Road To Super Bowl, 2011. You Can Pretend To Know About The NFL!

Soup Kitchen from the A2K Fantasy Football game joined in via email. Jerremy goes with:
Indy
KC
NO
Phil

David, as is apparent from the "thumbs down" we've received, they don't like us! I don't think I'll ever recover from this crushing rebuff.

I certainly didn't thumb down your or David's posts, Bill (may I call you Bill?).
I have read through your posts. I can't quite comprehend what seems to be animosity towards sports or phys ed for kids in school. You have a thread related to those issues. Please link it and we might join you there.
I shouldn't hold my breath, I suspect, waiting for your picks.

I don't have to thumb down david's posts. They are always invisible to me.

Note for the record, that I have no objection
to anyone thuming down any of my posts
(or of putting me on Ignore). Perfectly OK

I 'm just having a little fun on this thread.





David

Good for you, OSD.

Well, I like animals mainly, so my picks are:
Seahawks, Colts, Ravens and ... Packers.

(From what I gather, you have to pick teams every week right through the Super Bowl. Remember to come back next week and pick four more.)

Ha! Good one.

I guess it is animals as meat. I personally am not into eating crow, though!

Same picks for me.

Cycloptichorn

Whoa! These were my exact picks also. I thought I was being a "moldbreaker."

Really? I think that this season has shown that these teams are clearly superior to their opponents in this round of the playoffs, on the average.

Cycloptichorn

I don't think so, Oylok. This week is something of a practice one. If I am correct, after this, we have to - or get to - pick all the way through the Super Bowl.

AndyClubber goes with-
Indy
KC
NO
GB

Yes, this week is a warm-up because there are too many variables in who plays whom next week. It would be mind-numbing to try to explain the permutations.
Next week we will choose all of the rest of the way through.

Colts
Ravens
Saints
Eagles

Hi. Thanks for being civil.


You may call me Bill. I wasn't saying that you in particular thumbed down our posts. Of course, we did offend someone because we had "0" instead of the norm (which is "1"). But I wasn't personally offended by receiving a "0." I was just trying to have a little fun, just as David has said he was. The thought never crossed my mind to post in this thread until I saw that David had done so. As we've corresponded frequently by PM, I've considered David to be a friend. Some may disagree with his political views (As for me, I gave up on politics years ago), but he's one of the most polite members of this forum (as is edgarblythe, by the way, with whom I've also corresponded by PM a number of times)). My intention was simply to provide David with a little moral support. I'm dismayed and saddened by the disruption I seem to have caused. I guess some could argue that David was being perhaps a little rude, but I should point out that neither of us in this instance resorted to name-calling (e.g., this from a sports fan in another thread, "you ... pathetic f---ing loser(s)") or personally attacking someone who had simply made an innocuous statement. I had not intended to post any more comments in this forum about the sports culture or mandatory P.E. When I posted last, I assumed that nothing would come of my and David's posts. If I had known that I would have caused this reaction, I never would have posted here. Oh, well, you live and learn (again).


I've posted too much. I wonder how much you've read. Sometimes I am short-tempered, I guess.

There is a sense in which I'm not "anti-sports." If I had a teenage son who wanted to play football in high school, I would support him (with reservations). And I'm certainly not sedentary. I'm a confirmed gym rat (bodybuilding). I wouldn't dream of taking sports out of schools for those who want to play them. I'm not against phys ed. I favor the reform of mandatory P.E. The traditional sports-based approach (which even some "progressive" members of this forum support) shortchanges nonathletic students. The most hostile place for a nonathletic boy is a mandatory sports-based P.E. class. I'm convinced that historically more bullying has taken place in mandatory sports-based boys' P.E. (which, again, is supported by some "progressive" members of this forum, despite the bullying, which is dismissed as "part of life") than in all the academic classes combined.

Although you're clearly a gentleman, I regret that I must decline your offer to link the thread to which you refer. The hostile reaction that Chumley's two posts "I hate sports" and "Welcome, Sports Haters!" received indicates that no civil exchange is possible. I would be besieged with ad hominem attacks from members who believe that the sports culture (mind you, the culture associated only with several extremely popular sports) is sacrosanct and therefore above any critical evaluation. There's no point in having an exchange with people whose minds are closed. Besides, I had already given up posting in this forum anymore about any aspect of the sports culture or the need to reform mandatory P.E. for the benefit of those students who are the most physically unfit. I should have exercised better judgment and let David have his fun without me.


I'm sorry, my friend. I don't even know how the game is played. I guess the sports bug never bit me. Best wishes (sincerely). Exit (permanently, at least as far as this thread is concerned), stage left.

I didn't thumb down yours, Bill. I thumbed down David's. He interjects on threads routinely when they are just getting interesting in discussion with a kind of gun pulsing, or whatever. Anti sport is a new sideline.

I don't ignore david, generally - he is a civil person I can talk with and he with me, or so it seems.
I'm aware of your organized sports beef. I don't share the whole thing, but understand some of it.

This is a game thread. It's a place where many of us who disagree on all sorts of stuff come together to play with guessing.

Give it a break.

Bill, we who post here get used to thumbs. Sometimes thumbs are thoughtful, one way or another, and sometimes they are regurgation. Learn to look past them.

Wm has issues re bullying, which bunches of us get. He did go after fbaezer, which made me understand how he didn't understand. All these things are complicated.

I'm glad wm is here.

I was reading today about the quarterback for Stanford, Andrew Luck. He led his team to a rout in a bowl game over Virginia Tech a day or two ago.
He is listed as a senior next year, but actually has two years of eligibility left. His "dilemma" is whether or not he should leave college now or play another season or two for Stanford.
He is estimated to be able to sign something like a $40M contract over a few years if he turns pro now. If he stays another year, that could drop by half depending on the labor negotiations between the NFL and the players' union where there might be a cap on the salaries of rookies.
Complicating matters is the probable departure of the Stanford head coach (and his staff) and the graduations of several key players.
The Stanford fans are, of course, begging him to stay. The president of Stanford, however, was more pragmatic (humorously so).
One thing that caught my eye is that Andrew Luck is majoring in architecture.