|
Windmill Hut posted:why is there a two week break between the conference finals and the superbowl? is it so the players have more time to heal/get fit?
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 01:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 00:57 |
|
|
It's not a bad idea really. The last few years in the AFL (Aussie rules) equivalent of the superbowl, there have been key players with injuries where 1 extra weeks rest would've helped massively. It'd help make the game the best it could be - although the counter argument would be that the depth of a roster defines a championship team.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 02:26
|
|
|
At one point there had only been one week between the championship games and the super bowl. In 2001 they had to postpone the superbowl because of 9/11. They brought back the bye I guess as much for a scheduling buffer as anything
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 04:18
|
|
|
Also, more time for the media to hype it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2012 20:14
|
|
|
Hi, I've lurked for about two years, just started to post. I grew up in Connecticut, grew up on sports and always loved football... why does Andichu hate the Big East so much? Every other post it seems like he dedicates all of his energy to hating the Big East. Where did this all start and do other former Big East goons feel the same way as him?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2012 01:47
|
|
|
Sufficient posted:Hi, I've lurked for about two years, just started to post. I grew up in Connecticut, grew up on sports and always loved football... why does Andichu hate the Big East so much? Every other post it seems like he dedicates all of his energy to hating the Big East. Where did this all start and do other former Big East goons feel the same way as him? Because the Big East is bad at football. Look at his post history in the college basketball threads to see some serious Big East Loving from him.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2012 02:39
|
|
|
Sufficient posted:Hi, I've lurked for about two years, just started to post. I grew up in Connecticut, grew up on sports and always loved football... why does Andichu hate the Big East so much? Every other post it seems like he dedicates all of his energy to hating the Big East. Where did this all start and do other former Big East goons feel the same way as him? Also Andichu works in the WVU athletic department and has dealt with the Big East on a different level then the rest of us have. Why don't you go into the conference realignment thread and ask him yourself? He is happy to explain it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2012 02:59
|
|
|
drunk leprechaun posted:Also Andichu works in the WVU athletic department and has dealt with the Big East on a different level then the rest of us have. I understand his views (somewhat) currently, but the amount of effort he puts towards it seems like it was a long time coming. Do you think people that work in any conference are as jaded as someone that has worked in politics?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2012 03:20
|
|
|
Sufficient posted:I understand his views (somewhat) currently, but the amount of effort he puts towards it seems like it was a long time coming. Do you think people that work in any conference are as jaded as someone that has worked in politics? Maybe. Especially at the lower levels. He isn't very high up in WV's AD so his interactions with the conference are probably a lot of "yes sir no sir" bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2012 03:29
|
|
|
Sufficient posted:Hi, I've lurked for about two years, just started to post. I grew up in Connecticut, grew up on sports and always loved football... why does Andichu hate the Big East so much? Every other post it seems like he dedicates all of his energy to hating the Big East. Where did this all start and do other former Big East goons feel the same way as him? I'm not Andichu, but the Big East is a piece of poo poo conference run by the basketball cabal that has allowed the football side of the conference to be picked apart and destroyed twice through negligence and incompetence. edit: I don't like or watch basketball so I don't even get to enjoy that part of being in the Big East Brennan fucked around with this message at 06:55 on Jan 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2012 06:50
|
|
|
Sufficient posted:I understand his views (somewhat) currently, but the amount of effort he puts towards it seems like it was a long time coming. Do you think people that work in any conference are as jaded as someone that has worked in politics? I've hated the conference for a long time. I think KJI will pretty much agree with me on just about every reason why, too. They basically took a good thing and ruined it with awful management. The Providence Cabal that has run the Big East for the last 30 years is the most imbred bullshit ever, and there's a reason why everyone who could, has jumped ship at the earliest chance... that is if you're not a small private catholic school that have gotten fat from the fruits of the football school's labor. And I've said that for a long time, even while defending the conference itself. but leadership has failed at every level to make decisions that are beneficial to the members who mean the most to the league and that's why we went from having a conference made up of historically powerful programs to a bunch of "but they have a lot of potential" schools. I can give you a whole history on when this started, it's not new, but I think KJI and I went over this in the Conference Expansion threads, but the short version is that the league set it self up for failure in the 90's when they let the basketball schools snub VT, look down on Miami, and were forced to take us and Rutgers more or less at gunpoint, and then told Temple to gently caress off because 'Nova didn't want them in the same conference. drunk leprechaun posted:Maybe. Especially at the lower levels. He isn't very high up in WV's AD so his interactions with the conference are probably a lot of "yes sir no sir" bullshit. Just to clarify, I work for the SID, but mostly independently contract through ESPN, CBS and Fox (or whoever else is carrying the game.) Personally, the people I've worked with from the league office itself are pretty cool, and my one or two interactions with Marinatto before a football game last year were fine. I just think he's an inept leader divorced from reality. SteelAngel2000 posted:Because the Big East is bad at football. Look at his post history in the college basketball threads to see some serious Big East Loving from him. Like I said, I will defend the Big East conference members themselves. (Or would, anyway.) There's a big difference in defending who's in the league and defending the decisions of league's leaders that have fundamentally weakened the conference. -- Feel free to ask me anything else though, I don't mind. 
BI NOW GAY LATER fucked around with this message at 07:09 on Jan 26, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2012 07:03
|
|
|
Who is a good team to hate on? I've picked the chargers and their fuckin shite logo. Also is arena football worth watching in the offseason?
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2012 13:15
|
|
|
spe posted:Who is a good team to hate on? I've picked the chargers and their fuckin shite logo. Right now the Patriots and the Steelers are the two best teams to hate on. In the past decade they've both enjoyed massive success and been involved in nasty scandals. They both have large, vocal fan bases that swell massively with bandwagoners in the post-season.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2012 13:54
|
|
|
spe posted:Who is a good team to hate on? I've picked the chargers and their fuckin shite logo. Arena football isn't big so it is hard to find info on it and stuff. Also the quality of play is very low compared to NFL.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2012 15:45
|
|
|
spe posted:Who is a good team to hate on? I've picked the chargers and their fuckin shite logo. Unless you are SA2k or a fan of a division rival there is nothing really hate-able about the Chargers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2012 17:21
|
|
|
spe posted:Also is arena football worth watching in the offseason?
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2012 17:36
|
|
|
McKracken posted:Unless you are SA2k or a fan of a division rival there is nothing really hate-able about the Chargers. It's hard to hate the irrelevant. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2012 17:56
|
|
|
SteelAngel2000 posted:It's hard to hate the irrelevant. Even in their better days I never hated the Chargers, and I typically favored them as a secondary AFC team to cheer for as long as they weren't playing the Jets. I'd tell you to take heart in the potential of a good draft but I think AJ Smith has too thoroughly crushed your ability to hope.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2012 21:36
|
|
|
Its cos their logo is loving todge, best one probably the steelers, they're a 1990s telecom company. Titans are a shady junkyard from the 80s who do crimes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2012 00:44
|
|
|
spe posted:Its cos their logo is loving todge, best one probably the steelers, they're a 1990s telecom company. Of all the logos to hate, a lightning bolt?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2012 01:34
|
|
|
spe posted:Its cos their logo is loving todge, best one probably the steelers, they're a 1990s telecom company. The Steelers logo is actually a historical logo for steel. The three diamonds represent the three ingredients for steel. Coal, iron ore, and scrap. No joke they stole it from a steel industry group.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2012 06:46
|
|
|
SteelAngel2000 posted:Of all the logos to hate, a lightning bolt? The only team I could understand people hating on for their logo would be Washington.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2012 08:06
|
|
|
McKracken posted:The only team I could understand people hating on for their logo would be Washington. Not to start an international incident but that dude appears to be Australian so as far as reacting negatively to racism, well, uh,
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2012 08:09
|
|
|
What I don't get about the Redskins logo is why does the circle that has the Indian's head in it have a feather of it's own? What's the deal with that?
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2012 09:24
|
|
|
Detective Thompson posted:What I don't get about the Redskins logo is why does the circle that has the Indian's head in it have a feather of it's own? What's the deal with that? It traces back to when Lombardi was the Skins coach. Previous to him being there thye had an indian head logo or the spear logo that was used as throwbacks a few years back. When Lombardi what there in '70 he wanted to give the Skins an iconic logo like the Packers had. So the made an R with a circle around it and arrows coming off the side to invoke more on an indian motif. While that logo was abandon, the circle around the R wasn't. They went back to the indian head logo, but kept the circle. Why they kept it I am not sure, but that is where that circle comes from.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2012 09:42
|
|
|
I assume the yellow dotted line surrounding the field is to keep press/photographers safely away from the field of play, but what is the purpose of the white dotted line that runs parallel with it down the sidelines? Never noticed it before:
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2012 00:50
|
|
|
I've just checked the NFL rulebook, and as far as I can make out, the rulebook states that they shall be there, but does not say what their purpose is, or what the difference is between the yellow dashed line and the white one. Whatever it is, as you say, it's clearly some version of a limit line, behind which everyone not directly involved in the game has to stay, and presumably there's some special people who are allowed up to the white where everyone else has to stay behind the yellow. If anyone goes in the rulebook to have a look for yourself, be aware that when it talks about those lines it talks about two different concepts; one is the yellow/white limit lines that surround the field and team areas, and the other is that it talks about the team areas being marked with yellow around the back and then white to mark the boundary between the team area and the coaches' box. Now that I think about it, that image is actually a really good one for showing the zones that exist around a football field and how team areas work; the first 6-foot belt in solid white is for the officials only so they can have a safe zone to officiate in while not being on the field, with the chain crew operating on the back edge of the belt; then the green area is the coaches' box, which is for coaches only (and, in the NFL, the backup QB can be there if he's got a clipboard with him), and it ensures they can have an unobstructed view of the game without needing to creep up into the officials' belt because players are getting in their way; then behind it, painted with the team logo, is the team area, where all the players have to be while they're not on the field. NFL team areas are quite a bit smaller than college (due to much larger roster sizes in college); NCAA rules allow them to be marked between the 25-yard lines.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2012 01:16
|
|
|
Iron Clad Lou posted:I assume the yellow dotted line surrounding the field is to keep press/photographers safely away from the field of play, but what is the purpose of the white dotted line that runs parallel with it down the sidelines? Never noticed it before: If you cut along the yellow and fold along the white, you can make a box!
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2012 08:03
|
|
|
Never really realized how narrow the hash marks are in relation to the width of the field... /downiecomment
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2012 21:38
|
|
|
Its Miller Time posted:Never really realized how narrow the hash marks are in relation to the width of the field... They're wider in college
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2012 21:47
|
|
|
McKracken posted:They're wider in college And wider still in high school.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2012 02:48
|
|
|
But they are narrower in arena football.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2012 02:49
|
|
|
And wider in Canadian football, though not quite as wide as high school.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2012 05:10
|
|
|
Does anyone know the reasoning behind the narrow NFL hash marks? I vaguely remember they changed the width of the goal posts at some time (or the NCAA did or something). Has the NFL always had the narrow marks?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2012 05:12
|
|
|
Well AFAIK the NFL hash marks have always lined up with the uprights and college decided to make them wider. I'll save any speculation and let somebody else explain why the widened them for college ball
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2012 05:34
|
|
|
Goal posts used to be a lot wider, and also on the goal line. College never narrowed the hashmarks when they narrowed the goalposts (which I think has happened at least twice).
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2012 06:13
|
|
|
Did an exhaustive post on the history of hashmarks and goalposts a while back: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3324645&userid=77743#post385990186
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2012 13:13
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:Did an exhaustive post on the history of hashmarks and goalposts a while back: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3324645&userid=77743#post385990186 Ah thanks, that was what I was looking for. Interesting that for so long the NFL seemed to be trying to accommodate kickers, it seems every kicking related rule change since the last narrowing of the hash marks has been an attempt to make field goal kicking either harder or less inviting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2012 19:47
|
|
|
Can we go into 4-3 and 3-4 a little more? Which positions remain relatively the same when you change, and which are very scheme specific? Obviously there's no NT in a 4-3, but how about say the mike? How different is it when you have two mikes? Or 4-3 DE's vs. 3-4 DE's. 4-3's are harder to find because they do more rushing than occupying? You rely more on OLB's rushing in a 3-4? Its Miller Time fucked around with this message at 03:03 on Feb 3, 2012 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2012 02:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 00:57 |
|
|
Its Miller Time posted:Can we go into 4-3 and 3-4 a little more? Which positions remain relatively the same when you change, and which are very scheme specific? Obviously there's no NT in a 4-3, but how about say the mike? How different is it when you have two mikes? Someone else can do this much better than me, but you often do have a 'nose tackle' in a 4-3 over the centre-guard and tries to eat blockers and take up space while the Under Tackle tries to bust through a single gap and hit the runner/quarterback. 3-4 DEs are usually much more like 4-3 Defensive Tackles than 4-3 ends. Often they have two-gap responsibility, so instead of all-out rushing the passer they have tohold their ground and make sure a runner doesn't get by on either side. Ideally a 3-4 DE will be the size of a small defensive tackle, so like 300 pounds. A 4-3 Defensive end can be much more aggressive in pass-rushing and shooting through holes, so he'll be lighter and smaller. (Like 270-280lbs). 4-3 Linebackers I get lost on but there's usually one 'Elephant' pass-rushing specialist who's like a smaller, faster 4-3 End, and one 'Thumper' inside linebacker who's a big run-stopper. The other inside linebacker is the Mike, with the play calling responsiblities and stuff. E - and good 4-3 ends are hard to find because good pass rushers are hard to find. You often need just crazy size/explosive speed/athleticism combinations (see Peppers, J.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2012 15:48
|
|
