Create an Account or Login to make your own picks!
These are not our most current picks! Our freshest batch of picks are the NFL 2025 Season Week 1 Picks.
NFL 2008 Season Week 3 Picks
Chiefs 14 @ Falcons 38
Final
Sun, 9/21/08 12:00pm
4 Picks - 17%
20 Picks - 83%
Falcons
Falcons
Falcons
Falcons
Raiders 23 @ Bills 24
Final
Sun, 9/21/08 12:00pm
1 Pick - 4%
23 Picks - 96%
Bills
Bills
Bills
Bills
Buccaneers 27 @ Bears 24
Final-OT
Sun, 9/21/08 12:00pm
7 Picks - 29%
17 Picks - 71%
Bears
Buccaneers
Bears
Bears
Texans 12 @ Titans 31
Final
Sun, 9/21/08 12:00pm
4 Picks - 17%
20 Picks - 83%
Titans
Titans
Titans
Titans
Bengals 23 @ Giants 26
Final-OT
Sun, 9/21/08 12:00pm
0 Picks - 0%
24 Picks - 100%
Giants
Giants
Giants
Giants
Panthers 10 @ Vikings 20
Final
Sun, 9/21/08 12:00pm
16 Picks - 67%
8 Picks - 33%
Vikings
Vikings
Vikings
Panthers
Dolphins 38 @ Patriots 13
Final
Sun, 9/21/08 12:00pm
0 Picks - 0%
24 Picks - 100%
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Patriots
Cardinals 17 @ Commanders 24
Final
Sun, 9/21/08 12:00pm
6 Picks - 25%
18 Picks - 75%
Commanders
Commanders
Cardinals
Commanders
Rams 13 @ Seahawks 37
Final
Sun, 9/21/08 3:05pm
2 Picks - 8%
22 Picks - 92%
Seahawks
Seahawks
Seahawks
Seahawks
Lions 13 @ 49ers 31
Final
Sun, 9/21/08 3:05pm
7 Picks - 29%
17 Picks - 71%
49ers
49ers
49ers
49ers
Saints 32 @ Broncos 34
Final
Sun, 9/21/08 3:05pm
5 Picks - 21%
19 Picks - 79%
Broncos
Saints
Broncos
Broncos
Jaguars 23 @ Colts 21
Final
Sun, 9/21/08 3:15pm
2 Picks - 8%
22 Picks - 92%
Colts
Colts
Colts
Colts
Browns 10 @ Ravens 28
Final
Sun, 9/21/08 3:15pm
10 Picks - 42%
14 Picks - 58%
Ravens
Browns
Browns
Ravens
Steelers 6 @ Eagles 15
Final
Sun, 9/21/08 3:15pm
6 Picks - 25%
18 Picks - 75%
Eagles
Steelers
Eagles
Eagles
Cowboys 27 @ Packers 16
Final
Sun, 9/21/08 7:15pm
15 Picks - 63%
9 Picks - 37%
Cowboys
Cowboys
Cowboys
Packers
Jets 29 @ Chargers 48
Final
Mon, 9/22/08 7:30pm
7 Picks - 29%
17 Picks - 71%
Chargers
Jets
Chargers
Jets
Week Record:
13 - 30.812
Season Record:
30 - 170.638
No-Pack-Vike Record:
934 - 5220.641
Lifetime Record:
1039 - 6090.630
Week Record:
10 - 60.625
Season Record:
27 - 200.575
No-Pack-Vike Record:
863 - 5930.593
Lifetime Record:
949 - 6990.576
Week Record:
11 - 50.688
Season Record:
32 - 150.681
No-Pack-Vike Record:
934 - 5220.641
Lifetime Record:
1028 - 6200.624
Week Record:
10 - 60.625
Season Record:
32 - 150.681
No-Pack-Vike Record:
916 - 5400.629
Lifetime Record:
1022 - 6260.620
Falcons
Bills
Buccaneers
Texans
Giants
Panthers
Patriots
Cardinals
Seahawks
49ers
Broncos
Colts
Ravens
Eagles
Packers
Jets
| Week: | 9 - 7 0.562 |
| Season: | 31 - 16 0.660 |
| Lifetime: | 368 - 213 0.633 |
Falcons
Bills
Buccaneers
Titans
Giants
Panthers
Patriots
Commanders
Rams
49ers
Broncos
Colts
Ravens
Eagles
Packers
Chargers
| Week: | 11 - 5 0.688 |
| Season: | 32 - 15 0.681 |
| Lifetime: | 355 - 225 0.612 |
Falcons
Bills
Bears
Titans
Giants
Panthers
Patriots
Commanders
Seahawks
49ers
Saints
Colts
Ravens
Steelers
Cowboys
Chargers
| Week: | 10 - 6 0.625 |
| Season: | 30 - 17 0.638 |
| Lifetime: | 356 - 221 0.617 |
Falcons
Bills
Bears
Titans
Giants
Panthers
Patriots
Commanders
Seahawks
Lions
Saints
Colts
Browns
Steelers
Packers
Chargers
| Week: | 7 - 9 0.438 |
| Season: | 25 - 22 0.532 |
| Lifetime: | 194 - 120 0.618 |
Chiefs
Bills
Bears
Texans
Giants
Panthers
Patriots
Cardinals
Seahawks
Lions
Broncos
Colts
Browns
Eagles
Packers
