most of you can only imagine what i'm like after a steelers loss. and without living in my house, you're just going to have to continue to imagine. let's just say that it's not pretty. i'm writing these words about an hour after the steelers threw away (or should i say kicked away?) a game in chicago that they really should have won. so, given the wager i had on the game, and my intense loathing of mediocrity by the steelers, you can let your imagination run wild. if you are imagining a pounding headache, an unwillingness to move, a refusal to admit that it really happened, and a mess of things i threw at the tv that need to cleaned up, you're on the right track. i'll need a day to recover. talk to you tuesday.
blech.
Comments
We agree that there are tons of little things that go into the game, and we share much of the same passion for the game of football itself. My point is more of a philosophical one, though. It is perfectly right to say players were making better plays, or that one team was dominating the other. But that has "nothing" to do with "should have." At least, philosophically, it doesn't.
You can say they "played better," or "made all the right plays," or "they were 'winning' at the line of scrimmage," or any number of such things. But that doesn't mean they ought to have won. That just means they didn't make the plays that mattered most when they mattered most. Which speaks directly to your post's title "jeff reed makes me cry." Should is removed because players/teams make mistakes.
We can agree to disagree on this one, brother. Just as long as you know you're wrong... LOL
Love you, bro,
Chad
"would shoulda coulda". There's another one that doesn't get it done.
Hey man...I'm a living breathing example. Romo "shoulda" held that damn snap two years ago. He "shoulda" not thrown a pick six this weekend. Etc. Etc. Etc.
Look...if the three of us are honest at ALL, BOTH of our teams are pretty much in a heap of trouble if they keep playing like they've been...
-Kirk Voller
what is not a joke, however, is my insistence that the steelers absolutely should have won that game against the bears. if you put two opponents against one another in a competition, and one is obviously superior to the other, then that one should win. it doesn't always happen, of course, because any number of factors can make a difference. but that doesn't change the fact that they should have won. i'm not talking about a cosmic "should" like i'm freaking bertrand russell or something. i'm just saying, one plays better than the other but still loses. they should have won. but they didn't. and chad, you are absolutely right to point out the dallas/pittsburgh game from last year. cowboys should have won. they just didn't.
no excuses here. just disappointment in a mediocre/poor performance by a team that lost to an inferior opponent. disappointment in a team that should have won but didn't.