Page 1 of 2

Bellamy Bowl XII

Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 6:56 am
by Jonathan S.
The Bellamy Bowl came down to HFA...6.9 points.

Re: Bellamy Bowl XII

Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 8:53 am
by wolfe
I think it was that bullshit -8 points that Cutler lost on interceptions and fumbles. When are we going to change this stupid bullshit?

Re: Bellamy Bowl XII

Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 9:13 am
by wagordy
I was pissed. How can 3 starters not score me enough point to overcome a very attainable amount of points. Damn Steve Smith running bad routes! Good Game Jonathan.

Re: Bellamy Bowl XII

Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 9:13 am
by wagordy
wolfe wrote:I think it was that bullshit -8 points that Cutler lost on interceptions and fumbles. When are we going to change this stupid bullshit?
Are you referring to negative points for fumbles and Interceptions?

Re: Bellamy Bowl XII

Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 9:28 am
by wolfe
Yes. Most people use a crutch for why their teams loose -- except their own bad decisions. I just thought I'd join in.

You should have started Pierre.

Re: Bellamy Bowl XII

Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 9:41 am
by Jonathan S.
I was only commenting on the irony of it all.....no ancillary comments were needed from the Wolfe.

Re: Bellamy Bowl XII

Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 9:41 am
by Jonathan S.
I was only commenting on the irony of it all.....no ancillary comments were needed from the Wolfe.

Re: Bellamy Bowl XII

Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 9:49 am
by Oompa Midgets
wolfe wrote:Yes. Most people use a crutch for why their teams loose -- except their own bad decisions. I just thought I'd join in.

You should have started Pierre.
So we can bench HFA?

Points for nothing (HFA) versus points from a player's performance. Which can possibly fluctuate week to week?

I propose we add a 7-point Road Team Disadvantage (RTD). Not to be confused with STD.

Re: Bellamy Bowl XII

Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 10:31 am
by wolfe
There's nothing ironic about it.

Re: Bellamy Bowl XII

Posted: Tue Sep 29, 2009 12:34 pm
by Jonathan S.
Yes...it is ironic:

"incongruity between the actual result of a sequence of events and the normal or expected result"

One would expect the proponent of HFA to win by it's bonus rather than the opponent of HFA. Any rebuttal? I don't think so. There's the irony of it.