User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out! |
Page rendered in 0.5970 seconds
54 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
In case anyone hasn't seen the highlight, the field goal was only good by a few inches. 5 more yards and it's definitely a miss.
Yes, but I intentionally left that part out because the outcome of the kick is irrelevant in regards to the process. If he had missed it still would have been a stupid decision. The ball could have been on the 3 yard line and it is still a stupid decision. Let them get the penalty, then call timeout if icing the kicker is so important to you.
Norv is a horrible head coach but Lovie's fake punt call was insane.
Lovie is dumb, but Norv Turner goes to IQ 0 the second he puts on the head coach's headset. He's a good offensive coordinator - why can't the NFL just leave it at that? I kind of feel bad for Chargers fans going from Schottenheimer (another guy whose brain went on freeze the moment the playoffs began) to Turner.
And Shanahan, to me, is pretty much the Tony La Russa of the NFL. They even look a little alike.
Not quite. McNabb is famously lazy and if you noticed, he ballooned up, consistently, during his career, he quickly became lead footed and slow. Steve Young set the NFL rushing mark for a QB at age 37 or 39. Too lazy to check.
People here in SD are 100% enraged at/fed up with Turner.
I assume the obvious parallels between the famous 1962 Thanksgiving game (the first ever, I believe) between undefeated Green Bay and a tough Detroit Lions team led by Alex Karras and Roger Brown and this Thursday's game have been noted. Pretty cool set of circumstances.
I am constantly surprised at the clock mis-management I see in the NFL.
Clock management strikes me as pretty simple and straightforward; how is it these head coaches don't understand it?
EDIT: I count "time out management" as part of clock management.
#### fuck #### fuck me this ############# sucks ############# cocks.
EDIT: the nanny is weird!
anyway, it's always good to beat the giants, even when it's masked by the giant sucking sound of a season going down the drain.
I dunno. He's attempted a total of 14 regular-season passes in his career. Didn't the Bears scramble to sign Kerry Collins rather than have him as the primary backup at one point? That's not a good sign.
Yes, but if it were a deadball foul, then the Eagles would have gotten the completion, then had the taunting yards subtracted (but still a net positive).
Either way, Jackson's an idiot.
No, they signed Todd Collins last year, which proved to be an unmitigated disaster. Hanie played pretty decently in the NFC Championship game after the club foolishly gave Collins a couple of more series to confirm that whatever meager skills he once possessed had long since evaporated.
that was how the call should go in my mind. it might have been the right call, but i've never seen it, and logically, it seems wrong.
Bingo. The fact that they thought Collins was a better option -- even after seeing him play -- speaks volumes about their judgement regarding Hanie.
That said, I'm still upset by all of this.
Caleb looked pretty good last year in a very stressful situation. Hopefully the Bears have recognized his potential and the need for a decent backup and have worked with him a lot. If so I can see 4-2 being there likely result. I'd say over the next 6 games the Bears will something between 2-4 and 4-2.
Hopefully the Packers show up for the Lions at the end of the season. If they do I can see the Lions going 2-4 or 3-3 from here on out.
Presumably, it's no longer a deadball foul in any instance. If the Giants don't hold and Jackson taunts, the Eagles are assessed the penalty from the LOS (half the distance, in this case).
For the group: are Atlanta's current problems with completing drives for 7 points more schematic or personnel related?
Right. The Bears got the Falcons during the "Sam Baker blocks like a three year old girl" portion of the season.
I prefer to call it a game and a half lead.
Agreed. In the already-way-too-risk-averse land of the NFL, Lovie Smith is the King.
In order to win, yes. In order to exist, no.
But that's the entire season.
As a Colts fan, I'm hoping it can be flexed off the Sunday schedule entirely.
They ended up 4-12, and the offense never scored more than 24 points a game, 24th out of 28 teams, after being 17th in 1977. If anyone has more info on that team, it would be useful.
They were 2-12 the year before. Their pts differential was reduced, too. None of that means anything as Mike Livingston probably last ran a Wing T in high school, maybe college, if at all.
And 7-9 the year after.
They went defense, defense and more defense in the draft. They moved from 27th to 22nd in defense in '78, Simple Rating System says that their defense improved dramatically, then to 5th in '79.
Funny thing is they scored even less.
And somewhere along the way Marv Levy gave us the classic "you over officious jerk!" sound bite.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/11/21/week-11-monday-10-pack-2/
"The prevailing thought was that Eagles should have been able to decline the penalty against the Giants, and then to have the 15 yards walked off after the play, giving Philly a 35-yard gain.
But the outcome reflected the proper application of a strange donut hole in the rule book.
The process gets started at Rule 14, Section 1, Article 9: “If there has been a foul by either team during a down and there is a dead ball foul by the other team in the action immediately after the end of the down, it is a double foul, and all rules for enforcement of double fouls apply (see 14-3-1).”
Regarding double fouls, Article 14, Section 3, Rule 1 provides as follows: “If there is a double foul . . . without a change of possession, the penalties are offset and the down is replayed at the previous spot.”
In this case, a key exception almost applied, but ultimately didn’t. “If one of the fouls is of a nature that incurs a 15-yard penalty and the other foul of a double foul normally would result in a loss of 5 yards only (15 yards versus 5 yards),” the rule book states, “the major penalty yardage is to be assessed from the previous spot.” Since the penalty on the Giants entailed a five-yard penalty AND an automatic first down, the exception didn’t apply in Jackson’s case. Even if it had (for example, if the Giants had simply been offside), the Eagles would have had the 15 yards walked off (or, in this case, half the distance to the goal) from the previous spot.
Either way, the penalty on the Giants ultimately penalized the Eagles. Though the officials sorted it all out properly in real time, the rule book definitely needs to be tweaked to prevent such unfair outcomes."
They can get to that after they get that so-very-complicated "definition of a catch" thing worked out.
It was lousy, and then it got a LOT worse, and now I think it's a bit better than the original.
The middle ground was the weirdest - especially the part about needing to hire a notary public to sign off on the catch before the receiver hit the ground. That seemed a bit onerous, especially with no pre-qualifying of notaries. Even with a good hang time in mid-air.......
The last couple? It was only last year where Calvin Johnson was practically up the tunnel with the ball and it was waved off.
You don't need a definition. Every person who has ever played a sport knows exactly when a ball is caught and when it isn't. Only the NFL could turn that into an argument worthy of the Supreme Court.
Agreed. The current mess of "did he control it through the ground" is absurd. A receiver goes up and grabs a ball in the air, comes down, gets both feet in, steps out of bounds, falls to the ground and the ball comes loose. Only in the NFL would that not be a catch. Every rational person on the planet saw him control the ball; saw the two feet hit in bounds. Saw his next step go out of bounds. At that point the play is dead. The ball was caught and the play is dead. But the NFL has to watch the fall to the ground to see if the ground - which can't cause a fumble on a dead play - knocks the ball lose.
Absurd.
My first thought after that play is that we most often see taunting called after a touchdown, and I've never seen a touchdown called back for taunting. But I suppose a touchdown is considered a change of possession.
Alas, poor Orton. I knew him, Horatio. A Purdue quarterback of infinite jest.
49ers are playing the Ravens - Dilfer era - game of good defense, good running game and no mistakes. It's worked against a light schedule but come playoff time it will be imperative to keep games close or be ahead as I don't see this team as built for the big comeback. Thursday night's game will be fun.
I wouldn't think so, the scoring team still has "posession" for the extra point and kickoff.
The Niners schedule to date has been fairly easy, but not as easy as that of Green Bay, Houston, or the Giants.
Not that I have any particular coach who just did this in mind...
What's the over/under on number of games suspended?
The rest of their Schedule is pretty brutal. I think they go at best 2-3 from here, and 9 wins probably doesn't cut it. And I wouldn't be shocked if they went 1-4 either.
The Bears may go 4-2 or even 5-1 without Cutler. Green Bay is a loss, but the next toughest game is Oakland. After that they have Kansas City, Denver, Seattle, and Minnesota (not necessarily in that order). I think Detroit is going to be fighting for the 6th seed, and they lose the tiebreaker to Atlanta.
It will be interesting to see how the defenses setup against the Bears. You'd think the Bears are going to come out run heavy in that first game and I don't really know if the Bears offensive line and Forte are good enough to get through it. Plus I think the last successful screen the Bears ever pulled off was done sometime in 1943 so it will be really interesting to see what Martz does. Does he go to the old run, draw, slant of the Orton days? Or does he just let Hanie scramble around until somebody rings his bell?
I think the Bears will muddle through it and get to the playoffs but I don't really hold out hope for much in the playoffs. Bears offensive line sucks and the defense isn't what it once was. Unless something weird happens the Bears would play the Packers in the second game of the playoffs should they win the first.
*Except win special teams goes nuts.
This years Bears defense is better than last year's for example. Sure the Super Bowl season was better but that was a special season.
This response has been baffling to me. Suh has always (through college) been very well spoken, not at all press shy or cliche driven, all around a bright guy. Did he not know what he was doing? I've seen worse, Charles Martin slamming McMahon, etc., but come on dude.
He didn't know what he was doing when he stepped on the guy. He was blind to his actions. Whether, after he sees it a few times he admits his irresponsible behavior, who knows.
A few weeks ago one of the teams (I forget which) was in one of those lame end-of-game situations where it was trying to stop the other team on three downs so that it could get the ball back and have a chance. (Why people find this exciting I'll never know.) Anyway, the team used one of its timeouts with 2:07 remaining.
What am I missing here? The timeout only saves you 7 seconds there. But on the other side of the two-minute warning, you can save basically the entire play clock.
If I were in charge, I'd tell my QB to just take the delay-of-game rather than burn a timeout, especially in the second half. The timeouts are worth so much at the end of the game, and yet coaches just throw them away on nonsense.
I don't really see why people get all riled up about this stuff. He's a good player. He made a dumb play. You live with it and move on. I'd applaud Reid for doing that, but he may have cost himself a game the week before when he sat Jackson down. If I were the owner and Reid kept Jackson out of a game for missing a meeting, I'd fire Reid on the spot. You're trying to win games, not boyscout merit badges.
Besides, half the players in the league engage in silly celebrations and taunting efforts. If people can't stomach that, they should probably find a different sport to watch.
I though his bigger error, by far, was failing to go for 2 when everyone knew he needed 2. He went up 15-10 with 4 minutes to go in the 3rd quarter and settled for the extra point. Why.
Sparano was going to be fired at the end of the season anyway.
Jackson's idiocy goes beyond merely celebrations. He dumbassed his way off the team that weekend. He was already on thin ice, he hasn't done #### this year except hold out, drop balls and be an idiot.
I guess I'll have to also yawn at Suh's actions here. We see defensive players put unnecessarily brutal hits on runners, receivers, and QBs all the time. And we're supposed to get excited because some guy lost his cool and stomped on a player's side? What? Suh's actions couldn't possibly have hurt the player as much as concussions and violent hits to the upper body from defensive players have the potential to.
People are just all out of whack as far as what gets them all worked up. Suh is the Devil, but Polamalu is celebrated. Uh huh.
Probably. But they were on a roll and a win against the Cowboys would make it harder. They'd obviously have to keep the run going to save him but they look like a better team right now.
An error, yes. But, at that point, it wasn't life or death to go for 2. My guess is he didn't go because he didn't want to be second-guessed if it failed. The same reason he didn't throw the ball with 4 minutes to go. Can't be chickensh@@ when your life's on the line.
Yeah, he's something else, isn't he? On the field, Suh plays like he just escaped from a home for the criminally insane. Off the field, he could pass for Michigan's attorney general.
Not that it excuses what Suh did, but the Packer offensive lineman was clearly holding onto Suh's jersey, trying to prevent him from getting up. It should have been flagged, and I wouldn't be surprised if it was half-intended to get Suh to do something ejectable.
His fate was already sealed unless he won the division or made it far in the playoffs. Stephen Ross tried to interview Jim Harbaugh for the head coaching job.
I understand that but a long run, even if it didn't net them the playoffs might've saved his position. His cowardice Thanksgiving Day was the final nail.
I agree. And the stomp wasn't an accident, he looked right at the guy.
The "big difference" is that one is considered legal, one illegal; one is considered "dirty," one isn't.
Putting a hit on a player that could lead to a concussion or worse -- and then pounding your chest over it -- is far worse than anything Suh did on Thursday. A thousand times over.
And I think Suh is a thug; it's not my intent to defend him. But people have their list of outrages incorrect and out of order.
But so do the defensive players aiming to put other players in the hospital -- which is pretty much 99% of the league. Against that backdrop, spending more than 5 seconds worrying about what Suh did, painting him as evil, calling him names, strikes me as ludicrous.
No, they're both dirty.
At least Suh's actions were spur of the moment, unlike the hits defensive players plan.
I disagree. He has a bad owner who has already tried to replace him. There is no reason to think that after his 0-7 start there was anything Sparano could do to save his job.
I agree that rage is more rage is something I see a lot of these days. Maybe it's because of our media era where every event gets amplified that causes some people to try and scream louder than everyone else. But come on. Two weeks or three weeks ago a Packers OL was kicked in the balls and that got almost no mention, the offender was merely fined.
This is football. Suh was tossed and the player he kicked wasn't kicked that hard and was unhurt. The NFL and NFL media is partly to blame, they have turned Suh into this monster that breaks all the rules of decency in the game, which is an exaggeration, a huge exaggeration.
Making a larger point, it seems in the last decade, I've seen so many people take an odd position or attitude on rule breakers, (it could be slapping your wife or stealing gas or kicking a football player for example) that they basically should be banned for life, locked up forever, killed, etc.....as if the person should be eliminated from history due to a single event because the idea this person is eternally flawed. The concept of a finite punishment escapes these people.
And from what I recall, he stomped on his pads on his side, not on his arm. Not that stomping on his arm would rise to the level of some these vicious hits to the upper body.
The timeout forces an additional play to be run before the two-minute warning.
Scenario one: Timeout at 2:07. Second down runs to the two-minute warning. Third down takes maybe six seconds, 39 more run off before the punt at 1:15.
Scenario two: Let the clock run to the two-minute warning after first down. Call timeout after second down at 1:54. 45 more seconds for third down and the punt: 1:09.
I though his bigger error, by far, was failing to go for 2 when everyone knew he needed 2. He went up 15-10 with 4 minutes to go in the 3rd quarter and settled for the extra point. Why.
Because only you knew with that much time left that he needed two. For all everyone else knew, they'd miss the two-point conversion and give up two fourth-quarter field goals to lose by a point. Or they'd give up a touchdown and a two-point conversion, then only be able to tie the game with a field goal instead of winning it. There are too many scenarios with that much time left, which is why they wait until the end game becomes clearer to go for two.
Scenario one: Timeout at 2:07. Second down runs to the two-minute warning. Third down takes maybe six seconds, 39 more run off before the punt at 1:15.
Scenario two: Let the clock run to the two-minute warning after first down. Call timeout after second down at 1:54. 45 more seconds for third down and the punt: 1:09.
This particular instance doesn't sound like it*, but there are examples of misusing TOs around the two-minute warning that can cost a team a considerable amount of time (last year's AFC title game was one).
* Impossible to say for certain absent more information.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main