Chargers
| Week: | 6 - 10 0.375 |
| Season: | 21 - 26 0.447 |
| Lifetime: | 185 - 129 0.589 |
Falcons
Bills
Bears
Texans
Giants
Vikings
Patriots
Cardinals
Seahawks
49ers
Saints
Colts
Browns
Eagles
Cowboys
Chargers
| Week: | 9 - 7 0.562 |
| Season: | 22 - 25 0.468 |
| Lifetime: | 158 - 112 0.585 |
Falcons
Bills
Bears
Titans
Giants
Panthers
Patriots
Commanders
Seahawks
49ers
Broncos
Colts
Browns
Eagles
Cowboys
Chargers
| Week: | 11 - 5 0.688 |
| Season: | 30 - 17 0.638 |
| Lifetime: | 195 - 104 0.652 |
Chiefs
Bills
Buccaneers
Titans
Giants
Vikings
Patriots
Commanders
Seahawks
Lions
Broncos
Colts
Ravens
Eagles
Cowboys
Chargers
| Week: | 12 - 4 0.750 |
| Season: | 28 - 19 0.596 |
| Lifetime: | 150 - 102 0.595 |
Falcons
Bills
Bears
Titans
Giants
Panthers
Patriots
Cardinals
Seahawks
49ers
Broncos
Colts
Ravens
Eagles
Cowboys
Jets
| Week: | 10 - 6 0.625 |
| Season: | 28 - 19 0.596 |
| Lifetime: | 172 - 80 0.682 |
Falcons
Bills
Bears
Titans
Giants
Vikings
Patriots
Commanders
Seahawks
Lions
Broncos
Jaguars
Ravens
Eagles
Packers
Chargers
| Week: | 12 - 4 0.750 |
| Season: | 30 - 16 0.652 |
| Lifetime: | 120 - 75 0.615 |
Falcons
Bills
Bears
Titans
Giants
Panthers
Patriots
Commanders
Seahawks
49ers
Broncos
Colts
Ravens
Steelers
Cowboys
Jets
| Week: | 10 - 6 0.625 |
| Season: | 28 - 19 0.596 |
| Lifetime: | 129 - 69 0.651 |
Falcons
Bills
Bears
Titans
Giants
Panthers
Patriots
Commanders
Rams
49ers
Broncos
Colts
Ravens
Eagles
Packers
Chargers
| Week: | 10 - 6 0.625 |
| Season: | 32 - 14 0.696 |
| Lifetime: | 117 - 65 0.643 |
Falcons
Raiders
Bears
Titans
Giants
Panthers
Patriots
Commanders
Seahawks
Lions
Broncos
Colts
Browns
Steelers
Packers
Jets
| Week: | 6 - 10 0.375 |
| Season: | 15 - 16 0.484 |
| Lifetime: | 79 - 65 0.549 |
Falcons
Bills
Buccaneers
Titans
Giants
Panthers
Patriots
Commanders
Seahawks
Lions
Broncos
Colts
Browns
Steelers
Cowboys
Chargers
| Week: | 10 - 6 0.625 |
| Season: | 30 - 17 0.638 |
| Lifetime: | 66 - 43 0.606 |
Chiefs
Bills
Bears
Titans
Giants
Vikings
Patriots
Commanders
Seahawks
49ers
Broncos
Colts
Ravens
Eagles
Cowboys
Jets
| Week: | 11 - 5 0.688 |
| Season: | 19 - 12 0.613 |
| Lifetime: | 72 - 38 0.654 |
Chiefs
Bills
Buccaneers
Titans
Giants
Panthers
Patriots
Commanders
Seahawks
Lions
Saints
Colts
Ravens
Eagles
Cowboys
Chargers
| Week: | 10 - 6 0.625 |
| Season: | 10 - 6 0.625 |
| Lifetime: | 84 - 55 0.604 |
Falcons
Bills
Buccaneers
Titans
Giants
Vikings
Patriots
Commanders
Seahawks
49ers
Broncos
Colts
Browns
Eagles
Cowboys
Chargers
| Week: | 13 - 3 0.812 |
| Season: | 30 - 17 0.638 |
| Lifetime: | 118 - 52 0.694 |
Falcons
Bills
Bears
Texans
Giants
Panthers
Patriots
Commanders
Seahawks
49ers
Broncos
Colts
Ravens
Eagles
Packers
Chargers
| Week: | 10 - 6 0.625 |
| Season: | 31 - 16 0.660 |
| Lifetime: | 31 - 16 0.660 |
Falcons
Bills
Bears
Titans
Giants
Panthers
Patriots
Cardinals
Seahawks
49ers
Broncos
Colts
Ravens
Eagles
Cowboys
Chargers
| Week: | 11 - 5 0.688 |
| Season: | 31 - 16 0.660 |
| Lifetime: | 31 - 16 0.660 |
Falcons
Bills
Bears
Titans
Giants
Panthers
Patriots
Commanders
Seahawks
49ers
Broncos
Jaguars
Browns
Eagles
Cowboys
Chargers
| Week: | 12 - 4 0.750 |
| Season: | 20 - 11 0.645 |
| Lifetime: | 20 - 11 0.645 |
 | Cowboys 27 @ Packers 16 |  |
 | JeremyWhile this one might be a good test for the Packers, I'm not so sure it's the test for Rodgers everyone is making it out to be. Those Eagle receivers were open by 5 yards on every other play. |
