can someone please do me a favor?

[theburgh66]

i know this really isnt smack, but can someone please explain to me why a lot of the so-called experts are picking the saints this year to represent the NFC in the superbowl?

i know they have a great O (but nothing jaw-dropping in my opinion) but their D, especially the secondary, is beyond lousy. i know the NFC isnt good, but the bears showed what a great D could do to them last year. i also think the cowboys would torch them with their receiving corps. i just dont get why theyve become the darlings of the NFC. i think seattle, st. louis, chicago, and dallas all could beat the saints, and may even be better than them.

[Rayne]

i know this really isnt smack, but can someone please explain to me why a lot of the so-called experts are picking the saints this year to represent the NFC in the superbowl?

i know they have a great O (but nothing jaw-dropping in my opinion) but their D, especially the secondary, is beyond lousy. i know the NFC isnt good, but the bears showed what a great D could do to them last year. i also think the cowboys would torch them with their receiving corps. i just dont get why theyve become the darlings of the NFC. i think seattle, st. louis, chicago, and dallas all could beat the saints, and may even be better than them.

Because it would be a "feel good" story - like somehow it would make up for Katrina. Of course, those of us that lived on the La. border can tell you that the people of New Orleans didn't care about the team until they almost lost it after Katrina.

[Veteran Leadership]

i know this really isnt smack, but can someone please explain to me why a lot of the so-called experts are picking the saints this year to represent the NFC in the superbowl?

i know they have a great O (but nothing jaw-dropping in my opinion) but their D, especially the secondary, is beyond lousy. i know the NFC isnt good, but the bears showed what a great D could do to them last year. i also think the cowboys would torch them with their receiving corps. i just dont get why theyve become the darlings of the NFC. i think seattle, st. louis, chicago, and dallas all could beat the saints, and may even be better than them.

The reason the experts are picking the Saints is having another year of experience. I mean Bush has a year under his belt, Brees has a year in their season, that rookie WR that lit up the year last season is back and healthy, and to top it all off in their first year as a playoff team they beat a perennial power in the Eagles. Personally I think the Saints are better then all those teams you listed right now barring the Bears. Seattle is a team to watch out for, they where never really healthy and they almost beat the Bears. If I had to make the call right now I would go with the saying "The race is not always won by the fast, and the fight not always won by the strong, but that's the way to bet it" and pick the Bears. Man I wish the Bengals played in the NFC.:lol::lol:

[Bmoreblitz]

The media may still have a hangover from the media post Katrina feel good story they had last year. But they did have the #1 offense last year and their defense surprisingly were 11th on D right behind the Steelers.

[Rayne]

The media may still have a hangover from the media post Katrina feel good story they had last year. But they did have the #1 offense last year and their defense surprisingly were 11th on D right behind the Steelers.

Possibly, but please remember that they play in the NFC - and the NFC South at that. That's one weak division, man. Bucs, Saints, Panthers, Falcons.

"As iron sharpens iron, so a man sharpens another man". Proverbs.

Taking this a step further, a team sharpens another team. That's why the AFC is far and away better than the NFC, we make each other better.

Just looking at the AFC North.....3 of those teams could have beaten the Bears last year. The Steelers, Bengals or Ravens would have won SB XLI. Chargers, Broncos, Pats, Jags and Titans would have toasted them, too.

[Veteran Leadership]

Because it would be a "feel good" story - like somehow it would make up for Katrina. Of course, those of us that lived on the La. border can tell you that the people of New Orleans didn't care about the team until they almost lost it after Katrina.

Couldn't have been anything to do with a team that was a consistent loser huh? I guess that being a fan of a winning consistent team makes you slightly immune to this, but it gets rough to root for a team that consistently lets you down year after year, and makes terrible trades and moves all the time. If those people didn't care that team would have moved long ago.

[Rayne]

Couldn't have been anything to do with a team that was a consistent loser huh? I guess that being a fan of a winning consistent team makes you slightly immune to this, but it gets rough to root for a team that consistently lets you down year after year, and makes terrible trades and moves all the time. If those people didn't care that team would have moved long ago.

