For general discussion and debate. Possible talking point: Been a long time since I rock and rolled! Is Led Zeppelin the mother of all reunions:
[T]he band that played underneath those memories last night was not the one that misfired at Live Aid in 1985 or again in New York in 1988. This one was rehearsed, ready and out to kill. This band was Led Zeppelin in every way.
Page, Plant, Jones and Bonham the Younger opened their two-hour show with the confident wit and colossal nerve of “Good Times Bad Times,” the first song on Led Zeppelin’s 1969 debut album. Even before Plant opened his mouth, the original fury — a surprisingly lean, dub-like crossfire of cannonshot chords, frantic, gulping bass runs and polyrhythmic swagger — was in order and in force. “In the days of my youth/I was told what it means to be a man.”
Are you excited about this reunion, and willing to pay the big-bucks it's going to cost? Or, could you not care less?
Comments Policy
I would love to see
December 11, 2007 - 11:41 ET by sunandsteelI would love to see Zeppelin, dont care how much money.
What doesn’t kill you, only makes you pissed off. -Children of Bodom
I, too, would like to see
December 11, 2007 - 14:31 ET by Hero SquadI, too, would like to see that particular band. Unfortunately, I do have to care about how much money.
Saw The Police this summer. That was probably the reunion that excited me the most. And it was the same time as the reunion of my all-time favorite band, Genesis, which I did not catch. (Already saw them a few times though; when they get around to bringing back Steve Hackett and Peter Gabriel, then I'll be there, not caring about how much money.)
*****
"There are no stupid questions. Only stupid people who ask questions." - Chris Berman
As long as Plant doesn't
December 11, 2007 - 11:41 ET by mattmAs long as Plant doesn't try to reach notes he's no longer capable of reaching, I think it could be loads of fun... But it's still not Zep without Bonzo.
Matt
December 11, 2007 - 11:48 ET by Noel SheppardMatt,
His son's pretty darned good!
Count me in with the group that's excited about this reunion. Although I envision a concert where you're going to stand for two full hours -- which I hate!!! -- seeing these folks back together again will take 35 years off of me, and remind me of the easy days before I was a parent with too many responsibilities.
For me, it's been WAY too long a time since I rock and rolled! ns
No doubt. Bonzo Jr. is
December 11, 2007 - 12:02 ET by mattmNo doubt. Bonzo Jr. is great...
next to the beatles
December 11, 2007 - 11:43 ET by MivvisYES
ABSOLUTELY!!!
December 11, 2007 - 11:43 ET by notinstlWould love to see them play live.
More bad news on the MSM war front
December 11, 2007 - 11:50 ET by Prester JohnDoD Announces Recruiting and Retention Numbers for November 2007
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2007/12/mil-071210-dod01.htm
BOTTOM LINE:
All services met or exceeded recruiting goals for the month of November and have surpassed goals for fiscal 2008 to date.
AND
Active duty retention remains strong in all services. Army and Marine Corps continue to exceed retention missions.
AND
All six reserve components met or exceeded their accession goals for November 2007 and for fiscal 2008 to date.
yes but!!! i'm sure the
December 11, 2007 - 12:46 ET by TruthMongeryes but!!!
i'm sure the MSM will trumpet this positive news like nothing else ever
Led Zeppelin
December 11, 2007 - 11:53 ET by Noel SheppardFolks,
Get excited: http://www.youtube.c... ns
Dazed and Confused!
December 11, 2007 - 12:01 ET by Noel SheppardFolks,
You likely knew that Page came from the Yardbirds. However, did you know they did "Dazed and Confused" before LZ: http://www.youtube.c... ns
Yardbirds forever... the
December 11, 2007 - 12:11 ET by Jack BauerYardbirds forever... the band who had as consecutive lead guitarists.. drool over this...
Turn The Page
December 11, 2007 - 12:18 ET by NoMoreClintonsUnfortunately, Page's guitar is the only thing saving it.