 | MattI slept through the Cowboys/Eagles game last week, and I don't even regret it. Football sucks. Cowboys 32, Packers 17. |
 | SarahWe have a fairly decent defense and an ok offense. If we can just hold the Cowboys to a little less than 41 points, we should come out on top. Remember when the Cowboys never had to play at Lambeau? Grrrr.... |
 | JonWell, we all know ARod owns the Cowboys so I expect a blowout of 87-0.Actually I think T.O. scores twice and the Packers lose. |
 | Jets 29 @ Chargers 48 |  |
| JeremyLife as a Charger fan must suck these last couple weeks. The AFC is rough, and losing two weeks in a row at the last second, one of them a terrible break on an inadvertent whistle, isn't going to help your Superbowl chances any. |
| MattI just saw a commercial where Al Michaels said that he didn't think anyone had more fun playing QB than Tony Romo. I guess all the offseason drama must have affected Brett Favre's football enjoyment ability. |
| SarahI have no games to watch on Sunday afternoon now that the Jets are on Monday night and the Packers play Sunday night. I might be forced to watch the Vikings game!?!?! Go Brett go! |
| JonThe only question here is how many interceptions the Chargers will return for a touchdown. Odds are, it's zero. But would you be surprised if it's 3? |
Jfk10intex - My computer is better than yours!!!!
09/15/2008 @ 11:17:27 PM
I cant belive im picking the chargers over the jets.... just im not impressed with the jets against the patriots so Im sticking chargers....Packers are going to own the cowboys.... and i might change my pick with texans and titans... thats a toughy...
Yours:
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Carlos44ec - ...and Bob's your Uncle!
09/16/2008 @ 07:47:28 AM
Lions/Niners- sounds like nap time.
No, that is not an Imus joke.
No, that is not an Imus joke.
Yours:
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Total:
Rated 1 times.
RUFiO1984 - 216 Posts
09/16/2008 @ 11:46:18 AM
Carlos44ec Wrote - Today @ 08:47:28 AM
Lions/Niners- sounds like nap time.
No, that is not an Imus joke.
No, that is not an Imus joke.
:*(
Yours:
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Scott - 6053 Posts
09/16/2008 @ 06:04:55 PM
Here's what people are saying about Rodgers. Being a backup for 3 seasons seems to have been a big reason why this "rookie" QB is not playing like a rookie. With all the talk of these "tests" for Rodgers, we can all agree that this game against the Cowboys is absolutely going to be a test, not just of Rodgers, but for the Packers offense. The first two games were against pretty suspect defenses. The Cowboys are a powerhouse. This is going to be a pretty good indication of what we can expect from Rodgers and the Packers for the rest of the season.
My favorite quote from the link I posted:
To summarize: Wrong alignment. Unintended receiver. Touchdown. Some might call it lucky, but it stemmed from a cool and well-schooled quarterback making a snap decision you wouldn't expect from a first-year starter.
He was talking about the touchdown pass to James Jones, where Brandon Jackson lined up in the wrong side of the formation, Donald Lee was in the wrong spot and coming in motion, Greg Jennings was the intended receiver in the corner of the end zone, and Jones basically just got in the way and caught the ball.
