Posted on 01/15/2005 10:37:26 AM PST by CounterCounterCulture
Remember what side of the field they were at. The first kick was just short (and on a 47 yarder just short is not unexpected), and the second one was long enough (not sure why folks said it was short, he clearly had the distance) but missed which makes sense that after going just short his focus would be on distance. Nobody made a field goal on that side of the field for the entire first season of that stadium, and a few extra points were missed on that side too, that end of Heinz field seems to have been specifically designed to give kickers heart failure.
FOX... I beg you... pleeeeeease get Paris Hilton off my TV!!!!!
He might and he might not.
Probably. But that's not garaunteed enough for the Falcons to rest their starters, which was the original question.
True....but this has been a surprise. We expected this type of year down the line....maybe even next season. But they had all the markings of an 8-8 squad so I'll say their "A" game is actually a case of over-achievement.
I'm proud of this team.
" ... which was the original question."
I must of missed that prediction post. Of course, I would have never made it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Because Belichick constructs vile mean spirited defenses, and believes in a ball control offense that will leave Manning sitting on the bench for a lot of the game. He might still get 3 TDs, but most importantly he probably won't get enough TDs to win. Belichick is perfectly happy giving up 70 points, so long as his team gets 71, that's the way he coaches (just win) and that's what his team has been doing for him since he took over.
Now I'm totally confused... I thought we were talking about the Rams and Falcons?
I didn't need to hear that awful cover of "Saturday Night's Alright For Fighting".
In all the anlaysis of tomorrow's Pats-Colts game I have yet to see one show break down the Pats offense vs. the Colts defense.
Yes. Only with a phenomenal offense could the Rams hope to get through the playoffs with bad coaching. I always thought that this was the case in their past major wins.
Add a few special teams screw-ups (they already have one) and a turnover tonight, and they are TOAST.
So far, the Ram defense is making Vick and Dunn look unstoppable.
I guess Bolger is okay... Send in Chandler
I don't see any suprise in the Falcon's season. They were in the elite of the NFC two years ago. The only reason they sucked last year was that Reeves assumed the season was over when Vick got hurt. So this year they picked up where they left off two years ago, they are clearly one of the top teams in a weak conference. I don't think they'd be an elite team in the AFC, I think they'd be mid-range (probably a 10-6 team), but they don't have to worry about that, they're in the NFC and the only team there more complete is the Eagles, and with how they played down the stretch I'm not convinced the Eagles are all that complete either (especially given how afraid they are of injuries with 10 million in cap room, they have no excuse for that shallow a depth chart when they have money to burn).
They're a good team. They need some improvement on defense, and they need Vick to develop more quarterbacking skills (right now Vick is the best RB in the game, who happens to throw a lot of passes, he needs to become a true scrambling quarterback). But other than that they're solid and should be in the hunt in the NFC for a while.
17 St. Louis Rams
28 Atlanta Falcons
3rd Quarter/13:20 left
And tomorrow's games. You asked why Manning can't do to the Pats what he did to the Broncos, I answered.
That was some good football!
Good luck tomorrow!
He's a game time decision.
We'll see. I think Manning just might pull it off tomorrow.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.