Comments from the peanut gallary

From loyal reader "Brian" in response to my Peter King post a couple of days ago...

Brian said...
If the Patriots were 4th (seed) in the AFC last year (in a tiebreaker), then I guess the Colts were 3rd.The Colts were better than the Pats when it mattered - the AFC Championship game. But don't try to make it seem like the Pats were worse than they were. You just look like a homer masquerading as an analyst.
6/06/2007

Let's be clear about something, Brian (if that is your name), we at 18to88.com do not masquerade as anything. WE ARE HOMERS YOU MORON. OUR BLOG IS CALLED 18to88.com FOR FRICK'S SAKE. Duh. We are analyzing data through the grid of being long term die hard Colts fans. How is that not clear? We try to be funny and honest, but I don't see anyone around here claiming objectivity.

Now for his argument. The Pats WERE the fourth seed because of a tie breaker. What tiebreaker did they lose to Indy? Head to Head. They lost to the Colts twice (the second time being the playoffs). For most of last season Indy lead the AFC in overall record, before they got some bad luck (losing on a 60 yard FG? are you kidding?) and some tough calls (two no calls in Dallas at the goal line), and played one hell of a bad game against Jacksonville For most of the year, however, the Colts were class of the AFC and that came out in the playoffs. New England on the other hand, was consistently the fourth best team in the AFC all year. They won the mother of all luck games and knocked off San Diego, but Belichick is smart right? You don't think he's aware that they don't win that game but once or twice out of 10 tries? The Pats started slipping down the food chain last year, and are now acting desperate. They were the fourth best team in the AFC. It's true.

So yes, Brian, I am a homer, but that doesn't make me wrong.

As always, we welcome user comments.