My favorite quote from the link I posted:
To summarize: Wrong alignment. Unintended receiver. Touchdown. Some might call it lucky, but it stemmed from a cool and well-schooled quarterback making a snap decision you wouldn't expect from a first-year starter.
He was talking about the touchdown pass to James Jones, where Brandon Jackson lined up in the wrong side of the formation, Donald Lee was in the wrong spot and coming in motion, Greg Jennings was the intended receiver in the corner of the end zone, and Jones basically just got in the way and caught the ball.
Yours:
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Sarah - 4621 Posts
09/16/2008 @ 06:26:06 PM
Scott Wrote - Today @ 06:04:55 PM
With all the talk of these "tests" for Rodgers, we can all agree that this game against the Cowboys is absolutely going to be a test, not just of Rodgers, but for the Packers offense. The first two games were against pretty suspect defenses. The Cowboys are a powerhouse. This is going to be a pretty good indication of what we can expect from Rodgers and the Packers for the rest of the season.
Did you watch the game last night?
Yours:
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Scott - On your mark...get set...Terrible!
09/16/2008 @ 06:41:40 PM
yeah, the Cowboys scored 41 points.
Yours:
Total:
Rated 2 times.
Total:
Rated 2 times.
Jeremy - 9183 Posts
09/16/2008 @ 07:00:37 PM
and allowed 37.
Yours:
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Scott - Get Up! Get outta here! Gone!
09/16/2008 @ 07:02:51 PM
Yeah, but to the Eagles. They are no slouches offensively.
Yours:
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Sarah - So's your face
09/16/2008 @ 07:03:57 PM
We shouldn't be either.
Yours:
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Scott - 6053 Posts
09/16/2008 @ 07:05:20 PM
Ok fine, you've both convinced me. The Packers are going to dominate.
Yours:
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Alex - 3429 Posts
09/16/2008 @ 07:18:04 PM
Who else sent video of themselves playing WR in flag football to the Seahawks today?
Yours:
Total:
Rated 2 times.
Total:
Rated 2 times.
Jeremy - No one's gay for Moleman
09/17/2008 @ 12:43:04 PM
Gus Frerotte has been named the starter for the Vikings Sunday.
Yours:
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Carlos44ec - 2038 Posts
09/17/2008 @ 12:45:32 PM
Alex Wrote - Yesterday @ 07:18:04 PM
Who else sent video of themselves playing WR in flag football to the Seahawks today?
Jeremy was a pretty badass WR when we played. Of course, there was always the Carl Special, but I was a never- used RB type of fella.
Yours:
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Jeremy - 9183 Posts
09/17/2008 @ 01:00:19 PM
Yeah, unfortunately "lower your shoulder and run straight ahead like a maniac" doesn't fly in flag football leagues.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Carlos44ec - What the F@#$ am I being arrested fo?
09/17/2008 @ 03:09:51 PM
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 01:00:19 PM
Yeah, unfortunately "lower your shoulder and run straight ahead like a maniac" doesn't fly in flag football leagues.
You forgot to mention screaming like a lunatic. That was essential, as the Defense stopped for a full 2 seconds thinking "What the hell?"
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Jeremy - I hate our freedoms
09/17/2008 @ 05:38:24 PM
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
PackOne - From your first cigarette to your last dyin' day.
09/17/2008 @ 10:43:31 PM
Wow, at first I just skipped the top, and thought that dude was on crack. Then I realized that it's all-time. I also know that you are smart enough to know that this would happen if you just posted a blatant link with NFL rankings in it.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Jeremy - 1.21 Gigawatts!?!?
09/17/2008 @ 11:14:23 PM
Say what now?
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Scott - No, I did not change your screen saver settings
09/18/2008 @ 08:42:35 AM
No titles ever and the Vikings are 7th?
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Carlos44ec - 2038 Posts
09/18/2008 @ 09:35:22 AM
I am befuddled as well.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Jeremy - 9183 Posts
09/18/2008 @ 09:47:24 AM
What's to befuddle? The Vikings were a consistently good team for years. Besides that, it's not even an "opinion" based ranking system.
The Vikings won the NFL/NFC Central 16 times, nearly half the time, and made the playoffs 7 times as a wildcard. The Packers won it 6 times in 34 years (3 thanks to Favre, 1 in the strike shortened year).
The Vikings won the NFL/NFC Central 16 times, nearly half the time, and made the playoffs 7 times as a wildcard. The Packers won it 6 times in 34 years (3 thanks to Favre, 1 in the strike shortened year).
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Jeremy messed with this 2 times, last at 09/18/2008 10:09:35 am
Carlos44ec - You had me at "Hello"
09/18/2008 @ 10:20:45 AM
I understand that, but what I don't get is how a team can be ranked so "high" and not have anything to show for it. Look at the Packers- not in the top ten, but winners of 3 out of what, 4 superbowls? Befuddling.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Jeremy - Pie Racist
09/18/2008 @ 10:27:00 AM
Packers are 1-1.
I guess it depends what you mean by "nothing to show for it," they have "not sucking" to show for rarely sucking.
I guess it depends what you mean by "nothing to show for it," they have "not sucking" to show for rarely sucking.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Matt - 3845 Posts
09/18/2008 @ 10:31:57 AM
Carlos44ec Wrote - Today @ 10:20:45 AM
Look at the Packers- not in the top ten, but winners of 3 out of what, 4 superbowls? Befuddling.
The rankings are only since the AFL-NFL merger in 1970.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Carlos44ec - Since 1980!
09/18/2008 @ 10:34:32 AM
Yeah, I call that a hose job.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Carlos44ec - You had me at "Hello"
09/18/2008 @ 10:35:10 AM
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 10:27:00 AM
Packers are 1-1. I guess it depends what you mean by "nothing to show for it," they have "not sucking" to show for rarely sucking.
If you call (pardon my sailor-speak) playoff blueballs something to show, then yes, they do.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Carlos44ec perfected this at 09/18/2008 10:35:31 am
Jeremy - I believe virtually everything I read.
09/18/2008 @ 10:36:57 AM
Matt Wrote - Today @ 10:31:57 AM
The rankings are only since the AFL-NFL merger in 1970.
Carlos44ec Wrote - Today @ 10:20:45 AM
Look at the Packers- not in the top ten, but winners of 3 out of what, 4 superbowls? Befuddling.
The rankings are only since the AFL-NFL merger in 1970.
I know the time restraint hurts, the Packers look a little more ordinary when you factor out their 1814 "championship" victories over the "Appleton Scallywags"
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Jeremy screwed with this 2 times, last at 09/18/2008 10:40:00 am
Jeremy - 9183 Posts
09/18/2008 @ 10:39:04 AM
Carlos44ec Wrote - Today @ 10:35:10 AM
If you call (pardon my sailor-speak) playoff blueballs something to show, then yes, they do.
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 10:27:00 AM
Packers are 1-1. I guess it depends what you mean by "nothing to show for it," they have "not sucking" to show for rarely sucking.
If you call (pardon my sailor-speak) playoff blueballs something to show, then yes, they do.
Well the problem is, much of the time early on at least, they had to face those teams in the top 6 in their prime.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Jeremy screwed with this at 09/18/2008 10:42:16 am
Scott - Resident Tech Support
09/18/2008 @ 12:33:08 PM
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 11:27:00 AM
Packers are 1-1. I guess it depends what you mean by "nothing to show for it," they have "not sucking" to show for rarely sucking.
Another attempt to re-write history by claiming that the first two SuperBowls didn't count.
edit: since the merger, I see.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Scott screwed with this at 09/18/2008 12:48:55 pm
Carlos44ec - 2038 Posts
09/18/2008 @ 12:43:07 PM
Jeremy, the Appleton Scallywags were a force to be reckoned with. How dare you question them!
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Jeremy - I hate our freedoms
09/18/2008 @ 01:04:58 PM
Scott Wrote - Today @ 12:33:08 PM
Another attempt to re-write history by claiming that the first two SuperBowls didn't count.
As opposed to rewriting history to make them count? Check. Mate.
Yours:
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Alex - Who controls the past now controls the future
09/18/2008 @ 01:27:41 PM
I want to be able to choose my starting year. I wasn't born until 81, so I really don't care about the years before that, and I think the first Super Bowl I remember was 89, so I want to see what the rankings look like starting with the 89 season, because from there forward are the only years I really care about.
The Packers would definitely be higher on that list, although I couldn't believe they didn't have any of the 25 most crushing playoff loses before and I insist that some get added if we start from 89. TO TD, 4th and 26, Eli freaking Manning stars in 3rd Tynes the Charm, Favre throws 6 TDs (to the Rams!)
The Packers would definitely be higher on that list, although I couldn't believe they didn't have any of the 25 most crushing playoff loses before and I insist that some get added if we start from 89. TO TD, 4th and 26, Eli freaking Manning stars in 3rd Tynes the Charm, Favre throws 6 TDs (to the Rams!)
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Carlos44ec - 2038 Posts
09/18/2008 @ 02:40:41 PM
was it 1998 or 1999 when the Falcons kicked the Vikes in the head?
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Carlos44ec - 2038 Posts
09/18/2008 @ 02:41:23 PM
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 01:04:58 PM
Scott Wrote - Today @ 12:33:08 PM
As opposed to rewriting history to make them count? Check. Mate.Another attempt to re-write history by claiming that the first two SuperBowls didn't count.
You can't call checkmate on your own nonsense, that's like trying to give yourself cool points.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Jeremy - No one's gay for Moleman
09/18/2008 @ 02:53:07 PM
You're right, complaining about revisionist history taking away something that was given to you via revisionist history makes perfect sense. I'll take my nonsense elsewhere.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Jeremy - Pie Racist
09/18/2008 @ 03:08:12 PM
Carlos44ec Wrote - Today @ 02:40:41 PM
was it 1998 or 1999 when the Falcons kicked the Vikes in the head?
1998 season, game took place in 1999.
It was the season the Packers lost in the playoffs on the "OWENS! OWENS! OWENS! HE CAUGHT IT! HE CAUGHT IT! HE CAUGHT IT!" play, following Rice's non-fumble fumble. (Which I assume is the "TO TD" Alex mentioned)
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Jeremy perfected this at 09/18/2008 3:08:47 pm
Scott - 6053 Posts
09/18/2008 @ 06:26:39 PM
Jeremy Wrote - Today @ 02:04:58 PM
Scott Wrote - Today @ 01:33:08 PM
As opposed to rewriting history to make them count? Check. Mate.Another attempt to re-write history by claiming that the first two SuperBowls didn't count.
What? You don't have to rewrite history to make them count. That's the way it was originally written.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Jeremy - Cube Phenomenoligist
09/19/2008 @ 10:57:51 AM
Was it? The facts beg to differ.
http://www.newspaperarchive.com/TopicsFullArticles.aspx?c=sportssuperbowl
http://www.newspaperarchive.com/TopicsFullArticles.aspx?c=sportssuperbowl
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Scott - 6053 Posts
09/19/2008 @ 11:41:25 AM
Just because the name "Super Bowl" wasn't adopted at the time doesn't mean it was something different.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
jthompto
09/21/2008 @ 08:45:47 AM
Anyone pick up Tyler Thigpen yet, the Vikings actually drafted him last year.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Alex - 3429 Posts
09/21/2008 @ 02:22:59 PM
I have Ronnie Brown on my bench on my other team 
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Scott - 6053 Posts
09/21/2008 @ 02:53:26 PM
Has anyone noticed that the Fox Robot is doing the "electric slide?"
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Carlos44ec - A Vote for me is a Vote against Terrorism! ...or atleast just wasted.
09/21/2008 @ 04:48:59 PM
Pats lost, that's great!
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Scott - No, I did not change your screen saver settings
09/21/2008 @ 06:18:17 PM
I finished 9-5 during the day games. At one point though, based on the scores at the time, I was 1-11. Good recovery, teams I picked this week.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Alex - 3429 Posts
09/21/2008 @ 11:19:06 PM
Packers line play on both sides of the ball doomed them. Rodgers was so-so and winged a few wild ones, but it's not like Romo really outplayed him either, Romo just didn't get sacked as much and the Cowboys ran the ball better. Grant has looked bad this year, and I don't want to hear about how teams are gearing up to stop the run cause Favre isn't in there, he just seems to be a step slower than he was last year, maybe he's still not 100% healthy (fingers crossed).
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
romo9rulz - 4 Posts
09/22/2008 @ 12:10:52 AM
That's just how good the cowboys are...they can make some mistakes and still win...the first two weeks rogers played against the worst two passing defenses in the league last year. Now he had to play a real team and lost. Thats how far behind they are. No discredit to the packers though, rogers is just gonna get better but he still has a lot to learn. We have a good running game with marion and jones in the backfield...i don't think anybody can stop us this year. We have the best qb, kicker, punter, recievers, tight end, defensive end...should i keep going...but i surely don't care what the cowboys do in the season...its all about the playoffs!!!!!!!!
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
RUFiO1984 - 216 Posts
09/22/2008 @ 02:18:26 AM
romo9rulz Wrote - Today @ 01:10:52 AM
We have the best qb, kicker, punter, recievers, tight end, defensive end...should i keep going...
Please do....
Yours:
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Scott - 6053 Posts
09/22/2008 @ 07:55:07 AM
The question of whether the Packers were to be considered one of the NFL elite teams was just answered. They didn't look that horrible, necessarily, and the Cowboys didn't exactly look that outstanding. But the Cowboys not playing their best beat the Packers handily.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Sarah - 4621 Posts
09/22/2008 @ 08:01:25 AM
romo9rulz Wrote - Today @ 12:10:52 AM
..but i surely don't care what the cowboys do in the season...its all about the playoffs!!!!!!!!
Well then, the Packers have nothing to worry about, since the Cowboys can't win a playoff game no matter what the situation.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Carlos44ec - 2038 Posts
09/22/2008 @ 09:09:57 AM
playoffs? don't talk about playoffs... it's week 3.
Yours:
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Carlos44ec edited this at 09/22/2008 9:10:17 am
Jeremy - The pig says "My wife is a slut?"
09/22/2008 @ 09:54:25 AM
Scott Wrote - Today @ 07:55:07 AM
The question of whether the Packers were to be considered one of the NFL elite teams was just answered. They didn't look that horrible, necessarily, and the Cowboys didn't exactly look that outstanding. But the Cowboys not playing their best beat the Packers handily.
They put up 9 points, at home, and were losing by 18 before Dallas went into "Let them score, just make them take time" mode. In the same time span the Packers put up 9 points the Eagles put up 30, on the road. Rodgers was indecisive and fairly inaccurate, probably stemming from being under pressure all night, and getting sacked 5 times. Indeed, Dallas didn't look like they were setting the world on fire, but the Packers did look pretty bad.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Scott - 6053 Posts
09/22/2008 @ 12:43:29 PM
I don't know, I never had the feeling that "man, these guys are playing horrible." It just seemed more like the Cowboys were just that much better. The Packers' defense actually put a fair amount of pressure on Romo from time to time, but clearly it wasn't consistent and their run defense was a joke. It's hard to read too much into anything in this game, because it might just be that Rodgers needs more experience and the Cowboys are just that good. Heck, maybe the Packers are that bad. Rodgers seemed to have open receivers only about 3 times, 2 of which resulted in long completions. The Cowboys just played better. Disappointing, no doubt, but I don't think it's something to get too worried about.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Scott screwed with this at 09/22/2008 12:48:53 pm
Alex - 3429 Posts
09/22/2008 @ 01:25:01 PM
As far as the Eagles comparison, Westbrook is practically a one-man offense and Grant/Jackson isn't nearly the same threat out of the backfield, so when the Cowboys knew that the Packers had to pass the Packers couldn't give Rodgers much time because the Cowboys didn't respect the run or catch from the RB position. What I take from that is the Packers will not be making too many comebacks if they get down multiple scores this year, which is why settling for 3 field goals pretty much ended the game right there, unless Romo gave them some more free points.
Yours:
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Scott - 6053 Posts
09/22/2008 @ 03:23:36 PM
What we found out is probably simply that the Packers just aren't that good.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
PackOne - 1429 Posts
09/22/2008 @ 03:32:23 PM
Scott Wrote - Today @ 03:23:36 PM
What we found out is probably simply that the Packers just aren't that good.
That's not true, all we found out is that the Cowboys are right now. Injuries didn't help the cause. We got out coached a bit though.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
PackOne - Make my own decisions. That's my perogative.
09/22/2008 @ 04:21:17 PM
Al Harris out for year most likely. Nothing to follow. www.packerslounge.com
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Sarah - So's your face
09/22/2008 @ 05:06:44 PM
Ruptured spleen? Yikes. As for the game, it was pretty gosh darn shoddy. Our offense couldn't string anything together and were barely on the field and our defense forgot entirely about Jason Witten. Our defense is now officially banged up more than it might possibly be able to survive. With Harris out, I think that's going to change the way we play. Plus, Woodson has a broken toe, Collins could be out for a bit, and Bigby didn't even play yesterday. Let's see how tonight goes before I entirely blame Rodgers.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Alex - 3429 Posts
09/22/2008 @ 05:54:30 PM
I knew CB was going to be a problem. Despite the broken toe Woodson has been the man (TO = shut down, as opposed to when he torched Harris last year) which means whoever is on the other side is going to get bombarded repeatedly until they prove to other teams that they can play. And getting pwned by Miles Austin is not going to help. As far as Witten having a big game, missing Bigby certainly didn't help that situation.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
romo9rulz
09/22/2008 @ 07:11:01 PM
Yea u know the cowboys figured out rogers after a couple quarters. all the packers were doing was throwing those rinky-dinky 5 yard passes and they couldn't go deep at all. our recievers didn't do all that great. they stopped TO because they double teamed him every play and crayton did nothing at all. witten and austin were the only ones cayching anything. then we have marion who is a monster and F. Jones who is super fast which killed the packers. of course romo didn't have a good game but he didn't have too. I wasn't shocked the packers didn't do much but the cowboys should have whipped them by like 30.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Sarah - How do you use these things?
09/22/2008 @ 08:20:38 PM
But why?
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Carlos44ec - Tag This
09/22/2008 @ 09:07:05 PM
Is Brett just being Brett, or am I missing something?
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Sarah - So's your face
09/22/2008 @ 10:24:44 PM
Worst play calling ever. 2 pt conversion try, get it on the 1 inch line and then no runningbacks and Favre's in the shotgun position?!?! Soooo shocked that didn't work out.
Yours:
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Jfk10intex - My computer is better than yours!!!!
09/23/2008 @ 12:19:54 AM
romo9rulz Wrote - Yesterday @ 07:11:01 PM
Yea u know the cowboys figured out rogers after a couple quarters. all the packers were doing was throwing those rinky-dinky 5 yard passes and they couldn't go deep at all. our recievers didn't do all that great. they stopped TO because they double teamed him every play and crayton did nothing at all. witten and austin were the only ones cayching anything. then we have marion who is a monster and F. Jones who is super fast which killed the packers. of course romo didn't have a good game but he didn't have too. I wasn't shocked the packers didn't do much but the cowboys should have whipped them by like 30.
back on this packer cowboy game, it looked simple to me really..... grant/ jackson got shut out by the cowboy D, pressure was all on rodgers to make the plays = 3 field goals in 3 quarters... I dont think it was all on rodgers.... the cowboys Defense is pretty good, but i just wish we could have found a way to run the ball if we would have, less pressure on rodgers = big plays.... the the packers D had all those injuries so i mean thats perfectly explainable..... but if u wanna say rodgers sucked u might as well say romo sucked as well.... the only difference i saw in both the QB's was basically their choices as far as recievers go, and their opposing defenses. Romo made the TD pass because we didnt have harris to take austin, and they had a running game to take pressure off romo..... as far as circumstances are considerned rodgers had the better game.... but w/e
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Carlos44ec - 2038 Posts
09/23/2008 @ 07:34:42 AM
What has happened to our English as a Second Language Program?
Yours:
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Total:
Rated 1 times.
Jon - 3401 Posts
09/23/2008 @ 09:29:36 PM
Here's my question for anyone watching the Monday night game. Specifically the second half.
Did the guys in the booth ever notice/mention that Favre was limping out there? I watched a lot of the second half, when he got hurt and was limping, but I never heard them mention it, and when Favre was sitting out at the end they said, well they didn't want him to get hurt, but they never mentioned that he already was a bit.
I can't say I watched every second of the game, that's why I'm asking if anyone did hear it, but from the way they were talking, it sounded like that whole thing completely got missed by them. If so, it was classic modern sportscasting, where they have tons of information and stories and banter, but miss something blatently obvious. I mean, maybe they don't watch favre as closely as we do, but it was obvious after multiple plays.
Did the guys in the booth ever notice/mention that Favre was limping out there? I watched a lot of the second half, when he got hurt and was limping, but I never heard them mention it, and when Favre was sitting out at the end they said, well they didn't want him to get hurt, but they never mentioned that he already was a bit.
I can't say I watched every second of the game, that's why I'm asking if anyone did hear it, but from the way they were talking, it sounded like that whole thing completely got missed by them. If so, it was classic modern sportscasting, where they have tons of information and stories and banter, but miss something blatently obvious. I mean, maybe they don't watch favre as closely as we do, but it was obvious after multiple plays.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Jon messed with this 2 times, last at 09/23/2008 9:30:03 pm
Sarah - How do you use these things?
09/23/2008 @ 09:41:02 PM
I didn't notice it until the end of the game, but to be fair, I was trying not to watch the game because it was making me hate football.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Jeremy - As Seen On The Internet
09/23/2008 @ 10:48:54 PM
They did mention it at the end. (I mean literally the end, as Favre limped off the field.) It seems impossible for them to miss something like this, yet it happens all the time. It's not like it has to be noticed by the guys in the booth to get noticed.
Yours:
Rated 0 times.
Rated 0 times.
Leave a Comment of your very own
| Name: | |||
| Comment: | |||
| |||
Sign up, or login, to be able to upload files for Nutcan.com users to see.
Panthers 10 @ Vikings 20
Jeremy
I think it's gotten to the point where instead of listing players as "Out 4-6 weeks" or "Suspended 2 games" they should just start saying "Out until the Viking game" and cut out the confusion.I'm torn on how I feel about Gus Frerotte getting the start. On one hand there's a good chance the Vikings could have 2 wins, almost assuredly would have 1, if there was the tiniest of improvements at QB. On the other hand, that's really the best we can hope for.
I can't help but feel a little bit like T-Jack is getting thrown under the bus. Two close games against 2 teams that are expected to be near the top of their conferences and you're out?
Matt
Is Jeff George still available?Sarah
Panthers have been impressive I think. I don't think T-Jack was the problem, which is why it's going to be hilarious when the Vikings lose35-3.Jon
Say what you will about the Vikings, at least they're keeping me interested. I mean, it's like opening week all over again. Except they're down two games.