By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sports - The NFL Thread 2012: Baltimore Ravens win Super Bowl XLVII

 

Who will win the Super Bowl? Part II

Denver Broncos 24 18.75%
 
New England Patriots 14 10.94%
 
Houston Texans 1 0.78%
 
Baltimore Ravens 29 22.66%
 
Glasgow Rangers 3 2.34%
 
Atlanta Falcons 4 3.13%
 
San Francisco 49ers 29 22.66%
 
Green Bay Packers 4 3.13%
 
Seattle Seahawks 6 4.69%
 
I am a wuss, but I want to see the results. 12 9.38%
 
Total:126
Chris Hu on 21 January 2013
chocoloco said:
Chris Hu said:
amp316 said:

Stop with the sour grapes. The best teams are the two that are left because they had to win all of those playoff games to get there. If the Seahawks were the best, they most certainly wouldn't have lost to the Falcons who, by the way, were beaten by the 49ers.


No sour grapes here the two best teams rarely make it to the Superbowl.  As for the Seahawks their head to head matchups with 49er definetly proofed that they where the better team.  Also with just a bit of better clock management and decision making they could have beaten the Falcons by four points also so the 49ers win against the Falcons didn't proof anything.

It does not matter a ton of teams could make an arguement they are better so it is fruitless to claim any are better other than the ones that went on a hot streak and got lucky at the right time to win it. If the playoffs had at least three games per playoff round we would get better results, still that is impossible in such a physical game. 

 

And finally the Rams being claimed to ter than the Seahawks and 49ers is one of the most laughable things I have read in this thread.

The two best teams rarely make it to the finals of any sport no matter how the playoffs are set up.  The playoffs are mostly about hot streaks and teams that have the least amount of injuries.



Around the Network
chocoloco on 21 January 2013
Chris Hu said:
chocoloco said:
Chris Hu said:
amp316 said:

Stop with the sour grapes. The best teams are the two that are left because they had to win all of those playoff games to get there. If the Seahawks were the best, they most certainly wouldn't have lost to the Falcons who, by the way, were beaten by the 49ers.


No sour grapes here the two best teams rarely make it to the Superbowl.  As for the Seahawks their head to head matchups with 49er definetly proofed that they where the better team.  Also with just a bit of better clock management and decision making they could have beaten the Falcons by four points also so the 49ers win against the Falcons didn't proof anything.

It does not matter a ton of teams could make an arguement they are better so it is fruitless to claim any are better other than the ones that went on a hot streak and got lucky at the right time to win it. If the playoffs had at least three games per playoff round we would get better results, still that is impossible in such a physical game. 

 

And finally the Rams being claimed to ter than the Seahawks and 49ers is one of the most laughable things I have read in this thread.

The two best teams rarely make it to the finals of any sport no matter how the playoffs are set up.  The playoffs are mostly about hot streaks and teams that have the least amount of injuries.

People can say that though it can never be proven.



arcane_chaos on 21 January 2013

the Pats lost...there is a god



smbu2000 on 21 January 2013
Chris Hu said:
amp316 said:

Stop with the sour grapes. The best teams are the two that are left because they had to win all of those playoff games to get there. If the Seahawks were the best, they most certainly wouldn't have lost to the Falcons who, by the way, were beaten by the 49ers.


No sour grapes here the two best teams rarely make it to the Superbowl.  As for the Seahawks their head to head matchups with 49er definetly proofed that they where the better team.  Also with just a bit of better clock management and decision making they could have beaten the Falcons by four points also so the 49ers win against the Falcons didn't proof anything.

Head to head they were 1-1, so...that's a draw...The final score doesn't matter only the W.

Eh, could've, would've, should've, if and or but... If Kyle Williams doesn't fumble twice last year (including in OT!) then the 49ers could've won the NFC Championship last year and gone to the Super Bowl, it didn't happen though. If Akers could make some field goals (he missed makeable field goals in OT both games), then the 49ers win both of their games against the Rams, didn't happen though. If RG3 doesn't get injured (he was hobbling the whole game and the Skins were still in it), then the Seahawks might not even make it past the wild card round.

The Regular Season means jack all in determining who is the best team in the league. Last year the Packers dominated the regular season going 15-1 and what happened? They got destroyed by the Giants. Is anybody claiming the Packers were best team in the league? Or how about the 16-0 Patriots from a few years ago? They dominated the regular season and then you know what happened. Were they still the best team that year? There is no "regular season champion", the winner of the Super Bowl is the champion.

Always remember "Any Given Sunday"




starcraft: "I and every PS3 fanboy alive are waiting for Versus more than FFXIII.
Me since the games were revealed, the fanboys since E3."

Skeeuk: "playstation 3 is the ultimate in gaming acceleration"

smbu2000 on 21 January 2013
chocoloco said:

And finally the Rams being claimed to ter than the Seahawks and 49ers is one of the most laughable things I have read in this thread.

Haha, I said that as more of a joke because going by Chris Hu's logic they were the best team in the NFC West. ;-p




starcraft: "I and every PS3 fanboy alive are waiting for Versus more than FFXIII.
Me since the games were revealed, the fanboys since E3."

Skeeuk: "playstation 3 is the ultimate in gaming acceleration"

Around the Network
Chris Hu on 21 January 2013
chocoloco said:
Chris Hu said:
chocoloco said:
Chris Hu said:
amp316 said:

Stop with the sour grapes. The best teams are the two that are left because they had to win all of those playoff games to get there. If the Seahawks were the best, they most certainly wouldn't have lost to the Falcons who, by the way, were beaten by the 49ers.


No sour grapes here the two best teams rarely make it to the Superbowl.  As for the Seahawks their head to head matchups with 49er definetly proofed that they where the better team.  Also with just a bit of better clock management and decision making they could have beaten the Falcons by four points also so the 49ers win against the Falcons didn't proof anything.

It does not matter a ton of teams could make an arguement they are better so it is fruitless to claim any are better other than the ones that went on a hot streak and got lucky at the right time to win it. If the playoffs had at least three games per playoff round we would get better results, still that is impossible in such a physical game. 

 

And finally the Rams being claimed to ter than the Seahawks and 49ers is one of the most laughable things I have read in this thread.

The two best teams rarely make it to the finals of any sport no matter how the playoffs are set up.  The playoffs are mostly about hot streaks and teams that have the least amount of injuries.

People can say that though it can never be proven.

Plus a lot of times the best team doesn't show up for the most of the regualr season because they are bored by it this currently applies to the Miami Heat who are the best team in the NBA despite not having the best record. 



Chris Hu on 21 January 2013
smbu2000 said:
Chris Hu said:
amp316 said:

Stop with the sour grapes. The best teams are the two that are left because they had to win all of those playoff games to get there. If the Seahawks were the best, they most certainly wouldn't have lost to the Falcons who, by the way, were beaten by the 49ers.


No sour grapes here the two best teams rarely make it to the Superbowl.  As for the Seahawks their head to head matchups with 49er definetly proofed that they where the better team.  Also with just a bit of better clock management and decision making they could have beaten the Falcons by four points also so the 49ers win against the Falcons didn't proof anything.

Head to head they were 1-1, so...that's a draw...The final score doesn't matter only the W.

Eh, could've, would've, should've, if and or but... If Kyle Williams doesn't fumble twice last year (including in OT!) then the 49ers could've won the NFC Championship last year and gone to the Super Bowl, it didn't happen though. If Akers could make some field goals (he missed makeable field goals in OT both games), then the 49ers win both of their games against the Rams, didn't happen though. If RG3 doesn't get injured (he was hobbling the whole game and the Skins were still in it), then the Seahawks might not even make it past the wild card round.

The Regular Season means jack all in determining who is the best team in the league. Last year the Packers dominated the regular season going 15-1 and what happened? They got destroyed by the Giants. Is anybody claiming the Packers were best team in the league? Or how about the 16-0 Patriots from a few years ago? They dominated the regular season and then you know what happened. Were they still the best team that year? There is no "regular season champion", the winner of the Super Bowl is the champion.

Always remember "Any Given Sunday"

There is no way Akers could have won the first game against the Ram because the Rams would have won that easily in overtime if they had a better kicker.  Also last years Packers shot themselves in the the foot by going into shotdown mode before the season was over. 



smbu2000 on 21 January 2013
Chris Hu said:

There is no way Akers could have won the first game against the Ram because the Rams would have won that easily in overtime if they had a better kicker.  Also last years Packers shot themselves in the the foot by going into shotdown mode before the season was over. 

Both kickers were 1/2 in that first game.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=321111025

San Francisco's David Akers missed wide left on a 41-yard attempt that could have sealed it for the 49ers (6-2-1), who lost quarterback Alex Smith to a first-half concussion.

"I don't know what to make of this," Willis said. "We have one of the best kickers in the game, and it came down to him at the end and he misses it. That tells you right there something wasn't right."

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=321202014

The 49ers (8-3-1) failed to take advantage of a 14-yard punt by rookie Johnny Hekker to midfield when David Akers was barely wide right on a 51-yard attempt with 4:11 to go in overtime. Akers is just 7 for 15 from 40 yards and beyond.

"I probably missed it by 3-4 inches to the right," Akers said. "I just feel horrible for letting my teammates, the organization and the fans down."




starcraft: "I and every PS3 fanboy alive are waiting for Versus more than FFXIII.
Me since the games were revealed, the fanboys since E3."

Skeeuk: "playstation 3 is the ultimate in gaming acceleration"

Chris Hu on 21 January 2013
smbu2000 said:
Chris Hu said:
 

There is no way Akers could have won the first game against the Ram because the Rams would have won that easily in overtime if they had a better kicker.  Also last years Packers shot themselves in the the foot by going into shotdown mode before the season was over. 

Both kickers were 1/2 in that first game.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=321111025

San Francisco's David Akers missed wide left on a 41-yard attempt that could have sealed it for the 49ers (6-2-1), who lost quarterback Alex Smith to a first-half concussion.

"I don't know what to make of this," Willis said. "We have one of the best kickers in the game, and it came down to him at the end and he misses it. That tells you right there something wasn't right."

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=321202014

The 49ers (8-3-1) failed to take advantage of a 14-yard punt by rookie Johnny Hekker to midfield when David Akers was barely wide right on a 51-yard attempt with 4:11 to go in overtime. Akers is just 7 for 15 from 40 yards and beyond.

"I probably missed it by 3-4 inches to the right," Akers said. "I just feel horrible for letting my teammates, the organization and the fans down."

I don't know what you are trying to proof here I watched the overtime of that game and if the Rams had a better kicker they would have won the game they missed a makeable field goal a long time before Akers missed the the one with 4:11 to go in overtime.



Zelhawks37 on 21 January 2013

Go 49ers! That was a heck of a championship game, although Seahawks Niners would of been better. This SB will be great without the choking Pats.



Estelle and Adol... best characters ever! XD