114 new of 199 responses total.
I was surprised today to hear that the Lions have sold out all but one of something like the last fourteen home games. Hope blooms eternal?
Speaking of Lions, PSU won today. Good finish, too.
Syracuse has new Uniforms. I don't like them. They replaced the Blue home jerseys with Orange. The numbers are Blue, with a White shadow, and are very hard to read from a distance. They kept the Orange pants that they were wearing (that is the biggest mistake, imho ... I think that teams should not wear the same color pants as the jerseys (with the exception of Penn State's white jerseys/white pants road uni's) just don't look good). The walls around the field at the Carrier Dome are also Orange, so the players blend in with the walls. Oh yeah, they won 45-3 too.
That sounds suspiciously, very suspiciously, like a one-time deal engineered by Nike. Expect to see navy back later. Actually, I've long held that Syracuse, with fantastic road uniforms and a tradition of doing so, should wear white at home. I agree, though, that sounds like a nasty combination--I don't mind teams wearing the same color shirts and pants, and it can be a snazzy change-up, but not in this case. Visualizing it makes me cringe. Michigan did not play, but got two big breaks when Penn State beat Northwestern and Michigan State lost. The effects? Michigan no longer has to worrya bout taking one conference loss and losing the BCS bowl bid to a one-loss Northwestern on tie-breakers. Similarly, if UM loses to Michigan State, a distinct possibility, MSU already has two losses. UM is solidly in the driver's seat in the Big Ten. Too bad about MSU, though, because that game was beginning to look good... it still should be, but the implications won't be the same. The really big upset today was Stanford's win over Oregon, a tremendous back-and-forth shootout that broke Oregon's home winning streak and their unbeaten record, and kept Stanford in the PAC Ten race. Only UCLA carries the torch now. Thanks for the uni update, Eric.
I would've thought it was a one time Nike promotion except for the fact that none of the official apparel places either inside or outside the stadium had the new jerseys. If it was just a promotion, they would've had the new jerseys in the stores a few days before the game, so people start seeing the jerseys and thinking about buying them. Then the game comes, the team is wearing the new uni's, and people are thinking "wow, new jerseys. I have to buy one". Make no official announcements, but wear the new jerseys for one or two games, just long enough to sell a bunch, then go back to the old ones.
Might be a coache's idea, too. I saw a picture at a Syracuse newspaper site, and it looked awful. Please tell me that in the actual dome, the shirt and the pants were the same color of orange.
They did look (from my vantage point in one of the only obstructed view seats in the place) like the color was the same on the pants and the jerseys. Apparently, the team had been asking for Orange jerseys since the middle of last season. The team did not know they would be wearing new jerseys until they returned to the locker room after pre-game warmups. I think that they should have switched to navy pants with the orange jerseys, but that's just my opinion. I have a friend who is pretty good with photoshop, and he had faked up a few images of UM players wearing blue pants with their uniforms, just to see what it would look like. Blue pants with the white road jerseys would look fine, but not with the blue home jerseys. I'll try to see if I can find a copy of one of the pictures.
Out of the question. In football, pants are in no circumstances to be darker than home jerseys. I wouldn't be a fan of UM in blue pants at home, but it's an interesting idea I've thought about for away. The Lions lost another heartreaker, a last-second field goal loss to the Titans. They had just scored on a fourth down touchdown pass to Desmond Howard in the corner (sound familiar? Blech. At least they showed some fight. It looks like the major obstacle this season is going to wind up being injuries.
If the pants can't be darker than the home jerseys, then how could Syracuse go to white home uniforms, without also switching to white pants?
Well, when I say "home," in this case I mean "colored jersey." White jerseys, oviously, can't be darker than pants. I was sort of hoping to avoid explaining it, though... after all, a vast majority of college teams where colored jerseys as tyheir home jerseys in all situations. A small number (notably Georgia Tech and LSU) wear white at home, and a few wear white at home on one or two odd occasions, such as Florida. In the pros, jersey switching is far more common. It's kind of annoying, actually. Anyway, what I mean is that pants should never be darker than colored jerseys. :) How did I get started on this? Sick sick sick. Clevland beat Baltimore, the new Browns franchise overcoming the old Browns franchise, for the first time today. It was nice to see, and the crowd really got into it. Good day to be a Wolverine in the NFL, too. Anthony Thomas ran for 188 yards and a touchdown, and David Terrell caught 7 passes of 88 yards (I think, not positive of the stats) in Chicago's 24-0 win in Cincy. Desmond Howard caught the aforementioned tying touchdown pass in a losing effort for the Lions. Jerame Tuman caught Jerome Bettis' halfback pass for a touchdown for Pittsburgh. Tom Brady overcame a rough day for Michigan grads Elvis Grbac and Brian Griese to lead (sort of) the Patriots to a big win over the Colts, completing a season sweep. Brady is causing serious controversy in New England, and has yet to throw an interception in the NFL. And, lesser known, Tim Biakabatuka rushed for 120 yards in a Panthers loss to the Redskins.
(I think the Terrell stat was for 91 yards.)
The #4 team in the nation? Well, it's not Virginia Tech any more. Syracuse 22, Virginia Tech 14. Syracuse actually looked like a dominating football team for the first time this season (beating Temple does not count). No turnovers, but the defense and special teams forced 2, and a safety. We even managed to get some rushing yards against the VT defense.
Michigan's tackling was sloppy again today. Of course, so was a lot of the rest of their game. Right up until they got the ball back with maybe a minute left to play and six-point lead I feared they'd manage to lose.
All I can say is: it's a "W". What a crazy day. Michigan should approach 4th in the BCS poll.
Michigan is #6 in both polls, and is 7, 6, 9, 8, 7 and 2 in the computer polls which have been released so far. It looks like they'll be about #7 in the BCS this week.
#4. The teams we're behind are all very good, though, so don't count any chickens. Between the chances of Texas and/or Florida leapfrogging and the low probability of Miami losing (between Oklahoma and Nebraska, we are guaranteed at least one loss), Michigan is a long shot at best for the Rose Bowl... *if* Michigan wins out. That's not likely. Remember, this is Michigan State week, and Michigan State can easily take Michigan in East Lansing, injured or no.
Apparently, the VaTech coach isn't willing to face the fact that his team did not play like a Top Ten team, and is trying to come up with excuses for the loss. http://www.espn.go.com/ncf/news/2001/1029/1270567.html
Bah. I don't buy the "easily" in #101. I think it's going to be a good game, and that MSU has a shot...but my money's on the Wolverines. The MSU defense can't contain Walker, and the UM defense is still solid. MSU's best chance is forcing turnovers and mistakes, which have admittedly been a problem for Michigan.
Not a huge problem, but a problem. If MSU can convert a turnover or two in the right places, they could win in a shootout. It's not that hard to see--some radio commentators were predicting a defensive battle, but I don't see it. Both teams can run, and both teams can *really* pass. Michigan State has the best pair of receivers that Michigan will face all season, and the secondary has been known to give up the big play. Prominent big plays from Washington, Illinois, and Iowa wound up not having a large effect on the game (the latter two lost, and the Washington offense was not on the field for the important parts of their win), but Charlie Rogers can take the ball all the way.
True...but none of which negates my scoffing at an easy win for either side. I continue to scoff! <set bad french accent = off>
Oh heavens, it's not going to be easy. Even "blowouts" in this series are hard, hard games to win. Michigan was the better team and played the better game in '97 in a game that finished with a one-sided scoreline, but it took some big plays to put the game away, and Michigan State started with all the momentum. MSU looked like they had it easy against UM in 99, but only a critical catch by Plaxico Burress in the last two minutes sealed it after a furious Tom Brady comeback.
Damn damn damn! It conflicts with practice...I'm going to have to either skip practice or persuade my VCR to record properly. Does anyone know whether some VCRs are set to not record over tapes which have been previously recorded? It looks like that might be what's happening...have to check. And oh yeah...Michigan is still going to win. :)
Lynne, there is a tab on the "spine" of the videotape cassette which is to be broken out to prevent recording from happening. If you haven't broken out that tab, then the VCR should merrily record over whatever was previously on the tape. Commercial prerecorded VHS tapes will always have that tab removed, barring a screwup at the factory, so the owner doesn't erase their rental movies.
(Of course, there's nothing magical about the tab that's built into the cassette. Anything that covers over the hole should make the cassette recordable again. Scotch tape usually works.)
I'm aware of that mechanism. I was wondering if there was another one that had been developed. Trying again tonight with a new blank tape...but I think I'll make it home to watch Friends just in case.
Michigan got #4 in the BCS rankings for this week. That's pretty good for a team which lost it's quarterback, top receiver, best running back in history and 3 offensive linemen who went in the 1st round in the NFL draft.
And another drafted early in the second round... someone mentioned that there are a lot of pro teams that would have liked to have our offense from last year. I know the Lions would. With last year's #2 receiver destroying every defense he plays, and Thomas and Terrell emerging as major forced in Chicago, and... you get the idea. Remember, with all the great things we hear about this offense, Michigan State held us to 14 points at home last year.
How much of their defense from last year did they lose? I think I remember people commenting that it was a very young team.
The more important question for MSU: how much of their defense from THIS year did they lose (to injuries). Stanford has risen to #6 in the BCS. I'm still hoping for a rematch of the first Rose Bowl, exactly 100 years ago, which M won 49-0. (I'm not saying it's gonna happen, that's why I'm "hoping".)
Don't count your chickens, although that would have tremendous dramatic appropriateness (and it would give us a chance to exact revenge for Jan 1, 1972).
So, here's a primer to the "casual," that is, sane, fan of UM or MSU or any other type of contest in this state. MICHIGAN vs MICHIGAN STATE. November 3, 2001, 3:30 pm EST Breakdown: Michigan is 6-1, 4-0 in the Big Ten, ranked 4th in the BCS poll used to determine the teams that play for the national championship. Michigan State is 4-2, 2-2 in the Big Ten, unranked in any major poll. Michigan has an outside chance at going to the Rose Bowl national title game and can win the conference even with one more conference loss. Michigan State has an extremely slim, outside shot at the conference title, and is more likely shooting for a solid goal of playing in a New Year's day bowl game. Currrent trends: Michigan has followed its loss to Washington in the second game of the season with a run of good and occasionally really good play. With solid wins over Illinois and Purdue, the only other Big Ten teams with less than two losses, Michigan has established itself as the class of the field, even pulling out a win in a hostile environment against Iowa when playing flat. Michigan State started strong, slumped with a crushing defeat to Northwestern and a bewildering collapse against Minnesota, and hit stride last week against Wisconsin. Nobody's quite sure which team will appear to play Michigan this weekend, but you can be assured that most of the best players from the defensive backfield will be on the sidelines with injuries regardless. Players to watch: Offense overshadows defense here. Michigan has been riding Marquise Walker all season long, and Ann Arbor locals have begun talking him up for the Heisman Trophy, which he won't win. He is spectacular, and contributes huge plays in every game, though. BJ Askew can play at least three positions for Michigan, but he has settled in at tailback, where he can run effectively and catch passes on screens and safety valves. If he gets going on the ground early, Michigan will have a very easy time on offense. Michigan State is *loaded* with skill position talent. TJ Duckett has struggled early in the season (well, sort of; reports of his struggles are overrated--MSU has been able to run the offense through different directions), but he had a big game against Wisconsin last week, and he will be relied upon to run over and through Michigan defensive linemen that have been stingy against the run thus far this year. Herb Haygood and Charlie Rogers provide a tremendous double-threat at receiver that Michigan won't be able to match up with properly, and at least one of them should have a big game. Rogers, incidently, will draw NFL paychecks in a couple of yers, so he's worth watching. Key: Nothing original here. Turnovers and special teams will have a huge effect on the game. If MSU wants to win, they will have to get the ball deep in Michigan territory and convert for at least a couple of scores. Their ravaged secondary is going to get burned by Walker's superior physical talent at least once or twice, but how they play second and third receivers Ronald Bellamy and Calvin Bell will decide how efficiently Michigan can march down the field. Don't forget, this game will end under the lights, and if MSU is close or leading late, Spartan Stadium is going to become *very* hostile.
That's a good analysis. And this game will be the real test for the Michigan rushing defense, ranked #1 in the country. My analysis is a bit shorter (even if biased): M 34, MSU 17. (: [Note: I'm not even hedging my bet; this is the same prediction i posted in M-Net's sports cf earlier this week.]
