Chief games shows why players should GET UP.

[Ravage!!!]

Because of the ridiculous rules now set in the NFL, players that have their bell rung GET the **** up and to the huddle or sidelines, shake it off so that you are not removed from the game for the "concussion prodedure." GET UP... get to the huddle, the slight dizziness of having your head jarred goes away in 5 seconds and you REMAIN IN THE PLAYOFF GAME!!!

Seriously.... get up.

[BroncoWave]

This might be the dumbest thing I have ever read. Yeah! Get up! Who cares if your brain is jelly when you are 50? Be a big, tough man and get back out there!!!

[Ziggy]

Rav, it all depends on how hard you get your bell rung. It's awfully hard to get up and go to the sideline when you have no idea where you are, what you're doing, and why you are there.

[BroncoJoe]

Because of the ridiculous rules now set in the NFL, players that have their bell rung GET the **** up and to the huddle or sidelines, shake it off so that you are not removed from the game for the "concussion prodedure." GET UP... get to the huddle, the slight dizziness of having your head jarred goes away in 5 seconds and you REMAIN IN THE PLAYOFF GAME!!!

Seriously.... get up.

Between this post, and an earlier beauty where you said the game hasn't changed at all since the '30's, I am now convinced you're completely off your rocker.

[Mike]

This game showed me that even if you are up by 28, keep scoring til your up by 90.

[BroncoWave]

Between this post, and an earlier beauty where you said the game hasn't changed at all since the '30's, I am now convinced you're completely off your rocker.

Rav must have GOTTEN UP too many times during football games.

[Timmy!]

Go home thread, you're drunk.

[DenBronx]

4047

[SR]

This might be the dumbest thing I have ever read. Yeah! Get up! Who cares if your brain is jelly when you are 50? Be a big, tough man and get back out there!!!

I agree completely. In fact, I probably have never agreed with you more than this.

[SR]

4047

For some ungodly reason, that picture makes me want to watch MacGruber.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

I think many players in years past did GET UP, and continue playing, and that is now why so many of them are having terrible problems now.

[SR]

I think Lewis just got his eyeball gouged out.

[DenBronx]

I think Lewis just got his eyeball gouged out.

He should just pop it back in, get up and keep playing.

[wayninja]

Man I missed the party!

Good thread, Rav. Good thread.

[Joel]

I emphatically agree with all dissenters and further note none of the teams referenced are the Broncos.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

My son tried the whole 'get up quick and run off the field" thing this year. It didnt work so well because he collapsed on the sideline.

[Army Bronco]

All you gotta do is take some vagisil and rub some dirt on any issue and it gets better.

[Poet]

Ravage, I love you, you know I do...but...half this message board just styled on you.

[sneakers]

http://i.imgur.com/xw26DYd.jpg

[Zweems56]

http://i.imgur.com/xw26DYd.jpg

That is a beautiful *****.

[Shazam!]

I had a concussion once, and by no means are you able to just go about your business like nothing sometimes.

Even if the rules are changed, the cameras now catch everything, so if a player makes his way to the sidelines, it is viewed by all.

That's like saying when a boxer gets Kayoed to just 'Get up and back in the fight sissy!' Not happening.

[atwater27]

Concussions are 4 real, bro. I don't like the rules that receivers can't be touched anymore but the new concussion rules are there for a reason. Players are shooting themselves in the heart so their brains can be studied because they are so ****** up in the head at 50 that they can't even process a normal thought or remember what they did 5 minutes ago. Why not try some preventative measures?

[Joel]

I had a concussion once, and by no means are you able to just go about your business like nothing sometimes.

Even if the rules are changed, the cameras now catch everything, so if a player makes his way to the sidelines, it is viewed by all.

That's like saying when a boxer gets Kayoed to just 'Get up and back in the fight sissy!' Not happening.
The boxing comparison fascinates me: The NFL just coughed up nearly a BILLION dollars to end liability for all past concussions, and the only reason anyone ever offers a settlement THAT big is because they know they'd not only lose a civil trial but face a MUCH larger judgement as a result. Meanwhile, a sport where INTENTIONALLY causing concussions is a PRIMARY GOAL just keeps happily going on like nothing's wrong with that. I don't get it.

[Army Bronco]

I had a concussion once, and by no means are you able to just go about your business like nothing sometimes.

Even if the rules are changed, the cameras now catch everything, so if a player makes his way to the sidelines, it is viewed by all.

That's like saying when a boxer gets Kayoed to just 'Get up and back in the fight sissy!' Not happening.
The boxing comparison fascinates me: The NFL just coughed up nearly a BILLION dollars to end liability for all past concussions, and the only reason anyone ever offers a settlement THAT big is because they know they'd not only lose a civil trial but face a MUCH larger judgement as a result. Meanwhile, a sport where INTENTIONALLY causing concussions is a PRIMARY GOAL just keeps happily going on like nothing's wrong with that. I don't get it. I know, they should ban boxing and MMA. Its animalistic and barbaric.

[atwater27]

Boxing is really just stupid and dangerous. Most bouts are both guys taking repetitive blows to the head for several rounds. MMA is different. submissions are common endings, and the bouts don't last nearly as long, with refs decisively ending the fight and protecting fighters to end knockouts. That said, the force of NFL concussions rival many time over the force of boxing/fighting concussions. And one player can get multiple concussions in a practice or a game, compounding the problem.

[tripp]

I agree, this thread is really stupid. The NFL doesn't have procedure in place to screw teams over. But I think what you need to watch out for is players WILL get up now after seeing guys like Jamaal Charles get taken out of the game.

[DenBronx]

I know, they should ban boxing and MMA. Its animalistic and barbaric.


Not so sure about MMA being barbaric. Maybe UFC 1 and up until the early 2000's but now alot has changed to keep fighters safe. In MMA there are many more things you are allowed to do to protect yourself from just a boxing match. It's a contact sport so of course it's dangerous, just like football but these men are paid a kings ransom and are very skilled at what they do. Well, not so sure MMA is paid a kings ransom but they are paid very well, more than your average Joe. Boxing you are just taking shot after shot after shot to the head and long term that can't be so good. At least in MMA you can take someone down or defend yourself alot better.

[Army Bronco]

I know, they should ban boxing and MMA. Its animalistic and barbaric.


Not so sure about MMA being barbaric. Maybe UFC 1 and up until the early 2000's but now alot has changed to keep fighters safe. In MMA there are many more things you are allowed to do to protect yourself from just a boxing match. It's a contact sport so of course it's dangerous, just like football but these men are paid a kings ransom and are very skilled at what they do. Well, not so sure MMA is paid a kings ransom but they are paid very well, more than your average Joe. Boxing you are just taking shot after shot after shot to the head and long term that can't be so good. At least in MMA you can take someone down or defend yourself alot better. I was being sarcastic about MMA. I trained and competed in it for the Army for a couple years. I'm also a certified instructor for the Army.

[Dapper Dan]

I think I got a concussion once, playing football. I wasn't diagnosed, but I got really dizzy and vomited. My head didn't get hit, but I was coming across the middle and got hit. My head snapped forward. It felt weird. Never experienced anything like it.

[BroncoNut]

is this thread a joke? head injuries are nothing to sneeze at.

[BroncoNut]

I think I got a concussion once, playing football. I wasn't diagnosed, but I got really dizzy and vomited. My head didn't get hit, but I was coming across the middle and got hit. My head snapped forward. It felt weird. Never experienced anything like it.

something happened to you, that's for sure.

[Joel]

I agree, this thread is really stupid. The NFL doesn't have procedure in place to screw teams over. But I think what you need to watch out for is players WILL get up now after seeing guys like Jamaal Charles get taken out of the game.
I noticed lots of guys had helmets confiscated this weekend, and a GB lineman stayed on the field for a PAT after a concussion on the TD, because he knew the coaches and doctors would never let him come back in if he left the game. Then again, didn't Detroit or someone lose a game a few weeks ago in part because a concussed defender stayed in and blew repeated big plays? Should guys just "GET UP" when that costs their team a division title as well as further jeopardizing the players health? "Sure, you're irritable and violently deranged now, but at least we lost!"

[jhildebrand]

I have seen guys get up all year. In fact, Nick Hardwick tried to get up yesterday. What was the result? :confused: The same as if he had stayed on the ground. We saw it in the Eagles Bears game. We have seen it for two years now. Getting up doesn't improved a player's chances of staying in the game and who knows what the overall extra impact may be from actually getting up.c

[tripp]

I noticed lots of guys had helmets confiscated this weekend, and a GB lineman stayed on the field for a PAT after a concussion on the TD, because he knew the coaches and doctors would never let him come back in if he left the game. Then again, didn't Detroit or someone lose a game a few weeks ago in part because a concussed defender stayed in and blew repeated big plays? Should guys just "GET UP" when that costs their team a division title as well as further jeopardizing the players health? "Sure, you're irritable and violently deranged now, but at least we lost!"

There really is no benefit in staying on the field and playing after you have a concussion. There is back up players for your position who get paid handsomely to fill in your role when you are injured, let them carry the load. I get it though, competitive, they think they have a cape on and suddenly become a hero, but in reality you're handicapping the team.


At first, I thought Jamaal Charles injury was going to be the death of KC.. but c'mon, it really wasn't. Davis was just fine along with McCluster. I still would argue today, Chiefs blew that game regardless of Jamaal Charles injury or not. "The Bears are who we thought they were, that's why we took the damn field, now, if you're gonna crown them, you crown their ass! But they are who we thought they were, and we let em off the hook!" ".... thanks coach."


I think that speech could be said again to the Chiefs post game.

[Joel]

Much of KCs success this year was due to being the only AFC contender who didn't have a season-ending injury to a HoF and/or Pro Bowl player; their luck ran out Sunday. Davis was OK, but he wasn't Jamaal Charles (anyone think the Colts porous run D stops Charles TWICE from their 1 yard line? That alone was enough to cost KC the game.) However, Davis went out with a knee injury that looked pretty serious, leaving them with their third string back to play kill the clock for the rest of the game.

Plus they lost their best WR (Avery,) best CB (Flowers) and one of their top two pass rushers (Houston.) No wonder they blew that lead, but that's the playoffs: Championship teams need depth.

All that said, I agree it's stupid (and pointless) to try to stay in at well below 100% like your backup's a junior college scrub. Even if the team doctors would allow it (and after what Cleveland pulled with McCoy a few years ago, the NFL won't let them,) it doesn't help the team; just the opposite. And the NFL's gonna play CYA regardless.

[Army Bronco]

I think I got a concussion once, playing football. I wasn't diagnosed, but I got really dizzy and vomited. My head didn't get hit, but I was coming across the middle and got hit. My head snapped forward. It felt weird. Never experienced anything like it.Did you rub vagisil on yer temples? Works for me.

[Dapper Dan]

Did you rub vagisil on yer temples? Works for me.

No. I sued the park we were playing at. The guy was never fined though. Outrage.

[tripp]

No. I sued the park we were playing at. The guy was never fined though. Outrage.

1st year of football as a freshman, I played as a receiver, and HATED going over the middle to catch a 5 yard in route knowing you have idiot kids on the other team who watch pro's from the NFL lay guys out, wouldn't hesitate for them to try it out themselves, for that reason only, I hated playing receiver.

2nd year, switched to free safety and never looked back.

[BroncoWave]

I wonder if Rav will ever return to this thread?

[LTC Pain]

I've had two concussions (sandlot football and softball). And can tell you it's not at all a matter of "manning up" and "getting up" when your bell is rung. That is completely ignorant and uninformed. Especially with the NFL's strict concussion protocol designed to prevent/reduce head injuries. Which is purposely designed to take the decision out of the hands of the player so exactly what Rav is suggesting can't happen.

I couldn't walk or see straight for a couple of days after both concussions. It was a a couple of weeks before I felt normalized. And my manhood is being questioned? ROFLMAO! Epic fail Rav!

[BroncoNut]

I agree completely. In fact, I probably have never agreed with you more than this.

get a room you two!!

[BroncoNut]

I've had two concussions (sandlot football and softball). And can tell you it's not at all a matter of "manning up" and "getting up" when your bell is rung. That is completely ignorant and uninformed. Especially with the NFL's strict concussion protocol designed to prevent/reduce head injuries. Which is purposely designed to take the decision out of the hands of the player so exactly what Rav is suggesting can't happen.

I couldn't walk or see straight for a couple of days after both concussions. It was a a couple of weeks before I felt normalized. And my manhood is being questioned? ROFLMAO! Epic fail Rav!

Rav really needs to address this thread or I feel he should be eliminated from this year's the HOF voting ballot. I mean this has obviously left a few of us wondering.... " just what in the hell is this Ravage poster all about?"

[Ravage!!!]

Ravage, I love you, you know I do...but...half this message board just styled on you.

Hah...well I don't care at all what BTB thinks, and I can't help that Joe is unable to accept the fact that pass routes, blocking schemes, running lanes, and defenses are the same since the 60's. But I digress, that's for another discussion thread.

(btw, I haven’t responded sooner since I post from the office, and I don’t work Saturday afternoon, Sunday or Monday).

The difficulty of trying to type all this out without giving a “Joel” novel, is that there are so many facets to this discussion. This goes back to the debate on whether or not the NFL “really” cares about the players health/safety, and the debate on how much should the sport suffer when the players know that they are signing their names on big money contracts to play a CONTACT sport. They aren’t shocked to find out that people will be hitting them after they give their Hancock..... “say what? People are going to run into me while running??”... So it’s difficult to type out without having to at least touch on so many points

But here is what I’m saying, and I’m not really saying anything differently than the players themselves.

All season long the large debate has been about the increase in knee injuries due to the fact that tacklers have to go low to avoid the fines and penalties of going high. The players, themselves, are saying... "PLEASE hit me high as I would MUCH MUCH rather take the chance of concussion than the chance of a blown out knee.

The NFL has instituted this policy of checking players for head injuries in response to the lawsuite on the NFL by former players. We all know they (the NFL) don’t really care about player safety. But because it’s such a sensitive topic (just look at the ridiculous responses to my post here), I’m going to hit some nerves and honestly, I just don’t care.

This really comes down to the discussion we’ve all had on the boards on just how much “precaution” we should or should not take for the NFL players when they KNOW the dangers of the sport they are WILLINGLY partaking in. Not only are they CHOOSING, on their own free will, to participate but getting paid VERY well in compensation for doing so.

So all I’m saying that if you get hit and your “bell is rung”... grab your knee, grab your elbow, grab your friggin balls and scream “Coach, I broke my dick” ( I don’t care which one) but while they are looking at your knee, looking at your elbow, or giving you a hernia exam, THEN you can decide if the hit to your head was worth looking into. Hey, if after 5 minutes and you are asking the guys in the huddle what your name is, then yeah.... sit out for a concussion test.

Even the god himself, Peyton Manning (to Joel’s chagrin and distaste), admitted to INTENTIONALLY scoring poorly on his baseline concussion test so that he isn’t kept out of playing by some concussion test given on the sideline/locker room.

Do you think Charles is THANKING the staff for not allowing him to help his team attempt to win that game against the Colts? I would bet my life SAVINGs that Charles is upset that he didn't just bounce up and shake it off. Players WANT to play, they want to compete and they ABSOLUTELY want to help their team win the game. I know some of the bleeding hearts are going to say “we have to protect them from themselves.” Maybe, yes... maybe not. I also think that considering the name of the game is contact, and these players know what they are doing, that they should be giving the choice.

Do fans not believe that NFL players are saying the same thing I am? You don’t think that the players are working on NOT showing that their bell is rung if they are already thinking about scoring low on their baseline tests in precaution?

The NFL isn’t “really” concerned with protecting the players, they are concernd with protecting THEMSELVES. So it’s really just a farce, anyway.

I just don’t want to see important players being removed from a playoff game because they MIGHT have an injury. I get that it may not be a "popular" opinion around here, but I'm ok with that.

[BroncoWave]

lol

[WTE]

I stopped reading Rav's explanation the first sentence it became a Joel novel.

[BroncoJoe]

Hah...well I don't care at all what BTB thinks, and I can't help that Joe is unable to accept the fact that pass routes, blocking schemes, running lanes, and defenses are the same since the 60's. But I digress, that's for another discussion thread.

That's kind of like saying the automobile hasn't changed since the 60's. I mean it still has an engine, four wheels and tires, right?

I get what you're saying about the concussion thing, but I seriously doubt the NFL is taking these steps in fear of further litigation. I believe they are genuinely concerned about the players. If they all get hurt, there is no NFL.

[Joel]

That's kind of like saying the automobile hasn't changed since the 60's. I mean it still has an engine, four wheels and tires, right?

I get what you're saying about the concussion thing, but I seriously doubt the NFL is taking these steps in fear of further litigation. I believe they are genuinely concerned about the players. If they all get hurt, there is no NFL.
I could be wrong (not a lawyer) but believe the NFL has NO legal liability for concussions now. That was the whole point of paying a $750 million settlement: It ended ALL liability IN PERPETUITY. They might be liable for other injuries, and I'm not sure if the settlement covered all past AND FUTURE concussions or jus the first, but the NFL's largely off the hook for concussions at this point.

[Ravage!!!]

That's kind of like saying the automobile hasn't changed since the 60's. I mean it still has an engine, four wheels and tires, right?
Great example, Joe. The Car hasn't changed. The models have. They look different. They have added some bells and whistles, but the engines of the 40s are pretty much the same as today. The combustion engine hasn't really changed other than being monitored with electronics now. So I guess it comes down to what you consider to be "change." Has a few of the offense added a different model #? Sure, but even Bill walsh's offense was based on the offense he learned as an assistant coach back in the 60s. The Tampa 2 defense (which is the only example someone gave of the "change" in defenses to counter all the "change" in offenses) was nothing more than renaming a defense that Dungy learned while playing for the Steelers back in the early 70s, that even then was a defense they hadn't run for a long time but had been around.

Most of the "changes" we have seen are just regurgitated and renamed things from the past. The Wing T offense was brought back, renamed, and is now the "wildcat." The Wing T was derived in 1934. Now obviously with the speed of today's NFL things have made that offense hard to run on a regular basis, but its STILL used in Today's NFL. The "Spread" formation that is used heavily in today's NFL is the same as the single-wing that was derived back in the 40s. DIfference is today we throw the ball much more from that formation and back then they primarily ran the ball.

And don't even get me started on how old the "spread option" is.

The game hasn't really changed more than just renaming the model numbers and putting in more expensive parts. Players are bigger and stronger, the game is MUCh more passing than back then, and QBs are learning to read defenses at a MUCH MUCH younger age then ever before. So they are hitting the NFL at a face-paced jog instead of the walk they used to start at.


I get what you're saying about the concussion thing, but I seriously doubt the NFL is taking these steps in fear of further litigation. I believe they are genuinely concerned about the players. If they all get hurt, there is no NFL.

Well, I guess we'll just have to disagree on that. I don't think the NFL really cares about he safety of the players and believe they show that by even examining the idea of expanding the season to 18 games. It's like the "we didn't fully understand the ramifications of concussions then, but now that we do, you can see the drastic steps that we are taking." I personally believe the NFL TEAMS will do what it can to protect itself, but beyond that, they will make a public PRESENTATION of caring. An appearance or a facade. It's about money, and they know they will ALWAYS have players to play...its about keeping the fans in the spirit of believing they care so that we keep watching. That's how I see it, anyway.

[Joel]

Hah...well I don't care at all what BTB thinks, and I can't help that Joe is unable to accept the fact that pass routes, blocking schemes, running lanes, and defenses are the same since the 60's. But I digress, that's for another discussion thread.

(btw, I haven’t responded sooner since I post from the office, and I don’t work Saturday afternoon, Sunday or Monday).

The difficulty of trying to type all this out without giving a “Joel” novel, is that there are so many facets to this discussion.
Congratulations: That's why 90% of my novels are written, so this thread was worth it in "my book" if it helped a single person understand that for the first time.


This goes back to the debate on whether or not the NFL “really” cares about the players health/safety, and the debate on how much should the sport suffer when the players know that they are signing their names on big money contracts to play a CONTACT sport. They aren’t shocked to find out that people will be hitting them after they give their Hancock..... “say what? People are going to run into me while running??”... So it’s difficult to type out without having to at least touch on so many points

But here is what I’m saying, and I’m not really saying anything differently than the players themselves.

All season long the large debate has been about the increase in knee injuries due to the fact that tacklers have to go low to avoid the fines and penalties of going high. The players, themselves, are saying... "PLEASE hit me high as I would MUCH MUCH rather take the chance of concussion than the chance of a blown out knee.

The NFL has instituted this policy of checking players for head injuries in response to the lawsuite on the NFL by former players. We all know they (the NFL) don’t really care about player safety. But because it’s such a sensitive topic (just look at the ridiculous responses to my post here), I’m going to hit some nerves and honestly, I just don’t care.

This really comes down to the discussion we’ve all had on the boards on just how much “precaution” we should or should not take for the NFL players when they KNOW the dangers of the sport they are WILLINGLY partaking in. Not only are they CHOOSING, on their own free will, to participate but getting paid VERY well in compensation for doing so.

So all I’m saying that if you get hit and your “bell is rung”... grab your knee, grab your elbow, grab your friggin balls and scream “Coach, I broke my dick” ( I don’t care which one) but while they are looking at your knee, looking at your elbow, or giving you a hernia exam, THEN you can decide if the hit to your head was worth looking into. Hey, if after 5 minutes and you are asking the guys in the huddle what your name is, then yeah.... sit out for a concussion test.

Even the god himself, Peyton Manning (to Joel’s chagrin and distaste), admitted to INTENTIONALLY scoring poorly on his baseline concussion test so that he isn’t kept out of playing by some concussion test given on the sideline/locker room.

Do you think Charles is THANKING the staff for not allowing him to help his team attempt to win that game against the Colts? I would bet my life SAVINGs that Charles is upset that he didn't just bounce up and shake it off. Players WANT to play, they want to compete and they ABSOLUTELY want to help their team win the game. I know some of the bleeding hearts are going to say “we have to protect them from themselves.” Maybe, yes... maybe not. I also think that considering the name of the game is contact, and these players know what they are doing, that they should be giving the choice.

Do fans not believe that NFL players are saying the same thing I am? You don’t think that the players are working on NOT showing that their bell is rung if they are already thinking about scoring low on their baseline tests in precaution?

The NFL isn’t “really” concerned with protecting the players, they are concernd with protecting THEMSELVES. So it’s really just a farce, anyway.

I just don’t want to see important players being removed from a playoff game because they MIGHT have an injury. I get that it may not be a "popular" opinion around here, but I'm ok with that.
Several things:

1) Neurologists have been studying patients and telling the NFL since at least 1952 that EVEN ONE CONCUSSION OFTEN DOES SERIOUS LONG TERM DAMAGE, and the NFLs sole response for HALF A CENTURY was to deny and discredit those reports while commissioning others of their own that "proved" the opposite. In other words: No, the players DON'T know what they're getting into and thus CAN'T demand contract compensation for it—the NFL worked overtime for 50 years to prevent ANYONE knowing.

2) Much as when tobacco companies covered up the health risks and addictiveness of cigarettes for roughly that same half century (and especially tried to conceal their attempts to make cigarettes MORE addictive,) the NFLs massive $750 million settlement was to end the massive liability they knew would earn them MUCH more expensive judgements in a civil trial. They're not trying to CYA now; the settlement pretty much did that, at the cost of nearly 10% of last years profits. Cheap at twice the price. ;)

3) It doesn't really MATTER what the players want, because, if the NFL has protected itself from legal liability for concussions, individual TEAMS are more vulnerable than ever to NFL penalties if they knowingly let a concussed player return. It's been like that ever since the Browns sent McCoy back to finish a game knowing he was concussed, and that's when the NFL started putting its own doctors on the sidelines because it no longer trusted team doctors. Get up, stay down; fly around the scoreboard: It's not your call regardless.

Finally: If you swipe my Johnny Be Good reference again you'll be hearing from my lawyer. :tongue:

[Ravage!!!]

Congratulations: That's why 90% of my novels are written, so this thread was worth it in "my book" if it helped a single person understand that for the first time.

yeah, and I used to type out HUGE posts for the same reason. But we have both learned (well, I have) that people just skip your posts if they are more than 4-5 sentences.



1) Neurologists have been studying patients and telling the NFL since at least 1952 that EVEN ONE CONCUSSION OFTEN DOES SERIOUS LONG TERM DAMAGE, and the NFLs sole response for HALF A CENTURY was to deny and discredit those reports while commissioning others of their own that "proved" the opposite. In other words: No, the players DON'T know what they're getting into and thus CAN'T demand contract compensation for it—the NFL worked overtime for 50 years to prevent ANYONE knowing.
And?


2) Much as when tobacco companies covered up the health risks and addictiveness of cigarettes for roughly that same half century (and especially tried to conceal their attempts to make cigarettes MORE addictive,) the NFLs massive $750 million settlement was to end the massive liability they knew would earn them MUCH more expensive judgements in a civil trial. They're not trying to CYA now; the settlement pretty much did that, at the cost of nearly 10% of last years profits. Cheap at twice the price. ;)

RIght, I have forgotten there was a settlement.


3) It doesn't really MATTER what the players want, because, if the NFL has protected itself from legal liability for concussions, individual TEAMS are more vulnerable than ever to NFL penalties if they knowingly let a concussed player return. It's been like that ever since the Browns sent McCoy back to finish a game knowing he was concussed, and that's when the NFL started putting its own doctors on the sidelines because it no longer trusted team doctors. Get up, stay down; fly around the scoreboard: It's not your call regardless.

Ok, so change out "NFL" to "NFL Teams"...and the point is the same.

I still believe the NFL doesn't really care, and their main goal NOW is to change the image of the NFL to the specators and to the "moms" of the world that look at this as some barbaric recreation and won't let their kids play. Obviously, there will always be NFL players, but lets not let the protective moms turn this into a soccer nation.

[CoachChaz]

I think we can break down the NFL to it's simplest form and say that nothing has changed. Sure...a slant route is still a slant route. A dive play in the A gap is still a dive play in the A gap. But what has changed is how those things have evolved. Nowadays a slant route is combined with a hitch and it suddenly becomes a completely different route...a dive play can have a fullback or a pulling guard or a delay added to it. The routes and schemes just arent as simple as they use to be and that ultimately changes what they are. Yes, the engine in it's simplest form is still an engine, but modeled with fuel injectors makes it much different than the days of carbuerators.

[BroncoWave]

Rav has done a masterful job in deflecting this discussion into a rant about how the NFL doesn't care about player safety, as that is a much more popular viewpoint. Well done.

This still doesn't change the fact that his rant about players needing to GET UP after taking a hit to the head is about as idiotic as a statement could possibly be.

[Ravage!!!]

Rav has done a masterful job in deflecting this discussion into a rant about how the NFL doesn't care about player safety, as that is a much more popular viewpoint. Well done.

This still doesn't change the fact that his rant about players needing to GET UP after taking a hit to the head is about as idiotic as a statement could possibly be.

lol

[Ravage!!!]

I think we can break down the NFL to it's simplest form and say that nothing has changed. Sure...a slant route is still a slant route. A dive play in the A gap is still a dive play in the A gap. But what has changed is how those things have evolved. Nowadays a slant route is combined with a hitch and it suddenly becomes a completely different route...a dive play can have a fullback or a pulling guard or a delay added to it. The routes and schemes just arent as simple as they use to be and that ultimately changes what they are. Yes, the engine in it's simplest form is still an engine, but modeled with fuel injectors makes it much different than the days of carbuerators.

Combination routes have ALWAYS been around. Out and up, slants and up, wheel routes have always been around. Pulling guards and lineman have been around long before Lombardi.

Like I was saying, it comes down to what you really consider to be CHANGE, or simply costmetics (using the car example). Combustion engines are still the same, despite having the fuel injectors. The engines today aren't stronger than those of the past, they just have different components.

So there is the question again. Have things REALLY changed, or are we simply seeing the regurgitated and reused offenses of the past BECAUSE nothing has changed?

Oh well, I guess it comes down to what you consider change, or if things are just "different." Cars today are "different" than the cars in the '40s, but they haven't really "changed" as far as EVERYTHING that makes them run and function as a car.

Considering the fact tht we see the NFL continue to use the same offenses that were derived in the 40s, it would seem it's just using the offenses differently. Passing from a formation that used to run from, or running from a formation we used to pass from, to me...isn't change.

[Joel]

yeah, and I used to type out HUGE posts for the same reason. But we have both learned (well, I have) that people just skip your posts if they are more than 4-5 sentences.
Most people like to oversimplify complex matters, but that doesn't make matters simple; it just makes their analysis simplistic.


And?
And it's inaccurate to say players know all the risks when the NFL did everything in its power to conceal, deny and discredit those risks for half a century. That's why players who DISCOVERED far too late what they'd already gotten into created a decades-old literal brain trust: They were building a case with their own corpses, because the NFL would just keep playing dumb until/unless they did. They can't factor things into their contract demands unless they know those things exist so, no, they haven't already been compensated.


RIght, I have forgotten there was a settlement.
No worries. Now that we're talking about it, I AM a little curious whether it only covers past concussion liability, or future liability as well.


Ok, so change out "NFL" to "NFL Teams"...and the point is the same.
Yes, it is: The NFL may not need to play CYA anymore, but individual teams need to more than ever, because they know they have civil courts AND the NFL looking over their shoulders.


I still believe the NFL doesn't really care, and their main goal NOW is to change the image of the NFL to the specators and to the "moms" of the world that look at this as some barbaric recreation and won't let their kids play. Obviously, there will always be NFL players, but lets not let the protective moms turn this into a soccer nation.
I believe you're right the NFL doesn't give a dead rats rump about the players so long as the owners get their billions, but it's much deeper than just convincing soccer moms to let their kids play. The NFL's in no danger of running out of players and the owners couldn't care less how savage local moms consider the nearest Pop Warner team:

They're trying to convince soccer moms and teeny boppers to PAY for tickets, jerseys, NFLN subscriptions and copies of Madden, because they're already getting every dime they can from US MEN. That's why a girl I know on FB keeps posting pinup shots of Wilson and Sherman; it's also (part of) why she keeps trash-talking Pack fans and telling them 13 NFL titles (the last just three years ago) don't matter because they're "living in the past." She hasn't been following football long enough to realize how BAD her local team was for its whole existence prior to last year, and definitely has no appreciation of what the Pack's been doing since the '20s. I hate them more than just about anyone but Pitt and Philly, but their long record of excellence is unmatched.

Sadly, the expanded audience the NFL's courting by turning every field pink throughout October of every year is as oblivious to that as they are to how much the new flag football arena league rules have diminished the game, increasing the role of luck, big plays and scoring at the expense of skill, consistence and defense. Meanwhile, they're adding yet another London game next year, at 1:30PM local time, which is 12:30 where I am—and 6:30AM in Denver. That's three; how far is that from eight home games for a London BASED team?

The NFL's not trying to pacify soccer moms: It's MARKETING to them. The League's not content to be the sport of red-blooded American men anymore; it wants to be FIFA with NFL profit margins. Anything and everything the owners must sacrifice or add to make that happen is fair game, because adding another US team won't increase TV contracts, merchandise or licensing revenue. All it can increase is stadium revenue, and that's the one thing that's not shared: It would all go to NEW owners, NOT current ones. This is all much bigger than reassuring player moms.


Combination routes have ALWAYS been around. Out and up, slants and up, wheel routes have always been around. Pulling guards and lineman have been around long before Lombardi.

Like I was saying, it comes down to what you really consider to be CHANGE, or simply costmetics (using the car example). Combustion engines are still the same, despite having the fuel injectors. The engines today aren't stronger than those of the past, they just have different components.

If I have 3 WRs, a TE, and only use 8 different routes (the first person that tells us there are only 8 routes because of the directional tree is the first person to prove they are clueless) that each one can run....the combinations of those routes between players is a HUGE number. Add another WR or RB into that mix, and the possible combinations are basically endless (i know if I used the word infinite someone would jump on it).

So there is the question again. Have things REALLY changed, or are we simply seeing the regurgitated and reused offenses of the past BECAUSE nothing has changed? The spread offense isn't different, the spread option isn't new, the wildcat is simply a re-naming. If things have changed so much offensively, then why have we not seen these BIG changes in defensive schemes?

Oh well, I guess it comes down to what you consider change. Considering the fact tht we see the NFL continue to use the same offenses that were derived in the 40s, it would seem it's just using the offenses differently. Like driving a car on two wheels. It's still a car, just used differently. Passing from a formation that used to run from. Run from a formation we used to pass from.
Pulling guards have been around since Pop Warner invented the single-wing for Jim Thorpe while he was still in grade school (i.e. a VERY long time.) The single-wing mutated into the Notre Dame Box under Rockne, where Curly Lambeau picked it up and used it to maximize Don Hutson so effectively the first truly great receiver averaged 1 TD every 5 receptions. Hutson was possibly the first WR to spend hours practicing catching BAD passes; nothing new in the passing game.

I'll go further and say that in many ways the NFL's in a very interesting Back to the Future mode. The old dual threat T QBs of the '40s are making a comeback, just with a different emphasis; now instead of "the best passer in the world can't win if he can't run" it's "the best runner in the world can't win if he can't pass." Look around at all the teams running 3-4s and it'd be easy to get the idea it's the '60s AFL and NFL and Landrys 4-3 is still a novelty rather than a dinosaur.

Meanwhile, the Bolts beat much better Indy and Denver teams by playing solid D and running until/unless their opponents stopped them, getting very little on each play but SOMETHING on nearly all of them, while protecting possession, killing the clock, winning the field position battle and keeping their opponents very good offense impotently on the sideline. The Chiefs rode a similar old school design all the way to the AFCs third best record, only missing the #1 seed because a team breaking multiple scoring records swept them in the division.

In many ways though that's just footballs perennially changing-yet-not-changing nature so well suited to both the 20th Century and television (which, IMHO, explains why it displaced baseball as Americas most popular sport.) After all the passing and running innovation in the first decades of pro football, the Notre Dame Box was finally displaced by the T when the Bears beat Washington 73-0 in the 1940 NFL Championship (still the highest score in pro history.) Yet the T had been around so long it was supposedly drawn up by Walter Camp when he first devised the rules that forever separated football from rugby; the T had just fallen into disrepute as "obsolete"—until all the 1905 rules changes made it viable again, and, decades later, a few coaches with Stanford and the Bears "revolutionized" football with its oldest formation.

The more things change, the more they stay the same. Offense sells tickets, but I wouldn't count on the NFLs extreme shift toward offenses lasting much longer, simply because the nature of pendulums is to always swing back sooner or later. And I guess that's more than enough to say on those subjects for now. ;)

[BroncoNut]

dang Joel you are a wealth of knowledge, youi remind me a lot of Zam, I think youi guys overlapped

[Joel]

dang Joel you are a wealth of knowledge, youi remind me a lot of Zam, I think youi guys overlapped
It doesn't hurt that Zam and I read the same book. It's funny, 'cause there's a guy I've traded barbs with a lot on another site who reminds me a LOT of Zam, and apparently he's read it, too. I probably never would have heard of Arnie Herber or Don Hutson if not for The Hidden Game of Football, but those guys are freakin' legends. Not only was Hutson the first receiver to practice catching bad passes over and over, but the rest of the Pack supposedly once bet Herber he couldn't throw the length of the field if they gave him the roll. So he confidently stood on his goal line, launched a high arcing pass that hit at the other 20—and bounced BACK exactly as his teammates expected, because the angle was so sharp.

The moral of that story is that even the best are seldom as good as they think they are, and NO ONE'S infallible.

[BroncoNut]

It doesn't hurt that Zam and I read the same book. It's funny, 'cause there's a guy I've traded barbs with a lot on another site who reminds me a LOT of Zam, and apparently he's read it, too. I probably never would have heard of Arnie Herber or Don Hutson if not for The Hidden Game of Football, but those guys are freakin' legends. Not only was Hutson the first receiver to practice catching bad passes over and over, but the rest of the Pack supposedly once bet Herber he couldn't throw the length of the field if they gave him the roll. So he confidently stood on his goal line, launched a high arcing pass that hit at the other 20—and bounced BACK exactly as his teammates expected, because the angle was so sharp.

The moral of that story is that even the best are seldom as good as they think they are, and NO ONE'S infallible.

I might have to check that out,

[Joel]

I might have to check that out,
Again, it's the whole basis of Football Outsiders' very good site, the origin of Win Probability and arguably the reason fantasy football exists (there's even a 10th anniversary fantasy football sequel, though I've never read and can't vouch for that one.) Or, as Wikipedia puts it, "It was the first systematic statistical approach to analyzing American football (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_football) in a book and is still considered the seminal work on the topic." Perhaps the most impressive thing is how relevant most of it remains 25 years later, but since it's so old you can get a copy on Amazon for ~$1.

Plus the authors style is really really funny.

[weazel]

Perfect example of a guy that should have just got up quicker and headed back to the huddle.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7acc6qwcmQ

[slim]

Like I was saying, it comes down to what you really consider to be CHANGE, or simply costmetics (using the car example). Combustion engines are still the same, despite having the fuel injectors. The engines today aren't stronger than those of the past, they just have different components.




This is ludicrous. Of course the engines of today are more powerful (and more efficient) than those built in the 40's. To say the only changes in the engine have been cosmetic is absurd.

Good Lord...

[Timmy!]

Go home thread, you're still drunk.

[Simple Jaded]

I emphatically agree with all dissenters and further note none of the teams referenced are the Broncos.

Who are you and what have you done with Joel?

Joel if this is you, blink twice if you're in danger.

[SM19]

I can't believe this thread isn't satirical. Ravage, I've always respected your opinions, but this is the kind of thing I'd expect to see written by someone who thought Coach Kilmer was the hero in Varsity Blues.

[Shazam!]

Like I was saying, it comes down to what you really consider to be CHANGE, or simply costmetics (using the car example). Combustion engines are still the same, despite having the fuel injectors. The engines today aren't stronger than those of the past, they just have different components.




This is ludicrous. Of course the engines of today are more powerful (and more efficient) than those built in the 40's. To say the only changes in the engine have been cosmetic is absurd.

Good Lord...

Holy smokes you ain't kidding. Not to mention they last far longer. Once upon a time cars were falling apart with 100k, now 200k is near the norm.

[Ravage!!!]

I can't believe this thread isn't satirical. Ravage, I've always respected your opinions, but this is the kind of thing I'd expect to see written by someone who thought Coach Kilmer was the hero in Varsity Blues.

I explained my position in the longer post... I'm not ashamed of my position. Hell, Mike Golic said pretty much the same thing this morning when he explained that he hopes the "line" doesn't becomes so WIDE that teams sit players the moment the player bumps his head or gets his bell rung. I'm not saying anything differently. Im saying that because of the overly cautious reaction of teams is taking helmets away from players (as was the case in the NO game when the player was VERY cognizant) that players grab a knee, elbow, or nut sac so that they aren't put in a postion of missing the game for the CHANCE that they might have a concussion.

Perhaps I'm seeing that as a competitive person that would absolutely HATE to be pulled from a game because I had my bell rung. Perhaps it irks me that top players are missing playoff games because they had their bell rung. I dont' know, but I'm not apologizing for that stance.

[Ravage!!!]

This is ludicrous. Of course the engines of today are more powerful (and more efficient) than those built in the 40's. To say the only changes in the engine have been cosmetic is absurd.

Good Lord...

Oh for Fraks sake. I swear, explaining something to some of you is like trying to talk with a 6year old. The Car was the example given by Joe that I just tried to go along with for sake of using a metaphore. WHO GIVES A RATS ASS IF THE ENGINE IS THE ******* SAME IN CARS?!! jeeeezus. Quit looking at all the minute in the topic and look at what is ACTUALLY being discussed.

The car is still the car. THe cars made in the 40 and 60s can absolutely be driven and used on the roads today. Why? Because cars are the same. They are driven the same, they run the same, you turn them on the same, they are used in the same way. Yes, they are different, but they are the SAME. They still are a car. Four wheels, four doors (two, whatever), a steering wheel, frame, and combustion engine. Does it REALLY matter that the engine isn't exactly the same in the car when they BOTH do the exact same thing?

If the NFL has changed so much, why are teams STILL using offenses that were derived in the 40s? Why would they work if things are so different? Why are we seeing NFL teams bring back the Wing-T, the option, and the "wild cat" offenses if the NFL is so different than it was then? The biggest examples used to describe the "change" in the NFL is philosophies and approaches, but the game is STILL using the same formations, plays, routes, and philosophies of the 40s thru 60s. How can that POSSIBLY be true if the game has "changed" so much?

Because it hasn't changed...it just has a different model over the top of the basic frame.

[BroncoWave]

I can't believe this thread isn't satirical. Ravage, I've always respected your opinions, but this is the kind of thing I'd expect to see written by someone who thought Coach Kilmer was the hero in Varsity Blues.

I explained my position in the longer post... I'm not ashamed of my position. Hell, Mike Golic said pretty much the same thing this morning when he explained that he hopes the "line" doesn't becomes so WIDE that teams sit players the moment the player bumps his head or gets his bell rung. I'm not saying anything differently. Im saying that because of the overly cautious reaction of teams is taking helmets away from players (as was the case in the NO game when the player was VERY cognizant) that players grab a knee, elbow, or nut sac so that they aren't put in a postion of missing the game for the CHANCE that they might have a concussion.

Perhaps I'm seeing that as a competitive person that would absolutely HATE to be pulled from a game because I had my bell rung. Perhaps it irks me that top players are missing playoff games because they had their bell rung. I dont' know, but I'm not apologizing for that stance.

Which specific players that didn't actually have concussions and only had their "bell rung" were pulled from playoff games this year? I just want to be certain.

[slim]

Oh for Fraks sake. I swear, explaining something to some of you is like trying to talk with a 6year old. The Car was the example given by Joe that I just tried to go along with for sake of using a metaphore. WHO GIVES A RATS ASS IF THE ENGINE IS THE ******* SAME IN CARS?!! jeeeezus. Quit looking at all the minute in the topic and look at what is ACTUALLY being discussed.

The car is still the car. THe cars made in the 40 and 60s can absolutely be driven and used on the roads today. Why? Because cars are the same. They are driven the same, they run the same, you turn them on the same, they are used in the same way. Yes, they are different, but they are the SAME. They still are a car. Four wheels, four doors (two, whatever), a steering wheel, frame, and combustion engine. Does it REALLY matter that the engine isn't exactly the same in the car when they BOTH do the exact same thing?

If the NFL has changed so much, why are teams STILL using offenses that were derived in the 40s? Why would they work if things are so different? Why are we seeing NFL teams bring back the Wing-T, the option, and the "wild cat" offenses if the NFL is so different than it was then? The biggest examples used to describe the "change" in the NFL is philosophies and approaches, but the game is STILL using the same formations, plays, routes, and philosophies of the 40s thru 60s. How can that POSSIBLY be true if the game has "changed" so much?

Because it hasn't changed...it just has a different model over the top of the basic frame.

LOL....you are the one saying that engines haven't changed over the years. Stop saying stupid shit and maybe I will care what your point is.

[BroncoJoe]

LOL....you are the one saying that engines haven't changed over the years. Stop saying stupid shit and maybe I will care what your point is.

It's really beyond any productive, reasonable and/or intelligent discussion at this point.

[slim]

It's really beyond any productive, reasonable and/or intelligent discussion at this point.

Joe, how do feel about this game?

[Joel]

LOL....you are the one saying that engines haven't changed over the years. Stop saying stupid shit and maybe I will care what your point is.
The NFL tweaks rules annually and, with few exceptions, they've generally but marginally moved the goal posts toward the offense (in once case, literally) since the merger. However, with the notable exception of the 1932 season that moved goalposts to the goal line, gave us the first playoff (postseason games had actually been BANNED just a few years earlier,) hashmarks, indoor football and legal passes anywhere behind the LoS (instead of 5 YARDS behind it,) the game's had no major changes since 1905 legalized forward passes and imposed 7 men lines.

The biggest pro rule change since moving the goal posts (back to the pre-1932 spot) was the 2 PAT, neither old nor recent in the grand scheme of things. Therefore pro coaches since before there even WAS an NFL have mainly tried to reinvent the wheel. Remember, halfway into the NFLs 90 year existence the Packer Sweep was still considered the innovative cutting edge, but there's more to it than just drawing it up and having the first eleven scrubs you find run it in practice a dozen times. That and TV ratings is why the AFL played sandlot passing ball: It's easier.

The second chapter of The Hidden Game of Football ("How Football Got That Way") has a great overview of this from Flying Wedge to Shotgun Empty Set, and it's a mark of footballs endless variations on the same few themes that 25 years after that book there are still no new formations. Since 1905 forced offenses to keep 7 men on the line, there's been a real, hard and LOW limit to how many truly DIFFERENT formations an offense can use. My personal fave from the book:


Then in 1940, the T-formation burst on the scene. The T itself wasn't new. In fact, it had originally been drawn up by Walter Camp when he created the scrimmage. But the "old" T was a creaky formation with the quarterback standing a yard or so back from the center (a "quarter of the way back," to be exact.) The center hiked the ball the short distance to the quarterback, who then handed off or pitched out while standing there in the open for God, the spectators, and the defense to see. The T lacked power and was about as deceptive as showdown poker. Powerful, wedge-type plays replaced it in the 1890s, and when they were ruled out, the single wing or the related "Notre Dame Box" became the popular attacks. These had a little more deception than the wedge, but essentially their intent was the same—to concentrate as many blcokers as possible at the point of attack.
Pause for a few notes: 1) The thread asking why "quarterbacks" bear that title just got answered and 2) football's had pulling guards since (at least) 30 years before the NFL EXISTED.


Against all reason, a few coaches kept faith with the T, among them George Halas of the Bears and Clark Shaugnessy, who took over at Stanford University in 1940. They got together with Hunk Anderson, a line coach who knew more about blocking than Freud knew about ids. The result was a brand new T that worked entirely by deception.

The key was to move the quarterback flush up against the center. When he took the snap and turned his back to the defense, they didn't know what he was going to do. And that froze them. Holes and blocking angles had already been created by splitting the offensive line. The defensive backs were spread out of the play by sending a running back in motion or stationing him wide as a wingback. Meanwhile, the remaining offensive backs were in high gear. When the quarterback handed off, the ball carrier was through the line like a shot and running free.

On paper it looked as if it would never work—supposedly, quarterback Sid Luckman cried when Halas showed it to him—but on the field it was magic. Shaughnessy's Stanford Indians went undefeated and won the Rose Bowl. Halas's Bears crushed Washington 73-0 in the championship game.

Marshalling the creativity football coaches are famous for, head men all over the country scurried to copy the T, X for O. It took about a dozen years, but by the mid-1950s every pro team and nearly every college squad was using some version of the formation.

Although it was designed to break the ball carrier loose, the surprising thing about the "new" T was that it worked even better for the passing attack. All the ideas about freezing the defense and spreading the secondary went together to free up receivers and give the passer more time to throw. For the first time, coaches mumbled about using the run to establish the pass.
If a lot of that stuff about a 140 year old formation discussed in a 25 year old book sounds much like what you saw last Sunday, it should. Motion men, opening holes, spreading DBs, flanking receivers, play-action passes; there's nothing new under the sun. A disturbing amount of play design is devoted to finding new legal ways to do the same stuff the NFL banned in its most recent rules changes (that's why it took creating the NCAA, legalizing the pass and requiring 7 men on the offensive line to finally put an end to flying wedge variations.)

This actually IS your fathers Oldsmobile; a little fresh paint and some racing stripes don't change that, though hamstringing defenses much more very well might.

[weazel]

Silva should have just got up in his fight the other night

[BroncoJoe]

Joe, how do feel about this game?

I feel good. I believe we're going to win handily. And I'm not going to write 60 paragraphs trying to justify what many may feel is a stupid position to take.

[slim]

I feel good. I believe we're going to win handily. And I'm not going to write 60 paragraphs trying to justify what many may feel is a stupid position to take.

I can't believe its only Wednesday. I feel like I have been waiting a month for this game to start.

[DenBronx]

What ever happened to The Wall of Shame?

[BroncoJoe]

Hi Guys:

Did you know that THIS:

http://doublehappiness.ilikenicethings.com/wp-content/80s-brick-cell-phone.jpg

Is the same as THIS?

http://www.updatemyandroid.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Samsung-Galaxy-S4-32GB1.jpg

Of course, there is ZERO difference between these two items as well:

https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSLG2t9av8_WtSGDLZOpXWqzzQPC5ASO L1oxtzQk4JpkIHwm9HiNQ

http://www.8and9.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/2013-Ferrari-F150-Enzo_56.jpg

Moron.

[BroncoJoe]

Here's one of my favorite games. Wolfenstein. It has remained unchanged through the years as well.

Circa 1990
http://media.moddb.com/images/articles/1/123/122995/auto/wolfenstein-3d.png

Release Date 2014:
http://image.noelshack.com/fichiers/2013/31/1375524575-6.jpg

[slim]

Of course, there is ZERO difference between these two items as well:

https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSLG2t9av8_WtSGDLZOpXWqzzQPC5ASO L1oxtzQk4JpkIHwm9HiNQ

http://www.8and9.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/2013-Ferrari-F150-Enzo_56.jpg



Joe, those two cars a really the same. They are just made from different compenents.

So aside from all of their differences, they are basically the same.

[BroncoJoe]

Joe, those two cars a really the same. They are just made from different components.

So aside from all of their differences, they are basically the same.

Yes. I realize that now. In fact, I'm going to get rid of all my electronics in the house, including my 60" HDTV and get the old black and white out again. I'll be able to get some exercise adjusting the channel, volume and rabbit ears.

I don't know how I could have been so stupid.

[DenBronx]

Lolololololing!!!


Lol-o-copter


LMDAO


ROFLOL!!!


:lol::elefant::rofl:

[DenBronx]

This
4066

Is the same as this...

4067

[chazoe60]

What percentage of adults haven't had a concussion? Just wondering. My wife has, I have, my brother and his wife have. You can get a concussion from hitting your head on a cabinet door.

[chazoe60]

And you guys are being dicks to Rav. I don't approve.

[Joel]

Here's one of my favorite games. Wolfenstein. It has remained unchanged through the years as well.

Circa 1990
http://media.moddb.com/images/articles/1/123/122995/auto/wolfenstein-3d.png

Release Date 2014:
http://image.noelshack.com/fichiers/2013/31/1375524575-6.jpg
Still runs exclusively on binary. For that matter, the only significant differences between Wolfenstein 3D and Doom were better graphics and more weapons. Even the "2.5D" aspects of Doom were more gimmicks than true differences; secret doors went "up" and "down," but really they just toggled the ability to pass from one area to another: As far as the computer was concerned, everything was on the ground floor at all times. I realize the game engine itself significantly evolved in the interim, but how much of that was core change rather than features?

*shrugs* At a certain point, EVERYTHING is just fermions and bosons colliding, and always has been.

[DenBronx]

The original Castle Wolfenstein on Commodore 64 was epic! That was one of my fav games ever. Geez I am getting old.

BTxaHYK9cXw

[weazel]

the last few posts made me laugh really, really hard

[slim]

And you guys are being dicks to Rav. I don't approve.

Yes you do.

[Simple Jaded]

Still runs exclusively on binary. For that matter, the only significant differences between Wolfenstein 3D and Doom were better graphics and more weapons. Even the "2.5D" aspects of Doom were more gimmicks than true differences; secret doors went "up" and "down," but really they just toggled the ability to pass from one area to another: As far as the computer was concerned, everything was on the ground floor at all times. I realize the game engine itself significantly evolved in the interim, but how much of that was core change rather than features?

*shrugs* At a certain point, EVERYTHING is just fermions and bosons colliding, and always has been.

Joel, I respectfully vote to change your screen name to "Cliff Clavin".

[Joel]

Joel, I respectfully vote to change your screen name to "Cliff Clavin".
Hey, I stayed on topic; by MY standards, obsessively so.

Meanwhile, it seems not one but TWO NFL players "got up" and ignored NFL protocol in last weeks playoff games. The docs who wrote a report it on it basically said that if/when players tell trainers to go to Hell trainers should get backup from the position coach and/or other team staff. http://espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/2013/story/_/id/10273779/david-bakhtiari-keenan-lewis-violated-nfl-concussion-protocol

[BroncoWave]

Interesting. Harvin was taken out due to the concussion protocol, but is now back in the game after being cleared. According to our resident expert on the subject, the NFL is taking players out of playoff games who don't really have concussions. It's like maybe these highly paid doctors know what they are doing or something.

[wayninja]

Wow, I got lost in the corn maze there somewhere.

Let me see if I can find the way out:

1. Players want to get hit in the head so they don't hurt their knees
2. The NFL doesn't care about players
3. Because they don't care, they NFL has instituted mandatory protocols for checking for concussions.
4. Because of #1, the players should be the judge of whether or not their brain is dangerously swollen and or damaged.
5. The NFL is evil for not allowing this and therefore players should attempt to scam out of the protocol.

I bet once I reach the end of the maze, I find out we are really all plugged into a giant simulation or something.

[atwater27]

Interesting. Harvin was taken out due to the concussion protocol, but is now back in the game after being cleared. According to our resident expert on the subject, the NFL is taking players out of playoff games who don't really have concussions. It's like maybe these highly paid doctors know what they are doing or something.

I have my doubts about Harvins original hit. He had a concussion in my opinion after that blast. They let him back in because it was the playoffs. When he got laid out again, they had no choice. I doubt he will be back next week. Dude got killed today.

[BroncoWave]

I have my doubts about Harvins original hit. He had a concussion in my opinion after that blast. They let him back in because it was the playoffs. When he got laid out again, they had no choice. I doubt he will be back next week. Dude got killed today.

A player has to be cleared by an independent NFL neurologist to go back in the game. So I highly doubt they let him back in just because it's the playoffs. Look at the KC game. None of those players came back in.

[Shazam!]

I can't wait for the new Wolfenstein.

Loved 3D and RTCW too.