Rumors of Seattle game being flexed

[bjh2130]

According to Daryl Ruiter and Jim Donovan a flex of the Seattle game to Sunday night football has been discussed with the league Browns and Seahawks. The game scheduled for Sunday night is stoolers (awful team)  vs the chargers (no fan base). While it's fun to be a team that has the ratings and the talent that is being considered of being flexed I don't want to give up the advantage of a west coast team traveling east to play a 1 pm game.

[The Gipper]

It would be fresh to say to the Steelers:   your game is being flexed out in favor of  game featuring the Cleveland Browns. 

Nevertheless....I thought that they did not start "flexing" those Sunday night games until like after week 8.

[jrb12711]

I sure as hell hope not. Having a West coast team come to the East coast for a 1 p.m. game is a clear advantage (the same being true the other way around). It'd be pretty unfortunate to lose that angle. 49ers v Rams is likely not to get flexed, Chiefs v Texans is a strong candidate.

Further, this East coast dude loves his 1 p.m. games. It's awesome the Browns have some prime-time love, but we have enough. I think it's damn near criminal to be able to flex games in the first place, but that's just me. People spend thousands of dollars planning around an event.

[mjp28]

I've been so pizzed off for years where I live in NE Ohio Armstrong used to black out Cleveland for the pizzburgh PA team.

Nice to see Cleveland is back in demand again.....and on primetime.

[hoorta]

55 minutes ago, The Gipper said:

It would be fresh to say to the Steelers:   your game is being flexed out in favor of  game featuring the Cleveland Browns. 

Nevertheless....I thought that they did not start "flexing" those Sunday night games until like after week 8.

& I'm  sure  there's a  limit on prime time games (Sunday  and  Monday night) a team is allowed, not sure of the number  though. The Browns have  to be  close. 

EDIT: ok I  looked.  Flex scheduling starts week 5. And you have to  give  teams 12 days advance notice. Today is day 12 for the  Seahawks game. So if it doesn't happen  today, it's not  going to happen. 

[choco]

6 is the limit...browns currently have 5.  seen tweets this isn't gonna happen because they may want a browns game late in the year with possible playoff implications.

[Nero]

Please no. 

[hoorta]

19 minutes ago, Nero said:

Please no. 

Fore sure because of our European friends. Those late games start at midnight or later in your time zones... 

[bjh2130]

3 hours ago, hoorta said:

& I'm  sure  there's a  limit on prime time games (Sunday  and  Monday night) a team is allowed, not sure of the number  though. The Browns have  to be  close. 

EDIT: ok I  looked.  Flex scheduling starts week 5. And you have to  give  teams 12 days advance notice. Today is day 12 for the  Seahawks game. So if it doesn't happen  today, it's not  going to happen. 

I knew it started week 5 and there was limit of 6. Was unaware of the 12 day limit so thanks for the info.  It makes sense you have to give notice. Is the same true if they were to flex it to the national 4 o'clock game? I really want that advantage of west coast team coming to play at 1

[Tour2ma]

4 hours ago, bjh2130 said:

... I don't want to give up the advantage of a west coast team traveling east to play a 1 pm game.

Under normal circumstances sure, but we're returning from the Cali to a shortened week... so we might gain more benefit than SEA loses...

[The Gipper]

1 hour ago, Nero said:

Please no. 

What time...your time... do the 1:00 pm games start for you?  I am thinking that for you, every one of those games are about prime time for you.

[Nero]

2 hours ago, The Gipper said:

What time...your time... do the 1:00 pm games start for you?  I am thinking that for you, every one of those games are about prime time for you.

7pm-10:30 pm

Afternoon games 10:30pm-1:00 am

Sunday Night hell, MNF, TNF... 2:30-6:00 AM.

EDIT: In fact, I believe that the Superbowl is played at an odd time (6pm ET) because it's not a total shit for European viewers (ends around 4am) and in Asia you have it during a Sunday morning.

[hoorta]

1 minute ago, Nero said:

7pm-10:30 pm

Afternoon games 10:30pm-1:00 am

Sunday Night hell, MNF, TNF... 2:30-6:00 AM.

