|
herne
|
 |
« Reply #17775 on: December 28, 2012, 06:13:14 AM » |
|
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
herne
|
 |
« Reply #17776 on: December 28, 2012, 06:19:43 AM » |
|
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
herne
|
 |
« Reply #17777 on: December 28, 2012, 07:01:24 AM » |
|
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
herne
|
 |
« Reply #17778 on: December 28, 2012, 07:13:03 AM » |
|
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
herne
|
 |
« Reply #17779 on: December 28, 2012, 07:24:41 AM » |
|
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
herne
|
 |
« Reply #17780 on: December 28, 2012, 07:35:24 AM » |
|
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
herne
|
 |
« Reply #17781 on: December 28, 2012, 07:46:40 AM » |
|
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
FitnessFrenzy
|
 |
« Reply #17782 on: December 28, 2012, 08:25:20 AM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
El Diablo Blanco
|
 |
« Reply #17783 on: December 28, 2012, 08:27:02 AM » |
|
Where the fuck is the rest?
|
|
|
|
|
|
El Diablo Blanco
|
 |
« Reply #17784 on: December 28, 2012, 08:31:49 AM » |
|
Who is this sexy beast on the left. the thickness 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Voice of Doom
|
 |
« Reply #17785 on: December 28, 2012, 08:47:09 AM » |
|
It's a clean hit, and should be legal. But this is the GFL (girls' football league) now, and they want to censor violence in the game for two reasons:
1. lawsuits from disgruntled players tarnishing the homespun image of a violent game (quite the dichotomy they've got going) 2. female viewership. The NFL is selling networks on the ROI of how much they can charge for advertising. Claiming today's NFL hits more female viewers than ever, which is music to a network's ears. Women make the lion's share of a household's purchasing decisions, and today, hold more control over a family's earning potential and spending habits than we've ever seen. So that's a valuable target market to advertisers, who want to buy network time when women are watching. So the NFL needs more women to keep watching more NFL, so they can sell the product to networks. And women know there's some violence in the NFL, but their penchant for violence in the game doesn't meet male needs. But men don't buy stuff, nor are we as important as advertising targets as women are (think about generating new media money and comp'ing positive year over year for the shareholders...you need new business). So the NFL has to tone it down for the sake of selling the game. A bit less violence, more hugging, and lots of muscular men in spandex, and the women will come. That, and a pageant-like spectacle about the whole show to make it seem more like a soap opera (thanks to the halftime heartfelt pieces on rags to riches players who buy a house for their mom or take care of little kids).
I enjoy your posts. (no homo)
|
|
|
|
|
|
snx
|
 |
« Reply #17786 on: December 28, 2012, 09:06:10 AM » |
|
I enjoy your posts.
(no homo)
I enjoy posting! My wife can't stand listening to me babble on about all the stuff I think about, so I just dump my brain on getbig...good/bad/otherwise. Cathartic, is it not? Also, this thread is epic. It may rival, dare I say, Blinky's College Chicks thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
HockeyFightFan
|
 |
« Reply #17787 on: December 28, 2012, 09:28:52 AM » |
|
Intreging What is that she is lighting?
I would have guessed whipped cream?
|
|
|
|
|
|
freespirit
|
 |
« Reply #17788 on: December 28, 2012, 10:46:01 AM » |
|
.
|
balonie
|
|
|
garebear
Time Out
Getbig V

Gender: 
Posts: 6525
Never question my instincts.
|
 |
« Reply #17789 on: December 28, 2012, 10:52:27 AM » |
|
.
|
G
|
|
|
|
bradistani
|
 |
« Reply #17790 on: December 28, 2012, 10:56:07 AM » |
|
first of all.... SEAHAWKS BABY!!
second..... tell me how that is a penalty
helmet to helmet  in rugby you're not allowed to tackle a player if he's in mid-air . i don't know if they have a similar rule in the nfl, i doubt it though, lol. plus, i know these hits look pretty spectacular, they can hardly be called tackles though can they ? 'smashes' 
|
|
|
|
|
garebear
Time Out
Getbig V

Gender: 
Posts: 6525
Never question my instincts.
|
 |
« Reply #17791 on: December 28, 2012, 10:57:13 AM » |
|
.
|
G
|
|
|
|
FitnessFrenzy
|
 |
« Reply #17792 on: December 28, 2012, 11:06:43 AM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FitnessFrenzy
|
 |
« Reply #17793 on: December 28, 2012, 11:11:14 AM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dr.chimps
|
 |
« Reply #17794 on: December 28, 2012, 11:14:38 AM » |
|
helmet to helmet  in rugby you're not allowed to tackle a player if he's in mid-air . i don't know if they have a similar rule in the nfl, i doubt it though, lol. plus, i know these hits look pretty spectacular, they can hardly be called tackles though can they ? 'smashes'  At first glance it appears to be. Look again, and you'll see it's a clean hit. Knocked him into next week.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snx
|
 |
« Reply #17795 on: December 28, 2012, 11:28:12 AM » |
|
At first glance it appears to be. Look again, and you'll see it's a clean hit. Knocked him into next week.
It was legal and clean. No helmet to helmet. Didn't launch his body into a defenseless receiver. Put his shoulder into Davis' chest. He got flagged because refs just do that now out of gut reaction to any violent bang-bang hit, lest they have their hand slapped by the league and it's get-tough-agenda on concussion-producing hits in the NFL. He drew the flag, and I don't blame the refs. How could they tell? And you can't instant-replay a penalty. So err on the side of caution and try to protect the players. I'll tell you what though, Chancellor would do that again. He drew a flag, but I guarantee every receiver for the rest of the game was watching their back and running safer routes. And I'll bet a few told Kapernick to watch how far into the middle of the field and out of a zone seam he led them. And every receiver, if they didn't already respect the Hawks secondary (which is ludicrous...they're simply the best in the league by a long margin), now knows there's guys who will crush you legally, and without mercy. There's no way he's getting fined. There will be an uproar if he does. If I'm Pete Carroll, I'm very happy with how my secondary played, including that hit, and the team in general. And everyone else in the NFC is real glad too. The niners are banged up now (like the other Harbaugh team in the AFC) and are no longer shoe-ins for the NFC title game. That team that looked indestructible in mid-season certainly looks human now, don't they? And the Hawks are looking very, very good. I hate tapping rookie QBs as being special, but I like Wilson as this year's ROY, just going on regular season alone. But we all know the playoffs will determine which rookie QB gets the nod for being best (Luck vs RGIII vs Wilson). But I really like the Hawk's chances in the playoffs this year, more than I like how the Colts or Skins will match-up. Over the back of the year, Wilson has been stellar. I know Lynch takes a lot of heat off the kid, but he's really got teams guessing...reminds me of the way Big Ben shocked the AFC in his rookie year and how defenses had issues trying to contain a QB who could extend plays outside the pocket but still deliver accurately. Not saying Wilson will have a Ben-like career, but he's got teams really trying hard to figure him out. And that Hawks secondary is sick, sick, sick.
|
|
|
|
|
|
bradistani
|
 |
« Reply #17796 on: December 28, 2012, 11:34:29 AM » |
|
At first glance it appears to be. Look again, and you'll see it's a clean hit. Knocked him into next week.
aye, tha's right, tha knows ! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
herne
|
 |
« Reply #17797 on: December 28, 2012, 11:35:05 AM » |
|
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
herne
|
 |
« Reply #17798 on: December 28, 2012, 11:35:58 AM » |
|
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
bradistani
|
 |
« Reply #17799 on: December 28, 2012, 11:50:08 AM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|