the admiral 28,190 Posted February 4, 2019 12 hours ago, Quillz said: Some people around here wanted the Rams to win to "heal" SoCal after the wildfires and Thousand Oaks shooting. Crawl before you walk! How about "the Rams are not associated with white nationalism"? 0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FiddySicks 11,047 Posted February 4, 2019 Seeing PG&E crumble and not shift the financial burden to their customers would probably be a lot better way to “heal” Californians right now. 4 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
the admiral 28,190 Posted February 4, 2019 5 hours ago, rams80 said: Maybe it dies when Bob Kraft dies and his congenital idiot of a son takes over. Maybe Kraft's heart will explode while he's railing another "aspiring actress" and because of some deus-ex-machina fine print in the will, the New England Patriots are inherited by that kid he had with some other aspiring actress while his wife was dying of cancer. It'll be like a kids' sports movie, called Li'l Football Bastard. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DG_ThenNowForever 15,292 Posted February 4, 2019 I didn't watch the big game last night because the outcome was never in doubt and Patriots football is joyless. I wrote the same sentiment in fewer words than the returning Drew Magary, though I recommend you read his column anyway: https://deadspin.com/the-worst-people-win-again-1832321959 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Quillz 1,356 Posted February 4, 2019 2 minutes ago, DG_Now said: I didn't watch the big game last night because the outcome was never in doubt and Patriots football is joyless. I wrote the same sentiment in fewer words than the returning Drew Magary, though I recommend you read his column anyway: https://deadspin.com/the-worst-people-win-again-1832321959 History is full of bad people succeeding, whether its sports, politics, whatever. 0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
verno 170 Posted February 4, 2019 A neat little O/U l heard today, number of Super Bowls wins Tom Brady has left in him. The line is 1.5. I predict under. My primary feeling is Gronk will retire over the off season, eliminating a great over the middle threat for Brady. Your thoughts? 0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DG_ThenNowForever 15,292 Posted February 4, 2019 33 minutes ago, Quillz said: History is full of bad people succeeding, whether its sports, politics, whatever. Of course. And I'm not compelled to spend 5 hours of my precious time watching them do so. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wings 2,142 Posted February 4, 2019 I think Brady & Belichick want 7 so the Pats can pass the Steelers and stand alone. 0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rams80 4,219 Posted February 5, 2019 1 hour ago, the admiral said: Maybe Kraft's heart will explode while he's railing another "aspiring actress" and because of some deus-ex-machina fine print in the will, the New England Patriots are inherited by that kid he had with some other aspiring actress while his wife was dying of cancer. It'll be like a kids' sports movie, called Li'l Football Bastard. Crusader Kings 2 meets the NFL. 0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Darknes 374 Posted February 5, 2019 I think Belichick also wants to prove he can win one without Brady 0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sport 13,693 Posted February 5, 2019 1.5? So they can win one more and still be under? Under. Took some incredible good fortune against the Chiefs to win even this one. Were it not for a bone-headed offsides penalty the Chiefs would've won that game. Tom Brady will be 42 when next season starts, which means in order to go over 1.5 he'll have to do so as a 43 year old, at the earliest. Did he look good last night? He did not. Time will get him eventually. Someone on another team will get him eventually. I think that happens sooner than he thinks. 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
the admiral 28,190 Posted February 5, 2019 That 75-year-old sperm, poor kid is just gonna be memorizing train schedules and twiddling a third thumb. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BBTV 19,367 Posted February 5, 2019 1 hour ago, verno said: A neat little O/U l heard today, number of Super Bowls wins Tom Brady has left in him. The line is 1.5. I predict under. My primary feeling is Gronk will retire over the off season, eliminating a great over the middle threat for Brady. Your thoughts? Then they'll just make a star out of someone else. Players tend to look better when Tom Brady is throwing to them, as opposed to... oh, IDK... Chase Daniel. Funny how that works. 0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Quillz 1,356 Posted February 5, 2019 So the ratings were released, and this was the least watched Super Bowl in a decade, although it still had a very respectable 98 million viewers. I bet a lot of people stopped watching at halftime because they released it was going to be a slow, defensive battle. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Quillz 1,356 Posted February 5, 2019 Let's be honest: Tom Brady was almost a non-factor last night. He played fine, but not brilliant. Didn't even throw a touchdown. Granted, it was a slow defensive game so he didn't exactly need to be amazing, but as mentioned, he can't fight fate (i.e. Father Time). And I agree that if Gronk retires, the Patriots will still very much contend (it helps when they play in the worst division of all time), but I don't think will make the Bowl. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tracy Jordan 992 Posted February 5, 2019 47 minutes ago, Quillz said: So the ratings were released, and this was the least watched Super Bowl in a decade, although it still had a very respectable 98 million viewers. I bet a lot of people stopped watching at halftime because they released it was going to be a slow, defensive battle. That's what I did. 0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Wolf 5,513 Posted February 5, 2019 1 hour ago, Quillz said: So the ratings were released, and this was the least watched Super Bowl in a decade, although it still had a very respectable 98 million viewers. I bet a lot of people stopped watching at halftime because they released it was going to be a slow, defensive battle. I don't know why people worry so much about the ratings unless they're TV execs or advertising people whose livelihoods depend on them. Also, the Steelers-Cardinals Super Bowl that was awesome was rated lower than this one. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Quillz 1,356 Posted February 5, 2019 36 minutes ago, Tracy Jordan said: That's what I did. I did too, but only because of Maroon 5. And I knew from the start my Rams weren't going to win. 0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Quillz 1,356 Posted February 5, 2019 16 minutes ago, Red Wolf said: I don't know why people worry so much about the ratings unless they're TV execs or advertising people whose livelihoods depend on them. Also, the Steelers-Cardinals Super Bowl that was awesome was rated lower than this one. Which was exactly a decade ago, as mentioned by the ratings. I don't care about ratings, I was just curious because my assumption was the very slow-paced nature of the game would have turned a lot of people off, especially give the past few bowls that were a lot faster-paced and higher scoring. 0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Red Wolf 5,513 Posted February 5, 2019 28 minutes ago, Quillz said: Which was exactly a decade ago, as mentioned by the ratings. I don't care about ratings, I was just curious because my assumption was the very slow-paced nature of the game would have turned a lot of people off, especially give the past few bowls that were a lot faster-paced and higher scoring. I honestly don’t think the game itself dictates the ratings that much. The overall interest in the matchup beforehand probably determines the bulk of your ratings in these cases. That’s why a matchup involving the Arizona Cardinals who went 9-7 (and are named the Arizona Cardinals) would do relatively poorly despite being an all-time classic Super Bowl. 0 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites