Broncos vs Seahawks or Packers in SB (1 Viewer)

[sho nuff]

I'm so sick of hearing my fellow Packer fans pissing about the Seahawks game in week 3. If we want to win at Seattle, maybe try to score more than one touchdown in the game. The game was won and lost in the first half when the Packers were shut out and gave up 5 or 6 sacks. The Seahawks earned the win by completely dominating the Packers physically. It was a deserved result over 4 quarters, not just the last play. I'd love to see a rematch.

Uh, chief, the Seahawk fans are the ones whining in this thread. HTH.

Seahawk fans have nothing to whine about, we beat the Packers once and we'll do it again if we cross paths in the playoffs.

Then why do they keep whining?

 

[mad sweeney]

I'm so sick of hearing my fellow Packer fans pissing about the Seahawks game in week 3. If we want to win at Seattle, maybe try to score more than one touchdown in the game. The game was won and lost in the first half when the Packers were shut out and gave up 5 or 6 sacks. The Seahawks earned the win by completely dominating the Packers physically. It was a deserved result over 4 quarters, not just the last play. I'd love to see a rematch.

Uh, chief, the Seahawk fans are the ones whining in this thread. HTH.

Seahawk fans have nothing to whine about, we beat the Packers once and we'll do it again if we cross paths in the playoffs.

Then why do they keep whining?

Why do people keep insisting that GB had a game stolen from them?

 

[sho nuff]

They hadn't scored a TD in the first 48 minutes. What's more of an assumption and they were stopped cold on that drive: that they would score or wouldn't score? Odds are greatly in favor of them not scoring.

Even if I agree with your premise...the odds of them winning after the last bad call was 0.So it still works out to being far more important than the call you are still whining about.

So what? They shouldn't have been in the lead in the first place, so there shouldn't have been a need for a last second hail mary. Just because it's the last play doesn't make it more important.

So what?And again...you assume they could not have scored at all over the last 11 minutes of the game...only down by 1.To claim they should not have been in the lead in the end is your faulty logic again shining through.And yes...because it is the last play...and it 100% determined a winner or loser at that point of the game...with all else said...it does make that call that much bigger/worse.But you won't ever see that will you?

 

[sho nuff]

I'm so sick of hearing my fellow Packer fans pissing about the Seahawks game in week 3. If we want to win at Seattle, maybe try to score more than one touchdown in the game. The game was won and lost in the first half when the Packers were shut out and gave up 5 or 6 sacks. The Seahawks earned the win by completely dominating the Packers physically. It was a deserved result over 4 quarters, not just the last play. I'd love to see a rematch.

Uh, chief, the Seahawk fans are the ones whining in this thread. HTH.

Seahawk fans have nothing to whine about, we beat the Packers once and we'll do it again if we cross paths in the playoffs.

Then why do they keep whining?

Why do people keep insisting that GB had a game stolen from them?

Very few have...maybe one or 2 have claimed such a thing.

 

[mad sweeney]

They hadn't scored a TD in the first 48 minutes. What's more of an assumption and they were stopped cold on that drive: that they would score or wouldn't score? Odds are greatly in favor of them not scoring.

Even if I agree with your premise...the odds of them winning after the last bad call was 0.So it still works out to being far more important than the call you are still whining about.

So what? They shouldn't have been in the lead in the first place, so there shouldn't have been a need for a last second hail mary. Just because it's the last play doesn't make it more important.

So what?And again...you assume they could not have scored at all over the last 11 minutes of the game...only down by 1.To claim they should not have been in the lead in the end is your faulty logic again shining through.And yes...because it is the last play...and it 100% determined a winner or loser at that point of the game...with all else said...it does make that call that much bigger/worse.But you won't ever see that will you?

You assume they will score, for some reason, even though they couldn't do it all game long. Or that Seattle won't score again after rightfully stopping that TD drive. Sure, it was the last play. Big deal. Ref help for a TD is ref help for a TD. If one team doesn't deserve to win because of help, then the other doesn't either.

 

[sho nuff]

You assume they will score, for some reason, even though they couldn't do it all game long. Or that Seattle won't score again after rightfully stopping that TD drive. Sure, it was the last play. Big deal. Ref help for a TD is ref help for a TD. If one team doesn't deserve to win because of help, then the other doesn't either.

I correctly state they have a possibility of scoring.And they had scored during that game...they were not held to 0 points til that point were they?And what I have rightfully stated is you can't take that one call...and state that if GB does not get that call...that you know what will happen the rest of the game.That is the point...we don't know what would have happened.It is possible (despite your denial) that GB could have stopped Seattle and gone on to score and hold on for the win had that call not happened.What we can correctly state...was if the call was made differently on the last play...GB 100% would win. You simply cannot argue with it.So whining that the call you keep crying about will 11 minutes left made as much of a difference in the game as a play that 100% determined the final outcome is terrible logic that makes absolutely zero statistical sense.And you have not seen me state that GB deserved the win and Seattle didn't.

 

[devouredbychaos]

So what happens when Sherman misses the playoffs??One and done

He's pretty confident he isn't going to miss anytime and he's put his money where his mouth is all season.

He's also put those PEDs in his mouth all season too...

 

[godgers12]

So what happens when Sherman misses the playoffs??One and done

He's pretty confident he isn't going to miss anytime and he's put his money where his mouth is all season.

I'd 100% be willing to put money on this, look the guy is a beast everyone knows that, but his defense his is pretty LOL. People make mistakes, his may have been not sitting the last four games as he more than likely is gonna miss the next 4.No this isn't being a Seahawks hater either, as a matter of fact as a UW alumn i am stoked that Wilson is doing what I thought he could (albeit a lot sooner than I thought he would). And I had Lynch and their D on two of my championship teams this year that made me some nice coin. I have a lot of respect for them, but I seriously think the odds of him beating the adderal thing is less than 10%.edit--his defense against why he tested positive is LOL, not his defense on the field obv.

 

[Mr.Pack]

So what happens when Sherman misses the playoffs??One and done

He's pretty confident he isn't going to miss anytime and he's put his money where his mouth is all season.

He's also put those PEDs in his mouth all season too...

Buncha effin cheaters.

 

[devouredbychaos]

So what happens when Sherman misses the playoffs??One and done

He's pretty confident he isn't going to miss anytime and he's put his money where his mouth is all season.

He's also put those PEDs in his mouth all season too...

Buncha effin cheaters.

Yep. I'm not even a hater either.

 

[sho nuff]

Look...we know why he was using it...same reason Mike Neal was likely using it.

 

[mad sweeney]

You assume they will score, for some reason, even though they couldn't do it all game long. Or that Seattle won't score again after rightfully stopping that TD drive. Sure, it was the last play. Big deal. Ref help for a TD is ref help for a TD. If one team doesn't deserve to win because of help, then the other doesn't either.

I correctly state they have a possibility of scoring.And they had scored during that game...they were not held to 0 points til that point were they?And what I have rightfully stated is you can't take that one call...and state that if GB does not get that call...that you know what will happen the rest of the game.That is the point...we don't know what would have happened.It is possible (despite your denial) that GB could have stopped Seattle and gone on to score and hold on for the win had that call not happened.What we can correctly state...was if the call was made differently on the last play...GB 100% would win. You simply cannot argue with it.So whining that the call you keep crying about will 11 minutes left made as much of a difference in the game as a play that 100% determined the final outcome is terrible logic that makes absolutely zero statistical sense.And you have not seen me state that GB deserved the win and Seattle didn't.

Where have I denied that what you say I denied?

 

[sho nuff]

You assume they will score, for some reason, even though they couldn't do it all game long. Or that Seattle won't score again after rightfully stopping that TD drive. Sure, it was the last play. Big deal. Ref help for a TD is ref help for a TD. If one team doesn't deserve to win because of help, then the other doesn't either.

I correctly state they have a possibility of scoring.And they had scored during that game...they were not held to 0 points til that point were they?And what I have rightfully stated is you can't take that one call...and state that if GB does not get that call...that you know what will happen the rest of the game.That is the point...we don't know what would have happened.It is possible (despite your denial) that GB could have stopped Seattle and gone on to score and hold on for the win had that call not happened.What we can correctly state...was if the call was made differently on the last play...GB 100% would win. You simply cannot argue with it.So whining that the call you keep crying about will 11 minutes left made as much of a difference in the game as a play that 100% determined the final outcome is terrible logic that makes absolutely zero statistical sense.And you have not seen me state that GB deserved the win and Seattle didn't.

Where have I denied that what you say I denied?

When you claim that call was the same as the last call.To be so...that call would have had to have determined 100% the winner or loser. For it to do that, you have to believe there was no way GB was scoring.And given your multiple claims (and incorrect ones) that GB had not scored the previous 48 minutes...your denial is pretty obvious.

 

[mad sweeney]

You assume they will score, for some reason, even though they couldn't do it all game long. Or that Seattle won't score again after rightfully stopping that TD drive. Sure, it was the last play. Big deal. Ref help for a TD is ref help for a TD. If one team doesn't deserve to win because of help, then the other doesn't either.

I correctly state they have a possibility of scoring.And they had scored during that game...they were not held to 0 points til that point were they?And what I have rightfully stated is you can't take that one call...and state that if GB does not get that call...that you know what will happen the rest of the game.That is the point...we don't know what would have happened.It is possible (despite your denial) that GB could have stopped Seattle and gone on to score and hold on for the win had that call not happened.What we can correctly state...was if the call was made differently on the last play...GB 100% would win. You simply cannot argue with it.So whining that the call you keep crying about will 11 minutes left made as much of a difference in the game as a play that 100% determined the final outcome is terrible logic that makes absolutely zero statistical sense.And you have not seen me state that GB deserved the win and Seattle didn't.

Where have I denied that what you say I denied?

When you claim that call was the same as the last call.To be so...that call would have had to have determined 100% the winner or loser. For it to do that, you have to believe there was no way GB was scoring.And given your multiple claims (and incorrect ones) that GB had not scored the previous 48 minutes...your denial is pretty obvious.

We're talking about TDs, unless there's a way to do a hail mary field goal, so you can throw that out the window. GB hadn't scored a TD all game until they were helped to it by the ref. And we know 100% that the game wouldn't have happened the way it happened if that drive wasn't artificially extended. We don't know how it would've ended, but it obviously couldn't have played out how it did. I never denied that the last call 100% determined the winner. For some reason you seem to think I don't get that or deny it. A gift TD is a gift TD. If the team that got one to go ahead gets one called against them and they lose... tough ####. They should've complained when they got theirs, not when bad calls go against their artificial lead.You're not even making sense. You say I denied that GB could've stopped Seattle.. blah blah blah. I never even addressed whether or not GB could've stopped Seattle or anything else that you're trying to say.

 

[SSOG]

Pull your head out of the numbers. Ask yourself this: why does GB "deserve" to win or why a win was "stolen" from them when the whole game was terribly reffed? That whole game sucked, even when the refs were doing what they were supposed to (they were explicitly told not to call PI on Hail Marys). GB wasn't robbed, Seattle deserved the win as much as GB did. Whoever got screwed last was going to win that game. Either neither team deserved to win or the losing team would've had it given away. Play with your percentages all you want. Chances were that Seattle would've won if the GB drive was correctly called. It wasn't. The end of the game wasn't either.

Seattle would have been slight favorites to win if the PI hadn't been called. Green Bay was slight favorites after it was called. That PI call represented a swing from slight favorites to slight underdogs, and left the Hawks with 11:30 to rectify the situation. The Fail Mary represented a swing from 100% certain defeat to 100% certain victory, with no time left for Green Bay to redress the situation. I've already demonstrated the differences in win probability- a difference of 6 or 7 times. If you want to make the claim that both teams were screwed equally by the officials, you need to come up with at least 5 more calls equal in impact to the PI. The fact that you can't- that no one can- proves those calls didn't exist. Instead, everyone's left exaggerating the one blown call that went GB's way (under 5 minutes! Tied game! Put them in field goal range!) because it's far too weak of a case to make on its own merits, and everyone knows it. You can't just say "there were blown calls on both sides, so let's all just forget it, klolololol?" The magnitude of the blown calls matters. A blown false start on one side doesn't offset a blown 50 yard PI. A blown PI with almost a quarter left to play does not offset a magic god button that waits until the clock expires and then magically retroactively declares the winner to be the loser.

His point is stupid and an example of over emphasis on numbers. A gift TD is a gift TD no matter when it happens. If you want to complain about one, complain about both. But that's not what happens. GB had the game stolen from them and their gift TD is allowable but the last one isn't due to it being the last play of the game is a ridiculous conclusion.

Wow, you must really not think anything of Seattle's defense if you consider 1st and 10 from the Seattle 39 to be a "Gift TD". The refs didn't give Green Bay the ball in the end zone. The refs didn't give Green Bay the ball in the red zone. The refs barely even gave Green Bay the ball in the 20 yard zone that comes before the red zone. Seattle had 39 more chances to keep Green Bay out of pay dirt, and after they laid down and wet the bed, they still had two more drives to respond to the score. When someone calls first and ten from the THIRTY NINE a "gift TD", it's clear they have no interest in having an impartial and unbiased discussion about the relative merits of the case.

 

[mad sweeney]

Pull your head out of the numbers. Ask yourself this: why does GB "deserve" to win or why a win was "stolen" from them when the whole game was terribly reffed? That whole game sucked, even when the refs were doing what they were supposed to (they were explicitly told not to call PI on Hail Marys). GB wasn't robbed, Seattle deserved the win as much as GB did. Whoever got screwed last was going to win that game. Either neither team deserved to win or the losing team would've had it given away. Play with your percentages all you want. Chances were that Seattle would've won if the GB drive was correctly called. It wasn't. The end of the game wasn't either.

Seattle would have been slight favorites to win if the PI hadn't been called. Green Bay was slight favorites after it was called. That PI call represented a swing from slight favorites to slight underdogs, and left the Hawks with 11:30 to rectify the situation. The Fail Mary represented a swing from 100% certain defeat to 100% certain victory, with no time left for Green Bay to redress the situation. I've already demonstrated the differences in win probability- a difference of 6 or 7 times. If you want to make the claim that both teams were screwed equally by the officials, you need to come up with at least 5 more calls equal in impact to the PI. The fact that you can't- that no one can- proves those calls didn't exist. Instead, everyone's left exaggerating the one blown call that went GB's way (under 5 minutes! Tied game! Put them in field goal range!) because it's far too weak of a case to make on its own merits, and everyone knows it. You can't just say "there were blown calls on both sides, so let's all just forget it, klolololol?" The magnitude of the blown calls matters. A blown false start on one side doesn't offset a blown 50 yard PI. A blown PI with almost a quarter left to play does not offset a magic god button that waits until the clock expires and then magically retroactively declares the winner to be the loser.

His point is stupid and an example of over emphasis on numbers. A gift TD is a gift TD no matter when it happens. If you want to complain about one, complain about both. But that's not what happens. GB had the game stolen from them and their gift TD is allowable but the last one isn't due to it being the last play of the game is a ridiculous conclusion.

Wow, you must really not think anything of Seattle's defense if you consider 1st and 10 from the Seattle 39 to be a "Gift TD". The refs didn't give Green Bay the ball in the end zone. The refs didn't give Green Bay the ball in the red zone. The refs barely even gave Green Bay the ball in the 20 yard zone that comes before the red zone. Seattle had 39 more chances to keep Green Bay out of pay dirt, and after they laid down and wet the bed, they still had two more drives to respond to the score. When someone calls first and ten from the THIRTY NINE a "gift TD", it's clear they have no interest in having an impartial and unbiased discussion about the relative merits of the case.

I called the drive a gift TD. The Seahawks stopped them. There were more bad calls on that drive and there were far more than 5 bad calls the whole game against the Seahawks, as well as more than that fort the Seahawks. It was a horribly called game (though ironically the biggest and easiest non-call was exactly what the refs were told to do, not call PI on a HM). Saying the last call is the worst, most important, determiner of who deserved to win etc... is nothing more than a bunch of bs. GB didn't "deserve" to be in the lead in the first place so it's pretty silly to say they "deserved" to win just because they got screwed on the last call.

 

[Alkahsu]

So what happens when Sherman misses the playoffs??One and done

He's pretty confident he isn't going to miss anytime and he's put his money where his mouth is all season.

He's also put those PEDs in his mouth all season too...

Not true, you're just a hater. Even if he was taking them he obviously hasn't the last 3 weeks when he's been playing his best.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Pull your head out of the numbers. Ask yourself this: why does GB "deserve" to win or why a win was "stolen" from them when the whole game was terribly reffed? That whole game sucked, even when the refs were doing what they were supposed to (they were explicitly told not to call PI on Hail Marys). GB wasn't robbed, Seattle deserved the win as much as GB did. Whoever got screwed last was going to win that game. Either neither team deserved to win or the losing team would've had it given away. Play with your percentages all you want. Chances were that Seattle would've won if the GB drive was correctly called. It wasn't. The end of the game wasn't either.

Seattle would have been slight favorites to win if the PI hadn't been called. Green Bay was slight favorites after it was called. That PI call represented a swing from slight favorites to slight underdogs, and left the Hawks with 11:30 to rectify the situation. The Fail Mary represented a swing from 100% certain defeat to 100% certain victory, with no time left for Green Bay to redress the situation. I've already demonstrated the differences in win probability- a difference of 6 or 7 times. If you want to make the claim that both teams were screwed equally by the officials, you need to come up with at least 5 more calls equal in impact to the PI. The fact that you can't- that no one can- proves those calls didn't exist. Instead, everyone's left exaggerating the one blown call that went GB's way (under 5 minutes! Tied game! Put them in field goal range!) because it's far too weak of a case to make on its own merits, and everyone knows it. You can't just say "there were blown calls on both sides, so let's all just forget it, klolololol?" The magnitude of the blown calls matters. A blown false start on one side doesn't offset a blown 50 yard PI. A blown PI with almost a quarter left to play does not offset a magic god button that waits until the clock expires and then magically retroactively declares the winner to be the loser.

His point is stupid and an example of over emphasis on numbers. A gift TD is a gift TD no matter when it happens. If you want to complain about one, complain about both. But that's not what happens. GB had the game stolen from them and their gift TD is allowable but the last one isn't due to it being the last play of the game is a ridiculous conclusion.

Wow, you must really not think anything of Seattle's defense if you consider 1st and 10 from the Seattle 39 to be a "Gift TD". The refs didn't give Green Bay the ball in the end zone. The refs didn't give Green Bay the ball in the red zone. The refs barely even gave Green Bay the ball in the 20 yard zone that comes before the red zone. Seattle had 39 more chances to keep Green Bay out of pay dirt, and after they laid down and wet the bed, they still had two more drives to respond to the score. When someone calls first and ten from the THIRTY NINE a "gift TD", it's clear they have no interest in having an impartial and unbiased discussion about the relative merits of the case.

I called the drive a gift TD. The Seahawks stopped them. There were more bad calls on that drive and there were far more than 5 bad calls the whole game against the Seahawks, as well as more than that fort the Seahawks. It was a horribly called game (though ironically the biggest and easiest non-call was exactly what the refs were told to do, not call PI on a HM). Saying the last call is the worst, most important, determiner of who deserved to win etc... is nothing more than a bunch of bs. GB didn't "deserve" to be in the lead in the first place so it's pretty silly to say they "deserved" to win just because they got screwed on the last call.

Possible reasons you continue to miss his point:a) homer blindnessb) desire for ongoing shtickc) stupidityWhich is it?

 

[sho nuff]

You assume they will score, for some reason, even though they couldn't do it all game long. Or that Seattle won't score again after rightfully stopping that TD drive. Sure, it was the last play. Big deal. Ref help for a TD is ref help for a TD. If one team doesn't deserve to win because of help, then the other doesn't either.

I correctly state they have a possibility of scoring.And they had scored during that game...they were not held to 0 points til that point were they?And what I have rightfully stated is you can't take that one call...and state that if GB does not get that call...that you know what will happen the rest of the game.That is the point...we don't know what would have happened.It is possible (despite your denial) that GB could have stopped Seattle and gone on to score and hold on for the win had that call not happened.What we can correctly state...was if the call was made differently on the last play...GB 100% would win. You simply cannot argue with it.So whining that the call you keep crying about will 11 minutes left made as much of a difference in the game as a play that 100% determined the final outcome is terrible logic that makes absolutely zero statistical sense.And you have not seen me state that GB deserved the win and Seattle didn't.

Where have I denied that what you say I denied?

When you claim that call was the same as the last call.To be so...that call would have had to have determined 100% the winner or loser. For it to do that, you have to believe there was no way GB was scoring.And given your multiple claims (and incorrect ones) that GB had not scored the previous 48 minutes...your denial is pretty obvious.

We're talking about TDs, unless there's a way to do a hail mary field goal, so you can throw that out the window. GB hadn't scored a TD all game until they were helped to it by the ref. And we know 100% that the game wouldn't have happened the way it happened if that drive wasn't artificially extended. We don't know how it would've ended, but it obviously couldn't have played out how it did. I never denied that the last call 100% determined the winner. For some reason you seem to think I don't get that or deny it. A gift TD is a gift TD. If the team that got one to go ahead gets one called against them and they lose... tough ####. They should've complained when they got theirs, not when bad calls go against their artificial lead.You're not even making sense. You say I denied that GB could've stopped Seattle.. blah blah blah. I never even addressed whether or not GB could've stopped Seattle or anything else that you're trying to say.

But they did not need a TD to take the lead at that point in the game chief.When you claim the two calls were equal...you assume so much with 11 minutes in the game...I say you deny it because you act as if that one call meant as much as one that ended the game.Its that simple.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Just like with I'm the Masochist or whatever his name is, I just basically ignore your posts for good reason. But if it's proof you want, proof I shall provide:

Good

more

more bears

rolling along

Non-stop

Pretty much the same MO you have shown in this thread you show in all the others, maybe 80% of your posts.

So now we'll get another one of your last word posts defending yourself even though you have no defense whatsoever, and a continued breakdown of anything reasonable within this forum. So I'll save you the trouble, you can just end it by apologizing to me and never using the term "pony any out" ever again. Cool?

And Yes...I am a complete buffoon and I'm pretty sure not one person in this forum respects me. I'm ok with that, I have no friends in real life either so why should it matter to me? Nothing I say is reasonable.

And I have no need to apologize to you for jack squat.

I will apologize for my gutter English I just learned it yesterday..the phrase..and I talk in circles and I'm really hard to understand as you can see because I type fragment sentences and use elipses to try to hide the fact I have no idea what the hell I'm talking about...you know...as a trick pony thing which I know and that. You know?

Good man, I'm very proud of you right now.

 

[mad sweeney]

Pull your head out of the numbers. Ask yourself this: why does GB "deserve" to win or why a win was "stolen" from them when the whole game was terribly reffed? That whole game sucked, even when the refs were doing what they were supposed to (they were explicitly told not to call PI on Hail Marys). GB wasn't robbed, Seattle deserved the win as much as GB did. Whoever got screwed last was going to win that game. Either neither team deserved to win or the losing team would've had it given away. Play with your percentages all you want. Chances were that Seattle would've won if the GB drive was correctly called. It wasn't. The end of the game wasn't either.

Seattle would have been slight favorites to win if the PI hadn't been called. Green Bay was slight favorites after it was called. That PI call represented a swing from slight favorites to slight underdogs, and left the Hawks with 11:30 to rectify the situation. The Fail Mary represented a swing from 100% certain defeat to 100% certain victory, with no time left for Green Bay to redress the situation. I've already demonstrated the differences in win probability- a difference of 6 or 7 times. If you want to make the claim that both teams were screwed equally by the officials, you need to come up with at least 5 more calls equal in impact to the PI. The fact that you can't- that no one can- proves those calls didn't exist. Instead, everyone's left exaggerating the one blown call that went GB's way (under 5 minutes! Tied game! Put them in field goal range!) because it's far too weak of a case to make on its own merits, and everyone knows it. You can't just say "there were blown calls on both sides, so let's all just forget it, klolololol?" The magnitude of the blown calls matters. A blown false start on one side doesn't offset a blown 50 yard PI. A blown PI with almost a quarter left to play does not offset a magic god button that waits until the clock expires and then magically retroactively declares the winner to be the loser.

His point is stupid and an example of over emphasis on numbers. A gift TD is a gift TD no matter when it happens. If you want to complain about one, complain about both. But that's not what happens. GB had the game stolen from them and their gift TD is allowable but the last one isn't due to it being the last play of the game is a ridiculous conclusion.

Wow, you must really not think anything of Seattle's defense if you consider 1st and 10 from the Seattle 39 to be a "Gift TD". The refs didn't give Green Bay the ball in the end zone. The refs didn't give Green Bay the ball in the red zone. The refs barely even gave Green Bay the ball in the 20 yard zone that comes before the red zone. Seattle had 39 more chances to keep Green Bay out of pay dirt, and after they laid down and wet the bed, they still had two more drives to respond to the score. When someone calls first and ten from the THIRTY NINE a "gift TD", it's clear they have no interest in having an impartial and unbiased discussion about the relative merits of the case.

I called the drive a gift TD. The Seahawks stopped them. There were more bad calls on that drive and there were far more than 5 bad calls the whole game against the Seahawks, as well as more than that fort the Seahawks. It was a horribly called game (though ironically the biggest and easiest non-call was exactly what the refs were told to do, not call PI on a HM). Saying the last call is the worst, most important, determiner of who deserved to win etc... is nothing more than a bunch of bs. GB didn't "deserve" to be in the lead in the first place so it's pretty silly to say they "deserved" to win just because they got screwed on the last call.

Possible reasons you continue to miss his point:a) homer blindnessb) desire for ongoing shtickc) stupidityWhich is it?

d) I get his point, I don't agree with it.

 

[mad sweeney]

You assume they will score, for some reason, even though they couldn't do it all game long. Or that Seattle won't score again after rightfully stopping that TD drive. Sure, it was the last play. Big deal. Ref help for a TD is ref help for a TD. If one team doesn't deserve to win because of help, then the other doesn't either.

I correctly state they have a possibility of scoring.And they had scored during that game...they were not held to 0 points til that point were they?And what I have rightfully stated is you can't take that one call...and state that if GB does not get that call...that you know what will happen the rest of the game.That is the point...we don't know what would have happened.It is possible (despite your denial) that GB could have stopped Seattle and gone on to score and hold on for the win had that call not happened.What we can correctly state...was if the call was made differently on the last play...GB 100% would win. You simply cannot argue with it.So whining that the call you keep crying about will 11 minutes left made as much of a difference in the game as a play that 100% determined the final outcome is terrible logic that makes absolutely zero statistical sense.And you have not seen me state that GB deserved the win and Seattle didn't.

Where have I denied that what you say I denied?

When you claim that call was the same as the last call.To be so...that call would have had to have determined 100% the winner or loser. For it to do that, you have to believe there was no way GB was scoring.And given your multiple claims (and incorrect ones) that GB had not scored the previous 48 minutes...your denial is pretty obvious.

We're talking about TDs, unless there's a way to do a hail mary field goal, so you can throw that out the window. GB hadn't scored a TD all game until they were helped to it by the ref. And we know 100% that the game wouldn't have happened the way it happened if that drive wasn't artificially extended. We don't know how it would've ended, but it obviously couldn't have played out how it did. I never denied that the last call 100% determined the winner. For some reason you seem to think I don't get that or deny it. A gift TD is a gift TD. If the team that got one to go ahead gets one called against them and they lose... tough ####. They should've complained when they got theirs, not when bad calls go against their artificial lead.You're not even making sense. You say I denied that GB could've stopped Seattle.. blah blah blah. I never even addressed whether or not GB could've stopped Seattle or anything else that you're trying to say.

But they did not need a TD to take the lead at that point in the game chief.When you claim the two calls were equal...you assume so much with 11 minutes in the game...I say you deny it because you act as if that one call meant as much as one that ended the game.Its that simple.

And if they got a FG, chief, then the Seahawks wouldn't be throwing a hail mary, they'd kick a fg. You clearly don't understand how to use the word "deny" in a meaningful way.You're that simple.

 

[Judge Smails]

Another potentially good thread turned to ####...

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Another potentially good thread turned to ####...

Broncos look pretty good.

 

[devouredbychaos]

So what happens when Sherman misses the playoffs??One and done

He's pretty confident he isn't going to miss anytime and he's put his money where his mouth is all season.

He's also put those PEDs in his mouth all season too...

Not true, you're just a hater. Even if he was taking them he obviously hasn't the last 3 weeks when he's been playing his best.

Hahaha and how do you know he hasn't been taking anything the last 3 weeks?

 

[sho nuff]

Just like with I'm the Masochist or whatever his name is, I just basically ignore your posts for good reason. But if it's proof you want, proof I shall provide:

Good

more

more bears

rolling along

Non-stop

Pretty much the same MO you have shown in this thread you show in all the others, maybe 80% of your posts.

So now we'll get another one of your last word posts defending yourself even though you have no defense whatsoever, and a continued breakdown of anything reasonable within this forum. So I'll save you the trouble, you can just end it by apologizing to me and never using the term "pony any out" ever again. Cool?

And Yes...I am a complete buffoon and I'm pretty sure not one person in this forum respects me. I'm ok with that, I have no friends in real life either so why should it matter to me? Nothing I say is reasonable.

And I have no need to apologize to you for jack squat.

I will apologize for my gutter English I just learned it yesterday..the phrase..and I talk in circles and I'm really hard to understand as you can see because I type fragment sentences and use elipses to try to hide the fact I have no idea what the hell I'm talking about...you know...as a trick pony thing which I know and that. You know?

Good man, I'm very proud of you right now.

Ahh...quote manipulation...the sign of the truely desperate soul with nothing to offer.BTW...if I don't know what I am talking about when it comes to football, you would be able to come up with something better than this crap.

Grow up.

 

[ImTheScientist]

And I thought the whiners fans were awful..... Green Bay fan cry's more than they do. Let it go....maybe you will be unlucky and get to play the Hawks in the playoffs. I'll enjoy seeing the frozen tears of pack fans.

 

[godgers12]

And I thought the whiners fans were awful..... Green Bay fan cry's more than they do. Let it go....maybe you will be unlucky and get to play the Hawks in the playoffs. I'll enjoy seeing the frozen tears of pack fans.

when i first started reading this forum I thought you were a decent troll, but now your trying to hard. Carry on though, happy for ya, Seahawks lookin good.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Pull your head out of the numbers. Ask yourself this: why does GB "deserve" to win or why a win was "stolen" from them when the whole game was terribly reffed? That whole game sucked, even when the refs were doing what they were supposed to (they were explicitly told not to call PI on Hail Marys). GB wasn't robbed, Seattle deserved the win as much as GB did. Whoever got screwed last was going to win that game. Either neither team deserved to win or the losing team would've had it given away. Play with your percentages all you want. Chances were that Seattle would've won if the GB drive was correctly called. It wasn't. The end of the game wasn't either.

Seattle would have been slight favorites to win if the PI hadn't been called. Green Bay was slight favorites after it was called. That PI call represented a swing from slight favorites to slight underdogs, and left the Hawks with 11:30 to rectify the situation. The Fail Mary represented a swing from 100% certain defeat to 100% certain victory, with no time left for Green Bay to redress the situation. I've already demonstrated the differences in win probability- a difference of 6 or 7 times. If you want to make the claim that both teams were screwed equally by the officials, you need to come up with at least 5 more calls equal in impact to the PI. The fact that you can't- that no one can- proves those calls didn't exist. Instead, everyone's left exaggerating the one blown call that went GB's way (under 5 minutes! Tied game! Put them in field goal range!) because it's far too weak of a case to make on its own merits, and everyone knows it. You can't just say "there were blown calls on both sides, so let's all just forget it, klolololol?" The magnitude of the blown calls matters. A blown false start on one side doesn't offset a blown 50 yard PI. A blown PI with almost a quarter left to play does not offset a magic god button that waits until the clock expires and then magically retroactively declares the winner to be the loser.

His point is stupid and an example of over emphasis on numbers. A gift TD is a gift TD no matter when it happens. If you want to complain about one, complain about both. But that's not what happens. GB had the game stolen from them and their gift TD is allowable but the last one isn't due to it being the last play of the game is a ridiculous conclusion.

Wow, you must really not think anything of Seattle's defense if you consider 1st and 10 from the Seattle 39 to be a "Gift TD". The refs didn't give Green Bay the ball in the end zone. The refs didn't give Green Bay the ball in the red zone. The refs barely even gave Green Bay the ball in the 20 yard zone that comes before the red zone. Seattle had 39 more chances to keep Green Bay out of pay dirt, and after they laid down and wet the bed, they still had two more drives to respond to the score. When someone calls first and ten from the THIRTY NINE a "gift TD", it's clear they have no interest in having an impartial and unbiased discussion about the relative merits of the case.

I called the drive a gift TD. The Seahawks stopped them. There were more bad calls on that drive and there were far more than 5 bad calls the whole game against the Seahawks, as well as more than that fort the Seahawks. It was a horribly called game (though ironically the biggest and easiest non-call was exactly what the refs were told to do, not call PI on a HM). Saying the last call is the worst, most important, determiner of who deserved to win etc... is nothing more than a bunch of bs. GB didn't "deserve" to be in the lead in the first place so it's pretty silly to say they "deserved" to win just because they got screwed on the last call.

Possible reasons you continue to miss his point:a) homer blindnessb) desire for ongoing shtickc) stupidityWhich is it?

d) I get his point, I don't agree with it.

In other words, c) stupidityGot it. Good luck in the playoffs, Russell Wilson and Marshawn are both really fun to watch. As is the D.

 

[Alkahsu]

So what happens when Sherman misses the playoffs??One and done

He's pretty confident he isn't going to miss anytime and he's put his money where his mouth is all season.

He's also put those PEDs in his mouth all season too...

Buncha effin cheaters.

And Sherman wins his appeal, you guys can keep trolling though.

 

[Alkahsu]

So what happens when Sherman misses the playoffs??One and done

He's pretty confident he isn't going to miss anytime and he's put his money where his mouth is all season.

He's also put those PEDs in his mouth all season too...

Not true, you're just a hater. Even if he was taking them he obviously hasn't the last 3 weeks when he's been playing his best.

Hahaha and how do you know he hasn't been taking anything the last 3 weeks?

You really thing anyone would take a banned substance when they are in the middle of an appeal? Are you that dense or just straight trolling? Plus he won his appeal.

 

[packseasontix]

So what happens when Sherman misses the playoffs??One and done

He's pretty confident he isn't going to miss anytime and he's put his money where his mouth is all season.

He's also put those PEDs in his mouth all season too...

Not true, you're just a hater. Even if he was taking them he obviously hasn't the last 3 weeks when he's been playing his best.

Hahaha and how do you know he hasn't been taking anything the last 3 weeks?

You really thing anyone would take a banned substance when they are in the middle of an appeal? Are you that dense or just straight trolling? Plus he won his appeal.

So you are 100% agreeing Braun didn't take any steriods right? Just want to verify as they both used the same case. Although for Sherman's defense you would have to believe the 2nd cup had adderall in it, where Braun's you had to believe by leaving out the speciman for so long it could artificially raise certain chemical levels.

 

[Alkahsu]

So what happens when Sherman misses the playoffs??One and done

He's pretty confident he isn't going to miss anytime and he's put his money where his mouth is all season.

He's also put those PEDs in his mouth all season too...

Not true, you're just a hater. Even if he was taking them he obviously hasn't the last 3 weeks when he's been playing his best.

Hahaha and how do you know he hasn't been taking anything the last 3 weeks?

You really thing anyone would take a banned substance when they are in the middle of an appeal? Are you that dense or just straight trolling? Plus he won his appeal.

So you are 100% agreeing Braun didn't take any steriods right? Just want to verify as they both used the same case. Although for Sherman's defense you would have to believe the 2nd cup had adderall in it, where Braun's you had to believe by leaving out the speciman for so long it could artificially raise certain chemical levels.

I didn't follow Braun's story so I can't comment on it. If the Hawks had one teammate test positive for Adderall its not out of the realm of possibility that Sherman's test/another cup could have been contaminated. Certaintly more reasonable than what you're saying for Braun.

 

[Buffaloes]

So what happens when Sherman misses the playoffs??One and done

¿que?