Tuesday, April 23rd, 2024
 
 
 
Updates automatically
Twitter Link
CHN iOS App
 
NCAA
1967 1970

ECAC
1967 1968 1969 1970 1973 1980 1986 1996 1997 2003 2005 2010

IVY
1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1977 1978 1983 1984 1985 1996 1997 2002 2003 2004 2005 2012 2014

Cleary Bedpan
2002 2003 2005

Ned Harkness Cup
2003 2005 2008 2013
 
Brendon
Iles
Pokulok
Schafer
Syphilis

[Offtopic] Pats v. Rams - Can the Pats cover the spread, let alone win?

Posted by jeh25 
[Offtopic] Pats v. Rams - Can the Pats cover the spread, let alone win?
Posted by: jeh25 (130.132.105.---)
Date: January 31, 2002 02:52PM

The Rams are expected to win by 14 pts.

Do the Pats have the defense to stop the offensive juggernaut of the Rams?

Can Brady put up enough points to keep up with Warner in a shootout?

Did the Eagles have the right idea running up the middle against the Rams? If so, does the Pats O-line have the size to push the Rams off the ball and are the Pats backs durable enough to pound it out on the ground.

-j



 
___________________________
Cornell '98 '00; Yale 01-03; UConn 03-07; Brown 07-09; Penn State faculty 09-
Work is no longer an excuse to live near an ECACHL team... :(
 
Re: [Offtopic] Pats v. Rams - Can the Pats cover the spread, let alone win?
Posted by: Josh '99 (207.10.33.---)
Date: January 31, 2002 03:31PM

If I were gambling on it, and could really get 14 1/2 points as I'm reading, I'd take the Pats and the points. I don't believe they can win, honestly, but given how well they handled the Steelers rushing offense, complete with great offensive line, I think they should be able to contain Faulk enough to keep the game close.

Definitely the Pats don't want a shootout; that's totally Martz's style, and totally contrary to Bellichick's style, and they don't have the personnel to keep up in that style of a game.

As an aside (and keep in mind I hate the Eagles tremendously as I ask this): Does anyone NOT think that Aeneas "Not actually from ancient Greece" Williams committed flagrant pass interference to get that interception at the end of the NFC championship game? I coulda sworn only Randy Moss was allowed to get away with something that obvious.
 
Re: [Offtopic] Pats v. Rams - Can the Pats cover the spread, let alone win?
Posted by: Beeeej (---.udar.columbia.edu)
Date: January 31, 2002 04:33PM

Football season isn't over yet...?!

:-D

Beeeej
 
Re: [Offtopic] Pats v. Rams - Can the Pats cover the spread, let alone win?
Posted by: rhovorka (---.stny.rr.com)
Date: January 31, 2002 04:36PM

From the karma aspect of sports, look at the recent events.

Mariano Rivera blew a World Series game.
Brown beat St. Cloud and UML in back-to-back weeks.
Nobody thought the Pats would beat the Jets/Dolphins/Raiders/Steelers.

It seems that the more a "lock" a game has been recently, the more likely the upset will happen. And the Rams with their Tecmo Bowl offense are bigger favorites than any other game this postseason. Throw in the Ewing theory...I can't stand it. Take the Pats and the points.

And even more unbelievably, in the recent polls, someone actually said, "what about Harvard, aren't they good at hockey?" and everyone had a good laugh.
 
Re: [Offtopic] Pats v. Rams - Can the Pats cover the spread, let alone win?
Posted by: Josh '99 (207.10.33.---)
Date: January 31, 2002 05:01PM

Rich Hovorka '96 wrote:

And the Rams with their Tecmo Bowl offense are bigger favorites than any other game this postseason.
Bo Jackson up the middle... Bo Jackson up the middle... Bo Jackson up the middle...
 
Re: [Offtopic] Pats v. Rams - Can the Pats cover the spread, let alone win?
Posted by: jeh25 (130.132.105.---)
Date: January 31, 2002 05:27PM

One time, before we had DirecTV, me and Age were really jonesin' for a football game to watch. But not only were we *really* bored, we were also really lazy. Thus, our solution was to set the Sega to play itself while we sat on the couch, drank beer and watched.... I think the 49's won.

 
SB's are usually routs.
Posted by: Greg Berge (---.dial.spiritone.com)
Date: January 31, 2002 10:55PM

Someone told me the average margin of victory in SB's has been 17 points. Yuck! This surely looks like another one of those games.

If it were anybody but New England, I'd give them a shot, but this is not the team to back when they are an SB dog. It does suck for them that they've drawn dominant NFC champs three times running, rather than some Falcons or Eagles patsy. If it were Pats-Vikes, we might never have a winner. ;-)

Rams 35 Patriots 10, and may Kurt Warner accept Satan as his personal savior.

"Hey, Kurt. You just won the Super Bowl. What are you gonna do now?"

"Ah'm goin' to Hell! Yeeeeeee-ha!"
 
Re: [Offtopic] Pats v. Rams - Can the Pats cover the spread, let alone win?
Posted by: jy3 (---.twcny.rr.com)
Date: January 31, 2002 11:39PM

oh bo definitely knew running in that game!

i would take the pats on the points. i think we might get a shocker. the pats have been underdogs all year (they were given 14.5 when they played the lions!).

we shall see.

 
Re: SB's are usually routs.
Posted by: Josh '99 (---.stny.rr.com)
Date: January 31, 2002 11:43PM

Greg Berge wrote:

"Hey, Kurt. You just won the Super Bowl. What are you gonna do now?"

"Ah'm goin' to Hell! Yeeeeeee-ha!"
If Kurt Warner were to say that, I would literally die from lack of oxygen brought about by an inability to stop laughing.
 
Re: SB's are usually routs.
Posted by: jtwcornell91 (---.utb.edu)
Date: February 01, 2002 02:00AM

I hate to have to root for a rout, but given that I have to get on a plane from Houston to Brownsville at 8:50pm CST, I find myself hoping the Rams have buried the Pats by then. (Either that or I need to ask the pilot not to announce the score so I can run home and watch the tape of the fourth quarter once I get to Brownsville.)

But lest we forget, the Rams were expected to whallop the Titans two years ago, and we ended up a few feet from overtime. (I think I made a real impression on the 2am crowd at the Road House in Bern that night. :-))

 
Re: SB's are usually routs.
Posted by: CUlater '89 (64.244.223.---)
Date: February 01, 2002 10:01AM

The Rams were expected to wallop the Titans? I haven't checked back to see what the spread was but my recollection is different, especially considering they only squeaked by the Bucs in the NFC Championship Game and they lost earlier in the season to the Titans.
 
Re: SB's are usually routs.
Posted by: CUlater '89 (64.244.223.---)
Date: February 01, 2002 10:03AM

"...but this is not the team to back when they are an SB dog. "

Isn't that what they used to say about the Broncos?
 
Re: SB's are usually routs.
Posted by: jtwcornell91 (---.citlabs.cornell.edu)
Date: February 02, 2002 03:27PM

As I recall, the Rams were expected to roll over Tampa Bay, and what impressed me was that the Bucs took the Rams out of their game (which was in the style of the old Chargers teams of whom it was once said "the only way they can win is by scoring more points than the other team) and the Rams still managed to win.

But you're right, I'd forgotten about the loss to the Titans. I was in Switzerland and apathetic about football (as I still am), and I only started paying as much attention as I did because my all-time favorite team was suddenly beating everybody.

 
Wow, that was unbelievable
Posted by: jtwcornell91 (---.utb.edu)
Date: February 04, 2002 12:19AM

Can I just say I hate the cabin crew of Continental Flight 1771? I managed to see 3+ quarters of the game, up to the pivotal holding penalty, at a bar in the Houston airport, then saw the Rams pull to within 17-10 on my way to the gate, about 20 minutes before flight time. Then they made me get on the plane and refused to honor my request not to announce the score. Apparently others had asked to have it announced, and couldn't have waited 20 more minutes to find out. (We were already beginning our approach when the stewardess got on and blurted out something like "The Patriots won, twenty to sev--er, seventeen. Or something.";) So knowing the final score but nothing else, I was actually hoping, as I watched my tape, that the Pats would win it on the final drive, so I wouldn't have missed the first OT Super Bowl.

Anyway, incredible game, and kudos to the Patriots for pulling off the unlikely run to the title. I would be inspired if it hadn't come at the expense of my team. :-/

At least the games that put me on today's flights turned out right. (Way to go RED!)

 
Re: [Offtopic] Pats v. Rams - Can the Pats cover the spread, let alone win?
Posted by: aron (---.elnk.dsl.gtei.net)
Date: February 04, 2002 12:12PM

I guess we know the answers to your questions! GO PATS!
 
Re: SB's are usually routs.
Posted by: aron (---.elnk.dsl.gtei.net)
Date: February 04, 2002 12:15PM

EAT YOUR WORDS!
 
Re: SB's are usually routs.
Posted by: Greg Berge (---.metro1.com)
Date: February 04, 2002 01:06PM

Happily. May I follow up by saying that ECAC teams never win national championships. ;-)
 
Re: SB's are usually routs.
Posted by: Josh '99 (207.10.33.---)
Date: February 04, 2002 01:30PM

For maximum anti-woofing power, shouldn't you have said "EZAC"? ;-)
 
Re: SB's are usually routs.
Posted by: jy3 (---.twcny.rr.com)
Date: February 04, 2002 06:10PM

hey i shoulda put my money where my mouth/words were, huh?

 

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login