• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Official 2008 Superbowl Championship Thread

Page 76 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally posted by: dennilfloss
Even if he/she gets beaten in the next round and looses the gold medal, the record still belongs to that person as having had the best jump ever (until it too is beaten).

How can you retain a best-jump-ever record if someone beat you? 😕
 
i , for one , was not surprised at the outcome.

it just smelled like USC 2005 all over again. media loves to prematurely crown a darling.
 
If you're just talking games won in a row, the patriots already have that record. I believe it was between 2003-2004, they won something like 23 straight.

But for a single season, the simple fact remains that they didn't win the Superbowl. Maybe if the 1972 season were 16 games, those Dolphins would have went 19-0. Doesn't matter, they won every game that year including the Superbowl.
 
Originally posted by: GuideBot
Originally posted by: dennilfloss
Even if he/she gets beaten in the next round and looses the gold medal, the record still belongs to that person as having had the best jump ever (until it too is beaten).

How can you retain a best-jump-ever record if someone beat you? 😕


OK, maybe I should have chosen 100m sprint instead as the best jump carries to the next round.
 
The Dolphins beat every challenger that year and were the best team

The Patriots didn't and aren't

Second Place = First loser
 
Originally posted by: dennilfloss
Every year one team gets a Superbowl victory. Only one team went 18-0. Which is the rarer event?

It might be rarer, but it is meaningless. Ask any team if they would want to be 18-0 and lose the superbowl, or 13-6 and win the superbowl. Every team would pick the record with the superbowl win.
 
The Super Bowl is the 1 game of the 19 the Patriots played that meant the most. The playoff games that got them to the Super Bowl are of secondary importance, followed in importance by the games played in the regular season.

They couldn't win the big one that actually meant something. That's the reason the 72 Dolphins are the team that nobody has yet matched - when it counted, they showed up. Heck, they showed up even when it didn't count as much.

It's kind of like playing poker without playing for money - it just doesn't mean anything until the big game where real money is on the line.
 
Originally posted by: dennilfloss
Originally posted by: GuideBot
Originally posted by: dennilfloss
Even if he/she gets beaten in the next round and looses the gold medal, the record still belongs to that person as having had the best jump ever (until it too is beaten).

How can you retain a best-jump-ever record if someone beat you? 😕


OK, maybe I should have chosen 100m sprint instead as the best jump carries to the next round.

You play for championships not records. Brady would gladly give up every record he set this year for a ring.
 
With the Patriots defeat at the Superbowl, their chances at a perfect season came crashing to the ground.

Just another team that went to the Superbowl...and lost.
 
Originally posted by: dennilfloss
Every year one team gets a Superbowl victory. Only one team went 18-0. Which is the rarer event?

who cares? 18-0 is just like doug flutie drop kicking a PAT. sure, both have been done only once in any year since the super bowl started, but I'll take a super bowl victory any day over either of those "rare events"

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top