# Congrats Pack



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

Congrats to the Pack and their fans...

I want to go downtown right now and inflict bodly harm on Martz...
He had to get fancy with that stupid WR Reverse on 3rd and 4...


----------



## JACKIEGAGA (Dec 11, 2006)

That was a bad play call

Congrats Packer fans


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

And apologies to those that might have actually been using their DVR's and weren't quite caught up to live yet when they saw this thread title.


----------



## carlsbad_bolt_fan (May 18, 2004)

With a 4th & 4 and a young QB, why didn't Martz have something short called to help Hanie?

BTW, my wife is a Packer fan so she's happy. I'm just wondering about those last two play calls.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

carlsbad_bolt_fan said:


> With a 4th & 4 and a young QB, why didn't Martz have something short called to help Hanie?
> 
> BTW, my wife is a Packer fan so she's happy. I'm just wondering about those last two play calls.


The 4th and 4.. you could have called just about anything at that point, as the pack knew they wouldn't run it straight up.

It was teh 3rd and 3 that blew it.... run it down the middle, worse it would be is a 4th and 2, maybe 1....

Oh well... 
At least it turned out to be a game.... someone had to lose, just wish it wasn't my team...


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

Congratulations to the Packers!


----------



## TheRatPatrol (Oct 1, 2003)

Those first two TD by GB were very questionable if you ask me.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

Earl's Keys to the Game:

#1 - Cutler OverThrow to Hester, which would have made the game 7-7
#2 - GreenBay D holding Bears to no points till the 4th Qtr
#3 - Bears D holding GreenBay to only 14 first half points, when GreenBay spent most of the game in Chicago Territory
#4 - Cutler Injury, and not able to return especially haver Urlacher Interception...
#5 - Martz getting to cute at the end.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

spartanstew said:


> And apologies to those that might have actually been using their DVR's and weren't quite caught up to live yet when they saw this thread title.


If you're reading DBSTalk and not watching the playoffs live then you probably don't care that much about football.


----------



## codespy (Mar 30, 2006)

I was at Lambeau 3 years ago when the Giants beat us in the NFC Champ. with the temps below zero at the end of the game. It sucked, so I know what the Bears are going thru right now.

It was a hard faught game, and our defense saved our offense. Aaron was not all that sharp, but he will do better in Dallas.

Congrads to the Bears on a great season, and yes the Peppers hit was helmet to helmet. Looks like Cutler's toughness is being questioned on the NFL Network as we speak.

Time for another Miller Lite to Celebrate!


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

codespy said:


> . Looks like Cutler's toughness is being questioned on the NFL Network as we speak.


Of course it is...

Because he stayed on the sidelines... even though from what we are hearing on local radio, it was the trainers that pulled him... not Cutler saying that he couldn't go.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Earl - you're a class act as always. 

I sat with 3 Bears fans watching the game, and it was remarkably civil and good.

Then again...the good guys won... 

But the Bears - all but maybe Cutler - should be proud of a good season.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> But the Bears - all but maybe Cutler - should be proud of a good season.


While I was mad and frustrated with Cutler... that all went away when I heard what happened, and why he didn't return.

Cutler should be proud of his season... given where he was last year, the way everyone attacked him this year... and at times he was running for his life this year..

He got the Bears to the NFC Championship game.... There are 27 other teams that ended their season before today....

And now he will be attacked brutally by the media for the next 48 hours... and he will disappear till July when Training camp starts, if there is a season.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Earl Bonovich said:


> And now he will be attacked brutally by the media for the next 48 hours... and he will disappear till July when Training camp starts, if there is a season.


I suspect you are right...he got them pretty far...but his "inner will" will be questioned all offseason by the media. I've seen it already on 3 different post-game shows.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> I suspect you are right...he got them pretty far...but his "inner will" will be questioned all offseason by the media. I've seen it already on 3 different post-game shows.


Yep... they are bandwagon jumping... given that the TRAINERS had the final say.. It makes a good story, instead of talking about how close the Packers almost lost a game they completely dominated for the first 30 minutes.

Or how Brian Urlacher had a monster game, and did everything he could to keep the Bears in the Game...

Or how a 350lb lineman, had the the 6th sense to drop off the line, go half the field to his right and get a critical pick 6....

But no... it's let's continue to attack Jay Cutler...


