2008 NFL Season

Feanor · Post by **Feanor** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 9:48 am

Rodster wrote:On a serious note i'd like to see the NFL crack down on the huge hair coming out of the back of the helmets of certain players. It looks freakin ridiculous.

Every time I looked at the AFC game my wife made a comment about Polamalu's hair, so you're not the only one who wants something done.

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 9:58 am

Feanor wrote:
Rodster wrote:On a serious note i'd like to see the NFL crack down on the huge hair coming out of the back of the helmets of certain players. It looks freakin ridiculous.
Every time I looked at the AFC game my wife made a comment about Polamalu's hair, so you're not the only one who wants something done.

We can only hope. His hair looks like cotton candy and looks ridiculous.

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 10:33 am

I was more interested in Jeff Reed's hair. I might have to die my hair blonde if the Steelers win the Super Bowl! Polamalu had a interception for a TD, a huge tackle for a loss on Flacco's bootleg, several knockdowns, and was a big reason the Steelers stopped Baltimore on the 4th and one. You'd think NFL fans would be admiring his play rather than paying attention to his hair

The Steelers won't be able to make as many mistakes if they want to beat the Cards. The defensive TD saved the day as the offense dropped passes, took stupid penalties, and had poor clock management (including a totally unnecessary "injury" timeout after Sweed's dropped TD) and the special teams allowed a huge punt return and punted poorly. As much as I respect the Ravens, the Steelers should have won the game by 3 TDs. In fairness to the Steelers' offense, the Ward injury obviously took them out of sync as several times you could see fellow receivers telling Limas Sweed what to do.

Speaking of Limas Sweed, if Steelers receivers are going to continue to hit defenders when they aren't looking then I suggest that defenders start looking. That block ensured that Heath Miller got out of bounds and if it wasn't for poor clock management would have helped secure 3 points at the end of the half.

greggsand · Post by **greggsand** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 1:54 pm

Early lines have Pitt -6.5 with an Over/Under of 47. I'll take ARZ+6.5 & the over.

Jackdog · Post by **Jackdog** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 2:02 pm

Leebo33 wrote:
Speaking of Limas Sweed, if Steelers receivers are going to continue to hit defenders when they aren't looking then I suggest that defenders start looking. That block ensured that Heath Miller got out of bounds and if it wasn't for poor clock management would have helped secure 3 points at the end of the half.

He also prevented an interception which helped lead to 3 points for the Steelers.

Congrats on your team making it to the big game again.

Danimal · Post by **Danimal** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 2:37 pm

Yesterday's games where entertaining but the result have pretty much moved my super bowl interest level to about 5% which is something very hard to accomplish. I don't care enough about either team that I think I'll be even mildly entertained. I guess the 5% come from Fitzgerald he is about the only likable guy I can think of on either team.

Good luck to both teams and their fans, I hope it's a good game but I just don't see it.

greggsand · Post by **greggsand** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 2:51 pm

Danimal wrote:Yesterday's games where entertaining but the result have pretty much moved my super bowl interest level to about 5% which is something very hard to accomplish. I don't care enough about either team that I think I'll be even mildly entertained. I guess the 5% come from Fitzgerald he is about the only likable guy I can think of on either team.

Good luck to both teams and their fans, I hope it's a good game but I just don't see it.

(I'm a cards fan so it's all 'all good' to me)

I think the Warner story is pretty cool. Also, Whisenhunt vs his old team puts an interesting spin. It's bizarre to have a NFL team that's been around for so long FINALLY see a superbowl. Unfortunately, all of this will be beat to death by espn by the end of week 2 (like usual).

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 6:04 pm

What's not to like about Ben Roethlisberger or Troy Polamalu who have never held out, never complained, or ever got in trouble with the law? I guess people could be bothered by Roethlisberger's faith or Polamalu's hair. Or an undrafted player like James Harrison who works his ass off on defense *and* special teams coverage? Or "lunch pail" guys Heath Miller, Aaron Smith, Brett Keisel, James Farrior, Deshea Townsend, etc?

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 6:08 pm

Who the hell cares about a player's hair, and what difference does it make?

Seriously.

Take care,
PK

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 6:15 pm

pk500 wrote:Who the hell cares about a player's hair, and what difference does it make?

Seriously.

Take care,
PK

It matters to me because like I mentioned earlier it a) looks unprofessional and b) you can't even read the players name on the back of the jersey. It's no different than watching Man-Ram and his dreads.

I get it that it's a fashion statement but they are paid professionals and they should look the part. They Yankees and several other clubs have certain stipulations that require a certain bit of grooming by the player while he's on the field and playing for the club.

greggsand · Post by **greggsand** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 6:24 pm

It is odd the NFL will fine you if your shoes laces aren't an approved color, but 2.5 feet of dreads is just fine. That said, it doesn't bother me either way. Hair is considered part of the uniform (per NFL)...

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 6:29 pm

greggsand wrote:It is odd the NFL will fine you if your shoes laces aren't an approved color, but 2.5 feet of dreads is just fine. That said, it doesn't bother me either way. Hair is considered part of the uniform (per NFL)...

Thanks I wasn't aware of that.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 6:36 pm

Rodster wrote:I get it that it's a fashion statement but they are paid professionals and they should look the part. They Yankees and several other clubs have certain stipulations that require a certain bit of grooming by the player while he's on the field and playing for the club.

Which is utterly ridiculous. They're professional athletes, not politicians, stock brokers or even corporate-fueled race drivers.

I guess it's OK that Giambi juiced while he was on the Yankees because he was clean-cut while doing it.

Seriously, was Johnny Damon a less professional and effective ballplayer on the Red Sox because he resembled Cornelius on "Planet of the Apes?" I think not.

Plus, with many Samoan players (Polamalu, I believe), long hair is part of their culture.

God forbid the day the NHL prohibits playoff beards because the Grizzly Adams look appears "unprofessional."

Take care,
PK

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 6:42 pm

I'm with ya PK. Who the F cares what kind of hair the guys have? If they want to make it easier to tackle them, then that's their choice. It's always entertaining when a guy gets pulled down by the hair and then the defender walks away with a handful.

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 7:34 pm

pk500 wrote:
Rodster wrote:I get it that it's a fashion statement but they are paid professionals and they should look the part. They Yankees and several other clubs have certain stipulations that require a certain bit of grooming by the player while he's on the field and playing for the club.
Which is utterly ridiculous. They're professional athletes, not politicians, stock brokers or even corporate-fueled race drivers.

I guess it's OK that Giambi juiced while he was on the Yankees because he was clean-cut while doing it. Seriously, was Johnny Damon a less professional and effective ballplayer on the Red Sox because he resembled Cornelius on "Planet of the Apes?" I think not.

Plus, with many Samoan players (Polamalu, I believe), long hair is part of their culture.

God forbid the day the NHL prohibits playoff beards because the Grizzly Adams look appears "unprofessional."

Take care,
PK

That's the key they are supposed to look professional and not like Homey the Clown. It was really ridiculous then the NY Yankees would not have instituted a dress code while on the team.

What the NFL should do is require players to put their hair in their helmet while on the field.

Post by **ScoopBrady** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 7:43 pm

Rodster wrote:
pk500 wrote:
Rodster wrote:I get it that it's a fashion statement but they are paid professionals and they should look the part. They Yankees and several other clubs have certain stipulations that require a certain bit of grooming by the player while he's on the field and playing for the club.
Which is utterly ridiculous. They're professional athletes, not politicians, stock brokers or even corporate-fueled race drivers.

I guess it's OK that Giambi juiced while he was on the Yankees because he was clean-cut while doing it. Seriously, was Johnny Damon a less professional and effective ballplayer on the Red Sox because he resembled Cornelius on "Planet of the Apes?" I think not.

Plus, with many Samoan players (Polamalu, I believe), long hair is part of their culture.

God forbid the day the NHL prohibits playoff beards because the Grizzly Adams look appears "unprofessional."

Take care,
PK
That's the key they are supposed to look professional and not like Homey the Clown. It was really ridiculous then the NY Yankees would not have instituted a dress code while on the team.

What the NFL should do is require players to put their hair in their helmet while on the field.

1 team out of all of them institutes a dress code and you're using that as your platform? I hardly call an eccentric like Steinbrenner the norm. I honestly can't believe anyone would seriousl have a problem with the way a player decides to dress, wear their hair, or anything like that. Should NBA players not be allowed to have tattoos? Should mullets be banned in hockey and NASCAR? Why do you need to see the players names? Again, I hope this isn't even a blip on the NFL's radar with all of the other, actually important things, that they need to focus on.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 7:52 pm

Rodster wrote:That's the key they are supposed to look professional and not like Homey the Clown. It was really ridiculous then the NY Yankees would not have instituted a dress code while on the team.

Any coincidence this grooming code was instituted by George Steinbrenner, the ultimate control freak? I think not.

Take care,
PK

greggsand · Post by **greggsand** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 7:55 pm

I like my professional athletes to look as much like Al Hrabosky as possible

:

Rodster · Post by **Rodster** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 9:22 pm

ScoopBrady wrote:Should NBA players not be allowed to have tattoos? Should mullets be banned in hockey and NASCAR? Why do you need to see the players names? Again, I hope this isn't even a blip on the NFL's radar with all of the other, actually important things, that they need to focus on.

Yes i'm totally against tattoos in sports especially where it's so prevalent in the NBA. When I watch a game on TV I want to see the player who just made a play. I only follow the Dolphins so i'm not up on all the rosters. I'm not against players having long hair just stuff it inside the helmet when your on the field.

Don't worry because this is not even on the NFL's radar. I'm sure the CBA is on the top of their list with the 2009 season being the last of the salary cap.

Brando70 · Post by **Brando70** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 10:32 pm

I think this is a classic Super Bowl matchup -- top defense vs. high powered offense. Fathead QB vs. Stockboy QB. Slick Willie vs. Whiny Edge. Dreads vs. Curls. NFL Laughingstock vs. NFL Powerhouse.

I just need to ignore all media beforehand so that I'll remain enthused for the game.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Mon Jan 19, 2009 11:28 pm

Lets hope there are no controversial calls, as in Pittsburgh's last SB or in a couple of their games this year.

NFL loves the Rooneys but they don't need any extra help.

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 7:24 am

wco81 wrote:Lets hope there are no controversial calls, as in Pittsburgh's last SB or in a couple of their games this year.

NFL loves the Rooneys but they don't need any extra help.

I don't think you have to worry about that. The NFL issued an apology last year when there were multiple instances of holding not called on Garrard's 4th down 30 yard run that beat the Steelers in the playoffs last year. In fact, there was a span of something like 20 quarters this year when opposing offenses were not called for holding against the Steelers. That's amazing considering they are going up against one of the top sack defenses in the league. And CBS again showed the angle on Sunday that clearly showed Holmes in the end zone with the ball crossing the goal line in the game at Baltimore. Maybe the refs can get the call right the first time.

I just hope the game is better than SB 40, which was a horrible game. If Ben doesn't throw the pick going the other way it's a blowout and people don't remember the calls but rather Seattles picks, missed FGs, multiple touchbacks punting, giving up big plays on defense, etc.

Post by **ScoopBrady** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 11:48 am

Leebo33 wrote:And CBS again showed the angle on Sunday that clearly showed Holmes in the end zone with the ball crossing the goal line in the game at Baltimore. Maybe the refs can get the call right the first time.

I was glad they showed that. I thought it was a touchdown in realtime but I know some that thought there was no way it was a touchdown, including my dad. I'm sure Alex missed that though.

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 4:31 pm

Brando70 wrote:I think this is a classic Super Bowl matchup -- top defense vs. high powered offense. Fathead QB vs. Stockboy QB. Slick Willie vs. Whiny Edge. Dreads vs. Curls. NFL Laughingstock vs. NFL Powerhouse.

I just need to ignore all media beforehand so that I'll remain enthused for the game.

It's the old AFL-NFL dynamic with the conferences reversed.

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Tue Jan 20, 2009 10:49 pm

For a laugh: