Jump to content

Sport

Members
  • Posts

    27,220
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    131

Everything posted by Sport

  1. I need to go to sleep. All I was saying is he has a spot in NFL history. He proved the offense everyone still uses can work. That offense became the motor for the dynasty of the 80's. Find the lie. Ickey Woods probably won't get into the Bengals ring of honor because his career was too short. Ken Anderson has a good shot at an eventual veterans committee admittance to the actual Hall of Fame because, yes, he has the stats. Ken Riley, god rest his soul and the fifth most interceptions in NFL history should get in too.
  2. I've made my argument and the history's all there for you to read. His era's comps are almost exclusively in the Hall of Fame, he's got better stats than a lot of them, and he was the prototype west coast QB before it was even called that. I've made my point, but if you wanna keep being a tit about Ken Anderson and the Hall of Fame that's up to you. It was couched in sound reason, which you keep ignoring. I'll post it a third time so you can read it again. His case is his numbers are comparable or better than a lot of guys who are already in the hall of fame and he played most of his career in a defensive era and still has high completion percentages, yards, and yards per attempt. He won an MVP, Four times best passer rating, one of the best completion percentage of the era. He has objectively better stats than many QBs in the hall of fame including Terry Bradshaw. He has basically the same number of passing yards as Troy Aikman with fewer attempts. If Dan Fouts is the bar he's right there with Dan Fouts, who never won an MVP or played in a Super Bowl himself. If Ken Stabler's the bar he's way better than Ken Stabler. From the perspective of the story of football, you can't tell it without him - He was the guinea pig for the West Coast offense before it was called that. His numbers appear modern, but he played in the 70's when it was legal for DBs to murder wide receivers. There's no Joe Montana if Ken Anderson doesn't do it for ten years first. The reasons he's not in is the "FAME" part of Hall of Fame, which brings us back to how the Bengals don't celebrate their past great players, and that he didn't win a Super Bowl, which isn't a prerequisite to the Hall. He's got a really good Hall-of-Fame case and isn't even that hard to make.
  3. Ken Anderson proved Bill Walsh's offense could work in the NFL. Bill Walsh doesn't get a head coaching gig without him so yes in a way he did. It was actually a close game, but Joe Montana's career after that doesn't diminish Ken Anderson's stats.
  4. That's a nice false equivalency.
  5. Joe Montana isn't JOE MONTANA without Ken Anderson leading the way so yeah I said what I said. It was also couched in sound reason, which you cut out. I'll repost so you can read it again. His case is his numbers are comparable or better than a lot of guys who are already in the hall of fame and he played most of his career in a defensive era and still has high completion percentages, yards, and yards per attempt. He won an MVP, Four times best passer rating, one of the best completion percentage of the era. He has objectively better stats than many QBs in the hall of fame including Terry Bradshaw. He has basically the same number of passing yards as Troy Aikman with fewer attempts. If Dan Fouts is the bar he's right there with Dan Fouts, who never won an MVP or played in a Super Bowl himself. If Ken Stabler's the bar he's way better than Ken Stabler. From the perspective of the story of football, you can't tell it without him - He was the guinea pig for the West Coast offense before it was called that. His numbers appear modern, but he played in the 70's when it was legal for DBs to murder wide receivers. There's no Joe Montana if Ken Anderson doesn't do it for ten years first. The reasons he's not in is the "FAME" part of Hall of Fame, which brings us back to how the Bengals don't celebrate their past great players, and that he didn't win a Super Bowl, which isn't a prerequisite to the Hall. He's got a really good Hall-of-Fame case and isn't even that hard to make.
  6. He has 1100 fewer pass attempts than Fouts. Whenever this comes up people always act like I invented the Ken Anderson for the Hall of Fame argument. Profootballreference has his him right below Fouts in their Approximate Value rankings so yeah, he's right there. He's above actual Hall of Famers on that list despite playing mostly in a defensive era. He's got the numbers and he's the highest QB on the list not in the Hall of Fame. The case isn't insane. Not my fault you don't know football. The most basic members in our society always pick the lowest hanging fruit. It's not their fault. GOAT
  7. His case is his numbers are comparable or better than a lot of guys who are already in the hall of fame and he played most of his career in a defensive era and still has high completion percentages, yards, and yards per attempt. He won an MVP, Four times best passer rating, one of the best completion percentage of the era. He has objectively better stats than many QBs in the hall of fame including Terry Bradshaw. He has basically the same number of passing yards as Troy Aikman with fewer attempts. If Dan Fouts is the bar he's right there with Dan Fouts, who never won an MVP or played in a Super Bowl himself. If Ken Stabler's the bar he's way better than Ken Stabler. From the perspective of the story of football, you can't tell it without him - He was the guinea pig for the West Coast offense before it was called that. His numbers appear modern, but he played in the 70's when it was legal for DBs to murder wide receivers. There's no Joe Montana if Ken Anderson doesn't do it for ten years first. The reasons he's not in is the "FAME" part of Hall of Fame, which brings us back to how the Bengals don't celebrate their past great players, and that he didn't win a Super Bowl, which isn't a prerequisite to the Hall. He's got a really good Hall-of-Fame case and isn't even that hard to make.
  8. Eat a fart. Before Mike Brown inherited the team the franchise had a winning record over their first 20something years. Even since then they've had a lot of exceptional players throughout their history and the fans have wanted this for literally decades. Ken Anderson and Ken Riley should be in the actual hall of fame, but aren't because the Bengals are terrible at self-promotion. Finally getting off their asses and acknowledging their past greats will help that cause and it's happening because Paul Brown's kid finally relinquished daily control of the franchise.
  9. My prediction is Chad Johnson is in town and literally walking through the Paul Brown halls because he's there to model the new uniforms. This new Ring of Honor (about time. The 19 year old dang ass Texans have a ring of honor, Bengals) is mostly unrelated.
  10. I worked for the agency that did the Sounders logo. They did the logo years before I got there, but one of the art directors who worked on it told me the logo looks generic because it had to be. At the time they didn't know if they'd carry the Sounders name over, which is why the logo uses YASNL and has a very "PLACE TEXT HERE" placeholder looking box.
  11. "BuT tHE pIraTes suck" Yeah, we all know the pirates suck, party poopers, but the Cubs didn't hammer the Pirates this way and one of my favorite sports expressions comes to mind - "good teams make bad teams look bad". Mo Egger made a good point that the 2019 team that had higher expectations than this year's team already had 5 losses by this point to a Pirates team that would go on to lose 93 games. If you don't beat the bad teams like you're supposed to then you have to win more games against the good teams. That's how it works. They also scored 27 runs in the three games against the Cardinals who were everybody's pick to win the division so I think they might have something here. It's a long year, lots can happen, I still have concerns, and injuries will happen, but yeah just enjoying not tripping out of the gate for the first time since I don't know, 2014?
  12. Couldn't wait 3 more months, Texas? It's a self-selecting group of people who'd willingly attend a full stadium game in the middle of a pandemic, which means this particular collection of Chin Diapers isn't fond of diligent mask wearing or vaccines to begin with. If 10% of that crowd is fully vaccinated I think that'd be a very generous estimate.
  13. Let's look at the series of events and, not biased here, just recounting the video at this point 1. Woodford drills Castellanos in the back. Maybe he simply lost control, maybe he did it on purpose because Castellanos didn't respect the game enough on Thursday when he hit a home run. We'll never know. 2. Castellanos picks up the ball and asks him if he wants it back because he didn't seem to have very good control of that particular ball. Objectively funny thing to do, but also probably not enough respecting the game for the Cardinals liking. Castellanos also asks Molina if that was on purpose, ump makes everyone go to their places. Game Disrespecto Meter - 2 out of 5. 3. Castellanos eventually moves to third base. 4. Molina lets a passed ball by him (probably too distracted by Castellanos previous lack of respect for the game to fully concentrate), Castellanos slides into home, Woodford puts a knee into his back trying to apply the tag, Castellanos stands up, flexes, and yells "LET'S :censored:ING GO!" into Woodford's face, which was crotch level at that point. Not very sporting, not very game-respecting of him, Game Disrespecto Meter is now at 5 out of 5 but a suspendable offense? Hardly. I'd say it's about 1/8 as bad as, just making something up here, throwing your bat into right field after hitting a walk-off single. If someone were to do that I think that'd be dangerous and also very disrespectful to the game and the opponent. Good thing nobody's ever done that in baseball ever. 5. Castellanos begins to walk off the field, Yadier Molina shoves the umpire out of way, grabs Castellanos by the neck, Mike Moustakas gets in his face, and then the benches clear. Castellanos does literally nothing after this. Aside from Woodford and him colliding at home and Molina grabbing his neck, he never touches anybody throughout the entire incident. and now let's breakdown MLB's logic based on the video: throwing a high-velocity projectile at a guy - not a serious offense shoving an umpire - not a serious offense grabbing a guy by the neck, further escalating the incident - not a serious offense having the gall to disrespect the game in front of the St Louis Cardinals - two games. It's a joke.
