Congrats IGB! In saw 'city signs Robinho' on the scroll line during the TN/UCLA game and was positive the guys at ESPN just didn't know the difference between City and Chelski.
Can you imagine what it was like for Hughes yesterday? He comes in to work and finds out he has a blank check and 12 hours left in the transfer window. It reminds me of the Richard Pryor movie, Brewsters Millions. As I recall it didn't work out so well for Brewster, maybe Sparky will fare better....
posted by r8rh8r27 at 05:33 PM on September 02
All fun and games until some knuckle-dragging humanoid gets done on a live TV broadcast. It is only a matter of time, inevitable really. Then where will the "sport" be? Back on overpriced PPV or late-late night fetish networks like Spike or FX, which is exactly where it should be. MMA has surpassed boxing as the hand to hand contact sport of choice and it's not going anywhere. Being more popular than boxing isn't really saying much nowadays. Drift racing practiced at the amature level is more popular than pro boxing. The last MMA PPV drew 1.05 million buys. That's about 1/3 of 1% of Americans. Forgive me for not buying into the 'MMA is going to take over the sporting world' argument. ...it's not going anywhere...Agreed, MMA is nothing more than a 'grown up' version of WWF. Like anything, it will find its' niche yet remain obscure and strange to most people. I wont be watching unless they undergo a 47th rule change, one that allows blunt instruments to be used. The "winning" participant must kill both his opponent and at least one "fan" in the audience, then drink their blood whilst Joe Rogan throws 100 year old rotten eggs at their mother.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 11:11 AM on May 30
Why do they have to expand it? Why can't they just open up qualifying to anyone; if some women make the cut, they get to jump. Simple. The schedule wont need to be amended at all, and there would be no 'extra' event. Let 'em all jump together. May the best (wo)man win.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 12:46 PM on May 22
Strange. I just don't understand how someone can enjoy and respect the game of football and dislike John Terry. He represents everything that is good about the game. To list all his qualities on the pitch would be pointless, ya'll watch, you know exactly what they are. Do display such glee over what will undoubtedly become known as his greatest failure because you support some crap team whose entire squad can't equal the heart and character of JT is pathetic and petty. Anelka missed the deciding penalty. Blame should be laid on the Incredible Sulk followed closely by the manager who left Essien out of the first five and should have put Ballack in the 5 hole.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 08:32 AM on May 22
A guy that always gets left out in these 'greatest' lists: Eric Heiden. Five gold medals in one Olympics setting 4 Olympic records and one world record while skating every race from 500meters to 10,000meters. That is the equivalent of a track runner winning the 100meter, marathon, and every race in between. Not only will no one ever do it again, but I doubt any athlete will even attempt it.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 09:49 AM on April 18
I hit a stork once. It was maybe the worst shot in the history of golf, we're talkin Van de Velde awful. 40 yards left never rising more than 15 feet. Caught the poor fella on his foot while perched on a cypress stump in a pond. I felt AWFUL. I can't imagine the mindset of someone intentionally trying to hurt a bird with a golf shot. And at five bucks a pop for a ProV, this must have been a fairly expensive hunting trip. A fine is worthless as punishment. This muppet will lose $1,500 on the first hole of Wednesday's practice/gambling round at the next event. You have to take what is valuable to him for punishment to make a difference. I suspect with Isenhour that is time; time from his circuit rounds, time away from his family. How about making him shag balls at a public driving range sans armored scooper-cart? Put a helmet on 'em and sell buckets-o-balls donating the profits to some wetland conservation until the fine is raised. Ready. Aim.......
posted by r8rh8r27 at 11:08 AM on March 07
OK, one more. You gotta see the hottie at 1:25 take a volley from 23 yards out and score. what a strike!
posted by r8rh8r27 at 10:01 AM on March 06
Here is the Patriots/Panthers streaker that got nailed. This guy got it so bad security didn't even bother to chase him. What the world needs are more streakers like this.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 09:50 AM on March 06
His consecutive game streak is Ripkenlike Nearly as impressive as his career interceptions total. Nobody could throw it to the other team like ole Brett.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 10:25 AM on March 04
When I saw the tackle I didn't think much of it. Seemed like a free kick, a quick splash of the spray, a few minutes of limping, and a foreseeable tackle of retribution by Flamani upcoming. Then I saw Cecs' reaction upon looking down; pale skin, frantic waves to the training staff, hands in prayer, and I had to rewind. Again, the tackle didn't look that bad. It's football. Whatcha gonna do?
posted by r8rh8r27 at 09:33 AM on February 25
but apparently most any back is good for 1,000 yards in that system p.s. Before Davis "the system" was Elway chunkin' it 45 times a game and running for his life. The offensive line that Davis ran behind only carried Tom Nalen into the tenures in Gary, Anderson, Droughns, and Bell. So the success of those backs can't be tied to Davis'. Without Davis proving the viability of the 'zone blocking' scheme, it too could have gone the way of the dinosaurs.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 02:35 PM on February 04
but the question is whether 8 seasons and 115 games is enough to warrant inclusion I know this isn't scientific or accepted talk in HoF election meetings, but the length of one's career isn't really important to me. Some guys, like Monk and Carter, play for so long that eventually the sheer mass of numbers facilitates their election. But I only need one question answered appropriately: Was he great? Not really good. Not "a champion". Was he great in comparison to his contemporaries? And Terrell Davis was great. He was the best player in the NFL during a two year stretch. He was (and made the Broncos) unstoppable. The high-water mark for our franchise begins and ends with his career. Was Monk ever the best at his position in football? Was he ever the best player on his own team? Did he often propel his team to victory despite themselves? Terrell Davis did, of that there is no question.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 02:19 PM on February 04
may bad, sayers But you knew that, smartass.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 11:00 AM on February 04
I don't know how we could accomplish this, but I am fully caffeinated and feelin' ambitious. Well Monk couldn't get a sniff until Peter King released his hounds. Maybe an e-mail barrage to the SI King would help? Apparently his opinion and personal pleas in the election meetings carry a lot of weight. I will help the campaign if you pledge your support for the, "If Gale Sanders and Art Monk are in, Terrell Davis should be next protest". Deal? If not, I'm happy anyway. Zimmerman got in which brings the Mighty Donkey HoF tally up to an impressive....2.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 09:56 AM on February 04
Neither the Hicks-Gillett, nor DCI ownerships really care about the club. That is what the Kop should be worried about. Both conglomerates see it as a short-term investment they can turn over in 3,4,5 years. However, given the choice between absent, greedy, cheap-skate, Yanks or absent, greedy, kidnapping, human rights' abusin', dirtbags; ya gotta go with the Yanks, right? I like Rafa and all, but the anger against the idea of replacing the coach is going overboard. Does Rafa really deserve all this support? If Liverpool lose to Inter they could miss the CL altogether, what does Rafa think the transfer kitty will be then? The Kop were just singing songs they didn't really mean. They have gotten used to it. Like when they sing: ...a team that plays the Liverpool way and wins a Championship in May... "The Liverpool Way"? Really? Two holding midfielders banging it to a lone big guy?
posted by r8rh8r27 at 02:56 PM on January 25
Losing is one thing, but when you get destroyed consistently, it really messes with your confidence. Well if there is one thing EJ has, it's confidence. We could even say EJ has an overabundance of confidence based on an ability so-far unseen. The MSL held out for just a little more scratch and eventually put EJ on a team that--like Derby--will be playing in the Championship next season. By the time he gets consistent starts--if ever--we will still wonder if he can even play the English game. Had he gone to Derby, we would already know. If he can play in England, Premiership buyers would make a move for him. Guys that can put the ball in the net never get relegated.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 02:24 PM on January 25
Anyone here want to talk about Eddie Johnson and Fulham? Oo Oo Over here, teach. We kinda have a glass half empty (or half full). I like the idea that Demps will get some help. Playing alone up front has never and will never be his most useful role. If Fulham plan on playing Johnson with another striker and Demps on the wing this will immensely help the USNT, but only if they stay up, and only if such a lineup is consistantly played. If Johnson and Demps are just seen as interchangeable players, and one is often subbed for the other, then this is an awful move, from both the USNT and Fulhan FC perspective. Plus, I think Demps will find his way out of FFC and on to a mid-table side in England this summer. I wish Johnson would have gone to Derby last summer when the offer was made. He would be a whole year ahead of where he is now. The US needs more than 'a few players on teams abroad'. They (we) need the majority of the USMNT starting XI on top flight teams and starting the majority of their matches. As it stands, all our eggs are in the Fulham basket (sans Bradley who is lighting up the Dutch league). If Fulham go down, and I think they will, where does that leave us? p.s. No amount of money, manpower, or "training facilities" will put the US on par with the football powerhouses of the world. We are and shall remain in an untenable position with regards to the proper training of young talent. Our pro and college systems do not allow for an uber-talented 8-9-10 year old to progress with professional tutoring. The great young players in world football today are 18-20 years old. They all began their careers at club football at 13 or younger. Messi, Noble, Rooney, Bale....were playing first team-top flight football before American kids can legally drive. Dempsey and Johnson are what? 23-24 years old? Friggin dinosaurs in world football.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 10:14 AM on January 25
the finite amount of fan dollars (and, you could say, hours that a fan can sit in front of an idiot box, but we seem to constantly find ways to expand this despite the basic laws of physics DVR how I love thee. I woke up before kickoff of the early game last weekend. Turned the TV to the pregame and hit pause. Showered, began a modest 'honey-do' list, walked the dogs, hit play. By half-time, after FF through commercials and bullshite, I was caught up to the live broadcast. Paused. Watched the entire ManUre v Newcastle match (almost all, I stopped at five-nil feeling slightly nauseated). Restarted NFL playoffs sans commercials while the next game just started to record. By the start of the 3rd q of the Pats game I caught up to the live feed again.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 02:46 PM on January 18