Pardon me...but those of us who LIVED there know more than those who didn't.

The Steelers lost consistantly for 40 years...we're still here. Now, we've won for 40 years. Mr. Rooney started our team DURING the Great Depression and saw it through WW II when times were really tough. Even had to combine with the Eagles for a year, then the Cardinals the next. But he kept the team in Pittsburgh. Yeah...we Steeler fans know about losing, too. Some Steeler fans want to act like our history started with Chuck Noll, but I embrace those first 40 years, too.

The people of the great state of La. didn't attend those games. They didn't love the Saints. They didn't care about them....until they almost lost them. Then all of a sudden..."We've lost everything to Katrina...now they're trying to take our team away!"

The owner - in case you didn't know (and you didn't) was locked into a contract with the city of New Orleans. Oh, he was free to move the Saints, but had to pay the city 80 million bucks in a buy out in order to do so. UNLESS.....the place where the Saints played (in this case....The Superdome) was destroyed by an "Act of God" - such as a hurricane. Then he would be free to move the team without penalty.

Then and only then, did the Saints fans come out of the wood work.

[Veteran Leadership]

Pardon me...but those of us who LIVED there know more than those who didn't.

The Steelers lost consistantly for 40 years...we're still here. Now, we've won for 40 years. Mr. Rooney started our team DURING the Great Depression and saw it through WW II when times were really tough. Even had to combine with the Eagles for a year, then the Cardinals the next. But he kept the team in Pittsburgh. Yeah...we Steeler fans know about losing, too. Some Steeler fans want to act like our history started with Chuck Noll, but I embrace those first 40 years, too.

The people of the great state of La. didn't attend those games. They didn't love the Saints. They didn't care about them....until they almost lost them. Then all of a sudden..."We've lost everything to Katrina...now they're trying to take our team away!"

The owner - in case you didn't know (and you didn't) was locked into a contract with the city of New Orleans. Oh, he was free to move the Saints, but had to pay the city 80 million bucks in a buy out in order to do so. UNLESS.....the place where the Saints played (in this case....The Superdome) was destroyed by an "Act of God" - such as a hurricane. Then he would be free to move the team without penalty.

Then and only then, did the Saints fans come out of the wood work.

Maybe if I haven't seen you make so many stupid statements I would be more inclined to take your word for it. And what does the Steeler losing for 40 years back in the day have to do with now? Key word is NOW ghost. The Saints had fans, whether they went to games or not does not negate that fact, the reason they didn't go to games was because their owner A.never put a team on the field that contended past a year, B.Made terrible trades (the many draft pick trades to move up to get Ricky Williams), and C. never showed any type of committment to winning. What team that has a NFL team has no fans? When was that ever true?

[doctorhook18]

I think you will get an idea if they are for real on Thursday night!

They could have beat the Bears in the title game.....they had a shot and came up short. If they can beat them this year maybe that can beat the Bears at home.

I'm with you....Dallas is ridiculous....but still NFC is the JV

[Veteran Leadership]

I think you will get an idea if they are for real on Thursday night!

They could have beat the Bears in the title game.....they had a shot and came up short. If they can beat them this year maybe that can beat the Bears at home.

I'm with you....Dallas is ridiculous....but still NFC is the JV

I think that they could very well be real and still lose to the Colts. The Colts (and this somewhat pains me to say this) are perennial power houses in the AFC. I think it is plausible for the Saints to become as good as an above average or good AFC team (would basically make them the best or second best team in the NFC) and still lose to the Colts. I mean, the Colts are usually the scariest team to play in the regular season, and many good AFC teams have lost to Manning and company. Now, if they did beat the Colts which I don't think is likely I would be extremely impressed with them.

