Kramerica Industries

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Kramerica Industries

  1. So both 12s have the 5s on the ropes, as well as the 11-seeded Coyotes against the Preds. Now, given the circumstances of this season, I'm not complaining about this format*. Strange circumstances yield strange decisions to be made. So if upsets happen, then upsets happen. What cannot be allowed to happen is the NHL seeing these upsets (potentially) and thinking "you know what? Lets make this a permanent thing", and the only reason I have this concern in the first place is because we all know the NHL is stupid enough to do that. Whatever the urge is, don't do it. *I'm also a fan of a team who managed to stay above the fracas, so there's that.
  2. Indians, Dbacks, and Angels all come to mind. If not identical, then pretty similar and the same general idea.
  3. Watched parts of these first two games at the Rangers new ballpark and it looks as generic in action as it looks from the outside. Good job, Rangers.
  4. The regional Fox Sports networks still using the same graphics packages for MLB that have been in use since October 2017.
  5. Well that's totally stupid. They expect people to not lean forward at any point during the action?
  6. I think any runs scored in those situations are being considered unearned runs so no effect on ERA. Still, vexingly stupid and I can only hope that it's not going to continue for 2021. That rule change is way too extreme for this sport.
  7. High stirrups are silly. We're supposed to see more of the actual color, not the sanitary sock underneath it. 7 inches is a hard limit for me. Ideally, the 4-5 inch range is where it would stop.
  8. I can tell you that Bill Barnwell has made a conscious choice to not say "Redskins" going back at least as far as his Grantland days. Whether use of their logo still pops up is something I can't answer - I seriously tailed off reading him after Grantland shut down, for better or worse - but there's definitely some precedent among their writers for this going back for some time. I tend to agree with @Digby in that this is probably left as a "do as you wish" kind of deal for now, probably because ESPN doesn't want to issue an edict on this knowing that, like almost everything else, it will be politicized if they do.
  9. There's nothing about what I'm hearing about this season that I'm going to be able to accept as being legitimate. At this point, given how much the pandemic has already wiped out more than half the season, and that MLB doesn't want to consider playing regular season games beyond the end of September because of the television agreements they've already entered into - television agreements that see their sport treated a second-rate property by all three of their national TV partners, I may add -, and now this rubbish about the "runner at second base in extra innings" which, you know, we were always told this was simply a measure used in the minor leagues to keep games down there from running long but now is somehow seeing itself used, emergency or not, at the major league level... Honestly, if these are the circumstances that ML baseball is going to be played under for 2020, I'd rather there not be a season at all. And I say that knowing full well that my favorite team might well, under normal circumstances, be the favorite to win the World Series this year. Doing so this way would be illegitimate and feel cheapened. As much as I miss baseball, I'd rather just deal with not having it for a year than having to bury my head in the sand and pretend I'm watching something that isn't a poorly bastardized version of it. Not worth my time, even if I know I'll still watch every game that I can if and when we finally get going.
  10. I'm so glad I don't run into the same people you run into them. I have an online record of being a Cooper skeptic going back to 2016 after the Lightning had a dismal regular season (they finished with the sixth best record in the East and weren't inside the playoff picture for good until the end of February). And while I know Stamkos missed most of the 2016-'17 season, the fact of the matter is the Lightning had enough talent outside of him that they should've never been in last place in the entire conference in the middle of January (proof) and they should've never missed the playoffs. That was a fireable offense. That Ottawa Senators team who took the Penguins to double OT in Game 7 of the Conference Finals? The Lightning were more skilled, by a comfortable margin. That was a missed opportunity in a very weak Atlantic Division because the Lightning, for the second straight year, didn't start playing hockey until the second half of the season rolled around, and that time they didn't have enough time to climb out of the hole they dug for themselves. Last March, I'm not sure I'll ever forget the groan I had when I heard the news about Cooper getting a contract extension. I get why it happened - the Lightning didn't want a scenario like what happened with Trotz the year before with the Caps where they go on to win the Cup and then the head coach walks because his demands aren't met but, you know, Cooper has repeatedly been outmaneuvered in the playoffs and if such a repeat situation had occurred a la Trotz, then something tells me that it would've been an acceptable outcome because, you know, it would mean they won the Cup. That was such a pre-emptive move, awarded on the merits of what the Lightning had accomplished during the regular season even though everybody already knew that the regular season accomplishments weren't going to be what anybody cared about when it was all said and done. As it turned out, those accomplishments became a punchline. You said Sharks East, I would probably say Ducks East myself, but that's six-in-one/half-dozen the other. All three teams in the last decade are synonymous with strong regular seasons, win a few playoff series, but trip themselves up short of the finish line. I align more with the Ducks because, much like them, the Lightning have blown their share of 3-2 series leads over the years.
  11. I can't help the people you might encounter and deal with so I'm not discrediting your word on this at all...that being said, whatever arrogance our fanbase might have, I would sure hope that got extinguished after having the most embarrassing playoff failure in North American sports history last year. Literally nothing short of winning the Cup in, well, our next opportunity now I guess (whether that comes this year or not) is going to make that stain go away anytime soon.
  12. There are usually several replays per game that use the All-22 angle, so I have to imagine the answer is yes. And this has been the case at least as far back as when John Madden was at Fox...maybe even CBS but I've watched only a handful of games, if any, from that far back.
  13. I would agree with this stuff as well. In fact, in general, I would suggest any play-by-play job with any MLB/NBA/NHL team, at least the television ones and also some of the radio ones as well, are superior gigs to doing, ultimately, a studio program. At least, that's what I would say today. SportsCenter used to be a bigger deal back when watching highlights was a tougher thing to do. Now that anyone can watch highlights at a moment's notice...I'll just say that, outside of SVP's version every now and then, I'm not even sure I remember the last time I watched SC. There's really no need. Either I saw what I needed to see already, or I haven't seen it but am still planning to, or I don't care enough about it to see the highlights from anyway. So why would I watch? Besides, a great deal of the sports I watch these days are either hockey or soccer games, and I know SC isn't going to be airing the highlights from (most of them) anyway.
  14. Just to bring the topic back to MNF quickly, although this is a broader ESPN problem really, but one thing that bringing in a new broadcast crew isn't going to solve is ESPN's obnoxious overuse of panning to crowd shots after plays happen. They must do it far more than the other networks do, and the only other network I can think of that tends to use them with any kind of volume - Fox - does it so much better than ESPN does. As long as this is how ESPN does things, it's not really going to matter who they have in the booth because it makes their production look so amateur-ish.
  15. Surely I'm not the only one who saw those pictures and thought what it most resembled was an airplane hangar...right? EDIT: Indeed I wasn't. Guess I skimmed right over this one.
  16. Maybe it was just me trying to blot this game out of my memory, but this just came back to me. That was so ridiculously clutch and I liked the Yankees chances in Game 7 had it gotten to that point, given the pitching matchups. Instead, it gets forgotten because of the home run that followed in the bottom half of the inning.
  17. If someone wants to argue that the play should've been reviewed, I won't disagree. The lack of a review was a problem in and of itself. But there are just a few things here: 1) It was ruled no goal on the ice. There was no conclusive angle that would've overturned that call. No, your angle above isn't conclusive. The puck was also in the air, not on the ice, which further skews things. Perhaps, in the interest of all fairness, if it had been ruled a goal on the ice, there would've been difficulty overturning that call also. But it wasn't. 2) Would that have been ruled a "distinct kicking motion"? I have no idea because the NHL has never had a consistent definition for what that is. Not in 2004 and not today, though the rules against that in general were more strict back then than they are now. In any case, I never see anyone mention that and, sorry, but that's kind of a big deal. In my opinion, that's not a distinct kicking motion, but I've seen goals called back for stuff just like what he did before, and my personal interpretation has always been on the lighter side anyway. Others may disagree. 3) There were 6 1/2 minutes left in the third period at that point. The Lightning were the third-highest scoring team in the NHL that season. Nobody can sit here and pretend that them scoring a goal in those last 6 1/2 minutes would've been some kind of impossible thing to overcome. This wasn't overtime, so it's always been simplified to an extreme degree to paint this as a would-be Stanley Cup winning goal. So, you know, sorry but I'm not the least bit sorry about any of that.
  18. Jermaine Kearse catch towards the end of Super Bowl XLIX is high up there. Right up with Tyree and Manningham but lacked the ending those other catches had.
  19. Well, "won the battle but lost the war" seems to fit right about there. It's also something I appreciate about Bruce Arians because he's always made a point of it to himself and his coaches to work reasonable hours and make time for family events.
  20. I have no earthly clue why they didn't retain the orange stripes on last year's Color Rush set - this version quite literally looks like crap - but big thumbs up on the home and away. Wish they had brought in an orange alternate but that's not a big deal and might be something for the future anyway.
  21. Speaking purely for the white uniforms here even though it applies to the black ones as well - every single one of these is crying out for contrasting socks. White socks / red or black socks (preferably black) / white or black socks, and any of those combinations immediately becomes 10x more digestible. And I know this has been said plenty, but whatever. Facts are facts.
  22. I just don't understand. The Falcons could've taken the laziest possible route, and promoted their fauxback uniform, promoted their Color Rush uniform, and designed a white jersey based on those, and would've come out looking 100x better than this. Literally the only positive I have for this is that their main jersey color is black again, but that's only a positive because I'm biased towards the color black. And if they wear white pants with that jersey, the color balance is passable for me. If they wear mono-black like the Saints love doing (an ironic team to imitate, btw), then forget it. Mono-black in general is trash. Mono-black in an indoor stadium - usually indoor, anyway - even more-so. There are some mono's that I've seen in recent years that I feel actually work well; the Broncos and Chargers Color Rush looks come to mind, but most non-white ones don't work and none of those Falcons ones are any exception.
  23. Blowing a 25-point lead in the Super Bowl wasn't enough for you guys, huh?
  24. If they were going to have an alternate gray anthracite jersey, I would've just as soon rather them have gone with a black one instead, obviously only useful in night games in Tampa but something nonetheless. I always liked the way those looked. I think I have an old Derrick Brooks one laying around somewhere.
  25. I only saw his name once in a thread and I don't even remember what he said, but, that said, "FormerLurker", to me, would scream "I've been banned before" but perhaps this person truly got banned under this account on the sole basis of their posts and no other factors. Dunno.