The Eagles Super Bowl Victory Thread

message in quote.

Honestly, I considered that a fluke-from-hell game for the Dolphins. Kinda like when those 70-win Chicago Bulls teams in the 90s would drop a “who cares?” game to Atlanta.

Okay … not predictive, but okay.

Point taken.

The Pats are pulling turnovers out of their rear ends. Manning had a better TD/Int ratio than McNabb in 2004 … didn’t do him a lot of good. Belichick breakfasts pn opposing teams’ trends.

Point taken – but the Eagles themselves helped provide film on how best to stop a running QB when they successfully bottled up Michael Vick. Even realizing that McNabb is a far better passer than Vick, I’d be shocked if Belichick doesn’t pull a rabbit out of the hat.

It doesn’t indicate who will win a game. Philly won’t lose because they don’t have talent – they’ll lose because of something the Pats pull out of thin air.

Point taken.

I think this is BS until I see TO come up with an optimal performance in the SB. Dude will be hampered quite a bit.

Belichick and Crennel should be able to do this in their sleep. Sorry. Not much of an argument, admittedly. But I’ve seen the Pats dismantle too many top units to believe otherwise.

Point taken.

He’s great – Belichick and Crennel are ethereal (at least right now). Can’t explain it, but I have observed it.

Westbrook has returned kicks in past season (not sure about punts), AFAIK. Film should be out there. On top of that, you don’t want to be hanging your hat on a ST score.

True – this worked in the Pats’ favor three years ago. The game is played on the field.


You are absolutely correct, probably how the Rams were a few years ago. Watching how the Pats have played for 20 years, I cringe when they are the favorite. But after Peyton and then Pittsburgh I am not thinking about this logically. I hope Belichick is. I don’t see a blow out, I see a tough fought game with the Pats squeaking out a kick to win it.
For some reason I think who ever scores first will have a big advantage. (keen sense of the obvious).
Not having seen a lot of Eagles games, (even though they were on local tv here), I’d say the McNabb edges out Brady. Both can pass, Donovan can also scramble, and is harder to take down.
Running, I don’t think the Pats OL is that great, okay but not super. Edge Eagles?
Defense: Pats are hurting in the secondary. Edge Eagles.
Special Teams: both place kickers are very good , I’d say tie.
Coaching: tie. I favor Belichick buts thats just me.
Intangables: Patriots, this team seems to just do it.
So who do ya pick, logic says Eagles, but I am not there. Okay maybe with the points, if I was going to bet.

If the Eagles come out throwing deep, they can get a quick score and build a lead, then Westbrook will be able to chew up the clock. It will be a long night and misrable Monday.

(Pat fan bunkered down in NE Pa)

Not that I’m any kind of football expert, but hey, that never stopped me before. I think that while both teams have significantly different playing styles, they are more or less evenly matched. I give the Iggles the edge, if and only if, they play a turnover-free game. If they cough up the ball, however, the Patriot’s mostly machine-like precision will likely prevail.

Disclaimer: I’m a bit of Eagles fan, so may be viewing the situation through tinted goggles.

I don’t know anything about football, but I think the Lord owes Massachusetts bigtime for Kerry losing, so we’ll get the Sox and Pats winning in the same (athletic) year.

And the Bruins have as good a record as any other team in the NHL this year, too! :smiley:

Well, now at least the Pats people are justifying things with appeals to facts. That’s a lot better than being “on a roll” (like the Steelers?)

The 2nd & 3rd string Eagles had a combined 6 or 7 turnovers in the last 2 games of the season that Reid decided to lose to keep people healthy. The Eagles starters do in fact have something on the order of a +12 turnover ratio, and that is an advantage to us, yes.

If you’re going to judge the Eagles on the Pittsburgh loss - which is the only game our starters lost this year - then yes I could point out that the Foxboro Patriots lost two games with their starters, to those same Steelers and to, of all teams, Miami. When homefield advantage was on the line, no less.

McNabb hasn’t been running because he’s had decent pass coverage and can actuially throw the ball, unlike Vick. As he showed against our 2nd game against Dallas, he can still win a game with his feet if people aren;t getting open.

Any stats you see on total offense and defense should take into account that the Birds played their last two games of the season with backups at almost every key position. If you seriously think that Arizona and St. Louis make for tougher defenses for Brady to work against than ours, you’re not paying attention.

Foxboro struggled to win two Super Bowls by field goals; they haven’t exactly been blowing people away. And what about that middle year, something like 9-7, was it? Was Bellicheck a genuis then too?

As for Indianapolis, yes you beat a dome team that struggles on the road outside in January. Don’t expect the Birds to crumble like that.

The Iggles are the only team in the league to make the playoffs 5 consecutive years and a championship game 4 consecutive years. Nothing to sneeze at. I think some folks will be shocked on Sunday.

I know exactly nothing about football, am perfectly happy that way, and consider it rather a stupid sport. However, I am a Philadelphian, therefore, will take perhaps a few minutes of my Sunday to check the score.

There’s no way in hell the Eagles are going to win, though. If they weren’t Philly team, sure, bring it on, place your bets. But…sigh 'tis the curse of Philadelphia.

I’d rather have the football gods on my side than facts, personally.

Being on a roll != winning a bunch of games in a row. Maybe “being on a roll” is the wrong term for it.

No offense, Ninja, but I’m really beginning to question this Philadelphian thing.

  • location: Santa Fe, about as unPhiladelphia as you can get staying in th country
  • prefers whiz to actual cheese on her steak (blech!)
  • makes no mention of the Sarcone’s roll
  • discourages people from visiting the Liberty Bell and Independence Hall
  • thinks football is a “stupid sport” and might check in to see how we’re doing in our first Super Bowl since 1981

I’m sorry, but if we issued membership cards I’d have to suggest revoking yours at the next meeting… :eek: :wink:

Ya know, whether you think the Pats are better or not, how the f— could you route against the Eagles?

Okay, maybe if you are from the NFC East teams’ home cities (wash, dall, ny), but everyone else should be pulling for the Eagles.

There’s little rooting going on in this thread … mostly predicting, from what I can tell.

The Eagles fall into my category of “don’t care” teams, as do the Patriots. But it’s hard for me to regard the Eagles as being the Cubs of the NFL, being a Saints fan and all.


You’re being obtuse.

The Pats were ahead of Philly in total offense and total defense.

Yes, the Eagles sat some people the last two weeks.

If you want to play that game, fine. . .the Eagles also played 6 games against the Giants, the Redskins and the Cowboys, who were a combined 18-30 on the season. Beyond that, they only played 3 teams with a winning record this year.

The Pats, on the other hand, played 8 teams with a winning record, 5 playoff teams.

And, as a matter of fact, I DO think Arizona had a better pass defense than the Eagles this year. At best, it’s a draw. Their stats are comparable while the Cards faced much more serious passing teams (including the Pats, the Jets, the Rams twice and the Seahawks twice).

Your entire “analysis” is in a vaccuum. No shit you have TO and Westbrook. How do they actually matchup against a team that has perfect gap discipline, DBs that don’t let guys get behind them, fast, containing ends, the hardest hitting safety in the league, a team that was able to hold Indianapolis to 3 and 24 points, hold STL to 22 on the turf, with all their injuries. They held Kansas City to 19 at KC. All of these teams have better total offense and better passing offense than Philadelphia.

Philly is neither more skilled nor better coached, offensively, than most of those team.

You’re like everyone else out there. You look at the eagles and you see their 10 pro-bowlers and you have no idea how New England could possibly stop them with their make-shift defense, an offense with no standout receiver (but rather 8 guys who catch the ball every game).

You’ll still be shaking your head after Sunday, I suppose, as the Eagles walk off the field going, “that was the best team we played all year”.

I’ve heard some football fans say some strange things in my day, but this… did you type that with a straight face? Serious passing teams like the Pats, Jets, and Seahawks? Really? Those teams were 7th, 3rd, and 8th in the league in rushing yards this season. Lo and behold, the Cards got battered on the ground this season. Meanwhile, you’re only looking at total yards allowed as a barometer for the defense’s effectiveness, when the Eagles were thrown against more than almost any team in the league.

Incidentally, Rodney Harrison’s only the hardest hitting safety in the league if you’re only counting shots below the knee and above the shoulders.

Anyway, as far as predictions and thoughts, I think it’s going to be close and well-played, because these are two very good teams, but I’d have to give the edge to the Patriots if I was a betting man, for two simple reasons. One, they’ve done it before; and two, they’re the better team, all things considered. The Eagles can win, no doubt, but I certainly don’t think they’re the favorite. Whoever finds the end zone first wins it, I think, but who knows in a Super Bowl?

Apologies if I’m just reading this wrong, but this isn’t the first Superbowl for the birds. They made it one time in 1980 (i believe) to play, and lose, against the Rams. That game was vital in the banning of Stick-Um in the NFL.

Yeah, and opponents completed 60.7% of their passes against them compared to 53.7% against Arizona, second LOWEST in the league. You know who the top 4 are? Buffalo, Zona, Pittsburgh and Baltimore, teams New England played 6 times.

"Harrison’s reputation as the league’s hardest hitter – he was voted as such in an NFL players’ poll conducted by Sports Illustrated – is well-earned. "Link

I think just meant “the chances of actually winning their first”.



Remebr folks, Lawrence Taylor is to Joe Theisman as Rodney Harrison will be to Freddie Mitchell.

The Eagles are trying to win their first SuperBowl. What is complicated about that?

So, if you complete 60% of your passes, that’s better than completing 54% for fewer yards per attempt? The Eagles were third in the NFL in yards per passing attempt allowed. Which would you rather do, gain yards or complete passes? They also gave up fewer touchdowns and had more interceptions. There’s no statistical measure by which Arizona’s better than the Eagles, other than a lower completion percentage, which yielded more yardage and so was meaningless, and the number of passes thrown against them, which is clearly a product of how crappy they were as a team in general.

I also don’t see what New England or who New England played has to do with anything, other than the fact that you called them a serious passing team when they ran the ball 52% of the time.

That is to say, if you complete 60% of your passes, that’s not better than completing 54% for more yardage overall.