Master Index of Archived Threads


NFL stuff

Nymr83 Jul 17 2007 04:38 PM

Michael Vick [url=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,289693,00.html]indicted[/url] for dog fighting ring. Culpepper let go by Miami.

DocTee Jul 17 2007 09:06 PM

And that's a FEDERAL indictment against Vick-- my understanding is they only go for yoiu if they have a rock-solid case.

Nymr83 Jul 17 2007 09:23 PM

DocTee wrote: And that's a FEDERAL indictment against Vick-- my understanding is they only go for yoiu if they have a rock-solid case. from what i've read his complicity and even active involvement in what went on on his property isn't really in doubt. now lets see if he gets the celebrity get out of jail free card.

DocTee Jul 17 2007 09:30 PM

And let's see if Goddell has the marbles to suspend one of the marquee players in the league

Nymr83 Jul 17 2007 09:36 PM

if he doesnt he's a hypocrit. vick might not deserve a suspension as much as pacman jones but he deserves it more than chris henry and as much as tank johnson.

metirish Jul 18 2007 06:58 AM

After reading about the Vick inditment I hope his NFL career is over,the stuff that he and his people did to these dogs was so fucking cruel,I'd love to hose Vick down with water and then electrocute him.

Edgy DC Jul 18 2007 07:08 AM

If we're going to object to pit fighting, though, let's not just sting the odd celebrity. It's going on all over the place.

metirish Jul 18 2007 08:12 AM

Edgy DC wrote: If we're going to object to pit fighting, though, let's not just sting the odd celebrity. It's going on all over the place. So true,just watched a report on CNN about dog fighting in the Houston area,now beig prosecuted by the DA there.... [url=http://www.khou.com/news/local/crime/stories/khou070717_ac_dogfighting.849c40af.html]Dog Fighting[/url]

Vic Sage Jul 18 2007 01:26 PM

]If we're going to object to pit fighting... what do you mean "if"? Doesn't the fact that its illegal in most localities mean we've already objected to it? Enforcement is another matter. But why SHOULDN'T it be enforced against a celebrity? the visibility a case like that gets means a signal is being sent by the state, in a way that penalizing someone out of the spotlight does not accomplish. There's always going to be selective enforement of EVERY crime... they can't catch and convict everybody. But i don't think its unfair to target celebrities for prosecution because (1) they've chosen to put themselves in the public spotlight to cash in on what "celebrity status" means in this society and so heightened scrutiny would seem a forseeable cost for that benefit, (2) they provide a more visible example and so (to the extent prosecution is supposed to produce a deterrent effect) produces more effective deterrence, and (3) celebrity wealth more than evens the scales when they are able to buy a better defense than some anonymous jerk guilty of the same crime. Usually, however, the opposite occurs and celebrities are LESS likely, not more likely, to get prosecuted in the first place, because the CAN put up a better defense and they're also able to trade on their celebrity to make many charges just go away.

Edgy DC Jul 18 2007 02:08 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jul 18 2007 05:47 PM

="Vic Sage"] ]If we're going to object to pit fighting... what do you mean "if"? Doesn't the fact that its illegal in most localities mean we've already objected to it? Not necessarily. Plenty is illegal in this country that the forum hasn't spoken to, and I'd guess that, if put ot a vote, they'd be at best indifferent to on the whole. I'm glad to hear any and all objections here to blood sport and animal cruelty. ="Vic Sage"]Enforcement is another matter. But why SHOULDN'T it be enforced against a celebrity? I didn't and wouldn't suggest that. ="Vic Sage"]the visibility a case like that gets means a signal is being sent by the state, in a way that penalizing someone out of the spotlight does not accomplish. Maybe. On the other hand, a high-profile case can just crystallize an issue around that case, as if we've closed the book on the situation as soon as the case is over and the publicity dies. Under any circumstances, we all deserve to be tried as people, not as symbols. ="Vic Sage"]There's always going to be selective enforement of EVERY crime... they can't catch and convict everybody. But i don't think its unfair to target celebrities for prosecution because (1) they've chosen to put themselves in the public spotlight to cash in on what "celebrity status" means in this society and so heightened scrutiny would seem a forseeable cost for that benefit, (2) they provide a more visible example and so (to the extent prosecution is supposed to produce a deterrent effect) produces more effective deterrence, and (3) celebrity wealth more than evens the scales when they are able to buy a better defense than some anonymous jerk guilty of the same crime. I didn't and dont't suggest for a moment that this guy is being treated unfairly. ="Vic Sage"]Usually, however, the opposite occurs and celebrities are LESS likely, not more likely, to get prosecuted in the first place, because the CAN put up a better defense and they're also able to trade on their celebrity to make many charges just go away. You're talking to the wrong guy. I hope this guy goes to jail and never earns another football dollar again. Hell, I hope he blows the money he has earned on lawyers. I just want to make sure the objection goes well beyond Vick and the "Bad Newz Kennel."

Kid Carsey Jul 18 2007 02:59 PM

"(PU) Folks at Purina Puppy Chow could not be reached for comment, but one can be sure that in addition to Nike and Coca-Cola this high profile endorsement deal is likely a dead one."

Gwreck Jul 18 2007 05:24 PM

DocTee wrote: And that's a FEDERAL indictment against Vick-- my understanding is they only go for yoiu if they have a rock-solid case. Indeed. A 95% conviction rate is the stat that's being thrown around. Don't know if that's the entire federal criminal system, or just the EDVa, but the point holds.

DocTee Jul 18 2007 08:34 PM

Well it's official: Goddell's a pussy. According to CNN/SI he has decided not to discipline Vick until after a convictin. Says he doesn't want the NFL action to influence a verdict, bbbyyy. That's bullshit-- he didn't wait for due process with Tank Williams or PacMan Jones, why wait for it now?? Someone sugegsted that the league didn't want to try Vick in the way that the Duke lacrosse kids were prosecuted in the press-- again, a weak argument since the evidence here--as far as we know it--is WAY stronger (multiple corroborating witnesses, etc) Here's a kick in the head: Al Sharpton has joined with PETA and the Humane Society in calling for swift and severe treatment of Mike Vick. I'd say he's phucked.

Edgy DC Jul 20 2007 01:28 PM

There oft is a backlash against popular consensus, even with the greatest of scoundrels. OJ certainly had his supporters Several Senators did some handwringing on this today. When you're a black man being criticiized on the Senate floor by Robert Byrd, it's not hard to spin yourself from scoundrel into vicktim.

metirish Jul 20 2007 01:37 PM

Johnette Howard has a disturbing article on this today... [url=http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/ny-sphow205300086jul20,0,7568878.column?coll=ny-sports-headlines]Vick the dick[/url]

Frayed Knot Jul 20 2007 02:01 PM

So which commish is having a worse week? - Goodell dealing with Vick - Selig w/Bonds within reach of the record at his own park - or Stern and his crooked referee It's the first time in history any of them wished they were Gary Bettman

metirish Jul 20 2007 02:35 PM

Frayed Knot wrote: So which commish is having a worse week? - Goodell dealing with Vick - Selig w/Bonds within reach of the record at his own park - or Stern and his crooked referee It's the first time in history any of them wished they were Gary Bettman brilliant

Nymr83 Jul 20 2007 09:13 PM

[url]http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=stein_marc&id=2943938[/url] a link for anyone who hasn't heard about the gambling scandal yet. i won't bother with a new thread because i don't really have much to say other than "this is the worst thing that can happen to a professional sport."

metirish Jul 21 2007 01:56 PM

I''m sure this will end any thoughts of the NBA putting a team in Vegas.

Nymr83 Jul 21 2007 02:09 PM

metirish wrote: I''m sure this will end any thoughts of the NBA putting a team in Vegas. i think the all-star game chaos may have already done that. whats Culpepper up to now that he's been cut loose by the Dolphins? Atlanta should be beating his door down.

Nymr83 Jul 23 2007 06:26 PM

Goodell has told Vick not to go to training camp.

DocTee Jul 23 2007 08:37 PM

Maybe Roger has some after all.

Nymr83 Jul 26 2007 01:40 PM

Curtis Martin (officially retiring now) will be on WFAN today at about 6pm says Francessa. on an unrelated note the Wake Firest BBall coach just died after he collapsed while jogging, Francessa has been talking non-stop about heart health for the last 20 minutes.

Edgy DC Jul 26 2007 04:55 PM

I haven't paid any real attention to the NFL pretty much the duration of Curtis Martin's career. Now I watch SNY last night during a late-night TV binge in my mother's basement. Is Martin even half the class act he was being portrayed as? Back in the day, my parents were at the wedding of Pete Rozelle's daughter. Freeman McNiel was the only active player (maybe including retired ones as well) invited, supposedly due to Rozelle's respect for Freeman as the best model of an NFL citizen.

Kid Carsey Jul 26 2007 05:01 PM

SNY just aired a special Jets Nation with a half hour interview with Curtis. Must see tv for Jets' fans, football fans, people disgusted with high profile athletes, anyone needing a shot of cucumber coolness in their day.

Elster88 Jul 26 2007 05:05 PM

Nymr83 wrote: Curtis Martin (officially retiring now) will be on WFAN today at about 6pm says Francessa. Surprise guest appearance by Bill Parcells

Edgy DC Jul 26 2007 05:20 PM

="Kid Carsey"]SNY just aired a special Jets Nation with a half hour interview with Curtis. Must see tv for Jets' fans, football fans, people disgusted with high profile athletes, anyone needing a shot of cucumber coolness in their day. I only watched a handful of sound bites last night with my bullshit meter on low and damned if I didn't find myself wanting to have his babies.

Nymr83 Jul 26 2007 05:25 PM

Martin is truly the class-act that young athletes should aspire to be like. but the trouble-makers get all the press.

Nymr83 Aug 20 2007 02:26 PM

Vick is going to plea out. [url]http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,293826,00.html[/url]

Nymr83 Aug 23 2007 01:50 PM

Jets trade Kendall to the Redskins for "a mid-round pick." Clark will probably be the starter now.

Frayed Knot Aug 23 2007 02:17 PM

I'd be lying if I said I understood all the history behind this Jets/Kendall feud, but I hope this one comes back to bite the Jets on the ass. The NFL is real quick to "ask" players to renegotiate their contracts whenever they claim it's neccesary to 'fit underneath the cap' -- IOW, we have to cut your salary in order to stay within limits that we ourselves imposed -- but then manage to hide behind the 'sanctity of the contract' nonsense if a player wants to re-do the deal after a good year, or, as Kendall is apparently claiming, after he was promised they'd do so. Now they've run this guy down to where his value is a fraction of what it was and are forced to settle for a mid draft pick all because they didn't want to just cut him for fear that he'd wind up on a division opponent and probably with a better contract.

Nymr83 Aug 23 2007 02:22 PM

]Now they've run this guy down to where his value is a fraction of what it was and are forced to settle for a mid draft pick all because they didn't want to just cut him for fear that he'd wind up on a division opponent and probably with a better contract. That sentence makes absolutely no sense. They're forced to settle for a mid-round pick because they didn't want to cut him? what would they have gotten if they cut him? NOTHING.

Frayed Knot Aug 23 2007 02:50 PM

The compensation they're getting isn't likely to be as good as what they would have had by keeping Kendall but they prefered to pretend that he had no value at all (rookie dorms, 2nd team drills) in order to maintain the control they've got via these one-way contracts. Normally when a team so obviously wants nothing to do with a player they'd just cut him, but the Jets wanted it both ways; treating him like a scrub yet NOT cutting him because they knew he had more value than they let on.

Kid Carsey Aug 23 2007 03:27 PM

He was being as much of a prick as the Jets were. And I applaud them in taking a stance that their feet won't be held to the fire. They showed this in being slow to sign Revis too. Also, it's not about getting someone who will be likely as good it's about getting value (these guys are a commodity, like it or not) and today with a sore shoulder and his age his value was a fourth round pick in next years draft. Beat cutting him and getting bupkis. All that being said, gotta be worried for Chad (blind side of the line) and Jones' attack on that side if things don't shape up early.

