lazorbeak

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="D-Lyrium" data-cite="D-Lyrium" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26529" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I have a friend coming over at the weekend to watch Broncos/Chargers (she wants to see a game and it's the only one on ¬_¬). One of the things she's confused about is why 'nobody ever seems to be playing teams in their own league' (despite the fact that, ironically, that's happening this time).<p> </p><p> So er... I'm gonna post how I *think* the NFL schedule works. Lets see how well I do.</p><p> </p><p> - You play each of the teams in your own division home and away every year. So 6 games.</p><p> - Each division is paired with another division from that conference, and one from the other conference, on a four year cycle (so once every four years you'll play the members of each conference that isn't yours). Three years for your own conference obviously as one of those divisions is yours. You play all four teams from those two divisions once. So another 8 games.</p><p> - Finally, you play the team placed in the same position you were last year in the two divisions of your own conference you haven't played anyone from yet.</p><p> </p><p> So the Chargers, for instance, are in AFC West. So they'll play the Chiefs, Broncos and Raiders home and away.</p><p> </p><p> They're paired with AFC South this year, so they'll play the Colts, Texans, Titans and Jaguars, but only once.</p><p> </p><p> Their inter-conference pairing is NFC East, so they'll play the Cowboys, Eagles, Redskins and Giants, but again only once.</p><p> </p><p> Then because they've played teams from the AFC South, and they finished second last season in AFC West, they also play one game against the 2nd placed teams from AFC East and North (Dolphins and Bengals).</p><p> </p><p> I think that's right... the only thing I'm confused about is, is there any pattern to who is home and who is away for the teams you only play once? For instance, the Chargers have the Bengals at home and the Dolphins away. Is that just because that's how the cookie crumbled or is there something that decides that? It looks like you play half the matches at home and half away still, but what decides which teams you play at home? Is it just how the schedule looks? Like, if say Miami Heat are at home that week, the Dolphins might have to play away due to traffic and stuff (I have no idea where their two stadiums are geographically, just an example).</p><p> </p><p> Also, is home advantage such a big deal in NFL as it is in football over here?</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Yes, that's right. I think it's just one of the league's mysteries as to why a team plays at home vs. away. The league does that such that there's always 8 games at home and away. They also try to schedule it so that west coast teams are given late afternoon (4 PM Eastern Time) home games where possible. They also deal with the national television deals for the Sunday night and Monday night games, which are usually given to rivalries or teams that were good the previous season (this week's two games were a divisional game between two playoff teams in the Colts and the Texans, and a rivalry game between the Packers and Bears). The league has also been sacrificing the occasional home game for east coast teams (usually those that have attendance issues anyway) in order to play the game in London.</p><p> </p><p> And yes, home field advantage is a pretty big deal. I crunched the numbers before this week's games and saw that the home team this year was winning about 61% of the time this year, which is above the average for the past 45 years, which is around 57% (still not as high as soccer/football, but higher than baseball). If you take out two outliers on either side (the winless Jaguars and Bucs, and the unstoppable at home Packers and Broncos), the percentage jumps all the way up to around 65% this year. You're also far more likely to see blow-outs in favor of the home team. It's far less likely for a team to go into an opposing stadium and thoroughly beat a team, unless that team is embarrassingly bad the way the Jaguars and Bucs have been. Which is why it's so bizarre that the Eagles are winless at home and just won by 29 on the road.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Teh_Showtime" data-cite="Teh_Showtime" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>If anything Shield was weaker with the belts because they had to look vulnerable to set up challengers<p> </p><p> They lose absolutely nothing from the loss and with a few group beatdowns and dominant wins it will be like nothing ever happened.</p><p> </p><p> If anything it screws the entire tag division since there is only 1 non Shield heel team (Americans) and like 3 or 4 face teams to go with the face champions.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> 3MB are also heels, but they haven't won a match in... ever. And Real Americans are on the verge of a babyface turn or a split, based on the fan reaction to the giant swing.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Mammoth" data-cite="Mammoth" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Why are they pushing the Rhodes' so much? Don't get me wrong, I like Cody <em>and</em> Dustin; Cody has been brilliant for the past couple of years both with his gimmicks and in-ring ability, and Dustin looks like he's in the best shape of his life, but really? You'd sacrifice the momentum of the best stable you've produced in years, The Shield? It was obvious they'd win at Battleground, but I wouldn't have handed them the straps a couple of weeks later. <p> </p><p> I'm glad the 'E are seemingly trying to reinvest in the Tag Team division, but to reinvest in it you don't weaken your best team. You might say they've not been weakened because it was Show who cost them, but as long as they're no longer the Tag Team Champions, they're weaker... as a Tag Team and a stable. There was plenty of other ways it could have been played out with Show still interrupting, Triple H being aggravated and Rhodes' "winning" without them dropping the belts. I just don't understand it, that's all.[/2cents]</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> It doesn't "sacrifice the momentum" of a heel stable to lose midcard titles that they've dominantly defended since May in a match via interference in a hot feud. If anything, just being involved in major programs is a major step forward over time-killing feuds with the Prime Time Players or the Usos.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="moon_lit_tears" data-cite="moon_lit_tears" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26529" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Send Drew Brees, NO QB from QB to grrr<p> Receive Alshon Jeffery, Chi WR from grrr to Bench</p><p> Receive Russell Wilson, Sea QB from grrr to Bench</p><p> Receive Chris Johnson, Ten RB from grrr to Bench</p><p> </p><p> Was sent this trade proposal today in my pay league.</p><p> </p><p> Any ideas on a yay or nay?</p><p> </p><p> My back up qb is Sam Bradford if that helps make a decision.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> It looks like they want Brees for that stuff? Super-duper nay. Never trade $1 for three quarters. Nobody in that trade is as consistently good as a starter as Brees. Wilson would have to be your de facto starter, and he's a significant downgrade. If you need support at RB or WR, pick up somebody off the waiver wire, don't give up a pretty important starting QB. You shouldn't give up a regular starter unless you're getting significant improvement in an area you're weak in, and none of those guys look like they'd be significant improvements.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="GatorBait19" data-cite="GatorBait19" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26529" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Jackson vs the Giants could be a good match... Or the Giants finally wake up and remember how to win.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Is "have no running game, no offense line, and throw 3 picks a game" the way to win? Because the Giants are really good at executing that formula.</p><p> </p><p> In hindsight, Jackson had a slightly better game, but Smith did get 121 yards receiving, so I don't feel too bad about recommending him. In the meantime, I lead my league in scoring, but get beaten this week by Tony Romo's ridiculous performance.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Russelrules44" data-cite="Russelrules44" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I agree, Except the Undertaker isn't exactly retired, he still competes at WrestleMania.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Right, but I mean since he retired from the road, which happened back in 2010. At the time, it wasn't so unusual to see an Undertaker match headline a PPV, so the WHC seemed less like a secondary belt.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="dpoolez" data-cite="dpoolez" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I agree. Maybe Cena/Bryan II at WM for both titles? Cena will most likely win that one, though.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I'd unify the belts sooner rather than later. Especially since unifying the belts might be a good draw for a show like Survivor Series that WWE wishes was a top show but hasn't been in years. Last year they had that Cena/Rock team-up, so Cena/Bryan II (III if we count their classic on Velocity) to unify the belts might be a good main event.</p><p> </p><p> </p><blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="djthefunkchris" data-cite="djthefunkchris" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>/nod, I got that part. I should have worded it better. I just tried to, scrapped it because I was basically saying exactly what I did last time. <p> </p><p> I got that they are "cultish" backwoods type, people that you would expect to own chainsaws for more then just cutting up wood. I get that's why they are called "Family", etc. </p><p> </p><p> I'm trying to figure out what message they are actually trying to send though. Specifically, their "Follow the buzzards" "Devour of Worlds" "No such thing as a hero" "I've been here all along" type stuff. </p><p> </p><p> It's very entertaining, but when it all 'comes out', I can't help but to think this one is going to be a let down.... I think they are doing well, don't get me wrong at all. Just the build-up is making me anticipating something far more greater then the intellectual side of me thinks they can do.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I don't know that there is anything more to it than what's been described. All the stuff Wyatt says is really supposed to be kind of a cult leader's ramblings, not necessarily a real sign that he's possessed by some kind of entity or whatever. But at the same time, if WWE came out and said "oh, he's a fraud and a con artist," it would kind of lose its luster. It's far better if Wyatt really believes he's some kind of truth-teller, even if he just goes out there and rambles about how there aren't any heroes.</p><p> </p><p> Also, Waylon Mercy is the true Max Cady homage! "Lives... are gonna be in Waylon Mercy's hands. Know what I mean?" I loved that gimmick and wish it had been the next Goldust.</p><p> </p><p> The best thing about the Cape Fear remake is the Sideshow Bob episode of the Simpsons it inspired. De Niro gets too caught up in the physical side of being "scary." Mitchum's performance is far stronger, but at this point Bray Wyatt is as much "Night of the Hunter" Mitchum as "Cape Fear" Mitchum, and has definitely gone off and started doing his own thing with the gimmick.</p>

Hopefully it's a step towards unifying the belts. There's just no reason for the WHC title if Smackdown is just Raw Jr. where they do previews of next week's Raw midcard matches, but with editing. It's essentially been the equivalent of the IC title pre-brand split, with workrate guys and lower level main eventers holding it since Undertaker retired and the brand split ended.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="TheWrestlingMan" data-cite="TheWrestlingMan" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Sorry son, I'll talk about what I want to don't be a mad fanboy.<p> </p><p> It did feel like a RAW, The Rhodes are good, and the Sheild need to be used better. Creative just seems not to care much any more, I think Vince should let Zeb and Heyman write some storylines and make something interesting happen because I'm almost done with the E for a little while.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I'm not joking. TNA talk lives <a href="http://www.greydogsoftware.com/forum/showthread.php?t=60931" rel="external nofollow">here</a>, not in a thread called "The Official WWE Discussion thread." Not sure how anything I said merits calling me a "mad fanboy," either?</p>

<p>Ugh, please remove TNA discussion to the TNA thread, or, even better, nowhere. </p><p> </p><p> So, I guess WWE had a special bonus episode of Raw last night, eh? Seriously that show feels like the tread-wateriest thing ever. Thank goodness for the Rhodes family giving the audience something new and some actual storyline progress. They really need to just give D-Bry the title already. He can still lose it at the first hurdle due to heel chicanery or whatever, but months of almost giving him the belt is getting old.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Teh_Showtime" data-cite="Teh_Showtime" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>The difference is that NXT seems to base their turns solely on crowd reaction. Bo Dallas is clearly a heel (and has been for a while now). He's oblivious to crowd hate which is a classic heel move, he also made his invitational open to everyone except the top babyface (Sami Zayn), another heel move.<p> </p><p> I think its pretty much the only role he can play at this point. I've been watching the development companies for a couple years now and he's clearly improving as a wrestler but he just doesn't have the right mannerism to play a serious babyface. Combine that with his inability to look threatening and he doesn't have much to go on as a heel outside of the cowardly act. He's not full coward yet but his current act is working for him. For some reason he seems believable as someone so oblivious <img alt=":rolleyes:" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/rolleyes.png.4b097f4fbbe99ce5bcd5efbc1b773ed6.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> The difference is that Dusty and the NXT bookers are awesome and have used how insincere and clueless Bo was as a babyface circa the Royal Rumble and have turned it into a strength instead of just leaving him stumbling out there.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Teh_Showtime" data-cite="Teh_Showtime" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Except what about X Pac's face run in 01? Where he was booed out of the building?<p> </p><p> That is usually what I think of when I think X pac heat. Pretty much go away though when its a heel it's not necessarily a bad thing and channel changing heat doesn't exist (because the same people who say it know everything that person does so how could they have changed?)</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> X-Pac never had a face run in 2001? First he formed X-Factor, then he feuded with babyfaces like Tajiri and guys that could never work heel like Kidman. They kept him heel because his character couldn't easily turn, but that doesn't really prove there was "X-Pac heat." The crowd loved to boo the guy, the same way they loved to boo Owen Hart, or Vickie Guerrero, or Kurt Angle.</p><p> </p><p> But back to Bo Dallas, he makes a good case for how irrelevant "X-Pac heat" is, since he was getting booed for months as a bland babyface, but as a result tweaked his character only slightly so that now he's a guy who thinks he's an all-american babyface but who works against faces and who the crowd loves to boo. On a tiny scale, it's not all that different from when fans really hated Rocky Maivia and didn't want him to be on TV any more, so they gave him "change the channel" heat and of course he faded into obscurity.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Jaysin" data-cite="Jaysin" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>X-Pac heat means people hate the person, not the character and just want them to go away.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Except X-Pac heat is not a real thing. If a heel gets heat, that's better than a heel not getting a reaction, period. You know who got tons of heel chants and couldn't have turned babyface even if the rest of the roster did in 1999? Owen Hart. Sometimes a crowd just likes booing someone.</p>

<p>The tag title match was not very good, but that's not surprising, considering everyone involved's talent level. I hope Corey Graves "stays down" in NXT forever. On the other hand, heel Bo is looking great. I guess it's just genetics that all of the Rotundas are terrible babyfaces but great heels. </p><p> </p><p> Also great to see Chris Hero in action after his several month exile. I don't see where he's horribly out of shape, although it was a short match, so it was hard to see if he had any cardio. This guy needs to be on the main roster though. He's charismatic, athletic, and big enough to be seen as a real contender. WWE also desperately needs some midcard babyfaces not named R-Truth or Kofi Kingston. Or I guess they could remember that Yoshi Tatsu and a few other guys are still around and doing literally nothing.</p>

<p>Well the Ravens aren't going to be known for much this season, but Torrey Smith is basically the only Ravens receiver that's upright headed into the week, so I could see him getting a lot of opportunities. On the other hand, Miami's defense is far better than the Giants'. I still think Smith is more of a sure thing just because who else is Flacco going to throw the ball up for grabs at? Ed Dickson is apparently their #1 tight end after Dallas Clark proved unable to do much of anything, and Jones, Stokley, and every other receiver on the team is hurt. The Eagles on the other hand have a running game and a couple of other choices in their offense.</p><p> </p><p> Also are you in a small league or did you just draft receivers in the first 3 rounds? I had to scrape together my receiving corps of Fitzgerald, Edelman and Josh Gordon.</p>

Does Greg Schiano just hate his job and want to get fired? Because he's certainly on track. It's amazing how they lost winnable games against the Jets and others, benched their QB who has at least shown competency in the past to put in a completely raw guy in there who promptly throws 2 picks and doesn't move the ball even as well as Josh Freeman's zombie was doing. Oh, and how about completely sabotaging Josh Freeman? Ron Rivera's gotta be sitting in Carolina thinking "whew, finally a division opponent has a coach that doesn't make me look like a moron."

New update and pic pack are posted.

Haha, I haven't seen him target MJ, but I'm sure she deserved to be punished! Seriously though, since Spider-Man is supposed to be in the issue 130-150 range, Punisher is basically a Spider-Man villain who fights other villains at this time. In #129, he's hired by the Jackal to murder Spider-Man, while in 134-135, he fights, then teams up with Spidey against the Tarantula. When he shows up again in #161, he tries to murder Nightcrawler when he thinks he's behind a murder (it's actually Jigsaw in his first appearance). He's definitely used as a wild card until he starts having his own series in the mid-80's.

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="GatorBait19" data-cite="GatorBait19" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26529" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Hmmm turnovers against chiefs, but not against chargers<p> </p><p> So far 0-2 against the AFC west</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Yeah the NFC East sure is dreadful this year. The Cowboys might be the best in the division at "average." But again, the Eagles spotted the Chiefs 10 points and spent the whole game trying to dig their way out. You just can't do that in the NFL, no matter how good your offense is supposed to be. They're also killing their defense out there. The Eagles defense was on the field literally twice the amount of time the offense was on the field. Definitely two winnable games for the Eagles though. They're just not all that good, despite beating up a similarly bad Redskins team.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="bearded" data-cite="bearded" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="32668" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>my download says version 1.0. Is correct?</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> It's correct if the heroes/villains numbers are 62/194.</p><p> </p><p> Good to see you're enjoying it. <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p>

I uploaded the current data in the same file location, so the download link hasn't changed. I still need to finish up getting the picture files up. Anybody playing this, feel free to give me any feedback, as some character changes may have slipped through the cracks at some point.

<p>Yeah I also can't believe anybody would legitimately try to argue Monsoon over JR. Nobody but nobody could make a match feel special the way Ross did. He brought a real passion that came through in his play-by-play in a way that elevated what he was working with. </p><p> </p><p> And he loved skittles. </p><div class="ipsEmbeddedVideo"><div><iframe width="200" height="150" src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/PFIewQRbu4M?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="" title="Jim Ross loves SKITTLES"></iframe></div></div>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="Timber" data-cite="Timber" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="25169" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I'm sure that the WWE will or does have a contract for JR to continue to do DVD's and many other things for them. I'm sure anything to keep him from moving to TNA <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /><p> </p><p> Still, the quality of announcing from the WWE lately, the last few years hasn't been good. JR brought a ton of quality and style to the booth. One can't say that he's been a big part of the WWE for quite some time, but he'll always be recognized as the best at the desk. </p><p> </p><p> I'm sure good old JR won't disappear from wrestling. Just have to wait his 90 days to end. <img alt=":)" data-src="//content.invisioncic.com/g322608/emoticons/smile.png.142cfa0a1cd2925c0463c1d00f499df2.png" src="<___base_url___>/applications/core/interface/js/spacer.png" /></p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Like TNA can afford to pay anybody. And JR on that 2k14 interview looked like he was in pretty rough shape. I can't see him doing full-time commentating.</p>

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="bearded" data-cite="bearded" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="32668" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Thank you. I appreciate your time and effort. Is the updated version available for download yet?</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> I'll put up the updated data probably over the weekend. Unfortunately real life has kept me from working on images, but hopefully I'll get some of that done this weekend too.</p>

<p>Is there like, one guy in WWE creative who has to fill all leftover time with "Kofi vs. "midcard heel" until the audience has seen it roughly 400 times?</p><p> </p><p> And the crowd's reaction to Santino is no surprise when you consider that he's actually Canadian and all Canadians recognize their own.</p>

Just wanted to bump this. I've been working on cuts for some of the relatively unknown characters from the 70's, and also tweaking a few things. Right now the game word has 62 heroes, 18 anti-heroes, 193 villains, and 25 wildcards. I'm not sure if Adam is planning a CBH two, but I should be ready for it. I've also been watching Earth's Mightiest Heroes on netflix, and it's pretty cool that obscure guys like Chemistro and Gideon Mace make appearances on that show.