02-19-2018, 09:50 AM
(02-19-2018, 12:15 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: lol..... not at all.
Just pointing out that he had to look them up and still could only find one example.
But that's a nice copout attempt and I'm guessing now that you and JS will turn this thread into a a thread about that instead of acknowledging the substance of my last post.
Run along
Actually, I’d rather go back to this one: was Pat right? Because if not, the Pats were, in fact, lucky that Seattle made a bad call. And if it wasn't a bad call, you find yourself agreeing with Pat and admitting you were wrong. You can't have it both ways. Which do you choose?
Also, with respect to the Titans-Rams: let's take height out of the equation. After watching it again, it wasn't quite as close as I thought. But here's something else. The Titans used two timeouts Prior to that drive. Had they been more conservative with them, they'd have had at least one more play (maybe two) from the one yard line. Lucky for the Rams, eh?
The onside kick: any onside kick involves kicking an oblong ball straight into the ground. The bounce that it gives is not 100% predictable, regardless of how often you practice it. This one even bounced off the chest of a Colts player. Do you think they practiced that? There's a reason why the play is rarely used outside of desperate situations: it is a roll of the dice. Payton gambled and won. Luck.
And Butler: The Pats lost by a touchdown. Poorly ranked D or not, It's not implausible to suggest that the presence of one of their best defensive players could have made that small of a difference. Good fortune for the Eagles.
So, I stand by my examples. All of them. But, at the end of the day, these are subjective arguments, which means these are largely opinions. And you are entitled to yours. I'm content to rest in the knowledge that yours are more lowly regarded around here than you realize.
