ARE YOU READY FOR SOME (REAL) FOOTBALL?!?

trotsky

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-08-05 09:54 AM
Original message

ARE YOU READY FOR SOME (REAL) FOOTBALL?!?

NFL Kickoff 2005, Raiders at Pats: Who's gonna win?

Refresh | 0 Recommendations

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

KitchenWitch

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-08-05 10:12 PM
Response to Original message

1. I want the Raiders

but the Pats will likely win.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

trotsky

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-08-05 10:35 PM
Response to Reply #1

2. I don't care much for the Pats anymore...

but I don't want the Vikes to look like total idiots for trading Moss, so I'm rooting against the Raiders.

So far, Moss is doing for the Raiders what he did for us: turn in a couple of outstanding catches, maybe a TD, but not helping much to actually win games.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

KitchenWitch

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Thu Sep-08-05 10:45 PM
Response to Reply #2

3. so far that is pretty much it

Mr KW and I have a bet as to when Moss starts complaining about wanting a better QB...I said second game. He said third.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

trotsky

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Sep-09-05 07:23 AM
Response to Reply #3

4. Hehe

Edited on Fri Sep-09-05 07:23 AM by trotsky

You might just win that bet, especially if they lose again next week.

But yep, same old Moss. Makes a circus catch or two, scores a TD, then commits an offensive pass interference penalty to prevent his team from coming within one possession of tying the game.

It pissed me off when both Madden AND Michaels were ragging on the Vikes early in the game about "How can you make your team better by trading away the most talented receiver in the league?" and "I don't believe in addition by subtraction."

Well, dipshits, it doesn't look like the Raiders made their team much better by trading FOR the most talented receiver, now DID they?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

PatsFan2004

(245 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Sep-09-05 09:48 AM
Response to Original message

5. It was obvious that the Raiders improved their run defense, but

it appeared that they did it at the expense of their pass defence. Dillon was obviously frustrated by getting zip yardage in the first half. In the second half, Oakland decided to adjust for the passing game and gave up more yardage on rushes and screens.

The Pats adjusted by switching to the 4-3 with Warren, Seymour, Wilford, and Green as the front four, one of the best DLs in the NFL. And Oakland's offense was futile until the great punt block.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Sun May 05th 2024, 04:52 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.