PDA

View Full Version : TMQ Gets It Right



J.T.
10-23-2007, 02:29 PM
Finally some NFL journalism that wasn't written by a crackhead on Patriots payroll (read as: someone finally shows some god damned objectivity).

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/071023&sportCat=nfl&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab1pos1

http://xyberfreeza.homestead.com/files/The_Mutated_Space_Monkey_Project/GoodvsEvil.gif

Colts-Patriots tilt shaping as battle of Good vs. Evil

By Gregg Easterbrook
Special to Page 2

Patriots at Colts on Nov. 4 is shaping up to be one of the most attractive and exciting NFL regular-season games ever staged. The pairing is fabulous; the teams are the league's best; and there is a chance both will take the field undefeated. Plus, Patriots at Colts has a powerful, compelling narrative. Namely -- Good vs. Evil.

The fact that I don't even need to tell you which team represents Good and which stands for Evil says a lot about how low New England has sunk. You knew instantly which was which, didn't you?

Argument for the Indianapolis Colts as paladins who carry the banner of that which is beneficent: Sportsmanship, honesty, modesty, devotion to community, embrace of traditional small-town life, belief in higher power, even love of laughter. The Colts are the defending champions, so they obviously play well on the field. Yet after winning the Super Bowl, they have remained humble and appealing. Through prior years of postseason frustration, they never complained or pointed the finger outside their team. Their players are active in community affairs and don't carp about being assigned to a nonglamorous Farm Belt city with an antiquated stadium. Their coach, Tony Dungy, smiles in public and answers honestly whatever he is asked: He never yells at players or grimaces at bad plays and, when defeated, doesn't act as though it's the end of the world. Although religious, Dungy said on the night he won the Super Bowl that God doesn't care about football games, which shows perspective. The team's star, Peyton Manning, stands for love of family, constantly appearing in public with his brothers, father and mother. Manning is happily married and a major donor to a children's hospital. Manning spends a lot of time at children's camps and events, and he constantly makes fun of himself. Ladies and gentlemen, representing Good, the Indianapolis Colts.

Argument for the New England Patriots as scoundrels in the service of that which is baleful: Dishonesty, cheating, arrogance, hubris, endless complaining even in success. The Patriots have three Super Bowl rings, but that jewelry is tarnished by their cheating scandal. They run up the score to humiliate opponents -- more on that below -- thus mocking sportsmanship. Their coach snaps and snarls in public, seeming to feel contempt for the American public that has brought him wealth and celebrity. Victory seems to give Bill Belichick no joy, and defeat throws him into fury. Belichick and the rest of the top of the Patriots' organization continue to refuse to answer questions about what was in the cheating tapes -- and generally, you refuse to answer questions if you have something to hide. The team has three Super Bowl triumphs, yet its players regularly whine about not being revered enough. The team's star, Tom Brady, is a smirking sybarite who dates actresses and supermodels but whose public charity appearances are infrequent. That constant smirk on Brady's face reminds one of Dick Cheney; people who smirk are fairly broadcasting the message, "I'm hiding something." The Patriots seem especially creepy at this point because we still don't know whether they have told the full truth about the cheating scandal -- or even whether they really have stopped cheating. They say they have, but their word is not exactly gold at this juncture. Ladies and gentlemen, representing Evil, the New England Patriots.

In the Good vs. Evil narrative of the Colts and Pats, running up the score is a telling factor: It reveals a team's sportsmanship or lack of same, and whether a team shows sportsmanship in public might offer insights into its character in private. New England is scoring so many points the Patriots offense looks like cherries and oranges spinning on a slot machine. The Flying Elvii stand plus-159 in net points, by far the best scoring margin in the NFL. This is supposed to be impressive. But I think it's creepy, and New England's creepy on-field behavior is only underscoring the seediness of the Beli-Cheat scandal.

On Sunday, the Patriots led the winless Dolphins 42-7 late in the third quarter, yet Tom Brady was still behind center. And he wasn't just handing off the ball to grind the clock, either. Rather, he was back in the shotgun, still throwing to run up the score. Here is a summary of the Patriots' possession with a 42-7 lead late in the third and Brady, Randy Moss and the rest of their offensive starters on the field: Pass, run, pass, run, pass, pass. When backup quarterback Matt Cassel entered the game in the fourth quarter, with the Patriots leading 42-14 -- a margin larger than the greatest fourth-quarter comeback in NFL history (see below) -- did he hand off the ball to grind the clock? Here were Patriots' coaches first three calls: Run, pass, pass. Cassel's second pass was intercepted and returned for a touchdown, and Brady re-entered the game. Did he grind down the clock? Pass, pass, run, run, pass. The final score was 49-28.

