All of these discussions start with some stupid throwaway reference and then the next comment is 500 words beginning with, "Actually, that's a common misconception."

I kinda miss Grossman. He sucked, but he was entertaining in how often he'd lock on to the go or post route and throw to that receiver no matter what was unfolding in front of him. It's the way I used to play Tecmo Bowl.

Lee needed to destroy the Union army if he and the South ever hoped to win the war. McClellan was simply never going to let him do that while he was in charge of the main army.

REally? You are really going to single out WWII as somehow being unique in this regard? If anything this statement could follow the same theme as the linked article's theme. Obscure music, politics, movies, Billy Beane, Mets, Red Sox, so on and so on. You know I don't running around looking for every single obscure music threads so that I can bash the people involved.

to read historians do half-assed analysis of baseball

Of course that was about WWI, not WWII, and was therefore a much cooler conversation.

Lee needed to destroy the Union army if he and the South ever hoped to win the war. McClellan was simply never going to let him do that while he was in charge of the main army.

The only thing more entertaining than reading baseball experts do half-assed analysis of history would be to read historians do half-assed analysis of baseball.

McClellan = John Jellicoe. Discuss.

I'm a half-assed historian doing half-assed analysis of baseball...does that count for anything?

pounding on Mrs. Brady's vase

It sounded to me like Aikman wanted to jump on him but realized that it wasn't very professional. He submitted his criticism and let it go. You shouldn't, IMHO, continue to rag on guys anymore than you should praise every little thing. Critique the play and move on. I think Aikman is really good in the booth - enough so that he makes Buck almost tolerable. I wonder how Buck would fare in MLB if he had a really good partner.


As for the play, yes, Favre has been making that play for decades but I think a lot of it was his leg. I think he simply didn't want to run 10 more yards and get smacked, though if he does the Vikes are likely in the Super Bowl.

REally? You are really going to single out WWII as somehow being unique in this regard? If anything this statement could follow the same theme as the linked article's theme. Obscure music, politics, movies, Billy Beane, Mets, Red Sox, so on and so on.

One complete ass.

Proposed NFL postseason OT rule:

First Overtime: Full 15-minute OT -- no sudden death
Second Overtime: First team to lead by 6 or team leading after 15 minutes.
Third Overtime & Beyond: Sudden Death

McClellan = John Jellicoe. Discuss.


I was actually thinking the same thing. It makes for pretty boring warfare, and Jutland really demonstrated some serious flaws in the British Navy, but you can't really argue with the overall strategy.

This plan would definitely be supported by whichever team is scheduled to play the winner the following week.

It's the way I used to play Tecmo Bowl.

I had no idea Jubal Early (from Firefly) was named after a real person. This thread got very confusing for a minute

If a pro defense can't stop a team on its first drive, they deserve to lose.

Lee had a fantastic opportunity to destroy the Army of the Potomac during the Seven Days' Battles, but his divisions could never properly coordinate their attacks.

WWII threads seem unique to me in the neverending quest to prove that you have read more books, or have a more nuanced appreciation for historical complexities, or whatever.

Except when you've got two teams with great offenses playing great that day and meh defenses, you've essentially turned overtime into "whoever wins the coin toss wins the game".

Best idea I've heard is the silent auction sudden death.

I think most people vastly overestimate the probability of destroying any decent sized Civil War force.

What I like about Ben Bernanke is that he's willing to lay back and let market forces have their way, even during a multi-trillion dollar implosion. I really respect that.

After last night, I was more convinced that Ben Roethlisberger is Brett Favre's long-lost love child. So many of those decisions were ones that Roethlisberger has made in big games at important times. #28 had it right... when guys like Favre and Roethlisberger actually convert on their insane decisions they look like geniuses and Hall-of-Famers... when they don't, you get what happened last night. They live so close to the edge on almost every down that it's not surprising that they fall off so often.

This. A thousand times this. Every thread like this always eventually becomes everybody "correcting" each other, in an attempt to make themselves seem like more of an authority than the other person.

virtually all "conservative" US economists advocate/advocated just that.

Yeah, because the only problem with the NFL is that the games aren't long enough. Sheesh.

as somebody once said: "the art in restaurants compares favorably to the food in museums"

I was actually thinking the same thing. It makes for pretty boring warfare, and Jutland really demonstrated some serious flaws in the British Navy, but you can't really argue with the overall strategy.

All I've gotten from this thread is that Brett Favre was the president of the CSA.

So...Jubal Early vs. Jimmy Carter for History's Greatest Monster?

I guess we can throw Neville in there, too.

I always start them on a tivo delay

Every thread like this always eventually becomes everybody "correcting" each other, in an attempt to make themselves seem like more of an authority than the other person.

Making it a game of first team to six would solve all of the problems in one stroke.

Reality is often icky. People want bold decisive action. They don't want stalemates and they don't like results that they can't quickly see and comprehend.

I was actually thinking the same thing. It makes for pretty boring warfare, and Jutland really demonstrated some serious flaws in the British Navy, but you can't really argue with the overall strategy.

All I've gotten from this thread is that Brett Favre was the president of the CSA.

My favorite football rule change that will never happen is eliminating the incomplete pass - the ball is live until either downed or out-of-bounds.

Also, defensive backs should be allowed to carry and use those medieval spiked-ball-on-a-stick thingies.

Hold on. Football without feet? To tell the truth, football would be more interesting if there were no specialist kickers and you had to rely on Jeremy Shockey or Pierre Garcon to kink the gamewinner. Shrink the rosters back to 33. Also, bring back the leather helmet. That might reduce the concussions and the shorter rosters will make for less of a role for the behemoths.

Also, defensive backs should be allowed to carry and use those medieval spiked-ball-on-a-stick thingies.

Also, defensive backs should be allowed to carry and use those medieval spiked-ball-on-a-stick thingies.

Each team gets one blind man armed with a tranquilizer gun.

You basically have to say I'll kill them all and salt their earth to win this war. How many people are truly capable of doing that?

That’s one of the things I most admire about him.” Strikeouts are bad, but the best hitters don't go to the plate with the idea that they absolutely will not strike out.

For OT, have the home team choose where the opening kickoff will be from. Then have the away team choose whether to kick or receive.

I'm unable to see anything positive about the NFL's 45 second clock.

Bernard Montgomery