The NFL Play-offs

[VicVegas 70]

Now that I have seen all the highlights I gotta say Billy Cundiff choked the game away for the Ravens. That was a chipshot field goal and he should have made it and sent that game to OT.

 

Eli Manning was a man, taking much abuse from the 49er defense and getting up every time. He is a money player in big games.

 

Giants are on a roll, but so are the Pats. Tough call . . .

[MM 6,562]

Now that I have seen all the highlights I gotta say

Billy Cundiff choked the game away for the Ravens

. That was a chipshot field goal and he should have made it and sent that game to OT.

 

Eli Manning was a man, taking much abuse from the 49er defense and getting up every time. He is a money player in big games.

 

Giants are on a roll, but so are the Pats. Tough call . . .

 

And Kyle Williams will be remembered as the 49er who gave away the game. 10 of the 20 points scored by NY were because of turnovers attributable to him,

 

If you wanted to fix a game, this would have been the "go to" guy...he did it all by himself.

[joekicker 53]

Hmmm weird, what channel did you guys have on? I saw two excellent games that came right down the wire in both cases, absolutely no way to tell who was going to win either one right to the last minute - literally. Every game, a couple of guys star and a couple of guys make mistakes or worse - that's why they actually play the game instead of having computers duke it out on stats tables.

 

The Ravens would not have been in the playoffs without Cundiff, who also missed some kicks in the regular season but overall is an excellent kicker. Williams was a standout on special teams, without him the 49ers would have been worse than they were. That's what sports is all about ferpetesake is who steps up and who doesn't - in every game of the year, not just the last one.

 

.

[MM 6,562]

Hmmm weird, what channel did you guys have on? I saw two excellent games that came right down the wire in both cases, absolutely no way to tell who was going to win either one right to the last minute - literally. Every game, a couple of guys star and a couple of guys make mistakes or worse - that's why they actually play the game instead of having computers duke it out on stats tables.

 

The Ravens would not have been in the playoffs without Cundiff, who also missed some kicks in the regular season but overall is an excellent kicker. Williams was a standout on special teams, without him the 49ers would have been worse than they were. That's what sports is all about ferpetesake is who steps up and who doesn't - in every game of the year, not just the last one.

 

.

 

I was talking about the last game played, not the season. He (Williams) had 2 major game-changing errors on punt returns.

 

I wonder what the score would have been if Alex Smith could have converted on 3rd down.

 

Both losing teams had single players that affected the outcome in obvious ways. I think they will get a lot of roasting from their fans. It's what we do.

[joekicker 53]

Both losing teams had single players that affected the outcome in obvious ways. I think they will get a lot of roasting from their fans. It's what we do.

 

Yeah no args, and I was talking about - what games aren't affected by single players?? Ever? Both sides of the ball. Speaking of Williams - the Giants don't have Jacquian Williams, they don't get the fumbles, they lose the game, handily. Your logic, the only conclusion is that every game -- and every signing of every player really -- is an invitation to game-fixing. After all, using your logic, all Jacquian Williams would have had to to is hold back just a little bit when he had those two strips on Kyle -- even hold back on one of them -- and the 49ers win, Jacquian is a rich guy with the bribe money. But he didn't. But maybe Kyle, now, maybe *he* walked into those strips and is going to take the secret of game-fixing to the grave.

 

This whole season Jacquian Williams had 78 tackles and a sack - and nothing else, nada - up until Monday not a single FF, not one forced fumble or a sack. He stepped up, that's the point of sports. Why else watch? Agony of defeat and all? Getting on your slippery slope, the 49ers waited and waited and laid back to led Jacquian strip Kyle? Why not? If Kyle *COULD* have fixed the game there, why not every 49er fixing it and letting the very ordinary Jacquian Williams fix it -- a guy who had NEVER impacted a game much, ever?

