Displaying 1 - 10 of 119 Forum Posts 1 2 3 4 5 Next
  • Feb 13, 2017 01:00 PM
    Last: 5d
    59

    The Daytona 500 has been around for generations. We've not only seen stock car racing grow and evolve, for better or worse, but we've witnessed the same with the race itself. I'd like to start a memory-volley with race fans. I'll start with mine and I promise to keep it as short as possible. Wink

    The 90's - Growing up in the sticks in east Texas, sports that were not of the norm, were common place in small town Texas. For the city kids, their dads were probably part of a racquetball team, or they were into cycling. For some kids in my town, dirt track racing was as big as football. My dad never raced but I had a couple of friends who's dads did. I recall summers in my friend's dad's garage, trying to rebuild a go-kart, while his dad was trying to get his busted up dirt track car ready for the weekend's race. When you love dirt track, it was natural to love stock car racing as well. This was the era of Mark Martin, Rusty Wallace, Bill Elliot, Dale Earnhardt, and a new-comer who went by the name Jeff Gordon.

    As a kid, we'd wear our favorite driver's shirts, and race our bikes in a circular dirt track in one our back yards. In fact, we had at least two different tracks, which made us feel like we were part of a racing circuit. In our minds, the shirts we wore while racing our bikes were no different than the jumpsuits the drivers wore and the numbers on the cars. There would be at least one of us announcing the play by play as the race unfolded.

    One summer in particular stands out. My little brother and I, were racing in my parent's driveway. The race was going on the TV and the radio in the garage. We were racing big wheel trikes while the race went on. By this time, my favorite driver was quickly switched out from number 94, Bill Elliot, to number 24, the Rainbow warrior himself, Jeff Gordon. Jeff Gordon was the Micheal Jordan of Nascar at this time. Love him or hate him, he was on fire that year. I believe it was 97, and that was the year he won.

    At any rate, there's my story. Would love to hear any of yours.

  • Jan 07, 2017 03:19 PM
    Last: 29d
    302
    SFriedman Wrote: So my guess is it'll be the Steelers and the Cowboys for the Super Bowl. So I think there will be a repeat matchup, just not SB45. SB XXX. :)

    I was about to say. I'm glad I'm not the one who dated themselves making that parallel. Wink

  • Dec 23, 2016 03:06 PM
    Last: 2mo
    220
    Agreed, it was very hard to watch. Nunez hits like a train. I wanted Rousey to tap out after the first two hits.
  • Dec 23, 2016 03:06 PM
    Last: 2mo
    220

    This article is just some evidence as to where Ronda Rousey might end up if she decides to retire. This, of course, is mostly hanging on the results of her next fight against Amanda Nunes. The article says that she has received an alternate offer from WWE to join their roster. No offense to wrestling fans, but that seems like an insult to a former champion of actual fighting. Although, it is indicated that she is a big WWE fan herself.

    I don't know, it just reminds me old stories of famous gladiators in the Roman days. If they actually survived their career, some would return to the arena only to play fight, just so the fans could get a look at a former champion. Honestly, I hope she gets her belt back, but if she doesn't, why not acting? After all, movies and the like have a broader audience than WWE.

  • Nov 08, 2016 01:39 PM
    Last: 3mo
    833

    I wanted to dive back into my understanding of the sport, and I found an interesting article that breaks down the new rule changes for this upcoming season. It seems like every league, both pro and college are always changing the rules. Whether or not it makes the game more dynamic or political, is definitely debatable.

    1. Coaches will have the ability to call a timeout when a ball is "live" after a made basket on an inbound situation.

    2. Double Foul calls will be more common.

    In the words of the article:

    Post play physicality and "rebounding displacement" are two huge points of emphasis. The latter is mostly about officials' placement on the floor, but the former is going to take teams and coaches time to adjust. To put it frankly, when a guy with the ball is in the post, he can "shape up" by bending his elbows. He cannot use his arms to prevent a defender from getting around him, though. If that happens, it's now an automatic foul.

    3. Travelling calls will rise.

    It's become normal basketball movement to accept a pass and then take a tiny hop to set/square one's self. That's technically a travel. It will now be called as such.

    4. Big Ten and MAC are involved in an experiment, concerning block/charge plays.

    Big Ten and the MAC will now have the ability to review block/charge plays and overturn calls when applicable in the final two minutes of a game.

    5. Offensive players are granted more movement with the ball.

    Offensive and defensive players are allowed a certain amount of space to make natural, normal basketball moves. For the offense, a "normal basketball play" starts with either a shot attempt, a pass or a dribble. In a sentence: An offensive player should be able to make a move without having someone jamming up on them and restricting them.

    So there you have it. I'd like to hear some feedback on this, especially from the die-hard college basketball fans. Does everyone agree with these changes?

  • Nov 03, 2016 12:57 AM
    Last: 3mo
    790
    BearDown Wrote:

    I'm still in shock. I hardly slept at all last night.

    I was literally biting my nails. It was the best game I ever watched. I'm so happy the curse is broken, especially for the Cubs fans.
  • Oct 27, 2016 02:24 PM
    Last: 4mo
    223
    I don't know why, but it kind of creeps me out. I think it reminds me of the movie Gamer a little bit, where people are sitting in dark rooms, blissfully partaking in VR. It's a cool concept, I'll give it that, it's still not worth switching phone platforms, in my opinion.
  • Sep 29, 2016 01:14 PM
    Last: 4mo
    565
    BearDown Wrote:
    JFoster Wrote: Well, they just whooped up on the Dodgers last Saturday 5-0, clenching their first pennant in 71 years. It's them versus the Cleveland Indians. It's looking a hell-a-lot better if you ask me. Wink

    It's hard to put into words how exciting this is for Cubs fans. My dad was born ten years after the Cubs last World Series appearance. My long since deceased great grandpa was two years old the last time the Cubs won the World Series in 1908.

    This is quite the exciting time, but any real Cubs fan won't get too excited until the final pitch is thrown and we have won.

    I don't blame you one bit. I got over cocky when the Rangers were just two plays away from winning it against the Cardinals. My best friend can attest to the fact that I broke a perfectly good space heater as the Cardinals did their victory pile-up on the mound. I think I'm more excited for the Cubs than I have been for any other team. Perhaps it's underdog fever, but this year's Cubs are more deserving than any other team. They've played their hearts out this year.
  • Sep 29, 2016 01:14 PM
    Last: 4mo
    565
    Well, they just whooped up on the Dodgers last Saturday 5-0, clenching their first pennant in 71 years. It's them versus the Cleveland Indians. It's looking a hell-a-lot better if you ask me. Wink
  • Sep 29, 2016 01:14 PM
    Last: 4mo
    565
    No sir, I wouldn't. They've had one hell of a season. Actually it's their best season in over 70 years. If anything, it would build anticipation for next season.