The Weird, Wacky and Awesome World of the NFL - General Banter thread

Guffy

Don't know what all hype is about. He had a legit shot at qb. Course he takes it.

SantryRed

The reaction would be completely different if it was a line man getting ploughed. Shouldn't be different rules for quarterbacks.

mikemac1

If the QB is out there they are open for a legal hit.

And plenty can take care of themselves, I remember Brady Quinn in Cleveland going for a block and he injured Terrelle Suggs so badly that Suggs missed the next few weeks

Hazys

"I'll just wait for the next one"

TO.

Late in on this but as someone involved in coaching the game that block on Foles was a perfect hit all day and I would coach that to players on my team all day long. If that whistle hasn't been blown you block anybody in the path of the ball carrier. It was a clean block and not against the rules. If you want to bring Morality into it and call it a cheap shot so be it but it was within the rules of the game and clean.

JaMarcusHustle

Vandango wrote:

No, I seriously doubt the chicken would have tried that cheap blindside shot on a lineman.

You don't know that. You're using a hypothetical situation to back up your point. That's beyond nonsensical.

Vandango wrote:

Players don’t tend to block when a play goes dead.

But they do tend to block up to the whistle. And guess what? The whistle hadn't gone, hence the block.

Vandango wrote:

Complete nonsense, why don’t you go onto a field and try tracking a ball carrier while looking behind you as you run. I mean seriously wtf.

It's called awareness. Knowing what's going on around you. "Head on a swivel" and all that jazz. A pretty important attribute for a player at any position, actually.

Vandango wrote:

Breaking news, a QB isn’t a QB when he hasn’t got the ball. Is that supposed to be some sort of revelation? If you bothered your ass reading what I said – I said there was nothing technically wrong with the block. But I also said it was a deliberate cheap shot as the play went dead, against a blindside player. Therefore a chicken s**t play.

It's not breaking news at all, actually. He becomes a defensive player once the interception is thrown. If he has the right to tackle the ball carrier which he was intending to do, then Baker sure as hell has the right to block him. Foles chose to pursue the play after the interception, therefore he has to deal with the consequences.

As an aside from all that, I don't know why you're being so aggressive either. It's a discussion forum, no need to act tough and pretend to be a badass. You're impressing no one.

Chardee MacDennis

OAOB wrote: »

Great photo showing the size difference of King Dunlap and Eddie Royal.

I'd like to see Fr. Ted explain this one to Dougal

those photos are crazy, the perspective makes them like a magic eye or something. There's really only 30cm between their heights...

Vandango

JaMarcusHustle wrote: »

You don't know that. You're using a hypothetical situation to back up your point. That's beyond nonsensical.

Speaking of nonsensical, you're the guy that said this

JaMarcusHustle wrote: »

Eh, you can bet he would have if that lineman was doing exactly as Foles was doing.

So it's nonsensical of me to suggest he wouldn't have done it to a monstrous lineman. But it's O.K. for you to suggest he would.

JaMarcusHustle wrote: »

But they do tend to block up to the whistle. And guess what? The whistle hadn't gone, hence the block.

There's that patronising nonsense again.

JaMarcusHustle wrote: »

It's called awareness. Knowing what's going on around you. "Head on a swivel" and all that jazz. .

This again. Try running across the field pursuing a ball carrier and then try to turn your head back over your shoulder while doing so. No, it can't be done unless you can do this

JaMarcusHustle wrote: »

It's not breaking news at all, actually. He becomes a defensive player once the interception is thrown. If he has the right to tackle the ball carrier which he was intending to do, then Baker sure as hell has the right to block him. Foles chose to pursue the play after the interception, therefore he has to deal with the consequences.

This is the second time you said this. Why? Who do you think you are enlightening here? I've have already said the tackling technique was technically fine, it was not an illegal helmet hit ect. The problem is with the timing. It was totally unnecessary and thus a cheap shot. The ball carrier was going down. But Foles was still being lined up for the chicken **** hit.

JaMarcusHustle wrote: »

As an aside from all that, I don't know why you're being so aggressive either. It's a discussion forum, no need to act tough and pretend to be a badass. You're impressing no one.

Dafuq you on about? Badass? Aggressive? Fook me, stop smoking whatever you're smoking, because how you can derive that from my last post involves some stretch of the imagination.

TO.

Vandango wrote: »

This again. Try running across the field pursuing a ball carrier and then try to turn your head back over your shoulder while doing so. No, it can't be done unless you can do this

It's all about technique and being skilled at the position. Some of the best linebackers can move across the field with full awareness. Its not an easy thing to do and I wouldn't expect a QB to do it but it is possible to check on your blind spot with good technique and cover your backside.

This is the second time you said this. Why? Who do you think you are enlightening here? I've have already said the tackling technique was technically fine, it was not an illegal helmet hit ect. The problem is with the timing. It was totally unnecessary and thus a cheap shot. The ball carrier was going down. But Foles was still being lined up for the chicken **** hit.

See people keep bringing this up. Maybe from a morale standpoint it can considered a cheap shot but in all realism the whistle hadn't gone and the play not called dead thus meaning the player was within his rights to flatten a guy chasing the ball carrier. After all the run Int drills all the time and defensive players are thought how to lay blocks on an Int.

Legal fair hit by the rules of the game but if you feel it was a cheap shot that is your own prerogative really.

Hazys

I won't say too much on the South Park episode last night not to spoil it but there were some good parts to it. One cool thing was switching out RGIII for Cousins from the trailer ad to actual the show and using the audio from Goodell's press conference last Friday. I heard it takes the guys only hours to write the show but months to animate it. Maybe the technology has change since i heard that fact but the quick turn around is very impressive.



Jerry Jones drawing is hilarious btw

Podge_irl

Takes a "normal" animation show about 6 months but South Park is written and animated in a week. It's how they can do these kind of things.

HigginsJ

Sky Sports have signed a 5 year deal for Monday Night football starting from next season

Knex*

Not a bad trip to London for the NFL, coming away with that deal.

Masked Man

HigginsJ wrote: »

Sky Sports have signed a 5 year deal for Monday Night football starting from next season

Would have preferred more games on C4 but thank god it's off eurosport.

poldebruin

Masked Man wrote: »

Would have preferred more games on C4 but thank god it's off eurosport.

...true, but means it'll be blacked out on Gamepass - that will be 3 prime games per week blacked out.

Son Of A Vidic

poldebruin wrote: »

...true, but means it'll be blacked out on Gamepass - that will be 3 prime games per week blacked out.

Gamepass and the bypass is the only way to go imo.

BaronVon

poldebruin wrote: »

...true, but means it'll be blacked out on Gamepass - that will be 3 prime games per week blacked out.

Probably not, the Thursday night game isn't blacked out, so I doubt the Monday night one will either. There was no mention of exclusive rights in the press release.

hopefully anyway!

Bill simmons suspended for calling commission a liar.

Hazys

Deleted User wrote: »

Bill simmons suspended for calling commission a liar.

Meh seems like a load of bullsh1t attention seeking from Bill Simmons trying to be a man of the people and a bad boy.

He wasn't banned for what he said about Goodell, Olbermann and others have been saying way worse than Bill Simmons for the past couple of weeks. He basically forced ESPN's hand, in any other job if you acted like that, you'd be getting a call from HR.

I wouldn't be surprised if the whole thing was staged. If Simmons really has a problem with ESPN, why does he continue to work there?

Hazys

So touching...Devon Still giving his daughter a pre surgery pep talk

Fcuk Cancer

http://instagram.com/p/tXfQHcJ6sU/?utm_source=partner&utm_medium=embed&utm_campaign=photo&modal=true

JaMarcusHustle

Hazys wrote: »

If Simmons really has a problem with ESPN, why does he continue to work there?

He would lose Grantland which is his baby.

Though I fully agree that this is just a ratings exercise.

Son Of A Vidic

Hazys wrote: »

So touching...Devon Still giving his daughter a pre surgery pep talk

Fcuk Cancer

http://instagram.com/p/tXfQHcJ6sU/?utm_source=partner&utm_medium=embed&utm_campaign=photo&modal=true

Puts everything in perspective when you see a little kid going through that. Life can be such a kunt to those who least deserve it. Hope everything works out for them.

Hazys

Hazys wrote: »

So touching...Devon Still giving his daughter a pre surgery pep talk

Fcuk Cancer

http://instagram.com/p/tXfQHcJ6sU/?utm_source=partner&utm_medium=embed&utm_campaign=photo&modal=true

Nice...but not completely sure why he would video and upload what seems to be a nice, tender private moment.

But then again, really don't get why people would want to put clips or pics of their kids on the www.

GoldFour4

Hazys wrote: »

Meh seems like a load of bullsh1t attention seeking from Bill Simmons trying to be a man of the people and a bad boy.

He wasn't banned for what he said about Goodell, Olbermann and others have been saying way worse than Bill Simmons for the past couple of weeks. He basically forced ESPN's hand, in any other job if you acted like that, you'd be getting a call from HR.

I wouldn't be surprised if the whole thing was staged. If Simmons really has a problem with ESPN, why does he continue to work there?

I can see him being reinstated in a week or two tbh. This is a ratings move from ESPN, they know how popular Simmons is. I don't have figures for how many people read his columns or listen to his podcasts but I'd imagine the podcast is possibly one of the more popular on the station. It also shows the NFL and Goodell that they're still loyal to him.

empacher

Anybody watch the latest episode of South Park, making fun of the redskins, ray rice, and godell?

I'd post a link but I'm not sure if it's against the charter.

Putin

Deleted User wrote: »

Nice...but not completely sure why he would video and upload what seems to be a nice, tender private moment.

Not sure why that should be an issue tbh. If anything, something like that will more to do raise awareness and bring in donations for disease research ect.

dinneenp

Taken by me at The Croke Park Classic:
But all my friends are playing...

Son Of A Vidic

Putin wrote: »

Not sure why that should be an issue tbh. If anything, something like that will more to do raise awareness and bring in donations for disease research ect.

As someone who spent a significant part of my career working with cancer, I have to agree with you. What Devon Still still did, will raise awareness and promote the fight against cancer more than any health promotion campaign.

Hazys

Devon Still is the highest selling Bengals jersey and has raised over $400,000 for cancer research

http://www.examiner.com/article/bengals-devon-still-jerseys-shipping-include-note-of-thanks

Putin

Putin wrote: »

Not sure why that should be an issue tbh. If anything, something like that will more to do raise awareness and bring in donations for disease research ect.

Oh true, I'm sure it does.

Just never sure about adults putting clips of their kids on the www. In fairness to Devon Still, there's a lot worse out there, particularly on Facebook where kids exist solely to harvest "likes".