Comments on: No surprises among Super Bowl inactives

By: mediasloppy

mediasloppy — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 01:04:32 +0000

I always wonder if those guys get Super Bowl rings or not.

By: thegreatgabbert

thegreatgabbert — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 23:32:09 +0000

The final tally of inactives for the Super Bowl game is expected to be in excess of 100 million. Once the smoke, alchohol fumes, and excess stomach gas clears from living rooms, rec rooms, and bars across the country.

By: mendenhallfumblemachine

mendenhallfumblemachine — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 23:00:16 +0000

Alskdh if Brady and Rodgers deserved to be here they would be. Just werent good enough to get here, simple. So it goes for 30 of 32 NFL teams.

By: thetruuf

thetruuf — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 22:56:55 +0000

There should not be any “inactive” players for the Superbowl. Let them all be active!

By: alskdh

alskdh — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 22:33:54 +0000

Lets just say the obvious here. Everyone knows that the harbowl is only the consolation prize. Without the harbaughs, we get Rodgers vs Brady in the SB. A much more appealing matchup

By: jtchernak

jtchernak — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 22:19:41 +0000

Ray Lewis cheated tired of people protecting him, post my coments!

By: jakec4

jakec4 — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 22:17:52 +0000

Very nice. The Ravens inactives reads like a list of nobodies. On the other hand so does San Francisco’s. Nobody can really use the we didn’t have so and so excuse when it is all over.