[34inXXIII]

The Steelers lost consistantly for 40 years...we're still here. Now, we've won for 40 years. Mr. Rooney started our team DURING the Great Depression and saw it through WW II when times were really tough. Even had to combine with the Eagles for a year, then the Cardinals the next. But he kept the team in Pittsburgh. Yeah...we Steeler fans know about losing, too. Some Steeler fans want to act like our history started with Chuck Noll, but I embrace those first 40 years, too.
I may be nitpicking here, but here's a summary of that paragraph....

The Steelers have won consitently for 40 years
You're 39 years old
You're telling us "we Steeler fans" know about losingTo quote Dr Evil, "How about 'No!', you crazy Dutch *******'". :smirk:

You don't know about losing. You've been told about it. You've read about it, but you don't know it. Don't apologize for that. It's certainly not something to be ashamed of. I think it's great that you embrace your team's entire history instead of just the highlights, but that is not the equivalent of experiencing it, and very few Steelers fans can truly say they have. Congrats to you for that. You're very fortunate in that regard.....you and the majority of Steelers fans who have become fans since the Steelers first Super Bowl season of 1974.

As for the question at hand, I can explain those picking the Saints to go to the with 3 letters: NFC. Really, just draw a team name out of a hat and you've got a good chance of picking the winner.

[philhos]

I may be nitpicking here, but here's a summary of that paragraph....

The Steelers have won consitently for 40 years
You're 39 years old
You're telling us "we Steeler fans" know about losingTo quote Dr Evil, "How about 'No!', you crazy Dutch *******'". :smirk:

You don't know about losing. You've been told about it. You've read about it, but you don't know it. Don't apologize for that. It's certainly not something to be ashamed of. I think it's great that you embrace your team's entire history instead of just the highlights, but that is not the equivalent of experiencing it, and very few Steelers fans can truly say they have. Congrats to you for that. You're very fortunate in that regard.....you and the majority of Steelers fans who have become fans since the Steelers first Super Bowl season of 1974.

As for the question at hand, I can explain those picking the Saints to go to the with 3 letters: NFC. Really, just draw a team name out of a hat and you've got a good chance of picking the winner.


Unless that team you just drew out of a hat was Detroit. Then, you'd put it back in and draw another team. :)

[The Bat]

Then and only then, did the Saints fans come out of the wood work.
Just like the rock you climbed out from underneath...

[blkgld4lifer]

I could understand why although i am a little weary of their defense too. I think the difference now is the saints believe they are winners. I stated on the steelers message board that drew brees is probably the most consistent qb in the league right now. I am not saying he's the best but i think he plays within himself and knows his limitations and he has just brought a winning attitude to that franchise. The saints will put points on the scoreboard but if the defense can play respectably i won't rule out them playing in the nfc title game again. I would still rate the iggles and the cowboys ahead of the saints even though the saints opened up a can of whiposs on the cowboys last season.

[Veteran Leadership]

I could understand why although i am a little weary of their defense too. I think the difference now is the saints believe they are winners. I stated on the steelers message board that drew brees is probably the most consistent qb in the league right now. I am not saying he's the best but i think he plays within himself and knows his limitations and he has just brought a winning attitude to that franchise. The saints will put points on the scoreboard but if the defense can play respectably i won't rule out them playing in the nfc title game again. I would still rate the iggles and the cowboys ahead of the saints even though the saints opened up a can of whiposs on the cowboys last season.

Really, the Cowboys? I am not sold on Romo yet, and whenever your QB is a question mark I cannot really pick them. If Romo plays like he did last year I still cannot pick the Boys over the Saints, but I guess the offenses are on the same level (I take the Saint) and the Boys do have a better defense.

[Dr.Johnny Fever]

Really, the Cowboys? I am not sold on Romo yet, and whenever your QB is a question mark I cannot really pick them. If Romo plays like he did last year I still cannot pick the Boys over the Saints, but I guess the offenses are on the same level (I take the Saint) and the Boys do have a better defense.

watch that be the NFC championship game.

[Veteran Leadership]

watch that be the NFC championship game.

