Our First Letter!
...and Super Bowl thoughts...
21.2003 by Splatz

All right, I know this is like a week late but I just have had other things to do. I want to first start off by responding to an email we received here at Throw Down.

To the editor of this page:

I wanted to let you know that I have visited your site and that I must say it is quite good... Reporting is good, and commentary better.... I will be recommending it to many people I know...

I do have a few comments directed towards Splatz, your sports commentator.

Mr. Splatz....

While I am impressed and respectful of your opinions about hockey, I must disagree with you on at least one issue. I agree whole heartedly with your opinion that there should be no points for an Overtime loss.. Why reward a team for losing? makes sense to me. A loss is still exactly that... a loss.. But I do disagree with your assessment of "Ties" in the NHL.... While I do agree with your point about ties in the NFL (it happens so rarely) I must say to you that NHL hockey is a much more grueling game. 1 game a week vs. 3-4 for the NHL. 16 regular season games vs. the 80 plus for the NHL. While I will not dispute that both are very physically demanding sports, I will state my opinion that hockey is a more demanding sport then football. The reason for the the single overtime session is obvious, save your players for the long haul of the season. Yes a tie is lame to watch, but if you were a true fan, you would see that the beauty of hockey is the game itself, not the overall result. It is true that the NHL is looking to change this system soon, but don't look for it until after the Player's Association contract talks in 2004. They will argue this one and it could indeed add to the already growing fire that is forcing fans to look forward to a strike in 2004. I would love to see that game go to the international rule of overtime.. Penalty shots after tied overtime sessions. This would let us see a climax to some of these close games... By the way... GO CALGARY FLAMES (yes they suck, but so did Duck Football)

Your assessment of Barry vs. Emmitt is 100% correct and I will not argue it with you at all, only to say that neither is the greatest running back of all time, Brown was, and you have come to that conclusion as well.

That's my two cents, I will be watching your column and hope I can continue to enjoy it.


I would like to thank Hman for writing in, and I would like to also thank him for the nice things that he did have to say.

Now, I will say that I am definitely not a "true fan" of the NHL or hockey in general. I have never claimed to be. So saying that if I were a true fan I would see that the beauty of hockey is the game itself doesn't affect me. Also, I will give you that overall the season is more grueling for hockey because they do play more games per week and per season, but what I will not give you is that a single game is more grueling. There is a reason that they only play 16 games in a season and it isn't because they are just lazy. (Except for the kickers.)

As for the ties themselves, I never even said how I thought they should go about making it so there weren't any ties, you just assumed that I thought that they should play overtimes until there is a winner. I don't think that whatsoever, while it can make for some epic games in the postseason, it definitely doesn't make sense for the regular season. I also think that for college football they should do a couple OT's in the format that they have now and then find another way to do after that because games that go six or seven overtimes is just to much for college kids, especially given the recent problems with some football players dying in practice or something. My solution for hockey in the regular season is something that you put in your email. Shootouts. Shootouts are great entertainment, almost better than the games themselves. For football, maybe do there own shootout by having the kickers kick from predetermined lengths until someone misses, make them earn their scholarships or their pro money.

I would like to thank you again for you mail and I would also like to say that the Ducks did not suck, they just had a rebuilding year.

On to the Super Bowl...
Overall I would like to say that I thought that it was a very boring game. The only thing that made the game remotely fun to watch was the commercials and the attempt at a comeback by the Raiders. I will say that I was pulling for the Raiders. I wanted Tim Brown to get his ring and Jerry to get another ring. But I do not hate the Bucs by any means.

Now when I say the stuff I am about to say understand that I am not trying to take anything away from the Bucs, because they played one hell of a game. That is an amazing defense. I am also not saying that the Raiders would have been able to come all the way back. But I think that the players on the field should decide that not the refs. When the Raiders were coming back there were three call in particular that made me think that Al Davis isn't just being paranoid when he says that the NFL doesn't want his team to win. First was the pass interference call on Charles Woodson. He may have been guilty of holding but that is not what they called and the pass was so far out of bounds that it would have been uncatchable even for the great Shawn Bradley. Second was the two-point conversion. There is now way, unless the person is blind or retarded, that someone could honestly say that Jerry Porter wouldn't have come down in bounds. On top of it the ref was right there and still blew the call. Then they review whether or not he came down in bounds instead of whether or not he got shoved out by the defender. They say that the second option is not reviewable, then why did they do a review at all, it was obvious that he didn't come down in bounds, because he was SHOVED OUT. So that review cost the Raiders a time out. My third and final point is when the Raiders were driving towards the end of the game, Jerry Rice caught a pass in bounds and ran out of bounds to stop the clock, he was partially pushed out by the defender but he would have gotten out because he is the smartest and best receiver to ever play the game. But the refs apparently felt that even though he didn't go down in bounds and he pretty much ran out of bounds on his own that he was ruled down in bounds so the clock ran for another 15 seconds before they could get the next play off. All of that leads to me saying how the fuck did these officials get chosen for the Super Bowl. Maybe because they are the ones that the front office can control and make sure that if the Raiders start to make a game out of it the officials will put a stop to that by making bullshit calls. I am pretty sure that Al Davis is thinking the same thing that I am.

Until next time, GO DUCKS

This is my old project, THROWDOWN.

A group of friends and I put together this little project in 2003 as an outlet of out collective rage and anger about the subjects that each of us cared about. I was the editor-and-chief and games writer back then.

It was a blast to do and it to be involved in a great collaborative effort using the strengths of my friends was simply amazing. I hope you have fun reading our work as much as we had in creating it.

games | sports | wrestling | music | movies | advice | spew
2003 The Throw Down Group