|
|
Post by captain master talbot on Aug 14, 2009 7:33:46 GMT -5
Where's the one Giants fan that everyone loved, especially Ralpho?
|
|
|
|
Post by The Best on Aug 14, 2009 8:47:03 GMT -5
I hope he doesn't come back.
|
|
|
|
Post by Byron F'N Saxton Fan on Aug 14, 2009 9:57:47 GMT -5
Last thing we need on here is another Giant fan. Do we have a fan of every NFL team on here? I never see Bengals or Texans fans on here.
Unrelated note, I'm out for the Vick News Conference. Should be interesting to see what everybody involved has to say.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Best on Aug 14, 2009 10:04:38 GMT -5
There really aren't any obnoxious Giant's fans that are like "GINTS R TEH BEZT SOUPERBOLE CHAMPZ WE'RE GUNA BBBEEEE!!!!!" I mean i'm sure some of them will pop up during the season if they're doing well, but that happens with every team.
|
|
|
|
Post by "The Visionary" Eldniw on Aug 14, 2009 10:06:11 GMT -5
Wooooo! It is official, the press conference has started, Michael Vick is officially a Philadelphia Eagle!
I really say this, F**k all the haters! This day belongs to us Eagles fans!
And allow me to defend Mike for a second. He admitted to his wrongdoing. He paid his debt to society, he's served his time that he was sentenced. Allow him to get back to what he does, and stop trying to tear him down.
And a 2 point loss is NOT, in any way possible, a "shredding" as it was called. If that was the case, why didn't anyone say how the Eagles "shredded" the Cardinals when the Cardinals were up 24-6 at the half, and the Eagles came out with a 19-0 run to take the lead?
|
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Ralphio on Aug 14, 2009 10:12:23 GMT -5
Wooooo! It is official, the press conference has started, Michael Vick is officially a Philadelphia Eagle! I really say this, F**k all the haters! This day belongs to us Eagles fans! And allow me to defend Mike for a second. He admitted to his wrongdoing. He paid his debt to society, he's served his time that he was sentenced. Allow him to get back to what he does, and stop trying to tear him down. And a 2 point loss is NOT, in any way possible, a "shredding" as it was called. If that was the case, why didn't anyone say how the Eagles "shredded" the Cardinals when the Cardinals were up 24-6 at the half, and the Eagles came out with a 19-0 run to take the lead? I think there is something in the cheese steaks in Philly, again you need to ask your mom to check your eyes because you and Shane Victorino obviously need them checked. When Tom Brady was in, so were the first teamers of the Eagles and he went nuts on them, 21-6 was the score when TOM BRADY AND THE EAGLE STARTERS LEFT THE GAME. No one cares about what future checkers and Macy's clerks do in the 3rd and 4th quarter, but when the two groups of starters play against one and another, that is something that matters. |
|
|
|
Post by bad guy™ on Aug 14, 2009 10:18:24 GMT -5
Last thing we need on here is another Giant fan. Do we have a fan of every NFL team on here? I never see Bengals or Texans fans on here. Unrelated note, I'm out for the Vick News Conference. Should be interesting to see what everybody involved has to say. There are no Bengals, Texans, Jaguars, Seahawks, or Cards fans here. Come to think of it, other than K.J.V. who posts here once every couple months, there isn't a Packers fan here either. Nor a Colts...I could be wrong though. |
|
|
|
Post by "The Visionary" Eldniw on Aug 14, 2009 10:29:23 GMT -5
Wooooo! It is official, the press conference has started, Michael Vick is officially a Philadelphia Eagle! I really say this, F**k all the haters! This day belongs to us Eagles fans! And allow me to defend Mike for a second. He admitted to his wrongdoing. He paid his debt to society, he's served his time that he was sentenced. Allow him to get back to what he does, and stop trying to tear him down. And a 2 point loss is NOT, in any way possible, a "shredding" as it was called. If that was the case, why didn't anyone say how the Eagles "shredded" the Cardinals when the Cardinals were up 24-6 at the half, and the Eagles came out with a 19-0 run to take the lead? I think there is something in the cheese steaks in Philly, again you need to ask your mom to check your eyes because you and Shane Victorino obviously need them checked. When Tom Brady was in, so were the first teamers of the Eagles and he went nuts on them, 21-6 was the score when TOM BRADY AND THE EAGLE STARTERS LEFT THE GAME. No one cares about what future checkers and Macy's clerks do in the 3rd and 4th quarter, but when the two groups of starters play against one and another, that is something that matters. They also got a few favorable calls, and there is no one here who actually watched the game who can say otherwise. Happens all the time in football, so I'm not saying it's here and there and it only happens sporadically, or only to a certain team, just because it's that team. And why do the 3rd and 4th quarters not matter? Because the Eagles "SHREDDED" [Oh yes, I went there] the Patriots for a 19-3 run? Sure we came up 2 points shy, but you can't sit there and say that we didn't do the exact same thing in the second half that the Patriots did in the first half. [/thread] |
|
|
|
Post by captain master talbot on Aug 14, 2009 10:38:20 GMT -5
Because it was the third string teams.
|
|
|
|
Post by "The Visionary" Eldniw on Aug 14, 2009 10:49:05 GMT -5
Because it was the third string teams. 2nd and 3rd. Sure it was. I'm not denying that. But the fact that the first half is the only half being looked at in this game is not fair, when the Eagles did the same thing that the Patriots did. You can't look at one half and draw a legitimate comparison on the whole game. |
|
|
|
Post by bad guy™ on Aug 14, 2009 10:56:29 GMT -5
Half of the people that played for the Eagles and Patriots last night (and any team for that matter) will be Wal*Mart employees in a couple weeks. The only ones who TRULY matter are the 1st stringers....and MAYBE the 2nd. 3rd and lower....nah.
|
|
|
|
Post by captain master talbot on Aug 14, 2009 10:57:58 GMT -5
Because it was the third string teams. 2nd and 3rd. Sure it was. I'm not denying that. But the fact that the first half is the only half being looked at in this game is not fair, when the Eagles did the same thing that the Patriots did. You can't look at one half and draw a legitimate comparison on the whole game. No, but you can draw a legitamte comparison on the regular season...and the Patriots kicked the Eagless ass when it was the first team. |
|
|
|
Post by "The Visionary" Eldniw on Aug 14, 2009 11:11:25 GMT -5
2nd and 3rd. Sure it was. I'm not denying that. But the fact that the first half is the only half being looked at in this game is not fair, when the Eagles did the same thing that the Patriots did. You can't look at one half and draw a legitimate comparison on the whole game. No, but you can draw a legitamte comparison on the regular season...and the Patriots kicked the Eagless ass when it was the first team. That's where I disagree. That's why we play pre-season games. We work out the kinks. We went 1-3 in 2004, and what did we do in the regular season. 13-3, and Conference Champions. So really you can't. |
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Ralphio on Aug 14, 2009 11:17:05 GMT -5
No, but you can draw a legitamte comparison on the regular season...and the Patriots kicked the Eagless ass when it was the first team. That's where I disagree. That's why we play pre-season games. We work out the kinks. We went 1-3 in 2004, and what did we do in the regular season. 13-3, and Conference Champions. So really you can't. HOW CAN YOU DISAGREE, THE PATRIOTS FIRST TEAMERS PUT UP 21-6 ON THE EAGLES FIRST TEAMERS...HOW CAN YOU DISAGREE, I DO NOT UNDERSTAND. LOOK AT WHAT TOM BRADY DID HIS FIRST GAME IN ALMOST A YEAR TO THE EAGLE STARTERS, AND WHAT THE PATRIOTS STARTERS DID TO THE EAGLES STARTERS. Seriously kid? Why arent you talking about Chicago fans and making up more lies about Shane Victorino too |
|
|
|
Post by "The Visionary" Eldniw on Aug 14, 2009 11:52:14 GMT -5
That's where I disagree. That's why we play pre-season games. We work out the kinks. We went 1-3 in 2004, and what did we do in the regular season. 13-3, and Conference Champions. So really you can't. HOW CAN YOU DISAGREE, THE PATRIOTS FIRST TEAMERS PUT UP 21-6 ON THE EAGLES FIRST TEAMERS...HOW CAN YOU DISAGREE, I DO NOT UNDERSTAND. LOOK AT WHAT TOM BRADY DID HIS FIRST GAME IN ALMOST A YEAR TO THE EAGLE STARTERS, AND WHAT THE PATRIOTS STARTERS DID TO THE EAGLES STARTERS. Seriously kid? Why arent you talking about Chicago fans and making up more lies about Shane Victorino too Why are you bringing up a completely different topic in here? Is it because you have nothing else for your argument? You wanna compare first games back from injury? Okay. Terrell Owens breaks his ankle on December 12, 2004. 8 weeks later, to the day, the man is playing football again. I can tell you, a broken ankle is a hell of a lot worse than a torn ACL. T.O. needed a damn plate in his ankle to help it to heal. And he played in the Super Bowl. 8 weeks from a broken ankle, as opposed to 11 months from a torn ACL, which might I add, Donovan McNabb came back at least 2 months earlier than Brady did, from his tear in the 2006 season. While I'm on Donovan, he had more yards last night. Granted only 3, but all it takes is 1 more. 103, opposed to Brady's 100. He had more pass attempts, meaning his line did a better job protecting him and getting him time to throw, and an extra completion. 11, as opposed to Brady's 10. And while he may not have had a TD, he also did NOT throw an interception, which Brady did. Point out all the stats, before you try and bury one quarterback over another. |
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Ralphio on Aug 14, 2009 11:55:56 GMT -5
HOW CAN YOU DISAGREE, THE PATRIOTS FIRST TEAMERS PUT UP 21-6 ON THE EAGLES FIRST TEAMERS...HOW CAN YOU DISAGREE, I DO NOT UNDERSTAND. LOOK AT WHAT TOM BRADY DID HIS FIRST GAME IN ALMOST A YEAR TO THE EAGLE STARTERS, AND WHAT THE PATRIOTS STARTERS DID TO THE EAGLES STARTERS. Seriously kid? Why arent you talking about Chicago fans and making up more lies about Shane Victorino too Why are you bringing up a completely different topic in here? Is it because you have nothing else for your argument? You wanna compare first games back from injury? Okay. Terrell Owens breaks his ankle on December 12, 2004. 8 weeks later, to the day, the man is playing football again. I can tell you, a broken ankle is a hell of a lot worse than a torn ACL. T.O. needed a damn plate in his ankle to help it to heal. And he played in the Super Bowl. 8 weeks from a broken ankle, as opposed to 11 months from a torn ACL, which might I add, Donovan McNabb came back at least 2 months earlier than Brady did, from his tear in the 2006 season. While I'm on Donovan, he had more yards last night. Granted only 3, but all it takes is 1 more. 103, opposed to Brady's 100. He had more pass attempts, meaning his line did a better job protecting him and getting him time to throw, and an extra completion. 11, as opposed to Brady's 10. And while he may not have had a TD, he also did NOT throw an interception, which Brady did. Point out all the stats, before you try and bury one quarterback over another. I give up, you are just a blinded homer who does not understand common sense. I bring up the Victorino comment because you were WRONG and then just didnt own up to it and ran away. Regardless of McNabb's stats, the Patriots defense handled the Eagles, while the Eagles defense was unable to stop Tom Brady in the half they played together. Go get your Vick jersey kid, you have a lot to learn about football outside of Philadelphia. Are you going to come back and talk more about your moms fake job and stuff in Philadelphia in the MLB thread. we miss you  |
|
|
|
Post by captain master talbot on Aug 14, 2009 12:04:53 GMT -5
Just check the passer ratings
Bradys was 97.2
McNabbs was 76.9
Brady played better ball
|
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Aug 14, 2009 12:05:15 GMT -5
Because it was the third string teams. 2nd and 3rd. Sure it was. I'm not denying that. But the fact that the first half is the only half being looked at in this game is not fair, when the Eagles did the same thing that the Patriots did. You can't look at one half and draw a legitimate comparison on the whole game. You're right. If the NFL season was based on teams placing their 3rd string teams against one another; the Eagles would be the better team. But it's not. And the Patriots raped them. Mmkay? |
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Ralphio on Aug 14, 2009 12:11:43 GMT -5
No no no Kliquid you are missing the point, the whole time I have been talking about the first half...only the time Brady was in, but DUH DUMMY! The Eagles on lost by 2, so what if they get destroyed when Tom Brady was in, the Eagles only lost by 2! McNabb passed for ONE more yard, psssst Brady sucks.
|
|
|
|
Post by sonstuds on Aug 14, 2009 12:15:23 GMT -5
What a strange argument this has been.
|
|
