Archive 29

ClubHombre.com: -Off-Topic-: -Sports: Football - NFL: Archives 21-30: Archive 29
By Porker on Monday, September 12, 2005 - 09:05 pm:  Edit

Yardage stats like those in the KC and Indy games are very misleading, dude. KC and Indy dominated those games on defense and gave up a ton of yards very late in the game when the game was in total garbage time. The KC performance was especially impressive because the Jets offense is supposedly pretty good, and the way both those teams just shut down the run from good running teams/backs was very surprising.

I didn't see the Jacksonville game, but if they can beat the Seahawks rather easily, they did something right, and I doubt it was due solely to sloppy play.

And the Texans looked HORRIBLE on O. Part of that was the Buffalo D, I'm sure, but the Houston line looked very, very bad.

By Porker on Monday, September 12, 2005 - 09:07 pm:  Edit

Rams dominated the game? You're on crack.

By Porker on Monday, September 12, 2005 - 09:09 pm:  Edit

The Redskins won because they played the only team in the NFL that is more incompetent on offense than they are. Ride them straight into the toilet bowl.

By Due_diligence on Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 11:20 pm:  Edit

I am going to be betting against Jake Plummer a lot this year. He is downright AWEFUL. This week, imo, presents a good 'investment' opportunity. I've got the Chargers at even +125. Denver is a tough place to play but Jake will probably throw an interception or two to cost them the game. My prediction is for Bradley Van Pelt to take over the starting QB this year.

By Porker on Thursday, September 15, 2005 - 11:37 pm:  Edit

Why would you ever think that a backup QB would ever get a shot in Denver barring injury? Denver has 6 million reasons (roster bonus for Plummer), not to mention the most important one (Shanahan's ego) to keep running Plummer out there and taking their chances on him sucking ASS.

Personally, I tend to agree with you that Plummer SUCKS, but he has enough good games that the bad ones get chalked up to 'inconsistency'.

Regardless of the QB situation, Denver always seems to post decent records. Betting against them at home against a Chargers team that really isn't all that good and with Denver coming off an absolutely HORRIBLE game is probably not the world's wisest betting move. Of course it IS tempting to say that since Miami dominated them and the Chargers are better than Miami that this game is easy money.

Of course, finally (and most importantly) BEST WAY EVER TO MAKE MONEY BETTING ON SPORTS: Find out which game Porker actially pissed away his own hard-scratched deniro on and then BET ON THE OTHER SIDE! :-(

By Due_diligence on Friday, September 16, 2005 - 06:37 am:  Edit

All valid points. My friends in Denver say the talk radio lines are jammed with angry fans who want Plummer benched. Shannahan may bench him for a game to light a fire under his ass.

By Porker on Friday, September 16, 2005 - 07:08 am:  Edit

Don't bet on Plummer being benched and Shanahan never struck me as the type who listens to the PEANUT GALLERY about anything. Right now all those fans see are playoff ass-whippings by the Colts (not PLUMMER'S fault) and a good-pre-season by Tweedle-dum that's probably never even taken a regular season snap. I doubt the guy's Don Strock Jr. Lol, prob'ly not even David Woodley Jr.!

And if the Chargers can lose at home to Dallas, they can certainly lose to Denver on the road.

By Shadow on Friday, September 16, 2005 - 11:28 am:  Edit

Hey Porker

The only odds you and I should even think about are the odds of us meeting the guys in Thailand next month. I give myself 3/5

How about you?

By Porker on Friday, September 16, 2005 - 11:46 am:  Edit

1 in 30,000 :-(

By Shadow on Friday, September 16, 2005 - 08:24 pm:  Edit

I'll take that in Thai Baht, Bro!

Back on football - you might consider getting a good return on the 'niners this weekend. A whacked receiver and a hurt QB is no way for Philly to face an angry opponent.

