LMAO

Here's the article. He is such a fat pussy.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...bag/index.html

I wonder what happened in 2004.

What the ****?

that was the infamous 'one loss' superbowl champion...to this day no one is quite sure how that worked

LMAO

LMAO

The more I read this, the funnier it becomes.

Its pretty silly but without editing the rest of the statement its not as bad.

• Low Seeds Rule. Since 2005, Super Bowl winners are 12-0 on the road in the playoffs. The last seven champs have played only seven home games in all, in addition to the 12 road games, which means the champ has come out of the pack of those teams that often end up scrambling to make the playoffs at the end.

Hes trying to make the larger point of how higher seeding hasnt mattered as much in recent years.




Increasingly, the NFL postseason is ruled by the teams playing the best at the end of the season, not the teams playing at home. That's obvious just by looking at the seeds that have won the last seven Super Bowls: 6, 3, 5, 2, 1, 6 and 4. The home field in January is nice but not the sort of edge it used to be (the first or second seed won the Super Bowl for eight straight years, from 1989 to 1996

Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz2ErhBSQaa


Nice cherry pick GoTurd

I keep reading it over and over again to see if I can see what he was actually trying to say.

Maybe he was trying to say that since 2005, the last seven Super Bowl champions have played 12 road games and only 7 home games. But even so, why say anything about being 12-0? That's a f**king given.

In fact, the way he's saying it hurts my brain. I keep thinking of this scene...

http://www.andregarde.com/wp-content...tofthetime.png

The good news in all of this?

Denver won't be resting anybody in week 17.

What a second: What he's saying is that since 2005, Super Bowl teams are 12-0 ON THE ROAD.

The point being that Home Field Advantage in the playoffs isn't as important as once thought or even necessary to win a Super Bowl.

Therefore, winning the division has been proven to be an unnecessary component to winning a Super Bowl.

What's so wrong, funny or dumb about that?

That comment makes no ****ing sense. How many SB teams lose in the play offs?

:thumb:

Its not dumb if you read it in the full context of the story.