|
Who will win Super Bowl LI? | |||
| New England Patriots | 51 | 47.66% | |
| Kansas City Chiefs | 3 | 2.80% | |
| Pittsburgh Steelers | 6 | 5.61% | |
| Other (AFC) | 3 | 2.80% | |
| Dallas Cowboys | 10 | 9.35% | |
| Atlanta Falcons | 15 | 14.02% | |
| Seattle Seahawks | 5 | 4.67% | |
| Green Bay Packers | 5 | 4.67% | |
| Other (NFC) | 4 | 3.74% | |
| Scoreboard | 5 | 4.67% | |
| Total: | 107 | ||
|
RolStoppable said:
|
MTZehvor said:
Ouch. Well, even worse then. Why do these damn coaches let their starters practice. Geeze. |
I hope this is a joke. They obviously have to be ready to start the season. Teddy's injury was a freak thing that happened. Also gl on giants with how many picks eli throws and the back end of that defense yeesh.
EVERY GAMERS WORST NIGHTMARE...THE TANGLING CABLES MONSTER!

Coffee is for closers!


JamaicameCRAZY said:
I hope this is a joke. They obviously have to be ready to start the season. Teddy's injury was a freak thing that happened. Also gl on giants with how many picks eli throws and the back end of that defense yeesh. |
...you can be perfectly ready to start the season without playing the first few series in three or four ultimately meaningless games. College football does fine without it. And, sure, Teddy's was a freak thing, but there's still Romo, Malcolm Mitchell, Ben Watson, Jordy Nelson and Maurkice Pouncy from last year, and I'm sure the list goes on with plenty of names I'm not thinking of.

| NobleTeam360 said: Bridgewater hurt, our season is over before it even began Edit: Minnesota is cursed |
Fixed that for you. :(
burninmylight said:
Fixed that for you. :( |
Dallas and Minnesota in the same boat now xD, at least it was expected for most Dallas fan's though. I think the Vikings can still go 9-7 (give or take 1 game) without Bridgewater.
| amp316 said: I'll join if there's an open spot just to troll the Packers for their PED usage. |
Bears fans have to get their entertainment somewhere, I suppose.
MTZehvor said:
...you can be perfectly ready to start the season without playing the first few series in three or four ultimately meaningless games. College football does fine without it. |
Disagree. The first game or two are traditionally against cupcakes for a reason.


noname2200 said:
Bears fans have to get their entertainment somewhere, I suppose.
Disagree. The first game or two are traditionally against cupcakes for a reason. |
Perhaps it once was, but that mindset is changing in a hurry. Opening weekends have consistently been getting more and more stacked as time has progressed. This year has four opening week Top 25 matchups, #5 LSU playing what might as well be a road game in Lambeau against Wisconsin, #16 UCLA traveling to Texas A&M, #2 Clemson going to Auburn, and #10 Notre Dame playing at Texas. In other words, that's basically half of the Top 25 teams playing either against a ranked team or at a Power 5 school. By the end of Week 2, only six of the current Top 25 teams will not have met that description.

MTZehvor said:
Perhaps it once was, but that mindset is changing in a hurry. Opening weekends have consistently been getting more and more stacked as time has progressed. This year has four opening week Top 25 matchups, #5 LSU playing what might as well be a road game in Lambeau against Wisconsin, #16 UCLA traveling to Texas A&M, #2 Clemson going to Auburn, and #10 Notre Dame playing at Texas. In other words, that's basically half of the Top 25 teams playing either against a ranked team or at a Power 5 school. By the end of Week 2, only six of the current Top 25 teams will not have met that description. |
We'll see if that keeps up. I personally hope it does - as much fun as it is for Appalachian State to 1) exist, and 2) beat a ranked opponent, that happens way too rarely - but I suspect the results will discourage some schools from participating, as much like in Highlander there can be only one.
Farsala said:
|
Tag+ adjustments.