|
Unrelated:
I really don't like the overtime system. It finally came about after Brett Favre and the Vikes lost to the Saints in OT in the playoffs when NO won the toss and drove down for a field goal. It was suddenly unfair that Brett Favre didn't have a chance to respond to Brees' drive.
I don't see how the new system is much better. Basically, if you win the coin toss and get a touchdown, you win, end of story. But a field goal allows the other team to answer. Why can the team that loses the toss only answer to a field goal but lose outright to a touchdown? The bottom line if a team scores a TD on the winning toss, a great deal of the victory comes from the fact they won the toss at all. The problem of "the toss" remains, even if the NFL tries to give it a paint job. As far as I see it, it's now kind of an ugly hybrid of old NFL overtime and college football overtime.
Mike Golic suggested that the only logical idea was to play a full quarter of overtime, and won't end until the clock reads 0:00. Whatever the score at that point is determines the final outcome. By now the power of the toss is heavily slashed (though not completely irrelevant).
My idea (not really popular but) is that during the regular season, there is no overtime. Those games become straight up ties. This will obviously change a lot of preparation as well as game-time decisions deep into the fourth quarter, as there will be, as the season progresses, teams that cannot afford to settle for a tie, and those that can protect their position with simply a tie, a win being a bonus for them. I say in the playoffs, you play the full extra quarter. You cannot kill the coin toss, but 15 more minutes seems ample time to gauge a less controversial (or less kind of goofy) outcome.
|
On December 14 2012 11:15 Jaaaaasper wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2012 11:03 Ferrose wrote:On December 14 2012 06:43 Sermokala wrote:On December 13 2012 10:19 Ferrose wrote:
And we had an entire discussion here about how Tate caught the ball and it was the right call. Even then, we have the catch on VIDEO and people still deny it. 2 people catching the ball at the same time totally is what happens when one guy catches the ball and then the other guy gets his hands on it right? God that discussion was so painful can we please not continue it anymore. Lets also not talk about the Rob parker "is RG3 black enough?" story. I guess you didn't read the part where someone posted the NFL rulebook stating the offense gets the ball in cases of simultaneous possession. But it wasn't simultaneous. That being said, looking forward to the patriots blowing the 49ers out of the water. If the pats do that to the second best team in the nfl, what will they do to the forth or fifth best team?
The Pats is not going to blow the 49ers out. So no need to jump into conclusion. They lost to Zona at home need i remind you,
|
On December 13 2012 22:16 UdderChaos wrote:
Any ideas on who to start for week 15 in WR slot? i have:
Gracon, Welker, D.Alexander, Randal Cobb, Santana Moss and Reggie Wayne. Only have 2 slots (got alfred morris AP and ray rice in the 2 RB and wr/rb slots lol)
Randall Cobb and Reggie Wayne.
|
to be fair the Saints had injured bret farve out of the game already. It was really depressing and unfair system where the teams that won the coin toss Overwelmingly won the game on that first drive.
I agree though I don't want to see 4 hour games sprout out of it more and more in the regular season. Ties are also really meh so I don't know how to solve it myself.
|
On December 14 2012 12:22 Damiani wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2012 11:15 Jaaaaasper wrote:On December 14 2012 11:03 Ferrose wrote:On December 14 2012 06:43 Sermokala wrote:On December 13 2012 10:19 Ferrose wrote:
And we had an entire discussion here about how Tate caught the ball and it was the right call. Even then, we have the catch on VIDEO and people still deny it. 2 people catching the ball at the same time totally is what happens when one guy catches the ball and then the other guy gets his hands on it right? God that discussion was so painful can we please not continue it anymore. Lets also not talk about the Rob parker "is RG3 black enough?" story. I guess you didn't read the part where someone posted the NFL rulebook stating the offense gets the ball in cases of simultaneous possession. But it wasn't simultaneous. That being said, looking forward to the patriots blowing the 49ers out of the water. If the pats do that to the second best team in the nfl, what will they do to the forth or fifth best team? The Pats is not going to blow the 49ers out. So no need to jump into conclusion. They lost to Zona at home need i remind you,
But they can beat the rams ^.^
If the pats play like they did vs the texans, it isn't even close. The patriots lose far more trap games than games they know are going to be a challenge, it basically comes down to if the patriots think the niners are a challenege.
|
wow, what are the Eagles doing.... disconcerting cadence??
|
On December 14 2012 12:22 Damiani wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2012 11:15 Jaaaaasper wrote:On December 14 2012 11:03 Ferrose wrote:On December 14 2012 06:43 Sermokala wrote:On December 13 2012 10:19 Ferrose wrote:
And we had an entire discussion here about how Tate caught the ball and it was the right call. Even then, we have the catch on VIDEO and people still deny it. 2 people catching the ball at the same time totally is what happens when one guy catches the ball and then the other guy gets his hands on it right? God that discussion was so painful can we please not continue it anymore. Lets also not talk about the Rob parker "is RG3 black enough?" story. I guess you didn't read the part where someone posted the NFL rulebook stating the offense gets the ball in cases of simultaneous possession. But it wasn't simultaneous. That being said, looking forward to the patriots blowing the 49ers out of the water. If the pats do that to the second best team in the nfl, what will they do to the forth or fifth best team? The Pats is not going to blow the 49ers out. So no need to jump into conclusion. They lost to Zona at home need i remind you,
Early-season games are markedly different from games even halfway into the season. Just look at Arizona. Teams don't really come into "form" and become themselves until halfway through the season. You really shouldn't put too much stock into early-season wins or losses against particular teams, as that will have very little to do with late-season or post-season performance.
|
On December 14 2012 12:34 Jaaaaasper wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2012 12:22 Damiani wrote:On December 14 2012 11:15 Jaaaaasper wrote:On December 14 2012 11:03 Ferrose wrote:On December 14 2012 06:43 Sermokala wrote:On December 13 2012 10:19 Ferrose wrote:
And we had an entire discussion here about how Tate caught the ball and it was the right call. Even then, we have the catch on VIDEO and people still deny it. 2 people catching the ball at the same time totally is what happens when one guy catches the ball and then the other guy gets his hands on it right? God that discussion was so painful can we please not continue it anymore. Lets also not talk about the Rob parker "is RG3 black enough?" story. I guess you didn't read the part where someone posted the NFL rulebook stating the offense gets the ball in cases of simultaneous possession. But it wasn't simultaneous. That being said, looking forward to the patriots blowing the 49ers out of the water. If the pats do that to the second best team in the nfl, what will they do to the forth or fifth best team? The Pats is not going to blow the 49ers out. So no need to jump into conclusion. They lost to Zona at home need i remind you, But they can beat the rams ^.^If the pats play like they did vs the texans, it isn't even close. The patriots lose far more trap games than games they know are going to be a challenge, it basically comes down to if the patriots think the niners are a challenege.
..... here we go with that stupid logics again? Well then the 49ers can beat Arizona. ^.^
And are you serious about if the Patriots are thinking if the niners is a challenge? No really.. I really wanna know if you're serious about that part. You think Bill Belichek is in his office pondering if the 49ers is a legit team? And after he comes up with his conclusion he'll draw up a game plan based on what he thinks of the 49ers? Oh hot damn you're really something else. Thanks for the laugh tho.
|
On December 12 2012 16:26 Akamu wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2012 13:55 Wolfswood wrote:On December 12 2012 12:36 Akamu wrote:On December 12 2012 01:48 sc4k wrote:
By the way does anyone else get the feeling that, when it's all said and done, the NY Giants and NE Patriots are still the most likely to get to the SB? Both teams are remarkable for their ability to field relative unknowns and then get them to perform well in the system...and they have something special when it matters. And their staffs just put together good games. I mean, I still think a Broncos 49ers match is very possible but I wouldn't be that surprised to see a rematch of last year... Now personally i wouldnt mind if the niners win out as long as Seattle falls to the number 6 spot. To see the packers roflstomp the seahawks in the playoffs (which they will only make because of the fail mary play)((how fucked up is that?!)) will be hilarious. Moral of the story! NFC is where it's at. Hopefully the skins can win the east! Cuz i would love to see me some RG3 in the post season. As long as he is full speed with a healthy knee. and as a bonus! NFC playoff standings* Here's an interesting article on how much the fail mary is effecting the playoff picture in the NFC. pretty fucking cray. Replacement refs will most likely have a stain on who makes the superbowl this year. http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/50557/nfc-playoff-standings-week-14 It blows my mind how many not-smart people there are out there still going on about that play. Ignoring the fact that who really had possession was unclear and it was impossible to call without pissing off one side or the other, it was ONE PLAY. One play does not determine the outcome of a game, even if its the very last one. So yeah, sure, the replacement refs fucking up is the reason the Seahawks are going to the playoffs. Not their other seven wins, five of which came against teams that currently have winning records. Not their elite rushing attack and defense. Not their rookie quarterback, who has been as efficient as almost anyone in the league over the last two months. Its all because of those damn replacement refs. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teameffOMG THEIR SO BAD Sigh. Your arguement is ridiculous. Football, as espn so often loves to tell us, is a game of inches. Things and games are frequently decided by a defining moment or a single play. The catch, the immaculate reception, ect ect. All end of the game defining moments. Those games are remebered because of those plays. And if the seahawks make the playoffs over someone else. Because of a one win advantage due to the fail Mary that's all that will be remebered when the season ends. It's gonna be all over espn. Their season will be defined by that one play. Whether you think it was the right call or wrong call it doesn't matter. But what does matter is there will be a lot of people who see it as the wrong call. But most importantly, if they get in by 1 game there will be 1 or maybe even 2 teams that will look back at that play and see that after all their hard work, after all the sweat and tears and injuries that they will be going home instead of going into the playoffs not because of any fault of their own but because some replacements refs fucked up. So no. Right now the seahawks' other 7 wins don't matter. Nothing about them matters. Not willson not Tate not Lynch. Not while they are only one game ahead of everyone else for the wildcard. When they are two games up it instantly becomes about those guys. Because you can say with a straight face that that play no longer matters. Same thing if they don't make it. You can praise Willsons rookie year and how bright the future looks. But as it is right now. That one win margin is tainted. There is no escaping the * if that's how they get in.
The bolded part stinks of media hype. Imo, and take as much offense as you deem necessary, only a total buffoon would view things in this manner. Why? Let's examine.
Who might miss out if the Shehawks make it? Let's assume that the six teams stay the same. The Redskins, Cowboys, and Vikings would be the three potential teams to miss the playoffs then.
Washington blames the Seahawks? No, Washington can blame themselves for letting the Giants march down field, and blowing the coverage that allowed Cruz to waltz (or should I say salsa?) into the end zone with 19 seconds left on the clock. They can hang their heads about coming out flat versus the Steelers the very next week. They can feel free to blame themselves for being one of the big four wins that Carolina has to this point, completely laying an egg against one of the worst teams in the league. Who shouldn't they blame? The Seahawks. And only a completely uneducated fan, or a total homer would disagree.
Dallas is mad about that one game? Dallas got BLASTED by Seattle in week two, 27-7. Should they be mad? Maybe the shouldn't have been the most inconsistent team in the league for the first half of the season. Maybe they should have managed the clock better to get a closer kick when they played Baltimore, instead of letting the clock run out, while sitting on two time outs, and settling for a long, difficult field goal. Maybe Romo shouldn't have thrown so many interceptions this year. The blame rests squarely on their shoulders, and, as with the Redskins, only an uneducated twit, or a total homer would disagree.
The Vikings? Is it even necessary to discuss them? They're not as good as the Seahawks. They're a completely one dimensional offense, with a complete lack of play makers at wide out. Some say they also have one of the league's worst quarter backs. That they only have six losses is a miraculous feat, and a testament to the unwavering passion, drive, and skill of one Adrian Peterson. A winnable game versus Indy puts them in prime position to be in the playoffs, but they failed to capitalize on their opportunities. That said, they too, were handled easily by the Seahawks (30-20, and if I recall correctly, not as close as that score appears).
Two of the teams don't have a bone to pick, because they could have made the Seahawks record worse than it is, but instead, they got blown out by them. The other is the Redskins who wouldn't get the spot over them anyway, because they lost to the common opponent: Carolina.
Thus it is your position that is, in fact, ridiculous.
|
On December 14 2012 12:13 MountainDewJunkie wrote:
Unrelated:
I really don't like the overtime system. It finally came about after Brett Favre and the Vikes lost to the Saints in OT in the playoffs when NO won the toss and drove down for a field goal. It was suddenly unfair that Brett Favre didn't have a chance to respond to Brees' drive.
I don't see how the new system is much better. Basically, if you win the coin toss and get a touchdown, you win, end of story. But a field goal allows the other team to answer. Why can the team that loses the toss only answer to a field goal but lose outright to a touchdown? The bottom line if a team scores a TD on the winning toss, a great deal of the victory comes from the fact they won the toss at all. The problem of "the toss" remains, even if the NFL tries to give it a paint job. As far as I see it, it's now kind of an ugly hybrid of old NFL overtime and college football overtime.
