Forum Home

Master Index of Archived Threads


SB XLVI

Frayed Knot
Jan 22 2012 08:55 PM

Man, everything in this sport is New York & Boston ... that's twice in four years!!
The NFL really needs to put in a salary cap or something.


And the frenzy starts off with New England as the 3-point favorite

Ashie62
Jan 22 2012 09:01 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Just 3? wow

Mets – Willets Point
Jan 22 2012 09:07 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Frayed Knot wrote:
Man, everything in this sport is New York & Boston


East Rutherford and Foxborough, to be accurate.

Ceetar
Jan 22 2012 09:48 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Ashie62 wrote:
Just 3? wow


I'm surprised it's that high. Experts are still insisting the Patriots defense is paper thin.

Ceetar
Jan 22 2012 09:52 PM
Re: SB XLVI

With the Giants in the Super Bowl again, and the Knicks free-falling, the Mets are like on a back back burner. And the closer we get to Spring Training when there's actual games, the better.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr
Jan 23 2012 12:47 AM
Re: SB XLVI

This is a Super Bowl I could do without. I mean, it's not QUITE the 2008 Series, but, these days, it's not quite that Tyree Catch SB, either.

Benjamin Grimm
Jan 23 2012 04:23 AM
Re: SB XLVI

The only Super Bowls I ever watch are the ones with the Giants, so I'll be tuning in.

I did notice one time Joe Buck said that the Pro Bowl game would be on NBC. I also noticed that it wasn't until deep into the first quarter that he said who won the AFC championship game. I didn't know, so I was listening for that tidbit and was surprised at how late it came.

Ceetar
Jan 23 2012 05:35 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Benjamin Grimm wrote:
The only Super Bowls I ever watch are the ones with the Giants, so I'll be tuning in.

I did notice one time Joe Buck said that the Pro Bowl game would be on NBC. I also noticed that it wasn't until deep into the first quarter that he said who won the AFC championship game. I didn't know, so I was listening for that tidbit and was surprised at how late it came.


Joe Buck is just terrific. sometime the third quarteR (and other times) Manning completed a pass to "Guess who?!" Buck exclaimed. I'm not sure why it was supposed to be a guessing game, but Buck paused like he trying to figure out who it was that caught it.

Edgy MD
Jan 23 2012 05:53 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Giant Superbowls should be called by Summerall and Madden.

Boom! Tough-Actin' Tenactin!

Frayed Knot
Jan 23 2012 06:11 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Ceetar wrote:
Benjamin Grimm wrote:
The only Super Bowls I ever watch are the ones with the Giants, so I'll be tuning in.

I did notice one time Joe Buck said that the Pro Bowl game would be on NBC. I also noticed that it wasn't until deep into the first quarter that he said who won the AFC championship game. I didn't know, so I was listening for that tidbit and was surprised at how late it came.


Joe Buck is just terrific. sometime the third quarteR (and other times) Manning completed a pass to "Guess who?!" Buck exclaimed. I'm not sure why it was supposed to be a guessing game, but Buck paused like he trying to figure out who it was that caught it.


At least once when Buck said "Guess who" it was because he initially thought it was Cruz who had made a ton of catches already and whose horn he had been honking all game.
When the dude got up he realized it wasn't Cruz only then did he answer his own question by naming the actual receiver.

Ceetar
Jan 23 2012 07:02 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Also, except for foggy cameras and everyone slipping on like every play, it was hard to tell it was raining and windy. They showed a shot of it raining at the start of Overtime and that was like the first shot they showed and Buck and Aikman never mentioned it.

metirish
Jan 23 2012 07:12 AM
Re: SB XLVI

They won't be doing the superbowl right?, they are without equel in how bad they are.

Ceetar
Jan 23 2012 07:23 AM
Re: SB XLVI

metirish wrote:
They won't be doing the superbowl right?, they are without equel in how bad they are.


NBC.

Costas/Collinsworth/Michaels

Benjamin Grimm
Jan 23 2012 07:26 AM
Re: SB XLVI

By the way, I think it's great that the 49ers stadium is once again called Candlestick Park. I remember in the last years that the Giants played there it was called 3M, or something stupid like that. And when I was last in San Francisco, in 2007, I remember making a wrong turn somewhere and ending up in the stadium parking lot, and at that point it was called Monster Field (after Monster.com).

It's nice that Candlestick Park is still standing, still in use, and back to its original name.

MFS62
Jan 23 2012 07:46 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Benjamin Grimm wrote:
The only Super Bowls I ever watch are the ones with the Giants, so I'll be tuning in.

I did notice one time Joe Buck said that the Pro Bowl game would be on NBC. I also noticed that it wasn't until deep into the first quarter that he said who won the AFC championship game. I didn't know, so I was listening for that tidbit and was surprised at how late it came.

And, as I may have mentioned, that kind of arrogance is the reason I root against the team that shares the Jets' stadium. There was a time they wouldn't give the scores of Jets games during their game broadcasts (local anouncers). Since then, I never mention the name of their team. And root against them harder than I root against any other team. In any sport.

Later

Edgy MD
Jan 23 2012 07:54 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Because of Joe Buck.

Benjamin Grimm
Jan 23 2012 08:08 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Boy, THAT sure makes a lot of sense.

And you root harder against the football Giants than you do against the Los Angeles Dodgers?

I find that hard to believe.

TransMonk
Jan 23 2012 08:11 AM
Re: SB XLVI

As a fan of none of the teams involved, I would have preferred to see the 49ers in the SB, but it is hard to deny that the Giants have been playing some admirable football for several weeks now.

I'll be catching this tilt at a poolside bar in Mexico. Needless to say, I don't think I will care either way who the winner is.

metirish
Jan 23 2012 08:19 AM
Re: SB XLVI

TransMonk wrote:
As a fan of none of the teams involved, I would have preferred to see the 49ers in the SB, but it is hard to deny that the Giants have been playing some admirable football for several weeks now.

I'll be catching this tilt at a poolside bar in Mexico. Needless to say, I don't think I will care either way who the winner is.



sweet , enjoy...

I tell people i'm a Jets fan adn I am but not liKe I'm a Mets fan, so , I can pull for either team, I don't despise New England because they are a huge rival and I don't dislike the Giants because they are the other team in NJ.


If this game is as exciting as the last time they met in the SB then I'll be happy.

Nymr83
Jan 23 2012 08:34 AM
Re: SB XLVI

the nightmare of another yankees-phillies world series is here for me. i'd rather see the giants win (i guess) but i cant root for them, i'll just pull for my boxes to hit

MFS62
Jan 23 2012 08:38 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Benjamin Grimm wrote:
Boy, THAT sure makes a lot of sense.

And you root harder against the football Giants than you do against the Los Angeles Dodgers?

I find that hard to believe.

Believe it.
Can't explain why one over the other.
They're close.
But its true.


Later

sharpie
Jan 23 2012 08:41 AM
Re: SB XLVI

I'll be watching it at a bar in Bocas del Toro, Panama.

I'm a 49er fan but certainly are for the Giants over the Patriots.

I was kind of hoping for a Patriots-Packers SB so that I wouldn't care at all and could skip the game entirely since it will be a bit of a hassle to watch in Panama (no TV where we're staying, a cab ride into town plus mrs. sharpie won't go along).

Edgy MD
Jan 23 2012 08:43 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Because of Joe Buck.

G-Fafif
Jan 23 2012 09:37 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Giants attempting to become first team to win a Super Bowl on their fourth network, having prevailed in XXI on CBS, XXV on ABC and XLII on Fox.

Mets – Willets Point
Jan 23 2012 09:37 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Edgy DC wrote:
Because of Joe Buck.


Quiet everyone, I think Edgy is writing a song.

Fman99
Jan 23 2012 10:16 AM
Re: SB XLVI

I know plenty of obnoxious Pats and Giants fans so I don't really care who wins. I hope it's a competitive game that will sustain my interest until the end, no small feat given the copious amounts of alcohol, homemade chili (courtesy of yours truly) and homemade potato skins (courtesy of Fwife) I intend to indulge in.

batmagadanleadoff
Jan 23 2012 11:13 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Benjamin Grimm wrote:
By the way, I think it's great that the 49ers stadium is once again called Candlestick Park. I remember in the last years that the Giants played there it was called 3M, or something stupid like that. And when I was last in San Francisco, in 2007, I remember making a wrong turn somewhere and ending up in the stadium parking lot, and at that point it was called Monster Field (after Monster.com).

It's nice that Candlestick Park is still standing, still in use, and back to its original name.


Because the 49ers will likely be playing in a brand new football stadium in the near future, I intend to travel to SF soon, specifically to watch a Niners home game at Candlestick. The Niners are the only football team I ever rooted for and I've never been to Candlestick. It'd be a nice bonus if I can catch the Mets in town on the same trip, but I'm not counting on that because the Mets typically play at SF before the start of the NFL regular season. I also have reservations about sending this post because whenever I announce plans this early, something always goes terribly wrong.





I've been told that the red section of seats in the football configured photo are the best seats to watch a football game there. That section did not appear in the baseball configuration.

sharpie
Jan 23 2012 01:27 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Went to a bushel of baseball games and a handful of football games at the 'Stick. "The Catch" happened right in front of me sitting in an endzone seat. Certainly the most famous sporting moment I've been to.

Nothing much to like about the place. It's windy and the parking lot fills up and you pay (a lot) to park in muddy lots on the other side of the lot. On the other hand, there are fewer and fewer of the old-school stadia left so by all means take a trip to the Stick.

Ashie62
Jan 23 2012 03:34 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Mets usually equal Jets in fandom

Yankees equal Giants

at least in Northern NJ which is hardcore Big Blue land.

Rockin' Doc
Jan 23 2012 07:57 PM
Re: SB XLVI

I've always been a Mets and Giants fan. As a child I associated them together since the Mets were in the NL and the Giants were in the NFL (vs. the AFL) prior to the merger. I really have no problem with the Jets and wish them well, unless they are playing the Giants. Now, the Yanklees are an entirely different matter. I would likely pull for the IRS over the Yankees.

Ceetar
Jan 23 2012 08:55 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Rockin' Doc wrote:
I've always been a Mets and Giants fan. As a child I associated them together since the Mets were in the NL and the Giants were in the NFL (vs. the AFL) prior to the merger. I really have no problem with the Jets and wish them well, unless they are playing the Giants. Now, the Yanklees are an entirely different matter. I would likely pull for the IRS over the Yankees.



Well when the IRS went up against Jeter...they won. so, clearly you're a bandwagoner.

Mets – Willets Point
Jan 31 2012 08:21 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Why the Super Bowl is socialist.

metsmarathon
Jan 31 2012 08:37 AM
Re: SB XLVI

i can't entirely say why i became a mets/giants fan, though it probably stems from my grandfather. i'm pretty sure he was both a mets and giants fan, though i'm not sure how either of those came about.

well, actually, i can imagine how the giants fan thing came about. his brother joe was a longtime giants reporter, of some notoriety. i imagine that filtered through him to me. i don't necessarily remember sitting down with him to watch any football, as he wasn't a big tv guy, but i think that if he were to have been ever watching football, it woulda been the giants.

it would also have been the '85 & '86 seasons that i started taking an interest in televised sports. so that helps.

i can't recall how he felt about the yankees. but he took me to see the mets play at shea several times, and never once to the bronx (though that might've had as much to do with the neighborhoods as anything). i didn't pick up a dislike of the yankees through him, that's for sure. and i really only strongly disliked those guys starting at the close of the last millenium.

the jets i like. i'm not passionate about them, but i root for them. always have.

TheOldMole
Jan 31 2012 11:33 AM
Re: SB XLVI

I'll still root for the Giants, but...

Benjamin Grimm
Jan 31 2012 11:55 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Why don't we all chip in and offer Jeter $100 to go away forever?

metirish
Jan 31 2012 11:57 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Oh for fucks sake , is there nothing Jeter can't make better?, well, apart from herpes is there anything?

Frayed Knot
Jan 31 2012 01:12 PM
Re: SB XLVI

At least we don't have Eli claiming to have had Derek Jeter posters on his bedroom wall back in Louisiana.

themetfairy
Jan 31 2012 02:37 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Frayed Knot wrote:
At least we don't have Eli claiming to have had Derek Jeter posters on his bedroom wall back in Louisiana.


Yet....

metirish
Feb 01 2012 06:01 AM
Re: SB XLVI

People all over twiiter are soiling themselves because Russo and Francesa did a show together yesterday ,"they were brilliant", " why did they ever split?"......some are trying to start rumors of a full time reunion.

Benjamin Grimm
Feb 01 2012 06:27 AM
Re: SB XLVI

They were brilliant???

Edgy MD
Feb 01 2012 06:33 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Who to Un-Follow, Part I

Ceetar
Feb 01 2012 07:00 AM
Re: SB XLVI

metirish wrote:
People all over twiiter are soiling themselves because Russo and Francesa did a show together yesterday ,"they were brilliant", " why did they ever split?"......some are trying to start rumors of a full time reunion.


This stuff is what Media Day is all about. Happens every year.

They're not wrong that the show was much better when they were together, but the floor is so low.

Ceetar
Feb 02 2012 01:30 PM
Re: SB XLVI

[url]http://brooklynbrewery.com/blog/news/bi-coastal-brewers-bet-for-the-nfc-championship/

This is great, Tour guides at San FRancisco's Anchor Steam Brewery pouring Brooklyn Beers in Giants jerseys.

MFS62
Feb 03 2012 08:36 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Despite despite my feelings for the two teams (well, at least one of them), I'm still going to watch. Here's my analysis of the game.

I call it "You can't have a win without a W".

For the Pats:
Wilfork - can he stop the running game and keep the offense in third and long situations?

Welker - with the defense concentrating on generating a pass rush and covering the tight ends, can he find enough seams in the zone to keep the markers moving?

Whitehead - can he find enough cracks in the defense to squirt through for some key runs?

Walking Cast - with the cast removed, how effective will Gronkowski be?

For the other team:
Wideouts - can they pile up yards after the catch?

For both teams:
Weird stuff - the football takes funny bounces. Will there be any catches off the helmet or punts off the receiver's knee in this game? I expect it to be close, and just one weird play can be very important.

Whistles - will there be a call on a non-reviewable play that determines the outcome of the game? Will the zebras let 'em play?

Later

metirish
Feb 03 2012 08:47 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Despite despite my feelings for the two teams (well, at least one of them), I'm still going to watch. Here's my analysis of the game.

I call it "You can't have a win without a W".

For the Pats:
Wilfork - can he stop the running game and keep the offense in third and long situations?

Welker - with the defense concentrating on generating a pass rush and covering the tight ends, can he find enough seams in the zone to keep the markers moving?

Whitehead - can he find enough cracks in the defense to squirt through for some key runs?

Walking Cast - with the cast removed, how effective will Gronkowski be?

For the other team:
Wideouts - can they pile up yards after the catch?

For both teams:
Weird stuff - the football takes funny bounces. Will there be any catches off the helmet or punts off the receiver's knee in this game? I expect it to be close, and just one weird play can be very important.

Whistles - will there be a call on a non-reviewable play that determines the outcome of the game? Will the zebras let 'em play?

Later


the extra W there in place of the L and we have Water , also important

Frayed Knot
Feb 03 2012 10:04 AM
Re: SB XLVI

I think if the ________ can control the line of scrimmage, stay out of 3rd-and-long situations, avoid needless penalties, and win the battle of turnovers, they stand an excellent chance of winning.


There, I just saved you from actually listening to two weeks of opinions from experts and amateurs alike plus the six hour pre-game show.
And the best thing is that the above sentence works for every team and in every year, you just have to figure out the correct nickname to fill in.

You're welcome.

Nymr83
Feb 03 2012 12:06 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Actually, the Giants might be OK if they end up in 3rd and long situations. in 3 playoff games so far they've converted 60% on 3rd and >5 to go but only 28% in 3rd and <5 to go! add the patriots anemic pass rush and below average secondary and you've got a recipe for Giants 3rd down success!

Edgy MD
Feb 03 2012 12:24 PM
Re: SB XLVI



CitiField definitely needs a mammoth "Home of the Mets" flag hanging over the stadium.

Frayed Knot
Feb 04 2012 08:00 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Nymr83 wrote:
Actually, the Giants might be OK if they end up in 3rd and long situations. in 3 playoff games so far they've converted 60% on 3rd and >5 to go but only 28% in 3rd and <5 to go! add the patriots anemic pass rush and below average secondary and you've got a recipe for Giants 3rd down success!


So obviously what the Giants need to do then anytime they have a 3rd-and-short is to simply take an intentional delay of game penalty.
This not only puts them into the 3rd-and-long that they apparently crave so much but also gives them a more favorable 'Time of Possession' ratio, a factor which also contributes to winning more often. Or at least it does according to those who believe that statistics create games rather than the other way around.

Kong76
Feb 05 2012 07:19 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Longest two weeks in sports (except maybe the last two weeks
of spring training) is finally over. Thank freakin' Jehoshaphat! Of
course, I'm probably just green with envy.

Go pool numbers!!

John Cougar Lunchbucket
Feb 05 2012 12:11 PM
Re: SB XLVI

If I were an actual Giants fan and not a mild enthusiast, I'd be worried sick with all the predictions of imminent victory. Seems likem ost peeps are not just assuming they win but win big.

Making wings NOW!!!

(Mike Francessa the other day added that a team with a lead late in the game that can run out the clock will probably win. Think about that.)

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr
Feb 05 2012 03:02 PM
Re: SB XLVI

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote:
Making wings NOW!!!


Garlic-buffalo and Honey-adobo (wingily tweaked Filipino mom's recipe), with homemade shallot-blue cheese.

Oh, they are a GO.

dgwphotography
Feb 05 2012 03:17 PM
Re: SB XLVI

I'm boring - Just making homemade chicken soup from scratch, pigs in a blanket, and potato skins...

Rockin' Doc
Feb 05 2012 03:25 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Bourbon & coffee Barbecue Glazed Baby Back Pork ribs. Bourbon & Brown sugar baked beans. Fresh french bread. Potential for some bourbon liquid refreshment after dinner.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr
Feb 05 2012 03:27 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Oh. OH.

I think Rockin' Doc just made it move.

metirish
Feb 05 2012 03:32 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Ribs and chicken on it's way ........wings, chips and etc

metirish
Feb 05 2012 03:36 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Oh fuck of Dan Patrick , let's ask Eli for the hundredth time who he goes to for advice ....um maybe his brother and father, yeah they played the game Dan.

Ugh

Edgy MD
Feb 05 2012 03:46 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Giants lifer Jay Horwitz.

John Cougar Lunchbucket
Feb 05 2012 03:48 PM
Re: SB XLVI

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote:
John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote:
Making wings NOW!!!


Garlic-buffalo and Honey-adobo (wingily tweaked Filipino mom's recipe), with homemade shallot-blue cheese.

Oh, they are a GO.

Sounds good. Made glazed sesame sweet wings and regular buff style.

Fman99
Feb 05 2012 03:54 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Homemade beef/pork/veal chili (me) and homemade potato skins (Fwife). We be eatin good.

metsguyinmichigan
Feb 05 2012 04:20 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Hey, Kelly Clarkston remembered all the words to the anthem. Beats Christina Aguilera!

MFS62
Feb 05 2012 04:24 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Two kinds of wings:
Ketchup. cola and garlic powder
Spy souce, honey and Dijon mustard.

There are going to be so many wings eaten today that I'm guessing the price of eggs will go up.
(Or someone will get rich investing in a company that makes chicken prosthetics.)

Later

Ashie62
Feb 05 2012 04:27 PM
Re: SB XLVI

metsguyinmichigan wrote:
Hey, Kelly Clarkston remembered all the words to the anthem. Beats Christina Aguilera!


Barely....She made it her own.

metsguyinmichigan
Feb 05 2012 04:43 PM
Re: SB XLVI

If I'm ARod, I'm watching this one at home with NO popcorn to be found!

Gwreck
Feb 05 2012 06:15 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Madonna: solid but unspectacular. Not going to crack the top 5 list.

Edgy MD
Feb 05 2012 06:33 PM
Re: SB XLVI

There's a list?

Gwreck
Feb 05 2012 06:37 PM
Re: SB XLVI

1 U2
2 Prince
3 Bruce
4 Petty
5 James Brown/ZZ Top

metsguyinmichigan
Feb 05 2012 07:21 PM
Re: SB XLVI

You didn't like McCartney or the Stones?

metirish
Feb 05 2012 07:57 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Heyman with two good points


Jon Heyman @JonHeymanCBS
That's a flaw in the sport. Shouldn't be a situation where a td hurts u.


and

Another flaw in game. Giants benefited by having 12 men on field


it was kinda crazy no?

Gwreck
Feb 05 2012 07:58 PM
Re: SB XLVI

metsguyinmichigan wrote:
You didn't like McCartney or the Stones?


Stones were horrible.

McCartney was solid but unspectacular as well. Somewhere in the 6-10 range, along with Madonna.

Frayed Knot
Feb 05 2012 08:07 PM
Re: SB XLVI

How do you think the fans in Baltimore feel about ex-Colt Raymond Berry bringing out the trophy as if he is now or ever was part of Indianapolis history?
Leave it to the NFL to pretend that there's no ugly history there.

Frayed Knot
Feb 05 2012 08:10 PM
Re: SB XLVI

metirish wrote:
Jon Heyman @JonHeymanCBS
That's a flaw in the sport. Shouldn't be a situation where a td hurts u.

and

Another flaw in game. Giants benefited by having 12 men on field


Yup & Yup.

Edgy MD
Feb 05 2012 08:14 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Was Mike Pagel unavailable?

Ceetar
Feb 05 2012 08:26 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Boom, and Giants are champions. That was fun. "dream team" from Philly floundered and the team from New York took the division and the championship..you listening Mets?

themetfairy
Feb 05 2012 09:11 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Saw the game at the home of former neighbors of ours. We drove up, giving a ride to our neighbors R and B who live across the street. R had suffered a massive heart attack last August, so the fact that he was able to join us was truly incredible.

It was a great game, but it was overshadowed by the fact that we were able to watch it in special company.

SteveJRogers
Feb 05 2012 09:36 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Frayed Knot wrote:
How do you think the fans in Baltimore feel about ex-Colt Raymond Berry bringing out the trophy as if he is now or ever was part of Indianapolis history?
Leave it to the NFL to pretend that there's no ugly history there.


There is an article on Johnny Unitas in the SB program as part of their spotlighting the host city and the host franchise.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr
Feb 05 2012 10:57 PM
Re: SB XLVI

metirish wrote:
Another flaw in game. Giants benefited by having 12 men on field


Not so. The Giants benefited from the fact that a play occurred and took a while to do so. That there was a penalty was immaterial-to-mildly-negative for the Giants-- the key benefit was that 10 seconds ran off the clock.

The key point again is, Jon Heyman is not terribly reliable when venturing outside his realm of "expertise" (and even less so if his informant's name doesn't rhyme with "Shot Whore Us").

metirish
Feb 06 2012 05:41 AM
Re: SB XLVI

I assumed he was talking about the ten seconds?

Ceetar
Feb 06 2012 05:55 AM
Re: SB XLVI

I wonder if that was intentional by the Giants, or merely a lucky mistake.

Hell, why limit it at 12? put 40 guys out there.

Anyway, Heyman's tweets come across like he's watching football for the first time and instantly knows how to make it better.

He's also wrong about the TD hurting the Giants. Trying to think of a good baseball analogy for him (of course since it's a clock thing there won't be) Maybe like the home team, up by a run in the 9th with a first and third situation letting the run score in favor of the double play?

metirish
Feb 06 2012 07:06 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Not to defend Heyman here but his tweets came across just like the rest of us dolts tweeting about the game.




Lupica strikes......haven;t cliked to read the story yet but I bet my last dollar there is a reference to Jeter.

It's official: Eli Manning is as great a clutch athlete as we have ever had in New York, in any sport, at any time. read full story

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com#ixzz1lbuvXqGW

Frayed Knot
Feb 06 2012 07:06 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Ceetar wrote:
I wonder if that was intentional by the Giants, or merely a lucky mistake.

Hell, why limit it at 12? put 40 guys out there.


I immediately thought of the same thing, that the 'penalty' for this is a mere five yards plus down over while the benefit of having a 5th (or 6th, or 7th) DB is a much greater likelihood of the play failing (one which you know going in is going to be a pass). PLUS!! there isn't (at least to my knowledge) any mechanism for whistling the play dead before it happens so the defensive team gets the seconds off the clock that they really want.




He's also wrong about the TD hurting the Giants. Trying to think of a good baseball analogy for him (of course since it's a clock thing there won't be) Maybe like the home team, up by a run in the 9th with a first and third situation letting the run score in favor of the double play?


I don't think he's wrong at all. The flaw in the system is that in certain situations (like last night) the clock becomes much more valuable for each team than a single score to the point where the defensive team wants the offense to score as soon as possible at the same time that the offensive team wants to NOT score. It could even be argued that the Pats should have let the Giants score much earlier like when they were out on the 20 with a full minute left -- which would have lead to a comical situation where 11 guys in blue were standing around refusing to tackle while 11 dudes in white were standing around trying not to advance.

metirish
Feb 06 2012 07:09 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Lupica actually didn't mention Jeter.......

Ceetar
Feb 06 2012 07:17 AM
Re: SB XLVI

metirish wrote:
Not to defend Heyman here but his tweets came across just like the rest of us dolts tweeting about the game.


Sure, but I'm not a so-called 'respected authority' and Heyman's baseball tweets often come across with that 'I know better' ego as well. (at least the ones I see, since I don't follow him)

Frayed Knot wrote:


Ceetar wrote:
He's also wrong about the TD hurting the Giants. Trying to think of a good baseball analogy for him (of course since it's a clock thing there won't be) Maybe like the home team, up by a run in the 9th with a first and third situation letting the run score in favor of the double play?


I don't think he's wrong at all. The flaw in the system is that in certain situations (like last night) the clock becomes much more valuable for each team than a single score to the point where the defensive team wants the offense to score as soon as possible at the same time that the offensive team wants to NOT score. It could even be argued that the Pats should have let the Giants score much earlier like when they were out on the 20 with a full minute left -- which would have lead to a comical situation where 11 guys in blue were standing around refusing to tackle while 11 dudes in white were standing around trying not to advance.



I would disagree. Take the lead when you can take the lead. There are no guarantees. The TD over the FG means they have to go at least 35 yards further down the field to win. There's always the possibility of missing/blocking the FG, muffing the snap. I'm all for trying to force them to eat up time there during the play, walk along the goal line, etc, but to not score tempts fate in my eye.

I do agree that that's part of what makes baseball a 'better' game in that you're not presented with these situations where it's about strategic time outs and letting them score and other assorted things that aren't about the talent of the athletes against each other.

MFS62
Feb 06 2012 07:25 AM
Re: SB XLVI

There was another key "W" that I thought about, but forgot to add. It was:
Who dat? - the relatively unknown player who makes the key play in the game. That linebacker wil picked off Brady was the guy.

Later

Edgy MD
Feb 06 2012 07:26 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Baseball. Make outs or play all day.

It would be interesting to try football like that. Guarantee each team nine possessions. If they score, they receive the kickoff. If they keep getting their first downs and scoring, keep putting points on the board, they can pile it on. But like baseball, no matter how far down the losing team was on their last possession --- 49 points and fourth and 27 --- they would still be technically alive until they turned the ball over.

I'm sure there's things I'm overlooking --- tons of things --- but right now, I'm so committed to an idea I've given only about sixty seconds of thought to that I'm actually miserable that the game isn't played this way.

Ceetar
Feb 06 2012 07:29 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Edgy DC wrote:
Baseball. Make outs or play all day.

It would be interesting to try football like that. Guarantee each team nine possessions. If they score, they receive the kickoff. If they keep getting their first downs and scoring, keep putting points on the board, they can pile it on. But like baseball, no matter how far down the losing team was on their last possession --- 49 points and fourth and 27 --- they would still be technically alive until they turned the ball over.

I'm sure there's things I'm overlooking --- tons of things --- but right now, I'm so committed to an idea I've given only about sixty seconds of thought to that I'm actually miserable that the game isn't played this way.


I'm on board with that. Let's do it. Get me the commissioner on the phone.

And think about the strategy! You've got a 3rd and 8 on the opponents 35 yard line. Do you take the "sure" points and kick a field goal (which in my mind is giving up possession) or go for it?

Ceetar
Feb 06 2012 07:31 AM
Re: SB XLVI

This would be the perfect way to 'rebalance' a game where passing has gotten out of hand. Retaining possession becomes so much more important that you'd have to incorporate more running and less passing, especially since takeaways on defense would suddenly become so much more valuable that you'd actually start training guys to do that more than just taking down guys.

Frayed Knot
Feb 06 2012 07:32 AM
Re: SB XLVI

I'm not saying that there's a cut-n-dried point where wanting your opponent to score is [u:3l26cc3q]in fact[/u:3l26cc3q] always a better strategy.
But it's clearly a choice that can be argued as Belichek chose that option and it looks like the Giants at least thought about it too. And, again, one could argue that it would have benefitted the Pats at the expense of the Giants had they chosen to do what they did even earlier.

The only equivalent I can think of in baseball is one where they had to change rain-out rules a whole bunch of years ago due the team leading trying to make outs as quickly as possible in order to get the requisite number of innings in while the team on defense wanted that half-inning to never end so the game would never be official.

Frayed Knot
Feb 06 2012 07:36 AM
Re: SB XLVI

SteveJRogers wrote:
Frayed Knot wrote:
How do you think the fans in Baltimore feel about ex-Colt Raymond Berry bringing out the trophy as if he is now or ever was part of Indianapolis history?
Leave it to the NFL to pretend that there's no ugly history there.


There is an article on Johnny Unitas in the SB program as part of their spotlighting the host city and the host franchise.


I wish one of the mediots who spent the better part of two weeks sticking mics in Irsay's face asking him every inane question in the book had had the guts to ask him that when they finally get around to running Peyton out of town if they're going to do so via Mayflower moving vans in the middle of the night.

Edgy MD
Feb 06 2012 07:44 AM
Re: SB XLVI

I'd be at least a little disappointed to hear Unitas' family consented to his profile used in the promotion of the game. Not that I want people to sustain bitterness, but Unitas explicitly disowned himself from association with the Indianapolis Colts --- claiming that it was so definitively distinct from the franchise he played for that he wanted his name removed from their record books.

(Of course, Peyton Manning more or less took care of that for him.)

Frayed Knot
Feb 06 2012 07:45 AM
Re: SB XLVI

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote:
Mike Francessa the other day added that a team with a lead late in the game that can run out the clock will probably win. Think about that.




"That's gold Jerry ... GOLD!!"

Ceetar
Feb 06 2012 07:49 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Frayed Knot wrote:
I'm not saying that there's a cut-n-dried point where wanting your opponent to score is in fact always a better strategy.
But it's clearly a choice that can be argued as Belichek chose that option and it looks like the Giants at least thought about it too. And, again, one could argue that it would have benefitted the Pats at the expense of the Giants had they chosen to do what they did even earlier.


Earlier would've made sense I guess. (I'm merely saying Heyman was suggesting it was fact that that's the way you do it)

Supposedly Eli didn't say anything to Bradshaw until he handed him the ball, and Ahmad said it didn't click until about the 2 yard line.

But then, it was only second down. So in that sense I guess I get the idea of stopping on the goal line. force them to use that last time out and then you still theoretically have a really good shot at the one inch drive for a TD on 3rd which would eat up the clock if you didn't score with the 4th Down field goal as a backup.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr
Feb 06 2012 08:31 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Heyman is NOT right. A ten-second (or seven-second, or twelve-second) loss isn't a mandate every time there's a post-snap flag. Brady always has the option of chucking it out of bounds within a millisecond of the flag coming out-- if it's against the Giants, they save time while gaining yardage; if it's against the Pats, a positive gain likely isn't counting anyway-- but instead chose to go for the scratch-off lottery ticket downfield (the smart play in virtually every other game situation).


RE: the lay-down: as FK pointed out, Belichick's only real flaw in playing that way was that he should have done it much, much earlier (basically, once the Giants got to the 15 or so). Letting it happen the way it did wasn't a failure of the path taken-- it was a death-by-half-measure.

And if letting-the-other-guy-win-this-play-so-that-you-have-a-better-chance-to-win-the-game is a game flaw, then chess is one flawed, flawed game. (As is every other game/sport ever that's not a straight-line sprint or who-threw-it-farthest competition. Including baseball... or is bunting always a terrible, terrible option?)

Ceetar
Feb 06 2012 08:40 AM
Re: SB XLVI

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote:


And if letting-the-other-guy-win-this-play-so-that-you-have-a-better-chance-to-win-the-game is a game flaw, then chess is one flawed, flawed game. (As is every other game/sport ever that's not a straight-line sprint or who-threw-it-farthest competition. Including baseball... or is bunting always a terrible, terrible option?)


There are some that would say bunting is always a terrible option. percentage-wise it's not, but still. But that, and chess, are different in that you're not actually giving up points. Outs and chess pieces are not how the game is scored.

Edgy MD
Feb 06 2012 08:41 AM
Re: SB XLVI

For the fans, it sure can be.

Obviously --- and the Mets sure have shown this --- a game of sacrifice can soon become farcical.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr
Feb 06 2012 09:26 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Ceetar wrote:
LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote:


And if letting-the-other-guy-win-this-play-so-that-you-have-a-better-chance-to-win-the-game is a game flaw, then chess is one flawed, flawed game. (As is every other game/sport ever that's not a straight-line sprint or who-threw-it-farthest competition. Including baseball... or is bunting always a terrible, terrible option?)


There are some that would say bunting is always a terrible option. percentage-wise it's not, but still. But that, and chess, are different in that you're not actually giving up points. Outs and chess pieces are not how the game is scored.


Pardon. The correct, specific baseball analogue is "conceding the run" to arrest the potential big inning (allowing a score to conserve outs/clock).

Ceetar
Feb 06 2012 09:30 AM
Re: SB XLVI

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote:


Pardon. The correct, specific baseball analogue is "conceding the run" to arrest the potential big inning (allowing a score to conserve outs/clock).


And teams never concede the (tying/go-ahead) run in the ninth inning. They wouldn't even do it with Ruth-Pujols-Bonds coming up in the bottom of the inning.

Edgy MD
Feb 06 2012 09:32 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Sure, they do it all the time. Up by three, runners on first on third, you get a grounder and concede the run in order to get the sure out on the trailing runner and a chance a double play.

Mets – Willets Point
Feb 06 2012 09:50 AM
Re: SB XLVI

I just think it's funny that Giants won because they scored a touchdown by mistake.

Ceetar
Feb 06 2012 09:52 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Mets – Willets Point wrote:
I just think it's funny that Giants won because they scored a touchdown by mistake.


It's hilarious. Bradshaw was quoted as thinking "damn, why'd I score?" (About a Super Bowl winning touchdown!) when Brady threw that last hail mary.

Valadius
Feb 06 2012 10:15 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Four years ago was the happiest moment for one of my teams since I started following sports as a kid. This was just gravy.

When the Mets win the World Series though, I will spare no expense to be there when it happens.

metsmarathon
Feb 06 2012 11:24 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Frayed Knot wrote:
I'm not saying that there's a cut-n-dried point where wanting your opponent to score is in fact always a better strategy.
But it's clearly a choice that can be argued as Belichek chose that option and it looks like the Giants at least thought about it too. And, again, one could argue that it would have benefitted the Pats at the expense of the Giants had they chosen to do what they did even earlier.

The only equivalent I can think of in baseball is one where they had to change rain-out rules a whole bunch of years ago due the team leading trying to make outs as quickly as possible in order to get the requisite number of innings in while the team on defense wanted that half-inning to never end so the game would never be official.


a theoretical / anecdotal parallel is the rally-killing home run in baseball. you know, you've got hte opposing pitcher on the ropes, ripping double after double after double, pouring on the runs, when one of your guys does something stupid like popping hte ball over the fence and clearing hte bases. instant rally-killer.

at least so the story goes. if that were truly the case, why wouldn't the pitcher getting hammered start serving up juicy meatballs hoping to induce the rally-killer? or the defensive players not chase the ball on a would-be double, allowing hte batter to kill the rally and tired hisself out all at the same time?

ok, it's not reallyhte same thing, but its the case where, accoriding to some school of thought, the success of your opponenet hurts him. or some such.

Edgy MD
Feb 06 2012 11:37 AM
Re: SB XLVI

I tell you, boys and girls, I don't have nerves of steel like Mark Harmon did in that episode of The Hardy Boys Nancy Drew Mysteries where he played a college football kicker who had the tentacles of gambling ring wrapped around him but was freed to go ahead and make that last-second kick when Nancy Drew broke up the ring and had them all arrested then somehow got down on the sidelines to inform him of his liberty BECAUSE NANCY DREW IS AWESOME.

I tell you, I'm not like that. And if my team forsook a gimme touchdown only to have the running back dance on the one yard line to run the clock down, with full confidence in me hitting what amounts to a 99% likelihood short field goal, I'm going to run out on the field with mudtracks down the back of my uniform. I'd be terrified that they put me in that situation. If I'm the hiker or the holder, I'm shaking like a leaf too. I'm not made of stone.

Pressure is pressure. It's part of the game. But when my own team is setting me up for Jackie Smith's Hall of Infamous Super Bowl Stooges by handing me the pressure that should naturally be on the defensive backfield, it's much much worse. I'm palpitating now just typing this.

G-Fafif
Feb 06 2012 11:46 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Jaded professional athletes? Flight home reveals otherwise for Super Bowl XLVI champs:

[youtube:1243fem0]dyNPeLJBo7Y[/youtube:1243fem0]

metirish
Feb 06 2012 12:08 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Has Francesa given the ratings numbers yet?

Frayed Knot
Feb 06 2012 01:31 PM
Re: SB XLVI

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote:
And if letting-the-other-guy-win-this-play-so-that-you-have-a-better-chance-to-win-the-game is a game flaw, then chess is one flawed, flawed game. (As is every other game/sport ever that's not a straight-line sprint or who-threw-it-farthest competition. Including baseball... or is bunting always a terrible, terrible option?)


The difference with football is that, as both a timed game and an alternate possession game, you can run into situations where the team on offense doesn't want to score at the same time the team on defense has no interest in stopping them. That is the flaw.

Edgy MD
Feb 06 2012 01:35 PM
Re: SB XLVI

The other difference is that professional football is patronized by tens of millions at a time while chess is played for perhaps hundreds.

A continuing series of strategic sacrifices is perhaps not the most viscerally exciting spectacle, and the rules should perhaps be careful about rewarding them in too many ways.

metsmarathon
Feb 06 2012 06:32 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Edgy DC wrote:
I tell you, boys and girls, I don't have nerves of steel like Mark Harmon did in that episode of The Hardy Boys Nancy Drew Mysteries where he played a college football kicker who had the tentacles of gambling ring wrapped around him but was freed to go ahead and make that last-second kick when Nancy Drew broke up the ring and had them all arrested then somehow got down on the sidelines to inform him of his liberty BECAUSE NANCY DREW IS AWESOME.

I tell you, I'm not like that. And if my team forsook a gimme touchdown only to have the running back dance on the one yard line to run the clock down, with full confidence in me hitting what amounts to a 99% likelihood short field goal, I'm going to run out on the field with mudtracks down the back of my uniform. I'd be terrified that they put me in that situation. If I'm the hiker or the holder, I'm shaking like a leaf too. I'm not made of stone.

Pressure is pressure. It's part of the game. But when my own team is setting me up for Jackie Smith's Hall of Infamous Super Bowl Stooges by handing me the pressure that should naturally be on the defensive backfield, it's much much worse. I'm palpitating now just typing this.


not to mention that the gints had more than a few balls pop free through teh course of the game, and were quite fortunate to not lose any of them. i don't ordinarily buy into the fates, but i sure as heck know that you do not ever, ever tempt them. the pats did, and look what happened to them. they lost the game.

Benjamin Grimm
Feb 07 2012 06:44 AM
Re: SB XLVI

It appears that Gisele Bundchen is aspiring to be the next Anna Benson.

Ceetar
Feb 07 2012 07:03 AM
Re: SB XLVI

The parade is supposed to be well attended. Company president is walking around talking about 10% of the Metro Area is supposed to be there or something.

Ceetar
Feb 07 2012 07:11 AM
Re: SB XLVI

speaking of which, I created a "which team will have the next parade" poll

[url]http://www.ceetar.com/optimisticmetsfan/2012/02/07/poll-which-ny-team-will-have-the-next-parade/

Edgy MD
Feb 07 2012 07:19 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Every day of my life, I hold a parade for the Mets.

metirish
Feb 07 2012 07:20 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Ceetar wrote:
speaking of which, I created a "which team will have the next parade" poll

[url]http://www.ceetar.com/optimisticmetsfan/2012/02/07/poll-which-ny-team-will-have-the-next-parade/



my heart says Mets but head says Rangers

Ceetar
Feb 07 2012 07:26 AM
Re: SB XLVI

metirish wrote:
Ceetar wrote:
speaking of which, I created a "which team will have the next parade" poll

[url]http://www.ceetar.com/optimisticmetsfan/2012/02/07/poll-which-ny-team-will-have-the-next-parade/



my heart says Mets but head says Rangers


well Rangers get first dibs anyway.

Frayed Knot
Feb 07 2012 07:51 AM
Re: SB XLVI

With the defending champ getting the honor to host the Thursday night season opener, this September's game is already scheduled for the Giants & Redskins.
So given that set-up, the Redskins' need for a QB, the obsession Redskin owner Daniel Snyder seems to have with acquiring past-their-prime FAs, and the NFL's obsession with TV ratings, I could totally see the league working feverishly behind the scenes to clear every obstacle and make sure that Peyton winds up in Washington.

TransMonk
Feb 07 2012 08:13 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Frayed Knot wrote:
With the defending champ getting the honor to host the Thursday night season opener, this September's game is already scheduled for the Giants & Redskins.
So given that set-up, the Redskins' need for a QB, the obsession Redskin owner Daniel Snyder seems to have with acquiring past-their-prime FAs, and the NFL's obsession with TV ratings, I could totally see the league working feverishly behind the scenes to clear every obstacle and make sure that Peyton winds up in Washington.

As a Redskins fan, I would have mixed feelings about this. But Manning vs. Manning twice a year would certainly drive some revenue.

In my mind, the odds are that Grossman will start the season for the Skins next season.

TransMonk
Feb 07 2012 08:19 AM
Re: SB XLVI

I watched SB XLVI at a hotel bar in Mexico with about a dozen other Americans. In Mexico, they did not carry the NBC feed, but had two viewing options: an ESPN affiliate with English announcers but Spanish graphics and the NFL network feed with Spanish commentary but English graphics. Our room had the English feed, but the bar had the free drinks, so we watched with the Spanish commentary. Neither network showed any of the American TV commercials. They did show a commercial for the Mexican equivilant of Advil featuring Joe Montana about 15 times.

I have no love for the Giants...but none for the Patriots either. I typically pull for the NFC team in these circumstances and enjoyed the thrill of the game. I was content with the outcome.

Mets – Willets Point
Feb 07 2012 01:21 PM
Re: SB XLVI

900 pounds of Butterfingers dumped on a Boston sidewalk as a "tribute" to Wes Welker.



My god do I live among whiny, entitled douchebags.

Ceetar
Feb 07 2012 02:02 PM
Re: SB XLVI

lol, awesome, but Brady probably should've moved them somewhere hard to reach.

dgwphotography
Feb 07 2012 02:05 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Mets – Willets Point wrote:
My god do I live among whiny, entitled douchebags.


I wouldn't think there were so many MFY fans there...

Edgy MD
Feb 07 2012 02:26 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Ceetar wrote:
lol, awesome, but Brady probably should've moved them somewhere hard to reach.


Really? I think this is for crap. Public scapegoating and piling on is using the media for bullying.

Benjamin Grimm
Feb 07 2012 02:29 PM
Re: SB XLVI

I agree. It's just assholery.

Ceetar
Feb 07 2012 02:32 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Edgy DC wrote:
Ceetar wrote:
lol, awesome, but Brady probably should've moved them somewhere hard to reach.


Really? I think this is for crap. Public scapegoating and piling on is using the media for bullying.


I think it's a creative way to advertise. Play on the fans misery to remind them on your product. Like stupid Manhattan Mini Storage doing the "6 pro teams and the Mets" (although I hated that..so whatever)

Edgy MD
Feb 07 2012 02:34 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Yes, whatever.

And led by a pawn company.

Mets – Willets Point
Feb 07 2012 02:36 PM
Re: SB XLVI

dgwphotography wrote:
Mets – Willets Point wrote:
My god do I live among whiny, entitled douchebags.


I wouldn't think there were so many MFY fans there...


Yankees fans, Patriots fans, cut from the same cloth.

Edgy MD
Feb 07 2012 02:40 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Oh, I think they be everywhere, with winning teams and losing ones.

Frayed Knot
Feb 07 2012 04:24 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Mets – Willets Point wrote:
900 pounds of Butterfingers dumped on a Boston sidewalk as a "tribute" to Wes Welker.



My god do I live among whiny, entitled douchebags.



In fairness to Patriots fans, this seems to be the invention of the on-line Pawn service mentioned on that sign (I had no idea such things existed) trying to capitalize on the plight of disgruntled New England football fans rather than something started by those disgruntled locals themselves.

Pats fans could still be all spoiled DBs, it's just that this display alone doesn't make them so.

metirish
Feb 07 2012 04:25 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Not a fan of butterfingers myself


meanwhile in NY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... wvTPNMEEGI


[youtube:22n3lftr]player_embedded&v=wwvTPNMEEGI[/youtube:22n3lftr]

Gwreck
Feb 07 2012 05:11 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Ceetar wrote:
The parade is supposed to be well attended. Company president is walking around talking about 10% of the Metro Area is supposed to be there or something.


The parade may well have been well attended but the only way they are getting 2 million in attendance there is if they are counting everyone who would have been in Manhattan anyway this morning.

Ceetar
Feb 07 2012 05:25 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Gwreck wrote:
Ceetar wrote:
The parade is supposed to be well attended. Company president is walking around talking about 10% of the Metro Area is supposed to be there or something.


The parade may well have been well attended but the only way they are getting 2 million in attendance there is if they are counting everyone who would have been in Manhattan anyway this morning.


supposedly 2.3, which is both right around 10% and may be more than the Mets get in 81 games.

Mets – Willets Point
Feb 07 2012 06:56 PM
Re: SB XLVI

The Mayor's Office will be issuing the pawnbrokers a violation for commercial dumping ($1000 fine). Still, free Butterfingers.

Ceetar
Feb 07 2012 07:57 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Mets – Willets Point wrote:
The Mayor's Office will be issuing the pawnbrokers a violation for commercial dumping ($1000 fine). Still, free Butterfingers.


I don't think I'd take a free candy bar mocking my team.

Gwreck
Feb 07 2012 08:42 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Ceetar wrote:
supposedly 2.3


Got a link? Note that the NYPD has long since refused to give official crowd size estimates but I bet somebody will try.

I found one story that suggested that as many as 1 million people expected.

Ceetar
Feb 07 2012 08:57 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Gwreck wrote:
Ceetar wrote:
supposedly 2.3


Got a link? Note that the NYPD has long since refused to give official crowd size estimates but I bet somebody will try.

I found one story that suggested that as many as 1 million people expected.


no, saw it tweeted, by one of the Giants I think.

metsmarathon
Feb 07 2012 09:33 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Ceetar wrote:
Mets – Willets Point wrote:
The Mayor's Office will be issuing the pawnbrokers a violation for commercial dumping ($1000 fine). Still, free Butterfingers.


I don't think I'd take a free candy bar mocking my team.


i love the mets, but i'll gladly take a jumbo-sized butterfinger bar any day.

i regret typing those words.

Frayed Knot
Feb 08 2012 06:47 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Hey, it's not like the groups that put on events like this are ever prone to blowing up crowd size for their own pr purposes.
And I think one of the reasons police and other officials have gotten out of the guesstimating business is so they don't leave themselves open to being called sexist/racist or anti-whatever when their guess comes in significantly lower than what the organizing group claims it to be.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr
Feb 08 2012 08:06 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Granted, that's a publicity stunt.

What do you say to the perspective-laden gentles going nutballs over Gronkowski just... having... to dance?

biggin413 wrote:
There’s no excuse for partying after a loss like that. After playing so horribly you can’t even hold your head high and keep your chin up. You find a dark room and sit in that bitch in silence. It doesn’t matter how good of a season you had because if you don’t win that last game than its all for nothing.


eatdickmanning wrote:
Seriously, Wes Welker is prob contemplating suicide alone in the dark in his hotel room, and these two are doing this????? Gronkowski just dropped way down on my scale, and Matt Light who is already near the bottom for blowing cock in the ’08 Super Bowl, is now dead to me…
I hate every bit of this.


otter523 wrote:
Decapitate these shirtless faggots. I don’t see many chicks on stage with all those shirtless dudes…..Pretty fucking gay looking.

Edgy MD
Feb 08 2012 08:23 AM
Re: SB XLVI

You know, if I booked a party anyway, I'd go to it. The problem is that private affair that it is, everybody and his sister has a camera in their pocket. A videocamera. So your discrete affair is dancing on somebody else's grave of self-pity.

Probably should have kept their shirts on, but....

I don't believe for a minute that "...if you don’t win that last game than its all for nothing." Life is way too short for that nonsense. Of course, if Carlos Beltran was seen partying the day after a World Series loss, Mets fans would stop at nothing. They'd charter a boat to Puerto Rico and hunt him down.

Ceetar
Feb 08 2012 08:27 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Edgy DC wrote:
You know, if I booked a party anyway, I'd go to it. The problem is that private affair that it is, everybody and his sister has a camera in their pocket. A videocamera. So your discrete affair is dancing on somebody else's grave of self-pity.

Probably should have kept their shirts on, but....

I don't believe for a minute that "...if you don’t win that last game than its all for nothing." Life is way too short for that nonsense. Of course, if Carlos Beltran was seen partying the day after a World Series loss, Mets fans would stop at nothing. They'd charter a boat to Puerto Rico and hunt him down.


They killed Beltran when he was in the process of building a freaking school.

I don't get worked up about this stuff. People celebrate in different ways, people grieve in different ways. Who am I to judge?

Edgy MD
Feb 08 2012 08:32 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Maybe you're someone who cares about the people being killed.

Ceetar
Feb 08 2012 08:35 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Edgy DC wrote:
Maybe you're someone who cares about the people being killed.


if I hunted down and bitch-slapped every idiot that was killing athletes for stupid reasons, I'd never have any time to watch said athletes.

Edgy MD
Feb 08 2012 08:42 AM
Re: SB XLVI

We all seem to have plenty of time for our opinions nonetheless.

metsmarathon
Feb 08 2012 08:52 AM
Re: SB XLVI

fans are idiots. the keep forgetting that athletes are actual humans, real live persons, just like hte rest of us, and that their sport is something that's typically very important to them, and it's their job and their passion.

and instead of looking at this lie, hey, you just lost a game, you should be crying and wah wah wah because you let me down, why not turn it around.

lets say you were working all year long with a group of people at your company. you had some success, and some failure. you had a big pitch to make at the end of the year, and while you really came together as a team and put your best product out there -sure, there were some mistakes, some weaknesses, but nobody's percection is absolute, and you put your hearts and souls into it - at the end of the day, the other guys' pitch was better.

but your manager liked your work, and some of the ideas you came up with have the potential to be real winners. much of your team will be back to work on it, building those concepts into better products, but you know that for many of the people in the room, this will be your last time working together. joe and little bobby, the interns - they likely won't be coming back for another rotation. but good luck to them in school next year. and jane and ahmed, the new hires - those guys are always the first ones on the chopping block. old alfred is going to retire. and ray. ray's star is rising, and don't think they haven't noticed. ray's going to get pulled away for something bigger, you can just feel it.

you r manager planned a party for after the big presentation, anticipating that it would go well. the room is booked, it's all paid for. and he knows how hard you worked. hell, he'll be there too.

are you telling me that you're going to just go back to your hotel room and cry into your roll-aboar and garment bag? or are you going to go out with your team, and celebrate the hard work and hte good times you all had together? reminisce about how you overcame so many challenges, and all the times you stepped up to get this far. and what about sending off those guys who won't be coming back, who you may never see again except in awkward excahnges over linkedin? what about commiserating over the bitter end of it all, and how much the lead briefer on the other team looked like a big goofy doofus with floppy hair. fuck him, and his older brother too (fucking nepotism - he may be good, but that punk ass didn't work his way up like you did - he got it on his family's name).

you're going to turn your back on all of that just for one night? no. these are your people. you need to be with them, and live it up. you can write up your lessons learned tomorrow. that can wait one more night. you have months befor e the next request for proposals comes out. tonight you need to be a human.

Edgy MD
Feb 08 2012 08:59 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Yabbut who are you to judge?

(Clapping.)

Ceetar
Feb 08 2012 09:01 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Edgy DC wrote:
We all seem to have plenty of time for our opinions nonetheless.


and my opinion is I don't really have much feeling about athletes do when they're not doing the on the field/court/pitch/yard.

I do have strong opinions about the idiots that criticize them and make it a talking point on the radio/newspaper/blogs. But Carlos Beltran doesn't really need me to defend him and I lose interest in it pretty fast.

Edgy MD
Feb 08 2012 09:05 AM
Re: SB XLVI

"Who am I to judge?" is a backhanded way of saying "Who are you to judge?"

Ceetar
Feb 08 2012 09:10 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Edgy DC wrote:
"Who am I to judge?" is a backhanded way of saying "Who are you to judge?"


correct. I judge those that judge athletes for how they live their lives.

Edgy MD
Feb 08 2012 09:17 AM
Re: SB XLVI

OK, now I get it. "I don't get worked up about this stuff. People celebrate in different ways, people grieve in different ways. Who am I to judge?" spoke about your unwillingness to judge the athletes. Not about your unwillingness to judge the fans.

Ceetar
Feb 08 2012 10:17 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Edgy DC wrote:
OK, now I get it. "I don't get worked up about this stuff. People celebrate in different ways, people grieve in different ways. Who am I to judge?" spoke about your unwillingness to judge the athletes. Not about your unwillingness to judge the fans.


yeah.

I mean I try not to judge the fans either, there is no right way to follow sports and all that, but there is just SO MUCH stupid out there.

(aside, my brain is absolutely frazzled this week. I typed that last sentence three times and each time it was rife with spelling and grammatical errors well beyond the usual ones I make)

Frayed Knot
Feb 08 2012 10:18 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Part of this type of criticism is a way for pissed-off fans to convince themselves that a portion of the reason their team lost can be explained by athletes who simply don't care as deeply as they the fans do. Dancing, not crying enough, taking post-season vacations or otherwise continuing with their lives despite the last loss serve as 'proof' to those already given to that view. Add in the transient nature of players in a city -- "I've been a ______ fan for forty years and he's only been here for three!" -- and it becomes an easy way to transfer the pain.

It also doesn't help when mediots stoke the fires. Russo was always big on fanning this view. Benigno also.

Ceetar
Feb 08 2012 10:27 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Frayed Knot wrote:
Part of this type of criticism is a way for pissed-off fans to convince themselves that a portion of the reason their team lost can be explained by athletes who simply don't care as deeply as they the fans do. Dancing, not crying enough, taking post-season vacations or otherwise continuing with their lives despite the last loss serve as 'proof' to those already given to that view. Add in the transient nature of players in a city -- "I've been a ______ fan for forty years and he's only been here for three!" -- and it becomes an easy way to transfer the pain.

It also doesn't help when mediots stoke the fires. Russo was always big on fanning this view. Benigno also.


the mediots are who I have the biggest problem with. In my opinion (and what I am looking for when I read/listen) is talk about the game/sports/abilities. And while I enjoy hearing about things like Butterfingers, it should be a "hahah, did you hear that?" not a jumping off point for a three hour back and forth with callers about a players attitude or how much he cares.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr
Feb 08 2012 10:37 AM
Re: SB XLVI

Hell, I'd feel more of a need to go out drinking and/or dancing after the excruciating loss than I would after a win.

I'm just curious as to how his high-ankle sprain spread to his cochlea.

[youtube:37oybuqz]mNN_eBFlZ5U[/youtube:37oybuqz]

Mets – Willets Point
Feb 08 2012 05:42 PM
Re: SB XLVI

mm beat me to it with his long and excellent scenario, but I was going to point out that most people in whatever line of work will in fact actually be more likely to want to go out for drinks and social activity after a bad day at work. Football players should not be exempt.

metirish
Feb 08 2012 05:48 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Trust Ian O'Connor to be a total wanker on this



Ian O'Connor @Ian_OConnor
George Steinbrenner ripped David Cone by phone for leading a party posse of Yanks after the '97 loss. Bob Kraft, your move.

Mets – Willets Point
Feb 08 2012 05:54 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Yes, but Steinbrenner was a narcissistic douchebag.

Edgy MD
Feb 08 2012 06:11 PM
Re: SB XLVI

Your move, Ian O'Connor.

G-Fafif
Feb 10 2012 02:14 PM
Re: SB XLVI

What a "Finish": audio and video masterpiece from NFL Films.