Quote:
Originally Posted by YorkeDaddy
The first win for the Rams came from the hands of AJ Feeley, not Sam Bradford. Therefore, I'm displaying the fact that Sam Bradford might not be the best choice for the team. It's a form of sarcasm. If you don't know what sarcasm is, here's a link you should look at: Sarcasm - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It provides lots of examples and everything so you'll be understand it in no time!
Also, the Patriots have the second best quarterback in football and the best coach (up there for best all time) in football, backed up by probably the best set of wide receivers in football. The Bills have a decent QB, a great running back, a decent defense, and a nobody coach. I give the edge to the Patriots here when both team have the same record. You say the Bills are better because they beat the Patriots? Let's see what happens when that same game in played on Tom Brady's home court. I love the Bills, but I'm not an idiot when it comes to ranking them. Quit getting butthurt cause your team sucks A SS and has for a VERY long time (no Super Bowls? awww, poor san diego) |
Sam Bradford is the face of that franchise, but I don't expect you to know that you've proven you know very little about football. Your link doesn't work, but what did I expect, you provide so little here in terms of knowledge about football.
Ryan Fitzpatrick is average? Hes on pace for 4000 yds and 32 tds with a 93 rating. I think most people would agree thats not average, but your knowledge on the subject is clearly evident. Yes I say the Bills are better because they beat the Patriots head to head. Thats usually how you determine tiebreakers, do you know what tiebreakers are?
Why would i be butthurt over a first place team? San Diego is well within the hunt, but once again you'll have to learn what a tiebreaker is. I'd put San Diego on a par with your Vikings for history. But i'm probably talking to a 12 year old judging by your expert analysis.