Is NBC like the official Giants network? God

The BCS
Brett Favre
Around the Horn
Going out on the bubble
Dumb Girls

Amen X 100 ... Willie Parker has destroyed my fantasy football season...

These have ruined sports for everyone. Watching all the Illinois State Championship games over thanksgiving break without tv time outs was the most pleasant sporting experience I have had in a long while.

"beast", "beastly", "beastlike", "freak"

I'm tired of:

-All the NFL analysts over-analyzing every damn aspect of any "big" upcoming game.

-Emmit Smith. He is easily the WORST analyst I have ever seen. Everything he says is so false, so shaky, and hardly coherent. And to make it worse, he genuinely thinks that he is right/insightful/clever.

-Lack of trick-plays in football. This just in- THEY WORK.

-Mark May

yeah I never really understood this. is the mentality that it's more important to have your best players in later in the game? or maybe they think the player is going to foul out anyone so it's better to let him rest and play his remaining minutes with more energy?

sick of: seeing Riley pathetically scramble for a touchdown and get tackled 10 yards short

not sick of: seeing Stanford trombonist getting spiked

Maybe I'm an idiot -

but I've always thought players were benched in 'foul trouble' because teams can go after them. If a guy's got 4 fouls, it's only one more until he's within one of fouling out. since having five fouls is essentially like 'fouling out' (except that that player will be removed until near the end of the game), coaches don't like to put their players and themselves in that spot.

I don't watch much basketball and it's probably overlooking the fact that a guy fouling out isn't a huge sin compared to the amount of time he's going to miss - but there's the 'logic'.

announcers talking about everything but the game on TV

Agree with the OP on announcers who don't know the rules. A good example of this was Ed Cunningham in last night's Hawaii-Washington game. Hawaii WR catches the ball in the endzone, but the refs ruled he came down out of bounds. First replay clearly shows he got a foot down. Before the play is challenged, Ed Cunningham goes on a rant that the rules don't allow this play to be challenged...um...why the F not? Then he made a clarification: he said since it was in the endzone, that play could be challenged. WTF? Determining whether or not a wide receiver got a foot down can be challenged at any point, at any place on the field. How a football analyst doesn't know this is simply amazing.

1. Basketball coaches calling timeouts at the end of games down by 10 with 20 seconds left thinking they have a chance.

2. Sam Mitchell.

3. The Jets failure to stop the run for 10 years running.

4. Tommy Heinsohn.

You probably know more baseball than the average fan. I'm a casual baseball fan, and I probably couldn't tell you what every pitch was.

Not to take anything away from pro athletes, but in college our team only played one game ever against a DI school(Winthrop) and they had TV timeouts for that game...and its amazing how much more rest you get compared to normal games...really made the game a lot easier to play...of course we got killed though.

interesting point Assani, never thought about that.

TV timeouts only bother me in football. It's made it nearly unwatchable. Extra point. Commercial. Kickoff. Commercial. grrrrr.

Basketball there's only two per quarter and during normal full timeouts. No biggie.

I think it's correct to sit player X with foul count Y at time Z. Yes, there's the idea that the end game is more important than the early part. That could very well be a fallacy (doesn't matter when you score the points). The problem is, a guy with say, 3 fouls in the first quarter, is really exploitable on the defensive end. It gives the other team an edge by just attacking that

However, some coaches go overboard with it. The one I see most often is freaking out about 2 fouls. 2 quick ones early in the first is a concern, but anything else it's no big deal. I remember Sam Mitchell sat Bosh with 2 for the better part of the first half in the playoffs last year (I think game 1.. not sure). He ended up only player ~33 or 34 mins and ended the game with 3 or 4 fouls.

Letting guys play in foul trouble is one of the reasons I like Nellie a lot.

the end game is on average exactly as important as any other time. its leverage just has much higher variance than the first quarter. it either mean a lot more than the first quarter or a lot less.

basketball isn't baseball though, there's not a ton of benefit to resting your players and playing them if the leverage is really high at the end.

I understand that, but there's the whole "dynamics" crap about guys who "save up" for the fourth. I generally think it's a fallacy. Just look at the Cs blowing teams out in the first 36 only to let 20 point leads become 10 with scrubs in the 4th.

I'm just not confident enough to say that it's a fallacy without hesitation. Plus, fallacy or not, there's the real issue of having an exploitable guy out there. Generally, I think it's probably a bigger concern with front court players, especially 4s and 5s who patrol the paint.

True, I know more than the casual baseball fan. But I'm not berating the casual fans. I'm berating the announcers whose freakin JOB it is to TELL us what is happening on the field. And if you can't tell a fastball from a curveball, then please gtfo of the booth.

if ur starting c has 3 fouls 8 minutes into the game he's still a pretty big dog to get fouled out even if u dont bench him except for rest.

if ur not benching him due to fouls and the other team tries to go after him in order to foul him out they might get what, like two extra minutes from his backup on average. and that's at the cost of going to an otherwise suboptimal strategy all game.

Having the other team "go after" your guy in foul trouble has to be pretty suboptimal for them, or else they should be doing that from the opening tip. The basic idea is that you are going to get X minutes from him whenever you use him, with the only exception being if you bench him and then he does NOT end up fouling out of the game. In that case you wasted some of his minutes.

Earlier poster said something about getting the few minutes he has left when he is rested, I think thats about the only legitimate excuse for this but I doubt its the real one. The real one is probably the psychological impact of a player being "gone for good" and trying to avoid that at all costs.

He's only exploitable if you tell him to play like a vagina. Tell him to play his normal game and if he gets fouled out fine.

being forced to watch out of market games that end up being ****ty, and the network not switching over to an exciting or close game....i understand the the Giants game was close today great grand whatever, but cant we at least shift over the the Tampa or Cleveland game that were in the waning moments and something was actually happen like Winslows "non catch" or the Saints giving it away...

When there is a holding penalty that spring a huge run and commentators say that hold is going to take back a huge run.
That TJax is being unexperienced, but Favre is just a gunslinger.
Icing the kicker since it doesn't do anything.
John Ferguson Junior.

Hey dont you guys hate it when they refer to some guy as clutch? I mean whats that all about you know what I'm sayin amirite?