 

Hey BOTH teams I picked lost and the bookies made out like bandits. Why not the whole NFL in on game-fixing, financed by the books? That's the problem with slippery slopes -- or the beauty of them, depending on yoru view of course.

 

I just thought that they were two nail-biting games that went right, literally right to their ends, and that some guys stepped up, some guys didn't. Never crossed my mind they were throwing the games. Vic mentioned the same thing for the previous weekend, that the Patriots might all decide en masse to throw the game to Denver. I'm pretty naive, am I, thinking guys just go out and play the game?

 

.

[MM 6,562]

I only threw in the game fixing thing to get you wound up again, joe. And, like Vic, I made the comment in the form of a conditional...you know, starting with an "if".

 

No one else that I can see takes a statement like "If you wanted to fix a game" seriously enough to want to argue the point. I certainly don't and will concede all your reasons why it could not happen.

 

Just browsing through the local 49er media discussions, and oddly enough, they are somewhat critical of Williams...of course, the more level-headed are saying it's just one of those things, but there is a lot of disappointment, anger, and even twitter death threats.

 

I mean, really. 2 muffed punt returns that leave the punting team in scoring position...and they do score...both flubbed by the same guy.. It's going to be talked about. Luckily for Alex Smith, it probably dwarfs his abysmal completion percentage during the game.

 

Oh well, next season...

 

I pick the Giants over the Patriots.

[brotherbuzz 3,206]

If you want to talk about the picks we made before the play-offs began, then I was 1-1 (Pats/Packers) and you were 0-2 (49ers/Ravens).

Oh dear, as I only ever stated the SB teams, why would I talk about anything else...... We were either right or wrong Vic.

 

Now, if you wanna pat yourself on the back for needing to change your picks because you were wrong before I was, knock yourself out.

[joekicker 53]

And lets not forget my Denver picks. I was 1-1, so it's a wash

 

Bookies love people like you.

 

.

[The Mook 105]

I couldn't be more proud of my guy's efforts. Win or lose in the big game I very happy to be a fan of this fine franchise...

 

Edited January 23, 2012 by The Mook

[VicVegas 70]

I lean towards cutting the Williams kid more slack than Cundiff. He was filling in as returner for Ted Guinn, who was injured, and he didn't have much experience in such high pressure situations. Of course that doesn't change the fact that he cost the 49ers the game.

 

Cundiff, on the other hand, is a veteran and former pro-bowler. Like he said after the game, he has made that exact same field goal a 1000 times, but in the AFC Championship game with the seconds ticking down and an easy field goal standing between his team and OT, he simply choked. It wasn't quite a Scott Norwood or Jackie Smith choke, but it was close.

 

 

Vic mentioned the same thing for the previous weekend, that the Patriots might all decide en masse to throw the game to Denver.

 

No, Vic did not mention that. Vic mentioned this:

 

If ever there was a game tailor made for a fix, this is it.

 

Joe, do you understand the word "hypothetical"? MM and I are just speculating. Neither one of us accused anyone of fixing a game. We're just saying these two situations might lend themselves to a fix.

 

You'd love to have someone lay out a game fixing plan so you could fill up several more posts in which you nit-pick it apart and claim that it could absolutely never, ever happen, in that pedantic/obsessive way you have. Guess what Joe - games have been fixed in the past. People have done it. It can be done. Your opinion on the likelihood of a fix is probably just as credible as your opinions about Andrew Luck being a loser and that the Super Bowl cannot not possibly ever get any bigger than it already is - in other words, you are not credible.

 

 

Oh dear, as I only ever stated the SB teams, why would I talk about anything else...... We were either right or wrong Vic.

 

Now, if you wanna pat yourself on the back for needing to change your picks because you were wrong before I was, knock yourself out.

 

Great, then let's just restrict it to our original Super Bowl Pick, which means I was 1-1 and you were 0-2. Not patting myself on the back (do you honestly think a .500 record is an ego boost? ), but after some of the drivel that has been posted here by two particular BMs (whom I shall not name at this time), I just wanted to point to a tangible fact-based indicator of who really knows what they're talking about concerning the NFL.

