NFL 2012: Top 5 Matchups For Super Bowl XLVII

By Lance Barnett
July 08, 2012 11:20 am
444 Views 28 Comments
Hope springs eternal with the dawning of a new NFL season on the horizon. We use our imaginations in concocting the perfect storm scenario that will place our team on the world's greatest stage, the NFL Super Bowl.

But considering only 2 of 32 teams make it, the calculated odds are a mere 6.25 percent.

Assuming for the moment that your team doesn't make it to the big dance, what would be your most desirable matchup otherwise? 

My top matchups are gauged toward the league's most important and exciting position - quarterback.

The game's evolution - dictated by rule changes favoring a passing game - has created a situation where it is near impossible to win a championship without top quarterback play. So much so that I am listing the matchups by quarterbacks. 

1) P. Manning vs. Rodgers        (Broncos vs Packers)

2) P. Manning vs. E. Manning        (Broncos vs Giants)

3) Brady vs. Brees                  (Patriots vs Saints)

4) Brady vs. Rodgers             (Patriots vs Packers)

5) Tebow vs. Alex Smith        (Jets vs 49ers)

O.K., I know No. 5 is a liittle more than controversial. But who wouldn't want to see Tim Tebow starting at quarterback for Rex Ryan's Jets in the Super Bowl? Love him or hate him, we'd be spellbound. And San Francisco is a great football team with a quarterback who might allow Tebow to keep his team in the game. I just can't picture Rodgers or Brees presenting that same opportunity. 

Who would you like to see?

Learn how to get your FREE subscription to FFChamps via our partners DraftKings! FFChamps is the ONLY service with 1-on-1 Expert Fantasy Advice! SUBSCRIBE today!

submit to reddit

By Lance Barnett
Become a fan

Leave a Comment

Previous Comments (28)

Please to post a comment.

3 years ago
You're a Manning homer? The picture said what most everyone would like to see. Most people think Rodgers and Brady are the two best QBs in the league- especially w/ Peyton on a new team and we're unsure if he'll be the same with the neck situation. Many feel Brady was always better anyway. I do. So I'd rather see the best NFC QB against Tom. 2nd to that I'd like to see the winningest team- so it could be the 49ers instead of the Packers if things keep getting better for them...
3 years ago

hey Tony;
No, I'm not promoting Manning at all here. I was only making the point that I think the interest level for Manning going to the Super Bowl after coming off his injuries with a new team would be off charts.
thanks for the comment. Lance.
3 years ago

Thanks for the reply Lance. I know a Manning homer; my ex-gf from MS, and she'd rather see them in the SB than to be alive the following month. So I can understand that interest. And she doesn't think Brady should be in the same sentence w/ any Manning, so now you can understand my being overly-sensitive. haha!
3 years ago
NUMBER 3? OUCH!!! As much as people wanted to see the Saints go to the Superbowl because of their states disaster... NO ONE wants that team anywhere near their favorite team. They were playing "cheap shot" football - that's not F'n cool. I personally hate the Saints cause when I was in high school the Saints were known as the Aints and my school mascot was the Saints. Now that the Saints pretty boy image is ruined like a cheating Tiger, they will go back to the Aints.
3 years ago

Teams don't want to play a PRESEASON game against the Saints in the Superdome. You know good damn and well they don't want to face the Saints in a Super Bowl there!!
3 years ago
Kolb vs. Schaub... just cuz it rhymes, lol.
3 years ago

hey Cooper - how ya doin? - I read all your articles;

I don't disagree..... JUST cause it rhymes!

thanks. Lance.
3 years ago

Doing well Lance, thanks. I appreciate it.
3 years ago
I think if you take number 3 out and move all of them up, you'd have it... so, what game takes the 5th spot? Easy... JETS VS CAROLINA = if Tebow is playing.
3 years ago

Mike; I Like it!

thanks. Lance.
3 years ago
Romo vs. Roethlesberger for the shortest QB name vs the longest.

No, seriously Vick vs. Brady - Dog murderer vs 1 out of wedlock kid. (What, only 1?:))

Manning vs. Manning might mean I kill myself, but fortunately Peyton is on a team where receivers never practiced routes before, so I'm not worried.
3 years ago

hey William,
I love Romo vs. Roth; I can live without vick vs brady
thanks for the comments. Lance.
3 years ago
Cooper Manning vs. RG3 because we don't know enough about the third Manning. (Now just have to wait for the Dolphins to sign Cooper Manning.)
3 years ago

Pretty dang funny William.... although RG3 vs PMann would probably be great... in a year ot 2?
3 years ago
I would love to see my Saints hang a 4th Super Bowl loss on the patriCheats!!
3 years ago

You and most of the free World!! : )
3 years ago

The Patriots, who you so originally cal patricheats -never heard that one before- placed a camera where they could tape signals from a better than legal angle. They did not hire hitmen to cripple Brett Favre. (Cue a Saints fan to ask if Favre was injured. Yes, the hitman failed.)
3 years ago

First off, the patriCheats were found guilty pf taping another teams signals and penalized for it AND since that time are 0 & 2 in Super Bowls; that is what the police call a clue!!!
Instead of worrying about what the Saints did or didn't do to Favre, maybe you should ask why the vikings couldn't/didn't protect Farv like the Saints did Brees.
And don't kid yourself and think that if the vikings could have hit Brees like the Saints did Favre they wouldn't have!
The Saints are guilty of two things: 1. Running a pay-for-performance program, which violates the CBA AND which EVERY TEAM in the league does; and 2. Being dumb enough to keep a record of it.
3 years ago

Did I miss the court or were they found guilty by Goodell like the Saints coaches.
Gee, every team does it NEVER applied to teams like the Dolphins buying a tape Brady's audibles or the Jets taping at Foxboro. Jimmy Jones didn't admit to doing the same thing. And the Saints were not accused of bugging the vistor's owners box. Every team does it is something never heard before. (Can you hear the sarcasm or should I point it out?)
The Saints didn't have to protect Brees like that because the Vikings weren't hell bent to "kill the head" on running plays.
3 years ago

You should work more on your comprehension skills and skip the sarcasm.
If you don't think any defensive player wouldnt have legally put a hit on Brees that would have knocked him out of the game or injuried him to a degree that would limit him you are delusional!
3 years ago

So highly educated southerner,

Please show me where the Viking's had a pay for "cartoffs" of Drew Brees. I guess I'm delusional in my inability to see that.

What gets me about you, that is you personally - no insult to intelligent Saint fans intended, just this guy - is how quick you were with "Cheatriots" but obviously have no knowledge of spygate beyond what E!SPN told you but think they are wrong now.

If you are Christian, judge not lest you be judged. If you are Hindu, karma.
3 years ago

I never said that the vikings had a pay for cartoffs; show me, beyond what Kommisar Goodell and his lapdogs at ESPN have shown.
So tell me what I was wrong about what I said about the patriCheats!!
Yes or No were the New England Patriots found guilty of illegally taping a teams signals and penalized for it?
3 years ago

Dear Moron,

(You insulted my reading comprehension, so don't try to act offended.) Let's talk about your reading comprehension IN WHAT YOU WROTE.

"The Saints are guilty of two things: 1. Running a pay-for-performance program, which violates the CBA AND which EVERY TEAM in the league does..."
To which I replied with three exaamples of other teams taping signals. LEARN TO READ, MORON.

Again, let me apologize to any Saints fans that think I'm bashing the Saints. I'm not. I'm bashing this moron.

I'll answer your question, Moron. Yes.
Now answer mine. Same Yes or No. Did the Saints COACHES admit to it and not fight their suspensions in court?

Oh, why was Brady pulled from the 2009 Saints-Patriots game? Brady usually goes through 100% of the game unless he is injured or Belichick knows the other team is up to something. Oh, this is not yes or no, Moron. It is called a hypothetical question. (I figure that since you can't understand your own idiot scribblings it is only fair to point basic things out to you.)

I'll let you get last word as I've already gotten best word.
3 years ago

Oh Moron,
I see you think E!SPN and Goodell were right in 2007 but wrong now. Perhaps you could tell us what changed in 5 years.:)
3 years ago

I think if I could post this in crayon you MIGHT understand it better, but since I can't I will try it anyway.
The reason Brady, AND Welker were pulled from the Saints-Patriots game was because the Saints were stomping a mud-hole in their a$$es and walking it dry and they had 0% of winning.
Goodell and the league have constantly changed their story on the Saints scandal. League told everone they had video proof of Hargrove saying 'Pay me my money', when it was proven that the tape didnt show that, the league said that it didn't matter. The league initially said 22-27 Saints players were involved in the 'bounty' scandal; why are there only 2 current and 2 former Saints players named.
IMO, the coaches fell on their swords and offered and opinion in an effort to get their suspensions reduced.
When you resort to name-calling, it means you have lost the debate and can't debate the issues.
I look forward to your next non-sensical response!
3 years ago

"I look forward to your next non-sensical response!"

Since you obviously are too stupid to realize what letting you get the last word meant, I'll be kind and tell you.

Arguing with an idiot is boring me, so I'll not respond to your drivel.

Oh, remember before the players union got involved? (I know a few months might tax a retard's memory, so I'll ask first.) Payton and Williams did not threaten court action. They just took it. Like Belichick. You claim Belichick not fighting it was an admission of guilt, but 5 years later the same action is proof of innocence.

Oh, btw, the Patriots have lost worst with Brady in the whole game. Try another reason. I promise I won't reply, even if you ask me to again.
3 years ago

Arguing with an idiot is boring me, so I'll not respond to your drivel

But yet you still respond!!

I never claimed Belicheat didn't fight it; I think you have me confused with the meds you are supposed to be taking.
But since you going off on thse rants for no reason like an ex-girlfriend I had, I will have also drop you like 5th period French!
You lose all credibility when you start name-calling, a typical liberal tactic when you can't debate the issues.
3 years ago
You're more likely to see Brady vs Rodgers or Brees than any of the combinations listed. That's a big IF the Saints can beat GB, especially if the Packers defense returns to '10 form and Saints overcome losing coaches and players to "bountygate". Don't expect Peyton and Broncos to make playoffs, Eli and Giants may not even win their division much less playoffs.

Connect With Us

Sign up for our newsletter to recieve all the latest news and updates...
Privacy guaranteed. We'll never share your info.