Id say you need some lessons in what makes a good argument ROLMFAO Coming for the guy who's argument is essentially: "life is not fair, deal with it". So I will take your comment as a compliment. Thanks Tell me oh wise and noble blogger, is asking if a person is living in a cave a "good" way to debate a subject or not. I need clarity and you seem to know. Actually, scratch that. Go back to "stopping your conversation with me", that works better for ya. I'm about to break my personal 'no ad hominem directed at fellow SpoFits' rule. I don't want to do it. As since you have such thin skin, I don't want to be responsible for the results.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 12:52 PM on January 18
I realise, of course, that I am asking for trouble... Kudos to owlhouse, who has in his own way staged a coup of us SpoFites. By labeling a soccer thread as "culture" he manged to get a 40+ post thread about the beautiful game. A rarity among a constant barrage of 'lets debate the on base percentage of the American League for the third time this week' dailies. Had he chosen the more common approach, and put this under "soccer" it would just be me, him, and WC'02 in here agreeing with each other, again.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 12:19 PM on January 18
and only watch during the cup or Olympics. This could be part of the problem. No matter what the sport, the neutral fan wants to see the best competition and the best players/teams. I think the best football is played at the club level. Sure Brazil, Spain, Argentina, Portugal play beautiful football, and the rival games are must-see. But on a whole I think the Champions League is a better competition. The start of the knock-out rounds next month in particular is the best sporting competition on Earth. Following closely behind are 1st tier domestic leagues with a 'everyone plays everyone' format and the possibility of being dropped or promoted from the league. As a semi-casual fan I'm sure hawkeye and others like him do not really have the opportunity to see these games or understand their context. If FSC and Setanta were available on basic cable packages growth of these leagues would soar. The other major obstacle is the rejection of the draw. People in America just do not respect a drawn competition. American soccer leagues have gone to great lengths to supplant the draw with obscene endgames. But the draw is an important part of football historically and tactically. It can't be removed. The idea that a team will go into a match and WANT to get a tie is just too foreign for most.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 11:58 AM on January 18
I did not mean to demean the sport with first post Oh no, of course not. Likewise I'm not demeaning you when I agree that crassly xenophobic, casually homophobic, tediously sexist and smugly pig-ignorant soccer-bashers are scum. I'm just seeing what that comment looks like in the context of a post. /wink wink/
posted by r8rh8r27 at 10:59 AM on January 18
and decided to give up a intelligent discussion with you Yet here you are... you kept posting directly and indirectly about my English skills. One comment, and it was mild considering the abundance of errors you made whilst asking stupid rhetorical questions, and using the argument, "deal with it" as a crutch. I'm not sure how quote 2 got turned around to quote 1. Me either, because they have nothing to do with one another. #1 was a response to: "So what-life is not fair sometimes and deal with it, but don't throw your bitching on this sight..." This should be crystal clear in my 4:02 post to most, sorry I missed you. Canstusdis, Not sure what you are saying there, help me out. So you think my two person household is a bigger drain on the local public treasury than a family of five with kids in public school and big tax breaks? And this drain can be made up with higher insurance rates because my household uses more fuel per capita than a large family? Interesting. This relates to teacher/coach pay is what way?
posted by r8rh8r27 at 09:23 AM on January 18
Pleasantly surprised to see all the disappointment among CFL fans. Not because I'm a sadist or anything, but you make me think Pete Boone has finally got something right at my Alma Mater. One coaching mistake after another for Ole Miss. The straw being that bloated circus clown, coach "o". Which, as we came to learn, is a fitting moniker for that swollen, pompas, lick-spittle, coon-ass. We should have never sold our soul to the Manning family and agreed to hire a head coach strictly as a recruiting tool for one, Eli Manning. Then after shear luck it turned out Cutty was a decent coach--after four years of on the job training--we shouldn't have fired him. ...but this guy He has actually won something... ...and as a head coach!! Look out SEC West Can I get a Hotty Totty?
posted by r8rh8r27 at 12:58 PM on January 17
You argument is the equivalent of, "if you don't like it, don't read it." Take this entire thread and thus agreed to hear about it. You don't like people saying teachers should make more? Great! Don't worry about it then. I say this because that's exactly what you're telling us about teachers deserving more money. No, "don't worry about it" was Nake's, 'I'm throwing in the towel' argument. I was just repeating it faciciously. Like you, I don't take something like that seriously in a debate forum. I don't mind people saying "teachers should be paid more", I just don't agree; and my opinion on the matter is no more--or less--important than anyone else's. Do you even know what teachers make (or care?)? Slightly below the median 40hr week salaried employee of a given state, with better than average benefits. Which, as stated before, is about right IMNHO. They probably really enjoy their jobs, receive fulfillment that money doesn't buy, and live three months a year on the jib. You may not WANT to pay anything for other people's children's education but I put forth the idea that you WILL be paying for other people's children if they get no education by You are probably right. That is why the whole system is such a successful shake-down. "pay for my kids now or pay for 'em later" Brilliant. How about this concept instead: Let parents pay for the education of their kids. Let parents decide how much to pay teachers to teach/coach their kids. Instead of giving parents tax breaks, give them tax bills proportional to the actual services they receive? Crazy, huh?
posted by r8rh8r27 at 12:38 PM on January 17
to pay as little as possible due to the fact you are childless and resent what teachers make. No. I don't want to pay ANYTHING for other people's children. And i don't resent what teachers make I have said I think what they make is about right.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 04:55 PM on January 16
unless you were home-schooled, you are the benificiary of an education system. Actually, no. My parents, like Nake, paid through the nose for private education while supporting a failed public education system in my home state. The other services you listed are paid for through state income and sales taxes. School systems are supported through local property taxes. So instead of everyone paying their share, only those with property pay regardless of how many children they have in the system. Also, everyone benefits from fire, police, and military, not so for public schools. Parents who get to send their kids to public school for free benefit much more than the property owners who pay for that school sans crotch-fruit. teacher or a soldier, or a cop, or a fire fighter, don't do it for the money. All the cries for more pay from teachers withstanding? As you have pointed out there is value to the service-giver not measured in money, right? So not only do these people get to do a job they love, that they have dreamed of, but they also get to be paid whatever they think their service is worth? Sorry, I'm not buying it
posted by r8rh8r27 at 04:53 PM on January 16
Well you also has a choice.. Try and find a school district with a age group, that are mostly senior citizens (who don't like paying taxes for schools). I'm not sure if your going to find any to your liking, however, if felt the way you do about it , I would certainly try. Certainly the worth of a teacher is elevated in your opinion. Not just because your daughter is one, but because you seem in dire need of some assistance with the English language, and your reasoning skills. School districts for seniors? Really? I have a choice in paying property taxes? You lost me, pal. Completely nonsensical. It's also not society responsibility to bend to your will. Who said it was? I just think my opinion on the worth of a teacher is as meaningful as yours, or any one's. I help pay, so I get to help decide how and where the money is spent. So what-life is not fair sometimes and deal with it, but don't throw your bitching on this sight , call your representative and complain "deal with it" Remember those words when reading or scrolling past my drivel. I will "bitch" anywhere I choose. And I don't hate children, I just don't want to be forced into paying for their education whilst their preening, self-centered parents tell me they will decide how much I owe and I should just "deal with it".
posted by r8rh8r27 at 04:02 PM on January 16
I recall reading that same diatribe in 1844's, "Children ought to work in the coal mines," pamphlet. Interesting reading I suppose. But since the plight of children forced into servitude 160 years ago has absolutely nothing to with the agreed upon wages of voluntary adults who teach, coach, or sale insurance, I fail to see your point. Worth isn't arbitrary. It is static. It is decided upon by a complex formula between either a buyer/seller, or in this case employee/employer. Only those two parties can really know all factors to determine worth. The Oxford County school district thinks the football coach is worth 105K, the football coach agrees. That determines a specific worth, not an arbitrary one. Both parties have reason to believe they will profit from this transaction. You're right- many factors do contribute to my staying here even with the loss of salary. Even so, does that really mean I shouldn't want to make more money Of course not. We all want to make more money. That doesn't mean we deserve more, or that we are worth more. If you think you should be paid more, that is a private conversation you should have with your employer. Hopefully ya'll can come to an agreeable solution. If not, and you feel strong enough about your worth, and have evidence of your worth beyond how you "feel", then seek new employment, form a union, or have a strike. But complaining about a pay scale that you agreed to after the fact is, like I said, annoying. Teachers don't create a direct infusion of money like other jobs do and hence the pay scales. Excellent point. No direct infusion of money, unlike say, a 9-1 high school football team in BFE Alabama? Another reason for the "loss" may be there are plenty of happily child-less people (like me) who must support school budgets as much as parents with three kids. We think parents should suffer the burden of teaching their younglings. To us, the child-less products of private education, teachers have little worth in our lives. And since we help pay for these schools we help determine their worth.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 02:35 PM on January 16
Any person in America, be it a coach, teacher, mill worker, doctor, or janitor makes what they are worth. If a coach makes 105K, that is what the job is worth. No one forces you to coach football in this country, and no one forces you to teach 3rd grade math. If you decide to take a teaching job at 40K, 20K, or 5K; that is what your job is worth. If you think your performance is worth more than your salary, make an offer to your employer, if the counter-offer isn't sufficient, start looking for a new job where once again you and your employer can agree on your worth. The constant cry that teachers don't make enough money is annoying. I assume teachers bothered to check what their profession makes a year before they paid for a four year college education. Only two logical conclusions can be made from this obvious point: 1. Prospective teachers decided on their own that the many non-economic factors/perks teachers get make up for the "loss" of salary, 2. teachers teach for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with money. Have you been living in cave and oblivious to the current salary structure of teachers? Have you? Has your daughter been living in the cave too? Did the current salary structure begin with the graduation of your daughter? Is asking rhetorical questions fun? Is Dan Patrick a monkey in disguise?
