Conversation, part 4 ... the picks
This is the final part of my conversation with Jason from 'Bleeding Green Nation.' We finally get down to the dirty business of picking Sunday's winner. And, as you might expect, we have ourselves a bit of a disagreement.
Nonetheless, I have enjoyed the back-and-forth with BGN, and I thank Jason for his efforts on this. Now, on with today's conversation.
Big Blue View: When we talk about predictions for Sunday's game you know that, as the Giants' blogger, I am picking the Giants. Jason, I assume you will pick the Eagles and I am anxious to hear why. Anyway, here is my case for why the Giants will win.
Simply, it boils down to this. The Giants are the better football team. The Giants are defending Super Bowl champs, the Eagles did not make the playoffs last year. The Giants went 12-4 this season, won the NFC East and earned the No. 1 seed. The Eagles went 9-6-1, earned a playoff berth with a season-ending victory (albeit an impressive one) and are the sixth seed.
I looked at the two regular-season meetings between the Giants and Eagles earlier this week. I believe the Giants' 36-31 victory is a game New York thoroughly dominated, and that only a couple of uncharacteristic Giants turnovers made the game close. In the second game, I honestly believe the Giants lost it more than the Eagles won it. There was a dropped pass by Domenik Hixon that would have gone for an 85-yard touchdown. There was also a stupid reverse to Mario Manningham that cost the Giants a field goal opportunity. Those two plays equaled a 10-point swing, and probably cost the Giants that game.
The Eagles have not shut down the Giants' running game either time the teams have played. Brandon Jacobs ran for 126 yards in the first meeting. In the second meeting, he had 10 carries for 52 yards (a 5.2 yard average) before getting hurt and Derrick Ward had eight carries for 39 yards (a 4.9 yard average). In the second game I think the Giants simply did not run often enough. If the Giants stick with the run like they should, and like they normally do, I don't see the Eagles shutting it down this time, either.
Also, I read the other day that in 11 meetings between a six seed and a one seed, the one seed is 10-1. So, that favors my team.
All of that said, I do respect the Eagles. They are a good team and have, for the most part, played well in recent weeks. Brian Westbrook and Donovan McNabb are tremendous, and playing against a Jim Johnson defense is never a walk in the park. Would I be completely stunned to see the Eagles win? No, but if the Giants play the way they are capable of playing I don't see it happening.
My Pick: Giants 24, Eagles 20
Other Games:
Steelers 17, Chargers 14
Ravens 24, Titans 21
Carolina 31, Cardinals 14
Bleeding Green Nation: I happen to think the Giants got thoroughly dominated in game number two between these teams. Much like the first game, the close final score didn't really reflect how the game went. The Eagles owned the line of scrimmage in that game, much like the Giants controlled the line in the first game between the two.
You can call the Giants' turnovers in that game "uncharacteristic" but the fact is that it's not uncharacteristic for teams to turn the ball over against this Eagles defense. You can also say we didn't shut down the Giants' run game, but any time you hold a team that can run the ball as well as the Giants to 88 total rushing yards and less than 4 yards per carry.... you've done well. Maybe not "shut down" but pretty close.
And Hixon's pass drop? I would suggest that it's just as much of a fluke that he got open behind our defense as it was that he dropped the pass. This Eagles defense is ranked #3 in the NFL. They're the 3rd best pass defense in the NFL and it's not likely that many receivers are going to have opportunities to run free behind our secondary.
As for Jacobs getting hurt against us... would it shock anyone if he got dinged up again? He is a really good player, but he's clearly not the most durable back in the world. By Jacobs own admission he could have returned in that game but didn't see a point. "But why?" he said. "We couldn't get anything going and we didn't play as good as we're supposed to play." I thought that quote was interesting...
Plus, he always seems to get a case of fumbilitis against the Eagles. I believe he's fumbled in both games this year. Again, backs fumbling is not something that is rare against this Eagles defense.
Maybe the most amazing stat between these teams is that Giants have not yet sacked McNabb. I believe they got credited for a sack on a play where McNabb tripped after the snap and Justin Tuck touched him down. They've not been able to beat the Eagles' line and pressure McNabb for a sack once! The Giants' defense is built on pressuring the passer and when they don't get there, they struggle. That's evidenced by the 51 points they've allowed against the Eagles in two games this year.
The Giants may well be the better football team, after all records speak for themselves. However, the records do say that the Eagles are playing better football right now. Since the start of December the Giants are 1-3 and the Eagles are 4-1. There was a meaningless loss to the Vikes in there for the Giants, but the fact is that in the last month and a half the Giants have only tasted victory once. That means something.
I have no delusions about this game. Despite all my negativity toward your team in this post, I absolutely respect the Giants. They've got a good QB and a really good defense and when you have those two things you've got a better than average shot to win any game especially in the playoffs. Going on the road to beat a team like a the Giants in the postseason is a gargantuan task... but I'm keeping the faith. Keeping the faith in McNabb, Westbrook, and especially this Eagles defense. I say this ends with the exact final score of the last game. 20-14.
As for the other games...
Tennessee 17, Baltimore 20
San Diego 13, Pittsburgh 17
Carolina 31, Arizona 17
0 recs |
55 comments
|
Comments
Thanks fellas
for giving me something to read for this LLOOOOONNNNGGG week. I agree with both sides, but obviously have my G-Men leanings. For some reason Hixon hasn’t played like the breakout star we all thought he would be following the performance against the Cards (I believe). I’ll tell you what though, him getting behind your defense was no fluke. He gets behind a lot of secondaries.
by ProudYankee on Jan 9, 2009 12:13 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Weather
Now it looks like this game might be played in the snow!
by Cody K on Jan 9, 2009 12:27 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
that's gotta help us, right?
their offense is based on Westbrook’s quickness and McNabb slinging the ball, both of which should be neutralized by snow. Our offense is based on Jacobs running over people, which the snow shouldn’t affect too much…
by cjmulrain on Jan 9, 2009 12:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
don’t forget, even if westbook slows down, so does your defense… it’s not like they retain their mobility…
But T.O. and his sideline histrionics wear on a quarterback. He's like the hot stripper you tried to clean up and convert into a real girlfriend. It's a lot of fun until the moment she has her second drink while out to eat with your parents. You unravel quicker than she does.
by foos05 on Jan 9, 2009 3:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
not that it matters since it won't be snowing Sunday
but Westbrook is faster than our defense, and snow neutralizes the fastest players, thereby lessening his advantage. True, he’d still be faster than our guys, but his game is built on speed and cuts, which would hurt him more than it would our defense.
by cjmulrain on Jan 9, 2009 11:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Latest forecast
is for snow Saturday, clearing, cold and windy (16 mph) Sunday). Snow shouldn’t be a factor, but the wind might. If Jacobs is healthy and Westbrook is hurting, that’s gotta help us.
by django48 on Jan 9, 2009 3:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Bad weather
I think it may favor us a little, IF we are the physically dominant team in this game, which may or may not be the case. Probably we’re the slower team — we don’t have any RBs with breakaway speed — so it may be a benefit to have everything a little slower. But snow is a wild card and it doesn’t discriminates when it comes to DBs slipping or with fumbles. I’d rather not have any elemental funny business other than the swirling winds of the Meadowlands.
JasonB, that was a heck of a good rebuttal and you make a lot of good points. I am behind picking playoff games (took the Vikes) and was really waffling over Ravens-Tits. But since you both have the Ravens I will take them. I’ve got NYG and CAR, same as my brother, but took Pit and BAL, both differences. Wish me luck, I finished the 12-pack from the regular season a few hours after he gave it to me.
You play to win the game!
by Simms-McConkey on Jan 9, 2009 12:53 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
The Eagles did not shut down the Giants' run game
Because our run game was incomplete and nothing like what it should be without Brandon Jacobs. In addition to his clutch play on 3rd downs to give us the 1st, and the yards he picks up himsef, he wears down defenders (264 pounds!! see LaRon Landry, Game 1 of the Season) and makes the running of Derrick Ward and Bradshaw much more effective. Remember, the same defense of the Ravens that completely shut down the Eagles offense to the point that McNabb got benched was completely abused by us, picking up I think over 280 yards (maybe 298) ….. and the Eagles lost a must-win against the Redskins, and tied the Bengals. The Giants are the much stronger team by means of record and overall quality of play. The Eagles can win but if we don’t turn the ball over (Remember Eli only had one interception last postseason- and it wasn’t his fault, Steve Smith bobbled the ball and slapped it upwards) . And to cite the Eagles winning more in December and the Giants “tasting loss” translates to complacency for the Eagles and hunger of the Giants to win.
by mahmoodzaky on Jan 9, 2009 1:23 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
The Eagles tie against the Bengals means as much to this game as the Giants’ blow out at the hands of the Browns.
Nothing. A fluke. Every team has them.
by JasonB on Jan 9, 2009 1:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i don't know about that
The Eagles to me just fail to show a sense of urgency at times, especially when the game is on the line.
by queler on Jan 9, 2009 2:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
well what about that 70 yd screen play last week. I do agree, as an eagles fan, that they do seem to take their time in certain situations and it drives me crazy. And that tie actually is what allowed the Eagles to make the Playoffs. Of course a win would have been better but a loss would have put them out.
by Ben16 on Jan 9, 2009 2:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
On that 70 yard screen there were at least 2 holds.
Just for the record.
by Woogie526 on Jan 9, 2009 3:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
you mean holding occurs in the NFL!!! be still my heart!
But T.O. and his sideline histrionics wear on a quarterback. He's like the hot stripper you tried to clean up and convert into a real girlfriend. It's a lot of fun until the moment she has her second drink while out to eat with your parents. You unravel quicker than she does.
by foos05 on Jan 9, 2009 3:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
lol…glad a Giants fan wasn’t the ref then. There is technically holding on every play…the only thing you are allowed to do is push and shove.
by Clyde Simmons on Jan 9, 2009 3:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
No team can be at its best for 16 games.
by Ed Valentine on Jan 9, 2009 2:31 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
to true jason +1
"My first and foremost goal is to win a Super Bowl. I also set goals in terms of having a type of year to make the Pro Bowl. If I'm going to the Pro Bowl, I know I'm making plays for the team." Brian Dawkins
by EAGLE_MAN71 on Jan 10, 2009 2:49 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You know....
The Titans defense can completely shut down Joe Flacco. The most interesting part of this game will be how the Titans offense does against the Ravens’ defense; can Lendale White and Chris Johnson run against the Ravens, will Ed Reed go nuts like he did against the Dolphins and pick off Kerry Collins (remember… superbowl… 4 picks from this guy), and I pick the Ravens D-line over the Titans o-line.
by mahmoodzaky on Jan 9, 2009 1:28 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
New season, different teams
Yes, Jason, you are clearly dillusional. Lets address your points in order.
1. Line of scrimmage. Last time these teams faced eachother it was number 8 out of the toughest 10 game tail end schedule in the history of the game and the 11th game in a row since the bye. Tuck, Robbins, Cofield and Kiwi were hurt. This time the Iggles O-line is hurt, you are playing your 3rd string Guard and Runyon is hurt, old and slowing down while the Giants D-line is near 100%. Your guys are big, but there not the New York Blocking Department.
2. Turnovers. The G-men had 13 total turnovers this year and have a TO differential of +13 vs. Philly’s +3, so the term “uncharacteristic” clearly applies.
3. Shutting down the run game. Pullease! Jacobs had played with a torn PCL since week 3 and probably shouldn’t have played. The Eagles’ D-line is smallish and the only saving grace you have is Stewart Bradley, who is a fine player, but doesn’t play DT. This time around Jacobs is well rested and mostly healed and there are going to be some bruised bones and broken egos collective taking that lonely, last bus ride back to Broad St.
4. Give Hixon his due. He clearly beat his coverage and just dropped a ball. Take a picture of that play as you won’t see it again, this time. By the way have you met our 6’6" 253# TE, Kevin Boss? How tall are the members of the Iggs’ secondary? Toomer is primed for a good game, toes in.
5. Jacobs’ durability and "fumblitis? If a freight train runs head on with a full head of steam in to a redwood forest, things are going to break. The first few rows of trees will topple and the train will sustain some damage. Seriously, nobody can or wants to tackle this guy any other way than at the legs from the side and that whips the tackler around twisting the legs of the runner. Will he have long term durability issues? Absolutely, but all running backs end the season hurt and he’s played through it and would have played the games he was kept out of if the medical staff didn’t hold him back. Let me introduce you to Derrick Ward’s big, little brother…….for the third time this year, first time healthy.
Also a couple fumbles when your up against a team that emphasizes stripping the ball and the big guy thinks he’s all of a sudden an olymic hurdler, the nball is gonna come out once in a while.
6. The lack of sacks against McNabb. If you know anything, sacks can be overrated, though effective, but how many times was McNabb hit or end up on the turf, even with a withered D-line. Guess what? See point #1.
7. December records. By the beginning of December the Giants had already clinched the division and were banged up. They won the only game that mattered against a team you wouldn’t want to face due to the similar running prowess while Philly was playing for their playoff lives. Face it, Philly is a good team but the Giants are simply a better team that know how to do something ya’ll havent figured out. You are not the Giants of ’07. Nobody ever will be, besides the fact that we are btter even without Strahan and Osi(wait ’til next year)
8. You chose the Chargers over the Steelers and that proves your lack of judgement.
Sunday can’t come soon enough.
Bleeding Blue since 1962
by sunlion333 on Jan 9, 2009 2:01 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
well if you want to go on history the Steelers are 0-2 all time v. the Chargers in the playoffs. And addressing your point 7, weren’t the Giants hot at this time last year and weren’t they getting ready to take on the 1 seed in the NFC? I don’t see your reasoning as to why Philly does not have a chance. Face it both teams know each other extremely well. This game will probably come down to costly turnover by one of the teams.
by Ben16 on Jan 9, 2009 2:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Easy, Sun
You make a lot of good points, but remember — attack the post, not the poster. You’re skating pretty close to a personal attack on Jason here. Not picking on you, but I am seeing too much of that around here lately.
by Ed Valentine on Jan 9, 2009 2:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Personal attacks?
B/c its tough to curb your enthusiasm when you read a post and it bubbles up emotions that spill over the keyboard. B/c naturally as bloggers and not debaters or reporters, we type what 1st comes to head. Not that I’m promoting it, just saying I know personally that is what happens to me and I’m sure other casual bloggers.
by ProudYankee on Jan 9, 2009 2:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I know
Enthusiasm is great. I just want everybody to be careful not to go after a commenter. Attack the post, not the poster. We are all entitled to our opinions.
by Ed Valentine on Jan 9, 2009 3:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This seems like a pretty arrogant assessment if you ask me…
1) our O line has been playing better when Nick Cole than it was with MGB (the original back up). Nick Cole also made the block that sprung Westbrook for the 70 yard run last week. As for Runyan’s Knee, he is tough and always playing through something, I wouldn’t get too cocky.
2) Posting the turnover differential does not prove the point that the giants don’t turn the ball over.
3)Patterson and Bunkley are playing DT, and playing it very well. Both of them are decent sized dudes and play low to the ground with alot of leverage. Size isn’t everything.
4)Hixon beat the coverage on one play, and dropped the ball. Whats your point? he didn’t do it again…
5) I am not sure what the freight train analogy is all about, but the fact of the matter is Jacob’s fumbles against the Eagle’s.
6) I think this will be a key to the game, eagles need to convert on third downs and control the clock if they want to win.
7) To say you are better without Strahan or Osi is a very bold statement considering how many sacks the two of the piled up against the Eagles. Without them, there hasn’t been 1.
8) I don’t know why you insulted him here, he picked the Steelers, and even if he didn’t I think it is going to be a very close game.
I can at least agree with your last statement, Sunday can’t come soon enough
by Clyde Simmons on Jan 9, 2009 2:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
"Posting the turnover differential does not prove the point that the giants don’t turn the ball over."
What exactly does then? It seems to me that was the only point that was based entirely on facts.
by potroast on Jan 9, 2009 5:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
8. You chose the Chargers over the Steelers and that proves your lack of judgement.
and this proves your lack of literacy… thanks come again… if you weren’t basically insulting to Jason throughout the post, i would have let it go… especially this part….
But T.O. and his sideline histrionics wear on a quarterback. He's like the hot stripper you tried to clean up and convert into a real girlfriend. It's a lot of fun until the moment she has her second drink while out to eat with your parents. You unravel quicker than she does.
by foos05 on Jan 9, 2009 3:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ha ha good point foos05
"My first and foremost goal is to win a Super Bowl. I also set goals in terms of having a type of year to make the Pro Bowl. If I'm going to the Pro Bowl, I know I'm making plays for the team." Brian Dawkins
by EAGLE_MAN71 on Jan 10, 2009 2:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
A Few Counterpoints
As others have said on here, I appreciate your passion, but let’s try and keep it about the post itself.
1.) Runyan may be old, but he is effective. The o-line has played extremely well of late and I don’t think it is as one-sided as you make it seem. The Giants probably hold a slight advantage in that regard, but the Eagles defensive line is solid.
2.) The Giants have a solid turnover ratio, which is a fact. It is also a fact that the Eagles and Giants have both committed two turnovers total in the previous two matchups. I will take head-to-head stats. I see this as a wash.
3.) Jacobs is a great running back to be sure. But to call the Eagles D-line smallish is not the best description. The fact is, against the run, the Eagles rank 4th in the NFL. Overall, the defense ranks 3rd in the NFL. Effective might be a more appropriate adjective.
4.) I will give Hixon his due, he beat the coverage—he also dropped the ball. I would venture to say that the likelihood of him getting behind the secondary again is slim. But that is just conjecture. In regards to Kevin Boss, the Eagles held him to 1 catch for 5 yards in the last meeting.
5.) Not really much to debate here—Jacobs is a good player and the Eagles are a good defense that forces turnovers—it should be fun to watch.
6.) The fact here is they did not get consistent pressure on McNabb in either of the first two meetings. Will they get to him on Sunday? Probably, but I don’t think it will be relentless pressure. What it may do is force Westbrook to stay in and help pass protect which takes the Eagles biggest weapon out of the play.
7.) I guess the only counter point here is that you can view things how you want.
Chris Iafolla http://heardinthecheapseats.com/
by Chris Iafolla on Jan 9, 2009 4:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
San Diego 13, Pittsburgh 17
Unless this is the bizarro world, I believe that means I picked the Steelers.
by JasonB on Jan 10, 2009 11:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No offense intended
Hey, everybody gets a little excited. There was no real intent to insult, just a playful jab as he had stated having no delusions about thegame and the Steelers comment was a misread. Mea culpa but understandable. Also, my apologies to the man if he was offended, but I doubt he is that thin skinned or the choice of being a blogger would have been ill advised. I’ve never really been one of those posters who calls names to argue my points, so if it was perceived that way, let’s just let bygones be bygones.
I also enjoy people who comment without reading, myself being guilty of the mixing the nuimbers on the steelers/chargers deal. I actually agree with his picks and felt silly after re-reading the original post.
I never said the Eagles have no chance, I’m just of the opinion that the Eagles have not faced the team they are going to see on Sunday. They are banged up and the G-men are rested.
I also never said that the Giants are better without Stray and Osi, that would be a little bit of a reach. I stated that they are the better team in this match up even without them. Furthermore, I also posted the total turnovers for the year, which is an NFL record low the Giants now share with the ’Phins. Eli has done wonders with his game since last year as far as ball security is concerned as well as getting his completion percentage up. This is what has clearly improved the team over ’07.
The smallish comment was a recycled comment I’ve read in a few publications, but I’ll take the healthy rotation of Robbins, Cofield and Alford any day over the “not-so-smallish” Eagles D-line. One thing that will be different this time is the direction of push in the trench warfare, but this is my opinion.
Now, would I be shocked if the Eagles win? Absolutely not due the the “Any given Sunday” nature of the game. Do I think it will be a tough game? Definitely.
I’ve been a Giants fan for as long as I can remember due to family and geographical affiliation. This is one of the oldest rivalries in the game, going back to ‘37 when the Philly franchise was founded. I’ve also played the game into the collegiate level and know what toll a season can take on your body. I can’t imagine how much worse it is at the pro level. The Giants are just that much healthier, rested, have fresher legs and it is the postseason where the gloves come off.
I found Jason’s arguments thin and adressed them as such. I’ve usually found him to be more level headed and I think the fan side of him took over, this time, as I’m sure impartiality ran a bit thin in my language. In college debate class, we were taught to argue the point, regardless of veracity, as long as you can win. Follow ups like the “fact of the matter, Jacobs fumbles against the Eagles”, has no basis in fact and falls along the fanatic side of reason. Fan IS indeed short for fanatic. Either way I’m pretty sure that if the Coaches, who have more knowledge of the game than our collective, thought it was a trend it would already be addressed.
Overall, I believe that the Giants are just a deeper, more balanced team. Even admitting that McNabb seems to sread the ball around more evenly than in the past, it doesn’t change the extreme bias towards Westbrook, which will allow a focused scheme to cut the Eagles offensive production. One thing ya’ll have to admit, Spags is a genius at making adjustments and it appears that he is the next evolutional step from his mentor, Jim Johnson. Any one notice the fact that the master has adopted one of the student’s schemes in the “four aces” package? Statistics aside, the coaching edge goes to Coughlin , especially being able to come back from last year so strong.
Game on, Fellas!!! Peace.
Bleeding Blue since 1962
by sunlion333 on Jan 9, 2009 4:41 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Well,
I just got some warning logging on because apparently some inhospitable whiner at bleeding green envy took exception to my comments. So I just want to say, I went back and reviewed every single comment I ever made there, on 2 different posts, Shawn Andrews and Asante Samuel. And while I don’t pretend to be any angel, I have never left a messed up, insulting, or vulgar comment there. Rather, I have been sworn at repeatedly, called a retard and other curses, and been the subject of personal attacks to every point I make. I know nobody cares, but it’s all there in “Asante Samuel vindicated” and “Shawn Green returns.”
The only point in me posting this is to say this: You whiny, crybaby, two-faced, tattle-tale, lying Philly fans: I made some good-natured teasing at your blog, just like I posted a link to Tony Romo golfing at BtB. You reacted immaturely and idiotically, and in most cases, illiterately. I will come back to your site after Sunday. Hopefully it will be to post $1 for Asante Samuel, point out a Brian Dawkins cheap shot — seriously, he’s the master — and laugh at you for calling yourselves “this year’s Giants.”
In the meantime, grow up, get some thicker skin, and if you can’t take a little bit of impersonal, football-based, good-natured ribbing and opinions, then get your pathetic whiny TUSHIES back to bloody green with envy, and stop saying rude things here!
You play to win the game!
by Simms-McConkey on Jan 9, 2009 8:48 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
But hey, you decide:
Show me ONE rude vulgar thing I said in the “Asante Samuel” post to justify this, all cut & pasted:
you reject Giants fans
you’re overrated team
have fun picking Brian Dawkins’ cleats out of your asses.
smarter then you.
You look like an idiot
dumass… sorry that was a little rude
that just scream front running
He probably… became a: Giants fan in 2007
I’ve loved these teams forever!" Bullshit. You didn’t. You’re a front-runner
CT fans do NOT have that right. You get the fucking Huskies
wat u ann english techer now ha ha dont worrt the eagles will chill your ass off
Mr Giants Fan who is lost Go back to your sit clown.
could care less who you routed for, as long as you would stop trolling here
And I’ll admit, after getting that rudeness I did say this during “Shawn Green, but only after getting a bunch of rudeness:
"The Eagles suck almost as bad as the city itself, which sucks almost as bad as your literacy.
Have a field day with that one, I won’t be back here until after the game”
While receiving: you are too dumb to have intelligent conversation
Okey dokey, tardo. Suck a fat one, troll.
I challenge any Eggs fan to find anything I said remotely comparable to that childish abuse.
Sorry to get all serious, I like to keep it light. But you got me called out by the Blog admin at a site I really enjoy coming to, and you’re WRONG. Take your whining back to Philly with your weak team.
You play to win the game!
by Simms-McConkey on Jan 9, 2009 9:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm 5 beers in on my way to 20, so I'm gonna let this go until Monday
You play to win the game!
by Simms-McConkey on Jan 9, 2009 9:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yikes
Simms, you started and then seemed to enjoy all this back-and-forth jawing and now suddenly it’s this heart-wrenching sadness…? Is it the alcohol talking?
by ajay on Jan 9, 2009 9:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
this is why
I don’t drink during Giants games. The emotions are too crazy for me to mix with alcohol. If I had been drinking during the NFC championship last year there is no doubt I would’ve had a heart attack at 21 years old. I’m not kidding at all.
by mahmoodzaky on Jan 15, 2009 3:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
giant-Failure
we want our $ 1 eagles rule we are the last team standing , we are the beast of the nfc east
"My first and foremost goal is to win a Super Bowl. I also set goals in terms of having a type of year to make the Pro Bowl. If I'm going to the Pro Bowl, I know I'm making plays for the team." Brian Dawkins
by EAGLE_MAN71 on Jan 13, 2009 2:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
beasts
tie the cincinatti bengals?
by mahmoodzaky on Jan 15, 2009 5:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The $1
is for Asante Samuel. Weren’t you paying attention? ANyway, I went to Beeding green envy to post the $1 for Asante, and I got banned from the site. What a bunch of sissy girls you are. You can give it but you can’t take it. Your team sucks. FLUKE. Flukes do not win superbowls. You played 2 good games this year. They happened to be in January. Nice. You’re the Bills of the NFC only not nearly as good.
You play to win the game!
by Simms-McConkey on Jan 19, 2009 10:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
mock draft
Hey guys, check out this mock draft!
http://www.fanzak.com/fzrants/2009_NFL_Mock_Draft_10
by fanzak123 on Jan 9, 2009 10:06 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
that's
the 2nd mock draft I’ve seen that has the Giants taking a DE in the first round and alluding to Osi…people do realize he’s not dead, right? He’ll be back next season. I know they had success taking DE’s even when people thought they didn’t need them (see: Tuck, Justin and Kiwanuka, Mathias), and having 4 impact DE’s would be a nice luxury again, but it’s just that, a luxury. I’d rather see them take an impact linebacker if they can find one (and still have fantasies about them trading up a few spots to take Maualuga from USC, who I’ve been following for two years and am convinced is gonna be a stud)
by cjmulrain on Jan 9, 2009 11:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
while it's a luxury
I think it gives us the opportunity to draft some guys who might not be ready at linebacker, like the 3-4 teams did. Maybe we can get a rush-type LB who can situationally play end at first.
by queler on Jan 10, 2009 3:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Ajay,
you wouldn’t even know I’d had a beer until maybe eight.
Did you recognize some of those comments as yours?
I am fine with talking smack, although the record shows I am way funnier, factual, and on point. My only problem is getting my enjoyment of this site jeopardized by someone — probably someone responsible for all those insults — coming CRYING over here to complain about me. Believe me, I’d get way harsher than this and never get offended. You’re never going to hurt my feelings over sports. I just don’t appreciate crybabies, tattle-tales, and people jeopardizing my enjoyment of fansites with said etc.
So no, it’s not the alcohol, although this is way too serious for sports talk. So make you a deal: NO CRYING IN FOOTBALL. Don’t come crying over here about the nasty abuse heaped on me at Bleeding Green Envy. I’m not a crybaby, I’m not a tattletale, and all I expect is the same. I’m not saying it was you, I’m just saying it was yours. So wahh wahh on back, and talk to me after the game.
You play to win the game!
by Simms-McConkey on Jan 9, 2009 10:07 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
p.s.
This is gay, back to football talk
You play to win the game!
by Simms-McConkey on Jan 9, 2009 10:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
what I mean is
sorry to be a plaxico, I promise to stfu until Monday, unless I’m by a pc tomorrow, then maybe a final read and “good luck.”
You play to win the game!
by Simms-McConkey on Jan 9, 2009 10:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
GET READY.....
FOR A FEATHERY GREEN BLOODBATH IN THE MEADOWLNDS. EAGLE, WE’RE HERE TO “STOMP YOU OUT!”
by giantbeliever on Jan 10, 2009 1:27 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
didnt happen did it ! giant-Failure
"My first and foremost goal is to win a Super Bowl. I also set goals in terms of having a type of year to make the Pro Bowl. If I'm going to the Pro Bowl, I know I'm making plays for the team." Brian Dawkins
by EAGLE_MAN71 on Jan 13, 2009 2:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Giant Failure?
That hurts. I’ll wipe my tears with our third title we won from the 18-0 patriots last year. You on the other hand should talk to Bills fans about making the Superbowl, but never winning. The Cardinals completely shut down Deangelo Williams and Jonathan Stewart last week, as well as Steve Smith. I hope you get your ### kicked. Your best chance at winning is Asante Samuel picking off Kurt Warner, but Larry Fitzgerald is great at making plays with double coverage on him. And I don’t care what Dawkins says…… one of the dirtiest players in the NFL.
by mahmoodzaky on Jan 15, 2009 3:07 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
giant-Failure
do you actually think MCNABB will be intercepted FIVE TIMES LIKE delhome get real – Larry Fitzgerald at least the cards have him to play . he didnt shoot himself in the leg like only a total dumbass giant would do. enter Plaxico dumbass. this will be a better game than playing the giants the cards are simply a better team than the giants right now and so are the eagles or the giants would still be in the playoffs. ha ha ha ha
"My first and foremost goal is to win a Super Bowl. I also set goals in terms of having a type of year to make the Pro Bowl. If I'm going to the Pro Bowl, I know I'm making plays for the team." Brian Dawkins
by EAGLE_MAN71 on Jan 17, 2009 5:09 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
EGG FAILURE
You play to win the game!
by Simms-McConkey on Jan 19, 2009 10:42 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
stop being so hateful Simms-McConkey , ETVal nice post good sportsmanship
"My first and foremost goal is to win a Super Bowl. I also set goals in terms of having a type of year to make the Pro Bowl. If I'm going to the Pro Bowl, I know I'm making plays for the team." Brian Dawkins
by EAGLE_MAN71 on Jan 10, 2009 2:58 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

by 


















