Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site mhuxl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!mhuxv!mhuxh!mhuxi!mhuxl!jmd
From: jmd@mhuxl.UUCP (Joseph M. Dakes)
Newsgroups: net.sport.football
Subject: Re: Super Bowl XX
Message-ID: <481@mhuxl.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 15-Jan-86 10:52:44 EST
Article-I.D.: mhuxl.481
Posted: Wed Jan 15 10:52:44 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 17-Jan-86 01:44:13 EST
References: <417@decwrl.DEC.COM>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 56

> Make no mistake about one thing. New England is the best team in 
> the AFC. Those who choose to call their success flukey because of 
> the incredible number of turnovers they have "received" (caused 
> is the proper word) are ignoring reality. 

I don't know about the Miami game (I didn't watch it) but saying the Pats
caused the turnovers is ridiculous.  The play that took the steam out of
the Jets was a dropped punt returned for a touchdown by the Pats.  The play
that won it against the Raiders was the same, a dropped punt.  How did they
cause that.  Does the Pat punter have a trick spin or something?

> So, never mind the September 15 game. That's ancient history. Ask 
> the Raiders, who beat the Pats in Foxboro, 35-20, in September, 
> what such comparisons are worth. 
> 
> Remember this: Miami beat the Bears convincingly December 2. 
> I don't buy the theory that the game meant nothing because 
> Chicago had already clinched everything is wrong. The Bears 
> wanted to win that game badly. They knew they were facing a 
> possible Super Bowl opponent, they were on national TV, and they 
> wanted an unbeaten season. And the Dolphins were a far superior 
> team. 
>
> Miami was better than Chicago, and I'm sure they would have 
> entered the Super Bowl with a good deal of well-founded 
> confidence. New England is better than Miami. Much better.

Doesn't make sense.  You say games played during the regular season are of
no worth when comparing teams in the playoffs then go on to compare the
Patriots to the Dolphins to the Bears because of an earlier game.

As I remember the Bears-Dolphins game, Chicago was down by 14 with the ball
on their own 30 with about 5 minutes to play.  Plenty of time to try to
comeback via the pass to try and tie it but what do they do?  Handoff to
Payton to try and get him his 100 yards to tie a record, seems like they 
wanted to win that game real bad.

> This is not a prediction of a New England upset. I still haven't 
> decided about that. It is merely a statement that the Pats do 
> belong in New Orleans, and a warning to anyone planning on 
> wagering their grocery money on Chicago giving 9 or 10 points: Be 
> careful. The Pats have covered the spread 14 weeks in a row. 

I believe you that New England belongs in SuperBowlXX but, they haven't 
a prayer in beating the Bears.  As I posted earlier, the Pats won't be
able to run, Eason will be pressured like he never has been before when
he tries to pass (leading to fumbles and intercepts) and the Bears don't
commit costly turnovers.  The Pats are a good team but the Bears are much
better.  I'm betting all the money I won on the Bears' last two playoff
games to cover the spread in SuperBowlXX.  Even if I lose I
come out even, but if I win ...

						Joseph M. Dakes
						AT&T Bell Laboratories
						Reading, PA
						mhuxl!jmd