2007-02-04 23:06:45 · 8 answers · asked by man of ape 6 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
Definitely. It would've been more of a blow out.
2007-02-04 23:47:54 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
I believe so because the Colts seemed to get all the breaks in the game.
2007-02-05 07:18:04 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
if it was a clear night, the colts would have blew the game out of the water!
a victory is a victory!
COLTS SUPER BOWL CHAMPS!
2007-02-05 07:33:22 · answer #3 · answered by Coltsgal 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
IF IT WERE A CLEAR NIGHT I THINK BOTH TEAMS WOULD HAVE DONE BETTER BUT THOSE 2 PICKS GROSSMAN THREW WOULD STILL HAVE BEEN THERE NO MATTER WHAT THE WEATHER CONDITIONS WOULD HAVE BEEN. I KNOW THIS FOR SURE THERE WOULD HAVE NOT BEEN 4 TOS IN THE FIRST PERIOD
2007-02-05 07:12:09 · answer #4 · answered by A K 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes.
2007-02-05 07:11:03 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
maybe it was the weather but that game was boring. real sloppy and I'm not just talking about the wet field.
2007-02-05 07:30:00 · answer #6 · answered by zzzzzzzzz27 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No i think the bears would have done better and they would have had the ball more beacause it would not be wet
2007-02-05 07:24:55 · answer #7 · answered by Tony 1 · 0⤊ 2⤋
definitley
2007-02-05 07:11:59 · answer #8 · answered by neiyah11 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