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Earl Bonovich said:


> Yep... they are bandwagon jumping... given that the TRAINERS had the final say.. It makes a good story, instead of talking about how close the Packers almost lost a game they completely dominated for the first 30 minutes.
> 
> Or how Brian Urlacher had a monster game, and did everything he could to keep the Bears in the Game...
> 
> ...


You forgot the part about how the Pack defense stopped the Bears at critical times all day long and almost ended anything of a ground game. 

But yes...they'll be limited focus on the few things...and the QB tends to get the glory and take the blame in key games.

Both sides, I thought, had alot of key team plays.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> You forgot the part about how the Pack defense stopped the Bears at critical times all day long and almost ended anything of a ground game.


Re #2 in my post here: http://www.dbstalk.com/showpost.php?p=2692305&postcount=8

However, I disagree with the holding the run game... I think Martz screwed the pooch and stopped running... when he should have, as Forte was having some success.


----------



## bidger (Nov 19, 2005)

tcusta00 said:


> If you're reading DBSTalk and not watching the playoffs live then you probably don't care that much about football.


You limit technology so that one can't do both? I have Google Chrome open on a 23" monitor while I watch the game courtesy DirecTV2PC on a 42" HDTV. Hope you enjoy your frequent and abundant commercials. All I ask is that you start a thread dedicated to the game prior to kickoff and keep game-related stuff in that thread so that those us not still living in the 20th Century can enjoy the game(s) spoiler-free.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

bidger said:


> You limit technology so that one can't do both? I have Google Chrome open on a 23" monitor while I watch the game courtesy DirecTV2PC on a 42" HDTV. Hope you enjoy your frequent and abundant commercials. All I ask is that you start a thread dedicated to the game prior to kickoff and keep game-related stuff in that thread so that those us not still living in the 20th Century can enjoy the game(s) spoiler-free.


Honestly... seriously...

If you are even remotely on the internet now... or even right after the game, you are going to find out the score and the results.

It was IMMEDIATLY on ESPN, most news sites, facebook all over the place...


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

It's the playoffs.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Earl,

I think your analysis was excellent. And I'm glad you added the bit about Cutler being held back by the trainers. I wasn't sure what held him out, even if he held himself out, some injuries really are serious.

I was very surprised Hanie went in before the 4th quarter. Then when he got hit instead of sliding I wondered who the 4th QB was.

Assuming there is football next year, I can see Hanie having a chance to be a real QB for the Bears next year.

Cheers,
Tom

PS Brian Urlacher, a tough guy himself, stood up for Jay Cutler post-game.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Earl Bonovich said:


> Yep... they are bandwagon jumping... given that the TRAINERS had the final say.. It makes a good story, instead of talking about how close the Packers almost lost a game they completely dominated for the first 30 minutes.
> 
> Or how Brian Urlacher had a monster game, and did everything he could to keep the Bears in the Game...
> 
> ...


I certainly don't fault Hanie for that Pick 6. (well, yes to some degree, but...)

BJ Raji is VERY fast for 350lb. (or more...) But he (almost) NEVER drops back. He's almost always deep into the backfield even with double teams. 

So Hanie, a 3rd year rookie, can be forgiven for being totally surprised by that move.

Hanie played well considering this is as big a stage as the SB this year.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

The Packers were not all that impressive, despite their win over a Bears team that was poorer offensively and made more mistakes. When you finish the game with a QB rating of 55.4, as Rodgers did, that's nothing to celebrate. 

Poor coaching, Cutler's untimely injury, poor offense (which did include some bad Cutler decision-making while he was in the game), a bad offensive line (as usual) and some poor coaching and bad clock management are what did in the Bears. 

No matter, because the Packers have won the right to get their @sses whipped by the Pittsburgh Steelers, who will end up with a record 7th Super Bowl ring.


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

I don't think it mattered much. For a 7 point win, I never felt that a GB win was ever in doubt. I do see the Steelers beating them in the Super Bowl, however.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Lord Vader said:


> The Packers were not all that impressive, despite their win over a Bears team that was poorer offensively and made more mistakes. When you finish the game with a QB rating of 55.4, as Rodgers did, that's nothing to celebrate.
> 
> Poor coaching, Cutler's untimely injury, poor offense (which did include some bad Cutler decision-making while he was in the game), a bad offensive line (as usual) and some poor coaching and bad clock management are what did in the Bears.
> 
> No matter, because the Packers have won the right to get their @sses whipped by the Pittsburgh Steelers, who will end up with a record 7th Super Bowl ring.


Clearly there were times the Packers were not executing on offense. But I never discount the Bears Defense these days. They just know how the Packers operate.

And it is unfortunate that the QB rating doesn't include rushing TDs. 

I did not expect this many points. Both teams are very good.

I don't expect any can's of whoop butte in the SuperBowl. Both Packers and Steelers can play very, very well. And then the Packers will win. 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

Just remember last season's game when they combined for over 800 yards and Ben's last-second heroics.

Bears defense was good today for the most part, but turnovers, bad decision-making by Cutler and the coaches, and the other stuff I mentioned resulted in a Packers victory. They didn't win it as much as the Bears lost it.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

bidger said:


> You limit technology so that one can't do both? I have Google Chrome open on a 23" monitor while I watch the game courtesy DirecTV2PC on a 42" HDTV. Hope you enjoy your frequent and abundant commercials. All I ask is that you start a thread dedicated to the game prior to kickoff and keep game-related stuff in that thread so that those us not still living in the 20th Century can enjoy the game(s) spoiler-free.


I've thought about this for some time.

During the regular season, we ask that titles be somewhat discrete. There it is not unreasonable for someone to delay watch a game.

But when I'm watching a delayed game, I do not surf the web at all. If I'm delayed watching with intent, I don't want any clue. (I've even watched one game with the bottom of the screen blocked so I could watch another game with my son when he came home.)

And these are the championship games. If I surfed, I wouldn't expect anyone to hide the outcome. There are no competing games right now. You either watch or you get the news elsewhere.

I guess next time, you might want to time your delay better or stop surfing when the game is getting close to the end. 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Lord Vader said:


> They didn't win it as much as the Bears lost it.


But the Bears didn't lose it as much as the Packers handed them a loss. And the Packers didn't not lose as much as the Bears didn't put an effort in to winning it.

:scratchin

Never quite got that expression, to be honest, and I've probably used it in the past. It sounds silly now. Both teams played. One team played better than the other and won.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

Congrats Pack?

Is that some kind of Directv _loyalty_ gift? :grin:


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

tcusta00 said:


> But the Bears didn't lose it as much as the Packers handed them a loss. And the Packers didn't not lose as much as the Bears didn't put an effort in to winning it.
> 
> :scratchin
> 
> Never quite got that expression, to be honest, and I've probably used it in the past. It sounds silly now. Both teams played. One team played better than the other and won.


 I understand it, I have used it, but I ain't gonna defend Da Bears no more. 

I do expect the same thing in the SB that we got in the NFC Championship game: a good, tough, well fought game--with a Packers win.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Nick said:


> Congrats Pack?
> 
> Is that some kind of Directv _loyalty_ gift? :grin:


No, this thread is not in the wrong forum.

But thanks for thinking up a nice funny.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Tom Robertson said:


> I understand it, I have used it, but I ain't gonna defend Da Bears no more.
> 
> I do expect the same thing in the SB that we got in the NFC Championship game: a good, tough, well fought game--with a Packers win.


Yeah I guess it seems sore-losery when it's not used in the context of one of my teams... which is why I'll probably quit using it. :lol:


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Lord Vader said:


> The Packers were not all that impressive, despite their win over a Bears team that was poorer offensively and made more mistakes. When you finish the game with a QB rating of 55.4, as Rodgers did, that's nothing to celebrate.


Sorry sir Vader - but have to disagree.

You apparently missed the fact that they are the first NFC team EVER to come in the 6th seed and get to the Superbowl...not to mention 5 do-or-die consecutive games they won. They did that with 15 players on the season-ending Injured reserve list.

Most teams never even make the playoffs whatsoever under those circumstances. This season itself and getting to the Superbowl was *beyond impressive *to those who actually followed the path. Even we fans have to marvel.

On this day - the Packer DEFENSE outplayed the Bears defense....how ironic for the Bears to lose that way.


----------



## codespy (Mar 30, 2006)

After a miserable loss to the Lions, the Pack beat Giants, Bears at home. Then on the road Eagles, Falcons, Bears to round out the last 5. Pretty impressive stretch.

Favre struggled a little on dome turf, I like our chances with Rodgers....

Plus he gets to wear his favorite shoes for the finale........

All of us are just enjoying the ride right now. The Bears played a decent game and Urlacher is a class act. But #182 belongs to the Pack.

I hope the Steelers are favored to win by a small margin.....that puts more pressure on them. And there are a lot of folks who still dislike big Ben for his antics off the field.


----------



## Lord Vader (Sep 20, 2004)

Tom Robertson said:


> I understand it, I have used it, but I ain't gonna defend Da Bears no more.
> 
> I do expect the same thing in the SB that we got in the NFC Championship game: a good, tough, well fought game--with a Packers win.


Care to put a little wager on that? If Steelers win, I get to take your place for one week while you become a Padawan. (Anything that allows me to ban that grumpy James Long for a change!) :lol:


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

What I noticed in the Packers game, was the lack of any running game due to the Bears defense. In the Steelers/Jets game, the Steelers were allowing the Jets several 9 yard runs. If they allow Green Bay to get 9 yard runs AND pass, that will make it a totally winnable game for the Packers.

In any event, it should be a great game... Not so fun as watching this one with my Packer Fan family, but fun none the less.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

I don't think Green Bay stands a chance against Pittsburgh's defense.


----------



## codespy (Mar 30, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> I don't think Green Bay stands a chance against Pittsburgh's defense.


I think we can all agree their chances are better than if it was the Bears against the Steelers.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Sorry sir Vader - but have to disagree.
> 
> You apparently missed the fact that they are the first NFC team EVER to come in the 6th seed and get to the Superbowl...not to mention 5 do-or-die consecutive games they won. They did that with 15 players on the season-ending Injured reserve list.


Will give the Packers a ton of credit, for the 15 players on the IR...
And having played 5 lose and be done games in a row... that is a lot of pressure.

But please, spare us the: First 6th seed nonsense.

Seeding means NOTHING in the NFL Playoffs unless you are #1 or #2; 3, 4, 5, 6 all play the first weekend.

And this year most of all... the WORSE team in the playoffs, Seattle was a #4, because a nonsense rule that you can almost bet is going to be changed in the near future. (not that they wouldn't get in, but they most certainly wouldn't have gotten a home game)


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

codespy said:


> I think we can all agree their chances are better than if it was the Bears against the Steelers.


Why?

Any Sunday, Any Day...

One completed pass to Hester on that first drive.. 7-7, different game.

Field Goal instead of a pick-6 last week against Atlanta, maybe a different game.

Cutler doesn't air-ball, which turns into a pick 4 weeks back, Packers are maybe not in the playoffs.

You look at what the Pack did in their last two meetings with the Bears... they won by 1 score... even today's game... Their offense scored 2 times... and they dominated the field position game today... 2 times...

And if not for an impressive Pick-6 by a monster sized lineman... this may be a different ending... heck, it almost was a different ending.

The Bears can play... they had plenty of bounces their way this year... but you can say that about every team, just about every year.

The different from first to worse in this league is not all that much right now.

Pitt's defense is very good... equal or maybe even better then the Bears..
Pitt's offense may NOT be as good as Packers...

The Bears would probably have the same shot against Pitt...
We will never know... As that ship isn't going to happen, and next year... The teams will be different, the league will be different, football will change next year and beyond.


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

tcusta00 said:


> If you're reading DBSTalk and not watching the playoffs live then you probably don't care that much about football.


Couldn't disagree more. What does watching live have to do with being a football fan? You like commercials and halftime that much?

I always delay the start of sporting events. ALL sporting events, so that I can zip through commercials and skip halftime. Sometimes that means that I'm 10-15 minutes behind when the game ends.

What harm could there possibly be to have threads like this titled "Bears vs Packers: spoilers within"??

Even if it only effects ONE user, what's the harm?

It's inconsiderate, but yet it continues to happen for most sporting events. I don't understand why it happens here of all forums.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

spartanstew said:


> Couldn't disagree more. What does watching live have to do with being a football fan? You like commercials and halftime that much?
> 
> I always delay the start of sporting events. ALL sporting events, so that I can zip through commercials and skip halftime. Sometimes that means that I'm 10-15 minutes behind when the game ends.
> 
> ...


So when would have been the approrpriate waiting period... two weeks from today a few minutes before kick?

This was PLAYOFF Football, do or die. 
Even with stinking commercials. a LIVE viewing event.

Being on the internet, especially in a sports forum... the result was going to be spoiled.

So sorry I posted a title like this... but at least not prettend this was an airing of a sitcom, or just another regular season game that may be watched later.

Me.... If I can't watch live, don't care what game or what time... just tell me the score...

That's just my $0.02 on it.

Oh and for the record, this particular section of DBSTalk... doesn't carry the non-spoiler rule, like our TV Forum does.
Maybe we shoul ask the mods to set a pre-defined time limit, on when it is safe to be spoiler free.


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

Tom Robertson said:


> I've thought about this for some time.
> 
> During the regular season, we ask that titles be somewhat discrete. There it is not unreasonable for someone to delay watch a game.
> 
> ...


I've thought about it a lot too over the last several years as this keeps happening (and apparently always will). I wouldn't expect the outcome to be hidden on any other forum, which is why I don't go to any other forum. But on a forum where the majority of members use DVR's and time shift it just shouldn't happen.

*Again, what's the harm? What's the downside of not having spoilers in the title? There isn't one.*

I happened to be caught up today for the Packers game, but I wasn't for the Steelers game. So guess what? I knew I couldn't come to this forum. Is that the goal? Keep members out during certain times?

Might not be a big deal to most and generally it doesn't effect me either, but it's still a bit rude.

This is the forum many members go to when they're surfing the web and watching TV. Allowing spoilers in titles, prevents that.

After the pack game, I spent another hour surfing the web and this was the only site I went to that spoiled the outcome (for those who might not have known). It's also the only site dedicated to TV and DVR's. That seems backwards to me.


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

Earl Bonovich said:


> So when would have been the approrpriate waiting period... two weeks from today a few minutes before kick?


Why have a waiting period at all?

Answer the original question I posted Earl. What's the downside to having a title about the game without a spoiler??


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

spartanstew said:


> Why have a waiting period at all?
> 
> Answer the original question I posted Earl. What's the downside to having a title about the game without a spoiler??


There is no downside... You know the answer to that, and hence why it has been asked by you three times now.

But seriously... mountains out of mole-hills here.

If we want to turn this into a debate about thread topics... then it will be a short conversation, as we know the answer already.

But then again to the other point... if you were really intrested in not being spoiled about the result... then why be on the internet?

What is the harm about not going into a sports discussion forum, until the game that wasn't to be spoiled could be discussed?


----------



## codespy (Mar 30, 2006)

I just realized with the current discussion, If I am watching one of my sports teams time-shifted, I better not accidentally hit TVApps because showing all my local sports teams scores, it will spoil my day!

@Earl- I said before the start of Today's game, and assuming the Bears played the same as the last game of the season, if the Packers played the same as the last game of the season....we would likely not win. We needed to elevate our game.

We did not, but luckily the Bears did worse today.

Remember how many games we lost this season by a field goal? Traumatizing. Lovie still has a winning record against the Pack, but we won a very important game. There is no one on the Packer roster that has won a Super Bowl. Ikes. <Crossing fingers>


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

codespy said:


> I just realized with the current discussion, If I am watching one of my sports teams time-shifted, I better not accidentally hit TVApps because showing all my local sports teams scores, it will spoil my day!
> 
> @Earl- I said before the start of Today's game, and assuming the Bears played the same as the last game of the season, if the Packers played the same as the last game of the season....we would likely not win. We needed to elevate our game.
> 
> ...


Exactly correct...

Two good teams played today... each defense caused havoc for the other side. Difference was... the Bears Defense got hit hard first, broke, and recovered... but damage was done.

Green Bay... defense started strong, didn't break... until the end...

The phrase holds.... 5 more minutes, and who knows... but you don't have 5 more minutes, time is up... time to go home.


----------



## codespy (Mar 30, 2006)

Haine had a great game! He don't know what he can't do with the ball! He's got a good future ahead. The key for the second game in a row was keeping Hester in check. Special teams are always important- our rookie punter did pretty good again today.

Now back to my Filet with au jois enjoying this victory.


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

Earl Bonovich said:


> But then again to the other point... if you were really intrested in not being spoiled about the result... then why be on the internet?
> 
> What is the harm about not going into a sports discussion forum, until the game that wasn't to be spoiled could be discussed?


Because nowhere that I go on the internet spoils the result except for THIS site, which to me is very ironic.

And I don't go into a sports discussion forum, I come here and when I hit NEW POSTS (which is how I use this forum, and I suppose many others do as well), this thread will come up. Or if I use DBSTalk Spy, this thread will also come up. So, the only answer is to stay away from this forum in its entirety. That just doesn't seem like the way it should be.

It might be Mountains out of mole hills and to be honest, it rarely effects me (I think I've had one game spoiled over the last several years), it just seems weird that so many people are against a simple solution that would benefit others and cause zero harm. Zero.


----------



## Satelliteracer (Dec 6, 2006)

Packers open as 2 point favorites. The line had already moved up to 3 now. Should be an interesting game with two storied franchises.


----------



## codespy (Mar 30, 2006)

Yea I saw that. I will only guess at who Bradshaw is picking. 

I have a neighbor who is a Steelers fan. Time for one of those cheese and sausage trays like they had in the Sunday Ticket commercial.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Random things in no certain order...

1. Cutler is a jerk sometimes... and doesn't play consistently... BUT he always plays. I have no doubt that if he could have played the rest of the game, he would have played. You can blame him for some mistakes in the first half, but nobody should be questioning him for not returning after taking a hit to the knee.

2. Lack of offensive line protection + Martz playcalling is really the problem with the Bears offense. Martz is a genius but also his own worst enemy... many of his plays only work under perfect circumstances... which means good o-line + right call for the defense + timing + anything else working to perfection.

3. The Packers didn't play great... but they were good enough. In the end, it's all about the win... not if you won by 30 or by 3. Green Bay controlled that whole game, even when they weren't scoring themselves.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

spartanstew said:


> Because nowhere that I go on the internet spoils the result except for THIS site, which to me is very ironic.
> 
> And I don't go into a sports discussion forum, I come here and when I hit NEW POSTS (which is how I use this forum, and I suppose many others do as well), this thread will come up. Or if I use DBSTalk Spy, this thread will also come up. So, the only answer is to stay away from this forum in its entirety. That just doesn't seem like the way it should be.
> 
> It might be Mountains out of mole hills and to be honest, it rarely effects me (I think I've had one game spoiled over the last several years), it just seems weird that so many people are against a simple solution that would benefit others and cause zero harm. Zero.


What's the harm in just not surfing during the last minutes of the game?

I presume you already know some of the sites not to visit during a live game, just add DBStalk to the list, at least near the end of the playoff games. 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Regarding comparing Bears vs. Steelers or Packers vs. Steelers:

Any given Sunday.
I don't know how the Bears matchup against the Steelers. So I can't really comment.
Heck, I'm not sure how well the Packers matchup against the Steelers this year--and I watched some Steelers games.

All 4 finalists were very good teams. All 4 had opportunities--but the Any Given Sunday and the Matchups Matter rules both applied. 

I'm expecting a very good Super Bowl game. I think any combination of the final 4 teams would make at least a good game. 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

Tom Robertson said:


> What's the harm in just not surfing during the last minutes of the game?
> 
> I presume you already know some of the sites not to visit during a live game, just add DBStalk to the list, at least near the end of the playoff games.
> 
> ...


I understand Tom and this will be my last comment on the subject, but what's the harm in not having spoilers in the title? I (and I'm sure many) don't just surf during the last part of a game, I surf the whole game. Sometimes I forget that I'm not caught up to live and I surf the same standard sites I normally do (here, some droid sites, some deal sites, some work sites, my email accounts).

And why just playoff games? Seems much simpler to just not have spoilers in titles for any program (sports, TV, movies, etc.). Not sure why this suggestion causes such resistance and angst. Seems simple enough.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

spartanstew said:


> I understand Tom and this will be my last comment on the subject, but what's the harm in not having spoilers in the title? I (and I'm sure many) don't just surf during the last part of a game, I surf the whole game. Sometimes I forget that I'm not caught up to live and I surf the same standard sites I normally do (here, some droid sites, some deal sites, some work sites, my email accounts).
> 
> And why just playoff games? Seems much simpler to just not have spoilers in titles for any program (sports, TV, movies, etc.). Not sure why this suggestion causes such resistance and angst. Seems simple enough.


After hearing your POV I have to agree. I personally can't imagine not watching playoff football live, but I understand your point and don't see any harm in putting in a 1 hour rule (or more) to prevent spoiling. I watch all football live and the few times I've tried to watch it delayed it just didn't feel the same. But that's your prerogative and I think a rule should be considered.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

spartanstew said:


> I understand Tom and this will be my last comment on the subject, but what's the harm in not having spoilers in the title? I (and I'm sure many) don't just surf during the last part of a game, I surf the whole game. Sometimes I forget that I'm not caught up to live and I surf the same standard sites I normally do (here, some droid sites, some deal sites, some work sites, my email accounts).
> 
> And why just playoff games? Seems much simpler to just not have spoilers in titles for any program (sports, TV, movies, etc.). Not sure why this suggestion causes such resistance and angst. Seems simple enough.


Mostly because you're asking the many to conform to the requests of the few. When [strike]thousands[/strike] millions of other sites across the internet will be broadcasting the information.

You can't go to any news sites. They don't block the info.
You can't go to any sports sites. They don't block the info.
You can't go to facebook, twitter, myspace, or, or, or...

So during the time you're behind, just don't surf. Or don't be surprised.  You're asking too many people to think about too few people all the time. It just doesn't happen. 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

Tom Robertson said:


> Mostly because you're asking the many to conform to the requests of the few. When [strike]thousands[/strike] millions of other sites across the internet will be broadcasting the information.
> 
> You can't go to any news sites. They don't block the info.
> You can't go to any sports sites. They don't block the info.
> ...


The sites I frequent on usenet generally follow the rule of no spoilers in the subject line. A couple other forums don't do offtopic. Keeping scores out of Headers/subject lines is a simple courtesy.

At the same time, hitting UserCP rather than new posts will cut down greatly on the chance of a random disclosure- just an idea. NO guarantees! :sure:


----------



## codespy (Mar 30, 2006)

Tom Robertson said:


> Mostly because you're asking the many to conform to the requests of the few. When [strike]thousands[/strike] millions of other sites across the internet will be broadcasting the information.
> 
> You can't go to any news sites. They don't block the info.
> You can't go to any sports sites. They don't block the info.
> ...


And they better not look at any Text Messages on their cell phone either!

Mine was buzzing like crazy at the start and end of the game. With how quickly news spreads these days, you would almost have to isolate yourself from society to not get the spoiler. I will second your comments here also.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

codespy said:


> And they better not look at any Text Messages on their cell phone either!
> 
> Mine was buzzing like crazy at the start and end of the game. With how quickly news spreads these days, you would almost have to isolate yourself from society to not get the spoiler. I will second your comments here also.


I had 3 phone calls (two of which ended up as voicemails), at least 2 text messages, many facebook notes, etc. And several many emails. 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

codespy said:


> And they better not look at any Text Messages on their cell phone either!


I don't even pick up my phone, that's a lesson I learned long ago.


----------



## dettxw (Nov 21, 2007)

Nick said:


> Congrats Pack?
> 
> Is that some kind of Directv _loyalty_ gift? :grin:


Maybe it's included in the Premiere Package?


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

Congrats Pack and Arron Rogers. He has shown unbelievable grace in his handling playing second fiddle to Farve. He waited for his time, kept his mouth shut, lived under Farve's shadow even after Farve left and is taking his team to the SB. It can not get any better than that. Hard to find a more deserving person.


----------



## JACKIEGAGA (Dec 11, 2006)

Congrats to all the Packer fans well deserved


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Congrats to the Steelers too for getting to the Big Game!

It was great to be able to have Aaron seen on the big stage for the class act that he is...he is living proof that patience is a virtue.


----------



## Laxguy (Dec 2, 2010)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Congrats to the Steelers too for getting to the Big Game!
> 
> It was great to be able to have Aaron seen on the big stage for the class act that he is...he is living proof that patience is a virtue.


Isn't this and odd gesture at halftime??

<captured by iPhone from Samsung plasma>


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Laxguy said:


> Isn't this and odd gesture at halftime??
> 
> <captured by iPhone from Samsung plasma>


Warming up the ring finger? Naaahhhh... !rolling


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

Congratulations Green Bay on well-earned win.


----------



## Carl Spock (Sep 3, 2004)

JACKIEGAGA said:


> Congrats to all the Packer fans well deserved


We did play a good game yesterday...and I'm feeling it today. If I get by without a nap, it will be a miracle.

It was that house round of tequilla shots after the game that did me in.


----------

