1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Running NFL Week XVI thread

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by hockeybeat, Dec 21, 2006.

  1. buckweaver

    buckweaver Active Member

    Already taken two calls today about why the game's not on TV.

    We took five calls on Thursday about that game (including one idiot who asked if it was going to be shown on Fox News instead. ::)).

    Not sure how many times I've said these words since Thanksgiving: "Yes, we understand. Call your cable provider. We've taken a couple calls already today. Please call your cable provider. No, we can't put it on a different channel so you can watch it. That's up to your cable provider. Please call them and talk to them about it."
     
  2. doubledown68

    doubledown68 Active Member

    It never fails to amaze me why people call up the newspaper when something on TV is messed up. I always ask them if they call a plumber when the car breaks down.

    Anybody happen to see that game tonight? Was it as boring as the box score made it sound? I tried to listen on the Chiefs' flagship station, but, oddly, the site was too busy. Wonder why.

    Rich Eisen, Bryant Gumbel, et. al... I say again.... Fuck you. And don't have a Merry Christmas.
     
  3. Flying Headbutt

    Flying Headbutt Moderator Staff Member

    The few plays I saw were boring. I'd have seen more but Bryant Gumbel put me to sleep. He calls football like it's a PGA event in Scottsdale, Arizona, or like a filler interview on the Today Show. If he's very interested in the game, he has me fooled.
     
  4. BYH

    BYH Active Member

    I cannot express how great it is that almost every single game the NFL Network has aired, excepting the Cowboys-Falcons game, has been a turd.

    The NFL: We can do no wrong. Oh yes you can.
     
  5. DyePack

    DyePack New Member

    The one Thanksgiving night was OK.

    But these ftards apparently don't bring any backup material into the booth in case the game does suck.

    Fortunately there's only one broadcast left.
     
  6. slappy4428

    slappy4428 Active Member

    Eisen's been a smarmy fucktard since reaching Ann Arbor... can;t speak to him before then, but know that not much has changed since then...
     
  7. doubledown68

    doubledown68 Active Member

    He works for the NFL Network, and has broadcast two games of the team I root for, making it nigh-impossible for me to watch them. As for his broadcasting style... don't know, don't care.
     
  8. Rosie

    Rosie Active Member

    Because of the money-hungry NFL and its new network, I was forced to the local tavern to watch the game Thursday. Normally, I do not imbibe while watching the Vikings as I am usually doing some mundane chore suited for television watching.

    Thank GOODNESS I was able to indulge in a "barley pop" -- it helped deaden the pain of watching such a sorry excuse for a pro football game. And even though the bar was quite empty, there was still enough chatter to drown out most of the audio.

    I, along with other fans I spoke with before the game, was looking forward to seeing what Jackson could do. But, when he's stuck in the same unimaginative, useless small dink passes and short yardage rushes offense (three first downs? How pathetic is that!) -- it's the coaching. It stinks!

    I'm really getting anxious for spring training to start, anything to make me forget that this season's edition of Minnesota Vikings ever existed. I don't remember the Les Steckel era being this pathetic, and that was the worst season the Vikings ever had in win-losses, 3-13 in 1984.

    As for the NFL Network? I will sit back and patiently wait for them to fall flat on their faces!
    :mad:
     
  9. Herbert Anchovy

    Herbert Anchovy Active Member

    Less Steckel, More Bud.
     
  10. BYH

    BYH Active Member

    Disagree. The sample size is so small that it's apples and oranges. The schedule is what it is. And nine wins in 16 games is mediocre.

    Many 91-win teams have made the World Series. One 9-win team has made the Super Bowl in the 16-game era: The 1979 Rams. Nine wins is barely adequate.
     
  11. doubledown68

    doubledown68 Active Member

    How pathetic is that? The Raiders saw it and probably said "Well, at least we don't suck THAT bad."

    ;)
     
  12. Herbert Anchovy

    Herbert Anchovy Active Member

    The math is the same, and football's schedule is proportionate given its physical rigors. You can argue that a 16-game season is already too long, and to think that the morons in power have toyed around with the idea of an 18-game season. You'd be seeing some deplorably bad football late in the year on par with that Vikings-Packers game the other night. But that's beside the point.

    I can't remember where I read this, it might have been one of Bill James breviaries, but something about the so-called rule of thirds. That if you inspect most baseball playoff teams, you find that what they did in the middle third, games 55-108, are more determinate of the outcome of a team's season than either of the bookend thirds. I think that works with football. More seasons are doomed in October and early November in the NFL than are made by quick starts and strong finishes.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page