Mmmm...I think it'll be closer than that. Say UM 24, MSU 17. Two and a half hours to kickoff!
It's 24-20 with four minutes left. And the home team has the ball. This has been a hard-fought game.
Michigan State won, 26-24!
<krj does the happy Spartan dance> I want to thank senna for his pre-game analysis in resp:116. I thought seriously about working in the garden, because it was such a beautiful afternoon, but senna convinced me it would be a game worth watching. I was invited to the home of a couple of other MSU alumni and we had a great time. This was one of the most exciting football games I've had a personal interest in. I don't know enough to do any serious analysis, but these seem like two badly flawed teams. Michigan coach Lloyd Carr looked *really* unhappy, especially since those two late stupid penalties (one for a face mask, one for 12 men on the field!!!) kept Michigan from putting the game away after MSU had fumbled on a snap (argh again!) and allowed Michigan to take the lead. <krj does more happy Spartan dance>
Michigan was certainly flawed today, a depressingly regular pattern in Spartan Stadium. MSU usually does a good job of keeping Michigan off its game when MSU is at home-and those guys were flying for the entire second half. Michigan played like a sack of wet napkins all second-half long, but MSU deserves credit for the out-of-mind quality of play, particularly in the secondary. Not for the interceptions so much as for the elmination of easy options play in and out. I'm not sure why Michigan didn't try to attack the secondary too much, but I guess we never really got any drives going to do it. Controversy abounds in the existence of the last second (ESPN analyst Rod Gilmore suggests that there's some home cooking involved with the second left, but I can't really comment on the accuracy of that until I see a second-by-second replay. I thought it should have run off, but I wasn't watching the clock when the ball was spiked, so I couldn't say for sure. Michigan really didn't play a game to win, though. Countless opportunities to put the game away, including several in the last drive, were blown in heartbreaking fashion. Worse, Michigan never broke--if a team is going to drive to score, you hope that they leave some time left on the clock for a desperation comeback, but there was obviously no chance for that. The place wasn't as intense as some UM-MSU games have been at the beginning, but it was rocking by the time Michigan scored to go ahead 24-20. It *was* really hostile at night. A passenger jet flew directly over the stadium on its approach to the airport during halftime, causing no small consternation in the crowd, by the way. We aim to please, Ken. Absolutely cracking game of football today, a perfect example of.. escape through sports. :) Congratulations to MSUers, it was a terrific game.
Dammit. I thought the Michigan defense was really spectacular most of the game...it was *so* depressing to watch the friggin offense go three and out or just give the ball away. What a frustrating game to watch. I so miss Drew Henson.
I don't, really. He's gone, and there's no much we can do about it. The team that matters is what we have on the field, and it has already surpassed espectations on offense. The second half was abysmal, yes, but it was far more than the fault of missing one quarterback.
I agree. Michigan *always* has someone who can step up to replace *any* player. Navarre is working out. I don't like the interceptions he threw yesterday, and there were some incomplete passes (if I recall correctly) that could have been done better. But he's working out. We'll play on New Year's Day, and we'll be the Big Ten champions, which is all I ever ask of my football team.
Three wins in the big ten are never guaranteed, so nobody count their chickens yet.
As we saw yesterday. ;/
Okay, I see all this talk of Michigan has pretty much lost their chance at the Rose Bowl due to this loss. Why is that, they still have the best Big Ten record right?
This year, which also happens to be the 100th anniversary of the first Rose Bowl game (Michigan 49, Stanford 0), is the BCS national championship game. Thus it will feature the #1 and #2 teams in the BCS poll rather than the Big-10 vs. Pac-10 champions. Historical note: after Michigan's one-sided victory, the Tournament of Roses (which predates that game) went back to racing elephants (or some such) and didn't play another football game for about 15 years. Thus while it is the 100th year, it is only the 87th(?) game.
BTW, wasn't the Rose Bowl played in an eastern U.S. city for one year during World War II?
Yep.
RE#129 -- Man, that sucks. Why did they change it to the BCS crap?
The money.
Figures.
I think the Big Ten and PAC-10 didn't want to be left out of the BCS, and neither did the Rose Bowl. Meanwhile, I hope for a split national champion every year. The BCS championship is the official national championship. All of the coaches in the USA Today/ESPN poll are required to vote the winner as the #1 team, but the AP poll is done by the media and it's possible they could pick another team as #1. Unlikely, but possible. That's my dream scenario every year.
I forgot to set the VCR before leaving for Atlanta this morning; did anyone tape the game? If so, can I borrow the tape?
I'm afraid I have a blanket policy against taping Michigan games, but ones broadcast on ESPN or ESPN2 are occasionally replayed late at night on those stations--check into it. UM-Minnesota was probably shown last night, but you never know.
who won the game?
Syracuse beat West Virginia yesterday, and Miami survived a scare from BC, leaving SU and Miami as the only 2 teams that are undefeated in Big East Conference play. Next week's matchup between the two has become a huge game. A lot of people who were saying at the beginning of the season that Syracuse didn't have a chance are changing their tune somewhat. I think the general opinion on campus is that it will be a close game, rather than a blowout, and it could go either way.
Thanks for the pointer, Steve. I don't see it on tonight's schedule, so I guess I missed it.
RE #138 Michigan beat Minnesota 31 to 10.
Detroit TV note: channel 4 sportscaster Bernie Smilovitz just announced that "Sports Final Edition" will be resurrected for the 11:30 pm Sunday time slot. Fred McLeod will be the host. The station showed some of their Lloyd Carr interview which will be the main attraction this Sunday.
Now that it's Thanksgiving, let us all be thankful for the pitiful Wisconsin "special" teams... ;-)
Amen.
...and the strong and sure leg of Hayden Epstein. Not just for making the FG, but for kicking the ball out of the end-zone on the ensuing kickoff (which should also have been done in the final minute of the MSU game, instead of the squib kick which was returned to mid-field and set up, well, let's no go there.)
I found an interesting web page on the question: Why do the Detroit Lions play on Thanksgiving every year? http://www.sportsjones.com/sport&society7.htm http://www.profootballhof.com/history/1930s/thanksgiving.cfm
"...it's become a tradition.".
... and WDIV blew off the second half of the Dallas/Denver game so they could show "Ed", which they had previously pre-empted. Boo hiss!
Um, oops, wrong channel. Silly me, NBC hasn't had any football for years...
Some crazy games today. Amazingly, I missed the end of both, but they were fantastic.
So, how did the Lions snatch defeat from the jaws of victory this time?
They fell a two-point conversion short of a 16 point comeback to tie the game.
So on the basis of the late rally one might think the Lions might switch to McMahon as the primary quarterback; before that rally I thought he looked terribly ineffectual, though, with lots of incomplete passes.
0-10 - by far the worst record of my lifetime. OTOH, it's not like they're getting blow out every game, so it seems hard to call them a terrible team. But the record speaks for itself...
I doubt they'll switch. He was put in, in part, because the team appeare to bed doing nothing. He got some seriously good playing time. Charlie is still playing good football, and I think it would be better to keep McMahon at least partially under wraps for a while, so his development isn't disrupted. It's football weekend, and we're already having some fun. Colorado has jumped out to a 35-3 lead over #1 Nebraska early in the second quarter. Nebraska just scored to close it to 35-10. This is a shocking breakdown of Nebraska's defense, thought to be among the best in the country. Tomorrow is the BIG game.
Penn State won!?
In the "General Announcements" item, Richard commented on reactions to Michigan's 8-3 season. I'm ready to see _Navarre_ run out of town, but not Carr. He's thrown too many interceptions and uncatchable passes this season, especially the last few games. Gonzales falling asleep at the switch didn't help.
Don't pay attention to richard, Joe, he's just trolling for reactions. Navarre is young, and he's not playing with a lot of confidence, but the loss was far from his fault. He shouldn't have been the starter this year, but the starter is in the Yankees organization. Who's to blame for that? Well... the game, which doesn't allow players to be paid. Drew was too good, so what are you going to do? Ohio State needs to take games occasionally, or this isn't a rivalry. They hadn't won in Ann Arbor since '87. It was bound to happen eventually.
Yeah, I know they had to win. And having already lost two this season, losing this one doesn't hurt as much as it would were it the only loss of the season. And I knew this was supposed to be Henson's year as starter, with Navarre using it for experience before he became the starter. He can still learn, I guess.
