Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

If we lose to the Giants Sunday...


Captroop

Recommended Posts

...and that's a big if, I think we can take a little solace in the fact that the recent trend is for the team that lost in the regular season to take the game in the postseason.

The Giants did it to the Pats, and on our road to the superbowl in 2003 we beat two teams that had crushed us in the regular season in Philly and Dallas. A win would be great, as it would lock up homefield throughout, but I don't mind the idea of facing the Giants in the playoffs as underdogs.

I guess you could argue that the way they've been playing down the stretch, there's a chance the Giants won't even make it to the NFC championship game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The most ideal situation in my mind would be for us to beat them and pray that another team takes them out in the postseason earlier than the NFC Championship Game, assuming we make it. I think many people, even in spite of New York's recent slide, just assume they'll make it to that game. I take solace knowing two playoff contenders--Dallas and Philadelphia--have already beaten them.

Also, Arizona really hung with them in their game. It's not out of the question they learn from their mistakes and knock them off. Of course, I hope the Cards don't learn from their mistakes from our game if we play them again. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 things and 4 things only happen

1) we sweep them

2) they win the first game and we win the second

3) they beat us but then get beat out of the playoffs by someone else

4) they lose to us and then get beat before the NFCCG

at any rate i can easily see us sweeping them but i can't see them sweeping us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite simply...BECAUSE DALLAS DID NOT LOSE, we have to beat the Giants or it might all come down to the Saints.

If Tampa, Atlanta, and Dallas win their last two, if we were to lose to the Saints after losing to the Giants, we would not be in the Playoffs, because all three of those teams have the tiebreaker over us.

While the Panthers will clinch the top seed in the NFC and home-field advantage until the Super Bowl with a victory at the New York Giants (11-3) Sunday night, they still haven't locked up a playoff berth.

If the Panthers lose to the Giants and a week later at New Orleans, they'll miss the playoffs if Dallas, Tampa Bay and Atlanta all finish 2-0. That would leave all four teams 11-5 and the Panthers would lose the tiebreaker.

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/12/15/sports/FBN-Balanced-Panthers.php

Dallas better lose Thursday, since the Giants couldn't knock them off. Hopefully Minnesota will take care of Atlanta.

Win Sunday, and you lock up both a playoff berth and a #1 seed, but that's HARDER than having someone else lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and that's a big if, I think we can take a little solace in the fact that the recent trend is for the team that lost in the regular season to take the game in the postseason.

The Giants did it to the Pats, and on our road to the superbowl in 2003 we beat two teams that had crushed us in the regular season in Philly and Dallas. A win would be great, as it would lock up homefield throughout, but I don't mind the idea of facing the Giants in the playoffs as underdogs.

I guess you could argue that the way they've been playing down the stretch, there's a chance the Giants won't even make it to the NFC championship game.

I think we will win but *even* if we lose I think the Gmen will be the *worst* playoff team and the team with the least momentum. They have lost 2 straight, play us and the vikes and I think they have a good chance of going 0-2, or if they beat us 1-1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

losing this game wouldn't be that big of a deal to me. The playoffs are a completely different story and playing with a sense of alarm is great for our team and their emotional play. I feel a home field would be great but also create lethargic/comfortable play. Unfamiliarity can be a good thing sometimes.

No use in debating it though. What happens, happens, and you gotta play the game no matter what.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I have seen little inclination that they are laying down on him, that I can agree with. I don't think we are going to ever see much in the way of unfiltered opinions in the public realm from his teammates because that's extremely rare and extremely toxic behavior.  It's certainly a positive thing that they support him but, again, that doesn't make a successful NFL starting QB. Playing well on Sunday's does.  That is what has been lacking to date. He is not playing well consistently enough to be considered an NFL starting QB. He has to improve there. Be more consistent. Be more decisive. Make correct decisions more frequently. 
    • That's fine but for every Kurt Warner there are 10 Tony Banks that don't find their spot because....it never really existed.  Jake Browning was on and off practice squad teams for years until he stuck in Cincy. In his limited action over the past two seasons, he has played well enough that the Bengals panic traded for 41 year old Joe Flacco. It's easy to point to outliers like Warner or Purdy or Tom Brady as players who fell through the cracks because....well, they are outliers. The statistics over the long term have never really borne out the argument that every QB is just waiting for their perfect spot and situation. Most of these guys bounce around the league and it just never really clicks anywhere or they become marginal backup QB's. I don't think that exactly an accident. It's tough to be a starting NFL QB and it's why the hunt every offseason is so frantic. There are just so few that do it at a high level. My guess is that a theoretical market for Bryce Young(today) is going to look a lot like that post Chicago Justin Fields market. Not a lot of interest and a late round pick value at the highest. And a lot of that IS going to be his average to below average physical traits. It's extremely tough to be in that range and excel in the NFL. And it's precisely because you DO have to be closer to perfection to make up for the fact that you can't do a lot of the things that the elite to above average starters in this league do. 
    • Im never not impressed by how confidently wrong you are. I've watched probably 200 NFL QBs play live. This talk about Bryce's arm strength is retarded, pure and simple. Bryce can make every throw an NFL QB needs to make in any circumstance. Does he have an arm that makes you go wow all the time? No, but very few QBs truly do. Bryce has plenty of zip on the ball when he wants. That TD to XL was a frozen rope. He throws to the opposite hash and outside all the time with no problem. Bryce's arm is objectively stronger than Cam's post-injury. I've seen both live multiple times and I know. And Cam could still play QB well without his rocket launcher. OPs point remains. QB success relies on a lot of nebulous things. Obviously you dont like Bryce. But his success is not going to be bc he doesn't have the arm strength. Its embarrassing this is a thing. Go to some games and actually educate yourself.  
×
×
  • Create New...