Pats vs. Colts 2007 Commercial ( Submission ) Week 9

Colts vs. Patriots Week 9 Commercial
Denied Submission
Let the Trash Talking Begin!

Category:

Sports

Tags:

• Colts
• Pats
• Patriots
• Manning
• Peyton
• Brady
• Week
• 9
• 2007
• NFL
• Football
• Commercial
• Rivalry
• Super
• Bowl
• Belichick

[myricegirl]

i got a rap respnse for you, bare ass naked, title Pats tame colts.

[Tbpats]

pats won

[JIMFoamy1]

@JIMFoamy1 ames as is, the scores would have been tied, correct? Further, unless the touchdown you're refering to in your example was the difference in score, no, you could not make the same argument. And in the three examples I'm using, the score in question was the difference. The most you could say to argue that Brady won all 3 of those SBs is that he kept it close.

[JIMFoamy1]

@AllPro777 It is not flawed. Without the field goals, the scores for all three matches at the end of regulation, barring any other scores, meaning working with the g

[AllPro777]

@JIMFoamy1

LOL. You're just going to try and continue to validate that s-storm of illogic? Look, you're logic is flawed, accept it. I could say a TD pass Tom Brady threw in the 2nd quarter was the difference using the SAME thought process you're trying push off. In fact, that logic could be used for any point scored at any part of a game where the team winds up winning in the end. In the words of the great Mike Ditka: "Stop it"

[JIMFoamy1]

@AllPro777 In case I didn't make this clear enough, YES what you just argued is what I'm saying. I know that the score was 24-14 BEFORE the Eagles got another touchdown I said that if Adam V. hadn't kicked a field goal, it would have been tied. And no, what you're saying isn't necessarily true, as Super Bowl XLVI exemplified. The score you used can be made w/o a kicker. I only give credit to the kicker when he makes the points that make the difference. He did, regardless of when.

[AllPro777]

@JIMFoamy1

Nope, still wrong in regards to Super Bowl 39. The logic is totally flawed. Using your logic, I could go to an extreme like: Have team A score 100 points, then have team B score 0. Team B then comes back and scores 97 points, but loses 100-97... And because Team A won by 3 points, I could say "Well, the kicker's 3 points was what won it". But that's absurd just like what you argued because it ignores the context of the scoring. If it were 21-21 and not 24-14, you'd have a point.

[JIMFoamy1]

@oldgil17 Randy Moss says your argument is invalid.

[JIMFoamy1]

@AllPro777 Fine, BUT the point is the Pats won it b/c of their Kicker's leg, 3 TIMES, regardless of when the kick took place. W?O those 3 FGs, the scores at the end of regulation would have been 17-17, 29-29, and 21-21. The other points may not have been from the kicker, but the point is if Brady was the GOD he is often made to be, He wouldn't have need the FG to be the difference.

[AllPro777]

@JIMFoamy1

You're wrong. But say I were to agree that a kicker were the main reason for winning any of the Pats Super Bowls (which is ridiculous), you'd still be wrong because the Patriots didn't win their 3rd Super Bowl against the Eagles because of a final FG kick. The Patriots were already ahead of the Eagles 24-14. Dexter Reid then blew a deep coverage and the Eagles pulled within 3 (24-21). The Pats defense then held, and the Pats won. It wasn't because Vinatieri kicked a game-winner.

[Patsfan1216]

@oldgil17 very true brady never had an elite receiver until the 07 season

[JIMFoamy1]

@UNDERTAKER12314 , speaking as a die-hard COLTS fan, Peyton and Brady are both HOF QBs, and if you truly believe differently, see a doctor, because you're either blind or insane