&  subtract an hour off those times for our British pals Howie and G-Man.  

[Nero]

1 minute ago, hoorta said:

&  subtract an hour off those times for our British pals Howie and G-Man.  

That ain't Europe. Haven't heard ya?

[Zombo]

They should flex every game, because we are scoring 40 every week.

Z

[Nero]

1 minute ago, Zombo said:

They should flex every game, because we are scoring 40 every week.

Z

I'm not making threads for insomniac games all season...

[The Gipper]

28 minutes ago, Nero said:

That ain't Europe. Haven't heard ya?

Then push that island out further into the ocean. 

Besides, you shouldn't be so hard on the British.    Didn't they save your bacon against Napolean?

[Zombo]

Just now, Nero said:

I'm not making threads for insomniac games all season...

We'll put you on the payroll if we have to.

Just beat the bot.

Z

[Ibleedbrown]

34 minutes ago, Zombo said:

We'll put you on the payroll if we have to.

Just beat the bot.

Z

 

[mjp28]

1 hour ago, Nero said:

7pm-10:30 pm

Afternoon games 10:30pm-1:00 am

Sunday Night hell, MNF, TNF... 2:30-6:00 AM.

EDIT: In fact, I believe that the Superbowl is played at an odd time (6pm ET) because it's not a total shit for European viewers (ends around 4am) and in Asia you have it during a Sunday morning.

OMG.  But hey we're the TOUGHEST FANS IN PRO SPORTS maybe moreso in your case!

[jrb12711]

Well, unless I severly misunderstand the policies the deadline has passed (12 days prior to game), so this will be a 1 p.m. game as scheduled.

[Nero]

18 hours ago, The Gipper said:

Then push that island out further into the ocean. 

Besides, you shouldn't be so hard on the British.    Didn't they save your bacon against Napolean?

Save us? SAVE US? After harassing Spain for decades they gave military help only to avoid Napoleon going after their island, and they were so gentle that they set fire to the city of San Sebastian and raped all the women, for example.

Napoleon lost the war because he went to Russia with Spain still being rebelious. Britain had in favor that Villeneuve was given the command of the French-Spanish Navy in Trafalgar which resulted in the huge loss of both navies thus the British gaining supremacy on the sea. 

The UK suffered during WWII 460,000 casualties. In Spain, during Spanish Independence War against Napoleon, 30,000, which is respectable...

But...

Spain had 300,000 soldiers on the casualties list during that war. Over a million civilians died. If we were to thank someone for saving us, it would be Portugal, who had 150,000 casualties. That is a true ally. 

[The Gipper]

1 hour ago, Nero said:

Save us? SAVE US? After harassing Spain for decades they gave military help only to avoid Napoleon going after their island, and they were so gentle that they set fire to the city of San Sebastian and raped all the women, for example.

Napoleon lost the war because he went to Russia with Spain still being rebelious. Britain had in favor that Villeneuve was given the command of the French-Spanish Navy in Trafalgar which resulted in the huge loss of both navies thus the British gaining supremacy on the sea. 

The UK suffered during WWII 460,000 casualties. In Spain, during Spanish Independence War against Napoleon, 30,000, which is respectable...

But...

Spain had 300,000 soldiers on the casualties list during that war. Over a million civilians died. If we were to thank someone for saving us, it would be Portugal, who had 150,000 casualties. That is a true ally. 

I did my job...I tweaked your senses...with a good historical debate. 

As for San Sebastion...I suspect things can get our of hand in warfare like that...(and fyi....Portugal was a major player in that battle, which was an "allied" victory....do you absolve them of the rape?   What about the other major battles:   Salamanca, Vitoria, Badajoz, Talavera

Besides....the Battle of Trafalgar took place  2 years before the Peninsular War began....1805.   France did not invade Spain on the way to Portugal until 1807.

And I would expect Spain and Portugal to have taken the bulk  of the casualties  in that war. It was, after all, fought on their soil.

And, I suppose that if Spain and Portugal did not want British involvement...they could have disinvited them from participating.  Then all y'all could have continued under the thumb of Napolean...if that is what you wanted.   (but sure.....Napolean lost the war by stupidly going after Russia...especially in winter). Good old Adolph did not learn from that lesson, did he?

[TexasAg1969]

I have to admit that woman on the metro in Barcelona had me thinking it was worth at least an attempt had there not been so many witnesses including my wife. Damn Spain has beautiful women!😍

[Nero]

3 minutes ago, The Gipper said:

I did my job...I tweaked your senses...with a good historical debate. 

As for San Sebastion...I suspect things can get our of hand in warfare like that...(and fyi....Portugal was a major player in that battle, which was an "allied" victory....do you absolve them of the rape?   What about the other major battles:   Salamanca, Vitoria, Badajoz, Talavera

Sebastian*. Definitely. They still sacked the city of an ally. Could you imagine British or Americans sacking Caen only because they took long to conquer the city?

Besides....the Battle of Trafalgar took place  2 years before the Peninsular War began....1805.   France did not invade Spain on the way to Portugal until 1807.

So you agree that whatever happened on inland Europe was cleverly played by the British so they could take the victory not risking a huge number of soldiers in Spain? Thanks.

And I would expect Spain and Portugal to have taken the bulk  of the casualties  in that war. It was, after all, fought on their soil.

Agreed. My reaction was against the sentence "saved". They didn't save us. They helped us. But save? Nope.

And, I suppose that if Spain and Portugal did not want British involvement...they could have disinvited them from participating.  Then all y'all could have continued under the thumb of Napolean...if that is what you wanted.   (but sure.....Napolean lost the war by stupidly going after Russia...especially in winter). Good old Adolph did not learn from that lesson, did he?

So you would reject any help offering? In Europe was a common practise changing alliances during those years. They discussed the alliance in Gibraltar, which they took in a Spanish Succession War in which once again the Brits showed how good allies they are... To continue with the example, let's put the Union Jack in Caen and call it ours now that we are at it. 

About Adolph, he did not only make Napoleon's mistake, but he repeated the mistake of WWI in which he had fought. That mistake was made also because he thought he could pull the Blitzkrieg tactic in -a way bigger than France- Russia and end the war before winter. Numbers and logistics doomed them. It's amazing how History repeats itself. 

 

[mjp28]

1 hour ago, TexasAg1969 said:

I have to admit that woman on the metro in Barcelona had me thinking it was worth at least an attempt had there not been so many witnesses including my wife. Damn Spain has beautiful women!😍

Now now Ag behave.  

Rumors of TexasAg being flexed?   

[The Gipper]

2 hours ago, Nero said:

 

I did my job...I tweaked your senses...with a good historical debate. 

As for San Sebastion...I suspect things can get our of hand in warfare like that...(and fyi....Portugal was a major player in that battle, which was an "allied" victory....do you absolve them of the rape?   What about the other major battles:   Salamanca, Vitoria, Badajoz, Talavera

Sebastian*. Definitely. They still sacked the city of an ally. Could you imagine British or Americans sacking Caen only because they took long to conquer the city?  No, but that was a different era.  I suspect that sort of thing happened a lot pre 1900s.

Besides....the Battle of Trafalgar took place  2 years before the Peninsular War began....1805.   France did not invade Spain on the way to Portugal until 1807.

So you agree that whatever happened on inland Europe was cleverly played by the British so they could take the victory not risking a huge number of soldiers in Spain? Thanks.

Is that what happened? If so...I see that as only smart.  You want to win any battle with the fewest casualties. Fair to say? They were also fighting Napolean on a global front, not just in Spain....so they couldn't devote all of their efforts to the Peninsula.  (hell...they were even fighting against the USA part of that time)

And I would expect Spain and Portugal to have taken the bulk  of the casualties  in that war. It was, after all, fought on their soil.

Agreed. My reaction was against the sentence "saved". They didn't save us. They helped us. But save? Nope.

Do you think that Napolean would have been driven out of Spain without their assistance?   I sincerely doubt it.

 

And, I suppose that if Spain and Portugal did not want British involvement...they could have disinvited them from participating.  Then all y'all could have continued under the thumb of Napolean...if that is what you wanted.   (but sure.....Napolean lost the war by stupidly going after Russia...especially in winter). Good old Adolph did not learn from that lesson, did he?

So you would reject any help offering?

Not at all...I am just saying don't be resentful that you had to ask for that help...or that the help helped.  The USA fought a revolution which, without the help of France, we likley would not have won.  We have been eternally grateful for it.  The Lady in the Bay attests to that. 

In Europe was a common practise changing alliances during those years.

Oh, yeah....they were always incestual over there...jumping in and out of bed with each other.  England and....what became Germany (Prussia) were allies against Napolean....then look at later. 

I mean....even the US has had wars against England, Spain, Italy, Germany at different times, and at other times those all became allies....but you know, I do not think we have ever had a war against France.

They discussed the alliance in Gibraltar, which they took in a Spanish Succession War in which once again the Brits showed how good allies they are... To continue with the example, let's put the Union Jack in Caen and call it ours now that we are at it. 

Are you saying that you think the UK should get the hell out of Gibralter?  I guess that is sort of like the US having the base on Guantanamo, Cuba. I don't think either of us are leaving any time soon.

About Adolph, he did not only make Napoleon's mistake, but he repeated the mistake of WWI in which he had fought. That mistake was made also because he thought he could pull the Blitzkrieg tactic in -a way bigger than France- Russia and end the war before winter. Numbers and logistics doomed them. It's amazing how History repeats itself. 

DEspite great early successe. Hitler blundered around a lot which caused them to lose.   Which is good, really, because had he not attacked Russia, that regime could easily have survived much much longer.  With no massive Eastern Front, D-Day could never have taken place like it did. Had he turned south to the Arabian oil fields, instead of east, he could have had control of those massive resources.   Had he not switched tactics so often during the Battle of Britain, he could have won that and had England on its knees possibly. 

 

[Nero]

8 minutes ago, The Gipper said:

I did my job...I tweaked your senses...with a good historical debate. 

As for San Sebastion...I suspect things can get our of hand in warfare like that...(and fyi....Portugal was a major player in that battle, which was an "allied" victory....do you absolve them of the rape?   What about the other major battles:   Salamanca, Vitoria, Badajoz, Talavera

Sebastian*. Definitely. They still sacked the city of an ally. Could you imagine British or Americans sacking Caen only because they took long to conquer the city?  No, but that was a different era.  I suspect that sort of thing happened a lot pre 1900s.

That would have been considered barbaric even in Roman times. 

Besides....the Battle of Trafalgar took place  2 years before the Peninsular War began....1805.   France did not invade Spain on the way to Portugal until 1807.

So you agree that whatever happened on inland Europe was cleverly played by the British so they could take the victory not risking a huge number of soldiers in Spain? Thanks.

Is that what happened? If so...I see that as only smart.  You want to win any battle with the fewest casualties. Fair to say? They were also fighting Napolean on a global front, not just in Spain....so they couldn't devote all of their efforts to the Peninsula.  (hell...they were even fighting against the USA part of that time)

And I would expect Spain and Portugal to have taken the bulk  of the casualties  in that war. It was, after all, fought on their soil.

Agreed. My reaction was against the sentence "saved". They didn't save us. They helped us. But save? Nope.

Do you think that Napolean would have been driven out of Spain without their assistance?   I sincerely doubt it.

 

And, I suppose that if Spain and Portugal did not want British involvement...they could have disinvited them from participating.  Then all y'all could have continued under the thumb of Napolean...if that is what you wanted.   (but sure.....Napolean lost the war by stupidly going after Russia...especially in winter). Good old Adolph did not learn from that lesson, did he?

So you would reject any help offering?

Not at all...I am just saying don't be resentful that you had to ask for that help...or that the help helped.  The USA fought a revolution which, without the help of France, we likley would not have won.  We have been eternally grateful for it.  The Lady in the Bay attests to that. 

Don't forget that the Dollar Sign is $ because it resembles the Hercules Colums of Spanish coin that was aboundant in America during the revolution, and that there were Spanish forces fighting too. Maybe I should change the example and say that France and Spain saved you from Britain. Do you like that? lol. 

In Europe was a common practise changing alliances during those years.

Oh, yeah....they were always incestual over there...jumping in and out of bed with each other.  England and....what became Germany (Prussia) were allies against Napolean....then look at later. 

I mean....even the US has had wars against England, Spain, Italy, Germany at different times, and at other times those all became allies....but you know, I do not think we have ever had a war against France.

They discussed the alliance in Gibraltar, which they took in a Spanish Succession War in which once again the Brits showed how good allies they are... To continue with the example, let's put the Union Jack in Caen and call it ours now that we are at it. 

Are you saying that you think the UK should get the hell out of Gibralter?  I guess that is sort of like the US having the base on Guantanamo, Cuba. I don't think either of us are leaving any time soon.

Yes. Me neither. 

About Adolph, he did not only make Napoleon's mistake, but he repeated the mistake of WWI in which he had fought. That mistake was made also because he thought he could pull the Blitzkrieg tactic in -a way bigger than France- Russia and end the war before winter. Numbers and logistics doomed them. It's amazing how History repeats itself. 

DEspite great early successe. Hitler blundered around a lot which caused them to lose.   Which is good, really, because had he not attacked Russia, that regime could easily have survived much much longer.  With no massive Eastern Front, D-Day could never have taken place like it did. Had he turned south to the Arabian oil fields, instead of east, he could have had control of those massive resources.   Had he not switched tactics so often during the Battle of Britain, he could have won that and had England on its knees possibly. 

Adolf conquered Europe in a record time. He had gotten the German economy resurrected after the Crash and the WWI debt payment. The Russians had fought against the Fins and had lost not long before. The Russians had even had problems with Japan. Plus we can't forget the nazi mentality. They were closer to the UK or France than to the Russians, and they hated communists. Their only ideological conquest was that to the East, to reach the Lebensraum (Vital Space), attacking West was only due to (WWI like) alliances between Poland and France-UK. 

We can say what we want but it is 100% hindsight. I understand why he did it and he was close to making it (Had Moscow been 100km closer and maybe we were all speaking german atm). He had lost the Battle of England and an assault to the island was sought impossible: no matter how much bigger your army is, the Kriegsmarine was no match and the Luftwaffe had a similar strength to that of the RAF. He decided to look to his main goal: the East. 

 

 

[The Gipper]

Don't forget that the Dollar Sign is $ because it resembles the Hercules Colums of Spanish coin that was aboundant in America during the revolution, and that there were Spanish forces fighting too. Maybe I should change the example and say that France and Spain saved you from Britain. Do you like that? lol. 

I know about the Dollar signs...and about France helping US during the revolution.....but I have not heard anything...or much about Spain helping.  Please, elucidate.  I would be interested in hearing where and how they helped.  Perfectly willing to give credit where credit is due.

 

Adolf conquered Europe in a record time. He had gotten the German economy resurrected after the Crash and the WWI debt payment. The Russians had fought against the Fins and had lost not long before. The Russians had even had problems with Japan. Plus we can't forget the nazi mentality. They were closer to the UK or France than to the Russians, and they hated communists. Their only ideological conquest was that to the East, to reach the Lebensraum (Vital Space), attacking West was only due to (WWI like) alliances between Poland and France-UK. 

Yes, I know all that.....Hitler wanted to get into a death match essentially with Russia.    It was still a  tactical blunder....because he lost the death match he wanted so much.  His emotions prevailed over his common sense. 

We can say what we want but it is 100% hindsight. I understand why he did it and he was close to making it (Had Moscow been 100km closer and maybe we were all speaking german atm). He had lost the Battle of England and an assault to the island was sought impossible: no matter how much bigger your army is, the Kriegsmarine was no match and the Luftwaffe had a similar strength to that of the RAF. He decided to look to his main goal: the East. 

Well...yes, right.  But as I said,  the smart thing would have been to revise your main goal....if you want to survive. My main goal may be to do it with Kaley Cuocco....but I know better because if I tried I would likely get my nuts cut off....either by Kaley, or my wife. So....a revision of my goal is essential.

 

[TexasAg1969]

3 hours ago, mjp28 said:

Now now Ag behave.  

Rumors of TexasAg being flexed?   

I guarantee wifey would have had me "fixed"!.🎱🔪🎱