He can and he will. Jim Cnockeart made an excellent point earlier--Brian Griese was pretty lousy as a sophomore, too. Tom Brady didn't really get good until his senior year, but he was better than sophomore Drew Henson, who combined talent with youthful inexperience and couldn't get the job done. Remember his interceptions against MSU in '99?
Yeah, I remember the struggles of the sophomore quarterbacks. So it's not fair to expect more of this one. ;)
There's only one thing I've ever heard Joe Paterno say that I liked (and, in fairness to the coach, I don't hear much he has to say). "If you don't get better from week to week, you get worse." I haven't see Navarre get better. I would not bet on him being the starter next year, though he is the likely candidate given the importance of experience at the position. I don't think Gonzo fell asleep. My initial impression was that he was yelling signals to the receiver when the ball was snapped. I think it was snapped early and was also high. Carr has a pretty good record against top-10 and top-25 teams. Maybe the problem is that we need to play better teams.... (:
The Wolves only had 1 significant win out of their 8 this season - the blowout of Illinois. The comeback win at Iowa was important, but that is where the warning signs began. Probably the most disappointing thing has been the case of the dropsies that Walker has contracted. Losing to Ohio State, when the OSU team is superior and earns/deserves its victory, that is to be expected (and it was during the *real* rivalry, Bo and Woody). But to hand the game to OSU is what is hard to swallow. OSU had *1* drive that they deserved what they earned - all other scores were a benefit of Michigan turnovers. If Walker doesn't drop the TD pass, and Epstein doesn't miss the ensuing chippie, UM still could have won, which should tell you how little OSU "deserved" to win the game. We can only hope that the team gets its stuff together for the Citrus Bowl, so as to avoid an 8-4 season, from the "bad old days" of Gary M.
Tennessee likely awaits.
While I'm not a fanatic, I can't help but feel somewhat bummed after Nebraska's loss on Friday. I suspected we would have trouble with Colorado, but I did not expect THAT much trouble. Oklahoma's loss was even more bizarre...
I don't know. Oklahoma, at least, succumbed to problems that had been visible all season. Nebraska's meltdown is as shocking as any I've seen in college football.
So I caught the end of the SEC championship game. The Citrus Bowl is going to be interesting, but I fear it may not be much fun. I hope the offense can get its act together this month.
I believe you're referring to a possible UM - Tennessee matchup...
Until today's paper, everything I read listed it as "definite" not "possible". But yeah, that's what I was refering to.
Well, at least the Lions did not snatch defeat from the jaws of victory today. Tampa Bay just beat them when it mattered.
Depends on how you define it. The Lions continue to be great theatre.
I watched the last quarter. Almost, they had me hoping.
Hope springs eternal. It's fun watching the Lions with a detached pessimism; instead of worrying about the dire possibilities of a successfully completed winning drive by Tampa Bay, I am left wondering how they will be able to produce a touchdown when it seems to unlikely. Because, after all, they're certain to do it.
I tuned into the game inadvertently. When I saw that the Lions where ahead near the end of the game. I wanted to see how they could ness it up. Instead, Tampa Bay just played better. Losing the return kickoff just broke all hope, unlikely to see the Lions do anything with possesion and less than a minute on the clock.
The Bucs played atrociously except for the first quarter. The Lions let them win. There's no excuse for not one but two fourth-down 15-yd passes, followed by a game-winning pass to the *same player* that got the other two heroic passes. Then again, I want the Lions to go 0-16, so I'm still happy. =}
Now, will next year's issue of the BCS "rules" have something in there about conference champions getting precedence over those they have beaten, "regardless" of record? In this case, I'm referring to 10-2 Colorado having beaten 10-1 Nebraska, and winning the Big-12 championship, including a win over Texas, the team that beat them earlier in the year. This year's BCS put Nebraska ahead, based on some marginal categories. But that decision / rule is a great detriment to the concept of conference championships! OTOH, I *hate* it when for the post-season conference tournaments for basketball, some conference has a tournament champion with a losing record that gets the NCAA bid. I think that should be "outlawed".
I think Jim C. had _one_ good idea in his column this evening: Take the pressure off the "national championship." Two polls, two hundred champions works for me. College football ends on New Year's Day.
