Master Index of Archived Threads


Super Bowl XLV

Green Bay Packers

13 votes

Pittsburgh Steelers

7 votes

Valadius Jan 23 2011 07:50 PM

Who's your pick to win?

metirish Jan 23 2011 07:53 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jan 23 2011 08:28 PM

I'll be rooting for Green Bay.......I just do not like Rothlesberger.

cooby Jan 23 2011 08:19 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

metirish, I am not a big fan of his either, but I have to admit the man can play. I do not condone how this year started for him but this season he has been nothing short of outstanding. This is the first season I can say I have had perfect faith in him.

MFS62 Jan 23 2011 08:50 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

The famous films of the first two Super Bowls each feature the grinning face of Vince Lombardi. The fans in Green Bay might say he's still looking down on the team. And since that time, I've rooted for any team that can wipe that smirk off that face. Go Steelers. Later

Willets Point Jan 23 2011 09:00 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

I'm surprised these teams haven't met in the Super Bore before with all their respective dominance.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jan 23 2011 10:22 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

And since that time, I've rooted for any team that can wipe that smirk off that face. Go Steelers. Find this a more amenable smirk, do you? I've enjoyed this season immensely, and would hate for it to become fodder for Yinzer arguments over which Apeman-led SB team was best. No offense, Cooby (and Tomlin, for whose abilities/professional conduct I have a lot of respect), but I think Green Bay will win, and I hope very much that they do.

TransMonk Jan 24 2011 07:50 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

My gut says Pittsburgh this morning...but there are 2 weeks left before the game. Pittsburgh played better than GB on championship Sunday. Big Ben is not going to give the Pack 2 gimmie second-half INTs like the third-string QB from the Bears did. Still, the Packers are good at a lot of things and Aaron Rodgers is the real deal. I haven't voted in this poll and probably won't make my final choice until mid-week next week. I'm surprised, but Danny Sheridan from USA Today opens with GB favored by 2.5 and an O/U of 46...for whatever that's worth.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 24 2011 08:13 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

I'm sick of the hype already. Just play the damn game!

Ceetar Jan 24 2011 08:50 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I'm sick of the hype already. Just play the damn game! I hear the puppy bowl released it's rosters.

Edgy DC Jan 24 2011 09:05 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Fun with typos:

metsmarathon Jan 24 2011 09:10 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

rooting for green bay.

Ceetar Jan 24 2011 09:13 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

It's so stupid taht they won't let people say Super Bowl and force them advertise 'big game' parties. I hope the players strike until the league fixes this.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Jan 24 2011 09:58 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Ceetar wrote: John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: I'm sick of the hype already. Just play the damn game! I hear the puppy bowl released it's rosters. If you're watching at home/at a sympethetic friend or family member's home, and the game's a blowout, or the coverage is making your brain hurt, Puppy Bowl is like matzoh ball soup for your eyes.

Ceetar Feb 02 2011 09:00 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

A Super Bowl Ad will feature an embedded code for a secret level of Angry Birds: [url]http://adage.com/superbowl/article?article_id=148602

seawolf17 Feb 02 2011 09:16 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Rooting for the Packers, not because I care, but because I just learned that a former colleague's son is their backup tight end. http://www.nfl.com/players/andrewquarle ... =QUA373212

Benjamin Grimm Feb 02 2011 09:20 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Don't care. Won't watch.

Willets Point Feb 02 2011 05:29 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Rooting for the Packers, not because I care, but because I just learned that a former colleague's son is their backup tight end. Not that I knew him, but Mike Tomlin and I went to the same college at the same time. I don't think that trumps Pittsburgh having a rapist for a quarterback though.

dgwphotography Feb 02 2011 06:01 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

I've always hated the Steelers - their douche QB just seals the deal....

John Cougar Lunchbucket Feb 02 2011 06:28 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Half of Wifey's family are Steelers fans (the half that's not Eagles fans) so to the extent it makes them happy I'm OK with a Pittsy win. But mostly I want a good game.

metirish Feb 02 2011 06:31 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Willets Point wrote: Rooting for the Packers, not because I care, but because I just learned that a former colleague's son is their backup tight end. Not that I knew him, but Mike Tomlin and I went to the same college at the same time. I don't think that trumps Pittsburgh having a rapist for a quarterback though. I'd root for the Steelers but for him, Rooney being the ambassador to Ireland and all that.

Kong76 Feb 02 2011 07:27 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

I took the Steelers, but it's a toss up for me. Rootin' for cooby too! There is a small Green Bay factor that says, "F u to Brett Favre, didn't take long for us to get to the big game and win without you ya espn whorin' prick!" So I could go this way too with a small grin on my face if they win. I doubt many remember, but one of my friends didn't wake up after last year's annual Super Bowl party. It was a weird year with the summer and the holidays without him around. Super Bowl Sunday is going to be really strange.

cooby Feb 02 2011 07:31 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Thank you KC :) That is terrible about your friend! Guys, try to remember, Roethlisberger is NOT the favorite Steeler, we all love Polamolu, Hines Ward, Keisel, etc. Nobody condones what Roethlisberger did, but again I say, he is one hell of a quarterback. As my friend and officemate Mike can tell you, I did not call him "Bonehead" all year long so obviously he has improved himself.

Fman99 Feb 02 2011 07:35 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Don't care who wins. Rooting for a competitive game.

cooby Feb 02 2011 07:46 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

I think it will be Fman! I think it'll gonna be a great blue collar slugfest!

Kong76 Feb 02 2011 08:50 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

cooby wrote: I think it'll gonna be a great blue collar slugfest! Let's not get carried away ... how many players on either side ever had a real job?

Willets Point Feb 02 2011 09:12 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

I think she was talking about the fans in the bars.

cooby Feb 03 2011 03:49 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

heheh, yeah, and at home!

Ceetar Feb 03 2011 07:52 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Because the Super Bowl, and football, is all about the gambling..here's my wagers: Bodog wrote: Risked US$ 1.00 to win US$ 2.75 Yes +275 Football - NFL Team Props Super Bowl XLV Specials - Will Christina Aguilera wear a cowboy hat while singing the National Anthem? - Moneyline Risked US$ 1.00 to win US$ 1.75 Yes +175 Football - NFL Team Props Super Bowl XLV Specials - Will Christina Aguilera's hair color be anything except completely blonde when she sings the National Anthem? - Moneyline Must be any other color than completely blonde for Yes to be graded as the winner. Bodog's decision is final. Risked US$ 1.00 to win US$ 0.63 Over 2½ (-160) Football - NFL Team Props Super Bowl XLV Specials - How Many Times will FOX mention “Brett Favre” on TV during the Game? - Total Wager is on the number of times“Brett Favre”will be mentioned on TV during the Game (from kick off until final whistle). Live commentary only, Any Taped or Past Video does not counttowards wager, must say“Brett Favre”exactly. Bodog's decision is final. Risked US$ 1.00 to win US$ 0.77 Under 1½ (-130) Football - NFL Team Props Super Bowl XLV Specials - How Many Times will FOX mention “Lockout” on TV during the Game? - Total Wager is on the number of times“Lockout”will be mentioned on TV during the Game (from kick off until final whistle). Live commentary only, Any Taped or Past Video does not count towards wager, must say“Lockout”exactly. Bodog's decision is final. Risked US$ 1.00 to win US$ 5.00 Red 5/1 Football - NFL Team Props Super Bowl XLV Specials - What Color will the Gatorade be that is dumped on the Head Coach of the Winning Super Bowl Team? - Moneyline If nothing is dumped wagers will be No Action. Bodog's decision is final. Risked US$ 1.00 to win US$ 0.95 Tails (Coin Toss) -105 Football - NFL Team Props Super Bowl XLV - What will be the Result of the Super Bowl XLV Coin Toss? - Moneyline Wager is on the opening coin toss. All wagers have action. Risked US$ 1.00 to win US$ 10.00 Green Bay Packers 11 to 13 Points 10/1 Football - NFL Team Props Super Bowl XLV - Margin of Victory - Moneyline Game must go 55 minutes for action. Overtime counts towards wager. Risked US$ 1.00 to win US$ 0.87 Over Yards (Longest Touchdown) vs. Under Yards (Longest Touchdown) Over 43½ (-115) Football - NFL Team Props Super Bowl XLV - Longest Touchdown Scored in the Game (Yardage) - Total Offensive, Defensive and Special Teams touchdowns count towards wager. Game must go 55 minutes for action. Overtime counts towards wager. Touchdown must be scored for wagers to have action. Risked US$ 1.00 to win US$ 1.50 Yes (Steelers Convert a 4th Down) +150 Football - NFL Team Props Super Bowl XLV - Will the Pittsburgh Steelers Successfully Convert a 4th Down? - Moneyline All wagers have action. Penalty that results in a converted 4th down counts as yes Risked US$ 1.00 to win US$ 2.25 Yes +225 Football - NFL Team Props SUPER BOWL XLV CROSS SPORT PROPS - Green Bay Packers win Super Bowl and Milwaukee Brewers win on MLB Opening Day (3/31/11)? - Moneyline All wagers have action

TransMonk Feb 03 2011 08:30 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

In the end, I'm going Pack...even though it kills me. Their fans are going to be pretty crazy if they win.

Valadius Feb 03 2011 08:59 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

I want to know what kind of wagers Paddy Power's got going on the game.

dgwphotography Feb 03 2011 05:29 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Kong76 wrote: I doubt many remember, but one of my friends didn't wake up after last year's annual Super Bowl party. It was a weird year with the summer and the holidays without him around. Super Bowl Sunday is going to be really strange. Wow Kase, my condolences. that's just horrible.

Kong76 Feb 03 2011 06:45 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Thanks, yeah I couldn't remember if I posted about it. The whole week after the super bowl last year was pretty messed up.

Edgy DC Feb 04 2011 06:09 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Top Ten Things off the Top of My Head That I associate with Pittsbugh [list=1][*]The Steelers[/*:m] [*]Andy Warhol[/*:m] [*]Steel[/*:m] [*]Carnegies and Mellons[/*:m] [*]The Buccos[/*:m] [*]Three Rivers[/*:m] [*]The Penguins[/*:m] [*]Keith Haring (actually from Reading, but Pittsburgh was his last stop before NYC)[/*:m] [*]Donnie Iris[/*:m] [*]The Cathedral of Learning[/*:m][/list:o] Top Ten Things off the Top of My Head That I associate with Green Bay [list=1][*]The Packers[/*:m] [*]Meat Packing[/*:m] [*]The Packers[/*:m] [*]White People[/*:m] [*]The Packers[/*:m] [*]The Packers[/*:m] [*]The Violent Femmes (actually from Milwaukee, but Brian Ritchie and/or Victor DeLorenzo wore Packers garb on the cover of one of their albums)[/*:m] [*]The Packers[/*:m] [*]Catholics[/*:m] [*]The Packers[/*:m][/list:o]

MFS62 Feb 04 2011 06:44 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Valadius wrote: I want to know what kind of wagers Paddy Power's got going on the game. If you place your football wagers based on numbers, here's something I've observed over the years. Other than the final score (d'oh), the statistic that has most closely correlated to winning is rushing attempts. Not yards. After using it to win weekly office pools years ago, I've casually followed it ever since. This year, it has held up about 85% of the time (some weeks higher, some weeks lower). And one team that has won on weeks that it did not have more rushing attempts than its opponent has been the Packers. So, IMO, the great Steeler run defense might not be as important in this game as it would be against another team. Just sayin'. But I'm still rooting for the Steelers. Later

metsmarathon Feb 04 2011 07:05 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

but is it predictive?

Frayed Knot Feb 04 2011 08:03 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

MFS62 wrote: Valadius wrote: I want to know what kind of wagers Paddy Power's got going on the game. If you place your football wagers based on numbers, here's something I've observed over the years. Other than the final score (d'oh), the statistic that has most closely correlated to winning is rushing attempts. Not yards. After using it to win weekly office pools years ago, I've casually followed it ever since. This year, it has held up about 85% of the time (some weeks higher, some weeks lower). And one team that has won on weeks that it did not have more rushing attempts than its opponent has been the Packers. So, IMO, the great Steeler run defense might not be as important in this game as it would be against another team. You do realize that rushing attempts are high because the team is winning and not that the team is winning because of their numerous rushing attempts, right?

Ashie62 Feb 04 2011 08:56 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Green Bay is going to get their tits ripped off, and lose.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 04 2011 11:54 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

I want to know what kind of wagers Paddy Power's got going on the game. If you place your football wagers based on numbers, here's something I've observed over the years. Other than the final score (d'oh), the statistic that has most closely correlated to winning is rushing attempts. Not yards. After using it to win weekly office pools years ago, I've casually followed it ever since. This year, it has held up about 85% of the time (some weeks higher, some weeks lower). And one team that has won on weeks that it did not have more rushing attempts than its opponent has been the Packers. So, IMO, the great Steeler run defense might not be as important in this game as it would be against another team. You do realize that rushing attempts are high because the team is winning and not that the team is winning because of their numerous rushing attempts, right? Total correlation/causation mixup. ALTHOUGH... one could argue that a team that cannot steadily-- if not explosively-- run the football has trouble salting away games. (One would be wrong. See: New England Patriots of recent vintage, 80's Niners, etc.)

metsmarathon Feb 04 2011 12:07 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Total correlation/causation mixup. i think you just described 90% of every bit of football analysis that's ever been done. maybe 95%.

