How good are the Patriots?

[jeh25]

[Q]ben03 Wrote:

 [Q2]Facetimer Wrote:
Do I have to read two more weeks worth of this pointless dribble?

I'd rather have a discussion about how CU Athletics are fucking with Age.  Maybe they are prejudice against Italians?[/Q]
Facetime, sorry to nit-pick but the word is drivel (n): as in silly or irrelevant talk.

... let the name calling begin[/q]

Dribble is what your dick does after you bang facetimer's mom...

[CUlater 89]

[Q]Red Man Wrote:

 You sound like a jealous Eagles fan and an angry Yankees fan.  Weak response [/q]

Actually I'm a NY Giants and Mets fan, but that's besides the point.

[adamw]

I have covered the Eagles for 3 years.  If myself from 8 years ago came into the future, and found out now that I was pulling for them, my past self would've kicked my ass.  I HATED the Eagles, and everything about their fans, city, etc...

What I've discovered in three years, though, is that it's impossible to hate this team.  I totally agree that they are as close to the Patriots as anyone except the Patriots.  In fact, their depth and adept handling of the roster may be better.  Their coach is as classy as it gets - their coordinators are tremendous - and McNabb is one of the nicest people on earth.

Terrell Owens may be a loon with his end zone stuff ... however, I have found him to be a good guy who causes ZERO problems and does nothing but work his rear end off.

Look at it this way -- people talk about what the Pats have lost .... The Eagles will go into this game without their starting fullback, starting halfback, starting wide receiver, starting tight end, and starting middle linebacker from the beginning of the season - and they absolutely will not miss them (except Owens).  The Eagles' depth is nothing short of extraordinary.  They have 8 D lineman who play regularly and play well.  Linebackers too.

The Pats are a better team and should be favored.  But I can attest that the Eagles, as a franchise, are just as admirable, despite not having won the Super Bowl.  This doesn't necessarily translate into a win for the Eagles, but it should be pointed out to many of the naysayers here.

I loathe to defend an Eagles fan, but they deserve it.  Reid, McNabb and the team deserve it.

And indeed Brian Westbrook is a great talent, but probably no longer a secret.  He is MORE valuable to the offense than Terrell Owens - there's not even a doubt about that.

Last year, when the Eagles lost the NFC Championship game, it wasn't just because they didn't have Owens.  They lost without Westbrook, McNabb got hurt early in the game, without both starting defensive tackles (Thomas and Burgess), without the current middle linebacker (Trotter), and with rookie cornerbacks filling in for two injured corners.  Last year was smoke and mirrors.  This team is totally different.  The biggest problem, of course, being that they weren't really tested because the NFC stinks.

We'll see.  But I'm taking the Eagles +7.

[A-19]

fly eagles fly

[billhoward]

Patriots are a great team. I want the Patriots to win, though it's not the same desire as seeing the Sox win. But blow out the Eagles? Don't think so and, for the sake of entertainment value, don't hope so. The majority of these stupid XXXIX (why can't they just say 39?) years, if it wasn't for the cheap sex thrills in the beer commercials, there'd be nothing to watch.

[Nate 04]

Not to mention this cheap sex thrills in the halftime show:-D

I'm guessing they've told Paul McCartney that he can't rip off his shirt off any time during the performance.

[billhoward]

Like the NFL is really shocked and annoyed that Janet Jackson's boob popped out for a couple seconds. The NFL says it is committed to wholesome family fare. The Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders bouncing up and down on the sidelines for 35 years, that's wholesome. Janet undraped for 3.5 seconds, that's unwholesome?

[Facetimer]

[Q]ben03 Wrote:

Facetime, sorry to nit-pick but the word is drivel (n): as in silly or irrelevant talk.

[/q]


Thank you Ben, I stand corrected.  Let me see if I fully understand the word, let me try it in a sentence:

"Correcting one's word usage is drivel."

[Red Man]

I am a Mets fan too...painful.

Here is what I will concede.  Philly is modeled after New England and trying to become like them (Lorie and Kraft are both massholes and freinds).  However Philly can only be described as a poor man's New England and, obviously, the most important difference is the rings.  

As for the comparison of the mid 90s Yankees and today's Patriots my point is that the Patriots are doing it with the same pay cap that constraints every other team in the league faces.  The yankees did it with a salary that was 1.5x the league average (according to your numbers) in the mid 90s...to put that in a football perspective that is an advatage that would allow a team to afford 5-7 stars (pro-bowlers) that the average competitor could not.  Huge, huge, huge advantage.  The Cowboy and 49er dynasties had huge payrolls (and they are still paying for those excesses today).  The Patriots have no such advantage.  The other reason that I compare them to mid 90s Yankees is that the core players are not all stars but they have all bought into the team concept and they win.  Jeter = Brady but Bruschi+Harrison+Troy Brown = Brosius+O'neil+Tino M.  In my opinion the Patriots are the most impressive professional sports franchise I have seen in a long time.  Great role models.

As for the game itself....The Eagles just do not have enough weapons.  They have a versatile back who is a poor man's Marshall Faulk and a solid QB who can throw and run.  But their receivers will get DESTROYED by the New England secondary and back down.  The Eagles defense is strong but if they stop Dillon then Brady will go over the top and kill them....and the Patriots receivers will not shy away from getting hit and they never ever drop balls.  The Patriots are strong in all aspects of the game....I just don't see a way the Eagles can beat them.
     

[cornelldavy]

The Eagles aren't modeled after the Patriots at all, and the only thing about the Patriots that the Eagles want to become is that they are defending Super Bowl champs. The Eagles actually have been in the playoffs each of the past five seasons; the Pats have only made it in three of those seasons. So by that measure, you could say that the Eagles have been successful longer than the Patriots have.

I don't know how you can argue that the Pats' secondary will destroy the Eagles' receivers. Outside of Rodney Harrison, the Pats' secondary is a bunch of backups and actually was in the bottom half of the NFL in passing yards allowed. The Pats' defensive strength is in their linebackers. And Brady going over the top to kill the Eagles is also unlikely, since the Eagles' secondary hasn't been a liability all season, and actually has a Pro Bowl corner and two Pro Bowl safeties. If you don't see a way the Eagles can beat the Patriots, you're deliberately ignoring far too many possibilities.

By the way, I'm going to be in Jacksonville for the game...anyone have a good ticket contact?

[Nate 04]

Isn't it amazing that the top three teams (by most any "experts'" opinion and most fans' as well) all met or will meet during the course of the year.  Obviously Pittsburgh had the upper hand against both the Eagles and the Pats when they met earlier in the year, but those two teams both came together well after the losses.  Now they meet in the big game.

Minus Pittsburgh's second game of the season, the Pats' fluke (and I don't see how you can call it much of anything else) against the Dolphins and the Eagle's two losses at the end of the year where scrubs played most of the game, none of the teams have lost a game outside the triumvirate.  That's pretty impressive.  Clearly these were the top three in the NFL and the playoffs this season is working right as their seasons have been and will be decided playing against each other.

[KenP]

You want to talk about parity?  Look at the Men's draw at Australian Open.  All four of the semi-finalists (Safin, Roddick, Federer, Hewitt) were #1 in the world at some time.  I don't think that's ever happened before.

P.S. should be an exciting match tonight, when Roddick and Hewitt play for a spot in the finals.  LIVE tonight on ESPN2 at 3:30am.

[Red Man]

Patriots have a bunch of backups?  Safety Eugene Wilson was on some people's pro-bowl rosters and Asante Samuel is one of the best young corners in ther game.  Their supposed weak link is at the other corner where Law used to play and now played by some guy from LSU (can't remember his name) who has played just fine.  ESPN has their pass defense rating at 4th in the AFC (Philly is 4th in the NFC).  They shut down the Colts.  No touchdowns allowed against the Colts.  Your description of the the Patriots secondary as a bunch of back ups is simply wrong.  Try watching football on Sundays then you'll be better informed.  

There is no question that the Patriots have more playoff appearances and more playoff wins than the Eagles over the last 10 years.  They have been in 4 of the last 9 superbowls....

Watch what happens to those skinny little Eagles receivers next Sunday.

As a Giants fan I take some pleasure out of the Patriots success (Belichick).

[cornelldavy]

I'm not denying the Patriots' success, but to go back 10 years is useless. Both teams have been completely overhauled in the past 10 years. Nobody from the '95 Eagles is still on the team, and there's a different coach. The Patriots only have three players from their '95 team still on the roster, and they're on their second coach since then.

The Eagles allowed fewer passing yards and fewer passing TDs than the Patriots this season despite having more passes thrown against them. True, the Patriots had more interceptions (20) than the Eagles (17), but six of the Pats' INTs were by linebackers, not by the secondary.

Yes, Eugene Wilson is a good player, but Asante Samuel still doesn't exactly strike fear in my heart with his one interception this season. And how can you forget the name of Ty Law's rookie backup, Randall Gay?

The win over the Colts was impressive, I'll give you that, but the credit should go not to the secondary, but to the run defense for holding the Colts to under 50 rushing yards, to the offensive game plan for dominating the time of possession, and to the weather for hampering a dome QB.

Besides, hasn't watching the Eagles pound on the Giants for the last four years convinced you that the Eagles can play with any team in the NFL? Or were you not watching football on those Sundays?

[Red Man]

You are obviously an Eagles fan therefore you have an agenda and I am sure that you will find way to convince yourself that the Eagles are a better team and a better franchise than the Patriots.  The reality is that they have 2 lombardi trophies in their case and most likely will have a third by the end of next weekend.  The Eagles simply cannot measure up to that.

You sound like a Red Sox fan circa 2003.