Jump to content
Brewer Fanatic

OldSchoolSnapper

Verified Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    12,945

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    29

 Content Type 

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Milwaukee Brewers News, Rumors & Analysis

2026 Milwaukee Brewers Top Prospect Rankings

Milwaukee Brewers Videos

2022 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Milwaukee Brewers Trade & Free Agent Rumors

Milwaukee Brewers Fan Guides & Resources

2023 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2024 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

The Milwaukee Brewers Players Project

2025 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

2026 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks & Signing Bonuses

Store

Downloads

Gallery

Everything posted by OldSchoolSnapper

  1. OldSchoolSnapper
    I didn't go on about lasers bud, and I don't want those either. Someone else brought them up and I merely said the tech is there and isn't used because of the officials union. My argument was never to fix the situation with lasers, I think you skipped a few posts because I didn't start that conversation. My reason for scrapping replay rather than improving is that it has been around for 20 years and is actually getting worse. That ship has sailed. And its existence has not really cut back on controversy at all, it just gave way to everyone losing their minds about previously mundane missed calls. We have a Dez Bryant catch, change the rules, everyone loses their minds over something new. Rather than continue feeding this addiction for being right at all costs and destroying pace of game, I would simply find the TV product better if it just died altogether. When something like the Fail Mary can occur (yes I know they were replacements but there have been other questionable/blown other calls) replay doesn't work as intended. We got obsessed with something that made sense on paper and when it's put into practice it has done more harm than good. There are still a hundred Clay Matthews roughing penalties and the like. We'll always have the bad calls so I accept all of it. I would rather have the finality and excitement of living with the play than sitting through six disruptions to the pace every week to get 60% of the calls right. I don't know what else can be said on the topic though. I simply hate it and don't think it has worked.
  2. OldSchoolSnapper
    Those conversations are hard to quantify because the state school system has to be priced for the state since that is where most people are coming from. WI is not really a high-income state and the COL in the midwest in general is very low compared to the country, so the tuition is naturally going to be lower there than a lot of places. I do agree though that the selection of satellite schools is very good.
  3. OldSchoolSnapper
    You still have plenty of those suspenseful moments. The Richard Rodgers Hail Mary, Crosby beating the Cowboys in the divisional round. Or the playoff against the Cowboys prior when Cobb caught that 3rd and 10 to seal it against the Cowboys. How about John Kuhn throwing the block against Julius Peppers to save Rodgers who finds Cobb to win the North? Or Shields picking off Cutler to send us to the Super Bowl? There are many, many suspenseful plays that don't have a reviewable element so I'm not sure how you can say replay has taken a hatchet to the suspense of the game. If they're reviewing it, it's likely a controversial play which they want to ensure is called correctly which is exactly the original intent. You don't need to look past yesterday's game when a dumb replay sucked the joy out of one of those exact moments and I got up to pee and refill a water while waiting for them to say we won. But this is going nowhere. Most of you want replay and I don't, and nobody is going to convince me it's been good for sports.
  4. OldSchoolSnapper
    Wait? Are we supposed to live with human error or replace them completely? I don't get what this comment is supposed to achieve other than just being trollish. Because I hate replay and want it gone doesn't mean I think that's ever going to happen. The tech in sports is all underutilized because of officials unions. There is no reason to still be using geezer eyesight to determine balls and strikes if we're going to be so hell bent on getting everything right. Either get it right to the best of your ability or scrap it. We're not doing our best. Most of the issues like knowing when a guy is down, knowing when a play is dead, are not as complicated as they sound to the people that know this stuff inside and out. Those are all superficial issues that could be resolved if that was really the goal here. I feel like if we can build a responsive robot that plays soccer and were doing that a decade ago the ability to solve those things is very likely out there.
  5. OldSchoolSnapper
    There's no way I believe you can't put a sensor in the ball and a laser on the goal line/first down be done with it. The officials union would correctly see that as a step toward removing them from the game completely and fight it like hell.
