PDA

View Full Version : Manning Told Friends He's Retiring After Super Bowl



LTC Pain
02-01-2016, 05:10 PM
Just got this alert to my phone from the Score:

Report: Manning has told friends he expects to retire after Super Bowl
http://www.thescore.com/news/950169
(via http://thesco.re/theScore_app )

BroncoNut
02-01-2016, 05:32 PM
I'm not too surprised.

DenBronx
02-01-2016, 05:34 PM
I think everyone sees this coming. Doubt he pulls a Favre and keeps playing games with retiring and unretiring. I believe he said he would retire when the game wasn't fun anymore. Seems like the fun is wearing out now for him but all we need is 1 more game...just one more Manning!

chazoe60
02-01-2016, 05:42 PM
Now that he's had his arm amputated as a result of the horrific bus crash that happened earlier I think his retirement is imminent.

BronColt
02-01-2016, 06:02 PM
I think everyone sees this coming. Doubt he pulls a Favre and keeps playing games with retiring and unretiring. I believe he said he would retire when the game wasn't fun anymore. Seems like the fun is wearing out now for him but all we need is 1 more game...just one more Manning!

Into the Sunset he rides...Lombardi trophy in hand. I wonder if he'll fall asleep with it like Sean Payton did after his Suoer Bowl win.

Nomad
02-01-2016, 06:22 PM
I think everyone sees this coming. Doubt he pulls a Favre and keeps playing games with retiring and unretiring. I believe he said he would retire when the game wasn't fun anymore. Seems like the fun is wearing out now for him but all we need is 1 more game...just one more Manning!

I'm hoping we see the Manning that diagnoses the defense, and slices them up, opening up the run game for Anderson and Hillman. I believe we're going to see a determined Manning giving his all, even if it means he leaves on a stretcher holding the Lombardi. :lol:

aberdien
02-01-2016, 06:39 PM
http://i.imgur.com/q5C0IMS.gifv

LawDog
02-01-2016, 06:49 PM
http://i.imgur.com/q5C0IMS.gifv

That. Is. Hilarious.

Dapper Dan
02-01-2016, 07:34 PM
http://i.imgur.com/q5C0IMS.gifv

I just cried a little :(

Dapper Dan
02-01-2016, 07:34 PM
Just got this alert to my phone from the Score:

Report: Manning has told friends he expects to retire after Super Bowl
http://www.thescore.com/news/950169
(via http://thesco.re/theScore_app )

Ssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

Edmonton Bronco Fan
02-01-2016, 07:35 PM
I just want that lasting image to be him raising the Lombardi trophy over his head in a Broncos uniform.

Please.

Dapper Dan
02-01-2016, 07:47 PM
I just want that lasting image to be him raising the Lombardi trophy over his head in a Broncos uniform.

Please.

Kinda like this.

8406

DenBronx
02-01-2016, 08:26 PM
I just want that lasting image to be him raising the Lombardi trophy over his head in a Broncos uniform.

Please.

Kinda like this.

8406



And THAT was kicking and screaming. Manning needs to play his guts out.

Joel
02-01-2016, 10:14 PM
"Expects" leaves the door open as much as "might." That said, I can't believe it's still fun, with roughly half of Broncos fans spending roughly half the season DEMANDING he leave, wishing he'd done it last year, all while he's been playing through injuries since he played the last half of 2013 with both ankles taped. Realistically, he'll NEVER end a season THIS healthy again, so if he can't win that second Ring now, he can't win it PERIOD.

Maybe the League Office will tell the refs to give us every close call, as it seemed to for Baltimore when Stabby announced retirement before the playoffs. Manning's done at least as much on and off the field to earn a similar gold watch, and it IS the milestone "Golden SB." "I want to believe" the NFL's not just WWF with better production values, but stuff like this makes me wonder if it's pure dumb luck EVERY season ALWAYS happens to play out with such neatly dramatic narrative finales.

Screw it: I need a new hat. :tongue:

chazoe60
02-01-2016, 10:16 PM
Holy ******* shit Joel, you might as well be a Chiefs fan posting bullshit like that.

tomjonesrocks
02-01-2016, 10:21 PM
"Expects" leaves the door open as much as "might." That said, I can't believe it's still fun, with roughly half of Broncos fans spending roughly half the season DEMANDING he leave, wishing he'd done it last year, all while he's been playing through injuries since he played the last half of 2013 with both ankles taped. Realistically, he'll NEVER end a season THIS healthy again, so if he can't win that second Ring now, he can't win it PERIOD. Maybe the League Office will tell the refs to give us every close call, as it seemed to for Baltimore when Stabby announced retirement before the playoffs. Manning's done at least as much on and off the field to earn a similar gold watch, and it IS the milestone "Golden SB." "I want to believe" the NFL's not just WWF with better production values, but stuff like this makes me wonder if it's pure dumb luck EVERY season ALWAYS happens to play out with such neatly dramatic narrative finales. Screw it: I need a new hat. :tongue:

Well there's a number of words I'd never put together in that order...

Timmy!
02-01-2016, 10:30 PM
Holy ******* shit Joel, you might as well be a Chiefs fan posting bullshit like that.

Id really like to hit him with a chair.

tomjonesrocks
02-01-2016, 10:35 PM
There might be a David Lynch movie in Joel. Some of his thoughts are ... Uncommon.

Joel - have you considered essays about neon alligators lounging in corridors with paisley wallpaper?

Joel
02-02-2016, 12:06 AM
There might be a David Lynch movie in Joel. Some of his thoughts are ... Uncommon.

Joel - have you considered essays about neon alligators lounging in corridors with paisley wallpaper?
C'mon, people have openly wondered about SB fixes for a long time, and the last Ravens run was fishy as Hell. That was a BAD over-the-hill and injury-racked team that only managed to stagger into the playoffs because the Steelers were in full rebuild mode and Cincy had Marvin Lewis and Dalton. I actually felt sorry for the Colts in the wildcard game, because the calls were laughably and obviously one-sided. Then our game, then a weak Ravens team beats NE* in Foxboro.