The week before, New England led Dallas 42-27 and had second-and-goal on the Cowboys' 6-yard line with 1:43 remaining and Dallas out of timeouts. Three kneel-downs would have ended the game. But Belichick kept calling plays, frantic to run up the score -- including calling a play with 23 seconds remaining from the Dallas 1-yard line, resulting in a touchdown that made the final New England 48, Dallas 27. The Patriots then kicked off, and Dallas got the ball with 13 seconds remaining. Cowboys coach Wade Phillips showed the dignity Belichick lacked and ordered a kneel-down. Beyond defeating division-leading Dallas, New England has beaten six teams with a combined record of 11-27. In New England's six games against nonwinning teams, Belichick kept the starters in long after the outcome was decided, trying to run up the score. This doesn't just demonstrate Belichick has no class (although it certainly demonstrates that). It's worse -- this suggests something vindictive.

Yes, you can find games the Colts have won by a big margin in recent years, and yes, Manning was on the field through the fourth quarter at Jacksonville last night. But in that quarter, the Colts mainly ran to grind the clock: If they had wanted to win by more, they likely could have. As for New England's running up the score, supposedly the Patriots are angry about the Beli-Cheat scandal and are scoring points like crazy to express their anger against the world. Wait a moment: What right do the Patriots have to be angry? They, after all, are the ones who admitted to systematic cheating. Other people didn't impose that situation on them -- they cheated of their own free accord, imposing the tainting of their accomplishments on themselves. The Patriots were not wronged; they wronged others. Yet they're mad about being caught, and they seem to want to take out their bad feelings about themselves by embarrassing second-echelon teams. That bespeaks lack of character. That's Dark Side. That's Evil.

Suppose New England's version of events is true -- that Belichick is a fine person who made an honest mistake about rules that seemed clearly written to everyone else but somehow were confusing to him and that he regrets his honest mistake. If this were so, wouldn't Belichick be attempting to convince the world he is a good guy by showing sportsmanship at every turn? Instead, he is raising his middle finger to the rest of the NFL, to the sporting media, even to the NFL fans who made his wealth and celebrity possible. If he were a misunderstood man who regrets an honest mistake, wouldn't he be candid and open in public because making his life an open book would convince us he's sorry for what he did? Instead, in public, Belichick continues to glare, stonewall and act offended that mere mortals dare to address him. There is not the slightest hint that Belichick is sorry for what he did -- only sorry he got caught. Innocent people falsely accused crave the recovery of their reputation, working hard to convince the world they are good. Creepy people who think they can get away with something act belligerent and show poor sportsmanship, which is what Belichick is doing right now.

Since Belichick took over the Patriots and began the franchise's remarkable run, he and his team have been praised, praised, praised, praised, praised, praised, praised, praised, praised, praised, praised; criticized when it was discovered New England had engaged in what commissioner Roger Goodell himself called "a calculated and deliberate attempt to avoid long-standing rules designed to encourage fair play and promote honest competition"; then -- after about a week of criticism -- praised, praised, praised. This is not a sequence of experiences that would leave an honorable person angry at the world. Yet Belichick acts that way, and he appears to be encouraging anger in his players, which is itself unsportsmanlike.

Perhaps you can say in Belichick's defense that the modern American ethos encourages us all to feel sorry for ourselves -- so much so that even someone to whom football has brought wealth, celebrity and Super Bowl rings can tell himself he's a victim. Perhaps you can say in Belichick's defense that claiming victim status is a solid psychological ploy for the New England players -- who are not to blame for their coach's cheating, which they most likely did not know was happening. The New England players still might suffer some long-term harm from the cheating, though: Given the image New England is projecting, would you want Patriots' players endorsing your product?

But if the Patriots are unfairly maligned, why the whole screw-you act they are staging? If the Patriots were unfairly maligned, they'd be trying hard to convince us their hearts are pure, and that distinctly is not what they are doing. Sure, many New England players are awesome performers: Both of Moss' touchdown catches Sunday came when he was double-teamed; the Flying Elvii offensive line was flawless again; Mike Vrabel, waived by Pittsburgh, might be the best linebacker in the NFL. But if the Patriots are so awesome they don't need to cheat, then why were they cheating in Week 1? The whole situation remains creepy. Should New England continue on and win the Super Bowl without a major attitude shift toward nice-guy behavior -- and should the year end without the NFL's ever explaining what New England evidence it destroyed or why -- there could be a huge amount of cynicism about this NFL season. Cynicism doesn't sell a sports product, nor is it what the NFL should be marketing to the young.

That's why the Pats at Colts game Nov. 4 so clearly represents Good vs. Evil. The Colts stand for everything the NFL, and sports enthusiasts, should be proud of. The Colts stand for a positive future for the NFL. The Patriots stand for -- well, wouldn't it be nice if the Patriots would explain to us what they stand for. When Good meets Evil, I know who I'll be rooting for.

Bigzax
10-23-2007, 02:41 PM
Pats lose to the Skins this week bro!!!

J.T.
10-23-2007, 02:41 PM
Bill Simmons rebuttal about how he saw this article and started a conference call with his dad and Wally and they all three laughed it up as they read it with their pants down jerking off to autographed Tom Brady cards coming later today. Pun intended.

J.T.
10-23-2007, 02:42 PM
Pats lose to the Skins this week bro!!!

Wouldn't that be nice.

monosylab1k
10-23-2007, 02:47 PM
:lmao Gregg Easterbrook is nowhere near an icon for objectivity. He's at ESPN simply to be the anti-Simmons.

peewee's lovechild
10-23-2007, 02:47 PM
Pats lose to the Skins this week bro!!!

That would be nice, but it aint gonna happen.

I do want to see, though, how well the Redskins defense plays the Pats.

J.T.
10-23-2007, 02:49 PM
:lmao Gregg Easterbrook is nowhere near an icon for objectivity. He's at ESPN simply to be the anti-Simmons.

Please find me someone else not saying "PATRIOTS PATRIOTS PATRIOTS PATRIOTS PATRIOTS PATRIOTS... oh yeah the Colts are undefeated too, but... PATRIOTS PATRIOTS PATRIOTS PATRIOTS PATRIOTS PATRIOTS!" Or someone with enough cojones to call the Pats out on being a bunch of cunts who run the score long after the game was over. Matt Cassell should have about 100 times the amount of snaps he has right now. Which is what, like one drive?

J.T.
10-23-2007, 02:52 PM
I almost want to watch the 1985 Super Bowl right now to see players in New England jerseys be on the receiving end of what the current NE roster is doing.

Findog
10-23-2007, 02:56 PM
Look, JT, I agree the Belichick is a douche and the Patriots are not exhibiting good sportsmanship right now, but I wish Easterbrook would ease up on the hyperbole a little bit. Evil???? Brady = Dick Cheney because he smirks? I'm sure that smirk on Brady's face is because of all the primo salmon pudding he's getting.

Not to mention that Coach Dungy has no problem appearing before anti-gay groups. And the Colts don't point fingers or bitch and whine? Didn't Bill Polian agitate to get the rules changed after the Pats defensive backs got physical with the Colts recievers? Didn't Peyton throw his O-line under the bus after the loss to Pittsburgh?

Doesn't change the fact that I'm rooting for Indy over NW.

Findog
10-23-2007, 02:58 PM
Bill Simmons rebuttal about how he saw this article and started a conference call with his dad and Wally and they all three laughed it up as they read it with their pants down jerking off to autographed Tom Brady cards coming later today. Pun intended.

That will be just as unreadable as Easterbrook. I couldn't finish his column, I lost interest about 1,600 words in like most of his efforts. That's when I wrote "Game Over" in my notebook.

J.T.
10-23-2007, 03:03 PM
Actually those moments did cross my mind when I read that part of the article but this is still better than anything Bill "How Much Pats Cock Can I Suck In This Article?" Simmons has wrote this season.

As far as the anti-gay thing... Dungy is a conservative Christian man... not really a shocker that he'd on the anti-gay side. Hell, my opinions on gays is they be gay if they want to... but I've seen some flamers that could make my opinion tilt that way too.

Findog
10-23-2007, 03:06 PM
Please find me someone else not saying "PATRIOTS PATRIOTS PATRIOTS PATRIOTS PATRIOTS PATRIOTS... oh yeah the Colts are undefeated too, but... PATRIOTS PATRIOTS PATRIOTS PATRIOTS PATRIOTS PATRIOTS!"

If there's a storyline I'm also sick of, it's "Nobody is talking about the Colts." Yeah, right.

Findog
10-23-2007, 03:09 PM
Actually those moments did cross my mind when I read that part of the article but this is still better than anything Bill "How Much Pats Cock Can I Suck In This Article?" Simmons has wrote this season.

As far as the anti-gay thing... Dungy is a conservative Christian man... not really a shocker that he'd on the anti-gay side. Hell, my opinions on gays is they be gay if they want to... but I've seen some flamers that could make my opinion tilt that way too.

Simmons is better when his teams are struggling. He's just become a smarmy douche with the ascendancy of Boston sports right now. His non-Boston stuff is usually fine.

As for Dungy, I think there's far worse sins than the "sin" of being gay. Hanging out with flamers isn't my cup of tea, either, but I'm not supporting denying them the protection of the 14th Amendment.

leemajors
10-23-2007, 03:56 PM
That will be just as unreadable as Easterbrook. I couldn't finish his column, I lost interest about 1,600 words in like most of his efforts. That's when I wrote "Game Over" in my notebook.
i skip whole sections of TMQ's articles (mostly the sci-fi stuff), but i do look forward to scanning them every week. seeing simmons throw tantrums about them is funny.

FromWayDowntown
10-23-2007, 05:05 PM
What I think is funny about TMQ's criticism of the Pats is his attempt to laud Peyton Manning while bashing Tom Brady. Mostly, the notion that Brady is somehow less of a man of virtue than Peyton Manning because, in essence: (1) he's unmarried and dates supermodels; and (2) he's not public with his charitable giving.

It's funny that Easterbrook would chide Brady for being unmarried and galavanting around with supermodels when Easterbrook's columns routinely suggest that he would take that opportunity if it was presented to him. I think that's a fairly innocuous point of criticism here.

I take more umbrage at the notion that Manning is good and Brady "evil" -- for the purposes of Easterbrook's comparison -- because Manning is out front about his charitable involvement while Brady isn't. I suppose it's possible that Brady does no charitable work at all, though that seems unlikely. To the extent that Brady does charitable work and giving, and does all of it without seeking acclaim for doing it, doesn't that make his efforts more self-effacing and genuine in a sense?

To offer a TMQ-like oversimplification of the point -- Manning gives but wants everyone to know he's giving; Brady, as a likely contributor to charitable organizations, but a quiet one, doesn't seem to need everyone to know he's giving -- he just gives.

I'm not sure when a litmus test for being a good person was ensuring that the public knows just what a good guy you are. In fact, it was less than a year ago -- actually, on the heels of Indy's getting run over by Jacksonville last season -- that Easterbrook (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/061128) himself ripped Peyton a new one for putting himself above the team too frequently:


In other football news, at the end of last season as the Colts honked out of the playoffs yet again, Tuesday Morning Quarterback offered this unsolicited advice to Peyton Manning: Make no commercials or public appearances, do no endorsements or golf tournaments, focus on nothing but football until you reach the Super Bowl. Now it's holiday buying season and Peyton Manning is ubiquitous in television advertising, while the Colts have lost three of four. MasterCard, Sony, DirecTV, ESPN, Sprint: Maybe we should save time by listing the big corporations Manning hasn't filmed a commercial for in 2006. On Sunday, the Indianapolis receivers dropped passes and the Colts' defensive front seven quivered like a bowl full of jelly against Jacksonville, but Big Brother looked out of sorts, too. During one extended sequence the Jax defense forced Peyton Manning into an interception, followed by a sack, followed by eight consecutive incompletions. Manning's chance to attend the Super Bowl might be folding its tent and stealing off into the desert, yet he continues to devote time to being Mr. Endorser. Manning films most commercials during the offseason, but even film work "in the can" generates distractions during money time. Colts' players snap on the television, they see Peyton hawking Gatorade, it's not conducive to concentration or team harmony. A decade from now Manning will regret that he didn't totally focus on football and win a ring when he had the chance.
Now Peyton has won a Super Bowl and the very self-aggrandizing behavior that was once the subject of such understandable scorn is now the basis for TMQ to cast Peyton as the humble and modest paragon of virtue while deriding Brady as a lecherous and arrogant Cheney-in-training.

JMarkJohns
10-23-2007, 05:38 PM
Yeah... I read the article, and now I read FWD's synopsis/critique and I agree far more with FWD than I do Easterbrook. That was by far one of the most impressive posts I've read.

scott
10-23-2007, 07:20 PM
I used to like TMQ until I realized what a Redskin loving douchebag he really is...

...but I kind of see the good vs. evil angle, since The Pats are acting like score-running-up a-holes this year and have been caught cheating. Fun, yet meaningless.

I'll be rooting for Indy, just because I think they have a greater chance of losing to someone else down the road and I'm tired of hearing 16-0 banter.

FromWayDowntown
10-23-2007, 07:30 PM
I used to like TMQ until I realized what a Redskin loving douchebag he really is...

I don't really care that he might love the Redskins. I'm tiring of TMQ's self-righteousness. I'm also tiring of his over-simplification of relatively significant football concepts -- a week or so ago, he wrote that announcers should just refer to a 2 Tampa coverage as zone coverage; as someone who appreciates an announcer who won't talk to me like I'm an idiot, I actually appreciate announcers who will distinguish zone coverages by referring to them as Cover 2, Cover 2 Tampa, Cover 3, Cover 4 and so on. The notion that 2 Tampa would be the only zone coverage -- something that TMQ certainly intimated -- is nonsensical.

He also routinely bashes DBs for "looking into the backfield" and costing their teams by doing so when frequently what he's seeing is corners who are playing zone coverages and are sitting down in their zones. That the defense concedes a touchdown in such cases isn't usually on the corner, it's on a late safety; but it's never written that way.

I realize the guy has to have a schtick, but I think its disingenuous to hold yourself out as an expert based on a schtick that's rooted in oversimplification.

TheZackAttack!
10-23-2007, 07:57 PM
And Brady is a dead-beat dad to his bastard child.

monosylab1k
10-23-2007, 08:04 PM
And Brady is a dead-beat dad to his bastard child.
48-27 still stings I guess.

leemajors
10-23-2007, 08:04 PM
I don't really care that he might love the Redskins. I'm tiring of TMQ's self-righteousness. I'm also tiring of his over-simplification of relatively significant football concepts -- a week or so ago, he wrote that announcers should just refer to a 2 Tampa coverage as zone coverage; as someone who appreciates an announcer who won't talk to me like I'm an idiot, I actually appreciate announcers who will distinguish zone coverages by referring to them as Cover 2, Cover 2 Tampa, Cover 3, Cover 4 and so on. The notion that 2 Tampa would be the only zone coverage -- something that TMQ certainly intimated -- is nonsensical.

He also routinely bashes DBs for "looking into the backfield" and costing their teams by doing so when frequently what he's seeing is corners who are playing zone coverages and are sitting down in their zones. That the defense concedes a touchdown in such cases isn't usually on the corner, it's on a late safety; but it's never written that way.

I realize the guy has to have a schtick, but I think its disingenuous to hold yourself out as an expert based on a schtick that's rooted in oversimplification.
at least he has let up on the battlestar galactica lately.

SpursFanFirst
10-23-2007, 08:19 PM
Pats lose to the Skins this week bro!!!

If only...but no. :depressed

J.T.
10-23-2007, 08:29 PM
I'll be rooting for Indy, just because I think they have a greater chance of losing to someone else down the road and I'm tired of hearing 16-0 banter.

If they beat the Patriots and the Patriots go 15-1, I could see Indy trying for the undefeated season. They'd have the tiebreak at 15-1 by virtue of the h2h win over the Pats and strength of schedule but their last two games are home division games and even if they don't mean anything you kind of want to win those. I like how the schedule makers tried to jew the Colts by making them play the first 3 div games on the road. Suck on that, NFL.

dirk4mvp
10-23-2007, 08:29 PM
Redskins might not win, but I doubt they'll give up 40+ points either.

TheZackAttack!
10-23-2007, 08:44 PM
And Brady is a dead-beat dad to his bastard child.
That was written in jest. Just thought I'd let you know since you were too stupid to get it.


48-27 still stings I guess.
Huh, Oh you mean the game between the Cowboys and pats at Texas stadium you never went to and lied about? That game?

monosylab1k
10-23-2007, 08:58 PM
That was written in jest. Just thought I'd let you know since you were too stupid to get it.
right. you're known for saying hilarious shit like that all the time, i bet. whether in jest or not, only someone who was obviously bitter would make a dumbass comment like that.

CubanMustGo
10-23-2007, 09:07 PM
Pats lose to the Skins this week bro!!!

Skins were this close to losing to a team with a gimpy second-team quarterback and a division III guy playing WR. No way in hell they stay close to the Pats.

Findog
10-23-2007, 11:22 PM
I realize the guy has to have a schtick, but I think its disingenuous to hold yourself out as an expert based on a schtick that's rooted in oversimplification.

PUNTING ON 4TH AND SHORT MAKES YOU A PUSSY!

That's when I write "Game Over" in my notebook.

Findog
10-23-2007, 11:22 PM
Skins were this close to losing to a team with a gimpy second-team quarterback and a division III guy playing WR. No way in hell they stay close to the Pats.

I'm facing Randy Moss in one fantasy league and Tom Brady in another. They better not get rolled too bad with that "vaunted" secondary they have.

K-State Spur
10-24-2007, 12:18 AM
Skins were this close to losing to a team with a gimpy second-team quarterback and a division III guy playing WR. No way in hell they stay close to the Pats.

Reading too much into the Arizona game would be a mistake. Washington was so banged up last week that it was obvious that their whole game plan was just to survive. They accomplished that until they played an onside kick piss poor, then they needed a little luck.

If the Skins can get healthy, they might have more of a chance than most would be willing to admit. Not to diminish anything the Pats have done this year, but Washington will be the best defense they have played thus far. In addition, the Redskins boast the kind of secondary depth necessary to match up with the Patriots WRs.

However, for the past 1 1/2 games, the Skins have been banged up at 4/5 of the OL, their top 2 WRs, and their top 2 corners. Everybody has injury problems by this point of the season, but I challenge any offense to lose 80% of its OL for any prolonged stretch and still be successful.

If Kendall, Moss, Randle El, and Smoot can get back near 100% this week and they can get Rabach back into the line-up, they might have a decent shot. If the injury situation doesn't change from last week, it should be a rout.

K-State Spur
10-24-2007, 12:21 AM
I used to like TMQ until I realized what a Redskin loving douchebag he really is...

Guess they needed something to make up for Len Pastabelly, who goes out of his way to criticize WAS every chance he gets.

monosylab1k
10-24-2007, 08:19 AM
If they play up to their potential and don't have too many health problems, the Redskins will definitely give the Patriots a hell of a fight. This is by no means a guaranteed win for New England.

After finding out that the Cowboys are all bark and no bite, I definitely fear the Redskins & Giants more than them.

TheZackAttack!
10-24-2007, 09:43 AM
If they play up to their potential and don't have too many health problems, the Redskins will definitely give the Patriots a hell of a fight. This is by no means a guaranteed win for New England.

After finding out that the Cowboys are all bark and no bite, definitely fear the Redskins & Giants more than them.

Bigzax
10-24-2007, 09:50 AM
Skins were this close to losing to a team with a gimpy second-team quarterback and a division III guy playing WR. No way in hell they stay close to the Pats.


there was no way in hell buffalo was going to stay close to dallas either!

leemajors
10-24-2007, 10:34 AM
If they play up to their potential and don't have too many health problems, the Redskins will definitely give the Patriots a hell of a fight. This is by no means a guaranteed win for New England.

After finding out that the Cowboys are all bark and no bite, I definitely fear the Redskins & Giants more than them.
the boys were still able to move the ball very easily against the patties defense.

Findog
10-24-2007, 12:08 PM
After finding out that the Cowboys are all bark and no bite, I definitely fear the Redskins & Giants more than them.

Not taking that bait.

FromWayDowntown
10-24-2007, 06:38 PM
PUNTING ON 4TH AND SHORT MAKES YOU A PUSSY!

That's when I write "Game Over" in my notebook.

:lol

FromWayDowntown
10-25-2007, 02:42 PM
PUNTING ON 4TH AND SHORT MAKES YOU A PUSSY!

That's when I write "Game Over" in my notebook.

Just to mention it -- one of my favorite parts of that notion is the "proof" that going on 4th and short works, which is dervied from the fact that his son's flag football team never punts.