Master Index of Archived Threads


No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

Kong76 Sep 05 2012 09:54 PM

John from Staten Island, you're on the ....

Fman99 Sep 06 2012 06:14 AM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

Watched the first half of last night's game and then I got sleepy and went to bed. Cris Collinsworth is really a blowhard, too, I had gone in thinking that there was something likable about him as a broadcaster but whatever knowledge he has is drowned out by his awful vocal tones and endless jabbering.

Ceetar Sep 06 2012 06:53 AM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

I was bored of the pacing of Football already by the third quarter, and this was a relatively fast paced one. Giants played like crap too. dropped a zillion balls.

metirish Sep 06 2012 06:56 AM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

Fman99 wrote: Watched the first half of last night's game and then I got sleepy and went to bed. Cris Collinsworth is really a blowhard, too, I had gone in thinking that there was something likable about him as a broadcaster but whatever knowledge he has is drowned out by his awful vocal tones and endless jabbering. this and I think he started out good but seems to have got caught up in the hype of him being great ......STFU for a few seconds please, it's OK not to talk.

Kong76 Sep 06 2012 09:33 AM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

I often watch football games that I don't have a rooting interest in with the sound off. Yankee games too. If I find the urge to hear some intolerable dolt say something, I mumble to myself.

Ceetar Sep 06 2012 09:35 AM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

Kong76 wrote: I often watch football games that I don't have a rooting interest in with the sound off. Yankee games too. If I find the urge to hear some intolerable dolt say something, I mumble to myself. I turn them way down because I tend to multi-task and use the crowd noise to realize something's happening. But it's a good test of announcers imo. If you the announcers volume is low, if they have anything interesting to say you'd turn it up. If you never reach for the remote, they're probably not good announcers.

Frayed Knot Sep 06 2012 10:08 AM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

When I watch football games I usually watch them muted or with the sound way down. The hype that increasingly surrounds the way that sport is packaged and sold dictates that the in-game crew becomes an assault on the senses without a moment where there's not someone screaming at/to you. And it rarely has anything to do with who is doing that specific game because, with a handful of exceptions, most of them are generically interchangeable as far as I'm concerned.

seawolf17 Sep 06 2012 11:08 AM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

I wasn't watching at all (not a fan), but I was following some other things online. The way my friends on FB were posting about last night's game, I'd have thought the Giants had three first-quarter touchdowns. I clicked over to ESPN.com to find that it was still 0-0 into the second. So confused.

G-Fafif Sep 06 2012 11:17 AM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

Just got NFL Network and have been enjoying a surfeit of 2011 Super Bowl-related programming, so the beginning of 2012 and its loss hasn't really registered. Nice take from Sports on Earth's Mike Tanier on The Team in the Blue Flannel Suit. For the Team in the Blue Flannel Suit, a season-opening celebration is like an office birthday party: yellow tablecloths in the break room, ice cream cake, then back to work. The concerts and hoopla were remanded to Rockefeller Center, across the river. Risers carrying spotlights, lasers and smoke machines were wheeled onto the field minutes before the Giants left the tunnel, then whisked away seconds later. There were fireworks, but you missed them if you looked down to check a text message. [...] The record crowd of 82,287 was often spookily silent. The Giants were down by just seven points when the third quarter ended, but the crowd barely murmured as the defending champions went about their messy business. The Super Bowl party was short-lived. But then, the Giants are not party types. The Team in the Blue Flannel Suit may be the greatest champion in modern sports history, not because it’s the best team (not by an order of magnitude), but because it gives fans what they crave most. Modern sports fans do not want start-to-finish excellence or season-long domination. In fact, gaudy records and lopsided wins fill us with anxiety, because we have been trained to think of sports as a morality play and come-uppance as an actual primal force, like gravity. Fans prefer teams they can worry and carp about, but they also covet championships. Only the Giants can consistently cap a full season of frustration and consternation with a sudden burst of Super Bowl euphoria. They provide pleasure born of agony, the perfect cocktail for a nation that made “Fifty Shades of Grey” a bestseller. The Giants satisfy the modern fan’s barely hidden masochistic streak. Contrast the Giants with their regular foils, the Patriots, who sound hubris klaxons every time they take the field. Contrast them with their Meadowlands roommates, a Jets team that provides all the tension a fan could ask for, but none of the release. Or, contrast The Team in the Blue Flannel Suit with Wednesday’s opponent, the alleged America’s Team, whose owner holds the rights to one of the most recognizable international brands in the business world, yet feels the need to rap in pizza commercials. Jerry Jones’ compulsion to use the Cowboys as his personal outlet for self-expression has made the team a cautionary tale. They should be uber-villains like the Patriots or baseball’s Yankees, but instead have become the NFL’s blustery comic relief. Every Cowboys season is a Jay Gatsby soirée, loud and opulent, unfulfilling and increasingly soul-draining. Their season-opening victory, with its slew of penalties and awful blocking, raised many questions and answered few.

Ceetar Sep 06 2012 11:29 AM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

seawolf17 wrote: I wasn't watching at all (not a fan), but I was following some other things online. The way my friends on FB were posting about last night's game, I'd have thought the Giants had three first-quarter touchdowns. I clicked over to ESPN.com to find that it was still 0-0 into the second. So confused. I noticed that phenomenon with the the other stuff I don't watch, like the Knicks. And especially the 'love to hate' teams like the Heat. Everyone making Lebron jokes and sarcastic jibes and then I'd happen to notice a ticket or an update on the radio and found out they won. That's an interesting take by Tanier, but I'm willing to be the overlap of "readers of 50 shades of gray" and "football fans" is not large. Maybe this is why I hate ESPN so much but they succeed. As he suggests, people want the drama and storyline stuff, so when ESPN force feeds us narrative, it's actually what viewers want. And while there are plenty of people that rant and rave about it, they secretly enjoy it. Just like people rant against reality TV and watch it. I don't think this is a 'modern sports fan' thing either.

Ashie62 Sep 06 2012 01:14 PM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

Hey! Romo didnt fuck up.

The Second Spitter Sep 09 2012 11:08 PM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

I hope this thread sees greater participation from mm, ABNS, and Gwreck this year. Sorry guys...but as Bobby V would say, CPF is probably ready for more openly Giants posters.

metsmarathon Sep 10 2012 06:59 AM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

yeah, i should probably get my big blue on more. though, in truth, i watched more of the jets game this week than the giants. (my satellite dish had been disconnected last week, as we got a new roof. and i only caught about two downs of the jets game, as i was doing other manly things, like splitting wood with an axe.)

Ceetar Sep 10 2012 07:12 AM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

I'll probably post more too, once Football season starts in October after baseball season.

Nymr83 Sep 11 2012 03:31 PM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

Ashie62 wrote: Hey! Romo didnt fuck up. Its not December yet. Zing!

Ceetar Oct 21 2012 05:08 PM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

Giants now 5-2. Almost gave the game away on defense and some bad decision making, but with less than two minutes left Eli came back for a TD so fast I was worried the defense would have time to blow it again. but now, the Giants a good 1.5 games better than the Eagles and Cowgirls now. Only team with a positive run differential and a winning record. I know they've played an extra game, but they have almost as many points as as the Cowboys and Eagles combined.

metsmarathon Oct 23 2012 10:15 AM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

Ceetar wrote: Giants now 5-2. Almost gave the game away on defense and some bad decision making, but with less than two minutes left Eli came back for a TD so fast I was worried the defense would have time to blow it again. i had the exact same concern watching the game.

Ceetar Oct 28 2012 02:42 PM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

Eli throws a 50+ yard pass, and defense gets an interception, but field goals both times.

Ceetar Oct 28 2012 03:16 PM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

this game is ridiculous. The Giants are winning 23-0 and you're frustrated with their offense.

Swan Swan H Oct 28 2012 05:52 PM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

Wow. Bottom line, it's a win, but the Giants got away with one there.

Ceetar Oct 28 2012 07:08 PM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

Swan Swan H wrote: Wow. Bottom line, it's a win, but the Giants got away with one there. well, the Cowboys turned the ball over a gazillion times, so hard to say they deserved to win. what a mess. of course, the Giants practialy clinched the division with that.

TransMonk Oct 29 2012 06:28 AM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

Ceetar wrote: of course, the Giants practialy clinched the division with that. That may be a tad premature to say.

Ceetar Oct 29 2012 06:43 AM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

TransMonk wrote: Ceetar wrote: of course, the Giants practialy clinched the division with that. That may be a tad premature to say. exaggeration, but they're 2.5 games up and have played 2 more division games than anyone else (meaning they have to play each other). Also, they're the only team with a positive point differential, the only team over .500 and second in the NFL to the Patriots in points. We're talking 2007 Mets stuff here aren't we?

Frayed Knot Oct 29 2012 06:53 AM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

TransMonk wrote: of course, the Giants practialy clinched the division with that. That may be a tad premature to say. Yeah, but only a tad. If the Giants merely split their remaining eight games games the Cowgirls, Iggles & 'Skins would need to post 7-2, 7-2, and 7-1 records just to tie them (with a chunk of those games vs each other thus guaranteeing a loss in Big Blue's favor). Not a mathematical done-deal of course, but a surprisingly comfortable cushion considering that the league isn't quite to the halfway point yet. This, btw, is an example of why I keep telling folks about the danger of splitting leagues into more but smaller divisions: the odds of getting more than one good team in any one group goes down and the likelihood of an early run-away with a bunch of meaningless games at towards the end goes way up. Consider yourself warned Bud Selig.

Ceetar Oct 29 2012 07:05 AM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

Frayed Knot wrote: This, btw, is an example of why I keep telling folks about the danger of splitting leagues into more but smaller divisions: the odds of getting more than one good team in any one group goes down and the likelihood of an early run-away with a bunch of meaningless games at towards the end goes way up. Consider yourself warned Bud Selig. Part of the reason I'm happy about the Interleague all the time Astros demotion to the AL.

TransMonk Dec 16 2012 05:18 PM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

Frayed Knot wrote: of course, the Giants practialy clinched the division with that. That may be a tad premature to say. Yeah, but only a tad. If the Giants merely split their remaining eight games games the Cowgirls, Iggles & 'Skins would need to post 7-2, 7-2, and 7-1 records just to tie them (with a chunk of those games vs each other thus guaranteeing a loss in Big Blue's favor). Not a mathematical done-deal of course, but a surprisingly comfortable cushion considering that the league isn't quite to the halfway point yet. This, btw, is an example of why I keep telling folks about the danger of splitting leagues into more but smaller divisions: the odds of getting more than one good team in any one group goes down and the likelihood of an early run-away with a bunch of meaningless games at towards the end goes way up. Consider yourself warned Bud Selig. Bump.

Frayed Knot Dec 16 2012 05:38 PM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

Yeah, I remembered those remarks and I was thinking about this thread today. Your initial point about the Giants not being secure stands, but so does my last one about the drawbacks of the NFL's divisional set-up. For all the talk about how perfect the NFL season is*, 3 of the 8 divisions titles and 4 of the 12 playoffs spots overall were clinched two weeks ago when there was still 1/4 of the season to play (the equivalent of mid-August in baseball). It just turned out that the NFL-East wasn't one of them this year even though early on it looked like it was going to be. * a seemingly mandatory remark from every TV sportscaster everywhere

TransMonk Dec 16 2012 06:26 PM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

I agree about the set up. I'd be happy getting rid of the NFL divisions. The bump was more of a *wink* at the recent play of the Giants.

Frayed Knot Dec 16 2012 09:45 PM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

Yup. The Giants have played much worse than anticipated since that conversation and your Redskins have a decent chance at running the table through the end of the regular season anyway. Hell, they even survived a game without their new lord and savior. btw, on the topic of RGIII and like players such as Luck in Indy and whatisname out in Seattle: I'm wondering if the mediots who were virtually unanimous in pointing out how every draft pick who failed to live up to the hype -- THEIR hype, btw -- cried out for an immediate entry-level salary cap are going to call for that trio (plus maybe others) who have almost single-handedly turned their clubs around in the space of one season be allowed to re-negotiate those rigged deals? I probably shouldn't hold my breath, huh?

G-Fafif Dec 24 2012 04:33 AM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

Just need the Lions to beat the Bears, the Packers to beat the Vikings, the Cowboys to beat the Redskins and the Giants to beat the Eagles for the Giants to return to the playoffs. That's all.

Swan Swan H Dec 24 2012 08:02 AM Re: No Giants' 2012 Thread Yet?

G-Fafif wrote: Just need the Lions to beat the Bears, the Packers to beat the Vikings, the Cowboys to beat the Redskins and the Giants to beat the Eagles for the Giants to return to the playoffs. That's all. The Cowboys have to lose to make it happen, which is a bit more likely.