 

 

Right now I'm hesitantly leaning towards the Giants.

[joekicker 53]

Right now I'm hesitantly leaning towards the Giants.

 

Finally!! A hard-core prediction from a person who really knows what they're talking about concerning the NFL.

 

.

[brotherbuzz 3,206]

Great, then let's just restrict it to our original Super Bowl Pick, which means I was 1-1 and you were 0-2.

It's a pick Vic, for a single game and as singular as you typed it, and you were wrong with your pick. Funny watching you try to be better Don't see me trying to make hay that at least both teams in my pick made it to the conference championship......

 

I just wanted to point to a tangible fact-based indicator of who really knows what they're talking about concerning the NFL.

Lol. Why not point to the fact-based indicating last paragraph of your post #67, your original NFC title prediction, before you failed miserably. Yeah, you're quite the prognosticator, indeed.....

 

G'head Vic, compare your 'really knew what you were talking about' with any prediction I've made here.

Edited January 26, 2012 by brotherbuzz

[VicVegas 70]

It's a pick Vic, for a single game and as singular as you typed it, and you were wrong with your pick.

 

The question was, "Who is going to play in the Super Bowl?". I said the Pats and the Packers. I got one of the teams right. It says a lot about your personality that you refuse to give me credit for that.

[brotherbuzz 3,206]

The question was, "Who is going to play in the Super Bowl?". I said the Pats and the Packers. I got one of the teams right. It says a lot about your personality that you refuse to give me credit for that.

Lol. You're left with non-existent quotes now. Rather childish that you so desperately seek affirmation that you'd falsely quote something to obtain it. You can dance, oh so badly, for as long as you want but it won't change the fact that you refuse to accept your faults. Says everything about your personality.

 

BTW, this was in your OP though:

 

I'll be boring and pick a Packers/Patriots Super Bowl.

 

Take that to a book and see if they give you any credit....

[The Mook 105]

Sans spread, guys...who do you like this Sunday?

[VicVegas 70]

Lol. You're left with non-existent quotes now. Rather childish that you so desperately seek affirmation that you'd falsely quote something to obtain it. You can dance, oh so badly, for as long as you want but it won't change the fact that you refuse to accept your faults. Says everything about your personality.

 

BTW, this was in your OP though:

 

Take that to a book and see if they give you any credit....

 

This thread isn't a sports book. I didn't insert any money into my DVD drive. Nobody gave me a ticket. When I posted "Pats/Packers" MM didn't break in and say I had to get both teams right to win my bet.

 

We're just guys talking about football, but you are so warped in your determination to make me look bad that you twist and bend every statement I make to fit your imaginary arguments, from your original objection to my use of the phrase "lost their way into the play-offs" to this.

 

As for admitting my faults, I can and do. I admitted I was wrong about the Broncos/Steelers game and gave Tebow credit for playing well. Sound the "Incorrect" buzzer for Buzz. He's wrong again.

 

I was right about one of the teams that made it to the Super Bowl, Buzz, and no amount of twisting or bending of words by you can change that.

 

So sad that your self esteem seems to be tied to attacking me. Maybe you should get a hobby, . . . join a club, . . . I hear stamp collecting can be rewarding for people who have trouble with social skills.

 

Maybe you should just turn off your computer until you learn how to handle the world of internet message boards, which don't strictly conform to "The Rules Of Buzz".

 

 

Sans spread, guys...who do you like this Sunday?

 

Thanks, The Mook, for trying to get this thread back onto the Super Bowl.

 

I don't know what the spread is, but I like the Giants.

Edited February 1, 2012 by VicVegas

[brotherbuzz 3,206]

This thread isn't a sports book.

