Just watched the top 10 biggest meltdowns according to NFL Network. Not only was there no 2007 Patroits on the list, they weren't even mentioned! How can a team go undefeated then lose the Super Bowl not be the biggest meltdown ever? BTW Jim Mora's "Playoffs" speech was #1.
the NFLN is so awesomely bad, this doesn't really surprise me. the MLB Network is far better all around. there really is no comparison.
They didnt really meltdown. It was a close game they almost won, you are making it seem like they lost 40-0
Yeah, I'm sure it's a conspiracy. I'm certain they'd consciously make a bad program in order to protect one team from some mild embarrassment.
94 Jets and the fake spike game..bwaaah haaaa. even did a nice close-up of ***-wipe carrol and his "choke" even thought we came back and won that game. "Marino Magic, Melts Down the Jets"
Some of those Top 10 shows are quite old, it is possible that is was produced before the Super Bowl. Off topic, we are talking about a program that named the New Orleans Saints as the best linebacking corp in history. Better then the Steelers (Russell, Ham and Lambert), the Giants (Banks, Reasons, Carson and Taylor) and the Bears (Wilson, Marshall and Singletary). That "top 10 linebacking" corp list pretty much destroyed any credibility that program will ever have.
No it is not. The only reason they lost was because Manning eluded 5 defensive players, blindly chucked the ball in the middle of the field and the 6th string WR who had 2 catches all season and dropped every single pass thrown his way in the walk through came down with the ball, one handed, on his ****ing helmet. Plaxico's touchdown after that was a given. The Patriots defense was destroyed by that play. Losing a game by 3 by a miracle is not a meltdown, and even if you want to think it is, it wasn't any worse than any of the ones on the Top 10 last night. A meltdown that is more deserving that wasn't on the list was Doug Brien missing 2 field goals in 2 minutes in the 2004 AFC Divisional Round game against Pittsburgh. Although they at least did manage to get Vandershank in there.
When they'd been winning by as big of numbers as they had been, you could make an argument that a close losing effort is a meltdown. IMO.
After their Sunday Night Football *** raping of Buffalo (56-10) their scores were close, minus two games. Certainly nothing like their performances earlier in the season (38-14 twice, 38-7, 48-27, 49-28, 52-7, 56-10) 31-28 27-24 34-13 20-10 28-7 38-35 31-20 21-12 14-17
They were 18-0 and lost the most important game of the NFL season. No matter how you slice it they did melt down and blew the chance for a perfect season.
It was a meltdown. The Patriots offense that year including the two playoff games they won scored an average of 35.6 points/game. ...and they could only score 14 against a team that they scored 38 against a month earlier? The defense only gave up 16.6 points/game all year. They gave up 35 to NY a month earlier. The defense did what it did all year in the SB. The offense melted down hardcore. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7r-0mzvQHXw"]YouTube - Tom Brady Scoffs at 17 Points[/ame]
I respect the argument that the 07 Pats was not a meltdown but I guess if you watched the show they mentioned a few that IMO weren't warranted submissions. Trey Junkin (sp) the long snapper for the Giants that botched a playoof FG snap was on there, lame. Tony Romo's play after December 1st every year has been a meltdown but the same could have been said about Manning not too long ago. Heck even our own Miami meltdown MNF game against the Jets was worthy of at least being mentioned.
So holding the highest scoring offense ever to 14 points wasn't a reason the Giants won? The pressure they put on Brady all game long wasn't a reason they won? It was only that one play? That was it. You're ignoring a lot of the game. The Patriots choked because it should have never been that close.
You're foolish if you believe the Giants win that game, even with their Defensive performance, without the Eli to Tyree play. It doesn't happen without that play. The Giants lucked out. New England didn't lose this game by double digit points. They went down the field and got it done with 3 minutes to play. A lucky play screwed them. It is no world secret.
i like it too, but wasn't "America's Game" made years before there was an NFL Network? i am talking mostly about their studio show, and their post game sunday coverage and commentary. oh, and their "expert" analysis; which mainly consists of Marshall Faulk and Rod Woodson's hard to follow logic, and Deion Sanders and Warren Sapp trying to out-assclown each other.
That linebacking corp was ridicioulous. While the Steelers and the Giants were surrounded by probowlers on the line and the secondary, this saint linebacking corps only had one other teammate make the probowl the entire time there. Plus they were the only one to send 4 linebackers in the same probowl in the same year. They were destructive. It is not their fault they never had a team that could take them all the way. In fact this is the top 10 list that gave them credibility.
I honestly thought Miami could be considered on the list. There was a decent streak of Miami leading or being close to the lead in November only to lose at least 75% in december. It happened in the 90s. Then there was the time with Wanny when Miami had one of the worst losses in my life to the Patriots where Miami gave the game away. Hell they could put JJ's and Wanny's playoff teams there. Miami never scored more than 7 points in any of those games and even shut out against oakland. Including the 62-7 loss. After the 20-3 loss to the Ravens was the complete meltdown against the Pats.
I'm not sure if America's Game came before NFL Network. Their show(s), NFL Total Access and NFL Playbook, are not very good in my opinion. If you mean those, I completely agree. I don't learn anything from them. However America's Game, I learn a lot from. Its basically a historical show, which is done VERY well in my opinion. I also can't forget NFL Films, hosted by Steve Sabol. He does a fantastic job. Agree on their analysis by their commentating crew. They're pretty bad. I find it funny when they bring in guys like Rod Smith for example, who talks less than they do on the microphone yet says more intelligent comments. Dukes, Sanders and Faulk don't know much. Its kind of funny when you think about how good of players Faulk and Woodson were, yet they are horrendous at breaking stuff down and other commentary. I actually like Sapp. He's very straight forward and while he doesn't try to sound intelligent, he says some pretty good things. He did a segment on Randy Moss a while back where he talked about how his Buccaneers team had played cloud coverage when they faced Moss.
