Mayweather vs. McGregor, Aug. 26

He had a little uppercut early but he doesn't know how to throw a boxing power punch because as soon as the glove hit Mayweather's face he snapped his hand back whereas a real trained boxer knows that you uppercut to try to either put the chin through his temple as Mike Tyson so eloquently described or at least with the intention of lifting him off his feet by his chin.

And that was the closest thing he had to power punch. MMA guys tend to throw snapping punches using the strength from their hands and forearms. They don't train in using your legs and full core to maximize a punch and try to punch through the target.

Floyd's straight rights are amazing to watch. He tries to punch through guys with that shot whether he's going to the head or the body. It's the most perfectly executed I've seen. Every time McGregor got hit with that in the body he would take three steps back. He is the biggest asshole on earth at times but that's a fucking great punch.

 

So, he didn't technically win. I think he can still claim victory.

What do you think @Stoney and @doctorquant?

 

To be fair, they're used to a guy getting hit with a couple forearms to the head when he's obviously unconscious before a ref stops a fight.

 

What? Which Super Bowl are you talking about?

 

The ref caught hell for the stoppage? Everyone I talked to who watched it said it was a good call to stop it.

 

I still hear this from people every year. The notion that the Super Bowl is a shitty game is ingrained at this point, even though it hasn't been the case for many years. They'll say it again next year.

 

It was a great stoppage. Only people that didn't think it was a good stoppage were those who have only seen boxing matches feature Stallone, Mr. T, Carl Weathers or Dolph Lundgren.

How many unanswered right hands does a man need to take? He was at about 18.

 

In the past 15 years there have been two blowouts, one or two pretty lackluster games and about half dozen classics. Going through those games in the 70s, 80s and 90s were tough but they've finally gotten that game right.

 

Bad choice of words on my part. A better take would be that many of those who party during the Super Bowl are not regular NFL fans

 

I remember when everybody was fired up about Super Bowl XXX (Cowboys 27, Steelers 17) because it was a competitive game deep into the fourth quarter. And then when the Broncos upset the Packers two years later to end the NFC's 13-year winning streak (almost all of them blowouts) it was the most awesome thing ever.
Football fans from 1997 would crap their pants if they could see how great the Super Bowl has been over the past 20 years.
As you noted, there have only been three blowouts in the past 20 years. Half of them have had the winning points scored in the last 2 or 3 minutes, and four others weren't settled until late in the fourth quarter. If you were to compile an objective Top 10 list of greatest Super Bowls, only three of the first 31 seriously merit discussion.
It's amazing how difficult a time the NFL has had shaking the reputation it built up over the first 30 years of the Super Bowl era, when the second half of that stretch has been so memorable.

 

I remember working with someone who told me she and her friends watched for the commercials. I was amazed but I have since learned that a lot of people do that. Maybe there's an opportunities for commercialwatchers dot com.

 

My second ex-wife had zero interest in football or any sports for that matter. Yet every year she would try to get invited to the best (black) Super Bowl parties at a private residence or an upscale club here in L.A. Big prizefights were the same, as was Christmas, Halloween and New Years. She was into "see and be seen".