PDA

View Full Version : Boston killing sports.



m0ef0e
11-30-2007, 01:43 PM
I heard Colin Cowherd say that Cowboys/Patriots will be the greatest superbowl of all time this morning on ESPN radio... *gag* *gag* *cough* *puke*

The NFL isn't really all that interesting this year (lopsided AFC divisions, a slew of bad teams, etc) and the Patriots aren't helping anything with their 40+ point blow-outs. Maybe people from Boston and the sports media want to see another undefeated team emerge in the annals of NFL history but a lot of people are going to lose interest.

I think most people don't really want to see yet another post-season matchup between the New England Yankees and Dallas Red Sox. Football looks very similar to baseball this year-- completely lopsided. I thought the salary cap was supposed to prevent this?

Oh yeah, the Pats also got busted for cheating. Their punishment did not include any suspensions, just fines and they had draft picks taken away that they just recouped in a trade with San Fransisco (I think). Picture this: New England wins the superbowl and turns around to get a top-ten pick in the draft next year. The reason why I've been such a huge football fan over the years is because I used to only see this kind of imbalance in MLB or the NBA. Now, it seems that the NFL just wants the big teams to set a bunch of records-- kind of like they want to keep up with MLB because Bonds set the home run record this year or something...

Whatever's going on, it's lame and Boston is killing sports.

DrunkHillbilly
11-30-2007, 02:34 PM
Huh???????

hermhater
11-30-2007, 03:20 PM
Gotta agree with you there m0ef0e!

I heard yesterday that the Pats were breaking another rule, but turned the channel before they talked about it.

I have to say that I would rather the Pats win the Super Bowl than Indy though!

I friggin' hate Peyton Manning!!1

stlchief
11-30-2007, 06:15 PM
Gotta agree with you there m0ef0e!

I heard yesterday that the Pats were breaking another rule, but turned the channel before they talked about it.

I have to say that I would rather the Pats win the Super Bowl than Indy though!

I friggin' hate Peyton Manning!!1

0-0 tie - no winners - everyone hurt - game called - this is the best of all scenarios now in the super bowl.....

hermhater
12-01-2007, 04:20 AM
0-0 tie - no winners - everyone hurt - game called - this is the best of all scenarios now in the super bowl.....

See there guys.

Spoken like a true Chiefs fan!

Sounds like this guy grew up here...


:lol: :sign0098:

McLovin
12-01-2007, 06:09 PM
I would be all for the Detroit Lions winning the Super Bowl, or the Bears, or the Browns, or someone who hasn't won for a long time, Last year I was all for Indy or Chicago winning after the Chiefs were out of it, but I really could care less about the Pats because they have won it too many times in the last few years, and also Belichick is a total moron and could care less about the NFL or the game of football. He is all about proving he is a great coach and that he has created a dominant team. The whole Patriot thing from this year is they run up the score just to show that they can. I also blame Mangino and the Jets for this year, I personally don't like the Jets, Pats Giants, or any other New England - New York team.

I also don't want to see the Broncos, Chargers or the Raiders to win it, although I don't feel that it will be a problem this year.

chief31
12-03-2007, 07:31 AM
My theory on the "Patriots are running-up the score." complaint is that if the opposition wants the Patriots to stop scoring, then they either need to stop them, or "Say 'Uncle'". If the opposition pulls their starters, then they have waved the proverbial "white flag". Until then, it is all fair game.

m0ef0e
12-03-2007, 07:30 PM
My theory on the "Patriots are running-up the score." complaint is that if the opposition wants the Patriots to stop scoring, then they either need to stop them, or "Say 'Uncle'". If the opposition pulls their starters, then they have waved the proverbial "white flag". Until then, it is all fair game.

I've got no problem with the Patriots "running up the score" and all that. My problem with them is the fact that they got busted cheating and no suspensions were handed down-- only fines and loss of a draft pick that they recouped anyway. They should have not been able to trade for a first or second-round pick next draft as well as having the picks revoked. It seems like the Patriots just shoved an already-lenient punishment right back in the NFL's face-- way to rule with the iron fist, Goodell.

It seems to me that something slipped through the cracks somewhere and the Patriots found a way to exploit it. I can't say what, where, or how but the lopsided manner in which the Patriots have been winning this year just doesn't seem quite right to me-- it's not what I'm used to seeing in the NFL, anyway.

Chiefster
12-03-2007, 08:59 PM
I like pie.

McLovin
12-03-2007, 11:36 PM
I like pie.
Where my pie?

hermhater
12-04-2007, 05:17 AM
My theory on the "Patriots are running-up the score." complaint is that if the opposition wants the Patriots to stop scoring, then they either need to stop them, or "Say 'Uncle'". If the opposition pulls their starters, then they have waved the proverbial "white flag". Until then, it is all fair game.

Yep!

Don't tell me to stop punching you until you're ready to quit punching me!

If your starting offense is on the field it is there to score. Teaching any other way is a losing mentality.

Defense stops scores, and Offense scores.

Every time they are on the field.

chief31
12-04-2007, 05:21 AM
I've got no problem with the Patriots "running up the score" and all that. My problem with them is the fact that they got busted cheating and no suspensions were handed down-- only fines and loss of a draft pick that they recouped anyway. They should have not been able to trade for a first or second-round pick next draft as well as having the picks revoked. It seems like the Patriots just shoved an already-lenient punishment right back in the NFL's face-- way to rule with the iron fist, Goodell.

It seems to me that something slipped through the cracks somewhere and the Patriots found a way to exploit it. I can't say what, where, or how but the lopsided manner in which the Patriots have been winning this year just doesn't seem quite right to me-- it's not what I'm used to seeing in the NFL, anyway.

That isn't something that can be blamed on the Patriots. That would be the leagues responsibility. And, I don't have a big problem with the ruling. It is something that every team does, in some capacity. Try to find out what the other team is going to do.

m0ef0e
12-04-2007, 06:37 PM
That isn't something that can be blamed on the Patriots. That would be the leagues responsibility. And, I don't have a big problem with the ruling. It is something that every team does, in some capacity. Try to find out what the other team is going to do.

Of course not. I was blaming the NFL. The Patriots just get the benefit of making my case for me. The end of the game against the Ravens... I understand that Baltimore made a mistake by calling that time out and the false start also gave the Pats another chance (granted, from 5 yards farther away) but the defensive holding call... How many chances do they get?

DrunkHillbilly
12-04-2007, 07:21 PM
Of course not. I was blaming the NFL. The Patriots just get the benefit of making my case for me. The end of the game against the Ravens... I understand that Baltimore made a mistake by calling that time out and the false start also gave the Pats another chance (granted, from 5 yards farther away) but the defensive holding call... How many chances do they get?
By the rules, it was clearly holding. Even if the holding wasn't called, there was PI in the end zone also. The reciever was hit from behind before the ball got there. # 22 or 28 was the culprit.

rbedgood
12-04-2007, 10:09 PM
New England won that game...the refs were letting Baltimore defenders get away with holding Welker most of the night. I hate the Pats, but there were bad calls both ways, and even the last hail mary should've been sent back (and if it had been into the endzone likely would've been) as Derrick Mason was essentially tackling the DB that was closest to Clayton (who caught the ball) The TD that won the game was suspect at best, but I thought they got the call right. Funniest thing will be that no one will watch the Pats game at the end of the season because its on the NFL Network...HAHA, all this hype and no one will have the channel.

chief31
12-04-2007, 11:51 PM
Of course not. I was blaming the NFL. The Patriots just get the benefit of making my case for me. The end of the game against the Ravens... I understand that Baltimore made a mistake by calling that time out and the false start also gave the Pats another chance (granted, from 5 yards farther away) but the defensive holding call... How many chances do they get?


By the rules, it was clearly holding. Even if the holding wasn't called, there was PI in the end zone also. The reciever was hit from behind before the ball got there. # 22 or 28 was the culprit.

I agree with hillbilly. (I need a shower now.) I saw the replay, and the call was obvious. Especially since the player who was held was the intended reciever.

The refs didn't give the Patriots extra chances, the Ravens did.

As for the timeout, it appears as if some of the Patriots quit with the whistle. Meaning that the result may have been different, had there been no timeout.

I have yet to see the kickoff that the Pats got, from the Ravens' 30-35 yard line. I want to see that play. :D

DrunkHillbilly
12-05-2007, 12:10 AM
I agree with hillbilly. (I need a shower now.) I saw the replay, and the call was obvious. Especially since the player who was held was the intended reciever.

The refs didn't give the Patriots extra chances, the Ravens did.

As for the timeout, it appears as if some of the Patriots quit with the whistle. Meaning that the result may have been different, had there been no timeout.

I have yet to see the kickoff that the Pats got, from the Ravens' 30-35 yard line. I want to see that play. :D
The kick wasn't very interesting. He kind of pooch kicked it about 4 rows deep right through the uprights.

prough91
12-05-2007, 04:36 AM
If the only team the Pats beat this year was the Jets, I could see everyone getting their panties in a wad, but they kill everyone. I'm sure a lot of other teams have done it and just haven't got caught.

chief31
12-05-2007, 05:00 AM
The kick wasn't very interesting. He kind of pooch kicked it about 4 rows deep right through the uprights.

I know. I have just never seen what a recieving teams formation would look like, with that kind of kickoff field position. I think I would align my recieving team to guard against an onside kick.

Because, if you think about it, why not try one? If the Ravens recover it, they will still be near their own twenty. ( Hindsight reveals though, that the Ravens caught a "hail-Mary" at the three. Therefore, a couple more yards closer on the kickoff, may mean victory with that reception.)

DrunkHillbilly
12-05-2007, 09:51 AM
I know. I have just never seen what a recieving teams formation would look like, with that kind of kickoff field position. I think I would align my recieving team to guard against an onside kick.

Because, if you think about it, why not try one? If the Ravens recover it, they will still be near their own twenty. ( Hindsight reveals though, that the Ravens caught a "hail-Mary" at the three. Therefore, a couple more yards closer on the kickoff, may mean victory with that reception.)
I kind of thought they might try an onside kick too.

Did you see Derek Mason almost tackle the guy that was defending that hail mary?? Another reason to throw a flag on the cry baby Ravens!

chief31
12-06-2007, 04:31 AM
I kind of thought they might try an onside kick too.

Did you see Derek Mason almost tackle the guy that was defending that hail mary?? Another reason to throw a flag on the cry baby Ravens!

Yeah. I think the refs realized that since the game was over, might as well just keep that flag in the pocket.

prough91
12-09-2007, 09:43 AM
Yeah. I think the refs realized that since the game was over, might as well just keep that flag in the pocket.

I agree, but I bet if it had been a touchdown there would have been a flag.

chief31
12-11-2007, 03:32 AM
I agree, but I bet if it had been a touchdown there would have been a flag.

Probably, and a well deserved one, that would have made the Ravens cry even more.

hermhater
12-11-2007, 03:34 AM
Chambers never even caught the pass that would have kept the drive alive on one of the MANY Pat's fourth down conversions.

The NFL is corrupt with officiating bias.

rbedgood
12-11-2007, 09:05 PM
Chambers never even caught the pass that would have kept the drive alive on one of the MANY Pat's fourth down conversions.

The NFL is corrupt with officiating bias.

Chambers??? I think you mean Gaffney?! Chambers is on San Diego. Or are you referring to the trap on the first 4th down conversion...(I think that was Watson)

hermhater
12-11-2007, 10:41 PM
Chambers??? I think you mean Gaffney?! Chambers is on San Diego. Or are you referring to the trap on the first 4th down conversion...(I think that was Watson)

Yeah, my bad.

I was thinking of the Chargers game when Chambers DIDN"T catch the ball on their 4th down conversion.

Still pissed about game, but now it seems it wouldn't have mattered with the Chiefs getting clobbered by the Donks.