Super Bowl LIII - Rams v Patriots

PhuckHugh2

Saying that someone doesn't understand the game if they didn't enjoy last night is absolutely ridiculous. People are allowed to have different views and both be right. I didn't enjoy the game the defenses were decent yes but the offenses were very poor and riddled with mistakes that happened in isolation of the defense.

If you enjoyed it that is fine but basically coming to the conclusion that you have some superior knowledge to people who thought the game was poor is absolutely laughable.

Foxtrol

eagle eye wrote: »

You have it wrong, it was awesome defense on show last night on both sides of the ball.

If you've watched the Patriots at all over the years and if you've watched the Rams this season they have come up against some tough defense but found a way to succeed but last night there was no way to be better.

I take on board as I've just mentioned what you say about Goff but that doesn't mean he is a poor QB just that only an elite QB would be able to find a way to succeed last night. Brady did enough, Goff didn't.

I’d agree with awesome defenses if the Rams took the two plus additional interceptions that Brady threw out there and/or gotten more than the single sack they did. For the Patriots, I would agree if they repeatedly didn’t blow coverages that Goff either completely didn’t see or threw a poor passes to.

For comparison, I was enthralled by what the Patriots did to Mahomes and the Chiefs weapons in the conference championship and watching him try to learn and get around what they were doing. In the Super Bowl it was different, with one side completely incapable in offense and the other team basically refusing to risk trying anything more than the bare minimum.

Utopia Parkway

Lots of great Superbowl's in recent years so a dull one was probably overdue. At least it was close. Back in the 80's and 90's there were a lot of blowouts. Which is even worse.

riffmongous

Utopia Parkway wrote: »

Lots of great Superbowl's in recent years so a dull one was probably overdue. At least it was close. Back in the 80's and 90's there were a lot of blowouts. Which is even worse.

At least with a blowout you can get to bed early :pac: I just gave up watching last night at the end of the 3rd, I'm also another hour ahead which doesnt help

jack presley

riffmongous wrote: »

At least with a blowout you can get to bed early :pac: I just gave up watching last night at the end of the 3rd, I'm also another hour ahead which doesnt help

Did you give up when it was 28-3 a couple of years back?

riffmongous

jack presley wrote: »

Did you give up when it was 28-3 a couple of years back?

Didn't see that one as I was back in Ireland, did you watch all of Seahawks - Broncos?

jack presley

riffmongous wrote: »

Didn't see that one as I was back in Ireland, did you watch all of Seahawks - Broncos?

Yeah, I'm afraid I'll miss something if I bail early.

Billy86

Also to be fair, Edelman is better than Woods and probably on par with Cooks, while Gronk is comfortably better than any of them.

Realt Dearg Sec

riffmongous wrote: »

At least with a blowout you can get to bed early :pac: I just gave up watching last night at the end of the 3rd, I'm also another hour ahead which doesnt help

The problem is that ever since the Falcons Pats final, there's no such thing as a blowout anymore. You just never know what could happen. I actually did watch all of that game, and I remember posting something to the effect that it's never over until it's over with Brady involved.

But I didn't actually BELIEVE what I was writing. It was just the kind of thing you say in these situations to tell yourself a blowout is interesting.

Fromvert

Didn't think it was a great game, not sure if the Ram's O-line completely stunk or the Pat's D stepped it up or a bit of both but Goff was getting no help from them. The Broncos/Seattle blowout a few years ago was a much worse viewing experience for someone wanting a good game.

Christy42

Fromvert wrote: »

Didn't think it was a great game, not sure if the Ram's O-line completely stunk or the Pat's D stepped it up or a bit of both but Goff was getting no help from them. The Broncos/Seattle blowout a few years ago was a much worse viewing experience for someone wanting a good game.

I always wondered how miffed would you feel if you shelled out on tickets and travel and accommodation for that one without any real show. Especially if you were a Broncos fan. It is one thing to lose a game, it is another for the game to have gone horrifically wrong from the first play.

Either Pats vs Falcons or Pats vs Eagles would be a great show.

The_Honeybadger

Christy42 wrote: »

I always wondered how miffed would you feel if you shelled out on tickets and travel and accommodation for that one without any real show. Especially if you were a Broncos fan. It is one thing to lose a game, it is another for the game to have gone horrifically wrong from the first play.

Either Pats vs Falcons or Pats vs Eagles would be a great show.

I think New Orleans might have made a much better game of it Sunday night I doubt Brees would have been caught out
the way Goff was, they would have found a way to move the ball.

I actually enjoyed the game but definitely do prefer the high scoring games.

Christy42

The_Honeybadger wrote: »

Christy42 wrote: »

I always wondered how miffed would you feel if you shelled out on tickets and travel and accommodation for that one without any real show. Especially if you were a Broncos fan. It is one thing to lose a game, it is another for the game to have gone horrifically wrong from the first play.

Either Pats vs Falcons or Pats vs Eagles would be a great show.

I think New Orleans might have made a much better game of it Sunday night I doubt Brees would have been caught out
the way Goff was, they would have found a way to move the ball.

I actually enjoyed the game but definitely do prefer the high scoring games.

Brees vs Mahomes could have been a crazy game.

Big Pussy Bonpensiero

Not too sure Brees would've made things any more exciting. He's been struggling a bit for the last number of weeks, and didn't exactly light things up against either the Rams or Eagles, despite blowing them both apart earlier in the season. Would also have fancied BB to completely negate Thomas and the running game.
Would agree on Mahomes, he would've ripped any defence to shreds with the form he's in.

The_Honeybadger

Big Pussy Bonpensiero wrote: »

Not too sure Brees would've made things any more exciting. He's been struggling a bit for the last number of weeks, and didn't exactly light things up against either the Rams or Eagles, despite blowing them both apart earlier in the season. Would also have fancied BB to completely negate Thomas and the running game.
Would agree on Mahomes, he would've ripped any defence to shreds with the form he's in.

Yes that’s true I’d still fancy NO to put up more than 3 points Goff’s Inexperience killed the Rams even allowing for the defensive masterclass by the Pats.

Hazys

https://www.instagram.com/p/Btd6jdInHOa/?utm_source=ig_share_sheet&igshid=1ld0q6xo1728z

ELM327

Christy42 wrote: »

Brees vs Mahomes could have been a crazy game.

That would have been a 50-49 offensive blowout.
Give me a tactical defensive struggle any day of the week

el Fenomeno

ELM327 wrote: »

That would have been a 50-49 offensive blowout.
Give me a tactical defensive struggle any day of the week

Same here.

While 50-49 might have been easy to follow for the simple-minded, pea-brained, drooling masses who need to be reminded to breathe less they pass out from stupidity, I - an actual intellectual - need a defensive chess match before my appreciation even begins to be tickled, let alone challenged.

Most of you wouldn't understand this, and are too busy trying to eat cereal with a fork.

ELM327

Now you're getting it.

Paully D

This thread is well worth your time:

https://twitter.com/sharpfootball/status/1092791873092141056?s=21

j8wk2feszrnpao

.