I've heard that the Lions missed their opportunity to set a record for the most losses without a win at the beginning of a season: they now have a 1-12 record.
Darn. Who will remember a 2-14 season?
But who can forget a 0-12 start? At least until it's replaced by something more spectacular.
there's always next year
#180> there's been an 0-15 season. The Lions are now *tied* for the worst record in football, with Carolina, who (with 12 losses in a row) could still nudge the Lions for the worst record, and the longest losing streak (the Lions had had 13, including 1 from the last season, although the *longest* losing streak belongs to Tampa Bay, I believe, which didn't win a game until its 27th, in its second season).
I thought the worst start had been Tampa Bay at 0-14. That was the record I expected them to meet and maybe beat. I think it'll take more than a few 8-8 seasons to wipe out the memory of this one. A 16-0 next season _might_ do it.
oh, I think you're right, TB went 0-14 then 2-12.
The other day, I started reading some columnist's opinion that Tom Brady was a 'fraud'. I read about half of it and gave up, setting it aside for later consideration. ESPN2 just showed some highlights of an apparently recent game, one of which was Brady catching a pass for a first down.
I don't see how a "fraud" could survive in the NFL...
Ouch. That was not a good football game. It's only Michigan's worst bowl loss in history ... Michigan spent too much time trying to establish the run, and it took Lloyd Carr too long to realize that The Run had been established, and it was not working. I know, traditional Big Ten offense requires having a strong running game, but if you have a good passing offense, it will open up the defense, and allow you to run the football. In other Big Ten news, Ohio State went from being down 28-0 to having the game tied at 28-28, then losing to South Carolina, on a last second field goal (only over the bar by about 3 inches)
Yeah, but Michigan doesn't seem to have much of a passing game, either.
So the Lions said good bye to the Silverdome by winning. I'd have liked to have seen the game, now that I know how it turned out. It looked like they got an "excessive celebration" penalty after the second (?) touchdown.
It wasn't an "excessive celebration" The flag was for a facemask on the defense. The penalty was assessed on the ensuing kickoff. Although, if the NFL had the excessive celebration rule, Johnie Morton would've been flagged for doing the "worm" dance in the endzone after he scored that touchdown.
All I saw was him flopping around and a flag being thrown in front of him. Sometimes, highlights aren't enough.
I watched the Patriots beat the Steelers today. A couple of the calls seemed really wrong, but when all was said and done, my team won.
As I was waiting for the Simpsons to begin, the commentators
where saying that this was the *big* game while the Superbowl is
a reward for a conference championship. The other returned with,
no, it's the goal to make it to the Superbowl and win the Superbowl.
I can see where some of the logic comes from. If the Patriots
walk all over the competition in the Superbowl, then I can see looking
back and saying the the conference championship was the "super" game
to have won, as the logic would be that the Steelers also may have
wiped the floor with the competition.
Of the playoff games thusfar, which one was the best?
From you as a fan viewpoint, and as a toughest game to win
basis.
The Patriots game was the first professional game I've watched in memory. I'm no judge.
Let's see who's old enough to be able to remember what the "Playoff Bowl" was... :-)
No, I don't remember that bowl, but I *probably* am old enough to. So I'm watching the Superbowl. Again, the Patriots defense is doing better, offensively, than the Patriots offense. Still, as long as they keep it up, I'll be happy. :) Brady looked pretty good on the first few plays.
It turned out to be a really good game! New England actually won on a last-second field goal. The final score was 20-17.
Hearing the end of the championship game, I thought the Patriots
where supposed to wipe the walls with the Rams. Little I know. I did
see the end of the Superbowl. Hey, good to see that it did turn into
a match of the champions.
It kinda negates my asking the question again about "Was there
a game that was more Super for the Patriots in the championship series?".
Can it be said that an earier game gave them a tougher opponent or
where we seen better play?
Time for U-M fans to be proud of their alums in the Super Bowl: Brady on offense, Ty Law on defense. :-) The "Playoff Bowl" was an old NFL thing where the losers for the conference championships would play a "consolation game" prior to the Super Bowl. It was deservedly scrapped: Who wants to lose *2* playoff games at the end of the season?!
You have several choices: