Both games were lost, as often happens, by someone bitching out.
Cundiff had to rush out there to take the field goal atempt. It's why Belichick, if he had any TOs (I don't remember, but I think he did) didn't bother to ice him. Harbaugh-A didn't pick up on this and didn't call time out to settle his kicker. After his special teams unit wasn't ready to try a 52-yarder a few minutes earlier- and I don't know why you wouldn't have tried it, down by three with a few minutes left- that coach is sure to get canned.
Hakeem Nicks' shoulder was jacked up to the point where he was only out there as a decoy. The 49ers surely picked up on this by the 2nd quarter, when Eli was throwing every ball to Victor Cruz, and bottled up Cruz. Eli was left to throw to the practice squad. The one time he threw to Nicks in the second half, Nicks bailed on the pass and the two DBs nearly wound up killing each other.
Harbaugh-B's play selection was markedly different depending on his starting field position. Any time the 49ers started inside their own 35, he clammed up. This indicated that he didn't trust Alex Smith. Further indication of this is the 49ers dismal 3rd down conversion rate. They twice completed 3rd down passes for less than enough yardage.
In fact, two-thirds of the 49ers offensive yardage came on about 7 plays. The other 50 produced little more than 100 yards. This is what happens when you take away your QB's balls.
As bad as Flacco played- he left two touchdowns on the field; one on that early bomb to Torrie(?) Smith and another on the rollout left where he threw to the tight end(?) when the fullback in the flat, a much easier pass, had a walk-in touchdown- he put the ball in Lee Evans' hands. I'd like to tell you that the Ravens broke the golden rule of football (Never leave the game up to your kicker), but they had it.
That was a shit 4th down spot on Jacobs' run. But, as horrid as he is (the hole was there for him to blow through), he deserved no better. He was largely ignored in the later portion of the game because the coaches had lost all remaining faith in him.
There was plenty of crap called on the Giants whereas next to nothing was called on the 49ers. Calling an illegal contact penalty on 3rd & 19 is about as cunty as it gets. Calling a personal foul after letting three linemen gang up on one guy is horseshit. Taking 37 seconds to spot the ball (after a kneel-down) before Tynes' winner, then calling a delay of game penalty.
Of course, the Giants did get the benefit of the forward progress call that, while technically correct, was a quick enough whistle that spared the Giants from having to sweat a replay appeal. But, that is pretty much why the forward progress rule exists; so the defense can't hold you up and strip you right before you hit the ground. So, I don't feel bad.
In any event, Bokolis takes both games and heads to the Bowl 7-3 for the playoffs. I think I got some gators coming.
Monday, January 23, 2012
Sunday, January 22, 2012
Rugby for fairies, 2012 Conference championships
This is where we git down with the git down.
Ravens (+7.0) over PATRIOTS - I have a hard time believing the Ravens are going to beat the Patriots and, given their sniping of Flacco, for whom I have no respect, they are candidates to bitch out. This is my attempt as a value bet, as I think the last week's respective performances are being overvalued. The Ravens are going to need turnovers and a fast start.
Giants (+2.0) over 49ers - I think the range of results are from Giants +17 to Niners +7. I have a hard time believing the 49ers are going to move the ball on the Giants. Things ar going to have to go wrong for the GIants to lose.
In both cases, I'm going to get fancy with some supplementals. I'm taking the 11-1 that the Pats game lands on the number. I'm also buying the point to get the Giants at +3. It means laying 6-5, which isn't much.
I need a nap for this.
Ravens (+7.0) over PATRIOTS - I have a hard time believing the Ravens are going to beat the Patriots and, given their sniping of Flacco, for whom I have no respect, they are candidates to bitch out. This is my attempt as a value bet, as I think the last week's respective performances are being overvalued. The Ravens are going to need turnovers and a fast start.
Giants (+2.0) over 49ers - I think the range of results are from Giants +17 to Niners +7. I have a hard time believing the 49ers are going to move the ball on the Giants. Things ar going to have to go wrong for the GIants to lose.
In both cases, I'm going to get fancy with some supplementals. I'm taking the 11-1 that the Pats game lands on the number. I'm also buying the point to get the Giants at +3. It means laying 6-5, which isn't much.
I need a nap for this.
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Hey Franchesco! take the Gzziantsh and the points bihch
That's what I imagine what Jeff the drunk would sound like if he called in to Francesa's sh...usual talking to himself, for himself that passes for programming. It’s amazing how he authoritatively tries to pass off his mistaken rehashing of the game (somewhere, Russo is saying, getting’ old, Mikey, haheheha). He yelled at some guy who had the audacity to tell him that the fumble play was originally called a fumble, then changed by another official, then challenged by the Giants, upon which the call stood. After dressing down the caller in the face of being corrected, instead of accepting the caller’s view, he retrenched, re-tracked and revised until he eventually decided that there was no call on the field and that the referee made the call from inside the peep show.
This is nothing new as, when his ignorance is shown to him, he will resort to all manner of bullshit to bluff his alleged authority.
As more and more callers called in wanting to spew about the fumble call, he scolded the callers for making so much of the call when the Giants won the game and, realizing that the callers had the jump on him, to not call up to talk about it. Let's leave aside the sad state that he could never have his finger anywhere close enough to the pulse of his “audience” to realize that the venting is for all the crappy officiating that we’ve seen in the two games and that people are so focused on the officiating because they know the Giants have the best team.
Whothefuck does he think he is- Rush Limbaugh- telling his audience what to think? Lie to yourself all you want that the world isn't passing you by, jagoff. Don't lie to us and don't ever think that you know more than the people. You're only there because you can sell advertising, which keeps Chernoff on the dick.
I'd like to tell you that he lost his mind with all the fat. But, he's always been that way. As I said, he is talking sports to himself, for himself. The rest of us are there to be pitched commercials.
This is nothing new as, when his ignorance is shown to him, he will resort to all manner of bullshit to bluff his alleged authority.
As more and more callers called in wanting to spew about the fumble call, he scolded the callers for making so much of the call when the Giants won the game and, realizing that the callers had the jump on him, to not call up to talk about it. Let's leave aside the sad state that he could never have his finger anywhere close enough to the pulse of his “audience” to realize that the venting is for all the crappy officiating that we’ve seen in the two games and that people are so focused on the officiating because they know the Giants have the best team.
Whothefuck does he think he is- Rush Limbaugh- telling his audience what to think? Lie to yourself all you want that the world isn't passing you by, jagoff. Don't lie to us and don't ever think that you know more than the people. You're only there because you can sell advertising, which keeps Chernoff on the dick.
I'd like to tell you that he lost his mind with all the fat. But, he's always been that way. As I said, he is talking sports to himself, for himself. The rest of us are there to be pitched commercials.
Monday, January 16, 2012
Ehhh, wot I say?
Now, after telling that Packers fan that the Giants would win by two touchdowns, I've got to deal with my crushed boss. Upon hearing me talk it up, he was willing to take the Packers at (+13.5). I wonder what that would've gotten me.
The Giants do Bokolis two better, going +3 in the turnover battle, and crush the 15-1 and done Packers. Well, it would've been +4 if not for those bungling officials and borderline-criminally bad referee. Looking back, the Packers scored their two touchdowns on drives prolonged by questionable referee's decisions. As far as I'm concerned, the Giants defense pitched another shutout.
Always planning for the worst, I was looking for inflection points. That horrid reversal and replay non-reversal was one possible point. I'd like to tell you that my tirade was expletive-laced, but there weren't enough regular English words.
The other possible one was when, after Umenyiora poked the ball out of Rodgers' hand, just as he was about to throw a TD to a wide-open receiver, the horrid spot on Ware's 3rd down carry forced a 4th down and a punt.
The third was when, with about 9 minutes left on a 2nd down in the red zone, Jacobs was outside on an island with just the corner and, instead of 'dozing him, he tried to get the corner and was leg-tackled. Can you tell I can't stand this muthafucka? The conservative 3rd down formation indicated that the Giants were going to take the field goal and a 10-point lead.
Instead, I get to dwell on Nicks' touchdown catches- neither was the turning point...the first one was indicative of what a winning team does and the second helped out.
It could have been one of the Packers' many dropped passes. Bokolis' attitude is that, in many games like this, one team will bitch out. Those dropped passes were the manifestation of the Packers bitching out and are- like Rodgers mising a few relatively easy passes- what losing teams do.
The turning point was likely Osi's strip of Rodgers. While, the outcome was that it only served to further slow the Packers, they probably would've gotten their shit together, while introducing doubt into the Giants.
Off of four consecutive wins of at least two touchdowns, up next are the despised 49ers. The hate of post-season battles past will build up. Contrary to what the dried-out-juicehead mongoloids pushing sports in suits will tell you, there is plenty of room for improvement. They didn't play all that well...they played a team that bitched out. Bokolis is very impressed by the 49ers, as they are one of the few teams I've seen that really know how to cover.
So, after getting hooked in the Ravens game (which I'd've never touched), Bokolis goes 3-1 in the divisional round and stands at 5-3 for the playoffs. I already know which way I'm going for the conference championships. That's all the fuck I got for now. I just hope the lines behave.
The Giants do Bokolis two better, going +3 in the turnover battle, and crush the 15-1 and done Packers. Well, it would've been +4 if not for those bungling officials and borderline-criminally bad referee. Looking back, the Packers scored their two touchdowns on drives prolonged by questionable referee's decisions. As far as I'm concerned, the Giants defense pitched another shutout.
Always planning for the worst, I was looking for inflection points. That horrid reversal and replay non-reversal was one possible point. I'd like to tell you that my tirade was expletive-laced, but there weren't enough regular English words.
The other possible one was when, after Umenyiora poked the ball out of Rodgers' hand, just as he was about to throw a TD to a wide-open receiver, the horrid spot on Ware's 3rd down carry forced a 4th down and a punt.
The third was when, with about 9 minutes left on a 2nd down in the red zone, Jacobs was outside on an island with just the corner and, instead of 'dozing him, he tried to get the corner and was leg-tackled. Can you tell I can't stand this muthafucka? The conservative 3rd down formation indicated that the Giants were going to take the field goal and a 10-point lead.
Instead, I get to dwell on Nicks' touchdown catches- neither was the turning point...the first one was indicative of what a winning team does and the second helped out.
It could have been one of the Packers' many dropped passes. Bokolis' attitude is that, in many games like this, one team will bitch out. Those dropped passes were the manifestation of the Packers bitching out and are- like Rodgers mising a few relatively easy passes- what losing teams do.
The turning point was likely Osi's strip of Rodgers. While, the outcome was that it only served to further slow the Packers, they probably would've gotten their shit together, while introducing doubt into the Giants.
Off of four consecutive wins of at least two touchdowns, up next are the despised 49ers. The hate of post-season battles past will build up. Contrary to what the dried-out-juicehead mongoloids pushing sports in suits will tell you, there is plenty of room for improvement. They didn't play all that well...they played a team that bitched out. Bokolis is very impressed by the 49ers, as they are one of the few teams I've seen that really know how to cover.
So, after getting hooked in the Ravens game (which I'd've never touched), Bokolis goes 3-1 in the divisional round and stands at 5-3 for the playoffs. I already know which way I'm going for the conference championships. That's all the fuck I got for now. I just hope the lines behave.
Saturday, January 14, 2012
Are you ready for some...rugby for fairies, 2012 Divisional round
Conversation between Bokolis and God, shortly after 4PM, last Sunday:
God: Waas happenin', nucka?
Bokolis: Yo, man, why you drunk calling me again?
God: Watch waas gonna' happen on this Broncos game.
Bokolis: Aw, C'maughan. You know I already took the Steelers.
God: You better change that shit.
Bokolis: Why you gotta keep fuckin' with this dumbshit? Polamalu crosses himself before every play. And he came to you...he wasn't brainwashed into it like this mongoloid. Wassup with hooking him up?
God: Mayn, I already done plenty for Polamalu. But, muthafuckas down there don't realize that shit. They just think he's crazy and they already know he can do it. Well, I've got everybody buggin' now.
Bokolis: Why ain't you just let him win all his games instead of letting him lose those last three?
God: Man, you gotta learn how to carry a crowd. I got the Jesus freaks singing and the atheists buggin' tryna explain this shit some other way.
Bokolis: Bokolis doesn't have much use for keeping the crowd's attention.
God: I gotta tell you everything?! Of course the crowds don't know shit. It's about dropping them when you feel like dropping them.
Bokolis: Point taken. You gonna' chill here to watch the game.
God: Naah, man, this shit gotta happen from the control room. Check you later. Remember Broncos, plus nine. You got the over, right.
Bokolis: Yes, I have the over. Suave, homes.
Once I saw three favorites cover, I knew some shit was going to happen. I was heaviest on the Giants, so I sent it in with the booty. I didn't change it here, so I'll live with this 2-2 (it actually went much better). The rest of the world went 3-1, so I'm already chasing.
49ERS (+3.5) over Saints - I was hoping for a muddy track out in Frisco but, I'm told it hasn't rained in a hot minute. Banking on the sprinkler system to mysteriously malfunction...hope is not a strategy, they tell me. Nonetheless, the Saints are a different team on the road. And, don't put too much stock in what happened in last week's game after the officials fucked up that call. All right, maybe it's just that I don't want to have to go to the Superdome.
PATRIOTS (-13.5) over Broncos - Big nutmber, I know. They did it once, they will do it again. I know the Pats have a crappy defense and that Brady and Belichick are bored with it. But, making an example out of Tebow should motivate them. Besides, this is the week when inferior (8-8) teams get crushed.
Update Sunday 1000 (UTC +500). Dear me! I done misread the spread! Ravens are giving 7.5. Fuck it, I'll take the Ravens.
Texans (+13.5) over RAVENS - This looks like an even bigger number than the other 13.5. Normally, Bokolis wouldn't even look at this game. Surely, the Ravens will win against this QB. I think that the Texans have a solid enough team to keep this reasonably close.
Giants (+7.5) over PACKERS - Eyeing this up, it looks like another one-possession game. Even with a limited defense, the Giants did enough to the Packers in the first game- and there is plenty of upside to that first game- to convince me that the Packers are vulnerable. With a stronger defensive line, I have to think that the Giants will do a little more to them. If this game went right- by "right," I mean the Giants are +1 in the turnover battle- the Giants win by 10-14 points. Of course, the opposite can happen. But, I don't see the Giants rolling over.
God: Waas happenin', nucka?
Bokolis: Yo, man, why you drunk calling me again?
God: Watch waas gonna' happen on this Broncos game.
Bokolis: Aw, C'maughan. You know I already took the Steelers.
God: You better change that shit.
Bokolis: Why you gotta keep fuckin' with this dumbshit? Polamalu crosses himself before every play. And he came to you...he wasn't brainwashed into it like this mongoloid. Wassup with hooking him up?
God: Mayn, I already done plenty for Polamalu. But, muthafuckas down there don't realize that shit. They just think he's crazy and they already know he can do it. Well, I've got everybody buggin' now.
Bokolis: Why ain't you just let him win all his games instead of letting him lose those last three?
God: Man, you gotta learn how to carry a crowd. I got the Jesus freaks singing and the atheists buggin' tryna explain this shit some other way.
Bokolis: Bokolis doesn't have much use for keeping the crowd's attention.
God: I gotta tell you everything?! Of course the crowds don't know shit. It's about dropping them when you feel like dropping them.
Bokolis: Point taken. You gonna' chill here to watch the game.
God: Naah, man, this shit gotta happen from the control room. Check you later. Remember Broncos, plus nine. You got the over, right.
Bokolis: Yes, I have the over. Suave, homes.
Once I saw three favorites cover, I knew some shit was going to happen. I was heaviest on the Giants, so I sent it in with the booty. I didn't change it here, so I'll live with this 2-2 (it actually went much better). The rest of the world went 3-1, so I'm already chasing.
49ERS (+3.5) over Saints - I was hoping for a muddy track out in Frisco but, I'm told it hasn't rained in a hot minute. Banking on the sprinkler system to mysteriously malfunction...hope is not a strategy, they tell me. Nonetheless, the Saints are a different team on the road. And, don't put too much stock in what happened in last week's game after the officials fucked up that call. All right, maybe it's just that I don't want to have to go to the Superdome.
PATRIOTS (-13.5) over Broncos - Big nutmber, I know. They did it once, they will do it again. I know the Pats have a crappy defense and that Brady and Belichick are bored with it. But, making an example out of Tebow should motivate them. Besides, this is the week when inferior (8-8) teams get crushed.
Update Sunday 1000 (UTC +500). Dear me! I done misread the spread! Ravens are giving 7.5. Fuck it, I'll take the Ravens.
Texans (+13.5) over RAVENS - This looks like an even bigger number than the other 13.5. Normally, Bokolis wouldn't even look at this game. Surely, the Ravens will win against this QB. I think that the Texans have a solid enough team to keep this reasonably close.
Giants (+7.5) over PACKERS - Eyeing this up, it looks like another one-possession game. Even with a limited defense, the Giants did enough to the Packers in the first game- and there is plenty of upside to that first game- to convince me that the Packers are vulnerable. With a stronger defensive line, I have to think that the Giants will do a little more to them. If this game went right- by "right," I mean the Giants are +1 in the turnover battle- the Giants win by 10-14 points. Of course, the opposite can happen. But, I don't see the Giants rolling over.
Saturday, January 7, 2012
Are you ready for some Rugby for fairies 2012 Wild Card weekend
These numbers render the card lukewarm at best. I feel best about the Giants, which, being a Giants supporter, is cause for concern. I'd throw in some point totals for hedging, but that would be throwing good money after bad. Since we have to...
Bengals (+4) over TEXANS - If you must, we're left to figure out whether Cincinnati's 0-7 record vs playoff teams will predominate, or a banged up Houston team will find a way to win its first playoff game. Give me the points and let both happen.
SAINTS (-10.5) over Lions - With everyone being down on the Lions because they were torched by the Packers' back-up QB, they have nowhere to go but up and I think the Lions are sleepers here. Compared to all the other defenses that were torched in the dome, they didn't do so badly last time around, even without Suh. Still, while the back-door cover is in play, after crashing out last year, the Saints figure to want to leave no doubt.
Update 1625 (UTC -5): Barkley just picked the Lions to win outright. Knowing his history with gambling, the Lions are fucked.
GIANTS (-3) over Falcons - The Giants seem to be on an uptrend that's got everyone thinking of another magic carpet ride. There are similarities because, as bad as this secondary may seem, they aren't any worse than 2007's team. The pass rush masked that crew and, off the last few games, we can dream that this line do the same. The road map is there; if they can beat Atlanta, I'll take my chances in Green Bay against their generous defense and a subsequent date in Frisco (assuming the Saints die out in a muddy track at the 'stick. So, they've got a puncher's chance.
It's a pretty day- 60 degrees as I type- out here in the Apple. It'll probably be 45 at game time. That may sound good for the domers, but I think it's even better for Eli. The Giants have been pretty good about getting teams to 3rd down this year where, without a pass rush, they've been horrid. They are on the uptrend, both on defense and with their run-blocking. Bokolis is banking that this will continue and they will handle the Falcons.
Steelers (-9) over BRONCOS - I didn't see odds on whether Tebow will be pulled. This is an issue to me because I fully expect Tebow to be yanked. Bokolis does not expect that the Tebow-led Broncos will be able to sustain more than one drive of more than 50 yards. In my mind, Pittsburgh gets to 10 and they win If we get the back-up, stupid things, like a back-door cover, can happen.
Bengals (+4) over TEXANS - If you must, we're left to figure out whether Cincinnati's 0-7 record vs playoff teams will predominate, or a banged up Houston team will find a way to win its first playoff game. Give me the points and let both happen.
SAINTS (-10.5) over Lions - With everyone being down on the Lions because they were torched by the Packers' back-up QB, they have nowhere to go but up and I think the Lions are sleepers here. Compared to all the other defenses that were torched in the dome, they didn't do so badly last time around, even without Suh. Still, while the back-door cover is in play, after crashing out last year, the Saints figure to want to leave no doubt.
Update 1625 (UTC -5): Barkley just picked the Lions to win outright. Knowing his history with gambling, the Lions are fucked.
GIANTS (-3) over Falcons - The Giants seem to be on an uptrend that's got everyone thinking of another magic carpet ride. There are similarities because, as bad as this secondary may seem, they aren't any worse than 2007's team. The pass rush masked that crew and, off the last few games, we can dream that this line do the same. The road map is there; if they can beat Atlanta, I'll take my chances in Green Bay against their generous defense and a subsequent date in Frisco (assuming the Saints die out in a muddy track at the 'stick. So, they've got a puncher's chance.
It's a pretty day- 60 degrees as I type- out here in the Apple. It'll probably be 45 at game time. That may sound good for the domers, but I think it's even better for Eli. The Giants have been pretty good about getting teams to 3rd down this year where, without a pass rush, they've been horrid. They are on the uptrend, both on defense and with their run-blocking. Bokolis is banking that this will continue and they will handle the Falcons.
Steelers (-9) over BRONCOS - I didn't see odds on whether Tebow will be pulled. This is an issue to me because I fully expect Tebow to be yanked. Bokolis does not expect that the Tebow-led Broncos will be able to sustain more than one drive of more than 50 yards. In my mind, Pittsburgh gets to 10 and they win If we get the back-up, stupid things, like a back-door cover, can happen.
What do we know about 2011 NFL
Similar to MLB after its job actions that scuttled the 1994 season, the NFL had some mending to do after the lockout, widely perceived as a smash and grab op by owners, nearly fucked with fat people's Sundays.
And, just like MLB, the NFL opted to ratchet up the offense. Offensive holding, done on every play, was called only after a copy of the police report was produced, while sneezing on a receiver brought a flag. Hitting a receiver brought a fine.
We ended up with arena football, quite literally in the case of the Saints and the Lions. Both of their QBs passed for over 5000 yards, with Drew Brees eclipsing Dan Marino's record with a game to spare. Three QBs passed for 5000 yards- E. Manning was just below and Aaron Rodgers surely would've reached it had he taken part in last week's orgy against the Lions (not to mention that a healthy P. Manning would've been a good bet to do it). In total, 11 QBs passed for over 4000 yards, including Ruthlessbuggerer. It used to be that passing for 4000 yards was a sign that your team was forever badly trailing. Nowdays, only shlubs don't pass for that much.
I mean, ferfook's sake, the leading receiver had more yards than the leading rusher. When's the last time that happened? 2007, you say? Well, how about before that? 2001? crickets Ummmm, going back to 1990, I'm surprised it's happened as often as it has.
Yeah, I was trying to get at that it is, now more than ever, a QB's game. So, why not point out two teams that don't have it at QB?
Bokolis has it on good authority that Tim Tebow going 7-1 was God's way of fucking with people, just to see what everyone would do. I knew from the get-go- and, by from the get-go, I mean the first time I saw Tebow play for Florida- that he was a dumb fuck and was incapable of processing variables as necessary to be an effective NFL quarterback. What is bothersome is that no pundits pick up on this, choosing to focus on his mechanics and talent. People apparently don't recognize outlying results until mean reversion kicks them in the mouth.
In pointing out the Jets, I must first note that the reason for their mediocre season was that their ordinary defense wasn't good enough to bail them out. Blaming it on Sanchez' supposed regression or locker room cancers is a copout offered by those who need you to pay attention to that sort of nonsense. Sanchez has been the same shyte he's always been. In his prior two seasons, the defense put him in better positions to win games. Sometimes he got it done, sometimes he didn't.
In any event, Sanchez did not dictate the game. Rex Ryan wouldn't and won't have it. Rex sees the QB as target practice for his defense. Where have we seen this before? Oh, yeah, from Rex' old man. Buddy, who had the best defense ever in the 1991 Eagles, yet, likely because his offense was neglected and punch-drunk from having to go against the defense in practice, couldn't even make the playoffs. The ballsac doesn't drop far from the prick. Because Rex will not accept that this is a QB's game, he will never win anything while in charge.
And, just like MLB, the NFL opted to ratchet up the offense. Offensive holding, done on every play, was called only after a copy of the police report was produced, while sneezing on a receiver brought a flag. Hitting a receiver brought a fine.
We ended up with arena football, quite literally in the case of the Saints and the Lions. Both of their QBs passed for over 5000 yards, with Drew Brees eclipsing Dan Marino's record with a game to spare. Three QBs passed for 5000 yards- E. Manning was just below and Aaron Rodgers surely would've reached it had he taken part in last week's orgy against the Lions (not to mention that a healthy P. Manning would've been a good bet to do it). In total, 11 QBs passed for over 4000 yards, including Ruthlessbuggerer. It used to be that passing for 4000 yards was a sign that your team was forever badly trailing. Nowdays, only shlubs don't pass for that much.
I mean, ferfook's sake, the leading receiver had more yards than the leading rusher. When's the last time that happened? 2007, you say? Well, how about before that? 2001? crickets Ummmm, going back to 1990, I'm surprised it's happened as often as it has.
Yeah, I was trying to get at that it is, now more than ever, a QB's game. So, why not point out two teams that don't have it at QB?
Bokolis has it on good authority that Tim Tebow going 7-1 was God's way of fucking with people, just to see what everyone would do. I knew from the get-go- and, by from the get-go, I mean the first time I saw Tebow play for Florida- that he was a dumb fuck and was incapable of processing variables as necessary to be an effective NFL quarterback. What is bothersome is that no pundits pick up on this, choosing to focus on his mechanics and talent. People apparently don't recognize outlying results until mean reversion kicks them in the mouth.
In pointing out the Jets, I must first note that the reason for their mediocre season was that their ordinary defense wasn't good enough to bail them out. Blaming it on Sanchez' supposed regression or locker room cancers is a copout offered by those who need you to pay attention to that sort of nonsense. Sanchez has been the same shyte he's always been. In his prior two seasons, the defense put him in better positions to win games. Sometimes he got it done, sometimes he didn't.
In any event, Sanchez did not dictate the game. Rex Ryan wouldn't and won't have it. Rex sees the QB as target practice for his defense. Where have we seen this before? Oh, yeah, from Rex' old man. Buddy, who had the best defense ever in the 1991 Eagles, yet, likely because his offense was neglected and punch-drunk from having to go against the defense in practice, couldn't even make the playoffs. The ballsac doesn't drop far from the prick. Because Rex will not accept that this is a QB's game, he will never win anything while in charge.
What do we know...
Nah, man, Bokolis wasn't out fuckin' with these Occupy cats. I didn't catch a pepper spray to the grill. As I stated earlier, I'm not trying to do the dissident's 5-year bid. I'm not even trying to spend the night in Central. Besides, any protest that does not involve rock throwing is destined to ring hollow.
Say what you want about these muthafuckas. What you should've picked up from their adventures is that you start fucking with the PTB around here, Constitution be damned, they will come down on you. It should've also showed, once and for all, that corporations- and money- have more rights than people and our methods of handling disturbances are strikingly similar to the methods of the backwards countries we seek to "enlighten."
What makes the state of our nation all the more dire is that the police are all too willing to be the errand boys (the word is stronger, but using it would probably unneccesarily distract from the message) for the muthafuckas that are fleecing us. That, to Bokolis, is the biggest disappointment to come out of the first installment of the Occupy movement.
I don't really need to point out that the make-up of the police forces around this country is increasingly ex-military. Stereotypical NYPD used to be the drunk Irish hooples that let me walk right through them outside Joe's. In other cow towns, I was a bunch of Deputy Perkins-looking muthafuckas.
At some point, they decided to try and make the NYPD force look more representative of the demographics of the city. So, they let in more Blacks and 5-foot Latina birds. Nationally, after some well-publicized firefights with some cats armed for Armageddon and with the coming of the two wars, the faces on the force, as well as their battle gear, increasingly resembled military units. Municipalities all over the country are taking federal funding and buying up military surplus weaponry. At this point, Perkins is long-retired and living off his pension.
That brings me to the only good thing about the job- its pension. If Bokolis had become a cop (yeah, right) or a fireman (possibly) back when I'd become eligible, right about now, I'd be able to retire at half-pay. I'm still young.
Aside - Truth be told, if I avoided having the Towers fall on me, I'd've retired sometime shortly after 9/11 at quarter-pay of my highest of the last three years- which would've been 2001, as the overtime those cops were making in the aftermath would've probably gotten me close to the same pension as 20 years. I was still a kid at that point.
The reason I point out what a self-centered prick I'd've been is that the pension is the carrot dangled out in front of them to plow the field ahead of building all chain stores. After all, you can't build a bigger corporate monolith if enough ground is not level. So, while there has never been much police to protect us from the transgressions of business, there sure as shit is plenty of police to ensure that, if business does transgress upon us, we can't do shit about it.
Many cops, as we saw, were all too keen to do the job. They took relish in hammering hipsters that hardly put up resistance, much less a fight. They burned books and detained people for longer until arraignment that they would for violent offenders. But, we shouldn't expect anything more than cowardice from cops. With the pension dangling, their greatest incentive is not to fight crime. Their greatest incentive is to protect themselves and, like the rest of us, to keep their job; fighting crime is ancillary, protecting us is coincidental.
This isn't to say that all cops are this way. I'm sure there are quite a few that live the job. Collectively, however, that's what they are and what they do.
It's a shame, too. We don't expect any better from our leaders. After all, they are beholden to corporate soft money to keep their job. In the case of the Apple, the stooge in charge is one of them, a remorseless shill.
The public at large is largely misguided. Why else would anyone mock by telling protesters to get a job? I'll get to that. The point is that the public will believe whatever bullshit is fed to them my the corporate MSM. Protests will be covered insofar is the MSM call sell them.
It's left then, to change the attitudes of the police. The cops don't owe these muthafuckas any loyalty. They must think they do. Again, the carrot is the pension.
What the cops don't realize is that these muthafuckas are fucking them over, too, in a way that pensions and sweetheart loan deals don't make up for. They fuck us all by debasing our currency, which cheapens the value of our blood, sweat and tears- the only thing most of us have to offer. For the cops' efforts, they are taxed at a greater marginal rate than the muthafuckas they protect. knowing what side your bread is buttered on is of not much use when you are eating burnt toast.
So, when someone tells a protester to get a job, they should realize that the protesters are doing the working man's work, as the working man is getting fleeced even more so than the unemployed slob that is out protesting. When the cop gets out his pepper spray, or his billy club, or digs his knee just a little deeper into a non-violent protester, he should remember that the protester was not out to fuck with him.
But, maybe they should be. Failing this epiphany, the protests may be better served to take on a tone that will test police commitment to the ruling elite. That may include armed conflict...in a manner that is consistent with the idea that, if the police overstep their bounds and use disproportionate force, rather than wait for the courts to sort it out, the people will defend themselves.
Bokolis isn't saying that cops need to die or even get hurt- though it would inevitably happen. I'm saying that shit needs to happen that makes policemen reassess what they are protecting. They need to be tested. Since they can't see for themselves, they need to be made to see. How that gets done is not my call...just sayin'
That's all the fuck I got. I think I'm ready...
Say what you want about these muthafuckas. What you should've picked up from their adventures is that you start fucking with the PTB around here, Constitution be damned, they will come down on you. It should've also showed, once and for all, that corporations- and money- have more rights than people and our methods of handling disturbances are strikingly similar to the methods of the backwards countries we seek to "enlighten."
What makes the state of our nation all the more dire is that the police are all too willing to be the errand boys (the word is stronger, but using it would probably unneccesarily distract from the message) for the muthafuckas that are fleecing us. That, to Bokolis, is the biggest disappointment to come out of the first installment of the Occupy movement.
I don't really need to point out that the make-up of the police forces around this country is increasingly ex-military. Stereotypical NYPD used to be the drunk Irish hooples that let me walk right through them outside Joe's. In other cow towns, I was a bunch of Deputy Perkins-looking muthafuckas.
At some point, they decided to try and make the NYPD force look more representative of the demographics of the city. So, they let in more Blacks and 5-foot Latina birds. Nationally, after some well-publicized firefights with some cats armed for Armageddon and with the coming of the two wars, the faces on the force, as well as their battle gear, increasingly resembled military units. Municipalities all over the country are taking federal funding and buying up military surplus weaponry. At this point, Perkins is long-retired and living off his pension.
That brings me to the only good thing about the job- its pension. If Bokolis had become a cop (yeah, right) or a fireman (possibly) back when I'd become eligible, right about now, I'd be able to retire at half-pay. I'm still young.
Aside - Truth be told, if I avoided having the Towers fall on me, I'd've retired sometime shortly after 9/11 at quarter-pay of my highest of the last three years- which would've been 2001, as the overtime those cops were making in the aftermath would've probably gotten me close to the same pension as 20 years. I was still a kid at that point.
The reason I point out what a self-centered prick I'd've been is that the pension is the carrot dangled out in front of them to plow the field ahead of building all chain stores. After all, you can't build a bigger corporate monolith if enough ground is not level. So, while there has never been much police to protect us from the transgressions of business, there sure as shit is plenty of police to ensure that, if business does transgress upon us, we can't do shit about it.
Many cops, as we saw, were all too keen to do the job. They took relish in hammering hipsters that hardly put up resistance, much less a fight. They burned books and detained people for longer until arraignment that they would for violent offenders. But, we shouldn't expect anything more than cowardice from cops. With the pension dangling, their greatest incentive is not to fight crime. Their greatest incentive is to protect themselves and, like the rest of us, to keep their job; fighting crime is ancillary, protecting us is coincidental.
This isn't to say that all cops are this way. I'm sure there are quite a few that live the job. Collectively, however, that's what they are and what they do.
It's a shame, too. We don't expect any better from our leaders. After all, they are beholden to corporate soft money to keep their job. In the case of the Apple, the stooge in charge is one of them, a remorseless shill.
The public at large is largely misguided. Why else would anyone mock by telling protesters to get a job? I'll get to that. The point is that the public will believe whatever bullshit is fed to them my the corporate MSM. Protests will be covered insofar is the MSM call sell them.
It's left then, to change the attitudes of the police. The cops don't owe these muthafuckas any loyalty. They must think they do. Again, the carrot is the pension.
What the cops don't realize is that these muthafuckas are fucking them over, too, in a way that pensions and sweetheart loan deals don't make up for. They fuck us all by debasing our currency, which cheapens the value of our blood, sweat and tears- the only thing most of us have to offer. For the cops' efforts, they are taxed at a greater marginal rate than the muthafuckas they protect. knowing what side your bread is buttered on is of not much use when you are eating burnt toast.
So, when someone tells a protester to get a job, they should realize that the protesters are doing the working man's work, as the working man is getting fleeced even more so than the unemployed slob that is out protesting. When the cop gets out his pepper spray, or his billy club, or digs his knee just a little deeper into a non-violent protester, he should remember that the protester was not out to fuck with him.
But, maybe they should be. Failing this epiphany, the protests may be better served to take on a tone that will test police commitment to the ruling elite. That may include armed conflict...in a manner that is consistent with the idea that, if the police overstep their bounds and use disproportionate force, rather than wait for the courts to sort it out, the people will defend themselves.
Bokolis isn't saying that cops need to die or even get hurt- though it would inevitably happen. I'm saying that shit needs to happen that makes policemen reassess what they are protecting. They need to be tested. Since they can't see for themselves, they need to be made to see. How that gets done is not my call...just sayin'
That's all the fuck I got. I think I'm ready...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)