Football fans rejoice: Pats vs. Giants game to be simucast by CBS and NBC!

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

leeland

Diamond Member
Dec 12, 2000
3,659
0
76
Hopefully they will highlight the entire season of the Patriots during the broadcast...


Especially the part where they were caught cheating, docked draft picks, and fined...that was my favorite part of this historic journey!
 

Chiboy

Diamond Member
Jun 4, 2002
3,814
6
81
Originally posted by: Syringer
Wow Bryant Gumbel will be on 3 channels, at once! Who am I to thank for such a blessing?

Your local congressmen.
 

Sqube

Diamond Member
Dec 23, 2004
3,078
1
0
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Sqube
I'm impressed that the suits at the NFL Network realized that only 14 people have the NFL Network, and showing one of the more important games in NFL history (you don't have to like the Pats to recognize historical significance when it kicks you in the throat) on a channel that most viewers don't have is just stupid.

It's bad enough that they're showing football on Thursdays and Saturdays as it is. I hope whoever made that decision lost their job.

Except this is a meaningless game. Both teams are in the playoffs so I'd be shocked if the starters for both teams play the entire game. I won't be watching it. I'm sure there will be another game on in the league that will be more interesting.

meaningless? are you nuts? this is one of the most important game in years (of course next to superbowls). they are about to do something that has only happened once (in a shorter year!).

i understand why the giants will rest its starters. but would be shocked if the pats do unless they blow them out.

Well, here's to hoping that they play Brady the entire game and that he gets injured then. If they're that stupid then they deserve to get a season ending injury.

Yeah, seriously. Who would ever want to have a perfect regular season? It's not like it doesn't happen every year. :confused:
 

KeithTalent

Elite Member | Administrator | No Lifer
Administrator
Nov 30, 2005
50,235
117
116
Meh, all of us Canadians were already getting the game anyway.

I hope the Pats win and keep winning, I'm sick of hearing about those damn Dolphins every year.

<-- Vikings fan.

KT
 

leeland

Diamond Member
Dec 12, 2000
3,659
0
76
Originally posted by: Sqube
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Sqube
I'm impressed that the suits at the NFL Network realized that only 14 people have the NFL Network, and showing one of the more important games in NFL history (you don't have to like the Pats to recognize historical significance when it kicks you in the throat) on a channel that most viewers don't have is just stupid.

It's bad enough that they're showing football on Thursdays and Saturdays as it is. I hope whoever made that decision lost their job.

Except this is a meaningless game. Both teams are in the playoffs so I'd be shocked if the starters for both teams play the entire game. I won't be watching it. I'm sure there will be another game on in the league that will be more interesting.

meaningless? are you nuts? this is one of the most important game in years (of course next to superbowls). they are about to do something that has only happened once (in a shorter year!).

i understand why the giants will rest its starters. but would be shocked if the pats do unless they blow them out.

Well, here's to hoping that they play Brady the entire game and that he gets injured then. If they're that stupid then they deserve to get a season ending injury.

Yeah, seriously. Who would ever want to have a perfect regular season? It's not like it doesn't happen every year. :confused:

At the cost of winning the super bowl, great logic...

I would like to think that winning the super bowl holds more precedence than going 16-0
 

KeithTalent

Elite Member | Administrator | No Lifer
Administrator
Nov 30, 2005
50,235
117
116
Originally posted by: leeland
Originally posted by: Sqube
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Sqube
I'm impressed that the suits at the NFL Network realized that only 14 people have the NFL Network, and showing one of the more important games in NFL history (you don't have to like the Pats to recognize historical significance when it kicks you in the throat) on a channel that most viewers don't have is just stupid.

It's bad enough that they're showing football on Thursdays and Saturdays as it is. I hope whoever made that decision lost their job.

Except this is a meaningless game. Both teams are in the playoffs so I'd be shocked if the starters for both teams play the entire game. I won't be watching it. I'm sure there will be another game on in the league that will be more interesting.

meaningless? are you nuts? this is one of the most important game in years (of course next to superbowls). they are about to do something that has only happened once (in a shorter year!).

i understand why the giants will rest its starters. but would be shocked if the pats do unless they blow them out.

Well, here's to hoping that they play Brady the entire game and that he gets injured then. If they're that stupid then they deserve to get a season ending injury.

Yeah, seriously. Who would ever want to have a perfect regular season? It's not like it doesn't happen every year. :confused:

At the cost of winning the super bowl, great logic...

I would like to think that winning the super bowl holds more precedence than going 16-0

How many teams have gone 16-0? How many teams have won the Super Bowl?

Hmmm...

KT

 

Sqube

Diamond Member
Dec 23, 2004
3,078
1
0
Originally posted by: KeithTalent
Originally posted by: leeland
Originally posted by: Sqube
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Sqube
I'm impressed that the suits at the NFL Network realized that only 14 people have the NFL Network, and showing one of the more important games in NFL history (you don't have to like the Pats to recognize historical significance when it kicks you in the throat) on a channel that most viewers don't have is just stupid.

It's bad enough that they're showing football on Thursdays and Saturdays as it is. I hope whoever made that decision lost their job.

Except this is a meaningless game. Both teams are in the playoffs so I'd be shocked if the starters for both teams play the entire game. I won't be watching it. I'm sure there will be another game on in the league that will be more interesting.

meaningless? are you nuts? this is one of the most important game in years (of course next to superbowls). they are about to do something that has only happened once (in a shorter year!).

i understand why the giants will rest its starters. but would be shocked if the pats do unless they blow them out.

Well, here's to hoping that they play Brady the entire game and that he gets injured then. If they're that stupid then they deserve to get a season ending injury.

Yeah, seriously. Who would ever want to have a perfect regular season? It's not like it doesn't happen every year. :confused:

At the cost of winning the super bowl, great logic...

I would like to think that winning the super bowl holds more precedence than going 16-0

How many teams have gone 16-0? How many teams have won the Super Bowl?

Hmmm...

KT

I'm not trying to say that winning the Super Bowl isn't the point. But I see no reason to try to break the momentum the team has gotten by resting players.

More importantly, all you have to do is look at everyone in the organization. Is there anyone on the team who doesn't want to play, with the possible exception of Randy Moss?
 

Capt Caveman

Lifer
Jan 30, 2005
34,547
651
126
Originally posted by: leeland
Originally posted by: Sqube
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Sqube
I'm impressed that the suits at the NFL Network realized that only 14 people have the NFL Network, and showing one of the more important games in NFL history (you don't have to like the Pats to recognize historical significance when it kicks you in the throat) on a channel that most viewers don't have is just stupid.

It's bad enough that they're showing football on Thursdays and Saturdays as it is. I hope whoever made that decision lost their job.

Except this is a meaningless game. Both teams are in the playoffs so I'd be shocked if the starters for both teams play the entire game. I won't be watching it. I'm sure there will be another game on in the league that will be more interesting.

meaningless? are you nuts? this is one of the most important game in years (of course next to superbowls). they are about to do something that has only happened once (in a shorter year!).

i understand why the giants will rest its starters. but would be shocked if the pats do unless they blow them out.

Well, here's to hoping that they play Brady the entire game and that he gets injured then. If they're that stupid then they deserve to get a season ending injury.

Yeah, seriously. Who would ever want to have a perfect regular season? It's not like it doesn't happen every year. :confused:

At the cost of winning the super bowl, great logic...

I would like to think that winning the super bowl holds more precedence than going 16-0

B/c if you go 16-0 means you can't win the Super Bowl? :confused:
 

BeauJangles

Lifer
Aug 26, 2001
13,941
1
0
Originally posted by: Judgement
The jaguars are the only team that have a chance at beating the pats.

I am looking forward to colts/pats/jags playing each other, the NFC sucks.

Cowboys have a shot at the jags but that is it.

the Jags match up well against the Patriots - 2 good running backs, a QB who makes few mistakes, and a strong defense. I still think the Colts and Steelers have a shot at the Patriots too and i think the Cowboys could make a Patriots / Colts SB very interesting.
 

KeithTalent

Elite Member | Administrator | No Lifer
Administrator
Nov 30, 2005
50,235
117
116
Originally posted by: Sqube
Originally posted by: KeithTalent
Originally posted by: leeland
Originally posted by: Sqube
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Sqube
I'm impressed that the suits at the NFL Network realized that only 14 people have the NFL Network, and showing one of the more important games in NFL history (you don't have to like the Pats to recognize historical significance when it kicks you in the throat) on a channel that most viewers don't have is just stupid.

It's bad enough that they're showing football on Thursdays and Saturdays as it is. I hope whoever made that decision lost their job.

Except this is a meaningless game. Both teams are in the playoffs so I'd be shocked if the starters for both teams play the entire game. I won't be watching it. I'm sure there will be another game on in the league that will be more interesting.

meaningless? are you nuts? this is one of the most important game in years (of course next to superbowls). they are about to do something that has only happened once (in a shorter year!).

i understand why the giants will rest its starters. but would be shocked if the pats do unless they blow them out.

Well, here's to hoping that they play Brady the entire game and that he gets injured then. If they're that stupid then they deserve to get a season ending injury.

Yeah, seriously. Who would ever want to have a perfect regular season? It's not like it doesn't happen every year. :confused:

At the cost of winning the super bowl, great logic...

I would like to think that winning the super bowl holds more precedence than going 16-0

How many teams have gone 16-0? How many teams have won the Super Bowl?

Hmmm...

KT

I'm not trying to say that winning the Super Bowl isn't the point. But I see no reason to try to break the momentum the team has gotten by resting players.

More importantly, all you have to do is look at everyone in the organization. Is there anyone on the team who doesn't want to play, with the possible exception of Randy Moss?

They all want to play, even Randy, I can pretty much guarantee it. Besides, I think they will have a pretty comfortable lead by halftime, at which point they can rest their starters and start thinking about the bye/playoffs.

KT
 

leeland

Diamond Member
Dec 12, 2000
3,659
0
76
Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
Originally posted by: leeland
Originally posted by: Sqube
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Sqube
I'm impressed that the suits at the NFL Network realized that only 14 people have the NFL Network, and showing one of the more important games in NFL history (you don't have to like the Pats to recognize historical significance when it kicks you in the throat) on a channel that most viewers don't have is just stupid.

It's bad enough that they're showing football on Thursdays and Saturdays as it is. I hope whoever made that decision lost their job.

Except this is a meaningless game. Both teams are in the playoffs so I'd be shocked if the starters for both teams play the entire game. I won't be watching it. I'm sure there will be another game on in the league that will be more interesting.

meaningless? are you nuts? this is one of the most important game in years (of course next to superbowls). they are about to do something that has only happened once (in a shorter year!).

i understand why the giants will rest its starters. but would be shocked if the pats do unless they blow them out.

Well, here's to hoping that they play Brady the entire game and that he gets injured then. If they're that stupid then they deserve to get a season ending injury.

Yeah, seriously. Who would ever want to have a perfect regular season? It's not like it doesn't happen every year. :confused:

At the cost of winning the super bowl, great logic...

I would like to think that winning the super bowl holds more precedence than going 16-0

B/c if you go 16-0 means you can't win the Super Bowl? :confused:

I was trying to point out the possibility of a key person getting hurt for a game that doesn't matter IMO...

I see the zell of being 16-0 but I cannot even imagine what would be said if they keep Brady in there for an extended period of time and he gets hurt...thus hurting their chances at the super bowl...

That is the point I was trying to make...

I could put on the confused emonic...but I don't want to be that GAY
 

preCRT

Platinum Member
Apr 12, 2000
2,340
123
106
Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
Originally posted by: Kev
It makes me sick that I'm going to have to pull for the Giants.

Well, you will be sadly disappointed. I can see the Giants playing this game as an exhibition game.

Still thinks it's messed-up that this game will be on four channels in the Boston area.

Damn straight! Why isn't it on PBS, FOX, 38, CW...?
Imagine the money pbs/wgbh could raise during pledge break commercials :D
 

Sqube

Diamond Member
Dec 23, 2004
3,078
1
0
Originally posted by: leeland
Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
Originally posted by: leeland
Originally posted by: Sqube
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: Sqube
I'm impressed that the suits at the NFL Network realized that only 14 people have the NFL Network, and showing one of the more important games in NFL history (you don't have to like the Pats to recognize historical significance when it kicks you in the throat) on a channel that most viewers don't have is just stupid.

It's bad enough that they're showing football on Thursdays and Saturdays as it is. I hope whoever made that decision lost their job.

Except this is a meaningless game. Both teams are in the playoffs so I'd be shocked if the starters for both teams play the entire game. I won't be watching it. I'm sure there will be another game on in the league that will be more interesting.

meaningless? are you nuts? this is one of the most important game in years (of course next to superbowls). they are about to do something that has only happened once (in a shorter year!).

i understand why the giants will rest its starters. but would be shocked if the pats do unless they blow them out.

Well, here's to hoping that they play Brady the entire game and that he gets injured then. If they're that stupid then they deserve to get a season ending injury.

Yeah, seriously. Who would ever want to have a perfect regular season? It's not like it doesn't happen every year. :confused:

At the cost of winning the super bowl, great logic...

I would like to think that winning the super bowl holds more precedence than going 16-0

B/c if you go 16-0 means you can't win the Super Bowl? :confused:

I was trying to point out the possibility of a key person getting hurt for a game that doesn't matter IMO...

I see the zell of being 16-0 but I cannot even imagine what would be said if they keep Brady in there for an extended period of time and he gets hurt...thus hurting their chances at the super bowl...

That is the point I was trying to make...

I could put on the confused emonic...but I don't want to be that GAY

Oh ho! The ever-witty "you're gay" retort, guaranteed to win any argument... assuming you're dealing with 12 year olds. I'm not 12, and I'm not impressed at your resorting to ad hominem attacks because you didn't clearly state your reasoning until just now.

We all recognize the possibility of a key player getting hurt, and the second-guessing that would inevitably occur. Only people who aren't involved in the decision-making process and/or don't have the balls to make a decision are concerned about being second-guessed. You'll always be second-guessed about something.
 

leeland

Diamond Member
Dec 12, 2000
3,659
0
76
Sqube, even though you used the "confused emonic" to get your point across I wasn't referring to your post...

You can take offense to the comment if you like I was merely pointing out how stupid emonics are in a failed attempt to portray facial expression at the time of the reply...

I find them stupid, gay, childish...what ever you want to call them...they aren't needed...

Furthermore my comments are the same as many professional commentators...is it worth the risk to go 16-0 vs. winning the super bowl...

Probably 96 out of a 100 times they play that game no one gets hurt and they go on to be undefeated and go down as one of the the best teams in history...

but what about those 4 other times where a Brady or a Moss or some other key guy gets hurt...then what...then who looks like the asshole...Mr. decision maker?

or they don't play their key starters and still probably win and still have the same result...with minimal risk involved...the Giants are gonna lay down this week.

I just think the super bowl is more important than the perfect season...sure it would be nice for both but I think I would settle for the super bowl just fine...

You are right too...say they loose because they sit everyone...they will get hammered for sitting them and being to conservative...

I didn't mean to attack anyone with the reference I just hate when people put that stupid fucking emonic in there...that is like dealing with a 12 year old.

 

SSSnail

Lifer
Nov 29, 2006
17,461
82
86
HAHAHA... winning the super bowl, yes they did, three times within the span of four years. So winning another one for them don't mean that much anymore. Besides, every year someone will win the super bowl, it's not that special. Now, if they go 16 - 0 that there is history, a new accomplishment for ANY TEAM, history. Get that through your thick skull.

Those points aside, who's stopping them from 19 - 0? Base on your same idiotic logics, why not just rest the starters from beginning of the season and hope the team will get to the super bowl, then start them? Hey, they'd be well rested. It's really funny reading these 12 yrs old thought process.
 

JulesMaximus

No Lifer
Jul 3, 2003
74,459
855
126
Originally posted by: leeland
Sqube, even though you used the "confused emonic" to get your point across I wasn't referring to your post...

You can take offense to the comment if you like I was merely pointing out how stupid emonics are in a failed attempt to portray facial expression at the time of the reply...

I find them stupid, gay, childish...what ever you want to call them...they aren't needed...

Furthermore my comments are the same as many professional commentators...is it worth the risk to go 16-0 vs. winning the super bowl...

Probably 96 out of a 100 times they play that game no one gets hurt and they go on to be undefeated and go down as one of the the best teams in history...

but what about those 4 other times where a Brady or a Moss or some other key guy gets hurt...then what...then who looks like the asshole...Mr. decision maker?

or they don't play their key starters and still probably win and still have the same result...with minimal risk involved...the Giants are gonna lay down this week.

I just think the super bowl is more important than the perfect season...sure it would be nice for both but I think I would settle for the super bowl just fine...

You are right too...say they loose because they sit everyone...they will get hammered for sitting them and being to conservative...

I didn't mean to attack anyone with the reference I just hate when people put that stupid fucking emonic in there...that is like dealing with a 12 year old.

Agreed. And that's probably the main reason this game is going to suck and the main reason I won't be watching it. The Giants are horribly bad one week and then competent the next. It's amazing they made the playoffs. The Patriots beating them doesn't mean a damned thing to me.
 

SSSnail

Lifer
Nov 29, 2006
17,461
82
86
Oh, and you forgot one more thing, personal accomplishment. Yes, I know you're used to being a nobody, and will probably remain so. But these people will have a chance of being immortalized in the history of the sport, get that through your thick skulls too. So, if there is a chance once in their lifetime to do just that, they should not rest.

Sorry for that, now go back to your pathetic lives.
 

JulesMaximus

No Lifer
Jul 3, 2003
74,459
855
126
Originally posted by: SSSnail
Oh, and you forgot one more thing, personal accomplishment. Yes, I know you're used to being a nobody, and will probably remain so. But these people will have a chance of being immortalized in the history of the sport, get that through your thick skulls too. So, if there is a chance once in their lifetime to do just that, they should not rest.

Sorry for that, now go back to your pathetic lives.

Wow, you're an angry little bastard aren't you?

Did posting this make your e-penis hard?

Edit-What have you done in your life to "be immortalized in history" if you don't mind me asking? Or were you referring to yourself as well when you said "now go back to your pathetic lives?"
 

leeland

Diamond Member
Dec 12, 2000
3,659
0
76
Originally posted by: SSSnail
HAHAHA... winning the super bowl, yes they did, three times within the span of four years. So winning another one for them don't mean that much anymore. Besides, every year someone will win the super bowl, it's not that special. Now, if they go 16 - 0 that there is history, a new accomplishment for ANY TEAM, history. Get that through your thick skull.

Those points aside, who's stopping them from 19 - 0? Base on your same idiotic logics, why not just rest the starters from beginning of the season and hope the team will get to the super bowl, then start them? Hey, they'd be well rested. It's really funny reading these 12 yrs old thought process.

Hey when your cheating everything comes a little easier especially winning comes easy...

but I guess something like cheating and getting caught doesn't factor in to the equation for you cause it would tarnish history...

I don't know why everyone is giving the Patriots a free pass on the whole "getting caught" using a competitive advantage...

If they are such a special team why was it needed then? I don't care if they go 19-0 for the next two seasons. To me it is just like Barry Bonds getting caught using steriods and then down playing it saying it was after shave and someone borrowed it to him...Doesn't change the facts...

Barry Bonds holds the hallowed record and he cheated and took illegal drugs to give him a competitive advantage...

Patriots will be the first team to go 16-0 and probably 19-0 but so what...they cheated...



 

leeland

Diamond Member
Dec 12, 2000
3,659
0
76
Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Originally posted by: SSSnail
Oh, and you forgot one more thing, personal accomplishment. Yes, I know you're used to being a nobody, and will probably remain so. But these people will have a chance of being immortalized in the history of the sport, get that through your thick skulls too. So, if there is a chance once in their lifetime to do just that, they should not rest.

Sorry for that, now go back to your pathetic lives.

Wow, you're an angry little bastard aren't you?

Did posting this make your e-penis hard?

I was about to post something regarding e-penis but you beat me to it
 

rise

Diamond Member
Dec 13, 2004
9,116
46
91
Originally posted by: leeland
I don't know why everyone is giving the Patriots a free pass on the whole "getting caught" using a competitive advantage...
:laugh:

they were not given a free pass, remember? and only a fool would think it gave them a competitive advantage, in the first qtr, of the first game.

but next year you feel free to sit in your school library and mark an * next to the pats 19-0 record.

:laugh: