamalu's bitch..
[/quote]

Awwww, isn't that cute ? A little poodle's trying to hump a big rottweiler's leg.. Sorry dude, your team is about seventh in the conference on my list of worries, somewhere between the Jets and the Chiefs









Until the Steelers jump out to a 6-2 record or something, then maybe I'll start paying attention to you again







Until then, you can show yourself the way out of this conversation which you're not involved in in the 1st place
[/quote]

very delusional I see







one afc title and one trip to the bowl and 1-3 so far in the preseason and you already named the colts king of the afc







another sorry ass thats gonna have his heart broken, tell me something while your still up there on your soap box, what happened the year before, oh yeah thats right the colts had to face the Steelers and manning couldn't handle that Steel curtain




























you crying







"mannings a choke artist" then go running to jump on the seatle bandwagon







good times, see you in the playoffs bitch..


----------



## Liquid (Aug 24, 2004)

what..no wise ass rebuttal?? I didn't hurt your feelings did I









.../throws a heineken at jewels


----------



## Fargo (Jun 8, 2004)

Steelers can enjoy their Super Bowl on opening day, since that's as good as it's going to get for them.


----------



## Liquid (Aug 24, 2004)

Fargo said:


> Steelers can enjoy their Super Bowl on opening day, since that's as good as it's going to get for them.


 what, your only giving them the browns?







you better dig deeper then that. We're taking it all, only team I'm worried about is the Pats







mark my words..


----------



## ChilDawg (Apr 30, 2006)

Liquid said:


> what, your only giving them the browns?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Words marked.


----------



## Liquid (Aug 24, 2004)

ChilDawg said:


> what, your only giving them the browns?:laugh: you better dig deeper then that. We're taking it all, only team I'm worried about is the Pats
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Words marked.
[/quote]

what the hell am I supposed to do with this









Edit: Here you go..


----------



## ChilDawg (Apr 30, 2006)

Ah, for the days when the addition of levity would be rewarded with laughter.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

Liquid said:


> what..no wise ass rebuttal?? I didn't hurt your feelings did I
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No I never actually named the Colts the "kings of AFC"

I actually think the Colts have a very very tough road this year. We've lost players on D both to free agency and injury. AFC will be tough

The Patriots loaded up and on paper are clearly the best team in the NFL

The Titans should be improved as Vince Young matures

The Bengals are very good, Carson Palmer's the man

The Chargers are always a threat, LT is clearly the man plus they got bunch of playmakers on D

The Ravens will not be that good, but their D should carry them to playoffs

The Jets are a team that has underachieved the last few years, I am sure Thomas Jones will help them - this could be their breakthrough year

The Chiefs will not go far, although Larry Johnson may be the best back in the league

The Browns picked up Jamaal Lewis and Brady Quinn, they could be a "spoiler team"

Texans could make some noise with Matt Schaub...

Denver's ok...

yup, that pretty much covers it - AFC's a tough conference


----------



## r1dermon (Mar 9, 2005)

KINGofKINGS said:


> junior...why did you change what i said into one of your gay fantasies? you prodded for info, so i gave it to you to make you happy, but you're never happy...i can't imagine how sad you're going to be when the bears get to the playoffs on the back of THE worst division in the entire NFL and SOMEHOW lose to either the saints or any afc team. they're the worst dynasty in history!!! lol...


junior?... your a ****** dude--- you gave me info??? if i was looking for info of any kind, you would be the last person id check with---the North is not the worst division in football -- and your saying the only teams that are gonna beat chi are the saints or an afc team? ill take that! those are good odds at getting back to the sb--- and I never said chi was a dynasty, just that sportswriter and now you--- see why would i look to you for info when all your blabber is always so far off? but whatever... im sick of correcting you all the time-
[/quote]

i refuse to acknowledge that you're a true football enthusiast, rather than an absolute MORON, if you seriously believe that the NFC north is not the worst division in football...please explain to me which division is worse. i mean...i knew you were dumb...but come on...that's too easy...


----------



## Liquid (Aug 24, 2004)

Jewelz said:


> what..no wise ass rebuttal?? I didn't hurt your feelings did I
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No I never actually named the Colts the "kings of AFC"

I actually think the Colts have a very very tough road this year. We've lost players on D both to free agency and injury. AFC will be tough

The Patriots loaded up and on paper are clearly the best team in the NFL

The Titans should be improved as Vince Young matures

The Bengals are very good, Carson Palmer's the man

The Chargers are always a threat, LT is clearly the man plus they got bunch of playmakers on D

The Ravens will not be that good, but their D should carry them to playoffs

The Jets are a team that has underachieved the last few years, I am sure Thomas Jones will help them - this could be their breakthrough year

The Chiefs will not go far, although Larry Johnson may be the best back in the league

The Browns picked up Jamaal Lewis and Brady Quinn, they could be a "spoiler team"

Texans could make some noise with Matt Schaub...

Denver's ok...

yup, that pretty much covers it - AFC's a tough conference
[/quote]

wait, the ravens D should carry them to the playoffs but the bengals are very good and palmers the man, well at least your not as dumb as I thought you were :laugh: .. ooooooooh this is gonna be a good year.


----------



## Fargo (Jun 8, 2004)

Jewelz said:


> what..no wise ass rebuttal?? I didn't hurt your feelings did I
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No I never actually named the Colts the "kings of AFC"

I actually think the Colts have a very very tough road this year. We've lost players on D both to free agency and injury. AFC will be tough

The Patriots loaded up and on paper are clearly the best team in the NFL

The Titans should be improved as Vince Young matures

The Bengals are very good, Carson Palmer's the man

The Chargers are always a threat, LT is clearly the man plus they got bunch of playmakers on D

The Ravens will not be that good, but their D should carry them to playoffs

The Jets are a team that has underachieved the last few years, I am sure Thomas Jones will help them - this could be their breakthrough year

The Chiefs will not go far, although Larry Johnson may be the best back in the league

The Browns picked up Jamaal Lewis and Brady Quinn, they could be a "spoiler team"

Texans could make some noise with Matt Schaub...

Denver's ok...

yup, that pretty much covers it - AFC's a tough conference
[/quote]

Don't forget the Bills.


----------



## Jewelz (Feb 24, 2004)

Fargo said:


> what..no wise ass rebuttal?? I didn't hurt your feelings did I
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No I never actually named the Colts the "kings of AFC"

I actually think the Colts have a very very tough road this year. We've lost players on D both to free agency and injury. AFC will be tough

The Patriots loaded up and on paper are clearly the best team in the NFL

The Titans should be improved as Vince Young matures

The Bengals are very good, Carson Palmer's the man

The Chargers are always a threat, LT is clearly the man plus they got bunch of playmakers on D

The Ravens will not be that good, but their D should carry them to playoffs

The Jets are a team that has underachieved the last few years, I am sure Thomas Jones will help them - this could be their breakthrough year

The Chiefs will not go far, although Larry Johnson may be the best back in the league

The Browns picked up Jamaal Lewis and Brady Quinn, they could be a "spoiler team"

Texans could make some noise with Matt Schaub...

Denver's ok...

yup, that pretty much covers it - AFC's a tough conference
[/quote]

Don't forget the Bills.








[/quote]


----------



## Guest (Sep 3, 2007)

I saw an expert predict the Bills go 8-8 even with thier schedule. I'd say that would be generous.


----------

