SydLexia.com - The Forums :: View topic - Vikings return favor, give up on Randy Moss halfway through.

Posted: Nov 02 2010 03:43 pm

Fuck the patriots! as a raiders fan I will never forget that "tuck rule" incident

it was a fumble!! we totally had you guys beat!!

Posted: Nov 02 2010 03:51 pm

Don't blame the pats, blame the NFL, it's their rule.

What people also tend to forget, the game DID NOT end on that drive, there was still overtime which the Raiders failed to stop the Patriots from scoring.

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

bassguy252 wrote:

Fuck the patriots! as a raiders fan I will never forget that "tuck rule" incident

it was a fumble!! we totally had you guys beat!!

Whatever... it wasn't like the Pats won on that play. They had to kick two field goals after that to finish it up.

Bad calls are a part of sports, a team that falls apart after one bad call doesn't deserve to win. The Raiders had multiple opportunities to win after that call.

Posted: Nov 02 2010 03:59 pm

Yeah, Vinateiri's 4th quarter field goal is probably the greatest kick in NFL history.

UsaSatsui's Youtube Channel · Posted: Nov 02 2010 05:04 pm

I didn't mean to say Brady sucked, just that any above-average quarterback could still have success under the system. Clearly Brady is a phenomenal player.

Quote:

Fuck the patriots! as a raiders fan I will never forget that "tuck rule" incident

it was a fumble!! we totally had you guys beat!!

It was 10 years ago. Get over it. Then again, all the Raiders have nowadays is memories of the team actually being good 10 years ago...

Seriously. Letting someone know you were a Patriots fan on the east side of the bay was fucking dangerous.

Quote:

Bad calls are a part of sports, a team that falls apart after one bad call doesn't deserve to win.

This, 100%. If you can't win despite a bad call, you didn't deserve it.

2011 SNES Champ Joined: Dec 04 2006 Posts: 1929

UsaSatsui wrote:

This, 100%. If you can't win despite a bad call, you didn't deserve it.

Um, no. Getting screwed over about a turnover can easily cost 7 points to a team, which is really fucking huge if the game is anywhere near close.
Sure, if the referee blunders on a normal play, it won't have much of an effect on the game. But that was THE play of the game.
If you agree it's a bad call, you can't say the Patriots deserved the win in any way, because then it means they got a second chance after they seriously fucked up.

Personally, I think it was the right call in that situation, but the main problem I see with the rule, apart from being fucking stupid, is that it's hard to apply it without going to instant replay.

UsaSatsui's Youtube Channel · Posted: Nov 02 2010 07:45 pm

lavalarva wrote:

UsaSatsui wrote:

This, 100%. If you can't win despite a bad call, you didn't deserve it.

Um, no. Getting screwed over about a turnover can easily cost 7 points to a team, which is really fucking huge if the game is anywhere near close.

So can that holding penalty, that dropped pass, that Time Out you had to call when your tight end lined up on the wrong side, going for it on 4th and 1, not going for it on 4th and 1, and any number of 100 things that you could have done to change the outcome of that game. If the game was so close a bad call changed the outcome, then it was close enough that something else could have changed it too. Blaming just the bad call is easy because it's something right out there in the open, but it's never the only factor in a loss.

Posted: Nov 02 2010 07:49 pm

UsaSatsui wrote:

lavalarva wrote:

UsaSatsui wrote:

This, 100%. If you can't win despite a bad call, you didn't deserve it.

Um, no. Getting screwed over about a turnover can easily cost 7 points to a team, which is really fucking huge if the game is anywhere near close.

So can that holding penalty, that dropped pass, that Time Out you had to call when your tight end lined up on the wrong side, going for it on 4th and 1, not going for it on 4th and 1, and any number of 100 things that you could have done to change the outcome of that game. If the game was so close a bad call changed the outcome, then it was close enough that something else could have changed it too. Blaming just the bad call is easy because it's something right out there in the open, but it's never the only factor in a loss.

Yeah, its easy to blame bad calls because saying " It's not OUR fault we lost" is far more comforting. This shit happens all the time, to every team, even with replays. Can you imagine how the NFL History would be shaped if we had replay all along? I bet a ton of games would have been different.

2011 SNES Champ Joined: Dec 04 2006 Posts: 1929

I just think responding to "That was a BS call!" with "Yeah, but it's not like the Raiders couldn't win it anymore" is stupid.
That's making excuses for why your team deserved the win even though the other team got robbed of it earlier in the game.
It annoys the hell out of me, almost as much as Raiders fans bringing in the Tuck Rule in every single discussion that has anything to do with the NFL.
The whole fucking point of the argument is whether or not the game should have continued after the tuck rule play. Talking about the following plays is completely pointless.

Basically, stand your ground. Either say "it was a good call" or "the Raiders got robbed". Saying "It's not OUR fault the referees screwed up!" is also way too easy.

Posted: Nov 02 2010 09:28 pm

According to the rules, they made the correct call. I agree with it, it's not like they fucked up the call. They fixed a mistake, which is the point of replay. It was a good call.

UsaSatsui's Youtube Channel · Posted: Nov 02 2010 09:41 pm

No, it's not your fault the refs screwed up. That's just silly.

And hey, who says it was a fault thing anyways? Sometimes you do everything right, and it's not your day and still lose. Who says you need to have "fault" in a loss?

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

lavalarva wrote:

I just think responding to "That was a BS call!" with "Yeah, but it's not like the Raiders couldn't win it anymore" is stupid.
That's making excuses for why your team deserved the win even though the other team got robbed of it earlier in the game.
It annoys the hell out of me, almost as much as Raiders fans bringing in the Tuck Rule in every single discussion that has anything to do with the NFL.
The whole fucking point of the argument is whether or not the game should have continued after the tuck rule play. Talking about the following plays is completely pointless.

Basically, stand your ground. Either say "it was a good call" or "the Raiders got robbed". Saying "It's not OUR fault the referees screwed up!" is also way too easy.

This isn't Roy Jones Jr vs Park Si-Hun. There is no immediate subjective judgement call that determines a winner based on arbitrary information. It is a single call that happened in a game with a score and a set duration.

2011 SNES Champ Joined: Dec 04 2006 Posts: 1929

I think we're mostly agreeing with each other apart from some minor details so I'll stop before I somehow make things more complicated again Confused

I wonder though how much the blundered explanation (forward motion) helped fuel the controversy, because when the game ended everyone had a good reason to think it was a BS call.

Posted: Nov 03 2010 12:47 am

I think whats BS is the actual rule itself. It was obvious Brady had no intention to throw, but his motions by rule, dictated a forward pass incompleted and not a fumble. Another reason it seemed so BS was that the rule was a mere 2 years old or so, so it wasn't exactly a known rule or been enforced many times, or at all for all I know.

Posted: Nov 03 2010 01:11 am

Randy Moss is a douchebag. I've always hated that dumb little hand gesture he does when he gets a touchdown.

Posted: Nov 03 2010 03:05 am

Rydog wrote:

I think whats BS is the actual rule itself. It was obvious Brady had no intention to throw, but his motions by rule, dictated a forward pass incompleted and not a fumble. Another reason it seemed so BS was that the rule was a mere 2 years old or so, so it wasn't exactly a known rule or been enforced many times, or at all for all I know.

yeah I completely agree, that rule is crap! that "technicality" cost the radiers the game, it would of ended right then and there.

Sure it wasnt the patriots that made that rule but it always seems that way with them, questionable calls always going in their favor, everyone always seems to be so high up on them, like the Detroit Redwings when they were doing so well, not to knock the patriots as a successful team though, they are talented I just really dislike how much of a pedestal everyone seems to put them on. "The New England Patriots... Americas Team!! The best team in the WOOOORLD!!!" ugh Sad

now im just ranting and waaay off topic. im sorry, this is always a sore spot for me Sad

but Moss sucks worse then the tuck rule, he's a whiny primadonna who has no business playing in the nfl with his piss poor attitude.

Joined: Dec 06 2007 Location: Connecticut Posts: 11244

bassguy252 wrote:

Rydog wrote:

I think whats BS is the actual rule itself. It was obvious Brady had no intention to throw, but his motions by rule, dictated a forward pass incompleted and not a fumble. Another reason it seemed so BS was that the rule was a mere 2 years old or so, so it wasn't exactly a known rule or been enforced many times, or at all for all I know.

yeah I completely agree, that rule is crap! that "technicality" cost the radiers the game, it would of ended right then and there.

Sure it wasnt the patriots that made that rule but it always seems that way with them, questionable calls always going in their favor, everyone always seems to be so high up on them, like the Detroit Redwings when they were doing so well, not to knock the patriots as a successful team though, they are talented I just really dislike how much of a pedestal everyone seems to put them on. "The New England Patriots... Americas Team!! The best team in the WOOOORLD!!!" ugh Sad

now im just ranting and waaay off topic. im sorry, this is always a sore spot for me Sad

but Moss sucks worse then the tuck rule, he's a whiny primadonna who has no business playing in the nfl with his piss poor attitude.

Crushing my teams...

I liked the Redwings when they were last place in the division and Sergei Fedorov joined the team. I have mostly Russian ancestry, so I was excited about the new influence in the NHL. Sadly, I lost interest at about the same time he was traded and haven't followed hockey much. It wasn't all about Sergei Fedorov, more that hockey had two strikes and made stupid rule changes. In any case, my second favorite team was the Whalers, that dream is kinda dead though.

I have lived in New England my whole life and more specifically Boston for 5 years, so yeah, I like the Pats. Not in a fanatical way, but they would be the home team for me.

So yeah... I guess I picked two teams that seem like bandwagon choices.

Posted: Nov 03 2010 05:08 pm

Im not saying every fan of both teams are band wagoners, but thert were quite a few, especially up here.

Posted: Nov 03 2010 06:01 pm

Titans claimed him. Good move by them...

...if he even reports.

Posted: Nov 03 2010 06:35 pm

Eh, he is just as likely to hurt them as he is to help them. At least they have the bye to work him in some. I'm just happy all the local "bring randy back" chatter can finally end.

UsaSatsui's Youtube Channel · Posted: Nov 03 2010 07:01 pm

That's exactly the kind of team that needs him.

I'm willing to bet a lot of those 5-2 teams had a claim on him too.

Posted: Nov 04 2010 06:23 am

Wow, when's the last time a player played for 3 different teams in a single season?

Posted: Nov 04 2010 08:39 am

Well, lower tier players always bounce around, but a legit star doing it is pretty unusual.

UsaSatsui's Youtube Channel · Posted: Nov 04 2010 09:57 am

Pandajuice wrote:

Wow, when's the last time a player played for 3 different teams in a single season?

In a single -month-, even?

On a side note, I was wrong. The Titans were the -only- team that had a claim on him.

Wow.

Posted: Nov 04 2010 02:45 pm

UsaSatsui wrote:

On a side note, I was wrong. The Titans were the -only- team that had a claim on him.

Wow.

Technically, yes. But other teams were interested. Other teams were going to put claims in (Rams to block him from going to Seattle, Dolphins to stop him from going to either Jets or Pats), but when they found out that the Titans were going to put in a legit claim, they didn't send theirs in. Titans were very vocal that they wanted him, because they knew the teams with higher waiver priority would only claim him to block him from other teams.