  6. OldSchoolSnapper
    I mean, even Sherman's decision wasn't that bad. I don't have the details in front of me but did he punt on 4th and 1 in the playoff game? I think it was something like 17-14 at the time so he put the game in his defense's hands, and they then forced 4th and 26. It worked up to that moment and the door should've been slammed. There are variables that made it worse but I could be mixing seasons. I think they had not been stopped on 4th and 1 all year and Ahman Green had like 1900 yards that year.
  7. OldSchoolSnapper
    Reviewable pass interference is going away, they clearly just tossed it in to make it seem like they are doing something about the officials and will eventually wipe it off the books when the coaches complain that it's pointless. Also, this isn't a matter of replay adding to the ToG. It's a matter of replay taking a hatchet to the suspense of the game, which I cannot even grasp being a debatable point. It absolutely sucks. On ANY remotely borderline play the euphoria has been replaced by waiting to see something in UHD at 1/10 speed to make sure you can still be happy about it. And then sometimes they still tell you that you're wrong anyway (even when it's highly debatable) and we have to do it over. Their interpretations lack any consistency so we STILL end up arguing about 1/4 of the calls even after the 15 verification looks. We had the tech to put a laser in the ball 15 years ago and end the goal line nonsense.
  8. OldSchoolSnapper
    I've said many times I'm in the minority, but calling it vast and sweeping isn't right. A quick Googling brings up a lot of articles regarding the same endorphin type point, the same arguments about killing TV, etc. I'm not talking one or two either, there are hundreds. I did not come up with this stuff, a lot of people hate it. Including the ex-player that called the game yesterday and has been pretty vocal about hating replay.
  9. OldSchoolSnapper
    I think you can much more easily make the argument against it in the case of Sherman who I believe was clinging to a 3-point lead. I would never punt in that spot with a 3-point lead, don't even think I would punt with a 7-point lead. But it's that safety of the 8 points, knowing that even IF they score they still have to get in again, that makes me fine with the punt.
  10. OldSchoolSnapper
    Of course they are important, they are about 600x more likely to buy a $300 jersey.
  11. OldSchoolSnapper
    I remember when we knew the outcome at 0:00 and we all found ways to live with it. I think the point is that there is a whole lot of waiting "just two minutes" over the course of an NFL game and sometimes for stupid and obvious stuff. I.e. 3-4 minute commercial breaks to make sure someone didn't step out of bounds at the 1 on first and goal in the 2nd quarter. I hate all of it. Scrap it all and go back to human error. We all lived for decades with receptions bouncing off the turf and such. This endless obsession with getting it right like we are solving a murder is ruining sports.
  12. OldSchoolSnapper
    Oh, I have no problem with the drinking, so long as it's not sloppy and spilling on me. I mean I was there once. That was how I attended games from age 17-25. And also just cool it on the F bombs around families. I don't really take kids to night games on the weekend but I think minimal decorum is a reasonable request.
  13. OldSchoolSnapper
    You're making it sound like I'm the only person in the universe who's brought up how badly replay has hampered televised sports, or how bad the NFL's TV product has become. I'm not. Far from it. The NFL is the absolute worst at this. Usually in the NBA you don't even know it's being reviewed. I think 130 second delay in announcing touchdown is insane. The only reason we think that's normal now is that we've been conditioned. No, it has nothing to do with my priorities or life cycle. The televised product is hands down worse, and replay is a huge reason why. I absolutely would be OK with losing games on bad calls, because that is still happening at least more than it should be if we're able to replay the calls to "get them right." We're still getting them wrong and still randomly enforcing which things we actually call on the replays. So badly to the point the Packers didn't even challenge that abhorrent OPI because they knew it wouldn't get changed. NFL replay is an agonizing molasses mess, I'm honestly dumbfounded by how many people are OK with it. I guess everyone just loves football too much to care.
  14. OldSchoolSnapper
    They are similar though? The people you usually see out for runs aren't people that actually "need" to be running. The people who tend to be stingiest with money can afford not to be. People stick to the habits that got them where they are most of the time. I didn't make that analogy, but I thought it was pertinent. Let's veer the "why was the other thread locked" thread off course!
  15. OldSchoolSnapper
    He looked a lot better yesterday. Some of the chatter may have gotten to him.
  16. OldSchoolSnapper
    Either you have to live with that reality or live with the reality that somewhere along the line, an egregiously bad fumble call (Jerry Rice, 1998) or other egregiously bad reviewable play is going to decide an important game. Those are still happening though. Even if they weren't, I can in fact live with them when the trade off is awful TV. I realize I'm in the minority there but getting sports calls right is not so important to me that I demand it in exchange for destroying the game itself. I mean a lot of studies have been done about the connection people feel to sports and what brings them back, and that endorphin rush a fan experiences in a moment like that. Even though your team usually disappoints you, you always come back for that feeling. I can honestly say that I never got that rush yesterday. As soon as he hit the ground, my conditioning immediately went to "And now we have to look at this." 15 years ago I am storming through the house jumping up and down. I think that sucks.
  17. OldSchoolSnapper
    Good thing we had to sit around and wait 5 minutes for a review that didn't show anything. Just love instant replay and the suspense it has brought to the game. Football was such a boring sport before we reviewed every important play.
  18. OldSchoolSnapper
    They couldn't because of the clock. Might have been able to with a shorter field.
  19. OldSchoolSnapper
    I think we all watched the game so you can save the condescending comments. He should have been able to score at the end of the first half too and he didn't. That Rodgers is going to Canton is of no significance to their offense today and their offense today is not all that amazing. What's funny about this to me is that the argument you're making is the same one that could be used to punt. Force them to use very little time to go the length of the field, which they had to do and ran out of time. Their entire drive is a lot more relaxed if it starts at the 40 with an extra 10 seconds. To be clear, I would have been OK with going for it, but the 8-pt lead really puts me over the edge on punting. 8 points and 90 yards is something I'm OK with. You're acting like this was some god awful decision and it wasn't. Funny enough it also wasn't bad when Sherman did it. That they forced Philly into 4th and 26 should have ended that game. Memory is fuzzy but weren't the Packers up 3? That's a far cry from 8.
  20. OldSchoolSnapper
    You make quite a leap in that post. Odds are "very good" that they score, get the 2, win the toss, score a TD and end the game? No they aren't. I'm pretty sure the odds would still favor the Packers even if the Panthers score a touchdown. The Packers offense isn't that great either. Both units are pretty middling, probably on the higher ranking end of the 11-20 region, so even more impressive they've managed 8-2. The Packers also got absolutely throttled at the 1-yard-line. I'm not sure why risking 4th and 3 to give that vulnerable defense a short field is such a clearly better idea especially considering that Carolina ran out of time.
  21. OldSchoolSnapper
    It veered off the OP question and into a student loan discussion, the word "government" was used which is automatic lockage. I agree though, it seemed pretty benign and remained civil.
  22. OldSchoolSnapper
    I would have punted up by 8. That's what I was talking about earlier with it being hard to measure what the other team does re: the 2-pt conversion. If I'm up 7 I feel more inclined to end the game. But the cushion of knowing I CAN'T lose in regulation makes it more tempting to try to pin them at the 10. I don't think it's a bad move expecting your defense to stop a TD and 2-PT in a blizzard.
  23. OldSchoolSnapper
    They never actually return punts so that's not that surprising to hear. I don't think ST really are what they used to be. Can you make field goals and directional punt? That is really the only measure that matters. The way offense is played and penalties are called I just don't feel like an extra 4 yards on a PR are that significant. I think it's reflected in the resources teams use on those units now. Honestly the only thing that sticks out to me without looking it up, is that the Packers seem to struggle with starting field position a lot. Like punting out of their side of the 20 a lot and having teams start drives at midfield. Stats might show Scott having a bad year, but he's a good punter, and Crosby is a good kicker. I'll take that over a few more yards on punts.
  24. OldSchoolSnapper
    The Giants game scared me when they were 2-4 or whatever but that team is bad. It's still one they can lose but the Packers have as big of a 1-game lead as you can have. I really can't see them losing to Detroit or Chicago which really forces Minnesota to pick up two, which as I said earlier forces a 5-1 finish and the Packers going 3-3. It can happen, but if the Packers win a game they shouldn't, like SF, it's all but over. If they beat the Vikings again they would probably clinch before the final game.
  25. OldSchoolSnapper
    I feel like IG is called 5 times a year. I'm just so used it to not being called that I don't care.
×
×
  • Create New...