Matthew Posted January 29 Report Posted January 29 Congratulations for both teams getting into the Super Bowl, of course, I was very happy to see the 49ers get in. What I am finding strange though, and maybe this show how out of it I am -- how many people on the internet say that the games were "obviously fixed." Is that a thing now with the NFL? Teams no longer lose, but results are pre-determined? I'm use to hearing that stuff about the NBA, but now with everything now, "the fix is in." What a sad world. Quote
sgcim Posted January 29 Report Posted January 29 25 minutes ago, Matthew said: Congratulations for both teams getting into the Super Bowl, of course, I was very happy to see the 49ers get in. What I am finding strange though, and maybe this show how out of it I am -- how many people on the internet say that the games were "obviously fixed." Is that a thing now with the NFL? Teams no longer lose, but results are pre-determined? I'm use to hearing that stuff about the NBA, but now with everything now, "the fix is in." What a sad world. It's all rooted in the one thing that California is known for, in the commercial I just heard; California Psychics. They've got all the answers. How else to explain the 49ers comeback in the second half?- they called a California Psychic from the locker room... Quote
Dan Gould Posted January 29 Report Posted January 29 I was all set up for a perfect Super Bowl - two teams I had no serious rooting interest but could easily support both teams winning it all. I don't think the Lions coach covered himself in glory or did his team a lot of favors. Quote
Dub Modal Posted January 29 Report Posted January 29 I’m really surprised the Chiefs stymied Lamar and that Ravens offense like they did. No one has done that for quite a while. Congrats to them and the 49ers for the comeback victory even though Detroit in the Super Bowl would have been awesome. Quote
JSngry Posted January 29 Author Report Posted January 29 2 hours ago, Dan Gould said: I don't think the Lions coach covered himself in glory or did his team a lot of favors. This, pretty much. Quote
Dub Modal Posted February 1 Report Posted February 1 Washington hires Dallas’ DC Quinn as their new HC. My friends that follow them aren’t thrilled. Quote
gmonahan Posted February 1 Report Posted February 1 On 1/29/2024 at 5:33 AM, JSngry said: This, pretty much. Yeah, that game was a bit of a disappointment. I'd kind of hoped to see them get into the big game, but it should be a good game, regardless. Quote
Dub Modal Posted February 2 Report Posted February 2 15 hours ago, JSngry said: Us. otoh.... lol his defense withered in crucial games. I’m surprised they went with Quinn but maybe the gig was a hard sell. Quote
JSngry Posted February 12 Author Report Posted February 12 Took too long to get there, but it ended up being a pretty good game. Helluva finish! Quote
GA Russell Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 (edited) I listened to the fourth quarter on the radio. The announcer (Kevin Harland?) was behaving as if the Chiefs were running out of time. Is that correct? Would the game have ended even if the Chiefs were still moving the ball downfield? I see that now a team starts its drive on the 25 following a touchback. How long ago was that changed? I saw the third quarter on television. It looked to me that the 49ers' defense was better than the Chiefs' offense. But I guess not! PS - Kurt Warner on the radio was surprised that the 49ers won the overtime toss and elected to receive. He thought that the smart play would be to get the ball last, so that you knew what you had to do. Edited February 12 by GA Russell Quote
ghost of miles Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 (edited) 49 minutes ago, GA Russell said: I listened to the fourth quarter on the radio. The announcer (Kevin Harland?) was behaving as if the Chiefs were running out of time. Is that correct? Would the game have ended even if the Chiefs were still moving the ball downfield? I see that now a team starts its drive on the 25 following a touchback. How long ago was that changed? I saw the third quarter on television. It looked to me that the 49ers' defense was better than the Chiefs' offense. But I guess not! PS - Kurt Warner on the radio was surprised that the 49ers won the overtime toss and elected to receive. He thought that the smart play would be to get the ball last, so that you knew what you had to do. The speculative CW seems to be that SF’s defensive unit was gassed by the end of regulation and that they may have wanted to give those guys a breather, instead of them having to come right back out again at the start of OT. Edited February 12 by ghost of miles Quote
jlhoots Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 1 hour ago, JSngry said: Took too long to get there, but it ended up being a pretty good game. Helluva finish! Agree!! Quote
GA Russell Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 1 hour ago, ghost of miles said: The speculative CW seems to be that SF’s defensive unit was gassed by the end of regulation and that they may have wanted to give those guys a breather, instead of them having to come right back out again at the start of OT. Sounds plausible. Quote
Brad Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 6 hours ago, GA Russell said: I listened to the fourth quarter on the radio. The announcer (Kevin Harland?) was behaving as if the Chiefs were running out of time. Is that correct? Would the game have ended even if the Chiefs were still moving the ball downfield? I see that now a team starts its drive on the 25 following a touchback. How long ago was that changed? I saw the third quarter on television. It looked to me that the 49ers' defense was better than the Chiefs' offense. But I guess not! PS - Kurt Warner on the radio was surprised that the 49ers won the overtime toss and elected to receive. He thought that the smart play would be to get the ball last, so that you knew what you had to do. No, the game would not have ended. It would only have ended if KC mailed to make a first down and thus lost possession or scored a TD. The rule of starting on the 25 was instituted a few years ago for safety purposes. You’re not going to run it out of the end zone if you know you’re getting the ball on the 25. I don’t think it was a mistake to try to score first; puts the pressure on the other team. Quote
Dan Gould Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 The game was OK; I had no dog in the hunt but decided on the second or third view of Taylor that my true rooting interest was in knowing that 80 million or so Swifties were left crying in their soda pop and that didn't happen. Normally I'd say only a few days to Pitchers & Catchers but the Sox will be awful again so ... Quote
GA Russell Posted February 13 Report Posted February 13 On 2/12/2024 at 5:35 AM, Brad said: No, the game would not have ended. It would only have ended if KC mailed to make a first down and thus lost possession or scored a TD. The rule of starting on the 25 was instituted a few years ago for safety purposes. You’re not going to run it out of the end zone if you know you’re getting the ball on the 25. I don’t think it was a mistake to try to score first; puts the pressure on the other team. Thanks, Brad! Quote
Dub Modal Posted February 13 Report Posted February 13 The first 3 quarters of that game were brutal to watch. Thankfully things picked up in the 4th and OT. Had the Niners won, game ball should have gone to special teamer Chris Conley who absolutely balled out. Quote
Kevin Bresnahan Posted February 13 Report Posted February 13 On 2/12/2024 at 6:07 AM, Dan Gould said: The game was OK; I had no dog in the hunt but decided on the second or third view of Taylor that my true rooting interest was in knowing that 80 million or so Swifties were left crying in their soda pop and that didn't happen. Normally I'd say only a few days to Pitchers & Catchers but the Sox will be awful again so ... I don't get why so many people get their panties in a bunch over Taylor Swift. It's not like she was advocating for anything other than her boyfriend's team. The way I see it, she brought a lot of new football viewers, particularly young women, which can only be a good thing for that sport, which has a history of being pretty misogynistic. Quote
JSngry Posted February 13 Author Report Posted February 13 I still wish that they will show her reacting when something bad happens to her team. Because they do and they will. Maybe next year, if they're still together. Like, a reaction shot when Kelsey slammed into Andy Reid...is that when she chugged that drink? Quote
Dub Modal Posted February 13 Report Posted February 13 7 minutes ago, JSngry said: Like, a reaction shot when Kelsey slammed into Andy Reid...is that when she chugged that drink? IDK but someone needs to edit them together because that would be hilarious Quote
jlhoots Posted February 13 Report Posted February 13 39 minutes ago, JSngry said: I still wish that they will show her reacting when something bad happens to her team. Because they do and they will. Maybe next year, if they're still together. Like, a reaction shot when Kelsey slammed into Andy Reid...is that when she chugged that drink? Wonder what Kelce said to Reid. Quote
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
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.