So... one has to ask the question: Who matches up better...... Bears
or Saints?

timothy dugan wrote:

any good high school team could beat the pitiful Seahawks...

On Jan 6, 10:49 pm, timothy dugan mail.com> wrote:

They're both going to be very tough, but I'd take the Bears. At least
there's a chance Grossman will stink it up.

Melvin

Joe Cipale wrote:

If you want to look that far ahead, why not say
"Beware the Chargers" or "Beware the Ravens"?

We've got a way to go before we worry about the Eagles.

BillB

I work in marketing, and yeah, unfortunately, I do think most pro sports
will pass a few favors if it means creating an icon, prolonging in icon,
or pleasing an incredibly profitable group of people that they know will
spend, spend and spend more if the outcome is right. It's a sad reality
that money runs the world, including sports.

I didn't think both teams played like crap. =) There were just too many
penalties.

On Willie's 75 yard run, if you watch the replay, there were two very
obvious holds by the Steelers line and one of them was right in front of
the ref and right were Parker ran. The caliber and level of play between
two Superbowl contenders is such that nearly any team would score with
that kind of an advantage.

The trick play was awesome. No doubt about it and no whining from me.
The only information I have to suggest the Seahawks weren't a part of it
was a video I saw of the players where one of the hawks, I forget who,
turns to another one and asks him if he sees what's going on out there
and they were both complaining about how the refs were making it
impossible for them to gain any traction. So from that perspecive, I
have to believe they didn't get the memo.

On Wed, 10 Jan 2007 01:24:49 GMT, iNFiDEL no.com> wrote:

On Sat, 6 Jan 2007, timothy dugan wrote:

->So... one has to ask the question: Who matches up better...... Bears
->or Saints?

Chicago, by far. Joe Horn is healthy enough to play for New Orleans,
apparently. With Colston and Horn out there, I don't like the matchup
already. Then you throw in Reggie Bush, who had what, almost 90 catches
this year? He's deadly out of the backfield and out of the slot, which
just further makes me nervous given Settle's secondary situation. Oh, and
the Saints' quarterback is seventeen million times better than Chicago's.

Seattle's biggest weakness on D is their secondary. Which team can better
exploit that weakness? The one with the good receivers and the all-pro
quarterback, or the guy with the horrific quarterback play and no reliable
receiving threats?

Hell, when I put it that way I feel pretty optimistic about the whole
thing Sunday.

Nice post even though I don't agree with the fans as officials; mind
you, half the time I don't agree with the officials as officials.

I must say though that for an 11 point victory it sure seemed a lot
closer than that when the Hawks were driving the field at the end of
the game.

Stemmer

On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 23:16:58 -0500, "M. Zaiem Beg" iglou.com>
wrote:

I strongly disagree with this. He's eighteen million times better.

So do I. Normally I'd be nervous about a 9-7 team's prospects against
a 13-3 team, just on principle, but I'll be damned if I can figure out
how they lost only 3 games. This should be a real winnable game for
the Seahawks.

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mike Kohary mike at kohary dot com http://www.kohary.com

"timothy dugan" mail.com> wrote in message
news:PZ_nh.1125$UZ.769@newsfe03.lga...

Right now the Saints look like the hotter team.