MizzouHawkGal":22btif7r said:It's not crazy if it works. Personally I worry about 2 games here on out. Kansas City and Philadelphia because we already are going 4-1 in division the rest of the way.HawkWow":22btif7r said:Well, maybe not everyone. Let's think about this. I'm unsure of how many members we have here at .net. 5000? Maybe we've been going about this the entirely wrong way. Maybe divide and conquer is actually a double edged sword. Sure the technique has been used against armies for thousands of years, mostly because of religious fanaticism, but what if we divvied this .net army up and maybe like 500 of us devote our attention to any given individual game going forward?
One poster above felt we should focus solely on the Raiders. That would certainly be in line with tradition, but this is no time for that. So let's say he and 499 other posters focus on the Raiders while the rest of us totally ignore that contest (until kick-off). You see where I'm going with this? You've come up with a strategy that I believe may revolutionize the way fanbases back their teams. Do the Cardinals have one iota that 500 of us (2 so far) are looking passed every game on the schedule between now and 12-21, focusing strictly on them? Hell no they don't know! And that's wherein the beauty of your idea lies.
Pure. Frickin. Genius. My. Man.
I like the balance of KC. Excellent team and I've always liked Andy. I also like Philly, I'm a Foles fan though I'm still uncertain about Chip. I like where he's going, but at this point, it seems like he's doing more baffling with bull**** than dazzling with brilliance. I reference this past Sunday's utter melt down.
DBs, for the most part, have IQs just around room temperature, so I blame Chip and his staff for the complete you-know-what up that allowed the Eagles to lose to one-trick Palmer. Who aside from the Philly secondary didn't know Palmer was going to go deep? Unbelievable.