Maximum Grilled Steelers Forum
Sep 19, 2014 at 06:56 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home   Forum   Help Calendar Media Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: And in other news: Peter King Still Sucks!  (Read 700 times)
jonzr
Asst. VP, Jonzring
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 11361
Offline Offline

Posts: 11,462


Have a cup o' joe.


WWW
« on: Dec 15, 2008 at 14:51 »

Quote
The most controversial play since ... well, since the Tuck Rule.

Since the Tuck Rule?  REALLY!?  So, between 2001 and 2008 there has been absolutely no singular play more controversial than a "no touchdown" call that was overturned on the replay?  So, none of the apologies from the NFL on calls that *actually* cost the Steelers a game were controversial?  None of the fines against Steelers players for legal plays were controversial?

Quote
The magnitude of the play can't be overstated.

Hey Peter, you just did it!

Hmm, makes me wonder who he picked to win in B'more.  And against Dallas.  And in New England.  Wonder who he had in the '05 playoffs?  Could it be Indy and Denver?  What about Superbowl XL?  Surely it wasn't Seattle!

Can't believe I used to read this douche bag weekly as recently as last season.  This year I've started his articles about 3 or 4 times and managed to finish one - it was when Dr. Z, whose stuff I still read sometimes, was in the hospital.  Get well Dr. Z!  Get stuffed by a Ratbirds' Peter, King.  Effing fluffer.



Logged

"I like David Bowie, he was always my favorite member of Tin Machine."
- Rodney Anonymous

It's a Steeler Nation
whitmer_87
Brownstains can suck my Member
****

Karma: 484
Offline Offline

Posts: 847



« Reply #1 on: Dec 15, 2008 at 14:58 »

Must have bet on the Ratbirds. Well guess what Kingy boy? The Maryland State Pen aint got nuttin' on us!
Logged

"The duty of the comedian is to find out where the line is drawn, and cross it deliberately."-George Carlin
give'emthaboot
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 1469
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,837



« Reply #2 on: Dec 15, 2008 at 22:06 »

For his pick for the Pit/Bal game he actually had the audacity to say "the Ravens have the hotter defense right now."

Huh?

Seriously, fuck him.
Logged

'Oh, my, James Harrison is not going to the White House, he must be a devil worshiper!'
JackSplat
Jerk Store Proprietor
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 1541
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,311



« Reply #3 on: Dec 15, 2008 at 22:59 »

was it really a controversial play to begin with?  it sure was a close play, i'll give it that, but controversial?  come on dude.  I've seen far worse and even closer plays than that during this season alone FFS.

Anyway, who gives a shit what Peter King has to say.  Once a Doucher, always a doucher. Did that fatass come to the aide of few hundred betters who lost some coin on the pgh/Sd game?Huh? The more people actually take off the Hate glasses for the steelers they can become quite objective.

On the way into work heard Phil Simms on the radio between halfs of Cle/phi game actually say that after reviewing the play a few times that he agreed with the call.

Logged

Jerry, it's Frank Costanza, Mr.
Steinbrenner is here, George is dead, call me back!
PghSteel-43
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 2721
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,771


« Reply #4 on: Dec 15, 2008 at 23:13 »

Just another reason why I stay away from the national media. I read some of the remarks Collinsworth in a post on a different board and I thank my lucky stars for the local media.  How some of the jagoffs on ESPN/SI have a job is beyond me.

I'll take Savern, Cook, Bouchette, Ilkin, Pompeani and rest over the a good of the hacks in the national media. 

Anyways......

NFL backs ruling on Steelers' winning touchdown
Monday, December 15, 2008
By Ed Bouchette, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

The NFL is backing referee Walt Coleman's decision to overturn a call on the field and rule Santonio Holmes' catch a touchdown that gave the Steelers a 13-9 victory at Baltimore yesterday.

Coleman's officiating crew ruled that Holmes did not get into the end zone when he caught Ben Roethlisberger's pass from the Ravens' four with 43 seconds left. However, after viewing it on replay, Coleman overturned the call and signaled a touchdown.

"Walt Coleman determined via high-def video review that the receiver had possession and two feet down with the ball in the goal line, meaning it broke the plane,'' an NFL spokesman said via e-mail.

The spokesman said Mike Pereira, the NFL's vice president of officiating, backed the Coleman ruling after replay.

Coleman explained after the game that Holmes "had two feet down and completed the catch with control of the ball breaking the plane of the goal line."

By rule, his feet did not have to be down, however, when the ball crossed the goal line -- he had to be in possession of the ball when it broke the plane of the goal line and then, to complete the play, his feet had to touch the ground.

"When he gained control of the ball,'' Coleman said, "the ball was breaking the plane and then he fell into the field of play."

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08350/935329-100.stm
« Last Edit: Dec 15, 2008 at 23:18 by PghSteel-43 » Logged
Preacherman0
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 5808
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,811



WWW
« Reply #5 on: Dec 16, 2008 at 06:33 »

Quote
On the way into work heard Phil Simms on the radio between halfs of Cle/phi game actually say that after reviewing the play a few times that he agreed with the call.

I'll at least give him credit for taking time to reconsider the matter.  That's more than most media types would do.

To even compare this play to the tuck rule is absolutely ridiculous on so many levels, where do we begin?

1.  Tuck Rule call was a playoff game.
2.  Tuck Rule reversal kept the Raiders from ENDING the game.  If we have the ball on the 2-inch line, game is far from won or lost for anyone.
3.  Tuck Rule was actually the correct call, it's just a stupid, archaic rule that no one knows or understands.  According to his interpretation of the rules and the replay, the ref made a call that he believed to be correct.
4.  Tuck Rule sucked because it truly might have decided the game.  For the Ravens, the call sucks, but it didn't decide the game.  If you want to win, make a stop.  The Raiders made a stop and it was snatched away from them.  The Ravens didn't stop us, SA just happened to fall in the wrong direction.

These guys just want to stir up something to have a topic rather than producing any thoughtful commentary.  That's why they are fat, lazy loudmouths. 
Logged

We have traded Christ for the religion of Christianity.
Finnegans Wake
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 12190
Online Online

Posts: 22,270



« Reply #6 on: Dec 16, 2008 at 08:53 »

He's a fluffer.  He should just change his name to Peter Fluffer...  He holds fast to his strong opinions, which change from week to week.  Through the highs and lows of the long football season, the second you stumble, King is off fluffing the next team.  I've seen him suckle at the Steeler teat one week, and then we're old news the next.  Fuck him.

The Stonio TD was anything but controversial and honestly, it was a pretty routine kind of call.  The officials got it right, and Ol' Fluffy here is just stirring the pot.  If most analysts and league officials would have some kind of consensus that it was clearly a TD, Fluffy would be leading the charge, waving a marshmallow baton and wearing his pink velour Dr. Dentons, writing weepy panegyrics to the wonderful drive that clearly culminated in a Steelers TD, perhaps the greatest drive since The Drive, or some such shit.
Logged

Out of my mind on Saturday night...
pensodyssey
Halfsharkalligator halfman.
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 8121
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,706



« Reply #7 on: Dec 16, 2008 at 16:46 »

Anyone remember this gem from Peter Queen?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/peter_king/06/17/qbs/1.html

*snicker*
Logged

A shabby Charlie Brown.
msdmnr2002
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 2837
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,618



WWW
« Reply #8 on: Dec 16, 2008 at 18:20 »

Quote
Anyone remember this gem from Peter Queen?

Because he was a complete idiot and didn't take into account the first half of '06 was a waste as Ben recovered from his multiple injuries.
Logged
JackSplat
Jerk Store Proprietor
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 1541
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,311



« Reply #9 on: Dec 16, 2008 at 21:47 »

Awesome insight:

Ben Roethlisberger 17th? What gives? From Year 1 to Year 2 of his career, his completion percentage dropped 3.7 points; from year two to three it fell 3.0 points. His TD-to-interception ratio, plus-eight in 2005, dropped to minus-five last season. He is profoundly inconsistent. I say he's a C-plus player until I see six or eight straight weeks of the same guy.

and the best:

Want my upset specials in the top 10? Try Vince Young and Jon Kitna. Young's the most feared young player in football right now. More feared than Reggie Bush. He ran for nearly as many touchdowns last season (seven) as Mike Vick has rushed for in the last two (eight). And I put Kitna at No. 9 because, quite simply, he is the right trigger man for the Lions' offense. I believe he'll throw for 4,300 yards again.

Im not even going to bother looking up Young's and kitna's stats from 2007.  I can  imagine that they were very poor to say the least.

Does Peter King bring the fire or what?

Logged

Jerry, it's Frank Costanza, Mr.
Steinbrenner is here, George is dead, call me back!
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
SimplePortal 2.3.5 © 2008-2012, SimplePortal
| Sitemap
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!