That whole thing smelled rotten even before the lights mysteriously went out in the WHOLE STADIUM, and SF IMMEDIATELY turned a blowout into a nail-biter thereafter. Almost like NFL execs who remembered the '80s "Super Bores" when the NFC beat the AFC by 40 pts ANNUALLY for a DECADE didn't want to revisit what that does to ratings. And that was just ONE season:

Remember when a NO team that had only made the playoffs 5 times in FORTY YEARS saved a city the VERY FIRST SEASON after Katrina nearly destroyed it?

The Cinderella wildcard Giants miraculously upsetting the record-shattering rule-breaking NE* team NO ONE could stop—then doing it AGAIN?

The Cinderella Steelers upsetting Mannings Colts AND us en route to a SB win chiefly remembered for (wait for it...) lopsided and dubious officiating?

The coach Oakland had JUST fired beating a playbook he WROTE?

Then there's the "post-dynasty" cap and FA era producing the MOST dominant SD dynasty: We all know how that happened, and how few and small the consequences have been. But every good belt match needs a heel people tune in to hate, right?

I'm not saying it's fixed, just that there've been an awful lot of highly suspicious (but ratings-friendly) coincidences in the past couple decades. There's no smoking gun, and I don't think the owners would risk killing their cash cow with the discovery it's all for show. But most games have many close, often pivotal, close calls; would the League Office pre-advise refs to err on the side of the underdog and against the favorite, to keep games close, exciting and highly rated (i.e. profitable)?

Why WOULDN'T they?!

Timmy!
02-02-2016, 12:34 AM
Lol. Ya Joel. Rahim Moore doing Rahim Moore things in the playoffs was totally a conspiracy. I had more to say but the lizard people are stealing my thoughts.

BronColt
02-02-2016, 12:39 AM
Just got this alert to my phone from the Score:

Report: Manning has told friends he expects to retire after Super Bowl
http://www.thescore.com/news/950169
(via http://thesco.re/theScore_app )

Here's what Peyton said about his comment to Belichick at Super Bowl Opening Night.

https://youtu.be/wOfcc2CPLMQ

https://youtu.be/tedyhVEN39Q

Poet
02-02-2016, 01:29 AM
Joel, the Saints had several seasons before a monster offense. Their defense went into turnover god-mode. The Giants beat the ever-loving hell out of Tom Brady because their specialty, the pass rush, matched up well against a strong offensive line. The Giants then managed to do it again a little while later. The Steelers run started off by Carson Palmer tearing his ACL, MCL, PCL, and dislocating his kneecap. And as bad as the calls were against Denver, I never thought I'd see Hines Ward style on Champ Bailey like that, and Plummer was far from godly in that game. Oakland ran into the best defense of its era, and who would have thought that a dink and dunk offense would lose to a defense so stacked that it could stop the big play (the premise of the Tampa-2) and mitigate an offense that was good at turning a five yard gain into a seven or twelve yarder?

There's no conspiracy.

MOtorboat
02-02-2016, 01:47 AM
The Super Bowls are rigged?

So Elway's helicopter was rigged? Fitzgerald ran all that ******* way just so Santonio Holmes could make the most unbelievable catch I've ever seen? You suppose Roethlisberger is that good to make that an act?

Maybe Dyson wasn't actually down. The cameras were just at the right angle and the NFL CGI'd his knee on the grounds one yard short.

You suppose Carroll told Wilson to throw the ball a step too far?

Maybe Peyton Manning walked over to Tracy Porter before that interception and said, "I'm going to throw this a little inside, so you might want to jump the route."

Joel
02-02-2016, 04:11 AM
I'm not saying it's fixed....

The Super Bowls are rigged?
You're very good at rebutting things I DIDN'T say. That, and cussing out people, Code of Conduct be :censored:.


Lol. Joel, **** off.
One more time: The NFL would NEVER RIG games, because if that EVER got out itt would kill a cash cow worth >$10 billion annually. What the NFL very well COULD do is make clear to refs—without ever saying it—that every time a call can go either way it should go the way that makes the most marketable narrative.

Blow outs don't sell Buicks, insurance, pizza or NFLN subscriptions. The NFL's repeated changed THE RULES THEMSELVES to raise interest and excitement (i.e. profits) by raising scoring and big comebacks: None of ya'll think it would change ENFORCEMENT of those rules for the same reason...?

We're not talking ancient illuminated conspiracy: In the real world "mighty contests" not only "arise from" but TURN on enough "trivial things" plots are unneeded.

Northman
02-02-2016, 06:33 AM
I'm hoping we see the Manning that diagnoses the defense, and slices them up, opening up the run game for Anderson and Hillman. I believe we're going to see a determined Manning giving his all, even if it means he leaves on a stretcher holding the Lombardi. :lol:

I really hope so. Would suck to have him throw 4 Int's in this game.

TXBRONC
02-02-2016, 08:05 AM
Holy ******* shit Joel, you might as well be a Chiefs fan posting bullshit like that.

Maybe he do that some day.

Nomad
02-02-2016, 08:43 AM
I really hope so. Would suck to have him throw 4 Int's in this game.

Well....this is his chance to go out on top......a dream scenario.

GEM
02-02-2016, 11:12 AM
You're very good at rebutting things I DIDN'T say. That, and cussing out people, Code of Conduct be :censored:.


One more time: The NFL would NEVER RIG games, because if that EVER got out itt would kill a cash cow worth >$10 billion annually. What the NFL very well COULD do is make clear to refs—without ever saying it—that every time a call can go either way it should go the way that makes the most marketable narrative.

Blow outs don't sell Buicks, insurance, pizza or NFLN subscriptions. The NFL's repeated changed THE RULES THEMSELVES to raise interest and excitement (i.e. profits) by raising scoring and big comebacks: None of ya'll think it would change ENFORCEMENT of those rules for the same reason...?

We're not talking ancient illuminated conspiracy: In the real world "mighty contests" not only "arise from" but TURN on enough "trivial things" plots are unneeded.

Code of Conduct says no personal attacks and no circumvention of the filter, of which he did neither. It's not nice to tell someone to **** off, but it's not a personal attack and he spelled the word out. :shrugs:

BronColt
02-02-2016, 11:45 AM
Well....this is his chance to go out on top......a dream scenario.

Manning has been saving his arm all season for the big game. He's finally healthy enough to put some weight on that plantar fasciitis foot which means you should keep your eye out for some deep balls...that are CAUGHT!

I think we're gonna see some vintage Manning this Sunday, and NOT the interception machine he was early this year (he was dealing with that injury prior to the pre-season, and also dealing with the quad injury the end of last year.)

Besides Josh Norman, can you name anyone else on that secondary WITHOUT looking it up?

Besides Luke Kuechly, Jared Allen, Josh Norman and Thomas Davis, who else on that Defense stands out? EXACTLY!

I also think Davis is going to start the game, but the first time he tries to tackle Anderson / Hillman / Daniels he's going to re-injure it. Him starting the game is for morale purposes only. Has anyone ever broken an arm before? You're not playing contact sports 2 weeks after you get a metal plate and 12 screws in your arm. His legs will be there, but his tackling arms WILL NOT! Count on it!

Broncos D > Panthers D

Von Miller is gonna spy Cam the whole game, Ward and Stewart are gonna be awesome in the secondary. Harris and Talib are gonna cover Ginn and Olsen and make Brown and Funchess beat us on the outside.

If any of you watched the opening night last night, Cam Newton was all about CAM, the Broncos were all about the TEAM! This is how we win it.

MOtorboat
02-02-2016, 12:03 PM
You're very good at rebutting things I DIDN'T say. That, and cussing out people, Code of Conduct be :censored:.


One more time: The NFL would NEVER RIG games, because if that EVER got out itt would kill a cash cow worth >$10 billion annually. What the NFL very well COULD do is make clear to refs—without ever saying it—that every time a call can go either way it should go the way that makes the most marketable narrative.

Blow outs don't sell Buicks, insurance, pizza or NFLN subscriptions. The NFL's repeated changed THE RULES THEMSELVES to raise interest and excitement (i.e. profits) by raising scoring and big comebacks: None of ya'll think it would change ENFORCEMENT of those rules for the same reason...?

We're not talking ancient illuminated conspiracy: In the real world "mighty contests" not only "arise from" but TURN on enough "trivial things" plots are unneeded.

Don't lie. You absolutely were getting at the Super Bowl being rigged. Because I used a different word to explain what you were saying, doesn't mean you didn't say it.

Joel
02-02-2016, 12:03 PM
Code of Conduct says no personal attacks and no circumvention of the filter, of which he did neither. It's not nice to tell someone to **** off, but it's not a personal attack and he spelled the word out. :shrugs:
So cussing out someone's not a personal attack; I'll bear that in mind.

Ravage!!!
02-02-2016, 12:06 PM
yeah.. I believe the part abot how the refs gave all the calls to help out "stabby" for his retirement season was a dead giveaway in how he was suggesting that the NFL rigs the super bowls.

Joel
02-02-2016, 12:07 PM
Don't lie. You absolutely were getting at the Super Bowl being rigged. Because I used a different word to explain what you were saying, doesn't mean you didn't say it.
Rigged=fixed, but "I'm not saying it's fixed" is NOT SAYING IT'S FIXED. Beyond that:

If you accuse me of lying, you better have proof, and you don't, because I didn't.

Seriously, GEM, cussing someone out and calling them a liar's not a personal attack? Please define what IS a personal attack then; doesn't look like ANYTHING is.

Ravage!!!
02-02-2016, 12:08 PM
So cussing out someone's not a personal attack; I'll bear that in mind.

Calling you a F*** is a personal attack. Telling you to F*** off is just telling you to F*** off. Cursing AT you isn't the same thing as attacking you.

MOtorboat
02-02-2016, 12:09 PM
"The Super Bowl, especially the ones with Ray Lewis looked rigged, but I'm not actually saying its rigged."

Typical double speak so you can always claim to be right.

chazoe60
02-02-2016, 12:10 PM
And Rav would know, he's been told to **** off more than anyone here.

Joel
02-02-2016, 12:13 PM
yeah.. I believe the part abot how the refs gave all the calls to help out "stabby" for his retirement season was a dead giveaway in how he was suggesting that the NFL rigs the super bowls.
You really see no difference between dictating game outcomes and simply giving refs the strong impression that any time there's doubt about which way a call should go it should go to the underdog, or the popular team (or both) to "keep it interesting" (i.e. profiftable)? Even though refs are accused of doing that for reasons of outright favoritism every week? That's not a "fix:" It just INFLUENCES outcomes, in favor of ratings rather than a partiuclar team, without DETERMINING outcomes.

MOtorboat
02-02-2016, 12:15 PM
You really see no difference between dictating game outcomes and simply giving refs the strong impression that any time there's doubt about which way a call should go it should go to the underdog, or the popular team (or both) to "keep it interesting" (i.e. profiftable)? Even though refs are accused of doing that for reasons of outright favoritism every week? That's not a "fix:" It just INFLUENCES outcomes, in favor of ratings rather than a partiuclar team, without DETERMINING outcomes.

And you really don't think you're talking about fixing games? Rigged games?

Wtf?

Joel
02-02-2016, 12:16 PM
"The Super Bowl, especially the ones with Ray Lewis looked rigged, but I'm not actually saying its rigged."

Typical double speak so you can always claim to be right.
If someone managed to beat them despite losing ANY and EVERY judgement call, I don't think the league would've overturned the result, no. Again, the NFL can't afford to RIG a game, because when (not if) word got out it would kill their product. That's exactly the OPPOSITE of what they're trying to do, and it's just like a bookie: They don't care who WINS as long as everyone BUYS IN.

Joel
02-02-2016, 12:17 PM
And you really don't think you're talking about fixing games? Rigged games?

Wtf?
I really don't know what to tell you at this point except "Look up 'determinism' and 'influence.'" There's a big difference between saying, "if you're not sure, give the bad/popular team the break," and saying, "make sure team x wins, whatever it takes."

Ravage!!!
02-02-2016, 12:17 PM
And Rav would know, he's been told to **** off more than anyone here.

Never a truer statement than this!!

MOtorboat
02-02-2016, 12:18 PM
If someone managed to beat them despite losing ANY and EVERY judgement call, I don't think the league would've overturned the result, no. Again, the NFL can't afford to RIG a game, because when (not if) word got out it would kill their product. That's exactly the OPPOSITE of what they're trying to do, and it's just like a bookie: They don't care who WINS as long as everyone BUYS IN.

We've reached an impasse. You think the league dictating referee calls isn't fixing a game.

I disagree. Along with the rest of the world.

NightTerror218
02-02-2016, 12:20 PM
I hope Joel is right, that means we are a shoe in to win.

Ravage!!!
02-02-2016, 12:21 PM
You really see no difference between dictating game outcomes and simply giving refs the strong impression that any time there's doubt about which way a call should go it should go to the underdog, or the popular team (or both) to "keep it interesting" (i.e. profiftable)? Even though refs are accused of doing that for reasons of outright favoritism every week? That's not a "fix:" It just INFLUENCES outcomes, in favor of ratings rather than a partiuclar team, without DETERMINING outcomes.

No. I think you are talking about the same thing, as would ANYONE else if there was any kind of proof of this happening. This is exactly what "rigged" would be if you were talking about fixing games in sports, and the fact that you are trying to deny this, is funny. Of course you are talkign about rigging a game if this were the 'real' case. It's an absurd thought, anyway, but lets at least have the decency to all it what it is rather than trying to backpedal.

OrangeHoof
02-02-2016, 12:36 PM
Ever since the Jerome Bettis Super Bowl, I've questioned if the NFL was rigged, not that the Steelers won but the ridiculous ways the officiating crew made *sure* the Steelers won - like the 1919 Black Sox making it look too obvious they were throwing games.

I really want to see the Broncos win and Manning get his second trophy but I hope it isn't because of phantom holding and contact fouls at critical moments that throw the game our way.

Joel
02-02-2016, 12:36 PM
No. I think you are talking about the same thing, as would ANYONE else if there was any kind of proof of this happening. This is exactly what "rigged" would be if you were talking about fixing games in sports, and the fact that you are trying to deny this, is funny. Of course you are talkign about rigging a game if this were the 'real' case. It's an absurd thought, anyway, but lets at least have the decency to all it what it is rather than trying to backpedal.
Back pedal, nothing: I said from the start that I WONDER if the NFL has the refs give the dog/popular team every close call; that's VERY different than outright telling the refs whom to "make win." We're not even talking point shaving: In EVERY game there are ALWAYS close judgement calls that could go either way: So if you're not sure, err on the side that keeps it entertaining. Is it a "fix" if you're not dictating and don't even CARE who wins?

Is Terrell Suggs some kind of lunatic for publicly saying Goodell called in the SB XLVIII black out to prevent a BLOW out?

Ravage!!!
02-02-2016, 12:38 PM
Back pedal, nothing: I said from the start that I WONDER if the NFL has the refs give the dog/popular team every close call; that's VERY different than outright telling the refs whom to "make win." We're not even talking point shaving: In EVERY game there are ALWAYS close judgement calls that could go either way: So if you're not sure, err on the side that keeps it entertaining. Is it a "fix" if you're not dictating and don't even CARE who wins?

Is Terrell Suggs some kind of lunatic for publicly saying Goodell called in the SB XLVIII black out to prevent a BLOW out?

YES.. yes he is for making that STUPID STUPID suggestion. It's absolutely and incredibly STUPID and lunacy. It has to be one of the dumbest comments I've seen players make.

Joel
02-02-2016, 12:41 PM
Ever since the Jerome Bettis Super Bowl, I've questioned if the NFL was rigged, not that the Steelers won but the ridiculous ways the officiating crew made *sure* the Steelers won - like the 1919 Black Sox making it look too obvious they were throwing games.

I really want to see the Broncos win and Manning get his second trophy but I hope it isn't because of phantom holding and contact fouls at critical moments that throw the game our way.
Yeah, thought about that part of it, too; maybe it's generational, but all the stuff about how special Bettis getting a SB was, with all the dubious calls and the highly improbable way Pitt even got past Indy, let alone past us and into the SB, was when I and a lot of other folks I've talked with then and since started wondering. I take solace in knowing SB XXXII was called pretty evenly and cleanly, because people who buy that theory could suspect the same there.

It DID break the decade-and-a-half string of NFC blow out Super Bores, and I doubt the NFL was exactly sad about that; maybe it gave them ideas.

NightTrainLayne
02-02-2016, 12:47 PM
We've kind of gone off the rails here as to the topic, but I have to ask: Am I the only one who doesn't think the Steelers/Seahawks Super Bowl was a big sham job?

I remember thinking at the time that one or two calls could have gone either way, and they went the Steelers way, but nothing that really determined the outcome of the game, and nothing that seemed egregiously unfair.

Am I the only one?

Slick
02-02-2016, 12:50 PM
We've kind of gone off the rails here as to the topic, but I have to ask: Am I the only one who doesn't think the Steelers/Seahawks Super Bowl was a big sham job?

I remember thinking at the time that one or two calls could have gone either way, and they went the Steelers way, but nothing that really determined the outcome of the game, and nothing that seemed egregiously unfair.

Am I the only one?

I didn't even watch that game.

chazoe60
02-02-2016, 12:50 PM
We've kind of gone off the rails here as to the topic, but I have to ask: Am I the only one who doesn't think the Steelers/Seahawks Super Bowl was a big sham job?

I remember thinking at the time that one or two calls could have gone either way, and they went the Steelers way, but nothing that really determined the outcome of the game, and nothing that seemed egregiously unfair.

Am I the only one?

That SB was pathetic. It was so bad that a few years after the refs apologized for several egregious errors. Had that game been called correctly there is no doubt in my mind that the seahawks would have won. I don't think it was a fix it was just a group of men doing a really shitty job of doing their job.

Nomad
02-02-2016, 12:55 PM
That one was for Jerome:lol:

Northman
02-02-2016, 01:00 PM
We've kind of gone off the rails here as to the topic, but I have to ask: Am I the only one who doesn't think the Steelers/Seahawks Super Bowl was a big sham job?

I remember thinking at the time that one or two calls could have gone either way, and they went the Steelers way, but nothing that really determined the outcome of the game, and nothing that seemed egregiously unfair.

Am I the only one?


No, that game wasnt a sham either. People just get angry because they hate certain teams and cant deal with the fact the teams they hate still won. The NFL is not fixed.

GEM
02-02-2016, 01:31 PM
Rigged=fixed, but "I'm not saying it's fixed" is NOT SAYING IT'S FIXED. Beyond that:

If you accuse me of lying, you better have proof, and you don't, because I didn't.

Seriously, GEM, cussing someone out and calling them a liar's not a personal attack? Please define what IS a personal attack then; doesn't look like ANYTHING is.

Had he said **** you, you ******* idiot. That's a personal attack because of the ******* idiot part. It's not polite or nice to say **** you, but that in and of itself is not a personal attack.

OrangeHoof
02-02-2016, 01:33 PM
Do you recall any NFL game at any time when the QB who just threw an interception was called for tackling the interceptor too low besides that Super Bowl game?

Joel
02-02-2016, 01:50 PM
We've kind of gone off the rails here as to the topic, but I have to ask: Am I the only one who doesn't think the Steelers/Seahawks Super Bowl was a big sham job?

I remember thinking at the time that one or two calls could have gone either way, and they went the Steelers way, but nothing that really determined the outcome of the game, and nothing that seemed egregiously unfair.

Am I the only one?
You're far from alone, and that's exactly how I'd describe it. Many fans (including those I watched it with) had many pointed questions that have never really gone away, because they were all judgement calls: Who can sit in their living room and say the JUDGEMENT of the guy on the field is objectively "wrong"? Even if the NFL didn't tacitly or otherwise encourage it, it'd be natural for all the maudlin crap about Bettis in his hometown for his final game to affect the refs some on some level.

Tagliabue saying something like "gosh, I'd sure hate to see a HoFer embarrassed in his careers final game" within earshot of the refs isn't "fixing/rigging the game."

Joel
02-02-2016, 01:52 PM
Had he said **** you, you ******* idiot. That's a personal attack because of the ******* idiot part. It's not polite or nice to say **** you, but that in and of itself is not a personal attack.
So calling someone an idiot is out of bounds, but calling them a liar is not. "Personally," I think being dishonest's worse than being dumb, but OK.

At least I know cussing people out's fine, because I sure didn't before now.

weazel
02-02-2016, 01:53 PM
Jerome Bettis is from Detroit

Northman
02-02-2016, 01:54 PM
Good, if its fixed than Denver should win since its Peyton's farewell tour. Problem solved, i can sleep easy at night now.

MOtorboat
02-02-2016, 01:58 PM
So calling someone an idiot is out of bounds, but calling them a liar is not. "Personally," I think being dishonest's worse than being dumb, but OK.

At least I know cussing people out's fine, because I sure didn't before now.

I deleted it because your feelers got hurt. Quit whining.

Joel
02-02-2016, 02:02 PM
Jerome Bettis is from Detroit
Much like Ford Field.

Joel
02-02-2016, 02:08 PM
I deleted it because your feelers got hurt. Quit whining.
So calling you out for something you did is "whining" but calling me out for something I DIDN'T do is... what, exactly? What's the protocol; if I throw some four-letter words at you does that make saying you did something wrong less whiny? I'm not feeling sorry for myself or begging for help, because I don't need it:

I'm just telling you you did something classless. And doing it without going into some foam-mouthed tirade that descends into expletives.

MOtorboat
02-02-2016, 02:21 PM
So calling you out for something you did is "whining" but calling me out for something I DIDN'T do is... what, exactly? What's the protocol; if I throw some four-letter words at you does that make saying you did something wrong less whiny? I'm not feeling sorry for myself or begging for help, because I don't need it:

I'm just telling you you did something classless. And doing it without going into some foam-mouthed tirade that descends into expletives.

You're right. You didn't **** off. You kept posting.

Timmy!
02-02-2016, 02:22 PM
So calling you out for something you did is "whining" but calling me out for something I DIDN'T do is... what, exactly? What's the protocol; if I throw some four-letter words at you does that make saying you did something wrong less whiny? I'm not feeling sorry for myself or begging for help, because I don't need it:

I'm just telling you you did something classless. And doing it without going into some foam-mouthed tirade that descends into expletives.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/2f/0b/86/2f0b865b3b7616202f93303148c29553.jpg

Ravage!!!
02-02-2016, 02:36 PM
We've kind of gone off the rails here as to the topic, but I have to ask: Am I the only one who doesn't think the Steelers/Seahawks Super Bowl was a big sham job?

I remember thinking at the time that one or two calls could have gone either way, and they went the Steelers way, but nothing that really determined the outcome of the game, and nothing that seemed egregiously unfair.

Am I the only one?

I don't think you are the only one. There are some that just hate the STeelers so much that they will fight to believe that the refs "helped them'... But then I think you can find that same outlook on any close Super Bowl... as one set will always feel that they got screwed.

I would have HAPPILY taken the Steeler's place and all their "supposed help" to take that trophy home.

Ravage!!!
02-02-2016, 02:38 PM
Good, if its fixed than Denver should win since its Peyton's farewell tour. Problem solved, i can sleep easy at night now.

Won't be good enough. Peyton took the place of Tebow and has ONLY taken us to 2 Super Bowls. A complete failure of a tenure here when we COULD have kept that young, strapping, QB instead.

Joel
02-02-2016, 03:21 PM
You're right. You didn't **** off. You kept posting.
Funny how that works. Believe it or not, refusing to roll over for the petty insulting bile you habitually spew (apparently just for the Hell of it) isn't "whining." Let's get that straight: I'm the one calmly telling you you're acting like a 13-year-old whose mom just took her phone, and you're the one acting that way. Again. Still. Always.


https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/2f/0b/86/2f0b865b3b7616202f93303148c29553.jpg
Sorry, wrong number: Stop erring.

NightTrainLayne
02-02-2016, 03:45 PM
Do you recall any NFL game at any time when the QB who just threw an interception was called for tackling the interceptor too low besides that Super Bowl game?

That's the one call I can't figure out. I went back and looked at the game during lunch. It seems obviously wrong. The rest of the debated calls seem on the up and up to me. They are judgements, and some could go either way, some seem pretty clearly the correct call.

As far as the "low block" penalty on Hasselbeck, it was after the interception. 15 yards for the penalty certainly helped the Steelers start off a drive in good field position, but that didn't win the game for the Steelers.

MOtorboat
02-02-2016, 04:09 PM
Funny how that works. Believe it or not, refusing to roll over for the petty insulting bile you habitually spew (apparently just for the Hell of it) isn't "whining." Let's get that straight: I'm the one calmly telling you you're acting like a 13-year-old whose mom just took her phone, and you're the one acting that way. Again. Still. Always.


Sorry, wrong number: Stop erring.

Let us go back to the adult conversation in which you were accusing the NFL of a federal racketeering crime.

pulse
02-02-2016, 04:53 PM
This report and this thread is floating in the toilet. It is in dire need of a flush.

So many expect Peyton to retire, it's become a forgone conclusion despite the fact he nor anyone associated with him has been quoted that he in fact is retiring. The source of this report was highly questionable from the start, regardless of how believable/acceptable it sounds or how much it makes sense. When much of the media and most of the general public and fans are expecting Peyton to retire, that won't make it fact until it comes out of his own mouth.

If Peyton thinks he is healing and will again be able to play effectively as a QB, he might give it another year. Perhaps he does retire, but then again, we could just as easily be in the dark on his decision a month after the Super Bowl is over. He seems pretty sincere in his answers that he does not know right now. I doubt anyone else does either.

BronColt
02-02-2016, 04:57 PM
Let us go back to the adult conversation in which you were accusing the NFL of a federal racketeering crime.

It's not like it hasn't happened before in professional sports.

See Tim Donaghy

8411

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_NBA_betting_scandal

MOtorboat
02-02-2016, 04:58 PM
It's not like it hasn't happened before in professional sports.

See Tim Donaghy

8411

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_NBA_betting_scandal

I know. Which is why it's a very serious accusation, because Joel is saying its coming from the top.

BronColt
02-02-2016, 05:04 PM
This report and this thread is floating in the toilet. It is in dire need of a flush.

So many expect Peyton to retire, it's become a forgone conclusion despite the fact he nor anyone associated with him has been quoted that he in fact is retiring. The source of this report was highly questionable from the start, regardless of how believable/acceptable it sounds or how much it makes sense. When much of the media and most of the general public and fans are expecting Peyton to retire, that won't make it fact until it comes out of his own mouth.

If Peyton thinks he is healing and will again be able to play effectively as a QB, he might give it another year. Perhaps he does retire, but then again, we could just as easily be in the dark on his decision a month after the Super Bowl is over. He seems pretty sincere in his answers that he does not know right now. I doubt anyone else does either.

I think Manning doesn't want to be a distraction to the team, and is keeping the door open in case he changes his mind and decides right after the Super Bowl. I think knowing he'd get Clady back would be a pretty nice motivator to return. Sounds like he wants to play with "Sunshine" too, as he alluded to keeping an eye out for him next year.

I also think he'd be willing to cut back on his contract AGAIN so the team could afford to keep more players, and maybe bring in a few more pieces to that offense, say some more O line, a stud tight end and a nice slot reciever. He still does have one more year left on his contract.

pulse
02-02-2016, 05:17 PM
The important thing to remember: Will Manning's physical attributes be too limiting for him to return? If he feels healthy and he is having fun, why wouldn't he return? What else is he going to do? Coach? Work at ESPN? He lives for playing QB and being a dad. I can only imagine him retiring for two reasons: 1) His body just can't do it anymore and is limiting him from being effective in carrying out his mental preperation for each game; 2) He wants to focus on his children. I can see him retiring,of course, but if his foot heals or he feels all-around healthy, he just might surprise against the general consensus that he is finished after Super Bowl Sunday.

I am not saying he won't retire. Hell, I will be just as surprised if he doesn't. I don't want to see Peyton struggle like he did through the 2015 season. But if his struggles were predominantly due to the foot injury and related pain and if he is getting over that, perhaps he has another good year left in him. Only Peyton will know this for sure. I don't expect we will know what he will do for a while yet.

NightTerror218
02-02-2016, 07:52 PM
Manning will decide Sunday if he is retiring stay tuned to his post game interview for more details.

Heard it here first.

BronColt
02-02-2016, 08:43 PM
Manning will decide Sunday if he is retiring stay tuned to his post game interview for more details.

Heard it here first.

I'll be down close to the field...I'll keep my ears open. I'll also be live streaming the game from my HD Camera glasses.

thunndarr
02-03-2016, 03:00 AM
Here's what's weird...I generally enjoy Joel's posts. But his "The NFL is a rigged game" meme doesn't jive for me because the ramifications are pretty huge. Let's assume some of us are fans of the game. Do we then assume the players we are fans of are so incredibly stupid that they'd continue to play this game knowing that it's essentially pro wrestling? That's where Joel's argument falls flat. Either the players know its fixed, or they are too stupid to know it's fixed. (Or it's not fixed.) Pick one. But, for Joel's argument to be true, the players would have to be accomplices...Or very, very stupid. (Which many may very well be, but at least a few among the playerbase are not.)

SR
02-03-2016, 07:16 AM
Here's what's weird...I generally enjoy Joel's posts. But his "The NFL is a rigged game" meme doesn't jive for me because the ramifications are pretty huge. Let's assume some of us are fans of the game. Do we then assume the players we are fans of are so incredibly stupid that they'd continue to play this game knowing that it's essentially pro wrestling? That's where Joel's argument falls flat. Either the players know its fixed, or they are too stupid to know it's fixed. (Or it's not fixed.) Pick one. But, for Joel's argument to be true, the players would have to be accomplices...Or very, very stupid. (Which many may very well be, but at least a few among the playerbase are not.)

Most of what Joel posts is very far fetched, baseless, and along the same lines of thought as the "spaghetti monster". It's just best to skip by those novellas and converse with someone who gets it.

Yashahla17
02-03-2016, 08:25 AM
Just got this alert to my phone from the Score:

Report: Manning has told friends he expects to retire after Super Bowl
http://www.thescore.com/news/950169
(via http://thesco.re/theScore_app )

Of course he's retiring. I just hope he wins man. I can't take another Super Bowl loss in a few years with manning. This guy absolutely has to win this game.

Yashahla17
02-03-2016, 08:29 AM
Most of what Joel posts is very far fetched, baseless, and along the same lines of thought as the "spaghetti monster". It's just best to skip by those novellas and converse with someone who gets it.

Anybody who thinks players wouldn't play a game for millions and think its rigged at the same time is delusional. I would gladly take my million a week check to play even if i did feel like the cards are stacked against me and i have to face the team and the refs. Doesn't that already happen? How many players have said it feels like we were playing the refs today? Did they quit and not play? No

SR
02-03-2016, 09:26 AM
Anybody who thinks players wouldn't play a game for millions and think its rigged at the same time is delusional. I would gladly take my million a week check to play even if i did feel like the cards are stacked against me and i have to face the team and the refs. Doesn't that already happen? How many players have said it feels like we were playing the refs today? Did they quit and not play? No

The NFL isn't rigged, we landed on the moon, the Holocaust was real, and 9/11 wasn't an inside job.

VonDoom
02-03-2016, 10:38 AM
Is this thread still about Manning retiring? If so, I thought this was an interesting find from Schefter this morning - the Rams might have interest in Manning if he wants to play next year:


The Rams have had internal discussions about bringing Peyton Manning to Los Angeles should he want to play another season, per a league source.

Manning still is under contract to the Broncos for another year, but most around the league do not expect him to return to Denver next season, if he returns at all.

Manning still must decide whether he wants to play again, and the Rams still are formulating their quarterback plans. But they are monitoring the Manning situation, per a source, which is a sign that the Broncos quarterback could have options next season.

It also sets up the possibility -- even if it is remote -- that Manning could finish his career in Southern California just as former Colts quarterback Johnny Unitas did with the San Diego Chargers in 1973 and former New York Jets quarterback Joe Namath did with Los Angeles Rams in 1977.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/14703972/los-angeles-rams-discuss-peyton-manning-option-2016

Northman
02-03-2016, 10:40 AM
Falco just jizzed himself.

VonDoom
02-03-2016, 11:00 AM
Falco just jizzed himself.

I thought he renounced the Rams because they moved?

Northman
02-03-2016, 11:08 AM
I thought he renounced the Rams because they moved?

Oh he did? I must of missed that conversation. lol

Joel
02-03-2016, 05:04 PM
Let us go back to the adult conversation in which you were accusing the NFL of a federal racketeering crime.
There never was such a conversation, so no one can return to it.


Here's what's weird...I generally enjoy Joel's posts. But his "The NFL is a rigged game" meme doesn't jive for me because the ramifications are pretty huge. Let's assume some of us are fans of the game. Do we then assume the players we are fans of are so incredibly stupid that they'd continue to play this game knowing that it's essentially pro wrestling? That's where Joel's argument falls flat. Either the players know its fixed, or they are too stupid to know it's fixed. (Or it's not fixed.) Pick one. But, for Joel's argument to be true, the players would have to be accomplices...Or very, very stupid. (Which many may very well be, but at least a few among the playerbase are not.)
Again: Not saying it's rigged, fixed or whatever. I'm saying the NFL's REPEATEDLY changed THE RULES THEMSELVES to promote scoring, huge comebacks and ensuring any bad team can beat any good team on any given Sunday, Monday or Thursday: It's not above indirectly making clear that every time a ref's unsure of a call, he should err on the side of ratings. That wouldn't dictate who wins a game, nor even shave the victors points (though the effect would be similar to the latter.)

It'd just ensure entertaining games people pay to watch; avoid the tons of blow outs we regularly saw in '80s and '90s SBs. The NFL's feverishly trying to expand its audience beyond the profit-limiting US: GLOBALLY BROADCAST Super Bore EMBARRASSMENTS of NFL poster boys (and thus the whole NFL) can't do that. Whether the poster boy's Jerome Bettis a decade ago or Peyton Manning now. But just because they made it look good and tight wouldn't mean PLAY doesn't determine the winner.

Maybe we'll get blown out 43-8 again—but I doubt it; that's not good for the brand, especially twice in three years, and I don't think Carolina SO good (or us SO bad) that they could lose all or most close calls and STILL blow out the Broncos. If anything, it's more likely WE blow out CAROLINA because the refs cut us a bunch of breaks we don't need; maybe that would teach the NFL to leave well enough alone. Or maybe they already are, and I and many others are imagining the whole thing.

There sure have been a lot of questionable postseason calls though, and, for SOME reason, those only seem to NARROW leads unless a popular team's playing.

BroncoJoe
02-03-2016, 05:31 PM
Joel is great at talking out of both sides of his mouth. Unfortunately, neither side makes any sense.

thunndarr
02-03-2016, 05:50 PM
I'm not saying it's fixed, just that there've been an awful lot of highly suspicious (but ratings-friendly) coincidences in the past couple decades. There's no smoking gun, and I don't think the owners would risk killing their cash cow with the discovery it's all for show. But most games have many close, often pivotal, close calls; would the League Office pre-advise refs to err on the side of the underdog and against the favorite, to keep games close, exciting and highly rated (i.e. profitable)?

Why WOULDN'T they?!


You answered your own question. Think of the ramifications of a "Keep it close, refs" policy becoming public. Next, think of the likelihood of the clowns running the NFL being able to keep such a conspiracy secret for decades. Finally, realize that it's way too much risk (possibly fatal damage to the brand when the secret inevitably becomes public knowledge) for too little reward (yeah, higher rated games, which, yes, I get, means more money. But enough money to offset the colossal risk? No way.)

Joel
02-03-2016, 07:20 PM
You answered your own question. Think of the ramifications of a "Keep it close, refs" policy becoming public. Next, think of the likelihood of the clowns running the NFL being able to keep such a conspiracy secret for decades. Finally, realize that it's way too much risk (possibly fatal damage to the brand when the secret inevitably becomes public knowledge) for too little reward (yeah, higher rated games, which, yes, I get, means more money. But enough money to offset the colossal risk? No way.)
I doubt any conspiracy's happening or necessary. But as long as play still decided victory I don't think public exposing what I DO suspect would harm the brand. Changing THE VERY RULES for the same reason hasn't; how's that REALLY different?

MOtorboat
02-03-2016, 07:38 PM
Joel is great at talking out of both sides of his mouth. Unfortunately, neither side makes any sense.

He described the NFL rigging games and directing officials to make calls for specific teams. He got called on it and is now trying to say he was talking about the passing rules.

Joel
02-03-2016, 07:49 PM
He described the NFL rigging games and directing officials to make calls for specific teams. He got called on it and is now trying to say he was talking about the passing rules.
That willful reading incomprehension is way off, but expected at this point. I dunno what part of "I'm not saying it's rigged" was unclear; you tell me.

ShaneFalco
02-03-2016, 11:21 PM
Is this thread still about Manning retiring? If so, I thought this was an interesting find from Schefter this morning - the Rams might have interest in Manning if he wants to play next year:



http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/14703972/los-angeles-rams-discuss-peyton-manning-option-2016

Kroenke sick of stealing cities football teams, now he has to steal the QBs.

Manning came to Denver because of Elway, he will not go to LA for Kroenkes rug on his head to play Seattle twice and AZ twice a year.

p.s. Who will own all of Kroenkes Sports franchises when he dies? Because his son can not own them all.

chazoe60
02-03-2016, 11:23 PM
Kroenke sick of stealing cities football teams, now he has to steal the QBs.

Didn't Kroenke techically return a city's stolen football team?

ShaneFalco
02-03-2016, 11:24 PM
he was apart of the move from LA in the first place!

Guy still calls the Rams, the Yams because he doesn't even watch the sport. He watches the Forbes 500 list.

thunndarr
02-04-2016, 01:03 AM
I doubt any conspiracy's happening or necessary. But as long as play still decided victory I don't think public exposing what I DO suspect would harm the brand. Changing THE VERY RULES for the same reason hasn't; how's that REALLY different?

Well, one thing, Vegas would have a massive problem with that. Or, at the very least, the people who lost money wagering on the outcomes of games...But two, yeah, it's different. "Play still deciding victory" becomes a much bigger "if" if the officials artificially make the games closer than the should be. You know the axiom "It's a game of inches" right? How many bad calls does it take to turn victory to defeat? (The answer is, just one.) So, your assertion that "as long as the game play decided victory" is simply null and void.

Also, changing the rules...Certainly you can see how this is different. I would hope you can, at the very least. (Hint: altering an ongoing contest, vs. changing the rules under which future contests will be played. Please, this is beneath you to even ask.)

Joel
02-04-2016, 02:42 AM
Well, one thing, Vegas would have a massive problem with that. Or, at the very least, the people who lost money wagering on the outcomes of games...
Only the latter, because Vegas doesn't care who WINS anymore than the NFL does, only that everyone's INVESTED, which close games only helps by stoking suspenseful interest. The guys who lost money might be pissed, but they're pissed about losing money, too: Does that change anything?


But two, yeah, it's different. "Play still deciding victory" becomes a much bigger "if" if the officials artificially make the games closer than the should be. You know the axiom "It's a game of inches" right? How many bad calls does it take to turn victory to defeat? (The answer is, just one.) So, your assertion that "as long as the game play decided victory" is simply null and void.
Ultimately, I agree, but that wouldn't be a deliberate fix, just an unintended consequence of artificial parity. I suspect it's happened a few times, too. For example, I think the NFL may have had more faith in Manning than the betting public did in SB XLVIII: So cutting Seattle breaks (e.g. on the phantom 3rd and G PI that yielded 1st and G when their lead was still only 8-0) didn't help the dog make the game close, but help a better team PERCEIVED as worse blow out a lesser one.


Also, changing the rules...Certainly you can see how this is different. I would hope you can, at the very least. (Hint: altering an ongoing contest, vs. changing the rules under which future contests will be played. Please, this is beneath you to even ask.)
Yeah, OK, that's different, but only slightly; stacking the deck instead of keeping cards up ones sleeve. Go back to SB XLVI, when NE* stopped NYs opening drive just short of FG range, but the Giants punter pinned NE* at the 2, Brady dropped back on 1st and G to heave one deep over the middle incomplete, but there was a flag: I bet Brady was as shocked as anyone when it was a safety for grounding instead of a 1st down for PI. Maybe if NE* hadn't been favored by 3½.... ;)

Again, no smoking gun, so I can hardly say it's DEFINITE, only a suspicion after a decade or so of highly improbable finishes, and FAR fewer blowouts than 10-20 years ago. Maybe there's just more parity now, hence the first 16-0 and 0-16 team just a SINGLE year apart, and TWO losing division winners after 90 years of NONE. ;)

MOtorboat
02-04-2016, 02:54 AM
Only the latter, because Vegas doesn't care who WINS anymore than the NFL does, only that everyone's INVESTED, which close games only helps by stoking suspenseful interest. The guys who lost money might be pissed, but they're pissed about losing money, too: Does that change anything?


Ultimately, I agree, but that wouldn't be a deliberate fix, just an unintended consequence of artificial parity. I suspect it's happened a few times, too. For example, I think the NFL may have had more faith in Manning than the betting public did in SB XLVIII: So cutting Seattle breaks (e.g. on the phantom 3rd and G PI that yielded 1st and G when their lead was still only 8-0) didn't help the dog make the game close, but help a better team PERCEIVED as worse blow out a lesser one.


Yeah, OK, that's different, but only slightly; stacking the deck instead of keeping cards up ones sleeve. Go back to SB XLVI, when NE* stopped NYs opening drive just short of FG range, but the Giants punter pinned NE* at the 2, Brady dropped back on 1st and G to heave one deep over the middle incomplete, but there was a flag: I bet Brady was as shocked as anyone when it was a safety for grounding instead of a 1st down for PI. Maybe if NE* hadn't been favored by 3½.... ;)

Again, no smoking gun, so I can hardly say it's DEFINITE, only a suspicion after a decade or so of highly improbable finishes, and FAR fewer blowouts than 10-20 years ago. Maybe there's just more parity now, hence the first 16-0 and 0-16 team just a SINGLE year apart, and TWO losing division winners after 90 years of NONE. ;)

"So, here's how it could be game fixing, but it's not actually game fixing..."

"No offense, but I'm about to say something offensive."

Typical doublespeak. See, if I claimed you weren't calling it game fixing, you could come back and say, but you did. Likewise. You describe game fixing in very excruciating detail and then say, "but I didn't say they did it!"

Comical.

Joel
02-04-2016, 05:18 AM
"So, here's how it could be game fixing, but it's not actually game fixing..."

"No offense, but I'm about to say something offensive."

Typical doublespeak. See, if I claimed you weren't calling it game fixing, you could come back and say, but you did. Likewise. You describe game fixing in very excruciating detail and then say, "but I didn't say they did it!"

Comical.
If it were FIXED, they'd predetermine winners. Many calls are so close they can go either way: Unspoken urging refs give the underprivileged charity isn't "fixing."

It's presumed you're about to say something offensive though; no need to warn anyone.