By Due_diligence on Saturday, September 17, 2005 - 01:04 am:  Edit

If anyone is familiar with the Stardust Invitaional handicapping contest here are the selections for this week:

Fezzik
*****
Michigan State +6.5
49ers/Eagles U41
Panthers +3
Rams/Cards U44
Giants -3
BEST BET: Chargers +3

********
Ron Boyles
********
Pitt +10
N. Carolina +3.5 (Fezzik likes this, too)
Rice +41
Miss State -2.5
Arizona +7
BEST BET: Nevada +1.5

I've been following these picks for years and these guys are usally pretty good. If this is something people here do not want to see, I wont post them.

By Porker on Saturday, September 17, 2005 - 09:12 am:  Edit

I certainly don't have a problem with you posting that info.

Shadow, I'm thinking T.O.'s gonna rip the 49'ers a new culo. Of course I thought he was gonna put up 2 TD's on Monday night too, so who knows. Still, 7 catches for a buck-something in yardage is a pretty damned good 'off' game.

How tall is Ahmad Plummer again?

By Porker on Sunday, September 18, 2005 - 10:08 am:  Edit

That didn't take long for T.O.

By Porker on Sunday, September 18, 2005 - 10:56 am:  Edit

5-143 and 2 40+ yard TD's early in the 2nd quarter. That's muy bueno.

By Due_diligence on Sunday, September 18, 2005 - 11:25 am:  Edit

This is a mauling. Hats off to you if you layed that big number on Philly.

By Valterreekian on Sunday, September 18, 2005 - 01:14 pm:  Edit

Steelers looked fairly good today. I expected a bigger margin against the Texans who have not looked very strong thus far, but I was pleased that Big Ben was able to play and did well.

By Shadow on Sunday, September 18, 2005 - 08:02 pm:  Edit

OUCH!!!

Rumors of QB's injuries may be greatly exagerated! :0(

By Ootie on Monday, September 19, 2005 - 10:58 am:  Edit

I hope you guys aren't losing any of your hard-earned cash betting football. It's extremely difficult to overcome that vig.

The better option is to educate yourself concerning the nuances of Texas Holdem and take advantage of the still plentiful number of phishes who don't play properly.

A Currently making some money online kind of guy,

Ootie (Out-of-Towner)

By Porker on Monday, September 19, 2005 - 05:29 pm:  Edit

Paul Tagliabue is a jackass and the Saints playing in the Meadowlands tonight is a joke. When the fires in San Diego required a change of venue they moved to a nearby neutral site, they didn't give the visiting team a 9th home game. Asinine.

By Don Marco on Monday, September 19, 2005 - 08:55 pm:  Edit

Agreed. I would like to think there was some logic in the decision, but I for one can't what he was thinking.

By Don Marco on Monday, September 19, 2005 - 09:21 pm:  Edit

shit! Bill/ drew/ terry -- say it ain't so! Amazing the cowboys LET this game slip away!@

By Athos on Monday, September 19, 2005 - 11:20 pm:  Edit

I had the cowboys in a teaser and was thinking I was smart for a change. The redskins are awful, no offense and better than average defense, amazing they are 2-0, even the chargers can beat them.

By Ootie on Tuesday, September 20, 2005 - 07:31 am:  Edit

Washington won? I went to bed early assuming it was all Dallas. Unbelievable.

A Hoping my Giants take advantage of the 9th home game kind of guy,

Ootie (Out-of-Towner)

By Valterreekian on Tuesday, September 20, 2005 - 08:37 am:  Edit

I'm with you Ootie, I turned the game off half way through the 4th, when it was 13-0 confidant that it was over.

Interesting point...Until last night Bill Parcells was 77-0 when having a lead of ANY kind in the 4th quarter. What a melt down.

They better play better than that for those of us tax payers who are going to be paying for the new stadium!

By Catocony on Tuesday, September 20, 2005 - 03:35 pm:  Edit

Hail to the Redskins,
Hail Victory,
Braves on the Warpath,
Fight for old D.C.,
Run or pass and score -- we want a lot more,
Beat 'em, Swamp 'em,
Touchdown! -- Let the points soar,
Fight on, fight on 'Til you have won
Sons of Wash-ing-ton. Rah!, Rah!, Rah!

Hail to the Redskins
Hail Victory
Braves on the Warpath
Fight for old D.C.

By Maximus743 on Wednesday, September 21, 2005 - 10:38 am:  Edit

Anyone else enjoy the Carolina upset of NE as much as I did? :-)

I enjoyed Redskins win over Dallas as well.

By Don Marco on Wednesday, September 21, 2005 - 10:55 am:  Edit

ahh f-u ;)

Savor the moments-- you won't have many.

By Maximus743 on Wednesday, September 21, 2005 - 05:38 pm:  Edit

So far my moments are batting .500

One of two chances. :-)

I look forward to more.

By Fooledagain1 on Thursday, September 22, 2005 - 08:18 pm:  Edit

Looky looky looky who's sitting on top of the NFC East, How bout those Skins !!!!

By Porker on Thursday, September 22, 2005 - 11:43 pm:  Edit

I predict they'll still be undefeated heading into week 4.

By Due_diligence on Friday, September 23, 2005 - 06:02 pm:  Edit

Does anyone like Pittsburgh -3 on Sunday as much as I do? Every team likes to gun for the defending Super Bowl winner, and Pittsburgh has probably circled this date in their calender for quite some time. Huge revenge play here, and New England has some holes in their defense.

By Due_diligence on Friday, September 23, 2005 - 10:27 pm:  Edit

Stardust Invitional Handicapping contest-

This week pitted Kevin O'neal against Jay Gensbach. Last week's selections did well and put me in the black.

******
*Kevin*
******
Wisconsin +3
Purdue +3.5
Bears +3
Bills -2.5
Chiefs +3 (Will win SU)
BEST BET: Patriots +3 (Will win SU)

****
*Jay*
****
Clemson -2.5
Washington +13
Oakland/Eagles O46
Panthers -3
Steelers -3
BEST BET: Oregon +21

By sampson on Saturday, September 24, 2005 - 06:22 pm:  Edit

i'm with pitt this weekend. looks like a public trap as the suckers are all going to be saying something like the pats cannot lose two games in a row. buy the game to 2 1/2 though.

By Valterreekian on Saturday, September 24, 2005 - 07:57 pm:  Edit

Pats/Steelers should be a good game. NE is a bit banged up right now though so I would go with the Steelers. If the Pats were healthy, it would be a tough call.

By Khun_mor on Saturday, September 24, 2005 - 11:01 pm:  Edit

Thank Buddha I ignored one of those best bets. The Ducks played like their namesakes in the last 3 quarters of the game .I will also ignore the other " Best Bet " and expect similar results as the Steelers have a score to settle ,are at home, and the Pats are really thin in the secondary right now.

By Porker on Sunday, September 25, 2005 - 04:09 pm:  Edit

It's really hard to believe the Patriots are actually ahead in this game right now. They have tried very, very hard to lose this game. The Randle El botched pitch was FUNNY!

By Valterreekian on Sunday, September 25, 2005 - 05:18 pm:  Edit

Congrats to the Pats fans. They EARNED it. All those injuries and they still flatl outplayed the Steelers on their own field. Brady was awesome!

Pleased to see that Dallas got their head out of their ass in time to avoid loosing to a team they should have handled much easier.

By Don Marco on Monday, September 26, 2005 - 10:35 am:  Edit

Indeed- both the pats and ex--pats played up to my expectations. Now if only my fantasy team would cooperate ;)

Parcels -- billyboychuck SB. Now that's a fun thought!



By Porker on Monday, September 26, 2005 - 09:19 pm:  Edit

Did the Ketchup Bottle sell out to the visitors?

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=Amrp2HV4sC1aHcbYDcblA3NDubYF?slug=ap-patriots-steelersclock&prov=ap&type=lgns

By Maximus743 on Monday, September 26, 2005 - 10:58 pm:  Edit

THe Pats earned it?

Did they also EARN the extra 52 seconds that enabled them for the second time in history to win a important game they did not win fairly?

PITTSBURGH (Sept. 26) - A clock error added 52 seconds to the fourth quarter of the Patriots-Steelers game Sunday. The extra time aided the Patriots during a winning drive that ended with Adam Vinatieri's 43-yard field goal with 1 second remaining.

By Maximus743 on Monday, September 26, 2005 - 11:00 pm:  Edit

Once again the Jets who were supposed to have a good season lose there QB early on for the rest of the season.

So fucking frustrating. Had he not been injured they would of beat Jacksonville as well.

By Porker on Tuesday, September 27, 2005 - 12:52 am:  Edit

Pennington had only minor success when healthy 3 years ago. Griese Jr. eats his lunch. Lol, too bad Ken O' Brien's dead and gone!

By Blazers on Tuesday, September 27, 2005 - 01:14 am:  Edit

I disagree about that Porker. When healthy, he is as good as they come. Extremely accurate passer and natural leader. His demise has do with one thing and one thing only...bad luck with injuries. He is a tough guy but surgery is surgery and some guys never bounce back. It's too bad for the Jets because they seem to have everything else in place, although their RB is a bit old

By Maximus743 on Tuesday, September 27, 2005 - 01:37 am:  Edit

YEs Porker as usual you are correct.

I guess being one of the final four teams vying for the Super bowl is your definition of minor sucess.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

HE beat the Eventual Super Bowl bound Raiders, then slaughtered A tough GReen Bay team in Green Bay just to make the playoffs , then Destroyed the Colts like 37-0 to get to the AFC championship vs the Raiders where he went stone cold.

Yep you are right. That is minor success.

By Porker on Tuesday, September 27, 2005 - 06:43 am:  Edit

BFD. If he was so good they shouldn't have HAD to sweat the last few games to even make the damned playoffs, now should they? Making the NFL's final four is some sort of an accomplishment for a QB? I guess they should just enshrine Jim McMahon, Trent Dilfer, Doug Williams and Jake Delhomme in Canton now. They all played in the Super Bowl.

Blazers, Griese doesn't do it every year, but he's put up numbers every bit as good as the best Pennington ever has, and NOBODY would call him a particularly good QB. My dead grandma could be accurate if she only threw the ball 20 times a game and rarely threw more than 15 yards in the air. And Pennington had ONE good year. Just because Jets QB's have always SUCKED is the only reason he ever got noticed.

By Valterreekian on Tuesday, September 27, 2005 - 07:35 am:  Edit

Maximus> THe Pats earned it?

Did they also EARN the extra 52 seconds that enabled them for the second time in history to win a important game they did not win fairly?

PITTSBURGH (Sept. 26) - A clock error added 52 seconds to the fourth quarter of the Patriots-Steelers game Sunday. The extra time aided the Patriots during a winning drive that ended with Adam Vinatieri's 43-yard field goal with 1 second remaining.

I was referring to Sunday's game, not that fiasco last year. In this case, they did overcome a lot of key injuries, turn overs and a solid Steeler defense, so I feel they earned it. I am no Pat's fan, and hope to hell when the dust clears the Steelers are the one in the Superbowl, but I think it only fair to give the Pat;s their due, when appropriate. Next time, we will win I hope.

By Don Marco on Tuesday, September 27, 2005 - 08:57 am:  Edit

ohh gimme a break... I suppose if a call goes against a team, they "didn't earn it" either. Your assuming the clock would of unfolded the same if the 52 seconds were not there... it's odd how the 52 seconds didn't = a steelers win...


Get used to it-- the pats with 1/2 their starters out are better than the rest of the NFL on nearly any given Sunday.

Hey Parcel's-- c u in the SB.







By Don Marco on Tuesday, September 27, 2005 - 08:59 am:  Edit

BTW, Blazers that's 2 LoS barfines payable to me ;)

By Maximus743 on Tuesday, September 27, 2005 - 12:16 pm:  Edit

""Just because Jets QB's have always SUCKED is the only reason he ever got noticed.""

There you go again making assine all inclusive comments.

Yep you are right again Jets QB's always sucked and is exactly why Joe Namath is in the hall of Fame as one of the best QB's ever and the reason for one of the biggest upsets in pro football history.

(Message edited by maximus743 on September 27, 2005)

By Don Marco on Tuesday, September 27, 2005 - 05:20 pm:  Edit

terrible news for the Jets today. They are nearly as potent as the Bills O. There's always next year *cough*