Bored

They just said on NFL Primetime that Chad Lewis may have broken his foot on his second touchdown catch. Nope, although could make an argument for Super Bowl XIII and XIV. Super Bowl XIII was one of the greatest ever with the Steelers beating the Cowboys 35-31 and then in Super Bowl XIV the Rams actually were up 19-17 going into the 4th before the Steelers took over and won 31-19. Super Bowl XVI and Super XVII were both competitive games also although neither was a classic down to the wire game.

This is definently a better Patriots team than their previous two championships and when you consider how inferior the NFC was to the AFC this year I think it would be a pretty big upset for the Eagles to win. Patriots 27, Eagles 13

XXXVIII: close XXXVII: blow out XXXVI: close XXXV: blow out XXXIV: close XXXIII: blow out XXXII: close XXXI: blow out XXX: sorta close XXIX: blow out XXVIII: close at halftime, then a blow out XXVII: blow out XXVI: blow out XXV: close XXIV: blow out XXIII: close XXII: blow out XXI: blow out XX: blow out XIX: blow out XVIII: blow out XVII: close the majority of the game XVI: was a blow out, then became close XV: blow out XIV: close most of the game XIII: close XII: blow out XI: blow out X: close IX: not a classic blow out but not close VIII: blow out VII: not as close as the score VI: blow out V: close IV: blow out III: not as close as the score II: blow out I: blow out

They are honoring Super Bowl III this year? Uhhhh why? Yes I know the significance of the game but it's not like it's the 50th anniversary.

They really need to stop doing these onfield trophy presentations when the visiting team wins.

Might as well start the Super Bowl thread, this game is over. How did the Steelers go 15-1? To match the likes of the '84 49ers and '85 Bears just seems impossible from such an ordinary team.

But you can't put value on this... http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/sports/bb/3005449 Why do baseball writers even get paid?

Oh god here comes the race angle. Doug Williams did it 17 years ago, who fucking cares now?

Lowe wasn't on the original list and besides he signed with the team that actually plays in L.A., the Dodgers.

I'll have seven if the Orioles sign Delgado.

That's why I said they have to almost run the table or win the Pac-10 tournament. They've scored double digit wins on Arizona and UCLA the last two weeks so the beginning of this potential turn around wasn't against the bottom of the conference.

Ugh, he's not going away! http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/news/mlb...s_mlb&fext=.jsp

USF (San Francisco not South Florida) upset Gonzaga tonight. Stanford beat UCLA at Pauly Pavillion for a record eight straight time, 75-64. Looks like they've turned the corner on the season but damn that horrible start has put them in a position where they have to almost run the table (probably two losses at the most) to ensure themself a 11th straight trip to the tournament.

Dug up? Shit I posted that back in October when you were acting like such a fucking tool in the World Series thread. And you are the master of grinding threads to a halt in this folder.

It's not about you being a fan of certain teams it's your laughable assertion that you're a diehard fan of these teams, most specifically the Red Sox. I consider myself a San Jose Sharks fan and followed the team very closely during the mid to late 90's but in recent years I've lost almost all interest in hockey. Now I would still in the past check Sharks scores and see where they were in the standings and I did watch some of the Western Conference finals last year. Does this make me a diehard fan of the Sharks because I want them to win and check on how they are doing from time to time? Hell no. It's insult to anyone who does have real passion for the team for me to consider myself a diehard Sharks fan. Same reason why it's an insult, okay not even that, hilarious that you call yourself a diehard Red Sox fan.

Dusty don't like them young players. They don't have INTAGIBLES~.

Well now Rickey has to comeback.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/b/blackbu02.shtml

Okay Dama you've forced me to pull this one out of the moth balls again. How about those Red Sox?

So how many games do Jordan and Mondesi play combined this year? I'll go with 93.

This is a week old but I never even heard about this. Maybe I should start watching SportsCenter again? Nah. How hard up can a team be for some publicity? http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=1965506

Now this is just one source but by Baseball Prospectus' Defensive Efficiency by team, the Rockies were the worst defensive team in the N.L. last year. I was just going to look up if any Rockie starter has ever had two straight sub-4.00 ERA seasons and then I learn Joe Kennedy was the first Rockies starter to ever have a sub-4.00 ERA. Armando Reynoso finished right at 4.00 in 1993.

Rollie Fingers bounced between the starting rotation and the bullpen early in his career. He went 7-17 with a 4.32 ERA (back when the league average was well under 4) in 29 career starts.

Smoltz was for injury reasons and Eckersley at that point in his career was no longer an effective starter.

I'm a big proponent of trying out failed starters as closers and set up men. I also personally think LaTroy Hawkins is still a perfectly fine option at closer, another failed starter at one point.