posted by r8rh8r27 at 12:40 PM on January 16
I've got some catching up to do, so. Pondchickens by 3 "we want the ball and we really are gonna score this time" Pokes by 9 Ponies by 11 Pats by 17 only 6 turnovers seattle +2
posted by r8rh8r27 at 12:49 PM on January 11
It's the drowning that scares me My girlfriend is 30 and has never set foot in any "dark" water. No ponds, lakes, or especially the ocean. Why? Sharks. Scared of sharks in ankle-deep water. She went to school on a swimming scholarship, and is scared of the ocean. Me: "look hun, sharks don't live in Lake Tahoe, it is fresh water" Her: "yeah, that's what they want you to believe" women?!? BTW, that link is friggin fantastic.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 12:42 PM on January 11
An eight-team college football playoff would become one of the most-watched and most-loved spectacles in sports. Such a system would invariably propel, a two-loss team ... to the national championship in college football. And we would find ourselves here, again, arguing about the seeding system, home-field advantage, or the #9 team that 'got screwed'. Also, I would like to point out we already have an 8 team battle royal to decide the national championship, sorta. It's called: The SEC Regular Season.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 11:38 AM on January 08
Yards instead of YAC- I'll stay with Galloway, 9 rec for 124 yards yardage: Chris Cooley with 117 Me likey; risky, homerish, and completely unreasonable
posted by r8rh8r27 at 11:10 AM on January 04
PondChickens by 5 G-men by 3 Jags by 9 Bolts by 17 YAC=89 in a losing effort for Joey Galloway
posted by r8rh8r27 at 02:44 PM on December 31
Ten years from now I will have two memories of the Pats for their "perfect" season. The first will be all the money I won as Vegas couldn't get a handle on the over/under or the point spread for the first 10 weeks! The second will come from one of the few games I watched of the Pats: vs. the Bills on a Monday night, up by more than the National Debt, and I see Tom, Randy, and the O.C. on the sidelines going over the over-head pre-snap photos. Even when the game was completely out of reach for the Bills, those three were cooking up touchdowns in a 4th quarter meeting. It was like the score didn't count. Perfect execution of the next play was/is all that matters to them.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 09:33 AM on December 31
(no women need apply, of course) The US National Team won it in '99 after winning the World Cup. Before that, Bonnie Blair, but she had to split it with Koss. Maybe they figured that giving it to two women was the same as one guy? There are a few other females, but generally ypu are right. Women must to do something spectacular on AND off the field (and it helps if they are smoking hot with a propensity to de-robe in public) to get this kind of attention. Looking back at other winners this isn't the worse choice ever. No, that goes to Don "9 and 7" Shula who won it in 1993. He was an awful player, unloved as a coach, and far from a "sportsman" using any conventional definition of the word. His move to Miami was so tainted it would make Nick Saban blush. The annual "celebration" each year of the last undefeated team to go is pathetic. If Unitas wasn't in the game calling all the plays, Shula's "big-game" record would be even more abysmal than it is now, which by the way is the worst ever. Don Shula invented the art of giving away a playoff game with a better team. After retirement was forced upon him he took self-promotion to unimagined new heights. His greatest gift to the communities that made him rich and famous: The Don Shula Steakhouse.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 02:52 PM on December 27
Seems all other winners (you posted) in the past have been U.S. based sports. I just posted the most recent. Non-American winners have included: Roger Bannister who won it first, Ingermar Johnasson, Bobby Orr, Jackie Stewart, Wayne Gretzky, Kip Keino, and Johan Olav Koss. So giving the award to an Italian wouldn't be a big departure. However, giving the award to someone who hasn't won anything or participated in some grand charitable gesture is a departure from the standard of the award. some feathers might be ruffled with your pick. And here lies the crux of the argument. Brett was a "safe" pick. It would sell some copy. Get a few "debates" on ESPN, and generally keep the masses happy. That is why Brett won. It had absolutely nothing to do with his "sportsmanship" (or lack thereof) or his "recent achievements" (which do not really exists).
posted by r8rh8r27 at 10:36 AM on December 27
who would your pick Fabio Cannavaro won a World Cup Title and a Spanish Championship. SI.com says this award is, "the athlete or team whose performance that year most embodies the spirit of sportsmanship and achievement". The last four winners of the award were: Tim Duncan-NBA MVP, playoff MVP, champion Boston Red Sox-World Series Champions Tom Brady-two time Super Bowl MVP Dwayne Wade-NBA Champ, Finals MVP So the criteria stated really isn't mine, it's SI's criteria, which they apparently didn't follow. Brett's "achievement" mentioned is, "NFL touchdown leader" which is a lifetime accomplishment, not a yearly one. Also, it should be mentioned that this record will soon be shattered, and I truly hope that when it is, it is broken in the same UN-sportsman fashion that Brett allowed when Strahan broke the sack record.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 09:39 AM on December 27
I think the "Sportsman of the Year" should have won something, anything; a division title, MVP, Conference Championship...etc, at some point in the last decade. How many trophies has Brett and the Pack put in the cupboard lately, besides this meaningless one of course? None? Well then... This just seems like a "we think Brett is a 'cool' guy so we are going to give him an award based on how many school girls giggle because he looks cute throwing 4 picks before half-time" award.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 09:09 AM on December 27
I do not agree with his firing. Fulham were the better team in the first half of every match. I heard an announcer a few weeks ago say if you only counted the first half Fulham would be in second place in the league. I understand that there are two halves, but I think the trend is reflective of the players, not the manager. Every week Fulham come out with a plan, formation, and squad to win. They usually execute that plan and put the other team on the back foot with early goals. Fulham doesn't have a Premiership keeper. They don't have much money for transfers--the 8 million Sanchez did get last summer was well spent--and they haven't had their captain (who they depend upon to defend set pieces) all season. Fulham's best (only) chance to avoid relegation was with Sanchez. They are going down now, and Dempsey will be looking for a move out of West London.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 03:34 PM on December 21
confound your predictions. I predict the winner of Inter v Liverbirds will win it all. I feel confidant in this prediction yet I have no clue who will win the tie. I also predict The Arsenal will dismantle AC Milan, Milan will miss out on a C.L. spot for next season, and wholesale changes will ensue starting with the appointment of Sir Special One. This will cause AC to go 965 staright games without a loss, lead to new hights of bitterness and hatred on my part, and possiable sucide. p.s. Just in case I am wrong on the AC Milan bit; I would like to send word to Kaka that Jesus isn't a football fan, and if he were he wouldn't be rooting for MElan.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 03:02 PM on December 21
talking the basic $29.99 pkg Holy cow! Who has a $30 cable bill? Those thing went extinct about 8 years ago didn't they? As a sports fan life gets easier when you just bite the bullet and pay the premiums to watch the games that interest you. You can't really be a "die-hard" fan AND figure the $12 GOLtv, FSC, NFLN, ESPNU is too much to bare. "Die-hard" NFL fans are still getting off cheap. 4 or 5 games a week on basic cable for free, add the 4 weekly replays and the Thursday night games for pennies a day, plus ESPN programming. If that still isn't enough you can get the Sunday ticket for the price of a nose-bleed seat in Mile High and watch every game played. We futball fans don't even have use for most cable providers. We must have satellite to watch ($65 basic HD), pay for a "premium" sports package ($25), and we still need Setanta (14 clams for one channel) to be able to watch the Pool stomp the shite out of ManU this weekend.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 02:42 PM on December 12
Well at least we have proof that all of Droog's diving really is a result of a sniper in the stands. When he fell over in the 12th, 36th, 49th, 55th, and 81st minute for absolutely no apparent reason whatsoever, it must have been the light in his eyes.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 08:43 AM on December 04
I'm rooting for ya WC'02. May your (*)(*) find their way right below me.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 02:31 PM on November 30
Mourinho has come out and said it: Come and get me Oh Please please please baby jesus, please make Jose the next manager. xoxo, r8rh8r
posted by r8rh8r27 at 02:38 PM on November 28
anbody.. who doesn't think a playoff system is not only warranted, but overdue: SHORTSIGHTED. Dumb statement. In fact, the opposite is true. A playoff system would change college football into what college basketball has become: a one month a year sport. We want the system set up for the long haul, decades are our concern, not year to year manipulations of the system to insure maximum profits for ESPN, CBS, and ABC. The loss by Michigan at home in week one would be meaningless in a playoff system. OSU v UM in November would have no impact on the league whatsoever. A team could effectively lose 3, 4, 5 games in a season and still become Nat'l Champs. The only purpose of the regular season would be to amass just enough wins to make the playoffs. Scheduling cupcakes is already a problem, imagine what it would be like if coaches are only looking for enough quality opponents to get them to the #16 spot in the polls. People like myself (and I think I can include Holden) who do not want a playoff system are just trying to preserve the traditions of college football because we love it. The greatest thing about Div 1 football is the absolute value of winning on Saturday. Not some Saturdays. Not just Saturdays when the College Game Day crew is in town, or when you are playing the cross-State rivals; but every single Saturday. If you do that, it doesn't matter if you are Missouri, Michigan, or Mop Bucket University, you will get to a big-bouy bowl game, against big-bouy opposition, and have your shot at the title. This season is a great example of the beauty of the system. Lil ole Missouri gets one game to go out and show the world they are giant killers. 60 minutes to change their lives. Some here say they couldn't beat UF, OSU, or LSU in a single game, that may or may not be, we shall soon find out. But does anyone really think that Missouri could win a playoff series facing these three opponents on consecutive weeks? **No Way** Of course every so often the system in place produces controversy. Some tean and some group of fans feel at the end of the 200X season so-and-so was better than whatchamacallit. That is OK. Remember this is armature sport. Imagine a world without the Auburn T-shirts with a scrambled TV screen saying, "The championship no one saw", or if the animosity between LSU and USC over their split no longer existed. Our world would be lesser because of it. The only change I would be willing to accept is a "plus 1" game, for charity, on the rare occasion that a clear #1 and #2 --both undefeated-- don't get to settle the season on the field.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 10:31 AM on November 28
First black outfield footballer. First black officer. and, "Italy in 1917 he was commended for ‘gallantry and coolness’ at the battle of Piave." Dude's like a real life Denzel Washington character.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 02:29 PM on November 20
UK Sports Minister wants... I guess I should disclose that I am against any proposal made by any politician affecting sports. I realize this is a blanket statement and someone will soon point out an obvious exception to my rule, but I don't care. Politicians should stick to politics and let teams decide who to start at right back. p.s. Go Scotland!
posted by r8rh8r27 at 03:22 PM on November 16
My apologies. If I'm gonna rant, I should google before hand. I was just going off memory for Utd's lineup (I still didn't believe you about the draw and had to look it up...dementia setting in..?). Anywho. Of the 11 players on the pitch, 4 were English (carrick was sub-ed for hargraves) and Ferguson wants to impose a mandate? He can go right ahead if so inclined. He is the manager, he can play 11 Englishmen if wants for every game. Chances are he would soon find himself ranked among the clubs that do play a lot of Englishmen, like Sunderland, West Ham, and Middlesbrough. Those teams don't win much hardware. Gerrard's opinion is even more ridiculous. He is essentially buying the argument that making the EPL the best league in the world (by pursuing the best players from around the world) hurts English football.--Laughable and self retorting, right?--His club is Spain North. Crouch sits on his bench and rots while American owners drive a Brinks truck from Catalonia to Andalusia. The other solid English international, Carragher, quit on his teammates and Country for club football and was never criticized by Gerrard. I wonder what Gerrard thinks is more important for English football; having an actual center half to replace the injured Captain, or forcing Man.City and Arsenal to add one more Englishman to their 23 man squad?
posted by r8rh8r27 at 03:04 PM on November 16
Martin Samuel explains the real problem with English football here In short, "This country does not produce footballers. It produces right backs, central midfield players, centre halves. It has got to the stage where England’s players are not just married to one position, they are married to one way of operating in that position, and to specific teammates around them. Even more incredibly, we indulge this." It's an excellent article AND there is a magnificent picture of Angelina cleavage for good measure.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 11:23 AM on November 16
I agree with both of you - it's a diversion to keep the heat off McClaren. Agreed. McClaren and the FA are preparing for the riots that will start when England fail to qualify, and they will fail to qualify. Russia will beat Isreal, or England will lose to Croatia, or both. The FA needs an excuse handy for that occasion. The Three Lions got beat by Macedonia at home in a game that mattered. The FA would have us believe it's because the players aren't good enough, and not because they hired another incompetent nincompoop with neither the imagination nor stones required to manage a National Team. Robinson, Beckham, and Lampard get to wear the shirt regardless of their own performance or the performance of players below them challenging for a spot. The manager and squad are not picked on merit or ability and haven't been for a long time. The FA wants the same for EPL teams. "Not English enough" is just a prop used by the powers in English football to excuse the hiring of a bad English manager. Also, Alex Ferguson and Gerrard can go jump of a fucking bridge. What a bunch of hypocrites! If either of their teams were required to follow the rules they pretend to promote, both would be mid-table. Utd beat Blackburn 2-0 in their last match. Ferguson used a total of 3 British players. Liverpool beat Fulham 2-0 that weekend with the same number of British players. Society, whether you are in America, England, or India has a bad habit of blaming their ills on "those foreigners". No jobs?==foreigners Devalued currency?==foreigners High cost of living?==foreigners Skyrocketing real estate?==foreigners Crap football with 70 year old tactics?==foreigners
posted by r8rh8r27 at 10:30 AM on November 16
sails over heads..... LoL I don't watch hockey, and have no idea who Gaborik is, however I love me some sarcasm. Gaborik's statement is so good I just might watch my first Minnesota game. "But I am afraid management is obsessed with giving Minnesota fans a Stanley Cup." F-n classic!
posted by r8rh8r27 at 09:56 AM on November 16
Top four. Whew! I can die in peace now. I actually had nightmares a few months ago after falling below rcade in the relegation zone. Imagine my misery. For someone who pretends to know a little bit about footie, the league table was causing some serious introspection. Checking on my team on Monday mornings was like opening the S.O.'s credit card statement from December.--Slowly and with fleeting glances so as to warm myself up for the shock and throbbing blood vessels to follow-- Glad that's over. Now I can go back to my normal boistrious self. ahem *I Wrok*
posted by r8rh8r27 at 10:27 AM on November 14
If you read my recap above... I did, however I somehow missed, "fight between Lazio & Juve fans". I just assumed that if Lazio fans were beating the shite out of someone on match day at a planned (and I'm sure the scruff was organized) showdown it would have been Inter supporters. I guess it is a 'first come, first served' policy with regards to football violence. If the cop had accidentally shot a driver on the 6 lanes of traffic that separated the two Autogrills, I'd give even odds that footie wouldn't have been invoked by the media. The 'media' shouldn't mention footie fans in that scenario. The cop didn't shoot a passer-by, he shot a football supporter, on his way to a match, where he magically met up with opposing fans and caused a ruck. And I beg to differ that by following a club one must support the whole kit n' kaboodle, such as dumb political undercurrents. This is a cop-out, and a poor one. I will gladly bow to your assertion that not all Lazio supporters are violent neo-nazi scumbags, and conceed it is only most. If you agree that the Italian supporters at away matches are comprised almost entirely of Ultras organised at the club level. ..our feeling is that this kind of result is going to somehow prevent violence at future matches? Um, no.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 02:35 PM on November 13
I doubt that the Highway restaurant clash was a matter of coincidence. The irriducibili are generally a bunch of right-wing fascist fucktards with pocket-sized pictures of Mussolini in their wallets. Remember Paolo di Canio's 'Roman salute'? A planned pre-match ambush at the local Inter Milan hangout would be the norm, not the exception. This is as much a political battle as a sporting one. As long as Italian teams support their Ultras with money, tickets, and political power, the violence will continue. Ultras often control the grounds of their team. They decide who gets in, who gets beat down, and even which players are bought/sold/benched. I don't blame Italian police for brutality on these knuckledraggers at all. It sucks that someone got shot in needless violence, but a nickle to a donut says the departed was far from an innocent bystander. He was at that restaurant on his own accord. He was there to fight, injure, or harass Inter supporters. The club he supports is well known for its' neo-fascist ideology and political captains; the rival, left-leaning Inter opponents are often a target of their wrath.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 10:57 AM on November 13
you can see he is 100% committed to the cause. We must have different causes in mind. The Becks I have seen since arriving doesn't seem interested in the MLS, the LA Galaxy, or improving American soccer in general. The only times he played in consecutive matches for 90 minutes is before and after the England v Germany match. He had to play in those two games here. If he didn't, how could anyone justify his place on the England squad? He and Madrid hid the severity of his injury before he came. Once here he played in a meaningless friendly v Chelsey and got hurt for the sake of publicity. His appearances for the Galaxy were determined by the schedule of ESPN, not Galaxy trainers. And when the Galaxy needed him in the run to the playoffs, he was absent. Becks wants his 100th CAP. If he needs to shuttle out for a charity game, or pub match, to get on the squad, he will do it. If it means better players, like David Bentley, are kept off the squad, he is fine with that too. Whatever it takes to get to 100. As far as I can tell, the only "cause" Beckham is interested in is his "Q" score.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 03:36 PM on November 06
I think Mac is trying to get fired. There must be a buy-out clause in his contract that says he gets "X" million pounds if sacked before European qualifiers are complete. England would be better off if the SpoFi Fantasy Champion picked the team *points to self* :^)
posted by r8rh8r27 at 02:54 PM on November 05
But if you can prove that being a parent isn't one of the most profound experiences a human can engage in, I shall stand corrected. I don't really care to. A "profound experience" is something to be measured in the eye of the beholder. Wouldn't you agree? One person's "profound experience" can easily be another person's life-wrecking havoc. See: http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1005/p15s01-lifp.html http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/02/26/news/babies.php ..and so as not to be completely melancholy: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1355/is_22_107/ai_n15621971 Fatherhood was a profound experience for you. Great. Congratulations, really. For some people, as evidenced above, not so much. And there are plenty of people like me who haven't the slightest interest is raising children. We see far too many bad parents; parents that abuse, abandon, neglect, or spoil rotten their offspring, to believe there is some universally mesmerizing conscience awakening that follows a common biological ability granted to every animal on Earth.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 02:37 PM on November 02
Who said I was offended? ..... There are a number of offensive words/phrases here... Which is it? Are you easily offended or not. I can't tell. I reference another Lucas character because of your handle. Simple enough, eh? In response I am called, "a malfunctioning gob of grease" which of course receives applause from the Peanut Gallery. Now, aside from the fact that your "toss back" made little sense in relation to 'raiderhater27', it seemed to suggest you did not appreciate the reference I made. Try to see both sides of an issue before you start to rip a large portion of society. posted by THX-1138 I think they [coaches] are that way because they are dicks. posted by THX-1138 How about following your own advice... ...and I can't call you self-absorbed and self-serving. You are free to call me anything you wish. However, if you are going to call me "self-absorbed" AND make statements like, "being a parent, which is one of the most profound undertakings a human can engage in. It is outside your realm of experience.", expect to be called the same.
posted by r8rh8r27 at 12:24 PM on November 02
Copyright © 2014 SportsFilterAll posts and comments are © their original authors.