Nymr83 Aug 23 2007 03:27 PM

]The compensation they're getting isn't likely to be as good as what they would have had by keeping Kendall ok thats fine, but thats not what you said. ]Normally when a team so obviously wants nothing to do with a player they'd just cut him, but the Jets wanted it both ways; treating him like a scrub yet NOT cutting him because they knew he had more value than they let on. theres no reason for them to cut kendall as long as they can get ANY compensation for him, when a team cuts a guy its usually because he is completely without value (ie can't be traded for a draft pick) not because their estimation of his value differs from his and his agent's. it's not that he had "more value than they let on" its that he had more value than nothing and thus shouldnt be cut when he can be traded. it's the same as Culpepper with Miami, they refused to cut him until they had explored all their trade options, only after realizing that they'd get nothing for him did they cut him (and i'm still shocked he didnt end up in ATL)

Frayed Knot Aug 23 2007 04:57 PM

Oh it doesn't surprise me that they wouldn't cut him. It's just part of the mallett-sized hammer the NFL has over their players. Clubs are real big on threatening to cut someone if they won't renegotiate their contracts down when it suits their purposes, just a bit less swift when on the subject of renegotiating them up - even if it was previously implied they'd take care of a player who made adjustments for them. That the club was (IMO) dick-ish about how they treated him once the squabble became public knowledge is why I hope they wind up getting the short-end of the trade. Not that I have a dog in this fight really, it just seems to me that they would have been better off either: a) settling the dispute and keeping him or b) trading him before running his rep into the ground for several weeks

Edgy DC Aug 23 2007 05:03 PM

The NFL salary cap is intolerable.

Kid Carsey Aug 23 2007 05:57 PM

I'm alright with the cap and level p(l)aying field although it has it's flaws. I think the whole Kendall thing got more attention than it probably deserves if non-interested fans like Frayed are voicing displeasure. The bottom line is the dude is 34 years old, they got something for him, he'll be missed some- what, the Jets gambled they won't miss him that much, I doubt anyone will be talking about him in week four unless the guy they plug in is a disaster.

metirish Aug 24 2007 10:41 AM

This seems to be a more than decent blog site about the NFL http://www.profootballtalk.com/

Edgy DC Aug 24 2007 10:54 AM Edited 3 time(s), most recently on Aug 24 2007 11:23 AM

Kid Carsey wrote: I'm alright with the cap and level p(l)aying field although it has it's flaws. Isn't the field already pretty level? What's supposed to drive the revenue disparity of MLB teams is the inequity of local broadcast contracts. The NFL teams sharing rather in national broadcast revenues should defeat that.

TransMonk Aug 24 2007 11:22 AM

I believe NFL teams share ticket revenues as well. Something like 60/40 for home and away teams.

Nymr83 Aug 31 2007 09:58 PM

4-game substance abuse suspension for Patriots safety Rodney Harrison... as a Jets fan, I say: HAHAHA!

SteveJRogers Sep 05 2007 05:41 PM

Shameless plug for my week one picks at jabberfest.blogspot.com, check the link in my sig =;) For entertainment purposes only, of course!

Nymr83 Sep 05 2007 05:55 PM

my pick in bold. ] Favorite Underdog at Indianapolis 6 New Orleans at Dallas 5 1/2 NY Giants Denver 3 at Buffalo at Houston 3 Kansas City at Jacksonville 6 1/2 Tennessee at Minnesota 3 Atlanta New England 6 1/2 at NY Jets at Oakland 1 1/2 Detroit Philadelphia 3 at Green Bay Pittsburgh 4 1/2 at Cleveland at San Diego 6 Chicago at Seattle 6 Tampa Bay at St. Louis 1 Carolina at Washington 3 Miami at Cincinnati 2 1/2 Baltimore at San Francisco 3 Arizona hey steve, i don't know where you got those crazy lines from but if you can tell me which book is giving TEN +7.5 please share.

SteveJRogers Sep 05 2007 06:15 PM

[url=http://www.efbp.net]Electronic Football Pools[/url] Do not know where they are getting their lines from.

Nymr83 Sep 05 2007 06:17 PM

VegasInsider.com will give you the lines from all the major vegas casinos and offshore books, the TEN/JAC game is 6.5 everywhere

SteveJRogers Sep 05 2007 06:22 PM

Here is something from their FAQ ]Who sets the Point Spreads? – We set the default point spreads on Monday mornings for College and Tuesday mornings for NFL based on the current odds from USA TODAY. We always set the point spread to end with 1/2 point to avoid ties. In 2007 we are rounding up. If the point spread is even, say -7, we'll make it -7.5. If it's +3 we'll make it +3.5. Don't look at me Namor, its my company's office pool. Fair is fair, if I'm doing something there, I'm not going to change it on my blog or anywherelse just because of difference in the lines.

Nymr83 Sep 05 2007 06:30 PM

thats pretty lame. theres nothing more "real" about those lines than there is about lines i make up in my head and write down, they are equally unavailable to wager.

SteveJRogers Sep 05 2007 07:20 PM

For the longest time the guy who ran it used to do it all manually, getting the lines from a Vegas site. I guess it got to much for him to run off all the sheets, especially since people had to hand them in each week, so he went to the internet. No clue who told him about this site though.

Kid Carsey Sep 05 2007 07:36 PM

I don't get why it's internet rocket science. USAToday (I don't frequent online gambling sites or whatever ... this is Gannett) has been publishing this for at least five years ... I'd trust it over vegaatlanticrenoeatthis.com.

Kid Carsey Sep 07 2007 05:04 AM

Had the Colts in two three-strike pools this week last night. That musta been some second half - went to sleep grumblin' about a 10-10 tie.

Nymr83 Sep 10 2007 08:08 PM

Russell finally signed ]Russell, 22, staged one of the longest holdouts by a rookie in recent history. In 2002, offensive tackle Bryant McKinnie, the first-round choice of the Minnesota Vikings that year, missed the first eight games of the regular season. In terms of top overall picks, no one has held out longer than Russell since tailback Bo Jackson declined to sign with Tampa Bay altogether in 1986 Jackson, of course, had more leverage than anyone I can think of since then, he was in the Royal outfield by the time the NFL season started.

Nymr83 Sep 10 2007 08:10 PM

edit-forget it i was 9-4-1 this week with tonight's games pending. damn i wish i'd bet.

Kid Carsey Oct 21 2007 01:38 PM

Siragusa's color commentary from the sidelines is just freakin' annoying. And why's he not in the booth anyways? He doesn't fit? His ego won't? I've probably bitched about this before, but make him stop NOW!!!

Valadius Nov 19 2007 01:48 PM

Michael Vick goes to jail: [url]http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AhNePTdHEqJcobQT1JPsZ85DubYF?slug=ap-vicksurrenders&prov=ap&type=lgns[/url]

Elster88 Nov 19 2007 02:04 PM

Oops I didn't know this thread was here. Can a friendly mod please take the discussion on the Clev/Balt game that I started out of the Jet thread and put it here? OE: And the MVP stuff too.

Kid Carsey Nov 25 2007 01:29 PM

Everyone with the Giants in the office pool - YIKES

Nymr83 Nov 26 2007 09:31 PM

Miami remains winless. After losing to the Jets and getting held to a field goal by the Dolphins its pretty hard to have any confidence in the Steelers right now.

cooby Nov 26 2007 09:36 PM

Tell me about it.

smg58 Nov 27 2007 06:08 AM

Redskins safety Sean Taylor just passed away after being shot in the leg by a burglar in his house. The bullet severed a major artery. Another professional athlete in his twenties with a one-year-old child. Wow, what an awful week.

metirish Nov 27 2007 07:02 AM

Terrible stuff, Joe Gibbs must be wondering why he ever came back.

Edgy DC Nov 27 2007 07:28 AM

He can join me in that wondering.

Frayed Knot Nov 27 2007 06:30 PM

It's almost like if you run an NFL team you have to plan in advance for the 1 or 2 guys per year on average that are either going to get arrested, need substance abuse treatment, or wind up (on one end or the other) involved in a gun incident. Like it's just part of the cost of doing business.

Valadius Dec 07 2007 02:22 PM

Kevin Everett is walking again. [url]http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-bills-everettwalking&prov=ap&type=lgns[/url]

Willets Point Dec 07 2007 03:45 PM

Led Zep partners with ESPN, NFL. Anyone suspect there will be a Super Bowl Halftime show with a "Stairway to Heaven Medley" in the future?

Valadius Dec 07 2007 06:52 PM

That would be the greatest halftime show EVER.

Kid Carsey Dec 09 2007 02:39 PM

Someone tell Goose to tell Moose that Plaxido was playin' possum during warm ups. If he mentioned it twelve times he mentioned it fifteen how sur- prised he was how well he played after watching him hobble off ... bbbyyy. That b'cast team just pains me no end for some reason.

SteveJRogers Dec 09 2007 05:15 PM

How wild would it be if the Fish lose next week, and the Pats beat the Jets, then the Dolphins were the team that handed the Patriots the only loss!

metirish Dec 09 2007 09:40 PM

Kid Carsey wrote: Someone tell Goose to tell Moose that Plaxido was playin' possum during warm ups. If he mentioned it twelve times he mentioned it fifteen how sur- prised he was how well he played after watching him hobble off ... bbbyyy. That b'cast team just pains me no end for some reason. I can't watch them , remember Goose raving like there was no tomorrow when Burress ran some route , he extended himself during that route and Goose was amazed.....

Valadius Dec 18 2007 03:07 PM

Pro Bowl rosters announced. Osi Umenyiora was the only player from either New York team to make it. Sean Taylor was elected posthumously.

DocTee Dec 18 2007 09:13 PM

]Pro Bowl rosters announced. Osi Umenyiora was the only player from either New York team to make it. So that means the Meadowlands has one more representative than the entire NFC South.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Dec 18 2007 09:20 PM

There's a NFC South?

Nymr83 Dec 18 2007 09:28 PM

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: There's a NFC South? the 4 nfc south teams are 9-5, 7-7, 6-8, and 3-11. the 9-5 team is 4-5 outside the division.

Nymr83 Dec 27 2007 05:57 PM

Parcells down in Miami and at least one player is already kissing ass... ]Parcells needed only one practice to make an impact in Miami, linebacker Joey Porter said. "Guys were nervous out there," Porter said. "They got to running around a little faster. The coaches got to coaching a little louder. You definitely knew he was out there. ... "He's known for building programs to win, and we're just all waiting to see. This year is over. We've got one game to finish out, and then we'll wait for him to do his magic," Porter said.

Nymr83 Dec 29 2007 02:31 PM

Giants/Patriots on NFL Network, channel 9 in the Giants broadcast market and likely some local channel in New England, and both 2 and 4 (ABC and NBC) thanks to the commish giving the game to both networks. you'd think the president was speaking or something. leaving aside the stupidity of ANY game being on 4 channels (3 outside NY and New England) why THIS game? is going undefeated really that big a deal? in a game that means nothing for the standings with both teams having already locked up where they are in the playoffs? they'd both be justified in not letting the starters leave the locker room for this one. If the NFL wanted to give us a game off the NFL network on fre TV the game to do it would have been then 10-1 Dallas and 10-1 Green Bay a month ago in a game that was likely to control who got the topseed in the NFC.

metsmarathon Dec 29 2007 02:51 PM

i really want to know exactly how many people out there really care enough about this game that either don't already live in new york or new england, or don't have directv (either explicitly for the the nfl package, or just for tv in general) and therefore get the nfl network, too. anyone who really cares should, seriously, already have access to the game.

Frayed Knot Dec 29 2007 03:07 PM

]If the NFL wanted to give us a game off the NFL network on fre TV the game to do it would have been then 10-1 Dallas and 10-1 Green Bay a month ago in a game that was likely to control who got the topseed in the NFC. Because they don't WANT to give you a game on free TV, they want you to think you need it and therefore buy it from your cable system and, in turn, for your cable system to think fans are marching with pitchforks and torches demanding that the channel be made available on all tiers. The reason they're doing so now is that the undefeated season has focused attention not only on this game itself but also on the fact that it's one of those that's been pulled from the regular slate of free games and moved specifically to this new self-owned outlet. That last little fact tends to highlight that the NFL is acting as a monopoly to increase profits (which they, of course, are) which tends to attract the interest of Congress, a body not usually given to looking favorably upon monopolies. So, in effect, it's a two-pronged PR move more than anything else. Entice those who don't have into demanding that they get it, and then keep Congress off their backs by showing how nice they can be by not abusing their monopoly - even if only temporarily.

Nymr83 Dec 29 2007 05:01 PM

thing is i don't think anyone will be demanding anything, lets remember that the game was already available on free tv, like all games are, in their local markets. the NFL has every right to run their business as they see fit, but i think they've seriously miscalculated here. the NFL network is simply an unattractive product to cable companies, and unlike YES which provides 140 yankee games the NFL network provides about 15 games a year all of which are out of market games for everyone who cares (the in market ones are already available). they're not going to win their fight with the cable companies and they gave away their last bit of leverage by ceding and putting this game on free tv. the NFL network wont die right away, but mark my words the NFL won't get their way and this stunt hurt them more than it helped.

metsmarathon Dec 29 2007 06:22 PM

there's one thing about this game that really irritates me. not, not the will the giants rest 'em or start 'em and what the implications that might have on their game next week against tampa, or whether giants fans should care more about beating the patriots than getting into the second round of the playoffs. no, its that i keep hearing how inconceivable a thing it is for a team to go undefeated, especially in teh NFL. like that's just impossible, that it could happen in any other sports league and people would be like, whatever, it happens all the time, bun in the NFL! wow! undefeated! that must be special! i'm sorry, but this year, you've got the cowboys who'll probably finish at 14-2 or 13-3 along with the colts, and the packers hot on their heels. the worst the patriots can do is go 15-1, like the bears did back when. 13-3 is basically routine for a division leader in the league that's all about parity. when the fuck was the last time you saw a baseball team go 131-31, let along 141-21, 151-11, or a fucking impossible 162-0? in football, a 10-5 team has to hope they get into the wildcard. in baseball, a 100-win team is a favorite to win the world series. when the bulls went 72-10 in 95-96, that was historic. in the nfl, that's every year. its only a matter of time before a team goes 16-0 in the nfl. its a lot harder in the nba, and downright fucking impossible in the mlb. but i'm totally watching... well, i will be once i stop bitching about it...

Edgy DC Dec 29 2007 06:51 PM

In baseball, .600 is a pretty good standard of excellence, while it's more like .700 in the NBA and .800 in the NFL.

Nymr83 Dec 29 2007 07:10 PM

i think thats all a function of the number of games played though. if the NFL played 10x as many games you'd see records just like baseball records and with the same frequency. the same would be true of the NBA if they doubled the number of games.

KC Dec 29 2007 07:46 PM

Good game regardless of all the week long hype and opinions of what will, should, could, etc. be done. It will be interesting to see just how long these two teams keep the pedal to the metal ... go Jints!!! (actually, I want the Pats to win and then lose their first playoff game)

Frayed Knot Dec 29 2007 08:25 PM

Nymr83 wrote: thing is i don't think anyone will be demanding anything, lets remember that the game was already available on free tv, like all games are, in their local markets. the NFL has every right to run their business as they see fit, but i think they've seriously miscalculated here. the NFL network is simply an unattractive product to cable companies ... Oh I agree. The NFL created a channel that absolutely no one was clamoring for and are demanding that cable companies - the same cable companies that are being denied access the 'Sunday Ticket' package of nationwide games - charge ALL customers (by putting it on a basic tier) for the channel 24/7/365 for a total of 8 games per year. That's approx 24 hours/year of new programming and the equivelent of 364 days/year of filler. ]... they're not going to win their fight with the cable companies and they gave away their last bit of leverage by ceding and putting this game on free tv. the NFL network wont die right away, but mark my words the NFL won't get their way and this stunt hurt them more than it helped. They'll "win" their fight w/the cable companies as soon as they make them a partner in the venture. Once that happens both sides will call it a win and space will be cleared on a basic tier faster than Devon Hester can return a punt since, at that point, each of the partner system's customers will pay a per user fee for it whether they want the channel or not. That they're making this game available to the entire nation for free neither hurts nor helps and is really a non-factor in the long run as far as NFL/cable fight goes. But, in the meantime, they're hoping it buys them some goodwill with Congress.

Nymr83 Dec 29 2007 08:26 PM

i'd be happiest if they both lost their 1st playoff game. tonight i'm rooting for the giants

metirish Dec 29 2007 09:11 PM

Gumbel is terrible, he sounds like he should be reading the news.

cooby Dec 30 2007 09:01 AM

KC wrote: Good game regardless of all the week long hype and opinions of what will, should, could, etc. be done. It will be interesting to see just how long these two teams keep the pedal to the metal ... go Jints!!! (actually, I want the Pats to win and then lose their first playoff game) I just hope they lose sometime period. Manning was my fantasy QB this week; he did a nice job for me :)

cooby Dec 30 2007 05:25 PM

Gotta love Charlie Batch, the guy has heart

DocTee Dec 31 2007 01:09 PM

Brian "smug asshole" Billick canned in Baltimore.

KC Dec 31 2007 01:16 PM

They crap-canned the GM in Miami, no suprise, it will be interesting if Tunahead can resurrect the Dolphins.

Nymr83 Jan 05 2008 02:59 PM

Chargers -9, Jaguars -3, Giants +3, Seattle -5. those are the most recent lines i saw but i'll take the the same teams regardless of the lines moving

metirish Jan 05 2008 05:11 PM

Please stop this garbage, next Collinsworth will be telling us he sees Shaun Taylor on the field. Good game though.

Nymr83 Jan 06 2008 01:59 AM

Jacksonville blows an 18 point lead and hen kicks a FG to win by 2 (the spread, of course, was 3) fuck the NFL. and of course i didnt bet Seattle even though i liked them.

MFS62 Jan 06 2008 02:00 PM

I was just put into the position of having to root for the Dallas Cowboys next week. Tampa Bay lost 24-14. I hat this game. Later

KC Jan 06 2008 03:33 PM

I thought the G-men would win, but only by a couple of points or so. Hats off to them, they looked great after the first bunch of offensive series. They ain't knocking off the Cowboys ... right?

Nymr83 Jan 06 2008 09:58 PM

I was right on 3 out of 4 games this weekend, obviously the only one i actually bet was the one i was wrong on.

MFS62 Jan 07 2008 06:16 AM

KC wrote: I thought the G-men would win, but only by a couple of points or so. Hats off to them, they looked great after the first bunch of offensive series. They ain't knocking off the Cowboys ... right? They tend to beat up on teams with crap offenses. I don't think you can say that the 'Pokes are a bad offensive team. Later

DocTee Jan 08 2008 08:34 AM

Joe Gibbs retiring (again)

MFS62 Jan 20 2008 10:26 AM

Here I sit, broken hearted. The NFC game hasn't started. A New York AFL fan through and through, wondering what I will do. I can never wear the colors blue. I remember Super Bowls I and II. So the only pleasure this day could yield Would be if a meteor fell on Lambeau Field. Later

KC Jan 20 2008 10:55 AM

I don't care who wins the NFC game ... just want a good one. I don't hate the G-men (being a Jets fan) like the MFY's (being a Mets fan) for some reason. I will add that I don't like Shockey and I'm glad he's missing all the fun. As for the AFC game, I wanna see Tom Brady crying like a little girl on the sidelines sometime today. I'd like some cash too from the two box pools I'm in if it's not too to ask.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 20 2008 08:03 PM

Oooops. And we're headed to overtime.

metirish Jan 20 2008 08:05 PM

Damn, that may have been the chance right there, great game though.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 20 2008 08:13 PM

redemption! Eh. I kinda wanted Brett Fav-ra to go out in true style and beat the Pats in the bowl.

DocTee Jan 20 2008 08:19 PM

]I kinda wanted Brett Fav-ra to go out in true style and beat the Pats in the bowl Can you imagine how sickening the media would have been for the next two weeks with that story?

metirish Jan 20 2008 08:42 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jan 20 2008 08:57 PM

DocTee wrote: ]I kinda wanted Brett Fav-ra to go out in true style and beat the Pats in the bowl Can you imagine how sickening the media would have been for the next two weeks with that story? I'm sure it will get sickening with the Manning angle over the next few weeks.

Valadius Jan 20 2008 08:53 PM

GOOOOOOOO GIANTS!!! I am so fucking excited I can't sit still. I get another chance at having one of my teams win a championship at a time when I can appreciate it.

TransMonk Jan 20 2008 09:01 PM

DocTee wrote: ]I kinda wanted Brett Fav-ra to go out in true style and beat the Pats in the bowl Can you imagine how sickening the media would have been for the next two weeks with that story? I can, and believe me, around my area they had already been talking about it for the past 3 weeks. I have no love for the Giants, but I'm glad they won.

Willets Point Jan 20 2008 09:01 PM

metirish wrote: ="DocTee"] ]I kinda wanted Brett Fav-ra to go out in true style and beat the Pats in the bowl Can you imagine how sickening the media would have been for the next two weeks with that story? I'm sure it will get sickening with the Manning angle over the next few weeks. The New York-New England angle will be the most sickening of all. Not that it will matter one bit as the Patriots will crush the Midgets to make it 19-0 as well as furthering New England's dominance in sports, culture, and general all around greatness compared to the other 44 states.

Nymr83 Jan 20 2008 10:48 PM

Valadius wrote: GOOOOOOOO GIANTS!!! I am so fucking excited I can't sit still. I get another chance at having one of my teams win a championship at a time when I can appreciate it. wtf? you plan on dying soon?

Valadius Jan 21 2008 03:02 AM

LOL. I just haven't been able to celebrate a championship yet for any of my teams. The Mets and Knicks haven't won during my lifetime, and I was too young to appreciate the last Giants and Rangers championships.

Frayed Knot Jan 21 2008 06:21 AM

The whole Manning/Favre/Brady/Belicheck angles are part of the media's habit of picking out their fave story lines in advance and sticking to them no matter what. One would think, for instance, that after missing two makeable game-winning FGs in the closing minutes (closing seconds in one case), a good camera shot after finally hitting one would be of Tynes's reaction and/or his teammates' reaction to him. But noooo, they went immediately to Manning and then to Favre - both on their benches at the time - as if what triggered their reactions was merely some dispoable moment. But hey, it could have been worse. If the home team had won we would have been treated to crowd shots at the final moment, meaning that we turned on the TV in order to see the game but instead are watching people watching the game. That they now have their angles set and approx 300 hours of air-time to discuss them prior to **THE BIG GAME** will only make it worse.

Fman99 Jan 21 2008 07:09 AM

Is there anything more inane than the 2 week layoff between the conference championships and the Super Bowl?

seawolf17 Jan 21 2008 07:20 AM

Fman99 wrote: Is there anything more inane than the 2 week layoff between the conference championships and the Super Bowl? No. I'm not a Giants fan, but I enjoyed that game last night. Angles or not, fact is, the Giants played the Pats tough in Week 17. Could be an interesting Super Bowl.

DocTee Jan 21 2008 08:25 AM

Take away the KO return for a TD in Week 17, and the game really wasn't that close, but I think the Giants have closed the gap A LOT in the past month.

Frayed Knot Jan 21 2008 10:34 AM

="Fman99"]Is there anything more inane than the 2 week layoff between the conference championships and the Super Bowl? What, 14 consecutive days of hearing every member of the media try to come up with 15,637 different ways of phrasing the question; "so, who do you like in this game?" doesn't do much for ya?

Nymr83 Jan 21 2008 10:59 AM

]The whole Manning/Favre/Brady/Belicheck angles are part of the media's habit of picking out their fave story lines in advance and sticking to them no matter what don't forget the refs/league picking their favorite storyline- Favre vs. Brady. I'm not a giants fan and even i saw that the giants were getting hosed by the zebras all game long.

Fman99 Jan 21 2008 11:04 AM

="Frayed Knot"] ="Fman99"]Is there anything more inane than the 2 week layoff between the conference championships and the Super Bowl? What, 14 consecutive days of hearing every member of the media try to come up with 15,637 different ways of phrasing the question; "so, who do you like in this game?" doesn't do much for ya? I'd rather listen to recordings of my elderly relatives copulating.

Frayed Knot Jan 21 2008 01:16 PM

Nymr83 wrote: don't forget the refs/league picking their favorite storyline- Favre vs. Brady. I'm not a giants fan and even i saw that the giants were getting hosed by the zebras all game long. I don't buy that the idea that the league is instructing referees to fix the outcomes. I also don't know how football fans can believe this and still follow the sport.

KC Jan 21 2008 01:30 PM

I hate to generalize, but that's gamblerspeak to me in most cases.

AG/DC Jan 21 2008 01:47 PM

If I'm a gambler, and I half believe that, I know enough to go with the more attractive storyline every time. Another time the sports coverage sticks with their stoory line going in is Olympic trials (and sometimes the Olympics themselves) when they spend all the lead time before a race profiling the runner who won this event four years ago. If that winner doesn't win this time, they still get the first interview --- "What happened out there? Is this it for you?" --- while folks in the booth scramble to find out anything about who just won.

KC Jan 21 2008 01:57 PM

AD: >>>If I'm a gambler, and I half believe that, I know enough to go with the more attractive storyline every time<<< I should just clam up, I don't know what you mean or if you're even ad- dressing me.

AG/DC Jan 21 2008 02:21 PM

I'm agreeing in my own way. The real media conspiracy is that they never show Fman's elderly relatives copulating.

KC Jan 21 2008 02:24 PM

... and why there are recordings of it.

cooby Jan 21 2008 04:39 PM

If anybody has seen a picture of the Giants' head coach's face (it's gotta be sore) today, I'd love to see it...

Willets Point Jan 21 2008 05:17 PM

At times like this....

MFS62 Jan 26 2008 11:21 AM

The Onion chimes in on the Super Bowl. Not one of their best, but still funny. http://www.theonion.com/content/news/giants_we_almost_beat_the_patriots Later

Benjamin Grimm Jan 28 2008 02:34 PM

This is my first time opening this thread. I haven't watched a Super Bowl since 1991. (Or was it 1992? It was the last time the Giants won, anyway.) But I think I'm going to watch this one. I'm quite nominally a Giants fan. I like to see them win, but I don't pay a whole lot of attention to them. (I do know the name of their coach and their quarterback, which is more than I can say about the Jets.) Does this make me a bandwagonner? I don't think so, because I'm not pretending to enjoy this as much as the real fans are.

Willets Point Jan 28 2008 02:57 PM

No, you'd be a bandwaggoner if after a Giants win you adorned yourself with Super Bowl champions regalia and went around saying "We're number 1 bay-beeeeeeeeee!"

Nymr83 Feb 01 2008 01:11 PM

]WASHINGTON -- With the Super Bowl fast approaching, a senior Republican senator says he wants the NFL to explain why it destroyed evidence of the New England Patriots cheating scandal. "I am very concerned about the underlying facts on the taping, the reasons for the judgment on the limited penalties and, most of all, on the inexplicable destruction of the tapes," said Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., in a Thursday letter to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell. Are you kidding me?

KC Feb 01 2008 01:28 PM

There's some content missing from there, like he's been inquiring for quite sometime and hasn't gotten any response. It's not like he brought it up Super Bowl week to be a big doo doo head. I'm curious why the tapes were destroyed too. With all the gambling and TV money and everything that goes with the NFL getting all CIA the evidence was fucked up.

metirish Feb 01 2008 02:09 PM

My prediction is - New England 42 - NY Giants 24

Frayed Knot Feb 01 2008 02:16 PM

If I were the media (giving the NFL more publicity than they could buy even with their money) or the fans (wanting to belive that everything's on the up and up) I'd be pissed off at the way the evidence was destroyed. It's like the league saying to all: this is so serious that we're fining the team, we're fining the coach (close to a million bucks total), and we're taking away a [u:f0c5b2d8de]1st round[/u:f0c5b2d8de] draft pick, but we don't think you're important enough to deserve to know what we found, whether it was used to gain a strategic advantage, whether this was a widespread practice or an isolated incident, etc, etc. I just don't understand why the gov't (or at least Spectre) is interested here.

KC Feb 03 2008 10:18 AM

Six more hours and it finally ends the two-week-lonnnggg wait. Almost time to start thinking about whether to start with the American side or the Italian side of the six-foot wedge. Looking for sports I find the Lakers are on NBA TV. I didn't even know I had NBA TV - channel 430 on Cablevision.

metsmarathon Feb 03 2008 03:59 PM

not that i hate america or anything, but why are we listening to a recitation of the declaration of independence, and why have i never noticed this previously? oe... ah, dedicated to the troops, and overwrought by fox. that explains it all.

Rockin' Doc Feb 03 2008 08:03 PM

How about them Giants?!

AG/DC Feb 03 2008 08:06 PM

I like to enjoy the moment. You know? Live now and leave it to the future to force this stuff into historical context. Biggest upset since 1969.

metsmarathon Feb 03 2008 08:07 PM

yay, giants! yay, eli!

metirish Feb 03 2008 08:08 PM

WOW, that scramble by Manning will become the stuff of legend.

metsmarathon Feb 03 2008 08:19 PM

i don't quite know how he got out of there, nor how the guy held onto the ball on his helmet, especially when landing with his back across the defender's lap!

TransMonk Feb 03 2008 08:26 PM

Great game, congats to the Giants.

metirish Feb 03 2008 08:53 PM

metirish wrote: My prediction is - New England 42 - NY Giants 24 Twat

G-Fafif Feb 03 2008 08:56 PM

A friend asked: better catch, Endy or Tyree? Right now, Tyree.

Valadius Feb 03 2008 09:17 PM

What a game. What a great fucking game. I finally have a chance to appreciate a championship by one of my teams. Wow!!! All that's left for me is to see the Mets win one. And I'm feeling confident - New York championships seem to come in spurts.

DocTee Feb 03 2008 09:22 PM

Belicheck is a punk, not waiting for the last play. And his decision to forego a field goal ealrier (admittedly 49 yards) calls into question his genius-ness.

Gwreck Feb 03 2008 10:01 PM

G-Fafif wrote: A friend asked: better catch, Endy or Tyree? Right now, Tyree. Don't you blaspheme here! Plus, I disagree.

G-Fafif Feb 03 2008 11:24 PM

Gwreck wrote: ="G-Fafif"]A friend asked: better catch, Endy or Tyree? Right now, Tyree. Don't you blaspheme here! Plus, I disagree. I allow myself a twelve-hour window for giddy lack of perspective. If I'm still giddy in the morning, I'll request a two-hour extension from the commissioner. Which was better? I'm just grateful to have witnessed both.

metirish Feb 04 2008 04:55 AM

It's hard to say which catch was better, one had a wall climbing all over him and the other had Rodney Harrison climbing with him trying to intercept the ball. Both were WOW moments though but I am going with Chavez.

metirish Feb 04 2008 07:13 AM

Best Super Bowl ever? Two people in the office have said it already and I just got here a while ago, Lupica starts his column by calling it the best super bowl of them all and various others have said similar things. OK I am happy the Giants won and the finish was thrilling but the first 3 quarters were pure tripe, great defence alright but boring as hell for me at least(granted I'm not a huge NFL fan and the nuances of defence might be lost on me).

AG/DC Feb 04 2008 07:20 AM

I think we have to wait for NFL Films to decide if it was the greatest ever. But, to believe NFL Films, it can't be the greatest championship unless it's played on the frozen tundra of Lambeau Field.

Frayed Knot Feb 04 2008 07:37 AM

="DocTee"]Belicheck is a punk, not waiting for the last play. Not a pleasant person that Bill B. Although to be fair, the clock initially clicked down to 0:00 as BOTH coaches (and numerous others) ran out thinking it was over. Hard to tell when he realized (was told) that it wasn't really over but there was little point in hanging around once he did. But here's what I want to know; why did the refs insist on playing out the final meaningless second this time -- but back in the Pats/Rams SB when Viniteri's FG clearly went through the uprights with several seconds left on the clock they didn't make them play that one out, especially as StL still had a KO-return chance of winning it?!?

DocTee Feb 04 2008 07:50 AM

]A friend asked: better catch, Endy or Tyree? Tyree. Bigger stage, winning result. Seriously, with that catch and his earlier TD, he deserved some MVP consideration.

soupcan Feb 04 2008 07:57 AM

metsmarathon wrote: i don't quite know how he got out of there, nor how the guy held onto the ball on his helmet, especially when landing with his back across the defender's lap! ="Rockin' Doc"]The escape of Eli and the subsequent amazing catch by Tyree was the play of the game. Great effort on both ends of that play. Totally agree! Manning escaping all those Patriot lineman and Tyree's catch was without question the play of the game. Without that play the Giants don't win that game. What a great game. If it wasn't THE best Superbowl ever it has to be top 3. My 11 yr-old son and his friend had both thrown in the towel after the Pats made it 14-10 and the friend's dad and I both lectured them about keeping the faith and hanging with your team, etc., etc. Great lesson for the kinder.

Willets Point Feb 04 2008 09:57 AM

DocTee wrote: Belicheck is a punk, not waiting for the last play. Every single football game ever the players and personnel walk off the field before it's over, sometimes with 30 or more seconds to go. It's one of the many reasons why football sucks. Can you imagine players walking off the baseball field with only two outs, even in a blowout?

Nymr83 Feb 04 2008 10:56 AM

="AG/DC"]I think we have to wait for NFL Films to decide if it was the greatest ever. But, to believe NFL Films, it can't be the greatest championship unless it's played on the frozen tundra of Lambeau Field. wasn't the snowy AFC championship game great though? i wish they'd play the superbowl in Lambeau, Soldiers Field, or Buffalo but they care more about the stupid halftime show than they do about having a good football game in normal football conditions.

themetfairy Feb 04 2008 11:04 AM

No need to publish [url=http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1600781500/ref=pe_5050_8239550_pe_snp_500]this [/url]-

Benjamin Grimm Feb 04 2008 11:11 AM

I have to admit, I did think of Endy's catch after that play last night. Especially since, at the time, it was still possible that it might have been made in a losing effort. For both plays, I had that same sense of disbelief in what I had just seen. And both plays quickly turned something bad (a home run, a QB sack) into something good (a double play, a 45-yard gain).

G-Fafif Feb 04 2008 12:37 PM

metirish wrote: Best Super Bowl ever? Two people in the office have said it already and I just got here a while ago, Lupica starts his column by calling it the best super bowl of them all and various others have said similar things. Hard to rate these things in the heat of the moment (though after the heat of the moment, it's not as pressing a matter). I thought XXV (Giants' second SB) was the best-played game ever and XXXVI (Pats-Rams) had the most spine-tingling ending, followed closely by XXXIV (the tackle at the one yard line, Rams-Titans). This was a little reminiscent in form of XXIII (second Niners-Bengals) in terms of rather sedate three quarters and gripping fourth quarter. Giants no doubt Stepped Up their game, but they were also pretty good at dragging allegedly better teams down to their levels for three straight games. I'm pretty sure this was the first time one SB team had a regular-season record SIX games better than its opponent. And the opponent won. I don't know if this was the best Super Bowl of them all, but, considering the stature of the favorites and the general malaise of the underdogs through most (most) of their season, I feel comfortable calling this the biggest upset I've ever seen in professional team sports.

Willets Point Feb 04 2008 01:10 PM

These teams should be in the Super Bowl more often. The Patriots and Giants have been in three of the more exciting games that test the Super Bore label.

Frayed Knot Feb 04 2008 02:36 PM

="Willets Point"]Every single football game ever the players and personnel walk off the field before it's over, sometimes with 30 or more seconds to go. It's one of the many reasons why football sucks. The difference here was that the clock was stopped. The walk-off with time remaining occurs with a moving clock and the offensive team doesn't have to run another play before time runs out. My final word on the SB is that isn't it great that we had 14 consecutive days of 24/7 coverage which was, almost without exception, totally wrong! And not just in the winner/loser part - as upsets happen all the time - but in those all-knowing statements from the self-appointed poobahs about what either WOULD happen or what needed to happen in order for 'X' to win: - the Giants HAD TO establish the run or they had no chance (they didn't run for shit) - that the Pats' O-line was too good to get to Brady - that the Jints had to dominate time of possession or they had no chance (ratio favorder NYG about 31/29 min) - that it would be a high scoring game and yadda, yadda, yadda. The amount of trees sacrificed and spit acculated in micorphones all over the country was - as always - entirely meaningless. THAT is one of the reasons why football sucks. The ratio of talking about the game to the playing of it is all outta whack.

Nymr83 Mar 02 2008 02:22 PM

Michael Turner, a great talent who has been backing up Tomlinson in Sd for four seasons, has signed with the Atlanta Falcons. Very good signing for that downtrodden franchise.

Valadius Mar 04 2008 11:15 AM

Brett Favre has retired.