If the Cowboys hit the NFCCG then I will be eating some crow about Romo. I think his play at the end of the year will be more common then his first few games.

[Rayne]

Maybe if I haven't seen you make so many stupid statements I would be more inclined to take your word for it. And what does the Steeler losing for 40 years back in the day have to do with now? Key word is NOW ghost. The Saints had fans, whether they went to games or not does not negate that fact, the reason they didn't go to games was because their owner A.never put a team on the field that contended past a year, B.Made terrible trades (the many draft pick trades to move up to get Ricky Williams), and C. never showed any type of committment to winning. What team that has a NFL team has no fans? When was that ever true?

It's becoming more clear to me that any statement I make that you consider stupid, makes all the sense in the world. You judge me JUST for being a Steeler fan.

Never heard you use the word, "NOW!" in your thread. The subject was clubs that had gone through losing spells and came close to losing a franchise. We lost for 40 years, and we're still here.

It's a vicious cycle, I suppose. The owner can't put decent men on the field unless he's making money - and he can't make money if fans don't come to the games, and they don't come to games if they don't win....and they wont win if they don't have decent men.

I can tell you that he was locked into a contract and the city of New Orleans knew it. They knew he wasn't going anywhere, so they didn't care about the Saints. Then, when he was close to moving the team.....they start crying.

When the Oilers left Houston, I had no problem with it. The fans weren't coming to the games, the owner said he might move the team - they still didn't show up, he took the team to Tennesee.

The Browns weren't making money either, but the fans weren't given much a chance to get the attendance up. The people of Baltimore were so mad that Indy had stolen their team, they did it to someone else. That's why I hate the Ravens.

Don't know if you know your NFL history...but those aren't the first teams to leave because of bad attendance. Chicago once had THREE teams....the Chicago Bears (still there), the Chicago Cardinals (moved to St.Louis, then Arizona) and the Chicago Staleys. The Canton Bulldogs (why we have the HoF in Canton) is gone, too. Heck, even Cincy had a team at one time.

So you see, teams folding or moving for lack of attendance (money) is nothing new.

The Steelers have been here for 75 years, 40 years of that was losing. If you don't believe me, ask Joe. He's more than happy to point that out. =)

So yes, WE Steeler fans know about losing.

[philhos]

So yes, WE Steeler fans know about losing.

You could even say they're experts at it. :smirk:

[The Bat]

So yes, WE Steeler fans know about losing.
I'm beginning to wonder if you know the difference between this:


http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/4525/istockphoto130795assinjrm4.jpg
and this:

http://s87593039.onlinehome.us/images/Biefus_Hole.jpg

[Rayne]

I'm beginning to wonder if you know the difference between this:


http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/4525/istockphoto130795assinjrm4.jpg
and this:

http://s87593039.onlinehome.us/images/Biefus_Hole.jpg

And I'm beginning to wonder if you get it.

[The Bat]

And I'm beginning to wonder if you get it.

Woo... now there's a snappy comeback. You should be so proud...

http://img292.imageshack.us/img292/7711/glendp1.jpg

[bengals_in_miami]

And I'm beginning to wonder if you get it.ummmm...oh snap?

[BengalsAtOSU]

I'm beginning to wonder if you know the difference between this:


http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/4525/istockphoto130795assinjrm4.jpg
and this:

http://s87593039.onlinehome.us/images/Biefus_Hole.jpg

Just beginning? :cool:

[34inXXIII]

So yes, WE Steeler fans know about losing.
A good post until that final statement. Maybe it's just a difference of how we're using the word, but, as I stated earlier, to know about it and experience it are two very different things.

This would be like saying that WE Americans know about fighting for our independence. Yeah, it's a part of our history and we all learn at least a little about it, but I don't have any scars from the battles.

[Rayne]

A good post until that final statement. Maybe it's just a difference of how we're using the word, but, as I stated earlier, to know about it and experience it are two very different things.

This would be like saying that WE Americans know about fighting for our independence. Yeah, it's a part of our history and we all learn at least a little about it, but I don't have any scars from the battles.

