Obnoxious Football Trash Talk Thread

Brewer's Friend 728
Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
HoppyDaze said:
Russell Wilson would not have thrown it the receiver trying to hug it out with his boyfriend, but the one trying to make a play, or at least pretending he was part of the play.
Click to expand...

I have no clue what you are trying to say. Anyone translate Hoppy dialect?
 
h22lude said:
I have no clue what you are trying to say. Anyone translate Hoppy dialect?
Click to expand...

I think he's trying to say that Russell Wilson is a better QB than Brady because Brady threw a pass to a receiver who was getting dry humped through the end zone.

I know...

How do you think "Hoppy" got to be an adjective? Its sht like that.
 
Cape Brewing said:
I think he's trying to say that Russell Wilson is a better QB than Brady because Brady threw a pass to a receiver who was getting dry humped through the end zone.

I know...

How do you think "Hoppy" got to be an adjective? Its sht like that.
Click to expand...

Did you already forget? Gronk wasn't held, bear hugged or dry humped. No holding what so ever in that play.

Tuck rule, spygate, no SB rings in 9 years, cry baby, Pats suck, Brady is the worst. Don't worry guys I got all your "relevant" comebacks out for you already.
 
h22lude said:
Did you already forget? Gronk wasn't held, bear hugged or dry humped. No holding what so ever in that play. Tuck rule, spygate, no SB rings in 9 years, cry baby, Pats suck, Brady is the worst. Don't worry guys I got all your "relevant" comebacks out for you already.
Click to expand...
Someone's sore!
 
h22lude said:
Did you already forget? Gronk wasn't held, bear hugged or dry humped. No holding what so ever in that play.

Tuck rule, spygate, no SB rings in 9 years, cry baby, Pats suck, Brady is the worst. Don't worry guys I got all your "relevant" comebacks out for you already.
Click to expand...

Amen!!!!
 
Yeah, to be honest, that PI/Holding whatever the hell that hot mess might have been at the end never should have mattered.

- If McCourty doesn't get called for that holding penalty (what the hell was that? if all a receiever has to do is grab onto a DB for all he's worth to draw a holding call, then I think we're gonna see a LOT of receivers getting coached up to grab onto DB's for all they're worth!), Pats probably win

In all seriousness
- If Ridley doesn't put the ball on the ground in, what was it, the first quarter, the Pats probably go on to score and ultimately win. Two hands in traffic, man, two hands in traffic!
- If someone, for the love of Teebus, could've just sacked Newton on that freakin' 3rd down play in the 4th quarter, the Pats probably win. Instead, Newton dodged 4 attempts and pulled off probably the most impressive play of the game. Hats off to the kid.
 
h22lude said:
Please watch Sports Center. The penalty started 4 yards in and the ball was intercepted 4 yards in. It was catchable if the penalty wasnt committed. And if you disagree with me, ray lewis, Steve young and the rest of the commentators then let's talk about it being holding. Either way it was a penalty.
Click to expand...

"Catchable" doesn't even matter if the proper call is made, i.e. defensive holding.
 
MrNickVT said:
Someone's sore!
Click to expand...

Hahaha no actually I'm not. When it happened, sure I was mad but it is what it is and we move on. They lost the game well before that play. Ridley once again doesn't know how to hold a football while running. Talib being an idiot causes a 15 yard unsportsman like penalty. It wasn't that call that ended the game for them. Second time a game has come down to one throw and to win games in the playoff, you can't play like that.

Now let's see if we can have a real football conversation in here. When I watch a replay I see either PI, holding or illegal contact down field. You can argue the ball was under thrown but looking at the replay, the ball was caught in his chest. If Gronk stood still where he was and no one touched the ball it would have ended up hitting his legs. That isn't under thrown to me. If so then we can look at the McCourty penalty where the ball was over thrown. A holding penalty is called there. If you say the ball was under thrown for Gronk then it should be holding. And if you think no holding because the ball might have been in the air already then it was illegal contact down field. The defender was not looking at the ball and made contact.

Not crying, not saying refs blew it, just want to see if my understanding of the rules is wrong. Am I wrong?
 
stratslinger said:
Yeah, to be honest, that PI/Holding whatever the hell that hot mess might have been at the end never should have mattered.

- If McCourty doesn't get called for that holding penalty (what the hell was that? if all a receiever has to do is grab onto a DB for all he's worth to draw a holding call, then I think we're gonna see a LOT of receivers getting coached up to grab onto DB's for all they're worth!), Pats probably win

In all seriousness
- If Ridley doesn't put the ball on the ground in, what was it, the first quarter, the Pats probably go on to score and ultimately win. Two hands in traffic, man, two hands in traffic!
- If someone, for the love of Teebus, could've just sacked Newton on that freakin' 3rd down play in the 4th quarter, the Pats probably win. Instead, Newton dodged 4 attempts and pulled off probably the most impressive play of the game. Hats off to the kid.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. The Talib BS was stupid but didn't really change much. They had 1st down and were making a run to score. Ridley fumbled in the redzone. That is at least 3 points. McCourty's play would have been 4th down with no score (or maybe 3 points) but either way not a TD. Which I agree, if the Gronk play isn't a penalty, the McCourty play isn't either.

Here is a good replay http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:9998877 You can see at 21 seconds illegal contact is starting to be made and then it gets worse from there. The ref they have in the booth says it wasn't catchable, which I don't think is true but let's say it wasn't catchable even Gerry said if anything it is holding.
 
Ya can't blame Goodell. He's probably thinking, "Christ, we need to share the wealth. The Pats have been so dominant for so long it is starting to hurt other tv markets since fans of other teams are just giving up."

It's good business from Goodell's perspective.
 
Cape Brewing said:
Ya can't blame Goodell. He's probably thinking, "Christ, we need to share the wealth. The Pats have been so dominant for so long it is starting to hurt other tv markets since fans of other teams are just giving up."

It's good business from Goodell's perspective.
Click to expand...

So Goodell's been letting the panthers win all season, who now have the same record as the pats? Goodell didnt throw 3 touchdowns, nor did brady, that was newton.
 
finsfan said:
So Goodell's been letting the panthers win all season, who now have the same record as the pats? Goodell didnt throw 3 touchdowns, nor did brady, that was newton.
Click to expand...

I can't believe how badly the Pats couldn't tackle him. The Pats have been known to miss a lot of sacks (Giants SB) but he was just running around every where and no one could touch him. Like I said in a previous post, I'm not a fan of that style QB but he definitely does it well.
 
finsfan said:
So Goodell's been letting the panthers win all season, who now have the same record as the pats? Goodell didnt throw 3 touchdowns, nor did brady, that was newton.
Click to expand...

How the fck do you get "letting the panthers win all season" out of that???

I'm joking saying that Goodell is making the Pats lose... and you some how get "so Goodell's been letting the Panthers win all season" out of that??

Do the Pats and Panthers play against each other every game or something??

Christ... it's like posting with my sister's kids.
 
Cape Brewing said:
I think he's trying to say that Russell Wilson is a better QB than Brady because Brady threw a pass to a receiver who was getting dry humped through the end zone.
Click to expand...

That's one of the reasons. The dry humping was completely consensual. Maybe it's just karma for Gronks Look At Me-I'm Ready To Play-I'm An Entitled *********-Feed Me Cock video he made.
 
ku-xlarge.jpg
 
HoppyDaze said:
Russell Wilson would not have thrown it the receiver trying to hug it out with his boyfriend, but the one trying to make a play, or at least pretending he was part of the play.
Click to expand...

No, he wouldn't. Russell Wilson would have taken a knee because that's what you do when there's 4 seconds left in the game and you have a 17 point lead.
 
h22lude said:
When I watch a replay I see either PI, holding or illegal contact down field.
Click to expand...

Well, it wasn't holding because the linebacker went out of his way to avoid even giving the impression of it. It wasn't illegal contact, because I'm fairly sure the collision was inadvertant. It wasn't pass interference and if you think it was you fail both geometry and physics. It also wasn't guarding the face, because Gronk saw the pass coming and tried to slow down to redirect.

Even if it was one of those things, what happens? The Patriots aren't going to punch it in against a team that's allowed the fewest red zone rushing touchdowns. Not with the game on the line. So, they're probably going to throw it to Gronk, but Brady spent that entire drive basically failing as a QB anyway, so there's no guarantee the pass is going to be on target or that it won't be picked again.
 
Cape Brewing said:
Because they have played a string of teams that put up, combined, less point per game than Pats do solo.

The Panthers are going to have to check into local hospitals for severely over-extended anuses by the third quarter due to the power fisting the Patriots are going to apply.
Click to expand...

in soviet boston, anus fists you!
 
Yeah... Huge fail... Marching his team down to what should have been the 1 yr line with under a minute on the clock.

Damn it!!! When will the Pats pick up a decent QB!?!?!?
 
Darwin18 said:
Barnwell has a solid article about last night's game, that is if you can get over yourselves:

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-t...34/the-panthers-not-the-refs-beat-new-england
Click to expand...

I actually like this article. I said it previously, the Pats lost the game (the Panthers beat them). It wasn't the refs. It was their playing. Terrible penalties (Talib being dumb and McCourty holding on 3rd and long). Fumble by Ridley. Brady and his receivers being off. They just didn't play well.

With that said, I think we can all agree that the last play was a penalty and the article did a good job of describing why. PI can go either way. Some say it wasn't catchable and some say it was. I have seen PI called on non catchable balls before. Either way I think it is a judgement call and they called non catchable. So no PI. Illegal contact is iffy but the replays I have seen haven't been the best. For illegal contact Brady must have the ball in the pocket. He was in the pocket but couldn't tell if the ball was thrown when the contact start (again at 21 seconds in that ESPN replay). So from what we can see we can't call illegal contact though it could be. The last option is holding and that is 100% what it was. To quote the article which is from the NFL ruling "The defensive player cannot use his hands or arms to push from behind, hang onto, or encircle an eligible receiver in a manner that restricts movement as the play develops. Beyond this five-yard limitation, a defender may use his hands or arms ONLY to defend or protect himself against impending contact caused by a receiver. In such reaction, the defender may not contact a receiver who attempts to take a path to evade him." This is what happened without a doubt.

And this is really all I was asking. I'm not saying this call cost them the game because they shouldn't be coming down to one play but I was asking was it a penalty and yes it was.

Though one person commented on the article "Those two options aren't mutually exclusive. The Patriots lost because they put themselves in a position where they only had a 23% chance to win AND THEN were jobbed on the last play of the game." Which I agree. The Pats played like crap and lost the game HOWEVER they did have one more play to try and win.

Mindsculptor said:
Well, it wasn't holding because the linebacker went out of his way to avoid even giving the impression of it. It wasn't illegal contact, because I'm fairly sure the collision was inadvertant. It wasn't pass interference and if you think it was you fail both geometry and physics. It also wasn't guarding the face, because Gronk saw the pass coming and tried to slow down to redirect.

Even if it was one of those things, what happens? The Patriots aren't going to punch it in against a team that's allowed the fewest red zone rushing touchdowns. Not with the game on the line. So, they're probably going to throw it to Gronk, but Brady spent that entire drive basically failing as a QB anyway, so there's no guarantee the pass is going to be on target or that it won't be picked again.
Click to expand...

OK none of what you said makes sense.

Holding - because the linebacker went out of his way to avoid even giving the impression of it. What the hell are you saying. He grabbed Gronk. If you can't see that then you may want to get eye doctor insurance and go get them check. Read above or just read the article. It was definitely holding.

Illegal Contact - it doesn't matter if it was inadvertent or not. If the passer is in the pocket with the ball and the defender uses his hands on the receiver, that is illegal contact. The defender did use his hands against Gronk. What we don't know from the replays is if Brady was in the pocket with the ball.

PI - The reason they didn't call PI was because they said the ball was uncatchable which is arguable. One can say his momentum wouldn't allow him to get back to the ball. Someone else could say if he wasn't being held be the defender he could have made a move. Either way, it is a judgement call and they said uncatchable so no PI.


What happens if it was called. The Pats would have 1 play on the 1 yard line with the best QB sneak quarterback. If that was called they absolutely would have had a chance to win the game.
 
Cape Brewing said:
Yeah... Huge fail... Marching his team down to what should have been the 1 yr line with under a minute on the clock.

Damn it!!! When will the Pats pick up a decent QB!?!?!?
Click to expand...


I just spent six years dealing with Homo inferus bostonensis, their incessant ball-busting, and their provincialism. For once, and I know this is contrary to your kind's nature, shut your Masshole mouth and take the **** we fling on your team.
 
2 completely **** calls/noncalls flat out decided 2 of the biggest games of the weekend. NFL rules and officiating is pathetic.
 
Punity said:
Riiiight it had nothing to do with Kapernick ****eing his bed.
Click to expand...

Games in domes on the road against 7-2 teams are difficult. That call still decided the game. That is not arguable. Had the Niners had the ball they would have run out the clock.
 
They had the ball with 2 min left to go down and kick a FG and go home.....what did they do run backwards and commit a safety which wasnt called then tackle a fair catch. That call didnt decide the game.
 
Punity said:
They had the ball with 2 min left to go down and kick a FG and go home.....what did they do run backwards and commit a safety which wasnt called then tackle a fair catch. That call didnt decide the game.
Click to expand...

If that terrible call isn't made they win.
 
h22lude said:
I actually like this article. I said it previously, the Pats lost the game (the Panthers beat them). It wasn't the refs. It was their playing. Terrible penalties (Talib being dumb and McCourty holding on 3rd and long). Fumble by Ridley. Brady and his receivers being off. They just didn't play well. With that said, I think we can all agree that the last play was a penalty and the article did a good job of describing why. PI can go either way. Some say it wasn't catchable and some say it was. I have seen PI called on non catchable balls before. Either way I think it is a judgement call and they called non catchable. So no PI. Illegal contact is iffy but the replays I have seen haven't been the best. For illegal contact Brady must have the ball in the pocket. He was in the pocket but couldn't tell if the ball was thrown when the contact start (again at 21 seconds in that ESPN replay). So from what we can see we can't call illegal contact though it could be. The last option is holding and that is 100% what it was. To quote the article which is from the NFL ruling "The defensive player cannot use his hands or arms to push from behind, hang onto, or encircle an eligible receiver in a manner that restricts movement as the play develops. Beyond this five-yard limitation, a defender may use his hands or arms ONLY to defend or protect himself against impending contact caused by a receiver. In such reaction, the defender may not contact a receiver who attempts to take a path to evade him." This is what happened without a doubt. And this is really all I was asking. I'm not saying this call cost them the game because they shouldn't be coming down to one play but I was asking was it a penalty and yes it was. Though one person commented on the article "Those two options aren't mutually exclusive. The Patriots lost because they put themselves in a position where they only had a 23% chance to win AND THEN were jobbed on the last play of the game." Which I agree. The Pats played like crap and lost the game HOWEVER they did have one more play to try and win. OK none of what you said makes sense. Holding - because the linebacker went out of his way to avoid even giving the impression of it. What the hell are you saying. He grabbed Gronk. If you can't see that then you may want to get eye doctor insurance and go get them check. Read above or just read the article. It was definitely holding. Illegal Contact - it doesn't matter if it was inadvertent or not. If the passer is in the pocket with the ball and the defender uses his hands on the receiver, that is illegal contact. The defender did use his hands against Gronk. What we don't know from the replays is if Brady was in the pocket with the ball. PI - The reason they didn't call PI was because they said the ball was uncatchable which is arguable. One can say his momentum wouldn't allow him to get back to the ball. Someone else could say if he wasn't being held be the defender he could have made a move. Either way, it is a judgement call and they said uncatchable so no PI. What happens if it was called. The Pats would have 1 play on the 1 yard line with the best QB sneak quarterback. If that was called they absolutely would have had a chance to win the game.
Click to expand...

Cliff notes ffs!
 
motobrewer said:
i find all this whining about officials from patriot fans amusing.

please, keep it coming.
Click to expand...

Officials are bad, but the rules are just so terrible anymore. The league is not the NFL I grew up watching. The fact that you can't tackle a QB anymore is just depressing. I'm gonna be doing more brewing, fishing, and hunting on my Sundays now that football isn't a contact sport.
 

Similar threads

Broken Crow
To Clean sealed unopened keg with the same thing, Or Not To Clean..blah blah blah
Replies
3
Views
485
Broken Crow
Broken Crow
Ali01
Bottle conditioning a big beer?
Replies
4
Views
917
MaxStout
MaxStout
MMP126
Homebrewers Hop Quality
Replies
10
Views
1K
ncbrewer
N
M
Removable heating element
Replies
25
Views
2K
Broken Crow
Broken Crow
3 Dawg Night
FotHB XIX: Legal to Drink in Canada
2 3
Replies
89
Views
4K
BrewMan13
BrewMan13

Latest posts

Back
Top