| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Estonianzulu
Joined: 11 Jan 2007
Posts: 19731
Location: Middle of Nowhere VA
|
 Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:15 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
So, coming to the TNF game in Baltimore. What's good to eat at M&T? It'll be my first time back in the city since my wedding, any good bars to hit up where I wont get doused with booze for wearing a Browns shirt?
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
coordinator0
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Posts: 5873
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 12:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2012/10/08/patriots-huddle-relies-power-one/nHTapuVnBOwfFlffwTrN6J/story.html
This is a very good football article and I highly recommend it. Sadly it's about the Patriots (Ed Dickson has some quotes in it though) but what I'm interested in is the content about the no-huddle offense. I don't have any delusions about an offense like this coming to the Ravens any time soon but I'd fully support it if it did. Something as fast paced as what Oregon does probably wouldn't work as well in the NFL although on the other hand it might work even better with the higher quality of athletes on that level. Regardless we've all seen what damage a no-huddle offense can do (for and against the Ravens) and I'm also on-board with a more simplified terminology to move things along. Unlike the fad that the wildcat offense was I think that the no-huddle is something that's going to come in and make major changes in the NFL. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JROD82891
Joined: 15 Aug 2011
Posts: 255
Location: Virginia Beach
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
diamondbull424
Joined: 02 Dec 2007
Posts: 10016
Location: Baltimore, MD
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 6:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| coordinator0 wrote: | http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2012/10/08/patriots-huddle-relies-power-one/nHTapuVnBOwfFlffwTrN6J/story.html
This is a very good football article and I highly recommend it. Sadly it's about the Patriots (Ed Dickson has some quotes in it though) but what I'm interested in is the content about the no-huddle offense. I don't have any delusions about an offense like this coming to the Ravens any time soon but I'd fully support it if it did. Something as fast paced as what Oregon does probably wouldn't work as well in the NFL although on the other hand it might work even better with the higher quality of athletes on that level. Regardless we've all seen what damage a no-huddle offense can do (for and against the Ravens) and I'm also on-board with a more simplified terminology to move things along. Unlike the fad that the wildcat offense was I think that the no-huddle is something that's going to come in and make major changes in the NFL. |
It was excellent indeed. And it was truly a football article. I didn't even find it to be much about the Patriots besides the fact that Bellichick and Brady, along with Dickson- had the bulk of the comments. It was incredibly interesting... and I thought the part about Newton was very interesting.
Perhaps that's a reason Newton has been struggling early on this season as well, perhaps he's now learning the extended verbiage and is struggling to adept to a more complicated system. I know many people had the belief that the Panthers were using a "college" offense last season and that it wouldn't work for long once teams adjusted.. figured that might be the reason. But perhaps Newton is having to learn the complicated system to mix in with the no-huddle system for play calling.
But on another note... it appears as if the days of Peyton Manning in the shotgun calling audibles to the offense, while Ray Lewis changes up the defense... while offensive players are moving around in motion... and defensive players are changing their secondary alignments from off-man to press man to show blitz and move back... all in the span of 20 no-huddle seconds... will no longer be the evolution of football. THAT was a thing of beauty... it was a chess match of epic proportions.
But what football is evolving into looks pretty uninteresting. It's just points, quick points. Sure it's great if one team who does it meets up with a superior team who doesn't do it (college) and to see the adjustments made, but their is no micro-chasm taking place that you can point to and just see the intensity- like in the Manning/Lewis scenario- really it's just speed and points. I want to see defense... and I want to see strategy. Speed is a strategy, but much like how the Chiefs ran the ball for the vast majority of this past game... it's a very boring "strategy"... except for people who get the most love out of the game when players are crossing the TD threshold.
Well, it was nice while it lasted... defense, that is... 
_________________
Blind arrogance sows the field of it's own destruction. - Commander Greil, Fire Emblem |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DaBoys
Joined: 18 Feb 2005
Posts: 3020
Location: Lubbock Texas
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
You guys should uh ... get that GDT thread going....
_________________
| Matts4313 wrote: | | I agree with daboys, some of you might be insane. |
| The_Slamman wrote: | | Daboys is right. |
| Texas_OutLaw7 wrote: | | BTW, DaBoys wins this thread. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DontTazeMeBro
Joined: 20 Jan 2008
Posts: 20500
Location: 321
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| diamondbull424 wrote: |
Well, it was nice while it lasted... defense, that is... |
IDK. Maybe I'm optimistic but I feel like defense and running the ball are making a comeback. There are several teams this year playing excellent defense. Even the Patriots have become a somewhat run oriented offense. One-dimensional pass heavy teams like the Packers and Saints are struggling. I think there is a chance the NFL won't become the Big 12 after all.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ace5
Joined: 22 Jan 2007
Posts: 5544
Location: CT
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 5:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
So, given that Baltimore is most likely going to kick Dallas around the stadium this week, mind if I make the GDT? I've been meaning to catch up with you guys ever since FFMD, and just haven't gotten the chance.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
drd23
Joined: 26 Oct 2010
Posts: 5000
Location: Melbourne, Australia
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 2:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Ace5 wrote: | | So, given that Baltimore is most likely going to kick Dallas around the stadium this week, mind if I make the GDT? I've been meaning to catch up with you guys ever since FFMD, and just haven't gotten the chance. |
Our GDT? I don't have a problem with it but I don't know about the rest of the guys here.
