NFC/AFC and Super Bowl Predictions

[iacas]

Atlanta: 24
Philadelphia: 27

Michael Vick puts in a strong game, but makes a few critical mistakes. If Michael Vick can put in a solid 60 minutes, I think this game goes to Atlanta.

New England: 17
Pittsburgh: 21

I don't think the Pats have the mystery. I think against a corp of good wide receivers and a team that knows to run the ball (i.e. not the Colts, who were running the ball just fine before they gave up on it). Corey Dillon won't be the factor he's predicted to be, and Ben will bounce back from his experience.

Super Bowl
Philadelphia: 17
Pittsburgh: 34

Without TO, the Eagles become a much more one-dimensional team. The Steelers beat them up earlier in the season, and that was without a few key players who are now healthy.

[TomG]

I posted this earlier today on my blog:

As of right now, the weather report for Sunday at the Linc is, "Windy, periods of snow. Highs in the low 30s and lows in the mid teens." Who does this favor, the Eagles or the Falcons? On the one hand, the Falcons are a team from the South that plays on astroturf in a dome: advantage Eagles. On the other hand, the Falcons are a run-first team while the Eagles are a pass-first team: advantage Falcons.

I honestly don't have an answer, but I do feel that in the end, the Eagles will prevail: Eagles 20, Falcons 17.

[Rafcin]

iacs: Super Bowl : Philadelphia: 17 Pittsburgh: 34 ? hm.. where do you live again?

Here is my prediction: Atlanta rolls over Eagles, Patriots expose Ben's "rookieness" and Atlanta crushes the Pats in the superbowl. Not Vick, but their defense.

[iacas]

iacs: Super Bowl : Philadelphia: 17 Pittsburgh: 34 ? hm.. where do you live again?

Near Erie, PA.

Why?

[Mr_Slice]

Eagles over Falcons. The weather and the big stage rattle Vick, and Philly's vastly under-talked about defense struts their stuff.

Pats over Steelers. New England does NOT lose twice in the same year to the team that ended their historic streak. Brady is at his best in the playoffs. Big Ben can't handle it and makes a cruical mistake, but unlike the Jets, the Patriots offense pads the score with some points of its own.

Super Bowl: My heart says Eagles, my head says Patriots. Truth is, I think it goes down to the wire and who wins is really a toss-up.

[Rafcin]

There are 4 arguments against the Eagles though:
1. they've no wide receivers
2. Vick was very impressive in last year's snow/cold playoff game vs. Green Bay
3. Phily gives up 97 yds in avg. with 4.6 yds/carry. That's playing against teams with 1 RB. Atlanta has 3 star running back (you really don't concider Vick a QB, do you?)
4. Defenses win the playoff games and ATL is the top defensive team this year.

[Mr_Slice]

Fair enough, but...

1. Philly is fine at WR. They do what the need to do. They got it done last week and they will again this week. Their confidence is very high after last week's game.

2. Green Bay beat Atlanta last year if they played in the playoffs. So, he wasn't impressive enough evidently.

3/4. Duckett is hardly a "star RB." Dunn is a good RB, but not a "star RB." Philly has been much better against the run since Trotter joined the team again. And they don't have half of their defense going to the Pro Bowl because the suck. They lost one real game (Pittsburgh), so the Eagles defense is clearly under-rated. But that's fine. I prefer that way. Also, Vick can't pass. Take away they run and Atlanta is merely a decent team.

[iacas]

1. Philly is fine at WR. They do what the need to do. They got it done last week and they will again this week. Their confidence is very high after last week's game.

They lucked into some plays and laid eggs on other times. They could have closed out the Purples many times but failed to do so every time. The Purples laid an egg. The Dolphins could have beat the Purples last week.

Mitchell played a good game, but that was it. Every time I looked at the TV a pass was going through Pinkston's hands.

3/4. Duckett is hardly a "star RB." Dunn is a good RB, but not a "star RB." Philly has been much better against the run since Trotter joined the team again. And they don't have half of their defense going to the Pro Bowl because the suck. They lost one real game (Pittsburgh), so the Eagles defense is clearly under-rated. But that's fine. I prefer that way. Also, Vick can't pass. Take away they run and Atlanta is merely a decent team.

They lost to the Steelers - a team with a bunch of good running backs - by 24 points. And only that few because the Steelers knelt on the Eagles 8 with 2:30 to go. The Eagles had 111 yards of total offense in the game. They didn't just "lose," they were creamed. With TO.

And since when is the Pro Bowl about ability alone? Ray Lewis is going again, but he's an aging has-been. Several folks from the Steelers are going, too, but as a fan I would argue that other Steelers deserve to go instead of them, based on pure ability. If Vick plays well, the Eagles go down. That's my take. But regardless of which team wins, they're the dogfood in the next game. The real Super Bowl is being played at 6:30 on Sunday.

[Mr_Slice]

Can't get much more biased than that.

It's okay. I suppose when you've been so lousy for several years, you have to enjoy having a good team while you can. However, I find it hilarious that you can knock the Eagles performance last week when your precious Steelers lucked their way into a win. At least the Eagles were never in danger of losing, unlike Pittsburgh. And I'd take the Vikings over the Jets 10 out of 10 times, too.

Go ahead, though. Bash the consistent Eagles for their ONE bad loss of the year and keep your shaky confidence up. We'll see on Sunday.

[Rafcin]

Fair enough, but...

my mistake - I ment 2002, when Vick beat GB 27-7 in a snowed-in game at Green Bay..

[Rafcin]

Can't get much more biased than that.

Are these the same Eagles we're talking about? The choke artists of 3 years straight? You can't take a credit for a great round of golf if you triple-bogey the 18th

. I'm just busting your balls - don't really care. Waiting for little Manning to develop to see my G-Man back in the Big Game... 2008 ?

[iacas]

Can't get much more biased than that.

Statistics are biased? 111 total yards isn't bias, it's domination.

It's okay. I suppose when you've been so lousy for several years, you have to enjoy having a good team while you can.

The Steelers have won far more division titles than the Eagles have. Cowher (bumbleheaded playoff egg-layer that he is) routinely has solid, division-winning records. I like to deal in facts, Aaron, so have a look at these:

[pre] Steelers Iggles 2004 15-1* 13-3* 2003 6-10 12-4* 2002 10-5* 12-4* 2001 13-3* 11-5* 2000 9-7 11-5 1999 6-10 5-11 1998 7-9 3-13 1997 11-5* 6-9 1996 10-6* 10-6 1995 11-5* 10-6 1994 12-4* 7-9 1993 9-7 8-8 1992 11-5* 11-5 --------------------------- Total 130-77(8) 119-88(4)[/pre] That's twice as many division titles and 11 more wins in 13 years. And the Eagles haven't exactly been to a Super Bowl in awhile. So c'mon...

However, I find it hilarious that you can knock the Eagles performance last week when your precious Steelers lucked their way into a win.

I didn't comment on the Steelers, did I? I was responding to your post about the Eagles. Now that you bring it up, here's my take: the Steelers did everything they could to lose a game and still found a way to win. All those things you

aren't supposed to do in the playoffs (bad picks, big plays, special teams sucking, rookie QB) they did. And they still won. Were it not for the fumble, the INT for a TD return, and the punt return, the score could have easily been 31-3. But the Steelers did everything they could to lose, and still won. That's my take. A quick check of the stats will back things up. The Steeler D - the same that held your team to 111 total yards of offense - shut down the Jets. The Jets D didn't exactly stuff the Steelers (look at our running totals). The Jets got some big plays and the Steelers overcame it. The only "luck" in this game was on the side of the Jets - they got a few big "gifts" handed to them by a team that hasn't made many mistakes all year. A kicker missing from 40+ yards at Heinz Field? Happens all the time. Had their coach (who's about as dumbleheaded as Cowher in the post-season) realized this and been able to move the ball inside the Steelers 25, the Jets may have won thanks to their luck and the post-Christmas gifts they got. They didn't.

At least the Eagles were never in danger of losing, unlike Pittsburgh. And I'd take the Vikings over the Jets 10 out of 10 times, too.

Huh? The Jets are a solid team playing in a much tougher conference. The Vikings fold every year. If by saying you'd "take" the Vikings you're implying that they're better, that really sheds some light on things. I'd take the Vikings 10 times out of 10 too... if I'm choosing my opponent!

Go ahead, though. Bash the consistent Eagles for their ONE bad loss of the year and keep your shaky confidence up. We'll see on Sunday.

We won't see on Sunday, Aaron. The Steelers don't play the Eagles on Sunday. If they did, the Eagles would be in for an ass-whoopin'. Same is true if the Patriots were to play the Eagles. The one can't-miss prediction of this post-season: AFC will beat the crap out of the NFC in the Super Bowl.

A Steeler loss to the Patriots and an Eagles victory doesn't mean the Eagles are better than the Steelers, it means the Eagles played against a lesser opponent. The Iggles had their butts handed to them in week 9 (IIRC) by the Steelers in a head-to-head matchup. If the Eagles make it to the Super Bowl, it'll be because they didn't have to play an AFC team in the conference playoffs. The Steelers beat a Buffalo team struggling for its life in week 17... with 3rd stringers. The Eagles laid eggs at the end of the year. If you want some bias, here you go: in every way the Eagles (and the entire NFC) come up short against the top four AFC teams. There's your bias. "111 yards of total offense and 27-3 ass-whoopin'" ain't bias. It's fact. You'd do well to re-acquaint yourself with some of those, Aaron.

[iacas]

Are these the same Eagles we're talking about? The choke artists of 3 years straight? You can't take a credit for a great round of golf if you triple-bogey the 18th

Reminds me of a story about some guy named Van de Velde... hmmm...

And Cowher. Guy has an abysmal post-season record. If the Steelers win Sunday it will be in spite of their coach. P.S. If I ever shoot 60 but triple 18, you damn well bet I'm gonna brag about it.

[Rafcin]

wow, that cold weather and lack of golf accumulated a lot of passion in you guys. We were supposed to be about golf - it's just stupid fussball, game for the neanderthals !
hehehe... I'm lovin' it. That whole exchange should end up in some kind of bet guys.
Back up your positions with some hefty wagers!

[iacas]

I'd wager that the AFC team will beat the NFC team in the Super Bowl, regardless of who each team is. But I won't bet on the conference championships because within each conference, the games will be good. If the Steelers lose and the Eagles win, it in no way indicates that the Eagles were "better" than the Steelers.

[Rafcin]

I'd wager that the AFC team will beat the NFC team in the Super Bowl...

hm... if the dirty birds show that they're for real this weekend - I might take you on that bet for the Superbowl. What's the prize ?

How about a complimentary round at eachother club? It's only 3 hrs drive I guess

[iacas]

How about a complimentary round at eachother club? It's only 3 hrs drive I guess

Three hours? You're nuts! I live in the northwestern corner of PA. It's 8 to get to Philly.

Unless maybe you're driving one of those Ferraris from the other thread...

[Mr_Slice]

I'd bet, but I'm hardly as impressed with the Falcons as I would be either AFC team. Although, once Philly beats Atlanta and make the Super Bowl, you'd better be ready to put up or shutup. ;)