I think the press will be interesting to watch this week. If a lot gets made of Colts receivers getting an easy time of it then it will be interesting to see what the officiating will be like on Sunday. Cris Collinsworth apparently has already made an issue of it in the Colts-Chiefs game.

Also worth noting that the Colts have probably come up against the two worst performing QBs of the play-offs so far (Green and McNair).

that's a very good point. I don't remember the Pats being whistled for one pass interference call yesterday, but they always struggle against Harrison. I think we ned to do what we do best, close down their running game and wear them out with ours, and hope for the best.

So does everyone else. The guy is amazing.

So Bears vs Saints, and Patriots vs Colts...

My moneys on a Saints v Patriots super bowl! ;) EVen if Bears have the best offence, and Colts the best Defence, I can see a major upset! :lux:

Eh?

And eh?

And neither Pats nor Saints winning would be upsets.

I think either the Colts or Pats to win. I'll go with the Colts.

Nearly...

Bears have a crap O (and a good D) and colts have a piss poor D (and a good O)

"Tonight Matthew I want to be half as successful as my older brother..."

http://slamonline.com/online/wp-cont.../2007/01/1.JPG

Brohm's going back to uni, so in all likelihood there goes our chance of taking a QB in the first round. Russell and Quinn will be gone by that point and Smith is too much of a gamble to go that early. Bugger!

Think he meant that even if the Bears O steps up and has a great game, the Saints will still win. Similarly, if the Colts D has a great game, the Pats will still beat them.

I think that's what was meant, anyway!

That's a pile of bull... they know how to get the job done. Are you telling me the Pats didn't play their part in the best play-off game of the weekend?

Compared to the Colts/Ravens game which WAS dull compared to the other 3 matches, the Pats were brilliant and they did what they need to.

What about when the Ravens turned up at the Superbowl a few years back barely able to score but on the back of a miserly defence? The fact the Pats aren't great defensively (although they have the best D in Pats history points-wise this season) means the offence has to step up. Brady might be a machine but isn't that what all teams want? An ice-cold QB who can score under any pressure??

True benzhyi you are being harsh. The first Super Bowl win, against the Rams, was one of the great upsets of all time; the second, against the Panthers, was, after the first quarter, one of the most exciting Super Bowls of all time. We've also had the Snow Bowl (no matter what you think of the Tuck Rule, it was pretty exciting there at the end), won two AFC Championships in Pittsburgh, and twice shut down one of the great offences of all time against the Colts. How much more exciting could the Chargers game have been? Brady doesn't throw it long all that much, but we never blow anyone out, and so nearly all of our games are close. As a Pats fan, you never feel safe.

Rodney Harrison could be back for Sunday, which gives us more of a chance.

Now, that would bew a god-send against the previously mis-firing Manning, Snr... no, not Archie :D

I'm not disputing how good the Pats are; I was merely trying to get across how dull I find them. To me they're like the NFL's answer to Chelsea: effective but, if you're not a fan, tedious to watch. Though I was rather over-egging the point for what was supposed to be comic effect.

And I didn't enjoy the second half of the Chargers game because I was desperate for them to go through and could see they were going to blow it. :)

I mean this as a compliment - I think of the Patriots like the Germans. Very efficient, ruthless, not prone to defeating themselves.

Another good day for Ron Mexico.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive...71mexico1.html

The Bears don't have a crap O, as it happens. They have a mediocre O that plays like crap far more often than it should, but if it plays to its potential it is good enough.

It has a serviceable tight end and a bunch of very good posession receivers, albeit without a pure gamebreaker in the mix. It has two very good running backs (which is one more than most teams have) neither of whom is great. And it has a quarterback who can be very, very good indeed but as often is not is simply awful. All of that hides behind a first class offensive live anchored by a Pro Bowl class centre. To call the Bears O "crap" is facile, and suggests a lack of understanding of the game. Underachieving is more like it. There's never been a 13-3 team half of whose starting personnel are crap. Trust me on that.

And what's your field, Saxon? The company I work for is HQd in Boston and I spend about 10 days or so there a month. Better PM me and I'll see if I (or anyone I know) can help.

But I'd call West Ham crap, and what you say about Bears is very applicable (in a highly translated form) to the Hammers.

Calling them mediocre is hardly a step up from crap in my opinion.

I think this guy's mock draft is way off the mark, but would be quite happy to see Quinn fall to the Dolphins at no. 9.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slu...yhoo&type=lgns