  14. It's obviously not the Austin fans fault that the way you got a team was because of the biggest sports weasel in a long long time, but sorry people are going to hate your team as long as it's associated with that fat-faced trust fund baby because he is inextricably linked. Unless you happened to be one of the Austin trolls who found it incumbent on themselves to trash Columbus on social media during that whole saga then you're merely collateral damage and I wouldn't take Austin FC hate personally.
  15. Great point. What baseball "FAN" would want a system that means you only see half of the sports' players come through your town? Not a very big baseball fan if you ask me.
  16. I love interleague play and see it as correcting baseball's biggest wrong. Think about the hundreds of baseball greats who played during the exact same era as other baseball greats, but never against each other because they happened to be in opposite leagues. What a dumb system. Were it not for nostalgia and eschewing common sense in the name of tradition nobody would ever defend something so silly.
  17. Because suddenly a 100 point team built completely inorganically was dropped into the eco-system playing opponents who weren't built using the same advantages. In past expansion years those teams were also built inorganically, but the difference is the expansion rules didn't immediately put their rosters in better situations than already existing teams. They didn't need to win the cup to disrupt the competitive integrity. What they did was enough damage to be a problem. If they'd won the cup it would've felt very hollow and phony. I am (and everyone else should be) glad that they didn't win the cup and the league avoided that bush league bullshirt. Never said it was rigged. Nobody said it was rigged. It wasn't deliberate, which is why it's even more OITGDNHL than if it had been rigged. Everyone who takes issue with that team takes issue with how that team was covered as the castoff darlings and that they were gifted an easier ride than their expansion predecessors. End of story. That Bettman overcorrected and almost accidentally gave them the cup in year one is an extremely Bettman thing to happen.
  18. Of course I didn't expect them to reach the finals, but I did look at the depth on the roster, saw William Karlsson was going to get third line minutes like he had with a Blue Jackets team the year prior who had a similar surprise trajectory and thought a team with that kind of depth had a really good shot at the playoffs. I was more keyed-in on the expansion draft at the time because I was grouchy that the league had made things so difficult on Nashville, Atlanta, Columbus, and Minnesota and then turned around and handed Vegas extremely generous rules. It looked to me at the time like they over-corrected from lessons learned with previous tough expansion drafts. It's bad business to make your teams struggle for so long out of the gate, which ultimately led to Atlanta's death, so I get why they did it, but they went too far. Complaining about the dismantling of the sport's competitive integrity isn't complaining just to complain. That had to be a commentary on the league, though, because it was the story of the post 13 lockout. Fun things are fun. John Scott making a dumb all-star exhibition through a fan vote was fun. The league accidentally building a team that nearly wins the cup in their first year wasn't fun. Again, if it actually was a ragtag group of castoffs and misfits who banded together and almost won the cup in year one, that would've been really fun. I'm not really sorry to ruin that fairytale for people.
  19. The thing that bothered me about 2018 Vegas was at the time they were being covered as this team of castoff misfits that nobody wanted who were making this Cinderella run to the finals out of sheer gumption and determination and the drive for vengeance. That would've been a great story! But it just wasn't true. They were just a good collection of talent because the league made sure they were a good collection of talent. They got lucky with a couple pieces and the system afforded them top-to-bottom depth, which is like the biggest factor in building a successful NHL roster. The league having such a finger on the scale made the whole thing feel phony and I really wish that wasn't the case because a first year team full of castoffs and misfits would've been an all-time great sports story, but they weren't that.
  20. You're probably right, but I'm bookmarking this tweet in the event the Bengals actually win the game.
  21. Nobody's arguing that. Ask why are divisional matchups, for instance, more important than a cross conference game? Because of what the divisional games mean for the playoffs. Now take that logic where you agree that some regular season game are inherently more important than others and apply it to the postseason. Now you're getting it. Neither won when it was most important. They were both good teams who didn't finish the job so they'll never be counted among the greatest.
  22. An (incredibly) obvious reason: for teams who don't qualify for the playoffs the regular season is the only performance we have with which to judge them.
  23. Yeah it's sort of got the Philadelphia Eagles problem where it needs the right conditions for the color to look it's best and night is not the right conditions. The credit I'll give the pink car is it stood out, but now half the field is darkly colored cars.
  24. I think that looks pretty hot, especially replacing the pink cars that I never liked that much. BUT it is encroaching on Mercedes territory.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.