You Stay Classy Dolphins

Sunday, December 30, 2007

I don't think there's a question that this undefeated season is more impressive than the Dolphins. I think the Pats could lose in the playoffs and it would still seem like a bigger accomplishment to me. Well that's not what the Dolphins are saying today. Insert '72 Dolphin Kicker Garo Yepremian....

"They're playing well," Yepremian said. "But they still have three more opponents coming up.

"I can't say how I feel because they haven't done it yet. If I had hair, I would look like Tom Cruise. But I don't have any hair. They haven't done it, so how I can I say how I feel?"
What does that even mean? I think we found the real "idiot kicker". I'm also still looking for some Mercury Morris comments so we can all laugh at his ridiculousness.

Yepremian: Pats need three more wins to match Miami (ESPN)

Here are our good friend Mercury's thoughts......

"My feeling about it is as consistent as it has been all year. It doesn't matter to me whether or not they win them all because it doesn't affect anything we've done. When all the dust clears, the best they can do is to stand beside us, and in the end, that's not a bad thing. I will welcome them to the neighborhood with my Mr. Rogers sweater on, but first they have to get to the neighborhood."

Posted by Awful Announcing- at 12:36 PM


I think everyone realizes that if the Patriots don't win the Super Bowl, their season will be considered a disappointment and a notch or two below the '72 Dolphins. So why did Garo Yepremian, of all people, feel obligated to point it out and look like a jerk in the process?

Really, Garo Yepremian? The guy who threw the worst "pass" in NFL history and actually gave the Redskins a chance in the Super Bowl? THAT Garo Yepremian is talking smack?

Dec 30, 2007, 1:27:00 PM  

USA Today had an article and I believe it had links to more comments from players. Its online but I didnt save the link.

All the '72 Fish are is a group of angry old men and if that coke head Mercury Morris is yourleader you are fucked beyond all belief.

Steve said...
Dec 30, 2007, 1:37:00 PM  

I don't like the Patriots at all, but OMDQ is right. Seriously, this guy?

Dec 30, 2007, 2:05:00 PM  

I'm more on AA's side. The '72 Dolphins are pretty irrelevant because they happened in the years before parity. The fact that the Patriots were able to go undefeated with all the things stacked against dominant teams in today's NFL is much more impressive than the 19-0 for the Dolphins. Even if the Pats don't win the super bowl, it doesn't change that this was probably the most impressive regular season in history.

As for Mercury:
Tom's Son: "What's that?"
Tom Tucker: "Why, that's the planet Mercury...the planet closest to the sun. What it's doing down here by the water, I haven't the foggiest."
Peter: "I'm a guy you jackass!"

Brave Sir Robin said...
Dec 30, 2007, 2:38:00 PM  

It was 17-0 in 1972. They did have to play the AFC Championship Game on the road because of a rotation plan then in effect.Just because something happened before some of you guys were born doesn't make it irrelevant.

Anonymous said...
Dec 30, 2007, 3:22:00 PM  

Regardless of the 72 Dolphins, if the Patriots don't win the Super Bowl then it will be a huge disappointment and it will take some of the shine off of the perfect regular season record.

Remember the 2001 Seattle Mariners? Their 116-46 record was tied for the best regular season record in modern history. Did they win the World Series? Nope. Is that team seriously considered one of the best? Nope.

Football isn't even close to being the same as baseball; however, if the Pats don't win the Super Bowl then it takes some of the luster off of the regular season.

Anonymous said...
Dec 30, 2007, 3:29:00 PM  

@Anonymous: Sorry about giving the Dolphins two extra wins. I was typing too quickly.

Winning a Super Bowl in the NFL isn't the end all in determining good teams because of the one and done playoffs. There could be a couple random things that happen in a game that allow the lesser team win.

That's the one advantage MLB and the NBA have: their playoffs are weighted so that the better team wins most of the time.

And the Dolphins being irrelevant has nothing to do with it happening before I was born. It has everything to do with the different rules created to prevent teams from being dominant.

Brave Sir Robin said...
Dec 30, 2007, 4:05:00 PM  

winning a superbowl isnt the measuring stick? tell that to the early nineties bills that reached four straight superbowls, one of the most impressive accomplishments in nfl history, how many times do they get talked about as one of the best teams ever though?

and are all these dolphins guys releasing press statements or is the media going out and asking them to talk about it? if its the latter, i dont give a shit if theyre irritating, its the media's fault. do you guys REALLY think that the patriots and patriots fans are going to be less irritating than the dolphins and their fans?

Mike Georger said...
Dec 30, 2007, 4:24:00 PM  

I just think it's more amazing now because of the Salary Cap and the parity in the league.

You can't tell me the league and its players aren't better now than in the 70s. It's more regular season games as well.

With that said the Mariners point is a good one, but it's Baseball....Football is just different than any other sport when it comes to records.

(Good discussion everyone)

Dec 30, 2007, 4:54:00 PM  

the notion of parity is really overrated in my opinion, the idea that each team has a chance to beat every other team

to quote an article on foxsports about parity last week

"There have been 28 streaks of at least four victories or four losses in 2007, 15 winning and 13 losing. But look at some of the winning streaks, the Patriots lead with 15 straight and Dallas has had streaks of five and seven games. The Colts have had streaks of seven and six games and Green Bay has had two streaks of four and six games. San Diego is finishing the season with five in a row. Long losing streaks by teams such as the Ravens (9) and San Francisco (8). There are just teams that win and teams that don't and overall they are the same teams year after year."

dont get me wrong if new england wins the superbowl i will consider them the best single season team ever, but if they dont they do not deserve to be considered the best because they would not have won when it mattered the most.

Mike Georger said...
Dec 30, 2007, 5:01:00 PM  

btw fuck randy moss' "record" because rice caught 22 in a 12 game strike shortened season

Mike Georger said...
Dec 30, 2007, 5:07:00 PM  

The Dolphins need to get over themselves. Yes, it was a fine accomplishment, and the undefeated season hadn't been matched until now. However, they were far from a dominant team, and I don't think many would consider them the best ever. However, they would not even be in the conversation for one of the top teams ever if they did not win the Super Bowl. Even if the Patriots somehow did not win the Super Bowl, they have to be considered one of the best teams of all time, just due to the sheer dominance that they displayed all year. With Brady and Moss, their offense was virtually unstoppable, and they had arguably the best defense in the league, as well as the best coach. All Fins that sucked a$$ are trying to make it sound like they were better, just so their sorry careers are remembered for a few more years, where decent players from that team like Bob Griese could really care less.
Bottom Line: 2007 Pats > 1972 Fins

Joe D said...
Dec 30, 2007, 5:29:00 PM  

The 1972 Dolphins played ZERO playoff teams and TWO teams with winning records.

The 2007 Patriots have played 5 playoff teams + 2 more who maybe playoff teams in Was and Cle.

How can parity not be a factor? The league installed fiscal rules to prevent free spending like baseball and in 2007 all teams operate under the same system which wasn't the case in 1972.

I think the regular season accomplishment is best of the four unbeaten teams for those reasons but as a Pats fan they NEED to win the Super Bowl for it all to mean anything in the end.

Steve said...
Dec 30, 2007, 5:37:00 PM  

arguably the best defense? how about tampa, indy, and pitt have better ypg and ppg on defense
and didnt new england have the worst red zone defense in the league?

Mike Georger said...
Dec 30, 2007, 5:43:00 PM  

"the undefeated season hadn't been matched until now"
so theyve already won the superbowl? im pretty sure if you lose in the playoffs you didnt go undefeated

and its COULD NOT CARE LESS jesus

Mike Georger said...
Dec 30, 2007, 5:47:00 PM  

Yeah, but your stats about parity fail to point out that the Ravens were a playoff team last year. They lost some players to injury (not to mention that last year was out and out luck), but the fact they can drop from playoff team to godawful in the space of one year without really changing their roster is a pretty good example of the parity.

And winning the Super Bowl is the ultimate goal, but to ignore teams solely because they ran up against a flukey game or all-time team (see Buffalo running into the Cowboys) is a pretty lazy way to evaluate teams.

Brave Sir Robin said...
Dec 30, 2007, 7:31:00 PM  

Cocaine is a helluva drug...

Anonymous said...
Dec 30, 2007, 8:27:00 PM  

the dolphins need to zip it. put the pats back in 72 or bring the 72 dolphins into today, the patriots would kick their ass (and i hate the pats)

free iphone said...
Dec 31, 2007, 2:22:00 PM  

Post a Comment