Agreed.

I've personally never had to endure decades of losing, and as you said, I shouldn't apologize for it.

In a way, though....we have had to endure losing...how many times did we make it ALMOST all the way only to have our hearts broken by Denver, New England or San Diego in the AFCCG?

[Veteran Leadership]

It's becoming more clear to me that any statement I make that you consider stupid, makes all the sense in the world. You judge me JUST for being a Steeler fan.

Never heard you use the word, "NOW!" in your thread. The subject was clubs that had gone through losing spells and came close to losing a franchise. We lost for 40 years, and we're still here.

It's a vicious cycle, I suppose. The owner can't put decent men on the field unless he's making money - and he can't make money if fans don't come to the games, and they don't come to games if they don't win....and they wont win if they don't have decent men.

I can tell you that he was locked into a contract and the city of New Orleans knew it. They knew he wasn't going anywhere, so they didn't care about the Saints. Then, when he was close to moving the team.....they start crying.

When the Oilers left Houston, I had no problem with it. The fans weren't coming to the games, the owner said he might move the team - they still didn't show up, he took the team to Tennesee.

The Browns weren't making money either, but the fans weren't given much a chance to get the attendance up. The people of Baltimore were so mad that Indy had stolen their team, they did it to someone else. That's why I hate the Ravens.

Don't know if you know your NFL history...but those aren't the first teams to leave because of bad attendance. Chicago once had THREE teams....the Chicago Bears (still there), the Chicago Cardinals (moved to St.Louis, then Arizona) and the Chicago Staleys. The Canton Bulldogs (why we have the HoF in Canton) is gone, too. Heck, even Cincy had a team at one time.

So you see, teams folding or moving for lack of attendance (money) is nothing new.

The Steelers have been here for 75 years, 40 years of that was losing. If you don't believe me, ask Joe. He's more than happy to point that out. =)

So yes, WE Steeler fans know about losing.


Where you alive during those losing years? Did you experience those losing years? Did you keep rooting for your team even when they lost for oh so long? No, I am sorry you did not. You have HEARD about the losing years, but you have not experienced losing years ghost. I am not talking about two or three years in a row where your team is bad, I mean a long period of time where you have EXPERIENCED watching your team put up a failing, terrible, pathetic excuse for a team. You have never watched that, you don't know about losing. How old are you, and when you answer that question think about what you really have seen from your team and then you will get it. And for being stupid, why don't you brag about all your unpublished books again, that way you can use a semantic based argument to say that you are. Hey, let me help you out here Ghost, in fact I am going to do you a favor that you dont even have to thank me for. You know how you go on about how Joe golfs for fun so he is a golfer, so since you write amateur unpublished books you are a writer? Guess what, do you hear people who golf for fun say that they are good golfer? Maybe as some fun smack talk (which you have already proven that you cannot take because you cry like a little girl every time someone lays one off the top of your head), but in reality they know that they are good compared to other people who are not good at all, so it is not a big deal. Do you hear people who play poker for fun talk about how great they are at poker? Once again, maybe for fun, maybe at their home game, but no not really, it is not a big deal at all. These people do these types of things as a hobby, they do not do it for a living, they are not pros you blithering idiot. And before you come back with the "noobcake, I never said that I am a pro", you haven't said it outright, but you act like you are a pro when in fact you are nothing close. You are as much a writer as I am a professional journalist (that's my major in college, I figure I would have to explain that to you since you are proving yourself to be a fool). But keep on convincing yourself that you have actually done something by having unpublished books written, and keep telling us that you are a writer Ghost. In fact I beg that you do that, because when you do say those things you smack yourself harder then anyone else ever could. And no, I am not saying that you are so great at smack that only you could smack yourself you egotistical buffoon.

[BamBamRubble]

Agreed.

I've personally never had to endure decades of losing, and as you said, I shouldn't apologize for it.

In a way, though....we have had to endure losing...how many times did we make it ALMOST all the way only to have our hearts broken by Denver, New England or San Diego in the AFCCG?

Dude....imagine making to the SB just to be owned by Joe Montana.....TWICE.:shock:

[34inXXIII]

Agreed.

I've personally never had to endure decades of losing, and as you said, I shouldn't apologize for it.

In a way, though....we have had to endure losing...how many times did we make it ALMOST all the way only to have our hearts broken by Denver, New England or San Diego in the AFCCG?
Good point. That's a different type of losing. I would classify the Steelers frequent AFC championship game losses in the 90s as sudden heartbreak. It's tough, but it dissipates over time as you reflect on the many highs experienced throughout the season and look forward to the next. What the Bengals went through in the 90s, by contrast, I would classify as perpetual suffocation. Constantly dealing with one low point after another, each more disappointing than the last; finally feeling relief when a season comes to an end, but knowing the next season holds little hope for change.

I recall Vikings fans after their 15-1 regular season went up in flames in a conference championship game loss to the Falcons telling me they'd rather endure the constant losing of the Bengals than what they had just went through. You know who makes comments like that? People who haven't gone through what fans like those of the Bengals went through in the 90s, because there's no way I'd want to go through that again. I'd gladly take the agony of having a Super Bowl victory taken away with only 34 seconds left to play than 2-14 or 4-12 or 6-10.

While the greatest thing any fan can experience is their team winning a championship, the next best thing is experiencing legitimate hope that their team can win a championship.

[Veteran Leadership]

Agreed.

I've personally never had to endure decades of losing, and as you said, I shouldn't apologize for it.

In a way, though....we have had to endure losing...how many times did we make it ALMOST all the way only to have our hearts broken by Denver, New England or San Diego in the AFCCG?

Poor baby, I mean being a consistent winner in the NFL is sooooo hard. It must be hard to endure many seasons where you know that your team is capable of winning in the playoffs. Man, all those good regular seasons must be hard to watch.:nervous: That comparison is terrible, and it makes my head hurt. You know that your team is almost always going to do well, they will almost always have a good amount of great moments in the regular season, they will win more games then they lose, and that they will have powerhouse teams. On the other hand teams like the Bengals have their biggest moments on draft day when they hope their new "franchise" player won't be a complete and utter bust.

[BamBamRubble]

Good point. That's a different type of losing. I would classify the Steelers frequent AFC championship game losses in the 90s as sudden heartbreak. It's tough, but it dissipates over time as you reflect on the many highs experienced throughout the season and look forward to the next. What the Bengals went through in the 90s, by contrast, I would classify as perpetual suffocation. Constantly dealing with one low point after another, each more disappointing than the last; finally feeling relief when a season comes to an end, but knowing the next season holds little hope for change.

I recall Vikings fans after their 15-1 regular season went up in flames in a conference championship game loss to the Falcons telling me they'd rather endure the constant losing of the Bengals than what they had just went through. You know who makes comments like that? People who haven't gone through what fans like those of the Bengals went through in the 90s, because there's no way I'd want to go through that again. I'd gladly take the agony of having a Super Bowl victory taken away with only 34 seconds left to play than 2-14 or 4-12 or 6-10.

While the greatest thing any fan can experience is their team winning a championship, [B]the next best thing is experiencing legitimate hope that their team can win a championship.

Yes...but in a game of inches.....falling short of the mark doesn't cut it. Sometimes it just hurts more to lose by 3, than to get blown out.

[The Bat]

I've personally never had to endure decades of losing, and as you said, I shouldn't apologize for it.

But you should apologize for 99 % of your posts... :lol: (and I'm being generous ;) )

[Veteran Leadership]

But you should apologize for 99 % of your posts... :lol: (and I'm being generous ;) )

When I used to read these boards Ghost was actually a sensible guy. Now everything he posts is either repetitive, pretentious, self serving or stupid. Not to mention his ego is so big that it makes Terrel Owens go DAYUM!!!!!!

[The Bat]

When I used to read these boards Ghost was actually a sensible guy. Now everything he posts is either repetitive, pretentious, self serving or stupid. Not to mention his ego is so big that it makes Terrel Owens go DAYUM!!!!!!

Yeah, I actually came to his aid once against the Ghostard (Ghostrider), I'm sorry I did that now... but a man has got to learn from his mistakes, or he ends up sounding like... Ghostwriter ;)

My personal motto on these boards... NEVER take yourself too seriously :cool:

[Veteran Leadership]

Yeah, I actually came to his aid once against the Ghostard (Ghostrider), I'm sorry I did that now... but a man has got to learn from his mistakes, or he ends up sounding like... Ghostwriter ;)

My personal motto on these boards... NEVER take yourself too seriously :cool:

Hmmm, those are wise words Bat. Are you a writer?

[The Bat]

Hmmm, those are wise words Bat. Are you a writer?
Well, I wrote this, so yes, yes I am... :cool:

BATWriter at your service!

[Veteran Leadership]

Well, I wrote this, so yes, yes I am... :cool:

BATWriter at your service!


My god, you are soooo good at this. Bat, one day if you try really hard I think that you could write SEVEN unpublished, unread, unnecessary, and unheard of novels.

[The Bat]

My god, you are soooo good at this. Bat, one day if you try really hard I think that you could write SEVEN unpublished, unread, unnecessary, and unheard of novels.

I've already done that... they are buried in my basement right next to that "mean guy" from high school and a treasure chest full of "booty"... ;)

[Veteran Leadership]

I've already done that... they are buried in my basement right next to that "mean guy" from high school and a treasure chest full of "booty"... ;)

Be sure to let your wife out of there every once in awhile.:lol:;)

[Bmoreblitz]

Yeah, I actually came to his aid once against the Ghostard (Ghostrider), I'm sorry I did that now... but a man has got to learn from his mistakes, or he ends up sounding like... Ghostwriter ;)

My personal motto on these boards... NEVER take yourself too seriously :cool:

You couldn't have said it better.......I've been thinking the same thing for a looooong time.

[Veteran Leadership]

You couldn't have said it better.......I've been thinking the same thing for a looooong time.

Bmoreblitz, if you took yourself to seriously on the boards you would be a sad sad man.;);)

[The Bat]

You couldn't have said it better.......I've been thinking the same thing for a looooong time.

Yeah? Well don't start writing me fan mail and asking for my autograph because the line is too freakin long...
http://static.flickr.com/107/299015020_fce589dc82.jpg

[34inXXIII]

Yes...but in a game of inches.....falling short of the mark doesn't cut it. Sometimes it just hurts more to lose by 3, than to get blown out.
In a game of inches, falling short by a mile and a half doesn't feel too good either.

It may very well be true that losing by 3 can hurt more than getting blown out, especially if one becomes numb from losing so much, but I'd still rather experience the "pain" of a narrow loss in a big game than that of a series of losing seasons.

[UCarmymp]

i know this really isnt smack, but can someone please explain to me why a lot of the so-called experts are picking the saints this year to represent the NFC in the superbowl?

i know they have a great O (but nothing jaw-dropping in my opinion) but their D, especially the secondary, is beyond lousy. i know the NFC isnt good, but the bears showed what a great D could do to them last year. i also think the cowboys would torch them with their receiving corps. i just dont get why theyve become the darlings of the NFC. i think seattle, st. louis, chicago, and dallas all could beat the saints, and may even be better than them.

The same reason many "analysts" are picking the Ravens to win the AFC title. They are IDIOTS!!

[BengalsAtOSU]

The same reason many "analysts" are picking the Ravens to win the AFC title. They are IDIOTS!!


Who, the Ravens, or the analysts?? :smirk:

[philhos]

Who, the Ravens, or the analysts?? :smirk:

Both, maybe?

[Rayne]

Dude....imagine making to the SB just to be owned by Joe Montana.....TWICE.:shock:

If your defense had just made one - more - stop....