Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
I agree with you.God I hate it when congress gets involved in sports...except this time I don't.
The sense that I have is the national outrage is fading.
Unfortunately, the Saints organization and its fan base have to live forever with the memory of what would have happened had the referees simply done their jobs. It's a huge burden to bear and you had no choice in the matter.
In a similar fashion, my fellow Seahawks fans and I have had to bear the burden of that bonehead decision by Darrell Bevel and Pete Carroll to pass the ball from the 1-yard line in the closing minutes of SB 49.
That memory, and yours of the no-call in last week's game will forever be part of us. The only thing we control is how long we allow it to be our master. I truly feel your pain.
the holmgren Superbowl wasn't on level, I really do think you feel it and it is a pathetic replay for you. Stick around I think the real rocking is almost nigh.The sense that I have is the national outrage is fading.
Unfortunately, the Saints organization and its fan base have to live forever with the memory of what would have happened had the referees simply done their jobs. It's a huge burden to bear and you had no choice in the matter.
In a similar fashion, my fellow Seahawks fans and I have had to bear the burden of that bonehead decision by Darrell Bevel and Pete Carroll to pass the ball from the 1-yard line in the closing minutes of SB 49.
That memory, and yours of the no-call in last week's game will forever be part of us. The only thing we control is how long we allow it to be our master. I truly feel your pain.
Many here likely have forgotten that Bill Leavy made a public apology to Seattle for his crew's poor officiating in Super Bowl XL... howbeit some four years after the fact... from Wikipedia...the holmgren Superbowl wasn't on level, I really do think you feel it and it is a pathetic replay for you. Stick around I think the real rocking is almost nigh.
I asked this question once before and got a dead falcon for asking but i really would like an explanation. Can you explain to me why would vegas lose millions if the saints cover the spread? Its my understanding that points spreads are set and then moved to keep an equal number of bets on each team so whether the spread is covered or not an approximate equal number of bettors win and lose so as to have the losing bettors pay the winning bettors and vegas takes their cut no matter what. So why would vegas lose any more if the spread is covered by the saints rather than the rams?This is all my opinion, but sort of makes sense if you think of it from the gambling angle...
In the NFC Championship game, there was a very high chance that the Saints would have scored a TD if that call had been made. If they score a TD it would have covered the 3.5 point spread and Vegas would have lost millions. The refs knew that they couldn’t let the Saints score a TD at the point in the game. It would be awesome to have the referees appear before congress as well. I don’t think it’s so much about which team wins, but more about the point spread.
I asked this question once before and got a dead falcon for asking but i really would like an explanation. Can you explain to me why would vegas lose millions if the saints cover the spread? Its my understanding that points spreads are set and then moved to keep an equal number of bets on each team so whether the spread is covered or not an approximate equal number of bettors win and lose so as to have the losing bettors pay the winning bettors and vegas takes their cut no matter what. So why would vegas lose any more if the spread is covered by the saints rather than the rams?
I asked this question once before and got a dead falcon for asking but i really would like an explanation. Can you explain to me why would vegas lose millions if the saints cover the spread? Its my understanding that points spreads are set and then moved to keep an equal number of bets on each team so whether the spread is covered or not an approximate equal number of bettors win and lose so as to have the losing bettors pay the winning bettors and vegas takes their cut no matter what. So why would vegas lose any more if the spread is covered by the saints rather than the rams?
And in the NFCCG, and aside from the fact the Saints were heavily bet in the game, they were also bet heavily in the futures to win the Superbowl.
This is all my opinion, but sort of makes sense if you think of it from the gambling angle...
In the NFC Championship game, there was a very high chance that the Saints would have scored a TD if that call had been made. If they score a TD it would have covered the 3.5 point spread and Vegas would have lost millions. The refs knew that they couldn’t let the Saints score a TD at the point in the game. It would be awesome to have the referees appear before congress as well. I don’t think it’s so much about which team wins, but more about the point spread.