Monday Night Football Pick, Week VIII
New England at Minnesota. Patriots favored by 2½ points. The opening line was closer, at 1½ points. To me, this signals that the crowd is going with NE, and I agree. On turnovers, balanced running game, and quality of their quarterback and coaching, New England is the superior team. I'll take them to cover the spread.
Result: Patriots crush the Vikings. I'm now 5 and 3!
Posted by: annika at
03:43 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 78 words, total size 1 kb.
OSU Lends Cal A Hand
Or more specifically, Beaver DE Jeff Van Orsow lends Cal a hand, by batting away John David Booty's last ditch pass to send the game into OT. Beavers win (despite wearing the NCAA's ugliest uniform) and Cal moves into sole possession of first place in the Pac-10.
1
And yet, not a word about the number one team in the country. These Buckeyes are awesome. This team is far better than '02, and probably transcends '68.
I'm a little disappointed. I wanted USC to show up unscared in Glendale in January, so that there asswhipping could be complete. Looks like the Buckeyes will be the only undefeated team in the country at the end of the season no matter who shows up in Glendale.
Posted by: Casca at October 28, 2006 05:28 PM (2gORp)
2
If thats the case Casca, then you might meet Texas again, After all, so far the only team that beat us is the number one team in the nation.
Posted by: kyle8 at October 29, 2006 06:04 AM (63Tqx)
3
Sorry Kyle, as Anni or Shelly or another of the fucking lawyers might instruct you. This is settled law, besides, if anything the defeat would merely be more gruesome. It'll be the surviving team from the SEC.
Posted by: Casca at October 29, 2006 08:59 AM (2gORp)
4
Not if the SEC winner has two losses, which is entirely possible.
Also, although I believe that Ohio is clearly the best team in the country this year, If we played again the score would probably be closer. Don't look now but that little kid Colt McCoy, who played only his second ever game against Ohio State, has since then gotten good, real good.
His numbers are better than Vince Young's at this point last year.
But if we play USC in the non-title BCS game that's ok with me, I'd like to beat them again.
Posted by: kyle8 at October 29, 2006 07:42 PM (ruMxx)
5
My day of mourning is almost over so here it is:
I am a fucking lawyer; Annie is a fucking law student. Subtle distinction to be sure, but there it is.
Secondly, Cal will hold the lead until November 18; then they will go home with their tails between their ursine butts. Pete Carroll is not pleased;four turnovers will not win football games. Glad I'm not doing the pushups and running up the steps of the Coliseum this week.
OSU is clearly the best as of now. Spit happens.
Where the Hell is Glendale? The only one I know is near Burbank and Pasadena. I'm afraid that USC will be there, but OSU will be in Tempe. I was of the distinct impression that the BCS title tiff was at the Fiesta Bowl this year;last time I looked,it was still in Tempe.
Maybe Casca has had one too many spills on his four stroker Nazi two wheeler without wearing his helmet.
Posted by: shelly at October 29, 2006 08:48 PM (vFS/o)
6
lol, careful you addled old bile factory. Were I in need of a fucking lawyer, I know which of the two of you I'd turn to. Now if I needed to influence public policy, you might make the list.
On to current events. The Fiesta Bowl now does business out of a brand new stadium in Glendale, AZ vice Tempe starting this year. Now take all of your guns and pills over to your son's house and lock them up until the second week in January.
Kyle, Colt's doing well because he has some talent, and you guys play punks. There aren't many defenses on the same level as the Buckeyes, but the Wolverines have one. Alas, the folks at UofM have no receivers without Manningham, and the Buckeyes can handle him if he returns. I'm sure that Colt is better now. Trouble is that the Buckeyes are MUCH better now. The Buckeyes always have a defense, this Defense is almost as good as 2002. The difference is that the Buckeye Offense could and will play in the NFL. That should be the BCS championship... Buckeyes vs the Raiders, or the Cardinals!
Finally, you mention Colt McCoy when Troy Smith is playing Heisman ball for the Buckeyes? Where's your head at? Oh, I'll tell you! It's up the fat lady's ass!!
Posted by: Casca at October 29, 2006 09:51 PM (2gORp)
7
casca is right, I'm out in Phoenix right now and have been to the new stadium out in glendale, looks a bit like a silver ufo in the desert, but nice as hell inside. I'll look forward to Michigan and West Virginia playing there in the title game...
Posted by: Scof at October 30, 2006 01:27 PM (afLeY)
8
...and those Cal bears better watch out for my wildcats on the 11th. I think we've recovered nicely from that 45-3 beat down LSU put on us, the team psyche is like a wounded, delirious animal, we're crazy! watch out!
Posted by: Scof at October 30, 2006 01:30 PM (afLeY)
9
Cal is going to get mauled for two straight weeks then. USC plays Stanford for practice this week and then will get personal with Cal on the 18th.
It is conceivable that we can run the table on Cal, UCLA and Notre Dame, maybe enough to get us to Glendale (my ASU graduate son never mentioned the change to me), but I'm not betting on it.
Looks like we go to Pasadena to play Michagoose,unless they kick some Nutmeg butt; again, I'm not betting on it.
Oh, well, it's a shorter drive.
Posted by: shelly at October 31, 2006 06:54 AM (YadGF)
10
Oh yes, there's money to be made here. Put your money where your mouth is Scof. You want UofM over the Buckeyes? Bring it on bitch.
West Virginia? They don't belong in the top ten. They're tokens for their conference like Louisville. Shit, they'd have a claim if they played ANYONE ranked. They are a great run offense team and a mediocre everything else. In the SEC they'd be lucky to be .500.
Posted by: Casca at October 31, 2006 07:42 AM (Y7t14)
11
There are lawyers who specialize in fucking? And all this time I thought "screwing the client" was just a figure of speech.
Posted by: Victor at October 31, 2006 09:20 AM (WHtgF)
12
Lets try the 3way here....
Casca: I'm tellin ya man, Carr looks rabid angry this year, the buckeyes will bowdown. how you wanna do it yo? I'll place fifty on UofM. perhaps we can both paypal it to annie and she can distribute the winnings to me afterwards.
Victor: Divorce lawyers?
Shelly: How the hell could you do that to your son? Did you lose a bet? I mean its ASU for pete's sake! Your son's school colors are urine yellow and tampon red!
Posted by: Scof at October 31, 2006 01:55 PM (a3fqn)
13
Dude, you're on! $50 US, Anni can hold the cash, or you can just paypal me directly. You won't be going home with the dough. I'll take the Buckeyes and even money any day! You obviously haven't followed the Buckeyes this season, and know nothing of how Jim Tressel OWNS Carr's ass. This will be SOOOO sweet.
Posted by: Casca at October 31, 2006 02:43 PM (Y7t14)
14
Troubling point on the BCS roundup show tonight. In actuality, USC's loss is bad for Cal, because even if Cal beats USC, now they won't be beating an undefeated team, and the effect on their ranking won't be as great. Damn, I should have been rooting for USC.
Posted by: annika at October 31, 2006 06:54 PM (qQD4Q)
15
Shit, and I thought you just hated the rubbers.
Posted by: Casca at October 31, 2006 07:15 PM (2gORp)
MNF Pick, Week VII
Good matchup tonight. Giants vs. Dallas at Dallas. The Cowboys favored by 3, which is pretty even. Most folks are giving the edge to Dallas. But I hate Dallas so I'm rooting for, and betting on the Giants.
Result: Giants dominate 36 to 22. I win. My record is now a mediocre 4 and 3 thus far.
Worth Seeing Again
Disappointed as I am about the Mets' loss, I still think Endy Chavez's "dobleplay" is the greatest defensive play I've ever seen.
As for the World Series, I was rooting for the Mets because I thought St. Louis rolled over against the Sox. With Pujols in a slump, and Detroit well rested, I'm afraid the Cards might get swept again.
1
Yeah, I went to bed during the stretch thinking if the Mets win it would be because of that play, and if the Cards win it would be because of the pitching. And I'm really wondering where this so-called "Endy Chavez" came from and why he didn't do this kind of stuff when he was with the Nats last season.
Posted by: Victor at October 20, 2006 07:41 PM (l+W8Z)
2
Definitely the greatest catch I've seen in the postseason. I'd have to agree on the sweep thing. The AL is dominant and the Cardinals are in trouble.
Posted by: Shawn at October 21, 2006 11:11 AM (9Shuz)
3
The Cards may not win the whole thing, but at least they're putting up a good fight. GO StL!!!
Posted by: Sarah at October 24, 2006 05:07 AM (7Wklx)
1
He was only trying out some lines for a screenplay...
Posted by: Ontario Emperor at October 16, 2006 11:22 PM (m4mKL)
2
Well there's fifty bucks a week that he can kiss goodbye. Football is a thuggish sport, but "the U" takes it to the extreme in the NCAA. That's why it was SO sweet to bring them down in the '03 NC game, lest any have forgotten. My first thought when I saw the footage... half those assholes would be behind bars if it wasn't for football.
Posted by: Casca at October 17, 2006 06:09 AM (Y7t14)
MNF Pick, Week VI
Bears vs. Cardinals in Arizona. Chicago favored by 12½ points. The Bears will win this one, but will they cover?
The answer is yes, unless there's an earthquake, tsunami or alien invasion in Glendale tonight. And even then, they'll probably still win.
Update: Just like I said, a disaster happened and the Bears still won. Actually, there were two disasters: the Cardinals' collapse and the Bears' offense.
1
Ohmigod! I definitely would've taken the over myself, but damn! 9:19pm, just a bit left in the 1st quarter, and the Cards are the ones up 14-0.
Who'da thunk?
Posted by: ElMondoHummus at October 16, 2006 06:24 PM (xHyDY)
2
Grossman is floating the ball all over the place. Figures, Michigan grad.
Posted by: Casca at October 16, 2006 06:42 PM (2gORp)
3
Oh man!... 20-0 Cardinals.
That's messed up.
Now, there's still a whole half to play. And, Arizona's just leaning on luck, they're not going for the jugular. So the Bears can still pull this out.
But damn... I couldn't care less who would've won before the game started, but now! Man, I'm actually pulling for the Cards!
I can't believe I'm saying this, having been a Bears admirer since the '85 Superbowl run. But, my selfish ass wants my Colts to be the only undefeated team, so I'm rootin' fer de Cards.
Yeah, yeah, the Colt's can't stop anyone's run. I know. I man, do I ever know; I was screaming exactly that at the TV during the Titans' game. "Stop the !@#^ing run!!!" But dammit, I'm a fan nonetheless, and just being able to say "Only Undefeated Team", even if just for a week or two, is something I damn well want!
Posted by: ElMondoHummus at October 16, 2006 07:17 PM (xHyDY)
4
Damn, Cas, you're right. I haven't seem so many floaters since the Titanic sunk.
Posted by: ElMondoHummus at October 16, 2006 08:44 PM (q4uRJ)
5
Ariz (*GACK!*)...
Arizo (*GACK!*)...
Sorry... was trying to say "Arizona", but I choked. Then again, so did they.
Oh well... haven't rooted for the dog in a long time. Was fun while it lasted.
Posted by: ElMondoHummus at October 16, 2006 09:23 PM (iCOwR)
6
Fucking Cardinals, coaching loss. There is no surer formula for losing a lead, than by trying to sit on it. How fucking hard is it to keep doing what has been working. Poor Edge and Leinart, they deserve better.
Posted by: Casca at October 16, 2006 09:33 PM (2gORp)
Posted by: annika at October 16, 2006 09:52 PM (qQD4Q)
8
ha, my DVR stopped recording it right after Arizona deflected that ball and ran it in to make it 30 - 10. i didn't even bother checking the score online, game over! Normally I'll watch 'till the end, but Tony Kornhoser was being really annoying and catty and shit. They should have kept charles barkley in the booth.
Posted by: Scof at October 16, 2006 09:55 PM (gliHF)
9
I am now 5 and 1 in fantasy. Kickin ass. It helps a little since my home team is once again the worst franchise in football. (Texans), well I guess thats debatable since Oakland might actually be worse.
Posted by: kyle8 at October 17, 2006 03:07 AM (BP2CI)
10
Scof, that was my very thought. I was feeling sorry for Charles AND Theisman. Tony has GOT to go. Gawd he sucks.
Texans, Raiders, hmmmmmmm, could be a good game, er car accident. It has that, "couldn't bring myself to look away" element.
Posted by: Casca at October 17, 2006 06:21 AM (Y7t14)
11
Flip side of that game, to me, is Giants Cowboys, both need that win.
Posted by: Scof at October 17, 2006 07:02 AM (a3fqn)
MNF Pick, Week V
Tonight's game is Baltimore Ravens at Denver Broncos. Denver is favored by five points. That's crazy. There's a lot of hype about each team's defenses. But I think Baltimore's is better, and besides, they've scored more points this year. When these two teams met last year, Baltimore lost by only two points, with Denver scoring only one touchdown at home. I see the Ravens extending their streak to 5 and 0 after tonight, and I'll take them plus five points anyday. Agree with me, and you can laugh at the suckers later.
Update: The Broncos pull it out. I lose.
In other football news, I just learned that the unlikeable Bryant Gumbel and the intolerable Chris Collinsworth have teamed up to call NFL Network games. Could there be a more unwatchable broadcasting crew? Maybe, if they shoved Musburger in there.
1
Dude, you did NOT just diss two-time Super Bowl Champs the Denver Broncos.
Nuh-uh.
It is SO on!
Posted by: The Law Fairy at October 09, 2006 06:39 PM (XUsiG)
2
As much as I hate to agree with LF... it's the 4th quarter 3/3, and I STILL think the broncos will beat the spot and the fucktard Ravens. The Ravens suck ass.
Posted by: Casca at October 09, 2006 08:02 PM (2gORp)
3
It was the weather.
Broncos should have a cakewalk next week.
Posted by: annika at October 09, 2006 08:46 PM (qQD4Q)
4
13-3 in bad weather is not pulling it out. It's a win, fair and square.
Barry
Lakewood can see Invesco Field from here CO
Posted by: Barry at October 11, 2006 11:09 AM (kKjaJ)
5
>It was the weather.
Broncos should have a cakewalk next week.
Posted by annika on Oct. 9, 2006
If it was the weather, why didn't the Ravens win? Supposedly, their opponents were faced with bad weather conditions...
Posted by: Barry at October 11, 2006 11:13 AM (kKjaJ)
MNF Pick, Week IV
Tonight's game is Green Bay at Philadelphia. Philly is favored by 11½. I was stumped about who to pick, since Green Bay has burned me before. Here's the history.
On September 13, 2004, I bet Green Bay in the season opener. They won and I won.
On October 11, 2004, I picked favorite Green Bay, and they got trounced by the Titans, so I lost.
On November 29, 2004, I bet against the Pack. They won 45 to 17, and I lost.
On October 3, 2005, I bet on Green Bay. They lost, but Carolina didn't cover so I won.
On November 21, 2005, I bet against Green Bay. They won and I lost.
So I figure, there's enough information there to discern a pattern. Anyone who took the LSAT ought to be able to see it. If you want to try and guess it, don't click on the extended entry. Otherwise, the answer is below.
more...
1
I am kicking ass in Fantasy football, and my Texans squeeked one by the maladroit(hows that for a descriptive word) Dolphins.
Strangely enough, David Carr is like a top QB for fantasy purposes.
Good college games next weekend.
As for the game tonight, I got no players on either team, so as far as I am concerned a giant fissure could open in the earth and swallow both teams and I wouldn't give a damn.
Posted by: kyle8 at October 02, 2006 01:33 PM (3pXPB)
2
As God is my witness, I swear: I can find absolutely nothing wrong with your logic. Not. One. Thing.
Posted by: Victor at October 02, 2006 04:00 PM (l+W8Z)
Atlanta vs. New Orleans. The first game in the Superdome since Katrina. Falcons favored by 4. I'm going with the sentimental favorites, though. New Orleans plus the points.
1
Shit after this weekend where favorites couldn't cover. I may never bet a favorite again.
Posted by: Casca at September 25, 2006 07:27 PM (2gORp)
2
I usually hate any type of music performed in a stadium. But I have to admit, U2 and Green day, though a little corny, were pretty good.
I had the Saints Def. for my fantasy team so I won my third week in a row.
Posted by: kyle8 at September 26, 2006 09:42 AM (E4mbK)
3
How about that Monday night team in the booth? Do they define sucking ass or what?
Posted by: Casca at September 26, 2006 02:41 PM (2gORp)
4
They will definitely have to be an acquired taste.
Posted by: annika at September 26, 2006 05:55 PM (qQD4Q)
MNF Week 2
I can't figure out the oddsmakers this week. The line opened with Jacksonville favored by 2 points, and now they're 2½ point underdogs. Ben Roethlisberger is recovering from appendectomy surgery and despite practicing all week, he had a temperature of 104° at 2:00 today.*
I'm taking Jacksonville plus the 2½ points.
Which probably means you should bet Pittsburgh.
______________
* Personally I don't believe it. It would be too dangerous to start him if he really had that high of a temperature only 6½ hours before game time. Nobody would risk the franchise and his salary on one early season game like that.
1
I didn't even need your input. I already did it! Pretty fucking tight game so far.
Posted by: Casca at September 18, 2006 06:51 PM (2gORp)
2
Fucking Pittsburgh, they just aren't that good. I forgot how they stole that superbowl. Fucking Rothlesburger, rolls out and throws for 1st downs in the first series, and doesn't do it again for the rest of the game. And Parker, what a pussy! I can't believe that he stops and let's the tacklers whack him!
Posted by: Casca at September 18, 2006 08:13 PM (2gORp)
Raiders Chargers
What's MNF without the Raiders? And they're three point underdogs! That's crazy. The Raiders always come to play on Monday Night, especially at home.
Posted by: wayne at September 12, 2006 06:47 AM (IrbU4)
6
I was the President of the Coliseum Commission when the Raiders left LA for Oakland.
We had no protests from anyone. No one cared that they left. Al Davis had alienated everyone.
My favorite team is whoever the Raiders are playing that week.
Posted by: shelly at September 12, 2006 07:44 AM (ZGpMS)
7
Oh, Kyle, I feel for ya. One of my buds was trying to get me into a fantasy league last week, luring me with the news that Trent Green was still available at quarterback.
And I was thiiiiiiis close to doing it.
One of my coworkers is telling me that the poor sap in his fantasy league who's got Trent Green as his starter has Drew Bledsoe as his backup. So he's even worse off than you are.
Shelly,
What is it with Al Davis? Does that man have any friends at all? Or does he go by the logic of nations i.e. no friends, just interests?
Posted by: ElMondoHummus at September 12, 2006 12:18 PM (xHyDY)
8
Al Davis has no friends; he has a business associate, Amy Trask, who is his Vice President.
She is the female incarnation of Al; wears only black, white or silver. And, like Al, she's as mean as a sbake.
Posted by: Shelly at September 12, 2006 07:37 PM (ZGpMS)
9
LOL...
Yeah, those nasty sbakes, really hurts when they sbite you.
Posted by: ElMondoHummus at September 13, 2006 05:27 AM (DXodP)
10
Just win baby!!, not. My favorite team, not to cover. Don't wast your time with them, root for the 49rs, rofl.
Posted by: steve s at September 13, 2006 11:48 PM (7iFql)
1
1 - Troy Smith is kinda generic, I could see him playing anywhere. Colt McCoy would make a great running back (he'd be a workhorse).
2 - probably
3 - didn't see the game, but it probably would have made for a great drinking game had I seen it
4 - yes, yes she is
5 - they lost their quarterback, and ND is flat out better. Unfortunately, I didn't get to see this game either (I was at a first birthday party for a cousin)
6 - huh?
Posted by: KG at September 09, 2006 09:16 PM (AC0TE)
2
Well, the big game ended up pretty much as I suspected Colt is an up and coming QB but we have to remember that just last year he was in High school, and that made a big difference.
Now the big game will be Notre Dame VRs Ohio State in just a few weeks. As usual, USC cruises without any real opponants. Look for the game between LSU and Tennesee, whoever comes out of that one alive might be the favorite to go to the big game.
Posted by: kyle8 at September 09, 2006 09:31 PM (s80U7)
3
There are no "real opponents" for USC to play in the PAC 10 this year, or most years. But Cal always give us trouble in Strawberry Canyon, and we are in the Coliseum this year for the Golden Bears, who, incidentally found their game yesterday, a week late.
If you think Notre Dame is ever a "cruise", than you aren't much of a fan; fortunately, Touchdown Jesus will not see the likes of us this year, as we are home to them as well. But the Catholics are everywhere, they have their share of rooters in LA, believe me. I live with one.
Finally, UCLA is never a cruise. A good season is when we beat either UCLA or Notre Dame; a great season is when we beat both. The rest of the teams are usually just warm ups, although Cal can be tough to beat at home, as I said above. We've played in the Rose Bowl so often, it is just like home anyway, and our fans fill it up by buying out the UCLA kids' tickets.
Finally, USC will play OSU in the National Championship Game, which I believe is in Tempe this year at Sun Devil Stadium. OSU is the real thing this year; Woody was rolling in his grave as they passed a lot, but their D definitely shut down Texas, as Dick Cheney would say "Big Time".
USC's D is the fastest and biggest we've had in the Carroll era. But it is young and untested, really.
By the time we get to Tempe, we'll be ready for the Nutmegs. Will they be ready for us, is the question?
Posted by: shelly at September 10, 2006 12:42 AM (ZGpMS)
4
Heh, I'd have been here earlier, but I have a woman who expects hot sex on a Sunday morning.
1. I'll stipulate to that.
2. I'll stipulate to that.
3. Heh, THREE times, NO SHIT! And, it was STFU Mburger! I've almost learned to tune him out. But in the old boys defense, he's no Keith Jackass, whom I'd like to physically hurt.
4. Russian chicks usually are.
5. Last season was a fluke, Akron almost had their ass last week, and worth mentioning Akron beat NC State with a fabulously coached last minute score with no time left on the clock yesterday.
6. From the cut I saw, think Grandmaster P.
Heh Kyle, what's all this shit about "he was a high school QB last year"? That fucking horse has been going to camps and clinics with his high school coach dad for twenty years! He took shots from the OSU pass rush and rolled right back. Give a little love where it's deserved. Ohio State reloaded. If you think that Jim Tressel is going to show up without a defense, then you haven't been paying attention. He's all about defense, offense is the icing! Mack Brown was out-coached yesterday.
Posted by: Casca at September 10, 2006 09:35 AM (2gORp)
5
For the record, ND doesn't play the Buckeyes this year. I think they got enough last year. Still the best football game I ever attended was the 1985 ND USC game in the Coliseum. It was cold and pouring rain in November, and by halftime the only people left in the stands were about 5000 crazy Catholics screaming for the domers. It was a slugfest in the mud, and USC lost. At the end of the game, we were all down at the tunnel screaming for ND as they came off the field covered with mud.
When I go to the ND website, they say the score was something outrageous, but I recall them winning 5 to 3 on a safety. It was one of Gerry Faust's few bright moments.
Another item worth remembering, when Ohio State beat USC for the National Championship in 1968, OJ came to the OSU locker room, and told the Buckeyes that they were the greatest team that he'd ever seen. So much for OJ not having any class.
Posted by: Casca at September 10, 2006 10:35 AM (2gORp)
6
1. Agreed, Colt is slightly better given he has the perfect name to play QB in Texas.
2. I have no idea. But a undefeated ND vs. an undefeated USC would be awesome.
3. Watched in a bar, didn't hear him.
4. Yes.
5. That game was not the repeat of the 1992 snow bowl.
6. No Clue.
Posted by: the Pirate at September 10, 2006 01:56 PM (Rg0+S)
1
If there weren't penalty kicks, would some of these games take, oh i don't know, about 3 days to complete?
Funny moment I recently heard on local sports talk radio in Sacramento: the host stopped the normal call in-show and said "folks, we've got some breaking news that's pretty stunning: (preganat pause) apparently somebody has scored a goal in the World Cup."
What other sport could make you long to watch baseball on television? It is appropriate that, generally speaking, only third world ghetto dwellers and socialist idiots care about this crap.
Oh, and what is the deal with all these fucking pussies acting like they have been shot everytime somebody touches them?
Posted by: blu at July 09, 2006 03:26 PM (j8pkL)
2
Yeah, well the Gomba that Zizou headbutted in the chest didn't have to act; he was too busy trying to catch his breath.
That probably turned the tide in favor of Italia.
ABF!!! (Anybody but the Frogs)
Posted by: shelly at July 09, 2006 03:39 PM (BJYNn)
3
The anti-international culture here is in keeping with the New American Century, but it seems obvious that document is now settled in the dustbin. GWB has been working more closely with, and, more importantly, winning the support of the leaders of other nations.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5501752
Once we see the rest of the world as peers instead of subjects, the sooner we'll fill in the hole we've been digging ourselves into.
Posted by: will at July 09, 2006 07:32 PM (h7Ciu)
4
uhhh, just cuz i think soccer is boring means i think the rest of the world are subjects?
alright, you got me there.
; )
Posted by: annika at July 09, 2006 10:44 PM (fxTDF)
5
Will, do you ever wake up in the morning and feel like you might take yourself too seriously?
oh yeah, i forgot to add... AMERICA RULES, SOCCER DROOLS!
That ought to get you in a real hissy...
Now me and my co-conspirators need to get going on our plans of world-domination. We will accomplish our evil goal by forcing every country in the world to participate in a mandatory badminton tournment every 4 four years. You think soccer turns dudes into raving pussies,wait til we stick a skinny little racquet in their hands and have them chasing around oddly shaped objects called shuttlecocks.
Posted by: blu at July 10, 2006 07:49 AM (j8pkL)
6
>Now me and my co-conspirators need to get going on our plans of world-domination.
I'm assuming you are already clued into
http://www.newamericancentury.org/
>uhhh, just cuz i think soccer is boring means i think the rest of the world are subjects?
I'm not jumping on you per se, but addressing many of the commenters who disparage anyone or anything that isn't from US (or doesn't walk in lockstep).
GWB has much more experience in world affairs now and, more importantly, it is beginning to show in words, actions, and preliminary results.
Posted by: will at July 10, 2006 08:23 PM (h7Ciu)
7
seriously, will, i was just making fun of soccer. i have no plans for world domination. i can't even get my girlfriend to listen to me.
Random Soccer Thoughts
If the mere existence of a sport can be viewed as evidence of American superiority over the rest of the world, it is soccer.
There's real football, and there's futbol. They can't even fucking spell it right.
We suck at soccer because we don't care about it. We don't care about it because it is a stupid game.
You will never ever hear me say, "It's amazing, even though the score was 0-0, I really enjoyed watching that game."
Soccer is fun to play because all you do is run around and kick a ball. Soccer is boring to watch because all they do is run around and kick a ball.
When the foreign announcers say "gooooooooooooool!!!!" we laugh. But we're not laughing with them.
Beckham is eurotrash.
When Sylvester Stallone made that movie about soccer, he had to mix in a subplot about escaping from prison or some shit like that just to make it interesting, and it still sucked. The only movie about real football that had a prison subplot is The Longest Yard. It's now considered a classic, and they didn't even escape!
Soccer is like a slow, boring version of hockey, but without the fighting, or skating, or sticks, or guys getting slammed into a wall, or any action whatsoever.
Soccer is slower and more boring than golf, only there's more scoring in golf even though golfers are all trying not to score!
Soccer is basically like watching a high school football practice. A bunch of guys running back and forth across a field for three hours. Except the guys at my high school were cuter.
I root against the U.S. because the sooner we get knocked out, the sooner I get to stop hearing idiots complain that Americans don't like soccer.
If I have to, I root for Brazil because they come closest to making the game entertaining.
1
Your absolutely right about this game. It infuriates other countries that we could give a flying ---- about it. I once attended a game in Munich and couldn't believe the stench on the subway on the ride back to the hotel. (Imagine people drinking alot of heavy beer on a very warm day) And I'm half German from what they tell me.
There is a scenario, presented to me the other day, that might wane the rest of the world's appetite for this most boring sport: If the U.S. won the whole damned thing! And we still didn't give a crap or know anything about it, except that we won. This would be the kind of cursory attitude about all things international the rest of the world loves mocking us about. Some believe it will happen in the not too distant future. I hope they're right!
Posted by: Mike C. at June 18, 2006 05:28 PM (wZLWV)
2
European soccer fans are only interesting in drinking, fighting and vandalism. So they want the game to be as boring as possible so they are not distracted from their real reason for being there.
Soccer in Europe serves the same purpose as Muzak does in our elevators.
Posted by: Jake at June 18, 2006 08:50 PM (r/5D/)
3
Annika,
'
There was a movement in Poland or maybe it was Latvia a few years back, started by the die-hard, hardest drinking, vandalism loving fans, to have the ball removed from play for the entire second period. The local breweries funded the lobbying efforts as did the major vandalism provider, Erotrashit GmbH. THere were a few exibition matches played under the no ball in the second period rule but fans polled after the game claimed not to have noticed anything different. SO, the rule was not adopted or maybe it was.
Seriously, though, I happen to love watching soccer. I think it is tense, athletic and overall quite enjoyable. Those who focus on the fans and their bad behavior are just looking for another opportunity to beat on Europeans and to wave the stars and bars, oops, stripes!
Posted by: Strawman at June 19, 2006 07:35 AM (G2Zzw)
4
Soccer fits the European way thinking perfectly. Always play defense, ignore offence and hope for a miracle goal. Off the field Europeans always react to crises, never take proactive measures to prevent them and hope for a miracle.
Their soccer attitude caused WWI, WWI and the flourishing of Islamic terrorism. And of course, America had to come in and score the miracle goal and save their existence.
Posted by: Jake at June 19, 2006 08:09 AM (r/5D/)
5
Annika,
I played hockey from kidergarden through my senior year in high school.
Everytime I see one of these pansies get knocked over, pushed, shoved, or tripped I laugh at their reactions - 30-90 seconds of anguish and pain like they just ripped all the ligaments and tendons out of their knee or ankle only for them to hop up and run down the field a moment later.
Hey, Rolando, Ronaldo, whatever your name is...take a hit from someone who weighs 200+ pounds, moving at a much greater rate of speed than anyone can run, take that hit to the chops and have your mug smashed against the boards of a hockey rink, and your mellon bounced off the cold hard ice, and I bet you will never "act" so pathetically after being shoved to the grass again...
I think if they allowed fighting in soccer it would be worth watching.
Go Oilers!!!
Posted by: jcrue at June 19, 2006 08:12 AM (ZDQoM)
6
Go Jake,
Iraq really looks like a big save. And drinking beer raises your IQ. Anything else you need to know?
Posted by: Strawman at June 19, 2006 08:45 AM (G2Zzw)
Posted by: annika at June 19, 2006 08:47 AM (85hlL)
8
Any attempts to try and persuade the American television audience that soccer is anything but a painful exercise in boredom is obviously a Communist plot.
(I'd rather watch old re-runs of that guy on PBS who would teach you how to draw - remember him? he had the really huge white man's 'fro and talked really, really, really slowly and very, very quietly. Anyway, that guy drove me fucking nuts, and I'd still rather watch him than soccer.)
Posted by: blu at June 19, 2006 09:04 AM (j8oa6)
9
p.s. Jake, the first paragraph of your post was classic. Nice work.
Posted by: blu at June 19, 2006 09:06 AM (j8oa6)
10
Hey - it's better than cricket. Can i get an amen?!
Posted by: kyle at June 19, 2006 09:32 AM (yjytK)
11
Kyle - no, in cricket the bowler sometimes hits the batter. That's at least 10 times as entertaining as anything that happens on a soccer field.
The problem with soccer is that there is no systematic advancement towards a goal. They get the ball all the way across the field in a few seconds, and then someone power kicks it halfway back down the field. It's a grown up version of keep-away. There's no build-up to a climax, as there is with the 4 down posession system in American football or the advance around the bases in baseball (not that I like baseball, but it's a better game than soccer). And scoring in soccer is much too infrequent - the goal needs to be widened. Hockey suffers from the same drawbacks, but makes up for it with faster action and gratuitous violence.
The Klitschko Way
Mary Katharine Ham has a great background post about two of my favorite boxers, Wladimir and Vitali Klitschko. They're much more interesting than your average boxers.
Both brothers stand over 6'6", speak four languages, and have Ph.Ds. They served in the Ukrainian army, hold helicopter pilots' licenses, and excel at chess. They are described as intelligent, charming, and well-mannered in a sport that hasn't recently put a high premium on those qualities. They sometimes catch flak for it from opponents and critics who say they're too soft for boxing-- they lack the killer instinct.
Nonetheless, the two have both been heavyweight champions--Wladimir most recently beat Chris Byrd for the title in a bout that avenged his big brother's loss of the title to the southpaw American 6 months earlier. Inside the ring, the brothers combine for a record of 70-2 with 66 KOs. (Not positive that's a current stat, so don't quote me on it; I read several different stats on that, but that's the ballpark.)
Ph.D.'s? That's must be where the "science" part of "sweet science" comes in.
Posted by: annika at
09:47 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 183 words, total size 1 kb.
Bonds Sets Sights On Hank
I don't want Barry to beat Hank. Barry may be the most amazing hitter I've ever seen, but as a cheater, it would be a disgrace for his name to top the legendary Hank Aaron's. Barry should quit after this season.
Carl the gardener would know what to do.
What you've got to do is cut the hamstring on the back of his leg right at the bottom... he'll push everything off to the right. He'll never come through on anything. He'll quit the game.
Alas, Barry is thinking of coming back.
Now 40 home runs shy of catching home run king Hank Aaron, Bonds believes he may have another season in his 41-year-old body.
"If my health feels good and if I feel I can play," said Bonds, who turns 42 in July, "then I'm going to play. If I'm healthy enough, it's a good shot. It's still a long way away. We're still in May. Anything can happen between now and then."
Quit, Barry quit.
In anticipation of setting the new record, Barry has decided to change his image, too.
"The funny part is that it's brought out a softer side to me. And I don't want to go back to the other side. I'm having more fun. It's probably hurting my career more than anything because I'm not mad. I'm just happy."
A softer side? Well maybe getting off the roids had a little to do with it too...
1
Yeah, it's tough to like Bonds. But roids or not, I love watching the guy swing. His bat speed is amazing. His knee is definitely hampering his ability to turn on the ball. The next 40 are gonna be tough for him.
My only problem with Hank was that he hit a lot of HRs to a left-field fence that would be long pop-flys in many modern ballparks. Willie Mays nearly got 700, but he was hitting in insanely difficult parks his entire career.
As far as cheating goes, does speed, cocaine, and amphetamines count as cheating? If so, how does that impact other great players from the past? Are any records garnered by the great players of the 90's suspect? I only ask because as more guys are retiring and speaking out, the more appropriate questions appears to be "who wasn't doing 'roids?"
As good as Bonds was (pre-injury), the most impressive baseball performance for an older athlete was Clemen's ridiculous ERA at over 40.
Posted by: Blu at May 30, 2006 12:42 PM (04fPe)
2
C'mon, move your arm in the picture - you're blocking the hooch.
3
McClelland,
You know what I want to do to you?
First, I'd wrap the smooth side of a roll of sandpaper around my cock. Then, I'd sodomize you repeatedly.
I wouldn't stop until I see a rosebud weeping crimson, bitch.
Posted by: Spanky at May 30, 2006 03:41 PM (ZttME)
4
Bonds is a cheater and an all time narcissist. If he could see anything in the world beyond himself, he would step down with as much grace as is left to him.
I started to rip Blu for his "everyone did it" defense - and he does deserve some ripping for believing cocaine produces better baseball play, instead of merely producing an altered player who mistakenly believes he is playing better.
However, the question of playing on amphetamines is an interesting one. Do amphetamines improve baseball play? Even though generations of players may have believed amphetamines improve play, I'm going to say they do not. I'm a novice about drugs. I've never taken amphetamines. I've taken No Doz. I'm going to say amphetamines, like No Doz, would make a player more eager to get up off the bench and run out onto the field; as opposed to dragging their tired body off the bench, and trudging their tired body onto the field for another inning. Would amphetamines actually improve hand to eye coordination, or visual perception? I'm going to say no, with the caveat that I am a novice, and am only guessing. I'm guessing an amphetamine-amped player would FEEL more energetic when getting off the bench, or when chasing down a fly ball; but would not actually HAVE improved coordination, improved visual perception, or improved strength. I may be on shaky moral ground, but I believe amphetamine cheating is not in the same league with steroid cheating. Steroid cheating definitely allows improved strength, in a way which changes the game. Amphetamine cheating merely allows the player to feel more energetic. Even if players felt less energetic, they would still run out to the field, and chase down fly balls. I don't believe Amphetamine cheating had a tactile impact on game results. It was cheating. Maybe it had an impact on player's confidence. But it did not allow anyone to run the bases any faster. Steroid cheating did.
Posted by: gcotharn at May 30, 2006 04:34 PM (Rhyyb)
5
Steroids, as we all know, make a difference, gcotharn. Obviously, though, the person has to do the work in order to see the results. In the case of Bonds, he obviously did the weight training. Perhaps, more importantly, the "roids" and the human growth formula can help older atheletes avoid injury or recover more quickly. They don't, however, improve your hand to eye ability. So, you can question Bonds HR numbers if you like but not his place as one of the great hitters of all-time. Bonds, by the way, is more than a narcissist; he is a complete and utter ass. He's like Terrel Owens and Rick Barry (sorry for the old reference) on crack.
I'll leave it to you do your own research on the impact and relevance of amphetamine/speed/cocaine. I can tell that the players who took these drugs definitely believed they would help. I would also add that professional athletes have always used whatever substances they could get their hands on in order to improve performance. I suspect that they will continue.
Posted by: Blu at May 30, 2006 05:37 PM (RZ8UN)
6
Good Gawd, it's time to institute a cover charge in this place.
Shaq & Kobe, Still Competing
Shaq and Kobe just can't stop competing with each other.
The former Lakers teammates became fathers again Monday when their wives gave birth to girls six minutes apart.
. . .
Gianna Maria-Onore Bryant was born at 2:03 a.m. PDT in Orange County, Calif.
. . .
Shaquille and Shaunie OÂ’Neal became parents for the sixth time when Mearah Sanaa OÂ’Neal was born at 4:57 a.m. EDT in a South Florida hospital.
Congratulations to both couples.
And speaking of Kobe... what a game on Sunday. It was also great watching Nash choke, twice. MVPs are not supposed to fall apart like that. Did Magic ever? Jordan? Bird? Nash's got skills, but trust me. Ten years from now, nobody's going to remember who he was, except he was that skanky lookin dude who let the ball get away from him twice in that legendary Laker game.
1
c'mon....nobody will know who he is 10 years from? a repeat MVP, who is 6 foot nothing AND white AND and a point guard. trust me, folks will remember. nobody, and i mean nobody, in the NBA makes other people better like nash. with that said, the lakers are having a nice little run. i could see them getting to the western conference finals. but it don't matter cuz dallas is gonna crush anybody coming out of the west, including san antonio - if they can get past sac.
Posted by: blu at May 01, 2006 05:39 PM (ynXOp)
2
Dallas? As in the team that Kobe outscored by himself in three quarters before taking himself out of the game? The team that for years has been known as the Allas Mavericks - because there's no D in the Big D - those guys?
3
Avery Johnson was named Coach of the Year because Dallas did play defense this year. They also won 60+ games. Hey, I'm from Sacramento and would prefer rooting for my Kings, but if you look at the West, Dallas is playing better ball than anybody out here. I watched the Kings get lay-ups and dunks on Dallas for years. So, I know how they used to play D (or no D). They don't play that way now. But, hey, that's why you play the games.
p.s. When Kobe starts scoring 40+ a game is when the Laker's little run is going to end. They have done well so far because they been sharing the ball and pounding it inside on a very small Phoenix team.
Posted by: blu at May 01, 2006 06:28 PM (ynXOp)
4
I'm not saying they're not good, they have definitely improved from what they use to be. And that is one of the reasons that I have no idea who is going to win the west.
As far as how many points Kobe scores, it all comes down to match ups, I think. He'll have a bigger series against the Clippers because the favorable match up for the Lakers will be a shooting guard. Same goes for a series against the Spurs (though the Lakers would also have a advantage with Odom's match up if Duncan isn't guarding him) and Mavs. Against the Kings - and is there anyone here who wouldn't want to see 7 vs 8 in the conference finals, especially with these two particular franchises? - it would probably be more like the series against the Suns because of Artest.
And since I'm the kind of guy that believes that the only stat that matters is the final score, I really don't care how they win, so long as they win.
1
Well, a couple of my Hokies were selected. I think the Hokies will fill up te Atlanta Falcons. I'm not sure Young will do any good here for the Titans (I live in Memphis and am a Cowboy fan). Of course, Vick was questionable in Atlanta. However, the falcons had a decent defense to keep the score low. No such thing with the Titans.
Good call, Annie
Posted by: JJJet at April 29, 2006 06:45 PM (2tZZ5)
2
Al Davis apparently believes that Aaron Brooks is the answer. Heh.
And I wasn't scoffing. I just didn't think it was a good pick for them. And hey, even you said that a passing QB was better than a running QB.
Oh, and if anyone is interested, I did a half assed analysis of the thing today.
Posted by: annika at April 29, 2006 09:03 PM (fxTDF)
4
Sorry, but I think passing on Leinart is a good move. His arm, at best, is average and he takes way too long to make decisions. I'm afraid he is the lucky by product of college's best pro offensive line and a truly outstanding running back, supported by a very good running back. Leinart will most likely be a wash out.
Of course the most recent, and best supporting evidence that I'm right is the fact that he was drafted by the Cardinals after 9 other teams had first crack.
Posted by: Pursuit at April 29, 2006 09:04 PM (n/TNS)
5
The Raiders aren't even fun to hate any more. Comitment to exselence, indeed.
But when did my Redskins trade most of their draft picks away?
Love to know the inside story of what went on with the Texans, and with Bush's agent, over the last few days.
Posted by: Ontario Emperor at April 29, 2006 09:51 PM (t+zFd)
6
I'm crushed! Only five Buckeyes in the first thirty picks! Is there no justice in this world?
Posted by: Casca at April 29, 2006 10:22 PM (2gORp)
7
C'mon, Annie, remember the last left-handed USC quarterback the Raiders took? Can you blame them for not following that yellow (and cardinal) brick road again?
Posted by: Todd at April 29, 2006 10:47 PM (rywVr)
8
Young has more potential to be a bust than Leinart. He is big, but his skillset is suspect.
Leinart finally has something to prove, but shit if the NFL doesn't work out, he's pretty enough to stay in Hollywood.
Ultimately all of these players will have their destiny influenced by others, and external forces beyond their control, just like you and me. OJ didn't do shit in the NFL until Marv Levy showed up and built the offense around him, then nobody could stop him.
Posted by: Casca at April 30, 2006 08:33 AM (2gORp)
9
I don't know that I'd call it "real draft analysis", but thanks nonetheless
10
Nice way for Kubiak to start off on the wrong foot here in Houston, You have the chance for a once in a lifetime player, a guy who gives your team instant respectability, a guy who can put butts in the seats, and you take a defensive lineman, Way to go!
They better start winning fast or Kubiak will not last for his entire contract.
Posted by: kyle8 at April 30, 2006 01:38 PM (SXnzf)
11
Live from soCal...Been watching SC for twenty years. There is no way that Leinart could even carry Carson Palmer's helmet. He cannot throw the long ball, I mean Palmer can toss it seventy yards and hit a moving snake in the left eye. I also doubt that he has the velocity to throw the long out quickly. Also, the real reason he didn't come out last year was because he'd hurt his shoulder so badly he required surgery over the summer. He'd have lost all his bonus signing money anyway.
And what the hell has Denny Green ever won other than kudos from guilt ridden liberal sports writers? This guy was just Black at Stanford, people thought he could get along with all the Black super-stars on the Vikings and he busted, so now he's in Phoenix were everyone can roast in 120 degree heat until mid December. That heat will destroy the Cardinals.
Posted by: Howard Veit at April 30, 2006 05:40 PM (KoY3J)
1
WTFO!? Will the Buckeyes set a record with first round and total draft picks from on school!!! Bet on it!
Posted by: Casca at April 08, 2006 12:44 PM (2gORp)
2
I think Young will be a star - eventually. He will be overwhelmed for a long time - years, and will be awful during this period.
I'm additionally impressed with Young's leadership qualities. I would want him for my franchise. I would be willing to suffer through the early days. Even when he is awful, he should be fun to watch. Vince Young will always sell tickets.
Sometimes scouts and franchises overthink. Dan Marino was passed by something like 22 teams, and was the 6th QB taken in his draft. Mike Singletary was passed by the entire league in the first round, b/c he was "too short."
Posted by: gcotharn at April 08, 2006 04:36 PM (wg3L2)
3
Oh yeah - Al Davis:
Blinding glare from white sweat suit cause Raiders flunky to draft Lance Young: QB/WR, Univ. of Texas, with Raiders' first round pick. Lance has a 3.95 GPA, and a 4.95 40 time. He will go on to an outstanding career in the Raiders front office.
Posted by: gcotharn at April 08, 2006 04:42 PM (wg3L2)
4
Heh now, Al knows his market. California has a lot of criminals, and as long as there are prison gangs, the Raiders will have fans.
Posted by: Casca at April 09, 2006 06:44 AM (2gORp)
Posted by: Jane at April 09, 2006 07:43 AM (y6n8O)
6
To answer your questions:
1. he shows up
2. Texans
3. They already have a young QB (the guy from Cal, I believe) - look for the Packers to go defense
4. see #1
5. probably to the Titans
6. they won't - Texans need a guy like Bush and Leinart already knows the Titans offense. But if they do, don't expect him to do much at QB and figure that there will be talk of moving him to WR or RB.
7. the Raiders might actually be alright this year. The 49ers need every team in the league to lose their starting QB and RB to injury to have a chance just to make the playoffs.
8. I have no idea what you are talking about.
7
Of course, Aaron Rodgers, how stupid of me to forget!
Posted by: annika at April 09, 2006 12:39 PM (fxTDF)
8
Jane, if you're going to talk all nasty like that, please do it topless, and send pictures.
Posted by: Casca at April 09, 2006 03:39 PM (2gORp)
9
Vince Young was effective because his size made him a real threat to run on broken pass plays and options.
In the Pro's, he will just not be able to do that; they are all as big, or bigger than Vince.
Vince is not a remarkable passer. If I'm drafting, he is far down the list. Bush should and will go first, Leinart maybe third or fourth. There are a couple of DE's from somewhere that could go 2nd, but it is too early in the morning for me to remember which ones.
Young will be lucky to be drafted in the first round.
SC has a bumper crop, Bush, Leinart, Bing and Justice all can go in first round. Betcha USC goes stronger than OSU. Any takers?
Posted by: shelly at April 10, 2006 05:41 AM (BJYNn)
Posted by: Casca at April 10, 2006 08:19 AM (y9m6I)
11
Texans will take Bush. Any other year I would be upset with passing a once in a decade talent like Vince Young, especially since he is the hometown boy. But Reggie Bush might be an even bigger once in a decade like talent.
In addition, Two other players in this draft have that kind of potential at their position,
A J Hawk and T-brikassschwaww(whatever) Ferguson.
The depth of this draft is hard to believe, nevertheless, Alice Davis will probably screw it up and you KNOW that the Saints will certainly screw it up.
Why? well, because they are the Saints.
Posted by: kyle n at April 10, 2006 03:06 PM (7TdC2)
12
PS> Shelly, Vince's passing rating was in the high '80's. Also, he has all the intanglibles. Leadership, decision making, ect.
Actually I think Leinhart is the one who will have a little trouble adjusting to the NFL. He doesnt have the natural ability his predecessor Carson Palmer had. He might have trouble adjusting to the speed of the game.
When you have a great O line, a pretty damm good defense, and backs like White and Bush to help you, it tends to make you look like a great QB.
Now he might BE great, but he might also struggle a lot if he goes to a crappy team, (jets)
Posted by: kyle8 at April 10, 2006 03:14 PM (7TdC2)
13
I concur with Kyle on intangibles. Vince's running could be compared with Randal Cunningham, Steve Young, and Michael Vick. Plus, Vince has leadership qualities, and never say die competitiveness. In this regard, he reminds me a bit of Roger Staubach. I love Reggie Bush. But I hate to see the Texans pass a unique hometown talent.
Posted by: gcotharn at April 10, 2006 04:38 PM (PR0L+)
14
The problem with Vince Young is that Texas ran almost every play from the shotgun - it's a much easier offense for a QB because he can see all of the defense, he doesn't have to worry about a 3, 5, or 7 step drop and he can run out of it. No one runs the shotgun in the NFL as much as Texas did. And as far as running QBs go, they don't tend to win in the NFL - of the three you listed, gcotharn, they have a total of one SuperBowl title. Running on a busted play is one thing, running because your first read isn't open is another.
Leinhart's best fit will be Tennessee, where he already knows the offense. He'll struggle because all rookies struggle, but I think his game is better suited to the NFL than Youngs.
And when it comes to intangibles, I'm thinking that every single guy taken in the first round have 'em. They wouldn't be at this level without them.
15
I think KG is spot on about running QBs. I'd take a great passer over a "running QB" anyday.
Posted by: annika at April 10, 2006 06:08 PM (fxTDF)
16
Here's something I've wondered about:
if Vince Young declared himself a RB, and you were the Texans, would you draft Young or Bush with the first pick?
Vince has now won consecutive Rose Bowls, and, best I remember, has yet to be tackled inside the Pasadena city limits.
Posted by: gcotharn at April 10, 2006 06:32 PM (PR0L+)
17
That's because he was playing NO-D Pac 10 teams. He got his ass tackled in Columbus, and I have the video to prove it.
Posted by: Casca at April 10, 2006 08:52 PM (2gORp)
18
in that case, gcotharn, it becomes a tougher call, especially with the success that Pittsburg has had in converting QBs. Young may well be the best athlete in the draft, but you really don't have to be a great athlete to be an NFL QB.
19
SC drafts higher than OSU.
Stakes are one Annika Coffee Cup, but then, you probably never earned one.
Posted by: shelly at April 11, 2006 01:07 PM (BJYNn)
20
Let me get this straight, since I'm dealing with lawyers and their ilk. What exactly do you mean by "drafts higher"?
A coffee mug? Puhleez, at first I thought I'd send you a buckeye, since you've probably never seen one, and you could send me a box of them there trojans. Let's make the stakes something more manly, and worthy of the argument.
Posted by: Casca at April 11, 2006 02:19 PM (2gORp)
21
OK, how about 10 points for each first round pick, 9 for second round, etc. Whoever gets the most points after 10 rounds wins.
I don't want any used Buckeyes. How about Cuban cigars or nude pictures of Annie?
Posted by: shelly at April 11, 2006 03:17 PM (BJYNn)
22
Lol, you guys are funny. The season's over and you're still fighting.
I got buckeye once. A little ointment cleared it right up!
Posted by: annika at April 11, 2006 05:59 PM (fxTDF)
23
That'll teach you to use trojans, mwahahaha.
I like your scoring system.
"Naked pics of Annie"? How naked?
Posted by: Casca at April 12, 2006 06:46 AM (y9m6I)
24
as far as which QB will have a tougher time in the pros, i'd bet they both wash out as QB, young because his size won't matter any more, Leinart because he's obviously been scared to even go pro. they're gonna eat his lunch.