We Miss You Bonzo
December 11, 2007 - 12:15 ET by NoMoreClintonsSaw the Zep live in 1971 in Syracuse. I forgot how Bonzo doesn't just "play" the drums, he attacks them. A good friend of mine is Charlie Martin who played drums for Bob Seger in the '70's (think "Live Bullet"). Now Charlie, before his accident, was considered one of the best drummers in rockdom but when he met Bonzo in an elevator once before a gig he was totally speechless, he held the guy in such awe. I'm glad his son has taken up the mantle.
NMC...
December 11, 2007 - 13:08 ET by Clear thinkerWas this the concert held at the Univeristy? If it was, I was there also.
Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/ Rush then stated that the conservative was Fred Thompson
War Memorial Show
December 11, 2007 - 19:06 ET by NoMoreClintonsNo, it was at the Syracuse War Memorial Auditorium. The university had no place for large concerts until the Carrier Dome was built in 1980. Now they can fit in 32,000 for a major show.
Like Father, Like Son
December 11, 2007 - 16:25 ET by Del DolemonteThere are currently a couple of other excellent rock and roll drummers who got the love of the music from their Dads. In 1995 some friends and I saw one of the early edition of Ringo Starr's All-Starr Band, and he had his son Zak on drums with him. Zak has since moved on to become the drummer for The Who and also Oasis.
And this past summer I got to see a semi-reunion of a highly underrated 1960s British band, namely The Zombies. Curiously enough, they have added longtime Kinks bassist Jim Rodford (66 years young!) to the band, and Jim's son Steve is their drummer. Jim, by the way, originally helped Rod Argent found the band in the early 60s, but never played with them at the time. Be sure to see them if you get a chance-their songwriting was almost on a par with the Beatles. And they don't charge an arm and a leg for tickets!
I'm wondering.
December 11, 2007 - 11:58 ET by Dave in TexasDid they have a replica of Stonehenge? Was it the right size? ;)
Absolutely.
December 11, 2007 - 11:59 ET by Seton MotleyI had every album when I was eight years old, but they were gone whilst I was still in single chronological digits, so I never had the chance.
If I do now, I will be there.
Seton Motley
Director of Communications
Media Research Center
I'm checking the care needle
December 11, 2007 - 12:05 ET by BruzillaI'm checking the care needle on the Led Zeppelin guage right now and... yep, hasn't moved off zero since I turned 25. I guess I'll sit this concert out.
60-70 year olds acting like kids? no thanks
December 11, 2007 - 12:26 ET by SouthJersey1953I agree. Who would want to see old men acting like they were still in their twenties?
Their turn in the spotlight is behind them. Someone else's turn now...
Ditto
December 11, 2007 - 12:37 ET by Prester JohnI'm with you.
There's an age limit on
December 11, 2007 - 13:12 ET by mattmThere's an age limit on Rock and Roll?
If there is, I'm gonna...
December 11, 2007 - 13:18 ET by Clear thinkerdo what my wife does and lie about my age ;-)
Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/ Rush then stated that the conservative was Fred Thompson
yikes
December 11, 2007 - 13:20 ET by MrShyIf there is, that's not good news for me :(
:p
http://www.mr-shy.co...
"Are ZZ TOP part of the Taliban?? Think on it, son."
-- Professor TP&C (Talking Points & Cheetos)
No.
December 11, 2007 - 13:24 ET by sarcasmoSee "Rolling Stones." The real question, considering both bands, is whether there's any price-limit on concert tickets. I'd love to go (missed my last/only chance because JB died) but the free market will bear a hell of a lot more than I'm willing to pay for the experience of losing a bit more of my hearing.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
There's an age limit on Rock and Roll?
December 11, 2007 - 13:39 ET by general company"If you are too young to die, then you are never too old to rock and roll"
Ian Anderson.
I saw Zep 3 times in my youth, if they come around here I will be there.
"Always do right. This will gratify some people, and astonish the rest". Mark Twain
Zep
December 12, 2007 - 01:12 ET by UnsaneHaving been a wee tot when John Bonham met his demise, I have been deprived of a Zeppelin concert. When I was in high school, I discovered the joys of this band when a friend of mine tossed me a cassette (!) with "Kashmir". To this day that is my fave Zeppelin song.
Thus, if they tour, and they come CLOSE to my house, I am there.
Earlier today, I heard the comment that they are too old and that they should hang it up. I argue this isn't the case; it's not like they are churning out albums worth of crappy material past their prime (like Aerosmith!!!). I suspect that Plant, Page, and Jones all understand that now there is a generation that loves their music but has never heard them perform in concert. If they make some bucks from the tour, that's great! - so long as I and others my age can see them play.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Unsane, Great post.
December 12, 2007 - 09:42 ET by LeonUnsane,
Great post. Kashmir is a good song, however, it was ruined for me by the atrocious Puff Daddy remix.
Brutal.
matt -- could be according
December 11, 2007 - 13:43 ET by Jack Bauermatt -- could be according to The Who...
I can see the point that
December 11, 2007 - 13:57 ET by mattmI can see the point that some of these people ought to retire...It's obvious that some artists are merely making a last gasp/grasp for the glory and money of the old days. Those types need to hang it up...
But Zep is a different story. They are on a different level than most bands. A reunion of artists like this (if they can still play) is totally justified, and I will go, if they make it to within 150 miles of me.
DEMS HOLD FIRE ON HUCKABEE; SEE 'EASY KILL'
December 11, 2007 - 12:05 ET by vrwc13h/t Drudge
Democrat party officials are avoiding any and all criticism of Republican presidential contender Mike Huckabee, insiders reveal.
The Democratic National Committee has told staffers to hold all fire, until he secures the party's nomination.
"He'll easily be their McGovern, an easy kill," mocked one senior Democrat operative Tuesday morning from Washington.
A close friend to Huckabee explains: "Look, Mike is Hillary Clinton's worst nightmare. They should be squirming."
v
Bring it on - Hail Hillary vs. Hope in Huck
I dunno...
December 11, 2007 - 12:14 ET by sarcasmoThey've had this up for a while. I suspect it's only an outline of what various Clinton-operatives really know. When the Democrats can believably tag a Republican candidate as fiscally irresponsible, it's not good news for Mike in the general election!
As for worst nightmares, Alexa tells the true story an antilibertarian-biased news media obviously won't. :) Too bad, boys, but like I said months-ago, it's "The YouTube Election."
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
Sarc, if it comes down to
December 11, 2007 - 12:22 ET by vrwc13Sarc, if it comes down to "hail Hillary" versus "Hope in Huck" over the issues of ethics (your link). Who do you think has more baggage, really?
v
Here's what a friend of mine said about the Hillary "scandal": "Calling the ashtray chucking, lamp smashing, profane mouthed, cattle futures fraud investing, money laundering, perjury committing, justice obstructing, document hiding, adultery abetting, secret service abusing, Vince Foster cover up aiding, carpet bagging, lying political phony a bitch is too mild a term." November 15, 2007 - by mikej
It's hard to say...
December 11, 2007 - 12:28 ET by sarcasmoI'm spending too much of my time trying to, for once in my lifetime, PREVENT such a "lesser of 2 evils" election "choice." Happily, and despite rampant media-bias, I think it just might happen. One thing's for sure (see links) -- I know Hillary's REAL worst nightmare.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
"lesser of 2 evils" election "choice."
December 11, 2007 - 12:51 ET by vrwc13I have seen Imus come out saying "Hillary is still Satan".
But have yet to see anyone seeing Huckabee as "evil".
v
The lady in...
December 11, 2007 - 13:05 ET by sarcasmoThis article might see him that way...And look what he was saying in 1998, before he was finished increasing taxes & spending. I may like some of his words then, but I don't have to like any of Mike's subsequent government-enlarging actions. I like this idea instead.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
vrwc... I will not vote
December 11, 2007 - 12:29 ET by Clear thinkervrwc...
I will not vote for either.
Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/ Rush then stated that the conservative was Fred Thompson
I will not vote for either.
December 11, 2007 - 12:47 ET by vrwc13...careful about saying that, or the wrath of RJ will desend upon you and your "marxist" leanings.
v
Here's what a friend of mine said about the Hillary "scandal": "Calling the ashtray chucking, lamp smashing, profane mouthed, cattle futures fraud investing, money laundering, perjury committing, justice obstructing, document hiding, adultery abetting, secret service abusing, Vince Foster cover up aiding, carpet bagging, lying political phony a bitch is too mild a term." November 15, 2007 - by mikej
haha, vrwc, every time you set new milestones for inanity
December 11, 2007 - 13:05 ET by RJ...you return to outdo yourself. ;^>
As I said, vrwc, you're no better than the "godless Marxists"
December 11, 2007 - 13:15 ET by vrwc13As I said, vrwc, you're no better than the "godless Marxists" RJ
v
If Romney is nominated and you refuse to vote, your non-vote will be exactly the same as a Marxist vote FOR Hillary or one of the other anti-religious left. RJ
still not getting that reading comprehension thing, vrwc?
December 11, 2007 - 13:18 ET by RJWhere did I say you have Marxist leanings? ;^)
RJ's style, still arguing
December 11, 2007 - 13:23 ET by vrwc13RJ's style, still arguing the semantics instead of the issues.
v
"…you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts." -the late Daniel Patrick Moynihan.
What's "semantics" about my question, vrwc?
December 11, 2007 - 13:26 ET by RJAgain, when did I say you have Marxist leanings?
You can't show that I did, so you whine "semantics." ;^)
clear thinker
December 11, 2007 - 12:58 ET by shawn228I am actually surprised you feel that way. If another 100 000 people thought like you"this is what liberals are hoping for" Hillary will have the Presidency and most likely a senate majority. You are willing to help put one of the people you despise most into the Whitehouse because the person that won the GOP nomination is not conservative enough?
shawn...
December 11, 2007 - 13:11 ET by Clear thinkerI respect and understand where you are coming from, but I am taking a stand for what I beleive in. I have made a promise to myself to never, never again vote for a RINO.
Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/ Rush then stated that the conservative was Fred Thompson
I'm with clear
December 11, 2007 - 13:46 ET by candanceIt's not that we want to abandon the GOP - it's the GOP abandoning us. Instead of voting blue vs red the GOP wants to make it blue vs purple and tell their constituents "vote for us anyway or you're stuck with Hillary."
People love to bring up Bush Sr back in 92, conveniently forgetting he lied about raising taxes and was a huge disappointment.
I've heard several people say the GOP's base is Wall Street and not the Bible belt. It's actually more of a two-pronged base and if the GOP loses the religious right they will never win the White House again.
Candance
December 11, 2007 - 13:55 ET by shawn228If you do not get the candidate of your choice i'm sure it will be very disappointing. Especially if the person that wins the nomination is Rudy Guiliani for his pro abortion views.
Lets look at what could happen in the course of 4 yrs if conservatives stay home instead voting.
: Cut and Run in Iraq
: Drivers Licences to illegals
: Free Medical for Illegals
: Gay Marriage
: Bringing back partial birth abortion
And the most dangerous of all. Hillary appointing people to the SCOTUS unchallenged because she might have 60 seats in the senate. Is it truly worth it to stay home to prove a point?
What gets me with the one's
December 11, 2007 - 14:48 ET by midnight cowboyWhat gets me with the one's in our party who will never vote, for a Rudy, Mitt or anyone who isn't in lock step lock step with their "values" is that they are standing on a very selfish pedestal in which they won't vote for anyone that hasn't the perfect record on social issues, just so they can have a clear conscience and have a express ticket to the pearly gates. What about their kids, when these people are gone? Their kids will pay for the selfishness of their parents who sit out an elections or vote 3rd party therfore electing socialists. They want to leave a country to their kids where abortion rights and gay rights advocates will be writing legislation. Global warming Nazi's taxing them into oblivion, and more power will be given to the NEA than four star generals.
This is the ultimate child abuse. Start measuring the burquas for your daughters.
Playing the "kid card"
December 11, 2007 - 15:02 ET by vrwc13Cool, So voting my "values" hurts my kids.
We are raising 6 (so far) kids with "our values" so they can out-vote the socialists who are not having any or only a few.
They will be able to take care of themselves quite well, thank-you.
We survived 8 years of the first Clinton, we can survive another 8 if we have to.
"I'm not going to have some reporters pawing through our papers We are the president." - Hillary Clinton, First Lady
v
...just remember:
I've read the last page of the Bible. It's all going to turn out all right. - Billy Graham
We survived 8 years of the
December 11, 2007 - 15:20 ET by midnight cowboyWe survived 8 years of the first Clinton, we can survive another 8 if we have to.
3000 people in New York didn't survive due to 8 years of Clinton.
I'm sure your kids will be model citizens with a great set of values. just like all of us want our kids to be. However, Christians have been persecuted in the past and it's not a stretch to see what the current crop of liberal socialist would like to see happen to Christians today.
I for one long for the day we can elect another Ronald Reagan to the white house, unfortunately that's not happening this election cycle, so we have to play with the cards dealt to us. It's not a great hand but it's better than any of the cards the democrats are holding. Holding for a better hand or folding only empowers the libs.
shawn...
December 11, 2007 - 15:36 ET by Clear thinkerAll those things you mentioned are terrible and I pray they don't come true. If you feel the same way, then why not elect a real Conservative? That's the logical thing to do!
Rush Limbaugh stated that of the top 5 Republicans running for the presidency, only one was a true conservative. http://www.fred08.com/ Rush then stated that the conse
Clear Thinker
December 11, 2007 - 22:01 ET by shawn228To be totally honest, I have not even decided if I am going to vote for the Democrat or Republican nominee yet, it is too soon to tell. I am an independent voter with somewhat of a liberal stance but the issues that I pointed out are probably the biggest reasons for myself for not voting for the Liberal.
Just like when Israel was
December 11, 2007 - 15:00 ET by Dan The Man 2Just like when Israel was sold into slavery and when they were walking the wilderness for another 40 the GOP may need to do this to get right with its base. If we dont then we will have sold out like the Dem party has.
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
don't put words in my mouth
December 11, 2007 - 15:16 ET by candanceI never said I wasn't voting if "my man" loses. Don't turn this into an assumption of what I'm going to do. I'm simply saying the GOP is shifting more and more left every election and then they blame the religious right for whining about it.
It's not an issue of "staying home to prove a point." Most conservatives probably will go hold their nose and vote GOP anyhow. All I'm saying is the resentment is building and even though half the country is licking their chops to vote DNC, it's our fault if we lose. That's simply not very good motivation.
Candance
December 12, 2007 - 01:02 ET by shawn228When asked if between Huckabee and Clinton, Clear Thinker said he would not vote for neither. That either meant he will vote for a third party or not all all. Your heading on your subject line said that "I'm with Clear" I just thought you were with him on his voting stance and I apologize for putting words in your mouth.
Ack! Shawn I'm sorry!
December 12, 2007 - 01:15 ET by candanceI didn't realize Clear said all that. I was just agreeing with him conceptually.
Fred gets the nod = got my somewhat reluctant vote.
Huck gets the nod = got my vote but I refuse to defend his mistakes.
Mitt gets the nod = got my vote as I pray he's sincere.
Hunter gets the nod = unlikely, but would get my happy vote.
Paul gets the nod = demand a recount (joke).
Rudy gets the nod = lock myself in my prayer closet and consult with God before I make a decision.
Huckabee has that releasing murderers problem also
December 11, 2007 - 12:29 ET by Daniel Baker9 of his commutations were convicted murders whose whereabouts are now unknown.
NFL Hypocrisy?
December 11, 2007 - 12:08 ET by CaringwhiteguyWhat's with the National Football League? They "police" everything players want to do that deviates from their dress codes. Some time back they prevented Peyton Manning from wearing a certain type of shoe to honor the late Johnny Unitas. Last night, however, a number of Atlanta Falcons were out freelancing on behalf of their disgraced former teammate Michael Vick. Several sported eyeblack with Vick's number or initials. The booth announcers reported that another player sported a "Free Mike" t-shirt under his uniform. The NFL has a thug problem, and did nothing last night to shut it down. "FREE JOHNNY UNITAS"!!!
Not to mention
December 11, 2007 - 13:55 ET by general companyThey blathered all night about Vick and Bush, somtimes ingnoring the game compleatly. Reminded me of Jay Leno, with all of the guest and Tony Corny asking stupid question as if everyone tuned in to here him instead of watching a Football game. Between Sunday and Monday night Football, the NFL is getting to be gossip land.
"Always do right. This will gratify some people, and astonish the rest". Mark Twain
I think the NFL has more
December 11, 2007 - 13:59 ET by BruzillaI think the NFL has more than a thug problem after the New England/Baltimore game. I think they are getting too wrapped up in business and not enough in the game.
Going back to the AFC Playoff Game in 2005, between the Colts and my wonderful Steelers, the attention of most of the country was not on the Steelers winning a fifth Super Bowl, but on Manning and the Colts finally winning their first. There were a lot of bad calls made, one so bad that the NFL had to publically verify how bad it was, and every bad call went against the Steelers. When the Steelers went to Super Bowl XL, the country now had it's attention focused on the Steelers getting their fifth, and now all the bad calls went against the Seahawks.
This year, we had Tape Gate, and the NFL did everything possible to bury the incident as quickly as possible, and the Patriots did the same... I mean when was the last time a team in any sport took a big hit and didn't challenge or appeal it? Answer: Never. The NFL told the Patriots to shut up and take the punishment, and the Patriots counted their blessings. Then, in the Baltimore game, the deciding touchdown was called a completed pass despite clear video showing that the receiver did not have controll of the ball as he went out of bounds. Hines Ward made a similar catch the week before, and it was ruled incomplete... the Browns had a similar catch just that afternoon, and it was ruled out of bounds... the Patriots must score to keep their winning streak intact, and it's ruled a completed pass.
With all of these repeat occurences of refs making bad calls that favor the "hot" team at any given time, I see a bad trend forming. How much have the ratings on Patriots games gone up, along with associated ad prices, since the Patriots winning streak became hot news? How many more millions of viewers are watching these games just to see if they'll lose, and how many millions will the NFL and broadcasters be out if they don't? Makes me wonder if the NFL isn't running some interference for the Patriots.
bruzilla
December 11, 2007 - 14:04 ET by shawn228Yes the call was questionable, but you cannot deny that the Patriots are destroying teams without the help of any video tape. You also can't deny that Brady was magical in his comeback victories this yr against the Colts, Eagles and Ravens. They might have a had a call or two go their way, but Patriots are 13-0 for a reason. They are best team ever assembled, with no weaknesses.
The worst call in the
December 11, 2007 - 14:42 ET by Hero SquadThe worst call in the Patriots-Ravens game was Billick calling a time out to try and freeze the Patriots on 4th down late in the game. Instead of getting tagged with a possession-changing loss that would've effectively ended the game, the Patriots got another chance and made the most of it.
Billick doesn't make that call, and none of this matters anymore.
So... will the Patriots score 70 vs. the Jets this weekend?
*****
"There are no stupid questions. Only stupid people who ask questions." - Chris Berman
If those refs didn't favor the Patriots,
December 11, 2007 - 14:46 ET by RJthey would have ignored Billick's attempt to call time out...dirty, rotten refs! ;^)
If it were a one-time thing
December 11, 2007 - 14:53 ET by BruzillaIf it were a one-time thing I would agree that it doesn't matter any more, but this is the third time that an NFL officiating crew has made blatantly bad calls that all favor a team that's of particular interest in a game. That's a trend.
Oh, fer cryin' out loud...
December 11, 2007 - 15:03 ET by RJ...earlier in the season the Pats were on the wrong end of a couple of atrocious "pass interference" calls. Bad calls happen every week.
Youse guys are just fulla sour grapes, and I suppose it just makes you feel better to "wine"... ;^)
I am with you RJ. I have
December 11, 2007 - 15:09 ET by dvdaughtryI am with you RJ. I have NEVER heard this kind of complaining about "preferential" treatment--ever. It's humorous and annoying all at the same time.
The Pats are the best and it's not even close. And yes, they are making an argument to be discussed amoung the greatest teams ever.
Get over the money and get over they are the best, because there is always next year.
For the record, I have no ties to any football team except my fantasy team. May Drew Brees take me to the promised land!
(but I would feel a lot better if it were Tom Brady)
Well, for once, the rich white man is in control. --Montgomery Burns
In the context of crappy calls
December 11, 2007 - 15:14 ET by sarcasmoAnd a recent NBA-ref mafia gambling scandal, I'd hope y'all can see the other side's reasons for being dubious, at least on that particular Monday Night. Refs don't make that much compared to how much loot is bet on these games, so corruption will always be an issue.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
No argument here, but its a
December 11, 2007 - 15:21 ET by dvdaughtryNo argument here, but its a broken record. Happens year in and year out.
Jordan was always fouled, Maddux got the black, and the Pats got the calls.
Welcome to another season of Pro Sports!
Well, for once, the rich white man is in control. --Montgomery Burns
Yeah, but
December 11, 2007 - 15:31 ET by sarcasmoThat ref-scandal in the NBA was a new element this year. Even though we're now talking about the NFL's refs, suspicions tend to cross leagues... At least, for the already-suspicious minds like mine.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
Bad calls are a part of the
December 11, 2007 - 16:49 ET by BruzillaBad calls are a part of the game, but there are bad calls and then there are BAD calls... the ones that leave even the guys in the booth struggling to come up with words to justify what the refs are doing. This is not a Patriots thing aside from the Ravens game. I saw this during the Colts/Steelers game in 2005 when it was meant to help the Colts, and later that year when it helped my own team win Super Bowl XL.
Also, I don't think it has to do with gambling. These three occurences were with three different officiating teams. Not to mention that instant replay would make it hard for any one official to be on the take and get away with it. I think this is the result of some NFL policy.
Not to take anything away from Gaffney, Brady, or the Patriots, who played a heck of a game that night, there was ample, undisputable, evidence that Gaffney did not have control of the ball as he went out of bounds. The Ref had to go under the hood, and if he overturns the call on the field, the Patriots lose, the streak ends, and public interest goes away. If he validates the call, the Patriots win, the streak continues, and public interest and revenues stay up. Something made him refuse to accept what was pretty blatantly obvious, and I doubt it was because he's a Patriot's fan or hooked up with gamblers. My guess is he got the word from the NFL that if it's close, any questionable plays will break in the Patriot's favor.
Bruzilla
December 11, 2007 - 17:19 ET by dvdaughtryMy guess is he got the word from the NFL that if it's close, any questionable plays will break in the Patriot's favor.
Do you really mean that?
Well, for once, the rich white man is in control. --Montgomery Burns
Bruzilla needs lots of cheese
December 12, 2007 - 01:07 ET by UnsaneFrom what I am reading, you only saw one minute of a 60 minute football game. (Patriots-Ravens)
In your rush to whine about an NFL conspiracy, you fail to grasp the cold, hard reality that the Ravens had COUNTLESS opportunities to beat the Patriots but blew them all, and rather than take responsibility, they decided to blame everyone else but themselves (a very Leftist thing to do, no?).
I will believe your little conspiracy when you can show me the following:
1) The footage of Kyle Boller being forced to give the ball to the ref, who then threw an interception at the goal line.
2) The refs who blocked the Ravens defenders from tackling Tom Brady on 4th and 6.
3) The refs who called the time-out when the Patriots were getting stuffed on 4th.
4) The refs who threw the yellow flag into the stands; or the refs who accrued 35 yards in penalties in an extremely critical situation.
Until then, your crying over the Patriots-Ravens game has no basis in fact.
And as for your crying over the other two football games: stop blaming the refs for the failure of the teams to NOT put themselves in those positions. It is only a matter of time until the next bad call, as the refs are in fact human, so what NFL teams and players need to do is not put themselves in the position where that can make a difference!!!
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
sarky, have you been hanging out with truthers for Ron Paul?
December 11, 2007 - 15:22 ET by RJ...might be all that conspiracy stuff is rubbing off... ;^) (don't get all tense, it's a joke)
Actually, Billick lost the game for the Ravens, NOT the referees.
If so...
December 12, 2007 - 01:30 ET by sarcasmoIt's fully "cloaked" (no joke, the NB crickets have been chirpin' for days on that one!)...
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul. (All purpose anti-slander-link, sadly-needed these days...)
Drew Brees..
December 11, 2007 - 15:16 ET by vrwc13... he's generous too.
v
go Boilers! The school of great quarterbacks.
Good For Him
December 11, 2007 - 16:43 ET by Del DolemonteDrew had a nice game last night. The Saints actually have an outside chance of making the playoffs after a horrible start, but will have to do it without Reggie Bush. Won't be easy, as they host Arizona (also 6-7) and then finish the season hosting the Eagles and then travel to Chicago, where they got trashed in last season's NFC Championship game.
Best team ever?
December 11, 2007 - 14:45 ET by general companyDont know about that, not even sure they are still the best in the NFL. Did you see what the Colts did to Balt? No ref help needed. Also Dallas is looking pretty good as well. Having the best record all year dosent put you in the SB, just ask the Chargers and Balt from last yr
"Always do right. This will gratify some people, and astonish the rest". Mark Twain
That's true, but the Colts
December 11, 2007 - 14:57 ET by BruzillaThat's true, but the Colts are not the "ratings team" this year. This year, the national attention has been on the Patriots, and there are millions more people watching Patriots games just to see if they'll lose. If the streak ends, so do the extra interest, ratings, and associated revenues.
SD Was Overrated Last Year
December 11, 2007 - 16:45 ET by Del DolemonteAnd their coach at the time had a sterling record for playoff game chokes, unlike Belichik.
I'm not trying to blemish
December 11, 2007 - 14:50 ET by BruzillaI'm not trying to blemish the Patriots. They messed up and they knew they had. My problem is with the NFL. These guys can spend weeks investigating some stupid, one-time, thing a player does, but needs less than a week to investigate an allegation of cheating over years??? C'mon!
I think the NFL has, since 2005 at least, made a business decision to try to enhance their ratings and revenues by helping along the teams that are getting the most attention. The Patriots are on the cusp of reaching a very high status, which is why I think the NFL squashed the cheating investigation, and why, like with the 2005 Colts, they have officials make calls to help the favored teams along.
Yet more NFL whining
December 12, 2007 - 01:54 ET by UnsaneI think the NFL has, since 2005 at least, made a business decision to try to enhance their ratings and revenues by helping along the teams that are getting the most attention. The Patriots are on the cusp of reaching a very high status, which is why I think the NFL squashed the cheating investigation, and why, like with the 2005 Colts, they have officials make calls to help the favored teams along. There isn't anything that isn't a big freakin' conspiracy to you is there? Or perhaps are you one of those fans who approach the game from a Socialist angle (WAHHH!!! The Patriots and Colts have won too much!!! Someone else needs to be given a chance!!!)
The Patriots and Colts have put together some great teams that will be talked about for decades to come, and they are also attracting the bandwagoners and johnny-come-latelies to the game. Just as it has always been. So freaking what?
Again, you really need to get over the Patriots-Ravens game (for starters). What would have happened if Boller had thrown a touchdown instead of a pick at the goal line? Answer: you wouldn't be whining about the final score.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
We're not worthy...We're not worthy...
December 11, 2007 - 12:12 ET by Santino CorleoneIt is like getting a chance to see the Babe Ruth of heavy duty rock-n-roll come back and hit a few out.
What rock fan wouldn't pay to see that?
Yes, Bonzo was the monstrous backbone of this quartet but what better sub than his offspring.
sadly I'm left out
December 11, 2007 - 12:21 ET by candanceYou're talking to a girl who was born in 1980 here, so Led Zepplin doesn't quite register on my "cool radar." My parent