Comments on: 2007 NFL Playoff Predictions: Divisional Round

By: Jason

Jason — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 01:37:51 +0000

haha.. janelle has no freaking clue what football is even.
sorry but GB OWNED the seahawks.

I suppose your picking the giants too?
lol

By: colby

colby — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 18:34:02 +0000

come on janelle,

we are all waiting to hear from you. If your gonna talk smack, than you have to face your crowd after being brutally WRONG!!!!!!!

By: colby

colby — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 11:18:03 +0000

lol…….
hey janelle, do you still think greenbay is one dimensional. Maybe you should give up football and go with baseball.

GO PACK

By: Scott

Scott — Sun, 13 Jan 2008 18:34:13 +0000

haha LMAO!! janelle and Ryan grant.. is three touchdowns and 200 plus yards good enough for you? you mustve felt so proud after his two fumbles gave Seattle the lead and then he fucked them over.

By: steve

steve — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 01:08:32 +0000

Jannelle: sounds like you know a bit about the teams seattle and green bay. Picking a team to win on the road in a frigid field like lambo is pretty gutsey on your part. I have a good feeling about your prediction. I live in the state of washington and know they have had some to pull themselves togetherthis year. It’s good they are playing better toward the end of the season than in the beginning to the season. If their defence is like it can be the packers will lose. Seattle has much to prove since 2005 if any one watched that super bowel and is honest you know what Imean. Thanks steve

By: Festa

Festa — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 01:24:36 +0000

Green Bay will take the victory this weekend. I admit, Green Bay may lack experience when it comes to playoffs but Holmgren has never won at Lambeau field since he left GB. He will want the game very bad and intense his players but nobody can stand the cold fury of Lambeau like Green Bay does. Grant will have some break out runs but he will not be running like Jacobs for Giants nor Taylor for the Jaguars. Brett will rely on is WR’s since they do have the most yards after catch in the NFL. Think I am lying? Check it yourself. But my predictions are as follows;
Packers over Seahawks 38-24
Patriots over Jaguars 35-21
Colts over Chargers 24-21 (Shaky on that)
Dallas over Giants 24-17 (with TO it will be more)

By: Jannelle

Jannelle — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 08:40:42 +0000

Hey Dan, you may be right. If you are, I’ll be the 1st to admit that I am wrong. It aint the first time I was wrong in predictions and it sure won’t be the last. Just like it wont be the first nor the last time I was right in my predictions. Its whatever. I love watching football. I have followed it for a long time,and you never stop learning about the game.

To my defense, I’m not very familiar with Seattle. The only thing I know is Engram may not have the speed nor the athleticism, but he’s got enough of savy to garner

94 catches, 1,147 yds and 6 touchdowns. Stunning stats? No Respectable Stats? Yes. What I said may be the wrong choice of words but I dont want to underestimate him nor Hackett.

I’m not really familar with Green Bay either but agian, I’m going by what little I see of them. Like I said to William, I dont see Ryan running when I watch them on O, I see Brett throwing and throwing. I’m interested on knowing the story on Al Harris.

Back to my prediction and statement, I still stand by it. You stand by yours and we just have to agree to disagree and see on Saturday

By: Jannelle

Jannelle — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 08:23:51 +0000

Hey William, I dont give 1/4ths of a damn about Ryan Grant. Impressive stats, I will give him that. But it’s going to take at least one more or two more successful seasons to convince me. Great kid but the fact remains that he won’t do shit on Sat. Seattle will blitz the hell out of that backfield, and once again it will be up to Ol’ #4 to save the day.

Seattle may have slim pickins in the receiving corp but I still think one of them will have a big game because to me, Woodson lost a step. If Engram don’t get a wild hair in his ass and have a productive game, it may be Hackett. Hackett had 101 against a decent Wash. secondary. Now, who’s to say that it won’t happen again?

Just because I wrote what I wrote doesn’t mean that I don’t know a thing. I know what I see. I repeat I see a strong and aggressive Seattle D and everytime I see a Packer game which is not often, I see Favre throwing the ball, and it gets pretty redundant after a while.

Let me ask you some questions here. How good is Grant at picking up the blitz? How good is he at recognizing the
different packages? Since you claim that I dont know anything, c’mon enlighten me! Hell, entertain me!

As far as you bringing your friends over to this site. Go ‘head. I’m sure that will warm the cockles of Chuck’s heart to see an increase in traffic!

By: Dan

Dan — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 07:18:00 +0000

Like I said, there’s no way in hell Bobby Engram can tear up the Packer’s secondary. Granted, he’s a pretty good route runner, and pretty sure handed, but he lacks the speed and overall athleticism to beat Al Harris and Charles Woodson.

By: Chuck

Chuck — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 05:40:13 +0000

LOL, u mad?

I guess you missed the first part of the post, Jannelle isn’t on the Sportaphile staff (although we’d love to have her around). But be sure to tell your friends about the site, we don’t mind debating anyone about football. It’s all in fun.