The National Football League: 2009 edition
- Thread starter AAAintheBeltway
- Start date
Hilarious picture i came across today.
Rothlessburger is a girl magnet
they like his big swinging dick...
contract
they like his big swinging dick...
contract
You know, the above pic shows the ACTUAL spelling of his name, you got all 3 parts wrong 
Did you notice that Kyllthasenshine?
Did you notice that Kyllthasenshine?
Quote from killthesunshine:
Rothlessburger is a girl magnet
they like his big swinging dick...
contract
Quote from Steelers Baby:
Hilarious picture i came across today.
So what if our mediocre QB is gay. At least he's not an "alleged" rapist. The guys he has sex w/ are consensual.
:eek:
Atleast my quarterback sticks to raping women who are of age as opposed to raping children. Look a little closer at the picture there is no way those 2 boys he is fondling are of age.
Quote from killthesunshine:
Bellichick screwed up big time. he bet the entire game on one play. he mucked it. what an idiot
GO COLTS!
No kidding. Sure, if the Colts only needed a field goal it may have been an acceptable gamble, but a 4th and 2 from own 29 with Colts needing a TD, and the Pats punter nailing them all evening, was just plain dumb. This isn't a case of Monday morning quarterbacking either. I was in a bar watching the game and the whole bar was calling for a punt before the play.
If Bill didn't trust his defense, the smart thing to do after the dumb 4th down play, would have been to allow the Colts to stroll into the end zone on the next play and at least leave some time on the clock for the Pats to get back to field goal range.
it's an acceptable gamble to go for it on their 29 on fourth down if the Colts only needed a field goal? huh?? is it more probable that the Colts would get a TD rather than a game winning field goal when the PATS failed to convert on their 29? are you still in that bar
Quote from killthesunshine:
it's an acceptable gamble to go for it on their 29 on fourth down if the Colts only needed a field goal? huh?? are you still in that bar
It was more acceptable than if they needed a TD. Much easier to stop them getting into the end zone with 2mins remaining than to stop them getting into FG range. In fact, I would say that the odds of completing the 4th down would have been better than the odds of stopping Manning getting into FG range with 2mins remaining. Therefor, IMO it would have been an acceptable gamble.
\
doesn't matter if Colts needed a TD or a field goal.. a bad call betting the entire game on that ONE play. the smart play is forcing the Colts to the long field. do you want to give Manning 70 or 30 yards with 2 minutes