how could the redskins blow this. Up by 7 with 2 minutes left they were at the saints 3 yardline with the ball and now they are going to lose

won the toss, fingers crossed.

I really don't care. the 2009 phins beat the pats today!!

ps the skins will pull it out

I do, our undefeated record is our distinction... It is important to me and I am sure thousands of fish fans across the nation.

question--would you rather have the phins lose today or the saints win and go undefeated?

Bad replay call. I hope the officals catch hell. cost
wash the game

yes terrible call

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> question--would you rather have the phins lose
> today or the saints win and go undefeated?


Not the same as if they were playing the Pats or one of our AFC competitors, obviously they have four more games to play.

but BobH what's your answer?

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> yes terrible call


RESPONSE: And the traditional rule is that if the call is close, you never go with the call that will end the game.

In other words if you give the ball to the Skins, no big deal, they are on their own 37. If you give the ball to the Saints, however, they need 2 yards to get into 50 yard field goal range.

Terrible call.

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> question--would you rather have the phins lose
> today or the saints win and go undefeated?


They are not related. Those questions come when you can only have on or the other. For example when the pats played the saints. Would you rather have a pats loss or saints continue undefeated.

In this case I can have a pats loss and a saints loss which should have happened but the refs helped the saints because they are the sexy team.

SO your question is unrelated since both can happen, also a saints win does not mean then go undefeated...

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> berkeley223 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > yes terrible call
>
>
> RESPONSE: And the traditional rule is that if the
> call is close, you never go with the call that
> will end the game.
>
> In other words if you give the ball to the Skins,
> no big deal, they are on their own 37. If you
> give the ball to the Saints, however, they need 2
> yards to get into 50 yard field goal range.
>
> Terrible call.


yes infact if there was not indisputible evidence, definetly not enough to overturn the call...

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> but BobH what's your answer?

RESPONSE; See Reppa's answer above. Obviously we could have both. But the "they have four games left" comment lets you know that there are four more chances for the Saints to get beaten but had we lost today, then we would not have been able to have it both ways.

But since they are unrelated, it is really a silly question.

your refusal to answer is the answer

There is no reason for Jim Zorn to show up to work tomorrow. HE sucks.

Can't believe Washington lost this game with the ball on the 3 yard line and ONLY needing a FG to ice the game

Personally, I'd always rather see miami win over any kind of record. The present and future is always more important to me than the past.

I live in DC and love when the skins lose but I was hoping they'd pull it out. I wasn't watching so not sure how they lost but it looks pretty bad given how much they were winning by late in the 4th. NO seems charmed this year

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> your refusal to answer is the answer


RESPONSE: I guess I have to break it down to you. I said it twice and Reppa said it twice.

We would rather have the Fins win because there are four more and seven more if you count the playoffs for the Saints to get knocked off.

That's what we mean when we talked about four games. I guess you could not figure that out and thought we were dodging the questions.

But not every one learns at the same level so we must be patient.

I guess I need to re-ask the Q since you don't seem to be willing/able to answer it:

would you rather have the phins lose
> today or the saints win and go undefeated?


of course everyone would rather have miami win today and saints lose one of their remaining games. however that's not what I asked. I know it's difficult to follow....

Oh, I forgot, your powers of extrapolation are deficient.

Let me say it,

I would not want the Saints to go undefeated because that would finish any chances of us winning the SuperBowl.

Let me ask you this,WOULD YOU ACTUALLY ROOT FOR US TO WIN ONE BULLSHIT GAME IN EXCHANGE FOR THE SAINTS WINNING THE SUPERBOWL UNDEFEATED.

THAT WOULD MEAN A WIN IF THE SUPERBOWL WERE MIAMI vs. NEW ORLEANS.

Like I said, it's a sillier question than Reppa and I thought because what good is it to win a game if it means you don't win the SuperBowl??????????????????????????????????

good point but you are still dodging--leaving out the SB, what would you prefer? my point is that I really can't get hung up on the 1972 dolphins record on a day the 2009 phins just had their best win of the year. and I find it hard to believe that you care more about some 25+ year old record than the present day.

Wanna try the same question substituting in the Colts?

sure

yes I want us to win today, screw the 1972 record I'm sick of hearing old guys like you talking about it

*gasp* will the Lord strike me down??

berkeley223 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> good point but you are still dodging--leaving out
> the SB, what would you prefer?
RESPONSE: Now you are going from the silly to the ridiculous. Yes, I would want the Saints to lose the SuperBowl to US like the Pats lost to the NY Giants. Ridiculous question.

Once you take out the SuperBowl and guarantee me that the Saints do not go undefeated, WHERE IS THE STAKE FOR THE 72 DOLPHIN RECORD.


But your feeble attempt was to get me to admit that the 72 record was more important to me than this year's teams chances. Yet unlike PhinFans2 you chose a silly hypothetical.

And you made it ridiculous, even from the standpoint of what you were trying to accomplish by removing the Superbowl.

my question is why do so many of you spend so much time arguing insignifigant details about each others posts(i already know the because that the way things work in internet chat rooms) but anyways you are all missing the point (which i happen to agree with)is that on a day when we beat the pats to keep our slim(what i thought had alrerady disappeared)playoff hopes alive everyone seems distracted by saints continuing their unbeatebn streak

i ALMOST and repeat almost would like to see anothe rteam do it(please oh please not the pats) just so it can be let go

i think berkely's point was he would take the victory today (with the possiblilty of maybe having a playoff shot) than even worrying about the saints or colts finishing undefeated


i'll say this i'll take us going to the afc championchip game and losing to an undefeated colts who go on to face an undefeated saints team....i would sign that contract right now

right, that's why they call it a hypothetical, Judge