throwback week



Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 35
  1. #16
    gap Guest

    Re: View Point of someone who is obviously not a Patriot or Ram fan.

    Quote Originally Posted by psycho9985
    I've said for a long time that Tagliabue needs to go.He can take his socialist salary cap crap with him,because its corrupt.
    tags is just like the people who run the contract I work on. Efficiency and quality be damned when personal issues are involved. And personal issues take precidence over all else.

    That is how tags runs the NFL, and he has a VERY BIG vandetta against St Louis. Add that to the vandetta he has against Georgia for making him look like a fool when she moved the RAMS to St louis and it is an exponential increase.

    That's just how good the RAMS were in 1999. They were SOOOOOOOO much better than the rest of the NFL that the league would have had to make it undenialable that the games were fixed to keep the RAMS from winning it all. To anyone who is willing to go against the grain, and give up the notion that their precious NFL can't be rigged, they would see a whole lot more fixed games. Not just RAMS games, but any game that pits an league office favorite against a non-fave (and even more so with a league office despised) team.

    gap


  2. #17
    Pats and Sox Guest

    Re: View Point of someone who is obviously not a Patriot or Ram fan.

    Quote Originally Posted by gap
    That's just how good the RAMS were in 1999. They were SOOOOOOOO much better than the rest of the NFL that the league would have had to make it undenialable that the games were fixed to keep the RAMS from winning it all. To anyone who is willing to go against the grain, and give up the notion that their precious NFL can't be rigged, they would see a whole lot more fixed games. Not just RAMS games, but any game that pits an league office favorite against a non-fave (and even more so with a league office despised) team.
    So then, suffice to say, the Rams only lose because the league is out to get them. In 1999 and 2001 they were not champions because the league fixed the games. Sound about right?



  3. #18
    UtterBlitz's Avatar
    UtterBlitz is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    3,439
    Rep Power
    41

    Re: View Point of someone who is obviously not a Patriot or Ram fan.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pats and Sox
    So then, suffice to say, the Rams only lose because the league is out to get them. In 1999 and 2001 they were not champions because the league fixed the games. Sound about right?
    Please tell me you are not that innocent. Do you really believe that there can't be personal agendas that have impact on the NFL games? The fact that there is so very little review of the official's calls and there is no accountability for bad calls leads right into poor calling and the ability for the officials or other top executives to effect the outcome of any game.

    The attitude of "just let them play" in the playoffs has certainly helped the Pats get as far as they have.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  4. #19
    MOM's Avatar
    MOM
    MOM is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Springfield, MO
    Age
    38
    Posts
    566
    Rep Power
    19

    Re: View Point of someone who is obviously not a Patriot or Ram fan.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pats and Sox
    Everything was still patriotic at that point in time--it was hardly surprising for anything on the level of the SB to choose 9/11 as a backdrop. Speaking as someone who fled his office as the nearby Pentagon burned on that fateful day, I probably would have been deeply upset had the NFL not chosen to honor the fallen, the first responders, and the military.

    Thus, it's silly to draw the logo/Patriots parallel. I suspect they chose that logo long before the AFCCG was decided. That noted, the Patriots' logo is red, white, blue, and silver. The logo had no silver.
    It might not be quite as silly as you think. The NFL had been trying to get rid of it's "bad boy image" for a couple of years, and what a PR coup a Patriotic Superbowl would be! I found this article a couple of weeks ago.....could there be something to this? I ask that you give this some deep thought as I have, and make the connection. Sometimes PR has nothing to do with generating more revenue. Sometimes it can be about cleaning the halo.

    http://slam.canoe.ca/FootballNFLPrev..._overview.html

    This sure made me go, "Hmmmmmmmmm...."

    The question of "What could the NFL possibly have to gain from the Pats win?" was asked in another thread. Could a steak on their black eye be it?
    Last edited by MOM; -07-09-2005 at 09:17 AM.
    [SIGPIC]http://www.stickershoppe.com/mm5/graphics/00000001/MLRPANCmini.jpg[/SIGPIC]This is for Randy! GO BRM!

  5. #20
    UtterBlitz's Avatar
    UtterBlitz is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    3,439
    Rep Power
    41

    Re: View Point of someone who is obviously not a Patriot or Ram fan.

    Good points Mom. Interesting article. I was in Buckhead when the Atlanta shooting happened. It was not a good moment for the NFL.

    So many things could impact which way the NFL gets played. There is so much money to be made during the games, with the tv coverage, and all the crap that people buy. There are plenty of reasons that certain teams or players could become favorites.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  6. #21
    RamTime Guest

    Re: View Point of someone who is obviously not a Patriot or Ram fan.

    You know I'm not completely sold on conspiracy and many people have asked why would the NFL take such a risk. That is a good question but the answer is very simple. Money. Do you realize how much money could be thrown there way by the feds? It would be allot of money to the NFL while it would be just a slip of the pencil to the gov. I would believe that it was poor officiating had there been repercussions. It just doesn't make sense except it was just one of those freak occurrences where it was bad officiating that the NFL did not catch, It happened to be 911, it happened to be the patriots, the patriots happened to get there after the leagues worst on Field reversal in the history of the game and they just happened to forget to stop the clock. Maybe they were busy doing something else and they just forgot to stop it. Oh and have you seen the latest discovery?

    Paul Tagliabue offered his congratulations when he presented the Lombardi to Kraft for the third time. Then Tagliabue in a breech of impartiality added "And Keep It Up"

  7. #22
    Pats and Sox Guest

    Re: View Point of someone who is obviously not a Patriot or Ram fan.

    Quote Originally Posted by MOM
    It might not be quite as silly as you think. The NFL had been trying to get rid of it's "bad boy image" for a couple of years, and what a PR coup a Patriotic Superbowl would be! I found this article a couple of weeks ago.....could there be something to this? I ask that you give this some deep thought as I have, and make the connection. Sometimes PR has nothing to do with generating more revenue. Sometimes it can be about cleaning the halo.
    It is indeed as silly as I think. To pretend that the logo would have been anything other than red, white, and blue (And, again, none of the Pats' silver) is to do what many here have done--start with the conclusion you want and work backwards to support it. After 9/11 you don't think the NFL would have used a patriotic logo? We were a mere five months removed from our greatest domestic tragedy.

    Further, to pretend that a Patriots' victory would have been any more of a halo cleanser than a budding dynasty captained by a one-time castoff like Kurt Warner is the height of delusion. Frankly, I doubt either scenario counteracted Carruth or Lewis. Further, in case you missed it, foreign events had kind of overshadowed professional football for quite some time at that point.

    http://slam.canoe.ca/FootballNFLPrev..._overview.html

    This sure made me go, "Hmmmmmmmmm...."

    The question of "What could the NFL possibly have to gain from the Pats win?" was asked in another thread. Could a steak on their black eye be it?
    And the answer to your question is "no". A team named the Patriots winning in a time of patriotism, while perfect fodder for the people who think the CIA shot Kennedy or that all the Jews in the WTC called out sick on 9/11, does not a conspiracy make. As yet, there is still nothing in the way of a smoking gun. You have some calls that are questionable in the Super Bowl...as you do in each and every Super Bowl game. You have a rule that, while obscure and deflating to the Raiders, was absolutely called correctly as written in the AFC divisional championship.

    At the end of the day, the conspiracy theorists have proven nothing other than their wealth of free time and abundance of sour grapes.

  8. #23
    Pats and Sox Guest

    Re: View Point of someone who is obviously not a Patriot or Ram fan.

    Quote Originally Posted by RamTime
    You know I'm not completely sold on conspiracy and many people have asked why would the NFL take such a risk. That is a good question but the answer is very simple. Money. Do you realize how much money could be thrown there way by the feds? It would be allot of money to the NFL while it would be just a slip of the pencil to the gov. I would believe that it was poor officiating had there been repercussions. It just doesn't make sense except it was just one of those freak occurrences where it was bad officiating that the NFL did not catch, It happened to be 911, it happened to be the patriots, the patriots happened to get there after the leagues worst on Field reversal in the history of the game and they just happened to forget to stop the clock.
    Rule 3 (“Definitions”), Section 21 (“Pass and Passer”), Article 2, Note 2 of the NFL Rule Book:

    "When a Team A player is holding the ball to pass it forward, any intentional forward movement of his hand starts a forward pass, even if the player loses possession of the ball as he is attempting to tuck it back toward his body. Also, if a player has tucked the ball into his body and then loses possession, it is a fumble."

    The NFL Digest of Rules:

    "When a passer is holding the ball to pass it forward, any intentional movement forward of his arm starts a forward pass. If a defensive player contacts the passer or the ball after forward movement begins, and the ball leaves the passer’s hand, a forward pass is ruled, regardless of where the ball strikes the ground or a player."

    Maybe they were busy doing something else and they just forgot to stop it. Oh and have you seen the latest discovery?

    Paul Tagliabue offered his congratulations when he presented the Lombardi to Kraft for the third time. Then Tagliabue in a breech of impartiality added "And Keep It Up"
    That's it? That's part of your evidence? That the commissioner told the owner of a team that just pulled off a shocking upset that they should keep up their good work? You have, as noted before, clearly started with a conclusion you want and grasped for any possible way to justify it. It defies any semblence of logic or self-respect.

  9. #24
    RAMMAN68's Avatar
    RAMMAN68 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Escondido, CA
    Age
    46
    Posts
    2,714
    Rep Power
    15

    Re: View Point of someone who is obviously not a Patriot or Ram fan.

    You have some calls that are questionable in the Super Bowl...as you do in each and every Super Bowl game. You have a rule that, while obscure and deflating to the Raiders, was absolutely called correctly as written in the AFC divisional championship.
    What ever makes you sleep at night. There were ALOT of calls going the Pats way.

    as written in the AFC divisional championship
    So the refs made it up on the spot?
    That tuck call was a bust and ALL Pat fans know it.
    JUST WIN ONE FOR THE FANS


    "HIT HARD, HIT FAST, AND HIT OFTEN"
    Adm. William "Bull" Halsey

  10. #25
    Pats and Sox Guest

    Re: View Point of someone who is obviously not a Patriot or Ram fan.

    Quote Originally Posted by RAMMAN68
    What ever makes you sleep at night. There were ALOT of calls going the Pats way.
    Could you kindly demonstrate any variance from the normal number of missed calls?

    So the refs made it up on the spot?
    That tuck call was a bust and ALL Pat fans know it.
    Uh, no they didn't make anything up on the spot. Once again:

    Rule 3 (“Definitions”), Section 21 (“Pass and Passer”), Article 2, Note 2 of the NFL Rule Book:

    "When a Team A player is holding the ball to pass it forward, any intentional forward movement of his hand starts a forward pass, even if the player loses possession of the ball as he is attempting to tuck it back toward his body. Also, if a player has tucked the ball into his body and then loses possession, it is a fumble."

    The NFL Digest of Rules:

    "When a passer is holding the ball to pass it forward, any intentional movement forward of his arm starts a forward pass. If a defensive player contacts the passer or the ball after forward movement begins, and the ball leaves the passer’s hand, a forward pass is ruled, regardless of where the ball strikes the ground or a player."

    Further, what Raiders fans conveniently ignore (along with the hysterical types desperately seeking to prove they were cheated) is that if there was any missed call in that Pats/Raiders game, it was Charles Woodson's illegal shot to Brady's head in the midst of the tuck play. From RamTime's site, please observe Woodson's arm strike Brady's helmet:



    Woodson's head slap should have been a 15-yard penalty, which had the refs made the right call there, would have negated any conversation about the tuck.

    What many Pats fans agree on is that the rule offers far too much latitude to the QB to avoid a fumble. What anyone who reads the rules will concede, if they are the slightest bit honest, is that while the rule itself may need revision, it was correctly called in the AFC Divisional Championship.

  11. #26
    txramsfan's Avatar
    txramsfan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Poplar Bluff, MO
    Age
    50
    Posts
    7,266
    Rep Power
    65

    Re: View Point of someone who is obviously not a Patriot or Ram fan.

    I agree with some iffy calls, but to it was plain and simple about the Pat's SB, we got beat.

    Hopefully, we can meet again. I do hope so.

  12. #27
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    32
    Posts
    19,867
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: View Point of someone who is obviously not a Patriot or Ram fan.

    Quote Originally Posted by sbramfan
    Time to move on kids. The Pats got away with a lot of illegal blocking/holding of our receivers, etc.. in that game, but in the end, the Rams lost the game. Kurt made a bad decision to pass to Bruce, and got picked off. The defense was just not good enough to stop the Pats from moving down the field and kicking the winning FG. Martz perhaps could have called a better game, but these are the things that happen in a loss. It was a good, competitive, close game that came down to the last second, just as the Rams/Titans did. Many other coaches have said that Martz's scheme's use picks by the receivers that are illegal, and coaches/players are smart to push the limits of the rules and hope to get away with it. The Pats definitely got away with it in that game.

    Water under the bridge.

    The only way to get redemption for that game is the hope the Rams make a run at the SB this year, gain some respect, and bring back the GSOT.
    Good post, SB. I think we've pretty much beaten this dead horse into a pulp. We've seen RT's video evidence, and we've discussed it for quite a while. The league isn't suddenly going to strip the Pats of their title, so I'd rather not dwell on the topic just for the sake of keeping the scab from forming on this wound.
    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Four
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  13. #28
    RamTime Guest

    Re: View Point of someone who is obviously not a Patriot or Ram fan.

    It absolutely kills me that these patriot fans go running home to the CHFF web site to look for answers. Every Patriot fans apologie err excuse you read anywhere on any board is taken right out of the CHFF handbook. Many Patriot fans have asked the CHFF web site to do a video analysis and show how the Rams got away with the same type of play in an effort to debunk our videos at stlouisrams.net. They have asked CHFF to do an article debunking the videos at stlouisrams.net.

    Big surprise, instead of setting these misguided dot fans straight and telling them that there is no video to support what they are asking CHFF to do they say; "Were not interested in breaking down a game that is 4 years old." However when he decides to rip Skip Bayless (who left himself wide open to be bombarded) he breaks down games from the early 1980's.

    Anyway CHFF has been self anointed as the web site that discovered the "Vicious head slap" to Brady during the tuck play. On the surface this may look like a heroic discovery and while Patriot fans dance to inclination that the Raiders would have gotten away with a vicious head slap, isn't it true that if it had to be discovered days or weeks later that it wasn't much of a slap to the head? While they call it a vicious slap to the head they ignore the fact that Woodson came within inches of the football. Yet ask one of them about the slap to Warner's face mask and they say Oh that little tap. Its sickening how spoiled these post season NFL welfare recipients will go.

    Just for fun Let's play along with this rule that has cemented the CHFF web site into Patriot fan lore.

    Rule 3 (“Definitions”), Section 21 (“Pass and Passer”), Article 2, Note 2 of the NFL Rule Book:

    "When a Team A player is holding the ball to pass it forward, any intentional forward movement of his hand starts a forward pass, even if the player loses possession of the ball as he is attempting to tuck it back toward his body. Also, if a player has tucked the ball into his body and then loses possession, it is a fumble."
    The last I checked the hand was part of the body. If the hand is part of the body then Brady has finished tucking the football away and it is a fumble.

  14. #29
    Pats and Sox Guest

    Re: View Point of someone who is obviously not a Patriot or Ram fan.

    Quote Originally Posted by RamTime
    It absolutely kills me that these patriot fans go running home to the CHFF web site to look for answers. Every Patriot fans apologie err excuse you read anywhere on any board is taken right out of the CHFF handbook. Many Patriot fans have asked the CHFF web site to do a video analysis and show how the Rams got away with the same type of play in an effort to debunk our videos at stlouisrams.net. They have asked CHFF to do an article debunking the videos at stlouisrams.net.

    Big surprise, instead of setting these misguided dot fans straight and telling them that there is no video to support what they are asking CHFF to do they say; "Were not interested in breaking down a game that is 4 years old." However when he decides to rip Skip Bayless (who left himself wide open to be bombarded) he breaks down games from the early 1980's.
    I actually found out about this site through PatriotsPlanet, but since you mentioned CHFF, they put it best themselves:

    "Like we said above, not sure something so obviously hysterical needs us to comment on it. There are not even a lot of facts in it to refute. We can refute facts. We can’t refute hysteria."

    Face it, your site is hysteria, sour grapes, and a general indicator of a larger instability.

    Anyway CHFF has been self anointed as the web site that discovered the "Vicious head slap" to Brady during the tuck play. On the surface this may look like a heroic discovery and while Patriot fans dance to inclination that the Raiders would have gotten away with a vicious head slap, isn't it true that if it had to be discovered days or weeks later that it wasn't much of a slap to the head? While they call it a vicious slap to the head they ignore the fact that Woodson came within inches of the football. Yet ask one of them about the slap to Warner's face mask and they say Oh that little tap. Its sickening how spoiled these post season NFL welfare recipients will go.
    This is absolutely priceless and a perfect indicator of what a blind homer you are and how you have clearly started at a conclusion you hoped to reach and worked backwards.

    You say, "isn't it true that if it had to be discovered days or weeks later that it wasn't much of a slap to the head?"

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you, years after the game, "discover[ing]" all these missed calls that supposedly cost the Rams their rightly-earned Super Bowl victory? If these horrible missed calls are only being discovered now, "isn't it true that if it had to be discovered days or weeks later that it wasn't much of a [missed call]?"

    Referees miss calls. That none of us complained about Woodson's head slap that was clearly hard enough to cause Brady's head to jerk left does not mean it didn't happen. Winning teams don't usually harp on the bad officiating that happens in every game because, well, they won. Nothing to harp on. On to next week.

    The last I checked the hand was part of the body. If the hand is part of the body then Brady has finished tucking the football away and it is a fumble.
    Oh, dear God, it is simply impossible for you to be skilled enough to code a website and be this ignorant. If the hand was enough to complete a tuck, the rule itself wouldn't exist, since the moment the QB took posession of the ball and went to pass, he would have tucked it away in his hand. If the rule was not correctly called, it would have been acknowledged by the league...since it wasn't and there is no evidence that the Super Bowl had variance from the normal number of missed calls in a game, you're forced to concoct your wild conspiracy theory. Entertaining, to be sure, but probably for reasons you hadn't intended.

  15. #30
    Masspatsfan12 Guest

    Re: View Point of someone who is obviously not a Patriot or Ram fan.

    Just one question for all ram fans, if this game was fixed and all. How come you guys are the ones complaining about the game, and you don't hear one word from either Mike Martz or the rest of the ram team. I was just curious on this matter, I don't care about something that happened four years ago, I was just curious on your thought on this question.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •