crazietalk.net

CathyCA wrote:

captmojo wrote:

CathyCA wrote:
CaptMojo! YOUR AVATAR IS NEKKID!

Does it show?

I see you hiney!
It's white and shiney!
If you don't hide it,
I'm going to bite it!

Sean's godmother, my wife's BFF, used to shout that when she was changing his diaper, though she just repeated the first two lines over and over. I'll have to tell her about the other rest of the limerick!

bjornolf wrote:

CathyCA wrote:
I see you hiney!
It's white and shiney!
If you don't hide it,
I'm going to bite it!

Sean's godmother, my wife's BFF, used to shout that when she was changing his diaper, though she just repeated the first two lines over and over. I'll have to tell her about the other rest of the limerick!

And I see a typo. It should be, "I see youR hiney. . ."

I first had resevations about that avatar. Now, I'm cool with it.
It became instructional.
Wonder how long it would last somewhere else?

captmojo wrote:I first had resevations about that avatar. Now, I'm cool with it.
It became instructional.
Wonder how long it would last somewhere else?

With or without a fig leaf?

Either way.
Notice how careful I are not to be specific as to which someplace else.
This will be my last transmission on the subject.
I'll play nice.

Meanwhile, back on the scene of professional football....

Ok, I'll bite. The Panthers still suck. Brett Favre is a drama queen whose appendage pictures apparently include more than his arms. Even Justin Bieber is dissing Tom Brady's hair.

CathyCA wrote:

bjornolf wrote:

CathyCA wrote:
I see you hiney!
It's white and shiney!
If you don't hide it,
I'm going to bite it!

Sean's godmother, my wife's BFF, used to shout that when she was changing his diaper, though she just repeated the first two lines over and over. I'll have to tell her about the other rest of the limerick!

And I see a typo. It should be, "I see youR hiney. . ."

I thought that was intentional, and rather cute.

So, how are these new rules about tackling and suspensions going to change the league. As a former player at Duke, I have some strong opinions about this...

I think it's very important to limit the head to head hits where one player is head hunting another. However, it's a very fine line. I mean, there was really only one truly egregious hit last weekend, that I saw (the Patriots' Merriweather one), and one semi-borderline hit, yet three guys got fined massive amounts. Guys lower their heads when hitting or getting hit. It's human nature, a defensive mechanism. If you're gonna hit the defensive players like this, are you going to start suspending RBs, who lead with their heads more than any other position players? If they continue to do this, and defensive players aren't allowed to respond in kind, you're gonna start seeing different injuries. Defensive players are either gonna have to start more upright in their tackling, which is going to lead to broken sternums and clavicles, and POSSIBLY broken necks if the RB's head hits square on the defensive player's chests (Mike Utley anyone?), or busted legs and knees if the defenders decide "well, I can't hit him in the head, so I'm gonna go low." The fact of the matter is that when you get in PROPER tackling position, your face is in front of your shoulder pads. The fact of the matter is that the other player is constantly moving as well, often changing the vertical plane of his head, making a head to head collision much more difficult to avoid when running full speed. Looking at the Harrison hit on the WR in the Steelers/Browns game, the WR drops the ball and looks down to try to find it at the last second. If both had done the exact same thing without the WR looking down, thus lowering HIS head, Harrison wouldn't have been anywhere near his head. How do you punish someone for something that someone else did? I just don't get it.

Yes, head hunting needs to be limited, but I think this is a very hard thing to get right, to judge the "intent" of a player. Yes, there are some blatantly obvious ones, but there are a LOT that are in a VERY gray area.

I love football. I played it myself at Duke. But where is it going? We already protect QBs too much. Yes, some of the changes are good and QBs need some protection, but some of the roughing the passer calls I see are just stupid. QBs are turning into punters. What's the endgame here? Are we gonna end up with American football looking like the football in the rest of the world, with whiny pansies laying on the ground clutching their heads to get other players penalized or even ejected (they've talked about immediate ejections) and being carted off the field, then coming in the next play fine? That's not football, that's soccer, and that would hurt my soul.

I think it's kind of funny that the NFL has TAUGHT players to play this way and even made a profit off it, selling DVDs and VHS tapes of the league's biggest hits, 90% of which would now be suspension offenses. Here's a link to one: http://www.amazon.com/NFLs-Greatest-.../dp/6302461952. Seems rather hypocritical to me.

bjornolf wrote:http://www.amazon.com/NFLs-Greatest-.../dp/6302461952. Seems rather hypocritical to me.

It's all fun and games until someone gets an eye poked out. Good post and agreed. Have a .

Well at least the Panther fans have this to look forward too.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5958757

CameronBornAndBred wrote:Well at least the Panther fans have this to look forward too.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5958757

Definitely, a distinction worthy of a prideful season.

Time to declare the Jimmy Clausen experiment a bust? (That's a rhetorical question. The answer is, "Yeah, probably so.")

Whoever the new coach is ought to trade Clausen for whatever he can get for him (a can of almonds? a couple of flat Cokes?) and sign an experienced guy to mentor young Mr. Luck, should he decide to take his talents to the big stage.

My guess is they use their #1 pick on a QB. I don't think it's smart, but I bet they do it.

lawgrad91 wrote:Time to declare the Jimmy Clausen experiment a bust? (That's a rhetorical question. The answer is, "Yeah, probably so.")

Whoever the new coach is ought to trade Clausen for whatever he can get for him (a can of almonds? a couple of flat Cokes?) and sign an experienced guy to mentor young Mr. Luck, should he decide to take his talents to the big stage.

I hear Donovan McNabb is gonna be available. He'd make a good mentor to a young QB.

bjornolf wrote:

lawgrad91 wrote:Time to declare the Jimmy Clausen experiment a bust? (That's a rhetorical question. The answer is, "Yeah, probably so.")

Whoever the new coach is ought to trade Clausen for whatever he can get for him (a can of almonds? a couple of flat Cokes?) and sign an experienced guy to mentor young Mr. Luck, should he decide to take his talents to the big stage.

I hear Donovan McNabb is gonna be available. He'd make a good mentor to a young QB.

That's true. We don't have any experience for Clausen or his replacement to look to. I'd take McNabb, and he's probably cheap.

FWIW, SI's Peter King said this morning that he talked to Jim Harbaugh (it is Jim at Stanford, right?) and Harbaugh says if he had to bet money, he would bet that Andrew Luck comes back for another year of college and gets his degree.

Had the Panthers not traded for Armanti Edwards last year, they'd also have the first pick in the 2d round, but now that's gone to New England (where the rich get richer). Can someone explain to me why they didn't try a little wildcat with Edwards? Or did they and I just missed it? Drafting a QB in the 3rd round with the idea that he's going to become a WR, just doesn't seem very smart to me.

lawgrad91 wrote:FWIW, SI's Peter King said this morning that he talked to Jim Harbaugh (it is Jim at Stanford, right?) and Harbaugh says if he had to bet money, he would bet that Andrew Luck comes back for another year of college and gets his degree.

Had the Panthers not traded for Armanti Edwards last year, they'd also have the first pick in the 2d round, but now that's gone to New England (where the rich get richer). Can someone explain to me why they didn't try a little wildcat with Edwards? Or did they and I just missed it? Drafting a QB in the 3rd round with the idea that he's going to become a WR, just doesn't seem very smart to me.

How about...they would just never play him at all?

captmojo wrote:

lawgrad91 wrote:FWIW, SI's Peter King said this morning that he talked to Jim Harbaugh (it is Jim at Stanford, right?) and Harbaugh says if he had to bet money, he would bet that Andrew Luck comes back for another year of college and gets his degree.

Had the Panthers not traded for Armanti Edwards last year, they'd also have the first pick in the 2d round, but now that's gone to New England (where the rich get richer). Can someone explain to me why they didn't try a little wildcat with Edwards? Or did they and I just missed it? Drafting a QB in the 3rd round with the idea that he's going to become a WR, just doesn't seem very smart to me.

How about...they would just never play him at all?

"Panther brain trust" (or better yet, "Carolina brain trust") is an oxymoron.