_________________
db424 on the sig! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RavensTillIDie
Joined: 14 Jan 2007
Posts: 10834
Location: ----------------- Props to Jamison. on the dope signature!!!!!!!!!!
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 2:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
How about this, if I get all my work done tomorrow night. I'll put up our GDT by Friday, otherwise it's free game.
_________________
 | EliteTexan80 wrote: | | If this site represents "average" then yes. There are times where I forgo saying things because I'm afraid some of you will make me dumber. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
diamondbull424
Joined: 02 Dec 2007
Posts: 10016
Location: Baltimore, MD
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 4:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| DaBoys wrote: | | You guys should uh ... get that GDT thread going.... |
The GDT will be up by the morning. Sorry.
But on another note, your signature has to be removed. First, it was instituted in a sig bet made on this forum. It was only worn by me for a day because of a reneged bet that I was taking the place within.
Webby has outlawed that sig and sigs of that particular example as being inappropriate for these forums. So I'd like to ask that you remove it... it particularly won't be tolerated on this particular forum. Thanks and sorry for the inconvenience!
DB424
_________________
Blind arrogance sows the field of it's own destruction. - Commander Greil, Fire Emblem |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
diamondbull424
Joined: 02 Dec 2007
Posts: 10016
Location: Baltimore, MD
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 4:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Ace5 wrote: | | So, given that Baltimore is most likely going to kick Dallas around the stadium this week, mind if I make the GDT? I've been meaning to catch up with you guys ever since FFMD, and just haven't gotten the chance. |
| RavensTillIDie wrote: | | How about this, if I get all my work done tomorrow night. I'll put up our GDT by Friday, otherwise it's free game. |
If you two really want to do it, I have no problem.
If you want to make it Ace5, then by all means go right ahead. I'd just ask that you keep it appropriate (obviously) and do it as soon as possible- as in have it up by today (Thursday). I'm sure no one here would mind... as long as there isn't anything to mind. Think it could be interesting to see the opposing fan do a write up.
Either than that, if its not done by Friday... preference clearly shifts to RTID as he's our usual GDT guy.
_________________
Blind arrogance sows the field of it's own destruction. - Commander Greil, Fire Emblem |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Meco
Joined: 30 Aug 2012
Posts: 2306
Location: Las Vegas
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 5:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| diamondbull424 wrote: | | DaBoys wrote: | | You guys should uh ... get that GDT thread going.... |
But on another note, your signature has to be removed. First, it was instituted in a sig bet made on this forum. It was only worn by me for a day because of a reneged bet that I was taking the place within.
Webby has outlawed that sig and sigs of that particular example as being inappropriate for these forums. So I'd like to ask that you remove it... it particularly won't be tolerated on this particular forum. Thanks and sorry for the inconvenience! |
I hate to come in here all "headstrong" but that is a joke. That sig is banned and sigs of that variety are banned? That makes zero sense. Apparently some Ravens fans can't handle a joke… Banned because some people are too thin skinned and can't walk the walk to match the talk. I'll definitely be keeping this in mind in dealings with the Ravens forum.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
diamondbull424
Joined: 02 Dec 2007
Posts: 10016
Location: Baltimore, MD
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 5:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Meco wrote: | | diamondbull424 wrote: | | DaBoys wrote: | | You guys should uh ... get that GDT thread going.... |
But on another note, your signature has to be removed. First, it was instituted in a sig bet made on this forum. It was only worn by me for a day because of a reneged bet that I was taking the place within.
Webby has outlawed that sig and sigs of that particular example as being inappropriate for these forums. So I'd like to ask that you remove it... it particularly won't be tolerated on this particular forum. Thanks and sorry for the inconvenience! |
I hate to come in here all "headstrong" but that is a joke. That sig is banned and sigs of that variety are banned? That makes zero sense. Apparently some Ravens fans can't handle a joke… Banned because some people are too thin skinned and can't walk the walk to match the talk. I'll definitely be keeping this in mind in dealings with the Ravens forum. |
How about you pay more attention to my words. Webby as in the Webmaster of this site deems that sig to be inappropriate.
The above sig has sexually explicit images within it not viewed as appropriate for this community. Webby than reaffirmed the inappropriate nature of this particular sig and others like it. So unless you'd like to take your opinion up with him regarding the appropriate/inappropriate nature of sigs on HIS site, than I suggest you drop this issue.
... and unless you've seen posts from Webby that suggest otherwise, I have no reason to believe that Webby is a Ravens fan or gives preferential treatment to them in sig bets. I actually wore that sig out of mutual respect between our two respective fan communities... and it was initially brought to my attention by one of YOUR mods that it was deemed inappropriate.
So no, that sig is not a joke. It is against the forum rules. And will not be tolerated on this particular forum as stated above. Thanks!
DB424
_________________
Blind arrogance sows the field of it's own destruction. - Commander Greil, Fire Emblem |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Meco
Joined: 30 Aug 2012
Posts: 2306
Location: Las Vegas
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 6:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| diamondbull424 wrote: | | The above sig has sexually explicit images within it not viewed as appropriate for this community. Webby than reaffirmed the inappropriate nature of this particular sig and others like it. |
Wut? Clearly neither you (who appears to be in complete agreement with Webby) or Webby understand what "explicit" is.
Link.
| Quote: | -fully and clearly expressed or demonstrated; leaving nothing merely implied
-described or shown in realistic detail: explicit sexual scenes.
-having sexual acts or nudity clearly depicted |
Now maybe there is some second level of that sig that is invisible to me but I certainly don't see anything that is "fully or clearly expressed", "shown in realistic detail" or "depicts acts sexual in nature".
As a matter of fact, part of the definition is that something explicit "leaves nothing merely implied" and I for one have no idea what the hell the issue is. I see absolutely nothing inappropriate with that signature. I see Joe Flacco with a police hat and some wrestlers with jewelry, it looks like a poor rendition of the village people. Right hand to whatever power you do or don't believe in, I have no clue what is inappropriate about that signature which clearly contradicts the idea that this sig is "explicit".
But since it's clear you're implying those are some kind of strippers on the right side of the signature I feel like the rating system put forth by the Motion Picture Association needs to be reviewed.
| Quote: | Rated G: General Audiences – All Ages Admitted.
Rated PG: Parental Guidance Suggested – Some Material May Not be Suitable for Children.
Rated PG-13: Parents Are Strongly Cautioned to Give Special Guidance for Attendance of Children Under 13 – Some Material may be Inappropriate for Children Under 13. |
Why are we being held to a PG standard? At the very most we should be held to a PG-13 standard because I'm not sure about you but I distinctly remember checking a box that said "I'm at least 13 years or older". Why are we being held to a certain standard when the terms of agreement to join the site clearly state that there is to be no one under the age of 13?
And have you ever seen the show Arrested Development? They've got a TV-14 rating which is less significant than a PG movie rating and they've got a group of male strippers that occasionally show up called the "Hot Cops" who are darn near identical to the men shown in that signature. If you think Webby is being objective when he says that signature is too severe for a PG rating, you're wrong, he's made his own personal, subjective judgement that clearly doesn't have anything to do with any sort of preordained rating system at all.
But that's not even my main point.
| Quote: | | PG-rated motion picture should be investigated by parents before they let their younger children attend. The PG rating indicates, in the view of the Rating Board, that parents may consider some material unsuitable for their children, and parents should make that decision. The more mature themes in some PG-rated motion pictures may call for parental guidance. There may be some profanity and some depictions of violence or brief nudity. But these elements are not deemed so intense as to require that parents be strongly cautioned beyond the suggestion of parental guidance. There is no drug use content in a PG-rated motion picture. |
Clearly that sig falls between the confines of a PG rating.
But all of this begs the question, why are we being censored on the internet at all? Reddit doesn't mind. Facebook doesn't mind. Google doesn't mind. Twitter doesn't mind. All sorts of HUUUUGE internet companies that are wildly successful don't censor their users (obviously there are certain exceptions but for the most part, they're censorship free). So the argument that instilling some sort of language standard improves the site and drive less people away falls flat on it's face. As a matter of fact, I'd argue that the censorship drives more people away than it keeps. But alas, that's a discussion for another day. Sorry for raising so much havoc.
PS - Don't get all high and mighty, you're an internet mod not the POTUS. Dont' bring the hammer. Don't be a jerk. Respond like a normal human being plz. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
diamondbull424
Joined: 02 Dec 2007
Posts: 10016
Location: Baltimore, MD
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
I said explicit, clearly one could guess that implicit was the word I was shooting for. It's very early and a difference between two letters isn't a big deal if the meaning can be derived through context. I don't need dictionary definitions to understand the difference between a typo and what I meant, a simple question-correction on your end would've easily sufficed.
Also perhaps you are somewhat ignorant of my position here. I enforce rules and guidelines as a moderator- I do not make/change them. I'm sure you put a lot of effort into your response... but this isn't the forum for it.
Like I said, if you feel the rules are unfair in anyway, PM Webby regarding them. Now if you feel like I've been unfair in enforcing rules, than PM me. Those are the proper procedures here... and since I haven't even handed out any kind of official warnings... I don't see what the problem is here.
If you want to complain, take it to the appropriate channels. Not this thread and not this forum. Thanks!
DB424
_________________
Blind arrogance sows the field of it's own destruction. - Commander Greil, Fire Emblem |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
