Super Bowl Recap: Vol Good Guy 29, Hateful Smart Aleck Jerk Gator 17

#1
Volitics

Volitics

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2006
Messages
136
Likes
0
#1
Super Bowl Recap: Vol Good Guy 29, Hateful Smart Aleck Jerk Gator 17

The above heading about sums it up. If anybody can bear to remember in 2000 Tennessee had Florida beat in Neyland Stadium then Casey Clausen in the rain fumbled four straight times (down deep in Florida territory). It was on national tv. Florida gained momentum from that point and beat UT.

After the game tv sportscaster flake bimbo Jill Arringbum like a fool blathered over Grossman. Grossman, just like his hateful surrogate daddy Steve Spurrier, made hateful smart aleck remarks in condescending fashion.

You can view Grossman's post game comments (below link Yahoo web site). He says something like Chicago "failed to take advantage of key opportunities." Not exactly. They just got their tails kicked.

Yahoo! Sports - Sports News, Scores, Rumors, Fantasy Games, and more

Most people on this message board are too polite to say this but I think it needs to be said: The guy is a hateful jerk that got what he deserved - a beating on national tv.
 
#4
#4
Vol Good Guy 29, Hateful Smart Aleck Jerk Gator 17

Someone is a little hateful. :p
 
#5
#5
Tha Bears problems went far deeper than Rex, last night! There is enough blame to go around!
 
#6
#6
crimedawg12 said:
Tha Bears problems went far deeper than Rex, last night! There is enough blame to go around!
Click to expand...
yeah, he just didn't help. the d couldn't get off the feild and the O couldn't stay on it. just a real bad day for the bears all around.

and despite that, in the 4th quarter, they were still only down 1 possesion. that in and of itself was amazing.
 
#7
#7
Yeah I was having thoughts of a 24-22 score and what a shame that would of been!
 
#8
#8
i thought for sure the bears would cover....glad i didn't put my money where my mouth was....
 
#11
#11
jakez4ut said:
i thought for sure the bears would cover....glad i didn't put my money where my mouth was....
Click to expand...

Had bet with guy at work. Over/Under 48. He picked 60. I get a free lunch sometime this week. Thought game would be closer though.
 
#12
#12
That game had blowout possibilities! Seems Fulmer and Cut's presence had an impact!:jpshakehead:
 
#14
#14
Seriously though, I think the Colts were playing not to lose. Nothing wrong with it, just never seen them do much of it! Hey, whatever works!
 
#15
#15
crimedawg12 said:
Seriously though, I think the Colts were playing not to lose. Nothing wrong with it, just never seen them do much of it! Hey, whatever works!
Click to expand...
i agree. when they got that running in to the kicker call in the 3rd quarter.....that could have been the time in the game to go for it and take control of the game for good.
 
#16
#16
jakez4ut said:
i agree. when they got that running in to the kicker call in the 3rd quarter.....that could have been the time in the game to go for it and take control of the game for good.
Click to expand...
I was suprised by the call, the replay looked like the automatic 1st down infraction to me.
 
#17
#17
volmanjr said:
I was suprised by the call, the replay looked like the automatic 1st down infraction to me.
Click to expand...
same here, but even when they only called running in to the kicker, you get the ball at like what the 1 1/2?

you have had their D on the feild for more than 1/2 of hte 3rd quarter. the offense has sputtered. your D is playing well. worst case, you put 'em on the 2 yard line against a fresh D in a driving rain.

best case you get a two score lead late in the 3rd quarter.

it was simply amazing it was a one score game in the 4th quarter.
 
#18
#18
Actually guys, what I was saying during the game and now that it's calmed down somewhat, that was an incredibly sloppy game. It really came down to who could suck less.
 
#19
#19
jakez4ut said:
i thought for sure the bears would cover....glad i didn't put my money where my mouth was....
Click to expand...
I wish I would not have done so.:banghead2: I was really surprised that Chicago wasn't more aggresive on defense.
 
#20
#20
milohimself said:
Actually guys, what I was saying during the game and now that it's calmed down somewhat, that was an incredibly sloppy game. It really came down to who could suck less.
Click to expand...
oh, i agree......take out the peyton factor, and it was easily one that i could probably do with out.......sort of like last year's game......except instead of penalties being the thing of the day, it was turnovers and rain.
 
#21
#21
milohimself said:
Actually guys, what I was saying during the game and now that it's calmed down somewhat, that was an incredibly sloppy game. It really came down to who could suck less.
Click to expand...

Anyone remember the weather during the game?????

Of course it was a sloppy game -- it was played in a driving rain storm.
 
#23
#23
volinbham said:
Anyone remember the weather during the game?????

Of course it was a sloppy game -- it was played in a driving rain storm.
Click to expand...
We all know Indy is the dome team, but a team like Chicago is supposed to thrive in that kind of weather. Besides, the game doesn't recognize weather short of a full on hurricane.
 
#24
#24
milohimself said:
We all know Indy is the dome team, but a team like Chicago is supposed to thrive in that kind of weather. Besides, the game doesn't recognize weather short of a full on hurricane.
Click to expand...
i don't argue that it was a sloppy game. turnovers, weather etc......it was sloppy.

but there was a point in the third and 4th quarter where what Indy was able to do running the ball, methodically and deliberately driving down the feild, even though mostly resulting in FG's, that it was absolutely beautiful football. nothing fancy, line up, hit the guy in front of you and pound out 3-4 yards, or dump it off for 5-6 yards and then a draw up the middle for 10 yards.....how many times did the colts get a RUN for 8-10 yards?

if you really love football.....it was beautiful to watch. the big play gets the oohs and aahs...but they physically imposed their will on the bears and just wore them down.

it wasn't a beautiful game, but it had beautiful moments, from a football standpoint. and i think to a certain extent, the weather just enhanced it. two midwest teams playing in mud and bad weather.....running game and defense ruled the day. yep.....what it lacked in style it made up for in football purity.
 
#25
#25
I don't doubt that, Rhodes and Addai could have been co-MVP's. But whether you like smash mouth or finesse football, mistakes are never a good thing. A team usually should not have 3-4 turnovers and win a game. Like all the decently smart analysts said coming up to the game, turnovers are always the key stat in Super Bowl games. Neither team played exceptionally. Something I usually don't expect to see when this is supposed to be football on the highest of high level.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top