Mr. WEO Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 Not the point. The fact is the "stories" are what gets pushed by the league. The Saints win after Katrina? The Patriots* win after 9/11? The league needs a new poster boy at QB with Manning and Brady nearing retirement age, and are now pushing Luck. The replacement refs were impartial. I maintain that the "real" refs are not (and have been saying that for years). Pats* record with replacements: 1-2 Pats* record with "real" refs: 4-1 Packers record with replacements: 1-2 Packers record with "real" refs: 5-1 Odd, no? So the League did what after Katrina? I must have missed your point there. And what's the connection between the pats and 9/11? Was Boston attacked too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TC in St. Louis Posted November 9, 2012 Author Share Posted November 9, 2012 I don't understand this thread at all. These are the regular refs, they saved football from the horrors of the other refs; clearly they can do no wrong. I was just making an observation. They were particularly bad, and all the bad calls were to Indy's advantage. Not a big deal. Maybe we should trade for Gabbert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts