SwampD Posted October 20, 2014 Report Share Posted October 20, 2014 That was my initial reaction. But as you can imagine, I am experiencing a large amount of social pressure to change my view. Best overall football game I've watched in years. Definitely the right call. Now I understand your comment yesterday. I wish we had those refs against the Chargers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted October 20, 2014 Report Share Posted October 20, 2014 I find it entertaining that Georgia has been without Todd Gurley for 2 weeks now and not only does Gurley still lead the SEC in rushing but Georgia still wins and leads the SEC in rushing. I think I just went Full Chubb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bunomatic Posted October 20, 2014 Report Share Posted October 20, 2014 Apparently a commentator called the Williams sisters the brothers and now former player Martina Navratralova has got her boxers in a bunch. The Sedin brothers come to mind. It wasn't that long ago it was commonplace for the likes of Don Cherry ( i realize thats totally within character for Don ) and Mike Milbury to publicly call them the sisters without any repercussions. It'll be fun to see this play out or simply fade away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted October 20, 2014 Report Share Posted October 20, 2014 That was my initial reaction. But as you can imagine, I am experiencing a large amount of social pressure to change my view. Best overall football game I've watched in years. Understandable. ND appears to be my only hope for genuine sports happiness in the short term (Sabres bad, Bills mediocre, UB....well, UB), and they have given a couple of soul-crushing losses relatively recently. I'd imagine it must be significantly worse actually having gone there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted October 20, 2014 Report Share Posted October 20, 2014 Understandable. ND appears to be my only hope for genuine sports happiness in the short term (Sabres bad, Bills mediocre, UB....well, UB), and they have given a couple of soul-crushing losses relatively recently. I'd imagine it must be significantly worse actually having gone there paid them an immense amount of money. Yes yes, much worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted October 20, 2014 Report Share Posted October 20, 2014 Just saw that the FSU defender took his helmet off on the field (15 yard personal foul) right in front of the ref who threw the PI flag.The redo should have been from the 9 not the 18. That's a huge difference with Golson's feet. Also, the ref through the PI flag before the ball was thrown. Is that weird? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted October 20, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 20, 2014 Just saw that the FSU defender took his helmet off on the field (15 yard personal foul) right in front of the ref who threw the PI flag.The redo should have been from the 9 not the 18. That's a huge difference with Golson's feet. Also, the ref through the PI flag before the ball was thrown. Is that weird? I know that helmet rule exists in the NFL; is it in college ball, too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted October 20, 2014 Report Share Posted October 20, 2014 I know that helmet rule exists in the NFL; is it in college ball, too? yes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted October 20, 2014 Report Share Posted October 20, 2014 Just saw that the FSU defender took his helmet off on the field (15 yard personal foul) right in front of the ref who threw the PI flag.The redo should have been from the 9 not the 18. That's a huge difference with Golson's feet. Also, the ref through the PI flag before the ball was thrown. Is that weird? 1) If it makes you feel any better, I've seen this go uncalled several times in the NFL this year as well. Seems that refs everywhere have become inconsistent with it. Not feeling better? Sorry, I tried. 2) I don't think so. I think a pick can be called regardless of the timing of the throw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted October 20, 2014 Report Share Posted October 20, 2014 1) If it makes you feel any better, I've seen this go uncalled several times in the NFL this year as well. Seems that refs everywhere have become inconsistent with it. Not feeling better? Sorry, I tried. 2) I don't think so. I think a pick can be called regardless of the timing of the throw. But it's not a penalty on a screen pass right? So if Robinson catches it behind the line, no call. Somehow he knew Corey was gonna take 3 more steps forward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcsaberks Posted October 24, 2014 Report Share Posted October 24, 2014 I just noticed the world series is only 9 days long if 7 games. Is it always that short? NHL would turn that into at least 10, but probably 14 days. Interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted October 24, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2014 (edited) I just noticed the world series is only 9 days long if 7 games. Is it always that short? NHL would turn that into at least 10, but probably 14 days. Interesting. It is usually that short. There are a couple of reasons why the NHL takes longer: (1) Baseball uses a 2-3-2 format for 7 game series; the NHL hasn't done that since around the 1994 semifinals. Even then, the 2-3-2 format was used only in the Western / Campbell conference; in the East / Wales, it was 2-2-1-1-1 (as it is league-wide, in all series, now). So there is a need for more travel days in the NHL. (2) Although in days past, NHL teams used to play back-to-back games in some playoff series, that doesn't happen anymore; the league wants well-rested teams. Baseball teams are used to playing nearly every day even through the regular season. Edited October 24, 2014 by Eleven Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted October 25, 2014 Report Share Posted October 25, 2014 I hate 2-3-2. It should not be possible for a series to end with more games being played in the lower seed's building. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted October 25, 2014 Report Share Posted October 25, 2014 I hate 2-3-2. It should not be possible for a series to end with more games being played in the lower seed's building. +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted October 25, 2014 Report Share Posted October 25, 2014 I hate 2-3-2. It should not be possible for a series to end with more games being played in the lower seed's building. Don't get me started. I have been on this soapbox forever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted October 25, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 25, 2014 Don't get me started. I have been on this soapbox forever. It makes sense for baseball, though; it's always been a series-based sport (as in, three games here, four games there, three games at home against this team, three against that team, etc.). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted October 25, 2014 Report Share Posted October 25, 2014 It makes sense for baseball, though; it's always been a series-based sport (as in, three games here, four games there, three games at home against this team, three against that team, etc.). 3-3-1 would accomplish the same and give the home team an actual advantage, BUT... There is a nonsense method for determining home field advantage in the World Series, so I understand throwing a bone to the "visitors" by letting them be the first to 3 home games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted October 25, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 25, 2014 3-3-1 would accomplish the same and give the home team an actual advantage, BUT... There is a nonsense method for determining home field advantage in the World Series, so I understand throwing a bone to the "visitors" by letting them be the first to 3 home games. 3-3-1 would be pretty cool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted October 25, 2014 Report Share Posted October 25, 2014 It makes sense for baseball, though; it's always been a series-based sport (as in, three games here, four games there, three games at home against this team, three against that team, etc.). They don't always do 2-3-2 though, do they? I thought it was just when there was a long distance. Was that subway series back in the 90s a 2-3-2? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted October 25, 2014 Author Report Share Posted October 25, 2014 (edited) They don't always do 2-3-2 though, do they? I thought it was just when there was a long distance. Was that subway series back in the 90s a 2-3-2? Always. Edited October 25, 2014 by Eleven Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted October 25, 2014 Report Share Posted October 25, 2014 Always. Damn. If I was a betting man, I would have bet the house that back in the 60's, 70's & 80's it was 2-2-1-1-1. I just looked it up. I was wrong. :oops: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted October 25, 2014 Report Share Posted October 25, 2014 Damn. If I was a betting man, I would have bet the house that back in the 60's, 70's & 80's it was 2-2-1-1-1. I just looked it up. I was wrong. :oops: It made sense to do it that way back then because w/ no cross league play you couldn't necessarily say which team in the series was the better one prior to playing it. A few more wins in 1 league could be indicative of the quality of the competition rather than that of the league champ. Just alternate which league got 1,2,6,& 7 and expect it'll balance out in the long run. Same way the Bills were the road team in XXV & XXVII and the home team in XXVI & XXVIII. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted October 25, 2014 Report Share Posted October 25, 2014 It made sense to do it that way back then because w/ no cross league play you couldn't necessarily say which team in the series was the better one prior to playing it. A few more wins in 1 league could be indicative of the quality of the competition rather than that of the league champ. Just alternate which league got 1,2,6,& 7 and expect it'll balance out in the long run. Same way the Bills were the road team in XXV & XXVII and the home team in XXVI & XXVIII. I find this to be a much better option than basing home field advantage on the winners of a talent show. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted October 25, 2014 Report Share Posted October 25, 2014 I find this to be a much better option than basing home field advantage on the winners of a talent show. Absolutely. That would be my preference. If they have to award homefield to someone for a 'tangible' reason, give 1, 2, 6, & 7 to the team from the league that won interleague play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny DangerFace Posted October 27, 2014 Report Share Posted October 27, 2014 (edited) RIP Oscar taveras. Elite baseball prospect for the cardinals :( His girlfriend also passed away, car accident Edited October 27, 2014 by Numark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.