Limerlight
1836 replies · 27286 views
^ yeah, they are 
Jennka, it's because they are the best 
Can we still talk about food here? 
I just wanted you guys to know that today is Fat Thursday :drool: we need to celebrate 
^ yeah, they areJennka, it's because they are the best
Can we still talk about food here?
Lay, book off school at this time next year :|
You're having a visitor staying in Poland that day
Yeah, though ironically, the quarterback's importance over the years has been enhanced by the rule changes themselves :|
. It started out as more of a running and defense oriented game, but once they started passing oriented rules, quarterback stats went up drastically and as a result, more quarterback oriented game plans ect. It all started off with pass interference in the late 70s. Some believe it was one of the original rules of the game, but originally, defensive backs were allowed to freely jam receivers up and down the field. Once pass interferance was created, you could only jam the within 5 yards. This increased quarterback stats tremendously. In the 80s, they really didn't do any position specific rule changes, but it was said that you could no longer strike a player in the neck, which was fair enough. In the 90s, there was the introduction of the neutral zone infraction of course, but around the mid 90s, they decided to enforce pass interferance with more emphasis than ever to make it like it is now. In the 21st century, more emphasis than ever was made toward the quarterback individually to the point where now there are plays where even an inadverted touch on the helmet can result in a first down. So the importance of the quarterback has been greatly enhanced by the rule changes. But the thing is, running backs have shorter careers than quarterbacks and no rule has ever been passed for them. If it had just been about safety across the board, I wouldn't have minded the rule changes as much. Its really unfair to the players in a lot of ways in that you enforce such soft rules on such tough guys and probably the most diverse athletes in the world where you have guys with track level speed on one side and probably the most active 300+ pounders in the world on the other. As to the money thing, the issue is that the owners feel that the last bargaining agreement 5 some odd years ago was more in favor of the players and that the players basically need to pay back some of said money. The players on the other hand argue that since the sport is making more money than ever and they have made the owners billionaires, whey should they have to give them back more money? Especially since all the players aren't millionaires and most have short careers whereas the owners make far more money before, during and long after their careers. So yeah, both will lose in their own way. Though I'm more bothered by the rule changes than that admittedly. Then even if they brought in replacement players I would be torn because I would be glad for them to temporarily live their dream on one end, but wouldn't want to support the league in their foolishness on the other end.
Essay statement by Joe 
You know the problem overall is a sport identifies what's most important. For football it's the left tackles and QB's so they get grossly overpaid. I can understand to a point ya protect the QB but at the end of the day IT'S A GAME PEOPLE WILL GET HURT <_< Protect the punter? YES! By all means protect him if anyone, look at how they're kicking the ball, the penalties that protect them should be of high importance then the QB even if they play a less important role. And too much money is in professional sports this day. Look at Pujols in baseball, he wants $30mil a year :| For what??!?!??!!? 
Happy "Fat Thursday" to you all then! 
Medialuna love from Buenos Aires - clogging your arteries for breakfast since the 19th century:
Just like Jennka 
:brows:
Essay statement by JoeYou know the problem overall is a sport identifies what's most important. For football it's the left tackles and QB's so they get grossly overpaid. I can understand to a point ya protect the QB but at the end of the day IT'S A GAME PEOPLE WILL GET HURT <_< Protect the punter? YES! By all means protect him if anyone, look at how they're kicking the ball, the penalties that protect them should be of high importance then the QB even if they play a less important role. And too much money is in professional sports this day. Look at Pujols in baseball, he wants $30mil a year :| For what??!?!??!!?
I'll just leave this here for ya. Think about it.
A challenge my Limer:
You stare you lose.
I think we found our weapon of mass destruction.
Lost at 0:34 secs
Suck it China/Korea we had her first!
>.<
Just like Jennka
:brows:
Happy "Fat Thursday" to you all then!
Essay statement by JoeYou know the problem overall is a sport identifies what's most important. For football it's the left tackles and QB's so they get grossly overpaid. I can understand to a point ya protect the QB but at the end of the day IT'S A GAME PEOPLE WILL GET HURT <_< Protect the punter? YES! By all means protect him if anyone, look at how they're kicking the ball, the penalties that protect them should be of high importance then the QB even if they play a less important role. And too much money is in professional sports this day. Look at Pujols in baseball, he wants $30mil a year :| For what??!?!??!!?
Woa, the screen made that look really long :| 
. But yeah, I guess if a sport makes so many billions, its hard to justify not paying the best players millions 
any more than you can justify not giving millions to musicians, actors ect. whose performances produce millions. Of course in an ideal world police, fireman and teachers would make more, but people's interrest is what fuels a sport or entertainment market to to make it what it is whereas no one wants to say, "I want to pay EXTRA taxes so police can be paid more" . And not one wants to say, "I want to pay big money to see cheese rolling." 
But the way I see it, the awesomeness of cheese rolling is a self evident truth anyhow. Sure they may not be the biggest, strongest, fastest, smartest ect. but they sure are having one heck of a time 
.
I'll just leave this here for ya. Think about it.
A challenge my Limer:You stare you lose.
I think we found our weapon of mass destruction.
Lost at 0:34 secs
Suck it China/Korea we had her first!
:dance:
This week:
I have training for week so don't expect to see me. Because i'm actually on day shifts the whole week which is meh we'll see how that goes
And @ Joe: You can't have the keys to the vehicle. Berno has them this week.
Just like Jennka
:brows:
Great points and I agree 100% about the personality. My best looking girlfriend left me with no complaints on the physical end, but the one I loved the most was not in her league, but if I'd take her any day . About the 'it girl' thing though, it just seems everytime I look around there's a new VS or SI person that's suddenly in 95% of everyone's top 10 overnight I guess . Not saying anything's wrong with that of course. Interresting to see different people weighing in because I thought Michael* was the only one reading my sigs .
But best of luck on your venture 
and Berno gets the keys ?! Fair enough I guess .