If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   There have been better Super Bowls, they have been closer Super Bowls, there have been more exciting Super Bowls, but last night's game will go down in the history books as the weirdest Super Bowl of all   (slate.com) divider line 204
    More: Weird, Super Bowl, Phil Simms, Colin Kaepernick, Shannon Sharpe, Jim Nantz, Under Armour, Jean-Paul Gaultier, Steve Tasker  
•       •       •

3243 clicks; posted to Sports » on 04 Feb 2013 at 10:07 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



204 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-04 02:06:38 PM  

4NTLRZ: Is it just me or did that game show just what a biatch Karma is for Chris Culliver? That dude got torched at every turn.


Culliver is a pos and I dislike Ray Lewis, so I was happy that someone had to lose.  The fact that Culliver was burnt every play and Ray missed tackles all night was very satisfying.
 
2013-02-04 02:06:42 PM  

4NTLRZ: Culliver had no problem letting guys get behind him all night long.


And if they weren't, he was grinding all over 'em.
 
2013-02-04 02:08:13 PM  
For some reason I am continually amazed at the carping about the refs. You know going in there will be bad calls... as there has always been bad calls and they make bad calls during every game of the season. Sometimes they are for your team, and sometimes they are against. We'll have some in every game next year too. A bad call or two or six against your team does not in any way negate a victory. For me to change my mind about this you'll have to show me an official who has intentionally blown a call financial remuneration. Then we can talk about a negated victory. Until then, play better.

One other thing - in watching football for a really long time I have seen many many instances of teams prevailing against lopsided officiating too many times to count. Not that I'm saying that this game had lopsided officiating. With a total of 53 yards of penalties for the whole game it's clear the refs let both teams play and lots of players got away with lots of things. Why is there never anyone in these threads saying 'oh, if only we hadn't had two turnovers!'. 'Oh, if only we hadn't gotten three scores behind!' No, it's got to be the fault of someone else.

As someone with zero rooting interest I'm just gonna say, good, exciting game. If I had a slight preference it would have been SF because I picked them in my pickem' league so I lost seven bucks with baltimore prevailing. But there was nothing cheap about that win.
 
2013-02-04 02:08:35 PM  
I have to agree:  some superbowls are blowouts, and some are nail-biters, but this was somehow was both.  Plus utter fail, and flawless victory (109 yards!) and a nice controversy at the end so nobody really feels like they lost on account of being losers.

I could tell it was special when my wife, who barely pays attention and then only during commericial breaks, remarked afterwards that wow, that was a farked-up game.  Yes, it was.
 
2013-02-04 02:09:43 PM  

Droog8912: 4NTLRZ: Is it just me or did that game show just what a biatch Karma is for Chris Culliver? That dude got torched at every turn.

Culliver is a pos and I dislike Ray Lewis, so I was happy that someone had to lose.  The fact that Culliver was burnt every play and Ray missed tackles all night was very satisfying.


And Randy Moss got to lose!
 
2013-02-04 02:15:14 PM  
This is a fitting end to me. A HC (and former mediocre QB) in Jim Harbaugh who has carped all year about defenders actually playing defense against his receivers, whining, once again, like a biatch about the officials not treating his boys like china dolls. It was a correct non-call on a play in which there was mutual light interference between Crabtree and the defender during which neither gained a discernable advantage.
 
2013-02-04 02:16:26 PM  

IAmRight: And Randy Moss got to lose!


If he'd won with the Pats in '07, I think more people would have been happy - I certainly would have. That season, he was a human being saying and doing all the right things. Starting the following year (was it him biatching about the team's morning brunch spread?) he reverted to Moss/Owens/Johnson/Bosworth mode, whereupon karma saw fit to seat him in the cargo hold for the duration of his NFL journey.

// only letting him outside to catch some air last night, which is karma's knife-twist ending (along with watching RayRay celebrate)
 
2013-02-04 02:22:09 PM  

Dr Dreidel: If he'd won with the Pats in '07, I think more people would have been happy - I certainly would have.


Well, if he'd won the SB but the Pats still went 18-1, it would've been fine.

See, that's the thing about people talking about how it would've been great to have another undefeated team so the Dolphins fans wouldn't be so smug...a) I know two Dolphins fans, and they never bring that up, mostly because it happened before they were alive. b) brings me to the other point - the other time it happened was 1972 - not only are people not really bragging about it now, but anyone who remembers is over halfway to death. I really don't need an entire lifetime of Patriots fans talking about their undefeated season and how theirs was way better than the Dolphins'.
 
2013-02-04 02:23:16 PM  

IAmRight: 4NTLRZ: Culliver had no problem letting guys get behind him all night long.

And if they weren't, he was grinding all over 'em.


Oh sh*t! Larfin' out loud! Well played!

IAmRight: Droog8912: 4NTLRZ: Is it just me or did that game show just what a biatch Karma is for Chris Culliver? That dude got torched at every turn.

Culliver is a pos and I dislike Ray Lewis, so I was happy that someone had to lose.  The fact that Culliver was burnt every play and Ray missed tackles all night was very satisfying.

And Randy Moss got to lose!


There's that, too! How many catches did the self-proclaimed best receiver in the history of the game have? 2?

/helluva disappearing act you pulled there, Randy!
 
2013-02-04 02:24:31 PM  

IAmRight: , that's the thing about people talking about how it would've been great to have another undefeated team so the Dolphins fans wouldn't be so smug...a) I know two Dolphins fans, and they never bring that up,


I still say the pats lost to the ravens that year,  The refs just gave them 3 redo's well since they are the pats.
 
2013-02-04 02:24:56 PM  

DjangoStonereaver: poisonedpawn78: The lights out bowl !

if it wasnt for the lights the game was going to be 60-6 in a very quick and short fashion.

If I was still a believer in conspiracy theories, I'd almost say that the NFL specifically cut the lights to spice
things up.


I'll believe for you.
 
2013-02-04 02:27:02 PM  

IAmRight: Dr Dreidel: If he'd won with the Pats in '07, I think more people would have been happy - I certainly would have.

Well, if he'd won the SB but the Pats still went 18-1, it would've been fine.

See, that's the thing about people talking about how it would've been great to have another undefeated team so the Dolphins fans wouldn't be so smug...a) I know two Dolphins fans, and they never bring that up, mostly because it happened before they were alive. b) brings me to the other point - the other time it happened was 1972 - not only are people not really bragging about it now, but anyone who remembers is over halfway to death. I really don't need an entire lifetime of Patriots fans talking about their undefeated season and how theirs was way better than the Dolphins'.


I seem to remember that the schedule difficulty between the 72 Dolphins (.357) and the 07 Pats (.539) was pretty huge.  Any way you slice it, the Pats were a far superior team; they just used up all of their karma before the Super Bowl.
 
2013-02-04 02:28:02 PM  
Randy Moss giving up on routes and not going for that high ball needs to be addressed.  How many teams can this guy quit on before people get tired of him.  Can't even put in an effort during the Superbowl?  Jeesus Chreest.  I'm not sure he could've deflected that interception, it was pretty high, but to make zero effort at jumping or putting your hands up?
 
2013-02-04 02:29:08 PM  

IAmRight:
And Randy Moss got to lose!

That too.  Kind of like a late Christmas present. Double bonus: Jim Harbough acting like a twat on the sidelines at the end.

JohnBigBootay: For some reason I am continually amazed at the carping about the refs.


I think all the non-homers are saying the same thing, just arguing about a few calls along the way: the 9ers screwed themselves in the first half, and the refs swallowed their whistles (with debating to what extent they should/should not).

In my mind, the worst officiating I saw was not ejecting Cary Williams after the 2nd scrum.  If you want to let them push and shove, fine, but he shoved an official and was throwing blows.  That shiat is uncalled for.
 
2013-02-04 02:31:26 PM  

seumasokelly: It was a correct non-call on a play in which there was mutual light interference between Crabtree and the defender during which neither gained a discernable advantage.


I wouldn't go that far. The non-call being 'correct' I mean. That's one of those, 'sometimes they call it and sometimes they don't but either way you have to live with it' calls. If they had called it I wouldn't be saying BULLshiat is what I mean.
 
2013-02-04 02:31:56 PM  

IAmRight: I know two Dolphins fans, and they never bring that up, mostly because it happened before they were alive.



yeah, sports law #6:  you can only brag about titles won in your lifetime.

this means, 24 yr old yankee fan, don't lecture me on how great the 1927 Yankees were.
 
2013-02-04 02:32:33 PM  
49ers lost  because:
-of how the played up until the brown out
-the ridiculously lame play they called after having 34 mins to come up with a play on 3rd down after the brown out
-the poor play calling & clock management on their final series of the game (including the time out)
-bad special times throughout the game. KR's for TDs, Akers miss (he got a redo), coverage on the final punt, making no legit attempt on the final free kick

A year from now nobody will ever look back at this game and say the 49ers got screwed. In fact, had the 49ers won, the only real debate that would survive the test of time is if the brown out screwed the Ravens.

/Pats fan. Didn't care who wonbut after this I like Raven Harbaugh over 49ers Tantrum Harbaugh
 
2013-02-04 02:32:43 PM  

IAmRight: Ah, we all know that photographs are an excellent way to show action.


But they are an excellent way to show a defender who has two handfuls of jersey, one of which is reaching ACROSS THE BODY of the receiver to impede his route.  WITH. A. FISTFUL. OF. JERSEY.

There is zero doubt that is defensive PI.  It's catchable, the ball is in the air and he's got 2 handfuls of jersey while using an armbar to hook the WR.  That is a textbook defensive penalty of Illegal contact if the ball hasn't been thrown or PI if he ball has been thrown and it's catchable.

If you want to argue call or non-call to not decide the game...fine, but arguing that it's not a penalty is ridiculous.

And please, all of you...stop quoting Peter King and other media sheeple who routinely "carry the water" for Goodell and the NFL.  These knuckleheads aren't going to risk their unfettered access to the NFL by saying something the NFL doesn't want said about it's largest game.

And BTW, I can't stand Jim Harbaugh...with a passion do I not like that jackass with his self-inflated ego that I can't actually believe fit inside the Superdome...so if anything I'm on Cloud 9 that his team got jobbed...but that was a defensive penalty without question.
 
2013-02-04 02:34:09 PM  

Eegah: MugzyBrown: Eegah: That's what I don't get about this controversy. That ball was definitely uncatchable.

No way.  The ball was very catchable.  The only reason it wasn't catchable was because the receiver was being mugged.. he still got pretty close to it.

I'm not saying the ball was too far away from him, I'm saying the ball was too far out-of-bounds. From the way it looked to me, it appears that the receiver would have needed Inspector Gadget extend-o-arms to reach it, even if he had been standing just inside the sideline at the closest possible point. Perhaps someone could create a 3-D image and show how the receiver could've caught it as some point.


There is absolutely no way that ball could have been caught in bounds.  Hence, the no call.
 
2013-02-04 02:34:18 PM  

Droog8912: In my mind, the worst officiating I saw was not ejecting Cary Williams after the 2nd scrum. If you want to let them push and shove, fine, but he shoved an official and was throwing blows. That shiat is uncalled for.


We reran that several times at my house. I'm still gonna be surprised if he doesn't get fined by the league after the fact. After rewatching we decided he was just out of his mind after getting his head slammed against the turf and didn't really notice that the guy he was shoving was a ref.
 
2013-02-04 02:36:32 PM  

IAmRight: Dr Dreidel: If he'd won with the Pats in '07, I think more people would have been happy - I certainly would have.

Well, if he'd won the SB but the Pats still went 18-1, it would've been fine.

See, that's the thing about people talking about how it would've been great to have another undefeated team so the Dolphins fans wouldn't be so smug...a) I know two Dolphins fans, and they never bring that up, mostly because it happened before they were alive. b) brings me to the other point - the other time it happened was 1972 - not only are people not really bragging about it now, but anyone who remembers is over halfway to death. I really don't need an entire lifetime of Patriots fans talking about their undefeated season and how theirs was way better than the Dolphins'.


I think an undefeated team - even one with fans as annoying as the Pats' - is a good thing. I find the '72 Dolphins very public champagne-popping to be one of the more annoying sports "traditions" for many of those reasons (happened 40 years ago, takes focus off the current game to put it on themselves, shameless self-promotion, the endless talking about how that team is "the best EVAR" despite the .357 SoS and shorter schedule). YMMV.

CSB: My middle-school softball team was undefeated until the last game of the regular season. After losing that game, we were bucked up by the thought of the next week's playoffs (which we were easily favorited to win) - playoffs which got rained out twice, then cancelled. Not having the rest of that season to "avenge" the loss was a blow to a fragile young ego (and a kid who just wanted to play ball).
 
2013-02-04 02:36:57 PM  

born_yesterday: There is absolutely no way that ball could have been caught in bounds. Hence, the no call.


I arguing against blaming the refs, however... if we're talking about the same play the call would be holding, not PI. The ball need not be catchable to call holding or illegal contact after five yards. My point would be sometimes they call it and sometimes they don't.
 
2013-02-04 02:39:06 PM  

Dr Dreidel: I find the '72 Dolphins very public champagne-popping to be one of the more annoying sports "traditions" for many of those reasons


What are you gonna do? I just find it quaint and harmless. They played football for a long time before they did it and they've been playing football a long time since. I say let the old guys have their fun.
 
2013-02-04 02:40:22 PM  

JohnBigBootay: Droog8912: In my mind, the worst officiating I saw was not ejecting Cary Williams after the 2nd scrum. If you want to let them push and shove, fine, but he shoved an official and was throwing blows. That shiat is uncalled for.

We reran that several times at my house. I'm still gonna be surprised if he doesn't get fined by the league after the fact. After rewatching we decided he was just out of his mind after getting his head slammed against the turf and didn't really notice that the guy he was shoving was a ref.


If I were him, I'd just sign my Super Bowl check over to the league and pray they don't want more money.

That was a two-handed shove by a player who not only did he not make a "oh shiat" face and back pedal and show remorse like you would expect when you realize you just shoved an official...but he even started jawing at the same ref he just shoved.  How does that guy not get thrown out?  At that point you knew the league had told the refs to "do nothing controversial".  What were their 5-10 punches thrown without one flag?

This entire playoff season was poorly officiated.  You can't have this massive gap between how the playoffs are officiated and the regular season.  The NFL needs to get their officiating shiat together and pronto.
 
2013-02-04 02:41:04 PM  

Coach_J: IAmRight: Ah, we all know that photographs are an excellent way to show action.

But they are an excellent way to show a defender who has two handfuls of jersey, one of which is reaching ACROSS THE BODY of the receiver to impede his route.  WITH. A. FISTFUL. OF. JERSEY.

There is zero doubt that is defensive PI.  It's catchable, the ball is in the air and he's got 2 handfuls of jersey while using an armbar to hook the WR.  That is a textbook defensive penalty of Illegal contact if the ball hasn't been thrown or PI if he ball has been thrown and it's catchable.

If you want to argue call or non-call to not decide the game...fine, but arguing that it's not a penalty is ridiculous.

And please, all of you...stop quoting Peter King and other media sheeple who routinely "carry the water" for Goodell and the NFL.  These knuckleheads aren't going to risk their unfettered access to the NFL by saying something the NFL doesn't want said about it's largest game.

And BTW, I can't stand Jim Harbaugh...with a passion do I not like that jackass with his self-inflated ego that I can't actually believe fit inside the Superdome...so if anything I'm on Cloud 9 that his team got jobbed...but that was a defensive penalty without question.


Again:

1) Crabtree initiated the contact.  It could have been Offensive PI at that point.
2) Could not have been holding, as the ball was in the air when contact occurred.
3) Crabtree himself disagrees with you., as does Periera and a wide host of people not in Goodell's bucket.
4) The ball was not a catchable pass.
 
2013-02-04 02:44:16 PM  

Coach_J: If I were him, I'd just sign my Super Bowl check over to the league and pray they don't want more money.


What's funny is that same ref ( I think) had just gotten up from being creamed at the end of the play (unintentionally I think). Dude had a rough game.
 
2013-02-04 02:49:23 PM  

JohnBigBootay: seumasokelly: It was a correct non-call on a play in which there was mutual light interference between Crabtree and the defender during which neither gained a discernable advantage.

I wouldn't go that far. The non-call being 'correct' I mean. That's one of those, 'sometimes they call it and sometimes they don't but either way you have to live with it' calls. If they had called it I wouldn't be saying BULLshiat is what I mean.


Both guys were "givin' 'em the business" on the play. In that sense, I think it's a good non-call. Had Kaepernick not been rushed and flipped the ball to far, I think Crabtree makes the catch after the defender falls down and Baltimore is raving about an OPI call there (if they went on to lose).
 
2013-02-04 02:52:13 PM  

JohnBigBootay: Dr Dreidel: I find the '72 Dolphins very public champagne-popping to be one of the more annoying sports "traditions" for many of those reasons

What are you gonna do? I just find it quaint and harmless. They played football for a long time before they did it and they've been playing football a long time since. I say let the old guys have their fun.


On the list of things that annoy me about the NFL, it's #809,708,746,740,967 - right below "won't let me be a TE". The sportsmedia's pathological need to mention it wherever and whenever they can is far more grating.
 
2013-02-04 02:52:50 PM  

whizbangthedirtfarmer: Coach_J: IAmRight: Ah, we all know that photographs are an excellent way to show action.

But they are an excellent way to show a defender who has two handfuls of jersey, one of which is reaching ACROSS THE BODY of the receiver to impede his route.  WITH. A. FISTFUL. OF. JERSEY.

There is zero doubt that is defensive PI.  It's catchable, the ball is in the air and he's got 2 handfuls of jersey while using an armbar to hook the WR.  That is a textbook defensive penalty of Illegal contact if the ball hasn't been thrown or PI if he ball has been thrown and it's catchable.

If you want to argue call or non-call to not decide the game...fine, but arguing that it's not a penalty is ridiculous.

And please, all of you...stop quoting Peter King and other media sheeple who routinely "carry the water" for Goodell and the NFL.  These knuckleheads aren't going to risk their unfettered access to the NFL by saying something the NFL doesn't want said about it's largest game.

And BTW, I can't stand Jim Harbaugh...with a passion do I not like that jackass with his self-inflated ego that I can't actually believe fit inside the Superdome...so if anything I'm on Cloud 9 that his team got jobbed...but that was a defensive penalty without question.

Again:

1) Crabtree initiated the contact.  It could have been Offensive PI at that point.
2) Could not have been holding, as the ball was in the air when contact occurred.
3) Crabtree himself disagrees with you., as does Periera and a wide host of people not in Goodell's bucket.
4) The ball was not a catchable pass.


1)  My quote was "there is zero doubt this is defensive PI".
2)  Whether or not the WR initiated the contact is irrelevant to the call of defensive PI or not.
3)  The ball was easily catchable and since neither ref didn't indicate that the ball was not catchable as they are required to do by rule, you are wrong as usual.
4)  And if you think for one second the ex-VP of NFL officiating isn't carrying the water for the NFL, you are a bigger idiot than I thought.

Which is pretty impossible since I think you are clearly one of the biggest idiots on this site.

Well done...it's pretty hard to fit that much stupid into such a succinct post like that...very impressive.
 
2013-02-04 02:59:59 PM  

Dr Dreidel: On the list of things that annoy me about the NFL, it's #809,708,746,740,967 - right below "won't let me be a TE". The sportsmedia's pathological need to mention it wherever and whenever they can is far more grating.


Fair enough. I have my own list - one of the top ones is the recycled stuff about bye weeks. If you win, you were well rested and healthy. If you lose, you were rusty. And I never, ever, ever want to hear about a disadvantage for travel in football. Home field is home field of course.... but I really don't want to hear about a disadvantage for one trip a week - at most. On a charter in an oversized leather seat when you have your training staff, masseuse, psychologist, and personal dietician waiting at the other end of your limo ride.
 
2013-02-04 03:04:06 PM  

Coach_J: whizbangthedirtfarmer: Coach_J: IAmRight: Ah, we all know that photographs are an excellent way to show action.

But they are an excellent way to show a defender who has two handfuls of jersey, one of which is reaching ACROSS THE BODY of the receiver to impede his route.  WITH. A. FISTFUL. OF. JERSEY.

There is zero doubt that is defensive PI.  It's catchable, the ball is in the air and he's got 2 handfuls of jersey while using an armbar to hook the WR.  That is a textbook defensive penalty of Illegal contact if the ball hasn't been thrown or PI if he ball has been thrown and it's catchable.

If you want to argue call or non-call to not decide the game...fine, but arguing that it's not a penalty is ridiculous.

And please, all of you...stop quoting Peter King and other media sheeple who routinely "carry the water" for Goodell and the NFL.  These knuckleheads aren't going to risk their unfettered access to the NFL by saying something the NFL doesn't want said about it's largest game.

And BTW, I can't stand Jim Harbaugh...with a passion do I not like that jackass with his self-inflated ego that I can't actually believe fit inside the Superdome...so if anything I'm on Cloud 9 that his team got jobbed...but that was a defensive penalty without question.

Again:

1) Crabtree initiated the contact.  It could have been Offensive PI at that point.
2) Could not have been holding, as the ball was in the air when contact occurred.
3) Crabtree himself disagrees with you., as does Periera and a wide host of people not in Goodell's bucket.
4) The ball was not a catchable pass.

1)  My quote was "there is zero doubt this is defensive PI".
2)  Whether or not the WR initiated the contact is irrelevant to the call of defensive PI or not.
3)  The ball was easily catchable and since neither ref didn't indicate that the ball was not catchable as they are required to do by rule, you are wrong as usual.
4)  And if you think for one second the ex-VP of NFL officiating isn't carrying the w ...


1) ...or offensive PI (the defensive holding could not be a penalty, as the ball was in the air when the contact started)
2) the offensive player initiating the contact means the call could go either way.  Could the ref have penalized the Ravens?  Sure, but then he'd have to explain why Crabtree was pushing the CB down by the face.  Hence, no call.  It was contact, and jockeying, and it happens in every NFL game, and it goes unpenalized in every NFL game.
3) the ball landed out of bounds by a good yard and was in a high arc.  Uncatchable, and the refs didn't need to rule it that way, because they never threw the flag.  They signaled incomplete, which was appropriate.  Crabtree said as much.
4) you overlooked Crabtree stating that the ball was too high and was basically uncatchable.  But I guess that Crabtree carries water for Goodell, too, right?

What is stupid is arguing this call.  It was a good non-call, and everyone except 49er fans seem to understand that.  What is stupid is whining and complaining about one call when a) both teams got away with murder, and b) the 49ers sucked for three quarters.
 
2013-02-04 03:04:54 PM  

Coach_J: Which is pretty impossible since I think you are clearly one of the biggest idiots on this site.

Well done...it's pretty hard to fit that much stupid into such a succinct post like that...very impressive.


Internet Tough Guy, too!  I know for a fact Chris Culliver won't sleep with you.
 
2013-02-04 03:05:30 PM  

JohnBigBootay: Dr Dreidel: On the list of things that annoy me about the NFL, it's #809,708,746,740,967 - right below "won't let me be a TE". The sportsmedia's pathological need to mention it wherever and whenever they can is far more grating.

Fair enough. I have my own list - one of the top ones is the recycled stuff about bye weeks. If you win, you were well rested and healthy. If you lose, you were rusty. And I never, ever, ever want to hear about a disadvantage for travel in football. Home field is home field of course.... but I really don't want to hear about a disadvantage for one trip a week - at most. On a charter in an oversized leather seat when you have your training staff, masseuse, psychologist, and personal dietician waiting at the other end of your limo ride.


And they travel at least a day in advance. Anyone who's ever had to be at work after a redeye the night before laughs at the NFL's requirement that teams sleep in the city they're playing in the next day.

// for non-London games, the worst you'd get is 3-hour jet-lag
// fark, I bet they could fly 'em in at 6pm the night before a 1pm start without too much headache
// they may need to cut the 30th Sunday morning meeting, though if that was the case ("but that's the one where we talk about strategy in the 4th quarter if we're within 5 points with less than 3 timeouts and under 7:46 to play!")
 
2013-02-04 03:06:48 PM  
JohnBigBootay:  And I never, ever, ever want to hear about a disadvantage for travel in football.

Well....(sorry)...the travel advantage does exist for teams traveling cross country.  I can't look up the figures now, but the home team appears to win a statistically significant amount of the time.  Nobody gives a crap about traveling from Boston to Miami, but Boston to San Diego (and vice versa) is another matter with the large time zone changes and an individual's circadian rhythm.  That is the only real travel advantage beyond the crowds.  Anybody suggesting something beyond that is an idiot or ESPN writer.  But I repeat myself.
 
2013-02-04 03:11:09 PM  

Droog8912: JohnBigBootay:  And I never, ever, ever want to hear about a disadvantage for travel in football.

Well....(sorry)...the travel advantage does exist for teams traveling cross country.  I can't look up the figures now, but the home team appears to win a statistically significant amount of the time.  Nobody gives a crap about traveling from Boston to Miami, but Boston to San Diego (and vice versa) is another matter with the large time zone changes and an individual's circadian rhythm.  That is the only real travel advantage beyond the crowds.  Anybody suggesting something beyond that is an idiot or ESPN writer.  But I repeat myself.


Yep, the NFL did some research and changed most of the West Coast to East Coast times to the afternoon/evening when they could.  The percentage in win/loss for that situation was a huge favor to the East Coast teams.
 
2013-02-04 03:16:43 PM  

whizbangthedirtfarmer: Yep, the NFL did some research and changed most of the West Coast to East Coast times to the afternoon/evening when they could.  The percentage in win/loss for that situation was a huge favor to the East Coast teams.


And for the record, it's not like we're saying that it's completely unfair or that our teams were cheated because of it. I (at least in the case of the Seattle vs Atlanta game) just question the whole thing of "If you know that picking this time for these teams is going to result in even more of an advantage for the home team, why would you schedule it that way?"

And I'm told that they set the schedule weeks in advance based on seeds...I really don't think it's a problem for people to switch days off or whatever for a home playoff game. "Whoa, I'm not going to reschedule the babysitter for a different time! I'm going to have to pass up this game I spent hundreds of dollars for tickets for!"
 
2013-02-04 03:18:43 PM  

whizbangthedirtfarmer: Coach_J: Which is pretty impossible since I think you are clearly one of the biggest idiots on this site.

Well done...it's pretty hard to fit that much stupid into such a succinct post like that...very impressive.

Internet Tough Guy, too!  I know for a fact Chris Culliver won't sleep with you.


How does calling you "one of the biggest idiots on this site" make me an ITG?

BTW, if the ref uses the justification of "uncatchable" as to why he's not calling PI, he HAS to signal that by putting his palm above his head.  As you'll notice, no such call was given, thus once again, you are wrong.

They didn't make the call, because they "swallowed their whistles".  Not catchable had ZERO bearing on why the call was made or not.

http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/rulebook/pdfs/2012 %2 0-%20Rule%20Book.pdf
 
2013-02-04 03:24:21 PM  

Coach_J: They didn't make the call, because they "swallowed their whistles".  Not catchable had ZERO bearing on why the call was made or not.


Given that the 49ers were IN the Super Bowl because those plays don't get called (.gif above), tough to take complaints from them seriously.
 
2013-02-04 03:25:45 PM  

whizbangthedirtfarmer: Coach_J: Which is pretty impossible since I think you are clearly one of the biggest idiots on this site.

Well done...it's pretty hard to fit that much stupid into such a succinct post like that...very impressive.

Internet Tough Guy, too!  I know for a fact Chris Culliver won't sleep with you.



Yeah, see, an ITG is someone who threatens someone, not insults them.  In this, as in most things, you prove to be ignorant.
 
2013-02-04 03:51:50 PM  

Droog8912: I can't look up the figures now, but the home team appears to win a statistically significant amount of the time.


Home field advantage definitely exists. But that equals out. Everyone travels half the time.
 
2013-02-04 03:54:02 PM  

whizbangthedirtfarmer: Yep, the NFL did some research and changed most of the West Coast to East Coast times to the afternoon/evening when they could. The percentage in win/loss for that situation was a huge favor to the East Coast teams.


Heh. Wait until they calculate the statistical disadvantage in your team being named "the cleveland browns". That one is going to be tough to negate with schedule changes.
 
2013-02-04 04:03:41 PM  

JohnBigBootay: Heh. Wait until they calculate the statistical disadvantage in your team being named "the cleveland browns". That one is going to be tough to negate with schedule changes.


They could make the opposing team walk through Cleveland before the game, or just drive them around the state.  They might feel bad enough for the Browns to throw the game.

JohnBigBootay: Home field advantage definitely exists. But that equals out. Everyone travels half the time.


I meant specifically the Coast-to-Coast travel provided a ridiculous advantage to the tune of something like 70% for the home team.  Circadian rhythms ain't nothin' to fark with.  Had to change the scheduling of games as a result, iirc.
 
2013-02-04 04:14:56 PM  

Coach_J: whizbangthedirtfarmer: Coach_J: Which is pretty impossible since I think you are clearly one of the biggest idiots on this site.

Well done...it's pretty hard to fit that much stupid into such a succinct post like that...very impressive.

Internet Tough Guy, too!  I know for a fact Chris Culliver won't sleep with you.

How does calling you "one of the biggest idiots on this site" make me an ITG?

BTW, if the ref uses the justification of "uncatchable" as to why he's not calling PI, he HAS to signal that by putting his palm above his head.  As you'll notice, no such call was given, thus once again, you are wrong.

They didn't make the call, because they "swallowed their whistles".  Not catchable had ZERO bearing on why the call was made or not.

http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/rulebook/pdfs/2012 %2 0-%20Rule%20Book.pdf


Sigh.  For someone who claims I'm wrong, you seem to be terribly confused.  Defensive holding can only be called if the CB takes contact beyond five yards, and if the QB still has the ball.  Both of these failed, so we rely only on PI calls.  So, tell me how the CB did worse than Crabtree in this regard.  They were both equally grabbing and pulling.

Crabtree also said the ball was thrown too high to catch.  I have seen plenty of instance where the ball was uncatchable (almost every throwaway pass) where they didn't do the motion.  They only do it if players are disputing PI.  I would guess had Crabtree started arguing, they would have signaled it.  Even if the ball was still catchable, I still want to know how it is not O PI, what with Crabtree pushing Smith down by the face.
 
2013-02-04 04:15:53 PM  

downtownkid: whizbangthedirtfarmer: Coach_J: Which is pretty impossible since I think you are clearly one of the biggest idiots on this site.

Well done...it's pretty hard to fit that much stupid into such a succinct post like that...very impressive.

Internet Tough Guy, too!  I know for a fact Chris Culliver won't sleep with you.


Yeah, see, an ITG is someone who threatens someone, not insults them.  In this, as in most things, you prove to be ignorant.


Oh, sorry.  I guess instead of an ITG, we should just call someone who insults people through the anonymity of the internet over a non-call in a football game a pussy.  Better?
 
2013-02-04 04:16:01 PM  

Droog8912: I meant specifically the Coast-to-Coast travel provided a ridiculous advantage to the tune of something like 70% for the home team. Circadian rhythms ain't nothin' to fark with. Had to change the scheduling of games as a result, iirc.


That's a fair point. If there's a big enough sample to be statistically significant over a long enough period of time then I'm not going to try to pick a fight with math.
 
2013-02-04 04:19:14 PM  

JohnBigBootay: That's a fair point. If there's a big enough sample to be statistically significant over a long enough period of time then I'm not going to try to pick a fight with math.


It's not really that bad as long as you play the games in the middle hours - it only becomes a big effect when it's a West coast team playing at 10 am PST or an east coast team playing a game that starts at 8-9 pm EST.
 
2013-02-04 04:35:16 PM  

IAmRight: it only becomes a big effect when it's a West coast team playing at 10 am PST or an east coast team playing a game that starts at 8-9 pm EST.



i wonder what the 10-yr record of East Coast time zone teams is in the SNF/MNF 6PM california (or arizona) time slot is.
 
2013-02-04 05:45:21 PM  

rickythepenguin: i wonder what the 10-yr record of East Coast time zone teams is in the SNF/MNF 6PM california (or arizona) time slot is.


I found this.  http://deadspin.com/5934440/the-circadian-advantage-how-sleep-pattern s -benefit-certain-nfl-teams

Don't really have the actual numbers, but apparently the trip doesn't matter so much as the fact that it's late in the day for ESTers. This was over 25 years, MNF only:

"When an East Coast team traveled to another destination within its same time zone, it won 45 percent of the time. But if a team from the East Coast played somewhere in the Pacific time zone, its winning percentage shrunk to only 29 percent. "
 
2013-02-04 06:02:47 PM  

4NTLRZ: Is it just me or did that game show just what a biatch Karma is for Chris Culliver? That dude got torched at every turn.

Funny that for such a homophobe, Culliver had no problem letting guys get behind him all night long.


The best part of the evening, for me, was when Culliver pushed Sam Koch out of bounds for the safety.  He taunted a punter. . .after an intentional safety. . .with only 4 seconds left before he lost the superb owl.

Jackass
 
2013-02-04 07:01:43 PM  

Broktun: superb owl


That's a sweet typo.
 
Displayed 50 of 204 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report