Now with Favre's interception-ridden playoff-less season(pending the Jets don't come back in the 2ish minutes left in the Miami-New York game), do you believe in the "Madden Curse"?
I didn't before, but now I do
Printable View
Now with Favre's interception-ridden playoff-less season(pending the Jets don't come back in the 2ish minutes left in the Miami-New York game), do you believe in the "Madden Curse"?
I didn't before, but now I do
This is related: Why don't the Patriots get to make the playoffs if the Jets lose and the Ravens win? They would be tied for first...
No. A video game cover does not effect the outcome of football games.
Curses aren't real.
How do you explain how the majority of Madden cover players having subpar or injury-ridden seasons without any playoff appearances?Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Coincidence. It's certainly not some magic voodoo.Quote:
Originally Posted by defense
Well that is what you believe. There is really no way to prove that it does or doesn't exsist.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
It is like religion, it is a way to explain something.
fixed.Quote:
Originally Posted by RedsoxRockies
ExactlyQuote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
lets take a lot at who they've selected....
garrison hearst - did anyone honestly expect him to have a repeat year from the previous year's stats?
eddie george - a workhorse back who took more hits than any other player while he was in the league, the fact that he didn't break down before the madden cover suprises me more
michael vick - a qb who didn't have any accuracy to begin with & obviously didn't bother surrounding himself with the most reputable people, which typically leads to a downfall of some sort
ray lewis - happened to get injured (not a serious injury mind you) the season following his cover, but I don't think anyone wouldn't take him on their team right now
brett favre - what made people think that last season wasn't the fluke instead of the 2 seasons previous to that one?
donovan mcnabb - is always one of the most underrated qbs in the year, being successful w/o any 'good' wideouts or his team trying to establish a running game
vince young - many weren't expecting anything more from him than what you got with vick (a runner who would struggle to get 7 yards per pass & a 60% completion percentage)
shaun alexander - see eddie george...another guy who carried the load at the most injury prone position in sports & wore down...a rb nearing 30 years old getting plagued by injuries is more typical than atypical
have I forgot anyone?
Culpepper in 2002. Horrible season.
As I've posted before, I think Culpepper's success was correlated with Moss being on his team. A running QB getting a knee injury isn't atypical either
Since Even posted, I will go ahead and make my prediction that Peterson gets the cover next year & his fumble problems continue. Due to the fumble problems, Peterson will start trying to do too much when he has the ball & it will lead to a nasty hit & season ending injury.
So obviously true. The Campbell's Chunky Soup curse, though, was real. A soup can label is much more powerful than a video game cover.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Oh and that SI magazine curse thing? That's just silly... a magazine cover?
Quote:
Originally Posted by etothep
Even that isn't too far fetched - the knock on Peterson was that he was a power back with an upright running style and most thought that he was just an injury waiting to happen.
Cover or not, no one would be surprised if AP misses a large chunk of time .
For the record, I'm not wishing or hoping for that, in case its taken that way by anyone. I like Peterson (he's great to watch) and I think he's a great star for the NFL & he seems to be a nice guy off the field as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by gRYFYN1
really??? It was a 40 something year old Favre staying healthy and NOT making the playoffs with a team that won how many games last year that made you think the curse is real?Quote:
Originally Posted by defense
If you didn't believe it wasn't real prior, I don't see how Favre could have made you a believer :rolleyes:
they would be tired but Miami holds the tiebreaker... and the Raves hold the tiebreaker for the WCQuote:
Originally Posted by RedsoxRockies
Yea, I looked it up, but still, they should have to play a tie breaker game, this ending was just cheap and cheezy.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheNamelessPoet
I'm sure you would be singing a different tune if the Pats held the tiebreaker advantageQuote:
Originally Posted by RedsoxRockies
Ah, the bulletproof defense, used to defend anything, no matter how crazy or unbelievable it is. At either rate, the burden of proof is on you.Quote:
Originally Posted by defense
A tie breaker game? This isn't baseball, an extra game in the football season would cause a riot with the players union.Quote:
Originally Posted by RedsoxRockies
Funny. 50/50 split here. I bet if the question was "Do you believe in magic?" it would be an overwhelming "No", even though by believing in this, you ARE believing in magic.
Jesus...I realize I'm kinda grumpy tonight, but seriously...quit friggin whining. Miami made it due to tougher schedule and tougher winning percentage among the teams they played this year...that's what broke the tie. So, they did just as well against better competition. What in that do you possibly have a problem with?Quote:
Originally Posted by RedsoxRockies
i haven't voted at all on this, but aren't you one who in the thread about supernatural forces stated you believed in them? Ghosts and the like? I realize they aren't quite the same, but then again its not very different either.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Strange. Browns fans were thinking the same thing last year...and I'm sure there have been similar scenarios for every year of the modern NFL playoff system.Quote:
Originally Posted by RedsoxRockies
The current system ensures that the majority of games ON WEEK 17 are still important. Baseball can't claim that. Basketball it's hard to claim ANY of the regular season games count.
No. The current system works quite well, and we both know there would be riots if they had to play an extra game. A 163rd game when you've played 162 and have up to 21 more in the playoffs is no big deal That's what..about 0.7% extra? Adding over 5% to the NFL season is asking for it.
The Pats lost. Deal. Welcome to reality.
No. I posted once in that thread, mentioning the potential scientific reason behind near-death experiencesQuote:
Originally Posted by dickay
ok..Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
personally i am not totally sold on their being a 'supernatural' presence and most certainly not sold on a 'curse' of any type. I have not however ruled anything out personally.
It does seem unfortunate that a team with an 11-5 record (Patriots) is excluded from the playoffs, while teams with 9 wins (Eagles, Cardinals) make it, and an 8-8 team (Chargers) qualifies for the postseason. But thats just how it goes with divisional play.
Unfair? Probably. But it is what it is, so to speak. It has happened in the past, and will happen again, I'm sure.
I recall one season in MLB when the team with the best record in baseball was excluded from the postseason. It happens. Oh well.
thats impossible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Swampdog
Think again. It happened.
First off, had the Pats beatn that 8-8 Chargers team their fans are whining about, they'd be in the playoffs right now.
Secondly, swampdog, I think you need to put the bong downQuote:
Originally Posted by Swampdog
Never picked it up. You can compete with Dickay for the "Knows Nothing About This Subject" award, I guess.
When, in a non-strike season, has this occurred again?Quote:
Originally Posted by Swampdog
You think I refer to 1994, when there was no postseason? No. I refer to a season when there was postseason play, a champion crowned, and the team with the best record in baseball was excluded.
Do some research, then get back to me.
It was a different strike season, & thus is comparing apples to oranges. They finished 2nd in both halves, which they were given the headsup of beforehand, wouldn't be good enough to qualify for the postseason, since it wasn't counted as 1 full seasonQuote:
Originally Posted by Swampdog
The point is....was.... there have always been "unfair" results in sports, as far as who makes the postseason, and who doesnt. Nothing better illustrates this than the team with the best regular season record failing to even reach the postseason. That is hardly "apples and oranges".
The players went to strike, with the Reds having the second best record. As the strike ends, everyone agrees that its ok for the "first half winners" to play the "second half winners." You're right, a split season format is the exact same scenario as the postseason typically is & therefore isn't an apples to oranges comparisonQuote:
Originally Posted by Swampdog
My question of when did it happen in a non-strike season still stands unanswered
You have the answer, and your insistence on obtaining an answer is simply a smokescreen. You know it. You obviously didnt know about the Reds (remember the "bong" insult?), so this attempt to muddy the water deserves no further response.
I won the Inaugural SportsMogul Fantasy Football Championship, I don't have to take this nonsense :p
1981??? tahts tohe only season I remmber being split off the top of my headQuote:
Originally Posted by swampdog