User Name
Password
AppleNova Forums » AppleOutsider »

A random sports discussion thread


Register Members List Calendar Search FAQ Posting Guidelines
A random sports discussion thread
Page 1 of 9 [1] 2 3 4 5  Next Last Thread Tools
Windswept
On Pacific time
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Moderator's Pub
 
2010-01-12, 16:44

Over the last few months, I have wanted to make posts on various different sports topics, none of which warranted whole threads to themselves. So, once again, I've found the need to set up a general thread for posting comments about random issues, events and opinions, this time in the realm of sports.

This thread is available for any sport you wish, at any time of the year, particularly when you wish to posts comments that might not generate an entire thread.

My comments for today deal with the Green Bay Packers vs. Arizona Cardinals game that was played on Sunday, January 10, 2010, two days ago.

Did anyone else watch the game, and if so, do you have any remarks to make about it?

The thing is, these two teams played each other exactly one week earlier, at which time the Cardinals were crushed, 33-7, iirc. This first game was so dismal for Arizona that the coach took out his starting quarterback, Kurt Warner, and played his second and third quarterbacks.

Many other substitutions were also made, giving quite a few of those who spend a fair amount of time on the bench a chance to play in a regular season game.

Quite a controversy sprang up when other coaches across the NFL seemed to rest their starting players for this last game of the regular season, saving them for the first playoff game a week later.

But, when Green Bay returned to Arizona on Jan. 10, for the second match-up, one of the most amazing playoff games in NFL history was played, with Green Bay down 31-10 at one point, then rallying in the second half to tie the score 45-45.

The Green Bay players were literally stunned when the score was 31-10. They sat on the bench with glum, uncomprehending faces. What had gone on here? How could this have happened after what had occurred just a week earlier?

Well, today I read an interesting article about the book The Art of War by Sun Tzu, in which the article writer claims that Arizona coach, Ken Whisenhunt, was indeed using strategies from this book to defeat Green Bay.

Whisenhunt purposely allowed the Cardinals to show poorly in the first match-up with Green Bay, intentionally keeping his best players off the field. Also, the best players seemed plagued with injuries of every sort, acquired in that first game against Green Bay: knees, ankles, thumbs, giving sportswriters even more reasons to discount Arizona's hopes for success in the playoffs.

The Cardinals already had a playoff berth, and this first game didn't really count for anything. However, Green Bay played their hearts out in that initial game, and said they always played to win, even when the opposing team was fielding its third string players.

Whisenhunt tried out a few plays against GB to see how they would set up against those plays. The score and lackluster performance of Arizona lulled GB into a hearty confidence for the second game, the one on Jan. 10, a playoff game whose results definitely counted.

And, like I said, GB was stunned to see themselves down 31-10, before they started to pull themselves back together and function with their normal confidence. Their emotional state was a direct result of Coach Whisenhunt's manipulations.

Here's *part* of that interesting article that discusses his use of strategies from The Art of War:

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/01...ryday-winning/

Quote:
Coach Whisenhunt sacrificed ego to hide bag of tricks

Sun Tzu was on the NFL field this past week and his name was Coach Wisenhunt

by Johnny Punish

Wow! Did you watch last weeks NFL game between the Green Bay Packers and the Arizona Cardinals? Wow! I bet you're saying Kurt Warner should get into the Hall of Fame right now! And you'd be right! This guy is gold from top to bottom.

But did you really watch it and how do you think what was played out on the field can help you in business and investing? You see, the battle actually started a week before the game. That was the real MVP performance and it was hidden from view just like they planned it.

Check it...you see, Unlike some of his egomaniacal peers, Ken Whisenhunt doesn’t seem to possess a desperate need to receive credit for his team’s success. But the Cardinals’ third-year coach – and the only one to have taken the franchise to a Super Bowl – is as intensely competitive as anyone in the business, and his shrewd approach to preparing for the Green Bay Packers is a major reason his team is headed to New Orleans for Saturday’s divisional-round playoff game against the Saints. Whisenhunt is now 4-1 in the postseason with the Cards. Accident or something else?

It was The Art of War and he played it perfectly.

Consider that shortly before kickoff, Whisenhunt determined that the Vikings were headed for a victory over the Giants, eliminating the Cardinals from contention for a first-round bye and ensuring that there’d be a rematch with the Pack the following Sunday.

He thus settled on the bland blueprint, which was designed to a) reveal as little as possible to the Packers and b) on select occasions, flash some formations the team planned to use in the rematch as a means of confirming how Green Bay was likely to defend them. Specifically, Whisenhunt wanted to see how the Packers, who would finish the regular season as the NFL’s second-ranked defense, would try to match up against Arizona’s three-receiver sets, some of which would include tight end Ben Patrick(notes) split wide as a de facto slot receiver.

The result was that the Cards, who also rested Warner and other starters for part of the game, were essentially impotent in a 33-7 Packers victory, provoking a lot of criticism about Whisenhunt’s approach and creating the perception that the Cards were headed for a fall.
Some interesting theories about a great game.

Last edited by Windswept : 2010-01-20 at 16:48.
  quote
ezkcdude
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
 
2010-01-12, 17:07

It's very hard in the NFL to beat a team twice in the same season, let alone twice in consecutive weeks, especially when you blow them out the first time. Personally, I think all the "controversy" about coaches resting their best players was hogwash. It's all about winning. If the game is meaningless, as it was in the case of Indy and NO, it makes no sense to risk your franchise players getting injured. I'm sure the coaches are perfectly happy with their decisions, even if they didn't go down in history with perfect seasons. I think every NFL coach would make the same decision given those circumstances.

You know what happens when you make a "bold" choice in the NFL and it goes awry? It's much, much worse. Coaches tend to be conservative for good reason, most of them have learned by trial-and-error, that it almost always is better to be safe than sorry in the NFL.
  quote
Elysium
Environmental Bloodhound
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Land of ice and snow
Send a message via AIM to Elysium  
2010-01-12, 17:18

Quote:
Originally Posted by ezkcdude View Post
Personally, I think all the "controversy" about coaches resting their best players was hogwash. It's all about winning. If the game is meaningless, as it was in the case of Indy and NO, it makes no sense to risk your franchise players getting injured.
Yes, if the game is completely meaningless. By meaningless I mean that the outcome of either your team winning or losing and your opponent winning or losing has no bearing on the postseaon.

Meaningless game: Indy vs. Buffalo
- Indy has the first round bye and home field locked up
- Buffalo is out of the playoff hunt
- Perfectly fine scenario

Not-so meaningless game: Indy vs. NY Jets
- Indy has everything locked up, has the potential for a perfect season.
- New York needs a lot of help but is still playoff eligible.
- Definitely an uncool move by Indy to pull their starters (at home in a dome) and essentially laying down and improving the Jets chances for the playoffs exponentially at the expense of equally deserving teams.

Formerly known as cynical_rock
censeo tentatio victum
There is no snooze button on a cat.
  quote
Luca
ಠ_ರೃ
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Minnesota
 
2010-01-12, 17:32

It was certainly an exciting game, but on the other hand you could look at it as a tremendous defensive failure on both sides of the ball. Neither side was able to stop the other at all. Arizona's huge early lead came mostly from turnovers and just one defensive stop of Green Bay. Green Bay's huge comeback was only thanks to that clever onside kick and a single defensive stop of Arizona. By the end of the game, it seemed to come down to whoever could get the last possession. Combine that with a breakdown in Green Bay's offense in OT and that was the game.

So while many people like to see lots of scoring (and don't get me wrong, I do too), I can't help but think that neither Green Bay nor Arizona is really cut out for the playoffs. I don't think either team would be able to grind it out against a tough defense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elysium View Post
Yes, if the game is completely meaningless. By meaningless I mean that the outcome of either your team winning or losing and your opponent winning or losing has no bearing on the postseaon.

Meaningless game: Indy vs. Buffalo
- Indy has the first round bye and home field locked up
- Buffalo is out of the playoff hunt
- Perfectly fine scenario

Not-so meaningless game: Indy vs. NY Jets
- Indy has everything locked up, has the potential for a perfect season.
- New York needs a lot of help but is still playoff eligible.
- Definitely an uncool move by Indy to pull their starters (at home in a dome) and essentially laying down and improving the Jets chances for the playoffs exponentially at the expense of equally deserving teams.
I have to disagree with you there. Obviously the Colts/Jets game did have a major effect on the playoff picture, so it was not an entirely meaningless game. But it was meaningless to the Colts. A coach should never even think about how his team winning or losing will affect other teams with playoff hopes. The Colts' coach decided that the risk of injury was too great and that he'd be better off resting his best players instead. If the other wild card hopeful teams had played better earlier in the year, they wouldn't have to worry about what happens in someone else's game. It's all about controlling your own destiny as the football commentators like to put it. You want to put your team in a position where you don't need help from certain other teams winning or losing to decide whether you make it to the playoffs.

In other words, it's not the Colts' problem that the Steelers, Broncos, Texans and Dolphins missed out on the playoffs. Had those teams played better earlier in the year, they wouldn't have needed to worry.
  quote
ezkcdude
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
 
2010-01-12, 18:05

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elysium View Post

Not-so meaningless game: Indy vs. NY Jets
- Indy has everything locked up, has the potential for a perfect season.
Perfect season means nothing if your hall-of-fame quaterback gets injured, and if that happened, the coach would be second-guessed for the next 10 years. It's a matter of looking at the worst case scenario, and deciding it is just not worth it. 99% of coaches make that same decision, if nothing is riding on the game.

Quote:
- New York needs a lot of help but is still playoff eligible.
Whether NYJ win or lose is meaningless to Indy, and if they face each other again in the playoffs, probably better for them. I'm not sure if Pittsburgh or Houston would have made it, but I wouldn't have wanted to play the former.

Quote:
- Definitely an uncool move by Indy to pull their starters (at home in a dome) and essentially laying down and improving the Jets chances for the playoffs exponentially at the expense of equally deserving teams.
Coaches don't get paid to be cool, they get paid to win. And by "win", I don't mean the 16th game of the regular season. Not in the case of Indy. For them, anything short of Superbowl victory is considered failure.

EDIT: Yeah, um, I should have read Luca's post. What he said.
  quote
Wrao
Yarp
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Road Warrior
 
2010-01-12, 19:01

Lakers have the best record in the league, despite two major injuries to two key players. Gasol has missed over a dozen games, and the Lakers have lost 6 without him(8 total). Meanwhile, Kobe has a broken finger and though he has still played on it and posted some ridiculous numbers, it is clearly starting to annoy him, as he is shooting ~30% over the last 4 games which is uncharacteristically low for him. However, Gasol should be back tonight, and Kobe has a long history of bouncing back after a bad night(or two). So hopefully they pick it up.

The Lakers are easily the most spoiled team in the league. When they play at 80% they clobber opponents handily, yet most of the time they seem to be playing with their eyes closed. I suspect this is Phil Jackson's influence, as he is a notorious 'cruise through the season, blow the post-season out' type of coach. But, it is a little bit annoying to watch sometimes. When the Lakers decide to play at full capacity, no team in the league can beat them in a 7 game series. Except for the Charlotte Bobcats... for some reason.

I tentatively say that we will finally see a Kobe vs. Lebron Finals this year. But that is only assuming that the Magic are compromised. Boston will fall if they have to face the Hawks even if KG is healthy. But, I just don't see the Cavaliers winning out in a 7-game series against LA. Sure, they routed them in their first match-up, but, that game was completely bogus.


Next season, unless Lebron wins a ring, he moves, and this is an extremely minority opinion, but, I honestly believe he might wind up in LA. It sounds crazy, but, realistically, LA would be the best chance he has at winning. Much better than the Knicks, much better than the Cavaliers... LA could probably pull it off too if they traded Lamar Odom, Sasha, Fisher(although, I half suspect Fish might retire), and Cash. It would be unfair, it would be ridiculous, it would be absurd, but... It's not entirely out of the picture, imo.

Thing is, the media hypes up a Kobe vs. Lebron rivalry, but the two are contemporaries, they are olympians and they both respect one another. They play extremely well together(as demonstrated by the Olympics) and they compliment one anothers styles.

Okay, well, a fan can dream.
  quote
Windswept
On Pacific time
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Moderator's Pub
 
2010-01-14, 19:59

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luca View Post
It was certainly an exciting game, but on the other hand you could look at it as a tremendous defensive failure on both sides of the ball. Neither side was able to stop the other at all.
I'd have to re-watch the game to key in on this more closely, but I think Arizona had 'some' decent defense initially... that is, until the second half, when their defense seemed to dissolve into nothingness. I don't know if they were exhausted or if they just gave up. It was strange.

Quote:
Arizona's huge early lead came mostly from turnovers and just one defensive stop of Green Bay. Green Bay's huge comeback was only thanks to that clever onside kick and a single defensive stop of Arizona. By the end of the game, it seemed to come down to whoever could get the last possession. Combine that with a breakdown in Green Bay's offense in OT and that was the game.

So while many people like to see lots of scoring (and don't get me wrong, I do too), I can't help but think that neither Green Bay nor Arizona is really cut out for the playoffs. I don't think either team would be able to grind it out against a tough defense.
I generally agree with all your points. Most of the commentators on ESPN seemed to really like the game though. Almost all had picked Green Bay to win. heh.

I doubt if the Cardinals will win against New Orleans.
  quote
Luca
ಠ_ರೃ
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Minnesota
 
2010-01-14, 20:54

It should be an exciting game either way. Both the Saints and the Cardinals are pass-heavy, offense-heavy teams, so it should be a good show no matter who wins. It gets dicier once you pit either of those teams against the winner of the Vikings-Cowboys game.

It seems that the national sports media are very, very quick to write off any team that isn't "hot" at the moment, though. The Saints won 13 straight and then lost 3 mostly meaningless games in a row at the end of the season. And all of a sudden they suck and stand no chance. Same for the Vikings - they started hot, with a 10-1 record to start, and then lost 3 of their last 5. And because the Cowboys won so spectacularly in the last few games of their season, all of a sudden the Vikings have been written off.

Despite what I posted earlier, I have to say Arizona's passing game scares me. Maybe they put up a lot of their points in the Green Bay game because of defensive failures, but even against a tough defense they can be dangerous. I mean, they beat Minnesota in an embarrassing fashion several weeks ago, and I'd certainly be nervous if the NFC championship game pitted them against the Vikings again. Only advantage there is if that is the matchup, it'll be held at the Metrodome, where the Vikings have so far been undefeated this year.

I'm really excited about the rest of the postseason!
  quote
709
¡Damned!
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Purgatory
 
2010-01-14, 21:23

Random sports discussion? I'll give you random:

The Lions are going to kill next year. Mark my words.
  quote
Maciej
M AH - ch ain saw
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2010-01-14, 21:34

Quote:
Originally Posted by 709 View Post
Random sports discussion? I'll give you random:

The Lions are going to kill next year. Mark my words.
You can consider your words marked.
  quote
Naderfan
Queen of Confrontation
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Ohio
 
2010-01-14, 21:36

I don't think I've ever experienced the roller-coaster of emotions during a football game that I did at the end of the Packers/Cardinals game (starting with the Cardinals missed field goal to that heart-wrenching fumble). As a Packers fan, I was stunned (yet somehow not overly surprised) at how badly they started off. I couldn't believe how badly the defense did. And I also had a terrible premonition before the snap on that last play that the Pack was going to screw it up.

Here's my question, since I'm really not that great at sports strategy. After the Packers scored their last touchdown, should they have gone for a two-point conversion? On the one hand, if they went for it and didn't get it, the game's over. Getting the extra point ties the game and is (for the most part) a sure thing. If they get it, it doesn't change anything if the Cardinals score (and I don't think anyone saw the missed field goal at the end). On the other hand, with how badly the defense was playing, it seemed likely they could've gotten 2 and then if they prevent the Cards from scoring, they win the game and don't have to chance it with sudden death.

Obviously, none of that matters now, but I hadn't really followed any of the post-game analysis (it hurt too much), so I don't know if anyone else thought that would have been good or bad.
  quote
Maciej
M AH - ch ain saw
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2010-01-14, 21:53

Is there a lot of Green Bay fans here?

I'm a Bears fan living in Milwaukee, it's like sleeping in the enemy's den. Anyway, I think the Bears will decimate all next year. I know, I'm being optimistic.

I think most coaches go for the tie versus the two point conversion because the chances of losing the game defending an enemy drive are less than the chances of blowing a conversion. If that makes any sense? In other words I think it is easier to defend against the "game winning drive" than to try winning it on a two point. Maybe "easier" isn't the right word, but I think it's the "safe bet." Although I think that goes for most games, in a record breaking game (as with the Cards - Pack matchup, wrt scoring) that logic is a bit more questionable.

Also, IMO the problem with goin for a two point is that if you can't get it you're putting the game in the hands of your defense - the defense in which, you have just proven, you have no confidence.
  quote
Naderfan
Queen of Confrontation
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Ohio
 
2010-01-14, 22:42

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maciej View Post
Is there a lot of Green Bay fans here?

I'm a Bears fan living in Milwaukee, it's like sleeping in the enemy's den. Anyway, I think the Bears will decimate all next year. I know, I'm being optimistic.
Growing up a Packers fan in Minnesota, I know the feeling!
  quote
709
¡Damned!
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Purgatory
 
2010-01-14, 22:55

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maciej View Post
You can consider your words marked.
Believe it, baby.

I wish Stone was still here, because I could always count on him for a FUCK YEAH wrt to anything Detroit.
  quote
Maciej
M AH - ch ain saw
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2010-01-14, 23:06

  quote
709
¡Damned!
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Purgatory
 
2010-01-14, 23:37

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maciej View Post
Don't be like that.

Basically, 2010 is like this:
Pistons will fail.
Wings will do some amazing shit this year: They lose in the playoffs.
Tigers will win ALC again. Fans will die.
Lions will be in the SuperBowl*



*haha, good one Jay. Lions will actually win 6 games.

So it goes.
  quote
Luca
ಠ_ರೃ
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Minnesota
 
2010-01-15, 00:31

Quote:
Originally Posted by Naderfan View Post
Here's my question, since I'm really not that great at sports strategy. After the Packers scored their last touchdown, should they have gone for a two-point conversion? On the one hand, if they went for it and didn't get it, the game's over. Getting the extra point ties the game and is (for the most part) a sure thing. If they get it, it doesn't change anything if the Cardinals score (and I don't think anyone saw the missed field goal at the end). On the other hand, with how badly the defense was playing, it seemed likely they could've gotten 2 and then if they prevent the Cards from scoring, they win the game and don't have to chance it with sudden death.

Obviously, none of that matters now, but I hadn't really followed any of the post-game analysis (it hurt too much), so I don't know if anyone else thought that would have been good or bad.
I'm not entirely sure why coaches always seem to go for overtime rather than going for the two point. Maybe it's politically motivated (that is, if they go for the conversion and don't make it, everyone will criticize them for their decision and their job might be on the line). One statistic I've heard floated around is that the winner of the coin toss to begin overtime has about a 60% chance of winning. So it's a big advantage to start with the ball in OT, but it's no guarantee at all. Meanwhile, the chances of making a 2-point conversion are just a hair under 50%. That's a big advantage over going to OT and losing the coin toss, but a big disadvantage compared to winning the toss.

I did find an article analyzing it. I'm sure there have been hundreds of them. This one is a bit older, from 2004, and takes more of a pro-OT stance. Both mention that while many OT games end with both teams having a possession, a good percentage of them end on the first possession with the other team never getting a chance to touch the ball.

One idea I've heard floated is saying the first team to get 4 points wins. So you'd need two safeties or field goals, but just one touchdown to win. It'd give coaches a lot more to think about it when it's 4th and goal. Others have brought up the OT system used in college football, where each team takes turns from the 25 yard line and it doesn't end until one team has more points than the other after both have had the same number of possessions. To make things more interesting in college, they also force teams to go for 2 after touchdowns in the third overtime period and later.
  quote
Partial
Stallion
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Milwaukee
 
2010-01-15, 00:43

Die hard Pack fan here. What a heart breaking game. They were clearly outmatched but are only a year or two away from being really, really good, though.
  quote
RowdyScot
Ice Arrow Sniper
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Great Bay Temple
Send a message via AIM to RowdyScot Send a message via Skype™ to RowdyScot 
2010-01-15, 00:59

Agreed, Partial. A lot of nice names in the draft this year, too. I like our defense as is once it is healthy, but we need to seek out a solid running back and some offensive linemen in the draft this year. I'll say this - as a diehard Wolverine and Packer fan from NW Ohio, watching Woodson's game rekindled was awesome this season.

Authentic Nova Scotia bagpipe innards
  quote
Wrao
Yarp
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Road Warrior
 
2010-01-15, 02:06

The Cleveland Cavaliers just lost a game where they were up by 7 points with only ~32 seconds remaining. It is unusual for a team to lose in this situation. In late game situations, the team that is trailing has to intentionally foul to A) stop the clock and B ) hope that the opposing team misses at the line. With some luck, and some good shooting, close deficits can be reduced to a final shot situation. The Utah Jazz began intentionally fouling at around the :32 mark. There is a counter strategy to this that you rarely ever see, but sometimes, you'll see the team that has the lead ALSO intentionally fouling because it gives them the possession back quicker and ostensibly lets more time expire. When you are up by 7 with half a minute to play, this seems like a decent strategy on the surface, because with the opponents intentionally fouling as well, you stand to go up by as many as 10 or more if they miss at all.

Problem is. Utah didn't miss, not a single free throw, and they hit a couple of threes. So, what could have been an "easy" W for Cleveland, turned into a protracted and slow, point by point chipping away at their lead until they ended up losing, by one on a buzzer beater three pointer.

As a Lakers fan, this is a nice thing to see, because it gives the Lakers more separation in the standings, improving their chances for HCA and all together making them look just a bit better statistically. As a basketball fan, it is an excellent example of the do's and don'ts of late game strategy.
  quote
Windswept
On Pacific time
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Moderator's Pub
 
2010-01-15, 17:13

Note:

Don't know if anyone actually clicked on the link in my original post at the top of the thread. I discovered that the link disappeared and so I had to dig it up again. I replaced the old defunct link with the new one, which is:

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/01...ryday-winning/

The site is a military (veterans) site, and soldiers tend to look at stuff with a military mindset.
  quote
FFL
Fishhead Family Reunited
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Slightly Off Center
 
2010-01-15, 18:43

Sorry to break this to you, Windy... but now that the Saints have re-signed Deuce McAllister, your Cards have no chance tomorrow.







(seriously, though... it should be a really good game)
  quote
ezkcdude
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
 
2010-01-16, 10:51

When does an NBA team get to keep playing a guy who fouled out? When you're the Warriors* and would only have 4 available player otherwise, that's when. On Friday, the Warriors played the Bucks.

Quote:
In the Warriors' 113-104 loss to the Bucks on Friday night, however, they provided a first for official Joe Crawford. When he whistled Stephen Curry for his sixth foul with four seconds remaining, the Warriors were down to four eligible players.

In what is believed to be the NBA's first use of the rule, the Bucks were awarded a technical foul shot, but Curry was allowed to stay in the game despite fouling out. The Warriors would have been assessed a technical for each subsequent personal foul he committed.

"I had no idea. I thought we'd be playing with four people," Curry said. "It's crazy. It's an unfortunate sequence of events that have all come right on top of each other. The severity of our injuries is unbelievable."
*I say this as a lifelong and suffering Warriors fan. You know it's really bad when you wish your team was at least as good as the Clips.
  quote
Windswept
On Pacific time
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Moderator's Pub
 
2010-01-16, 14:14

Quote:
Originally Posted by FFL View Post
Sorry to break this to you, Windy... but now that the Saints have re-signed Deuce McAllister, your Cards have no chance tomorrow.








Quote:
(seriously, though... it should be a really good game)
Well, sugarplum, I heard that he'll run out onto the field with the team, but he won't actually be *playing*.

So, nyah, nya-ah, nyah, nyah!!!!!


Definitely will be a good game though. You're right about that.
  quote
FFL
Fishhead Family Reunited
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Slightly Off Center
 
2010-01-16, 19:46

Quote:
Originally Posted by Windswept View Post








Well, sugarplum, I heard that he'll run out onto the field with the team, but he won't actually be *playing*.

So, nyah, nya-ah, nyah, nyah!!!!!


Definitely will be a good game though. You're right about that.
Definitely a great game! I have a feeling that I enjoyed the game a little bit more than you did….



While it is tempting to rub it in after such a dominating Saints performance, I'm just gonna say

WHO DAT?

and suggest that everyone enjoy a couple of classic 25-year-old videos:
(No Radiators Content - but a fine performance by Aaron Neville!)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfEjZunhEvY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMSu4dOIsbg
  quote
evan
Formerly CoachKrzyzewski
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Charlottesville, VA
Send a message via AIM to evan  
2010-01-17, 18:28

Quote:
Originally Posted by FFL View Post
Definitely a great game! I have a feeling that I enjoyed the game a little bit more than you did….



While it is tempting to rub it in after such a dominating Saints performance, I'm just gonna say

WHO DAT?

and suggest that everyone enjoy a couple of classic 25-year-old videos:
(No Radiators Content - but a fine performance by Aaron Neville!)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfEjZunhEvY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMSu4dOIsbg
watch out for my vikings next week. defense was FEROCIOUS. And you can count on Peterson coming back strong
  quote
FFL
Fishhead Family Reunited
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Slightly Off Center
 
2010-01-17, 19:30

Quote:
Originally Posted by CoachKrzyzewski View Post
watch out for my vikings next week. defense was FEROCIOUS. And you can count on Peterson coming back strong
Yeah, Vikings-Saints for the NFC title is the game I've been expecting all season. Good luck to you and all the other Minnesota fans around here - may the best team win!

Nice job by the Vikes in rubbing the Cowgirls' noses in the dirt, BTW.....
 

  
  quote
Wrao
Yarp
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Road Warrior
 
2010-01-17, 20:18

Quote:
Originally Posted by ezkcdude View Post
*I say this as a lifelong and suffering Warriors fan. You know it's really bad when you wish your team was at least as good as the Clips.
The Clippers have almost all of the pieces to be a really good team. They've gone toe-to-toe with all the best teams in the league this season. I wager with better coaching and perhaps one more really good player(who might actually just be Blake Griffin, if he ever gets to suit up) They could easily become a top franchise in the West.

There was an article today suggesting the possibility of Lebron winding up on the Clippers. It was surprisingly not a completely idiotic idea, and the Clippers could potentially make it work financially without sacrificing too many key players. That'd be something else...
  quote
ezkcdude
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
 
2010-01-17, 21:03

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wrao View Post
The Clippers have almost all of the pieces to be a really good team. They've gone toe-to-toe with all the best teams in the league this season. I wager with better coaching and perhaps one more really good player(who might actually just be Blake Griffin, if he ever gets to suit up) They could easily become a top franchise in the West.
Yeah, dude, I know. That's why I said what I said.
  quote
gsxrboy
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
 
2010-01-17, 21:04

I'd kinda wouldn't mind if Aoyama does a number on Simoncelli this year.
  quote
Posting Rules Navigation
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Page 1 of 9 [1] 2 3 4 5  Next Last

Post Reply

Forum Jump
Thread Tools
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2009 Random Toxicity Trivia Thread Moogs AppleOutsider 13 2009-07-13 08:19
The Star Trek Babe Thread (split from the movie discussion thread) Kickaha AppleOutsider 37 2009-05-24 11:41
Random Question Thread Yontsey AppleOutsider 25 2008-05-30 17:05
Another random ACD thread Ghost2 Speculation and Rumors 21 2006-09-09 05:32


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:26.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2024, AppleNova