Mike Golic suggested that the only logical idea was to play a full quarter of overtime, and won't end until the clock reads 0:00. Whatever the score at that point is determines the final outcome. By now the power of the toss is heavily slashed (though not completely irrelevant).
My idea (not really popular but) is that during the regular season, there is no overtime. Those games become straight up ties. This will obviously change a lot of preparation as well as game-time decisions deep into the fourth quarter, as there will be, as the season progresses, teams that cannot afford to settle for a tie, and those that can protect their position with simply a tie, a win being a bonus for them. I say in the playoffs, you play the full extra quarter. You cannot kill the coin toss, but 15 more minutes seems ample time to gauge a less controversial (or less kind of goofy) outcome.
I think a shortened quarter would be better. 10 minutes instead of 15 minutes, or maybe eight minutes. Isn't that how NBA OT works? Shortened quarters?
On December 14 2012 11:15 Jaaaaasper wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2012 11:03 Ferrose wrote:On December 14 2012 06:43 Sermokala wrote:On December 13 2012 10:19 Ferrose wrote:
And we had an entire discussion here about how Tate caught the ball and it was the right call. Even then, we have the catch on VIDEO and people still deny it. 2 people catching the ball at the same time totally is what happens when one guy catches the ball and then the other guy gets his hands on it right? God that discussion was so painful can we please not continue it anymore. Lets also not talk about the Rob parker "is RG3 black enough?" story. I guess you didn't read the part where someone posted the NFL rulebook stating the offense gets the ball in cases of simultaneous possession. But it wasn't simultaneous. That being said, looking forward to the patriots blowing the 49ers out of the water. If the pats do that to the second best team in the nfl, what will they do to the forth or fifth best team?
Except that you have to have two feet on the ground for possession to count. There is no such thing as possession while in mid-air. By the time both of the DB's feet hit the ground, Tate has both hands on the ball. The NFL has a history of being very open and honest when they get a call wrong. They don't change it, but they're honest about getting them wrong. The guys at the top reviewed the play and the two things they said were that it should not have been overturned, but that he should have been called for OPI, which would have ended the game. I can't possibly stress enough that there is NO SUCH THING as possession in mid-air. The rule is very, very clearly defined as having both feet (a knee, elbow, butt, etc, pretty much all body parts except one foot or no feet) touch in bounds on the field for possession to begin. The DB did not fulfill this requirement of the rule, and therefore, never had possession of the ball before Tate had it.
Things get a bit more murky here, but the rule book has undergone recent changes (within the past five years or so) to remove ambiguity from the calls. For instance, all face mask calls are 15 yards now, because the ruling of "inadvertent" was too subjective. The force out rule is gone, as well (the old rule that said "if the player is pushed out of bounds, but the ref thinks the guy probably would have landed in bounds otherwise, then it's a catch"). Those rules are gone to eliminate subjectivity in calls. Therefore, there is no percentage of possession. In the past (and this is where people get confused) there probably was something like that (Cris Carter referenced that on Mike & Mike, ignoring that the rules have changed since his retirement), but it's not applicable in 2012.
Since possession is defined as starting when both feet touch the ground, and the DB's feet did not touch the ground before Golden Tate had a grasp on the ball (and both feet on the ground), possession (as defined) happened simultaneously. And since there is no percentage of possession (because arguing percentage is subjective, and ambiguous), the tie goes to the offense.
I don't think I could possibly make this more clear, and honestly, I've argued it far too much as is, so this is the last post I'm making on this (I was really hoping this was dead).
Regardless of any of that though, if all the teams remain the same, Seattle holds tie breakers over every one of them, so none of this is relevant anyway.
|
On December 14 2012 14:34 Damiani wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2012 12:34 Jaaaaasper wrote:On December 14 2012 12:22 Damiani wrote:On December 14 2012 11:15 Jaaaaasper wrote:On December 14 2012 11:03 Ferrose wrote:On December 14 2012 06:43 Sermokala wrote:On December 13 2012 10:19 Ferrose wrote:
And we had an entire discussion here about how Tate caught the ball and it was the right call. Even then, we have the catch on VIDEO and people still deny it. 2 people catching the ball at the same time totally is what happens when one guy catches the ball and then the other guy gets his hands on it right? God that discussion was so painful can we please not continue it anymore. Lets also not talk about the Rob parker "is RG3 black enough?" story. I guess you didn't read the part where someone posted the NFL rulebook stating the offense gets the ball in cases of simultaneous possession. But it wasn't simultaneous. That being said, looking forward to the patriots blowing the 49ers out of the water. If the pats do that to the second best team in the nfl, what will they do to the forth or fifth best team? The Pats is not going to blow the 49ers out. So no need to jump into conclusion. They lost to Zona at home need i remind you, But they can beat the rams ^.^If the pats play like they did vs the texans, it isn't even close. The patriots lose far more trap games than games they know are going to be a challenge, it basically comes down to if the patriots think the niners are a challenege. ..... here we go with that stupid logics again? Well then the 49ers can beat Arizona. ^.^ And are you serious about if the Patriots are thinking if the niners is a challenge? No really.. I really wanna know if you're serious about that part. You think Bill Belichek is in his office pondering if the 49ers is a legit team? And after he comes up with his conclusion he'll draw up a game plan based on what he thinks of the 49ers? Oh hot damn you're really something else. Thanks for the laugh tho.
Seriously, this isn't even close to a trap game. This is a good team that's had some rough games versus division opponents (like most of the teams in the league). The Patriots most certainly are not taking them lightly.
|
What ever it was called it would not have been over turned. The packers are over it, you should get over it as well.
edit: can we talk roty? rg3, wilson, luck who gets it?
|
On December 14 2012 19:47 thuracine wrote:
What ever it was called it would not have been over turned. The packers are over it, you should get over it as well.
edit: can we talk roty? rg3, wilson, luck who gets it?
As much as I hate the Colts, the way that team has turned around is absolutely incredible, so I feel like it has to go to Luck. RG3's been doing great, don't get me wrong, but he inherited a better team that also drafted some other really good talent (especially Alfred Morris).
Fantasy question time:
I have Demaryius Thomas, Cecil Shorts, James Jones, and Michael Crabtree for my at WR (I know, my receivers suck), and I'm planning to play two of them. Thomas obviously has to play, but I'm up in the air about the other three... Shorts has been spectacular the past few weeks, but his status is still somewhat up in the air with the whole concussion thing, and I'm not sure the Jags will be pushing too hard since they're pretty much fighting for draft position now. Crabtree seems like a good matchup, but he kind of sucks, and I doubt I'll play Jones.
Donnie Avery, Andre Roberts, Brian Hartline, and Brandon Lloyd are also on waivers.
|
On December 14 2012 14:34 Damiani wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2012 12:34 Jaaaaasper wrote:On December 14 2012 12:22 Damiani wrote:On December 14 2012 11:15 Jaaaaasper wrote:On December 14 2012 11:03 Ferrose wrote:On December 14 2012 06:43 Sermokala wrote:On December 13 2012 10:19 Ferrose wrote:
And we had an entire discussion here about how Tate caught the ball and it was the right call. Even then, we have the catch on VIDEO and people still deny it. 2 people catching the ball at the same time totally is what happens when one guy catches the ball and then the other guy gets his hands on it right? God that discussion was so painful can we please not continue it anymore. Lets also not talk about the Rob parker "is RG3 black enough?" story. I guess you didn't read the part where someone posted the NFL rulebook stating the offense gets the ball in cases of simultaneous possession. But it wasn't simultaneous. That being said, looking forward to the patriots blowing the 49ers out of the water. If the pats do that to the second best team in the nfl, what will they do to the forth or fifth best team? The Pats is not going to blow the 49ers out. So no need to jump into conclusion. They lost to Zona at home need i remind you, But they can beat the rams ^.^If the pats play like they did vs the texans, it isn't even close. The patriots lose far more trap games than games they know are going to be a challenge, it basically comes down to if the patriots think the niners are a challenege. ..... here we go with that stupid logics again? Well then the 49ers can beat Arizona. ^.^ And are you serious about if the Patriots are thinking if the niners is a challenge? No really.. I really wanna know if you're serious about that part. You think Bill Belichek is in his office pondering if the 49ers is a legit team? And after he comes up with his conclusion he'll draw up a game plan based on what he thinks of the 49ers? Oh hot damn you're really something else. Thanks for the laugh tho.
Belicheck thinks every team is a challenge, but all teams get over confident at times, and the niners are not as scary as the texans.
|
On December 15 2012 01:53 Jaaaaasper wrote:Show nested quote +On December 14 2012 14:34 Damiani wrote:On December 14 2012 12:34 Jaaaaasper wrote:On December 14 2012 12:22 Damiani wrote:On December 14 2012 11:15 Jaaaaasper wrote:On December 14 2012 11:03 Ferrose wrote:On December 14 2012 06:43 Sermokala wrote:On December 13 2012 10:19 Ferrose wrote:
And we had an entire discussion here about how Tate caught the ball and it was the right call. Even then, we have the catch on VIDEO and people still deny it. 2 people catching the ball at the same time totally is what happens when one guy catches the ball and then the other guy gets his hands on it right? God that discussion was so painful can we please not continue it anymore. Lets also not talk about the Rob parker "is RG3 black enough?" story. I guess you didn't read the part where someone posted the NFL rulebook stating the offense gets the ball in cases of simultaneous possession. But it wasn't simultaneous. That being said, looking forward to the patriots blowing the 49ers out of the water. If the pats do that to the second best team in the nfl, what will they do to the forth or fifth best team? The Pats is not going to blow the 49ers out. So no need to jump into conclusion. They lost to Zona at home need i remind you, But they can beat the rams ^.^If the pats play like they did vs the texans, it isn't even close. The patriots lose far more trap games than games they know are going to be a challenge, it basically comes down to if the patriots think the niners are a challenege. ..... here we go with that stupid logics again? Well then the 49ers can beat Arizona. ^.^ And are you serious about if the Patriots are thinking if the niners is a challenge? No really.. I really wanna know if you're serious about that part. You think Bill Belichek is in his office pondering if the 49ers is a legit team? And after he comes up with his conclusion he'll draw up a game plan based on what he thinks of the 49ers? Oh hot damn you're really something else. Thanks for the laugh tho. Belicheck thinks every team is a challenge, but all teams get over confident at times, and the niners are not as scary as the texans.
I'm not sure. The Texans don't look as capable as the Niners in actually challenging for a AFC/NFC championship, respectfully. And that's saying a lot because of how great the NFC looks compared to the AFC (remember, the Pats are 1-2 vs the NFC west going into this weekend). I don't have a giant throbbing erection for the Niners, yet I can still say I wouldn't be at all surprised about them winning the NFC championship.
|
At the beginning of the year the Texans and Niners seemed so strong and well rounded overall, but now you have that feeling when the time comes some part of their team will break down and they won't be able to stop the ship from sinking.
I think the Texans / Colts game is going to be one of hte most interesting games this weekend. A Colts win would really jumble things up. As of right now the Colts are a giant underdogs, +9.5 in vegas.
|
On December 14 2012 16:54 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote:
Regardless of any of that though, if all the teams remain the same, Seattle holds tie breakers over every one of them, so none of this is relevant anyway.
I don't think anyone cares about the case where if Seattle had one less win, they still would make the playoffs due to tiebreakers. They care about the case where if Seattle has one less win, they don't make the playoffs. Whether that is because of a lost tiebreaker, or because they simply have less wins is what is irrelevant.
On December 14 2012 16:34 SweeTLemonS[TPR] wrote:
Washington blames the Seahawks? No...
Dallas is mad about that one game? ...
The Vikings? Is it even necessary to discuss them? ...
Your "blow out" analysis as for why Seattle is better than Dallas and Minnesota conveniently forgets how both games were in Seattle, and how Minnesota and Seattle both have been feast at home, while famine on the road.
None of that means anything though. Pointing out the blunders and missed opportunities made by the teams that might catch the Seahawks as an argument for why they don't deserve to catch the Seahawks doesn't make any sense: they (hypothetically) managed to catch the Seahawks in spite of whatever shortcomings you list. The fact is, if these teams pull even with Seattle and miss out on the playoffs because of a tiebreaker, then there is a single call that can be pointed at as literally deciding who got into the playoffs. If you think the call was correct, then sure, all is right with the NFL world. But I think that is what you should be arguing (and you do in a later post), rather than using some kind of weird, sideways logic that the Seahawks are better and thus more deserving, when their (hypothetical) records don't show that.
As a Packer fan living in Minnesota though, I'm loving the cruel twist of how the Vikings fans laughed when the Packers got screwed, and how it now might come back around to mess up their playoff hopes. And that's despite the fact that I'm perfectly willing to cheer for the Vikes when they aren't playing the Pack, and am loving how AP has put my fantasy team on his back.
|
whos hyped for the best week of matchups yet ?!
|
Another week i have to sit here and watch my awful team try to win. Cant wait till Tannehill stops overthrowing receivers and we get one that can catch the ball when it hits their chest.
|
I totally just called AD's 82 TD run :D
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
