Re: Question: Do the Pats have stupid opponents?
- From: Mattu <gocism@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 15:30:26 -0800 (PST)
On Jan 24, 3:07 pm, "John C (tx)" <jcn...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
A couple reasons. First of all -- it doesn't make sense that players would
consider another's player a priority in comparison to a super bowl ring.
Second, the fact that players continually say this stuff every year
indicates that, at least from their standpoint, it doesn't matter. And
third, guys like Rodney Harrison have flat out said it doesn't matter.
Mark, I agree.
I think the key issue is whether Coughlin is the guy to use the two
weeks wisely in order to prepare. I don't think that there is anyone
out there can prepare a team better than BB but I think Coughlin is
better equipped than the Packers. I don't bet but if I did I would bet
heavy on the Pats.
NFL Live showed and interesting stat concerning the Giants after a
bye. Let's just say they're less than 500 after time off. The Pat's
are considerably better.
.
- References:
- Question: Do the Pats have stupid opponents?
- From: Dan Darby
- Re: Question: Do the Pats have stupid opponents?
- From: MZ
- Re: Question: Do the Pats have stupid opponents?
- From: Dano
- Re: Question: Do the Pats have stupid opponents?
- From: MZ
- Re: Question: Do the Pats have stupid opponents?
- From: John C (tx)
- Question: Do the Pats have stupid opponents?
- Prev by Date: Re: Question: Do the Pats have stupid opponents?
- Next by Date: Re: Belichick comments on Brady's Ankle...
- Previous by thread: Re: Question: Do the Pats have stupid opponents?
- Next by thread: Re: Question: Do the Pats have stupid opponents?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|