Them Green Bay Packers! What did I tell you all? I knew they would make it to the Superbowl, and I fully expect them to win it, just like they did when I was in Nursery... :o
A formiddable lineup for Feb 6
Quote from: John on February 01, 2011, 03:46:11 PM
Them Green Bay Packers! What did I tell you all? I knew they would make it to the Superbowl, and I fully expect them to win it, just like they did when I was in Nursery... :o
A formiddable lineup for Feb 6
The superbowl? But it's February, it's not done with yet?
Quote from: John on February 01, 2011, 03:46:11 PM
Them Green Bay Packers! What did I tell you all? I knew they would make it to the Superbowl, and I fully expect them to win it, just like they did when I was in Nursery... :o
A formiddable lineup for Feb 6
That appears to be the winners of the 1998 Bowl, eh?
Well, after having watched the playoffs, I have to say that this is going to be one of the most competitive games ever. I fancy Pittsburgh's chances rather more than Green Bay's, but I could see it going either way with the last team to have the ball ending up the winner on a last second field goal. :)
Quote from: Scarpia on February 01, 2011, 03:50:27 PM
The superbowl? But it's February, it's not done with yet?
It has been a few years now since the Super Bowl was moved to the first Sunday in February. Just like every other sport, they want to make the season just as long as possible for those $$$. Look at baseball; if the World Serious goes 7 games, it now ends in November! :o Now
that is a travesty!
8)
----------------
Now playing:
Manfred Huss - Haydn Sinfonietta Wien - Hob 01a 06 L'Incontro Improviso: Sinfonia in D
QuoteGurn: That appears to be the winners of the 1998 Bowl, eh?Quote
Oh curses, I forgot about that one, just shows you .... :o
Quote from: John on February 01, 2011, 04:46:23 PM
QuoteGurn: That appears to be the winners of the 1998 Bowl, eh?Quote
Oh curses, I forgot about that one, just shows you .... :o
My wife is from Wisconsin. I am not allowed to forget things like that... :-\ :D
8)
----------------
Now playing:
Manfred Huss - Haydn Sinfonietta Wien - Hob 01a 10 Lo Speziale: Sinfonia in G
The Super Bowl? That's football, isn't it?
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 02, 2011, 05:51:45 AM
The Super Bowl? That's football, isn't it?
You need to get out more, Karl... ::)
8)
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on February 02, 2011, 05:59:36 AM
You need to get out more, Karl... ::)
I was under the impression that the official name is the Stuporbowl, no?
Quote from: Scarpia on February 02, 2011, 06:01:33 AM
I was under the impression that the official name is the Stuporbowl, no?
Some years it is. Depends who is playing. It won't be this year. Anyway, I don't care if I'm the only one here who enjoys it, I'll watch happily. I like American football. I like world football too. Neither one has the interest that golf has, but not much one can do about that. :)
8)
Go Steelers.
8)
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on February 02, 2011, 06:54:29 AM
Some years it is. Depends who is playing. It won't be this year. Anyway, I don't care if I'm the only one here who enjoys it, I'll watch happily. I like American football. I like world football too. Neither one has the interest that golf has, but not much one can do about that. :)
8)
I'll be watching. I don't have a favorite to root for, but I'm expecting to enjoy what should be an exciting close game.
I've nearly remembered the name of our team . . . was it the Matriarchs? . . . no, that cannot be quite right . . . .
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 02, 2011, 07:36:11 AM
I've nearly remembered the name of our team . . . was it the Matriarchs? . . . no, that cannot be quite right . . . .
(http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQeJKe1hNb_h1iS5xYBnd239H2MURVw6S9pElxnj3maA1ddUm7N8g)
Karl said what!!!
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 02, 2011, 07:36:11 AM
I've nearly remembered the name of our team . . . was it the Matriarchs? . . . no, that cannot be quite right . . . .
I believe it is the Scoundrels.
Quote from: k a rl h e nn i ng on February 02, 2011, 07:36:11 AM
I've nearly remembered the name of our team . . . was it the Matriarchs? . . . no, that cannot be quite right . . . .
No, that's what
I call them though. >:D
8)
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on February 02, 2011, 08:04:29 AM
No, that's what I call them though. >:D
8)
(http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2010/0511/bos_u_makinsl_in_300.jpg)
Gurn said what?!!!
Superbowl 45. It is live on BBC1 in the UK.
Now I will watch the Steelers get packed the hell back to Pittsburgh. 8)
Quote from: John on February 06, 2011, 02:18:47 PM
Superbowl 45. It is live on BBC1 in the UK.
Now I will watch the Steelers get packed the hell back to Pittsburgh. 8)
Early times yet (halftime to be precise) but the Packers are looking good. A couple of critical injuries though could make the 2nd half look a lot different. Good game so far... :)
8)
----------------
Now playing:
The Ames Quartet - Fauré Op 045 Quartet #2 in g for Piano & Strings 3rd mvmt - Adagio non troppo
I've never understood the American fascination with sports. They put more stock into this low-brow form of entrainment than they do the arts. Sometimes I feel completely at odds with other Americans and not just about something as trivial as sports, but life in general.
Quote from: Mirror Image on February 06, 2011, 04:39:42 PM
I've never understood the American fascination with sports. They put more stock into this low-brow form of entrainment than they do the arts. Sometimes I feel completely at odds with other Americans and not just about something as trivial as sports, but life in general.
You probably are. :)
8)
Steelers touchdown with only 7:34 on the clock. Now 25 - 28 to the Packers. I am on the edge of my....er...computer seat.
I hope the Green Bay Symphony Orchestra are ready to celebrate. :-*
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on February 06, 2011, 05:19:39 PM
You probably are. :)
8)
Yes, I am. :D Don't worry I'm in a 12 step program. ;)
Quote from: Mirror Image on February 06, 2011, 05:52:39 PM
Yes, I am. :D Don't worry I'm in a 12 step program. ;)
Start light, something like tennis... :D
8)
----------------
Now playing:
The Ames Quartet - Fauré Op 045 Quartet #2 in g for Piano & Strings 3rd mvmt - Adagio non troppo
GREEN BAY - WINNERS OF SUPERBOWL 45
;D
Pack 'em Aaron Rodgers!
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on February 06, 2011, 06:08:30 PM
Start light, something like tennis... :D
8)
Actually, tennis and basketball are my favorite sports.
Quote from: John on February 06, 2011, 06:09:58 PM
GREEN BAY - WINNERS OF SUPERBOWL 45
;D
Pack 'em Aaron Rodgers!
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
Yes, good game that! Looked like Pittsburgh was gonig to come back there, but in the end Green Bay had the stuff. :)
8)
----------------
Now playing:
The Quintetto Fauré di Roma - Fauré Op 089 Quintet #1 in D for Piano & Strings 2nd mvmt - Adagio
Quote from: Mirror Image on February 06, 2011, 06:32:38 PM
Actually, tennis and basketball are my favorite sports.
See? Spotted you out. :D I watch Wimbledon every year, but that's about it. Even sports that I am not wildly exuberant about I will watch when the very best are playing it. It is appreciation of something done at a very high level. Doesn't matter so much what it is as how it's done. :)
8)
----------------
Now playing:
The Quintetto Fauré di Roma - Fauré Op 089 Quintet #1 in D for Piano & Strings 2nd mvmt - Adagio
Quote from: Mirror Image on February 06, 2011, 06:32:38 PM
Actually, tennis and basketball are my favorite sports.
I approve! :D
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on February 06, 2011, 06:40:14 PM
See? Spotted you out. :D I watch Wimbledon every year, but that's about it. Even sports that I am not wildly exuberant about I will watch when the very best are playing it. It is appreciation of something done at a very high level. Doesn't matter so much what it is as how it's done. :)
8)
I only like women's tennis. As far as basketball, the last game I watched was Bulls (w/ M. Jordan) were playing against Utah Jazz (Malone, Stockton). These were some intense games to behold.
Aye, and the GREEN BAY PACKERS won the Superbowl chaps. F*$£ tennis!
Quote from: Mirror Image on February 06, 2011, 04:39:42 PM
I've never understood the American fascination with sports.
You don't think it's a global fascination?
Quote from: Bulldog on February 06, 2011, 07:21:56 PM
You don't think it's a global fascination?
I don't know if it is or not. I can only speak from the United States. ;) Perhaps you are much better equipped at answering your own question.
Quote from: John on February 06, 2011, 07:13:33 PMF*$£ tennis!
I love tennis. I can appreciate the skill. As far as football, I can appreciate the strategy behind it, but I think tennis is much more demanding on the players.
Quote from: Mirror Image on February 06, 2011, 06:58:00 PM
I only like women's tennis.
:-\ The women's game is dreadful compared to the mens...
Quote from: Lethe on February 06, 2011, 09:28:04 PM
:-\ The women's game is dreadful compared to the mens...
But I like women's tennis! >:( ;D
Since the Raiders won't be in contention until Kimi becomes a mother, I probably won't follow American Football for quite some time. Besides, the only active player I remember watching play football was Carson Palmer and that was at SC.
We now watch sports that Kimi likes, which are: women's tennis (Kimi and MI have something in common!) and .... snooker.
Quote from: Mirror Image on February 06, 2011, 07:28:34 PM
I don't know if it is or not. I can only speak from the United States. ;) Perhaps you are much better equipped at answering your own question.
Must be, so I'll say that sports is a global fascination that far exceeds the appeal of the arts.
Quote from: Lethe on February 06, 2011, 09:28:04 PM
:-\ The women's game is dreadful compared to the mens...
I don't know if it still so, but I found women's tennis more interesting to watch. In men's tennis it degenerated into a dual of serves. It all seemed to be dominated by who got more aces, and less double faults. In women's tennis, for whatever reason, the servers never surpassed the point where the opponent couldn't return the ball, and so they would actually managed to hit the ball back and forth a few times. More strategy involved.
If you want to see some tough and sexy women play American football, check out the Lingerie Football League - much more interesting than womens' tennis.
Quote from: Scarpia on February 08, 2011, 12:02:13 PM
I don't know if it still so, but I found women's tennis more interesting to watch. In men's tennis it degenerated into a dual of serves. It all seemed to be dominated by who got more aces, and less double faults. In women's tennis, for whatever reason, the servers never surpassed the point where the opponent couldn't return the ball, and so they would actually managed to hit the ball back and forth a few times. More strategy involved.
Oddly, the Mirror Image of my own experience. :D After watching 5 sets of nothing but serves, the mens' game paled considerably. To say nothing of hot, sweaty wom... um, nothing, nothing... :-[
8)
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on February 08, 2011, 12:14:33 PM
Oddly, the Mirror Image of my own experience. :D After watching 5 sets of nothing but serves, the mens' game paled considerably. To say nothing of hot, sweaty wom... um, nothing, nothing... :-[
I'm having trouble figuring out if you are agreeing or disagreeing with my viewpoint, and why. ???
Quote from: Scarpia on February 08, 2011, 12:21:46 PM
I'm having trouble figuring out if you are agreeing or disagreeing with my viewpoint, and why. ???
No, I agree with you. Am I that roundabout? Oh well. :)
8)
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on February 08, 2011, 12:52:10 PM
No, I agree with you. Am I that roundabout? Oh well. :)
Sounded like you agreed, but "mirror image" implied the opposite, I thought.
Quote from: Scarpia on February 08, 2011, 12:56:59 PM
Sounded like you agreed, but "mirror image" implied the opposite, I thought.
When Scarpia sees MI, he immediately prepares the artillery. ;D :P
Quote from: Scarpia on February 08, 2011, 12:56:59 PM
Sounded like you agreed, but "mirror image" implied the opposite, I thought.
It was a pun. never mind. :)
Quote from: Antoine Marchand on February 08, 2011, 01:20:14 PM
When Scarpia sees MI, he immediately prepares the artillery. ;D :P
Yes, I wasn't thinking.
Anyone else maybe... :D
8)
Quote from: Gurn Blanston on February 08, 2011, 02:55:42 PM
It was a pun. never mind. :)
Sorry, the pun went over my head. :-[
Quote from: Scarpia on February 08, 2011, 02:59:42 PM
Sorry, the pun went over my head. :-[
That's called a lob. ;)
Quote from: Scarpia on February 08, 2011, 12:02:13 PM
I don't know if it still so, but I found women's tennis more interesting to watch. In men's tennis it degenerated into a dual of serves. It all seemed to be dominated by who got more aces, and less double faults. In women's tennis, for whatever reason, the servers never surpassed the point where the opponent couldn't return the ball, and so they would actually managed to hit the ball back and forth a few times. More strategy involved.
My problem with women's tennis is the number of 2-0 steamrolls that began during the Williams sisters and the inability to produce truly memorable matches such as men's when they reach at 2-2. I agree that the fast serving men's game doesn't produce as much rallying, but when it does, it's of an infinitely greater quality, with some freakish athleticism on show. Women's tends to degenerate into big scream sessions as they try to return the ball too hard for the opponent to manage rather than focusing on expert placement or trying to unbalance the opponent by bluffing them as men's rallies require - as in the men's game simply hitting a return hard is often not enough, wheras a Williams can do that and win most of the time.
(http://www.eseats.com/sports%20images/PackersInset.jpg)
Unlikely candidates for womens Tennis.
Quote from: Lethe on February 09, 2011, 01:05:06 AM
My problem with women's tennis is the number of 2-0 steamrolls that began during the Williams sisters and the inability to produce truly memorable matches such as men's when they reach at 2-2. I agree that the fast serving men's game doesn't produce as much rallying, but when it does, it's of an infinitely greater quality, with some freakish athleticism on show. Women's tends to degenerate into big scream sessions as they try to return the ball too hard for the opponent to manage rather than focusing on expert placement or trying to unbalance the opponent by bluffing them as men's rallies require - as in the men's game simply hitting a return hard is often not enough, wheras a Williams can do that and win most of the time.
I must qualify, I stopped watching any tennis after the rise of the Williams sisters.
I must qualify, I started watching THE GREEN BAY PACKERS after the rise of the GREEN BAY PACKERS. >:(
QuoteSynthetic pot used at Naval Academy
We're talking the next generation of Teflon, I am guessing?
Just to remind my USA friends that THE GREEN BAY PACKERS won the SUPERBOWL in February.
Yes. That's THE GREEN BAY PACKERS.
Okay?
Just thought I would remind you of the great GREEN BAY PACKERS.
Right? Thanks.
The New York Giants won against the Falcons yesterday to play off against the GREEN BAY PACKERS. It is such a shame they were so excited at the end of the game, as come the meeting with the GREEN BAY PACKERS on the 15th of this month they will be destroyed. The GREEN BAY PACKERS are on the way to win yet another Superbowl on February 5th. Oh yes, did I mention THE GREEN BAY PACKERS won last years Superbowl?
I LOVE THE GREEN BAY PACKERS! They are better than Stockhausen. ???
Quote from: John of Clydebank on January 09, 2012, 05:45:24 AM
The New York Giants won against the Falcons yesterday to play off against the GREEN BAY PACKERS. It is such a shame they were so excited at the end of the game, as come the meeting with the GREEN BAY PACKERS on the 15th of this month they will be destroyed. The GREEN BAY PACKERS are on the way to win yet another Superbowl on February 5th. Oh yes, did I mention THE GREEN BAY PACKERS won last years Superbowl?
I LOVE THE GREEN BAY PACKERS! They are better than Stockhausen. ???
My wife is from GREEN BAY, not entirely sure if that should make me a fan of THE PACK or the opposite.... :-\
8)
I can certainly entertain the possibility of the superiority of Green Bay over Stockhausen.
I know many people, especially in Denver (Bogey?) loved Tibow, and they can be terribly exciting (or just terrible much of the time as well), but what is a college football team doing in the NFL?
Quote from: springrite on January 09, 2012, 06:33:27 AM
...but what is a college football team doing in the NFL?
Winning.
Quote from: springrite on January 09, 2012, 06:33:27 AM
...but what is a college football team doing in the NFL?
Winning. ;D
Quote from: John of Clydebank on January 09, 2012, 06:34:47 AM
Winning.
Haha, I didn't even look at your response when I posted mine. Seriously answered the same way.
Ater watching this weekend's games I feel secure to say that all of these teams are good, and healthy. The NY Football Giants look as if they're replaying their 2008 season and playing their best football during the playoffs; Saints look unstoppable; don't be fooled by a rookie QB and a first post-season appearance as the Texans have a solid "D" and a great RB.
Should be an interesting rest of the playoffs, especially in the NFC as all four teams are strong.
Just shivered at an apparition of the spirit of Charlie Sheen . . . .
Actually I have not watched a game in almost ten years except a few months ago when I was in Denver and I watched the Denver Cornhuskers... I mean Broncos play on TV. Maybe later this year when I am in Baltimore I get to go to a real game.
Quote from: karlhenning on January 09, 2012, 07:15:44 AM
Just shivered at an apparition of the spirit of Charlie Sheen . . . .
Ouch, I apologize, nobody wants that.
Well, having tiger blood helps . . . .
Quote from: karlhenning on January 09, 2012, 07:25:18 AM
Well, having tiger blood helps . . . .
And maybe a few goddesses around to help you...well, that's for another forum.
Quote from: TheGSMoeller on January 09, 2012, 07:26:40 AM
And maybe a few goddesses around to help you...well, that's for another forum.
Some would gladly settle for sluts and bitches, but...
Here are the current odds to win the Superbowl:
Green Bay Packers 2 to 1
New England Patriots 2.85 to 1
New Orleans Saints 3.85 to 1
Baltimore Ravens 7 to 1
San Francisco 49ers 15 to 1
New York Giants 17 to 1
Houston Texans 38 to 1
Denver Broncos 45 to 1
People aren't talking much about the Patriots, but the oddsmakers sure like them. The New England defense is questionable, but their offense is a powerhouse. Even in this year of the quarterback, Brady is still number one and he has an amazing arsenal to work with. He has no fewer than four receivers who can dominate a game (Welker, Gronkowski, Branch and Hernandez) and a viable set of running backs for any situation (Green-Ellis, Woodhead, the rookie Ridley, and the newly acquired Polite ). On top of that, they have a coaching staff that knows how to exploit the opponent's weaknesses and adjust on the fly if necessary.
I think a Green Bay/New England Superbowl is likely, but despite a great season, the Packers may have peaked too soon. The Giants look scary and seem to be getting better with each game. I wouldn't count them out.
I'd be rooting for Denver and Tebow if they weren't playing the Patriots this week. They're a great story and it's refreshing to see a player getting so much media attention for something other than shooting people, dealing drugs, or abusing women. I don't think they have what it takes, though, to get past the Patriots.
Quote from: Szykneij on January 09, 2012, 06:08:13 PM
. . . and it's refreshing to see a player getting so much media attention for something other than shooting people, dealing drugs, or abusing women.
Nice to see professional athletes diversifying their portfolio, certainly.
THE GREEN BAY PACKERS had a tough game against the Giants only last month. There was only three points between them in a high scoring game. This time I am confident Aaron Rodgers can avoid being sacked so much, and the GREEN BAY PACKERS will dominate. Lessons have been learned. I am looking forward to watching that game live on Sky Sports...
I haven't paid much attention to Denver since the days of John Elway, :o but I will be taking notes on what they're up to just in case they're a bigger threat thatn I think. I will watch them against the Patriots, who are a team I admire very much if it weren't for the brilliant GREEN BAY PACKERS.
Quote from: John of Clydebank on January 10, 2012, 05:19:13 AM
THE GREEN BAY PACKERS had a tough game against the Giants only last month. There was only three points between them in a high scoring game. This time I am confident Aaron Rodgers can avoid being sacked so much, and the GREEN BAY PACKERS will dominate. Lessons have been learned. I am looking forward to watching that game live on Sky Sports...
I haven't paid much attention to Denver since the days of John Elway, :o but I will be taking notes on what they're up to just in case they're a bigger threat thatn I think. I will watch them against the Patriots, who are a team I admire very much if it weren't for the brilliant GREEN BAY PACKERS.
Yes, but in the other football world, is it
CELTIC or
RANGERS for you? ;)
And if one of those teams were to play the
GREEN BAY PACKERS for the Stanley Cup, who would win?
Go, Leafs, Go!
Quote from: chasmaniac on January 10, 2012, 05:31:53 AM
Yes, but in the other football world, is it CELTIC or RANGERS for you? ;)
And if one of those teams were to play the GREEN BAY PACKERS for the Stanley Cup, who would win?
Go, Leafs, Go!
If Glasgow Celtic FC met the
GREEN BAY PACKERS in a Stanley Cup challenge, the
PACKERS would be sliding all over the place and Celtic would give it up because of the sheer size of the
PACKERS offense. The
PACKERS would win whilst sliding on their arses legs akimbo without Celtic even being in the rink. Celtic would have to watch "The Goon" for tips on unusual offensive measures before even thinking of being demolished by
THE GREEN BAY PACKERS on ice.
Quote from: Szykneij on January 09, 2012, 06:08:13 PM
Here are the current odds to win the Superbowl:
Green Bay Packers 2 to 1
New England Patriots 2.85 to 1
New Orleans Saints 3.85 to 1
Baltimore Ravens 7 to 1
San Francisco 49ers 15 to 1
New York Giants 17 to 1
Houston Texans 38 to 1
Denver Broncos 45 to 1
People aren't talking much about the Patriots, but the oddsmakers sure like them. The New England defense is questionable, but their offense is a powerhouse. Even in this year of the quarterback, Brady is still number one and he has an amazing arsenal to work with. He has no fewer than four receivers who can dominate a game (Welker, Gronkowski, Branch and Hernandez) and a viable set of running backs for any situation (Green-Ellis, Woodhead, the rookie Ridley, and the newly acquired Polite ). On top of that, they have a coaching staff that knows how to exploit the opponent's weaknesses and adjust on the fly if necessary.
I think a Green Bay/New England Superbowl is likely, but despite a great season, the Packers may have peaked too soon. The Giants look scary and seem to be getting better with each game. I wouldn't count them out.
I'd be rooting for Denver and Tebow if they weren't playing the Patriots this week. They're a great story and it's refreshing to see a player getting so much media attention for something other than shooting people, dealing drugs, or abusing women. I don't think they have what it takes, though, to get past the Patriots.
The last game with Denver was the first time I got to see Tebow and what the fuss was about. He's definitely a problem with his running skill. But he will not last in the league unless he shortens his passing motion. He throws like a baseball pitcher, and eventually he will get into trouble with his slow release. Either he will get creamed or his receivers will pay the price, probably both.
Quote from: drogulus on January 10, 2012, 02:20:06 PM
The last game with Denver was the first time I got to see Tebow and what the fuss was about. He's definitely a problem with his running skill. But he will not last in the league unless he shortens his passing motion. He throws like a baseball pitcher, and eventually he will get into trouble with his slow release. Either he will get creamed or his receivers will pay the price, probably both.
In addition to his passing inaccuracy, Tebow doesn't have much of a touch on the ball. Every pass he throws comes out like it's shot out of a bazooka. That's one of the reasons many of his short passes go incomplete.
On the other hand, when you have wide receivers like Demaryius Thomas who can snag those rockets and run just as fast after the catch, Tebow's ability to scramble and buy time is a nightmare for a defensive safety.
Tebow reminds me of Flutie, a great player whose combination of strengths and weaknesses made it hard to fit him in. You have to build the offense around these guys, and most teams don't want to do that for one oddball player.
Quote from: drogulus on January 12, 2012, 01:37:17 AM
Tebow reminds me of Flutie, a great player whose combination of strengths and weaknesses made it hard to fit him in. You have to build the offense around these guys, and most teams don't want to do that for one oddball player.
Doug Flutie had a significant size disadvantage for the NFL. Tebow, at is 6'3", 230 pounds has the right physique for a quarterback. I stood behind Flutie in line at a Celtics game and couldn't believe how small he really was in person.
Denver are being utterly crushed by New England.
Scary.
Later, the mighty GREEN BAY PACKERS.
The last 3 minutes of the 49ers/Saints was insane, classic playoff game.
Quote from: TheGSMoeller on January 14, 2012, 06:36:59 PM
The last 3 minutes of the 49ers/Saints was insane, classic playoff game.
Missed it, but will watch the highlights in about 6 hours Greg!
Quote from: Scots John on January 14, 2012, 06:38:38 PM
Missed it, but will watch the highlights in about 6 hours Greg!
Much better game than Pats/Broncos. You're a Packers fan, right? 49ers looked scary, and Giants are repeating their 2008 season when they play their best ball in the end. Should be an exciting few weeks.
Baltimore are beating Houston so far in the second quarter. BALTIMORE????? :-[
Quote from: Scots John on January 15, 2012, 10:18:24 AM
Baltimore are beating Houston so far in the second quarter. BALTIMORE????? :-[
Just by four points now, though. Baltimore is a very good team, so I'm rooting for Houston today. The winner of this game plays my Patriots next week and I think the Texans will be an easier team to beat. I want a New England/Green Bay Super Bowl, so I'll be cheering for your Packers tonight.
Quote from: Szykneij on January 15, 2012, 10:24:38 AM
Just by four points now, though. Baltimore is a very good team, so I'm rooting for Houston today. The winner of this game plays my Patriots next week and I think the Texans will be an easier team to beat. I want a New England/Green Bay Super Bowl, so I'll be cheering for your Packers tonight.
The Patriots completely ripp'd the Broncos yesterday. That is the final I too would like to see, because if the
GREEN BAY PACKERS didn't exist I would be a Patriots man. But...
THE GREEN BAY PACKERS exist alright, and they exist to open the field and crush the very bones of any who stand before them. :o >:D
Quote from: Scots John on January 15, 2012, 10:42:21 AM
The Patriots completely ripp'd the Broncos yesterday. That is the final I too would like to see, because if the GREEN BAY PACKERS didn't exist I would be a Patriots man. But...THE GREEN BAY PACKERS exist alright, and they exist to open the field and crush the very bones of any who stand before them. :o >:D
(http://a4.ec-images.myspacecdn.com/images02/51/b3efba7c3b8747afa3037025af2aa0ba/l.jpg)
The last time New England faced Green Bay in a Superbowl was Superbowl XXXI in 1997. Brett Favre and the Packers beat Drew Bledsoe and New England 35-21. (Especially disappointing considering how much I can't stand Favre.)
(http://www.thesportsbank.net/core/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/aaron-rodgers-tom-brady.jpg)
I like Aaron Rodgers, but I think Brady and the Patriots can handle him and the Packers.
Houston at Baltimore - 13-20
The Texans really struggled against the Ravens. The commentators are right - too many silly mistakes and some bad plays by Houston. Only their short yardage defence was good.
HERE COME THE GREEN BAY PACKERS! Now we'll see who are "Giants"...
Well, them damn Giants are up 10 at the end of the first half. The Green Bay defence is giving them WAY too much time to do the damage, and there are mistakes galore. Still, there's another half to go, and The Green Bay Packers have to step on it. >:D
Quote from: Szykneij on January 15, 2012, 10:24:38 AM
Just by four points now, though. Baltimore is a very good team, so I'm rooting for Houston today. The winner of this game plays my Patriots next week and I think the Texans will be an easier team to beat. I want a New England/Green Bay Super Bowl, so I'll be cheering for your Packers tonight.
That's the best matchup IMO. The Packers would probably be a slim favorite.
(http://www.deuceofdavenport.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/belichick.jpg)
Did you see the Hooded One after the game? I love his victory face....like someone just ran over his cat. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/grin.gif)
6 mins to go. The Green Bay Packers keep giving the ball away...fumbles...the lot. I suppose in fact this is just a Green Bay training game for NEXT YEARS Superbowl... yes, thats why they're letting the Giants win.
Them damn Giants won, but clearly The Green Bay Packers let them win 37-20 in training for next years Superbowl play-offs. Ach! Turns out the Giants were Giants. >:( :-[ We'll be back...next year.
Quote from: Scots John on January 15, 2012, 03:57:25 PMWe'll be back...next year.
Will you still be in bold every time?
Quote from: The Six on January 15, 2012, 05:43:31 PM
Will you still be in bold every time?
No, but the mighty
GREEN BAY PACKERS will. :D
Quote from: Scots John on January 15, 2012, 03:27:03 PM
6 mins to go. The Green Bay Packers keep giving the ball away...fumbles...the lot. I suppose in fact this is just a Green Bay training game for NEXT YEARS Superbowl... yes, thats why they're letting the Giants win.
Giants are playing good ball. I'd love to see a rematch of NE-NY from a few years ago. But the Niners are going to be tough.
By the way, your new avatar give me the heeby jeebies (is that spelling correct?)! I might have to disable the viewing of avatars if you keep that!
Quote from: mc ukrneal on January 16, 2012, 01:29:59 AM
Giants are playing good ball. I'd love to see a rematch of NE-NY from a few years ago. But the Niners are going to be tough.
By the way, your new avatar give me the heeby jeebies (is that spelling correct?)! I might have to disable the viewing of avatars if you keep that!
I apologise my avatar is giving you the heebie jeebies! :) My features will change when I listen to somethings else...but it is only a wee bee, even though it should be a wasp. I'm still stuck in the nineties, eighties even, and wonder how the 49'ers ever manage without Joe Montana!
****bbbbbbzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz**** >:D
Quote from: TheGSMoeller on January 14, 2012, 06:46:14 PM
...and Giants are repeating their 2008 season when they play their best ball in the end...
Just wanted to quote myself.
Super Bowl - Latest Odds to Win
Patriots (44% chance)
49ers (21% chance)
Giants (21% chance)
Ravens (14% chance)
Quote from: Szykneij on January 16, 2012, 04:26:32 AM
Super Bowl - Latest Odds to Win
Patriots (44% chance)
49ers (21% chance)
Giants (21% chance)
Ravens (14% chance)
I don't believe it. You
can't pick the Pats over the Ravens unless you're a fan. Same with the Giants. I don't know about the Niners.
Why are people still in awe of the Pats like it was 2004? They beat bad teams and lose to good teams and that's the way it's been for quite a while now.
Corey Dillon is long gone. Without a tank like Dillon to take the pressure off Brady, he won't have time to find the open receivers. It goes like this: Pats try to run, it doesn't work, Pats give up on the run, try short passes, Brady is pressured into bad throws, interception, Ravens score, rinse and repeat. The score is low, the game is ugly, Ravens win.
Quote from: drogulus on January 16, 2012, 06:59:52 AM
I don't believe it. You can't pick the Pats over the Ravens unless you're a fan. Same with the Giants. I don't know about the Niners.
Why are people still in awe of the Pats like it was 2004? They beat bad teams and lose to good teams and that's the way it's been for quite a while now.
Corey Dillon is long gone. Without a tank like Dillon to take the pressure off Brady, he won't have time to find the open receivers. It goes like this: Pats try to run, it doesn't work, Pats give up on the run, try short passes, Brady is pressured into bad throws, interception, Ravens score, rinse and repeat. The score is low, the game is ugly, Ravens win.
I'm fond of the Patsies, but this sounds right to me. I think the best balanced team still in the hunt is the Niners. They have the defense to keep Manning in check, and the Giants' pass rush will not avail them against on offense that can run. SF-Baltimore sooper bowl, I reckon.
Quote from: drogulus on January 16, 2012, 06:59:52 AM
I don't believe it. You can't pick the Pats over the Ravens unless you're a fan. Same with the Giants. I don't know about the Niners.
Why are people still in awe of the Pats like it was 2004? They beat bad teams and lose to good teams and that's the way it's been for quite a while now.
Corey Dillon is long gone. Without a tank like Dillon to take the pressure off Brady, he won't have time to find the open receivers. It goes like this: Pats try to run, it doesn't work, Pats give up on the run, try short passes, Brady is pressured into bad throws, interception, Ravens score, rinse and repeat. The score is low, the game is ugly, Ravens win.
Pressure Brady and cover Welker tight, Brady is not mobile, game should go to Ravens. I agree.
Quote from: drogulus on January 16, 2012, 06:59:52 AM
I don't believe it. You can't pick the Pats over the Ravens unless you're a fan. Same with the Giants. I don't know about the Niners.
Why are people still in awe of the Pats like it was 2004? They beat bad teams and lose to good teams and that's the way it's been for quite a while now.
Corey Dillon is long gone. Without a tank like Dillon to take the pressure off Brady, he won't have time to find the open receivers. It goes like this: Pats try to run, it doesn't work, Pats give up on the run, try short passes, Brady is pressured into bad throws, interception, Ravens score, rinse and repeat. The score is low, the game is ugly, Ravens win.
I haven't seen much evidence of people being in awe of the Patriots. I think (mainly because of their horrible defensive stats) they've been pretty much underrated by most -- and that's a good thing because they usually perform best as underdogs. They were definitely able to use all that attention given to Tebow this past week to their advantage.
Green-Ellis isn't Corey Dillon, but he's no slouch either. The Patriots have an incredibly diverse crew of running backs and they can move the ball on the ground when they want to. And even if they do need a blocking back (which I don't think they will), the addition of Lousaka Polite has taken care of that.
(Ernie, have you watched the Pats much this season? It seems your observations are somewhat dated.)
Quote from: TheGSMoeller on January 16, 2012, 09:03:17 AM
Pressure Brady and cover Welker tight, Brady is not mobile, game should go to Ravens. I agree.
That might have been true last season, but with the emergence of Gronkowski and Hernandez, Welker has been the third option for many games recently (and when a receiver of his ability is your third look, your secondary is going to have its hands full).
Quote from: Szykneij on January 16, 2012, 09:36:10 AM
I haven't seen much evidence of people being in awe of the Patriots. I think (mainly because of their horrible defensive stats) they've been pretty much underrated by most -- and that's a good thing because they usually perform best as underdogs. They were definitely able to use all that attention given to Tebow this past week to their advantage.
Green-Ellis isn't Corey Dillon, but he's no slouch either. The Patriots have an incredibly diverse crew of running backs and they can move the ball on the ground when they want to. And even if they do need a blocking back (which I don't think they will), the addition of Lousaka Polite has taken care of that.
(Ernie, have you watched the Pats much this season? It seems your observations are somewhat dated.)
Yes, I've watched at least part of every game this year, and all of several of them. I've seen some analysis on the tube that says the league is different now and teams that allow huge yardage are now prospering in the playoffs. Well yes, they are
getting to the playoffs, but how deep will any team go that is at the bottom of the league at pass defense?
So it's possible that teams should be judged differently now. Maybe. Possibly. I'll feel better if the Pats do something radical like beat a good team. If they crush the Ravens I'll change my mind.
Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good. The Patriots are in the Super Bowl. They escaped with a 3-point victory against Baltimore when, in the final seconds, Lee Evans dropped what should have been the winning touchdown for the Ravens and then Billy Cundiff shanked a relatively easy 32-yard field goal attempt that would have sent the game into overtime. Sterling Moore made the defensive play of the year for New England when he swatted the ball out of Evan's hands in the end zone.
The good news for the Patriots heading to Indianapolis is that Brady didn't play all that well and they still won. General consensus has been that the Pats can't win if Brady is off his game. Today they showed they can, and Brady's not going to have two sub-par performances in a row, so look out NFC.
The 49'ers are leading the Giants 7-0 in the game that decides the Patriots Super Bowl opponent. I think the Patriots match up better against San Francisco, but a Giants/Patriots rematch would be a more exciting pairing.
Crush! Kill! Destroy!
(http://cache.io9.com/assets/images/8/2009/11/forbidden_planet.jpg)
(http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcToHLLN62lspM77Pi4qZRHvupJKtVhBEgfAfSxlGu_17AznXN6MZwm0m7cS)
... at the late night, double-feature picture show.
Quote from: Szykneij on January 22, 2012, 03:22:42 PM
Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good. The Patriots are in the Super Bowl. They escaped with a 3-point victory against Baltimore when, in the final seconds, Lee Evans dropped what should have been the winning touchdown for the Ravens and then Billy Cundiff shanked a relatively easy 32-yard field goal attempt that would have sent the game into overtime. Sterling Moore made the defensive play of the year for New England when he swatted the ball out of Evan's hands in the end zone.
The good news for the Patriots heading to Indianapolis is that Brady didn't play all that well and they still won. General consensus has been that the Pats can't win if Brady is off his game. Today they showed they can, and Brady's not going to have two sub-par performances in a row, so look out NFC.
The 49'ers are leading the Giants 7-0 in the game that decides the Patriots Super Bowl opponent. I think the Patriots match up better against San Francisco, but a Giants/Patriots rematch would be a more exciting pairing.
It was a low scoring game and Brady was frustrated exactly the way Ravens intended, yet the Pats won. But they won because the Ravens missed 2 opportunities to win or tie the game in the last few seconds. That doesn't exactly fill me with confidence. But you're right that Brady has almost never played consecutive bad games. He's pissed that he almost blew this one and the Giants may suffer for it. Yeah, that's it. The Giants better watch out!
Now I feel better. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/smiley.gif)
Phew!
It is on British news tonight that a rhinoceros is being used to predict the winner of the superbowl by choosing from two team-logo infested balls. He chose the Giants. Well, in the absence of the Green Bay packers, that stupid rhonoceros is wrong, and if I ever see it walking down the street I may knock it clean off its horny throne and have severe words about its alleigance. I would also tell it to get the hell out of town, because there aint no rhonoceros on Gods Earth who has the sense to make a considered judgement on the matter.
I will watch and support the Patriots. And if a rhonoceros approaches while I'm watching it, I will have to put it in the fridge.
What, did the octopus retire?
Quote from: Scots John on February 02, 2012, 05:04:59 PM
It is on British news tonight that a rhinoceros is being used to predict the winner of the superbowl by choosing from two team-logo infested balls. He chose the Giants. Well, in the absence of the Green Bay packers, that stupid rhonoceros is wrong, and if I ever see it walking down the street I may knock it clean off its horny throne and have severe words about its alleigance. I would also tell it to get the hell out of town, because there aint no rhonoceros on Gods Earth who has the sense to make a considered judgement on the matter.
I will watch and support the Patriots. And if a rhonoceros approaches while I'm watching it, I will have to put it in the fridge.
That's an awesome fat lady there. Where can I get some pics?
Quote from: karlhenning on February 03, 2012, 06:53:34 AM
What, did the octopus retire?
Oh Karl, it was served to me as a starter in a Greek restaurant, Camden Town, London, with a whole bottle of Glenfiddich and some Lamb to follow. It correctly predicted that I would eat it, and no longer makes predictions.
Quote from: snyprrr on February 03, 2012, 07:05:30 AM
That's an awesome fat lady there. Where can I get some pics?
I have no idea Snyprr. The pic is a link from search for 'Wagner Valkyrie' in google pics.
Quote from: Scots John on February 03, 2012, 08:09:35 AM
. . . with a whole bottle of Glenfiddich
I'm surprised you didn't eat up the rhino, too, laddie!
Go kick ass, etc, The New Scotland Patriots!! Make mincemeat of those New York animal trough washers!
Quote from: Scots John on February 05, 2012, 03:37:56 PM
Go kick ass, etc, The New Scotland Patriots!! Make mincemeat of those New York animal trough washers!
It is halftime and Madge the Maddonna is on stage crouching and crooning. Now what they SHOULD do is invite The American Youth Orchestra there to bash out some great movie themes and all American anthems for the half time show. Anyway, when all these ladies stop their bawdy antics and the guys are back out, more will be revealed...And remember, the only reason the
Green Bay Packers are not in this final is becuase they used the run-up and wildcard games as training for NEXT years Superbow... :o
Quote from: Scots John on February 05, 2012, 04:14:34 PM
It is halftime and Madge the Maddonna is on stage crouching and crooning. Now what they SHOULD do is invite The American Youth Orchestra there to bash out some great movie themes and all American anthems for the half time show. Anyway, when all these ladies stop their bawdy antics and the guys are back out, more will be revealed...And remember, the only reason the Green Bay Packers are not in this final is becuase they used the run-up and wildcard games as training for NEXT years Superbow... :o
The NYGs won. They are giants right enough.
I didn't watch. Did anybody win?
Quote from: karlhenning on February 06, 2012, 03:46:25 AM
I didn't watch. Did anybody win?
The Yankees just edged the Red Sox. Wait... wrong sport.
Quote from: karlhenning on February 06, 2012, 03:46:25 AM
I didn't watch. Did anybody win?
You'll know soon enough, Karl. When the parade doesn't happen in Boston... :D
I strongly dislike both teams, but I dislike the Patriots more, so this outcome was acceptable (barely). Hard to get behind a team in my own team's division, of course. :-\
8)
D'you suppose, O Gurn, that I jinxed them by getting a cake with Go, Pats! in special icing on the top? . . .
Quote from: TheGSMoeller on January 09, 2012, 06:53:02 AM
The NY Football Giants look as if they're replaying their 2008 season and playing their best football during the playoffs...
Quoting myself from a month ago, and I won $30 for the G-Men win. Being a Jets fan, my second favorite team is whomever is playing the Pats (sorry, Karl) and NY was represented so I'm pleased.
Your grammatical delicacy is appreciated, Greg. You're right: you needed whoever there instead : )
Quote from: karlhenning on February 06, 2012, 08:15:49 AM
Your grammatical delicacy is appreciated, Greg. You're right: you needed whoever there instead : )
Krazy Karl :P ;D
Don't know if you're a Bo-Sox fan, but the upcoming season with Bobby V. as manager should be interesting.
Yesterday's game was very exciting. What it came down to was that the Patriots dropped passes while the Giants made catches.
Concerning the half-time show, I thought it was easily the best ever (I've seen all of them).
I know there's about 5 months or so to go before the Superbowl, but interesting on British television...
Last night Channel 4 carried Detroit at San Francisco, and tonight we have 'Monday Night Football' with Atlanta at Denver on...the BBC of all places! That IS a surprise. Thats a LOT of coverage of this sport within 24 hours for UK TV.
Anyway, bad news is my beloved Green Bay Packers lost to the 49ers last week, but came right back with a win over Chicago. Next, we will demolish the silly Seahawks, and in five months we will be at the Superbowl AGAIN. 0:) :D
Tonight we have New England at the Baltimore Ravens. If I didn't have a soft spot for the Packers, I would most definitely be a New England man. Go Patriots! :P
Well, I have just watched the Seattle Seahawks win a game they didn't really win at all, and I'm 'pissed' about it. In the very last second with the score 12 - 7 in favour of Green Bay, a twenty odd yard pass into the end-zone was intercepted by Green Bays Safety, Jennings...it was the last play of the game, and Green Bay had defended unto the last, and Green Bay won the game. But wait a minute! Here's Golden Tate on the floor of the endzone, rolling around with Jennings, taking the ball off him! Two 'replacement Officials' awarded Tate a touchdown, erroneously thinking it was he who caught the ball. It clearly wasn't, not even close.
The replays were consulted, and STILL the goal was given to the silly Seahawks. It was SHOCKING, a real warning for pundits like me who want to see replay technology in soccer...even when you have it, it's still not foolproof.
The Seahawks had no problem accepting a win that wasn't theirs. >:( >:( >:( >:(
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtYeeFpPPz0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtYeeFpPPz0)
I feel bad for the replacement refs, they are out of their element, the blame is on Goodell and the owners.
Quote from: Scots John on September 25, 2012, 05:04:56 PM
Well, I have just watched the Seattle Seahawks win a game they didn't really win at all, and I'm 'pissed' about it. In the very last second with the score 12 - 7 in favour of Green Bay, a twenty odd yard pass into the end-zone was intercepted by Green Bays Safety, Jennings...it was the last play of the game, and Green Bay had defended unto the last, and Green Bay won the game. But wait a minute! Here's Golden Tate on the floor of the endzone, rolling around with Jennings, taking the ball off him! Two 'replacement Officials' awarded Tate a touchdown, erroneously thinking it was he who caught the ball. It clearly wasn't, not even close.
The replays were consulted, and STILL the goal was given to the silly Seahawks. It was SHOCKING, a real warning for pundits like me who want to see replay technology in soccer...even when you have it, it's still not foolproof.
The Seahawks had no problem accepting a win that wasn't theirs. >:( >:( >:( >:(
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtYeeFpPPz0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtYeeFpPPz0)
John, I feel your pain, as I've been a
Green Bay Packers fan for over 15 years. As well as my local
Winnipeg Blue Bombers, (but we won't talk about them because they suck big time right now). :D
However.....Green Bay would not have lost that game had they not allowed 8 fricken sacks in the 1st half. How the bloody hell does that happen???? :-\
So yes.....the refs blew that call at the end of game, just saying it shouldn't even have been a matter of contention, for the way GB's offensive (yes, very offensive) line played in that 1st half.
Quote from: ChamberNut on September 25, 2012, 05:36:37 PM
Green Bay would not have lost that game had they not allowed 8 fricken sacks in the 1st half. How the bloody hell does that happen???? :-\
Aye, it was grim. That Clemons played us stupid. He is the new super sacker. Marshall Newhouse should be first on the Green Bay
exit list.
Tonight it's the Giants at Philadelphia on Channel 4 UK. I am tuned in. Tomorrow night (or 1am the following morning here), 'Monday Night Football' aired on the BBC, which I will also watch.
***sighs***
We Brits are pure spoiled for American Football these days.
Quote from: Scots John on September 30, 2012, 05:00:09 PM
Tonight it's the Giants at Philadelphia on Channel 4 UK. I am tuned in. Tomorrow night (or 1am the following morning here), 'Monday Night Football' aired on the BBC, which I will also watch.
***sighs***
We Brits are pure spoiled for American Football these days.
Too bad my team put up a big goose-egg today :(
(I'm a Jets fan, shhhh)
Please be aware - be VERY AWARE.
October is Breast Cancer AWARENESS month. Let's all be aware. Wear pink. If you wear pink, it means you are aware that breast cancer exists, and that by wearing pink, you are insuring that you are ridding everyone of breast cancer.
Football teams all wear pink. They are all aware. Aware of what breast cancer is.
Thank goodness, someone is aware.
Quote from: ChamberNut on October 30, 2012, 05:37:40 PM
Please be aware - be VERY AWARE.
October is Breast Cancer AWARENESS month. Let's all be aware. Wear pink. If you wear pink, it means you are aware that breast cancer exists, and that by wearing pink, you are insuring that you are ridding everyone of breast cancer.
Football teams all wear pink. They are all aware. Aware of what breast cancer is.
Thank goodness, someone is aware.
8)
For the past month every American Football team has incorporated pink in their outfits. It is most commendable. We know when we see huge and strong guys, who are not soft but playing hard fought football with visibly pink colours on them, that they're spreading an important message. The whole of professional American Football have done brilliantly this month to raise that awareness.
Quote from: Scots John on October 30, 2012, 05:45:41 PM
8)
For the past month every American Football team has incorporated pink in their outfits. It is most commendable. We know when we see huge and strong guys, who are not soft but playing hard fought football with visibly pink colours on them, that they're spreading an important message. The whole of professional American Football have done brilliantly this month to raise that awareness.
This is true, John. Since absolutely NO ONE on planet earth knew breast cancer existed before pro football teams started donning pink.
Quote from: ChamberNut on October 30, 2012, 05:50:42 PM
This is true, John. Since absolutely NO ONE on planet earth knew breast cancer existed before pro football teams started donning pink.
You seem pretty pissed about Breast Cancer awareness. I do not know why. Here in the UK it is a big issue, and is discussed and supported regularly. In fact, it was in the news again today. It would be pretty hard to find anyone here who didn't know of it - pink and pink ribbons can be found in unusual places, and many people carry the pink ribbon symbol on their lapels, etc. I would hope the USA would be similar, if not leading the way with this, but I don't know...
Why are you so angry about a perceived lack of Breast Cancer awareness, or am I misinterpreting your post(s)?
(http://students.cis.uab.edu/ijgeerts/breast%20cancer%20ribbon.jpg)
Quote from: Scots John on October 30, 2012, 06:20:42 PM
You seem pretty pissed about Breast Cancer awareness. I do not know why. Here in the UK it is a big issue, and is discussed and supported regularly. In fact, it was in the news again today. It would be pretty hard to find anyone here who didn't know of it - pink and pink ribbons can be found in unusual places, and many people carry the pink ribbon symbol on their lapels, etc. I would hope the USA would be similar, if not leading the way with this, but I don't know...
Why are you so angry about a perceived lack of Breast Cancer awareness, or am I misinterpreting your post(s)?
(http://students.cis.uab.edu/ijgeerts/breast%20cancer%20ribbon.jpg)
It is in jest. There is no perceived lack of Breast Cancer awareness. None. My mom and my aunt both had breast cancer, and survived.
I don't think there is anyone out there in the world who is not aware that Breast Cancer exists, AND that it is also made tremendous advancements in treatments over the last two decades ~ due to increased awareness and quartrillions of dollars in research funding.
Quote from: ChamberNut on October 30, 2012, 06:24:36 PM
It is in jest.
Ach! Hoots! And here was I hoping for a good argument on the matter. :P
QuoteMy mom and my aunt both had breast cancer, and survived.
Bless.
Unfortunately, with all its visual support of breast cancer, there have been reports over the years of the NFL keeps quite a bit of the profits made on sales of pink NFL gear. I looked online and found some conflicting arguments over how much they keep and how much they donate.
Quote from: TheGSMoeller on October 31, 2012, 03:06:26 AM
Unfortunately, with all its visual support of breast cancer, there have been reports over the years of the NFL keeps quite a bit of the profits made on sales of pink NFL gear. I looked online and found some conflicting arguments over how much they keep and how much they donate.
Oh hell, I didn't know that. They should not keep
ANY of it. Thats raising money for themselves and portioning some off to charity to allow them to keep doing it. Thats not good at all, I really didn't know they
KEPT some of the money they raised. American Football, The Green Bay Packers, and even Tom Brady can take a hike from my general entertainment draft pick, and I'll tune in to NASCAR instead if they're doing such things. The very thought is ripe with corruption. I'm away to have a look at those conflicting reports...
From Forbes:
...According to the NFL, "All money the NFL would normally receive from merchandise sales goes to support this program, either through direct funding to the American Cancer Society or covering the costs of A Crucial Catch." With respect to items sold on NFL Auction, 100 percent of the net proceeds of the items auctioned go directly to the American Cancer Society. A large number of the items auctioned are game-used items worn by players, coaches and cheerleaders...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/aliciajessop/2012/10/29/the-nfls-a-crucial-catch-campaign-raises-millions-for-the-american-cancer-society/ (http://www.forbes.com/sites/aliciajessop/2012/10/29/the-nfls-a-crucial-catch-campaign-raises-millions-for-the-american-cancer-society/)
I'll take it from Forbes.
Quote from: Scots John on October 31, 2012, 09:51:57 AM
From Forbes:
...According to the NFL, “All money the NFL would normally receive from merchandise sales goes to support this program, either through direct funding to the American Cancer Society or covering the costs of A Crucial Catch.” With respect to items sold on NFL Auction, 100 percent of the net proceeds of the items auctioned go directly to the American Cancer Society. A large number of the items auctioned are game-used items worn by players, coaches and cheerleaders...
http://www.forbes.com/sites/aliciajessop/2012/10/29/the-nfls-a-crucial-catch-campaign-raises-millions-for-the-american-cancer-society/ (http://www.forbes.com/sites/aliciajessop/2012/10/29/the-nfls-a-crucial-catch-campaign-raises-millions-for-the-american-cancer-society/)
I'll take it from Forbes.
The kicker there (haha) is 'normally receive' and 'net'. If they are just recovering their direct costs, for example, that would seem fine to me. But, if they have embedded any other costs not linked directly to the manufacture and sale of the said materials, they would not be donating what they should (in my opinion). The implication above is that they aren't adding any costs, but I know Forbes (the magazine), and frankly I don't trust them to understand the issues well enough. So, I can only go on good faith and hope they are doing the right thing. It is a worthy cause.
Foul play! Just five per cent of takings from NFL's pink kit for breast cancer campaign goes to charities
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2216671/Questions-NFLs-breast-cancer-pink-equipment-campaign-alleged-charities-cent-profits.html#ixzz2AvhXcNY2
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Here is just one of the articles that I've come across.
In 15 minutes, the Cowboys at the Falcons.
I have never liked the Cowboys. I am not a fan of Texan stuff. Come on the Falcons.
Quote from: Scots John on November 04, 2012, 04:14:05 PM
In 15 minutes, the Cowboys at the Falcons.
I have never liked the Cowboys. I am not a fan of Texan stuff. Come on the Falcons.
I've never liked the Cowgirls either, my brother and father are big fans. Having just moved to Atlanta I'll join you in saying, Come on Falcons!
The Falcons won 13 - 19. The first two quarters were a wee bit slow, but the whole game was a cracker. My favorites, THE GREEN BAY PACKERS have won two in a row, against the Jaguars and the Cardinals. Next game is against the Detroit Lions.
Superbowl here we come (again).
(http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1196549.1352066882!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_635/tom-crabtree.jpg)
Tonight (or this morning here in the UK) it's Monday Night Football (even though it's Tuesday morning) with the Philly Eagles against the New Orleans Saints. Given that the Eagles share a city with the great Philadelphia Orchestra, I support the Eagles for this one.
And so would Stokowski and Ormandy if they were still around.
(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Sport/Pix/pictures/2008/11/28/1227887915151/Philadelphia-Eagles-runni-001.jpg)
I had to comment on it. First Quarter, the Eagles are on 2nd and Goal. Yes, 2nd and goal, just a hop and a jump from the first touchdown. BUT they muck it up and an interception return of 99 yards gets New Orleans a touchdown instead. Amazing. You just never know what's going to happen in this game.
EDIT: The Eagles were beaten quite soundly 13 - 28. The way they played, I am surprised they have won a game at all this year.
Looks as if SF will be 6 for 6.
Quote from: DavidRoss on January 22, 2013, 11:39:43 AM
Looks as if SF will be 6 for 6.
Well, Denver and New England both underestimated.... :) Looks to me like talent v mojo.
If my missing friend John was here, he would undoubtedly have given the nod to SF, simply because they knocked off his beloved Packers..... :-\
8)
Well, as both of my favorite teams (the Patriots since I grew up in NH, and the Seahawks since I've lived in WA for 14 years now) have already made their playoff exits, I'm not terribly interested in who wins this year's game. I suppose I'll pull for the Ravens, since San Fran has already won five Super Bowls to Baltimore's one!
I'll be happy regardless of who wins (even though SF knocked off my beloved Packers)
The Harbaugh Bowl!
I might actually be interested if the Jaguars made it to the Superbowl, but it doesn't look like that will happen any time soon. ::)
J-E-T-S JETS! JETS! JETS!
Quote from: TheGSMoeller on January 22, 2013, 01:12:33 PM
J-E-T-S JETS! JETS! JETS!
Yep, they were great in '68, and mighty fine at the start of '69.
Quote from: DavidRoss on January 22, 2013, 01:14:53 PM
Yep, they were great in '68, and mighty fine at the start of '69.
Gotta stay loyal.
49ers
Have any city's MLB & NFL franchises won a "world title" in the same season before? Or will the Niners' win Sunday next be the first time?
Quote from: DavidRoss on January 25, 2013, 03:12:05 PM
Have any city's MLB & NFL franchises won a "world title" in the same season before? Or will the Niners' win Sunday next be the first time?
Looked it up, great question...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_major_sports_championship_seasons
Whilst a Webern oboe makes strange pathways into the delicacy of my consciousness, I have time to say that IT IS SUPERBOWL NIGHT! My beloved Green Bay Packers didn't get past the 49'ers to make it there, so I hope with all my feeble might that THE BALTIMORE RAVENS kick the 49'ers's 5 and 0 Superbowl record into the dustbowl, and utterly destroy them.
Come on the Ravens!
(https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-tuFunbDozis/AAAAAAAAAAI/AAAAAAAAAB0/62D3vDoJQjc/s250-c-k/photo.jpg)
Yes, one of these teams will be 'World Champions'. :laugh:
Quote from: ChamberNut on February 03, 2013, 09:38:47 AM
Yes, one of these teams will be 'World Champions'. :laugh:
I agree with the silliness of that. Don't know about these days, but the Baseball used to be called the World Series - but only American teams played in it! No wonder Baseball didn't catch on throughout the
World, although I understand it is big in Japan. We had an 'American Football' team here in Glasgow called the "Scottish Claymores" - they were a good, strong team in the European league, and I even went to see them play Dusseldorf's Rhinefire. But they went bust around 2004, and so did Rhinefire, and the whole thing went to pot. :(
Quote from: Scots John on February 03, 2013, 09:48:54 AM
I agree with the silliness of that. Don't know about these days, but the Baseball used to be called the World Series - but only American teams played in it! No wonder Baseball didn't catch on throughout the World, although I understand it is big in Japan. We had an 'American Football' team here in Glasgow called the "Scottish Claymores" - they were a good, strong team in the European league, and I even went to see them play Dusseldorf's Rhinefire. But they went bust around 2006, and so did Rhinefire, and the whole thing went to pot. :(
Yes John, in baseball, it is still called the 'World Series'.
Is the NFL Europe not operational anymore?
One silly thing they really need to get rid of in the NFL. Having Buffalo Bills give up one home game every year to play in Toronto. Utter nonsense. I hope they charge $50K per ticket to each fan in Toronto, and reimburse Buffalo season ticket holders.
There are already the perfect amount of teams in the NFL - 32
There will not be more, and if they do, they will go to Los Angeles first, and they should.
Toronto, wake up you morons!!
YOU WILL NEVER EVER HAVE AN NFL FRANCHISE!! Go support your Toronto Argonauts instead, for God's sake! >:D
London could get a team, they sell out every time they play a game there and Goodall has mentioned interest in it.
Regarding the Super Bowl, I have decided to spend a year away from betting, fantasy football, etc... so I'm not saying who will win, all I know is that my NYJets will not be losing today.
Quote from: Scots John on February 03, 2013, 09:29:43 AM
Whilst a Webern oboe makes strange pathways into the delicacy of my consciousness, I have time to say that IT IS SUPERBOWL NIGHT! My beloved Green Bay Packers didn't get past the 49'ers to make it there, so I hope with all my feeble might that THE BALTIMORE RAVENS kick the 49'ers's 5 and 0 Superbowl record into the dustbowl, and utterly destroy them.
Come on the Ravens!
Sorry, John, but it seems you're due for another disappointment.
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 03, 2013, 12:31:46 PM
Sorry, John, but it seems you're due for another disappointment.
I know David, I'm clutching at straws since
THE GREEN BAY PACKERS got beat. :o But maybe, just maybe...
This is Mike Carlson, and American fellow who is the face of NFL in the UK, our resident expert! He is a top man, insightful, and I wondered if he is well known or not in the USA.
(http://1amsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/carlson.jpg)
Our Mike
Quote from: Scots John on February 03, 2013, 03:07:56 PM
This is Mike Carlson, and American fellow who is the face of NFL in the UK, our resident expert! He is a top man, insightful, and I wondered if he is well known or not in the USA.
(http://1amsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/carlson.jpg)
Our Mike
Nope.
Quote from: mc ukrneal on February 03, 2013, 03:13:10 PM
Nope.
Looks like the UK got lucky then. He is good company for anything NFL on UK television. There is another guy called Willie McGinest who is a former New England Patriots linebacker and three-time Super Bowl champion who is also sitting in. It looks like
THE RAVENS are on the way!!
EDIT: I should add that while it is on BBC with it's own presenters in the intervals, the coverage comes from CBS America.
The first half is over, 21 - 6 to the Ravens. :D ;) ;D ;) ;) :D :) ;D :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:, etc...
I am NOT watching the half-time show though. Such things are usually bloody awful. ???
I will listen to some Copland instead, beginning with my favorite piece by him, "Quiet City." 0:)
Well, it looks like the home team is kickin' it. Like I said, Can the fans handle success?
Quote from: Scots John on February 03, 2013, 03:07:56 PM
This is Mike Carlson, and American fellow who is the face of NFL in the UK, our resident expert! He is a top man, insightful, and I wondered if he is well known or not in the USA.
(http://1amsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/carlson.jpg)
Our Mike
No, and I am enough of a fan (since 1958) to recognize most of them. However, Willie McGinest is
very familiar, he played for a long time at a high level.
Interesting game so far. As I half expected, Flacco's arm at a distance is the difference. That guy can flat throw a ball! :o
8)
Jacoby Jones. Wow. 109 Yards, and the second half has only started. Frisco are being HUMPED. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
:'(
Now half the lights have failed, and the game is suspended for a wee while. The BBC feed must also have been affected, because now we have the CBS coverage, what you're watching on CBS over there, which I must say looks pretty awesome. These are guys who know what they are talking about, they're hyped, and their set is much, much better! Because BBC don't do adverts, we get short snippets of "Super Bowl Memories", giving brief rundowns of past victories.
It is a bad thing to happen, I sincerely hope the Ravens don't lose their focus.
Does anyone remember John Riggins who played for the Washington Redskins in the early 80's. He was an awesome player, I remember him to this day!
Quote from: Scots John on February 03, 2013, 04:52:58 PM
:'(
Now half the lights have failed, and the game is suspended for a wee while. The BBC feed must also have been affected, because now we have the CBS coverage, what you're watching on CBS over there, which I must say looks pretty awesome. These are guys who know what they are talking about, they're hyped, and their set is much, much better! Because BBC don't do adverts, we get short snippets of "Super Bowl Memories", giving brief rundowns of past victories.
It is a bad thing to happen, I sincerely hope the Ravens don't lose their focus.
Does anyone remember John Riggins who played for the Washington Redskins in the early 80's. He was an awesome player, I remember him to this day!
Oh yes, he was our (Dallas Cowboys) archenemy. Even great players on teams you don't like must be acknowledged as great players, I'm afraid. Tackling Riggins must have been a real load! :)
8)
Quote from: Scots John on February 03, 2013, 09:48:54 AM
I agree with the silliness of that. Don't know about these days, but the Baseball used to be called the World Series - but only American teams played in it! No wonder Baseball didn't catch on throughout the World, although I understand it is big in Japan. We had an 'American Football' team here in Glasgow called the "Scottish Claymores" - they were a good, strong team in the European league, and I even went to see them play Dusseldorf's Rhinefire. But they went bust around 2004, and so did Rhinefire, and the whole thing went to pot. :(
Not this nonsense again. Saying only "American" teams play in the World Series is wrong. Look at the rosters. The best players in the world come to play in the US. You got Vnezuela, Japan, Taiwan, Cuba, Korea, and more. Also, when the World Series started, The US was the only country that had a major league. That's not true anymore, but the best teams are in MLB. Win there, and you're the best.
:)
Another late night...last night I stayed up to the very wee hours to watch UFC fighting from Vegas, which I also am a fan of. Now this. Damn. If we got coverage of the Indy car series like we used to, I'd be up watching that too.
Looks like the Ravens are sewing this up. ;D
Quote from: The Six on February 03, 2013, 05:21:46 PM
Not this nonsense again. Saying only "American" teams play in the World Series is wrong. Look at the rosters. The best players in the world come to play in the US. You got Vnezuela, Japan, Taiwan, Cuba, Korea, and more. Also, when the World Series started, The US was the only country that had a major league. That's not true anymore, but the best teams are in MLB. Win there, and you're the best.
Yes - this nonsense again. Tell me a TEAM from Korea who play in the 'World' Series of the MLB. It is
not a World Series. It is an American Series with other Nationals playing in it. It is a MLB series, not a World series. The best players from other countries may play in American MLB, but there is no evidence of it being a
World Series. I don't see the Detroit Tigers nipping down to play the Caracas Lions, or the Yankees going over to Japan to take on the Yokohama Bay Stars, or vice versa. It is not by any stretch of the imagination a "World Series".
And now the 49ers are powering back again. :'(
Damn 49ers. Who switched the lights out and messed things up for the Ravens? Only 10 minutes to go and the 49ers are back in it big-time. :'( :'(
Baltimore 34 - SF 29 Only 5 minutes to go, but the ball is in SF possession for the next play. Damned exciting stuff.
Two minute Warning and them damn Francisco types look like they are going to do it. What a great game this is, thoroughly enjoyable. 8)
THE RAVENS DID IT!!!!! :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :P :P :P :P :P :P :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
???
What a great game. No matter who won that, it came right down to the final seconds, and it was only when 4 seconds were left on the clock that I was comfortable the Ravens had done the job. Great stuff. However, if the Packers had beat the 49ers and made it to the Super Bowl, it would be a different story, the Packers would have had the game won by the end of the third quarter. :P
Yeah Baby, etc, this sort of thing...
Quote from: Scots John on February 03, 2013, 06:48:23 PM
THE RAVENS DID IT!!!!! :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :P :P :P :P :P :P :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
???
What a great game. No matter who won that, it came right down to the final seconds, and it was only when 4 seconds were left on the clock that I was comfortable the Ravens had done the job. Great stuff. However, if the Packers had beat the 49ers and made it to the Super Bowl, it would be a different story, the Packers would have had the game won by the end of the third quarter. :P
Yeah Baby, etc, this sort of thing...
Yup, great game, one of the best. When I have no dog in the fight, then 'down to the wire' is all I ask. This one did nicely! :)
8)
(http://gregscottmoeller.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/mr-moeller-thegsmoeller-on-twitter.png?w=500&h=94)
Changed my mind and made a prediction, correct winner, and close on score. It was a great game. Will it be known as the "Lights Out Super Bowl"?
I don't watch sports at all, but I was proud that Baltimore beat San Francisco. I always hated the 49ers. I don't know why, but they just always seemed like a pretty arrogant team.
The last win-or-lose situation for the 49ers with the overthrown pass and the guy right there, just short of catching it... priceless.
Quote from: Greg on February 03, 2013, 07:06:45 PM
The last win-or-lose situation for the 49ers with the overthrown pass and the guy right there, just short of catching it... priceless.
A pass I'm sure they'll think about on the plane ride home. :)
Quote from: Greg on February 03, 2013, 07:06:45 PM
The last win-or-lose situation for the 49ers with the overthrown pass and the guy right there, just short of catching it... priceless.
Of course, on TV in SF, you will see over and over the Montana to Clark pass 100 times more often than this missed one.
Quote from: Scots John on February 03, 2013, 05:40:11 PM
Yes - this nonsense again. Tell me a TEAM from Korea who play in the 'World' Series of the MLB. It is not a World Series. It is an American Series with other Nationals playing in it. It is a MLB series, not a World series. The best players from other countries may play in American MLB, but there is no evidence of it being a World Series. I don't see the Detroit Tigers nipping down to play the Caracas Lions, or the Yankees going over to Japan to take on the Yokohama Bay Stars, or vice versa. It is not by any stretch of the imagination a "World Series".
Sorry, you don't know what you're talking about. The evidence that it's a World Series is that it's the highest level of play in the sport. There's a reason the best Latin American leagues play in the winter. It's so their MLB players can come home and continue to play. In virtually every matchup of MLB players vs. Japanese teams, the Japanese teams were crushed. It's not America vs. the World. The best Caracas Lions players are in MLB.
And, of course, there's an MLB team in Canada, too.
Quote from: The Six on February 04, 2013, 06:41:00 AM
Sorry, you don't know what you're talking about. The evidence that it's a World Series is that it's the highest level of play in the sport. There's a reason the best Latin American leagues play in the winter. It's so their MLB players can come home and continue to play. In virtually every matchup of MLB players vs. Japanese teams, the Japanese teams were crushed. It's not America vs. the World. The best Caracas Lions players are in MLB.
And, of course, there's an MLB team in Canada, too.
The best players playing in it, and it being the best leagues does not make it a World Series. In sports where the US does not excel in, no one calls their domestic league competition (which may be the undisputed best in the world) as The World Championship. No one. Not in any sport or non-sport competition.
One of the main reasons I lost interest in the NFL years ago was because all too many games were being decided by poor officiating. The problem has been widely recognized for a long time, yet despite all of the technology available to remedy the problem the NFL has never dealt with it seriously.
During yesterday's game, I was out of my seat on 2nd and goal during the Niner's final drive when the defender came over Crabtree while the ball was in the air and there was no flag. But I could only shake my head in disbelief when there was no flag after Crabtree was blatantly held in the end zone on 4th and goal. The defender had both arms around him and a handful of his jersey, and still Crabtree was able to push off get within 2 feet of a perfectly thrown and very catchable ball.
The right call was pass interference in the end zone. There was nothing remotely questionable about what took place on the field. The penalty would have been first down at the one yard line, and SF would almost certainly have scored, putting them ahead by two after the PAT.
Would that have decided the game? I doubt it, because SF then would have had to prevent a Ravens field goal to win it. With almost 2 minutes left on the clock, Baltimore would probably have been able to get downfield make the FG with no time left on the clock.
That would have been a clean win and no one could say that the Ravens wouldn't have deserved it. But that's not what happened and so this game will be memorable only for the bad officiating that decided the outcome in the W/L column.
Of related interest is this article from the week before about officials unhappy with irregularities in the NFL's Super Bowl official selection process: http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nfl--officials-question-nfl-s-process-for-selecting-super-bowl-referee-145832403.html (http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nfl--officials-question-nfl-s-process-for-selecting-super-bowl-referee-145832403.html)
Guys, you do realize the name 'World Series' was adopted in 1903?! At the time, there were just 16 teams, covering only a small portion of the country. At this point, I don;t see the name being dropped, but don't read too much into it either.
What I don;t like is this bi-yearly tournament that is intended to be a competition to crown a national team champion. First, not all players take part (lots of 'best' players sit). Second, the timing is all wrong (before the season - as long as it is before the season, I don't see this really working from a US point of view). Related to that, who wants to see a pitcher go three innings and then have to call it a day? Third, US doesn't take it seriously. Fourth (again, in the US), who cares? No cares if you win that (in the US) - it only matters if you win the World Series. I don't have good solutions to some of these issues, but until someone is honest about it, I think it will take a long time to catch on (if it ever does).
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 04, 2013, 07:49:40 AM
One of the main reasons I lost interest in the NFL years ago was because all too many games were being decided by poor officiating. The problem has been widely recognized for a long time, yet despite all of the technology available to remedy the problem the NFL has never dealt with it seriously.
During yesterday's game, I was out of my seat on 2nd and goal during the Niner's final drive when the defender came over Crabtree while the ball was in the air and there was no flag. But I could only shake my head in disbelief when there was no flag after Crabtree was blatantly held in the end zone on 4th and goal. The defender had both arms around him and a handful of his jersey, and still Crabtree was able to push off get within 2 feet of a perfectly thrown and very catchable ball.
The right call was pass interference in the end zone. There was nothing remotely questionable about what took place on the field. The penalty would have been first down at the one yard line, and SF would almost certainly have scored, putting them ahead by two after the PAT.
Honestly, I didn't watch the game, but I saw the repeats of that play. No pass interference for sure, in my opinion, but possibly holding. Having said that, they were both pushing and shoving at each other the whole route, so again I don't really see this as a missed call myself.
I don;t think the ball was catchable either, but that is not really relevant in my opinion.
QuoteGuys, you do realize the name 'World Series' was adopted in 1903?! At the time, there were just 16 teams, covering only a small portion of the country. At this point, I don;t see the name being dropped, but don't read too much into it either.
Exactly. For decades MLB was the only pro league in the world of any merit. It's not about semantics of the term as much as it is the best way to determine the best in the world.
The World Baseball Classic only exists because the sport was dropped from the Olympics.
QuoteOne of the main reasons I lost interest in the NFL years ago was because all too many games were being decided by poor officiating. The problem has been widely recognized for a long time, yet despite all of the technology available to remedy the problem the NFL has never dealt with it seriously.
There's really no way to fix it. The game moves too fast, and too many calls are judgment calls. The rules of the NFL are so convoluted and complicated it's a wonder any official can ever get a call right; at times it seems like they're making rules up (tuck rule).
It's a common thing for refs to swallow their whistles on big plays at the end. The Niners should have ran the ball, anyway.
Quote from: mc ukrneal on February 04, 2013, 08:01:41 AM
Honestly, I didn't watch the game, but I saw the repeats of that play. No pass interference for sure, in my opinion, but possibly holding. Having said that, they were both pushing and shoving at each other the whole route, so again I don't really see this as a missed call myself.
I don;t think the ball was catchable either, but that is not really relevant in my opinion.
Apparently you didn't see replays that clearly showed the offense, but only ones that made it appear questionable. See, for instance:
http://www.youtube.com/v/TinDQSUww5U
And if you believe the "catchability" of the ball is not relevant, then you don't understand the rules. See http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/passinterference (http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/passinterference)
Didn't get to watch it this morning (my time 0730) so I will have to watch the replay, available Wednesday morning or Friday morning, and I mean early early morning.
I'm a big NFL fan and I was rooting for SF. However, the Ravens were the best team yesterday in one of the most exciting championship games I've ever seen.
A few observations:
1. SF's first offensive series was pathetic and set the tone for the entire first half: three and out(actually four and out). The penalty against SF on its first down was inexcusable, and running the ball on third down was nothing more than playing not to lose.
2. The "lights-out" period of more than a half-hour was a god-send for SF. Without it, they would have fallen apart.
3. The crucial part of the game was when SF had four chances to score toward the end. They simply didn't get it done, and I don't blame the officials. Crabtree was grabbing as well, and pass was overthrown anyways. Whether or not the pass was catchable certainly factors into making a decent call.
4. Flacco deserved MVP. I've never thought of him as being an elite quarterback, but I sure do now.
5. The half-time show, as usual, sucked. I don't know where Beyonce gets her music, but even my wife found it hard to take.
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 04, 2013, 08:24:36 AM
Apparently you didn't see replays that clearly showed the offense, but only ones that made it appear questionable. See, for instance:
http://www.youtube.com/v/TinDQSUww5U
And if you believe the "catchability" of the ball is not relevant, then you don't understand the rules. See http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/passinterference (http://www.nfl.com/rulebook/passinterference)
Sorry - which one do you think was violated?
Quote
Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to:
(a) Contact by a defender who is not playing the ball and such contact restricts the receiver's opportunity to make the catch.
(b) Playing through the back of a receiver in an attempt to make a play on the ball.
(c) Grabbing a receiver's arm(s) in such a manner that restricts his opportunity to catch a pass.
(d) Extending an arm across the body of a receiver thus restricting his ability to catch a pass, regardless of whether the defender is playing the ball.
