ADVERTISEMENT

Eagles or Chiefs 2/12?

I have watched Mick Jagger grab his crotch numerous times. Rihanna and Jagger are not alone.

Did he smell his fingers? Does he have a vagina? Rihanna was tame. I actually like her. At least she kept her clothes on. Much better than the pigs they’ve had on the past few years. It was almost great.
 
Did he smell his fingers? Does he have a vagina? Rihanna was tame. I actually like her. At least she kept her clothes on. Much better than the pigs they’ve had on the past few years. It was almost great.
Maroon 5, Shakira/J-Lo, The Weeknd, Eminem....I do not consider them pigs.
 
There were plenty of "what ifs" in that game. In my humble opinion the game turned when the KC offensive line took control at the start of the 3rd . They established the run and scored on the opening drive after the half. The Eagle's defense had no answers and simply could not stop the Chiefs the rest of the game. There were several key moments where plays occurred and either kept or killed momentum for both teams. However, make no mistake about it. Mahomes was able to to what he did because his offensive line rose to the occasion and took over in the second half. The Chief's did just enough on defense to keep the game within reach and make a comeback.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BGI User 756
That was the worst ending to a SB I've ever seen. They gotta make a new rule, and you gotta score if you can. And it's a fifteen yard penalty to slide at the one yard line....
 
As for the defensive holding call, it was a tough call on the Eagles, but it was a penalty. Even the player who committed the penalty, James Bradberry, admitted he held Smith-Schuster. I did like the take that Greg Olsen had on the call during the broadcast: "Let 'em play." I expect Eagles' fans wish the NFL refs would be like NHL refs in the final stages of a close Stanley Cup game, where the refs basically "swallow their whistle," but that has never been the culture in the NFL. In an NHL game you practically have to mug a guy to get a penalty call.

On one of the talk shows I heard an interesting discussion about little things that smart, veteran coaches do in games to avoid those kinds of calls. If Belichick knew the opposing team was wearing white jerseys, he made sure his DBs wore white gloves, so holds and grabs weren't so obvious. The Eagles DB was wearing black gloves, which made the jersey tug a little more obvious.

What impressed me the most about the game was Andy Reid's play calling. Let's face it, the guy is brilliant. People can talk all they want about Sean McVay and Kyle Shanahan--and they are both great play callers--but I will take Andy Reid any day of the week and twice on Sundays. He put on a play calling clinic in the second half. Of course it helps when your QB is Mahomes. But there is no denying the genius of Andy Reid.
 
one of the dumbest posts Ive ever read
No it's not, it's a good idea. It was a terrible end to the game, totally sufficiently shitty and unsporting and just generally terrible enough to motivate a rules change, so as to discourage intentionally not scoring a TD, and sitting on the ball so as to make a chip shot FG as the clock runs out. You could also make it so the defense can be flagged for deliberately letting them score.

It's a great idea....
 
No it's not, it's a good idea. It was a terrible end to the game, totally sufficiently shitty and unsporting and just generally terrible enough to motivate a rules change, so as to discourage intentionally not scoring a TD, and sitting on the ball so as to make a chip shot FG as the clock runs out. You could also make it so the defense can be flagged for deliberately letting them score.

It's a great idea....
While we’re at it, let’s also flag running out of bounds to stop the clock, spiking the ball intentionally to stop the clock, and only kicking the ball 10 yards on the kickoff in an effort to recover it when trailing….all of these are “very unsporting”. Come on. 😉
 
While we’re at it, let’s also flag running out of bounds to stop the clock, spiking the ball intentionally to stop the clock, and only kicking the ball 10 yards on the kickoff in an effort to recover it when trailing….all of these are “very unsporting”. Come on. 😉
No, not come on. That ending was a disaster. You had a player very intentionally and visibly not scoring, as well as a defense seemingly willing to let them score, and such cynical tactics on both sides could easily be discouraged with a rules change. Or it's certainly worth a look see. And some serious consideration.
 
No, not come on. That ending was a disaster. You had a player very intentionally and visibly not scoring, as well as a defense seemingly willing to let them score, and such cynical tactics on both sides could easily be discouraged with a rules change. Or it's certainly worth a look see. And some serious consideration.
Should Deshone Kizer have used that strategy against Stanford ?
 
Wait! I forgot to include a pitcher intentionally throwing four absolutely unhitable balls to walk a batter, intentionally fouling another basketball player when losing in an effort to get the ball back, and missing a free throw on purpose when losing by more than 2 pts.

While I don’t agree with your rant at all, I’m also just having a little fun with you….atyour expense perhaps. All good!
 
No, not come on. That ending was a disaster. You had a player very intentionally and visibly not scoring, as well as a defense seemingly willing to let them score, and such cynical tactics on both sides could easily be discouraged with a rules change. Or it's certainly worth a look see. And some serious consideration.
So you favor rule changes that would prevent you from running out the clock ?

Rule changes that would prevent or stifle ball control ?
 
No, not come on. That ending was a disaster. You had a player very intentionally and visibly not scoring, as well as a defense seemingly willing to let them score, and such cynical tactics on both sides could easily be discouraged with a rules change. Or it's certainly worth a look see. And some serious consideration.
What new rule would you recommend ?

Please be specific with the details.

Thanks
 
Wait! I forgot to include a pitcher intentionally throwing four absolutely unhitable balls to walk a batter, intentionally fouling another basketball player when losing in an effort to get the ball back, and missing a free throw on purpose when losing by more than 2 pts.

While I don’t agree with your rant at all, I’m also just having a little fun with you….atyour expense perhaps. All good!
Alright, then.... Nevertheless, NFL teams only recently started doing this, this hyper tactical efficiency, where one team is daring the other to score, and often willing let them walk into the end zone, while the team in possession is almost literally tripping over themselves not to score. That's not a good trend, and it really did kind of ruin the game. And there's no rule against make a rule against that....

And I don't think you agree or don't agree, on the substantive part of the subject at least. I figure you just want to disagree with someone, just to be difficult, and this is as good an excuse as any. Otherwise you wouldn't have listed all those irrelevant examples, which would have no bearing on whether on not we should make a rule change for this situation. They come off as cheap talking points with no conviction behind them. The NFL or any sport or league is under no obligation to be consistent, and to let some gamesmanship ploys go, yet make others against the rules. There's just no connection there. They don't have a Supreme Court in the NFL to declare some new rule unconstitutional. It would just be a rule and the teams would have to manage accordingly.

At least I don't think they have an NFL SCOTUS, where rules can be challenged and possibly overturned by some sort of quasi-judicial decree. Though they do have instant replay.....
 
  • Like
Reactions: ND410
Alright, then.... Nevertheless, NFL teams only recently started doing this, this hyper tactical efficiency, where one team is daring the other to score, and often willing let them walk into the end zone, while the team in possession is almost literally tripping over themselves not to score. That's not a good trend, and it really did kind of ruin the game. And there's no rule against make a rule against that....

And I don't think you agree or don't agree, on the substantive part of the subject at least. I figure you just want to disagree with someone, just to be difficult, and this is as good an excuse as any. Otherwise you wouldn't have listed all those irrelevant examples, which would have no bearing on whether on not we should make a rule change for this situation. They come off as cheap talking points with no conviction behind them. The NFL or any sport or league is under no obligation to be consistent, and to let some gamesmanship ploys go, yet make others against the rules. There's just no connection there. They don't have a Supreme Court in the NFL to declare some new rule unconstitutional. It would just be a rule and the teams would have to manage accordingly.

At least I don't think they have an NFL SCOTUS, where rules can be challenged and possibly overturned by some sort of quasi-judicial decree. Though they do have instant replay.....
The NFL has a “rules committee” that meets every year to review current rules and proposed rules.

Please detail your proposed rule change

Thanks
 
No, not come on. That ending was a disaster. You had a player very intentionally and visibly not scoring, as well as a defense seemingly willing to let them score, and such cynical tactics on both sides could easily be discouraged with a rules change. Or it's certainly worth a look see. And some serious consideration.
You can not possibly be serious!
 
You can not possibly be serious!
No man, I'm totally serious. I don't even know what's controversial about that. This was the effin' Super Bowl, and the Chiefs RB is having to catch himself so he can clumsily down it at the one, barely suppressing all his normal, healthy competitive instincts and training, and NOT score the go-ahed TD, so he can bleed the clock down on his coach's orders... It's almost sort of a disgrace. It's definitely not good. And so that's what rules are for, and why pencils have erasers.

Though it is fitting, for a socio-economy as ruthless and soulless as America's, that the beauty of the game as it were means absolutely nothing, and winning, however ugly and purely tactical and cynical, obviously trumps any other consideration. If there was some obscure strategy where you could win the game without even playing, and sit on the ball for 59 minutes and 59 seconds, everyone would probably nod in agreement....
 
No man, I'm totally serious. I don't even know what's controversial about that. This was the effin' Super Bowl, and the Chiefs RB is having to catch himself so he can clumsily down it at the one, barely suppressing all his normal, healthy competitive instincts and training, and NOT score the go-ahed TD, so he can bleed the clock down on his coach's orders... It's almost sort of a disgrace. It's definitely not good. And so that's what rules are for, and why pencils have erasers.

Though it is fitting, for a socio-economy as ruthless and soulless as America's, that the beauty of the game as it were means absolutely nothing, and winning, however ugly and purely tactical and cynical, obviously trumps any other consideration. If there was some obscure strategy where you could win the game without even playing, and sit on the ball for 59 minutes and 59 seconds, everyone would probably nod in agreement....
The object of the game is to score more points than your opponent, and if that involves employing a strategy that prevents your opponent from gaining possession of the ball, that’s a viable tactic.

Now as to your diatribe against America, since you hate it so much, why don’t you just pack your bags and get the fook out. I’ll even help you. I’ll pay for your one way fare to any other country in the world, one where you will take up permanent residence !

Just let me know what country you choose so that I can look into booking the ticket for you.
 
I'll preface it by saying I'm a Gmen fan so I'm happy that Philly lost. Philly got away with three obvious calls in the first half. Last drive before the 1st half was a delay of game that was not called. Ju Ju was held that ended a drive. Also Mahomes was hit in the helmet almost face mask that wasn't called. KC played a great game & I thought it was a good SB. Lotta points & I collected a envelope @ The rambling House in The Bronx! BTW Philly is Fetterman out of the hospital yet?
 
No man, I'm totally serious. I don't even know what's controversial about that. This was the effin' Super Bowl, and the Chiefs RB is having to catch himself so he can clumsily down it at the one, barely suppressing all his normal, healthy competitive instincts and training, and NOT score the go-ahed TD, so he can bleed the clock down on his coach's orders... It's almost sort of a disgrace. It's definitely not good. And so that's what rules are for, and why pencils have erasers.

Though it is fitting, for a socio-economy as ruthless and soulless as America's, that the beauty of the game as it were means absolutely nothing, and winning, however ugly and purely tactical and cynical, obviously trumps any other consideration. If there was some obscure strategy where you could win the game without even playing, and sit on the ball for 59 minutes and 59 seconds, everyone would probably nod in agreement....
It’s called smart football.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT