|
View Poll Results: If Santana Moss doesn't play this week, who plays? | |||
G. Jennings @ MIN | 2 | 22.22% | |
Re. Williams vs HOU | 7 | 77.78% | |
Ma. Clayton @ TEN | 0 | 0% | |
Voters: 9. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1051
|
|||
|
|||
Re: ***** Clash of the Titans, Week 9: NE @ Ind*****
There is 1. 2 more Pats.
|
#1052
|
|||
|
|||
Re: ***** Clash of the Titans, Week 9: NE @ Ind*****
colts have played a great defensive game today btw. just sick good.
|
#1053
|
|||
|
|||
Re: ***** Clash of the Titans, Week 9: NE @ Ind*****
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] shipitt [/ QUOTE ] LOL like their D can stop Indy.. [/ QUOTE ] their d has actually done a pretty good job of stopping indy when they aren't given a short field or a bunch of cheap PI's. |
#1054
|
|||
|
|||
Re: ***** Clash of the Titans, Week 9: NE @ Ind*****
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] 8/131 vs. 2/10 [/ QUOTE ] 1. neutral zone infraction - obvious call 2. PI - consensus call 3. illegal contact - obvious call 4. PI - debatable call 5. Illegal formation - obvious (declined) 6. personal foul (leg whip) - obvious call 7. ineligible downfield - obvious call 8. unsportsnmanlike (block OOB) - obvious call 9. personal foul (on int return) - not replayed 10. off interference - debatable 6 obvious flags, 1 likely, 2 debatable, and 1 not replayed. Basically, 1 debatable PI flag early that had an effect, and NE has definately committed far more penalties than IND otherwise, and have deserved the majority of calls that have been made. [/ QUOTE ] [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] Redbean |
#1055
|
|||
|
|||
Re: ***** Clash of the Titans, Week 9: NE @ Ind*****
What is it about people from Boston that they can't win or lose with class? At least meet the rest of us halfway.
|
#1056
|
|||
|
|||
Re: ***** Clash of the Titans, Week 9: NE @ Ind*****
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I'm hoping neither Edge nor Sublime posts in this thread again. [/ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ] I am just fine with whatever people say until guys like sublime come in here and tell me to die. That doesn't fly in pretty much any forum except for BBV and he does it to me for absolutely no reason. I have been more than fair and I don't want to distract from this thread any more. |
#1057
|
|||
|
|||
Re: ***** Clash of the Titans, Week 9: NE @ Ind*****
[ QUOTE ]
There is 0. 3 more Pats. [/ QUOTE ] |
#1058
|
|||
|
|||
Re: ***** Clash of the Titans, Week 9: NE @ Ind*****
This drive will prolly be 12 plays.. 8 of which are runs to Addai for 55 yards...lol
|
#1059
|
|||
|
|||
Re: ***** Clash of the Titans, Week 9: NE @ Ind*****
[ QUOTE ]
I thought the Randy Moss PI call was a pretty clear no call. [/ QUOTE ] he got away with one the TD catch |
#1060
|
|||
|
|||
Re: ***** Clash of the Titans, Week 9: NE @ Ind*****
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] 8/131 vs. 2/10 [/ QUOTE ] 1. neutral zone infraction - obvious call 2. PI - consensus call 3. illegal contact - obvious call 4. PI - debatable call 5. Illegal formation - obvious (declined) 6. personal foul (leg whip) - obvious call 7. ineligible downfield - obvious call 8. unsportsnmanlike (block OOB) - obvious call 9. personal foul (on int return) - not replayed 10. off interference - debatable 6 obvious flags, 1 likely, 2 debatable, and 1 not replayed. Basically, 1 debatable PI flag early that had an effect, and NE has definately committed far more penalties than IND otherwise, and have deserved the majority of calls that have been made. [/ QUOTE ]\ Fine, except calling the two PI's "debatable" is just idiotic. They're not. They were awful. |
|
|