Get over it, move on and stop stalking me Vic. :dhorse :dhorse :dhorse :dhorse :dhorse :dhorse :dhorse :dhorse :dhorse :dhorse :dhorse :dhorse :dhorse :dhorse :dhorse :dhorse :dhorse :dhorse :dhorse :dhorse

[joekicker 53]

I don't know what the spread is, but I like the Giants.

 

New England by about three. I say "about" because, first, the books are about evenly split between 2-1/2 and 3-1/2 as I write, and second, there is a LOT of money suddenly coming in on New York for those odds. Looks like it's going to settle right about even on the totes at least.

 

.

[CheshireTom 1,377]

This thread isn't a sports book ... I don't know what the spread is, but I like the Giants.

 

I'll go for a draw.

 

Only joking - Patriots it is, but how does the book work in the US? Are you betting on the outright winner, or at the end of regulation time. I only ask because in UK, you can do either/or on the FA Cup, CL knockout stages etc.

 

If it hasn't been mentioned, the coverage starts at 6:30 a.m. Thai Clock on Astro Supersport 2 and Astro SuperSport HD2.

Edited February 1, 2012 by CheshireTom

[Greg_B 306]

Giants

 

1. Lack of running game (Pats)

2. O-Line issues (Pats)

3. Defense Issues (Pats)

 

 

10 point win (Giants)

Edited February 2, 2012 by Greg_B

[joekicker 53]

Only joking - Patriots it is, but how does the book work in the US? Are you betting on the outright winner, or at the end of regulation time. I only ask because in UK, you can do either/or on the FA Cup, CL knockout stages etc.

 

There are hundreds of possible Super Bowl bets, including the coin flips.

 

But when people say "the book" they mean the final score and the actual winner. "I bet the Patriots". Bear in mind that the actual books including Las Vegas always use a half point, so that there are no pushed bets. Every bet made with a sports book either wins or loses so long as the game is completed. There are no ties in Super Bowl, the game is played to a final result. (If a typhoon hits the stadium all bets are returned.)

 

So. Let's say for argument the Patriots are favored by the bookies by 2.5 points at the time you bet. That is the EVEN bet, returning you $2 for $1 bet -- is that the final score will be a Patriots' win by 2.5 points or more. It's a very simple, even-money bet.

 

Since there are no actual half-points in gridiron football, it works like this on that bet on the Patriots by 2.5 points.

 

If you bet $1 that the Patriots win, then:

- If the Patriots win by 3 points or more, you get your $1 back plus $1 winnings.

- If the Patriots win by one point or two points OR if the Giants win by any score at all, you lose your bet, the bookie keeps your $1.

 

It is very simple betting but this is what Americans mean when they say "what are the odds" on any sports bet. There are many other bets, some of them horrifically involved, and each of them with unique rules and odds. The second most popular after the winner, is an under-over bet on the TOTAL points scored in the game, which last I looked was set by the bookies at 55.5 for this Super Bowl. Again, not complicated - either the two teams score 56 or more points, or 55 or fewer points total. And again you simply double your money if you win; otherwise you lose your bet.

 

While bookies set original odds for these things, almost all books use a computerised tote system, where the sucker... er, the gamblers themselves are actually setting the odds and the books can't really lose on almost any bets. The chances of actually beating a real book in the U.S. is indistinguishable from zero - but of course any individual bettor can do well for himself if he thinks out what he is doing AND gets some luck to go with it. He's not beating the book, he's beating dumber fellow gamblers.

 

 

Super Bowl gambling is like New Year's Eve drinking - amateur hour. "Real" bets on US sports are going to be odds, but again it's fairly simple stuff. TeamA is favoured by 6-5 over TeamB, for example - so you risk $6 to win $11 (your bet plus $5 winnings) if you bet TeamA, and vice-versa for TeamB. One of my favourite all-time odds, where I made a tidy little needed sum was 8-to-1. Those were the odds that Sonny Liston would beat up Cassius Clay. The reason I took that bet and won $8 for every $1 I risked, was that I figured that one pro boxer against one pro boxer can't EVER be that long odds.

 

Nice to be right once in a while and have something to brag about, heh. But I really hate betting on humans. Animals and things are much more predictable. I've won 100 times more at the track than on team-sports bets, that's for sure. North American track odds are simple, like my TeamA-TeamB example - a horse is 3-to-1 say - so you bet $2 and if the horse wins you get a total of $8 back.

 

Caution: Horse racing in Thailand *is* betting on the humans involved. Form and training mean nothing. Best possible advice about betting on Thai ponies: Don't.

 

.

Edited February 1, 2012 by joekicker

[VicVegas 70]

Tebow-mania sweeps into Indy.

 

http://sports.yahoo....per-bowl-020212

 

Thank godness our Tebow expert, Buzz, made this statement earlier in this thread, so we know this article must be a fabrication:

 

"Tebow is a tiny blip on the screen compared to Green Bay's popularity. Like I said, you've got Tebow so far up your ass you can't see straight. Step away from your emotions and look at it logically and then try to convince yourself he's incredibly popular throughout the country. Fact is Vic he's not the water-cooler item you've built him up in your mind to be."

 

A few choice quotes from the article, which obviously can't be true:

 

"Five feet away sat the center of attention, the quarterback who caused crowds to push up against barriers and crane their necks and hold their camera phones high and disregard Montana and the rest of the celebrities in this third-floor hotel ballroom."

 

"Tebow needed two cops, an entourage of handlers and press agents and the focus that lets him barrel through a secondary just to get from one interview to the next. Everyone wanted a picture, an autograph a quick moment of his time.

 

The cult of personality surrounding the man who became the story of the season as he led the Denver Broncos to repeated late-game victories shows no sign of slowing down."

 

"As Tebow made the rounds, so too did everyone from Rodney Harrison to Curt Schilling to Papa John. It’s always a wild time.

And yet there was nothing like the reaction to Tebow."

 

Just a blip compared to Green Bay's popularity? The entire Packers team walking thru press row in uniform wouldn't have gotten half the response "Tebowner" did.

 

Again my position on His Tebowness: Grossly over-rated and over-hyped, A walking advertisement for Christianity in an "aw-shucks" athletes body. I don't like him, but there's no denying his popularity among the ignorant massess.

[joekicker 53]

we know this article must be a fabrication:

 

No kidding. It says, for example: Tebow "led the Denver Broncos to repeated late-game victories." You've already exposed that lie many times. Proves you can't believe anything in that article, eh?

 

Is Tebow still in the NFL Play-offs, the reputedly alleged so-called subject of this totally trashed thread?

 

Again my position on His Tebowness: Grossly over-rated and over-hyped, A walking advertisement for Christianity in an "aw-shucks" athletes body. I don't like him, but there's no denying his popularity among the ignorant massess.

 

Sigh. And once again, absolutely gratuitously, you have to be the only one to mention religion. Aetheism really is the most crazed, warped and missionary religion ever.

 

.

Edited February 3, 2012 by joekicker

[MM 6,562]

Sigh. And once again, absolutely gratuitously, you have to be the only one to mention religion. Aetheism really is the most crazed, warped and missionary religion ever.

 

.

Vic, I see Joe's point. Whether it be a republican candidates or sports figures, you seem to have a special animosity for anyone espousing Jesus loving religious views. I trend to agree, but don't make it a single issue failing, subject to visceral hatred a you seem to do.

[brotherbuzz 3,206]

Thank godness our Tebow expert, Buzz, made this statement earlier in this thread, so we know this article must be a fabrication:

Nah, you're the only self-proclaimed expert, I'm just a guy who actually comprehends that the Green Bay Packers will always have more of a following than Tim Tebow, and for a single game a person can't be 1-1.

 

BTW, how's your search coming for that non-existent quote you never made yet moronically quoted?