Ceetar Feb 04 2011 12:11 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

metsmarathon wrote: LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Total correlation/causation mixup. i think you just described 90% of every bit of football analysis that's ever been done. maybe 95%. Thanks to sabermetrics, baseball is down to like 85% As Moneyball teaches us...just because a guy plays, or played, the game, doesn't mean what he says is true.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 04 2011 12:20 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Feb 04 2011 12:34 PM

There are some people out there making inroads on explaining football-- and what makes "good" and "bad" teams different from "lucky" or "unlucky" teams-- more completely. Football Outsiders is probably the standard-bearer... but like BP, the good stuff's largely pay-to-play. One free, good sample piece/sampler: this week's "Walkthrough," assaying the sex/death myths surrounding football fans and Super Bowl Sunday, and taking a look at what each of Troy Polomalu's seven INTs this year tell you about the Steelers' defensive scheming.

Frayed Knot Feb 04 2011 12:30 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

metsmarathon wrote: LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Total correlation/causation mixup. i think you just described 90% of every bit of football analysis that's ever been done. maybe 95%. But at least football analysis doesn't spend dozens of hours each week or hundreds of hours each SB dissecting such stuff and presenting it like it's manna from heaven .... oh wait!! The difference in baseball & football as far as statistical analysis goes is that baseball has the one-on-one pitcher/batter matchup which are not only so numerous as to rid itself of statistical noise but also can only be minimally affected by the game's situation. No such thing in football where every running back would have a 0.0 yard rushing average without his offensive line and the number of times he does or does not get the ball in a game is totally dependent on the score, his coach, the time of game, etc.

Frayed Knot Feb 04 2011 12:38 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

btw, - now that it's been sub-freezing in the D/FW area all week; - and had a couple inches of snow fall just this morning to add to the as-yet melted ice that fell earlier; - and even though the warmup is coming it's still only going to be in the low-mid forties for game time; how'd you like to be one of those guys who bought $100 tickets (plus who knows what to park) for the privilege of sitting outside next to the parking lot watching the game on a big screen with the stadium as a backdrop? Hmmmmm, forty degrees just as night begin to fall with slushy snow/ice at your feet while watching TV and paying dearly for the honor.

seawolf17 Feb 04 2011 12:44 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Any of youse know anyone within spitting distance of Heinz Field who owns a camera or smartphone and can do me a favor today?

MFS62 Feb 04 2011 07:10 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Frayed Knot wrote: MFS62 wrote: Valadius wrote: I want to know what kind of wagers Paddy Power's got going on the game. If you place your football wagers based on numbers, here's something I've observed over the years. Other than the final score (d'oh), the statistic that has most closely correlated to winning is rushing attempts. Not yards. After using it to win weekly office pools years ago, I've casually followed it ever since. This year, it has held up about 85% of the time (some weeks higher, some weeks lower). And one team that has won on weeks that it did not have more rushing attempts than its opponent has been the Packers. So, IMO, the great Steeler run defense might not be as important in this game as it would be against another team. You do realize that rushing attempts are high because the team is winning and not that the team is winning because of their numerous rushing attempts, right? Yes, it is a chicken/egg kind of thing. I didn't say it was predictive. I just said there is a high degree of correlation. Are they running to protect a lead. Or does a successful running game open up that team's offense, and/ or frustrate the other team into defensive mistakes (overloading the "box")? However, Mike Ditka on ESPN this morning agreed with me that attempts are more improtant than yardage. And I heard that after I made my post. Again, I'm not sure it is predictive. But that didn't stop me from winning those office pools. Later

Ceetar Feb 04 2011 07:12 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

attempts are more important than yardage? Isn't that like saying At Bats are more important than hits? or Stolen Base Attempts are more important than Steals? Changeups thrown are more important than strikes?

metsmarathon Feb 04 2011 07:31 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

how would you use it in the office pool?

metsmarathon Feb 04 2011 07:32 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Ceetar wrote: attempts are more important than yardage? Isn't that like saying At Bats are more important than hits? or Stolen Base Attempts are more important than Steals? Changeups thrown are more important than strikes? see, i could see it working in baseball. "the team with more plate appreances is gonna win" "the team that throws fewer pitches is gonna win" those examples would tend to make sense to me.

Ceetar Feb 04 2011 07:40 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

metsmarathon wrote: Ceetar wrote: attempts are more important than yardage? Isn't that like saying At Bats are more important than hits? or Stolen Base Attempts are more important than Steals? Changeups thrown are more important than strikes? see, i could see it working in baseball. "the team with more plate appreances is gonna win" "the team that throws fewer pitches is gonna win" those examples would tend to make sense to me. You know, I have heard people tie plate appearances to winning. I don't remember the number they gave..40?

MFS62 Feb 04 2011 07:59 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

metsmarathon wrote: how would you use it in the office pool? I logged attempts for and against each team for the first few weeks of the seasons. Then I used that info to pick the winners later in the years. Picked some games that appeared real "upsets". Some of them I said "nahhh, can't be". But I picked them anyhow and was pleasantly surprised. And, as I said, this year's Green Bay team has won despite lower attempt numbers more than most teams. Later

batmagadanleadoff Feb 04 2011 08:13 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Ceetar wrote: [rushing] attempts are more important than yardage? Isn't that like saying At Bats are more important than hits? This is funny because the team with more at bats usually wins the baseball game.

batmagadanleadoff Feb 04 2011 08:14 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

metsmarathon wrote: Ceetar wrote: attempts are more important than yardage? Isn't that like saying At Bats are more important than hits? or Stolen Base Attempts are more important than Steals? Changeups thrown are more important than strikes? see, i could see it working in baseball. "the team with more plate appreances is gonna win" Ya beat me to it.

Ceetar Feb 04 2011 09:27 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Ceetar wrote: [rushing] attempts are more important than yardage? Isn't that like saying At Bats are more important than hits? This is funny because the team with more at bats usually wins the baseball game. But they're getting more AB because they're getting more hits. They're getting more attempts because they're getting yardage. (10yards, first down, 3 more attempts, etc) It all boils down to making use of the time you have the ball. whether thats running up the clock by making a lot of rushing attempts, or not making outs by getting hits and walks and not bunting. an example in baseball would be the 2009 Mets. lots and lots of attempts. not a lot of runs. or when Reyes set the AB record because he never walked and played 161 games. wasn't the most productive player in the league, just tried a lot. Jets fans used to complain that they'd drive down the field and then kick a field goal. lots and lots of attempts, very little result out of it. i don't know what i'm getting at here. stop bunting. fire jerry. *whew*

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 06 2011 12:22 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Still confused about for whom you should root? http://www.holytaco.com/a-flowchart-to- ... -bowl-xlv/

Ceetar Feb 06 2011 04:23 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Christina was blond, no cowboy hat lost my first two bets

metirish Feb 06 2011 04:29 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Ceetar wrote: Christina was blond, no cowboy hat lost my first two bets fucked up the words too right?

Ceetar Feb 06 2011 04:45 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

metirish wrote: Ceetar wrote: Christina was blond, no cowboy hat lost my first two bets fucked up the words too right? no idea. was the coin flip tails? Volume issues over here

metirish Feb 06 2011 05:30 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Was that Rusty Staub with Travolta ?

Ashie62 Feb 06 2011 06:04 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Ceetar wrote: Ceetar wrote: Christina was blond, no cowboy hat lost my first two bets fucked up the words too right? no idea. was the coin flip tails? Volume issues over here Aguilera 1 minute 52 total was 1:54 1/2 Tail win Yes, she messed up the words.

metirish Feb 06 2011 06:12 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

the official jump the shark moment came with Slash

metirish Feb 06 2011 06:18 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

A comedy show for the half time entertainment , this is fucking vile...

Gwreck Feb 06 2011 06:21 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Worst halftime show since they had "Up With People" doing it.

Ashie62 Feb 06 2011 06:24 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

I believe the Black Eyed Peas called out Obama. Otherwise it looked like an alien invasion.

Ashie62 Feb 06 2011 06:25 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

metirish wrote: A comedy show for the half time entertainment , this is fucking vile... Tinkers could do a better job.

Valadius Feb 06 2011 06:53 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

At least they decided to take some kind of risk with it as opposed to the decidedly stale halftime shows post-Janet Jackson. And I have to admit I was surprised by Usher's appearance.

metirish Feb 06 2011 06:59 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Valadius wrote: At least they decided to take some kind of risk with it as opposed to the decidedly stale halftime shows post-Janet Jackson. And I have to admit I was surprised by Usher's appearance. A risk with the Black Eyed Peas?, they could hardly have chosen a more vanilla group if they tried , they are as lame a Paul McCartney .

themetfairy Feb 06 2011 07:18 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

I bet that Pink would do a kick-ass halftime show.

Ashie62 Feb 06 2011 07:53 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Metallica !!

John Cougar Lunchbucket Feb 06 2011 08:14 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Pretty good game and the team that played better won. I made wings just as nasty, spicy and greasy as you'd get in any sports bar.

metirish Feb 06 2011 08:30 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

How did you make the wings, dumb question I know but a few years ago I bought the Wing It that whatshisname was flogging on the telly, made good wings , getting the right sauce is key though. http://www.mysimon.com/shopping-picks/w ... deep-fryer

John Cougar Lunchbucket Feb 06 2011 08:41 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

We had our friends come by with their kid (Lunchpail's age), so I made two kinds: One was basically mild fried chicken for the kids: soaked 'em in buttermilk and dredged flour/salt/pepper and tiny hit of cayenne, fried in veg shortening & butter. Krispy and good. The sports-bar variety was marinated overnight in wheat beer, then tossed with chili powder, paprika, salt & pepper, fried in oil, then drowned with melted butter, frank's hot sauce and siracha. The recipe called for a grill, but I didn't feel like digging it out of the snow and as a result they were greasy, but I thought authentically so because of it. You could not really taste the beer but the spiciness and messiness was just right, and I was proud to serve it.

Frayed Knot Feb 06 2011 08:57 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

metirish wrote: the official jump the shark moment came with Slash This jives with something I was saying in a different thread a while ago -- Is there some reason why many if not most current acts can't seem to put out an album or have a live show without requiring one or even multiple "guest star" appearances? I mean the Super Bowl gig is, by definition, 15 minutes or less and a supposed 'Super Group' still needs TWO drop-ins to help them get through it?!?!

Ceetar Feb 06 2011 08:58 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Frayed Knot wrote: metirish wrote: the official jump the shark moment came with Slash This jives with something I was saying in a different thread a while ago -- Is there some reason why many if not most current acts can't seem to put out an album or have a live show without requiring one or even multiple "guest star" appearances? I mean the Super Bowl gig is, by definition, 15 minutes or less and a supposed 'Super Group' still needs TWO drop-ins to help them get through it?!?! I'm not sure that's the groups doing. it's all about name dropping. i miss when celebrity death match was on during the half time show.

metirish Feb 06 2011 09:14 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Having the usher sing is hardly name dropping though , that's some serious chicken winging JCL .

Frayed Knot Feb 06 2011 09:17 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

I'm not sure that's the groups doing. --- Well if the SB committee (or whoever runs these things) is thinking that the Peas don't have enough stuff to pull off a 15 minute show then I'm not sure why they're hiring them in the first place. it's all about name dropping. --- and stuff like "branding" and "synergy", but none of those things reflect well on the band either because it implies that their name isn't enough. i miss when celebrity death match was on during the half time show --- I'd be in favor of a celebrity death match with real celebrities as opposed to just the claymation figures. Will.i.am holds up fingers to indicate the number of fans the band would have if Fergie didn't look and dress the way she does.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Feb 06 2011 09:26 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

The vocoder must die.

metirish Feb 06 2011 09:33 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

what a laugh , ABC News just showed footage of Packers fans in Greenbay celebrating the win , don't know exactly where in Greenbay it was but it was outside a Subway , poor bastards.

Ceetar Feb 07 2011 06:00 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

i don't know if it's true or not, but i'm sure they judge 3 celebrities is better than 2 is better than 1. special effects, awe. They're certainly not looking for the best 15 minute artistic performance on a hastily constructed stage in a giant stadium.

G-Fafif Feb 07 2011 06:04 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

I thought it was a great halftime show. I mean the kittens during Puppy Bowl VII.

Frayed Knot Feb 07 2011 06:52 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Ceetar wrote: i don't know if it's true or not, but i'm sure they judge 3 celebrities is better than 2 is better than 1. special effects, awe. If three are considered better than two and two better than one then it sounds like the one wasn't good enough in the first place. Ditto special effects. They're certainly not looking for the best 15 minute artistic performance on a hastily constructed stage in a giant stadium. Maybe they should be.

Ceetar Feb 07 2011 06:56 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Frayed Knot wrote: Ceetar wrote: They're certainly not looking for the best 15 minute artistic performance on a hastily constructed stage in a giant stadium. Maybe they should be. Different argument. Or maybe they could just play football.

Edgy DC Feb 07 2011 08:13 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

The scary part (and I'm part of the 1% of the male population whose main interest int he Super Bowl is the halfitme show) is that they seem to be retuning to the state of things at Boobiegate and before where spectacle trumps music so extremely that music is an afterthought. They seem to think that they have run out of acts who (1) retian popularity that transcends genre, and (2) don't go blue as a matter of course to cover up their artistic limitations, but (3) but are still young enough/active enough to put on a decent show. They haven't, but they just aren't thinking hard enough. They should call me.

Ashie62 Feb 07 2011 10:03 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Ceetar wrote: Ceetar wrote: They're certainly not looking for the best 15 minute artistic performance on a hastily constructed stage in a giant stadium. Maybe they should be. Different argument. Or maybe they could just play football. Super Bowl in NJ-NY area so how about "Kiss" for halftime?

Edgy DC Feb 07 2011 10:17 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

It's almost guaranteed to be Bon Jovi, isn't it?

batmagadanleadoff Feb 07 2011 10:25 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Edgy DC wrote: It's almost guaranteed to be Bon Jovi, isn't it? Or Springsteen, even though he did the Super Bowl gig two years ago. Are repeats allowed?

Ceetar Feb 07 2011 10:35 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Edgy DC wrote: It's almost guaranteed to be Bon Jovi, isn't it? I've already seen Bon Jovi at the new giants stadium. pass.

Edgy DC Feb 07 2011 10:51 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Edgy DC wrote: It's almost guaranteed to be Bon Jovi, isn't it? Or Springsteen, even though he did the Super Bowl gig two years ago. Are repeats allowed? Doubtful. And lame if they did. As for "pass," me too, but we don't get a vote.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 07 2011 11:12 AM Re: Super Bowl XLV

At least two morning shows referred to this year's halftime act as "edgy." In what world? The Eminem Chrysler ad was kind of stunning, though. Best thing outside-the-lines.

Frayed Knot Feb 07 2011 02:34 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Good to see that the NFL and Jerry Jones - determined to break the all-time SB seating record - sold some 1,200 more seats than they actually had. They were attempting to get said seats put in but weather and other delays set them back (although the stadium hasn't hosted a football game in over a month) so fire/safety marshals declared them to be unsafe and couldn't be used. About 2/3 of folks with those tickets were re-seated in places with last-minute cancelations and in press seating but some 400 were turned away at the door [insert film of little boy wearing his Packer gear crying here]. The league is reportedly offering the folks triple their money back for the $900 face value although it seems to me that most SB tickets (with blind approval of the NFL) are purchased via secondary markets and at way over the list price not to mention the travel and hotel expenses that are incurred.

metirish Feb 07 2011 02:36 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Frayed Knot wrote: Good to see that the NFL and Jerry Jones - determined to break the all-time SB seating record - sold some 1,200 more seats than they actually had. They were attempting to get said seats put in but weather and other delays set them back (although the stadium hasn't hosted a football game in over a month) so fire/safety marshals declared them to be unsafe and couldn't be used. About 2/3 of folks with those tickets were re-seated in places with last-minute cancelations and in press seating but some 400 were turned away at the door [insert film of little boy wearing his Packer gear crying here]. The league is reportedly offering the folks triple their money back for the $900 face value although it seems to me that most SB tickets (with blind approval of the NFL) are purchased via secondary markets and at way over the list price not to mention the travel and hotel expenses that are incurred. Un-fucking -real , I hope four of those 1200 tickets were going to those four pricks that have never missed a SB.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 07 2011 02:46 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

I feel terrible for those people that forked over up to $10,000 for Super Bowl tickets with barely a deep swallow, then got offered thrice face value, free tickets for next year, plus (for the most part) seat upgrades, comped food and merch for their trouble. I really do. /Waves class-warfare banner //Whistles Billy Bragg songs

seawolf17 Feb 07 2011 02:48 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

metirish wrote: I hope four of those 1200 tickets were going to those four pricks that have never missed a SB. Actually, I read that at least one of those guys from the commercial is recovering from some sort of illness and had to miss the game; he sent a few family members instead. Sucka.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 07 2011 03:10 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

bo I hope four of those 1200 tickets were going to those four pricks that have never missed a SB. Actually, I read that at least one of those guys from the commercial is recovering from some sort of illness and had to miss the game; he sent a few family members instead. Sucka. The irony? It was the Packers fan in the group. Less ironic, more just, um, "impressive:" that miserable creep who brags about missing weddings and births wasn't kidding. It’s one thing to pass up a party or miss a wedding, anniversary or even a funeral, but Jacobson, 71, of San Francisco, tells the tale of giving up the chance to adopt a child. Jacobson and his wife were participating in an open adoption in the 1970s and he says the birth mother’s only prerequisite was that the adoptive parents be present for the birth of the baby. The problem was that the baby was due on Super Bowl weekend. “I said it’s no problem,” he recalls. “I’ll take the red-eye (flight), watch the game and take the red-eye back. That was fine with my wife, but it wasn’t with the mother.” Because of Larry’s growing obsession, he and his wife passed on that adoption but later adopted two biological sisters, neither of which knew until recently the story of the abandoned adoption. “My daughter said she was glad about the Super Bowl,” Jacobson says. “If we’d gotten that child, we wouldn’t have gotten our daughters. So they think the Super Bowl is a good thing.”

DocTee Feb 07 2011 07:00 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

The Eminem Chrysler ad was kind of stunning, though. Would have been better but for his selling out in the earlier Lipton ad. Whatcha think of the Groupon/Tibet commercial? They're getting roasted for it here in Cali.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 07 2011 08:52 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

I get what they were going for, and it didn't really bother me that much... but it did seem a little off-key.

MFS62 Feb 07 2011 09:46 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

The best ad, hands down, was the Hugh Laurie (as House) spoof of the classic commercial in which Mean Joe Green tosses the kid his jersey for a bottle of soda. "My patient just died, kid". Later

Willets Point Feb 08 2011 12:33 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: The Eminem Chrysler ad was kind of stunning, though. I guess I really don't get the point they're making. Because one wealthy hip-hop star can drive a luxury car that means that everything is ok in Detroit and the auto industry isn't bankrupt? It seems that it would be the equivalent of saying that because the Yankees play in the Bronx that the Bronx is a prosperous area.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Feb 08 2011 12:43 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Willets Point wrote: LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: The Eminem Chrysler ad was kind of stunning, though. I guess I really don't get the point they're making. Because one wealthy hip-hop star can drive a luxury car that means that everything is ok in Detroit and the auto industry isn't bankrupt? It seems that it would be the equivalent of saying that because the Yankees play in the Bronx that the Bronx is a prosperous area. I felt it was total bullshit. Wasn't it only a few years ago Chrysler was shoving that German douchebag 'Dr. Z' down our throats?

metsmarathon Feb 08 2011 12:49 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

to be fair, it's a new ownership group. besides, you're not supposed to remember that at all.

Edgy DC Feb 08 2011 12:50 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

I wonder if Diego Rivera would approve of his mural being so adapted.

seawolf17 Feb 08 2011 12:58 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Edgy DC wrote: I wonder if Diego Rivera would approve of his mural being so adapted. Fucking Diego Rivera.

metirish Feb 08 2011 12:59 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

Wasn't that long ago that Eminem was singing crap about Detroit.....I guess there's only so much hating a man can do from the lap of luxury.....word to you mommas

John Cougar Lunchbucket Feb 08 2011 01:04 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

metsmarathon wrote: to be fair, it's a new ownership group. besides, you're not supposed to remember that at all. Da. Who eees dis Em undt Em?

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 08 2011 01:05 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Feb 08 2011 01:11 PM

Yeah, total 180 from the German-engineering tack. The overall message I got from this was, "We're building something, and it's something good, and it's something American." By grounding it locally, not nationally, it hit a lot harder. (The aim in using Eminem, I think, wasn't to tap a billion-dollar-rap-superstar; instead, they were using a plainspoken-but-still-cool human symbol who, in the public eye, still reflects OF "Detroit" values-- hardscrabble, self-made, not-showy. This isn't a flossing Jay-Z astride the Brooklyn Bridge, or cartoon Kanye West, or poppy anime aliens like the Black Eyed Peas; this is the local boy made good in a nice sweatsuit and a prison haircut.) I liked the camera pointed outward at the recognizably bombed-out Detroit 'burbs and slums, with the initial emphasis on the current physical and economic world that "we" (company and viewer) live in together, rather than "check out the pretty car." And since they couldn't run away from their very public TARP bailout, they subtly embraced it with the American/Detroit angle: this is YOUR car company. This is a little bit of beauty in the commonplace-- affordable, everyday luxury-- from you and for you. I'm not saying it wasn't bullshit. I'm just saying it was compelling as a standalone and as a message, and beautifully executed. (Then again, so was Triumph of the Will.)

metirish Feb 08 2011 01:08 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

This might be a more relevant message about Detroit. http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/wee ... 50373.html good article btw

Edgy DC Feb 08 2011 01:14 PM Re: Super Bowl XLV

seawolf17 wrote: Edgy DC wrote: I wonder if Diego Rivera would approve of his mural being so adapted. Fucking Diego Rivera. Is this a reference I'm missing. I'm not sure I approve of my post being so adapted.