BaltimoreFan

Members
  • Content Count

    2,859
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Prospect
  1. I haven't posted on here in a long time, but I had to say something about how awful these Maryland jerseys are. The school has ruined great jerseys in two sports. I like originality and the use of the flag, but this is just horrible execution. It looks like something a kid would design. In an NCAA full of awful uniform designs this may be the worst. The thing I hate most is that the school has recently had very good designs and they get rid of it for complete trash.
  2. Hopefully people will say "The old rule was bull- . It's nice to see that it takes more than winning the toss and getting a couple first downs to win a playoff game in OT." They won't say that, but I'm hoping they will. More likely it will be met with the same sort of breathless hysteria that a 7-9 team making the playoffs was met with. This is the NFL. We are NFL fans. Overreacting is what we do. I like the rule itself, but I don't like that its being enacted for the playoffs. The playoffs should be consistent with the regular season when it comes to rules. I won't overreact if the rule does come into effect this postseason. However I will insist that it becomes a part of the next regular season, which I'm doing now anyway. Well I'm sure Roger Goodell will take your concerns into consideration. "However I will insist that it becomes a part of the next regular season."What are you going to do, send an email to the league office? Post it to your twitter account? Bitch about it on Facebook? Or worse, here? No offense dude, but that post is nothing short of hilarious. Thank goodness you won't overreact. What the are some of you people smoking? LOL, I was talking more about the extent of bitching I will do on this board. Which is about the only "bitching" I do about sports at all. I would think most people that have read the majority of my posts here would realize that I'm not very serious about sports. Not sure what it is in this thread, but most people seem to be completely misjudging the amount of concern I'm putting into these playoff issues. I must be typing in a different tone, than I intend to. Just to be clear: -I feel the any division winner deserves a spot in the playoffs, but not necessarily a home game. -The rules for the playoffs should be consistent with with regular season. -I don't plan to lose any sleep or take any action to skew things toward my opinion. I'm not going to take my concerns to any social networks. Nor would I waste the time to contact Goodell. I could honestly care less.
  3. Hopefully people will say "The old rule was bull- . It's nice to see that it takes more than winning the toss and getting a couple first downs to win a playoff game in OT." They won't say that, but I'm hoping they will. More likely it will be met with the same sort of breathless hysteria that a 7-9 team making the playoffs was met with. This is the NFL. We are NFL fans. Overreacting is what we do. I like the rule itself, but I don't like that its being enacted for the playoffs. The playoffs should be consistent with the regular season when it comes to rules. I won't overreact if the rule does come into effect this postseason. However I will insist that it becomes a part of the next regular season, which I'm doing now anyway.
  4. If this were 2005, Orioles fans would have reason to say more than, "who gives a anymore?" Lee was actually the 1B I wanted for the offseason. I'm shocked the Orioles were able to pull it off. It looked like they were going to get stuck in an awful contract with LaRoche. I think Lee makes a solid stopgap with a good chance at a bounceback year. It will be an interesting season. Lee, Reynolds, and Hardy are all solid additions, but none of them are game changers. Alot will depend on the young pitching, but I think a winning record is possible this year. But I'm not getting my hopes up after the disaster that was 2010.
  5. I have no problem with the Seahawks getting into the playoffs. They won their division, they deserve a spot. I don't like that they get a home game (or the Chiefs and Colts for that matter), but I've already made that argument and its just a difference in opinion. It really doesn't matter too much because the Saints have no excuses for losing in Seattle. Glad the Ravens pulled off a win even though it didn't matter. Always good to have momentum going into the playoffs. Not sure what it is with the Bengals but they know how to play against the Ravens. It sucks, that that was the last game of the season. Hopefully the Chiefs aren't able to figure it out with the game film. I'm just glad we missed the Colts, which are another team that has the Ravens figured out. Not sure what to think of the Ravens this year. They obviously have talent, but always play a close game. They are horrible at holding a lead in the 4th quarter. I think the most likely outcome for the season is that we will lose in the divisional round to either the Patriots or Steelers, but it will be close. We could easily go to the Super Bowl as well. It all depends on if they can get the job done in the 4th quarter in the playoffs.
  6. You forgot it's December. This model only applies to games from September - November, and not on weekends with a full moon. Okay, then... What model applies to December? It depends, which day of the week is it?
  7. Yea, and the home team is coming to the stadium from their houses and get to play in front of their own fans in their own stadium. I'm not saying the road team is screwed, but the home team most definitely has an advantage. That's why home field advantage is the reward for the #1 seed. I heard Warren Sapp comment on this earlier this season. Again, I could really careless about this issue, its the argument that I don't like. A team that's worse than you is telling you, oh well you should have played better. This just happens to be an odd season where one division is unusually weak and someother divisions have two very good teams. EDIT: BTW, I'm talking about playing on the road 2-3 weeks in row. Not just one week. It's not "tough" to go on the road, but it is when you just did it the week before. That's what Warren Sapp commented on earlier this season on Inside the NFL. He predicted the Bengals would beat the Ravens in Week 2 because he said it was difficult for any team to travel two consecutive weeks.
  8. The league is 100-125 on the road if my math is right, so it doesn't look that hard. Nine teams have clinched winning road records, and another two have clinched even records. I didn't state it clear enough, I was talking about having to go on the road multiple weeks in a row. All that travel is tough. Its just puts the team at a disadvantage. But whatever, I don't really care that much about it. I do feel the Ravens are one of the 4 best teams in the AFC and as such deserve a home playoff game, but at the same time they shouldn't have blown a couple games either.
  9. I disagree. If the division winner is so poor, shouldn't the wild card team have no problem beating them no matter where the game is played? This is a fluke season and it will all even itself out in the end after the Rams or Seahawks get bounced in the first round by the Saints. I agree that all division winners should have an automatic spot in the playoffs. However, I believe teams should EARN homefield for the first round. Look at what;s going on now. The Saints, Ravens and Jets will all finish with 11 or 12 wins. But because they're locked in divisions with other 12+ win teams (NE, PIT, ATL), they are almost guaranteed to play all their games on the road in order to "reward" 7-8-9 game division winners home-field. It's crap. Then why even have divisions in the first place? Why not just have two tables, take the top 6 teams and seed accordingly. I like the system the way it is. If you want a home playoff game, be the best team in your division. Who cares how great or poor the division next you is. Take care of business and beat the teams your division if you want to be the best. And guess what.... If you're the best team in your division, yet you suck, you're going to get embarrassed in front of your home fans wildcard weekend. I have to agree with Cujo on this one. Yes, the division winner that sucks will get embarrassed at home. However the better wild card team is forced to play 3 straight road games if they want to make the Super Bowl. I know its been done before, but that's an extreme disadvantage. Now to an extent I agree with you that they shouldn't complain because they lost their division. But at the same time they may have had a much harder division to play in. I have no probably with a 7-9 division winner making the playoffs, but it does bother me some that they will be given a home game. Solution: Don't lose to Atlanta at home by a field goal. Or ing beat Arizona and Cleveland. Otherwise... /Division winner will be 8-8. I have no problem using that argument for the Packers (or whoever the first team out of the playoffs happens to be), but I don't think it applys in this situation. In this situation the Saints have proven they are a playoff team. It seems really odd for a Rams fan (I'm just using them because they are the NFC West leader at the moment) to say if you want home field advantage don't lose to the Falcons, Cardinals, and Browns. While the Rams lost to 2 of those teams and also the Lions (and 5 other teams). I think alot of people underestimate how hard it is to go on the road in the NFL. With that said, yes the #6 seed in the NFC has no excuses for losing to the NFC West leader at home regardless. But it makes it that much harder to go on the road against the #1 seed the following week. You're penalizing them for having a harder schedule.
  10. I disagree. If the division winner is so poor, shouldn't the wild card team have no problem beating them no matter where the game is played? This is a fluke season and it will all even itself out in the end after the Rams or Seahawks get bounced in the first round by the Saints. I agree that all division winners should have an automatic spot in the playoffs. However, I believe teams should EARN homefield for the first round. Look at what;s going on now. The Saints, Ravens and Jets will all finish with 11 or 12 wins. But because they're locked in divisions with other 12+ win teams (NE, PIT, ATL), they are almost guaranteed to play all their games on the road in order to "reward" 7-8-9 game division winners home-field. It's crap. Then why even have divisions in the first place? Why not just have two tables, take the top 6 teams and seed accordingly. I like the system the way it is. If you want a home playoff game, be the best team in your division. Who cares how great or poor the division next you is. Take care of business and beat the teams your division if you want to be the best. And guess what.... If you're the best team in your division, yet you suck, you're going to get embarrassed in front of your home fans wildcard weekend. I have to agree with Cujo on this one. Yes, the division winner that sucks will get embarrassed at home. However the better wild card team is forced to play 3 straight road games if they want to make the Super Bowl. I know its been done before, but that's an extreme disadvantage. Now to an extent I agree with you that they shouldn't complain because they lost their division. But at the same time they may have had a much harder division to play in. I have no probably with a 7-9 division winner making the playoffs, but it does bother me some that they will be given a home game.
  11. I've never understood this line of thinking when it comes to trading. A team should take the best offer they receiver, even if its in the same league or division. You've got to improve the team and its stupid to take a lesser offer. Especially when the player you trade can just sign with your competitor in free agency. The Royals have a stacked farm system, so I don't think it will be too long before they begin competing again. I personally think they would have been better off keeping Greinke, but if he wanted out I guess they had no choice. I'm guessing the Brewers are trying to go all in as this may be their last season with Prince Fielder.
  12. Yes, on Dec. 20, 2010. And the last outdoor game in Minnesota was...Dec. 20, 1981. Given the whole set of circumstances, that's just a very weird coincidence. BTW, somebody was grumbling (rightly so) about playoff seedings and division winners with losing records. NFL Network is reporting the league is considering a previously-defeated proposal submitted by Atlanta's Rich McKay that would have playoff positions 3-6 seeded by record instead of division winners automatically having a home game. So this season for example, if the playoffs started today St. Louis would play at New Orleans instead of the other way around. Assuming the division winner would win any ties, instead of today's 3 through 6 seeds being Eagles-Rams-Saints-Giants in the NFC, it would be Saints-Eagles-Giants-Rams. Or we could tell the Saints that they should have bothered to win that game against the Falcons or Arizona or Cleveland (WTF?!) or the Giants that maybe they should consider not getting shelled by crappy Dallas, Indianapolis, and Tennessee teams. It's not that hard. If you aren't getting that home playoff game you think you should have, it's probably because you lost a game or two somewhere that you shouldn't have. I would agree with you if we were talking about getting into the playoffs. However the Saints have already proven (or will in this scenario), that they are a playoff team. I don't think they should be "penalized" for finishing second in a better division. I'm a little torn on this issue. I think it is a good idea. I don't mind an 8-8 or 7-9 team getting into the playoffs, but it does kinda bother me that they would get a home game. After all they were already extremely lucky to get into the playoffs since their division as a whole was so weak.
  13. Mark Cuban says he will fund a playoff I saw this on Yahoo!'s front page. Mark Cuban says he will put $500 million into a plan to try and start an NCAA playoff. I know a lot of people don't care for Cuban and you can certainly question his motives behind this. However, its going to take something like this to end the BCS. You've got to respect a guy who takes action instead of just sitting around and complaining. Especially if he puts in a large chunk of his own money to do it. Not sure when he will try to accomplish this or if he actually will, but it will be interesting to see if he goes through with it.
  14. Well, if the Orioles got him he'd be in competition for the closer's job with Gonzalez and Uehara. So he could be the set up man. My best guess is that Uehara has the closer's job out of Spring Training, but he's pretty soft so that could change. Not sure how I feel about this move. I don't like spending alot of money on the bullpen, but at least Gregg doesn't lose a pick. As long as this deal doesn't prevent them from doing something else, financial wise, I guess its an okay move.
  15. Please keep him for at least one more week... Haha, I'm now a little worried about that game. It's gonna be close, like all the Ravens games have been. I don't think Cameron is a bad OC, just not the right fit for this team. He seems to like to run alot, which works if you have LaDainian Tomlinson or the 2008 McClain/McGahee tandem. However Ray Rice isn't that type of back. Rice can run well, but he's best at catching short passes. The Ravens really need an OC that leans toward the pass. I've also heard Cameron doesn't like his QBs audibling at the line. That would explain why Flacco never makes adjustments at the line and why the same blitz killed us 4 times in 2 quarters. The teams got to go in a different direction next year. EDIT: I typed in audibling on Yahoo to make sure I was spelling it correctly. After I submitted I noticed the second result was "Cam Cameron 'Audibling is Overrated'"