(e) Cutting off the path of a receiver by making contact with him without playing the ball.
(f) Hooking a receiver in an attempt to get to the ball in such a manner that it causes the receiver's body to turn prior to the ball arriving.
Quote from: The Six on February 04, 2013, 06:41:00 AM
Sorry, you don't know what you're talking about. The evidence that it's a World Series is that it's the highest level of play in the sport. There's a reason the best Latin American leagues play in the winter. It's so their MLB players can come home and continue to play. In virtually every matchup of MLB players vs. Japanese teams, the Japanese teams were crushed. It's not America vs. the World. The best Caracas Lions players are in MLB.
And, of course, there's an MLB team in Canada, too.
Honestly. It is the most arrogant, nonsensical thing to call the MLB series the "World Series." The argument for it is so poor. So what if the best Baseball in the World is played in Americas MLB? So what if other leagues play in different seasons so their top players can play in the American MLB? It is such a preposterous idea! It is an AMERICAN league, nothing to do with the rest of the World. Generally, 'World' in sport means the countries of planet Earth - for example, in soccer, teams from different countries of THE WORLD play for THE WORLD CUP. That is because they are teams made up from different countries of THE WORLD.
Quote
It's not America vs. the World.
Thats my argument exactly. If it WAS America vs. the World, you then WOULD most certainly have a World series in your hands...But no, it's one part of America v another part of America. New York v Detroit. Chicago v Denver. This kind of thing. Nowhere in your MLB do you find the USA v JAPAN or SPAIN v EGYPT or whatever. It is not a World series. It is nonsensical to call it a World series. There are no WORLD CHALLENGES involved. For sure it is the home of Baseball and America would no doubt win against any country of the World, and for sheer spectacle and playing at the highest level, MLB in America cannot be beaten. It simply cannot be beaten (at this time). If you invite countries of the World to come and play your select best players, Team USA or whatever, THEN by all the Gods you WOULD have a WORLD SERIES. But as it is, it is an American series with multi-nationals playing in it.
I'm fed up with this. I have better things to argue about. :blank:
Quote from: sanantonio on February 04, 2013, 10:49:54 AM
You did not quote the relevant section on if pass catachability:
Actions that do not constitute pass interference include but are not limited to:
(a) Incidental contact by a defender’s hands, arms, or body when both players are competing for the ball, or neither player is looking for the ball. If there is any question whether contact is incidental, the ruling shall be no interference.
(b) Inadvertent tangling of feet when both players are playing the ball or neither player is playing the ball.
(c) Contact that would normally be considered pass interference, but the pass is clearly uncatchable by the involved players.
Oh, well that just strenghtens my case I think. But I must say, I don't like the rule. I mean, you can say that about any pass that wasn't touched and it is hard to contradict with any surety. And hard to call with any consistency. That would tick me off too.
Quote from: Scots John on February 04, 2013, 10:46:09 AMThe argument for it is so poor. So what if the best Baseball in the World is played in Americas MLB?
You're dismissing this rather easily.
QuoteIt is an AMERICAN league, nothing to do with the rest of the World.
Yes, it has so little to do with the rest of the world, all the best players leave their homelands to go play there! ::)
Quotefor example, in soccer, teams from different countries of THE WORLD play for THE WORLD CUP.
THOSE ARE TEAMS COMPOSED OF PLAYERS EXCLUSIVELY FROM THOSE COUNTRIES. MLB HAS PLAYERS FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD. (since you like using CAPS)
You're so caught up in MLB being in the US (and Canada, which you may or may not have noticed by now). The US is simply a location. New York vs. Chicago is not a team of New Yorkers vs. Chicagoans. I think you just want to ride this "American arrogance" canard, so you look for something to be offended about.
Quote from: The Six on February 04, 2013, 11:40:59 AM
THOSE ARE TEAMS COMPOSED OF PLAYERS EXCLUSIVELY FROM THOSE COUNTRIES. MLB HAS PLAYERS FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD. (since you like using CAPS)
You're so caught up in MLB being in the US (and Canada, which you may or may not have noticed by now). The US is simply a location. New York vs. Chicago is not a team of New Yorkers vs. Chicagoans. I think you just want to ride this "American arrogance" canard, so you look for something to be offended about.
Yes, good point. I just checked the roster of the Boston Red Sox for this upcoming season, and of the 34 players listed, 12 (more than 1/3) are from countries other than the U.S.: Dominican Republic (4). Venezuela (2), Japan (2), Cuba, Mexico, Canada and the Netherlands.
No one on the roster is originally from anywhere near Boston, with the possible exception of a player from the neighboring state of Connecticut.
I think the miserable result of the Daisuke Matsuzaka signing goes to show how superior MLB is to baseball in Japan.
Quote from: Scots John on February 04, 2013, 10:46:09 AM
Honestly. It is the most arrogant, nonsensical thing to call the MLB series the "World Series." The argument for it is so poor. So what if the best Baseball in the World is played in Americas MLB? So what if other leagues play in different seasons so their top players can play in the American MLB? It is such a preposterous idea! It is an AMERICAN league, nothing to do with the rest of the World. Generally, 'World' in sport means the countries of planet Earth - for example, in soccer, teams from different countries of THE WORLD play for THE WORLD CUP. That is because they are teams made up from different countries of THE WORLD.
You're so disrespectful, bitching about the World Series when the Superbowl is the appropriate topic of the day. :D
Ach! :blank: I will return to this thread later in the year when the American Football starts up again.
A New Yorker's view of the world:
(http://www.samefacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/new-york-center-of-the-universe-new-yorker-cover-steinberg1.jpg)
Quote from: DavidRoss on February 04, 2013, 02:15:34 PM
A New Yorker's view of the world:
(http://www.samefacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/new-york-center-of-the-universe-new-yorker-cover-steinberg1.jpg)
Awesome! And pretty true!
Green Bay Packers 44 - Minnesota Vikings 31
Yep. It's that time of year again. Joined the game when the Vikings were 0 - 7 up in the first quarter. Stayed with it until the so-called Vikings got humped. :)
What I don't like about that New Yorker cartoon is it contains too much extraneous detail. The guy is just showing off. Do we really need to know about Utah*as if somebody would go there on purpose?
But the real question is why do there have to be so many of these places? What are they for? Does Nebraska really have to have a big thing like a mountain sticking out of it? It's unnecessary and extravagant. There, I said it! I'm a tolerant person but there are limits.
* Besides which the speakers were made in Indiana. (http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/Smileys/classic/cheesy.gif)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v388/pedrohead/utah1.jpg)
It's not the Superbowl, but this is the only thread I can find on the subject of football in the NFL.
I have been off the mark with NFL Football for some years, so it will be good to return...(a bit like GMG for me also :( ) Channel 5 in the UK has picked up on live Monday Night Football, and tonight (well, 1am Tuesday) we get the Las Vegas Raiders v Los Angeles Chargers. At some point I'll get to see the good old Green Bay Packers giving it good to anyone who gets in their way! (Aye, the Bengals are next to get sent 'packing'.) ??? :D I do not understand why some of the NFL teams change their names. A while back, it was the LA Raiders, but now they're the Chargers? And Las Vegas I don't remember being in the NFL? Clearly I am well out the loop, may take some reviews to catch up... 0:)
Quote from: John Copeland on October 04, 2021, 09:54:43 AM
It's not the Superbowl, but this is the only thread I can find on the subject of football in the NFL.
I have been off the mark with NFL Football for some years, so it will be good to return...(a bit like GMG for me also :( ) Channel 5 in the UK has picked up on live Monday Night Football, and tonight (well, 1am Tuesday) we get the Las Vegas Raiders v Los Angeles Chargers. At some point I'll get to see the good old Green Bay Packers giving it good to anyone who gets in their way! (Aye, the Bengals are next to get sent 'packing'.) ??? :D I do not understand why some of the NFL teams change their names. A while back, it was the LA Raiders, but now they're the Chargers? And Las Vegas I don't remember being in the NFL? Clearly I am well out the loop, may take some reviews to catch up... 0:)
I think you're looking at the team names from the wrong direction. The teams are franchises known by their last name. The City name is just where they play now. So it isn't that the LA Raiders have become the LA Chargers. It's the San Diego Chargers who have become the LA Chargers. The LA Raiders have become the Las Vegas Raiders. See also St Louis Cardinals becoming the Arizona Cardinals, or for that matter the LA Rams becoming the St. Louis Rams becoming the LA Rams again. The only exception that I know of is Washington, whose name has been canceled!
Quote from: Sef on October 04, 2021, 02:21:00 PM
I think you're looking at the team names from the wrong direction. The teams are franchises known by their last name. The City name is just where they play now. So it isn't that the LA Raiders have become the LA Chargers. It's the San Diego Chargers who have become the LA Chargers. The LA Raiders have become the Las Vegas Raiders. See also St Louis Cardinals becoming the Arizona Cardinals, or for that matter the LA Rams becoming the St. Louis Rams becoming the LA Rams again. The only exception that I know of is Washington, whose name has been canceled!
Thanks for that. :) I hope the Green Bay Packers always remain the Packers. They're my team only because they were the first team I ever watched on UK TV in 1983...don't know who they were playing, but I always remembered the Green Bay Packers! Well, Channel 5 started ok with it, gave the build up...then suddenly replaced it with a Travel programme just as the game was about to start! No explanation was given. :'(
Quote from: John Copeland on October 05, 2021, 04:39:20 AM
Thanks for that. :) I hope the Green Bay Packers always remain the Packers. They're my team only because they were the first team I ever watched on UK TV in 1983...don't know who they were playing, but I always remembered the Green Bay Packers! Well, Channel 5 started ok with it, gave the build up...then suddenly replaced it with a Travel programme just as the game was about to start! No explanation was given. :'(
The name change for the "Washington Football Team" (as they are now temporarily called) had to do with their previous inappropriate team name of "Washington Redskins". Many U.S. sports teams have a Native American theme (e.g. Atlanta Braves), but none so blatantly objectionable as
Redskins. The Cleveland Indians baseball team is also changing its name.
Quote from: John Copeland on October 05, 2021, 04:39:20 AM
Thanks for that. :) I hope the Green Bay Packers always remain the Packers. They're my team only because they were the first team I ever watched on UK TV in 1983...don't know who they were playing, but I always remembered the Green Bay Packers! Well, Channel 5 started ok with it, gave the build up...then suddenly replaced it with a Travel programme just as the game was about to start! No explanation was given. :'(
First game I saw was the Superbowl between Miami and 49ers in Jan 1985, but remember the following superbowl better. Being from England, knowing no better, and rooting for the underdog I wasn't a big fan of Chicago. Funny, because I ended up moving there and of course since found out that the team back in 1985/6 was just just about the only good team they've ever had. Still, I have to support my local team so the Packers get a big thumbs down from me!